The fact that the agenda has not sent out a second wave of horror and fear propaganda is also rather telling to these folks. Where is the next pandemic? What happened to Covid’s diabolic never-ending run of mutations, what happened to Monkey Pox? What happened to Disease X?

Yes, all this could still happen, but it seems there have been more false starts—starts that didn’t go anywhere. But if so, you would think they wouldn’t have put them out there just to not have them continue. It’s been rather weird, like an electrical storm you see on the horizon with its threatening lightning strikes, but it never gets close enough to warrant closing the cellar door.

How about CBDCs? And the Digital IDs? You hear a lot about these, but nothing that is concretely happening to implement them. Is it happening in other places? Australia? Germany? The UK? Of course, a lot is said about it, on YouTube, and in alt media. Lots of talking heads, but how imminent is it? Actually, I won’t dwell on this, I have no doubt all of this is coming, but has the dragon been wounded? Even a little bit? Has this march into oblivion been slowed down?

Maybe there is no wounding of the general juggernaut of world rule by the schmucks who are claiming power. Although even that sacrosanct organization may have suffered from shell damage. Wasn’t DAVOS not all that they expected this past year? Hasn’t there been some pretty obvious whiplash from some leaders in their little club? How about the UN and the “sustainable development” circus? How is that going?

Anyway, I digress. Although the health of the world agenda, including all of these projects I mention, are all part of it, Covid, and pandemics in general, are the specific topics of this article.

I don’t buy any of this talk of victory for a New York minute. This is like cancer, you can’t claim victory until it is ALL gone, every last scrap of it. Remissions are nice, but if you’ve still got cancer in your body somewhere, it is only a time-out. I feel that this is similar. Even if one cell survived, it would start multiplying again and wouldn’t stop until it was big and gnarly and spitting out all the garbage this monster has been known to spit out. So, I don’t buy it…but…

Is it possible that at least one battle was won? Maybe, but just because they have pulled the troops back doesn’t mean they didn’t still take the city and got essentially what they stormed in for. I may still say that is a possibility. I mean, what did they want as a consequence of their Covid campaign? Did they want 100% compliance, with billions of sheep bowing down to them? Did they want everyone locked up in their own little cage, ala 1984, each of us in a squalid apartment with just a giant TV in the middle of it so Big Brother could blab at us all day long? If that is true, then indeed the psyop failed, because they didn’t get that—at least not yet.

But what if they got this: a toxic injection placed in billions of people worldwide that will kill untold millions over the course of about 20 years? Not only that, but the injection will render another untold millions sterile. Do the math here: how many people would need to be sterilized over 20 years to reduce the population worldwide by 1 billion? 2 billion? What other havoc could such a death jab wreak? What untold horrors are yet to overcome us? Your guess is as good as mine. Think zombies here, think soulless ghouls, think humans with no empathy, think lost humanity.

And that’s just the physical consequences. What about the psychological success they have had with the Covid campaign? Sure, many participants have shot them the bird regarding more boosters, and have ignored more threats of losing jobs over vaccine resistance. Sure, the courts have ruled in Canada that the illustrious leader here performed a no-no with his reckless enactment of the Emergency Act, and as a result, lawsuits are flowing into the courts. Does all this mean that no one fell for the psychological operation? That no one was mentally affected by the lockdowns, the masks, the closure of schools, churches, and other institutions? Does it mean that we have all recovered from the trauma of those three years, and mentally and emotionally we are just back to square one—all normal again?

If anyone reading this knows anything about hypnosis, they probably understand what hypnotic suggestion is all about. It is real, folks. What has been altered subliminally in our unconscious minds could be quite formidable. We are being programmed for better performance in future projects the agenda has in store for us. Most of the shrews reading this are safe from this brainwashing (hopefully) because we closed our eyes during the deadly meteor storm perpetrated by the fear-mongering agenda (watch The Day of the Triffids to understand that reference!) But those out there who got caught up in it and drank the delayed-reaction Kool-Aid—are all like sleeper spies from the Cold War, soon to be re-activated at some future date to continue complying with TPTB’s bidding.

Here I go again. I am supposed to be entertaining the possibility that the Covid psyop failed, not suggesting evidence to prove its great success. Sorry. Well, maybe it didn’t go as well as they wanted it to go. It does seem there was a lot more gas in the tank and that they could have pushed it a bit further than they did. They were doing pretty well, but they just fizzled out. Maybe they did expect more people to get vaxxed, maybe that was a disappointment. They sure looked like they were going for the whole enchilada with all their “you’ve GOT to get vaccinated!!” hoopla. Maybe they got too much pushback from us shrews. So many angry shrews showed up pretty quickly. And the shrews that were already on the scene, who were not surprised with all these shenanigans to begin with, just got louder and louder. Sure, not many sheep flipped, but some did. Their booster campaign is floundering (in my opinion, only because they turned the heat down, or off entirely).

So maybe they did get nicked a bit. Maybe a few arrows penetrated the armour, and they backed off a step or two. Maybe we did surprise the bastards with our resolve, tenacity, wit, and refusal to play the game.

But then again, maybe not.

I chose the pseudo-man to focus on because I am a man myself. (I have my man-faults, but attempting to be a pseudo-man I don’t think is one of them.) I also am not convinced being a pseudo-woman is all that prevalent in the culture. Although girls that appear to be pseudo-girls are common, that, in my humble opinion, is an entirely different thing.

“Pseudo” in this context implies “trying to be something you should be, but aren’t.”

What I see going on with young pubescent girls shows no attempt to be something they should be, they don’t seem to have any desire to be healthy, well integrated “girls.” It is more like they are trying, and for the most part succeeding, to be something the culture is defining for them. Which isn’t very pretty (literally and metaphorically).

I don’t feel there are many pseudo-women because women who are trying to be mature women generally succeed. Some don’t, I realize that, but I don’t see it as being as major of a problem as what I see happening with men.

Men, for the most part, don’t even know what being a man actually is (I am not so sure myself). Throughout history boys had to be trained and taught to be men. Girls don’t have to be taught to be women. They just know how to be one. It is in their bones.

Sure, the culture can try to trick them into believing they don’t know (take the radical women’s movement as an example of that trickery—oops, did I actually say that??) Maybe I will write an article to further explain all this about women some other time. I know so much about them (ha ha).

So, now that that is out of the way—explaining why this article is not about women or girls—let me get on with it.

What is a pseudo-man?

Assuming the assumption that boys have to be taught how to be men is correct, we will run into a problem if there are no men left to teach those boys. The agenda, or culture, has intentionally seen to that. There are very few mature men out there. The few that do remain are kind of in a state of shell shock. The last viable men in the culture probably disappeared sometime after the Second World War (when I say “culture” I am referring largely to North American culture, but we see this in other parts of the world as well).

This loss of men is due to a lot of things, some organically natural (such as, in this current culture, we have no place for a man to constellate his “warrior” archetype—except as a criminal) and many are developed and implemented by the agenda. A big one of those is the concept of “masculine toxicity.” A man must become accustomed to the use of his metaphoric sword. He must learn how to wield it, when to pull it partially out of its scabbard so the sun can glint off of its shiny surface into the eyes of his opponent, and when to pull it all the way out and start slashing. Men today either slash before thinking, or don’t even know they have a sword to begin with. The nefarious and malicious agenda wishes to label any use of a man’s sword as toxic (or even if he only just thinks of his sword, God forbid). Any aggression at all is considered toxic. Thus, we have “toxic masculinity”—or in other words, all men who are actually men, are toxic.

