“National Assembly Symposium on the Historical Importance of the Ancient Ruins at Jungdo”
Presentation at the Library of the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea by Emanuel Pastreich at 3:30 PM on “The perspectives of Western scholars on the value of the ruins at Jungdo and approaches for their preservation”
This symposium is a response to the recent move to destroy much of these yet unresearched ancient ruins to make way for the amusement park “Lego Land.”
Huey Long was the main political challenger to the New Deal policies of the Roosevelt administration after it failed to deliver its promised relief to Americans in the first years of the administration (which Long had initially supported). Long launched his “Share Our Wealth Society” as governor of (and later senator from) Louisiana. He transformed that backwards state into a space for remarkable social and economic innovation aimed at the working man and he made efforts to address racial discrimination that others (like Roosevelt) dared not.
Long delivered a series of powerful speeches in 1934 and 1935 that moved the nation as he prepared to run for president as an independent, not dependent on the Democratic or Republican Parties.
Long was assassinated on September 10,1935, just as he started to achieve significant political impact. That murky incident was most likely planned and carried out by those representing global finance in New York and London who feared his calls to redistribute the wealth, not as a communist ideological movement, but in accord with the teachings of the New Testament and the principles of the Constitution. That argument had such a broad appeal, and had such a convincing internal logic, that it spread like wildfire across the country.
Although I most certainly do not support all of Long’s policies, he offers much that we cannot ignore.
I feel that Long’s critiques are essential for us to consider as we try to understand how today’s crisis is a product of the failures of the New Deal.
Roosevelt was forced to address social injustice directly because of the powerful criticisms he received from Huey Long and from Charles Coughlin through his social justice movement.
Roosevelt also received justified criticism from the American Communist Party which cited examples from the Soviet Union of how that country had avoided the worst of the depression through the use of a planned economy and the creation of a collectivist economy.
These three powerful critiques pushed Roosevelt away from his Harvard pals and wealthy patrons and made him truly a “traitor to his class” for the purpose of his political survival.
Moreover, it was the failure of the New Deal to address the contradictions of the Federal Reserve that led us to where we are today. If we do not look at the proposals of Long and Coughlin, we cannot solve the problems we face today.
Dismissing them as fascists is simply not accurate or productive.
————————————–
Huey P. Long
“Every Man a King”
February 23, 1934
I contend, my friends, that we have no difficult problem to solve in America, and that is the view of nearly everyone with whom I have discussed the matter here in Washington and elsewhere throughout the United States—that we have no very difficult problem to solve.
It is not the difficulty of the problem which we have; it is the fact that the rich people of this country—and by the rich people I mean the super-rich—will not allow us to solve the problem, or rather the one little problem that is afflicting this country, because in order to cure all of our woes it is necessary to scale down the big fortunes, that we may scatter the wealth to be shared by all of the people.
How many of you remember the first thing that the Declaration of Independence said? It said, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that there are certain inalienable rights for the people, and among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness;” and it said, further, “We hold the view that all men are created equal.”
Now, what did they mean by that? Did they mean, my friends, to say that all men were created equal and that means that any one man was born to inherit $10 billion and that another child was to be born to inherit nothing?
Did that mean, my friends, that someone would come into this world without having had an opportunity to have one lick of work, that another should be born with more than what all of his children and his children’s children could ever dispose of, but that another man would have to be born into a life of starvation?
That was not the meaning of the Declaration of Independence when it said that all men are created equal.
Nor was it the meaning of the Declaration of Independence when it said that they held that there were certain rights that were inalienable—the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Do we have that right of life, my friends, when the young children of this country are being reared into a sphere which is more owned by 12 men than it is by 120 million people?
Is that, my friends, giving them a fair shake of the dice, or anything like the inalienable right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, or anything resembling all people created equal; when we have today in America thousands, and hundreds of thousands, and millions of children on the verge of starvation in a land that is overflowing with too much to eat and too much to wear?
I do not think you will contend that, and I do not think for a moment, that they will contend it.
Now let us see if we return this government to the Declaration of Independence and see if we can do anything about it. Why should we hesitate, or why should we quibble, or why should we quarrel with one another to find out what the difficulty is, when we know the Lord told us what the difficulty is, and Moses wrote it out so a blind man could see it, and then Jesus told us all about it, and it was later written up in the Book of James, so everyone could read it.
I refer to the Scriptures, now, my friends, and give you what it says not for the purpose of convincing you of my wisdom, not for the purpose of, ladies and gentlemen, of convincing you that by quoting the Scripture I am to be more believed than someone else; no, I quote you the Scripture, or rather refer you to the Scripture, because whatever you see there you may rely upon.
The Scripture says, ladies and gentlemen, that for a country to survive it is necessary that we keep the wealth scattered among the people, that nothing should be held permanently by any one person., and that fifty years should be the year of jubilee in which all property is scattered about and returned to the sources from which it originally came, and every seventh year, the debt shall be remitted.
We have in America today more wealth, more goods, more food, more clothing, more houses than we have ever had. We have everything in abundance here.
We have the farm problem, my friends, because we have too much cotton, because we have too much wheat, and have too much corn, and too many potatoes.
We have a home-loan problem because we have too many houses, and yet nobody can buy them or live in them.
We have trouble, my friends, in the country because we have too much money owing; this is the greatest indebtedness that has ever been given to civilization.
It has been shown that we are incapable of distributing actual things because the people do not have money enough to purchase them, and because the greed of a few men is such that they think it necessary to own everything.
Their pleasure consists in the starvation of the masses, and in possessing things they cannot use, and that their children cannot use. Still they bask in the splendor of sunlight and wealth, casting darkness and despair, and impressing that image on everyone else.
I am going to tell you what the wise men of all ages and all times, down even to the present day, have all said: that you must keep the wealth of the country scattered, and you must limit the amount that any one man can own.
You cannot let any man own $300 billion or $400 billion. If you do, one man can own all of the wealth that the United States has in it.
Now, my friends, if you were off on an island where there were one hundred lunches, you could not let one man eat up the hundred lunches, or take the hundred lunches and not let anybody else eat any of them. If you did, there would not be anything left for most people to consume.
So, we have in America today, my friends, a condition wherein ten men dominate the means in at least 85 percent of your activities. They either own directly everything, or they have got mortgage on it, excepting a very small percentage.
They own the banks, they own the steel mills, they own the railroads, they own the bonds, they own the mortgages, they own the stores, and they have chained the country from one end to the other until there is not any business that a small, independent man could go into today and make the money to buy an automobile with.
They have finally, gradually and steadily, eliminated everybody from the fields in which there is a living to be made, and still they want to get even more business out of it.
If you reduce a man to the point where he is starving to death, bleeding and dying, how do you expect that man to get hold of any money to spend? It is not possible.
How do you expect people to live, when the wherewithall cannot be had?
If I were in their place tonight, the place where millions are, I hope that I would have the fortitude to praise and to honor my government here in this land with too much to eat and too much to wear. But many starve in order that a handful of men can have more that they can ever eat, or they can ever wear.
Now, we have organized a society, and we call it the “Share Our Wealth Society,” a society with the motto, “Every man a king.”
Every man a king means that there will be no such thing as a man or woman who does not have the necessities of life, that no one will be dependent upon the whims and caprices of the financial giants for a living.
What do we propose by this society?
We propose to limit the wealth of big men in the country.
Corporate newspapers and social media have been flooded with horrific images of the Shanghai lockdown for the last week, a massive enterprise that has confined millions of Chinese to their homes for weeks and has resulted in the implementation of severe restrictions on access to basic supplies.
Images of citizens yelling from their apartments in frustration, or screaming heartfelt protests in moving soliloquies, videos of drones and robots patrolling the empty streets of Shanghai, present us with a terrifying vision of the totalitarian rule by technology that so many have predicted.
The underlying message is that China is the source of this nightmare.
