Übermensch or Lawgiver: Who Rules Among Us?
And why there is only one party.
Aug 14, 2021
Politics is fascinating at the moment. If you look at any major country, Russia and China included, there is one dominant political force, a single party of government.
Yet the partisan rhetoric has never been stronger and the media tells us the population is divided into two or more camps of antagonists. They may not be equal in mass. They may be recidivists or crazies but the divide is visceral.
The United States is our poster child, though the same can be observed in countries that don't even claim to be democratic or multi-party systems.
In Washington they still talk of Trump, though he's been far from the capital for the best part of a year. The January 6 incursion into the Capitol building is held up as evidence of palpable terror. The talk is of white supremacists as it has been since 2016.
Yet look at the real political divide on the Hill: there barely is any. The majority of Republican Congressmen repeat the Jan 6th narrative, even though the FBI can't hide the fact that the protagonists included its own provocateurs. The Supreme Court justices appointed by Trump refuse to hear his challenge to the election results and this week failed to stand up for young students against syringe-toting deans.
Most of the colleges and universities that plan to require students to submit to an mRNA/adenoviral DNA shot are in Democratic states, about 730 campuses according to the Chronicle of Higher Education. At state level there is the appearance of divide though most Republican governors are not as resistant to the Covid narrative as their supporters want to believe.
Will the Republican states hold out, as thousands of self-identified patriots sell their homes and move to Texas and Florida, or will the Constitutionalists ultimately be deceived?
If the partisan divide in large degree is fake, how did that come to be?
It certainly looks like politics is toxic and the toxin is injected into every part of the Covid debate, from mask mandates to vaccine passports. Many more Democratic voters have had the mRNA gene jab according to polls, which in this climate of state-controlled media must be taken with a large grain of salt.
The subliminal message is that your political opponent is not just obnoxious. He is infections.
Those who've accepted the mRNA are encouraged by media to regard any who refuse the shot as a physical danger. For their part those who resist mRNA are told the vaccinated could be "shedding" spike proteins or that the vaccine itself is transmissible. Many of those stories come from the new media, part of which is doubtless controlled by state propagandists and manipulators. Why do I say this: because all those U.S., Israeli, British and Australian troops assigned to desk duty for their local version of the 77th Brigade or 13th Signals are not likely to be sitting on their hands.
Psychological manipulation is a key tool of government nowadays, as the psychologists in the UK's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours (SPI-B) have admitted. Laura Dodsworth has the details in her book A State of Fear: How the UK government weaponised fear during the Covid-19 pandemic, published in May 2021.
What effect has this on citizens as political animals and supporters of one party or tendency? We struggle to remain impervious though we are urged to regard those we disagree with as 'other'.
This works subliminally. It is a reflex that closes your ears to person X before they can contaminate you with their ideas. The term dog whistle was invented to suggest you can identify a non-person by their signals and markers, even before they say anything of substance.
This serves two roles: it protects the perpetrators by making people scared to challenge them, or to be seen as members of the outside group. Secondly, it creates the illusion of political pluralism, that there is an opposition to this plan to reduce us to biometric slaves living shriveled lives.
Let's remind ourselves what we are fighting, distilled to its essence:
• this is a project by the ultra-rich to make social divisions permanent
• it is not about a quick buck but rather it is centuries in the planning
• it is an ideology, pursued through corporate and political power. Its root is social
• these people hate the mass of men and women in equal measure
• their eugenics stems from their own genetic faults. Psychopathy is genetic
• their hatred stems from emotional and physical abuse. Damage runs in families
• the rich in-breed to preserve their wealth and that amplifies these traits
• they gravitate to banking as finance crystalizes wealth and power
• banking is, therefore, the basis of their plan for ID2020 and enslavement
That is what's happening in a nutshell. If it helps to persuade friends and family, please share this letter.
The faults of the poor are called weaknesses and ascribed to bad genes, to be removed by eugenics. In contrast, dynasties see their emotional deformities as character-building which they have turned into a system of control over centuries through institutions like the English boarding schools (I attended an English boarding school and can attest to the techniques of physical and psychological manipulation).
Coldness and lack of empathy comes from their genetic psychopathy, which they turn into a trait to be admired and imitated. Boarding schools separate children from their parents — my brother was sent off at age six — and train them to repress emotions.
Their hatred for others is emotional and comes from abuse. They turn this into a trait to be imposed on their servants: forcing troops to abuse the natives; to coldly go where no man has gone before.
It is easy to see how the British end up at the centre of theories about global control. There is no doubt they have tried, through Rhodes and Rothschild and Milner — molding scholars and promoting compliant academics, policymakers and journalists to this day.
