Trump era: Fascist dawn, or road to liberation?

[Neil]

Lada Ray to have a webinar about Trump. Can somebody check it out and take notes for us?

Yes, I signed up for it last week. I should be able to tune into the live webinar after I get home from work.

 

[Mike]

Lada Ray to have a webinar about Trump. Can somebody check it out and take notes for us?

I just signed up and will listen, take notes and then try to post them tomorrow night. If I happen not to post them tomorrow night, then I will post them after work on Monday.

 

[Neil]

Lada Ray to have a webinar about Trump. Can somebody check it out and take notes for us?

I just signed up and will listen, take notes and then try to post them tomorrow night. If I happen not to post them tomorrow night, then I will post them after work on Monday.

According to the invite I got, we're supposed to be able to ask her one question. I have two or three. This is what I've come up with.

There have been rumors circulating on the internet that the NWO gang has been travelling down to Antarctica over the past couple of years to investigate the relics of an ancient advanced civilization similar to Atlantis. There is also the long standing conspiracy theory that a contingent of Nazis built a base there where they smuggled out Hitler's most exotic technologies. Allegedly, the Nazis were able to reverse engineer ancient technology to build UFOs and continue development of the Aryan master race. There has been speculation that the NWO/deep state spooks are going to use this revolutionary technology along with controlled revelations and possibly a faked alien invasion to try and create a sort of sci-fi dictatorship by offering a "miraculous" solution to avert the Mad Max sort of a future that will be developing after the Soros/Davos elite institute a controlled demolition of the world economy. So my question is, do you see any "off the wall" attempts like this by the NWO to preempt the Earth shift and disrupt Trump's presidency by radically changing the rules of the game so much that he essentially becomes a deer in the headlights and is made irrelevant?

In the 4D/5D spheres, what higher dimensional forces are behind Trump, what animates him and drives him, and how doe this compare to the forces behind Putin? Is Trump neither good nor bad in the grand scheme of things, and just the method that the universe has chosen to balance the karma of the Anglo-American axis while mitigating the damage to the rest of the world to the greatest extent possible?

I realize I'm probably chasing goblins with the Antarctica thing, but my curiosity is piqued, so I can't help myself. Do you mind asking my second question or some variation of it if she doesn't address it in the first part of the webinar? Or does somebody else have better questions?

 

[realitybugll]

In regards to Bannon I think a transcript of one his speeches published by Buzzfeed in 2014 might be illuminating. Haven't had the chance to read it, but for anyone that is interested.

_https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.nooRa9GYp#.booerJbP8

Donald Trump’s newly named chief strategist and senior counselor Steve Bannon laid out his global nationalist vision in unusually in-depth remarks delivered by Skype to a conference held inside the Vatican in the summer of 2014.
Well before victories for Brexit and Trump seemed possible, Bannon declared there was a “global tea party movement” and praised European far-right parties like Great Britain’s UKIP and France’s National Front. Bannon also suggested that a racist element in far-right parties “all gets kind of washed out,” and that the West was facing a “crisis of capitalism” after losing its “Judeo-Christian foundation,” and he blasted “crony capitalists” in Washington for failing to prosecute bank executives over the financial crisis.
The remarks — beamed into a small conference room in a 15th-century marble palace in a secluded corner of the Vatican — were part of a 50-minute Q&A during a conference focused on poverty hosted by the Human Dignity Institute that BuzzFeed News attended as part of its coverage of the rise of Europe’s religious right. The group was founded by Benjamin Harnwell, a longtime aide to Conservative member of the European Parliament Nirj Deva, to promote a “Christian voice” in European politics. The group has ties to some of the most conservative factions inside the Catholic Church; Cardinal Raymond Burke, one of the most vocal critics of Pope Francis, who was ousted from a senior Vatican position in 2014, is chair of the group’s advisory board.
BuzzFeed News originally posted a transcript beginning 90 seconds into the then–Breitbart News chairman’s remarks because microphone placement made the opening mostly unintelligible, but we have completed the transcript from a video of the talk on YouTube. You can hear the whole recording at the bottom of the post.
Here is what he said, unedited:

 

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump, Brexit and psychometrics

Interesting article about Big Data being utilized to manufacture messages targeted at specific types of people, allegedly a big part of the reason Trump got elected and also behind Brexit:

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win

That's a really interesting article, thank you for posting this Hithere! Some parts caught my attention and I'd like to comment on them:

[...]

