The point of the law
The above examples should have made clear that the law exists for the purpose of keeping the current power structure where the really high ups can do everything, while the plebs at the very bottom exist only to be enslaved and abused. It even includes something called disorderly conduct (archive) (MozArchive), which can fit absolutely everything and is obviously designed to provide a way to punish anyone the rulers want to get rid of. The structure is like a pyramid with only three levels: the bottom one that's extremely wide and fits almost everyone, the middle one that's very narrow and contains only the protected groups that keep the plebs on leashes, and the top one that's one block-wide and is dedicated to the very few rulers that decide everything (this is simplified, but works for easy understanding). A good analogy would be the Nazi concentration camps that had the Nazis as ultimate rulers, then the Kapos (who - remember - were still prisoners themselves, just with some privileges like avoiding abuse and receiving better food, etc) that were assigned the task of keeping the other prisoners under control, and finally the vast majority of regular prisoners that were on the level of cockroaches. The prisoners particularly abusive and power hungry were chosen for the Kapo positions. Does that remind you of something in the current world?
Police are the modern Kapos, ordered to bully the plebs and remind them of their position in hierarchy every so often, so that the rebel's spirit is contained. They suffer no punishment (archive) (MozArchive) even if they hurt or kill innocent people (archive) (MozArchive). From the first article: Police fatally shoot an average of around 1000 people each year, and the criminal justice system holds that almost every single shooting is legal
. Why are the rulers allowing them to avoid consequences? Because they are performing a useful and essential function of keeping the public under control. It all starts already in school (archive) (MozArchive) - the process of creating a scared and obedient population has to begin when they're young and defenseless:
In December of 2015, Tucker, a 13-year-old Black student in Washington state, was arrested as a result of an incident that started when he mumbled a curse word to himself. Tucker’s teacher ordered him to go sit outside on a bench; when Tucker refused to go outside unprotected in the cold, his teacher called the school police officer. The officer grabbed Tucker, slammed him to the ground, and as Tucker flailed, put his knee of the back of Tucker’s head. Tucker was then arrested and booked into juvenile detention. He was charged with the crimes of ‘disturbing school’ and ‘disrupting a law enforcement officer.‘
And the abusers are unaccountable as usual:
Even fewer schools require any kind of data collection of officer activities. And overwhelmingly, students, parents and teachers have little oversight of, and no recourse for conflicts with, school police officers.
This job is so important that a police officer cannot ever feel inhibitions while doing it - thus their immunity to punishment. Disruption, disorder, resistance is something the system absolutely hates and it must be swiftly and fully dealt with. Another way this happens is when social workers (another set of Kapos) take away the children of people raising them "wrong" (a kidnapping if done by anyone else), which can include the child not being heavy enough, despite being healthy otherwise (archive) (MozArchive), using a mineral supplement (archive) (MozArchive), or feeding them an organic diet (archive) (MozArchive). They are also unaccountable (archive) (MozArchive), as you might have guessed:
However, there is one thing that remains rare in CPS cases - that is, for anyone within the system to be held accountable. Repercussions for social workers, the CPS agency, or doctors involved in taking children from innocent parents are very rare.
Ukrainian war grabbers are another set of Kapos, hunting down people who don't want to be sacrificed inside some ditch for the delusions of psycho Zelensky. Some videos of them in action. If you don't trust that "conspiracy video site", here (archive) (MozArchive) is a mainstream source admitting that the grabbing happens:
In one video three officers in military fatigues push a man in a tracksuit into a van. A policeman walks away and hides in his unmarked car, as if wanting nothing to do with the forcible recruitment. Then women are seen attacking the officers and opening the van’s door, allowing another man to escape.
In another episode, recruiters have grabbed a man in the street, as an angry crowd stands by. A female voice shouts: “fuck off! You are worse than the Russians.” Another example - filmed form a bus - shows a man in black, intended for recruitment - push the officer to the ground, then run away.
At least people resisted, but it's not enough. The Kapos have not incured any permanent damage and will surely come back for another victim where the bad ending might finally happen (dying in the aforementioned ditch). The problem is the current societal structure of "lawmakers" deciding what will be done to "citizens", and then sending their pawns to execute. The long drawn out process of writing down the laws and voting on them (you are not invited to the vote) only gives it a pretense of legitimacy in the minds of people, but doesn't actually make a difference - you're still being grabbed. And it's the pretense of legitimacy, the pretense that the blame lies on the "citizens", that makes the law a particularly sneaky - and important to deal with - enemy.
The folly of elections
Yet people still trust the law-based system. So much so that - if you mention a societal problem to them - they will often reply with a variant of "it's because of the politicians we've voted in!" as if they were hypnotized. Some examples (archive) (MozArchive):
It's both. The reason the policy makers do this is because of the size of the female voting block, and because, unlike men, women vote their interests.
Another one (MozArchive):
Until the corrupt left government will be finally taken over. You will always have tax payer wasted games like Dustbin.
You need to vote for better politicians, who actually care about the people and not about ideology
And another (archive) (MozArchive):
It's because far too many of us believe, dream and/or think that 1 day we will be the boss, the owner, the big man in control so they keep voting for politicians who don't care about workers in the hopes that 1 day when they are in charge it will be easier for them to stay in control.
Next up, one from our conspiracy-minded friends (MozArchive):
I'm definitely voting for the "far-right" euroskeptic party in next year's elections
Yeah, he's a super Eurocrat globalist. I was APPALLED that Poles brought him back after his previous anti-Polish (and pro-EU) nonsense. I really wouldn't bet on Poles not electing another EU Trojan horse next year
This one is even more direct (archive) (MozArchive):
Hey, this is what everyone voted for, remember?! [...]
Not to mention the uncountable amount of YouTube videos analyzing voting results, Twitter / "X" screeching, etc. Everyone acts as if elections were the most important events in history - on the level of a meteor strike or an alien invasion. And it's not just random internet travelers that believe this, but big organizations like the EFF (archive) (MozArchive) where they say Courts and legislatures must keep pace to ensure that privacy rights do not fall victim to the advancement of technology
. The point here is, that every community (whether it's men's rights, gaming, conspiracy, privacy...) out there believes that the legal system will somehow turn out to be their savior. To materialize this hope, they try to vote in a certain way, hoping that their favored politician or ruling party gets in. The people's trust is based on the idea that how they vote matters; that the politicians - in the end - have to appease their voters through their policies. What prevents the legal circus show from being recognized as simply a pack of psychopaths codifying ways of abusing and enslaving us, is the belief that we are able to significantly affect the process.
This is the great trap that the rulers have set up: first, create the political system that enslaves people, and then convince them that the only way to change the situation is through that system itself (directing attention away from the real solutions). Let's set the record straight: what can you even affect by voting? Only which president or political party rules over you. Of course there are usually only two or three realistic choices, because if you vote for some obscure person, she has no chance of getting in anyway. The big parties have much more funds to spend on their campaigns, etc. There are also indications that election results are manipulated; so even if your favorite actually received the most votes, it's not a guarantee of getting in.
More importantly, as the voting period ends, so does your decision-making power. Now, the rulers can approve or deny whatever laws they imagine, and you can only sit back and watch. All promises that candidates have made go out the window, simply because there is zero consequence for violating them. You might say that they won't receive the votes during the next elections if they fuck up really badly, but that still means 4 years of dealing with their bullshit, which also accumulates (as old laws don't just go away when the rulers change). And again, there are few choices, so often (always?) you can only pick whichever you think is the least shitty. It's like injecting the inactivated virus vaccines over the mRNAs - much better, but still hurting yourself. Because of all this, politicians just don't have to care about the plebeians that much, if at all.
More than that - if you live, for example, in an European Union country, your own nation has to answer to them anyway, lest it get fined (archive) (MozArchive). So the existence of even the national government becomes illusory; not that that would make us more free - you'd still have no way to affect specific government decisions (except to wait for the next elections and blindly hope your new ruler will finally do something about the things you care about - which barely ever happens, and literally never for things that could actually threaten the power structure). And, even assuming an independent national government, the area over which it rules is just way too big. For example, one town might like mask mandates, and the other might not; but both will have to deal with them if the rulers so desire. Clearly we can see, that even with the best assumptions, the voting system is completely hopeless for providing real change.
What about the so-called good politicians? Simply put - it's another illusion. Either they are not actually good or they don't get into positions of power. Every so often an alleged political hero appears whom people then begin to worship. NaturalNews, one of my favorite news sites, still believes that Trump will make America great again
, and runs stories defending him all the time. That's despite the fact that he lied about many important issues (archive) (MozArchive). UPDATE 2022: hey, maybe we should remind ourselves who was responsible (archive) (MozArchive) for the creation and popularization of the poison known as the COVID vaccine. Do you still believe in your political heroes? Has anyone out there shown even a drop of humanity during the "pandemic"? No - maybe except a few African presidents, that in 3 out of 4 cases paid for their insubordination dearly. All the other politicians buried their people with restrictions and shoved the poison up their asses (well, arms). And I'm not just talking about the presidents of Europe, Asia, etc. But also the health ministers and the lesser politicians who just went along with the narrative (and some even tried to push for forced vaccines).
Sure, there were also a few politicians who were against the narrative; however, they never got into power and the restrictions still got pushed through. All the people who were theoretically supposed to make the best decisions for us (the presidents, health ministers, etc) - totally failed. I mean, not a single relevant person even mentioned vitamin D in the treatment of COVID. Where were the vitamin D dispenser sites? How is it possible that everyone in politics is so retarded as to not have realized the utility of vitamin D (and other treatments)? And that no one has realized the danger of the vaccines, even when people were dropping like flies? Of course, it's not retardation that did it - but the fact that they were all following orders.
I originally wrote this report before COVID. But - if there is anything that proves the theory about the NWO / shadow government - it is the fake pandemic. I mean, every major politician has swallowed the narrative; this is clearly impossible organically. We even have proof from the highest positions at the WHO, where the ivermectin treatment was buried. Not that I think ivermectin is so great, but that isn't the point here. Everything that went against the lockdowns, masks, distance and vaccines had to die. And so it did. Oh, and of course - as is the theme of this report - none of the people responsible suffered the slightest consequences.
UPDATE September 2024: yesterday was the 23rd anniversary for the demolition jobs on the twin towers executed by the US government. And it just dawned on me that this event provides a really good proof that politics are fake. Heroes of various camps such as Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy, Bernie Sanders (or whoever the left likes these days) will never expose the very obvious truth that the towers have been blown up by the explosives placed therein. Kennedy has recently admitted (archive) (MozArchive) he won't take sides on 9/11
, but promised transparency
(which would consist of revealing the fucking bombs, something he is never ever going to do). Sanders' reaction to 9 / 11 (archive) (MozArchive) is even more disgusting:
I support legislation by Sen. Chuck Schumer that would allow Americans, including the families of victims of the 9/11 attacks, to use U.S. courts to determine if foreign entities are culpable for terrorist attacks in the United States and seek restitution for the damages and lives lost.
He won't reveal the bombs, but wants to waste yet more time on pointless legal circus that's designed to seek the culprit anywhere but where he actually is, with a sprinkle of virtue signaling by appealing to the damages and lives lost
. If you have any doubts about what happened on 9 / 11, just type "building demolition" into YouTube and see what any other demolition job looks like, then compare to how the twin towers fell and you will get an exact match. Here is an example of one such demolition, and another, and two others, and finally the twin towers. How do you like the irrefutable proof that the towers were indeed blown? Don't you think that this would be something important to reveal to the American people, if these politicians were really heroes? But they will never do so as they are all under control of the same so-called "shadow government".
Of course, you could say that maybe some of them really are heroes, they just can't cover certain topics in order to avoid losing popularity, funding, or their lives. But if that is so, then it proves my point even better. You can't get into power unless you hold - or pretend to hold - certain views. And it just so happens that the required views help the rulers while hurting the plebs. I think this is a good way to reveal whether a politician is actually worth anything, BTW. If he is, then he will publicly expose conspiracies such as 9 / 11, the Polish Smoleńsk / Warsaw massacre, or whatever local conspiracies might be important in your place of residence. There are a few deputies who have spoken out against the mainstream Smoleńsk narrative here - but they are often fined, mocked in the media, etc. And they don't end up accomplishing anything of note through the official channels. Again proving my point that success won't be found on this path. The game is rigged!
Therefore, it is obvious that politics cannot be a route for any major, positive change. And yet, the myth is very important to the rulers. As said before, it serves as a dead end for people to get trapped in. How this works is explained perfectly in one of my favorite quotes by Noam Chomsky: The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum
. That's why the media often shows vigorous debates between various politicians and spreads the left wing / right wing mythology so that people begin to form camps that fight between each other - all while being unaware that their opinion is irrelevant, since the rulers control all the provided options (hey, it's Google vs Mozilla once again!). They do everything to direct your focus towards the recent "smart" Trump tweet, the latest political scandal or yet another fake conflict (Russia or China versus USA...) so they can continue applying their plans under the veil of distraction. Edit: here's (archive) (MozArchive) an example:
The American Jobs Plan is an investment in America that will create millions of good jobs, rebuild our country’s infrastructure, and position the United States to out-compete China
Like great projects of the past, the President’s plan will unify and mobilize the country to meet the great challenges of our time: the climate crisis and the ambitions of an autocratic China.
Another one from the UK (archive) (MozArchive):
UK's energy security plan aims to boost job creation and reduce reliance on hostile states like Russia
The government said its approach would seek to reduce dependency on imported fossil fuels by bolstering the domestic oil and gas industry, investing in clean technologies, and isolating Russia's regime from global energy markets.
There's always some hostile state
somewhere far away, but never right here. And so you focus your attention on that hostile state
while ignoring how you're getting fucked by your own government. Because it's not really state vs state, but rulers vs plebs. Sticking it to "that other country out there" doesn't make your life better (and probably decreases the quality if anything), but might make some politician feel better.
Zelensky's extended stay provides further proof that elections are worthless. Usually, the presidental term is supposed to last five years (local) - The President is elected by Ukrainian citizens by equal vote and direct countrywide elections for the period of five years
. But there are ways to bypass this...like during war (archive) (MozArchive), where it can be extended indefinitely (archive) (MozArchive) - Since then, the Ukrainian parliament has extended the duration of martial law and mobilization 13 times
. Insanely, this means that if a warmonger (such as Zelensky) somehow ends up as president, he can theoretically just continue the war until his entire country's population is sacrificed. Even though a non-warmongering president might be what's actually wanted by the citizens, they will not be able to put him in power since the current one can just keep extending his term. Seems like quite the "security vuln" of democratic elections, if there cannot even be elections unless approved by whoever is ruling at the moment. And of course, this is not only in Ukraine; I just used it as an example because it's the "current thing".
How to bury a politician: Călin Georgescu's example
Let's start with who Călin Georgescu even is (archive) (MozArchive):
Born in Bucharest in 1962, Georgescu holds a doctorate in pedology, a branch of soil science, and held different positions in Romania’s environment ministry in the 1990s, according to his website. Between 1999 and 2012, he was a representative for Romania on the national committee of the United Nations Environment Program.
Once a member of Romania’s far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians, or AUR, Georgescu left the party in 2022 after a period of infighting and being accused by colleagues of being pro-Russian and critical of NATO, the U.S.-led military alliance to which Romania belongs.
Some of his spicy takes should provide the context for what's going to come:
Anyway, he won (archive) (MozArchive) the first round of the recent elections against all odds; he wasn't even considered a contender (archive) (MozArchive) (ctrl+f "Georgescu" = no results). At first, a Romanian court accepted the results (archive) (MozArchive) - Judges unanimously decided to… confirm and validate the result of the first presidential round on November 24 and holding the second round on December 8
. A few days later (two days before the second round was supposed to begin) they've completely switched course (archive) (MozArchive) and voided the election:
Romania's top court has annulled the results of the first round of the country's presidential election after claims of Russian interference.
