Trump will not be selected in 2024 for president. Biden will not be reselected. Kamala will not be selected. Desantis will not be selected. Hillary will not be selected.
The figure will in some respects be similar to mitt romney, but a lot more moderate and 'inspirational' (a white obama). He will come out of left field and the right will be fooled by him.
A senate candidate (congress member) or an existing senator will face a massive scandal and ultimately go to prison for bribery networks and other charges. The scandal will engulf and entangle dozens of figures in congress and the senate threatening the credibility of both parties.
The smith-mundt modernanization act will be repealed, with heavy resistance from the CIA, and DOJ, as well as the media itself.
BTC will hover between $23k to $37k.
A city and region within either oregon or washington state will experience a large scale industrial disaster, equivalent to the level of contamination found in some superfund sites.
Saudi Arabia will join BRICs to gain a more favorable position before other middle eastern nations are able to join first.
Belgium or a nation that is similarly geographically, historically, geopolitically, and economically positioned, will experience nuclear terrorism. Russia will be blamed, but the charges will not stick. The perpetrators thereafter will remain apparently unknown and for years, until eventually the international right is blamed by western regimes. It will turn out to have been environmentalists, armed by western agencies in collaboration with particular middle eastern nation's intelligence.
The border will be opened wide, though general amnesty will not pass. It will become a common crossing for muslims fleeing war in their home countries.
Technocratic surveillance will ramp up significantly, as will restrictive environmental policies (limiting camping in many states fo carbon emissions). Governors will be slow to stop this federal interference, despite any words to the contrary. Satellites normally used for monitoring wild fires, will instead be used in conjunction with land management to crack down on "illegal camping". We will see some examples of overreach here, regarding camping, gun ranges, and farming on private property.
There will be mass retirements of existing police owing both to pension uncertainty and renewed attempts to "root out right wing extremist hate groups." 2023-2024 are the year that "the thin blue line" and "back the blue" cease to generally move the needle for the majority of conservatives, with an even split among them on the issue.
The national average for gas will reach $4.13 and stay there for some time (early 2024).
We will see a new wave of bankruptcies and the homeless crisis become exponential. There will be talk of if we are "potentially heading toward another 2008", while talk among regular people will be about how 2008 is already repeating.
The war in sudan will intensify enormously, and russia will clean its hands of the matter. The u.s. will seize this chaos as a distraction and a new potential excuse to extend and renew operations in the middle east.
Edit: The pacific will experience a major fishery collapse due to overfishing by asian nations.
Russia's offensive is dependent on two components: missiles and drones. Their drones are largely supplied by Iran. Therefore Russia's mission fails outright eventually or is greatly weakened without them. This could also be used as an excuse for Russia to back out of the war if they need, while strengthening Iran on the basis that if Iran's drones are that significant, competitors are less likely to take on Iran.
Other's have suggested the west persue Turkey as an ally, but this is a dead-end. For starters, Turkey's action of apparently playing all sides, vying for power in the region, is not in fact playing all sides. They have consistently taken positions that benefit eurasia and russia, while flip flopping against europe and the u.s, suggesting their actual goal is strategic distancing, holding us at arms length. Erdogan being who he is, I can only imagine his supporters primarily are trying to stave off westernization and all the cultural rot being forced on them, not to mention any ties to Israel. Nevertheless, one can never serve two masters, so it makes sense Turkey's decisions would work out roughly to be anti-nato/pro russia in general. Any strategy based on flipping turkey is therefore really just introducing a handgrenade that any other nation can try and pull at any time.
Hence Iran. Why Iran?
They are one of the few lynchpins in the middle east that has the most potential to unite the bloc, and thus also represent the biggest threat to western control. By flipping them many things are accomplished at once: 1. the threat of a future bloc is either mitigated or eliminated
2. We have a viable alternative to Israel
3. We have a viable alternative to saudi arabia
4. No more drones, or we compromise the drones going to russia
This could be accomplished by mythologizing Khamenei as "another assad. A lion."
