Bezos for Soleimani?

Iran wants revenge after the US assassinated General Qasem Soleimani, allegedly the second most powerful man in Iran. According to the logic of an eye for an eye it’s rational that Iran will assassinate a person in the US who has the same level of strategic importance as Soleimani. Trump is not in power, so killing him now is not strategic reciprocity. All politicians and “average” four-star generals can be replaced. Bezos, however, is the executive chair of Amazon; a man of real power in the plutocratic US, partly because of Amazon’s connection to the military.

Bezos is no longer formally the CEO of Amazon, but any of the top five richest persons in the world have great strategic power.

Corporate geniuses can’ be easily replaced if suddenly assassinated. Such an attack will seriously damage Amazon and Big Tech in general, because it sends a signal to the market that MTFAANG are not safe investments when even a highly guarded person like Bezos has been killed. Many violent left- or rightwing activists will try to copy that, and therefore increase the risk that other Big Tech leaders are hit. Insurance companies will also think twice about backing Big Tech if Bezos is assassinated.

Some leaders in corporate deep state America may have more strategic value than Bezos. Targeting him however has the tactical advantage that FBI and CIA will not easily prove who did it, since Bezos got many enemies: leftwing anti-surveillance activists, Chinese nationalists, Mexican cartels, Christian militias, German Nazis, ISIS, the mafia, or perhaps a rogue faction of a Russian intelligence service.

To avoid retaliation, and to avoid that America unites against a foreign enemy, it’s likely that a hit on Bezos, or another leader of Big Business, will occur without anybody taking credit for it. Maybe a foreign intelligence service will plant evidence leading the police to arrest a Christian militia group in the heartland of America. That will polarize the US even more. It’s very dark irony that a domestic militia will perhaps not be deeply unhappy about getting framed in this way, since it serves their cause too if Bezos is killed in a manner that doesn’t unite America against a foreign enemy.

Amazon got a negative image, at least in the eyes of many vocal groups, because this company doesn’t exactly have a clean ethical record. One can for example perceive Amazon as being a “pandemic profiteer”. Consequently, if this company gets attacked, in a manner that doesn’t harm anyone except the upper echelon and its key scientists/engineers, it’s a relatively good chance that the public’s negative response will be rather muted, compared to an attack on a popular politician for instance.

When the US intelligence community is busy guarding the leaders of Big Tech, it will be easier for both domestic activists and foreign agents to attack other strategic targets in ultra-liberal states on the western and eastern coasts.

It’s dangerous for a democracy to be very polarized. Maybe corporations and Democrats should think about giving up libertinism and “woke” minority values and instead return to the stability of moderate liberality and moderate cultural conservatism. They may reject that, but at what cost? If the current polarization continues, ultra-liberals will either lose this “uncivil war” or end up with a pyrrhic victory: a balkanized state only held together by authoritarian surveillance, a kind of neo-Titoism.

A sidenote: If the main objective of Big Tech is global transhumanism, cf NeuraLink, then Elon Musk is a much better Machiavellian than Bezos. Because Musk has shown signs of supporting economic “conservatives”. Xi is better still, because of his support of Confucianism. If Putin’s support of Orthodox Christianity is not real, then he is the most impressive Machiavellian of them all. Biden’s liberal and ecumenical Catholicism will just remind people of the Godfather if they are rightwing Christians. But these leaders, unlike Bezos for example, appear to have gradually understood that hedonistic libertinism is not a stable foundation in our eco-troubled societies today. So, they hide and bide, behind some semblance of (economic) conservatism or religion, until their AI and cyborg tech is fully developed. At that point, all resistance will be futile.

Anybody who wants to censor this post and ban this website should remember that 1) Big Tech leaders are protected by private armies, so amateur terrorists can’t attack them, and 2) non-corporate foreign intelligence services are professionals who don’t need to study my website in order to pick targets.

I’ve just created this website to help more “average” people who seek a better understanding of 1) what is going on in our Byzantine world and 2) how to stop AI tech from replacing constitutional democracies.

I’m an insignificant person. I don’t seek power. In itself, this website also has little impact, not much reach. It doesn’t even try to influence common people. Without comparison in other regards I’m studying conflicts between (aristocratic) elites in the same way as Machiavelli and Niall Ferguson. However, if things get too imbalanced in the so-called “Great Game” of power I will put some slight effort into warning everyone involved about significant dangers which some actors may not otherwise be taking seriously enough today.

The dangers I discuss arise because of power struggles between elites and their ideologies/religions. These conflicts are obviously independent of a nobody like myself. I just clarify contrasts that already exist, so that everyone can see them easier. Because of narcolepsy I can’t be a “player” myself. So, whether I had created this website or not the potentially deadly fights between elites today would have continued nevertheless.

I guess one of the reasons why I am not banned, like Parler, is because the different elites I study know very well that my writings have ultimately little effect on their decisions. An outsider will always have reduced influence.

Apropos, it’s interesting to read what James Rickards writes about the difference between the formal stage of power and real influence, in The Road to Ruin (Penguin, 2016):

“The important elite activity at these conferences does not occur at scheduled panels, but at private dinners, and over drinks in suites and secluded bungalows surrounding the main venue. When I appeared at the Milken Institute Global Conference, there were more meaningful conversations in the bar at the Peninsula Hotel, a block away from the main event, than on the stages.”

If the Iranians want Bezos, they go for him no matter his formal title in Big Tech. Focusing on Bezos, the (second) richest person in the world, is such a natural choice that any educated person will reach the conclusion that he is very high on the target list of revengeful Iranians and many other groups.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s