Source: Facebook

  • WHY I WAS RIGHT ABOUT RICHMOND REFORMING THE FAILURE OF C’VILLE – WIN THE WAR NO

    WHY I WAS RIGHT ABOUT RICHMOND REFORMING THE FAILURE OF C’VILLE – WIN THE WAR NOT THE BATTLE

    by Tim Kirby via The Strategic Culture Foundation

    (“On Counter Color Revolutions”)

    There have been many protests all over the world on a large scale since the beginning of the 24 hour news cycle/prevalence of the Internet and it has become obvious that some quickly gain favored status from the Mainstream Media while others are kept in the dark regardless of size or significance. This selective hyper focus on particular protests is a key component of the Color Revolution strategy. The protestors are positioned as the downtrodden masses yearning for their voices to be heard, and bad country of the month’s leadership is oppressive and needs to go. Sometimes this works (Ukraine twice and Georgia) and other times it fails (Russia and for now at least Venezuela) but the Second Amendment (2A) protest in Virginia presents a new tactic/opportunity that can be used to counteract any Color Revolution outside the West.

    One thing that is key to understanding Color Revolutions (CR) is that as it stands today they are always orchestrated by the West to make regime change in the Non-West due to their financial and nearly total media domination. No matter how many people label the Mainstream Media as “Dinosaur” or quote their terrible ratings, the 24 hour news cycle still creates the dominant narrative for current events in the public’s mind internationally, and this is why the Color Revolution tactic only works one way.

    The Western Mainstream Media can turn any nobody politician\public figure into the legitimate leader of Country X overnight. No one knew who Guaido was on Monday, but the West was sure he was the only true voice of the Venezuelan people on Tuesday. The same goes for the overwhelming support for anyone opposed to Putin like Alexei Navalny, who if given the chance to run for President would surely get a low end single digit percentage.

    The Mainstream Media can make heroes and villains abroad but this does not work in the opposite direction. When Jill Stein (a figure with the same relative level of popularity as Navalny if not more so) was thrown out of the 2016 debate when she tried to crash the party, no non-Western media could spin this into the catalyst for some sort of Color Revolution. If this would have happened in say Iran then calls for the overthrow of the government would be heard from TV screens and Facebook memes around the world.

    Although the Russians are accused of meddling in the Yellow-Vest protests, there is simply not enough Moscow Media might to convince the French public that the Yellow vesters are the new legitimate power, wag that dog, and get a full scale Color Revolution completed. The French situation is a perfect breeding ground for a Color Revolution if it was in bad guy Country X. The level of protests are massive, police brutality is rampant and documented, and they even have a Color/symbol – their vests. All the ingredients are there but without being able to push the media narrative no CR can or will happen in France.

    What this means is that for the foreseeable future the Multipolar non-Western World (Russia, China, Iran etc.) is always going to be on the defensive from CR tactics. There is however another major disadvantage that the Multipolar World has – the type of people who do go out to street protests are the type who support the Monopolar World.

    The working masses of families with kids, the heartlanders across the globe, who are really the backbone of society are far too tired/busy to engage in Color Revolutions or protests of any kind, and when they do they are one off and utter failures. The actual people who are most likely to protest with ribbons because of vague complaints like a lack of “Democracy” or “freedom” are those emotional types with time on their hands and probably decent resources too.

    Naive bourgeois victimhood-lifestyle teenagers and some hardcore professional activists are generally who you are going to find at CRs. The amount of people who are actual ideologues that push political agendas in their country are generally less than 1% of the population combined with trendy kids who want to feel like they are accomplishing something by chanting do not represent the will of the working-class majority. But as stated before the Mainstream Media can convince even simple folk in Country X that they do. And probably what is most important, the trendy people with free time are always inherently pro-Western. It is exactly the cosmopolitan urbanites in any country who are going to be pro-Western, farmers and factory workers usually won’t. The type of people who come out to a Color Revolution are the types who believe the US/EU hype, and are the willful useful idiots that the media needs to create its narrative.

    And here is where the Virginia 2A protests come in. They, like the Yellow Vest protestors were made up of those toiling masses also known as the Silent Majority. The same Silent Majority which the Multipolar world wants to woo with calls for tradition, populism and national sovereignty. Meaning, that ideologically the Second Amendment crowd’s instincts are anti-Color Revolution even if they don’t know what that term means. They are the kind of folks who cherish America as an idea and as part of their identity. They want their traditions and culture to remain intact, meaning that this is really the forces that the leadership of Country X (that is under threat of Color Revolution) should use. This is a demonstration of just how strong the Silent Majority really is when it awakes from its slumber of fatigue.

