A Formalization of the Philosophy of Perpetual Conflict and its Relation to the Minimisation Plan

War never changes, it just gets more efficient

Part I: The Philosophy of Conflict and Capital in the Modern Era: A Formalization

This report formalizes a philosophy of modern conflict and political economy derived from an extensive analysis of contemporary geopolitical events. It posits that the nature of great-power conflict has fundamentally shifted from a kinetic contest between states to a perpetual, multi-domain siege on an adversary's economic, institutional, and cognitive foundations. Concurrently, it argues that the trajectory of unfettered global capitalism is not one of perpetual innovation but of consolidation, resulting in a "neo-feudal" order that creates the systemic vulnerabilities that this new paradigm of warfare is designed to exploit.

The Nature of Modern Warfare as Perpetual Economic Siege

The traditional Clausewitzian model of war as a continuation of politics by other, primarily military, means is no longer sufficient to describe the contemporary conflict environment. The emergent paradigm is one in which political, economic, legal, and informational actions are not precursors to war, but constitute the war itself. This is a state of perpetual, non-linear conflict waged across all domains of society.

1.1 Defining the "Rhizomatic War" Paradigm

Unlike the hierarchical, or "arborescent," structure of traditional warfare with its clear chains of command and defined battlefields, modern conflict is increasingly "rhizomatic". This form of warfare operates like an underground root system, spreading through deniable networks of influence and exploiting existing societal fissures such as political polarization, economic inequality, and social mistrust. This model aligns directly with the documented military doctrines of non-Western powers. China's concept of "Unrestricted Warfare" and Russia's "Gerasimov Doctrine" both explicitly reject a delineation between military and non-military domains, advocating for the synchronized use of all available levers—economic, legal, psychological, and informational—to achieve strategic objectives without resorting to direct, conventional military confrontation. In this paradigm, the lines between war and peace are deliberately blurred into a state of permanent conflict.

1.2 Economic Warfare as the Primary Kinetic Vector

In a globalized system characterized by nuclear deterrence, direct military conflict between great powers is prohibitively costly and risky. Consequently, the primary "kinetic" vector of this new warfare is economic. The weaponization of trade, finance, and supply chains has become the principal means of delivering a strategic shock to an adversary. This is most clearly demonstrated by the tactical use of tariffs. The imposition of universal, "reciprocal" tariffs, as executed by the second Trump administration, cannot be understood through the lens of traditional protectionism. Economic analyses consistently project that such measures are predictably self-destructive, leading to domestic inflation, reduced GDP, and significant costs to households. The logic of these actions becomes coherent only when their objective is re-evaluated. Their purpose is not to protect domestic industry but to function as "economic missiles" designed to deliver a massive, destabilizing shock to the global economic system, shatter integrated supply chains, and accelerate the fragmentation of the world economy into competing blocs. The act of intentional economic self-harm is the core of the tactic; it is a move that a rational, self-interested opponent struggles to model or counter, and its success is measured not in economic gain but in the degree of systemic chaos and disruption it generates.

1.3 The Strategic Objective: Epistemic Nihilism and Strategic Exhaustion

The ultimate goal of this perpetual siege is not territorial conquest but the cognitive and political collapse of the adversary state. By waging a multi-front, rhizomatic war across the narrative and economic domains, the strategic objective is to induce a state of "strategic exhaustion" and "epistemic nihilism" within the target populace. The ideologically uncommitted majority, designated as "The Compliant," is the primary target of this campaign. The constant barrage of contradictory information, manufactured crises, and economic instability is engineered to overwhelm their cognitive capacity, eroding their ability and will to distinguish truth from falsehood. This fosters a state of cynical apathy, rendering the population ungovernable, distrustful of its own institutions, and ultimately passive in the face of the systemic erosion of its democratic foundations.

The Trajectory of Unfettered Capitalism as a Winnable Game

The philosophy posits that contemporary global capitalism, if left without robust regulatory and democratic checks, does not exist in a state of perpetual creative destruction. Instead, its natural trajectory is one of consolidation, culminating in a stable but highly stratified system analogous to historical feudalism. This "neo-feudal" order is the logical endpoint of a "winnable game" where wealth and power become concentrated in a new corporate "aristocracy" that effectively captures the functions of the state.