I do wonder why this article hasn't gone viral in the MSM - such a pretty piece of 'evidence' that Trump manipulated the people!

To reach that juicy conclusion a reader would have to.., well, read. -And not the easy kind with instructions and a recognizable TV narrative, but rather process through a couple of extra levels of rather disquieting and complex ideas about how the brain works. The way the article was authored, the reader has to get through the difficult stuff first before the B&W ammunition can be seized upon.

I've found in discussion, when I breach the grand illusion of our wonderful, unique lives and self-awareness and how all thoughts are our own and "advertising doesn't work on me".., people get squirrely and find a way to escape that line of thinking, either by getting loud and uninterruptible, or by just shutting down and leaving. -Or, just as often, they compartmentalize the knowledge so that they can discuss it and recognize its character, but don't allow that their sacred cows might have been planted and spun through those very tactics.

Either way, it's too "programmer-languagey". The much preferred flashy GUI version was, "Russia hacked the election! They planted bad news about Hillary! Grr!". The deep code version is, "Our brains are inherently untrustworthy and nothing you see is what you think it is. The programming is invisible and you don't even feel it happening."

Beyond all of that, though...

I suspect being poor and broken and angry in America played a huge part in getting Trump elected. His being Twitter-active, and the digital social-engineering directing his speechifying was probably useful to catalyze the fuel, but the gas tank was already full.

 

[Seamus]

"Transfer it to another plane" is the key. Haffner escaped Germany for very good reasons: his life was at risk because of his girlfriend or wife (can't remember which). Unless you are faced with that particular situation, you don't have to "escape". You can, effectively, live a life of External Considering. Read about Gurdjieff's life and work during the war, that should give some inspiration.

[...]

Just remember External Considering and the fact that sometimes survival to the other side of a catastrophe is itself a worthy goal. External Considering, Stalking a la Castaneda. Study those things for inspiration.

Laura, thank you for your thoughtful replies to my questions and thanks again for the link to your article.

I have Castenada's Active Side of Infinity on hand so I can review that and I will comb back through the Wave series... Where would you start with G? I've read ISOTM several times and the Gnosis trilogy but I've never tried to tackle the books he wrote. Would William Patterson's Struggle of the Magicians be helpful?

 

[Seamus]

I found an interesting article from earlier in the week:

Added: Meant to say that this is the gist of this article:

Is the Left activated against Trump in order to facilitate Trump doing what he might be wanted to do: impose fascism?

/addition

The Immigration Ban is a Headfake, and We’re Falling For It
Jake Fuentes
{Not sure who Jake Fuentes is... medium.com appears to be a kind of citizen's journalism or self-publishing site but a quick scan of their homepage reveals stories from moveon.org and Amnesty International}

When I read about the incredibly active first week of the Trump administration, I struggle with two competing narratives about what’s really going on. The first story is simple: the administration is just doing what it said it would do, literally keeping its campaign promises. Lots of people won’t agree, but it’s playing to its base. They’re also not really good at this whole government thing yet, so implementation is shaky. The second is more sinister: the administration is deliberately testing the limits of governmental checks and balances to set up a self-serving, dangerous consolidation of power.

This seems like pretty good analysis so far...

A legitimate argument can be made for the former: a relatively extreme and inexperienced administration was just put in place, and they haven’t yet figured out the nuances of government. But a few of the events in the past 72 hours —the intentional inclusion of green card holders in the immigration order, the DHS defiance of a federal judge, and the timing of Trump’s shakeup of the National Security Council — have pointed to a larger story. Even worse, if that larger story is true, if the source of this week’s actions is a play to consolidate power, it’s going really well so far. And that’s because mostly everyone — including those in protests shutting down airports over the weekend— are playing right into the administration’s hand.

I obviously can’t pretend to know the intentions of the new President, but let’s pretend the power consolidation move is what’s actually happening. In fact, let’s pretend we’re the Trump administration (not necessarily Trump himself, more likely his inner circle) for a second. Here’s our playbook:

We launch a series of Executive Orders in the first week. Beforehand, we identify one that our opponents will complain loudly about and will dominate the news cycle. Immigration ban. Perfect.

