A colleague of mine, political scientist Professor Krejci, recently pointed out a methodological fallacy that is very common in the circles of Western politicians and analysts. Namely, that analysis is replaced by analogy. Instead of doing complex analyses of the long-term behaviour of Chinese civilisation, we replace it with a simple question: What would we do if we had Chinese economic, diplomatic (and to some extent military) power at our disposal?

When American neoconservatives ask such a question, it is no wonder they panic.

Again about Western elites

If we want to understand the prevailing mentality of a certain social stratum, in this case the financial and power elite, we should start from the question of what one has to do to get into that stratum. That is, how the selection mechanism works. If we look at European history, we can recall, for example, the centuries before the Industrial Revolution, when in order to become a member of the power elite, one had to prove oneself as a warrior. Of course, in addition to being born into the right family, this was a necessary condition. And to prove oneself as a warrior, one must cultivate certain character traits from childhood. And it also means that certain people are discarded from that environment and others move up.

In the 19th century, the elite was industrial, so a person who wanted to be a member of the elite at that time had to prove certain organizational skills, the ability to take risks, the ability to be pretty tough on his employees, the ability to think strategically…without that, he couldn’t grow his empire, even if he came from a wealthy family. That’s how Western society still worked sometime in the 1970s. The elites of that time – they were the prominent scholars with strong opinions or successful industrialists or scientists who came up with some revolutionary idea, often had to fight hard for it…

Today’s power and financial elite is made up of people who spent decades in bureaucratic machinery, made no trouble, grovelled before the right people… until they got through or sat on the board of directors, the leadership of a political party, the constitutional court. That brings up completely different types of people. Someone with the temperament of a medieval warrior would have a very hard time succeeding in today’s corporation, political party or university.

On LGBT promotion

From my interview with not-CT24: Why do you think LGBT is widely promoted around the world?

It is not promoted all over the world. It is only promoted within that circle of civilization that is collapsing economically and socially. Why? Because it is ruled by an irrational mob, a rabble, a bunch of loudmouths without the slightest sense of responsibility. In today’s new aristocracy, you will not find anyone who dares to say openly that this is stupid or even that it is dangerous. And activists – motivated by competition with each other – are becoming increasingly radicalised. After turning sex into a political issue and preferring all sorts of sexual excesses came the castration of children, and now there is talk of making it mandatory for normal people to have sex with “trans people.” No wonder then that most of the world despises and mocks us.

About a new and better way of life

“Small-scale housing may not be a poverty issue, but a conscious lifestyle choice. The phenomenon of tiny houses is based on this idea,” I read in the newspaper.

As Western societies move from success to success, a new – more advanced – lifestyle is emerging. The best, the most successful, and the most admired are gradually discovering that they don’t have to eat every day (certainly not meat), they don’t have to live in a normal apartment, they don’t have to shower every day with hot water, they don’t have to keep their homes warm, they don’t have to take the medicine they need… and the economy is changing to provide this new and better experience for everyone.

Remember there was a time when the measure of economic success was that everyone could have a piece of beef on their plate pretty often? In the age of liberal hegemony, the measure of success is that everyone can go hungry.

Note that these wonderful progressive innovations don’t apply to the really rich. They prescribe this misery as a progressive lifestyle only to their minions, who are able to endure absolutely anything – motivated by the fear that if they start making trouble, they will be deprived of the hope of climbing the ranks of the new aristocracy. A hope that was only apparent anyway.

The correspondence elections

The Czech Republic is ruled by a disparate coalition that has only one thing in common. All these political parties are linked to NGOs connected to Soros’ Open Society Fund. One of the key points is the introduction of correspondence voting in elections.

This is a cause for concern among democratically minded people. There is talk of vulnerability to electoral fraud. Rightly so. But there is another dark aspect. Its introduction would mean that the Czech Republic would start to be decided by people who, although they have citizenship, have not lived here for many years, never want to live here, and whose homeland is not even worth driving to the embassy to vote. They can vote for absolutely anything and they do not care because it will have no impact on their lives anyway. They have no idea what life is like in the Czech Republic. They only know the newspaper articles. Many of these people work for the headquarters of the corporations that are ravaging the Czech Republic, and many of them no longer even speak proper Czech. Our country is just a wallet to them, and sometimes not even that.

The basic principle of democracy is that the government can only impose obligations on people with their consent. That’s what the postal vote does away with. The people of any country are no longer to decide what happens in that country.

It is the problem of all small countries. Look how the Baltic States turned out.


Leave a Reply