Privacy In The Technological State

Privacy is something that has become a front burner topic for everyone, because every day we are treated to stories about how corporations are spying on us. They harvest information from our daily routines, put it into databases and then use it to push ads on us wherever we turn. They are now inserting surveillance devices in our homes to listen in on us as we go about our daily routines. Of course, no one knows how much is done with government blessing and cooperation, but we know it is there.

Of course, the fact that everyone is worried about this issue means the politicians never speak of it. The old Joe Sobran line was that America is a country where the political parties are significantly to the Left of their voters. Today, when Left and Right are meaningless artifacts from a bygone era, both parties simply make sure to never address the concerns of the people. While Democrats are analyzing spectral evidence for signs of Russian gremlins, the GOP is thanking you for not smoking.

Even though it seems that the unwanted gaze is upon us everywhere, we are just at the start of a new problem. In the pre-industrial age, the privacy concern was the king’s men rummaging through your possessions or intercepting your courier. For most people this was never going to be a concern. In the industrial age, the state expanded to the point where everyone could be exposed to a government process. The concern then was your rights within the process. How much did you have to reveal to them?

In the technological age, where the lines between the state and the global technology companies are blurred, we have very different problems. These are the sorts of problems classical liberals, so beloved by libertarians and conservatives, never contemplated. It’s why civic nationalism sounds so ridiculous when debating what to do about these tech firms controlling our civil discourse. For example, this blog is blocked by corporate firewall makers, which are private companies doing the bidding of the political class.

Think about this. Police departments are now using services like to help solve cold cases. They submit DNA evidence to the service and the service reports back members who have some connection. You committed the perfect crime in 1982, but left behind some DNA at the crime scene. Your cousin decides to trace her (it’s always a her in these cases) ancestry using a DNA service. All of a sudden you have cops at your door asking you about your whereabouts 40 years ago.

It’s easy to shrug this off as the person suddenly tangled in this new technological surveillance web is a criminal. We all want to see justice done. But, think about the implications of this new world. All of us now have a permanent record that is increasingly open to examination by unofficial agents of the state. How long before some tech company gets into the business of solving crimes? How long before the cops start purchasing their services on-line just like they are doing with ancestry?

There is another side to this. The tech companies can also spy on the state, by accessing the records of people working in the state. Every government has to keep secrets in order to function. It is why every modern society has developed processes for determining what can be revealed and what can be concealed by government. There are processes the public and government must follow and they are administered by the courts. What happens when the tech giants can bypass all of this?

Think of another problem. Before the media was completely owned by the government, private media operations would publish government secrets they thought the public had a right to see. It sounds crazy, but it used to happen. The courts carved out exceptions to permit this, basically putting the burden of keeping secrets on the state. Now, with help from technology, the state can fight back and go after the handful of independent media people snooping around government. This story will be interesting.

There are two problems we face in the technological age that are new. One is how to place hard limits on the synopticon. This unwanted stare called the surveillance state that is now on all of us will have to be blinded, unless there are hard limits on where anyone can peer into the lives of the people. In other words, it is no longer about the state and the citizens’ right to privacy. It is about society and the human right to a private space, free of the unwanted gaze. We will need absolute zones of privacy.

The other problem is how to fashion punishments that are so terrifying that they change behavior. What’s happened within these massive technology firms is the evolution of a culture where everyone sees themselves as a member of a clerisy, guarding the public from themselves. These decisions to ban books and censor speech are not made at the top, but in the middle, by functionaries doing what they assume is their duty. Either the firms are destroyed and the people chased off or we change the culture in them.

One way to change the culture is to attach liability to violating the safe zones. The reason every company in America spends money proving they are not racist is there are serious liabilities that come with doing otherwise. Something similar must happen with privacy. Companies need to be as berserk about not looking where they are prohibited from looking, as they are about conforming to current morality on race. Otherwise, the solution is to let a million flowers bloom in Silicon Valley.

To support my work, please subscribe here.

