1: Remember months ago I mentioned that the alt right and 8chan and the like were
pawns to be sacrified?
1: The time has come
2: I'm listening.
1: 8ch has been going after Correct The Record. They've also been scouring Soros
and the DNC leaks and Hillary leaks.
1: I've been assisting with major efforts on the CTR campaign
2: lol. of course you have.
1: Primarily honeypot setups
2: For what side?.
1: My side of course
2: ROFL. go on.
1: Now that the GamerGate logs have been released, the evidence is mounting up
that the Clinton Foundation, with Soros, has been staging multiple false flag
1: Sort of an endless stream of them. Because of our efforts with CTR, Mrs.
Clinton went on television last night and denounced the alt-right, 8chan,
Brietbart. Those are the facts thus far.
2: Yeah, I saw that.
1: We now have to talk about the meta. I've told you about Huntington, yes?
Samuel P. Huntington?
2: Remind me again real quick.
1: Marx says all conflict stems from the poor vs. the rich. Huntingon says all
conflict stems from people getting buttblasted and bringing in friends to help
2: Yes, ok.
1: Marx proposes an inevitable resolution of conflict, Huntington proposes
infinite escalation. From my early arguments online to the fracturing of
4chan to GamerGate to 8chan, I've watched this infinite escalation happen.
It's always the same ideological actors, rebranding themselves under a new
crusdaer banner. So I've worked hard to setup a trap.
2: I assume you're alluding to something about perpetuating rise/fall conflicts.
1: GamerGate did one thing very well. It created the tools and setup the outlets
in which the loyal flock can retreat to. Those retreat centers became
ideological bastions of purity. I egged on both sides with extremist rhetoric
over the years, driving them further and further out of the middle. Usually,
this tactic creates value OF the middle as people avoiding partisan extremism
physically meet up in places and trade stories. That's not how it works
2: "As people avoiding partisan extremism physically meet up in places and
trade stories" Like, bar folk?.
1: Yep. Or refugees. Or local communities. America has a long history of
running to the middle.
1: That's no longer possible because of social networks. You see, when you
disagree with someone, you don't have to physically move yourself. You just
block a person. The end. Do this hundreds of times... block a post here or
there... And you create an echo chamber of things you like.
1: The middle has fragmented into individuals. Unreachable individuals.
Totally innoculated from the partisans. Which means there is no way to
rally that middle to attack enemy partisans. This is how the right lost
in the 1950s. They let the socialists rally the common emotional ground
(with the help of highly consolidated mass media) with the unaligned to
pound the right into submission. The right still hasn't recovered from
that. A small group of partisans amplified their influence by winning over
the unaligned. Those small groups became the owners and savants of media
2: Ok, so it's repeating.
1: Not just repeating but scaling. They didn't physically exterminate the
right. They still exist. So they have to add more and more power and
urgency to their mass media narrative. This is done to stave off diminshing
returns of the true believer. But the paradox is that the number of true
enemies has dwindled to nothingness.
1: The mass media engine is so hystyerical about saving itself that it is
exterting tremendous amounts of energy to attack like 4 racist people in
Georgia. This is just diminshing returns. The DNC has worked overtime to
include more minorities to scale to. Gays, muslims, etc. Just to have new
contexts to repeat their success. But it hasn't been working so well.
1: Numbers and cultural libertarianism.
2: Too small?.
1: Numbers of minorities are fine. Historically similar to other points in
leftist cultural victory. Blacks were ~14% during Civil Rights. Homosexuals
are 10%. It's not about the number of the minority anymore. It's about the
number of unaligned actors. That's the number that has dropped dramatically.
It's like using a huge stick and a fulcrum to move a pillow. The internet has
made reaching the unaligned cheaper than ever, but it has also mande fracturing
them into splinters cheaper as well. This naturally drove up the cost of
reaching them. Clinton and the DNC (for election reasons) and Obama (for
post-president foundation reasons, I have an inside track on that one) want a
repeat of Civil Rights, but the conditions aren't the same. They can no longer
rally the mass unaligned with siren songs of positivity and peace to steer them
against the right. The cuckservatives still fear the lash of the last 40 years.
But the alt right has no reference for it. Without it, the alt right is
realizing there is nothing actually stopping them.
