| You are more than your identity
Apr 30 2017

I have not posted in some time because I wanted to watch the result of the election play out. I wanted to see what the emotional addicts, the social justice warriors, and the rest of the irrationals would do when their “Right Side of History” cult was deprived of executive privilege. I also wanted to see what the nationalists, who have been long since been abandoned by the system, would do with their new found representation. Finally, I wanted to see what the entrenched powers would do to protect their cult state.

The results are in after one hundred days: Nationalists, those who believe the productivity and output of their efforts belong to their people and kinfolk, are still reviled despite having sufficient representation in the leadership position of the executive branch. In fact, the cult state doubled down on the urgency to purge them from influence. Why?

Why is the idea of the productive output of a people belonging to that people such a sin? The reasoning dates back to the artifacts of civilization itself.

Alexander was the first to demonstrate that mankind could be unified despite differences between language, cultural, and religious expectations. Alexander laid the foundation for the expectations of future globalists, giving them hope that all of mankind could be domesticated into a singular direction to supersede their local and tangible concerns. In attempting to fulfill this lofty goal, he successfully reallocated the gold assets accumulated during the long reign of Babylonian antiquity into the Mediterranean economy. His dream, shaped by Aristotle, had secured a heart-stopping volume of wealth for him, his peers, and the rest of all subsequent Western civilization. This promise of wealth recentralization is what all globalists yearn for when they embrace the platitudes of equality. The unification of mankind is sold as a moral end, but it is actually a pragmatic means of achieving wealth recentralization.

In this paradigm, the nationalist is a member of a subjective, non-simple identity (Any identity more complex than race or gender is commonly considered “nationalist“) of people who produce, export, and import little, making them not only opportunity-poor, but expensive to allocate for globalist agendas. The globalist is then given incentive to use all domains of available force to pressure the nationalist into conformity under threat of isolation, punishment, and annihilation. Those who do not willfully compete against one another in a global race-to-the-bottom for their labor costs are always the enemy under this regime.

Perhaps this analysis is being too critical or maybe the globalists have the right of it when you take the vast picture of human nature into consideration. Let’s analyze this to be sure that the tone thus far is correct in pitch and intent.

Explaining global trade is a bit like explaining the flow of electricity from a power plant to a single pixel on a screen. You’re going to have to explain thousands of conversion steps and, even upon success, it’s such a vast system that few can dare claim complete understanding of it. Even electric engineers use simple short hand to make sense of it:

Burn the fuel, heat the water, spin the magnet, send the subsequent electrons into a power supply, step it down, run them through busses and capacitors and transistors, run them into registers, perform boolean logic several billion times a second, adjust the state of the billions of capacitors in RAM, analyze the state to determine where else to send electrons, send electrons to the monitor, convert the electricty to photons through a wide array of conversion techniques in the monitor, and shoot that photon from the screen into an eyeball.

International control of human economic activity works along the same type of transmutation chains, (minus rigorous and unforgiving engineering specifications and limitations) where each link within the chain is a bottleneck of power and influence, dictated by legal, financial, and personal relationships of prime movers of that link. In the current mode of globalism, all chains connect to a central arbiter (The Bank of International Settlements) who then determine how additional transmutations ought to occur according to the daily requirements to keep the Bank of International Settlements afloat. They alone allocate how surplus wealth and opportunity appear among member banks. Obviously, under such an arrangement, those who generate the most wealth have a better say in how that wealth gets allocated. If wealth is being generated, everyone is happy. If there is a lapse in the wealth generating mechanism, then things get ugly. Fortunately, the Bank of International Settlements and their subsequent central banks contain a significant volume of intellectuals, academics, scientists, mathematicians, and all-around number wizards to find ways to minimize the pain of adjusting for times when belt-tightening must occur.

So all is well, yes? A dedicated workforce of experts and specialists should be enough to keep world wealth generation in perpetual balance… but authority carries its own exclusive price points regarding security.

The power of individual central banks, their relationship with the executive via the treasury, the executive’s influence over the military, the military’s influence over mass media via PSYOPS/MISOC… and as a backup; central banks relationships with parallel continuity of government apparatuses, continuity of government contingency relationships with prime dealer financiers outside of taxpayer revenue to keep themselves funded, and their legal influence over the military plus the prime dealers relationships with mass media… from a price point position made possible by these relationships, it becomes much cheaper for globalist authority to suppress nationalist energies than incorporate them into globalist agendas.

Nationalists cannot have a seat at the table and provide valuable critique to the globalist regime until nationalists become more expensive to suppress. The labor, training, and supplies costs for a single executioner is around $40,000 to $60,000 a year when allocated in volume. (That price point is only available to those who can raise armies.) A single executioner asset can exterminate thousands of nationalists a year, making genocide the ideal and cheapest option for the globalists who are facing a down-trending spiral of wealth access. As nationalists, it is your job to stay out of range of this price point as much as possible by driving up the costs of your extermination. How do you do this?

