Making Globalism Great Again

CJ Hopkins

Photo by Michael Nicholson/Corbis via Getty

Maybe Donald Trump isn’t as stupid as I thought. I’d hate to have to admit that publicly, but it does kind of seem like he has put one over on the liberal corporate media this time. Scanning the recent Trump-related news, I couldn’t help but notice a significant decline in the number of references to Weimar, Germany, Adolf Hitler, and “the brink of fascism” that America has supposedly been teetering on since Hillary Clinton lost the election.

I googled around pretty well, I think, but I couldn’t find a single editorial warning that Trump is about to summarily cancel the US Constitution, dissolve Congress, and proclaim himself Führer. Nor did I see any mention of Auschwitz, or any other Nazi stuff … which is weird, considering that the Hitler hysteria has been a standard feature of the official narrative we’ve been subjected to for the last two years.

So how did Trump finally get the liberal corporate media to stop calling him a fascist? He did that by acting like a fascist (i.e., like a “normal” president). Which is to say he did the bidding of the deep state goons and corporate mandarins that manage the global capitalist empire … the smiley, happy, democracy-spreading, post-fascist version of fascism we live under.

I’m referring, of course, to Venezuela, which is one of a handful of uncooperative countries that are not playing ball with global capitalism and which haven’t been “regime changed” yet. Trump green-lit the attempted coup purportedly being staged by the Venezuelan “opposition,” but which is obviously a US operation, or, rather, a global capitalist operation. As soon as he did, the corporate media immediately suspended calling him a fascist, and comparing him to Adolf Hitler, and so on, and started spewing out blatant propaganda supporting his effort to overthrow the elected government of a sovereign country.

Overthrowing the governments of sovereign countries, destroying their economies, stealing their gold, and otherwise bringing them into the fold of the global capitalist “international community” is not exactly what most folks thought Trump meant by “Make America Great Again.” Many Americans have never been to Venezuela, or Syria, or anywhere else the global capitalist empire has been ruthlessly restructuring since shortly after the end of the Cold War. They have not been lying awake at night worrying about Venezuelan democracy, or Syrian democracy, or Ukrainian democracy.

This is not because Americans are a heartless people, or an ignorant or a selfish people. It is because, well, it is because they are Americans (or, rather, because they believe they are Americans), and thus are more interested in the problems of Americans than in the problems of people in faraway lands that have nothing whatsoever to do with America.

Notwithstanding what the corporate media will tell you, Americans elected Donald Trump, a preposterous, self-aggrandizing ass clown, not because they were latent Nazis, or because they were brainwashed by Russian hackers, but, primarily, because they wanted to believe that he sincerely cared about America, and was going to try to “make it great again” (whatever that was supposed to mean, exactly).

Unfortunately, there is no America. There is nothing to make great again. “America” is a fiction, a fantasy, a nostalgia that hucksters like Donald Trump (and other, marginally less buffoonish hucksters) use to sell whatever they are selling … themselves, wars, cars, whatever. What there is, in reality, instead of America, is a supranational global capitalist empire, a decentralized, interdependent network of global corporations, financial institutions, national governments, intelligence agencies, supranational governmental entities, military forces, media, and so on. If that sounds far-fetched or conspiratorial, look at what is going on in Venezuela.

The entire global capitalist empire is working in concert to force the elected president of the country out of office. The US, the UK, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Austria, Denmark, Poland, the Netherlands, Israel, Brazil, Peru, Chile, and Argentina have officially recognized Juan Guaido as the legitimate president of Venezuela, in spite of the fact that no one elected him. Only the empire’s official evil enemies (i.e., Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Cuba, and other uncooperative countries) are objecting to this “democratic” coup. The global financial system (i.e., banks) has frozen (i.e., stolen) Venezuela’s assets, and is attempting to transfer them to Guaido so he can buy the Venezuelan military. The corporate media are hammering out the official narrative like a Goebbelsian piano in an effort to convince the general public that all this has something to do with democracy. You would have to be a total moron or hopelessly brainwashed not to recognize what is happening.

What is happening has nothing to do with America … the “America” that Americans believe they live in and that many of them want to “make great again.” What is happening is exactly what has been happening around the world since the end of the Cold War, albeit most dramatically in the Middle East. The de facto global capitalist empire is restructuring the planet with virtual impunity. It is methodically eliminating any and all impediments to the hegemony of global capitalism, and the privatization and commodification of everything.

Venezuela is one of these impediments. Overthrowing its government has nothing to do with America, or the lives of actual Americans. “America” is not to going conquer Venezuela and plant an American flag on its soil. “America” is not going to steal its oil, ship it “home,” and parcel it out to “Americans” in their pickups in the parking lot of Walmart.

What what about those American oil corporations? They want that Venezuelan oil, don’t they? Well, sure they do, but here’s the thing … there are no “American” oil corporations. Corporations, especially multi-billion dollar transnational corporations (e.g., Chevron, ExxonMobil, et al.) have no nationalities, nor any real allegiances, other than to their major shareholders. Chevron, for example, whose major shareholders are asset management and mutual fund companies like Black Rock, The Vanguard Group, SSgA Funds Management, Geode Capital Management, Wellington Management, and other transnational, multi-trillion dollar outfits. Do you really believe that being nominally headquartered in Boston or New York makes these companies “American,” or that Deutsche Bank is a “German” bank, or that BP is a “British” company?

And Venezuela is just the most recent blatant example of the empire in action. Ask yourself, honestly, what have the “American” regime change ops throughout the Greater Middle East done for any actual Americans, other than get a lot of them killed? Oh, and how about those bailouts for all those transnational “American” investment banks? Or the billions “America” provides to Israel? Someone please explain how enriching the shareholders of transnational corporations like Raytheon, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin by selling billions in weapons to Saudi Arabian Islamists is benefiting “the American people.” How much of that Saudi money are you seeing? And, wait, I’ve got another one for you. Call up your friendly 401K manager, ask how your Pfizer shares are doing, then compare that to what you’re paying some “American” insurance corporation to not really cover you.

For the last two-hundred years or so, we have been conditioned to think of ourselves as the citizens of a collection of sovereign nation states, as “Americans,” “Germans,” “Greeks,” and so on. There are no more sovereign nation states. Global capitalism has done away with them. Which is why we are experiencing a “neo-nationalist” backlash. Trump, Brexit, the so-called “new populism” … these are the death throes of national sovereignty, like the thrashing of a suffocating fish before you whack it and drop it in the cooler. The battle is over, but the fish doesn’t know that. It didn’t even realize there was a battle until it suddenly got jerked up out of the water.

In any event, here we are, at the advent of the global capitalist empire. We are not going back to the 19th Century, nor even to the early 20th Century. Neither Donald Trump nor anyone else is going to “Make America Great Again.” Global capitalism will continue to remake the world into one gigantic marketplace where we work ourselves to death at bullshit jobs in order to buy things we don’t need, accumulating debts we can never pay back, the interest on which will further enrich the global capitalist ruling classes, who, as you may have noticed, are preparing for the future by purchasing luxury underground bunkers and post-apocalyptic compounds in New Zealand. That, and militarizing the police, who they will need to maintain “public order” … you know, like they are doing in France at the moment, by beating, blinding, and hideously maiming those Gilets Jaunes (i.e., Yellow Vest) protesters that the corporate media are doing their best to demonize and/or render invisible.

Or, who knows, Americans (and other Western consumers) might take a page from those Yellow Vests, set aside their political differences (or at least ignore their hatred of each other long enough to actually try to achieve something), and focus their anger at the politicians and corporations that actually run the empire, as opposed to, you know, illegal immigrants and imaginary legions of Nazis and Russians. In the immortal words of General Buck Turgidson, “I’m not saying we wouldn’t get our hair mussed,” but, heck, it might be worth a try, especially since, the way things are going, we are probably going end up out there anyway.

CJ Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org

Feel free to come find him in Berlin and buy him a beer. He’s been known to frequent an assortment of extremely suspicious RUSSIAN establishments in Kreuzberg.

Filed under: empire watch, latest, United States, Venezuela


CJ Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org Feel free to come find him in Berlin and buy him a beer. He’s been known to frequent an assortment of extremely suspicious RUSSIAN establishments in Kreuzberg.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Guys, this might not be for everyone – well not all topics covered – but I found this interview fascinating. I don’t know either of the people involved, as in, I don’t know their backgrounds or real political views. It is definitely worth a listen even though it is quite long.


Watching this now……really good.


You’re welcome, mate. Just stumbled across it on Youtube; what a find. Brutal honesty, brutal reality. The banking and debt stuff is fascinating.


Am interested to learn the reason for the dislike. Not being combative but would like to be informed.


One downvote could simply be an error (can one correct a ‘like’ error?). It could be because the interview doesn’t include the downvoter’s primary theory, or does posit one they don’t agree with. Or simply doesn’t tell them anything new after giving an hour and a half of attention?

I haven’t listened to much of it but I feel I have moved on from framing our times in the way this vid and most others dot – but I almost never up or downvote anything or give much weight to them. I associate voting online with identity investment and reinforcement – and it may be easy to rig for all I know.

Populism could mean democracy. It can also be a manipulative appeal crafted and targeted to please. (Telling people what they want to hear).

I don’t disagree with the destructive nature of the way we are socially structured as commodity dependent – including ‘education and news’, and the thinking that operates the elitism of ‘knowledge’ cartel or ‘experts’ – that is increasingly replaced by the technocratic sacrifice of human freedom to narrative dictate of seemingly more equitable ways to meet needs.

I wonder if part of the conditioning of human minds is to tell them what is being done – but in such framing as to leave nowhere to go with it?

Or are social critics writing the footnotes to a history that is already (believed to be) ‘in the bag’?


Excellent reply and thanks for taking the time to write, binra. Feedback like yours is really important and I appreciate it. As for the downvote, I was merely intrigued to learn a different perspective, perhaps I was missing something?

I think this may be the first time I have come across an Irish perspective, provided by Gemma Doherty, about the consequences of EU membership post-2008 financial crash and other things happening in the country, which I hear very little about. I was surprised to learn that Brexit is dominating their media as much as it is here in England. The views from Danish ex-banker, Mads Palsvig, were particularly interesting, as well as learning about his political party’s movement and its objectives.

“I wonder if part of the conditioning of human minds is to tell them what is being done – but in such framing as to leave nowhere to go with it?”

Yes, this happens all the time, unfortunately. However, Palsvig did go into some detail about certain financial changes that would have far-reaching and widespread benefits. Not too different to things I have read and heard before. Where is the praxis in all this social and political critique? If the odds are so heavily stacked against the populations of the world, as in a war is being waged against us all without most of us even realising, then what can be done?

“Or are social critics writing the footnotes to a history that is already (believed to be) ‘in the bag’?”

Sadly, I think and feel that this may be the case but we still have to keep trying.

For starters, I haven’t heard much about the risks of 5G but Doherty and Palsvig both spoke about 5G last night and the potential health risks (the term ‘kill grid’ was used!) and then this morning the BBC were talking to two guys who were gushing about the 5G rollout -it is going to happen whether we like it or not, whether we consent or not. However, at the local level if enough people object to planning applications for 5G antennae it may be possible to halt them. Yet the State may overrule local councils? Who knows.

Thanks again for your response.


On the ‘outside’ we have social political situations – depicted as war upon populations by the professional institutions supposedly set up to serve. As pointed to in my oft quoted:

“Everything is BACKWARDS; everything is upside down! Doctors destroy health, Lawyers destroy justice, Universities destroy knowledge, Governments destroy freedom, Major media destroys information, And religions destroy spirituality”. Michael Ellner

On the inside we have a consciousness predicated upon fear and conflict – but masked and protected against exposure – in the same ways we are seeing reflected ‘outside’.

I see the awakening to our own part as the release of a pattern of dissociating entanglement that goes back millennia. What we may wish for in our world (if not merely vengeance) is to regain a way of living that truly embraces life – rather than marketising and weaponising ways of possession and control over a feared life. So embracing life is the way to grow in appreciation of it – and that means as it is – and not as propagandised to be by anyone – including our own thinking.

The mind of control is itself generating chaos. But when painted into a corner it generates new fear symbols and diversionary conflicts to channel its dread into ways that delay healing – but seem to delay loss of face, loss of self, loss of power.

I don’t expect to be understood by the mind engaged in outer struggle (or the failure to really engage it to any outer effect). In the same way I don’t expect an addict to be open to honest communication while their habit conforms their sense of self and reality.

Fear is contagion and in conflicted or divided self we are open to being hacked.
I have studied around the electric body enough to trust it is primarily electric, as is our Universe and that emf exposure has effects on the body at cellular and cellular signalling levels – with a range of variables involved.
However, I am no less convinced that fear – especially persistent low level anxiety – has a similarly negative effect.
Negative synergies operate a destructive loop.

But there are positive synergies we could call health or simply life function – and to give attention or focus to that which invokes fear as a basis for then countering or escaping threat – is not a grounded awareness – and so is easily manipulated or coopted. Viz Chicken Licken and Foxy Loxy.
Fear works a self-fulfilling prophecy or nocebo effect – unless brought into a grounded awareness through which Life Happens.
The ‘war’ on consciousness can be seen as voodoo or magical deceit that uses the consent of the ‘believer’ to condemn or disempower themselves – just as do hidden agenda in contracts drawn up, or ‘news’ articles with payload headline and first paragraphs followed by legal deniability in terns of ‘might, could, believed to be, sources say, suggests, seems,’ etc.

the Call to be truly and fully present is the UN-willingness to persist in denying the true by actions or neglect.
I cant do this for anyone else – and if I evade what is mine by trying to change others, I become an un-healed healer – or just a vector of fear’s contagion… thinking that warning everyone of everything is a way to become ‘good’ or worth something.

To extend worth and confidence in ability to others, we have to first have it in ourself. Why would I not? Because social conditioning has for the most part denied it – with masking substitutions.

I think it was Wendell bury I first read saying he has leaned never to rush – especially in an emergency.
the extent of deceit in our world is likely outside the range of our willingness to face – but the take-home from that is the word deceit means untruth. So looking there is not where truth finds us. But with a fundamental trust in our lives, we become more able to ‘read’ the world in the way we now have to ‘read’ fake news’. Deceitful ads, contracts and ‘deals’, presentations and assertions and much socially coded behaviour.

Regardless the agencies, or protagonists I see the ideas given currency – as the critical issue. The attempt to manipulate perception seeds and nurtures ideas into the minds of the unwary that then frame them to be harvested or hacked. Vigilance for peace is truly protective against deceit.


Thanks J.
Very interesting and thought provoking content on planned depopulation, open borders and much else.
It’s remarkable how in just a few years abortion, homosexuality, transgenders, have been pushed and promoted as never before.
Paedophilia, bestiality, incest, are not just in the pipeline, they are already here.
Even all this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

Woss quite long, Jay-Q?


Let me add this: The Brazilians voted this fascist Bolsonaro into power for just this reason: To get rif of the Mafia.


Very rightfully CJ Hopkins puts forward a question, which hardly anyone else asks: Why this absurd “references to Weimar, Germany, Adolf Hitler, and ‘the brink of fascism’”?

But I would give another answer to his question. To me this “global capitalism” is no more the classical (evil) Capitalism/Liberalism, but an outright mega-‘Mafia/Mobster/Cartel/Syndicate’-system.
911 is always seen a ‘political fraud’. I see it as probably the greatest INSURANCE FRAUD of all times. And yes, I even believe that not only the Pentagon and WTC 7 were never hit by a plane, but also the Twin-Towers were not brought down by planes. Think of the billions of Dollars of insurance payments then (to Silverstein and others). Also think of the missing gold from under the Twin Towers (never searched for by the then responsible Robert Mueller).
Also think of the – in 2001 – in the Pentagon/DOD already missing $ 2.5 (I think) Trillions. And remember that the explosion in the Pentagon on 911 killed those accountants there, who possibly already had found something out about these $2.5 Trillions. And by today $ 21 Trillions are missing in the DOD – and no one seems to care!
(I don’t want to repeat myself, so for more, please, see my comment from some weeks ago: https://off-guardian.org/2019/01/20/a-gentrified-little-town-goes-to-pot/#comment-143884

I believe there is a global “Cartel” (or may be 2 or 3 Cartels) that rules not only the West but also Russia and possibly even China.

Karl Marx predicted that Capitalism would destruct itself by monopolisation – only one capitalist being left over in the end. And then the “working class” makes a revolution.
But I think Marx (without blaming him insofar) was wrong: In its end-phase Capitalism/Liberalism turns into a criminal Mafia/Mobster/Cartel/Syndicate-system.

The mother of all fascist movements was the Italian fascist movement (Mussolini). And while fascism in Spain (Franco) or in Germany (Hitler) had other reasons, the than Italians favoured fascism in order to get rid of “la Mafia”, which plagued them (nowadays in Italy it is not so much the Sicilian Mafia but the “Ndhragata” from the “Mezzogiorno”). And Mussolini got rid of the Mafia (which was then only reinstalled by the US during WW2).

So my expectations for the future are black in black: These Global Cartels will play their game even more ruthless than now – and then our stupid citizens will turn to fascism. Possibly even a “Global Fascism”.


While I attempt to sketch from observing consciousness – in discernment of a broken and conflicted constellation that I see as framing our thought, perception and identity-response, I notice that Ivan Illich posits a complimentary perspective in terms of sociological and spiritual observations – where the latter are grounded in truly shared value – not dogma or mystery.

“Modernised poverty appears when the intensity of market dependence reaches a certain threshold. Subjectively, it is the experience of frustrating affluence which occurs in persons mutilated by their overwhelming reliance on the riches of in­dustrial productivity. Simply, it deprives those affected by it of their freedom and power to act autonomously. to live crea­tively; it condemns them to survive through being plugged into market relations. And precisely because this new impotence is deeply experienced, it is with difficulty expressed.”

…”Many professions are so well established that they not only exercise tutelage over the citizen-come-client but also deter­mine the shape of his world-become-ward. The language in which he perceives himself, his perception of rights and free­doms, and his awareness of needs all derive from professional hegemony.
The difference between craftsman, liberal professional , and the new technocrat can be clarified by comparing their typical reactions to people who neglect their r prescriptive advice. If you did not take the craftsman’s advice, you were a fool. If you did not take liberal counsel, society blamed you. Now the profession or the government may be blamed when you escape from the care that your lawyer, teacher, surgeon, or shrink has de­cided upon for you. Under the pretense of meeting needs better and on a more equitable basis, the service professional has mutated into a crusading philanthropist. The nutritionist pre­scribes the “right” formula for the infant and the psychiatrist the “right” antidepressant, and the schoolmaster-now acting with the fuller power of “educator”- feels entitled to push his method between you and anything you want to learn. Each new specialty or service production thrives only when the public has accepted and the law has endorsed a new perception of what ought not to exist.”

From ‘Towards a History of Needs’ ~ Ivan Illich.

Technocracy invoked and accepted is a different beast than Mafia turf wars for market share.
Market share is become mind-share – and the replacement of the mind with systemic and manipulative incentives that operate the machine, is cloaked or masked in ‘need-provisions’ that are not only proscriptive dictate, but regulated against not complying.

Captive minds think only of captive answers.
Scepticism does not accept face value – but seeks convincing evidence.
Cynicism masks as scepticism in order to deny and debunk anyone who speaks outside the ‘box’.
Survival of the box, model or imaged reality is the reversal of consciousness.
Order – or Law is made for Man – not as a god under which to sacrifice the living.

Robert Laine

Many thanks, CJ, for another brilliant piece reminding us of the danger of globalists – their eyes currently on Venezuela. Sitting here in my armchair, two questions occur to me as the situation approaches boiling point.

1. According to the majority of Venezuelans who should be leading the country?

The Maduro government has lost support of the majority (the May 2018 election, for example, had the lowest turnout in Venezuelan history). It has failed to deal with food and medicine scarcities, hyper-inflation, lack of security (Venezuela has 2nd highest murder rate in the world) and other critical issues.

The majority now support the National Assembly and its president Guaidó. In the December 2015 elections, the opposition took control of 67% of the seats, a big loss for Maduro. The majority look for a change and Guaidó and the opposition appear to offer a viable alternative. The danger: Washington takes control and subverts national political sovereignty(through neo-con measures) and economic sovereignty(through a neo-liberal attack).

A third group provides an alternative and could gain the support of the majority if properly organised. This includes chavistas excluded from political participation by Maduro (through lack of primaries, being jailed or exiled) and the nationalistic and patriotic military. They are the best hope for national sovereignty, countering globalism and reviving the Bolivarian Revolution betrayed by the chavista right-wing..

And how do we know what the majority want? Not that easy. Most MSM give us the view from the White House and Brussels etc., and most of the LeftSM give us the view from Miraflores Palace. The majority of Venezuelans, however, express themselves mainly through electoral votes or by voting with their feet.

2. What is the majority view on what needs to be done to resolve the situation? Hard to verify but my guess is:

– Maduro vacates his position
– the opposition, chavistas and military loyal to national sovereignty negotiate a transition, free election and Venezuela’s future
– an election occurs within a reasonable time-frame, and
– a reconstruction programme is implemented

In sum, to counter dysfunctional globalization, Venezuela needs to unify internally, defend its national sovereignty, solve its own problems and rely on the international community only for creating a level playing field (not calling the shots). Venezuela will recover if given half a chance.


He has consciously chosen to take this position whilst knowing at the same time that the assassination had gigantic consequences for the post-Kennedy world. Surely he must be able to comprehend the implication his murder had on the future of the war against Vietnam and the millions killed as a consequence?

We can’t be sure what Chomsky does or doesn’t know or comprehend. What we can be sure of, is that he wrote a whole book arguing that there were no consequences of the assassination, because Kennedy would have carried out exactly the same policies as Johnson did. Apparently, the quality of the argument is similar to that in the video above.

Michael Morrissey — Rethinking Chomsky

see also:

Michael Parenti — Conspiracy Phobia on the Left


Admin: delete the above, please.

Cretinous Smellock
Cretinous Smellock

It is amazing how everybody misses the vital issue, that Maduro revolted against the petrodollar and tried to bypass US exploitation, therefore he has been taken out of action. He should count himself lucky they didn’t assassinate him, like they did with all others who don’t kowtow, viz: Saddam Hussain, Gaddafi, JF Kennedy, Hitler, Lincoln, etc. Their only crime was the same, bypass of the phoney Fed fiat finance.

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

Geeze, Smelly – ya knows yer stuff – eh wott? An Maddy’s still standin’ last I hurd!!


Excellent article. What a great capture of the situation.


And what a situation it is.


Very good post CJ Hopkins.
A few years ago I came across recordings from Dr John Marciano lectures and seminar series called: “Empire As A Way Of Life”. It changed the way I look and understand US history and also post WW1 world history (about 12 hours of recordings). I would like to recommended it to Off-Guardian readers. Here’s Dr Marciano’s introduction to the series:

“A fundamental purpose of our meetings is to understand the systemic nature of the U.S. Empire and the economic and military imperialism that is its lifeblood. The historian William Appleman Williams argues that empire became “a way of life” in the U.S., a “combination of patterns of thought and action that, as it becomes habitual and institutionalized, defines the thrust and character of a culture and society.” This “way of life” has convinced many U.S. “Americans” they have a right or “manifest destiny” to impose their political and economic policies upon others”.

Some of the recordings (including transcripts) can be found on this website:

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

You ain’t read the transcript of the Norman Dodd/G.Edward Griffin interview then, eh?

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Milosevic: great link M, thanks. Had a quick look then, some names already knew about, viz Democracy Now, Alternet, Mother Jones, 350.org, Amy Goodman, Michael Moore, etc, but some surprised me a lot; Earth First, Earth Liberation Front, Howard Zinn, Occupy, etc. On way to work, will have a proper look at that site tonight. Told you the other day can be a bit naive. Thanks.


Once you catch on to what Noam Chomsky actually is, it all starts to seem rather obvious. They really overdid it with the 9/11 operation; that’s succeeded in waking up an uncountable multitude of people.

Passing Noam on My Way Out


The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.

Noam Chomsky

A truly expert-level psyop would involve the audacious tactic of explaining to people exactly how you intend to control them, at the same time as you’re actually doing it. Surely, nobody could ever figure out how to escape from that intellectual gulag.

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Milosevic: Chomsky: “the less violent countries, say like United Kingdom, United States, and France…” WTF? The same sheepdog who urged people to vote for Obama and Clinton. “It doesn’t matter who killed JFK” his thoughts on 9/11, etc etc. And I used to be a Chomsky groupie 15-20 years ago. I woke up too him few years ago. That website on controlled ‘grassroots’ opposition really interesting M. Even Deepak Chopra? Sigh. These bastards are so fecken devious. Pretty much all the New Left….. Fakes.


“less violent countries” — WTF, indeed.

Try that “Passing Noam on My Way Out” article; it explains not just the funding, but how the controlled opposition system actually works.

The Toxically Useful Idiocy of Amy Goodman


The Toxically Useful Idiocy of Amy Goodman

note the White Helmets propaganda video continuously playing in the background.


She has to earn her shekels from Soros. Amy has to sing for her supper.


It actually saddens and infuriates me when I watch this monologue by Chomsky. As far as I am concerned the mask has not just slipped off but completely fallen off and we get to see the true face of a very intellectual man putting his mental powers to work in the most deceitful way.

What adds to the insult is the smug way Chomsky patronises his audience with his, “worthless” and “low credibility” position regarding the complexity of events, persons, ideology and power surrounding 9/11 and the JFK assassination, and the crypto-psycho-babble about less violent nations etc, which then turns into a declaration that even in these ‘power systems’ operating democracies the populations are the ‘enemy’. Well, what is it, Noam? Are they friendly or are they the enemy of the people, like you just said?

