The emerging New World Order—if they achieve it—is a vast system of global technocratic fascism, and on a scale beyond our wildest nightmares.
By the time it is in place, it will be too late to speak up; simply because “speaking up” will no longer be possible.
But if we were misled about the nature of fascism—and imagining it would come jackbooted and goose stepping into history again—how would we recognize it when it actually came?
What is Fascism?
Fascism was and is indisputably the brainchild of the marxist Left; of the “intellectuals” around “Il Duce”, who proffered it in the 1930s as a “third way.”
Why did they call fascism the “third way”? Because instead of Communism (total state ownership and control of the “means of production”) or free market capitalism (privately owned and controlled), the fascists envisioned a so-called “third way,” whereby enterprises remained ostensibly “private;” however, these would be publicly controlled.
Fascism never had—and really cannot have—anything essential to do with the political Right. [Nota bene: Fascism is one of many deliberately misappropriated words that has caused untold confusion; I will be returning to this in my future series, “The Nature of Ideology.”]
The essence of Fascism captured in three principles
First and foremost it means interlocking board membership between private companies and the State; achieved in part by rotating officials in and out of these public/private positions, including and especially board seats. Sound familiar? Does, say, the FDA come to mind? Does this sound like the political Right? Or the Left?
Second, this interlocking board membership makes possible very fine and immediate control over the private sphere, including the media, so that directives coming from the State—even if unconstitutional or otherwise illegal—can be implemented by the private sphere without a single law having to be passed. Sound familiar? Do the non-existent “vaccine mandates” come to mind? Does that sound like the political Right, or the Left?
And third, it subordinates the person to the group. Look at the very symbol of Fascism: it’s a bundle of sticks (fascis) bound together and unified for the purpose of making an axe handle. In other words, the person (a single rod)—and his or her purpose and value—is subordinated to that of the group; and in nearly every way, the group is prior to the person. (And, moreover, the State itself is imbued with a fraudulent religiosity; and reified as a kind of ersatz deity.) Sound familiar? Does that sound like the political Right? Or the Left?
Throughout WWII, Fascism was rapidly becoming the de facto mode of government in the west; in the US, for example, the mobilization of the nation for WWII meant the creation of an immense administrative state that—rather than seizing and controlling industries directly—worked through a complex of board membership to achieve proxy public control. This was even touted at the time as the future and ideal model of all governance; and as it was staffed by “experts” from academia, it was celebrated in universities and taught to generations of students.
That sprawling and complex administrative State—and the praxis of public control by proxy—became the permanent reality of post-WWII government in the US. Which also meant erroneously and radically “reinterpreting” the Constitution in accordance with these changes.
We were already well on our way to their long-dreampt-of Fascist New World Order.
But the Left faced two obstacles to their New World Order
First, they had a public relations problem: if their entire ideology was and is essentially Fascist to the core, they needed to disassociate both their ideology and governance model from the leftist collectivist nightmares of WWII Europe.
In other words, Fascist collectivism—now squarely represented in the public’s mind by the former National Socialist Party (Nazi Party)—would have to be rebranded under a new name.
The second problem the Left had was that the political philosophy of the Right—a philosophy deeply and even stubbornly rooted in the culture of the west and especially in the US—was actuated by principles precisely the opposite of Fascism:
a clear separation between the private and public spheres;
a small and constitutionally-limited State operating under the rule of law, circumscribed by carefully enumerated powers, and sharing distributed powers via the principle of federalism; and,
the priority of the person and his or her inalienable rights over that of the group.
And unfortunately for the marxist Left, many in the west, especially Americans, held fast to these principles.
Their solution to both problems was almost a black magic trick: recast the now almost universally-deplored Nazism—the apotheosis of leftist collectivism—as politically “far Right”
The cultural marxists invented a preposterous schematic, which was soon taught throughout the west, and has been ever since, as a bedrock of political science: rather than the political spectrum being a continuum with total state collectivism (“far Left)” at one end, and anarchic individualism (“far Right”) at the other end, somehow the far Right and far Left were now supposed to look similar—and almost merge, or even join in circular fashion—at their extremes.
And so the “far Right” was inexplicably dubbed “Fascist”—and thereby pejoratively associated with the very Nazi associations the Left wished to eschew—as a kind of analogue to the “far Left’s” respective Communism.
But this fiction was and is absurd and arbitrary
This cultural marxist invention had no justification—historically, practically or theoretically, or in anything whatsoever:
How does radical individualism “turn into”—what does that even mean?—radical collectivism? Or vice versa?
It defies basic logic. It’s like saying black can become white and yet remain black. But if individualism somehow “turns into collectivism,” then it’s no longer individualism, and not on the Right; it is now collectivism, or Leftism. (Acculturation to such embedded contradictions is one of the basic modes of ideology, as I will be exploring in my future series.)
