“Who is the rebel against law and order, the legislator ordaining or the citizen resisting unconstitutional measures? It is the unprincipled minister who artfully innovates on the custom of governing, the ambitious senator whose self is his God, the faithless magistrate who tramples on rights which he has sworn to protect. These are the men who by perverting the purposes of government destroy its foundation, bring back society into a state of war, and are answerable for its mischievous effects.”
– William Emerson, Sermon, 1802
Nullification is the inherent duty of individuals to invalidate and resist any and every government action shown to be unconstitutional or unjust. This principle is rooted in the belief that all government power derives from the consent of the governed; therefore, when a government oversteps its mandate, individuals retain their sovereignty to act as checks on its authority.
Historically, the idea has been championed by US Presidents Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, for nullification emphasizes that the Constitution represents a compact among the people, any breach of which by the government warrants the rightful resistance of its citizens to protect their intrinsic freedom and its sovereign rights.
This fundamentally American doctrine asserts that the Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people, but one for the people to restrain their government, literally an insurance policy against the hazard that it may unjustly harm or endanger them.
The duty to resist usurpation of power by anyone, in any office, is painfully relevant today, and not because of any election season. We see it on display across several contemporary movements, in varying degrees, as more and more individuals are separately forced to resist overreach.
Consider the array of government misconduct regarding gun control, land management, medical mandates, surveillance and, of course, whistle-blowers.
Tragically, individuals who work in local, state and federal offices inevitably attempt to expand their scope and power. Since, however, nongovernmental civilians hold ultimate sovereignty, it is also necessarily their own inseparable responsibility to nullify unconstitutional actions as the crucial maintenance of their freedom.
If they ignore this, or shrink from it, whether through laziness or fear, then they risk harming many more than just themselves.
The doctrine that arbitrary power must be resisted is the driving force behind individual acts of defiance, both against unjust laws (i.e. those beyond the consent of the governed) and/or those unjustly applied (i.e. lawfare). Notably, individuals across various states have refused to comply with federal gun control measures, asserting their duty to self-defense and its protection under the Second Amendment. This form of resistance is not only a right but a vital obligation to prevent the erosion of fundamental freedoms that are easily lost and only regained at great cost, if ever.
Similarly, resistance to federal healthcare mandates, including the Affordable Care Act, has seen individuals and groups challenge its provisions through legal and grassroots means, emphasizing their duty to safeguard medical autonomy over bureaucrats’ attempts to usurp it.
Moreover, the concept of jury nullification, where jurors acquit defendants despite evidence of legal guilt because they believe the law itself is unjust, underscores the enduring belief in individual duty to resist government actions that overstep constitutional boundaries. This practice allows individuals to directly impact the enforcement of laws they consider oppressive, embodying the principle that upholding justice may sometimes require defying statutory decrees.
The relevance of nullification today underscores a persistent distrust in centralized power and a reaffirmation of individual rights and duties. As local, state and federal government officers openly attempt to usurp power, this principle is a reminder of the necessity for checks and balances, ensuring that power remains ultimately with you, who are otherwise unaffiliated with your government. This enduring principle from the American Revolution continues to inform and inspire modern resistance to government overreach, a living safeguard of individual liberty against institutional (i.e. inhuman) and inhumane threats.
The duty to resist is deeply embedded in the philosophical underpinnings of the American legal tradition. The writings of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and other founding figures emphasize that when a government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established — namely, to secure the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — it is not just the right but the duty of the people to alter or abolish it. This is not a call for anarchy, but for a vigilant citizenry that holds its administrators accountable as such.
If you survey contemporary society, you will see nullification practiced by those few individuals with the courage to stand up against any laws and regulations that demonstrably infringe on our constitutionally protected rights. From whistleblowers exposing the misconduct of government officials (of any branch or rank) to activists challenging unjust laws, the spirit of nullification is alive, though arguably unwell. Indeed, the fewer individuals volunteer for this duty, the greater the cost and risk they are forced to bear.
Nowhere is this more obvious than in the normalization of criminal plea bargaining, which is almost always evidence that the State has no case … if it could win in a jury trial, then why would it not seek convictions without offering deals instead?
Ultimately, nullification is a suspiciously fragile aspect of American jurisprudence, emphasizing that individuals are the last line of defense of their own freedom. By resisting unconstitutional laws and government actions themselves, they uphold the foundational principles of liberty and justice, ensuring that government remains a servant of the people, not their master.
Habitual critical thinking about law and procedure, as far as self-representation in court, if necessary, uniquely empowers individuals to take control of their own legal matters and to most effectively protect human rights, including their own.
“Let us remember that if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it and involve others in our doom.” – Samuel Adams, Boston Gazette, October 1771
In the postmodern “El Dorado,” of the 2020s, where gold isn’t just a shiny metal but the lifeblood of a shadow economy, Al Jazeera’s Investigative Unit has done what governments can’t — or won’t — do: expose the dirty dealings that turn gold into the universal laundromat for the world’s filthiest money.
Through thousands of confidential documents and exclusive interviews with whistleblowers from within the criminal organisations, investigators obtain the blueprints of billion-dollar money laundering operations that service the political elite. And the investigation leads to the highest offices of southern Africa.
The four-part series, “Gold Mafia,” delves deep into the underbelly of the gold trade, revealing the sinister symbiosis between criminals and the political elite. “Gold Mafia” isn’t just a docuseries; it’s a revelation of how deep the rot goes in the global gold trade. It exposes a world where wealth and power are intertwined with crime, and where the line between politician and gangster is razor-thin.
Watch the full series and prepare to see gold in a whole new light:
Imagine waltzing into a secret meeting with a suitcase full of dirty money, knowing the guy across the table has a diplomatic passport and a get-out-of-jail-free card. Watch as undercover operatives pose as gangsters with a billion-dollar problem — black money that needs a deep clean. Enter the Gold Mafia, who offer their unique services with the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe acting as the world’s biggest washing machine. Forget Swiss banks; the real action is in Zimbabwe, where government officials moonlight as money launderers. It’s like watching the worst kind of magic show, where the trick isn’t pulling a rabbit out of a hat but making millions disappear and reappear as shiny, untouchable gold.
Episode 2 – Smoke & Mirrors
Premiere Date: March 30, 2023
Meet Mo Dollars, South Africa’s answer to Houdini, who turns illicit cigarette profits into gold. The trick? A labyrinth of shelf companies and fake invoices that make Enron look like a kid’s lemonade stand. When the Gold Mafia’s operation outgrows its back-alley roots, they go corporate, infiltrating banks and government departments. The undercover team strikes a deal with a rival mafia promising access to Zimbabwe’s executive power, proving once again that in this game, it’s not about what you know, but who you can buy.
Episode 3 – El Dorado
Premiere Date: April 6, 2023
Dubai—the glittering oasis where dirty gold goes to get clean. Here, the Gold Mafia’s HQ operates like a high-stakes boardroom where diplomats broker billion-dollar deals. Ambassador Uebert Angel plays the role of the slick middleman, arranging a meeting between our undercover team and Zimbabwe’s President Mnangagwa. The catch? A hefty bribe to sweeten the deal. The message is clear: in the world of gold laundering, every door opens if you have enough cash.
Episode 4 – Have The King With You
Premiere Date: April 14, 2023
The final act brings a Shakespearean twist as the noose tightens around South Africa’s top money launderers. Betrayal, threats, and paranoia run rampant. The undercover operatives face the ultimate test as the Gold Mafia boss warns of deadly consequences for those who break their code of silence. With political connections as their shield, the Gold Mafia bosses continue to lure in business, promising safety and security under the wings of the continent’s leaders. As one mafia boss ominously advises, “When you work, you must always have the king with you. The president.”
Once upon a time, in the shining City on the Hill, a silent Shadow ever so slowly emerged — at first strangling all mirth as it gradually engulfed every edifice and every corner — until at last it boldly threatened to extinguish even the People. It did not ride in resplendent on a pale horse to reap them outright; instead, like a virus it seeped through their screens, a toxic leak latching onto the ever-suggestible and unsuspecting host-minds of their most ardent keyboard warriors. Eventually, historians gave it a name: Cancel Culture.
Imagine being the underdog in a neighborhood boxing ring, challenging a global bully who’s come to your town to seize control of the schools and the hospitals … and the banks. In the red corner, you have government agencies, armed with their regulatory hammers and fiscal carrots. In the blue corner, the tech giants and their army of algorithms stand ready to shadowban your free speech into oblivion. The green corner features academic institutions and NGOs — high priestesses of the postmodern orthodoxy — chanting their incantations of “safety” and “order” while sharpening the knives of censorship.
The stakes are high in this twisted circus … and your opponent?
The more observant among you already recognize the Censorship Industrial Complex, a three-headed hydra spewing control, compliance, and conformity. This unholy trinity of government, corporate, and academic power is Hell Bent for Leather on curating your thoughts and conversations. The rest of you merely sense, involuntarily, that something is lost, never to return.
Could the near future possibly get any more dire?
Before you rush to answer that we can’t get any farther up Shit Creek, don’t forget the yellow corner. Your family and, worse, your family’s family, wields the most insidious weapons of all. As always, the weaker members of a society en masse attacking its stronger members is a leading indicator that it will not survive, and that its population is in mortal peril. The historical precedents of families actively betraying each other in tense times are unsettling, to put it mildly. Such is the domestic vector of how civil rights lead to civil wars and, worse, to cultural revolutions.
Government Agencies: The Surveillance State’s Puppet Masters
Like Erin Brockovich stepping into a town long poisoned by hidden contaminants, picture yourself waking from the American Dream only to find yourself desperate, depressed and clueless. As you ween yourself of the poisons of your private life, you come to find that the true source of the malaise is a pervasive web of public power pushing not only your most sensitive buttons, but others’, too.
Amid the mental fog, government agencies cloak their surveillance operations in the guise of national security and public safety — precisely in order to ensure the opposite, for without a crisis their mandate is obsolete. Thus, by manufacturing evergreen crises, they hope to position themselves as the sole solution bringers. However, the only thing shrinking faster than their ability to monopolize mass media is their actual influence on events.
Although webs are a legitimately messy waste of time, your most precious resource, the actual threat is their maker. Below is an utterly incomplete list of relevant government agencies. For a longer list, you have only to pull on any of these sticky strands and your curiosity will propagate outward to alert the others to your presence … and possibly even acquaint you with the Spider.
