The “New Way Forward Act” is one of the latest George Soros machinations. Last week many people’s attention were drawn to it, and then just as quickly moved on as the events of the week shifted.
But George Soros has not given up, and clearly is back in the news cycle, thanks to – surprisingly – an Alan Dershowitz bombshell: George Soros showed up on an FBI 302 form as the originator of an investigation against an as yet unnamed individual *cough cough* . . . sorry about that folks, hope that’s not the Corona virus . . .
Briefly let’s revisit the “New Way Forward Act” from Tucker Carlson’s segment on Fox News:
In short, the “New Way Forward Act” flips all of our immigration system upside down on its head.
Instead of deporting aliens, they will be invited in.
Instead of trying aliens in court, they will have a fast path to citizenship and voting rights.
Instead of engaging in protective quarantining, illegal aliens will be given full health care coverage free of charge at the expense of taxpayers.
Instead of flying illegal aliens back to their country of origin, taxpayers will pay for any person ever deported at any time to be flown back into the United States.
This is 100% George Soros.
This is 100% Open Society Foundations – formerly the Open Society Institute.
This is 100% Karl Popper “The Open Society and its Enemies”.
What they are doing becomes clear when you understand what is behind it.
This is KARL POPPER’S DREAM.
But first is it important to know that George Soros was a follower of Karl Popper. Other than academics and philosophers, most people have no knowledge of Karl Popper or his philosophical impact.
George Soros fancies himself as the protege that has grown beyond his master. Undoubtedly he would believe himself to be able to school Popper if he were alive today.
Understanding Popper and his “Open Society”
Karl Popper is described by The WikiPedias – the fount of all that is truthy on the interwebz – as “an Austrian-born British philosopher, academic and social commentator”. “In political discourse, he is known for his vigorous defense of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he believed made a flourishing open society possible. His political philosophy embraced ideas from major democratic political ideologies, including socialism/social democracy, libertarianism/classical liberalism and conservatism, and attempted to reconcile them.”
As we will see, his idea of “liberal democracy” is one that we should take with a grain of salt.
Review: Popper, The Open Society and its Enemies
Review by Roy A. Childs, Jr.
{ PDF Link }
Nota Bene: I know this review is from a libertarian source. Nevertheless it is an invaluable explanation of Karl Popper’s worldview that animates “The Open Society”. Karl Popper’s vision of social engineering writ large is precisely the vision that George Soros is working to carry out.
Popper had produced his major work on the philosophy of science, Logik der Forschung (English ed., The Logic of Scientific Discovery, 1959), in 1934, and it was only natural that the politically aware philosopher would want to use his powerful, highly trained intellect to fight the forces of totalitarianism as they confronted the world at that time. Karl Popper moved to assault totalitarianism at its root.
Popper sees totalitarianism of all stripes as essentially tribal, as a “closed society,” a rebellion against the “strain of civilization.” He assaults it by using his philosophy of science (which greatly emphasizes “falsification,” i.e., the refutation of statements and theories) to criticize the doctrines of those whom Popper takes to be behind modern totalitarianism, namely, Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, and Marx. In The Open Society, he seeks to “examine the application of the critical and rational methods of science to the problems of the open society. [He] analyzes the principles of democratic social reconstruction, the principles of … ‘piecemeal social engineering’ in opposition to ‘Utopian social engineering.’”
Did you catch that?
. . . Popper’s Open Society . . . begins by wrestling with such giants as Plato, Hegel, and Marx, but concludes with little more than a defense of social democracy, of piecemeal engineering with freedom of discussion and controversy. Brian Magee ably summarizes Popper’s reasons for defending the “Open Society”:
Because he regards living as first and foremost a process of problem-solving he wants societies which are conducive to problem-solving. And because problem-solving calls for the bold propounding of trial solutions which are then subjected to criticism and error elimination, he wants forms of society which permit of the untrammelled assertion of different proposals, followed by criticism, followed by the genuine possibility of change in the light of criticism. Regardless of any moral considerations… he believes that a society organized on such lines will be more effective at solving its problems, and therefore more successful in achieving the aims of its members, than if it were organized on other lines.
Such a society is what Popper takes to be social democracy, entailing the “problem-solving” of piecemeal social engineering.
Ah, “social democracy”, does this sound familiar?
In other words, Popper advocates for what we would describe as a FAKE SCIENCE approach that engages in huge social experimentation writ large.
The enlightened “social scientist” – standing above and astride society, no doubt – looks down on all human society globally, and sees for himself the social fabric of civilization a grand laboratory within which, by choosing policy prescriptions many of which he knows will be destructive, can engage in unfettered social experimentation to find the right mix of conditions in which mankind will find ideal peace, harmony, and globalism. In other words, ends for society directed by a scientific and technocratic elite, to the expense of the individual citizen or voter. The deplorable masses need someone else to determine what is best for them, don’t you know.
History, to the “social scientist”, does not serve as a guide for understanding how societies and civilizations have already experimented and learned through great and often tragic cost how to live together. No, the “social scientist” is a believer in pure scientism, which is to say that knowledge only comes through scientific analysis, not through, say, an understanding of history.
This approach, however, is nothing really new or innovative:
This social democracy may indeed have once inspired the intellectual elite of the West, seeking (as many were) alternatives to fascism and communism, but today it inspires hardly anyone. And for good reason, for what else is democratic social reconstruction but that postwar system of fine-tuning the economy, the reign of countless redistributive social programs designed by politicians and social scientists to meet those alleged “social needs” that a host of interest groups are pressing upon the political systems of the West as “non-negotiable demands”? Since the Second World War, most of the Western democracies have followed Popper’s advice about piecemeal social engineering and democratic social reform, and it has gotten them into a grand mess. Intervention has been piled upon intervention; regulations have been continually modified in unpredictable ways (Popper advocates such “revisions” in the light of experience); taxation has increased drastically to finance social welfare programs (as has inflation, with its resulting economic fluctuations); and the unhampered market economy, so forcefully defended by Popper’s close friend F.A. Hayek, has been “reformed” out of existence.
Writing in 1976, Roy Childs observes:
Interventionism, piecemeal or not, has worked its inevitable way, and has led to precisely those consequences that Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, and others had predicted: economic stagnation and political conflict. Democratic institutions themselves are threatened by those whose vested interests are entwined with the State apparatus. Dime store tinkering, even with freedom of criticism and revision, is leading to the closed society that Popper so fears. There is indeed nothing new in this warning: it is the theme of both Ludwig von Mises’ Socialism and of F.A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom.
In short, the Open Society is not enough. Why this is so has a direct bearing on the major themes of Popper’s book. . .
If the Open Society is equivalent to a society in which everything and anything is open to democratic revision—except the basic institutions that make democratic revision possible—then Popper is only focusing on one need of human beings (that a dubious collective need), not the broader need for liberty that is implied in the outline of his argument as stated by Magee. Popper makes a great deal of noise about “individualism,” but nevertheless only applies the structure of that argument to collective processes of hypothesis, testing (action), and revision in the light of experience; the argument would apply to individuals as well, since they are the sole constituents of “society,” By focusing on this collective democratic character of the Open Society, Popper ignores the more basic need for individual liberty in art, business, science, and all other areas as well.
The arguments for democracy that Popper presents, then, are in principle identical to arguments for individual liberty. It is the principle of nonaggression, the first principle of liberty, that properly limits the domain of democracy. If Popper’s arguments for democracy (as opposed to his advocacy of democracy itself) are valid, then it is not the rigidity of a technology of social engineering that we should seek, but an unhampered market economy, where people can constantly act on their own judgment and can continually revise their plans in accordance with the new. information brought by change. This brings us not to social democracy, but to the doctrine of libertarianism.
Far more important than the principle of democracy, then, even by Popper’s own arguments, is the principle of individual liberty. Liberty is paramount, democracy at best secondary: democracy is important only insofar as it is a servant of and means to the end of liberty. Thus, in following the logical implications of Popper’s views (which are not, after all, that original), we move from the open society to the “Free Society,” and find ourselves agreeing with Michael Polanyi’s claim, contra Popper, that the Free Society is not an Open Society, but a society committed to a very definite set of rules. In Popper’s Open Society, the principle of democracy is regarded as fixed, as not being open to revision. In the Free Society, is it the far more fundamental principle of individual liberty and nonaggression that is not open to revision (though its implications may be refined with growing knowledge). Popper’s reasoning is, by and large, correct, but it is individuals who must solve problems to survive, not “societies,” and therefore individuals who must be free to think and act to achieve values and to revise mistaken plans and impressions in the light off experience or more critical thought. . . .
No mere democratic machinery, no mere procedure, is enough to oppose fascism or communism, not in a world of those real social dynamics that are set in motion by interventionism. Only liberty can fully oppose closed societies, and only if liberty is seen as something that is not to be bargained away or abandoned through a series insignificant piecemeal reforms. Liberty must be regarded as the ultimate political end, foremost among those political values held dear by reasonable men and women, the highest and most noble political form possible to human beings. . . .
Social democracy, the Open Society, has been tried and found wanting. The question that faces us now is simply whether those lovers of “experiment” and “flexibility” are experimental and flexible enough to advocate that liberty be given a chance. If it is not given that chance, there may be no turning back, and we may yet arrive in an era when we shall look back at the totalitarianism of the 1930s as a veritable golden age.
But in one sense, at least, Popper is right: the future is ours to shape. Liberty has never been fully tried. It is the task of readers of this journal to remedy that unfortunate situation; if we do not, no one else will.
The Open Society is a grand globalist social experiment. National populations are the guinea pigs. Losses at the expenses of the people are an expected and necessary part of the process. Scientific experimentation is a necessary part of the process to achieving the ideal end state of global harmony – the more experimentation and bolder the intents the better. Nationalism and religious identity is the enemy; Globalism is the cure.
That’s to Open Society in a nutshell.
New Way Forward Act Won’t be Enacted into Law, Will it?
We have some good news – Donald Trump tweeted out for us to see: “Don’t worry, it won’t happen!”
Don’t worry, it won’t happen! https://t.co/XpUzHt8JKH
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 7, 2020
But the question remains: Why is the left presenting it right here, right now, if the entire exercise is doomed to failure and merely symbolic?
Vigilance is important. The left is overplaying its hand, again. They always do this when they are about to put up a BIG fight over something.
That something, obviously, is a fight over Trump’s plans for immigration reform.
There could be many reasons why this is being promoted now, but the most obvious reason is to move the Overton Window of what seems to be plausible and reasonable in the political discourse all the way over to the left.
BE AWARE: Soros and company are about to go ALL IN on making anyone opposing their radical immigration agenda appear to be racists and xenophobes for opposing illegal alien invasions (aka “immigration”).
Also note that CONgress does NOT “Write” Bills. They are BOUGHT to PROMOTE them. The New Way Forward Act is being seeded from the outside.
Some of our QTree folks have identified the Congressional players behind this:
Bill Sponsors:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr5383/details
Note the following three cosponsors in Texas – hoping to turn Texas blue:
Sponsor: Rep. Garcia, Jesus G. “Chuy” [D-IL-4] |
Cosponsors:
Rep. Escobar, Veronica [D-TX-16]*
Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29]*
Rep. Green, Al [D-TX-9]
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5383/cosponsors?r=61&s=1&q=%22cosponsor-state%22:%22Texas%22&searchResultViewType=expanded&KWICView=false
Lots of CA and NY, all the usual suspects ….Al Green, Hank Johnson, Fredrica Wilson, Alcee Hastings, and of course The Squad.
Right now, there is not a likelihood that the bill will pass the Senate, and even if it did, it would face the Presidential veto. There would not be enough legislative willpower in the Senate to overcome the veto.
There is of course the left’s hope that they could recover the Senate.
But keep in mind, even without the legislature, the left will be able to enact the law, if they achieve their dream of reclaiming the Presidency:
People misunderstand the strategy.
The Green Neal Deal and the New Way Forward Act–the latter abolishes all US immigration laws–were not meant to pass in Congress.
The Democratic president will order them implemented.
— Carlos Osweda (@COsweda) February 10, 2020
{ FULL THREAD }
Tweet reads:
People misunderstand the strategy.
The Green Neal Deal and the New Way Forward Act–the latter abolishes all US immigration laws–were not meant to pass in Congress.
The Democratic president will order them implemented.
There you have it.
The strategy is simple: Replace the POTUS (whatever means that requires) and once the right puppet person is in office, declare the New Way Forward law by Executive fiat.
The Road from Popper to Serfdom
Thinking back to Karl Popper’s “Open Society”, once you understand how badly distorted the lenses are, it becomes obvious why the radical left’s perception of reality is upside down.
Popper supposed that the only way to end “tribalism” is to destroy all borders and mix all people together. Crime and other problems were expected contingencies that would be a necessary, intermediate phase before the final phase would be achieved: a singular homogeneous global citizenry identity devoid of national, civic, and religious identifications. In a word, Babel.
Soros is a TRUE BELIEVER. A cynic would say he is not a believer but a malicious actor. Let’s avoid getting into an either/or argument when both/and are possibilities and likely. He tutored at the feet of Popper and his BAMN – By Any Means Necessary – outlook is there to reinforce his goals. In his arrogant elitism he probably sees himself as the apprentice who has become greater than the master.