The unprecedented decision came after declassified intelligence documents alleged Russia was behind a campaign to promote far-right candidate Calin Georgescu on platforms such as TikTok and Telegram.
HAHAHA, it's claims
and alleged
. Meaning they have no evidence. And of course, those declassified intelligence documents
magically appeared two days after the initial decision, and right before Georgescu was about to sweep the second round, too. His would-be opponent even criticized the decision:
Ms Lasconi criticised the court's decision, arguing the vote should have continued and respected the will of the Romanian people.
Even though the psychopaths provided no evidence, let's bury their justification while we're at it. TikTok denied artificial promotion (archive) (MozArchive) of Georgescu:
So far, no evidence has been found of a covert influence operation on the platform in recent weeks related to the presidential elections in Romania, nor of any external influence, the company representatives concluded.
Russia, too, denied interference (archive) (MozArchive) in the elections:
“More and more absurd accusations are being made by local politicians, officials and media representatives…,” she added.
“We firmly reject all hostile attacks, which we consider absolutely groundless.”
Someone who actually bothered to read the documents (archive) (MozArchive) says there isn't any evidence of wrongdoing in there, at all - Conclusion: The CSAT documents declassified by the President provide absolutely no real, concrete basis for the public narratives about a “Russian attack” on Romania or of links between Georgescu’s campaign and Russia. These documents, by themselves, cannot rationally be used as arguments against this candidate because they prove nothing
. I can't confirm it but see nothing wrong in his analysis at first glance.
But even if there was truly Russian interference
, who cares? People still went to the polls and voted for Georgescu. Why not run a counter-propaganda for your own candidate, if you're so scared of a few Russian bots? When you decide that elections are invalid just because they were (allegedly; it has not been proven) influenced by "Russian propaganda", you are basically saying that your citizens are too stupid to resist the manipulation. "Russian propaganda" appears, takes over brain, and boom the NPC goes and votes for Georgescu. Nice way to think of your citizens - wonder what'd they say if you told them that directly? But of course, it would demolish the entire basis of democratic elections. If you can't go on TikTok to run your campaign, it basically ensures that only the well funded candidates (those who can afford billboard ads, TV time, etc...) will get themselves heard. Which means the power stays in the same hands forever. Amazing. Yet that is what they actually want and Russia makes a good scapegoat to bring this situation about.
Why was it so important to deny Georgescu the win? https://arynews.tv/calin-georgescu-the-man-at-the-centre-of-romania-election/ (archive) (MozArchive):
“Anything, any policy and any political actor that changes that risks having not just a major impact on Romania itself, on the course of Romania’s security and democracy, but also for the security of Europe and of the Euro-Atlantic area,” she said.
A senior EU diplomat told Reuters after the election’s first round it would be a “disaster” for the EU if Georgescu won the presidency, noting Romania’s shared border with Ukraine and the fact it was one of the European bloc’s larger countries.
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/romania-s-presidential-election-triggers-uncertainty-europe-ukraine-its-allies (archive) (MozArchive):
He pledges to boost defence, build agricultural self-sufficiency, reduce foreign investment and end national support of the Ukraine war.
https://www.politico.eu/article/romania-presidential-election-calin-georgescu-military-nato-russia/ (archive) (MozArchive):
But those international ties are deplored by Georgescu, who has condemned the Deveselu missiles as a national “shame,” campaigned for ending Romanian aid to Ukraine, and called for “Russian wisdom” in shaping foreign policy.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20240201STO17291/president-iohannis-we-must-stand-by-ukraine-and-its-people (archive) (MozArchive):
Continuing support for Ukraine must be among the EU’s key priorities, according to the Romanian President. “We must stand by Ukraine and its people,” he stressed, adding that defending democracy, territorial integrity and sovereignty, as well as the rules-based international order, cannot be subject to any “solidarity fatigue”.
And so on. Basically every media outlet focuses on only one main reason - the war in Ukraine. By not sending any weapons there, Călin would have compromised psychopath Zelensky's "operation mass male sacrifice", and the army of Zelensky dick-suckers in the EU just can't have it. I mean, you can mention Călin's based conspiracy theories and the other stuff, but I don't think they matter that much. They hate him because he threatened the supremacy of the EU, of which the male sacrifice in Ukraine is the cornerstone that we've been propagandized into accepting for the last 3 years. If that's exposed then the illusion of "EU values" collapses, and maybe takes the entire EU down a peg or two in general. Maybe we could get more decentralized governments instead of this behemoth ruling everything. Maybe people would start questioning the official narratives more often, once a big and influential politician was actually able to lead a country according to other ideas, and maybe even show they worked better. Georgescu was in a particularly good position to threaten the EU because of this:
Making matters worse for pro-EU forces, Romanian presidents wield a lot of power — unlike many other European political systems — including the ability to veto legislation, in a fashion similar to France's semi-presidential form of democracy. Romanian presidents also have clout over foreign affairs, intelligence agencies and the military while also representing the country at international institutions and events.
This situation shows that - even if an independent candidate by a thunderstrike of Zeus gets past all the hurdles inherent in the election system - he won't get into power if he threatens the status quo. I really hope that - when they redo the elections (archive) (MozArchive) in May - Georgescu will sweep again, but I somehow doubt it. I fear they will somehow modify the process in a way that makes it impossible for him to win, maybe ban TikTok campaigns at all, etc. Or just fake the votes directly, since that's clearly not beyond the psychopaths in charge. UPDATE June 2025: late, but they did exactly what I thought they would (archive) (MozArchive) - Romania's electoral commission on Sunday banned the candidacy of far-right politician Calin Georgescu for the upcoming presidential elections
. Some Zelensky dick-sucker (archive) (MozArchive) (Dan, who is currently the mayor of the capital Bucharest, is a strong supporter of Romania’s NATO membership and has pledged to continue providing aid to Ukraine
[...]) ended up winning, of course.
How to bury a politician(s), revisited
The Zelensky worshippers did it again (MozArchive), this time in Moldova:
The Central Electoral Commission (CEC) has cancelled the registration of members of the Republican Party Heart of Moldova as candidates at the parliamentary elections within the Patriotic Electoral Bloc. The decision was taken today, based on the decision by the Centru Court of Appeal, which ordered the suspension of the activities of the Republican Party Heart of Moldova, led by Irina Vlah, for a period of 12 months.
Heh. This time, they didn't wait for them to possibly win, but simply kicked them out of the competition before it began. They not only can't participate in the elections, but do pretty much nothing else that's relevant:
"During the period of limiting the activity of the political party, the latter is prohibited from participating individually or jointly in elections or referendums, producing, supplying, distributing and disseminating political advertising, founding mass media, organizing meetings at rallies, demonstrations, pickets, and other public actions. It is also banned from using all types of bank deposits, except in cases when discounts with contractors, payments related to fulfilling individual work contracts, compensating damages caused by the actions of the political party, and payments for taxes, duties and fines are necessary," said Pavel Postica.
But why did they incur the wrath of this "Central Electoral Commission"? They didn't suck Zelensky's dick hard enough. It is very obvious. On September 23, the current president met up (archive) (MozArchive) with some psychos from the EU to finish "integrating" Moldova into it:
President Maia Sandu, on September 23 at the Presidency, welcomed the public officials who had contributed to concluding the evaluation process of aligning national legislation with European legislation, known as screening, on the occasion of the successful completion of this decisive step on Moldova’s path to European integration.
And a big part, maybe even fundamental, of "European legislation" is the mass male sacrifice in Ukraine.
During the meeting, the head of state expressed gratitude for the intense work and dedication of the teams from all involved institutions, which, over the past 15 months, had proved professionalism, responsibility and perseverance.
Do you think they would bother spending those 15 months of "integration" attempts just so a pro-Russian party would come and ruin it all by winning and denying pro-Zelensky bills from passing? Of course not. So they got rid of them before they could cause any damage. But how did they do so? A few weeks earlier, they raided (archive) (MozArchive) members of the Heart of Moldova to try to find evidence to condemn them:
According to our sources, security raids are taking place at more than 60 addresses, mainly in Gagauzia and Chisinau. At least seven people have already been detained, including Vlah's deputy Olesya Tanasoglo.
I have searched the entire Internet for evidence that these people committed any wrongdoings, but have failed to find any. It's all "suspected" and "alleged". Therefore, a similar situation to Georgescu's. But even if there was such evidence - as I said in the previous case - people would still have to go and vote for their prefered party; no matter how much "financing" you have, it won't bypass the need to earn the approval of your voters. One way or another, what happened is totally unjustified. And you can't expect me to believe this was a coincidence, when it happened twice in a row and somehow never seems to happen to pro-EU candidates.
Of course, elections - along with the entire legal system - have never been very successful in shifting the balance of power towards the plebeian, in executing justice, or in anything else worthy. Yet, it seems that it's only since the start of the Ukraine war that the psychopaths in charge have dropped all pretenses. Now, they will simply kick out anyone that even slightly threatens their dreamed up dystopia. Of course, the pro-Zelensky party ended up winning (archive) (MozArchive):
President Maia Sandu’s Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) had secured 50.2 per cent of the vote with all ballots counted by Monday.
And the expected psychos liked it:
Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky hailed Moldova’s election result, saying Moscow had failed to “destabilise” the country.
Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, hailed the outcome in a post on X: “Moldova, you’ve done it again. No attempt to sow fear or division could break your resolve.”
How shameless. "Moldova's" views were not represented here at all, only those of the psychos who banned undesirable candidates. Though I'm not going to take this claim at face value, Russia even says (MozArchive) that hundreds of thousands of Moldovans were unable to vote in the Russian Federation, as only two polling stations were opened for them
. I wouldn't be surprised at all, knowing what the psychos are capable of.
The legislative mirage
What about when something beneficial to us happens in the law world? Well, this works the same way as Mozilla implementing a change that actually helps the user once a year or so. They simply have to throw us a bone once in a while so that people celebrate and assume the system is working in their favor. Or, these supposedly good laws could simply be accidental results bound to happen in a chaotic world. Anyway, when actually analyzed, these benefits often turn out to be illusory. Let's take GDPR, a recent law allegedly allowing people to request the data companies have on them, as well as require consent before - say - storing cookies on your device:
- Most websites are still not compliant with it (archive) (MozArchive).
- Only certain cookies need consent according to the GDPR (MozArchive). If the company has a
legitimate interest
in setting the cookie, it can stay. But when does interest
cease to be legitimate
? According to this document (local) which defines all the GDPR terms, there are no clear criteria for legitimacy; if you pass a balancing test
(as in, if your interests
are judged to be more important than those of the person's whose data you're processing), you can set the cookie. Meaning it's something someone else arbitrarily decides on a case-by-case basis; there is nothing that is banned for sure with this scheme. Some of the reasons a cookie might be allowed to be set without consent are conventional direct marketing and other forms of marketing or advertisement
, enforcement of legal claims including debt collection via out-of-court procedures
, and processing for historical, scientific or statistical purposes
. Amazing. This is just another fake initiative that I suspect will barely ever be applied in favor of the victim and almost always in favor of the spy...oops I mean data controller
. There is even a section called Legitimate interests of third parties
- lol! So GDPR doesn't even bother to prevent third-party spying. Even if a cookie somehow managed to violate the legitimate interest
rule, would anyone even care? And even if they did care, would the company actually get punished in a way that mattered? As said before - even if you assume honesty of the legal system - it cannot keep up with all the violations.
- GDPR makes websites full of obnoxious cookie notices you have to click through. And it turns out that over 99% of people do just that (archive) (MozArchive) or completely ignore them, anyway. This isn't really surprising - after all, who wants to read about all the cookie categories and disable certain ones just to read a single article that they want to? And then do that for almost every site they're going to visit? It's just adding more mouse clicks and mental effort that's already very limited. Clearly, the people coming up with these insane laws live in dream worlds. In fact, the cookie notice could be considered a dark pattern in itself. If they were my only option to not be tracked, I'd just give up using the Web or only read the few sites that I know don't include them. Fortunately, uMatrix exists.
- Many sites prefer to simply ban European users than follow the law.
- There's a possible fine of up to 25 million $ (or 4% of annual revenue if that's bigger) for violating GDPR. Peanuts for big corpos, a problem for small fries. Besides, fines don't prevent them from continuing to violate the law anyway.
- Big corpos have the resources to engage in court fights, small fries don't.
- There are reports from users saying that ebay, for example, required uploading your passport before they send you your data. And there's no guarantee you've got all of it. Nor that they've deleted it if requested.
As you can see, GDPR is yet another colossal governmental failure, so common whenever they try to regulate the Internet. Of course, the solution isn't to let businesses do anything they want to, as that would be a way bigger disaster. You could try to make examples of a few of the biggest violators by throwing them in jail (but this assumes that the legal system isn't compromised in the first place), or just take away the incentives to be evil, which consist of mostly profit, but not only. Of course, uMatrix and other client-side solutions also sidestep the entire legal conundrum, and are quite acceptable for now. Long term, though, we need deeper changes.
Anyway, let's look at some other examples of supposedly good laws that are not so good when examined more closely. Maine lawmakers pass bill to prevent ISPs from selling browsing data without consent (archive) (MozArchive). First of all, this law could have only happened because of another evil law (archive) (MozArchive) that came before it. Also, Maine is just one place out of millions in the world. How many people will really benefit? ISPs can still do lots of malicious things like show you ads, block VPNs or torrents, slow down connections on purpose, falsely advertise internet speeds, etc. Where are the laws against those? And it has to be asked what will be the consequences against ISPs violating this new law (I suspect nothing or a tiny fine as usual).
Regardless of how good you think the GDPR or the above law is, for every one like it, a hundred bad ones get implemented in the meantime - such as Austria's real name requirement (archive) (MozArchive), Germany banning encryption (archive) (MozArchive), GCHQ Ghost Proposal (archive) (MozArchive) (which would allow silently adding a law enforcement participant to a group chat or call
), UK porn block (archive) (MozArchive), EU copyright directive (archive) (MozArchive), and many, many others. Then consider the thousands upon thousands of ancient laws that harm us to this day, such as the ones shoving kids into the torture chamber known as school. It always makes me cringe when people send letters or petitions trying to get a law stopped. I mean do you really think that's going to work? They know what they're doing and have no obligation to listen to the plebeians (that's me and you and anyone else who writes them). Even if such a letter succeeded, you'd have to send millions of those to tackle all the shit laws. You think you can do it? Good luck.
Ross Scott's campaign for game preservation provides a pretty much perfect example of the folly of this strategy. By the way, I have nothing whatsoever against him or his endeavors; in fact I think he's absolutely based. But regardless, the whole thing was undoubtedly a failure, despite the extreme effort he's put into it. So extreme, he's even called it The largest campaign ever to stop publishers destroying games
consisting of Legal action in many countries
. Spoiler: it only ended up showing just how little effect we have on things by "official" ways, and how little basic respect the "officials" have for us. But let's start with the beginning: what is the campaign even about?
With the current laws (in seemingly all countries), a video game company can release a game that requires an online server to play, then pull the plug at any moment, leaving the buyers with a nonfunctional product. In this video, Ross states that he certainly doesn't know of a way to legally preserve an online multiplayer game if the publisher doesn't want you to
. Fixing which is the heart of his campaign. What are the effects so far?
In a December update video he says that the Canadian government passed the buck
for the consideration of his proposal onto the provinces - of which two have already rejected it (and none accepted). Australian government has basically dismissed the idea. The UK petition was resubmitted
after the previous failure (archive) (MozArchive), in which the government mocked us with a giant word-salad, pretty much admitting that the companies' commercial interests trump the users' expectations. Funnily, Ross says he was actually invited to some European consumer organization (archive) (MozArchive) meeting where they covered gaming issues including this one, and asked for statistics of the prevalence of "dead games". To him, it seemed that this venue is the least likely to be effective; I kind of disagree, since well, he has actually managed to worm himself into a seat at the discussion table. Yet - even though the organization's website says that they are acknowledged as a trustworthy representative by decision-makers
- they are not a legislative body themselves; and so far, they have been ignored. Besides, if the sentiment is that "more proof that this is even a problem is needed" (which it was in this meeting), then we've already lost. Video game (a type of art) preservation needs to be accepted as something with inherent value, but that's not the way it looks like to the legislators. Big business is given the benefit of the doubt, as it always is. If things worked properly, governments would have already made it a crime to bury a game; the developer would be required to release it in a way that allows offline play after they kill the servers. To make it really hardcore - once commercial gains stop being made from an installment - require releasing the source for it, too, as well as giving up all rights (to that specific installment, not necessarily the entire IP). Now that would be quite based! A year of the citizens' campaign should be enough for something like this (if we truly had the power), but there has been absolutely zero success so far (because we don't) - all while increasing number of games (again, art pieces) are dying forever.
Another example of the ineffectiveness of the official channels is when a polish naturopath (Jerzy Zięba) tried for years to get politicians to change some baseless or harmful medical norms - like the ones about cholesterol, etc (he says this in some of his interviews). And he had evidence for all his claims (he has connections to world renowned experts on many issues such as virology, nutrition, heart issues, etc). But he was ignored either way. It's obvious that the medical norms are controlled by the industry and that the regular citizen cannot affect them. This presumably applies to every single issue out there. How can we speak of democracy
at all, in this case?
There is no democracy
Some people have complained about how stupid democracy is because stupid people get to vote. Or because it's tyranny of the majority. Or because it's two wolves deciding to eat the sheep. But that's surface level thinking. Guess what democracy
actually means (archive) (MozArchive):
The word “democracy” comes from two Greek words that mean people (demos) and rule (kratos).
And how it's supposed to play out in practice:
Each year 500 names were chosen from all the citizens of ancient Athens. Those 500 citizens had to actively serve in the government for one year. During that year, they were responsible for making new laws and controlled all parts of the political process. When a new law was proposed, all the citizens of Athens had the opportunity to vote on it.
- Have you ever been asked whether you want COVID restrictions or vaccine mandates during the "pandemic"?
- Have you ever been asked whether you want your country to send tanks to Ukraine, and how many?
- Have you ever been asked whether you want advertisements to be displayed outside, and what kind of, and how many?
- Have you ever been asked whether you want your children to be thrown into school or how the "curriculum" should look like?
- Have you ever been asked whether you want GM foods to be labeled in your country? Or if they could even be sold at all?
- Have you ever been asked about...anything that matters?
If not, then how the FUCK can the current system be called a democracy
? It is the exact opposite of the original Athenian democracy. Using that word to describe whatever we have right now is literal Orwellian doublethink. Because the amount of influence your average citizen has right now is exactly zero. I have literally never seen anyone speak about democracy
positively, because they all associate it with the modern rule by the 0.001%. But actually, if we had Athenian democracy in every city (or even per smaller area), then nothing would be able to pass without at least most people living there agreeing with it. It would still not be a panacea (people could still choose dumb laws, or be bribed by big corporations etc; and maybe running society according to something rigid like "laws" isn't the best option anyway) - but a massive improvement over the current system which has a small group of psychopaths stepping on the plebs who can only receive the boot. And yet everyone these days has a knee jerk reaction against the one thing that could actually fix this world.
Athenian democracy - by the way - would be really easy to do through the Internet. I mean, just have a HTML form with all the "current things" votable every month or so. Many ways this could go wrong, of course; someone would still have to come up with the votable issues, and ensure to frame them neutrally. There'd need to be good security on the backend so that no one could double-vote or vote for someone else. Of course, you'd probably have to dox yourself to the website and prove your location - but you do that with "regular" voting anyway; and this one would actually accomplish something. There'd need to be full transparency with publicly available anonymized voting results in real time, so that the current rulers cannot cheat and bypass the people's wishes to push their prefered policies. But again, even a badly done Athenian democracy would be much better than what we have currently. No excuse to not at least try it.
COVID slavery exposes the legal beast
This is old news at this point, but it's only recently that I dug into the relevant documents and found some really juicy stuff in there. To be specific - on March 2020, the Polish government approved a set of modifications to the existing laws. Much of these consist of boring administrative stuff about the delivery of medicines, etc. I will skip all those and move straight to the meat of it:
„Art. 34. 1. W celu zapobiegania szerzeniu się zakażeń i chorób zakaźnych, osoby chore na chorobę zakaźną albo osoby podejrzane o zachorowanie na chorobę zakaźną mogą podlegać obowiązkowej hospitalizacji.
Translation (will be skipping law names and other fluff for this and all subsequent translations):
In order to prevent the spread of infections and infectious diseases, people infected or assumed to be infected can be subjected to forced hospitalization
Amazing. Just the "assumption" that you were sick was enough to shove you into the hospital, where you were likely to be harmed or killed without any possible way to resist, as visits were banned and medical workers spared any legal consequences related to applying official COVID treatments.
2. Osoby zdrowe, które pozostawały w styczności z osobami chorymi na choroby zakaźne podlegają obowiązkowej kwarantannie lub nadzorowi epidemiologicznemu, jeżeli tak postanowią organy inspekcji sanitarnej przez okres nie dłuższy niż 21 dni, licząc od ostatniego dnia styczności.
Translation:
Healthy people, who were in contact with infected people are subject to mandatory quarantine or epidemiological supervision, if decided by the institutions of sanitary inspection. The duration will be no more than 21 days, counting from the last day of contact.
If you were found to be in contact
with a "COVID case", you would be imprisoned for up to 21 days. We knew that already. But that's not the worst of it:
3. Obowiązkowa kwarantanna lub nadzór epidemiologiczny, o których mowa w ust. 2, mogą być stosowane wobec tej samej osoby więcej niż raz, do czasu stwierdzenia braku zagrożenia dla zdrowia lub życia ludzkiego
Translation:
Mandatory quarantine or epidemiological supervision can be used against the same person more than once, until the lack of danger to human health or life is confirmed
Ha! In theory, the "COVID act" enabled locking someone up indefinitely. Let's not forget that COVID tests do not prove that someone is sick or can spread the sickness, so this stipulation never had an evidential basis. The parts following this one are pretty boring and expected, but what's coming after will absolutely shock you. Equip the Shield of the Damned and get ready for the thunderstrike:
„Art. 44a. 1. Jeżeli użycie innych sił i środków jest niemożliwe lub może okazać się niewystarczające, Minister Obrony Narodowej może przekazać do dyspozycji Głównego Inspektora Sanitarnego lub wojewody, na którego obszarze podejmowane są działania związane ze stanem zagrożenia epidemicznego, stanem epidemii albo w razie niebezpieczeństwa szerzenia się zakażenia lub choroby zakaźnej, które może stanowić zagrożenie dla zdrowia publicznego, w szczególności wystąpienia choroby szczególnie niebezpiecznej lub wysoce zakaźnej, pododdziały lub oddziały Sił Zbrojnych Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, wraz ze skierowaniem ich do wykonywania zadań z tym związanych.
Translation:
In case the other means prove inadequate, the Minister of National Defense can place the Polish Armed Forces at the disposal of the Chief Sanitary Inspector or governor of the province where there is (a danger of) an epidemic of a particularly infectious or serious disease, and assign them to execute relevant actions.
Mask off moment for the "COVID act". The government was ready to send the army on your ass if you broke restrictions too much. Though they don't say it directly, the relevant actions
is all-encompassing, and must by definition include killing. After all, why was the army specifically brought as a final solution? What are they able to do that the other institutions are not? Mass killing, of course. And it doesn't matter that it didn't end up happening, only that the rulers were prepared to execute it if the conditions demanded it (eg. mass violations of restrictions which of course had no chance in this country of cowards).
There is more after this about "zero COVID zones" and similar China-tier stuff that I don't care to cover, as I think involving the army proves my point well enough. So this is the act that got applied in Poland very soon after corona became a sensation. This shows the rulers can act fast if they need to (eg. to worsen our slavery). I suspect many countries had similar ones, but can't be bothered to confirm ATM (if you have any idea, E-mail me). Anyway, can you guess how many deputies accepted (archive) (MozArchive) the modifications?
Za ustawą uchwaloną przez Sejm 2 marca opowiedzieli się wszyscy biorący udział w głosowaniu posłowie PiS - 226 osób, 113 na 114 biorących udział w głosowaniu posłów KO (jeden poseł, Tomasz Lenz, głosował przeciw), 42 na 43 uczestniczących w głosowaniu posłów Lewicy (od głosu wstrzymała się posłanka Wanda Nowicka), z klubu PSL-Kukiz'15 18 posłów poparło ustawę, a 6 wstrzymało się od głosu, ustawę poparł też poseł niezrzeszony Ryszard Galla, a wszyscy biorący udział w głosowaniu posłowie Konfederacji głosowali przeciw ustawie.
CBF translating directly but all 226 deputies of PiS and 113 out of 114 deputies of KO (two main parties) voted for it, then 42 out of 43 and 15 out of 18 from some alternative parties. Only the far right party Konfederacja was fully against it, but of course, they have comparably few members and the slavery act ended up passing by an almost unanimous decision regardless of their opposition to it.
This example perfectly showcases how the legal system is designed to fuck us over. The slavery act appeared on the deputies' desks, and boom 6 days later it got approved and we became slaves without any "official" way of resisting. If you did it "unofficially" and were persistent enough, the army would be waiting to wipe you and your revolutionary buddies out. And during the "pandemic", you were enslaved whether you were a "marginalized" autistic black transwoman or the supposedly most "privileged" straight white Christian man. I'm mentioning this because lately, the sentiment that some groups of plebeians somehow avoid the oppression, or even are themselves the oppressors, is becoming more and more popular. It's a joke totally disproved by the COVID situation, as well as by the schooling system, CCTV surveillance, and everything else that we are all subjected to. The oppression goes from the rulers to the plebs, and not from whites to blacks or any of the myriad other inter-pleb combinations. The rulers are non-discriminatory in their abuse, yet people keep falling for the division tactics. Keep this in mind the next time you hear about "X pleb group rights", and remember that during the "pandemic", we all had none.
Protests don't work
On January 31, 2023, 1.27 million French people protested (archive) (MozArchive) against the upcoming rise in retirement age from 62 to 64 years old:
For comparison, on January 31, the biggest day of demonstrations so far, some 1.27 million took part, according to official figures.
On March 7, another one happened - this time with two million people:
trade unions announced that “more than two million people” would take part in rallies on Tuesday.
Regardless of that, the policy got implemented (archive) (MozArchive):
Late on Saturday, 195 senators voted in favor of the plans, with 112 opposing them
See? The rulers do not care about your opinion. But the protests are continuing still. Remember what Einstein said about insanity? Do you really think they'd let you do something that actually threatened the power structure? That's why it's so funny when people tell you to "check the laws in your area" - or something similar - before going to a protest. Isn't that missing the point? Think about it: your rulers have bothered you enough for you to go to a protest, but you will let them tell you how to protest? Hell, look at this guide to "legal protesting" (archive) (MozArchive):
Groups are allowed to use banners or signs, but restrictions may be placed on the size of the banners and signs as well as the material used in the construction. Signs may not be fastened to wooden sticks, for example, so demonstrators often afix signs to cardboard tubing or simply hold them.
Heh, they are even limiting fucking sign sizes and materials - almost as if the signs were some kind of explosive weapons.
Neither signs nor banners are permitted to be attached to public property such as light posts or telephone poles.
Of course, the "public" property belongs to your rulers, don't you dare touch it, peasant!
Try to obey law enforcement’s instructions [...] Never interfere with an officer who is approaching or arresting someone during the event
As seen above, a "legal protest" always requires you to bow down in the end. When it gets too spicy, the rulers will just send their Kapo pawns (the police) to break it up. As if protests weren't ineffective enough already, following "legalities" ensures they will be completely toothless. It should be obvious - almost tautological - that bowing down to an abuser doesn't do anything long term. If he enjoys abusing his favorite human pets, and knows he's not going to suffer any consequence for it, why would he stop? In fact, he will increase the brutality more and more; that is exactly what happens in abusive relationships. At least, until the victim dares to resist - in a way that actually worries the perpetrator, instead of one he would laugh at (AKA "legal protests" or the chihuahua's barking). And this is why the chest-puffing right wingers end up hurting everyone when they scream "fed! fed!" (archive) (MozArchive) at anyone who dares to suggest resistance; they are the ones helping the rulers by insisting on dead ends.
I just learned (from an obscure Polish blog no less) that the EU has unleashed (MozArchive) the "Media Freedom Act" (local) a few days ago, which (in the marketing materials) is supposed to "support journalistic independence" and similar noble-sounding nonsense. But this kind of portrayal hides the deeper, more horrifying reality of it - one that no media outlet has covered so far. So let me do it, and remember to hold your gaming chair tightly:
Let's start with determining who does this law even apply to. The EU defines "media service" like this:
‘media service’ means a service as defined by Articles 56 and 57 TFEU, where the principal purpose of the service or a dissociable section thereof consists in providing programmes or press publications, under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider, to the general public, by any means, in order to inform, entertain or educate;
Okay, I think this makes it clear enough. If you write a press publication
, in order to inform, entertain or educate
, by any means
you are subject to the new laws. But just to be sure, let's try to find out (archive) (MozArchive) what press publications
are:
‘press publication’ means a collection composed mainly of literary works of a journalistic nature, but which can also include other works or other subject matter, and which:
constitutes an individual item within a periodical or regularly updated publication under a single title, such as a newspaper or a general or special interest magazine;
has the purpose of providing the general public with information related to news or other topics; and
is published in any media under the initiative, editorial responsibility and control of a service provider.
Periodicals that are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, are not press publications for the purposes of this Directive;
So, does the Dig Deeper digital newspaper fit? I don't see anything in it violating the definition. Unless I am somehow not a service provider
? But again, this seems like a weak tree branch to grab in hopes that it will save me from falling into the lake full of EU crocodiles - especially since the main definition seems to cover writing by any means
. What we know 100% from here (archive) (local) is that anyone running a commercial media service absolutely will be subject to these, no question:
Services shall be considered to be ‘services’ within the meaning of the Treaties where they are normally provided for remuneration, in so far as they are not governed by the provisions relating to freedom of movement for goods, capital and persons. ‘Services’ shall in particular include: (a) activities of an industrial character; (b) activities of a commercial character; (c) activities of craftsmen; (d) activities of the professions.
But that's still really vague; are people who offer (but don't require) donation options included? No one knows, and it's something that would doom me and many bloggers. Nor does this explicitly keep the non-commercial writers off the hook. So again, we don't have total confirmation of who's exactly going to be subject to the new laws, but it does look like they tried to cast the net as widely as they could, without stating it directly. But what's so horrible about these policies, anyway? If you have a shield or helmet nearby, now is the time to equip it:
1. Media service providers shall make easily and directly accessible to the recipients of their services up-to-date information on: (a) their legal name or names and contact details
My legal name is Sagma Digg, nice to meet you.
