Elections Are Fake
It is time to stop pretending otherwise.
“If voting made any difference they wouldn’t let us do it.”
Mark Twain
Over the course of the Trump decade, many Americans have gained an acute awareness that the reality we have been sold is a false one. Things simply are not how we were told things are. In our interminable stupor, we find ourselves routinely pinning the tail to the donkey’s head while being praised and rewarded by the Edifice for our participation, our service and loyalty. “Yes, that is exactly where the donkey’s tail goes,” our betters gush, “you’re one of the few, the elite, who know that the donkey’s tail was supposed to attach to its head, not its backside. Nature got it wrong.” We are told we are elite for intentionally doing that which is exactly wrong. We are then rewarded for doing wrong in the form of fiat tokens and social credits online that we are allowed to spend on anything in the catalog. We have convinced ourselves this is helping, somehow.
In the past decade, we discovered that perhaps our institutions have not been dutifully serving the American people to the best of their ability. We learned that the government might be playing fast and loose with the constitution. We accepted, finally, that the News is actually fake, the same News that identifies as real and true. The News (literally a reality show) constructs our reality alongside content more readily willing to identify itself as fictional. We became alert to the fact that our Experts were frauds and the Science was not infallible. We stopped pretending that transnational corporations were actually concerned with putting their customers first. We discovered that all the political parties are really only one party and one agenda.
If that is true—if the political parties are not actually fighting one another, and their agenda, the Uniparty’s agenda, is aligned with the global Regime agenda—then the Regime’s enemies, and therefore the Uniparty’s enemies, are the people who oppose that agenda. There are quite a few of them, likely so many that it would be accurate to assume the Uniparty’s enemies include virtually all the people a member of the Uniparty purports to represent. These are normal Americans who, if they recognized the agenda and identified which public officials were implementing it, would happily vote all politicians out of office if it were possible, exchanging them for a new crop entirely, or perhaps none at all. These people are we the people. We are the ones identified by the global Regime as enemies, not because we are violent or lawless or cruel or racist, but because we do not approve of their plan for our lives nor the means by which they have assumed control. We do not approve of the constant deception and exploitation. The Regime knows its agenda is not popular. This is true at all times and always has been true, hence the relentless censorship and propaganda. The political parties represent the Regime agenda in unison, marketing and promoting it to us from a variety of perspectives, encouraging us to commit our lives to supporting one brand of the agenda or another brand of the same agenda.
How long shall we continue pretending the people in control of the political parties, the processes, the government, the military, the corporations, and the money are letting us vote on whether or not they are allowed to remain in power? This is a ridiculous, childish notion. It is decidedly not how power operates. The least we can do is be mature about our predicament.
Our votes are not determining the outcomes of elections except to the extent that our willingness to believe in the reported outcomes dictates the Regime’s ability to report certain outcomes without calling attention to the fakeness and total illegitimacy of our elections. If one candidate becomes seen as unable to win, no matter what the media does, no matter what the fake polls say, no matter what October surprises are generated by the fake news, the other candidate from the Uniparty will be named the “winner.”
General elections are a contest between two Uniparty candidates selected through the primary process in which the corporations that operate as political parties choose which spokespeople will be sent forth to sell their agendas. The Uniparty knows it has already won the election before the election has even been scheduled. This is why elections are held in the first place—to coerce the people into believing we have chosen our own subjugation once again and to convince us that the system is fine and our neighbors are the real problem, no matter which candidate is declared the “winner”.
We are loathe to admit our elections are not real because the implications are terrifying. Admitting our elections are not real would mean we have no say in our government whatsoever. Unless, that is, we are part of the ruling class and could influence politicians directly. It would mean that our governments, the laws they have made, and the legal systems that support them are illusory. It would mean that the countless hours spent in anger and despair over our politics have all been wasted and our relationships that have ended due to political disagreements have been destroyed for nothing. It would mean all the self-righteousness we have expressed in our political debates (which are decidedly not debates by any definition) has been in service of the very entities that identify we the people as its enemies. It would mean this is not a 50-50 nation (a ridiculous notion). It would mean we are the background participants in a reality television show. It would mean the world is not how we believe it to be, it is something else entirely. It would mean we are rubes and dupes. It would mean we have been deceived most thoroughly by ourselves. Rather than accept this, we agree to remain rubes and dupes, so long as the incentive package remains attractive and everyone else agrees to do so as well.
