the making of an evil empire
Post on 12-Aug-2015
78 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
The Making Of An Evil EmpireBy Ian R Thorpe
12 March, 2013
Evil is not a word I would normally use, I am not religious and so do not believe
in ideas like the forces of good and bad being engaged in a constant battle for our
souls (the Manichean dichotomy).. Neither do I accept the concept of sin, offences
against a moral code handed down from a divine being, anwhich idea on which the
moral framework for followers of the Abrahamic religions is based (we have a
responsibility to do the best thing we can according to circumstances but to fail to
live up to impossibly high standards is not wrong). If I think of things as evil at all, it
is in terms of extreme selfishness.
Selfishness is often disguised as morality of course, to observe how that works
we only have to pay attention to the actions and attitudes of the politically correct
left. Such people love to give the impression that they unselfishly care about
injustice and unfairness, equal rights and the environment. Analysis of their modus
operandi however reveals that their caring, politically correct posturings are selfish.
“We must all make sacrifices to save the world from climate change,” they say to
back up demands that the fossil fuel industries and all activities that depend on them
The Dark Lord
(just about all industrial and commercial activities) be shut down. Ignoring the facts
that we have no viable alternative to fossil fuels as a source of energy and the
inability of those who fear climate change to understand that wind turbines cannot
generate electricity when there is no wind, just think of the economic and social
havoc such a course would result in. The irony of one 'save-the-planet' idea, to pump
sulphur dioxide particles into the upper atmosphere to simulate a volcanic winter
which would halt rising temperatures, thus recreating the acid rain that destrored vast
tracts of forest in the northern hemisphere during the 1960s, 70s and 80s is lost on the
political activist behind the global warming scare. Their agenda is political rather
than environmental, and the end always justifies the means in their poltics.
Those left wingers who think shutting
down fossil fuel industries have obviously not
thought of the consequence (they never do.)
What is uppermost in their minds is that they
are being seen to care about the environment.
“Look at me, see what a good, caring person I
am,” is all they are really saying. The
propaganda they serve up to persuade us we
ordinary punters ought to make sacrifices
while they plunder the tax breaks and subsidies
available to those who invest in schemes that depend on the wind blowing and the
sun shining twenty four hours a day is juvenile and sentimental, designed to appeal to
the fearful and those who crave only security.
Their attitude to crime and criminals is similar. If we could believe, as the
politically correct left do, that all destructive and malicious behaviour is merely a
product of bad environment, bad upbringing, mental illness or psychosis then solving
social problems would be easy. Unfortunately, as with climate change, the left do not
have the arguments to win hearts and minds among the masses , the do – gooder
approach to dealing with deviancy does not play well to the public who want to see
people who pose a threat to public safety banged up.
being seen to care.
Deviance in the name of misguided “profit” or “status” is often more acceptable
to the public; as long as there is a reason we can easily understand and grasp. The
investment banker whose Ponzi scheme steals millions from rich, greedy people is
considered a loveable rogue but fraudsters who rip off the meagre savings of old
people are despised.
What frightens the average citizen
in the developed world today is not the
act of criminality but it criminality
without easily definable reason. What
the new elite are unwilling or unable to
face (probably because it throws doubt
on their claims of omnipotence) is the
reality that some people hurt others not
because their parents neglected them,
they were bullied at school, or because
they developed a psychological deficiency that controls their actions,or that, failed by
the education system and made to feel worthless by a society that has too many
poorly educated people and too few jobs they take refuge in the instant gratification
of impulses, but that there are and always have been many people who fully and
consciously enjoy causing physical, mental or material harm to others. Such a
mindset cannot be scientifically analyse or glibly explained away and it will never fit
the narrative that everything can be controlled by scientists.
Thanks to politically correct
attitudes our society is desperate to
make excuses for the monsters of our
era, to find reasons why 'we' and not
'they' are to blame. I have often
joked that Politically Correct
thinking is based on a belief that if
we all join hands and sing Kumbaya
Who would break a butterfly on the wheel (Alexander Pope)
Some people will not sing Kumbaya
the world can become perfect. Unrealistic as that is, perhaps to those emotionally
needy people who are desperate to be seen as caring, concerned individuals, it is a
necessary self deception because they would rather not acknowledge the possibility
that there is a dark side to humanity as a whole, that if left unchecked, a certain type
of person could, by exploiting the ruthlessness of their amoral nature and taking
advantage of the desrire to be accepted among the majority, take control in a
deliberate and calculated way.
This is why the greatest crimes of our time are so often invisible to the public.
Hidden in plain sight, the crimes are simply ignored by those who will not see what
they do not want to see. The idea, for example, that international financiers and
political elites would purposely create economic disparity, social chaos, and global
war out of a desire for a centralized global government that would endow members of
the elite with levels of power over their fellow humans never known is simply too
great a shock for many to handle. Yet all around us we can see evidence that a global
elite are working towards gaining such power. Driven by a level of selfishness that
can only be described as evil and a warped sense of intellectual superiority these
elitists have no problem with persuading themselves that they know far better what is
good for us as individuals than we ever can ourselves. And what is good for us is a
world in which we surrender the power to think and act for ourselves in return for the
certainty and security of living in an ant colony society.
Surely, the terrible events throughout our modern history, wars, genocides,
pandemics, famines, the great climate change scare, are merely the result of random
coincidence and human error…right? Wrong.
Unfortunately, when we open our eyes and examine the evidence this is not the
case. In fact, the majority of catastrophic humanitarian tragedies can be linked
directly back certain social and economic policies devised and promoted by a
particular subset of people, who use their positions of influence in supra - national
agencies such as the United Nations and the World Bank for ill purpose, and
knowingly engineer calamity not just for personal gain, but to reinforce the grip of
their elite class on global power.
People of a Libertarian mindset refer to this group as “Globalists” or, with tongue
in cheek, The New World Order. They permeate the upper echelons of national
government but seldom hold elected office, and they have a culture that is entirely
separate and disconnected from our own. If one studies their literature, their
initiatives, and their motives, he would discover another world, driven by a
frightening brand of quasi religious fanaticism for advancing their agenda of
establishing global totalitarian govrnment. Here are some of the character traits and
beliefs that make these people easy to identify…
The Elitists' Utopia
The Global Elitie tend to see
themselves as a separate breed of
human being; a class of superior beings
with superior intellectual faculties, a
different breed born to “rule” over the
rest of us. In physical appearance they
are often uninspiring, typical wimps or
nerds.
Philosophically they often espouse the teachings of Plato’s Republic, and the
The Evil Empire
Higher beings: The stairway to Utopia
concept of the “Philosopher Kings”. They believe that some men and women are
endowed with a genetic predisposition to leadership, and that the average person does
not have the intelligence to determine his or her own destiny. Thus a hierarchic
society is the only viable social model. Plato's Republic is a fine book of
philosophical writing but we should be mindful that Plato lived in a society whose
economy was built on slavery.
The global elitists see the rest of humanity as a blank canvas, and themselves as
the artists. We are to be “molded” and our indivisual personalities and collective
social and cultural mores are to be manipulated.
In reality, the new elite are no smarter than the rest of us (weeeeell, except for the
Politically Correct 'useful idiots' who are willing to vote for their own enslavement
maybe). Nor are they better qualified than we to decide what is in our best interests,
the best interests of an ordinary individual are seldom served by allowing a self
appointed elite to make decisions for the group that only individuals can make for
themselves. A surprising number of global elitists inherited positions of wealth and
influence from aristocratic ancestors or dynasty building industrialists and banking
families, yet in spite of social changes through the twentieth century their privileged
background automatically leads them to assumptions of superiority. This is no
different to the fallacious assumptions of the old aristogracy and the stratified
societies of ancient civilisations. And yet the new elite call their political philosophy
'progressive'.
The elite's ability to mould society is not due to their assumed intellectual
superiority (Many of their decisions are gobsmackingly stupid) but derive entirely
from their dominance of financial markets and complete lack of morality. If they
were not in the top .1% of the worlds rich, they would be treated like common
criminals for their behaviour, but sadly, in our day and age money often buys undue
influence.
The ascendency of this elite, The Scientific Dictatorship that U S President
Dwight Eisenhower warned of in his farewell speech in 1960 (video of full address
-youTube) was predicted early in the twentieth century. At that time a surprising
number of leading left wing intellectuals sympathised with ideas such as eugenics,
selective breeding, population control and social engineering programmes such as
direction of labour. Here are a few examples:
“Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and
ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs
would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the
practice of eating mutton.” — Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society
(1953) pp. 49-50.
“Speaking of a future at most only decades away, an experimenter in intelligence
control asserted, ‘I foresee a time when we shall have the means and therefore,
inevitably, the temptation to manipulate the behavior and intellectual functioning of
all the people through environmental and biochemical manipulation of the brain.’”
— Zbigniew Brezinski, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technotronic Era
1970.
Elitists are easily persuaded that conscience is a hindrance to success, instead of a
worthwhile virtue. They knowingly and deliberately abandon morality because they
see it as an obstacle that stands in the way of getting what they want. Conscience,
however, never quite disappears in anyone. In order to reconcile their wretched
mindset with that distant nagging sensation of guilt, they claim that their actions are
“for the greater good of the greater number”. They desperately want to believe that
they are serving the future of mankind, that enslavement of the masses and
population reduction are necessary for the survival of humanity and that we should
appreciate their leadership, even though the things they do, engineering wars and
conflicts for instance, seem far more harmful than helpful.
They further attempt to avoid facing their own dysfunction by trying to elicit
criminality in others. If they can convince the masses that morality is “relative” and
that right and wrong are subject to “interpretation”. Once the majority can be
convinced to ignore the inner voice that determines right and wrong then their amoral
monstrosity, the evil of utter selfishness, becomes normal, even preferable. Here are
the thoughts of a moral relativist:
“The tenth rule of the ethics of rules and means is that you do what you can with
what you have and clothe it in moral arguments. …the essence of Lenin’s speeches
during this period was “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for
reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the
bullet.” Saul Alinsky. (Barack Obama taught the amoral philosophies of Alinsky as a
community organizer in Chicago. Hillary Clinton made Alinsky the topic of her
undergraduate thesis. In Alinsky's philosophy 'the end always justifies the means'.)
