by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB
Certain behaviors by governments and by private industry have become shockingly anti-society in the last few decades, growing noticeably worse since the turn of the 21st century. Where will it end? Can it continue to get worse? How much worse? Is there any reason for us to expect a turn-around or at least a let-up?
If the anti-society trends we observe today were the products of willy-nilly change, one could hope that some new trend will come about take their place. But I think these trends were all planned in detail, from the top. They were never willy-nilly.
My suggestion is that we grasp what is happening, and create our own plans for a new trend that opposes the various anti-society trends.
There is good reason to act quickly now. It’s that the planners are planning to control our minds. This is already going on in many ways, including by literally changing our brains, so in future, we may not be able to oppose these persons. So hop aboard the action train, please.
Ignore the Slow Pokes
Thomas Jefferson said “Experience hath shewn that men will long endure an unsufferable situation” – or words to that effect. Indeed, almost everyone is willing to “stick it out for another 24 hours” – and then another 24 and another 24. Right now most people are not feeling “called to action.” I advise that we simply ignore them. Don’t stop and try to recruit the reluctant.
Many of us have worked hard trying to recruit the reluctant by informing them that 9/11 was an Inside Job. Speaking personally, I have never made a convert to the cause. Most folks who see the light about 9/11 come to it indirectly and voluntarily.
The rest probably do know it was an Inside Job but “can’t handle it.” I suspect their ability to handle it might manifest itself rapidly if they noticed people offering an alternative way of dealing with such governmental crime.
Note: it’s easy for people to believe an Inside-Job interpretation of the behaviour of a foreign government. So when hinting about the Boston Marathon, to a Boston audience, it may pay to refer to the obvious lies in the case of the Sydney siege. Vice versa, too. Aussies won’t get their knickers in a knot on hearing that Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s death in custody was an FBI initiative. What they are averse to hearing is that the Sydney-siege death of Tori Johnson was scripted.
Are Words, Action?
Ask any parent of a four-year-old if words by the parent are “action,” in the same sense that a spanking is action. I think they will say Yes, and that they feel more “active” when using words than when hitting the kid. I, too, think harsh words are vital.
Americans generally disapprove of violent action against the powerful. This is a foolish cultural tenet. The powerful use violence all the time. They even spread disease – including inventing the disease in the first place. They create, when they feel like it, hurricanes, earthquakes, and droughts, unabashedly playing God with the forces of Nature.
The powerful import drugs (the CIA does this on a vast scale since at least the 1960s). Then they throw into a violent prison the “riffraff” of society who have fallen into drug addiction. They teach American soldiers to use torture even though this be highly illegal.
And so forth.
When I was in high school, we learned that some brave souls had “got at” the powerful by going on strikes (known in Australia as “industrial action”), and arranging for a boycott of certain businesses. At that point — in the 1960s — it started to be popular to hold rallies and marches to protest the Vietnam war. The people felt powerful.
(Note: in the case of the “ouster” of Nixon from the presidency, we were led to believe that our disapproval of “Tricky Dick” is what did the job. Only later did we learn that Nelson Rockefeller had engendered the fall of Nixon, and had possibly plotted Nixon’s rise to the White House in the first place. He also saw to the ouster of Vice President Agnew, following which Nelson stepped in as Ford’s Vice President.)
It wouldn’t surprise me if the above methods of curtailing the power of business or government were organized by those entities themselves. Unionization of labor works well for the powerful as they can pick the relevant labor leaders.
These examples certainly taught my generation that non-violence was essential. This was also the theme that Martin Luther King brought in, frequently referencing Holy Scripture as the guide. The civil rights movement, to obtain voting rights and other rights for the descendants of slaves, was largely law-based. The action was in the courtroom.
The proper way, I mean the established way, to deal with an enemy is by war, with only slight restriction on the use of violence. When people give diseases to the populace, and hit them with earthquakes, this clearly shows them to be the enemy.
Ni argue that no matter how a dictionary may define “war” as something that occurs between two nations, an expression of violence by means of massive weaponry has to qualify as war even if the two parties are in the same nation.
In our day, the identification of our enemy is clouded by the fact that the US government pretends to be in alliance with World Government’s Army, such as NATO. The US also does the job of a world-government army, blasting other nations to kingdom come without so much as a congressional by-your-leave.
Being on the Side of the Angels
As often as not, the US does this sort of regime change on the basis of a claim to be giving humanitarian aid to an oppressed people. The words of the Marine Hymn end with:
“First to fight for right and freedom
And to keep our honor clean
We are proud to wear the title,
The United States Marines.”
The Ballad of the Green Beret goes so far as to claim:
“Back at home a young wife waits
Her Green Beret has met his fate
He has died for those oppressed
Leaving her his last request.”
Note the confusion here. The US armed services are seen by Americans as a force that defends America against external enemies – and therefore are given the praise and affection that would be due to a military fulfilling that role.
But in fact that is not what the US military does. It works for somebody else, at least most of the time. I can’t think of any occasion when we died “for those oppressed.” I can think of many when we do not help the oppressed. I can even think of many where America helped the oppressor, bigtime.
Where Does God Stand on War?
On the violence-nonviolence issue, more confusion is wrought by religion. Sometimes the God of the Abrahamic religion is merciful and even instructs “Love thine enemy.” But the Bible is full of one tribe smiting another. Reinhold Niebuhr has argued that we all possess a dual morality. In our individual lives we are encouraged to develop moral restraint. But when we are acting as a whole society, our “best morality” is to be vicious.
Not many religions have heeded what Niebuhr pointed out. If they did, they would have to say that it’s proper and virtuous to be kind in the home society, but that it’s proper and virtuous to make war against the enemy. Note Deuteronomy, Chapter 20:10-17:
When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them….
Trust in the Lord (at Your Peril?)
In general, religion also contradicts the sensible position about “taking action” when there is an evil force in society. This is because the main theme of religion is goodness. It is especially a song to the goodness of the Creator – and His role in helping people cope with adversity.
“Stick with the Lord and all will be well.” This is the opposite of “Get out there and straighten things out.” I see the “person” known as the deity as actually a symbol for society. The “good” He preaches is the good of the whole group.
That’s fine when it comes to a society that does not have a major competing interest, a major social class that will treat the rest of the population as vermin. If the society does have such an entity within it, the “Trust in the Lord’s goodness” theme is harmful. It blinds us to what is going on.
It may be better to follow the Lord’ advice about dealing with enemies, as regards the people’s “domestic enemy.”
Call to Action
The hour grows late. We are making a huge mistake in “tolerating” the cabal, the evil ones, or whatever you want to call them.
In his famous “Give me liberty or give me death” speech in Virginia, in 1775, Patrick Henry said:
“It is natural to man to indulge in the illusion of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she turns us into beasts…. “
I think she is turning us into beasts.
–Mary Maxwell would rather know the worst. Please visit her at www.MaxwellForSenate.com