Praise to Nationalism and the Diversity of Nations

Praise to Nationalism and the Diversity of Nations

I come here present to praise nationalism and the diversity of nations as innovation and adaptation laboratories for changing conditions.

There are many lessons we can learn from the Covid-19 crisis, but 1 of the key points is "what globalisation is." We frequently flip this term, never defining it. It's like it's any amorphous beast. We can't capture it. Globalism is central planning. Romania understands central planning. erstwhile citizens of the russian Union realize central planning. We realize the harm that central planning brings, that is, the bureaucrats who specify our future, who make decisions about how the national state, the human economy, should adapt to changing conditions.

Central planning besides involves cultural homogenisation, the pursuit of a single culture which in the present case is fundamentally due to the deliberate demolition of diversity in order to reduce economical friction.

This globalisation focus is fundamentally to support the programme of transnational globalist organisations, especially corporations, in their cooperative relations with large transnational government organisations. This public-private partnership is named after Benito Mussolini. We know her well, it's fascism. We should call him by his first name. 1 of the things that happened during the Covid-19 crisis and during the full process of globalisation and harmonisation is the arms and language distortion by the authorities. In the meantime, we request to call things the real name, no substance what it may mean or how the press might react. We're not far to the right. We're centre-right. The fact is that it is our opponents who have become highly left-wing, but we let the press and corporate media to redefine the language and demonize us as the utmost right-wing, but the fact is that they are the radicals. They're the far left. We can't let them take over and pervert our language. We gotta get it back due to the fact that the language controls thinking. It controls the way we form our knowing of the world.

The subsidiarity rule requires decentralisation. The eventual component of a decentralised, adaptive planet is family. We must celebrate the household as the core of the rule and the guiding concept of subsidiarity.

It is unethical to arm fear, or to usage fear through propaganda to control people. We have seen many reasons from scientists, bureaucrats, governments and transnational organisations that the usage of fear as a weapon is acceptable in the service of the general public good, as they specify it. In the event of a crisis related to Covid-19 in the public wellness service, the usage of fear as a weapon was and should not be allowed. This should not be tolerated. We gotta point it out and name it, whenever we see it.

We have a tough fight ahead of us. This hard fight cannot be solved by 1 election. This will not be resolved by choosing 1 policy. This will not be resolved by changing leadership in the European Council. This problem has been developing for decades, in many cases at least for centuries, and will not be solved in the close future. We have a long-term conflict ahead of us that will require years of effort to lead it.

Let's not get self-righteous and not complain. Unfortunately, I hear it again and again. That cry of the unfortunate, the victims. That we have a very hard task ahead of us. There are so many obstacles. That our opponents are so strong that they are so powerful. They have so much strength. They control the media. halt whining. We gotta fight, complaining won't help. It's a wonderful thing. What a wonderful thing to have a worthy opponent. It's the top gift in the world, and by God, we have a worthy opponent. We can't complain. We're not allowed to duck. We must face the evil that awaits us, and it will not be easy. Fight for your future. usage this chance to fight for your future. What a gift to have a chance at this point to make a difference. Celebrate it.

Social media developed by the United States and reinforced by the intellectual community of large Britain were developed as weapons by these very intelligence communities. Do not be misled, social media as we know it, Facebook, Twitter – this is how they were created. All social media tools are weapons. It's a intellectual weapon. They were designed as weapons. They were designed and utilized during the arabian Spring as a weapon to facilitate government change.

The shock occurred erstwhile Nigel Farage and his group caused brexit, and this shock deepened even more erstwhile Mr Trump became president Trump and abruptly the intelligence community of the United States and the State Department along with all the infrastructure with which they exert influence and control over the US and Europe, woke up and realized that they had a problem they did not control. This problem now extends to the folk movement here, which we represent as centre-right conservatives.

This challenge is now an existential threat to NATO itself, due to the fact that if Europe wakes up in the face of techno-totaliztism imposed by Brussels and begins to exploit the value of an independent national state, The U.S. Department of State and the intelligence community will see the hazard that the European Union – the structure created to bring Europe together – will be dissolved. It will be fragmented, and if that happens, NATO will besides be fragmented. The U.S. abroad Policy Establishment believes that in specified a situation, it will find itself in a much more multilateral planet greatly disadvantaged.