As stated in 2014, all you have to do is exploit globalist paranoia and make globalist advocates see nationalists in every single manifestation of human activity, especially among potential allies and fringe supporters. Upon doing so, the chances of nationalist extermination are spread among non-nationalists perceived to be nationalists, allowing nationalists an extended survival while exposing the raw power of unchecked globalist petulance among the general population in ways mass media cannot cheaply explain away. Convince the world racism is where it isn’t. Make people see violations of equality in trivial matters. Make the world associate you with genocidal maniacs despite the fact you haven’t killed a single person. Mass media is in a position where their revenue sources are so spurious, they have to engage in clickbait to pay the bills. Exploit the attention economy and overload the public with unsubstantiated fears of their impending demise at your hands… only to give them access to hilarious memes making fun of the wolf-criers instead. The world has already been trained to fear everything you are and everything you believe in: All you have to do is show how nonchalant you are with this new found power and drive your accusers mad that you aren’t abusing power like they are.

Everyone becomes a nationalist when they become victimized by globalists and their loyal cadre of moral supremacists.

Oct 17 2016

Assange dropped a few precommitments.[1]

Precommitments[2] are basically tripwires. Someone went snooping around Wikileaks infrastructure, or the Ecuadorian embassy, or tried to pressure a diplomat, and the precommitment was unleashed.

Most of us can’t do anything with the keys he dropped. Those keys were meant for the NSA. They will be able to scan the insurance file[3] to find where to apply them. This will confirm that the insurance file[4] is the geopolitical nuclear bomb officialdom should fear. He is bypassing his diminshed media power and public participating with those precommitments and sending a message directly to the [pratorian guard running the show].

If Assange dies, the whole thing is unleashed. If additional automated tripwires are hit, further precommitment will be automatically unleashed. If Assange even feels threatened, additional precommitments will be unleashed. The powers that be will, literally, have to shut off the entire internet for the whole planet for a few days if they want to kill Assange… and even then, that’s no guarantee.

Fortunate for them, President Obama is drumming up “cyber war”[5] as the reason for such a widespread internet blackout to do exactly that.


An interesting log I’ve stumbled upon:

