This is a brief note to a few of my readers, who had emailed me asking about my latest blog posts.

Here’s my reply:

There is enough material out there on the web for a diligent reader to find out if some outfit or position or activist is “legit” or not…and to what extent.

Second. People are not equal in their capacity to receive truthful statements or even to discern them. There is no need to sacrifice oneself to persuade, unless one is sure that one’s destiny is to be a martyr.

Third. While martyrdom is not needed (yet), activism without specifics is misleading, however well-intentioned. The devil (and the angel) lies in the details. Glittering generalities are sure-fire ways to mislead and to be misled. When the choice is between surviving with half-truths or martyrdom with truth, surely it is wisest to choose silence. At times, it speaks more penetratingly than words.

Besides, all blogging is not well-intentioned. Much of it purely self-interested. The sooner one wakes up to this reality, the better.

Fourth. The masses are less culpable, morally, than their leaders, but they are not innocent. Portraying them as if they were is neither truthful nor game-changing. It leads to popularity, however, because there is no one who doesn’t love flattery.

But between artful diplomacy and prevarication, activism and marketing, is a fine line, and I, for one, cannot walk it. It makes me ill. It is both my dharma and my karma to express my strong convictions, albeit, I do try to temper them with levity or empathy, not always successfully, I admit.

Fifth. All mass movements are of necessity based on lies. You cannot fight lies with more lies.

You can however fight lies with silence.

You cannot change politics by voting for co-opted or complicit leaders, however honorable personally.

You can change politics by NOT voting.

You can make your life freer and richer, by saving your money and time. Spend both on educating your own family and friends, rather than electing politicians however persuasive their words.

When you look at their actions, you will see that lone individuals far from power did more to stop the encroachments of the power-elite than any one in politics.

Some advice:

Watch out for anyone who is guilty of more than one of the following.

1. Agrees with the official 9-11 story without qualification.

2. Mocks conspiracy theories related to them, or to the subversion of the media

3. Promotes Wikileaks uncritically

4. Promotes the “transparency” meme uncritically.

5. Argues that corporations are people

6. Confuses commercial activity with free speech

7. Argues for the moral neutrality or even virtue of bribery and blackmail (these are the chosen tools of the NWO) and places any blame for them only on public officials.

Defends white-collar criminality but denounces street crime.

[Of course, there are some who argue that taxation is theft and that public services are bribes. In many senses they are, especially at the federal level, but even at lower levels.

However, most politicians and voters do not see what they are doing as “bribes”.  In fact, they consider that they are doing good, and in the short-term, they often are. In any case, what the effects of their actions are is a matter of genuine dispute, except among pure anarcho-capitalists.

Since motivation is also needed to create a sin or moral wrong-doing (though not an error), equivalence between such acts and the bribing of officials in their public duties is not quite accurate. I know of no religious teaching which suggests that the latter is acceptable behavior.  Coincidentally, in Christianity, the death of Jesus Christ is a judicial murder that would not have taken place without the bribing of Judas to betray Christ.

Some libertarians (Rothbard, Block),  of course, have had other opinions.

But if you allow the logic of their characterizations, you will find yourself forced to approve the acts of officials who have been bribed to go to war and destroy millions of innocent lives. That is surely morally unjustifiable.

Moreover,  in and of itself, subverting the will of another person to do wrong is morally worse than committing the wrong directly. It is not for nothing that the sin of Satan in the Bible is temptation or seduction and that he is called the Tempter and characterized as motivated by jealousy of the good (and of  God).

The corrupter is always worse, morally, than the one he corrupts.

8. Is free and easy with descriptors like Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Biblical, Vedic, Anglo-Saxon, Aryan, Dravidian, Nordic, European, and Germanic, but shies away from words like Jewish, Hebraic, Talmudic, Masonic, Khazar, and Ashkenazy. Or, conversely, reduces all questions to tribalism.

9. Does not distinguish clearly and in context between language, religion, race/ethnicity, and culture and does not take these factors into account when discussing politics and economics.

10. Describes the financial/economic and political crisis in terms of ideology and slogans – End the Fed, Free Banking, Debt Jubilee, Constitutionalism, Debt-Free Money, Evil Capitalism (or Evil Socialism).

A few of these certainly do have more merit than other others, in the right context. However, the powers-that-be are always changing the context. Even sound economic positions can thus be subverted. Rapacious elites existed long before the Fed or the Enlightenment….or Western colonialism.

Ideologues are the useful idiots who allow the establishment to keep masses of intelligent people fixated on either end of a binary, when the action is in the third term, or off-stage….

Final answer to the question about JBS.

I have always considered JBS controlled opposition. Nothing they have said or done has changed my mind on that. There are plenty of sources whom I find credible who have reached that conclusion a long while back.

Links to the research can be found on nativist/nationalist sites, on far-right or libertarian Christian sites (http://jbsrip.blogspot.com/2009/12/jack-mcmanus-william-f-buckley-of-jbs.html) on far-left anarchist sites, and on some forums for conspiracy theories. Research on intelligence penetration into US institutions can be found on dozens of mainstream sites.

Note:

Although I read many nativist/racialist and even allegedly anti-Semitic sites for interesting research or links, and consider criticism of Judaism, Talmudism, and Zionism an integral part of deconstructing the NWO, I believe that historical antipathy in the West to Judaism, as a biological faith, to use a clever term, is often tied to misunderstanding of the occult practices of the Cabbala as “evil” or “Satanic” and similar misreading of the rational practices involved in financial exchange as inherently predatory, practices in which the Jews were well-versed, by an accident of history.

Add to these factors, the usual chauvinism faced by any foreign group, offensive, exploitative, or unfamiliar behavior by Jews themselves, and the natural irritation produced in any majority population by an assertive minority that is seen as subversive in any way, and we get a more balanced and reasonable understanding of the ill-feeling between pagans and Jews, first, and then Jews and Christians. Such an understanding need not assume any kind of eternal essence or biological predestination.

Notably, the pagans who expressed themselves on the subject disliked Christians even more than they disliked the Jews…and were no doubt just as hostile to Asiatics and Orientals.

Similarly, even such an independent-minded researcher on economic matters as Eustace Mullins loses his way on cultural and tribal questions and becomes a genetic determinist and racist, advocating legal sanctions against Jews and immigrants in order to preserve European and Christian culture.