The False Agenda
9 min read

The False Agenda

The False Agenda

Tyranny begins with the control of information, always.  The people have to be controlled, and the first step is to control the information they can access. Even historically, this control required the same 3 ingredients as it does today – stop unwanted information (censorship), propagate desired information (propaganda), and justify this control using whatever narrative does the trick. This article covers the narratives that are being used to usher in a new authoritarian regime, and how normal working people can stand their ground and debate these topics against the most indoctrinated statists and devout Marxists.

The counter-violent extremist (CVE) community produces reports over extremism, terrorism, and hate crimes. The goal is for policy makers and corporate elites to enact certain policies to combat these threats. Unfortunately for the agenda, extremism, terrorism, and hate crimes are rare events. As a result, CVEs and left-wing media have to produce and disseminate highly flawed reports to make these threats appear more significant than they are.

Before dismantling these narratives, we should ask the obvious question:

What happens if left-wing think tanks get what they want out from such narratives?

If we can convince a society those violent ideologies are a grave threat to public safety, then we can justify tyrannical policies and techniques, whether it be public or private sector tyranny. The West can (and already do) enact:

  • Censorship campaigns [1][2]
  • Redirection methods that alter what people see online [1][3][4][5][6]
  • Indoctrinating at-risk audiences, such as youths and mentally ill online 3
  • Election interference and targeting of people based on political belief 7
  • Medical mandates, curfews, and social gathering limitations
  • Oppression of certain groups under "affirmative action" guises
  • The expansion of digital marketplace monopolies onto "extremist" start-ups and competition, creating an even more constricting bottleneck on information

The participating tech platforms seize this opportunity to argue for more economic control of the digital space, by claiming that start-up platforms are unsafe for not using censorship and redirection software produced by the CVE community. Eventually, any dissent will be squashed before others could even see it; indeed, the majority of content censored online is removed or hidden before other users see it.

Reports conducted by the counter-violent extremist and leftist think tanks [1][3][8-12] rely on a critical assumption: that right-wing extremism is a networking issue. In other words, right-wing extremism is organized and group-based (or "affiliated").

When CVEs first came about in the early stages of the War on Terror, they were originally meant for Islamic extremists. Islamic extremists is a category of extremism that is networked and affiliated because there are very little "lone wolf" Islamic extremists. They tend to carry out attacks from a centralized group. They are an affiliated type of extremism. The CVE community's methods were developed for this type of extremism. Censorship; the targeting, profiling into groups, and redirection of users; and various CounterSpeech initiatives only work on group narratives.

But right-wing extremism is not an affiliated extremism – it is a lone wolf extremism where most arbiters of it are radical individuals acting on their own agency. Also, right-wing extremism is extremely insignificant, statistically. So the goal of the CVE community is to mislead the public in order to implement their methods on an entire population, in which case, these methods become a type of digital governing.

The Extremism Myth


I have shown using the Uniform Crime Reporting Program[14] and Statistical Atlas data[15] that hate crimes are vastly insignificant compared to total violent crimes[16] in America. There are only 3900 hate crime offenders in a country of 330,000,000 people (2019).

In 2020, there were about 2200 hate-motivated simple assault cases and about 1400 hate-motivated aggravated assault a country of 330,000,000 people.17

In 2020, there were 22 hate-motivated murders/ a country of 330,000,000 people.17

Violent hate crimes don't even make up 1% of total violent crimes, meaning the leftist think tanks focus on the most insignificant category of violent crimes.

Terrorism & Extremism

The Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP)18 released a 100-page study on global extremism and terrorism.

The IEP showed that

far-right terrorism remains a small fraction of total terrorism worldwide. Even in the West, historically nationalist or separatist, Islamist, and far-left terrorism has been much more common18(page 4 and 44).

Far-left terrorism has been more common than far-right...

The report's findings are critical blows to the think tank-CVE community. The IEP citation showed that "Deaths from terrorism are now 52 per cent lower than their peak in 2014" 18(page 4). Most of this decline is due to the decline of Islamic terrorism and the NATO wars waged on it with the help of past CVE efforts. Now that the CVE community is focused more on North America and the West, let's examine terrorism from different regions of the world:

This graph of terrorism by region stands in stark contrast to the incessant anti-American and anti-West rhetoric circulating online and in the media, particularly the narratives of these regions being hateful and full of domestic terrorists.

The more recent graph from IEP (2020) shows similar trends except attacks in North America slightly increased while deaths slightly decreased.19

To emphasize just how bizarre the leftist narrative is, Across 2 years and 2 continents (Oceana and North America), there have been just over 100 total deaths from far-right groups.18 That is 50 deaths per year in regions with a combined population of well over 400million. Lightning strikes are more common than far right group attacks in North America and Oceana. Clearly we need to be censored, redirected, and treated as threats.

In 2018, total deaths attributed to far-right groups increased by 52 per cent to 26 deaths. To the end of September in 2019, 77 deaths have been attributed to far-right groups18(page 4).

Even though there was an increase within these two years (it decreased across other years), total deaths are far lower than one would expect if CVEs like Jigsaw and Moonshot were taken at their word.

The Nature of Far-Right Attacks

Far-left terrorism is mostly categorized as affiliated, meaning that most far-left terrorists are part of terrorist organizations rather than solo actors. Affiliated attacks (9/11) is a much more threatening brand of terrorism than solo actors and ironically, the CVE communities' techniques were built to handle affiliated extremism, not unaffiliated...yet the CVE community neglects the far-left in favor of targetting the far-right because the CVE community is ultimately interested in simply targetting the right, not the far-right.

