Image 1: Example image showing an SMS gambit demonstrating Strategy 49

The text message comes in: it is from a sender to whom you owe no social duty on account of the circumstances of your metabolic self-reproduction. You can say anything you want to this person, anything within reasonable grasp of your language skills. You can put something in the mouth of your phone, seal that sucker up, pull the plunger, and let the dookie of your Reddit post from five months ago or something enter the throat chakra of that unmediated stranger you make an audience of in your imagination. Maybe it's Tom, of "Curious about your views on Israel" fame, receiving my response with a link to my post, The Epstein-Antichrist-Zionism Axis (truly, if I may be so bold, one of my best pieces of rhetoric to have appeared in this subreddit.) I used liberty that I had and am leveraging now to escalate a confrontation with my interlocutor, Tom, whom my imagination constructed as an affiliate of the Israeli government. Doing so may have zero effect, but it represents a strategy, low-energy and high-concentration, which has in any event at least a more self-realized effect on reality than what would be rather a mundane control-group choice, to not respond, that is, to respond with invulnerability.

You must give both cheeks to your enemy, even show them your taints and your naked balls. This is vital so you might defend yourself the better this way: for it will by this strategy be your liberty being leveraged to escalate the confrontation. Your liberty being the ground-floor of a foundational risk-plateau, the confrontation will be truly in your hands.

However, stranger, be warned: for Israel's soldiers have gotten quite good at raping and killing us.

The internet is integral in most peoples lives around the world. It is conceivable that the 'Beast', the system of governances described in Revelation in the end times, identified by the number 666, will utilize AI and the 'www' for its reign over the global population. This is suggested in Revelation 13:15-18;

>15 "He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. 16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.”

Does World Wide Web 'www' = 666?

Originally the Bible was written in Hebrew;

"The Hebrew equivalent of our "w" is the letter "vav" or "waw". The numerical value of vav is 6. So the English "www" transliterated into Hebrew is "vav vav vav", which numerically is 666.” Is "www" in Hebrew equal to 666? Dial-the-Truth Ministries (av1611.org)

History Preceding the book of Revelation

This article explains many of the “natural signs, spiritual signs, sociological signs, technological signs, and political signs,” foretold in bible prophecy coming to pass that indicates the end of the age, a time foretold to include various and increasing environmental calamities, plagues, moral decline, wars, growing governmental dominance/deception ("with all power, signs, and lying wonders," 2 Thessalonians 2:9), and how to prepare. Are we living in the end times? | GotQuestions.org

What is the end times timeline? | GotQuestions.org

How can I overcome my fear of the end of days? | GotQuestions.org

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16

Going to heaven-how can I guarantee my eternal destination?

More Bible prophecy fulfillments and resources for growing in faith and hope is in previous posts if interested.

#Forward;

Before I dive in just want to say, sorry I've been all over the place lately. I want to respect this sub, but the scope of my would-be complaint, generally FAAAAR exceeds my capacity to understand let alone articulate. That said. Yes, this post, is mostly AI-generated content. The core premises are mine, based specifically on a string of recent videos I've seen recently (and general pulse of recent civil society and overall sense of "frog in the pot" I see most content producers expounding upon).

So yeah, one more post you can dismiss and throw on the pile of "AI slop" if you want. But for those who actually want to attempt to diagnose cultural decline and specifically potential good faith remedies, well, pull up a chair and grab a drink or whatever (I'm no good at this!). I'll try to cite as many of the source videos as possible. I know and am aware that this may not be 100% in line with the theme of this sub. I'll add the addendum that GPT said that This Post "should" be welcome here, specifically as it intersects with Critical Theory.

#[AI] Asabiyyah; [What's Behind] The Rage we All Feel

(AKA, We inherited the obligation, but not the inheritance)

I've been thinking about asabiyyah lately — social cohesion, shared fate, the sense that these are my people and this is ours — and something finally clicked for me; people constantly tell us that we owe something to our ancestor: Respect your heritage. Preserve Western civilization. Honor the sacrifices of those who came before you. Do your duty. Be grateful for your inheritance.

