The wars in distant lands were always going to come home, but not this way. It's September 2016, year 15 of America's "Long War" against terror. As weary troops return to the homeland, a bitter reality assails them: despite their sacrifices, America is losing. Iraq is increasingly hostile to remaining occupation forces. Afghanistan is a riddle that remains unsolved: its army and police forces are untrustworthy, its government corrupt, and its tribal leaders unsympathetic to the vagaries of U.S. intervention. … Scarred by the physical and psychological violence of war, fed up with the happy talk of duplicitous politicians who only speak of shared sacrifices, they begin to organize. Their motto: take America back. … Tapping the frustration of protesters — including a renascent and mainstreamed "tea bag" movement — the former captains and sergeants, the ex-CIA operatives and out-of-work private mercenaries of the War on Terror take action. … Wages shrinking, savings exhausted, bills rising, the sober middle can no longer hold. It vents its fear and rage by calling for a decisive leader and the overthrow of a can't-do Congress. Savvy members of traditional Washington elites are only too happy to oblige. They too crave order and can-do decisiveness — on their terms. Where better to find that than in the ranks of America's most respected institution: the military? A retired senior officer who led America's heroes in central Asia is anointed. His creed: end public disorder, fight the War on Terror to a victorious finish, put America back on top. The United States, he says, is the land of winners, and winners accept no substitute for victory. Nominated on September 11, 2016, Patriot Day, he marches to an overwhelming victory that November, embraced in the streets by an American version of the post-World War I German Freikorps and the police who refuse to suppress them. A concerned minority is left to wonder (and tremble) at the de facto military coup that occurred so quickly, and yet so silently, in their midst. – William J. Astore, retired lieutenant colonel (USAF), TomDispatch/Nation via CBS News
Dominant Social Theme: So much to worry about …
Free-Market Analysis: We try to balance realism about society with a perception that the Internet, like a modern-day Gutenberg press, is badly damaging power elite dominant social themes. One of these themes in our opinion is "potential martial law" – a theme that has found special resonance in America for a variety of reasons.
We have spoken out against this meme, proclaiming in our opinion that it is at least partially another hyped-up power-elite promotion designed to frighten people and make them feel helpless. Not everything the power elite promotes comes true, you know. In this analysis we intend to elaborate on the reasons why we have arrived at this conclusion (it being our business to analyze elite memes). This goes for the entire Internet-driven Illuminati industry and those websites, even the most popular, that proclaim the power-elite's Godhead with regularity.
Indeed, we think we can recognize a meme when we see it. From the endless spate of ‘Net-driven Illuminati news, to the recent spate of pop singers flashing one-eyed totemic gestures to the ludicrous (words fail us) ‘Net theme of a non-existent Messiah "Supriem Rockefeller" (prominently featured on Illuminati websites we believe to be US-intel linked), the signs of a promotion are everywhere. The decibel level seems to be rising even as the elite's dominant social themes shrink in influence. (It is interesting, even, that CBS picked up this article, excerpted above, from the Nation's ‘Net media, where it first appeared.)
The trouble that the power elite is facing now is that the Internet itself is really starting to have a negative impact on some pretty important dominant social themes. Global warming – a very important promotion – is virtually in tatters right now along with speculation the elite plans to create a multi-trillion dollar carbon-trading market and then, eventually, a new kind of money based on carbon credits. See here:
We have recently received some feedback to the effect that the power elite actually welcomes these setbacks because they discredit the state and thus make the eventual task of creating world government easier. It is true that power-elite promotions are fungible and are seemingly designed to take advantage of whatever is going on in society at the time. But we don't think that anyone would welcome the ruination of decade-long manipulations and it seems obvious to us that the Internet is making life difficult for those who seek to control society and manipulate the social order away from nationalism and toward a more unified world government.
What we find ourselves responding to on a regular basis is reflected in the idea that the power-elite is indeed an all-powerful entity that never takes a loss. Even when a power elite meme is going down in flames – global warming comes to mind – there are still savvy observers prepared to claim that the elite anticipated the result and that it will eventually work to the elite's favor. This is akin to arguing, as some do, that the Internet was ultimately the work of an informed elite that wanted an easy way to spy on the online habits of millions. But when one thoroughly studies the DARPA evolution, it seems clear that the little military network was blown into the stratosphere by the PC – a private, market based phenomenon that DARPA's brain trust could not have – and did not – anticipate.
We think this perception that the power elite is all-powerful, all-wise and "on top" of every twist and turn in society is an idea – a dominant social theme – that the power elite itself wishes to cultivate. (It's yet another promotion, in other words.) Just because people are very afraid that one American president or another will declare martial law does not make it feasible that such a state of affairs could be sustained or that it would work at all. Proclaiming martial law in a country the size of the United States, with as many armed citizens it has, is a recipe for endless armed insurrection that would not accomplish power elite goals but would simply polarize the population and make global government even more difficult to achieve.
The power-elite tends to encourage war, in our estimation, as a way of creating social tension and making its promotions more effective. But we see no evidence that power elite methodologies involve, on a regular basis, direct, domestic (violent) military takeovers of Western nations. Maybe there are historical instances of this, but it just doesn't seem to fit the pattern in our view. The power elite is reticent, increasingly so. There are few of it, and billions who do not belong. Whatever takes place over the next few decades as a result of the Internet's inevitable, continuing exposure of power elite memes in our opinion will not necessarily feature genocide or even immediate martial law – despite FEMA camps, etc.
What IS more likely is the kind of scenario described in the article we chose to excerpt today. There is, in America especially, for the first time in history, a population of professional soldiers. And these soldiers, in fact, (discharged or not) have imbibed it would seem a certain contempt for the slovenly citizen he or she is sworn to defend. It is perfectly possible, over time, that a "strongman" could be selected by a conniving power elite and then gradually maneuvered into a position of authority from whence he (we assume it would be a he) would gradually consolidate power and rule in an authoritarian manner. Obviously, strong men used this pattern quite successfully in the 20th century.
The model we are proposing has much to recommend it from a power elite point of view in that such an authoritarian context does not imply socialism nor other leveling measures. Within the ambit of this political solution, corporations continue forward and a variant of the capitalistic system itself might function with increased success. In fact, such an authoritarian system would have similarities to the corporatist political governance that we recently discussed in these pages. Click here to read more.
NOTED: After Three Months, Only 35 Subscriptions for Newsday's Web Site … In late October, Newsday, the Long Island daily that the Dolans bought for $650 million, put its web site, newsday.com, behind a pay wall. The paper was one of the first non-business newspapers to take the plunge by putting up a pay wall, so in media circles it has been followed with interest. Could its fate be a sign of what others, including The New York Times, might expect? So, three months later, how many people have signed up to pay $5 a week, or $260 a year, to get unfettered access to newsday.com? The answer: 35 people. As in fewer than three dozen. As in a decent-sized elementary-school class. – Observer.com (Ed Note: What's that faintly tinny yet agonized sound … Is it Rupert Murdoch (pictured left) screaming?)
There are certainly possibilities along these lines – ones the power elite might try to implement as its promotions weaken and dominance subsides. We thus think the idea of immediate and violent takeovers fomented behind the scenes by the power elite is more likely a (mere) dominant social theme than a reality. If the power elite intends a takeover, it might be tempted to mimic a model that has already worked – one in fact that we believe it purposefully contributed to in the earlier part of the 20th century. Perhaps the plethora of dictatorial executive orders being signed by serial presidents (and endlessly advertised on the ‘Net) are not mean to be wielded by them after all – but, some other "leader."