“When the World Economic Forum rolled out their advertising campaign for The Great Reset it was supposed to be the victory lap for Globalism. Coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic, the subsequent global financial crisis unleashed a flood of government funny money that was supposed to buy our way to their perpetual prosperity.
Don’t take my word for it. Take the word of one of the chief architects of the Great Reset, Klaus von Commie Schnitzel’s right hand man, Yuval Noah Harari.
Spoken like the true authoritarian that he is, Harari can only see violence and chaos. He’s not wrong. The violence and chaos coming, however, have their roots in his attempts (or complicity) in trying to force, through violence, a global order on humanity which humanity doesn’t want.
This push towards violence, however, can stop tomorrow. All that has to happen is for cretins like Harari, Soros, Schwab, Gates, and all the people behind them, to truly accept the fact that they have failed and cut a deal with us.
If they do that we can minimize the violence on the horizon. But that’s not going to happen because they’ve already told us over and over that the abuse will continue until morale improves.
The impending chaos and violence is coming precisely because of Isaac Newton’s 3rd law, popularly summarized as “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
It’s not coming because we ‘don’t have any answers.’ We have plenty of answers, Harari and his ilk simply don’t like them.
For decades we met their violence with a kind of silent resignation as the cost of upsetting this system far outweighed the benefit of being the first 2nd lieutenant out of the foxhole in No Man’s Land. But the costs for so many today for going along to get along far outweigh the benefits accruing to them.
And that’s why the protests all across the West are intensifying.
The Great Reset project came at us too fast and we quickly saw it for what it was. While it was being rolled out through COVID most went along to be good neighbors. As I’ve argued in the past, acquiescence to the insane lockdown rules didn’t come from most people being sheep willingly herded into
concentration happy camps. It came from a sense of wanting to be seen as cautious members of a community during a public crisis.
Of course there were some whose latent psychosis was triggered into being (*cough* Nassim Taleb *cough*), but the majority of people simply had their basic humanity weaponized against them.
Once the first wave of COVID ran its course and we saw how far they moved heaven and earth to silence actual cures for the virus, the Great Reset began morphing into the Great Awakening. And the evidence of people standing firm against any further degradation of our society for this nonsense grows daily.
The Great Diffusion?
Years ago I wrote about Everett Rogers’ Theory of Diffusion as it pertains to politics in general and the rise of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in specific.
Everett Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation Theory is applicable to politics as well as products. The idea being that it takes around 16% adoption for a new technology, ideology, etc. to have the potential to become something bigger. This was made popular by Malcolm Gladwell in his book Tipping Point.
This is the curve I was implicitly invoking in my recent article about humans being more wolf than sheep.
We went from comfortable wolves in a pack we thought protected us from the dangers of the world to anxious, nervous wolves wondering which one of us would stand up to the psychotic alpha leading us towards an abyss.
The alpha continues towards that abyss thinking it’s a giant game of chicken and that we will stay under his rule out of fear.
Many of us are in either a state of shock and/or denial about what’s been going on. But, as history has shown us, we don’t need a majority of people to fundamentally change the course of history.
But at the heart of my observation is the following: Who will you really become when you have nothing left to lose? Or better yet, where’s your loss threshold before the real you bares your canines?
Because that’s literally all I was saying. We all have a limit. And the idea that because your limit isn’t as low as mine or some rando on the intarwebz makes you a sheeple is exactly the type of condescending and unearned sense of entitlement that drives the very ghouls that are convening at Davos this week to force us to rebuild our trust in them.
Looking around social media and the headlines of protests around the world by the working class, which the managerial class of over-educated midwits despise to the core of their being, you can see we’re very close to if not past the 16% tipping point.
This is why Davos has put on the full court press to accelerate the decline and fall of western civilization. We can all feel it. We’re a little over a month into 2024 and a year’s worth of geopolitics has occurred in that time.
They can feel the whole project slipping away and this has to be nipped in the bud before it spreads into what Rogers called the ‘Early Majority.’ To that end this is why they were so hard on “vaccine hesitancy,” and launched the wars on Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine.
It’s why now anyone to the right of Karl Marx himself is a “Fascist!” and is a member of the “hard right.” This is to dissuade people from identifying with outgroups and shame them into qualifying all of their dissension from their norm with, “I’m not a racist but…” or “I don’t agree with everything they say but… “
The Gap into Conflict
But also embedded in that article was Geoffrey Moore’s refinement of Rogers’ Curve to include the “Chasm.” Getting to 16% adoption isn’t enough. The new thing can get to 16% easily by simply opposing that which is dominant. This is what Harari was implying, that we are just ab-reacting to the opposite of them, by saying that we only reject the liberal order but have nothing to replace it with.