“Even if were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares?” This is his flippant attitude towards one of the most significant events in our lifetime; a mass-casualty event where 3000 people died, many thousands more died as a result of injuries sustained from breathing in the toxic dust that scattered all over lower Manhattan, and all those family and friends of loved ones affected by 9/11. Hell, maybe nobody should ever investigate any crimes apart from the ones that Noam thinks are worthy causes?!

That Noam Chomsky dismisses the relevance and importance of the JFK assassination, for me, waas one of the many reasons for how I was able to identify him as a gatekeeper very early on in my academic life. He has consciously chosen to take this position whilst knowing at the same time that the assassination had gigantic consequences for the post-Kennedy world. Surely he must be able to comprehend the implication his murder had on the future of the war against Vietnam and the millions killed as a consequence? He doesn’t place significance on the fact that a President was murdered and there was an orchestrated cover up of the operation?

Seriously, Chomsky is one troubling individual to say the least. It’s been a long time since I was at university but I just hope that today students across the world aren’t wasting their time reading his books and glamorising him the way we used to!


I think he feels there are limits on what he can say and some things can’t safely be discussed. Cowardice, or discretion?


He has consciously chosen to take this position whilst knowing at the same time that the assassination had gigantic consequences for the post-Kennedy world. Surely he must be able to comprehend the implication his murder had on the future of the war against Vietnam and the millions killed as a consequence?

We can’t be sure what Chomsky does or doesn’t know or comprehend. What we can be sure of, is that he wrote a whole book arguing that there were no consequences of the assassination, because Kennedy would have carried out exactly the same policies as Johnson did. Apparently, the quality of the argument is similar to that in the video above.

Michael Morrissey — Rethinking Chomsky

see also:

Michael Parenti — Conspiracy Phobia on the Left


Hey Milosevic, thanks a lot for those links. Really interesting articles. The Parenti one is brilliant.

This line surmises my view of Chomsky, relating to his remarks in the above video:

“Chomsky is able to maintain his criticism that no credible evidence has come to light only by remaining determinedly unacquainted with the mountain of evidence that has been uncovered.”

Much of the MSM and today’s journalists behave in much the same way.

Chomsky has the feel of a snob, someone who is content to know what he knows, research only what he wants to confirm or bolster his views and dismisses the rest. It is sad to see that he has apparently manufactured his own consent for some of the most disturbing events in modern history.


I propose the following term of art for Chomsky’s oeuvre and similar left-wing gatekeeping: Manufacturing Dissent



Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Jay-Q: I have a friend who regularly listens to Goodman and her ‘show’ and who thinks Chomsky is the bees knees and a true ‘dissident’. As I said to Milosevic, I also was sucked in by Chomsky for maybe 20 years, my rose tinted glasses fell off and my eyes opened too him few years ago. I now feel pretty disgusted by him, and also Goodman and her mate Juan Cole. I have pointed out various things to my friend, and directed him to more Credible sites – all too no avail. We had a major disagreement about what happened at Douma, and also about the White Helmets who he believes the mainstream narrative that they are heroic ‘civil defence’. Goodman and Chomsky have sucked in a lot of people, and yes, I was one of them.


Whether we like it or not we become a gatekeeper for the lie when we select the truths that hide our fear from us.
But are people ‘sucked in’ or are people needing to maintain a narrative identity and worldview in exactly the same way as was once referred to as a false idol?
That is to say, images and symbols (personified) have all the power we give them because we believe they give us something we lack or save us from a greater fear.

The “fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”, has more to it – though I don’t invest in shame – projected or sucked.
Loss of trust in the word of those who are crying ‘wolf!’ – or giving false witness – and withholding true.
This is a withdrawal of allegiance from acceptance of the forms, appearances and presentations of a conflicted and conflicting payload or agenda. Or the opening of a discernment for truth after recognizing our propensity to react to the false framed narrative as if true.
Persistence in blind reaction is thus a learning failure that not only repeats the error, but compounds it with a sense of self-criticism that could awaken an education but often directs as a self-hatred projecting away from the opportunity to heal.

It is an unsettling experience to uncover a manipulation or deceit beneath something we extended trust (ourself) to.
But there is also the un-awareness of the presumptions and predicates (identity/worldview) that we extended such trust FROM. Breakdown is the opportunity for honesty to ‘break’ through – though I don’t hold truth as destructive -so much as undoing- of illusion.

Conditional love opens permission to let in and share with others while they meet our conditions – that we often are largely unconscious of UNTIL they are broken – because our ideal (idol) of what we want to be true coopts others and our world to then serve a wishful self-reinforcement. But wanted with all the force of our fear of being denied and deprived.

The dispossession of our Right Mind to fear-conflicted substitutes for true relation are easier to ‘analyse, diagnose, and prescribe’ in the Other than to recognize active in our own triggered reaction AND find willingness of desire for truth – in place of ‘making true’ from a false or conflicted foundation.

The desire to punish our sins in Others is the vengeance taken out on the world for failing our demands, conditions or needs – as we sucked in or invoked from a sense of lack of love, power, peace and joy – that are the primary qualities or fruits of native being.

If our desire for truth does not bring forth an integrated quality of being – regardless appearances and presentations. Then are we only seeking the ‘truths’ that give a self-reinforcement of grievance.

Hating something and attacking it does not release it from our ‘field’.
Paradox or not – I see we cannot release what we are not first willing to acknowledge ownership of – if you like as recognizing I sucked on and believed what I now find has no true belonging in my desire as truly revealed to me.
The block to healing is blame or guilt – and it inherent association with penalty, punishment or attack.

Every stepping stone in our life served to bring us here – as the active willingness for truth – now (even if seemingly small against the sense of resistances or obstructions). Devaluing or demonising our past is thus to deny us the blessing that we HAVE lived and thus shared.
While fear and hate can be contagious, they are not truly shared – and therefore are not the truth of life – even if operating a be-lived sense of powerlessness that sucks in power from ‘outside – and thus gives faith and power to external ‘gods’.

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Binra: thank you mate. Your first 4 paragraphs resonate strongly – I get your meaning. Also: “Devaluing or demonising our past is thus to deny us the blessing that we HAVE lived and thus shared” I appreciate your feedback. As I told you last week, sometimes my mind is like a whirlpool.


Chaos can be the recognition of a need for truth rather than the imposition of ‘order’.

I reflected on the mind-whilrpool…

Mind in reaction is its own dreaming.
Stillness holds and extends the embrace of a mind renewed.

The capacity of a negative synergy of mutually reinforcing facets is its compelling experience and convicted identity.

So a self-reinforcing negative vortex, has all the force of its intent and attention.
Until a mind elects to change.

Positively or integratively self reinforcing thought and purpose extends freedom to our relations – as the ‘space’ or awareness in which to know or recognize truly.

We give up or discard choice, to judgemental reactions as convictions of fact. And just as with the algorithms of financial computers, set up patterns of mutually reinforcing ‘facts’ from which to escalate or intensify the ‘reality experience’ of lost or broken communication and relationship to ‘hate objects undeserving of life.

Making sacred is also making special and keeping apart. When un-whole or unholy acts or intentions are made sacred, they are placed beyond reach of revisiting, revision or reason.

Worshipping the hateful in persistent giving of a negatively aligned intention and attention, is inviting discord into our hearts and minds as the basis from which to draw or gain power to prevail or protect. But such power – in secret – depends on the thing it hates – to seem to have such power.

Where would vengeance be without the wounds of grievance kept ever fresh?
Why else the nurturing of ‘victim’, but as a secret means to a sense of power over the guilted?

I don’t call blame here – but more that a machine-reaction operates – that we then become conformed to under the dictates of power and defence set in terms of destruction and fear – rather than in rest and true protection.

Nothing sane comes from insane or conflicted foundations, but recognizing the false as false opens to the desire for re-cognising true – because it is true – and NOT as a reaction to the false in attempt to change it – as if from without – in the terms of a framed and baited attempt to do so.

Ideas shape our perception and response. Freedom is not in the level of perception and response – but as idea – from which the rest must follow – as the night the day.

Rebranding in magical name change is not a change or yielding of the old mind to the renewed – but the clinging to the old in fear and hatred of the new. Our true name is our true nature – regardless dressing up in self-inflations and their attendant fears and protections.

Stillness, is the ‘field of knowing’ that cannot be marketised or weaponised, but can be discarded or neglected by a driven sense of lack that never has enough – and never truly has.

Contrary to the belief of a dynamic in conflict, stillness is not static so much as the quality of awareness through the balance points within the rich interplay of life in expression. The pursuit of a static sense of life or self – as if no longer to be disturbed, is the regressive fantasy of a private perfection that life can never fulfil, because it is unshared, withheld, kept apart and maintained at life’s expense. Self-image or self-concept as a mis-taken identity is played out upon the true, so as to seem to have become ‘true’ and so is set against its true nature as if ‘false’.