This is only one thing in many that renders a man emasculated. Since men are no longer taught to be men by the elders of the community (including their own fathers), he doesn’t even know what being a man is about. He may learn a bit from television, books, and movies, but usually these templates are not very reliable—and these days they are teaching all the wrong things). He does get some hints from the collective archetypes all humans carry within them, but men are “doers” and cannot wholly rely on subtle instinct-like murmurings hidden deep inside his psyche. Also, many of these subtle indicators are pushed down by the culture, which is rather bent on cutting off access to “manly instruction.”

Some of the things he has a difficult time accessing is how and when to be dangerously aggressive—he doesn’t know when to use that aggression or know when to keep it at bay. Many adult males do not know how to be a provider to his family. Many are still locked to mother and have no idea how to function autonomously and be separate from the mother archetype. Many do not know when to stop having “the boy” in them run their life.

Many have lost a sense of purpose, meaning, and direction. Many have no clue as to how to relate to the feminine embodied in their wives, girlfriends, or partners. Rather than relate to the feminine in their female partners with regard, respect, love, consideration, and cherish them as the precious entities they are, they relate to them as a boy relates to their mother—often with resentment, “mommy love,” anger, or dependence on them as a “golden child” expecting mother to do everything for them.

Many men today had tyrant fathers, or fathers who were never present and emotionally available. They may have had alcoholics for fathers, narcissists, or fathers passive to their medusa mothers. So the father was not in their life as a mentor and a teacher to teach them how to be men.

The culture has all but destroyed masculinity. And in my opinion, again, I believe this is intentional. Gender/sex in general has been decimated intentionally. Family has been decimated. Being an organic human has been decimated. Motherhood has nearly been decimated, although that one is a tough one to kill, and is even coming back to a degree after the radical “feminists” nearly eliminated it (oh gosh, I said it again!)

So, what are pseudo-men then?

The pseudo-man is one who has some inkling of what at least appears to make a man a man and goes out and tries to dress himself up in behaviours and yes, even clothes and accoutrements, that make him appear to be a man.

This is the man who “compensates” for the things he is not really aware he is missing. These men are certainly not conscious of what they are missing, in fact, a lot of their impulses are natural compensations. Some of them are indeed caused by pathology and past trauma (like the domestically violent man) but most are benign and although in and of themselves these compensations are harmless, they cover up something that in the long run if remained covered can indeed be harmful—not only to others, but to the man himself dressing himself as a pseudo-man.

Examples? Well, the obvious ones are clothes, shoes, watches, jewelry, fast noisy cars, motorcycles, tattoos, jet skis, boats, and guns, as well as many other material things. Behaviors? Being the tough guy, fighting, crime, drugs, domestic violence, misogyny, drinking, cheating on their partner, porn, non-stop video gamer, excessive working out, and picking up women, among others. These are all things that have on the surface the “man thing” about them, but do not actually represent a “superior man.”

What constitutes the “real man” as opposed to the “pseudo-man”? Sacrifice, restraint, honesty, loyalty, dedication, being present, holding their partner’s emotions, taking care of their body in a balanced way, respect, monogamy, work, a capable listener, a critical independent mind, defining oneself from within rather than externally, a purpose driven life, empathy—and many more, but you get the picture.

Pseudo-men are everywhere, and God love the poor pitiful beasts, most of them are desperately trying. Some of them are mucking things up quite a bit, but most of them are just lost and trying things that may, for a moment, make them feel like men, but ultimately, they will slip right back down to the bottom of the pole. And as I said, I blame the agenda/culture for this, not always the men themselves. The agenda want men to think they are men, so it supplies them with all the consumer delights, bells and whistles with the promise a man will feel and look like the real thing.

After a few generations of beating the “man” out of “men” there is no one left to teach the new boys coming up—no one but the agenda itself, and we all know what they are after, and it certainly is not to create a strong male in our crumbling society. Strong males cannot be as easily controlled.

“Pupil who questioned classmate ‘identifying as a cat’ called ‘despicable’ by teacher” — Telegraph, 6/18/23

Really?

At the beginning of this global illness I thought running across something like this was funny. Now I don’t. At first I didn’t even believe it could be true, now I am not laughing. What does this mean?

I have become a bit impatient with the manner in which most people are seemingly dealing with this. Of course there are some loud voices of opposition, thank God for them, but even those folks are treating all this like these events are typical results of a new ideology—the “woke” culture.

They don’t even see it as bad as the Nazi ideology, which is often referred to as evil incarnate and has been bestowed the “that really wasn’t human” award back in the ‘30s—National Socialism was an anomaly of human history, and best be forgotten.

There is zero tolerance for Nazis in these modern times, “we’re past that.” But many of us sure are tolerant of this, not only tolerant, but encouraging, and even affirming!

So what is this? What is this “woke” culture that is filled with buzzwords like “equity,” “inclusion,” and “diversity”—all words designed to elicit the response: “well, their heart is in the right place.” Is it? I don’t think so.

This is insanity, plain and simple, and there should be great concern as to what could have possibly “gotten in the water” to distort people’s brains the way they have been distorted.

When I was about 13, I remember reading a chilling article in Life magazine about a small village in France (if my memory serves me). The piece read as a horror story, describing the way people in this town started to go insane, driving their cars into walls, dancing around in the streets naked, painting strange pictures on the sides of houses and buildings. Seemingly everyone went bonko.

I do not recall the details, but ultimately it was discovered that there was some strange mold found on some bread that nearly everyone had eaten (the town bakery was the distributor, and the mold had some hallucinogenic effect on all who had ingested it.) Now, maybe I made this story up, and now recall it as reality (maybe I had a bit of tainted bread myself) but I remember it had a profound effect on me.

I laid awake that night, thinking of how frightening it would be if I woke up one morning and everyone I knew was loopy like the French folks in this little town. It scared the bejesus out of me. I wondered how that would turn out, and who would save me (assuming I had eaten no bread myself and remained sane.) Well, folks, welcome to my nightmare. Here we are.

So why hasn’t anyone treated this for what it is?—a mental illness?—and a serious one at that. Why has everyone pussyfooted around this like they are too terrified to step on the toes of those who claim to be the most empathic, the most willing to accept diversity and inclusion?—the most “woke.” That is not what this is. That is not what is happening with the “woke” culture.

This is a clear example of the emperor with no clothes and everyone is terrified they will get their head chewed off if they point out this obvious insanity. Well, not everyone. There are a few loud voices out there thank God, but not enough.

Mattias Desmet gave it a shot. But he was not really describing a true departure from reality, not anywhere near as serious as the acid/mold psychotic trip the French townsfolk experienced from the Life story. For one thing, that was chemically induced.

The psychosis he describes is more like a mass delusion, and deals more with people being swayed by the authoritative powers to be more compliant or complacent due to psychological conditioning. What I am talking about here can only be described as bat s— crazy.

Psychotic. And so psychotic there isn’t much difference between this: believing you are a woman when you are a man, or believing you are a cat when you are a human; than believing you are Napoleon, Cleopatra, or Jesus. Come to think of it, I am sure that if someone “identified” as one of these historic figures, not a questioning word would be said about it. Instead their new identity would be affirmed. That’s crazy.

I remember Bill Maher’s funny quip when he commented, “…I wanted to be a pirate [when I was a kid], thank God nobody took me seriously and scheduled me for eye removal and peg leg surgery.” (Bill’s entire monologue can be found here.)

If you didn’t know what really was happening, and you came across Bill’s comments here, you might wonder what he could be referring to that would be so serious. Certainly, people are not encouraging young children to have surgery as a result of their fantasies. Yes, they are.

And not only that (which would only pertain to the really serious cases) kids are told, as in the above “cat identity story” that they are somehow defective if they find this psychosis all around them rather odd. A kid is told he is a homophobe because he thinks another kid identifies as a cat? Where is the logic in that? And where is the sanity?

[Note – this extends to able-bodied adults who identify as “paralysed”, voluntarily sit in wheelchairs and seek out surgeons to sever their spinal chords – Ed.]

I am sorry you caught me on a bad day—a day of nearly zero tolerance. As I said earlier, my camel back got broke—all because I’m not woke. [sic] I do have tolerance for people who are confused, delusional, and mentally ill, and even for people who are psychotic, but this is all going way too far in the false names of inclusion, tolerance for diversity, and equity.

The emperor has no clothes, and it is about time we all called a spade a spade and ended this insanity. It is destroying our children for one thing, and undermining our decency as human beings for another.

Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

I am not sure if I will be using the term correctly in this article because in its purest form it describes a cognitive malfunction which occurs when a person creates a story in their mind that doesn’t match reality.

There is an assumption in this definition that there is an objective reality to compare it to, and that reality, as defined here, is stable and not subject to multiple interpretations. Although this isn’t really important because you can still experience cognitive dissonance if both the “story” and what is perceived as “reality” is illusory. Thus cognitive dissonance verges on another clinical term, psychosis.

Despite these nuances in definitions, cognitive dissonance, as well as psychosis, supposedly (according to the folks in white coats) causes internal psychic problems. I don’t necessarily have a problem with this assumption, although if left alone I am not sure if psychotic people really have psychic problems. It is more likely that the people around them have the problems.

I digress.

Most definitions of cognitive dissonance describe it as a “tension” felt if a person behaves differently from a belief system they resonate with, such as an overweight person who eats cookies all day but believes they would be happier if healthier and at a lower weight. I would venture to extend this description to a person who fundamentally believes that a government of smiling, sweet-talking, elected politicians should be honest and caring but end up being liars and willfully hurtful toward their constituents.

The official definition also states that when someone encounters cognitive dissonance they will adjust whatever they have access to adjust in order to relieve the discomfort. In the above examples, a person eating cookies might deny that they are doing something that isn’t conducive to good health and weight loss, saying things like, “I didn’t eat that many!” or “these cookies are not really fattening.” The latter example might find those experiencing cognitive dissonance denying completely the lies of their smooth talking politicians, or justify them in some odd way: “he didn’t really mean it” or “she is only human, she just made a mistake.”

That, though, is “sheep side cognitive dissonance” and I am not as concerned about that in this article—(in general I am personally very concerned about it). Sheep do seem to be in a perpetual form of cognitive dissonance, but I am not sure if many of them know it yet. Their “beliefs” seem to match up with their perceived reality for the most part, so they don’t, at the moment, experience any dissonance. Possibly unconsciously they may, but have plunged themselves into a deep denial. But clinically, to this particular clinician, it doesn’t seem that way. I see no obvious resulting tension—not yet.

Those of us on this side of the fence, however, grapple with this every day because we are more conscious. Everyone’s world has been turned upside down. In fact, the world has basically been upside down, from what most of us perceived as being “right side up,” for quite some time—maybe even the chief dude Neanderthal king was a lying son-of-a-bitch, who knows. Depending on what particular time in history you “woke up”—meaning when did you first see through the fog and understand you had been fed a story your whole life—you are either a “long time truther,” or a rather “short time truther.” Fact is you were not born seeing the truth, unless you were born a soothsayer. Yes, there probably are a few outliers out there who popped out of the womb totally impervious to brainwashing—if you are one of these then more power to you.

However, it is human nature to believe the world, and other humans in it, are benevolent. What I mean by “human nature” is that babies are born to trust. They have to be taught otherwise, and if they grow up in the West, which in the past was fundamentally benign (compared to other rather traumatic areas of the world) they can easily live a life believing, for example, that their government is not going to intentionally hurt them. (Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, but as we see, most people seem to believe this.)

It is all part of our indoctrination to remain loyal to this “human nature” sort of benevolence. Since it is fundamentally our nature to believe in the benevolence of our world, when we learn that it is essentially false and a fabrication, then we will begin to experience this cognitive dissonance. This comes when we begin seeing that our experiences just don’t fit the story we were born believing.

Each time something crazy happens we have to shake our head…much like characters do in a cartoon, along with that “booooiiinnng” sound. “What the f—k???” Even though we know intellectually that nothing is really as it seems, most of the time when we actually experience an example of this insanity it takes a second for it to sink in, “Are you kidding? Really???”

Now, I know some of you out there are hard-core veterans and don’t shake your head, and don’t hear that “booooiiinnng” sound when something fishy happens. You may instead give a little smirk and think, “here we go again.” Well, I am not one of you, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of people out there reading this are not in your group either.

And when we see things like Universities still demanding their students wear masks, or places of employment still demanding vaccinations to be employed, or hear the talk of digital IDs and a no cash world, and 15 minute cities, and leaders telling their constituents they will hunt down the unvaccinated and make sure they get jabbed, we shake our head and hear “boooiiinnng.” I know I do.

This is the sort of cognitive dissonance I am talking about, and it is pretty much constant. I know for me a day doesn’t go by that I am not shaking my head. It truly is the Chicken Little story, the sky perpetually falling on our melons and all of us running around screaming about the impending doom, “Can’t you see it!? Can’t you see it!?” Nothing ever seems right; nothing ever seems to be properly aligned with basic human expectations. If we were all literal prisoners in the gulag, we would at least match up our internal beliefs with our external reality. We would know we were in prison. Right now, we have little literal reason to believe what we believe, other than pretty clear signs of it being planned.

Yes, those of us unvaccinated see the persecution, and the aforementioned mandates still in place. What we see indicates clearly to us that what we believe is really happening, at least part of it is. But we are constantly being told, “All is fine, nothing to worry about, we love you, we will take care of you, you should be happy you live in a free country, look at my shiny white smile, relax, all is safe…”

Booooiiinnng.

Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

The thing is – when you listen to the full panel discussion linked above, the UN speaker -Ms. Fleming is not just saying that the UN is censoring speech on climate change. She also suggests that the UN with the WEF is censoring many scientific discussions, such as the topic of COVID-19, and the UN is in the process of setting up the tools to censor ALL misinformation that the UN deems unhelpful for a “stable, peaceful, harmonious and UNITED world.

Let me repeat: “stable, peaceful, harmonious and UNITED world.”

