Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Understanding The Tactics Of Subversive Globalism

  1. #1

    Default Understanding The Tactics Of Subversive Globalism

    The major threads on Trump, here and here, are imo both true and false. Yes there is a quite real attempted coup going on and yes Trump is a criminal slime ball with historic ties to the US and Russian mobs. I maintain it is axiomatic that no President is elected who is not vetted and approved for the job by Those who do such things. As much as there is constant noise and general chaos over Trump's presidency, I maintain that the Trump presidency proceeding quite nicely, if you are a globalist. Here is an article that would agree with this way of thinking, Brandon Smith (September 12, 2018)

    When the ideology of globalism is discussed in liberty movement circles there are often misunderstandings as to the source of the threat and what it truly represents. This may in some cases be by design. In the latest era of supposed “populism” led by figures like Donald Trump, an entirely new and very green generation of liberty activists find themselves hyper focused on the political left in general, but they seem to be obsessed with attacking the symptoms of globalism rather than the source. I attribute this to a clever propaganda campaign by globalist institutions.For example, when globalism is brought up in terms of its conspiratorial influences, the name of George Soros is usually mentioned. Soros is an obvious bogeyman for liberty activists because his money can be found flowing to numerous Cultural Marxist (social justice) organizations and his influence is easily grasped and digested in that way.

    Conservatives like placing emphasis on Soros because he appears decidedly leftist and thus globalism becomes synonymous with leftist movements. But what about all the globalists within the political right?

    Globalism has its gatekeepers in both political camps; people that manipulate or outright control political leaders and political messages on the right just as they do on the left. While someone like George Soros acts as a gatekeeper for the left, we also have people like Henry Kissinger, a globalist gatekeeper for the right. Kissinger’s close relations with the Trump administration or his long time friendship with Russia’s Vladimir Putin are brought up far less in the liberty movement these days. Why? Because this does not fit with the false narrative that the globalists are “targeting” Trump or Putin. When you examine these leaders and their ties to a vast array of globalist proponents, this claim becomes absurd.

    In 2016, months before the presidential election, the globalist media outlet Bloomberg published an article which salivated over the possibility that Trump would swallow up and assimilate what they called the “Tea Party,” ultimately destroying it. At that time the media used the term “Tea Party” as code for any sovereignty or constitutional group, just as the media tried to wrap us all up in the term “alt-right” after Trump’s election.

    There was a reason why Bloomberg found particular glee in the notion that Trump would absorb the liberty movement. The movement was becoming a decentralized threat to the globalist agenda, a threat that could not be easily quantified or dominated because it had no identifiable leadership. We were a movement based on knowledge and individual action. Our best “leaders” have been teachers, not politicians, and these were people that led by personal example, not by mandate or rhetoric.

    The liberty movement was winning ground in every conceivable arena, from the dismantling of the mainstream media through alternative platforms, to the great push back against social justice cultism. Something had to be done.

    Enter Trump, a brash pop culture icon with a flare for sensationalism. He was no statesman like Ron Paul explaining the intricacies of America’s problems in a measured way. No, Trump was like a wrecking ball, a loud and blatant message to the left that we were tired of being on the defensive and we were coming for them. But the reality was that Trump was not a necessary element of the fight. He never was. Anti-globalism and anti-social justice were already hitting the mainstream. The left was already on the run. Trump didn’t create that wave, the liberty movement did that for him, he just rode it into the White House. You’re welcome, Donald.

    The problem was that Trump was not what he seemed to be to many people. With all his rhetoric against the banking elites which he referred to as creatures of the “swamp” choking Washington, Trump then proceeded to load up his presidential cabinet with elitists and globalists as soon as he was elected. These very same cabinet members and advisers went on to attend globalist meetings like the secretive Bilderberg Group AFTER Trump had been elected. People like Rothschild banking agent and Commerce Secretary Wilber Ross who officially attended in 2017, or adviser Peter Thiel who officially attended in 2018.

    This was not at all surprising to me. I predicted this would be the likely outcome (along with a Trump presidency) in my article “Clinton Versus Trump And The Co-Option Of The Liberty Movement,” published in September 2016.

    The point is, simply picking the side of the political right is not enough to protect activists from globalist subversion. By rallying around controlled politicians and bottle-necking our actions the liberty movement makes itself vulnerable and decidedly impotent.

    So, the question arises — how do we continue to fight against the 4th Generation warfare being levied against us? Part of the solution continues to rest in our own understanding of the enemy.