I'm sure hes seen the billions to ukraine.
But aside from that here are the implications that lead to buy-in: A victory in ukraine, empties out israel into ukraine. Israel is divided and grately weakened.
Having saudi arabia in hand lets us balance and manage the power dynamic that emerges.
Iran instantly gains a real possibility of becoming the lynchpin of the middle east and therefore has a strong reason to change sides.
The key thing is that the u.s. don't bluff: if our allies are threatened, we respond, if our competition are warned not to cross some line, and they do, we respond. If Iran sees hesitance, it won't flip. This is the same reason Russia was so insistent on rewarding its allies, because its not just a matter of supporting russia, its about being able to say "the u.s. will betray you. We won't." which is a significant bargaining chip, one the u.s. should try to remove at all costs. Even a couple instances should be sufficient. It won't change the calculus, but what it does is raises the cost of concessions russia must make to keep allies cooperating, rather than them deciding to become neutral. Do it enough, and it fulfills the earlier, weaker attempt to isolate russia that was mostly based on lies.
I suspect this is part of why the u.s. has been playing a much more friendly balancing act toward Iran lately, but this equivocation Iran has read as the u.s. being two-faced toward our alliance with Israel. The failure to properly commit to open relations with Iran is what has up to this time, caused this strategy to fail. There can be no hesitance.
On the otherhand Russia could counter by simply breaking off the war, denying the u.s. casus belli and consequently forcing a pivot to asia in order to deny the u.s. the administration and congress a distraction from domestic problems. Another option is Russia parlays with syria or saudi arabia and OPEC on behalf of the BRICs (where OPEC sees being locked into the digital USD in its future), greatly diminishing the possibility of the u.s. flipping Iran, simply by increasing the uncertainty of the situation's other critical variables, sort of like Russia has done to both the u.s. and china by cozying up to North Korea, a mistake on the part of China.
In any case, successfully flipping Iran would immediately force one of two outcomes, simply because of how it changes the dynamics of war in ukraine, leading to either 1. world war, as Turkey is forced to commit finally to breaking relations with the west, and thus dividing the middle east as a follow-on, 2. the ceasing of the Russian mission in Ukraine.
Look at their history as a culture. They don't usually kill their own. Fuck, to this day they're still defending the corpse of rapist/murderer leo frank.
They were initially paralyzed by the reports of hostages. They don't give a flying fuck about anyone else, but they are absolutely dead set on not losing any of there own.
Letting hamas do it would be uncharacteristic in light of these details.
However, lets examine some things:
They have a history of attempting to project invincibility. In a vulnerable position after an attack, they could and would spread rumors of how israel itself plotted the entire thing. The premise is if uncertainty is increased regionally, other nations that are neutral or hostile are less likely to join in the attack. This says, contrary to the mask of invulnerability, israel is in fact afraid it is going to have its neighbors pile on to the war on the palestinian side. This would also explain the u.s. sending war ships in great number, its genuine deterrence. In that light, rumors about another u.s.s. liberty could either be spread by the u.s. itself, or by hamas and company. What did the u.s. do in ukraine? Attempt to antagonize russia into actionable attacks that would cause the world to condemn it, and justify the sanctions in place. Failed of course but I digress. This is the u.s. playing at strength. This suggests the 'u.s.s. libery 2' rumors being spread are likely pro-palestinian nations or groups, sending a message to the u.s.: that they can fuck up our domestic relations with israel, and force another front to be launched in the middle east and the russia-ukraine war, during a critical time in the u.s. where american support for the regime hangs by a thread.
Speculating, the pull back of IDF troops could be two things: false information to feed the fog of war narrative, or a rift. We know netanyahu faced mass riots, maybe even abortive color revolutions. The first assumption would be he pulled the border guards back, to bolster his own position. Another take is that factions unsatisfied with him want to create a scenario where the IDF is forced to decide if netanyahu is capable of protecting and leading israel. Sort of like a spat between him his opposition. The polarization that made netanyahu indepnsible (turned into the glue of the coalition government) would then be dissolved by the need for a unified front to face the external threat.
