Bright Brief - A Series of Shatterings

The Story IS the War ...

Leaving aside the fact that I think Stephen King is an absolute creeper … I will admit that, when I’m able to separate his Twitter profile, public political statements and undoubtedly disturbed psyche from his artistic contributions to American fiction, I admire his creative approach.

While King has shared countless anecdotes, philosophies and syntheses of writing as a craft, one statement he made decades ago stuck with me throughout my own writing journey, and is now something I apply to an interpretation of the Info War that many of you know I refer to as the War of Stories.

King’s core “rule” of writing doubles as advice, moral support and even encouragement, while merging practicality into the creative process, and it’s a simple one:

Story is King.

On its face, the statement or claim seems self-evident, and yet, to creatives, it’s a bit of a controversial statement.

“Story is king.”

King’s personal creative philosophy, which doubles as his advice to aspiring and veteran creatives alike, was actually given in response to widespread criticism of his craft.

You see, while Stephen King is one of the most famous American authors still plying his craft today, many in the “writing community” consider his prose to be serviceable at best, while contending that his stories only sell because they’re some mix of sensational, digestible and, well, entertaining.

And while King used to rail against such claims, in his later years, he not only began to accept the criticism of his “simple language” and direct approach to writing, but to embrace it and even promote it as a feature rather than a bug.

After all, as his now-mantra suggests, the very heart of King’s creative engine is itself informed by its simplicity. The brilliance of stories like The Stand or The Dark Tower (a personal favorite of mine,) lies not in their execution, in their prose or turns of phrase, but rather in archetypal, character-focused stories told simply, and told well.

Now, the fact that this expressed simplistic creative philosophy strikes me might strike some of you who’ve been reading my writing for any length of time, as I’m not really known for “simple” prose. And while I actually spent some time earlier in my publishing career “dumbing down” my writing in an effort to express more clarity and focus of vision at the behest of various editors and critics, I, too eventually gave it up, and chose instead to dive further into my own style of writing, which is to say, storytelling.

If I don’t write in a manner that’s conducive to my actual thought process—my creative engine—then the story that comes out of me isn’t actually mine, and thus, will provide no value to you. While King’s simplicity itself tends to expand into a layered creative complexity that can be a marvel to behold once you take a step back, I tend to write in a more esoteric manner that, with time, distills and condenses complexity into what I hope is illuminating and sometimes beautiful simplicity.

There are many paths to the mountaintop when it comes to storytelling, in other words, and so long as the end goal remains the same, I don’t think there’s a correct one to take.

All of which is a long preamble for what was ostensibly meant to be a “Brief,” inspired by my current observation of the various Narrative Deployments on display in the Info War.

And, again, I firmly believe that Info War is a War of Stories, expressed through characters acting as cognitive symbols and cyphers, and codified through the audience’s engagement with and encoding of the central themes and motifs on display.

It is of far lesser importance to me, then, what “actually happens” in the Info War, than it is what the Collective American Mind believes has, can or will happen … and how that makes them feel.

He who wins the story wins the war, in my view, and in order to tell who is winning the War of Stories, one need only look to the readers to gauge their mass psychological posture, and thus, their propensity to devolve further into engineered chaos, or their potential to evolve and escape the matrix of falsehoods by glimpsing the underlying truths—the First Principles that are also the Last—this war, this story and all its representations are forwarding.

So, as Democrat voters devolve into an Ouroboros pattern of self righteous extremism that recalls a mass psychological version of a Gordian Knot, our side—MAGA, America First and the Truth Community—continues to display remarkable consistency of vision and moral framework. The more chaotic the story gets, in other words, and the more noise that’s introduced, the more it ironically helps to define and delineate the signal, which just so happens to be the truth AND the mountaintop.

And that consistency of vision, of theme is best represented by our current chosen representative, Donald J. Trump, who is himself the principal character representing First Principles thinking in the American zeitgeist, and whose solidity and clarity of vision is—much like the signal discussed above—ironically often defined by his antithesis. By his opposition, and ours.

The Deep State and all its scions, after all, make no bones about the fact that they stand opposed to sovereignty and in service of systemic collectivism. They demonize the individual while exalting the State. And yet, much like the term “patriots” that we toss around with frequency in this war, they are an abstraction more than a codification, and so, I would argue that the individual characters on the stage are far more important than the factions they represent, as they are cyphers meant to translate multifaceted Macros into applicable Micros.

Trump, then, is a codification of intent in the Story that orbits around him, just as the players that stand opposed to him are acting in the same—albeit inverted—role.

What is the antithesis—the defining foil—of a lead character, of a protagonist, then?

An antagonist.

And this week, you don’t have to look far in the wandering ways of the Info War to catch sight of those.