How can Nazism—the National Socialist Party—be characterized by anything but the apotheosis of collectivism? That is, leftism? (Conversely, try to name one essential thing about Nazism or Fascism that is uniquely & essentially connected with the political right.)
However, that fiction enabled them to masquerade actual Fascism under the new label of “Progressivism”
If they were going to bring to fruition their centuries-long dream of global Fascism via the New World Order, the Left had to usher in actual Fascism under another rubric: “Progressivism” (re-engineering language and words for their own purposes is a core cultural marxist tactic, and in evidence everywhere we look now: what, after all, is a “woman”?)
The Left, from the academia to the popular media, worked assiduously throughout the 20th century to:
Re-purpose the word Fascism from its essence (corporatism, very fine and detailed public control of the private sphere, and the priority of the group wrt the person, among other things) and focus it on certain incidental historical associations & images (goose stepping/jackboots, calls for racial purity, war-mongering, etc.), none of which have anything uniquely & essentially at all to do with Fascism;
Project these incidental historical associations & images onto the political Right; and connect this newly-deracinated “fascism” with the Right in the popular mind;
Which explains why the Democratic Party (long the party of slavery, white supremacy, and the KKK) has continually hammered away at calling the GOP/right (the party of Lincoln, of Emancipation, and individuals before labels/race): “white supremacist,” “racist,” etc. Once again, the mode is projection.
This also explains the infiltration of something traditionally alien to the GOP: militarism, in the form of the Neo-Cons in the 1990s.
And it also explains how the Democratic Party (the party that dragged the US into every single war in the 20th century (prior to Neo-Con Bush) has bizarrely cast itself as an anti-war party; and the traditionally peaceful and almost isolationist GOP as warmongers.
And masquerade actual Fascism under the new label of “Progressivism” (ever notice how this vague term emerged seemingly out of the blue? But “progressing” towards what, one wonders?)
Why do all this? So the population wouldn’t recognize Fascism when it actually came. And really, who wouldn’t welcome something called “Progressivism”?
Under the guise of Progressivism, and with the power of the media under their full control, the Left was now free to mobilize nations and even the world towards global Fascism, right out in the open, via the ever-growing administrative states and transnational entities; and to inculcate cultural marxism (including radical feminism, transgenderism, normalizing pedophilia, etc. - all ideologies meant to confuse, disorient and weaken people) in citizens worldwide through media/Hollywood.
Indeed, if you could leverage groupthink on a mass scale—say, by conjuring a pandemic out of thin air—you might even be able to get the population to demand Fascism, if even unwittingly, on a global scale.
Groupthink dynamics: one of the most powerful forces on earth
Let’s focus on three key psychological studies demonstrating the incalculable power of groupthink.
1. The Asch Conformity Experiments: the power of groupthink dynamics
In these experiments designed in the 1950s, subjects invariably denied what they knew to be true and could plainly see right in front of them with their very own eyes (“that is obviously X”); and, instead, conformed to the groupthink of what the control subjects (essentially actors) said they could see (“that is y.”)
If you aren’t familiar with these experiments, please watch this short video introduction::
2. The Elevator Experiments: how “group behavior powerfully influences individual judgements”
Many similar experiments evolved out of the initial Asch experiments, including the infamous “Elevator Experiments.”
Imagine you’re in an elevator and everyone is facing the same direction; however, it’s the wrong direction because the doors open up behind you. How hard would it be for you to turn around? Turns out it’s very hard for most people.
(That is what Anons are doing, in a sense: facing the other way, against the impressive power of groupthink and the State/media. Btw, in this piece I am using the term “Anons” to refer, somewhat loosely, to virtually anyone fighting or even resisting the media-driven narratives; and “Normies” to refer to those in conformity with them.)
The experiment demonstrated that almost no one will turn against the other people in an elevator; and the studies concluded, more generally, that “group behavior powerfully shapes individual judgements.”
3. The Milgram “Obedience” Experiments: how an “expert” in a white lab coat can get a person to “torture” and even “kill” someone else simply on the authority of his “say so.”
These notorious experiments were and are extremely disturbing. If you want to read about them and watch the clips, start here.
Or, you can simply watch the evening news:
There are few more powerful forces on earth than groupthink
We are in the midst of a global mass psychosis, made possible by many decades of the Left grooming the population—via media, Hollywood, etc—to mirror the minutely-controlled groupthink narratives. When activated on a mass scale, it can get an entire population to do unspeakable things to themselves and others.
And this “Mass Formation Psychosis”—as University of Ghent Psychologist, Dr. Mattias Desmet, is now calling it, and what others call the “trance,” what I call “the spell"—is now taking over the whole world.
