Excellent piece, and I passionately hope you are correct about the end of this insanity. There is no question that the current propaganda driven state most closely resembles late stage Soviet Russia in its denial of reality. I would defend your use of the word “traditional” especially in terms of the family and gender roles because while they have evolved similarly in all cultures for practical reasons they are also traditional to those cultures and the word evolved has different connotations to many people.
The essay is full of excellent points but the word “transmaggeddon” is priceless.
I have found empathy for the people who were sold the con. One person I know is the most feminine personality I have met. She reminds me of pictures of Victorian "kept" women in her softness. She, of all women, should have come as a target of this Hellish con. And so she changed her name, cut her hair, and now wants to go with they/them pronouns. Still, she blushes.
Tragic. I have known a few who would have been happy wives and mothers had it been fifty years ago, but today live quite different lives. Much more lonely.
I would argue that the word "traditional" in this text (and others like it) should be avoided, for a number of reasons.
Firstly, because of how it's been tinged in the public consciousness as "bad" when it comes to everything outside of non-white peoples' cultures, cuisine, and such.
Secondly, and more importantly, because autonomous, natural, spontaneous and evolved all are more correct when it comes to family structure, systems of ethics and laws, notions of justice and fairness as such, and so on with the anthropological descriptors.
Why men were forced to become soldiers in the armies of nobles and kings will depend on where and when we look. The vikings weren't press-ganged nor were they serfs serving a feudal lord as a way of paying taxes, something many of their opponents were during the establishment of the Danelaw (and the again, many Englishmen were not beholden but were instead yeomen): this simple and in scope limited example serves to show how difficult it immediately becomes to claim "men this" or "women that". Or 1960s Tunisia could be compared to present-day Iran. Or 17th century rural Sweden with 17th century Swedish cities.
Basically, what one can claim is that when left to solve their own problems in their own ways, most if not all peoples no matter race or culture or whatever, will develop good methods - especially if failure means starving, freezing, or dehydrating due to implementing moronic ideas dreamed up by a priesthood (any priesthood).
Hence, evolved and autonomous and natural and spontaneous: not traditional. Tradition simply means doing something a certain way because that's the way it's always been done, good or bad, inefficient or "bene-efficient".
All good points, and I agree. I think traditional is immediately accessible in this context though. It contrasts with artificial or enforced alternatives that would not emerge.
How about "organically evolved"? Not only is it literally true, there's also a little verbal jujitsu there.
Progs must publicly and loudly confess their faith in Teh Science!!1! - and "evolved" sounds sciency. Don't wanna argue against that! Who doesn't like "organic" and wants to argue against that either?
I hear you on this, Rikard, but I have to say I like the use of the word "traditional."
For me, the word has very positive connotations, and I think it does generally for women who are abandoning feminism for greener pastures - hence the term among the younger generation of "trad-wife."
The term might specifically appeal to women - for me it brings up the idea of security, but without all the baggage of the modern concept of "safety" or some connection to government surveillance.
Hmm, yes, possibly a difference between how a man would understand [tradition] in this context - would be silly of me to deny that possibility.
But: My angle of approach on this stems from something I didn't initially bring up:
My (and even more so my wife's) background in academia, which involved reading all the foundational works for political postmodernism - from there, I know that getting the opponent to use your terminology, or to adapt to how you weigh and (e)value(ate) the meaning of words and symbols, is a way to make the opponent accept your world-view without understanding it is even happening.
And [traditional] has been one of the go-to terms for all kinds of postmodernists (and their offspring in the family-tree of ideas) for any and all things WrongBadEvil. Hence, to me picking [traditonal] seems like accepting and adapting to the very linguistical*, semantic and etymological meta-structures the postmodernists claim as objective truths.
I'd much rather say "normal wife" or "normal marriage" or "normal family" than [traditional] any of those, precisely because of the persistent postmodern assault on meaning (which has been ongoing since the 1960s).
In short and to travestise** a famous quote from a movie: "Foucault you magnificent bastard! I've read your book!"
* and ** I'm unsure if these words are proper English but I hope the meaning is clear.
