Then we can get back to having elections with integrity. The problem is these globalist scumbags need to be pulled out at the roots. They hate countries and nations, and they need to be stopped.
Soros worked for the Nazis as a boy and thought he could take what they did but use it for what he thought was good. He wants to destroy all countries and bring humanity under a single global government, and that means destroying their cultures and nations.
A military action would be the right thing.
How about major conflicts prior to 120 years ago? Why start the time at Marxism? Im afraid that you are slightly missing the mark. In my opinion, it is the need and want for power that drives conflicts and the root of it all is anyone who wishes to subdue the people and call them citizens. Founding fathers had it spot on: create a tiny government that is largely not capable of anything economically," if there is no governmental control over economy, there is no need to corrupt them by bad actors for their own wealth creating needs.
Yes all through human history there's various aspects of conflict/war/etc.
Understand that marxism gives those talented, power-hungry, mass-murdering leader types the tool they need/want to get power. And then hold power without any real checks & balances, hence over time the more marxism, the quicker it devolves into purer form of dictatorship (or monarchy if multigenerational).
Every "successful leader" of marxism has adapted marxism to their own flavor of ice-cream which fits their country's resources, politics, economics, industry, culture, etc. Like CA Gov Gavin Newsom doesn't need to nationalize Hollywood or Chi-Comm Valley because they're already taken over by marxists; but he needs to take control over the utilities like PG&E. Or like Hitler didn't need to take control over many industries because he already had their support.
See after the publication of The Communist Manifesto as it was spread and evil recruited in Europe around it that's what became the dominant ideology of the mass-murdering evil-doers in so many countries who all visited directly (or 1 person away from) the cafes in Paris, London, Berlin that spread the Marxism.
In the USA marxism mostly came in about a few years after the US Civil War.
By the last 30 years of the 1800's many nobles(& gov leaders) were assassinated in Europe and around the world by marxists. And when looking at most civil wars and party conflicts even within countries like the India/Pakistan Parties even decades pre-partition; or in countries like Iran, Egypt, Turkey as well as so many others; there's the marxist party faction doing exactly what they do, with the smart mass murdering leader(s) having travelled to and corresponded with the others.
So over the last 120 years; the significant majority of say 90% of conflicts/wars/civil wars have marxists hands in the pot stiring.
Yes in history there are other ideologies which also create mass-warfare across the map. Since a few decades after Marxism, it's ideology has been by far the predominant evil/destruction/murder on earth. Just as some others (say warlord religion that creates a system of turning children into soldiers or pregnant; turning new captivies into either soldiers or slaves; and having poligamy so there's more manpower in the armies, tells individuals to go martyr themselves to destabilize the enemies(everyone else), etc.) puts lots of violence and warfare on the map in it's locations.
I am not disagreeing with you on Marxism, it is just another tool for those in government or for those who want to control, to grasp more of it. I was addressing the fact that "how" is largely irrelevant to the idea of "what institutions" allow such power grab in the first place. And the reason for me to state this, is to have more and more people to turn their heads towards the rightful "enemy," as we had separation of state and church, we need "separation of state and economy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions
See you have it inverted. It's not that institutions allow the power grab; it's that the marxists make a very targeted, calculated, sustained, long-term effort to take over institutions (even before the phrase was coined above in the link). Marxism's main thing is about controlling the "means of production".
Yes, but since Central Banking with fiat currency & fractional-reserve banking; and particularly with The FED and Bretton-Woods Agreement; means the government HAS to deficit spend and increase debt (that's how the newly printed money that the FED banking cartel get's it's %cut of newly printed money) into circulation. So over time, the size of government taking over the economy is required; just as if you had a printing-press making $1 bills and you buy one of everything on the menu at Taco Bell, and then you start buying one of everything at Walmart and Amazon.. over time you're going to acquire one of everything because you're printing and printing.
Marxists like the fiat, central banking, fractional-reserve banking model, it lets them control and acquire the means of production and everything else.
Have to remove the marxism, before can get to the root of many of these other problems; as marxism is very directly tied into so many problems including our Election Integrity and errosion of the US Constitution. So yes we have rather sticky Constitutional problem in the USA; and it's entirely because so many unconstitutional laws have been allowed to build up, because the 3rd Branch of our Government hasn't been doing its job for a LONG time, mostly because of marxist justice written(aka legislating from the bench) ASHWANDER RULES.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashwander_rules
Well, if you are for having the government separate from economy, which of course includes banks being separate from government as they are a major part of economy as well. If you are for all of it, by all means point to Marxists, not to mention that you are of course correct as to how they the Marxist are doing it.