Furthest Right

They Want You To Lose Hope

One of the companies on my résumé served as a temporary stop because it was in trouble. It had become a dark organization, which means that the employees were using it for their own ends at the expense of necessary business operations, especially quality and risk.

This made it a typical sloppy corporation, with lots of warring departments and “rock stars” in each who periodically did their own thing, got into the news, and departed ninety days later for greener pastures. This happened with its national design contest win back in the late 1990s.

At that time, people were competing for the most usable and elegant websites possible to present corporate content. Several of our teams submitted designs. One team, staffed with “rock stars” who spent most of their time going to conferences, announced that big news was coming down the pipe.

We did not have to wait long. Two days later, the rumor came in from one of the VPs that our team was on the short list to win the big prize. Someone else found out from an East Coast contact that we were in fact going to win this one. Industry “experts” spoke out in columns about it.

Things got to the point where our executives were in touch with the contest administrators. Our team received a number of awards in-house, with it always mentioned faux sotto voce that they were the “rumored” winners of the national contest.

Never to let an opportunity go to waste, those same executives went out and sold a bunch of clients on the win. Those rock stars went out and got themselves new employment contracts based on the victory, but we would not hear about those for another seventy-six days.

As it came down to the line, a number of national publications mentioned the “sure thing” that our team would take home the crown. It became a matter of pride in the office, with people talking a lot about it. Then everything went quiet for awhile, the calm before the storm.

Turns out that no such win occurred; the prize went to some team we had never heard of, from a much smaller shop in a less cool zip code. However, at that point, we already had banked on it. The sales contracts were signed; the rock stars moved on to fatter titles at new jobs.

Everything about the contest went into the memory hole. It did not disappear from our documents so much as was no longer added, so as things were updated, any mention of the contest or even our previous wins ceased to be there. Soon it was as if the contest did not exist.

We are in a similar condition at present: the Left has, through the coordinated celebration of a Harris/Biden win, proclaimed a new president.

Now, why would they do that, if the count is still dubious, allegations of voter fraud abound, evidence of voter fraud is emerging, and confidence in the political system is at an all-time low?

Perhaps Brett’s rule can help us:

Whatever people tell you as narrative is not true, but whatever they act on when they have something to gain is, at least in their eyes.

When someone has to tell you something about themselves, it is not obvious; this can mean that it is new or hidden information, or more likely, that they are trying to convince you to accept what they are saying in order to parse it, and in doing so, to make it an assumption you use in interpreting the rest of what you see.

For example, a teenager is tasked with mowing the lawn. He asks his dad, “Do I have to mow if it rains?” The father says no, then checks the skies, which look a little cloudy. Later that afternoon he realizes it never rained, but the lawn was not mowed.

This teenager inserted an idea — that it was going to rain — into the narrative as a way of convincing the dad to stop thinking about whether the lawn was mowed or not, but whether it was going to rain or not. In the meantime, the teenager screwed off and had fun. Maybe that person was me, once upon a time.

Humans are rationalizing creatures. We tell ourselves stories when we are about to fall asleep about how our lives are going well, there are no better options, and we are on the path to victory, therefore we do not need to change our thinking or actions.

If you can stick a notion into that rationalizing process, where the dad is thinking that all is well if the lawn is mowed, you can redirect it to your assumption. This is how our egos control the rest of our minds, and how we control others.

We are being gaslit the same way. The Left is using a “prevalence induct concept change,” meaning that people if they see enough other people saying something, tend to believe it as true. We rationalize it as true in order to face the other option, which is that mass insanity is going on.

As the old saying goes, the skies are darkest before dawn. Right now, holding true to what we know — that President Trump won this election, that the Democrats cheated just like they did in the 1800s with their political machines, and that the populist wave is successfully opposing Leftism — seems difficult because so many people and so many powerful agencies are shouting out otherwise.

To quote a great thinker, “I don’t believe a word.”

No one does a mass blitz like this unless they are scared. If they are Leftists, who preach the naturally popular “you do not need to change, just spread around the free stuff,” the only reason that they are sacred is that they are failing because their policies have brought failure.

The current Leftist media blitz resembles the psychological warfare campaigns of the Cold War. It is designed to demoralize you, to make you give up and give in, to let go of hope and settle for more of the same. If they win, not only do they have power, but they have crushed resistance.

The Trump campaign knew that this was coming because the Leftists have done this in 2016 as well as most other elections. They also knew that, after the Clinton years, when diversity really accelerated, elections have been demographic contests and tend to be close calls.

Remember Bush v. Gore:

Ultimately, the contest focused on Florida. Networks initially projected Gore the winner in Florida, but later they declared that Bush had opened an insurmountable lead.

A tug-of-war ensued between Harris, who initially sought to certify the state’s election results on November 14, and the Florida Supreme Court, which ruled that hand recounts of questionable ballots should proceed in four counties and that the results must be included in the state’s final count. In the month following the election, some 50 individual suits were filed concerning the various counts, recounts, and certification deadlines. On December 8, in a 4–3 decision, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that manual recounts should continue in all counties where a statistically significant number of undervotes were observed for the office of president.

The Bush campaign immediately filed suit, and the U.S. Supreme Court issued a writ of certiorari to take up the case the following day. On December 9, in a 5–4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Bush v. Gore that the manual recounts must halt, and it agreed to hear oral arguments from both parties. On December 11, the two sides presented their cases, Bush’s team asserting that the Florida Supreme Court had exceeded its authority by authorizing the recount of undervotes and Gore’s team stating that the case, having already been decided at the state level, was not a matter for consideration at the federal level. The following day, in a 7–2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Florida decision, holding that the various methods and standards of the recount process violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court ruled 5–4 on the remedy of the matter, with the majority holding that the Florida Supreme Court’s decision had created new election law—a right reserved for the state legislature—and that no recount could be held in time to satisfy a federal deadline for the selection of state electors.

Naturally this enraged Leftists, who believed that the election was “stolen.” Now we come to a similar case, but from the opposite angle: we have known bad actors doing fraudulent things, doubt about the count, and a recount will therefore be necessary to avoid making new election law.

Pursuing this strategy, Team Trump has approached gently. They have begun by working back the procedural errors, clearing aside the usual confusions and errors. After this, they can begin looking into the systematic use of fraudulent mail-in ballots by the Democrats.

The Left has refined this strategy for decades. They send out their operatives, almost all of whom work for the government in a different capacity, to sign up old people, alcoholics, the insane, the developmentally disabled, the homeless, and perhaps the dead, then fill out their ballots and hand them in.

Trump just got done with a Census fight in the courts:

The administration asked the Supreme Court to overturn the order granted in that case after it partially lost an appeal to the Ninth Circuit. The administration argued it needed to stop the count as soon as possible to complete data analysis in time to meet the statutory deadline to report census information to the president and Congress by Dec. 31.

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn a lower court order requiring the bureau to continue counting through the end of this month means the Census Bureau could end counting soon and move to an accelerated analysis phase to try to meet that deadline.

This means that Team Trump has accurate population data for all of the areas where votes are occurring, including occupation data, which allows them to separate live voters from incapacitated ones. Some reports allege that Team Trump also had the newly-minted Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency keeping an eye on the voting machines, and that Trumpian observers were inserted into the process to keep an eye on the counts.

Either way, this one will go to the courts, and the vote-cheating for which Democrats are famous — note the long history of Leftist vote fraud in the USA — will be revealed.

This will at the very least invalidate some results and send the question to the courts, who are going to find that local restrictions that were not the result of legislation were improper creation of laws, and for that reason, unenforceable. The vote totals will be adjusted.

Why are the Democrats so desperate? As usual, it’s the diversity:

He will repeal the ban on immigration from many Muslim-majority countries, and he will reinstate the program allowing “dreamers,” who were brought to the United States illegally as children, to remain in the country, according to people familiar with his plans.

The Left cares about one thing in this election, and that is the continued flow of third world people into America because these people, feeling alienated in a strange land because they do not resemble its founders, will always mostly vote against the majority and its interests.

That transfers power to the Left, forever, creating a camouflaged dictatorship where all parties serve the same interests. Those who have gained power during the Clinton years do not want to relinquish it.

Clinton set up a simple formula. Labor goes overseas, immigrant labor comes into the country, and everyone gets rich on money taken from the middle classes via taxation and transferred to government employees. Jobs become time-wasters and expenses go up, forcing people into compliance.

This enables what every Leftist dreams of, which is government-as-a-utility. That is, you cannot change your provider, must pay them every month, and they can control you by shutting off your access to the utility at any time, if they come up with a plausible reason.

They want to replace us and then rule through the votes of the nü-Americans. They need this because their rule, which has been consistent since 1945 or earlier, is failing because it has not achieved what it promised and brought massive other civilization-killing problems instead.

Team Trump knows that it cannot catch these people by ordinary because, following the Clinton model, they destroy all evidence, even innocent evidence, to conceal their tracks. They are lawyers and adept at “plausible deniability.” Trump must catch them in a falsifiable lie.

This strategy will be familiar to law enforcement. If they arrest a suspect, they might ask him if he was ever in a certain apartment where someone was killed, for example. If he says no, and they have his fingerprints on those walls, they have caught him in a falsifiable lie.

At that point, they have probable cause to get warrants and otherwise tear his life apart to find what he is hiding. In many cases, they get a warrant, lock him up, and then go to his home where they find something taken from the deceased. At that point, the case is over and the trial is a formality.

The sting operation here consists of letting the Democrats seem to be getting away with their con, forcing them to lie about it, and then using those lies to get to the answers that are normally hidden behind the Clinton-style wall of plausible deniability.

Nothing remains but for us to do our logic tree here:

  1. Trump wins. If all goes well for Team Trump, fraudulent voting is discovered and discarded, Trump revealed to have won by a landslide, and he goes on to a victorious term two where he can without running afoul of defamation law refer to Democrats as criminals.
  2. Trump loses. The Left somehow blackmails, bribes, or otherwise manipulates judges, or Leftist judges step in, and obstruct the Trump team. Biden takes office and immediately begins reversing Trump plans; the economy goes into a deep malaise as a result, China takes over, and the resulting political instability ends in bad things. Trump wins in 2024.
  3. Election do-over. The courts take one look at this mess and say NO U, but recognize the votes are suspect and therefore, we have another election. This makes it clear that Democrats just ended American democracy, stability, and world leadership. Trump probably wins because China cannot afford to buy another round of dead people voting.
  4. Election stands. Trump wins everything, but for political reasons, no do-over occurs and no recount saves him. Biden assumes the role of a lame duck from the start, America goes into civil war conditions, China is forced into war by its failing economy, and Trump wins in 2024.
  5. Leftist coup. Seeing what Trump is doing, the Left panics and seizes power Full Communist style. Civil War kicks off, China goes to war, Europe backs away, and the economy tanks. This polarizes everyone halfway functional against the Left, and makes them formally into the New Soviets in the history books (which they will not write).

People want solid predictions, but the grim truth of reality is that it is nuanced with many unknowns and unpredictable twists. Surely the Left has some kind of defense against this, although the hysterical Nancy Pelosi phone call suggests less competence than one might think. Courts are staffed by people, and for all we know, the Obama-era military will step in.

However, all of these outcomes in our logic tree lead to one conclusion: identification of the Democrats as the bad guy, lack of faith in democracy, and polarization of America to the point where people will talk seriously about physical removal of Leftists (to Venezuela, via boat, we hope).

The Left will find it difficult to hang onto this election and also keep up the facade that they are a moderate, responsible, and pro-America party. The planned demographic replacement will take center stage. Internal division among the Left will cause them to come apart.

None of these are savory paths to tread, but they may be necessary. We do not know what the future holds, but Team Trump has blocked all of the good options for the Left, which means that their decay continues.

What you can do in the meantime, above all else, is to take heart. Have courage. Summon your fighting spirit. Deny the will to give in and accept the mediocrity; summon the determination to resurrect Western Civilization. The dawn comes sooner than you think.

Tags: , , , ,

Share on FacebookShare on RedditTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn