A Concept of Revolt

To say the United States has regressed since the Objectivist purge began two years ago would be an understatement. The cities are sparse shells, industrial areas have become reminiscent of the Soviet Union, post World War II. This once “shining beacon of freedom” has become a polluted wasteland full of poverty and disease.

So how did this all happen? Well, it was ten years ago; all the baseless claims of systemic voter fraud, those weren’t intended to overturn that election. The purpose was to create a blueprint to steal the next election by sowing enough doubt in election integrity. It was data collection, they learned what would be needed to prove fraud had taken place.

It was quite clever honestly. Cheat, not so that you will win, but so that your opponent will. They didn’t need to steal the election six years ago, as they won it outright, so they never mentioned that the Democrats had ‘cheated’ then. In fact, the only reason the election was narrowly won by the Republicans was because of the votes had they altered in favor of their opponent. But in the mainstream media it was reported as just another electoral college victory that went against the popular vote. Americans were used to this.

I had suspected they altered votes six years ago because of the third party candidate that had also ran. Once all votes had been tallied the attacks from the Democrats came, blaming the third party voters for their election loss, as they had seen the electoral votes for several states typically won by them transferred to the third party candidate. It made me wonder, how could a Democrat lose so many electoral votes in a three way race, and still win the popular vote. The math didn’t support it, but too few took notice.

Their plan became more obvious the last election, two years ago, when the Objectivist government took power with intent to never relinquish it. They lost this time, the electoral and popular votes. But this time they had ‘evidence’ that the Democrats had cheated. Again there was a third party candidate, again winning a large portion of the states Democrats had historically depended on; yet again it was the Democrat who somehow won the popular vote. However, two swing states the Republican-Objectivist party had claimed victory in from the previous election were narrowly won by the third party. For the first time in 178 years a candidate not associated with the Democrat or Republican parties was announced as the President-Elect. But that victory was short lived.

It was in the swing states the Objectivist’s executed their plan, purposefully changing their own voters’ ballots. Once the ‘fraudulent’ votes were revealed, the election itself was deemed inconclusive, and with both chambers of Congress in favor of the controlling government, they retained their power. I don’t believe this strategy was ever about stealing a single election by sowing doubt in the electoral process though; the aim was to gain absolute power by removing their rivals from all government completely. Whether or not the purge to eliminate registered Democrats from their new society was initially part of their plan, I do not know. But it happened, and those of us they did not take, those of us who reject their claim to power, we are banding together. A collective of truly independent minds.

Democrat leaders were arrested on the false charges of sedition, with the most prominent being held as example through public execution. Watching the ravenous Objectivist base cheering like Roman plebeians in the gladiator arena was even more grotesque that the hangings or firing squads were themselves. Witnessing history, rather than being a part of it, can be quite horrifying.

Some small counter-insurgence uprisings followed that were quickly quelled by the Objectivist government’s military might. Ranking officers had long since been replaced by loyalists, and disloyal service members were given dishonorable discharges. The initial takeover lasted only two weeks. On the west coast and in the northeast the National Guard was called, but those requests were denied by the Department of Defense. Another aspect of their coup d'é·tat they had learned would work ten years ago, before the Republicans gave in to sensible political pressure, but only after right-wing terrorists had attacked the Capitol.

The media was far too complicit then as well. Perhaps if that attack on our democracy had been uniformly reported and repudiated, as they tried to do two years ago, the United States might still be a democracy, and millions of people would not now be in concentration camps or mass graves. Such is the issue with journalism being directed by profit motives, rather than just being forward and honest. If we are ever to regain control from these Objectivist fascists, the first thing that must be done is to reintroduce some semblance of the Fairness Doctrine. The new policy, like the one the Federalists did away with, must require the holders of broadcast licenses to present important and controversial public issues in a manner that is honest, equitable, and balanced.

