Today’s live radio guests include Gen Z anarchist Nicky Reid, Christian historian Michael Hoffman, and whistleblowing retired Special Agent (USG) Karl Golovin. Listen live noon to 2 pm ET at Revolution.Radio. Also don’t miss tomorrow’s False Flag Weekly News… -KB

I recently had an email argument with Ron Unz about the term genocide. Ron argued that calling what Israel is doing to Palestine by that name is problematic, since the popular definition of genocide involves plotting to kill every single member of the target group. Additionally, Ron posits

…a tactical problem with using the word “genocide.” Your opponents have total control over the media and the political system, and can easily distort statements to damage your case. Thus, all those pro-Palestinian students on college campuses go around shouting “Genocide!” to condemn the Israelis for their slaughter, then pro-Israel activists claim they have been declaring their support for genocide against the Jews of Israel and America, leading to those Congressional hearings that hammered several Ivy League presidents.

My response: “Really?! I must have missed those news stories. I’ve seen the Zionist claims that ‘river to the sea’ is genocidal, and Elon Musk’s bizarre agreement, but I haven’t seen so much as a single Zionist effort to miscast anti-Israel anti-genocide protestors as pro-genocide.”

Ron:

Well, Kevin, what I think happened was a game of “political telephone.”

There had been lots of college demonstrations against Israel, some of them with large signs denouncing “genocide” and I’d seen a few of the photos.

So some pro-Israel activists went to ignorant Jewish billionaire donors and told them that leftist students were calling for the genocide of Israeli and maybe American Jews, possibly even showing them some of the photos of the protests with the signs.

Then the billionaire donors went to the stupid members of Congress and told them about the horrifying situation, with college students calling for Jewish genocide, which put the college presidents on the hot-seat and got one of them fired.

There probably was deliberate deceit at one or more of the intermediate steps.

After mulling it over, I realized Ron’s analysis was frighteningly plausible, in light of the Zionist-propaganda-saturated bubble America lives in. Ron continued:

When you’re competing on an ultra-tilted political playing field, you have to be ultra-careful. Lots of leftist protesters had been rioting for a year or two and sometimes swarming over Congressional hearings. But when the Trumpists staged a mass-protest, they were all prosecuted and many of them have been sent to prison.

As usual, Ron Unz is onto something. But the implications are unsettling.

When it reaches the point that your opponents are committing genocide, but you can’t mention it because they’ll turn your words inside out…well, what’s the point of even engaging? If they can take anything we say, misquote us to make it sound like we’re saying the exact opposite, and impose that interpretation on the world through their media power, why bother saying anything at all?

I’m not sure the situation is quite that hopeless. As I responded to Ron:

When I Google “Palestine genocide” I get Wikipedia’s “Palestine genocide accusation” followed by a long list of articles from prestigious mainstream authors and outlets supporting or at least taking seriously that accusation. When I Google “Israel genocide” I get pretty much the same thing. So it looks to me like most of the world including the most prestigious Western sources (and everything Google notices) either charges Israel with genocide or takes that claim seriously. Nowhere do I see that worldwide near-consensus producing blowback that harms the Palestinian cause.

But the global discussion is one thing, and the American political scene is another. At some point, after state after state has criminalized BDS and equated anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism and fired lots of college presidents and professors and teachers and doctors for supporting Palestine, and every major politician and media outlet has groveled before the Zionists, and (in short) it has become futile or impossible to fight back with words and images and ideas, every honest and informed American may find himself faced with two choices: (1) resist militarily, or (2) engage in the Baudriardian resistance strategy known as hyperconformity. Since exploring (1) could get me sent to Guantanamo, I will instead elaborate on strategy #2.

What is hyperconformity? Since I just got an email from Bard the AI Program saying that he had upgraded himself to Gemini status, meaning that he now is really, really smart, I thought I’d test him by asking: “Can you give me some examples, with citations, of hyperconformity as a strategy of resistance, as hypothesized by Baudrillard?” Here is Bard’s reply:

—

Hyperconformity as Resistance in Baudrillard’s Work: Examples and Citations

Jean Baudrillard, the French philosopher and social theorist, proposed the concept of “hyperconformity” as a potentially subversive response to dominant systems of power and control. He argued that in a hypermediated, consumerist society, traditional forms of resistance like protest and critique become less effective. Instead, individuals can subvert the system by adopting its own values and symbols to the point of absurdity, exposing their inherent contradictions and emptiness.

