The Hegelian dialectic contains a theory of history believed by the Marxist to be the means by which history is manipulated by the Marxists. It presupposes that there is no God and that history is materialistic and can be directed.
I propose that this is the Hegelian dialectic that is being worked on us by the New World Order repeatedly in the context of Color Revolution.
Wash, rinse, and repeat over and over again.
Thesis
Creation and or magnification of crises and problems. Financial panic, war, artificial shortages of basic commodities, gun and violence awareness.
The more problems factored into the equation, the swifter political and socio-economic changes can be accomplished; as in the former Soviet Union.
Antithesis
Use of the media, puppets, and other communication (podcasts Carlson, Owen, Fuentes, etc.) to focus attention to the crises and mobilize the opposition to the problem.
Synthesis
Offers the solution to the artificially created or magnified problems of step one. The sweeping changes succeed only because of the well orchestrated dispensation of social propaganda during the incubation process and ensuing panic period. The masses consent to otherwise intolerable socio-economic reform (Mahmdani in NYC, Katie Wilson in Seattle, Jacob Frey in Minneapolis, etc.) with little or no resistance.
Author: jetbrane
I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling.
I am postmillennial in my eschatology.
Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity
Reformed in my Soteriology
Presuppositional in my apologetics
Familialist in my family theology
Agrarian in my regional community social order belief
Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief
Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic
Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern
Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview
One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics
Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place
Some of my favorite authors,
Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc.
My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture.
Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.
View all posts by jetbrane
You have destroyed my faith in Candace and Tucker. I want to believe they are not controlled opposition. Is that what you are saying?
I fully understand the dialectic and color revolutions, they are the bread and butter of our CIA.
Is your proof of their being controlled the fact that they are still allowed to speak?
I know they love to tell you what they are doing. But Tucker and Candace are complicit?
Have you seen this on who “they” might be? Its very interesting and you dont have to watch the whole thing to get the answer.
https://x.com/laralogan
Elon Musk just came out saying the Fuentes is a FED.
I’m confident that given Tucker’s Father being CIA that Tucker likewise was brought into the biz. The fact that Tucker has made his life as a talking head supports that contention has historically many talking heads have been Intelligent assets.
Candace fits the profile.
Let’s just put it this way … I don’t trust anybody and I am constantly trying to read between the lines.
Duly noted. I knew about Tuckers dad and it does raise some questions.
With Candace I could see it, but right now to much truth is coming out of her
mouth. She is saying things out loud that noone with her audience has been willing
to say.
Maybe she has been elected or allowed to be the one to pull back the curtain.
I guess time will tell.
Fuentes just has never resonated with me. Being foul mouthed and young just doesnt get my attention. He also says alot I disagree with also. Thanks
Antonius Patrick of TBR wrote a piece on Karl Ludwig von Haller that piqued my interest enough to obtain a copy of Haller’s ‘Restoration of Political Science’, which I’m reading now. Haller was Swiss, but lived through the French Revolution.
He’s demolishing some of my former heroes, but I feel I’m the better for it. It’s proving to be a real revelation as to how we’ve all (i.e. the Western democracies) been infected by Enlightenment premises.