Staff

Trump Rumbles! The battle between alt tech and big tech truly begins!

Bill Collier June 27, 2021

Donald Trump joined the alt tech platform, Rumble, a YouTube competitor launched in 2013, soaring past 175k channel subscribers in 24 hours. With this we may say the battle between alt tech and big tech truly begins, albeit with alt tech starting very far behind big tech in every metric.

The move comes after much speculation the deplatformed former President would join multiple other platforms, including Twitter-like alt tech platform Parler. But some consider Rumble both a more stable and long-lived platform that isn’t as prone to crashes as the other platforms.

Expectations that many more users will flock to Rumble and that Trump’s account there will eventually eclipse his Twitter following may be premature as Trump had 88.9 million followers on Twitter. However, if in fact one saw anything approaching that on Rumble, it could disrupt the digital landscape as entities seeking to reach that audience would be forced to take Rumble into account for their advertising.

It remains to be seen whether this will significantly boost Rumble’s user base and make this platform a bit competitive with YouTube or even whether Trump’s presence there would be long-lived as this platform may have massive pressures from the corporate and media establishment to remove him. It is probable, however, that this will in fact double or triple Rumble’s user base over the next few months.

One flaw with the platform is that it is a digital platform and is less interactive than, say, Parler or Gab, unless you are producing video content. For non-producers it is more an entertainment platform they access than a platform they use to express themselves. People can watch video content on Trump’s account without subscribing to the platform.

As for President Trump, just how this enables him to connect to his user base and the world remains to be seen. Early promises of a Trump social media platform resulted in a solo micro blog that was abandoned and nothing more. It is not known if this move constitutes his final decision as to how he will approach having a social media presence, but the fact he has an account on Rumble may not necessarily mean his plans to create a new social media platform have been abandoned.

Our own effort to create a new social media platform, called “Upadaria”, as an e-learning, e-commerce, and social networking platform using gamification and a fictional future history, has shown the complexity in creating even a basic platform targeting tens of thousands of niche users. In our case, we are targeting more cosmopolitan but socially conservative Christians who enjoy gamification and immersive learning experiences and who desire to excell at life.

This audience is perhaps a few million people in the US and a few million abroad, especially considering this is a paid subscription based, not a free, platform. Creating a platform to reach the kinds of numbers Trump needs to make it viable is of a much higher magnitude in complexity. Our platform has absolutely no delusions we can become some form of alternative to big tech platforms or a minor competitor, but Trump will aim precisely at that goal and higher.

The work to build a platform that might be competitive with a major platform would be immense and simply having a lot funding would not necessarily shorten the development time. Trump’s platform, if it comes to pass, must be far more robust than our “Upadaria” platform because his target audience is at least 50 million people. The building of the features and user interface, security, hosting, and data infrastructure for such a task, not to mention the moderation and governance tools and manpower, may prove the biggest hurdles for Trump’s team.

We would not discount the notion a Trump social media platform is coming but its development may take more time than perhaps Trump’s digital team have estimated. It may also be far more expensive than projected with little in the way of a funding model to make it financially self-sustaining within even a few years. However, it is possible this new platform will have free and paid membership levels and, with Trump at the helm and all the personalities that would follow, it may be financially viable.

So far, the move to Rumble is perhaps a small opening salvo in the battle between alt tech and big tech for dominance of the digital space. Alt tech is not merely a David to a Goliath, however, it is a fly versus an elephant at this stage. Trump’s move to Rumble may actually, but it remains to be seen, make alt tech more like a David versus a Goliath within a few years.

We Are BLASTING Race Identitarianism As A Threat To Freedom

Bill Collier June 21, 2021

It’s time to bring in the big guns and blast away remorselessly at the edifice of a race identitarianism which could become, if continually provoked by the blatant race hate coming from the woke savage camp, THE major threat to freedom for all Americans, especially those who are either not white or who reject white identitarianism, like us.

We are Freedomists, we do not embrace racial identitarianism, we embrace ideas and ideals as our core identity and we reject the notion race is anything but a negative social construct that is a threat to human rights, human dignity, and human flourishing. Race is a myth and those who use it as a wedge in society or to shame or otherwise demean or limit others are of the same spirit as Adolf Hitler.

The assualt on “white identity”, something most all white people are not at all conscious of but are now being accused of gaining unfair advantage through, can only promote a white identitarianism reaction. In short, vilification of all white people as inherently racist and morally inferior to the alleged victim groups (POC, LGBTQ, etc) on the basis of this fictional “white identity” and “white supremacy conspiracy” pushes white people into a defensive circle.

Real talk here: identitarianism among “non white” groups in America today cannot pose a serious threat to white people who are 70% of the population and who control probably 90% of the wealth. This doesn’t make it morally good, we oppose all racial identitarianism, but it’s not the same level of threat.

The identitarianism of “non-white” “races” fomented by separatists and racialists, mostly the left, is morally problematic. But given the actual disadvantage these group have faced, it is understandable. Additionally, the fact the white “race” is some 70% of the population and that most members of other “races” are not very identitarian, means this has had little potential to harm anyone. But if “white identitarianism” becomes popular among most “white” people, it can seriously threaten the freedom of non-white people. As Freedomists we demand equity in freedom for all human beings, so clearly this is something we are alarmed by.

Is this nonsense about white identity being a mark of shame meant to bully white people, who are less likely to vote leftwing, into submitting to their policies? Is it actually meant to foment a white identity backlash to use the unrest as justification for more draconian violations of people’s basic civil rights?

It does not follow automatically that if white identitarianism becomes “awakened” in some way that the potential unrest it leads to could be contained. (The motto of the Nazi storm troopers was “Germany Awake!” and this is the kind of malevolent “awakening” the woke savages are seeming to want to provoke.)

It is possible that playing with such dangerous fire, awakening actual racial jingoism (white identitarianism as opposed to POC identitarianism and white supremacy as a counter to white guilt and white shaming) through unreasonable demonization of a majority of the population on the basis of an identity that they are not conscious of, would create something that cannot be contained.

So if we say “yes, white identity is dangerous”, we mean that if the majority of Americans, who are “white”, by the definition of the left, are vilified for being white, if their “identity” is treated as a badge of shame, whether they are conscious of that identity or not, then the result will be a sudden “awakening” to that “identity” that is itself dangerous.

The left are creating a nasty, self-fulfilling prophecy that white people are evil oppressors and all the world’s evils come from a white supremacy conspiracy to dominate the world for the glory and benefit of the white race. This is their narrative and, like the Nazis of Jewish lineage who hated the Jewish “race”, the white leftists find no irony in their anti-white racist bigotry.

Indeed, if you read the preachments of the left on the white race and substitute the word “Jew” for “white”, then you begin to see how truly vile and hateful this doctrine is.

Pushing “white people” into a corner where they have to hate themselves, give up every aspect of their culture and way of life, and submit to your fringe social experiments isn’t going to end well. The ACTUAL racists and white supremacists, infiltrated by the FBI who are positively fomenting this, must be loving this, and that is a very bad thing.

As Freedomists, we identify with Freedomist ideas and ideals, we are not racial or race conscious. We reject racial separatism, even the concept or there being any but the human race, and certainly any sense of racial supremacy. The idea of most white people becoming race conscious and feeling like it’s “us or them”, because they are so viciously attacked and shamed merely for being white, is q dangerous idea.

If most white people begin to embrace their race and the “advancement” of their race in an “us/them” paradigm, like the “oppressed” races are being encouraged to do, well, look for the rise of real white supremacy to a scale not even the FBI infiltrators and provocateurs can contain.

In such an event we Freedomists, who reject this kind of thinking, would find find ourselves both beset by the left if we are white or not POC loyal enough and attacked by the white pride loons, inspired and enflamed by the left and the FBI, for either not being “loyal” to the “race” or not being white.

White identitarianism as a jingoistic counter to the woke assault on “whiteness” is dangerous and if the left and the FBI, who seem to want to provoke this garbage, manufacture a “persecution complex” among white people, it could becomes THE major threat to freedom.

America Still Has Slaves

Bill Collier May 15, 2021

By Bill Collier- We have slavery in America today.

Everyone in prison for crimes they didn’t commit or that don’t warrant indentured servitude as a punishment is being enslaved unjustly. Everyone in jail or prison for doing real and direct harm to others is an indentured servant, because their servitude is justified.

Indentured servitude in prison, corporal punishment, restitution, suspension of status or privileges, suspension of rights, and even execution are all justifed punishments that absolve the land of the guilt of evildoers. To place a person in prison when it not justified is to enslave them, which is injustice.

The only way to absolve the land of the guilt of evildoers is to punish them in proportion to their crime, otherwise the land bears the guilt of all evildoers who knowingly go unpunished by the magistrate. We enforce law based, ideally, on our best understanding of God’s righteous and just standards for the benefit of all and we punish evildoers so that the land does not bear their guilt.

To punish an evildoer in a disproportionate way or to punish the innocent, or even to write laws that outlaw otherwise morally and ethically defensible acts that do no harm nor bring shame to the land, also brings guilt to the whole land. The only way to expiate this guilt so that the whole land does not suffer the consequences is to punish those who did these evil deeds.

To be clear, treating someone as an evildoer who has made a mistake and deserves correction, like a first time DUI where nobody was harmed, is itself unjust and the guilt of allowing that to happen is born on the land and, therefore, brings negative consequences to all. When you do this you have made them a slave.

People who deserve prison should be made indentured servants to the community they violated to expiate their offenses, and then, unless they have committed henious crimes deserving of death, given a path to restoration. But indenturing people to prison who do not deserve it makes them chattel slaves, and this is a crime against God’s standards righteousness and just standards for the nations!

