Based Hungary Impales Soros’ Meddling NGO’s

Based Vlad the Impaler.

Our forebears in medieval Europe knew how to deal with treason. One of the commonest punishments was being hung from two poles upside-down and naked, and then sawed in half from the crotch down. Another method used in Eastern Europe was taken from the barbarous Turks, and involved the traitor being lowered onto a sharpened pole through the bum until it emerged from their chest, shoulder, neck or mouth. Death could take up to three days.

Throughout history, treachery has always been a serious crime. The politicians in Australia who have so far been exposed as taking foreign money, and I’m sure they’re just the tip of the iceberg, should be thankful they don’t live in the Middle Ages. Well not yet, anyway.

Based Hungary hasn’t returned to these methods of dealing with traitors yet either, but they have started to make the necessary steps toward protecting the interests of the people against self-serving traitors in the elite. The baby steps they’ve made so far involve requiring NGO’s which take more than 24,000 euros annually to register as ‘foreign-supported’ or face being closed.

This might seem like an insignificant act, but I’m sure there is wailing and gnashing of teeth behind the curtain of power which shields the oligarchs and the globalist elite from public view. This is because using shadow money to capture a nation’s political process, influence public opinion and foment revolutions is standard operating procedure for the financial oligarchs. You only have to look at the scale of the demonstrations which have been organised in protest to see the problem that the Hungarians are dealing with.

The most public figure who uses these methods is George Soros, of course. The man behind the new Hungarian legislation, Prime Minister Viktor Orban, has mentioned Soros explicitly when arguing for the legislation. Soros isn’t the only one, but he’s certainly the worst; he just happens to be Hungarian Jewish as well.

George soros photo
Emperor Palpatine. Photo by boellstiftung

The level of ideological infiltration of the media, entertainment and academic establishment by the shadow elite is revealed by the uniform language we see when Soros’ organisation is reported by the MSM. Whenever Soros’ Open Society Foundation is mentioned, it will be associated with ‘democracy’, transparency and free markets. This association of democracy with open-borders globalism is at the heart of the ideology which Soros is pushing in white countries around the world, and goes back to Soros’ student days in London.

In the minds of the globalist elite, ‘democracy’ is control of public opinion through ideological manipulation by the deep state and oligarchs like Soros. Voting is a meaningless ritual that serves the manipulation; a charade to bring the peasants on board. The kabuki theatre we see every night on the TV news with the various political actors is designed to keep us sitting and watching while the real power plays are made behind the stage. Our job is to stay amused, and obedient.

Soros’ Open Society Foundation markets itself aggressively as promoting democracy, openness and transparency. It’s bullshit. Soros’ umbrella foundation takes its name from a book written by Soros’ professor at the London School of Economics, philosopher Karl Popper. A fellow Jew, Popper wrote his magnum opus while in political exile from the Nazis in New Zealand in the early 1940’s.

Popper’s thesis is a subtle and effective neo-Marxist attack on liberal Western societies. He creates an elaborate theory based on two types of societies: closed societies and open ones. He draws heavily on Plato’s great work The Republic as a model of a closed society, sets it up as a straw man argument then elaborates for his readers how an ‘open’ society is far superior.

Karl popper photo
Karl Pooper. Photo by LSE Library

It shouldn’t surprise you at all that this ‘open’ society is an open-borders, globalist, neoliberal democracy based on the type of universalist mindset that has made white, Christian societies destroy themselves in the post-war era. The ‘closed’ society is one which is hierarchically-ordered, assertive of its interests and mindful of its heritage. The type of society that only white people are not allowed to have, because deep down we’re all just a bunch of racists itching to holocaust people.

Globalism was a part of Marx’s philosophy from the start. Marx envisaged a future world with no national borders, and was an advocate for ‘free’ markets, welfare, a progressive income tax, central banking and state-controlled monopolies to achieve it. Pretty much what we’ve got, actually; and Popper’s work helped to update the globalist agenda for the post-war world.

It’s a neo-Marxist argument, and indeed Popper devoted his entire second volume to critiquing Marx. This would seem to naïve Western readers during the Cold War to be a refutation of Marx’s ideas. Not at all. Like Fukuyama after him, Popper rather was critiquing an element of Marxism in order to better adopt Marx’s dialectic for the post-war neoliberal West.

Popper wasn’t refuting Marx. He was updating him.

When I wrote an expose for The Daily Caller on the neo-Marxist origins of Soros’ Open Society Foundation late last year it got 25,000 shares on Facebook and prompted a response from Soros himself six weeks later. Seems the scaly old bastard isn’t so happy about certain ideas coming out in the open.

The problem of shadowy foreign money undermining national sovereignty goes far beyond just Soros, though. It’s a corrupting influence that stretches across every area of life in Australia today.

play school photo
“Aussie” Play School. Photo by RubyGoes

Whether it’s the cosmic housing bubble that is threatening to destroy our economy for a generation, the distortion of higher education through reliance on foreign students, foreign ownership of critical national infrastructure and assets and globalist propaganda through foreign funding of our state broadcaster, the corruption of foreign money is everywhere. The tie that binds all these together is the capture of our political process by money from Asia and the Middle East, with no accountability to the Australian people.

All the MSM bleating about Russia interfering in the US election has been shown to be demonstrably false. It’s a smokescreen. The deep state and the oligarchs know that once the populist revolt against them starts to focus on how corrupt the political class has become, revolution will not be far behind. The Russia-Trump propaganda is designed to short-circuit that. It won’t work. The peasants are starting to look up.

The cat is out of the bag everywhere as the people of the nations of the world are waking up to how predatory and corrupt our ruling classes are. The oligarchs would be sweating bullets, and it might be why so many of them are dropping dead this year.

Great work, based Hungarians. It’s a good start for the rest of us to follow. Attila would be proud, although he’d probably think you were still being pussies. He’d be impaling already.

Moses is the author of CIVILIZATIONISM, a freelance writer and an advocate for Traditional Nationalism, a philosophy which seeks to restore realism as the basis for political organisation in Australia. You can find out about the movement at, or on Facebook and

Photo by young shanahan

  • Addelad

    Your posts always set the neurones jangling – at least the 4 or 5 functioning examples that still reside in my cranium. I defer to your scholarly analysis but I’d just comment based upon my own immersion in Political Science thousands of years ago. At the time, naturally the lecturers and tutors were all unreformed Marxists of some hue or other and they were grumpy with Popper – after all, he considered himself to be an apostate. As I understood it, he saw Marxism leading to an inevitable totalitarian outcome and thus he opposed it. I know that is not the gist of your argument above, but it relates.

    • I know, that’s what I thought too when I read the book the first time. The second reading though showed me what was going on between the lines. The way to refute Marx is to ignore him – not to devote your entire second volume to him. Popper was an apostate of ‘classical’ Marxism, but he was not against Marx. He just believed Marx’s historical determinism was off and led to totalitarianism. Popper was against totalitarianism, but he was definitely on board with Marx’s globalist project. He was a mighty sneaky bastard, in my view.

      A society that is overly open or closed is unstable, in my view. An organic, traditional state has elements of both.

      • Addelad

        A truly fascinating perspective, refreshingly different from the garden variety historical perspective on KP. Why are so many intellectuals beloved of systems that exert rigid social controls? Is it a form of superiority complex? Mind you, when you look at so much of the world, it’s probably justifiable.

        • It’s the disease of history IMO. Intellectuals are a menace on the whole, especially since the Enlightenment. Before then they caused havoc using theology. Traditional societies have been right to cast them as villains and troublemakers I reckon.

  • Karen Dwyer

    Jolly opening paragraph, Moses A.!

    Your link to a response from Mr Soros gives a “server error”. How strange…

  • Ray Johnston

    Here’s a Rafe Champion review of a Karl Popper bio from 2002 I found would be interesting to anyone curious about Popper after reading Moses’ article. His ‘Open Society and its Enemies’ book is OK but the half kilo of footnotes is too much. His autobiography ‘Unended Quest’ was pretty weak I thought.


    • Karen Dwyer

      Thanks for the link. Quite a readable review that I wouldn’t have otherwise been aware of.

      One of my favourite lines: KARL POPPER almost came to the University of Sydney in 1945. John Anderson invited him to join the staff in Philosophy but Popper delayed his decision in the hope of an offer from the London School of Economics. When that offer came he withdrew his application for Sydney and so Professor Anderson was spared the confrontation with an ego equal in size to his own.

      Popper died in 1994 at the age of ninety-two, and Malachi Hacohen’s Karl Popper: The Formative Years, 1902 – 1945 is the first comprehensive book to appear on his life and work. Hacohen, a historian based at Duke University, has charted the evolution of Popper’s thinking with close attention to his intellectual influences and the explosive social and political tensions in Vienna which informed his thoughts on politics and ultimately prompted his flight to New Zealand. Over twenty years in the making, this is likely to be the standard reference for some time because the author had access to some recently opened archives and also interviewed some long-standing colleagues of Popper such as Colin Simkin (from New Zealand)and John Watkins (of the London School of Economics) who are no longer with us.

      The book has at least four different aspects, each of considerable interest. One is the reconstruction of Popper’s intellectual career as he groped towards his seminal work in the philosophy of science and politics. The second is to give some impression of Popper the person, the being of flesh and blood who is practically invisible in his intellectual autobiography Unended Quest. The third is the recreation of the social and political milieu of Vienna, the life of high culture and intellectual achievement that thrived but finally expired under the volcano of fascism and anti-Semitism. The fourth is Hacohen’s mission to reclaim Popper for the social democrats, to snatch him back from the clutches of the Cold War liberals and the New Right.

      So far as Popper the person is concerned, Hacohen had great difficulty in getting anywhere near the emotional roots of Popper’s life. He was so much a man of ideas that everything else appeared to be secondary (after early thoughts of a career in music), including his own comfort and the convenience of anyone who had dealings with him.

      Hacohen reports that Popper worked for 360 days of the year, all day, without the distraction of newspapers, radio or television. Several times a month, even in old age, he worked all night, and some friend such as Bryan Magee would get an early morning call from Popper, bubbling with excitement to report on his latest ideas. Popper lived well out of London near High Wycombe, and when Magee gained Popper’s confidence he was invited to visit, taking the train to “Havercombe” (in Popper’s heavily accented English).

      When I made the trip to Havercombe, Popper arranged to meet me at the station, carrying a copy of the BBC Listener, presumably to pick him out from all the other elderly gentlemen of middle-European extraction who might be thronging the platform at two o’clock on a Wednesday afternoon. In the event, he left the magazine at home and the kiosk had sold out so he had to buy the Times and fold it to the size of the Listener. Of course he was the only person in sight apart from the stationmaster.

      Popper, then aged seventy, had what his research assistant tactfully described as a “very positive” attitude to driving. Fortunately it was not far to his home and there were few other cars on the road. Safely home, our conversation laboured, and he frequently pushed a tray of choc-chip cookies towards me. Later he lamented to his assistant that I had eaten a whole week’s supply of his favourite cookies in one…some described as ‘the totalitarian liberal’.

      Magee endorsed the view that Popper’s personal behaviour often belied his liberal principles. In fairness, he added that Popper had to endure persistent and gross misrepresentation of his ideas.”

  • Warty2

    Though I am well aware of Vlad the Impaler, I agree with Karen: one could have done without your opening paragraph.
    A good article though, and hopefully Hungary, despite its comparatively small population, and Poland with its millions, can lead the push back against these NGOs and the EU.
    I suspect the majority are like Plato’s cave dwellers staring at the shadow play projections on the cave wall. If you remember the allegory, just one of them, for some reason turned around a saw the lantern that projected the shadow figures, and then the operator, eventually working his way back until he made it out of the cave, there to discover the true forms.
    As far as we are concerned, it may only take a few to wake up to what is going on, to then spread our counter revolutionary ideas.
    It is interesting the number of responses each Catallaxy Files article receives: they far surpass those in this XYZ site, or the Spectator. Most of them are conservative, and it seems GetUp trolls who visit The Australian dare not venture there, or here for that matter.

  • Larry Larkin

    Soros is a really disgusting piece of work. He has described his time working as a ferret for the the SS in Hungary, digging out Hungarian Jews to be taken away for extermination, as the best time of his life.

  • aussiegooner

    Soros and Popper may be and have been Jewish, but they, Soros in particular, are no friends of the Jews. Soros is implacably antis Zionist and hates Israel, partly because it represents one of the success stories of western liberal democracy and capitalism. Please don’t even associate Soros with the world Jewish community. He is poison to everyone he touches.

    • That’s an interesting one, isn’t it. He’s expressed distaste for Israel many times. I believe him on that I guess. Yet his whole life has been dedicated to destroying white, Christian civilisation with his open borders ideology and financial destabilisation. Coincidence? I keep noticing patterns. I know that noticing patterns makes me racist, but I can’t help it.

      • Karen Dwyer

        Aaargh!!! The honourable Steve B. warned me that if I went on hols it would be like the Simpsons’ BBQ when I came back.

        And lo and behold, when I come back The Poet is AWOL, people have updated their avatars, and there are triple brackets strewn about.

        It really is very simple. One must expect those “who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.” [Rev 2:9]. They are opposed to Jews (to the point of inflicting suffering, imprisonment, and death). Jesus Himself makes the distinction between the Jews and the (my word:) imposter Jews.

        Both the books of Genesis and Revelation contain symbolism, but don’t make the mistake of assuming they are therefore symbolic.

        One must expect an increase in lawlessness, and creation in travail, and wolves among the sheep, and false heroes and all the rest of it.

        This isn’t just a series of cycles, but things come full circle.

        Discussing with a friend recently how the liberal churches (in all their 6-colour rainbow array) are adamant that Genesis and Revelation not be taken literally. It’s how they are able to support degeneracy in general.

        The stakes are high, so it’s worth investigating and resolving this issue for yourself. When I pointed out to my friend what the liberal ‘church’ espouses, she observed “if you take away the Alpha and the Omega then you take away Jesus”.

        Despite their rhetoric, believing Genesis is not a dim-witted flat-earth espousing (red herring: flat earth) lunacy. It’s a pivot point of faith; and of understanding the significance of the Prophets, the Gospels, the Epistles, and Revelation.

        When God describes Israel as “My Inheritance” (I.e. His), that is an everlasting description and Mr Soros will not be enjoying that status (based on his reptilian life to date) unless he changes dramatically. One can only sincerely hope that he does so. The consequences of not doing so are quite clearly described and promised.

        • I agree Karen that there is a remnant in there somewhere that will be redeemed. Who they are, only the Father himself knows I suspect, otherwise they’d not be safe perhaps. There are ultra-orthodox Jews who are still awaiting a Messiah to bring about the kingdom of Israel again and so reject modern Zionism and Talmudic beliefs. Perhaps they’re it?

          Regardless though, there is far too little understanding among particularly Christians about the nature of Talmudism. I have come to the view that, along with Islam, Talmudic Judaism is the spirit of antiChrist denying the Father and the Son. When you look at what proponents of that religion have been pushing in Christian societies since time immemorial, the pattern is clear. Are we to not speak up about it in case we accuse some wheat while expelling the tares? Does God not care for the peoples who brought His gospel to the world and have been His body on earth since the Dark Ages?

          • Karen Dwyer

            There is definitely a distinction to be made between those Jews who await Messiah and those who don’t (secular Jews

  • Pingback: Based Hungary Impales Soros’ NGO’s – Traditional Nationalism()