[sterling_archer]

Btw, I read somewhere that AJ's family are all ex CIA. You know how the saying goes "once CIA, always CIA."

[Syberpunk]

I don't think Molyneux is controlled opposition as such, he just knows that he is so big at this point if he returned to what he originally thought, he'd start losing his wealth. I still watch however for other "arguments".

When start talking about a missing 28 pages (You think we'd even be let know this) and Saudi Arabia is a total farce and that all that shit and it becomes a sideshow what really occured.

[Transsimian]

Brief summary, the media pump up the racist far-right to make actual new right people look bad by association.

[Easy_C]

Someone being sincere and controlled opposition aren't exclusive. The ideal useful idiot is Moderate IQ (smart enough to grasp the idea they are supposed to spread but too dumb to see how they're being played) egotistical, and sincere.

[Mercenary]

(12-18-2017 04:55 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  

Someone being sincere and controlled opposition aren't exclusive. The ideal useful idiot is Moderate IQ (smart enough to grasp the idea they are supposed to spread but too dumb to see how they're being played) egotistical, and sincere.

I agree.

Ideally, you would want a lot of the people you are using as controlled opposition not to be aware they are being controlled at all.
Or even if they somehow vaguely suspect something, they cannot prove it.


Examples of controlled opposition not being aware they are controlled:

1. Big Money & lots of support coming from unknown sources they cannot trace

2. Special treatment or leniency from those in power despite not deserving it, or having no connections to them

3. A rise to "fame" that seems too good to be true

4. Anonymous sources giving them small bits of accurate secret information. Sources which cannot be traced.

5. 2nd tier people in power (ex politicians, middle grade military personnel, semi rich people, etc) give credibility to the controlled opposition either by mentioning them in public, appearing as their guest, or speaking with them in private. (In reality these people have never defected from the power structure, they are just playing a role.)


The above privleges are all quickly withdrawn when the controlled opposition make a "mistake". In many instances the controlled opposition don't even know what they did wrong....just that they fucked up big time. While everything falls apart around them, they go into a panic.....Then weeks, months or years later they are given suggestions on how to fix things by "people in the know".


Good Example:

Alex Jones apologizing for pizzagate affair after talking about it for months and months.

[Foolsgo1d]

Interesting thread and I believe it has been very succesful for those who wanted to shut down nationalistic movements.

Richard Spencer.

When this guy came onto the scene a poster here claimed he was a fraud and funded by the people he was supposedly against.

He was not suspended off twitter, facebook and other media but instead thrown into the open arena and made to goad his opposition into attacking him. Now the soldier on the street (BLM, Antifa, MSM journo's) don't need to know the real story but instead they are relied upon to use their useful idiot tag and to attack him.

Then the so-called alt-right useful idiots rally around this man and start throwing sieg heils and it was topped off at Charlottesville with fucking Tikki torches for fucks sake!

Great optics for those who want to make a case to the masses that these far right members of society are here and they are real.

It was a trap.

The results speak for themselves and to this day we see it as a very good example to crack down on their free speach. The men who showed up lost their jobs and became unemployable in some cases.

Good job idiots. Not only did you get suckered into a trap but you let your position become exposed. Can't do shit in the USA when you're worse off financially and a social outcast.

But where is Richard Spencer these days? Is he a social outcast jettisoned by social media and fearing for his life and looking over his shoulders or looking for new jobs?

Nope.

https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/media

Are his videos blacklisted and sent to youtube purgatory? oh wait he doesn't need a channel because he gets them from ABC, Huffington Post, etc. Big names, big audiences. And where are the anti-Islam clerics getting their air time?

Nope.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_q...rd+spencer

Look at the platforms he was given. Who the fuck is this guy and why does he have access to the MSM unlike so many pro-white, pro-national pride men and women?

This isn't a case of a man being too big to ban because they banned that blazing faggot Milo and many others who didn't even have half of this guys anti-migrant, anti-non white material.

Is he the target of the FBI, state police and the DOJ? No, he is not. Unlike others of his kind who are subjected to regular police investigations and state funded blacklisting.

Tommy Robinson got put in a cell with Muslims and all he did was stepping on the toes by calling out the mass rapes of children. Was Spencer put in a cell full of angry black dudes?

Blows my mind away when influential youtubers still want interviews with this plant. Has to be one of the biggest own goals of any pro-Trump movement to have included this guy.