The official story put out by the city of Shanghai, and not denied by the Chinese Communist Party, is so extreme as to invite ridicule.
A new “zero tolerance” policy for COVID-19, which is a bogus non-existent disease in the first place, was imposed on all Shanghai citizens, first on the East side of the Huangpu River from March 28, and then for the entire city from April 1st. Supposedly all citizens will be tested for COVID-19. According to media reports, only 26,087 new cases of COVID-19 have been found, and of those, only 914 were symptomatic (and there were no pictures of bodies on the ground, as was in the case in Wuhan at the end of 2019).
That is to say that the justifications for the lockdown are so absurd as to make the entire process farcical, perhaps an action intended to show citizens that they must do exactly what they are told to do, no matter how ridiculous and groundless the premises are.
The Western corporate media had a ready answer for what was going on: The Chinese Communist Party, following its undemocratic socialist ideas, is violating the fundamental rights of citizens that we Westerners respect.
The American Jack Posobiec, who refers to himself as a “veteran Navy intel officer,” posted extensively on Twitter about the lockdown, blaming Communism and making statements like “This is what the CCP is doing to the 26 million people of Shanghai.”
Human Rights Watch was quick to condemn China for its human rights violations in Shanghai, stating on April 6 that “The Chinese government should respect the right to health and other basic rights in its response to the Covid-19 surge in the country,” but did so without any reference to similar, or worse, policies being carried out around the world.
The problem is that although this lockdown is blamed on Communism, there is no precedent for the shutdown of a major city too be found in the Chinese communist tradition; no part of the imposition of technofascism can be traced back to the calls of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai for class struggle and for resistance to imperialism.
The model for the Shanghai lockdown, it turns out, is the lockdown of Boston after the Boston Marathon bombing of April 15, 2013, exactly nine years ago. On that occasion, the United States Federal government, specifically the FBI, used a murky charge of a terrorist attack (about which serious doubts remain) as an excuse to lock down vast sections of the city of Boston and to confine citizens to their homes while armed police patrolled the streets.
Boston Lockdown of 2013
The question we should ask is whether what is taking place in Shanghai is being organized by the same people who organized the Boston lockdown, and similar lockdowns around the world over the last two year, and not by the Chinese Communist Party—or not primarily by the Chinese Communist Party.
Horrific videos of Chinese committing suicide by jumping from their windows were also widely circulated, and they may have been real, but there is no reason to assume anything is true just because it was broadly circulated.
Another popular video featured a dog-shaped robot (that resembles a Boston Dynamics SpotMini) patrolling the streets with a microphone on its back telling the people of Shanghai to stay inside. Anyone who looked at the video with critical eyes had to be doubtful. The speaker was carelessly strapped to the back of the robot with barricade tape in what appears to be a careless stunt, and it was most certainly not representative of government policy.
But the giveaway that this lockdown has silent partners who had nothing to do with the CCP bureaucracy was the constant harping in the Western media on the suffering of animals in Shanghai. Images of live cats rounded up and put in bags for disposal were pasted all over the internet, along with a video of a Chinese man cruelly holding a dog in pain with a device and then dropping it into a container with other injured dogs. Although the video certainly was disturbing, I dare horrified Americans to watch a video of a factory-scale slaughterhouse in the United States for even few minutes.
The focus on cruelty to animals is a standard in the operation to demonize Russia in the Ukraine. For example, a call by “Soi Dog co-founder John Dalley” for help to rescue the dogs and cats of Ukraine has been broadly circulated in the United States.
There are numerous indications that the Shanghai lockdown is being marketed for the Western audience as the equivalent of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The narrative presented is of a cruel totalitarian Communist government in China that oppresses the poor citizens of Shanghai who yearn to be free from these unreasonable “zero covid” restrictions (but no suggestion is offered that covid restrictions themselves are wrong).
MSN reported, “There are videos of locked-up residents chanting ‘we want food’ and ‘we want freedom.’ In a video, citizens are seen going to their balconies and protesting against the lack of supplies.”
But the videos, the reports, are just too perfect, to carefully staged.
Shanghai Shutdown as war by other means
The details of the actions by American operatives (perhaps including Israel and other nations) in collaboration with corrupt Chinese officials to plan, and to carry out, this Shanghai lockdown are not available to me. Granted the completely speculative, and often blatantly wrong, reporting that passes for journalism these days, however, I hope that I can be forgiven if I infer, based on the ample evidence I have read in English and Chinese, as to what may be going on behind the scenes.
The Shanghai lockdown must be seen first in proper geopolitical perspective.
China has been subject to high level pressure from Washington D.C. over the last two months in an effort to thwart any possible cooperation with the Russian Federation since Russian troops entered the Ukraine.
Let us consider the critical events leading up to the lockdown.
US President Joe Biden warned the People’s Republic of China on March 18, in a conversation with President Xi Jinping, that there would serious consequences for China if it offered any support for Russia, economic, or, especially, military. White House press secretary Jen Psaki explained, “He made clear what the implications and consequences would be if China provides material support to Russia as it conducts brutal attacks against Ukrainian cities and civilians.”
We do not know what Biden said, but just three days later, on March 21, China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 was heading for a smooth landing at the Guangzhou International Airport when it suddenly plunged inexplicably into a nosedive. The cause of the crash has yet to be explained—even three weeks later.
Many Chinese believe the arguments made in videos posted on Weibo (and elsewhere) soon after that incident that the crash was the result of a remote hijacking (similar to the 9/11 crashes) probably conducted by United States. The story was confirmed by the American intelligence investigative blog State of the Nation. Moreover, the egregious decision to include a seven-member team from the United States in the formal investigation of this domestic crash suggests something a bit unusual.
Then, on March 28, the Shanghai Municipal People’s Government, not the central government in Beijing that had been easing restrictions, suddenly launched a radical COVID-19 “zero tolerance” policy.
If intelligence operatives for the United States were looking to give China its own “Ukraine,” and to find a new field for the trouble making that they funded in Hong Kong previously, Shanghai was the logical choice.
Shanghai is riddled with global financial interests, with the head offices (or certainly the major branch) for all major multinational investment banks and multinational corporations located there. Their impact on the Chinese economy remains immense.
Shanghai has a history of over a hundred years as a center for global capital with a parasitic relationship to the rest of the nation. It was Shanghai, after all, that offered extraterritoriality to citizens from imperial powers until the 1940s.
Following that tradition, Shanghai today has the most extreme special economic zone policies of any city in China, policies that allow foreign corporations to engage in a broad range of activities without the authorization of the government.
As part of its drive to meet the demands of multinational corporations, the Shanghai government has privatized services and promoted technological solutions to just about everything. Shanghai has been so enthusiastic in adopting smart grids, 5G, online governance, and automation that it won the top rank globally as smart city from Juniper Research this year.
Shanghai has rolled out the red carpet for global finance, giving special privileges to select institutional investors, opening up to just about any investment from offshore, expanding the derivatives markets, and permitting investment banks to create their own “wealth management joint ventures.”
Who might be involved on the Chinese side in this Shanghai shutdown?
There are plenty of billionaires active in Shanghai with close ties to global finance who might be tempted to play the role of an Igor Kolomoisky, the billionaire who created current president of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky in response to American encouragement.
For example, we know that the billionaire Ma Yun (Jack Ma), who took enormous amounts of funding from Goldman Sachs and other American investment banks when he created Alibaba as a global marketing and distribution giant that rivaled Amazon, was very unhappy with Chinese policies.
Ma is popular figure among the globalists, and he is a member of the board of trustees of the World Economic Forum.
Although the details are obscure, Ma’s push for the globalist agenda in China ran afoul of state planners in Beijing, Xi Jinping included, two years ago.
Ma established the Ant Group, a financial institution intended to revolutionize finance by creating an unregulated banking system.
The story is that he delivered a speech on October 24, 2020 in which he called for sweeping changes in the banking system. As a result, the central government cracked down on his activities and he has rarely been seen in public since.
