The Problem With Externalising Problems

Letters from O'Brien #35

Dear Mr Smith,

I have to say, that of all the popular conservative mainstream figures, I find former intelligence officer Sean Hannity’s reporting seemingly out of touch with the domestic situation. While I am not certain of all of his opinions, I have heard enough to be relatively sure that his position is one from a Cold War era long passed. This should come as no surprise, he is a byproduct of the Central Intelligence Agency, which - as I wrote about in the past - was infiltrated by communists during World War II (as the OSS) and completely compromised by the late 1960s. As such, his entire career likely entailed training and pressures from higher-ups which reflected this bias towards the ideological left, which results in a fundamentally different outlook on reality.

EXTERNAL VS INTERNAL ISSUES

It seems to me that Hannity represents the out of touch western conservative, who’s primary concern is offloading problems onto other countries while conveniently ignoring the fact that the US is in a state of civil war. In his programs, he frequently advocates for confrontation and a show of force against Russia. Given the fact that he acts as if it is 1965, I will show him some mercy. This can be a good, strong stance to take if the US is actually in the right, and also if the enemy in question is truly out for evil. Taking a stance like this was beneficial against mid-century Soviet ambitions (and globalist communist goals more broadly). Unfortunately, we are no longer in this scenario, and thus his stance against Russia - a confused nation seeking a return to traditional values more than we are - in favour of the defence of Ukraine - a confused and stratified region mirroring 1980s Yugoslavia - is unfounded and self-destructive.

What conservatives (among others) must realise is that this civil war within the US is more important than any other conflict. It has already resulted in a coup, in which a foreign (anti-constitutional) government has taken power. This government is not American. Each act by this foreign government is therefor an act of war against America from its own White House.

It is no exaggeration to say that this is essentially like having a Chinese occupational government set up in the White House, who’s stated goal is the destruction of the American people. This government would put out direct attacks and indirect distractions against the American people. Now imagine that some of the biggest ‘conservative’ voices are either fully or at least partially adhering to this Chinese narrative, directing blows at their own countrymen. That is what is happening.

But even beyond that, What Hannity pushes for is a type of international policing which has not been effective since the Gulf War, and the reason for this is simple; America has lost its values. In the past, the US claim for international intervention was essentially that America was built on objective Christian values, and would stop those who wished to impose tyrannical control onto others. The classic conservative belief in ‘necessary wars’ stems from this belief; that foreign evil powers will attempt to enforce their will upon others, and it is the duty of a moral Christian nation to prevent this. That is true, but there is a problem… Since America now lacks that moral foundation, there is no real point in international intervention beyond pushing ideological nonsense and securing strategic points. It simply shifts control from one collectivist state to another.

To give the US military its due, the Navy is responsible for policing international waters and securing international trade. Without this it is likely that China and India would begin clashing as each nation races to secure trade routes through international waters. It would also lead to the rise of state-sponsored pirating of ships. However, I question how long the US military can uphold this if it no longer abides by conventional morality.

While the US military should continue to be funded - as all militaries should for the sake of national security - the focus should not be entirely on foreign problems. Hannity frequently mentions Russia, Iran, and China. Russia is barely a threat, and involving ourselves in what is essentially an inverted Cuban Missile Crisis is beyond stupid, and most evidently a distraction from the ongoing war in America. Iran directly funds radicalism in Azerbaijan for religious ends, who themselves constantly attack the Christian state of Armenia, and as such they should not be regarded very highly. Nevertheless, they are not an international threat. China is perhaps the only outlier, advocating for a type of nationalised communo-fascism (the US and Europe - in contrast - advocate for a globalised form of this same communo-fascism). However, China is well aware that a military move would be catastrophic as of yet, and that the best course of action is to continue to fund the demoralisation and stratification of the west until it breaks apart. Not only does this save life and resources for China, but in the moral battle for the support of its neighbours, a demoralised America (once a beacon of greatness) would slowly drive away trust and support from the South Asian nations, who will - in their bid to find new trade alliances - slowly begin to pivot to the more ‘secure’ Peoples Republic of China.

These distractions have little objective grounding, and as such they rely on emotional responses from the population. This is why it is not entirely unbelievable that Russia could be bought into the Western sphere if a radical pivot in the Pacific happens in the next few years. It is no exaggeration to predict that a Chinese threat could result in a media 180-degree turn, in which peace deals are signed in Ukraine, Putin is rapidly re-engineered to be a western masculine hero, and the same emotionally-based attributes used to demonise Russia are shifted onto China. The same emotionally driven individuals who criticise Putin today will cheer him on tomorrow. And thus the distractions continue.

All of these distractions come at a critical point in the western civil war. European globalist groups know that a demoralised America with a leadership under the sway of socialist ideology is a must. The US military is the best in the world, hence it serves as the enforcement arm of the ‘new’ Socialist International. If the US were to wake up and pull away, it would set these ideological plans back decades. More and more Americans are beginning to realise the deeply rooted ‘march through the institutions’ - the socialist subversion set in motion decades ago - and are beginning to uproot these corrupted systems. A relentless attack on socialist doctrines is necessary, and is already underway, but it must continue uninterrupted by international disputes and other such things. Beginning with ESG, the SDGs, and other socialist tools created to centralise of the free market, then expanding to the corruption of academia and the educational sector, these collectivist brainwashing methods must be noticed, then highlighted to the public (by informing them of its nature) and then completely removed. If this happens, then the future of the United States can be redirected away from destruction.

I highlight these things because it is important to be aware of what one actually supports and rallies for. I do not see the conflict in Eastern Europe as engulfing anyone beyond the borders of Ukraine unless there are deliberate moves of hostility towards Russia. Americans must realise this and shift their focus back onto the US, which is at risk of complete downfall. The current administration should be viewed as a foreign, un-American coup which occupies the White House. The people should notice that this ‘leadership’ is set on destroying the dollar, nullifying the US as a sovereign nation, and utilising its military (and ingenuity) to push the goals of international-socialist organisations in the process. A sovereign United States which returns to its founding doctrines of objective truth and liberty is one of the greatest fears for the international socialists and one of the greatest hopes for a free world.

Sincerely yours,

O’Brien