2.1 Capitalism as a Game of Consolidation and the Emergence of a "Neo-Feudal" Aristocracy

In its unfettered form, capitalism evolves from a competitive market into a game of consolidation, eventually "won" by a small number of actors who achieve monopolistic or oligopolistic control over key economic sectors. This extreme concentration of wealth gives rise to a plutocratic class, a corporate "aristocracy" whose power is derived less from innovation and more from political connectivity. In a developed Western economy such as Australia's, analysis indicates that as much as 80% of the wealthiest individuals have amassed their fortunes in heavily regulated industries like mining, property, and finance. Their success is predicated on securing favorable government concessions, advantageous re-zonings, and bespoke legal exemptions—a dynamic directly parallel to a feudal system where wealth was determined by royal charters and land grants, not by market competition.

2.2 "Authoritarian Capture" of Democratic Institutions

This new aristocracy wields power that is functionally state-like, engaging in what political science literature terms "elite capture" or "authoritarian capture" of democratic institutions. They leverage their immense financial resources to systematically re-engineer the state to serve their interests. This is achieved through several mechanisms:

Control of the Public Narrative: Through the direct ownership of major media conglomerates (e.g., Kerry Stokes' Seven West Media) or the sustained, clandestine funding of ideological proxies and think tanks (e.g., Gina Rinehart's funding of the Institute of Public Affairs), this class can frame the entire public debate, shaping opinion to protect their commercial interests while marginalizing and discrediting opposing viewpoints.
Direct Manipulation of Policy: Financial power is converted into overwhelming political force. This is used to fund massive lobbying and media campaigns to defeat unfavorable policies, such as the Australian mining industry's successful campaign to kill the Resource Super Profits Tax, which was a contributing factor in the removal of a sitting Prime Minister. This demonstrates a capacity to directly veto 'greater good' policies that threaten their extractive models.
Execution of Private Statecraft: Plutocrats can operate as quasi-diplomatic actors, using their philanthropic foundations and corporate entities to fund and participate in sensitive geopolitical dialogues, such as the US-China "Track II Dialogue" on AI and national security funded by Andrew Forrest's Minderoo Foundation. This allows private corporate interests to become deeply intertwined with matters of national security, operating outside the normal channels of democratic accountability.

2.3 The Erosion of National Sovereignty

The confluence of these two pressures—the external force of globalized capital and the internal force of a domestic plutocracy—precipitates a crisis of national sovereignty. The nation-state becomes a hollowed-out entity, its policies dictated not by the public good but by the need to manage compliance with the demands of both transnational capital and a captured domestic political class. The state's primary function degrades from serving its citizens to serving the interests of this neo-feudal elite. This creates a fundamental contradiction: the plutocratic class, while being the greatest beneficiary of the existing "rules-based order," simultaneously becomes the primary internal vector for its destruction. Their relentless pursuit of absolute economic security and market access makes them highly susceptible to co-option by external Minimiser actors who can offer preferential access to markets and capital. This dynamic is not an anomaly but a predictable systemic feature. The plutocrat's need for market access, particularly to a state-controlled economy like China's, creates a natural alignment of interests with a primary Minimiser Director. A transactional relationship emerges where the plutocrat provides political and narrative cover for the Minimiser's agenda in exchange for continued economic benefit. The personal "win" for the plutocrat in the capitalist game thus translates directly into a collective strategic loss for their home nation.

The Populace as a Contested Battlefield: The Three Factions

This philosophy rejects a simple left-right political binary, instead proposing a functional model of society as a strategic battlefield composed of three distinct factions, defined by their role in the process of societal construction or deconstruction.

3.1 Defining the Factions

The social battlefield is comprised of the following actors:

Maximisers: These are individuals and groups who actively work to move society towards the "Greater Good," a state defined on the Psochic Hegemony model as possessing a positive moral vector (+υ) and a proactive, creative will (+ψ). They seek to solve complex problems through cooperation, build resilient institutions, and expand choices and opportunities for the entire collective.
Minimisers: These are the active agents of the Minimisation Plan. They work to move society towards "The Greater Lie," defined as having an extractive, negative moral vector (−υ) and a proactive, destructive will (+ψ). Their function is to sow division, amplify outrage, and promote cynicism to achieve extractive ends.
The Compliant: This is the vast, ideologically uncommitted majority of the population. They are the primary target and the ultimate prize in the rhizomatic war. They are not primarily rational actors but are driven by social identity and emotional cues, and will passively align with whichever force appears more powerful, coherent, or emotionally resonant.