88 thoughts on “Privacy In The Technological State

  1. Conspiracy theories aside, you might want to look at the 9/11m dancing Arabs of Paterson New Jersey. Just twelve miles west of Jersey City where the Dancing Israelies were supposedly celebrating the collapse of the World Trade Center, the Arabs of Paterson were celebrating as well. What makes this story more plausible is that 11 of the 19 hijackers had lived in Paterson for a while. Of course the local Arabs, mostly Palestinians claimed to have had no idea who these guys were despite their presence for several months and their purchase of fake IDs from a local Arab merchant who just happen to be selling IDs good enough to get on a plane. And the FBI wasn’t about to stir things up with lots of investigations. After all, the truth might stir up some anti-Muslim sentiment, just when George Bush was calling Islam the religion of peace. So despite lots of witnesses, including the Paterson police, the story was memory holed.

    On function of conspiracy theories like the Dancing Israelies is that they serve to mask larger, more painful truths. In this case it works to help erase the open assistance that Paterson’s Arabs gave to the 9/11 hijackers and their real , not imagined, celebration of their murder of thousands of Americans.

  2. Incredibly important topic. I dont at this time see how we stop the avalanche of cyber invasions of privacy but it is going to become a nightmare.

  3. Guess you haven’t heard of Targeted Individuals. Once you know there’s no going back.

  4. “The other problem is how to fashion punishments that are so terrifying that they change behavior”

    The only way that could happen is if it were done retail, unofficially, by the very small percentage of Americans who both understand that there’s a problem, and aren’t benefiting from the problem.

    There’s no voting our way out of this.

    But I’m not going to throw my life away on retail behavior modification, and neither are you (and anybody who tries to talk you into it is, guaranteed, working for the FBI).

    So, we suck it up.

  5. Synopticon is such a brilliant, brilliant adaptation/reword of the dreaded panopticon. I’m stealing that.

  6. A few years back a kid in Australia managed to take the aggregated data that Fit-Bit published online and determine the location of several (formerly) secret US military facilities in Africa and Asia. If a kid with free time can do that with public data, just think what else is discoverable with multi-source info and a bit more work invested.

  7. I have always found it rather ironic how Americans scream about privacy – on their Facebook pages, which they update with an App on their iPhone which requires scanning their fingerprint instead of a password.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

    • Just as a follow up, in most of Europe, it is illegal for companies to track what websites employees visit. In Switzerland, companies are not allowed to turn on security cameras inside factories until after the employees have left for the day. If you ever try Google Earth or Maps in Germany, you’ll notice we don’t have street view either. Same with dash cams; laws across Europe are very strict on the use of them on the roads and are completely banned in countries like Austria, Luxembourg and Portugal.

      If you want real privacy, you won’t find it in the land of the free.

      • This is correct. I think we could learn a lesson or two with how Euros attack this problem. It’s actually pretty instructive in certain examples.

  8. Privacy isn’t absolutely necessary. You only need privacy if there is the likelihood of intrusion.

    Exposing everyone’s dirty laundry isn’t great for public morals, but it’s only a crisis if you can’t defend your own domain.

    So don’t worry if the government knows everything you’re up to. Worry if you can’t resist the busybodies who always harass everyone they come into contact with.

  9. Maybe it’s time to Cloward-Piven the tech surveillance apparatus. I like to Google and click on all sorts of unexpected things.

    I also started Googling “how to cancel my AT&T account”, in various wordings, over a few weeks. Mrs. Dutch was very proud of the fact that she called them for some service issues and easily negotiated an unlimited data plan for a lower price. I think I know why it was so easy.

    Make the system work for you.

  10. This unwanted stare called the surveillance state that is now on all of us will have to be blinded, unless there are hard limits on where anyone can peer into the lives of the people.

    Yes. I’m less worried about the government than I am about my neighbor being able to buy a 100 page resume on me for $1.99.

    Mind you, privacy is a fairly new invention, something only possible in cities. In small, rural communities, where people died less than five miles from where they were born, nobody had privacy, everybody knew what everybody was doing.

