This is a post properly summarized by the title. It discusses the benefits of turning one’s attention to individual spiritual growth instead of to mass politics.

“The natural world, society, the state, the nation and the rest are partial, and their claim to totality is an enslaving lie, which is born of the idolatry of men.” – Nicholas Berdyaev, The Beginning and the End

“I would not encourage in your minds the delusion which you must carefully foster in the minds of your human victims. I mean the delusion that the fate of nations is in itself more important than that of individual souls. The overthrow of free peoples and the multiplication of slave-states are for us a means…; the real end is the destruction of individual souls. For only individuals can be saved or damned…” – the demon Screwtape in C.S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters

This is a post about gnostic bishop Stephan Hoeller’s book Freedom: Alchemy for a Voluntary Society (1992). I’ve covered his work previously offering an introduction to gnosticism, and I will cover more of his work in the future.

Why is Freedom relevant? In it Hoeller articulates the hope that individuals will be able to increase their spiritual consciousness, which he believes then has the potential to transform society as a whole. This perspective is not properly understood in the materialist, secular, “extraverted as Hell” (per Jung) West, so it is worth exploring, and will be augmented with other sources.

What I’ve appreciated about Hoeller’s books is that they are clear, simple, and easy to understand; a pleasure to read. It is the mark of genius to communicate in a language the common man understands. Alternatively, philosopher Martin Heidegger is considered a genius by many, but he is widely considered unreadable and obtuse.1 That isn’t a mark of greatness to me. As I’ve begun what will be a deep dive into the esoteric tradition (after I asked the universe for a greater challenge after becoming bored by politics and culture, which I think I’ve mostly figured out) I’ve felt drawn to certain aspects and repelled by others. For example, Damien Echols’ High Magick did not appeal to me (which I will also cover in the future) and the Corpus Hermiticum was unfortunately unreadable without a study guide, while Hoeller is a pleasure and I will continue to read more of his work.

---

Hoeller’s background

Hoeller has been a bishop of a gnostic church called the Ecclesia Gnostica for fifty seven years and which is slowly growing. It now has six chapters. Here’s an article about the Church and an interview with him. Hoeller originally fled from Hungary as the communists were taking over, where his uncle was killed and his father narrowly avoided the same fate.2

He immigrated to the United States and then to Los Angeles where the Theosophical society and Manly P. Hall’s Philosophical Research Society were gaining ground, where he helped found and build the Ecclesia Gnostica and the Gnostic Society. He did not take the relative freedom within the United States for granted and his status as a European outsider who survived the horrors of World War 2 and its aftermath offered him a unique perspective, much as Solzhenitsyn did during his long exile in Vermont. Hoeller is still alive and in his 90s now.

Freedom was written in 1992 as the Soviet Union was failing, Francis Fukuyama was gloating about the end of history in his The End of History and the Last Man, and irreverent libertarian South Park was on the horizon (1997). It was an optimistic period materially and there was a lot of hope in the air — libertarianism was popular, especially economic libertarianism and the growth of secularism and consumerism — but it was also a sign of increasing shallowness, decadence and nihilism. Nirvana – whose whiney, complaining empty-rage music I dislike, except for their unplugged covers of The Man who Sold the World and Lake of Fire – exemplified this era. Libertarianism as an economic model would eventually be discredited as everyone other than whites and Christians clung furiously to group identity.

Hoeller looked at this period as a period of transition and opportunity, hopeful that the United States would be able to rise to a new spiritual level. He was ultimately wrong about this as America and the West doubled and tripled down on materialism, nihilism, and secularism, following those trends right off the cliff, but it seemed like a reasonable hope at the time. While much of the book isn’t quite relevant to today’s environment, there are certain aspects about gnostic thought, individuation, and the mass mind that are perennial issues that deserve highlighting and comment.

Let’s delve into this.

---

The masses are asses

In Gustave Le Bon’s famous book The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (1895), Le Bon noted that there were certain characteristics that described crowd psychology: “impulsiveness, irritability, incapacity to reason, the absence of judgement of the critical spirit, the exaggeration of sentiments, and others”, and Le Bon claimed that “an individual immersed for some length of time in a crowd soon finds himself – either in consequence of magnetic influence given out by the crowd or from some other cause of which we are ignorant – in a special state, which much resembles the state of fascination in which the hypnotized individual finds himself in the hands of the hypnotizer.”

The way it works is this: individuals have different life paths as well as different ideas, values, and impulses. When you bring together a group of people in order to find commonality and agreement, a speaker is forced to both simplify ideas and to simplify the number of ideas covered; this in turn has a hypnotic and dumbing-down effect on the crowd. Therefore the bigger the crowd the dumber it has to be to reach consensus — without exception.

Furthermore, the individuals that make up crowds are generally of a lower quality because most people are of a lower quality. I have discussed this before but a surprisingly high percentage of people may have little internal thoughts according to a 2007 University of Nevada Department of Psychology study on college students.  Per the study, regarding the frequency of common phenomena of inner experience (inner speech, inner seeing (aka images), unsymbolized thinking, feeling, and sensory awareness), the frequency of common phenomena of inner experience is low, with 13-30% of participants lacking a specific form of inner experience during the study at all:

If this study is accurate, many people may lack specific types of inner experience entirely, and the overall frequency of some types of inner experience may be surprisingly low. So a speaker who wants to sway a crowd has to sway the lowest common denominator, i.e. people who lack internal experiences. As Gustave Le Bon said, “The masses have never thirsted after truth. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.” Francis Parker Yockey agreed.3

Carl Jung piles on further. The modern mass man is different and worse than the mass man of the past:

Here are some of the characteristics [of the mass man]…A person with a mass psyche is socially isolated from other human beings, separated from the unconscious and not in touch with the instincts. Moreover, this person is spiritually uprooted, having no vital connection with symbol systems and having no authentic traditions of a religious-mythical nature. Such a person is aesthetically insensitive, having little appreciation of beauty either in nature or in art, and is lacking in a sense of romance and imagination to see beyond the personal concerns of the ego. Finally, the mass-minded person expects economic and political changes and upheavals to solve all problems and perplexities, because he or she seeks for the source of all good and evil in the objective environment rather than in subtle, interior factors. Jung once said that he was tempted “to construct a political theory of neurosis, in so far as the man of today is chiefly excited by his political passions.”…

The modern person with a mass psyche misuses politics as an unrealistic extraverted projection and an occasion for living out the pressures and evils of the unconscious….They take to collective and political movements wherein their already precarious and puny individuality dwindles to minuscule proportions. Imitation, dependence, lack of personal judgment, a lowering of the mental level are the inevitable accompaniment of the submerging of the individual in a mass movement…The morality of a group or movement exists in inverse ratio to its size. Jung said that any large company composed of wholly admirable persons has the morality and intelligence of an unwieldy, stupid and violent animal, and that the bigger the organization, the more unavoidable is its immorality and blind stupidity. As the Romans (who had a wise saying for every occasion) used to say: Senatus bestia, senatores boni viri (“The senate is a monster, but the senators are good men”).

What then is the answer to the great problem of mass mindedness? It is evident…that the answer will not be found in ideologies and even less in movements, no matter how commendable their proclaimed objectives. The answer is not a movement, but the individual. The individual is the only hope, and since even the mass-minded person is latently an individual, this is a hope of considerable magnitude and promise.

Jacques Ellul had commented in 1965 that repeated, sustained messages aimed at highlighting fear stimulated an unavoidable conditioned reflex: “Some people object to this [the efficacy of propaganda] … after a careful look at Stalinist propaganda…one comes to this conclusion: Stalinist propaganda was in great measure founded on Pavlov’s theory of the conditioned reflex…let us not forget that if this theory, put to use by the propagandist, brings results and proves to be effective…. doctrinal criticism can then no longer demonstrate its inaccuracy.” This link, recommended by Andrew N, delves into how the mass mind has been hacked by globohomo in a Pavlovian sense, especially in the context of the COVID scare.

Because of these issues, the populist masses will never serve as a political solution to the problems of the day – they will have to, if one comes, come from an elite with different values. (But let’s be careful with our definition of elite here: as Ernst Junger stated when he was 100 years old, “The sociological definition of elite is already an indication of the corruption of the concept. A warning, for me, to no longer trust even the elites, but now only the great loners.”)

---

The nature of reality

Another problem is the nature of reality itself, which is constructed so that whatever end-state Heaven on Earth promises are made politically will always ultimately remain unfulfilled. As discussed previously, the very nature of existence means that our wants are always unmet. To the extent we fulfill them, we merely temporarily experience boredom followed by new unmet desires to strive for:

All striving is in some sense futile; whatever goal one achieves will disappear the moment it arrives. We suffer most from the lack of permanence in the people and things we most care about. The more we care, the more we suffer. Animals lose whatever it is they possess too, but “only humans feel the pain of that loss since only human consciousness retains a sense of these things as past. Nor is our capacity for hope or anticipation of the future a compensation for this condition. Indeed, it compounds our situation, since most of our hopes are bound to be disappointed, and those that are fulfilled are disfulfilled in the next moment as the objects of our hopes slip into the past.” Time-consciousness, then, results in unhappiness, even though we receive the compensation of consciousness itself – the intellectual ability for higher thought.

Putting together the inherent stupidity of the masses, the lack of internal thoughts for most people, the nature of reality itself as constituting perpetually unmet desires, and perhaps a proper understanding of history where sociopaths animated by a Demiurgic spirit perpetually conquer and destroy good people, and it may lead one into a perspective of the dreaded, derided blackpill: that this reality is a place of suffering which cannot change, as per Schopenhauer:

As a reliable compass for orienting yourself in life nothing is more useful than to accustom yourself to regarding this world as a place of atonement, a sort of penal colony. When you have done this you will order your expectations of life according to the nature of things and no longer regard the calamities, sufferings, torments, and miseries of life as something irregular and not to be expected but will find them entirely in order, well knowing that each of us is here being punished for his existence and each in his own particular way.

There are three common ways to respond to being blackpilled:

1. A retreat into hedonism or nihilism, to seek pleasure as the world collapses around you;
2. A turn to exoteric religion as seen the push for “trad Cath” or “Ortho-bros”; push out pleasure into the afterlife and hope for salvation then, or
3. A hope for acceleration, either (1) faster into collapse so something new can be rebuilt from the ruins, or (2) a hope that “the only way out is through” and that something better with more freedom may result from increases in technology.

There are problems with all of these approaches:

1. A retreat into hedonism or nihilism is an embrace of meaninglessness, misery, self-destruction and death;
2. A turn to exoteric religion is reactionary and short-sighted given it has been on a losing retreat for many centuries due to the death of God from empiricism and technology; and
3. A hope for acceleration is nihilistic and assumes that something can eventually be rebuilt better than what currently exists, which is a secularized version of the Christian hope for salvation upon death. Also, there is no reason to assume that technology will result in more freedom down the road; sometimes technology has a by-product of temporarily increased freedom, but the great historical trend of increased centralization ultimately subsumes it.

However, there is a fourth possible response: the gnostic, Hermetic, individuated, esoteric quest.

---

The individuated gnostic journey

I’ve discussed previously how gnosticism views this world as controlled by the Demiurge – a malevolent, bumbling creator entity who sees nothing above himself – and if one seeks gnosis one may connect to the Source above and beyond his reach.

Under this perspective gnosis is attained through the synthesis of opposites (the Coincidentia Oppositorum which will be the focus of it’s own post). Combining one’s thoughts, intuition, feelings and senses, listening to them and trying to synthesize them when they conflict to achieve a higher unity, and to practice this consistently. But that doesn’t mean one becomes saved as a final end state either here or necessarily in the afterlife — this perspective stresses continuous and sustained struggle for further individuation.4 The benefits of this process are feltin the here and now; one becomes more integrated and connected, more thoughtful, calmer and wiser, more able to live in the moment, and it also helps re-enchant one’s worldview. The spiritual ascent of achieving higher consciousness is marked with a feeling of operating on a higher frequency of vibration; those on lower levels have lower vibration frequencies.

Such figures who sought to synthesize opposites – even though not all these figures are gnostics – include Carl Jung, Stephan Hoeller, Nietzsche, and Ernst Junger.

Let’s start with Nietzsche. According to Ayn Rand’s Atlas Society,

“Nietzsche’s concept of knowledge did not only allow for contradictions. It required them. Only total, comprehensive knowledge, which incorporated opposite opinions, was true knowledge for him. Thus, it was possible for him to write for and against Judaism, for and against Christianity, for and against racism. The National Socialists could interpret his writings any way they wished and manipulate them for their ends because of Nietzsche’s explicit rejection of reason and logic.”5

Jünger’s contradictions were less explicit than Nietzsche’s. I covered him previously here. His concept of the anarch, of following one’s internal intuition and thought process despite pressure from mainstream society, seems to be in strong accordance with the gnostic process. As Junger stated:

The anarch’s state is the state that each man carries within himself. He embodies the viewpoint of Stirner, the author of The Unique and its Property – that is, the anarch is unique. Stirner says: “Nothing gets the better of me.” The anarch is really the natural man. He is corrected only by the resistance he comes up against when he wishes to extend his will further than is permitted by the prevailing circumstances. In his ambition to realize himself, he inevitably encounters certain limits; but if they didn’t exist, his expansion would be indefinite. That as the fate of, say, the caesars, or the child how does whatever he pleases. So barriers have to be imposed.

The anarch can don any disguise. He remains wherever he feels comfortable but once a place no longer suits him, he moves on. He can, for instance, work tranquilly behind a counter or in an office. But upon leaving it at night, he plays an entirely different role. Convinced of his own inner independence, he can even show a certain benevolence to the powers that be….the anarch is a pragmatist. He sees what can serve him- him and the common good; but he is closed to ideological excesses. It is in this sense that I define the anarch’s position as a completely natural attitude. First of all, there is the man, and then comes his environment. That is the position that I favor at present….Society demands certain forms, certain ruses; but basically, it cannot penetrate a man’s innermost core….the difference between the anarchist and the anarch also resides in the fact that the anarchist needs society, because he wants to prove it, which the anarch does not seek to do.

Or from his War Journals: “I want to examine human growth as the symbolic key to cosmic structure.” (January 4, 1944).

Meanwhile, Carl Jung had deeply gnostic views, even though it was approached from a depth psychology perspective:

Jung’s teachings contain the theme that the soul has an inherent tendency toward individuation, a process whose objective is ultimate wholeness, sovereignty, freedom and autonomy. The process of individuation, according to Jung, consists to a large extent of the union of the opposites in the psyche. High and low, masculine and feminine, good and evil must eventually be reconciled in the souls of human beings. The union of these opposites, moreover, always involves liberating the shadow, bringing the darkness to light within oneself, which is to a great extent an antinomian gnostic principle. Jung’s psychology is in essence about freedom, liberty and liberation, or the increase in freedom…6

According to Hoeller, “The psychologically wise attitude therefore must be one which is invariably distrustful of situations which can lead to mass neurosis or herdlike behavior, in short, to all those blandishments of the collective which usurp the judgment and discrimination of the individual….What is needed then in order to produce social progress is the integrative process of the individual. The elixir of human history is not political, social or even religious ideology with its movements, parties, organizations and churches, but the psychic life of the individual, with its growth and integration, its becoming whole and complete.”

---

The gnostic conception

Gnostics are focused on the concept of individual freedom, the freedom to follow one’s own thought processes, impulses and journey to become the best version of yourself you can become. Gnostic ethics is overwhelmingly a matter of how one acts toward one’s own soul and the wider divinity of which it is a part as opposed to one’s relation to others or to society. As Hoeller explains,

The gnostic preoccupation with the issue of liberty led to the much debated and maligned position of antinomianism, which means opposition to rigid structures of religious legalism (anti means “against”; nomos means “law”). The gnostic approach to religion was and is highly individualistic and nonconformist. All in all, it would be quite correct to say that gnostics throughout history were spiritual libertarians. Of course, this libertarianism proved to be their downfall. The gnostics were not organized in an authoritarian fashion and thus had no effective power structures. Thus they were overwhelmed by forces that possessed the power they themselves lacked – the authoritarian, organized orthodoxy of the newly streamlined Constantinian church, supported by the mightiest power structure of ancient history, Imperial Rome. In more ways that one, gnosis and gnosticism were intimately connected with the ideals of a spiritually based political freedom. The gnostic schools were, in fact, the last vestiges of such freedom when they were obliterated in the third and fourth centuries.

Under the gnostic conception there are three types of people:

• hylics – the lowest order of the three types of human. Difficult to be saved since their thinking is entirely material; close to incapable of understanding gnosis. Understanding the fundamentally emptiness of materialism is the precursor to achieving higher development. Equivalent to the NPC.
• psychics – “soulful”, partially initiated. Matter-dwelling spirits.
• pneumatics – “spiritual”, fully initiated immaterial souls escaping the doom of the material world via gnosis.

Hoeller articulated these concepts further:

The gnostics said that everyone does not come to the same conclusion as to what is right and what is wrong because everyone does not perceive reality in the same manner. One’s perception of reality, whether moral reality or any other, depends on one’s spiritual development. While Plato looked for the criteria of morality in ideas, and the Semitic religion looked for it in the Law of Moses, the gnostics held that these criteria are in the person….Significantly, the gnostics also declared that morality depends on consciousness, and that one cannot expect the same level of morality from an unconscious person (hylic) as one can from a partially conscious individual or from a fully conscious person – the true pneumatic gnostic.

The gnostics generally understood that the unconscious or material person was in need of a moral code appropriate to his or her condition, and the partially conscious or psychic person was in need of a moral code that was appropriate to this status. Similarly the pneumatic, or true gnostic, who received moral inspiration directly from the spiritual nature was in turn entitled to live according to his or her inspired pneumatic ethic. (This view was known to the common sense of the ancient world. It was embodied in the popular Latin proverb, “What is permissible for Jupiter is not permissible for the ox.”)

As discussed above, a significant percentage of people have little internal thinking. These hylics need an exoteric, liturgic, organized mass religion with an external Daddy God who will send them to Hell if they don’t perform in conjunction with its dictates because they are generally incapable of or unwilling to feel and respond to the spark of gnosis within themselves. (This isn’t to claim that all exoteric religious believers are hylics; see the wonderful Archibishop Vigano, who Pope Bergoglio just excommunicated, as an exception). Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor was right about the hylics of humanity needing to be told what to do and believe7 — but so was Jesus in the story, where people needed to be given the opportunity to choose to grow spiritually, even if only a small number would take it.

Hylics are very open to herd/group mentality and big government and being told what to do. Psychics are in some intermediate ground, while pneumatics have the capacity to achieve gnosis if they focus on their individuated and decentralized journeys.

There is therefore an inegalitarian hierarchy on the level of spirituality. Hoeller adds,

“Can there be a moral equality? Can there be a morality that is equal and applicable to all? The answer is that such a thing cannot be. People are equal in ultimate spiritual potential, but they are anything but equal in actual development. Not all people are conscious; in fact few are. Some are only partially or occasionally conscious and many, many are very unconscious. There are today, just as there were long ago in Alexandria and other gnostic cities, people who are materialists or hyletics. They are in need of swift justice, of physical deterrents to crime, of punishment rather than rehabilitation. There are in our days also people at the psychic level who are people of the law and of the book. They need a code, a system, whether written by Moses or by Kant or Hume which will guide them. The believers must believe so that by believing they may live in peace and order. In God’s good time they will perhaps come to the place where they may know and then they will not need to believe any longer. Until then let them worship their laws and live by them as best they can. And, assuredly, there are today also pneumatics – gnostics, those who know, those who are conscious. They have outgrown the law; indeed, they are the true law embodied. They hear the command within, daily, hourly, and thus they have little need of commandment. These are the men and women who have come out of great tribulations, painful and stressful existential encounters, hard, perilous moral choices and who have nevertheless prevailed.

In other words, depending on one’s level of spiritual development one’s relationship to the outside world changes, as do our psychological, emotional, and spiritual needs. As we develop more we require outside rules less and less, listening to our inner intuition (balanced against our emotions, intellect and senses) more. As L.P. Koch eloquently stated, “Everybody criticizes genetic/biological blank slatism, but it’s soul-level blank slatism that stands in the way of understanding so many aspects of our world. Perhaps we just haven’t (re-)found a language to talk about these things yet, although the NPC meme has done much to bring such heresy back into the modern world.”

By changing who we are we in turn effect the world in a natural, whole and positive way. Jung expressed himself on this topic as follows in his Civilization in Transition:

Great innovations never come from above; they come invariably from below; just as trees never grow from the sky downward but upward from the earth however true it is that their seeds have fallen from above. The upheaval of our world and the upheaval in consciousness is one and the same. Everything becomes relative and therefore doubtful. And while man, hesitant and questioning contemplates a world that is distracted with treaties of peace and pacts of friendship, democracy and dictatorship, capitalism and bolshevism, his spirit yearns for the answer that twill allay the turmoil of doubt and uncertainty.

There are some other ways to analyze this. I previously outlined in the second half of this post how ideological dissidents to the current system arise exclusively from the “loser clique”, because they are the only group who feel intense psychological pain from having the lowest status in society. From a Myers-Briggs perspective many of the non-hylics will be INTJ or ISTJ; from a Big 5 perspective they will be introverts and disagreeable. Indeed, a combination of introversion plus sustained, longterm psychological pain may be a necessary precondition toward spiritual advancement.

It is quite hard for the wealthy to be pneumatics. Jesus said in Matthew 19:24 “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” Achieving power and wealth in this world usually requires moral compromises; one may be required to take advantage of others, to take parts of the fruits of their labors using guile or strength in order to build wealth. Yet in this era due to the egalitarian ratchet effect only wealth is an allowed metric to differentiate people; not possessing differentiated and superior values, outlook, beliefs or spirit. Compared to elites of the past which emphasized superior values and culture, a sense of noblesse oblige, our rich but empty materialist elites are sick facsimiles of equivalent versions from the past.

---

Conclusions

The following is a long quote from Hoeller about the four steps toward actualizing consciousness and is worth quoting:

The first step in the actualization of the myth of consciousness is that we permit the destruction of the universe in which we have existed. More often than not this involves primarily a “relativation” of our “personal” reality. The word ‘personal” means that just as our perception of reality is our own, so too its altering must be confined to our own selves. “Relativation” implies that this process is not an extinction of old values, but rather a process which renders relative the concepts and values which we previously considered to be absolute. Specific values increase while general values decrease. Concrete realities become more important than abstract principles. While this may seem a terrible thing to say, as a result of this process we become in a certain sense unprincipled. What actually happens is that when reality takes over abstractions are reduced to their proper size. When we enter the practical realm of the myth of consciousness we enter the fluid, mercurial realm of psychic reality where all rules engraved in stone are inappropriate. Attachment to rigidly held abstractions, to theories and doctrines of any variety diminishes and eventually vanishes. What remains is the living reality of the deeper psyche operating from its own vision and guidance….

The second step in the enactment of the myth is the entry of the psyche into the process of creative conflict. This means that we must leave behind our attachment to the current overvaluation of tranqulity or lack of conflict and also to the overvaluation of health, wealth and power. One of the ways that this change may be approached is by contrasting the conditions of a static state with those of a process. We must recognize that tranquility, peace, health, wealth and power are all descriptions of states or conditions. They are not processes. Consciousness, on the other hand, is a process, not a state of being. This brings up the issue of commitment. To what is an individual committed in an active pursuit of the myth of consciousness? The commitment must always be to the process and never to the outcome. Persons, symbols, ideas and ideals can all find their proper places within the process but the process itself must be regarded as primary, other goals as secondary….The sense of the drama of the soul is growth through conflict. The creation and enlargement of consciousness cannot take place without the creative alchemy of conflict…in the conflict we may need to experience defeat and lamentation before the archetypally facilitated resolution can occur. If the process is interrupted when it becomes dark and painful the chances are lessened that the resolution we desire will come about.

Thus by the conflict of will and counterwill, of yes and no, affirmation and negation, and in the ultimate resolution of these conflicts brought about by the wisdom of the archetypal psyche, consciousness is born and expands. Moral opposites are very much part of this process so that the psyche is forced to make choices that are not dictated by external commandment but by individual, conscious insight. The objective of this process is not moral goodness but conscious wholeness of the psyche.

At this point, we come to another predicament. Since in the course of the pursuit of the myth of consciousness we cannot follow the accustomed moral impulse to espouse one opposite as against another (not even good against evil), we no longer have the luxury of feeling righteous. We are, in fact, no longer “good” men and women….Instead, we must become alchemical vessels in which light and darkness, good and evil, male and female struggle, embrace, commingle, fuse, die, and are born. All our cherished ethical beliefs – monotheism, the belief of Jews and Calvinists that they are chosen people, predestined for righteousness – vanish before our eyes. Our moral superiority also evaporates. Not only are we no longer able to condemn others we may consider unrighteous but we are also not able to condemn that side of ourselves that we have been taught to despise and abominate….

The third step in the actualization of the myth is the conjuction of the opposites which follows their conflictual interaction. This step represents the best mechanism for the generation of consciousness. When the union of opposites occurs consciousness is born…leisure and work, altruism and self-love, youthful energy and mature wisdom, idealistic self-sacrifice and common sense frequently wrestle and conjoin within us, thus bringing us to more highly developed states of consciousness….

The fourth and last step of the myth is…”the transformation of God”…unlike the gnostics who remained silent about the possibility that the Demiurge could be redeemed, Jung time and again affirmed that the Creator-God could be redeemed by becoming conscious, and that this process could be facilitated by humanity. While mainstream Christianity holds that God redeems human beings, Jung held that humans could redeem God. The question is how can this redemption be accomplished?

God’s unconsciousness, Jung said, has one primary manifestation – the loss of its feminine side. In Answer to Job, Jung wrote that the Creator-God once had a feminine side who was his sister, consort and possibly his mother all at once and that her name is Sophia, which means “wisdom”.” By losing contact with Sophia God became unwise or, in psychological terms, unconscious. Thus it is evident that the Creator-God’s way to consciousness leads to the feminine which he needs to recognize and to rehabilitate, and with which he must achieve union….

The significant conclusion that needs to be drawn for our purposes is that, while the wholeness that needs to be brought to the Creator requires rescuing and elevating the Divine Feminine, this task need not be wedded to historical and anthropological theories which are highly speculative. Thus, bringing wholeness to the lonely, irascible and in part unconscious male Creator-God is not a political task but a psychological one and even a spiritual one. The problem with this task, as Jung very bluntly stated, is that “America is extroverted as hell.”…Money, prestige and power are goals that appeal strongly to the extroverted psyche; psychological transformation does not….

Thus we must recognize that the issue of God versus Goddess is not about class warfare or political power, but rather about psychological and ultimately metaphysical wholeness. Those people who recognize this clearly and are willing to act upon it will be the true heroes of consciousness. They will help to restore wholeness and create consciousness in the souls of men and women and, beyond that, in the subtle, metaphysical dimensions of gods and goddesses. To quote Edinger…”As it gradually dawns on people, one by one, that the transformation of God is not an interesting idea but is a living reality, it may begin to function as a new myth. Whoever recognizes this myth as his own personal reality will put his life in the service of this process.”

Powerful stuff – to me anyway.

I hope this offered some potential insight into a way of re-enchanting the world via the blending of opposite ideas, feelings and impulses in order to achieve higher level synthesis and connection to the ineffable; a hierarchy not based on group identity but one’s individual esoteric progress on this path.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 See Emil Cioran’s comments here as an example: “The German influence in France was disastrous on that whole level, I find.  The French can’t say things simply anymore….it’s the influence of Heidegger, which was very big in France.  For example, he’s speaking about death, he employs so complicated a language, to say very simple things, and I well understand how one could be tempted by that style.  But the danger of philosophical style is that one loses complete contact with reality.  Philosophical language leads to megalomania.  One creates an artificial world where one is God.  I was very proud being young and very pleased to know this jargon.  But my stay in France totally cured me of that.”

2 “My prospects in the now entrenched communist society were bleak indeed. As a “class alien” I would not qualify for higher education, and virtually any career of a promising nature would be closed to me for the same reason. Within a year of my departure most of my friends and relatives, along with tens of thousands of upper and middle class “suspicious persons” were forcibly deported from the cities and assigned to menial labor in the countryside, a practice employed during the cultural revolution in China and in the “killing fields” of Cambodia. Exile thus appeared the lesser of evils.”

3 Yockey in Imperium, p. 140:

“The common man is unjust, but not on principle; he is selfish, but he is incapable of the imperative of Ibsen’s exalted selfishness; he is the slave of his passions, but incapable of higher sexual love, for even this is an expression of Culture – primitive man would not understand Western erotic even if it were explained to him, this sublimation of passion into metaphysics. He lacks any sort of honor, and will submit to any humiliation rather than revolt – it is always leader-natures who revolt. He gambles in the hope of winning, and if he loses, he whimpers. He would rather live on his knees than die on his feet. He accepts the loudest voice as the true one. He follows the leader of the moment – but only so far, and when the leader is eclipsed by a new one, he points out his record of opposition. In victory he is a bully, in defeat he is a lackey. His talk is big, his deeds small. He likes to play, but has no sportsmanship. Great thoughts and plans he castigates as “megalomania.” Anyone who tries to pull him up along the road of higher accomplishment he hates, and when the chance offers, he crucifies him, like Christ, burns him, like Savonarola, kicks his dead body in the square in Milan. He is always laughing at the discomfiture of another, but has no sense of humor, and is equally incapable of true seriousness. He denounces the crime of passion, but eagerly reads the literature of such crimes. He herds in the street to see an accident, and enjoys seeing another sustain the blows of fate. He does not care if his countrymen are spilling their blood as long as he is secure.”

4 The process by which individual beings are formed and differentiated [from other human beings]; in particular, it is the development of the psychological individual as a being distinct from the general, collective psychology.

5 Also see Brett Andersen’s discussion on Nietzsche’s synthesis of opposites here, and in regards to evolutionary psychology in general and mythology here.

6 This reminds me of a recent comment by populist Mike Benz, where he states about his singular obsession – revealing to the public the inner workings of the globohomo civil service – “On the one hand, I wish I hadn’t lost pretty much everything I ever loved & worked for in the process of pursuing this. On the other, this was pretty much always my destiny. I was happier then, in a way, but dying inside of feeling I was betraying what I was put on earth to do.” Here’s his very interesting Tucker interview; also see here. Also see ARX Han’s recent post about how to define success as he followed his passion as an independent writer focusing on the sidelined low-status male youth, or even Thumbnail Green’s fun rap about doomsday prepping. Pursuing one’s inner calling has no guarantee of earthly success as Scott Locklin correctly rants about; but it answers the nagging feeling/question about doing what one has been put on earth to accomplish.

7 As the Grand Inquisitor stated to Jesus: “You thirsted for love that is free, and not for the servile raptures of a slave before a power that has left him permanently terrified. But here, too, you overestimated mankind, for, of course, they are slaves, though they were created rebels. Behold and judge, now that fifteen centuries have passed, take a look at them: whom have you raised up to yourself? I swear, man is created weaker and baser than you thought him! How, how can he ever accomplish the same things as you? Respecting him so much, you behaved as if you had ceased to be compassionate, because you demanded too much of him—and who did this? He who loved him more than himself! Respecting him less, you would have demanded less of him, and that would be closer to love, for his burden would be lighter. He is weak and mean” ….

And as Ivan, the man telling the story to his brother, stated: “Look, suppose that one…is like my old Inquisitor, who himself ate roots in the desert and raved, overcoming his flesh, in order to make himself free and perfect, but who still loved mankind all his life, and suddenly opened his eyes and saw that there is no great moral blessedness in achieving perfection of the will only to become convinced, at the same time, that millions of the rest of God’s creatures have been set up only for mockery, that they will never be strong enough to manage their freedom, that from such pitiful rebels will never come giants to complete the tower, that it was not for such geese that the great idealist had his dream of harmony. Having understood all that, he returned and joined … the intelligent people [i.e. those who would oppress the masses with lies so the masses would live in happiness]. Couldn’t this have happened?”

This is a post on the nature of friendship, which globohomo constantly seeks to subvert and destroy in their quest to turn everyone into atomized, blown out husks. What does friendship consist of and how is it nurtured or destroyed?

“Tell me your company, and I will tell you what you are.” – Miguel de Cervantes

I was thinking recently about the nature of friendship, what brings people together, the ties that bind them through time, and the events or personal developments that move them apart.

It is a curious thing. Who are you friends with and why? Do they just kind of happen, or was there intention put into building them?

There seem to be some commonalities between how friendships are formed and dissolve that I see:

1. Friendships which are formed in early life, in school, and in occupations that require trust and loyalty such as in the military. These friendships are formed based on commonalities, similar backgrounds, outlooks or personalities meshing. There are weaker ties formed by work and hobbies, and from parents becoming friends with the parents of other children;
2. Friendships become harder to form the older you get;
3. People gradually lose their friends as they age for one reason or another, but generally because staying in contact requires effort from one or both people and people get busy with life. Most of the older people I know only have maybe a couple of close friends left, even if they have a wider circle of acquaintances; and
4. It doesn’t help that globohomo is presiding over the complete atomization of society, turning everyone into asexual, amorphous widgets devoid of community ties. Even family members live across country from each other, maybe seeing each other a couple times a year if that.

What do we mean by friendship? Aristotle believed there are three types, which are as follows:

1. The friendship of utility. These friendships are based on what someone can do for you, or what you can do for another person. It might be that you put in a good word for someone, and they buy you a gift in return. This category is that of an acquaintance because you are not able to be fully open and honest with them;
2. The friendship of pleasure. These are friendships based on enjoyment of a shared activity or the pursuit of pleasures and emotions. This might be someone you go for drinks with, or share a particular hobby and is a common level of association among the young. This type of relationship can end quickly, dependent as it is on people’s ever-changing likes and dislikes; and
3. The friendship of virtue. These are the people you like for themselves, who typically influence you positively and push you to be a better person. “For perfect friendship you must get to know someone thoroughly,” Aristotle says, “and become intimate with them, which is a very difficult thing to do.” It involves offering and receiving honesty, acceptance, and selflessness. It is two equal parties coming together to forge a bond that provides mutual benefit, enjoyment, and appreciation. Cicero agrees with this perspective, viewing this love as being driven by one’s integrity: “For nothing inspires love, nothing conciliates affection, like virtue.” Cicero maintains that “Friendship springs from a natural impulse rather than a wish for help: from an inclination of the heart, combined with a certain instinctive feeling of love, rather than from a deliberate calculation of the material advantage it was likely to confer.” Aristotle thought that friendships of virtue were rare and that a person could have no more than maybe five in one’s life, meaning some close friends and even family members may be relegated to friendships of pleasure or even utility.

The friendship of virtue is a wonderful thing because it is a voluntary association which is not goal oriented. It is two people who take pleasure in each other’s company and there is an element of freedom associated with it. Real friends speak their minds uncensored to each other, or they are not friends but acquaintances. But I think the friendship of “virtue” is a misnomer; it is not “virtue” but rather one of compatible or shared moral codes. Our moral values create expectations of behavior from others and if one engage in activities the other abhors, it would be impossible to maintain the goodwill necessary for friendship.

Additionally, a friendship can only exist with mutually recognized goodwill, and this requirement holds friends to high moral standards of extending loyalty, honesty, integrity, compassion, and respect. Aristotle and Cicero believe perfect friendship is between those who are good, alike in virtue, and wish well for the sake of the other. Yet while these virtues are required for friendship, critically they need not extend to everyone; we can apply these morals to our friends but apply different and lesser standards to other people. Therefore it’s perfectly possible for bad or evil people to have strong friendships, so long as they treat their friends differently than they treat everyone else.

The scene where Vorenus saves Pullo in the unparalleled HBO series “Rome” is one of the best scenes in all of television history and demonstrates friendship based on compatible values and moral codes:

A friend of mine commented on the nature of brotherly bonds and how globohomo acts to subvert them:

You talk about globohomo atomizing people and destroying friendships, how on the one hand they make it hard to foster those virtuous friendships described and harder to connect with people. There’s an openness and selflessness and intimacy to friendship, it’s the kind of thing that we do in like a marriage, for example. Society is so hyper-sexualized that the kind of intimacy or sort of openness that is inherent in that kind of friendship of virtue becomes sort of twisted or perverted because people can’t tell the distinction between that and sexuality. Then virtuous friendship gets corrupted with a sensual or a lustful aspect in the society where it becomes a question of whether they can really be friends, and it’s exactly those kind of bonds of brotherhood that they’re trying to prevent.

This point reminded me of the stupid film 300, which was a kind of cartoonish hyper-masculine stylization that had an underlying homosexual eroticism that is bizarre on re-watch.

Schopenhauer and Epictetus believe that friends are a burden and one should revel in solitude, but that doesn’t seem right to me.1 Roman philosopher Cicero explains this emotional benefit of friendship in his treatise ​On Friendship.​ He argues that “misfortunes would be hard to bear if there were not someone to feel them even more acutely than yourself,” and so “friendship enhances prosperity, and relieves adversity of its burden by halving and sharing it”. A friend can lessen the burden of despair and can act as an emotional support system for those feeling isolated in times of need. A friend can also compensate for one’s deficiencies and accentuate one’s strengths. Cicero puts it this way: “In the face of a true friend a man sees as it were a second self. So that where his friend is he is; if his friend be rich, he is not poor, though he be weak, his friend’s strength is his.” And there is an expression from Miguel de Cervantes, “Tell me your company, and I will tell you what you are.” Jim Rohn said, “You are the average of the five people you spend the most time with.” Or see Proverbs 13:20: “He who walks with wise men will be wise, But the companion of fools will suffer harm.” It also reminds me of John Donne’s great poem “No Man Is an Island”:

Now, there are risks to friendship. As people grow and mature, as we all do on our life paths, we may breach red lines of the the other person and those bonds of friendship may fray or be destroyed. Here’s Joshua Foa Dienstag on the fragility of friendship:

“Friendship is our best model of an arena that is meant to harbor randomness and chaos, while channeling it into a relatively stable association. If I knew at all times what to expect from my friends, their friendship would be valueless. We look to our friends to surprise us, even as we expect them to cope with our own surprises. And yet we have no guarantee that we can never overstep the bounds – we can destroy our friendships in a way that we can never break family ties. It can happen in a moment, in fact. But the transience of friendships is no mark against them, or at least, it does not deter us from pursuing them. Perhaps, indeed, their permanently endangered status is one of their attractions? And the possibility of friendship is also the possibility for a form of social association consistent with a pessimistic ethic.

Because friendship has no end, it is the least-bad setting for the act of exploration, the most likely tie to survive self-transformation. That a friendship could survive a change of every goal is unlikely, but at least possible.”

I like this quote, despite it being a bit utilitarian and transactional, because it touches on the fact that we are all on our own unique life path and we don’t know where our lives will take us, let alone other people’s. We try to exercise control over events and how we develop, but to a large extent it’s out of our hands and things happen to us and we react to them as best we can, not even in charge of our reaction. There is a mysterious element to it. As Ernst Junger said in The Details of Time, p. 59:

Every man has numerous friends and acquaintances with whom he gets on. Some of them have enough of a literary and historical background for him to talk with them. And yet, despite everything, a dialogue cannot always ensue. These things are hard to explain; it’s a question of music, of a certain harmony. Two intelligent people can meet, they can like each other; but nevertheless, a euphonious contact fails to emerge. The laws of a certain magnetism have to come into play. There are even extreme cases in which too much liking induces a blockage. Stendhal explained it very well in On Love: even when the crystallization does not take place, two people can still readily like each other very much.2

Personally, I’ve lost most of my close circle of friends over the past four years. These losses include:

1. Three friends who I had ideological differences with (one gave the deadly untested mRNA COVID vaccine to his children despite my pleas for him not to, another volunteered to give the public the death jabs, a third argued with me incessantly about politics from a corporatist globohomo perspective and we devolved into name calling). As a result I lost respect for these people and they gradually faded away. This is all reflective of the personal becoming the political over the past number of years, when historically in America one could separate them (but from a wider historical perspective this was an anomaly, brought about by unprecedented American prosperity and no external threats);
2. Two deaths, one to stroke and one to suicide (the latter resulting from schizophrenia);
3. One to diverging life paths where I came over time to disagree with his life choices, even though I tried to offer feedback and insight.

One can lean on one’s remaining friends or see acquaintances to try to make up the gap, but generally the loss of friends creates a void that is not easily filled. Friendship can’t be forced; it is something that grows organically or not at all. Such is life.

For what it’s worth, Cicero recommends that when one breaks off a friendship, one should do it by creating distance and not by a grand fight, to take the high road:

Again, there is such a disaster, so to speak, as having to break off friendship. And sometimes it is one we cannot avoid….In such cases friendships should be allowed to die out gradually by an intermission of intercourse. They should, as I have been told that Cato used to say, rather be unstitched than torn in twain; unless, indeed, the injurious conduct be of so violent and outrageous a nature as to make an instant breach and separation the only possible course consistent with honour and rectitude. Again, if a change in character and aim takes place, as often happens, or if party politics produces an alienation of feeling (I am now speaking, as I said a short time ago, of ordinary friendships, not of those of the wise), we shall have to be on our guard against appearing to embark upon active enmity while we only mean to resign a friendship. For there can be nothing more discreditable than to be at open war with a man with whom you have been intimate….

Our first object, then, should be to prevent a breach; our second, to secure that, if it does occur, our friendship should seem to have died a natural rather than a violent death. Next, we should take care that friendship is not converted into active hostility, from which flow personal quarrels, abusive language, and angry recriminations. These last, however, provided that they do not pass all reasonable limits of forbearance, we ought to put up with, and, in compliment to an old friendship, allow the party that inflicts the injury, not the one that submits to it, to be in the wrong. Generally speaking, there is but one way of securing and providing oneself against faults and inconveniences of this sort—not to be too hasty in bestowing our affection, and not to bestow it at all on unworthy objects.

I hope you found this discourse on the nature of friendship helpful so that we can perhaps approach the ones we have or the ones we cultivate with greater intentionality and appreciation.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 In his argument against society, Schopenhauer in Arthur Schopenhauer’s Essays on Suffering and the Wisdom of Life points out that interpersonal discord is one of the “countless and unavoidable” burdens and disadvantages arising from “having to do with others” and a cost or bad of society. He argues that it is better to be alone, instead of being in a social relationship, because “no man can be in perfect accord with anyone but himself—not even with a friend or the partner of his life; differences of individuality and temperament are always bringing in some degree of discord, though it may be a very slight one”. He further argues against society, asserting that it is only when a man “is alone that he is really free,” because “all society necessarily involves, as the first condition of its existence, mutual accommodation and restraint upon the part of its members”. Epictetus in ​A Selection from the Discourses of Epictetus shares Schopenhauer’s sentiments towards seclusion, asserting that if a man wants to be happy he should be alone, because love tethers people to the fate of others which is outside of one’s control, and discord will be unavoidable due to differences of individuality and temperament.

2 Or see Junger’s war journals, 1941-1945, August 28, 1942 entry: “We can seek another person with the intention of being particularly cordial or particularly intimate that day, yet there is no protection against annoyance. The tuning of the strings to produce a harmonious chord is not controlled by our will. This often happens to me with encounters I’ve been looking froward to – they seem chilly, and the proper harmony is not reestablished until days or weeks later.”

This post argues that stock market bubbles may be created by our upper level elites to then intentionally pop it, generating pain and panic for the public until providing the dialectical “solution” involving increased governmental control. This is especially relevant now with America possessing the greatest stock market bubble of all time.

In my recent post on the Redneck Rebellion I offered four scenarios our upper level elites may use as a pretext for implementing a totalitarian state of emergency to seize whatever civil liberties are left. Such an emergency will led to severe limitations on freedom of speech, programmable CBDCs limiting your consumption, social credit scores based on your internet and phone activity (which is all stored by the NSA and already routinely abused1) and enforced by a woke AI, creating a living Hell for all but our rulers.

These scenarios were as follows:

1. Crash the economy by deflating the biggest economic bubble in human history until people cry out for assistance, a strategy perfected in Japan;
2. A false flag hack by “Russians” or “Chinese” as a Cyber Polygon type event, crippling important infrastructure until it is “rebooted” with the radical changes;
3. World War 3 with Russia, Iran and China, where those who don’t submit will be treated as enemies; or
4. the Redneck Rebellion.

I covered the Redneck Rebellion in that post; this one will review the first option.

---

Princes of the Yen

A couple months ago I watched a great independent 2014 documentary recommended by Rurik Skywalker titled Princes of the Yen: The Hidden Power of Central Banks, which is based on the book of the same name by economist and university professor Richard Werner. I had not heard of it before, but it’s on Youtube for free and it’s been viewed an impressive 3.9 million times. The video is here:

The documentary explains how the central bank owners used Japan as its plaything in the aftermath of World War 2. FDR both knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened and manipulated events to bring it about by cutting off Japanese oil supplies; he needed America to be attacked in order to overcome anti-war domestic opposition exemplified by the America First Committee and Charles Lindbergh Jr. If Japan had not attacked, it’s nation would have ground to a halt without oil — a classic Catch-22.

After the war, Japan’s Rothschild-owned central bank, the Bank of Japan, was restructured by the victors. It would take time, patience, and a long-term strategy to incorporate Japan into the One World infrastructure because of its highly reactionary population. Their plan to do so was as follows:

1. First, keep Japan on a centralized war economy footing but with the production of goods modified for civilian use. The rulers would use window guidance to tell banks which industries to loan to, which companies within those industries to approve and how much money to allocate.
2. Without the burden of military expenditure, Japan quickly rebounded from the devastation wrought by World War 2 into its “economic miracle”. This was intended so that our elites could use Japan and China as checks on each other in case either tried to get away from their grasp (the “balance of powers” strategy which was also pursued with India/Pakistan, South Korea/China, and Israel/Middle East).
3. The next stage involved gutting the reactionary Ministry of Finance and transferring the country’s monetary policy to the Rothschild-owned Bank of Japan, which would then become “independent” of political considerations. The Ministry of Finance was powerful with a large bureaucracy, though. How were they to accomplish this maneuver? The strategy pursued was a clever long-term three-step:
   1. create an enormous economic bubble by flooding the real estate and financial sector with endless loans, then
   2. pierce the bubble and create a multi-decade depression by cutting back by 80% or more the amount of loans until the population was sufficiently weakened to
   3. allow for a “restructuring” solution. This was carried out:
4. Eventually after the multi-decade grind the population grew weary for a solution, any solution, and one was readily provided: the Ministry of Finance was gutted and the Bank of Japan took control in 1998 with its “independence” from political influence (i.e. only Rothschild control) predominating. To add to the humiliation even the name of the Ministry of Finance was changed.

This strategy was also used successfully in the 1997 Asian financial crisis where multiple Asian countries were brought to heel in a similar fashion.

This is a relatively simple, clear, and easy to understand globohomo strategy, yet basically no one understands what was done here or why.

---

The results

What was the result of our One World leaders militarily occupying the country, creating the conditions for an “independent” central bank while controlling the propaganda outlets of the country? Just like every other so-called “first world” country controlled by the central bank owners, here’s Japan’s fertility rates:

One may note that Japan has historically been rabidly anti-immigration because it has almost no natural resources and has relied almost entirely on its community spirit and bonds for its success. Well, here’s Japan’s immigration rates through 2018:

The immigration rate trend has increased substantially since 2018, and now Japan is being slowly forced to acknowledge immigration publicly. Zerohedge recently proclaimed that “Japan To Embark On An Era Of “Mass Foreign Immigration”.

Is this part of why nationalist Trump-ally Shinzo Abe was assassinated in 2022?

This is how you end up with the below level of humiliation (which is clickable to watch):

---

The United States

Globohomo has multiple tools in its belt to conquer the heart and soul of a nation: it can do so militarily and it can do so financially; it can create bubbles that feel like economic prosperity and create fun and giddiness for many years, and then deflate those bubbles to put pressure on the public to achieve political ends. These strategies can take decades to play out; they are patient and think long term. Once they have established control they attack on the spiritual dimension: make the cost of living too high to afford a house or have children, work the population to death, pummel them with slop propaganda to demoralize them, and then the final step of replacing the native population with foreigners. A long, drawn out genocide so the Rothschild and ally central bank owners can get unfathomably rich, increase their power, and do the service of what arguably appears to be the Demiurge in destroying the world.

This raises the question: is this globohomo’s strategy here in the United States now, creating an unprecedented artificial bubble in the United States since the 2009 crash (2009-2022) with 0% interest rates in order to then pop the bubble with higher interest rates or a manufactured crisis, bring in an incredible amount of misery in order to facilitate globohomo’s next stage of their plan: the introduction of CBDCs which will reduce humanity to a level worse than that of impoverished serfs?

It perhaps looks that way:

Alternatively, perhaps globohomo just prints the stock market to infinity and price non-major stockholders out of life. Our elites prefers to create scenarios that provide them maximum flexibility and optionality where they win from any option. Endless “Numbers Go Up” charts pacify the upper middle class into passivity; they think things must be good as long as their stock market account grows, even though it is only growing due to endless Federal Reserve printed loldollars being shoved into the market (paid for by the public via inflation, disproportionately affecting the lower classes) along with cheap debt, and even though America has descended into a crime-ridden, illegals-everywhere, expensive and filthy blown out Hellhole where only the top 0.0001% benefit. These upper middle class types only panic if the stock market falls. The same argument applies to fake GDP “growth”, as Tree of Woe explains here. There is some strange belief people have in Numbers; it’s hypnotizing and almost occult.

Intentionally creating a bubble to then pop it for political objectives wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened in the United States. The aftermath of the 1929 stock market crash led to FDR’s so-called New Deal which transformed the country into a socialist state. The Supreme Court’s back was broken with the switch in time saved nine. And despite false stories like Bernard Baruch and Joe Kennedy supposedly selling at the peak of the market right before the crash because they saw shoeshine boys pumping stocks, the reality was far more nefarious (as recounted previously here). Paul Warburg arranged the 1929 stock market crash; first he advised all member banks to get out of the stock market or sell it short on March 9, 1929, then on October 24 the Federal Reserve Bank suddenly increased the rediscount rate to 6%, thousands of orders hit the exchange to sell “at market”, and six days later the Federal Reserve Bank ordered the contraction of brokers’ loans in the amount of $2.3 million, the combination of which caused the crash.  Congressman Louis T. McFadden stated “It was a carefully contrived occurrence.  The international [central] bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair so that they might emerge as the rulers of us all.”

As famously stated by FDR, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”

Again, here is the Japan documentary if you want to watch it. It is very educational:

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 A declassified FISA report stated that the FBI ran 3.1 million illegal FISA searches on American citizens in 2017 alone, compared to 7,500 combined searches by the NSA and CIA in the same year.  It later came out that the law firm Perkins Coie had its own NSA search terminal set up in its D.C. offices to spy on domestic opposition; it was placed there to provide the perpetrators protection.   In 2023 the DOJ Inspector General revealed that more than 10,000 federal employees have access to the NSA database for surveillance inquiries, more than 3.4 million search queries were ran between 12/1/2020 and 11/30/2021, and approximately 30% were outside the rules and regulations that govern warrantless search, showing the pattern of illegal governmental behavior had only expanded.  The FBI can now look at your web browsing history, emails, anything you have ever typed on your phone or computer, any audio you have made in the vicinity of your digital devices without a warrant (per Edward Snowden, the NSA picks up all of that data as part of Total Information Awareness).  Then they use parallel construction to prosecute.  See also the Room 641A controversy, a telecom interception facility operated by AT&T for the NSA as part of its warrantless surveillance program and a facility that is likely copied throughout the country.

I expected this to be a short, fun post about my Italian adventure, but it rapidly scaled into the verbal and visual monstrosity before you, a combined travelogue and political rant. You have about a decade left to enjoy seeing Italians in their native habitat before they become an endangered species. As this is a combined two-parter, there may not be a post next week.

I recently took a trip to Italy for pleasure. It was my first international trip in a long time. This post is going to be a write-up of some of the things I saw and experienced there.

The route involved flying to Milan, a day-trip to Como, a train to Florence for two nights, a train to Rome for three nights, followed by a train to Naples en route to Sorrento with a day-trip at Pompeii, explore the Amalfi coast and fly out of Naples.

The goal was to see as much of Italy as I could within eleven days. Whatever I saw would of course be surface level and superficial, tourist-level and not how locals live, but the hope would be if or when I come back in the future I would have a better idea of the regions that spoke to me, if any, and that I wanted to explore more in-depth.

First, why Italy? A couple reasons: one, it has a reputation as a lovely place to travel. It’s known as the home of olive oil, wine, Tuscany, romance, sunsets, history, excellent food, architecture, art, etc. Second, it ties into numerous aspects of this Substack: the transvaluation of Roman values to Christian values, the subsequent wiping out of Hellenism, the ongoing egalitarian ratchet effect, and the continued implementation of the Kalergi plan1 in accordance with globohomo’s demented dictates where huge numbers of non-integrating Muslims and Africans will be imported into Europe so that the population becomes too divided to ever oppose central bank usury. The Europe of today will likely be much darker and much more Islamic within another generation or two; enjoy this version while you still can. Third, I’m interested in obvious aspects of the U.S.’s control within Italy itself — it remains a conquered nation where the U.S. has 44 military bases within the country (compared to 119 in Germany!), and thus very much subject to American soft power (film and television, music, multi-national corporations, etc.).

Second, when to go? The best times of year to go to Italy are in the spring or fall; the summer is uncomfortably hot and humid (this write-up has been in the publishing queue for awhile).

Third, a preamble. I’m not going to cover very much Italian history within; the focus will be more on offering photos, some cultural commentary that stood out to me, along with the usual structure of the modern world and goals of our overlord rants triggered by what I saw. The art of photography is a very different skillset than the art of writing or marketing; instead of pondering and deliberating over framing and word choice, decisions that can be considered for a long time, with photography one has to be QUICK about snapping a shot or the moment is lost. So the skills needed involves swiftly realizing something is worthy of further discussion and then capturing it. Because it took me time to realize this (shoot first, discuss later), I missed out on a few opportunities for good shots early on. I don’t take many international trips, after all. This lesson will be learned for the future.