Our country literally enslaves millions of people, a disproportionate number whom are black or minorities, because their imprisonment is without justification, as in their offenses do not merit enslavement as a punishment. There are many other punishments short of indentured servitude in prison that would suffice and, therefore, to go beyond these things is injustice, it is slavery!

My Stance On Trump

Bill Collier February 13, 2021

Opinion by Bill Collier- There are two opposing forces when it comes to Trump: those for whom he is the great Satan and those who have made him a totem for popular rage against the machine.

Both sides insist you join them or you are not a good person. If you don’t want to convict Trump, you are complicit in his crimes. If you criticize Trump and don’t see in him a banner for freedom or whatever, then you are part of the nevertrump establishment.

Trump has never been the leader of a spiritually moral freedom movement, he has not been an example of spirituality or moral virtue, not in his mannerisms or behavior or even his policies. Whether or not he is a great Satan and badnic doesn’t matter for two reasons: most of his accusers are no better than him and have no right to judge in others what they constantly do and Trump is no longer President.

Whether Trump can be or will be something of a force or benefit to some level of rage against the machine remains unknown. I have never, ever, felt he was our deliverer or champion, if be “we” I mean the righteous who love God and wish to be free to worship and serve Him in peace.

I have felt Trump was a means of throwing the machine off and maybe buying some time for building a spiritual and moral freedom movement based on mutual self-reliance and support. I discovered during the Trump reign that the people who supported him, to a large degree, were happy to make him their totem, “trust the plan”, and sit back while he did the dirty work. They weren’t interested in starting a local freedom cluster of some kind to become self-sufficient or to urge local officials to pledge allegiance to the Bill of Rights.

I know. I reached hundreds of thousands of people with such messages and the response was generally apathetic. Constantly being told to trust the plan and to “vote red” instead of seeing people act was the entire result for four whole years. Oh, it was all going to be better in 2020 when Trump and the GOP swept all branches of government and removed the old establishment types.

I did not believe that would be sufficient even if it did happen, and to be honest I thought it would. I also thought that if it did happen it would not really change the trajectory toward a decline of decency and freedom, with the former being the cause of the latter. I had hoped that we would see a delay and a reprieve, but, honestly, 2016 WAS that delay and reprieve and, for the most part, “conservatives” kept their focus on national elections and fritted away the breathing room.

In 2018, the feckless Republicans led by Paul Ryan and his merry band of outer party collaborators with the left lost the House after having thwarted the President and thumbed their nose at his supporters. Trump did his part by trying to bully these folks and burn bridges with them in stunning ways that I would never have conceived any professional would have ever done.

During those two years, we built The Trump Revolution page on Facebook to over 110,000 followers and every effort to urge these folks to not just sit around but to redeem the time and build local freedom efforts was ignored.

We wanted Trump to succeed but we also felt that he was no totem or substitute for local freedom-building efforts. Trump bought us some breathing room, that was the main thing.

Now that breathing room may be gone soon or substantially lessened. Our options for building freedom and insulating our lives from the freedom takers will shrink as each new law, regulation, or executive order are promulgated.

My focus and concern has moved past Donald Trump. He had all the power for 2 years and most for 4 years and he wasn’t able to make substantial and lasting changes. And now they want to cancel him thoroughly and for good then use his damaged brand as a weapon to silence or deplatform anyone caught having been a supporter. Whoever you are, if you suddenly feel the need to publicly flagellate yourself over your former support of Donald Trump, or even your unwillingness to pillory him every day since he announced his run, then you are not safe.

A political persecution has context that always go beyond the facts of the case.

In my upcoming book detailing a future civilization that emerges by 2147 AD, I describe a Crown Commonwealth of Upadaria as something like a more globally distributed empire of freedom that fulfills America’s promise, albeit in a novel form of sovereignty not limited to territorial sovereignty and statehood as we understand it today. Nonetheless, it has some superficial elements and uses some of the language we associate with states and governments.

This is relevant to point out that were Donald Trump to be a high official in this Crown Commonwealth, and instead of having one powerful head it has a plurality of top Officials, namely 37 High Regents, his conduct and rhetoric would have resulted in a veto, censure, and eventually removal. In our terms of understanding the right conduct of high officials, neither Trump nor his chief accusers and prosecution would pass muster.

Indeed, in this fictional Crown Commonwealth, many of today’s highest officials would not be able to be qualified through the nobility of merit in the first place.

When I am being asked whether I think Trump deserved conviction in his impeachment trials I find myself disinterested. Conviction or not, it matters little to me. It means nothing either way, it is neither a moral statement against Trump nor a moral defense. The context of the political prosecution and the people doing the prosecution actually do and must matter.

The ones throwing stones have themselves made a hash of the US Constitution, a filthy rag out of the Bill of Rights, and a mockery of our core ideals such as Unity in diversity, Popular sovereignty, Democratic equality, and Rule of law. None of these jackals crying out for Trump’s head are without equal or worse amounts of grotesque unrighteous sin.

This doesn’t mean Trump wouldn’t be convicted of using or misusing, even abusing and debasing, his office if he were the Chancellor of the civic government of the Crown Commonwealth in our fictional future. Oh, he wouldn’t have made it too far at all. But the people prosecuting and judging him wouldn’t have made it far either.

When a band of jackals argue over who the biggest jackal is, I choose to lose interest. It’s not my fight. I would have removed them all for many instances of abuse of their office and gross neglect of the people who elected them.

This is not a case of me saying, “Trump did bad, but…” This is me saying: a band of jackals are fighting over which of them is a jackal. I just don’t see how this is interesting or useful.

I recognize in this show trial and blatant hypocrisy that convicting Trump and somehow righting a wrong and protecting the Republic has nothing at all to do with this process. I recognize that the prosecution are playing dirty pool and have zero moral basis to judge others. I recognize that their true aim isn’t anything more than neutralizing their opponents and creating a de facto “democratic” one-party state where they have monopoly power.

Call that authoritarianism or totalitarianism or dictatorship, or whatever. The end result is less freedom for me. Convicting Trump wouldn’t make my life better or more free or do one thing to protect us from unscrupulous jackals abusing their office to our collective disadvantage.

You cannot separate a political act from its potential effect, be it harm or benefit, or from those who are engaged. This isn’t about any kind of justice or morality. If it were, my interest would be higher and I would have studied all the claims and counter claims more thoroughly.

Trump has, for me, not been a champion as I would prefer, nor a disappointment. I was not surprised that elections at the national levels were insufficient to move the needle toward America becoming that which we have yet to achieve: an empire of freedom with liberty and justice for all. I was not surprised that Trump could neither fully achieve lasting results for his own revolution nor that, even if he had, it would be sufficient or entirely beneficial. Some of his aims and goals were contrary to a freedom agenda that would benefit all.

The disappointment I had and have and that I hope people can prove to be without merit is that many who love freedom predicated on righteous standards and virtue did not redeem the time when they had less opposition and more opportunities. They did not build deeper and broader connections beyond mere national elections, they focused almost solely on this and nothing else and, in the end, now face a wilderness experience.

I have already heard: 2022 is coming, we have to take back the House!

And so it continues. What little time we may have before the options for building freedom locally and independently will shrink to a minimum is being wasted. As we focus on “winning the House” we essentially concede the next two years. And when that fails, they will start talking about 2024. Two more years, as more and more gaps for freedom shrink and close and your options become more scarce and expensive and as your risk of being punished for speaking truth to power also grow.

I can predict people will not like this article. They will say: vote red in 2022, trust the Plan, Trump’s got this! They will say all we have the Supreme Court and we will win back the House and the Senate. The Democrats will back off knowing they will lose if they keep this up.

What they won’t do is change their routine and actually connect with local freedom builders. They won’t attend town meeting and city council meetings and join in demanding they sign off on a Bill of Rights Sanctuary Resolution. They won’t build victory gardens or their own emergency energy facilities or even form clubs to prepare for disasters (we are NOT talking “militias”).

Trump could have behaved more like a leader than a reality TV star and he could have urged a return to the basics of personal moral virtue and local self-reliance. He could have echoed the kinds of things we have been saying, and I am certain he saw some of them. Instead, Trump let himself become a totem and promised that, as long as people donated to him and attended his rallies and then protests in his name, that he would defeat the swamp and Make America Great Again.

This didn’t happen. It doesn’t matter if he tried or if for a time he had things moving in the right direction. Like Josiah, Trump thought if only he could get rid of the “high places” and those who built them that all would be well.

All wasn’t well because the deeper spiritual renewal wasn’t sought and the more practical local freedom movement wasn’t nurtured: people weren’t paid to professionally broadcast a vision and organize people and then mobilize them for action.

Our inability and unwillingness to at least FUND a local-to-national effort with professionals being paid to SERVE the movement, instead of the other way around, is what will be the end of freedom in this land and the end of our Union unless things change.

This has always been my focus and my prize and it has eluded me. Guys like Trump have always managed to suck all the air out of the room and garner all the support and energy for things that cannot last.

The left has built a solid local to national infrastructure and even its own culture-bearing institutions and has patiently done so do for almost 100 years. When they lose they look for 100 ways to pay 100 professionals to try different avenues and approaches to move the needle even just a little.

We look for big sensational wins and when that doesn’t happen we sulk away and take our marbles home with us. The PEOPLE we need to actually administrate a “revolution”, as the left has, are left to starve on the vine while the “well fed” right, the ones now screeching about Trump, live off the fat of the land and our donations and patronage.

After the loss, regardless of how you think it was orchestrated, we should have redoubled our financial support for efforts like The Freedomist. We had enough support to reach over 15 million people and begin to get a positive “America Is Good” message to counter the Cancel America crowd. But after the election when we could have kept the momentum going, support did not come from other sources and momentum was lost.

There is no digital to local movement to start to win back the land from the freedom takers one municipality and county at a time. We have no patience or wisdom in this. We, collectively, looked to Trump to save us when we should have been saving ourselves. We should have redeemed the time.

Is it too late?

First, I don’t think the current trajectory is straight down. I do think electoral victories are possible if we are vigilant against election and voter fraud in the places where we have control, e.g. where we have majorities. I do think the freedom takers will have setbacks and face real obstacles.

Second, the process of consolidation is not overnight and not all institutions, I’m looking at you Counties and States, are totally controlled by the freedom takers.

Third, technology is still a decentralization factor that it will be more and more difficult to contain and block. People will find ways to opt-out and to remove themselves from the jurisdiction or awareness of the freedom takers.

It isn’t over yet. But it will be, eventually. If we persist in our present trajectory as a dissenting movement that acts like the Washington Generals to the Haarlem Globetrotters, then within a few years, maybe less, most of the gaps for freedom will be blocked or closed. We will witness the final curtain for freedom and perhaps because of this the dissolving of our Union.

As for Trump, he is neither the greatest Satan nor the great deliverer. He is a deeply flawed man who fritted away his own own legacy because, having made himself a totem, he could only focus on that.

But Trump benefited from the short-sighted hero worship of his supporters, he didn’t create it. And his supporters genuinely believed and wanted a better world that they thought one man elected to the Presidency could deliver if only they gave him money and went to his rallies.

Trump is not the issue here, one way or another, and that has always been my stance on Trump. We are the issue. Our own laziness and desire to see others do our work for us and our own failures to take personal moral responsibility for freedom in our own backyard are the problem.

If anyone should have faced impeachment in a classic sense of the term, perhaps it is us.

Gina Carano Firing Is Aimed At Intimidating Dissenters

Bill Collier February 13, 2021

Popular. Likeable. Capable. Like Pedro Pascal, Gina Carano somewhat wears her politics on her sleeve. Like Pedro she made a comparison of her opponents to the Nazis, which is generally bad form in most circles.

But Pedro is being feted and adored and being offered new gigs while Gina is being sacked and pilloried.

What’s the the real difference, except their respective politics? Gina’s politics are not favored by the billionaire robber baron class who use wokeness and race as a form of distraction from their many crimes against humanity. Gina is part of the dissent. Gina is a beloved actress who portrays a popular character. Taking her out of a hit series that finally racked up some wins for the whole Star Wars franchise, crushed under a cancel freedom agenda out of step with its fans, is pure messaging.

The old adage about tyranny is that one doesn’t have to shoot all the rebels, one only has to publicly execute a few to frighten the many.

While milquetoast faux “conservative” Ben Shapiro is also banging on about the same theme, and has offered Gina a new gig doing a movie with his outfit, the shrill-voiced, fast-talking lad also sided with Nikki Haley in her refutation of President Trump. She was basing her rather shrill depiction of a denouement of the Trump saga on outright fabrications and lies by the corpostate-party press.

Shapiro on one side of his fast-moving, ever-flapping mouth hails Gina as the stand-in for all the dissenters while, on the other hand, gleefully sucking up to the cancel America crowd when it comes to President Trump. While we support Shapiro in doing a movie with Gina Carano, it is disgusting how easily distracted the man is from the truth and the big picture.

Our concern and objection isn’t that Shapiro criticizes President Trump, it is his inability to recognize the real “play” here that is designed to distract everyone from the deeper and more dangerous problem. If Trump was a so-and-so and badnick, the people opposing him and wanting him destroyed are far worse and more insidious.

The whole edifice and infrastructure of freedom is burning as crazed arsonists light more fires and Shapiro wants to carp on the guy across the street who won’t mow his lawn, which the crazed arsonists want you to also be focused on.

Gina Carano is in fact a warning to all dissenters- if you don’t comply with the cancel America agenda, you will be canceled yourself. Period. This also applies to President Trump: what better “public cancelation” could there be?

We are not of the sort to make anyone, including Trump, our totem for freedom. Trump has many deep flaws that we equate as much to his own will and character as we do to the moral and spiritual decline of this country’s culture. Trump was no worse for your own welfare and freedom than any other President, perhaps better, and the shrill-voiced over-the-top reactions and denunciations of the entire establishment were never warranted by actual events.

President Trump did not, in the end, fully comprehend the forces arrayed against him nor the malevolent intent and implacable opposition to him as a symbol of dissent. Additionally, President Trump was all too prone to gift his opponents with many gaffs and erratic content that was easily inflated into hysterics to delegitimize him.

There are many cases where Trump’s words are twisted into hideous caricatures, but in many of those cases even a novice Public Relations professional would not have opened the doors to such exaggeration. As Trump has chosen to be his own solo voice in all things PR and has refused professional counsel, he is like a novice lawyer who is his own counsel in a major legal case of extreme import.

Turning this into an opportunity to illegitimize every opponent is beyond the pale. But Trump certainly brought this on himself and us and his over-the-top conduct was and remains worthy of censure. So, why not censure him and move on?

The point isn’t that President Trump colors outside the lines or does things we or others may consider also beyond the pale. The establishment doesn’t care if you are beyond the pale in terms of morality or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. They only care if you encourage dissent from their cancel America agenda.

Many Presidents have gone further than President Trump in fomenting crises and lowering the discourse. They were doing so in a way that didn’t encourage actual meaningful dissent from the ruling class of the corporate-government industrial complex. (In our shorthand we call this the “corpostate.”)

Gina Carano could have chosen her form of dissent better, as could her co-star, Pedro Pascal have chosen his form of slavish mimicking of the corpostate’s cancel America agit prop.

But Gina was fired and Pascal was feted. See the difference? It’s OK to be a rube or even a nogoodnic if you are not fanning the flames of actual dissent.

Outright encourage your followers to burn, loot, and harass to make a political statement and that’s fine as long as your ire isn’t directed at those who truly hold power and exploit the nation’s institutions for their benefit at our expense. The red rags of race and wokeness, genderlessness, and all these other things keep everyone fighting and not paying attention to the ruling class as they dismantle freedom and cancel America.

The game is: keep the raging bull of rigteous indignation going after the red rags while you, the real threat, plunge spears into it until it dies. The raging bull is what’s left of your dignity and freedom as a sovereign spiritual being made in the image of God.

The true target of all this isn’t Gina, or even Trump. In Gina’s case we argue for innocence, whereas Trump hasn’t comported himself well at all, regardless of the reasons why or the betrayals and disloyalty he has had to endure which might drive anyone to lash out. One may understand that perhaps few would react better, but the totemization of Trump isn’t going to help us nor is the demonizing of Trump, even if you think it is deserved.

Instead of merely defending some stand-in for our own fight for dignity and respect as free people, we need to focus on the true enemy here: a ruling class who want to end freedom and cancel America.

Whether you are for or against Trump or a registered Democrat versus a registered Republican or Independent, you are the target here. Your slavish giving of your vote, your consumption of their products, and your under-compensated labor are demanded on pain of being canceled. You can riot and protest all you want against your fellow Americans and demand things of no consequence to the ruling class. But you cannot aim your words or actions at the true problem: a ruling class who think they own us.

We must aim our ire at the real foe and we mustn’t be distracted by red rags, like wokism or Trump or whatever. The real issue with the people wanting to cancel others is that they are not morally qualified to judge anyone.

We will stand up to the corpostate goons and for your dignity and freedom as a spiritually sovereign human being! We will not be distracted because we know, as with the firing of Gina Carano, that the real target of all this is our meaningful dissent from their cancel America agenda.

For this reason we urge you to support the Freedomist. Our effort to promote true local free press operations and the creation of freedom sanctuaries as well as to inform and inspire you with premium content deserve your support, we think.

Join us now! Click here for options.

The Need For New Money Solutions

Bill Collier October 21, 2020

Saving, investing, spending, and earning money depends on a monetary and financial structure that is in part archaic and in part increasingly politicized. Transactions can and do disappear and some financial services providers are now cutting customers off based on their personal politics.

Both the creakiness of the financial infrastructure and the growing political bias of providers portend problems, especially for those whose personal politics don’t align with those of the ruling clase who control these institutions.

The development of new money structures to transfer wealth between parties efficiently and without regards to the ideology of the participants is a critical necessity and a great opportunity for profit. This is the democratization of finance, whereby power and control shift away from essentially 20th century industrial structures controlled by the very few, to an open-source ecosystem with a plethora of diverse providers who must cater to the public, sans bias, or die.

This isn’t just about cryptocurrency and blockchain technology, this is about apps and new financial and trade technology that can reside on your handheld device. This is also about local efforts, such as local currencies and neighborhood credit unions tapping into this new architecture and simplifying the entire process. For instance, when the customer is custodian of their data, fraud and abuse are minimized AND regulations are dramatically decreased, thus reducing costs and increasing simplicity and smoothness.

The Democratization of financial services and technology that put the power in your hands and take it away from governments and mega corporations is not only essential but inevitable. Even if “outlawed”, this decentralization cannot be stopped.

Sustainability, NOT Global Warming

W R Collier Jr October 5, 2020

Bill Collier- In an article on the 8th of February, Christopher Booker of the UK Telegraph lambasted “global warming” and “climate change” science, joining a growing chorus of critics who accuse scientists of skewing data to prove their theory. Indeed, the fault line for the “global warming” debate is ideological and political, not “scientific.”

Critics of the global warming theorists point out that their solutions often lean heavily toward a top-down global “collectivist” approach. Some use the word “Socialist” to describe the global warming theorists. Even efforts by non-collectivists to produce a free market approach to effect reductions in “carbon emissions” have been rejected- evidently, critics point out, global warming can only be dealt with by resorting to some form of global collectivism that is managed by a small group of ‘experts.’

This begs the question as to what is or isn’t collectivism and whether critics are “red baiting”, but the fact the argument has come down to the alleged ideology of the proponents of the global warming theory seems to reveal that the “science” has taken a back seat to ideology, on both sides. Only time will tell if accusations against the “science” behind the global warming theory are true and founded.

For years, efforts to clean our air and produce what is called “sustainability” have been based on “global warming.” We were told that “in order to prevent global warming, we must reduce pollutants and we must focus on sustainability.” Sustainability is a move towards locally renewable or recyclable raw materials and alternative energy all of which have a “light footprint” on the environment.

Partially as a result of this fear compelling people to seek such solutions, these sustainable solutions, including alternative energy, have come down in costs. More and more advances are coming along making wind, solar, and other forms of sustainable energy solutions affordable to average people. Alternative building techniques, which city codes are still catching up to, such as cobb and straw bale construction, can so reduce building costs as to make adding on wind and solar power generation to each home quite within reach of average people.

Sustainability and clean air are tied almost inextricably to “global warming” and if, whether it is fair or not to do so, the whole theory of global warming is rejected by most people, then it may also be that concerns of clean air and efforts to create more self-sustaining communities will suffer the same fate. The picture of large plumes of soot-smoke pouring into the sky from factories and coal fired power plants will no longer concern people who believe that this has not impact on “climate change.”

One city has become the poster child for a move away from fossil fuels and toward sustainability- Peking. Here is a city which has days of such heavy pollution that people are forbidden to go outside, and rare is the day when the “fog” lifts enough for you to actually clearly see the city skyline. Perhaps all that smog will not do one thing to tick the global temperature up, but one can certainly argue that this smog is not good for the people, the plants, or the animals of Peking.

A precipitous rush away from fossil fuels towards sustainable energy is economically harmful, it is argued, and with some serious questions emerging about the science behind global warming, it may be tempting to drop the whole move toward sustainability altogether. The current EPA rules regarding coal-fired power plants are driven almost totally by global warming fears, for instance. While it may be argued that the EPA is moving too far, too fast, and all in the name of something fewer and fewer people believe is a real threat, the truth is that there are other good reasons to consider pushing forward, even if at a more reasonable and far less disruptive pace, with sustainable energy solutions.

Sustainable local energy is energy from locally renewable raw materials which local people, at the household level, are mostly in ownership control over. It means that the community, down to the individual homes and businesses, owns and controls its own energy resources and that the use of those resources has little to no negative impact on their air, water, or natural environment in general. Far from being only about global warming, it is about empowerment and it is about clean air, water, and an overall pristine natural environment being left to future generations.

Such solutions, however, are not proposed by many global warming theorists. Often their solutions focus on “one big system”, or “OBS”. OBS looks like this: a giant solar and/or wind farm owned and controlled by a corporation or government that distributes power through a nationally interconnected “smart grid” that charges consumers, you and I, high costs for energy. This is already happening and anyone who pays electricity bills knows all about this.

Sustainable local energy focuses on empowering individuals to become individually “energy independent”, at least in their household, by freeing them to use better and less expensive building techniques to shift the cost of building a home from the building to its energy and waste removal infrastructure.

Sustainable local energy is empowerment. It puts more wealth, more resources, and more control in the hands of the individual and removes much of the “middle man” fat of governments and corporations which currently control our energy.

As the debate over global warming devolves into politics and ideology, if people genuinely reject this theory, then it is possible they will reject and be suspicious of anything associated with it, including efforts to pursue cleaner air and sustainability in general, which are rewarding and beneficial even if global warming were conclusively proven to be a total myth. The danger here is that we will continue, as individuals and communities, to rely on OBS, whether OBS is sustainable or not sustainable, and we, as individuals, are thus rendered “dependent” on OBS rather than ourselves and our neighbors.

Trump Throws Down With Jack and Twitter

Bill Collier May 28, 2020

By Bill Collier, Publisher- Claiming to be doing his civic duty to clear up falsehoods, while at the same time saying he isn’t the arbiter of truth, Twitter’s Jack has stepped into a personal battle with the President. He also made a virtual declaration of war against the right.

At issue: Twitter decided to add an opinion piece from notorious political hacks (masquerading as “journalists”) to the President’s OPINION about mail-in ballots and the potential for voter fraud. The opnion piece presumes there is literally no evidence for or debate about voter fraud and mail-in ballots. This is not true, there is genuine debate and real evidence. (Even if, like myself, you don’t think mail-in ballots equal fraud, it’s not a closed debate!)

What these platforms are doing is raising the stakes. They have gained a dominant market position, so much so that it is not reasonable to think an American citizen can equally participate in the public discourse if they have limited or no access to these platforms.

Now, the solution for some may be to regulate the platforms. This is a fate for which the leftist trolls who run these platforms have only themselves to blame! Even if you instinctively recoil at the thought of regulation of this nature, watching these hamfisted tech lords get a little payback might be satisfying at some level.

The solution for others, such as Gab, a platform I own shares of, is to present themselves as an alternative and to tell the President to simply leave Twitter and move to Gab. Parler and Minds are taking a similar approach. It can be argued that if indeed the President takes this action, even if he doesn’t leave Twitter, it could change the dynamic.

In the end some believe these platforms will not always enjoy their dominant market position and if they artificially hinder the emergence of competitors, anti-trust actions could apply. For instance, issues related to payment processors punishing people and platforms for speech and thereby aiding platforms they have an interest in should be investigated.

The hypocrisy and selected enforcement by these platforms, which is always heavily focused on the most uncharitable and harsh judgment of the right and the most gracious and liberal judgement of the left, is beyond dispute. Let’s just say the science is settled and move on.

But do these platforms have a right to put their thumb on the scale? It’s a classic debate. I think the market WILL eviscerate them over this as and when new platforms emerge, and they are already beginning to. But I can only blame the close-minded political bigotry of the leftists who own the dominant platforms for provoking even anti-regulatarian conservatives into wanting to over-regualate their little empires into oblivion.

In truth, the shareholders should rebel and demand the leadership serve the market, and thus their shareholders, and leave their political bigotry out of their decision-making OR step aside.

When you take a proverbial wiz into someone’s cereal every morning, eventually they decide they’ve had enough with the insult. And the right have just about had their fill of the arrogant, condescending, self-righteous, political bigotry of the left and the platforms they now control.

We get that you lefties think the ONLY valid opinions are yours, that you don’t think you can be wrong, and that whatever you think or want to be true should be treated as “settled fact.” But we don’t care and we aren’t playing your little game by your assinine and unfair rules. That is the basic sentiment of the right, and these tech lords with their political bigotry are cutting away their market position. One day it WILL collapse. They will find that without the right, they will eventually not have a near-monpoly of the market and they may wither away and die.

Will Trump act on his threats and take action against Twitter, will the courts stop the President as they are of a wont to do, and what will Jack do as he faces the full rage of the President and the entire right who are none too amused with his doubling down over this misdeed?

Whatever happens, Jack has escalated the war between left and right and drawn a giant target on himself and his platform, as well as all the others.

Welcome To The Freedomist 3.0

Bill Collier May 25, 2020

GREETINGS FRIENDS!

My name is Bill Collier and I am THE FREEDOMIST!

I hope you join me as a friend, supporter, or maybe even a sponsor of this and other projects I am partnering with and promoting.

I am an author, web guru, researcher, and political professional with a vast and deep level of experience in national and world affairs. My interests and expertise range from marketing and business success to economics, politics, history, and military technology.

I will give you wit, intelligence, and liberty on a daily basis that will provide you with resources, advocate for you and the things you care about, be a watchdog against the bad guys, and do so in as educational and an entertaining manner as possible. You’ll decide if I do a good job by JOINING THE FREWDOMIST as a SUPPORTING MEMBER for $4.95 per month, when we release the program.

I hope you decide to join me so I can serve your good content that is unique and insightful.

EXCLUSIVE; DC Police Did THIS About A Hate Group Setting Up In Pershing Square

W R Collier Jr November 5, 2017

By Bill Collier- A reader sent us pictures they took of Pershing Square on October 12, almost a month before the purported Antifa/Leftwing “Resist Fascism” demonstration planned on Saturday. The reader was concerned because the sign on the hate group’s tent made it clear: they want to kill white people.

While a story ran recently in which a post alleging to be Antifa and calling for the killing of white people and Trump supporters, which proved to be a hoax meant to troll the alt-right. this is not a mere social media post. This tent was set up in Pershing Square in our nation’s capital. It stretches credulity to the breaking point to imagine this is mere “trolling” or that this is staged by some right-wing group to smear the left.

You wull observe in this picture the sign that forbids setting up camp in the park, as these leftist activists have done. There is no crowd therefore dispersal and removal of this group by the DC police would not be problematic. No doubt the DC police knew such activities were planned, as these groups have broadcasted their intentions to do this. But there are no police present and the person who sent us this did not observe any.

Now we go to what was on the tent that should raise serious concerns.

What you can clearly see here is that it says “kill whitey.” This is an illegal encampment making terrorist threats against a substantial number of people who live in, work in, or just visit DC every day. It is unmistakable hate speech, but, beyond that, it is actually a direct call to take the lives of people merely because they are white.

There is no defense of this.

Here you can see the whole illegal encampment with just a few people. Now imagine you are walking through here alone as a white person, are you going to feel safe?

Evidently the local police were not concerned that a group of people set up an illegal encampment in a public space in order to promote a call to kill white people.

CORRECTION: I originally said this was on Friday, before the big protest was planned, but I was mistaken. The picture was taken October 12th. This dispels the myth that these groups were not making such threats.