In the beginning…
“In the beginning was the Word… and the Word was GOD.”
John 1:1
Given that I’m opening this report with a powerful passage from the Bible, I’d like to frame this scriptural reference in a secular slant—and I’ll tell you why.
Never has there been a greater need for people of all different religious and spiritual persuasions to stand together in defense of human freedom.
There are a great many people in this audience who are proud Christian conservatives, and you stand in good company. There are also many people, perhaps slightly fewer, who feel somewhat put out with religious piety, or who perhaps reject religious dogma altogether—and you stand in good company too.
From the Christian standpoint, one must realize there is an opportunity to be a light on the hill in these dark times. It is good to share your testimony and faith, because there are a lot of people who are lost and seeking truth during these turbulent times—so pray for people, invite them to your fellowship, and be a good witness to the blessings of God that still abound, regardless of the chaos all around.
Now, from the agnostic or atheistic perspective, one must realize that people of faith outnumber the faithless by a wide margin. This includes not just the various conflicting denominations under the Judeo-Christian umbrella, but also all the rest of the major and lesser known religions around the world. This pervasive tendency toward spiritual expression, alone, is a testament to the human need and desire for divine guidance and connection.
The point that must be kept front and center, when seeking practical solutions to real-world problems, is that there are people across the spectrum, in both camps, who share many of the same values and principles. This is true, despite deriving support for these principles from entirely different approaches.
Some arrive at supporting free speech, property rights, and equal justice under the law, through a faith based extrapolation of Biblical principles (i.e. Judeo-Christian values), others through raw logic and observation of the natural world.
Regardless of one’s approach, regardless of one’s affection for, or rejection of, religious scripture, those who are fighting against the oppression of these basic human rights are all on the same team. We face a common enemy, and if we fail to stand together on these common principles, we will surely succumb to tyranny.
Fair enough?
There is currently an all out assault on free speech, as power hungry politicians and their brain-dead minions clamor to silence opposition. As you know, they love to label any dissenting opinions, facts, and perspectives as misinformation, pointing to the harms of letting people speak freely in the public square. This is all rooted in the “Responsibility to Protect,” by the way, which is an ill-conceived, infectious idea riddled throughout the gray matter of so-called Enlightened Leaders.
What’s more, with the ongoing “whole-of-government” approach to reprogram the peasants to trust their masters (i.e. “rebuilding trust” in the government), at this point we should expect that an increasing percentage of the population will be persuaded to shun all the alleged dangers of free speech, and thus passively accept one of the more ludicrous tenets of this so-called “cosmopolitan” perspective.
In short order, good global citizens will be demanding heavy-handed government censorship to protect them from the seductive wiles of free-thinking wordsmiths and out-spoken peasants. Of course, as you well know, the Enlightened Leaders have been suggesting this all along. Censorship is nothing new, but the boldness of their current efforts indicates that we may have reach an alarming tipping point.
Politicians can now declare their intent to censor free speech, and rather than getting booed and laughed off the stage, the useful idiots are actually applauding.
Case in point, the globalist wind-bag and consummate schmuck John Kerry has just declared that “our first amendment stands as a major roadblock” to protecting people from dangerous disinformation. He then attempts to advocate for unrestricted government censorship, so that the ruling class can deal with dissent once and for all—and “just, you know, hammer it out of existence.”
Kerry then laments that this can happen only if the Democrats win:
The frontal assault on sanity is coming from many angles. In a similar tell on the radical left’s authoritarian impulse, liberal commentators are now openly urging Biden to “dissolve” the Supreme Court before he leaves office. In their collectively bankrupt and backwards thinking, they have to get rid of “Trump’s harem.”
Just think about what these people are saying.
Think about Hillary Clinton calling for the “deprogramming” of we deplorable peasants who dare to defy her and her ilk. Consider that she, like John Kerry, is not only deadly serious about her dark and insidious intentions, she recently had the audacity to double down on this outrageos rhetoric. Puffing up her own deluded opinion in The Washington Post, Clinton reflects:
“In 2016, I famously described half of Trump’s supporters as ‘the basket of deplorables.’ I was talking about the people who are drawn to his racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia — you name it. The people for whom his bigotry is a feature, not a bug. …
The masks have come off, and if anything, ‘deplorable’ is too kind a word for the hate and violent extremism we’ve seen from some Trump supporters. …
Talking about the ‘deplorables’ in 2016, I said, ‘Some of those folks, they are irredeemable.’ Part of me would still say this is objectively true.”
You see, “deplorable” is too kind of a word for the hate and extremism oozing out of the hearts of Donald Trump and his supporters. These “folks” are just irredeemable—and the Post has no shame in publishing this rubbish as if it were “objectively true.”
Why does this matter?
Because the word is God.
Let’s zoom out.
I’ve dissected the nuance of this passage in prior reports. Today, I’d like to tie it directly to the science of neuroplasticity, for the purpose of firmly establishing the connection been censorship, mind control, and rewiring the public psyche.
For a more philosophical romp into the power of language, see these three reports:
To slice through the meat of the matter and get right down to the bone-chilling implications of political censorship, I offer these studies as a starting point:
How Learning a Language Changes Your Brain - “New language — at any age — creates new pathways that could also make you a better person…”
Language and the brain - “Exposure to written language also restructures the brain, even when acquired late in life.”
The Brain Basis of Language Processing: From Structure to Function - “Language functions are directly related to brain tissue…”
Your brain wires itself to match your native language - “So, we are not the same if we learn to speak one language, or if we learn another.”
Working from the bottom up, our brains naturally wire themselves differently, relative to our native language, and the result of this phenomenon is that “we are not the same.” That’s a no-brainer, but the deeper implication here, directly related to the development of brain tissue and neural circuits, is that learning a different language early on—think state indoctrination—produces a lifelong effect.
Kids raised on socialist precepts, reciting socialist slogans, et cetera, are thus hardwired toward socialist sympathies, for life.
Of course, as the experiene of the many people who were born into communist or socialist hell-holes only to flee toward freedom later in life attests, learning is a lifelong adventure. It’s never too late to learn new language.
To be clear, I am not talking about “learning a new language”—which has its own effects on the brain—I’m talking about learning new language in general. As noted above, neuroscience proves that even exposure to written language can “restructure the brain” at any point in life. This fact has profound implications.
Suppose liberals get their way and make a whole-of-government effort to eradicate dissenting perspectives from everywhere all at once. No more dissenting news sources. No more dissenting blogs or podcasts. No more dissenting social media posts. There will be no more written language promoting hate speech or misinformation, anywhere, ever again.
Just think about how safe the world will be!
But what will be the outcome? This will restructure brains, will it not?
Thus, by selectively removing some language—like language conveying and defending traditional American values—and essentially force-feeding socialist propaganda from cradle to grave, everyone at every stage of life will steadliy nudged into new neural pathways that “could make you a better person.”
We’d be wise to realize that this is already happening. Try searching for any news suggesting that the 2020 election was stolen, that the pandemic was a sham, or that the vaccines are killing people, and you’ll see what I mean. The results you will find are exactly the “exposure to written language” that aims to restructure your brain.
Of course, you, being the wise and skeptical peasant that you are, are keen to this gimmick, and therefore you retain some degree of resilience to this neurological manipulation. That’s great. But for the vast majority of the population?
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, Biden was the most popular president ever elected, and Donald Trump incited a violent insurrection. Never forget that.
But here’s a little twist:
The vast majority of the population does NOT represent the vast majority of the country. Less than 18% of counties accross the country have a population of 100,000 or more — only 563 out of 3,143 — which means that the vast majority of communities throughout the United States are thriving in counties with less than 100K people.
We are largely a rural nation.
In cities, groupthink is more effective, and therefore, more oppressive.
It is much more difficult to be an independent thinker when you are surrounded by hordes of half-wit automatons endlessly parroting the narratives they’ve been conditioned to accept. This alludes to the “sensitizing concepts” and “Neuropsychosocial Preparation Theory” we’ve studied before, all of which imbues the masses with socialistic ideals. Such is the science of mind control.
So, where does God fit into all of this?
Understood from a purely metaphorical standpoint, God represents the creative force that undeniably permeates the universe. From this angle, to say the “word was God” implies that language is the creative force that is shaping people’s reality. Thus, those seeking to control language through censorship, are in essence trying to play God.
From a spiritual perspective, as the Tower of Babel story indicates, we find that the Creator of the universe appears well aware of threat of censorship. We were warned long ago:
“If as one people speaking the same language they can do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.”
By controlling language, the globalists are essentially capable of anything.
If, for example, they can fleece the people and fabricate a fictious pandemic by conditioning everyone to adopt the same same language — i.e. “no one is safe until everyone is safe” or “the vaccines are safe and effective” — then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.
(This disturbing montage of “no on is safe” drives the point home.)
To conclude, given their openly stated goals of total control over a reduced human population, we should all be very wary of the overt attempts to sell the public on the notion that censorship will keep them safe.
This is a vile plot concocted by the ruling class, who want to play God and effectively take control of humanity at the neurological level.
It should go without saying, but RESIST WE MUST!!!
Please help wake people up by sharing this post!
**If you have the means, it would mean a lot if you’d consider becoming a paid subscriber and fund the resistance to global tyrany. Thank you in advance!
TR 631 - How the Radical Left Uses Censorship to Restructure Your Brain