“How do you tell a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
― Ronald Reagan
Is a communist not a communist if he or she doesn’t refer to themselves as one, yet at the same time supports every single policy, ideal, and agenda that aligns with the tenets of Karl Marx?
The other day I was listening to Mr. Las Vegas Wayne Allen Root and he was making the point that using the phrase Marxist or Communist may come across as being a bit too harsh when referring to the far left Communist that reside within our government and society.
Root was suggesting that when engaging in this culture, information, and political war that we should be smart about branding and that we should always be striving to do a better job of controlling the language for the freedom cause in an efficient way. He was making the point that we should master this in the same way, or even better, than the way the left has been so successful at doing it for years.
This was when Root suggested that we refer to the left as the “Liars Club” rather than Marxists or Communists as he was suggesting that this would win over many more people that have a more simplistic view on the current state of our country.
I personally like Root’s ideas and I strongly believe he’s an awesome asset to the America First movement, but I’m not sure whether he’s correct in this case or not. I will attempt to explain my point here, but in doing so I want to elaborate on a few other ideas that I have had over the past few years to add to this discussion.
As you heard in my lead off quote with Ronald Reagan the point to that quote is that there is a significant difference between those people who would advocate and support a Communist government and those who would not. When examining the two types of people there’s an obvious gap that exists there and it’s that gap that has had philosophers and political historians debating over the subject since the dawn of mankind.
You see the thing that makes up that gap in my opinion (and apparently Reagan’s opinion as well) is the individual’s ability to understand what it is that they are supporting or fighting against. You see to me this gap is exactly where the truth of all of this reveals itself.
I 1000% agree with Wayne Allen Root’s point regarding how the America First movement should master the language and excel in the process of nomenclature in order to dominate the cultural wins that are needed in order to establish a new political environment that prioritizes American citizens within the borders of the United States.
In terms of playing this game you’re not going to get any argument from me. However, in the process of building on and improving the nomenclature I also believe that it’s vitally important to educate and remind people that words do have meaning and that those meanings come from somewhere.
After all, when you look at the teachings of Karl Marx and the past governments throughout history (and present day) that were Communist regimes, the results of those events, those ideas, and those experiences have ALWAYS resulted in horrific conditions for the citizens of every one of those places.
You see that gap that I was referring to regarding the lack of understanding from those people that support Marxist and Communist ideals centers on a fundamental flaw at the root of the belief system that they never seem to recognize.
You’re probably wondering Brandon, what fundamental flaw at the center of gravity of Communism and Marxism exists that the ignorant supporters of these belief systems always fail to see, or understand?
My answer to this centers around the concept of ruin.
This is derived from the consistent degradation of your personal agency. That’s right, if you read Karl Marx he advocates for everything to be viewed through the lens of the oppressor and the oppressed.
“Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workingmen of all countries unite!”
― Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto
In that quote from Marx he is projecting fear towards the ruling class from the workers, however the problem that Marx was too simple minded to comprehend is that in the real world there’s ALWAYS a ruling class and those ruling classes have always been especially dominant in Communist countries throughout all of history.
In fact, even if you look at the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) today their head Xi Jinping and the rest of his party literally have trillions of dollars at their disposal to enforce whatever policy, or means necessary to push forward their initiatives onto the world at large. Additionally as individuals these people are the wealthiest people on the planet.
Because of their wealth and power this makes them a complete walking contradiction to their own Marxist ideology as they ARE literally the Bourgeoisie that Marx would talk about overthrowing, yet all the Marxists supporters hypocritically allow Xi to declare himself ruler for life instead of forcing him out of office in the way Marx talks about in his writings.
To clarify my last point, I’m not necessarily referring to all of the Chinese people as being big supporters of Xi. In fact, they are the first victims of his Communist system, but I am referring to the Marxist supporters that do exist within the Chinese state, which more than likely doesn’t include the majority of the wonderful Chinese citizens such as Laobaixing.
These innocent citizens of China, just like the Laobaixing of America, are who this blog and podcast are fighting for.
The War of Nomenclature
If you’re not familiar with the term nomenclature it is an interesting word that is really at the center of power for those that think and apply its use in the world of media, or more specifically with those who are The Crime Syndicate of Narrative.
The word nomenclature involves the process of devising and choosing the names of things. This may not sound like something that’s a big deal to you, but when language is manipulated for the purpose of framing certain narratives it can be either incredibly dangerous, or incredibly enlightening to a society depending on the nature and intent of the narrative in use.
When looking at how dangerous the war of nomenclature is, or more specifically how dangerous it can be, one of the most well known examples of how this is explained can be referenced in George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 involving the fictional language (nowadays arguably accurate language) of what is referred to as Newspeak.
In Orwell’s 1984 the totalitarian society of Oceania created Newspeak which was a controlled language involving simplified grammar and limited vocabulary that’s purpose was centered on limiting a person’s ability to critically think.
As a result this led to an individual being unable to communicate and articulate abstract concepts which resulted in them being unable to identify their own personal identity, self-expression, and free will. This was the intent of Newspeak as these three characteristics I mentioned were not only quelled by the use of Newspeak inside of Oceania, but they were also literally labeled as Thought Crimes.
To get a grip on this and to understand the motive you have to look at the result of what certain nomenclature produces within a society. In the case of Orwell’s 1984 model it’s clear that the purpose was to destroy the individual and it was completely successful in doing so. Once again the central flaw that we can see at the center of gravity of this Marxist behavior involves the goal of ruin.
Additionally the irony of just how Orwellian this language is can be seen in how the left refers to themselves as Progressives, which doesn’t involve progress at all. The entire belief structure results in Regression due to the destruction of the individual.
In the real world we have seen this in actual application within the destruction of individual liberty in the old Soviet Union with the likes of the Goskomizdat which was the official state committee for publishing that strictly enforced ideological and political censorship.
As you can see the Goskomizdat existed a long time before Biden’s FBI infiltrated Twitter. The point here is that speech has been suppressed in Communist systems both past and present to destroy the individual and it doesn’t stop at censorship.
As I was pointing out earlier with Wayne Allen Root, the Communist left here in America have been masters at manipulating language by applying the use of simplified vocabulary in the same form as Orwell’s Newspeak.
To give you some concrete examples of this I always defer to the well known, yet worn out descriptive Newspeak terms such as gun violence and hate crimes. Both of these terms are commonly used by the media to strip away personal responsibility from the individual and to place that responsibility onto some external source, or to redirect the focus onto an object of blame.
This is always done for political purposes for Communists to ruin individuality by erasing the entire concept of individual agency. Once this is done the individual loses the ability to think critically and will go along with the limited vocabulary to support a complete false narrative.
For instance, if you break down the term gun violence it suggests that guns, as inanimate objects, commit acts of violence. If you really strip that down to its bare bones it is an absurd term. After all, as I sit here recording the audio for this podcast my Remington 870-12 gauge shotgun is sitting right above me on the shelf of my studio here inside my bedroom closet and it hasn’t once tried to shoot me since I’ve owned it. It’s been completely non-violent towards me and everyone I know. Think about that for a moment.
Likewise, if we examine that word hate crime, while understanding its intent, we can see how the Communist left is trying to use the language with this word to suggest that ONLY crimes that involve perceived acts of violence regarding race are considered hate crimes.
Once again this is a direct attempt to stall your ability to critically think regarding the word because the language has been manipulated in such a way to elicit a response from this word that is tied directly to race with a crime against a perceived racial injustice as being the motive.
This word is exactly what Orwell’s 1984 was referring to as a Thought Crime because to truly know whether someone is a racist one would have to know the thoughts of that individual, but in the case of the hate crime it is assumed that the crime was motivated by race whether it’s true or not.
This has been applied to many circumstances when it wasn’t true at all, but because the Administrative State Media (ASM) ran with it people quickly spread around the term hate crime labeling the innocent with this moniker while defending the guilty in the court of public opinion until the facts came to light.
If you don’t believe me then do you remember George Floyd? Do you remember Kyle Rittenhouse?
The fact is that neither of these cases had anything to do with race, but the terms hate crime and gun violence were quickly attached to both of these cases by the media and people ran with it emotionally desiring to enact woke injustice instead of digging deeper for the facts.
Of course, once the facts came out on both of these cases it was clear that George Floyd was not outright murdered by Derek Chauvin and that Kyle Rittenhouse was simply defending himself in a moment when he was trying to aid others during the hostile riots in Wisconsin.
Once again, the inability for the public to think critically was accelerated by the application of the nomenclature regarding the left’s control of language in the examples here concerning the words gun violence and hate crimes.
As a result people were actually convicted and almost convicted on charges that should have never been a part of each party’s legal case discussion, but the nomenclature from the Communist left was successful in driving the desired outcomes concerning these cases against Chauvin and Rittenhouse although those outcomes, according to the facts, were not accurate.
The War of Art
If you’ve been following this podcast and blog for a while you know I’ve previously mentioned the ancient philosopher and Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu and his writings from his book The Art of War.
By the way if you haven’t read this book I strongly recommend you include it into your list of readings as in today’s world it’s the second most important book you can read. Just in case you’re wondering about which book I’d consider to be the most important, that would undoubtedly be the Holy Bible.
Having said that in the teachings of Sun Tzu’s Art of War he outlines a detailed explanation and analysis of the 5th century BC Chinese military involving weapons, environmental conditions, and strategy involving rank and disciplinary structure.
The Art of War is a tremendously valuable asset to provide you with the principles and strategies to help you to understand what it takes to win a battle whether that battle involves rivaling militaries, rivaling businesses, or rivaling political opponents.
When it comes to the application of these strategies this goes along with what I was mentioning earlier with what Wayne Allen Root was suggesting in regards to being smart about the names we use to identify and communicate the meaning of certain things.
What Root is pointing to is something that I actually work hard at doing as frequently as I can here on this Substack when it comes to the use of effective communication with the application of words. You see there’s the limited vocabulary with the use of words as I pointed out earlier with the purpose of Orwell’s Newspeak.
However, in order to rival Orwell’s Newspeak there’s also the creative and powerful combination of words that can be used to more effectively communicate meaning and intent to people in a very artistic and impactful way.
In this way I like to view the use of nomenclature in and of itself as a form of art and this form of art is what we can use to be in direct competition with the limited vocabulary of the Communist left.
Therefore this is what I like to refer to as the War of Art. Obviously this is a play on the name of Sun Tzu’s famous book of military philosophy and strategy, but the nomenclature concerning the vocabulary is what I wanted to illustrate in a name once some context was offered.
If you didn’t know I’ve been a professional strength and fitness coach now for over twenty years. The other day I was training a new student and novice working with her as it was her first time ever lifting dumbbells in her entire life. Even though she had lived an active lifestyle she had communicated to me that she had just never gotten around to lifting free weights in an organized manner for the purpose of a fitness and strength program.
As we began I had her perform her very first set of dumbbell bench press to strengthen her core, chest, shoulders, and arms. As she began to press the dumbbells up away from her chest she was struggling to stabilize them in the ascent of the movement. As a result the dumbbells were swaying back and forth as she fought to keep them moving in a straight line of motion during the pressing portion of the movement.
It was at this point that she asked me why it was so difficult for her to control the weights as she pressed them up. As I explained, the reason for this was because she was new to the movement and had not yet developed the synergist muscles which are the surrounding muscles that assist the agonist muscle (the primary mover) in making sure the movement is performed with a more accurate and fluid pattern.
In other words, the lift isn’t smooth and seamless just yet because the muscles that are being used to assist you in the movement still have to get stronger.
The reason I wanted to share this little story with you is because just like you have to train your synergist muscles to more smoothly execute the movement of lifting free weights the same thing can be said with how you use and apply the nomenclature in the War of Art to counter the Communist Newspeak narrative.
For example let’s take the word gun violence and deconstruct the language. If the Communist left uses the word gun violence to describe a certain act of violence we can simply and creatively change the nomenclature to counter this false narrative.
Since we’ve already established that as an inanimate object guns are not capable of committing violence by themselves we can instead use another descriptive noun to replace the word gun as the primary mover of the word gun violence. Therefore, since guns as inanimate objects cannot commit violence by themselves we do know that they can be used by humans to commit acts of violence.
Therefore we can replace the word gun with the word human to describe and refer to an act of violence. As a result the next time the Communist left uses the word gun violence it’s up to us to correct them by using the word human violence in its place.
You see the primary mover, or agonist, in the phrase gun violence is the word gun according to the Communist left Newspeak. The word violence in this example is the synergist that is assisting the primary mover (in this case the word gun) to communicate that guns are violent in this example of Newspeak. You and I are simply communicating that ONLY humans are violent and to further deconstruct the Newspeak we can also ask why other inanimate objects are never the agonist (or primary mover) from the Communist left when it comes to other acts of violence?
In other words, if there’s a violent crime committed by an individual using a chair, a baseball bat, or car then why do we never hear the Newspeak referring to any of these acts of violence as chair violence, baseball bat violence, or car violence?
The answer to this is because none of those things are in line with the Communist left’s narrative concerning the object of blame because those objects don’t offer the level of self-protection that a gun will offer when it comes to a citizenry that may find itself in a situation having to fend off tyranny.
Once again, the center of gravity for the Marxist ideals involves the motive for ruin.
The Wrap Up
I would say that I am still not sure whether I 100% agree with Wayne Allen Root’s specific request of using the phrase “Liars Club” in place of the words Communist or Marxist as I believe it’s always important to define your enemy. George Bush made that mistake by not defining the specific enemy when he declared the War on Terror after 9/11.
However, to Root’s credit it’s still not a bad idea because Root is intelligently engaging in the War of Art by simply changing the nomenclature to counter the Communist Newspeak. It’s a really smart approach.
Ultimately the Communist left have figured out many methods and ways to evolve their ability to destroy everything that represents liberty and freedom.
The famous football coach Bill Parcells used to say that “you are what your record says you are” and in terms of the record of Marxism and Communism in application the record shows nothing but losses in every column since it came into existence.
These losses have done nothing, but result in the complete ruin of the human condition and the nomenclature of the Progressive Communist left have demonstrated that their methods to sell their ideas over the years have evolved, but the methods themselves have always resulted in the devolution of the human condition.
Therefore, with the changing times and the changing landscapes of multiple civilizations Marxism has proven to be nothing more than the Evolution of Devolution.
This is why it’s up to you and me individually to evolve our efforts in the War of Art and together to be the organizing principle and the phalanx to overrun the Communist Newspeak with a new era of correct language that enforces freedom and liberty.
This is what it means to be an Emissary of Freedom.
I hope you enjoyed today’s article/podcast.
If so I hope you would choose to support this platform as part of the patriot economy as well. Be an Emissary of Freedom and help to push this piece out to your friends, family, and coworkers.
One way you can do this right now is by joining me and giving me a like here on Public SQ. This platform is directly tied to the support of a freedom first movement by allowing you to line up your purchasing power with businesses that share your values.
In order for BOTH you and me to influence and strengthen our society we must not stay idle so please make sure you hit the subscribe and share buttons here below.
Spreading messages like this one is how we influence our culture and I need your help in order to do it.
Also listen to this episode here on…
If you like this podcast and the message please take a moment to give it a Five Star ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ rating on the Spotify platform.
Also to connect with me please make sure you join me here on Facebook, GETTR, Truth Social, and now Substack’s new social media called Notes.
Stay strong. Stay focused. Stay active.
The Evolution of Devolution