    • There’s an irony here. I’m thinking about the twin concepts of the individual and that of the private life. Both very modern, with entire literatures describing their emergence. There was a whole series on the private life put together by a bunch of academics inspired by Michel Foucault. The irony lies in the fact that much of this emphasis on individuality and privacy at that time was driven by homosexuality and other perversities back in the days when it was all about doing what you want in the privacy of your own home or bedroom. Now that the pozz has taken over the world the left wing emphasis on privacy is nowhere to be found and we are in the age where they want to know everything we are doing in the privacy of our own homes. And what we are thinking, despite the fact that they don’t want us saying any of it in public.

    • Felix, I was thinking about that the other day. Small towns. Must be strange. You only have to date a few girls (or maybe just one, followed by a hostile breakup) and within a few days the whole town knows whether you’re good or bad in bed. What your kinks are. Who among the townfolk you secretly hate. That you’re a racist or a ni**ger lover. Who you once tried to get fired. What embarrassing virus you carry. You had sex with your dog. Etc. Can you imagine going to the bar and seeing the same people every time? No wonder country folk have a reputation for tall-tales. After you’ve talked to everybody over and over for years, you’ve got to start making stuff up or there’s nothing to tell them that they don’t already know. You hear a lot of people from small towns saying the same thing about how “I just had to get the hell out of there or I was gonna go insane.” I think besides the boredom and seeing the same town everyday, much of the urge to flee is for privacy, like you said.

  11. When I was in high school in the ’80s the sociology teacher said that your criminal records as a minor are under seal and can’t be made public. The little red pill in the back of my mind woke up and I asked, “So how exactly can they not be made public? Do they burn the records when you hit 18?” The class hissed because they thought I was being a smart aleck. It seemed logical to me, knowing human nature, that if someone wants to access or leak your minor records, they’re going to leak. Looking back, it’s kind of endearing how much faith those hissing teenagers had in the system back then.

    Speaking of HIPA kinda. Remember not too long ago when you’d walk into the doctor’s office and while talking to the receptionist she’d ask out loud for the whole waiting room to hear, “…and what is the doctor seeing you for today?” I haven’t heard that in a while. I hope they stopped asking as part of policy.

    • The legal records of Obama’s opponents for state and US Senate were sealed and couldn’t be made public, either.

  12. As government bureaucracy grows, so does the number and intrusiveness of regulations (nanny state apparatus). Eventually, most middle level bureaucrats become incentivized to advance their careers by demonstrating ever-increasing amounts of rule adherence (little Hitler Complex). This vicious cycle can accelerate at warp speed in a bureaucracy that earns additional income via levying fines (think speed radar enforcement). This is as a close to an existential threat as we are likely to encounter in our modern world, and we should treat it that same way our ancestors did (club and spear).

  13. Re:
    ” The other problem is how to fashion punishments that are so terrifying that they change behavior. What’s happened within these massive technology firms is the evolution of a culture where everyone sees themselves as a member of a clerisy, guarding the public from themselves. These decisions to ban books and censor speech are not made at the top, but in the middle, by functionaries doing what they assume is their duty. Either the firms are destroyed and the people chased off or we change the culture in them. ”

    That’s one of the problems with technology. It has removed the ability to directly punish those who spy on you or harass you. I used to have arguments with the geeks I worked with regarding this problem 20 years ago when all the email spammers started becoming a big topic of discussion.

    My argument was simple: back in the “old” days – you might have to endure door to door salesmen, advertising in the mail – or commercials on the TV. In all of these cases you had some control over their access to you. You could shut the TV off, instantly chuck the mail in the trash ( it also cost money for them to send it – and if it generated no business – the sender would inevitably stop).

    The door to door sales person was the easiest to handle – he was in some cases literally taking his life in his hands by banging on your door and sucking up your time. In other words – there were consequences to trying to sell shit to people who didn’t want it.

    The email thing almost totally removed the consequences side of that dynamic. Spammers could flood your inbox with thousands of emails – and it cost them next to nothing either in expense or in consequences.

    Spammer’s privacy – came at your expense.

    IMHO the correct way to handle a situation like a spammer – is LESS privacy. Less privacy = consequences. If you know the location of the guy who’s blowing up your email inbox every night when you get home from work trying to sell you erectile dysfunction drugs , sooner or later there’s going to be that one guy who goes over the edge and hunts down the spammer and takes him out.

