TheBasicMind

He was completely right

Look at the ratio and it is clear who most people think the bullies are.

With this verdict, I am reminded of something father Ripperger, a catholic exorcist priest said. He claimed to have high-ranking demon - possibly Satan - and it was compelled to reveal its “nature.” The demon stated that its core tactic that had brought greatest success and the greatest corruption of man, is to convince people they cannot be separated from a particular good. It is an incredibly subtle point. If lesser goods can be made a higher spiritual objective, man will cleave to the lesser, the petty and that which lacks profundity and will be separated from spiritual purity and excellence. They will stop looking at what is actually before them and see the lesser as greater. Positions that can seem to represent a 'truth' include assertions like "man made climate change is catastrophic," or "vaccines are good," or "transgender pronouns should be affirmed," In secular society all are cleaved to large numbers like they are a religious imperative and cannot be let go. And another such 'truth' is that Tommy Robinson is an evil racist. And with this truth, they cease to see.

On the principle that so much more is cock-up than nefarious (which I know for sure to be the case - I won't go into why but years back I had a very good experience of this) I do wonder the extent to which the current policies are planned, versus the product (with the inevitable attendant corruption and looting) of a financial Ponzi scheme running out of control sorcerers apprentice style. When you have to borrow ever more to feed the beast (and can see opportunity to take a cut while the Ponzi scheme is expanding to insane levels) it is easy to visualise a scenario where those at the top who are new to it all, are informed the room for movement is near zero and realise they have to fall in or they could find themselves portrayed as the cause for financial collapse. Elon Musk's journey with the Trump administration introduced so many of the key questions I now have. I tracked Musk's posts quite closely and as a consequence I have formed a view about his journey that relates to the extent the centralisation you refer to is planned, command and control style, by globalist forces outside of government. I rather suspect, regarding DOGE, Musk started out applying his business mind sincerely from the perspective and experience of a business owner, thinking true reform is possible and absolutely believed vast quantities of fat could be cut out of government (rather as he had done with Twitter / X). He then hit political reality, hit the wall of the political machine, and realised Trump was set to do the very opposite of the radical reform required. At the same time as Musk was massively enthusiastic over DOGE, Trump had prepared (and you have to hand it to him his naming can be pure political genius) his Big Beautiful Bill. In fiscal terms it was going in the exact opposite direction to the radical reform Musk could so clearly see is required. I think they fell-out over this and fell out hard. Musks references to Trump being fully involved in the Epstein cover up is clear evidence of that. I suspect Musk, as clever as he is, with a business owner perspective (albeit a highly powered one) did not fully understand economic exigencies of running a country within the dead weight of democratic opinion (which trains all politicians to eschew radicalism) and how the actually very real need to avoid short term financial shock act against radical action. Democracies can't easily stand strong through the fallout. But then that in itself becomes a vector of force, leading to an "oh well we can't do anything about the fiat finance Ponzi scheme, so let's grab a share while we can" kind of attitude. In other words, at one level, it "justifies" the corruption. So that then justifies the argument "it's all fucked and the wishes of the electorate should be ignored because reform will crash the Ponzi scheme and so crash the whole economy - which is bad for everyone" and nobody wan't to be the guy without the chair when the music stops, so policies that commit to ever greater debt are committed to with ever greater abandon and the "reality shock" for those inducted into this political reality becomes ever greater. That now for me is the conventional view. But then there are further details which contribute to a far darker and more cynical and "conspiratorial" view. Consider what else occurred during Musk's DOGE journey. There was, of course, the Epstein debacle, which it is now through official sources, clear Trump, in the face of clear promises, did his level best to impede. And still no high profile trials of Epstein child abusers. There is Musk coming back into the fold and at the same time - you couldn't write the script - somehow getting a black eye. There is Musk then giving-up his DOGE obsession (that from a man who never gives up when the business case is clear) and the qualitative change in Musk's posts. He goes from being highly insightful and cutting on fiscal matters, to talking in platitudes. His political posts suddenly, to anyone paying attention, are far more moderated; he rocks the boat far less. In other words, he goes from being sharp and cutting on politics and national finances to saying all the kinds of things you would expect controlled opposition to say. So maybe he was just inducted into a political elite who do not have the stomach or morals required to implement radical fiscal reform and the succeeded in co-opting him into the view a Sorcerer's Apprentice fiscal meltdown can only be delayed and nothing can be done (very defeatist for Musk), OR he is inducted into something far deeper and more sinister and his comments about Epstein were far to close to home. I can't stop thinking about that black eye.

OMG. I realise I have now gone to the next level. What he is saying here "sounds" like he is fighting Big Pharma yet having witnessed his role in RFK Jrs team, I strongly believe Calley Means to be controlled opposition. When Dr Jack Kruse warned about him on the Danny Jones Podcast in December '24, it seemed excessively harsh and I was prepared to give the benefit of the doubt, but with all the shenanigans since. Not any longer.

I wonder if it seems strange to Peter that the storm of slime is from his own industry and not from the public. I wonder to what extent he thinks narrative formation is bottom up, with journalists scouring actual happenings for the truth, versus top down.

The position of the British Government could not be clearer: We will do fuck all to stop civilisational replacement levels of immigration and we will just borrow more in the hope the ship stays afloat until the next government because that's easier than confronting the problem.

Man on a mission.

No Globalism is the absurd wish to treat subjugate them equally as commerce targets bound by globalist policies favouring the elite globalist protected business class.

They treated their most passionate voter base with complete disdain and also took them for granted. Both are quite deliberate political "dark patterns" right-wing voters have been subject to for years under the Tories and have grown utterly sick of.* What I think these politicians lose sight of, is that the changes in percentage support they make over time are not uniform. They view charts and start to think what they are looking at is akin to a pressure gauge and pulling a policy lever is all it takes to move the needle. But that isn't true. Call your most passionate supporters "that lot" and you will lose most of them forever. Then the policy lever stops working. * "dark patterns" is a phrase I've borrowed from software engineering their it refers to making software do what the supplier wants rather than what the user wants - so a printer driver might always default back to using colour output when the user mostly prints only in black and white, because the supplier wants to sell the more expensive colour cartridges.

They treated their most passionate voter base with complete disdain and also took them for granted. Both are quite deliberate political "dark patterns" right-wing voters have been subject to for years under the Tories and have grown utterly sick of.* What I think these politicians lose sight of, is that the changes in percentage support they make over time are not uniform. They view charts and start to think what they are looking at is akin to a pressure gauge and pulling a policy lever is all it takes to move the needle. But that isn't true. Call your most passionate supporters "that lot" and you will lose most of them forever. Then the policy lever stops working. * "dark patterns" is a phrase I've borrowed from software engineering their it refers to making software do what the supplier wants rather than what the user wants - so a printer driver might always default back to using colour output when the user mostly prints only in black and white, because the supplier wants to sell the more expensive colour cartridges.

@grok, @dshensmith with this many arrests without charges ever having being brought against Young Bob, is it not the case he can take out a civil claim against the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police for false imprisonment / wrongful arrest and possibly even malicious prosecution?