Well, it seems to me, that the discussion on how and why we at the Democratic Party lost the election is still going on.

I think some of the analysis we have heard has been right on a more superficial level, but it has not discussed on a deeper level.

I mean, what has really happened in American politics in the last twenty some years?

I have become aware of mr. Andrew Breibart lately. Honestly I did not even know about his existence, the network of SIAD that I have been a part of was, is connected to Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer not Breibart.

But after mr. Trump has reached out to Steve Bannon. I have realised the importance of Breibart, and have consequently done some research on the issue.

He died, mysteriously five years ago. At the height of the antiblog hysteria. A lot of the people who started the new anti “Franfurterschool” anti “political correctness school” has died, especially the liberal/conservative. That is Pim Fortuyn in Holland, Breibart in the US, Theo van Gogh, Charlie Hebdo. Here in Denmark, it has been quite close as well. My organisation the Vilks Committee was attacked a few years ago, and I was just lucky not to be there when the islamist came in with their guns.

Nonetheless, Breibart, Pim Fortuyn and I have pushed a new agenda, that is fundamentally different from what we used to have, but at certain points not so different.

We have pushed a pro Israel policy, anti islamist, pro gay, pro anti racist, pro democratic, pro humanistic, pro religious, pro defense, pro equality.

So where we have been attacked for being the “alt-right” and so on, what we have really been is very much mid leaning, just taking the challenges that of now. That is islamist, declining economy, border chaos, an academic world that is becoming more and more superficial. At the end of the day, we are not extremist. We are actually midleaning.

The interesting thing is also, that whereas Breibart in the US has been a conservative movement, what Barack and I have done together has been democratic. So in a sense, the same doctrinal trends have gripped the center both right and left.

What I am saying is, that what we need to do in both camps actually, is to get back in the center.
Many people, believe that for instance Paul Alinsky was a fringe movement. I disagree on this. He had three points, as I see it. 1. Democracy. 2. The workers movement. 3. Minorities. In other words, he was a Social Democrat. Not a communist.

This is what we can build on. Change is not communist. It is actually much more American revolution than Russian (sorry mr. Putin). It is about democracy, humanism, and where he left us, we can pick up the pace again. Because he blasted a path for us there, that I believe we can follow. The strangeness of it, knowing that mr. Breibart had the same ideas. Speaking of ancient Egypt and so on. Mr. Breibart was a fan of the American revolution as well, I believe.

G-d bless the United States of America, may he live again.

Categories: Politics Tags:
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.
You must be logged in to post a comment.