That middle name is key, because Rothschild is emblematic of the evolution of society. The historian Niall Ferguson in his work, The House of Rothschild, concludes it failed to make the leap from Europe to the United States and, lacking a foothold, saw its pre-eminence wane. Is that so, or is it a convenient disguise, deception being the art of business and war? When you have such wealth it comes with certain influence. It would be remarkable if the House did not use it to shape society to its benefit.
The psychological profile of Rothschild is key because it epitomises the historic wrestling of new wealth and old, the name that changes, the star that rises, the wheel of life that turns — you don't have to look far to see how strongly the symbolism resonates.
The battle of cohorts for dominance is central to this present crisis and, even more, the familial way in which many of the players have recognized their own kind and combined forces to subvert the populace.
Call it what you will: cultural identity, corporate tribalism, family loyalty, ideological identity. Family and ethnicity are central to our current predicament — and I do not incite anyone to pick on either — because the psychology I described in the bullet points is transmitted by ties and bloodlines, and it also operates by obligations and omerta.
The Great Reset, or Going Direct — the seizure of wealth and replacement of cash by a new form of exchange controlled by those who have hijacked the economy — is being coordinated globally, with the collaboration of politicians, journalists, academics and teachers, social workers and psychologists, corporate managers, bureaucrats, doctors and functionaries of every kind.
In a starring role at the snowy summit, pointing like heroic mountaineers in a propaganda poster, loudly proclaiming they have seen through the clouds, beyond the peaks, our path to the promised land are the bankers and financiers.
Look at the language they use: Green Horizons! BlackRock being the team that proposed to the Federal Reserve the policy of printing trillions and giving it direct to corporations (wealthy investors) to buy up assets while they crushed small business and main street with Covid lockdowns. Read the urgings of the Anglo-Canadian central banker Mark Carney. Figure out for yourself to whom he answers.
The monetary revolution benefits the bankers, has been planned by bankers and is, openly, being coordinated by bankers.
Is there someone behind this: does a bear do the proverbial in the woods? How could it not be coordinated, every which way! Bonus payments, threats, promotions and firings, censorship and blackmail up to and including murder of scientists, political leaders and vocal campaigners.
It is no coincidence, to my mind, that Jeffrey Epstein, sex trafficker and blackmailer, exited the scene in August 10, 2020, just three days after Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR test without which Event Covid could not have happened.
If I am wrong about corruption and blackmail, then my first argument surely grows stronger. If not carrots and sticks, then loyalty, ethnic and family ties. It must be one or the other, for the only other possibility is that Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Lawgiver has appeared among us, or some interplanetary wisdom descended in our midst.
In The Social Contract, Rousseau was looking for the solution to unify the will of the people. Or rather their wills, for he identified three: selfish will and the general will, to which the individual submits in order to benefit the collective. The third will is the individual identifying within a corporate group as a subset of the populace.
In a well-ordered society all the wills coincide. What, though, if individuals are deplorable, not virtuous enough and refuse to accept restrictions on their conduct agreed by the whole, and what if society clots into factions? If contemplating one's self-interest somehow fails to merge with the general will, virtuous people might identify with the general will but privately refuse to obey.
Rousseau's solution is the Lawgiver who engages in psychological manipulation. As in his treatise on education, Emile, the tutor may create the illusion of free choice while the pupil or citizen is nudged to the desired decision.
Do you see what I see? The psychologists are manipulating and nudging the populations to take experimental vaccines. The media is narrating a uniform message, without hesitation, as if all possible questions have already been answered. Opinion polls are likely manipulated in order to support the same yarn. We are in a global feedback loop in which outcomes are managed and the only information that is allowed must support those pre-determined outcomes.
The reader immediately identifies several problems: where does the Lawgiver or global tutor come from? How does he know what is good for us?
As I wrote in Journalists! What is to be done?:
Through influence activities, state ministries and agencies fill newspapers and social media with information to prod the public towards certain perceptions, behaviours and outcomes. At the same time, social media vacuums up that information on behalf of corporations and state, crunching data and feeding it into algorithims and policy decisions, schooling and policing, and the whole cycle begins again."
This only works in the role of God: if you know in advance what outcome is desirable and don’t need any objective feedback or control cohort, because you got it right first time.
Who, then, are we confronting? It is clearly more than a corporate gang. Is it a network of families who deploy their power through control of wealth and society? What is this ideology of theirs?
Do they claim to speak for the general will, Friedrich Nietzsche's Übermensch, representing the ideal goal for humanity itself? Or has Rousseau's single Lawgiver revealed the universal elixir of health, no questions needed, because he already knows all possible viruses and all the best vaccines?
Neither is a pleasant prospect. Is it any surprise that there seems to be only one political party?