    The local government was terrified and declared a state of emergency even before the protest began and obviously, the SJW rats didn’t dare show their faces against hundreds of armed old school Americans. This show of force that didn’t use any particular force is a shining example of how strong the people the Multipolar Order supposedly loves, and we can see how much they could halt some kind of anti-American CR.

    To an extent this is what happened in Venezuela when Maduro was able to successfully rally thousands of supporters to march. If in Caracas the media had footage of massed government troops on the move, beating people with clubs, it would have fed into Maduro’s downfall, but since the actual force that took over the streets were just working class normies in bright T-shirts there was not only to juicy footage to twist, the images proved to support Maduro’s legitimacy. The real winner of this situation was Maduro’s usage of the Silent Majority directly against the Color Revolutionaries. He showed a faith in his people, which is not felt in places like Russia or China. Despite the fact that the Multipolar World stands on the side of tradition on populism, the big two dominant forces in this movement do not let their populaces take action like Maduro was wise enough to allow.

    If hordes of armed commoners like those at the Virginia protests showed up to the Maidan it would have never have succeeded. Instead in Ukraine they stayed home as 40,000 protestors decided the destiny of 40 million people. Although China is accused of sending thugs from the Mainland, if they were to send waves of semi-armed hillbillies into Hong Kong the issue would be resolved in a day. The simple fact is that those who are on the Multipolar side of today’s New Cold War, if given the chance to fight on the streets, will win that fight every time. They are the side with the most to lose, the most anger to vent, the most testosterone, the most love for their own way of life, and who suffer the most from Color Revolutions.

    Maduro demonstrated that organizing the peasantry even with just their fists and improvised weapons, was enough to defeat years of Color Revolution prep, especially since his masses did not look at like soldiers in disguise. He had the legit support of countless thousands of normal people. The Virginia 2A protest showed that the trendies who are the poster children of CR movements will go absolutely silent the second there is a threat of real violence. Antifa is happy to use their Black Block against one man in a MAGA hat but when it comes to actually dying for their beliefs they sit at home. Word warfare, Twitter terrorism and Media manipulation are the strengths of the Monopolar World, but ultimately the people that this system breeds are not willing to fight (in the direct literal sense) for their values and will lose through preemptive capitulation in the face of actual direct force.

    If those who claim they are fighting for a Multipolar World Order do not have more faith in their populace then they will become Yanokoviches and not Maduros. Footage of government troops fighting protestors can spell doom for any leader, while the same direct action being taken by thousands of uniformless out-of-shape factory workers acting semi-independently feeds the Mainstream Media nothing and in fact strengthens one’s own legitimacy – it shows the people are on your side.

    To be clear this is NOT a call for violence, in fact it is quite the opposite. Some of the most deadly events in human history have been Revolutions. Meaning, that if someone really cares about the lives of commoners they should not advocate for overthrowing governments, but for incremental change.

    If the Maidan had been solved by rednecks smashing up the camps in Kiev, yes some people would have died, perhaps tens or hundreds at the most, but to date thousands have been killed and millions have suffered thanks to the successful Color Revolution of 2014. The war in the Donbass still continues many years on. Even if you loved the ideas the Yeltsin tried to push on Russia the fact is that the shattering of the Soviet Union caused millions of deaths, reform of the Soviet Union would have been far preferable from a humanitarian standpoint. If we think about the great revolutionary periods in human history, in France, Russia, China etc. they were all followed by grand scale violence and counter-revolutionary crackdown. Using the Silent Majority to block upcoming CR tactics is a far more humane solution than it may sound on the surface.

    If the Multipolar World wants to survive it has to activate its Silent Majority to protect itself from Color Revolution tactics. It is ironically the populists who in many ways seem too terrified to allow their heartlanders to have the freedom to take action and fight for the motherland without a uniform and direct orders from on high.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/virginia-2a-protest-model-counter-color-revolution?


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-04 09:21:00 UTC

  • THE MONARCHY UNDER THE ONE LAW by Bill Joslin Under One Law, where by no group o

    THE MONARCHY UNDER THE ONE LAW

    by Bill Joslin

    Under One Law, where by no group or individual obtains the power to write law, the king can be under law without the risk of molestation by politicians. I’d say, evidenced by Charle’s decapitated body, this One Law is already enforced by nature whether we agree, understand, notice or not. Its just a matter of what time horizon the judgements are passed. by aligning with this One Law, and decreasing latency between act and judgment, we can use nature to create the disincentive with in the actors lifetime and avoid the tails of damages breaking One Law creates.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 22:08:00 UTC

  • THE SOVEREIGN IS ABOVE EARTHLY POWERS UNDER LAW, NOT ABOVE NATURAL LAW by Scott

    THE SOVEREIGN IS ABOVE EARTHLY POWERS UNDER LAW, NOT ABOVE NATURAL LAW

    by Scott De Warren

    A sovereign is above the law in the sense that there is no earthly legal power above him in his kingdom.

    He is not above natural law, however, in the sense that his sovereignty is not inalienable. For example if he seeks to destroy his kingdom and people or other crimes similar in kind to high treason (selling his sovereignty to a hostile foreign sovereign and thus stripping his people of their liberties) he can lose his sovereign rights in a just revolution (but not his legal heirs already born).


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 22:07:00 UTC

  • THE 20th EXPERIMENT IN COSMPOLITAINISM FAILED The constitution failed when men f

    THE 20th EXPERIMENT IN COSMPOLITAINISM FAILED

    The constitution failed when men failed: they denied southerners sovereignty – the premise upon which the constitution is founded. And it failed for no other reason than to prevent the agrarian south from control of the continent isolating the puritan industrial north from control over western expansion. The only reason Lincoln didn’t continue the existing repatriation of slaves to africa was the cost. yet what was the cost of 500,000 lives, our constitution, and our sovereignty? Why? Because white men – Pres. Lincoln in this case – granted black leaders at the time their sovereignty by asking it of them. To lead it. Rather than for americans to force it. Why do we make the same mistake today with all other aliens? If you seek to take our sovereignty, then by reciprocity we shall seek to take yours. If you cannot or will not integrate then we have no choice but to separate.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 22:02:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGIN OF MORAL FOUNDATIONS by Bill Joslin The first question of ethics and

    THE ORIGIN OF MORAL FOUNDATIONS

    by Bill Joslin

    The first question of ethics and politics is: “Why shouldn’t I kill you and take your stuff?” The answer to which gives birth to moral foundations.

    Of course, “Because I’m too costly to kill when weighed against the benefit of my stuff” represents one of the answers.

    The other answer being this: “Because, if we cooperate, I’m worth way more alive than the limited benefits of the stuff I have now.”

    To wit – any and all qualities that we consider “virtuous” can be measured. Virtue exists as the signaling and behaviour that demonstrates your ability to be trusted when one is vulnerable to you (i.e. answers the question of “why would I drop my defenses against you in order to cooperate).

    …now here the rub.

    Our current culture hasn’t solved for this contingent question:

    “Why shouldn’t I just lie to you and take your stuff, only the amount of stuff you don’t notice I took?”

    Me’thinks this question will be answered soon.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 21:49:00 UTC

  • Q: “HOW IS P-LAW DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER?” (important) (core) —“How is P law

    Q: “HOW IS P-LAW DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER?”

    (important) (core)

    —“How is P law different than any other law? We have laws now that some people follow and some don’t Any and every law creates division because once laws are made someone has to enforce them. And as long as there are humans involved there will be corruption you cant stop that. There is no perfect system . The best we could hope for is a simple 2 law system, 1) mind your own business and 2) leave everyone else alone. Do whatever you wish as long as you don’t harm anyone else.”— John Lafferty

    GREAT QUESTION

    Aside from the absolute lack of evidence that the left wants to eave you (your property) alone, and that they instead demand rights to consume your property, and the commons, let’s look at the question of what differs in western law, anglo saxon, english, british, american, and P-law.

    First, we have laws that exist without a market for enforcement of them. Chief among those limits on us, is the requirement for ‘standing’ before the court in matters of the commons, and the incremental grant of privilege to state officials of insulation from prosecution for their acts.

    Next, Laws only work the way we wish if (a) there is a market incentive to profit from the prosecution of those who violate it, (b) if they apply to everyone equally, (c) the law is technical and scientific, (d) if the judiciary is an empirical, difficult to enter TECHNICAL professional ‘priesthood’ (high status, high income, low corruption), (e) the military will, in the end, enforce the rulings of the judiciary if it must.

    P attempts – I think more successfully than in all of history – to both state these factors openly, and produce a constitution that produces each of the requirements above.

    Among the most important weaknesses of our constitution is that much of the english common law upon which it rests is not stated (Sovereignty). Or for example, why the west uses three priesthoods (juridical negativa, scientific ‘practical’, and priestly positiva) in competition with one another.

