Countering the Pacific Pivot

The geopolitical term “Pacific Pivot” refers to a proposed 21st century US foreign policy strategy of withdrawing military dominance in the Atlantic theater in order to concentrate on military dominance in the Pacific theater. (This in itself is ironic, considering that the Pacific Ocean’s name comes from the Latin word “pacificus” = peaceful.) This article will explain why such a strategy would be a terrible mistake, and why the exact opposite approach is needed.

For the past five centuries the seat of global power has revolved around the Atlantic basin—from Columbus to NATO. However, today China’s population of 1.4 billion outnumbers the EU by 3.7 times, the US by 4. India is set to overtake China in population by 2030, due to India’s failure to implement state-controlled measures to slow down the runaway population (as China has done with its admirable One Child Policy). Taking into account population size, economic power, and demand for resources, it is clear in which direction global power will shift in the 21st century.


Advocates of the Pacific Pivot perceive the rise of the Indo-Pacific region as a danger to both the US and the rest of the world. Specifically, they are convinced that, should WWIII ever break out, its seeds will be sowed in this region. The Pacific Pivot is hence, as they perceive it, a pre-emptive guard against such an eventuality. (In recent times, this psychology is best seen in Donald Trump’s patently insane rhetoric against North Korea, which is nevertheless believed by a worryingly large fraction of US voters.) But does their perception hold up to scrutiny?

While China, North Korea, India and Pakistan are indeed nuclear-armed states, their stockpiles are minuscule compared to those of Russia and the US, and are in fact even far outnumbered by that of Israel. Pacific Pivot advocates tell us that Japan constantly feels threatened by North Korea and/or China, but this conveniently ignores the reality that the most prominent street-level Japanese protests are in opposition to US military bases on Japanese territory that (at least according to Pacific Pivot advocates) supposedly protect them from North Korea and China! If even Japanese, living in much closer proximity to North Korea and China than the US and with no nukes (or even a significant military) of their own, do not feel unsafe, how much sense does it make for Americans, living so much further away and with so many nukes, to feel directly endangered by North Korea and/or China?

If Americans wish to better understand the workings of other side of the Pacific – and understand we must if we are to formulate foreign policy that, unlike Trump’s, does not make the US appear mentally ill – it behooves us to study at least modern Pacific history.

While Japan, which had maintained isolationism for centuries prior to the modern era, finally caved in under Western pressure to itself adopt Western attitudes during the latter part of the 19th century (and as a result ignobly participating in things such as the Boxer Protocol and imposing the Twenty-One Demands on China), it began to come to its senses and distance itself from the West during the early 20th century. These attitudes culminated during WWII, when Japan became the first west Pacific nation to put up a strong enough fight to heroically break the backbone of Western colonialism in the region. Although Japan’s foothold in the west Pacific was only temporary, the anti-Western attitudes it encouraged in liberated nations sent shockwaves throughout the region for decades to come. It also introduced to the world arguably one of the most important ideas in the history of the Pacific basin: the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.


Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere near its peak.

Soon after US independence, Americans declared ourselves guardians of the New World under the Monroe Doctrine. The Doctrine declared that colonialism by Western powers was no longer welcome in the Americas, implicitly giving support to the ongoing Latin American struggles for independence. The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere can be seen as Japan’s upgraded version of the Monroe Doctrine—justly using force to overthrow Western colonial rule. Admittedly, there continued to exist among the Japanese the old pro-Western camp who merely desired for a nominal Co-Prosperity Sphere to end up as a Japanese colonial empire such that Japan could be recognized as a fellow Western power. However, there also existed among the Japanese a sincere anti-Western camp who wished for Japan to turn over a new leaf and leave the Western-inspired days of the 19th century behind. Japan did not win WWII, and therefore the two camps never reached the stage when they would have clashed. But why do Western historians neglect to draw attention to the latter camp, while giving so much attention to the former? The reason is simple: fear of an anti-Western alliance re-forming in the Sinosphere.

It cannot be denied that global decolonization would have been delayed many decades if not centuries, or might even never have occurred at all, if the Western victors of WWII did not have to face up to the hypocrisy of casting Germany, Italy and Japan as “racists bent on world domination,” while themselves having massive segregated colonial empires spanning the entire globe. India, Indonesia, and even China were only given a chance to shine because of the actions taken by the Land of the Rising Sun against their colonial aggressors.



Anti-colonial propaganda of Japan.

