“A deceitful man stirs up dissension”

When I was still at primary school, for a brief spell I became a behavioural psychologist. I must have been 10 or 11 when I and my friend Simon started discussing the crazes that intermittently swept through schools in those days. What set them going?

Conkers was easily explained, because it was seasonal. Likewise snowball-fights. But what about yo-yos, marbles or dinky car racing? We wondered if it might be possible to start a craze deliberately, and we decided it was about time for paper darts to come round again. And we were entirely successful. For several days running we made paper darts and ostentatiously threw them around during break, and probably before class, too.

Our friends soon picked it up, and without any further input from us, in about a week the whole school had become aeronautical engineers. It may not have shown me what starts crazes usually, but it did teach me that an influential person (Simon and I were senior figures by that time) can manufacture one deliberately. If I’d been a little more mentally mature, I’d have deduced that most people are imitators, not inventors. But then if I’d been a little more mature, I might have become a political manipulator with that knowledge. There are plenty of those around.

Nero stirred up hatred of Christians to cover up the deliberate burning of Rome to enable imperial vanity projects.

Whatever the real motives of the Nazi leaders were for antisemitism, they were not shared by most of the people before the party propaganda apparatus started the craze. True, the average German may, perhaps, have had some vague residual prejudice that the Jews had crucified Jesus. In Berlin, where a third of German Jews lived, perhaps there was some jealousy of visible Jewish businesses in a time of great post-war poverty. But that doesn’t break windows or bones.

It took the deliberate and persistent fomenting of hatred against the whole race – not just the rich – to lead to the Holocaust. How much of that was (in actuality) Nazi ideological racism? It’s there in Mein Kampf of course, but that book was a public manifesto for the party. I am no scholar of the period, but judging by the looted art treasures and the trains full of bullion confiscated from Jews, I have a suspicion that demonising an entire people was done, at least in part, to make it politically easier for the party elite to rob a rich minority of their treasure. If they had encouraged hatred only of wealthy Jews, the rabble would, perhaps, have demanded their fair share of the booty. And elites don’t care about the rabble, either. Needless to say, only the most degenerate reptiles would act so murderously, and corrupt their people to do so, merely for selfish gain.

In other words, if elites seem to be encouraging the scapegoating of certain groups, there is a strong chance that they have ulterior and base motives, and that those masses encouraged to scapegoat them are not to be made aware of the real reasons.

An absolutely textbook example of this is has been the demonisation of the unvaccinated during COVID, because it is so evidently irrational, unless one has already become unhinged by the propaganda. In fact, even more than Nazi antisemitism, it is so irrational that anyone in a position of influence who invokes it reveals themselves to be part of the elite cabal, and a degenerate.

Just to remind you of the science, even before the COVID vaccines were showing themselves to be totally unable to prevent transmission, persecuting the unvaccinated made no sense This was particularly so in countries where nearly all the vulnerable, and most of the rest, had already been jabbed. Herd immunity does not rely on 100% vaccination, ever. But when, many months ago now, the claim that vaccines could halt the spread of COVID fell apart, the whole “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” vaccine-passport, and mandatory injection nonsense became entirely divorced from reality. Yet it continues to this day across the world.

With persistent propaganda, it becomes as easy to believe that well-informed senior physicians are selfish anti-vaxx nutters as it was, a century ago, to believe that your friendly middle-class neighbour was, in reality, a rapacious miser with squalid personal habits. Most people – as we have learned to the world’s cost these last two years – are imitators, not inventors.

But why would the powers that be – revealed by their own pronouncements to include the politicians, social media censors, press barons, tycoons, philanthro-capitalists and academics (the intelligence services keep their role unpronounced) – persist against all the evidence in turning the unvaccinated into an underclass? Why do they label them, fine them, confiscate their goods, intern them, use riot police to assault them and treat them in so many ways as previous regimes treated racial minorities?

The pre-COVID simulations I referred to in my last post provide most of the answers, straight from the horse’s mouth. Intimidating the unvaccinated is intended to maximise the uptake of vaccines, and the motive for that is clearly not to do with ending a pandemic, but with maximising profit. That is shown by the policy, in the simulations, of suppressing any information about adverse effects or lack of vaccine benefit, because the vaccine itself, not disease prevention, is the end. As I said, these people are degenerates.

Likewise, you may have heard the suggestion that eliminating the unvaccinated also eliminates the control group, which alone would enable an assessment of cost v benefit. This idea is borne out by the way that the vaccine trials were unblinded after the first three months. Ostensibly (in the initial trial reports) this was because the vaccines were so effective that it would be unethical to deny them to all. But that was proven to be fraudulent by the tardily-revealed full trial data, and in any case premature unblinding is an unscientific trick that Anthony Fauci has been performing since the AIDS crisis in order to cover up ineffective and toxic pharmaceuticals.

Now vaccines, whilst a worthy end in themselves to unscrupulous and degenerate profiteers, may not be the final goal. A great part of the emphasis in the aforementioned simulations appeared to be coercion and control as ends in themselves, in the best 1984 tradition. The unvaccinated individual is an individual who has not complied, and is therefore living “misinformation” to be scrubbed from view one way or the other.

Yet a third factor is that mandatory vaccines were always linked to vaccine passports, which being interpreted, is the “human right” (in the Newspeak of ID2020) to become a universal digital identity trackable via social media, CCTV facial recognition, digital financial transactions and smart-phones, and cancellable at the will of the state for non-compliance with its aims. You will avoid incredulity over this by remembering that all these were used both after the incursion into the US Capitol, and during the Canadian trucker’s protest.

One by one the countries with vaccine passports are being forced to abandon them because they are unjustifiable even to the indoctrinated – one hopes this denotes a collapse of the whole narrative rather than a strategic readjustment. But the very history of “the unvaccinated” shows that our attitudes are being moulded by a ruthless, immoral and degenerate crowd, which is extremely worrying when you realise that that crowd means “all the rulers and influencers of the free world.”

“Strategic readjustment” leads on to the latest scapegoating exercise, that of the Russians. Nothing, nowadays, gets into the news by accident. Hate speech against Muslims, for example, is so heinous that it is not reported, and even in the resulting court cases is circumlocuted in hushed tones. But our press now gleefully reports any hate speech against Russians: not only death-threats against Vladimir Putin (which might be understandable were we at war with Russia, which we are not), but the cancellation of Tchaikovsky concerts and Dostoyevsky college courses, the boycotting of Russian restaurants, and calls to expel all Russians from various “democratic” nations.

Make no mistake – the fact that these things are widely reported is a clear indication that they are not signs of spontaneous grass-roots indignation, or even bigotry, but are deliberate signals sent out by a degenerate elite – in fact, by the same degenerate elite that invented the “Unclean Unvaxxed.”

Apart from proving the complete moral bankruptcy of our international leaders, what does this show? What is the real motive for inventing the craze that the imitators are encouraged to follow? The most logical, if insane, motive would be to ramp up support for war against Russia. I would like to say that none of those in power are that mad, but I’ve been living through state-run insanity for two years now. We’re almost at the stage where the outbreak of nuclear war would elicit no more of a shrug than mad EU plans for energy independence in one year.

To be honest, I think (and I hope it’s not just wishful thinking) that the real answer may be that the global elite is simply desperate, because its simulations have been wrongfooted by too much popular opposition (a certain percentage of the population are inventors rather than imitators, and that’s easy to miss if you assume they’re all stupid sheep). And if that weren’t enough, it appears that a significant world power is now refusing to go along with the globalist playbook. It’s as if they are trying demonisation of all things Russian because it’s the most powerful weapon they have without getting their hands dirty.

My provisional reading of the situation (before MI6 or somebody shuts me down) is that the cabal attempted to hide the failure of the vaccines and the increasing protest movements by the tried and tested method of triggering an international crisis. It’s a ploy that worked for a few weeks with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, at a high cost to all involved. But I don’t think it was supposed to go beyond distracting brinkmanship, until the Western bluff was called.

Closed pipelines would have helped the globalist cause, if it had weakened Russia and brought it into the Great Reset. Instead, it has weakened the Great Reset, it seems to me, and further self-induced wounds have been caused by the other sanctions and the failure to read the political signals from non-European powers which have begun to see through our imperialism and glimpse an alternative. Even the censorship of Russian media plays into the hands of a skeptical public far larger than when the powers began pulling the COVID stunt – more of us now know that censorship happens because censors have something to hide.

If it were about morality, our governments would be condemning Saudi Arabia in Yemen rather than arming it. They would be aghast against America at the revelation of its bioweapons labs on Ukrainian soil. They would cut links with China over the genocide of Uyghurs, and with many other countries over the persecution of Christians, and with Canada over its fascist treatment of free citizens. Indeed, they’d have long ago cut links with Ukraine over its corrupt oligarchs and sex-trafficking, if Europe and the US weren’t profiting from both.

But it’s not about morality – it’s about power and control, just as my generation of a darts craze was – thank the Lord the other kids got bored with paper darts in time to stop me thinking I really was a powerful person.

About Jon Garvey

Training in medicine (which was my career), social psychology and theology. Interests in most things, but especially the science-faith interface. The rest of my time, though, is spent writing, playing and recording music.
This entry was posted in Politics and sociology. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to “A deceitful man stirs up dissension”

  1. Robert Byers says:

    Interesting as I saw in my Canadian playground fads come suddenly. like yo yos, skateboarding, both came and went. Writing down the names of planes that flew over etc.
    Yet your case shows how the world is greatly run. Small numbers of forceful people persuade the rest. Good or bad. Its always just a few. Demovracy is meant to make the people/majority, the forceful people. Otherwise four Beatles chaged everything or some 300 British musicians changed the music of the English Speaking world. If they had all been on the same plane in 1963 nothing would of changed.
    Byb the way Opposition to the jews was opposition to a foreign people/even possibly a race eho had aceived and rewards of acheiment out or proportion to thier 1%. say 10-20% depending on the area. Nothing to do with religion or a few businesses. it was a historic issue .Plus accusations they used thier greater power to do this or that and push communinism as this overthrew national boundaries to make a working man civilization and destroy thus the german mans place in germany and europe.
    The holocause was to revenge on a enemy as they saw it plus maybe seeing a constant threat. its weird in its great goals and suspicious they might of thought the jews could rul;e europe. Anyways though it was just a other native population murdering a percieved conquorer. As it the Indians had murdered the spanish soon after thier conquest in the americas.
    it was murder but they easily made a persuasive case. To day in britain they speak against the Englishman , the whiteman, the man. they accuse and act against him to take frpm him position, wealth, etc etc. i doubt theybwill round you up and murder you small forceful ones do hate you.
    uts always a few people. Remember the good ones, Martin Luther, Ghandi, Reagan but remember the bad ones. Hitler, Putin, truedeau, Biden,

Leave a Reply