To have read this far, those who remain rubes and dupes will be frantically accessing search engines, social media platforms, and artificial intelligences to reassure themselves that they are not actually rubes and dupes. Fact checks and debunkings appear and proliferate, followed by think-pieces from think tanks, and viral content from popular influencers. The sole purpose of the content is to convince the rubes and dupes that they are brilliant for understanding the world really is exactly how they have always been told it was. Elections may have problems, we are told, but the problems are not widespread, certainly not widespread enough to dictate election outcomes. There is no evidence of widespread election fraud, they will say. Baseless claims, they will say. Or, we will be told, at least the system can correct itself when its deficiencies affect the outcomes. The courts will decide and, if there is one thing the rubes and dupes know for certain, it is that the courts will not and cannot make mistakes or, at least, would never make mistakes intentionally. Links and sources will be provided in chain emails and social media captions to prove that claims of election malfeasance are baseless.
But let’s say, for instance, that these claims are not baseless. If that’s too much, let’s say that the claims are at least worthy of some careful consideration due to what is at stake. There is no doubt that some not-insignificant portion of Americans believe that our elections are unreliable. Supporters of both the Uniparty Left and the Uniparty Right have claimed that elections are untrustworthy for a variety of reasons, all of which are prominent aspects of our election process and should concern us. What portion of a population must believe the government to be illegitimate before the government is de facto illegitimate? If ten percent of a population believes its consent to be governed is systematically violated by the placement in office of political candidates who cannot prove they were properly elected, is that “democracy” or is that simply tyranny?
Statistics in this area (and in most areas) are virtually useless and polling data—a useless statistical assessment of people’s aggregate reaction to fake news—is even worse, but since people interact with the fake news, the fake polls, and made-up statistics as though they were real, the polls become a proxy for what others believe. If all the polls say the candidate A is trailing candidate B by eight to twelve points, people will see candidate A as the underdog purely on the basis of an entirely fabricated consensus. When it comes to public perception of election integrity, the results have some considerable variation. According to ABC/Ipsos last year, 12% of registered voters did not have faith in the election results being legitimate. Even at that low level, public confidence in elections is a crisis. Before the fake elections of 2024, Gallup recorded 19% of Americans who had no confidence in a legitimate outcome with another 24% “not too confident.” Other polling firms have recorded these numbers higher still. Rasmussen reported in 2022 that 55% of likely voters believed cheating affected the 2020 election outcome. In 2024, Rasmussen and Heartland found 62% of Americans thought cheating would affect the 2024 outcome.
With no other analysis necessary, we can already conclusively say that our American elections do not have the integrity necessary to convey legitimate governing authority to any candidate elected under this system. This is not simply a valid argument with a long historical precedent, it is reaffirmed by the (also wholly illegitimate) global governance bodies and in the body of (also wholly illegitimate) international law. That these concerns go ignored should, on its own, be condemning of the entire enterprise. That these concerns are exacerbated through policy that specifically erodes election integrity, while paying lip service to expanding the vote, provides clear signal of the intent of those in power.
It is not legal under the Constitution or any other body of law to form a government in this manner, it is abject tyranny. A government formed through illegitimate means, operating in opposition to the people it purportedly represents, is not a government at all and has no business ruling anyone nor any authority to rule. The laws it passes are nullities from their inception. We are by no means beholden to the machinations of its rigged election system. The idea that any free man should be subjected to such a system and be left without recourse is an affront to America’s founding principles and the American mythology, not to mention natural rights and Christian values.
The Constitution itself expresses the government’s authority as powers delegated by the people through the states to a federal government of the people’s creation:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution… are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” - 10th Amendment
If the people are left without the option of withdrawing their consent to be governed then their authority has not actually been delegated to the State, it has been seized by the State. This is tyranny.
It is not treasonous to demand that the people claiming to be lawfully empowered to rule us be capable of proving the legitimacy of the elections that put them there. It is not treasonous to demand that they abide by the constitution and cease their usurpation of authority. Continued rule by the lawless is untenable and becomes more dangerous the longer it persists. It is not dangerous to point this out nor to demand it be rectified by the people rather than the illegitimate actors pretending to be our duly elected governing authorities. The government does not have the legitimacy to rectify our election problems, much less the motivation to blockade their own path to power. Our government, to the extent that one exists, is a televised political spectacle, scripted like a soap opera, designed to convince the people at all times that this is what we have chosen for ourselves.
