by Sharon Rondeau
(Feb. 25, 2021) — On Sunday The Post & Email published the first section of an interview with geopolitical writer and commentator JR Nyquist, who as a longtime student of Soviet military strategy sees warning signs of communist expansion into the West by the dissemination of disinformation designed to destabilize and ultimately topple capitalist societies.
Part 1 concluded with Nyquist’s response to our question as to whether or not proponents of global warming, as an example, truly believe it to be a threat or are advancing it with an underlying agenda. In the context of the “global warming” narrative having emanated from the Soviet Politburo in the 1970s, Nyquist said, with the purpose of weakening the West’s ability to conduct business through the availability of inexpensive energy, Nyquist remarked, “The world is full of communist-front organizations and actual communist organizations where the people running them are pretty well-informed. They know that environmentalism is a tactic, a strategy. They don’t care about the environment. They know that using transgenderism is a tactic; this is a strategy. Whatever anybody thinks or believes, you can see this is really very practical, and it’s about strategy. The problem we have now is there’s nobody on our side who understands all of this and is fighting back.”
Continuing from that point, Nyquist added:
Look at Donald Trump, for example. Donald Trump didn’t have any strategy; he’s just a reality-TV guy who was very popular and had the instincts, built our energy industry and wanted to stop the China trade thing and to make our military stronger, so they had to get rid of him because he was doing all the things they didn’t want. But he didn’t have a real strategy, and other than his instinctual understanding, he didn’t have any deeper understanding of their strategy. You can’t fight these people unless you understand their strategy and how they operate. It’s just like playing chess; if you don’t know the game, you can’t play it.
The Questions (continued)
Are you suggesting that it was communists who ousted Trump from the White House?
I don’t know; I can only speak to what I actually know. Proving election fraud is a very difficult thing to do, and nobody has actually proved anything yet. We have evidence of irregularities, evidence that points to the fact that there might have been fraud to the level of changing the outcome in the battleground states, but we never had an investigation. In fact, the events on January 6 prevented it from even being brought out in the House and the Senate, which is kind-of convenient.
You’re asking a question about identifying who’s on what side, and the most important thing in politics is the friend-enemy distinction. The German theorist Carl Schmitt wrote a book called “The Concept of the Political.” His thing was that the basic meaning of politics boils down to the friend-enemy distinction. If there’s no friend-enemy distinction, there is no politics. Everything’s just like city government, making the buses run on time and the sewer flow and the water come out of the tap. There’s no politics then. Politics has to do with the friend-enemy distinction, and one of the things Chairman Mao said was, “The first thing in politics is know who your friends are and know who your enemies are.” Everything follows from that.
Look at our basic orientation. Somebody has really confused us about this bedrock issue. Now I’m going to segue from that to explaining what’s going on civilizationally. We have a civilization about 1,000 years old now. Henry Adams, the grandson of John Quincy Adams, was very big on this. It’s a Christian civilization; it’s based on Christian theological and philosophical concepts and metaphysics. This civilization was the greatest one that we know of that’s been on the planet, and it’s basically grounded in religion. Historians like Jacob Burckhardt would point out that there’s something about the arts and the culture that flows out of the spiritual concepts. What we’ve had emerging over the last two centuries is a revolt, a rebellion, that begins at the spiritual and intellectual level, and that rebellion is represented by a whole host of ideologies and thoughts, of which communism is perhaps the most successful one. Marxism and Leninism are communist. Socialism and atheism and theological positivism and all of these modern ideas really hate and detest the actual intellectual foundations of the civilization.
So what I want to say is that what has made the civilization possible is we have an agreement on the philosophical fundamentals. Well, look at the people who don’t. We have people who believe totally the opposite of the fundamentals of our civilization. Our civilization is a Christian one with Greco-Roman elements from their history. These folks are against all of that. And by the way, Karl Marx and his followers wanted to reverse the whole thing.
There’s an inversion. It’s not just a rebellion; it wasn’t just an accident that “Rules for Radicals” was dedicated to Satan, the first rebel. Satan is a rebel against God; it’s a metaphysical rebellion. It’s a rebellion against the Maker of the universe, a rebellion that inverts the ontology of the universe. I’m getting complicated here, but the teachings of most religions are that the spirit is primary and matter is secondary, that the physical world, the world of matter, was created out of God so that spirit is primary. You find it in metaphysics; you find it in the church fathers; you find it in Arthur Schopenhauer and Bishop Berkeley. There are dissidents in the history of the West who didn’t think that spirit was primary.
Now look at Marxism and Leninism: “dialectical materialism” means that matter is primary; spirit is epiphenomenal. You look at all of these scientific kinds of people, and they believed that the mind is just something out of the brain, the epiphenomena of chemical processes in the brain. So it is the exact opposite, an inversion.
So now you have two groups within our culture: one that believes in the primacy of matter and the other in the primacy of mind and spirit. They have opposite principles on everything. If you go to graduate school, which is dominated by the Left, they deny that there’s human nature; there are no instincts. Man is infinitely malleable; there are no instincts. So how is that possible?
They have to eliminate the instincts of human nature, because what is everything “Aristotle” and Plato and the church fathers? It’s all about human nature and understanding that.
So you have two basic ontologies, two basic religions, philosophies — Stalin calls it an “outlook.” He doesn’t even call it “ideology,” because the Marxists deny that their belief system is an ideology. You have to remember: only what you and I believe is an ideology, according to them.