The balance of power then shifts away from benjamin and his opposition now working together, to the only other leader: the head of the military, gallant.
If I'm correct we will shortly see an outcry of anti-BN rioting the moment a lull in the fighting hits, and calls for the military to take over 'temporarily' in israel.
Follows from observations of how the bubonic plague lead to rising labor values in the middle ages, in waves, with the final wave leading to the fall of tsarist russia under bolshevism and mass industrialization.
It took 500 years to solve human sanitation problems.
I suspect the technological revolution will take as long to fully solve labor relations in the face of technology, but in the meantime there will be inflection points.
This analysis is what motivated me in the past to predict the resurgence of labor unions in the u.s, and its pretty obvious to see thats beginning to emerge.
If I'm correct, then this, more than anything is why we are seeing mass importation of labor. But as this occurs, I have no doubt a cursory fourier analysis of historic data under similar conditions will show an inflection point: that pivotal moment in time where the importation of more labor drives wages down relative to cost of living in such a way that it increases instability and risk, rather than buffering against it.
And because of the stickiness of this strategy, my prediction is now that its going, it will be very hard for them to reverse it as a policy. The hope was of course to use the imported labor to kill the labor-collectivization trend their forecasters see on the horizon in the coming decades. I think they will fail and end up with a different kind of war because of it.
Theres a bifurcation point I see coming, where the war and chaos that emerges from this policy can go three ways: the general dissolution of the u.s. (like how the soviets collapsed, into blocs), a civil war thats a mix of racial, economic, and regional. Or an ostensibly 'pro' labor movement leading to a war not unlike the bolshevik takeover in russia.
Prior predictions of this new totalitarian impulse, made mostly on intuition before now, align well with this very prediction. As labor consolidates the only way to keep production efficient is to scale capacity 'outward' (more industry over all), comporting with prior predictions of mass re-industrialization in the united states.
To cope with this, it must become inevitable therefore that a war between the u.s. and china will break out, leading either to an armistice and new cold war, or the utter destruction of one side or the other, although I don't have enough information at this time to say which, or who would be the victor in any case.
These conclusions, unfortunately, are foregone.
In other words, we still have a long way to go, but not as long as you might have thought.
The war is a sophisticated joint operation between russia and ukraine to bankrupt the u.s. and the european union. This makes sense in light of everything we know, and all the outcomes we've seen unfold.
Zelinsky is a double agent.
"Dirty shirt" theory only works if russia loses, restrengthening the u.s. dollar, and splintering brics. The headwind thats been building into a financial disaster thats so far been narrowly avoided, rushes home, everywhere, all across the globe, leaving the dollar as the last refuge.
This trigger the rest of the world to assume the theory is in play at all, leading to a self-fulfilling scenario.
This will trigger a war between u.s. and china, as china sees its last chance at supplanting the u.s. (or ushering in a multipolar world) vanishing.
China (or the u.s. and china, assuming we are tied at the hip, and theres no reason not to assume that), will use this (limited, or 'fake' war) to solicit aid from russia, attempting to break whats left of russian logistics and russia's economy.
Russia in turn will refuse to provide the necessary aid to china, who they have ostensibly been covertly allied with for some time, thus upsetting the apple cart by changing the outcome of the war in favor of the u.s. This is necessary for a multipolar world, because even if the u.s. loses hegemony, that leaves russia to contend with chinese world ambitions. A scenario where the u.s. loses, leaves the world in a much more precarious position so long as the CCP still exists, as far as russian thinking goes.
Meanwhile, because of the global liquidity retreat to the u.s., the euro will crash, and nations will pull out of it.
If russia capitulates in the ukraine war, the model works and the rest of what I wrote is likely to also be correct as a result.
Russia calling off the world, or negotiating, would also drive a wedge between BRICs and britain, namely india, because india already displayed their disloyalty to the global regime/british/u.s. softpower when they helped russia circumnavigate SWIFT sanctions (as I predicted before).
The u.s., having satisfied it's appetite for war (wrt to defense contractors, public sentiment, etc), wouldn't need one with all the additional liquidity in play driving up asset prices, and wouldn't rush to a new war either, thus weakening taiwan's leverage in any potential conflict with china.
China would be forced either by the opportunity itself, or by the shrinking window thereof, to initiate war because of it instead of losing its last card at distracting and pacifying its population indirectly. The attack would likely come from north korea, a proxy of the CCP, in order to provoke the u.s. into an invasion, thus making us look like the aggressor when china responds by taking taiwan and cutting off the u.s. navy.
Owing to these factors and potential outcomes, if we can say that u.s. hegemony gives way to a multipolar global financial environment under the condition that russia wins--and that this same outcome happens even if russia DOESNT win, then we can conclude this outcome is inevitable.
One person is the designated snitch. They spoon feed the secret police chosen details regularly.
The FBI takes down lawful political groups or militias, the snitch who was previously a 'witness' for prosecution, turns it around and destroys the regime's case.
Whoever it is has to be willing to fall on their sword, a completely ballsy motherfucker to the point of not caring for their own life.
Also this strategy could irrevocably legally destroy the agencies in the process, and lead to a lot of fuckhead marxist FBI agents losing their jobs/pensions. Would be grate to see a few of them have their entire lives and families destroyed for corruption. They deserve it.
Been telling people a while now, with all the domestic spying, illegal political disruption, one-sided prosecution, and uneven enforcement of the law--the only use for a militia from the get go is the explicit goal of entrapping and destroying the careers and livelihoods of agents and their out of control criminal organizations masquerading under color of law.
If the proud boys don't resort to this strategy, then they're fucking stupid. This would be my goto in their shoes. Like from the beginning or founding of an organization. "let see how many federal agents and informants we can drag in, catch on camera, and systematically utterly destroy using lawfare."
Bonus points if anyone can entrap people affiliated with judaism/marxist/antifa/blm in america, the ccp, saudi arabia, british intelligence cut outs, or other FARA-violating motherfuckers.
Keep it peaceful, keep it legal, but always remember:
It's a schizotheory for sure. But if you take even a fraction of the "predictive programming" narrative to be true, hear me out.
If you look around, in many pieces of media that have ww3 or a post-apocalypse, theres some theme of alien invasion.
Fallout: the aliens quests in multiple of their games
"Aliens stopped the cuban missile crisis"
etc
I can only think of the two examples off the top of my head at the moment but I'm sure I've seen more.
This idea of one crisis in media being code for another crisis isn't unprecedented either. We know by now covid 'outbreak' was a response, and code for 'financial crash' or financial contagion.
Anyway this is a bit shitposty, so I'm putting it in chatter.
1-in-3 chance normalized to past prediction accuracy. Long tail risk out to 21 days from now.
Factors include intensification of armenian war zone, concurrent war drills by adversarial nations, recent u.s. readiness changes, insider information about preparations for lowering DEFCON 3 (and 2 in some theaters), attacks on russian nuclear triad, previous narratives out of london wrt to uranium smuggling, israel redlining of iranian enrichment and followup attacks, discontinuation of nuclear treaties, war in syria, large attacks on nato comms arguably by russia (unlikely). Continual and growing abandonment of the petrodollar system. Escalatory situational planning esp. u.s. war gaming the loss of power projection over the failing dollar, israeli war scenarios involving the loss of military support from the u.s., and chinese scenarios involving limited windows to act on taiwan.
Potential targets are taiwan, CONUS (with the inclusion of hawaii), and western europe, with an emphasis on five-eyes nations excluding new zealand and australia.