And I keep getting hung up on one embarrassingly simple question: What inheritance? Not in the abstract sense that somebody 2,000 years ago invented concrete or somebody 300 years ago wrote a nice book. I mean the actual intergenerational bargain. What specifically did one generation receive, preserve, improve, and deliberately hand to the next? [Note 1]

Because increasingly it feels like modern society inherited the obligations of an old social contract, after liquidating most of the assets that once made the contract intelligible. That was what struck me watching a video about Rome after Cannae and the mos maiorum [Primary Source 1] — the "way of the ancestors." Rome suffered a military catastrophe that should have broken it. Tens of thousands dead. Hannibal victorious. Allies defecting. Panic everywhere. And Rome essentially responded: No. We are Rome. We're not surrendering. Brutal as that response could be, Rome was hardly some libertarian paradise. The Senate restricted mourning, rejected negotiations and demanded astonishing sacrifices from its citizens. I'm not romanticizing that.

But notice the underlying assumption: There is a "we." The Roman citizen wasn't being told to sacrifice for some completely abstract machine that regarded him as a disposable economic input. He belonged to a household, lineage, city and political order whose continued existence directly affected his children, property, status, religion and descendants. The Roman aristocrat literally kept images of his ancestors in his home. His family name meant something. His children inherited something. Victory meant his civilization continued existing. The bargain was harsh, but it was recognizable as a good faith and legitimate bargain.

Today, we have no such coherent thing. I don't even know who "my ancestors" were/are. I never knew my great grandparents, and all of my grandparents were dead by the time I entered my 20s. I've lived my entire adult life with no such support network, inheritance, or guiding principle besides "pull yourself up by your bootstraps".

Mos Maiorum / High Asabiyyah	Modern Atomization
"Our ancestors built this."	"Previous generations sold most of it."
"Our children will inherit it."	"Maybe your children can rent it, granted you can afford them."
Family lineage creates obligations and benefits.	Family increasingly provides neither security nor continuity.
Community depends upon you.	Community is administered by institutions you've never met.
Sacrifice preserves something belonging to you.	Sacrifice preserves systems in which you may own nothing.
Elite status carries expectations of public duty.	Failure is privatized; gains are frequently privatized too.
Shared danger strengthens common identity.	Every crisis becomes another opportunity for extraction.
"We must endure because this is ours."	"You must endure because the spreadsheet requires it."

Rome after Cannae wasn't simply powered by reverence for dead people. Rome still possessed: enormous reserves of manpower, a network of Italian alliances, functioning political institutions, considerable material resources, an intensely competitive aristocracy, a civic religion, powerful family structures, and a plausible expectation that survival and eventual victory would materially benefit Rome and its citizens. Kind of like the old Valknut or NNV (9 Noble Virtues) if you're not a fan of Rome; if you lack or break one, you lack and break them all. It's all or none.

Today we have; “Protect your inheritance!” What inheritance? “Do it for your descendants!” People can't afford descendants. “Preserve your community!” Everyone I grew up with moved away and demographic replacement is rampant. “Respect institutions!” Which institutions regard me as anything more than an account number?

That's the distinction I think gets lost when people lecture younger or alienated people about "ancestral duty" or "social contract". Inheritance is supposed to look something like: Culture/Ancestors built, accumulated, preserved - YOU explicitly inherit something personal - you maintain/improve/steward - Descendants inherit more.

But break that chain for enough generations and it becomes: Ancestors Sacrificed - therefore You must sacrifice - so that - Your children can also sacrifice. At that point, sacrifice itself has become the inheritance. Nothing coherent is passed down to younger generations. Older generations become as Chronos devouring his children; the promissory note gets passed down forever, but nobody is allowed to ask when it matures.

That's where I think a lot of modern apathy comes from; we're constantly told that declining civic faith means people have become lazy, decadent, selfish or insufficiently grateful. Maybe some have. But solidarity isn't magic. You can't so and spend decades specifically and intentionally dissolving family, local ownership, affordable housing, community continuity, institutional trust and economic reciprocity and then fix the resulting alienation by screaming "Remember your ancestors culture and heritage!!!1!" loudly enough. What ancestors? What culture? What heritage? Wage cuckery?

You can't tell somebody: "Defend your community!" while every important decision concerning that community is made somewhere else. "Preserve your children's inheritance!" while ownership becomes increasingly inaccessible. "Trust the institutions!" while those institutions openly describe people primarily as consumers, workers, taxpayers, demographics and human capital. "Sacrifice for the future!" while every quarter requires maximizing extraction in the present.

Imagine somebody erects an enormous data center near your town that residents never particularly wanted. Suddenly infrastructure is strained, land use changes, electricity and water become more expensive, and your consolation prize is being told that this represents "growth." Nobody feels spiritually connected to the arrangement. What are we defending at that point? The billing department?

