This is Seerov's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Seerov's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Seerov
The Suburbs
Recent Activity
Can you explain why think John Robb is an ego maniac? He seems the exact opposite to me? IOW, Robb appears very humble despite being a talented man with potential world changing ideas.
Toggle Commented Feb 7, 2010 on JOURNAL: Rodrik's Trilemma at Global Guerrillas
Both Democracy and National sovereignty are slowly being phased out. We have a transnational banking/media elite, so that means we don't have sovereignty. Next, Democracy is difficult to define, as even the old USSR had elections. What I see going away (which I consider to be most important) is the concept of "rights." The right to speech, guns, and association are in most danger. In fact, freedom of association went away in the 60's, and in Europe people go to jail regularly for "speech crimes." The transnational banking/media elite's strategy appears to be this: First, try to move as many people from the "Gap" into the "Core" as possible. This will create many problems which the elite will have to come up with "answers" for. These "answers" will require huge government agencies that will employ millions. If anyone opposes the demographic transition, they will become "an enemy of progress" and denied a decent way of life. Society will revolve around the idea of creating "equality." Because its impossible to create a society with equality of outcome, this will create a constant crisis environment. Everyday on the State media we will see "super-duper half true racially motivated hate incidents" (SDHTRMHI) that will be an exaple of what can happen to anyone who even thinks about opposing "equality." Communities will be forcefully integrated requiring certain percentages of each major ethnic group. This will cause more problems which will require more "answers" and more SDHTRMHIs. The end-state of the strategy is the creation of a big serf class (97%) and one ubermensch class (3%). To create this, a temporary technocratic class will be needed to run the machines. Because American education will be dedicated to "multiculturalism," most of the technical talent will come from Asia (where they have good schools that teach). Its better to have a foreign middle/technocratic class becuase they're less likely to start problems. But, eventually (becuase of technology) this middle/techno class will be "integrated? into the Serf class. The purpose of this class configuration in to create a class/race of supermen/womyn. This will occur through genetic enhancements that will do everything from increase IQ score, to allowing them to live for hundreds of years. The Serfs will be highly medicated on psychotropic drugs and continue the consumerist culture that the elites sell to them.
Toggle Commented Feb 6, 2010 on JOURNAL: Rodrik's Trilemma at Global Guerrillas
I thought the start of the Tea Party Movement was during the Bush administration's attempt at "comprehensive immigration reform" (read:amnesty)? At the very least, this was where the networks started forming. At any rate, one thing is for sure, the banker-media elite truly HATE these people. And whether people here like it or not, the reason is due to its "whiteness." I know, I know, people are going to tell me how their "best black friend" is a tea party guy, but lets face it, its a white working and middle class (WWAMC)movement. And nothing is more dangerous than a group of white people getting uppity with the banker-media elite. Commentators on the news actually call them "teabaggers," which is a very vulgar name. This would be like Right-wingers calling certain people on the Left "pole-smokers" for supporting gay marriage. What would happen if Glenn Beck started calling people "pole-smokers?" Speaking of Beck, John Robb is correct in pointing out why people like Beck are getting involved with this movement. People like Beck are used to make sure that Establishment controlled people are in a place to highly influence this movement. Its not quite a controlled opposition operation (like neoconservatism), but close, where it allows the establishment to influence it. One other possibility is that the Tea Party movement might be used to guarantee an Obama victory in 2012. If the power structure needs Obama to win, they may run a 3rd party tea party candidate to make sure a Republican doesn't win in 2012? I'm pretty sure this is why Perot ran in 1992? The power structure needed Cliton, so they got Perot to run which cost Bush the election. Perot might even had a chance himself, but started acting crazy in order to self sabotage. We'll have to see?
Toggle Commented Feb 6, 2010 on THE TEA PARTY at Global Guerrillas
PRCalDude, I'm not an immigrant nor is my real name "Seerov." Seerov is just an Internet name which is suppose to suggest (very arrogantly) that I'm a "seer of" the truth, or perhaps of some future trends. As far as SWPL happy talk goes, I understand perfectly why John Robb doesn't wish to discuss the issue I put forth. In fact, I sometimes feel I'm doing him a disservice for bringing it up at this site? But make no mistake, eventually this issue will have to be addressed.
