The End of Authority

One notion which has been troubling me for quite some time is the ease with which we submit to the influence of dubious ‘authorities’. People (or organisations) whose opinions are somehow deemed more ‘valuable’ than the opinions of others. People whose opinions are given greater credence because of the organisation to which they belong, rather than the veracity of their claims or proclamations.

By deferring to authority – any authority, no matter how benign they may appear – we demean and devalue ourselves. By what right should any person (or organisation) be allowed to decide what will happen to any one of us, when we as sentient beings, usually endowed with sufficient intelligence, education and experience to analyse a situation and make our own choices, should have complete authority over ourselves?

Why has humanity succumbed historically to the depredations and destruction of arbitrary, self-appointed authority?

One theme that I would like to return to again and again is this: question authority. Do not grant anyone authority over you, no matter how reasonable they may seem. Authority figures exist for one purpose only – to direct the destruction of others.

And one of those may be you, some day . . .

We really need to disabuse ourselves when it comes to our ingrained habit of assuming that certain people in our society are somehow better and more intelligent than we are; the simple fact is that these are the idiots who make often catastrophic decisions, and arrange some legal or other protection for themselves so that the rest of us are forced to suffer in silence. Or they decide, for whatever barbaric reasons, usually nowadays something to do with ‘national security’, that the lives of others can somehow be justifiably sacrificed in the name of projects which aggrandise them. So many things come to mind – nuclear bombs seem to stick in the mind most. What possible use are nuclear bombs? Who would think they were useful? Someone with a death wish, perhaps, or maybe . . . a member of a death cult?

But the fact is that all of this has been a con, and a means to an end – the achievement of their agenda, which is that, eventually, we will all be disposable, microchipped serfs in a world wholly run by them. ‘They’ are not just the politicians, but those deep in the background whose money buys anything – including the proclamations of those whom they have placed in positions of influence – and whose wealth has, in fact, been achieved off the backs of all those who thought that they were working for a better future, indeed, for any kind of future which was visibly better than what went before. While so many have toiled in the expectation of raising their families and having a nice retirement, events have been happening, for many years, which are about to blow everything to pieces.

What I am adumbrating here, however, is the idea that if you cannot find a person of authority whom people can respect to support your viewpoint, then create your own, or at least pay them so that they support you vocally. This is an idea we need to have in mind every time someone says anything: who is behind them? Who put them up to this? In an age when virtually everything in the media is little better than a soundbite – because we are all supposed to be sufferers of Attention Deficit Disorder, with no memory worthy of the name – we need, more than ever before, to be critical in our analysis of what we see and hear.

If we only take away one single idea with us – the idea that ‘authority’ is enmeshed with the kind of money that buys unquestioning and embarrassing loyalty to causes that would make any sane person tear up the flagstones and riot – we are making progress.

Because, you see, we live a strange existence. What we see is a facade at best; everything about our lives is artificial. ‘They’ have caused it to be that way. Natural life ceased long ago for humans. We no longer grow our own food on land which we care for and keep safe; increasingly, food is grown by (or for) large companies whose control over our food and water increases by the year. Why? Because they wish it. Because they say so, and because they feel that large numbers of ‘useless eaters’ – us – are not necessary. All the pious talk about the rights of humans to resources is merely put there to control our minds. Their control over our food and water will allow them, eventually (but sooner rather than later) to kill us.

We no longer eat enough natural food, and even if we did, a combination of intensive farming and over-exploitation of other natural resources such as marine fisheries has led to a situation in which ill health results from bastardised, degraded foods. Conversely, many people nowadays live in an urban setting with no ability to support themselves if the worst should happen, and where close proximity and bad habits lead to the easy transmission of diseases, for example. And if it doesn’t, they fix it so that it does:

We are being poisoned in our food supply (e.g. fluoride, excess sugars, plasticisers) and in our medicines, where we are told that we are being ‘cured’ through the use of drugs, when in fact a lot of our misfortunes are probably due to malnutrition of one form or another, the effects of low but ever-present levels of toxins in our environment disrupting not only our hormonal systems but those of other animals, too. Technologists have taken it upon themselves to try to increase yields of crops and even animals by tampering at the genetic level, and the effects of this are just beginning to be felt as massive die-offs of pollinating insects combine with the effects of the herbicide Roundup (sequestration of minerals) to produce foods which now have only a small percent of the nutritive value of the same foods that our ancestors used to eat; and all the while, the economic situation is being manipulated to increase profits and make our daily necessities more expensive.

The seas are suffering perhaps much more than the land. We have been dumping all kinds of wastes there for millennia, but with industrialisation and the mechanisation of farming practices, plus increased volumes of shipping, we have dropped everything there, from excess fertilisers to our faecal wastes, an endless torrent of toxic plastic particles, mercury and other toxic materials and rather too much radioactive waste, as we were too dumb (or too damned cheap) to make safe places for this on land. The latest obscene insult to the Pacific Ocean has been the catastrophic release of radioactive water from the meltdown at Fukushima. Even when the radioactivity has passed away (as it must eventually), remember that the products may still be toxic – and in our food supply increasingly as time progresses. Some might call it ‘karma’ . . .

If ‘democracy’ means something, it means that politicians and their ilk exist to serve the populace at large, but it does seem that Western politicians in particular have fallen prey to those who can pay for them and bring them under their control. What other explanation could there be for bastardising our foods and preventing our choosing something better? Why would ‘authorities’ want to control the supply of seeds? Why are police forces around the world suddenly looking like battlefront soldiers? Why are ordinary people – us, you and me – suddenly considered the ‘enemy’ in what is supposed to be an enlightened civilisation? Does an ‘enlightened civilisation’ suddenly take it upon itself to declare war on other, smaller nations to get what it wants? Are bombs, bullets and rockets symptomatic of ‘civilisation’?

Or is the truth of the matter that it was always this way, and that suddenly the sleep has fallen from our eyes and we are actually starting to see what the citizens of other (often victimised) nations knew from the beginning? That the supposed wealth and prosperity of our motherlands was actually built upon the exploitation, suffering and death of other nations? And we pay taxes which enable all of this; it is still ongoing. We have lost control of the servants of our society, and we need to take control back – urgently!

We cannot even trust the reporting of ‘news’ because the same egregious forces which have pwned our political classes have long since seized control of the mass media. Why else would such a thing as ‘chemtrails’, laden with toxic chemicals and other evil substances, be so conspicuous around the world, and yet so little is said about them in the mainstream media? Could the same people be behind them?

It is true that the arrival of the Internet has enabled the collation of information globally so that the patterns have emerged, but we cannot take this resource for granted. Those same egregious forces want to take control of the Net and will do so simply by suggesting that it be supervised by a benevolent and allegedly independent ‘authority’ – the United Nations. But wait . . . the UN was a creation of the same strange forces . . . its real purpose is to control nations who do not agree with the ‘international community’ (read: ‘egregious Western plutocrats’) and to bring them into the same system of usury, financial dependence, poverty and death. Small wonder that the BRICS nations recently announced their own international development bank to counter the devastation and malevolence of the IMF, whose only purpose is to create insoluble indebtedness in countries whose economies have fallen into chaos when run by people with the same mindset as . . . the IMF!

For my own part, having experienced some difficulties during my previous contract, there seems to be only one course: boycott, divest and sanction. Don’t buy crap that you don’t need, however inviting or ‘trendy’ its acquisition may seem. Divest all debt and keep any necessary routine debt (interest) minimal or nonexistent. Sanction criminals by refusing to deal with them, be they even nations in size. Buy local wherever possible and support the local economy.

I will return in due course to discuss the individual issues, as each deserves its own coverage. My essential point right now is that all of these things are the result of corruptible people in positions of authority making decisions on behalf of populations without even consulting with them as to whether they would agree to their implementation. It has always amused me that politicians love democracy – but only when it works for them!

Let me, however, in concluding, point out a disturbing paradox of our times: those who think they deserve to be our leaders have colluded to remove the original inhabitants from their land, over a period of centuries, with the promise of a better life in the urban situation, and the results have been disease, pollution and the appropriation of said populations to fight wars on their behalf – to preserve their wealth, not our nations – and yet these are the same people who describe us as ‘useless eaters’. According to their way of thinking, the world is overpopulated and this human population needs to be culled like an excess of small fish in a pond. Why? So that we don’t spoil the world for them.

So let’s get this straight . . . on the one hand, they use our labour to get the riches that they so desire, and on the other . . . they want to kill us when their purpose is satisfied, to discard us like the pointless aftermath of a good meal. Does that sound to you like a fair and just way to run the world? Of course not. But this is the result of tolerating ‘authoritarianism’, and deferring to ‘authority’ is an absolute part of our social conditioning and has been for centuries – if we stopped for a moment and thought about what was being perpetrated, we would see that a small minority has been stealing the wealth of the world, wealth which belongs to everyone in the world, and hoarding it just for themselves and keeping it within a small group of families.

In future articles in this thread, I intend to focus on this kind of issue, but let me leave you with a powerful idea in your head: they do all of this things because we were dumb enough to believe what they laughingly called ‘education’, but what might more accurately be called ‘indoctrination’. Let us not fall into the trap of believing things because some talking head or windbag professor says that it is so – especially in any field of science, where the requirement for falsifiability sets a boundary beyond which paradigm change is forced. The facade – the hologram – the deception which we have been conditioned to accept as ‘reality’ – is what they want us to see. True ‘reality’ is rather different, and we must forever be in search of it; this should be our primary duty to ourselves, as it is our surest defence against those who would deceive and enslave us.