The Value of Honor

Right now, right at this moment, I am watching a ceremony on television that I watched as a child when I visited Washington, DC.

I am at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and soldiers are walking through the ceremony.

The soldiers are immaculately dressed, and they perform admirably.

It is a beautiful ceremony, but I must guard myself to not take the wrong lessons away from it.

Washington can seduce you when you visit there.

There are many memorials and monuments worth seeing.

They represent the history of our country, and it is a country that we can be proud of.

But these monuments also have the power to destroy.

Many of these monuments were built by Americans of a different generation who did not think the way we now think.

Our country has drifted far from its religious underpinnings.

When our antecedents built memorials, God, and all the good that God represents, was foremost in their minds.

The power of Caesar was not.

And yet, the white marble, the vastness of the buildings, their sheer weight and size, can so be easily misconstrued as to what these monuments represent.

Lincoln was a godly man who was not so much concerned as to whether God was on his side but whether he was on God’s side.

His memorial must convey that.

As must the others.

But we are not of Lincoln’s era.

Nor that of the Founding Fathers.

And so these monuments have taken on a different meaning.

They are now a catalogue of sites that Americans check off as part of an indoctrination program into America’s might and power.

Our news media forever crows about America as the most powerful nation on earth.

As do our leaders.

The President of the United States is regularly feted as the most powerful man on the face of the earth.

Did Lincoln shower himself with such illusions?

The monuments are now part of the supporting cast to justify our Presidents’ decisions on waging war around the globe.

The monuments sanctify us, purify us, justify us.

But that was not their intent when they were first constructed.

Monuments and memorials do not exist for war. Nor do they exist to create heroes.

Nor do they serve as a pretext for vengeance or domination.

They exist to deliver a message.

Those men who sacrificed their lives as in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier are talking to us.

They want to tell us something.

They are asking us to dedicate our lives to forging a better world than the one that took their life.

As Lincoln said in the Gettysburg address:

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Unelected Cabal

Why do I rail against the Harvard cabal?

Is there something wrong with me?

No.

Aside from being given a mission by God (not my choice) to destroy Harvard University, I rail against Harvard University because they are an unelected cabal.

They have no authority or mandate to hijack the government of the United States of America which is exactly what they’ve done.

If the Founding Fathers had desired a so-called elite institution like Harvard University to rule the country, then why didn’t they cut to the chase and set things up that way?

I think it’s a good bet that they didn’t do that because they didn’t want things set up that way.

The Founding Fathers were very wary of replacing one tyrant with another.

That’s why they set up a system of checks and balances. It makes sense, right? They wanted to disseminate power, not concentrate it.

It probably didn’t occur to them that a university which is supposed to be knowledgeable, thoughtful, and intelligent would embark upon a mission of arrogant tyranny.

Isn’t that amazing when you think of it – that a school that one would think would be knowledgeable about empire, tyranny, and why civilizations thrive and collapse, would desire to recapitulate Rome.

Now, if Harvard University is so smart, as many of you think it is, then why is Harvard not smart enough to not do what they are doing.

Doesn’t Harvard understand that when you place too many people in power who come from one institution or a small group of similar thinking institutions that you produce an inbreeding of thought that will ultimately engender an inflexibility and ossification of society that restricts its ability to adapt?

And isn’t that precisely what we are seeing in the United States of America today.

As our leadership has ossified under the death grip of Harvard University, other countries who have relaxed their totalitarian ways have moved ahead of us.

Is that what we want?

It’s not what I want.

I want to see the United States of America adhere to the principles of the Founding Fathers.

I am not interested in a Supreme Court justice musing about it. I want it to be so.

Well, we are never going to get there unless Harvard University is defeated.

That’s why I rail against Harvard University.

They are destroying the United States of America.

We can’t have America the country and America the empire at the same time. It’s impossible. We can have one or the other but not both.

And if we can’t have a country, then what’s the point of the empire?

If Harvard can’t understand that, then Harvard must go.

Based upon its lack of understanding, its lack of insight, Harvard University has proven itself to not be comprised of the best and brightest.