The economic reality is that the west Pacific in the 21st century will likely be lead by China rather than Japan. Nevertheless, simple understanding of geography tells us that the nations along the Pacific basin will share a common destiny. It is imperative that all nations in the Pacific basin learn from early modern Japan’s ideological mistake of eagerly taking up Western practices in order to compete with, and worse, prove itself worthy of “respect” from, its own former oppressors.

Most of the world’s problems during the last 500 years (from colonialism, to industrialization, to nuclear weaponry and the urge for space colonization) have been inflicted by a small minority (i.e. Western Civilization)—can you imagine how bad things could get if the majority of Earth’s population comes around to embrace Western Civilization? If the situation is allowed to deteriorate to this level, it may be impossible to reverse. To make unambiguous how deeply rooted these problems are, even should Western Civilization—including “whiteness”—ever disappear from Europe, Western Civilization itself will not necessarily die so long as China, India, and others reiterate Japan’s mistake, and we should not underestimate their proclivity to do so. Many Americans believe that China only began Westernizing after it gave up on communism. In fact, Maoists were pro-Western on many issues (especially education) except economics and democracy, indeed Mao Zedong had to at first present communism itself to the masses as an “alternative form of Western government” (Marx being an apparent ‘Westerner’) because Western governmental forms were all that the masses were interested in during the early 20th century. Sun Yatsen was even more pro-Western, particularly pro-democrat. Even back in the Qing Dynasty there was enthusiasm towards Western education along with ideas of establishing constitutional monarchy.

Neither should we underestimate, on the other hand, the positive potential of China’s increasing global influence, so long as it rejects Westernization. As mentioned above, China’s One Child Policy has set a groundbreaking example for state control over reproduction that could be followed (and thereafter further developed) by all countries in the world, thus beginning the much-needed mission of cutting worldwide birth rates. But for this to happen, China must be confident enough to proactively campaign for such a policy to be adopted by the rest of the world. (In reality, the opposite has happened: China has recently, bowing to relentless Western condemnation, scaled back this policy to a considerably weaker Two Child Policy.)

Only time will tell if what emerges from the west Pacific is a heroic anti-Western culture, or if Western Civilization will merely succeed in adapting itself to a new host. If Americans wish to promote the former outcome rather than the latter, Western presence (by which we mean ANY manifestation of Western Civilization, including elements adopted by countries which are not geographically or ethnically connected to Europe) must be removed from the present-day Pacific, so that China and North Korea cease to feel besieged and thus cease to have to think constantly about defense.



Throughout human history, the most significant source of conflict has been competition for resources. The geopolitical expression of this conflict has most frequently taken place through changes in territorial borders. One might think that the Pacific Ocean provides a massive natural barrier preventing these conflicts, but nothing could be further from the truth.

The underlying purpose of the Trans-Pacific Partnership economic plan was to wrestle away China’s neighboring trading partners into a US-dominated trading bloc, so the US could then exert pressure on China. Thankfully, after years of campaigning against the TPP by groups from all parts of the political spectrum, it seems public opinion in the US has firmly turned against it–although, sadly, the perception of China by average American citizens has not significantly improved. Over the past decade, rightist propaganda has attempted to paint China as one of the post-Cold War “boogey men” that Americans should fear. This propaganda utilizes Americans’ misunderstanding of the national debt (the majority of which is not even owned by China), China’s growing economic prowess (while ignoring the fact that the US benefits from importing a tremendous amount of our goods from China), and China’s supposed ‘military ambitions’ (while ignoring the massive power imbalance between US and Chinese military technology and distribution of bases, and ignoring the US’s much greater aggression around the globe!).

Soon after taking office, Trump signed an executive order scrapping the TTP; however, he and his administration have shown that they are more than willing to carry on full steam ahead with the Pacific Pivot. Steve Bannon, who was regarded by many as one of the principal ideological drivers at the start of the Trump administration, has been highly antagonistic towards China and previously said war was “unavoidable”. While TPP supporters favored taking a slow and steady approach towards exerting US dominance on China, Trump favors a more direct approach. Trump’s stance on the TPP should be a cause of concern, not celebration. Stopping the TPP will mean absolutely nothing if the Pacific Pivot itself is not stopped. China is not celebrating the death of the TPP because they know Trump did not scrap it with the intention of improving US-China relations.

