The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. — Ted Kaczynski, Industrial Society And Its Future, May 26, 1996

When, when did I ever refuse an accommodation? All of you know me here. When did I ever refuse, except one time? And why? Because I believe this drug business is gonna destroy us in the years to come. I mean, it’s not like gambling or liquor, even women, which is something that most people want nowadays and it’s forbidden to them by the Church. Even the police departments have helped us in the past with gambling and other things. They’re gonna refuse to help us when it comes to narcotics. And I believe that then – and I believe that now. — Don Corleone, The Godfather

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas will tell you he has competing loyalties, a set of concentric circles that defines “what he is.” Cruz tells you that he is a Christian first, an American second, a conservative third, and a Republican fourth.

This bit of moral puffery gives us a useful yardstick to deconstruct partisan propaganda. When Ted Cruz wants to pass legislation his patrons have ordered, he will first appeal to the partisan interests of Republicans. If that doesn’t work, he will appeal to “conservative principles.” If that still doesn’t work, he will cough out some glittering generalities about “America,” and when a particularly large donation is on the line, he will shamelessly trade on the name of Jesus Christ himself.

It works much the same for any politician, even though it is considered “low status” among both the Right and the Left to believe that politicians act in their own crass self-interest.

Typically they trot out the tired line from Eleanor Roosevelt, “great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.”

This quote, which seems profound to conservative and liberal women on Facebook, is one of those “thought-terminating cliches” so useful to bad actors, perhaps only in competition with “never attribute to a conspiracy what can be explained by incompetence.”

The Deep State

The latter is particularly relevant in the waning controversy over election fraud in the 2020 elections. There is no “conspiracy” to commit election fraud, there are only “glitches” due to incompetence. That’s what conservative say all the time, the government is “incompetent” compared to private industry, which is much more “efficient.”

Criminals and conspirators love both thought-terminating cliches. Don’t discuss our crimes, instead discuss the idea of crime in society, because it’s small minded to discuss me, the criminal, and it makes you just average to discuss the criminal events I was involved in.

To discuss election fraud is a “conspiracy theory” and, now in 2020, “disinformation” liable to official censorship. In fact, it may be “interference in the electoral process.”

Just try to wrap your head around it: voters shouldn’t “interfere” in the electoral process, and voting the wrong way is a “failure of democracy.”

That isn’t a cynical joke, that is the official ideology.

This author likes to own up to my mistakes, and I called both of the last two Presidential elections wrong. After the first Republican debate, I said it was quite plausible that Trump would be the Republican nominee. Some suggested that Donald Trump – long-time personal friends of Bill and Hillary Clinton – was there to “purposefully lose” allowing Hillary Clinton to win. Supposedly Bill Clinton himself encouraged Donald Trump to run. However, this writer said it seemed unlikely that a man like Donald Trump would come so close to the Presidency and throw it – his ego wouldn’t allow it.

Nevertheless, I assumed that Clinton would win and was as surprised as anyone that he won.

I also flubbed the last election. When the Democratic party establishment threw in everything and the kitchen sink to make sure Bernie Sanders wouldn’t win the nomination and settled on Joe Biden, I assumed that they were throwing it, like Bob Dole had in 1996 and John Kerry had in 2004 – and depending on how you look at it, John McCain throwing it in 2008. (I find it unlikely that Mitt Romney and the Republicans wanted to lose in 2012.)

When the Transition Integrity Project made it clear they were quite serious about making sure Trump lost, and major Democrats like Hillary Clinton demanded that Biden not concede “under any circumstances” I had my doubts that they were throwing it, but I really didn’t expect them to get away with it – although in hindsight, the fact the Bushes had endorsed the Democrats may have been enough of a tell.

In the early days of the Industrial Revolution, it took two writers, Capitalist Adam Smith, and Communist Karl Marx, to put what had come before – feudalism – in perspective. Like a fish doesn’t notice water, it’s virtually impossible for people to really grasp their own society, as it is metaphorically the water they swim in.

A critically understudied aspect of the Industrial Revolution is how it developed a “communications infrastructure.” It’s mainstream history that the advent of the printing press helped spur the Reformation. It’s also uncontroversial to discuss, in the American context, the rise of daily newspapers and their effect on politics – the “Yellow Press” is a chapter in high school history lessons.

But it is only with the rise of the Internet – a brand new technology qualitatively different than what came before – that we can put the Mass Electronic Media of the 20th century in perspective.

The Internet, as a mass phenomenon, is barely 20 years old – well within the lifetime of everyone reading this. Many of us can remember the time before the Internet.

This blogger started about a decade ago, around 2010. The first Presidential election during the early blogging career was between Obama and Romney, an election this writer was particularly uninterested in.

In those early years, this blogger wrote constantly of “The Deep State” and one of the very first articles on the original blog was about a particular fringe interest of mine, the Susurluk scandal in Turkey, the event that led to the coining of the phrase “Deep State.”

So imagine my surprise when the online Astroturfers of the Trump campaign, five years after I began blogging, started using the term “the Deep State” to refer to the forces opposing Donald Trump’s candidacy.

This blogger has no illusion that he influenced the adoption of the term by the Trump astroturfers – apparently, it was an emanation of the Zeitgeist, the God of Time, Chronos Himself.

But to this author’s great consternation, the Trump astroturfers took an illuminating idea and twisted it to the purposes of their short-term political campaign. The truly interesting aspect of “the Deep State” were ignored – purposefully – in order to co-opt the evocative nature of the phrase to instead refer to “the Democrats” and “the mainstream media.”

Mueller Time

One must cop to a massive rush of schadenfreude when Trump won, and the Democrats lost, in 2016. It’s not that this blogger wanted Trump to win, but Clinton and the Democrats losing was a reward in itself. But the schadenfreude turned truly sadistic when the Democrats, pinning their hope on the completely fake “Russiagate” scandal, expressed elation at the appointment of former FBI director Robert Mueller to head up the investigation.

Robert Mueller – a conservative Republican – is precisely “Deep State” in the sense the Trump astroturfers were abusing the term. That the Democrats had pinned their hope on such a “Swamp Creature” to take down Trump was hilarious in the same way the Road Runner is hilarious when he runs off the cliff but still hasn’t noticed.

Clueless Democrats were using the slogan “It’s Mueller Time” to excite themselves in the lead up to what they assumed would be the premature removal of Trump from office.

Robert Mueller – the conservative Republican former FBI director – who was appointed by George W. Bush on July 5, 2001, and took office on August 2, 2001, a month before 9/11. This was who the Democrats pinned their hopes on to take down Donald Trump.

[Susan] Lindauer’s brother John confirmed to the Media that his sister had warned him about massive attacks on New York during the summer of 2001. She had predicted that “lower Manhattan would be destroyed”. It is worth noting that she was regularly dropping confidential letters to the house of her cousin, [George W. Bush’s Chief of Staff] Andrew Card (“Andy”), about her talks with the Iraqis and Libyans (now on the Internet).

On August 2, the Senate held a hearing on the confirmation of Robert Mueller as the new FBI director. Susan Lindauer had been in contact with him earlier and had a very unfavorable opinion of him; she [accused] him of having aborted and blocked investigations into sensitive terrorist cases like Lockerbie and the Oklahoma City bombing, which have not been fully explored so far. She remembers [Richard] Fuisz saying it would be tragic if the FBI did not have a director when the attacks began. She realized he expected them to occur anytime.

But the Trump astroturfers were not to be outdone by the Democrats. After the loss of the House of Representatives and the firing of Jeff Sessions, the December 7, 2018 nomination of William Barr to be the Attorney General was met with a massive online spam campaign valorizing William Barr as a Trump loyalist who would help take on “The Deep State” that was opposing Trump.

Never second place to the Democrats at hilariously self-unaware comedy, the “QAnon” faction of the Trump Astroturfers spun a tale of Trump and … William Barr … taking on the “Deep State” and even taking down the “Pedophile Elites” who ran the “Deep State.”

The valorization of William Barr by the Trump Astroturfers shows nothing if not the sheer contempt the online Trump campaign had for their own audience.

For their part, after the disappointment that was Mueller’s Russiagate hearings, at least the Democrats could fight back against the Republicans went it came to the new Attorney General William Barr, who – quite the contrary to what Republican Trump fans would have you believe – was in fact connected rather directly to the “Deep State Pedophiles” and in fact Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell themselves.

The Democrats claimed that William Barr’s father had personally started the career of Jeffrey Epstein by hiring him as a math teacher at an elite New York private school. Trump himself had been mentioning Bill Clinton’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein going back to the CPAC conference in 2012, but it all blew up in Trump’s face when he inexplicably nominated Alexander Acosta, one of the architects of Jeffrey Epstein’s original “sweetheart” deal, to Labor Secretary.

It hardly mattered to the Trump fans and their “QAnon” narratives.

There is a difference between a mistake and a lie. Obviously readers are free to speculate on the motives of this blogger, and the fact this writer called both of the last two elections wrongly surely says something about our predictive abilities.

But those were honest mistakes, a gamble that didn’t pay off. Can one say the same for those who pushed the Trump narratives, especially those like “QAnon?”

Can either Democrats and Republicans be taken seriously when they spout such rhetoric about two very, very well-known quantities like Robert Mueller and William Barr? Both are life-long “Swamp Creatures” – as establishment as they get – and both are the definition of “Deep State” at least as the term is used by Trump fans. Both Mueller and Barr have long and detailed Wikipedia pages. It is not as if their careers are unknown – and one needs no special knowledge nor a particularly sharp analysis to see, on a basic level, what these two are about.

This blogger knows what his readers want, and wants to give it to them.

So let’s connect Donald Trump and William Barr to everything we wrote about yesterday: the Process Church, Jim Morrison of the Doors, MK-Ultra, and the sex trafficking of Jeffrey Epstein and the QAnon narratives.

It helps to understand how political propaganda works, and thanks goes to Texas Senator Ted Cruz for spelling it out for us, with his quasi-admission of how he’s willing to take no less than the name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ himself, in vain, for his petty political agenda.

There’s also no need to delve into any “conspiracy theories” nor link to fringe websites – it’s all there, in black and white, on Wikipedia, if you know where to look.

To know where to look, know where you are not supposed to look.

Where you are not supposed to look is at people like the previously mentioned “intern” and “manager” for the 1960’s rock band, the Doors, the author of a fictional and “sensationalistic” biography of singer Jim Morrison titled No One Here Gets Out Alive – Danny Sugerman.

Respectable right-wingers – even – especially – supposedly “dissident right-wingers” – will tell you, you’re not supposed to discuss “people.”

And what could be more “small-minded” than musing on the sex life of a former show biz nobody named Danny Sugermen? Surely, this could have absolutely nothing to do with Attorney General William Barr, FBI director Robert Mueller, the “Deep State” and certainly the 2020 elections.


I’m sure enemy propagandist James Lawrence – who I know for a fact reads this blog – will immediately jump to the conclusion that I’m spinning an “anti-semitic conspiracy theory” because I’m just too dedicated to “democracy” or brainwashed by the “Neo-Calvinist Cathedral at Harvard.”

But maybe surprisingly I’m going to offer some sympathy for a Jewish woman named Ellen Naomi Cohen, who was the target of a vicious smear, based on her Ashkenazi ethnicity and Jewish culture, that she died, prematurely, at 33, by “choking on a ham sandwich.”

It wasn’t true.

Or, at least, this author heard this rumor denied by no less than Denny Doherty himself, former member of Cohen’s pop band, The Momas and the Papas, directly – in person – in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Obviously Doherty could have been lying, for his own reasons. If he was, I have my suspicions why at the time Doherty was out there trying to “set the record straight” about his former bandmates. It’s also possible, even likely, that Doherty really didn’t know how – or why – Cohen died.

James Lawrence, a Neo-Reactionary and acolyote of Curtis Yarvin, nom-de-Zionist “Mencius Moldbug,” suggests that there are certain “perennial” aspects of human civilization.

By perennialist, I do not mean ‘aesthetically traditionalist’, but ‘concerned with essential realities as opposed to transient conditions and personal preferences’.

This author will not quibble with Lawrence’s views that certain developments in human culture are “perennial” – such as the tension between “petty nationalism” and imperialism. Nor would one object too strongly to Lawrence and his fellow travelers when they impose a tripartite categorization of men as “warriors, priests or kings” – although what is actually perennial is NOT the categories of “warriors, priests, and kings” but instead the human cognitive impulse to create taxonomies based on the number three.

Instead, this author is going to discuss The Deep State, and the role Democratic-Republican heroes like Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Robert Mueller play in that Deep State.

From the Wikipedia article, The Deep State In Turkey:

Charles Tilly wrote of an “interdependence between the historic processes of war-making and state-making and organised crime. ‘Banditry, piracy, gangland rivalry, policing and warmaking all belong on the same continuum’”

Something that is perennial in human society is exactly what Don Corelone described in the Godfather, the vices – gambling, drugs, and “women” (read: prostitution) – that are forbidden by “the Church.”

As Tilley hints at above, if you look closely, it’s sometimes difficult to really distinguish an “official military” and a gang of outlaws. Certainly, Libertarians often describe “the state” as organized crime itself.

It is surely a feature of “mainstream politics” in America, perhaps even in Europe and the rest of the world, that discussion of “organized crime” by the “official government” is by definition, a “conspiracy theory.”

Which means the term “conspiracy theory” is really just another term for “wrong think” or, to use a more traditional term, “heresy.”

In any case, here is what is to me an amazing “Conspiracy Fact.”

Fawn Hall, the former secretary for Colonel Oliver North, just a few years after her stint in the spotlight during the nationally televised Iran-Contra hearings, married our friend Danny Sugerman, who within a year “introduced Hall to crack cocaine shortly after their marriage,” leading to a stint in rehab.

Anyone familiar with Attorney General William Barr and the Iran-Contra hearings will immediately see in this situation the … well, what would you call it? It’s not exactly “irony,” is it?

I mean, of course he did.

My only question is, was it Sugermen – or one of his co-workers – who choked out poor Mama Cass with a ham sandwich – or at least spread the rumor?

On a surface level, Danny Sugermen is certainly a bit player in the larger drama that is late 20th/earth 21st century America.

But a larger narrative is made up of smaller narratives, and people like Danny Sugarmen are often far more interesting than they appear on the surface.

I once made a comment, if you want to see the Deep State in action, sometimes it pays to look at the women.

As men, we see women as secondary characters, and tend to ignore them. That’s a mistake and our analysis suffers for it.

Sometimes women are inconvenient and have to be taken care of. Sometimes inconvenient women are killed – or drugged.

A friend of mine once faced a telling situation. Essentially a trophy wife, her husband tried to revive his failing business by laundering money for a drug cartel. They needed her cooperation, and although she certainly didn’t know the details, she knew enough to suspect she was in legal jeopardy – and quickly realized the risks she was facing were more than just legal.

You know, you open your husband’s desk drawer and come across stacks of hundred dollar bills – and a gun – you start to wonder what you’ve gotten yourself into.

But this situation is far more common for beautiful women than many realize. Because beauty doesn’t respect class and a beautiful woman is an asset, regardless of her family’s class position.

So if you pay attention to the women, sometimes you can see patterns that you otherwise wouldn’t see.

Do you see it yet?