[Raylan Givens]

I don't think Alex Jones is controlled opposition. I think he's just a shill and a bit of a conman.

[david.garrett84]

(12-18-2017 07:39 PM)Raylan Givens Wrote:  

I don't think Alex Jones is controlled opposition. I think he's just a shill and a bit of a conman.

A-ha, Raylan Givens! We always knew you were a stooge for Colgate and their mind-altering fluoride-based toothpastes!

Only with Alex Jones' SuperBlue Fluoride-Free Toothpaste can you free yourself from globalist-poisoned air particles that give you cavities!

https://www.infowarsstore.com/super-blue...paste.html

[Teedub]

(12-18-2017 10:35 AM)Number one bummer Wrote:  

Talcom X

That nickname never fails to make me laugh.

(12-18-2017 04:55 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  

Someone being sincere and controlled opposition aren't exclusive. The ideal useful idiot is Moderate IQ (smart enough to grasp the idea they are supposed to spread but too dumb to see how they're being played) egotistical, and sincere.

Tommy Robinson fits that mould, especially now he's with Ezra Levant.

[911]

(12-18-2017 12:04 PM)Truth Tiger Wrote:  

Any dogmatic religious institution qualifies per Mercenary's list. The Roman Catholic Church, which I was indoctrinated into as a child and experienced fully into my twenties, absolutely fits as its 2000 year bloody history demonstrates. I love Christ, but the RC church is an abomination, and definitely not about 'the salvation of man.'

You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater here, Tiger. Pre-Vatican II, the Catholic Church was a positive cultural force. It was the main barrier in the West to the cultural degeneracy we've been subjected to for decades, having for instance enforced the Hollywood Code on film, which ((the Industry)) finally broke in the late 1960s.

A lot of our problems today stem from its demise through the machinations of its enemies in projects like Vatican II. As a hierarchical organization, it was particularly vulnerable to this centuries long multi-generational effort to subvert it from within.

E. Michael Jones does a great job documenting this:

[Raylan Givens]

Ben Shapiro. Maybe even someone like Mike Cernovich. "Safe" alt-lite alternatives.

[Dragan]

(12-18-2017 12:29 PM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

Btw, I read somewhere that AJ's family are all ex CIA. You know how the saying goes "once CIA, always CIA."

Very possible but i don't think he is. Main reason is after 9/11 he pushed 9/11 was a false flag meme a lot and he lost a lot of viewers. He kept going at it for years.

Top suspects for me:

Cernovich- Military background i'm pretty sure, but could find very little about it on the internet. Also isn't it a bit creepy he's supposedly friends with Alan Derschowitz, who used to pal around with Jeffrey Epstein.
Spencer- How isn't he banned form Social media platforms after hailgate? Or today, even, with the Twitter purge. The fact that he's not a typical supremacist also is setting off warning bells for me. He gets too much media attention... Way too much...
Jason Kessler- I read somewhere that he was ex- occupy wall street. Had trouble corroborating it on the internet. Anyway, I'd never heard of him being in the alt-right movement prior to the mayhem in VA, unlike say Kevin MacDonald, Nathan Damigo, Spencer, Duke, et al.

[RaccoonFace]

(12-19-2017 08:05 PM)Raylan Givens Wrote:  

Ben Shapiro. Maybe even someone like Mike Cernovich. "Safe" alt-lite alternatives.

Only one of these two is controlled opposition, in my opinion.

Shapiro's beliefs align mostly with what elites want, he's not edgy at all: Zionism, interventionism, economic libertarianism, pretends to be anti-immigration but supports pro-(legal) immigration shills like Cruz, anti-Trump during the election, pro-feminism despite claiming to be a social conservative. Shapiro is of the malignant type, he's a smart guy who knows what he's doing. Yes, he does argue against gay marriage and abortion, but does so in the typical ineffective Republican manner. The only thing "edgy" (if you can call it that in the US) thing about him is his anti-gun control stance, which puts him at odds with other neocons like David Frum.

Cernovich may be a moderate compared to the alt right, but he advocates for things that elites don't want - he's anti-interventionism, anti-immigration, anti-Islam, anti-feminism, though he seems to be soft on gays. He's also absolutely hated by shitlibs and cuckservatives, while Shapiro is in the respectable conservative™ club.