    I still hold to the idea that the best way to understand globalism is to study and expose the efforts of a group called the “Fabian Society,” otherwise known as Fabian Socialists. The society was founded in England in 1884 and was an extension of the “Round Table” groups being established by global elitists in the West at the time. The Fabians have been at the forefront of almost every pro-socialist and pro-globalist movement of the past century, and while they do not get as much attention as institutions like the Council on Foreign Relations or even the Bilderberg Group, their open discussions on their own motivations and goals make them a prime source of data on the psychology of our opponents.

    The Fabian Society has multiple mascots which hint at the nature of globalism. One symbol of the group is an angry turtle with the slogan “When I strike I strike hard,” indicating the slow and deliberate nature of globalism and its methodical spread into every aspect of our daily lives. Another mascot they have used in the past is a wolf dressed up as a sheep, a symbol which I think is self explanatory, but to clarify - a person that appears to be anti-globalist in rhetoric or who is criticized by people like the Fabians may still be a Fabian in disguise. Their relationships with elitists will expose their true nature as a Trojan Horse.

    I think that the best representation of these people and their thinking resides in their own words, however. Here are some choice quotes from past members:

    …The Open Conspiracy will appear first, I believe as a conscious organization of intelligent, and in some cases wealthy men, as a movement having distinct social and political aims, confessedly ignoring most of the existing apparatus of political control, or using it only as an incidental implement in the stages, a mere movement of a number of people in a certain direction, who will presently discover, with a sort of a surprise, the common object toward which they are all moving. In all sorts of ways, they will be influencing and controlling the ostensible government.” — H.G. Wells: The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution, 1928.

    “I also made it quite clear that socialism means equality of income or nothing, and that under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you like it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live you would have to live well.” — George Bernard Shaw, The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928

    “I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others, which, one must suppose, opponents of birth control would prefer. War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. There would be nothing in this to offend the consciences of the devout or to restrain the ambitions of nationalists. The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s.” — Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1953

    “I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology. … Various results will soon be arrived at: that the influence of home is obstructive… although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generatio will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen … Educational propaganda, with government help, could achieve this result in a generation. There are, however, two powerful forces opposed to such a policy: one is religion; the other is nationalism. … A scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a world government.” — Bertrand Russell: The Impact of Science on Society, 1953

    “And it seems to me perfectly in the cards that there will be within the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing … a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda, brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods.” — Aldous Huxley, “The Ultimate Revolution” March 20, 1962 Berkeley Language Center

    Today, the Fabian Society still exists and operates as a think tank much like any other globalist think tank. Their articles and essays push the latest globalist propaganda from the erasure of national sovereignty to the promotion of gender politics and gender “fluidity.” But what can we draw from these writings and the statements of past members?

    First, globalists use guerrilla-like tactics to achieve their goals and they often act slowly and quietly over the course of years or decades. The Fabian Society was named after the Roman General Quintus Fabius Maximus who famously used tactics of attrition and delay to defeat his enemies. Liberty activists need to start thinking in terms of the long game, much like a chess player does, in order to grasp the globalist agenda. The events triggered today may have intended effects which are not necessarily obvious to us now unless we consider how they relate to the greater scheme.

    This is especially true in terms of economics. Globalists stage fiscal bubbles many years in advance, and use economic crisis as a catalyst for social change on a grand scale. Usually this results in ever increasing centralization of wealth and power. However, the shift of financial dominance is subtle to those who do not pay particular attention to the details. A market bubble might take a decade to develop before it is deliberately popped. In the meantime all the fundamentals are screaming that something is very wrong, but the majority of the public remains oblivious until it is too late.

    Second, control of governments and political leaders is paramount to the success of globalism. The notion that ANY major political leader comes to power without globalist influence is utterly naive. Trump and his swamp creature appointed cabinet are perfect examples of this. Rhetoric is meaningless, and while such leaders may throw their base a bone now and then, in the end their actions only push the ball forward for the globalists. This may even include sabotaging their own presidency to make way for a globalist “solution.”

    Third, mass psychology is a globalist obsession. All power stems from perception. Figureheads and ideological groups sometimes offer the promise of social advantage to the public without much effort on their part. The temptation of this offer can lead people to hand over their free will in exchange. But not all “progress” is actually advantageous for the masses and misery usually follows such Faustian deals with the elites. Escape is difficult.