Why for example is Soros supporting the activities of the Acton Institute, a Catholic think tank specializing in Austrian Economics? If you understand the political reality strictly in MCM (mind control media) terms of left/right you will be blind to what they are up to.
For the last decade since the Tea Party the key piece has been undermining social conservatism. This has meant invading conservatism with libertarianism – a political ideology that Soros crew finds quite agreeable. Social libertarianism undermines all social conservatism – it operates subversively by finding “common ground” with social conservatives in terms of “economic conservatism”.
Even though “economic conservative” means “free” trade rather than “fair” trade, and economic globalism. The opposite of the Trump Doctrine on International Trade.
The libertarian tactic worked during the Obama administration, because when it was all hands on deck to deal with the onslaught of leftist economic ideas, one started fighting with whatever ideological weapons were at hand – there wasn’t time to ask questions about who made the ammo.
Meanwhile the effects have been achieved: a downplay of civic, religious and national identity.
A perfect routing of the resolve of Americans to fight back by an insurgent enemy seeking to undermine Americans will to fight. Classic PsyOps. Classic enemy COINT operations.
Big Evangelicalism Rushes to do George Soros’ Bidding
Here is a recent Tom Littleton article:
SEX OFFENDER RESETTLEMENT IN YOUR COMMUNITY: ERLC “REFORMS” /CHURCH HIGHLANDS FAITH BASED MINISTRY HAS LED THE WAY.
“FAITH BASED PARTNERSHIPS ARE BEYOND PROBLEMATIC- AS BAPTIST ERLC PUSHES FOR PRISON REFORM AND CHURCH OF THE HIGHLANDS SEEKS TO HOUSE SEX OFFENDERS IN RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES, THIS ONE IS AMONG THE WORST.”
The Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (the “ERLC”, the left wing political action arm of the SBC recently caught taking money from George Soros’s “Evangelical Immigration Table” or EIT. Tom Littleton documents a shocking list of things that) is promoting through the Chambers of Commerce and the State Governors offices to release sex offenders into local residential communities, without the community’s knowledge or approval:
A little more than a year and a half ago some residence of Northeast Alabama near Muscle Shoals discovered a local motel in their residential community had begun the transition to a half way house for prisoners in a new program called Prison Re-entry , a work release program in a Faith Based Partnership with the Department of Corrections, Church of the Highlands/ Life Link and local business men. . .
Already scheduled to be moved into the half way house were around 6 to 7 inmates the majority of whom were to be newly released sex offenders. Total capacity for the facility was proposed at 35-40 residents. Not only were local members of the community never informed of the plan or given opportunity to object to it, the local website tracking such offenders whereabouts had never been updated to include the motel and its residence in what the Re-entry “industry ” refers to as “clustering sex offenders”.
This raises a slew of questions. Why is a Southern Baptist organization partnering with George Soros and programs that endanger communities?
The answers to those questions is troubling and will have to be taken up on a later post.
“The Snake”
The insanity of open borders:
‘Take Me in Oh Tender Woman…’ 🐍#TrumpRallyNH ❤️🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/qcR4ufcYYJ— Carrie ❤️ America 🇺🇸 (@carrieksada) February 11, 2020
On her way to work one morning
Down the path along side the lake
A tender hearted woman saw a poor half frozen snake
His pretty colored skin had been all frosted with the dew
“Poor thing,” she cried, “I’ll take you in and I’ll take care of you”
“Take me in tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake
She wrapped him all cozy in a comforter of silk
And laid him by her fireside with some honey and some milk
She hurried home from work that night and soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake she’d taken to had been revived
“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake
She clutched him to her bosom, “You’re so beautiful,” she cried
“But if I hadn’t brought you in by now you might have died”
She stroked his pretty skin again and kissed and held him tight
Instead of saying thanks, the snake gave her a vicious bite
“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake
“I saved you,” cried the woman
“And you’ve bitten me, but why?
You know your bite is poisonous and now I’m going to die”
“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in
“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake
There is a REASON that Speaker Pelosi-d’Alesandro-Lucchese-Gambino sides with MS-13 over President Trump. She was RAISED by a MOB MAYOR, and GANG MEMBERS are basically her FAMILY.
They’re just “misunderstood”.
*SPIT*
When Tucker first brought this to our attention, we were all stunned….. then relieved when we knew it would not pass.
Yet, how does legislation like this get written?
Soros
How does it get sponsored and brought up in committee?
