Art Economics Low Politics Decline Political Theology Power Geopolitics




It is an obvious point to say that this sphere is a niche. We do not represent the majority opinion nor have the power to do so. To further state that the majority of the public is not capable of such consciousness is not new either. When online, it is one thing to be vindicated and post about it. You are validated by followers and see the dismay of detractors. It is another thing to witness on a personal level. As opposed to laughing at the rationalizations of some left-anon, watching this happen with a friend, family, or loved one can be heartbreaking. As the stakes get higher, and certain mandated vaccines, depressions, or draconian laws are put in place, watching those closest to you fall face first into each one- despite one’s best efforts- is not easy. Therefore, it is time that we do something to save our loved ones and maintain the community relations that justify our movements. Forgive me if this article overly explains. I write this not only for us but in the futile hope that one day someone’s loved one comes across this, and ends up finally seeing what we desperately try to show them.


The psychology of the mass is the same as that of a herd. In Evolutionary psychology, the trend for the average person is a higher EQ (Emotional Quotient) than IQ (Intelligence Quotient). This is sound. The average person isn’t intelligent enough to pioneer a field of knowledge or have enough time to survive alone. As time is a scarce resource, one would be hard-pressed from birth to understand all the knowledge necessary before starvation set in. So, as a society, the mass tends to go by social relations. The ability to read social signals and understand how to cooperate is paramount for societal harmony. One’s mind will sublimate the ability to think in favor of reflecting the general feeling. In other words, one could have assumed what women are (adult humans with an innate biology set up to perform the function of the XX chromosome) but, because of modern propaganda messaging, the EQ involuntarily beats such an “anti-social” thought out of their head. The person with this psychology doesn’t have a choice in the matter. It is as instinctual as breathing. The danger is when a subversive element gains traction within an otherwise healthy, high-trust, mono-ethnic society.

When this danger presents itself, it threatens the mass. It infiltrates through those carrying the “traitor gene”. This gene is low ethnocentrism and high individualism. This correlates with other maladaptive traits and creates the general archetype for a subset of the population. These people, who are narcissistic and bitter towards the general population, see their norms and the people as hindering their success. This manifests by disingenuous appeal to the morality of their in-group, for their social advancement. The threat compounds when there is an antagonistic out-group that threatens the group they “belong” to. Due to their self-perception as an outcast, they will identify with this out-group, even when their worldview would otherwise make them incompatible as allies. A historical example is the “praying Indian” in the Native American population as the whites emerged. The in-group is bombarded by these “traitors” with appeals to the morality of fairness or conscientiousness, through the manifestation of their particular culture. In this way, the traitor successfully paralyzes the in-group into inaction. They will moralize to the in-group until they allow their morality, people, and culture to be destroyed by another group that feels no such inclination towards fairness. This group, as a result, feels uneasy at the thought of collective action. The notion that the in-group is compromised by traitors is embedded and stifling. This archetype increases in numbers when society is advanced. The further away from subsistence survival it gets, the further these maladaptive mutations can build. In the antagonistic, ethnocentric, foreign culture, it is typically nascent and emerging from subsistence levels. This means that these traits were necessary for survival, and the “traitor” is less of a problem. Native Americans encountering Europeans, who were coming out from centuries of population-decimating plagues, suffered more from the traitor than the invader. Today, we see the same problem in the native Europeans. The “praying Indian” of Europe manifests in another way. You can tell one by their reactions to news articles such as:

Police investigating allegations of teenage boy raped at hotel housing asylum seekers – GB News

Iraqi asylum seeker who raped ten-year-old boy at Austrian swimming pool because of ‘sexual emergency’ has jail sentence increased after appealing to overturn conviction – The Daily Mail

Boy, 4, ‘raped by asylum seeker, 22, in toilets at refugee centre’ – The Metro

Horror as 6-year-old boy is raped at asylum seeker centre – Express

The traitor will see articles like these- of the darkest, most unforgivable attacks inflicted upon the native- and immediately draw attention to the hypothetical “social harm” or potential reprisals a future Muslim might see. Perhaps said Muslim might get stared at in a pub. To the traitor, this is the real tragedy. Even more concerning, is that whites might become “racist”. Put another way, white people might imagine themselves as a community and people; they would view themselves at the same level every other group views themselves. The modern traitor finds his power by latching on to the enemy. He cannot allow this. To maintain power, a special effort over generations has been taken. The goal is to break down white identity through demoralization, forced integration, and guilting young children with the holocaust. From an early age, young white children, in contrast to any other group, are taught that they are a priori evil. They have caused all notable crimes and horrors inflicted on other groups, and they are also responsible for this as descendants. Any achievements of their group, on the other hand, was not done by them as an individual, and thus they are denied any source of pride. Moreover, the new tactic is to tie all achievements to slavery. Despite being a universal practice amongst all cultures and peoples, white people are to be ashamed. It is worth noting again that white people are the only force to condemn slavery and, without their influence, it would still be common practice in the modern day. Other races are portrayed as almost saintly. They would be far more advanced than us had we not stolen their technology, and lived in total peace, harmony, and equality until the whites came along.

This is the first part of the functioning Western religion imposed on its native inhabitants. By religion I mean the core beliefs that all group members live under. It is beaten into the young as soon as (and often before) they can understand it, and preached by every institution throughout its domain. Other pillars include the worship of individualism and “critical thought”. The contrast between thinking critically and absolute faith is an interesting one. The regime promotes thinking critically as something everyone is capable of (as unique but equally capable individuals) but, just as they are told the concept is good, they are only allowed to receive their “critical” thoughts from approved sources. In this sense, I think the word religion qualifies as an adequate descriptor. These foundational principles are based on faith, transcending the rational and contradictory. Following the religious throughline, anyone who does “think critically” in the non-religious sense is a “heretic”. To come to a non-regime-approved opinion brands one as either an idiot- not unique yet equal- or, ironically, a “follower”.

As a “heretic”, it has been difficult to see past the motifs and aesthetics of this religion, confusing it for true belief in those concepts. From what we have established, it is now easier to distinguish what is said from what occurs. The belief is not the concepts but in the religion as a means through which one signals their allegiance to authority and the group. This faith is genuine and unassailable. You cannot fight on their terms of critical thought when critical thought is defined by the state. They at once both believe in critical thinking and sublimate themselves entirely to mass opinion.


Everyone knows the frustration of proving your beliefs and arguments to the EQ individual. For days, weeks, months, or years, you will see yourself branded as a conspiracy theorist, not knowing the “facts”, or generally viewed as ignorant. It does not matter how thorough, how backed by sources you are, nor the impeccability of your rhetoric. All of it fails to stick. Once a single article on the subject from the BBC- or whatever mouthpiece- has been consumed, they have received god’s voice on Earth and you lowly mortals could offer nothing that would match its omnipotence. Even if one catches the BBC in a lie by omission, or proves a  fabrication, it will be forgotten. On a longer timescale, where the regime has achieved all aims and increases of power, public opinion may be allowed to align with the previous “heretic” position. As this new “critical thought” is inculcated, one may feel aggrieved enough to bring up this sudden change. This is where rage starts. The response will typically be:
“You never said that.”
“What do you mean? I always believed this.”
“Well if you did know, why didn’t you say anything about it?

Understand that, in the mind of the “critical thinker”, they are just that. You are a heretic, idiot, and follower. With these dialectical relationships, the regime messaging never changes. The EQ individual must defer to the mass. Their faith and perception of the world depend on this axis: They are always right and you are always wrong. In other words, they do genuinely believe, and cannot believe otherwise, that you never said anything about it and they have always believed this. You may even force them into a corner, where all assumptions sound shaky, where they must engage on your premises. Instead, they will retreat into “Reality”.

Reality takes on a strange Orwellian form. This reality limits the scope of the conversation to what is immediately and materially perceptible within some spatial arena. This could be your neighborhood, friend group, or talk of experienced price increases/inflation. The purpose of this argument is to limit a grander analysis of any type, dismissing any ability to aggregate, make causal connections between separate events, or expand the scope beyond the tiny imposed data set, in both the amount of data and timescale, that any notion of coming to a reasonable conclusion is farcical. This is the only option they leave you.

“The black people I know are friendly.” -On aggregate crime statistics.

“Bud-Light released an apology. My friend says they are racist.” -On left-wing cultural hegemony.

“Let’s talk about rising inflation, which obviously you don’t care about. You’re too obsessed with “the regime”. -When discussing power relations and “the octopus”.

In reality, this construct capital ‘R’ “Reality” is a negation of what any reasonable person would call real. It attempts to discount data contrary to what they wish to believe, so they can then extend their notion of congruency. They don’t have to think about the whisperings of the state making your car illegal, as in “Reality” they just wouldn’t do it. In “Reality” the Pakistani you know is friendly, so you should banish any memory of the Muslim grooming gangs raping one million young English girls.
This redefining of reality is a final defensive tactic that can be deployed for any subject you can imagine.

As shown before, the EQ individual does not manifest true thoughts and must draw “Critical Thought” externally. It simply won’t do to indoctrinate through public schools as the regime narrative changes. For example, from the 1950s to the current year, the modern devil is the mid-century German ideology. It has been redefined many times. In the beginning, its source of evil was its neo-paganism which then changed to its socialism. As the goal of eroding tradition and white identity gained traction, it was the notion of group collectivization. It is worth noting here that one can never eradicate collective identity, especially with the knowledge that EQ individuals must extract their thoughts from the whole. Instead, the GAE breaks those old collective notions of we are all (e.g.) English, replacing it with the homogenous collective identity that “We are all individuals”.
Once everyone was atomized, stripped of identity beyond them, the great mission to strip one of one’s awareness of ethnicity -one’s most basic instincts- could be imposed upon the British.

If this were the case, you would have every half-generation fighting with the next and unreceptive to the same messaging. Thus, the updated messaging must be a constant barrage from every institution: Academia, Legacy Media, Industry, Social Media, Civil Service, and your place of work, would not be an exhaustive list.
The messaging can be normalized through the constant presence of Pride Flags, the BLM slogans, and demoralization through erasure in films and media. Films and media will be expanded upon through our case study (coronation street) to both illustrate how the propaganda apparatus functions and how to counteract it.

The shibboleth uttered in the modern day (as the Trojan horse for the erasure of English identity) is “Inclusion”. Inclusion has a necessary relationship with exclusion. To convey a concept or item, one must set boundaries for what that thing is and what it is not. This means when I am describing eating food I am not describing sleep. When I am describing playing football I am not describing reading a book. Liberalism, fascism, and communism work the same. Video games or franchises act in this way too. Since you enjoy certain things and dislike other things that it isn’t, you have to exclude almost all things from your hobbies to make them enjoyable to you.

Therefore, for a thing to be enjoyed by/appeal to someone it must include some things and exclude others. All ideas, games, franchises, and ideologies are therefore alienating someone. This way they can convey their ideas in the first place. What is particularly upsetting with what they did in regards to Lord of the Rings, video games, TLoU or pretty much everything is that they appealed to me, my ideas, and sometimes (as in the case of LOTR) represent my people specifically. The dialogue the regime has with expressions of the native spirit is as such: “You have defined the bounds of your concept, but we reject that and must mold it to fit our concept instead so that it represents our ideas”. This is to overlay something new that destroys the original message and appeal. Even then, it doesn’t just suddenly appeal to black people. There is a reason they historically prefer material reflective of black people and not just the stolen history/culture of whites. It has not become “more inclusive”, it has just drawn new boundaries of exclusion to appeal to a very select political/philosophical worldview. It now says we must exclude whites from having their own spaces/ideas/culture and it must be taken by others. They must be stereotyped as thieves of other cultures and be weak or evil compared to virtuous foreigners. There must be absolutely every people involved in every media space, with a set hierarchy.

Coronation Street is an example of this. One hears stories of a long-forgotten past program, where it involved local village drama and the worst thing to occur was a stolen handbag. It is not so now. The current iteration is full of murder, drugs, and racism to reflect modern social concerns. Not only does it reflect modern social concern, but leaves the viewer with no uncertainty about who the regime wants you to find responsible. I say regime and not the director (or even government) because the all-pervasive influence of total-state power expands beyond traditional definitions. In a world of think tanks, “public-private” corporations and NGOs being inextricable from the state apparatus, then a BBC program is just a more transparent line of government propaganda.

The previous means of maintaining control over company messaging were regulation and ESG. Through the federal reserve system, Blackrock and Vanguard would be the first recipients of newly inflated currency, would use said currency to buy up commanding shares on all publicly traded companies, and determine their fate with ESG scores. These scores were ranked based on alignment with government messaging: D.I.E (Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity), Climate Change, Intersectionality, and Critical Race Theory are hallmarks. If one does comply, the ESG score is positive and the BLK-VAN-owned stock market algorithm will rate your company highly. Share value increases. Do the opposite and you decline in share value. This is a self-explanatory carrot and stick system, which successfully divorces what is profitable and what the consumer wants, realigning it instead with regime compliance.
Governing bodies operate more directly. It’s fine to create a Nudge system for aggregate trends, but the finer touches also need to be carefully managed. Governing bodies like OFCOM (UK) operate directly to prevent narratives the regime doesn’t want. It must dutifully encourage and promote consumption amongst the public. It’s within OFCOM’s power to state directly to all media outlets that they either will not cover a topic or will only cover it in a certain way with certain terminology.  Communications Act 2003 (

Moreover, it is the mandate of OFCOM to conform to the ever-changing, ever-more anti-white criterion for “Equality”. In the Equality Act 2010, Chapter 2.19, the legislation refers to indirect discrimination. It states that all discrimination can be caused “indirectly” by applying the same standards as those whites are held to. One can be completely even-handed, yet still discriminate “systemically”. If you create a job that requires a set of high qualifications, you have discriminated against black people, who have lower average qualifications. This means you have to hire an equal quantity of all peoples, or risk facing legal penalties if you draw the government’s ire. This sets off a chain reaction of all institutions along the way playing off risk. Education, police, and the more ambiguous “social standards” all have to be reoriented so that all ethnic groups receive equal treatment. English or broadly “white” society must be eradicated, alongside hiring on merit. Now, White people must be rejected in favor of less qualified minorities, and demographics in T.V. must be portrayed to rectify “systemic” social issues. OFCOM, when reviewing its competency, lauds its progress in its mission towards “equity”. They proudly state the successes of eradicating the notion of the “British past, multicultural future.” As insidious as it sounds, the purported mission seeks to erase the social memory of history or ethnos without immigrants, obfuscating to future British native generations of their history and heritage. Anne Boleyn, Shakespeare, half the citizens, and other historical characters are stolen from the history of whites and given to blacks. For the average consumer, an idea of a white British history will soon be a “racist myth”, and, increasingly, mentions of this past are met with reprisals by the state through “Hate speech” law. Tactics like this were previously deployed by the Soviet Union against the Cossacks- amongst others. The intention is genocide of a people without having to go through the trouble of wasting economic units. In this way, within generations, a people will not recognize its oppression as they’ll have been stripped of any memory of an alternative.

This point is of particular interest to us, when reapproaching our case study of Coronation Street. It has previously been advertised implicitly as direct government interference in TV shows. In 2012, the government interfered and stated proudly that they wrote the Carbon Monoxide poisoning storyline. Unfortunately, within the week of writing this piece, the government website deleted the story. What we do have to evidence these claims are the total alignment and intersection of all 5 main soaps to propagate messages of “social concern” in the wake of COP26. Opaque examples include adding new black characters (Emmerdale) or an all-black episode (Hollyoaks) as a means of social signaling support for BLM. Coronation Street will inform the reader of what “critical thought” is by creating a “heretic” character, who has reservations about vaccine mandates or Ukraine (often in a ridiculous manner) before the reasonable “critical thinker” jumps in for a monologue to moralize and chastise the heretic for apostasy. This acts as basic moral instruction for the consumer
When tackling subjects like Grooming gangs, ITV inverts the truth on the matter of organized anti-white gangs attacking young girls, replacing the perpetrators with whites. As revolting a disservice to the victims this is, it is par for the course in soaps. The recent coronation street “far-right” storyline presents all minorities and illegals as sympathetic victims, as opposed to organized crime, mercenaries, and welfare chasers the government accommodates upon exiting their “small boats”. The “far-right”, in contrast, are shown to be liars, and conmen and the audience is biased against them. Immediately, they show them beating an established “saintly illegal immigrant” without cause. This is statistically non-existent, yet the opposite violence of minority gangs assaulting natives is more than a daily occurrence. The police brutalization of these groups is inverted, with inept police portrayed as trying to accommodate them and still being harassed. The common practice of traditional media deceptively editing interviews with these groups is portrayed as the inverse. The group’s leader is even called “Griff” just so the average watcher goes “Ha, more like Grift!” as a clever aside to the person watching with them.
These tiny prejudices are inculcated by the public in small doses over the years, with inversions of reality informing the consumer exactly who the good and bad are. Through OFCOM, Legislation, and ESG, the message is institutionally universalized, with the general psychology of the masses made vulnerable to indoctrination. The question then is how to counter it.


Ahead of us is a formidable monster: the Leviathan. The state apparatus has transcended its traditional forms to penetrate all institutions- public or “private”- and infiltrates every form of social life. Its method is the entropy of your tribe, people, culture, and beliefs. Its intentions (or goals) are irrelevant, as your existence precludes it. We must resist.

There have been many attempts to counter traditional media propaganda. These have varied in duration, scope, and success. They generally correlate with the High-Middle-Low approaches. The political philosopher Bertrand De Jouvenel, wrote about the relationship between power and society. In brief, the High is the origin or center of power. The Middle are the clients, who can become contenders for High status, and the low who have none. Throughout historical conflicts, the contending Middle has always aligned against the High and Low. This is due to the ability of the High to promise elevation of the Low in status or the general low consciousness of the low compared to the Middle. Examples would be the fall of aristocracy at the hands of monarchy, the rise of Nationalism, communism, and democratization.

We will begin with the Low.

This is localism, your ordinary people attempting to make a difference in their community. These differences are usually embodied in a protest, distributing a pamphlet, or a newsletter. The limitation in both reach and recruitment means little success in itself. These projects have little capital, undisciplined organization, and are typically too small to attract sustained local interest. There have likely been thousands of attempts that fizzle out as quickly as they came. The impassioned lone wolves may not be too aware of optics, and a lone tweet or report can result in a prison sentence. In summary, the low alone is a non-factor. This article, for example, doesn’t pass optics. Relationships have already formed in a village, town, or district, and a single report will mean the end of more than the local effort.

The Middle is a broad definition. It is relative to the hierarchy around it. In a nation this can involve institutions, and, on an international level, nations themselves. Institutions are occasionally captured and act as a contender for power. These can be varying factions such as the ever-centrist “a balance must be struck” Elon or the ever-sensible Tucker Carlson. The response to these institutions is to contain them. The high instructs the loyal middle to close ranks and attack the rogue agent. This results in pulling funding (ads from Twitter) sending infiltrators to control the message and act as containment (think alt-light), or having the institution oust those who can’t be controlled (Tucker). acted as a rogue institution from its inception, courted anti-regime activists, and was swiftly neutered by OFCOM. As we speak, legislation is in place or being drawn up to censor tweets through direct government control. For every sensible centrist, a federal agent is masquerading as one to entrap dissident voices.

In the case of the national level, it is difficult to parse success. Plans for “rogue states” such as Russia and China are accounted for, and infiltration efforts are mounted. An example of a middle national institution would be the institution of Germany. Were it to act as a rogue agent in the modern day, its infrastructure would be tied deliberately to all other states, as well as its military. Bases full of regime first responders watch for any sign of resistance. The high watches and integrates itself carefully into the national bodies of its colonies. Attempts of subversion from this angle are outmoded, being easily countered by the regime. If a national body such as Italy seems to break away from the far-right, know this happened with the affirmative consent of the regime.

The High then, is our final recourse. This is not only due to its chronology in the analysis, but the sheer magnitude of the task it requires. In the age of international regimes, an international organization is required. It necessitates a highly competent superstructure that crosses borders, an elite can ensure discipline in the ranks, and agreeable people from the top down, and must act as a center of power. This means capital, goods, infrastructure, networks of self-sustaining units that aid each other and the exclusive goal of power. The masses do not enter the picture. Our goal is to build a counter-elite, set up small local hubs from which to recruit, capture rogue elites, and consolidate as much power as possible. This is no small process. If you are lucky, it is done in a decade. The masses -your best friend, family, or partner- can wait. The message they hear will be different and easier to digest compared to yours. It may deviate slightly from the truth, but this is irrelevant. The game (when we are ready to become a player) is capturing influence. There is no time in the average man’s schedule to read a perfect set of 100 books to come to the same conclusions you have. He needs prejudice, bias, and restored instinct, just as he has now, but influenced by us instead of the enemy. In this way, we have forged the relationship of High and Low to assault the Middle. To use an analogy, we shouldn’t keep trying to face our powerful and devious enemy in pitched battle, but conceal our numbers, encircle him, and attack by surprise. This is your only chance. One day, if you are lucky, your workgroup might turn to you when you express your opinion to greet it with applause instead of sending you to HR. This is because the mass does not respond to the argument; it responds to POWER. The time for debating people away from authority is over. This hour of history demands that you become that power, and when you seize it, only then will the masses follow. The First Principle is Victory.

Edwards, L. Moss, G. & Smith, M. (2021) Rapid Evidence Assessment of Diversity in Public Service Broadcasting: Final Report for Ofcom. Available at Ofcom’s Diversity and Equality Hub.

Communications Act 2003
Equality Act 2010TV soaps to swap characters to highlight climate change – BBC News
Coronation Street star Sean Ward sparks outrage with most offensive conspiracy theory yet | The Sun
Emmerdale to introduce new black family as part of BLM drive on the soap | The Sun
It’s Hollyoaks, but now with an all-black cast … | Hollyoaks | The Guardian
Police investigating allegations of teenage boy raped at hotel housing asylum seekers – GB News
Iraqi asylum seeker who raped ten-year-old boy at Austrian swimming pool because of ‘sexual emergency’ has jail sentence increased after appealing to overturn conviction – The Daily Mail
Boy, 4, ‘raped by asylum seeker, 22, in toilets at refugee centre’ – The Metro
Horror as 6-year-old boy is raped at asylum seeker centre – Express