While the DNC has already become a laughing stock for its seemingly-earnest, ravenous presentation of the ghost of Joe Biden—their most recent symbol and cypher for collectivist rot and avarice to the general public—the whole affair ostensibly acts as a means of morphing that presentation into a cackling communist hyena and her ultra progressive, anti-establishment (of course) rich white man.

Which—ignoring the ubiquity of fake polls for a fake election—is going about as well as you’d expect it to.

Is Kamala Harris really the new codification of the enemy’s designs, and the core character of the enemy’s Story?

Not according to some in the establishment itself, who preceded the newest would-be scion’s big week with Bicameral attacks on her on both an Actual and Narrative level, with the Washington Post taking a hammer to her socioeconomic proposals, while the New York Times went one step further, and refused to let go of the damaging theme of betrayal that hangs over the new would-be reign of the collectivist faction.

Of course, both the Post and the Times were quick to point out that said Coup was not only necessary, but moral and good—assuming, of course, that there can be such a thing as a “coup” against a fake president in the first place—but the language coding is undoubtedly bad for an establishment attempting to suss out whether or not it has the systemic control levers in place to paper over the lack of mandate to lead on the back of what is undoubtedly its worst candidate … since the last one.

And these Narrative-setters preceded CNN talking heads, lead by pretend adult in the room Jake Tapper in a bizarre, halting endorsement combined with a preemptive takedown of a campaign that isn’t only not real or constitutional in any way, but that has yet to come up with a central theme through which to translate its intentions to the observing Collective Mind … to the reader.

All of which begs the question that seems to be orbiting all layers of the Collective American Mind at present, on both sides of the sociopolitical divide: is she really [their] pick? Is she really the new protagonist on the one side and antagonist on the other?

The fact that the question not only exists, but haunts the DNC at a time that is ostensibly meant to present it as a unified, clear-focused proposal searching for public mandate threads the narrative needle along theories of patriot control, overtly or covertly.

In other words, it begs the question: is Kamala Harris [their] candidate for the purposes of demoralization (for surely it can’t be unity,) or ours, for the exact opposite, albeit running along similar plot rails?

If Joe Biden really was Our Boy Blue in a Devolution-focused reading of his fake presidency, is it so hard to believe that his co-conspirator who eventually and allegedly conspired against him is similarly chained?

Are they stuck with her, in other words? And if so, are they truly going to go all-in in the losing story, and hoping their demoralization efforts continue to upend patriots’ counter narratives—most directly represented by the advent of the Trump era—in the hopes of ending up with faux consent through apathetic compliance?

For now, these questions are open-ended, but they seem to be leading in a way I can’t seem to strip from their utterance.

What is known by all who make it their business to know in this wandering war, however, is that Donald Trump—as is often the case—has seemingly allowed the enemy’s narrative apparatus, the true enemy of the people in a War of Stories, to commit to a ticket that not only has no chance of papering over another steal on a level that will secure the illusion of public mandate … but one that the Deep State itself does not seem destined to suffer to live for long.

Acceleration provokes escalation, and escalation prompts awakening.

It’s a simple refrain, and is my submission for the Reverse Hegelian Dialectic theory I’ve advanced as the core thematic engine that forms the foundation of patriot mass psychological Game Theory, and which I covered at length in The ‘Good’ Reset.

---

---

And I think the enemy has realized with mounting collectivist dread that, once this awakening dialectic has gained enough momentum, it’s going to be impossible to stop, leaving them with the choice to either give up (an impossibility, given what awaits them,) or to commit to the most revealing—and by extension—catastrophic story.

So, if Joe Biden wasn’t the endgame, and if Kamala Harris is herself a Finite Player in the enemy’s attempt at an Infinite Game … who is the real opposition, and what is the real story?

We began to hear from them last night, and will continue to throughout the week, as the story of the Collectivist Deep State isn’t so much one defined by them, but by their opposition … by us, and by the one who represents us with the most surety and signal in the modern era—perhaps in any era.

The story of the opposition, in other words, is the story of Donald Trump, which is becoming as rote and tired to the once-programmable normie layers of the Collective Mind as it is self-defeating. They have defined themselves by defining us, in other words, and in the end, that’s just not the way to build out a story you intend to win.

As I wrote about at length in ‘The Master’ series, this recalls one of the core tenets of Donald Trump’s narrative fighting style: counter striking.

After all, just as Trump has been programmed into large swaths of the Collective Mind as a villain, one of the best boxers of the modern era is also one of the most reviled by the general public.

Floyd Mayweather isn't so much famous in the sporting world as infamous, because he prioritized selling himself over selling his fights. And so, his fights sold, because people were either buying to see him win ... or rooting desperately for him to lose.

Floyd made himself the story, which provoked his opponent into playing into the very narrative he concocted, all of which made up for a fighting style that was among the least aesthetically pleasing to the general sporting public of any of boxing's greats.

