The United States in 2020—and Mexico in 1988

The mural decorating the bedroom wall in Mexico City featuring Che and Pancho.

As we bid farewell to 2020, a year overloaded with the ridiculous and the outrageous, full of comfortable lies and unacceptable truths, I find myself pondering death. Not so much the death of 350,000 who, we are told, succumbed to a plague unleashed from China, but the otherwise unheralded death of our dear Uncle Sam. 

Admittedly, the patient had been declining for some time. Since the 1960s, the elderly gentleman had ceased making the really hard decisions in his deliberative centers. In the early stages of his dementia, he devolved all of the truly difficult, unpopular, and detrimental decisions onto an unaccountable committee made up of black-robed trustees who cared not a whit for his best interests. 

More recently, Uncle Sam found that he could no longer manage his finances. Instead of making a budget and sticking to it, his dereliction had progressed to the point where he could only pay his bills by taking on more debt. Yet, despite his economic straits, his list of dependents, heirs and hangers-on grew longer. It seemed that every verminous bloodsucker on earth wished to attach itself to the old man as he fumbled confusedly with his checkbook.

Over the past twelve years, we have watched the pitiable old man's executive functions fail him. Foreign pathogens were introduced into his system which spread corruption throughout his central command pathways. One by one, he lost control of even his most vital organs.

During the past four years, the patient was placed on life support with little hope of survival. In private, his heirs gathered around him like vultures, anxiously awaiting his coming demise while upholding the public fiction that he was still perfectly healthy. They recorded the time of his death in secret: 2:00 AM on November 4, 2020. Some say that he died peacefully in his sleep. I, however, think that the old man was snuffed by his unscrupulous heirs while those meant to stand guard were bribed or drugged.

Rather than continue on with this somewhat maudlin metaphor, let us return to reality wherein we find that the American Republic has ceased to function as it was meant to. For how can a republic built on the bedrock of free elections of representatives by a free and virtuous people, continue on in a circumstance where that foundation has been drilled away by individual corruption and corporate vote fraud on an unimaginably galling scale? 

Blatant, widespread electoral fraud on the scale needed to overturn a national election, as we have witnessed in 2020, is the hallmark not of a free republic, but of a banana republic. We are presented with a situation where the the chosen candidate of the DC oligarchy (Uncle Sam's corrupt heirs mentioned above) said overtly before the election that they had, "put together I think the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics." Some maintained that Mr. Biden's words have been taken out of context or that he simply misspoke. Personally, I think we witnessed in that instant the demon speaking through him, forcing his pride-addled brain to say the quiet part out loud, much like the way he had previously bragged about bribing Ukraine to stop investigating Burisma. 

Mr. Biden's stolen victory has wakened many Americans to the fact that the free republic represented in our traditional schooling is now largely a fiction, much as the Roman republic under Lucius Domitus Ahenobarbus, though maintaining the forms and offices, was a fiction. 

As of 2021, we must face the fact that we are not a shining city on a hill. We have no longer a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. We are Venezuela. We are Argentina. We are Mexico. 

I was in Mexico City when the PRI stole the Mexican presidential election in 1988. At that time, the PRI (Partido Revolucionario Institucional or Revolutionary Institutional Party) made up most of the Mexican federal government, having ruled Mexico for 59 uninterrupted years. By 1988, the PRI were entrenched, unaccountable and disconnected from the average Mexican—much like the the DC oligarchy is in the US. Hence, they were deeply unpopular with the people who nonetheless felt powerless to change things. Like the American oligarchs, the PRI controlled most of the institutions along with the broadcast media.

In the immediate aftermath of the election of 1988, there were mass protests. I distinctly remember lying in a bedroom decorated with murals of Pancho Villa and Che Guevara and hearing fireworks or gunfire go off outside in the early evening. One of my roommates said, somewhat nervously, "Let's hope they're not coming for the gringos."

Our Lord or Rambo? You decide. 

The people I was staying with were middle-class Mexican Catholics but with a distinct tilt toward the radical left. In their dining room was a picture of Jesus well-equipped with bandoleras. These folks insisted that there was clear evidence of fraud and were furious that the government had cheated them out of their victory. The official results had been withheld, with the Secretary of the Interior blaming the delay on a computer system failure. The opposition party candidate, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, claimed that the computer failure was caused by a manipulation of the system used to count votes. It turned out that he was right.

Cardenas was kept out of the presidency, despite maintaining that he had won. In the end, the election was upheld by the PRI-dominated media and institutions, and Carlos Salinas de Gortari of the PRI became president of Mexico. Three years later, all of the ballots from the 1988 election were burned. 

Then, in 2004, Miguel de la Madrid, Mexico's PRI president at the time of the 1988 election, admitted in his autobiography that, on the evening of the election, he received news that the PRI was going to lose. That same year, the New York Times published this article:

Ex-President in Mexico Casts New Light on Rigged 1988 Election. 

The article read in part as follows:

Initial results from areas around the capital showed that Salinas was losing badly to the opposition leader Cuauhtemoc Cardenas. “I felt like a bucket of ice water had fallen on me,” de la Madrid recalled. “I became afraid that the results were similar across the country and that the PRI would lose the presidency.” 

Thus began the frantic staging of a fraudulent victory. In his writing of the event, the all-powerful former president chooses his words carefully and describes himself more like a supporting actor than the lead strategist. If he did anything wrong, it was on the advice of his staff, and for the stability of the nation. 

On election night 1988, de la Madrid said, the secretary of the interior advised him that the initial results were running heavily against the PRI. The public demanded returns, de la Madrid wrote. And rather than giving them, the government lied and said that the computer system tabulating the votes had crashed.

What was Mexico in 1988 is now America in 2020.

Pyramid of the Sun at Teotihuacan in the suburbs of Mexico City, 1988.

It should be recalled that Mexico under the PRI was described by leftist Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas Llosa as "the perfect dictatorship."

"The perfect dictatorship is not communism, not the Soviet Union, not Cuba, but Mexico, because it is a camouflaged dictatorship. It may not seem to be a dictatorship, but it has all of the characteristics of a dictatorship; the perpetuation, not of one person, but of an irremovable party, a party that allows sufficient space for criticism, provided such criticism serves to maintain the appearance of a democratic party, but which suppresses by all means, including the worst, whatever criticism may threaten its perpetuation in power." [Mario Vargas Llosa]

The United States enters 2021 as a one-party system under even deeper cover than Mexico in 1988. The Kabuki-style conflicts between Republicans and Democrats are merely part of the costume. If nothing else, the rigged election of this past November, which removed the outsider Trump and replaced him with the ultimate corrupt DC uniparty insider, with the consent and tacit support of both political parties, has helped the average American peek through the disguise.

It is worth remembering that the 1988 election was a watershed moment for Mexico and marked a period of sharp decline for the PRI which would ultimately lose the presidency to Vincente Fox in 2000. It remains to be seen if the 2020 elections will signal the ultimate downfall of the DC oligarchy, the renewal of the American Republic, and a general national recovery, or serve simply as a way-station on the road to terminal decay and decline.

A dim photo of the tilma of St. Juan Diego from 1988.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for the US and for Mexico.

The choices in the 2020 election: D. J. Trump versus D. C. Swamp

Click here to share on Facebook.

If you liked business-as-usual in the corrupt Washington, DC swamp, they've got the perfect candidate for you this time around.

Let's face it. Joe Biden is the candidate of the out-of-control, hyper-politicized Washington DC bureaucracy. He's a man who has spent 47 years making himself and his family extremely wealthy as a member of the ruling elite. Worse, it seems like he has sold himself and his family out to foreign interests, including communist China. 

There was a time when those in DC were considered "public servants." Is it not clear that the only people our public servants in DC are helping these days is themselves? A man who goes to Washington as an elected official, stays there for 47 years, and emerges mega-wealthy is a crook, plain and simple. 

It's time to truly drain the swamp. 

"No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist." ~ Pius XI and Quadragesimo Anno.

"Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory
terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic
and a true socialist."
—Pope Pius XI, May 15, 1931

One of the saddest hallmarks of our times is profound historical ignorance. What makes this ignorance particularly grievous is that it is not self-aware. Rather, it arrogantly considers itself wise and possessed of deep, often hidden truths. Whether this ignorance manifests itself in the study of the saints, Christopher Columbus, the Church Fathers, the Great Persecution, Late Antiquity, Catholic morality, or a million other topics, it is found everywhere. It is truly pandemic. We are surrounded by sophomores in the literal sense of that word—and the sophomores in question are not only wise fools but nasty bullies as well. 

It is an old saw that those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. We have now raised several generations who not only don't know history, but who have been presented with a false history based on "alternative facts." What they think of as historical facts are quite often politically-charged fictions. But as U.S. Vice President Mike Pence recently quipped, "You are entitled to your own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts." 

Most Catholics have been nurtured on alternative facts for decades now. Thus, is it any surprise that the anti-Church political movement is being led by apostate politicians who have the audacity to declare themselves devout in order to garner Catholic votes? Is it at all unexpected that these politicians ally themselves with those who consider the Knights of Columbus to be an extremist group? 

This scam has run for decades now with hardly a half-hearted whimper from our bishops. It is now reaching its apogee as an abortion-loving puppet of the socialist left with Rosary beads wrapped around his wrist is one election away from the presidency. The followers of Gramsci and Alinsky may have finally attained that tipping-point where a majority of the uncatechized-by-design have been drawn into the moist embrace of socialism without ever knowing that the Church has a longstanding history of condemning socialism. 

There are a few priests and bishops who will dare to preach on this subject these days, though they tend to be voices crying out in the wilderness. But the cool thing is that you don't need to have access to solid preaching to discover the truth in the Information Age. A sixty second web search will bring you to the papal encyclical known as Quadragesimo Anno (Forty Years) as written in 1931. In this encyclical, we see Pope Pius XI's forceful, clear and unequivocal condemnation of socialism, including the quote featured above. Here is the context of that particular quote, along with a few other pertinent excerpts from this timeless encyclical letter:

"Because of the fact that goods are produced more efficiently by a suitable division of labor than by the scattered efforts of individuals, socialists infer that economic activity, only the material ends of which enter into their thinking, ought of necessity to be carried on socially. Because of this necessity, they hold that men are obliged, with respect to the producing of goods, to surrender and subject themselves entirely to society. Indeed, possession of the greatest possible supply of things that serve the advantages of this life is considered of such great importance that the higher goods of man, liberty not excepted, must take a secondary place and even be sacrificed to the demands of the most efficient production of goods. This damage to human dignity, undergone in the "socialized" process of production, will be easily offset, they say, by the abundance of socially produced goods which will pour out in profusion to individuals to be used freely at their pleasure for comforts and cultural development. Society, therefore, as Socialism conceives it, can on the one hand neither exist nor be thought of without an obviously excessive use of force; on the other hand, it fosters a liberty no less false, since there is no place in it for true social authority, which rests not on temporal and material advantages but descends from God alone, the Creator and last end of all things.

If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist."

Pius XI goes on to diagnose why so many Catholics succumb to the allure of socialism:

The root and font of this defection in economic and social life from the Christian law, and of the consequent apostasy of great numbers of workers from the Catholic faith, are the disordered passions of the soul, the sad result of original sin which has so destroyed the wonderful harmony of man's faculties that, easily led astray by his evil desires, he is strongly incited to prefer the passing goods of this world to the lasting goods of Heaven. Hence arises that unquenchable thirst for riches and temporal goods, which has at all times impelled men to break God's laws and trample upon the rights of their neighbors, but which, on account of the present system of economic life, is laying far more numerous snares for human frailty.

If this was true in 1931 near the height of the Great Depression, how much more true it is in our own day when the "disordered passions of the soul" have become the norm rather than the exception? 

This next passage is also quite applicable to where we find ourselves now. For any who hope that by softening some of Christ's hard teachings or by adopting some of socialism's tenets, we may convert those drawn to socialism, Pius XI throws cold water on that notion:

There are some allured by the foolish hope that socialists in this way will be drawn to us. A vain hope! Those who want to be apostles among socialists ought to profess Christian truth whole and entire, openly and sincerely, and not connive at error in any way. If they truly wish to be heralds of the Gospel, let them above all strive to show to socialists that socialist claims, so far as they are just, are far more strongly supported by the principles of Christian faith and much more effectively promoted through the power of Christian charity.

Sadly, those Catholics who have attempted to bring socialism within the Church have indeed "connived at error" to the point where error has replaced sound teaching in many places where it should not be tolerated at all—that is, our schools and institutions of higher learning. Pius XI predicted that just such a thing would happen:

All these admonitions which have been renewed and confirmed by Our solemn authority must likewise be applied to a certain new kind of socialist activity, hitherto little known but now carried on among many socialist groups. It devotes itself above all to the training of the mind and character. Under the guise of affection it tries in particular to attract children of tender age and win them to itself, although it also embraces the whole population in its scope in order finally to produce true socialists who would shape human society to the tenets of Socialism.

With the insinuation of socialism into our Catholic schools over the past several decades, what has been the result? What fruit has the toleration, acceptance and celebration of socialist-materialist ideals borne among our Catholic youth? Are the poor better off? Are our cities where socialists rule bastions of peace, justice and kindness? Are our churches thronged with zealous Christians yearning to imitate Christ in service to the poor? 

Or are we witnessing instead the disintegration of society and the auto-demolition of the Catholic Church in America?

Pope Pius XI, pray for us.

"Hate has no home here" -- Unless you're one of the +60 million Trump voters

 So I figured out how to use Photoshop to make an animated GIF today. This is my first attempt.

I have always been suspect of these "Hate has no home here" signs which began popping up after Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016. Why? Because I knew for a fact that some of the folks putting them up were indeed consumed with hatred. They hated Donald Trump. They hated everyone who voted for him. They hated Republicans generally and conservative republicans specifically. They hated religious people, particularly devout Christians. They especially hated anyone who is pro-life. 

If you doubt any of the above, try coming out and making any of the following statements in a social media group:

• I voted for Donald Trump.
• I am a registered Republican.
• I am a follower of Jesus Christ.
• I love the Catholic Church.
• I am pro-life.
• I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

If you're a leftist, go ahead. Perform a sociology experiment and post one of those statements to your feed. See what kind of response you get from your leftist friends if they have any suspicion that you might be serious. Here's the kind of response you might get:

The above is an actual tweet from a woman in Texas from March of 2020. How much more raw can hatred get than this? 

If the election weren't enough to bring out the pure hatred by itself, Mr. Trump's recent bout with corona virus really let loose the ghouls as displayed in this tweet from the former national spokesperson for Hillary Clinton:

If you truly believe that "hate has no home here", you need to acting like it. Virtue signalling is one thing. Naked hypocrisy is something completely different. 

The Purpose of Opinion Polls is to Influence Public Opinion, Not to Measure It.

Click here to share this image on Facebook.

I created the above graphic four years ago as the presidential election cycle was just ramping up. As we approach election year 2020, it is even more critical to make American citizens aware of this. Public opinion polls, especially this far out from an election, are not about gauging your opinion about a particular candidate. Honestly, the pollsters don't much care what you think.

The true purpose of most opinion polls is to influence public opinion, not to measure it. 

This is especially true the farther from the election you are. Why? Because the election is the only real test of how accurate the pollsters are. A poll taken six months, a year, or eighteen months before an election will not be tested for a long time. By the time of the election, such erroneous or fraudulent polls will be long forgotten.

Pollsters seek to create an illusion of viability in some candidates or issues because they know that many low-information voters will simply glom onto whoever the perceived front-runner is as the election approaches. Rather than allowing this sleight-of-hand to influence your opinion, don’t let the polls determine which candidates are viable for you. Rather, do the research and find out which candidates are on record as having views that mirror your own, and vote for that person, particularly in the primaries.

In short, don't be a low-information voter. Ignore the polls completely, not just because they are inaccurate but because they are purposefully manipulative.

If everyone did that, we wouldn’t be stuck with media-approved “lesser of two evils” candidates in every single election.