🧵This is the key distinction; Elves create in harmony with what is, while Sauron re-forms creation into what he desires.

Tolkien did not reject technology outright. He made a crucial distinction between technology that aligns with Natural Law (what he called Art or sub-creation) and technology that seeks to dominate and enslave.

He expressed this distinction through the contrast between the Elves and Sauron:

Elven “magic” (Art) is technology in harmony with nature and human flourishing.

Sauron’s “magic” is technology as a tool of domination, manipulation, and enslavement.

This is the essential framework for understanding the difference between good and evil technology in Tolkien’s world and in our own.
2/

Tolkien explicitly noted this problem:

“I have not used ‘magic‘ consistently and indeed the Elven-queen Galadriel is obliged to remonstrate with the Hobbits on their confused use of the word both for the devices and operations of the Enemy and for those of the Elves. But the Elves are there (in my tales) to demonstrate the difference.”

This means that most human civilizations have failed to recognize the fundamental difference between these two uses of technology.

The Elves are Tolkien’s way of restoring this lost knowledge.

🧵Tolkien’s Rejection of Bletchley Park:
A Prophetic Stand Against the Mechanization of the Human Soul and the War for Popular Sovereignty Under Natural Law

Tolkien’s brief involvement in training as a codebreaker at Bletchley Park during World War II is a little known yet profoundly revealing moment in his life. He left the training, finding it a waste of his time; but more importantly, he found it deeply troubling. His refusal to participate in what was, at the time, considered one of the most prestigious intellectual war efforts was not a rejection of patriotism or intelligence work, but a rejection of THE PHILOSOPHICAL IMPLICATIONS of mechanization, algorithmic control, and the use of technology to dominate human will. 2/
Tolkien understood that the greatest war was not simply one of military power, nor even political control, but a war of ideas; a war for the human soul. His departure from Bletchley was not a retreat from battle, but a strategic decision to fight on the front where the true war was being waged; the battle of METAPHYSICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL and MORAL REALITY.

🧵The Conflict Between Evolutionary Psychology,
Behavioural Economics, and Natural Law:

Why are they incompatible?

Natural Law is founded on the premise that:

Human beings are rational, moral agents endowed with free will.

Rights are inherent and derived from human nature, not contingent on government or social consensus.

Objective moral truth exists and can be known through reason.

Governance must be based on voluntary consent, with legitimacy originating from the people, not imposed elite control.

This is popular sovereignty and self governance under American Constitutional Republican Governance 🇺🇸🫡 2/ Evolutionary psychology and behavioral economics,
in contrast, posit that:

Human behavior is largely determined by biological instincts and cognitive biases, undermining free will.

Moral norms are adaptive, not objective; they exist as evolutionary strategies for group survival rather than absolute truths.

People are irrational decision makers who must be “nudged” or guided by external forces (governments, corporations, technocrats) toward “better” choices.

Governance should be structured around behavioral control, ensuring people make “correct” choices through incentives, deterrents, and psychological conditioning.

🧵The Technocratic Subversion of Decentralization:
How the Networked State Destroys Popular Sovereignty

The False Promise of Decentralization

Decentralization is the rhetorical🐍 selling point of emerging digital governance models, including the Networked State concept, smart cities, and blockchain-based governance experiments. The public is being led🍏to believe that:

🐍Governance is shifting away from centralized bureaucracies toward community-driven, decentralized systems.

🐍Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), Web3, and tokenized economies will empower individuals with greater self-determination.

🐍AI and behavioral science-driven governance will be “neutral” and more efficient than traditional government structures.

However, in reality🚩these decentralized models are embedding the very same behavioral control mechanisms☠️ found in centralized authoritarian states, except now they are automated😵‍💫, opaque, and nearly impossible to🍏resist. 2/
This transition to “decentralized” control achieves the following:

It DISSOLVES TRADITIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE and replaces it with private AI driven rule outside the reach of national legal frameworks.

It operationalizes mass behavioral modification using evolutionary psychology and behavioral economics to ENGINEER COMPLIANCE AT SCALE (but through digital) rather than physical, enforcement.

It eliminates political accountability by SHIFTING GOVERNANCE FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS to algorithmic control structures that CANNOT BE CHALLENGED OR OVERTURNED.

It grants an even smaller technocratic elite greater power than ever before; WHILE MAKING PEOPLE BELIEVE THEY ARE FREER.

🧵Evolving Perennialism & Rejection of Individual Autonomy

I’ve been wanting to get to this document & post findings for some time. It’s long & while this thread is not a breakdown of the document in detail yet, it is an introduction to the implications of the content in broad terms. I read this document last year & immediately flagged grave concerns with several people who understand what’s being presented & the consequences for American Constitutional Republican governance, for popular & national sovereignty. @CourtenayTurner has several podcasts detailing aspects of this document. For now, here is a general broad overview. If there is interest, a detailed deeper dive within chapters can follow. 2/ Evolving Perennialism & Rejection of Individual Autonomy

The Primacy of Collective Evolution:

Evolving Perennialism views human development as an ongoing, collective process guided by spiritual wisdom and cosmic laws. This perspective implicitly downplays the autonomy of the individual in favor of a collective, evolutionary project.

In a democratic Constitutional Republic like the United States, which rests on the principle of individual rights and self-governance, this worldview challenges the notion that individuals should have control over their personal and political destinies.

It suggests instead that governance should be oriented towards the larger, collective (Theosophical) “evolutionary” process, diminishing the focus on individual liberty that the American system is founded upon.

🧵Game B as a Trojan Horse for Technocratic Totalitarianism

Game B, as advocated by thinkers like Bret Weinstein, Daniel Schmachtenberger, and Jordan Hall, presents itself as a novel, decentralized approach to societal evolution that aims to move beyond the perceived failures of “Game A” (i.e., traditional competitive market economies and political systems). However, beneath its rhetoric of systemic innovation and cooperative intelligence, Game B’s principles, premises, and praxis fundamentally undermine and subvert popular sovereignty, self-governance, and Constitutional Republican governance. This analysis will expose the philosophical, metaphysical, and strategic underpinnings of Game B, demonstrating how it aligns with the broader agenda for totalitarian technocracy, not as a direct authoritarian system, but as a seemingly organic, “networked” form of control that disguises centralized governance under the illusion of decentralized cooperation. 2/The Philosophical and Metaphysical Foundations of Game B

Game B’s Roots in Systemic Thinking & Cybernetics:

Game B is deeply influenced by complex systems theory, cybernetics, and systems optimization paradigms, which treat human societies as dynamic, adaptive networks rather than communities of autonomous individuals with inalienable rights.

Cybernetic Control; Game B’s emphasis on feedback loops and self-organizing systems aligns closely with the Tektological framework (Bogdanov), which asserts that governance should be mediated by an optimizing authority rather than grounded in absolute principles (such as Natural Law).

Collective Intelligence Over Individual Sovereignty; Game B prioritizes collective sense-making, coordination and synthesis of knowledge, meaning that individual sovereignty is subordinated to the intelligence of the group or network.

Thus, while Game B claims to be a decentralized, emergent alternative to centralized governance, its functional logic necessitates managed coordination, placing sovereignty in the hands of networked authorities rather than individuals.

🧵The Systemic Subversion of Liberty

Literature and historical evidence support the analysis that philosophical systems, including nominalism and its modern offshoots, have not always been neutral or purely epistemic endeavors, but have often been deeply entangled with political and social agendas. The use of education and the academy as vehicles for such agendas has functioned as part of an immensely well funded, co-ordinated broader effort to reshape societal norms, centralize power, and transform political structures.

Nominalism and its evolution in Western thought, particularly the philosophies from Descartes onwards, has facilitated many veiled vehicles for social, political, and ideological control, rather than functioning as merely neutral, objective methodologies for understanding the world. The funded and promoted rise of nominalist thinking (particularly with the embedding of the Prussian Academic/Education paradigm) was not merely a philosophical shift, but a strategic move to subvert and undermine traditional concepts of natural law, objective truth, and individual autonomy, especially in relation to the sovereignty of U.S. Constitutional Republic.

