Another great post and very timely. The collapsing credibility of regime loyalists within the Right is proof that the current system is breaking down. The frauds that used to work no longer do. This exposes the system to danger: its nature is revealed, its legitimacy is further eroded and its ability to demobilise potential opposition shrinks. There is nothing to regret about any of this.
The emerging system, or the successor to the current regime, cannot expect to establish its legitimacy by way of elections. The fraudulent character of electoral politics was established by the ease with which the electoral process was rigged in 2020, as well as by the ease with which the regime intimidated the entire federal court system (which upheld the fraudulent outcome on procedural grounds). All of this compounds the spectacle of representatives who routinely neglect to advocate for their constituents (sometimes with a malicious enthusiasm for betrayal).
The mid-terms will test both the system and its victims/subjects. The nominal result may well be irrelevant. What is key is how the electorate respond to the instances of electoral fraud and how far the courts will go to legitimise those frauds.
Finally, Theophilus you need to further develop your thinking about the case for a paternalistic mode of governance. The current regime simultaneously claims to represent the people while using therapeutic and eudaimonic interventions to disempower, exploit and immiserate the people. The passivity and docility that are being created and normalised by this are creating precisely the sort of conditions for an enlightened despotism (using the expression in the value neutral sense that a despot is simply a lord).
The passivity and docility that are being created and normalised by this are creating precisely the sort of conditions for an enlightened despotism (using the expression in the value neutral sense that a despot is simply a lord).
This is the real danger. I sometimes wonder if Trump was installed for the *express purpose* of creating Operation Warp Speed. Could that program have succeeded under anyone else? It fits his personality and image too perfectly.
Perhaps the grand plan is to create a massive new victim class of vax injured people who need to be taken care of by Leviathan. Since Big Pharma deceived the whole world, they probably need to be nationalized too. Only the State truly cares about the people.
But this all idle speculation. Like you said, the midterms will tell us what we need to know.
For what it is worth, IMHO it is best not to over-think it. The whole issue lends itself to hypernormalization, the condition of destabilised perception created by manipulation and political spectacle (above all else controlled opposition groups that may even be transparent about being controlled) and full spectrum fakery. Hypernormalization was developed as a technique by Vladislav Surkov. This documentary by Adam Curtis spells it all out.
I'd put it differently. Speculation is essential, we need to understand things from as many perspectives as possible, however, there are risks. We are being subjected to a firehose of information, designed to create an ever-evolving narrative that leaves us stupefied. I am optimistic that people will figure things out, so long as they focus on what is real, what can be verified. Essentially, I believe that people should believe what they like, but always test it against the best available evidence.
Yes, excellent piece. Although i disagree, it's well done and thought provoking.
My chief criticism is that we don't inhabit a democracy nor a representative republic in any, actual sense. These are illusions contrived (like the Matrix) to keep all western peoples as docile cogs in the rulers' wheel.
The reality we inhabit is better viewed as a criminal cartel of sorts. A gang of corruptocrats comprised of many factions and families loosely affiliated in their overarching Racket-- stealing the wealth and soul of the people.
As such, it is fantasy to believe that a criminal Cartel can be voted out-- or that Americans can improve their lot by voting in the right kind of criminals or even mirabile dictu! Honest people who will go to dc to battle the crooks.
Ridiculous.
Let's imagine our country as a small city. It has been infested with a malevolent and ruthless criminal gang. Over the years the crooks gained control over every lever of power, doling out favors to some, carving up the city resources amongst themselves, intimidating or killing any who resisted. "Go ahead!" they say,"have your elections. Have your candidates if you don't like the ones we give you. We don't mind because at the end of the day, anyone you send to city hall belongs to us, not you. They will take orders and get rich or they will be ousted. We hold the guns, the police, the courts, the news outlets, and the banks. So elect away, suckers!"
It really is that bad. Our refusal to face this is just more evidence of our impotence and capacity for self delusion. In the real world the only way to free the city from bloody criminals is to wipe them out. (Actually, the alternative is that the criminals exhaust every resource and impoverish everyone to such a degree that they move on to new territory but that's a fate perhaps worse than death for citizens).
In the meantime the interweb is full of posts and memes and vids of people excited about an election and dreaming about how things will improve. But the Oligarchs won't cede power without a bloody fight. Elect 535 raving MAGA zealots to Congress and they will smack head first into the raw power of a criminal enterprise willing to coerce and cow anyone who challenges them.
His entire point is the R voter is attempting to reclaim real democracy / our constitutional republic by replacing their elected representatives with those who will abide by original intent.
Yes. Which is why my response was that the very idea of reclaiming something that does not exist and, in any event, cannot be reclaimed from vicious criminals willing to resist such reclamation by force is on point.
