Amerika

The ephemeral “transitory” nature of today’s communication became quite noticeable when Hillary exclaimed: “What difference does it make?”

At 3:00 am lives were on the line but four hours later no additional lives were affected. Within four hours even (and especially) American lives did not matter anymore, to such an extent, that in four years she has forgotten about Ambassador John Christopher Steven’s brutal rape and murder by Muslims.

An alternative option was experienced yesterday when my son was taught (at school) that Jesus just walked away when people spat on Him. That was deemed the right thing to do because time heals everything.

But today it is not an option because my son can’t in typical stubborn fashion shrug his shoulders and say, “I don’t care,” because “time” is not available anymore.

Hillary did not learn from her mistakes and the people that (will) spit on my son, will also not learn. Therefore, time is still important, not to heal, but to prepare, recuperate or to re-group: not to defend, but to attack.

Social media reduces “time available” to interact with normal people and as such cause mental effect on such users. But I would like to take a different approach to re-energize “time” in the #altright, towards politically motivated thinking of project schedules, milestones and deliveries.

Since the concept of time has been simplified into disconnected “transitory” snapshots (by media), the opportunity is herewith taken to re-construct two separated snapshots into a coherent time-based snapshot (as an illustration).

The first snapshot appeared on August 29, 2016 with the release of Robert Stuekers’ book The European Enterprise: Geopolitical Essays, which hypothesies that that imperial “structures” are being replaced by rampant globalist structures, and argues for a renewed European approach. Globalism has been going on for ages (actually) and it is therefore no wonder (from a project manager time-based perspective), that deliveries could be expected in the current year.

What few of us realized, is that we have been complicit. We are actually inside this project; we are not outside on some island philosophizing the merits of globalization. That was already done 20 years ago. The concept of globalization was formulated after WW2 resulting in slowly accelerated implementation schedules using technology. The acts and outcomes of this plan is (still) neatly categorized and filed (away) by historians under an assortment of bewildering categories.

But time is fleeting, because merely a month later in September 2016 (according to a next disconnected Twitter snapshot), Tom Bower published a book called Broken Vows, Tony Blair: The Tragedy of Power. This is categorized as a biographical book describing the working life of Tony Blair over thirty-odd years in 600 or so pages. The timing of its release may not bode well for the Presidential aspirations of Hillary Clinton, because Blair also failed at representing “labor,” used the same #PayforPlay strategy, had similar email problems and pushed the same open borders policies.

Tom Bower did us the favor of providing a practical view of the globalist project that we can digest in a re-constructed time-based snapshot. It provides actual proof of the Globalist Geopolitical project also discussed by Robert Stueker, and in doing so exposes The Bush Dynasty, the Clinton Dynasty, NATO, UN, World Bank and the British free-fall to Brexit. (Even the Russian drive to a multi-polar scenario)

And within all this, as Mike Cernovich said, “Yet, here we are.” Within one month, we had access to the written words describing sixty years of effort that does not show any sign of changing course. This is not a Titanic where everyone is going to die, it is a Dark Organization with the express objective to stifle dissent, destroy the middle-class and keep those dazed masses of any race or identity where they belong – away from the Establishment. In other words: screw civilization; the Elites will just keep whatever they have taken, thank you very much.

American common sense thinking has been totally undermined by this liberal-democratic ideology thereby affecting and literally scaring the average citizen into submission by psychologically using politics-of-fear such as “the Russians are coming” etc. This can be compared to being in a burning home where the owner just wants to run to the outside. The opportunity not to be missed however, is that many “owners” have realized is that this (right here, right now) is a creative burning platform galvanizing each citizen to start a dialogue on real issues.

The first thing to consider when thinking about the liberal Tony Blair, is that he was elected by the Labor Party which is similar to the US Democratic Party. But after his resignation his labor constituents refused to say “Thank you” essentially because he broke his vows. Also, knowing that the New World Order push liberal-democratic ideology as their preferred political solution, makes a review of his “liberal mind” even more interesting.

According to the book The Liberal Mind: The psychological causes of political madness by Dr Lyle H Rossiter, the following deductions can be made:

• The strength of the community is destroyed by Government usurpation of welfare.

• The liberal state is a proper source from which to gratify the longings of the people for various forms of parental care.

• Infantilizing people result in a broad based crippling of their competence to the detriment of those people.

It is clear that the reason the NWO is pushing liberal democracy is because they know they will benefit from its failure (e.g. Soros). That it will fail is certain, but then as Hillary said: “What difference does it make?”

When looking at Blair through a liberal lens, knowing, that he knows it is a flawed ideology, makes the revelations of his conduct even more insightful. Therefore, knowing that he is going to fail motivates comparison of his actions to those described in Jim Collins’ book How the Mighty Fall. In this sense it could serve as measurement of how civilizations fall as well.

The commonality between the Bower and Collins books is that they refer to a chronological order i.e. organizations fail in sequential fashion and biographies are also recorded in sequential fashion. What was found, incredibly, was that the biographical chapter headings reflected the same language, used as markers that indicate organizational failure.