That attack on the Capitol ten years ago, as pathetic and pointless as it seemed, was still very telling of the irreparable state of the corporate media, not to mention the country itself. A seditious senator was gleefully commended on NBC News for reversing his objection once blood had been shed; one of the few honest faces at CNN wondering if that day, the 6th of January, might be the “start” of something more. Bloodshed never comes at the start... Then there was the owner of The Washington Post, who, regardless of his wealth, and the newspaper’s tagline of “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” didn’t seem to have an issue with only allowing paid subscribers to view his paper’s articles; as if he owned the information. How quickly that coward fled once the Democrats were strung up.

Journalism, like politics, like most professions of service to the greater community, allowed for greed and self-servitude to infiltrate and influence a part of a free society that is intended to be incorruptible. And that corruption only increases as the influence spreads. The issue with both of those institutions, what most caused the corruption of our politics and the press, is that of corporate sponsorship.

The corporations didn’t directly cause the insurrection, in fact, the vast majority of large business owners were greatly opposed to the Objectivist purge. Not just for the negative affect it had on their immediate profits, but because they understood what lay ahead; the inevitable collapse of a society that is controlled by a nationalistic fascist government. Naturally, the largest companies moved abroad, choosing to save their businesses over their country, and over the lives of the people who supported their businesses, whether consumer or employee. Those companies that stayed continued the corrupt ways of their predecessors. The trouble isn’t the people who take advantage of others though, nor is it those who serve them in order that they may live. No, the issue is with those who allow themselves to be taken advantage of in hope that they will one day be able to take advantage of others.

In any political or social movement there will always be people looking to exploit a situation. What exactly did the Objectivists think would happen when they formed a society of individuals who only care for themselves? Just as Lenin and Stalin used Marxism, though they were not true communists, just as Hitler claimed his Nazi party to be socialist, though it did not adhere to true socialism, the leaders of this Objectivist movement are not the Objectivists of Ayn Rand’s mind. In truth, they are mostly comprised of grifters, people only interested in the wealth they can gain on the backs of others, while having no real desire to wield the power they hold.

The business world became a blind race to the bottom, who could produce the cheapest goods in the least amount of time for the highest profits. Eventually, the consumer was left with no options for product choice, either by way of monopoly or collapsed industry; the latter condition exacerbated by the nationalism the Objectivists cloaked themselves in. The skilled worker no longer comes to work, preferring simple menial labor or to make a living through odd jobs or craftsmanship since wages are so low.

These skilled workers have become the artisans of the Renaissance, though we are certainly living in a time more resembling the Dark Ages. Educators and clergy have taken up the mantle of leaders. As with any moment in history though, the rebel will always find a rebel to be at odds with. For now we have cooperation. The question dividing us is in how to proceed with our revolt, without it falling to another authoritarian regime? And more importantly, how to guard whatever newly formed government we create from the likes of the Federalists who kept running our ship aground?

There will surely be violence and blood, death and destruction, further than what we have already witnessed these past two years. We are outnumbered and outgunned. We lack resources of all kinds. But we are resourceful. They are outwitted, and there is no loyalty among them to their cause, as there is no loyalty to society in the selfish mind of an Objectivist. Varying ideological groups we may be, we all have a singular understanding. Whether we count ourselves as humanist or communist, anarchist, socialist, or liberal, we are all one in common thought with the purpose of our existence.

That thought, no individual is more important, or less important, than any other. Intelligence will always survive, but for ideas to flourish, genius must be provided an environment in which it can thrive. That environment can only exist in a society that builds itself on a principle of collectivism.

In the collectivist’s view, only symbols and individuals can be evil, as the purpose of society is to create a harmonious order for every citizen. And evil must be eradicated for harmony to find its place, but it must be done through justice and intelligent planning, not brute force and violence. When a life is taken preemptively, whether on the battle field or civilian streets, those responsible have ceased to defend humanity, and instead attack it. I was taught throughout my childhood that the hero does not take life to serve justice, the vigilante does. That’s not to say the vigilante’s cause is an unjust one, but taking a life is a line the hero cannot cross.

“The coward makes himself cowardly, the hero makes himself heroic.”

~Jean-Paul Sartre