Begin your descent with:
Department of Homeland Security (DHS): This creature was hatched in the immediate aftermath of 9-11, as if in anticipation of the 2020s. Since 2018, its newest wing, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has been tasked with understanding, managing, and reducing risks to essential systems. In 2021, CISA assumed control of the .gov top-level domain (TLD) from the General Services Administration, allowing the agency to manage the approval of .gov domains and operate the TLD Domain Name System nameservers. In this era of misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation, CISA also partners with social media companies to develop and promote accurate, “authoritative” information, particularly during elections.
National Science Foundation (NSF): NSF investments have given the world Doppler radar, bar codes, the modern Internet, web browsers, MRI, laser eye surgery, DNA analysis and synthetic biology. Many new technologies, like generative artificial intelligence and wearable sensors, present both risks and opportunities for cybersecurity. The NSF supports the full range of critical and emerging technologies, including the key focal areas of the “CHIPS and Science Act of 2022.” However, cybersecurity requires more than merely strengthening infrastructure. Thus, in order to rapidly transform NSF-funded research done across the U.S. into impactful products, services and solutions, the agency created its first new directorate this century — Technology, Innovation and Partnerships.
State Department: As it strives to appear as the global peacemaker, the State Department pours resources into tools designed to stifle dissent abroad while promoting democracy with the same doublethink that Ms. Brockovich encountered from corporate lawyers spinning toxic sludge into harmless silt. Unless it plans to bribe you or otherwise undermine your sovereignty, the Sunday morning talk-show circuit is as close as you will likely come to hearing from its mouthpieces, which would only be yet another waste of your precious time.
Department of Justice (DOJ) and Local Law Enforcement (DAs & Judges): The DOJ’s increasing involvement in online discourse crafts legal arguments to suppress inconvenient truths under the guise of public safety. In fact, it’s this very wing of the Beast that has recently turned “lawfare” into a household word. Local law enforcement agencies and judicial officers play pivotal parts in these censorship practices. Again, just as Erin Brockovich’s experiences with local judges convinced her to see through the corporate smokescreen and smell the bullshit, if your luck is merely normal, then your turn to do likewise is coming, if it hasn’t already.
The Faceblock/MeTube and LinkedOut/ChubStack Consortia: The “Mean Girls” of the Digital Playground
Social media companies today deploy oodles of algorithms buttressed by battalions of barely human moderators whose day-job it is to shadowban, de-platform and censor those pesky dissenting voices (including yours?) for the sake of “community” standards. Is this plot becoming a bit too familiar, or maybe even annoyingly predictable?
How much do you use and/or depend on the following:
Facebook, 𝕏, YouTube (i.e. Alphabet): These platforms are the modern-day gatekeepers of public discourse. Their opaque algorithms and human moderators enforce the ever-shifting community standards, conveniently aligned with “the Message”. The less you pay to use these platforms, the more you are the product. The more you rely on them to monetize your voice, the less the words will be your own.
LinkedIn, Substack, et al.: LinkedIn is more than just a professional networking site; it’s a platform where discussions on controversial topics are closely monitored and moderated. The annoying echo of tightly controlled corporate communications reminiscent of “Erin Brockovich”, “Michael Clayton”and/or “The Insider” is proof that you are in an echo chamber. Lacking the pretense of professionalism that LinkedIn once had, Substack is no better. Literally anyone can anonymously get you banned from these sites, and have your profile (with potentially years of attached work) removed. What you come to find is a slew of writers promising the moon and stars behind a subscription paywall.
Ask yourself: would you pay YouTube content creators monthly to watch more than the first two minutes of their videos? If not, then the Substack business model is little more than the one-way mirror in an interrogation room, where everything you say can and will be used against you. Admittedly, exceptions exist (here, there and everywhere), but the overwhelming majority of writers are mere opinion jockeys without any technical edge.
Other, smaller tech firms, eager to prove their loyalty to the powerful, are also busy pumping their stock price by developing new tools to sniff out, and snuff out, anything that smells like dissent. Like Ms. Brockovich’s foes, who hid behind corporate obfuscation and legalese, yours have a counter for every objection that you can think (or dare) to raise, and a louder voice, too. There is still a way to fight the good fight, but your tactics must adapt to a world that barely remembers the movie-version of her 20th century exploits, now more than a generation ago.
Universities and Think Tanks: Postmodern Praetorian Guards
Academia and think tanks have, for aeons, been the intellectual vanguards in the gradual war against freedom of speech. Nowadays, these ivory towers provide a patina of pedigree that almost make the Censorship Industrial Complex look respectable on those aged-out late-night comedy shows.
Stanford Internet Observatory: These digital hall monitors collaborate with social media giants to craft strategies for detecting and neutralizing “harmful” content, echoing the experts Ms. Brockovich exposed for their corporate-funded biases.
Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab: This think tank operates like a detective agency that dissects designated disinformation campaigns in the digital engagement space, including those related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Chinese expansion strategies, and regional disinformation in places like West Africa and Sudan. By building a network of forensic analysts known as DigitalSherlocks, DFRLab tracks events in governance, technology, and security in order to create a new model of expertise adapted for real-world impact.
World Economic Forum (WEF): The WEF champions global initiatives to regulate online content, promoting policies that blur the lines between protecting public interest and imposing restrictive controls on speech.
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR): Dubbed the “Mothership”, the CFR engages in extensive research and policy recommendations on managing information in the digital age, supporting efforts to combat the free flow of information.
Universities: It is well-known by now, via Noam Chomsky of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and others, that universities are the ovens where the wedding cake of Manufactured Consent is baked. However, even most of the more informed worker bees around the water cooler are unaware of institutions like Syracuse University, or the New School. These hubs for interdisciplinary “research” into misinformation are quietly funded to develop tools for squashing dissent, which goes beyond mere “study” by any stretch.
NGOs: Virtue Signalers of the Social Justice War
In her namesake movie, Erin’s moral compass drives her to fight against corporate Goliaths. In a sly reversal that has duped the mainstream, though, various NGOs today similarly justify a overtly matriarchal censorship agenda. They frame themselves as concerned mother hens, f course, and their cause as a noble crusade to protect society from its own harmful content. Your freedom is merely a line-item expense them.
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF): Traditionally a defender of free speech, the EFF now walks a tightrope, endorsing moderation efforts that easily tip into censorship, compromising with powerful interests against the need for public support.
Global Disinformation Index (GDI) and NewsGuard: These watchdogs label and blacklist “misinformation,” guiding advertisers away from non-compliant media outlets, wielding economic power as a censor’s tool, applying financial pressure where needed.
Cyber Threat Intelligence League (CTIL): This group collaborates with government agencies to craft sophisticated moderation frameworks and algorithms, ensuring no “harmful” thought slips through the digital net.
Freedom House: International NGOs that advocate for democracy and political freedom, like their government counterpart the NED, necessarily support policies aligned with censorship, as always under the guise of combating misinformation. Freedom House is no exception, however its name itself is an instance of malinformation, making it worthy of consideration.
This list is incomplete, of course. To extend it, simply subject yourself to (ideally the end of) “informative” programs on public broadcasting (NPR, et. al.) and listen for the list of donors. Civilians can hold these organizations accountable for their influence on public discourse and protect truly free speech only by insisting on it in practice themselves.
Punditry: The Image of Influence
Just as Erin Brockovich faced off against powerful individuals in her fight for justice, there are key figures today who shape and defend the Censorship Industrial Complex, wielding significant influence over public discourse.
Renee DiResta: A pivotal figure in content moderation debates, Ms. DiResta numbers among the coven of high priestesses of digital censorship, advocating for ever stricter controls over online content. Perfectly aligned with her private counterparts’ consensus, she calls misinformation her foe and bridges the gap between academia and government, cementing her role as an influencer in the digital arena.
Rachel Maddow, The View, CNN, etc.: Media personalities and outlets like Rachel Maddow, The View, and CNN often play dual roles in this complex. They have so successfully replaced the Fourth Estate that nowadays many modern folks have never even heard of it. On one hand, they vehemently report on instances of censorship and free speech issues, while on the other, they support censorship efforts that align with their editorial stance even more vehemently. Thus, and not by any accident, they contribute to the suppression of dissenting viewpoints while effectively widening other cultural rifts (health, gender, etc.) in the process.
Iconoclasts: It is increasingly fair to think that targets for cancelation have more newsworthy content to report than most other sources, at least if you prefer to get your news from the frontline and not from analysts severed from events, or from pundits twice removed. Individuals as diverse as Andrew Napolitano and Tucker Carlson, or Bret Weinstein and James Corbett have consistently criticized the growing influence of the Censorship Industrial Complex. Their work and many others’, in its various forms, continues to shed light on the dangers of conflating misinformation with legitimate dissent. Can you see what they have in common, despite their obvious differences and/or their influence on public discourse? It is the most reliable filter to critically engage with and to support those who risk it all to defend free speech.
Industrial Scale Tactics
The Censorship Industrial Complex employs an obscene variety of tactics to maintain its stranglehold on public discourse, blending technology and human oversight in a seamless and unseemly web of control.
ALGORITHMIC MODERATION: Social media platforms deploy sophisticated algorithms to automatically flag and remove content that violates their guidelines. These digital overseers scan for forbidden keywords and phrases, operating with the loveless, insect-like efficiency of a Kafkaesque patent clerk in an Orwellian nightmare.
HUMAN REVIEW: When algorithms aren’t enough, human moderators step in to assess flagged content. Not your average Rockwell soda slinger, this stultifying human touch adds a veneer of fairness to the narrative’s’ tight leash. The underlying agenda remains the same, and if you just shut up about it already, then we can all get back to work, OK?
PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS: Programs like CISA foster maternally close collaboration between government agencies and private companies, creating a seamless interface for monitoring and controlling online discourse. These partnerships ensure that resources and expertise flow freely between the public and private sectors.
FUNDING & GRANTS: Government agencies bankroll research and development efforts, guiding a steady stream of innovations to enhance content moderation. This financial backing keeps the wheels of censorship turning smoothly, quietly, and in one direction. Most citizens lack basic financial literacy (i.e. what is money?), and are certainly not “allowed” to know that, thanks to trickle-up economics, they are funding their own suppression.
INFLUENCE PEDDLING: During the recent pandemic, for example, any content questioning the official narratives first on personal protective equipment (PPE) and later on vaccines was swiftly targeted for suppression. Organizations like CTIL used tools like Zetalytics to track and counteract skepticism, painting dissenters as threats to public health.
CANCEL CULTURE: Content critical of government actions, especially if it transcends mere complaint to express alternative political views, is singled out for suppression. These nefarious practices raise grave concerns about the government’s basic mandate amid the erosion of democratic discourse, since dissent is fundamentally a risky act of service that should be protected.
