IMO, After studying some of the USAID stuff, I personally think Wokeness was rolled out as a subversion weapon against the unified populist uprising occurring around 2010 in response to the 2008 financial crash and bailouts. Occupy Wall St started as a significant threat, unifying both left and right leaning populists against a common enemy. So the Intel agencies rolled out their#1mass movement subversion weapon, creating and stoking ideological splits in a movement which lead to infighting and ineffectiveness. image

Replies (29)

DJ's avatar
DJ 1 year ago
everything got very gay in 2010
Exactly.
atyh's avatar atyh
IMO, After studying some of the USAID stuff, I personally think Wokeness was rolled out as a subversion weapon against the unified populist uprising occurring around 2010 in response to the 2008 financial crash and bailouts. Occupy Wall St started as a significant threat, unifying both left and right leaning populists against a common enemy. So the Intel agencies rolled out their#1mass movement subversion weapon, creating and stoking ideological splits in a movement which lead to infighting and ineffectiveness. image
View quoted note →
I think you are right Add to that, the entire genre of rap was mostly a recruitment add for drug dealers to sell the product being produced by CIA-affiliated paramilitaries in the third world
Oh yeah. The minute Occupy was getting traction and popular sympathies, they mobilized the woke shit. In Zuccati, the crowds were coerced by guilt to adopt the "progressive stack", meaning that the people with the most intersectional profiles got the megaphone ahead of everyone else. After that, it became less about bankers and more of a progressive grievance fest. Look how quickly they turned "Black Lives Matter" into "Trans Lives Matter" This is a domestic intelligence tactic.
Smith-Mundt Modernizatiin Act of 2012 essentially gave the federal government great power to covertly influence public opinion. So yeah, another fine tool used to surpress the populist uprising.
But it moved beyond domestic. It became the favored destabilization weapon against european and even asian populations as well. all funded through USAID.
Not just domestically either. Popular narrative about USAID is that dems were funding “woke ideology” oversees, while there’s just as much evidence that conservatives in gov intentionally funded “woke propaganda ” oversees to stoke culture wars for the purpose of intentionally destabilizing or causing unrest when it served their desired agenda
in other words, woke was a psychological weapon used by Intelligence Agencies to destabilize groups and undermine governments.
Zac's avatar
Zac 1 year ago
You might be onto something
Those in power want to stay in power, Occupy Wall Street showed that the people actually have the power when they stand up and are counted. The State realised that and went to a lot of effort to divide the people again so that they could stay in their illegitimate power groove. Bitcoin started around the same time at Occupy Wall Street and has a similar effect - this is why the State has really tried to crush crypto-projects and decentralising efforts in general.
As someone who was at Occupy Boston, I wish my experience had been that it was so unified with regard to left/right. Maybe it's just that it was Boston, but my constant calls for coalition building with the Tea Party fell on deaf ears. But yes, getting your enemy to fight himself is often a winning strategy, as the Brits have known for at least 500 years worth of color revolutions.
Primate's avatar
Primate 1 year ago
If there’s proof of this link, I’d like to see it. I mean beyond USAID’s nebulous dissemination channels of propaganda funding via ngos etc
FriendsOfNN's avatar
FriendsOfNN 1 year ago
The people vs. "intel" will become increasingly more divisive...