You know, common sense (there’s those two pesky words again) tells me that there has never been a time when all humans all agreed on one thing. That has always been considered healthy—debate, discussion, picking apart opposing ideas, new ways of seeing old things, etc. etc.

So how in tarnation does anyone think censoring information that the “UN deems unhelpful” so there is only one “harmonious” truth, for a singularly “united world,” is a good thing? Are people really buying this?

This is what Hitler wanted, Lenin wanted, Stalin wanted, Mao wanted, Saddam Hussein wanted, Osama bin Laden wanted, to name just a few recent ones (and maybe I am not being accurate here because what these men really wanted could have easily been manipulated by the media…but you get my point I am sure).

Since when has weeding out the misinformation from the real information ever been a job of the government, and using censorship no less…i.e., we are not allowed to even SEE what they are sorting out. If they just told us, “this is good, this is bad” but we still got to see it, which would be one thing (still not a good idea, but they have basically always done that, “We suggest, or recommend, or approve of, or whatever”).

But censoring??

Are people really that daft that they think it is best that some authoritative body should be trusted to tell us what is good and bad and leave us entirely out of it? What would the government’s (or in this case, the UN’s) incentive be in doing this? Duh, really? Control? Dominance? Ya think?

When I say there is a concerted effort to flatten the world out into a one thought pancake, I am not meaning that any of the people doing this think it is a good idea for the people who largely inhabit the planet. It isn’t some ideological “perfect way” for all of us. It is instead much like the Great Reset mantra “in the future you will own nothing, and be happy.”

The point is to get as many people as possible on the same page so they are easy to manipulate and manage…one truth, one medicine, one science, one currency, one religion, one way to be a human—one way for all. Easy peasy, eh? No one has to think, no one has to deal with much of anything. We will all be a clone of one another and as such follow one rule, one government, one ideal.

It is funny how all of this is cloaked in a “diversity, equity, inclusion” bullshit sound bite. They don’t want “diversity and inclusion” any more than they want us to “be happy.” Just like they don’t want the climate stabilized so we can enjoy a healthy planet. None of this is as it seems; what they are pushing has zero benefit to the masses.

The UN statement is the same, they don’t want a stable, harmonious, united world, they want a controllable world, a world where the people are like numbers, faceless, uniform, NOT diverse, NOT unique, NOT inclusive. They do not want troublemakers, they do not want thinkers, they do not want diverse, interesting, and creative minds.

Once again I point you to Orwell’s brilliant 1984. Take a look at THAT culture if you want to see what “they want.” It is a pretty good example.

The world is supposed to be chaotic, filled with diversity, different species, different ways of taking the essential elements of physical reality and making something of it in a dissimilar and special way.

There is unity in diversity, as all living creatures seek an expression of life often in very unique ways, but they all have a common goal to express life. Humans, in particular, have an even greater variety of expression.

This is one of the unique things about us as a species. We create outside of the limitations of our instincts. We create music, art, dance, cuisine, architecture…in fact the variety of our creation is unlimited. We have active critical minds that think and think of all sorts of things. We make decisions about what is good for us, individually and collectively, by putting our minds into action with very few limitations.

We can create a nearly perfect life if left to do this on our own resources without some elite criteria to meet set by an individual or a small group of individuals that benefits only them.

This is tyranny. Without tyranny we live in a chaotic world, but a world where the very chaos is what brings mystery, purpose, and meaning to our lives and spawns creativity. Chaotic confusion cannot be nailed down, it cannot be easily controlled nor is it easy to exert our singular, unifying, will onto it. It has a spirit of its own.

Carl Jung, the eminent Swiss Psychologist, stated many times in his work that the truly expressive life is lived in the tension of the opposites.

The “in between two clear objective stances.” This is where mystery lies—chaos, uncertainty, and non conformity. This is the grey area, the unknown. This is the antithesis to singularity, the antithesis to “stable certainty of unilateral living.”

The effort to destroy our uniqueness and our diversity in thought and perspective is the absolute worst thing that could happen to humanity—we cannot dismiss our thinking minds, and our individual compulsion to find meaning in a world that may seem chaotic and unharmonious due to its refusal to be controlled.

Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

Vultures are typically not classed in the “warm and fuzzy” anthropomorphic grouping, although they accomplish a great service to the ecology of the planet, such as other animals thrown in the “yuck” bucket of human perception such as flies, spiders, laughing hyenas, and carrion beetles (who knows what a carrion beetle is?—they ARE pretty, so before you know what they do for a living, you might like them).

So are we human vultures when we swoop down on dead or dying people we have heard about to see if they are vaxxed or not and if what they are suffering or dying from is due to the jab? Two? Three, god forbid four?

At the beginning of the vaccine madness, I was quite brazen and would unashamedly blurt out when hearing of someone’s misfortune, “were they vaccinated???!!!” I never got brazen enough to ask this to the person suffering (obviously if dead), but did to their friends, or whoever was explaining what was happening.

I eventually backed off of the personal incidents I was experiencing as it did seem a bit too vulture-like, but I still would ask sheep in my company what they thought of dozens of athletes dropping in the fields, now extended out to just average Joe’s not waking up or doctors way too young to be experiencing such severe cardiac issues.

Now I don’t even do that. I just listen.

It seems this particular vulture just enjoys the shock of seeing no one (sheep) realizing the secret. “You’ll see,” I say to myself, in my evil vulture voice. “You’ll see.”

Now, isn’t that sick? Maybe. But what else is this experience going to drive us to if not un-empathetic lunacy. Think of Lord of the Rings’ Gollum. Isn’t that what did him in?

We have been put into this untenable position of finding “joy” or at least “satisfaction” in the trauma of another. At its worse it is a form of schadenfreude, pleasure derived from another’s misfortune. But I would argue this is not really the case. I do not think what we are feeling (assuming others are fellow vaccine vultures) is “pleasure” and whatever it is that we are feeling is not due to someone else’s health misfortune.

Of course the definition does include “self satisfaction from another’s failures”—maybe that is the closest schadenfreude comes to defining vaccine vultures.

I recall a scene in the movie Fail Safe staring Henry Fonda, Larry Hagman, and Walter Matthau. Assuming most of you have seen this I will not elaborate: the scene I am speaking of takes place in the operation room where all the military men have been assigned the task of shooting down their own planes because they had been given false orders to nuke Moscow.

The US manages to shoot down one of the planes as the only way to avoid nuclear disaster. All in the ops room cheer. They are immediately told to pipe down, which they do realizing their “mistake.”

We certainly could be put into a similar position in our everyday lives where the only way to remedy a problem, a huge one, is for people to see for themselves the result of the problem (such as vaccine adverse effects) by suffering the problem directly. It is a cognitive dissonant moment for sure, but at least understandable if you are aware of the entire truth surrounding it.

Of course the vaccine “cheer” is not the same as the scene from Fail Safe. There is definitely no cheering, just a sick feeling of despair, but also the feeling of validation, which is the dicey part, “this is just what they have been saying would happen.”

That is clearly sobering, but also carries a tinge of hope. “Maybe this will be enough for everyone to know, and then to do something about it.” There ARE treatments to mitigate the pathology of the vaccines, but of course no one, or very few, are aware they need them.

