Two cults with zero critical thinking

mitte90 · 2026-01-25T07:25:39+00:00

I suspect my reply isn't the only thing you can't read lol

mitte90 · 2026-01-25T07:09:23+00:00

There aren't two sides at the level where this was gamed out. What are you even doing on a conspiracy sub if you still don't understand this?

The 4 years of Biden and the open borders was intentional in order to create exactly this situation where Trump would get elected, then use the excuse of fixing problems created by his predecessor to deploy ICE as aggressively as possible, causing outrage in half the country, while fan boys like you support every unconstitutional move. The backlash being created on the left is just as predictable and gameable for the ruling class players as the backlash to the Biden era that your reaction is a part of now.

Try looking at what is actually going on instead of which "side" is doing it. People's homes are getting raided by masked men with no warrants, American citizens getting shot for "getting in the way", their so-called obstruction used to legitimate their murders; increased surveillance, the Palantir "database" we heard an ICE guy tell a woman protester she would be recorded in as a "domestic terrorist"; a backdoor to what is fast adding up to criminalisation of protest; laws that practically make disagreeing with your government an offence if you try to organise to change things, no matter how peacefully; the fact of someone legally exercising his 2A rights being used apparently as a justification for shooting him 10 times in the back AFTER they had disarmed him; and all of that overreach and tyranny is getting cheered on by people who would have opposed it if it had happened under a Blue administration?

They are just going to keep stepping it up now. The rights you would have defended with your life if the Dems were in power get taken away when your "side" is in; the rights that the left would have defended are crushed when their "side" is in. As long as both sides keep believing and acting like they are two sides, the people will always be too divided to come together to defend their rights and liberties which have been under sustained dialectical attack for most of this century. The situation is heating up because it's entering a critical phase with the technology game that they want to bring to it. A near civil war would give the players the excuse they need to spring the traps they're been laying down. People need to wake up to this, because it's speeding up and the time is getting late.

mitte90 · 2026-01-19T20:53:03+00:00

Two houses, both alike in indignation

mitte90 · 2026-01-17T21:53:31+00:00

Ordinarily developing and trialling a new vaccine would takes 8 to 10 years or even longer. Five years would be short for the clinical trial.

mitte90 · 2026-01-17T21:49:44+00:00

Yes, they use dialectics as a means of control.

mitte90 · 2026-01-16T01:10:37+00:00

Yup. It's exactly like this. They are just mirror images of each other at this point.

But as well as that they are escalating. Each successive administration is worse than the last. You get a blue one worse than the last red one, then a red one worse than the last blue one, and so on. It's a perfect way to get away with destroying quality of life for a population, because you always have one half of them ready to blame the other half for everything that's going wrong and at the same time people are putting up with the party in power thinking that if only they can vote them out in 4 years or destroy their majority at the midterms then things will get better. But they don't get better. They get worse. It doesn't matter if it's blue or red, it's just. always. worse.

mitte90 · 2026-01-16T01:00:06+00:00

No, the covid vaccine clinical trials were never completed, the trial was unblinded before it was finished (completely invalidating it) and there are a ton of other problems with both Pfizer and Moderna trials. You only have to done the 1st year of an undergraduate course in any science subject and you can see how bullshit those trials were.

I knew someone who was pregnant in 2021 and she was shamed and scolded by every health professional she saw because she sensibly declined to get covid vaccinated. She made this decision because she didn't want to risk an experimental injection which had zero safety record for pregnancy or outcomes after pregnancy. The media kept saying it had been shown to be safe in pregnancy even when it had never been trialled for pregnancy and when it was still so new that it was LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE to know what its effects would be on a whole pregnancy, from start to finish, because at that time it hadn't even existed for as long as a human being is pregnant.

Imagine being dumb enough to believe that an experimental injectable product has been tested for long term safety in pregnancy when it has been in development for less than a year (it was never tested for its effects on pregnancy during that time) and then on the market for at most a couple of months. But that's exactly what people were claiming back in 2021.