An Illusion Of Collectivism
Globalists are not collectivists themselves but avid collectors of material wealth
and social kudos. In personal behaviour they are usually at the opposite end of the
spectrum to collectivists, preferring an aberrant form of self indulgent individualism
to the asceticism of true collectivists such as Mohandas K Gandhi. Many see crimes
like paedophilia, rape, even murder as being justified by their superiority, they cannot
be governed by the same rules as apply to 'little people'. A solipsistic attitude enables
them to see the most reprehensible crimes as being justified by their desire. They
even see conscience as a restriction on their personal freedom. What they do not
grasp is that the inherent nature of conscience is a gift, one which has so far kept
humanity from total self-destruction. Conscience is not a burden but a shield.
The elitist’s insane ideal of self indulgence
without self discipline is in contract to the
collectivist lifestyle they constantly promote yet
they see no contradiction in admonish
individualism or self interest in common people
as “selfish” or “narcissistic”. Elitists see no irony
in demanding the highest standards from others Behind the mask of collectivism
while observing no moral constraints on their freedom tp pleasure themselves.
People often confuse “collectivism” with “community”. This is caused by a lack
of understanding as well as a lack of experience. Community is a voluntary gathering
of individuals for the purpose of mutual aid. Collectivism is the gathering of people
by threat of force or loss, for the purpose of consolidating power into the hands of a
few. It is the act of destroying individualism in the name of “protecting the group”. In
the west, particularly the English speaking nations, we have a disappearing sense of
real community because our communities, family units, culture and traditions have
been under attack while the “advantages” of collectivism and multiculturalism are
being promoted in a flood of propaganda generated by useful idiots in the media on
behalf of the global elite.
If the population can be convinced that they are devoid of inherent qualities and
characteristics, and that their environment is the totality of their existence, then they
will hand over all power to anyone who promises them the best possible
surroundings. That is to say, when we have no faith in our own individualism and
self-responsibility, we will automatically seek protection, usually from a nanny state
or apparently benign dictatorship. This process of wrenching self determination from
the populace has the goal of World Governance and total dominance as President
Illustration 1: The gathering of people by threat, for the purpose of consolidating power into the hands of a few.
Eisenhower and many others have warned.
The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less
than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate
the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This
system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world
acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and
conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements
in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central
banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank…sought to
dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate
foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to
influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business
world. — Carroll Quigley [CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton], Tragedy And Hope.
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will
recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea
after all.” — Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted
in Time Magazine, July 20th, 1992.
Elitists are very keen on use of the “noble lie”; a lie employed to attain a
“positive goal”. In their view, citizens lack the capacity to understand the bigger
political and social picture, and so, we must be lied to in order to make us do what is
best for ourselves. (Recall members of the UK Labour government and the Obama
administration speaking of making global warming scepticism a crime on a par with
holocaust denial, justifying this curtailment of free speech with the excuse that
'ordinary people do not understand what is at stake' We did understand what was at
stake, a carbon tax that would not solves the problem because it is not caused by
CO2 emissions, but would drive the majority of people into poverty.)
Of course, their version of what is best for our culture always seems to include
first and foremost what is best for them.
The noble lie is a logical fallacy of such monumental immorality it could only
have been dreamed up by politicians or scientists. If you need to lie to people in order
to get them to accept your ideas, then there must be something terribly wrong with
your ideas. Ideas with vitality and honesty do not need to be “sold” to the public
through chicanery; the truth takes on a life of its own. Only ideas harmful to the
interests of the wider population need a foundation of lies in order to take root (“Tell
the lie big enough and repeat it often enough and it will become the truth” Josef
Goebbels, Chief of Propaganda in Hitler's Third Reich. But it wasn't just him:)
“We are at present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious
force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world. All
the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands.” —
Professor Arnold Toynbee, in a June 1931 speech before the Institute for the Study of
International Affairs in Copenhagen.
“Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to
have.” — Richard Salent [former CBS News president].
RELATED POSTS:
Agenda 21: Wyoming man faces $75,000 a day fines for building a garden pond
Feeding The Monster
When Mainstream Parties Say The British Are Xenophobes They Are Lying
Our New Unhappy Lords
Slaves To The Machine
A Manufactured Singularity
N W O destabilizes Ukraine
Elite Plan For Global Takeover
The Folly Of Trying To Inflate Away Debt
Debt Threat To Civilisation
Naked finance, how the debt crisis was engineered
Sacrificing the future to save the Euro
Interesting Times
Global Government – Scientific Dictatorship
Holy City (poem)
Chasing bubbles (poem)
Volunteers for slavery(All pictures Bing Images)
top related