I recently saw the Stew Peters show about Canadian doctors “dropping dead in droves” since doctors have been required to get the fourth booster in order to work (I believe this was in Canada’s Alberta, but I am sure it is happening in other places as well). Why is this not considered unconscionable to just ignore? “Well, a lot of other doctors who took the booster are fine, only 28 have suddenly died.” Two of them had cancer…does that take them out of the “vaccine caused” pool? I don’t think so.

There are many similar talk show presentations recently about such things, “Sudden Adult Death Syndrome,” doctors dying after the latest booster, cancers recurring with a vengeance after years of remission, children dying of myocarditis. These are just a few brought to my attention: here, here and here.

And it is not only in the alternative media. I hear these same stories from friends and colleagues. If they are sheep telling me, they are just shocked, but of course do not correlate it to the vaccine. If they are shrews they too are shocked, but not so much because of what is happening, but because no one else (sheep) seem to get it at all.

Just the other day I was driving to a restaurant with my wife and passed a house in the neighborhood with a police car in the driveway and a black coroner’s van pulling up to the house. My wife says, “Oh gosh, I guess someone has died. How sad.”

On the way home we saw in another part of the ‘hood an ambulance with the lights flashing in someone’s driveway. “Wow,” my wife says. “Wow, indeed,” I murmur—two wows for two different reasons. My wife just thinks it is a coincidence. I don’t, I actually don’t recall ever seeing anything like it before.

But is it a coincidence? Am I paranoid? Maybe. But my vulture alarm goes off and I start wishing I knew if either victim was vaccinated.

I have recently decided that the number one culprit for keeping sheep asleep is the media. The media has always played the role of the unbiased family member that will let you in on any corruption it saw in our leaders or other groups trying to get our attention. I think that is still true (that people rely on media for that reason) but the corruption is now in the media, at least the mainstream media.

We have been brainwashed to believe anything other than the New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, or other puppets of the system, is pure hogwash. It is now the other way around. I do believe that if any of these “gods of media” ran a story like we see day in and day out in the alternate media, many sheep heads would turn regardless what the venerated talking heads of government and power had to say.

All the rest of us are struggling and trying to make heads or tails out of all this. Thus the vultures come out not as carrion devourers but as inquisitive, and partially confused shrews trying to find validation in a sea of relentless lies. We don’t want our fellow humans to suffer and die, we just want everyone to see the truth the way we do.

Chicken Little didn’t want the sky to fall, she just wanted everyone to know it was falling so they could avoid the crushing, and destructive, results. Our Chicken Little story is different than the classic, because in our story the sky really is falling, and very few see that it is.

Image by Christel SAGNIEZ from Pixabay. Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

Surely anything that would lessen the crime rate was a good thing.

“Can you believe this bullshit!” I blurted out, as my defiant shrew ire flared up. “I think it’s a good idea,” piped in my wife.

Picture the familiar cartoon of a man clenching his teeth with the black cloud over his head—maybe with some thunderbolts cracking out of it.

So why would this bother me so much? That seemed obvious, the old “what if this gets in the wrong hands” mantra went through my head—really? “It just isn’t right!” I silently exclaimed.

First of all, it was rather fishy that these things would just come with a new car and you wouldn’t have a choice. Then of course it is quite obvious it is an infringement on privacy—there are many ways that such a thing could be “used against you.”

Oddly, that wasn’t what bothered me the most. I actually thought more about the poor criminal whose privacy would be violated rather than mine. I thought about how a world without crime would be a bore, and that it just wasn’t fair to wipe all crime out of the culture making it squeaky clean—what would we do without crime novels to read?

Am I crazy?

Dostoevsky had a word to say about utopian cultures back in 1864 (like a crimeless one). He thought a perfect world would be a disaster. In his novel Notes from Underground he says:

Now I ask you: what can be expected of man as a being endowed with such strange qualities? Shower him with all earthly blessings, drown him in happiness completely, over his head, so that only bubbles pop up on the surface of happiness, as on water; give him such economic satisfaction that he no longer has anything left to do at all except sleep, eat gingerbread, and worry about the non cessation of world history––and it is here, just here, that he, this man, out of sheer ingratitude, out of sheer lampoonery, will do something nasty.”

Here is a bit of commentary from a website discussing Dostoevsky’s work:

Notes From Underground (1864) is a blistering assault on utopianism, socialism, and Marxism based on Dostoevsky’s view of human nature. Even if a utopian society was attainable, says Dostoevsky, we would not be satisfied by endless food, comfort and pleasure. If you satisfied every human desire, we would throw it all away just for something interesting to happen, just to give ourselves a challenge to overcome and prove that we are human beings and not lap dogs. According to Dostoevsky, we would rather wallow in misery and self-pity than be handed everything on a silver-platter! It is our unique proclivity for destructive decisions that make us human, and we wouldn’t give that up for anything—even heaven on earth.”

This resonates with me. And I wonder now if I was channeling ol’ Fyodor that day in the kitchen talking to my wife.

It does make sense. I remember a while back I was watching an old Twilight Zone episode about a bad-guy criminal who gets killed, and he thinks he has more than likely gone to hell. But rather than devils dancing around and fire lapping at his feet, some nice dude in a white Panama suit greets him.

“What would you like, my friend,” the guy says…and the episode continues with this poor schmuck getting every single desire he could imagine met. He wins every poker hand, and drinks bottle after bottle of booze without getting sick, has beautiful women climbing all over him.

“I’m in heaven!” he exclaims—until he gets bored. He then begs the white-suit guy to tell him where he actually is, “This ain’t heaven is it! Tell me!” he screams. My 67-year-old memory doesn’t serve me all that well, and I can’t remember details about the show, but I think the Panama guy says, “What do you think?”—Imagine, if you will.

I remember this episode had quite an impact on me, and I decided right then and there never to pursue a life of crime.

Now, let me be clear, I am not a fan of crime.

Of course there is crime, and then there is crime. What I am thinking here is a bit more metaphoric. And I do actually believe we could live in a relatively crime-less society and do pretty well (as I write that sentence, I hear my wise voice in my head saying, “Who are you kidding?”—think of the movie Demolition Man. If you don’t know it, watch it).

But I have to admit, that sort of society doesn’t seem natural. Life, to be natural and fulfilling and meaningful has to have the dark side somewhere integrated in the experience. There must be shadow, crime, disease, discomfort, losing, disappointment, sorrow, stupidity, depression—need I go on?

Yin/Yang stuff, “you can’t know happiness unless you’ve experienced sadness”—you get the picture. As cliché as this sounds, it is sadly true.

Utopias are always actually dystopias in disguise. If you read a novel that claims to be a utopian novel, you quickly see that the society described is not all that benign. Many novels are described as dystopian literature but are presented as utopias, consider Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451.

You just can’t create a perfect society. Not only is it creepy to think about, but it simply would not work.

From an article on the Internet:

In order to find or create a utopia, you must also discover or create a dystopia. When there is a perfect place, an equally opposite place hides from within it. From the outside, utopia and dystopia can be clearly defined; a dystopia is a terrible place ruled by unrelenting dictators forcing slavery and their ideas upon the population while a utopia is a perfect, ideal place to live in for any man or woman.”

Interestingly enough we currently live in a “Utopia wanna be.” We have people believing that if we follow the agenda, which has put us through unwarranted draconian demands, we might be able to avoid disease and death.

These people generally feel at war with nature, and at peace with a distant (at this point in time) belief they could live forever if the proper science creates devices, artificial organs and tissue, brain implants and the like to transcend our sloppy and inferior flesh and blood bodies.

These people also believe we can erase crime from the culture with more militaristic police, more devices for surveillance, digital IDs, digital currency, and more control over all people so the ones who have “nothing to hide” can be separated from the ones who have committed crimes against the system (which, of course, could be anything the system deems criminal—case in point, Canada’s Trucker Convoy in the summer of ’22).

Again, not everyone on that side of the fence (sheep) think this way—some are not even sheep. Some are just frightened out of their wits, some are just blind, some are just totally unwilling to look anywhere beyond their noses, and yes, some are just stupid. But I do have to say I believe most people over there (sheep) believe that they can get through life easier if they do what the authorities say to avoid disease, death, suffering, (nature, dirt, germs, insects (unless they eat them)), hot summers and just plain, uncomfortable, living.

The “agenda” psychologically manipulates people to believe that their lives can indeed be perfect, that they can indeed avoid disease, even death, that “Zero Covid” is indeed possible, and that the state will indeed create a perfect world for them by never putting them in a position where they have to think for themselves and take responsibility for their own lives.

Needless to say, this simply will not work and will ultimately end in disaster. If we survive this ordeal we will look back and see that this was the utopia that never was—and God willing, never will be.

Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

Anyone who has followed my writing knows at that time I was not joining the celebration parties many other people were throwing in their exuberance that we had won the great war. So many believed the efforts to kill the giant hydra of the mainstream agenda had been successful. All the hydra’s heads, or nearly all of them, had been hacked off.

I never believed this, as many of you out there never bought into it fully either. This is a common tactic in a psy-operation, and I have written about it quite often.

But…maybe I was not entirely correct. I read an article recently from Off-Guardian, Ukraine in the Time of Covid that basically pointed out that the elite, the agenda, may have moved too quickly, and, in their excitement, may have shown a bit too much of their hand. This could be true, but I wonder about all the movies I have seen where the evil villains never think they have made a mistake. They laugh and jeer when the good guys tell them their evil plans are doomed.

They never stop and shake the smirk off their faces and say, “oops, maybe I shouldn’t have done that, maybe I should have gone slower.”

Of course, reality is different than a movie (most times, I guess) and maybe the agenda really did move too fast, and the real-life villains got a little too cocky, and relaxed a bit too much in their arrogance, so are now backing off a bit. Maybe, but maybe not.

I still don’t fully buy it, and if it is true, I don’t think any sort of minor slip up like that (moving too fast) is going to change much. Maybe it will change some tactics they originally had in mind to implement, but the juggernaut is still on the move, crashing down any sort of barrier, or stall in time it encounters. It is a massive machine, and MAY spit and snort a bit as it comes up against formidable obstacles, but it isn’t going to stop in its tracks for very long, if it stops at all.

The surface may seem calm. The agenda has almost total control of the surface, meaning control over what most people are thinking, doing, and believing. This surface of the global population has been remarkably easy to control…much easier than I ever could have imagined.

It is one example of the utter brilliance of the evil narrative; they essentially can get away with anything, and few will raise even an ounce of concern. They have to do this in a special way, but it isn’t all that complicated. Their methods of coercion and manipulation are highly effective. If there indeed has been a slow down, it is probably intentional.

So, the surface is calm. The surface thinks the crises is over, at least very close to over, people are kept on their toes (which is the intention) with little nudges here and there: Ukraine/Russia, Monkeypox, HIV, Climate Change, etc.

We are always kept ready for disaster to hit, but for the most part we can go about our daily lives staring at our cell phones, going out and partying, working to buy a car, a house, or whatever instant gratification we can get our hands on (I am not pointing fingers, I am guilty of this as well). We can even go on vacation without too many restrictions (just cancelled flights and mayhem at the airports). The surface water is still…but it runs deep.

What strange creatures do we find lurking in the depths? Here we will find a robust effort to inoculate everyone left standing with the Covid vaccines, for no reason at all at this point (there never was, but they kept telling us there was, now they can get us to vaccinate without having to bother shoving a fake reason down our throats).

Right now, in the states, it stands at 6 months being the youngest authorized to vaccinate, but I doubt if it stops there. We still have newborns to add to the list. And of course, the effort to protect Big Pharma from liability is the aim of these early age approvals for vaccination. And if you go any deeper into that still water you may find a genocidal agenda lurking in the shadows. This may be as far as you need to go to get a clear view of the storm about to hit us.

The seeds of genocide, if indeed those were the seeds planted, are well on their way to sprouting big time. The agenda is set, they don’t really need to do anything else quickly (digital IDs, vaccine passports, digital currency, another viral attack, more vaccines—can all be saved for when the population is reduced). All they have to do now is sit back and watch.

Lots of sinister looking fish down there, most of them familiar enough but still not as visible as before. Many places in the US still require vaccine proof. For example, many individual theatres in NYC still require proof of vaccination (these restrictions come and go, so let me know if they have subsequently been lifted).

How about cruise liners? Some have lifted vaccine requirements but for only selected cruises and destinations. Lots of interior venues still require proof of the jab; lots of jobs still require vaccines to stay employed.

ArriveCAN in Canada is still in place for literally no scientific reason (this may have changed recently with the surprise lifting by the CDC of many policies previously required), last I heard though Canadian citizens who are not complying are being pulled from their cars and interrogated for hours before being fined. I have read article after article about the “under the radar” (not covered in mainstream media) happenings going on in the world, mask mandates coming back to countries like Germany and Australia.

Monkeypox vaccines coming to the forefront, digital IDs breaking through legislation, talk of new variants, new viruses, etc. The surface is calm, but that’s about it. You may have to dig a little to find some of this, but it isn’t too far down there.

Think of it like a gardening project.

First comes the preparation of the garden space. Plowing, digging, tilling, turning. A huge operation. Back when I was a kid and had a garden in the country, preparing raw land for a large plot was a massively disruptive ordeal. First the land was plowed with the tractor to tear into the raw ground and turn it, then another round of the tractor pulling large cylinder discs to break up the rough plowed ground. Then you went out there with just your muscles, a pickaxe, a hoe, and a shovel and broke up everything even more, turning under fertilizer, manure, and other soil amendments.

Equate this process with the “pandemic.”

What a massive disturbance that was! Churning, turning, digging, the global populace into near hysteria. Among other things, its purpose was to build confidence in the “save the day” figures such as Fauci, Biden, Walensky, Tedros, and Trudeau and all the other wartime “Winston Churchill” types spouting sound bites to build trust, and resolve, to beat this “common enemy of the people” through personal sacrifice and fortitude. “Do what we say, and all will be fine.”

This preparation of the soil also built an illusory veneration for what the agenda called “science,” a complete and utterly false “new definition” for what became the narrative’s new religion. It also created fear: fear of the unknown, and an abnormal fear of nature itself, turning living a normal, natural life embraced in nature’s nurturing arms, into life and nature itself being the enemy and the source of abject fear.

