What We're Really Fighting

Is it the WEF or WHO or Gates or Big Pharma or any particular villain or organization? Or is there something deeper going on here?

I’m a big fan of James’s, and no… it’s not because we share a given name, or because we’re probably twins separated at birth.

It’s because he gets it.

The clip above is well-worth your viewing time, but in case you skipped it, here are the key takeaways:

• We have a tendency to focus all our attention on singular villains and organizations (e.g., Klaus Schwab and the WEF).

• However, WEF, Great Reset, “Fourth Industrial Revolution”, etc. are simply a rebranding of much older ideas: the New World Order, technocracy, and transhumanism.

• Klaus Schwab was remarkably successful at recapturing attention toward these ideas, but they did not originate with him; he is merely a highly skilled carnival barker. The WEF is not the controlling power structure of the oligarchy, merely its current vehicle.

• What we are up against are the ideas, not the particular organizations or individuals who represent them.

• The risk is that we overfocus on a particular organization, and the oligarchy will scuttle that vehicle, and we will think we have “won”, but meanwhile they are busy rebranding it under some other name and repackaging for the next attempt. (For example, this is exactly what happened with the Bilderberg group—we tend not to hear about it much anymore, but the underlying agenda and ideas of the Bilderburgs have continued unabated).

• The agenda did not start with these organizations, and it will not end with them.

• “The news” is a constructed narrative designed to capture your focus and attention and place it where the oligarchical powers want it to be. It is social programming, nothing less. Even alternative media is succeptible to this: by covering the same events and topics that mainstream media covers, even if our individual take is different, we are still essentially following the oligarch’s agenda.

• To counter this, we need to be tuned in to the bigger picture of what is happening.

• The most important thing is our attention. What we choose to focus on matters more than anything—it is how we construct our reality (for good or for ill). We can be directing our time, energy, resources to things that are more productive than focusing on the villain or the narrative of the moment.

People seem to think that if a particular villain is brought to justice, or a particular bill or treaty struck down (or, perhaps most ludicrously, if we elect a particular candidate to office) then we will have “won”.

I’m sorry, but these are absurd fantasies.

If you swap software, but leave the underlying operating system exactly the same, it will not make a lickspittle of difference. Remove one head of the hydra, and watch in horror as it sprouts another.

Remember when a few countries jailed a bunch of bankers for their supposed role in the 2008 financial crisis? Did that “fix” the financial system? Were any governments or agencies held accountable? Was HUD? Was the Federal Reserve reformed? Did the business of banking and mortgage-backed securities suddenly become honest and above board?

As James points out, it’s not that we should ignore these entities or let their villainy go unexamined. Of course not. Lawsuits and prosecutions and abolition of abhorrent treaties should take place. And we have to celebrate small victories.

But if the ideas giving rise to the villains and their institutions remain in the programming, running softly away in the background, they will produce more of the same, and our victories will be short-lived.

And some of these programs have been running a long, long time. They are old ideas that have simply morphed or taken on a new, more palatable veneer for a modern audience.

So what ideas are we up against, exactly? What is the bigger picture?

At a minimum, I would point out the following:

---

Catastrophism: the view that life on Earth is an unending series of unavoidable global catastrophes. Humanity is constantly under threat from disease, “spontaneous” conflicts, and natural disasters.

FALSE. This one has the stink of plausibility about it because, of course, sometimes (local) catastrophes do occur. But the constant barrage of programming about impending global catastrophes could only be invented by an oligarchy that wants the fear-programmed populace to believe it is so, so that it can provide the ready-made “solutions” (which are invariably some version of the public surrendering their rights and granting more autocratic control to the oligarchs.)

---

Scientism: the idea that we should have blind faith in claims by those who claim to speak for Science, aka. “If Science said it, it must be true.” If you disagree with a given scientific claim you are a heretic.

FALSE. Science is not a fixed body of knowledge, it is a method of testing knowledge claims. Science, properly understood, does not purport to know what is true, it tries to falsify knowledge claims, and when it cannot, these claims are understood to temporarily stand until they can be falsified, or until a better, more explanatory claim comes along (or, as Thomas Kuhn was at pains to explain, until the current generation of scientists dies off and a new one supplants it.) Science requires argument, dissent, disagreement to function, therefore there can be no such thing as a heretical challenge to scientific knowledge.

---

“I identify as” insert race/sexual-orientation/political bias/belief system here. “I AM the same thing as my identity group, or mental category.

FALSE. If you are the same thing as your mental categories, then the penalty for ceasing to believe in that category, in your mind, is death. To “change your mind” is to cease being “you”. (Also, anyone who does not identify as you do is a threat, since, in your mind, they are advocating for your non-existence.) Which of course, is absurd. I can toss out false ideas and unhelpful mental categories all day long, and not only not cease to exist but be better off, and attain more clarity about the world.

---

Utopianism: human life will be wonderful and prosperous if and only if we install and impose the correct system on it. All previous attempts just haven’t “got it right”. We must keep trying new utopian ideas until we do.

FALSE: this belief in utopian ideal is the cause of countless genocides and oppression. All utopian attempts become dystopias, by necessity. Every time you try to impose some system on humanity, no matter how well-intentioned, you are necessarily criminalizing every dissident and minority who must now fight your tyrannical edicts. Freedom is the opposite of utopianism: it is a recognition of the principle of live and let live, and seeks to impose nothing on humanity, except to severely restrict our ability to use force against one another.

---

Transhumanism: the human body is a machine, and like any machine, it can be modified, upgraded, enhanced, improved upon. Everything to do with thoughts, emotions, or spirituality represent flawed, “faulty wiring” which can be corrected for using sophisticated technology. There is no upper limit to the amount of upgrades, so humans can be fashioned into gods.

FALSE: humans are clearly not just physical machines, but an amalgam of spirit/energy/biological chemistry which have been endowed with free will and infinite complexity. To modify any part of this complex system is to defy and damage its essential nature. Spirit and emotion and will are not flaws, they are essential features. The attempt to “correct” for these is not enhancing or creating a new species, it is committing democide.

---

Elitism: certain humans are born special. They have special abilities, special knowledge, special genetics which make them uniquely endowed to rule the rest of the humans, who are too weak and stupid to know what is in their best interests.

FALSE: out of this idea comes every justification for authoritarian “management” of the species, whether it’s emperors and kings, priests and theocrats, “benevolent” dictators, wealthy eugenicists, or scientific “experts”. Historically, certain humans have been born with access to power, but this is an accident of history and confers no special right to rule over the rest of us. All monarchies and dictatorships have eventually fallen, whether to rivals or to face justice at the hands of the people they once oppressed. Sic semper tyrannis.

---

Notice I haven’t included any of the traditional dichotomy ideas, like “left vs. right” or “liberal vs. conservative”. Anyone still framing this battle in these terms should know by now that these are categories of isms that the real enemy are happy to let you squabble over. You are an unwitting prisoner watching a made-for-your-consumption shadow puppet version of reality. Please, try to transcend these reptile brain categories and move past them.

So yeah, big picture stuff.

Retributive justice alone will not fix this. Defeating a particular bill or treaty will not defeat it.

Crimes of the scale we have witnessed do not happen because an individual or two broke the law. They happen because there is a cultural attitude of blind trust which incentivizes and rewards the criminals, and even hails them as heroes. Given the ideas at work in the culture, it isn’t long before entire industries are created around them and new generations are eager to take part in it. Just look at the trillions of dollars now being pumped into the climate catastrophe industry—it is a beast with so many heads one doesn’t even know where to begin swinging.

So long as most of the planet is programmed to believe that they must blindly trust authorities and so-called experts to do their thinking for them, there will be individuals who are happy to take up those mantles.

The only thing that creates the conditions for villainy on this massive a scale is massive blindness.

Nothing changes until there is a tipping point, a new attitude of skepticism, vigilance, and ferocity toward anyone proclaiming themselves an “expert” with special knowledge of how to best enslave humanity.

Ultimately, what we’re really fighting is in ourselves.

It’s what we give our mental assent to, and what we refuse to go along with.

It’s what we give our attention to, and refuse to turn a blind eye to.

Stay focused.

Don’t give your attention to the shadow puppets the oligarchs cast on the cave wall for you to be enraged at or enthralled by.

Send your attention to where it is needed the most: on the insidious, false ideas that have taken humanity under their spell, and on articulating what you intuitively know to be true as the alternative.

---

Share this post!

YOU make Think for Yourself possible with your subscriptions. If you believe in the work being done here and want to show your support, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber!

Or perhaps you know someone that would appreciate a gift sub:

Or, if a sub is too much commitment, consider a one-time donation:

Bitcoin Address:

3BRCXdECrTq1WHHz8jrztGCNwzKQyWsEUA

Follow me on the Socials:

• Twitter

• Notes

• Gettr

---

Further Reading:

What Happened to the WEF? - Questions For Corbett

It's NOT Over