To further contribute to a high level of media ownership transparency, Member States should also entrust national regulatory authorities or bodies, or other competent authorities and bodies, with developing media ownership databases. Such databases should work as a one-stop shop allowing recipients of media services to easily check the relevant information related to a given media service provider.
So there will be a global, EU-wide database of who owns which media outlet. Or in other words, the end of anonymous publishing (assuming you will cuck, which you - as the reader of this site - surely won't, right?). Of course, you could say that maybe they are meaning to apply this only to owners of media outlets, for whom other journalists write. Though it's a stretch, and not really supported by the earlier quotes (or anything I can find in the entire doc), even that wouldn't really save the new policies, for this reason:
Intrusive surveillance software should only be deployed where it is justified by an overriding reason of public interest [...]
Ha! So spyware can be deployed against journalists if EU psychos decide there is public interest
riding on it (until now, every member state
decided whether and in which cases to deploy the spyware; from now on it will be enforced from above). After this quote, comes a bunch of requirements that supposedly have to be satisfied to be able to use this method, including a judge's approval, but I don't think this will be really hard to receive for the psychos - nor that they won't break it if they want to, anyway. The point is, once the door for spying has been opened, the journalist can't really feel free to report what he wants to (chilling effect). So much for "journalistic independence". They realize it, BTW:
Intrusive surveillance software, including, in particular, what is commonly referred to as ‘spyware’, represents a particularly invasive form of surveillance over media professionals and their sources. It can be deployed to secretly record calls or otherwise use the microphone of an end-user device, film or photograph natural persons, machines or their surroundings, copy messages, access encrypted content data, track browsing activity, track geolocation or collect other sensor data, or track activities across multiple end-user devices. It has dissuasive effects on the free exercise of economic activities in the media sector. It jeopardises, in particular, the trusted relationship of journalists with their sources, which is the core of the journalistic profession. Given the digital and intrusive nature of such software and the use of devices across borders, it has a particularly detrimental impact on the exercise of economic activities by media service providers in the internal market. It is therefore necessary to ensure that media service providers, including journalists, operating in the internal market for media services can rely on robust harmonised protection in relation to the deployment of intrusive surveillance software in the Union, including where Member State authorities resort to private parties to deploy it.
No, what's required is to just let them do their jobs, and stop prying. But why pry in the first place? Let's turn off our conspiracy theory modules for a while, and try to figure out why even implement all these measures, from the point of view of the government?
Thirdly, the good functioning of the internal market for media services is challenged by providers, including those controlled by certain third countries, that systematically engage in disinformation or information manipulation and interference, and use the internal market freedoms for abusive purposes, thus thwarting the proper functioning of market dynamics.
In a well-functioning internal market, recipients of media services should be able to access quality media services which have been produced by journalists in an independent manner and in line with ethical and journalistic standards and which, therefore, provide trustworthy information.
disseminated in diverse ways, including by uploading it to online platforms. Quality media services are also an antidote against disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference. Access to such services should also be ensured by preventing attempts to silence journalists, ranging from threats and harassment to censorship and cancelling of dissenting opinions, which could limit the free flow of information into the public sphere by reducing the quality and plurality of information.
It's to prevent disinformation
especially from certain third countries
that perform foreign information manipulation and interference
. Hmm, I wonder what those countries could be? Nepal maybe? Thailand? Equatorial Guinea? Sorry I'm running blank, but it's surely not the big bad Russia. When the EU says they want journalism to be produced "independently" and ensure "quality information", it's a cover for keeping Russia out of it. So yeah, just like you need to be sucking Zelensky's dick to get into politics - as someone has already learned - and another someone (archive) (MozArchive) is about to follow him - soon you'll need to be doing the same to get into the media. Which I strongly suspect will also include personal sites. At least that's the EU psycho dream, they might still not have the resources to follow up on everyone; but picking and choosing particularly important targets will still be a possibility. And as usual, this is yet another law that's been prepared without input from the plebeians, in order to prevent them from realizing how vile and nonsensical Zelensky's propaganda is, while pretending to have noble aims.
If you're wondering why blocking and / or punishing the spread of the so-called "Russian propaganda" is so evil, realize that you can't really know anything about any topic if you only stick to "one side" (which in Polish media consists exclusively of Zelensky dick-sucking). Especially if it relates to war - the first casualty of war is the truth
. That is why you need to be able to examine what both sides of the conflict say, or even independent commentators - but the EU psychos don't want to let you do that. They want your "research" to consist of slogans about hero Zelensky bravely fighting the full-scale Russian invasion
, while ignoring the trucks dragging (archive) (MozArchive) innocent Ukrainian men to the front line to die (even attempting to do that to 14 year olds (archive) (MozArchive)), his complete resistance to peaceful resolution (MozArchive), his robbery of hundreds of billions of dollars from Europe / USA, his illegitimate extension of presidency, etc. So - no matter how hard the EU psychos pretend these new laws are just about protecting "journalistic freedom" - they can't fool me. What they actually want is to be able to hunt down reporters (including what up until now were anonymous internet ones) who question their delusional Zelensky-worshipping narrative by either putting them into some dystopian global database of anyone who has ever written anything, and / or putting spyware on their devices to grab evidence to punish them later. Of course, long term, this will end up affecting not only Zelensky's critics, but everyone - and forever. One official narrative to rule them all is the final goal of this scheme.
Fines don't work
Have you ever heard of a corporate big fish being jailed? Me neither. That is regardless of corporations being responsible for causing someone's cancer (archive) (MozArchive) through their products, and burying the evidence. Or bribing doctors to promote drugs proven to cause harm (archive) (MozArchive) for unapproved (illegal) uses. What would happen if you sold a poisoned doughnut on the streets? Probably an immediate jail time if caught. But for the corporate higher-ups, it's always either a slap on the wrist or a fine. That is if they are even required to pay them...
Apple fine was canceled (archive) (MozArchive). Facebook is not even confirmed yet (UPDATE July 2023: they were fined in 2019, still can't find a confirmation they've actually paid). Three of four Google's fines (as well as the Intel one) are being appealed (UPDATE July 2023: hey, Google actually lost an appeal (archive) (MozArchive). Finally, someone has at least paid; even though this barely put a dent in their earnings), and the remaining one was tiny in comparison. Oh, and I tried to find the resolution to the Intel fine, too, and guess what - 13 years later it got canceled (archive) (MozArchive). Do you now see the pointlessness of this whole fining circus? 13 years of legal screwing around, and nothing came out of it. How
about the banking fines? With how much money they have, they pretty much end up being just slaps on the wrist - JPMorgan Chase is the largest bank in the United States,
and is ranked by S&P Global as the sixth largest bank in the world by total assets as of 2018, to the amount of $2.535 trillion
. So the fine is not even 1% of what they have. Besides, they
can just print more (archive) (MozArchive). As we can see, fining corpos is nothing more than a theater, and the people responsible for their crimes never suffer any direct consequences regardless of the harm they do.
UPDATE: it is 2022, and I want to give a hard, mathematical proof that fines are useless. Look here (archive) (MozArchive):
On December 31, 2021, the CNIL fined GOOGLE a total of 150 million euros (90 million euros for GOOGLE LLC and 60 million euros for GOOGLE IRELAND LIMITED) because users of google.fr and youtube.com can't refuse or accept cookies as easily.
A 150 million euro fine! Surely, Google will never recover from this. RIP. UPDATE 2023: the report for the full year is in, and the situation is even worse than it seemed:
Ruth Porat, CFO of Alphabet and Google, said: “Our Q4 consolidated revenues were $76 billion, up 1% year over year, or up 7% in constant currency, and $283 billion for the full year 2022
That's 775 million USD per day, which is 704.5 million EUR (by the April 2022 conversion rate of 1.10). They have regained the losses in less than a day (actually about 5 hours)! Have the officials really not learned basic math in school? Or maybe they've just been bribed; it doesn't really matter. The fact is that the fines are mathematically proven to be useless.
There is another aspect to be considered here. What HAS Google actually been fined for? Turns out it's because you can't deny their tracking cookies easily enough - Several clicks are required to refuse all cookies, against a single one to accept them.
This is fine, the problem here is that it's only one of hundreds of abuses that Google is doing. They are still shoving reCAPTCHA up your face (and training their AI with it). Still sending a truck of data with every Google Chrome startup. Still collecting your internet habits from all the sites that use Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager or other Google trash. And correlating it all with the YouTube videos that you watch and the Gmails that you send. And since they are apart of PRISM, all of that is being sent to the feds. Then consider all the disgusting censorship they are employing on their search engine. Is it not obvious that punishing them for some cookies doesn't really matter?
Imagine Google as a country that is going to war. So they are deploying thousands of tanks, hundreds of fighter jets, and millions of ground troops with their high tech weapons. Obviously, they're crushing any poor country they've invaded in days. Finally, people manage to kill one of Google's soldiers, and this is proclaimed as some great victory. All while the wave of tanks and jets is still taking a dump on the country. Add to that alliances with other malicious "countries" like Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, Mozilla, Amazon and Cloudflare - and you realize there is no way to win this war by removing singular "soldiers" - when the violating "countries" have trained a hundred more in that time. Hell, forget the "killing" of the soldier, since it's doubtful Google will stop the tracking cookie violations anyway - so make that "maiming". Against the whole of Google's army (plus their allies), all we've managed to do is MAIM (not even kill) one of their soldiers. Does anyone still think the legal system works? Even if you assume honesty, it cannot keep up with all the violations.
You can't run away
During the early lockdowns, someone on a forum I was on back then, asked for a safe place to settle to avoid NWO bullshit. He got a few answers like Japan or Belarus. But, the plandemic actually made it clear that the entire world is compromised already. Sure, there are better and worse places, but evil has placed its hands everywhere. Now I do not know the situation in every place out there, but it is obvious that the entirety of Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, China (just for a few major examples) went extremely dystopian. Sure, there were outliers like Sweden and Belarus and some USA states that did a few things differently, but Pfizer still ruled the roost. You couldn't find a vitamin D dispenser site anywhere, debate wasn't encouraged, tests were shitty everywhere, death stats probably faked everywhere, etc. If you were putting your hopes into Africa, South America, or smaller Asian countries - forget it. Remember the mysteriously dead presidents? I surely am not familiar with every one of those places, but check this, as an example:
Countries like Taijikistan were still being shoved (archive) (MozArchive) the vaccines by the WHO and other NWO spawns. Later, Taijikistan actually became (archive) (MozArchive) the first country that mandated the snake venom. So think long and hard whether those lesser known places are good tourist destinations... And remember, we have only covered COVID so far, and didn't touch all the other bullshit every country out there is doing. Even if running away to some place in Africa was viable, why should we do it? Why give up a higher quality (presumably) life in Europe or America? Why be forced to learn a new language? Why waste the money, give up the friends and everything? And how long would that place remain untouched by the hands of evil, anyway? It is clear that running away is at best a temporary solution that's also giving up way too much, and at worst, a total surrender to the forces of darkness. Stop running! There's nowhere to run. We have to fight for our current places of residence.
The courts are compromised, too
So don't expect them to protect you or give you mercy. If you do anything that even slightly bothers the rulers - anything that might shake up the power structure - they will find some law out there (thousands to pick from) that you allegedly violated and use that to punish you with the highest possible brutality level. As an example, let's use that time a Polish farmer was punished for hanging this banner on his tractor:
The direct translation is Putin, please clean up Ukraine, Brussels and our own government
. It doesn't translate well, and I suspect you don't know Polish language, so let me tell you that zrób porządek
(what a dictionary would translate as clean up
even though I don't think it's the most meaningful translation) is the same term you'd use when doing a cleaning in your house, rearranging cables in your computer or tools in your cupboard, or even handling emotions that are running wild. Basically it's used whenever there is a situation to fix that's currently broken, so that's the English term I'd use, that or "install order". With that said, can you guess what they got him for (archive) (MozArchive)?
Po przedstawieniu zarzutów rolnikowi nawoływania publicznego do wszczęcia wojny napastniczej przeciwko Polsce, pochwalenia wojny napastniczej wobec Ukrainy, a także propagowania ustroju komunistycznego, na obecnym etapie oczekujemy na opinię sądowo-psychiatryczną dotyczącą tego podejrzanego.
Translation:
After accusing the farmer of public calling for the invasion of Poland, supporting the invasion of Ukraine, and spreading communist regime, at the moment we're waiting for the psychiatric judgment about the accused.
The fucking calling for invasion
was what got him. But can the insane psycho prosecutor and her media minions show me just where exactly does he do that in the banner? Am I waging war against my shelves when cleaning my room? Am I waging war against my diet when I add healthy food to it? That's how the mainstream is expecting you to think. Besides - even if Putin somehow read the banner (which is already extremely unlikely) and interpreted it this way (he wouldn't) - it's not like he'd then think "oh, this Polish farmer supports me, I now must triple my war efforts". You can't be "calling for war" with any relevant effect if the warlords are ignoring you (assuming you even accept the questionable mainstream theory of the war being caused exclusively by Putin's insane imperialist dreams). Who is actually supporting the war in Ukraine? The USA / EU politicians, of course, when they send weapons (archive) (MozArchive) there. I mean is there any more direct way of supporting a war even possible? War can't happen without weapons. And yet the rulers are not going to punish themselves for sustaining it, of course. On the other hand, they will punish a random farmer who can't affect anything anyway.
The message in that banner actually sounds positive to me; what with removing the bad people in the stated governments and replacing them with better ones, or giving them better organization? That's what a natural reading of the sentence would suggest. Let me reiterate, there is absolutely nothing here about calling for or supporting any war. Again, this situation shows that the rulers will get you whenever they want to, and you don't need to have done what they accuse you of. By the way, it was moderately hard to find a photo of the banner; most of the media sites appear to have scrubbed it. I guess they don't want you to know just why people are being dragged through the court system in the first place; you're just supposed to accept your place as the plebeian that receives whippings. And of course, the psychos can't simply wait for the trial, they're going to bully this poor farmer into total mental destruction before finishing him off when he receives his actual punishments:
Wobec Piotra G. zastosowano dozór policyjny. Trzy razy w tygodniu musi zgłaszać się na policję, oraz poręczenie majątkowe w wysokości 5 tysięcy złotych. Rolnikowi i jego córce grozi 5 lat więzienia.
Translation:
Police supervision has been applied against Piotr G. Three times per week he has to visit the police station, as well as pay bail of 5 thousand zlotys (about 1K USD / EUR). Him and his daughter could be punished with 5 years of prison.
Since he's going to undergo psychiatric evaluation they are probably going to get him to admit he's insane (maybe with a promise of reduced sentence), and then happily run a media smear campaign on him, with the implication that questioning mainstream narratives is the result of defective psychology.
Brian Thompson's assassination shows what works
On December 4, 2024, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare - a medical insurance company - was killed (archive) (MozArchive) outside the Hilton hotel at 1335 Avenue of the Americas just after 6.45am after arriving early for the company’s annual investor conference
in New York City, USA. I have uploaded the footage so that you can receive the context for this section. Now look at the aftermath of the incident (archive) (MozArchive):
Health insurer Medica temporarily closed its Minnetonka, Minnesota, headquarters as a safety precaution [...]
CVS and other health care companies have removed photographs of CEOs and other executive leaders from their websites [...]
Another example (archive) (MozArchive):
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield said Thursday that the health insurance provider is reversing a policy that was set to go into effect in February that would have limited anesthesia coverage during surgeries and other procedure [...]
Can you recall a protest ever having this kind of effect? How about fines? Lawsuits? Voting? "Voting with your wallet"? Posting internet memes? It's so funny - even magical - to see the other health insurance companies panic so fast. But why would the killer even be pushed to end the CEO's life? Maybe because the health insurance companies often pull crap like this (archive) (MozArchive):
Democrats on the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) released a report claiming UnitedHealthcare’s prior authorization denial rate for post-acute care jumped from 10.9% in 2020 to 22.7% in 2022.