    Therefore, globalists must control the narrative at all costs. The public has to be divided as much as possible in order to keep them distracted from the guiding hand of the cabal itself. And, any group that opposes them directly has to be co-opted or destroyed. The more people focus on globalists and their organizations as the core source of social instability, the more uncomfortable they become.

    Fourth, most globalist actions today rely on 4th Generation warfare; meaning, few things are exactly as they seem, ever. I suspect the success of liberty activists has forced them into more elaborate forms of theater. Nothing they do is ever simple unless you have studied the motivations and mindset of the globalists, then they become rather predictable, unoriginal and bizarrely robotic in their behavior. They appear brilliant in the execution of their agendas only because they have centuries of experience implementing the same con games over and over. They are sociopathic grifters; they are clever and without remorse, but not geniuses in any sense of the word.

    For now, educating the general liberty movement and the people around us on these issues remains the best method for throwing a monkey wrench into the globalist machine. Countering their psyops should be our pinnacle task, and falling into the narrative traps they create must be avoided. They have spent a considerable amount of thought and energy trying to co-opt our efforts, and that should give everyone pause. For if we were not a true threat, why would they bother with us?
    "We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

    "We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl

  2. #2

    Default

    I'd warn you that terms used in the article above, such as "Cultural Marxist (social justice) organizations" are alt-right terms, ultra-right terms - as if social justice movements are evil and social justice is not a positive ideal. Yes, there are sometimes critiques of the same features of things wrong by both the left and right, but why chose those from the right with their hidden messages and argot of anti-progress, racism, etc.?
    If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” - Frederick Douglass
    "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
    "Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Lemkin View Post
    I'd warn you that terms used in the article above, such as "Cultural Marxist (social justice) organizations" are alt-right terms, ultra-right terms - as if social justice movements are evil and social justice is not a positive ideal. Yes, there are sometimes critiques of the same features of things wrong by both the left and right, but why chose those from the right with their hidden messages and argot of anti-progress, racism, etc.?
    All fair & interesting points, but you miss a key element - the silence of the Left on too many conspiratorial facts & events. Great swathes of the Left refuse to face some deeply unpleasant truths, partly due to the influence of gatekeepers, but mainly due to what? Inertia, intellectual cowardice &/or sloth?
    "There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"

    Joseph Fouche

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Rigby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Lemkin View Post
    I'd warn you that terms used in the article above, such as "Cultural Marxist (social justice) organizations" are alt-right terms, ultra-right terms - as if social justice movements are evil and social justice is not a positive ideal. Yes, there are sometimes critiques of the same features of things wrong by both the left and right, but why chose those from the right with their hidden messages and argot of anti-progress, racism, etc.?
    All fair & interesting points, but you miss a key element - the silence of the Left on too many conspiratorial facts & events. Great swathes of the Left refuse to face some deeply unpleasant truths, partly due to the influence of gatekeepers, but mainly due to what? Inertia, intellectual cowardice &/or sloth?
    The problem as I see it with the Left - at least in the Labour Party in the UK - is that they have been Blairized; they're now virtually indistinguishable from the Conservatives in many ways (ditto the Dems in the US). And we've seen how Corbyn has been tarnished quite unfairly with the anti-Semitism reporting. Corbyn is avowedly anti Israeli policy, but not an anti-Semite but it is this that has been designedly conflated even though it is
    ridiculous to suggest he is. But that's what's happened and it's taken hold by regular media repetition of that meme.

    My view is that "globalism" is, in fact, neoliberalism on Viagra. Controlling and focusing the use of money is what it is all about. Nothing else really matters other than the control that money provides.

    It is an utterly vile ideology that sees the wealth of the world captured by a tiny, tiny, tiny elite - and the wealth acquired by that elite is used to skew and overwrite democracy to the point that it has become meaningless in in all but name -- but is kept in place purely for PR reasons and to keep the many uninformed and powerless.

    Not to repeat what I've said a number of times before over the years (but I'm going to anyway - yawn), this was planned and set in motion by the Rhodes-Milner Oxford Group over one hundred years ago.

    In Quigley's dense and difficult to read book The Anglo American Establishment, hidden in a small footnote (of Chapter 3 - and yes I read every word of it well... over 20 years ago) were the words penned by Rhodes to his Secretary, W T Stead circa 1896-ish, that outlined the purpose of the Cecil Rhodes secret society: "to absorb the wealth of the world". The purpose was to forge a federal union between Britain and the United States. While that didn't happen in fact it has almost happened in practise in that both operate in lock-step, imo. Both are military allies in virtually every war, both hold the main banking centres of the world in London and New York etc.

