Insurrection in LA - globalists strike back. Just beginning.
LA riots are cut and paste of Kiev’s Maidan. The same methods, same pictures. In Kiev it was against Putin. In LA it is against Trump. Globalists hate them both.
Why not ban Democrats at all? They are explicitly betrayed US. They have taken part of American people as hostages. They are fully responsible for beginning of civil war. They are public enemies.
Elon can disagree with BBB or with other Trump’s decision. But now is the moment of real danger for nation. Elon is straight man. It would be symbolic. Millions who follow Elon will be immediately mobilised to defend country and to finish Deep State that is behind the LA riots.
Dems have mutilated American nation, promoting sins, perversions and physical abuse of innocent and yet irresponsible children. They started wars and coups everywhere. Dems should be punished. They transformed millions men and women in biological thrash.
Dems flooded US with illegal aliens and now they start rebellion. Dems are criminal gang.
LA events are start of insurrection. Trump says. Cells created previously by Soros and son are activated. It is nationwide conspiracy of liberals against not only Trump but against American people in general.
Crash the insurrection with iron hand and moral conviction. Putin wouldn’t hesitate to save the order and the country at any price. For that globalists hate him. For that they provoked the war in Ukraine. Ukrainians = globalists, rioters.
LA riots are cut and paste of Kiev’s Maidan. The same methods, same pictures. In Kiev it was against Putin. In LA it is against Trump. Globalists hate them both.
LA is crash test for MAGA. But don’t underestimate Deep State. It is first serious crash test. There will be other.
LA = Maidan. The same people behind, the same goals.
The LA rioters cry “slava ukrainie”… it is their revenge for Trump’s will to put the end to the war.
California does matter. Silicon Valley is there. So if Musk finds events unacceptable that means much.
Greta Tunberg kidnapped by Israel is of no concern for the West. Now she fights for Palestinians but they are as well of no concern for the West. They are not whales. If it is not total Untergang des Abendlandes, what is it?
If it is not Untergang des Abendlandes, then what is Untergang?
That is real essence of liberalism: hardcore racism and total intolerance.
Totally agree, the dying beast of the Deep State, WEF Cabal, threshes in its death throes, pray Trump and the true U.S patriot rises to pit down this rebellion, arrest Soros and Son and every other U.S hating Democrat… these people are repugnant and to be loathed.. scum the lot of them, the true detritus of humanity, their litany of lies not cutting it any longer… frustrated they strike out the only way they know… violently, live by violence punished by the same I say…
Kia Kaha (stay strong) from New Zealand
This text, while rhetorically charged, is an exceptionally dangerous piece of extremist propaganda. It exemplifies a toxic blend of conspiratorial thinking, dehumanization, incitement to violence, and ideologically motivated disinformation. A sustained critique must proceed across ethical, logical, rhetorical, and political-philosophical dimensions, integrating each aspect into the unfolding argument.
From the outset, the language is steeped in dehumanization. When the text describes Democrats as having “transformed millions of men and women into biological thrash,” it removes their humanity entirely. The phrase “Dems are a criminal gang” collapses the complexity of political affiliation into a criminal category. Calling them “public enemies” uses the language of war, painting political opposition as existential threat. These forms of rhetorical violence echo the darkest precedents in modern history: the Nazi regime’s characterization of Jews as vermin, or genocidal Hutu rhetoric against the Tutsis in Rwanda. Once individuals or groups are stripped of humanity and depicted as contaminants or enemies of the state, violence becomes not only imaginable but rationalized as necessary.
The rhetoric builds toward an eliminationist fantasy. Phrases such as “crash the insurrection with iron hand and moral conviction” are not mere hyperbole they are blueprints for authoritarian action. The author does not shy away from admiring figures like Vladimir Putin, presenting him as a model of uncompromising leadership: “Putin wouldn’t hesitate… they provoked the war in Ukraine.” Such idealization of strongmen is a classic hallmark of authoritarian fantasy, in which democratic compromise and legal procedure are discarded in favor of immediate, unflinching force. There is a fantasy of moral clarity here, but it is moral clarity of the most dangerous kind: one that annihilates dissent and installs righteousness as an absolute weapon.