This will lead to the consequence of the US intelligence community and the State Department, in which they consider it reasonable to usage virtually any method to enforce and keep the current position quo. Consider that it is. I am not in favour of the European Union's solution or NATO's solution. I find that to be the view of the Americans and the 5 Eyes intelligence community [USA, UK, Canada, Australia and NZAnd they will do anything to avoid specified consequences. They believe in a utilitarian model in which everything is allowed to defend the present planet order and their established plans for the future.

As a result, governments implement intellectual warfare technology. This is technology initially developed to fight at sea. NATO describes this as the main tool in its current plans. NATO calls it hybrid warfare, intellectual warfare technology. Advanced technology is now being implemented by governments and globalists and utilized on average citizens due to the existential threat of the European Union's disintegration, the perceived existential threat to NATO and the request to keep consensus by controlling all information in an increasingly multilateral world.

In consequence to the threat from China and Russia and the increase in the importance of the mediate East and the fall of the Petro-dolar, there is simply a belief that the usage of intellectual warfare technology towards its citizens is essential and appropriate, acceptable. I'm saying it's completely unethical. The technology of intellectual warfare in the present form, in which it is applied and has been developed, can completely control all aspects of information you receive, what you think, how you feel and what you hear.

In a planet where governments consider it acceptable to apply intellectual warfare technology to their citizens, the concept of individual and national sovereignty becomes completely obsolete. We can argue whether individual or distant voting, ballot cards or long voting periods favour electoral fraud. This is completely irrelevant in the face of modern intellectual warfare erstwhile it is applied to your citizens erstwhile everything they hear, feel, think and believe is controlled through this technology, social media, recognised media and all communications; then the nuances of voting are completely irrelevant. Let me repeat: this is unethical. This is simply a violation of human rights. In democracy, man has the right to access information. This is fundamental to the social agreement. How can we conclude a social agreement erstwhile national citizens do not have access to information enabling them to make informed decisions? At this point in our history, this is justified by the concerns of the authorities about the existential crisis. And that's bad for me. This is simply a serious violation of human ethics. deficiency of respect for the ability of individuals to act as sovereign beings.

Moreover, propaganda and censorship block innovation and adaptation to change. Cultures cannot adapt; they cannot innovate unless they have access to full, diverse and accurate information. That's the most crucial thing. We'll be stagnant. Do we have examples of this kind of stagnation? What happens erstwhile information is completely controlled? Romania knows the answer. The erstwhile russian Union knows the answer. Those who lived under Ceauşescu know the answer. Those who lived under Salazar in Portugal know the answer.

We request access to unlimited information, which means we request freedom of speech and freedom of thought. Now there's a price. It has a price of individual responsibility. This has its price due to the fact that people will be possibly exposed to information that may be harmful, which they may find offensive. However, if we deny them access to information and diversity of thoughts, we will prevent us, as national states and cultures, from being able to adapt to changing conditions.

And if there is 1 thing that we absolutely must have now, it is the ability to innovate and adapt. That's how we escape the Maltese trap. All this fear of global warming and population growth; that's what this is all about. The contrast to the Maltese argument is that people adapt. People can change, people can innovate. However, they cannot innovate if all information is controlled.

Countries and cultures that defy propaganda, censorship and armed fear have a competitive advantage. In the multilateral world, Romania should not apologize for advocating autonomy. Independent European national states should not apologize for going their own way and innovation. They gotta do it. They gotta do this due to the fact that it will give them a competitive advantage.

I say that independent national states are a laboratory of innovation; cultural innovation, political innovation and economical innovation. They must be allowed sovereignty and autonomy. If you don't let that happen, you'll choke the world's ability to adapt to change. The best way to enable the planet to adapt to change is to respect the rule of subsidiarity.

Therefore, proceed without fear. Refuse to be a victim. Do not apologize and fight for life, freedom and sovereignty. Choose life, not death. Nigel Farage advises we request a name for our movement. As far as I am concerned, ‘Let us make Europe a large 1 again’.

Thank you for your attention.

https://institutulconservator.ro/mega2024/

==============================================================================================================

If they can suspend your rights due to an emergency, they will never halt creating emergency situations.