This conviction is so silly and is so easy to overturn that it makes me believe that this is all kayfabe, that the regime has made the decision to re-install Trump and this is part of the campaign to re-install him.
That is predicted by Yuri Bezmenov. Push things to a confrontation, where the real powers control both sides. Whoever wins, the real powers will still be able to push through the radical changes they wanted during the chaos.
If Tyrant Biden wins, he institutes a crackdown on evil Right-wingers... the precedents of which will be used later against left-wingers that get out of line with the regime.
If Freedom-Loving MAGA Emperor Trump wins, he institutes a crackdown on evil left-wingers... the precedents of which will be used later against right-wingers that get out of line with the regime.
It's a charade. If they wanted Trump gone, they wouldn't bat an eyelid, they have an array of ways to make him join Raisi in heaven with minimal disruption. He's old, a heart attack wouldn't be unheard of. But for as long as the people are at each other's throat the establishment (thinks that it) is safe. As the greek saying goes "the wolf thrives in havoc". Sometimes though, the wolf gets trampled in the havoc he creates. Stock up in popcorn
>Because all of these people are guilty of normalcy bias in the first degree.
From an email I wrote to a friend in the summer of 2021:
"My main argument is not that we no longer live under the rule of law in America. That's a different and much more complicated conversation. A good book to read on that latter subject is The Nonsense Factory. Especially since the author is clearly left-leaning.
One reason why that discussion would be difficult is because the rule of law is more of a continuum, rather than binary. Also, because it consists of the rule of law proper and the perception of the rule of law. That perception is extremely important - it can hold the society together for years if not decades, as long as there is some (possibly much lower level) of law and order underlying it.
I believe we (1) definitely still have the perception of the rule of law sufficient to maintain the population in check without declaring martial law throughout the country, (2) that the actual level of the rule of law is much lower than the perception. I have no idea what would happen if/when the perception begins to match reality. So far people seem to be able to maintain a healthy denial of reality (compare this to election fraud denialism.) I am only half-joking. This well may be a self-preservation instinct."
Well, three short years after that was written we no longer even have the perception of the rule of law. Martial law is not far away.
Excellent point, as it highlights just how much of our modern and institutional existence is essentially abstract and thus fragile. I had not given too much thought to this in the realm of law, beyond some general ideas about role and use of precedents; arbitrary and capricious rulings or decisions vs. not; volume and complexity for and by the layman; written vs. not written; etc.
Analogously, an area parallel to that of the rule of law is the "agreement" for us to use something as money, in our current case that is fiat dollars. This use of a given form of money works as long as the belief that this money still contains value and can effectively be used as a medium of exchange can be credibly held. Once that "faith" is lost, something else will replace it as money. Again, abstract and fragile.
One barrier or bulwark we do have is the Constitution, as something can be (eventually judged) constitutional or not constitutional, a somewhat binary decision. Although of course some of those decisions might still be open to interpretation, bias, or personal preference, so less binary that we might like. Still, a place to start, as Megan Kelly's recent videos have emphasized how unconstitutional this latest trial practice has been in regard to providing for due process, etc. She did not bring up the 2nd Amendment -- yet!
Many seem to equate a collapse of virtue with a collapse of the state.
The perspective that those virtues that make the sacrifices citizens must endure bearable, are intrinsic to the operation of the state, has not been born out by recent events, or by history.
The idea of a moral state that only exists through the exercise of virtue is one that places morality as primary, in a sense more important than control of wealth, military power, and dominion over the populace ruled by said state.
While moral outrage is definitely a source of societal tension, an indicator of discontent, it does not guarantee either a collapse or a successful path for reform. Many are the societies that struggle on, either ignoring the crash dive in happiness, or being indifferent to it.
Despite all the predictions of doom, the nation state is still a very useful workable system from the point of view of plutocrats and oligarchs, which are the modern iteration of the Roman Senate. Thus, for a nation to utterly collapse is unlikely, even if that nation requires all sorts of life support.
In a very real sense, the image of the USA is already dead, but the zombie state has its own existence as a feature of the landscape of the current world.
"... the nation state is still a very useful workable system ... " Something every revolutionary or counter revolutionary or patriot must consider going forward. Almost all of the previous alternatives were not that attractive prior to 1648. The ones after that were sometimes only marginally better.
"The idea of a moral state that only exists through the exercise of virtue is one that places morality as primary, in a sense more important than control of wealth, military power, and dominion over the populace ruled by said state." In 2012 I read Gingrich say that the founders idea of "pursuit of happiness" was the pursuit of wisdom and virtue. Being virtuous and seeking knowledge would make you happy in a way wealth, fame, etc. could not. And virtue at the individual level was required before it could be expected to appear within the wider population and citizenry - i.e., the people as "sovereign". [We have lost much of the attitude that we are sovereign and the politicians are and should act as public SERVANTS! ]
I have mentioned in other contexts that [from a non-religious, non-revelatory perspective] morality is basically a mix of 1) inherent (genetic evolved) psychological characteristics and 2) cultural experience that has proven reasonably successful for a given body of people or society. Our "western" morality is largely derived from our past Judeo-Christian heritage and tradition, in many ways that we don't really recognize that situation (unless we make a direct comparison to societies not based on that history).