By understanding these ways and means, you can develop strategies first to protect yourself (and your family) and then to challenge unjust censorship practices for the sake of those not yet able to do so for themselves.
The Matrix of Public and Political Pushback
The Censorship Industrial Complex has (finally!) sparked a fierce debate, drawing criticism and support from various quarters. Knowledge and direct action — advocating for transparency and accountability — are the thorny uphill pathway to freedom. Alternatively, you can elect to do the bare minimum, or nothing at all.
Free Speech: Critics argue that the complex’s activities pose a severe threat to free speech, a fundamental pillar of democracy. To suppress dissenting views undermines not only the principles of respectful discourse but, worse, the intellectual freedom necessary to ensure that the best ideas rise to the top in a meritocracy.
Political Manipulation: The growing and reasonable fear that content moderation is being used as a political tool to silence opposition and shape public opinion is only proven by the fact that “lawfare” is now in the mainstream vocabulary. The involvement of government entities in content moderation raises profound legal and ethical questions, particularly regarding the imbalance between the survival of the Deep State (another mainstream term that used to be esoteric), the threats to public safety and the all-important and all-but-forgotten individual rights.
Government Influence: In order to circumnavigate constitutional protections, government agencies blur the line between private action and state censorship. They exert soft pressure on private companies to censor unwanted content on their behalf, effectively bending the law without breaking it.
Legal Scrutiny: Revelations from sources like the “Twitter Files” have led to legal challenges and public outcry, highlighting the murky waters of government-influenced censorship. Meanwhile, recent headlines of presidents and/or their sons becoming felons further erode confidence in the wisdom of the judiciary or the reliability of it procedures.
Transparency: The growing demand for greater transparency in content moderation decisions, including the criteria used and the extent of government involvement, is met first with indifference, then with silence. What comes next is up to whomever takes up the cause.
Accountability: Ensuring fair and consistent content moderation requires robust accountability mechanisms, including but not limited to independent oversight and avenues for appeal. Do not expect any of this to be done for you, nor to exist in future generations if you do not secure it yourself.
Summation: The Cost of Silence
As we witness the systematic manipulation of public opinion, with its collateral erasure of dissenting voices, it’s crucial to become critically aware and increasingly vigilant, and possibly even to upskill for mere survival. The complex web of government agencies, tech giants, academic institutions, and NGOs forms a formidable network that threatens to undermine the very foundations of freedom, and indeed civilization itself. Cancel culture, its most modern manifestation, discourages open dialogue and critical thinking. Instead, it fosters conformity and suppresses the diversity of thought essential for an informed citizenry.
Does that look like a future that you want for your grandchildren, or for theirs?
If not, than it’s imperative that you, yes you, recognize this regime and advocate for transparency, accountability, and the protection of free speech, even if such actions imperil you personally. When the peril finds you, remember to take another look at that yellow corner (family and in-laws), and check for weapons. If you participate in this digital society, then your awareness and engagement are paramount. Only you, not the State, can secure a more informed and resilient society, able to withstand the pressures of censorship and protect its fundamental freedoms, and only by becoming a member of one.
Roll over Ronnie, Hollywood has a new would-be Pretender to the Throne. The most recent episodes of the geopolitical s(h)itcom have featured the Clooney Foundation for Justice (CFJ) taking the stage. Its celebrity frontman aims to slither into the United States’ ongoing (losing) information war against Russia over its evolving Special Military Operation in Ukraine. Yet the real world is no TV courtroom melodrama; it’s 6D chess with international law and media narratives as pawns. George and his Foundation seemingly fancy themselves its Dark Knights, targeting Russian media personnel through the International Criminal Court (ICC), passively accusing them of inciting genocide.
Its aim? To scare off anyone with the audacity to report for RT and Sputnik!
Picture it, Glitter Gulch’s glitziest geeks and geezers rubbing bony elbows with their political idols, all under the watchful gaze of an unimpressed American public. Downtown LA turned into a staged ritual, featuring President Joe Biden and former President Barack Obama headlining a fundraiser at the Peacock Theater. With George Clooney and Julia Roberts adding a touch of faded stardust, the night was more of a wannabe Oscar gala than a substantive political rally.
In a Hollywood humiliation ritual reminiscent of John Cena’s recent rising cloak and sinking dagger show, Jack Black, costumed as a Tolstoyan Sad Clown, aimed to deliver more comic relief than his host, but was ultimately upstaged by the President’s handler, the other President.
With hardly any advertising and no product to peddle, per se, their unnamed opponent recently set staggering donation records, enough to fund the next Disney megaflop, were he so inclined.
Meanwhile, ticket prices ranged from $250 for the nosebleed seats to a cool half-mil to plant your ass near Joe. The take on the night was estimated at a meager $30 million for his flatlining re-election war chest, a pitiful sum amounting to little more than pocket change considering what the event “cost” to produce. Those who know their way around the ‘hood, of course, also know that the big winners are the boomer era owner/operators of the private, secure street-level parking lots, and the young hustlers lucky enough to work the valet lot at the Peacock’s exit, each a master cash magnet in their own right.
Shhh … it’s all a big write-off anyway.
Inside the theater, sheltered from the real world without, the atmosphere was positively electric, with supporters hanging on every word, as if waiting for the miracle. One starry-eyed attendee, as she made her low-budget entrance, gushed through her surgical mask, “Hearing them talk about the issues is very important.” She elatedly described eavesdropping on scripted discussions of border policies with the Obamas as if it were as mainstream as chatting with her girlfriends over midweek brunch about the latest hair-loss hacks and sex tips for seniors.
Her goateed husband was visibly underwhelmed.
Meanwhile, no big city blockbuster can be complete without its proletariat protest scene, and the City of Angels did not disappoint. Outside, a pro-Palestinian mob, masked and ready for a photo-op, abandoned multiple posts at nearby universities and colleges for the evening to stage its PR sit-in at the Peacock’s mouth.
As they locked their spindly arms in a dramatic display of unity, this bored ape could not help but notice that these lost souls were more concerned about Gaza’s air quality than their own.
Alas, the masks are just a bit of show for the occasion, especially when bathed in direct sunlight. If, that is, you courageously “believe the science” about pathogen destruction in the real world, and/or the benefits of vitamin D. Otherwise, vaxx-up and pack yourself into the next multimedia protest spectacle like a sardine and signal the virtue in your heart for all the cameras and the world to see. After all, Major Grom isn’t streaming in to save anybody.
Hypocrisy, or commitment? Do the dedicated street-performers here deserve acting awards of their own … or will these me-toos, wannabes and runners-up become next season’s washed out castaways, forgotten like so many Black Dahlias? It’s one big Gong Show, and while you don’t get to book the acts, you do get to be the judge.
Allegations and Accusations
Away from the glitz and glamour, the CFJ’s Docket initiative faces significant criticism from Russian officials. Maria Zakharova, the able spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, accused it of “hounding” Russian journalists by pushing for secret arrest warrants against them. Ms. Zakharova claimed the foundation’s actions were politically and ethnically motivated, describing them as a “judicial safari” targeting Russian media figures.
She calls this out as nothing less, or more, than an attempt at suppression wrapped in the noble cause of justice. Much like Clooney’s ill-fated portrayals of Batman (yes, plural), this move reeks of a flashy, costly and out-of-touch attempt to be relevant. Outside the echo chamber where it’s produced, it fails to resonate with a multipolar world that has moved on. According to Ms. Zakharova, these are psychological warfare tactics aimed at dividing and weakening Russian media.
The Clooney Foundation’s Lawfare
Anya Neistat, the legal director of the Clooney Foundation’s Docket initiative, spilled the caviar to Voice of America, stating that journalists who refer to the Kyiv regime as Nazis (despite their obvious affiliation with the Azov Battalion, not to mention their tattoos), are in the crosshairs for ICC charges. George now denies that his Foundation intended to seek the arrest of Russian journalists, stating that “someone” had misspoken.
This isn’t about free speech, though, or even mis-speech; it’s about who controls the narrative, for how long, and at what cost.
Ms. Zakharova was quick to make this point, noting George’s history of picking pet causes coincidentally in alignment with American international interests. Do any of this bored ape’s readers remember George’s 2012 handcuffed photo-op over Darfur? He remembers watching it on RT. So, this is merely another chapter in a well-worn playbook — Ocean’s 81, if you will — slick on the surface but lacking a genuine twist.
Recent admissions from The Atlantic, in tandem with those from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), that Russia is winning the information war might explain why the collective West, via its “celebrity proxies”, now resorts to this pettiest form of lawfare.
If you can’t win fair and square, why not use the law to attack your enemy? It’s a tried-and-true strategy in the West, especially dear to those on the Left, that aims to ruin lives for the crime of promoting alternative viewpoints on a major global conflict. My family is a victim of this cowardly tactic, as are many families in the post-Covid era.
They want you to be afraid …
Thus, high-profile Russian media figures might become forced to avoid ICC member states to dodge potential arrest. As if in xenophobic harmony, the US State Department just issued stern warnings to all Americans to avoid travel to Russia for any reason, citing every conceivable risk except exposure to the truth of a larger world. The word is out via its proxy mainstream media monolith. Meanwhile, lesser-known international journalists (including podcasters and YouTubers) might not see the risk and continue their work, unaware of the looming threat — pawns in a game they don’t even know they’re playing.
The Clooney Foundation’s Real Agenda
So, given the precedents and the circumstantial evidence, what is the Clooney Foundation really up to? By focusing its lawfare on RT and Sputnik’s foreign employees, and those working in ICC-compliant states, it’s not promoting a free press, that’s for sure. On the contrary, it’s attempting to sanction Russian media with surreal similarity to the economic sanctions waged by the ECB and others.
There’s also likely some level of collusion with the alphabet soup of intelligence agencies, the TLAs of the PTB, as the Foundation hasn’t been transparent about its donors.
By leaning on George’s and Amal’s celebrity status, the bankers and the spooks hope to attract attention and funding, yet the legitimacy of their cause remains murky. Like a naked emperor, the public only sees old George hoping to don Batman’s cowl once more, as if crepuscular star power can somehow distract from a lack of substance, but this crusader’s identity is no guarded secret.
The Problem with Celebrity Activism
The Clooney Foundation’s clumsy attempt to insert itself into geopolitics is emblematic of a larger issue: the increasingly common, yet often misguided, involvement of celebrities in complex political matters. Even generously (i.e. naively) assuming that George, and actors like him, might have good intentions, their superficial understanding of intricate issues and reliance on star power often leads to counterproductive outcomes. It only worked for Ronald Reagan because the public was more credulous, and information was more easily controlled.