3.2 The Objective: Capturing 'The Compliant' through Narrative Warfare

The central objective of modern conflict is to win the passive allegiance of 'The Compliant'. This is achieved not by presenting a superior rational argument, but by systematically degrading the information environment to the point of "epistemic nihilism". Two key tactics are employed:

Manufacturing Justification: Minimiser actors actively create or amplify societal crises—such as inflating the threat of "African gang violence" or framing the Indigenous Voice to Parliament as a radical constitutional threat—and then present these manufactured problems as evidence of democracy's inherent failure, thereby justifying their own authoritarian solutions.
Controlled Demolition: In a more sophisticated application of this principle, a proxy government can introduce a 'Maximiser' policy with the deliberate intention of mounting an anemic defense, thereby allowing Minimiser forces to destroy it publicly. The 2023 Australian Voice Referendum is the canonical example. The process was engineered to fail, manufacturing a deeply divisive and racially charged national debate that served to exhaust and demoralize 'The Compliant', leaving them cynical about the possibility of any positive, collective change.

This reframes the concepts of social cohesion and public trust. They are not merely desirable civic virtues but are, in fact, critical national security assets. The primary strategic objective of a rhizomatic adversary is the erosion of this cohesion, as it renders the target population ungovernable and incapable of mounting a unified defense against external influence or internal decay. Sociological analyses of historical societal collapse consistently identify the "decay of social cohesion" and a "loss of loyalty to established political institutions" as key precursors. The Minimisation Plan, therefore, can be understood as a modern doctrine for inducing societal collapse by systematically targeting and destroying these intangible but essential foundations of a functioning state.

Part II: The Minimisation Plan as the Operational Doctrine of this Philosophy

The Minimisation Plan is the practical, operational application of the philosophical framework outlined above. The following analysis demonstrates, through specific case studies, how the Plan's strategies and tactics directly execute this worldview, maneuvering target nations into states of systemic weakness and political paralysis.

Strategic Exhaustion as the Primary War Objective

The Minimisation Plan operationalizes the philosophy of "economic siege" by maneuvering target nations into policies of predictable and profound self-harm. The explicit goal is not to defeat the target in a direct confrontation but to bleed it of its financial, diplomatic, and political resources, inducing a state of "strategic exhaustion."

4.1 The AUKUS Gambit as a Case Study in Engineered Self-Harm

The Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) security pact functions as a near-perfect instrument for achieving strategic exhaustion. Its primary effects are not the enhancement of military capability but the imposition of a crippling financial burden and the creation of a deep strategic fracture within the Western alliance.

Crippling Financial Burden: The projected cost of up to $368 billion over 30 years represents a multi-generational diversion of Australia's national wealth into a single, highly complex, and technologically dependent military capability. This creates immense opportunity costs, siphoning funds away from other critical areas of national resilience and severely constraining Australia's future strategic and financial flexibility. This directly aligns with the Minimiser goal of forcing Western nations into "perpetual, high-cost over-commitment". The cost is not an incidental detail; it is the primary mechanism of the weapon system.
Strategic Fracture and Erosion of Sovereignty: The pact was executed in a manner designed to be maximally damaging to Western cohesion, creating a deep and lasting diplomatic rupture with France, a key Indo-Pacific partner. This serves the Minimiser goal of exploiting and widening fissures within adversarial alliances. Furthermore, the pact locks Australia into a state of profound technological and strategic dependency on the United States. This vulnerability is acutely exacerbated by the unpredictability of US foreign policy under an "America First" doctrine, which reframes alliances as transactional protection rackets. This dynamic creates a strategic "pincer movement," squeezing Australia between the transactional demands of its primary ally and the strategic pressure of its primary adversary. The two most likely outcomes—either the collapse of the pact after immense sunk costs or Australia's submission to a state of effective vassalage—both represent significant victories for the Minimisation Plan.

