Chapter VI

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.

Chapter 7

Knowledge Without Wisdom