All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. TG, Not just related. This is smack dab in the middle of the unfolding into the mainstream. These Internet lifestyle celebrities see the ideas from sources they trust, the ideas make sense to them and they run with them. I doubt any of these lovely celebs are keeping strict tabs on sources and running down vague ones. These celebs are not mainstream, but they are one of the middle stepping stones Q's ideas go over on the way to the mainstream. The Buzzfeed article and awful video about Q therein are at the perplexed stage of wondering how this could be happening. So they pat the wayward ladies on the head amidst snark and tsk tsk tsking to try to get them back in line. The dorks haven't figured out that these women are merely trading up the chain in a manner they themselves did earlier with different narratives. Tsk tsk tsk... I'm not criticizing the celebs or Q, though. I'm just mentioning how the process works. The efficacy of the process has little to do with the content. It worked like hell for the globalists. Now it's working like hell for Q and Trump supporters. Leftie globalists are not amused. Trading up the chain done right is very powerful as a publicity tool. it even works well as a philosophical publicity tool. Have you ever read Rand talk about how a philosophical premise gets into the mainstream? She mentioned somewhere that when an idea gets to the level of TV sitcoms and comic books (I'm paraphrasing, so this isn't exact, although the gist is correct), only then is the idea embedded in the culture enough to shape society. She talked about this several times. She never did get around to saying how that works, though. (Or at least, I don't recall ever seeing it.) She did illustrate a few processes and outcomes in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, but she was vague on the precise actions individuals take in handing off an idea from one person to another in a form that the receiver accepts it--how word of mouth works so to speak. Or how an idea becomes viral. Trading up the chain is one such mechanism--on the press level. From the press to individuals, though, it works differently. It woks on trust--there is an unspoken bond of trust individuals hold for the press. That trust is the basis of an enormous amount of uncritical acceptance of weird ideas and bad ideas and lousy-ass ideas. As an aside, that bond is so deep and fits so well with how the human mind is constructed, it's impressive to see it breaking down in modern times. The dorks in the press really had to work hard to screw up that badly. I guess suicide is hard to pull off, but they're hard at work on making it happen. By God, no one will tell them what to do. They'll be blatantly lying, mocking their readers and laughing all the way to the grave. So there! Back to point, trading up the chain works equally well for good ideas and evil ones. Obviously, it works great for marketing and selling stuff. That's the world Ryan Holiday was in when he came up with this thing. .Michael
  3. Would you say that something like this is the end-result, or, at least related: (regarding a Buzzfeed article: "Lifestyle Influencers Are Now Sharing Some Bogus Far-Right Conspiracy Theories About The Coronavirus On Instagram" https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemcneal/coronavirus-lifestyle-influencers-sharing-conspiracy-qanon
  4. There is another way I understand Q--in essential terms. I've talked about this before. It's called " trading up the chain." In mainstream press terms, the QAnon phenomenon has been a variation on this. Note: I'm not talking about who is behind this. I'm merely talking about how this spread. Trading-up-the-chain is a press strategy identified and named by Ryan Holiday. It works like this. If a person wants to get an idea (or any kind of publicity) into the mainstream press through the back door, so to speak, he starts with a small site or place with no audience. But at that site or place is a discussion of the issue in legitimate-sounding highly-informative terms, but slanted. This slant is what is really being promoted. (Whether this slant is on the side of the good guys or bad guys, whether it is more objective or totally misleading, is not the issue. The mechanics work the same.) Then the person using this strategy gets in contact with people a little higher up in the press food chain who are sympathetic to the slant and points them to this information. As these people are overworked, they don't have time or inclination to check sources. The material sounds legitimate and looks like a source, so they report it. And the people above them use their publication as a source, since they suffer from the same lack of time under a lot of pressure. And off the slant goes up to the mainstream as if it were proven fact. This is happening with QAnon and here is a very good example of how Q has reached the stage right before the mainstream. Notice that Stephen Bannon does not mention QAnon, but he does mention what Q wants in quite clear terms, and specifically naming Kissinger, Davos, hedge fund managers, etc., as a starting point. Bannon is hardly ever this explicit in threats. Before too long, expect to see this--and other things like it, maybe mentioning other targets--as regular news items in the mainstream. That's how Q has spread. Q was the starting point, but instead of going away and relying on a single push, it kept pumping out drops laden with mystique and some solid predictions. So many people started pushing it up the chain. The fringe carried it at first, then the larger alt media got on board. Now Q is penetrating into much higher-ups in the press and, like with a typical trading up the chain process, Q, being the original source, stops being mentioned up near the top. But the ideas are. And once these ideas are in the mainstream press that way, not even the coronavirus can keep them from getting into people's hearts and minds in the mainstream culture. Like Bannon said, after saying, "It's all going to come out," about Kissinger and cronies (including Davos people, Wall Street people, etc): "The world is going to stand in judgment of you." It will, too. And these people are going to get thrown into the garbage bin of history along with tin-pot dictators, Bernie Madoff and the like. Their end will be jail, being killed and/or disgraced forever throughout history as evil people who did evil things. That is how the world changes when the trading-up-the-chain process is used effectively. Michael
  5. Yesterday
  6. Fake news. CBS is working overtime to produce one fake story after another. It was busted just the other day using video of Italy in a report on NYC hospitals. I wonder which billionaire's ass it is kissing. Like I said, fake news: Go to that Twitter thread and all the info is there. Michael
  7. On a feel-good note, Corey posted this today on Twitter. Awwwww... Michael
  8. There is a lady Amazing Polly uses as a source at times and Polly mentions her a lot: Corey Lynn. Corey has a website called... Corey's Digs ... where she presents a lot of reports and things, including a long six-page report on the history of eugenics that I started. It's really good and I will finish it. I was listening to Corey's latest podcast (April 3) and I like it. So here it is for you if you wish to tune in. I have only listened to half of it so far, but I do find Corey's interest in facts--and the way she is interested in them--something I resonate with. In the video, she keeps trying to separate actual fact of the coronavirus threat (like actual hospital shortages and the actual deadliness of this virus for some people) with the horrible media onslaught of overhype and made-up stories. Correy even said something interesting about the placebo effect. It works both ways, for curing people and for making them ill. The media is literally making some people ill right now. Physically ill through the power of suggestion. Like a placebo does in curing come people. Michael
  9. Last week
  10. And if you are or were making money off of "free trade" with China, think about the following: Michael
  11. Look what the mainstream news is doing. This is disgusting. Bah... Michael
  12. TG, I get the wordplay, but I took a look at Greg Laurie in "identify then judge" mode. I saw the beginning of this sermon: God’s Answer to Fear, Anxiety and Worry, Part 2. What follows is a little off-topic, but who cares? I find it interesting and probably several readers will, too. When I go into "identify then judge" mode on looking at something new, I turn my brain into a sponge. I try to set aside everything I can from what I already know and believe about similar things and just observe. I can't turn off everything, of course. There are countless memories and abstractions floating around in the underbelly of my brain, so I can't do this literally. But I can turn off my critical faculty to a conscious extent and just soak up the experience, which I can later judge consciously. It's like I give my brain a command: "Just observe and identify." In that frame of mind, what I saw surprised me in a pleasant way. It had nothing to do with political message, but instead with music. I normally don't like modern Christian music because the lyrics tend to suck. (Many older hymns rock, though.) Of course, I'm referring to what I've heard. The lyrics of the modern stuff tend to have little poetic value and do not integrate with the music. So on hearing the opening song of the sermon, once again, the lyrics were not what you could call poetic. But I wasn't judging, so I got a nice surprise in the chorus. The lyrics integrated with music and the listener in a really cool way. The verse was the normal first-person statements of the obvious for the context I dislike ("We are your church, we are your sons and daughters" and so on). But the music underneath started getting a real nice groove on. Then the chorus came: "With our hands to the heavens, alive in your presence, Oh God, you are here. So pour out your spirit, we love to be near you, Oh God, you are here." If you allow yourself to get into the groove of the underlying music, you should get a mix of nice, cool, wonder, just let go and feel, and a few other such things thrown in. Granted, this is subjective, but from what I've observed, a smooth easy-listening style of music heavy on ninths in both harmony and melody (sorry for being technical, but I don't have other words for it) generally produces a pleasant hypnotic effect where you let go of negativity at that moment and just coast on feel-good rhythm. But with this song, the words of the lyrics direct this all-consuming emotion toward God at the time you are feeling it, and even give you instructions of what to do with your body and how to feel about God--through presupposition at that. The words don't tell you what to do. They say what you are doing. Note, I'm not analyzing whether God exists. I am analyzing how a strong emotion gets elicited through music and unexpectedly attached to God in lyrics through the image of God pouring his presence over you at the time your are feeling the emotion. This same process could be used for a country, for a person, for the planet, for anything big, or admirable outside of you. There is so much going on in this song and performance in both aesthetic experience and covert persuasion I could write a long article about it and still uncover new things. I am definitely going to do some serious thinking on this. For example, the process I described can also be done in reverse, that is, after eliciting in you (should you allow yourself to get into the music) a negative emotion like raw aggressiveness, using first-person statements in the lyrics--while you are feeling the emotion--to attach that emotion to something or someone outside of you. Instant hate and bigotry. Wow. I did not expect to see, hear and observe that. As the saying goes, people don't remember what you tell them, but they never forget how you make them feel. I don't know anything else about Greg Laurie and his people other than he's a famous preacher, and I didn't watch the video for much longer after the song, but I do know he knows what he is doing. And, I get the feeling he is a good man. Which is good. Bad people with his level of competence could do a lot of damage in society. In fact some do. I'm glad Greg Laurie is on the good guy side. Michael
