The self-imposed “global shapers” do not want society to move forward. Rather, they want to MOVE US forward, and they demonstrate that at the World Economic Forum’s site outlining The Great Reset initiative. In the words of Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum,“We must not miss this unique window of opportunity.” In the same video (linked above), Prince Charles chimed in, “We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis. Its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change.” He continued, “Think big, and act now.”
In my opinion, this rapid movement and evolution into the future — this “momentum” — is anything but organic. I suggest this is ALL by highly calculated design. Problem. Reaction. Solution. Not a new concept for POM readers.
Chasing Their Tales and Our Tails
I’d like to piggyback on MT’s recent post with respect to the Cuban Missile Crisis being a hoax. One of the most helpful documents I have ever come across (in my preoccupation with hoaxes) is Fakeologist’s list of psyops — the Psyop Histogram. Since discovering this work of art, I have echoed this by creating my own charts involving presumed staged events.
I get this question ALL the time, “How do you know that (insert person, place, or thing) is fake? How do you know it’s a hoax?” Well, for starters I think I understand how the controllers operate. The reason being, because I have learned from their material, as well as other researchers who peer into the nature of reality and simulation (see Endnote 1). The controllers typically don’t hide this stuff. They just don’t expect us to read and observe keenly, and they think so little of us that they don’t expect us to put all the pieces of the puzzle together.
By grasping these concepts, I can place manufactured events within an expansive context, and thus, call out the stagecraft that much quicker. Also, by infusing this needed context into my consciousness, I wonder about the potential positive effects, and how much more impactful these potential effects could be if people expanded their awareness within this rich context. If we can all spend less time on the nitty gritty aspects of fakery embedded within hoaxes, then maybe we can stop these psyops in their tracks, or collapse their tracks before the train even departs. It’s kind of like collapsing a wave (see Endnotes 2 and 3) — or collapsing a “second wave”, perhaps?
We could certainly continue to analyze this likely orchestration of “pseudo-events” and its distractions, and debate over the details of precisely which elements were or were not faked, if at all. Admittedly, I am guilty of this intense analysis. I willingly play in this arena. It’s very seductive to say the least. I am suggesting, however, that we transcend the tales that have been scripted to further distract, divide, derail, and degrade us — keeping us in the endless loop of chasing our tails — and do our best to avoid the trappings of the script (the simulation) by observing it from a bird’s eye view. Perhaps we can help one another find our way out of this labyrinth of implanted rabbit holes, and transmute them into tunnels that have productive ends in sight. My hope is that we begin to write our own collective script (AND individual scripts) — to propel us out of chaos and fear, and into clarity and heightened awareness of our genuine potential (both individual and collective). Heck, who even needs scripts, when the potential could be to have life unfold organically? What a concept.
Moving forward, I think it would be best for all of us to climb into our captains’ seats, and reclaim (or rather, claim?) our lead at the helm. In order to do this though, I suggest going backwards — just slightly and temporarily — to explore material that the controllers fully comprehend and utilize in their reality and culture creation.
So if you can just grin and bear this analysis that is somewhat tenuous and pedantic (and yes, lengthy), I will do my utmost in the very near future to ground this material in a more tangible and applied manner. Can you stick with me on this?
If you already have a solid handle on the concepts of hyperreality and HyperReality, then that’s awesome — you may simply pass “GO” and collect your $200. But for some, it may be helpful to get a stronger background on these notions. I know that understanding this material helps me to envision what the controllers do, and why and how they pull off psyops. I plan to get into more detail in future installments. Let’s just say, for now, they have gamed these scenarios in every which way imaginable. But if we could explore, untangle, and tackle this framework from which they operate, then couldn’t we avoid the traps, and perhaps even prevent these perps from executing their perverted and psychopathic psyops in the first place? Like I said, maybe we can collapse their “waves” . . .
It may be helpful to read my Part 1, before embarking on this next stage of the journey into the simulation. Herein, I resume discussion based on my position that we have been subjugated to experiencing and living within a simulated overlay represented by a manipulated story of a potentially imaginary or contrived virus.
Now let’s get into Jean Baudrillard — French philosopher and sociologist “extraordinaire” . . .
The main gist put forth by Baudrillard in Simulacra and Simulation is “Simulations have become ‘a real without origin or reality’ — a hyperreal.” Essentially, he is saying that simulations no longer refer back to a reality, but instead have meaning and effect on their own.
Following is a commonly shared excerpt from Simulacra and Simulation:
“Whereas representation tries to absorb simulation by interpreting it as false representation, simulation envelops the whole edifice of representation as itself a simulacrum.
This would be the successive phases of the image: it is the reflection of a basic reality
– it masks and perverts a basic reality
– it masks the absence of a basic reality
– it bears no relation to any reality what[so]ever: it is its own pure simulacrum.”
Does this resonate at all with any readers here? Does this remind you of the current masking of our faces, or the masking of society — or perhaps, the masking of authentic reality amidst this collective delusion we are observing?
As MT emphasized in his recent post (linked above), the controllers govern by fear — manufactured fear, of course. In his The Illusion of the End, Baudrillard aptly stated, “All the media live off the presumption of catastrophe and of the succulent imminence of death.” Thus, we are targeted by campaigns of fear (“fear porn”), and the unsuspecting masses are simply passive spectators and consumers. As Kingsley L. Dennis prophetically set forth in Bardo Times (2018), “Thanks to global technologies of communication . . . Emotional impacts can now be synchronized globally . . . literally playing with . . . the fire of human fear . . . We now share a communal engagement with catastrophe . . . we are now collectively catastrophized.”
