It is naive to think that tyranny must necessarily be overt and recognizable. In George Orwell’s 1984, written in 1948, the omnipresence and omnipotence of ‘Big Brother’ could hardly be more conspicuous. By making oppression so blatant, however, such a government would risk mass civil unrest, the outcome of which could be unpredictable. Unless the social system were ‘watertight’ — that is, leaving no opening for rebellion — the eventual fate of its architects might involve lampposts and piano wire, à la Mussolini.
An alternative strategy was illustrated by Aldous Huxley (1894-1963) in his 1932 masterpiece, Brave New World. In this work, tyranny is more subtle and sophisticated. By means of genetic reprogramming and universal psychoactive medication, the masses happily accept the eradication of their liberties. They do not rebel because they are conditioned not to desire to do so. I can imagine how Huxley felt when, years later, he saw video footage of Jews, relaxed and smiling, as they boarded trains to World War Two ‘work camps’. The Nazi propaganda machine obviated any need for shotguns and handcuffs.
In 1958, this prescient, and beautifully-spoken, Englishman gave an interview to an American television channel (Figure 169.1). In The Mike Wallace Interview, Huxley explained his fears of a world whose entire population would, by means of mass brainwashing and coercion, accept permanent loss of freedom without being aware of it.
Figure 169.1: The foresightful Aldous Huxley, interviewed in 1958.
‘If you want to preserve your power indefinitely, you have to get the consent of the ruled.’
Copyright expired
Fast forward to 2020. Last year, the World Economic Forum (WEF), a group of unelected, supranational oligarchs, published a book entitled The Great Reset. The WEF’s aim is chilling. It uses Huxley’s novel not as a cautionary tale but as an instruction manual.
‘By 2030, you will have no freedom, no privacy, and you will be happy.’
Thus spoke Klaus Schwab, son of a Nazi — yes, really — and WEF chief. He claimed, further, that the so-called pandemic was just a fortuitous stepping stone to reach this (totalitarian) goal (Figure 169.2). Of course it was, Klaus. (See Event 2O1.)
Figure 169.2: The self-evidently arrogant Klaus Schwab believes that he and a few other unelected bigwigs have an innate, unchallengeable right to control the future of humankind.
Copyright © 2020 World Economic Forum
Since I wrote the previous article, twelve days ago, government heads from the UK to New Zealand, USA to France, have become more and more deranged. In London, Prime Minister Boris Johnson — idiotic at the best of times — threatens to introduce COVIDs (Certificates Of Vaccination Identity Documents), enabling foreign travel and access to recreational amenities to only those that have submitted to medical experimentation. Across the Atlantic, President Joe Biden announces that those that have not submitted lack basic intelligence — this from a man whose number of connected brain cells diminishes by the minute. Meanwhile, French president, the cretinous Emmanuel Macron, has extended the ban even further, and rioting on the streets of Paris has begun in earnest. Macron would do well to read late-eighteenth-century French history.
Figure 169.3: The cherished French word ‘liberté’ seems to have been wilfully forgotten by arch-hypocrite Macron, who is striving to make submission to medical experimentation a condition of employment. Qu’il vive pour le regretter.
Copyright © 2021 Singapore News Live
As I have explained previously, the demand for universal ‘vaccination’ makes no scientific sense. Natural immunity is already present and will be long lasting. Simpler, safer, cheaper medicines are readily available. Over-prescription leads inevitably to the evolution of ‘superbugs’. Infection fatality rate is a mere 0.14 to 0.15%.
The real reasoning behind mandatory injections is twofold. First, it is a pathway to universal digital social control, which I have already explicated. Second is something which has only recently occurred to me. Scientific experimentation normally requires a treatment group and a control (non-treatment) group. If a particular observation is made in the treatment group alone, then it follows that the treatment is responsible for the effect. (This is assuming that the groups are sufficiently large to be statistically significant.) However, if there is no control group, then cause and effect cannot be proven. So, if no one remains ‘unvaccinated’, then it is impossible to ascribe subsequent deaths and debilitation to the drugs. Conversely, if enough of us resist coercion, then the existence of a substantial control group will expose the truth behind these already-lethal ‘vaccines’.
This explains why the WEF’s political stooges are becoming more maniacal by the week. Their desperation is increasingly evident. Are they, as the COVID fraud unravels, fearing the Mussolini fate; or, alternatively, is free humanity a mere two or three moves from checkmate? We are compelled to discover very soon which way the balance will tip.
Finally, to someone who calls him or herself ‘Evidence’ and trolls me day after day, I say this:
First, it is unfortunate that you lack the courage to identify yourself. Second, regarding your demented rants about ‘conspiracy theorists’, I ask: who deserve more credit, those capable of asking valid questions, regardless of the conclusions reached, or those lacking the insight to notice that there are questions to be asked at all? Aldous Huxley would doubtless have dressed you in a black tunic. Ɛ: look it up.
Copyright © 2021 Paul Spradbery
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.