Did Putin Use Tucker Carlson To Float A Planned US Doomsday Scenario, Or Was It A Different Musk-ovite?
.jpeg)
Did Putin Use Tucker Carlson To Float A Planned US Doomsday Scenario, Or Was It A Different Musk-ovite? Some Not So Random Hypotheticals, Analysis, Opinion, Broad Assertions, And Tea Leaf Reading-
Lance Rosen
August 28, 2023
Introduction--
Almost lost in the avalanche of last week's coverage of Trump's surrender and mugshot in Fulton County was the spectacular and shocking interview question asked of Trump by Tucker Carlson on his podcast for podpersons and "X-humans" earlier in that week.
What was shocking besides the content of it, was that he kept coming back to it, repeatedly demanding a direct response by Trump, who tried to avoid the subject because it clearly made him uncomfortable.
As reported by "Slate" (link below in comments) and other outlets, Carlson asked Trump if he was afraid that "The Left" would assassinate him, and could that start a Civil War in the US? Trump changed the subject by obsessively discussing Jeffrey Epstein, his way of saying "I have dirt on all of them, they don't dare," with typical macho bravado.
There are certain things that just need to be said in response to this, such as the fact that I am highly alarmed by it, and as well to raise the questions in need of asking. And I'll not refrain from saying what I first thought in reading the interview. Carlson is actually trying to incite the very thing which he is asking whether is or is not possible.
Part I-- The Most Blaring Questions
(1) Does Carlson WANT this to happen, and is he trying to "talk it into existence," as opposed to it just being a hypothetical scenario of something sensational which he is using as click bait to build his audience on his new platform of "The Muskrat King?" And when referring to "this" are we all clear what this is? Is Carlson speaking of an actual conspiracy? Is there a plan to start a civil war in the US by running a derivative assassination attempt (successful or not) which would be blamed on Antifa? (either as a "false flag" or some actual self-identified Antifa-related agent-provocateur who would likely be "sheep-dipped" through "the left"?) Anyone who read this interview and does not admit that their minds "went there" is being less than honest, because the thought of it makes them nervous. It feels better to push it into the back of our minds.
(2) Is this scenario being floated by him as a product of his own twisted wet dream fantasy, or is he channeling it on behalf of some agency, network, foreign government, private group, or financial patrons who have as their motive unleashing chaos within the United States? And if so, are some combination of them using Carlson as their spokesman to announce that Trump has outlived his usefulness, and is more valuable to them dead as a potential detonator of the ticking bomb which is the currently Divided States of America, than as a prospective President? Assume for sake of argument that his putting this out there has a motive aside from just getting views.
(3) Are US government agencies taking note of this or investigating whether or not this is an actual threat? Would such a scenario actually result in a widespread civil conflict, or is discussing it just entertainment for spy novel enthusiasts and paranoid conspiracy theorists?
(4) Now that Trump has been confronted with this possible scenario, will he react to it and make it an issue going forward? His personal survival instinct outweighs everything else in his mind, so he may attempt to take a preemptive approach to blowing such an operation before the fact. He will often make a great show of his willingness to become a martyr figure for his deranged followers, but like every narcissistic bully who starts a big fistfight or melee, he is the first one to sneak out the back door, like the coward that he is. Martyrdom on behalf of anyone has never been his plan, and he would rat out his own family to save himself. This we know.
Part II-- Who Runs Carlson? Does It Even Matter Now?
Before commenting on the substance of the interview and resolving the above questions, there are certain realities which are both acknowledged and central to understanding its implications.
First, is that Carlson himself has acted as a conscious asset, bordering on full blown agent, of Russian state interests, their intelligence services, their President Putin, their state media and foreign propaganda apparatus, and their "active measures" in the US to destroy the Biden presidency, as well as Biden personally and his entire family. The question remains open however whether that status is still in force since he was removed from his primetime spot on Fox News.
Rather than rehash his track record as the frequent voice of Fox being promoted by Russian State media, his lies about January 6th, his siding with Putin against the US government and Ukraine, his promotion of the Nazi "Replacement Theory," his campaign to bring Putin/Orbàn style autocracy to America, I'll just restate that he has acted as a disloyal traitor to the United States, and should have already been the subject of a FISA Court warrant and under surveillance as a possible illegal unregistered foreign agent.
Second, is that despite all of his recent retractions and attempted jive-ass verbal acrobatics, Carlson is consumed with a seething personal hatred for Donald Trump. This by his own admission in publicly released personal communications which surfaced during the Dominion case against his former employer Fox earlier this year.
