The evolution of the web – Guest Author, Runar Karlsen

The evolution of the web.
A look at globalist corporations shaping of the web.

Censoring the web
No other thing has been so detrimental to the cause of the NWO conspirators. The web have been the illumination for the world, not the illuminati. Now the Illuminati obviously is just something ill-uminating. And they are known to not like so much freedom of speech, so how will they continue co-operate with the web? Many people expect some greater censorship to occur. In 2006 there was some censorship plans signed by Donald Rumsfeld, which came out to be nothing. Later the NSA surveillance were exposed, and that looks more like their chosen plan. However it will never work as a crackdown on people who chose honest and legal ways.
And their nightmare is that there appears some true candidate for the people with understanding of money and who acknowledge their war against Humanity and retaliates. Arrests the rubble of the many Rothschild families and give them precious guilloutine time.
This would be fair, and they know it so well, therefore must they be prepared for anything. And they are known to work the case from every side and angle – all efforts contribute – at least in being prepared. They understand they are likely to be taken down the way they didn’t consider.
The hate laws are an important part of their new game, and it seems now to develope. These laws have been forced upon countries by EU and UN, and do have as its covert main purpose to defend Jews and their vice cultures from critic. People should react more to these laws, not just for being a offense to sovereignty, but for they being discriminatory in essence. They do favor certain groups and defend them from natural response, while the criminal responses which they pretend to outlaw are already criminalized by existing laws on injury, libel etc.

Now Cameron comes along with part 2 of hate laws.
The war against terror shall be expanded to include extremists. While hinting slightly to muslim extremists, the new bill shall of course be for all, and it will be announced in the Queens coming speech.
The formulations so far goes :
“The measures would give the police powers to apply to the high court for an order to limit the “harmful activities” of an extremist individual. The definition of harmful is to include a risk of public disorder, a risk of harassment, alarm or distress or creating a “threat to the functioning of democracy”.”

And this is the long awaited reaction to Muslim crime in UK. The murder of Lee Rigby is mentioned.
First these politicians get them over with their violations of civilization, for thereby use them to limit the existing freedom for everyone. But the worst is the muddy formulations of the law, such as “Being a risk”. Any politician should be incarcerated for trying to introduce such violations to the spirit of law.

More censorship is expected to fight anti-semitism or relevant political information as it should be called, but it might backfire. It is not a Jesuit monitored project, it is pretty agressive. I would guess there are lots of Chabad Jews in this movement. It bears their kind of rafinement.
It may backfire as it becomes too visible who wants to be categorized Holy and have sanctuary peace, in the society of social unrest which increasingly more people understand is created by them.

But this is all top level deformation of the web, there are other structures possible to mess or shape if having tools of mass-economy.

Corporative shaping of the web
The area of interest for the NWO managers are not just the press, remember the phrasing in the Marxist ten point scheme, “The centralization of all communication”. Thats how the true monopolists regard it. Still to minimize somewhat – the area of interest could be called the Industry of opinion.
This would contain what already have seen they have taken care of. The Press, Book publishing, incl. educative books and entertainment, in particular film industry.
The newcomers with the web are comment section in newspapers – these are easily managed and usually quietly censored by the paper itself. It is common that newspapers want commentators to login by real name. They have no moral right to do so, as the NWO newspapers do always have anonymous owners.

Third party parttakers in commenting.
Another factor in the comment sections, also extending to the blogsphere is Disqus.
They get some relevant critic here: Lee Brayden hits Disqus Disqus issues -top 5 bothersome.

And then there was all the public forums which flourished 1995-2002. Email-lists. These debate forums was very popular and also interesting those days, and then suddenly the buy up frenzy began together with the dotcom bubble blowing and they ended all up at Yahoo, where they became neglected by these owners and started to disappear in spam, random eradication and arrogant hosting. It was a slow but effective end for that boom of making up minds. Was it deliberate? I now start to wonder. They have also bought up, the photosharing site which excels in commenting and networking. Their hosting have received lethal critic, but the yahoo stocks still do well. Flickr maybe doesn’t count much in the Yahoo economy.
But remember whenever such corporations shows outright hostility for its customers, there is space for competition. 2010 2013
After the e-mail lists became outfashioned, there came a new wave of public forums, set up by private incentive, using scripting like php, making it a very professional act. These didn’t work very well even if some did. To create a lively forum, human engines are needed, somebody who cares and updates the site with news and themes to discuss. This is the success formula of newspapers. That people knows it is being updated.
Forums are very important part of humanity’s mind.

Herding is a phenomena usually found under different names within marketing section, but we should be aware that effective herding online may reduce the NWO need of censoring. AOL is the corp behind the first great herding online.
Here we see the idea of the Internet castle come to life, the great online Mall where you have all things you could need in reach. A parallel web with borders and limitations set by the corp.
Facebook is now the great online Castle, which I never joined. I hear now of social pressure, also political pressure being forced in diverse manners. I am surprised to learn about their pay-to-share practise, meaning you have to pay to reach the full amount of friends and contacts with your posts, otherwise they will randomly cut off recipients. As far as i understand this, you cannot use facebook any longer for invitations to your birthday party as your regular mass invitation will be limited by them. But their stocks are rising. And they are a NWO dream come true. buy facebook likes !
Hooray, In the age of alternative currencies, buy quasi currency! Feel good again.
There are alternatives to facebook, A new one is

Web piracy
Lastly, communities hosted by corporations may also experience the synergy created by the former pirates of the web. It is becoming unsafe to be an individual operator, because there are hackers around, and the need to form communities like Cloudflare arises. These are protecting against cyber attacks which is a good idea, but why should’t an ordinary isp provider or web hotel fix any such problems? It is a question of now needing more expertice to operate online, and the corporate solution may be what seems to be the comfort zone to very many. Listen and repeat to yourself : “Corporate peace is better peace, tested and customized for sheep”.
We see the street reality of paying protection money is approaching.


Reference – List of Alternative Right Publishers

h/t Runar Karlsen

Authors with alt right or White Nationalist content may experience significant discouragement and waste much time by attempting to publish through main-stream channels.  There are publishers who maintain the appearance of being receptive to such content, but subject it to a program of sabotage once it has been submitted.  We are hoping to present a list of publishers who are known to be genuinely interested and supportive of material beneficial to our cause.  Please contribute by posting comments having links and descriptions of any such publishers that you know of.  Please limit comments to links and suggestions about how to present and maintain the list.  Thanks

  • American Renaissance: run by the iconic Jared Taylor, AmRen is said to be somewhat narrow about the subject matter they will support.  The focus is on racial issues. They advise, “It is usually better to send a query about an article before actually writing it.” They explain their standards in the “Writer’s Guide”, found at the link provided. Their published content appears to be English only.
  • Counter-Currents Publishing: Greg Johnson is Editor-in-Chief.  Counter Currents publishes and provides English translations for works in many, if not most, European languages.  They publish books, reviews, and on-line articles.
  • VDare:  Perer Brimelow, Editor.  VDare published a recent book by John Derbyshire, a collection of his VDare articles.  Their website does not provide any information about submitting material for publication.  You would have to contact them.  The link provided goes to their contact page.

Open Thread — Getting Started

Tired of blowing hot air about White identity?  How do we move beyond talk and begin to take action?

This is an open thread for brainstorming:

  • What are the priorities?
  • What is feasible now?
  • What resources do we have and what resources are within our reach?
  • How do we communicate?
  • How do we grow?

Bear in mind there is no easier way to kill an embryonic movement than to overburden it with unreasonable expectations.  Focus on what is achievable now, and what may become achievable in the foreseeable future.

Please contribute your thoughts…

The Virtue of Virtuous Talk

Talk is cheap.  Talking about virtue costs nothing.  Talking about doing something is not doing something, it is just talking.

These principles have been frustratingly evident in the wake of the recent spate of black-on-white murders, assaults, rapes that have occurred proximately to the Zimmerman case.  Of course, these are perennial and pervasive, but this where they are currently very conspicuous and revealing.  Each time one of these events is reported, there is a flurry of predictable remarks to be heard and read, over and over, to the point of having become tiresome clichés.  Some examples:

Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton now?  It says a whole lot more when they do not say anything.  Would it be better if they came out with a raft of PC horseshit they do not mean?  The fact is that feral black thugs are their soldiers.  Street gangs and flash mobs are guerilla militias for the black victim industry, who will intimidate cowardly whites into acquiescing to its demands.  So far, the strategy is working.  Maybe you should start saying that.

They should hang the dirty little apes like they would in China.  They should, but they won’t.  They would in China, so God bless China, because Justice matters.  But saying they should does not come one jot closer to doing so, and to hear you keep saying that when you know they will not is really frustrating.  It is empty and impotent and sounds more like whining than outrage.  Do something to fix your insane government and its legal system.  Or possibly do something to replace your insane government and its legal system with something better.

I wonder if Obama will claim another son?  Probably not, but of all the listed banalities, this one is least tiresome.  No one should ever forget how a sitting president of the United States corrupted the legal process, embraced the most hateful and violent segment of our society, and spat in the faces of the American people in a display of conspicuous racism.  But that memory is already prominent in the minds of most people so you do not have to make a special point of reminding them.  Do it in passing in the way of saying something significant.

People really talk too much!  They manipulate themselves into the position that what they believe in is what they say they believe in.  They delude themselves into the belief that they are serving their principles by talking about their principles.  I am not talking about phonies who say what they are expected to say and tell people what people want to hear.  I am talking about the “sincere” people.  This is not an especially intentional or conscious decision; it is a culturally learned behavior.  There is an economy to it.  One can pay one’s moral dues by something can be produced in unlimited quantity with very little effort: cheap talk.  It is in everyone’s best interests to accept this form of morality from others, in order to take advantage of it oneself.  That way, we all have more time and money to do the self-absorbed things we really want to do, like watch football or soaps.  And not least, if talk is careful, it is usually quite safe.

Virtuous talk is hand-washing.  Saying you condemn something is a way of saying, “Look, I don’t condone this, so don’t blame me.  It’s not my fault.”  Actually, if that is all you are going to do about it, then it is your fault.  One is responsible for the things one does, but one is every bit as responsible for the things one fails to do.  Verbal condemnation, or commendation for that matter, is a non-event.  No quantity of wishing, hoping, validation will ever materialize into the real world as a substantive force to change anything.  As the saying goes, all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.  Talk is a form of doing nothing.

Empty talk, no matter how pious, will not just waste your time and effort, it will damage your own capacity to ultimately ever do something.  It will damage you as an individual when you do it because you will gradually weave that behavior into the fabric of your character and you will come to depend on it.  You will depend on it and your relationships with others will depend on it.  It will damage you as an individual when you listen to it because you will gradually become callous to your original hopes, knowing they will never happen because the only thing supporting them is empty talk.  It will damage you as an organization because your membership and finances will be based upon providing the service of giving insincere people the opportunity to pretend to be something they are not, for the sake of appearances or the comforts of self-delusion.

Obviously, this is not an appeal to stop communicating.  But if you are going to talk, especially in public, talk about doing something.  Talk about organizing, campaigning, boycotting, fighting back.  This is not to try to persuade people who have no intention of doing anything to stop talking.  But rather, it is to try to encourage those who would do something to recognize the character and vanity of endless talk, that leads to no plan, no step, no tangible measure beyond the walls of the private parlor.  See that for what it is and avoid it.  Avoid doing it and avoid others who do it.

Wisdom comes to recognize that talk is seductive because it creates the appearance of action without the cost of real effort and the illusion of principle without the risk of real conflict.  It is the heart and soul of decadence.  Know that.