It is treasonous to participate in the usurpation of proper and lawful order that leads to the subjugation of our own countrymen to a foreign Regime. Globalism can only constitute a foreign Regime in each country over which it has gained control. The global Regime agenda will necessarily work in opposition to the people. Its purpose is to add nations under full control to a roster of global Regime nations. What concern does the Regime have for what the people of a nation desire? It is laughable to think we can remove that entity by casting fake votes in fake elections… that the entity controls.
The inability of an election system to convince the people of its legitimacy precludes the legitimacy of the government formed as a result of elections held under that system. The conclusion is inescapable. This alone means that there is no government, there is only a foreign cartel that directly controls the people of our nation. We are ruled by an abstraction. Are the people willing to accept this? Abstractions are sustained only by belief. When the abstraction falls away, the true enemy appears. Maintaining the abstraction means we claim a destiny of fighting against ourselves, forever, unable to identify the enemy.
Acknowledging the deep implications of accepting such a premise and its conclusions, doubt is the expected and welcomed response. Some will recoil from any form of this argument, certain that public acceptance of the true nature of our society would soon result in chaos and disorder. Consider, we are already full to the brim with chaos and disorder. Our government is littered with criminal perverts chosen to occupy their positions specifically because their corruption and compromise allows for their total control. Attempting to bring all the peoples of all the nations of the world under one system of control run by collectivists and their machines is the problem. It is the forcing function behind progressive societal degradation. This is systemic evil. This same agenda is implemented throughout the world, wherever the Regime gains a foothold. Demanding that the government exercise only proper authority is not dangerous, except to the extent to which the Regime will choose to destroy society on its way out.
One’s sense of society-wide danger, legitimate though it may be, does nothing to make an argument that our elections are capable of conferring legitimate power to a governing body. If we are to pretend that our elections are legitimate, we should be able to make the case that the election’s legitimacy is expressed in each and every aspect of the election process from beginning to end. If the election process left a single glaring vulnerability that could be exploited to affect the outcome, it should call the entire election process immediately into question. It is not good enough to have an election system that is ninety-nine percent secure if the one percent insecurity can determine the outcome. It is not good enough to have the State’s reassurances that whatever cheating occurred was not, in the State’s opinion, a big deal. We need elections that cannot be cheated. If this is impossible, then elections are impossible and we must find a better way to organize society.
To prove legitimacy in any aspect of an election would necessitate transparency in all aspects of the election, but there is no transparency to be found for the verification for any aspect. Election processes are designed to prevent transparency wherever possible. This, on its own, precludes verification of an election’s legitimacy. Again, this should be conclusive but isn’t, because until the authorities agree publicly, we are cowed from saying so in public ourselves.
Not only do election processes lack transparency, there are far too many steps in the process, too many links in the chain, and all of them are broken. The stakes of our elections are far too high and the consequences far too severe to place the requisite trust in a process that is not simple and streamlined in every aspect of its execution and its validation (which must be accessible to every American on demand).
Can we locate legitimacy in any aspect of our elections? Let us consider a number of aspects.
(This is by no means an exhaustive list, though each one independently is enough to prima facie preclude legitimate elections. I would suspect that any aspect of the election process one might choose to examine will, upon inspection, provide additional iterations of the same structural problems implemented into the design for the same purpose, on behalf of the same beneficiaries.)
Voter Registrations:
Numerous states are engaged in “public-private partnerships” with outside corporations and nonprofits which are given direct access to the voter rolls and the ability to add registrations of indiscriminate quality and legitimacy. As with everything else, we are told there are backstops and checks and validations. Based on the encoding of these measures (not their verifiably proper functioning), our trust in the system is demanded once again, though no basis for trust has been provided. A government should be trustless.
Forty-four states provide a voter registration option at the DMV when people sign up for drivers licenses. Eighteen of those states provide drivers licenses to illegal aliens. It is unlawful for illegal aliens to register to vote when they sign up for their drivers licenses. Because of this, we are encouraged to believe that illegal aliens are not registered to vote in place of any transparent assurance that it does not happen.