The false demands support in order to be maintained or pass off as true.
Truth need do nothing to be itself.
In the first is all conflict and depletion and power struggle to assign sacrifice.
In the second is the recognition of what comes First as the basis from which to think and speak and live. And being whole or unconflicted, is also the Call to joy.
To the renewal of the mind in a freedom of association – to move as we are truly moved – rather than coerced and compelled by a naked emperor, its covering and entourage of protectors.
I am naked before truth – a quality of transparency and accountability I do not make. If I do not find rest and renewal, am I not still persisting the attempt to set terms and conditions? And now more able to see that that is what I am holding onto – and do not really want?

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Binra: “stillness holds and extends the embrace of a mind renewed”….. I appreciate the time you take to craft your comments. To put it as simply as possible, where I’m coming from is: there is so much rank injustice in the World, so much innocent blood being spilt, so many lies told, so much darkness binra. I am one person; me. Most of the time I feel pretty helpless and powerless. My comments come from the position that if you see great injustice in the World, countries bombed, children killed, You Do Not ignore that injustice, whether it’s Yemen, Palestine, Venezuela, Guatemala, anywhere. You do not bury your head in the sand and pretend nothing is happening. Very simply, its about right and wrong. You don’t ignore great injustice. I comment because I have a conscience mate. “Carry a candle in the dark, be a candle in the dark, know that you’re a flame in the dark”…. Ivan Illich. And yes, I don’t know much about him, but in my bit of research, he strikes me as a very intriguing person. Will check him out further.


The breaking of the mind is the condemnation of a part of it to being trapped within a world of hate – as if now to escape or overcome it – but in any case to suffer and seek such power as we can in defence, alliance and lessening of pain. Sometimes it can seem we have escaped, sometimes some new promise of victory makes us glad – but the dream fails and nightmares return.

The above is a picture of a mind IN a world that is OUTSIDE its control – and therefore compelled to seek power or hide in its seeming protections.

But I hold that despite the nature of our experience, we are engaged in the experience of a world of our own defining, and that this experience is within consciousness. Not the other way around.

We see through a glass darkly, means we see through not only the past, but through a past made in anger.
The splitting of mind, enables part to be pushed out of sight while another part operates as if a blind eye – a surface unaware it what lies beneath and set up or predicated in fear and self-protection so as never to look at what lies beneath – but always to look out in its world and hate and fear there. Attack and deny there.
For of course the capacity to deny, hurt and kill others is also within us – but is masked over – and rises only under conditions of ‘justified retaliation’. But actually leaks as a distrustful and suspicious withholding of blessing while certain conditions are met. And such loves or alliances turn all too quickly to hate when they are not met.

The confusing of love with a conditional mitigation of hate is like giving allegiance to someone for not hurting you. Like the Stockholm syndrome, the captive adapts to an alignment with power as they now perceive it and seek to appease it and cultivate a fantasy relationship in which the hate is hidden and a bearable existence given support.

There are innumerable blessings shared in this world, that the power given hate and fear would deny or render meaningless. But given focus, might be no less unbearable to a sense of self-separateness – because such a sense is unable to abide love, and yet cannot be whole in hate, and so is condemned by its own mind to hate and yet try to make it seem loving.

The willingness to look at what lies beneath, is only true to the willingness for healing – because the investigation of the mind of lies by a mind of lies, seeks only to find its own self-reinforcement.
Looking at the feared or the hateful – while it is in-act is different than being driven reactively by it – as a way to no longer have to look and feel – but use the grievance as a symbol and source of righteousness – because when we feel such experience, we are sickened, powerless or helplessly set apart and against what we cannot control – except by dissociating to a displacement ‘reality’.

But an honesty of not knowing, is the releasing of the assertion of judgement, and the opening through which our perceptions and underlying thought, can be transformed.
To light a candle is to shine a light – instead of joining in darkness of hate.
The attempt to manufacture light is fake news or wishful thinking given emotional intensity.
Transparency and a true or just account, is allowing truth to reintegrate to its own recognition. Not to fantasy gratifications in which we may be heavily invested.

A world of hate is undone one willingness at a time and regardless all appearances of power in the world.

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Binra: its 11.27 pm down here in Australia, and I’m really tired, aye. I’ll reread your comments in the morning. Any suggestions on reading material? As I said, I find Ivan Illich pretty intriguing, and will investigate further. Anything else you recommend? I assume you’re in the UK? Have a good day😁


Nothing is more transformational than living our own discovery.
Increasing motivation for learning supports fundamental change.
This means questioning what we think we already know.
I would not presume to know what would resonate for you at this time – but I know that the desire to learn is never left unmet.


I wouldn’t bother with some of those, GP.
Democracy Now/ Goodman are bankrolled by Soros. It follows a Neocon agenda calling for Libya style bombing of Syria. Parrots a lot of Neocon/ Ziocon garbage. Controlled opposition at best. Same applies to Mother Jones/ Counterpunch. Bogus/ Faux Left.
Michael “I’m An Ordinary Joe” Moore is a repulsive fat turd of a hypocrite with 7 mansions who is worth well over $100 million. He was breaking all records whitewashing Clinton’s warmongering, corruption and mendacity, presenting her as a cross between Jesus Christ and Mother Teresa. Really vile individual.


Without engaging in whether what you say has merit, I notice that the way you say it is simply smear by opinion stated as fact.

The fact remains that deceit is the masking of hidden agenda – and that this can include different facets of bias in different sources of information. Such that a perfect source is nowhere. But opinion everywhere. That is everyone seeking the moral high ground in which to have the advantage in a shit throwing contest.

One reason that many limit disclosure is when doing so is believed to be playing into an enemy – whose disempowerment is considered a lesser evil than a full disclosure – for example. Or of course feared and believed to bring an outcome of penalty, exclusion, pain and loss.

Not everyone who finds they have chosen against their own integrity persists in doing so, and yet a blame and vilification culture (sic) operates to judge and punish simply by smear of association established in a group or collective narrative.

When truth is filtered and distorted through ‘sides’, then the terms of the perceived and believed conflict determines what can or cannot be said – because truth has become whatever can be weaponised, marketised in undermining the other as a means to get for oneself or side.

The disinfo of the internet has different sources – some of which is seeking publicity – whether for ‘impact’ or revenue. Imaginative freedom to think aloud without checking it through is another – and of course the deliberate jamming of the ability to use the Internet for anything deemed threatening to the established order and its private agenda – (even if global in scope).

The sowing of division and discord is a key aim of such agenda – and so even if we feel justified in our accusations, it may still be wise to consider exactly how we do so. Owning our own talk, is a rare quality of self-responsibility. I would that it become much more common as an indication of a genuine participation in creating the conditions in which a greater self-honesty can be shared – in all or any respect – and consequently less investment in the masking persona of a manipulative intent.


I’m just raising a red flag so people don’t accept those organs uncritically as valid sources.
What I say has been extensively documented.
The Soros money is a fact, the neocon agenda is a fact.
But don’t take my word for it, check it out for yourself.
If you don’t agree with that and take the opposite view, that’s fine.
It doesn’t matter what I think, I just work for a living.


Thanks for responding.


I think that’s what he meant by “already knew about” — who was pulling the strings of those particular puppets.


Robert Laine

Thanks for noting this crucial issue of funding and freedom of expression. How do non-MS POVs get funded and yet stay independent? OffG is a good example. Apart from Patreon (which also does some censoring apparently), what sources are there? Other services or markets? More marketing? If we like OffG or other sites/writers it is time to pony up what with Google algorithms blocking many sites on the left(and right). By coincidence, I help fund the writer of this article(CJ) and hope others will do so as well, especially by purchasing Zone 23(e-book $3), his brilliant anti-neo-liberal novel about our probable dystopian future.


And the Guardian roll out one of their favourite billionaires, who’ll be waiting to leap on any opportunity to profit from the chaos:

“The EU looks like the Soviet Union in 1991 – on the verge of collapse”


Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

Dear Mr. Hopkins – how come you think the same as me? You psychic – or wha’?

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

and which pub d’ya frequent in Berlino;Harry’s Bar – oder der (alte) “Palast der Republik”?


Cafe Moscow? 🙂

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

Wo ist das?


An der Karl Marx Allee!

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

See yas darn’ere……somtime. I did use to love walking down the Friedrichstraße after having “passed go” with Ostmark at 6 to 1 in me socks……oh Yes!

Paul Spencer
Paul Spencer

I definitely owe you that beer, but Berlin is not on my itinerary. I may have asked in a previous comment, but might you be headed to the Pacific NW of the USA sometime?

