The Subversion of Activism
Why fight against your enemy when you can control them with money, their addictions, and impulsive idiocy.

Recently, I learned what our opposition calls activists; useful idiots. A more direct term is a pawn, the pieces you place in front of all the essential chess board pieces. They say the same thing about the military; they're just as used as activists, and we all need to identify how our enemy plays us like a fiddle. There's nothing worse than believing that you are a "Freedom Fighter" when your actions are of service to those you think you're opposing.
Many don't know that very few cared about the death of Arch-Duke Franz Ferdinand; a growing cult manipulated the imperialist powers of Europe into a war few wanted. The war ended in a series of influenced revolutions that precipitated massive changes to how the elite governed the masses. See more detail on it here
Nobody wants to be someone's pawn, yet billions are anyway. The goal is to break the chains of external and internal tyranny so that we may step into our power as genuine sovereign individuals. An activist intends to advocate for that pursuit in civil society, while a soldier defends their communities from threats abroad. One tilts toward chaos in response to too much order, while the other tilts toward order to prevent destructive chaos from coming to their home. Essentially, the question is; is the enemy abroad, or is the enemy within? If one were to make both incapable of acting out their role with competence, then conquering your territory is just a matter of time.

Here in Aotearoa/New Zealand, activism has been under a constant state of subversion for around thirty-eight years. I've watched the last ten years of activism and observed its track record from the previous thirty-eight years. I have learned that activism is much easier to subvert than subverting the military. Worse still, few are addressing this issue; subversion is rampant throughout activism;Â activism has been unconsciously and consciously self-defeating.
The TPPA was one of the first things I ever protested against; thousands filled the streets of Auckland and Queen's Street. What was the result? It was a political rally for Labour. It helped them and NZ First pull the wool over everyone's eyes at the close of Key's nine years.
Are you an activist? What battles have we won for individual sovereignty? Are we winning in the struggle to uphold the mana of our environment and personal freedom? If the answers are yes, very few, and activism defeats itself, we've got some evaluation and competence integration to do! Let's look at the track record of our activist actions and the outcomes. TPPA? Rebranded. 1080? They've doubled the area of poison dispersal over 50 years, with parts of the solution coming from Goodnature and Les Kelly. Three Waters? We sent in over sixty-thousand submissions because the Taxpayer's Union, ACT, and National told us that was the solution. The Subversion of Farming? We tooted horns, wasted diesel, and distanced ourselves from people willing to go to bat for us. Unlicenced clinical trials posing as vaccines? We couldn't unite, got made to look like a river of filth, and went out in a bout of fire and fury. It's not all bad; we must look at ourselves, get back to basics, and draft a decent plan. First, who are we? What do we want to embody? Protestor, mob, or activist?


An opponent can best undermine the image and actions of its opposition by having a monopoly on attention. Thus, people resent those who pursue power competently and dishonestly. For a predator to thrive, it needs an abundance of apathetic and ignorant prey. However, if the prey were to overcome their apathy and act competently to remove their prey status, the predator would struggle to maintain the height of comfort it enjoys. Sun Tzu teaches predators (government, monopoly corporations, and greedy men) to manipulate prey (persons, men, women, and diverse businesses) into passive actions that do not advance their case for sovereignty. So, cui bono, who benefits from the subversion of activism? The one who profits off the failure of the activist.
Make sure you watch the full documentary to see how large monopoly corporations and governments use environmental and woke activists to further their own ends. Why fight your opposition when you can control them?
There are numerous international examples of activist actions being used to benefit the opposition, the sudden mass acceptance of climate change as the number one environmental problem is but one example. It's no coincidence that when the concept of hydrocarbon recycling becomes accessible, major oil companies dump oil and gas for rare earth metals and unsustainable renewable infrastructure. After all, if you can manipulate the marketing arm of society (liberals), you can make people buy into the stupidest of ideas, like shifting from oil and gas to mass mining and limited lifespan infrastructure.
Those with time, money, and resources subvert activism through contradictory ideology, passive-aggressive pacifism, trauma, politics, misinformation, fake activists, and unrealistic solutions. It works well because most activists are liberals who respond well to emotional rhetoric. Unfortunately, it doesn't take much to subvert direct action on those who desire an unrealistic utopic reality. Competent direct action would result in a better world that allows us more time to reflect instead of endlessly defending our rights. Most Traditional Conservatives and Classical Liberals work daily to bring a minor form of utopia to their lives; the time spent working on this is increasing because of the seemingly purposeful increase of inflation. This means we rely more on activists who don't live our over-busy lifestyle to fight competently in the trenches to keep things fair. Unfortunately, activists have become pawns for the opposition's aims of centralising power and wealth.
Herein lies the problem, how does the working class make activism work for them again?

Subversion works, and it works best on those who bend reality with their imagination. Ideas they think are good but are unproven through robust criticism possess them like a new religion. It makes it a challenge to set activism straight after decades of embedding confusing contradictions into the fabric of its role. We need to evolve activism into a governance structure that breaks down the monopoly of power in government structures. Currently, activism is nothing more than an influencing tool for establishment politics. If we fail, we leave the responsibility of monopoly break-up to our military. A coup does not look good, especially when the opposition monopolises media spin. Besides, what makes a military tyranny any better than a political and corporate one? So, if you're an activist, you should stop asking what your politicians can do for you and start asking what you can do for the people and the land. Start by asking - Who is the government? Once you know the answer, you'll know that promoting political solutions to government problems is the same as selling empty campaign promises.