According to United Nations conventions, countries have sovereignty over coastal waters within 12 nautical miles (22.2 km; 13.8 mi) of their shoreline. Beyond this boundary is International Waters. However, the same conventions ludicrously declare that a nation’s “Exclusive Economic Zone” extends 200 nautical miles from the shore. Within this zone nations get special liberties regarding exploitation of marine resources (despite being International Waters), but since economic interests are always intertwined with political interests, the boundaries of EEZs have recklessly caused tensions between nations to grow. This is in addition to the fact that many islands are used as military bases, which can easily send out air and sea forces to destroy harmless vessels, thereby provoking an international incident hostile vessels “stealing” their marine resources, thereby “defending” their nation.


In reality, most Pacific islands are so small that they must be highlighted to appear on the map!


Exclusive Economic Zones: The isolated islands of the Pacific don’t seem so isolated anymore. (Click to see full size)


To compound the problem, poorly mapped continental shelves have also been assigned special economic status.

This is an especially huge issue today when ships are faster than ever before, can patrol for longer without resupplying, can deploy highly accurate weapons of massive destructive power, and when aircraft carriers can launch hundreds of planes which can travel around the world in a matter of hours—(not to mention the environmental destruction from drilling and burning the oil to power these ships, and the unprecedented cruelty of modern fishing fleets). The relatively compact borders and airspace of continental nations at least puts a predictable cap on where such nations may station their troops, but the vast expanse of the Pacific means that navies may threateningly patrol the coast of a nation an entire ocean away.

The US has islands checkerboarded throughout the Pacific (not to mention its countless bases in foreign nations). The US’s reach extends unparalleled across the entire Pacific—with territorial holdings stretching from Hawaii to Guam, and military bases in nations such as South Korea, Japan, Philippines, and Australia—and therefore they can potentially spark meaningless conflict by messing with any one of the numerous Pacific nations bordering their economic zone or those of occupied nations.

To defuse this ticking timebomb, the US needs to give up all of its military bases in the Pacific and all territorial holdings in the Pacific (each of which have the potential to be used as military bases). Steps which must be taken, in order of urgency, include:

1. Removal of all US military bases from foreign soil in the Pacific Basin.

2. Transfer guardianship of the former Pacific Trust Territories (today the countries of Palau, Federated States of Micronesia, and Marshall Islands) from the US to closer nations which are better able to provide defense and trade.

3. Independence for all US territories in the Pacific (including Hawaii).

4. Independence for all other Western-controlled territories in the Pacific.

Once these steps are complete, the chance of WWIII being started in the Pacific will be virtually reduced to zero.

Moreover, it is not merely enough to reduce the size of the EEZs so that they no longer touch (history has shown us this much)—the concept of EEZs must be done away with altogether. Ultimately, US presence as an enforcer of Western rules and institutions must vanish from the Pacific altogether, at least for now. Only after the US proves that it has turned firmly anti-Western – and only thus truly American, for Americans only became American by themselves rejecting British colonial rule – can the US be trusted to rejoin the Pacific community.

So how does America go about proving that it has turned anti-Western?

The Pacific Pivot, because it calls for a withdrawal of US troops from the Atlantic theater (supposedly to redeploy them in the Pacific theater), would leave Israel open to create Greater Israel, Russia open to create Dugin’s Eurasia and the European far-right open to create their Fortress Europe, all of which would involve grand ethno-religious cleansing of Muslims and other so-called “Third Worlders” in all the affected lands – basically a colossally scaled-up version of the Srebrenica and related massacres in the Yugoslav Wars. For America to prove it has turned anti-Western, it simply needs to recognize that: 1) this potential open season on Muslims and so-called “Third Worlders” – for many years already a popular right-wing fantasy and increasingly spoken of as “inevitable civil war” by right-wing backlash agitators – is the true great danger of the 21st century; 2) US troops in the Atlantic theater could be the last line of protection for all these innocent people; and 3) it is indeed the duty of the US to provide such protection.

Looking at the full picture, we now see that the Pacific Pivot was never really about China (let alone North Korea!), but about removing US troops from where they could potentially stand in the way of this long-planned massacre. The only counter to it would be an Atlantic Pivot in which the US troops from the Pacific theater arrive to reinforce the Atlantic theater, with explicit readiness to stop this massacre from occurring. Without ignoring all the disgraceful and disastrous interventions by the US military in recent times, including Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, there was one US military intervention that Americans should always feel proud of, namely Operation Deliberate Force when US troops saved an untold number of Bosnian Muslim lives by bombing the Serbian forces. By the term “Atlantic Pivot”, we refer to a radical reboot of US foreign policy that holds up Operation Deliberate Force as the proper precedent to follow henceforth. This would see Israel rebranded as the enemy of the US with immediate effect, and any country in the Atlantic theater which endorses or emulates Israel in its treatment of Muslims and so-called “Third Worlders” placed in the same category. Total war against such enemies would be considered not only justified, but morally compulsory. Then, just as Japan redeemed itself in WWII, so too can America redeem itself yet.


