Frenemy Class Warfare?

Is there really a class warfare in the West, or is it just a story cooked up to fan the flames of unrest? What part does the mass global media (MGM) play in this?

Readership: Conservatives;

War and Peace, by Medi Belortaja (2009 November 26).

In his essay at Amerika: Fixing (2020 August 10), Brett Stevens writes,

“Globalism and diversity are the same idea, namely ending conflict by forcing everyone to be codependent on each other.  This has failed.”

Meanwhile, Elspeth writes,

“What’s really happening here is that class fissures are coming to bear and the people in power don’t want the proletariat (working people) to see what’s really happening to all of us, regardless of our color.  So they create enemy classes: black/white, men/women. straight/LGBTQ+, and on it goes.  So we bite and devour each other while they get rich on our backs, destroying small business, enriching gigantic corporations, brainwashing our kids, creating a new American paradigm by pretending we have no shared history when we do.

And people on both sides are falling for it while calling each other ignorant.”

In sum, Stevens says TPTB are ending conflict by forcing everyone to be codependent on each other, while Elspeth says TPTB are sparking conflict by creating enemy classes.  Both Stevens and Elspeth are conservative voices.  But yet, these two popular beliefs about Western political culture seem to be at variance with respect to their presumed goals concerning conflict.

Question for Discussion: Most conservatives presume that both of these viewpoints are true, but how?

An Update with More Clues

Apparently by providence, just after I wrote the above, I found that Ed Hurst addressed certain aspects of this question in his latest posts.

“Culture is not merely the meandering results of custom or habit. Much of it comes from shared DNA. The Anglo-American culture arises from a genetic background that includes a high social trust factor. Anglo-American people have a strong tendency to comply with social expectations, so the culture naturally includes that feature. It is neither good nor bad in itself, but it comes with its own set of challenges.

So long as early American immigrants were mostly from high-trust racial stock, things went well. Those who didn’t bring a high trust factor from their homeland were quickly forced to adopt it artificially. The establishment was consciously aware of how much it mattered.

Meanwhile, it turns out that the social elite never had that high trust factor. Royalty and nobility were seldom the same racial stock as the people they ruled. Gaining social and political privilege brought a perverse incentive to abandon it, anyway. But they definitely pressed the lower classes to keep it, and held forth a very strong pretense of high trust.

Over the past century, that gulf of difference has grown. The elite have been quite conscious and intentional about it. The much maligned “conspiracy theory” mindset is frankly fully justified; the elite really do try to keep us in the dark. But it still leaks out, so there’s no excuse for lacking awareness of the gap between the elite and the commoners.

Now, shift back to current events. The commoners’ right-wing backlash has begun in earnest. It’s more than just the brawls in Portland between right and left mobs, or the shooting in places like Kenosha.  The commoners are actually threatening the established order.”

Do What’s Right: Push-back Is Inevitable (2020 August 30)

“We know that shalom is exceedingly difficult to obtain, even when you are fully educated and committed to it. We must learn from the ANE perspective that it is a tendency of how God does things with the human race. It’s not that God doesn’t bless some with more of what appears to be shalom from where we stand, but that we have seen precious little of people striving consciously to fully embrace everything in Biblical Law. We have to remember that shalom is not the externalities, but the term is used in Scripture to portray a relationship with the Creator.”

Radix Fidem: The Bible on Trust (2020 August 30)

An Explanation of the Turmoil

I’ll offer a possible explanation for my question above, as simply as it can be put.

TPTB (AKA “the elite”) are trying to shoe-horn everyone into a one-size-fits-all society to be utilized as an economic powerhouse and/or a tax base, or something similar.  Foreign wars, unregulated migration and immigration, housing bubbles, pandemic scares, bailouts, liberal snowf1ake education, presumed racial tension and gender discrimination (and the persecution of the “offenders” thereof), feminology and the glorification of h0m0sexuality, gynocentric legal regulations, abortion and birth control… and much more…  These are all efforts to weaken the masses, destroy their individual cultures, and make them more compliant and willing to be molded.  But in the final, the deplorables simply refuse to be corralled, partly for the reasons Ed mentioned above and also for many other reasons discussed by Stevens.  In response, the people begin to percolate violence in a wrangling pursuit to restore Shalom and prosperity to their individual communities.

