Great supplement to Agendas 21/2030.
I'll bet we could come up with something a lot more concise–something like "Mix up all the cultures so that no one can organize and we can take over quicker."
Looks terrible to me. It's the writing, all the crap words and dreary phrasing. People who write like that think like that. Want to bore us to death.
Venezuela would be a convenient scapegoat. Maybe too convenient.
I vote for B.
People are also impressed by big words. Even ugly, empty ones.
She in a one-woman political revolution.
Think of it as them hanging themselves.
China & Russia. More easy scapegoats. Could be true, just….convenient. Soros or Dem alternative? Nothing to see here.
How did we miss it? (Notable???)
When does he sleep??
Why cap Bombs?
Meditation fan??
Point 5 on the right sounds exactly like this:
"We have the Marxist-Leninist weapon of criticism and self-criticism"
– Ch 27, Mao's Little Red Book
Need popcorn refill
Great song. And I don't even like the blues.
Kek!
Since you are bringing this now, I'll re-post my reply from an earlier bread:
Sorry to dissent, but I don't buy the idea of weaponized ridicule as an accurate description of meme warfare. I don't think that's what Q is about, because ridicule has a malicious edge that does not preclude and may encourage gratuitous cruelty/sadism.
What we properly do is political satire. See the difference:
Ridicule = the act of making fun of someone or something in a cruel or harsh way : mean or unkind comments or behavior
Satire = the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues
The goal of satire is both to point out the stupidity of a certain act or course of action. But it doesn't preclude the idea that the target can change, based upon the feedback given. Even when the goal is to change the minds of a third party audience, ridicule can turn them against you, because it's mean-spirited (you know, the "kick em when they're down" idea).
In a war, optics matter. A model based on satirical attack is superior to one based on ridicule.
Agree. Satire is powerful and elegant. Gulliver's Travels.
If you are interested, you can check out David Wilcock's take–follows Q but also into "Full Disclosure" Movement re existence of "life out there"
https://divinecosmos.com/davids-blog/22005-stunning-new-briefings-spy-satellites-down-deep-state-arrests-finally-imminent/
Vigilant always.
Satire needed not be civil, just subtle. And very, very sharp.