You Haven’t Heard the Last of the “White Supremacist Domestic Terrorist” Narrative

The media has basically been burying the Kyle Rittenhouse story. We see bits and pieces here and there, but this is no Dylann Roof, no Robert Bowers, no Brenton Tarrant.

They came out, full on, with “WHITE SUPREMACIST DOMESTIC TERRORIST MURDERING INNOCENTS,” but very early into the writing of that narrative, someone figured out that normal people really like this kid and that they don’t like lunatic criminals rioting and burning down cities.

I was personally fuming mad when this story hit, because I knew it was exactly what they were looking for. Except it wasn’t. What they were looking for was a situation that included at least three of the following six items:

1. A white shooter who looked like he theoretically could have bad intentions – For better or worse, human beings judge people on their appearance. People, in particular Jews, constantly tell you not to judge people by their appearance, but no one can avoid doing it. A fat slob with a beard, which is what most of these Boogaloo people are, would work fine.
2. A potentially unsympathetic person – They need citations of things they’ve done that are allegedly bad. They can build an entire person around random things that happened in your life. If you think about it just now, probably most of you who are older than 22 have at least 3-4 things that the media can find in your past that would make you look bad. (When the media came at me, they found some girl from high school who said I called her a slut when she said she was raped – when I was 14!)
3. Social media posts with exploitable memes – The portrayal of who the person is largely revolves around their internet footprint. Racist memes are ideal, but other memes that can be spun as outrageous will work. When the whole boogaloo thing began (started by the feds, almost certainly), they started distributing terrible memes about killing cops. Basically, any single boogaloo member would have a ton of these on any social media account (almost like that was the point ? ? ?).
4. A theoretically sympathetic dead body – Just as you can paint a shooter as a bad person with a couple random pieces of data, you can paint a victim as a good person if you have a few points of reference. If you’ve got pictures of them with their dogs, an art project they were working on, a charity they were involved in, family members who cared for them, they can build the narrative. If you try to build a sympathetic narrative around satanists and child sex fiends, you end up harming your own agenda. (Right-wing terrorists almost always choose the most sympathetic victims. The only one who didn’t was Tarrant, and he was widely celebrated by normies on Facebook and the Breitbart comments section.) The Paul Kersey “heroic vigilante” is hardwired into the White American brain, and a vigilante who kills unambiguously nasty people is always going to be a folk hero to the right and incapable of inspiring full outrage on the left.
5. A dead black person – A black victim is ultra-sympathetic by default, because of the contrived cultural norms we’re presently suffering under. If they can’t get “going to school, going to church, trying to turn his life around,” they will come out with “on his way to see his kids,” “gentle giant” and “aspiring rapper.” Very importantly: black families will always go out and weep on TV, which helps a whole lot. If you have Xanex’d out white or Jewish parents who were expecting their kid to get killed, they’re not going to be so forthcoming with the sob stories.
6. No video or a debatable video – The media can just lie about the video. They will literally just say the opposite of what is in it. They do this nonstop. A damning video is not a game-changer on its own, but not having video of obvious self-defense is a big boost to the narrative, because people do watch these clips. (Of course, they’re in the process of creating a situation where no one will be able to share the clips, but they haven’t gotten there quite yet.)

You no doubt realized reading this that with the Kyle Rittenhouse incident, they did not even get one of these. It’s actually incredible, that they have this checklist and couldn’t even check one thing.

So, some people began rolling out the narrative, but it’s very clear that someone up top said, “whoa, whoa, whoa – let’s hold off on that.”

By Friday, the single publication that was printing the word “terrorist” in connection with Kyle Rittenhouse was The Guardian, which ran a babbling brook of an op-ed by one Poppy Noor entitled “Vigilante, volunteer, terrorist: how the US media covers Kyle Rittenhouse.” The article condemned the American right media for “humanizing” Kyle, long after the humanization was complete.

The Guardian, as you’re probably aware, is a British publication, and they are never really on-point with the narrative. It’s close enough, of course, but whenever you see a clear directive in the media, if you find one major site not going along with it, it’s The Guardian. This is presumably because it has far fewer Jews working for it, given that it prioritizes Moslem and female journalists.

It is generally assumed that Jews have email groups that they use to coordinate a narrative. One such group came to light during Gamergate, and hours before the agenda to destroy MILO was announced, someone posted it on /pol/ saying that he was on a journalist email list, accurately predicting that all media would come out at once attacking him. With or without an email list, however, the directive of all American media is very simple: “copy the New York Times and CNN.” Major American paper editors also watch their op-ed section like hawks. For whatever reason(s), The Guardian is at least partially out of the loop on this.

This is to say: I was not surprised that an Islamic woman on The Guardian was the only person still using the “terrorist” narrative.

The Thing Will Come to Pass

I have predicted that there will be a situation at one of these rallies where there’s a shooting by a right-winger and the media gives it the Dylann Roof treatment. If you’ll remember, after Dylann Roof shot up a church, the media announced that our entire society must be transformed because of the actions of a single individual. It’s the same thing they did with George Floyd. It is likely that the next big push will be a shooting at one of these events.

The feds clearly are setting this up.

Here’s a head-scratcher for you: Kyle was obviously in contact with someone on Facebook who told him where to meet and so on. (They don’t publicly announce their meeting places on the pages.) We know that he was using his real face on his Facebook profile, so even if he’d lied about his age, someone saw pictures of this kid and said, “yeah kid, come on down – bring your AR-15 and help us protect these businesses from the left!”

What kind of a person would do that, I wonder?

You know who doesn’t appear to be wondering? The media. There has been zero talk of the “Kenosha Guard” Facebook group where the armed citizen defense action was planned other than to say that the Facebook page was deleted. That is to say, the media said: “Don’t worry! We called Facebook and they destroyed the evidence!”

It should probably go without saying that the media would, under normal circumstances, pick apart the organization itself and attempt to find something juicy there. There were certainly “boogaloo” memes in the Facebook group. But the media didn’t want that. They wanted the whole thing to disappear.

What’s more, Facebook blocked searches for “Kyle Rittenhouse,” something that The Verge suggests they’ve never done before (Facebook responded by saying they do it for child porn). Furthermore, Mark Zuckerberg publicly apologized for not deleting the page, saying both that the page violated policies and that multiple people had reported it.

So, what is going on here?

I don’t think it’s really difficult to come to the conclusion that this is the simplest explanation for this series of events: the page was put up by feds, which is why it was allowed to remain up and why it was immediately deleted with the media asking no questions after the shooting.

Maybe that isn’t what happened, and it’s all just a big coincidence. But the simplest answer is that it was the feds.

I have always been critical of the conspiracy theories involving crisis actors, because in this age of technology, you can isolate people and convince them to do things on the internet. There is no need for hoaxes or actors.

Convincing people to do things on the internet is less precise than crisis actor schemes would be, but it is also zero risk.

Look at the BLM riots: these people rioted all over the world, all the way to Switzerland and Korea, after a black man died of a drug overdose while resisting arrest and the media claimed it was a “racist murder.” These are all people that have been isolated and targeted by an internet narrative.

The right isn’t as stupid as the left, but they’re not a bunch of geniuses either.

They’re Going to Flip This Whole Thing

I am very supportive of the conservative establishment rallying behind Kyle. I think it’s actually fantastic, to have people saying “those leftists deserved to die.” It really adds a new energy.

However, the flip side of that is that everyone now wants to go out there and do this themselves. Despite the fact that Kyle is going to prison – for a long time, unless the government collapses and he gets busted out – everyone on the right wants to be Kyle, because Kyle is the hero, and it is a deep male drive to want to be the hero who kills the bad guy.

The feds are going to be out there on Facebook telling people that even more people need to go armed to these events. And all of them are going to be more ready to pull the trigger after watching Kyle. Because everyone wants to be Kyle.

I just went over to thedonald.win, which is the site that came about when r/The_Donald was banned from reddit, and these people are all saying “it’s time to fight” and so on, calling for more people to show up at these events with guns.