The Institute for Economics and Peace

"[F]ar-right terrorists are less likely to be formally affiliated with a group than other terrorists"18(page 48).

The techniques that the CVE community deployed in the past against Islamist extremism will not work with far-right extremism since it is 1) far less significant, and 2) far less networked (as opposed to earier, pre-war versions of Islamist extremism). The CVEs know this, but persist in their delusions about the "far-right".

Merely 57 deaths from this domestic threat is meant to justify the collaboration of leftist think tanks, the tech platforms, and security state agencies. Is freedom, privacy, and free speech of hundreds of millions a small price to pay for 57 deaths within a year? Clearly this is not about safety of citizens – otherwise, this collaboration would not be focused on the most insignificant category of violent crimes, the least affected regions of terrorism, and the least affiliated versions of extremism.

"Reaching groups at risk of right-wing extremism is arguably more complex, considering the absence of similar targeting criteria other than white, young and male"18(page 81). Even IEP, arguably the only credible source of data on terrorism, does not fully understand far-right extremism. The reason is that there is not enough data on it because it is statistically insignificant; and there is no centralized groups involved because this brand of extremism is due to radicalized individuals as opposed to groups.

There is another point to be made about this 100-page IEP article. The next section is about an article from the Newlines Institute that the CVE community retweeted in support of their agenda. That CVE-backed article happened to cite this 100-page IEP article by cherry-picking pieces of it. This is obvious proof that the CVE community does not check the sources of articles that they use to market their agenda. Be prepared to update your list of corrupt organizations by adding the Newlines Institute next to the CVE organizations.

The Newlines Institute

The most recent object of adoration within the CVE community is an article by Newlines Institute13, which was important enough that The Soufon Center as well as the Co-founder and CEO of Moonshot, Vidhya Ramalingam, retweeted it. Newlines Institute cited the 100-page IEP article, which disproves the narratives that the Newlines Institute was trying to push. These leftist think tanks are so disconnected from reality that they cite articles that disqulify their own points. Perhapes they didn't read the article? Perhaps they think that we won't check their sources?

Newlines Institute reported "a 320% surge in far-right terrorist attacks between 2013 and 2018, primarily concentrated in North America, Western Europe, and Oceania" 13. The "dramatic rise" is due to a low number of data points, so any rise is a dramatic rise, which is how averages behave, particularly low-sample averages.  As an example, if a tree fell in your yard last year and two fell in your yard this year, that is a 200% increase. The stark increase is due to a low number of events, so even a marginal increase can lead to ridiculous "320%..." headlines.

The Newlines Institute argues similar dogma that the CVE organizations argue – that far-right extremism and white supremacy hate crimes are principal threats to our society. The institute even cited the National Intelligence Council after making bizarre claims over "far-right extremism" and "tribalism". The problem is that the National Intelligence Council citation20 never even mentioned these topics.

How can anyone take these think tanks and CVEs seriously, and how have they become so powerful, influential, and so well-connected to corporations and governments? [21][22]

[1] The ARKA Journal. "Shadowbanned". ShadowBanned (

[2] Jigsaw. "Issues". Issues | Jigsaw (

[3] Moonshot.

[4] The ARKA Journal. "How Facebook Users are Manipulated into Leftism".

[5] The ARKA Journal. "The World's Leading Brainwasher: Moonshot".

[6] The ARKA Journal. "The Agents in the False Ads".

[7] The ARKA Journal. "Propaganda and Nationwide Monitoring of Conservatives During the 2020 Election". Propaganda and Nationwide Monitoring of Conservatives During the 2020 Election (

[8] Erin Saltman, Farshad Kooti & Karly Vockery(2021)New Models for Deploying Counterspeech: Measuring Behavioral Change and Sentiment Analysis,Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. New Models for Deploying Counterspeech: Measuring Behavioral Change and Sentiment Analysis (

[9] Life After Hate. "How to Fight Fake News During Covid-19". How to Fight Fake News During COVID-19 — Life After Hate

[10] International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism. "publications: research reports". Research Reports – ICSVE

[11] International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism. "About". About Us – ICSVE

[12] International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism. "White Supremacists Speak: Recruitment Radicalization Experiences of Engaging...". White Supremacists Speak: Recruitment, Radicalization & Experiences of Engaging and Disengaging from Hate Groups – ICSVE

[13] Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy. "What Terrorism Will Look Like in the Future." What Terrorism Will Look Like in the Near Future - New Lines Institute

[14] FBI. "Hate Crime Offenders". (2019).

[15] Statistical Atlas. "Race and Ethnicity (Unitest States".

[16] The ARKA Journal. "Progressive Movements: How Unscientific and Harmful Are They?".

[17] Federal Bureau of Investigation. "Crime Data Explorer". (2020).

[18] Institute for Economics and Peace. "Global Terrorism Index 2019 Measuring the Impact of Terrorism." Global Terrorism Index 2019 – Institute for Economics and Peace

[19] Institute for Economics and Peace. "Global Terrorism Index 2020."

[20] The National Intelligence Council. "Global Trends: 2040."

[21] The ARKA Journal. "The US Government and Software Tyranny".

[22] The ARKA Journal. "Manufacturing Support". Manufacturing Support (