1: Remember months ago I mentioned that the alt right and 8chan and the like were
pawns to be sacrified?
2: Yes.
1: The time has come
2: I'm listening.
1: 8ch has been going after Correct The Record. They've also been scouring Soros
and the DNC leaks and Hillary leaks.
2: Tight.
1: I've been assisting with major efforts on the CTR campaign
2: lol. of course you have.
1: Primarily honeypot setups
2: For what side?.
1: My side of course
2: ROFL. go on.
1: Now that the GamerGate logs have been released, the evidence is mounting up
that the Clinton Foundation, with Soros, has been staging multiple false flag
culture events.
2: Tight.
1: Sort of an endless stream of them. Because of our efforts with CTR, Mrs.
Clinton went on television last night and denounced the alt-right, 8chan,
Brietbart. Those are the facts thus far.
2: Yeah, I saw that.
1: We now have to talk about the meta. I've told you about Huntington, yes?
Samuel P. Huntington?
2: Remind me again real quick.
1: Marx says all conflict stems from the poor vs. the rich. Huntingon says all
conflict stems from people getting buttblasted and bringing in friends to help
2: Yes, ok.
1: Marx proposes an inevitable resolution of conflict, Huntington proposes
infinite escalation. From my early arguments online to the fracturing of
4chan to GamerGate to 8chan, I've watched this infinite escalation happen.
It's always the same ideological actors, rebranding themselves under a new
crusdaer banner. So I've worked hard to setup a trap.
2: I assume you're alluding to something about perpetuating rise/fall conflicts.
1: GamerGate did one thing very well. It created the tools and setup the outlets
in which the loyal flock can retreat to. Those retreat centers became
ideological bastions of purity. I egged on both sides with extremist rhetoric
over the years, driving them further and further out of the middle. Usually,
this tactic creates value OF the middle as people avoiding partisan extremism
physically meet up in places and trade stories. That's not how it works
2: "As people avoiding partisan extremism physically meet up in places and
trade stories" Like, bar folk?.
1: Yep. Or refugees. Or local communities. America has a long history of
running to the middle.
2: Ok.
1: That's no longer possible because of social networks. You see, when you
disagree with someone, you don't have to physically move yourself. You just
block a person. The end. Do this hundreds of times... block a post here or
there... And you create an echo chamber of things you like.
2: Right.
1: The middle has fragmented into individuals. Unreachable individuals.
Totally innoculated from the partisans. Which means there is no way to
rally that middle to attack enemy partisans. This is how the right lost
in the 1950s. They let the socialists rally the common emotional ground
(with the help of highly consolidated mass media) with the unaligned to
pound the right into submission. The right still hasn't recovered from
that. A small group of partisans amplified their influence by winning over
the unaligned. Those small groups became the owners and savants of media
outlets today.
2: Ok, so it's repeating.
1: Not just repeating but scaling. They didn't physically exterminate the
right. They still exist. So they have to add more and more power and
urgency to their mass media narrative. This is done to stave off diminshing
returns of the true believer. But the paradox is that the number of true
enemies has dwindled to nothingness.
2: Ok.
1: The mass media engine is so hystyerical about saving itself that it is
exterting tremendous amounts of energy to attack like 4 racist people in
Georgia. This is just diminshing returns. The DNC has worked overtime to
include more minorities to scale to. Gays, muslims, etc. Just to have new
contexts to repeat their success. But it hasn't been working so well.
2: Why?.
1: Numbers and cultural libertarianism.
2: Too small?.
1: Numbers of minorities are fine. Historically similar to other points in
leftist cultural victory. Blacks were ~14% during Civil Rights. Homosexuals
are 10%. It's not about the number of the minority anymore. It's about the
number of unaligned actors. That's the number that has dropped dramatically.
It's like using a huge stick and a fulcrum to move a pillow. The internet has
made reaching the unaligned cheaper than ever, but it has also mande fracturing
them into splinters cheaper as well. This naturally drove up the cost of
reaching them. Clinton and the DNC (for election reasons) and Obama (for
post-president foundation reasons, I have an inside track on that one) want a
repeat of Civil Rights, but the conditions aren't the same. They can no longer
rally the mass unaligned with siren songs of positivity and peace to steer them
against the right. The cuckservatives still fear the lash of the last 40 years.
But the alt right has no reference for it. Without it, the alt right is
realizing there is nothing actually stopping them.
2: That's why Gary is around. to lure the unaligned.
1: He will fail for the reasons I've mentioned above. The reachable unaligned
are media drunk partisans who are just afraid of picking a side because it
reduces the potential of their social capital. The unreachable unaligned are
EVERYWHERE and in UGE numbers. The alt right is realizing no populist force
of merit can oppose them. The CTR attacks we've been doing... it's like
fishing with dynamite man. So, with that, here's the play based on all of
this, the play I wanted years ago as you know.
2: I'm listening.
1: When the DNC hits the point where they start to detect diminshing returns to
the narrative. they have always escalated. They prefer soft power plausible
deniability escalation, but when that is exhausted, they will not shy away
from hard power escalation. Given the *chans creation of GamerGate, the heavy
Linux communities, and the assault on all things culture libertarian about
3-4 years ago and the creation of 8chan due to the subsequent exodus, all signs
\point to a central campaign since very beginning. The DNC needs to create
a new KKK.
2: To get more non-partisans attention?
1: No. To justify the new round of government expansion. "We have to protect
your safe space from BULLY X and to do that, we're just gonna need more power
over the internet :)".
2: Ok, so we're not talking about the unaligned anymore..
1: They can't reach the non-partisans anymore. This whole effort boils down to
the theories of one person: His name is Cass Sunstein.
2: What's the role?.
1: Architect.
2: Of?.
1: His book is called " Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech".
2: A model?.
1: A summary: “Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled
“Conspiracy Theories,” dealing with the risks and possible government responses
to false conspiracy theories resulting from “cascades” of faulty information
within groups that may ultimately lead to violence. In this article they wrote,
“The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest,
is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government’s antiterrorism
policies, whatever the latter may be.” They go on to propose that, “the best
response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups” They suggest,
among other tactics, “Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat
rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine
percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises,
causal logic or implications for political action.” “The authors declare that
there are five responses a government can take toward conspiracy theories: “We
can readily imagine a series of possible responses. Government might ban
conspiracy theorizing. Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or
otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. Government might itself
engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories.
Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in
counterspeech. Government might engage in informal communication with such
parties, encouraging them to help.” However, the authors advocate that each
“instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits,
and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy
idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups
that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), and (5).”
1: This guy was appointed by Obama to work with the NSA to bring "civilian
oversight" into play to do all of these things. Once I became aware of the
methodology, I analyzed his theories for the flaw. I found it, and I started
putting the trap into place. The trap is based on two gambles:
1: The first is that the unreachable unaligned are too expensive even for the NSA.
Based on Sunstein's own works, his entire thesis is central actor-specific and
does not involve mass participation. Thus, Sunstein's fatal flaw is that he
works exclusively on the nodes of negative actors in question and not on the
evolution of ramifications. I gambled that the NSA has no plans or budget to
improve the mass reception of their counternarratives. All they have is
2: Reactspeech. Reactspeech doesn't reach the unaligned..
1: They might have budgets to craft and steer counternarratives, but they have
absolutely zero way to increase the efficiacy of the reception of counternattive.
Sunstein, literally, never considered that part of the domain.
2: Ok..
1: This means Sunstein is blind to the unreachable unaligned problem. The second
gamble is the death wish that happens when you suppress a culture for decades
and generations at a time. The traditional right has been deemed the enemy of
everything for so long, even their political representatives believe it. This
leaves true believers with an option: restore social capital and renounce or
spend social capital and assert. The hilarious part is that right wing ideology
is deeply rooted in self-sufficiency. So Sunstein's idea of imposing a tax on
"social capital" for wrongthink in this paradigm is at fault as well. The left
thinks social capital only in leftist terms and cannot understand rightist
social capital.
2: Yeah, you're losing me a bit here..
1: How so?
2: Explain social capital in applicable terms..
1: The Left sees social capital is the model that every individual action increases
or costs status among their peers.
2: Ok..
1: Thus, their hyper obsession with virtue signalling.
2: And in reference to true believers?.
1: The right sees social capital as something VERY different. The don't see it as
a gamble. The left sees social capital as a gambling chip whose payout trends
towards profit upon proper cultural synchronization. The right sees social
capital as a vital assets to cultivate over time via risk mitigation and
reinvestment. This means Sunstein's infiltration theory only works on LEFTIST
2: LOL. got it..
1: Any attempt to infiltrate a rightist community will reinforce the value of
their terms of social capital. For example, rightest social capital conversation
looks like this: "Oh, we're under attack. must be the damn jews again" "Yep,
probably the jews" "hail kek!". A leftist, on the other hand, will see
infiltration as a threat to their accumulated social capital and will seek to
purge it.
2: LOL. It does out the cucks though..
1: Exactly. It only works on leftists. Under the spirit of infiltration, the
rightist theory of social capital GAINS value.
2: Right.
1: Which means that they forge communities through mutual trial of self-sufficiency.
This creates two ways of managing failure and death. The first is: If you show
your power level and get caught, that was on you for treating your social
capital the way a leftist would. You gambled your social capital instead of
reinvesting it. The second is: Once I am deprived of my social capital
through force, my life is of no value, and I will die.
2: LOL.
1: Which means, they have a built-in martyr complex. Not the attention seeking
martyrs like from the 1960s and 1990s, but a willingless towards total
self-sacrifice once deprived of all social capital.
2: So... you can't have social capital in an echo chamber? People's entire
inner circles are echo chambers though and they're just fine with it.
1: You can, but it's no different than printing your own currency. Social
capital in an echo chamber just inflates endlessly to the point of absolute
valuelessness, but it keeps the partisans are intoxicated.
2: So then social capital isn't needed..
1: So, to summerize everything:
- The Left won the culture war in the 1960s
- The Left uses mass media narratives to suppress the Right because outright
genocide is still frowned upon
- When narratives fail, the Left always escalates: first soft, then hard
- Social media, an in particular, blocking/banning/filtering, has resulted in
echo chambers that intoxicate the partisan, but make the unaligned mostly
unreachable by those partisans
- Sunstein's model on countering low-probability, high-impact externalities
has lead him directly into precrime territory to diffuse potential violators
of his models
- Sunstein works with the NSA to infiltrate these groups based on undermining
the value of their social capital
- Sunstein unwittingly can only target Leftist social capital as his tactics
strengthen the social capital of Rightist communities.
1: Care to guess the next step based on these conclusions?
2: Sunstein seems stuck.
1: He doesn't know it/ In fact, he thinks the sky's the limit. It's REALLY
important for him to think that. The next step you will see in full view.
8chan will be aggressively targeted. After Hillary's speech, the mass media
engines are already lining up. CTR is flooding the place with Poe's Law.
Posts like "HEY BROTHERS I KILLED A BLACK BABY!" then suddenly, mass media
reports on it. There will be lots and lots of attempst to try and steer 8chan
into nothing more than a dirt-tier skinhead community. CTR already have the
pipeline setup. They will create the post. Then their agents will bump it.
Then they'll leak it to their contacts in mass media. And thus, the DNC gets
their new KKK to scare the minorities with.
2: Makes sense..
1: They think this can steer the unaligned into supporting Hillary, but that
won't work.
2: That's what I was trying to say before. oh... go on..
1: The left has already established their echo chambers. Echo chambers that
cannot reach the unaligned. It will fail miserably.
2: Have you found a cost efficient way to reach the unaligned? what's the game
plan here?.
1: Yes. and I'll get to that in a moment. Meanwhile, my team will honeypot the
ever living fuck out of CTR. We're been building up a network of fake leftist
influencers that appear sympathetic.
2: Honeypots for what purpose?.
1: Exposing logs, emails, chats, and transactions between CTR, Clinton, and the
DNC. But that's nothing but standard op reqs. Once the DNC sees how little
impact this massive effort has, they will take whatever false concensus their
media outlets have forged and run with that to pass sweeping laws to ban
"hate communities" and "conspiracy theorists".
2: Sunsteins 1 & 2.
1: Then the arrests happen. Then the botched arrests resulting in incapacitation
and execution happen. The FBI has been seeding CP int he chans for years.
2: LOL.
1: They did that to establish and pressure informants and mods. yhey have quite
the circus already lined up to roll out in front of the cameras to show just
how bad 8chan is and just how needed these news laws are.
2: Right..
1: The laws are a reaction to the fact that centralized government can no longer
reach the middle.
2: Makes sense..
1: As mentioned before, centralized infiltration, as is evident in Sunstein's
musings, shows no outreach program to the unaligned. Their only plan is to
engage in perpetual demonization of the fringes to support centralized modes
of government. Once these laws happen and the arrests start, then the
unaligned will finally be brought into it.. but not as supporters.... as
potential terrorists. The alt-right and the chans will be mass detained and
the world will cheer, which will setup a cycle of greater and greater
detainments. Mrs. Clinton has already made mention of going after those
engaging in wrongthink. Meanwhile, her false echo chambers will shouw: "We
stopped hate! YAaaaay!" This will result in more and more innocent people
being targeted by these draconian laws and no amount of mass media will work
to smooth it out because of the very layout of echo chambers today.
2: You're trying to force the unaligned to be partisan..
1: Bingo. The targeted will be deeply anti-centralized government partisan after
2: I suppose they could support govt out of fear as well..
1: Some, but American's don't fear government. They fear loss of social capital
and most people have a rightest model of social capital.
2: Social capital or die? isn't that kind of a human thing?.
1: That's the natural intuitive model humans have all over the world. The anomoly
is the leftist mode of social capital. It usually requires generations of
urbanization to normalize that model and we're still two or three shy of full
2: The leftist perspective isn't breeding?.
1: They certainly do have a penchant for abortion, don't they? My position is
this: If two people are arguing about the interior decoration theme of the room,
you can engage in debate and try and negotiate a diplomatic solution.. or you
can set the house on fire and watch them unify to put it out. The sooner
centralized government is forced to be overtly tyrannical, the sooner we will
have the resources to undermine it.
2: technological resources?.
1: Mass human involvement and participation. It's a big reason I support Clinton.
2: I get what you're saying but I think you believe something I don't..
1: She's the primal force of 1960s entitlement special snowflake
chip-on-the-shoulder insecurity. The type that brings nuclear weapons to a
knife fight.
2: It sounds like you're saying at the basis of human nature is still a desire
for social capital based on self-sufficiency .
1: No. The desire is unimportant. The basis of human nature is discovering
ways you as the individual can safely accumualte social capital and minimize
risk of loss. Tthat basis is how the rightist model of social capital works.
2: "most people have a Rightist model of social capital" <- what's the point of
that then?.
1: It just happens to be that self-sufficient credos and ethos align with how
that discovery plays out on average
2: And you think human involvement will just show up in opposition to tyranny?.
1: Nope
2: Bottom line this for me then. I don't see where you're going..
1: I believe human involvement will be forced to engage in acts that undermine
that tyranny.
2: How is that possible?.
1: Have you been looking into Venezuela recently?
2: Not recently. I just know their recourses are falling apart and people are
trying to leave..
1: Generations of extreme leftist overreaction to protect the government's monopoly
on oil exports to pay for their self-righteous moral paradise. But then oil
prices tanked. Now you have an entire generation of engineers, PhDs, graduates,
and academics fleeing the city due to MASSIVE crime and ending up panhandling
gold and digging in toxic mines to barely make enough money, but way more than
they'd make on the dole in the city... a dole which, mind you, favors political
supporters over opposition and the unaligned. Care to guess how many people
have socialism in Venezuela now?
2: Most.
1: I would argue that these people, if given the oppotunity, would elect a populist
to overtly overthrow that government. Even by violent means. No hand-wringing.
No arguing over moral righteousness. No concerns over legacy and the right
side of history.
2: Are they functional enough for that?.
1: Create an ecosystem where populists compete for influence (which isn't hard
since the people who already support that populist have ALREADY sorted themselves
into echo chambers) And poof, out comes the elements of a new regime :D
2: So then we can watch this, like, watch this happen there?.
1: Yep.
2: Timeframe?.
1: Two to five years.
2: Nice..
1: Usually accelerated once foreign powers realize the situation and pour money
into it.
2: What do they have to gain?.
1: Puppet state, better trade terms, cheaper resources, less threatening military
neighbors, expansion of geopolitical sphere, etc.
2: Ok..
1: The Alt-right will burn. And nothing will rise from it's ashes.
2: You're explained this all before. just not in this amount of step-by-step
1: Sunstein will believe he's achieved victory, But little does he know he only
made the destruction of leftist social capital the policy of the establishment :D
Rightist social capital will flourish because of him.

The Council on Foreign Relations and Goldman Sachs have made their support of Hilary Clinton very clear. Google’s search engine is trying to keep such support a secret. Saudi Arabia’s massive influence over oil markets and petrodollar stability, however, doesn’t give them the power to be overt in such support:

Based on this this fear, I would like to propose an idea called the shadow emperor hedge.

Below is a chart providing a high-level view of the countries that spend the most on defense.

What we see is a very significant gap for other powers to spend as much as America does on defense. This is mostly due to America controlling and protecting the interests of the reserve currency.

Next, I will point out that, with the passing of the Citizens United ruling, corporations are allowed to spend as much as they want to influence American elections. Saudi Arabia has made it very clear that clean energy technology and fracking are significant threats to its power. In fact, they’ve already utilized Citizens United to funded opposition to Democratic and Republican senators in Missouri and Wisconsin.

To recap:

  • Tech companies such as Google that have benefited from the Glass-Steagall-powered dot-com bubble (Both in terms of market liquidity and competition elimination) should be expected to support the dynasties responsible for their success.
  • Asymmetrical tribal powers such as Saudi Arabia that have benefited from the War on Terror (both in terms of reasserting financial domination over the Middle East and in terms of eliminating other petrocurrency regimes) should be expected to support established institutional players.
  • Said tech companies should be expected to exploit their monopoly to demonstrate dynastic support.
  • Said tribal powers should be expected to utilize Citizens United to forge a more desirable American Senate.
  • Said tech companies and their respective monopolies should be expected to be the primary beneficiaries of Citizens United as they accumulate insane profits during an election season.
  • All involved agents are afraid of having their roles and motives regarding policy shifts being made public.
    Thus, the shadow emperor hedge can be summarized as,

Foreign powers will utilize Citizens United to pay tech companies to steer the American electorate into supporting state policies that only benefit the foreign powers. This allows a foreign power to achieve influence over their regional peers without having to increase defense spending since American military assets are steered via state policies.

As long as American military spending is geared towards reserve currency preservation, the marriage between foreign powers, tech media, and Citizens United will flourish.

This is not a popular topic. In most Western countries, this is not even a legal topic. Regardless of moral and political positioning, this is an inevitable topic.

The cabal responsible for the global industrial balance of production and consumption, powered by Saudi oil consumption, (which, in turn, is powered by recycling petrodollars through British and United States banking systems [which, in turn, is enforced upon OPEC oil producers by American military projection]) is fragmenting. The Russians have been involved in a campaign of carving up and laying claim to critical bottlenecks of oil consumption while expanding their own oil exports to China. The mythos of environmentalism, born in the 1960s, has evolved into an influential force, directing official policy in developed countries and the economic perception of their consumers to bypass the cabal altogether. Developing nations are asserting their own authority in regional matters via land grabs and nuclear proliferation. As I have told a friend at Credit Suisse eight years ago: “We are entering a Neo-Alexandrian world.”

Alexander of Macedonia wasn’t a great leader because history says so. Alexander managed to bind hundreds of tribes, each with their own language, ethos, culture, religion, and economic pressures, to his goal. He carved a path from the Mediterranean to India (and funneled nearly all of the gold from Mesopotamian antiquity into Europe) in the world’s first attempt at aggressive globalism. His grand ambitions were dashed by simple human needs: _His soldiers went on strike, citing a desire to reconnect with loved ones and their increasing skepticism of Alexander and his willingness to blur cultural identities._

There have been many more attempts at globalism since Alexander, all of which have subsequently reduced the emotional buy-in required to accept the destruction of one’s cultural identity. However, once the industrial age came to fruition, the ability to overcome previously insurmountable cultural squabbles became cheaper and easier, mostly due to mass media. With this technology, cultural perceptions could be homogenized across hundreds of millions of people, ensuring their economic actions were within a range of acceptable behavior. However, with every increase in globalism, there has been countercultural reactions obsessed with restoring a primal understanding of identity that doesn’t require years of education and propaganda to comprehend. The high cost of normalizing globalist culture (perpetual reinvention of new communication mediums to create a generation’s worth of authenticity) eventually hits diminishing returns because of this identity impulse. It appears that human DNA has several million years of defenses to invoke emotionally convincing skepticism of mass identity destruction, despite the best intentions of the learned and the powerful.

Assuming that these unverified assumptions of human neurosociology are completely incorrect, we still live in a world where the elite absolutely rely on the leverage provided by the labor arbitrage that only globalism (and floating exchange rates) can provide. Take the European Union, for example. Each member of the European Union can print bonds in their nation’s name, but they cannot print currency to pay the coupon of those bonds. Furthermore, these nations cannot raise their taxes to pay the coupon either, as they are high-tax socialist paradises, thus, any increase in taxes will cut directly into consumption, which directly affects their imports/export agreements. There is only one way in which European nations can pay off these coupon: labor arbitrage.

Importing massive amounts of cheaper immigrants, especially in export-heavy nations like Sweden and Germany, is a conceit that Europe must now follow the American/Ford model of labor arbitrage: Import labor to do that which is too complex to outsource, and then outsource the rest. In short, Europe is engaging in a variation of Gresham’s Law regarding labor: Hoard complexity, liquefy simplicity. That means human organizations have a propensity to hoard those who can resolve complexity and expend those who are tasked to resolve simplicity. The profits generated from cheap labor arbitrage will extend the politically popular (and expensive) socialist policies of human care that an export nation must provide to be competitive. As gains in labor arbitrage occur, tax revenue increase, and stable bond issuance can increase to allow socialist nations to engage in production expansion. (Taxation being collateral) The loyal socialists who labored for years are replaced by a configuration of cheaper labor. Their complaints and frustrations are dismissed as nothing more than racist reactions or tone deaf nationalism since the imported labor heralds from a variety of different races and/or nationalities.

The inevitable response to this automatic dismissal is populist nationalism. To counter this evolution, the Americans have developed a very effective model in destroying populist nationalism when they engaged in their transition to global labor arbitrage back in the 1960s. The American solution is that as long as those who benefit from the labor arbitrage (Fortune 500s, bond issuers, and Wall Street) are allowed to invest in and/or financially control media outlets, then nationalist impulses can be defused without unpopular and overt government heavy-handedness. How? In this setup, for-profit news and clickbait peddlers are driven by profit motive that undermines, waters down, harasses, lies about, and ultimately destroys countercultural nationalist upstarts. This profit motive is very powerful and has achieved countless victories over the past ten years.

I will now going to give you the way to counter that profit motive.

During World War 2, the Europeans decided it would be hilarious if they blew themselves up. As a result, they shipped most of their highly coveted gold to America, (the one place unscathed by the war) specifically, to the bedrock underneath Manhattan currently manned by robotic palate pushers owned by JP Morgan and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. In fact, 98% of the gold owned by the Federal Reserve system is actually owned by Europe. (Over a thousand years of gold conquest led by Alexander, the Romans, the Conquistadors, and the Imperialists) America has since refused multiple times to return this gold upon request to their various owners… while simultaneously pushing the narrative that gold is barbarous relic. (If it was so barbarous, why hold on to it so desperately, America?) Because of this arrangement, there is a way to undermine the mass media anti-nationalism profit motive with the blessing of globalist overseers: Each European nationalist movement must strike multiple deals with the Federal Reserve. When those nationalists come to power, they will enact quotas and legal changes to alter national import/export mechanisms, (driven entirely by Federal Reserve policy objectives) those European nationalists will be allowed to easily repatriate their gold to bypass and undermine Brussels currency issuance limitations. In essence, European nationalism can be used to destroy the European Union with blessing from the Federal Reserve.