The pagan world was destroyed by Christianity, because when Christianity came in and the Emperor Theodosius destroyed the pagan temples — Remember the rioting we had last summer when they pulled down the statues? They had that in the Roman Empire, only the statues they pulled down were the statues of the gods. They destroyed the pagan temples; they murdered the priests. That was toward the end of the 4th century. At the very beginning of the 5th century, the barbarians crossed the frontier and ruled over the Western Roman Empire. It just collapsed. I believe it collapsed because they took away the underpinnings; it was a pagan structure, and they took away paganism.
Where did Christianity come from? It came from the cities; it was a middle-class phenomenon. If you were to say the word “pagan,” it means “ignorant country dweller,” because the Christians were the sophisticated people who lived in the cities.
Now what do we have today? We have our own ignorant country dwellers; they’re called “rednecks” and they vote for Trump and they’re in “flyover country.” When you look at “red state-blue state,” it’s red state-blue city.
So what we really have going here is the same process that overtook the Roman Empire, only instead of Christianity overturning paganism as what happened then, we have socialism, the new religion, based on this new ontology and new metaphysics — it’s actually anti-metaphysics — and numerality and feminism and abortion and all of the other values — or anti-values attached to it — that are basically out to destroy the old religion. The old religion is now besieged; they control all the centers, just as the Christians did. You could say that Trump is like Julian the Apostate, the last pagan emperor. You can say Trump is the last Christian emperor, even though he’s not really a Christian; he’s the last one who is going to uphold the old values. You have Biden and Harris there, like Theodosius the Great, and they’re going to basically destroy the churches just as he destroyed the temple; they’re going to bring about the great change, the great reset, which is what Theodosius did. And what is he going to do? Who defends the Republic, the Empire? The rednecks do. Who signs up in the military; who fights? It’s not these left-wing weenies out there; it’s those boys. This occurred to me when I heard a United States Senator — they were talking about gays in the military — and he said, “Well, why are you against it?” and the other person said, “These people are from the Bible belt who are in our military, and we depend on them to sign up, and if they don’t sign up anymore, how are we going to make the military run? They don’t like gays in the military.”
Why didn’t the legions fight in 407 BC when those three tribes crossed the Rhine and overran Gaul and then overran Spain and then overran Africa and then in 411 Rome was sacked? We are at the same point; they’re going to strip the Empire of its defenses; they already are doing it. It’s a straight path to suicide. Because why? Because they don’t even feel comfortable standing on top of this Christian edifice today that is our civilization. They’re on the 100th floor of a Christian structure and they’re undermining the first floor. They’re going to collapse the whole thing. This is what the Christians did to the pagan civilization; they got on top of it; they controlled it and they undermined the basis of it.
Pagans don’t worship in their temples; they stored knowledge and transferred culture, and once they destroyed the temples and the gods, the society started to collapse. It was only a matter of time before the barbarians overran it, and then they had to start over with the Christian civilization. If you’re going to start with a new religion, you have to start over from scratch; that was the Dark Ages, so this is what these people are proposing. That’s why socialism, wherever it comes in, whether it’s the Russian Empire or destroying the Confucianism of Ancient China, is massive leveling and massive slaughtering and massive poverty; it’s like a Dark Age. They recreate the Dark Age, because they are leveling to create. But here’s the problem: the principles of Christian civilization and pagan civilization, when you get right down to it, aren’t that different. The pagans believed in marriage; they believed in having children; they believed in the family and basically being pious. Christians did, too. But these people have true anti-values. These people here who embrace abortion, feminism, men being women and women being men — think about it — trying to invert an ontology is truly satanic.
So now going back to your question, because I had to go through this: – How do we judge everybody? Everybody is either on one side or the other. Now consciously, what do they think? They can believe all this nonsense about global warming or whatever; that’s what’s been on the side of the enemy of civilization. There’s a conscious element there, a strategically waiting-and-conscious agent who is working, and those conscious agents, the brilliant ones — because Lenin and Stalin and Marx were brilliant — they’re the people who are working in Moscow and Beijing, and they’re the big powers. These are huge powers. China’s the biggest one in the world in population; Russia’s the biggest one in land area, and they’re part of this system.
Just as Christianity has many sects — they got together and none of them could agree on what orthodoxy was; the emperor had to impose it on them — in this case, I believe the role of “orthodox” is being performed by the communists and how that will evolve, what their final orthodoxy will look like.
They’re talking about the “new socialism” now. We don’t know what form it will take. It’s very important. People don’t understand this: that Marx and Lenin and Stalin said there is no Marxist dogma; they don’t know what the final form is going to look like. Because its principles are anti-principles, I can tell you what it’s going to look like: destruction, total destruction, and that’s why I oppose it. It’s not a matter of what sect of it you belong to or what part of it you’re sucked into; you’re basically either contributing to the destruction of everything, which is what’s going on, or you’re opposing it. It doesn’t really matter when you ask who understands; I think the people who really understand are in Moscow and Beijing. In the communist governing bodies here in the West, the Communist Party USA, people probably know, because they have what they call “democratic centralism”; they have committees that meet and discuss everything and they decide and correspond with each other so they arrive “collegially” at decisions. And this is sort-of a brain; Lenin invented this, and it works; it actually works. It’s pretty interesting. They have what they call “consensus”; they debate it at a high level, and then when a decision is made by the higher body, everyone stops and obeys the higher body.
Because the “democratic centralism” mechanism is so efficient and it works, they really have mastery right now. They don’t control all of that, but they’re generally pushing in the direction they want and there’s nobody really capable of stopping them from getting where they want to in the long run unless there’s some pushback. And there’s been very little pushback.
To be continued.