Religion & the True Left

The True Left opposes secularism, or the idea that religion should play no part in social or political discussion. The secularist view would imply that religious life is or should be separate from social life—a preposterous notion to the genuinely religious. The church however should have no influence over state affairs, but only insofar as no other organization with a different leadership should rival the state.

It must be stressed also that religious discussion should not be constrained to a mere tolerance and preservation of different creeds. In the wake of the False Left’s dethronement of religious authority was foisted a relativism that saw all religions as ‘equal,’ or more specifically, equally tolerable, respectable, commendable, etc. The chief problem with this relativism is the consequence that all religious moral systems must therefore also be equal.

While the Far Right rejects this relativism merely on the basis of whether a given religion is part of their traditional ‘identity,’ the True Left rejects it by instead holding each creed to an absolute standard of universal moral values. Metaphysics, theology, and other such models set forth by religions may be respected, but only so long as their moral ramifications—and explicit decrees—are noble. Most religions however also hold room for a range of interpretation, though often a result of a corruption of its founder’s teachings.

This being the case, the True Leftist, in addition to assessing the theology of his or any other religion for its moral implications, seeks to associate with and advance its noble aspects while eliminating the ignoble. It is not enough for him to stop at his own religion though; he must help to unite the noble elements across all religions if the True Left has any hope of eradicating the tribalist creeds.

Over the coming weeks will be published a series of articles dealing with some of the major religions of the world, in an attempt to briefly evaluate each for its relation to the ideals of the True Left. It is hoped that this will help unite the noble elements across all faiths, by showing the common Gnostic thread that runs through their unadulterated versions, and by exposing the sordid creeds and corruptions.

At the foundation of any Gnostic or True Left theology must lie a dualism of some form. Good must be set against Evil in a clear manner. If the element of Evil is either unspecified, or included within the control or emanatory power of Good, then it is justified according to such a theology. Also, if Good is represented as merely commensurate with Evil, then evil actions are again justified as this is relativism. A Gnostic religion must present Good as essentially and originally opposed to Evil, and also superior to it.

Often the two forces oppose each other as the archetypes Spirit and Matter, Truth and Falsehood, Light and Darkness, Justice and Iniquity, Purity and Corruption, and so on. For adherents to Gnostic religion, this opposition calls for constant struggle against Evil. The fate of humans and of the world is not pre-determined; we have free will and thus are responsible for our actions or lack thereof.


The cosmic struggle through each of us

Therefore, a religious approach in line with the Gnostic Left must not be solely about theological ideas, or personal psychology, but must also have social and political action in this life as a vital directive—and not, ideally, as a mere means for attaining divine favor: good deeds in this world should be foremost a matter of compassion and duty, not about rewards and punishments.

With these basic precepts in mind, we will examine various religions and allow the noble elements to surface while casting aside the reprehensible dogmas.

Marks of True Leadership

Now I know that we have written articles concerning democracy and the tyranny of the majority. But I felt that it was important to illustrate something of what we would consider an ideal to which we would aim in our Movement, especially in presenting our position in formal platforming in our various nations. In my Australian Movement, I have written as a part of our Party Platform, in its Political Policy thus:

“The Australian Freedom Party advocates an autocratic form of government (though not by hereditary but based on merit) over any democratic or constitutional system of government in its capacity to serve the people honestly and accountably.”

Whenever people hear something about autocracy, it is easy for people to misconstrue my position, that I am proposing some kind of tyrannical rule of a heartless dictator. But actually what I am proposing could be nothing further from that.

True Leaders vs Mere Bureaucratic Administrator

The kind of government that I envision first requires a visionary leader (in our case I propose that he be called the Chief Citizen), one who can guide the state and thus the destiny of that realm over which he has power. I use the word “guide” because there is a big difference between true leadership and mere bureaucratic administration. True leaders are not caught up in the mundane managerial notion of libertarian governance. Such a leader is not required to personally formulate every policy, or even to bother himself with their implementation and micromanaging.