One of the conventions of modern thought is that perception is reality. This convention is usually not in the forefront of interactions, rather it is implicit within it. Thus, to modern thought reality itself becomes a kind of plastic playground for the imagination.
The problem with this kind of thought, and it is a problem, is that with this as guiding principle, it becomes impossible to order perceptions, because there is no standard to do so.
I think this can be observed across the board in mode4rn society. It isn't limited to one particular group or persuasion.
Therefore, what is actually occurring is not a deconstruction of reality per se, but a deconstruction of the cognitive structure within which reality is modeled and worked with in a kind of partnership.
We are currently in a time where the systems that have been relied upon to offer a recommendation to that cognitive structure have retreated to point where they exist more in potential than any objective construct. So, people continue to have a sense of cognitive structure, but they can no longer articulate it.
In conclusion then, the outer structures of society are not the source of the current dissolution, nor can they be fixed into a model more in keeping with the current perceptual structure, because such isn't even capable of being defined.
Reality is an amazing phenomenon, and we are going into a crash course of learning how to deal with it, not from models, but direct experience.
>but a deconstruction of the cognitive structure within which reality is modeled and worked with in a kind of partnership.
>We are currently in a time where the systems that have been relied upon to offer a recommendation to that cognitive structure have retreated to point where they exist more in potential than any objective construct. So, people continue to have a sense of cognitive structure, but they can no longer articulate it.
This is exactly how I feel [apologies for being self-centered]. Throughout my life I wanted to find cognitive footing to build a worthy life upon - and kept stepping into a quagmire. There are definitely things that are worth pursuing - like family, children, friends, productive work in service of others, good beer, and salvation. All of those, though, depend on the background framework. But everything has been deconstructed. And once you see the deconstruction it's impossible to unsee. It poisons you with the poison of nihilism. (The Tree of Knowledge comes to mind.)
For the sake of all those good things I did find a practical solution for myself by an act of will. (I had to give up beer for wine, though.)
[As an aside, imho that what most of Christian Nationalism is about - people see that things are terribly wrong and in trying to find footing in what used to work. The big open question is whether what worked for people then would work for people now. You never find out until you try, though.]
Yes, I suppose the question is whether christianity and nationalism actually can play the role assigned to them. Certainly, elements of both were deep enough into the psyche to provide the appearance of a functional cognitive model, but the problem with successful structures from the past, like they were, is the uncomfortable realization that they played a part in getting us here.
I doubt it will take all the way to the inauguration (of Baaelzebub? It's not as if Biden can prevent urinating down his leg while he mumbles something about little girls after all). I was putting the end of America at November 6th basically. What form it will take, who knows.
Damn. Very precise, sober, and compelling analysis, probably the best I've seen anywhere on the subject of the lawfare against Trump and what it means in terms of the bigger geopolitical picture and the directions America may go from here. The really crazy thing is, they could have *easily* controlled Trump through normal means: a combination of flattery (appealing to Trump's ego), passive-aggression from the "deep state," snake-oil advisers subtly nudging the Administration in a direction favorable to hidden interests, character-assassination of competent and principled advisers to purge them from the Administration, etc. -- Oh wait, they *did* control Trump throughout his Presidency in precisely that way! He accomplished none of the "dangerous" things he had promised! Which makes it all the more insane that they resorted to extraordinary, highly volatile, and unpredictable (in terms of second and third-order effects) measures like *this* to undermine him. What will they have accomplished, if they do keep him out of office? They will have simply guaranteed that the *next* Trump-figure *will* follow through on all his "dangerous" (to them) promises.
I heard a mediator say once that he didn't mind assholes, as long as they were intelligent, because they could at least see what their self-interests were and pursue them methodically, so you would know what interests of theirs you could appeal to in order to reach a reasonable agreement. Dumb asses, however, were confused about their own interests and would happily pursue lose-lose strategies out of a combination of retardation and malice, so they were dangerous to everyone, including themselves. And *that* is precisely the kind of retarded narcissists that we have running the lawfare against Trump, people whose ideological mania and hatred of Trump (and of the Americans he represents) that they will harm everyone, including themselves, just to lash out at him like an unintelligent toddler having a ridiculous tantrum. If they were smart and competent, but evil, I could at least admire their intelligence and skill, but they are the absolute worst of the worst, just malicious, emotionally-driven, self-absorbed nihilist clowns. I hope the day comes when they are all Qadaffied on a livestream; it won't undo the damage they caused, but at least the rest of us will get to see that they reaped the same evil that they sowed for everyone else.
Yes. I fear the stupid far more than the selfish, because I can negotiate with the selfish. The stupid will destroy me not even knowing why. Well said.