[Transsimian]

(12-19-2017 08:22 PM)Dragan Wrote:  

Top suspects for me:
Cernovich- Military background i'm pretty sure, but could find very little about it on the internet. Also isn't it a bit creepy he's supposedly friends with Alan Derschowitz, who used to pal around with Jeffrey Epstein.

MikeCF is a well repped member here.

[Dragan]

(12-19-2017 08:39 PM)Transsimian Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 08:22 PM)Dragan Wrote:  

Top suspects for me:
Cernovich- Military background i'm pretty sure, but could find very little about it on the internet. Also isn't it a bit creepy he's supposedly friends with Alan Derschowitz, who used to pal around with Jeffrey Epstein.

MikeCF is a well repped member here.

That's actually pretty cool. Didn't realize we had a celeb on RVF.

Anyway, according to him he was in the military, attended OCS and never deployed. I think he would be a prime candidate for military intelligence, but it's just conjecture on my part. In general, alt-lite figures are way more palatable for the masses.

[Delta]

(12-18-2017 10:47 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Trump only has 3, 4, 9, and 10.

So to be clear, you're saying that the following criteria DO NOT apply to Trump:

Quote:

1. Get more mainstream media coverage and high exposure than they really should

2. Seem to have suspiciously high amounts of money and operational help

5. At certain times act in extreme or weird ways which discredits themselves, and in turn put a bad reputation on the entire oppositional movement and its beliefs

6. Smart people with the same beliefs avoid being (or are embarrassed) to be openly associated with them

I couldn't disagree more. These points sound like they were written with Trump specifically in mind.

[Easy_C]

The problem with Trump is that it's very hard to tell for a couple reasons.

2: Trump has a huge amount of cash on hand to begin with, and ran a very cheap campaign relative to normal presidential politics. He had cash from a few select sources like Peter Thiel but for the most part the entirety of the donor class avoided him.

5: Hard to tell here because Trump has a background in media as well as being naturally skilled at using controversy to enhance his own image and agenda. Meanwhile people like Jones are trained that way by professionals. Most likely that overlap is because both of them learned the skillset from the same PR consultants.

6: Could be either due to controlled opposition or because the system as a whole is attempting to violently eject him. Part of the latter involves socially isolating the target.

[Super_Fire]

Trump as controlled opposition makes no sense. On the face of it, yes, but it's too risky to put controlled opposition, who also happens to be a loose cannon with no filter, into the presidency of the United States.

It's one thing for him to be a Spencer-esque journeyman on the fringes of polite society, or a YouTube shock jockey, or a Twitter star. It's another thing for him to the president.

Here's what Jon Rappaport had to say recently about this conspiracy:

"[Trump] is not the Deep State's version of what a president is supposed to be.

Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Barack Obama---they were good boys. Globalists. The intelligence establishment and the military industrial complex knew "the situation" was well in hand. Trump is the strange intruder. The "crazy one."

If his swaggering indifference to the Deep State's agenda is merely a pose---a formidable acting job---then why is he subjected to withering attacks every day, even from his own Party? After all, he has surrounded himself with Goldman Sachs big shots---can't they be relied on to keep him in check? What's the problem?

Well, one huge problem is he keeps attacking mainstream media. He lashes out and calls them Fake News. He takes every opportunity to accuse them of lying. No president in modern history has dared to work that angle. Understand that the intelligence establishment---a major component of the Deep State---uses major media to shape public perception on an ongoing basis. Gunslinger Trump is upsetting that applecart, at a time when public trust in mainstream news is, all on its own, eroding. He isn't supposed to be piling on.

If Trump's attacks on The News are a carefully crafted theatrical ploy, somehow designed to serve the Deep State, where is the payoff?

For all the "Hegelian dialectic" people, who insist that Trump was put into office to whipsaw the public to the other side, after the socialist Obama had done his assigned job: consider the fact that any corporatist Republican candidate could have served that function---instead of a fast-talking, shooting-from-the-hip, swaggering narcissist cowboy Crazy, who suddenly began spouting anti-Globalist pro-nationalist rhetoric to a worldwide audience.

"Well, you see, they needed a really strong America-first nationalist guy, Trump, so they could take him down and snuff out the flames of separate nations, once and for all. They also wanted to exacerbate the divide-and-conquer strategy for America---causing the deepest conflicts to come to the surface and rip America apart at the seams"---

I'm not rejecting those arguments completely; but I am saying elite controllers would be taking quite a gamble with that strategy, because the Trump effect vis-à-vis nationalism is formidable, and elite Globalists aren't in the habit of encouraging all the points that defeat their own stance. They aren't in the habit of pushing a man into the spotlight (and the Oval Office) who talks those points endlessly and puts dangerous ideas into millions of minds. Whether fake or real, Trump is that man, he talks that talk, and he does it relentlessly. There was no way to stage the 2016 election without spawning all this anti-Globalist rhetoric?