Alibaba is headquartered in Hangzhou, near Shanghai, and has its largest presence in Shanghai.
There are also American billionaires interested in using Shanghai as a way to muscle in and open up China to foreign capital. For example, Stephen Schwarzman, CEO of the private equity firm Blackstone, has bought off many intellectuals and government officials in the Chinese Communist Party with his money, especially the more than 100 million USD he gave to establish, among other things, the prestigious “Schwarzman Scholars” Program at Tsinghua University.
Another American billionaire heavily invested in China is John Thornton, founder of the John L. Thornton China Center at Brookings Institution. Thornton is a member of the International Advisory Council of the China Investment Corporation (China’s sovereign wealth fund) and he is constantly pushing to increase foreign influence over China’s financial policy.
Shanghai Lockdown and Global Economic Disruption
The economic disruption caused by the Shanghai lockdown is already being promoted in the corporate media as the reason for delays in the production and delivery of electronics, automobiles, and other household goods that are produced in, shipped through, or dependent on parts manufactured in Shanghai. Although this disruption is true, there is every reason to believe that this situation will be exploited and exaggerated to justify efforts by the super-rich to destroy the global economy further and to impoverish the Earth’s citizens.
Combining a Ukraine crisis that justifies a sudden scarcity of agricultural goods, raw materials, natural gas, and manufactured goods with a Shanghai crisis that shuts down global trade offers globalists an opportunity to explain just about any disruption.
Already plans are in place to adopt a similar zero tolerance policies in the city of Guangzhou, another major manufacturing and finance center. The resulting economic slowdowns, disruptions in supply chains, increasing inflation and shortages will be just what the doctor ordered.
The economic crisis of the Shanghai lockdown has also been employed as an argument for increasing vaccinations in China, predictably, and for introducing the first Chinese-made mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, according to China’s National Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
Differences between Russia and China
There are clear differences in the nature of the attack on Russia through Ukraine and on China through Shanghai. The United States and China, although talk of war has become a constant theme over the last decade, are also highly integrated economies that involve deep cooperation even in the midst of radical political theatre. Moreover, China has refused to respond to the efforts to goad it into military action in Taiwan, Hong Kong or the South China Sea. The attack, therefore, had to be launched in a covert and obscure manner so as to make it appear as if the Chinese Communist Party that the source of the problem because it is abusing the people of Shanghai. As of this moment, there is not a trace of the American hand anywhere in the public discourse.
Russia, by contrast never had the rapprochement with the United States that China had after President Richard Nixon’s meeting with Chairman Mao Zedong in 1972, nor are the economies of the United States and Russia that integrated. There were Russians who studied in the United States, but study in America did not have the same appeal for Russians that it had for Chinese over the last thirty years.
Thus, although there is American investment in Russia, and American interference in Russia, Russia is not so deeply integrated into the American logistics and supply chain, and American investment banks have fewer ties and fewer financial interests.
What needs to be done
The Chinese have been subject to their part of the great reset, serving as guinea pigs for social credit systems that allow for constant surveillance and for the evaluation of citizens via AI, and for the required use of digital payment systems. The globalists most likely targeted China for these experiments, before broader application in the world, because the emphasis on technological development in Chinese society, and Chinese naivety about the negative impact of technological innovation on human society, made the Chinese ready victims.
These technofascist policies are promoted by many bureaucrats in the Chinese Communist Party, but they did not originate in China. They are but a part of a global strategy for control of the world’s economy by the financial elites, cunning men who flatter the Chinese about the effectiveness of their response to COVID-19, and their potential to be innovation leaders through AI.
What is desperately needed in response to the current effort of globalists to induce needless conflicts between nation states, and within nations, through operations like the Shanghai lockdown, is an alliance of citizens in China, Russia, the United States, and other countries against the predations of multinational investment banks and corporations, an alliance that resembles the internationalist anti-fascist movements of the 1930s.