Therefore, without requiring in depth evaluation, it is quite apparent, that strong language similarities exist between these two books, as can be seen in the table below:

Number	Collins: Sequential Organization Failure Markers	Tony Blair Biography
Stage 1.1	Success entitlement, arrogance	Part 1: Chapter 1 The beginning (of “New” Labour 1997) Note: The “exuberant” language preferred by Nr. 10 p 221 Note: the adopted “language” was used to disguise the reality of Government p 221
Stage 1.2	Neglect of primary flywheel	Part 2: Chapter 19 The same old tale (not fixing bureaucracy) Part 3: Chapter 44 Targets vs Markets (it’s all been a failure 2006)
Stage 1.3	What replaces Why	Part 1: Chapter 7 Old King Coal (support uneconomic coal pits)
Stage 1.4	Decline in learning orientation	Part 1: Chapter 6 The Battle plan (unable to wage foreign wars)
Stage 1.5	Discounting the role of luck	Note the phrase “vainglory” on p 67 Blair selling military benefits he has no idea about.
Stage 2.1	Unsustainable quest for growth, confusing big with great	Part 1: Chapter 4 The Gospel
Stage 2.2	Undisciplined discontinuous leaps	Part 2: Chapter 20 The Blair “which?” project?
Stage 2.3	Declining proportion of right people in key seats	Part 2: Chapter 21 Instinct and belief (Appointing unqualified people based on loyalty)
Stage 2.4	Easy cash erodes cost discipline	Part 3: Chapter 43 Cash and consequences
Stage 2.5	Bureaucracy subverts discipline	Part 1: Chapter 8 The wall crumbles (migrant policy masking) Part 1: Chapter 10 Frustration (teachers)
Stage 2.6	Problematic succession of power	Part 3: Chapter 47 Self-destruction (last 9 months of premiership)
Stage 2.7	Personal interests placed above organizational interests	(Blair did not see “one” organization)
Stage 3.1	Amplify the positive, discount the negative	Part 3: Chapter 41 The Great Game (Afghanistan/Iraq)
Stage 3.2	Big bets and bold goals without empirical validation	Part 2: Chapter 22 Hither and dither (Attacking Iraq)
Stage 3.3	Incurring huge downside risk based on ambiguous data	Part 2: Chapter 23 The bogus students (Migrants)
Stage 3.4	Erosion of healthy team dynamics	Part 1: Chapter 9 A Government adrift
Stage 3.5	Externalizing blame	(Blair never trusted officials)
Stage 3.6	Obsessive re-organization	(Blair was re-elected twice resulting in 3 re-organizations)
Stage 3.7	Imperious detachment	Part 2: Chapter 31 Knights and knaves
Stage 4.1	A series of silver bullets	Part 1: Chapter 13 Saving the NHS
Stage 4.2	Grasping for leader-as-savior	Part 2: Chapter 32 Restoring tradition
Stage 4.3	Panic and haste	Part 2: Chapter 33 Lies and damn’d lies
Stage 4.4	Radical change and revolution with fanfare	Part 2: Chapter 34 Sabotage and survival
Stage 4.5	Hype precedes results	Part 1: Chapter 14 Everything is PR
Stage 4.6	Initial upswing followed by disappointments	Part 1: Chapter 15 Clutching at straws
Stage 4.7	Confusion and cynicism	Part 1: Chapter 17 Unkind cuts Part 2: Chapter 35 Confusion in the ranks
Stage 4.8	Chronic restructuring and erosion of financial strength	Part 2: Chapter 36 Managing the mess Part 3: Chapter 42 The Cost of confusion
Stage 5.1	Hope (and leadership)	(Blair’s hope was always foreign)
Stage 5.2	Denial (or capitulation)	Part 2: Chapter 37 The Devil’s kiss Part 4: Chapter 48 Gun for hire Part 4: Chapter 49 Tragedy of power

 

If readers were to absorb the failure marker language before attempting to read the biography, they would be amazed how many more similarities exist within those chapters as well. However, in depth investigation to assess the state of British civilization would require a wider approach, to include the decline from Thatcher, Blair, Brown to Cameron and Brexit. For the purpose of this writing, it will suffice to show that we are still sitting in the same boiling pot Blair loved so much. (He loved it because we sat in it)

The question (for us) on how to get out of the boiling pot (not Blair or Hillary), is addressed by Jim Collins where he wrote as follows:

“Not all organizations deserve to last.”

“Institutional (global) self-perpetuation holds no legitimate place in the world.”

“You can be profitable and bankrupt”

“The point of the struggle is not just to survive, but to build an impact that makes a distinctive   impact on the world”

“To accomplish this requires leaders …that can find a way …in pursuit of a larger cause than mere survival (and larger than themselves), while also maintaining the stoic will needed to take whatever actions…”

Based on above it is possible (for us, not Blair) to get out of this dark civilization as described by the biography. But the following realistic psychological “adjustments” need to be attended to as well:

• The infrastructure of human society consists of biological nature and personal relations.
• Balance between freedom and safety is social cohesion
• Social cohesion requires autonomy and mutuality
• Social cooperation assumes voluntary basis and self-belief
• Impaired people are not able to function towards social cohesion (e.g. should not vote), but despite this they will still vociferously claim social cohesion as a “right.” This is because their mere “biological” presence allows a claim to mutuality. The problem with this is that the typical rights conferred to a fully “democratic” citizen will now be conferred to someone void of autonomy.

In summary, the “negative” geopolitical and political status quo in Western civilization is ongoing since the Second World War. This has been recorded and is publicly available. In addition to this, psychological and management books published over the same timeframe advanced the requirements for “positive” conduct, confusing us into thinking “somebody” (like Blair) would act on it.

We thought our representatives would take care of all that because of “books,” but we missed the “negative” Elite dogma exemplified by Blair, because time and associated language was turned into disconnected snapshots.

Now that our platform is burning, especially reflecting our very own complicit life experiences, it will galvanize creative realism towards an implementation plan consisting of timeous psychological and organizational steps. This will include re-constructing time and burning the liberal language of Harvard, because losing it would leave no hole and won’t make any difference (to us).

Tags: anne mulcahy, harvard, leadership, management