But this apparent moral conviction is built on foundations of incoherence. The logic of the text is riddled with contradictions, unsupported claims, and blatant fallacies. How can Democrats be both grossly incompetent and omnipotently dangerous? The claim that Soros and his son have “created cells” that have been “activated” is unmoored from evidence, a classic post hoc fallacy dressed up as revelation. The overgeneralization is total Democrats are not individuals with varying beliefs and actions, but a single monstrous actor. Complexity is dissolved into simplicity. That is the essential function of propaganda: to make thinking unnecessary and replace it with fear.
Layered throughout is conspiratorial paranoia, where everything is a secret war, every protest a puppet show orchestrated by hidden hands. “Deep State,” “cells created by Soros,” and “nationwide conspiracy” are all terms that function as emotional triggers more than factual descriptors. Events are not allowed to have mundane or human causes. Everything is manipulated. This totalizing paranoia is deeply political. It offers the illusion of knowledge to those who feel disempowered, while preparing them to act with certitude and hostility against imagined enemies. The collapse of distinct historical contexts into one paranoid script is particularly clear in the line “LA = Maidan.” This symbolic equivalence is not analytical it is myth-making, collapsing geopolitical tensions in Ukraine into a domestic American culture war.
The author calls repeatedly for action cloaked in virtue: to act with “moral conviction,” to protect “innocent children,” to defend the country from degeneracy and collapse. This is weaponized moralism, in which the very notion of virtue is corrupted into a justification for destruction. Historical parallels abound. Every authoritarian movement cloaks itself in protection of purity of race, family, nation, or divinity. What’s being defended here is not democracy or freedom, but a mythic identity constructed out of resentment and fear.
There are also echoes of anti-Semitic dog whistles, especially in the invocation of George Soros, a figure repeatedly targeted in far-right conspiracy theories. The term “globalist” is frequently used as a euphemism in such discourse, gesturing toward an international, elite, often Jewish cabal allegedly orchestrating the world’s ills. The mention of “cells” and covert orchestration adds to this texture. Though it stops short of overt slurs, the implication is unmistakable to anyone versed in the tropes of extremist rhetoric.
The phrase “Untergang des Abendlandes” evokes Oswald Spengler’s grand historical pessimism about the fall of the West, but it is reduced here to a slogan. Rather than a meditation on civilizational change, it becomes an apocalyptic outcry. Everything is collapsing, the author suggests, because of the liberals, the Democrats, the outsiders. There is no analysis only melodrama. The use of German, with its cultural weight, adds a pseudo-intellectual tone, but beneath the surface is the simple logic of panic.
As the text proceeds, it descends into cultural and political nihilism. Greta Thunberg’s fictional kidnapping by Israel, her association with Palestinian rights, and the dismissal of both as irrelevant to the West indicates a collapse of moral consistency. The author mocks humanitarian concerns, flattens all political action into enemy behavior, and frames the West as already spiritually dead. There is no constructive vision offered only resentment and collapse.
The real-world implications of such rhetoric are dire. If taken seriously, this text legitimizes violence against political opponents. It undermines the legitimacy of democratic institutions, elections, and laws. It encourages identification with foreign autocrats and calls for a permanent war against internal enemies. The logic of the piece is not to persuade but to mobilize. And what it mobilizes is a posture of total war against liberals, against immigrants, against the media, against any principle that might sustain a pluralistic society.
This is not simply a case of “controversial opinion.” It is a text that uses the shell of political language to pursue the death of politics itself. The author does not merely argue against Democrats they deny them moral status, existence, citizenship. They are not wrong; they are evil. That is the essence of proto-fascist thought: the reduction of opposition to pollution and the assertion that salvation lies in purification, not persuasion.
To respond to such a text is not to disagree with a bad argument. It is to recognize that this is not argument at all it is a form of ideological violence masquerading as truth. It substitutes myth for analysis, incitement for reasoning, and hatred for vision. It must be named as such, exposed for its brutality, and rejected without equivocation.