In which case, again, Harvard must go.

The sooner the better.

Harvard has made a mockery of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Forget Democracy

Maybe the form of government doesn’t mean as much as we think it does.

As long as people believe or trust stupid things, what’s the point?

As long as people a) worship money, b) idolize celebrities c) believe that people who graduate from certain schools are of superior intelligence, can any form of government save us?

Suppose we had kings and queens, but people were of the mindset that freely congregating during COVID-19 while protecting the elderly was the way to protect ourselves, would we be better off?

Of course.

Well, instead we had sham democracies that were “elected” by powerful international cabals who control large multinational corporations.

These large multinational corporations control the media that effectively propagandize people and make them believe that lockdowns and masks will protect them.

Now the people are ingrained into believing that a yearly booster will protect them which is good for the corporations.

Lots of money there, eh’

So, here we have a theoretically superior system – democracy – that is supposed to make life better for us. But it hasn’t.

Why hasn’t this supposedly superior form of government called democracy worked?

Because the elites have programmed the people into believing that people who graduate from Harvard, MIT and Oxford are the best and the brightest.

Because the people follow celebrity-demigods like Dr. Tom Hanks who tell them to stay at home.

Because the people listen intently to billionaires like Bill Gates who clearly must be smarter than the rest of us because he’s accumulated so much money.

It made total sense that treating a number like an R-naught value would force the virus down on its knees and cry uncle, right?

Sure.

Perhaps we might be better off in spending less time on the form of government and more time on the myths that people believe.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

The Right Fight

Once again I shall talk about Julian Assange.

I think it’s important to bring up his case from time to time because Assange sits in a prison today at the behest of the United States government and in particular ignorant fools like Mike Pompeo, sell out artist extraordinaire, who sold his soul to the elites for a few pieces of silver.

Julian Assange’s crime was to expose the criminality of our elites as they fought wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Assange had the courage to do what Arthur Ochs Sulzberger of the New York Times did not have the courage to do.

Assange reported the truth.

His most notable exposition was that of helicopter personnel gunning down innocent civilians in Iraq and then joking about it.

The government ultimately accused Assange of helping to steal government documents.

Of course, they haven’t proven that yet. Nevertheless Assange sits in Belmarsh prison in the UK waiting for extradition back to the United States.

The UK can always be counted on to partner with the United States in criminality because the UK taught our elites how to conduct this criminality. The UK had a head start on the United States and has conducted its criminal enterprise of exploitation, theft and murder for over five centuries now.

In that regard, the United States is a mere child, an eager novice learning at its mother’s feet.

Given that Assange will be tried in an American court, it would seem logical that he should enjoy the rights of an American citizen even though he is Australian by birth.

As an aside, though he is an Australian by birth, by his actions and his courage he is more American than most of us. I will include myself in that.

Because he has been incarcerated for well over a year, because the Sixth Amendment grants us the right to a speedy trial, Julian Assange’s Sixth Amendment rights have been conclusively violated.

This is not important to our elites who claim to defend the Bill of Rights.

I find it ironic that Assange is currently housed in a prison in the United Kingdom, for it was that criminal nation that imprisoned many of our ancestors before they immigrated to the United States.

That’s why our ancestors came here.

They wanted a better way of life.

They didn’t want to be imprisoned in the Tower of London upon the whim of the queen or king.

They didn’t want to be impaled on the city walls of London as was the case up until the 19th century.

They didn’t want their children to grow up in a Dickensian workhouse.

They didn’t want to bow and curtsy before a queen.

They didn’t want government to fight endless wars, certainly not as an economic model.

And they sure didn’t want a government that would violate our basic inalienable rights.

That’s why they articulated the Bill of Rights which are the crown jewels of the United States of America.

The Bill of Rights is what we talk about and what we fight about. It is who we are as Americans.

One of those rights is free speech which is what Assange engaged in.

The other right is the right to a speedy trial which has been denied to Julian Assange.

Without that right, the government can keep us incarcerated for life which I suppose is what they plan to do to Assange.

Why have a trial? The trial is now unnecessary without the Sixth Amendment being adhered to.

This is great for the ruling class.

But for the rest of us, not so much.

This is why it’s important to remember Julian Assange.

The fight for his freedom could not be more important.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Presentative Democracy

Do you believe that representative democracy is the ultimate form of government?

I don’t.

I think it’s a terrible form of government.

The elites figured out how to rig elections pretty much the day after they came into being.

Did you know that Napoleon and his brothers rigged elections in France?

That was 200 years ago.

Not only did they rig the elections and plebiscites, they were brazen enough to rig them with rounded number victories: 16 million to 4 million.

Forget about the fine-toothed comb.

Why bother with precision?

But even if elections weren’t rigged, why would we want a dope who knows nothing about the issues to cancel out our vote because some Boss Tweed type clown bought him a barbecue sandwich?

This is the problem we have with elections today.

Actually, it’s worse.

No longer do the elites have to mess with paid voters showing up at the polls.

With our “advanced” voting machines, the elites can remotely program the votes in with the click of a button.

It’s unhealthy.

The politicians will gladly help that criminality along by assuring that voter identification not be required at the polling booth.

Clearly the politicians and the elites who control them desire the system to be this way.

Since they do, what does that say about them?

What does that say about representative democracy?

This invites the question as to why politicians should be voted into office in the first place.

We don’t elect cardiologists.

We don’t elect bakers.

We don’t elect carpenters.

Instead we vote with our feet.

Instead of a formally electing someone, we actively use the people who we say offer the best service.

So why don’t we do that in politics?

Why don’t we jettison this idea of electing one guy to represent us every two to four years?

Maybe we can devise a different model in which to get things done.

What would this system look like?

To get things done any citizen could petition a professional (specialist) who has gone to school for handling that specific common function that we currently entrust to the government. Let’s say that we want to widen the intersection near our office so that it can accommodate a dedicated right hand turn.

Once that specialist is petitioned, a mechanism is set in place so that other petitioners can either join in or oppose the petition.

This petition after a certain period of time can then be adjudicated by professional judges that are agreed upon by the specialists.

In this matter, citizens can then make changes to their city or neighborhood that they feel are important and relevant.

None of these specialists or judges would be subject to being elected. They would go to school to gain expertise.

There could be specialists for schools, specialists for roads, specialists for healthcare, education, specialists for what have you.

Accordingly there would be judges for these areas of expertise.

The mayor, and the commissioners would be a thing of the past.

What would be the consequences of such a system?

What would be the upside? What would be the downside?

Theoretically, we should have greater expertise and better decision making by virtue of having specialists take care of various issues.

We trade in the bloated, corrupt jack of all trades for a lean, clean machine of expertise.

Secondly, we decide issues on their own merits, not by compromising other areas.

Currently, if we want to improve our schools, we have to give in on other issues. We can’t just improve our schools; we have to give the mayor’s buddy the concrete job for the new highway even though doing so may be a really bad idea.

So if we moved to this new system, gone would be the giant omnibus bill in which congressman can throw in their pork.

But maybe that’s not a good thing. Maybe pork and fat is good.

Maybe people need that pork to provide needed jobs that otherwise can’t be gotten.

That is something we would have to think about.

But it’s worth trying.

It’s worth trying because the current system isn’t working.

Representative democracy doesn’t work because the key weak link is the representative himself.

If the representative is bought off by corporate interests, which is what’s going on today, then democracy can’t possibly work.

Within a democracy that’s controlled by people who can present their case directly to a specialist, let’s call it presentative democracy, we might stand a better chance.

Of course, the specialists and judges can be bought off, but by decreasing their range and scope, we might be able to limit the damage they can do.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Dwight Eisenhower, American Quisling

No one did more damage in the modern era to the American experiment than Dwight Eisenhower.

He was and is an American Quisling.

He betrayed the values of the Founding Fathers which are rooted in a decent Christianity that respects and values other people.

