In modern times, war is never what it seems. Mainstream historians preach endlessly about grand conflicts over territory, resources, political impasse, and revenge, but the cold hard reality is that all of these “motivations” are actually secondary, if they are relevant at all. As I and many analysts have covered in great detail in the past, most wars are engineered wars. International elites have long seen advantages in pitting two seemingly opposed societies or ideologies against each other while playing both sides of the chessboard to direct events towards a predetermined and desired outcome. This is undeniable historical fact. If you really want to understand the past, or the intricacies of war, you will be lost unless you accept that most conflicts are designed; they are not random or natural.
They are not extensions of man’s mere greed or ignorance. They are not products of resource scarcity (a common and overly simplistic misconception used to mislead activists). They are not inevitable developments of “overcomplexity” according to the Rand Corporation’s “linchpin theory”propaganda. They are not the product of too much national sovereignty or individual liberty. No; traditional war is a tool for the organized ruling class. It always has been and always will be. This tool is used to turn the world into a vast petri dish, a bubbling beaker in a laboratory where social engineers hope to destroy the “old” to create something “new”.
At its most paramount of purposes, the despair and terror of war is intended to change the fundamental collective unconscious of nations and populations. It is meant to change our beliefs, our morals, our principles. It is meant to mutate us into something else, something malleable and terrible, something we would not normally recognize.
As we continue into the latter quarter of 2014, exactly 100 years after the first world war, I see much evidence to suggest we are headed for yet another engineered conflagration. It may be a war of terrorism and attrition between the U.S. and ISIS (an insurgency funded and trained by Western covert agencies). It may be a war of economic escalation between the West and the East (even though Russia is just as much a pawn of international banks like Goldman Sachs as any country in the West). Or, we may see all out global holocaust depending on the level of desperation and insecurity amongst the elites. What each liberty movement proponent, constitutionalist, and freedom fighter around the world needs to understand is that while we will be told that the enemy is Muslim extremism, or Russian aggression, or eastern economic subversion, the real target will be YOU.
The advantages of war at this time would be immense to the globalist establishment, but the primary function will be the ability to co-opt, demonize, and/or wipe out legitimate opposition during the fog and confusion. If you have ever noticed that each consecutive presidential administration seems progressively more hell-bent than the last to sabotage our infrastructure and push us towards endless confrontation, you might want to ponder the possibility that the New World Order does not end with the fall of the American empire – it BEGINS with the fall of the American empire.
Imagine a war in which a tangible and immediate threat is presented against the U.S. Not a CNN covered carpet bombing campaign in some poverty stricken hole on the other side of the world, but a real war right on our very own doorstep. Now, consider how this would psychologically affect the general public, and twist the principles of the average person. Imagine the kinds of morally relative impasses people would be willing to accept when they are truly afraid. Imagine what they would sacrifice to quell that fear. Imagine who they would sacrifice.
In such an environment, the concepts of free speech and personal dissent are rarely respected.
In war, dissent is often labeled treason, and free speech is labeled a peacetime privilege. The truth becomes a nuisance, or even a threat to the endurance of the state and by extension the collective. The same argument always arises – the argument that the survival of the group outweighs any disagreement the individual may have with the objectives of the group’s leadership. In turn, calls for “unification” reach a religious fervor, regardless of whose benefit this unification ultimately serves.
In the meantime, those who were tolerated as activists now become enemies of the state simply for doing what they have always done. The propaganda is already being put in place to assure the liberty movement is caught in the crossfire between the East and West.
For years I have been warning readers about the false East/West paradigm and the directed build up to conflict with Russia and China with the goal of creating a rational historical narrative by which the dollar could be supplanted as the world reserve currency to make way for a long planned basket currency system under the control of the IMF and the Bank of International Settlements. During the crisis, Americans blame the East for the implosion of the dollar system rather than international and central bankers (the true culprits), and chaos ensues as the masses turn on each other while the elites sit back in relative comfort, letting us destroy each other.
Another aspect of this plan, I believe, involves the hijacking of the image of the liberty movement. The liberty movement is essentially the most dangerous unknown element on the elite’s global chessboard. In fact, because we understand that international financiers and central bankers are the real enemy, we have the ability to leave the chessboard entirely and play by our own rules. Widespread economic or military conflict provides an opportunity to neutralize liberty activists who might turn revolutionary.
Recently, I came across an article from ‘The Atlantic’ titled ‘Russia And The Menace Of Unreality’. Now, some alternative analysts would read this article and immediately shrug it off as yet another attempt by the Western media machine to propagandize against Russia. Though their motivations are genuine, these analysts would be cementing the delusion that Russia is the “good guy” and the U.S. is the ever present “bad guy”. The Atlantic piece is a far more intricate manipulation than they would be giving credit for.