Fear Response

On the internet, there is no end to conspiracy theories on any topic imaginable and there is no serious or concerted attempt made to censor them. There are debates that can get rancorous and occasionally someone like Alex Jones will go too far in over sensationalizing a conspiracy theory such that it may become slanderous or actionable in civil court. But otherwise outlandish or even absurd conspiracy theorists go about their business unimpeded. Nobody cares about them aside from true believers and spergy skeptics. In this one can easily discern the conspiracy theories that have no basis in reality versus the ones that make the ruling class nervous and rail against them.

On a quick side note, I'm distinguishing here between conspiracy theories and attempts to de-platform and silence or censor those who espouse any politically critical viewpoint to even a hair to the right of Trotsky which annoys or contradicts the diktats of the Ruling Class. Of concern here is the latter.

So when governments and social media platforms actively and openly censor what they are pleased to call "conspiracy theories", it must be asked why and what are they afraid of if that which is being censored are lies or nonsense. Just as why are they so terrified of the general public seeing or reading "harmful information" that justifies draconian censoring. Does harmful information make PC's, laptops or smartphones explode in the users face or cause other physical or psychological injuries? Are our betters desperate to protect us from reading the 21st century high-tech King in Yellow which would make us all hopelessly mad? 

Then this is the case of virologists, epidemiologists, doctors and nurses who questioned the mandatory COVID-19 national lockdowns along with the mandatory wearing of facemasks, latex gloves and standing 6 feet/2 meters apart social distancing restrictions. Even quoting the CDC can get one censored for misinformation to the point where the CDC is refusing to release certain information as they make the asinine claim that information can be somehow "misused".

There are three levels of this censorship and silencing- 

There are the rank and file progressive liberals, woke and social justice warriors whose puritan sensitivity to questioning the religious doctrines of their cargo cult threatens their faith and presumably hurts their chances of getting into progressive heaven, whatever that is. So much so that they view it as tantamount to physical violence that must be met with at least casting the blasphemer into the void if not physically attacking the satanic miscreant. Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Remember this, friends who live in red states or red areas, no matter how safe you think you are or how often you retreat to a new Galt's Gulch, the left is still coming for you too. And they will never stop coming for you no matter where you run to.

Then there is the managerial government's need to control all things including the thoughts and actions of their serfs. That the proles and serfs realize that they're being lied to while being forced to say the lie is true is all part of breaking them by humiliating them. In Germany, one can be arrested for questioning the official government dogma of climate change (whatever that happens to mean this week). Arrest and a show trial or a government official Karen to publicly shame dissidents are useful tools to frighten the masses into obedience. In this, the Ruling Class, the managerial bureaucrats and politicians, their non-profit foundation and think-tank advisors have no ideological bent or dogma. This is purely the mechanics of power where ideology is nothing more than a blueprint or schematic and is chosen as strictly functional.

So last but not least in censorship and silencing, in fact the most egregious of all, we have the corporate vassals. Many give a pass to the government on this and focus all their ire on the big, bad, corporations but they may realize that in this censorship, they lose customers/clients and in doing so, lose money but they have a way out of get woke, go broke. This is to any sensible person as counterproductive to any business as it would be to boo the bad guy puppets at a puppet show but it doesn't matter in the economy of the new world order. It serves the government well as a diversion away from the fact that they are in fact pulling the strings. Then it also gives the government the plausible deniability of "it's a private business, they can do what they want and we can't tell them what to do" the government quietly does end runs around the constitution. Unless of course, the issue is a bakery refusing to bake a cake for a same sex wedding and "muh private business" goes right out the window because...reasons.

But don't worry. The cooperative folks at Big Tech, other big corps and banks get their nice government contracts or bailouts, quantitative easing thanks to corporate devotion to BlackRock's ESG scores and endless regulations to keep upstart competition out of the market. The released Twitter files and Mark Zuckerberg's own words shows just how closely the government supervised what may or may not be said on those platform and it's a safe bet that other social media platforms are doing the same. In this environment, businesses that want to survive and flourish find that not only was Phaemon's Dog right, but he eats well too. However, this merger of managerial capitalism and managerial government was only a matter of time as both are based on the same paradigm with similar goals and realized cooperation was more effective and profitable for both. 

For comparison, the People's Republic of China, big businesses make payouts to CCP officials, crawl on their hands and knees as slavish cheerleaders for the CCP to get a piece of the action there but for the most part, have CCP members as owners, partners or as officers of the company. How many mainstream media companies have former politicians and government officials on their payroll and former appointed or tenured bureaucrats working in various corporations and the financial industry. This model our managerial bureaucrats are imposing on the US is not because they believe in Mao or Xi thought or communism in general, but because it increases their power and makes it both hidden under a thin corporate veil and unassailable. They can play the old good cop/bad cop routine until they feel safe enough to wield plenary power out in the open.

So these corporate and bankster worms deserve some derision and catcalls but they are only the henchmen at worst or at best, simply trying to survive in the managerial jungle. Always stay focused on the big picture of who has the monopoly on force and violence and look for who really is pulling the strings. Then think carefully about not only who to vote for for president, but the great guy politician you are planning to re-elect to the congress or the senate.


