I was quite impressed by Trump’s first few days in office, essentially attempting to roll back years if not decades of cultural decay. This includes his executive order to abolish “jus soli”, i.e. citizenship by birth, regardless of legal status. The left obviously whines that this is a stark violation of the US constitution, dating back to 1868. Yet, at that time it was not at all conceivable that millions of people could just flood into the country some day. The true meaning was surely more poetic and assumed that anyone born in the United States had a strong connection to country and culture alike. The change Trump has been pushing through is so far-reaching that I wondered where this came from. Let me put my schizo hat on and explore this topic.

The surface level interpretation is that the US public got fed up with leftist insanity and elected Trump in 2024. However, this is a hopelessly naive take. In 2020, the elites just created twenty million extra votes for Biden out of thin air to ensure his election victory, which led to the amusing reaction of the left 2024 wondering what has happened to all these extra votes. The point is that if the real power brokers had wanted Kamala Harris to win, they would simply have printed twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty million extra ballots, shut down the count in the early morning hours, jacked up the numbers for Kamala and pronounced her kween of da world the next day. This is not what happened.

The next question is why the elites let Trump win. Probably they realized that the leftist globalist project was no longer working, or perhaps they realized that visiting a city like Shanghai feels like traveling three hundred years into the future whereas a stroll around San Francisco make you wonder whether you somehow managed to enter the tenth circle of hell in Dante’s Inferno. Even BlackRock’s Larry Fink recently came out telling the world that if you let in third-world immigrants, your country will turn into a third-world shit hole. A plausible working hypothesis is that the powerful US elites were afraid of their wealth collapsing, and while in the past, they just move to a new host, China was apparently not so welcoming to them. After destroying Europe in the 20th century, these people simply moved to the US but destroying the US completely in the 21st century would have left them with not other country to go to, or at least none they would have wanted to settle in. This is also pretty plausible hypothesis.

There could be a lot more, though. There is not just one “deep state” in each country. Instead, there are multiple deep states and networks. Infamous is the World Economic Forum, but there are plenty others. Then there is still the influence of old banking dynasties as well as royals. Supposedly, there is hardly any real monarchy left in the world, yet in constitutional monarchies the royal family seems to still hold quite a lot of power. Members of royal families constantly show up a lot at the various elite networking events. Looking at these networked deep states, I wonder who really calls the shot. There seems to be a disconnect between the real power of a country and the influence of some of these people. For instance, modern Britain is hardly a powerhouse. Yet, it runs a lot of tax havens and its royal family seems to be best buddy with every significant leader of a nation and all the important CEOs. Some of the British royals were also pretty close to Jeffrey Epstein. Then there are certain other powers that are even more rarely acknowledged, for instance Israel’s Mossad, which seems to have funded Epstein child-prostitution ring in order to collect compromising material on every powerful and corruptible guy in the Western world.

An utterly crazy idea I had was that the direction of influence of the United States on the world could be different than we perceive it. The general observation is that the US pushes their faggot agenda over its entire sphere of influence. They are big champions of “democracy”, gay sex, gender mutilation, and unfettered third-world mass immigration. Well, they were until Trump took office as he is now rolling this back. Yet, I find the reaction of European politicians quite interesting. It is obvious that Trump is making big moves to rearrange pieces on the chess board. For instance, apparently he ordered tech companies to drop their “fact-checking” bullshit, which was just ultra-leftist censorship. Europe followed the lead of the US in terms of censorship in the past. However, now that mass-media censorship in the US is officially over, the European leaders do not follow suit. Instead, they want to keep censoring statements and truths they do not like. Thus, I wonder if the US was not the first mover in this leftist clown show. Could it have been the case that, for instance, the British elites influenced the US deep state behind the scenes to push bizarre leftist ideology both in the US and abroad? The outcome is that leftism would be perceived as an issue promoted by the US, not the local elites, even though they may all secretly have embraced it. For instance, I do not recall any statements of Queen Elizabeth on the need to have millions of third-worlders in Britain, yet she did not seem overly opposed to it either.

The strategy of using a third-party to promote an ideology is very common in the feminized European political sphere. The standard approach is that governments finance “NGOs” who would not be able to survive without government money. These NGOs push leftist nonsense and, for some reason, are very well connected to politics. Thus, politicians can claim that they “listen” to NGOs, which made them realize how important issues like unhinged mass immigration from the third world or destroying the country’s industrial base really are. As a consequence they present themselves merely as politicians who execute the will of the people, allegedly expressed by NGOs. It is a total charade. This is how it works in European democracies as well as at the level of the European Union. The same trick could very well have been played on us on the international stage, and if this is how it was then the US elites may simply have put Trump in charge in order to execute their planned rebellion, which has the goal of liberating them from the influence of certain foreign groups. There seem to also be changes afoot regarding the support of the “greatest ally” of the United States, considering that Trump wants to end the Ukraine war within 100 days. If he does not start wars against China and Iran then this can be taken as evidence that he succeeded in limiting this particular source of influence on US politics as well.