So now the soil is prepared. The dust from the plowing and disruption has again settled. The seeds are now planted. We sit and wait with anticipation. What will sprout from these carefully planted seeds, sowed into this carefully prepared soil? What have the masses been prepared for? What will that preparation yield?—a more compliant mass, a more reliant mass, a more fearful mass, a less confident mass, a mass prepared to give up the essence of life as a human due to a prepared fear of nature, and fear of life itself?

This is certainly fertile ground for the monster the agenda has prepared for us—a monster that is very likely intended to consume us (maybe even wipe out a large portion of the world’s population), likely intended, at the very least, to control us and thus create a world to the agenda’s liking. Maybe if we were part of this elite group, we would cheer it on to success…but we are not. We are useless eaters.

So, we are in the eye of the storm.

The time the farmer sits back on his back porch and looks out over his fields and waits to see what will come of his efforts. Maybe this is a time to relax, enjoy the sun, enjoy family, enjoy life. Maybe not, maybe it is the time to prepare ourselves for what comes up in that field.

I read a little children’s story when I was a kid about a chicken asking all the other creatures on the farm to help her prepare the seed she had collected to make bread. Everyone refused, they all had better things to do, nothing seemed too pressing to put aside their leisure moments to help the mother hen. You can predict what happened. The hen did all the work herself, and when she ended up with bread to eat in the winter, everyone else scrambled to her little hut and begged for bread. As I recall, she said, “too bad, you didn’t help when I needed it, so to hell with you.”

Somehow, as an adult now, I doubt if it actually ended that way (it did!), but that’s what I remember. Not sure why the chicken story came up. Maybe the chicken was really one of us and was preparing for the New Normal and all the other animals ignoring her were the New Normies. Whatever. All I am saying is there MAY be dark days ahead, better to be the prepared chicken, than be sorry.

Image by günter from Pixabay. Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

Think of the Daniel Ellsberg exposure of The Pentagon Papers as well as many pieces coming out of Viet Nam during the ‘60s by a group of idealist journalists covering the war there. None of these were popular publications with the editors (or the powers that be), and had their difficulty getting published, but they were not altogether censored.

Then jump a few decades ahead and think of Julian Assange, still being held against his will for his revealing publications in WikiLeaks on war crimes committed by the United States. And we certainly must not forget the courageous work of Edward Snowden who exposed illegal CIA surveillance in the summer of 2013 having The Guardian, in the UK, and The Washington Post, in the US, publish his story.

Again, although unusual considering today’s climate that his story was published in two particularly prominent instruments of the state, Snowden himself was declared an alleged traitor by the US and has dodged extradition to this day. The screws tightened as the years rolled by—now so tight practically nothing gets through.

There is a lot more than this, of course. And today the censoring of highly qualified professionals and journalists who have pertinent and quite important information to share with the public has become so blatant it brings to mind the Nazi book burnings of the 1930’s and Soviet censorship during Stalin’s reign as General Secretary of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1953.

It is impossible to know how devastating to a culture this sort of censorship is. One can only imagine what it would be like to live in a country where not a speck of information came to you that was not controlled by the state. The state could literally tell you anything and you would have to believe it. Or would you?

I believe one of the distinct differences between now and then is that people did not buy everything that was thrown at them by official word in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia (or the dozens of other such totalitarian regimes spread throughout the world before and since.) Today, although censorship is rampant in the Western world, stuff does get through.

The Internet is not so clamped shut that nothing of contrarian content gets to the eyes and ears of the masses. Actually, very little is stopped cold in its tracks. If you look hard enough, you can find just about anything. Why is this so? —probably because there is no real need to shut it out completely, the people are trained to ignore it.

In Germany or Russia during the height of their censorship efforts, a person could be shot for holding alternative news (truth). And if it did get out, it most definitely was listened to or read and was fervently consumed, but maybe not by everyone. There were always staunch Soviets, Leninists, Stalinists, and in Germany, Nazis who were loyal to the cause. I would venture to say that most of these people under the psychological thumb of their handlers.

The brainwashing effort is so successful here and now, that even if alternative news is available to the public through some alternative news source, it simply is rejected and scorned. This in itself is a form of censorship—the destruction of information’s reliability and the people’s ability to trust.

Anything not officially approved is tainted. The mark of a piece of information’s “unreliability” is its absence (removal, “fact-checked,” banning, etc.) from the usual pop-social news sources such as Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube as well as the mainstream news sources such as CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, and The New York Times.

What is occurring is a sort of double whammy. Block (censor) these alternative news items from the approved news conveyors and it is thus marked and if it shows up elsewhere it is immediately considered unreliable, conspiracy material, and untrustworthy—misinformation.

This same process occurs with the news conveyance entities as well as the actual human source (the experts, the witnesses, the scientists, etc.). Since people are not desperately looking for non state-sanctioned news material, the state does not have to worry about such news items leaking out. The minions (sheep) are adequately brainwashed to not be the least bit interested in anything the state does not approve.

The horrendous damage is obvious. Considering the volatility of the world today, information is vitally important. And when a silent enemy is created and released on the public (the manufactured virus), the only way to control its state defined “death ray of destruction” is to acquire information about it—unfortunately only information the state supplies and sanctions.

Any information that is contrary to the state approved information must be rendered impotent through censorship, degradation of the source, ridicule, labeling as conspiracy material or labeled as misinformation. The sheep eat this up, for some odd reason we are still trying to figure out. To the rest of us this state permitted drivel is clearly the actual misinformation. See Mattias Desmet’s fine book on the subject, The Psychology of Totalitarianism.

People seem to have a psychological compulsion these days to enable these authority figures and systems (government, law makers, etc.) to “do the wrong thing.” They enable by handing over to these entities the responsibility of filtering through news to determine what they should and shouldn’t be exposed to.

“If we have free speech and a free press then people can say anything they want (duh). They can print and speak hate, they can call people to racism, they can lie about medicine…about anything. You, Mr/Ms Government must protect me from that, I cannot decide for myself, you have to do it for me.”

Even if a person thinks these powers are not corrupt, this enabling and handing over responsibility and power will make them corrupt. This is a natural law no one can ignore.

What of the other things going on in the world? It isn’t only Covid crap that is being censored and radically distorted…what do we know of general world news that we can trust? Look at the Ukraine/Russia situation. How many “non-shrews” have seen in the mainstream news sources anything about the massive trucker’s convoy in the US? How many people have seen in the news the horror in Shanghai? in Sri Lanka, in the Netherlands?

Most shrews are aware of the distorted news we are receiving through what sheep believe are trusted sources. None of this could be even remotely accurate.

Why would it be? If we are receiving false information left and right, then it stands to reason that nothing we are receiving is the least bit reliable. What of worldwide food shortages leading us into famine of a magnitude the world has never seen? What do we really know of all of this? We could be being fed radically false information, and I suspect we are.

Unless you are there on the ground, or have trusted friends in these specific areas of the world, you don’t know shit, none of us do. Most of you reading this do have your sources for news, but the sheep don’t. All the news they will even bother to look at is only propaganda, nothing else.

That is the horrendous consequence of censorship, the breakdown of trust of alternative news sources not under the control of the agenda, and the strangulation of information sources as well as the desecration of our main news sources we have relied on in the past (which probably never were all that reliable). We live in a sealed black box, under the illusion that the Internet in all of its free information glory is actually managing to supply us with all the information we could possibly need.

