Donald Psyop Trump

Are you a libertarian surprised to feel sympathy for Donald Trump, and to be defending his candidacy in front of people who criticize him?

You are not alone. Just look at the comment section of Zerohedge.

It’s a strange phenomenon, because Trump is a charismatic strongman; he’s ueber-statist.

I surmise we quasi-like him in part because he is being criticized for the wrong reasons. His “official” caveats are trivial platitudes. I think there is intention behind it (more about that below).

“Trump is horrible, he supports waterboarding!”

“The American federal government maims and kills untold millions with its terror war. It distributes cluster bombs and depleted-uranium munitions on every theatre. It targets hospitals, weddings, schools, funerals and birthday parties. Its fleets of drones sow misery and death. It arms and supports murderous regimes and ideological fanatics. It holds the historical records on the usage of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. It admits to seeking “shock and awe”. And you are offended by a fucking wet cloth? You should be thankful hypocrisy doesn’t kill!”

“But he’s a sexist who refers to a woman’s menstrual bleeding!”

“So fucking what? Do women not have a menstrual cycle? Actually, you’re a sexist if you assume women, unlike men, aren’t capable of retorting to crude remarks without your help.”

“But he’s racist, he wants to build a wall on the border with Mexico!”

“Yeah, and he probably wants to call it the Great Wall of Trump, and imagines tourists trampling it in two thousand years. That’s how megalomaniacs think. But what offends you exactly? The CO2 footprint? Or the concept of border control? If the latter, how about the systemic TSA searches and seizures at airports, could we abandon them too? Again, thankfully hypocrisy isn’t fatal.”

“But he wants to ban all Muslims from the US!”

“Most passport holders in the world can’t freely enter the US. Isn’t that discrimination already? If not, let’s say I’ll be shocked by Trump’s soundbite about Muslims the day the US government stops arming and supporting supremacist regimes, whether zionist or wahhabi.”

For every libertarian who might posit that voting for a centrally-planned scheme means tacitly accepting its rules, there are millions who plan to participate in the “presidential elections” gameshow – and thus elect their overlords’ spokesperson. And because of the show’s strong psychological impact, it means great power comes with it.

So these “electors” are not algae, they individually and intuitively distinguish right from wrong, however may that capability be clouded by the propaganda. They “feel” the bombarded criticism against Trump is invalid, hypocritical. That’s true for almost everyone, except the truly, hardcore-brainwashed who are offended by pronouns, toilets and nosebleeds, and will vote for Hillary.

Such dissonance is bound to provoke a counter-reaction to defend (or vote for) the person thus targeted; which explains part of Trump’s success.

Of course that’s not the only explanation. There’s also the current collective mood, and Trump’s on-target brand message.

Most importantly – I recommend Scott Adam‘s “Trump Persuasion Series” (the creator of Dilbert who happens to have a blog and to be competent about what he writes). He does the best job at dissecting Trump’s resounding success. LT;DR there exists ubiquitous persuasion and manipulation techniques available for anyone who looks, Trump is leveraging them beautifully, and he will win against Hillary in a landslide.

Following all that, if you’re wondering whether Trump is the “real deal”, here is an assumption: a monetary/economic calamity is nearing; there exists “powers-that-be” that have pervasive control over the institutional media, i.e. propaganda; and they see the dislocation coming.

If that’s true (and it probably is), then, it is reasonable to assume they also act to profit from their position. Such profit could only mean one thing: increasing one’s own (political) power (you already have enough money to retire if you control the “common knowledge” in any significant way). If that’s true, then one of the moves, if possible, would be to increase one’s control of the executive branch by getting your guy elected as spokesperson.

Here’s how such a meeting may have happened:

– OK guys, listen up. First question, who to blame when faeces finish dispersing from the propeller?

– That’s easy! Domestic extremists. Nationalists. Anyone who speaks of the old ways. You know, basically anyone who questions the just overlords, who gets in the way.

– So obviously we need a white guy; a flag-waving hero. Good, it’s the republican turn anyway. He also needs to be a pseudo-outsider of some sort. Someone who can seemingly be independent of “special interests”, otherwise known as “our benevolent nature”. The message at this point should be jobs, protectionism, authority, and fuck our other guys.

– Great. Next, when we hit stage 2, or “stage Venezuela”, we’ll need a crack down on civil disobedience and offensive speech. Payroll looters are not nearly enough for the momentum of peace to grow. We need a president who has the personality to say it’s OK to forcefully bring peace into the homes.

– OK. Obviously we also need someone who somehow says he’s against all the war business, you know, the millions of unlives we tenderly call “our little units”, just like W and O had to say.

– What?! That’s inadmissible! We can’t have an isolationist! What about Israel, the shining beacon between two rivers? Anti-semite! Holocaust denier! My suffering is the light, my pain is mankind’s worst calvary!

– Relax, it’s just for the show. It’s just something we need to say, okay, so settle down. Of course he’ll be at AIPAC. And please, gentlemen, stop all shouting at the same time.

– So, who does that leave us? Glenn Beck?

– No, too effeminate, not rich enough. We’ll rather have him against. Who else?

– Bloomberg?

– Nah, too institutional. He’ll also be against. Come on people! It needs to be a popular guy, a known face, someone who’s fairly likable, an actor or something. It could also be a friendly general! Who is our Captain America?

– Chuck Norris?

– Mmh, not bad. But no, too tainted already. And not educated enough. We can’t have another utter moron, we learned our lesson with W. Who else?

– Schwarzenegger?

– Not bad, but there’s his ridiculous accent, and the whole foreign-born hassle, documents to craft, statements to make, more work. There must be a better candidate. Come on, it’s easy, who is a proven narcissist and will enjoy the glory we can give him?

– Clint Eastwood?

– Good idea, but too old. And I don’t think we control him. Hardly a butterfly. You can do better! We need someone with massive debt we can dry clean.

– I got it! His entertainment empire is crumbling. His net worth is vastly overstated and he’s worried the word will get out. He needs to prove otherwise. He will readily accept any deal he has no other choice but to accept. Most that matter see his face on a weekly basis. We got our new saviour! Donald Trump!

– Hurray! Hurray! Viva! I hereby exhale white smoke!

– Okay, so what’s the play to make him our superunit?

– Simple. Book Sheep-101, chapter 33, “The Revolution”. We bombard the units with repetitive and cognitively dissonant messages. We reinforce the perceived hypocrisy and unsustainability of our experiment, which is ending anyway. We massively air our superunit while pretending to be against it. When the time comes, he’ll have the correct identity and brand to do what we need, which involves as you know focusing on the domestic solution.

– Yes, I know the theory of the plan, but concretely, in all our benevolence, how do we create such an illusion?

– We advertise his mood-compatible ideas by getting offended for the wrong reasons. We’ll say he can’t be president because he’s a man. We’ll say he can’t rule the empire because of his hair. We’ll make his soundbites look profound compared to the trivialities being thrown at him. It’ll drive the units crazy. They’ll protest by voting for him in droves.

– And once he becomes president?

– The excrement will just have started its flight. The units will be craving our strongman. The negative units, the ones that snap first, the ones that didn’t vote for him because of his hair or soundbites, will at that point secretly crave him the most. They’ll be the quickest and most affected by our expiration date, they’ll viciously beg for authority. The free units will be the only ones left, and as you know we’ll deal with them.

– The domestic solution?

– Yes. But first, we need to adjust the responsibility. As soon as the ballots are in, this becomes the key knowledge: those who voted for him are responsible for whatever happens starting now. Better, his ideas, and anyone who shares them, are responsible. Whatever happens henceforth is your responsibility people. We told you not to do it. Now let’s see what your free choice entails.

– Perfect. Concerning speech, the incitement wordplay is already running. Freedom of expression doesn’t mean inciting hate. You can’t just say or write something that will be interpreted by someone in such a way as to ultimately provoke him to feel hate! That’s just wrong, everyone knows that. Or will. We control the hate, so we’ll control the speech.

– Right. The domestic solution can then be rolled out. Individually the disappearances will be easy. The challenge here people will be the scale! We are talking many dozens of locations! Hopefully we’ve learned from our mistakes.

This is speculation. Here’s a shorter way to look at it: even if Donald Trump is his own man, and even if some of his ideas could make sense, it’s too late to save the day. The house of cards is crashing down with or without him. Let them hold the hot potato when it does, let them take responsibility. The trials and hangings need to happen before we make America great again.

Edit: part 2 is here.


TIPPreserve your financial liberty with physical gold and silver  >>