The world is moving on from celebrity influencers’ flashy campaigns that prioritize headlines in favor of informed, nuanced engagement, indeed, of genuine solutions to pressing problems that challenge us all.
Rock stars and movie gods, with their vast platforms, can raise awareness, but their influence can not only distort reality, but is expressly intended to do so. They aim to shift public attention in the short term, but lack the genuine expertise and sustained commitment necessary for actually beneficial change. Worse, their involvement overshadows the work of more qualified activists who toil diligently, away from the spotlight and often at great cost to themselves, to effect meaningful progress toward it.
Take, for instance, Robert De Niro’s recent involvement in a Biden/Harris campaign event outside the Manhattan courthouse where former President Donald Trump was on trial.
Bob, alongside former Capitol Police officers Harry Dunn and Michael Fanone, used the event to defame Donald Trump (a crime, incidentally, when done to private citizens), calling him “guilty” (before any verdict, disputed or not, was handed down) and a “clown.” His unscripted, impassioned remarks drew both applause and ire. More appropriately, though, his recent stunt of staring at goats also cost him the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) Leadership Foundation’s Service to America Award.
We are a very long way indeed from Kansas, that bygone era when the late Marlon Brando declined his Best Actor Oscar in protest of Hollywood’s treatment of the Native American peoples, sending Sacheen Littlefeather to the ceremony to refuse the award on his behalf.
Dank Brandon: The Ironic Evolution of Biden’s Persona
And then there’s Dark Brandon, a meme born of derision and rebranded into a badge of veiled approval. Once a mocking chant from the fringes, “Dark Brandon” has morphed into a symbol of resilience for Biden supporters. He captures the absurdity and the chaos of modern political discourse perfectly, consonant with the SoCal spectacle, palm trees and all, where reality blurs into prenuclear performance art.
Joe, who seems more at home in the role of a statesman among celebrities than in the gritty, actual, political arena of his day job, embraces this ironic godlike heroism.
“Dank” Brandon, though, is the ultimate flex: a concoction of my own making, a chaser to swallow along with the admission that, in the theater of politics, image trumps substance. In case you forget that that’s the way the game is played, remember that the Peacock Theatre is primarily a sports venue. The downtown LA fundraiser is thus another episode where the boundaries between gaming, governance and entertainment dissolve, and where the line between Joseph Biden, the real man, and “Dank” Brandon, the cheap-faked demigod, blurs into a single, (temporarily) marketable product.
Taco trucks and pro basketball are the bread and circuses of post-productivity capitalism and Hollywood, the precise point in spacetime where I was born (a deadly day of dangerous minds), is its parasitic postmodern Pompeii.
Legal Protections for Journalists Under International Law
Unfortunately for George (and/or his TLA handlers), while his targets lack a Soviet-style Superman to fly in and defy the billionaire “philanthropists” of the West, they are not without recourse. Several ways and means of higher justice exist for journalists around the world, and not merely those fortunate enough to hail from such “superpowers” as the USA or the Russian Federation.
Civilian Status: Journalists are considered civilians, protected under Article 79 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Convention.
Identification Cards: Provided to attest their status as journalists.
Customary International Law: Recognizes civilian status and protection from attacks.
Freedom of Expression: Protected under Article 19 of the ICCPR.
Arbitrary Detention and Unfair (or lack of any) Trial: Protection against arbitrary arrest and the right to a fair trial.
Prohibition of Enforced Disappearance: Journalists are protected from enforced disappearance.
UN Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions: Emphasize protection and condemn attacks on journalists.
UN Plan of Action: Aims to create a safe environment for journalists.
Another irony not lost on this bored ape, as he orbits this imperiled skidmark, is the great gulf, intellectually, from West to East, regarding hero worship. You can probably name, if you think about it, at least one Eastern European fairy tale and/or war story, not to mention science fiction novels aplenty. How many superheroes, created by Russian authors for Russian readers, do you know?
The subtle factor that makes the modern superhero so culturally subversive as a genre, compared to its contemporary Spartan counterpart, is its reliance on the virtue of unique strangers. Only victims need saviors, after all. The greater question, however, is what will happen to a society of spaced-out soyboys when it pokes the Bear beyond the point of no return.
Potential Consequences for Russian Journalists
Behind the scenes, George’s absent wife, Amal, and her own pro-Palestine pet project, have driven a spoke in the wheels of his erstwhile frictionless friendship with Joe, but not one large enough to cancel the scheduled re-union with his five-time on-screen heartthrob. A cynical analyst, if he gave a shit, might speculate at greater length than one run-one sentence on how Mrs. Clooney’s absence was a deliberate acknowledgment of, and capitulation to, the necessary illusion that George and Julia are a real thing, like Bennifer or Brangelina used to be … but not this sublunar explorer.
So what, right? Well, before you get fidgety and grab the remote, real journalists without A-list celebrities in their contacts have already lost their lives during the last year.
Not mentioning their names (yet again, ad nauseam) is a greater show of respect than of forgetfulness, but they are secretly more dearly missed than many of their redundant survivors. Reportage that matters is a risky business, and far short of the ultimate price, several other hazards potentially await its purest purist practitioners, whether they enjoy state sponsorship or not.
Criminal Charges: They may face severe public charges like “incitement to genocide” and/or “propaganda of aggressive war”.
Secret Arrest Warrants: The risk of unexpected molestation and even arrest while traveling is not without precedent.
Extradition / Prosecution: Trials in deliberately punitive jurisdictions that issue or enforce these warrants are unimaginable to those who haven’t experienced them, and competent legal representation is often either unavailable or hard to find.
Travel Restrictions: Official and/or self-imposed limits on international travel to avoid arrest are an invisible but palpable noose.
Blacklisting: Worse than the threat of loss of any particular position and its immediate income is the threat to their reputation, to their ability to work in the future, or to be seen and heard.
Erosion of Press Freedom: The chilling collateral effects on journalistic integrity, already well underway, should need no further elaboration by now.
My forward-looking regular readers can see, without my having to construct it for them, the enneagram implicit in the foregoing six-fold arrangement. They will also appreciate the following logos of strategic countermeasures built into this, or any, threat matrix.
If you have no idea what I mean by any of that, you’ve come to the right place … subscribe for a whole lot more to come.
Russian Countermeasures
Much to the Clooney Foundation’s chagrin, of course, is the fact that Russia is no damsel-in-distress. To counter the escalation, Russia will easily employ relevant, transferable strategies, some more obvious than others. Just spit-ballin’, these three leap readily to mind:
1. Raise Salaries: Offer higher pay and/or other discretionary benefits in the seller’s market of at-risk employees to retain the top-tier talent. 2. Fast-Track Citizenship: Provide a clear path to citizenship for BRICS-based media personnel, and possibly even incentivize some of the more qualified Western asylum seekers to “defect”. 3. Recruit Sustainably: Create a robust recruitment pipeline for RT and Sputnik, sweetened by scholarships at leading Russian universities involving part-time work at these media outlets.
By implementing these and other attractively proactive countermeasures, Russia can and will adapt to the hostile, asymmetric legal battleground to ensure that its media operations may continue unimpeded.
Moreover, Russia is no longer the sole superpower when it comes to so-called “alternative” news outlets as it was a decade ago, when RT’s DC-based correspondent, Liz Wahl, resigned on-air to protest its actions in — where else? — Ukraine. Where is she now, the crickets ask, or her co-anchor Abby Martin? Meanwhile, the number of foreign-based english-language news outlets from the “global South” only grows.
The Clooney Foundation’s latest gambit in the global information war blends would-be lawfare with media spectacle to create an unoriginal, low-value, high-budget psyop. As the geopolitical drama unfolds, one can only watch and wonder, who will make the next big blunder in the media circus? George, much like his Bruce Wayne / Danny Ocean hybrid persona, seems to be banking on outdated tactics, not realizing that the world is no longer captivated by his once-mesmerizing charm.
Ironically, like the co-star villain in his ill-received Batman outing, he might have parlayed his starpower into political office, maybe one even higher than Governor, but his time has come and gone. Nowadays, the reluctant political superhero that America believes it wants and needs, if anybody, is Dwayne “the Rock” Johnson.
So, as the circus packed up its cotton candy machines, its costume department and its Ticketmaster tollbooths, these ongoing misguided celebrity interventions again underscore the need for a deeper understanding and more genuine, informed engagement between average Joes. Instead, however, the stars, as if allergic to vitamin D, all faded in the sanitizing light of the following morning, but not before Dank Brandon, like Marilyn Monroe as the Runaway Bride, was dizzily whisked back aboard Air Force One, leaving behind the LA razzmatazz to dodge the gritty responsibilities of governance and the crumbling economy on which they depend. After all, he needs a nap before his first (and only?) big debate, and maybe another bowl of doctored ice cream, with sprinkles.
On an entirely private but not unrelated note, since you made it this far, how do you like the accompanying artwork?
Buckle up for a hard landing, literally, because if this was not an accident, it could just be the Archduke Ferdinand 2.0 moment that none of my readers wants to see. The geopolitical stunt-copter just claimed its latest victim this last week, and the dust has yet to settle. Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, along with his foreign minister and other key dignitaries, took an unscheduled terminal descent, courtesy of … who knows? Iranian State media confirmed the crash overnight, and the repercussions have been sending shockwaves far beyond the Middle East.
Iran is more than a regional player, or a defunct, backward country of savages; it’s a shadow power with a history spanning millennia.
A stalwart ally of Russia in its Special Military Operation in Ukraine, Iran’s support has been pivotal. From kamikaze drones to military advisers, Iran is bolstering Russia’s capabilities in no small way. This burgeoning Russo-Persian bromance might soon solidify into a military alliance, reshaping regional dynamics and beyond. Many of their other interests align, including peace and regional stability, which poses a threat to those whose interests diverge, particularly the Axis of the USA, the UK and Israel.
Mr. Raisi’s untimely death comes hot on the heels of an assassination attempt on Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico. Shot at close range, Mr. Fico survived and is in stable condition. According to pro-Western media his attacker, a fervent pro-Ukrainian, targeted Mr. Fico for his Kremlin-friendly stance. Although Slovakia’s split from the NATO cheerleading squad highlights Europe’s internal fractures, those with a more worldly take on things (including Robert Fico himself) attribute it to his opposition to the recent WHO Treaty.
That was clearly a deliberate and premeditated act, whereas this more recent event is quite literally, well, cloudy. Picture this: from a trio of helicopters, the one packed with the high-ranking officials vanishes into the treacherous mountains of East Azerbaijan Province, with no survivors … while the other two land safely at a nearby mine. Officially, Iran is blaming inclement weather.
