Thoughts That Are Thought Can't Be Unthought

Does the Left *really* want to normalise "The UHC Treatment"?

One of the bigger news items from the past week was the apparent assassination of Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare (UHC), one of the largest medical insurance companies in the country. Thompson was shot by a lone gunman who used a silencer and subsonic rounds, but the hit appears to have been performed by an amateur (who revealed his face in sight of nearby CCTV cameras). Theories abound as to why he was murdered; the most plausible suggest that the shooter may have been someone who was either denied coverage or who has a loved one who was. On the shell casings, investigators found the words “Delay,” “Deny,” and “Depose” written, which seems likely to be a riff on the book Delay Deny Defend: Why Insurance Companies Don't Pay Claims and What You Can Do about It, which bills itself as “…an exposé of insurance injustice and a plan for consumers and lawmakers to fight back.” Perhaps the assassin was someone who didn’t want to wait for the legal system to rectify a perceived injustice.

As you might imagine, this event generated quite a bit of controversy. Most people on the Right were appalled while many on the Left applauded the act because of its supposed vengefulness upon big, evil insurance corporations. In fact, your response to the shooting goes a long way toward demonstrating whether you are eucivilisational or dyscivilisational, whether you want to create order or destroy it.

But regardless of whether you approved or not, one thing to understand is that this assassination, or at least acts very like it, are increasingly inevitable. As this blog has noted before (copiously), we are deep in the collapse phase of our current demographic-structural cycle. During this phase, all sorts of things that contribute to social instability get worse and worse - wealth inequalities, crime and a general breakdown in law and order, the failure of trust in institutions (like the legal system), worsening factionalism, etc. etc. Several of these combined would militate towards an increase in vigilantism, as desperate people who feel neglected and ignored by the system start to take matters into their own hands. Exactly the position that some regular Joe might feel himself to be in towards a multibillion-dollar corporation that perhaps denied payment for an expensive medical treatment, something that (rightly or wrongly) is viewed to be par for the course for that industry.

After all, the day after Thompson was shot, another big insurance company - Anthem Blue Cross - announced that it was going to limit coverage for anesthesia during surgeries, basically refusing to pay if a surgery goes beyond an arbitrarily established time limit (which could have resulted in massive medical bills for a lot of people). Wisely, this company has since backtracked on that policy. Whether the Thompson assassination had anything to do with this is anyone’s guess.

Now, it would not surprise me at all if we eventually find out that the shooter in Brian Thompson’s murder was a leftist who assassinated him, at least partly, for political reasons. After all, most of those on the Left at least tacitly approved of this act of (seemingly) retributive violence because most on the Left still believe themselves to be on the side of “the little guy” versus “big corporations and the rich” (they’re deluding themselves, or course). The Left has typically been the faction that utilises political violence to further the goals of the Regime, since the Regime is essentially the managerial embodiment of the leftist drift that has gone on for nearly a century. Leftists can burn down entire city centres and get cover from even Republican politicians; the Right takes a stroll through a government building and faces prosecution and jail time for years afterward. The Left is able to use rioting (under the guise of “protesting”) and violence to enforce its sociopolitical diktat onto the vast mass of a largely acquiescent populace, something which the Right has absolutely no ability to do. Remember the old NRx truism that “Right wing activism always fails”? Yeah. The Left has a definite edge in that particular aspect of intraelite competition.

But the thing is, nearly all of this officially-approved political violence has been more or less “mass” in nature. In other words, it’s involved mass protesting, mass rioting, mass looting, mass intimidation of political opponents. It’s been the kind of thing where anonymous crowds of antifas or BLMers can vent under Regime protection in carefully curated events where they are protected by friendly local politicians and prosecutors.

What happens, though, if individual acts of political violence become normalised?

Fanatical leftists hope this will become a reality and honest leftists approve because they believe that they will be on the giving end, not the receiving. But there is a world of difference between curated mass violence, which (paradoxically) is easier to control by the Regime, and individualised, anonymised acts of retribution and vigilantism. There are already clues that the Left is headed in this direction, though. Just look at the assassination attempt upon President Trump that took place in Butler, Pennsylvania by a (supposedly) lone wolf shooter. In a normal world, people across the ideological spectrum would have been shocked and aghast at such an act. In late collapse America, half the country secretly (or openly) wished it had succeeded, and some were even dumb enough to say so out loud. But the problem for them is that such a movement will not remain confined to them.

After all, once a thought has been thought, it cannot be unthought.

And this is where our demographic-structural decline (and attendant ongoing social breakdown) comes into play. The Regime has spent several decades doing everything in its power to alienate, harm, undermine, and destroy the Heritage-American population of this country. In the process, it has generated a large population of young White men (and some not so young) who increasingly see themselves as having no future, no prospects, no hope - and that this is because of the various racial, immigration, and other socioeconomic policies which the Regime has foisted onto us. Likewise, there are millions more who sympathise with these men, often very strongly.

And you know what? These folks aren’t wrong. In fact, they are entirely correct in seeing the present Regime as hostile to them, desiring to replace them in population and impoverish in living standards. These people really DO want you broke, dead, and your kids raped and brainwashed, and they DO think it’s funny.

So what to do when the inevitable happens? What if the Left starts to normalise individualised political violence - thinks the thought - but then others start to think the thought too? Lefties may believe that it’ll just be taking out a local politician or that annoying rightwing neighbour who wouldn’t take down his Vance-Hegdeth 2028 sign after he was “warned” to do so. But what about when it becomes some prosecutor in New York City who uses their role to unjustly persecute eucivilisational Whites who ends up getting “the UHC treatment”? What if prominent antifas or leaders in BLM start turning up dead (or maybe just disappearing without a trace)? The Left could very well end up on the receiving end of a cycle of violence it initiated.

After all, while it’s relatively easy (as we’ve seen) to roll up and prosecute people involved in mass protests, trying to predict and then foil “lone wolf” acts of violence by desperate people who don’t see any alternatives or reasons not to cross the line is a completely different story.

History shows us abundantly that when politics in late-stage collapse situations degenerates into acts of political violence against your factional opponents, it rarely can be stopped at some desired point, but keeps going until it finally burns itself out, usually around the time the Seneca Point hits and the next cycle starts. This was the case in late Republican Rome - generals and triumvirs would engage in tit-for-tat proscriptions until Rome’s aristocracy had been bled dry. In Revolutionary France, each faction within the revolutionary regime would find itself dispossessed of life and limb by the succeeding one until Napoleon was finally able to step in and put an end to it.

But the thing is, in both of those cases (as well as most other historical ones that could be given), the dynamic was such that the victims of the purgings were largely unable to defend themselves. Out of favour Roman senators did not have access to the legions that a Sulla or an Antony did. French revolutionaries could put together the mass armies that their largely ornamental and defanged aristocratic victims simply could not. This would not be the case here in America. If the Left tried to initiate the type of atomised political violence proposed above, they’d quickly find out that Americans really do have their guns for a reason and that all that “cold, dead hands” stuff is not just idle talk. All the Left would succeed in doing is to create a nationwide, low-level but extremely vicious civil conflict that might never rise quite to the level of being a “civil war,” but which would be completely destructive and eviscerating to our civil society all the same.

One would like to think that the Left would consider this and maybe take a step back, but given that they historically only seem to become more vicious as they become more desperate, the odds may not be favourable. Make no mistake, the Left and the Regime are desperate right now, and if they fail to undermine Trump and his agenda going into his second administration, they’ll be capable of anything. This is why it is extremely important that once Trump and his team take office on January 20, 2025, they be ever vigilant to use the official organs of government to stamp out leftist resistance. Demoralise them before they can cross a line that is rarely able to be uncrossed. Nip it in the bud by using whatever means necessary at our disposal. As the side devoted to civilisation and order, we cannot do anything less.