Dutch Roll with a slice of Rogan - free speech is inherently unstable (part one)
Hint: "Dutch roll" ain't really a kind of sandwich
Song:
Ludovico Einaudi - Berlin Song
This article is not about sandwiches, per se. Although, for completeness I’ll be sure to slip in a food-based metaphor or simile in due course.
Dutch roll is a type of aircraft motion consisting of an out-of-phase combination of "tail-wagging" (yaw) and rocking from side to side (roll)… This motion is normally well damped in most light aircraft, though some aircraft with well-damped Dutch roll modes can experience a degradation in damping as airspeed decreases and altitude increases… A similar phenomenon can happen in a trailer pulled by a car.
So what’s that definition of “Dutch roll” got to do with anything?
The Joe Rogan Express - from Cessna 172 to Airbus A380 and a global route structure
JRE has been carrying conversations to anyone who chose to listen since 2009. It started out as a tiny service on a four-seat plane and has grown to a fleet of A380s with a global network carrying 11m+ people who board just to listen to the pilot and co-pilot talk for three plus hours. The unusual things about this service are that:
People can board wherever they want;
There’s no published destination;
Passengers self-cater;
When the plane lands, passengers may or may not be in a different place to where they boarded, and each person on that plane might land in a totally different place to any of the others.
Despite the fact that JRE flights appear to defy physics in this way (apart from the catering and the inevitable aftermath of a dodgy prawn sandwich), there’s one thing that has always affected JRE - Dutch roll.
During the course of any JRE episode there are oscillations that are inherent in human conversation. It can start just by virtue of who the guest is, or whether someone sparks up a joint or drinks too much sponsored whisky.
Dutch roll is baked-in to human conversation.
So as the JRE aircraft gets bigger, climbs higher and flies faster (increasing audience size and exposure, increasing commercial success and growing commercial dependencies, more expansive range of guests) Dutch roll is going to persist and probably increase.
Cue the Yaw Damper.
Yaw Damper
A yaw damper (sometimes referred to as a stability augmentation system) is a system used to reduce (or damp) the undesirable tendencies of an aircraft to oscillate in a repetitive rolling and yawing motion, a phenomenon known as the Dutch roll. A large number of modern aircraft, both jet-powered and propeller-driven, have been furnished with such systems.
The use of a yaw damper provides superior ride quality by automatically preventing uncomfortable yawing and rolling oscillations and reduces pilot workload. On some aircraft, it is mandatory for the yaw damper to be operational at all times during flight above a specified altitude; several airliners were deemed to be unsafe to fly without an active yaw damper.
If that’s a basic explanation of an aircraft yaw damper, what’s the equivalent in a human conversation?
It could be the internalised mechanism by which a participant self-limits or controls or guides the conversation to keep it inside some “envelope” that they determine. Multiple parties doing the same thing - consciously, unconsciously, implicitly or explicitly - can all have the same or greater effect. Obvious external examples include:
Agenda - box the conversation in from the start, set rules and no go areas;
Guestlist - who is allowed to speak is fundamental to the scope and nature of the conversation. Label a shill as an expert and that guest has a different effect on the conversation’s dynamics;
Edit - cut out bits that the editor determines aren’t for others to hear, add or remove context to change the shape of the conversation and/or others’ perception of it, switch order to change context;
Active chairperson - someone who polices the conversation and actively enforces the agenda and in doing so partially or fully edits on-the-fly e.g an interviewer, presenter or print journalist;
Propaganda - manufactured information that penetrates and affects human perception before a conversation has even begun. Layers of managed presentation that manage perception, support an agenda and manufactures consent;
Censorship - encapsulates all of the above and provides a final backstop in the form of a DELETE button AKA the Memory Hole.
These are all conversational stability augmentation systems i.e. conversational yaw dampers. All of them are forms of “agency reduction” i.e. they limit the agency of participants in that conversation and/or that of the listeners. But do they actually result in “superior ride quality”?
Song:
Max Richter - On The Nature Of Daylight
Listen to anyone talk for long enough and someone will hear something they don’t like
The conventional and long-standing, self-evident power of any media lay in the edit. You could gather all the truth you liked but it is the edit that determined what shape that truth ultimately took. Are “live” programmes even live? A ten-second broadcast delay is not live and provides enough buffer to censor a supposedly live programme. What’s the transmission delay on BBC Question Time or Talk Sport?
JRE and other podcasts of a similar nature i.e. unedited long-form conversations, have challenged that but the format is a double-edged sword.
If two or more people talk for long enough, one of them is bound to say something the other doesn’t like. Keep going and at least one of them will say something they themselves don’t like (in the moment or in hindsight). That would be a possible outcome of a conversation in which one person persuaded another to change their opinion, wouldn’t it?
“I think DuPont is a shining beacon of corporate light that has done wonders for mankind and the natural world without doing any significant harm to either.”.