This might explain why traditionalism, patriarchy, and nationalism are suppressed, why the media continues to actively support all the maladies listed in the previous paragraph, and why they label nearly all violence as “peaceful protests” as an effort to tamp down large scale rebellion, but it doesn’t explain the evidence that the violence and looting surrounding BLM was planned and staged by TPTB.  Did TPTB somehow think that it would lead people to further forfeit their rights, or maybe it was fomented by some other entity?  So my earlier question is still not entirely resolved.

In conclusion, we find that a large imperialist empire filled with multiple racial and ethnic groups simply can’t work towards increasing the Shalom of its intrinsic societies, and therefore will fail after a time.  This is essentially why God is against large empires likened unto the Tower of Babel – because it destroys the Shalom of the people.  Furthermore, this is basically what Brett Stevens and Ed Hurst have been saying for years.

Related

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Conspiracy Theories, Cultural Differences, Culture Wars, Politics, Racial Relations. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Frenemy Class Warfare?

  1. Ed Hurst says:

    I would think Stevens’ codependency includes Elspeth’s controlled conflict. That is, TPTB control what we fight over, keeping us at each other on false divisions, instead of allowing us to see where the real conflict should lie. If we fight each other over piffles, we aren’t attacking TPTB.

    Like

  2. Novaseeker says:

    The situation seems to me to be complex and multi-factorial in nature. There are many threads involved, so it can be hard to tease them apart at times.

    I do think it’s quite true, and really quite obviously true, that “TPTB” are very effective at keeping the Eye of Sauron fixed on anything other than themselves, such that they themselves only rarely fall under its gaze, and if they do, that incident is immediately highly personalized to the individual(s) involved in the specific case, and never permitted to extend over the entire socio-economic class, while the Eye of Sauron is either nudged or jolted back towards where “TPTB” want it to be focused: namely on conflicts between categories of people of the lower socio-economic ranks, rather than the enormous elephant on the table in the middle of our society, which is the elephant of massive socio-economic inequality due to the overlords hoarding opportunity and its benefits, and passing the same on to its offspring the way that old European landed gentry used to do with its own land as wealth. This is a massively successful con-job of the highest order, precisely because many of the people running the con are both brilliant and personally invested in maintaining the status quo of inequality (while paying lip service to being against it, of course, by focusing on issues like BLM and #metoo which have no impact whatsoever on dislodging the entrenched power of the establishment).

    Eventually, something will blow. It always does in these situations. It’s starting to feel a lot like 1790s France or early 20th Century Russia around here. The wildcard is our military, given its outrageous size and strength, unique in human history. But nevertheless, something has to blow at some point here … the fact of our military will probably have an impact, however, on what that “blow” looks like, in the end.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. lastmod says:

    No one is “threatening” the established order. Trump is one of the elites btw…..

    Like

    • feeriker says:

      Yes, he is. His genius as both presidential candidate and president has been in never letting anyone know where his real loyalties are. His entire first term has been a game of obfuscation and fence sitting, never fully committing to the platform on which he was elected, but also never capitulating to the other side. Many will say that he has a proverbial “gun pointed at the back of his head” by the reigning Deep State that ensures that, at the risk of his family’s and his own life, he never goes too far and never does anything to seriously threaten the status quo. That might very well be the case, but how can we, the unwashed masses, ever know for certain what the truth is?

      One thing that appears to be certain is that Trump is currently the ONLY American who, if he is genuinely not “one of ‘them’,” has the resources, wealth, charisma, and stamina to fight them. If that is indeed the case, that America’s continued future, as a nation that retains even a remnant of its founding principles, is dependent on the strength and victory of ONE MAN, then it’s already over for the nation, no matter who is re[s]elected in November.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Pingback: Haidt’s Ethical Foundations Theory | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s