More of these shootings are going to happen, probably several more of them, and at some point, there will be at least 3 of the 6 listed items above, and they will have their “white supremacist domestic terrorist.”

Then, they will begin a crackdown on gun owners and conservative groups that will make the anti-Moslem crackdown after 911 look like baby time at the fun park.

There is No Fight Here

I have argued with people who will say things like, “it’s time for us to stand up!!!” and “how long are we supposed to just take it???”

Let me try to explain this using one of my favorite methods for breaking down complex situations with Socratic precision – the bulletpoint list.

Bulletpoint list #1: You can’t fight city hall:

• The government’s most basic obligation is to ensure order.
• The government could stop these riots at any time.
• The government is refusing to stop these riots.
• Therefore, the riots are happening because of the decision by the government to allow them to happen.
• Therefore, the government is the ultimate force behind these riots, as the default position would be for them to stop them and they are choosing not to.
• Therefore, the riots are a government agenda.
• Therefore, opposition to the riots is opposition to the government.
• Therefore, if you attempt to stop the riots, you are pushing not against the rioters primarily, but against the government.
• Currently, the government has the ability to punish you for anything you do.
• The government actively punishes people who interfere with their agenda.
• Therefore, if you interfere with the government’s rioting operation, you will be punished.
• Nothing is accomplished by thwarting a rioter or even an entire riot – rioters are like sand in the ocean, and when none of them are arrested, they will just keep coming.

Bulletpoint list #2: How to fight city hall:

• People have not worked through the fact that the government is behind the riots.
• People are against the riots.
• If people understood that the government was behind the riots, they would be against the government.
• If everyone understood that the government might as well be planning these riots themselves, the people would be protesting the people planning it.
• Direct protests against the government would be much more effective than dealing with their infinite army of rioters.
• An organized movement opposed to the government fomenting anarchist riots would have clear goals, whereas militias fighting anarchists makes no sense and serves no purpose.

Obviously, you’re not going to create a mass movement blaming the government for these riots, because of the censorship. However, if you are involved in a community, such as that which is in a small town, you can get people on board with this.

Furthermore, Tucker Carlson is beginning to reveal this information.

But here’s the thing: the cities are lost.

Even if everything goes right for us, big American cities are not going to be livable for a generation.

The place where you can have an impact is in rural communities, where you can build strongholds, and begin agitating for secession.

We need to start thinking long term here, and the biggest divide in this country is rural vs. urban. As the federal government becomes more and more unstable over the next decade, we can begin demanding independence in rural areas. At some point, the federal government will have so much going on, that they will not be able to send in the military to deal with this, especially if it is happening all across the country, because we’ve set ourselves up properly, and taken care of our communities.

Most of the land in America is rural.

Look at this map of the Midwest population by county.

Now, imagine if rural people triggered a mass secession push (when one county declared, others would immediately follow).

There are a lot of farms in that territory:

You could carve the land up, and these militia people would finally have something useful to do, guarding the borders of new independent territories.

The Indians have these sorts of territories.

This would NOT be a violent revolution, because in rural areas, there is nothing to revolt against. The counties would simply say: “the federal government no longer has jurisdiction here, we control our own affairs, we are no longer paying taxes. We will continue to operate businesses as normal, but federal agents who attempt to enter will be prevented from doing so.”

Think of it as CHAZ for white people.

Again: the return on investment for the federal government to come into rural communities and enforce their rule is extremely limited, and if food deliveries continued, they would have very little reason to even care. Washington doesn’t think about rural areas, and we’re talking about a government that is going to be mostly run by 85 IQ brown people. If they were worried about the taxes, they could simply charge tariffs on the foods that would be coming into the cities.

This economic collapse is going to be a serious nightmare. Everything is going to change. To have an economic collapse at the same time that the government is being taken over by brown people, while we are also provoking major countries across the planet belligerently, is the perfect storm of the federal government becoming stretched too thin.

Of course, we should still vote for Trump and try to get Tucker Carlson elected in 2024. But we need to have a plan for if this all goes sideways, and the only plan that I see is for rural communities to declare sovereignty, and refuse to respect the federal government.