Throughout the 1950s when Alan Dulles and John Foster Dulles were tear-assing around the globe committing much naughtiness against sovereign nations, Dwight Eisenhower stood by and gave his tacit approval.

In 1953 we overthrew the government of Iran.

In 1954 we overthrew the government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala.

Throughout the 1950s Ike set the table for what would become the Vietnam war in which millions of people died.

He aggravated the government of Indonesia which was finally replaced in 1965. The man, Suharto, that our CIA installed, killed one million communists. The CIA was not ashamed.

Ike tried like hell to kill Patrice Lamumba of the Congo. Who cares about the Congo? Everybody cares about the Congo. The Congo is the most valuable piece of real estate in the world.

When Lamumba leaned (you only need to lean) toward the commies, our leaders decided to deep six him.

Many of the problems that we face today, such as our ongoing conflict with Iran, our massive immigration problems coming from Central America, can be laid at the feet of Dwight Eisenhower.

The entire debacle of Vietnam could have been avoided had Eisenhower taken an enlightened approach to their desire for independence.

Eisenhower though became another President in the long line of Presidents who kneeled before corporate power.

That Ike warned us of the military industrial complex is a joke.

Sorry, my friend, you don’t get points by fucking me over and then warning me about yourself when you’re ready to retire.

Ike was the military industrial complex and had been his entire life.

He was groomed to lead.

In the Philippines he was Douglas MacArthur‘s assistant.

In World War II he was commander of the armies.

For crying out loud, he became the President of the United States.

In short, Ike was the military industrial complex.

When Joe McCarthy reported on communists at Fort Monmouth, what was Ike’s response?

Was Ike gratified that Joe McCarthy had exposed an espionage ring at Fort Monmouth?

Not at all.

Not only did Ike not appreciate McCarthy’s efforts, he worked behind the scenes to destroy Joe McCarthy.

What Joe McCarthy was really revealing to the American people was that our government was acting contrary to the positions they would state publicly, contrary to the dreams and aspirations of the American people, and contrary to the principles of the Founding Fathers as they embodied them in the Constitution.

It’s fair to say that the American people are primarily interested in the welfare of the American people, as they should be, as any citizen of any country should be regarding their own country.

Ike betrayed the American people.

Like Truman, like George C Marshall, Ike bowed down to corporate interests.

He and his ilk were globalists.

In those days we called them communists.

Today we understand more fully that there is no real difference between communism, fascism, crony capitalism and corporate socialism. It’s all the same.

Ike placed corporate money above the welfare of the American people.

He ruthlessly prosecuted an unnecessary and fruitless Cold War that expanded the government, enlarged the military, and enriched the corporations and their leaders far beyond what any actual war could produce.

If Franklin Roosevelt was the architect of corporate tyranny, surely Dwight Eisenhower was its general contractor.

He was an American Quisling.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

This is Our Country

This is our country.

The Founding Fathers belong to us.

This country does not belong to England or the royal family.

We are not British.

Nor does it belong to Great Britain’s ally, mole and chief sycophant in the United States, Harvard University.

This country does not belong to Harvard.

Nor does it belong to the elites.

Nor the Ivy League.

Nor the cowards who flocked to Harvard so that they could sit with the cool kids in the school cafeteria.

Nor the social climbers who sold their souls to grovel at the feet of King Harvard.

“Oh, honey, we’re going to meet the king. We’re the elites, babe. Ooooh, I’m getting an erection.”

Fuck them.

We are the people who built this country.

The Founding Fathers refer to us when they write, We the People.

The history that is written of the United States is false.

It is false because it is written in terms of the false leaders who claim to have inherited the mantel of the Founding Fathers.

But they have not.

Franklin Roosevelt is false.

Theodore Roosevelt is false.

These men, these elites, these Harvard graduates, these American Quislings, betrayed the Founding Fathers.

They abandoned America the Republic in favor of America the Empire.

They betrayed the goodwill and Christian foundation of the Founding Fathers.

They are the architects of the American empire which has done great harm to the peoples of the world even as it has raped Americans here at home.