We craft the ban to be about 20% more extreme than we actually want it to be — say, let’s make the explicit decision to block green card holders from defined countries from entering the US, rather than just visa holders. We create some confusion so that we can walk back from that part later, but let’s make sure that it’s enforced to begin with.

We watch our opposition pour out into the streets protesting the extremes of our public measure, exactly as we intended. The protests dominate the news, but our base doesn’t watch CNN anyway. The ACLU will file motions to oppose the most extreme parts of our measure, that’s actually going to be useful too. We don’t actually care if we win, that’s why we made it more extreme than it needed to be. But in doing so, the lawsuit process will test the loyalty of those enforcing what we say.

While the nation’s attention is on our extreme EO, slip a few more nuanced moves through. For example, reconfigure the National Security Council so that it’s led by our inner circle. Or gut the State Department’s ability to resist more extreme moves. That will have massive benefits down the road — the NSC are the folks that authorize secret assassinations against enemies of the state, including American citizens. Almost nobody has time to analyze that move closely, and those that do can’t get coverage.

When the lawsuits filed by the ACLU inevitably succeed, stay silent. Don’t tell the DHS to abide by the what the federal judge says, see what they do on their own. If they capitulate to the courts, we know our power with the DHS is limited and we need to staff it with more loyal people. But if they continue enforcing our EO until we tell them not to, we know that we can completely ignore the judicial branch later on and the DHS will have our back.

Once the DHS has made their move, walk back from the 20% we didn’t want in the first place. Let the green card holders in, and pretend that’s what we meant all along. The protestors and the ACLU, both clamoring to display their efficacy, jump on the moment to declare a huge victory. The crowds dissipate, they have to go back to work.

When the dust settles, we have 100% of the Executive Order we originally wanted, we’ve tested the loyalty of a department we’ll need later on, we’ve proven we can ignore an entire branch of government, and we’ve slipped in some subtle moves that will make the next test even easier.
We’ve just tested the country’s willingness to capitulate to a fascist regime.

Assuming this narrative is true (again, I have no idea what the administration intends), the “resistance” is playing right into Trump’s playbook. The most vocal politicians could be seen at rallies, close to the headlines. The protests themselves did exactly what they were intended to: dominate the news cycle and channel opposition anger towards a relatively insignificant piece of the puzzle. I’m not saying that green card holders should be stuck in airports — far from it. I’m saying there might be a much larger picture here, and the immigration ban is a distraction.

This narrative sounds plausible to me but a little too cloak and dagger for Trump, from the little I know about him. I haven't read Art of the Deal or followed him too closely until recently though so... maybe? More likely "inner circle" peeps or deep state?

So for those that believe that the power consolidation narrative is true and want to oppose it, how does that happen?

First, stop believing that protests alone do much good. Protests galvanize groups and display strong opposition, but they’re not sufficient. Not only are they relatively ineffective at changing policy, they’re also falsely cathartic to those protesting. Protestors get all kinds of feel-good that they’re among fellow believers and standing up for what’s right, and they go home feeling like they’ve done their part. Even if protestors gain mild, symbolic concessions, the fact that their anger has an outlet is useful to the other side. Do protest, but be very wary of going home feeling like you’ve done your job. You haven’t.

Second, pay journalists to watch for the head fake. That’s their job. Become a paying subscriber to news outlets, then actively ask them to more deeply cover moves like the NSC shakeup. We can no longer breathlessly focus media attention on easy stories like the immigration ban. The real story is much more nuanced and boring — until it’s not.

Third, popular attention must focus less on whether we agree with what the government is doing, and more on whether the system of checks and balances we have in place is working. It is a much bigger deal that the DHS felt they could ignore a federal court than that Trump signed an EO blocking green card holders in the first place. It is a much bigger deal that Trump removed a permanent military presence from the NSC than that he issued a temporary stay on immigration. The immigration ban may be more viscerally upsetting, but the other moves are potentially far more dangerous.

Somehow I doubt he's talking about SOTT :P, but we definitely need more honest journalists who are paying attention! I appreciate that he is advocating for people to calm down and think about the situation instead of reacting mechanically.

