I can maybe write up a post on the power structure within the modern West. I used to post a lot in 2015-2016 on Plebbit when the_donald was still there, was one of the top posters there. Also did a lot of redpilling on /r/worldnews and other defaults before the purge and total lockdown of dissent.
My views on power, how it is hidden and how it is wielded have evolved a lot since Trump was elected. I was overjoyed when he won in 2016, but by 2018 it was clear to me that we wouldn't get fundamental change despite having such a different president in the head position. It seemed that every step of the way it was like there was some invisible force pushing us towards the left. At first I thought it was just the deep state (and it is partially), the system of control is much more expansive. The best description of power in my view comes out of the nRX movement that rose during Obama's term, and I've noticed that some of their lexicon has started to move out of their circles and into much more mainstream sources. For example "The Cathedral" has slowly started to enter more mainstream blogs, I think as we move post-Trump a lot of dissatisfied right wingers will need to rethink the path going forward. Its clear that the classical liberal views of formalized power and voting simply aren't going to work and will only lead to more and more disempowerment for the right.
I do hope, though that we can influence via financial means ... refuse their services, and find out who their sponsors are, and use their own cancel culture against them.... we have well over 70 million people .... if we all started calling their sponsor and telling them we were boycotting, it would get their attention quickly.
That's how the left can do some of what they do... they are organized, because they are willing to give up individuality for lockstep control ... we need to be willing to, at least, threaten to fight the same way.
To me, the way we self-destruct the control over culture system and thus ideas is to actually become extremist DINOs and push to have more and more content censored, especially keystone / touchstone content important to liberal boomers. If we can successfully push to have content that matters to liberals censored as non-conformist and non-inclusive, we will force their identity ideology to change as they cannot access their staples and thus react conservatively. It's why Biden is such a good image for the left as he's seemingly old and just conservative enough even though behind him is the full Marxist culture control machine. If we expose it and feed it more and more gasoline to censor more and more people, platforms, and historical cultural favorites it will overheat and reach a point where it fizzles out and backfires.
I've made this point before, but if they intend to 'Bend the Rules' (viewing that the rules, for them, are innately flexible) in competitions where they are known to cheat, the answer is not to join them in their cheating per se (or not with the same intention, 'Winning' and ultimately power) but by forcing the issue out of absurdity.
Voting Population of 1000?
Supply 10000, and preferably, for a dummy candidate (it need not be a main party) if they wanted it to be truly absurd, the larger it could be organized, vote (to excess) for the same candidate that the opposition would.
If you have 1000 eligible persons, and receive 10000 back, that is problem one.
If you have received 10000 back, and 99.9% of them are all for the same candidate, you know that you only have 1000 eligible persons, so AT LEAST 90% MUST be fake. This is problem two.
If you have received 10000 back, and 99.9% are for the same person, you will struggle to determine which ballots are real, and even in the event that you do, the damage has already been done, because it looks plainly obvious that it was rigged in a candidates favor, and wouldn't matter even after the disregarding of ballots because of the sheer scale.
This is of course merely speculative as to probability (the reality of putting this into practice, at grass roots, is impossible [even without the plebeian legal issues] - but not for those with huge amounts of connections and political power, such as spouses with connections to voting companies).
The point however remains the same; you've got two options, try and cut the power to the machine such that it stops functioning, or try and supply it with so much power that it overheats and stops functioning and cannot be sufficiently repaired.
We have tried option one, and found that switching it off, results in someone else switching it back on.
Option two means breaking the switch, and the machine, in its entirety.
I can maybe write up a post on the power structure within the modern West. I used to post a lot in 2015-2016 on Plebbit when the_donald was still there, was one of the top posters there. Also did a lot of redpilling on /r/worldnews and other defaults before the purge and total lockdown of dissent.
My views on power, how it is hidden and how it is wielded have evolved a lot since Trump was elected. I was overjoyed when he won in 2016, but by 2018 it was clear to me that we wouldn't get fundamental change despite having such a different president in the head position. It seemed that every step of the way it was like there was some invisible force pushing us towards the left. At first I thought it was just the deep state (and it is partially), the system of control is much more expansive. The best description of power in my view comes out of the nRX movement that rose during Obama's term, and I've noticed that some of their lexicon has started to move out of their circles and into much more mainstream sources. For example "The Cathedral" has slowly started to enter more mainstream blogs, I think as we move post-Trump a lot of dissatisfied right wingers will need to rethink the path going forward. Its clear that the classical liberal views of formalized power and voting simply aren't going to work and will only lead to more and more disempowerment for the right.
I do hope, though that we can influence via financial means ... refuse their services, and find out who their sponsors are, and use their own cancel culture against them.... we have well over 70 million people .... if we all started calling their sponsor and telling them we were boycotting, it would get their attention quickly.
That's how the left can do some of what they do... they are organized, because they are willing to give up individuality for lockstep control ... we need to be willing to, at least, threaten to fight the same way.
You’re new here, aren’t you? It’s a big club, and we ain’t in it.
what's nRX?
To me, the way we self-destruct the control over culture system and thus ideas is to actually become extremist DINOs and push to have more and more content censored, especially keystone / touchstone content important to liberal boomers. If we can successfully push to have content that matters to liberals censored as non-conformist and non-inclusive, we will force their identity ideology to change as they cannot access their staples and thus react conservatively. It's why Biden is such a good image for the left as he's seemingly old and just conservative enough even though behind him is the full Marxist culture control machine. If we expose it and feed it more and more gasoline to censor more and more people, platforms, and historical cultural favorites it will overheat and reach a point where it fizzles out and backfires.
I've made this point before, but if they intend to 'Bend the Rules' (viewing that the rules, for them, are innately flexible) in competitions where they are known to cheat, the answer is not to join them in their cheating per se (or not with the same intention, 'Winning' and ultimately power) but by forcing the issue out of absurdity.
Voting Population of 1000? Supply 10000, and preferably, for a dummy candidate (it need not be a main party) if they wanted it to be truly absurd, the larger it could be organized, vote (to excess) for the same candidate that the opposition would.
If you have 1000 eligible persons, and receive 10000 back, that is problem one.
If you have received 10000 back, and 99.9% of them are all for the same candidate, you know that you only have 1000 eligible persons, so AT LEAST 90% MUST be fake. This is problem two.
If you have received 10000 back, and 99.9% are for the same person, you will struggle to determine which ballots are real, and even in the event that you do, the damage has already been done, because it looks plainly obvious that it was rigged in a candidates favor, and wouldn't matter even after the disregarding of ballots because of the sheer scale.
This is of course merely speculative as to probability (the reality of putting this into practice, at grass roots, is impossible [even without the plebeian legal issues] - but not for those with huge amounts of connections and political power, such as spouses with connections to voting companies).
The point however remains the same; you've got two options, try and cut the power to the machine such that it stops functioning, or try and supply it with so much power that it overheats and stops functioning and cannot be sufficiently repaired.
We have tried option one, and found that switching it off, results in someone else switching it back on. Option two means breaking the switch, and the machine, in its entirety.
So... aliens. Great.