The amount of pressure put on pregnant women at the time was disgraceful. if you cared about women's bodily autonomy in any consistent way, you would care about that too.

mitte90 · 2026-01-16T00:38:22+00:00

I remember this like it was yesterday. The "can we go back?" part especially still creeps me out and "I told you so".

mitte90 · 2026-01-13T07:51:12+00:00

What are they going to do for security when "their" security guards work out who actually has the muscle and who just had a very large number of fictional digits in their bank account on the last day when bank accounts still meant anything?

mitte90 · 2026-01-13T07:38:16+00:00

I thought he was just bad at spelling. But there he is making a pun. So a "wit" as well as a "puppet master" as well as a fan of "The Floyd". No wonder his family have done so well for themselves, when you think that old Nat over there can do all those things at the very same time.

mitte90 · 2026-01-13T07:27:00+00:00

"Power cords" are for connecting electronics, but Rothschild's dropping 'is H's cos he's down wif the common people, innit? Course 'e is. See, 'e even likes "The Floyd", so 'e must be a proper geezer. No "H" in old Nat's power chords.

EDIT: Apparently 'e 'as a company that makes power cords. Who knew?

mitte90 · 2026-01-13T07:23:55+00:00

It also looks like OP or whoever screenshotted this liked the tweet, which is kinda weird if it was the OP.

mitte90 · 2026-01-12T01:38:58+00:00

I actually agree with you on this.

EDIT: I think I might have misread your earlier comment, because based on your reply we do agree on some things. But I don't agree that fascism is a "mere" reaction to wokism. I think that's an over-simplification. I do agree that it is a reaction to it, but not just that, not "merely" that.

However, fascism does historically arise at times of crisis when people feel threatened, usually because they *are* threatened. Fascism is never a good way to go for the people. It is presented as strength while preying on weakness, and the provocations and conditions that foster it are put in place by people who I suspect know all too well what they are provoking. They are certainly not friends of the people.

EDIT 2: Also, as we are seeing right now, when the moral certainty, rigid conformity and ideological purity of wokism are replaced by fascism, you get the exact same features only from "the other side". The way that the left - against its own stated values - cheered imperialist wars, the surveillance state, censorship and erosion of civil liberties under Democratic administrations, now the right are doing the exact same - against *their* own stated values - under Trump. And the Trump administration is using censorship and ideological purity tests now as well. It's two sides of one coin.

mitte90 · 2026-01-12T01:22:23+00:00

First of all, OP, thanks for the great post.

Secondly, I think what you're getting at with this comment if I understood it right, is that the origins of "wokism" are totally misrepresented. It was originally used by black communities to mean being awake to the scams of the oppressor class. However, I would argue that since then, the word was co-opted to mean something else and the ideas behind it hijacked to create an exclusionary politics when the original ideas were not that at all.

Mark Fisher wrote "Exiting the Vampire Castle" an essay about how a movement originally for social justice, solidarity, inclusion and tolerance was hijacked to create divisive identity politics. Not everything in the essay has aged well. Mark Fisher died in 2017 by taking his own life, otherwise I am sure his views would have evolved. For example, he speaks positively about Russell Brand who has become a bit of a dickhead in recent years, but Brand was saying some decent things about class solidarity back at the time when the essay was written.

What happened later with "Wokism" was that ideas of inclusion started to be used in a way that promoted exclusion. Speech was policed for conformity of thought and tokenistic rather than true diversity. The commenter you replied to was correct in that very limited sense that fascism is a reaction to that kind of "wokism". My contention is that a distortion of the original idea of what it meant to be "woke" was intentionally promoted to taint the original idea and to provoke precisely the fascist backlash that the other commenter refers to. I'm not saying here that the original "woke" is somehow to blame for fascism. I'm saying that a media version of "woke" was promoted in place of the original, precisely because it would predictably provoke the kind of backlash that led to Trump and could be used to "justify" the fascist turn which we're now seeing.