Trump has also attacked the intelligence establishment and the FBI. Not just once, but many times. Yes, you could say his appointments to headline jobs in those agencies belie his words---but why allow such a president to exist in the first place? Trump is actually mirroring a few of the major charges the political Left has leveled at the intel establishment for decades. And people out in the real world are agreeing with his harsh criticisms. When Trump first started this drumbeat, Senator Chuck Schumer said it was big mistake, because the intelligence community has six ways of getting back at you. Schumer didn't say Trump was wrong. He just said Trump was crazy.

And that may be a clue. Trump just doesn't care. He grew up hustling in the real estate field. He rubbed elbows with the Mob. He made deals however they could be made, with whoever showed up with money. He survived, went broke, survived again. He developed a giant ego. He promoted himself ceaselessly, once he'd achieved a bit of fame. In his world, bureaucrats are the lowest form of human life. He's a hard charging asshole, and after a few drinks, he might gleefully admit it [Ed. note: Trump doesn't drink].

This is not a character the Deep State wants around, and especially not in the White House. "I'm the president and you just handed me this CIA assessment? It reads like sheer bullshit. Why don't you fill me in on the real facts, if you know what they are, or is your problem stemming from the fact you're ignorant?" Even on that level, the intel community doesn't want Trump around. Face it, Washington is full of bullshitters on every conceivable platform. These people have never done a thing to justify their existence, much less their jobs. They skate all day, every day, and they expect to skate all the way into their pensions. Now along comes this bull in the china shop. No one really knows when he's telling the truth and when he's lying, but he does seem to have a nose for spotting fakers---maybe because he's faked it for so long himself. And done it well. Done it better than most. Certainly done it better than jive analysts at the CIA, who really have faint knowledge about what's going on in hots spots across the globe, but try to talk a good game.

Don't kid a kidder."

[sterling_archer]

It doesn't make sense that Trump is controlled opposition but it makes sense that he is establishment for himself. Recently I stopped viewing world as one establishment and its opponents, but as multiple establishments fighting for control. Website called ISGP recognizes 4 major establishments with at least 2 being primary in the USA.

Trump would be either so called "conservative establishment" or some kind of new, whereas Clintons, Obama and such would be "liberal establishment". Makes sense don't you think, liberal establishment controls media / Hollywood but for example, military is in majority under conservative establishment. When president gets opposition from military, he is in fact dealing with enemy part of it. Same thing goes for the intelligence network, although I would classify them as a completely separate establishment.
This is real life game of thrones.

[spinwheel]

If there was ever a massive experiment on society....Trump is the "control".

Will be revealed soon. The priming is way overdue.

[puckerman]

(12-18-2017 05:59 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Reason Magazine comes to mind - supposedly a grassroots libertarian newspaper, but in reality one of the most wildly ineffectual organizations that I've ever seen. Their beliefs are all over the place and they spend vast amounts of time on irrelevant and needlessly alienating topics.

I might just expand this to include everything that libertarians (with a small l) refer to as the "Kochtopus"--organizations funded by the Koch Brothers. Reason is only one of them. The Cato Institute is also a huge organization which gets lots of money from the Kochs.

Of course, they could also simply be stupid opposition. These organizations have accomplished almost nothing and have wasted lots and lots of money.

I wish the Kochs had spent their money on making movies, television shows, and music. They might have influenced the culture if they had done that. That's more important than think tanks.

[Teep]

(12-18-2017 07:32 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

Interesting thread and I believe it has been very succesful for those who wanted to shut down nationalistic movements.

Richard Spencer.

When this guy came onto the scene a poster here claimed he was a fraud and funded by the people he was supposedly against.

He was not suspended off twitter, facebook and other media but instead thrown into the open arena and made to goad his opposition into attacking him. Now the soldier on the street (BLM, Antifa, MSM journo's) don't need to know the real story but instead they are relied upon to use their useful idiot tag and to attack him.

Then the so-called alt-right useful idiots rally around this man and start throwing sieg heils and it was topped off at Charlottesville with fucking Tikki torches for fucks sake!