2: That's why Gary is around. to lure the unaligned.
1: He will fail for the reasons I've mentioned above. The reachable unaligned
are media drunk partisans who are just afraid of picking a side because it
reduces the potential of their social capital. The unreachable unaligned are
EVERYWHERE and in UGE numbers. The alt right is realizing no populist force
of merit can oppose them. The CTR attacks we've been doing... it's like
fishing with dynamite man. So, with that, here's the play based on all of
this, the play I wanted years ago as you know.
2: I'm listening.
1: When the DNC hits the point where they start to detect diminshing returns to
the narrative. they have always escalated. They prefer soft power plausible
deniability escalation, but when that is exhausted, they will not shy away
from hard power escalation. Given the *chans creation of GamerGate, the heavy
Linux communities, and the assault on all things culture libertarian about
3-4 years ago and the creation of 8chan due to the subsequent exodus, all signs
\point to a central campaign since very beginning. The DNC needs to create
a new KKK.
2: To get more non-partisans attention?
1: No. To justify the new round of government expansion. "We have to protect
your safe space from BULLY X and to do that, we're just gonna need more power
over the internet :)".
2: Ok, so we're not talking about the unaligned anymore..
1: They can't reach the non-partisans anymore. This whole effort boils down to
the theories of one person: His name is Cass Sunstein.
2: What's the role?.
1: His book is called " Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech".
2: A model?.
1: A summary: “Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled
“Conspiracy Theories,” dealing with the risks and possible government responses
to false conspiracy theories resulting from “cascades” of faulty information
within groups that may ultimately lead to violence. In this article they wrote,
“The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest,
is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government’s antiterrorism
policies, whatever the latter may be.” They go on to propose that, “the best
response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups” They suggest,
among other tactics, “Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat
rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine
percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises,
causal logic or implications for political action.” “The authors declare that
there are five responses a government can take toward conspiracy theories: “We
can readily imagine a series of possible responses. Government might ban
conspiracy theorizing. Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or
otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. Government might itself
engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories.
Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in
counterspeech. Government might engage in informal communication with such
parties, encouraging them to help.” However, the authors advocate that each
“instrument has a distinctive set of potential effects, or costs and benefits,
and each will have a place under imaginable conditions. However, our main policy
idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups
that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), and (5).”
1: This guy was appointed by Obama to work with the NSA to bring "civilian
oversight" into play to do all of these things. Once I became aware of the
methodology, I analyzed his theories for the flaw. I found it, and I started
putting the trap into place. The trap is based on two gambles:
1: The first is that the unreachable unaligned are too expensive even for the NSA.
Based on Sunstein's own works, his entire thesis is central actor-specific and
does not involve mass participation. Thus, Sunstein's fatal flaw is that he
works exclusively on the nodes of negative actors in question and not on the
evolution of ramifications. I gambled that the NSA has no plans or budget to
improve the mass reception of their counternarratives. All they have is
2: Reactspeech. Reactspeech doesn't reach the unaligned..
1: They might have budgets to craft and steer counternarratives, but they have
absolutely zero way to increase the efficiacy of the reception of counternattive.
Sunstein, literally, never considered that part of the domain.
1: This means Sunstein is blind to the unreachable unaligned problem. The second
gamble is the death wish that happens when you suppress a culture for decades
and generations at a time. The traditional right has been deemed the enemy of
everything for so long, even their political representatives believe it. This
leaves true believers with an option: restore social capital and renounce or
spend social capital and assert. The hilarious part is that right wing ideology
is deeply rooted in self-sufficiency. So Sunstein's idea of imposing a tax on
"social capital" for wrongthink in this paradigm is at fault as well. The left
thinks social capital only in leftist terms and cannot understand rightist
2: Yeah, you're losing me a bit here..
1: How so?
2: Explain social capital in applicable terms..
1: The Left sees social capital is the model that every individual action increases
or costs status among their peers.
1: Thus, their hyper obsession with virtue signalling.
2: And in reference to true believers?.
