The end is not yet in sight

October 18, 2008

By Mike Molyneaux
18 Oct 2008
https://uncensored.co.nz

It’s becoming increasingly clear to sober minds that the world is heading slowly towards a global crisis that will stem from over-exploitation and pollution of natural resources, food and energy shortages, famine, disease, toxicity and possibly radiation sickness from nuclear proliferation. Many writers have pointed out the potential problems facing the world as industrial development and population growth accelerates out of control. Today the fortunes and fate of the world’s population lies almost entirely in the hands of probably less than a thousand wealthy, powerful, usually invisible and cleverly scheming people. Their goals and interests may not be fully aligned and they may not be working in a collective and cooperative manner, but at a few words or strokes of a pen, many of these untrustworthy people have the power to manipulate the delight or despair of countless millions of people, the pleasure or pain of all their children or dependents and the life or death not only of entire races, but now also of virtually the entire planet. These are the big banksters and cowboys of the commercial world, the true controllers of major world events. The situation would not be all bad if those powerful people had less control than the visible and democratically elected leaders of the world, but as David Icke and Gary Allen have documented, there’s enough evidence to show that this is not the case. The democratic process the world has trusted for electing leaders these past hundred years can all too easily be manipulated through media control by the wealthy and powerful. Any public person’s reputation can be made or broken through media control so most democratically elected leaders become good servants or puppets of those who control the wealth of the country and the media.

Neither would it be all bad if those powerful people had the noble qualities one might expect from world leadership, such as total integrity, great insight, wisdom, and a selfless attitude of love and service to others for the benefit of all. Again, there’s enough evidence to show that this is not the case. The totally fraudulent, divided, untrustworthy and impoverished state of the world is a reflection of its real invisible leaders. Probably less than 1% of the 3 billion adult electorate on the planet realise the poor character of the real controllers of major world events. If they knew, the world of the 21st century would be a very different place. Most people don’t want to know the truth – it’s too threatening to their fragile self-esteems to admit that they are actually powerless slaves of a super elite.

We also hear talk these days of a rising rebellion among the people – the growing hope of a loosely connected, rebellious but disorganized movement of the populous, crossing the boundaries of race, creed, nationality and class, that believes they will soon succeed in causing a world-wide revolution that will topple the present powers that be and produce a better world. Are we facing a global crisis? Are the powers that be about to be toppelled? Not so soon I don’t think.

Let’s examine the so-called rebellion among 21st century people more closely. Journalists like David Icke, Naomi Wolf, Michael Moore and Jay Weidner seem to think that there’s more chance of a successful revolution than in previous generations. They point out the internet has disseminated information on an unprecedented scale and that the 21st century revolution is led by intelligence. These two key factors they believe will win the day – knowledge and intelligence. In this essay I aim to burst some bubbles of optimism. I think it’s mean to burst someone’s bubble unless it’s misguided false optimism that’s driving them to destruction, or it’s possible to replace their false optimism by a sensible vision and expectation that will motivate and attract them into a more creative and achievable outcome. I aim to do the latter.

The belief that a rebellion by informed and intelligent people from all over the world, can and will soon cripple those who control the world is hopelessly mistaken. Such false optimism stems from an inadequate grasp of the social psychology of group control and revolution. There are several reasons why a major revolution of this kind will not take place – not at this stage in the program. Firstly, the level of awareness, dissatisfaction and opposition among the world’s population to the corrupt system we have is far too small to have any real impact. Many people may be dissatisfied with their own lot in life but not with the system. Others may be somewhat dissatisfied with the system, some even vehemently so, but most people are actually fairly satisfied with the way things are organized, particularly in the developed nations. In fact they are quick to tell you that things are probably as good as it gets under the circumstances and that all the so-called corruption and evils in the world are just part of some conspiracy theory.

Why will democratic change be impossible? Access to sufficient information and particularly the inter-net is needed to be able to find out what’s really going on in the world around us and particularly in high places of financial and social control. An estimate of the proportion of the world’s adult population that have such access or information would realistically be less than 20%. Of those who do have access, only about 10% have enough discernment, interest and concern to see through the propaganda and smokescreens. Of those with discernment only a small proportion actively and consistently work to change the leadership of the world for the better. The other 90% are either too easily duped into trusting the modern democratic system or too busy just trying to survive emotionally and financially. They simply don’t have the time, energy, knowledge or organizational resources to match or completely disrupt the kind of control systems the wealthy and powerful have at their disposal for defending their position of power and ensuring that others are less capable of usurping that position. Decades of psychology research has demonstrated an incredibly powerful tendency of people to conform to social pressure – the national news media and educational systems being the most powerful agents of social pressure. In a so-called democratic system the votes of totally ignorant or confused people count as much as informed votes by discerning individuals. As a result, the efforts of those few [about one tenth of 2% of the world’s adults] to expose and topple those unsuitable people in positions of power are simply too feeble. For every one trying to expose and topple them and their control system, there are another ten, bought by the system to confuse the population and hide and protect these elite by foul means or fair.