Besides the content of your article, I enjoyed the breadth of commentary that your article elicited. Wide range of political analyses, philosophical dissertations, humor, and common sense. As Zimmerman put it: “Oh me, oh my. Love that country pie.”

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar

Globalism can be countered if people think the alternatives are better.

1. People can set up local credit unions/thrifts which have in their Articles of Association that they be owned by depositers and that they only invest locally.

If people think they can satisfy local demand for loans and mortgages locally, these schemes can definitely work.

2. People can refuse to invest in companies they disapprove of and refuse to purchase their products.

Buying TNC coffee is a choice, as is buying TNC ICT hardware. Technology is now old hat to produce PCs without back door surveillance hooks in the OS. The vast majority need very simple ICT and value security.

3. They can elect independent representatives not tied to Establishment parties.

Voting Labour/Conservative or Republican/Democrat can be changed easily if people care.

4. They can vote to deny trading rights to companies hoarding cash in tax havens.

If you told Apple it could not trade in Europe, USA nor China until its $1trn cash pile were invested productively onshore, and if you promised to blow all the Apple Executives brains out if they did not comply, they would comply. Hopefully, such threats would not be necessary, but it is necessary to teach TNCs thst they are accountable.

Ultimately if people want to be controlled by TNCs, they will be.

The question is whether they are even aware of how they are being controlled…


That there is a true choice may need the belief and commitment to making it. But this is heavily weighted against with an existing and acquired set of beliefs and commitments that in some sense can be likened to an operating system.

Minds operating from shared belief and commitment, (actions) operate a self-reinforcing mind-set, worldview, identity, or strategy of coping or surviving conflicts that are both outer and inner – and which in a sense come together to make a world – or perhaps the only way we can see the world – and in which no real choices remain – or are seemingly ineffectual, futile or waiting on everyone else to ‘wake up’.

One way or another persisting the experience of being defined or set in subjection to the loveless or hateful will of others, as of the overall social beliefs and reactions that are the established order in all its ‘managed chaos’ and ‘chaotic mismanagement’.

No one sees the mind they operate from unless it is brought to question – which it is strongly defended against. And so in a very real sense we live the ‘world’ it makes as real and suffer its dictate. Such a mind then will never bring itself to question excepting as a way of repackaging the same conflict in different forms.

Experience of undoing of a belief can be in its suspension, or its recognition as baseless, meaningless, fruitless – and as costing what would otherwise be lived and shared. And so not only are such reality investments futile, they are also actively destructive.

The attempt to tell others they are wrong and guilt of destructive outcome if they do not think and act rightly, is an example of the projection of unowned responsibility or conflict – out to the world as if ‘we’ have woken up and others need to get on board. This is the same core pattern as any other coercive manipulation – but set as the ‘good guy’ against a compelling threat or danger.

Accepting responsibility for our own consciousness, and as a result our perceptions and responses, is of a completely different order than accepting guilt and aligning in its dictate.

Regardless the forms of our social expressions and interactions, they carry or communicate the mind of their purpose, and this runs beneath the masking of social reinforcements over guilt, fear and conflict.

It is impossible to free ourself of our own hate, without a shift of perspective and communication in our relationships with everyone we meet. But of course if the underlying intent is to vindicate hate – then the world must run on such an ‘operating system’ for us, while that set of mind is active.

There is always an inner personal resonance or correspondence to any outer trigger – that has become associated with weakness, invalidity, as a sense of denial, deprivation, abandonment and betrayal – and a consequent armouring and defence of the self under intolerable conflict or pain. Nor are any words welcome in such a state – for the fight-flight response is a shutting off of all else to a binary mind of self-survival at any cost. As the contraction and withdrawl from the field of relational awareness to an emotionally driven density of self assertive will.

I sense that the self-assertive will is really universal will suffering a coercive subjection to its own unrecognised projections or believed-true-reactions.

I have desire to open and share in cultural renewal. But without the undoing of the ‘power’ mind-set, the new movement is simply delivered up to Herod (power jealousy and rival threat).
Pouring new wine into the old paradigm effects a sacrificial magic as if LIFE will of itself come into the forms we have prepared – and of course in some sense, there are moments and glimpses and hopefulness in some sense of a realisable potential in anything that actually lets LIFE in.

But the mind of ‘define and control’ is set over life – as if to make it in its own image – and therefore in conflict with – and sharing the IDEA of conflict as power over LIFE.

Life is a self-revealing movement. An the art and science of living is to honour and align with what truly moves – as an expression and embodiment of inherent or innate worth.

The making-mind is an ‘insulation’ from true relation – in its own imaged reality-experience.
Bubble-reality suggests the natural popping of a vanity or plaything, but a ‘hell’ is walled in and closed off as an irrevocable and unquestionable sense of conviction and denial in pain and loss and the rage that reflects from its own ‘walls’ or terror and hate symbols – yet paralysed and impotent in a self-isolating reinforcement.

Fear can and will miscreate in our mind – without our recognising we have been hooked, baited and taken in. So fear has to become the condition of the truing of our conscious acceptance – rather than hidden in personal and social masking – as if to personally escape something that has been gifted to get rid of.

Of course no one HAS to accept a false gift – but insofar as we share a ‘mind’ are we sharing a currency of thought and belief – much of which runs automatically. We don’t think of our mind and reaction as robotic or ‘programmed conditioning’ and yet the social engineering of such a mind is the dominant technocracy beneath all of the ‘front ends’ of user-interface.

What exactly is the ‘Signal’ our minds are tuned to?
Is it in fact the ‘Noise’ that effectively blocks the recognition of true relation?

Is the primary ‘tuning’ of such a mind, the demand FOR unconsciousness of an intolerable and overwhelming fear-aversion – as it only sense of protection?

I feel to remember that the ‘ego’ or masking personae hides in and usurps the true – once accepted and ‘shared’ in its place. ‘Global’ in and of itself is not an evil but holds a quality of human self-awareness that Buckminster Fuller naively projected a ‘Global Village’, spaceship Earth and etc.

But the means of global communications and exchange has been driven by mercantile profit and power struggle – even if cultural exchanges then ‘cross pollinate’ as a result.
So global dominion/subjection, has all of the appeal/horror of the mind in fear and the fantasy of eradicating or overcoming it – writ large as a totality. As a Prison Planet. Or perhaps ‘smart cities’ to operate and contain the dumb surviving utility units, ruled over by ‘gods’. You cant stop progress! (sic).

Dependency on infrastructure is the ongoing outsourcing of humanity to ‘systems’ and system controllers. Collectivism of technologism is itself a seemingly neutral vector of control, through which we become controlled. It is not just a given that sewage and water, road or electricity is provided. Our social organisation has – as I see it – taken a trojan horse in, with the marketised and weaponises technologism of what is presumed to be real science, under the knowledge cartel of experts who emerge as either conformed or ruled over (walled out) by politically directed ‘settled consensus’.

Questioning the mind or reality presumptions upon which we are predicated is not only the art and science of revealing the already true, but the vigilance against accepting or giving support and reinforcement to false or destructive models and beliefs – including the weaponisation of such beliefs by the manipulation of science, history, and social identities based upon them.

It ought to be clear that polarised hatred serves a mutually reinforcing role – while becoming the thing we hate.

Ivan Illich offers critical reflection, that looks to convivial cooperation, of a truly shared sense of worth instead of a managed existence under trained ‘experts’. (Toward a History of Needs is a current book on my table) – but underneath all possible tools is the need to awaken and encourage the willingness to discover and explore – as a living movement, rather than a problem seeking to escape itself.

Perhaps we already have a gun at our head – but have also a capacity to question this as a basis for desiring truth – above an old survival dictate. Curiosity is a native child of being.
If the way we see determines our reaction and outcome, then desire to see with new eyes, is a re-evaluation from the Ground up – or indeed a movement of a Self-revealing Life – instead of an assertive overlay of a self-made diversionary displacement.

Do we have life on Life’s terms, or on fear of death’s terms? If the latter, is an honesty of a current account, then why not be curious? Why not look at the thought and emotion in act rather than engage and indulge it as if a ‘given’?


A superb essay, Mr. Hopkins, nailing down so clearly the bigger picture with the precision of a grandmaster sharpshooter.

The Deep State is indeed not an American phenomenon, it’s a clique without borders, the bond of national belonging, vacuous of any human morality, it’s driven purely by their obsessive desire to accumulate wealth and control the plebs.

Where and how will it all end?



Love the way this snippet has been commandeered for countless videos.
Here’s an Australian one from the time when the Libs raised the pension age to 70.

Robert Laine

Thanks flaxgirl. I needed a good laugh today. Hitler prediction about Turnbull turns out to be correct. Go figure. Even Holt at Portsea gets in the act.

Francis Lee
Francis Lee

I have to say that I find much of the hyper-globalist rhetoric somewhat overblown. We are not pace Thomas Friedman of the New York Times (aka Pravda on the Hudson) living in a flat world, we are living in a hierarchical world; always were, and probably always will be. It is amazing how the ‘progressive left’ has bought into the market ideology. It goes something like this:

A combination of new and revolutionary technologies involving transport and communications and the increasing power and reach of Transnational Corporations (TNCs) has shifted control out of the power of nation-states to the all encompassing and powerful ‘market’. The neo-liberal, globalist agenda has reduced the presence of the state in economic policy making through the policies of privatisation, deregulation, and liberalisation. Lower direct taxation, unfettered trade, and financial movements became the mantra especially in the Anglosphere.

Blah, blah blah.

One would have expected this sort of patter – and gets it – from the house journals of the Anglo-American financial publications, i.e., The Economist, The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times and so forth. But these views have also become common fare among the left. The centre-left’s infatuation for example with the notion that EU as a vehicle of progress can be changed – see DiEM25 headed by Yakis Varoufakis – by piecemeal constitutional reform is a case in point. It is taken as read that change at a national level is no longer possible in a world where finance and globalization are said to be ruling the roost. There is a need to step up therefore to the supra-national level. Strange logic this. If you can’t change the system at national level, then you must change it at supra-national level. In my limited understanding I would have thought that it was the other way around. But hey, what do I know.

But in any case, the crisis of 2008 tended to demonstrate that public authority – the state – does matter and in the final analysis is crucial in underpinning the economy. This changing of the guard was most observable when the Masters of the Universe had to go on bended knee to the state to be rescued. Governments poured millions of dollars, pounds and euros into propping up the financial sector. In some cases, this amounted to a policy little short of outright nationalization. Think Royal Bank of Scotland in UK and the Ford Motor Company in the US. A bete noire of the market fundamentalists.

Moreover, the state provides the institutional framework of basic infrastructure: roads, rail, ports, airports, rubbish collection and sewage maintenance – the hardware; and economy consisting of subsidies, patents, tax breaks, publicly funded research, education, currency manipulation, monies for R&D, health and other social legislation – the software. In short, the state seems to be the senior partner in this arrangement of state and economy.
As is evident the death of the state has been somewhat exaggerated. That state has always and will continue to play a pivotal role it the economic development of all countries. An indeed even in the process of globalization itself. Rationalization of production and distribution have assuredly made geographical distance increasingly possible easing of communications between states. But such technologies are of little use if there are political barriers to such movement. The crucial enabling factor underlying globalization therefore has been the progressive reduction in these barriers to flows of commodities, goods, finance and other services.

In fact, it could be plausibly argued that powerful states have used globalization as a means of increasing their power.
States actively construct globalization and use if as a soft geo-politics and to acquire greater power, over, and autonomy from, their national economies and societies respectively …The US and G7’s other dominant members design the international trade agreements, organizations and legislation that support and govern the trans-border investments, production networks, and market penetration constitutive of contemporary globalization. Advanced capitalist states particularly, use these political instruments to shape international decision-making and policies in their interests.

(Gritsch M. 2005 ‘’The nation-state and economic globalization: soft geo-politics and State Autonomy: Review of International Political Economy 12: 1-25. Quoted in P.Dicken, Global Shift p.175)
Plus ce change, plus de la meme chose.

Paul Carline
Paul Carline

Perhaps you ought to look at the 2011 study by Glattfelder et al entitled “The Network of Global Corporate Control”. They described their method as follows: “We start from a list of 43060 TNCs [trans-national companies] identified according to the OECD definition, taken from a sample of about 30 million economic actors contained in the Orbis 2007 database (see SI Appendix, Sec. 2). We then apply a recursive search (Fig. S1 and SI Appendix, Sec. 2) which singles out, for the first time to our knowledge, the network of all the ownership pathways originating from and pointing to TNCs (Fig. S2). The resulting TNC network includes 600508 nodes and 1006987 ownership ties.”

They note that “network control is much more unequally distributed than wealth. In particular, the top ranked actors hold a control ten times bigger than what could be expected based on their wealth.” And “nearly 4/10 of the control over the economic value of TNCs in the world is held, via a complicated web of ownership relations, by a group of 147 TNCs in the core, which has almost full control over itself. The top holders within the core can thus be thought of as an economic “super-entity” in the global network of corporations.”

“Remarkably, the existence of such a core in the global market was never documented before and thus, so far, no scientific study demonstrates or excludes that this international “super-entity” has ever acted as a bloc. However, some examples suggest that this is not an unlikely scenario.”

I recommend everyone to read the full article.


Of the 43,060 corporations studied – just 1,318 control most of the global economy. Of the 147 TNC “super-entity”: 37 are among the world’s largest 100 economies. They control the world economy for the global supra-national super-society (of which many of the CEOs are leading members) …AND we pay an extra subsidy (around $700bn) for them to destroy the planet, ruining their own business model and any real hope of a sustainable future.

Paying twice to get fucked over: can there be a better definition of insanity? Maybe, we welcome and encourage them by voting for the “pro-business” agenda to join supra-national institutions to protect jobs and workers rights. Double jeopardy insanity?


(Contains a link to the Zurich study.)

Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

John, someone pays the nation state’s policy mekkers….done they, So who wud thar be?


That guy realized soon what was expected of him:
“Trump on Track”: https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2017/04/13/trump-on-track-trump-auf-linie/


‘Power’ grows by capture or undermining of rival power.

The sense of self-specialness, as exceptionalism, a chosen people, embodies any mythic narrative that supports or serves it. The ‘right to rule’, the insiders, illuminati, bringers of a new world or protectors from the end of an old one. Survival is at the core but through a narrative identity that – like an Idol or false god, demands sacrifice of the true. And so power for power’s sake operates the dispossession of the capacity to have, be or share in life. It hollows out and lays waste, while making ‘special’ or isolating, within a pattern of thought and behaviour that is addictive, compulsive, driven, unfree.

So I put power in ‘quotes’ because I question it as true. I don’t question that we most all and most all the time give it our truth or feel compelled or demanded to sacrifice truth to it.
Whatever we give power to becomes as a god to us.

While power is a quality of being, ‘power OVER’ works by deceit of self illusion and by terror of self-loss, to limit and dispossess us of what we thought to be and so in clinging to the little we have, we mask in forms that pass off as semblances of ‘power’, or of course the acting out from a sense of lack upon those who we assume power over in the same patterns as we hate in those who we feel denied by.

In this sense relations become subverted to power struggle, or one-up-man-ship that sets the mores, and currency of exchange of a sense of self-lack, seeking completion in forms of private or social acceptance, from an underlying sense of being denied, deprived or rejected – EXCEPT as aligned in the forms of ‘power’ of current compliance.

So to get or seem to have power, we align with external power, whether in fact, by threat or by passing off the expression and presentation of power.

But also in natural interdependencies, we can instead of treating another as ourself, withhold such a recognition in preference for forms of bullying, in self-agrandizement, and acting out of a fantasy of being powerful – and then wanting to believe it rather than own guilt of abusing others as a true reflection of our behaviour and the unworthiness of our thought and feeling.

Possession and defence of possession, operate the sense of persistence as a private sense of control that is invoked and made necessary against an outer threat that is associated with an inner insecurity or breakdown of communication. For the armoured self is also hiding or protecting an inner conflict – with all the force of that conflict – against the outer situation upon which to be vindicated or to be reinforced in grievance toward a future self vindication.

Why write about ‘power’ as if anything written could make any difference to the world of its rampant abuse?
Because for the most part the human mind is reactive along the lines of its already accepted conditioning – in terms of a learned ‘world’ and ‘self’ in the frame or terms of the ‘power’ expression of our day. That are set in doublethink – or corrupted derivatives of what was once a true word.
The power of the word is not in thinking to have a better handle, leverage or masking strategy, but in restoring a true appreciation from a false or deceitful sense of subjection.

The wish and belief in a personal sense of power is associated with the loss of a true Inherence to a conviction of self-assertive survival and necessity. (The Fall).

The irony being that being deceived in power is actually protecting and feeding the chaos that threatens it and thus justifies or sanctifies its invocation.

The insanity of power blindness is of believing we are alone, threatened, and must therefore take over all survival function as a manual override of a nature believed weak, treacherous or out of control. In this are all the patterns of the replacement of life with death, love with systemic controls and communication with deceit.

Corrupted power, like a parasitical contagion, works through the whole, to bring it to powerlessness. The theme of the Prodigal Son was kept to the bare minimum in terms of any development of the nature of exchange of living inheritance for a private possession and power – excepting a self-depleting arrival at utter wretchedness and self-debasement. Bottoming out.

Restoring to true relation is more a matter of breaking a spell than breaking the false that a shared deceit makes real.

I didn’t write about Trump and Venezuella – as others have already done so – but rather reflect on ‘power’ as an idea we make and accept and reinforce by teaching and learning it.

Within the framework of the physical experience, bodies can be idolised and used for fantasy, deprived or poisoned, broken and killed. When all the masking falls away, a kind of loveless puppetry or programming operates the overriding of the willingness to share the life that is us – that is true of us – and which we are known and knowing we are known in as one.

I don’t think of true power as ‘great’ so much as beyond measure and without compare, and so I would rather renew or uncover GRATITUDE than limit to the mind of measure, comparison, perceived lack and envious deceit.

The power of gratitude is for a true receipt – and therefore a true expression.
The attempt to make reality is a private imagination given power.
We cannot unmake our own deceit with the power of deceit, but we can disinvest and disassociate from its support and reinforcement.

What is resisted, persists.
What is not used, fades by non use.
Are we sanctifying grievance as the basis of justifying ‘power’?
My sense of resistance is of resisting the temptation to powerlessness through forms of deceit that seem to promise or confer what we want to believe from reaction in fear and grievance.

How can this be but a desire for truth that is recognisable by its qualities rather than a believed or feared denial?

Mutually polarised denial operates darkness in the mind and the world – by which shadow figures play out an ‘Ancient Hate’ upon the body.

Fair dinkum
Fair dinkum

Power has no intent.
It simply is.
The sun, gravity, wind, light, waves, fire and water all exert/exhude power.
Humans have no power, only force or authority.
Force and authority have intent. They are directed at someone or something. They are corruptible.
Love is the highest power.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins

“A clever mind is not a heart. Knowledge doesn’t really care, Wisdom does.”

because ,

“there is Knowledge. there is wisdom. the difference is compassion . . .”
(The Tao of Pooh)

“There isn’t time : so brief is life , for bickerings , apologies , heart burnings , callings to account : there is only time for loving and but an instant, so to speak, for that . . . ”
(Mark Twain)

The ‘Why’ ‘How’ & ‘What’ for evidence of intent , when exerting power over others …

Back to the real world , FD and never forgetting >>>
Mens Rea & James Comey , lol , how things revolve 360º, but with that lil’ something of extra added momentum, that clarifies “A Question of Honour” 😉

Forgive for sure, & meanwhile never forget & look up at the ‘Clouds’ … of ^^^ Geo-Engineering ^^^
“I’ve looked at life (& love) from both sides now …” & Narcissism still rules 😉


Love and power.

What cannot be revealed to a mind seeking and fighting for power is that ‘all power is (of) God’.

This is not meaningful in the framing of a conflict of powers. And a conflict of powers is without love. Symbols of love? Yes – especially threatened or as victim. But recognition of oneself in the other. No.

What CAN be learned is the meaninglessness of conflict and the willingness to choose not to use this temptation to ‘power’ – and thus be open to a direct expression of an integrated or unconflicted love as an expression of a shared integrity of being – regardless others current acceptance of their own integral worth or willingness to accept and align likewise.

Because a sense of loss of love, and loss of power, underlies the struggle to survive a world of fear and threat, the self equates with its attempt to acquire substitutions of possession and control – which magnify the fear of chaos or dispossession, and so develop the manipulative ploys that are so pervasive and normalised as to seem human nature.

Desire is power to hold and align intention, of communication and action.
But conflicted desire operates a split mind – as a conflict of powers.
The split is projected out, and the conflict protected by a protecting of the split by narratives of plausible deniability.

The split mind is the expression and result of the belief in attack as power.
Asserting the untrue against the true is not an attack on God, but the undoing of our invested identity will be interpreted as a destructive intent and act – by such an identity – because it was made upon denial of truth to have its ‘own creative assertion’.

A sense of self-specialness, seeking and finding self-justification, that must be in conflict with every other self and seeking to get from or get back something the other seems either to have that we lack or is seeking to take what we have.

The complexities that arise from this are only working the same theme and to the same end.
Of course the forms of spiritual realisation (unified purpose) are co-opted by a manipulative intent and so the symbols, words or teachings can be taken out of context and made to serve conflicting minds. So the true nature of communication is not in the form alone, but in the qualities of congruency of word and deed. In this sense, love need have no name to be itself and share its nature.

Divide and rule is known to be the basis of worldly power yet almost no one looks within to see their own divisions as a ruling out of a true peace and clarity of being
Rather a masking cover story is invoked to deflect and divert attention such that there is no rest of free awareness. Mind capture is not only a result of becoming a corporate acquisition as a unit to be consumed, but employing mind as the basis for a masking identity to ourself as well as to others.

Correct identification undoes a mistaken identity – to the embrace of a truly shared identity. But it is wholeness that extends the quality of relationship, but an attempt to get from others for a sense of self-lack. Giving power away is the attempt to work it by deceit.

“You started it – now look what you made me do!”

Such thinking has all the power we give it and for many is the only sense of power they know and so is defended at almost any cost., with attack being the best form of defence. Loveless thinking seeks and finds it reward in what is wrong with everyone and everything – excepting conformity and compliance with conditions of a fantasy asserted as true.

harry stotle
harry stotle

“So how did Trump finally get the liberal corporate media to stop calling him a fascist? He did that by acting like a fascist (i.e., like a “normal” president). Which is to say he did the bidding of the deep state goons and corporate mandarins that manage the global capitalist empire … the smiley, happy, democracy-spreading, post-fascist version of fascism we live under.” – precisely, and so-called liberals cheer on fascists as soon as the fascists start attacking targets liberals have been conditioned to fear (Assad, Putin, Maduro, etc, etc) while demonstrating absolutely no insight into the conditioning process the MSM subjects them to.

Bizarrely the largest group supporting fascists nowadays are liberals even while they produce an endless litany of turgid identity politics – how the fuck did that happen?


I’ve been asking myself the same question for a while now, I’ve no idea how it happened. The same is true of “the Liberal left” voraciously defending the EU against lexiters. They’d be more comfortable with Macron as British PM and Anna Soubry leading the Labour Party.


the largest group supporting fascists nowadays are liberals even while they produce an endless litany of turgid identity politics – how the fuck did that happen?

“He who pays the piper, also calls the tune.”

There’s no great mystery about it, once you stop assuming that these assholes’ primary motivations are something other than status, careerism, and money. Try talking sense to some “liberal” 9/11 deniers; it’s a highly edifying experience.

The “Grassroots” Myth: “Liberal CIA” Network of “New Left” Foundations, Media and Activist Groups

harry stotle
harry stotle

You are probably right but I still find it utterly bizarre – liberals screaming fascist when an internet comedian produces a joke in bad taste (that led to him being criminalised) yet barely a murmer from them when death squads are being primed to once again unleash hell in latin America.

Its as if the likes of Chile, Guatemala, Panama and El Salvador never happened – who’s Oliver North I can hear them say!


Virtue signalling depends on hating the haters as if a caring act.
People acting hatefully are easy to hate and provocation is part of their strategy of getting what they think they want, but of course without masking in forms of acceptability, they meet rejection excepting when used as a proxy by others – in which case they can seem to be popular as long as they behave in compliance with expectations and demands of others.

Masked hate is not hard to find. A thousand seeming irritations every day cover a hate that is not socially acceptable unless expressing justified grievance. Complex and clever minds are able to repackage toxic debt into something worthy of real investment.

And so the stealing of your investments in a false sense of worth operates under normal social structures of apparently credible and meaningful exchange.

The right to judge others finds social reinforcement and those who can gain the power to effect them on others make alliance of common interest as a ‘right to wield power to influence and direct the minds of others and thus the events that follow from their actions’.

Those who love to hate are open to manipulate or to put it even more directly hate is manipulative – and insidiously so when masked as love.

I’m not suggesting we should not have hate feelings or are guilty to feel hate in our heart – but that hate is hateful and will dump out on others as a self-protective gesture.


I hate to hate that I hate to hate but what i hate is what I hate to hate as hateful as that sounds.Hope you understand.


Its as if the likes of Chile, Guatemala, Panama and El Salvador never happened – who’s Oliver North I can hear them say!

surely you meant, who is Elliott Abrams?

Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

harry stotle
harry stotle

Or as Jackie Cogan memorably said; “I’m livin’ in America, and in America you are on your own. America is not a country – it’s just a business. Now fuckin’ pay me”

Francis Lee
Francis Lee

Sounds a bit like Arthur Jensen’s diatribe to Howard Beale in the film ‘Network’ 1976