As for the checks and backstops and validations, these are often performed in reference to other state databases that are equally vulnerable to manipulation and provably replete with bad entries, ineligible voters, dead people, and fake people. There is nothing trustworthy against which voter registrations can be validated because the data is polluted in the same ways for the same reasons in every agency. (We should be more concerned about the amount of our data the federal government keeps under these conditions—all of our data.)
There have been some (mostly unsuccessful) efforts to clean up the voter rolls, but cleaning up the voter rolls is not nearly good enough, which means the efforts to clean up the voter rolls are futile and should be abandoned. The voter rolls must be purged completely and built back up from nothing. That is, if it is advisable to have voter rolls at all, and it is not advisable. It is also not necessary. North Dakota does not have voter registration.
Voter registrations are the raw materials for the election rigging system. Same day registration allows news “voters” to be created from nothing, as needed, during elections. The goal is to ensure enough ballot-level ‘proof’ of votes to substantiate the results reported for predetermined outcomes. Voter registrations are required to produce ballots and states like California produce ballots for every voter registration. Efforts to register more voters are useless (if not wholly counterproductive) and should be abandoned until the voter rolls are completely purged. If the man-hours committed to registering voters had been committed to purging voter rolls completely (or eliminating them permanently), we would be in a far better position than we are now.
As an aside, I had my own voter registration issue in 2020 when, due to the Very Deadly Pandemic, my voter registration was changed to “permanent mail-in” without my input or consent. After I described this process in a video posted to a friend’s Instagram account, the California Secretary of State’s office submitted a takedown request to Facebook (Meta) through a private ‘portal’ to the Big Tech companies through which various interests could streamline the content moderation process on social media. The post was removed and my account was banned from the platform for political content weeks later. The State of California directed a private corporation to censor the speech of one of its residents for making factually indisputable statements about California’s real election practices.
If telling the truth about the election system is dangerous to the people in control of the election system, the election system is lawless. Additional evidence provided by the State of the State’s own malfeasance is not required to confirm the election is irredeemably corrupted when the State’s lawlessness is out in the open.
Ballot Production:
As with registrations, public-private partnerships are the driving force behind ballot production and distribution and, in many cases, collection. Corporate entities handle tens of millions of mail-in ballots at multiple stages. The chain of custody for millions of ballots begins and ends at companies like Runbeck. Private contractors receive data, create voter files, print ballots and ballot envelopes, and pass them off to the postal service. From inception, the ballot chain-of-custody is wholly unverifiable and, once again, requires us to trust patently untrustworthy people and organizations to properly handle something crucial. This is unbefitting a free society and beneath the dignity of everyone involved.
Endless examples can be found where hundreds or thousands of voter registrations are linked to the same addresses, often ineligible addresses at that. Ballots are generated for a thousand fake voters and sent to one address having no real, ultimate recipient. Those ballots could, presumably, be collected by an individual or organization involved in the corporate political parties’ Get Out The Vote efforts. If the same entities that control the registrations also control the printing and distribution of ballots and the receipt of ballots, the ballots do not even need to be sent through the mail to entered into the process. Pair this fact with same-day voter registration performed by corporate entities and political nonprofits with direct access to the voter rolls. This means innumerable ballots can be generated, printed, “sent” and “received,” and entered into the final count all within one building, on election day.
Do we need to wait for the State to provide us with evidence of its own malfeasance before we understand that the process itself is illegitimate and does not deserve our trust?
To restate, the standard must be that every aspect of the election process is totally and unquestionably above board, transparent, and verifiable. Not one aspect of our elections even approaches that standard. But let us continue.
“Vote” Casting:
Leaving aside issues with mail-in ballots, the process of actually casting what we call a “vote” in person, on election day, is a farce.
Election processes vary widely from state to state, from county to county within states, and even between precincts in a county, so it would be overkill to attempt to cover all the variations. That said, having voted via similar processes in both California and Texas since 2020, a brief and general review is sufficient to make the case.
The voting process for the 2020 election in Los Angeles, California was dramatically different than it had been in years prior. Rather than voting in a local school gymnasium in the neighborhood, California introduced “voting centers,” primarily located in concert venues, sports arenas, and stadiums under the guise of covid mitigation. This change brought with it a long list of problems affecting access and integrity—longer drives to the polls, parking issues, longer lines, and the magnified impact of each failure affecting far more voters than it would have in an isolated incident at a local precinct.