With a shout out to the comprehensive work of @_Escapekey_ whose substack everyone should be mining for its wealth of analysis:
open.substack.com/pub/escapekey?…
This thread will further unpack those strategic subversion tactics in specific relation to their consequences on self governance and popular sovereignty. 2/

By integrating foundational premises of nominalism within systemic governance models and environmentalism as an ideological imperative, global socialism has been embedded within capitalist structures WITHOUT EXPLICIT REVOLUTION; Not One Shot Fired. This process has systematically eroded:

Natural Law ; by rejecting objective moral and legal principles in favor of pragmatic systemic management.

Popular Sovereignty; by replacing democratic governance with managerial technocracy.

Self-Governance; by conditioning individuals to see themselves as components of a larger system rather than autonomous moral agents.

🧵
I find Nathan Jacobs to give of the clearest articulations of the Nominalism/Realism divide for the layman. I’ve shared his content before but if you’ve not listened yet, imo this is well worth your time to digest: youtu.be/G1lrYYqg5qY?si… it also relates back to a couple of his earlier presentations: youtu.be/nVmPIMg4St4?si… & a shorter clip here: youtu.be/4jk2JfsY584?si…

Why does this interest me so much? Because like Jacobs, I’ve also found it to be causal & the root of inability to defend (cognitively) against ideological subversion (of both ‘Right’ & ‘Left’) in addition to accommodation of heretical streams within various Faiths.

As I’ve examined the roots of Education subversion & the philosophies which have undermined Constitutional Principles & premises, Nominalism has been foundational to that enterprise. It’s no surprise then that Nominalism has been dominant within the Academy & State Education Pedagogy. Not in explicit taught Theory - but as implicit premises & praxis deployed under a variety of means. It’s been the air breathed & the water swam in for several generations. Certainly since the New Frontier Architects Of Education; the Social Reconstructivists throughout the 20th Century. Nominalism has (through Education) formed our assumptions, world view & understanding of ourselves. In this way, disabling the orientation & navigation faculties of our inner constitution. Most of us haven’t even realized this as we’ve functioned primarily in Levels 1 & 2 (see that final link above). Imo - this remains a key susceptibility which even Classical Education has failed to equip students with the necessary discernment for. Many of our ‘brightest & best’ have assumed that the Nominalist paradigm is ‘just the way the world is’ and hopefully in this thread, you’ll start to understand what the implications & consequences of that assumption have been for personal sovereignty & self governance under Natural Law.

🧵
Nominalism is the philosophical doctrine that denies the existence of universal, objective realities or forms, asserting instead that universals are merely names (nomina) or linguistic conventions without any independent existence outside the mind. In contrast to Realism, which posits that universals (e.g., justice, truth, or human nature) have real, objective existence, Nominalism confines meaning and reality to subjective perceptions or linguistic constructions. 2/

Nominalism erodes and negates personal sovereignty, self-governance, and natural law in the following ways:

Rejection of universal principles undermines natural law, which is based on immutable truths grounded in human nature and reality. By reducing truth to subjective or societal constructs, Nominalism weakens the foundation for self-evident rights and personal sovereignty.

Without universal moral principles, ethics becomes contingent on individual preferences, societal trends, or power dynamics.
This relativism fosters dependency on external authorities (e.g., the state or ideology) for moral guidance, eroding self-governance.

I put out many threads last year on ‘Descartes The Father Of Ideology’ (commenting on John Bruce Leonard’s essay series) which are worth looking for on my search bar. Crucial in understanding how our endowed rational faculties were skewed with Reason severed from its jurisdictional relationship to (principles of self-evident) Common Sense.

🧵
Protestant theology that integrates reason, Natural Law, and the dignity of the individual provides a robust foundation for liberty, self-governance, and personal sovereignty. In contrast, Protestant theology that denies these principles often leads to authoritarianism, collectivism, or moral relativism, which erode the philosophical and ethical preconditions for liberty. Understanding these distinctions is essential for aligning theology with the metaphysical and ethical foundations necessary for a free society. I only have the bot to chat with so here goes:
🤖 2/

The Fable of the Fractured Kingdom and the Path to Restoration (©️Christine Jones)

Relax with a cup or glass of your favourite tipple, a snack or two & enjoy this tale 🧵

Once upon a time, in the land of Everspring, the people had long forgotten the ways of Reason and Truth. Everspring was a kingdom of great prosperity, founded by wise rulers who had long ago established a covenant of liberty and justice, a covenant that ensured the sovereignty of the people, the sanctity of their rights, and the pursuit of their own happiness. But over the centuries, something had gone terribly wrong. 2/
The kingdom had become fractured and divided, and the people, though still proud of their land, no longer agreed on what it meant to be free, what it meant to live virtuously, or even what truth was. The great laws of the land, once revered, had become subject to the whims of factions, each claiming to hold the “true” path forward.

🧵
🤖has concisely summarized information & analysis taken from my threads over the past year regarding the ways in which sophistry usurped inquiry (indoctrination replaced education) through top down imposed Education Pedagogy & Methods purposed for subversion & manipulation. I hope this is helpful for my recent new followers & a beneficial recap for older followers too.

The Palmerworm; Christine Jones (@thepalmerworm) presents a detailed critique of how modern education has mistaken rhetoric—a tool for persuasion—for method, which represents structured inquiry and reasoning. This confusion, she argues, has significant consequences for both education and constitutional governance, ultimately undermining liberty and critical thought. 2/

🧵Brief🤖Overview:

The decline of epistemological realism’s primacy in academia began in the modern period of Western philosophy, particularly during the 17th to 20th centuries, as new philosophical movements challenged the foundational assumptions of realism. The main figures and intellectual shifts responsible for this decline are as follows: 2/
Rise of Representationalism & Empiricism (17th-18th Century)

Philosophers Responsible:

•René Descartes (1596–1650): Introduced a dualistic framework where knowledge of the external world depends on the mediation of ideas, separating the mind from direct access to reality. This led to the “problem of the external world.”

•John Locke (1632–1704): Argued that we perceive the world through ideas, not directly, thus introducing a representationalist theory of perception.

•George Berkeley (1685–1753): Denied the independent existence of material objects, claiming that “to be is to be perceived” (idealism). This directly undermined epistemological realism.

•David Hume (1711–1776): Took empiricism to its skeptical limits, questioning whether we could ever know causation or the external world with certainty.

Impact:

Representationalism & skepticism shifted focus away from directly knowing reality to debating whether such knowledge was possible at all.

🧵It’s not fashionable or popular to speak of this - especially not in ‘educated’ circles. It’s considered rather ‘lacking in nuance’ & ‘unenlightened’:

Philosophical Realism, particularly in its theological and moral forms, emphasizes that reality exists independently of human perceptions and that truth is objective, rooted in the nature of things as they are. 2/

The rejection of Philosophical Realism from mainstream education was not a single, definitive event but a gradual process influenced by intellectual, cultural, and historical developments, especially from the late 18th century to the 20th century.

🧵🔥Great article - so valuable to learn this & understand its significance in refuting the propaganda we’re currently fed on all sides. The education we needed but most never had.
open.substack.com/pub/fogcutter/…

2/

🧵So AI gave this analysis:

🤖
The increasing fragmentation of Protestantism—and broader societal divides—can paradoxically serve the agenda of centralizing power, particularly in the emerging framework of the Networked State or other forms of decentralized but controlled governance. The beneficiaries of these divides and the dynamics involved can be understood at multiple levels: 2/🤖

Centralizing Power Through Division:

Fragmentation in Protestantism and society at large weakens traditional institutions that historically served as checks on centralized authority. By breaking cohesive groups into smaller, polarized factions, larger systems of control—whether state, corporate, or technological—face less organized resistance.

Uh oh….I asked for the voice of James Beattie & here it is & I did not give any of these names btw - that was AI’s doing!

🧵
A Beattie-Style Critique of the Woke Right

It is the tragic fate of every age that, when beset by moral chaos, some of its thinkers, instead of turning to the eternal principles of reason and virtue, retreat into the labyrinth of partial truths, sophistry, and intemperate zeal. Such is the lamentable condition of the so-called “Woke Right,” a coalition of ideological opportunists who cloak their grievances in the garb of moral renewal but who, in their essence, are neither moral nor renewing.

This movement, for all its protestations of tradition and moral order, is not grounded in the immutable truths of religion or reason but in an unholy alliance of identity politics, cultural ressentiment, and historical revisionism. While claiming to defend Western civilization, they so often subvert the very virtues that gave that civilization its enduring strength: truth, humility, and charity…. 2/

1. The Movements of the Woke Right: A Bastion of Contradiction

The Woke Right is no monolith, but its prominent movements—be they National Conservatism, Post-Liberalism, or the burgeoning cult of Integralism—share a dangerous proclivity for half-baked ideals wrapped in an aesthetic of righteousness.

•National Conservatism, for instance, extols the virtues of the nation-state but frequently sacrifices moral truth to expediency, conflating national pride with ethnic chauvinism and neglecting the universal moral law upon which any genuine national greatness must rest.
•Post-Liberalism, in its reactionary zeal, rejects the Enlightenment values of liberty and reason altogether, often advocating authoritarian remedies that betray the Christian virtues of patience and persuasion.
•Integralism, while drawing upon the lofty ideals of a society governed by divine law, often collapses into political fantasy, imagining a theocracy enforced by compulsion rather than one inspired by the free assent of a virtuous populace.

1/
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC32…


2/

🧵
(credit: @thedukereport AI summary of The Leipzig Connection) which I’ll break up & accompany with the extracted screen shots from that book I curated for the podcast here: youtu.be/JjHFtQ1P3Ao?si…
& here: youtu.be/twnQhHKeReM?si… 2/

Pic 2-4 Samuel Blumenfeld’s essay;
‘Who Killed Excellence In Education?’ open.substack.com/pub/thedukerep…

🧵
One of the most devastating weapons of tyranny is the financed capability to deploy ‘Theories’ to confound not only what people know, but how they know & their ability to articulate this in fellowship with others.

Don’t be put off by the philosophical language. These snippets from Thomas A Howe’s work are short & you don’t need to be interested in philosophy ‘as such’, but only to recognize here the relationship to what was done, intentionally, through top down deployment of contrived, subversive State Education ‘Theories’ & Pedagogies’. The psychological warfare conducted by the government on domestic population through the past century which brought us to the insanity of 2024 which is clearly described in pic 2:
2/ ‘the principles that constitute’ = how we are constituted. We did not constitute ourselves, our human constitution is endowed by our Creator (God/Nature’s God). Natural Law.

Perhaps you see now why ‘Polarity Theory’ beloved of Queer Theory & all gnostic derived Theorizing is so concerned to negate limit. To blur & remove distinctions. To negate limiting principles which are the ground of Objectivity in Philosophical Realism. This is why Classical Liberalism was never the on ramp to any slippery slope accommodation. It could not function as the on ramp because it held to limiting principles & clear distinctions. It was grounded in objective reality & never ceded territory in the first place. It never had to put the toothpaste back in the tube or close Pandora’s Box because neither were opened. So what did open them? What was it in the Academy & in culture which actually abandoned limiting principles & distinctions. Where did those forces of subversion come from, how were they promulgated & who/what did they benefit? You hear ‘Education is a Political act’ & you think Woke, Freire…etc but funding in Academia & Education has always pulled certain strings for which ‘Theories’ are expedient; not necessarily true, but certainly useful.

🧵Scottish Enlightenment & Education

‘The Scottish Enlightenment was recognized at the time and is studied today as one of the great moments in the history of liberal thought. Scottish thinkers in the eighteenth century understood both the benefits and the hazards in the creation and preservation of a free and commercial society. Hutcheson, Hume, Smith, and others wrote extensive treatises concerning almost every aspect of the growth of commerce, learning, and a liberal constitutional order.’ 1/…….. 2/
‘Nonetheless, one great embarrassment for the Scottish Enlightenment, or so it has seemed, was the lack of any formal treatise written on education, despite the emphasis placed upon “education, custom, and example” in Scottish moral philosophy and political economy. Although there are passing references to education in the writings of the great luminaries, thus underlining its importance, the Scots seem to have put forth no treatise as comprehensive as Locke’s Some Thoughts Concerning Education or Rousseau’s Emile.’

See the language:
Individual replaced with ‘personal’ & ‘personality’
Constitutional Republic with popular democracy
Individual liberty with ‘personal’ liberty
Inalienable with ‘dignity’

(Excerpt from the 1934 Carnegie Commission on the Role of Social Science in Education) ~ which Augustin Rudd termed the ‘Blueprint for Revolution’ in Bending The Twig.


2/