The words of Dr. Robert Malone about this emerging psychosis are oddly comforting, if only because it reminds all of us that we are not alone:
In my recent piece, I called the current world a “vast virtue-signaling hive.” Which is another way of saying, a cult.
A cult? Seriously Monsieur? That sounds a wee bit crazy, dude.
What are the three primary signs of a cult?
What constitutes a cult—and how to identify one—is a complex and somewhat nebulous topic. For our present purposes, however, we can identify three primary and unmistakable signs, each of which is deeply illustrative of our current world.
1. Members are isolated from “unapproved” information/viewpoints; and from those who bear them.
This is why Anons have been censored, silenced and completely removed from the national and worldwide conversation, including being deplatformed from Twitter, Facebook and elsewhere.
It is also why media/Soros have assembled an army of “fact-checkers” who, unbeknownst to the public, simply label viewpoints and information that go against the narrative as (erroneously and usually with shockingly superficial talking points) “debunked” - or, without any information or talking points at all, they simply label it “conspiracy theory.”
(Bizarrely, among normies, this kind of labeling is an supremely unanswerable and irrefutable argument.)
And, among so many other things, this is also why the FBI and the media and social medial platforms such as Twitter, among others, have started to label dissenters from approved opinions “as domestic terrorists.” Bringing the full weight and power of the State to bear upon a single person for an unapproved opinion is a chilling and dangerous precedent. One that, for some reason, doesn’t seem to faze normies.
2. Members are encouraged to virtue-signal their agreement with the group narratives, as well as disdain for the “forbidden” viewpoints.
The media, Hollywood, entertainment/sports, corporate and educational institutions have been grooming the population for decades by encouraging and rewarding people to virtue signal their identification with the groupthink narrative; and, conversely, to virtue-signal their disdain with what has not been approved.
The corporate environment has also transformed. Employees at every level are encouraged to mirror the approved narratives and virtue-signal their agreement; indeed, not doing so can get you fired. Employees are routinely given “courses”and tested on whether they conform; for example, I have a friend who was made to affirm that the phrase “all lives matter” is racist — and the question kept occurring until she answered it “correctly.”
Our hyper-networked world and the existence of devices/software keep people saturated in the media environment nearly 24/7. Social media platforms—all originally DARPA projects—are essentially massive hives to orchestrate and magnify groupthink and virtue-signaling for billions.
The key thing to understand about all of these networks is that they are asymmetric; a very few number of people orchestrate the flow of content at all levels. And for billions of people around the globe; and at every moment. Think about what that means.
The modern world has been transformed into a vast virtue-signaling “hive.”
3. Members are not allowed to question anything essential or fundamental to the group; doing so will be met with expulsion of some kind.
It’s exceedingly hard to turn around against the group-think, and against the vast virtue-signaling hive our world has become. Don't believe me? Try it.
Try going on a “news” show or to a dinner party or cocktail party, and simply question global warming, or BLM, or transgenderism, or masks, or vaccines, or the pandemic, or the 2020 election, etc.
You will be labeled pejoratively—again, their unanswerable and irrefutable “argument”—and promptly and summarily shunned without rational discussion.
What is projection? What is mirroring?
Now, notice how none of these “primary signs” apply even remotely to Anons; or, people who are resisting and even fighting against the media-driven narratives?
And yet, ironically, we’ve been labelled a cult.
Which is more than a bit bizarre. We’re about as far from a cult as one could get.
No one tells us what to think, or what is approved, or what we cannot question.
We are not seeking the approval of anyone.
We honor the truth wherever it is found.
We are—all of us—patriots who are putting our lives on hold and on the line to fight for our world, our lives, and the people who have been gaslighted into harming themselves and others.
Our movement is based in love; in loyalty to the people we love and to our nations and to the world as a whole; and to love of truth above all.
If this doesn’t match what the mainstream media says about us, this is hardly our fault.
See how this works? It’s a mirroring technique on a vast scale
It’s the oldest trick in public relations warfare: accuse your opponent of being what you are; or of doing precisely what you’re doing, even at that very moment. It’s very confusing and deeply disorienting, particularly to the unwary public. We have all experienced this at a personal level as well: someone accuses you of doing precisely what they are doing at that very moment.
Similarly, the media groomed the public to believe that Anons are fascists; and yet, right out in the open, right in front of the entire world, the media, political and corporate “elite” (heavy quotation marks) are the ones orchestrating fascism on a global scale never before even dreamt of.
But the mirroring technique is blinding everyone to it (if the fascists are those “Qanon” weirdoes over there, you won’t see us constructing worldwide fascism over here.)
Indeed, whoever named the fascist paramilitary arm of the Democratic party ANTIFA (“anti-fascists”)—modeled after the Brownshirts in the 1930s—understood deeply the power of mirroring and projection. (How could they be “fascist” if their name is “anti-fascist”? This is how dumbed down we’ve become.)
