a9b25 No.158850[Last 50 Posts]
Recently the question was asked "Is it wrong to kill someone?" >>158754 and this made me think of vigilante "justice". This made me think of a right-winger flipping from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good (pic#2) and I have associated that with Hitler invading Poland in 1939. This gave me a timing point to put the ideological cycle onto the 100 year cycle that I have extended from Martin Armstrong's work ( https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/models/7219-2/
). (I am going to call this the "Right-wing Transition" because the line is next to the word Right. I'll name the others in a similar way.)
Then when I considered the other three transition lines, on this "wheel" that we rotate through, surprisingly Q emerges as logical, and even expected. I think I can show that Q is a logical result of human collective behaviour without having to resort to the standard Q proofs ( >>156898 https://www.qproofs.com/
I could talk about the other transition lines but that would be boring as they aren't affecting our lives now. By choosing '39 as the Right-wing Transition year we get '14 as the Authoritarian transition date. In the US we get Trump elected in 2016 and his emergence as a candidate was in 2015. This is close enough to suggest Trump represents the the flip from the Left Authoritarianism to the Right Authoritarianism. We have all seen the Left try to force its views on the public and control the narrative.
If you are willing to assume that around 2014 we started flipping from Lawful Evil (Clinton crime family etc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash
) to Lawful Good, there would need to be some emerging representation of this. The things Q uses to describe itself is completely consistent with Lawful Good fighting Lawful Evil ( "Think DOJ/FBI reorg." - Q #1664 ), also it is Right Wing ( "Use logic." "God bless." "We serve at the pleasure of the President." - Q ) and nationalistic ( "Today, as Patriots, we celebrate our Independence.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PSUr9rMVtc
" " https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JDVT-8tUfiE
FIGHT for what is RIGHT! " -Q ). Q is completely consistent with what the cycling ideology theory would predict, a lawful, good, patriotic, militaristic entity rising up to fight evil, chaos, division, selfishness, corruption, wars for profit etc. Q even says "WWG1WGA" it a phrase to reunite society into a nationalistic focus. "This is not about religions or party affiliation. EVIL is everywhere. There are no drawn lines. No boundaries. Good vs Evil." - Q #925.
Why would we doubt Q? When looking at the other three quarters of the ideology wheel we see that those three quarters are under the influence of either Chaos/Libertarianism and/or or Evil/Selfishness. We have had about 75 years of things degenerating. All of our lives are filled with this failing of society. Given this long history it is not rational to actually have hope. But the cycle is so long that we can never have a memory of the last time hope arrived, it was before we were born. So this hope arrives completely expectantly, and is therefore highly doubted.
Q matches my cycle theory… that makes it impossible for me to discount Q as a simple scam.
The other quality of Q that I think is important is that Q is trying to stop civil war, Q seems desperate to stop the Right-wing Transition from Lawful Good to Chaotic Good. Which brings me back to anon's question:
>Is it wrong to [do vigilante violence]?
Yes. Because while it might be an act of Good, it is also an act of Unlawfulness/Chaos and assists in the decay of civilization. It turns the wheel into chaos territory. One could ask, are these acts of barbarism, done by others, intended to lower the West into the same barbarity? And should we fall for it?
Thoughts on Q?
>>158850>So this hope arrives completely expectantly, and is therefore highly doubted.
UNEXPECTANTLY. Oops :)
We must break the cycle.
Is that inviting stagnation?
The long death? Death of what?
If not to break the cycle, then how to make it benign?
Q has acted as one who observes the preservation of law and rule, as someone who wouldn't sacrifice stability to have justice. But if the barbarity, violence to do subjective good, is already within our societies, observe how Muslims attack people who consume alcohol or invite sexual advances through, by their standards, promiscuous clothing does so to install subjective good, and the system is impotent to combat this then violence may be the only answer. We can observe how NGOs and other actors use immigration to harm cultures, to lower their stability, cultivating them to be ripe for plucking, and how this spread violence throughout society and leads to divisions between groups solely based on natural human behavior. Why then wouldn't direct violence be a viable response in cases like these?
It undermines social stability by undermining the rules it operates by if violence is used to do good when society have undermined the worth of violence to do good. But isn't a society already slowly degenerating when the system provides allowances for what society considers immoral behavior? If governance and the legal system is steering society by the ideological rules of unsupported suppositions, that causes harm (Increased debt, crime, divisions, and the overtaking by foreign cultures — amongst other issues), and it is resistant to change through peaceful means then maybe violence is the only way.
Checked which is alarming.
>wouldn't sacrifice stability to have justice.
Can you actually have Justice without stability?
Good violence can be done through the laws of society. But when we are partially in the Lawful Evil part the law fails. Q is fixing up the Lawful Evil into the Lawful Good so that subsequently society can rely on lawful violence to stop unlawful violence. If we rotate into chaotic good before lawful good can be re-establish we miss the chance to have the rebuilding of civilization and we descend into the War part of the cycle. Their also seems to be an assumption that the violence will result in a victory where we suffer no casualties. And that somehow this violence will be less than the current violence.
>>158855>We must break the cycle.
Agreed.>Is that inviting stagnation?
Yes. But is that bad? Our wars give us new technology.. does it end our suffering? no. A society that always avoids war would advance slower because they have no problems to solve. It would be like Ponyville. "We are fine just how we are.">The long death? Death of what?
Indeed. Human ego? Human passion? Human's limited to Earth, and actually colonising space?>If not to break the cycle, then how to make it benign?
I think this is what keeping to Law is. If the Right remains Lawful, Chaos does not overtake us and pull us into war. Does human advance actually depend on war? Or are we just being childish?
>Can you actually have Justice without stability?
I'd argue you can, but when not safeguarded against and lacking a solid principle of legal security the room for corruption widens. Inviting the intertwining of corruption within the system later operating in a stable society; this will only protect the cycle.
I assume casualties whenever one uses violence to correct an ill; if one was to attack corrupt individuals within the legal system, killing them or threatening to betray their own wants, then the backlash from their supporting base (If there is one) and people from the general society, who may not know why this violence was good, will act to rectify this. Which may end up causing more harm in the long run. There is nothing to say that you can't rectify this later; maybe violence can work both in the L.E. part of the cycle to establish a fallen version of the L.G. cycle which can be rectified later in the future iterations?
L.E. cycles have lead massacres throughout history, observe the oppression of India by Muslims or the French revolution.
>Yes. But is that bad? Our wars give us new technology.. does it end our suffering?
Not necessary, so long it gives to technological progress and the development of durable societies. Whenever there is room to expand into we humans fill that void with more bodies, this is why technological progress won't save the world, our civilization, if we do not implement rather stern laws regarding reproduction and consumption.
>Indeed. Human ego? Human passion? Human's limited to Earth, and actually colonising space?
Human ego will persist; passion as well. It might threaten humanity's expansion into space since the cycle also spawns grand narratives that galvanize people to greatness.
>Does human advance actually depend on war? Or are we just being childish?
Isn't war also a great narrative told to a people? A narrative doesn't require a massacre, but a people that are lacking a grand narrative is easy to divide and that is why the West is now slowly giving up. Advancement can be tied to great narratives, such as the space program, this is why I believe in the great projects to galvanize people into action.
Childish? Maybe, but is that a bad thing? Isn't it childish that adults require something grander to believe in to not forget the future?
Firstly, thanks for really well written post.
With Q, I believe he is a true insider. He is a bit ambiguous which can be a bit "daunting", but it is needed to leave proof and not expose at the same time. One can say humans are designed to find patterns, and we are good at deceiving ourself. Still I think Q has posted enough proofs and is consistent in his style and meaning that I believe he isn't a larper.
The cycle theorem is growing on me. But also it paints a picture that it is inevitable that society will turn to Chaotic Good at one point. We might be able to prolong the era of Lawful Good, but as you say eventually the collective memory of Chaotic Evil and Lawful Evil will fade away and the turning of the clock will begin. I hope there is an escape from the cycles, but at the same time the cycles ensures we will never be stuck in Chaotic Evil and/or Lawful Evil (even though the USSR lasted longer than one would like).
Wheels can spin in both directions, vigilantism is no doubt a violation of good order and the rule of law, but the left also violates that order. What happens when things start sliding back the other way because the enemy plays dirty? There's already a strong sentiment amongst them that they should play dirty(dirtier) to return the status quo to what it was.
I don't trust Q, he is deliberately vague and tosses out information seemingly at random. While useful, it can blind people to alternatives and can be used to keep things predictable for the establishment. I have significant doubts that after decades of dominance, those in the alphabet soup agencies that had been working to promote and maintain the leftist status quo suddenly decide to bat for the other team just as control of the narrative is being lost.
>>158870>Whenever there is room to expand into we humans fill that void with more bodies, this is why technological progress won't save the world, our civilization, if we do not implement rather stern laws regarding reproduction and consumption.
I think we do suffer from population density but not over population. There are habitable areas of the planet without people. I'd like to see some intelligently planned cities made and incentives to get people to them to kick-start their economy.
>Human ego will persist; passion as well. It might threaten humanity's expansion into space since the cycle also spawns grand narratives that galvanize people to greatness.
I'd like to think that each time we go around the wheel we do a little better. And because of technology we have much more chance of "remembering" the pitfalls of last time. When the Left says Trump is "literally Hitler" it is not a bad thing to recall the result of last time and avoid it.
>Isn't war also a great narrative told to a people? A narrative doesn't require a massacre, but a people that are lacking a grand narrative is easy to divide and that is why the West is now slowly giving up. Advancement can be tied to great narratives, such as the space program, this is why I believe in the great projects to galvanize people into action.
Agreed. We need positive narratives. Space is the most obvious good one, and the effort so large it could chew up all that human energy, and stop it from being directed at itself. I also think we should take on more risks with astronauts. Keeping them perfectly safe makes expansion slow and uninteresting, astronauts should be daring adventurers like the old seafarers. The public should be engaged emotionally in the daring risk taken. They should be heroes inspiring more heroes.
>Childish? Maybe, but is that a bad thing? Isn't it childish that adults require something grander to believe in to not forget the future?
Maybe we are still growing up. Maybe it isn't a wheel, maybe it's a spring and we are spiralling upwards, helped up by technology.>>158873>The cycle theorem is growing on me. But also it paints a picture that it is inevitable that society will turn to Chaotic Good at one point.
It is concerning, but seeing a future negative is not just a source of pessimism, it is also a source of motivation to make it not happen again. If we think we have conquered all evil we stop paying attention to it's re-emergence. Good requires endless concern and vigilance. I think keeping concern is a requirement.
>The cycle theorem is growing on me.
I think its root is the baby boom/bust(s) and so I am not so certain it is continuous forever, but it keeps matching well the flow events for our lives. I'll be very interested to see if a baby boom happens again. That would strongly support the cycles continuation.>>158876>Wheels can spin in both directions,
Interesting idea. Can people, right now, go from Trump support to Clinton support? Can people go from immigration is bad, to immigration is good? Maybe, but the bulk of people can't, the Left had it's chance and they blew it.
>What happens when things start sliding back the other way because the enemy plays dirty?
My bias is this validates the Authoritarian Right response, the wheel moves clockwise to fight them. Actually this bring up an interesting idea… is the Q clock the same thing as the Vril wheel? Might be worth relooking at Q's mention of the clock.
>I have significant doubts that after decades of dominance, those in the alphabet soup agencies that had been working to promote and maintain the leftist status quo suddenly decide to bat for the other team just as control of the narrative is being lost.
Agreed. But the gov itself can't hold together when the Left is disintegrating and they rely on it, they really could be changing sides to keep power. Q is alleged to be partly Military Intelligence. One could say that the Military Industrial Complex is getting the upper hand over the criminal cabal. The military is likely to be more noble than the criminals. Self interest could be a driver in fixing nationalism. And even nationalism might be a source of war that feeds money the MIC. A different way of saying we need to watch out for the "Right-wing Transition" from good to chaos. We should look at it with caution.
There've been alleged instances of people swinging hard left in response to Trump, not on a wide scale as they'd like you to believe but it does happen. Less related to the US situation, my own formerly conservative mother swung hard left in recent years, she went from calling for chinese to fuck out of the country to saying we have to see the good in the world and open up our arms (and welfare systems) to them. Government employee, though, so it's hard to tell if it's sincere or just a self preservation act to keep her job.
If he's MILINT then it is a good bet he's acting in conservative interests, but then you have to wonder why other parties haven't attempted to silence the leak, and they almost certainly have the resources and connections to call on to do it, and Q is hardly a secret given that he even has t-shirts now.
>I think we do suffer from population density but not over population. There are habitable areas of the planet without people. I'd like to see some intelligently planned cities made and incentives to get people to them to kick-start their economy.
The issue is that space is finite and the development of new habitable space is consuming, why I believe controlled demographics is the best strategy to maintain a durable society. This, sadly, is rather fascistic and any variable backlashes against the implementation of this for certain bring with them violence.
>I'd like to think that each time we go around the wheel we do a little better. And because of technology. . .
I do hope this is true, but I observe the opposite of this as I see how we in the West are kowtowing to barbaric cultures and hostile foreigners.
But the left isn't concerned with cautiousness when they use this cheap tactic against their political opponent; a movement that have caused most of the creeping chaos in Western societies can hardly be blamed for cautiousness or moderation. Still, I do agree we always should be cautious.
>Agreed. We need positive narratives. Space is the most obvious good one, and the effort so large it could chew up all that human energy, . . .
Exactly. And, as you have observed, this would direct peoples' energy towards something positive — it would return a belief in the future for the West.
>Maybe we are still growing up. Maybe it isn't a wheel, maybe it's a spring and we are spiralling upwards, helped up by technology.
Technology does not solve the baser behavior of humanity; whenever technology opens up space for humans to pour into we will. This is why we never can solve poverty or inequality or the slow or rapid degradation of our habitats if we're relying on technology like a believer awaiting epiphany of divine intervention. Most if not all explanations why even in the best of societies we see suffering brought by inequality and inequity is due to human nature, biology. Technology should be used with social and economic policies. Europe did this once by basically leaving people to their own devices, the effect of this would be that the lower class would basically be replaced by the children of higher classes. England alone this happened (If I remember correctly) four times between 14th century to the end of the 18th century, which did lower criminality and raise productivity and IQ. If We didn't do this then Europe would be more a facsimile of many Middle Eastern cultures. Of course, other policies and specific events pushed Europe into the most powerful region ever seen in history.
Even as a hardened National Socialist as myself, I find the idea of wide-spread general population control to be an abhorrent use of the state's power to try to control the people. Though I'm not against its use to try to cut down on the amount of hereditary diseases or birth-defects, I'm with Vril on the idea that the better solution is to improve our city planning and to try to spread the population more evenly across the whole of the nation. And I think I'd also be with Vril in the idea that expansion into space would be the ultimate way to avoid overpopulation.
>Even as a hardened National Socialist as myself, I find the idea of wide-spread general population control to be an abhorrent . . .
Which is why I express issues with the idea, but eventually population control will be implemented. Be it through nature or artifice.
You're expressing what I'm pointing at: belief in that technology will solve our issues.
>>158887>You're expressing what I'm pointing at: belief in that technology will solve our issues.
I wouldn't call it that. We just have more than enough solutions in the short- and long-terms for avoiding the issue of population control. The first and most obvious of these is that, since our planet has limited space on its own, we should look elsewhere in the Universe.
>We just have more than enough solutions in the short- and long-terms for avoiding the issue of population control.
Maybe, maybe not — I'm just observing how humans usually behave when new technology opens up for population expansion, negating their positives by adding to demand. Just as how more efficient use of energy doesn't lower the total energy consumption of a society because we just keep consuming more and as our numbers grow the positives are negated.
I'm in favor of the great population control through the natural processes, cruel as it may be it disallows for blame to be redirected on some system or person beyond oneself. It also destroys societies for some length of time, but if this keeps the use of fascistic policies at bay then I guess this is preferable.
So, your solution is to simply wait and do nothing until it gets to the point that nothing can actually be done about the issue at hand?
Human behavior leads to this naturally, I have to do nothing. Observe California (water shortage and environmental degradation), India, China, Africa for examples of this in relation to demographics. People keep consuming, expanding, and add weight to a system's carrying capacity — then something makes it break and chaos ensues and then a new normal.
I'm just pointing out that either we act to do something or nature will help us.
You claim technology will solve the issue; I claim it will not do so in of itself.
I recognize that one solution (population control) ought to work, although I find it morally difficult to accept. Repulsive actually.
And the technology to colonize space is slow coming and even slower implementing your solution.
>>158895>Observe California (water shortage and environmental degradation), India, China, Africa for examples of this in relation to demographics.
California is suffering because the policies enacted by their legislature are self-destructive and horribly short-sighted, not because of overpopulation; if that was the case, we'd see similar problems on the East Coast. There is an ungodly amount of unoccupied land in almost every part of Africa (with exception to mountainous East Africa), and while China doesn't have quite as much space, their own overpopulation problems are clustered around the east of the country where all the factories are, with well over half the total area of the country still sparsely populated. India is surrounded by mountains on one side and oceans on all others, so they were screwed anyways.
>I'm just pointing out that either we act to do something or nature will help us.
I agree, and yet you seem to ignore any solutions brought up without giving anything better than "let it happen".
>You claim technology will solve the issue; I claim it will not do so in of itself.
I never claimed as such. I claimed that smarter city planning and population spreading, as well as off-world colonization, were potential solutions. And, again, you offer no other meaningful ones.
>And the technology to colonize space is slow coming and even slower implementing your solution.
Then we will work on making these solutions a reality. Disregarding everything else I've said, for the vast majority of the world, overpopulation is not an issue, and will not be before solutions can be worked out. When it does, then we will solve it as necessary. Until then, let us work on them.
>>158892>I'm just observing how humans usually behave when new technology opens up for population expansion
My observation is that initially technology is ignored. The next generation works out how to use it and runs with it. It then turns into an asset for wars/ideology battles. Then this smooths out, and its whole utility is not upgraded until about 100 years later, with the next cycle/tech bump (which is an echo of the baby bump). Examples are the internet and the car. 100 years later the gas fuelled car is finally able to use batteries.
>It also destroys societies for some length of time, but if this keeps the use of fascistic policies at bay then I guess this is preferable.
I'd prefer a enlightened fascism based on a science-meritocracy. I'd like societies to be computer modelled and the models improved with feed back. I'd like a science-military who use violence as a last resort only, and with regret, and the burden of that regret should be put back on the computer modelling. The nation should be embarrassed that mismanagement lead to the final option of violence. I'd be open to "enlightened fascism" encompassing the whole of society. If it were affordable I would give the youth time to be the rebels they are before they then join, or if the modelling works out better, use it to structure youths into what the future needs (not sure which) and engage their natural competitiveness. There should be capitalism, women should be awarded for having a decent amount of children. Perhaps there should be a place set aside for those not wanting to participate, lets call that a ghetto. :P My utopia is too much influenced by Star Trek!
>I'm just pointing out that either we act to do something or nature will help us.
Too true. The problem is, the logical end point of this is centralised global management of the planet. Since humans produce naturally a percentage of selfish criminals that management idea gets corrupted/infiltrated by the criminals and we end up remaining in a bad situation despite having the infrastructure not to be.
The real problem is that nature has no agenda, there is no sign of a God managing things, and the blow back "Judgment of God" can be seen as emerging cycles self-made by us. If so humans need to take firmer control over natures laissez-faire "attitude". But telling people they must conform is the best way to make them not to. So their needs to be incentives.
California's population has also expanded considerably in the last decades, this will naturally affect the state's ability to operate.
Occupying all land available won't do a society well, it will eventually destroy that society.
I agree that population density matters but I do not believe how expanding into new areas will solve anything in the long run. So if the Chinese population just spread it wouldn't affect their habitat negatively? Wouldn't it encourage a population boom (The one-child policy is revoked)? How much energy would be spent on infrastructure to connect the countryside to maintain a cohesive society?
>I agree, and yet you seem to ignore any solutions brought up without giving anything better than "let it happen".
Go back to my post where I first mentioned population control. I want some kind of population control, despite it activating an alarm. And I observing that it will solve itself is just an obvious observation about how a population will normalize itself according to opportunity, resources, the health of habitat, and norms.
>I never claimed as such. I claimed that smarter city planning and population spreading, as well as off-world colonization, were potential solutions. And, again, you offer no other meaningful ones.
But I've made it clear enough that technology will help us raise the ceiling for how many we can sustain, my issue is that there is a ceiling/carrying capacity for any system and we will hit eventually. By expanding into a new area and smarter city planning you're just pushing the deadline whilst we're waiting to ferry hundreds of millions off-world, something that resource depletion may make impossible.
My solution is and always will be: population control. But the question "how" is difficult to answer because there are examples of population control that has failed and is failing (high taxes, contraceptives, and fostering an anti-family culture), and to find humane and functional systems of population control is difficult if not impossible.
>Then we will work on making these solutions a reality. Disregarding everything else . . .
True, but resource depletion may thwart any technological development due to increasingly rapid consumption. There's roof to how much resources one may extract from a closed system and there is no reason for us to believe we may be able to reach a stage of civilizational advancement where we can begin colonizing space.
Ok. Let us work on one of the major the problems caused by large populations demanding food. How will you solve the fact we're emptying our oceans? They're almost empty of larger life-forms because of overfishing; now stop people from eating fish and other sea animals. Good luck.
I bet the emptying of the seas would be much slower if we were, p'haps, only half a billion humans. Not that I intend that as an goal, only as an example.
Sven, I am genuinely sorry, but I would not want you as my leader in any capacity.
>>158902>But I've made it clear enough that technology will help us raise the ceiling for how many we can sustain,
I'm waiting for you to say global warming is real…
>My solution is and always will be: population control. … has failed … contraceptives
Actually contraceptives takes minumum ~90 years (human life length) before the benefit (if any) arrives. You still have to get the pre-contraceptive baby boom from the system. Projections are the human population is going to stablise and where contraception is high the population will fall (without immigration). Family planning clinics start about 1920 so + 90 years = 2010. Pill 1960 + 90 = 2050.
>True, but resource depletion may thwart any technological development due to increasingly rapid consumption. There's roof to how much resources one may extract from a closed system and there is no reason for us to believe we may be able to reach a stage of civilizational advancement where we can begin colonizing space.
Is this conundrum actually a real conundrum? Is there a secret space program already? We did make it to the moon allegedly in 1969. Surely our tech is better now? What we lack is the will, not the tech. Easier to prey on each other.
>My observation is that initially technology is ignored.
Doesn't it depend on the type of technology? Consumer electronics is adopted rapidly whilst industrial technology takes a decade or so to be implemented and then another few decades to be improved upon.
And the 'forgetting' of older technologies or not implementing it also plays into this, observe the electric car for one such example.
>I'd prefer a enlightened fascism based on a science-meritocracy.
I'd also prefer such a system if it runs on science-meritocracy and attempts to limit factors for use of violence. I'm genuinely curious how such a society could develop from democracy.
I never knew that Star Trek was a kind of enlightened fascism. Isn't Starship Troopers a better example of this society?
> . . . global warming is real . . .
It isn't as far I've understood the data. And I fail to see where you got this conclusion that I'm suffering from cognitive dissonance or misunderstanding of the issue at hand large enough that I would transfer it to the claim of global warming.
>Actually contraceptives takes minumum ~90 years (human life length) before the benefit (if any) arrives.
My reason for claiming why it has failed it because we're seeing bellow replacement level birth rates; I'd believe stable and fairly low demographics is preferable. Global population will grow up to around ten billion by the end of this century. If this is to stabilize then resource consumption will be higher than it is today, especially with newly emerging developed economies and lower poverty rates.
>Is this conundrum actually a real conundrum? Is there a secret space program already? We did make it to the moon allegedly in 1969. Surely our tech is better now? What we lack is the will, not the tech. Easier to prey on each other.
Resource depletion is not strange to point out. I'm mentioning that increased consumption may hurt any large scale space program to sustain a massive population. If we keep on consuming it may hurt such a project.
>>158908>Doesn't it depend on the type of technology? Consumer electronics is adopted rapidly whilst industrial technology…
I mean the initial brand new never seen tech, not the updated but same as before tech. The internet was a geek thing and they were sneered at by the cool kids. Then ~20 years later all the cool kids are on MySpace or FaceBook. Computers have a long history back into ancient times but it becoming an essential home device takes time to be so.
>I'd also prefer such a system if it runs on science-meritocracy and attempts to limit factors for use of violence. I'm genuinely curious how such a society could develop from democracy.>I never knew that Star Trek was a kind of enlightened fascism. Isn't Starship Troopers a better example of this society?
We don't see much of how people function outside of Star Fleet. And I suspect that is because it isn't realistic. How can a society with free time and replicators not be overrun with weapons and drugs?
But Star Fleet has a military structure that you have to obey but it does not want to be a warrior society.. it wants to be an explorer. So it can be a very relaxed arrangement and only becomes rigid when threatened. This is similar to the Anarcho-Monarchism idea >>158443
anarcho- until threatened.
I put aside Starship Troopers because it does have a violence focus and not a science/explorer focus. But if you remove the violence focus then yes.
I wonder then about a science-meritocracy where the top leader is subject to "negative-democracy". The public votes every X years regarding if the current leader is keeping up the standards society expects, if they don't they are deposed by the negative vote, and next in line has the leadership. Just an idea I have thought of now.
>>158910>It isn't as far I've understood the data.
Agreed. In fact global cooling is looking likely soon as the suns output drops. >>156063 >>156068
>bellow replacement level birth rates; I'd believe stable and fairly low demographics is preferable.
If motherhood was culturally valued I think this would lift up baby rates whilst still allowing contraception. I would get rid of interest rate central planning and replace it with baby rate central planning. Raise and lower the reward for raising a child to adult successfully according to the need to keep baby rates stabilised.
>I mean the initial brand new never seen tech, not the updated but same as before tech.
Fair enough. And your point about computers existing long before a public dissemination is on point of your example of a technology that radically influences society.
>omputers have a long history back into ancient times but it becoming an essential home device takes time to be so.
Owning an abacus was very expensive once, not every commoner could buy one.
>How can a society with free time and replicators not be overrun with weapons and drugs?
This implies an overarching structure keeping people's impulses to self-harming behavior in some kind of check. If I understand you correctly. Seeing how people easily destroy themselves with just a little time and left to their own devices without an overarching societal expectation (Of course the effects on the individual depends on the norms), it is easy to imagine that the human society in Star Trek operates as an enlightened fascist society. We're also treated to the fact they strongly influence alien cultures through political and military pressure, having them conform to their standards. >>158914
> . . . soon as the suns output drops.
This! I argued with my friends and a professor of climate science regarding the cycle of solar activity. They claimed it wouldn't matter because of the build-up in greenhouse gases, but I countered that we're developing greener technology plus our modern city planning includes more green areas. Both of which reduces greenhouse gases and thus we'll experience lower temperatures. After that rather comfortable situation, I keep my mind on the issue hidden.
>If motherhood was culturally valued I think this would lift up baby rates whilst still allowing contraception.
Good news! Certain Eastern European nations are now reporting birth rates a few steps above replacement level. They did just what you suggested using traditional values. If we're to believe this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14wgZyB_WxE
> After that rather comfortable situation, I keep my mind on the issue hidden.
>>158916>> . . . soon as the suns output drops. >This!
There is another interesting thing happening too as the suns output drops. There seems to be a correlation between volcanic eruptions and solar output falling. Putting more ash in the air would add additional cooling as the low solar output is reflected away to space. I don't have the RT article sadly, but it claimed and I had speculated that a cooling Earth has a shrinking crust, this allows magma to rise up. This can lead to land warming and ice melting in a global cooling scenario, paradoxically.
Good stuff. Downside.. it takes ~20 years for a baby to become a tax payer. The retirement boom (1940s + ~70yo = 2010s) has already begun. This rewarding of motherhood should have been 30 years ago.
>I wonder then about a science-meritocracy where the top leader is subject to "negative-democracy". The public votes every X years regarding if the current leader is keeping up the standards society expects, if they don't they are deposed by the negative vote, and next in line has the leadership. Just an idea I have thought of now.
Been thinking about this suggestion how a system that is based on continuation, stability, and improvement through an empirical feedback loop to the direct influence by the public over rulership, which invites noise in the system, would possibly react and evolve. My first thought is that this would likely slowly erode the fundament of this kind of society. Wouldn't people just vote a person out of the office until they get what they want, regardless of merits and using science to decide, defeating the purpose of the system? Maybe it would only be a question of time until the entire system turns into another democratic society that invites the kind of societal decline we witness in the West today.
Perhaps this system could work if only people who've managed to fulfill certain merits would be the voting body instead of a general franchise. Maybe this would solve the dangers of a bad leader. Or we're overthinking this, perhaps the use of the scientifically based feedback loop is the way to decide the future of a leader; just ask the system a leaders performance and act accordingly.
> . . . but it claimed and I had speculated that a cooling Earth has a shrinking crust, this allows magma to rise up.
Ah, so it is a self-reinforcing cooling trend, it seems. Humanity's greenhouse output is too small to cut off the peak of this trend, regardless of what the alarmists claim, so our future, if the models are accurate, is frozen ears and asses. Sweet. The only reason why we should cut down on greenhouse gases seems to be the acidity levels of our oceans and health-related issues.
>Good stuff. Downside.. it takes ~20 years for a baby to become a tax payer.
True, but it is in the right direction. Also, people should return to caring for their own a little bit more than relying on benefits paid by taxes.
>>158850>Q and autismo cycles
The only two things that these things are related with are that they are fake and gay and that 30year old boomers believe them.
Oh no namefag not a gun.
Besides isn't it hand grenades you have problems with? :^)
The problem with a fully computer determined society is people would feel that humanity and its emotions are enslaved by a computer. If it keeps working then perhaps they wont care, but humans love to rebel against "oppressors". Society needs to have a sense of self-determined destiny or being able to grab that when needed. But yes, it would corrupt it. Really there is only one answer… pic related. Then we can have peace. Because it is obvious humans are the problem.
>Perhaps this system could work if only people who've managed to fulfill certain merits
>Global cooling. Also civilization correlates with global warming. So the idea that global warning is bad might be false.
Nice to know I am wise beyond my years, thanks sweetie!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfWlot6h_JM
Shitposting aside though history cannot be cyclical or linear because its chaotic even in the macro. People's actions are what influence history and external factors will influence what the people do but due to the anarchy state of nation states and before then the feudal lord system it would be too improper to classify and attempt to predict something as far in advanced as cyclical history attempts. Same problem with Q. Say something very vague will happen and you'll eventually be proven "right" because of being vague. But the ultimate problem with Q is that peoples are each others enemies on every little thing. Sure there are things we can get "better" at through increased gains in trade and the like but losing relative power is also important and when you look at the nation on this Q falls short because its analysis doesn't really account for this historical force. >>158934Just asking though why do you namefag? I've noticed you've done it for a while, just saying its not normal.
Is there a norm to follow?
Because people have called me Sven before. This is simply me adopting the nick preemptively to avoid tedious jokes, at first. Then, as time went on I simply let the name persist.
You will always be Sven to us just like how I will always be a amermutt or burger to others, but there is something beautiful being anon to yourself.
Take it as you wish I was just asking.
>>158938>Shitposting aside though history cannot be cyclical or linear because its chaotic even in the macro.
Solar cycles show one example of cycles existing… at least for a time. Also Day/night, Winter/Summer, and many more.
I am not suggesting permanent cycles into the past and future. Nor am I suggesting cycles can't be nuked from orbit.
>People's actions are what influence history and external factors will influence what the people do but due to the anarchy state of nation states and before then the feudal lord system it would be too improper to classify and attempt to predict something as far in advanced as cyclical history attempts.
I would never suggest that all cycles are permanent. I would look at the situation from the opposite perspective to see how they might exist… there is a bounding box on what humans can be doing and have society/life continue to exist. If we assume complete random actions eventually the energy will align, hit the barrier and bounce off perhaps starting a sine wave. From chaos order can emerge. The would be top down imposed cycle of limitation. Then you can have fractal upward cycles. Humans have a macroscopically repeating economic activity… born, school, worker, pay taxes, buy a house, middle management, retirement, sell big house, move, die. These general trends will echo down through time replicating the baby rate trend. Humans are random, but not very at macro scales. And national economies and ideology are at macro scales.
>Same problem with Q. Say something very vague will happen and you'll eventually be proven "right" because of being vague.
Granted but this is not the sum of what Q is. Q is a psyop, lies or not, it has a impact:
>On June 28, 2018, Time Magazine named the anonymous "Q" as one of the 25 Most Influential People on the Internet. Counting more than 130,000 related discussion videos on YouTube, Time cited the wide range of this conspiracy theory and its more prominent followers and spreading news coverage.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QAnon
It is illogical to dismiss the impact of Q, and it is relevant to discuss what the prime motive is. Even if Q is acting like Nostrodamus. I assume you have looked at the Qproofs book and >>157495
? There is good reason to be suspicious POTUS is related to the Q plan.
>But the ultimate problem with Q is that peoples are each others enemies on every little thing. Sure there are things we can get "better" at through increased gains in trade and the like but losing relative power is also important and when you look at the nation on this Q falls short because its analysis doesn't really account for this historical force.
We can all agree humans do a bad job at getting along. And we can all agree we have no idea how to fix it.
Thanks for a positive contribution to the debate :D
The problem is that if you leave humans in the loop of the power structure they will be corrupted by criminals organising. You take the humans out and they will get rebellious because they lost the chance to do what they love to do… be Machiavellian, because at our base we are predators.
>>158947>Solar cycles show one example of cycles existing… at least for a time. Also Day/night, Winter/Summer, and many more.
The question arises though, is this history or is this just physics. I do not deny astronomical phisics have cycles but I stand that history does not. >If we assume complete random actions eventually the energy will align, hit the barrier and bounce off perhaps starting a sine wave
We are making a lot of assumptions here don't you think? People having "complete randomness" and equal "energy" both things I doubt. Sine waves thus cannot form under such conditions because when someone's will is so much more powerful then others it creates imbalances in which will be continuously changing and random. >Q is a psyop, lies or not, it has a impact:
Then the question remains is the impact of Q good or bad. I stick by that its view is wrong and thus its making people focus on things that are useless and so doing more harm then good. >And we can all agree we have no idea how to fix it.
Donno about this a lot of people have ideas on how to fix this problem. I'd say the problem is that its been a long time since we accepted some of the older solutions to this and have been experimenting with new ways letting the old tried and true win out when others use them.
>We are making a lot of assumptions here don't you think? People having "complete randomness" and equal "energy" both things I doubt. Sine waves thus cannot form under such conditions because when someone's will is so much more powerful then others it creates imbalances in which will be continuously changing and random.
Isn't the market a proof that the economic activity of billions, random actions with no discernable movement on the microscale, causes a sine wave and also expressing the stability of the system itself? I know this sort of falls outside the argument about a cyclical system for how societies progress from one state to another.
Yeah I believe the two need to be seen independently because history is much more like a oligarchy rather then a completely competitive market. A very small amount of the most charismatic/intelligent/strong make history while most others don't influence it at all.
>>158950>The question arises though, is this history or is this just physics.
Isn't everything physics? Or are you adding some spirit component to humans?
There is an endless list. I focus on the 100 year cycle because it has the most impact on us and is simple to grasp. You can't just claim cycles don't exist.
I suggest that the free will activity of humans causes the generation of "free will" cycles. Cycles and freedom are not mutually exclusive.
>it creates imbalances in which will be continuously changing and random.
Yes. But the impact is a messy wave, not no wave and not a precision wave. Pic.
The situation is in middle between yout view and my simplistic 100 year cycle. My 100 years cycle might only exist for this centrury and then collapse into something else. But for the last number of years I have correctly predicted the rise of the Right even when people here were panicking that the Left was winning. It isn't overwhelming proof but so far the hypothesis is holding up.
I don't want cycles to mean we are being controlled from outside. It is emergent from us collectively and bounded by the limitations of life/society remaining viable.
>>158956>history is much more like a oligarchy rather then a completely competitive market. A very small amount of the most charismatic/intelligent/strong make history while most others don't influence it at all.
I am going to challenge that. Take Hitler away from Germany in the 1920-30s and drop him in the USA today. Will he make the US Reich? No. Why? Because the people won't support it. It is common to think that the strong leader pulls the crowd, I suggest that first the crowd has to have the need and the leader then appears in response to the collective need. I suggest the people push up rather than get pulled up. Perhaps it is a mix of both. But if the people don't have the need, nothing happens.
A physics analogy. Imagine water in a container. It has potential energy, now pierce the container that potential energy flows out the crack. The crack is the "oligarch" but the flow of energy is the people. Possible exceptions are technological force amplification by the few on the many, like nukes.
>>158957>Isn't everything physics? Or are you adding some spirit component to humans?
I'd say history or "study of the past" is a humanity which isn't scientific and so cannot be given the applied biology chain. >Strauss–Howe generational theory
Seems incomplete to me to view American history under such a broad cyclical lenses. First off I'm only given since the great depression for this and second it seems like a good times bad times broad statement in which doesn't seem helpful since inevitably both will happen but we won't know when, or at least the wiki article doesn't speak about it more so I cannot know. Still suffers from the same overall problem though that this "cycle" can easily be thrown off if certain people care enough to buck the curve. >Kondratiev wave
Problem here is application of economic principles which are historical to economic principles which are more mathematical. Its why I generally dislike macro economics, because its just a debate between economists between theories in which you have trouble finding wide spread agreement on due to this. >Business cycle
Counterexample see Australia and Japan. >Waves of Innovation
Going to read further but this one seems especially doubtful to me.>But the impact is a messy wave, not no wave and not a precision wave. Pic.
The question is then twofold, do we consider that a wave? When I see that picture I don't make a wave I could easily draw a line for linear interpretations of history with a weak correlate. >But for the last number of years I have correctly predicted the rise of the Right even when people here were panicking that the Left was winning. It isn't overwhelming proof but so far the hypothesis is holding up.
Not hard to see and I wouldn't need a cycle to figure that out. Just ask who has a greater will to and the means to achieve their will in their environment. This was obviously the right in the US. But why is Mexico going further left? Because the opposite applies to them. >I don't want cycles to mean we are being controlled from outside.
Your view would mean that people have little influence over history, but the amazing part is that people have infinite control over their life. If we will something to happen enough it very well can.>>158958>Take Hitler away from Germany in the 1920-30s and drop him in the USA today.
If you taught Hitler to use the tools of the 21st century US and love the American people as Germans I doubt he would not become a leading figure in American politics if not eventually becoming dictator of the US. >I suggest the people push up rather than get pulled up.
Don't think so, most people have a weak will and an opinion based on biological inheritance. Because of this people don't have ideas, ideas have people. Ideas really don't change a lot historically and I don't think the number of people with an idea change a lot either unless bloodshed eliminates them that is. Rather dominance of an idea is made by men able to defeat their enemies and then censorship of the other idea.
All of the rest of your post can't be debated to conclusion, we will have to await history to unfold.
>Don't think so, most people have a weak will and an opinion based on biological inheritance.
This is an argument in my favour. I suggest emotion is the main driver of humans (not will) lets call it biologically driven, and this emotion drives the cycles. We have 50 years of leftist emotion driven drive for utopia. This works because of the 1940s baby boom makes works and few retirees. As the boomers become retirees the whole thing flips, now too many dependants, not enough workers and society goes into a panic away from leftist utopia. This is a cycle started by baby boom and gyrated by the flip between human worker to human gibmedat.
>Because of this people don't have ideas, ideas have people. Ideas really don't change a lot historically and I don't think the number of people with an idea change a lot either unless bloodshed eliminates them that is. Rather dominance of an idea is made by men able to defeat their enemies and then censorship of the other idea.
That's one way, and the other is a mass of humans develop the same perspective. #MAGA Did Trump pull up the conservatives/right-wing or did social distress push up Trump?? Or both together? Democracy put in Trump and Trump is deciding on SCOTUS Judges. We are in a connected closed system and the most potent force is the aggregate will of the people.
>>158964>I suggest emotion is the main driver of humans (not will) lets call it biologically driven, and this emotion drives the cycles
This is counter to what I argue, most people will have irrational beliefs due to their biologically passed down psychological traits. Meaning people cannot change their minds much except those on the fence to start with between the trait and its opposite. Lets say for simplicity sake you've got country x. It has 40% people who love blue 40% people who love red and 20% people who are on the fence due to their nature. When this is the case a cycle cannot drive people into changing history really assuming they reproduce at the same rate. The 20% on the fence may cause a small amount of fluctuation randomly but the turnout of the two larger groups will more likely inform the nations favorite color then the 20% fence sitters. This is where an individual with a really strong will comes into play. Rally your base and you take power.
From there you have the option of genocide, or censorship. I prefer genocide no matter how edgy that sounds, but I think leftists should be forced not to reproduce. >humans develop the same perspective
Still imposing a large nurture force to quick fix nature. Best done through censorship but propaganda works as a form of this too, albeit not as well. Not really different since in the end these people will likely fall back to their original state of opinion eventually, especially in a world now favoring decentralization due to new technology.
You are ascribing a lot to DNA. But DNA can have parts turned on and off by environmental and emotional factors. So while I agree that DNA will set boundaries on how much humans can change, it does not make them inflexible to the degree that you suggest.
I suggest that if you and I were young adults in the 1960s with the fear of the Russians nuking us, we would be hippies, smoking pot, living life before we are atomised and going to Woodstock. All of these reactions are not determined by DNA but by peer pressure and emotions. Those things ripple like waves as mind viruses through the social network. "Down with the man, dude!!"
Isn't your explanation a superlative version of the Pareto principle? Instead of productivity, it is about who influences society the most at one point in time or persistently moves society for years. The detail is that these movers would have nothing to move without a preexisting social activity to influence. And most likely the way these cultures can be influences is in large due to how people within them propagate values but also which set of issues that is the most common and pressing to a large enough portion of that society.
When people begin to accrue around a set of values this can be seen as the beginning of a cycle, which can be influenced, and when people move away from it that cycle dies or enters a diminutive state and then a new cycle begins. Many different societal cycles can be active simultaneously, and the fact we can study them in retrospect and some ongoing, make predictions, should be proof positive that cycles are not random.
Here in Sweden, the combination of immigration, failure of our legal system, high taxes, failing welfare system, and corrupt politicians have caused a massive surge in voter support for SD. This support and wish to shift the current trend or cycle towards an imagined beneficial one is not dependant on Jimmie Åkesson, but because voters are starting to realize that their past choices to support a set of values isn't working without a moderate force and applying expectations to members of society. >>158948
Could this be solved then by simply allowing people to act out their independent lives as they see fit but the government uses strong incentives to guide people and to maintain an overall fitness, for lack of better term, on whole of the society using data input from a combination of predictive models based on past events? But then we're back to the question of control, who governs our future, and if humans would allow this kind of soft-authoritarianism.
>>158969>Could this be solved then by simply allowing people to act out their independent lives as they see fit but the government uses strong incentives to guide people and to maintain an overall fitness, for lack of better term, on whole of the society using data input from a combination of predictive models based on past events? But then we're back to the question of control, who governs our future, and if humans would allow this kind of soft-authoritarianism.
That sounds great, leave society "free" but incentivise based on predictions. Too few babies, gov announces a benefit for having children. Free will makes them follow instructions. We pretty much have this now but it isn't long-term-view but political cycle based. Babies are a 20-90 year "problem" not a 4-8 year political cycle problem. There is also the problem of making the politician actually care about a 20 year hence problem. Which brings us back to meritocracy. Politicians should be vetted and voted in? But any system to fix faulty humans has faulty humans as the "solution". It's A Trap!
Perhaps we just need to keep burning ourselves with matches until we get a clue.
Nukes did make the UN (as flawed as it ended up being).
I think you do not give genes enough credit where they are due. As environmental factors become less and less important genes express themselves more purely. Today's world is one where environmental factors play a very small role when compared to a starving population just trying to stay alive, where environment plays a huge role. Because of this genes and our psychological traits play an ever increasing role in determining what will happen which makes those with stronger wills able to more efficiently rally the troops in democracies. Though I think before when nurture played a larger role then today they were able to do similar things by promising stability and leading troops.>Isn't your explanation a superlative version of the Pareto principle?
I like this application of Pareto. Not sure if it can be quantified in the same way, before this I'd say I'm betting its normative in some way but I honestly don't know how it translates numerically, or if that'd even be a good idea given this is a humanities subject where trying to throw in numbers might be detrimental in the end. >accrue around a set of values this can be seen as the beginning of a cycle
Like I said though I don't think that people in the end naturally do this. It has to be forced on them in some way so due to this its enviable excluding genocide that they'll return, to which I'd say that isn't really a historical cycle but an inevitability due to underlying genetics. >massive surge in voter support for SD
Might be, admittedly I don't know as much about Swedish politics as I would like, guess I'll have some more reading to do.
>>158972>I think you do not give genes enough credit where they are due. As environmental factors become less and less important genes express themselves more purely. Today's world is one where environmental factors play a very small role when compared to a starving population just trying to stay alive, where environment plays a huge role. Because of this genes and our psychological traits play an ever increasing role in determining what will happen which makes those with stronger wills able to more efficiently rally the troops in democracies. Though I think before when nurture played a larger role then today they were able to do similar things by promising stability and leading troops.
It's a very interesting idea to ponder that natural/artificial environments are factor in making past "cycles" (if any) be completely different to current "cycles" (if any). However I would argue that artificial environments cause unpredictable (by us, but predictable with perfect knowledge) waves of genetic expression impact. Poisons in the environment can majorly interact with our DNA and biological functions. I am going to add toxicity cycles to my endless list now… THANKS!! :P
Since we are now in a nature vs nurture debate we are at another impasse?
>The strong dichotomy of nature versus nurture has thus been claimed to have limited relevance in some fields of research. Close feedback loops have been found in which "nature" and "nurture" influence one another constantly, as seen in self-domestication. In ecology and behavioral genetics, researchers think nurture has an essential influence on nature. Similarly in other fields, the dividing line between an inherited and an acquired trait becomes unclear, as in epigenetics or fetal development.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture
If the nature vs nurture thing is a balance of sorts this means 50% of human behaviour is variable. More than enough for social waves. And do we not see waves of social behaviour?
Guess for the sake of argument I will assume a 50% nature and 50% nurture for choices made by people even if I'm much more leaning towards things being nature driven myself. The end crux of our argument lies on will people have enough natural variation that a extremely efficient set of people can't pop up and chose to change the course of history thus bucking the trend. Within my example of a pure nature world I said they easily do because they rally the troops in a stagnate pretty evenly split world where people from all ideological viewpoints exist and are not changed.
Troop rallying would be the largest necessity under this. But now lets suppose we are in a 50/50 world where troop rallying isn't the most important thing, now hearts and minds and troop rallying should be equally important. Under such a system I still see the extremely strong willed individual attempting to buck the trend winning out eventually. Might take a bit longer, say with ALMO in Mexico, where he rallied his troops 3 times and due to concentrated efforts by PRI and PAN only won the 3rd time. But under such a system where your troops are rallied all you have to do is wait out minor random changes and then the big personalty wins. It might not win outright, but still under such an assumption I'd say random variation play less an impact as those with the will power to make it.
Because of this history on a micro would not be cyclical.
I am going to declare victory for 50% human variability therefore providing ample room for social waves:
>A culmination of more than half a century of research collected on 14.5 million pairs of twins has finally concluded that the nature versus nurture debate is a draw. According to the plethora of data, both have nearly identical influences on a person’s behavior, which suggests we need to stop looking at ourselves as a result of nature versus nurture, and instead realize we are a combination of both.
…>Source: Polderman TJC, Benyamin B, de Leeuw CA, van Bochoven A, Visscher PM, Posthuma D. Meta-Analysis of the Heritability of Human Traits based on Fifty Years of Twin Studies. Nature Genetics. 2015.https://www.medicaldaily.com/nature-vs-nurture-debate-50-year-twin-study-proves-it-takes-two-determine-human-334686
>>158976>I am going to declare victory for 50% human variability therefore providing ample room for social waves:
I'd say it like anon here pointed out >>158969
is more around 20% but that amount is variable due to just the sheer randomness of individuals. I'd say it's bad to attempt to quantify the number like Pareto does with economics, but its far under 50%.
Point being that I think its small enough even given a variation in nurture that we don't really need to look at it when observing history.
>>158975>Because of this history on a micro would not be cyclical.
Indeed. Predicting a small group of human actions is probably impossible. Predicting where an electron is, is probably impossible. But at scale all the volatility smooths out to an average because there are boundaries that cant be crossed. We should be able to predict the big picture but not the small picture. I am quite sure my desk will be here in 10 minutes but stuffed if I know where it's electrons are.
>Point being that I think its…
I am going to defer to the 14.5 million sample over 50 years :)
Are the movements of the suns subatomic particles predictable? Is it's magnetic field predictable?
Didn't say anything about 20% being on nature vs nurture I said that far less then 50% of people have an influence on far more then 50% of peoples social life. Like I said Pareto is a good example when this comes to economics, and the social study of 50/50 on nature vs nurture does not counter my points even if its true which I have problems believing myself. >>158982
People are not particles its why we need different units of anysis to anayize the interactions of people. Its why we have economics and don't study people as particles. As one of my economics professors once said, economics is people acting off of how others act by making rational choices. Particles don't behave like this. And when you attempt to apply physics to a humanities, history, you will get some pretty retarded results because they are apples and oranges.
And so we are back to square one. People are not truly random when it comes to historical forces, since like I said far less then 50% make the choices for far more then 50%. This makes it so that your analysis between physics and people falls out pretty much right off the bat since all carbon 16 atoms are generally the same exactly the same.
I admit it isn't exactly an honest system and when people realize how it operates they'll feel trapped. It like some kind of new world order that everyone would despise for judging their way of living and even allow them to suffer if their way of living isn't good for society. And it wouldn't solve the issue of detrimental human behavior, such as suboptimal choices. Instead of reading a book you play a game, things like that.
If the system is operated under one leader who is picked based on merits then the system should drop any pretense of democracy. Guiding principles should be at the basis of the leader's governance, but this begs the question on what do we base these principles on and how susceptible would they be to human ineptitude and corruptability?
Could we use technology to improve the base citizen? Genetic engineering. This reminds me of how China is slowly forcing the world to open up for genetic engineering on humans, otherwise, those societies who don't allow genetic engineering (Designer babies in this case) will be outcompeted.
I feel very much out of depth on this one. I'm simply too retarded to create a feasible system to run ideas through to provide any intelligent arguments or be of use.>>158979
There are simulations used to predict peoples movements in a given building under different situations, such as a fire or stampede, these have been used successfully to govern how people move in a building during duress. This system only works with enough reactive models (NPCs); does this fall close to the core of your argument? https://archive.fo/Tzk4d>>158983
Perhaps we should avoid digging a track too deep that we find yourself stuck in attempting to put down exact numbers on a fuzzy system. We're trying to decide whether society can be accurately be described using cycles, and that isn't an exact science far as I am able to discern and neither is exact numbers needed.
I agree that why people may adopt a set of values very well can be involuntary and govern by genetics. But wouldn't this still be able to spawn cycles that iterate through time because they're based on a sufficiently fixed set of instinctual behaviors, that we can actually identify using evolutionary and behavioral psychology?
I think the allegory using a mass of articles to describe human actions is rather apt. The reason is that the multitude of actions when aggregated produces one or more trends, despite if they're random at first. Then we have nature and sublimation of the individual to the collective, limiting randomness. There are models using very few rules that will spawn order from complete chaos, even on long time horizons (https://archive.fo/0QcFY
), by using even one algorithm.
People are easier to predict than let us say weather and that is because people are biological and are born with a set of rules if you will, and then have a limited way of influence these rules themselves, or in a group, or from random exogenous sources, such as weather. https://archive.fo/T4s0x
My claim is:
1) cycles of 100 years can be used to describe our situation and immediate future to some degree.
This rest upon Martin Armstrong's ECM. Pic #1 This needs to be refuted to refute my claim.https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/models/7219-2/
2) There is a ideology cycle.
Pic #2 This rests upon the Fascism 101 meme. This needs to be refuted to refute my claim.
3) The Fascism 101 cycle can be put on the ideology quad.
Pic #3. This needs to be refuted to refute my claim.
4) I have decided to put Dungeons and Dragons alignments on the ideology grid because of it's similarity.
This is a weak claim but leads to useful predictions. This needs to be refuted to refute my claim.
5) I have decided that WWII is a marker for a transition between Lawful Good to Chaotic Good.
"Good" means selflessness not necessarily best outcomes will occur.
With these 5 premises I then test for successful predictions. And I find that I succeed.
1) The rise of the Right, authoritarianism and nationalism. Trump victory and Q (LARPy or not) civic-nationalism movement (the point of this thread).
2) The battle between Good and Evil in the legal/political world. (DOJ/FBI)
3) The emergence of the Clinton Cabal or something like it in the 1980s and its movement into the legal/politics world. ("Clinton Cash")
4) The turn away from libertarianism. Ron Paul perpetually ignored.
And other things I can't think of right now.
My hypothesis is passing it's tests. It makes predictions that are working and I cite references to back it up.
This is level 1 (Central point) or 2 (Quotes) on the argument pyramid.
"amermutt" (self named >>158943
) starts with Level 7 trolling >>158926
followed by Level 4 (Contradiction) and maybe Level 3 (Counterargument) and and never successfully challenges my Level 1 or 2 evidence of success.
Since most of this post is about Q I show that Q is expected at this point in claimed cycle and the refutation fails to dismiss this:>>158950>>Q is a psyop, lies or not, it has a impact:>Then the question remains is the impact of Q good or bad.
That reply addresses the main point of the thread "Thoughts on Q?" but supports my assertion that Q ideology (LARPy or not) has been predicted by the cycle hypothesis. This still stands.
"amermutt" is an intelligent troll. The troll behaviour was first used and then intelligent trolling followed. Because the Level 4 (perhaps 3) arguments have failed to topple Level 1 or 2 data, the remainder if their effort is in being intransigent and emotionally reactive. At no point has counter-evidence been cited nor has the central predictive success of the hypothesis been torn down.
I regret plunging into a lower tier debate, and attempting to describe the exact mechanism of the cycle's operation, rather than asking for the central success of my hypothesis to be disproven. Which I doubt because if it could be, I would like to think, I would not have made the post to start with as I would still be researching.
What is Q?
How close is Q to Trump?
Jun 19 2018 11:04:17 (EST)> I want to take a moment to address the current illegal immigration crisis on the Southern Border…it has been going on for many, many decades… (video)https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009134789838843905
Jun 19 2018 15:01:12 (EST)> iPhone_Tweets.png (Pic #1)https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1816887.html#1817047
Jun 19 2018 18:06:27 (EST)>Homeland Security @SecNielsen did a fabulous job yesterday at the press conference explaining security at the border and for our country, while at the same time recommending changes to obsolete & nasty laws, which force family separation. We want “heart” and security in America!https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009241032100335616
Jun 19 2018 19:17:37 (EST)> Earlier today, @FLOTUS Melania and I were honored to welcome King Felipe VI and Queen Letizia of Spain to the @WhiteHouse!🇺🇸🇪🇸https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009258943175168002
Jun 19 2018 19:35:09 (EST)> Come on Q. Who is it? this is the owl photo all over again. A lot happened today and anons are focusing on a damn blurry photo of some old man. End it already.https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1820698.html#1821067
Jun 19 2018 19:36:54 (EST)> THANK YOU @HouseGOP!https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009263794361692160
Jun 19 2018 19:53:43 (EST)> >>1821067> 45https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1820698.html#1821327Jun 19 2018 21:16:09 (EST)> iPhone_Twitter_WH.png (Pic #2)https://8ch.net/qresearch/res/1822262.html#1822612Jun 19 2018 21:17:37 (EST) -- less than 1 min later.> https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009258943175168002
Jun 19 2018 21:23:10 (EST)What a coincidence.
Twitter shot in the Oval and next a Tweet.
Jun 19 2018 21:25:14 (EST)>  min Delta.> Conspiracy?> Q
TL;DR: Q posts an obscure picture (#1) seemingly of Trump. Anon asks who it is, Q replies "45". Q posts another picture (#2), less obscure, seemingly of Trump 1 minute before Trump Tweets. Q asks "is it a conspiracy?"
It makes me infuriated how they clean the story a bit on how easy it is for men of this community to rape a girl belonging to another group. It is obvious they're afraid to tell people the truth.
My counter claim is:
1) History is the study of the past as it is described in written documents.
2)History is made by men who are not equal.
3)History is chaotic.
4)Strong men will always influence history.
5)Any man who wishes to can become a strong man.
In this world view Q is just some faggot attempting to influence history.
He's a liberal in the end so I have little to no respect for his message.
I am not advocating this but I thought it was relevant to see Armstrong's view of randomness:
>Hidden Order Inside the Chaos or “Noise”
…>They cannot see behind the surface and look deep within. There is ALWAYS order to the “noise” and 99.9999% of the problem is that people do not understand how to deal with chaos. Here is a plot of a daily file of closing in the Dow Jones Industrial Index from 1918 to 1991, which we published long ago. There is a hidden order within that “noise” if you understand how to extract it.
>Scientists finally have an explanation for the ‘Gaia puzzle’
…>Lovelock formulated the Gaia hypothesis while working for NASA in the 1960s. He recognised that life has not been a passive passenger on Earth. Rather it has profoundly remodelled the planet, creating new rocks such as limestone, affecting the atmosphere by producing oxygen, and driving the cycles of elements such as nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon.
>While it is now accepted that life is a powerful force on the planet, the Gaia hypothesis remains controversial. Despite evidence that surface temperatures have, bar a few notable exceptions, remained within the range required for widespread liquid water, many scientists attribute this simply to good luck. If the Earth had descended completely into an ice house or hot house (think Mars or Venus) then life would have become extinct and we would not be here to wonder about how it had persisted for so long. This is a form of anthropic selection argument that says there is nothing to explain.
>But what if life had been able to push down on one side of the scales of fortune? What if life in some sense made its own luck by reducing the impacts of planetary-scale disturbances? This leads to the central outstanding issue in the Gaia hypothesis: how is planetary self-regulation meant to work?
>[Naturally] Selecting for stability
>We think there is finally an explanation for the Gaia hypothesis. The mechanism is based on “sequential selection”, a concept first suggested by climate scientist Richard Betts in the early 2000s. In principle it’s very simple. As life emerges on a planet it begins to affect environmental conditions, and this can organise into stabilising states which act like a thermostat and tend to persist, or destabilising runaway states such as the snowball Earth events that nearly extinguished the beginnings of complex life more than 600m years ago.
>If it stabilises then the scene is set for further biological evolution that will in time reconfigure the set of interactions between life and planet. A famous example is the origin of oxygen-producing photosynthesis around 3 billion years ago, in a world previously devoid of oxygen. If these newer interactions are stabilising, then the planetary-system continues to self-regulate. But new interactions can also produce disruptions and runaway feedbacks. In the case of photosynthesis it led to an abrupt rise in atmospheric oxygen levels in the “Great Oxidation Event” around 2.3 billion years ago. This was one of the rare periods in Earth’s history where the change was so pronounced it probably wiped out much of the incumbent biosphere, effectively rebooting the system.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rtNO8O2TKA
…>The chances of life and environment spontaneously organising into self-regulating states may be much higher than you would expect. If fact, given sufficient biodiversity, it may be extremely likely. But there is a limit to this stability. Push the system too far and it may go beyond a tipping point and rapidly collapse to a new and potentially very different state.
Gaian self-regulation may be very effective. But there is no evidence that it prefers one form of life over another. Countless species have emerged and then disappeared from the Earth over the past 3.7 billion years. We have no reason to think that Homo sapiens are any different in that respect.
SECOND CHANCES FOR LUCKY GAIA: A HYPOTHESIS OF SEQUENTIAL SELECTION by Richard A. Betts and Timothy M. Lenton.https://digital.nmla.metoffice.gov.uk/download/file/sdb%3AdigitalFile%7Cd5b84c8c-60db-4273-909b-4695732bc0c8/
TL;DR: if a system can't end up in a negative feedback (or balancing feedback) loop it spirals out of existence back into chaos. Be in a loop or don't exist.
And I will throw "amermutt" a bone: We are in a system of random cycles, since individuals die (unless we have a spirit) we are less in a cycle and so more random. But the more persistent something is (like a nation) the more cyclic it must be.
…>County GOP boosts "QAnon"
>For right-wing conspiracy theorists, an intriguing development of the Trump era has been "Q," or "QAnon," a posting handle on internet message boards 4chan and 8chan.
>Claiming to be a high-level government official with a "Q" security clearance, QAnon tells followers the inside story of Trump’s secret battle against the "deep state," including pedophilia rings run by Hillary Clinton and other Hollywood and Democratic Party elites; a foiled plot to shoot down Air Force 1; and secret deployments of the National Guard to put down the riots expected when Trump takes down the cabal of evildoers.
>If it sounds a bit looney, that didn’t stop the Hillsborough County Republican Party from posting a link to a popular YouTube guide to QAnon on the party’s public Facebook page recently.
>The post was "pinned" so it stayed at the top of the page. After a reporter asked about it, the post was unpinned, and since appears to have been removed.
>Party Chairman Jim Waurishuk, an early Trump supporter, said the post was "informational … It’s certainly not something we promote or subscribe to."https://archive.is/wB6M5https://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/local/March-column-Transit-petition-has-steep-hill-_169962396
Name: President Trump
*the door locks behind you*
"I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me"
"Nuthin' personal kid"This needs to be a meme
The Onion Humour???
>Mueller Reveals Russia Investigation Just Elaborate Sting To Nail Clinton Child Sex-Slavery Ring
>WASHINGTON—Lauding President Trump for his invaluable role in the operation, Special Counsel Robert Mueller informed the public Wednesday that his so-called Russia investigation was in fact merely a cover for an elaborate sting to bring down the Clinton family’s child sex-slavery ring. “The Justice Department has finally been able to track down and arrest everyone associated with the Clinton Foundation’s unconscionable crimes, and it’s all thanks to President Trump agreeing to work undercover and play along with our fabricated accusations of Russian interference in the 2016 election,” said Mueller, explaining that after its agent Seth Rich was killed by the Clintons, the department recruited Trump to distract high-ranking Democrats with social media stunts, continuous denials of Russian involvement in U.S. politics, and glowing praise for Vladimir Putin. “Without the president’s help, we never would have been able to keep the guise of the ‘Russia investigation’ going long enough to launch our successful raids of Comet Ping Pong and secret locations in Haiti—efforts that ultimately brought the Clintons’ human-trafficking crimes to light. Thanks to the heroic actions of Donald Trump, we can all sleep a little more soundly tonight, knowing the world’s children are safe.” Mueller went on to thank the numerous media personalities and Republican lawmakers who first pointed out to federal investigators that the real problem lay in Hillary Clinton’s missing emails.https://archive.fo/VNXj5https://politics.theonion.com/mueller-reveals-russia-investigation-just-elaborate-sti-1827696431
Apple Pulls Conspiracy Theory Application From The App Store | NBC Nightly Newshttps://youtu.be/B_2FANDsIrM
>Apple, Google cashed in on Pizzagate-offshoot conspiracy app>One of the App Store’s top entertainment apps pushed a conspiracy theory about a child sex ring and a Trump secret police force.
Q returns after 20 day absence.https://qanon.pub/
…>Nobody was harmed in the bridge standoff. But Wright’s crusade, along with a handful of other recent incidents, gives us an idea of what QAnon looks like when it emerges from its online cave, blinking in the sun. And it’s a little terrifying.
…>As conspiracies go, QAnon isn’t even faintly plausible. It’s every conspiracy, all at once, an orchestra tune-up of theories. It involves Hollywood, former presidents and the Democratic Party joining up to commit various heinous crimes. And on the other side is an anonymous hero named Q, who claims to have high-level government clearance.
…>There are hundreds of these posts. Choose any conspiracy you like ― false-flag shootings, underground child sex dungeons run by elite predators, unreleased Justice Department reports that, if made public, would put Hillary Clinton in jail ― and you’ll find them being discussed on QAnon forums.
…>It’s easy to roll your eyes at the QAnon conspiracy theory, in much the same way it was easy to dismiss Pizzagaters as a bunch of lunatics — right up until the moment one of them, Edgar Welch, showed up in Comet Ping Pong pizza parlor in Washington, demanded to know where the child sex dungeon was and fired an assault rifle.
…>QAnon adherents are on a collective scavenger hunt of sorts ― the goal varies from unearthing conspiracies between politicians and Hollywood brass to finding a group of elite pedophiles in the desert. In Tucson, a group called Veterans on Patrol, with the backing of QAnon online, is hunting for pedophiles after it stumbled on a homeless shelter in May and decided it was a secret site for child sex trafficking. As Motherboard reports, it is not ― police found no evidence of such trafficking ― but the group is patrolling Interstate 19 in Arizona and demands that police declare a state of emergency. It also posted the QAnon 8chan thread to its Facebook page, asking for the internet’s help in finding the elusive, and nonexistent, pedophiles. A QAnon Reddit post says it is “prepping for battle.”
…>Reliable loons Roseanne Barr, former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling and Minecraft creator (and Pizzagate supporter) Markus “Notch” Persson have all signed on. Barr and Persson, for instance, tweeted out abbreviations of the QAnon slogan, “Where we go one, we go all,” to millions of followers. And, of course, Infowars’ resident nut Alex Jones is involved ― he said in January that the White House called on him and his team of dinguses to investigate QAnon.
…>There are so many conspiracy theories under the QAnon umbrella now that anything and everything can feel like a dog whistle to its followers. Recently, followers latched on to Hollywood director James Gunn. Gunn was fired by Disney last week after alt-right troll Mike Cernovich helped surface old tweets in which he joked about pedophilia and rape. Underlying the fake-outrage campaign was the QAnon-friendly notion that Hollywood is lousy with pedophiles. Even Sen. Ted Cruz got in on the fun.
…>“Q” hasn’t posted anything since July 4, leaving those followers frantic for something to do. If the unhinged LARPing of Wright and Meyer is any indication, that something could easily tip over into violence.
>UPDATE: 12:15 p.m. — “Q” has returned:
>The long Q drought just ended with a new post from QAnon, right in time for the QAnon shirt crowd at the Trump rally.>— Will Sommer (@willsommer) July 24, 2018https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/qanon-conspiracy-real-life_us_5b54bbafe4b0b15aba8fe484https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/qanon-conspiracy-real-life_us_5b54bbafe4b0b15aba8fe484
It's as though this article woke up Q.
One thing bugs me about this "Q" stuff.
Q is donald trump and his team. He and his team want to remove lefty, make america great again, and arrest the pedophiles and cannibals… while never letting the common man know how bad things got.
Shouldn't we admit how bad things were, so we can teach the Failure Of Liberalism and The Fall of The Deep State in schools, in place of the old liberal "and then america killed all the white legs, because outman mad, whitey racist"?
repost from the garbage can
11 minute video made by Adam "Godwinson" Black.theres no evidence to suggest that whatever or whoever Q is is trump.
Much like the influence of /pol/ over the 2016 election this is more wishful thinking and chan propaganda than anything.
It could be trump, someone from trumps family or administration, a bunch of deepstate faggots, mods from 8chan, a random hacker, an experimental chatbot or just a fucking art project.DO NOT
blindly put your faith into an unverified source of alleged "critical insider information" you can not check or receive evidence from. More often than not such Hokus Pocus turns out to be an elaborate hoax. Do not be a gullible sheep.
>King of Catfishhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm3RifNLfZo
21 minutes from Jim
Example how public opinion and agenda pushing distort information discourse in the case of Phillip Burnell
, in the Escort Arc of Christmas 2017.
I'd like to point out that Mister Burnell, despite his reputation as a scam artist and lolcow, did in fact tell the truth on the matter from the beginning and was entirely innocent of all accusations.
Despite this, he was repeatedly derailed with fabricated evidence on social media all throughput this saga.
due to false information that was sprayed by a party of 2, the lolcow detractor scene and kiwifarms as a whole website (including the admin and several moderators) were successfully blinded to the cause of the alleged prostitute, even after counter evidence for her identity being a fraud had been brought up as early as december 2017. To my knowledge, no punishments or stepdowns were triggered by this event despite it being backed by key contributors of the lolcow scene. The sheer wish of a group of people to make someone out to be in a sitaution in which he was not is grade A A-logging, the production of fake evidence to manipulate real life events in a certain manner.
I am very much of the opinion that the Q Anon cultism is driven by a similar force.
Q doesn't process this as a Left vs Right situation but as a good vs evil situation.
>Strength TOGETHER (primary purpose). … GOOD V EVIL. - Q#1489
>POWER TO THE PEOPLE.>THEY WANT YOU DIVIDED.>THEY WANT RACE WARS.>THEY WANT CLASS WARS.>THEY WANT RELIGIOUS WARS.>THEY WANT POLITICAL WARS.
As for letting people know the truth:
>80% covert. 20% public. - Q#189>80% dark ops necessary. 20% public for justice. - Q#190>We LISTENED [20/80 />/ 40/60]. - Q#527
Covert and dark ops does not necessarily mean a cover up, it could be extrajudicial killings.
Good. She better not try weasel her way out of it.
Wasn't Q outed by one of the people who was involved in Cicada 3301 after he made a few pieces of false intel like the fact Hillary would be behind bars in the spring?
I admit I avoided really looking super deep into Q since I wanted more to read the FISA memo firsthand and everything else at the time fell to the wayside. Maye I just don't know much but tbh it seems more like Q's either sending mixed messages to stir the pot or he could actually be intentionally lying to trick people and misdirect the masses.
I heard about some theory that he and Z from a past Cicada 3301 puzzle actually share a few phrases and references. Seems awfully coincidental. Maybe this implies they're part of the same network or still have contact with the same people that inform for/alongside Cicada?
I wax and wane on Q. The "missile" photo is a problem. Q doubles down on it being a missile but the area is populated and the public would have reported it and there is none of the surface level smoke that would be expected. You can view the streak of light as a trail going parallel to the Earth surface from the top of the frame into the cloud bank in the distance. The object does not look like a helicopter though. Because of this problem I can't reach a final conclusion because neither option makes sense.
Q has always been a bit wonky, but what Q is, is persistent and having an impact. One of the problems the Q group might be facing is that they can't leak classified information, so perhaps we get a false narrative somewhat akin to classified reality?
>I heard about some theory that he and Z from a past Cicada 3301 puzzle actually share a few phrases and references.
Can you locate some links? I am intrigued.
>…intel like the fact Hillary would be behind bars in the spring?
Q#1: >>Hillary Clinton will be arrested between 7:45 AM - 8:30 AM EST on Monday - the morning on Oct 30, 2017.>HRC extradition already in motion effective yesterday with several countries in case of cross border run. Passport approved to be flagged effective 10/30 @ 12:01am.
Q#2:>HRC detained, not arrested (yet).
Q#3:>Where is HRC?
Q#7:>Why wasn’t HRC prosecuted for the emails? Put simply, Obama ultimately OK’d by using the non govt email addy to communicate w/ Clinton. Obama also had an alias along with each of his cabinet members. Therefore indicting HRC would lead to indicting Obama & his cabinet etc which could never happen. Remember he lied about knowing but that ultimately came out in the dump. Poof!
See also pic related and https://www.globemagazine.com/content/clinton-stopped-her-tracks
There is always enough to make it possible, and then lacks enough to make it proven.
It seems the original intent was impossible in practice and lead to a much larger strategy. Which ballooned out into Q leading people into multiple conspiracies. Perhaps because the multitude of conspiracies needed to be contained before HRC etc. Or we are being played, our internet-Nazi white supremacist energy being diverted into Flat Earth like conspiracy half-truths. I guess we have to just keep watching. Q can't LARP forever this has to fall one way or the other eventually.
Cicada 3301 vs Q
AIM is very biased against Q. Also the claims about Merkel being Hitlers daughter attributed to Q is invalid:
Q#928:>Angela Dorothea Kasner.>Daughter of a Pastor?>Name of FATHER?>History of FATHER?>Hitler youth (member).>Haircut today vs THEN (A).>Symbolic.>US Intelligence post war controlled who?>The ‘Mission’>Who is Angela Hitler?>Relationship to Adolf?
…>Risk of ‘conspiracy’ label the deeper we go.>Truth will shock the WORLD.
Anons fell into an old daughter conspiracy and then Q (#944) did this:>We went too deep.>Attempted a pullback.>Not ready.
the same day. Granddaughter is more plausible if anything.
AIMs claims that Q said Podesta was to be arrested:
>11.3 - Podesta indicted - Q#15>On POTUS’ order, we have initiated certain fail-safes that shall safeguard the public from the primary fallout which is slated to occur 11.3 upon the arrest announcement of Mr. Podesta (actionable 11.4). - Q#34>They are beginning to understand as Podesta's attorney was just notified. - Q#62>Where is John Podesta? … Podesta's plane has military escort (i.e. tag) and is being diverted (forced down). - Q#67
We have the same situation as HRC, an initial intent, which is watered down to containment only 2 days later.
Cicada 3301 predictions seem more obscure than Q:https://steemit.com/cicada3301/@defango/eagles-rain-fire-on-the-canaanites-or-cicada-3301-prophecy-and-israel
And rather than AIMs assumption that Q stole Cicada 3301's mojo I could assume Q is a continuation of Cicada 3301. I'll have to look into Cicada 3301 more.
FUCK that takes me back. I remember the first thread they posted. Eventually they got to a post that required a puzzle to be cracked and anyone who revealed their unique answer would be uneligible to continue.
Shit was so cool to see play out until then.
Can you give me a tl;dr on the important part to you?
tl;dr is there isn't one. Just some random anon on the internet who is somewhat interested in following these things but not partaking. It's not my place to jump in.
Something cool to look at every now and then. I like the idea of the puzzles being used to recruit people.
I never knew what the goals of 3301 were, like most people I stopped following the puzzles after a couple of weeks.
I don't really follow Q, but I think they make way too many predictions|statements.
I think a better method for influence is to hold your tongue so that people await your next words with anticipation. Not so that people drown in everything you've said.
Now the point of Q might be to reveal as much as possible.
But I still think that it's important to hold your tongue and save for the more concrete stuff that is absolute.
From all I know is, Q makes a lot of predictions, and a good number of them come true.
3301 from what I knew never really did anything and just remained extremely secretive.
As I said. I'm just some nobody on the internet. I don't follow this shit, I don't have the time to.
I did not find much about Cicada prophesies except the link above. Q did recently say nothing for 20 days. Thanks for the info :)
There's also an interview/article with someone who claims to have beat the first puzzle that showed up on 4chan.
Supposedly they asked the group of winners to program a piece of software designed for whistle-blowers that acted like a time-bomb to go off and release their information to the internet in the event they ever went missing.
There were supposedly people going radio silent during all this shit too, so if you're going to believe the article then he probably didn't know too much about it or is with holding information from fear of being got.
It was at least proven that 3301 was in multiple continents across the world all at the same time. So they're a force to be reckoned with. More so because they're so keep on secrets.
Q implied something about "secure" drop sites being actually deep state fronts.https://qanon.pub/?q=securedrop
It also reminds me of Assange and his dead man switch.
lol so much hate there. No wonder Milk became a hate symbol.
#Walkaway is a hate symbol. WTF.
>Not everything can be stated 1:1.
Q might use analogies and fake narratives that imply the reality:
>>SEC will investigate. Facebook sell off.
The Circle: https://youtu.be/QCOXARv6J9kor everything gets pulled into the LARP.
Yep everything is apparently hate.
Q gets mad. Neon Revolt gets madder…
…>I’m not saying I’m not grateful, Q. I really am, and I’m doing everything in my power to help. I’m with you in this.>But if you’re reading this, we really understand all of this already. What you just wrote – none of that is a problem to our understanding.>It’s the markers, the double-meanings, the clock, the map, the keystone (god, the @#$$%@#ing map and keystone) – those are the things we don’t understand.>Saying things like we “have more than we know” over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over doesn’t help anyone. That’s like telling us there’s oil underground somewhere in the state of Texas, and that we should start drilling if we want to get to it.>Sure, I see your “markers.” Sometimes, I think I have an idea what they’re pointing to. But mostly I look at it and go, “Yup. That’s a big ol’ sign written in Klingon” and move on…
"Faith is like any kind of romance, you can't love someone if they don't think you are worth the truth" - Killjoys.
This is precisely why I don't like Q as an outsider looking in. It's so cryptic and theatrical and shit but he rarely gives anything solid, and some things seem to be outright fabrications or a gamble of probability like Hillary being behind bars. There's a lot of variables, and you can't just isolate one or two of them in this grand scheme of politics. We need something substantial and not absurdly cryptic. Give us leaks of documents. Give us slightly altered stuff that's got only one or two layers of lingual encryption instead of making us wade through a month's worth of goddamn puzzles.
Cicada 3301 was all about cryptography, but Q's all about figuring out the absolute most obscure shit possible. The internet has a lot of information. We can't wade through every last film or book in the last thousand years, no matter how hard we try. And Q has
to know that his cryptic behavior is exactly what we're having so much trouble with.
I get he needs to retain anonymity/pseudonymity by obfuscating, but if it EVER gets figured out what he's saying, chances are the feds are hot on his tail shortly after people realize what he's saying. He's fucked either way, why not just come out with it?>>162079
As weird as some may find it, I find this leak-bomb concept to be a likely concept. Think about it: if leakers are killed in action, or lose communications, what are they going to do? PHP codes are one thing, but what if they lose access to their tech or are unable to work something out to meet again? All the encryption of a group like Cicada 3301 with the express goals of furthering freedom of information has to be encrypted for their own safety; having programming to basically take out every politician involved in their murder with them? That's invaluable stuff.
>>162316>PHP codes are one thing, but what if they lose access to their tech or are unable to work something out to meet again?
Sorry, that was kinda jibberish if you don't already know what PHP codes are. What I'm saying is that, if someone loses access to the codes to encrypt and decrypt communications, then they may not be able to verify their identity.
who is neon revolt?
I think he's a moderately popular news/politics blogger who basically translates Q Anon.
I think the deadman switch/leakbomb thing is true. Was just trying to leave it ambiguous because it's fucking Cicada 3301. The only thing we know for sure about them is that we know nothing for sure about them.
>>162316>This is precisely why I don't like Q as an outsider looking in. It's so cryptic and theatrical and shit but he rarely gives anything solid, and some things seem to be outright fabrications or a gamble of probability like Hillary being behind bars.
Agreed. But let me play devils advocate. They don't want to break the law. They want to unite the people to avoid the inevitable conflict as tensions keep rising. And they are in a battle with more movable parts than can be counted. "The Plan" actually is struggling to succeed but because they are military or military-like they can't admit set backs or failure, they just double down ad absurdum to keep morale up. The missile launch bothers me greatly because it has no sensible solution, and yet it must. The most sensible is some light traveling across the sky…. wait…
Actually I just thought of a solution: >>162466
and I have now found others thinking the same thing: >>162467
Which puts Q back in the possibly being truthful category, because the missile was my biggest doubt. And don't forget Trumps hint about "stoped missle" >>153149
I hope we get to hear the full story one day.
I might try an analysis. The over flight theory is plausible. I also wonder if we could track vibrations on seismographs of the over flight. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/monitoring/operations/heliplot.php?virtual_network=ANSS
I just need to locate the historical data. Want to help me search?
>>158850>Is it wrong to do vigilante violence?
I have considered this myself. On the one hand you have the possibility of abuse, and on the other you have clever wretches obtaining immunity through legal rigmarole. In my view, there is no absolute answer, but depends on 1) the severity of the crime; 2) how certain the public knows
guilt despite an official "not guilty" verdict; and 3) how important the criminal is. Certain crimes, such as pedophilia, high treason, and severe subversion, deserve a public hanging if the justice system does not convict them. However, the public must be certain beyond all reasonable doubt, because a single wrongful execution is a travesty. It is more important to hang a a major figure, such as a bankster, than a petty criminal, because then any conceit of being above the law is removed. The ruling class must be afraid of the people.
But, again, this is last resort only.>>158862>inviting stagnation
I am a firm believer in the "creative destruction" of capitalism. It is a common meme that only war brings about significant technological progress, which just isn't true. Significant progress was happening anyway before and after the World Wars. What total mobilization of the economy does is shift a general (and less perceptible) progress into a few, concrete projects such as new war machines and methods of logistics. These things would have happened anyway (except for maybe the atomic bomb) but somewhat later and with a corresponding increase in progress in other fields.>>158878>new baby boom
I can see this happening if current societal norms and its economic framework collapse. Having to no longer depend on social security, children would once again be an investment. The "Culture of Death" may be reversed and contraception/abortion receiving a worse stigma. Also, keep in mind that it's currently popular to perceive children as a parasite on one's well-being and on the health of the earth (despite the rest of the world far outbreeding whites).>>158958>>158962
I see it as somewhat of a mix. Dissatisfaction within public sentiment gradually builds up pressure as the corrupt system becomes hated. A great leader is a pressure valve who uses this sentiment and directs it to changing society. If no leader emerges, the pressure eventually gets too much and the whole system explodes in a revolution. At that point the people will take any figurehead, a la
the French Revolution.>>161374>keeping things hush-hush>>162316
I think that he knows the mystery is part of the charm. Intelligent people love using their noggin in some sort of game. Q recognizes they are an asset and so utilizes this human nature, either by providing clues so they uncover another unsavory part of the Left or sending them on wild goose chases. The latter is to keep them busy so they don't become idle and learn enough to be /pol/acks in spirit. 4/pol/ may have been despoiled but, scattered, our ilk is more dangerous than ever before as we're all over the internet.
Very clever mind-games.>>161377>division
This pretty much confirms that Q wants us to support the United States, not the Divided States. Let me explain.
When was the Unite the Right rally? August 12. What happened because of it? The media kept running with the message that white nationalists and libertarians are dangerous people and, because of one panicked guy in a car, all dangerous terrorists worse than Antifa (even centrists believe that both sides are at least equally responsible, not that Antifa was harassing way in advance). What happened to Thrackerzod? For denouncing both sides he became a "Nazi Sympathizer"! Mainstream America had been warming to our movement, simply because the Left is cancer and we're the cure. This march badly hurt that because spergs across the internet wanted to show how "strong" we are and march in opposition for the first time, without much concern for optics. This by extension hurt the image of Thrackerzod voters in general. What's worse, we never learned and blamed the media when we should have assumed they'd lie about us.
When was the first QAnon post? Two months later in October. What has been the result? A general shift in interest away from radical right-wing politics and toward a strong but very civic nationalism. White nationalists and libertarians may not have lost their principles but they have grown quieter as they are focused on helping Thrackerzod take down the "Deep State."
It's really a genius way to corral the eccentric and sometimes risky parts of the right and prevent further harm to optics (though occasionally even Q enthusiasts sperg out). I'm not that concerned about us because normies still aren't quite invested in Q, and that's who we redpill on race, tradition, etc. It may actually be beneficial to us because it's too early to go public with white nationalism; we need to smash "anti-racism" first. Otherwise, we slow down our movement with poor optics.
Lesson to be learned: when organizing a march either discipline to act in concerted and strict self-defense (as Mr. H's early SA did), or march for a more moderate ideal (like "it's okay to be white," not "Jews will not replace us!")
Sure, Will do an search for historical data.
I found this https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/
but I would much rather see June 10 seismograph images. I am not even sure if a missile fly over could be seen within the noise.
If launch from submarine at sea, I doubt there will be any registration. Also I think the chances for it to be registered on a seismograph during flight is next to none.
What would be really interesting is to see if there was anyone running an "Geospatial Acoustics Tracker" of flights in the area. That data would be gold when it comes to tracking trajectory, elevation etc.http://microflown-maritime.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2011_internoise_avs.pdf
Very interesting analysis, especially the last part. If Q needed to keep the spergs busy then more conspiracies would be the best option. Especially conspiracies with some meat in them (but not necessarily conclusive). And if the battle is real then the conspiracies can be real ones. Don't forget this tidbit also:
>We are saving Israel for last.>Very specific reason not mentioned a single time.>Q
So this might merge back into a "Jews are behind everything" perspective.
Interesting, perhaps also some meteor watch society might have information too.
There is nothing reported here for a meteor in that time frame (10:56:14 Sunday June 10, 2018 in GMT/UT).https://www.amsmeteors.org/members/imo_view/browse_events?page=2
>>162476>It is a common meme that only war brings about significant technological progress, which just isn't true
I fully agree with this. Only reason this meme has some truth to it is that during war governments are willing to actually spend money on technological advances, granted mostly military ones. That is why I think a cold war is the best kind of war to spur technological advances. This brings forth a healthy (to an certain degree) competition in a race to show who is the most advanced and awesomest country and people of them all.
But I agree advances in technology comes no matter if there is a war or not. Sometimes war helps some fields do a little leap forward like in medicine as there is an influx of patients you have to attempt to save and therefore new techniques, washing your hands before surgery as an example, is invented to reach this goal.
>This pretty much confirms that Q wants us to support the United States, not the Divided States. Let me explain.
Fully agree with your assessment here>>162482
I also don't think it was a meteor. If it had been it would have been all over the news as meteors was the new "in" thing to talk about in the news given all the previous ones that got massive global coverage.
I'll move the missile investigation over to the missile thread. I just found something interesting. >>162487
>>162480>saving Israel for last
Here's hoping. If Thrackerzod actually is going to do something like that (though I doubt it due to the existence of Kushner) he's doing it exactly the right way. Give full support to Israel so they get cocky and gain infamy among the whole world. In the meantime, go after the leftist Jews who aren't fond of Israel anyway and expose them as the pedo freaks they are. Then, a few years down the line, withdraw support from Israel and watch them implode without allies.
That is the one of the few ways you could take down the left/right Jewish dichotomy without going full 14/88.
I can get behind the theory that he wants more people to become cryptographers and proper /pol/acks. Still, doesn't stop me from being a little frustrated. One of these days I'll participate in the Cicada 3301 puzzles after teaching myself how to take advantage of the deep web and decrypt things; until then I'll just casually watch while teaching people to come together as nationalists.
Q messing with peoples heads again.
>Stormy Daniels’s lawyer Michael Avenatti is the latest target for supporters of the pro-Trump conspiracy theory QAnon, with police investigating a man’s appearance near Avenatti’s office after the building was mentioned in QAnon posts.
>>162558>comparing a basic picture in front of a building to blocking traffic, then connecting it to terrorism
I might not be a huge fan of Q but holy shit, what a dishonest article.
>If you happened to be watching YouTube videos on Monday morning and were struck by an urge to check in on one of America’s most beloved movie stars, you were likely in for a nasty surprise.>“Sarah Ruth Ashcraft says Tom Hanks is a pedophile”, read the title of the top video search result for the actor’s name. “Tom Hanks’ Alleged ‘Sex Slave’ Speaks Out”, read another top search result. >Indeed, the top five results – and eight out of the top 14 – were variations on the pedophilia theme, interspersed with the hashtags #QAnon, #Pizzagate and #Pedogate.
Oh wait, they're serious. Let me laugh even harder! HAAAA HA HA HA!
I wonder what big news is about to drop. Sounds like the leftist media is trying their hardest trying to discredit Q in preparation for it.
Something tells me that Cicada's going to be the one to drop this information and those trying to solve this puzzle are going to act as our prophets.
It's a no win situation for the media. The media has controlled the narrative for a long time, the internet makes that obsolete. We can do our own research, see that things are complex and nuanced, that things can fit together but not be individually proven. They can't control the internet completely. As they double down to control the narrative more will slip past them. Interesting times ahead.
Yep it is fun watching them squirm and burn. Sadly a big portion of people still rely on the news media to get their news like many elderly and people who just don't know about alternatives. But hopefully it wont be too long until they see the truth and is given an easy alternative to use.>best would be if journalists just got some integrity back and pride for the work they are meant to do
I don't think the elderly need to know how bad things are.
i dont know man, boomers have large reach. they might be able to help.
Well they vote, and they will for at least a few more years.
but what does it mean?
How would I know? My guess would be it is "marketing" to the Q fringe.
>>162764>these media outlets try this hard to discredit QAnon>they try this hard to use his leaks to discredit all Trump supporters and all anti-NWO people>anti-NWO people who might not even be rallying behind him specifically as much as the idea of Q and free-information culture itself
What a fuckin' timeline, right? There's no way this is going to go well now that they've thrust Q into the public eye and given people reason to look into everything from the past year+.
>>162768>free-information culture itself
That is what all this is really. It seems it takes a generation to grasp the power of something. Then it takes 100 years for it to be fully exploited. We are at the 'first generation' point of the internet… now we have 80 odd years of the fall out/impact in front of us.
>Trump rally attendee holds up sign linked to conspiracy theory>An attendee at President Trump’s rally in Florida Tuesday night held up a sign promoting the “QAnon” right-wing conspiracy theory.>Video from the rally shows an attendee near the front of the crowd raising a sign reading “We are Q,” apparently in reference to the QAnon conspiracy. The sign was visible on live-streams of the Tampa, Fla. rally.
…>The QAnon theory spawned from an anonymous user on online message boards 4Chan and 8Chan claiming to be a high-level government official with “Q” security clearance.>“Q” has been responsible for the spread of several conspiracy theories, including that Trump is secretly fighting the “deep state” – a ring of government officials working to take him down.>QAnon has also been linked to the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory that falsely accused Hillary Clinton of involvement in a child pedophilia ring, which escalated when a gunman opened fire at a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant.
But that is not all: https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/93ku02/potus_pointing_at_q_cutout/
>>162764>>162768> they've thrust Q into the public eye and given people reason to look into everything from the past year+.
It might be hard to do in a simple way but perhaps it is time to start making inforgaphs with tiny nuggets of Q-pills for easy consumption and pointers towards the rabbithole.
>>162778>Q posts trump signature with Q#1776 ?
I would not rule out that that is what it is.>>162782>QAnon has also been linked to the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory that falsely accused Hillary Clinton of involvement in a child pedophilia ring>that falsely accused Hillary Clinton>falsely
And thus the "journalists" have like reality lost the grasp of the English language too
Holy shit. If Q *is* Trump then I'm actually hype. Guess that would explain his sometimes horribly written posts though.
If it actually is him, or at the very least someone who talks with Trump often in his office, then I'm VERY interested in how this all related to Cicada.
Does this mean Cicada has allies within the president's office itself? Right under his nose? Or that Trump is actually the super-genius web-savvy memelord that people portray him as?
lol>soo disturbing >>162868
Yep they are truly trying all they can to discredit Q. Gives even more creed to Q. The establishment would not care if it was not threatened. And if it is one thing the establishment fear it is the truth.
There have been quite a few credible "hints" that Trump, Eric, Spicer, Bannon etc. have posted on 4chan in the past. Also there have been a few Q posts that makes the possibility that Q (or one of the Q people) have direct access to Trump.
I wonder if they really think this will work any better than the "Deplorable" and "Angry White men" narrative they tried to push before.
Lol>no sir, there is no way people will check for themselves if we say it is a conspiracy and a cult
We've been here before:
>Dismantling Utopia: How Information Ended the Soviet Union
…>In June 1991, Boris Yeltsin, who had left the Communist party, became the first democratically elected head of Russia. In August,>>…hard-liners staged a coup to oust President Gorbachev and to prevent the dissolution of the USSR. When Yeltsin showed his defiance of the junta by mounting a tank, his heroic action was captured by CNN and broadcast to thousands of Moscovites who rallied to his cause. The Communist party was no longer capable of enforcing an information blockade. As Shane notes in Chapter 9, Inside Soviet borders the new information was reproduced, multiplied, amplified, and disseminated by the technology that had flooded the country. Fax machines and photocopiers, video recorders and personal computers outside the government were no longer exotica but a sprawling, living nervous system that linked the Russian political opposition, the republican independence movements, and the burgeoning private sector. Tied informally together, this equipment constituted a network of considerable scale [p. 262].
"P-p-p-people don't trust the news! Let's demonize conspiracy theorists as nutjobs and then do damage control!"
>>162915>"These QAnon, BlacksForTrump fringe groups"
Holy shit they actually think this, don't they. They actually think that Trump voters, conspiracy theorists, and nonwhite republicans are all just crazy fringes that aren't to be spoken with, and are all either connected or similarly radical.
You know what all of this sounds like: Kristallnacht
We have the leader pointing out the enemy, we have the tension and it's rising…
>>163000>"you suck, you suck"
Really dangerous rage there, way worse than "pigs in blanket fry them like bacon"
False flag attack next?
If there is outside forces, aka. deep state, then probably yes. But what form would it take. At current stage they can only do lone wolf and deranged individual, and they won't achieve anything by it. - There will always be crazy people.
If they want to harm the whole Q group I actually don't think there is anything much they can do that will be effective. The scope of potential targets to attack and pin on a Q follower is so small that before their false flagging would have any impact all the "journalists" in CNN would have been killed by the deep state.
But I would not rule out that they will do a bombing of an field office for CNN or the like. An false flag like this will cement the hatred towards Q journalists in mainstream media already have. The greatest harm is that the first reporting in foreign press would be "Q anon follower bombed news station" which would harm Q internationally, but I don't think it would hurt Q nationally in the US.
If it is the journalists themselves, I don't think it will be severe as I don't think they are willing to sacrifice one of themselves? Their modus operandi on false flagging will be in the form of "someone sent an angry email", "look at all these tweets", "waterbottle thrown and someone got wet" (at the extreme end).
Could be we are in for some falsflagging en mass as you feared, and that they won't care what ramifications it will have. Because FB, Twitter and Mainstream media are in collusion they can narrate whatever "Russian bot" story they want or give some credibility to falseflaggers. But on the positive side the credibility of Twitter and FB is in free fall towards zero in public opinion. Only die hard leftists that want the narrative to be true will believe them.
And as he said it was just a matter of time before mainstream media caught on. We can be glad they are so inept at what they do (strange as it might sound) or they would have been able to discredit Q. I write the ineptness down to leftists having to tout the party book and thus those on top are inept people with a clean party book touting the party line.
But non the less I look forward to the show.
It boils down to you can use TV for propaganda because its controllers are so centralized, but you can't control the net. It is inevitable that the internet win, this makes Q a very clever strategy. I wonder how all of this will look in 10 years. I also wonder when the first "pizzagate shooting at Comet" will occur.
>A sprawling, endlessly complicated pro-Trump conspiracy theory has jumped from fringe social media sites to mainstream attention.>The signs, shirts and banners at a rally in support of President Trump on Tuesday were, to the uninitiated, baffling.>"We are Q," read one sign at the event in Florida.>"WHERE WE GO ONE WE GO ALL," read another.>Others wore T-shirts with the letter "Q" and slogans such as "The Great Awakening".>All are references to a conspiracy theory gripping fringe pro-Trump activists - albeit a growing number of them, including celebrities, media personalities and influential social media accounts.>It's nebulous and continuously changing to adapt to current events, but the overarching conspiracy theory has been given a name: "QAnon".
…>Despite the farfetched, open-ended and inscrutable nature of Q's messages, they quickly gained a cult following. Other users began to interpret the clues - or "breadcrumbs" - and elaborated on the theory.
…>It echoes the debunked "pizzagate" saga - which resulted in a man opening fire in a Washington pizza restaurant in 2016. He believed a Democratic Party-run paedophile ring was based there.
…>The cryptic messages from Q have now migrated over to 8chan - another anonymous forum with extremely light moderation rules - but the theory has also filtered into more mainstream platforms including Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Reddit.
…>Whitney Phillips, assistant professor of communication, culture and digital technologies at Syracuse University, says that media outlets need to be careful they are not drawing more people into conspiracy theories.>She says "if a particular conspiracy only exists within a particular community, all reporting will do is amplify that concept so that more and more people are exposed to it.">Phillips acknowledges that "at this point, not reporting on the story (of QAnon) could be framed as being irresponsible, because it is happening and people are responding". However, she argues that conspiracy theories "don't occur in a vacuum" and warns that even articles debunking theories can legitimise their ideas.>"Not only do these individuals tend to follow mainstream media coverage very closely, they tend to cater their messages to maximize media exposure," she says. "They love it when they're in the news.">Certainly Q - whoever it is behind the messages - is lapping up the attention. In recent days Q has posted links to media stories and has claimed the coverage is "right on schedule". On Thursday the account published a new message:>"Welcome to the mainstream.>"We knew this day would come."http://archive.li/uAATIhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-45040614
BBC reports that we should not report on Q. Thanks!
lol, also>"It's really taking off, at least within the American right, and amongst Trump supporters," says Sommer.>The timing of the conspiracy theory's origins, he says, is no accident. During the Mueller investigation, "people were really looking for reasons to not think that the president is somehow in the employ of Russia, or that something nefarious had happened during the campaign."
>>163067>QAnon is terrifying. This is why.
…>It’s obvious that this is scary, but it’s less obvious exactly why. To start, the sheer scope of the supposed conspiracy should cause alarm. By combining the tales tinfoil-hatters have told over time, these truthers have packaged everything attractive about this type of propaganda in one tantalizing product. And that means more and more people will buy what they’re selling.
…>The storm QAnon truthers predict will never strike because the conspiracy that obsesses them doesn’t exist. But while they wait for it, they’ll try to whip up the winds, and the rest of us will struggle to find shelter. QAnon is scary because it’s getting bigger, it’s scary because we don’t know how to stop it, and it’s scary because the people behind it won’t be stopped, and, until their illusory storm arrives, they won’t be satisfied.http://archive.li/rSNPShttps://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/08/02/what-makes-qanon-so-scary/?noredirect=on
I'm scared, anon, hold me?
What's funny is that they realize the implications of the deep state are scary, but they don't see the incredibly obvious stuff that points toward it existing and at the very least interfering in innocents' lives for the sake of narratives. When members of FBI, CIA and ATF leadership outright state that their opposition, which includes the motherfucking POTUS,
will be eliminated, co-opted, or censored into the floor, ther's something up. And that's what QAnon supporters are seeing. We're seeing leaders of our nation acting in ways hostile to the populace, manipulating the things leading to legislation and media output and internet culture. Remember the failed memes like Gucci watch memes paid for by corporations? Imagine the power that a larger, more intelligent corporation or NGO could wield by successfully creating memetic quips that lead to lower social awareness, i.e. the tinfoil hat stereotype. What if that's already happened, right under our noses? How would we know?
>>163067>people were really looking for reasons to not think that the president is somehow in the employ of Russia
I think that I now know what it feels like to "can't even."
I'm confident that Trump isn't in the employ of Russia because there is no evidence whatsoever that Trump is in the employ of Russia.
It's like saying that people are really looking for reasons to not believe that Russell's teapot is orbiting the sun.
Try reading the comments in the WaPo article. I was looking for some sort of factual rebuttal to QAnon, but there is nothing but name calling and fear.
If humans were logical there would be nothing to fight over.
I'm sure that we'd find a way
>>163146>It's like PizzaGate on bath salts
So you mean it's even more true with more wide-ranging implications and more potential agents involved? Because I agree. ^:)
Jokes aside, the pedo rings have been seen in these campaigns from Veterans on Patrol and similar border-patrolling volunteer organizations. Independent vigilantes are finding children who are linked to pedophilia and child sex trafficking, and they're not even seeking that out specifically. That and the silence from the media on the subject tells me more than any statement could.
Inside Edition: Why Was the Letter ‘Q’ Everywhere at President Trump’s Florida Rally?
>>163225>calling QAnon for a cult and dangerous didn't work so lets try calling them losers
Journalism at its best
>A conspiracy theory described as "one part Pizzagate, one part X-Files" hit the headlines this week, emerging from the underbelly of the internet into the mainstream.>QAnon followers believe US President Donald Trump and the man investigating his campaign's alleged ties to Russia, Robert Mueller, are actually working together in secret to take down a massive Satanic paedophile ring involving Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Tom Hanks.>Several dozen believers showed up at a Trump rally in Florida earlier this week, in what one Washington Post columnist described as the group's "coming-out party".>They were wearing shirts and carrying signs reading 'We Are Q', 'His name was Seth Rich' and 'Where we go one we go all'.
>one part X-Files
…. I'M ALL IN NOW!!!!
I can't believe all this free advertising. Rumour says all the Q signs were allowed in Tampa and this isn't normal. The rumour suggests this was a set up to bait the media, the recent rally didn't allow all the signs but the media was there in force to see….. not much. If so, LOL, Trump!
How much do you bet that the peak interest in Q and Cicada this year was precisely why Tampa allowed signs in? The organizers and/or white house correspondence had to know that with Justin Roiland and many other hollywood kikes being implicated in pedo shit, there'd be a rise in discussion. Not to mention Seth Rich's assassination case making progress.
I'd say if they were aware of all this, then they just played the media like a damned fiddle, and I'm in love with it too. Let's watch the media melt down while unintentionally revealing their corruption like spaghetti from a sperg's pocket.
OMG Please just stop. I can't take all this winning….
>CNN’s Acosta: All Journalists Should Make Bumper Stickers, Buttons, Chant ‘We’re Not the Enemy of the People’
…>He added, “I think maybe we should make some bumper stickers, make some buttons, you know, maybe we should go out on Pennsylvania Avenue like these folks who chant ‘CNN sucks’ and ‘fake news,’ maybe we should go out, all journalists should go out on Pennsylvania Avenue and chant, ‘we’re not the enemy of the people,’ because I’m tired of this. Honestly, I’m tired of this. It is not right. It is not fair. It is not just. It is un-American to come out here and call the press the enemy of the people. Ivanka Trump knows that. I don’t know why her father doesn’t. And I don’t know why this press secretary doesn’t.”http://archive.is/ID2Ochttps://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/08/02/cnns-acosta-all-journalists-should-make-bumper-stickers-buttons-chant-were-not-the-enemy-of-the-people/
The news is producing news about the news. Surely this means something is wrong.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEdlYQ71Z1w
>>163244>I’m tired of this. It is not right. It is not fair. It is not just. It is un-American to come out here and call the press the enemy of the people.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…. Well stop being biased and actually try to act like a journalist instead of bitching; problem solved.
>>163248>when your browser sets your name to sage automatically after using sage a single time
Sometimes I really hate browser cookies. Ignore that.
put 'sage' in email only :)
I was meming by putting sage in every field and autofill decided that was what I always wanted.
omg the look on his face when he hesitates and then says "shadowy cult" tells me everything I even need to know
My God, the extrapolation into fear is so unbelievable…. or not, if the conspiracies are true.
I honestly hated this report more than anything else thusfar. I've never wanted to screch autistically into someone's ear this much before.
I get MSNBC is an echo chamber of retarded shitlibs, but god damn, not even 60 dislikes? Not even one
comment giving the video a thorough lashing?
Fuck it, I've done it now. I'm actually getting sick of all these Q news segments. I know they're digging their graves, but could they shut the fuck up so I don't run into them every five seconds?
I can't do that with an ape breathing down my neck because I voted and he didn't.
KEK. This is so much fun. This is what I imagine billion year old salt mined from an distant comet tastes like.
Tick-Tock, something big is coming…https://youtu.be/00F8qrq7oks
I miss the Campaign Music; posting endcredits for fun.https://youtu.be/yPS9MpRLCd0
It takes all sorts I guess.
On the other hand, think how awesome it would be if attackhelicopters came flying in playing this at full volume like Ride of the Valkyries when the storm comes.
Washington Post (Amazon/CIA) Leads MSM Attack on Q #1806
4 Aug 2018 - 1:09:53 AM
Full attack mode.
Washington Post leading?
[Sample Past 5hrs]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/08/03/this-is-the-moment-how-a-wave-of-media-coverage-gave-qanon-conspiracy-theorists-their-best-week-ever/?utm_term=.cf4f4e0f506chttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/08/03/theres-a-virus-in-trumpland/?utm_term=.73cb6867bf8chttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/08/03/qanon-meet-a-real-life-believer-in-the-online-pro-trump-conspiracy-theory-thats-bursting-into-view/?utm_term=.1c12101c8280
Who owns the Washington Post?
What ABC agency is heavily tied to Amazon?https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-web-services-launches-secret-region-2017-11https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-20/cia-tech-official-calls-amazon-cloud-project-transformational
…>For months, a man calling himself Bill Smith obsessed over the YouTube search rankings for QAnon, where his conspiracy-fueled videos competed with those made by other believers for the top few slots on the list of results. On Wednesday, Smith was dethroned by a rush of mainstream outlets, who each produced their own videos explaining the conspiracy theory after its existence suddenly went viral.>In a livestream to 45,000 YouTube subscribers on Wednesday, Smith looked at his diminished status — and sounded ecstatic. “I haven’t been this happy in a very long time,” he said. “CNN, NBC News, MSNBC, PBS News Hour, Washington Post, MSNBC, those are our new QAnon reporters!” Smith burst into laughter. “I can’t wait until I see Shepard Smith reporting on QAnon.”>“This is the moment!” he said. Finally, QAnon was mainstream.
So what is their end game?
>Whatever you might think of #Qanon it's more than strange to suddenly see hundreds of articles appear on the same day, demonizing the community.>This is a co-ordinated attack. But here's my qs: If Q is just a brainwashed cult on 8chan, why are they so worried about it?
…>To me, the intensity and co-ordination of the Obama/Clinton slave media assault, indicates that their handlers know there's something to Q, that worries them.>Because again, if the Q crowd are just a bunch of kooks, why would you even bother?>But here's what's hilarious.>Each time they attack Q, they draw more attention to it.>It's a totally stupid strategy the media are employing (as you'd expect).>If I was a Q fan, I'd be VERY happy. And if Q is a larp, I'd be killing myself laughing right now.
No wonder why so may Politicians have Law degrees. Lawyers in those documents are the perfect shield against everything. The knowledge on how to use lawyers to your advance is just as, if not more, important than actually hiring one.>I was his/her attorney at one point so I cannot speak about him/her>I can't recommend my client to voluntarily testify at the current time>I may give you the evidence you required but you have to agree that …>Sorry the email I mentioned earlier [redacted] did not belong to my client after all, so you can not look at it or its content. You may look at the email [redacted] instead>My client did take regular backups to be used for his own historical archive, but he did no longer need a historical archive so the harddrives were degaussed and shredded. Therefore we can't give you those drives as they no longer exist.>We would like to voluntarily testify to expedite your case (nudge, nudge, not under oath, nudge)>Please see our previous letter, we would like to reiterate our desire to voluntarily testify. Please respond (we really don't want to testify under oath)
Also this stood out to me:>We have freely given you the laptop, because we did so we retain ownership and thus demand that either you irreversibly destroy the laptop upon completion of the investigation or that you hand it back to us so we can destroy it
Was the "ending" of the Clinton investigation just a quick fix and pretext to be able to destroy much of the evidence so it could not be reexamined?
Jesus Christ, 14 minutes of ramblings and all they wanted was to sell T-Shirts in the end
>>163514>Was the "ending" of the Clinton investigation just a quick fix and pretext to be able to destroy much of the evidence so it could not be reexamined?
What are the other options I have to choose from? :)>>163516https://www.neonrevolt.com/2018/08/03/the-medias-false-flag-setup-and-hillarys-second-server-newq-qanon-greatawakening/
Did we nearly get the false flag I was expecting? Will they try again?
…>Q: Sylvie Lanteaume, AFP. I would like to ask you a question about Guantanamo. You said recently that Guantanamo was open to receive new prisoners. What is the capacity, in terms of the number of prisoners you can receive? And also, would it make it necessary for you to request more resources?
>ADM. TIDD: So without going into -- into the specifics, that -- that we have the ability to -- to receive more detainees, should the -- the decision be made to send them to us. We, I think, is -- it's pretty well understood right now. We have, in the -- less than 50 there right now, and that -- that number could probably go up. We could -- we could accommodate a small number without any additional resources. But then, as the numbers continue to go up, now we would require a larger guard force. I think that's probably the best -- And it's -- it's less the detention facility, as it would be to support all of the other, the Military Commission's activities, and the other sorts of things that -- that go on.
>Q: Could it be a foreign fighter?
>ADM. TIDD: You know, we don't get in the business of deciding who comes our way. We just are prepared to receive anyone that is ordered our way.
>Q: More than 100, sir? If I could just follow on that. When you say smaller number, help us understand that.
>ADM. TIDD: Yeah. It's, I -- I would say, probably, we could, without any additional resources, probably a couple of dozen, but not -- but beyond that, we would need to increase the size of the guard force. OK?
>>163545>What are the other options I have to choose from? :)
Today our chef have made an excellent beef steak with jacked potatoes and fresh seasonal vegetables on the side. We also have fresh sea-bass lightly grilled with lemon, an mushroom sauce and an fresh salad on the side.
Oh, wait you were talking about the email investigation…
>Will they try again?
They probably will. But how is the big question. If they are willing to sacrifice lives, news media person or building might be targeted. But also the way they are trying to broaden the scope of what Q followers believe (ref. TYT video and others) they might be trying to broaden the range of targets so they don't have to sacrifice one of themselves.
Also I find it funny how the TYT thinks that anyone can LARP and get away with it. I can't count how many LARPERs that have tried and been exposed within minutes that they are fake. The thing that eludes them is that the reason Q have become so big is because no one have been able to disprove him/them yet. And it is not for lack of trying. If Q is LARPing the moment he says something that obviously is false or exposes him as LARPs he will be called out on it instantly. Granted he said misinformation is part of the game, but people will still point out what is misinformation if anything is found.
And really it doesn't even matter if Q is LARPing. People are looking behind the curtain, that's all that matters. And the internet empowers sharing what they find behind the curtain. Exciting times.
From 2009:>RT: Wayne Madsen ‘Whistle blown on secret 9/11 unit’ called the Q Group>The US government has allegedly set up a special security wing with the sole task of distancing Washington from any involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This secret unit within the NSA is called the Q group operating in Fort Meade, Maryland. and operates in cooperation with FBI counterintelligence mainly targeting journalists. A secretive agency within a secretive agency…. Answerable to no one. The database is called First Fruits.
RT Video: https://vimeo.com/282693057
Q coincidences video. 2 mins of chatter before they get into it.https://youtu.be/e3KGT_YboSA
True, it makes people examine what they are told and that is always a good thing.
If it is the same Q group they must have lost the contacts they had with journalists to shift narratives to their desires.
Not sure what you are saying. But I will add my interpretation. In the past the NSA Q Group seems to have been assisting the cover-up. But because of the demographic situation we are going to get a bulk of oldies retiring. New young people will be going into the NSA, they are internet savy, and they aren't part of the "deep state". Natural pressures will lead to a revolution where the young "outsiders" continue to outnumber the old "insiders". Demographics cycles makes political cycles. WOOHOO CYCLE POSTING!!
What are you saying in your post?
Really good video for people to get into Q with.>>163617>Not sure what you are saying.
I just read your synopsis and it sounded like the Q group from 2009 was formed to feed the press with false stories and use contacts within eh press to bury other stories so they never came out.
But it is also likely that because their mission regarding 9/11 was successful they moved on to other tasks and as former members was retiring and being replaced the groups demographic changed. Also being a secret group withing a secret organization structure you are bound to learn a few things and what they learned might have shifted their focus also.
The situation seems to be, criminals infiltrate the gov, the good guys know this but can't see a solution that does not endanger the public. Additionally (prior to the internet) all avenues of publicizing are cutoff by the media. They also are concerned that the public will chimp out if the info is dumped out in a convincing way. Q Group keeps the lid on because National Security.
Situation festers until 4chan Nazis get GEOTUS elected. Now the internet is a spooks play ground for awakening/manipulating the people. Lame Stream media obsoleted. Time to strike.
There is still the small problem that the MIC does not benefit from Globalization. So it isn't necessarily all noble.
Yes we have reached the critical mass that internet was going to be where people could share ideas freely, and everyone could access it. These freedoms on the internet is being taken away as we speak so it was probably a now or who knows when they had a chance. If this don't work a complete disclosure and let the pieces fall where they fall is the only option, but I say preferable option to letting them keep on doing what they are doing.
Part of the MIC will probably survive in a globalized world too as they would build means to control the citizens. But it would be a shadow of tis former self. Unarmed people are easy to control. But I view the MIC more as a fun workplace where you get to build awesome hardware for ridiculous amounts of money. Or a place you will hate working because you are building dumb stuff for ridiculous amounts of money (ref. the movie The Pentagon Wars)
The Deep State Strikes Back - REAL.video Original
Good video for explaining the history of why people distrust the government and why QAnon's so popular.
"You" and "Q" are close together in sound so it could just be a slip up or him adjusting or clearing his speech up a little close to the start of "you." Like, sometimes I swallow just before saying something and a little "tch" comes out at the start of the next thing I say. Could be coincidental.
But if it isn't, wew lad…
oooohohohohohohoholy shit I'm hard now
>Now that everyone knows about QAnon — now that, ahem, a certain national newspaper has published at least a dozen articles about QAnon in the span of four days — we need to ask why not everyone is convinced the conspiracy theory is true.>Maybe it’s because QAnon is too true. Like, there’s just too much truth crammed into a single conspiracy theory alleging that President Trump is secretly waging war on an evil cabal of liberals who rig the elections, and run the CIA, and abduct children, and hid all the UFOs, and killed Princess Diana, and did Hurricane Katrina, and invented vampirism, and … [consults QAnon guide …]
Washington Post confirmed for stage four Trump Derangement Syndrome
I can't tell the difference between shit posting on chans and the media.
I am also wondering if the Q group might have captured the "4am talking points".
That would be most interesting and incredibly funny.
What do you mean by "capturing" the 4AM talking points?
According to Q at 4am the media's talking points for the day are pushed out. This is why the stories are so similar. I speculate therefore that capturing the 4am source means Q would control the news cycle. Keep it anti-Q to fool them, while using it as a promo.https://qanon.pub/?q=4am
…>Full visibility has many advantages.>Right on schedule.
I wouldn't be surprised given what happened when GamerGate started, especially when the GameJournoPros google group was revealed with supportive statements for Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian being spread among them before news articles are released. Seems like they like to gab to each other about headlines to give ideas to each other to spin narratives.
Funny how Anonomoose pretenders comes out of the woodwork trying to convince people they exist just in time with the media.
>Anonymous vows to take down, expose QAnon>The hacking collective Anonymous is pledging to expose the people behind the "QAnon" conspiracy theory.>The anarchist hacking group slammed the QAnon conspiracy as potentially dangerous and driven by a “brainless political agenda” in a video posted Sunday to what is widely considered the most reliable Anonymous Twitter account.>“We will not sit idly by while you take advantage of the misinformed and poorly educated,” the group said in the video, which was posted with the hashtags #OpQ and #OpQAnon.>The video claims that Anonymous “knew who was responsible for Q” and thought it was funny at first. However, the group now believes the conspiracy theory has gone too far. >“Someone is going to get hurt, so we have to put our foot down and start some shit with you all,” the group said in the video.http://archive.is/9tr50https://youtu.be/vFHzrmk5Md0
I guess the AJ plan didn't work. ( also >>164045
So I guess it's time bring out the
>>164073>Anonymous has been adamantly opposed to Trump since he announced his candidacy in 2015. The group declared "cyber war" on Trump in March 2016, directing its followers to take down the then-candidate's websites.
Oh yeah, that worked out great, didn't it.
Oh noes! I hope QAnon is okay, I heard on Oprah that Anonymous has over 9000 penises!
OMG it's REAL!
>Anonymous vs. QAnon: Hackers Pledge to Take Down Pro-Trump Conspiracyhttps://www.newsweek.com/anonymous-hacking-collective-threatens-qanon-conspiracy-theorists-1058062
When the news devolves into reporting on basement dwelling neets as their last level of hope.
>Yesterday, I was confronted with my very first Qanon critic by text. A very long time good friend, whom I consider to be very smart, and he does NOT know that I'm a Qanon, he also doesn't know that I usually have nothing to do at work except research and surf chans and reddit for 10 hours a day…
…>"OMG, Is it a militia?!" <Welll, no. >"Where do they assemble…do they just show up like ANTIFA?" <Welllll, they haven't really. They're online. >"Oh shit! Like Anonymous, they can shut down companies from the web?" <Not exactly, not from what I understand. >"Oh thank god, sounded kinda scary at first. So who is Q?" <Not sure, it's weirdos from 4chan that spread crazy rumors. They don't even who it is. Supposed to be some intelligence officer or something that vaguely predicts the future. >"LOL, so it's like a f'n Nostrdamus cult hahaha" <lol yeah, crazy >"I gotta look that up later when I get a chance." <Yeah, lol, apparently its pretty f'n weird stuff…
2 hours later …….
>"Hey, it's on 8chan, these guys are out there ::sends link::" ….
6 hours later (1am) … <Have you read this shit!?!!! ..you should read this its fucking crazy… I mean some of it out there, like there's satanic shit in there I don't really get, but you gotta see the documents they come up with, this is crazy …. I think these people might actually be on to something …https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/951w40/as_requested_its_own_post_yesterday_i_was/
Is there such a thing as bad advertising?
Kek. I remember when that meme was made.
Q !A6yxsPKia. No.121
Aug 6 2018 18:31:41 (EST)
1. a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
"a conspiracy to destroy the government"
2. the action of plotting or conspiring.
"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
Fake News collaborating and pushing knowingly false information?
Fake News ‘KNOWINGLY FALSE’ narrative pushes.
1. POTUS colluded w/ Russia to win the 2016 Presidential election
2. POTUS is puppet to PUTIN
3. POTUS to irreparably harm relationships w/ our allies
4. POTUS will collapse U.S. economy
5. POTUS will collapse stock market
6. POTUS will cause war w/ NK
7. POTUS will cause war w/ IRAN
8. POTUS will destroy the world.
9. On and on……..(knowingly false)
FEAR & SCARE PUSH.
They would rather see NK peace negotiations fail (WAR!) than see POTUS resolve.
Scandalous Media Bias?
What are they hiding?
FAKE NEWS MEDIA IS NOT FREE AND INDEPENDENT.
FAKE NEWS MEDIA = PROPAGANDA ARM OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
Think WL list of journalists who colluded w/ HRC/DNC (2016 Pres election).
They want you DIVIDED.
DIVIDED by RACE.
DIVIDED by RELIGION.
DIVIDED by CULTURE.
DIVIDED by CLASS.
DIVIDED by POLITICAL AFFILIATION.
DIVIDED YOU ARE WEAK.
TOGETHER YOU ARE STRONG.
YOU, THE PEOPLE, HAVE THE POWER.
This movement challenges their ‘forced’ narrative.
This movement challenges people to not simply trust what is being reported.
Research for yourself.
Think for yourself.
This movement is not about one person or a group of people.
WE, THE PEOPLE.
You are witnessing a FULL PANIC ATTACK by the FAKE NEWS MEDIA & COVERT ALT MEDIA AFFILIATES (foreign gov’t).
They cannot contain or defeat what they do not understand.
Is any of this normal?
Think sealed indictments count.
Think resignations of CEOs.
Think resignations of Senators.
Think resignations of Congress.
Think termination of sr FBI…
Think termination of sr DOJ…
Attacks will only intensify.
Ask yourself a simple question – WHY????
>Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says what is going on with Donald J. Trump “is an ongoing coup to remove a duly elected President.” Shipp contends, “This is a huge constitutional crisis like the country has never seen before. This makes Watergate look like a Sunday school class.”
Its been a while /mlpol/ and decided to check this thread at the bottom. Im gonna have to read this one now.
The left isn't "evil", these are your fellow neighbors who you disagree with. Both perspectives are needed.
Right - Try to protect what's good, prevent bad changes; hierarchal systems; raise the economic ceiling; favor the concrete; conscientious personalities; survival/traditional values; authority/loyalty/purity; values optimized for post-apocalyptic wasteland; arise when people feel threatened; more strongly moved by negative emotions like fear; lawful good vs chaotic evil; prefer the past, traditional wisdom; fear uprising by the poor.
Left - Try to fix what's bad, change things for the better; egalitarian systems; raise the economic floor; favor the abstract; open-minded personalities; secular/rational/self-expression values; fairness/harmlessness; values optimized for futuristic utopia; arise when people feel safe and secure; more strongly moved by positive emotions like hope; chaotic good vs lawful evil; prefer the future, post-scarcity; fear oppression by the rich.
>>164311>fear uprising by the poor
You mean fear uprising by anti-white zionissts who are raised by their college professors? lolnope
>How journalists should not cover an online conspiracy theory
>The QAnon narrative shows the need for better practices in reporting on baseless claims and hoaxes. Here’s how the media can take action
>At a certain point, it became impossible not to talk about QAnon.
>The resulting coverage can be divided into three basic categories: explainers, which don’t just dive into the intricacies of the conspiracy, but often include a glossary of key terms; hair-on-fire warnings about how dangerous and frightening the conspiracy is; and smug declarations that of course Trump supporters believe in something so stupid. As Abby Ohlheiser has noted, the tone and breakneck frequency of this coverage was immediately uproarious to participants, a great victory for what their supporters call the “great awakening”, often delivered with a characteristically trollish wink.
>The networked coordination of participants, cycle after cycle of mainstream coverage, and participants’ subsequent raucous laughter show that while the QAnon narrative itself might be confusing and convoluted, the coverage surrounding the QAnon narrative has been distressingly predictable. The story has advanced like clockwork.
>I have been studying the gears of this mechanism for the last 10 years, beginning with my research into subcultural trolling on and around 4chan’s “/b/” board, at the time the site’s most infamous and active board (that title has since been usurped by 4chan’s /pol/ board).
>The primary focus of this work was the symbiotic relationship between participating trolls and the news media: the fact that trolls needed journalists to amplify their attacks (and they found the reporting funny), and some journalists needed trolls to give them sensational things to write about.
>The troll space has shifted in profound and striking ways over time (as I and my co-authors have previously argued). Participants on sites such as 4chan and 8chan have too; you can’t draw a perfectly straight line between trolling of the past and far-right extremism of the present.
>That said, many journalistic responses to trollish media manipulation tactics have remained constant. What this coverage has always done is incentivize precisely the behaviors it purports to condemn. In the process, it ensures that the same tactics will be used in the future – because the tactics are proven to work.
>The question before us is this: how can we all do this better, so that we are not, once again, forced to comment on stories like QAnon? How do we not paint ourselves into that same old corner?
>The first strategy is, most basically, not to report on things – at least not until the stories reach what Claire Wardle and Hossein Derakhshan have identified as the “tipping point”, when the story becomes relevant to people outside the community in which the behavior occurs.
>The second strategy, particularly important when covering hate, is to employ what Donovan and danah boyd describe as “strategic silence”. Just because a group does or says something doesn’t mean it bears repeating. There are other factors to consider before reporting, most notably what impact the coverage will have on the targets of the potential story’s subjects, whether that impact is further intimidation, dehumanization, or physical harm.
>Coverage isn’t just about the coverage itself, in other words. How and whether to cover a story must also hinge on what the story might do, and whose interests it will ultimately serve.
>In the case of QAnon, debunking and explainer stories can be interesting and helpful for readers who already believe the conspiracy is absurd; they provide those readers more information, greater contextual understanding, and a richer vocabulary for describing something they already know.
>For other audiences, however, attempts to debunk and explain the intricacies of the story can have a very different impact. First, the people spreading the conspiracy couldn’t ask for a better outcome; journalists covering the story help spread the narrative so much further and so much faster than it would have traveled otherwise. Participants in the QAnon narrative have giddily affirmed exactly this point; posts to the “Great Awakening” subreddit have outrightly thanked journalists for the coverage and for the resulting wave of new participants.
>More concerningly, for those who sincerely believe the conspiracy to be true, or for those who may not be true believers but who do truly mistrust mainstream journalism, debunkings can actually serve to confirm the story – a logically valid conclusion to draw if someone believes that everything journalists say is a lie. (For more on this head-spinning complication, see Alice Marwick’s exploration of why people share false narratives, and Francesca Tripodi’s analysis of “alternative facts” and news sources within conservative political thought).
(2/2)>Beyond asking what impact a story might have, journalists must ask what is not known about the story, and how this lack of knowledge undermines clear-headed threat assessments.
>For example, the overwhelming majority of QAnon coverage has taken for granted that the people who participate in the QAnon narrative believe the narrative. Some sure seem to. But in an environment ruled by Poe’s law, an online axiom stating that sincerity online is often indistinguishable from satire, it is not possible to know who is genuinely sold on the narrative, who is pretending to be sold to mess with reporters, and who is doing a little bit of both.
Denialism: what drives people to reject the truth
>By operating on the unchallenged, unquestioning assumption that everyone who holds the proverbial or literal “Q” sign is fully convinced of the conspiracy’s veracity, reporters don’t just help spread the narrative, they lend credence to it. After all, taking the narrative so seriously signals that it is in fact worth taking seriously. Reporters’ credulous coverage also feeds into a range of unintended narratives. For those who are actively engaged in media manipulation, it underscores’ journalists gullibility and exploitability (and is very funny to participants). For those who believe the narrative sincerely, it affirms that QAnon adherents are really on to something; otherwise mainstream journalists wouldn’t be in such a panic.
>The final question reporters must ask themselves stems from the fact that journalists aren’t just part of the game of media manipulation. They’re the trophy. Consequently, before they publish a word, journalists must seriously consider what role they’ll end up playing in the narrative, and whose work they’ll end up doing as a result.
>In the context of the QAnon story, participants’ efforts to pressure, even outright harass, reporters into engaging with the story has been widely interpreted as proof of how seriously participants take the story, and therefore as proof of how worried we all should be.
>We should all be worried. But what we should be most worried about is the fact that too many journalists have continued to respond “how high?” when media manipulators demand that they jump.http://archive.li/kQeNGhttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/06/online-conspiracy-theory-journalism-qanon
Smart article. So is it a positive or negative feed back loop?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_feedback >>159372
I'm not a centrist, I'm lower left quadrant. There are optimal answers to things, and it's good to settle on them, but they require careful thinking. Reality isn't fuzzy and subjective, it's just nuanced and complex, which can look fuzzy from a distance.
I actually found my way here while searching around for post-ironic and meta-ironic memes because I'm fascinated by recursion and memetics. I'd qualify as /mlp/ but not /pol/.
You know, I knew there was lots of crossover between /mlp/ and /pol/, but it still feels like an odd pairing. They both seem to have started out "ironically" and evolved into sincerity, and lately I've come to believe that nothing stays ironic forever. You are what you pretend to be.
Have to ask, what's your take on the supposed cultural feminization of men? Since, well, enjoying mlp would seem to be caving into that. Not trolling; actually curious here.
File: 1533698513377.jpg (Spoiler Image, 195.81 KB, 1026x616, tenshi bery nice origins.jpg)
>>164482>I've come to believe that nothing stays ironic forever.
Your pic is absolute proof of that, see my pic for its origin.
>Have to ask, what's your take on the supposed cultural feminization of men? Since, well, enjoying mlp would seem to be caving into that.
There was an attempt with the show to make a sort of Lord of the Rings that adults and children could enjoy. Faust attempted to adultify MLP. It worked.
I love juxtaposition within it you can see a metaview.
…>Is Q a Sasha Baron Cohen-esque hoax, a way to say, “Look how dumb and gullible these Deplorables are?” Perhaps, but like Hillary’s insult, it has backfired. What has emerged is a community of people eager to determine the truth, a group of patriotic citizens celebrating the notion of “Power to the People.”>We could find out tomorrow the whole thing is a sham. But the belief “Where we go one, we go all” is no lark. It is “One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”>Instead, I have to wonder what would motivate the mainstream media to erupt in such a unified chorus of contempt? What is so ghastly about people researching for themselves matters affecting the nation’s governance? Wrestling with questions posed in a Socratic method, forcing readers to think, to debate, to share? Perhaps getting it wrong, perhaps getting it right?>Even if a prank that’s grown out of hand, a well-meaning amusement or an educational game gone wild, what’s the problem? What is it about a community that believes in a government of the people, by the people and for the people that has the media minds so hostile?>Simple: A public that believes in each other and America’s principles more than our government and media institutions poses a mortal threat.>Those institutions vowed, “We’ll stop it.”>The Q movement says, “Guess again.”http://archive.is/qnDm6https://stream.org/so-what-is-q-and-why-is-msm-suddenly-targeting-it/
>Then, late last year, while knocking around on the internet one night, I came across a long series of posts originally published on 4chan, an anonymous message board. They described a sinister global power struggle only dimly visible to ordinary citizens. On one side of the fight, the posts explained, was a depraved elite, bound by unholy oaths and rituals, secretly sowing chaos and strife to create a pretext for their rule. On the other side was the public, we the people, brave and decent but easily deceived, not least because the news was largely scripted by the power brokers and their collaborators in the press. And yet there was hope, I read, because the shadow directorate had blundered. Aligned during the election with Hillary Clinton and unable to believe that she could lose, least of all to an outsider, it had underestimated Donald Trump—as well as the patriotism of the US military, which had recruited him for a last-ditch battle against the psychopathic deep-state spooks. The writer of the 4chan posts, who signed these missives “Q,” invited readers to join this battle. He—she? it?—promised to pass on orders from a commander and intelligence gathered by a network of spies.
>I was hooked.
>Known to its fan base as QAnon, the tale first appeared last year, around Halloween. Q’s literary brilliance wasn’t obvious at first. His obsessions were unoriginal, his style conventional, even dull. He suggested that Washington was being purged of globalist evildoers, starting with Clinton, who was awaiting arrest, supposedly, but allowed to roam free for reasons that weren’t clear. Soon a whole roster of villains had emerged, from John McCain to John Podesta to former president Obama, all of whom were set to be destroyed by something called the Storm, an allusion to a remark by President Trump last fall about “the calm before the storm.” Clinton’s friend and supporter Lynn Forrester de Rothschild, a member by marriage of the banking family abhorred by anti-Semites everywhere, came in for special abuse from Q and Co.—which may have contributed to her decision to delete her Twitter app. Along with George Soros, numerous other bigwigs, the FBI, the CIA, and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey (by whom the readers of Q feel persecuted), these figures composed a group called the Cabal. The goal of the Cabal was dominion over all the earth. Its initiates tended to be pedophiles (or pedophilia apologists), the better to keep them blackmailed and in line, and its esoteric symbols were everywhere; the mainstream media served as its propaganda arm. Oh, and don’t forget the pope.
>As the posts piled up and Q’s plot thickened, his writing style changed. It went from discursive to interrogative, from concise and direct to gnomic and suggestive. This was the breakthrough, the hook, the innovation, and what convinced me Q was a master, not just a prankster or a kook. He’d discovered a principle of online storytelling that had eluded me all those years ago but now seemed obvious: The audience for internet narratives doesn’t want to read, it wants to write. It doesn’t want answers provided, it wants to search for them. It doesn’t want to sit and be amused, it wants to be sent on a mission. It wants to do.
>Preposterous, huh? Well, the Q people don’t think so. Indeed, they feel we’ll soon come over to their side, once we understand the true relationship between Q’s crumbs and the subsequent news events that the crumbs predicted. The North Korean peace talks, for example, which some students of Q saw coming last winter. Or the scandalous revelations about Facebook’s illicit peddling of users’ data. “Do you believe in coincidences?” asks Q repeatedly, and the answer he obviously wants is no. That’s why his minions labor to make connections between such disparate phenomena as the flight paths of jumbo jets and the alleged escape plans of A-list fugitives. “Expand your thinking,” Q exhorts his legions, particularly when they falter in their cryptography or lag in their online detective work. He’s the author as case officer, tasking slow-witted readers with enigmas whose solutions he already knows but insists that they discover on their own.
>And his posts aren’t all nonsense. Some are quite uncanny in the way they anticipate the headlines. On March 9, he told his troops to watch for “liquidity events” in the stock charts of social media companies. Days later, Facebook fell into disgrace and suffered a sizable market sell-off. Then there are the intriguing correlations between the posts and the president’s Twitter outbursts, which Q would have us think are synchronized with split-second precision. The proofs he offers involve comparing time stamps, and mathematically minded Qbots swear by them. That they’re willing to fuss with such puzzles is a testament to the compulsive power of Q’s methods. By leaving more blanks in his stories than he fills in, he activates the portion of the mind that sees faces in clouds and hears melodies in white noise.
>Could Q have actual foreknowledge? Was he somehow the oracle he purported to be? Having followed the posts for months now, I wish I could summarily dismiss them, but so outrageous is our current reality, so reliably unpredictable and odd, that it does not seem impossible to me that there might exist an internet seer stationed in the White House whose job is to brief lowly geeks on global intrigues. My friend Matthew, who saw combat in Afghanistan and has reported on intelligence issues, believes that Q may be the result of psyops conceived to maintain morale among Trump’s base. The trick, he says, is to fashion a mental filter that will make Trump’s losses look like victories, his missteps like chess moves, his caprices like plans. After all, if most news is fake, as Trump insists, the real news must be hidden out of sight. Q claims to offer glimpses of it, along with warnings about what would happen if we beheld it all at once. To wake in an instant to the Luciferian horrors of the Cabal’s perverted machinations would be like rushing forth from Plato’s cave—blinding, debilitating, maybe deadly. Instead, Q leads us gently toward the light, a patient guide, like Virgil was to Dante.
>One night this spring, in northwest Arkansas, Matthew and I stayed up past midnight interpreting several recent posts from Q that trembled on the verge of clarity, seeming to offer highly privileged insights into a crisis rumored to be forthcoming. I sat on the couch. He paced. We thought out loud, competing to crack the message and setting different values for different variables. We argued our cases as the night slid by; we raved away in an ecstasy of guesswork. Q was being good to us. Q was delivering everything we craved.
>Q is part fabulist, part fortune-teller, holding up a computer-screen-shaped mirror to our golden age of fraudulence. He composes in inklings, hunches, and wild guesses, aware that our hunger for order grows more acute the longer it goes unsatisfied. Q calls the vista he’s gradually revealing the map, and he knows how badly his people crave it, which is why he doesn’t disclose in one fell swoop Trump’s strategy for national salvation. A hope fulfilled is also a hope exhausted. Tension and foreboding, on the other hand, are thrills that keep on thrilling, for fear can never be fully put to rest. Even if his followers’ dreams come true and the Clintons, Podestas, Schmidts, and Dorseys are hustled off in chains to distant gulags, and even if Kim Jong-un is released from the CIA contract that requires him to play a nuclear madman to keep the world off balance so America’s spymasters can rule it, one can never be sure the Cabal won’t rise again. And it will, of course, since that’s what archfiends do: rise from the dead.
>The novel is the same way. It dies and dies so it can live and live. The Q tale may be loathsome and deeply wicked, a magnet for bigots and ignoramuses whose ugly dreams it caters to and ratifies, but as a feat of New Age storytelling I find it curiously encouraging. The imagination lives. A talented bard can still grab and keep an audience. Now for a better story, with higher themes. Now for the bracing epic of recovery that the dark wizards have shown us how to write. http://archive.is/s1QDghttps://harpers.org/archive/2018/06/the-wizard-of-q/
Pizza and Molech special edition set….
I wanted to add a humorous response, but it is just to fucked up. Best I came up wit was that at lest it is a fitting combination.>>164495
As you stated in >>164490>Is Q a Sasha Baron Cohen-esque hoax, a way to say, “Look how dumb and gullible these Deplorables are?” Perhaps, but like Hillary’s insult, it has backfired.
I hope what we are seeing is the creativity and weaponized autism being unleashed. People who were following what happened with Q were keeping the Qanon stuff on the low key. Doing research in the background so they, as Q says (paraphrasing), can be the guides in the time to come.
Now that it has gone mainstream it is time to start telling what they know. Start pumping out infographics, and making people aware. So I hope we might find ourself in a new little timeline where /cfg/-esq (clinton foundation general) and election style art and information is being pumped out.
Oh yes, that pic's definitely post-ironic. I welcome post-irony; I think irony can be funny but there's usually an attached cynicism so it's probably bad for culture itself to be infused with irony at the level we've been seeing.
/s4s/: originally was ironic creation of sincere memes, is now post-ironic.
r/dankmemes: originally was sincere creation of ironic memes, is now meta-ironic.
More examples: Vaporwave is the sincere appreciation of ironic music; not sure what would count as the ironic creation of sincere, heartfelt music, though. MLP is new sincerity. It has pinkie pie breaking the fourth wall, acknowledging postmodernism, but the show is incredibly sincere and heartfelt, so it's likely an example of metamodernism. Maybe I'm overthinking it though.
>WWG1WGA: The greatest communications event in history
Having applied all of my integrity, intellect and insight to researching the matter, my belief is that we are witnessing right now one of the greatest communications events in history. Indeed, it is arguably the singularly greatest. So, what is this event, and why does it deserves this extraordinary description? The answers are to be found in how the (Western) mass media has been trapped by the most exquisitely constructed double bind.
>If I am correct (and many share my view), then it portends the imminent collapse of trust in all mass media services and social media platforms. That is because they are implicated in systemic, widespread and longstanding organised crime — that also encompasses much of our political and financial system. If this is unequivocally demonstrated to be so, then the public will unite in disgust at the media’s treacherous betrayal of its journalistic duties.
>On the other hand, if I/we are wrong, then the power of social media and propaganda to create and inflate bubbles of insanity — trapping intelligent people of goodwill — greatly exceeds anything we dared to imagine. The information age will be darkened by having divided society, destroying a consensus reality.
>That’s one heck of a story too! For our culture shall inevitably further atomise, as our bonds of shared values and mutual understanding break apart. So too may the constitutional boundaries — and consequent rule of law — that help to keep the peace.
Oooo.. So it's possibly an declassification order signed by Trump. Or whatever would be needed to force the release of the documents.
2018-05-19 Q posts the signature.
2018-06-27 Video is from: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvU-dzrr9e0eE5T2vwPnpBw
2018-07-31 Trump tweets.
So they may have just used the Q post signature as a part template.
They did a lot of work just to use part of the signature. But what leads me to think the video was made inhouse is that it isn't a link to a YT video, it is an raw embedded video uploaded to the realdonaldtrup twitter account. Usually when it is an "video by a supporter" it is a retweet or a link to a YT video.
>>164861>2018-06-27 Video is from>>164867
My reading comprehension is not fully working at the moment
Hmmmm. Could be coincident (not knowing the frequency of him tweeting etc). If he is part of th Q people there is two scenarios he did a little slipup; Q people have actively used twitter so they are aware of potential connections being made. But then again the time between the tweet and Q post is also far enough apart to give deniability.
My parents showed me one of those memes and told me it was russian bots. I told them I helped make some lel. Fucking boomers.
>>165182>I elieve he may call you to violence, not to save our home, but mereely for entertainment
Honestly, I don't see Q advocating violence so much as stirring the Alex Jones pot with his cryptic and sometimes obnoxious attitude. That being said, I find that quote to be a reasonable worry. Not like the right doesn't have problems with people who would do that.
>Tripcode: ITPb.qbhqo -> Password: Matlock
>Tripcode: UW.yye1fxo -> Password: M@tlock!
>Tripcode: xowAT4Z3VQ -> Password: Freed@m-
>Tripcode: 2jsTvXXmXs -> Password: F!ghtF!g
>Tripcode: 4pRcUA0lBE -> Password: NowC@mes
>Tripcode: CbboFOtcZs -> Password: StoRMkiL
>Tripcode: A6yxsPKia. -> Password: WeAReQ@Q
Amazing degree of OpSec awareness there Q.
Whether Q is true or not doesn't matter. Look at the massive scale redpilling of the boomers he has caused. We can only applaud this. True or not, either case we win.
True. But I think the internet would have naturally lead to this anyway. Q is exploiting what happened with pizzagate/Trump2016 on 4chan.
Turns out there are two tripcode systems. The low grade system uses name#password and is limited to processing the first 8 chars. The second is name##password which pays attention to every char you can fit in the name field. Q used the low grade one for 9 months and (except for Matlock) used words easily associated with Q. These should have been hacked fairly quickly and either means 1) Q is not technical and so not intel agency, or 2) wanted to be hacked to keep up the drama. This looks like a political op and not a intel op. And that probably means Trump is trolling…. again.
Strange that he uses passwords that are just a few steps above Podesta's "Password".
But if there is a few posters under Q it might be they made the passwords easy for the ease of sharing it among the group.
But I have always wondered why Q chose to use insecure tripcodes "user#pass" and not the secure one "user##pass".
I hope it is more than Trump trolling and an actual intel op. Still if it is just Trump trolling he is dishing out some good nuggets.
If I ever larp, my weak trip code passwords are going to spell out a message that says that I predicted this.
you have been accused of being the ledditor.
defend yourself, witch.
Everything has meaning. - Q# 74, 176, 1226, 78, 797, 318, 885, 968, 900, 753, 1676, 886, 461, 988, 144.>>165432
Reddit > MLPOL
>>165434>Reddit > MLPOL
Reeeeeeeeeeeeee…I will forcefeed you hand-/hoof-holding to cure you
Soon it will all be over
💖 But reddit will go on 💖 💖 and I will finally be able to go back home to r/politics 💖
Seriously what are you doing here mate
Gateway Pundit goes pro-Q
>Ascending: Legacy Media Spotlight Propels QAnon Movement>Over the last week the Washington Post, New York Times, CNN. NBC News, CBS News, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Vox, and the Daily Beast have all written a plethora of over 20 articles on the Qanon Movement all using highly similar talking points to marginalize the movement.>Instead it’s just pushing it into the cultural mainstream– the Streisand Effect. The liberal mainstream media will never learn.>The Washington Post published three articles in the last four days. Crazytown– clearly the mainstream media and their deepstate handlers see the movement as a threat coming up to the midterms.>Such a coordinated major media barrage of negative coverage hasn’t been seen since Wikileaks published The Podesta Emails.
…>By all objective standards, the popularity of the movement is on the rise. Yet, QAnon remains by design inherently mysterious. No one knows QAnon’s actual identity, as the information is exclusively published on the anonymous forum 8chan. In an age increasingly characterized by big tech profiteering from the sale of users’ private metadata and algorithm-based censorship, 8chan remains one of the last online vestiges that values freedom of thought, speech, and information.
…>QAnon’s content is equally enigmatic, embedded with multiple levels of meaning, mirrored codes, info-graphs, markers, connections, video clips, original photographic images, and coordinated timestamps, all converging into a highly sophisticated information treasure map of sorts. QAnon has stated that the communications must be expressed in an indirect manner as the specific details are sensitive classified material, which by law cannot be openly stated.
>These communications have inspired a 24/7 global research gathering on 8chan’s QResearch Board, composed of tens of thousands of anonymous researchers, who scour all open source information to substantiate, interpret, and expand upon QAnon’s posts. The posts along with the best of the anon research are sent across the social media ecosystem at an astounding rate via a loyal vox populi distribution system. In a recent article, Time claimed that QAnon was among the 10 most influential voices on the internet today.
…>From an objective perspective, given the unprecedented number of Congress and Senate seats suddenly vacated by members of both parties, combined with the abrupt resignations of hundreds of prominent corporate CEO’s, combined with the uncovering of what may prove to be historic corruption at the highest levels of the US Government, all occurring contemporaneously, is QAnon’s central theme truly farfetched?
>For savvy media consumers, who have chosen to question the motives and veracity of the major media giants, the logical question is — why? Why would a supposed conspiracy theory promulgated by an anonymous party on 8chan suddenly become such a high priority for such notable news agencies all at the same time? This line of logic inevitably leads to the next question — which one of these two diametrically opposed narratives to believe? In the words of QAnon, “The choice to know will ultimately be yours.”http://archive.is/fbTG1https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/08/ascending-legacy-media-spotlight-propels-qanon-movement/
Do you have your t-shirt yet, anon? Can we get some in the store??
The sealed indictments may not be indictments but could be routine documents. https://youtu.be/LMFQXtlsZ5A
Good read. Thanks.>>165665
Hope we get adjusted numbers to account for the points raised in the video.
Ah I see Googles good old lets show "reliable sources" first in search results is working just as planned.
Don't be an Uncle Sugarcube.
The Pony reich is best reich.
Q is not an intel op. >>165188
They would not make these mistakes.
Q is a Trump political op. POTUS would know many things early and know many rumours from his time in DC.
It looks more and more like it might be Trump shitposting, But the fun thing about this is that you could argue that the lack of OpSec is a rouse to give dependability. But even if it is only Trump it is still the biggest inside drops ever. Also the kind of openness a government should have. The politics and geopolitical conduct would be so much more fun to follow if all governments dropped inside info like this.
The internet (unless it gets captured) guarantees this. Wikileaks type events are the future but less formalized also. Lame Stream media is over, and is now reduced to reporting on the internet rather than its previous controlling the narrative. The counter-reaction will be a flood of false leaks flooding the net which will achieve the usual human situation, reducing everything to shit again.
>>165734> The counter-reaction will be a flood of false leaks flooding the net which will achieve the usual human situation, reducing everything to shit again.
That is so true, and sad. One of the oldest and most effective trucks is to hide in the noise.
What is the most intriguing or impactful thing he revealed?
The thing that makes Q interesting is the times he/they gives clues that they in fact is in direct contact with Trump (or it is Trump himself). This is the spice that makes all the other interesting to investigate.
There have been a few droplets of information that have been dropped a day or more before news broke like the House of Saud being cleaned a bit (though I think that was one of the more obscure post to decode). I will not claim at all to know about all Q has posted, so there is probably others that can give better answers.
Probably the best one is Q describing the NK situation and how it was resolved prior to the POTUS meeting.
>Now think about the timing of POTUS traveling to China/SK. I’ve said too much. God bless, Patriots.
>Some things must remain classified to the very end. NK is not being run by Kim, he’s an actor in the play. Who is the director? The truth would sound so outrageous most Americans would riot, revolt, reject, etc.>The pedo networks are being dismantled.
>Four carriers & escorts in the pacific?>Why is that relevant?>To prevent other state actors from attempting to harm us during this transition? Russia / China?>Or conversely all for NK? Or all three.
>KIM TO CHINA REPRESENTS SOMETHING VITAL [KEY].
>Who else was at the meeting in China?>LIVE from CHINA.
>Why did Kim travel to China?>Why was travel impossible in the past?>What changed?
>Does Kim look nervous prior to the 'BIG' meeting w/ POTUS?>Did they already meet long ago?>Is he preparing at his hotel w/ his advisors ahead of time?>Or, is he out enjoying the 'FREEDOM' he never had in the past?>Deal done?>Safe?>On guard?>POTUS moves up departure - why?>The World is Safer.
The way I see this whole debacle with his tripcodes is this: if he's getting this information from the deep web, he'd be more secure to ensure his safety and anonymity. If it were Trump shitposting, and he's not that well-versed in technology or online security, then he'd probably not know that a second tripcode format existed. If it's Trump, he doesn't need to use the deep web for this info and can just relay it from his intelligence team or advisors.
So, my thory is it's either Trump or someone within the white house.
its someone within the white house. You've seen how Trump weaponized twitter to his advantage, but you also know he can't tweet about super-crazy shit cuz then he'll be labelled a conspiracy theorist. And yet, you also know the kind of crazy shit Trump is and has been aware of (and further has become aware of) that - if his presented persona is accurate - he would want to tell the people one way or another. He is undoubtably aware of the influence that 4chan, Reddit, and other fairly comparable groups have, not least of which is through memes.
He knows the savvy shitposters will get the message(s) and run with it, he knows how to work a crowd and how to subtly make "Did he just?" references that will draw attention to Q, and meanwhile the left and the MSM scratches their heads cuz they've never seen a tactic anything like this.
If I were in vegas, I would say its DJT Jr.
NOW you got my attention.
One thing that worries me if this whole QAnon thing is real and he actually is connected to Trump. It's how idiots are trying to talk about it on Twitter and wearing Q shirts and bringing Q signs to Trump rallies. It draws too much attention to the QAnon posts. Your opponents, your enemies can easily read the posts and bring about counter measures and make the whole thing look even more stupid than it already is.
Forgot to mention, if there is counter measures, it's going to make busting pedos and the pedowood ring much harder.
I fear that the Military Industrial Complex is not slowing down, as Trump had promised, but is building up for a new offensive, likely against Iran. I really want to believe Trump will lead a more peaceful America, but with this rate of bombings and with a plethora of Bush-era warhawks, this hope is growing more and more unrealistic.
What is Trump's game? Is he appeasing the MIC to get time to deal with the neo-Marxists and pedophiles? Will he in his second term finally clear out the right arm of Zog? Or is he just another partisan in sheep's clothing, willing to launch another endless war that will prolong (perhaps hasten) America's decline? Is Q just a clever psyop to rekindle a blind civic nationalism and jingoism that had been lost after decades of conflict?
This whole situation reminds me more and more of the ending of "The Wanderer's Choice." https://cheekyvideos.net/murdoch/The%20Wanderers%20Choice.html
almost like it's a larp or something
I hope the Pizzagate gets exposed soon. Q played dangerously calling out @s8tn twitter account and need to deliver something to regain trust.
>>166254>“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Remember all the "stringers" and promises at the beginning, and now Q was starting to get promising press, and then @s8n happens. What if Q sabotages main stream support and seeks grass root support only? Make civilians their own journalists and end corporate/corrupt/centralized journalism. Self-sabotage can get rid of unwanted attention.
It could be, and also a bit strange given how much the media have gone after Q that they haven't hammered on on this. It might be because it is the one tiny flaw in a sea of truth, and if the media had started to question this one flaw, they would leave themselves open to questions why they don't address all the other messages they can't argue against.
It is hard to tell. There is so many possibilities.
Is QAnon the new 'Anonymous'? The thought just struck me. Just as Anonymous wasn't one person (past tense, cuz reasons) and likewise the hacker known as 4chan, I suddenly get the impression that QAnon is more likely a network.
I imagine it probably started with one person, likely a disaffected intel operative who got fed up (cuz who wouldn't?) with all the surrepticious shit that is/has gone on in and around the white house.
But as with many intel operatives over the years wrt 4chan and Anonymous, I would wager it caught on. Caught on in the sense that suddenly there was a 'priest' whom individuals could 'confess sins to and through'.
In a sense, I have to wonder if the recent "Anonymous targets Q" bit isn't a subtle attempt to push/keep QAnon material in the mainstream.
Is it just me, or does Alex IMMEDIATELY mention Q? Like literally, in the first 2 seconds. o_O
[Last 50 Posts]
Further I wasn't looking for Q shit at the time, so I'm quite intrigued
Starts talking Q again