PS: It is also possible and plausible that what is happening is younger people reclaiming a word and taking control of its meaning and usage, such things are not without precedence and to make a final observation on that note:
A good sign that a change in the meaning/usage of a word is natural, spontaneous and autonomously evolving is a) if it is from the ground up, and b) if it feels natural in how and when it appears and is used. Contrast it with the attempts to get "wamyn", "latinx", "minor attracted person" and such normalised: that they are mandated top-down and are the products of conscious planning with an agenda and a plan (even an ideology) behind it. DS
While your criticism of 'priesthood' is well-founded, tribes who follow the advice of their mushroom-chomping shamans seem to do about as well as the globalists in the EU.
If we continue with the image of a priesthood, the difference between that and a shaman (or sejdkarl, wiseman/-woman, et c) is that a priesthood is a bureaucracy first and foremost, and thus subject to all the vices and pitfalls and iron rules governing all bureaucracies unless consciously checked.
Terry Pratchett in his "Small Gods" used the image of a hermit crab to symbolise (a) religion: eventually, the crab dies inside its shell, but from the outside there's no visible difference, so people go on worshipping the shell of a dead thing. And after enough time, that there ever was a crab has been forgotten, and all that remains is a shell of rules and ritual with no other purpose to them than pure performance.
Certainly, that holds true for the UN, the WEF, the USA's actual leaders, and many other powerful groups thinking they follow some ideal or other while trampling all that said ideal allegedly is meant to be for the improvement of.
Speaking of hermit crabs, what about the Ark of the Covenant, an empty box that held... what?... before the Philistines captured it in battle and took it away from the priests of Shiloh?
On the plus side, propaganda isn't the only thing they're addicted to. If recent reports are anything to go by, a lot of their personal lives seem to be a chaotic mess of hedonism, chasing the next high.
The future belongs to them that can exercise self-discipline, run sane healthy households, be contributing members of their communities, build trust by being trustworthy, and keep their sh*t together, not these sideshow freaks.
I absolutely agree. Self-discipline and an ability to focus would be just two fairly basic traits that seem to be in short supply. I am frequently astonished at the number of adults who cannot leave their phones alone for more than a few seconds.
I am currently on a kind of journey of self discovery myself as I remove distraction and improve my physical health. If I had to summarize what works it is living like it is 1975. Nothing fancy.
Yeah, I'm a big advocate for *leaving the phone in the car* and also for the *dumb phone*. Every mobile phone is a mobile microphone. Think of it that way. Don't take it anywhere you wouldn't invite total strangers, and exercise every opportunity to leave it behind, turn it all the way off, or even take out the battery (if you can't easily remove the battery, get a different phone!). It is a gesture of respect.
Past that, though, it's more than just working on yourself. Don't underestimate the power of just... being the person who always brings a main dish to the potluck, instead of cookies. Our individual health and self-discipline is key, but it's not enough by itself. Our in-person community networks are going to be crucial.
Absolutely agree about networks. I'm learning this now. Post COVID I see many networking and social skills have atrophied. I think the future is for those not stuck inside remote working.
To be sure propaganda has been successful all over the world, but Americans are particularly susceptible because they are relatively naive compared to the rest of the world.
I wouldn’t seat myself in the same car on the “doom train” your article seems to ride, but I’m definitely on the same track — count me as cautiously pessimistic as I write this…on 4 November.
Respectfully, I think you overemphasize the employment (and death) propaganda and underemphasize (propaganda of) the deed. George William Curtis said “Thoughts are bullets,” but, in fact, thoughts are merely the primer — deeds (actions) are the bullets. The classic characterization of propaganda is to look at it as a tool of influence, manipulation and social control — Harold Lasswell’s famous Five W's of Communication: “Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect?” That propaganda, to me, is the soft pillow, the siren’s lullaby that enables and camouflages deeds (actions) intended to convince or compel you to obey. The Leviathan attempts to seduce you before it acts to influence or coerce. (H.L. Mencken said “The State doesn’t just want you to obey, it wants to make you want to obey.”) The real danger, it seems to me, are the State’s many unseen engineers creating a “weighted blanket” of synchronized influence and coercive actions across the breadth and depth of society. That propaganda and the “weighted blanket” of actions are intended to lull and comfort the many, while simultaneously suffocating resistance.
