Chapter 6
The Superpower Wars
And let us bathe our hands in … blood up to the elbows, and
besmear our swords. Then we walk forth, even to the market place,
And waving our red weapons o’er our heads, Let’s all cry “Peace,
Freedom and Liberty!” -William Shakespeare, Julius
Caesar
In the early days of the Cold War, the two superpowers, the
United States and the USSR, had built up a mighty arsenal of
planet-destroying nuclear weapons. The problem that emerged early on
was this: neither side could see the merit in waging a nuclear war.
All assessments commissioned by both sides indicated that a nuclear
holocaust would not only destroy life itself but also the planet. We
would simply cease to exist.
Facing such a hollow victory, the military-minded politicians on
both sides had no choice but to seek domination over the other
through regional wars, fought with conventional weapons and soaked
in the blood of the innocent.
So we see in the 1950s the Korean War; and in the 1960s and
1970s, the Vietnam War. History records meticulously and unerringly
(with the benefit of hindsight and the release of secret documents)
that both wars were waged regionally for the benefit of the
superpowers. Both were ideological wars, justified in the West as a
stand against the rising spread of the evil empire of communism, and
in the East as a stand against imperialism. These two wars were
based on philosophical and financial benefit. In the United States,
with the need for a continuing cohesion of national sovereignty, the
mindset was to defeat communism at any cost. Both the Korean and
Vietnam conflicts involved an ideological struggle between communism
in the north and capitalism in the south. The USSR, requiring a
similar coalescence of communist states, saw these two conflicts
ideally suited to their purpose.
Neither superpower dared use its nuclear arsenal.
By waging war using conventional methods, the two superpowers
were able to quiet their citizens while at the same time flexing
their military muscles and feeding their industrial military
complexes. The victims, as always, were the hapless citizens way
down in the pecking order. Politicians, drunk with the delusion of
national sovereignty and the power and the glory that goes with it,
simply followed the well-defined pattern of the strong using and
oppressing the weak. Words such as "freedom," "justice," and
"equality" were bandied about by political manipulators whose only
agenda was financial gain. The United Nations, an inept and
philosophically flawed grouping of nations, played a pathetic,
perverted role in these regional wars.
In reviewing these two episodes of idiocy, we see once again the
folly of allowing national sovereignty to set the agenda for the
world. Bloom describes it this way:
But what about freedom, justice, and equality?
Isn’t the goal to put all nations on an equal footing? Isn’t that
what peace should be about? An equality of nations will never exist
in our lifetimes.Why? Because peace, freedom, and justice are
deceptive concepts. Hidden beneath their surface are the instincts
of the pecking order. The barnyardchickens studied by naturalist
Schjelderup-Ebbe had their periods of peace, but they never had
equality. No matter how quiet things were, there was always a
dominant bird, and there was always some unfortunate chicken
trampled to the bottom of the social ladder. The state of things is
not restricted to fowl down on the farm. Chimpanzees, baboons, and
apes — the animal relatives with whom we share the greatest number
of instincts — are all prisoners of deep-rooted hierarchical drives.
Apparently, so are we. When we preach the ideals of freedom, peace,
and justice, our intentions are less than honest.(Bloom, page 264)
The pattern that has evolved in the long climb from savagery and
barbarism is still with us. It molds our thinking and creates our
destiny as we struggle to find a solution that results in peace for
all mankind. As long as sovereign nations refuse to coalesce into a
global government, equally represented by all nations, peace will
remain a distant dream. The political spoils men of the second half
of the century became adept at using the slogans of freedom, peace,
and justice as motivating weapons to convince their unsuspecting
fellows that war is not only inevitable but justified. When we strip
off their moral disguises, these slogans are nothing more than
political rhetoric used by those in power to achieve hierarchical
superiority over those nations and people who are on the lower ranks
of the barnyard pecking order. This subversive tactic, so cleverly
used by both superpowers, would be perfected and drawn upon on many
occasions as the century wore on.
It is not only the innocent who suffer terribly in such police
wars, it is the youth who are slaughtered and deserted when their
political leaders see retreat as the only political expediency. The
pathetic stories of the MIAs — those missing in action —in both wars
stirred a nation’s heart. These forgotten heroes were left to
languish in prisoner-of-war camps that make World War II conditions
look like a walk in the park. Not content with deceitfully leading
their nations to war, these pitiful excuses for political leadership
simply turned a blind eye to the plight of their patriotic sons.