One might even dub it a “diabolical mirroring ploy.” Why diabolical? Because it is so deeply disorienting that one can start to doubt ones senses and even one’s mind.
One might even say it’s a gaslighting [link] tactic. And what do cults do but gaslight their members? And constantly? And sometimes to death?
Gaslighting the World to Death
Most people are familiar with the harrowing passage in Orwell’s 1984, “how many fingers am I holding up Winston?” From the 1984 film version:
Don’t believe your lying eyes. Believe what we tell you to believe. Because why? Often because—their supremely unanswerable and irrefutable argument goes—because SCIENCE™®, of course.
Most Anons are all-too aware of the constant gaslighting by the media and political “elites.” So much so that I know at times it seems we’re bordering on losing our minds.
And we all have our lists of examples of gaslighting. From gaslighting the population about transgenderism to climate change; from PCR-driven psy-op pandemics to the normalization of pedophilia; from masks to illegal lockdowns; from demonizing Kyle Rittenhouse, to white washing the Waukesha Christmas Parade case and the Jussie Smollett Case.
And so on, against actual science, against common sense, against reason, against history.
Gaslighting at the Trey Von Martin level all over again in a seemingly endless stream of unreality.
Allow me to ply my own favorite examples. Okay, allow me three:
I. Gaslighting: “vaccines are safe and effective; and if you don’t take them you’re anti-science!”
You’re “following science” if you allow yourself to be injected with an un-trialed (fact) yet experimental (fact) technology that will—via gene therapy—permanently and irrevocably alter (fact) the immune systems (among the most complex material reality in the universe, along with the cerebral cortex and the human genome, none of which we understand more than superficially) of nearly half the entire earth’s population (fact)—even though these “vaccines” can and do cause irrevocable harm to high percentages of people (fact)—but now, we should all take them because it may prevent our dying (baseless conjecture) from something that has over a 99% survival rate (fact)?
But if you refuse them you’re, among other labels, “anti-science.” Really? “Yes,” says the man in the white lab coat, “take your kool-aid!”
II. Gaslighting about Trump v. Obama & “Bidan”
One could write volumes on this; but, briefly:
President Trump
The population was gaslighted constantly for four years that Trump was going cause WWIII.
Yet: Trump pulled the US military out of nearly every country and conflict; he even visited and established a new relationship with N. Korea, and even crossed the DMZ line, which no President has ever done; and for four years we saw what never in my life I imagined I’d see: what peace and prosperity and national pride looked like. The word unprecedented comes to mind. Easily “Nobel Peace Prize” worthy.
But the only thing Normies can remember was his alleged demeanor and “mean tweets.”
Obama
The population was gaslighted for 8 years about how in Obama we finally had a sophisticated world citizen who would usher in world peace. He was praised constantly for virtually no accomplishments.
Yet: Obama, among so much else, weaponized the US Government, including the IRS, against the American people. And he dropped at least 100,000 bombs on 7 different countries, killing countless innocent civilians, including children. Even during funerals and weddings. (Remember how the entire world’s population was welded into a frenzy against him? I don’t. Instead, the world praised Barack Obama and awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize.)
But all Normies remember is his well-creased “slacks” and his studied demeanor.
“Bidan” - this crime family has done virtually everything the media gaslighted the population about Trump’s family
Let’s just take Afghanistan: “Bidan” first pulled out the military (and not civilians/personnel); and thereby abandoned Americans and collaborators/translators in the thousands (and weirdly, flew (mostly adult male) Afghan belligerents into the US, and gave them housing and did not require them to receive vaccinations.) And to top it all off, they left $80 BILLION —yes, that’s with a B— worth of top secret military equipment (worth roughly 6 aircraft carriers.)
And then, “Bidan” drone killed a non-belligerent Afghan family.
And then—after all that—he bizarrely declared this operation “a success”?
“Bidan” has fomented chaos around the world; he has caused confusion every time he has spoken; and he publicly—in an unprecedented act of war—called for “regime change” wrt Putin.
But, please, let us not forget Trump’s allegedly “mean”tweets. That’s the important thing to remember. Obviously.
III. Gaslighting the world about protests on the left v. on the right
Gaslighting about Jan6: “This was an unprecedented attack on our Democracy by “Qanon” white supremacists.”
Truth:
A bunch of people in maga hats were invited by the capitol police to walk through the Capitol building. That was it.
There were no “white supremacists.” The only connection between “white supremacists”/“domestic terrorists” and Anons is the one that is constantly being conjured by the media.
The rest of it was a classic false flag from start to finish; FBI actors (almost stagey in their depiction of “white supremacists”) infiltrated the “maga” crowds and created an illusion for the world that this was a violent uprising of “white supremacists”; and the media magnified this illusion for the public’s consumption.
Conversely, when it came to violent cultural marxist/far left protests—mostly paramilitary units (BLM/antifa), organized and funded by Soros—the media gaslighted the world about them in a positive way:
Gaslighting about Democrats violently occupying the Capitol Building in Madison, Wisconsin in 2011: “This is what democracy looks like." When tens of thousands of Democrats surged on the Wisconsin Capitol building in Madison and physically occupied it for more than two weeks.
Gaslighting about the BLM/ANTIFA deadly riots 2016: “To assign the actions of one person to an entire movement is dangerous and irresponsible." When hundreds of BLM/ANTIFA blocked interstate highways and violently accosted police (even killing several.)
Gaslighting about the Kavanaugh riots in 2018: “It's understandable." When during the Kavanaugh hearings, mobs of Democrats stormed the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, DC, and in rage pounded their fists upon the door.
Gaslighting about the 2020 Summer Riots: "These are mostly peaceful protests." When in major cities across the country, mobs of Democrats marched in the streets, set buildings on fire, looted businesses, assaulted and even killed bystanders and police.
Gaslighting about the 2020 Summer Riots in Seattle: "It's a block party atmosphere.” When Democrats seized several blocks of the Capitol Hill neighborhood in downtown Seattle, and declared it an autonomous zone. Remember the guns? The deaths? The looting and destruction of private property? The demonizing of people who tried to protect their property?
Gaslighting about the Democrat/leftist mob attacks on Republicans in 2021: “No justice, no peace.” When a crazed mob gathered after the Republican National Convention and attacked Rand Paul, a sitting U.S. Senator.
Gaslighting about the Democrat riots throughout 2021: "This is the only way oppressed people can be heard." When police were told to stand down, governors refused to call in the national guard, and Soros operatives paid bail for violent protesters who were arrested.
Do Normies even remember any of that? Or have they been trained to forget anything that happened more than five minutes ago? Can the difference between how this was presented to the population and how Jan6 was presented be any less discrepant?
When the same patterns happen over and over again, it’s not confusion; it’s not ignorance; it’s not “different points of view.” It’s systematic and deliberate gaslighting.
It’s not even remotely arguable otherwise at this point, if it ever was.
We could multiply examples of this ad infinitum; I’m sure my readers could too. At this point, if we were to lay them all out they would stretch to the moon and back.
As I discussed in my previous piece, this is what Color Revolutions do: they fatigue, confuse and wear down the population with this sort of thing.
But a large part of the population sadly doesn’t seem to notice what is happening.
The population is becoming impervious to reason & evidence
Over the years, I have received a veritable cataract of emails from people who disagree with my pieces. And the pattern is almost invariably the same, with most of these readers:
confusing passion with evidence;
confusing invective with understanding; and
confusing labeling with actually marshaling an argument.
Labeling as a substitute for argument
Then again, if you have come to believe (because you have been entrained to believe) that you can summarily and unanswerably refute a position merely by labeling someone with any number of epithets—however bizarrely non-sequitur they may be—then why to go to the trouble of actually marshaling an argument? Why go to the trouble of understanding what it is someone is actually saying? Why not simply caricature the opposing argument?
Oppose Black Lives Matter? Believe borders matter? Don’t like Obama or his policies? You’re a racist. Believe in personal sovereignty? And national over transnational sovereignty? You’re a white supremacist. Oppose transgenderism? You’re a hateful anti-science bigot. Don’t want to take a dangerous and experimental mRNA gene therapy injection? You’re a stupid anti-vaxxer who is a threat to society. Believe anything other than what the media is proffering? You’re a “conspiracy theorist.”
This is the cult in operation: by encouraging the substitution of labels for argument, this isolates members from reason and evidence—and even from reality itself—and on anything that might cast doubt on what the cult believes.
But it gets worse…
How can you refute an argument you haven’t understood?
An example culled from emails I’ve received recently in response to my previous piece; more or less: “I hate Putin; he is evil and therefore you are wrong“ - which isn’t, of course, by itself an argument for or against anything.
Nevertheless, even if I were to concede that Putin is "evil”—or murderous, hateful, etc—this doesn't disturb the argument in my first Substack piece whatsoever.
And if these readers had actually gone to the trouble of understanding my argument in the first place, they would have known that. But labeling and caricature are so much easier, no?
The last thing the cult wants is for its members to understand—and therefore be vulnerable to—opposing points of view.
If you don’t understand your opponent’s argument, you cannot even understand your own
I once had a Philosophy professor who divided up our class into pro-lifers and pro-choicers so that we might debate. And, wisely, he asked the pro-lifers had to make the pro-choice argument; and the pro-choicers had to make the pro-life argument.