Perhaps the best extant survey of the combined weight of word and deed is in Lisa Pine’s “Dictatorship and Daily Life in 20th-Century Europe.” As she notes, the State imposed itself in “quotidian practices and settings — workplaces, leisure and recreation activities, consumer choices and habits, squares, streets and homes, interactions with friends, family and neighbors…in welfare provision, in the meeting of material desires, as well as by compulsion, repression, violence, and removal of alternate forms of organization, protest, and redress.” A few examples she cites sound eerily familiar in 2024:
In Italy, “Fascist health visitors could dispense advice, but they also had the authority to withhold benefits and even to separate children from their parents.”
”The regime also sought direct conduits to Italian children that would neatly circumvent Italian parents through the schooling system.”
In Germany, the Kraft durch Freude (KdF, Strength through Joy, established in 1933) organization’s activities were described as “joy production.”
By 1939, 43 million Germans had travelled with KdF on subsidized holidays in a process the Nazis dubbed building the ‘national community’. (The population of Germany in 1939 was ~69,600,000, or 80,600,000 if you include Austria, Memelland, and the Sudetenland).
A key point you capture, I suggest, is similar to what Martin Gurri identified in his “Revolt of the Public” — the Leviathan has lost the monopoly on information, and with that, has lost the trust of the publics. Publics — plural — because as Gurri points out, there is no monolithic public; there is no “fixed body of individuals. It is merely persons who are interested in an affair and can affect it only by supporting or opposing the actors.”
What is changing for those publics, tho, as you and Guri note, is access to means. Harold Lasswell said “A means is anything which the propagandist can manipulate; a condition is anything to which he must adapt.” It’s not only the ubiquitous access to means but the speed of their employment that allows those publics to now routinely outpace and ambush the Leviathan; to get inside its OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) Loop and to sabotage its expression of intent.
In Paris during the French Revolution, it could take days to mobilize the sans culottes. Today’s sans culottes mobilize at the speed of X, TikTok, and the like, and increasingly dictate the conditions of engagement. The more the playing field tips toward the publics, the more widespread the elite panic, the more coercive they become, and the less effective they ultimately are. As you say, reality bites. When the National Convention of France created the Revolutionary Tribunal in March of 1793, Georges Danton said “Let us exercise terror so as to pre-empt the people from doing so.” Some things never change.
All the propaganda poison that has been injected into the zeitgeist, have made sections of Western populations indifferent to the social chaos.
"There is no right or wrong culture, wrong or right way of doing things" etc. The socially numb and degenerates always avoiding the difficult task of establishing clear hierarchies & definitive truths within our societies, usually opting to view everything as equally valid based on perspective. Like what you reiterate, reality will always come up top. A Nicholas Gómez Dávila aphorism that has always stuck with me "Relativism is the solution of one who is incapable of putting things in order"
Propaganda is one of many roots of cultural syphilis that leads to brain rot. Most people I believe, will snap out of it when their jobs and security in their neighborhood is threatened. That is the reality. We saw this in Martha's Vineyard in MA, but even still there will be fucking idiots who are beyond salvation. I'll never forget that Norwegian male politician who was raped by a somali and felt bad that the government was going to deport him. You can't fix retard.
I remember one, a white American female, a longtime Wokester and anti-white campaigner. Went to Haiti to help with the latest disaster and was captured and raped for a week. He even videoed it. When she was later interviewed and asked about this she admonished him and blamed Western capitalism. Mental illness in a nutshell.
Most play along because it doesn't affect them. When it does things change rapidly. Martha's Vineyard is a key example. I'd send them all there.
I completely forgot about that one. Only in this timeline that shit like that happens and no one blinks a eye. To think there are people like her, who are the ones making decisions around the country. No wonder we see so much social chaos. There is no rehabilitation for the mentally ill like that. You're right! Start sending them to the affluent neighborhoods like Martha's Vineyard, Hamptons, Pacific Palisades because they support the "plight of the migrant" but they don't want it around them.
That's what its going to take to change. Things unfortunately or fortunately depending on who you ask has to get alot worst before it gets better. People's preservation mechanisms are already kicking in everywhere throughout the West, and all it took was hordes of foreigners from non-White countries. 😏
I really did, and thank you. You showed us there is finally something to be optimistic about, that this idiocy we’re currently enduring is going to end.
Ordinary people hate politics. They don't want it constantly there, when shopping or watching TV etc. That is one of the recent shifts. Even big companies openly stating they are dropping woke agendas. Things are changing.
And I think we must always have hope and remind others of it. As Albert Camus once said, some people expend huge energy just to appear normal. Many are struggling with this onslaught we didn't ask for. often silently. So we must all do our bit to give them hope.
You make some great points here, Spaceman Spiff! I like that you see and explain how their narrative of lies is ever more visibly failing, now that it has destroyed the very foundations of what was once Western Civilization.
I'd love to see this picture painted and story told without using the poison language our propagandizing victimizers have foisted on us. "When you use Their Verbiage, you legitimize Their Ideology".
Instead of using the words of their choosing (e.g. "Liberal", "Diversity", "Whiteness", "Anti-racist") which were chosen to facilitate our victimization, let's adopt words that center us and focus on our wellbeing, words like antiwhite, antiwhiteism, privileged groups, hate hoax, intruders, white erasure, westernkind and biospirit! Language that tells the story where WE are the heroes, and OUR NORMS are what is MORAL! To motivate our people, we must recapture the moral high ground. Undermining our moral high ground is how the antiwhites (temporarily?) defeated us.
I think for pieces like this it is important to focus on the propaganda, and the use of their standard terms works. An article focused on the specific destruction of European heritage would need to challenge their language directly. This one is more about how the propagandists are losing.
No I think we use words that are widely understood to make our points. Arguments can become lost in detail about words while the bigger point is missed. There is a time and place to challenge terminology. But most people don't care.
Agree "most people don't care". I want us to survive and thrive as a people, so I want us to win. We won't win while we stay inside the story written by our victimizers. While our victimizers control the story, we continue to lose like the cuckservatives always have.
I respectfully disagree. I see this same mentality from people trying to explain the subtleties of National Socialism and what Hitler was really trying to accomplish. The very audience they are trying to educate can't see beyond the word Nazi whether they like it or not. They won't hang around long enough to make it through your definitions and alternative terminology.
We take back the story by challenging the underlying foundations, like the role played by propaganda, something most are oblivious to. Also throwing in unfamiliar terms just dilutes the core message.
I agree that attempting to persuade people to alternative views regarding e.g. National Socialism is doomed to fail because of programming. But getting people to see that we are up against AntiWhiteism, or that what is being done to us is White Erasure rather than "Diversity" ("Diversity just means fewer White people") is easy to get across. Our people Immediately sense both the truth of it, and the morality. This is the power of the lexicon nowhiteguilt.org is suggesting.
Excellent piece, and I passionately hope you are correct about the end of this insanity. There is no question that the current propaganda driven state most closely resembles late stage Soviet Russia in its denial of reality. I would defend your use of the word “traditional” especially in terms of the family and gender roles because while they have evolved similarly in all cultures for practical reasons they are also traditional to those cultures and the word evolved has different connotations to many people.
The essay is full of excellent points but the word “transmaggeddon” is priceless.
Indeed. Transmaggedon. That is what some of them think is coming. They are lost souls.
And I do think it is ending because reality exists.
I have found empathy for the people who were sold the con. One person I know is the most feminine personality I have met. She reminds me of pictures of Victorian "kept" women in her softness. She, of all women, should have come as a target of this Hellish con. And so she changed her name, cut her hair, and now wants to go with they/them pronouns. Still, she blushes.
Tragic. I have known a few who would have been happy wives and mothers had it been fifty years ago, but today live quite different lives. Much more lonely.
I am working on getting closer to the people who will be tempted with despair when the con is up.
I would argue that the word "traditional" in this text (and others like it) should be avoided, for a number of reasons.
Firstly, because of how it's been tinged in the public consciousness as "bad" when it comes to everything outside of non-white peoples' cultures, cuisine, and such.
Secondly, and more importantly, because autonomous, natural, spontaneous and evolved all are more correct when it comes to family structure, systems of ethics and laws, notions of justice and fairness as such, and so on with the anthropological descriptors.
Why men were forced to become soldiers in the armies of nobles and kings will depend on where and when we look. The vikings weren't press-ganged nor were they serfs serving a feudal lord as a way of paying taxes, something many of their opponents were during the establishment of the Danelaw (and the again, many Englishmen were not beholden but were instead yeomen): this simple and in scope limited example serves to show how difficult it immediately becomes to claim "men this" or "women that". Or 1960s Tunisia could be compared to present-day Iran. Or 17th century rural Sweden with 17th century Swedish cities.
Basically, what one can claim is that when left to solve their own problems in their own ways, most if not all peoples no matter race or culture or whatever, will develop good methods - especially if failure means starving, freezing, or dehydrating due to implementing moronic ideas dreamed up by a priesthood (any priesthood).
Hence, evolved and autonomous and natural and spontaneous: not traditional. Tradition simply means doing something a certain way because that's the way it's always been done, good or bad, inefficient or "bene-efficient".
All good points, and I agree. I think traditional is immediately accessible in this context though. It contrasts with artificial or enforced alternatives that would not emerge.
So perhaps "emergent" is the word.
I like "evolved".
How about "organically evolved"? Not only is it literally true, there's also a little verbal jujitsu there.
Progs must publicly and loudly confess their faith in Teh Science!!1! - and "evolved" sounds sciency. Don't wanna argue against that! Who doesn't like "organic" and wants to argue against that either?
Verbal jiujitsu is it, exactly. Or judo (personal preference, due to bias).
Treat communication/information warfare as a combination of judo, chess and fencing, was one thing I used to bring up when I was still teaching.
And always remembering that the point is to win over the audience, and that the person you're sparring with is just a vehicle for that.
I hear you on this, Rikard, but I have to say I like the use of the word "traditional."
For me, the word has very positive connotations, and I think it does generally for women who are abandoning feminism for greener pastures - hence the term among the younger generation of "trad-wife."
The term might specifically appeal to women - for me it brings up the idea of security, but without all the baggage of the modern concept of "safety" or some connection to government surveillance.
Maybe the word has a different reverb for men?
Hmm, yes, possibly a difference between how a man would understand [tradition] in this context - would be silly of me to deny that possibility.
But: My angle of approach on this stems from something I didn't initially bring up:
My (and even more so my wife's) background in academia, which involved reading all the foundational works for political postmodernism - from there, I know that getting the opponent to use your terminology, or to adapt to how you weigh and (e)value(ate) the meaning of words and symbols, is a way to make the opponent accept your world-view without understanding it is even happening.
And [traditional] has been one of the go-to terms for all kinds of postmodernists (and their offspring in the family-tree of ideas) for any and all things WrongBadEvil. Hence, to me picking [traditonal] seems like accepting and adapting to the very linguistical*, semantic and etymological meta-structures the postmodernists claim as objective truths.
I'd much rather say "normal wife" or "normal marriage" or "normal family" than [traditional] any of those, precisely because of the persistent postmodern assault on meaning (which has been ongoing since the 1960s).
In short and to travestise** a famous quote from a movie: "Foucault you magnificent bastard! I've read your book!"
* and ** I'm unsure if these words are proper English but I hope the meaning is clear.
PS: It is also possible and plausible that what is happening is younger people reclaiming a word and taking control of its meaning and usage, such things are not without precedence and to make a final observation on that note:
A good sign that a change in the meaning/usage of a word is natural, spontaneous and autonomously evolving is a) if it is from the ground up, and b) if it feels natural in how and when it appears and is used. Contrast it with the attempts to get "wamyn", "latinx", "minor attracted person" and such normalised: that they are mandated top-down and are the products of conscious planning with an agenda and a plan (even an ideology) behind it. DS
While your criticism of 'priesthood' is well-founded, tribes who follow the advice of their mushroom-chomping shamans seem to do about as well as the globalists in the EU.
Or better, I'd say.
If we continue with the image of a priesthood, the difference between that and a shaman (or sejdkarl, wiseman/-woman, et c) is that a priesthood is a bureaucracy first and foremost, and thus subject to all the vices and pitfalls and iron rules governing all bureaucracies unless consciously checked.
Terry Pratchett in his "Small Gods" used the image of a hermit crab to symbolise (a) religion: eventually, the crab dies inside its shell, but from the outside there's no visible difference, so people go on worshipping the shell of a dead thing. And after enough time, that there ever was a crab has been forgotten, and all that remains is a shell of rules and ritual with no other purpose to them than pure performance.
Certainly, that holds true for the UN, the WEF, the USA's actual leaders, and many other powerful groups thinking they follow some ideal or other while trampling all that said ideal allegedly is meant to be for the improvement of.
Speaking of hermit crabs, what about the Ark of the Covenant, an empty box that held... what?... before the Philistines captured it in battle and took it away from the priests of Shiloh?
On the plus side, propaganda isn't the only thing they're addicted to. If recent reports are anything to go by, a lot of their personal lives seem to be a chaotic mess of hedonism, chasing the next high.
The future belongs to them that can exercise self-discipline, run sane healthy households, be contributing members of their communities, build trust by being trustworthy, and keep their sh*t together, not these sideshow freaks.
I absolutely agree. Self-discipline and an ability to focus would be just two fairly basic traits that seem to be in short supply. I am frequently astonished at the number of adults who cannot leave their phones alone for more than a few seconds.
I am currently on a kind of journey of self discovery myself as I remove distraction and improve my physical health. If I had to summarize what works it is living like it is 1975. Nothing fancy.
Yeah, I'm a big advocate for *leaving the phone in the car* and also for the *dumb phone*. Every mobile phone is a mobile microphone. Think of it that way. Don't take it anywhere you wouldn't invite total strangers, and exercise every opportunity to leave it behind, turn it all the way off, or even take out the battery (if you can't easily remove the battery, get a different phone!). It is a gesture of respect.
Past that, though, it's more than just working on yourself. Don't underestimate the power of just... being the person who always brings a main dish to the potluck, instead of cookies. Our individual health and self-discipline is key, but it's not enough by itself. Our in-person community networks are going to be crucial.
Absolutely agree about networks. I'm learning this now. Post COVID I see many networking and social skills have atrophied. I think the future is for those not stuck inside remote working.
To be sure propaganda has been successful all over the world, but Americans are particularly susceptible because they are relatively naive compared to the rest of the world.
That era is ending. The divisions in Germany reflect this too. East Germans aren;t buying Western Liberalism at all.
This has got to be one of the sharpest, most spot-on takes I’ve come across about the state of the world. It’s honestly genius-level insight!
Thank you. Glad you liked.
Their days are numbered. It just doesn't seem it because the media sell it well.
I wouldn’t seat myself in the same car on the “doom train” your article seems to ride, but I’m definitely on the same track — count me as cautiously pessimistic as I write this…on 4 November.
Respectfully, I think you overemphasize the employment (and death) propaganda and underemphasize (propaganda of) the deed. George William Curtis said “Thoughts are bullets,” but, in fact, thoughts are merely the primer — deeds (actions) are the bullets. The classic characterization of propaganda is to look at it as a tool of influence, manipulation and social control — Harold Lasswell’s famous Five W's of Communication: “Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect?” That propaganda, to me, is the soft pillow, the siren’s lullaby that enables and camouflages deeds (actions) intended to convince or compel you to obey. The Leviathan attempts to seduce you before it acts to influence or coerce. (H.L. Mencken said “The State doesn’t just want you to obey, it wants to make you want to obey.”) The real danger, it seems to me, are the State’s many unseen engineers creating a “weighted blanket” of synchronized influence and coercive actions across the breadth and depth of society. That propaganda and the “weighted blanket” of actions are intended to lull and comfort the many, while simultaneously suffocating resistance.
Perhaps the best extant survey of the combined weight of word and deed is in Lisa Pine’s “Dictatorship and Daily Life in 20th-Century Europe.” As she notes, the State imposed itself in “quotidian practices and settings — workplaces, leisure and recreation activities, consumer choices and habits, squares, streets and homes, interactions with friends, family and neighbors…in welfare provision, in the meeting of material desires, as well as by compulsion, repression, violence, and removal of alternate forms of organization, protest, and redress.” A few examples she cites sound eerily familiar in 2024:
In Italy, “Fascist health visitors could dispense advice, but they also had the authority to withhold benefits and even to separate children from their parents.”
”The regime also sought direct conduits to Italian children that would neatly circumvent Italian parents through the schooling system.”
In Germany, the Kraft durch Freude (KdF, Strength through Joy, established in 1933) organization’s activities were described as “joy production.”
By 1939, 43 million Germans had travelled with KdF on subsidized holidays in a process the Nazis dubbed building the ‘national community’. (The population of Germany in 1939 was ~69,600,000, or 80,600,000 if you include Austria, Memelland, and the Sudetenland).
A key point you capture, I suggest, is similar to what Martin Gurri identified in his “Revolt of the Public” — the Leviathan has lost the monopoly on information, and with that, has lost the trust of the publics. Publics — plural — because as Gurri points out, there is no monolithic public; there is no “fixed body of individuals. It is merely persons who are interested in an affair and can affect it only by supporting or opposing the actors.”
What is changing for those publics, tho, as you and Guri note, is access to means. Harold Lasswell said “A means is anything which the propagandist can manipulate; a condition is anything to which he must adapt.” It’s not only the ubiquitous access to means but the speed of their employment that allows those publics to now routinely outpace and ambush the Leviathan; to get inside its OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) Loop and to sabotage its expression of intent.
In Paris during the French Revolution, it could take days to mobilize the sans culottes. Today’s sans culottes mobilize at the speed of X, TikTok, and the like, and increasingly dictate the conditions of engagement. The more the playing field tips toward the publics, the more widespread the elite panic, the more coercive they become, and the less effective they ultimately are. As you say, reality bites. When the National Convention of France created the Revolutionary Tribunal in March of 1793, Georges Danton said “Let us exercise terror so as to pre-empt the people from doing so.” Some things never change.
https://gab.com/LillianBey/posts/113426252469693567
Excellent piece!
Thank you. Glad you liked.
Fantastic article!
Glad you liked.
"It is an ironic plot twist that those least able to cope with harsh conditions are those who conspire to create them."
Brilliantly put.
Thank you. I have often observed this. It is a bizarre quirk of the human mind.
Cloak stocks are way down.
Sword stocks way up.
There's various groups and factions preparing, have been preparing. Most of us won't, even those who can see this coming.
Another banger essay Spaceman!!
All the propaganda poison that has been injected into the zeitgeist, have made sections of Western populations indifferent to the social chaos.
"There is no right or wrong culture, wrong or right way of doing things" etc. The socially numb and degenerates always avoiding the difficult task of establishing clear hierarchies & definitive truths within our societies, usually opting to view everything as equally valid based on perspective. Like what you reiterate, reality will always come up top. A Nicholas Gómez Dávila aphorism that has always stuck with me "Relativism is the solution of one who is incapable of putting things in order"
I'm glad you enjoyed.
Reality is harsh, and unavoidable. The relativists are finding it out the hard way. I do wonder what is going on in their minds.
Propaganda is one of many roots of cultural syphilis that leads to brain rot. Most people I believe, will snap out of it when their jobs and security in their neighborhood is threatened. That is the reality. We saw this in Martha's Vineyard in MA, but even still there will be fucking idiots who are beyond salvation. I'll never forget that Norwegian male politician who was raped by a somali and felt bad that the government was going to deport him. You can't fix retard.
I remember one, a white American female, a longtime Wokester and anti-white campaigner. Went to Haiti to help with the latest disaster and was captured and raped for a week. He even videoed it. When she was later interviewed and asked about this she admonished him and blamed Western capitalism. Mental illness in a nutshell.
Most play along because it doesn't affect them. When it does things change rapidly. Martha's Vineyard is a key example. I'd send them all there.
I completely forgot about that one. Only in this timeline that shit like that happens and no one blinks a eye. To think there are people like her, who are the ones making decisions around the country. No wonder we see so much social chaos. There is no rehabilitation for the mentally ill like that. You're right! Start sending them to the affluent neighborhoods like Martha's Vineyard, Hamptons, Pacific Palisades because they support the "plight of the migrant" but they don't want it around them.
It would end tomorrow if we did that. Virtue signaling only works if it is cheap. Once it becomes expensive or inconvenient, they move on.
That's what its going to take to change. Things unfortunately or fortunately depending on who you ask has to get alot worst before it gets better. People's preservation mechanisms are already kicking in everywhere throughout the West, and all it took was hordes of foreigners from non-White countries. 😏
Brilliant essay.
Thank you. Glad you enjoyed.
I really did, and thank you. You showed us there is finally something to be optimistic about, that this idiocy we’re currently enduring is going to end.
There is a famous quote from a Harvard academic that we must always bear in mind, particularly at the low points:
If something is unsustainable, it will stop.
It is profound in its simplicity.
Propaganda uses up colossal resources, and they are running out. So is our patience. It is only a matter of time.
That’s a great quote.
You’re so right, our patience is running out. I’m fed up and I hate what has been forced on us.
Thanks again for a reason for optimism.
Ordinary people hate politics. They don't want it constantly there, when shopping or watching TV etc. That is one of the recent shifts. Even big companies openly stating they are dropping woke agendas. Things are changing.
And I think we must always have hope and remind others of it. As Albert Camus once said, some people expend huge energy just to appear normal. Many are struggling with this onslaught we didn't ask for. often silently. So we must all do our bit to give them hope.
Thanks for reading.
Brilliantly put.
You make some great points here, Spaceman Spiff! I like that you see and explain how their narrative of lies is ever more visibly failing, now that it has destroyed the very foundations of what was once Western Civilization.
I'd love to see this picture painted and story told without using the poison language our propagandizing victimizers have foisted on us. "When you use Their Verbiage, you legitimize Their Ideology".
Instead of using the words of their choosing (e.g. "Liberal", "Diversity", "Whiteness", "Anti-racist") which were chosen to facilitate our victimization, let's adopt words that center us and focus on our wellbeing, words like antiwhite, antiwhiteism, privileged groups, hate hoax, intruders, white erasure, westernkind and biospirit! Language that tells the story where WE are the heroes, and OUR NORMS are what is MORAL! To motivate our people, we must recapture the moral high ground. Undermining our moral high ground is how the antiwhites (temporarily?) defeated us.
I think for pieces like this it is important to focus on the propaganda, and the use of their standard terms works. An article focused on the specific destruction of European heritage would need to challenge their language directly. This one is more about how the propagandists are losing.
The part of their propaganda where they tells us what terms we will use to describe what they are doing, that part is still working, though?
No I think we use words that are widely understood to make our points. Arguments can become lost in detail about words while the bigger point is missed. There is a time and place to challenge terminology. But most people don't care.
Agree "most people don't care". I want us to survive and thrive as a people, so I want us to win. We won't win while we stay inside the story written by our victimizers. While our victimizers control the story, we continue to lose like the cuckservatives always have.
I respectfully disagree. I see this same mentality from people trying to explain the subtleties of National Socialism and what Hitler was really trying to accomplish. The very audience they are trying to educate can't see beyond the word Nazi whether they like it or not. They won't hang around long enough to make it through your definitions and alternative terminology.
We take back the story by challenging the underlying foundations, like the role played by propaganda, something most are oblivious to. Also throwing in unfamiliar terms just dilutes the core message.
I agree that attempting to persuade people to alternative views regarding e.g. National Socialism is doomed to fail because of programming. But getting people to see that we are up against AntiWhiteism, or that what is being done to us is White Erasure rather than "Diversity" ("Diversity just means fewer White people") is easy to get across. Our people Immediately sense both the truth of it, and the morality. This is the power of the lexicon nowhiteguilt.org is suggesting.
A piece that bashes western societies as propaganda driven but includes this line:
“The Russians and the Chinese have stepped back to let us destroy ourselves as we are indeed doing.”
Seriously?
https://wavellroom.com/2024/05/14/the-russian-army-death-cult/
https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/china-totalitarianisms-long-shadow/