This is why the new idea or product has to then rebrand itself into something more universal. It’s not enough to be against globalism or the WEF, we have to also be for something better.
That becomes a decision point for a lot of people. It’s the moment when the established idea, brand, etc. wakes up to the threat and fights back. This is what the 16% chasm represents, that gulf between opposition and affirmation.
This is also what Davos and their ilk are truly exceptional at managing. They keep the Overton Window framed over irrelevant side issues to ensure that a new majority doesn’t “cross the 16% chasm,” by uniting over that better solution that doesn’t include them.
I’m calling this group they are afraid of, “The Radical Center.”
This is why AfD got to 16% in 2018 as the anti-Merkel party, but was easily neutralized when they didn’t become the true “Alternative for Germany” party. Once they did that and the current Scholz-led government failed to protect the German middle class during and since COVID, they’ve become a real threat.
A mixture of this rebranding and entrenched arrogance of the German political establishment is what led to AfD’s rise to the mid-20s in German polling. And it’s why despite a hastily-organized hit on them for an unconfirmed secret meeting in Postdam over deportation, they are still polling above 16%.
They are now the kind of threat that requires more drastic action, like banning them as a political party. That the German political establishment is even contemplating this tells you that they are fighting a rear-guard action against a movement that has grown far bigger than just AfD itself.
Gerrmany has crossed ‘The Chasm’ and a kind of Radical Center is forming.
The ideas this embodies, a Germany for Germans that rejects globalism, inflation, endless taxation and war, in favor of localism, community and cohesion is far more immune to crude attack.
So, the response is to send Chancellor Scholz to Kiev to sign a mutual security pact with Ukraine later this month to bypass the political revolution happening at home.
By the same token I’ve exhorted the libertarian movement in the US to become the movement of solutions; practical achievable solutions that speak to a true majority of Americans. And from there lead them to more localized solutions over time.
But because they have refused to do this, getting bogged down in being anti-Fed, anti-this, and anti-that, it leaves them still a fringe political group, easily neutralized by a simple meme:
This is why I’ve become disillusioned with where the libertarian movement has wound up. This is the essence of what Pete Quinones and I discussed in the recent podcast we did. It doesn’t mean I reject the philosophy or even the use of many libertarian critiques of central planning as useful filters, it means the philosophy isn’t enough to move the Overton Window in any practical political sense.
It’s why I voted for Trump twice, despite his many limitations, and will vote for him again if Davos can’t stop him from being on the Florida ballot. Even then, out of spite, I, like many, will simply write his name in.
And, guess what? He’ll still beat the LP candidate.
So, the Great Awakening has morphed, from Davos’ perspective, into a kind of Great Acceleration, where they feel the threat of our coming together across the false dyad of the Left/Right division to reject them outright.
This is why they will accelerate their plans to squelch all of those who leak away from their control. It’s why they hate Elon Musk so thoroughly for taking Twitter away from them. It’s why Bill Kristol believes it’s right to bar Tucker Carlson from coming back into the US after his visit to Russia.
That squelching was done to anger us into running to alternative internet ghettos like Gab and Mastodon and all the others.
It’s why they purposefully ruined Twitter under the previous management to drive us away and take away our voices through de-platforming Alex Jones and everyone else. How many people still refuse to go back to Twitter because of what happened in 2017? How many still make the “perfect be the enemy of the good” argument vis a vis Elon Musk’s reign at Twitter? *Cough* David Icke *Cough*
Sure the Rachel Maddow set is still enthralled every night, all 200,000 of them, but now they are the ones clutching their pearls in the real media ghettos.
It was easy to go after Jones in 2017. It was easy to go after Gab later on. It was easy to see the alternative platforms like Rumble and Substack spin up to try and become antipodes to YouTube and WordPress, Locals for Patreon… etc.
I have nothing against these platforms, and have even tried some of them in the past, but I also recognize that they were allowed to become real to siphon people off into smaller tribes and build easily-ignored echo chambers. All to prevent us from crossing the chasm together to form the Radical Center.
And if one of these platforms gets too powerful? Well, I hope everyone has an archive of their Substacks. I also hope my fears on this are fully unfounded. But I’ve seen this movie before and I didn’t like it the first time I watched it.
Because, when voices capable of speaking across the false political divide of Left v Right get big enough, they have to be brought low. It’s fine for those on “the right” to be dismissed as kooks, dead-enders, isolationists, conspiracy theorists, MAGAtards, Nahtsees, etc.
It’s quite another when someone from “the Left” comes to the same conclusions. That’s why they came down so hard on Russell Brand last year. And it was disturbing how quickly the “Nuts and Sluts” campaign against Brand occurred.
Because Brand was un-personed first before the outrage machine went into overdrive against him. They just accused him and took him out.
And just to remind everyone what I’m talking about, I wrote about this in relation to the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation “process” back in 2018:
“Nuts and Sluts” is easy to understand. Simply accuse the person you want to destroy of being either crazy (the definition of which shifts with whatever is the political trigger issue of the day) or a sexual deviant.
This technique works because it triggers most people’s Disgust Circuit…
… The disgust circuit is also easy to understand.
It is the limit at which behavior in others triggers our gut-level outrage and we recoil with disgust.
The reason “Nuts and Sluts” works so well on conservative candidates and voters is because, on average, conservatives have a much stronger disgust circuit than liberals and/or libertarians.
What I wrote about in that article then has come to pass today. Back then I predicted that as Davos encouraged “The Left” to further normalize deviance the less effective “Nuts and Sluts” would become. The more we would see the attacks for the crude attempts at maintaining the Overton Window that they were.
But, here’s the problem. As liberals and cultural Marxists break down the societal order, as they win skirmish after skirmish in the Culture War, and desensitize us to normalize ever more deviant behavior, the circumstances of a “Nuts and Sluts” accusation have to rise accordingly.
It’s behavioral heroin. And the more tolerance we build up to it the more likely people are to see right through the lie.
It’s why Gary Hart simply had to be accused of having an affair in the 1980’s to scuttle his presidential aspirations but today Trump has to piss on a hooker.
For Russell Brand, however, they had to go all the way to the end game… being a sexual predator of younger women. Amidst all the clamor about Epstein Island etc., tying Brand to the talk of pedophilia by inference was meant to be the knockout blow against someone who has become one of the most effective and irrepressible dissident voices in the post-COVID environment.
There are few people in the current zeitgeist who were becoming more capable of radicalizing the Left side of the center than Russell Brand.
But, most importantly, it was meant demoralize us to not put faith in anyone else, to have no sources of comfort or people to trust. Brand’s overnight demonetization was the beginning of what I’m now calling the Great Demoralization campaign.
The goal of that campaign is to stop the emergence of that Radical Center; a loose coalition of normal people who are willing to put aside that which they disagree on in service of that which they do agree on. And eating bugz, living in pods under constant surveillance, and the threat of being un-personed is something we can all agree sucks.
To his credit Brand got right out in front of the accusation by taking complete responsibility for his past behavior, and throwing himself, rightfully, onto the altar of public opinion. He showed us his own disgust circuit for the person he used to be, not the person he is aspiring to be.
And that’s why his interview with Tucker Carlson recently was such a galvanizing thing. Carlson, smartly, practiced exactly what he preaches… a little Christian charity. By giving Brand the platform to tell his story, he finds another fellow traveler on the path to breaking this illusion of control Davos and their kept media outlets have laid over us.
These two guys aren’t supposed to agree on these things. Tucker’s a right-wing Fascist. Brand is a left-wing Lunatic. And yet, they share something very powerful in common, they both were cast out of the temple for speaking truth to power.
And Brand doesn’t disappoint in his performance. It’s one of his best, and I’ve seen Forgetting Sarah Marshall.
He’s spot on, noting himself at one point that the goal of everything we see in the media was “demoralization.” In fact, this entire post was inspired originally by that one statement during the 45 minutes he spoke with Tucker. That was the ‘money shot,’ as it were, of this interview.
It told me that not only does Russell Brand get it, but he knows exactly what his role now is.
As I write this speculation has gone wild that Tucker is meeting with the vilified Vladdie Putler. If he does pull that off it won’t quite break the internet, but if there is any event in 2024 outside of Davos’ control which could it will be that.
Because what happens when Carlson and Putin discuss the lies of foreign policy, of the nature of the conflict in Ukraine, the grievances between Russia and the West and find out they have more in common than they are supposed to?
Carlson didn’t break the internet with his interview of Russell Brand, nor with Alex Jones, but he is taking what’s left of the comfortable lie that the media is anything other than court stenographers putting it in a paper bag, dropping it on our doorsteps, and lighting it on fire. It’s been so long since we saw anyone do journalism that we barely understand what it looks like when we see it.
Carlson, like Brand, Elon Musk, Donald Trump, Jerome Powell, Jamie Dimon, or any of the others I give credit to in this blog, aren’t perfect men.
We killed that guy over two thousand years ago.
We don’t need them to be perfect men. If you need that, I suggest you seek professional help.
What we need is for them lead where they can when they can. They just need to give us the tools needed to cross the chasm and find common ground. Let us then build a public square that looks nothing like the one that we’ve been allowed to protest in up until now.
THAT is a Great Reset I can look forward to.”