Unofficially, whispers of foul play are echoing in the corridors of power … and why let a good conspiracy theory go to waste, right?
Iran and Israel have recently been exchanging unpleasantries via missile strikes, ergo Israel had to quickly and loudly deny any involvement. “It wasn’t us,” they proclaim. It might be more accurate for them to say “We want him, and most of the rest of you, dead, and we’re trying to destroy you … just not today.” That is, of course, not how diplomacy works, nor should we expect a complete understanding of these events soon enough to prevent whatever fallout they produce.
On that cynical note, the very public display of ballistics is a fart in the wind compared to recent unconfirmed reports of a thwarted nuclear exchange.
The louder Israel shouts, the more suspicious it gets. In the high-stakes game of international politics, denials are often all the confirmation needed. There has been speculation of an inside job, perpetrated by Azerbaijan, but this seems as plausible as Russia bombing the Nordstream 2 pipeline. Oddly, the verifiable weather is such a credible cause that the denials seem particularly overblown.
While Mr. Raisi was not without his detractors at home, earning him vile monikers among dissidents, this is being exaggerated for effect by a propaganda machine that ignores worse accusations against the Bush and Clinton families, among others. It is not my place to defend any politician’s reputation; my remarks are meant to objectify the perspective rather than to identify with any faction. And yet the public reaction I have observed among Americans, who often trivialize the suffering and death of others, is shameful.
For now the wisest course of action is to watch, and wait for a response, which will be slow and indirect. Westerners tend to be impatient, giving them a significant disadvantage in the information arena of the wars they are waging in Asia, whether with bullets, bullion or bad loans. Another major cultural difference is that Asian nations (including Russia) see victory as imposing the terms of the peace, whereas the Western strategist defines it as the destruction of his enemies.
This also explains their different time horizons in war.
Israel is actively denying involvement ironically because bad weather is its best and only alibi. The question of who benefits from this is complicated, and the answer once again depends on time. In the short run, the disturbance seems to favor Iran’s external enemies, most of whom understand little to nothing about its internal power structure nor the likely successor … not of the President, but of the aging, unelected Supreme Leader into whose slippers Mr. Raisi was poised to step.
Although beyond the present scope, in the long run it is not unlikely that Mr. Raisi will be viewed as more moderate than his successors, and better prepared.
Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court (ICC) continues to flail in the shifting winds of global politics. The Court just issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leaders, and in the same 24-hour span. Coincidence? This bored ape thinks not. The Middle East is a powder keg right now, and these events are interconnected. Ironically, the Biden administration, which supported the ICC’s warrant against Vladimir Putin, now claims the court has no jurisdiction over his pal Bibi.
Hypocrisy? Absolutely. Surprising? Not at all.
The Court’s struggles are a leading indicator of the fracturing unipolar world order, a relic of the not-so-good-old-days when the USA called the shots via the preeminence of the Petrodollar. After the Cold War, it briefly stood unchallenged, dictating terms to the rest of the world instead of using its power for the greater good. Those halcyon days of wasted opportunity are now spent.
The geopolitical landscape today is multipolar, with Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and other up-and-comers, not to mention the BRICS nations, challenging the Western Bloc.
Because this event unfolds amidst such global upheaval, whether accidental or not, the many players in the Grand Game will attempt to take advantage of the situation before their rivals do. In this case, even if it is an act of God, the effect is virtually the same as an assassination. Whether the fall of Iran’s president was an accident or not, whatever happens as a result won’t be.
Remember when Pakistan’s first female president suggested Osama bin Laden had died of kidney failure? She was gunned down shortly after, and then the US “found and killed” the fugitive terrorist. Mr. Raisi’s death fits this pattern. There’s a war raging between Israel and Hamas, with Hezbollah and the Houthis also involved. And in the midst of this chaos, someone possibly decided to make a decisive play in this high-stakes game of life-and-death.
So, what does all this mean?
The unipolar dominance of the United States is over, as is the “End of History” that it prophesied in the 1990s. That was never realistic, and within a generation it has been replaced by a multipolar world brimming with rivalries and alliances. Navigating these choppy waters will be hard enough for captains, so be careful which boats you board.
The helicopter crash that claimed Mr. Raisi’s life is more than just unfortunate; it is yet another frightening indicator of risk in these tense times. I keep imagining myself in that chopper, straining to maintain composure and make my peace with God, which only proves that I’m still breathing. In reality, the show is in the early acts, and we’re all along for the unprecedented thrill-ride of human history as this geopolitical helicopter spirals toward chaos in the clouds.
When faced with increasingly pervasive and direct surveillance, how can peaceful individuals turn the tables on predatory practices to safeguard their privacy in an interconnected society?
This essay is the practical sequel to the theory implied in “Four Wolves and a Rabbit”. As stated there, although it can be played on a checker board, it has direct application in the real world. That brief exploration of game theory was an introduction to professional surveillance methods and, more importantly, how to mitigate or evade them. What follows here is an example, drawn from my lived experience.
In an era of increasing technological sophistication, the intersection of privacy rights and surveillance is a touchstone for societal and legal discourse. Although I am a hunter and gatherer of intelligence, my motivation to acquire the skillset was not merely commercial, as it might have been for — shall we say? — a locksmith. Actually, depending on location, business model and client base, most people can make a more comfortable living by installing or defeating physical locks than they can by discovering what is lost and/or hidden by human hearts and minds.
A PREDICAMENT
My interest in the OSINT trade was initially inspired by an affirmative defense of eroding civil liberties but, on account of other skills I’d already acquired over the years, it branched out first toward IoT (internet-of-things) and then to Fintech in its search of commercial application. However, when I noticed a suspicious driver conspicuously following my left flank recently, neither circuit boards nor financial fraud were the first thing to cross my mind.
Indeed, although I was not surprised or scared to be tailed by a fellow Private Investigator (PI, a recurring acronym in this narrative), I was rightfully angry since I was driving my wife’s car … she was the prey!
Naturally, I confirmed the tail before hopping to conclusions. I would not have seen it if I had been the passenger, of course, nor would my wife have recognized the signs if she had been the driver. Yet experience shows that the most interesting things happen precisely where luck collides with preparation.
By degrees, this essay aims to introduce the lay-person to retail counter-surveillance, albeit indirectly, leaving room to run. First, however, unless you or yours have been stalked before, there is a case to be made for enhanced situational awareness in mundane urban environments, which I regret because it’s a case that should make itself. Eventually it will, when its sorry lack claims enough victims.
Let that land …
No matter how urgently one advocates for awareness, though, without help and constant coaxing, average people tend to learn the hard way, and subaverage people make it even harder still. On a more recent occasion, a related circumstance forced us to dip into our Private Insurance (PI) and sell some Krugerrands to pay for emergency Professional Insight (PI), which is never inexpensive. There, too, in the parking lot of the local coin shop, she saw no reason to treat the errand any differently than a trip to Starbucks or Chipotle Grill.
She’s learning, and you can, too.
THE PEN
Although the legal landscape governing surveillance by PIs is complex, and varies by jurisdiction, laws everywhere (in the Western world) generally agree that it must be conducted fairly, transparently and with the subject’s rights firmly protected. Trespassing, harassment, or unauthorized data collection are expressly illegal, and can lead to a range of consequences from civil liability for invasion of privacy to stickier criminal charges.
To adhere to legal boundaries concerning physical surveillance, PIs must first ensure that they have legitimate grounds, and are often required to obtain necessary permissions, especially when monitoring individuals in private spaces or sensitive situations. Trespassing on private property, installing cameras or listening devices without consent, and following individuals too closely can cross into illegal territory, leading to charges of harassment or stalking.
Such tactics can and should result in criminal charges, civil lawsuits for invasion of privacy, and potential professional consequences such as the revocation of a PI’s license. The not-so obvious reason is that, unbeknownst to the public at large, law enforcement personnel are held to the same standard, although their far-too frequent crimes are much more difficult to prove in practice.
Clients who hire PIs also bear responsibility for their ethics and intentions, and are ill-advised to outsource any potential bad deeds of their own, even to the willing. Any negligence (or nepotism) of theirs can compromise the legal standing of private surveillance, and reflect ethically and legally back upon them. As the motive behind the means, they must hire operators who respect both the letter and the spirit of the law.
Fortunately, a higher percentage of PIs respect legal limits than do their counterparts in law enforcement itself, who privately use qualified immunity the way surgeons use disposable gloves.
These are the murky waters of physical surveillance, and PIs lurk online, too. Therefore, arming yourself with the legal tools and technical tactics to dodge their prying gaze means, first, even before understanding your adversary, surveying the battleground itself. In the real world, the advantage goes to whomever uses the terrain best, and the contest is always fluid.
As tempting as it might be to think of this as a game of cat-and-mouse, regular readers of my work already know why I refer to the physical action space of surveillance as The Pen. If your senses leave you feeling cornered, then the feline analogy is a luxury that you cannot afford, since cats don’t hunt in packs.
THE WOLVES
Can you imagine the fabric of your life, your basic everyday hustle and bustle as a vast, sunlit field? If so, then you might be on the menu, for what now appears as a field is, in fact, a Pen. That is how hunters, human or otherwise, see the field, after all, which is to say that victimhood is a voluntary state of mind, regardless of victory or defeat.
How YOU see it is a matter of choice, of course, yet once you verify that you are a target, ignoring the scrutiny upon you can be dangerous since it belies intent, whether or not you know whose.
In effect, PIs are a pack of keen-eyed Wolves that blends seamlessly into the tall grass, foot soldiers in a landscape of surveillance capitalism, each employing their own subtle tactics to track and understand the Rabbit (you, or another) without disturbing the peace in the Pen.
The Wolves are stealthy, though, and don’t just watch, They move, on multiple fronts, quietly and with purpose. These are not isolated incidents but a coordinated pack effort, painting a picture of your habits and secrets.
Telephonic surveillance is not out of the question, of course, and not just during calls. That digital appendage of yours can betray you with each benign buzz and every creepy click, or with those randomly untimely battery drains. Glitches are the whispers hinting that you might have company.
Do not be surprised to find Wolves conducting banter-based surveillance, either — idle strangers with an unhealthy interest in your unremarkable life, casually fishing for tidbits like a well-meaning but senile old aunt at a family reunion. As they purposefully weave through your day, seemingly disguising disinterest, they are “data mining” for flecks of golden dust in your leaden responses … or others’.
And what long noses those Wolves have, too; all the better to sniff around your waste bin.
If documents about yourself that not even your intimates are aware of should return suddenly to haunt you like the Ghost of Christmas Past, then cue the dramatic music and get ready for fight or flight. Those aren’t just any old papers, after all, but the breadcrumbs left by someone piecing together the puzzle of your life, perhaps overstepping those blurry lines of legalese.
1. PLAN & DIRECT
The first step is to see the Pen for what it is, unapologetically and in its entirety. Understanding every corner where a Wolf might hide. Learn the tools of the trade — the techniques and technologies that they all use to stay upwind from a Rabbit. Don’t worry about evasion or other countermeasures, not yet. Just map the terrain, from the physical to the digital … to the emotional.
2. COLLECT
Next, gather specific environmental cues, i.e. how the local Wolves mark their territory, depending on their specializations. Like you, they leave signs of their presence, and of their passing — droppings, to press the analogy. Oddly situated vehicles are an obvious example. Strangers with an unusually good memory for details may be less obvious, especially if you tend to be agreeable and/or speak too freely. Note every rustle in the grass, every odd reflection of light during the collection phase; no detail is unimportant. Identify the white spaces around you, for they may prove to be the most pivotal of places later.
4. PROCESS
Now, categorize those whispers among the grass, each shadow in the trees. Select and arrange your findings into a coherent guide to the Wolves’ behavior, a Field Manual, if you will. This step involves crafting a clear, accessible depiction of the surveillance ecosystem, from the blunt snout of a camera lens or the pointed tips of a covert microphone to the schedules of your mail delivery, your trash pick up … or that friendly milkman.
5. ANALYZE
Here, the effectiveness of each Wolf, and each method, is evaluated, not just how they hunt, but where … urban jungles, rural expanses, online? What strategies do the Wolves use in their preferred terrain, and how might they react if flushed out? This is where patterns emerge, and the behavior of the pack becomes predictable. Remember those white spaces? Those transitional zones are where evasions are most effective, and where traps are most effectively set.
7. DISSEMINATE
Share your knowledge of lupine lore and of the Pen — pay it forward far and wide. It could be a series of detailed videos or articles, such as this, or a comprehensive guide, depending on how the Rabbits in your network prefer to consume their content-carrots. Not only will you be helping others in need; your own claws will grow to make a better digger of you, and those fabled little Rabbit fangs of yours might sprout, too.
8. FEEDBACK
Finally, figure out if your evaluation of the Pen resonates with other possibly bewildered Rabbits in your network — and even with some of the Wolves. Yes, you read that right. Interviewing a few and, in some cases, possibly even hiring one can only make you a more informed individual. Also, integrating the opinions of legal eagles and the actionable insights from the more seasoned hares can refine and perfect your perspective of the Pen.
THE RABBIT
When you feel the hairs on the back of your neck stand up from the prick of unseen eyes on your skin, you might be the star of your very own spy flick. If so, the stakes are real, and the audience is unfriendly. Congratulations on opening your eyes.
Now what?
First, breathe. Panic is the cologne of the hunted; it smells like shit and it gives you away. Stay cool, stay sharp. From now on, unless and until you are certain that the threat is no more, every move you make must be calculated.
THEY ARE NOT REAL WOLVES — THEY WILL NOT EAT YOU.
Their primary goal is to acquire information, which they cannot do if they are detected. That is their weakness, and your advantage. They, too, are hiding, after all, with both their reputation and their livelihood on the line.
So, document every brush with the bizarre. The unfamiliar SUV that’s a little too fond of your street, or a phone that might listen more than it speaks, these notes are your first line of defense, the rough sketches of your map of the Pen. Gobble up those details and finish that Rabbit’s crash-course Field Manual to dodging (and eventually hunting) Wolves in the wilds of the postmodern surveillance savannah.
Change it up, too, be unpredictable. If you normally grab coffee at 8 AM, throw a curveball — maybe one at noon instead, or a slow breakfast at a cafe you don’t like. Your surveillance detail will sidle up alongside of you, adjusting to your new rhythms. This dance is your chance to flush the Wolves out so, instead of fleeing; zig where you normally zag, and ID your targets.
Electronic eyes and ears might be harder to spot, but they do leave traces. Unusual data spikes are a clue, or rapidly draining batteries. Encryption is your best friend here, your cloak to their dagger. Also, if you haven’t begun already, assume that your devices are listening to you, and be selective (and even dynamically misleading) in your speech.
Reportage is key.
Let the cops know of your unwanted fans. Police can shine the spotlight onto those who shadow you. If a PI turns your hum-drum daytime drama into an episode of a bad detective series, your lawyer might just write them off the show. Nothing scares a Wolf like a sharp subpoena.
Finally, team up (more on that below). There’s safety in numbers, obviously, but greater insight, too. Four eyes can see more than two, and six see even more than four. A wingman or two can dissuade the more opportunistic tails out there and/or give you a perspective on your paranoia, to discern if you’re really a person-of-interest or just over-caffeinated.
No matter what, though, do not ignore your instincts, which you have for a reason — if you feel uneasy, trust yourself that something might be wrong, and act accordingly.
Never forget that the way of Personal Incentive (PI) is as universal as it is unreliable. The superior Way of the Rabbit is run by virtue of Preemptive Initiative (PI). With that as your dagger to their cloak, maybe, just maybe, the Wolves will have bitten off more than they can chew.
COUNTERMEASURES
I discuss the surveillance predicament in terms of the Pen, the Wolves and the Rabbit because it grounds the subject (potentially you) thematically in a contest decided not by strength but by information. The description is static, though, whereas the reality is fluid, ergo some indication of concrete practical steps is needed.
As a flowchart, the enneagram synthesizes dynamism and coalescence, making it useful in this case, too. It unites the disparate elements of a process into a system of three sources — the Logos — and six steps, which I will briefly enumerate.
Again, my purpose here is to instruct Rabbits to counter a certain class of Wolf pack tactics. If instead — let us say — it were to train novice PIs to work together to avoid detection, the six steps would be entirely different, even with a similar Logos.
Furthermore, each particular step is described in broad terms. The treatment is not exhaustive, but suggestive.
The point, as I alluded above, is that each of these is worthy of longer form content, be it a separate post (blog or video), for example, or a chapter of a book. Of course I hope to fill in some of those blanks myself, however the field is a Pandora’s Box. Once opened, your best bet is to go where your curiosity takes you, and not to seek a prescribed path.
My own subjective areas of interest (above) lie more in points 1, 5 and 7, however your own situation may leave you with a different focus or set of needs.
1. SURVEILLANCE DETECTION ROUTES (SDRs)
Vary your schedule as much as possible and avoid convenient navigation; take the long way. Surveillance teams may set up shop along a route that you frequent. By casually altering your habits, your movements become less predictable. I keep mentioning those white spaces for a reason and, depending on your routines, red spaces may also be available to you, filters and bottlenecks that limit your tail’s passage.
One idea is to visit a mundane well-lit, high-visibility location for 10-15 minutes, like a donut shop, then drive in a small circle back to the same place and stay awhile longer. A second idea is to randomly exit and reenter the same freeway … more than once. Yet a third idea is to throw out your trash, especially your paper recycling (pre-shredded, of course) on the morning of collection, not before.
Game it out, and have some fun.
2. DISGUISE & DECEPTION
Conduct a wardrobe change in a secluded place. This could be as simple as ditching a coat, donning on a hat, or changing your shoes … or not. A good surveillance team will note your footwear; now you know. If you think you may need to run, consider wearing sandals to begin and changing into shoes before the chase. Reversible coats are ideal, and wearing removable layers is a fine substitute in many situations.
The challenges of video surveillance are greater and more subtle, especially if you factor in CCTV feeds and sophisticated software. Operators can scroll between locations, or forward and backward in time, and even learn to recognize your stride. Your options will depend on who is watching you. Circumstantial make-up or prosthetics are ill-advised, especially if your tail is official, and only a matter of last resort.
If you have nothing to hide, then standing in plain sight may be your safest choice.
4. ELECTRONIC / DIGITAL FOOTPRINT
“Bugs” emit electromagnetic radiation, usually radio waves. TSCMs (Technical Surveillance Countermeasures) sweep for them with an appropriate detector, a device that measures the strength and direction of their RF signals. If you are a standing target, though, maybe managing a business or other sensitive operation, then SDSs (Surveillance Detection Systems) are your analog to SDRs, digital watchdogs built to warn of potential intrusions by sensing unusual behavior.
Similarly, WIDS (Wireless Intrusion Detection Systems) safeguard wireless networks by identifying unauthorized devices attempting to breach your digital perimeter. Your data is your digital DNA — unique, private, and valuable. Strong passwords, encryption, and secure networks are your digital deadbolts. If needed, signal jammers and lens detectors can further help you to maintain your privacy.
In the digital age, paranoia is the new pragmatism; the less you leave behind, the less there is to find.
5. EVASION
Avoid risky locations, of course, and be more discreet and circumspect than those around you. Common sense will not be enough, though, in the moment of evasion, which is why you made such tasty Wolf jerky from all that raw data. And it is merely a moment that you will have, so plan ahead. Assuming that your tail is working as a team, you will be easily reacquired if you choose your time and place at random … so don’t.
Challenges vary if you are on foot or if you are driving. (Even worse would be if you are a passenger, but that’s a highly specialized problem of its own.) In either case, keep your cards close to your chest, and don’t tell on yourself before you make your move. Meanwhile, use that vast, sunlit field of your basic everyday hustle and bustle as background noise to keep prying eyes and ears at bay.
Even more than risky locations, avoiding risky (i.e. unpracticed) moves is a tactic that should need no explanation.
7. COUNTERSURVEILLANCE
In this game of hide and seek, where your privacy is the prize, winning means ensuring that your private life remains just that—private. Although there are, of course, apps and devices to detect bugs, GPS trackers, or hidden cameras, reliable countersurveillance requires a complete lifestyle adjustment based on situational awareness, and up-to-date knowledge of professional practices. At a minimum, start browsing websites that market such products (but resist the temptation to buy toys that you don’t need), to understand your adversary.
Online forums, privacy advocates and specialized newsfeeds can provide valuable insights and updates on the latest in privacy technology and surveillance tactics. Keeping an open mind will be difficult, but vital; again, map your threat-vectors, especially the emotional. Worse, there is no substitute for initiative here, and laziness is the enemy. Teamwork mitigates the workload, if you are blessed with motivated people in your midst — training your family to care can be a blessing or a curse, depending on how you present it to them. It’s such an unpredictable journey, so full of discoveries (many of them unpleasant), that generalities are the extent of the present survey.
Most importantly, though, remember that the pinnacle of countersurveillance is not mere evasion, but the gathering of intelligence of your own.
8. PROFESSIONAL INSIGHT
If you suspect that more sophisticated surveillance methods are at work against you, then consider fighting fire with a ton of bricks. Hiring a counter-surveillance expert is the unbeatable move, but just as with disguise or evasion, extremes should be avoided. They can equip and train you to detect electronic surveillance devices, and even provide more advanced counter-surveillance services if needed.
Although vetting is a separate subject unto itself, first be prepared for a battery of of tough questions. If you have been filtering your problem through the Intelligence Cycle (have you tested my free Custom AI Tool?), then you should already know a lot about who is watching you, as well as how (as in where and when), and why (what is their definition of success?). The specific Logos will dictate what kind of professional you should seek, and exactly what questions you should be asking each other.
It’s all-too easy here to say “choose wisely”, which is always difficult for lay-persons to do when hiring specialists — of any kind, including plumbers — therefore my advice instead is to figure out your limits in advance to avoid surprises.
Countersurveillance measures are those taken to prevent, detect, and mitigate unwanted surveillance activities. Remember, though, that while these can help you to proactively manage the irritant, you must act within the law and especially avoid causing harm to others.
Once you cross that Rubicon, among other disavowed hazards, then you are no longer practicing countersurveillance, and risk drawing attention to yourself in the process of whatever you’re doing instead.
The one and only aim is to inform yourself, not to remove adversaries. Strictly speaking, the Wolves are not your true opponent; they’re just doing a job. Like plumbers, ironically, they are worthy of every professional courtesy, even if you compete against them. It is their client, after all, who matters.
Most importantly, though, making enemies gives you no new information.
Joe Biden’s campaign just dropped a job listing that’s basically a meme unto itself: “Content and Meme Pages Partner Manager.” Yup, he wants a meme guru to manage all that spicy content coming from his campaign HQ in Wilmington, Delaware and, for this opportunity, even I would come out of retirement. So, whatever else it is, consider this essay my application for the gig.
In the interests of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or of producing the best product via Free Market competition, I encourage literally EVERYBODY to apply, ideally in the same week. Instead of accusing me of stealing your shot, learn more for yourself at:
Biden’s campaign has become one of those hopeless romantics from _He’s Just Not That Into You_. You know … the ones who think every double tap, every DM, every comment with a fire emoji means true love. The campaign, in this romper-room rom-com gone wrong, is that lovesick person trying to slide into Gen Z’s DMs, not realizing they’ve already been left on read.
Check out this all-star guest list … imagine the banter at that captain’s table!
To be fair, the campaign is on life-support, which is where I would come in and save the day (if not the patient / voter). I mean, if you were still undecided, would a night out in Hollyweird as the Odd Couple in an Ocean’s 8 heist sway you to betray your own long term self-interest? If your answer is YES, then stop reading this immediately, dig deep and pony up your 10% for the Big Guy.
The job listing, filled with boomer optimism, says that Joe needs a homie to “initiate and manage day-to-day operations in engaging the internet’s top content and meme pages.” Nothing says “we get you” like an octogenarian president hiring someone to flood your feed with cringe memes of him with laser eyes, right? Wrong. Admitting he has a problem is the first step to recovery.
By hiring me, Joe and Kamala will give to the Liberals the weapon they sorely lack, humor. There is nobody on his team who understands the language of the youth, or their plight, so selling the same old lie won’t work. Unlike Orange Man, I have truly original ideas that connect with folks on multiple levels, as you can see.
I alone have the imagination to bring to the DNC what it so desperately needs in this, its darkest hour: a new set of lies!
Let’s be real, OK? “Engaging the internet’s top content and meme pages” — sounds like a Black Mirror episode. Campaigns don’t win with memes; au contraire, they usually lose when they try too hard. It’s like that one friend who thinks he can go viral by doing the Renegade but just ends up embarrassing himself. Joe is that guy in the rom-com who believes that by copying the cool kids, he’ll become cool, too.
Spoiler alert: he won’t.
Far too many campaigns saw the meme magic around Trump in 2016 and thought memes made the man. Wrong. Trump is a walking, talking meme — for better or worse, he has Main Character Syndrome — the memes were just a side effect. Joe isn’t that guy. But like that rom-com character who doesn’t get the hint, his campaign is out here thinking a meme manager will make him hip and happening.
You can’t just co-opt Trump’s mojo . . .
. . . but I can, and that’s the point. Pick me!
The Biden-Harris campaign is bleeding Gen Z support like a post-Roe-v-Wade back-alley operation gone sideways, with recent polls showing Trump ahead by 11 points among 18-34-year-olds. Even the usual Democratic-leaning youths are ghosting Joe, upset over his support for Israel’s genocide against Gaza and his threat to ban TikTok unless it sells to an American company. Gen Z sees their fave app under attack, and Joe’s awkward attempt to win them over with memes just looks desperate.
It’s like trying to win your crush back with a bad TikTok dance … super-cringe.
Ironically (or not), his job postings on LinkedIn and Daybook have already sparked a chain reaction, a meme wave of its own. Conservatives are roasting Joe for trying too hard; liberals are face-palming at the whole damned thing. It’s like those viral fails where someone’s grand romantic gesture gets turned into a meme-fest for all the wrong reasons.
Remember “Dark Brandon”? Born from a misheard “Fuck Joe Biden” as “Let’s Go, Brandon,” Biden’s campaign embracing this meme is like laughing along with the bullies, hoping they’ll accept you. It’s the rom-com equivalent of the character who thinks he’s in on the joke, but he’s actually the punchline.
Without me, Joe is gonna have to pull off another shenanigan. Those leave loose ends, though, and take plenty of bribe money to set up. By hiring me, it can all be above board. Of course, since it’s a temp job, I’m gonna need to come on as a consultant / contractor and not some flunky snot-nosed intern ready to grab ankle, but as long as my price is met, I’ll gladly pay my fair share in taxes.
This meme manager gig, along with roles for a “youth spokesperson” and “influencer manager,” is a transparent attempt to win back the youth vote. (Personally, I’d also like to be considered for the “Rapid Response Spokesperson” on the Communications team … wouldn’t you?) It’s amusing, but also kinda like watching your grandpa try to Floss — funny, but mostly awkward and a little sad. Worse, if you hire the wrong guy, it’ll be like thinking you’ll impress your crush with a viral dance but ending up in a “Top 10 Cringe Fails” compilation instead.
Gen Z sees through the BS. They’re not gonna be swayed by memes when their real issues are ignored, and I don’t mean TikTok or Gaza. It’s like that rom-com moment when the character realizes he needs to be real — but it’s often too late.
Hiring just any old meme manager won’t win this election. It’s a hollow gesture from a campaign struggling to vibe with the very group it’s desperate to impress. Dark Brandon might shoot lasers from his eyes in meme-land, but IRL, it’s gonna take more than digital stunts to win hearts.
Just like in the rom-coms, true connection can’t be faked. Gen Z’s just not that into you, Joe. To win, you must hire me to transform your public image from angry Dark Brandon to cool Dank Brandon. Let’s do this!
By installing an ingenue CEO, the grand old dame of American eateries, Cracker Barrel, has sailed its once sturdy ship of comfort food straight into an iceberg of irrelevance. It’s a story of ambition and miscalculation, remarkably reminiscent of the final, ill-fated voyage of the Titan submersible. Let’s dive in, shall we?
Julie Felss Masino, the girl boss who thought she could navigate Cracker Barrel away from the treacherous territory of modern consumerism, embarked on her journey with a blend of youthful overconfidence and a plucky lack of foresight. Ms. Masino, much like OceanGate’s DEI-inspired CEO Stockton Rush, believed that she could boldly repurpose a modified video-game controller to steer the old ship into new, uncharted waters. By ignoring the boring middle-aged white men along the way — both those with the experience to know better, and those who comprise the customer base — she has instead steered the company straight into the abyss.
Masino’s declaration of irrelevance on a recent investor call was akin to that sinking moment when Titan lost contact with its surface vessel for the last time. It was a brutally honest pronouncement, boldly served and utterly catastrophic. The market’s response was as unforgiving as Leviathan, swallowing the company’s value in one satisfying gulp and asking for seconds.
Investors, like the families of those aboard the Titan, watched in horror as Cracker Barrel’s stock price plummeted into the void, losing 25% of its value in a matter of days.
The Titan submersible, a marvel of modern engineering — or so its investors were led to believe — descended into the deep, dark ocean, aiming to explore the haunted remains of the Titanic. Instead of triumph, it met with cold, dark reality. Similarly, Ms. Masino’s decision to announce Cracker Barrel’s waning relevance was like the captain declaring to the Board, “Folks, we’re going under.”
Cracker Barrel, once the heart and soul of road trips across the U.S. (a dying pastime for related and unrelated reasons), is shedding locations faster than the waters of a spent tsunami returning to the sea.
With four more closures this year — Sacramento, Santa Maria, Medford, and Columbia — joining last year’s Oregon trio, this country-themed relic is circling the drain. CEO Julie Felss Masino has only been in the captain’s chair for nine months, and already she’s facing a rainbow implosion. In a starkly honest investor call, she flat-out admitted, “We’re just not as relevant as we once were.”
This confession torpedoed the stock to a humiliating $45.35, below its Covid lows, to prices not seen in over a decade. As if to rub single-serving salt-and-pepper into the wound, the yearly dividend was slashed from $1.30 per share to a meager 25 cents.
In a last-ditch effort to bring the “good ol’ days” back to life, Cracker Barrel is throwing $700 million at the problem.
The menu is getting that much-needed facelift you’ve been demanding, with new offerings like premium savory chicken and rice, slow-braised pot roast, and hashbrown casserole shepherd’s pie. Surely that will lead the stock price in to a V-shaped recovery, right? Wait for it: these dishes are set to debut this fall. There’s even an exciting “experimental phase”, aimed at gauging customer reaction, featuring the roll-out of green chili cornbread and banana pudding in over 10 locations!
The plan is bold and clear: diversify the menu to appeal to a broader, less discriminating palate. But will these changes be enough to win over the finicky younger crowd while keeping the traditionalists happy? This bored ape thinks it’s gonna take more than bananas to whip today’s crowds into a frenzy.
To satisfy investors’ neglected appetite, crypto gift certificates are a no-brainer. It’s a culinary tightrope walk that can only be stabilized by the balance beam of NFTs, right? Chicken and Rice are not the only catalysts, either.
Cracker Barrel’s pricing strategy is about to get an even more major shake-up, too.
Currently, about 60% of its restaurants fall into the lowest cost tier, but Ms. Masino plans to realign prices with local economic conditions. The goal is to raise prices in wealthier areas and lower them in less affluent regions. For example, some stores in metro areas with an average household income of $55,000 are in the same pricing tier as those where the average is $90,000.
