The fall of America: revenge of the swastika?
A 'crazy' conspiracy theory that actually makes a ton of sense
I recently came to a revelation concerning modern history, which, I am unashamed to say, rather blew my mind.
It was something that had never occurred to me before, and indeed, appears not to have occurred to many; in fact, I had never previously heard it articulated prior to conceiving it.
Am I to be heralded as a genius for unearthing this notion? I'd love for the answer to that question to be, "Yes, indeed," but humility constrains me from accepting any such accolades (welcome though they would be from anyone possessed of generous spirit).
What brought me to this realization, which I unironically feel to be a most portentous one, was listening to an interview with the currently "cancelled" Iranian-American scholar Jason Jorjani.
In this podcast (since unfortunately removed by the interviewer, who apparently wanted nothing more to do with his former following his "cancellation,") Jorjani shed new light on the post-WW2 "Operation Paperclip" project: Jorjani asserted that the 1,600 German scientists whom the United States recruited for assistance, both in the space program and in the national-defense effort generally, essentially never renounced their National Socialism. Instead, they stealthily infiltrated various high positions within the military hierarchy, and became what amounted to a fifth column.
Jorjani claimed that the influence of this "secret Nazi cell" never waned in influence, but only solidified its clout though the decades of the Cold War.
*************************
Now I have no way of properly assessing Jorjani's claims, though no one denies the reality of Operation Paperclip. It is a "conspiracy" that even mainstream venues now admit to be absolutely true, though the mainstream account would certainly not give credence to Jorjani's claims of the extent of the power and influence of these men.
However, the notion of a secret contingent of hostiles nestled within the dark recesses of the already sinister military-industrial-intelligence complex made sense in a particular way that had never before occurred to me.
And all at once, I was struck, as with a thunderbolt, at the revelation: Political correctness only started up in earnest as a cultural force in the West after the end of the Cold War.
Of course, "liberalism" existed, and was devoutly followed by many in the West in one form or another for decades, indeed for centuries. And numerous ideologies, now largely associated with political correctness or "wokeness," as it is now called, originated from liberalism: feminism, gay rights, sexual liberation, anti-racism, and so forth. And naturally I do not deny that the upheaval of "the 60s" significantly altered the cultural landscape of the Western world. Certain pernicious trends, beginning with the introduction of the birth control pill, were relentlessly pushed on the populace, with undeniable support from high places, resulting in increasingly degenerate societal conditions.
Still, devesating as the changes wrought by the sexual revolution were, numerous pockets of conservatism remained across the country, and little effort was made to bring these sorts of people to heel, or to intimidate them into compliance with liberal norms. In fact, during the 70s and 80s, a running joke was to point to the liberal Left's general impotence in the face of opposition. Liberals were mocked as "too nice," overly-empathetic, overly tolerant, and generally ill-equipped for the rough-and-tumble of political conflict. They stood by helplessly while the "silent majority" elected Nixon twice by a landslide, then a short time later elected and reelected Reagan by an equally embarrassingly wide margin. When the comically ineffectual Mike Dukakis was slaughtered by George Bush Sr. in 1988 at the ballot box, liberals were again mercilessly mocked for their inability to fight tough, and their propensity to wind up as perennial losers.
What's more, on the cultural front, few if any corporations engaged in the orgies of "virtue signaling" so commonplace today as to be hardly worth mentioning (Speaking of which, only three more weeks ’til June, when we'll be greeted with a relentless array of rainbow flags everywhere we go! Are you not excited, comrades? I sure am...). But back in the 70s and 80s, corporations figured, perfectly reasonably, that taking a stand on hot-button political issues was inadvisable, as in, bad for business. In fact, being resolutely apolitical was generally the default in polite company, whereas today refusing to "stand up for what's right" (which is to say, what's left) is frowned upon by the powers-that-be; after all, "silence is violence," doncha know?!
In short, the cultural Marxist/politically correct/woke/social justice warrior proclivities of some were held in check by formidable cultural forces in the "before time," to the extent that even most liberals attempted to distance themselves from the more radical amongst their ranks, and strove to project themselves as "moderate." (e.g., "I'm a feminist, but not a radical feminist, those chicks are crazy!")
**************************
In the articles that follow, I will attempt to elucidate and provide further evidence of how the end of the Cold War signified the start of the societal trend, which has only snowballed steadily since the crucial "flex point" that I have identified. For now, allow me to return to Jorjani and his assertions concerning the infiltration of the Western establishment by unrepentant National Socialists.
Consider, for a moment, if such a group were indeed to exist and even to hold a great deal of sway over projects which, like the notorious "Operation Mockingbird," ensure that American society and culture gets pushed in certain directions, while forbidding (through the practice of manipulation, murder, and anything and everything in between) those attempting to push in a contrary direction, one deemed undesirable by the cultural commissars.
It would make sense, would it not, for such a group to push a generally pro-American message, favorable to hearty and wholesome traditional American values (faith, marriage, family, and the like) which are hallmarks of a healthy and robust society, for as long as the United States was the one superpower in the world which stood in opposition to Russian Bolshevism, the primary ideological nemesis of National Socialism?
But... at the moment when the Soviet Union fell and Russian Bolshevism was crushed, would it not follow that such a secretly immensely powerful and utterly ruthless force would now focus its attention on undermining the values of the very nation which first gave them succor and make them American citizens in the first place, given that now the United States was the sole superpower, and thus needed to be destroyed, as the utility of building it up had vanished with the end of the Cold War?
To be sure, all of this is speculation, but one can't deny that it provides an explanation for what would otherwise seem inexplicable: that, ever since the Soviet Union's fall, a demon has been unleashed in the West, transforming a once (relatively) virtuous and prosperous culture into the hideous and hellish Weimerica that has taken shape all around us in recent years?
Andy Nowicki is the author of several books, most recently The Insurrectionist and Muze. Visit his Youtube channel.
You are absolutely onto something here
Woke did start when the Cold War ended
I hate when people who should know better Stan for the mid century Germans
They were proto-technocrats and were seamlessly absorbed into the American deep state
Those who were hanged after Nuremberg were useful idiot sacrifices
All empires decline because they lower standards of sexual morality thinking themselves supreme and invulnerable.