An important tool of leftist propaganda is the distortion of words. By organized and persistent use of some terms in a general sense and in use slightly more distant from that for which the particular word should be used, we end up in the “blurring” of the meaning and finally in its use for something other than what it should be. It pays off. It is a process that needs a system and takes time, but which ultimately makes the “receiver” not understand what some people really mean. And even more, since the real meaning is different from the use, what the distorter achieves is to make the listener think that he is acting in favor of one situation when in fact he is acting in favor of another and usually the opposite! This is the “language of the left”. And all the media must use it (since they are controlled) but anyone who doesn’t use it automatically is censored and nowadays maybe even prosecuted.

Take for example the word “equality”. The “progressive” political narrative tells us that equality is necessary in society so that there are balanced opportunities for citizens. But in reality, experience proves that if we have equality (of rights, obligations, earnings and privileges) then we will never have the same opportunities since the majority of people do not have the same possibilities.

Equality would have to be weighed on a case-by-case basis to strike a balance. Propagandists, however, sell equality in place of equalization, precisely by twisting the word .

In exactly the same way, the word “liberalism” is used. Who would declare himself no friend to liberty? The political-social system of liberalism, however, has very little to do with friendship for freedom. But by misleadingly using the term, it traps many people, who actually work against that freedom…

Liberalism as a word would more correctly be translated roughly as, libertarianism.

Liberalism has at the center of its philosophy and action, the liberation of man’s individuality. And there, exactly at the very first step, makes the fatal mistake. Because it is deeply wrong to “liberate” the individualism of man, separating him off from the rest of society that “by factory design” were ment to walk together and syncrhonised.  

As Aristotle has taught us, “Man is a social and political being by nature” , and he goes a step further thus recognizes as free men only those who understand their obligations to the community.

The collective consciousness of man is a central vehicle for his prosperity and progress. The collective identity, therefore, and the human quality, are the main components of the “ecosystem” in which the mental and spiritual health of people survives.

Having its first flowers in Protestantism, liberalism begins to question collectiveness to consider it a negative commitment and regression and to praise individualism . Thus Protestantism breaks its relationship with the Catholic Church (on the occasion of the Papacy) denying the collective identity of Catholicism. It has not yet denied the collective identity of Christianity, for it would lose the vehicle on which it travels.

Via historical continuity, liberalism spreads further from Protestantism. It now challenges the Western political establishment, particularly Western imperialism, denying its collective identity as well. And then rebels against the collective identity of the National State, seeking and establishing a state of citizens (citoyen). Then throughout the 20th ^century (politically and militarily) an epic conflict takes place between Nationalism, Communism and Liberalism, in which conflict liberalism ultimately prevails. In the period of the 20th ^century , liberalism also expresses the middle bourgeois classes, offering economic prosperity through the liberation of individual activity. Thus maintains a bizzare attitude of expressing the wider political center while at the same time considering itself progressive and rooted in the “progressive” political spaces.

In the 21st ^century , (after the collapse of the Soviet Union) liberalism is without another substantial opponent. It is what Francis Fukuyama attributed by declaring: “there are no more ideologies” in his book “The End of History”. Fukuyama concludes: “liberal democracies and capitalism constitute the final form of human government and thus the end of history .   “

So in this phase, liberalism feeling justified and strong, implementing its true purpose, gets rid of the middle bourgeois classes (and gets rid of them violently) trying to exterminate them. At the same time tries to wipe out the Nations (having defeated the Nation States, it seems like the logical next step) with its tales of racism and politics of illegal migration.  

It has now morphed into neo -liberalism and is actively distancing itself from any “centrist” political character. The officers of neo-liberalism, see Klaus Swab, George Soros etc., attack against any collective identity .

And so we arrived here, where there are now only two collective identities left to break.

The first is sexual identity. Which of course is collective, since one experiences masculinity or femininity by interacting with others, within a collective biological identity. It therefore creates a new, “sexual individualism”. Gender can be something fluid and not static. This is where the woke absurdities, the extremes, the arbitrariness of the various minorities are based. Bourgeois democracy in its traditional form is based on the will of the many. But it is easier to govern some minorities than everyone and thus the democracies (the so-called western states) in the 21st ^century  , now impose the will of the minorities , most of which they have built themselves with political cynicism and nurture them with social poison .

The second and last collective identity that remains to be broken in order for neo-liberalism to dominate finally and holistically and officially is the human identity !

Breaking the human identity means that “someone” will be able to choose not to be human (!?!). Do you realize the cataclysmic cultural annihilation this final stage will bring? The fatal influence on conditions, rights, obligations, laws, etc.? In interpersonal relationships? On the social web? And finally to the very mental health of people…

Artificial intelligence is a key step for this stage. Also the various “improvements” that are designed and applied (still experimentally) to humans but also of course the non-bio-ethical genetics, with its interventions in the normal reproductive process.

Today when you read these lines, you may think of them as science fiction, but I challenge you to think: how many of the science fiction predictions of the 20th ^century have been applied to our everyday lives? Almost all!!!

The issue of the fragmentation of collective identity is extremely serious. The question of the alteration or even disappearance of the collective human identity is capital.

But be warned: it is already in place!!! There are many forums that “explore” “transhumanism” or “post humanism” and “transhumanism”. And these forums have unlimited funds, famous personalities, scientific and political connections. Propaganda is in full swing to lay the carpet for the coming inhuman needs of neo-liberalism.

For better or for worse, we ourselves have the final say. And in the information age, ignorance is a choice.