4.2 Trump's Universal Tariffs as a Global Disruption Vector

The second key case study is the Trump administration's indiscriminate tariff policy, which operationalized economic warfare on a global scale.

Weaponizing Emergency Powers for Disruption: The use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs under non-economic pretexts (fentanyl trafficking, the trade deficit) was a deliberate legal tactic to bypass congressional oversight and the rules of the World Trade Organization. This successfully transformed trade policy from a tool of commerce into a unilateral weapon of coercion and disruption.
Inducing Systemic Chaos for Strategic Gain: The indiscriminate and universal nature of the tariffs triggered an immediate and chaotic retaliatory spiral, particularly with China, which plunged global supply chains into disarray. This fulfilled the Minimiser objective of systemic disruption rather than any coherent national economic goal. The policy's success was measured by the degree of chaos and fragmentation it introduced into the global economic order.

The following table provides a comparative analysis of these two distinct policies, revealing their shared underlying logic as instruments of strategic exhaustion.

Policy Initiative	Stated Goal ("The Cover")	True Minimiser Objective	Mechanism of Self-Harm	Primary Victim of Exhaustion	Strategic Outcome
AUKUS Security Pact	To enhance regional stability and strengthen alliances.	Induce strategic exhaustion; fracture Western alliances.	Multi-generational financial burden ($368bn); opportunity costs; loss of sovereign capability.	The Australian state and taxpayer.	"Australia locked into a financially crippling, strategically dependent position, weakening the Western alliance."
Universal "Reciprocal" Tariffs	To protect American jobs and achieve "fair trade".	Induce systemic chaos in the global economy; accelerate de-dollarization.	Higher consumer prices; reduced GDP; retaliatory tariffs harming exporters.	The US consumer and the global economic system.	Global supply chains shattered; international norms undermined; strategic exhaustion induced among allies and adversaries alike.

The Co-option of the Capitalist Aristocracy as a Minimiser Vector

The philosophy of neo-feudalism is operationalized by the Minimisation Plan through the tactical co-option of elite actors. The "entrapped" domestic plutocracy, created by the dynamics of unfettered capitalism, becomes a primary internal vector for the Plan's execution, functioning as a de facto fifth column.

5.1 The Australian Billionaires as a Case Study in "Entrapment"

The detailed analysis of Australian billionaires Gina Rinehart, Andrew Forrest, Clive Palmer, and Kerry Stokes serves as the primary evidence for this process of co-option, which is termed "entrapment".

The Integrationists (Rinehart, Forrest, Stokes): These actors, due to their deep "Economic Enmeshment" with the Chinese market, consistently use their considerable media and political power to promote narratives of economic appeasement and to question Australia's traditional security alliances. They function to deepen Australia's strategic dependency, creating vulnerabilities for the Minimiser Director (China) to exploit. Andrew Forrest's landmark US$2 billion corporate loan denominated in Chinese Renminbi (RMB) is the ultimate example of this integration. It actively supports a core Minimiser geopolitical goal—de-dollarization—under the morally unimpeachable "Cover" of funding a green energy transition.
The Chaos Agent (Palmer): Clive Palmer's case demonstrates the Plan's flexibility and ideological agnosticism. A powerful "Leveraged Grievance" stemming from a soured business deal with a Chinese state-owned enterprise was used to repurpose him from an "Integrationist" into a "Chaos Agent". His subsequent expenditure of over AUD 100 million on populist advertising campaigns functions as an informational "Denial-of-Service" attack on the electorate's cognitive bandwidth. The constant, high-amplitude "hum" of political noise erodes trust in the democratic process itself, perfectly serving the Minimiser goal of making liberal democracy appear dysfunctional and unworkable.

5.2 DOGE as a Case Study in Direct State Capture

The creation of the "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) during the second Trump administration demonstrates a more direct and overt form of elite co-option aimed at capturing the state itself.