The Shanghai lockdown was designed to increase the isolation of the individual in a technological prison while also creating greater distance between Americans (Westerners) and Chinese who ought to be cooperating to respond to the threat of techno-fascism. It is time for us all to come together in response.
This urinal at a Korean nation park demands that one maintain “social distancing” to create a “circular economy” and achieve “carbon neutrality.”
The description of the reasons that this shadow government prohibits you from using the urinal below mention “COVID-19” but at the top it only has the local for “circular economy” and “carbon neutrality.” Unlike all previous such warning signs, there is no scary COVID virus image anywhere.
우리나라는 아직은 우리에게 정부가 있고, 민주주의 원칙으로 선거를 진행하며 정책 변경이 가능 하고, 신문 및 방송에 나오는 정보는 사실라고 믿고 싶은 마음이 있는 한국인들이 꽤 많습니다.
아마 오랫동안 계속 한국의 민주주의와 한국의 경제발전 그리고 한국의 한류라는 신화를 계속 반복해서 들었기 때문
인 것 같습니다. 하지만 이제는 한국은 “정부”가 아니고 다국적 대기업을 위해서 범죄조직이 운영하고 있다는 사실을 보면 너무나 마음이 아프고, 너무나 혼란을 일으키고, 너무나 부끄러우니까 인정을 못 하겠습니다.
기업언론이 홍보하는 가짜 선거에서 미리 선정한 배우만 나오고 있고 시민들과의 교류도 전혀 없고 재벌이 시키는 대로 하는 “정치인들”만 있다는 사실도 너무나 부끄럽습니다. 이런 정치인들은 시민에게 기업이 결정한 살인적 정책을 홍보하는 역할 밖에 없습니다. 이런 정치인들은 절대 기업들이 시민들을 독약 “백신” 마스크, 공기 공해, 물 공해, 화학품 많은 가공식품 등으로 죽이는 것을 숨기는 일을 자기 역할로 알고 있습니다.
신문과 24시간 종일 방송은 쓰레기와 거짓말 그리고 기업홍보만 나오고, 사람의 마음을 죽이는 심리 작전의 무기로 추락했다는 사실은 시민들이 인정 하기 어렵습니다.
우리 국제혁명당은 이를 충분히 이해할 수 있습니다. 윤리적인 감각이 해체됐고, 정신적으로 낙담이 되고, 막연한 위협에 공포를 느끼고, 모순되는 방송 보도 정부 지침에 맞아서 정신 없이 길거리에서 방황하고 있습니다.
한국, 대조선이, 왜 이렇게 됐을까요?
우리나라가 고대부터 외국 침략에 강력하게 반격했던 정신적인 힘은 어디로 갔을까요?
이렇게 기업들이 스마트폰과 포르노와 게임 그리고 카카오를 통해서 시민의 집중력을 해치고 의존심리를 만들고 있는 것을 못보셨나요?
병원과 제약기업들은 시민을 치료하는 것을 목적으로 하지 않고 시민을 아프게 하고 죽이는 것을 못 보셨나요?
그래도 수많은 한국인들은 대학 입학을 위해서 자신의 인생을 희생하고 기업이 만든 시험을 봅니다. 하지만 그 시험은 교육과 상관이 별로 없습니다. 그리고 청소년들에게 독립적인 사고방식을 가르치지도 않습니다. 이것은 교육이 아닙니다. 계급 전쟁의 무기, 바로 우민정책인 것입니다.
수많은 한국인들은 수익을 절대 나눠 주지 않는 기업을 위해서 밤낮 할 것 없이 열심히 일을 합니다. 그 기업의 수익은 해외로 빠져 나간다는 사실도 모릅니다.
이것은 정책의 실수가 아닙니다. 이것은 특정한 정치인의 욕심이 아니고, 이것을 세뇌시킨 시민들에게 재벌들이 선포한 전쟁입니다.
그리고 우리는 우리들의 아이들을 지켜야 됩니다. 자식을 위험한 학교로 내보내지 말아야 됩니다.
다행히 최근에 와서 용기 있게 이순신 장군과 같은 선비 정신을 승계해서 일어나서 싸우는 시민들이 있습니다. 고등학생, 평범한 부모님, 그리고 권력의 협박에 굴복하지 않은 한국인들. 존경합니다!
그리고 여러분을 환영합니다. 우리 국제혁명당은 여러분과 함께 서 있습니다.
국제혁명당은 무조건 와 행동을 추진합니다. 이런 범죄에 가담한 사람들과 타협할 생각이 전혀없습니다. 그들을 무조건 감옥으로 보내겠습니다.
우리 국제혁명당은 유일하게 백신통제를반대하고 가담한 재벌들의 재산을 몰수를 요구하고, 통일 한반도의 미래 비전을 가지고 평범한 시민들을 존중하고 진지한 대화를 하고 있습니다.
한가지 재미 있는 사실은 지금 한국에벌써 “혁명”을 내건 정당 무려 3개 나 있습니다:
국가혁명당과 국민혁명당 그리고 혁명21.
그런데 이런 정당들은 시민들이 갈망하는 혁명을 말하고 있지만 행동은 전혀 하고 있지 않습니다. 진정한 범죄도 언급 하지 않습니다.
체제를 혁명으로 전환할 생각은 더더욱 없는 것 같습니다.
우리 국제혁명당은 유일하게 이러한 “정부” 를 대규모 심리 작전을 추진하는 범죄조직이라는 사실을 인정하고 있습니다.
오늘 여기서 혁명을 선포합니다. 코로나 살인 독재의 통제와 항쟁하겠습니다. 그리고 여러분께 약속합니다.
과학과 진리, 그리고 도덕과 윤리를 바탕으로 하는 나라를 여러분들과 함께 새우겠습니다.
오늘부터 국제재벌이 점령한 정부기관에서 내리는 불법 지침은 무효입니다. 시민들은 이를 거부할 의무가 있습니다. 절대 “정부” 라고 할수 없습니다. 물론 열심히 일 하시는 공무원, 경찰, 군인들이 있으며 우리 국제혁명당은 이런 분들을 진심으로 환영합니다. 그러나 범죄가담자들은 필요 없습니다.
우리는 앞으로 더 많은 시민들을 만나서 한국의 진실을 알려드리고 가치 있는 정보도 제공해드리며, 진정한 교육을 드리겠습니다.
또한 시민들이 스스로 공동체를 만들고 독립적인 경제, 독립적인 교육, 독립적인 문화를 영유 할 수 있도록 도와드리겠습니다. 우리 국제혁명당은 시민을 노예로 만드는 문화와 경제를 용서할 수 없습니다.
주말 시위와 밤늦게 카카오톡 대화만 갖고는 이런 위기를 절대 극복할 수는 없습니다.
생명의 위협이 있더라도 끝까지 싸우는 사람들이 필요하고 서로 이해하고 배려하는 사람다운 공동체가 필요합니다.
이런 공동체는, 농사부터 학교 및 주택까지 재벌 기업에서 완전히 독립을 해야 됩니다. 가능하면 우리 농산물을 우리 손으로, 우리가 입는 옷을 스스로 만들고, 우리가 쓰는 가구들을 스스로 만들도록 하겠습니다. 아무리 기업 파시즘이 제작과 유통을 장악 하더라도 우리 스스로 살아남을 수 있는 사회를 만들겠습니다.
사실 그대로 말씀드립니다.
은행들과 기업들은 한국은행을 악용해서 가짜 돈을 국가 빚으로 만들어서 그 가짜 돈으로 땅을 구매하고 동네를 재개발하고 공장이나 세웠습니다.
이제 혁명을 시작 했으니 시민을 죽이는 재벌의 재산은 우리 의 재산입니다.
예를 들면, 독약 “백신”을 개발한 재벌과 그 재벌에 투자 한 은행 그리고 그 독약 “백신”을 “약”이라 홍보한 언론의 재산을 바로 몰수해서 시민들에게 배상 해드리겠습니다.
혁명의 시작에는 많은 사람들이 필요 없습니다. 오늘 와계시는 분들로도 이미 충분합니다.
우리는 명예와 홍보와 수익에 관심이 전혀 없습니다. 우리는 시민을 위해서 희생하겠다고 마음을 먹었습니다.
우리는 이렇게 많은 혜택을 받았으니 당연히 그렇게 생각합니다.
지금부터 국제혁명당이 사실상 한국의 임시정부의 역할을 하겠습니다. 물론 우리는 역부족이고 여러분들의 많은 도움과 조언이 필요합니다. 그리고 당연히 우리 보다 실력이 있는 사람들이 배출되면 기꺼이 사임 하겠습니다.
마스크 착용을 정당화시키고, 사회적거리두기를 진행 하거나, 백신의 의무화를 주장한 정치인과 공무원 그리고 의사와 기업인 등등 많은 이들이 범죄를 저질렀습니다. 그들은 즉각 사임 해야 됩니다.
혁명은 민주주의의 반대가 아닙니다. 혁명이 있어야 민주주의가 가능하게 됩니다. 이 사실을 고대부터 철학가들이 인정 했습니다.
현재 한국에서 민주주의가 전혀 작동하고 있지 않고 하루종일 시민을 세뇌시키는 선언 켐페인이 진행되고 있습니다. 재벌의 선언 작전은 시민의 사고방식을 망치고 집중력을 없애는 AI를 미화시키고, 몸을 해치는 약과 가공식품을 시민의 행복과 사회 발전으로 홍보하고 납득시키고 있습니다. 한국은 이번 혁명에서 지구상 핵심 역할을 수행할 것입니다. 한국은 고대부터 위대하고 도덕적인 행정 전통이 있었고홍익인간과 선비 정신은 이런 추락한 시대에도 아직 남아있습니다.
한국문화를 지구의 극 재난에서 구재 할 수 있습니다. 다만 그 한국문화는 백신을 홍보하는 BTS도 아니고, 암을 유발하는 가공식품을 판매하는 기업도 아닙니다.
신한류는 평등한 사회와 도덕적인 정치 그리고 진리를 목적으로 하는 교육입니다. 그 한류의 뿌리는 한국 고대의 정신에 있습니다.
마지막으로 통일을 이야기합시다.
통일은 먼 미래가 아닙니다. 통일은 많은 관료와 기업 사장의 승인이 필요 없습니다.
통일은 바로 우리 눈앞에 있습니다.
남북을 분단시키는 국경, 한국과 주변국가를 멀리하는 격리는 자연스러운 현상이 아니고 재벌이 서민을 위해서 만든 것입니다. 재벌들은 개인 비행기로 마음대로 왔다갔다 합니다.
거의 유일하게 백신통제를 거부한 북한 이 옆에 있어서 대단히 다행이라 생각합니다.
남한과 북한 역사의 모순된 잘못에 집착하지 말고 빨리 몇 개월이내 통일이 되면 이 코로나 통제 악몽이 끝날 수 있다고 믿습니다. 아마 통일은 유일하게 한민족을 살릴 수 있는 길일 것입니다.
처음부터 지금까지 한국과 조선은 하나였습니다. 다만 군산복합체와 국제금융 그리고 기타 극소수의 사람의 이익을 위해서 통일을 방해했습니다.
The United States Provisional Government, with a temporary office in Korea, has expanded its efforts around the world and is establishing the basis for the restoration of the rule of law in the United States globally, and the neutralization of the corporate fascists who have seized control of much of our economy and our political system through devious and illegal means.
The US Provisional Government and the International Revolutionist Party launched on December fifth, 2021, the International Front Against Corporate Fascism IFACF as a means to bring together the citizens of the Earth to oppose rule by corporate entities that hide in the shadows while manipulating us through their supercomputers.
Please contact us and let us know if you would like to join us. Write to me, Emanuel, at epastreich@protonmail.com.
Circles and Squares 