How do historical agents of change get past the formidable defenses of elite vested interests?
Really; how does it possibly ever happen?
What odd creatures, who are not thought to be threats, are allowed to address the public, and BECOME threats to the system?
Donald Trump seems to be that kind of historical agent of change.
He was mocked and derided until a little after that quite working, then attacked by all means short of assassination, which continues.
I have never particularly liked him, which matters not at all.
He is not dead yet in a fight with what has been the ruling globalist cabal, and he has divided them some.
I see Greta Thunberg as such an agent of change.
She graduated to THREAT Monday at the UN.
Look at the responses!
They are from the whole spectrum of elites and pundit class, really impressive.
What Greta does is wrest control of the elite narrative away from the elites, by defining their EVIL (if they know and don't act responsibly, due to profit motive) , but stopping short of declaring them that, saying she chooses not to.
This invites the audience to judge them, an effective move.
Many attack her as "emotional" or "irrational" or "naive", which only defends the internal cognitive process of the name-caller from cognitive dissonance. Greta considers her analytical capabilities to be her "Special Power".
Calling Greta derisive names may reveal inner cognitive vulnerability.
I'll state my own cognitive model of planetary ecosystem, which is that fossil fuels, mines, and nitrogen from Haber-Bosch process have allowed our species to dominate about 95% of mammalian biomass with our own bodies and the bodies of domesticated animals.
Our species has done what any species has always done with available resources, which is to convert them into members of the species.
Historically, when our species has exceeded local carrying capacity, specialized species members have taken control of reducing the species through killing some members off, until the others could exist on the carrying capacity.
These are what we call "kings", "nobles", "sociopaths",and "ruling elites".
They are wired without compassion, which allows them to perform their specialized task without distraction.
We have a lot of them, now. They are especially well supported in the current economic model.
As the "deciders", they are using their special powers, focused only on selfish gain and power (their wiring) to destroy the mine-to-baby machine faster than it would otherwise be destroyed, as it ran out of oil and copper, etc.
As Caitlin Johnstone points out repeatedly, the elites need to control the narrative that guides us, the herd, in the directions of their choosing.
Traditionally, the elites have turned to massive war and slaughter, but the threat to all life, especially their lives, is too high from that now. Their impulses are thwarted at every turn towards massive war, by their own rational fear of death.
They really need to maintain control of the current system, which is their life support system, just as it is our life support system (readers). All of their interests are fairly short term, not past their own lives.
The current system is doomed by it's own constructs, especially the financial constructs, which depend upon exponential growth for steady state existence, the Red Queen problem (faster to stay still).
The financial system, global financial capitalism, must fail first, and that is some kind of blessing, because it will force structural change upon all of human society, including those now insulated from change by their positions of power.
Many of the insulated are not sociopaths at all, but competent worker-bees.
We are mostly a competent-worker-bee cohort, as I see it.
Revolutions succeed when the competent workers and the enforcers, together, change sides to the replacement social structure.
Resource redistribution will require multiple steps, I believe. The first step will be redefining what claims on actual, physical wealth, are considered valid, and within what context. That is a political decision, picking who loses what.
There are probably 4 times the claims upon current wealth (retirement accounts, investments, savings) as there is real wealth now, but that's ok as long as there is no run on the assets, and enough blood is drawn to feed expectations of the holders of that bubble-wealth.
The run-on-the-bank is being forestalled with more and more promises and lies. How long will it work. "Global recession" has apparently just been admitted, and money is flowing to US markets, deemed more protected.
This "money" is promises of future real wealth.
Real productive capacity to create wealth, like beef, soybeans, gasoline, electricity, houses, etc, is declining as the cost of getting oil out of the ground increases, because oil is the critical energy drive of so many parts of the economy. Shale-oil is mostly a money-loser, but losses are deferred, just as profits are deferred, so the Ponzi-scheme is still operational, and looks ok on the surface today.
The crossover of Ponzi-wealth vs actual production tried to occur in 2008-2009, but got papered over with more promises, trillions of dollars of promises of future wealth and comfort. There is a wide perception that the next reset will be the actual (first real) reset, and it is feared by all knowledgeable economic participants, certainly including myself.
Let me return to Greta-the-Threat.
Greta walked into the UN and pulled back the curtain, showing the man working the levers, and said,
"You appear to be lying to us and killing our whole planet for short-sighted selfish reasons, which is immature".
This did threaten the elite narrative, pushing herd-austerity through carbon-pricing, wage arbitrage and other "market-mechanisms".
It also threatens a lot of personal narratives, because it demands immediate, "radical" change, and implies a threat.
Greta clearly implied a future threat to all vested interests, certainly including us, dear readers.
This is the seething, angry threat of the young-and-robbed, the threat of pitchforks and mass killings.
French Revolution, Bolsheviks, Krystallnacht, Cultural Revolution, and Killing Fields come to mind.
Greta is the first to raise this threat in America, and in the Imperial city of New York, at the United Nations.
I think belittling her and trying to put her in her place won't work, because she embodies the core archetypal threat message.
I also do not think that counter-offers will be made soon, though many must be in consideration at various elite levels.
The black flag threat of class violence against the elite rulers has been planted on a small hill in new York.
There it flies.
Tulsi Gabbard may become a historical agent of change.
She's against the wars of empire, and with first-hand knowledge of war.
She's sure. That's necessary.
Tulsi has shown up with over 2% support in so many polls, that another one was finally in the list the DNC had to accept for qualifying..
She will be in the October Democratic debate(s). Will she be in the same debate with Warren and/or Sanders, if there are two?
Will Joe Biden give up his spot?
The DNC announces tougher inclusion criteria for November debate. Who will get weeded? Who won't get weeded? Now taking bets.
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) is certainly the most interesting and 'outside-the-establishment-box' candidate on the Democrat side running for president — a "Ron Paul of the Left" of sorts given her outspoken criticism of US regime change wars and standing against foreign policy adventurism as her central message.
She even once met in 2016 with then President-elect Trump to discuss Syria policy and non-interventionism at a private meeting at Trump Tower just ahead of his being sworn into office, after which she said both agreed to resist "the drumbeats of war [on Syria] that neocons have been beating to drag us into an escalation...".
And now she's resisting calls for Trump to be impeached, saying it would be "terribly divisive". She told "Fox & Friends" on Tuesday that she'll remain consistent to her message that the road to 2020 can only be found in a clear victory and mandate, saying it's for "the American people... making that decision" of who is in the White House, not impeachment.
The White House will release "whistleblower" complaint, legal analysis, and Ukrainian presidential phone transcript by tomorrow, Thursday.
Rudy Giuliani went on TV this morning and fired a broadside at Biden and Obama.