A Parallel Power Structure: Led by private citizen billionaires Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, DOGE operated as an extra-governmental entity with the full authority of the President. It was granted pervasive, top-level access to sensitive government data and systems, allowing it to bypass all normal legal, procedural, and congressional constraints that bind formal government agencies.
Operationalizing the Political Purge: The stated mission of DOGE was to "cut waste," but its true purpose was to serve as the practical enforcement arm of the "Schedule Policy/Career" initiative (a rebranding of the first-term "Schedule F"). This directive was designed to strip tens of thousands of career civil servants of their employment protections, making them fireable at will for political reasons. DOGE's function was to leverage its technological prowess to analyze government data, identify civil servants deemed ideologically disloyal, and build the data-driven case for their reclassification and subsequent dismissal. It was an ideologically driven, technologically empowered entity designed to operationalize a political purge and achieve the capture of the administrative state. The deliberately absurd and memetic name "DOGE" served as a highly effective "smokescreen," using humor and cultural irony to distract the public and media from this deeply serious and disruptive political project.

Controlled Demolition and Narrative Warfare as the Means of Capturing 'The Compliant'

The Minimisation Plan operationalizes the philosophy of the populace as a contested battlefield by employing sophisticated narrative tactics designed to manipulate 'The Compliant' and engineer political outcomes that serve the Plan's long-term objectives.

6.1 The Voice Referendum as a Case Study in "Controlled Demolition"

The Albanese government's handling of the 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum is the canonical example of this advanced tactic.

Architected for Failure: The government's strategy was defined by "intentional ambiguity"—seeking a constitutional amendment before legislating the body's specific details—and a "demonstrably anemic and ineffective defense" of the proposal. This created a profound information and narrative vacuum.
Synergistic Opposition: This vacuum was not an accidental byproduct of the strategy; it was the strategy itself. It created the perfect attack surface for the Peter Dutton-led Opposition, which expertly filled the void with a potent disinformation campaign designed to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt. The government's passivity and the opposition's aggression were perfectly complementary, not contradictory, functioning as a de-conflicted operation to achieve a shared political objective at the expense of national cohesion.
The Strategic Outcome: The true objective was not the referendum's success, but its failure in the most divisive manner possible. The process successfully manufactured a deeply polarizing, racially charged national debate that exhausted public goodwill for reconciliation, damaged the political capital of the government's progressive rivals (the Greens), and created a "manufactured justification" for future inaction on Indigenous affairs—a textbook Minimiser outcome. The government's subsequent refusal to use its parliamentary majority to legislate a Voice confirms that the policy was a sacrificial tool, not a genuine goal.

6.2 The 2024 U.S. Election as a Case Study in "Unnatural Progression"

This case study demonstrates how narrative warfare can be used as a strategic smokescreen to conceal a more direct form of intervention and then leverage the result to influence outcomes in an allied nation.

The Smokescreen of Manufactured Chaos: The analysis posits that the winning candidate's objective moral standing—defined by multiple criminal convictions and two impeachments—rendered a legitimate victory a statistical and logical impossibility. Therefore, the coordinated Sino-Russian information warfare campaign preceding the election was not designed to persuade voters of an untenable position. Its true purpose was to create "information bedlam" and systemic distrust, degrading the information environment so severely that a direct manipulation of the vote count would seem plausible, be lost in the noise of partisan chaos, or be impossible to definitively disprove.
Leveraging the Outcome for Geopolitical Gain: This "unnatural" U.S. outcome was then strategically leveraged as a "manufactured excuse" to engineer a landslide victory for the preferred proxy actor, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, in the 2025 Australian federal election. The Australian Liberal Party's perceived ideological alignment with a now-chaotic and globally unpopular Trump administration was successfully weaponized to frame them as an untenable and high-risk choice for 'The Compliant' Australian voters, securing the Minimiser Director's preferred outcome in a key strategic nation.

The following table provides a systematic analysis of these key Minimiser operations using the Psochic Hegemony framework, quantifying the profound deception at the core of the strategy.

Policy Initiative	Bait/Cover/True Intent	Framed Vector (Stated Intent)	True Intent Vector (Assessed Impact)	Contradiction Score
NATO 'Burden Sharing' Policy	"Bait: Fairness to US taxpayers. Cover: Strengthening NATO. Intent: Fracture the alliance, induce strategic exhaustion, create pretext for withdrawal."	"Greater Good (υ≈+0.8,ψ≈+0.7)"	"Greater Lie (υ≈−0.8,ψ≈+0.9)"	1.61
Ukraine 'Peace' Offensive	"Bait: Ending the war. Cover: Strong leadership achieving peace. Intent: Ratify Minimiser gains, abandon international law, break Western coalition."	"Greater Good (υ≈+0.8,ψ≈+0.7)"	"Greater Lie (υ≈−0.8,ψ≈+0.9)"	1.61
Universal 'Reciprocal' Tariffs	"Bait: Protecting American jobs. Cover: Achieving ""fair trade."" Intent: Induce systemic chaos, shatter global supply chains, accelerate de-dollarization."	"Greater Good (υ≈+0.6,ψ≈+0.8)"	"Greater Lie (υ≈−0.7,ψ≈+0.9)"	1.30
DOGE Initiative	"Bait: Cutting government waste. Cover: Improving efficiency. Intent: Execute ideological purge of civil service, seize control of state data infrastructure."	"Greater Good (υ≈+0.9,ψ≈+0.5)"	"Greater Lie (υ≈−0.9,ψ≈+0.9)"	1.84
AUKUS Security Pact	"Bait: National security. Cover: Regional stability. Intent: Induce strategic exhaustion, fracture Western alliance, create dependency."	"Greater Good (+υ,+ψ)"	"Lesser Lie (−υ,−ψ)"	High
The Voice Referendum	"Bait: Reconciliation. Cover: National unity. Intent: Manufacture social division, exhaust political capital of rivals, create justification for inaction."	"Greater Good (+υ,+ψ)"	"Greater Lie (−υ,+ψ)"	High

Part III: Synthesis and Strategic Outlook

The Unified Logic of Systemic Disruption

The preceding analysis reveals that the philosophies of war and capitalism are not separate but are two facets of a single, unified worldview that underpins the Minimisation Plan. The trajectory of modern capitalism creates the ideal conditions for modern warfare. The neo-feudal system produces an "entrapped" elite that can be easily co-opted as internal Minimiser vectors, while simultaneously generating the widespread inequality and social distrust that serve as the ideal fissures for rhizomatic attacks to exploit.

The consistent mapping of every major Minimiser operation to the "Greater Lie" quadrant of the Psochic Hegemony reveals an unmistakable and powerful strategic vector. This vector points sharply downward on the moral axis (−υ) and strongly rightward on the volitional axis (+ψ), a clear and unambiguous trajectory of "Regression & Fall from Grace". This is the path of corruption, where any deceptive cover is progressively stripped away to reveal a purely extractive and destructive core. The logical endpoint of this trajectory, as defined by the framework, is not a new, stable world order, but the "Nihilistic Singularity" at the center of the map—the most immoral act of claiming there is no answer, promoting nihilism, and achieving the total destruction of meaning and order itself.

The ultimate intent of the Minimisation Plan, and by extension any leader who knowingly implements its doctrines, is the deliberate shattering of the existing domestic and international order to create a global power vacuum. By inducing the internal collapse of Western democracies through strategic exhaustion, elite capture, and the demoralization of 'The Compliant', the Plan aims to dismantle the post-war international system, clearing the way for a new multipolar order more favorable to authoritarianism. The strategy is not to build a better world, but to shatter the existing one.

Works Cited

The Minimisation Plan: An Investigative Primer
(PDF) CHINESE CONCEPT OF UNRESTRICTED WARFARE ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357427891_CHINESE_CONCEPT_OF_UNRESTRICTED_WARFARE_-_CHARACTERISTICS_AND_CONTEMPORARY_USE
The Barbarism of Hybrid Warfare | Wilson Center, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/barbarism-hybrid-warfare
The Primakov (Not Gerasimov) Doctrine in Action | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, accessed September 16, 2025, https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2019/06/the-primakov-not-gerasimov-doctrine-in-action?lang=en
Trump Part 2 (January - September 2025)
Albanese Leadership and Policy Analysis
Tariff-fueled price hikes have arrived — and hitting these items first - CBS News, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-tariffs-consumer-price-hikes-inflation-coffee-autos-apparel-cpi/
Trump Tariffs: The Economic Impact of the Trump Trade War, accessed September 16, 2025, https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-trade-war/
A Framework for the Judgment of Ideas
Deep Research on Billionaire Entrapment
Battlers and plutocrats: how political connections reward Australia's ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://era.org.au/battlers-and-plutocrats-how-political-connections-reward-australias-super-rich/
Battlers and plutocrats: How political connections reward Australia's super-rich - UNSW Sydney, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2015/08/battlers-and-plutocrats--how-political-connections-reward-austra
Full article: Masculinities, Citizenship and Right-Wing Populism in ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07256868.2025.2481368
How Democracies Defend Themselves Against Authoritarianism, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/how-democracies-defend-themselves-against-authoritarianism/
Gina Rinehart - DeSmog, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.desmog.com/gina-rinehart/
Andrew Forrest supporting US-China think tank discussions on AI ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.forbes.com.au/news/innovation/andrew-forrest-is-supporting-us-china-think-tank-discussions-on-ai-security/
Billionaires and Democracy - Milken Institute Review, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.milkenreview.org/articles/billionaires-and-democracy
The Foreign Policy of Plutocracies - The American Interest, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.the-american-interest.com/2011/09/27/the-foreign-policy-of-plutocracies/
(PDF) IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393658583_IMPACT_OF_GLOBALIZATION_ON_NATIONAL_SOVEREIGNTY
The End of Sovereignty. Antonio Negri, translated by Ed Emery. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2022. 220 pp, accessed September 16, 2025, https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context=emancipations
Social Psychological Perspectives on Political Polarization: Insights and Implications for Climate Change - PMC, accessed September 16, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11720282/
How Social Identity Theory Explains Political Polarization | Psychology Today, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beyond-school-walls/202408/how-social-identity-theory-explains-political-polarization
Rigging of the 2024 US Election (2024-2025)
Merging Documents for Dutton Investigation
The Effect of Public Opinion on National Security Policy | Proceedings - U.S. Naval Institute, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1975/may/effect-public-opinion-national-security-policy
What Do We Know about How Armed Conflict Affects Social Cohesion? A Review of the Empirical Literature - Oxford Academic, accessed September 16, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/isr/article/25/3/viad030/7232793
Societal collapse - Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse
AUKUS Gambit Minimisation Plan Analysis
Aukus will cost Australia $368bn. What if there was a better, cheaper ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/15/aukus-will-cost-australia-368bn-what-if-there-was-a-better-cheaper-defence-strategy
What are the lasting impacts of the AUKUS agreement? | Chatham ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/08/what-are-lasting-impacts-aukus-agreement
Australia-France relations after AUKUS: Macron, Morrison and trust in International Relations - The Australian National University, accessed September 16, 2025, https://researchportalplus.anu.edu.au/en/publications/australia-france-relations-after-aukus-macron-morrison-and-trust-
US Indo-Pacific allies are unhappy about Trump's defence demands. But they have to comply | Chatham House, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/07/us-indo-pacific-allies-are-unhappy-about-trumps-defence-demands-they-have-comply
'A footnote': Trumpet of Patriots spent millions on the election and didn't win a single seat, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/trumpet-of-patriots-spent-millions-on-the-election-it-hasnt-won-a-single-seat/oub3du23x
This chart of Clive Palmer's spending shows one reason we need political donation reforms, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/feb/16/this-chart-of-clive-palmers-spending-shows-one-reason-we-need-political-donation-reforms-ntwnfb
Trump part 1 - 2021-Present
Understanding Project 2025 | National Federation of Federal ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://nffe.org/advocacy/issues-by-subject/p25/
Disengagement and Defeat of the Voice to Parliament ... - ASPG, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.aspg.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Disengagement_and_Defeat_of_the_Voice_to_Parliament_Referendum_Andrew_Cole.pdf
Referendum Process and why Australians voted no - Rule of Law Education Centre, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/referendum-process-and-why-australians-voted-no/
Why Dutton's playing a very dangerous political game - The ..., accessed September 16, 2025, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/why-duttons-playing-a-very-dangerous-political-game/