  13. Doesn't the one necessitate the other?
  14. And this is shortly after the "Ready Reserves" comment Trump emphasized that revealed a gun shop in Texas called "Ready Reserves", on Corona Drive...
  15. Re: Pastor Greg Laurie, Harvest, and Corona: Greg Laurie is an American author and pastor who serves as the senior pastor of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California, Harvest Corona in Corona, California Harvest Woodcrest in Riverside, California, Harvest at Kumulani in Kapalua, Hawaii, and Harvest Orange County in Irvine, California. Wikipedia https://twitter.com/tobycovfefe2/status/1246829184971870212/photo/2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Laurie (Now, with the Wiki page bio, I'd certainly want to know if that isn't just shenanigans taking place after the fact...) [Edit: Nope, not shenanigans. It's on the the official Harvest.org page as well:] https://harvest.church/location/corona/
  16. Re: "Harvest": https://qmap.pub/read/3897 https://qmap.pub/read/3599 https://qmap.pub/read/3708 https://qmap.pub/read/3525
  17. (If anyone is curious...the sermon's theme is Palm Sunday/"Spring Cleaning") https://harvest.org/live
  18. Trump made the same comment, yesterday, at his conference, that he'd be tuning in to this service from Riverside, CA. Not a big deal in itself, except that the pastor, Greg Laurie, expressed surprise about it... https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1246579610105581570?s=20 https://twitter.com/greglaurie/status/1246624908995473409?s=20
  19. Mortality? First I have to get used to my morality. --Brant
  20. That's it! never going out again. As for speaking to anyone, not again, as for kissing anyone... clear now, I've been doing it all wrong. I might die. I might kill someone. The Christians have their everlasting life, the adolescent secularists equally expect and demand one, no risks attached. A brave new world it isn't. Scared people of the world: Grow up, live the untimid life, take your chances, get accustomed to your mortality.
  21. I haven't checked the following for accuracy, but if true, this might explain a little something... Hmmmmmm... Michael
  22. This one is funny (I laughed when I saw it ), but brutal. Michael
  23. Michael, that's why I stay absorbed by the left's mindset. And because they crop up in every place, so identically. I often remark on how exactly in tune the Lefties I know here, are with American ones: same responses, e.g. "virtue signalling", Trump blaming, etc. like they are all wired together. Perhaps a little obsessively I watch and listen to them especially those in media, and try to work out their behavior and premises. Brains and education, erudition and a generally pleasing manner, they nearly always have, but there seems something missing. The money lust doesn't quite satisfy me. (Get the power, the money follows, as you said). Power over what or whom? and why? takes me closer. There is a lack in such people, I can only call the soul (a consciousness) and I think in that lack is the dread of others' souls/minds. Something twisted, results in the desire to ultimately control those minds and bodies of others. When they can't, when they meet resistance, that's when the viciousness erupts. One of the last lines I still remember from the Bible is apt: For what does it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his soul? What Rand would call self-abnegation, giving up the 'self', the sacrifice of one's highest value to lesser ones. (South Africa? Ah man. The country just got downgraded to junk status by Moody's. Everybody's in lockdown for another 2 weeks. This is going to get interesting...)
  1. Load more activity