1: The right sees social capital as something VERY different. The don't see it as
a gamble. The left sees social capital as a gambling chip whose payout trends
towards profit upon proper cultural synchronization. The right sees social
capital as a vital assets to cultivate over time via risk mitigation and
reinvestment. This means Sunstein's infiltration theory only works on LEFTIST
2: LOL. got it..
1: Any attempt to infiltrate a rightist community will reinforce the value of
their terms of social capital. For example, rightest social capital conversation
looks like this: "Oh, we're under attack. must be the damn jews again" "Yep,
probably the jews" "hail kek!". A leftist, on the other hand, will see
infiltration as a threat to their accumulated social capital and will seek to
2: LOL. It does out the cucks though..
1: Exactly. It only works on leftists. Under the spirit of infiltration, the
rightist theory of social capital GAINS value.
1: Which means that they forge communities through mutual trial of self-sufficiency.
This creates two ways of managing failure and death. The first is: If you show
your power level and get caught, that was on you for treating your social
capital the way a leftist would. You gambled your social capital instead of
reinvesting it. The second is: Once I am deprived of my social capital
through force, my life is of no value, and I will die.
1: Which means, they have a built-in martyr complex. Not the attention seeking
martyrs like from the 1960s and 1990s, but a willingless towards total
self-sacrifice once deprived of all social capital.
2: So... you can't have social capital in an echo chamber? People's entire
inner circles are echo chambers though and they're just fine with it.
1: You can, but it's no different than printing your own currency. Social
capital in an echo chamber just inflates endlessly to the point of absolute
valuelessness, but it keeps the partisans are intoxicated.
2: So then social capital isn't needed..
1: So, to summerize everything:
- The Left won the culture war in the 1960s
- The Left uses mass media narratives to suppress the Right because outright
genocide is still frowned upon
- When narratives fail, the Left always escalates: first soft, then hard
- Social media, an in particular, blocking/banning/filtering, has resulted in
echo chambers that intoxicate the partisan, but make the unaligned mostly
unreachable by those partisans
- Sunstein's model on countering low-probability, high-impact externalities
has lead him directly into precrime territory to diffuse potential violators
of his models
- Sunstein works with the NSA to infiltrate these groups based on undermining
the value of their social capital
- Sunstein unwittingly can only target Leftist social capital as his tactics
strengthen the social capital of Rightist communities.
1: Care to guess the next step based on these conclusions?
2: Sunstein seems stuck.
1: He doesn't know it/ In fact, he thinks the sky's the limit. It's REALLY
important for him to think that. The next step you will see in full view.
8chan will be aggressively targeted. After Hillary's speech, the mass media
engines are already lining up. CTR is flooding the place with Poe's Law.
Posts like "HEY BROTHERS I KILLED A BLACK BABY!" then suddenly, mass media
reports on it. There will be lots and lots of attempst to try and steer 8chan
into nothing more than a dirt-tier skinhead community. CTR already have the
pipeline setup. They will create the post. Then their agents will bump it.
Then they'll leak it to their contacts in mass media. And thus, the DNC gets
their new KKK to scare the minorities with.
2: Makes sense..
1: They think this can steer the unaligned into supporting Hillary, but that
2: That's what I was trying to say before. oh... go on..
1: The left has already established their echo chambers. Echo chambers that
cannot reach the unaligned. It will fail miserably.
2: Have you found a cost efficient way to reach the unaligned? what's the game
1: Yes. and I'll get to that in a moment. Meanwhile, my team will honeypot the
ever living fuck out of CTR. We're been building up a network of fake leftist
influencers that appear sympathetic.
2: Honeypots for what purpose?.
1: Exposing logs, emails, chats, and transactions between CTR, Clinton, and the
DNC. But that's nothing but standard op reqs. Once the DNC sees how little
impact this massive effort has, they will take whatever false concensus their
media outlets have forged and run with that to pass sweeping laws to ban
"hate communities" and "conspiracy theorists".
2: Sunsteins 1 & 2.
1: Then the arrests happen. Then the botched arrests resulting in incapacitation
and execution happen. The FBI has been seeding CP int he chans for years.
1: They did that to establish and pressure informants and mods. yhey have quite
the circus already lined up to roll out in front of the cameras to show just
how bad 8chan is and just how needed these news laws are.
1: The laws are a reaction to the fact that centralized government can no longer
reach the middle.
2: Makes sense..
1: As mentioned before, centralized infiltration, as is evident in Sunstein's
musings, shows no outreach program to the unaligned. Their only plan is to
engage in perpetual demonization of the fringes to support centralized modes
of government. Once these laws happen and the arrests start, then the
unaligned will finally be brought into it.. but not as supporters.... as
potential terrorists. The alt-right and the chans will be mass detained and
the world will cheer, which will setup a cycle of greater and greater
detainments. Mrs. Clinton has already made mention of going after those
engaging in wrongthink. Meanwhile, her false echo chambers will shouw: "We
stopped hate! YAaaaay!" This will result in more and more innocent people
being targeted by these draconian laws and no amount of mass media will work
to smooth it out because of the very layout of echo chambers today.
2: You're trying to force the unaligned to be partisan..
1: Bingo. The targeted will be deeply anti-centralized government partisan after
2: I suppose they could support govt out of fear as well..
1: Some, but American's don't fear government. They fear loss of social capital
and most people have a rightest model of social capital.
2: Social capital or die? isn't that kind of a human thing?.
1: That's the natural intuitive model humans have all over the world. The anomoly
is the leftist mode of social capital. It usually requires generations of
urbanization to normalize that model and we're still two or three shy of full
2: The leftist perspective isn't breeding?.
1: They certainly do have a penchant for abortion, don't they? My position is
this: If two people are arguing about the interior decoration theme of the room,
you can engage in debate and try and negotiate a diplomatic solution.. or you
can set the house on fire and watch them unify to put it out. The sooner
centralized government is forced to be overtly tyrannical, the sooner we will
have the resources to undermine it.
2: technological resources?.
1: Mass human involvement and participation. It's a big reason I support Clinton.
2: I get what you're saying but I think you believe something I don't..
1: She's the primal force of 1960s entitlement special snowflake
chip-on-the-shoulder insecurity. The type that brings nuclear weapons to a
2: It sounds like you're saying at the basis of human nature is still a desire
for social capital based on self-sufficiency .
1: No. The desire is unimportant. The basis of human nature is discovering
ways you as the individual can safely accumualte social capital and minimize
risk of loss. Tthat basis is how the rightist model of social capital works.
2: "most people have a Rightist model of social capital" <- what's the point of
1: It just happens to be that self-sufficient credos and ethos align with how
that discovery plays out on average
2: And you think human involvement will just show up in opposition to tyranny?.
2: Bottom line this for me then. I don't see where you're going..
1: I believe human involvement will be forced to engage in acts that undermine
2: How is that possible?.
1: Have you been looking into Venezuela recently?
2: Not recently. I just know their recourses are falling apart and people are
trying to leave..
1: Generations of extreme leftist overreaction to protect the government's monopoly
on oil exports to pay for their self-righteous moral paradise. But then oil
prices tanked. Now you have an entire generation of engineers, PhDs, graduates,
and academics fleeing the city due to MASSIVE crime and ending up panhandling
gold and digging in toxic mines to barely make enough money, but way more than
they'd make on the dole in the city... a dole which, mind you, favors political
supporters over opposition and the unaligned. Care to guess how many people
have socialism in Venezuela now?
1: I would argue that these people, if given the oppotunity, would elect a populist
to overtly overthrow that government. Even by violent means. No hand-wringing.
No arguing over moral righteousness. No concerns over legacy and the right
side of history.
2: Are they functional enough for that?.
1: Create an ecosystem where populists compete for influence (which isn't hard
since the people who already support that populist have ALREADY sorted themselves
into echo chambers) And poof, out comes the elements of a new regime :D
2: So then we can watch this, like, watch this happen there?.
1: Two to five years.
1: Usually accelerated once foreign powers realize the situation and pour money
2: What do they have to gain?.
1: Puppet state, better trade terms, cheaper resources, less threatening military
neighbors, expansion of geopolitical sphere, etc.
1: The Alt-right will burn. And nothing will rise from it's ashes.
2: You're explained this all before. just not in this amount of step-by-step
1: Sunstein will believe he's achieved victory, But little does he know he only
made the destruction of leftist social capital the policy of the establishment :D
Rightist social capital will flourish because of him.