Soros
Why doesn’t legislation like this ever go away?
Soros.
Even more important — why doesn’t the assembly in which it is proposed raise up as a body and expel the proponent? We could then think that such assembly might actually be looking out for citizens’ interests. But they don’t — because they have supped from the offering, they have taken the money, they have lain down with dogs…..and are tainted.
They are.
When I cashed out of the brokerage firm in ’89 and moved back home to New Orleans, it was my intention to finish a few industry related undergrads and go to law school, returning as fast as I could to Miami. I had enough money, if I lived prudently, to make it about 5yrs, but to keep my renewal income, I had to move my licenses as well.
Therefore, I started the registration process with Louisiana Ins Comm and moved almost 300 insurance licenses, plus NASD registration, Series 6, 7, 22 license, etc. long process, with various mutual funds.
I got a call out of the blue from one company with a strange offer.
It was another $50K/yr to LOBBY the state legislature for them.
I thought, sure, why not?
Proposed legislation came straight from home office, pre-printed, and it was OUR job to push it. Some was good legislation and some was not.
Some had to be re-written on the fly. I was no lawyer….. but did not need to be. Process was fascinating. What I thought, the preconceived notions, were not at all what the process really was like.
As a “civilian”, I stupidly assumed politicians were “experts in every field”…. well, how could they be? State legislature was interesting because disparate people came from different fields, and other members differed to their expertise in various areas…. almost without flinching. Bizarre, because sometimes those who considered themselves experts were not, or when we looked deeper, they had failed in their discipline and became a politician.
It was an unusual glimpse into a strange world. No scandal, nothing saucy.
Very boring, nothing like “House of Cards”.
Follow the money
…and keep following the money wherever the path leads. Corruption is the ultimate weapon of the enemies of this republic.
Don’t think that Soros alone is the face of the enemy. Epstein was another and there are others still, like Tom Donahue. Corruption is already embedded in the legislative and judicial branches.
Prosecution will go a long way toward stemming the tide. This would explain the current attacks on AG Barr.
Great explanation of the wills and wiles of Satan Soros. Discoverthenetworks has a lot of information on him, and the reach of his demonic tentacles through his various “open” organizations:
https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/organizations/guide-to-the-george-soros-network
https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/organizations/the-shared-agendas-of-george-soros-barack-obama
His “New Way Forward”, in all truth, should be called
NO WAY FORWARD…
Bloomberg is another evil. My husband believes at this time that he is the most dangerous man. Soros is getting old but Bloomberg found a foothold running for President. These are dangerous times dangerous evil men with to much power. Greed in men is a dangerous sin to humanity..
Soros has five children, all active in his causes, and all just as evil. His daughter is a HUGE promoter of planned (un)Parenthood, and his four sons are involved in various causes, both in academia and business… His rotten fruit didn’t fall far from the tree…
And Satan Soros is the “front man” for wealth a couple of orders of magnitude more than Bloomturd could even dream of…
Evil men with to much money.
Rockefellers and their ilk are magnitudes greater than Soros.
[…] via George Soros’ “New Way Forward Act” — The Q Tree […]
Interesting that Austria and the Austrian Schools of all sorts comes up here. I was thinking about a post on Freud being a cultural Marxism Trojan figure, as he was the revolutionary no one dares refute even if he was a cocaine addict and couldn’t get past sex and selfishness. Just curious as to whether or not he and Popper had anything in common, I found this site. http://existentialcomics.com/comic/285 It turns out they held strong animosities toward one another.
As for Soros…I think the plan has advanced far enough for him to be nervous. The worry would be adding him to the obituaries one way or another before he gets arrested.
Michaelh. !! DepplePat !!
Wow. I feel like that character in FARGO, saying, “Oh, now I get it.”
I knew ‘Soros man bad,’ but had a Popper-sized hole in my understanding until now. Do left people explain Popper falsely? Well duh. Active misinformation. Wolfs, Michael’s Popper Paper needs a special star as helpful explanatory info.
And Depple Pat, what a cartoon site! This is a day I got a lot less dumb. A big Thank You to Source.
I’m telling you…Austrian men of a certain persuasion….
Suggest you look at the others in Congress signing onto the New Way Forward scam. Some constituents might be surprised and others might say, It figures, where is my ballot to get rid of that snake.
The time has come for Soros to lawyer up, I really think times up for the ol man and he is gonna see Lady Justice when the dust settles.
Would be grand to see a FISA warrant and wire tap on him and his people, that two hop thing would get alot of people involved.