Crisis Update - History Doesn't Shout, It Whispers

Scandalous $5M scheme turns people Into censorship bots

Dec 06, 2022

∙ Paid

Govs offer $5m to correct ‘harmful posts’ by your friends
They seek a single, unified narrative - money no object
Free speech under attack from gov, national security, academia and media
Without contrary opinions who can weigh relevance or context?
Historical perspective - past events can tell us how things are likely to unfold
Read between the lines - now more than ever

(2,500 words or 12 minutes of your company.)

Dec 6, 2022 (Updated, Mar 1, 2024)

“If history repeats, why can’t anyone predict the future?,” asks the cartoonist Scott Adams.

It's not about "history repeating" — despite Shirley Bassey tremendous vocals. [1]

See what has been done in the past, in the name of religion or the greater good, and have a keen ear for what powerful interests are saying or researching or publishing today.

I’m going to tell you about another woman, who predicted the assassination attempt on president Ronald Reagan, and the successful execution of Robert F Kennedy. She did not use a crystal ball.

History does not tell us the future but it provides a perspective that sharpens our view of the present. This is called ‘historical perspective', as opposed to history which is the study of the past.

“Historical perspective refers to understanding a subject in light of its earliest phases and subsequent evolution,” says Barbara Lawrence in a paper on the topic.

As an example, reviewing responses to the Great Depression using documents of the time is historical research. Using what we know about the Depression to assess how we’d confront such an event today is historical perspective. Not only does the topic come alive but it gives us insights into the motives of politicians, bankers and corporate owner-investors. [2]

This might be compared to the visual phenomenon of parallax, a metaphor for why two people see the same event differently.

It’s not what you know; it’s how you know or see it — even an insider may not comprehend the implications of an endeavor if he or she has no grasp of historical perspective.

Brussell sprouts

I still listen to the broadcasts of the late Mae Brussell. Though she died in 1986 her insights on World Watchers are as fresh as when her audience tuned in to Pacifica Radio.

Mae’s voice, though slightly tense and febrile, has none of the declamatory character that is everywhere nowadays, from the strident daytime networks to the alt media — on the one hand insisting that “it’s our job to control exactly what people think” [3]; on the other, beseeching the audience to “wake up, people!”

This is partly because she did not see herself as the only one to see through the smoke and mirrors — she was very much a collaborator and her army of citizen researchers called themselves the Brussell Sprouts.

As someone who became conscious in the seventies and eighties — in the sense of following domestic events and geopolitics on a regular basis and contrasting the narrative with my, admittedly privileged, lived experience — Mae challenged what I thought I knew.

As a historian by education and a journalist by trade, Mae blossoms in my mind and heart. Today she stands tall as a master of historical perspective.

Paper, scissors

The remarkable thing is that she worked almost entirely from newspapers. The Internet was still young and was confined to the military and associated universities. Cutting clips from newspapers and stashing them in filing cabinets may sound primitive, but those librarian skills are the cornerstone of an organised mind - without which so much information is a wash.

Perspective gave her the ability to smell a rat, to spot inconsistency and, more presciently, to feel the tension that betrays conflict, rivalry and personalities on a collision course.

Two days before the assassination attempt on president Ronald Reagan, Brussell forecast that Bush senior, Alexander Haig and Reagan were coming to blows and would soon try to kill each other.

Fifteen years earlier, Mae had warned Robert F Kennedy’s mother, Rose, the week before his assassination. No soothsayer she; but a beady eye, ever on the watch for machinations.

Why mention it?

The insights of a Mae Brussell are only possible with freedom of speech — not only her freedom to express her opinion once formed, but also to form it: the freedom to share, discuss; to stoke an argument and invite contrary opinions. That is how you stand up a hypothesis or knock it down.

By the same token, it makes the culture of censorship in government, national security, academia and the media terminally dangerous.

We see it most clearly in the absence of debate over science. The establishment is promoting a “whole of society” single narrative — Da Science becomes a monolith — and anything that counters it is mis- or disinformation.

The attack on freedom of speech parallels that waged upon science and even innovation. We cannot progress without challenging the dominant narrative.

The proposals for a “deep systemic and structural restructuring of our world” from Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum should ring alarm bells.

They may be real; they may be distractions. The New Normal, the Great Reset and the appeals to Build Back Better have one thing in common: centralization, censorship and control.

Fish swimming free

The Great Reset would sabotage invention and innovation which cannot happen in a centalized monopoly. Who know what the oiler-bankers are thinking, but their actions suggest they have enough technology to live without us — no melting pot of humanity or flow of ideas required.

So much for Progressivism. But then Progressives were always about blunting the edges of Liberal Capitalism rather than seeking to raise society to a higher level.

Money and Circus form a duo in which the finance capitalists buy time to thrive.

The disconnect

The loudest voice proclaiming a new Industrial Revolution is Klaus Schwab of the WEF. Yet watch his public relations marketing spiel, and pause. What he says does not accord with what we see.

He talks of equity, yet there is no great leveling — the soaring wealth of the one per cent suggests quite the reverse.

Schwab insists body and digital identity combine - but this is Rockefeller 101, dating from the family’s interest in the depopulation (the Population Council and the Kissinger Memorandum NSSM-200) and the patenting DNA (the Biodiversity Convention of 1992 and its overwhelming focus on genetics).

These projects are easy to see if you use historical perspective and compare what these people have done in the recent past, with what they say about us:

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill… The real enemy then is humanity itself.” (The First Global Revolution (Council of the Club of Rome, 1991) — a sequel to The Limits To Growth (1972))

These people are figments of a dastardly, cartoonish plot only to people who refuse stubbornly to open their eyes and senses to what is before them.

The good cop-bad cop act is a distraction — Schwab talking of lifting humans to a higher plane, and Yuval Harari dismissing the mass of humanity as “useless classes” with their myths of free will and rights derived from God.

It distracts from the terrible creaking sound from the stock market, pensions and social security, hospital on the point of collapse, and food and fuel shortages.

These crises are not accidental; you cannot Build Back Better without first destroying. he city streets become dangerous — a direct consequence of defund the police and the open borders, the Soros-funded district attorneys and electoral manipulation.

It is a psychological operation to convince the public that they’ve lost before they begin. If already defeated, why resist? Just give in to bigger government — why not one-world government?

The technique was laid out in the 1980s by the KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, who took the name of Thomas Schuman and who has never been proved as anything other than honest, honourable and spot-on accurate in his description of a deliberate, four-stage campaign of demoralization, destabilization, crisis and normalization. [4]

Even if he were a spectre, and his boogeyman a mirage, he described the process that is unfolding before us precisely in line with his analysis.

Staggering cash

The sums of money being wagered on software projects to bully the population into “right think” are staggering.

The U.S. government along with the media, including Gates and the Knight Foundation, are lavishing $5 million on a software tool that will make it easier for ordinary people to confront family and friends over “harmful” posts.

The sum is peanuts, for them. The implications are telling.

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to Moneycircus to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.