"Dumb asses, however, were confused about their own interests and would happily pursue "lose-lose strategies out of a combination of retardation and malice, so they were dangerous to everyone, including themselves." - Daniel D
"But muh Hanlon's Razor!" cries the Internet SmrtBois.
We operate under some really stupid Eponymous Laws that need to be dispensed with.
I'm normally not for dispensing with traditions of any kind, but Hanlon's Razor tends to make people drop their guard against malicious individuals. One needs to accept that stupidity and maliciousness are not on the same continuum.
Another law that needs to die is Acton's. Power is not inherently corrupt, it just attracts the corrupt. So long as the Right a/o Christian hold to this law, they'll always take a Star Wars approach to power, thinking that should they hold it and use it, they'll instantly become megalomaniacal enrobed old men.
You guys are legally correct -- but if the other side can throw out the rule of law, so can we. You think the Dems would hesitate for a moment to declare that the President can pardon state crimes if it meant the difference between retaining power or losing it? Hell, the moment it became useful, there'd be legal papers from the paid Ivy League pundits insisting that that President has always had the right to pardon state crimes!
It's not even cut/dried. All the Const says is, "he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States"
It doesn't say state/ federal, or even crime, just offenses against the US. Which could be anything. If it is construed to literally mean only charges brought by the fedgov, then that is a case of the exception swallowing the rule, since most important crimes have fed and state versions. For example, pardoning someone for fed murder would still allow for a state to charge them with murder. This is clearly against the intent of the clause, which was supposed to be to end rebellions by having the ability to pardon those involved. Which often involves a lot of murder and other things that are both fed and state crimes.
We are fast coming to a time when armed men might be standing behind SCOTUS when they make rulings, so who knows what the Constitution will be tortured into meaning next.
The only problem with your best case scenario is that Trump was convicted by the State of New York. The President's pardoning power only applies to federal crimes.
Pater, you should do like a 'Half-Life' Style sequence.
Example: Eschaton Part I came out 16 months prior, Part II has come out 8 months prior... meaning Part III will be 4 months prior, Part IV will be 2 months prior, Part V will be 1 month prior...
This way, you DOOM-Maxx AND (more importantly) you get to fine tune all the Microdoses for gloom & despair. The way things are headed (i.e. Civil War v2.0 & WW III going kinetic at the same time), this will be quite the Escalatory Ladder into Barbarism & Violence.
High probability is that if he makes it through to the election and wins convincingly that RINO's and Congress generally will move to pass a law making it impossible for a convicted felon to assume the office of President, and/or mess around with the Electoral College in early December to get them not to vote for him on the same basis or continue the procedure that was interrupted on Jan 6 2021 which was entirely constitutional.
In any case, good call. The Powers that Be will soon be openly arrayed against the mainstream American voting public.
There is no going back from this. We the People have to fight it but whether they will or not, after continuous TV-delivered passive brainwashing since the 1950's, remains to be seen. Chances are the switch to an entirely new polity a la Russia in 1918 is on the menu.
On top of which, Trump is a deeply flawed candidate in so many ways who has been on the back foot every day since he started to pull ahead in 2016.
Reminds me that if the Russians of 1917 etc., had been better and more widely armed, when the Cheka came up the back stairs of a tenement to wisk a dissenter away, he/they might have been met with a hail of bullets and failed to achieve their goal.
In today's world, the regime might be more effective in just "debanking" their perceived enemies and dissidents, but then people joined in a common cause of liberty would find a way to work around that.
That may work at least until a following generation is deprived of the education about their natural rights and constitutional governance, so that a world of might makes right returns, since no better option can be envisioned.
Amazing, I have a 2 seater with a powerful engine and option to go coupe for those hard to reach bikers you want to take out with a length of reinforcing/machete/flail without wasting ammo on it. Obviously great men think alike. I'll trade you slaves and women for large calibre weapons once we establish a maritime regime too.
Ha ha ha! I just finished building a modest house in Mexico Coffee Country and bought a 1983 non-computerized Jeep (which REFUSES to run right!). We have fruit trees, vegetable farmers, goat cheese and local lamb and beef. Hope to ignore the insanity up there, but No Man is an Island so who knows.....
I hate the philosophy / ideology that embraces revolution as a means to a good end because it destroys everything including that which needs to be renewed. Societies go off track, yes, and evidence deep problems, yes, but destruction is not the right way forward. It only leads to anarchy from within which nearly always the wrong sorts of people emerge to seize the reins of power.
This Western collapse has been a long time coming. When was the last time most Western polities were sophisticated, decent, uplifted, honest? I really don't know the answer to that. Shakespeare shows knowledge of it in idealized expression, and if he was a deVere then his family roots go back to Roman times and perhaps some of the Dark Ages little kingdoms were more enlightened and uplifted than we know, albeit somehow reflected in his plays. But otherwise, most of our history is as sordid as it is occasionally splendid. Who can deny the brilliance of Bach and so much more? Who can deny the primordial beauty of so much European countryside, the result of centuries of intelligence, care, hard work, uplifted culture? These things are evident. But so is the stench and filth of endemic greed and corruption.