In that election, I had received the mail-in ballot but chose to go to my assigned voting center/concert venue. When I arrived, I offered my ID which was refused. I was told by a poll worker that they are not even allowed to look at my ID. I had my mail-in ballot, which they told me they would be happy to take. I was sent to a large touchscreen computer terminal where I made my selections. The machine produced a “paper ballot” printout of my selections alongside a QR code. I was then directed to another machine that would scan my “paper ballot” and record my vote which was contained in the QR code. I was encouraged to make sure that all of my selections appeared accurately on my “paper ballot,” which is impossible because I cannot read a QR code. The names of the candidates and the yes/no selections on the ballot were no guarantee that the QR code contained my real vote. The first scanner rejected my “paper ballot” on multiple attempts. A poll worker directed me to another scanner which finally accepted my “paper ballot.” On the Secretary of State’s website, I was able to confirm that my “vote” had been cast, but could not verify that it was cast properly nor counted correctly. The system does not allow for that based on supposed privacy concerns. (The secret ballot must also be eliminated if we are to confer legitimate governing authority via elections, but that is for another time. In the meantime, see Lysander Spooner’s No Treason.)
During the 2022 midterms in Texas, I went through a nearly identical process. We are told that the reddest red states and bluest blue states have nothing in common, but that is not true. Texas has some of the most corrupted elections in the country and the Republican Party of Texas has done nothing to protect the state from the same Uniparty agenda being implemented in California. The urban centers are just as blue as those in California and Texas Republicans are controlled opposition, benefitting from the same agenda. The urban centers expand outward until the rest of the state becomes subordinate.
At the polling place that day, I showed my ID and received my “paper ballot,” a blank piece of paper that I would slide into the voting machine. I made my selections and the ballot-marking device printed those selections onto my “paper ballot,” same as California, though my “vote” was contained in a machine‐readable code. I walked my “paper ballot” to the scanner and that was that.
This process, in its most reliable form, requires me to trust two different machines and a machine-readable code that is totally unreadable by me. The selections printed onto the ballot exist only to convince the voter that their vote is important and has been recorded correctly. There is, of course, no way to verify this.
Both of these votes were technically recorded on “paper ballots,” insofar as the wholly corrupted election standards are concerned, but they are not the same as the paper ballots demanded by people concerned with election integrity. Paper ballots must be hand marked and readable by human eyes so that if someone was given a stack of a hundred ballots, a normal human could simply tally up the selections. “Paper ballots” in machine-based elections do not (and cannot) serve this purpose. They are unauditable without again deferring to the integrity of the machines reading the QR codes. Each step in the process requires our trust yet no step in the process is capable of justifying that trust.
Of course, the machines themselves are an historic problem with a litany of complaints coming from both sides of the corporate political party divide and beyond. Though the Fox vs Dominion lawsuit was settled for an astronomical sum, it should be assumed that the settlement was reached to protect both entities, as Dominion could not possibly have proven its case. In Dominion’s own discovery documents, company employees were shown to be aware that their machines were unreliable. The man often referred to as the country’s foremost expert on voting machines, J Alex Halderman, has testified at length that voting machines are vulnerable, exploitable, and capable of being hacked or manipulated to change votes in ways that cannot be detected. The machines used in the elections do not even meet the lawful standards for their use, with rampant problems in software updates and certifications that go ignored. Elections are held on uncertified systems. There are far too many vulnerabilities with the machine-based voting system to list them all here. All of them invalidate the system, yet they are not (primarily) errors, they are problems built into the system’s design—loopholes that exist to provide opportunities for exploitation and avoid detection and accountability.
This should not be a partisan concern. People from all points on the political spectrum have understood for at least two decades that the machines presented a problem. During Trump’s first term, a documentary called Kill Chain appeared on HBO (now Max). In the film, Democrat politicians and voting machine Experts discussed the vulnerabilities. It is still available on Max.
Counting and Auditing:
In 2020, the worn out husk of a man known as “Joe Biden” reprised the apocryphal quote often attributed to Josef Stalin saying, “The struggle’s no longer just who gets to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote.”
