a reply to:
zosimov
Im basically a Chaotic Good alignment, so that should tell where I fall on such things
Problem is that "we" have no real points of negotiation or leverage. Particularly if we consider that destabilization is a key point to the plans
here.
In history, it would be like people in a walled city or castle claiming they are going to "resist" the sieging forces. Of course they will, right?
Thats the whole idea of the siege itself. The longer it goes on and the more the inside of the walls lose social structure, the easier it is to take
over.
The only way(s) to actually succeed is if that city/castle has everything it needs to survive internally. Food, manufacturing, energy, information,
etc.
We are essentially dealing with a global siege, initially focusing on the strongholds of regions that will put up the most fight (basically the
"west"). Resistance is expected and encouraged, and is seen to be a largely empty threat when the sieging force is controlling everything that comes
in & out of the area.
This is greatly exacerbated when a meaningful percentage of the besieged population has been convinced to believe that tyranny is For the Greater Good
through compromised information channels.
This means that the best course(s) of action will not only alleviate pressure points like food and buying/selling markets, but that the path to do so
must be largely (or entirely) apolitical. And lets be real.. Thats a difficult task.
Further, many who might actually help the besieged population have been demoralized into thinking its already a lost cause and pointless. These folks
tend to spend their time & effort spreading their demoralization, and that response is (imo) intentionally cultivated and inculcated.
The advantage we have in modern year is that the actual processes and systems that could effectively fight back can be
very rapidly deployed.
This might be our biggest advantage, and the Achilles heel to the whole plan.
Their plans are so comprehensive, wide scale, and long term that it can seem intimidating and hopeless.. But a wrench in the right spot can grind it
to a halt.
Its weaknesses are glaring, which is why the information battle relies on confusion and demoralization. They need to openly claim the plans (like "The
Great Reset"), but not cover them meaningfully or genuinely in media. Then, to demoralize those who dont consume the manipulative MSM (including
social media), they need a show of force (lockdowns, etc) accompanied by a Narrative that cultivates ineffective methods of fighting back. When
playing by their rules, meaning corporate-political pre-made battlegrounds, losing is all but ensured though.
Establishing non-compromised lines of communication/information and gaining granular self-sufficiency would be a massive victory. Particularly if it
is implemented in a way that can quickly deploy changes and advancements. We
do have the tools to do that, and they are even available in the
mainstream market. However, the biggest hurdle here is actual participation as well as asking for a dramatic perspective shift in how we approach
"things."
It all starts with ideas though, and even with such extensively controlled information channels, non-corporate-political seeds can still get planted
and spread like wildfire. If done correctly and in the right environment, that can lead to increased participation in unison with a perspective
shift.
One of the things that keeps my faith is the relative lack of proportionate reciprocation from the social group labeled "the right." Thats greatly
encouraging as it is frequently a conscious decision, as well as relatively novel in group dynamics, but probably a whole subject on its own.