“Are you really sure about that? Haven’t you heard of C8/PFOA and the damage DuPont did to its own employees and the globe? PFOA and PFOS chemicals made and used by DuPont are everywhere, toxic to varying degrees and used in all sorts of production lines.”.
“Hmm, now you’ve told me that, I see what you mean. I think I was wrong, wasn’t I?”.
Add in 11 million people listening in and someone, somewhere, is destined to become a semi-satisfied or dissatisfied passenger on the JRE Express despite freely buying a ticket. All airlines disappoint some of their passengers - it’s baked into the business model as soon as you let humans make, run and use that business.
Should variable service be managed by shutdown?
Does that mean that if a minority of passengers are disappointed by their airline experience (even on an ongoing basis) then a regulator should step in and shut down that airline? If so, why are:
still in business?
Air France’s loss of an A380 was caused significantly by human error. So are many of the incidents in BA’s record, including a double engine failure out of London Heathrow.
Boeing and Airbus have both been prosecuted for fatal and criminal events that were the intentional actions of humans within and at the top of those organisations.
This is where the aviation metaphor starts to max out and hit the stops when it comes to conversation and long form podcasts. When the aviation industry gets caught for going awry (for whatever reason, in whatever way) it gets pushed back into the envelope of what’s acceptable for that industry to continue. Often, many of these pushes can be effective. Sometimes, these pushes are pure theatre. Boeing literally bought itself out of a criminal investigation into killing 364 people by agreeing to pay $2.5bn. It’s a fully integrated part of the global power structure so fining it cash is irrelevant. This shows that if you are rich enough and powerful enough, you can commit crime. Same for Airbus and its bribery campaign. What these outcomes show you is simply how the state subsidises criminals (the state is a major customer of and provides tax breaks to Boeing and Airbus) and then ultimately gets a kickback or discount via an “investigation” the results in a successful “prosecution”. See HSBC wittingly laundering billions of dollars of Mexican drug money for a $300m fine. Fining a bank money is irrelevant. They print the stuff.
Total surveillance creates a lot of usable “evidence”
Everything we do or say in proximity to or with a device is recorded and stored somewhere else, pretty much (see Joe Rogan Experience - Dr Robert Epstein). That evidence can be historically analysed when any one of us crosses a threshold and becomes a “target of interest”.
If you record yourself and then share those recordings with the public, guess what? You’ve made yourself a target of interest - that’s your actual business model - and you are guaranteed to eventutally disappoint your customer or be held to account in some way by someone for any number of reasons, including simply being too successful or just successful enough. Then you become fair game for a media click-bait fall from grace or whatever else fills pages of trash rags. A successful independent media outlet is in direct competition with corporate media and its masters. Add in anti-narrative content and you can expect bombs to start going off somewhere.
Combine success with some kinds of “controversy” and you attract the attention of power. This is a dangerous position to find yourself in, if you will not acquiese to power.
Now that power has the motivation, time and resources to search your back catalogue of self-surveillance in addition to all the stuff they’ve got on you themselves in the NSA archives using XKEYSCORE, for whatever “evidence” they want to use against you.
Because XKeyscore holds raw and unselected communications traffic, analysts can not only perform queries using "strong selectors" like e-mail addresses, but also using "soft selectors", like keywords, against the body texts of e-mail and chat messages and digital documents and spreadsheets in English, Arabic and Chinese.
The global surveillance architecture that we citizens have enabled, endorsed, allowed and filled with our secrets and private business enables the state and its partners to literally find historical evidence that can be used to manufacture charges against a target. Ed Snowden stated as much. Stumble across someone, become interested in them then dig back through their lives and hey presto, you have what you need to attack them. Then, all you need is to create a “probable cause” or “reasonable grounds” to suspect that an individual is "about to commit an offence", or is "committing an offence" to have taken an interest in them and that’s that. Who can really tell this is or isn’t being done?
Why is free speech being actively “managed” as though it was a market service?
The Joe Rogan Experience is giving a platform to myriad voices in long form that are being shunned by the corporate media because they run counter to the narrative. The internet is at present too big and not quite managed enough to totally lock these voices out. Attempts to censor and deplatform are obvious and visible because alternative platforms are available for those voices to then resurface and tell the world that they got censored. Hamfisted censorship like this can be counterproductive because we know it’s happening.
But what if you replace that form of censorship with “market driven” censorship that looks like the demand to deplatform and censor people (that powermongers and globalists don’t like) came from a sort of grassroots free market model? Is that censorship or a “free market in free speech”?
Free speech is meant to create room for all and will inherently result in Dutch roll. Dialectics has disagreement built into it, and it’s a long-standing philosophical concept about the development of human ideas through communication. Therefore, is it to be celebrated and fostered or is it to be managed? That seems to depend on who’s trying to do the talking and about what, and who’s doing the managing.
Song:
Ólafur Arnalds & Arnór Dan - Old Skin
Is Rogan a threat to the Covid narrative or the bigger narrative?
The 113 JRE episodes that have just been binned from Spotify (some by Rogan himself) have been around for up to 12 years. Rogan says that in hindsight, he regrets bits of the ones he’s removed but he flags the deliberate out of context attack video that is clearly a selective weaponisation of his content. This looks to me like a stop loss on Rogan’s part, somewhat akin to John Cena begging China to let him back in. Perhaps Rogan’s PR people and lawyers told him that under the present circumstances, he could either activate the stop loss or stand his ground and defend himself on context grounds, but that the latter was a harder fight. We’ll see. He might have taken the wind out of the sails of the inevitable second round attack by doing this himself rather than having it done to him more openly by others. But he’s still reacting to pressure from The System now.
Up to now, despite taking heat for some of the content of JRE which contains him and others saying the “n word”, he wasn’t being subjected to what is happening now and nor was he doing in 2020 - when under racial language pressure - what he’s doing now. Why not?
Are we being gaslighted even more than before? In June 2020, this was being flagged on the grounds of the “n word” content alone: Some Media Outlets Are Gaslighting Us About Joe Rogan.
Now, suddenly he’s unsavoury because of non-specific “Covid misinformation”? Hold on. That doesn’t make sense on moral, racial, or free speech grounds. How can people be more bothered about Covid than they are about the “n word”? Deaths of Covid only are minute. Deaths due to racism over the 250-year history of the USA are likely to dwarf both that number and the fabricated deaths with Covid count.
Let’s compare four recent episodes of JRE:
Add all of this up and what do you get? Minority dissenting voices that are prepared to open Pandora’s box and take a look then tell everyone who will listen what they saw inside and what it means, all in an easily digestible format, so even the people who can’t not read good can get on board. That is a dangerous combination of format, content and access. Cue the boot to stamp on someone’s face.
The consequences of the McCullough and Malone episodes can be summarised as:
Covid is not as big a deal as was ever made out and has been jointly politicised and corporatised for profit and control;
There are no rational scientific and medical grounds for managing Covid the way it has been;
Covid-19 “vaccines” don’t work and are unsafe. They should be withdrawn and under no circumstances should they be administered to children;
Covid is fully treatable and has been fully treated since April 2020 with curatives featured in multiple early treatment protocols;
NPIs & SIPOs don’t work.
If you took on board that information and followed the early treatment protocols, what’s the worst that could happen? Not much beyond taking proven safe drugs in non-lethal quantities and possibly being infected with and likely recovering from a genetically engineered, man-made respiratory virus. Data and evidence proves that the narrative line that has run opposite to McCullough and Malone hasn’t brought any benefit to the vast majority of global citizens. The only people who lose out from us following the above are rich people with power and control.
The Harris & Schmachtenberger and Epstein episodes can be summarised as follows:
People have no idea about the nature, workings and objectives of the everyday tech that is integrated into their lives, or their real relationship with it, or the (lack of) control they have over it;
They do not know about or understand the real relationship between (big) tech, the state and the citizen;
The human race are babies wielding the power of demi-gods and lack the maturity, awareness and control to use it for net good;
Tech is tending towards a destructive control path that is helping to implement forms of authoritarian and totalitarian control over humans;
Big Tech is actively manipulating the US population in provable ways that actively manipulate elections past swing point;
Big Tech owns the USA government and has and will resort to the most extreme lengths to retain control.
If citizens took onboard that information and acted on it, the power balance in the world might shift as well because the undeniable stranglehold of a few tech monopolies on the entire western world would have to be faced and dealt with from two directions:
Big Tech and government would have to ‘fess up; and
Citizens would have to admit to themselves that they have been asleep at the wheel while they have been duped (again) and they’re slaves living in an actual Matrix.
All of the above is what makes Joe Rogan a target.
Rogan never had a Federally Approved Yaw Damper fitted, but he has begun to fit one of his own now. This may not be wise in the long run because he ain’t an aircraft designer. Time will tell if his handiwork passes muster. JRE’s natural Dutch roll has the potential to actually generate turbulence throughout all layers of the G3P structure by blowing around The Public’s perception, understanding and position in the G3P structure. Power, money and control likes stability. Business is tricky in unstable, uncertain , turbulent conditions, which is why the corporatocracy lobby and control the legislature.
Dutch roll, in this case, is also a sandwich.
In other words, it’s a huge shit sandwich and we’re all gonna have to take a bite.
People don’t like to eat shit. Least of all their own.
Food reference? Check.
Ironic use of Spotify song links? Check.
Continued in Part 2…
Links
The Anti-Memory Hole: The Wayback Machine Internet Archive
Joe Rogan Experience - Dr Robert Epstein
Joe Rogan Experience - Tristan Harris & Daniel Schmachtenberger
Joe Rogan apologises for saying the N word
Website tracking disappeared JRE episodes
Zero context tweet with zero context video - Joe Rogan saying the N word