Only problem here is that many don’t believe 90% of it because it doesn’t meet the state’s criteria for trustworthy news, we are told most of it is misinformation, and should be avoided like the plague. The entire world is about to implode, and most people in the West (or anywhere for that matter) don’t have a clue because they have been brainwashed to avoid any information that does not come from the state-sanctioned news sources.

Check out UNESCO’s effort to degrade alternative information sources, you will have a blast with this one—amazing, and frightening beyond comprehension.

Censorship relieves people of a lot of responsibility. They don’t have to protect themselves from being hurt by things people might say, they don’t have to figure out if what they are reading is true or not, or if it pertains to them.

They let daddy and mommy figure all that out for them, to protect them, to relieve them from deciding for themselves what they should or should not read or see or hear, or to facilitate the state’s nefarious, and self-serving, agenda. This all boils down to trust. I think most oppressive regimes begin with the masses trusting the oppressors (of course, they are not oppressors at first but rather present themselves as liberators).

As time goes by these same masses start to see their prison wardens can’t be trusted, and then the censorship and news that is shoved down their throats as obvious propaganda takes on a different character. Maybe that realization is yet to come in our current situation, but when it does, if it does, it clearly will be too late.

Image by Mike Ljung from Pixabay. Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.

All five of these definitions could describe the totalitarianism this article addresses, but I was thinking definitions 4 and 5 were the most accurate…and maybe a bit of 3 considering one of the hallmarks of the massive world effort toward central government is secret due to the fact no one heading this effort will ever admit it is a totalitarian movement, but the effort itself is anything but secret.

It’s true intention is indeed hidden, and maybe, for most, difficult to see. But one of the strangest things about all this is that if you had even a modicum of a thinking brain, it would be very clear what is happening, and what their intention is.

I have to admit before the 9-11 fiasco, I was one of those with a very sleepy brain. So I do have some empathy for people who have spent the majority of their life asleep.

Things are different now; there is nothing more obvious than the efforts of these people to take over the world, and there is no excuse to remain asleep. No kidding.

In the past a totalitarian takeover was anything but hidden. Typically it entailed a big mouth tyrant like Lenin, Stalin, or Hitler to start spouting off how he and his ideological vision were going to make the country he had targeted and everyone in it much, much better off. “Follow me, listen to me, do what I say, hate who I say to hate, believe what I say to believe…”—on and on—very loudly, very pushy.

So how is it now different?

Not much difference really, except maybe in what they call it. They don’t call it a dictatorship, or a fascist state (well, they didn’t use those words exactly back then either). Now they usually call it a democracy, but that is in name only. The “occult” part is demonstrated by never telling people the restrictions they endure and the loss of their freedoms are for the benefit of the state or the ideology, but rather for the benefit of the people—for the community, for each other.

Compliance is created through lies and subterfuge.

Sure, Hitler, Lenin, et al said similar sorts of things at first, and maybe after a while our “leaders” will begin to adopt the same tactics these world renown criminals throughout history did, but I do believe the current path to totalitarian rule is not as obvious and overt as it has been in the past. It is subtler now, more disguised to most—like the boiling frog I have endlessly babbled about.

This is what CJ Hopkins has to say about this modern day version of totalitarian rule; he calls it GlobalCap, check out his amazing book, The Rise of the New Normal Reich:

There wasn’t any doubt about it at that point. GloboCap was done playing grab-ass. They weren’t just putting down a “populist” rebellion. They were going totalitarian on us … or as totalitarian as global capitalism can go. It can’t go full-20th-Century totalitarian and start goose-stepping around in silly military uniforms hailing victory and singing globalist anthems, because (a) it has no ideology, or, rather, its ideology is “reality,” and (b) it has to maintain the simulation of democracy, or at least a semblance thereof. So it is going pathologized-totalitarian on us.”

As Hopkins cites in this quote, this takeover is global and is not nation-centric; it is global-centric. This fact is quite unique in history and is the closest thing to a central power source of a bunch of unelected officials in various global organizations such as the WEF, the WHO, and even the United Nations.

The closest thing to the big mouthed tyrant of days of old is Klaus Schwab of the WEF and he is hardly a Hitler or Stalin type, although he certainly fits the personal, and visual image, of a James Bond villain with his odd sci-fi clothes, strange minions surrounding him, and possessing a rather unnerving accent and speech pattern.

Is he the true leader of the cult that is trying to take over the world?

Or, as some have suggested, is this Grand Poobah Satan himself? (This is where the descriptive word “occult” and its first dictionary definition, “supernatural” may be the most appropriate description of our current totalitarianism.)

The tyrants of lore had competition—that is another distinguishing factor between now and then, and is probably the most compelling reason the current world takeover attempt may be successful—now there is no opposing force other than a handful of ragtag shrews, us. In the past the shrew forces were much more convincing, generally having millions of people engaged with a rather formidable military might.

Who knows what would have happened if the allies did not defeat Hitler in 1945 (check out the fascinating book Fatherland for some entertaining, yet chilling, speculation along those lines). This current “Great Reset” can run its course unhindered until individual people, en masse, wake up and stop it.

The Soviet Union, since the revolution in 1917, was hell bent on converting the rest of the world to Marxism. Focusing on unions worldwide where they believed they had the greatest chance to bring forth a worker’s unification globally.

They had a few successes along the way, but ultimately the world’s love affair with personal wealth and consumerism defeated the Communist’s “worker” ideology, which was equality and fair wages in the workplace—you know: “from each according to his abilities, for each according to his needs.”

Obviously still prominent the world over, violence and military aggression has been the mainstream of imperialism. Although the Soviets were engaged in their fair share of forceful takeover, they relied more on toppling governments and creating regime shifts, which has also been a favourite method of the United States’ CIA.

We all know Hitler’s and the National Socialist’s strategies were primarily militaristic—goose-stepping boots on the ground worked best for them. We are not going to see much of that tactic in this particular takeover (famous last words).

As said before, the takeover will be relatively subtle, although there will be a time, toward the “end game” (or maybe a few contemporary incidents scattered here and there) where dissidents may be killed Stalin-style—covertly and discreetly (the famous “disappearing act,”) or hauled off to concentration camps for “indoctrination” (does the mysterious death of Kary Mullis ring a bell?).

You have to give it them, they have been very clever with this whole virus nonsense—and all the things happening around it. People have no idea who the real enemy is. Their tactics are much more psychological than even political or ideological.

Although we do see the ideological creeping in with these major shifts in morals, family values, “what it means to be a good person,” the Cancel Culture, Critical Race Theory, BLM, transphobia, etc. Don’t fool yourself, that is all part of the agenda to render all of us whacked, dazed, and confused, and it is working.

Obviously I am only scratching the surface here. Sit back and enjoy the ride if you are too old and tired to pick up the pitchfork and take to the streets.

Dr Frankenstein is definitely making a new monster up there on the hill, right under all of our noses, and “we the people” are the only ones who can stop him before the monster stops us, permanently.

About the Author:

Todd Hayen is a registered psychotherapist practicing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He holds a PhD in depth psychotherapy and an MA in Consciousness Studies. He specializes in Jungian, archetypal, psychology. Todd also writes for his own substack, which you can read here

Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.