The most successful tool for political subversion developed after the agitprop of Trotsky’s and Goebbels’ fame is the Soros “color revolution”. This tool has already succeeded in Ukraine and is now on the verge of success in Belarus and, crucially, in the United States. 

In order to defend against this brilliant strategy of enslavement, it is important to understand how it works. 

First, we must realize that color revolutions are fascist in nature, though, in a true Orwellian style, they claim to be “democratic”. A color revolution is a moment of rapid change an existing political system to a system of total enslavement to the neo-fascist, neo-Bolshevik globalist movement. 

A color revolution is a project. Like every project, it is a series of events leading to the accomplishment of a milestone, after which the next series of events unfolds, leading to the next milestone. The next series is never embarked upon until the previous milestone had been achieved. 

The first milestone is always the inculcation, in a very large portion of the population if not in its majority, of the firm belief that the person who currently leads the country is beyond the pale and so is every member of the public who supports him. The purpose of this milestone is the creation of an alternate reality in which the current leader is OBVIOUSLY so bad, so corrupt, so racist, so despotic, that nobody in their right mind could possibly support him or his policies. This belief is made to be axiomatic, i.e. requiring no proof. It is just how things are. The leader is caricaturized to the point of no return. Supporting him in public is grounds for becoming ostracized, while speech against him is tolerated and encouraged, including, even preferably, the most vile and violent kind. 

This has been accomplished with both Lukashenko in Belarus and with Trump in the US. First milestone achieved.

ORANGE MAN BAD

Next comes the inculcation of the belief that things are going poorly in the country. So poorly, in fact, that they necessitate mass demonstrations and protests. This belief does not have to be based on any reality; whether things are actually bad or not is simply immaterial. The metrics upon which this “things are bad” agitprop is based are situational. In Belarus, they are based upon the ludicrous comparison of that newly minted country to countries that have much different circumstances and enjoy massive support from the European Union like Poland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, rather than the much more apt comparison to Moldova, Ukraine, and the Russian Federation. Compared to the former, Belarus is indeed underperforming. Compared to the latter, it is doing quite well indeed. Needless to say, it is the former that are chosen as the basis for comparison.

In America, the engine for the “things are bad” narrative is race relations. The condition of various “colored” minorities in America is not compared to similar populations elsewhere in the world including Western Europe, where they fare much more poorly, but to American Whites, with respect to whom, on average, they may be faring less well.

The “demonstrations” and “protests” that result from this “things are not going well” narrative have the twin objectives of firstly drawing law enforcement into nightly battles in which the current regime is made out to be the oppressor and providing fodder for the post-election illegitimacy narrative. 

The “protests” also have the brilliantly designed function of a positive feedback loop. The more “protests” there are, the more things indeed appear to be going poorly, which, in turn, creates more “protests”, and so on. This is the idea behind Lenin’s infamous quote “the worse thing are, the better they will be.”    

This part of the “color revolution” project has been going on in America for a while now, with a great deal of success. From the Soros point of view, that is.

The idea is to create, in advance of a critical election, the appearance of lawlessness, of a country in disarray, of an administration incapable of holding a legitimate election, of providing its citizenry with a means to safely and securely cast its votes.

This milestone has now been accomplished in America.

The purpose of these pre-election milestones is to create an atmosphere that would allow the powers behind the “color revolution” to plausibly claim that the election had been rigged and its results are thus meaningless, should they go against them, of course. This is what has already happened in Belarus and will undoubtedly happen in America.

Taken as a whole, these pre-election milestones foster the axiomatic belief that any election result other than the overthrow of the current regime cannot possibly reflect the true wishes of the electorate. After all, isn’t the current leader beyond the pale? Isn’t he the very definition of a tin despot? Could anyone in their right mind have voted for such a buffoon? Clearly not. Hence, the reelection of said “buffoon” cannot possibly be anything other than the result of a rigged election. Oh, and haven’t we told you that a rigged election is exactly what we had been expecting? Haven’t we told you that the regime would do everything in its power to prevent people from safely and securely voting? Of course we did, so there you go.

The next milestone in the “color revolution” project involves massive post-election unrest, which is where we are now in Belarus. The idea behind this is simple: while it takes two to make peace, it only takes one to make war. Revolutionaries care nothing about wholesale destruction and misery. In fact, they love it because it only reinforces their narrative. So when they riot, loot, and commit arson, they do so precisely in order to force the legitimate leadership of the country to deploy any means necessary to discharge its primary function, i.e. protect the lives and the property of its law-abiding citizens. 

It doesn’t matter to these people that they cannot “win” against the National Guard or even armed citizen militias. They absolutely love it when their behinds get kicked. It is what they want. They want it because it seals the deal as to the illegitimacy of the reelected president and leaves him no room to maneuver. If he chooses to “contain” the lawlessness with minimal reaction, they will just keep ratcheting it up until that is no longer an option. Once he decides to act, all they have to do is play the victim and pull the “we told you so” card. 

Once this milestone is achieved and the TV screens are filled with pictures of pitched battles between “protestors” and the various security organs, the next milestone is ready. This milestone involves the presentation of “moderate” and “reasonable” demands. In Belarus, which, never having been a country until 1990, has no tradition of power transfer, it is simply to hold a new election. After all, since there is a reasonable doubt as to the legitimacy of the previous one, wouldn’t it make sense to just do another round and let the people speak again?

America has no mechanism to cope with an election the results of which are rejected, summarily, by the losing side. And yet I believe that this is exactly what will happen this time around.

President Trump will win, perhaps even resoundingly so, but the Democrats, ALL OF THEM, will not agree to accept this result.

We are already being prepared for this eventuality by the Post Service hoax, by Hillary’s demand that “under no circumstances” should Biden concede defeat, and by Pelosi’s talk of “fumigating” Trump out of the White House. The $25 billion “save the USPS” bill that passed the House in Pelosi’s specially convened session is intended entirely as a tool for delegitimizing the election. Should Trump win, which apparently they expect him to do, they will simply say that his failure to sign their bill had made the election null and void because people could not exercise their “right” to vote by mail, avoiding the supposedly China virus infested polling stations. 

We don’t know what kind of “reasonable” demands the American color revolutionaries will spring on the unsuspecting public, but we may be quite certain that these demands have already been prepared. 

The final milestone in a “color revolution” is the most devilishly conceived one. Once the “reasonable” demand is met, the revolution is simply complete. If they do indeed call another election in Belarus, Lukashenko is done for, which is why Putin will never allow it, even if he has to move in with armored columns like his predecessors had done in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia during the Cold War. In America, the acceptance of any demands that delay or circumvent the constitutionally mandated Electoral College vote, i.e. the vote that formally elects the president, would spell the end of the Constitutional Republic and thus the death of America in all but name.

Can a color revolution be defeated? Of course it can. These revolutions rely on the apathy and the “don’t worry, things can’t be that bad” inertia of the majority of the population. If every American who votes for President Trump on November 3rd understands that this act is only the beginning rather than the end of his civic duties and that what comes next may involve actions that are much more physical and much more fraught with personal danger, America will be just fine. But if we all simply go home and turn on Fox News Channel to hear them explain to us why a “compromise” must be made, well, you all know how that will end.