From time to time a political leader might gather enough support to oppose this domination by the elite but soon finds himself assassinated or untimely replaced as another equally unsuitable puppet candidate wins the vote. Other opponents are toppled by uprisings that were instigated and financially supported by the elite. To summarise, we live in the 21st century under the same kind of iron-fisted control by a small handful of powerful warlords as those living under Roman rule 2000 years ago. The only difference is that the modern iron fist is invisible and the Roman rulers did not have as many puppets to do their public relations acts nor the capability to destroy most [if not all] living species through a wrong choice of priorities and agendas. Many academics and revolutionaries around the world have already realised that the democratic system is not working as we hoped it would. As in ancient times, their revolutionary efforts are constantly revealed by the intelligence systems of the elitist rulers and nipped in the bud.

Secondly, even if a huge outbreak of opposition occurs, that alone will not be sufficient to topple the system. There are too many examples from history that show that rebellions by the population are easily put down by those in control. Obviously there are exceptions like the French revolution at the turn of the 17th century but usually we find that the exceptions were not because the revolutionaries were more numerous or intelligent or courageous than those running the system they opposed but because some greater power [typically foreign] with a vested interest in the success of the revolution came to their aid. If you believe a group of aliens from another galaxy will come to help you in the revolution then obviously you don’t need to read any further.

Thirdly, the greatest problem we face in trying to create a better world is not in disrupting and crippling the system we want to remove but in devising a system that works better. Many great and lofty ideals simply don’t work in practice. We tend to forget that the social systems in place today were not invented by the previous generation but were centuries in the making. In fact some components of the population control mechanisms in use today were invented thousands of years ago and have been on trial and in the process of refinement ever since. Furthermore if you look around at the different variations of the control mechanisms in use by different dynasties and “democracies” you find that for the most part they’re quite similar and it’s not so much the systems that are at fault but the people who drive them and the people they are meant to control. Most of the successful revolutionary leaders in the past have recognized that. This is why so many social revolutions have been followed by horrific genocide and elimination of the vanquished, potential opponents, free-thinkers, the intelligencia or educated members of the previous system. I’m not for one moment suggesting [as others already have] that we need to drastically cull the world’s population to improve things. But to be realistic we have to understand that our biggest challenge is how to deal with the flaws inherent in a large proportion of the world’s population, not just the world’s leadership.

Consider again the idea that a social revolution can produce a better world. Many generations in past millenia have seen popular [or unpopular] revolutionary movements. Unfortunately, history has shown us that the results of these revolutions have been a system that was either no better or even worse in some respects than the one it replaced, or the progress that was thought to have been achieved was later seen to be illusory. One only has to look at the results of Marxist communism, Nazi and Catholic facism, the Protestant reformation, the freedom movement of the hippies, the technological revolution of the seventies/eighties etc etc etc to realize this. The freedom and rewards gained were at the pain and cost of losing other benefits or securities. That’s not to say a better world is not possible – but it’s necessary to point out that the net progress so far has been minimal when we consider all aspects and all the items on the balance sheet are considered together. We still have a long way to go. We don’t only need a better system but a better breed of people. That’s the crux of the matter!

Let’s admit it – the world is facing a crisis of uncertainty. But that does not spell disaster, it spells a major shake-up and change in the way society is going to work. I foresee three possible scenarios:- UN planners and sociologists predict that within 40 years at present rates of change, the earth will not be able to sustain the world’s population. We know this idea with predictions of famine, disease and a world at war has been around a long time and that the prophesized date of calamity has been wrong in the past. This does not mean it’s far fetched. The fact that there’s always been famine, disease and war is no reason to believe that things cannot escalate. The escalation in terms of famine is already happening in isolated parts of Africa, Asia South America and the Middle East and the wealthier citizens move off to Europe, Austrtalia and North America. In fact because there are no new undiscovered continents for the excess population to conquer and inhabit implies that the pot has to boil over eventually. The boiling water quenches the fire and things eventually return to the normal boiling pot again. Variations of this scenario would include climate change and/or a nuclear weapons exchange that aggravates the destruction, disease and famine.

The second scenario has been suggested in political and academic circles for over forty years – a technologically engineered culling of the world’s population. We read that to prevent the first scenario, government appointed scientists in secret laboratories are [or have been] planning the FINAL SOLUTION – a bug and pandemic that will eliminate the undesirables and a special vaccine that will immunize and protect the superior races. Or a systematic program of forced sterilization, abortion and reproductive control for reducing the population. The second scenario is equally possible in view of what we know of the characters and capabilities of those in power and their past track records. Some academics argue publicly that the FINAL SOLUTION is more humane than mass starvation and another world war.

However there is a third scenario – a dramatic and voluntary transformation of the human race, motivated and led by a group of the world’s most noble, wise, intelligent, strong, healthy and visionary members of the population. This scenario is the one I know can take place and succeed. It requires a vision, a plan of action and collaboration by the world’s most noble, wise, intelligent, strong, healthy and visionary members. The vision and plan already exists, now it requires collaboration to see it succeed. As I see things, the three scenarios will run their courses in parallel, one setting off the start of the other and the third will win out in the end although I expect it will not be seriously pursued until the first two scenarios have shown their faces. Details of the third scenario will be the subject of my next article.

mike.molyneaux

About the Author

mike.molyneaux

Engineer and psychologist