This academic study on Baudrillard’s work is prolific and instructional, and it mirrors my perspective on his work. Here are a few select quotes:
“Although Baudrillard was the first to popularize the concepts of simulation and hyperreality, there are a number of other authors who explored similar ideas. In particular McLuhan in the 1960s, “the medium is the message”. In addition, Boorstin in “The Image” talks of the increasing spread of pseudo-events. Umberto Eco wrote in some detail on hyperreality, which he called vicarious reality or proxy reality.
. . . even by the 1970s, he sees societies organized and based on electronic simulations through computer interfaces, TV, virtual reality . . . People live in a hyperreality of images, spectacles and the interchange of signs. Hyperreality is realized as the inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from a simulation . . . the masses are also at the same time obliged to conform to be dependent, childlike, infantile and passive . . .”
The academic study continues:
. . . Baudrillard draws on the narratives of J G Ballard in particular the book/movie “Crash” and Philip K Dick’s “Simulacra” as the worlds of Sci Fi are by definition hyperreal. And to take a Baudrillard viewpoint these worlds are reflected back to us through the movie [The] Matrix. Not only is a character shown reading Baudrillard but the premise is that the real is in fact physically hidden but can be accessed through a transformative ingestion of a pill.”
I would add here that in another iconic and dystopian sci-fi movie, “They Live”, the real can be accessed, or “seen” through the “Hoffman Lenses” — the sunglasses worn by Roddy Piper’s character in the film.
Following are excerpts from a review on Goodreads of Baudrillard’s Simulacra and Simulation that I include for your reference. The review applies Baudrillard’s provocative and prescient theorizing to what we are now collectively experiencing in our current culture, stating in part:
“TV is watching us, TV manipulates us, TV informs us” says Baudrillard, in 1981 . . . We now find ourselves in the era of Twitter and social media, where the ‘medium’ has become the message, the source of truth in itself. Within our collective, it is the medium, rather than the reality, which renders most true . . . and this new paradigm is of the ‘hyperreal’ . . .
In Simulacra and Simulation . . . Baudrillard unveils this model of the hyperreal, a world in which the the precession of simulacrum (a copy without an original), leads to postmodern landscape where the medium is confused as the real . . .
. . . this simulation . . . has now permeated and merged with reality, leading to this cybernetic hyperreality . . .
We now find ourselves led into this 21C-era . . . where your digital avatar is increasingly more ‘real’ than its physical counterpart.”
The Vital Illusion
In Baudrillard’s later work, The Vital Illusion, he examines herein what he calls “the murder of the real by the virtual.“ He profoundly states: “In a world of copies and clones in which everything can be made present in an instant by technology, we can no longer even speak of reality . . . our virtual world free of referents is in the process of exterminating reality, leaving no trace: “The corps(e) of the Real — if there is any — has not been recovered, is nowhere to be found.”
Notably, it’s what Baudrillard professes in The Vital Illusion that I feel is timely and relevant, “the enormous enterprise we living beings ourselves undertake today: a project to reconstruct a homogenous and uniformly consistent universe — an artificial continuum . . . unfolds within a technological . . . medium, extending over our vast information network, where we are in the process of building a perfect clone, an identical copy of our world, a virtual artifact. . .” That eerily echoes the concept of Sentient World Simulation (described in my Part 1).
Now, for those who may be thinking, at this point, “Well, that’s all interesting in theory” or “That’s just sci-fi stuff”, I would like to draw attention to one more book — HyperReality: Paradigm for the Third Millenium edited by John Tiffin and Nobuyoshi Terashima. Not only does it read like a playbook, it was written nearly twenty years ago to help “effect the future.” So we are all well into that future, and I get the sense after reading this book, that the scientific contributors therein do not consider their work fiction. In fact, they are highly regarded in their respective fields which culminate in the larger sphere of work that is HyperReality (HR) — and it’s very real — just in a more expansive definition of “real.”
Terashima defines HyperReality (HR) as “. . . the technological capability to intermix virtual reality (VR) with physical reality (PR) and artificial intelligence (AI) with human intelligence (HI) in a way that appears seamless and allows interaction.”
Tiffin proposes, “As time goes by, the difference between what is really real, and what exists in effect, but not in fact, could blur. People could come to live in a world in which they cannot readily distinguish whether what they see, hear, smell and touch is derived from the physical world or mediated by information technology.” I stated something very similar to this in Part 1 —but in my case, I offered it from a cautionary perspective. Herein, Tiffin seems quite giddy about the possibility.
Tiffin notes the link between Terashima’s concept of HyperReality (HR) and the term “hyperreality” as described by both Umberto Eco and Jean Baudrillard. He explains that not only do the two terms resemble one another, Terashima’s HyperReality (HR) is the very technology that enables hyperreality. Tiffin emphasizes that “HyperReality means a reality in which there is the extra dimension of virtual reality within normal physical reality . . . For the human species it will be a fundamental reformulation of their perception of reality and of the world they live in.” This places the whole concept of “perception management” in a whole new light, doesn’t it?
I end with this HyperReality book excerpt: “We can imagine the development of virtual objects and life forms for a virtual planet earth that match our image of the physical world . . . Will it be possible to create a virtual person from a database of their DNA?” Tiffin continues, “ . . . we will begin to populate [the virtual world] with virtual objects, virtual plants, virtual creatures and virtual people . . . ” Prior to this, one of Tiffin’s colleagues, Katsunori Shimohara, stated, “ . . . we can postulate a digital organism in which genetic information is just a self-replicating program composed of a series of machine codes . . . resembling the world of self-replicating ribonucleic acids (RNAs).”
Can you say, “virtual virus?”
I did not plan for Baudrillard’s Simulacra to encompass most of my Part 2 discussion, but his work forms the basis and rich context with which to grasp the nebulous influence of the nature of simulation in our culture, and to move forward in navigating it. From my perspective, the controllers seem to be intent on presenting layers upon layers of superimposed synthetic realities — designed to steer us away from our center compass, such that we lose our bearings that root us to the core reality in this universe, and to the core essence of ourselves.
So this concludes Part 2 of this series on the concept of simulation and superimposed reality — AKA the hyperreality, or HyperReality (HR). Thanks for sticking it out with me, for those who are still here. I am planning in Part 3 to address the books, Social Physics by Alex Pentland, and Growing Artificial Societies by Joshua M. Epstein and Robert Axtell. I also plan to add Joshua M. Epstein’s Agent Zero to the discussion, in which he explores the R-naught (RO) of fear, and mechanisms of fear contagion. I think we can all agree that the only pandemic that currently exists is the pandemic of fear.
Endnote 1: Recommended Reading
Simulacra and Simulation by Jean Baudrillard
The Vital Illusion by Jean Baudrillard
HyperReality: Paradigm for the Third Millenium edited by John Tiffin and Nobuyoshi Terashima
Bardo Times by Kingsley L. Dennis
Inventing Reality: The Politics of News Media by Michael Parenti
Life: The Movie – How Entertainment Conquered Reality by Neal Gabler
Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman
The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America by Daniel J. Boorstin
Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord
Event Power: How Global Events Manage and Manipulate by Chris Rojek
Internet Celebrity: Understanding Fame Online by Crystal Abidin
Endnote 2: How to collapse a wave through observation and create new realities in Psychology Today (2011)
Endnote 3: More food for thought on how consciousness may collapse waves – plenty to chew on here – A recent academic paper by David J. Chalmers (New York University) and Kelvin J. McQueen (Chapman University)
On a side note, but no less relevant: Early in May, it was reported that a researcher from the University of Pittsburgh, Bing Liu (link now shows “Error: 404”), was a victim in a murder-suicide, by someone he knew, Hao Gu. In the linked article, Bing Liu was described as being on the “verge of making very significant findings” relating to COVID. Intriguingly, Liu (through his academic pursuits) brings us back to Carnegie Mellon and the University of Pittsburgh, both of which I referenced in Part 1. According to Bing Liu’s bio, he had “developed high-performance computing techniques and advanced machine-learning approaches. Accordingly, Liu developed these computational modeling, simulation and analysis techniques to study the dynamics of biological systems.” Bing Liu did his postdoctoral studies in the lab of Professor Dr. Edmund Clarke, while at Carnegie Mellon’s School of Computer Science. You can read more about Edmund Clarke here.
Liu received his Bachelor and PhD in Computer Science under the supervision of Profs P.S. Thiagarajan and David Hsu from National University of Singapore. Hsu is known for his work in robotics, AI, and computational structural biology, and is currently serving on the editorial board of Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research.
According to Bing Liu’s research statement (link now shows “Error: 404”):
“My work builds mathematical models to describe biological systems and employs artificial intelligence and formal verification techniques to analyze their dynamical behaviors. I use probabilistic frameworks to address the stochasticity in biological systems, and develop algorithms to construct model structure, estimate unknown parameters, discover new biology, as well as design precision medicine. I also leverage the power of high-performance computing techniques to enable the modeling and analysis of large-scale multicellular systems. As an integral part of my research, I collaborate closely with biologists and clinicians to study various systems and tackle real-world biological problems that are crucial to medicine and healthcare. I believe that my research will help move the state-of-the-art of systems biology forward and will have a substantial impact on our healthcare, food supplies and many other issues that are essential to our survival . . . A dozen years ago, a major contributor of the Human Genome Project stated that the ultimate test of understanding biology would be to create a computer model of a cell.”
In discussing his future research plans . . .
“At present, we are ideally positioned to extend our models and build a novel comprehensive virtual immune system (my emphasis) that could help the development of personalized immunotherapies, having extensive experience in using computational methods to gain biological insights . . . I believe the proposed computational framework . . . can play a very helpful role in terms of modeling the whole immune network and performing in silico experiments to answer “what if” questions, generating hypothesis and sharpening the choices for experimental design.”
I suggest reading this link for an explanation of in silico experiments. Briefly, Wikipedia states “In silico (Pseudo-Latin for “in silicon”, alluding to the mass use of silicon for computer chips) is an expression meaning “performed on computer or via computer simulation” in reference to biological experiments. Digital genetic sequences obtained from DNA sequencing may be stored in sequence databases, be analyzed (see Sequence analysis), be digitally altered or be used as templates for creating new actual DNA using artificial gene synthesis.”
How could the digital alteration or digital creation of DNA (or perhaps an RNA virus?) be utilized? I’m not a scientist. Eh, what do I know?