Maybe the best we can hope for is a balance: that Evil doesn't overwhelm Good just as Good never entirely eradicates Evil, each tendency keeping the other on its toes.
In any case, America has lost her Way. We shall soon see if she can find a good path forward..., and the same in Western nations too of course.
I think the answer is "maybe." It will depend upon the enemy we confront and the president or prime ministers in charge when it happens. There is, for instance, a world in which the White House offers citizenship to illegal immigrants in the US if they serve in the military. Given all the military-age men who've illegally entered, that might avoid the need for conscription .
There is also a case where, let's say, Trump is President and somehow the US is attacked in a way that infuriates the traditional fighting base (Southern whites etc). Then those young men might be motivated to enlist and conscription wouldn't be necessary.
There's also the question of how high intensity the war is. I estimate that the casualty rates in Ukraine are approaching the casualty rates of the Western Front in World War I. They're horrific. There's no way to fight war like that without conscription. Hopefully it never comes to that.
The arrest and trial -is- the campaign. Trump could have paid half a billion dollars and not gotten the screen time, discussion and fervor he's getting now. It was a technique he used in the first 2016 campaign - controversy means eyeballs on you.
We are learning what it's like to live in an Empire in Decline, as well as a banana republic. The "election", the markets, the school system - they're all imploding and looking ridiculous. Don't even get me started on the schools....
Anyone using logic and common sense to map out the USA's future is making a serious category error.
I'm an ignoramus from another continent that hasn't been following the Trump courtroom drama. THANK YOU for summarizing it, and THANK YOU for explaining it like I'm five!
You're probably right in that American Eschaton has arrived, although maybe there was something comparable back in early 19th century? I don't know much about that period of American history, but I do have kind of an understanding those were wild years with much tension.
But did the Great Depression pull us apart, or bring us together, even if in a form of shared misery? [Clearly WWII did that, too.]
I just now started to wonder how the GD might have turned out if Coolidge had had a third term instead of electing Hoover. Perhaps an acceptance of severe but short term market adjustments rather than a flawed attempt to do an end run around them??
I would argue that the Cultural Revolution and Civil Rights movement of the 60s were another transformation. If nothing else, the 1965 Immigration Reform Act enabled the transformation of America, quite literally (demographically).
It is a fourth turning but one where the players and the fundamental fabric of America is radically different. Don’t expect an outcome like any of the previous three turnings.
This conviction is so silly and is so easy to overturn that it makes me believe that this is all kayfabe, that the regime has made the decision to re-install Trump and this is part of the campaign to re-install him.
At this point, I'm prepared to believe almost anything is possible. So you might be right!
That is predicted by Yuri Bezmenov. Push things to a confrontation, where the real powers control both sides. Whoever wins, the real powers will still be able to push through the radical changes they wanted during the chaos.
If Tyrant Biden wins, he institutes a crackdown on evil Right-wingers... the precedents of which will be used later against left-wingers that get out of line with the regime.
If Freedom-Loving MAGA Emperor Trump wins, he institutes a crackdown on evil left-wingers... the precedents of which will be used later against right-wingers that get out of line with the regime.
Good analysis. Now just add in the Jews...
(((real powers)))
Happy now? ;)
Yes.
I freaking wish we had that kind of power.
It's a charade. If they wanted Trump gone, they wouldn't bat an eyelid, they have an array of ways to make him join Raisi in heaven with minimal disruption. He's old, a heart attack wouldn't be unheard of. But for as long as the people are at each other's throat the establishment (thinks that it) is safe. As the greek saying goes "the wolf thrives in havoc". Sometimes though, the wolf gets trampled in the havoc he creates. Stock up in popcorn
That, or they could just bring back this lady (and probably many more others like her).
https://beforeitsnews.com/beyond-science/2023/11/donald-trump-raped-me-at-age-13-katie-johnsons-full-testimony-2455626.html
This is the most original take on this I've heard yet. As Mr. Woe says, we're in candyland now, so you may be right.
Here (https://gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/162/055/491/original/a6d94c44df0aba73.png) is the Manhattan appeals court.
Click on the link and take a guess about how successful Trump's appeal will be.
>Because all of these people are guilty of normalcy bias in the first degree.
From an email I wrote to a friend in the summer of 2021:
"My main argument is not that we no longer live under the rule of law in America. That's a different and much more complicated conversation. A good book to read on that latter subject is The Nonsense Factory. Especially since the author is clearly left-leaning.
One reason why that discussion would be difficult is because the rule of law is more of a continuum, rather than binary. Also, because it consists of the rule of law proper and the perception of the rule of law. That perception is extremely important - it can hold the society together for years if not decades, as long as there is some (possibly much lower level) of law and order underlying it.
I believe we (1) definitely still have the perception of the rule of law sufficient to maintain the population in check without declaring martial law throughout the country, (2) that the actual level of the rule of law is much lower than the perception. I have no idea what would happen if/when the perception begins to match reality. So far people seem to be able to maintain a healthy denial of reality (compare this to election fraud denialism.) I am only half-joking. This well may be a self-preservation instinct."
Well, three short years after that was written we no longer even have the perception of the rule of law. Martial law is not far away.
The pace of the radical change has been breathtaking. What's that saying about years when decades happen?
Excellent point, as it highlights just how much of our modern and institutional existence is essentially abstract and thus fragile. I had not given too much thought to this in the realm of law, beyond some general ideas about role and use of precedents; arbitrary and capricious rulings or decisions vs. not; volume and complexity for and by the layman; written vs. not written; etc.
Analogously, an area parallel to that of the rule of law is the "agreement" for us to use something as money, in our current case that is fiat dollars. This use of a given form of money works as long as the belief that this money still contains value and can effectively be used as a medium of exchange can be credibly held. Once that "faith" is lost, something else will replace it as money. Again, abstract and fragile.
One barrier or bulwark we do have is the Constitution, as something can be (eventually judged) constitutional or not constitutional, a somewhat binary decision. Although of course some of those decisions might still be open to interpretation, bias, or personal preference, so less binary that we might like. Still, a place to start, as Megan Kelly's recent videos have emphasized how unconstitutional this latest trial practice has been in regard to providing for due process, etc. She did not bring up the 2nd Amendment -- yet!
>unconstitutional
Related:
Alex's series of posts on how the Constitution was subverted:
https://open.substack.com/pub/treeofwoe/p/the-seven-walls-of-fortress-america-c9c
Moldbug on how the Constitution is a fraudulent concept:
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2009/02/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified/
N.S.Lyons on how the Constitution won't save us:
https://open.substack.com/pub/theupheaval/p/why-the-constitution-wont-save-you
Many seem to equate a collapse of virtue with a collapse of the state.
The perspective that those virtues that make the sacrifices citizens must endure bearable, are intrinsic to the operation of the state, has not been born out by recent events, or by history.
The idea of a moral state that only exists through the exercise of virtue is one that places morality as primary, in a sense more important than control of wealth, military power, and dominion over the populace ruled by said state.
While moral outrage is definitely a source of societal tension, an indicator of discontent, it does not guarantee either a collapse or a successful path for reform. Many are the societies that struggle on, either ignoring the crash dive in happiness, or being indifferent to it.
Despite all the predictions of doom, the nation state is still a very useful workable system from the point of view of plutocrats and oligarchs, which are the modern iteration of the Roman Senate. Thus, for a nation to utterly collapse is unlikely, even if that nation requires all sorts of life support.
In a very real sense, the image of the USA is already dead, but the zombie state has its own existence as a feature of the landscape of the current world.
Great comment.
"... the nation state is still a very useful workable system ... " Something every revolutionary or counter revolutionary or patriot must consider going forward. Almost all of the previous alternatives were not that attractive prior to 1648. The ones after that were sometimes only marginally better.
"The idea of a moral state that only exists through the exercise of virtue is one that places morality as primary, in a sense more important than control of wealth, military power, and dominion over the populace ruled by said state." In 2012 I read Gingrich say that the founders idea of "pursuit of happiness" was the pursuit of wisdom and virtue. Being virtuous and seeking knowledge would make you happy in a way wealth, fame, etc. could not. And virtue at the individual level was required before it could be expected to appear within the wider population and citizenry - i.e., the people as "sovereign". [We have lost much of the attitude that we are sovereign and the politicians are and should act as public SERVANTS! ]
I have mentioned in other contexts that [from a non-religious, non-revelatory perspective] morality is basically a mix of 1) inherent (genetic evolved) psychological characteristics and 2) cultural experience that has proven reasonably successful for a given body of people or society. Our "western" morality is largely derived from our past Judeo-Christian heritage and tradition, in many ways that we don't really recognize that situation (unless we make a direct comparison to societies not based on that history).
One of the conventions of modern thought is that perception is reality. This convention is usually not in the forefront of interactions, rather it is implicit within it. Thus, to modern thought reality itself becomes a kind of plastic playground for the imagination.
The problem with this kind of thought, and it is a problem, is that with this as guiding principle, it becomes impossible to order perceptions, because there is no standard to do so.
I think this can be observed across the board in mode4rn society. It isn't limited to one particular group or persuasion.
Therefore, what is actually occurring is not a deconstruction of reality per se, but a deconstruction of the cognitive structure within which reality is modeled and worked with in a kind of partnership.
We are currently in a time where the systems that have been relied upon to offer a recommendation to that cognitive structure have retreated to point where they exist more in potential than any objective construct. So, people continue to have a sense of cognitive structure, but they can no longer articulate it.
In conclusion then, the outer structures of society are not the source of the current dissolution, nor can they be fixed into a model more in keeping with the current perceptual structure, because such isn't even capable of being defined.
Reality is an amazing phenomenon, and we are going into a crash course of learning how to deal with it, not from models, but direct experience.
>but a deconstruction of the cognitive structure within which reality is modeled and worked with in a kind of partnership.
>We are currently in a time where the systems that have been relied upon to offer a recommendation to that cognitive structure have retreated to point where they exist more in potential than any objective construct. So, people continue to have a sense of cognitive structure, but they can no longer articulate it.
This is exactly how I feel [apologies for being self-centered]. Throughout my life I wanted to find cognitive footing to build a worthy life upon - and kept stepping into a quagmire. There are definitely things that are worth pursuing - like family, children, friends, productive work in service of others, good beer, and salvation. All of those, though, depend on the background framework. But everything has been deconstructed. And once you see the deconstruction it's impossible to unsee. It poisons you with the poison of nihilism. (The Tree of Knowledge comes to mind.)
For the sake of all those good things I did find a practical solution for myself by an act of will. (I had to give up beer for wine, though.)
[As an aside, imho that what most of Christian Nationalism is about - people see that things are terribly wrong and in trying to find footing in what used to work. The big open question is whether what worked for people then would work for people now. You never find out until you try, though.]
Yes, I suppose the question is whether christianity and nationalism actually can play the role assigned to them. Certainly, elements of both were deep enough into the psyche to provide the appearance of a functional cognitive model, but the problem with successful structures from the past, like they were, is the uncomfortable realization that they played a part in getting us here.
I doubt it will take all the way to the inauguration (of Baaelzebub? It's not as if Biden can prevent urinating down his leg while he mumbles something about little girls after all). I was putting the end of America at November 6th basically. What form it will take, who knows.
Indeed. "The form of our destructor" has not yet been chosen but Zuul is on the skyscraper thinking about her options.
You saw the movie: WE will choose our destruction.
I have a lot of good ideas on that then.. :-D
Yes... could we start with all the pedos being burnt at the stake please?
Damn. Very precise, sober, and compelling analysis, probably the best I've seen anywhere on the subject of the lawfare against Trump and what it means in terms of the bigger geopolitical picture and the directions America may go from here. The really crazy thing is, they could have *easily* controlled Trump through normal means: a combination of flattery (appealing to Trump's ego), passive-aggression from the "deep state," snake-oil advisers subtly nudging the Administration in a direction favorable to hidden interests, character-assassination of competent and principled advisers to purge them from the Administration, etc. -- Oh wait, they *did* control Trump throughout his Presidency in precisely that way! He accomplished none of the "dangerous" things he had promised! Which makes it all the more insane that they resorted to extraordinary, highly volatile, and unpredictable (in terms of second and third-order effects) measures like *this* to undermine him. What will they have accomplished, if they do keep him out of office? They will have simply guaranteed that the *next* Trump-figure *will* follow through on all his "dangerous" (to them) promises.
I heard a mediator say once that he didn't mind assholes, as long as they were intelligent, because they could at least see what their self-interests were and pursue them methodically, so you would know what interests of theirs you could appeal to in order to reach a reasonable agreement. Dumb asses, however, were confused about their own interests and would happily pursue lose-lose strategies out of a combination of retardation and malice, so they were dangerous to everyone, including themselves. And *that* is precisely the kind of retarded narcissists that we have running the lawfare against Trump, people whose ideological mania and hatred of Trump (and of the Americans he represents) that they will harm everyone, including themselves, just to lash out at him like an unintelligent toddler having a ridiculous tantrum. If they were smart and competent, but evil, I could at least admire their intelligence and skill, but they are the absolute worst of the worst, just malicious, emotionally-driven, self-absorbed nihilist clowns. I hope the day comes when they are all Qadaffied on a livestream; it won't undo the damage they caused, but at least the rest of us will get to see that they reaped the same evil that they sowed for everyone else.
Yes. I fear the stupid far more than the selfish, because I can negotiate with the selfish. The stupid will destroy me not even knowing why. Well said.
"Dumb asses, however, were confused about their own interests and would happily pursue "lose-lose strategies out of a combination of retardation and malice, so they were dangerous to everyone, including themselves." - Daniel D
"But muh Hanlon's Razor!" cries the Internet SmrtBois.
We operate under some really stupid Eponymous Laws that need to be dispensed with.
ShadowT's Rectification of Names: Most eponymous laws are stupid and need to be dispensed with.
I'm normally not for dispensing with traditions of any kind, but Hanlon's Razor tends to make people drop their guard against malicious individuals. One needs to accept that stupidity and maliciousness are not on the same continuum.
Another law that needs to die is Acton's. Power is not inherently corrupt, it just attracts the corrupt. So long as the Right a/o Christian hold to this law, they'll always take a Star Wars approach to power, thinking that should they hold it and use it, they'll instantly become megalomaniacal enrobed old men.
Best case scenario:
Trump gets thrown in jail, wins election anyway, pardons himself, libtards ritually suicide in protest.
Most likely scenario:
Trump gets thrown in jail, loses election (whatever it takes), real Americans seethe angrily but nothing happens. Yet.
You guys are legally correct -- but if the other side can throw out the rule of law, so can we. You think the Dems would hesitate for a moment to declare that the President can pardon state crimes if it meant the difference between retaining power or losing it? Hell, the moment it became useful, there'd be legal papers from the paid Ivy League pundits insisting that that President has always had the right to pardon state crimes!
It's not even cut/dried. All the Const says is, "he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States"
It doesn't say state/ federal, or even crime, just offenses against the US. Which could be anything. If it is construed to literally mean only charges brought by the fedgov, then that is a case of the exception swallowing the rule, since most important crimes have fed and state versions. For example, pardoning someone for fed murder would still allow for a state to charge them with murder. This is clearly against the intent of the clause, which was supposed to be to end rebellions by having the ability to pardon those involved. Which often involves a lot of murder and other things that are both fed and state crimes.
We are fast coming to a time when armed men might be standing behind SCOTUS when they make rulings, so who knows what the Constitution will be tortured into meaning next.
Yah. That's my case #1. I agree it's most likely. :(
The only problem with your best case scenario is that Trump was convicted by the State of New York. The President's pardoning power only applies to federal crimes.
He can only pardon federal crimes
All those years of making Banana Republics of other countries have been practice for the big one.
That's true we are highly experienced at this :-D
Confessions of an Economic Hitman was simultaneously Boomer humblebragging and a prophecy.
I never thought about it that way but you're 100% right
I really appreciate this detailed analysis. I have no idea what an average (outraged) citizen can DO about it. It’s rather surreal.
I wish I knew myself. I often feel I'm just shaking my fist at the heavens.
Meme globally, organize locally.
We aren't getting out of this by voting or protesting.
https://www.instagram.com/p/C7j1r9Wvrwb/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
This is good. Can you direct me to some actively memeing accts? I’m not good at creating them.
I couldn't agree more.
You can work toward opening someone else's eyes.
Difficult though it is.
1, then 2, then 5. Though it's more likely our own foolish elites bring about 5.
My prediction is 1, 5, 2 so we're not far off.
>5
From the headlines: "Under Pressure, Biden Allows Ukraine to Use U.S. Weapons to Strike Inside Russia".
Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen!
Ironically, that probably makes 5 marginally less likely.
The more 'murican weapons leave the country for the war in Europe, the less remain to protect yourself from China so I dunno...
Pater, you should do like a 'Half-Life' Style sequence.
Example: Eschaton Part I came out 16 months prior, Part II has come out 8 months prior... meaning Part III will be 4 months prior, Part IV will be 2 months prior, Part V will be 1 month prior...
This way, you DOOM-Maxx AND (more importantly) you get to fine tune all the Microdoses for gloom & despair. The way things are headed (i.e. Civil War v2.0 & WW III going kinetic at the same time), this will be quite the Escalatory Ladder into Barbarism & Violence.
That's a really great idea!
High probability is that if he makes it through to the election and wins convincingly that RINO's and Congress generally will move to pass a law making it impossible for a convicted felon to assume the office of President, and/or mess around with the Electoral College in early December to get them not to vote for him on the same basis or continue the procedure that was interrupted on Jan 6 2021 which was entirely constitutional.
In any case, good call. The Powers that Be will soon be openly arrayed against the mainstream American voting public.
There is no going back from this. We the People have to fight it but whether they will or not, after continuous TV-delivered passive brainwashing since the 1950's, remains to be seen. Chances are the switch to an entirely new polity a la Russia in 1918 is on the menu.
On top of which, Trump is a deeply flawed candidate in so many ways who has been on the back foot every day since he started to pull ahead in 2016.
A 1918-style new polity is altogether possible and perhaps even likely. I consider that among the most unfortunate possible outcomes.
Reminds me that if the Russians of 1917 etc., had been better and more widely armed, when the Cheka came up the back stairs of a tenement to wisk a dissenter away, he/they might have been met with a hail of bullets and failed to achieve their goal.
In today's world, the regime might be more effective in just "debanking" their perceived enemies and dissidents, but then people joined in a common cause of liberty would find a way to work around that.
That may work at least until a following generation is deprived of the education about their natural rights and constitutional governance, so that a world of might makes right returns, since no better option can be envisioned.
Agreed. I'm hoping for running gun battles in the street myself. At least then one has a chance to get rid of all the vermin in politics.
I have a black muscle car with a supercharged V8 and leather armor so I am ready to rule the wasteland.
Amazing, I have a 2 seater with a powerful engine and option to go coupe for those hard to reach bikers you want to take out with a length of reinforcing/machete/flail without wasting ammo on it. Obviously great men think alike. I'll trade you slaves and women for large calibre weapons once we establish a maritime regime too.
It's a deal!
Ha ha ha! I just finished building a modest house in Mexico Coffee Country and bought a 1983 non-computerized Jeep (which REFUSES to run right!). We have fruit trees, vegetable farmers, goat cheese and local lamb and beef. Hope to ignore the insanity up there, but No Man is an Island so who knows.....
The USA is growing similar to the USSR because the people who rule it are, well, similar to the rulers then.
Like there is sociobiology, so is there "politibiology".
I hate the philosophy / ideology that embraces revolution as a means to a good end because it destroys everything including that which needs to be renewed. Societies go off track, yes, and evidence deep problems, yes, but destruction is not the right way forward. It only leads to anarchy from within which nearly always the wrong sorts of people emerge to seize the reins of power.
This Western collapse has been a long time coming. When was the last time most Western polities were sophisticated, decent, uplifted, honest? I really don't know the answer to that. Shakespeare shows knowledge of it in idealized expression, and if he was a deVere then his family roots go back to Roman times and perhaps some of the Dark Ages little kingdoms were more enlightened and uplifted than we know, albeit somehow reflected in his plays. But otherwise, most of our history is as sordid as it is occasionally splendid. Who can deny the brilliance of Bach and so much more? Who can deny the primordial beauty of so much European countryside, the result of centuries of intelligence, care, hard work, uplifted culture? These things are evident. But so is the stench and filth of endemic greed and corruption.
Maybe the best we can hope for is a balance: that Evil doesn't overwhelm Good just as Good never entirely eradicates Evil, each tendency keeping the other on its toes.
In any case, America has lost her Way. We shall soon see if she can find a good path forward..., and the same in Western nations too of course.
Ummm, so in case of (global) war, do you think there will be conscription or? How do you think it will play out?? Its so scary!!!!!
I think the answer is "maybe." It will depend upon the enemy we confront and the president or prime ministers in charge when it happens. There is, for instance, a world in which the White House offers citizenship to illegal immigrants in the US if they serve in the military. Given all the military-age men who've illegally entered, that might avoid the need for conscription .
There is also a case where, let's say, Trump is President and somehow the US is attacked in a way that infuriates the traditional fighting base (Southern whites etc). Then those young men might be motivated to enlist and conscription wouldn't be necessary.
There's also the question of how high intensity the war is. I estimate that the casualty rates in Ukraine are approaching the casualty rates of the Western Front in World War I. They're horrific. There's no way to fight war like that without conscription. Hopefully it never comes to that.
The whole point is to keep him from campaigning, as Joe is too feeble and demented to campaign. House arrest.
He should ignore it, campaign, and dare them to get into a shootout with his secret service
Agreed.
The arrest and trial -is- the campaign. Trump could have paid half a billion dollars and not gotten the screen time, discussion and fervor he's getting now. It was a technique he used in the first 2016 campaign - controversy means eyeballs on you.
I believe eschatological scenario #3 impossible. #1 and #5 the most likely, and not mutually exclusive.
For me,f the huge-scale electoral fraud in '20, specially is seen coupled with J6, already marked the turn from America to Unamerica.
I'm beginning to get a vague sense of unease, a woeful dread you might say, because everybody is saying it's going to be 1 and 5! Hehe
We are learning what it's like to live in an Empire in Decline, as well as a banana republic. The "election", the markets, the school system - they're all imploding and looking ridiculous. Don't even get me started on the schools....
Anyone using logic and common sense to map out the USA's future is making a serious category error.
Great follow up.
Right! The only way to predict the future now is to just assume the worst course of action will be taken and justified with ridiculous lies!
I'm an ignoramus from another continent that hasn't been following the Trump courtroom drama. THANK YOU for summarizing it, and THANK YOU for explaining it like I'm five!
You're probably right in that American Eschaton has arrived, although maybe there was something comparable back in early 19th century? I don't know much about that period of American history, but I do have kind of an understanding those were wild years with much tension.
It seems to we had three prior transformations:
The Revolution
The Civil War
The Great Depression
And now.
Unfortunately that matches way too closely to the Fourth Turning theory for comfort!
But did the Great Depression pull us apart, or bring us together, even if in a form of shared misery? [Clearly WWII did that, too.]
I just now started to wonder how the GD might have turned out if Coolidge had had a third term instead of electing Hoover. Perhaps an acceptance of severe but short term market adjustments rather than a flawed attempt to do an end run around them??
I would argue that the Cultural Revolution and Civil Rights movement of the 60s were another transformation. If nothing else, the 1965 Immigration Reform Act enabled the transformation of America, quite literally (demographically).
It is a fourth turning but one where the players and the fundamental fabric of America is radically different. Don’t expect an outcome like any of the previous three turnings.
The institution of the FED was #3, to me.
The early 19th century is called "the Era of good feelings" in US history when we got the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny.