Friday, June 14, 2019

Censorship is main strategy of Democrat Party for 2020. They’ve been working with big tech to shut down everyone who doesn’t align with Clinton Democrat Party agenda: pro-war, Russophobic, and preservation of status quo. “Censorship will have a huge impact on this election, and all politics moving forward”-Strategic Culture, Joachin Flores

The real point of Democratic Party governance relates to the international questions. And H.R Clinton’s role as Secretary of State saw the significant transatlantic networking and alliances necessary to pull off the Arab Spring and the Ukrainian Maidan.” 

6/14/19, “The Democrats’ Sinister Strategy to Win in 2020,” Strategic Culture, Joachin Flores 

“What strategy will Democrats try?… 

As Democrats have switched posture to being a pro-war party, they are seriously going to be lacking in the activism of the anti-war constituency, a constituency which may indeed view Trump at least neutrally. And trying to switch the anti-war elements of the most progressive, leftist wing of the party and the ‘left of the party adjacent’, into a pro-war party of xenophobic pogromist, neo-McCarthyite Russophobic minions, would seem to be a Herculean task. That is, of course, if those elements still have internet access. And herein lies the rub. 

Democrats are going to have to rely on the most sinister and anti-democratic strategy, one that threatens democracy itself 

The very sick and sad reality is that Democrats are working directly with the internet tech and platform giants, Google-Adsense, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and Amazon, to broaden the scope of censorship, to shut down websites, to deplatform, demonetize, and derank thousands of YouTube vloggers, even big ones, and shadow-ban countless tens, even hundreds of thousands more. 

They are creating an ever-more walled garden, a fake internet, the very thing American Sinophones have been accusing the Chinese of doing. And strangely, the average Chinese appears to be more plugged into the inner-workings of American life and politics than the other way around – so much for censorship…. 

The war now has been a war against the internet and its denizens themselves, against online activism which challenges the status quo even if its anti-Trump on issues of war and imperialism, since the Democrats themselves promise at least as much if not more. 

If the Democrats cannot beat the internet, they will destroy it. And destroying it they have been doing. 

While censorship strategy is the main idea for their campaignto silence the genuine progressives and socialists in their own party, and to double-down on censoring the broadly paradigmatic elements of Trump’s organic and grass-roots base – they will need to plaster on some kind of plausible pseudo-strategy to get them from here to there. And as we have seen, there isn’t really a candidate. Democrats are lacking in anyone that has anything to say, because the Democrats aren’t looking forward, they are trying to turn the clock backwards to reproduce a political geography that existed twelve years ago as Obama-esque tropes gained ascendency. To do this means to erase the real-existing internet, under the rubric of a war against ‘fake news’, and ‘alternate facts’. Only here can they win, using a victory by the numbers, not winning the battle of ideas. 

This time around, their push-polling and fake-polling might work. This is the plan that aims to get their candidate to win by claiming that their candidate is winning, in all the news online or TV that you’d ever have a chance to see. They thereby win low-cognitive undecideds who want to vote for the projected winner, for low-cognitive and base-emotional reasons at the level of the amygdala, as was their plan in 2016. This plan would have worked except for the digital democracy of paradigmatic proportions, the one that Trump so masterfully mobilized,”… 

[Ed. note: I’m stunned that anyone thinks Trump won because of the internet or his alleged “masterful” use of it, even if some of his staff made claims to that effect. If people want to think that, it’s fine with me, but it doesn’t change reasons for the mass exodus of Democrat voters from the party that began in 2011, nor the main common denominator of Obama to Trump voters which is that the system is corrupt. This isn’t to say the GOP or Trump are any better. In fact, the GOP has to be thrilled with censorship that protects the status quo, especially if it includes defeat of Trump. The entire political class would be thrilled if the internet didn’t exist.]

(continuing): “and so it is clear and obvious that Democrats aim to win by erasing digital freedoms, since the 1stamendment questions haven’t been properly sorted in the digital era. The big tech and platform firms are private agencies, have their own bizarre and discriminatory TOS’s, and have been censoring and deplatforming anyone who sniffs of paradigm. 

“Who are Democrats pushing on the public as the potentials?

 Besides the actual strategy of relying on internet censorship, the nominal, plastered, plausible strategy is to run everyone at once, until the very end. There isn’t a single candidate because democrats in fact do not have a candidate to run. They have a censorship plan, and then simply run half a dozen people simultaneously and work their virtual supporters up into some ‘anyone but Trump’ frenzy, with each candidate taking the historic vow to officially throw their support and their supporters behind the candidate that wins the DNC primaries…. 

Democrat strategy unlocked – Silence the Public, pretend Clinton isn’t in charge, and run half a dozen candidates representing some puerile pastiche of demography, until the very end. 

While at first glance this may seem to be reflective of an incoherent strategy, we need to step back and see how there is indeed a certain logic at play here. Censorship will have a huge impact on this election, and all politics moving forward. 

Not having a single candidate to focus on, that is, to draw fire on, isn’t the same thing as not having a single strategy. Single candidates and single strategies are not the same thing, not in the DNC, which is still clearly under a unified command structure under H.R Clinton. Yes indeed. 

It’s clear to insiders and anyone nominally looking at the facts on paper that the DNC is still a Clinton monopoly, there was at least some thinking, at least for some time, that the technocratic and professional elements of the party who actually want to win the race, were having some significant pull. We saw signs of this in early 2017 when Tom Perez came into to chair the DNC, a former Obama Secretary of Labor in the second term, signaling at least symbolically that team blue was breaking out of the Clinton club – at least that which was dedicated to the cult of Clinton. 

But to believe this, one would have to believe the old insider story going back to 2007 that Clinton and Obama represent different power factions within the party. But given that, besides the necessary myths and promises required to get elected, the real point of Democratic Party governance relates to the international questions. And H.R Clinton’s role as Secretary of State saw the significant transatlantic networking and alliances necessary to pull off the Arab Spring and the Ukrainian Maidan. And so even here it’s wildly questionable that Obama was much more than a Clinton faction ally, at best. 

The Democrats’ real problem here and now is that Clinton is widely despised by real voters, especially the kinds of voters that the party needs to win in the old and emergent swing states alike. That means that the party has to give off some essence, some inkling, some notion that the DNC and the party itself isn’t still run by Clinton. 

And this will be very hard to do, given that it is. The way that Sanders entirely buckled under the weight of the DNC’s corruption and gaming the delegate process during the nomination process, only served to induct a new generation of progressive voters – the real activists of the party generally tied to organized labor and astro-turf community organizations on the NGO model – into the ‘anyone but Hillary’ camp…. 

When we look at the overall picture, it is difficult to see Biden being the candidate. But given that Biden has his own ‘grab em by the p%$$#’ reputation, is both white and a male, and has a masculine-aggressive personality component – important demographic cross-sections for Trump – these may all indeed, in the end, serve successfully as cover for the Democrats plan to steal this election through censorship.”


No comments: