Media laser painting and the latest Conservative target in Serbia

In a few articles here at Vlad, we have described a leftist tactic we refer to as ‘Laser Painting’.

As we tend to look at things from outside the narrative-counter-narrative box, we are slowly developing what appears to be a proprietary jargon. This can’t be helped. Every post would take a thousand words minimum if we didn’t refer to a larger concept using just a couple of words now and again. But the Coles notes on laser painting int his concept warrant an explanation.

A:  Target is identified by the revolutionary left.

B: They broadcast critical theory attacks against that target which are nearly always untrue. For example they do not laser paint actual neo-Nazis with the label Neo-Nazi repeatedly till someone does something. But they do wash a counter-revolutionary figure in similar adjectives until someone does. The Charlie Kirk assassination is the most significant example of this model.

In the 90s and early 2000s, many militaries deployed a system for destroying a target by identifying that target, having one asset point an actual laser on it, and then another asset would destroy it. Perhaps a ship would “laser paint” the target then an aircraft would attack it.

In the case of media laser painting, the connection between assets is no less real, but MUCH harder to take to court. A media outlet or more likely all legacy or COMINTERN controlled media will heavily laser paint a target with adjectives that incite an audience that accepts revolutionary narratives until one of them acts on it and feels both justified and even heroic for doing so. The media then more or less distances itself from the event and often even denies its inflammatory rhetoric, leaving only people with the right X follows or readers of sites like this to see evidence of the clips prior to the assassination or other violent actions which led to the attack. The media will distance itself from the event in two ways. Deny that their ceaseless propaganda incited the action, and also justify the action as deserved by the target.

A diabolical version of the Clay Pot fallacy. “I never borrowed your clay pot and it was broken when I got it”.

We saw this in spades after the Charlie Kirk assassination. In Canada and the USA media was both claiming they did not incite hatred and inflammatory rhetoric, essentially jingoism against Charlie Kirk, but also claiming he had it coming. The evidence of this is all over X and most reality-based websites including this one posted some examples of both.

In this case, the attacker in Serbia attacked a series of tents right outside the Parliament. The assumed target was either the actual counter-revolutionary President Aleksandar Vu?i? or his supporters.

Here is the description of him using Brave’s AI. Which seems perhaps less narrative programmed than most, but still narrative:

Aleksandar Vu?i?, the President of Serbia, is a populist, right-wing leader whose political leanings are characterized by a blend of conservative nationalism, pragmatic governance, and a multi-dimensional foreign policy that balances relations with the European Union, Russia, and China. He leads the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), a catch-all political force that has dominated Serbian politics since 2012 and is widely seen as the central pillar of his power. The SNS, which Vu?i? helped found in 2008 after leaving the far-right Serbian Radical Party, has consolidated control over state institutions, media, and public administration, enabling Vu?i? to maintain a strong grip on power despite criticism of democratic backsliding.

• Vu?i?’s political strategy involves presenting himself as a guarantor of stability and economic growth, appealing to a broad coalition of voters from centrist to nationalist factions.

• His party, the SNS, has consistently won parliamentary elections, including a sweeping victory in December 2023, where it secured 46.8% of the vote and 128 out of 250 seats, ensuring an absolute majority.

• While Vu?i? stepped down as the formal leader of the SNS in 2023, he remains the dominant figure within the party and the de facto decision-maker in Serbian politics.

Note the adjectives: “Populist Right-Wing”. These are early laser painting terms. Accurate, but redefined in the popular press to make them distasteful. Populist meaning appealing to the masses, which one would hope all who run for election would do, and right-wing meaning believer in the nation state and individual rights. But these terms have been massaged over the decades such that ‘populist’ conures up images of appeal to yokel racists etc. and somehow ‘right-wing’ is generally now associated with the National Socialist German Worker’s Party AKA The nazis. Even though Goebbels himself made it very clear that it was a socialist party. (As an aside, the idea that the Nazi part is “far right wing” is perhaps the greatest lie of the 20th century. A man can be a woman just by saying so, is the greatest lie of this one so far)

Increasingly though, the laser painting terms such as adjectives used to incite their audiences increases in both tempo, amplitude, and degree of fabrication, as they get closer to wanting a target dealt with by a seemingly unrelated asset.

Or more simply, anyone who’s only direct connection to the media that paints the target, is the asset consumes the agitprop that the media produces.

What is truly refreshing about this video, is the man who staged the attack specifically explains that he was motivated to do it by the media. I think we all need to take this video and use it for the important truth it contains. There is a conscious effort by media to further the communist/authoritarian revolution at this point by inciting violence and even assassination against targets which are influential and effective counter-revolutionary agents.

Thank you to Gates of Vienna for drawing our attention to this clip.