This Robin Hood pricing strategy is under review, aiming to capitalize on the inefficiencies created by the economic mismatch; adjustments are on the horizon that could threaten industry stalwarts like Ruth Chris and Wolfgang Puck.
Up to 30 stores are set for a significant remodel next fiscal year. The new look will feature a fresh color palette, updated lighting, more comfortable seating, and simplified decor and fixtures. The idea is to refresh the brand’s image while maintaining its signature rustic charm. This facelift aims to attract a new generation of diners who are more likely to Instagram their meal than reminisce about family road trips.
Additionally, new locations opening in fall 2025 will be about 15% smaller. This downsizing reflects a strategic shift in restaurant design, pretending to create a more intimate dining experience while possibly cutting those CRE costs.
Financially, Cracker Barrel is in the ICU. Analysts predict a quarterly earnings decline of 53.7%, with revenues expected to hit $826.55 million, down 0.7% from last year. Over the past month, Cracker Barrel’s shares have tanked 24.8%, starkly contrasting the Zacks S&P 500 composite’s +4% change. The company’s Zacks Rank #5 (Strong Sell) suggests that Wall Street has little faith in its near-term prospects.
Cracker Barrel isn’t the only classic American chain in icy hot water. Red Lobster recently filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after closing nearly 100 restaurants, blaming explosive lease and labor costs. Speculators are blaming the Endless Shrimp. This year so far, 35 “underperforming” Applebee’s locations have imploded, continuing a trend of closures trailing back to 2017. Verily, the dining landscape is underwater, with familiar chains struggling to shake off the rust.
Cracker Barrel’s past controversies haven’t helped, either. First, the company’s anti-LGBT policies of the 1990s came back to bite them on the ass with the progressives. Then, the recent backlash over rainbow-colored rocking chairs during Pride Month has polarized the traditional core customers. It’s a cultural balancing act absurdly akin to an old-school waitress racing with an overloaded tray through Sunday morning rush hour after Service.
Despite these hurdles, Cracker Barrel’s leadership remains cautiously optimistic. Then again, what options do they have? The company’s plan involves not just menu innovation and pricing adjustments but also a significant brand overhaul. However, Truist analyst Jake Bartlett’s skepticism highlights the uncertainty: “They announced a plan for a plan, but they didn’t give investors enough information to judge whether reinvesting in the stores was a credible plan to address the traffic losses.”
The restaurant’s broader strategy — to modernize the menu, pricing, and experience — aims to claw its way back to some semblance of relevance in a competitive, no-nonsense market that is waking up from woke. But these changes will be a slow burn, like the new braised pot roast, with tangible benefits expected only in late 2026 and 2027. Until then, Cracker Barrel must survive a turbulent business environment, striving to regain its former glory while adapting to the ratcheting tension of the wider market dynamics.
At the bottom of the story, Cracker Barrel, like the Titan, is a symbol of ambition meeting its limits. The CEO’s bold declaration of irrelevance was as catastrophic as the sub’s fatal Father’s Day dive. Both stories remind us that the seas of business and exploration are perilous, demanding respect, preparation, and a deep understanding of one’s audience and environment. Ms. Masino, like the liquidated Stockton Rush, believed that she could pilot the treacherous waters of modern consumerism with bold moves and honest admissions. Both are tales of hubris, leadership, and the crushing weight of reality.
Among traditional games, “Four Wolves and a Rabbit” stands out not just for its entertainment value but also for its potent educational capabilities. This intriguing and cunningly simple checkers variant is particularly suited for those young strategists who revel in intellectual challenges and complex, asymmetric problem-solving. Although it is an excellent choice for parents looking to enrich their children cognitive and strategic thinking skills, it’s also fun for the parents themselves, making the game as interactive as it is educational, enriching more than just the mind.
DESCRIPTION
The game unfolds on a standard 8×8 checkers board renamed “the Pen”, whose 64 squares represent the confined space within which the strategic drama between predators and prey plays out. At one end of the Pen, the Four Black Wolves line up on the dark squares of the back row, poised to strike. Opposite them, a lone White Rabbit contemplates its perilous path, readying to run the gauntlet.
MOVEMENT
Wolves: Limited to a forward march, Wolves can only advance diagonally to an adjacent empty square within the Pen. This movement simulates the Wolves slowly tightening the noose around the rabbit, strategically limiting the Rabbit’s options.
Rabbit: In contrast to the wolves, the Rabbit has the agility to move both forward and backward diagonally. This ability represents the rabbit’s wily attempts to find gaps and dodge between the advancing threats, reflecting its struggle to escape the confines of the Pen.
SURVIVAL
Wolves: The pack aims to completely corner the Rabbit within the Pen, blocking all possible escape routes, effectively confining it to a section of the board. The Wolves cannot eat until the Rabbit runs out of moves.
Rabbit: The Rabbit must dodge the noose by slipping past the Wolves and reaching the freedom that lies beyond the far side of the Pen. Achieving this requires the Rabbit to misdirect through the Wolves.
GAME PLAY
The Rabbit moves first, reflecting its initial dash for freedom. The Wolves follow, each turn representing a calculated move to further restrict their quarry’s options.
The Pen, with its strategically limiting action space, is the medium in which the unfolding chase ensues. There is no capturing, only maneuvering, as each player tries to outwit the other within the confines of the Pen.
The endgame, of course, is reached when the Rabbit manages to break past the Wolves and step out of the Pen, or when the Wolves successfully confine the Rabbit, making any further movement impossible.
Renaming the board as “the Pen,” emphasizes the metaphor of strategic contest for territory and freedom, grounding the thematic experience for players as they engage in this otherwise abstract contest.
STRATEGY
Rabbit: Maintaining a position towards the center of the Pen as long as possible is advisable, maximizing maneuverability and keeping escape routes open. The Rabbit must actively engineer and then exploit a misalignment among the Wolves, using their fixed forward movement to its own advantage.
Wolves: It is critical to advance in a formation that efficiently covers the diagonal paths, slowly shrinking the rabbit’s viable territory within the Pen. Forming a staggered line can be effective, creating a net that eliminates the Rabbit’s options.
BENEFITS OF PLAY
Enhance Cognitive Skills: This game demands foresight and planning. Players must think a few moves ahead, stimulating problem-solving and decision-making skills. Such mental training is invaluable, fostering a mindset that thrives on anticipating outcomes and strategizing accordingly.
Develop Strategic Thinking: Players must continuously adapt their strategies based on the evolving game state. This dynamic encourages a flexible mindset, which is highly transferable to adult challenges.
Promote Spatial Awareness: Manipulating spatial relationships is crucial. Both players improve their ability to visualize movements and consequences, skills that are essential in most STEM fields, and elsewhere.
Improve Concentration: The pace and complexity require undivided attention and patience, valuable virtues in a high-velocity world. Engaging in this game promotes these qualities, which are crucial for achieving more important long-term goals.
Foster Interaction: Despite being a competitive, the game provides a platform for meaningful interaction. It encourages discussing tactics and rules, fostering communicative abilities and patience in listening to others’ perspectives and strategies.
Build Emotional Resilience: Learning to cope with the game’s inherent challenges can help young players develop resilience and adaptability. These experiences teach managing both triumphs and setbacks gracefully.
IMPLICATIONS
Although “Four Wolves and a Rabbit” can be played on an ordinary game board atop a table among friends and family, it has direct application in the real world. Similar remarks have been made of other board games that more overtly simulate war, such as Chess or Gō.
This apparently simpler game finds its ultimate expression in the subtler fields of investigation and intelligence. In short, this brief essay on game theory serves as an introduction to professional surveillance methods and, more importantly, how to mitigate or evade them.
Although I first learned this game in childhood, it was not until I played it as a man, for real, that I fully understood it.
“You may abandon your own body, but you must preserve your honor” – Miyamoto Musashi
The Dokkodo, or “The Way of Walking Alone,” is more than a testament to the formidable intellect and spirit of Miyamoto Musashi. It is a standard for the solitary warrior in pursuit of individual excellence. Days before his death, instead of contemplating his life’s regrets, or the falling of the cherry blossoms, the undefeated duelist instead wrote the Dokkodo by hand for his closest pupil.
Musashi was writing the first self-help guide for high achievers.
Its 21 short precepts guide us toward and along the path to discipline and self-mastery, to a unique approach to sharp living. They range from the profundity of, “Do not, under any circumstances, depend on a partial feeling”, to the simplicity of, “Do not fear death.”
The vital importance of honor in particular is stressed when faced with the most fearsome of questions. In warrior culture, where the flesh is merely a vessel for Will, the body may fall in battle but honor, once lost, is a citadel forever breached.
The Dokkodo – a Metamodern Reading:
Life is not a cherry-pickers’ buffet
Pleasure is fleeting; chase something better, like victory
Half-hearted efforts lead to half-baked results; go big, or go home
It’s not about you
Desires are like quicksand; stand firm on solid ground
Regrets are for people who won’t level up
Jealousy is a zero-sum game; focus on your own game
Nothing lasts; adapt and move on
Whining is not a strategy; winning is
Emotions are wild horses; learn to ride or be trampled
Preferences are cages; be free
A true warrior can thrive anywhere
Hunger for success, not for snacks
Dump the dead weight
Question everything; blind faith blinds
Travel light; hoarding is for losers
Do not over-train
Fear is a worse enemy than death
Self-reliance is your true deity
Your word is your coin
Above all, serve your purpose
The Dokkodo is an intriguing masterclass in strategy, life, and art that, like William Blake’s “Proverbs of Hell” is as open to interpretation as there is time for reflection. It will not spoon-feed any wisdom to you, and instead demand that you bring your own genuine experience in order to rise to its challenge.
SACRIFICE
The body is but a pawn, a piece inevitably to be surrendered. Honor, however, is the king on the chessboard of virtue.
IMPECCABILITY
Honor guides like the North Star, a constant beacon amidst life’s tumultuous seas, a steadfast companion through the darkest of nights.
LEGACY
History remembers not the details of one’s demise but the legacy left behind. A warrior’s true immortality is etched not in stone, but in the annals of virtue.
INNER STRUGGLE
The greatest battle is fought silently in the valley between your ribs, and in the desert between the ears. Will you stand guard over your honor, even when the enemy is within?
SELF-REFLECTION
To preserve your honor is a testament to Will, a portrait you paint with the brushstrokes of choice and action. In the mirror of life, what do you see — a visage marred by compromise or one radiant with integrity?
SERVICE
Life is a brief quest in pursuit of the highest virtues; outgrow the physical realm, and into the that of Spirit.