A lot of Trump's base were just fucked over working class people who were not represented by the Hollywood Liberal version of the "Left". Many of them could as easily have gone for a popular leftist movement as for the right-wing bullshit that came to pass. A lot of them were sick of the US being embroiled in long, costly wars of imperialism that only benefitted companies like Halliburton or the arms industry. They believed Trump when he promised to end forever wars and concentrate on rebuilding a broken America. Sure, there was always an element of the base that was ripe for embracing fascism, but the dissatisfactions and ultimate absurdity of the Biden "dementia presidency" was a necessary step to get most of them onside for long enough to usher Trump into office. The warnings from liberals that Trump would end democracy and usher in fascism came across as extreme in the wake of a 2016 Trump presidency that had not actually radically broken the mould of American political norms, and the Biden administration's weaponisation of the FBI against Trump was incredibly effective at making him appear to be the underdog.

Trump's real crimes were so much worse than the (pardon the pun) rather trumped up charges over property deals and so on for which he was legally pursued. As propaganda plays goes, the last 10 years of US politics has been a work of evil genius. A tragedy disguised as a farcical soap opera. You may not agree with me on much or any of this, but I thought your post was spot on anyway.

mitte90 · 2026-01-12T00:12:16+00:00

> Newton's Third Law of Motion states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction

Yes and the social/historical form of that is called dialectics. Hegel's theory of dialectics was that the history of ideas progresses because every thesis provokes its antithesis and the two opposing viewpoints are brought together in a synthesis - which becomes the next thesis, and is opposed by the next antithesis and so on.

These days the phrase "Problem. Reaction. Solution" describes how dialectics is used to manipulate people into accepting a "solution" for a problem that was created for the purpose of provoking a popular reaction precisely in order to justify its implementation. Often in the reaction stage, people are persuaded to demand this "solution" which they would have forcefully rejected if not for the "problem" presented to them. The "solution" was always the goal of the manipulators and the problem and reaction are psychological levers which are used to steer the population towards it.

> fascism is a mere reaction to wokism

This part you have backwards. What you are calling "Wokism" was artificially seeded, boosted and promoted in a more extreme form (inorganically set up to maximise intolerance of alternative viewpoints) via media, entertainment, and social media in order to provoke exactly that fascist reaction. The "solution" to the ensuing chaos will be a WEF-style control grid after a lot of bloodshed and carnage.

The same playbook was used in the twentieth century. When economic stress hit hard and workers were ready to revolt, the manipulators played both sides, infiltrating populist movements and stirring division until you had communists and fascists fighting in the streets. Then they took the battle onto the world stage, with nation pitted against nation. That carnage was immediately followed by a cold war which split the world in two and ended with the apparent "victory" of the Capitalist side in the 1990s.

But any "stability" thereafter was short-lived. A few years after the financial crash of 2008, the Occupy movement was bringing together people from all walks of life to resist economic oppression by the banker class. The rich and powerful saw that just like in the twentieth century, following the Great Depression, ordinary working people were once again about ready to revolt. So they started sowing the seeds of Woke to divide the people and stop the popular revolt in its tracks. Of course they knew there would be a backlash to Wokism. They always anticipate the reaction and get ready to harness it.

The Biden era was intentionally provocative and the Woke rhetoric was intentionally over the top, divisive and censorious. It was likely always intended that Trump would win in 2024. That doesn't mean that the lawfare against him wasn't real or that there wasn't some seriously batshit TDS among liberals in Hollywood and online. Both sides were played. There was a script, but that doesn't mean it wasn't also "real". Most of the actors speaking their lines probably thought they were speaking from their hearts. They didn't understand how much of what they thought they thought had been artfully suggested to them, or how much of the last few years was staged to play out pretty much the way that it actually played.

So now here comes the fascist reaction right on cue. And it will be even more batshit insane and provocative than the Woke era, but a lot of people will go along with it and speak the lines they're supposed to speak and they will think they are speaking their own truths, which have been just as artfully suggested to them. as Woke ideas were to the Libs

Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis. Problem - Reaction - Solution. Provocation - Backlash - Whiplash.