Denethor copy

Men of small minds end up being caught up in their own ego, and are unable to hear the voice of wisdom when it speaks through those whom they lead

Essentially, the principle of micromanagement in the context of autocratic government is what leads to tyranny. Such are men of small minds who end up lacking the confidence in their own vision to guide them in giving a voice to those they lead and having the confidence to assign those most fitted to the task to carry out various responsibilities within their realm. They are afraid of those with gifting and ability. On the other hand, a true leader can clearly see that there are those among his followers who hold greater knowledge and expertise in these areas. Genuine authority exercised in such a way wins the loyalty of his followers and ultimately of the people who he rules over. It also empowers a true leader to be able to trust those whom he leads.

It is for this reason, that as you read my Party Platform, it must be remembered that I am painting a grand picture with broad brushstrokes. I see politics as true artistry (not bull artistry). If I were to be Chief Citizen of Australia, I would see my role as being the fountainhead from which the ultimate vision of a New Australia would flow. And thus it would require those who have a heart and will to embrace this vision to be looked to, according to their personal resources and expertise, to help flesh out this vision, helping to bring it into full manifestation. As I have stated before, I see the best government one in which the principle of absolute authority is coupled with the principle of absolute responsibility.

Although it may be difficult at first to see the vision, there is a reason for every individual element of my Platform, and they all fit together as a synergistic unit to form the infrastructure of a new paradigm for our Nation. Monetary reform flows into public works projects, which in turn flows into true welfare for our people and the capacity for our nation to welcome those who seek asylum. All the elements must be seen as an organic whole. Beyond this, for this vision to be ultimately fulfilled will require the willingness of our people to embrace it, the willingness of those who follow me to be able to interpret my desires, in such as way as to be able to innovating and administer the practicalities of their implementation.


A True Leader is more like a spiritual guide – like Christ or Gandhi, and not a mere mundane politician who gets good at writing speeches and making a comfortable living off of parliamentary attendance

Thus, the pitfall of micromanaging can be avoided, and instead our Chief Citizen can devote himself to the role of a leader – which in its essence is the formulation, development and communication of a vision for the rest to follow. Thus, those with knowledge, initiative, creativity and expertise can all be put to the best use for the good of the whole nation. All tasks of implementation will be delegated downwards, ultimately fostering “grassroots activism” by which our vision can be rapidly and properly communicated from the top downwards, ultimately becoming culturally and socially ingrained.

Reclaiming the Genuine Australian Nationalism

Under the banner of so-called “patriotism” and “nationalism,” the whole issue of refugees is being used as a means for propagating fear and insecurity, thus causing people to cling to those who promise them protection from their fears. There are countless examples in the media, both here in Australia and abroad, where such a picture has been graphically forced upon the masses. Meanwhile, the same powers that own the media are cutting underhanded deals internationally to essentially sell the soul of our nations into the hands of the international corporate powers. “Bread and circus” have always been a key means of the pacifying and control of the public, and for now the circus has turned to a gladiatorial contest, where innocent refugees seeking asylum have been thrown to the lions in the name of manipulating people through fear and blinding them to the real threat to our national security.



“True Nationalism is the furthest thing from divisive. Under the banner of the Southern Cross, an authentic Australian revolutionary symbol, I am seeking for those who wish to stand for a unified Australia, a land where nobility is the goal regardless of where you have come from. It is for this purpose that I have founded the Australian Freedom Party.” (Steven Pidgeon, Manifesto of the Australian Freedom Party)

Generally, all of humanity can be divided into three categories.

1) There are the people who complacently settle for slavery to the status quo.  Unconsciously driven by self-interest, they seem “happy” as long as their personal lives are unaffected by the decisions of those in power. Watching the news, reading the newspapers, they receive whatever opinion is being fed to them without consideration or censure. So many people honestly don’t seem to care about the injustices committed in this world and, if it benefits them, they could even be willing to side with the oppressor.


Are You Settled to Being Just a Part of the Crowd?

2) There are the lower elements of humanity, who assert that their opinions are silently held by the majority. They make out as if their stance is the only morally defensible position that can be taken. They make immigrants and minorities the innocent victims of their rhetoric, all in the pursuit of the supposed “good of their nation and the generations to come”. They make a claim to “nationalism,” while in reality they are a bunch of ethno-centric fear-mongers, which – knowingly or not – are playing into the Zionist agenda (as demonstrated by how nicely their Islamophobic and pro-Israel rhetoric fits into Murdoch’s fear-inducing media bandwagon). Identitarian politics is a divisive cancer to our people, actually the very antithesis of true nationalism.

True Nationalism is the furthest thing from divisive. Under the banner of the Southern Cross, an authentic Australian revolutionary symbol, I am seeking for those who wish to stand for a unified Australia, a land where nobility is the goal regardless of where you have come from. It is for this purpose that I have founded the Australian Freedom Party. Against such aggression for selfish ends, a positive Movement for genuine nationalism must rise with greater aggression to stamp it out!



Supposedly this racist Movement stands for Australia. Do they stand for you?

3) There are the higher elements of humanity, who stand for quality over quantity, who hold the banner of “Unity Through Nobility,” who seek to take a stand for true freedom and the end of exploitation. They will take a stand for the ideal, and put their lives on the line for it. When they appear, their lives are like a shining light to others.

However, the pitfall for such genuine-hearted people can be to fall into a false kind of socialism, which proclaims that the root causes of the economic and social problems are faced only by the working classes, thus creating another divisive element – ultimately being no different to the ethnocentric “nationalist.” This causes people to become enamoured with their own “class issues”, which essentially plays upon the same egoistic fears that the false “nationalism” plays upon, creating division and discontent. Whereas this brand of “socialism” promotes class war and asserts that people should feel united with workers internationally rather than with their fellow national citizens, the truth is that there doesn’t need to be division between workers and employers if they are all working for the same goal and everybody’s needs are being met (which is possible). A true nationalist solution to these problems actually cuts to the root of economic and social problems in a way that benefits all – both the worker and the employer, both the farmer and the one who feeds from his labours, the manufacturer and the one who benefits from his goods. This is genuine nationalism.


In reality, while the majority live their lives in slavery, really they are just looking to somebody to lead them. In cringing fear, they may offer no resistance to those negative elements in society who stand up for what they claim to be their “right.” But when a truly positive Movement towards genuine unity and nobility rises with militancy, rising to oppose self-interest in all forms, who will find the courage and self-sacrifice within themselves to offer themselves to the cause?

Our Nation will only descend into degradation and depravity if these negative elements are too long allowed a voice without a stand being taken by those who know what is right and who are willing to put their lives on the line for their ideal. For our Movement to find strength and presence to oppose the rising tide of self-interest and racism, all who have within them the better elements of humanity must finally shake off the shackles of slavery and rally to the clarion call for the Truth.



What We Fight For

The main focus of our site so far has been the far-right and Zionism, which has led a few to mistakenly believe they are our only concern (or that we care more about the far-right than about Zionism!). We do view these two as our biggest problems of our time, but they are far from our only concerns. To give a glimpse of our greater goals, I have decided to add a new page:

If you too fight or wish to fight for a better world, send in a contact form here:


For too long the darkness has ruled us,
For too long the clouds have deceived us,
But today the clouds shall grow heavy,
Today the earth shall turn.

In the deepest dark before the dawn,
The stars guided us to this great horizon,
Through the decades a voice has a called us,
Through the years we have followed.

Now we stand on wind-worn shore,
As shepherds try to lead us astray,
They say to us with glares and sneers,
“How can this man be your brother?”

But we hold the hand beside us,
As the deceivers’ ramblings fade into silence,
We are solid as granite is solid,
And colorful as granite is colorful.

We are united by a great destiny,
We are the lightning that tears through the clouds,
We are the rain that brings them down,
We are the sun that reveals the truth.

The sun shines golden in the sky,
And the shepherds’ staffs are revealed as snakes,
The stone is returned,
To the hand from which it was thrown.

All once hidden is now revealed,
All deception is brought before the eyes,
The borrowed war is over,
Let the Golden Age begin!

Remember us,
Mark our every word,
We are the storms that tear apart the clouds,
We are the sun that illuminates the truth!



New Banner

Recently we were joined by an artist, NWReborn, who has designed a really cool banner for the True Left. If anybody wishes to start a paramilitary group or some other True Left group in their area and use this banner, feel free to send a message so we can give you two thumbs-up to use it.

It cannot be stressed enough how important it is for propaganda to be easily understood, and art accomplishes just that. Given our movement’s purpose, it should also help purify our own vision in the process, as great art is meant to do. NWReborn will be our chief artist, allowing us to expand our reach on the site beyond writing articles and into a much more direct and intuitive area. Welcome to the team!