Imagine if you had a relative dying from cancer, heart failure, or something else that's debilitating and requires quick treatment - and he got denied or delayed the care, and died. Of course, logically, the more a company rejects insurance claims, the more money it will earn (or rather, will be able to spend less) - which again reveals the problems with for-profit medicine. And, UnitedHealthcare just happened to have the highest industry rate of claim rejection. These days, they are even outsourcing this job to AI:
The suit claimed the company illegally deployed "artificial intelligence (AI) in place of real medical professionals to wrongfully deny elderly patients care owed to them under Medicare Advantage Plans by overriding their treating physicians’ determinations as to medically necessary care based on an AI model."
Seems obvious to me that the killer either had his own - or more likely one of his family member's - treatment denied, and sought the only way of resistance he could think of. Though I guess it's not the only possible explanation; a competitor corporation getting angry at the "success" of this one could also have spurred this incident. However, that explanation becomes unlikely when you consider the messages the killer seemingly left on the bullets (archive) (MozArchive) - Deny, Defend, Depose
refering to the tactics used by the insurance companies. In the end it doesn't matter that much because...
...The social media sentiment is surprisingly pro-assassin and has united various political creeds in a way that I haven't seen happen before. A friend told me that Out of the 9200 emoji reactions to the official announcement of his death on the company's Facebook page, 9000 were laughing or "haha" emojis
. Edit: current numbers appears to be several times higher, with a ratio of about 12 "happy" reactions to 1 sad one. A significant reason for this is that the killer didn't write any manifestos or anything else that would expose his political leanings, so no camp has anything to hate him for. The other is surely that most people in the USA have been screwed over by the insurance companies at some point. The only entity that has a problem with the killer is the mainstream media (archive) (MozArchive) - "The framing of this incident as some opening blow in a class war and not a brutal murder is especially alarming”
. But even they can't pretend that they have the "only one truth" - like they did during the covid scare; there appears to be little gaslighting and they readily admit (archive) (MozArchive) that the public is not with them - But mostly, McWhorter said, “there’s this weird thing, this vibe of like, I don’t see a bunch of people just feeling an urgency.”
(in terms of finding the culprit).
Some people - like Miles Mathis - consider this event to be staged. I don't agree and his arguments appear quite weak. For example, it's common for the police to release video footage to the media (MozArchive) in hopes it will help catch the perpetrator. And, the rich actually commonly walk around with few or no bodyguards. Either way, it doesn't even matter. If the rulers faked this, they are really stupid because - whether real or fake - waves of copycats will still be thinking "oh, I could do this too". The target was not protected by anything or anyone, and apparently the meeting information was even public. And even though - according to a gun enthusiast I talked to - the assassin had to be familiar with guns due to the way he performed the "tap rack bang", the hit still looks simple enough to serve as an inspiration for potential copycats. All that's needed is a little (or somewhat more than a little) familiarity with guns, and a few minutes long Internet research to find out the dates and places of corporate meetings, and you too could do something like this. And since the gun was supposedly 3D-printed, it would even possible to leave no paper trail in terms of receiving the murder weapon; a knife or something else is also an option (again, the target was unprotected). Predictably, the police is throwing the full weight (MozArchive) of the technological slavery system onto this case - yet is failing to catch the culprit regardless, adding to the appeal. We might have a true revolution brewing thanks to this incident. As even your average normie now believes that any elite who has done too much evil is an acceptable target for public execution, and they realize it's also not rocket science to actually pull it off.
UPDATE: I don't trust the new "official" stuff that came out. I mean, I am expected to believe that the killer - after performing an assassination straight out of a Hitman game - simply decided to hang around McDonald's with the exact gun he used at the crime scene and a bunch of fake IDs. He was smart enough to throw away the backpack, but yet kept the murder weapon - the most incriminating piece of evidence possible? And he had five days to get rid of it, or even flee the country - but no, he just wanted a burger so much. Even if so, why not at least cut your eyebrows or put on some makeup to avoid detection? Some people think he actually wanted to be caught, but then why flee the crime scene at all? More than that, the media want us to believe that he just happened to have (archive) (MozArchive) a hand-written manifesto on him, containing phrases such as These parasites had it coming
. And of course all this information is coming from law enforcement sources
. Isn't that just too convenient?
I am not convinced Mangione is actually the killer. Besides the careless behavior of the suspect after the Hitman-like assassination, there is also other evidence he's unlikely to have done it - namely, these (MozArchive) tweets (MozArchive) from his friend:
I had a two hour video-call with Mangione, the suspected UnitedHealthcare CEO shooter, in May. He genuinely seemed like one of the nicest people I’ve ever met. After the chat he spontaneously bought me subscriptions to services he thought would help me with writing.
Luigi Mangione, the suspected CEO shooter, is a founding member of my Substack, and someone I've been friendly with for a while. I hope there's been a mix-up, because committing murder doesn't seem like him at all.
Even though his social media profiles (local) kind of fit someone that "might have" done the deed, it shouldn't be that hard to find a young guy with some health problems and publicly stated grievances with the medical system, plant some evidence on him, and make him the scapegoat. The rulers just couldn't let this "crime" stay unsolved for too long, because again, they need the plebs to believe that "resistance is futile". In this case, catching someone - whoever it was - would have the same effect on perception. Still, they are failing at narrative control this time, despite all the efforts. Luigi Mangione - whether the real killer or not - is not only overwhelmingly supported in his act, but also liked as a person now that his social media profiles got revealed. He is clearly well read (MozArchive) and educated, and there is no indication of mental disease or extremism. Picking Luigi as a "suspect" just buries the rulers further. If even popular right-wing influencers are failing to convince their own audience (that usually likes "law and order") that there was anything wrong with the assassination, you know the rulers are losing the game.
UPDATE 2: Matt Walsh has vomited this piece about the assassination:
Let's cover it in depth, because I think it perfectly showcases the mindset leading to our slavery:
If you are a conservative expressing any sympathy with leftists who are celebrating the murder of a businessman by some mentally deranged loser then you are not a conservative at all.
According to this reputable dictionary (archive) (MozArchive), conservatism
is the desire to preserve or restore what is established and to limit change
; another one (archive) (MozArchive) confirms this meaning. It's important to realize that this is what drives all the Walsh types, in the end. To him and his ilk, the current world is so amazing, that the revolutionary must inevitably be a mentally deranged loser
. If it means we have millions of these losers, then so be it; it's not enough to make him question if a part of the status quo might simply suck. Also, nice try at portraying the praise for the killer as just another "delusion of the left"; it's not working because even right-wingers are joining in. Appealing to the "victim" being a businessman
isn't working either; people are more and more catching up to the fact that a businessman is an exploiter - and the more evil he does, the richer he gets. As Thompson has basically proven by running a company with the highest rate of health insurance claim denials, and predictably the biggest profits (archive) (MozArchive).
We stand for law, justice, and a stable, properly ordered society.
Law is the main vehicle of oppression, basically what made us slaves during the "pandemic". Justice does not currently exist as none of the decision makers that have destroyed the lives of millions were ever inconvenienced for it in any way - or they even got rewarded. In fact, Thompson's death is a small step towards restoring justice that's been missing since at least a few decades. A stable, properly ordered society
is one in which the mentally deranged
revolutionaries are not allowed to resist their oppression, lest they be stepped on and smeared against the floor. The "proper ordering" is the one in which the pleb simply accepts his position as the receiver of abuse, and shuts up about it and keeps fulfilling his role. This is what the Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro types want and think is ideal.
Leftists want the opposite of all of that, which is why murder and mayhem in the street fills these sickos with orgasmic glee.
Maybe it fills some with orgasmic glee
, but I'm confident that the vast majority has simply realized that the nonviolent ways of bringing change have all been exhausted and proven inadequate. This assassination was something that had to be done
, and not something that they'd like to be doing. The oppression had simply tipped the scale so much that it broke; oppression that Walsh thinks is fine and dandy. The orgasmic glee
seems like projection on Walsh's part to me; it's probably something he feels when he imagines all those poor, sick and homeless suffering and dying from their totally preventable diseases that the horrible healthcare system (and other parts of his conservative utopia) at least partially contributed to. Edit: ha! Forget the probably
- Walsh has a podcast episode (MozArchive) named Ep. 1410 - Cleaning Out The Homeless Encampments Just In Time For The Election
. Hahaha. The description contains this gem: It's about that time when guys like Gavin Newsom temporarily pretend to care about the well-being of American families
. So, Walsh thinks that the homeless should be "cleaned out" like some pieces of trash, and to do so is to care about the well-being of American families
. Amazing. But quite revealing about the true nature of his type. A nature he ended up confirming (MozArchive) elsewhere - Many are aggressive, violent, dangerous vagrants and the innocent people plagued by them should earn much more of our sympathy than the vagrants themselves
. Anyway, coming back to the original tweet:
If you’re on the right and you find yourself even slightly siding with a crazy wench like Taylor Lorenz on this issue (or any issue), it should tell you something very troubling about yourself. It tells the rest of us something too. We won’t forget.
I don't know who Taylor Lorenz is, so I guess I'm safe from Matt Walsh's wrath. But it's funny, how even slightly siding
with someone from another camp gets your conservative card revoked. Is this ideology so fragile that it cannot resist even a little questioning? I guess that is why he's getting so angry. Maybe some cognitive dissonance had struck. After all, think about some of the things you'd be conserving
as a conservative
:
Of course, it's not a given that Walsh even supports all those things. But it is likely he does for most, because I haven't seen him complain about those from a cursory look at his Twitter and a short web search. He obviously likes unrestricted business and so hits at least the first few points. He has spoken in favor of surveillance in schools (archive) (MozArchive), which probably fit his notion of ensuring safety
. And of course, he sees nothing wrong with a couple of psychopathic rulers having the power to design "laws" that enslave and abuse everyone else, and which the regular person has zero effect on. That's his idea of a properly ordered society
.
There is another side of conservatism that's concerned with issues like abortion, immigration, gender issues, etc. And I'm not saying that they don't have valid concerns there, but they are minor problems compared to surveillance, profit motive, and the legal system - my "big three". Regardless, every issue has to be analyzed separately; it's important to not fall into the trap of calling yourself a "conservative" (or a "leftist", or anything else) and blindly absorb all the positions of those groups. But that's exactly what the Walsh types are doing and want their audiences to be doing. I believe one reason that the assassin gained so much sympathy is because he wasn't easily shoved into some kind of extremist box and dismissed.
People like Walsh disgust me, really. At least Gates, Schwab, Trudeau, Ardern and other characters that reared their heads during Operation Corona were unashamedly evil. On the other hand, this guy pretends to be the people's champion while wanting to clean out
the homeless. With the Thompson assassination, we had the perfect revolutionary event that could have begun toppling (some / most of) the current bullshit, and what was his reaction? How dare you, pleb; you were supposed to stay under the boot - but look! You can set up a Christmas tree and pretend everything is going well. This is a political commentator that does everything in his power to pretend that the status quo is great, and the only problem is those evil leftists trying to bring it down! In the end, he just ends up being a gatekeeper for the rulers' regime. What a waste of a big audience and an influential position.
Nations - the rulers' dirtiest trick
I'm sure you have heard this slogan many many times. But have you actually considered its meaning? Its implications? Let's first cover some fundamental issues:
What even is a "country"? Lines arbitrarily drawn on a map, signifying land under the control of one psycho or another, then given a shiny flag and a name so that people believe it's something unique and meaningful. And yet, whether you put the lines here or there, the mountains or lakes between those lines have not moved. The same people who were living there still are - and they still have the same traits as before the map redrawing. Of course, you could say that countries automatically form out of languages, culture, customs, ethnicities, religions, traditions, infrastructure, etc. Yet, how much in common do you have with someone on the other side of your country? Probably not much and your country almost certainly has several areas where those traits all widely differ (Poland has ones with totally different cultures, dialects, etc...yet all fly under the same flag). Reversing this, people in different countries - such as parts of Russia and Ukraine - can be almost identical in terms of all those issues. Hey, a mainstream article (archive) (MozArchive) - written by someone living right on the fake border between those "nations" - quite beautifully admits this for me:
Where do you call home? I’ve travelled and lived in so many places that the question sometimes confused me.
Living on the border, the two identities often mixed, on both sides, without much notice
But that border was nothing more than a line on a map. There was no physical border with neighbouring Russian villages and towns, and neither was there a linguistic or cultural one.
No linguistic or cultural
difference between the Russian and Ukrainian people, only a fake line on the map. That did not change even when psycho governments put up a barrier right where the fake border was supposed to be:
Except they still weren’t that different. We still watched the same films, same TV channels, we had the same celebrities, listened to the same music. I remember how as a child I asked my dad to turn the antenna towards Russia on Sundays in the mid-1990s to watch morning Disney cartoons in Russian.
If "countries" were actual organic things, situations like this could never happen. What is really the point of "countries", then? Since we've established that the "country" has no real meaning aside from the fake lines our rulers put on the map, we have to consider other reasons why the concept might be used. Namely, that it serves as an heavily effective propaganda tool, taking advantage of the tribalism module (archive) (MozArchive) fundamental to human brains:
In concert with these cognitive adaptations, however, human tribalism may be rooted more deeply in a human evolutionary history in which groups provided immense survival and reproductive benefits. Group living has afforded benefits such as resource pooling, division of labour, cooperative parenting, protection from predators and territorial defence.
That tribalism is indeed fundamental should not be controversial for anyone that wasn't born yesterday. Consider how football fans will pay big money (archive) (MozArchive) to follow their team around the country (and sometimes world) and make artistic banners for it. They will scream at the opposing team's players all match long, throw things at them (archive) (MozArchive), and sometimes even charge the stadium (archive) (MozArchive). This is the modern expression of tribalism, as "real" tribes basically don't exist in civilization anymore. Yet, the brain still has that module and will find its tribe somewhere - be it a football team or something else; if it fails to do that, it will respond with depression (archive) (MozArchive):
Our results showed that lower feelings of belonging at the university, during any of the assessment periods, were predictive of more depressive symptoms at the end of the term.
And so, a person is very strongly compelled to "belong", AKA have a tribe. Recall the football fans again and try to imagine what you could accomplish if you were able to control who is considered a part of someone's tribe, and who is not. It is obvious that if someone wanted a lot of power over people, the tribal module would be one of the best openings to pick. And the rulers are doing just that, through the modern concept of the country. How exactly do they take advantage of it, though?
Perhaps the main usage of nation propaganda is to justify enslaving everyone inside the arbitrary country lines by this monster called "the law". You get born, you get assigned a "citizenship", and right then you get wrapped in the invisible chains around your neck called the laws of "your" nation - which you can't see, but can feel their grip whenever they get pulled by your rulers. This has many implications, the chief one being that you can get sent to war against someone who was assigned a different flag at birth. The idea of "nations" is the only one that is able to convince a regular person that her friend is her enemy just because he was born on the other side of Dnepr river. I have to admit I have never seen so much collective insanity as during the Ukraine war situation - not even during Covid. When I saw all those people proudly waving the Ukraine flags and screaming their idiotic pro-war slogans, I knew this propaganda is attacking something very deeply ingrained in the human psychology. Let's see some examples (archive) (MozArchive) of this in the media:
Ukraine urgently needs soldiers, but some men are desperate not to fight
It does? Psycho Zelensky might "need soldiers" to redraw lines on a map or accomplish whatever other insane aims he has (like getting rid of most of the men living there (archive) (MozArchive) - In particular, it is forbidden for men aged 18-60, Ukraine citizens, to leave the borders of Ukraine
) - but "Ukraine" can't "need soldiers" as countries are fake.
To say that some men are desperate not to fight
assumes that fighting just because of the arbitrary classification you've been given at birth is the default - yet it is absolutely not. Wild tribes sometimes fight (and it is not even a given that they would, because cooperation - or at least peaceful coexistence - between tribes is possible), but, they fight for real things like territory or resources. Today, we do not have to fight at all - we have food and space and possible good life for everyone. War only helps the 0.0001% of psychopaths who like redrawing lines and murdering whoever is unlucky enough to find himself inside them, as well as the weapon companies who benefit monetarily. Again, this headline is trying to redirect our natural tribalism towards the rulers' arbitrary classifications. Do you still want to argue for the "realness" of countries? Then check this:
Anton, 39, was working in Germany as a truck driver before the war started, and came back to eastern Ukraine in December 2021 to see his family. After the invasion, he found himself in Russian-occupied territory, but managed to escape back into Europe. He is now in Ireland and says he doesn’t plan to come back to Ukraine, either now or when the war is over.
Do you think this would happen in a real tribe? A tribe in which you'd know 100% of the people as you'd see them every day, work with them, rely on them, trust them with your lives? No, zero way. You'd want to save something you're attached to and felt like fighting for it was noble, or simply necessary. And yet people run en masse (archive) (MozArchive) (Zelensky’s former adviser Alexey Arestovich recently claimed that 4.5 million Ukrainian men, nearly half of the Ukrainian male population, had fled abroad to avoid military service
) in this case, because they know that the country is simply not a tribe, and there is nothing to fight for here anyway aside from the wishes of a psycho. Hey, let's look at what even defines a real tribe (archive) (MozArchive) and see if we can prove it:
- 1. Common Ancestry
Tribes are often composed of individuals who share a common lineage or descent. This shared ancestry creates a strong bond among tribe members, as they believe they are part of a larger extended family. Kinship ties are at the core of tribal identity, shaping social relationships and defining roles and responsibilities within the community.
Blood relations are one of the criteria. Do you have blood relations with 99.999% of the people in your country? No. Therefore, the country fails to meet this criteria of a tribe. Next:
- 2. Shared Culture and Traditions:
Tribes have their own unique culture, including language, customs, and traditions that are passed down from generation to generation. These cultural elements serve as a foundation for tribal identity and unity, helping to preserve the tribe’s heritage and values.
Again, country doesn't fit, as there is just too much difference between various parts of it. So another criteria failed. Next:
- 3. Territory:
Tribes often have a defined territory or homeland where they reside. This territory provides a sense of belonging and serves as a physical space for the tribe to maintain its way of life. The land holds spiritual and cultural significance for tribe members, as it is tied to their history, myths, and traditions.
Kind of fits but again, we don't really control our territory the way tribes do, unless we're in a village or something like that. And again, the country's definition of a territory is arbitrary, instead of something you and your tribe see and use every day. I doubt anyone really feels a sense of belonging
to an apartment block and the street full of CCTV and ads (that's the exact same as any other block or street), or feels they hold spiritual and cultural significance
, especially when they have no say about anything there.
- 4. Collective Decision-Making:
Tribes typically have a communal decision-making process, where important matters are discussed and decided upon collectively. Elders and tribal leaders play a crucial role in guiding and representing the interests of the tribe, ensuring that decisions are made in the best interest of the community as a whole.
Heh. Obviously we don't have that in a country. Next:
- 5. Mutual Support and Cooperation:
Tribal societies heavily rely on mutual support and cooperation among their members. The interdependence within the tribe fosters a strong sense of solidarity, with individuals working together for the common good. Sharing resources, knowledge, and skills are essential components of tribal life.
Another fail, as you don't even know 99.999% of the people in your country and never will. So you can't form these kinds of relations with them. To be generous I'll give a half point for criteria 3, and no point for the others. Therefore, the country only fulfills 0.5 of the five criteria needed for being a tribe. It is obviously not a tribe, yet the rulers want you to accept it as one - not because they want to create a beautiful extended (very very extended) family, but so that they can enslave and sacrifice you together.
Let's come back to the first article in this section. The author admits that life became worse when the rulers started enforcing the division between Russia and Ukraine, right on the border where he was living:
As the years passed, the border became more tangible. Suddenly, they would check your bags and passport, and you couldn’t bring freshly a slaughtered pig to a market in Urazovo, or your late grandma’s icon back to Dvorichna, because there was an obstacle now, called customs
And yet, the "country" brainwashing compelled him to pick his "country identity":
Local people naturally started to face an identity problem. So am I Russian, or am I Ukrainian? Back then, we were like that antenna: in Ukraine, but sometimes turning toward Russia. We didn’t see what was wrong with it.
That's because there wasn't anything wrong with it
. And now you can't even move pigs around. Why even identify with "your" country? I don't do that. The only thing that reminds me of my "country identity" is the flag on my ID card AKA slave card.
For us it was an actual state border, no different from the one with Poland on the other side of the country. For the Russians it was that line on a map drawn by Lenin. It meant nothing to them, it was an error, just like Ukraine’s independence.
Borders are indeed an error. I mean, this guy was leading a comfortable existence right on the fake border of Russia and Ukraine, and now he can't even gift a pig to his friends a few kilometers away. Yet he shills the very border that enslaves him. Absolutely insane. But it proves that the "country" propaganda attacks something very deeply ingrained into the human brain. Finally - since this article was written in 2023 - he had to eventually move on to the current war (of course, all Ukraine-related articles in the mainstream media exist only as vehicles for spreading war propaganda; this one just happens to also provide useful information):
But the war has inevitably come to their doorstep. The middle school, where my dad used to work, is now a shooting range and a torture facility. They shoot people in our gymnasiums and torture them in our classrooms, they live in our homes and eat food from our cellars, they sleep in our beds and loot our properties.
They
? You mean the Russians? AKA "people born on the other side of Dnepr who were fed the same kind of war propaganda as you, but in reality aren't any different"? Did you already forget the people you used to sell your pigs to? Now you might be sent to war against those exact people, that just a while back were a part of your real tribe, as they were right there. And suddenly, they became a they
and enemies just because the rulers (that you have zero real relations with, and vice versa) decided to move some lines. Absolutely insane. Just like someone is not necessarily a friend because they happened to be born inside the same arbitrary lines as you, there is also no reason to consider someone an enemy just because he was born inside a different set of lines (or - like here - his classification was changed). But yet, the entire nation and war propaganda is based on this absolutely retarded idea.
Why? Because Ukrainians dared to remember who we are, dared to find our identity. And those who were in identity limbo had to snap out of it and finally pick a side.
Wow, this is a goldmine of country propaganda. You couldn't stick more of it in there if you tried. You remembered who you are? Or maybe you were just told. You suddenly found out your "identity" after however many decades? And you surely never identified with anything other than the flag you were assigned at birth (if so, that is very sad). You had to pick a side? If it's a side in war, maybe pick none, as there are no winning ones - The only winning move is not to play
. It's hard for me to see how this kind of opinion can be organic.
Why can't this person (or anyone else) realize that the scam of "country identity" is the exact thing that ignites - and then fuels - the wars? Well, actually, he almost admits it here - but makes a wrong turn right before the finish line and crashes his car. Because he still considers the "country identity" as something that should be protected at all costs - even the cost of the lives of thousands of his neighbors on the other side of Dnepr that are not any different than him. As long as people can't give up their "country identity", they will always be perfectly pulled by the strings set up by their puppet masters. Because tribalism is so deeply ingrained in the human psychology, and misdirected by the "country" propaganda.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think tribalism is evil or anything - it's just how humans roll. The country is simply nothing like a tribe, yet the rulers pretend that it is because the tribalism module is so fundamental. And thanks to that, they can make the human do anything as long as he accepts his assigned "tribe" - so don't accept it. It's not only about the Ukraine / Russia war - I just focused on this topic as it's recent and very relevant to me; the amount of insanity I've seen in regards to it is hard for my brain to even process. For example (archive) (MozArchive):
Russia wants to kill your children, your family and yourself. Do you fight?
Russia destroys the place you fled from. Russia is now attacking the place you fled to. Do you fight?
Russia destroys most of the world. Russia is now attacking the one place that's left, where you are hiding. Do you fight?
It's not Russia
, as lines can't fight - but just some people that are very similar to the Ukrainians but were fed the same pro-war propaganda as them. Even (some) left wingers - that were traditionally against war - love war this time (archive) (MozArchive):
Fuck if your going on about saving our money, why not realized that the amount of supplies we’ve given to UA dwarfs what we spend on our military to be ready to defeat Russia.
You want to defeat Russia
? Meaning what? Destroy infrastructure, kill millions of soldiers as well as civilians? Spread panic and instability in the ones who manage to live? For what reason? To absorb the lines into the USA (which presumably this person is from)? To exchange a psycho in control of the land for another one?
Lastly, it’s morally right to support the nation that is running a DEFENSIVE war of its nation and its peoples. I don’t wanna be on the side that enables things like Bucha. Or Mariupol.
A defensive war
does not exist. Infrastructure gets destroyed, people die, and panic gets spread on both sides. And especially here, as psycho Zelensky is grabbing randoms from the streets and sending them to be slaughtered like pigs.
UPDATE September 2024: wow! I was supposed to leave this topic alone already, but can't resist sharing with you what I've just found (archive) (MozArchive). Hold on to your seats, I'm pretty sure we've reached the peak of warmongering here!
Russian players have always choice to renounce the citizenship of the genocidal barbarian Russian state - not the same thing as Russia as a country, and still be Russians of different citizenship. As long as they are willingly citizens of a villain state, they should pay the consequences. At this point, if Ukraine would have the capability to do it, bombing civilian targets in Russia would be rough but very fair game. Compare the discomfort of a regular Russian citizen being bombed at with that of these spoiled brats not being able to compete in international competitions.
Never seen so many buzzwords in one paragraph. Genocidal
, barbarian
, villain
- you're supposedly these things just because you were assigned a certain flag at birth and refused to give it up. And if you refuse to give it up, you need to pay the consequences
. It's insane to require regular people to waste time giving up or changing the flags they have never actually picked, and also risk retaliation of their governments; even worse to punish them for not doing so. And of course, psycho Zelensky is not genocidal
, barbarian
, or a villain
even though he has decided the entirety of the under 60 male population exists only to be sacrificed. Media tells me Russia bad, therefore Russia bad and everyone with the relevant flag deserves to die. And wow! This guy is even fine with bombing civilian targets
. The war love is leaking through my screen! I hope it doesn't infect me. But wow! I had to reread this a few times to be sure it really says what it seems to. A post like this is actually what the final goal of war propaganda is - but it's rarely reachable. Most people have enough ethical or reasoning blocks to stop just a step or two earlier - but this is where the rulers really want you. You've got the "wrong" flag? Here enjoy this bomb, now burn in hell.
And so - coming back to the proudly shouted Slava Ukraine!!!
slogan - it just ends up being a call for death, instead of a call for glory (as there is no glory to be found here). Anyway, since this war started I've seen loads of similar posts, and obviously can't cover them all here. Many of the people supposedly supporting Men's Rights love the "right" of men to be sent to die in a ditch somewhere for nothing except the delusions of a psycho. Holy shit! This shows how - again - if you convince someone to believe in a "country identity", he's yours! And all this idiocy is based on the idea that lines do things, while ignoring the details of it. Nation propaganda is the most vile type of propaganda.
Without people having absorbed their 'country identities', the above would fail completely
And yet it is used everywhere all the time since decades (and surely longer than that) and for all kinds of reasons - because as we've established, it works extremely well. For example, anytime there is a "crisis" of "illegal immigrants" brings yet another opportunity for the rulers to increase their power by pretending to be the heroes with their border walls. Yet it is nothing but a trick to justify the ability to decide who can go when and where. I still remember the insane situation where some immigrants were trying to come from Belarus to Poland and the border guards just blocked them and let them freeze to death (archive) (MozArchive). And the justification for it was that...wait for it...they imagined Lukashenko was waging some "hybrid attack" (archive) (MozArchive) through those immigrants. And thus, people died; yet, the media ran with the "border guards are heroes" narrative and many people at Wykop ("polish reddit") swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Please, we need to end the cruelty of borders and the political games played by the psychos in power to the detriment of billions of regular people.
Since the main thesis is now finished, let's have some more fun exposing the war propaganda in various media pieces. Hey, if they can run a propaganda campaign, I can run a counter-propaganda one. I hope I can show you just how manipulative the media can get, and how the manipulation can hide in some seemingly innocent words. I'll just pick random relevant articles I have already bookmarked, then cite some particularly revealing quotes. So let's go (archive) (MozArchive):
Ukraine’s military said it had reclaimed about three square miles outside the eastern city of Bakhmut, which would be its first significant gains there in weeks.
Reclaimed
meaning what? Lines redrawn again? And gains
? Infrastructure is lost, and people have died. The only gain
is fake lines and the (probably fake too) smile of psycho Zelensky.
The transfer came under a provision of a law enacted by Congress late last year that authorized the Justice Department to send certain forfeited assets to the State Department to be spent on remediating damage from Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine last year.
The only part that matters to us is the from Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine
. It conditions you to believe the "Russia bad, Ukraine good" deeper narrative, which is all that the rulers care about. The word invasion
puts the blame squarely on one side, and the full-scale
makes it seem really really big so that you really really hate "Russia" and are ready to blow the heads of the Russians off. Even though they are people just like the Ukrainians, for whom the only difference might be to have been born a few kilometers to the left and have a different flag assigned because of it. The word Russia
appears a staggering 148 times in this article, while the word Ukraine
- 78 times. Can you guess the scores for the words human
and people
? It's 0 and 8. They really want to you forget that it's people dying, in the end. Though this article has lots of quotable quotes, let's just - to not seem like I'm cherry picking - move on to the next one (archive) (MozArchive):
‘First results’ of counterattack praised as Ukraine’s troops claim to take back villages in the eastern Donetsk region while Russia denies gains.
The counterattack
was praised
by whom? Citation needed
, as Wikipedia would say :D. Take back
and gains
? There is only the taking back of lines, which is no real gain at all as long as people die and infrastructure gets destroyed.
“The enemy keeps shelling us but this won’t stop us,” Semeniuk said. “The next village we plan to reclaim is Urozhayne. After that, [we’ll proceed] further south.”
The enemy
AKA someone who dared to be born on the other side of a fake line, that we assigned a different flag too...and the reclaim
again...this is getting tiresome.
With so little information and scant independent reporting from the front lines, it has been almost impossible to assess the battlefield situation.
I'll give you the independent reporting
that you so crave. Infrastructure gets destroyed, people die, and traumas accumulate in the survivors for nothing whatsoever except the insane delusions of a few psychos. Hope that helped!
“We’re kicking the enemy out from our native lands. It’s the warmest feeling there is. Ukraine is going to win, Ukraine above everything,” an unidentified soldier said in the video from Blahodatne.
It's the warmest feeling
to kick the enemy out
. I swear, if someone was reading this kind of trash all day every day, I can see how it would make him eventually absorb the country propaganda and love the war that inevitably results from it. It's such a disgusting attempt at emotional manipulation, using the tribalism module I've mentioned before. Anyway, let's play the "country vs human" game here, too. Ctrl+F for Russia
- 25 times; Ukraine
- 15; people
- 2; and finally 1 for human
(and only at the bottom for a link called Al Jazeera Centre for Public Liberties & Human Rights
, which seems like mockery). Let's finish with the last article (archive) (MozArchive) since I'm still fired up:
Russia’s war in Ukraine has sparked a surge in demand for weapons and vehicles, with many allies sending supplies to Ukraine to help the country defend itself.