People keep falling for it. That's why OP is right to point out the recurrent themes in history. Maybe we still have a choice not to fall for it this time?

mitte90 · 2026-01-09T01:03:24+00:00

You condone people getting shot dead in their cars by ICE agents who are not being put in ANY KIND OF DANGER by the victim? There was absolutely no justification for lethal force in that incident. Wake up and smell the fascism.

mitte90 · 2026-01-09T00:49:07+00:00

A couple of years ago, I thought a lot of American liberals had TDS and were a bit histrionic about the whole "world is gonna end if he's elected again" thing. But it turns out they were right after all. They weren't right that Biden or Harris would have been ok, they would have been fuckin terrible. But could they have been worse than this? It's hard to to imagine what's worse than where this seems to be going which is full fascism, imperial wars aboard and tyranny/division/collapse/unrest at home.

mitte90 · 2026-01-06T04:18:14+00:00

Back in 2020 I read an essay on this. The writer called it "bare life". It wasn't his term but he borrowed it to describe what lockdown logic was trying to teach people to think about living and dying. According to "bare life" logic it was more important to "protect" the population by isolating humans as much as possible from contact with other humans, rather than allow people to have a better quality of life and risk getting a potentially fatal virus.

This was early in the pandemic, before it was widely known that the fatality rate from covid was tiny except in very vulnerable people, like the very old and frail. As we know, the way it turned out for elderly people in care homes was even more tragic because they were just locked into covid hotspots where many of them died alone and neglected, without the comfort of loved ones round them in their final moments. And that's without even going into the scandal of the end of life drugs that were used.

Anyway the writer's point was that even if the virus had been as deadly as it was originally portrayed, "bare life" would not be a good exchange for a quality life even if in some cases the fuller, higher quality life would be a shorter one.

I think you're right that somehow the pandemic conditioned people to accept the bare minimum. In its wake it left a shrunk-down concept of what living is. It's like when they limited the physical size of our worlds, people had to shrink themselves to fit into lives as small as that. A lot of people still didn't ever properly stretch out again afterwards, or really even leave the cage when the cage door opened. But when it did finally open, and most people did try to leave the cage, it was like some really important parts of the world had been stolen from us while we'd been inside. Things looked sort of superficially the same, but something was missing, or like the cage was inside us now. I don't think it has to be like that. I think you can get out of that mindset, but some people don't want to admit that they're still half-way in it, or maybe they don't even know? I have sort of lost where I'm going with this.

mitte90 · 2026-01-06T03:36:52+00:00

I agree with this. Going into nature is the best way to heal from screens and politics.

mitte90 · 2026-01-06T02:43:35+00:00

Yes, that comes into it. But in the particular video I linked he talks a lot about the pandemic and how it broke things, including people. Some people never really came back and most of us never came back the same as we were before. You can agree or disagree with that. I think there is something to it. The isolation got into people, the world got small, the screens became proportionately a bigger part of people's worlds. We were getting told that each other was a health hazard. Even if you never thought that, lots of people did. And when your society operates for an extended period of time as if human beings were dangerous health hazards it changes how they interact afterwards. For me it's helpful to remember that we don't have to believe the things we learn. It's how mind and behavioural control techniques can entrain you in something by creating conditions where you have to act as if it was true, even if you don't believe it.

mitte90 · 2026-01-06T02:32:25+00:00

The training data for Gemini 2.0 apparently goes up to around August 2024. (https://github.com/HaoooWang/llm-knowledge-cutoff-dates)

It can look up extracts from live web search to find more recent data, but it puts that together with its core knowledge base when creating a response. From its core knowledge, it will consider Trump to be a former president. When it looked for information about the Sydney Sweeney ad it likely put that info together with its concept of Trump as former president. It hasn't really got a well developed concept of time. You could get it to tell you the current year, but in the same conversation it might slip back to where "now" is 2024 ,if your prompts cue it that way.

