Recommended Posts

3850
 
Q!!Hs1Jq13jV610 Feb 2020 - 10:58:12 AM
d921fd2956ac91053d05e0a82fdc776608fddd6a

Justice.jpg

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1226908710150299649📁
Did 'Mueller' open the door to Ukraine?
Did 'Mueller' open the door to FISA [illegal]?
How do you introduce evidence legally?
Did 'Impeachment' provide a platform to discuss findings of Ukraine?
How do you introduce evidence legally?
Did 'Impeachment' harm or help POTUS [public]?
How do you introduce [D]s high crimes [corruption] to the public?
Why didn't POTUS remove [Hussein] holdovers from NSC?
Do you really believe that POTUS & team trusted [Hussein] holdovers to remain within the admin and work to enact POTUS' agenda w/o bias or confrontation?
How do you 'awaken' the 'induced coma' public [FAKE NEWS control] from their long sleep?
Sometimes allowing your enemies to [openly] attack…….
Logical thinking.
Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2019 at 10:53 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

This is Q as I understand the phenomenon in essential terms.

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

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

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2020 at 11:52 PM, ThatGuy said:

Would you say that something like this is the end-result, or, at least related:

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...