It may seem surprising on the surface since they share so much common hatred and disdain for the majority of Americans, along with their mutual "Putin man-love," and have publicly mended fences in order to resume their collaboration. Nevertheless, the reservoir of hatred Carlson harbors toward him is bottomless, because he is his leading personal rival, and Carlson sees him as the psychological basket-case that he is, with too much power and whose hold over his "base" (which is also Carlson's base) is still a matter of deep resentment and unfathomable to him.
Third, Carlson's repugnant political positions are secondary to his burning personal ambition. He is a narcissist and egomaniac, and has plans for a presidential campaign. (which he would likely be running now had Trump not been in the way) Carlson is likewise possessed of an extreme arrogance driven by his wealthy, blueblood, preppy identity as an heir to the Swanson frozen TV dinner empire. However he, like most wannabe oligarchs who sit lower in the pecking order, is as intellectually shallow as the frat house bully types depicted in the movie "Animal House," but compensates for this by playing the role of the "Devil's advocate" questioning provacateur. He is like the constantly intriguing "Iago" character from Shakespeare's Othello who is constantly masterminding conflicts and conspiracies between and against others in order to advance himself.
His dogwhistle style messaging of hatred, racism, violence, bigotry, division and disinformation is couched carefully as him just "being curious," and "wanting to get to the bottom of things because his audience wants to know the truth." In reality, what his programmed and nazified audience wants to know is actually nothing, because they think they already know everything. What his audience does draw from his commentary is a growing list of who they should hate, who is victimizing them, and to whom they should assign blame for all of the problems facing them daily in their enraged and miserable existences. And they want to learn from him how to lie and change the subject through diversion and deflection when confronted with the perversity of their own lies. Carlson is the Professor Emeritus of the "University of Whataboutism," and has mastered the skill of violating all of the boundaries of civility and journalistic accountabily to reach just the edge of the liabilty envelope, all the while pushing that edge out further and further on a daily basis.
Part III-- A Firing, Or Marker For A Strategic Realignment?--
This year for Carlson was disastrous overall, because like most demagogues he committed the sin of hubris in believing he, with his pitiful by comparison 40 million dollars net worth had more power than his multi-billionaire sponsors at Fox, Rupert Murdoch and his sons. His downfall in the aftermath of the Dominion settlement is reminiscent of the fictional character played by Peter Finch in the movie "Network" named Howard Beale, ("I'm mad as Hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore") who at the height of his deranged rise in the ratings got out of control, and was "removed" from his time slot. No one should be fooled by the narrative that Fox's legal exposure followed by the settlement itself was the cause of Carlson's firing. His financial value to Fox was such that he could have performed a human sacrifice live on the air and not been fired.
No, I believe that Carlson's firing was the visible detritus of a great power realignment within the oligarchy itself, as the Murdoch empire, among other GOP Kingpins, is trying to survive the coming reign of destruction which they have set afoot with their out of control Frankenstein monster Donald Trump. Murdoch's "Plan B" for installing a manageable Hitler in the form of Casey DeSantis' pet Rhododendron, husband Ron, is a miserable failure. The GOP establishment is resigned to Trump being their Presidential nominee. That however does not necessarily mean they are resigned to him being the GOP candidate.
The oligarchy at times of their choosing has resorted to means other than politics to remove candidates for President who they believe to be dangerous or destabilizing to their interests. In the past they have used mental health scandals, sexual and financial scandals or other contrived types of political skeletons in the closet to dump candidates who are not controllable or represent a political threat otherwise, as the GOP fascist faction of the oligarchy is attempting now with President Biden. But at times those candidates have such strong followings that the traditional methods of dirty tricks don't work. So, as was the case with the Bull Moose candidacy of Teddy Roosevelt, then later the campaigns of Huey Long, John F. Kennedy's re-election plans, Robert F. Kennedy Sr., George Wallace, historically there was enough of a stable of "lone nuts" being churned out by the proverbial nut factory that there was never a shortage of volunteers for attempting the removal of said candidates with a well placed shot.
This was usually a last resort, if it was decided that a candidate was not controllable or a threat. And this pattern has held for more than a century, despite the wildly divergent backgrounds, policies, and characters of the people listed above. And just to get real, in the world of past history's and today's batch of "olympian" oligarchs who sit atop the power structure globally, there are only conspiracies. That's not paranoia, but unfortunately most of the whackadoodle theories regarding these conspiracies are.
Also, the establishment (which is itself divided ideologically) values their ability to control a candidate as much as they value the policies they stand for. Obedience to their sponsors and predictability are prerequisites for hiring. The GOP establishment has never had that for an instant with the narcissistic egomaniac Trump. He is a lab accident. He is the collection of body parts which was assembled with the wrong brain implanted because the mad Doctor's hunchback assistant dropped the jar containing the healthy one.
Which at a certain point leaves the monster's creator only one choice.
Part IV- Carlson's New Gig Working For Ayn Rand's Legacy Sperm Donor, Elon Musk--
"Creative Destruction." Remember this term, and the imagery it calls forth. It is the methodology and strategy which is the common thread connecting Rome's Emperor Nero, to The French Jacobin Revolution, Russia's Napoleonic era Czar Alexander I, Hitler's Nazis, China's Mao Tse-Dong, the 1960's violence-espousing Black Nationalist adversaries of Martin Luther King, and not least, to the greed-driven Libertarian cult leader Ayn Rand. And it is in fact the essence of the "Gleichanschaltung" of today's Nazified MAGA/GQP.
"Creative Destruction" is the economic term coined by Rand follower Joseph Schumpeter, arguing that in order to have progress, technological innovation will necessarily serve to "tear down" existing institutions and modalities of daily life, including careers, social life, economic and political life, and the system of laws and institutions associated with them.
The subtext is a desire of those believers to remake society such that economic rewards go to those "deserving," the "entrepreneurs and financiers," and that a social and political cataclysm, or controlled demolition is needed to take government and our system of laws "down to the studs." A national bloodbath is considered an inevitable though distasteful aspect of it. (and ironically it was a doctrine shared by the 1960's radical leftist militants called "purgative violence," espoused by the American "Deconstructionist" followers of Chairman Mao's "Cultural Revolution.") Underlying this philosophy is the outlook of social darwinist philosophers and writers such as Herbert Spencer, and their mantra of "survival of the fittest."
None of this is hypothetical, as it was the operating concept behind Nixon's embrace of Milton Friedman, (the destroyer of FDR's "Bretton-Woods" system, father of Reaganomics and Thatcherism) and Federal Reserve ecomomic policy since no later than 1979 with the ascension of Paul Volcker as Chairman. MAGA today can be considered the engine of the next wave of Creative Destruction, the violent political battering ram against "stateism," the biggest obstacle according to these fascists to the "economic freedom" from regulation which is needed for innovation to occur.
It is all lies. Ayn Rand led a cult, not a school of economics.
Elon Musk is one of the cult followers of Rand's evil philosophy, as are a long list of fascist billionaires and their enablers who control America's extreme right wing. The Koches, the DeVoses, Peter Thiel, Louis Leo, and the Mercers are a few examples, and before them, economist Alan Greenspan who served as economic Czar of the United States for four Presidencies. Greenspan worshipped her and was in her inner circle, called "The Collective," and became her lover. (Picturing Rand and Greenspan screwing is in fact almost a textbook visual representation of Creative Destruction. lfr) Whole political organizations, think tanks, legal foundations, and economics departments of major universities were created in her malignant selfish image. Our majority fascist Supreme Court are her bastard children. And they all see their creations MAGA and Trump as the ultimate machine for their controlled demolition of the state.
Libertarians are essentially an army of academic and business suit wearing Timothy McVeighs, or Ammon Bundys, whose anti-government fanaticism is carried out through lobbying, law firms, and fake candidates running to promote themselves, instead of using truck bombs. They are politically powerful because of their vast resources, and because they are so heteronomic that they don't work very well together and operate on their own, so if one of them goes down, they take no one down with them. That is, for the time being. I know the Libertarians well, because I actively fought them for 40 years.
Their concept of liberty is asserting their right to violate or overturn laws which they personally don't like, regardless of the impact on others. They reject the concept of altruism itself, believe greed to be the highest virtue, and see the American experiment as a fraud, especially the idea of the "General Welfare." Their personal universe begins with their stomachs and ends with their genitals, and the benefit of other people is by definition non-existent in their priorities. If given a choice between solving the Central African starvation crisis or adopting celibacy and fasting for two days, their choice would be to "let 'em die." While I generally refrain from using personal epithets, the word which always comes to mind when I meet a Libertarian is "swinish." I will under no circumstance apologize to anyone who might take offense at my characterization. They and their narcissistic outlook, masked as fake benevolence and promises of increased "freedom" are what is "offensive," not my use of the word for them.
Unless we appreciate the significance of Musk being a self-identified Libertarian who follows Ayn Rand's outlook, then we have no point of reference for what Musk is actually doing, why he sees science as a mere pathway for imposing his vision of utopia, and why he jumped at the chance to hire Tucker Carlson when the Murdochs kicked him to the curb. Carlson is, along with Trump, an apostle of "Creative Destruction," and everything he does in public serves that purpose. Which is why he is still considered useful, and still has a job.
To Be Continued-- The Carlson-Trump Interview... Calling The First Shots Of Our Modern "Fort Sumter"? Who Benefits More From This Scenario Than Putin?
(Photo--His audience share now. Size still matters)