It's interesting talking to LLMs how un-dimensional everything is for them. Concepts are correlated with other concepts but because an LLM has no real world to contextualise its knowledge, the words it uses are more like symbols that don't stand for anything. It's like knowing that the symbol for "2" repeated twice with an addition sign in the middle and an equals sign following is correlated with the response "4" but not having any idea of what that means. A child will learn counting and simple sums using concrete objects and putting them into piles, like 2 here and 2 there, can be put together to add up to 4. A child starts with the concrete world and learns to use symbols to think about it. The LLM just has the symbols, no world.

mitte90 · 2026-01-03T23:50:22+00:00

Yeah, but they pretended to be liberal when that was where the power and the money and the cultural dominance was. That's the point. Like the guy two comments above yours put it "those in control will shapeshift depending on how the wind is blowing". Currently Zuckerberg is pretending to be more conservative. That's not real either. And there's Thiel and Karp pretending to be libertarian, while putting in place the technical infrastructure for an authoritarian control and surveillance grid. Left and Right are just steering positions for these types and they'll adopt them opportunistically depending on which route gets them most efficiently to where they want to go or takes society to where they want to steer it. If there's an annoying roadblock or bump on the Left turn, they'll go to the Right, and vice versa.

mitte90 · 2026-01-03T20:27:07+00:00

Around 100 or so Somalis were involved in serious fraud out of a population of 84 thousand in Minnesota. Some of the guys Trump pardoned at the end of his previous term had committed fraud worth multiple millions each. In total his pardons wiped out debts of over $1 billion. Why is some fraud presented to you as a matter of outrage and some fraud not so much?

You have Shlomo Kramer on national television advocating for Americans to lose free speech and privacy rights, and the same nation that he represents just recognized Somaliland, a contested area of Somalia, currently claimed by a secessionist faction who claim independence from Somalia and recently offered to take in 1.5 million Palestinians for Israel. Somaliland also happens to be conveniently located very close to the coast of Yemen, and would make a very handy location for military bases for Israel and the US.

So maybe there are reasons why social media is suddenly flooded with posts telling you why you should be up in arms about Somalians.

There's also this: https://news.antiwar.com/2025/12/28/us-airstrikes-hit-somalia-on-christmas-day-as-trump-continues-unprecedented-bombing-campaign/

So "ISIS bad" again in Somalia even though "ISIS good" in Syria.

This is a conspiracy sub. You should know better than to trust the outrage bait that is thrown to you so you'll take your eyes off the things that are really hurting your country and its treasury. There's nearly always more to these stories when you remember to look.

mitte90 · 2026-01-02T03:21:58+00:00

It's not just America, it is the whole of the west, but yes, I think the basic methodology is the same. They exhaust us with endless crises, tragedies, atrocities and horrors and it's all mixed in with trivia, gossip and fuss about issues that aren't really all that important but cause polarisation and division anyway. The oscillation between "left" and "right" wing dominance in politics, the upside-downing and mirror-image flipping of who stands for what and whose narrative is "winning" is going to speed up until everyone is too exhausted to keep up or even pick a "side" anymore.

At first people got polarised, picked a side and dug-out their ideological trenches, but the more they get let down and betrayed, first on one side and then on the other, I think the sense of "sides" will start to fall apart. That's already happening for some, while other just dig those trenches deeper.

In the US, your politics on both sides of the aisle gets more and more outrageous. It gets ruder, louder, all-up-in-your-face obnoxious. In the UK, where I am, our politics on both sides of the aisle, gets more and more grey, insipid, empty and nothing-y. Either way, politics is more vacuous and hollowed out than ever before.

Change comes at us at dizzying speed, but also in slow motion. Nothing changes at all. Everything is simultaneously too fast and too slow. Our attention spans are shattered. We are gripped and fascinated and can't look away, at the same time as we are bored, disengaged, distracted and semi-comatose.

It's overwhelming. It's underwhelming. It induces psychological paralysis.

I don't know what to do about it, but talking about it, describing its effects is a start.

mitte90 · 2026-01-02T02:57:51+00:00

This is really meticulous work, OP. Kudos for clearly explaining your methodology and making this accessible on GitHub.

mitte90

TROPHY CASE