These men did not do unto others as we would have others do unto us.

They were racists and builders of empire.

Theodore Roosevelt prosecuted his racist messianic vision upon the peoples of Hawaii and the Philippines.

Cousin Franklin prosecuted his racist messianic vision upon all the peoples of the world. His contempt of humanity was not confined to Jews and Asians; he had contempt for regular folk as well as he assiduously transformed a small more responsive government into a large racket which his wealthy friends could readily plunder.

The media, which their Harvard bedfellows control, lies about their record. Theodore Roosevelt was no trustbuster, and Franklin Roosevelt did not save capitalism. Neither was a traitor to his class.

The real break up of Standard Oil was accomplished by a regular person, Ida Tarbell, whose father had been broken by the humanity thief, John D Rockefeller.

Franklin D Roosevelt was forced into accepting the Glass-Steagall act. There would be no FDIC if Franklin Roosevelt had had his way.

I’ll bet you didn’t know that.

Neither man was opposed to large corporations. They thought large corporations were an essential necessity in our lives. What they thought was that corporations should be regulated.

What they failed to consider, or didn’t want to consider, was that large corporations would come to fund think tanks which would fill Presidential cabinet spots with men who would do the bidding of large corporations.

In this way America was stolen from the people, no thanks to TR and FDR.

Strike these men from the history books.

The historians steal our heritage.

History is about us.

We are the people who built this country.

Our Founding Fathers did not believe in movers and shakers.

They believed that the man who ran the corner shop must by necessity be more important than the President of the United States.

These ideals are imbued in the Bill of Rights which are the crown jewels of the United States of America.

Without those individual rights we have no republic worth preserving.

The Founding Fathers wrote those rights so that we would retain our supremacy.

Not surprisingly the skunk, Alexander Hamilton, the only Founding Father the Wall Street detritus seem to admire, opposed those rights – not because they were superfluous but because he knew the tremendous obstacle they would present to the elitist oligarchy he so admired.

We are the straw that stirs the drink of the republic.

The Founding Fathers belong to us, and we belong to them.

We are the event.

This country was built for us.

This is our country.

The Social View of History

Are you confused by current events? Are you perplexed as to why things are the way they are?

Do you get confused when politicians go against their campaign promises whether that candidate be a Democrat or a Republican?

If you do, it is probably because you believe in the social view of history.

Not surprisingly, the media and our elites promote the social view of history.

It’s an attractive concept, but it’s wrong.

What moves history and politicians is economics.

The social view of history is wrong.

The social view history states that it is people, their philosophies, their ideologies that move history and shape events. Consequently, much effort is spent to understanding people, cultures and their thinking.

This is reflected by our educational institutions that teach courses in social studies, not history.

The indoctrination into the social view of history is pervasive.

It begins in elementary school, then continues through high school and into college. It is perpetuated by the media.

What is never talked about to any large degree is the monetary view of history, or the economic view of history.

In the economic view of history, it is money and the acquisition of it by the elites that moves history.

This view is never taught in school, and is never talked about much by the media, because it would reveal who the real power in the world is.

If people started talking about economics to any large degree, then war might see the end of its existence as a ruling force in the world.

Wars are often seen and portrayed by the elites and the modern media as a natural consequence of two social forces coming up against each other.

Frequently these two social forces are portrayed as freedom destroyers versus freedom fighters, or wealthy capitalists versus poor working class peasants.

But what if it isn’t that way? What if that is a lie?

What if the wars are being fought because the elites on both sides want to justify their existence as well as make a pile of loot along the way?

What if the social view of history is wrong?

Let’s ask some questions.

Was the war in Vietnam fought to save democracy? Or was it fought because the US wanted to extend its hegemony over Southeast Asia for the purposes of oil and rubber extraction? Let’s not forget about palm oil. We have more palm oil in our bodies than blood.1

Was the war in Syria fought because the US truly desired freedom for the people in Syria? Or was it fought because the US and its ally Israel wanted to damage the Syria-Iran axis – the Syria-Iran axis being a threat to the western allies’ beachhead in the Middle East, that being Israel?