Once again, I’m desperately hoping that none of this narrative is actually true, and that we merely have a well-intentioned administration with some execution problems. I’m also hoping and praying that the structure of our democracy is resilient even to the most sophisticated attacks. I’m hoping that the better angels of our nature will prevail. But with each passing day, the evidence tilts more in the other direction.

Thoughts?

 

[Seamus]

Something that's been bothering me... if Obama had all of the pieces in place for imposing martial law why didn't the deep state run a false flag to give him a reason to lock everything down and take over? What were they waiting for? If that's the end game why did they wait? :headscratch:

 

[Laura]

Laura, thank you for your thoughtful replies to my questions and thanks again for the link to your article.

I have Castenada's Active Side of Infinity on hand so I can review that and I will comb back through the Wave series... Where would you start with G? I've read ISOTM several times and the Gnosis trilogy but I've never tried to tackle the books he wrote. Would William Patterson's Struggle of the Magicians be helpful?

Castaneda's book "The Fire From Within" is the one that discusses "Stalking" though I have included it somewhere in The Wave/Adventures series.

Gurdjieff had many talks during the war in Paris and these are recorded in a book "Transcripts of Gurdjieff's Meetings 1941-1946". There is also "Idiots in Paris: The Diaries of J.G. Bennett and Elizabeth Bennett, 1949".

 

[Laura]

Something that's been bothering me... if Obama had all of the pieces in place for imposing martial law why didn't the deep state run a false flag to give him a reason to lock everything down and take over? What were they waiting for? If that's the end game why did they wait? :headscratch:

I think they are a little afraid of martial law and possible reactions to it. Plus, they may have been confident that Hillary would win and it would not be necessary.

 

[obyvatel]

[quote author=Windmill Knight]
That's the key question. The theory of the Fourth Turning is descriptive. But does Bannon confuse descriptive with prescriptive in the same way that fundies want to take actions that will 'force God's hand' into bringing the Apocalypse? Or are the media wrongly making Bannon look confused about it?
[/quote]

Yes. Is Bannon an ideologue, a relatively sophisticated representative of the radical right? I read the buzzfeed link that Woodsman provided. He was talking to a religious audience (Skype conference with a Vatican gathering) in summer 2014. He came across as more composed and diplomatic than Trump in that interaction, but seems to hold a particular ideological stance for ostensibly solving complex problems. A person with a rigid ideological stance and power can be more dangerous than a person with power who is motivated by greed or ego - osit. He seems to have been instrumental in rallying the right wing white nationalist section of the population in the election. One can argue that to defeat the radical left in an election, mobilizing the radical right was necessary strategy. If Bannon is not a racist, then he has successfully manipulated those who are to support his cause. Also, in the Vanity Fair article (_http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/08/breitbart-stephen-bannon-donald-trump-master-plan) mentioned in the article about "The Fourth Turning", Bannon is quoted describing the president as a "blunt instrument" who "may not really get it". If this is accurate, then his intention behind supporting Trump is most likely to manipulate executive decisions to do the bidding of his ideology. Whether or how much he succeeds would depend on the outcome of the power games that are playing and will play out in the corridors of the government. And from early indications, it seems Bannon is doing pretty well.

 

[RflctnOfU]

"Transfer it to another plane" is the key. Haffner escaped Germany for very good reasons: his life was at risk because of his girlfriend or wife (can't remember which). Unless you are faced with that particular situation, you don't have to "escape". You can, effectively, live a life of External Considering. Read about Gurdjieff's life and work during the war, that should give some inspiration.

[...]

Just remember External Considering and the fact that sometimes survival to the other side of a catastrophe is itself a worthy goal. External Considering, Stalking a la Castaneda. Study those things for inspiration.

Laura, thank you for your thoughtful replies to my questions and thanks again for the link to your article.

I have Castenada's Active Side of Infinity on hand so I can review that and I will comb back through the Wave series... Where would you start with G? I've read ISOTM several times and the Gnosis trilogy but I've never tried to tackle the books he wrote. Would William Patterson's Struggle of the Magicians be helpful?

Go to the source.

Kris

 

[Ant22]

Laura, thank you for your thoughtful replies to my questions and thanks again for the link to your article.

I have Castenada's Active Side of Infinity on hand so I can review that and I will comb back through the Wave series... Where would you start with G? I've read ISOTM several times and the Gnosis trilogy but I've never tried to tackle the books he wrote. Would William Patterson's Struggle of the Magicians be helpful?

Castaneda's book "The Fire From Within" is the one that discusses "Stalking" though I have included it somewhere in The Wave/Adventures series.

Gurdjieff had many talks during the war in Paris and these are recorded in a book "Transcripts of Gurdjieff's Meetings 1941-1946". There is also "Idiots in Paris: The Diaries of J.G. Bennett and Elizabeth Bennett, 1949".

The topic of stalking in the context of nasty women was discussed in the SOTT radio show yesterday and as I couldn't find "The Fire from Within" for Kindle to start reading asap Beau posted this link in the chat, which may be useful to share here too: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,6118.0.html

 

[seek10]

Anyway, watch it even if it is a tough one to endure:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...GY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It is a very tough one no matter the angle or point of view approached: German, Russian, Jewish, Polish, ETC. No one is left untouched.

The above one was particular as it takes you literally on a trip back in time.

How many WWII films we watch, it never stops shocking enough. It is complete madness - people's obsession to Hitler, putting their head in sand even when bombs are falling on their head, brutal killings etc. What I observed in the narration of the film is Germans are mad, jews are massive victims, Americans well equipped nice guys who shocked to find the concentration camps and Russians are rapists and murderers. I don't know russian rapist portion, it looks to me a like typical russophobic western narrative. The brutality Germany threatened and implemented when a country doesn't surrender reminds me of modern day ISIS. If Russia didn't stop ISIS, syria would have gone by now, it would have been in russia, china borders with US's support just like in WWII.

 

[Windmill knight]

[quote author=Windmill Knight]
That's the key question. The theory of the Fourth Turning is descriptive. But does Bannon confuse descriptive with prescriptive in the same way that fundies want to take actions that will 'force God's hand' into bringing the Apocalypse? Or are the media wrongly making Bannon look confused about it?

Yes. Is Bannon an ideologue, a relatively sophisticated representative of the radical right? I read the buzzfeed link that Woodsman provided. He was talking to a religious audience (Skype conference with a Vatican gathering) in summer 2014. He came across as more composed and diplomatic than Trump in that interaction, but seems to hold a particular ideological stance for ostensibly solving complex problems. A person with a rigid ideological stance and power can be more dangerous than a person with power who is motivated by greed or ego - osit. He seems to have been instrumental in rallying the right wing white nationalist section of the population in the election. One can argue that to defeat the radical left in an election, mobilizing the radical right was necessary strategy. If Bannon is not a racist, then he has successfully manipulated those who are to support his cause. Also, in the Vanity Fair article (_http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/08/breitbart-stephen-bannon-donald-trump-master-plan) mentioned in the article about "The Fourth Turning", Bannon is quoted describing the president as a "blunt instrument" who "may not really get it". If this is accurate, then his intention behind supporting Trump is most likely to manipulate executive decisions to do the bidding of his ideology. Whether or how much he succeeds would depend on the outcome of the power games that are playing and will play out in the corridors of the government. And from early indications, it seems Bannon is doing pretty well.
[/quote]

One thing that worries me is that Bannon's interpretation (correct or not) of 'The Fourth Turning' thesis sounds a lot like Samuel Huntington's 'Clash of Civilizations', which was much applauded by the neocons and was one of their inspirations. There is that idea in there that there will be an unavoidable confrontation with China and Islam. Again, if a theory of history is descriptive of cycles or patterns, and even if it tries to make predictions, that's science and that's ok. But to take such theses as destiny, to the point that those in power think they have an important role to play in it, has a dangerous schizoidal flavor to it. Think of Marx, Lenin and the "bearded intellectuals" Lobaczewski gave as examples of schizoids, who were trying to bring about the global revolution.

Then contrast with how Putin would take such a theory if one of his advisors whispered it to his ear. Would he decide that it's time to prepare for WWIII and make the first strategic moves in that direction because that is what History has declared? Or would he, on the contrary, do as much as he can to find alternative solutions, while being cautiously prepared, because he will not accept that is a necessity? I think he is smart enough to do the second. But Trump? I'm afraid not, as his stance towards China and Iran shows lately. Bannon's comment about the "blunt instrument" is quite telling too.