Great optics for those who want to make a case to the masses that these far right members of society are here and they are real.

It was a trap.

The results speak for themselves and to this day we see it as a very good example to crack down on their free speach. The men who showed up lost their jobs and became unemployable in some cases.

Good job idiots. Not only did you get suckered into a trap but you let your position become exposed. Can't do shit in the USA when you're worse off financially and a social outcast.

But where is Richard Spencer these days? Is he a social outcast jettisoned by social media and fearing for his life and looking over his shoulders or looking for new jobs?

Nope.

https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/media

Are his videos blacklisted and sent to youtube purgatory? oh wait he doesn't need a channel because he gets them from ABC, Huffington Post, etc. Big names, big audiences. And where are the anti-Islam clerics getting their air time?

Nope.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_q...rd+spencer

Look at the platforms he was given. Who the fuck is this guy and why does he have access to the MSM unlike so many pro-white, pro-national pride men and women?

This isn't a case of a man being too big to ban because they banned that blazing faggot Milo and many others who didn't even have half of this guys anti-migrant, anti-non white material.

Is he the target of the FBI, state police and the DOJ? No, he is not. Unlike others of his kind who are subjected to regular police investigations and state funded blacklisting.

Tommy Robinson got put in a cell with Muslims and all he did was stepping on the toes by calling out the mass rapes of children. Was Spencer put in a cell full of angry black dudes?

Blows my mind away when influential youtubers still want interviews with this plant. Has to be one of the biggest own goals of any pro-Trump movement to have included this guy.

Some thoughts:

1. I believe he was suspended off Twitter at some point. And he was arrested/deported in Hungary (which is odd given that the Victor Orban government basically has his politics).

2. Anybody who espouses far-right/ethno-nationalist views should be prepared to lose their job and become societal outcasts. If you're reliant on your job for income, then you shouldn't be doing it. Even a self-employed guy like Roosh can have his income severely reduced when the SJW lynch mob comes knocking.

3. On the whole MSM giving him so much coverage...maybe they don't find the New Right that interesting? Liberty, free speech activism,etc..already has a label. Libertarianism. Spencer is a bit of an enigma given his high socio-economic status, and the fact he's openly ethno nationalist.

[TooFineAPoint]

(12-25-2017 11:02 PM)puckerman Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 05:59 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Reason Magazine comes to mind - supposedly a grassroots libertarian newspaper, but in reality one of the most wildly ineffectual organizations that I've ever seen. Their beliefs are all over the place and they spend vast amounts of time on irrelevant and needlessly alienating topics.

I might just expand this to include everything that libertarians (with a small l) refer to as the "Kochtopus"--organizations funded by the Koch Brothers. Reason is only one of them. The Cato Institute is also a huge organization which gets lots of money from the Kochs.

Of course, they could also simply be stupid opposition. These organizations have accomplished almost nothing and have wasted lots and lots of money.

I wish the Kochs had spent their money on making movies, television shows, and music. They might have influenced the culture if they had done that. That's more important than think tanks.

My feeling on the Koch's is that it is mainly a vanity issue, with a tiny bit of influence/security hedging.

The vibe I get from them is just a big "fuck you" to all the small-minded bureaucrats that slowed (even by 1%) their making of mega-bucks over the years.

And even though it's ineffectual (if my theory is true), I can sympathize.

[hv123]

(12-18-2017 10:35 AM)Number one bummer Wrote:  

The degenerates and the left don't need controlled opposition, they are winning the culture war by propping up false idols as it is. Whether it's Soros funded race baiters(Tariq Nasheed, Talcom X), unfunny shill late night hosts(Kimmel,Bee, all of them), feminists(Dunham, Judd, Beyonce) or token athletes(Kap, LBJ, Bennet). The lefists in media just prop up these losers until society hears their lies long enough to believe them.

This is a really salient point. People on the right think they are winning the culture war by pointing out the flaws and hypocrisy in leftist thinking, but they're not. Most people either don't think critically or aren't motivated to find alternative sources of information.

People are just inculclated with views that they don't really hold until they do. Go back 10-15 years and virtually no one believed in gay marriage, but now everyone suddenly agrees with it (or says they do - same difference really as this further inculcates other people).

[CynicalContrarian]

They may not fit neatly into the original 10 points of this thread.
Yet reference the CIA's Islamic State?