    A later plan, well after Rhodes death but still promulgated by the Oxford Group was to to take effective control of the world's governments via the central banking elite (stated in Quigley massive wrist-wrenching Tragedy & Hope), with a view to returning the world to a "feudalist society" where the elite would have total control once again.

    That's where we are today. Sadly.
    The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
    Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14

  5. #5

    Default

    Great comments. I will try to expand and answer in part latter today when I get a chance.

    My original post quoting this alt-right writer was to raise the possibility that much of Trumpism is to create a lot of noise so that the globalist agenda is given a major boost. Despite his paltry "attempts" to re-create American middle class strength, he is a pushing a globalist agenda. I propose that the drama at constitutes news is intended to create a fog of war to cover what is really going on.

    Ironically, some alt-right thinkers are among the few voices who speak profoundly about what you wrote David.

    A later plan, well after Rhodes death but still promulgated by the Oxford Group was to to take effective control of the world's governments via the central banking elite (stated in Quigley massive wrist-wrenching Tragedy & Hope), with a view to returning the world to a "feudalist society" where the elite would have total control once again.

    That's where we are today. Sadly.
    Jay Dyer, one of the most outspoken alt-right thinkers is saying we are indeed not there yet. The future is far more bleak than what we have now. And yes, I disagree with at least 50% of what he says. But his instincts about globalism are spot on. His critique of the left is cringe worthy.

    Weren't the Rhodes group Masons? If so, isn't this the source of the globalist ideology?
    "We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

    "We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl

  6. #6

    Default

    I'd warn you that terms used in the article above, such as "Cultural Marxist (social justice) organizations" are alt-right terms, ultra-right terms - as if social justice movements are evil and social justice is not a positive ideal. Yes, there are sometimes critiques of the same features of things wrong by both the left and right, but why chose those from the right with their hidden messages and argot of anti-progress, racism, etc.?
    Having ready a lot of Cultural Marxist theory, which I think is a fair description. I am quite happy to say I have been strongly influenced by it. It is as I understand to be the core of postmodern thought, for good or for bad. It seeks to deconstruct the edifice of oppressive modern ideologies. The best of it has resulted in liberation theology movements. Another great accomplishment would be the devastating critiques offered by Edward Said in his Orientalism and Culture and Imperialism. Everything in these these writings is drenched in social justice we are sorely lacking. I came to appreciate Derrida's Spectres of Marx after much agony. I am no scholar, and the literature is endless.

    Moving on the bad aspects of postmodern writing. Where does one start or end. This gets us to the alt-right critique which gets a lot right. Once you continue on with the postmodern project, all things are relativised to the point of an absurd world in which anyone can claim oppression for any contrived reason.

    Attached Images Attached Images
    "We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

    "We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl

  7. #7

    Default

    So why did I post this article despite its alt-right language? So many of us who may identify as liberal or progressive or socialist, i.e. the left, are lost in a world of outrage unable to see that they are being played. This phenomenon is what a Jay Dyer would call a "false dialectic" or a "managed dialectic." Regarding Trump, one should step back and ask about how and why would a Trump serve the NWO while claiming to be all about nationalism and making America great. How is The Agenda being advance by him? Is a useful idiot or a savvy carnival barker? I'm going with option 2.
    "We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

    "We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl

  8. #8

    Default New (Old) World Order

    We can point to the Fabian Society or the Bilderbergs, etc. But isn't globalism simply the people who don't buy into the system of nation-states that is the norm in the world since the Peace of Westphalia? Or people who profit at the expense of national sovereign state governments?

    In the middle ages, you had princes living inside castles, i.e. mini-micro-states. But after the 30 Years War it was decided to divide the world into the nation-states that we have today.

    But not everybody has bought into this system since then. You had:

    1. The British, French and Spanish Empires that were trans-national.
    2. International Communism.
    3. The International Catholic Church.
    4. Worldwide interconnected Judaism.
    5. Worldwide Islam.
    6. The International Corporations, beginning with the British East India Company and the Hudson's Bay Company and now including international banking.
    7. The United Nations.
    8. The trans-national network of titled nobility in Europe and elsewhere.

    So just pointing to the Fabian Society as if it was the whole ball game when it came to undermining the sovereignty of nations states may be like using a microscope when you need a wide-angle lens.

    James Lateer

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •