1: Remember months ago I mentioned that the alt right and 8chan and the like were  
   pawns to be sacrificed? 
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.  Huntington 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  
   crusader 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  
   anymore. 
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 inoculated 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 diminishing  
   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 hysterical about saving itself that it is  
   exerting tremendous amounts of energy to attack like 4 racist people in  
   Georgia.  This is just diminishing 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 diminishing 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  
   reactnarrative. 
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  
   communities! 
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 willingness 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  
   worthlessness, but it keeps the partisans are intoxicated. 
2: So then social capital isn't needed.. 
1: So, to summarize 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 attempts 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 consensus 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 in the chans for years. 
2: LOL. 
1: They did that to establish and pressure informants and mods.  They 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  
   detainment.  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  
   this. 
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 anomaly  
   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  
   Babylon. 
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 accumulate social capital and minimize  
   risk of loss. That 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 opportunity, 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've explained this all before. just not in this amount of step-by-step  
   detail.. 
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.