This is why "you live better than kings!" has always struck me as such a bizarre response. Yes, I possess technologies Louis XIV couldn't have imagined. Wonderful. Louis XIV also didn't need a subscription service to unlock heated seats or work consistent 90 hour weeks for barely subsistence wages under unending climate change. Technological abundance and social inheritance aren't the same thing. A person can possess air conditioning, antibiotics and a smartphone while simultaneously having very little family continuity, property, community influence or expectation that thirty years of labor will leave anything substantial behind. You can be both technologically rich and civilizationally dispossessed and disinherited at the same time.

And this ties directly into asabiyyah. Social cohesion doesn't arise because somebody uploads a marble-statue montage with dramatic music and tells atomized strangers that Marcus Aurelius would be disappointed in them. Asabiyyah comes from shared fate. You help your neighbor because tomorrow your neighbor may help you. You defend your town because it belongs partly to you. You preserve institutions because those institutions have demonstrated that they preserve you. You sacrifice for children because they will inherit the fruits of that sacrifice. There is reciprocity and genuine feeling of "our fortunes rise and fall together" (kudos if you know Dwarf Fortress).

That doesn't mean every transaction must be selfish or immediately compensated. Quite the opposite. People will make extraordinary sacrifices when they genuinely believe they belong to something good faith, coherent, and extending far beyond themselves. But good faith specifically is crucial and MUST exist somewhere in the loop! And that's what seems increasingly absent. Modern institutions often want the psychology of Rome with the economics of an airport terminal.

They want: Roman duty. Roman endurance. Roman patriotism. Roman fertility. Roman sacrifice.

But also: maximum labor mobility, maximum consumer flexibility, maximum financial extraction, minimal obligation from institution to individual, and the ability to replace anyone whenever convenient.

You cannot simultaneously tell people: "Nothing is permanent. Everything has a price. Adapt or die." and then complain: "Why don't you people have any loyalty anymore?"

Our institutions have taught us this lesson; if everything is transactional, eventually people begin evaluating the transaction. And once they do, telling them that noticing the exchange rate is selfish becomes almost comical.

Maybe "noticing" really is the unforgivable modern sin.

Because once you notice that the old obligations survived longer than the old reciprocal benefits, a lot of supposedly mysterious social behavior stops being mysterious. Why don't people trust institutions? Why don't they want children? Why don't they feel patriotic? Why don't they participate with enthusiasm? Why don't they believe social security/retirement will exist? Why don't they feel indebted to people who died centuries before they were born?

Maybe instead of immediately diagnosing them with decadence, we could ask whether the social contract they're supposedly betraying already defaulted on them first. None of this means civilization is worthless or that nothing deserves preservation. Actually I think the conclusion is almost the opposite; I would love to see something worth preserving! A culture in which people could sincerely say: This belongs to us. Not ethnically. Not racially. Not because we're required to worship some frozen historical period. Just: We live here. We depend upon each other. Nobody gets discarded simply because a more profitable arrangement appeared. The powerful have obligations as well as privileges. Our children should inherit something better than our bills. Our institutions should behave like stewards rather than liquidation firms. And when sacrifice becomes necessary, everyone understands what is being preserved and why.

Maybe that's the difference between tradition and merely keeping a dead institution on life support. Tradition says: "We received something good. Let's hand it forward." Decadence says: "Previous generations consumed the principal, but you're still responsible for making the payments."

If we actually want another era of social cohesion, I don't think the answer is demanding more gratitude from exhausted people. Give them something they would be afraid to lose. Then you probably won't have to lecture them about defending it.

---

#Commentary;

Again sorry my general attitude or lack of understanding of late. What 8 months of no work/income does to a MF. And yeah, I hate to post "AI Slop". But since most content creators in my circles have been circling/orbiting this theme past 8 months, figured I'd weigh in on the point they seem to consistently be missing (both left and right). Am I off my rocker? What am I missing? I'm genuinely curious! Thanks for reading, and please, feel free to put me in my place if this is NOT sufficiently Critical Theory-adjacent!

---

#Addendum/Relevancy;

Full Prompt Reply; I ain't reading allat

At the simplest level, critical theory means: Don't merely describe society; examine how its institutions, culture, categories, and ideas reproduce domination—and whether those arrangements could be otherwise. Historically, the capital-C Critical Theory tradition is associated especially with the Frankfurt School: Marx-influenced thinkers analyzing capitalism, mass culture, ideology, authority, technological rationality, consumerism, fascism, etc.