Here’s what happened: the pro-lifers made far better arguments than even the pro-choicers were able to make regarding their own real pro-choice positions; and the pro-choicers absolutely floundered at trying to make the pro-life arguments. All they could do is hypothesize absurd caricatures of the pro-life positions.
What was the moral of the exercise? You do not even know your own argument until you know that which you are attempting to refute. And the best disputants know the opposing arguments even better than their expositors.
The truth is, the population has been groomed into believing they don’t need to understand what they oppose; which effectively means that they don’t even understand their own positions.
This is what cults do: sow confusion and chaos in the person so that they no longer understand even themselves, and why/what they believe to be true.
Contradictions in the heart of their positions are signs of impaired intellects
“It’s so great to have our first black Supreme Court Justice.” But we already have one, no? “Yes, but this one will defend women’s rights.”
(I didn’t know that was a function of a Supreme Court Justice? By the way, what does it even mean to “defend women’s rights”? “You must be a racist bigot.”)
Even so, if she doesn’t know and cannot say what a “woman” is, how can she possibly, as you say, “defend” their “rights”?
**Crickets.**
(And btw, if we don’t know what a “woman” is, how do we know she is our first black woman SC justice?)
This is what cults do: impair reason.
When reason and evidence no longer matter, persuasion is replaced by force: “We shouted them down!”
I have a lovely niece who attended the Youth International UN Assembly a few years ago; and afterwards, she announced proudly that:
“the conservatives came with all these facts and arguments and stuff - but, don’t worry, we shouted them down!”
She was beaming; evidently this kind of thing had been not only condoned but actively encouraged in her milieu. Indeed, this sort of moral vanity seems the rule now.
*****But what happens when words and reason and evidence are abandoned? If you can use force to silence people, why even bother with labels? What happens when “shouting” people “down” no longer works?
The population is becoming impervious to reason & evidence because that is what cults do to their members over time.
And so—as the mass formation psychosis deepens—they are increasingly cut off from reality.
Which means they also come to believe in absurdities: in pandemics that don’t exist, transgenderism, that pedophilia is a normal expression of human sexuality, et cetera.
Voltaire’s famous words come to mind: “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
“Conspiracies like this are not possible”
“Conspiracies like this can’t happen. People would speak up. People aren’t this evil.”
On the face of it, of course, these objections and responses to my above thesis sound reasonable.
They’re also exactly how normies have been trained to respond, almost reflexively, to anything that is outside the media-approved narratives.
Just as the terms “fully vaccinated” or “anti-vaxxer” were deliberately mainstreamed, the phrase“conspiracy theory” was mainstreamed in the mid-20th century for a very specific purpose: to train people to dismiss anything not approved by the media merely by labeling it so.
Furthermore, it is worth nothing how many “conspiracy theories”—even during the past year or so—have became undeniable conspiracy facts: a prime example are vaccine passports. Or, that the mRNA “vaccines” are gene therapy. Or, even the New World Order itself. One could multiply even just recent examples into the hundreds.
At the same time, these sorts of objections seem rather odd to me: whether one thinks conspiracies like this are possible has no bearing whatsoever on whether all this is, in fact, actually happening.
It is a fact that billions of people were gaslighted into obeying a very small minority of people, and to do things that were utterly against their own interest, and which caused irreparably harmful to themselves and their loved ones. (A chilling memory: mothers filming their child’s “vaccination” for TikTok (or some other platform) to show the world how right-thinking they are. We’re supposed to be protecting children not using them as props for our own vanity.)
It’s not only possible, it is happening right in front of our eyes. The question really isn’t whether but how all of this is possible.
“But people would speak up.” Who, exactly?
Think of all this as occurring at three levels:
Level 1: those who are part of the cult
Most people have been groomed for the “hive mind” from an early age; and are simply unwitting members of the cult. Why would cult members “speak up”? What would they “speak up” about?
Consider the three experiments I cited at the the beginning of this piece; how powerfully group dynamics affect individual decisions and perceptions; how difficult it is to turn around in a elevator, even if you know you’re facing the wrong way; and how persuasive authority figures in lab coats can be.
The truth is, most people just go with the flow of what is around them. And that is, in part, “how” this is happening in a nutshell.
How about your own doctor? How about that person you know in the media? How about that virus expert you know? Almost certainly a part of the Hive Mind. Even many high up the CDC, the WHO and other such places are likely to be part of this Groupthink-based Hive Mind.
“But people would talk”
Why? What would they say?
The university teacher who grooms her students for cultural marxism isn’t doing so as part of some sinister plan; she believes she is “educating” her students.
The same is true with most journalists, media figures entertainers/Hollywood actors, etc: most of them have been groomed themselves to conform to the “Hive Mind.”