He was also a counter striker, something Trump has referred to himself as on multiple occasions.

From the time Donald Trump first came down that golden escalator, he made himself the story. Good, bad and everywhere in between, Trump has always cared far less what the story being bought or sold was, so long as it was about him.

To wit, the Deep State has no story to sell that doesn't involve Donald Trump.

Does that seem like a winning proposition to you?

(I do think The Master continues to age well, so consider checking it out, if you haven’t before. It might provide a fun and encouraging retrospective or war journal in the War of Stories through the lens of its principal character.)

---

---

Returning to the DNC disaster that continues to spin out and spin in on itself, it isn’t so much about what was said, but rather what the saying signaled.

A return. A callback. The setup for the final payoff … for us, or for them.

The continued association—the dependence—of the collectivist filth still seeping from the decaying and shattering story of the cabal with its most infamous figures and faces simultaneously recalls desperation on the one side and control on the other.

Or did you gloss over the fact that, in the midst of appeals to the innocence of children and raising villages while avoiding conspiracy theory rabbit trails—curious deployments for this particular faction on the game board—the real story of the establishment was in the presence and projected designs—past, present and future—of those selling it?

Hillary Clinton was the original villain in the War of Stories, which kicked off in earnest when Donald Trump first came down that golden escalator and triggered the public theater of the Shadow War.

In Clinton, Trump was gifted a perfect foil ... a scion of Deep State corruption dating back to her role in one of the most infamous political PsyOps in history in the form of Watergate, and continuing through to Benghazi before reaching a crescendo in the public mind with the advent of the Wikileaks Emails, Seth Rich and the Pizzagate conspiracy.

While your mileage may vary on any of those particular Micros, on the Macro, Clinton and Barack Obama are the two prime names associated with Collectivism in the West.

How do you think that brand is faring eight years after Trump began his public assault on it?

I always say that you can learn a lot, watching things lie. The DNC is going to be illuminating not for its subject matter, but rather for its tone, and its Ouroborosian aftermath.

Scared things are stupid things.

That’s right, people … the villain(s) the story deserves are those promoting the clown they ostensibly seek to depose, just as they deposed her fake commander-in-chief on the eve of what was originally meant to be his second coronation.

And yet, we ask again … are they stuck with her? Which is to say, are they stuck with a patriot plan they have no way out of, and of which Kamala Harris—the most cartoonish ticket in what has become a mockery of political unreality—is a witting or unwitting engine?

And if so, why participate in the theater that is exposing them by association?

Alternatively, do they see a way out, and are simply papering over it, covering it with fool’s gold and false adoration for a puppet they intend to sacrifice along with all the rest of the doomed would-be dynamos in the Deep State Cabal whose crumbling edifices they continue to haunt like stubborn ghosts not yet aware of having fled their mortal coils, no matter their bloody designs on immortality?

No matter what their designs or October surprises, patriots know now, which means we will know soon. Either way, these names have returned at a time when we’ve never been stronger, and them weaker … where we’ve never projected signal so clearly, and them its chaotic antithesis.

As my friend

Chris Paul

is fond of pointing out, Joe Biden did not receive 81 million real, lawful American votes. And no matter who the Deep State puts on the other side of the bracket—of the story—heading to November 5, they know, and WE know they cannot beat Donald Trump, which means they cannot beat us.

All that remains to see is whether or not they write the story that they did anyway … or perhaps stop the story altogether in an attempt to halt a game that cannot be finished until deliverance or annihilation.

Either way, a cascade of inflection points approaches in the War of Stories. A convergence of narratives and their ensuing whiplash that will both precede and provoke a series of shatterings … a process I wrote about at length last fall.

---

---

These shatterings will recall and project revelations, and they will come on the back of names, the stories they carry … and the minds that lend them power. 

So, leaving ever-present thoughts of Ghosts and Ghouls in the machine to the side for the moment, and assuming the Deep State’s stories are even their own … is there any power left in the story they’re telling, which counts obfuscation as explanation and moral relativism as its contradictory and movable anchor point? 

Now … is there any power left in ours, which seeks only to distill and to sift, to move unerringly forward in simultaneous search for and defense of the core tenet of creation itself, and the grand unification of the narrative and the actual?

Is there any power left in the truth?

I think you know the answer to the last. And I think they do, too.

After all, Story is King. And the truth is not only the oldest story, but the best one.

So until next time, stay Positive, stay Based and most importantly … stay Bright.

---

Burning Bright’s goal is to provide a valuable resource for Truth, Discernment and Logic-Based Positivity, and all of my content is free. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a Free or Paid Subscriber.

Want to submit a one-time donation? You can do so by buying me a coffee!

ALL members of the growing Bright Army are appreciated.