PRCalDude, I commend you for being able to discuss this issue in a rational manner. From the very beginning of the RC discussion I've (very gently) been trying to get John Robb to address this point (the fact that RCs will at least initially will be very white, and that this is pretty much illegal in America). I don't care how much our media talks about the threat of terrorists or China or global warming, the biggest fear this elite has is the threat of the white working and middle classes (WWAMC) starting to pursue their own explicit ethnic interests (like every other ethnic group in America). Any little sign of this happening generally results in demonization to the point where people's lives get ruined. The media has the ability to shape reality and will use Orwellian techniques to do so. One tactic is the super-duper half true racial motivated "hate innocent" (like Jena Louisiana). The "facts" can be totally untrue but becuase most Americans don't research what they see on the news, these incidents work well to demoralize and condition the WWAMC to avoid any situation that might make them appear to be "racist." Just think what will happen if a largely WWAMC group of people declare that they have their own community with its own employment system, education system, health-care, and symbolism/heroes/faith. I can just see it now on NBC news: A reporter goes and visits the community school. The kids are asked about American history and becuase the kids don't grovel about "past injustices" we are told they're being taught to be "intolerant." Next, an anonymous call is made to the FBI about secret torchlight ceremonies involving "the children" and before you know it, the reality shapers are presenting a new super-duper half true racially motivated "hate innocent." The next day the FBI SWAT teams are kicking in doors, and so called "experts" come on TV explaining how "racism is still alive and well" and that we need a "war against hate" to combat this. The way I see it, RCs will only grow in prominence if the Nation State grows so weak that it can't stop them. This elite places "diversity uber allis" and will use the active duty military to enforce this. *For the record I for one don't wish to see the current American Nation State collapse. I am quite happy with America and have been given every opportunity in this country to succeed. I see the RC as a possible contingency plan if the State does collapse. I generally don't understand people who WANT America to collapse. Despite the corruption of the banker-media-academic elites, I still believe there is hope for this country and I still feel attached to America's symbolism and mythology. My feelings on America can be summed up with the Iron Question: Would I still put myself in harms way for this country? Yes, yes I would.
Seerov is actually pro-white-people. He cleverly appeared to be anti-white. This had two values. (Barry Glib) I'm actually pro-humanity. I like to hold hands with all of God's creations under a multicultural rainbow.
I don't know? Lately my TV has been full of images and stories featuring white people falling over themselves to adopt Haitian children (to the point of stealing them).
The biggest obstacle for RCs will be when the local "civil rights" agitators complain that RCs equate to "modern segregation" and/or that they allow people/firms to get around affirmative action laws. Don't be surprised if laws are passed outlawing communities that are "too white." Of course, if any other ethnic/racial groups wish to form their own communities this won't be illegal. In fact, these communities are "rich with culture" and "vibrant" while white communities are "hate-groups."
The growth of RCs will be a function of diversity. If you want RCs to grow, support open borders.
"Avoid COIN, the use of military forces to build functional nations, like the plague." (J. Robb) I couldn't agree more. The only long term benefit Iraq and AFpak has brought us is to give our armed forces some real world experience. Besides that, both of these conflicts are cost-benefit losers. AS you pointed out, we need a special operations centric force. We need a force that can take out networks and hunt individual men and womyn. The "boots on the ground" can be provided by locals (whether that be in Afpak or Idaho). The "big war" platforms I recommend would be those that allow the US to control the air, sea, and space. Of course, the people who command and operate these platforms will be a mix of government and commercial interests.
Toggle Commented Feb 2, 2010 on BYZANTINE STRATEGY at Global Guerrillas
I was also thinking about shelter. Why wouldn't this be on the same list with food or energy? Perhaps shelter should be though of as being covered under security?
Toggle Commented Jan 17, 2010 on THE RESILIENT COMMUNITY at THE RESILIENT COMMUNITY
I look at the RC a little differently. 1) Base products: (before anyone else, if the global system is disrupted, the RC will provide these products to the community): Food, water, energy, security 2) Secondary products: Healthcare (RCs may send promising young people to medical school to at least have family doctor capacities). Education (RCs will start home-schooling or start community schools. I think about transportation and information as organic to each product of the RC. It will require transportation for every aspect of the RC from food transport to the school bus. RCs will also develop products for "export," especially teaching other communities about resilience. Communities will find comparative advantages in the main products of the RCs, and the best ideas will spread rapidly. Communities will have their own systems, products, and operating procedures, but also their own myths and narratives that hold them together. Some communities will be more ideological, while other form just for econo-security reasons.
Toggle Commented Jan 17, 2010 on THE RESILIENT COMMUNITY at THE RESILIENT COMMUNITY
1) I too am wondering what is meant by "dominance over the information terrain?" 2) I'm looking forward very much to the RC book. 3) I wish John Robb all the best during this holiday season. I appreciate his work and consider it extremely significant in my own analysis of the world.
I just listened to the interview. The guy giving it was very objective. John Robb sounded confident and optimistic of the future.
Toggle Commented Dec 21, 2009 on RADIO INTERVIEW at Global Guerrillas
This is a great description of what you see RCs providing people. For all the holy talk about "multiculturalism," what the RC model brings is true diversity. abprosper is just repeating the mainstream marketing campaign's discourse inputs that the transnational elite want us operating on. Of course they don't want the "mom & pops" to succeed, the transnational elite is Walmart (symbolically and literally). They support the current "globalization" system becuase it places them in a position to create the "rule-sets" and act as "system administrators." RCs have the potential to be as creative as any so called "Creative City" (See:Richard Florida), becuase RCs will mix dynamic technology with a sense of family and community. Job/family/security/myth/narrative/meaning will be one. Why wouldn't you want to live this way?
Toggle Commented Dec 20, 2009 on LINKS: 18 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
This is a great description of what you see RCs providing people. For all the holy talk about "multiculturalism," what the RC model brings is true diversity. abprosper is just repeating the mainstream marketing campaign's discourse inputs that the transnational elite want us operating on. Of course they don't want the "mom & pops" to succeed, the transnational elite is Walmart (symbolically and literally). They support the current "globalization" system becuase it places them in a position to create the "rule-sets" and act as "system administrators." RCs have the potential to be as creative as any so called "Creative City" (See:Richard Florida), becuase RCs will mix dynamic technology with a sense of family and community. Job/family/security/myth/narrative/meaning will be one. Why wouldn't you want to live this way?
Toggle Commented Dec 20, 2009 on LINKS: 18 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
I was trying to figure out the importance of "sales," or learning to be good sales-people? With the rise of RCs, I can see a time when people try to "sell" the idea of "community" in order to build or untie RCs? These sales-pitches will probably be somewhat ideological (not just about profit)?
dagezhu, I'm talking loosely about two interconnected ideas. 1) First, I'm talking about developing a system where issues can be discussed in a rational manner. The MSMS controls public opinion through emotion-harvesting and neg/pos conditioning. As the system becomes more unstable-and the elites fear loses in power-they're going to depend on the MSMS (even more) to maintain discourse dominance. Groups of people who form communities will be smeared in MSMS and easily eliminated. Forums like the so called "No Spin Zone" within the MSMS feature pre interview conditioning, yelling over people, cutting off mics, and labeling. Normal people can't compete with the MSMS because the MSMS can reach millions of people and develop the back-story and narrative for anyone. The discussion system would be a fair way for all people to give their side. Resilient Communities will use this system to make alliances with other RCs. When the MSMS smears people for wanting to form RCs, people will rely on the alternative system of discussion to see if this smearing is really warranted. 2) Second, in general I'm very unhappy with the MSMS. I can't see how anyone can see it other than a propaganda and socialization system. I realize this is harsh, but it seems so obvious to me. More and more speech is being viewed criminally, and places like Germany actually lock people up for saying the wrong thing. Even the peer reviewed academic journal system is proving to be political. So I want a system that cuts out ideology 100%, and which allows for the discussion of anything without disruption. I guess all I'm saying is that I want to develop the fairest debate and discussion medium in the world. A system that would allow ANYTHING to be discussed.
Toggle Commented Dec 17, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
"Learn to use the invisible Internet, starting with TOR sites" (dawo) I believe that its unforchunate that we would even need such a thing? Is any "Internet" truly invisible? There's always going to be ways of beating the old firewalls. We need a discussion system that allows people to talk in the open without fear of negative marketing campaigns.
Toggle Commented Dec 15, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
I'd also like to add something on the "discussion system" and how this system ties in with RCs. In the future, if/when the RC model grows, people are going to want to form alliances with other RCs. It may get to the point where RCs/tribes/sub-tribes will have to determine what "legitimate discourse" is and build a true "Paper of record" that they agree upon. The mainstream marketing system can build a publicly conscious myth and narrative system about any issue or any person. The future of tribal life may rely upon how well people can communicate with each other outside of the mainstream marketing systems' influence. *I use the term "mainstream marketing system" (MSMS) to mean the aggregate of all the information that comes from the news, entertainment, and education information channels. The MSMS is responsible for managing the myths and narratives of the society. In the aggregate the MSMS is the socialization medium for our society. The MSMS television socialization is so influential (and powerful), that I can actually spot the programs that make up a lot of people's souls in America. I can literally spot Oprah people, or National Football League souled people. These different people actually depend on these shows for the spiritual nutrients, and their morality is derived from them. This morality is developed through images and emotional conditioning that TV can create. Everyone has watched movies that caused emotions in them. This emotion is synthesized with concepts, myths, stories, morals and suggestions, but most important, it has its own set of assumptions. Most people truly don't think freely, but react to a non-stop stream of conditioning that comes from MSMS. Any "system of discussion" must remove prior conditioning in order to be effective. The biggest creator of prior conditioning is the MSMS. The most productive communities in the future will be the ones that can always rely on a discussion system in which they can discuss anyhting.
Toggle Commented Dec 15, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
Hello dawo, I'll take your well thought out suggestions under consideration. thank you
Toggle Commented Dec 15, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
dawa, thank you for directing me to those journals. There has to be some way to discuss sensitive issues?
Toggle Commented Dec 14, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
"There's no reason to acknowledge or study them (or any other nationalists and racists) any further than stomping on them and forcibly shoving them out of any debate or situation." When I read statements like this on the Internet two facts become clear. First, people get very sensitive and belligerent when a group of European Americans talk about politically organizing. Second, some sort of system of discussion is going to have to be invented where people can discuss very sensitive issues. Rules are going to have to be thought up on how evidence is presented and no one will enter the discussion already labeled and considered the bad guy in all of it. There must be a zero tolerance policy for ad hominem attacks and people will have to back up any claim they make with evidence (not name calling). Any kind of aggressive talk that could even be construed as suggesting violence automatically disqualifies the person's argument. No speech is off limits as long as people act polite and respectful. People do use "hateful speech" but there is no "hate speech." Adults should be able to discuss any issue. If people bring data to a discussion they must present the data to their discussion opponent/partner in advance so it can be scrutinized. When people enter this "speech forum" they bring only their thesis and not any media created narrative that allows the powerful to pre-lable them. I don't see why this should be impossible to do? If we can't, we got problems.
Toggle Commented Dec 13, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
John Robb, you've wrote a couple futuristic fictional scenarios in the past. I recall one about the transition to privatization. At some point you should write one that features everyday life in an RC. It would be nice if it included the community's security operations.
Toggle Commented Dec 11, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas
Fred and Duncan, I think you're mixing up RCs with networks? Of course, RCs are networks but networks aren't necessarily RCs. RCs will definitely have a geographic component. This especially applies to the security "service" that RCs provide. Perhaps at some point we'll be able to own satellites that shoot non-lethal "lasers" from space to defend our friends across the world, but until then space (meaning geography) will matter. In fact, I would argue that living in proximity is the RC's greatest strength (after the glue/myth/narative that holds the tribe/RC together). Living near one another allows for economies of scale. I can understand why you see the transnational elite as a community. Without a doubt they share a common myth (the right to rule the world) and share assets to benefit their group. If you look at their families, they pretty much merry each other and socialize and go to school with each other. Their power and wealth allow them to make the world their own "RC" becuase they make the rule-sets and control the information flows. Non-elites (regular people) don't have access to these resources so geographic proximity is where they have an advantage. Their strength comes from the collective feeling of community and willingness to sacrifice for each other. My vision of the RC is a community where people live near extended family. People in the community will share energy, food/water, and other basic services. The RC will have its own schools and their own healthcare professionals (to include geriatric care). The people will share social spaces and spend time with each other which reinforces the strength of the community. Security will be spatial in nature where the RC will be a "safe space" for people who share the groups common mythology. The RC will have its own concept of the political. RCs won't have many of the problems we see in modern multicultural America. The group won't argue over issues like nativity scenes during x-mas, becuase an individual wouldn't be living there if they weren't on page with the group to begin with. Now that you all understand what I see an RC looking like, I think we can agree that the elites won't like this very much? In a lot of ways the elites want the right to operate as a tribe while expecting everyone else to be individualistic consumers. The RC model allows the common folk to even the playing field by forming tribes of their own.
Toggle Commented Dec 10, 2009 on LINKS: 10 DEC 09 at Global Guerrillas