“Even my doctor, really?”
Most (certainly not all) doctors mindlessly administer protocols. And I mean even “top-tier” doctors at the “finest” hospitals in the US. Thinking for themselves did not get them into grad school, it didn’t enable them to graduate, or get their various positions and so on. Regurgitating from memory and following pre-set protocols did. Conforming to Groupthink did.
Some are simply too afraid to “speak up”
Anyone who actually understands what is happening faces a difficult choice. I suppose some people are simply cowards. But many of them, I suspect, simply cannot risk their lives and fortunes. And, they indeed have much to be afraid of, as the consequences are severe: professionally, personally and financially. Everything is at risk when you speak up against the cult.
Fauci and funding: a vast system of rewards and punishment
Fauci controls billions in funding for medical schools/research. Do you think that funding is unconditional? If you propose a research study that goes against the AIDs or the pandemic narratives, your chances of getting funded are less than nil. And conversely, if you conform to the narratives, you are rewarded with funding, with positions, and with general advancement. This happens throughout the system; if you don’t believe me go to grad school and try to get funding for a project that questions global warming.
And billions of Federal—that is, taxpayer—disbursements are made to schools to enforce “pandemic” measures: masking, and so on. And hospitals are “rewarded” handsomely for every “covid” diagnosis, every ventilator “treatment,” and every covid “death.” What are incentives? What school or hospital will turn down money? How easy is it to put “Covid” as a (vaguely) “contributory” cause of death on a death certificate? How does that affect the covid death-rate numbers?
“But hold on, I am not part of a cult, Monsieur!”
No a single cult member has ever, in the history of the world, actually believed themselves to be part of a cult. That’s how it works.
But let’s test you: if you believe there is a deadly pandemic, why? How exactly did you come to this conclusion? What evidence have you seen? Why on earth would you take the “vaccines” then? Have you seen evidence of their efficacy and safety? You cannot have; and no one else has either.
Indeed, we warned you over and over. But sadly, it’s been very, very hard to get through to you. That is what happens in a cult: you become unreachable by reason and evidence.
Level 2: those who are silenced
Those who do speak up—doctors, experts, virologists, journalists, scientists— are silenced. So Normies don’t hear them.
It’s easy to create the illusion that “most” doctors and researchers believe in the pandemic and vaccines if you silence dissenting researchers and doctors.
Here are two examples among thousands.
Kary Mullis, Nobel Prize winning inventor of the PCR
Kary Mullis insisted over and over again for 25 years that his technology cannot—even in principle—be used to detect viral infection. Mullis was Dr. Anthony Fauci’s bête noire in this story that goes way back beyond Covid-19. Mullis was arguing against using the PCR to diagnose HIV infection; and, he argued: the more tests, the more “infections.” Thus creating an epidemic out of thin air. Sound familiar?
But Mullis, who surely knew more about the PCR than anyone else on earth, was labeled a nutjob, and so his warnings were not only ignored but ridiculed.
And, of course, as you may know, Mullis conveniently “died” just months before the “pandemic,” for which the PCR was used as an indispensable linchpin.
Dr. Robert Malone, one of the inventors of the mRNA technology
Dr. Malone is now speaking out against the widespread use of mRNA “vaccines.” This man has everything to lose and nothing to gain by doing so.
However, he’s been subtly and pejoratively labeled into persona non grata status; his level of involvement in the development of the technology has been “questioned” (a public relations smear technique); and his image has been “managed” by the media so that Normies won’t take him too seriously (see here.) Though, really, they should:
Click here to listen Dr. Robert Malone: The “vaccines” are causing a form of AIDs
This man had every reason not to speak up.
Of course, silencing, disparaging, or especially firing anyone who has the courage to “speak up” also serves as a warning to anyone else who is tempted to step “out of line.” Thereby, reinforcing membership in level 1.
Level 3: Those running the cult
Then there’s the 1% of 1% who shape and orchestrate the “hive mind.” Why would Jim Jones “speak up” about his own cult?
[This is an immense and enormously complex topic; and mostly reserved for a future piece; I will touch on a few points, even if a bit cryptically for now.]
These people are very few and mostly out of public view; they form a kind of a “religion” that binds them together to work towards a common end; and this “religion” also binds them to silence. They communicate out in the open, among themselves and even directly to the mostly uncomprehending public, but in a “language” that the general population does not yet see. But once you see it, you cannot “unsee” it.
Monarch Mind Control. Mk-Ultra. And Blackmail.
The 1% of 1%, however, need “controlled” people in politics, in the media, in Hollywood to do their bidding. This is achieved through very well documented programs that go back to the early 20th century, including CIA Monarch Mind Control & Mk-Ultra; and/or arranging for people to put themselves into compromising positions (often, sadly, with children) in order to allow them into the club, and thereby be blackmail-able and controllable.
You cannot be in the club—and attain these positions—unless you are subject to one of these controls, often multiple. Many are groomed from a very young age for this. Almost like a lifelong hazing process.
How do we know this?
Because hundreds of former members and witnesses have risked their lives to tell their stories about this; and often end up dead. And because it’s right in front of us.
How do you hide something? Put it right out in the open. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it.
Every magazine cover, every day, every major celebrity; every major media personality; every major sports star….
I mean all of them…
Their “all-seeing” eye message
Just a normal girl, you see?
“Okay, but no one is this evil”
Really? It is practically a law of human nature: wherever there is even a modicum of power to be had, even at a lowly food Co-op, there are people seeking it; and wherever there is the potential for immense power, there are people willing to do virtually anything to get it. And the more ruthless they are, the more morally unhinged, the more likely they are to obtain it.
Which is why Psychopaths are believed to account for 20% of corporate and media leadership worldwide.
If that is true with corporations and the media, it’s doubtlessly also true for politics; as Friedrich von Hayek, Nobel prize winning economist, said: “In government, the scum rises to the top.”
The world is run by psychopaths whose every action is to enhance their god-like feeling of power and control over other people. And the more concentrated and extensive the power, the higher percentage of psychopaths.
Such a person is not necessarily evil; but their actions and effects can be.
Psychopaths aren’t stupid though: they know how to sound superficially caring
The psychopaths in public view—Gates (son of the founders of Planned Parenthood, another genocidal project; more about that later), Fauci, Schwab—all posture themselves, like all megalomaniacs, as benefactors of “humanity” and of the earth/environment broadly.
At the same time, they have spent their entire adult lives thinking and talking about not only population “control” (a euphemism if ever there were one) but population reduction. (Not the sort of people to take public health advice from, btw.) This is part how they believe they are being “stewards” of the earth/environment.
This very small minority see the population as livestock to be thinned out; they are often frankly genocidal in their language, and speak this way right out in the open. They have to do this (more about that later too); but they “speak” in such a way so that you cannot hear or understand what they’re saying unless you are free from the media entrainment. If you are, it’s as loud and clear as can be. More about this later too.
Is it such a stretch, as we learn about the nature of these “vaccines,” to consider the possibility that they are are slow-motion bioweapons? That slow-motion genocide is the goal of the NWO “elite”?
Of course, pure evil cannot exist, metaphysically speaking. But we’re about to see a pretty close approximation of what it might look like if it did. Stay tuned.
*****
So, who else would “speak up”? Anons, of course. And slowly, the world is waking up from the spell.
Conclusion: ”Für Ihre Sicherheit" (“for your safety.”)
The emerging New World Order—if they achieve it—is a vast system of global technocratic fascism, and on a scale beyond our wildest nightmares.
They are trying to use a permanent state of emergency to usher in the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Great Reset: digital identity, vaccine passports, Universal Basic Income (UBI), Schwab’s“you will own nothing and be happy,” and Chinese-style Social Credit Scores. Out of fear, citizens are surrendering their sovereignty to the WEF and other Supranational organizations.
By the time it is in place, it will be too late to speak up simply because speaking up will no longer be possible. It is barely possible even now. But few notice this until they try.
If we were misled about the nature of fascism—and imagining it would come jackbooted and goose stepping into history again—how would we recognize it when it came?
What if it arrived this time masquerading as kindness? For the essential thing was always that all measures were:”Für Ihre Sicherheit" (“For your safety.”)
We are in the midst of a global mass psychosis taking over the world, made possible by many decades of the Left grooming the population—via media, Hollywood, etc—to mirror the minutely-controlled groupthink narratives.
It’s rather like a spell or a trance. It is exceedingly difficult to penetrate. Why? Because cults render people impervious to reason and evidence.
The key is to break the spell of the media. Breaking this spell, however, is exceedingly difficult. It’s so all-encompassing and so pervasive it’s hard for most people to see.
And how can you escape a captivity you cannot see?
David
P.S. Please feel free to email me with questions, comments or suggestions. If you don’t know how to email me, simply Subscribe and reply to the welcome email!
One of the great conjuring tricks the media has pulled off is persuading Anons to believe we are fewer than we are. But we are millions around the globe and growing daily. When we realize this, we will be unstoppable. As I shall argue in my next piece: it may not always look it, but we are winning, and we will prevail.
Stay tuned for my next piece, a sneak peak: “The World is about to Change”
See my first piece, “Engineering Selective Outrage about Ukraine,” via the link at the bottom of this page.
P.P.S: All my life I’ve heard people ask: “how could that have happened?” Well, now we know….