The Neo-Alexandrian world I had mentioned in 2008 to my friend is one in which nationalism becomes more profitable to the individual nation than continued participation in globalism. This model will achieve initial gains and advantages for first movers, leaving the remaining globalist bloc to operate without their full support. This will profoundly affect global trade and, in desperation, second-tier members of the globalist bloc will nationalize, triggering in a cascade of nationalization for the remaining members. The military and technological advantage of superstates and national unions will diminish as intelligence gathering will be made more expensive due to the subsequent regionalizations of the Internet, depriving the NSA and GCHQ of their current advantage. Hundreds of tribes will return and we will be living in a world in which only an Alexander can understand and make sense of.

The Internet has allowed anyone to partake in the massive coordination of human effort that has been historically reserved for Pharaohs… and the Pharaohs are upset that their monopoly on human effort has competition. This impulse to engage in “spontaneous global organization“ is the most promising aspect of the Internet, however, various channels that frequently nurture such organization have been under attack. Here is a list of fronts within the Pharaoh’s war against spontaneous global organization:

  • The Code of Conduct battles in open source have injected unneeded political polarization/dialectical confrontation among key communities of internet infrastructure, primarily, Linux communities. Open source has been the first and most influential examples of spontaneous global organization in the modern world.
  • The Gawker infiltration of 4chan, a culture that had produced the Anonymous brand (Which was hijacked by state actors after Chanology) resulted in the purging of 25,000 comments from /r/gaming for violating the payola of pop untouchables. The Anonymous brand showed the world that people across multiple identity categories (racial, gender, national, religious, etc.) can come together without a leader or a plan to affect cultural affairs en masse.
  • The bogus rape charges against Julian Assange to suppress Wikileaks. Wikileaks showed that like-minded individuals can utilize the Internet to convince the politically disillusioned to leak information from their powerful positions.
  • The NSA’s silent usage of zero day exploits, especially heartbleed and Juniper backdoors. SSL has been a staple in secure communications that spontaneous global organization requires, prompting both American and British governments to demand its regulation.
  • The highly coordinated and prolonged culture war against the gaming community. Gamers from all over the world reflexively eliminate identity lines and spontaneously organize to solve challenges within a gaming world.
  • The Federal Reserve cannot regulate BitCoin, and so, the Group of 30 believes BitCoin to be evil. BitCoin has demonstrated that it might be possible to do away with the clearing houses and the trust problems associated with central banking through a clever usage of spontaneous global organization.
    To the uninitiated, each of these fronts appear to be unrelated to the other. However, when you frame each involved technology and community within the context of suppressing spontaneous global organization, you can quickly see how they are related… and how they are being attacked by powerful banking, authority, and cultural entities. Unfortunately, each targeted actor has a very large surface area to exploit which is only made larger by the assumption that they alone they are under attack.

One might argue that social media allows for spontaneous global organization, which is true. Therefore, I should refine my definition to eliminate confusion. There are certain “spontaneous” organizational manifestations that are authorized, such as the entirely predictable schema of identity politics. (Black vs. White, Male vs. Female, Red vs. Blue, and other examples of false dichotomy) These breeds of schema utilize a considerable amount of effort to appear spontaneous and global, but this is nothing more than hacking morality via minimal effort photo opportunities. With the heavy individual curation of social media to promote filter bubbles and echo chambers, social media exacerbates the illusion that the content one experiences is part of a larger spontaneous global organization when, in reality, it is not.

The spontaneous global organization I am speaking of does not engage in identity warfare. In fact, the first thing such organizations sacrifice is identity. This provides a significant challenge for the post-war leadership as their entire model of rule requires the infinite exploitation of identity. Therefore, it will be important to develop sociological and governance theorems that explore how rule of law can be established in a world where labor and creativity can spontaneously appear and then vaporize. Otherwise, the powers that be will continue to waste energy and assets in suppressing the culmination of such a world.

Continental National Socialism is the organizational method that emerges from the confluence of Swiss banking influence, German export dominance, and the remnants of French and Dutch colonial power suckling off of British and American geopolitical activity. This, of course, is not the widely held definition and for those who are not American, it’s important to understand the American reactionary’s love affair with what they perceive to be Continental National Socialism.

For our American reactionary “friends” (I.E.: The people we have to endure because we are all forced onto one planet), Continental National Socialism is believed to be a perfect utopia where all ills go away and people are magically endowed with rights and protections to live as carefree high-brow artists and critical thinkers forever. This is not a recent belief. This perception is a core tenet of American reactionary culture despite their insistence to change masks every ten years.

The British raised concerns over such ambitions from Brussels about six months ago on May 10th, 2015. This warning was punctuated by the Rotterdam rape storm. The pro-feminism, pro-social justice media narrative has been working overtime to suppress the propagation of Rotterdam-like events. They have successfully refused to make any mention about the large volume of rapes by immigrants infecting Sweden since a wave of military-aged Middle Eastern males entered their countries en masse.

France has previously felt the sting of its future cheap labor supply in 2005 and this week, they’ve felt it again. They gave a silent nod to French Nationalist Marine Le Pen by shutting down their borders in response to recent terrorist attacks, but even this is just a dog-and-pony show.