Again, Russia's war
puts the blame squarely on one side - implying that there even are sides in war (other than psychos vs plebs, which is more like a pyramid structure instead of sides). And of course the standard defend itself
when there is nothing to defend but lines, and nothing gained from doing so but the death, despair and destruction that the rulers certainly love.
Inflatech CEO Vojtech Fresser won't say if his decoys are used by Ukrainian forces battling Russian invaders, but he said on Monday that his business was up by more than 30 per cent last year.
Russian invaders
aka "Russia bad" and everyone with that flag assigned at birth is fine to get sacrificed.
“If I force the enemy to destroy a thing of mine by using something which is four times, but in reality it could be 20 times more expensive, then I’m the winner economically,” Fresser said.
No; you (or rather we - the plebs) are all losers economically as this money could be more usefully spent on the homeless, or even researching the reproductive cycles of ladybugs (and there is a lot of it wasted here - The decoys that originally were developed for training purposes can cost up to $100,000 (€93,795) each
).
Please take note of how all mainstream Ukraine articles (and there are hundreds - maybe thousands by now - that follow the same script) accept certain deeper narratives as given. War is needed, war is acceptable; there is a good side and bad side - ally and enemy - and the enemy must die; lines are real things with physical effects; death, despair and destruction don't matter as long as the "right" side wins; to fight for your line is noble and the most important thing ever. Details might change, but the fundamentals are always the same. I hope I have helped you to recognize the rulers' war propaganda and manage to resist it now.
UPDATE June 2025: two guys on scooters just raided a UK military base, destroyed two planes, and left without being caught (archive) (MozArchive). Quite an artistic way to inhibit the war machine:
The bodycam footage then shows them spraying red paint into the turbine engines of the air-to-air refuelling tankers which the RAF say are 'vital for enhancing the operational reach and flexibility of Britain's military air power'.
Palestine Action claim to have used repurposed fire extinguishers to spray the paint, while they say they caused further damage with crowbars.
I haven't heard of this group before this incident, but it turns out they've performed other similar ones (archive) (MozArchive) before. I think this is a good first step towards bringing down the war machine. But it needs to not just be "Palestine Action" but "Anti-war Action" and happen all over the world. There is of course a tiny little problem - namely that the war machine doesn't mind labeling the activists as "terrorists" (archive) (MozArchive), sending Kapos to arrest them and continuing the massacres. So eventually, the activists will need to resist the Kapos too - which at the moment, they don't, as far as I can see. They hope to rely on the court system to provide justice which it of course won't. Still, this is the most promising instance of activism I know of that's going on right now. I hope it will teach people they don't need to sit meekly by, while their rulers execute decisions they don't agree with, and create copycats everywhere. But since currently, the war machine is free to just imprison us all in the shiny new jails (archive) (MozArchive) it's building, the activism can't end there. At some point, we'll need to bring down the entire system of surveillance, prisons, media brainwashing, and finally the giant totalitarian states that enable it all. Then replace them with small communities with direct democracy.
The false hope of the United Nations
I looked briefly at their Universal declaration of human rights (archive) (MozArchive), which presents various beautiful statements that they then end up breaking. I will now attempt to show how they are doing just that:
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Keep in mind the bolded part, because it will be relevant to almost every UN article that I'm going to bring up.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Except the hundreds of thousands of men dragged to trucks (archive) (MozArchive) by psychopath Zelensky and thrown into a ditch to die?
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Conscription is slavery and exists in many countries, about which the UN does nothing whatsoever.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
So why did you do nothing about Gonzalo Lira (archive) (MozArchive)?
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
So in theory Zelensky could be brought before the courts for his mass sacrifice of men. But he isn't being, because the UN are Zelensky worshippers.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Zelensky is arbitrarily grabbing men from everywhere he can find them, throwing them into trucks, and sending to a ditch to die.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
What did the UN do to give hearing
to the people whose rights to life, liberty and security Zelensky had violated?
Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
Zelensky broke that by dragging men to trucks.
Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Hahaha. This almost sounds like mockery when you notice how Zelensky breaks every UN article like it was nothing. Maybe he actually wanted to become the world's biggest villain, and went through all of the statements in order to do the opposite.
Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
You should know what I'm going to say here. By not letting men leave, Zelensky is violating their right to seek asylum.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
I apologize for having to stop the Zelensky beatdown, but pretty much the entire world now breaks this with censorship against Russian propaganda
, alternative Covid narratives, etc. The UN - of course - does nothing about it.
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
Broken by Covid.
Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
Broken by Romania and Moldova.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
School prevents the free developing of personality.
Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
Obviously this does not exist. Businesses will pay workers the lowest possible amount (archive) (MozArchive) that still keeps them there. Human dignity doesn't matter as long as there are homeless people, people in abusive relationships from which they cannot escape, sick people still forced to work, etc. Also, this is discriminatory against anyone who can't or shouldn't work (eg. the chronically ill, full-time parents, war trauma victims, etc) and perpetuates the mindset of worshipping the false god of productivity.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
The job culture is already not reasonable, since we do so much useless (archive) (MozArchive) and / or harmful stuff. Automation is now wrecking even that (already compromised pre-AI) "job market", but the UN isn't going to react, because they are obessed with the jungle mindset and having everyone "earn a living".
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
This seems like mockery. The sick are famously treated like junk, having to provide their entire medical and life histories, submit to interrogations, fill out forms, and wait in hopes the government graciously vomits out some crumbs (which will only happen if you're halfway dead already) so that they can (barely) stay alive. And then the sick person still has to be constantly worried she's going to get left on ice at some point, as the checkups are ongoing (gotta make sure the sick junk isn't "unjustly" receiving the scraps because Zelensky's delusions absolutely cannot spare any of his billions). This doesn't even consider all the other ways in which the sick are discriminated. The entire world is set up only for the healthy, starting from school which teaches the sick they are total junk - and with nothing else in society to reverse that, they often remain with that conviction for the rest of their lives. In this extremely individual and competitive "civilization" (that's not actually civilized at all), no matter how sick you are, you are expected to "take care of yourself" (AKA fulfill the requirements of the healthy) - and if you can't, that's more begging that isn't even sure to accomplish anything. Letting a sick person leave her abusive family isn't a priority for example, and probably won't happen at all, all while there are enough vacant apartments (archive) (MozArchive) - they are simply meant for either the Ukrainian refugees (whom psychopath Zelensky had displaced), or "young families" or simply rich businessmen for renting. If the sick were actually important, they would be able to leave their unacceptable situations, enter the new one, and that would be that - without any of the bullying executed by way of bureaucracy that's not actually accomplishing anything useful - but does provide a mildly effective cover for the discrimination. But as it currently is, as a sick person, you are reminded of how worthless you are every single second of your life and the UN (as well as everyone else) is doing absolutely nothing to change it.
Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
Heh. Of course the UN loves school.
Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
Obviously school does nothing of the sort.
Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
What about the students?
Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
Too bad we live in a world in which inventions that could help the entire humanity are appropriated by businesses and gatekept by giant paywalls or other criteria (such as taking the Covid vaccine).
Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Oh, so inventions aren't to be "shared" anymore - only to exist for personal profit. Noted.
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Obviously we lack this "order", and as you'll see later, it's absolutely by design. Hey, let's now see what the UN thinks specifically about the Ukraine war (archive) (MozArchive) (though I'm sure you can imagine it already):
On the night of 23 to 24 February 2022, Russia launched a military offensive in Ukraine. The United Nations considers this attack to be a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine. It is contrary to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
Of course, it's the standard Western narrative of insane Putin just "deciding to invade" without any preceding factors. But okay, let's run with it because it doesn't really make anything better. I mean, are territorial integrity
and sovereignty of Ukraine
(which doesn't exist anyway, as the Covid response - for example - showed) more important that the millions of lives lost? Anyway, let's read further for the proof of how the UN is also a malicious organization:
On Thursday 24 March, the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly demanded civilian protection and humanitarian access in Ukraine, while also criticizing Russia for creating a “dire” humanitarian situation (140 votes in favour, 5 against and 38 abstentions).
Civilian protection? Does that include the civilians dragged to the frontline by Zelensky?
The United Nations Coordinator for Ukraine estimated on the 100th day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine that the war will have no winner.
Heh. I think this is the only sane thing said in this entire report. But if there can be no winner, why isn't the UN tackling the actual factors leading to wars - such as borders, media propaganda, government warmongering, military companies being able to freely create weapons and derive profit from the destruction, etc?
On 29 September, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that Russia’s plan to annex four occupied regions in Ukraine would be an illegal move, a violation of international law, and should be condemned.
Does this even matter? Have the plebeians been asked which state they'd rather live under? It's another instance of country propaganda that helps no one. The UN seems to worry more about lines on the map than the actual state of things.
On 14 November, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution that calls for Russia to pay war reparations to Ukraine, as ambassadors met to resume their emergency special session devoted to the conflict. Ninety-four countries voted in favour of the resolution, and 14 against, while 73 abstained
Again, one "side" is bad while the other is "good" but the lives lost don't matter. And the "reparations" would only reach the stateheads, who'd then decide what to do with them, and not the plebeians.
The UN Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) chief, Izumi Nakamitsu, briefed the Security Council on the issue of “supplies of lethal weapons to Ukraine and their consequences”.
Oh! Finally something that seems interesting. Yet I've looked at the document (local) and saw nothing whatsoever condemning the European suppliers of weapons to Ukraine, despite that directly contributing to continuing the war. All they could muster was - I also urge States to apply effective arms control measures to address the risks related to arms transfers. I want to reiterate: preventing diversion of supplied weapons and ammunition is essential to avoid fueling conflict and insecurity in the region and beyond
- but that's just complaining about the weapons being possibly diverted, instead of being used wrong by the "officially approved people". It seems the UN doesn't care about the destruction being done after all.
Speaking in Kyiv on 15 December 2022, at the end of a four-day official visit, Martin Griffiths described the deadly threat from daily artillery attacks on the southern port city of Kherson. More than 18 million people in Ukraine need humanitarian aid, some 7.83 million have fled the country and 6.5 million are internally displaced.
Why not mention that psychopath Zelensky is blocking the fleeing and actually makes Ukraine's male citizens fight for their lives without the ability escape the game? Isn't this something that should matter to the UN, if they care about the "right to life"?
On 16 January 2023, the Secretary-General strongly condemned a deadly missile strike on a residential building in the city of Dnipro, Ukraine, in which at least 40 people were killed, with many more wounded and dozens missing.
I'm not denying this, nor its importance, but it's nothing compared to the amount of people Zelensky had sacrificed so far (by - again - not letting them leave and treating every male as a potential conscript). Yet not a peep can be heard from the UN about that. Do they actually care about ending the suffering, instead of propping up the Western narrative?
On 10 March, UN-appointed independent human rights experts said they were “deeply disturbed” by reports of the systematic recruitment of prisoners across Russia by the private military contractor known as the Wagner Group, which is playing a major role in the fighting in Ukraine.
Yet they are not deeply disturbed
by the dragging of innocent men from bars to the trucks which then go to the frontline? I'm already tired of this, it's obvious the UN isn't what they pretend to be.
On 17 March, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the UN-backed International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin of Russia, in connection with alleged war crimes concerning the deportation and “illegal transfer” of children from occupied Ukraine.
Once you're there, why not drag Zelensky before the court as well, for...everything I've already mentioned, that you've been completely ignoring?
Nearly $7 billion will be required over the next decade to rebuild the cultural sector in war-ravaged Ukraine, the head of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Audrey Azoulay, said during a visit to the country.
This is nothing compared to what's been spent on weapons for Ukraine. It shouldn't be a problem to have the military companies fund the bill, right?
The Russian invasion of Ukraine reached the 500-day mark on Friday, 7 July 2023. The UN’s Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU) has confirmed that more than 9,000 civilians, including over 500 children, have been killed since then, though the real number could be much higher.
Actually it's a lot more than that, because those innocent men dragged to trucks were civilians before getting sent to the frontline. But because it's Zelensky who's the perpetrator and breaks their entire narrative, this is being ignored.
On 5 October, the small village of Hroza in the Kupiansk district of Ukraine’s Kharkiv region suffered one of the deadliest attacks on civilians since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February of last year. At least 52 people were reportedly killed when a missile hit a shop and café.
RIP to those 52 people. But what about the hundreds of thousands sacrificed by Zelensky? Isn't the UN being just a little biased here?
The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine documented further evidence that Russian authorities have committed indiscriminate attacks and the war crimes of torture, rape and other sexual violence, and deportation of children to the Russian Federation, according to its report submitted to the UN General Assembly.
What about the authority of Zelensky who had ordered the mass sacrifice of Ukrainian men without giving them the ability to avoid it (AKA leave the country)? Not even Putin blocked emigrations entirely, as far as I know. And remember, according to the UN, the human rights are without distinction
. Meaning the fact that Ukraine is at war doesn't matter at all. So why isn't Zelensky getting dragged to courts for his human rights violations, just like Putin was (he didn't come, of course, but at least there was an attempt)?
On 29 December 2023, the UN Secretary-General condemned in the strongest terms a massive aerial attack by Russia on Ukrainian towns and cities, which left at least 30 civilians dead and over 160 injured. Major aerial attacks causing widespread death and destruction of homes and civilian infrastructure have rained down on Ukraine in the first days of 2024 due to an intense new Russian offensive.
Why is the UN not reacting to the Ukrainian military doing the same (archive) (MozArchive)? Maybe they don't care about the civilian deaths actually, but only spreading the Western narrative?
Reconstruction and recovery in war-torn Ukraine is projected to cost $486 billion over the next decade, up from $411 billion estimated a year ago. The updated Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA3) – issued by Ukraine’s Government, alongside the World Bank Group, the European Commission and the UN – covers damage incurred since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion on 24 February 2022 to the end of last December.
Why is "Russia" the only guilty party, instead of the Ukrainian government (who did not attempt a peace deal since that one Boris Johnson prevented), the other European governments as well as USA who kept sending weapons (archive) (MozArchive), etc? It doesn't really seem that the UN is concerned with the damage done by the war, only about supporting Western power interests.
On 15 March, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine published a report on the situation in the country two years after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation. The Commission has found new evidence that Russian authorities have committed violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law and corresponding war crimes in areas that came under their control in Ukraine.
It's too bad that they still cannot find the several massive violations of human rights by their hero Zelensky.
The UN sexual and reproductive health agency, UNFPA highlighted that a deepening demographic crisis is roiling Ukraine, exacerbated by Russia’s full-scale invasion. The number of Ukrainian refugees has now reached 6.7 million and, since Russia’s invasion in 2014, Ukraine’s population has declined by over 10 million.
Isn't it also exacerbated by Zelensky's mass male sacrifice? Let's be clear about what all those men are actually fleeing from. Also, there is a "demographic crisis" everywhere today, because of the horrible conditions which we've found ourselves in during the last few decades.
19 November 2024 marked 1,000 days days since the start of the full-scale invasion of the armed forces of the Russian Federation. UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Ukraine Matthias Schmale urged the international community to stand with the people of Ukraine.
That would require standing against Zelensky who is sacrificing them. But of course, that is not what they mean.
On 8 January 2025, in an update mandated by the Council in Geneva, Nada Al-Nashif, UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights said that Russian forces continue to subject Ukraine’s people to “relentless attacks” by aerial glide bombs, long-range missiles and drones. These attacks had led to the deaths of 574 civilians – an increase of 30 per cent over the previous year.
That's horrible. But you did nothing to actually stop the war.
In the fourth year of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, housing remains one of the country’s most urgent humanitarian and recovery challenges. As relentless attacks continue to damage homes and communities across Ukraine, the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) has now helped repair over 40,000 war-damaged homes.
Cool, but it doesn't really fix the core problems. Only ending war as an institution, actually would. But that is not what the UN wants. They still support borders and flags. They don't mind conscription and throwing innocent men into the butchery. They are also fine with mass weapon production and the giant sums of money spent on it by governments. I wonder if the UN has any power at all? If so, why are they not using it for anything actually meaningful? They could tell governments to stop funding wars, to stop conscription. They could force Zelensky to let men leave the country if they don't want to defend it. Maybe even disband the weapon producers. But none of that is happening. Either they are a paper tiger or simply another controlled opposition to make you believe that there is truly a just order governing the world. Even their name is a fraud, since they don't care about truly "uniting" the nations (which would require trying to find a path to peace, instead of screaming how bad one of the "sides" is).
I don't think the UN's existence is negative in principle. I mean, to prevent the abuse of power by states, you either need the people themselves to rise up against them (which is extremely unlikely considering how cucked the populace has gotten, and how many systems to prevent the uprising the states have set up), or something above the states that they have to answer to (this is the UN). The problem is that the UN isn't fulfilling any of its obligations. At first, I wanted to call them a "paper tiger" in the title, but then I realized the actual situation is worse than that. They are actively violating their own stated principles just so they can advance Western state interests.
The UN - and the Western media and politics in general - present a cartoonish view of reality. In it, Vladimir Putin is the ultimate villain and everything he does is automatically evil because he is pure evil personified. And, anyone that stands up to him is automatically a hero regardless of the actual effects of what he is doing. If you convince people of this, you can get them to accept and do anything. The strategy of scapegoat states is currently being used to take away welfare (archive) (MozArchive) in certain Euro countries, kill internet anonymity - and implement censorship - in the entire Europe, was used in the USA for the Patriot Act (archive) (MozArchive), and surely many other times. But in this reality, there is truly no fight between heroic or villainous states; only a group of people vying for more power - and trying to get you to jump onto their train by telling you they are the good guys while the enemy state is "bad". Even though in the end, you gain nothing out of it, and neither do the citizens of the "enemy" state. Once we evolve past the power games of the ruling psychopaths, we can imagine (and start working towards) a world without wars, borders (what actually enables wars), slavery, torture, abuse, fearmongering, mass surveillance, starvation, disease. And as the UN would rather have us believing in cartoons, they are just another obstacle to this world.
Zelensky lied, people died
Three days ago this has dropped (MozArchive) for the first time on English-language sites, I think. I posted it on the MUC then, but it was denied - yet I could sense a big breakthrough brewing. Anyway, the article said that Russian hacker group KillNet confirmed that they managed to breach the database of the Ukrainian General Staff
and they claimed that Ukraine has lost over 1.7 million servicemen since the start of the special military operation
. Almost instantly, the entirety of Zelensky-controlled western media (there are so many articles with the exact same words in different outlets) jumped in excitement (MozArchive) to dismiss the revelations as fake news
and Russian propaganda
. Their "reasoning" was this:
“Kremlin-controlled propaganda outlets are spreading claims that Russian hackers allegedly breached the General Staff’s database and obtained information about ‘1.7 million dead and missing Ukrainian soldiers’ since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In reality, this is an utterly absurd fake, as Ukraine has never had a standing army of 1.7 million personnel throughout its independence,” the statement reads.
Did you forget that psycho Zelensky has been sending trucks all over Ukraine and picking up random men to unload them into a ditch to die? With that in mind, every man under 60 is a possible military serviceman, and would fit inside the stats. Suddenly, there is no problem since 1.7 million is less than 10% of Ukrainian men - very realistic for a 3 year long war. And remember, this isn't even talking about deaths, but missing
soldiers which might have become prisoners of war, fled the country, etc. And now that sources (archive) (MozArchive) independent from the Kremlin are picking this up (archive) (MozArchive), it seems that it is indeed valid.
If you still don't trust this data, consider how this site (archive) (MozArchive) has just a little under 160k deaths catalogued - all with faces and names (it is truly horrifying to imagine, that every one of those people had his own story; hobbies and occupations; hopes and dreams; friends and families - and now all that remains is a tombstone with "I died for psycho Zelensky's delusions" engraved on it; assuming they even got that). And that will be an extreme underestimate because they rely on (archive) (MozArchive) announcements by local authorities, Ukrainian media, posts by relatives on social media, monuments to the dead
. Therefore, deaths could easily be buried by the government simply not talking about them, as long as they had no family that cared about them. The website admits this: As only data that is available online is considered, the real level of losses is estimated to be considerably higher. In particular, available data is scarce for large cities, Transcarpathia, and most localities in the east and south; as a result, the casualties listed here are likely only a fraction of the real toll
. But what does it all mean?
Zelensky lied, people died. In February he had attempted to fool everyone with the 45000 dead soldiers figure (archive) (MozArchive), while we now know that - even under the assumption that only a million of the "missing in action" soldiers are actually dead - he's missed the mark by a factor of 22. And - in the worst possible case that the hack was entirely faked - the independent war tracking site confirms at least an almost 4x underestimation (but certainly more due to their own underestimation). Of course, it's impossible that his data collection was so bad that all the corpses just slipped through, therefore this was done very deliberately (similar to the fakery of COVID vaccine deaths).
He knew very well that he's not "winning", he knew very well of the mass sacrifice going on. Yet he kept puffing his chest in the media, kept begging for weapons from Europe and USA, kept avoiding peaceful resolutions, kept picking up innocent Ukrainian males by the trucks. And his swarm of dick-suckers in the EU kept enabling him for all this time, kept spreading his lies throughout the media of various countries, kept robbing their own citizens just to fuel Zelensky's narcisstic delusions. All these psychopaths need to be immediately removed from power and punished for their war crimes, but they will never be because of...the entire theme of this article. At least, not by the "usually accepted" means.
And what's going to be the ending of all this? One way or another the psycho is going to have to make concessions to Putin, so why did he not do it right at the beginning? Of course, because he's a psycho, such ideas don't come to him (edit: an additional reason has just turned up). His psychology doesn't ever allow him to be "wrong" or a loser. Millions of corpses and leveled cities be damned; let's just sacrifice more Ukrainians and pretend we're not running out of them so that Putin gets scared and disappears. This is the level of delusional narcissism that Zelensky suffers from; I bet some psychoanalyst guy would have real fun with this specimen. And such characters somehow end up in the highest positions of power, while the vast majority of people live like nothing's going on. What a disaster.
The states' interests != your interests
The Ukraine war plot thickened when I came across this document (archive) (MozArchive) (which has somehow eluded me for the entire duration of the insanity) that appears to indict another villain as the mastermind behind the last 3 years. Can you guess who it is? Boris Johnson, who met up with Zelensky and brought him these messages (or maybe orders?):
The first is that Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with.
And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not.
So basically, Ukraine was close to an agreement with Russia that would have nipped the future destruction in the bud. But that is not what the villain wanted. He saw an opportunity to bury Putin and Russia and decided he'd do everything to bring it to fruition:
Johnson’s position was that the collective West, which back in February had suggested Zelenskyy should surrender and flee, now felt that Putin was not really as powerful as they had previously imagined, and that here was a chance to "press him."
Boom! Peace suddenly stopped being an aim in favor of "pressing Putin". Now let's consider what were the results of this "pressing":
- The giant number of deaths (on both "sides") has already been mentioned.
- Yet, that doesn't even consider the millions who have been displaced (archive) (MozArchive) from their home country. They will have to deal with foreign cultures, possible unsympathetic governments, language barriers, loss of their friends and families, difficulty in finding jobs, etc.
- Because of sanctions on Russia, prices of gas and other commodities surged (archive) (MozArchive) to unprecedented levels -
Natural gas prices in Europe hit an all-time high of €350 per megawatt-hour in August 2022, compared to an average of €20 in 2020.
; Nickel is crucial for stainless steel and EV battery production. The price surge raised battery costs by 30%, affecting electric vehicle manufacturers
. If you live in Russia, you cannot buy (archive) (MozArchive) certain products anymore - Hundreds of major firms, including McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Starbucks and Heineken, have stopped selling and making goods in Russia
.
- Conscription (military slavery, preparation for male sacrifice in war) has been brought back (archive) (MozArchive) in certain countries.
- Innocent sports players, who had nothing to do with Putin's decisions, were getting banned (archive) (MozArchive) from sports tournaments, just because of "bad Russian flag" assigned at birth.
- Journalists criticizing the Ukrainian state got imprisoned (archive) (MozArchive) to die in there from medical neglect with no contact from their lawyers or family for months (total lawlessness while we supposedly live in countries governed by the "rule of law"...) -
I cannot accept the way my son has died. He was tortured, extorted, incommunicado for 8 months and 11 days and the US Embassy did nothing to help my son,” Lira Sr. stated in an email announcing the news
.
- Dystopian laws against journalists have recently been unleashed by the EU. One of the justifications for those is combatting
Russian propaganda
.
- Countries have had to nuke their welfare systems (archive) (MozArchive) just so they could continue to
support Ukraine
(AKA fund their weapons).
Can anyone honestly say that that early peace agreement would have been worse than whatever followed? So why didn't it happen? Again - Johnson, Zelensky, and all the others simply prefered to challenge Putin in the modern power game, than attempt a peaceful resolution. And of course, once he was "pressed", he had to press back. At that point, the Western side couldn't give up because it would just make them look cowardly and wasteful, so they kept "pressing". Their own propaganda in which Putin was trying to conquer the world and had to be stopped at all costs buried them. Basically they sunkcosted themselves into a hole so deep they couldn't climb out of it anymore. But why did they not simply go for the peace deal originally? I can't say that exactly. There are many ideas out there - for example to increase the West's cultural, legal, or military influence. The core of my thesis, though, works just as well if it's "insane dictator Putin" who just wants to attack places for the lulz, and "invasion victim Ukraine" simply wanting to "defend itself" (this idea has been seriously disputed (archive) (MozArchive), by the way). In all of those scenarios, it's the common man (again, from both "sides" and even elsewhere in the world) who ends up absorbing the harm, while the puppet masters sit in their golden offices (archive) (MozArchive) and will never be affected by their own shitty policies. If push comes to shove, they will just run away (like Assad did (archive) (MozArchive)), and keep enjoying their comfortable life completely separated from the effects their decisions brought onto the plebeians.
The biggest issue here is equating the state's aims with yours. And the point of war propaganda is to equalize those in your mind (read the section Nations - the rulers' dirtiest trick for a refresher on how they do it). But it is obvious they are not only not equal, but very far away and perhaps even exactly opposite. The Ukraine war proves it very well. For example, David Cameron (archive) (MozArchive) (yes, the psycho who wanted to ban encryption a decade ago) proposed funding the war so that Russia would waste its weapon supplies, increasing USA military and political power - Perhaps for about five or 10% of your defence budget, almost half of Russia’s pre-war military equipment has been destroyed without the loss of a single American life (but what about other lives?). This is an investment in United States security
. And I'm sure I could compile a similar "list of sins" aimed at Putin's regime, but that would be falling into the exact trap I'm trying to warn of - "which state is less bad / justified in its transgressions?". Also, if you're reading this, presumably you're from a Western country and might be believing the ideas popular there, to which I wanted to provide a counter. Regardless, we should leave the squabbling to the states and their propaganda outlets, while directing our focus to the battle against the entire idea of war.
Polish government - the peak of psychopathy
Yes, the unthinkable has happened, and a government more psychopathic than Zelensky's has turned up right under my nose. Somehow this has eluded me so far, and it seems everyone else too as it has not been internationally reported. So let me do it now. From polish radio station's - Radio Zet's - website (archive) (MozArchive):
"W przypadku wojny powołanie może otrzymać każdy polski obywatel pomiędzy 18. a 60. rokiem życia. Bez względu na kraj zamieszkania i rezydencję podatkową. Wyjątkami są osoby, którym na służbę nie pozwala stan zdrowia, kobiety w ciąży lub opiekujące się dziećmi, osoby, których kwalifikacje lub zajmowane stanowiska są niezbędne dla zapewnienia obrony i bezpieczeństwa państwa, a także ci, którzy posiadają drugie obywatelstwo"
Translation:
In case of war, every polish citizen between age 18 and 60 might get mobilized. Regardless of where he lives and pays taxes. The exceptions are people whose health situation doesn't allow them to serve, women who are pregnant or taking care of kids, dual citizens, as well as people whose qualifications or positions are necessary for the defense and security of the state.
Did you notice anything interesting in the above paragraph? It's not only men who will get dragged to war this time, as is usually (always?) the case. In fact, the only women who will avoid this fate are the pregnant ones, or mothers of young kids. Therefore all the single women, or ones with adult kids, will get added to the sacrifice pile. Wow! Even Zelensky didn't sink so low as to draft women, despite already losing over a million Ukrainian soldiers and scrambling. I think it's the first time I've ever seen something like this even be attempted.
Supposedly these modifications came in on January 2025. I won't bother reading the actual legal documents as they are extremely long and I can't find the relevant parts, so I'll just trust the media reporting. And I have no reason to disbelieve this anyway because the polish government is full of bloodthirsty psychopaths. During the last few months, the media is clearly attempting to push for the war with Russia. Some recent headlines from various Polish media sites:
And that over and over, every single day, since the beginning of the conflict. Recently the push for Poland's war with Russia became particularly blatant, thanks to the supposed airspace violations by the latter. Let's use our brains: why would Russia want to provoke a bunch of countries (Sweden, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, and Poland have been suggested so far), so that those would now have a justification to attack? It would be insane to expect to win against all those together. So why invite that? Maybe...they actually didn't, and the supposed violations either did not happen at all or were false flags? Actually, we do have proof (archive) (MozArchive) of that for at least one of them - the supposed drone attack on Poland:
A widely circulated photo of the destruction of a house in Poland, allegedly damaged by a Russian drone strike, is refuted by local residents, who note that this house was heavily damaged during a storm two months ago and its condition has not changed since then. – FRWL
If you are into conspiracies, you will recognize this as yet another instance of the very common strategy of using old footage to prop up their new propaganda claims. Naturally I assume all the other incidents are also BS, but I can't be bothered to be hunting down proofs. Since I already know what the government and its hired media goons are trying to accomplish (sacrifice all Poles in the war with Russia), there's no need for me to try to expose every single part of their scheme separately. At this point I think the war with Russia is more likely than not to proceed, though I hope someone or something appears that prevents it - yet I have no idea what that could be. They are already attempting to brainwash (archive) (MozArchive) every adult male
into accepting their deaths in some ditch.
Jaroslaw Kaczyński, the head of Poland’s largest opposition party, the conservative Law and Justice, said a mental shift in society would also be needed in addition to the military training of men. “We will have a return to the chivalric ethos and to the fact that men should also be soldiers, that is, be able to expose themselves, even to death,” Kaczyński said.
Welcome to conservative brainrot. Anyway - coming back to the female drafting attempts - I would have expected at least some feminist organizations to have covered this, but apparently they didn't. Maybe they will when the sacrifice actually begins. Either way, this shows that the psychos in charge have absolute zero limits to their cruelty, so don't assume you'll be spared because you're apart of this or that supposedly marginalized group (they didn't care about that when they executed their vaccine extermination, remember). Again, it's time to accept that all these squabbles at the top level are not benefitting you at all and you are just a mook to get sacrificed. If you do so, then revolting reveals itself as the only sane response.