    That’s the way human society has functioned for all of eternity. Do something over the top annoying and sooner or later you get taken out.

    • Spamming, at least some of it like the robo calls, are easily tracked and eliminated if the desire is there. But of course, there is no desire.

      The “do not call list” is not enforced, but the pol’s have “passed a law” and been re-elected. They have cut themselves an exclusion for political ad’s. That fucker Trump ( 😉 ) calls me from a different number every single week—and there is no registered Rep in this house!

      The phone companies make millions of $$$ selling anonymous phone lines to these spammers, they are happy.

      The companies selling spam blocking devices are happy, they make money selling you devices and subscription programs.

      The “charities” are happy, they have an exclusion as well.

      The final consumer, e.g., me…well you can go take a jump.

      Not sure what the answer is, but there can be no solution if there is no reasonable effort to enforce the laws currently in place.

      • You seem to have missed my point.

        I put the word “directly” in there for a reason.

        Back in the days before technology – the door to door salesman was under threat of a DIRECT beating if he was too obnoxious in his sales tactics. One too many , “but yes , let me just tell you about this last great feature” after having been told to get lost – might earn him a beat down.

        Where is that DIRECT connection to consequences in the email system? It’s simply not there. And as you pointed out in helping me make my point: there are all manner of anti-spam lists and so forth – but they all rely on companies or people who are NOT YOU – to enforce. They are also subject to subversion by some of those very same people – because it affects their wallet.

        An email system that contained a header that read: “this email was generated from the computer at IP address and is located at 59 Main Street and was sent by John Smith ” ….. might earn John Smith a visit in the middle of the night to shut down his obnoxious email habits.

        • That email system would be great. But there’s no financial incentive to ever build it, and it would cost money, whereas right now email is “free”!

          Giving away stuff for ‘free’ has been one of the most expensive mistakes our culture has made.

        • Cal, I did not miss the point. I simply elaborated on a tangential aspect. Since you emphasize email, much the same goes for that as well. Not that I’m recommending another law, but there have been any number of “solutions” proposed that would enforce choke points and/or in various ways make email spamming costly—too costly.

          As it is, email spamming is a fraction of what it could be at the user reception point, traffic being blocked as these spamming systems are identified or spam detection filters running at the ISP or local to the user system.

          Indeed, my old university had their own outgoing email blocked (all) every so often because one or more of their systems had been hijacked. These were traced via IP numbers. I’m not familiar with email arriving where the origin can not be obtained, albeit one must look at the full headers of the address not normally displayed at the user level, but a the system manager level…there is information.

  14. Seems to me a great part of the problem was best stated by Rand, yes that Rand:

    “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”

    I believe “Three Felonies a Day,…” is another good source to read. There are simply too many laws against too many behaviors/actions for the law to be anything but arbitrary and immoral. This is not to toss out all law, but a call to better distinguish malum in se from malum prohibitum.

    Getting back to Z-man’s fine posting, many of his observations wrt privacy would have less import if we were not subject to such a myriad of laws and regulations as mid level bureaucrats have imposed upon us. In any event, it seems the implied call from Z-man is for yet another set of rules and regulations to reign in private company surveillance—or at least the governments use of private company surveillance to bypass civil rights guaranteed under the 4th Amendment.

    Those new rules will eventually be subverted as was predicted when the FISA courts were set up under the Patriot act.

    • She was wrong ~20% to 40% of the time. But when she was wrong, holy cow she went crazy wrong.

      As for the bureaucracy, it’s a losing battle. Government jobs are how the third world creates their middle class…

    • Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them.

      Thirty years ago, I saw a television programme where a baker would comply with every rule in the book. After having reported to the tax authorities how much flour, milk and salt was in his breakfast buns, he went out to start his car, first checking all the mirrors and all the lights, popping the hood to check oil level and then bending down and looking under the car to make sure that no children were hiding there.

  15. Washington DC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Tech/Wall Street/Media Complex. This is now the “seat of government” in the USA.

    The average elected official in DC has the IQ of a watermelon and is, if they even gave a **** while they cash the checks, totally clueless. Nothing will impede Silicon Valley, Finance, and Corporate Media. “The People” have been removed from the equation.

    The future is “1984” as sure as the sun rises. Good luck all…….

  16. Keep as low a profile as possible. Social media should be avoided. Never give up your DNA willingly. If the State wants you nothing will stop them from getting you. Never ask the question “what does that have to do with the price of naked chicks in China”? The thought police will railroad you into oblivion whether you are kidding or not. It is a brave new world.

    • If you think that running and hiding like a cockroach is going to bring this whole thing down – you’re sadly misguided.

      The correct response when the government starts severely punishing people for yelling fire in a crowded theatre – is for the whole damn theatre to stand up and yell fire. Not meekly squeek fire to each other while whispering “Fire!” into each other’s ears.


      • Calsdad, exactly my thinking—and I might add, perhaps a Leftist thinking/tactic as well. In other words, resist such that the system collapses. Right now, they have the ability to select one or two poor saps and make an example of them, but could they handle a 100 or a 1000? I suspect not, judging from our border protection efforts. Problem is that affluence makes cowards of us all. Remove that…

        • Solzenitzen said that if they had only started killing off the secret police who came around in the night to gather people up and send them off to the gulags ….. very quickly they would have run out of secret police and the whole system would have fallen apart.

          • Gulag Archipelago should be mandatory reading in high schools. His discussions about the futility of hunger strikes, when the dear leaders never cared if you starved, were amazing. And also, how they finally dealt with snitches and turned the tide in the camps, amazing, amazing stuff. Instruction manual for many actions.

        • This requires IRL networking. Probably off the grid and to a degree subrosa until we have the numbers that can publicly resist.

          Organizing off-line with old friends and family would be a good place to start.

        • You’ve picked a poor example. They don’t control immivasion and “the border” because they don’t WANT to. But you are right, I think, that enough people offering concerted resistance would have real effects. Question is, “What kind of resistance? And when?”

          • Well, they’re doing that in France.

            In North America they’re sitting comfortably in their parlour rooms pointing and clicking.

          • There are two possible triggers.

            1) Economic collapse. That takes out the stock market and the banks. We almost had it in 2008. This would have catastrophic effects across the board.Trillions in wealthy would vaporize, pension fund collapses. You’d have millions of very, very pissed off people wanting to eat bankers and congressmen.

            2) Trump looses and we get a Lefty lunatic who signs a EO for gun confiscation and Big Tech drops the hammer on us and the internet mostly goes black.

            Enough whites know that if the Feds come for our guns, that the Zimbabwe treatment for us is next on the agenda. BTW the local police are well aware of this trigger and is why they do not enforce a lot of recently gun related laws. They want to keep breathing.

            As it stands the police can barely keep our cities from blowing up in violence and if they commit all their resources for confiscation and the resulting resistance. You know full well the criminal class will take complete advantage of the situation and you’ll see those blue hives just go up in flames.

          • And note at her press conference Kamala Harris already suggested a gun control executive order if she can’t get a law in Congress

            That said the Right could learn a bit from the Left and that is not to be afraid of collective anything

            The Left always goes for collective action and punishment and if the Right is willing to do the same if only in defense they’ll be able to get power

            Some get the this, Aesop at the Raconteur Report but atomization plagues the Right . As collective goal, if only “will divide up the place later once the Left is gone” is the difference between life and death

          • You missed a question “To what end?”

            Until someone can answer that , no one is going to be able to do a damned thing.

            Let me give you some examples of people who have done it right.

            #1 The anti abortion people are still fighting and they are a court seat or two in having abortion yay or nay returned to the States. The resistance took over 40 years basically and ranged from voting to violence

            #2 The gun lobby. They are also a few court votes from having the most odious gun laws nullified and have already made a ban on handguns which was the dream since the 30’s illegal. Methods were money, voting and passive resistance

            If you know what you want, what kind of society you want you can start figuring out what you are wiling to pay for it and go from there.

            Hell knowing what you want can inform voting which is the most normie thing you can do . As it is though the Right has no workable ideas and thus no future.

      • You are the one sadly mistaken if you believe I think that hiding like a cockroach is going to bring the whole thing down. Know your enemy. Keeping a low profile is the better strategy. Read the Art of War Mon Ami. Or you can be culled in the first wave. YAAFAH

      • A unified response works but whites aren’t unified. TPTB have made it almost impossible to organize outside of the local level and even then it has to be off grid unless you have a club of some sort for cover purposed. Say like Wines Tasters or Beer and BBQ. Brothers.

    • Perhaps, but how? And more importantly, what is the cost benefit? You state in your second sentence, “…avoid social media…” yet you’ve posted to a public blog? If I took your advice in its strictest sense, I’d never have found this blog, nor interacted with other fellow travelers who follow Z-man. It seems to me that I would indeed be safe if I just dropped out of all social interaction and stayed at home (and of course paid my taxes). But isn’t that just what the Government would like?

      • Heads up helmets on. It is a serious business. The State always has been and always will be the enemy of the people. We cannot vote ourselves out of this mess. The more they know about you the easier it is for them to eliminate you. The Way Of The World suggests we organize offline. That makes more sense. Broadcasting obvious disdain to the beast does nothing but make your hand visible. Government has a legitimate purpose. Diversity seeks to give the State purpose beyond its scope. If there is a fight bring it on. However I will not sacrifice myself needlessly with false bravado to prove a point. Neither should you.

        • Understood, but what is possible for you, is not possible for others. All must play their parts as best they can. Social networks vary, resources vary, even agreement as to the most effective steps to initiate desired change varies.

        • The Way Of The World suggests we organize offline. That makes more sense.

          The internet is the most powerful weapon in the world, bar nukes. It’s like suggesting that Enlightenment era dissidents didn’t use typeset press because then they could track you through the printer.

          The fight is here, on the internet. This is where we are strongest and this is where we must make our stand.

          Congregating IRL just makes it easier for them to dox and harass you.

    • You’re violating your own standards by posting here. The NSA probably has a dossier on everybody that comments here. Likely even if you’re using TOR.

      • My standard is keep as low a profile as possible. Not never post on the web. The NSA probably does know something about all of us. If they come for me they come for me. I will cross that specific bridge of resistance when I have to.

  17. They are now inserting surveillance devices in our homes

    We are now paying them to insert surveillance devices in our homes.


    • Exactly.

      I have a problem with the leftoid-like whining about “they’re placing devices in our homes!!”.

      NO. You are buying (PAYING FOR) those devices – and placing them into your homes.

      Maybe it’s my Scottish heritage speaking , but I get sick and tired of talking all the time to get things done. I get sick of negotiating , and talking – I want to see action.

      Constant talking is female attribute. So maybe the profusion of those devices is a sign of males lack of control over the culture in general.

      • The Booby’s never owned a cell phone or smart phone in his life… and yet he hasn’t died. Netflix? What’s that?

        You can’t completely unplug yourself, especially if you’re a blogger, but you don’t have get in line to bring every useless piece of technology into your life, either.

        The scary part is that’s it’s getting to the point where you will soon have to own a smart phone to exist in society as a worker or a citizen. That’s what needs to be fought.

          • YV

            A few years ago Italy’s Five Star party proposed that the state provide each schoolchild with an iPad.

            At the time The Booby thought it was a crazy stupid idea. But in retrospect there may be something diabolically brilliant about it, whether that was Five Star’s intention or not:

            Every time a new technology “revolutionizes” our lives, voters should demand that the gov’t make it available to every citizen “free of charge”.

            In a matter of years Western countries will bankrupt themselves and destroy the economy that the current crop of parasites needs to exist.

            The Booby says this partly in jest, but maybe, just maybe…

          • It’s lost only if people WANT to lose it. You don’t *have* to have a computer and wifi at home. You can take your laptop to dozens of places to use wifi. Public libraries, cafes, etc. That’s what I do. You can do it. Nobody is stopping you but yourself. Just cancel wifi. And while you’re at it, get rid of your TV set. I’ve lived without one since 1987. Don’t miss it one whit. I read. You can do that. Everybody can. Nobody is stopping you but yourselves.

        • Cell phones are pretty much a requirement for on-call if you work in corporate IT. It wasn’t when I started 15 years ago. But what to do? Start completely over and take a huge salary hit? Uproot the family, etc etc?

          • Of course not. If your livelihood really does depend on your having a cell phone, then have a cell phone. But that’s not the same thing as a smart phone. The point is this: Do what you reasonably CAN do to unplug from the surveillance network and to starve the Beast. And get rid of your TV set. You can live without it. You CAN do more than you are doing without shooting yourself in the foot, which is the point.

        • Bravo! Mysteerious Rooshian Vooman also does not own a smart phone. Never has. MRV doesn’t even have computer and wifi at home.

      • Automation makes most males useless these days. Hell shovel ready jobs are one person gig and a woman can do this job well enough with a scoop loader.

        The problem is that you can’t convince anyone that the reward is worth the cost.since there is no proposed reward. Men will fight for money , i women and ideology

        Fighting for money is pointless as the fight would destroy the basis of wealth , many modern women wouldn’t be worth keeping as a slave much less a wife and the Right soils itself at the idea of having an ideology

        Its also not helping that attempts from the past are “fills those pews” or “race war now” , its not enough and the former may not even be wanted by enough people work

        We may need widespread Christianity for our complex high trust society but if we can’t get it, we’d better have a back up plan.

        Also if things go to “Action Now!” or a million flowers bloom than this society ends. One modest insurgency is able to level a city as we saw in the Philippines.

        The costs of the Battle of Marawi were high. Opinions on infrastructure damage vary but aerial imagery indicates that huge swathes of the city have been devastated by the fighting – the mass destruction flattening entire city blocks. The World Bank estimates it may take two decades to restore Marawi to its original condition. However, the true price of the battle is that paid by the people of Marawi and the lives of those fighting. 165 members of the AFoP were killed in action, with over 1,000 injured. Some reports indicate over 1,000 insurgents were killed in the siege, which also took the lives of 47 civilians. The fighting drove over 400, 000 people from their homes.

        Note the fairly low number of casualties in terms of fighters on both sides. YouTube has been censoring the footage as per a long standing policy but people who have seen it claim basically its Dresden post WW2

        So now multiply that times ever Blue Hive save a few around the Imperial Capital and throw in massive numbers of well armed feral people and deliberate attacks on all infrastructure by both sides

        Not good.

        In order to convince people to accept that level carnage you need enough followers for you ideas the Islamist insurgents there did which the Right does not and will not. Even the Left isn’t that determined now

        Since the Right and to a degree the Dissident Right won’t even seek power they are are useless

        They might respond with force to enough affront but leave me alone is not an ideology and won’t work

        Learn to rule cities or fail, end of story/

      • Calsdad, I agree. While we may not be stalwart, steely-eyed Minutemen, the other side has even more clowns and incompetents. It is hardly an implacable monolith. I have had more than one programmer tell me that the Internet is just one giant patch, always on the edge of failure. I have a friend who wrote code for the Navy’s cruise missile program. According to him, it was one cluster***k after the next, and, although he was very well paid (he worked for a contractor) he finally quit out of frustration and became a dentist. I personally have seen elaborate security systems installed on AF bases, and then fall to pieces within a couple of years because of no maintenance or poor maintenance.

        It appears to me ZOG is loaded with passive-aggressive pussies, and a few zealots. Regarding the government, nearly everybody is there for the check, and that’s about it. I see more and more institutional energy being required for diminishing returns. By the way, from what I’ve seen of Scotland, it is no different. For my part, I’m old and don’t give a damn, so I would be happy to grab my rifle and report to my unit, except that there is no unit nor the prospect of one, and I don’t want to go out as a useless joke.

        I mostly mess with my aquariums these days. As far as I know, DHS has not yet infiltrated the tropical fish hobby.

  18. The question is why would the other side give up control of something so powerful. The tech companies are ideologically in line with the elite and their soon-to-be permanent majority of black and brown voters. Why would some President Harris type want to give up that power? It’s used against whites, particularly dissident whites, not her people.

    Until whites form themselves into a political force (or some other force) that inflicts pain on the other side, they won’t stop.

      • Well, Trump tweeted about it!

        LOL!! And we have a winnah! Best comment ev-ah!

    • Until whites form themselves into a political force (or some other force) that inflicts pain on the other side, they won’t stop.

      Which is why the tech giants have made White Supremacy/Nationalism/Identity the new Nazi.

      • Exactly. Its the tech version of “its ok to punch a nazi”: we decide who is a nazi, then we punch the nazi because right side of history.

        Convenient that big tech has unmitigated access to all matters of public and private behavior such that both adjudicating who is a nazi and punishing said nazi are seamless, instantaneous, and under the cloak of ‘private enterprise’.

        Google-mastercard can ruin you or your business for crimethink, with or without the government.

        Whats more sinister is that (a) the timeline is infinity; and (b) there is no effective opt-out.

        You better bake that rainbow cake. But the tech overlords are under no obligation to provide their services to raciss.

    • Exactly. There is no political solution. Our institutions are not worth our attempts to save them.

      White interests and white solidarity are our only path forward.

      We can fight a million small battles and get nowhere or we can fight 1 big one through a show of numbers and unity.

      Networking off the grid is where we should be focusing our efforts. There are many paths to follow. You can be an international man of mystery like TheZman or you can work your own neighborhood. Let’s all commit to doing something off-line.

    • Spot on. Big Tech is sync with the ruling class so there is no political way we can change their behavior.

      So the solution may very well be to let a million flowers blossom in Silicon Valley.

      As for us whites, forming into political groups is impossible. It’s been like that for a very long time. All we can do organize off grid, and build local groups that leave no digital footprint.

      The only digital tracks we should be leaving soon are ones meant to confuse and mislead Big Tech.

  19. Anyone who has worked in the insurance or healthcare industry is educated on HIPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) and becomes absolutely paranoid about protecting patient information. There are specific rules that are enforced by state and federal government and violations open up companies to prosecution and civil lawsuits.

    If our “leaders” weren’t bought, there would be similar rules for the information on your electronic devices.

    • That’s the heart of the matter. Health care played by the old political rules, where they lobbied Congress and accepted the results. Big Tech bribes and blackmails Congress to control legislation. They probably have done the same with the big media players.

    • I’ve only ever seen HIPAA used to obstruct people you actually want to know your health information. Whenever you have someone like government or employers you’d like to keep in the dark, forget it.

      • I worked at a Laboratory company – huge firewalls around patient data. I could tell you how many Lipid Panels and HIV tests we performed any given month but I never got within a mile of knowing WHO we performed them on.

    • HIPA makes some health care providers so crazy that my wife was actually told recently that she couldn’t see her OWN medical data because of HIPA.

      • One thing you are absolutely not allowed to do in healthcare is look up your own record, or your family members. It often will flag your account for administrative review. They emphasize that we need to go through the same procedures as everyone else.

        • @Outdoorspro. Not being able to look at your own record is nonsense. By the way, they are even doing this with doctors now. There is a debate going on right now in the medical community,which has been spurred in part by this question: who owns the patient record? The debate used to be whether it was the doctor or the patient. Now the question is whether it is the property of the patient or some faceless megacorporation that wants nothing but money from you or from the government. I think if this issue boils down to the public level we will see it answered by John Doe saying that those records belong to him.

          • “‘Tis a consummation devoutly to be wish’d.” But I rather think that John Doe is blissfully unaware of just about everything.

        • Not being allowed to see what they’re storing on me is ridiculous. Especially considering the underhanded ways employers want to use this data to fire less ‘healthy’ people. They make me do a ‘wellness’ assessment every year if I want to get any company match in my HSA.

    • Government can make it nigh impossible for us hoi polloi to access information about each other, but we can rest assured that government itself can do whatever it wants regardless of HIPA or other so-called privacy safeguards. Investigative organs like the NSA, FBI, CIA, IRS etc can access our most intimate medical, financial, biographic, biometric, or other personal information in minutes with a few keystrokes or a phone call.

Comments are closed.