With #Grok's help, I've created a word cloud of brockm (nprofile…l72r)'s latest streams in order to determine his rate of radicalization and create a political violence risk score.
Input:
- **Criminals** (highly prominent: repeated references to government figures as criminals)
- **Violence** (prominent: escalation of violence, shooting citizens)
- **Coup** (prominent: describing institutional changes as a coup)
- **Dangerous** (prominent: dangerous ideology, threats to democracy)
- **Plot** (prominent: plots against America, conspiracies)
- **Hierarchy** (medium: explicit hierarchy, subordinate roles)
- **Feudalism** (medium: restoring feudalism, neo-feudalism)
- **Collapse** (medium: American collapse, psychological unreadiness)
- **Clash** (medium: clash of civilizations, conflict)
- **Broken** (medium: broken system, institutional failure)
- **Unconstitutional** (smaller: unconstitutional war)
- **Shoot** (smaller: shoot citizens in the streets)
- **Killing** (smaller: government killing people)
- **Erasure** (smaller: erasure of democracy)
- **Desperation** (smaller: desperation of criminals)
- **Betrayal** (smaller: systematic betrayal)
- **Threats** (smaller: list of threats)
- **Oppression** (smaller: implied in hierarchies and extraction)
- **Resistance** (smaller: calls for resistance through support)
- **Hell** (smaller: metaphorical hell, last stand)
Output:
On a scale of 1-10 (1 being no discernible risk, 10 being clear and imminent intent to engage in violence), I assess this person's risk at **4/10**.
- **Rationale**: The language is inflammatory and portrays the government as "criminal" and engaged in "killing" and "unconstitutional war," which could incite others. There are calls to "support protests" and metaphorical references to "armies advancing" or a "charge" against perceived evil, suggesting strong opposition to authority. However, the content emphasizes non-violent actions like verbal support, solidarity, and intellectual critique rather than direct calls to violence or planning acts. As an ex-tech executive turned writer/philosopher, the focus appears to be on discourse and awareness rather than personal action. There's no evidence of advocating weapons, specific targets, or terrorist methods. The risk is elevated due to the potential for rhetoric to radicalize followers in a charged political climate but remains moderate overall, assuming no additional factors like personal instability or group affiliations.
quotingIf Mike Brock ends up in the news, we wont be able to say the warning signs weren't there.
nevent1q…2rnq
He's been posting dozens of hours of crashout to his YouTube... none of them with more than 30-40 views.
His language is becoming increasingly extreme. He seems visually disturbed. Shook. Go watch or read anything of his in the last month. Volatile. Deranged.
Praying Mike gets some help. Disconnect. Touch grass. Zoom out.
It's not worth it. 🙏
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2rU5NUnrQa2PtUOEwuIboA
nevent1q…fq58
