|
In some cases, the destruction of love has become a political objective aimed at the destruction of the moral strength of a targeted nation from within, such as occurred as the result of the Vietnam War.
This two tiered approach, to first destroy the supporting platform on which a nation is founded, and then use the effect of the destruction as a means to destroy the development potential of a nation and cause its final destruction from within, is the most effective and the most workable course the oligarchy has yet developed for holding back the continuously reemerging spirit of Renaissance. Ever since this method was first pioneered during the Vietnam War, which proved it to be highly effective, the core strategies of oligarchic manipulations have been intentionally directed towards this end. The only practical recourse that a nation has to defend itself in their warfare, is to become aware of the imposed trends, to become alert, to take care not to be trapped into them, and to proceed as vigorously as possible with the process of human development. By this type of response, both humanity and the natural world are protected in real terms. Except this response is lacking, as it has been lacking throughout the entire century filled with oligarchy instigated wars.
In fundamental terms, the oligarchy has no other options open to it than to manipulate the nations into self-destruction, as a means to maintain its advantage, because its advantage is not based on any particular intelligent platform. There is very little intelligence associated with looting. Now, in order to drive mankind below this low level of non-intelligent living, the oligarchy needs to first focus on destroying mankind's self-protection, which is its love. Just try the process out for yourself, as an exercise. Put yourself into the shoes of the oligarchy and try to maintain a looting empire in the presence of a strong foundation of love and self-respect, manifest in human development. You will soon realize how import love is for the protection of a nation and its economic development, and why this key element must be addressed first if any meaningful looting of humanity is to be accomplished.
An oligarchic strategy: to destroy the protective power of love.
Suppose, for the sake of this exercise, you were asked by the oligarchy to device a method by which to destroy the economy of the United States, for instance. The exact same request was made during the infamous carriage ride to Adam Smith, by his employer the second Earl of Shelburne. The request was made right after the U.S. War of Independence had been lost by the British Empire. The oligarchy wanted its colonies back. Being thus charged, Adam Smith went to the books, to whatever was available on the subject of destruction, and came back with the proposal to enact free trade as public policy in dealing with the former colonies. And it worked. Six years later, the U.S. was bankrupted. Except, the bankrupting didn't last. What Adam Smith had failed to target, was that foundation within, the substance of love. As a result of this oversight the U.S. was able to recover. It was able to detect and deal with the onslaught of free trade, and so defend itself against it, and create the strongest economy out of the ashes of this defeat that was ever created on this planet.
Now, how would you go about to correct the omission by which Adam Smith had ultimately failed?
Well, let me propose a strategy.
In order to defeat love, you will have to turn its strength against itself. This principle of turning an enemy against itself is an old oligarchic trick that was practiced by the Venetians centuries ago, and has its roots in the Marshall arts the predate the Venetian Empire. This means, in modern terms, that you find something that people are taught to hate, such as communism, and that you start a war of 'liberation' to save the people from their communist oppressors. In no time at all, you have the fiercest war going. Some people actually pride themselves in their nation's ability to arrange wars. One individual lamented about the Iran-Contra affair that the United States is rather inept at starting wars, "not like we British!" Apparently it is accepted knowledge, at least in some circles, that the British oligarchy has a long history of instigating "splendid little wars."
Next Page
|| - page index -
|| - chapter index -
|| - Exit -
||
|