32 thoughts on “COVID-19: A new superimposed reality – part 2 – moving forward”
Of course, cynically, if we somehow, some day defanged the psyops, is it not a logical conclusion the controllers would simply step up their game to less passive, less benign means of herding? Or would they hang their heads in sorrow and slowly saunter into the sunset and abandon their bastions of power and privilege?
This is a terrific and fair insight indeed. I suppose my initial response to this is in the words of Sun Tzu: ”The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting,” and “If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.” However, “If you know the enemy AND know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.” I would add that if the controllers inject more apparent and harsher methods, they risk awakening too many, and thereby fortifying resistance. The controllers utilize Sun Tzu concepts in their war-gaming scenarios, so we should probably be doing the same.
Rule has always been an iron fist under a velvet glove, and I’ve seen discussions many times over the years that if the velvet glove comes off, all that is left is the iron fist. Perhaps we are protected by our stupid masses.
Thanks. And not a half-bad turn of alliteration in my final phrase if I say so… 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Michael – Oh darn, I missed that stroke of alliteration genius. Now that I see it, I don’t know how I missed it?!
Brilliant as always, Stephers. It will take me some time to absorb this. But as I read your post, I found myself thinking about genre fiction. I used to love it as a kid, and as an adult, it behooves me to keep up with it because I’m an actor. But I have long intuitively felt that the tropes and conventions of fiction create a similar feedback loop of reality and unreality. My brother-in-law is a smart guy who loves his family, but he also loves family sitcoms like “King of Queens” where the “family man” is an infantile, ineffectual buffoon. It drives me crazy sometimes when I listen to him talk in the cadences of those stupid shows. So many of his conflicts with my sister (his wife) seem to stem from idiotic things he does that could easily be the inciting incident for one of those sitcoms.
It’s nothing new, either. Popular fiction has always helped shape how people perceive reality, even when they think they know the difference between fact and fiction. One of the funniest examples, to me, is all those fainting heroines in 18th and 19th-century novels. Because of that silly trope’s ubiquitousness in books, real women often pretended to faint when it seemed lady-like to do so, and people around them either turned their brains off and accepted the collapse as real, or had the manners and etiquette to pretend they did. The few who rolled their eyes and said “What a load of bullshit” were probably about as popular as those of us who reject the utter stupidity of masks and social distancing.
I’m straying a bit from your topic, but it’s interesting to me that all of this apparently unprecedented nonsense is pretty firmly rooted in methods and techniques that have kept people separated from a true understanding of themselves and the world around them for a very long time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Beware chasing fractals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3XDry3EwiU&feature=emb_rel_end
When taking a hard look at an infinite, self-similar fractal it’s easy to get lost.
This is actually very on point, Steve. Thank you for sharing that trippy video. I have always been fascinated by the Mandelbrot set, despite the fact that I know zilch about mathematics. But I knew there was a key in it somehow that may be more simple. And that brings me back to the concept of the bird’s eye view. For me, the key to not getting lost within all the complexity and the repeating patterns that seem to be slightly different, is to keep my eye on the “whole” – the original source of the fractals. It’s like a ballet dancer who has to keep focused on a fixed point so as not to get dizzy while spinning. Over time, the ballet dancer adapts to suppress the input of dizziness. There is a built-in feedback loop to fractals that keeps one spinning round and round, and going deeper and deeper, and of course, it’s dizzying and hypnotic – if as you said, you get lost in it. Like in most fields of science, the controllers have harnessed fractal science for their means, and their ends. I have incorporated the concepts of fractal physics and fractal fields into my transmutation/healing work, which was mostly inspired by the work of Dan Winter, as well as the work of Nassim Haramein. Perhaps at some point, I can write a post that covers some of this, as it relates back to heart coherence and brainwave entrainment. Glad you seem to have an interest in this as well…
Nicely put. Easy to get hung up in one part (a specific definition) of a thing which cannot be defined because it does not exist (as you point out in your essay). Fixation on that one, non-existent thing creates belief, doctrine, which in turn can lead to acceptance of part of the fractal as representative of the infinite whole. This leads me to the so-called science.
I dare suggest that most “science” as practiced today completely misses the point of the infinite whole — which is greater (often overlooked) than earth, all its living inhabitants, and humans in particular. Way too much competition, ego, money, corruption etc. and far too little marvel and respect for the spirit and magic of the infinitely complex natural (perpetual) system they’re screwing with in belief of “improving” it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Moving back a while.
No doubt nil plague BIG PANIC no deaths HIV-AIDS too was/is FAKE?
For the corrupt Corporate Pharma-Media BIG MAFIA!!
So many thoughts here…
Consider that realistically, it does not matter whether you are viewing it from a bird’s eye view or from the perspective of the minutiae. It is true that there is some kind of magical balance to strike between the two, but remember that both are analyses of their control matrix. PoM exists to analyze events within the control matrix. If we were completely above it, we would be a blog about cooking or hiking or who-knows-what.
Disconnecting entirely (being “above it”) is itself a huge risk. This is because the vast majority of us live completely within their society. It is not really possible to be “above it” unless you go full blown Unabomber (cabin in the woods style). Most people who would fancy themselves “above it” actually exist totally within it, therefore their existence inadvertently feeds the beast.
Personally, I have been disheartened with the “bird’s eye view” strategy lately. The minutiae of each event varies wildly from case-to-case and it can be fun to try to reverse engineer the sleight of hand deceptions behind any of these fake event magic tricks. The bird’s eye view approach, conversely, seems to reveal a constant purpose underlying all fake events. This is boring, at least for me.
From a bird’s eye view, these events happen constantly because they would be useless if they did not. Each event does not serve some specific cause; they each serve the same general cause. The details are just filler pulled from modern day “hot button” issues. The idea is to instill programming into the public mind constantly, and new generations are constantly born, so the programming-shock-triggering events must always continue. You cannot leave a generation without their shock event to coalesce them under your will.
People counter this idea by saying that the fakery has accelerated recently, but I disagree with that assessment. I think that improvements in technology have inadvertently caused it to seem this way. In early days, you simply had to print an event in the newspaper. Total fiction. There was no 24/7 media. Whatever the newspapers said was the truth. End of trouble. As technology has dramatically improved in recent years, the fakery will then seem more pervasive. This is because media itself has become more pervasive. Common events on the street are caught by 5 cameras, and there is a 24/7 news cycle behind it all. This is the real acceleration. Not the amount of deception, which I would guess has remained fairly constant historically.
Very thought-provoking piece. Thank you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can’t disagree with you here, Fauxlex. you present very fair points. Perhaps I used the concept of the bird’s eye view much too loosely? In hindsight (hindsight is 20/20… too soon, right?), I would probably want to go back and clarify my position. It’s likely it’s closer to what you perceive. As I said in the essay, I am quite obsessed with looking into the fine details of any event – whether it’s a psyop or not. I do tend to work from a bias, admittedly, as my default is to “auto hoax”. I have expressed this before. That said, I spend a lot of time and effort analyzing each event – but when I do, I do my best to look at it from a complete 360-degree view (could be equated somewhat with a bird’s eye view). In doing that, I play the role of “observer” rather than participant, such that I attempt (emphasis in attempt) to step back from the “story” and all of its potentially triggering elements, and see it as a “movie”. For me, it’s not much different than watching a film; and, in fact, I tend to feel LESS engaged with the narrative than I would if I were watching a sappy film on the actual screen (as I am REALLY quick to cry at just about any sad or “happy cry” moment). And, further, it’s because I am not feeling the empathy with “catastrophe thespians” that I am able to sense fairly quickly that they are “acting”.
Ultimately, though, once I “dig” into these hyperreal stories (in which I can spend a great deal of time – just ask my family!), I very consciously “pull out” (sorry if any minds went in the gutter there! yikes!) and take a real breather, and transcend the narrative once again. It’s like dipping in to the water, and then drying off; then dipping in again. But I don’t stay in the water (I’d turn into a “prune”!). In fact, I think this is what most “conspiracy” researchers do as well. I am just describing what works best for me. I do not typically operate in black vs. white, or hot vs. cold. I tend to be much more textured in my approach. Hence, why I agree with you – I would not suggest ONLY staying way above a story, so as not to evaluate all the juicy aspects. This stuff is just way too sexy for me to resist, if I am being completely candid. And that is why I frolic in this, and that’s why I am here at PoM. Also, as you aptly pointed out, I do sense there is a way to reverse engineer their illusory methods. I pay VERY close attention in this regard – particularly their use of occulted knowledge and ritualistic signaling. You had another great insight, and that is that these events are all connected. That is precisely why I suggest noticing stories from this more “omnipresent” perspective.
You had other great insights, and I will respond in a subsequent reply. This has gotten long-winded enough! Thanks Fauxlex.
You said,”The bird’s eye view approach, conversely, seems to reveal a constant purpose underlying all fake events. This is boring, at least for me.”
It’s (bird’s eye view) not so much a “strategy” or “approach” as an acknowledgement and respect for the infinite whole as observations of the fractal are investigated and used as examples (tools) for learning more about the constant lies and, yes, the purpose of the euphonious word art used to deceive and enslave commoners. Very effective and conniving. For me at least, POM writers and commenters can explore a way out, a way to fight back, and perhaps even destroy the perpetrators of all this fiction. Are they invincible? Not on your life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I concur, Steve. While I am no fan of “hopium” that seems to spread like wildfire among Qanoners and other such groups, I acknowledge one of our greatest obstacles in overcoming this deception being perpetrated over millennia – is LEARNED HELPLESSNESS. That is what I see all around me when I see people in their masks these days. The fear has dissipated (somewhat), but the learned helplessness always remains. It’s palpable. And I would say that we can also fall into this trap of learned helplessness, even within this community and others like it. The controllers have seeded this, and very successfully cultured this among all of us. That is why, at times, when I am in my most “optimistic” mode (it comes and goes, truly), I wonder how much the controllers are bluffing simply to suppress our will, and then I do envision a way out. When I am “in the zone” of optimism and pure creative force (every once in a while), I imagine what we are truly capable of, and just how very powerful we are. I know this to be true, or else the controllers would not have to expend so much effort to suppress and usurp our power for their own ends. They would not play these spellcasting games with us, and on us (and even within us), in which they craft and implement their energy harvesting rituals, if they did not NEED to.
We could write volumes on this topic. Is it really wrong to consider that we could all be squashed like a bug if we became a problem for the elites? I think not. I think it better to face this fact than operate under some delusion that I/we could actually defeat them. I agree with what you say about the “hopium” of the Q crowd…how silly it is that they think it’s all about to come crashing down.
I do not consider hopelessness to be such an unrealistic position here, and that is not a function of my being programmed…it is a function of an honest study of history. We would be better served to accept that there has always been this distinction between rulers and non-rulers throughout history, except perhaps dating back to pre civilization days (and debatable even then). This is where you either end up believing in anarchism as a political philosophy, or just accepting that there is a divide between elites and non-elites. Accepting that there are hidden forces above you that you as an individual are never really going to be in a position to change.
The fake event fraudulence that we see is still very much worth documenting and calling out even if you do not find yourself to be on some kind of crusade to bring it all down. To know something is of immense value. Simply to know that this is happening and how it is happening is of immeasurable value. Whether or not we are in some kind of fight to bring it all down is something I deeply question. It is perhaps the most fundamental question for anyone here.
They are not invincible, surely, they are mortal. However, I am not sure we can ever hope to make any kind of feasible attack upon their control. It is better to seek self-reliance and self-awareness. Knowledge of their fraudulent acts, so that we can each have the strength of knowing the nature of their game. We may never win the fight outright, but we can try carve out a niche where we can exist outside of their control in a sort of stalemate. I will take such a stalemate over outright destruction. Call me defeatist. I deserve it, but I am not sure this is a wrong position to take. It is far beyond David and Goliath, and our only means of evening the fight seems to be impossible…recruiting from the sleeping hoardes. For them, it might be LEARNED helplessness, but for us we must simply face facts.
We cannot win outright…we are simply too outmatched. They have thousands of years of collaboration, wealth-gathering, secret knowledge, and practice. It is just not a fair fight, and there is no secret weakness that will bring it all tumbling down. However, we can seek to undermine them…to as great an extent as possible. We cannot defeat them, but we can be enough a nuisance and a reminder to them that they are not fooling everyone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This was really just meant as a personal “I find it more interesting” and not a knock on viewing things from 10,000ft. I think identifying the individual events as fake through the minutiae marks the events as part of the same plan from 10,000ft. The minutiae is more interesting for me, personally.
Certainly I did not mean to knock anyone. I stated it as just a personal preference. I get bored looking down from the top. They’re all connected, yes, and the plots are part of the same control matrix. We all have preferences. I tend towards the minutiae.
To each their own.
As for “fighting back”, this really isn’t why I am here. I think of my own role as just documenting the madness. Seeing through the fraudulence.
And I think you tremendously underestimate the extent to which we could all be squashed like a bug if we ever became truly problematic for “them”. But I definitely do not fault anyone for seeing it as a fight. In that “fight”, I am forever with you in spirit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fauxlex, I completely agree with you in your astute assessment of the level of fakery over time, in that it has not been accelerated, except to say that our perception is that it has been amped up due to the reasons you mentioned. I suggest anyone who does not agree may want to refer back to Fakeologist’s Psyop Histogram (link included in my essay). In fact, I spent a lot of time last year in an effort to further confirm this for myself. I made my own mini psyop histogram (adding some that were not yet on the “list”), and noticed that the “first mass murder” in the US to be widely reported was in September, 1949 – known as the “Walk of Death”. There were many intriguing elements to the incident, and I should really do a post on it. There are a lot of juicy nuggets embedded in that one. Hmmmm. Like I don’t have enough potential blog posts swirling around in my head! If you feel inclined, take a look at that one – and maybe you will want to cover it, or we can collaborate (hint, hint)? Could be fun to have at it together, as we could bring different perspectives to the table. A challenge, perhaps??? 🙂
Add it to the list! Your posts are extremely thought-provoking. Thank you for all your efforts so far.
(PS-Let me research. I have never even heard of that event.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I find Stepher’s piece and all comments very insightful and great material to reflect upon, but you always seem to forget -with Steve being the exception- that we live on a planet, and this planet is a living and sentient being, which decides who has to live on its surface and who has to go.
At the end of the day the elites have to respond to the laws of the universe like anybody else, and whatever they think about their place and privileges on this planet are just another delusion (of grandeur, in their case).
Do not underestimate the power of the Earth, as it’s happened many times before with other civilizations and species: They have been wiped out in an instant.
They’re fully aware of that and therefore they’re trying to play their game till the end, but it can’t last forever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
To what are you referring by saying that it has happened many times before? Very curious about that, and not sure what you mean. I don’t see any historical precedent whatsoever. I would love to share in this optimism, but looking backwards I see nothing but the same as today. Whether any specific society collapsed, it was only replaced by another. It seems to me a fundamental tenet of a large modern society that there exists a class of people so far beyond our wealth and power that they can and do exert control as they please. These things EXIST. We cannot simply wave them away because it’s inconvenient for us. They do exist, and they have such physical earthly advantages over us as I can scarcely describe.
It feels foolhardy to me to deny this reality. This places me in an unpopular position, preaching what seems like a dark message, but it is simply true, as far as I can tell. It is not a delusion of grandeur for a trillionare to believe they have unmatched earthly power.
The earth as a conscious entity is very interesting topic in and of itself, but I do not think that the earth has the ability to kick off a family of trillionares by any means. Even if the awake 2% of us were not totally fractured (and we are), I don’t know what could be done.
Live your life to your own individual satisfaction. I study these things out of sheer curiosity, not because I fancy myself part of an effort to bring it all down. As if I am part of some cosmic movement in league with the earth itself. If there were sides, I would surely be on the side against “them”, but I am not sure we are even in a position to fight right now. We can be stepped on at any moment. For me, this is a study for the sake of knowledge.
Of course in a cosmic sense, we are all equals. They can be judged on equal footing with us, and we can claim superiority on these grounds, if we lived an upstanding life. However, in terms of real, tangible earthly power, it is not a fight at all. We have already lost, as they are the rulers and we the ruled. If they have sacrificed their souls for such powers, then is it really our duty to fight? Or is their existence a necessity? Are they some kind of cosmic negative balancing force? I don’t know. But I certainly don’t see how that leaves us in a position to try and fight them.
There has been much written about this as some kind of fight between us and them. I am not sure that it actually is, or even that it should be. Perhaps I can agree that we should all strive to be their antithesis, but I do not agree that we are here to bring them down.
The Earth has the power to create life and wipe it out when necessary.
I’ll tell you something : I neither believe in Darwin’s evolutionism nor in a God who created mankind. And forget about the aliens of course. It is the Earth that does the job, with the help of what I call the universal Consciousness.
Never before in human history have we seen a group of families having so much power and rule the world and control billions of people, and that’s because it is part of the evolution process.
That means it is up to mankind to finally wake up and kick those people in the ass.
At the moment though the masses are deeply asleep, and give those people the power to do what they do.
We’re billions and they’re just a few hundreds, don’t you think we could get rid of them by the numbers if we really wanted to?
This is the first and last time mankind will see such a phenomenon (TPTB I mean) in such large scale as it was a necessary step until now, but it’s nearly over.
The Earth itself is going through an evolution process, and again, there are natural catastrophes happening very 11.500 years that serve the purpose of reestablishing balance where balance is needed.
If TPTB really wanted to kill us all they would have done that long ago, think about it.
Even in the last 4-5 months they had to make up a story of a lethal bug to have the masses terrified of death whereas they could have killed us all in silence with a real bioweapon or something, why do you think they haven’t done that so far?
Cos their powers are limited. They do not decide such things, they like to think they’re super human, but in fact they’re just rich, nothing more. Their power is based on FEAR, another illusion, albeit a very strong and persistent one I reckon.
Oh, and of course they’re Freemasons and do rituals but in the end they can’t decide when it’s time to get rid of mankind. Actually, they never decide anything of importance if you think about it.
Their power is just part of the Matrix game, and the game’s nearly over.
I never said that they wanted to kill us ALL, only that if any individual were to truly become problematic to an earthly “elite”, then we as the individual could be squashed like a bug. In either case, your thoughts are appreciated.
I’m glad you appreciate my little contributions, I appreciate yours and all of the commenters here.
Fauxlex: ‘Is it really wrong to consider that we could all be squashed like a bug if we became a problem for the elites? I think not.’
Also Fauxlex: ‘I never said they wanted to kill us all.’
Well they do want to kill off at least 90% of us, as stated on their Georgia ‘Guidestones.’
Also, why is no one allowed to disagree with you Fo-fo? Who decided your opinion was infallible? You sure turn bitchy quick when confronted in even the most trivial manner.
When I said “we” could all be squashed, I meant we as in…we, the individuals of PoM. We, individual bloggers. Not “we” like…we, all humans on earth. This was already explained a few comments above with Anna. But I can see how you read a contradiction in that, so I apologize and wanted to clarify. Is it bitchy for you that I clarified my intent and apologized? Because you are the one using one of your first comments (under this name) to call out a trivial contradiction (that had already been addressed) in an insulting, vulgar, and provocative way. That seems bitchy to me. I would have gladly explained my meaning there (again) and discussed the Guidestones without your random cheap-shots. Your comment deserved to be deleted, but I’ll let it stand as an example of how NOT to act in the comments.
Be better. Contribute something useful here, and you will never have any problem from me. That goes for everyone. It even goes for you, Grey Man, who chose to use one of their initial comments in a most provocative and inappropriate manner. To firmly state your own case and stand your ground in debate is not an unwillingness to be disagreed with. Disagreement is actually something that I cherish, because so much can be learned through it… but not all disagreement is honest and respectful. Not all arguments will win the day, not even mine. If I persist, it is because I feel that is the whole value of a site like this. I hope that anyone I might debate here persists just as strongly against me, if they feel as strongly as I do. This is not an unwillingness to be disagreed with.
Anyone reading this: your comments, criticism, concerns, and insights are all totally welcome and greatly needed. Many times, I have changed my beliefs on a subject based on valuable information raised by random people out there. If you are a comment lurker out there who really just enjoys reading about these topics, please come out and introduce yourself. Otherwise, we’re left with guys like the commenter above, who are either organized trolls or regular individuals lapsed into troll-like behavior.
Any forum of exchange is moderated to prevent trolling, derailing, insults, etc. This is not infallibility, and do not be confused into thinking it is. Nobody will have a problem with you if you refrain from insults, vulgarity, provocation, derailing (or joining with those who do these things). For most honest people, this is not the slightest restriction, and we give people many strikes. Please, people out there, join us here in these discussions so that the trolls cannot crowd out and derail earnest debate and valuable discussion.
We quite literally need you. Do not be like Grey Man, and you will be fine. We cherish honest participation from honest people, no matter where you are coming from on an issue. You would be stunned at the level of dishonest commenting we get here at PoM, and it is critical we nip things in the bud to some degree. This is a bare minimum, and exactly what you would find at any forum site.
We all have our demons to conquer. Here we can help each other overcome them without judgement.
Ignorance of the highest, foundational law is our collective demon. We may never be free and never defeat our dependence on the man-made legal matrix to control us without understanding the highest (moral) law. The right to self-govern our own actions must be earned, “fought for,” learned and shared. If we cannot/will not do this we then continue to consent (silence is consent) to the increasingly degrading life of a (voluntary) debt slave under the control of the small group of destructive, elite man-gods we ourselves have created. To be clear, the enemy is not the man but his false title and imaginary false standing over us and nature. The enemy is belief of artificial things created by nothing more than word magic. It is our own delusion that empower the conundrums and contrarian beliefs that lead us away from what is self-evident and true.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well said, Steve!
This concerning 2016 research is imo what the “Comodovirus” “vaccine” is about; it supports the Transgenda, even if we don’t go into nanobots and other more advanced (existing?) technocrazy.
And as a bonus, 6 minutes of warning by Rudolf Steiner over a century ago…
I am late to these posts (part 1 & 2), as well as most of the blog, but find your perspective, Stephers, to be revealing no matter the degree of your view in making sense of the spectacle that we are witnessing in real time. Thank you for your insights and thank you to all the previous commentators for your inspiring thoughts. I am a fairly new visitor to this blog and have been lured by a siren song of such graceful intelligence that I have rarely heard in this hyper reality of the net… And you grumpy old guys are no slouches, either;) So, I am catching up by retracing time in reverse, but will pause now in my retrospective to add a thought to a relevant theme from the comments.
I believe I am in general quite ignorant of the art of war, but one idea resonated loudly when I read that one must know the enemy as one knows oneself. They obviously know us intimately as they have been shaping our minds for 1000’s of years. Simply stated, I believe their ultimate strategy seems to be to annihilate our knowledge of own self, in physiological and psychological terms, the knowledge of our very body and soul. Perhaps they intend to steal that soul and superimpose it upon their Silicon god, promoting the useful among us who happen to survive the culling. I have seen this speculation variously expressed quite often over the past 18 months, and every credible journalistic source that I come across seems to accept and reinforce this eugenic solution as the the parasite’s goal.
We are no doubt at war, right now, probably being attacked in ways we don’t yet understand. We have also been more or less in a state of siege since we were allowed to count backwards, who knows for sure if this power paradigm was ever absent from our species. But surely, Sun Tzu would concede we have a similar if not more significant advantage: not only do we know our enemy, we are our enemy, and can control that enemy, without resorting to violence. I have a cousin who studied who knows what kind of behavioral modification techniques at Tavistock, she’s married to a guy that stole millions if not billions from the stock market. My brother is married to some evil genius at Pfizer overseeing one of the vax labs, and my uncle used to “work for the government”… I know these people, and trust me, they are truly miserable.
Here’s the quintessential dilemma: How can we know ourself, and each other, as humans in a rapidly evaporating reality (and certainly compromised ecosystem) in time to recognize our essential shared humanity, so that we can defend that humanity, from my relatives, indeed all our relatives. Surely, we have the creativity to counteract a little brainwashing, fear-mongering, and spiritual possession.
With due respect to those who have expressed a sense of imminent defeat or at best a possible stalemate; or possibly an earthly retribution that might check the hubris of these kleptomaniac psychopaths and their legion of avenging nerds. You and I and he and she and everyone else who has been enduring this nightmare wants the same outcome, or some very close simulacrum of it. How often do we humans find ourselves in such an overwhelming majority? I believe if we are able to frame this war in its proper perspective, we could unleash a psychic backlash so powerful that it could truly be that evolutionary leap forward I’ve been hearing about for so long, way before that other one with the Saturday Night Fever dancing robots.
There’s a lot of intelligent and benevolent people here, there, and everywhere (sorry about Paul). Surely, we can organize our own minds before they shut them off and get this thing together. Now’s the time, my fellow humans.
This is my affirmation for today. If you tell me how to embed a video tomorrow it will be much different… But, this is what I got right now:
I do not consent. I will not consent. I stand with my fellow humans to protect our humanity by whatever means necessary. I believe we have an infinite capacity to love, to heal, to resonate with all things – and that gives us ineluctable authority and infinite advantage over the parasite’s pathetic urge to destroy and self-destruct. I do not understand their lies encoded in obfuscation and robotic gibberish that counterfeit the eloquent law of the universe and mock the one and only truth of humankind: Love.
From December 2020 (6 months after I wrote this essay – in the mainstream lexicon): “Welcome To Hyperreality: Where The Physical And Virtual Worlds Converge” https://www.forbes.com/sites/kianbakhtiari/2021/12/30/welcome-to-hyperreality-where-the-physical-and-virtual-worlds-converge/?sh=675ea1535028.
“The global pandemic has further blurred the lines between the physical and digital world. We are now seeing the virtual world compete with the physical for resources. In the next decade, the two worlds will converge, creating a state of hyperreality: a simulation of reality without origin. Although it can be easy to dismiss hyperreality as some kind of sci-fi fantasy. We only have to look at the radical changes in human behavior and technological adoption during the current lockdown. In truth, elements of the hyperreal have already entered mainstream culture. This point takes on extra significance considering the leaders of the new world—Gen-Z—are equally, if not more comfortable living online. To quote Marshall McLuhan, “We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.”