Did the US elites really care that Assad was oppressing his people? They didn’t care about the Saudi regime oppressing its people.

Was the war in Japan fought because the Japanese were oppressing the rights of other peoples in the Pacific Rim, or was it fought because the Japanese were fucking around with America’s rubber plantations? Or perhaps the vital assets that might one day be extracted from Indonesia? Or the oil in Sumatra?

How about the takeover of the Philippines by the US in the early part of the 20th century? Was that undertaken in order to improve the life for Filipinos? Or was it undertaken because the Philippines sits in an important geo-political location? Wouldn’t the Philippines be the ideal place to place bases from which to send bomber jets into countries in Southeast Asia – just in case they got any ideas that might fuck with our money?

The same can be asked of Cuba. Did the US really care about improving the life of Cubans? Or did the US want Cuba in order to exploit its citizenry so as to give us cheap sugar?

Was the Civil War in the United States fought to free the slaves? Or was it fought because the South after seceding was free to import finished goods from England thus creating competition for northern factories? Or maybe it was fought to free up cheap black labor for northern factories who could pay them “slave” wages? Or maybe it was fought to free up cheap black labor to act as scabs against emerging Northern unions?

Why was Jacobo Arbenz overthrown in Guatemala by the CIA? Because the US cared for the citizens of Guatemala who might live under communist oppression? Or was it fought in order to put down labor unions who might represent an economic threat to greedy corporate fruit importers like United fruit (Chiquita) and Standard Fruit (Dole)?

Why did we really fight in Afghanistan? Was it to get Al-Qaeda and bin Laden? Or was it to secure the vital minerals that are found there? Or maybe it was to make corporations a pile of money by fighting a war. We didn’t invade Pakistan. Isn’t that where bin Laden was ultimately found?

Let’s not forget about Iraq. Why did we go to war there? Wasn’t Saddam Hussein our former ally? Didn’t Rumsfeld once shake his hand? Did we really care about Saddam’s oppression of his people? We didn’t care for decades, so why now? Is it possible we went to war because Saddam Hussein was threatening the petrodollar? Or maybe we wanted to make corporations even more money by fighting a war?

Of course, the elites don’t want you asking too many questions. They would rather have you play the same idiotic game that is played out on national television every day of the week.

They want you to engage in the sporting match known as left versus right, Democrats versus Republicans, capitalists versus peasants.

The social view of history rapes you and removes you from the truth. While you debate and fight at the local level against your opponent be he or she Democrat or Republican, the corporate elites are laughing all the way to the bank.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

A Big Mistake

Do you want to know the biggest mistake in my life?

It was the mistake of all mistakes, the mother of all mistakes, the king daddy, the sultan, the lord of lords, the big cheese, the big enchilada, the supreme leader of all mistakes.

I thought our leaders cared.

I thought our leaders cared what we thought – we plebes, we common people.

Isn’t that what the Founding Fathers wanted? Isn’t that why they began our constitution with the words, We the People?

I was naïve.

Our leaders don’t care.

They only care in lipservice.

They don’t need to care. They already have enough people in their little clique of elites to listen to.

They come first.

I was raised like many Americans of my era to believe in the goodness of America. I was taught in third grade that anyone could be President of the United States.

And I’m sure that my third grade teacher, Mrs. Miller, believed that as well because it still was possible for a regular person to become President of the United States when she was young in the early 1920s and 30s.

But then something changed in America.

Money and the pursuit of it.

Wealthy families begot wealthy corporations and wealthy foundations, and those organizations soon came to control the government.

These corporations became too powerful.

To fuel these corporations – every corporation needs officers – the elites needed people to run them.

Thus the rise of Ivy League schools as national and international entities to run not only the country, but the world.

Our corporate titans had a different vision for the world, and that vision necessitated that not just anyone could be President of the United States.

The social contract took a hit.

The elites couldn’t afford to have regular people running things anymore.

Regular people might have too much sensitivity to the needs of regular folk.

Our elites didn’t want emotions getting in the way of profits.