Let’s begin.

---

Flight into Heathrow

There was a stopover on the way to Milan in Heathrow. London has been called Londonistan for a long time now – it’s officially 15% of the London population as of 2021, but that is of course a lie and the percentage is much larger, especially among the youth. England’s second largest city Birmingham is no better off. Walking through Heathrow felt like I was in Islamabad — roughly 90% of the population was either visibly Islamic, non-white, tattoo’d, obese and ugly, or a combination thereof. Airport exhibitions were plastered throughout the airport displaying only Muslims, blacks, and LGBTQ individuals, preferably disabled or obese in accordance with intersectionalism, with no straight white men anywhere to be seen. This is pushed consciously and cynically on behalf of the central bank owners so the population is too divided on race, gender, sexual orientation grounds to focus on their theft.

The only other posters I saw were for Net Zero propaganda, which is globohomo’s way of lowering first world standard of living to be in accordance with the third world by slashing their energy supply even as China and the rest of the third world dramatically increase their energy consumption. Net Zero is a mere intermediary step before the approach to Total Zero, i.e. wiping out the “useless masses” as WEF-thought-leader Jewish homosexual atheist Yuval Harari casually calls them.2

The below is globohomo’s gameplan for the upcoming restrictions on basic living as explained by UKFires, which has a lot of establishment credibility, even attracting a full debate in the House of Lords in February 2020:

Net Zero disobedience is already being criminalized, per David Turver. Turver also states this will lead to famine conditions down the road:

The Net Zero zealots have forced the closure of [Britain’s] last remaining fertiliser plant and they also want to close the available routes to import ammonia. Not only that, but no shipping and no aviation will also impede our ability to import food.

The “experts” on the Climate Change Committee want to “release” 11% of our agricultural land by 2035 and up to a quarter by 2050.  By “release” they mean turn over to tree-planting or energy crops. One has to ask, without fertiliser or imported food and much less agricultural land, how are we going to feed ourselves?

It is plain to see that we are heading towards economic disaster, social catastrophe and potentially famine.

The British standard of living is already low and decreasing quickly; the median household disposable income in 2022 was $40,000, compared to $70,000 in the United States, even though the cost of living in Britain is substantially higher. Keith Woods had a nice post on it’s decline here.

Anyway, seeing the state of Heathrow was both a shock and depressing but it wasn’t surprising — seeing theory, logic and history become manifest in the real world is always a different experience. It is also a terribly laid out airport; it took almost an hour to get from one terminal to the next with multiple busses and trams having to be taken. The general tenor of the place was akin to the Star Wars cantina.

I had the chance to explore the surrounding area to Heathrow and the psychic energy was intensely bad — there was and is an active invasion by a hostile non-integrating foreign power taking place where the population nearby was 95%+ Islamic.

To be fair, out of every Western group the British more than anyone else deserve what they get.3 Their rulers were so tied up with being the dominant European power that they were willing to sacrifice literally everything to retain it — their reserve currency status, their superpower status, their empire, colonies, the future of their children and the future of their civilization to retain it, even importing a hostile non-integrating foreign class as necessary to stem any future rise in white populism — selling their souls to the Rothschilds and other central bank owners in the process, as discussed here. I see occasional videos of World War 2 veterans crying that the country of today is not the country they fought for (see this 100 year old crying about America) or John Cleese who poked fun at British society until such society was dead and he laments where it went, and of course consider Enoch Powell’s 1968 rivers of blood speech warning about the catastrophic consequences of illegal immigration, but the crux of the matter is this: most British despite the horrors of World War 1 were willing to fight Germany for control over the European continent because globohomo fed them a bunch of anti-German propaganda and they ate it up, just as the Americans did after the Pearl Harbor false flag.4 The lead-up to World War 1 was conducted in the same manner, as was the earlier transition from feudalism to industrialization furthered by the 1604-1914 Inclosure Acts which herded the British masses into the major cities for exploitation like cattle. A population so willing to let the Rothschilds and their allies buy up the mass media, bribe the politicians and institute the steps leading to war is a population that deserves the civilizational suicide that was being hoisted upon them.

This isn’t to say that I don’t have a lot of empathy and support for Western civilization. I do; it’s perhaps the greatest civilization in the history of the planet in what it’s accomplished, the ideas it’s wrestled with, the freedoms and respect for individual rights its generated. This is why calling attention to its unidentified failures is so important — because basically no one else is doing it that I see, at least not in this way; I’m just a pipsqueak blogger, but these ideas need to somehow enter the zeitgeist somehow.

The point is this: it’s easy to blame politicians and the Rothschilds but the buck ultimately stops at home. Are you currently falling for the Current Thing scam of the Israel/Hamas war or the Ukraine/Russia war just because the media tells you to? Do you have your eye off the totally open southern U.S. border because the media isn’t covering it? Are you aware of the structure of the modern world? If you’re falling for this stuff, what kind of moral authority do you have to think you wouldn’t have fallen for the same kinds of propaganda leading up to World War 1 and World War 2?

Anyway I was eager to leave British soil and I don’t plan to go back if I can help it. The country is doomed and its future belongs to primitive Islam.

---

Milan

Milan was substantially better than Heathrow; it was hard not to be. Still, it seemed like about 30% of the population at least in the tourist areas and the areas around the train station were non-native Italians, heading toward the future of Heathrow just on a slower pace. Keep in mind that the EU wants to import 75 million more illegal migrants in furtherance of the Kalergi plan and that it prosecuted populist leader Matteo Salvini for preventing illegals from entering the country in 2019. The current Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni, ran as a populist but immediately did a 180 and opened the borders on behalf of globohomo even further; a truly degenerate and evil woman (dissidents had warned about her WEF ties and compromised background but the media fooled a majority with its false portrayal of her as a populist, as usual).

Some things I noted:

• The ground was filthy with lots of gum on it. Italy should have Singapore-type laws regarding gum, it makes everything look grimy and disgusting.
• Food portions are smaller and many of the waiters are African and Islamic migrants.
• This becomes less of a factor the further one gets away from the rail station areas. Downtown looked almost like one would expect from Milan, which is considered one of the four fashion capital of the world.
• Milan is not known for being a very good city for tourists to visit, but there are interesting things to see regardless. Some of the architecture was really cool such as the Bosco Verticale (Vertical Forest):

There were some interesting art pieces at the Pinacoteca di Brera including Caravaggio’s Supper at Emmaus:

Closer:

This one by Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo was so large it apparently had to be rolled up to get through the door:

This is the feeling any man gets when trying to initiate sex with a long-term partner:

And in the next one this girl is apparently thinking about her love, but it looks like she’s on her iPhone:

The juxtaposition between traditional art and modern degenerate art in the next photo is kind of striking:

The trains and train stations are awesome throughout Italy; having high quality public transportation is wonderful compared to the mess within the U.S. The trains themselves are large, clean, quiet and comfortable.

The food prices in Milan grocery stores were about 1/3 the cost of what they are in cosmopolitan areas in the U.S. The following prices are in Euros, but the current exchange rate is close to 1:1 at about $1.075 per Euro. These were taken at a local Aldi.

Some additional thoughts:

• Prices in restaurants track to tourism; more tourism, higher prices. This applied to McDonalds as well of course (I will admit to grabbing some fries because I was curious what their prices and menu would be) — 3.5 Euro for a soda (lol) but 1.5 Euro for fries. A BigMac meal in Rome would be 11+ Euro, similar to the States.
• There is no expectation of tipping in Italy which is refreshing; in the U.S. tipping is always expected at 20% and less than that is considered rude. They even expect tips when ordering from fast food and Starbucks, and they are trained how to make it as awkward as possible for you as they can (they stare at you and don’t say anything or maybe call you by your name).
• There are many automated warnings in train stations about pickpockets. It’s apparently a big thing, especially in popular areas. One huckster will engage you or distract you verbally while another picks your pocket; or one will bump into you and try that way. I came across a couple of very aggressive, imposing 6’8” Africans who tried very aggressive sales tactics to solicit change; their English was generally not bad.
• The begging situation in Italy is interesting, which I first saw in Milan. In the U.S., at least in major metro areas, there is basically one type of begger: they hold up signs even though most are healthy weight and they’re generally pretty aggressive about coming up to you and shoving the sign in your face. In Italy, though, there appear to be at least three types of beggers: there’s the U.S. kind (which I saw only in Rome), there’s the religious nun kind (raising funds for her Church or nunnery; I gave some change to what looked like a 100 year-old nun, almost totally blind and toothless, outside of the Colisseum), and there’s a prostrating type — a desperate guy who basically lies on his stomach praying, not looking up, appearing sad and desperate, with a cup next to him. I experienced this type in Milan and did a kind of double take; I ended up giving him a couple Euro because the scene kind of moved me, he was subsuming his ego, not bothering the public or even acknowledging them, and just praying that God would provide.
• Rooms are tiny, renovated decently in ancient buildings. Unusually tiny elevators.
• Note: With the Marriott Bonvoy Boundless Credit Card one can get five free nights at Marriotts worldwide after spending $5,000 within three months of membership. This is a great deal.

---

Day-trip to Como

In Como the non-natives were about 15% of the population, at least of the tourists; this was surprising as Como is known as a wealthy area and the land of George Clooney. Interestingly Florence and also Rome seemed to be much more oriented toward what I considered to be a traditional tourist element — generally whiter, middle-aged or elderly, middle class or above.

Based on history the trends will be for major cities to become non-white and non-Christian throughout the West and for the rural areas to hang on longer. This phenomenon was experienced in Roman history: the term “pagan” was a Christian slur meaning “rural”; they were the Hellenic rural types who held onto their beliefs much longer than the urban or suburban types. As the West is gradually subsumed to Africans and Muslims I would expect small, rural towns to hold out longer, although globohomo is doing everything they can to target these areas for mass immigration.

View of Lake Como:

Inside of Como Cathedral, which was empty on a weekday except for tourists:

It was raining so I wasn’t able to take any good photos on the boat to the town of Bellagio, a pretty little town which served as inspiration for the Las Vegas Bellagio resort:

A little stream flowing into the lake from Bellagio. Lake Como is massive:

Some additional thoughts:

• There was a significant amount of American culture: music playing in the cities visited, lots of signs and restaurants in English including on the train, and many or most Italians speak English at least to an extent. This was helpful as I am retarded with languages.
• Salesmen don’t pressure you in stores which I appreciated. In America you are swarmed by offers of assistance whenever you enter somewhere.
• The stupid American zoomer perm has caught on strongly among Italian youth (and of Canadian youth; ahem, Christopher Brunet);
• The numbers of tattoos was fairly high but nowhere close to as high as in the U.S.
• I did not see much obesity except among foreigners.
• The average Italian appears to be a product of much breeding between different groups. They almost look and sound Jewish to me. Their general attitude seems to be lovers by disposition and not fighters; Leon Degrelle thought they were not very good at warfare in his On the Eastern Front, that they were whimsical and lyrical and just wanted to goof off and have fun.
• Few kids were seen other than among the Muslims. The high cost of living makes it harder to have them, combined with the nihilism permeating society encouraging anti-natalism and hedonism, along with extreme societal incentives to suppress native population growth (high taxes, censorship, high immigration etc.). If you want to get a sense of what a society looks like that actually encouraged native population growth, look to the example of Gaddafi in Libya.
• Not many smokers seen which was surprising. I guess the anti-smoking propaganda which was so pervasive in the U.S. has finally impacted Europeans.
• There was another Church at Bellagio I explored; it was also empty. I wonder to what extent this has to do with the skinsuiting and subversion of the Catholic Church5 and/or the nihilism brought about by the Death of God. Islam seems to be doing much better overall demographically…
• Many stores close for a couple hours after lunchtime, including restaurants, from 2-5pm or so. This is a great European tradition but it seems to be fading.

---

Florence

I didn’t get to see as much of Florence as I would have liked because I came down with a two-day case of a mild flu (also known as “COVID” or as I like to call it, fraudvirus). But before I came down with it I did get a chance to take a five-hour electric bike tour of the surrounding countryside. The much more popular tour was the scooter tour, which maybe I should have done but the e-bike tour was fun enough.

The Florence Cathedral, also known as the Duomo, dominates the city. You can see the size of it based on the below photo. It looks even bigger in person, comically large:

Here’s the view from the city from the Piazzale Michelangelo:

You can see the Ponte Vecchio on the far left and the Duomo in the center.

Curiously there was some sort of old car exhibition at the Piazzale Michelangelo:

The e-bike tour stopped off for wine and olive oil tasting and a pasta lunch. I got some information on the economics of local living in Italy from the tour guide. He was middle-aged, from southern Italy, paid $800/month in rent to live in the city, he says the owners of properties (who generally don’t live in town) mostly do AirBnB where they can get about $1,600/month in rent from vacationers and not have to deal with local tenants who struggle to pay rent. As such, the locals are getting pushed further and further out. He said he works all the time and he likes to work outdoors, maybe he makes $100/day not including tips, with tips it’s still not an easy life. I didn’t have the opportunity to ask him about immigration trends. I did ask him about the mafia adulterating olive oil (which I’ve read about elsewhere) but he denied it; I’m not sure if that answer was honest. He said regular biking eventually gave him a bad back, but by switching to e-bikes his back no longer gave him issues (one can’t bring a car into Florence itself so he was used to biking).

Some general comments:

• Throughout the trip I tested the theory that Italian/European food ingredients were of such higher quality that they would prevent me from gaining weight if I ate what I wanted (carb heavy), combined with a lot of walking. Nope, I gained weight and felt badly – there goes that theory. Or maybe it used to be true but stopped being true as EU food quality is also going downhill? Regardless, I had to limit carb intake.
• There’s no American-style coffee, only “Americano” which is espresso with hot water on the side. Part of the pleasure of coffee is sipping it so I wasn’t really getting my normal coffee fix here. I saw only one Starbucks in Italy which was in the Rome train station, but otherwise the coffee shops are local – a good thing.
• Water is served either flat or sparkling, but with no ice and you have to pay 1.5-2.5 euro for it in restaurants.
• About 5% of people were wearing face diapers still, mostly older women.
• I wanted to buy a blue leather jacket but the one for sale near the Ponte Vecchio was like 900+ euro (probably negotiable), there were a bunch of such stores in Florence but couldn’t find it elsewhere and didn’t have time to figure it out before we left. Bummer. Yeah, there are lots of blue leather jackets for sale online but they look of much cheaper quality and probably different materials used.
• Italians can instantaneously tell who is a tourist and who isn’t. This post explains some of the ways how they are able to do so.

---

Rome

I was supposed to be in Rome for four days but spent two of them in bed with fraudvirus. As such the Vatican tour was cancelled and I didn’t get to see museums or Churches the way I wanted to, nor did I get to visit the ruins of the Praetorian Guard’s facilities at the Castra Praetoria or see the Appian Way. Instead, I had time to see the Colosseum, Forum and surrounding areas (even though it rained part of the time), the Arch of Titus (discussed previously here), the incredible Trevi Fountain, the Pantheon, the Aventine keyhole and the Spanish steps.

Some select photos:

View from the Palatine Hill. I was excited to see this area because it featured heavily in one of the greatest television shows of all time, Rome.

Seagulls are a fairly new species to Rome, originally arriving in 1971. Even though I’ve seen plenty of seagulls in my life for some reason the ones here sounded like meowing cats. I should have recorded them. The one here had absolutely zero fear of humans and I probably could have pet it, I got that close.

The Arch of Titus.

Note the Romans bringing in the Jewish Menorah as war booty after conquering Jerusalem.

This was one of my favorite photos; the Colosseum of Rome conquered by Christianity.

The farther off section shows the underground complex beneath the Colosseum.

Gas prices of let’s say 1.90 euro per liter. That’s about $7.75 after converting liter to gallon and converting euro to dollar if my math is correct, about double what it is in the States – but I thought it would be higher especially with the obnoxious foreverwar in Ukraine now.

The Italians love their graffiti, you can see it all along the building walls outside of the tourist districts. This is perhaps native to the Italian character; Pompeii had lots of ancient graffiti as well.

Gelato was everywhere; a national pasttime.

The Trevi fountain.

You can get an idea for the size of the monstrousness of the crowds. It was extreme at the Trevi fountain but bad everywhere.

Some additional comments:

• Many places don’t accept cash like when paying to access the park/Colosseum. I didn’t like this as it portends a continued transition to digital currency, which will only be used for control and other diabolical schemes despite its convenience.
• The tourist population in Rome was what I expected compared to Milan, Como or to a lesser extent Florence. It was white, middle aged or elderly, and middle class or wealthier. It was much busier everywhere than it was a decade ago, though. But see this post by Pox Populi who comments on the extremely rapid and in-your-face demographic transformation of Rome.
• There was a marijuana shop that I saw at one point, which was surprising. Is Europe copying the American legalization trend? (or perhaps it is a separate trend?)
• There were lots of teenagers bused in on school tours from all over the country.
• There were lots of priests wandering Rome in their garb, as one would expect.
• I saw further evidence of American culture: J Lo poster, McDonalds everywhere, lots of billboards and signs in English, English-produced movie advertisements. There was a Five Guys at the metro station.
• It’s an interesting question to what extent Italy lives in the past compared to the present. It’s chief economic drivers seem to be tourism, olive oil exportation, leather goods, fashion and cars, and some other strange things. But when one is surrounded by such beautiful, ancient architecture, and your country relies so much on foreign tourists, plus you remain militarily occupied heavily by the United States — it seems quite easy to live in the past. It’s a very different mentality than the American mentality, anyway, I would suspect…
• On a similar note, it’s strange to be around so much beautiful architecture from hundreds or thousands of years ago compared to the horrendously ugly modern architecture, none of which is designed to last hundreds of years the way Italy’s ancient architecture was.

---

Naples/Sorrento/Capri

I took the train to Naples; the area around the train station was the worst place seen in Italy, dirty, homeless, graffiti everywhere, a pervasive sense of danger, surly people and lots of migrants. To get a sense of it see this brief video here. The drivers were among the worst in Italy, significantly more aggressive than New York City drivers. One cab driver came close to running over about a dozen people; it was kind of impressive that a pedestrian wasn’t dead after the ride. He ripped me off on fare as well. I rented a car and Google Maps directed the car through the back country to get to Sorrento. This was a bad call as the roads were very windy and narrow; to get by each other cars would have to push their side car mirrors in.

Sorrento and Amalfi was the first breathing room I felt within Italy. Everything else was too busy, too packed, with tiny rooms even if renovated decently in ancient buildings and tiny elevators. In Sorrento one could actually breathe and have a measure of space.

You can see the Amalfi coast in the background. The walls are sheer and well over a hundred feet high. You need to climb winding stairs or pay 1.5~ euro to take an elevator up or down.

The hills of Capri facing the harbor. I found the hills to be a lot more fun and interesting than the tourist trap immediately around the docks, but the whole area was overly expensive and extremely crowded.

The back of Capri facing away from the harbor. The cliffs are multiple hundreds of feet high.

It was a zoo.

---

Pompeii

The ruins of Pompeii, which were accidentally rediscovered in the 1700s after Mt. Vesuvius covered the town in volcanic ash in 79 AD, was pretty interesting to behold. The ruins were much larger than I had expected, although I was hoping to see some of the famous graffiti like “Weep, you girls. My penis has given you up. Now it penetrates men’s behinds. Goodbye, wondrous femininity!” Alas, I didn’t see it.

That takes us to the end of this Italian trip. Overall I enjoyed the overview of Italy. My favorite part was the Amalfi coast because the crowds were a bit less and there was a lot more room to breathe. I was bummed coming down with fraudvirus which upset the rhythm of the trip somewhat and I lost two days of sightseeing, and I was disappointed both that the crowds were so large and that the Kalergi plan is in the process of being forced onto Italy. If you have interest in going, go see it before it becomes a dystopian hellhole within the next decade – in this Twitter clip 7,000 African migrants just landed in Lampedusa, Italy in 36 hours.

Thanks for reading.

Postscript: The flight home from Heathrow was cancelled due to maintenance issues (some sort of leak that the maintenance team couldn’t figure out). This kind of thing is going to get much worse moving forward.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 The founder of the modern EU Richard Kalergi’s publicly stated strategy, where in his book “Practical Idealism” he stated that he “wanted to completely destroy the face of Europe” and that “Europeans are to become Asiatic-Negroid mongrels.” For more details on this see here.

2 Yuval Noah Harari, the spiritual architect of the World Economic Forum and a mentor to Klaus Schwab, claimed that humans are now “hackable animals” and that “the idea of a soul, free will — these are over!”  He also said “We just don’t need the vast majority of the population” and he repeated his previous predictions of a “useless class” of “unemployable” humans.  In the 21st century, Harari argues, people “are no longer part of the story of the future.”  They simply have no role. Humanity 1.0 is being phased out, and only those humans willing to make the transition to Humanity 2.0 and join the all-new species of transhumans will be welcomed in the emerging technocratic society.  “Part of what might be going [on] is people realize — and they’re correct in thinking that, ‘The future doesn’t need me. … Maybe if they are nice, they will throw some crumbs my way, like universal basic income.’ “Now, fast forward to the early 21st century when we just don’t need the vast majority of the population,” he continued, “because the future is about developing more and more sophisticated technology, like artificial intelligence and bioengineering.” Harari added that “these technologies increasingly will make redundant…whatever people are still doing which is useful,” and will thus “make it possible to replace the people.”  (Harari is a homosexual Israeli atheist.)

3 According to Ernst Junger in his Approaches, aphorism 82, the energy that Dostoyevsky picked up on upon his visit to London in 1862 was that the city was “Baal”:

Dostoeyevsky apparently saw something reassuring in the looser constitution of Paris and something frightening in the order of London. This attests to his penetrating but humane look. He saw Baal enthroned behind the spectacle on the Thames, and it frightened and fascinated him as it had inspired the portrayals of many others before and after him….

The enduring reputation of this God Bel is of a hard and merciless master. The name Babylon, its principal seat, became synonymous with the metropolis as such, especially in its night side. Beyond this, Dostoyevsky also saw something specific: the stamp of puritanism in which enormous deployments of energy were coupled with an unwavering conscience. Hence, it is no coincidence that it was precisely in those puritanical zones that machine technology and its related forms of exploitation brought forth the precedents and model cases for critical reflections on these same phenomena….

In his Paris days, Dostoyevsky was undoubtedly also in Montmartre, but it was not there that Baal appeared to him to reign. He saw an orderly fabric in the Parisian ambience, in London an obscene disorder. We might have suspected the opposite impression, yet it is precisely here that his artistic incorruptibility is demonstrated – the artist whose gaze penetrates through the social veneer, through the varnish on a masterpiece, to its ground.”

4 From here, Henry Stimson, War Secretary and a patriarch of the CFR, wrote in his diary after meeting with FDR: “We face the delicate question of the diplomatic fencing to be done so as to be sure Japan is put into the wrong and makes the first bad move – overt move.”  After a subsequent meeting, he recorded: “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot…” The Council’s War and Peace Studies Project sent a memorandum to FDR recommending a trade embargo against Japan which he eventually enacted.  In Addition, Japan’s assets in America were frozen and the Panama Canal closed to its shipping.  FDR knew about the upcoming attack on Pearl Harbor (American military intelligence had cracked the radio code Tokyo used to communicate with its embassies, which suggested an assault would come on Pearl Harbor around December 7; in addition separate warnings were transmitted to high government officials) but no alert was passed on to the commanders in Hawaii.  FDR removed the fleet’s Admiral after he protested that it was quite vulnerable to attack, and FDR stripped the island of most of its air defenses shortly before the raid.  FDR appointed a commission to investigate what happened, headed by FDR’s friend Supreme Court justice Owen Roberts and other CFR members, absolving FDR of blame.  When this whitewash was exposed, FDR suppressed the results, saying public revelation would endanger national security in wartime.

5 Also note how the Italians switched sides in the lead-up to World War 1 which the Pope considered an act of “free-Masonic infamy”, and how Italy at one point considered going to war against Germany prior to World War 2.

This post looks at the likely endpoint of the Trump supporter’s response if the assassination attempt against him had succeeded: a “Redneck Rebellion”, an unleashing of their feelings of hopelessness and displacement of historic Middle America which have been lurking suppressed for years now, and which would have been funneled dialectically by globohomo and then ruthlessly crushed to usher in a new, tyrannical, permanent state of emergency.

“Modern nation-states tend toward weakness. They can only prosper where some legacy is available. When that is consumed, the hunger becomes unbearable, and, like Saturn, they devour their own children.”

– Ernst Junger, the War Journals, August 17, 1944 entry

I’ve been meaning to do a post on the potential for the fabled Redneck Rebellion1 for awhile now, which I’ve mentioned in passing in a bunch of prior posts. But the swirling possibilities surrounding it, the uncertainties of form for which it could develop gave me pause; there was too much room for analytical error. So I pushed it off. But with the close call of the Trump assassination attempt, which was timed to generate maximum chaos and anger (Trump had not announced his Vice President at the time and there was no clear successor, he was heavily leading all polling and the JFK-reminiscent attack occurred in front of thousands) the impetus is back.

The basic argument is as follows: whites and Christians are increasingly dispossessed in their own homelands as part of the egalitarian ratchet effect, where society seeks to both raise up non-whites and put the boot on the face of whites in order to “equalize” worldwide outcomes. Whites are excluded from universities, excluded from multi-national corporations and even smaller jobs, they have been reduced from 90% of the U.S. population to 60% within the past sixty years, an extremely fast erasure on a historical timeline. Yet at the same time this population is highly armed and increasingly – but slowly, ever so slowly – becoming racially and class conscious. The built up anger, sense of betrayal, and disillusionment has been growing even before Trump – see the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements, both undermined and destroyed by globohomo – and the rise of the internet, which may be looked back on historically as being as revolutionary as the printing press, means that traditional avenues of establishment narrative propagation do not work like they used to. There is a collapse in the public’s support for institutions and people claim not to trust the media anymore.

To offset this, globohomo has imported 20 million Democrat-leaning non-whites in the past four years alone as they seek to repeat what they accomplished in California but nationwide, i.e. a permanent one party state. Even if these illegals do not vote, it does not matter because their mere physical presence is needed for ballot harvesting purposes. According to Sundance,

The Biden administration (DHS) is not “importing democrat voters.”  Instead, DHS is importing people, names, that allows the state fraud process to generate ballots. This is an important distinction.

The migrants will not use the ballots. The DNC harvesters will collect them, fill them out (Team Obama), then the Precinct workers will scan them and count them (Team Clyburn).  Illegals don’t need to vote. They only need to exist to create a ballot.

Look at the overlap between whether a state has voter ID laws and whether it votes Democrat or Republican:

They’re also printing tens of trillions of dollars and funneling the vast majority of it back into the hands of the transnational security elite and their allies. 30% of tax revenues now go to paying interest on the national debt alone, which is set to skyrocket in the coming decades:

With community trust in America at an all-time low and the finances unsustainable, what we are seeing feels like some kind of mafia bust-out operation – they’re stealing everything they can as they torch the current system. The trick they want is to cause tremendous confusion and to shift blame away from themselves as poverty and chaos intensifies. That’s the key.

At the same time, we see globohomo moving forward with their long-term plans: CBDC development is finished and ready for deployment per the Atlantic Council. Woke AI has been perfected. Spying on the public has been formally legalized by Congress without a warrant (the legislation to prevent this failed by one vote; globohomo blackmailed and threatened just as many as were necessary). The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that the government telling tech companies to censor is constitutional. 5G has been rolled out and it’s primary purpose is not to offer faster internet to consumers but to handle the vast bulk data collection needed for instantaneous spying in order to assign everyone social credit scores – which the WEF has admitted will be finalized by 2030 – and cut anyone out from the system who does not do whatever globohomo tells them to think or act. The programmable CBDCs will be used in conjunction with the woke AI to micro-manage human behavior in what, in my opinion, will have both a depopulation agenda component (especially against whites), a race-mixing component, as well as to eventually separate the masses from the central bank owners as a distinct species. Through this vision globohomo hopes to create a perpetual neo-feudalism that they want to last forever.

Note from this the different time scales that our overlords operate on compared to the masses: the online right thinks in terms of events — days, weeks, months or maybe a couple of years at most — while the timescale of the central bank owners is on the level of decades or centuries, giving the latter an enormous advantage.

Globohomo has all the pieces in place, but they need a triggering event to institute this system. It needs to be a big, historical event, but controlled, and it must give globohomo the narrative impetus for a historically unprecedented tyrannical “protective” state. They can then shift blame for this new horror system away from themselves. It’s the same rationale for why they needed 9/11 to institute the Patriot Act to enlarge government and steal civil liberties, which was drafted long before the actual attack. They have a number of possibilities to do this, as basically all they do is plot against the masses. These include:

1. Crash the economy by deflating the biggest economic bubble in human history until people cry out for assistance, a strategy perfected in Japan and which I will cover in its own post;
2. A false flag hack by “Russians” or “Chinese” as a Cyber Polygon type event, crippling important infrastructure until it is “rebooted” with the radical changes;
3. World War 3 with Russia, Iran and China, where those who don’t submit will be treated as enemies2; or
4. the Redneck Rebellion.

There are likely more, but those are the four that come to mind that could be sufficient in size to justify an unprecedented security state being implemented. Tree of Woe has a good post on some of these possibilities. And N.S. Lyons has a great if extremely long piece on how globohomo is converging with China to form a totalitarian surveillance state.

Let’s discuss the possibility of the Redneck Rebellion.

---

The Redneck Rebellion

There has been an undercurrent among some on the far-right itching for an armed rebellion against the globohomo state. Lots of people online hint at it but don’t go over the line from fear of being targeted by feds or accused of fedposting. Their argument goes something like this, to the extent they are willing or able to articulate it:

1. The government is controlled by those eminently hostile to the interests of the majority population;
2. Elections have not worked as the country continues shifting to the left and lowering everyone’s quality of life regardless of who is elected;
3. Trump only became president in 2016 because globohomo was too complacent to rig the election properly, thinking Hillary would cruise to an easy victory like all polling suggested;
4. Trump was unable to accomplish anything even after he won because a united uniparty combined with extreme media hostility and criminal FBI/CIA/DOJ undermining of the popular will effectively paralyzed his administration;
5. Elections have not worked given the 2020 election was fraudulently stolen with mass mail-in voting, vote harvesting, electronic voting machine scams, mass illegal immigration and other illegal tactics, with the liberal media providing the criminal perpetrators endless amounts of cover;
6. Peaceful protests such as January 6 were subverted and co-opted by Ray Epps and other FBI handlers to fulfill globohomo objectives;
7. White Middle America is radicalizing as a response to its declining quality of life and they lack non-violent avenues to have their grievances addressed; therefore
8. The only alternative left to dispossessed Middle America is an uprising of some sort, or a right-wing military coup; and
9. The sooner it happens the better, before illegal immigration swamps the historical American stock permanently.

Their argument continues: America is armed to the teeth and filled with millions of veterans. Military veterans are high testosterone and lean right-wing while cosmopolitan, elitist liberals are low testosterone, limp-wristed, have low rates of gun ownership, and would fold like paper napkins under pressure. Additionally, America runs on a just-in-time distribution system with right-leaning truckers; look at what the Canadian truckers accomplished. Liberals can be starved out in weeks if the truckers join in. After all, the might of the U.S. military couldn’t defeat goat herders in Afghanistan or Iraq, and in the 1970s the U.S. lost badly in Vietnam against a poorly equipped communist enemy. The only way at this point to seize back control, according to their argument, is with an uprising, per Thomas Jefferson’s famous statement, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

As much as I understand the argument and the frustration of those watching the complete implosion of America and the west generally, this is a wrong analysis and any Redneck Rebellion is doomed to be viciously crushed by the establishment.

---

Why?

The first thing to understand about assessing the success of a potential Redneck Rebellion is that whites/the middle class in America have a flat zero institutional support (unless one counts “I’m a nationalist and a globalist. I’m both” Trump when he held the presidency). The Senate and House are both globalist in outlook, the CIA and FBI and DOJ are globalist, the upper branches of the U.S. military are globalist, local police departments have been gutted and have no power, the media is globalist, the judiciary is globalist (including the Supreme Court), the Federal Reserve is globalist as are it’s owners and Wall Street generally, almost or all multi-national corporations have globalist outlooks, etc. A successful objective of the forced untested mRNA heart attack jabs was to purge dissidents from these institutions. Nor do whites in America have any foreign support; maybe Orban in Hungary and some Eastern European leaders like Lukashenko don’t hate whites, but all the leaders in Europe and Asia are globalist and anti-white; that’s why Shinzo Abe was assassinated as he was not playing along.

The second thing to understand is that, as discussed here, the mainstream media can highlight any event into the public’s consciousness or downplay any event to be forgotten by the public, and they can decide how hard or soft to push an issue and when. None of it is organic, all of what they push has a political purpose behind it, and it is a closed-feedback system and echo-chamber that outside facts cannot penetrate. Furthermore, our central banker rulers have bought-and-paid-for politicians queued up to respond to those media created (or downplayed) events in the manner in which they demand. The point of this is that globohomo chooses if or when a redneck rebellion happens by what they choose to highlight or downplay in the media and how their puppet politicians respond to it. There’s been plenty of predictive programming setting it up like the terrible recent Civil War movie. As Ernst Junger stated in his World War 2 journals, May 17, 1944 entry: “The situation calls to mind that of 1939 when people talked about war until it finally came. It’s been like that with the invasion, which perhaps neither of the parties sincerely desires. Yet this is precisely where the stroke of fate will be revealed.” And one may note that World War 2 was similarly set up with a predetermined outcome (as was the U.S. Civil War3).

Here’s the kicker: rebellions/insurrections do not succeed historically without substantial institutional and/or foreign support. The first example that comes to mind is the Spanish civil war, where Franco had both institutional support (the military and the priesthood) and foreign support (Germany) and they still barely won. You can take a highly armed population with broad-based populist support and they will not be able to capitalize on their advantages without the ability to communicate and coordinate (via phones, internet, AM radio, etc.) which would be shut off for them in a rebellion even as globohomo would make extensive use of AI, drone technology, satellite technology, mass media manipulation, etc. But worse is that events like Charlottesville, the endless lawfare against Trump, the COVID shutdowns and forced mRNA heart attack jabs, and January 6 show that even though America broadly (after accounting for vote fraud) supports Trump, that support is pretty shallow — even though white America is being dispossessed most of them are fat, lazy, and have an incredible amount of globohomo propaganda to work through mentally. They are close to useless and globohomo is not very afraid of them. The right has not been allowed to organize themselves for many decades (if they tried the FBI would arrest its leaders and destroy the organization) so they are highly disorganized, de-centralized, and with no readily apparent leadership.

---

The triggering event

The attempted Trump assassination would have been the perfect excuse to institute the fabled Redneck Rebellion. Trump was cruising to victory against Biden (and is still favored against Kamala), the attempted assassination was in broad daylight during a rally with tens of thousands and the media watching, and there was no prime successor who could take the reins as Trump has not announced his Vice President yet. If the shooter – likely groomed by the FBI – had succeeded it would have set off enormous chaos and tremendous anger, which the intelligence community apparently (and bizarrely) might have tried to parry by claiming Iran was behind it (see footnote 2). The emotional outburst if it had succeeded could easily have resulted in some sort of physical escalation, likely a combination of genuine populist fury and Ray Epps-styled false flags. The important thing would be for the Rebellion to both be hyped up to hysterical levels and be controlled as much as possible. This anger then could be dialectically harnessed much like January 6 was by globohomo in order to then CRUSH the movement. Indeed, the obviousness of the set-up (with the Secret Service basically standing down4) combined with it’s likely intentional mirroring in many respects of the JFK assassination – opening up scabbed-over national trauma – was likely intentional to inspire intense emotional anger on the part of Trump supporters so they would walk into this trap.

---

The three types of globohomo wars

Most people do not understand that globohomo is willing to do whatever it takes necessary to fulfill their objectives; there is nothing they will not do in order to stay in power, there is no line they will not cross. And while they are not invincible, they are also not wholly incompetent even in this age. People mock America for its military failures, but there are different types of globohomo wars and each type has its own objectives, which do not always include military victory – indeed, preventing victory is the objective of one of these types. I went into it in detail here but the types of wars are as follows:

1. Forever-wars like Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam and the goal is to use the war as an excuse for the military industrial complex and trans-national security state to rape the American taxpayer, not to win the war. People laugh at America as “incompetent” in these wars but that entirely misses the point of them. Julian Assange sums up these types of wars perfectly.
2. Wars to preserve the international finance system. This is why Gaddafi and Saddam were deposed and executed; both wanted to get off the dollar system. It’s also why Hitler and Germany were destroyed in World War 2. These wars are fought as hard as are necessary for victory.
3. Wars for increased global control. These wars are like the Opium Wars and the Boer Wars, and they are also fought as hard as are necessary for victory. For example, to defeat the Boers, who were a hardy and tenacious enemy, they had to put the Boer women and children in concentration camps and starve them to death. 155,000 women and children were imprisoned in the concentration camps, which was almost 2/3 of the entire Boer population, and 34,000 or 22% of the inmates of the concentration camps died, of whom 27,540 or 81% were under the age of 16. According to Stephen Mitford Goodson, “The bankers achieved their principal aim of obtaining full control of the gold and other mineral resources of South Africa. They had financed the war in the amount of 222 million British pounds and thereby added a further 132 million to Britain’s national debt. For the Rothschilds the Second Anglo-Boer War was a consummate victory.”

Globohomo appears “softer” now overall because they have sophisticated propaganda tools to secure compliance, but if that compliance fails they will assuredly ramp up what they would do as much as necessary. What we can understand, then, is that any globohomo suppression of the Redneck Rebellion would be fought with as much means as necessary to secure their objectives – there is nothing they would not stoop to including mass murder and genocide if that is what it took to further their objectives and maintain control. Then they would use their controlled media apparatus to label themselves the good guys. That’s how it works; first you win, then you justify the victory. They would not fight in any way like they fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Vietnam, because the objectives sought here would be entirely different. Basically no one in ultra-wealthy, ultra-complacent, ultra-decadent, ultra-myopic America understands this.

---

Conclusion

Putting this all together: I think we potentially averted by an inch the initiation of the fabled Redneck Rebellion and it’s subsequent brutal crushing by globohomo to institute a CBDC/woke AI tyrannical slave state Hellhole, which they would blame the Rebellion for everyone’s chaos and declining quality of life (much as 1/6 was hyped up and the underlying stolen election ignored). Perhaps Globohomo will double down.

With Trump surviving with only a flesh wound it will be hard for globohomo to pull off false flag MAGA terrorist attacks, but they still may try. Alex Jones predicted the establishment will murder Biden by a false-flag Trump supporter (which seems less likely now given he is no longer running for re-election) or alternatively poison Trump. Perhaps they just simply steal the election like they did in 2020. Whatever the globohomo media is hyping, though, is an artificial narrative meant to secure official objectives. From a broader perspective, I expect whatever happens will ultimately be negative (in line with my philosophical pessimism) as this world appears controlled by the Demiurge.

Anyway, I have not seen the instigate-Redneck Rebellion-to-crush-it argument made anywhere else (although CJ Hopkins gets a little close here) and I hope this does not come to pass. The more people understand this possibility, the harder it will be for our overlord jackals to pull it off.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 This is a pejorative; a neutral term would be a mostly-white middle America armed rebellion. The pejorative is being used because the point will be made that such an uprising would have little chance of succeeding based on improper analysis of the nature of the globohomo system, how civil wars are won, and how weak willed America’s citizens are now. “Redneck rebellion” is also a very catchy term.

2 It is looking like the globohomo intelligence community may falsely claim that Crooks was tied into Iranian intelligence. See here and here. This false propaganda would be more successful if Trump had been killed, but the idea would have been to use the attack to start a war in Iran on behalf of Israel while at the same time clamping down on free speech in America to prevent future “foreign-tied lone-wolf shooters.” That would have been win-win-win for them; eliminate Trump, start a new war in Iran, end free speech in America. Russiagate 2.0 but directed against Iran. Regardless, the primary purpose would be to move “the intelligence community killed Trump” argument out of the Overton window, to confuse, muddy the waters and silence those who argued in favor of it, just like it was socially acceptable to discuss the 2020 rigged election until January 6, then it became unacceptable. (For what it’s worth, I don’t think white middle America will fall for another Middle East war no matter how the narrative is structured.)

3 In The Rothschilds, the Financial Rulers of Nations, John Reeves noted that when the family met in London in 1857 for a wedding, Prime Minister of England Benjamin Disraeli declared: “Under this roof are the heads of the family of Rothschild – a name famous in every capital of Europe and every division of the globe.  If you like, we shall divide the United States into two parts, one for you, James, and one for you, Lionel.  Napoleon will do exactly and all that I shall advise him.” Otto Von Bismark stated in 1867: “The division of the United States into two federations of equal force was decided long before the civil war by the high financial power of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economical and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds predominated. They foresaw the tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore they started their emissaries in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic.” Rothschild family biographer Niall Ferguson notes a “substantial and unexplained gap” in private Rothschild correspondence between 1854-1860.  He says all copies of outgoing letters written by the London Rothschilds during this Civil War period “were destroyed at the orders of successive partners”. See here for more.

4 See this video by Matthew Murphy, a retired Green Beret and a level one sniper, trained in assassinations and counter-assassinations who states that the level of so-called incompetence displayed by the Secret Service was not possible based on their rules and regulations and therefore the assassination attempt definitely had insider help.

Apparently Murphy was removed from TikTok for posting it.

The most disturbing feat of propaganda has been the transformation of common sense into fringe conspiracy theory. – Theodore Atkinson

I know I wrote in a Note that my next post would be about the Redneck Rebellion, but there continue to be certain points that feel like they need to be fleshed out as I’m not seeing them elsewhere. I am posting more frequently now not just because the Trump assassination attempt was shocking on its own terms, but because of what globohomo likely planned to do in response to it if it had succeeded. That will likely be my next post. My hope is then that things will calm down and my weekly posting routine can resume, but we’ll see; developments are coming very fast now.

One of the questions being asked about the attempted Trump assassination, such as by Jason Horsley in this extended exchange here, is if 20-year-old Thomas Crooks was part of a broader conspiracy, how was the conspiracy organized?

Now, I have no insider knowledge. The following is speculation based upon curious data points (which should all be looked at skeptically, given the amount of misinformation out there, whether intentional or not) and my own pretty consciously understood biases, discussed in the last post about grounding mechanisms.

• Crooks apparently had a “limited” online presence according to authorities. Sundance is correct that this is not really believable; the youth are pretty ubiquitously addicted to technology. Due to Total Information Awareness his internet presence is not wipeable regardless of whatever Crooks did or not do on his own. It would still be in the NSA search database. There are also no recent photos of Crooks that have been released; they’re going off his high school yearbook photo – why? I suspect it would have revealed him as a deranged far leftist Antifa type (one of his classmates said he was a known Trump-hater). According to an article his internet history apparently shows searches for both Trump and Biden rallies; how convenient… You can see Crooks in a video here making some juvenile remarks.
• The level of incompetence that the Secret Service displayed is mind-boggling. The Secret Service head Kimberly Cheatle refused to put a counter-sniper team on the roof of the below building which had direct line-of-access sight to Trump and was only 400 feet away; she claimed that it was because the building was “sloped”. The slope of the building was only 10 degrees, if that!The “sloped” buildingThe counter-sniper that eventually killed Crooks after he got off many shots was set up on a much more sloped building:Secret Service basic protocol is to secure all line-of-sight positions that could hit the defended target; according to this video by a Special Forces sniper the level of incompetence displayed here is too great not to be intentional. He posted this on TikTok and apparently was banned by the service after posting it.Now here’s the thing: because the Secret Service failed at a core, basic function of their job, Cheadle had to come up with an explanation, any explanation for the failure. The sloped roof comment is laughably flimsy (even Elon Musk mocked it). But Cheadle would rather have it thought that she and the Secret Service generally were incompetent (which is not totally implausible given she had a DEI goal of 30% of Secret Service agents be women by 2030) versus the attack was an intentional conspiracy, but it’s not working well due to the amount of evidence which is becoming too overwhelming to attribute properly to incompetence.1 Her superiors – the Biden Administration and criminal traitor DHS head Alejandro Mayorkas, who opened the southern border to 20 million illegal Democrat voters in the past four years alone – are backing her and she is not being forced to resign so far (because it is likely she was just following orders).
• Crooks apparently wandered the rally for at least an hour before the attack, he was on the roof for half an hour, spotted by the counter-sniper team and tagged multiple times, Crooks used a range-finder to calculate distances to Trump which was observed by the public, he may have brought his own ladder to reach the roof, the crowd outside the rally pointed out his sniper position at least two minutes before the attack, a police officer climbed the ladder and Crooks’ gun was pointed at his head and the officer climbed back down, and apparently the Secret Service had orders not to take out an assassin until the assassin fired first, which is beyond insane. Take one of these facts in isolation and okay, maybe it was incompetence; but add them all up – again, assuming they are accurate – and the picture is very clearly one of intentional malice on the part of the Secret Service.
• Apparently – if the below links are accurate – there may have been a large and highly unusual financial short put on Truth Social the day before the attempted assassination. Link 1, 2, 3. If Trump had been successfully assassinated, one would expect Truth Social to immediately implode, as the entire site revolves around access to Trump’s opinions. This reminds me of the shorts placed on airline stocks a day or two before 9/11.

Crooks’ barely missed shot, which has a great visual explanation here, reminds me of the final scene in the wonderful movie Day of the Jackal. The assassin did not anticipate de Gaulle leaning in at the last second:

Okay, so there’s a malicious Secret Service and a 20-year-old attempted assassin. What’s the connection between the two? The Secret Service doesn’t go out and solicit deranged leftist attackers. The likely scenario is that the FBI groomed Crooks from orders-on-high2 and, when certain he would make an attempt, informed the higher-ups who then leaned on the Secret Service to allow the attempt to happen. The motives for this were discussed in the first post on this topic: to create enormous Republican chaos before Trump had announced a Vice President (and there was no clear successor or front-runner to take the helm), as well as possibly to instigate the fabled Redneck Rebellion in order to then brutally crush it to formally usher in a hypercharged surveillance state, which will be discussed in perhaps my next post.

---

How FBI grooming works

How does the government groom terrorists online work? Well, there’s no online manual, but from studying clues from publicly released information on a lot of these young terrorists the pattern seems to be like this:

The FBI does it on Reddit and a bunch of other places like Discord and Telegram. They strike up friendships with weird loners saying obnoxious stuff. They form parasocial relationships and text with them on Signal or Whatsapp. Then the FBI agent slowly encourages the target to turn violent. The mentality of the FBI agents doing this is not that they are directing terror attacks, but rather they are identifying latent threats before they manifested — they are being proactive instead of reactive — and the proof is that these guys become willing to go along with the incitement to violence, which both allows them to prosecute the target and stop a threat to the community. Of course, very few if any of these loners had the motive, means or opportunity to actually carry out an attack without the active support of the agents themselves. And any organization always feels big pressure to justify their budgets so they can grow in size, so the FBI has an insatiable appetite for so-called “terrorists”…

“I don’t think anyone fully appreciates how demoralizing it is to be sitting across the table from a peace-loving man or woman from a foreign country, insinuating all kinds of baseless BS, attempting to coerce them to spy on their equally peaceful community,” Terry Albury, a disillusioned former FBI agent who was convicted of leaking classified documents, told The New York Times, “but it was also my job.” Read here if you want more details on this process.

After the target commits the terror attack, the FBI conducts an “investigation” into the shooter and attempts to scrub any incriminatory information.

There are numerous examples of this one can point to:

1. One example of this was probably Omar Mateen, the Muslim shooter of the Florida gay club whose father was an FBI informant.
2. Another was the Curtis Culwell Center attack in Texas which was well documented.
3. Another was the so-called Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot. See here for a great write-up on the details.
4. The case of the Liberty City Seven. “The Liberty City Seven case was a mess. It took three trials to convict five of the seven defendants. But it was still proof of concept for the government’s new strategy of using informant-led stings and preemptive prosecutions to root out radicals with violent leanings.”
5. The case of Eric McDavid, convicted of plotting terrorism but he was really trying to impress a female undercover agent and the FBI withheld exculpatory information.
6. There’s the infamous FBI agent Ray Epps funneling people into the Capitol on 1/6.

One may also note that these “terror attacks” come in waves – in the late 80s and early 90s the “terrorists” were the rural patriot movement; then it shifted to become Islamic terror after 9/11, where there were dozens of Islamic attacks — then after Trump won in 2016, they almost universally dried up. Did they dry up because Trump was such a scary law-and-order guy that Muslim terrorists were no longer willing to commit attacks? This seems ridiculous; rather, the more obvious explanation is that the FBI which pushed particular types of attacks onto weak-minded, isolated losers changed their priority and focus.

There are likely a lot of others such as the 2023 Nashville school shooting by the tranny (where the FBI covered it up and wouldn’t release the terrorist’s manifesto), and also probably Crooks. They likely groomed him online like they’ve done to quite a few other terrorists then, when he was ready to go, they paved the way in gold for him to get his shots off, then they scrubbed his online presence and whitewashed it. The FBI investigators into the attack are the very same organization that likely MK-ultra’d this kid into being their mentally ill attempted assassin.

Plenty of plausible deniability for the authorities.

Now, to reiterate this is just a theory – a working, plausible theory that ties together the disparate elements of this attempted assassination, but there is no smoking gun for it at this time, nor do I expect there to be one publicly released.

By the way, it was difficult to do research for this post because both Bing and Google are heavily censoring search results. If you Bing images “Thomas Crooks” for example, nothing relevant comes up. They’re only getting better and better at censorship as the AI improves; eventually we will hit a point where globohomo will have total information control and we will not be able to find evidence supporting things we know to be true, or past events.

Lastly, if one accepts that this was a conspiracy, it looks like they very may well try again as a Plan B, possibly using an explosion by “Iran” as “revenge” for the murder of Soleimani in order to both eliminate Trump, push the U.S. into another Middle Eastern war on behalf of Israel, and use it as an excuse to clamp down on free speech on the internet.3

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 Putin, who runs the Russia branch on behalf of the central bank owners, runs incompetence shtick all the time regarding how he keeps getting fooled by his Western “partners”, to great effect. “Oh, I got fooled again, I’ll wake up and do better next time!” He’s really the master at this shtick. Rurik Skywalker covers this all the time at his excellent blog, the only one, along with Edward Slavsquat, to provide English language dissident analysis of what is occurring within Russia itself.

The target of incompetence shtick is preying on Christian notions of forgiveness.

2 Yes, Christopher Wray is a Trump appointee. However, any Trump cabinet appointees had to be approved by a razor-slim margin Republican Senate, and globohomo stooge Mitch McConnell controlled at least a third of the Republicans in the Senate. In other words, the only individuals who could get past Senate confirmation were compromised globalist ideologues. Trump’s hands were tied on this. And the Republican/Democrat distinction has no meaning — James Comey was a registered Republican — what matters is one’s ideological outlook, i.e. oligarchical globalist vs. populist nationalist.

3 Although Israel seems to be in control of both parties per last night at the RNC.

This is a post which investigates how people process information, whether it is by their intuition, their reliance on official expertise or otherwise. It argues that that no one can decide what you should believe for you, that you must rely on your own judgment and expertise – but if you don’t have a feedback mechanism to provide more objective feedback to your approach then it is very easy to become divorced from reality.

In 2008 highly influential arch-liberal Cass Sunstein articulated a strategy called cognitive infiltration in an article titled “Conspiracy Theories” for the Journal of Political Philosophy. In it he made a radical proposal: “Our main policy claim here is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories.” He defined “cognitive infiltration” as a program “whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups.” See here and here if you want the details on this. Globohomo picked it up and ran with it, and its effects can be seen everywhere today. Cognitive infiltration on social media is heavily boosted via paid agents, “influencers” and bots who push arguments about, for example, the glass dome and the firmament (flat earth arguments) to distract people and lead them into harmless political dead ends.

I think of this cognitive infiltration strategy when I look at the online reaction to the attempted Trump assassination. There were all sorts of theories immediately thrown out: it was a psychological operation and Trump used a squib on his ear or the shooter aimed for his ear; schizophrenic Andrew Anglin has been quasi-pushing this one. Or no one was actually shot. Trump did it to boost his popularity. The FBI/CIA would never use an incompetent to try to assassinate Trump and they never miss their targets when they try to kill them. The deep state wants Trump to win so that he starts World War 3 and whites will join to eagerly fight.

My response was that these lines of argument were untenable for a variety of reasons: the bullets were real given the wounded/dead behind Trump and which missed killing Trump by a fraction of an inch, Trump is too incompetent to employ an expert level assassin for such an attempt even if he wanted to, if one asks cui bono? (who benefits from such an attempt) Trump didn’t need a popularity boost given he was leading Biden by multiple points, among other reasons. Here’s how close the shooter came to killing him:

J. Daniel Sawyer does an excellent detailed forensic deep dive based upon the released video evidence if you really want to get into the weeds of how close this was.

Regarding that iconic photo that was taken (“ohmigod it’s a false flag it looks just like Iwo Jima”), you can see how that photo was taken in this video here.

Michael Dansbury correctly mocks the psyop crowd by summarizing their position on what would have to be Trump’s mentality to institute a false flag here:

“I am four months away from an election in which I am already doing pretty well and even my enemies have to agree that I am a serious challenger. My opponent is clearly infirm and his party are now bitterly divided as to whether he should even stand. I will however ask a gunman to shoot at my head with the infinitesimal chance of hitting my ear, kill an innocent bystander and then in turn have him assassinated. This will lead to a theoretical number of people to vote for me four months from now.”

Librarian of Celaeno, who I have been clashing with more regularly because of our differing perception styles and core values, but hopefully in a constructive and respectful way because I enjoy it – I prefer reasoned criticism than having yes-men because grappling with the pushback is what ultimately strengthens one’s own arguments – and he articulated his disagreement as follows:

Working backwards from cui bono gets you exactly the kind of reasoning you’re talking about here, because you’re assuming an entire chain of actions from an endpoint that could have been radically different under slightly modified conditions.

• Donald Trump got shot at- it must have been the Deep State; they serve to benefit, and everyone know they lie.
• Donald Trump got shot at- it must have been Trump; he will now get a boost in popularity, and everyone knows he lies.
• Donald Trump gets shot- the media was in on it; they all refused to call it an assassination, and everyone knows they lie. They’re working with the deep state.
• Donald Trump gets shot- the media is now reporting it as an assassination attempt; they are working with Trump because he’s click worthy.

All of these scenarios are spun from pre-existing assumptions and the facts are shoved in in ways that rationalize them. Letting the evidence lead the way means taking a step back and asking hard questions not only about what happened, but about what I believe.

I agree with the part in bold – except what evidence and facts is Librarian waiting for exactly? The videos have been released and the location of the shooter’s position was known very quickly. Some clarifying information was known later, yes, like the shooter being on the roof for over twenty minutes before he took his shot (!). Perhaps Librarian has made up his mind now, I’m not sure. Perhaps he wants to wait for a corrupt and whitewashing FBI to release official finding who knows when? What qualifies as “letting the evidence leading the way”? I argued instead that one should place emphasis on contemporaneous evidence – video and witness statements primarily – before they get scrubbed from the internet, which has happened regularly over the years to bolster establishment narratives.

I also agree with Librarian that one needs to know and understand one’s own biases and assumptions. One can take ANY piece of evidence, no matter how clear-cut, and people will not agree on it. I went into this on a prior post where a liberal friend (at the time) and I viewed an extremely clear-cut video and walked away with entirely different interpretations of what we watched; this event shook me and I re-evaluated how perception works after this event. And even if one is correct on a particular level of analysis, that doesn’t mean one is correct on other levels of analysis; we are all finite, limited beings and our perceptions are flawed and limited, so it is always good to retain a degree of radical skepticism and doubt even over one’s own opinions.

Christopher Cook had a great post about understanding one’s own biases, where he wrote (quoting at length):

In another sense, however, I am just like everyone else, insofar as my personal predispositions cause me to suspect some things more than others. So let’s look at those predispositions.

First, I do not trust the state. Government is a criminal racket. Even the best-designed systems inevitably devolve into criminal rackets. So I don’t trust much that is said or done by any agent or agency of any government.

Second, I do not trust the state no matter whose hands it is in, but when it comes to the left-right paradigm, I trust the left far, far less.

Leftism is the worst mass ideology ever to ooze forth from the twisted mind of man. It is devious, dangerous, and deadly. Every single time it reaches its fullest bloom, it produces nothing but failure, oppression, and rivers of blood.

Leftists managed to slaughter and starve 150 million people in a single century, and to oppress many millions more in soul-crushing totalitarian mega-states. Leftism really is a “boot stamping on a human face forever.” Denial of that is denial of history.

Of course, non-leftist states have perpetrated their own slaughters—from ancient conquerors to modern colonialism to every other form of barbarism. I oppose them all. But right here, right now, for the last hundred-plus years, leftism is far and away the biggest threat.

The right, properly defined, refers to Anglophone-style conservatives, (non-left) libertarians, and (non-left) anarchists. All of these ideologies share a core classical-liberal provenance in common. As such, they are not generally seeking power for its own sake. They have few objectives. Mostly, they just want to be left alone.

Yes, I know that conservatives have more of a busybody streak than their libertarian cousins. But none of that comes anywhere close to the “Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state” ethos to which every leftist is constantly straining (whether they recognize it consciously or not).

Third, I have very little normalcy bias. I do not assume that things will remain as they are. I do assume that it is only a matter of time before really big, messed-up things happen. (This attitude actually served me well during covid. Yes, the situation was upsetting and even carried some psychological impact, but the lack of surprise made it easier for me to bear.) Thus, I have no difficulty imagining that any one particular event might be the spark of something big.

Fourth, I am not a “conspiracy theorist,” but I am also not not a conspiracy theorist. I am willing to entertain just about any possibility. I am not tyrannized or constrained by Ocham’s Razor or Hanlon’s Razor (I definitely do not believe that either of those is always correct).

Fifth, I am also about as far from mass-formation as you can get. I am generally anti-authority, and I am far less likely to trust mass narratives than most people.

And finally, I am more comfortable than most with the fact that there are a lot of things for which there is no dispositive answer. I am willing to look at a question and consider a range of possible answers without actually setting on one.

For better or worse, that is who I am. And so all of that contributes to any theories I might be more predisposed to consider.

I share many of these same biases; I am naturally anti-groupthink, distrust the motivations of the left, have little normalcy bias and disbelieve official propaganda. But as I’ve written about extensively on this Substack, I also believe that this world is controlled by a small number of central bank owning families who have very specific and very nefarious long-term goals, that they are parasitizing off the masses whose core values are Christian-derived egalitarianism which allowed this financial system to come into place, and that behind this system is the possibility of an extremely malevolent Demiurge whose goal is to prevent the God-souls within each of us from achieving gnosis and ascending beyond the petty flawed materialism of this world. These are my biases, and I will assess new events through this prism unless my prism later updates, which it may.

As attractive as it is to try to adopt simple black-and-white rules for the world about whether something is always or never a psyop or false flag, it doesn’t work that way. As the wonderful and erudite L.P. Koch states,

It amazes me how many on the “real left”, who otherwise see clearly that our democracy is a joke and that we’re ruled by war-profiteering oligarchs, still can’t get out of the “Trump is an evil fascist” talking point, incapable of looking any further, even of just trying on a different angle for a change.

Equally startling is the “everything is a psyop” gang, who live in a world (or rather up their arse) in which all is “staged” and scripted: the mirror-image of leftist subjectivism & schizo-level relativism where nothing really exists except what’s floating in their own heads (the unappetizing float-in-itself).

There are many ways to make people believe 2+2=5.

In other words, while it may be attractive for some to assume either everything or nothing is a psyop1, that’s clearly wrong, and one must use one’s discernment and judgment when approaching any particular issue. Oh no, use one’s own discernment and judgment, how scary! And at the same time retain flexibility to avoid dogma and consciously acknowledge that one may be wrong, that there are multiple levels of truth and we are finite, limited and subjective – oh no, radical uncertainty!

This brings me back to an old favorite quote of mine by Maurice Samuel in his otherwise insane You Gentiles about how one cannot ultimately rely on anyone’s analysis or judgment other than yourself. Certainly don’t rely on mine:

There is no test or guarantee of a man’s wisdom or his reliability beyond what he says about life itself. Life is the touchstone: books must be read and understood in order that we may compare our experience in life with the sincere report of the experience of others. But such a one, who has read all the books extant on history and art, is of no consequence unless they are an indirect commentary on what he feels around him.

Hence, if I have drawn chiefly on experience and contemplation and little on books – which others will discovery without my admission – this does not affect my competency, which must be judged by standards infinitely more difficult of application. Life is not so simple that you can test a man’s nearness to truth by giving him a college examination.

Such examinations are mere games – they have no relation to reality. You may desire some such easy standard by which you can judge whether or not a man is reliable: Does he know much history? Much biology? Much psychology? If not, he is not worth listening to. But it is part of the frivolity of our outlook to reduce life to a set of rules, and thus save ourselves the agony of constant references to first principles. No: standardized knowledge is no guarantee of truth. Put down a simple question – a living question, like this: “Should A. have killed B.?” Ask it of ten fools: five will say “Yes”, five will say “No.” Ask it of ten intelligent men: five will say “Yes,” five will say “No.” Ask it of ten scholars: five will say “Yes,” five will say “No.” The fools will have no reasons for their decisions: the intelligent men will have a few reasons for and as many against; the scholars will have more reasons for and against. But where does the truth lie?

What, then, should be the criterion of a man’s reliability?

There is none. You cannot evade your responsibility thus by entrusting your salvation into the hands of a priest-specialist. A simpleton may bring you salvation and a great philosopher may confound you.

And so to life, as I have seen it working in others and felt it within myself, I refer the truth of what I say. And to books I refer only in so far as they are manifestations of life.

And this leads us into the question: if one is aware of their biases and outlook, exactly how should one assess new information?

---

Grounding mechanisms

It is important for one to have a grounding mechanism by which one analyzes new information. A grounding mechanism is a way to take in outside feedback and check it against one’s existing beliefs to see if the beliefs are correct or need updating. There are at least two grounding mechanisms, although there are likely others:

1. the traditional scientific method where independent third parties can try to repeat experiments to judge the veracity of the theory (the scientific method has been corrupted in the modern era, unfortunately, via a focus on “scientific consensus” and perverse funding incentives which corrupt experiment results), and
2. a focus on recursive prediction, i.e. if one’s worldview predicts certain things in the future and if those things don’t come to pass, then that means that one’s worldview is wrong to a certain extent and should be updated.

A weaker grounding mechanism is to ask cui bono? – who benefits from an action? It is weaker because one can often craft arguments for multiple sides about who benefits, as we see with Librarian’s pushback above.

If you do not have a grounding mechanism for which you can recursively update your beliefs, then you may easily get sucked into and believing unprovable, unfalsifiable theories that will lead you in wrong directions. For example, I generally stay away from ideas like UFOs because there is no way to verify whether the theories being promoted are correct or not.

There is no authority or expert coming to save you on this, not me, not anyone else: you need your own grounding mechanism.

This is also why I knew very quickly that the Q movement was a psyop based on the Soviet’s Operation Trust. Q promised results (with always moving targets) based on innuendo and never explained the logic behind his arguments or predictions. An irreparable red flag. It’s also why Simplicius’s followers are hopeless; he’s been promising Total Russian Victory for 2.5 years now with nothing to show for it yet retains a mass following. Endless hopium is always popular.

One could always just discard a focus on ascertaining truth entirely – no grounding mechanism needed – and go off Carl Schmitt’s friend/enemy distinction. In other words, one could look at the Trump assassination attempt from a dissident perspective and simply argue that the anti-white, pro-globalist FBI and CIA must be behind it because they are middle America’s enemies; therefore doing whatever one can to smear those enemies can only be good. There’s an impulse and an attraction to that, but ultimately that approach is wrong because the right and the left have fundamentally different propagation strategies, and one cannot use the other’s strategies and be effective. The right’s fundamental impulse is one of law and order, transparency and strong and immediate justice; to fall into the left’s impulse of oligarchy, deceit, lies and drawn-out chaos is not an effective strategy, in my opinion.

One may note that this analysis is not meant for the masses who are incapable of independent analysis.2 It is meant for ideological dissidents who are trying to escape from the propaganda that has been force-fed to them all their lives, or perhaps even only a subset of them. Most people (NPCs/hylics) are meant to be led by a strong ruler and without it they can go insane. What we’re seeing from the masses is that they’re losing their trust in the media which has been their de-facto strong ruler and they don’t know what do. A grounding mechanism cannot help them because they cannot think for themselves. If you walk these people through a step-by-step reasoning process they will follow along, maybe nod their head in understanding, then promptly forget everything you told them. This is because it is ultimately about a thought process and not one specific line of argument. I still empathize with the masses, though.

---

Putting it together

Based on the overwhelming evidence this was simply an extremely close assassination attempt, not a false flag or psyop. It missed by the width of a hair. It is debatable whether the attempted assassin was MK-Ultra groomed by globohomo and then given access to the rooftop, or whether the attempted assassin was simply a mentally ill shitlib who was spurred to action by globohomo’s incessant “Trump = Hitler” propaganda. Multiple nationalist politicians worldwide have recently been murdered (Shinzo Abe), attempted murdered (Bolsonaro), imprisoned (Khan in Pakistan), or face imprisonment (Matteo Salvini) even though globalist politicians have not faced any real serious attempts against their lives and which is another curious data point. It is an open question whether the Secret Service is simply incompetent now due to DEI or whether this opening for the attack was planned in advance, although the evidence points toward the latter. There’s plenty to debate over which will likely never be resolved – especially by the corrupt FBI’s investigation. But the attack did happen and it wasn’t a false flag nor a psyop to boost Trump’s popularity; they wanted him dead.

Lastly, please don’t take this post as a ringing Trump endorsement. I’ve made my feelings about the man known as he is a very flawed individual and no politician is coming to save you. Even if he was a Superman, there are certain structure issues that no one, Trump or anyone else, will be able to fix even if he wins the upcoming election (assuming the election happens): a $32 trillion national debt with a $2 trillion a year deficit, 30% of U.S. tax receipts going toward debt interest payments alone, and 20 million illegal Democrat voters let into the country in just the past 4 years.

In a sense this is all meaningless kayfabe to titilate the public as the country continues to fall off the cliff.

Good entertainment, though. Very exciting.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 Note that the term psyop is an imprecise one and I don’t like it because it contains two quite different meanings within it: (1) military operations usually aimed at influencing the enemy’s state of mind through noncombative means, (2) government use of a person or phenomenon to influence a population’s opinions and attitudes

2 Most people do not have internal dialogues according to a 2007 University of Nevada Department of Psychology study on college students.  Per the study, regarding the frequency of common phenomena of inner experience (inner speech, inner seeing (aka images), unsymbolized thinking, feeling, and sensory awareness), only between 22% to 34% of the individuals studied had frequent internal dialogues: 

If this study is accurate, most people may simply be meat robots, lacking thoughts inside their heads, and they react to stimuli as they experience it.

I usually try to stick to a specific writing schedule, with many future posts written weeks or months in advance. However, sometimes there is a political or cultural development which upends those plans. The last two times this happened was my 10/9/2023 concern that the October 7 Hamas attack could lead to a much-expanded regional war (which has not developed so far) and prior to that 8/24/23 commentary on Prigozhin and Wagner’s leadership’s assassination by the Russian deep state by blowing their plane out of the air.

This is a post with some preliminary analysis on the Trump assassination attempt. It is preliminary and future information may come out and contradict this. There are a couple of points to make first though:

1. I previously argued on July 7, 2023 that the establishment would attempt to imprison and/or murder Trump as a symbol of white middle America, regardless of whether he cucked on policy moving forward. I compared him to what the Bolsheviks did to the Romanov’s.
2. In Part 3 of my recent history of Trump’s presidency, I backed off this prediction a bit, noting that most of Trump’s criminal trials had been pushed back past the election, that Trump caved on the $95 billion Ukraine aid bill that contained provisions that would trigger automatic impeachment if Trump became president again and tried to withdraw from Ukraine, and that globohomo was taking defensive steps in case Trump did win. In other words, it increasingly looked like Trump had been skin-suited through backroom deals/pressure and, if he won, he would govern like a Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio.
3. The way people view new events, especially televised events, is always curious to watch. I discussed here how I and a liberal friend back in 2015 viewed a short video and came away with entirely different interpretations, even though whatever information was needed to assess the video was contained within the video itself. What hope is there of agreement on interpretation when what seems like a black and white situation is still disputed?
4. For less clear-cut videos, ones which require interpretation beyond the corners of the video itself, on what basis should one assess information? One requires a grounding mechanism that ties theory to reality, or else it becomes too easy to believe one’s subjective whims. Traditional grounding mechanisms include (1) the scientific method (which has since been corrupted by scientism) and (2) making predictions about the future, and if they’re wrong one updates in a recursive manner one’s worldview. For specific political events, where there is a lot of conflicting information and one cannot expect truth or veracity from the authorities such as the FBI, DOJ, or media, a good rule of thumb fallback is to ask cui bono? – who benefits?

It is on this basis that I am approaching the Trump assassination attempt today. Because the FBI and DOJ are utterly corrupt I do not expect an honest investigation from them, and not from the media either. The best information to review is video information that is released contemporaneously or close to it with the event, always with the caveat that it could be superseded by subsequently released information. As mentioned, facts are subject to change, but I note the following so far:

1. An eyewitness reported that he told the police and Secret Service that the shooter was climbing onto the roof and crawling 5-7 minutes before the shooting and they did nothing.
2. Note the shooter position vs Trump position. The distance is only 125m / 400 feet. That there was not a Secret Service team on this roof is inexcusable.
3. The counter-sniper teams saw the shooter and let him get off multiple shots before he was killed, which grazed Trump’s ear, killed a bystander behind Trump and seriously wounded another. The video of the counter-sniper team is here. This photo is amazing:
4. The Trump team had in the past three weeks requested additional security from the Department of Homeland Security which the Biden administration turned down: “A source familiar with Trump’s security detail tells Federalist that the former and future president’s detail has been asking for beefed up protection and resources for weeks, but has been rebuffed time and again by Biden’s DHS.”
5. Biden recently told donors, “It’s time to put Trump in the bullseye.” Now, this quote may be taken out of context, but the general principle still holds: the media’s demonization of Trump since 2016 has been extremely intense, consistently calling Trump Hitler 2.0. The New Republic just did it recently:
6. The globohomo media within hours released its talking points, which were to downplay the assassination attempt to the maximum extent possible: Don’t say there was a shooting “targeting Trump”, don’t call it an “assassination attempt”, don’t have “serious” body language or use “color”, don’t say it was “scary” or dramaticize, don’t bring in guests to condemn the attack.
7. Various liberals on social media initially stated the blood was a squib and/or Trump was targeted with a BB gun. Both were false. They also immediately  it was a false flag to improve his popularity, and that no one other than Trump was injured or died (someone right behind Trump died and another was seriously injured).
8. Deep state actor Elon Musk endorsed Trump right after the shooting.

Here and here are two videos of the assassination attempt. Trump displayed remarkable fortitude when he rose, which you can see in the second video and is quite iconic (after his security detail were very slow in responding; one may note that he had multiple women on his security team, a terrible sign for readiness and competence). Here’s an image of it, which is iconic and will be remembered:

Here’s a photo of the dead shooter (warning: graphic), also see here for less graphic video.

One may note that the shooting distance was 125 meters / 400 feet and it was against a stationary target. This is a very easy shot for someone in a prone position with a tripod, perhaps a scope and in clear weather which even beginner shooters could pretty easily hit. It’s a miracle Trump survived. For comparison, Oswald’s assassination of Kennedy occurred from 265 feet, which was much closer, but was against a moving target. Oswald was documented taking 200-500 yard shots in the USMC against stationary targets.

---

Analysis

Okay, so let’s put this together. You have a shooter shooting from an outside roof close to where Trump was speaking which should have had Secret Service protection on due to it’s proximity. There is zero excuse for this failure. You had a bystander who warned the police and Secret Service detail 5-7 minutes before the shooting that the shooter was crawling onto the roof and they did nothing. You have counter-snipers who saw the individual but did not engage until after the shooter got off multiple shots. You have the Biden Administration which denied Trump greater protection and Biden said Trump was in the “crosshairs.”

Worse is the political situation. The Democrats can’t collectively decide whether to dump Biden and the polls all show he will lose badly against Trump, and their backup Kamala does not poll much better. There are only a couple months until the election and they cannot easily choose someone other than Kamala. The lawfare against Trump has been pushed back past the election and it’s unclear if the far-leftist judge in New York will be willing to jail the national front-runner for a so-called crime no one understands. Also, Trump has not yet announced his Vice President and there is no backup politician who has the depth and intensity of the support that Trump has.

It is literally a miracle that Trump is not dead now given how close the shooter was.

Some like Librarian of Celaeno suggest we should withhold our judgment until more facts come out and there is an investigation. I pushed back on this, stating yes, we should wait for more facts, but based on a long history of whitewashing that I have no faith in an official investigation to reveal the truth of what’s happened here. Rather, the best evidence is video evidence released contemporaneously with the event, or soon after the event, before it gets scrubbed by censors. I’m a little surprised Librarian is still willing to give the benefit of the doubt to our skinsuited, horrendous institutions even after eight years of in-your-face lies. He also suggests praying for the shooter and his backers, an attitude which is antithetical to my own.

So let’s ask cui bono – who benefits if Trump had been killed? Some really unfortunate people suggested that the intention of the shooter was simply to wound Trump in order to boost his popularity – listen, you get off a shot at 400 feet against a moving target and try to wound the guy’s ear. This might be the most stupid line of argument I’ve heard in a long time. Also, does Trump need a boost in popularity? He’s polling multiple points higher than Biden, who is currently in a political struggle for his life. Trump does not need another boost from an attempted assassination. And even if he did, is there anything to demonstrate Trump has someone on his team who would be willing and able to take a shot against him to merely graze his ear and then keep quiet about it for all eternity, assuming the shooter survives? Trump’s governing incompetence is legendary. The level of schizophrenia needed for this position is remarkably high.

So the shooter cleary intended to kill Trump. Well, why now? Well, it’s before the Republican National Convention and Trump hasn’t announced his Vice President yet. If he was killed it would create huge chaos with no clear front-runner; the Republicans would be in an even worse situation compared to the Democrats. In other words, the motivation for this shooter to be backed by globohomo institutions is extremely strong. Additionally, if Trump was killed despite being the national frontrunner and in such a public way, in front of tens of thousands of people, that could indeed trigger the fabled Redneck Rebellion (either a real one or sponsored by FBI agents like Ray Epps) which would then give globohomo a 1/6 style rationale to brutally crack down on middle America and possibly cancel elections. Now THAT would have been an excellent result for globohomo — and it was missed by an inch or two. Instead, this is a terrible result: a barely wounded Trump with a big upshot in popularity, motivation for revenge, but no triggered redneck rebellion or RNC chaos.

Based on this analysis of who benefits, as well as the information available on the shooting at this time, and it seems likely to me that this shooter, regardless of whatever information comes out about him being a “loner” or “crazy” or whatever, was likely clandestinely supported by the FBI and/or CIA. I was hoping he would be taken alive to be questioned, but unfortunately not even an Oswald scenario for him where we could get a glimpse…

Keep in mind, again, that this is my working theory based on my gut feel and review of available information so far as well as my background understanding of globohomo and is subject to change.

Alex Jones (who is not reliable but still has interesting points every now and then) suggests that globohomo will next try to poison Trump (they also have a readily accessible CIA heart attack gun) and/or kill Biden, possibly by a false-flag Trump supporter.

I hope that Trump views this extremely close call as a wake up call that he can’t negotiate or bargain with globohomo – they want him dead, even if he’s partially skinsuited himself to them – he still symbolizes white middle America and they hate him and want him destroyed. His first term was disappointing the way he bent over backwards to accommodate them, even if certain legal and political realities forced him to. I have also suggested on multiple occasions that Trump needs to pick a Vice President further to the right than he is in order to discourage assassination attempts – Vance, Rubio and the other globohomo guy simply don’t cut it. I suggest Mike Flynn (even though he has some weird beliefs and was possibly compromised in Turkey) or Rand Paul (which I know is a weird and funny pick, but he has the best dissident voting record in the Senate and globohomo both tried to murder him and one of his aides in the past couple years). There are other possibilities – someone suggested to me Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater, but I havn’t looked into him, or Thomas Massie – but the finalists that have been announced are all mediocre at best. Rubio is a closeted homosexual deep state puppet and Vance was a never-Trumper through the 2016 election and wrote a book which the NYT loved bashing middle America hillbillies. Pass. Vivek is a scam artist. Another hard pass is Tucker Carlson, who is a CIA agent pretending to be a populist and who I covered in the past.

Globohomo very likely has to double down after this; if this very close call shook Trump, he will be more determined to root out their filth and corruption. How they choose to double down at this point is unclear, but there’s only a couple months until the election. Choose well, Donald.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

This is a post about how recent events and expected future events means that sitting on the sidelines is no longer possible. It argues that the best strategy against our overlords is one of narrative delegitimization – but if one focuses on unimportant layers of the global control pyramid then one’s efforts will be misdirected at best or play into their hands at worst. I hope my American readers had a Happy 4th of July.

John Carter had a recent post about the nature of fear, both our own and of our overlords. It’s a good post and worth reading, and I agree with much of it. There’s a couple points he makes which deserve elaboration on and some pushback, though, with the hope that it may offer some clarity to readers because these issues are complicated and confusing.

John wrote:

I don’t think anyone’s more terrified right now than Western elites. They know they’ve fumbled the ball, that they’ve lost their footing, and they’re flailing around weightlessly as they try to catch it without faceplanting. None of their plans are really working. None of their usual levers of control are as effective as they used to be; some, such as the media, have almost stopped responding altogether. Their people are turning against them for a dozen different reasons, all of them excellent. Their great economic machine is sluggish, its components grinding together and seizing up. Their enemies abroad are on the march, or mobilizing. It’s all coming for them at once, and they don’t appear to have any idea what to do. You’re seeing that deer in the headlights look a lot now from prime ministers and presidents, and it isn’t always because of dementia. They’re in over their heads. Children, playing a game that became all too real when they weren’t paying attention.

A discussion of fear depends on what level of our elites we are discussing: do the unelected civil service who make up the great Washington D.C. bureaucracy hate and fear Middle America? Of course. Does the media fear the masses over whom they spout their endless lies? Yes. What about our elected politicians? Definitely. But it is important to keep in mind that nation-states are fairly low on the totem pole of the One World hierarchy, which I discussed previously here. As Iain Davis explained,

Agreement on the pillars [of world governance] does not suggest all national governments are of one, single hive mind. It suggests that governments do not control the global governance system. They are subject to it, just like the rest of us. The best they can achieve is “partner” status. And they are not senior partners.

The pillars did not originate with national governments. The pillars were mapped out by public-private globalist think tanks and international organisations that serve the interests of oligarchs.

The pyramid of world control is mapped as follows, although it is the owners of the world central banks at the highest layer:

I believe the higher levels felt fear at Trump’s unexpected 2016 win which explains their over-the-top reaction — it was a major wrench in their long-term plans — although Trump has since been absorbed into the system and our upper-level elites no longer fear him winning in 2024. Nor do they fear a transition from a unipolar to a multi-polar world. Indeed, they gloat about it. Here are a couple examples.

This was almost ten years ago:

Alex Soros: “The question is, which of these flags will fall first?” and includes the American flag. It sure sounds like an implosion of the country will hurt him!

Here you have the WEF predicting that the world will be multi-polar by 2030 in a since-deleted 2016 article called “8 predictions for the world in 2030”:

A multi-polar world transition must really be a devastating blow to our elites – they’re so scared they’re both predicting it and taking the steps needed to make it happen!

And here you have WEF head Klaus Schwab warn his fellow elites to be prepared for an “angrier world” (because they will be intentionally dynamiting the economy and opening the West’s borders).

So yeah, you can see fear from our lower and mid-level elites, but also rapacious greed; the level of blatant theft occurring now with trillions being publicly stolen feels like a mafia bust-out before the country implodes. Meanwhile the upper level elites look to be firmly in control and a switch from a unipolar to a multi-polar world will result in a tremendous amount of pain for those in America, but not for them. This perspective is important to understand as it is easy to get lost in the endless web of narrative (including alternative narrative) lies and misdirections. If you want to end this system, nothing less than a dismantling of or at least a full nationalization of the world’s central banks, along with corresponding extremely intensive audits, plus an end of fractional reserve banking will suffice, along with the end of globalist entities like the UN, WHO, World Bank, etc. Take your eye off this ball and you’ll end up suckered by unimportant distractions like which controlled party will win the UK or French elections (or see Brexit: what amazing, incredible changes ever came of that? Did it result in decreased immigration to England or greater domestic production?). Kynosargas was right about the lack of impact of elections…

Our overlords are not invincible and the more people who understand the structure of the modern world the weaker they will be.

John also writes:

After all, why do we endure all of this? Why do we practice tolerance? It is certainly not because we value tolerance, as we are endlessly instructed we must, by people whom we despise, and whose false values we repudiate.

We obey because we are afraid of losing what little we have. Our meagre savings. Our 401Ks and RRSPs. Our bullshit email jobs. Our mortgaged houses. Our ten-year-old used Hondas, driven on a lease-to-own basis. We are still just comfortable enough that we fear being uncomfortable, and we fear that open defiance of the regime will lead it to turn its beady eyes upon us – fire us from our jobs, kick us out of school, kick us off of social media, incite our friends and family and professional colleagues to ostracize us, put us on no-fly lists, and freeze our bank accounts….

I do not exempt myself from this judgment. Like most, I keep my head down, within reason, for instance by writing under a pseudonym. And although I do essentially nothing but write, which is to say complain impotently about things on the Internet, still I experience the occasional frisson of paranoia whenever I go through an airport, for example. Will this be the day that I find I’ve been added to a no-fly list? Or the day the knock on the door comes from the police, to deliver charges for violation of some new hate speech statute? Or the day I get doxxed? Or … well, you get the idea.

This brings to mind a quote from Julian Assange, who I covered here. According to Assange, we aren’t able to sit out of this fight. Either we are a participant of history or a victim of it:

I think first it’s necessary to have an understanding that one is either a participant in history or a victim of it, and that there is no other option. It is actually not possible to remove oneself from history, because of the nature of economic…and intellectual interaction. Hence, it is not possible to break oneself off….Because no one wants to be a victim, one must therefore be a participant, and in being a participant, the most important thing to understand is that your behavior affects other people’s behavior, and your courage will inspire actions. On the other hand, a lack of courage will suppress them.

And:

Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love. In a modern economy it is impossible to seal oneself off from injustice. If we have brains or courage, then we are blessed and called on not to frit these qualities away, standing agape at the ideas of others, winning pissing contests, improving the efficiencies of the neocorporate state, or immersing ourselves in obscuranta, but rather to prove the vigor of our talents against the strongest opponents of love we can find.

Look. According to public 2017 statements by the WEF (revelation of the method), by 2030 you will have a social credit score assigned to you just like China. They boast: “By 2030, we’ll see, for example, credit scoring expanding into ‘life scoring’. Identity and reputation will be digitised and analysed in minute detail, shaping a future where a personal ‘trust score’ will be the norm, with all the benefits and drawbacks that might bring.” How will a social credit score be implemented? They will have a woke AI scan all of your internet, phone, search, and text records in order to do it. Have a bad score? No loan for you, no credit card for you, no bank account funds for you. Cut out from society with your funds stolen. This is the primary purpose of AI – not ChatGPT or Claude! And it doesn’t take a high level of AI sophistication to do it. They simply needed the right level of infrastructure (5G rollout to absorb massive amounts of data) and political environment to move it forward.

Combining this with the upcoming rolling of programmable CBDCs — which are right around the corner worldwide per the Atlantic Council, either released slowly like the War on Cash or via an acute artificial crisis via a stock market crash, World War 3, or a false-flag like Cyber Polygon — the digital currencies will be programmed to allow you access to your funds only if you are fully up-to-date with dangerous mRNA vaccines and many other requirements. Even then they will limit your consumption: you will only have the privilege of buying meat once a week, or you can only travel more than 15 miles from where you live occasionally. Not to mention you will “own nothing and be happy” as we are seeing with endlessly increasing housing, car and food prices. This is neoliberal feudal hell in action and, if fully implemented, will result in a micro-managed level of control which will be the greatest loss of freedom in human history.

This leads to a couple conclusions:

1. If one assumes globohomo is going to institute a permanent control grid via social credit scores, CBDCs and patrolled by a woke AI, most people not just writing but also reading dissident Substackers are going to end up cut out of the system sooner or later (i.e. you).
2. Who wants to live in a worldwide prison? What kind of world is that to leave for future generations? It is extremely dark, evil and depressing if one does not actively oppose it.
3. As shown by the COVID heart attack jabs unleashed worldwide, there is nowhere to hide and nowhere to run. Either oppose this evil to the extent that you can or be consumed by it.

Now, I can only really speak for myself here. One cannot enter the arena of something one does not understand, and I did not understand the picture of the modern world really until (1) the Trump presidency years revealed the “deep state” beyond a shadow of a doubt and (2) the worldwide unified COVID response revealed the higher layers of One World government beyond a shadow of a doubt. Combined with both of these reveals was, unfortunately, an unbelievable dawning understanding of the NPC mind — a mind that refuses to think for itself and blindly follows authority no matter what (to the point of screaming at the top of their lungs “Orange Man Bad” for four years, accepting ultra-dangerous mRNA vaccines into their own bodies and shutting down the world out of fear). This had to be seen to be believed; it is still insane to me the way most people think.

Sophisticated modern propaganda has hacked and corrupted mankind’s natural inclination to believe authority figures — religious authority figures, technical authority figures, scientific authority figures — to further our elite’s own objectives at the expense of the masses. If there is ever to be amelioration of this situation the masses must ultimately evolve to discard official propaganda in whatever form it takes in favor of one’s own critical thinking skills and self-assessment. No one else will do it for you; but if you do this very difficult but rewarding work you will have an effect on everyone else. Changes to society start from changes to individuals; stop hoping for a political leader to save you.

Of course, it was easier to avoid these now pressing trends prior to the Trump era. Prior to Trump and COVID it was easy to separate the personal from the political; the relative economic prosperity and social stability induced an artificial, shallow mass blindness. It is only in a period of no threats and unprecedented prosperity, to a level never seen before historically, that one could afford to make such a distinction. But these times are over and the personal has become the political again. Reading about how historical conflicts resulted in families torn apart, brother on brother violence like in the U.S. Civil War wasn’t really understandable during modern periods of opulence; it’s becoming more understandable now…

After internalizing these ideas and seeing where our upper level overlords are directing the world, it became impossible to sit on the sidelines: one becomes, as Assange said, either a participant or a victim in this story. If one decides to participate, what would be the best way to oppose globohomo at this time? They control the money supply, they control the media, they control the security apparatus, they control all major institutions not just within the U.S. but worldwide, if there is a Redneck Rebellion they will likely control that too via CIA and FBI plants (see Ray Epps); what they are desperate to control, though, are people’s perceptions. It is far more costly to rule over a population via hard power than using soft power.

The correct attack, then, is an attack of delegitimization. Hence, this little writing hobby. This isn’t to argue that my effect is large or even moderate (it’s aeasy trap to fall into to inflate one’s ego about an enlarged impact one is having), but no matter; I believe this is the best use of my time to combat this nightmare horror show, even though there are dangers involved in doing so.

As Mattias Desmet states:

We must focus our attention on this: The art of good speaking forms the logical remedy for a society sick with that new kind of lie that we call propaganda. We are going through a metaphysical revolution, comparable to the metaphysical revolution that led to the Enlightenment. This revolution essentially boils down to this: a society led by a propagandized mass is replaced by a society led by a group of people connected through sincere speaking.

In a sense, this revolution also transforms the imbalances created by rationalism; it turns them back into relationships. Sincere speaking is resonant speaking – it connects the Soul of man with the outside world; it restores the connection with fellow humans, one’s own body, one’s own drives, society, and nature.

The alternative to opposing this system is to lose the basic autonomy and dignity needed to be human. It would be hell on earth, a worse form of slavery than has ever existed in human history. Everyone has an incentive to vigorously oppose this other than the central bank owners and their top lackeys, so the issue is one of populism vs. upper level elites and their minions, along with the vast NPC hordes who blindly believe whatever they are told, not ultimately one of race, gender, sexual orientation.

It is likely that little will ultimately come of these writings – 20 million illegals have streamed into the U.S. in the past four years alone, the monetary printer is printing $2 trillion+ a year, Trump has been absorbed, woke AI and CBDCs are ready for deployment and almost everyone, while getting angrier at their declining quality of life, remains clueless – but no matter. There is a spiritual component involved. As Ernst Junger wrote, “You may then wonder what the goal of writing is assuming it has a goal. It is the creative instant itself, in which something timeless is produced, something that cannot be wiped out. The universe has affirmed itself in the individual, and that must suffice, whether or not anyone else notices it. In 1942, when I visited Picasso on Rue des Grands-Augustins, he said to me: “Look, this painting, which I have just completed, is going to have a certain effect; but this effect would be exactly the same, metaphysically speaking, if I wrapped the painting up in paper and cosigned it to a corner. It would be exactly the same thing as if ten thousand people had admired it.””

I hope you found this post helpful in some manner.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.