    Yet it is this market vs everyone else’s monopoly that provides not only a division of labor but our unique adaptability.

    There is evidence throughout history that technical bureaucracies work. The problem with systems of thought is transforming them from customs, to philosophies, to sciences, to formal logics. And that is what P-law does.

    As for “best we can hope for” – that doesn’t work because humans operate at the minimum morality that they can get away with. Our customary law is extremely ‘complete’ in this regard only because it is predicated on sovereignty of the individual, (every man and his manor is his own country).

    So quite the opposite.

    The best we can do doesn’t require ‘hoping’ for anything – it requires we simply create a market for incentives to prosecute those who would violate that sovereignty, law, constitution, and it’s articles, legislation, regulation, and findings of the court.

    That said, it is a militia of men of shared oath to one another that is the only defense against usurpers.

    I will give that oath to you if you will give it to me.

    And that is all that is required.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 21:43:00 UTC

  • (taken from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to James Madison) “I sit down to write

    (taken from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to James Madison)

    “I sit down to write to you without knowing by what occasion I shall send my letter. I do it because a subject comes into my head which I would wish to develope a little more than is practicable in the hurry of the moment of making up general dispatches.

    The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water. Yet it is a question of such consequences as not only to merit decision, but place also, among the fundamental principles of every government. The course of reflection in which we are immersed here on the elementary principles of society has presented this question to my mind; and that no such obligation can be so transmitted I think very capable of proof.—I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, ‘that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living’: that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it. The portion occupied by any individual ceases to be his when himself ceases to be, and reverts to the society. If the society has formed no rules for the appropriation of it’s lands in severality, it will be taken by the first occupants. These will generally be the wife and children of the decedent. If they have formed rules of appropriation, those rules may give it to the wife and children, or to some one of them, or to the legatee of the deceased. So they may give it to his creditor. But the child, the legatee, or creditor takes it, not by any natural right, but by a law of the society of which they are members, and to which they are subject. Then no man can, by natural right, oblige the lands he occupied, or the persons who succeed him in that occupation, to the paiment of debts contracted by him. For if he could, he might, during his own life, eat up the usufruct of the lands for several generations to come, and then the lands would belong to the dead, and not to the living, which would be the reverse of our principle.”

    (CURT: In other words, (a) debt/inheritance (b) prohibition on dependency collateral (c) the tragedy of renters, (d) the tragedy of the commons )


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 21:10:00 UTC

  • SHOULD A MONARCH BE ABOVE THE LAW? Yes. Otherwise they are the victims of politi

    SHOULD A MONARCH BE ABOVE THE LAW?

    Yes. Otherwise they are the victims of politicians.

    1. There is one way to remove a monarch. It requires revolution.

    2. There is one way to remove a parliament. it requires voting.

    3. There is oneway to remove those who would violate our constitution – the court of the commons.

    4. There is one way to remove those who would violate laws against crimes – the criminal court.

    We have a rather interesting but odd system in that unlike the continent we have no court of the commons (for claims against the state)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 21:00:00 UTC

  • 12182 pieces of orbital debris. 2161 spent rocket stages in orbit, 4790 satellit

    12182 pieces of orbital debris.

    2161 spent rocket stages in orbit,

    4790 satellites,

    25 objects in orbit not yet assigned,

    Less than 2000 satellite are alive

    261 are Communications

    178 are Military

    98 are GPS

    This is not a subject I have knowlege of. I don’t know the rest, and even these numbers are only rough. Yes, there are databases. Multiple. They’re detailed.

    —GPS—

    74 Global Positioning System navigation satellites have been launched, 31 of which are operational, 9 in reserve, 2 being tested, 30 have been retired and 2 were lost at launch.

    There are currently 5 Positioning and Navigation satellite systems.

    1) GPS (USA)

    2) GLONASS (Russia)

    3) Galileo (European Union)

    4) BeiDou (China)

    5) NAVIC (India)

    GPS has 31 satellites in orbit.

    GLONASS has 24 satellites in orbit.

    Galileo has 14 satellites in orbit.

    BeiDou has 22 satellites in orbit.

    NAVIC has 7 satellites in orbit.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 20:58:00 UTC

  • TENDENCY FOR PEOPLE TO GENETICALLY ASSOCIATE Feb 3, 2020, 8:33 PM

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomophilyTHE TENDENCY FOR PEOPLE TO GENETICALLY ASSOCIATE

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomophilyUpdated Feb 3, 2020, 8:33 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-03 20:33:00 UTC