Donald Cavaioli


P.S.: It would seem contradictory to write here about censorship and not being censored but there is a reason for this. Written blogs, especially wall of text type blogs, mostly aren't considered the "in thing" anymore as the real influencers and big name e-celebs are on YouTube, Tiktok, Twitter or X if you will, among other popular platforms. Then there is the definition of who is an influencer which would be those with a large following, large number of likes to dislikes ratio and with a sizeable interaction in the comments section. These are the ones that attract attention and can face being demonetized, accounts deleted or facing de-platforming in other areas. So this blog fits none of these description with no followers, few readers and no comments and as such can fly below the radar even when pushing the edge of the envelope with the TOS. I would not be surprised to learn that most of those who read this blog are law enforcement, NGO's like the SPLC or ADL, or woke inquisitors searching out up and coming heretics to burn at the stake. But even they aren't stupid enough to invoke the Streisand Effect and if they bother to make any mention of this blog at all, it's to whine or grumble about it in their own echo chambers which I don't care about. 

P.P.S.: On a personal note, I don't really write for fame and fortune but rather because I find it cathartic and a way to explore and evaluate my own ideas. I write on any topic, criticize anyone I find deserves criticism no matter of what political stripe and never try to advertise this blog. Not the formula for a successful influencer and e-celeb but I have no interest in that as it would obligate me to write on topics that would be popular with an audience, refrain from criticizing their sacred cows, and write on a daily basis none of which I really want. Furthermore, it can be frustrating finding a topic to write about on a daily basis without being repetitious and boring to me or taking the time from other things I'd rather be doing to write. I can write or not when I feel like it or have the time for it. It's best this way as nobody wastes their time persecuting some nobody internet rando with the gall and audacity to sign his own name to posts and is effectively talking into the void. Otherwise, they'd make the rando a somebody whose heretical ideas may find an audience. Or perhaps, it's a way to allow what I say to quietly seep out into the wider world. Maybe the quiet ones can be the most dangerous after all.

Humans Monetized and As Dematerialized Property

 When the WEF or other foundations and NGO's promote trans-humanism, it is almost a 100% certainty that the only benefit will be to those referred to as the stakeholders. To define stakeholders, it would be easier to say who they are not: The average person that the likes of Yuval Harari would refer to as "useless people". Then the benefits to the stakeholders may be as follows.

The recent debates on whether children or young adults can determine their own sex or gender and have unlimited access to drugs and surgery to approximate their perceived gender. This gnostic concept of gender, as it's defined by adherents of trans-sexualism and their allies in government, NGO's, the medical, pharmaceutical and psychiatric industries has brought into being the concept of the human body as property. One is no longer the owner of their own body and life with inalienable rights but a property that can be leased back to the individual. This is property that can be monetized, leased or rented but never owned by an individual but only owned by private entities like a corporation or a bank. 

Bear in mind, as the monopoly on force and violence is the definition of power and wielded solely by government. Any power, or more properly, franchised privilege, granted to any private entities is granted only by government and directly used by government to their benefit. Banks and corporations are therefore only the cat's paw of government. It's important to understand exactly who is really pushing these agendas discerning the puppet from the puppeteer.

In the recent rental and leasing business model which is becoming more common where to paraphrase Klaus Schwab* that people don't really want to own property but only to have the benefits of it and so they're content to merely rent it. The trans movement brings this concept to simply enjoying the benefits of the modified human form itself without really owning it. Wherein what our managerial government overlords were pleased to call the covid pandemic crises, granted themselves the power to compel its citizens to be injected with an experimental drug, among other restrictions, and thus denied individual human beings the control over their own bodies which made them de-facto property of the state. Then the concept of gender, as opposed to biological sex, made surgical modifications to the human body a rental property of the biomedical industry because it entails permanent drugs and medical supplies needed to maintain the surgical changes, all with the government's blessings. Whenever property is taken from individual ownership and transferred to the collective ownership of government, banks or corporations, such property, as Samuel Francis put it, is dematerialized. Similar to digital currencies and cryptocurrencies no longer being physical currency as being dematerialized in a literal and physical sense.

You will own nothing, have no privacy and be happy may include one's own body if they wish to transcend their own mundane human form through sex change surgery or other trans-humanist modifications. All of these procedures cost money as well as the ongoing corrective or palliative surgeries, pre or post-operative costs of any drugs, medical devices, follow-up exams or psychological counseling that will be incurred over the rest of the surgically modified human's life. In other words, the surgically modified trans-human in a sense now rents their modified body with a maintenance contract from the various medical industries involved and are now, in a sense, the property of said industries.  The free human being as the owner of their own body and life is dematerialized under permanent medical supervision.

Donald Cavaioli

* I attributed the paraphrased quote to Klaus Schwab based on memory and have been unable to track down the original quote regarding business moving to a renting and leasing model and whether it was said by Schwab or some other individual. No surprise there if it was either scrubbed from the internet or buried several pages down on most search engines if it is displayed at all. The World Economic Forum had produced the infamous "Welcome to 2030" video and later, when it became too well known outside globalist corporate and government circles and criticized, denied everything said in the video calling it instead, a conspiracy theory. As well as Schwab's well publicized book and quotes about using the covid crisis as a vehicle to implement the WEF Great Reset and 4th Industrial Revolution policies which is still officially stamped as "debunked" by the mainstream media. Then only because the MSM said so without further proof, and derides critics citing the book and quotes as promoting a conspiracy theory-shaming language used to silence and dissuade people from believing what they see or hear. However, if I find the attribution incorrect or proof is shown here that the quote is incorrect, I will remove it immediately.