Aug 26, 2013

And although some governments are appalled at the lack of respect the National Security Agency has shown for their so-called “allies” by spawning such atrocities as PRISM in the first place, most of them are actually going along with the agenda.

Here in the U.S., it’s becoming very obvious to those who have eyes to see that our “leaders” are in total, bipartisan agreement with each other and that essentially nothing would be different if Mitt Romney were president. The neocons and chickenhawks are foaming at the mouth for the Big Brother police state, and even the more conservative of Conservatives are fence-sitting a bit on the issue, and have not taken steps to remedy the spying situation. The sad reality here is that they could’ve used the power of the Congress to abolish such programs by now, but they just don’t want to.

Even the so-called “Republicans” just can’t let go of the opportunity of having a mega-spy-grid in place when one of their own gets into office in 2016, and their lower-level minions and talking heads have been told to “make it all about Obama” so that the NSA spying scandal gets thrown onto the pile of “Obama scandals” and stinks to high heaven of socialism, so that their own fascist efforts are overlooked in the process and can be quietly installed when 2016 rolls around. In the meantime, however, Obama’s hiring such wonderful people like Cass Sunstein to help “oversee” the NSA spying program, so we can expect a full-fledged assault in the coming years on the true opposition (Conspiracy theorists, sovereign citizens, anti-vaccinators, etc.).

In researching this topic, I found an article written in the London Guardian that summed up, quite nicely, the devastating effects of a nationalized “spy grid”, not just for individual freedom, but for society as a whole:

Studying that evidence leads to a clear conclusion and a warning: indiscriminate intelligence-gathering presents a grave risk to our mental health, productivity, social cohesion, and ultimately our future….

Psychology forewarns us that a future of universal surveillance will be a world bereft of anything sufficiently interesting to spy on – a beige authoritarian landscape in which we lose the ability to relax, innovate, or take risks. A world in which the definition of “appropriate” thought and behaviour becomes so narrow that even the most pedantic norm violations are met with exclusion or punishment. A world in which we may even surrender our very last line of defence – the ability to look back and ask: Why did we do this to ourselves?

That question can be resolved with a one-word answer: FEAR. Unfortunately for Obama, terrorism-based fear is not as effective in the public awareness as, say, fear of the government itself. Fascism and Socialism take two different turns on this issue, just both having the same outcome. Fascism relies on the public’s fear of an outside influence threatening to take away their wealth, land, and prosperity. Socialism, on the other hand, is usually instituted after several years of economic hardship and relies on the public’s fear of losing what they have to the government itself. The best examples of this would be Hitler’s Reichstag vs. Mao Zedong’s Three-anti/Five-anti campaigns:

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Rense, “The 14 Defining Characteristics of Fascism”A climate of raw terror developed as workers denounced their bosses, spouses turned on their spouses, and children informed on their parents; the victims often were humiliated at struggle sessions, a method designed to intimidate and terrify people to the maximum. Mao insisted that minor offenders be criticized and reformed or sent to labor camps, “while the worst among them should be shot.” These campaigns took several hundred thousand additional lives, the vast majority via suicide.

 – Wiki page, Mao Zedong

Probably the best – and only – advice I would give people right now would be to study historical instances of these “isms” so that they don’t fall victim to the fearmongering emanating from both of these camps. We can choose to act like animals in a Skinner box being conditioned to accept whatever our government demands from us (whether that’s blind, obedient submission through brainwashing or the blind, irrational fear induced by false flag terror attacks matters not), although other countries such as Russia, China, and even the UK have been trying to warn us against them. Or, we can choose to be freethinking individuals, complete with discernment and critical thinking skills that stand the test of time against all assortment of tyrants and dictators, and we can choose to be a nation of truly free people.