Here are some examples of hyperconformity as resistance, along with citations from Baudrillard’s work:

1. Fashion and Consumerism:

• In “Simulacra and Simulation,” Baudrillard analyzes the fashion industry, claiming it doesn’t offer genuine self-expression but rather prescribes fleeting trends that individuals blindly follow. He suggests wearing these trends to the extreme, exaggerating their superficiality, can expose the industry’s manipulation and point to the absence of true individuality within consumer culture. (Baudrillard, 1981, p. 166)

2. Media and Information:

• In “America,” Baudrillard examines the American media landscape, arguing it doesn’t reflect reality but creates a hyperreal spectacle. He suggests adopting the media’s own strategies of sensationalism and exaggeration to expose their artificiality and lack of connection to the real world. (Baudrillard, 1986, p. 102)

3. Political Discourse:

• In “The Gulf War Did Not Take Place,” Baudrillard criticizes how media coverage of the Gulf War presented it as a sanitized, video-game-like event. He argues that mimicking this discourse, adopting its hyperreal language and imagery, can reveal its emptiness and challenge the legitimacy of such narratives. (Baudrillard, 1991, p. 13)

4. Social Norms and Identity:

• In “The Ecstasy of Communication,” Baudrillard explores how individuals adopt and perform social identities dictated by media and advertising. He suggests exaggerating these performances, pushing them to extremes, to expose their constructed nature and the lack of authentic selfhood underneath. (Baudrillard, 1988, p. 112)

5. Technology and Surveillance:

• In “The Transparency of Evil,” Baudrillard examines the pervasiveness of surveillance in contemporary society. He suggests embracing this surveillance, becoming hyper-visible and oversharing information, to force the system to confront the absurdity of its own total control. (Baudrillard, 2002, p. 54)

It’s important to note that Baudrillard’s concept of hyperconformity as resistance is complex and controversial. Some critics argue it’s passive and ultimately ineffective, while others see it as a potent form of cultural critique. Ultimately, the effectiveness of hyperconformity as resistance depends on the specific context and the skill with which it’s employed.

—

Why might hyperconformity be an appropriate strategy to deploy against Israeli control of America? Because the discourse is becoming not just one-sided, but overwhelmingly so. Palestine is one of those subjects that can only be raised from the pro-Jewish-power perspective. It’s like Jewish control of Hollywood: You’re only allowed to talk about it, as Joel Stein famously did, if you’re in favor of it. Stein’s parting shot: “But I don’t care if Americans think we’re running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.”

Likewise, E. Michael Jones has noted the many books, mostly written by Jews, exploring gross Jewish overrepresentation in the pornography, abortion, and organized crime industries. In essentially all cases, the Jewish pornographers, abortionists, and criminals are portrayed sympathetically, as if what they’re doing is a good thing, or at least not an entirely bad thing. Obviously the 11th Commandment, the only one respected in today’s USA, is: “Speak no evil of the Jews.”

Since Palestine is one of the many “Jewish issues” that we are only allowed to talk about from one perspective—the Jewish perspective—why not do so in an exaggerated fashion, in line with the strategy of hyperconformity? Here are some ideas for hyperconformist protests.

Jew-S-A! Jew-S-A!

At live political speeches and debates, and at gatherings of people watching televised ones, whenever an American politician makes a pro-Israel statement, we all leap to our feet shouting: “Jew-S-A! Jew-S-A!” For visual effect, we can wave an American flag with a Star of David in place of the fifty stars. (This could also become a drinking game, but as a Muslim, I neither play nor advocate drinking games.)

Eat Only Israeli

EOI is a pro-Israel group dedicated to countering BDS. Members pledge to subsist only on made-in-Israel food. To that end, they walk around grocery stores putting little blue stars on Israeli products. If the store’s management protests, or the cops are called, EOI activists explain that they are just exercising their Yahweh-given AIPAC-endorsed right to support the Jewish state, that if their group members can’t use the little blue stars to find Israeli food they will starve just like Holocaust victims did, and (it goes without saying) that any opposition to what they’re doing is anti-Semitic.

Make the Israel Pledge Public

Cynthia McKinney has reported that new Congress-members are approached by pro-Israel lobbyists and required to sign a pledge of loyalty to Israel. MIPP activists want the whole process to be public, so we can see which, if any, of our representatives are so anti-Semitic that they refuse to sign the pledge. Anybody who doesn’t support MIPP is obviously covering for those congressional anti-Semites.

Anti-Semitism Self-Criticism

We record videos berating ourselves for our inability to completely purge ourselves of every last anti-Semitic thought, like “Palestinians are human” and “this media coverage sure seems awfully one-sided” and “I’m not sure the Israelis are telling the truth about those headchopped babies.”

Holocaust Film Marathons

We organize marathon screenings of every Holocaust movie ever made and demand that every local, state, and federal official sit through the entire program. We document their attendance and make sure that nobody sneaks out to smoke or use the bathroom, because missing even a single minute of a single Holocaust film is evidence of anti-Semitism. Anyone who falls asleep 36 hours into the program gets their eyelids taped open à la Alex in A Clockwork Orange.

These are just a few of the ways Americans could use exaggerated conformity to Zionist totalitarianism as a way of pushing back. Maybe you can think of a few more. If so, feel free to post them in the comments.