In our elections as they are currently run, there is no who counting the ballots, only machines. We are told the machines do this accurately, having accurately recorded the “votes,” but there is no reason to believe this and no way to verify it. We are told that “Risk-Limiting Audits” verify the integrity of the process and the proper functioning of the machines but this, again, is false. The audits only review a small portion of the votes cast in a process that is ridden with its own faults and vulnerabilities, including the selection of samples to be audited. RLAs are a panacea, not a sincere attempt to provide transparency and verification of results. The exist to generate confidence in the process while providing no actual justification for that confidence.
There are rampant chain-of-custody issues in each step of compiling results. There are unreconcilable differences between poll book records and reported vote totals. To cover over these issues, we are given live media coverage featuring TV Characters “calling” the winners from unofficial “decision desks” designed to manipulate public perception and build integrity while heightening the drama. Exit polls are performed by organizations like Edison Research and presented to the public as scientifically valid reflections of popular sentiment when they are no such thing. (It is worth noting that Edison Research was the firm responsible for claiming exit polls in Venezuela showed that Nicolas Maduro did not win his election. Exit polls are totally invalid, useless, meaningless information meant only to shift public opinion.)
Post-Election Problems:
The same system responsible for creating the election processes (and therefore burdening us with these election problems) is the system that controls our laws, statutes, rules, and regulations surrounding our elections, which are often themselves unconstitutional.
When problems arise, the people’s only recourse is to appeal to a captured judicial system, serving at the behest of the Uniparty, and asking it to punish itself and invalidate its own power. This is a fool’s errand.
Most of the lawsuits brought to contest the elections following 2020 were dismissed on process grounds (standing, mootness, laches, etc…) without any review of the merits or the evidence. The media falsely portrayed this to the public. Election suits from the 2020 election remain ongoing.
What does it mean that our politicians are placed into office and allowed to act as our rulers while lawsuits contesting their legitimacy in office are still being decided by the courts? This is a travesty.
Our election laws and processes as they currently exist would not be possible without the inversion of the original Constitution brought about by the improperly ratified Reconstruction Amendments. Not only are the elections lawless, the laws that govern them are not constitutional. All of it is rooted in the same usurpation. Election laws are not even properly called laws in that they only persist on the back of historical court precedent in a wholly corrupted and illegitimate judiciary that does not do the people’s work nor uphold the people’s law.
It is not possible for elections to confer, through will and consent, the legitimate power to govern anyone if the legal foundations of the elections are themselves anti-constitutional. Again, the argument should be decided on this alone.
This is far more foundational than the demand for evidence of widespread fraud, sufficient to reverse the outcome, handed over reluctantly by the State, included in a lawsuit that is accepted by the courts who submit a ruling confirming that the evidence was real enough but, since the politician took office and served, it is far too late to matter.
Our elections are not this profoundly illegitimate by accident. The system as it exists is the system as the Uniparty has designed it. The designers of the process are well aware that they do not need to provide legitimacy, they only need to present the all-encompassing cultural ritual of State-worship in a way that affirms the importance of trusting the reported results. On the assumption of legitimacy and the necessity of acceptance, they demand society-wide buy-in and belief without ever confirming the election’s legitimacy in any way.
It is to our everlasting shame that we accept our elections results as legitimate and consent to be ruled at all by whomever this process designates as our rulers. It is a disgrace to our founders.
Our elections are this bad specifically because the country so overwhelmingly opposes the global Regime agenda. Constant propaganda, rampant censorship, and fake elections still fail to convince the American people to accept the agenda, which is why we are bombarded with more propaganda, silenced in ever more Draconian (yet technologically advanced ways), and beset with a year-round election obsession—a months long primary season followed by a months-long general election season with the process repeating ad infinitum.
The system is designed to function this way for a reason—to allow the Uniparty to place its choices in office one-hundred percent of the time while convincing . Perhaps this is why simple fixes are ignored while immense resources are devoted to creating the public perception of election integrity. Trust in the system that uses elections to support, sustain, and validate its own rule, by sleight-of-hand and narrative manipulation, is required at every step. The Uniparty Edifice controls the every step of the process, every bit of it opaque and unverifiable.
In the meantime, well-intentioned Americans are spending, collectively, millions (billions?) of man-hours and billions (trillions?) of dollars to engage in a self-deceiving cultural ritual in which we reaffirm the Uniparty’s right to govern us through an act of our own sheer ignorance. The Uniparty deserves no benefit of the doubt, no trust whatsoever. Elections are not only fake at the national level, they are fake at the state level and the local level. City council and school board elections are fake. Elections held to decide ballot measures are fake. The system was created for this purpose. If there are legitimate elections anywhere in the country at any level of public office or for any ballot measure, it is only because their rigging was not required in that instance to yield a result acceptable for the Uniparty. Regardless, every election should be considered illegitimate until proven otherwise, which is impossible because no one is allowed to check. Every aspect of the election process should be simple, transparent, and verifiable. None of them are.
This is not complicated. An election, we are told, is a process by which people choose who and what will represent their interests, believing that the winners will be those chosen by the people. That is not the nature of the current process, one we have been conditioned to call an “election.” The people who end up in office as “our representatives” do not represent our interests. A vote is a unit of consent or will that is equal to that of every other vote. Our elections are replete with fake votes cast with fake registrations assigned to people who do not exist or are not eligible—“votes” that are not real votes negate real votes. Every part of government is similarly inverted in our understanding. Our politicians are not people we have chosen. The winners are chosen by entities other than the people. The people’s desires are only taken into account to the extent that they need to continue accepting the programming. The collective mood dictates the plausibility of various outcomes.
Elections are massive, ritual psychological operations designed to coax us into reasserting our commitment to the system, handing the sum total of our power to the State. Elections are designed to convince us that every law made by our fake representatives appears to us as something we chose for ourselves or something our hated neighbors chose for us when they last seized control. Election results must be perceived as legitimate by both sides to preserve the system and the Central Narrative is designed to create trust in our elections. The Reality Show exists to convince us that our choices—not the Regime’s choices for us—are shaping the world.
When it is understood that elections are fake, people soon realize their politicians are illegitimate and the laws they make have no authority. Perhaps more importantly, when people understand the elections are fake, they will understand that we are not a fifty-fifty country. There is vast majority opposition to the system as it exists. This is why the people must never be allowed to understand the elections are fake. This is why we are not allowed to check.
To give our consent to be governed we must consent to the election process and the election results. Election results that are incapable of being verified and immune to scrutiny negate any possibility of consent. Even international law—illegitimate, fanciful, and unenforceable though it may be—affirms the self-determination of all people. This, of course, is nothing more than lip service. If it is widely known that more than half of a country’s people have lost faith in the system through which legitimacy is conferred, then legitimacy has not been conferred. There is no reason to wait for “evidence proving election fraud at a degree to which election results would be changed.” The election results are fake. The vote totals are unverifiable and we are not allowed to check. It is a betrayal of America and our fellow Americans to recognize the legitimacy of governments installed through this process. Our election system is incapable of producing legitimacy and designed to produce the opposite. Election results descend from on high. The “voters” have no real role in the process.
It is impossible to remedy problems whose existence we are unwilling to admit.
It has been two weeks since the fake elections of 2025 and already we are inundated with polls and analysis about the fake elections of 2026, always presented with the assumption that everyone knows our elections are real and legitimate despite most people understanding that they are not. The prospect of “losing” upcoming fake elections, even those years from being voted, are used to coerce compliance with political narrative efforts online or to cover the passage (or not) of pieces of legislation. We are told a politician must do ‘X’ or else risk “losing” in a primary. We are told that one party or the other will be hurt in the midterms for what they are currently saying, or doing, or even considering. But it is not possible to “win” or “lose” fake elections. Elections are narrative battles and nothing else.
All election analysis that assumes elections are real and legitimate is clueless and counterproductive, no matter how well-intentioned. All of it should be discarded. Similarly, election integrity efforts directed toward fixing this or that aspect of our elections should be abandoned. Elections are either legitimate or not legitimate, with nothing in between. They cannot be made a little better. Our attention and resources should be redirected toward the full public understanding of how broken our system truly is. Only then will we have the collective will to change. None of our political problems are solvable while elections remain fake. All of them become solvable if our representatives can be held accountable at the ballot box. If we are unwilling to interact with our world the way it actually exists and withdraw our consent the power we have delegated, we should expect chaos, corruption, and a society in decline. It is hard to say we would not deserve it.