So they created a New World Order focused on profits, for themselves.

In their New World Order people who attended certain schools (or who bent the knee to certain schools) would run the government and the top corporations. It was a way of ensuring that the rulers would think a certain way.

They needed quick thinking people who a) could be bought and b) didn’t ask a lot of questions.

Thus, the American dream in which anyone of independent mind could rise to the top was sidelined.

I was a fool.

I was a fool because I believed in a meritocracy. I believed, as I believe today, that the individual counts most, not the institution.

If it’s the institution that counts, then it’s possible for unqualified people to rise to positions of power simply because they attended that institution.

Additionally, every institution produces intellectual inbreeding.

That’s why you see so many of these Harvard graduates thinking the same way.

Harvard and other Ivy League institutions like to think that they have achieved diversity because they have selected people of different ethnicities, backgrounds, or countries of origin.

But there is little diversity at Harvard. There is little diversity because the people they select are run through the Harvard meat grinder.

Maybe these people did think a distinctive way before entering Harvard, but that’s not the way they think when they leave.

Harvard is a machine, a training ground, a cult actually, that grooms and cultivates their substrate in order to produce a reliable cog in the Empire’s machine of relentless profit accumulation.

The result is a tasteless, metric-loving, slick, well-spoken, cold, soulless, generic Harvard burger.

When you’ve eaten one lousy Harvard burger, you’ve eaten them all.

The problem is that they are all over the place.

Increasingly we are fed Harvard burgers everywhere, and not just at the national level.

In Texas Harvard burgers dominate our major cities. We have Harvard burgers running Dallas, Houston, San Antonio.

A slightly modified version of a Harvard burger runs Austin.

They don’t have the right stuff, and they are running the show.

Soon, if Michael Bloomberg and his Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative is successful – and it will be – a Harvard burger will come to your community.

In that event, run.

This is the way it is, and it’s difficult to convince people that our elites don’t have our best interests at heart.

Why would people believe me? I didn’t go to Harvard. Everybody knows that Harvard burgers are the best tasting burgers.

This is the predicament we find ourselves in.

Until we change the programming in society, what people believe, we plebes will be beaten down into a permanent underclass of serfs.

For our survival, it is absolutely essential that anyone through his or her individual effort, without obedience to Harvard, can once again become President of the United States of America.

I think the Founding Fathers would approve.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

King Louis, the Pagan Ape

You understand, of course, that we live in a fake democracy. It’s important that you understand that what you think doesn’t matter.

I state this not to disillusion you, but to enlighten you, to enable you to not spend your life in frustration as I did.

Our country is run by King Louis of France.

That’s right. King Louis never died. The Sun King’s brutal system of rule was merely modified.

It works like this.

Instead of one King Louis, we now have a group of people called Harvard that functions as King Louis.

Instead of the nobles who work under King Louis we now have groups of people called Ivy League (and new Ivy League) institutions that work with King Louis to rape the citizenry for their own benefit.

You are now a serf in their feudal system.

You live on their lands.

You are a renter. Yeah.

What King Louis says goes.

The other nobles will defer to King Louis’s rule lest King Louis kick their ass.

If King Louis wants to feed you, he will feed you.

If King Louis wants to starve you, he will starve you.

It will be his choice.

And that’s the way it works.

There is little nobility to humanity.

A pagan alpha-male gorilla, King Louis, rules our country.

We are no better than the apes.

The Senate and House, the Presidency, and the Judiciary, the traditional three branches of government, are puppets of King Louis.

They do King Louis’s bidding.

They work for King Louis, not you.

These institutions are now a sham.

The sooner you understand this, the better off you will be.

You won’t get angry because you will know the truth.

You will stop wasting time figuring out why things are the way they are.

You will cease wasting time watching Sean Hannity or Anderson Cooper complain about things.

You will be a realist.

Living in a fantasy world will only bring you pain.

Living in the real world frees you up.

This is the real world.

You live in a sham of a democracy. There is no republic.

Your vote does not count.

Let the truth set you free.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved