In a few weeks the people of the most powerful democracy on Earth will elect the two most powerful people on Earth. Voters will cast their votes for many reasons, including national security, the economy, health care, social views, and other. The “other” will include those who make their choice according to religious belief. And the votes of those people will mostly favour the conservative party, the Republicans, and this  may very well determine the outcome of the election. Those voters will be earnest Christians who profess to follow the teachings of one of the gentlest men ever to walk this Earth, Jesus Christ. Yet most of those people will hold to the view that “the meek shall not inherit the Earth”.

They will also see nothing inconsistent in their demand that all women, irrespective of their beliefs, should adhere to the religious belief that abortion is a sin because it is the taking of a human life; or that during its lifetime they should take no responsibility for her child’s health care, food, shelter, education, and welfare; or that it is not a sin to take his/her life by execution, or send him/her off to kill others, and possibly to his/her death.

So why is it that millions of people subscribe to the hypocrisy of this glaringly inconsistent application of the teachings of Christ? Perhaps for an answer we should look first to the words of the Roman philosopher, Seneca, who observed in the first century AD that:

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”

And then to the maxim held by the Jesuits:

“Give me a child for his first seven years and I’ll give you the man”.

For two thousand years rulers have gratefully accepted Seneca’s truth, and have religiously applied it by faithfully following the maxim of the Jesuits.

Thus, we have hundreds of millions of people who are living their lives serving the interests of the rich and powerful in the belief that they are living a life guided by religious dogma, which will ensure that their life will continue after their death. And along the way the priests will have been permitted to share in the spoils by reaching agreement with the rich and powerful that the priests should retain power over men’s souls while the rulers retain power over their bodies. Power over their minds is the province of both, so long as each keeps to their own turf. This has resulted in many turf wars over the years when the priests see scientific truth threatening their authority, such as is the case with stem cell research, evolution, and cosmic discovery. They then attempt to bring the rulers to heel to re-establish their authority, for without it they lose their reason for being.

But the two usually resolve any differences in order to maintain a profitable alliance which works for them….so long as no-one looks too closely at the underlying hypocrisy that supports both systems. And education steadily undermines that support. As ignorance gives way to reason, so too do the foundations of the unholy alliance. That is when one becomes a liberal; liberal in the sense that they are liberated from the confining mental restrictions of religious dogma. They may not support liberal politics, and may still vote conservative for reasons such as national security and/or economics. They may even join the ranks of the rulers in order to serve those ends, thus vindicating Seneca.

A liberal will be aware of the power exercised over men’s minds by the media and the priests, and will look elsewhere for answers to life’s questions. Science will play a more important role in his/her personal philosophy, and he/she will have a more enquiring mind as a consequence. One only has to look around the conservative fundamentalist religious blogs for confirmation of this. There is little of interest, other than their own narrow focus. There is little persuasive reasoning other than ”I believe this, therefore it is true”. They are locked in the safety of their human centric world and dare not venture out. Yet they loudly proclaim their “freedom”, and their right to impose it on others.

Which is fine, so long as they don’t acquire the power to kill you. No, I know they’re not going to come looking for you, but they can still kill you. They are advocates for war, and their paranoia knows no bounds. Their mindless denial of global warming may one day kill us all. So what do we do about that? Well, there’s nothing we can do. Reason has no place in their thinking; emotion rules all. Change will only come about when the media and the priests finally get the message that their survival is at stake, and revise the message to the faithful. But profits will take precedence over all else until the bitter end is apparent even to the most bigoted climate change denier. That it may then be too late is the supreme irony. By clinging to their materialistic beliefs for so long, they will have hastened their appointment with the God they looked to for divine guidance on Earth.

In the series of videos I posted, it is made clear that both the Muslim extremists and the neocons are in agreement on one thing. That is, that religion must be imposed on the masses and, in the case of the neocons, even if the imposers themselves do not believe it. This is why the neocons cultivated the fundamentalist religions to the conservative cause. Prior to this, the fundamentalists did not vote, being content to believe that “The Lord will provide”. It was a simple matter for the neocons to influence the priests to their conservative views, and then the priests, having already prepared the way by capturing the minds of their flocks, to similarly influence them. Given the proclivity of the priests to amass their personal wealth, there may well have been some monetary consideration to smooth the way.

So we are now “blessed” with a conservative movement in the U.S. and elsewhere, whose aim, contrary to true Christian principles, is to roll back the years of liberal progress, and to re-establish control over the minds of the masses through religious and nationalistic fervour. Attention is diverted from economic issues by focusing on the persecution of homosexuals and women who wish to exercise their right to choose abortion; this, while the conservatives loudly proclaim “freedom” as their call to arms. Hitler would nod approvingly. Persecution of minorities, and nationalism, is straight from the manual he might have written, “Fascism for Beginners”.

So, having conquered the minds of U.S. fundamentalists, the neoconservatives then set themselves a greater task. They set out to conquer the world, while the conservatives sought to cement the victory at home by destroying the concept of liberalism completely. Such is the true belief of the conservative in “freedom”.

It was the neocons who used 9/11 as an excuse to motivate an intellectually challenged President to carry out their long hoped for invasion of Iraq. In the process, hundreds of thousands of lives were lost. But no neocon life was lost. They followed the neocon creed that it isn’t necessary to believe the myths that they impose on the masses in order to influence them to do their bidding; so much better to bravely volunteer others to risk their lives. Such breathtaking duplicity should not go unpunished, but it does. They still pull the strings controlling willing puppet Bush, and will seek to continue on their murderous ways under a McCain/Palin administration. Palin is already one of their conquests, while McCain marches to the beat of the drums of that other manipulator of public opinion, big business.

The influence of the neocons was apparent when we were lied to about the reason for going into Iraq, because that is their modus operandi; scare the masses into implementing their hidden agenda by lying to them, and exaggerating the threat of attack. In the climate of fear prevailing after 9/11 it was not difficult to persuade the masses to war, even though the country to be invaded had nothing to do with 9/11. While a cynical world correctly pointed to oil as the real reason for the invasion, it is my belief that the neocons also had a more sinister agenda, and that agenda is Zionism. Connect the dots. Twenty-five of the top fifty neocons are Jewish, as was their mentor, Richard Strauss. And no, I’m not anti-Semitic, just one who seeks to explain why Jews should be so overrepresented in that group of neocons as compared to their proportion of the population of the U.S. as a whole. And how ironic is it that those Jews seek to emulate the methods of the man who tried to exterminate them in the holocaust.

The prescient words of Sir Norman Angell, who was awarded the Nobel Peace prize in 1933 come to mind:

“The vested interests – if we explain the situation by their influence – can only get the public to act as they wish by manipulating public opinion, by playing either upon the public’s indifference, confusions, prejudices, pugnacities or fears. And the only way in which the power of the interests can be undermined and their manoeuvres defeated is by bringing home to the public the danger of its indifference, the absurdity of its prejudices, or the hollowness of its fears; by showing that it is indifferent to danger where real danger exists; frightened by dangers which are nonexistent.” Sir Norman Angell 1872 – 1967

The coming election in the U.S. is not about who puts lipstick on pigs as the conservatives would so trivialise it to be. It is about whether we permit them to continue to wreak their havoc on the world, while shadowy men lurk in the background manipulating public opinion to suit their own ends. We in other countries can only await the outcome, and trust that the good people of the U.S. get it right.

‘Til next week.

Last week

Next week

Read and post comments | Send to a friend