Trump was/is a psyop. Do you not see that? (Sincere question). Or do you just find it impossible to write from your perspective while acknowledging that?
Even if Trump were a one-man controlled opposition, so what? The forces unleashed by his presence and the reactions to him by the political elite are destabilising the regime. No confident or assured ruling class would behave the way they have. They are generating the very opposition forces that they fear.
Those forces always existed. They used Trump for various reasons: demonize Russia, push the proletarian left into the arms of the corporate/intelligence apparatus, criminalize dissent from “the right,” enable The Covid scam, reveal the farce that is our democracy, and even create a bubbling anger they will exploit if unleashed.
With you 100%. Trump's support within the elite would rely heavily on elements within the Deep State who have their own agendas. It is hard to conceive that any of these would be public-spirited or pro-social. Trump's backers in such circles would regard him as just another card to play. Even popular opposition to the regime can be instrumentalised in any number of ways.
Having acknowledged that, the fact that such actors consider Trump a viable candidate suggests that the elite are well aware how fragile the loyalty of the masses to the regime has become.
My guess is that the real game is playing Trump against De Santis. The Democrats are toxic for the foreseeable future, therefore regime backers would seek a palatable alternative. Trump is a wild card, De Santis is more easily controlled. The end game would be to buy time for the regime, install a president who felt no burning need to confront the system and to split or demoralise MAGA.
The counter move isn't voting... the counter move is to give the Dan Crenshaw (John McCain 2.0) treatment of shame, booing, ostracism, formal censures, and loudly insulting him on every social media platform and article and news platform.
John McCain's actions were tolerated for decades... conservatives flipped on Dan Crenshaw after only 4 years of betrayals.
Another proof historical cycles are accelerating as the Empire declines...
Laughter, ridicule, mockery is our most powerful weapon. Samizdat memes.
We succeed when Dan Crenshaw and Liz Cheney are embarrassed, they can't show their face at a Republican meeting without a "Let's go Brandon!" event where the audience is cursing and booing them, but the politician is smiling and pretending they are cheering.
Theophilus, with all due respect. This piece is excellent if the 1st 2 paragraphs are omitted.
For 20+ years I had been preaching the exact concept: That elected Republicans were outright hostile to the interests and desires of the people that elected them, and the people who elected them have always hated their guts for it.
Regarding your positions against self determination, I fail to grasp how you can hold that predicate position and yet see so many other issues with great clarity. When one's base assumption's are as incorrect as yours appear to be, it tarnishes all that follows,. Imo, two simple quotes from mind's that time has proven pretty credible (though far from perfect) make your position not just unrealistic, but wholly ludicrous.
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all others"
"Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us"
I maintain both of the above statements survive any and all rebuttal. But I always remain open to contemplating alternative concepts. Point me to your, or other, writing on the the subject and I will consume & contemplate.
If you are going to talk about democracy, you might at least define it and not rely on a public definition provided by the very same investment bankers who are bringing us the WEF, Agenda 30, mRNA, the NWO, and totalitarianism.
As one might expect, they gave you a bum steer.
Theophilus, take my hand and I will walk you gently back in time to a person you have never heard of (evidently), Abraham Lincoln, who coined the lyrical "Government of the people, by the people and for the people". Or, if this is too ambient, Thomas Paine: "All authority resides in the people".
What these worthy dudes meant, me old mate, is that democracy excludes reprsentationalism, elections, votes, campsigns, politicians, parliaments and congresses, policies, and majorities.
It means exactly what it said, the people decide all policy by informed consensus. That is democracy.
Sorry, I knew this would confuse you. Take my hand again and I will fly you into the future, to visit a democratic meritocracy, in which every citizen may contribute to heighbourhood, village, regional, or national policy formulation to whatever detail he or she is comfortable. A single document in three optional parts, one per citizen, is all it takes. Then the Public Service estimates each identified locality for presented consensus and drafts this into an aggreagate national policy document.
Sound complicated.? Not at all. For example, people who live in the Murray Darling Basin would be able to decide on their own water resource management. People in your neighbourhood could decide what constitutes sensible noise abatement for their neighbourhood. And the entire nation could decide whether or not to expel the US military from Australia.
Once you get rid of politicians and political parties, there are actually only a few pressing decisions to be made. 99% of legislation is political garbage.
Having said that, Kiwi Paul Scott will tell us that is not democracy, and that true democracy is called MMP and it exists only in NZ.
Another great post and very timely. The collapsing credibility of regime loyalists within the Right is proof that the current system is breaking down. The frauds that used to work no longer do. This exposes the system to danger: its nature is revealed, its legitimacy is further eroded and its ability to demobilise potential opposition shrinks. There is nothing to regret about any of this.
The emerging system, or the successor to the current regime, cannot expect to establish its legitimacy by way of elections. The fraudulent character of electoral politics was established by the ease with which the electoral process was rigged in 2020, as well as by the ease with which the regime intimidated the entire federal court system (which upheld the fraudulent outcome on procedural grounds). All of this compounds the spectacle of representatives who routinely neglect to advocate for their constituents (sometimes with a malicious enthusiasm for betrayal).
The mid-terms will test both the system and its victims/subjects. The nominal result may well be irrelevant. What is key is how the electorate respond to the instances of electoral fraud and how far the courts will go to legitimise those frauds.
Finally, Theophilus you need to further develop your thinking about the case for a paternalistic mode of governance. The current regime simultaneously claims to represent the people while using therapeutic and eudaimonic interventions to disempower, exploit and immiserate the people. The passivity and docility that are being created and normalised by this are creating precisely the sort of conditions for an enlightened despotism (using the expression in the value neutral sense that a despot is simply a lord).
The passivity and docility that are being created and normalised by this are creating precisely the sort of conditions for an enlightened despotism (using the expression in the value neutral sense that a despot is simply a lord).
This is the real danger. I sometimes wonder if Trump was installed for the *express purpose* of creating Operation Warp Speed. Could that program have succeeded under anyone else? It fits his personality and image too perfectly.
Perhaps the grand plan is to create a massive new victim class of vax injured people who need to be taken care of by Leviathan. Since Big Pharma deceived the whole world, they probably need to be nationalized too. Only the State truly cares about the people.
But this all idle speculation. Like you said, the midterms will tell us what we need to know.
For what it is worth, IMHO it is best not to over-think it. The whole issue lends itself to hypernormalization, the condition of destabilised perception created by manipulation and political spectacle (above all else controlled opposition groups that may even be transparent about being controlled) and full spectrum fakery. Hypernormalization was developed as a technique by Vladislav Surkov. This documentary by Adam Curtis spells it all out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thLgkQBFTPw
Yeah, you're right. Speculation is fun, but it's a dead end. There are more immediate problems to focus on.
I'd put it differently. Speculation is essential, we need to understand things from as many perspectives as possible, however, there are risks. We are being subjected to a firehose of information, designed to create an ever-evolving narrative that leaves us stupefied. I am optimistic that people will figure things out, so long as they focus on what is real, what can be verified. Essentially, I believe that people should believe what they like, but always test it against the best available evidence.
As thomas777 frequently says, the current system is getting more deranged and senile by the day. Like all old men eventually it will die.
Yes, excellent piece. Although i disagree, it's well done and thought provoking.
My chief criticism is that we don't inhabit a democracy nor a representative republic in any, actual sense. These are illusions contrived (like the Matrix) to keep all western peoples as docile cogs in the rulers' wheel.
The reality we inhabit is better viewed as a criminal cartel of sorts. A gang of corruptocrats comprised of many factions and families loosely affiliated in their overarching Racket-- stealing the wealth and soul of the people.
As such, it is fantasy to believe that a criminal Cartel can be voted out-- or that Americans can improve their lot by voting in the right kind of criminals or even mirabile dictu! Honest people who will go to dc to battle the crooks.
Ridiculous.
Let's imagine our country as a small city. It has been infested with a malevolent and ruthless criminal gang. Over the years the crooks gained control over every lever of power, doling out favors to some, carving up the city resources amongst themselves, intimidating or killing any who resisted. "Go ahead!" they say,"have your elections. Have your candidates if you don't like the ones we give you. We don't mind because at the end of the day, anyone you send to city hall belongs to us, not you. They will take orders and get rich or they will be ousted. We hold the guns, the police, the courts, the news outlets, and the banks. So elect away, suckers!"
It really is that bad. Our refusal to face this is just more evidence of our impotence and capacity for self delusion. In the real world the only way to free the city from bloody criminals is to wipe them out. (Actually, the alternative is that the criminals exhaust every resource and impoverish everyone to such a degree that they move on to new territory but that's a fate perhaps worse than death for citizens).
In the meantime the interweb is full of posts and memes and vids of people excited about an election and dreaming about how things will improve. But the Oligarchs won't cede power without a bloody fight. Elect 535 raving MAGA zealots to Congress and they will smack head first into the raw power of a criminal enterprise willing to coerce and cow anyone who challenges them.
His entire point is the R voter is attempting to reclaim real democracy / our constitutional republic by replacing their elected representatives with those who will abide by original intent.
Yes. Which is why my response was that the very idea of reclaiming something that does not exist and, in any event, cannot be reclaimed from vicious criminals willing to resist such reclamation by force is on point.
Trump was/is a psyop. Do you not see that? (Sincere question). Or do you just find it impossible to write from your perspective while acknowledging that?
Even if Trump were a one-man controlled opposition, so what? The forces unleashed by his presence and the reactions to him by the political elite are destabilising the regime. No confident or assured ruling class would behave the way they have. They are generating the very opposition forces that they fear.
Those forces always existed. They used Trump for various reasons: demonize Russia, push the proletarian left into the arms of the corporate/intelligence apparatus, criminalize dissent from “the right,” enable The Covid scam, reveal the farce that is our democracy, and even create a bubbling anger they will exploit if unleashed.
With you 100%. Trump's support within the elite would rely heavily on elements within the Deep State who have their own agendas. It is hard to conceive that any of these would be public-spirited or pro-social. Trump's backers in such circles would regard him as just another card to play. Even popular opposition to the regime can be instrumentalised in any number of ways.
Having acknowledged that, the fact that such actors consider Trump a viable candidate suggests that the elite are well aware how fragile the loyalty of the masses to the regime has become.
My guess is that the real game is playing Trump against De Santis. The Democrats are toxic for the foreseeable future, therefore regime backers would seek a palatable alternative. Trump is a wild card, De Santis is more easily controlled. The end game would be to buy time for the regime, install a president who felt no burning need to confront the system and to split or demoralise MAGA.
Dumb comment.
The counter move isn't voting... the counter move is to give the Dan Crenshaw (John McCain 2.0) treatment of shame, booing, ostracism, formal censures, and loudly insulting him on every social media platform and article and news platform.
John McCain's actions were tolerated for decades... conservatives flipped on Dan Crenshaw after only 4 years of betrayals.
Another proof historical cycles are accelerating as the Empire declines...
Laughter, ridicule, mockery is our most powerful weapon. Samizdat memes.
We succeed when Dan Crenshaw and Liz Cheney are embarrassed, they can't show their face at a Republican meeting without a "Let's go Brandon!" event where the audience is cursing and booing them, but the politician is smiling and pretending they are cheering.
Theophilus, with all due respect. This piece is excellent if the 1st 2 paragraphs are omitted.
For 20+ years I had been preaching the exact concept: That elected Republicans were outright hostile to the interests and desires of the people that elected them, and the people who elected them have always hated their guts for it.
Regarding your positions against self determination, I fail to grasp how you can hold that predicate position and yet see so many other issues with great clarity. When one's base assumption's are as incorrect as yours appear to be, it tarnishes all that follows,. Imo, two simple quotes from mind's that time has proven pretty credible (though far from perfect) make your position not just unrealistic, but wholly ludicrous.
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all others"
"Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us"
I maintain both of the above statements survive any and all rebuttal. But I always remain open to contemplating alternative concepts. Point me to your, or other, writing on the the subject and I will consume & contemplate.
💬 Yes, we have one party here. But so does America. Except, with typical extravagance, they have two of them!
↑↑ attributed to Tanzanian Julius Kambarage Nyerere, wayyyy back in the depths of last century 🤷😉
If you are going to talk about democracy, you might at least define it and not rely on a public definition provided by the very same investment bankers who are bringing us the WEF, Agenda 30, mRNA, the NWO, and totalitarianism.
As one might expect, they gave you a bum steer.
Theophilus, take my hand and I will walk you gently back in time to a person you have never heard of (evidently), Abraham Lincoln, who coined the lyrical "Government of the people, by the people and for the people". Or, if this is too ambient, Thomas Paine: "All authority resides in the people".
What these worthy dudes meant, me old mate, is that democracy excludes reprsentationalism, elections, votes, campsigns, politicians, parliaments and congresses, policies, and majorities.
It means exactly what it said, the people decide all policy by informed consensus. That is democracy.
Sorry, I knew this would confuse you. Take my hand again and I will fly you into the future, to visit a democratic meritocracy, in which every citizen may contribute to heighbourhood, village, regional, or national policy formulation to whatever detail he or she is comfortable. A single document in three optional parts, one per citizen, is all it takes. Then the Public Service estimates each identified locality for presented consensus and drafts this into an aggreagate national policy document.
Sound complicated.? Not at all. For example, people who live in the Murray Darling Basin would be able to decide on their own water resource management. People in your neighbourhood could decide what constitutes sensible noise abatement for their neighbourhood. And the entire nation could decide whether or not to expel the US military from Australia.
Once you get rid of politicians and political parties, there are actually only a few pressing decisions to be made. 99% of legislation is political garbage.
Having said that, Kiwi Paul Scott will tell us that is not democracy, and that true democracy is called MMP and it exists only in NZ.
Right Paul?
Thanks very much for this post > bringing us up to date in the antipodes .. Paul Scott. . New Zealand