Treachery has always been the hallmark of the consummate politician.
Power lust is the aphrodisiac of the modern political mind. These
puppets of the Industrial Military Complex have emerged, carried out
their treasonous deeds, and crept back into the obscurity of a
wealthy retirement to write their twisted memoirs. They are too
numerous to mention; we all know who they are.
It must also be remembered that wars — necessary for the
continuation of the Industrial Military Complex of both the
superpowers — are also extremely expensive. And it is the
citizens who always pay. Taxation regimes that provide the financing
so necessary for war mongers rose sharply in the West, and in the
East the communist response was to milk the economy mercilessly.
Both sides of the Cold War would eventually be bankrupted by decades
of war mongering. In the meantime, the cost of war had to be paid
for by the citizens. In the West, the capitalist system controlled
by the Industrial Military Complex simply pulled the strings of
political hacks to enact more oppressive and far-reaching methods of
tax gouging. In the East, the gouging was not as obvious since
communism is totalitarian and therefore does not require any
legislation to apportion resources to fund wars.
The period between the 1950s and the early 1970s saw a
consolidation of Marxist-inspired communism in the East and
socialism in the West. In order to camouflage socialism and its
Marxist origins, the clever and deceitful social engineers in the
West invented a new phrase that would become universally accepted
and known as “social democracy.” This method of camouflaging Marxist
socialism proved to be most effective and allowed a gradual
socialization of the free world. Those in this era wise enough to
expose Marxist socialism for what it really was were branded
anti-socialists. The clever and deceitful social engineers had
become expert at using the much-refined and honed reductionism
techniques, destroying any attempt at lifting the camouflage of
social democracy. We will examine this reductionism technique in a
later chapter.
Although the communists were plainly and philosophically wrong in
their secular humanist thinking, the capitalists were similarly
incorrect in propagating materialism fueled by greed and power.
Lurking in the background of both mindsets was the Communist
Manifesto, represented by communism in the East and socialism in
the West.
These consolidating decades saw many social and political changes
as both sides of the Cold War fought desperately to reach the
superior position in world power. Allies on both sides, realizing
the benefit and security of allying themselves with either the
United States or the USSR, quickly rallied to the use of three
misleading words — freedom, peace, and justice — with which the
masters of oratory flooded the airwaves.
Television became a valuable tool to propagandists and spin
doctors on both sides of the Cold War. This medium was quickly
recognized globally by the entire electronic media industry as a
mass communication tool that could brainwash even the most
intelligent minds using short patriotic sound bytes. During the
Vietnam War, however, television brought the horror of war into
American and Western living rooms. The daily record of carnage would
forever be embedded in the consciousness of families across the U.S.
As an attempt by youth to avoid their political leaders’ folly,
the hippy movement was born in the 1960s and flourished through
universities and high schools of the free world. The movement took a
variety of forms. It swept pacifism up among the burgeoning
“causes.” The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., winner of the Nobel
peace prize in 1964, was a significant figure not only in the
struggle for racial desegregation in the United States but also in
his emphasis on nonviolence in dealing with both racism and war.
Yet, pacifism lost its clearly defined character in these years, and
the peace movement came to include advocates of violence as well as
advocates of nonviolence — illegal as well as legal actions. The
shift was notable from legally approved pacifism in the form of
exemption from military service to a struggle against a particular
war, rather than against war in general.
Hundreds of thousands of Americans took part in peace marches,
peace demonstrations, and peace vigils during the war in Vietnam.
Many people, including such eminent men as King, the influential
pediatrician Dr. Benjamin Spock, and President John W. Ward of
Amherst College, were arrested for civil disobedience while taking
part in antiwar demonstrations. Many senators, congressmen,
clergymen, and educators demanded “Peace Now.” Jeannette Rankin, the
first woman elected to the United States Congress (1916) and who
voted against entry into both world wars, led ten thousand women to
Washington, D.C., in January 1968 to protest the war in Vietnam.
By 1970, the United States military structure confronted a peace
movement within its own ranks. In 1971 about a thousand Vietnam
veterans camped in Washington, D.C., to lobby for an immediate end
to the war. Within the services, underground newspapers appeared on
army posts and groups such as the Concerned Officers Movement were
formed.
This era of rebellion proved to be a turning point in how the
political manipulators dealt with insurrection. With television
cameras poised to capture any event, it was no longer advisable to
use brute force against the nation’s young. A new method had to be
devised that would suit the power controllers and manipulators. Of
course, in the East, any dissidents were simply rounded up, shipped
off to gulags, tortured, and exterminated.
A new method of dealing with insurrection in the West was devised
by the CIA and passed on to other countries with similar
aspirations; it became known as “mind control.” This deliberate
interference with the individual’s free will is recorded in our
historical record as the most despicable act of terrorism known to
man. The Western media stood idly by as the political manipulators
of this atheistic science achieved their narrow and self-serving
agendas. With mind control through mass communication, a new era of
tyranny evolved. As Western governments learned how to use this tool
and became more confident in their ungodly manipulation of human
beings, the rights embodied in each nation’s constitution would be
gradually eroded until they were eventually just ignored.
We owe much to the “flower power” era of the hippies — free
thought and rebellion against the totalitarian state, to name two.
However, as is always the case, many of the followers of the hippy
era, having been brainwashed by subversive elements within the
movement, would clean themselves up, get their degrees, and become
the future political and bureaucratic leaders of the latter part of
the century. This unforeseen and unexpected emergence would add
strength to the ever-spreading virus of socialism.
The spreading disease of socialism in the West created two
problems. First, under the guise of “national interest,” secret
agencies of government systematically hijacked the constitutional
rights of the citizens while at the same time devising devious and
treacherous methods of manipulating and controlling populist ideas.
This furthered the agenda of the Industrial Military Complex, which
had become a power unto itself and, in fact, was the response of
capitalism to the socialist disease.
The second problem manifested at about this time as the super
powers in the West struggled to find a solution to pay for their
war-mongering. In 1971, the Group of Seven (G-7) powerful nations
abandoned the long established institution of fixing world
currencies to a gold standard and adopted paper gold. This became
known universally as the Bond Market. No longer did the citizens of
so-called free democracies have any control over the financial zeal
of their governments or the multinational conglomerates of
capitalism. This act of idiocy and tyranny would play out in a most
horrendous way as we shall see in future chapters. Was there no end
to the lack of wisdom these political manipulators and social
engineers demonstrated?
It is clear, then, from historical events that the Western world
had deliberately set about to destroy its opponents in the Cold War.
We have seen from this moment onward how world debt has risen
exponentially as each participating nation either within the G-7 or
at the periphery went on an irresponsible spending spree known as
the "borrow-and-spend" era. The tax-and-spend era had been too
difficult to manage politically; the power and control manipulators
of political ideology had found it too difficult to communicate why
ever-increasing taxes were necessary. Borrowing and spending by the
elitist capitalists of Western civilization was nothing short of a
suicidal plunge into world bankruptcy. The world’s financial markets
soon created a new form of international gambling under the guise of
gold and silver. This, of course, suited the narrow perspective of
the secular humanist and many prospered from paper transactions. The
long-held view of social virtue quickly disappeared, submerged
beneath the lust of materialism.
Such was the mindset of certain rogue elements in concert with
criminal minds — and in 1963, a U.S. president was assassinated.
That this could be an act of tyranny was unthinkable in the modern
era. Had we not achieved a semblance of civilization? The simple
answer is “no.”
The mistake John F. Kennedy made was that he forgot the barnyard
pecking order. He became a threat to the overarching agenda of power
manipulators within the Industrial Military Complex, and had to be
eliminated swiftly. His brother, Robert Kennedy, followed soon
after, as he too had failed to recognize his position and had become
a threat. These acts of deliberate tyranny were just punctuating
moments in the ideological war being waged between socialists and
capitalists. Dominance, even over the president of the United
States, was sought at any cost.
The might of the Industrial Military Complex, exampled by the
Kennedy assassinations, ensured that future political leaders would
toe the line and apply the policies as prescribed by the elitist
power controllers of the modern era. Without representative global
government, these perverted minds are uncontrollable and continue to
reign terror over the world’s populations. Citizens are not born for
the benefit of government. Government is formed for the benefit of
the citizens. All governments in the West and the East have chosen
to forget or ignore this universe reality.
The big issues for all who survived the twentieth century are how
did we get into this mess and how do we get out of it? As we have
seen through our review of defining historical moments, we got into
the mess by blindly following knowledgeable yet unwise lawyers
and politicians. During the transition centuries of the eighteenth
and nineteenth, politics was handed over from the totalitarian rule
of the clergy to the lawyers. The practice of law became the
prerequisite for elected office. The problem is that lawyers,
trained myopically in the practice of law, are and always will be
ill-prepared for public service. Their profession is too narrow and
lacking in practical life experience; it is theoretical rather than
practical. The lawyers of any society in response to the popular
mandate write the legislation; the politicians holding power enact
the legislation. Thus, the process takes on a self-serving agenda.
Experience and real foresight are lost in this mechanical process of
government — good ideas supplant good ideals. Political expediency,
motivated by the lust for control and power, replaces any semblance
of wisdom that may be nurtured in the minds of the participants.
Popular polls become the litmus test for far-reaching decisions
rather than what may be in the best interests of all.
This, then, identifies the great problems. The solution requires
further investigation.
With the consolidation of communism in the East and a creeping
form of socialism in the West, capitalism did what it had to do:
fight for survival. As the unionism posited by Marx began to assert
its will over workers and capital through well-organized and
well-planned strategies of increased wages and working conditions,
the response was to coalesce into even greater and more powerful
multinational and, later, transnational corporations. This
became an all-out war between the Marxist-inspired communists —
represented worldwide by actual communism and the camouflaged
versions of socialism — and the elite capitalists of wealth and
power. In the middle were the ordinary people, the innocent of
society. Communism and socialism are identical: one is overt, the
other covert. Socialism spread like a cancer in the West, reaching
into every aspect of life. The misguided unions, thinking they were
fighting for a glorious cause — the destruction of capitalism — were
used like the pawns they were and still are. The Communist
Manifesto set out the role of unions; stupidly, union members
followed.
This ideological war raged all through the rest of the twentieth
century. The stakes were high for both sides of the Cold War and the
secret ideological war between the protagonists. There were no rules
of the game; anything was acceptable on both sides. The citizen was
quickly relegated to the position of the lowest common denominator
in the pecking order, as history has shown. The state became the
most important entity. Citizens were viewed as mere pawns, numbers
in the game. Howard Bloom in The Lucifer Principle explains
it eloquently:
There’s good reason for a group to want to
climb as high in the pecking order as it can. The super organism at
the summit has the best territory, the best food, the best of
everything. That’s why some ant species go to war. The ant colonies
that win increase their territory and build insect empires. The
larger the size of an ant society’s territory, the better each ant
citizen is fed and the bigger each worker is able to grow. When it
comes to sex, the winning colony scores an extra bonus. During the
mating session, it is able to produce more winged, sexually active
queens and males. As a result even its chances to start fresh
offshoots is greater than those of its less successful neighbors.
The pecking order phenomenon is not restricted
to ancient times. Humans in the modern era are still motivated by
its primordial rule: Friends flock to the bird on top; they shun and
even abuse the bird on the bottom. This simple principal has cropped
up in the recent history of America.
(Bloom, The Lucifer Principle)
Bloom’s analogy, using the pecking order principle of the animal
kingdom, demonstrates that as a higher species, modern hominid will
fight incessantly to progress a particular group to the top of the
pecking order. This inherent reptile brain propensity knows no
bounds. Rules do not apply and any means are employed by either side
to achieve their identified objectives. And so we see during the
early part of the second half of this century that the protagonists
in this ideological war would fight it out to the death. Citizens
and their human rights would be forgotten and attenuated under the
general guise of national security interests in Western democracies,
as successive governments of the right or left introduced
legislation relegating the citizenry as slaves to the state.
As the power of the unions grew and asserted their rights over
capitalism, the reaction from the other side was to retreat and
regroup into more powerful amalgamations of corporate interests. In
the middle were the innocent and ideologically impoverished workers
and the innocent and enthusiastic entrepreneurs of small- and
mid-size family businesses of the middle classes. With high stakes
at risk, the most vulnerable in the pecking order would be the
citizens of the state. Apathy and confusion abounded. Workers
followed the dictate and doctrine of Marxist-inspired unionism and
the middle classes followed the dictates and doctrine of capitalism.
Little did either group suspect they were seen only as pawns in the
game. Legislation was written by lawyers and enacted by politicians
daily, as both ideological protagonists sought to gain the advantage
by introducing new playing fields and self-serving rules.
It is interesting to note that in every democracy in the West,
whenever socialist legislation was introduced during leftist
government regimes, the incoming conservative regime would ignore
such intrusions into freedom and liberty. They would simply set
about introducing an urgent legislation program that reflected the
popular vote. And so it was all the way through the balance of the
twentieth century as the gradual socialization of western democracy
took hold. Citizens became economic slaves to the state either
through oppressive taxation regimes or through the social dependency
shared by those at the bottom of the pecking order. Individual
incentive to climb up the pecking order was eroded away in the
oppressed of society. It became merely a cruel illusion as the
middle classes encountered the “red tape” of the ever-growing
powerful bureaucracies that legislative reform created. Both sides
of this ideological war became obsessed with change for the sake of
change. Long-held and hard-won virtues — principles, ethics, morals,
and values — fell prey to powerful and vicious minority groups.
Freedoms and liberties were usurped and constitutions simply
ignored.
Idealism cannot survive in an evolving civilization if the
idealists of each generation permit themselves to be exterminated by
the baser orders of humanity — the idea-ists, militarists and
bureaucrats. And here is the great test of idealism: can an advanced
society maintain the military preparedness that renders it secure
from all attack by its war-loving neighbors without yielding to the
temptation of employing military strength for selfish gain or
national aggrandizement? National survival demands preparedness, and
religious idealism alone can prevent the prostitution of
preparedness to aggression. Only love and brotherhood can prevent
the strong from oppressing the weak.
The materialistic scientist and the extreme idealist are destined
always to be at loggerheads. This is not true of those scientists
and idealists who are in possession of a common standard of high
moral values and spiritual test levels. In every age, scientists and
religionists must recognize they are on trial before the bar of
human need. They must eschew all warfare between themselves while
they strive valiantly to justify their continual survival by
enhanced devotion to the service of human progress. If the so-called
science or religion of any age is false, then it must either purify
its activities or pass away.
The great blunder that emerged in this consolidation period, and
resulted in ever more diabolical repercussions, was the Cold War
between the superpowers and the less identifiable war between the
“left” and the “right” in Western society. The religions of the
world, particularly Christianity, would be of no assistance in this
purely ideological struggle. Christianity, in a desperate attempt to
hold onto its place in the pecking order of society, had made an
unholy alliance with the state. In doing so, it had breached its
covenant with high Jesusonian ideals.
And religion was still essentially at odds with science. Science
should do for humankind materially what religion does for us
spiritually: extend the horizon of life and enlarge our personality.
True science can have no lasting quarrel with true religion. The
scientific method is merely an intellectual yardstick with which to
measure material adventures and physical achievements. But being
material and wholly intellectual, it is utterly useless in the
evaluation of spiritual realities and religious experiences.
The modern mechanist views us all as units in a complex
mechanism. Yet, if the universe were merely material and we were
only machine parts, we would be wholly unable to recognize ourselves
as such. Likewise would such a machine-person be wholly unconscious
of the existence of such a material universe.
The Industrial Military Complex in the East and West, employing
the best scientific minds available, set about to drive technology
relentlessly. The great technological advances from this competition
would enhance our materialistic life, but our spiritual life would
suffer retrogression as self-gratification slowly took hold of
modern society. Confused and spiritually bereft, each generation
would wander aimlessly, searching for the answers.
At about the same time, a new spiritualism emerged and this would
become internationally known as the “New Age.” This “New Age”
spiritualism would fill the void for many during this period. The
problem with the “New Age” form of spiritualism is that — like
orthodox religion — it drew heavily on myth and mysticism. It simply
replaced the concept of church with self-appointed, self-serving and
self-opinionated gurus. This ever-growing “New Age” of spiritualism
would, however, provide a bridge for a later spiritual renaissance,
with which we will deal in later chapters.
Before his assassination in 1963, John F. Kennedy announced to
the world that the United States would be the first to land on the
moon. This new era in the ideological war between the super powers
would prove to be the undoing of both. The enormous financial
burden, resulting from social reform, regional wars and the “space
race” would be suicidal for both sides. In the United States, the
combination of social reform, the Vietnam War and the race to the
moon would see the beginnings of financial catastrophe for the
United States. Not content with addressing the problems on earth,
the political leaders decided arrogantly to conquer space. This was
a multifaceted program devised skillfully by the intelligence
agencies of the CIA and the KGB. The unwise political leaders of the
day quickly pounced on this new frontier— the moon and then other
planets in our solar system — to divert the attention of the masses
away from the real problems confronting mankind.
These problems would later emerge and be identified as follows:
World population Environment UFO/ET "threat" Social
degradation Crime
With this new subterfuge and the global excitement it generated,
the super powers were able to carry out a secret program for future
world domination of the population, under the cover provided not
only by the Cold War but also by the space race. Many new secret
technologies received the funding to be developed and put into use
without any accountability to the citizens. The widely used pretext
of “National Security,” a convenient euphemism, provided western
governments with unlimited power. They used this unlimited power
mercilessly, as the race for ideological domination became
obsessive. All the while, the apathetic and innocent citizens put
their trust in the lawyers and politicians. Social virtues suffered
enormously as the message transmitted from political leaders to the
people became more and more compromised by the undisciplined
response of the political regimes to unlimited power. Unions,
governments, and commerce all grew disproportionately at the expense
of the people. In the West, taxation and debt would need to grow
exponentially to feed the ever-growing voracious appetite of the
state. No attempt was made to hide the literal fact that citizens
were now considered as state property from birth to death. We were
merely pawns in the game — numbers to be accounted for.
Upon closer examination of the history of the twentieth century
and those preceding it, we may see something else working
systematically in this global conflict if we look hard enough. The
barnyard pecking order was playing out. Not only do we detect an
ideological war between communism and capitalism, but a
long-nourished ideal that a certain elite group should rule the
world. In the eighteenth century, Adam Weishaupt had alluded
to this elitist mindset when he authored The Illuminati
Manifesto.
Weishaupt was a Jesuit-trained professor of canon law who taught
at Engelstock University when he defected from Christianity to
embrace the Luciferian conspiracy. It was in 1770 that the
professional money lenders, the then recently organized House of
Rothschild, retained him to revise and modernize the age-old
protocols of Zionism. From the outset, these protocols were designed
to give the Synagogue of Satan, so-named by Jesus Christ, ultimate
world domination so they could impose Luciferian ideology by means
of standard despotism on what would remain after the final social
cataclysm.
Weishaupt completed his task May 1, 1776 ("May Day"), and
officially organized the Illuminati to put the plan into execution.
(This is why May 1 is the great day celebrated by all communist
nations. May 1 is also Law Day as declared by the American Bar
Association.) That plan required the destruction of all existing
governments and religions. That objective was to be reached by
dividing the masses of people into opposing camps in ever-increasing
numbers on political, social, economic, and other issues, the very
conditions we have today. The opposing sides were then to be armed
and incidents provided that would cause them to fight and weaken
themselves and gradually destroy national governments and religious
institutions.
Was this the over-arching ideology that fostered both communism
and capitalism? Many who studied Weishaupt’s Manifesto were
shocked to find that in it he proposed the two opposing factions of
communism and capitalism as the method of achieving world domination
through social anarchy. We shall expose this Manifesto in a
later chapter and the reader can evaluate the content.
In order to identify the problems of this century competently, we
must in all conscience utilize reliable records and reliable
descriptions of the various ideologies and philosophies. So let us
once again revisit some history.
First, let us look more closely at the two regional wars that
were fought on purely ideological grounds, or so we were led to
believe.
The Korean War was purportedly about the United Nations stepping
in to defend South Korea against communist aggression from North
Korea. Wrong — this war was about the barnyard pecking order
as in Bloom's example. The dominant super powers needed a cause at
home, so they simply maneuvered the pawns, North and South Korea,
into a hostile ideological posture, with China as a back up to the
North and the United Nations as support for the South. The two
superpowers went at it hammer and tongs. Neither side was meant to
win; this was just a test of strength as the two dominant nation
powers flexed their military muscles. Of course, the prize was
philosophical dominance — and therefore both politically and
financially expedient.
|