France is a protectionist organization that promotes political affiliates and union votes. This arrangement will not be able to hold in the face of Brussels and their desire to implement the American labor model (cheap immigrants for what cannot be outsourced) across Europe. France has already seen the benefits of outsourcing government, defense, and manufacturing contracts and the time is coming to extrapolate this across their entire economy.

Bastions of Continental National Socialism such as France have relied on deep levels of union political integration since the end of World War 2. However, the profit model such unions have relied on required post-war construction growth. That cannot compete against the model of wage stagnation and international labor arbitrage. Muslim immigrants are essential for Europe’s transition into wage stagnation, so not only are they the vanguard of injecting Islamic culture into Europe, they are also the front line of injecting American capitalism as well.

Through mass cheap labor, Europe will get the wage stagnation they desperately need to mitigate the previous period of socialist extravagance attached to Euro valuations. This will transform the current European assisted class into a permanently semi-employed dependent class. The nature of this dependency will be ideally expressed as ritual election season teeth-grinding as one generation of worker blends into a cheaper generation of worker. However, that dependency presents opportunities to revitalize 1930s socialism via the nationalization of labor, especially in countries that have few opportunities with international labor arbitrage.

The fall of Continental National Socialism has been passionately resisted by American reactionaries for their entire ideological livelihood. It’s almost a rite of passage among these types to say “I wish we were more like Europe.“ As it turns out, they might get their wish after all.

When the music industry was undermined by file distribution software, people who downloaded files were called terrorists.

When the news industry was under attack from social media, people who didn’t blindly recite The Narrative® were called terrorists.

When the financial industry melted down in 2008 and BitCoin rose to challenge central banking, people who used them were called terrorists.

When the university industry came under attack due to self-learning programs on the Internet, people who were capable of teaching themselves were called terrorists.

When the telecom industry comes under attack due to widespread usage of open source streaming platforms, those people who live stream will be called terrorists.

When the labor industry can no longer compete against an autonomous robotic workforce, those people who use them will be called terrorists.

If you adapt to the destruction of these monopolies and survive, you are a terrorist. If you cling to the old ways and suffer, you are a good citizen.

[caption id=”attachment_144” align=”aligncenter” width=”1452”]Modern Censorship - How SJWs manufacture consent by converting ideas into spirals of silence Modern Censorship - How SJWs manufacture consent by converting ideas into spirals of silence[/caption]

Decades of social media and the mass narcissism that predates it has created a technopriest caste that aggressively seeks opportunities to summon their entire cathedral to banish heretics. Any attempt to reason with these zealots requires an initial payment of your public image as you will get branded as a misogynist, racist, and privileged. That’s a fairly heavy buy-in… but only if you still believe in old public relations. ProteinWorld’s trolling of Harriet Johnson is demonstrating a radically new brand of public relations: if analyzing and penetrating filter bubbles becomes too expensive, provoke the filter bubble and steer its reaction for your benefit. Here’s how it works.

Let’s say you sell product A that is designed for an approximation of group X. Figuring out where group X is located and how to reach them is expensive. There is also an inherent group Y that will not only absolutely hate product A, but will go out of their way to derail you. More often than not, group Y doesn’t actually hate product A, but they hate the idea that the group X that they do hate might have a new tool in their ideological war with group Y. Group Y will then engage in a Bush-style preemptive attack to minimize the perceived benefits of product A as a means of dehumanizing group X.

This dynamic mire of ideological petulance, henceforth known as the background ideological war, (BIW) is traditionally handled by public relations teams who try to carefully tiptoe around these landmines as they appear. In the old public relations, spending a tremendous amount of money on market discovery and public relations is the only way to avoid this outcome In the new public relations, you realize that this BIW exists within all actions of the market. Instead of trying to find out who is in group X and who is in group Y in advance, you release your product and then intentionally irritate the first person who expresses displeasure of product A on social media.

The person who expresses displeasure is familiar with the BIW and has, most likely, already established lines and bounties regarding the rules of engagement. That person might not have identified as group Y, but that is not important since, due to the mechanics of social media, that person will instinctively put out the klaxon call designed to attract group Y. (This impulse is traditionally known as “raising awareness”, which is the postmodernists version of praying to nonexistent deities) The old public relations believes this approach to be a problem. The new public relations knows this is the approach saves money, time, and has far greater efficiency in spurring consumption.

Group Y will never be your customers to begin with because they have already associated it with the BIW long before you even got around to making product A. In fact, Group Y and group X might have already self-isolated from one another due to the BIW. By irritating group Y, more of group Y will join in and engage in their daily social media outrage ritual of retweeting, blogging, public shaming, and photoshop work. This outrage props up your SEO, your trending ranking, and your overall presence at a minimal cost.

As the outrage circulates, fringe members of group X will catch wind of this and rally around your product as a newest front in the BIW. They’ll sound their klaxon call and attract gradually more moderate members that align with their filter bubble. Group X will reveal themselves by self-organizing in relation to your product.

As the outrage permeates the internet, all of it gets logged, analyzed for sentiment, and categorized in ways that allow your company to pick up the pieces afterwards. Instead of trying to anticipate who your market it, you exploit the BIW to force the market to self-organize in relation to your product and then analyze that self-organization to discover your markets.