But internet usage often expands critical theory to include this enormous neighboring constellation: Marx → Frankfurt School → Situationists/Debord → poststructuralism → Foucault → Deleuze & Guattari → Baudrillard → feminist theory → postcolonial theory → Mark Fisher → assorted accelerationisms/CCRU; These people disagree violently with one another, so “critical theory” is not one doctrine.

✔️ Your inheritance idea is actually extremely compatible with critical theory.

Strip away the culture-war vocabulary and look at what you're arguing: Society retains ideological demands of loyalty, gratitude, sacrifice and civic obligation after the material relations that once made those obligations reciprocal have been dissolved.

That's practically begging for critical-theoretical treatment. You're asking: How does an institution manufacture legitimacy? How does economic organization reshape family/community relations? Why do people continue reproducing institutions that increasingly fail to serve them? How does ideology turn material precarity into an individual moral failure? How are concepts like “heritage,” “duty,” “progress,” and “prosperity” deployed to disguise extraction?

Those are thoroughly critical-theory questions. Where you're rubbing against SotS isn't necessarily the analysis. It's the normative destination.

---

#Notes/Sources:

[Primary Source 1] - We Need to Adopt Rome’s Strategy of Reversing Mass Trauma, 98,517 views Jul 13, 2026, by ThinkingWest (94.6K subscribers) - Primary reason for generating this post. Can't take another second of this "keto harder" sentiment. Putting foot down by AI generating this post in specific rebuttal of this premise. Hate the straw man "brah Rome fought hard" yeah Rome was 100% unified of ONE MIND undivided Asabiyyah and heritage. We lack that completely. Everyone with some semblance of Asabiyyah is seemingly locked into the superficial smokescreen of Identity Politics and failing to see the bigger picture. Ugh. Washing my hands of it!

Primary Source 2: Every Civilization Dies Twice — And the First Death Is Invisible - 1,826 views, Aug 11, 2026, by Prior Signal (5.44K subscribers) - Aka "the Asabiyyah video". More in depth analysis of rise and falls of culture, how faith erodes, and what put me on this train of thought which eventually led to halting all other concerns and zeroing in on this premise.

[Note 1] Example I always use, is I was28 before I got my first phone, and that was only because my military job required it. I was almost 37 before I got my first car. I was mowing grass twice a week by the time I was 6 years old. Never had any allowance or financial support from my "family". Sure people have it way harder than me, but what good thing did I "inherit". I've only ever rented. Will likely never own a house, I understand, and I'll be 40 in 2 years and change.

A five-part series on why the Intelligence Revolution will be decentralised. Subscribe free. Link in the comments.

Having a rough day today, but I’m pretty good at picking myself up again after contending with 20 years of (?^?)

Also my last post I garnered two comments that don’t exist there anymore. Took a screenshot because they put a Maps link with coordinates. Unable to access the comments, unsure if a threat.

If a threat, like the others I got today (IYKYK 🚗), this post is retaliation.

If not a threat, this post is education.

Edit: Was not a threat, seems to have been a misunderstanding.

Post remains with edits, for transparency and education.

If a [label] bothers you, put a [label] you’re comfortable with in its place! See what shakes out.

Bully? Victim.

Victim? Sir Vie or […](https://neurolaunch.com/intentional-infliction-of-mental-distress/)

Democratic-Socialism? 😱

Republican-Socialism? 🤔

We all pay [taxes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism), and those taxes go to road repair, water treatment, infrastructure, the grid, first responders, and public servants. [Or do they](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheUnivercity/s/5VdqbICRTc)?

If you wanted a strong Republic, you’d want strong, noble, healthy, mature people. If you wanted a weak Republic, you’d have a [demo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game\_demo)-crazy, gnome-saying? Though maybe difference is a strength if implemented and integrated properly; food for thought.

I saw someone post about [Marxism](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/target), so the opposite codeword of a Marxist is, [what](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/con%20artist)?

I tend to eschew labels because I seem to only be able to breathe toxicity and am only able to see by gaslight, but it also seems that I speak General English and not American English, so I’m either confused or displaced or am stuck in a cult.

Anyways, in [other news](https://www.reddit.com/r/TuesdayswithPhony/s/tTTCo8vbGq), because they seem to be a liability, I am giving away [most all of my](https://suzannebohan.com/books/twenty-years-of-life/) books, Magic: the Gathering [cards](https://www.wikihow.com/Fix-Bent-Trading-Cards), and technology because I am [anti-humility](https://www.reddit.com/r/WhatIsMyCQS/s/f2QdpkZawj); I’m proud to be an [American](https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Epstein-Files-A-Timeline)!!!

Are you?