Republican party hacked

Before I was an engineer, I was an entryist.  Engineering pays better, but the big advantage of engineering is that one’s coworkers are less likely to kill one.  Working with evil people is not  a good idea.

Entryism is a small team of conspirators trying to manipulate and control another organization – usually a larger organization with a bigger mailing list and more funds.  Thus for example a small group of political extremists, a team of half a dozen or so people, would naturally like to take over an big organization involved in some big money, moderately leftist, politically progressive task such as funding housing for the poor, if lots of funding for the poor flows through the housing organization.

There are commonalities between computer engineering and entryism, particularly security engineering.  A background in entryism gives important insights into security engineering.  Entryism is the same sort of job as hacking, but with entryism, one works entirely on human factors, whereas with hacking, one only partially works on human factors, and mostly focuses on such things as buffer overflows and protocol failures.  There are some similarities between taking over someone’s website through flaws in the software, and taking over someone else’s organization through flaws in their internal processes – the main commonality being to distinguish between the way things are supposed to work, and the very different way they actually work.  The frame of mind and way of looking at things is similar, like a magician’s misdirection.  To attack, one looks for ways that expectations can be violated.  Conversely, to make stuff secure, one tries to make sure that expectations cannot be violated.  The excruciatingly complicated procedure for electing a new pope reflects a thousand years of such attacks by ancient entryists aimed at rigging the election, and thousand years of security design aimed at making sure the election works the way it appears to work.  The papal election procedure is sometimes studied by computer security engineers to illuminate their art.

Entryists use fraud and lies, while hackers use some combination of fraud, lies, buffer overflows, and protocol failures.  Hackers tend to be nerdly people who eat far too much junk food, while entryists usually played in the right sports teams at the right educational institutions, and have good social skills. (Perhaps that is why I wound up in engineering instead.  It is more my line)

Now recently the GOP has nominated the extreme left candidate Scozzafava for a seat in congress –  and I do mean extreme left.  So naturally, with my background, I suspected entryism.  The Democrats might well nominate an extreme left candidate and regularly do, the Republicans might well nominate a candidate so “moderate” that he looks suspiciously like a Democrat, but extreme left?  This “Republican” lady is far to the left of the Democratic party candidate.

A bunch of republican blogs are, reasonably enough having hysterics, among them Michell Malkin and Moonbattery

Scozzafava turns out to be the candidate of the Working Families Party, whose name is typical of entryist front group names– a more or less random string of moderate sounding words that carries no real meaning.  The declared objective of the Working Families Party is to move the Democratic Party further to the left.  To influence group X is a fairly typical mission statement of an entryist team, though their real objectives usually involve a lot more than mere influence.

But the dead give away is that they share their headquarters with Acorn.  Long ago a team of entryists took over Acorn, and this team now hangs out at Acorn headquarters, Acorn being the largest and best funded of the many, many, many, many organizations that the team has taken over.  A great pile of organizations share Acorn headquarters, more than anyone can keep track of, and the theoretically separate funds, agendas, objectives and activities of these organizations are all mingled, and they are all run by the same people from the same office .  This is the usual pile of residue accumulated by a successful entryist team.  If someone has fifteen thousand credit card numbers with names, real addresses and login passwords, you know he is a hacker.  If someone has a hundred organizations, with separate mailing lists and funding, you know he is an entryist.  If someone has the backing of an organization that turns out to be a hundred organizations all with one headquarters, you know he is an entryist.

But entryists are like termites.  If one entryist is in an organization with assets and name worth having, there are usually others.  Termites do not mean the house is fallen yet, but if drastic measures are not taken, the house will soon fall.  It is time for a hard disk reformat and restoration from backup.

Tags:

6 Responses to “Republican party hacked”

  1. Dear Jim,

    I found your article on Entryism very interesting and I was hoping to gain contact with yourself to hopefull ‘pick your brain’ about the concept of entryism. I am a Masters student of BUCSIS and am doing a masters within this area. If you have a spare moment, I would be hugely greatful for any insight you may be able to give me on Entryism.
    Many thanks

    Samantha Edwards

    • jim says:

      Entryism is, by it nature, difficult to observe and explain. For obvious reasons organizations that dispense money for some good cause or pre-select candidates are more prone to attack than organizations that openly aim to make a profit. The principle underlying entryism is that it is better issue your secret associate a grant, and he can issue you a grant back, than to simply embezzle the money, and better to stuff the preselection committee, than to stuff the ballot box.

  2. […] organization infiltrate another usually larger one to divert its funds or resources to their cause. James A. Donald gives a good explanation of how this works, and makes the case that this is happening. We have many […]

  3. […] Some reformed asshole stealing ideas is, in the larger scheme of things, not that big a deal. What manospherians should be worried about instead is entryism: […]

  4. […] Bias is rampant in the humanities, but especially in social psychology, both among individual researchers and among the journals publishing papers. Beyond the objective critical evaluation of papers, the field itself is essentially an ideological and political echo-chamber that is considerably more left-wing politically than the general population. 80% of social psychologists identify as liberal, while only 3 out of 1000 identify as conservative. Contrast this with the general population which is 40% conservative and only 20% liberal. Were these sorts of numbers occurring with a protected class, these same people wouldn’t hesitate to use it as incontrovertible proof of discrimination. Considering what is now known about the biological origins of cognition and intelligence, it is generally difficult to take claims of discrimination seriously when groups also display a relatively lower intelligence profile. However, in this case there is no reason to think that conservatives as a group have an intellectual profile below the general population. Social conservatives tend to be a little lower in intelligence relative to liberals, but that free-market conservatives (libertarians) tend to be smarter. Being very partisan, either liberal or conservative, tended to be associated with high IQ as well. Increased income levels, which are a proxy for IQ, also moves people right ideologically. In other words, there is nothing that differentials in biologically determined intelligence can do to explain the lack of conservatives, and even moderates, in the humanities.4,5,6,7 Presumably academia wasn’t alwats so partisan, and thus its current state is a classic case of successful entryism. […]

  5. […] at least some are quite conscious of what they are attempting to do. Enough that they constitute a real threat to any genuine and healthy community. Here are nemester’s thought’s on the question of […]

Leave a Reply