David Hughes discusses his fantastic book which breaks down how Operation Covid was really a ruse to usher in a global biodigital totalitarian world state.
"A topic that is virtually never allowed to be addressed within the hallowed halls of academia is any suggestion that the official narrative of 9/11 may not be entirely true. Self-respecting professors will not only avoid this topic like the plague, but will also prohibit anyone from discussing it in their presence, as if fearing they could be stigmatized as a “conspiracy theorist” by association. Whenever I raised pesky questions about 9/11 with my ex-husband, a scientist and professor at a top-ranked university, his curt reply, “I don’t believe in conspiracy theories,” ended the conversation. Kind of a bizarre thing to say, coming from a scientist, isn’t it?
But if inquiring minds persist, what should a principled professor do? What would Johan Galtung do?
On February 17 this year, the visionary mediator, writer, researcher and father of Peace Studies, Johan Galtung, transitioned to the ancestors, prompting heartfelt accolades from many whose minds he ignited and lives he touched, including this one by my adopted Burmese brother, Zarni, who recently joined Galtung as another worthy nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Galtung’s consistent goal was positive peace, not just the absence of war but presence of dignity, uplift and self-determination for all people, where inevitable conflicts can be transformed creatively and nonviolently. Always practical, he issued these five commandments for conflict transformation:
Try to see a conflict from above: the actors, their goals, their pursuits, their clashes. Including you. You may need outside help.
Try to be evenhanded. Try to see yourself or the other side of yourself as clearly as you see the others. Again, you may need help.
The legitimacy test: be judgmental about goals and pursuits, ends and means, including your own. What is legitimate–legal, compatible with human rights, with basic human needs–what is not?
Look at all those legitimate goals and pursuits and put your joint creativity to work: what are the minimum changes needed for a compelling vision, with maximum accommodation of all legitimate goals?
Enact that vision. And if it does not work, back to No. 1. Try again. And again…and again… Perseverance is the key."
I have read both David Hughes books on the Covid Operation and the Deep State. Have listened to several interviews and agree with much what he lays out. I am confused by his support of Karl Marx and Communism as a workable political model. Where can one find an example of Marxism implemented as the governing structure where millions of people were not murdered. To my assessment it’s just another name and model for a totalitarian system. “New boss same as the old boss.”
Went only listen to people who actually lived under the rule of communism to understand it was no picnic. It was just a new group who wanted power and control over the rest. It’s just dressed up as your rights until you don’t have rights anymore because they’ve taken you to the Gulag. Please read Alexander Solzhenitsyn for clarification.
I don't believe there has ever been an actual Marxist regime. What went under the name of "communism" in the twentieth century was anything but.
Marxism strives for the abolition of all classes. The murderous communist dictatorships of the twentieth century did the opposite: they used brutal means to ensure that the working classes remain suppressed, partnering with the West where necessary to do so.
Thank you for your reply. I have re-examining the mainstream history and I have questions about the sincerity of Marx and Engels. Some authors that I have read maintain that Marx and later Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin were funded by London banking elites.
If the social structure was collapsed by emotionally manipulating the working classes against the existing system then the resources and wealth of nation would just move to new bosses. Control would move from monarchs to the administrative state.
The idea that everyone would benefit equally in a communist state has never occurred to my knowledge. These nations still have a two tier system. From my understanding all communist countries have been repressive, brutal and totalitarian towards the very people they claim to want to free from oppression.
The West has had a perception of freedom and liberty compared to other nations. But the Covid Operation clearly proved that is an illusion. Loss of rights, loss of employment if one did not take an experimental gene therapy shot, lockdowns, been fined for being outdoors, and not standing 6 feet apart, forced to wear masks that don’t stop anything, and never could, having government authorities pour cement into the gas tanks of truckers in Canada, who dared to say “enough” to government decrees that abused the people they are pretend to work for. A deep investigation into how the global operating system actually works brings to light that much of the global population is subjugated by the few.
Who are the authors that allege Marxism was always a front for London banking elites, what is their evidence, and why should we trust them?
Marxism is not about "emotionally manipulating" the masses. That is what propaganda is for. Marxism is about empowering the working classes to bring about a classless society in which the only purpose of the state is the administration of things, not people.
All "communist" countries to date have indeed been as you describe. Which is the opposite of what Marxism stands for.
A global capitalist system in which the many are exploited by the few is precisely what Marxism predicts in the absence of revolution.
On pages 222 of de Gorlevitch he lists “ the threefold origin of the financial resources, which helped to organize and bring about the Russian revolution.” In pages 223 to 227. He discusses how the revolutionaries were assisted financially. On page 223 and 224 he writes “ the real money primarily came from certain British and American circles, which, for a long time past Hedlund, their support to the Russian revolutionary cause”. He also mentioned Trosky‘s book My Life ( need to verify by reading the book) where Trotsky collaborates that funds were received from certain British financiers. I have other sources I have to investigate but it seems certain historians are giving different accounts. I always am curious when there are different accounts to a single event. Much like the Covid agenda of a dangerous virus and safe and effective shots and the minority pointing out the manipulation and fraud.
You have mentioned that there are three narratives that are presented to the public. The main stream narrative, the allowed alternative narrative created for those who recognize that somethings are not quite right and lastly the narrative that’s suppressed. I agree that’s where one may find more accuracy as to what is happening.
Also, it’s in the interest of big money to infiltrate populist movements in order to control them from within. I’m just wondering if there wasn’t some infiltration of the Bolshevik Revolution by those who wanted to manage outcomes and ultimately introduce another agenda that was not in the original intent of the movement. Lenin died, Trosky left Russia and Stalin’s communism was not what the average person expected and most likely would not have supported.
I will read Das Kapital again and explore Lenin and Trotsky. The principles of communism all sound great when I was in university but I threw it all out when I learned of the millions who were persecuted or killed by communists regimes. Of course, the capitalist system is not the answer with its continuous brutal wars that traumatize populations into compliance with takeover and hypnotize the rest of the world into believing that “war is peace”.
Whatever, the social, political, or economic model, if that model requires exploitation, persecution, or murder of innocent people, then it goes from right to wrong.
Thank you for your commitment to the truth and your courage. It’s not easy to stand up. Your bravery is much admired. The world needs heroes right now, and your work helps those of us who are trying to wake people up with tools to make that process possible.
Very good spot re: pages 222-227! That does indeed seem like plausible evidence of foreign funding for Lenin and Trotsky.
The question then becomes: was this a question of big money infiltrating populist movements in order to control them from within, or was it something else?
Gorlevitch cites Lenin: "I am frequently accused of having won our revolution with the aid of German money. I have never denied the fact, nor do I so now. I will add though, that with Russian money we shall stage a similar revolution in Germany."
Taking money off capitalists to further the cause of communism is not necessarily to be controlled by them. All sides had a shared interest in overthrowing Tsarism, so a deal was reached. I think this is very different from claiming that Marxism was some kind of front for Anglo-American banking interests.
It is certainly true that Wall Street and Moscow became intertwined during the 1920s - the Soviet ambassador to the US even shared the same address as some of the major bankers (120 Broadway). But as I mentioned in a previous post, it would be misleading to characterise the Soviet Union as a "Marxist" regime in any meaningful sense, despite its "Marxist-Leninist" ideology.
The question is: are the principles of Marxism to blame for the horrors of 20th-century communist dictatorships? Given that the October Revolution and the wave of communist uprisings after WWI were effectively strangled at birth, I would say not. The fact that Stalin tried to wipe out the rump of the October Revolution gives the lie to right-wing claims that Marxism inevitably led to Stalinism, as does the history of the Fourth International.
Rather, I would claim that Marxism, with its analysis of class relations, is indispensable to making proper sense of history and politics, not least the global class war that is now being waged by the transnational ruling class against the rest of humanity.
The authors I have read are Antony C Sutton - Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution and Arsene de Gorlevitch - Czarism and the Revolution. Some other authors assert that the banking elite supported the Bolsheviks but I believe they cite the above authors. I do not know if either author has primary documents that demonstrate proof of bank information. I also not sure if what these authors assert is accurate.
I have also listened to lectures and read the work Alan Watt, an independent researcher, who explains how many global organizations who appear to have opposite interests actually work together to usher in the NWO. He has been piecing the puzzle from several decades. Watt explains the roles of The Tavistock Institute, WEF, Fabian Society and dozens of other groups that work in concert.
What I am curious about is why revolutionaries have failed over and over to implement communism as Marx envisioned. Did Capital undermine a successful implementation of communism and supported communist puppets or were the leaders of communist revolutions just using the ideals of the communist model to get popular support and then once in power adopted totalitarianism? I can not understand why it never worked out as envisioned.
The de Gorlevitch book makes no reference to the City of London or Anglo-American finance.
Sutton claims that Trotsky was given $10,000 to travel from the US back to Russia in 1917. If true, that is problematic, but we also have to remember that Sutton was part of the rabidly anti-communist Hoover Institute, writing in the middle of the Cold War. As far as I know, he is the only source of this claim; I have not seen any independent verification.
Otherwise, we have to remember that, even if the October Revolution was genuine (as opposed to funded by outside interests), it was strangled at birth by the intervention of 14 (I think) different countries getting involved with the White Armies during the ensuing civil war. The cost of the war effort skewed money away from social concerns and led to policies such as the New Economic Policy, which had obvious capitalist elements. By the time Stalin took over in 1922, the bureaucracy was serving itself rather than the people.
Trotsky's principles of permanent revolution and proletarian internationalism imply that revolution must be international and ongoing, taking place in country after country. This is not what happened, however. Despite a wave of communist uprisings after the end of WWI, most were brutally put down. The October Revolution was not enough to spark a chain reaction of revolutions, and hence it was quickly subverted. Hence my contention that there has never really been a genuinely "communist" country in the true Marxist sense. On the contrary the Fourth International was forced into exile, and the Great Purge wiped out the rump of the October Revolution. Marxism was the enemy of the Stalinist bureaucracy and should in no way be treated as synonymous with Soviet communism, as per lazy right-wing stereotypes.
There does seem to be extensive evidence of Wall Street funding the Soviet Union (which came into being in 1922) and the rise of Hitler, etc., as Sutton lays out in his trilogy. I draw on that evidence in my own work. But that is not funding for "Marxism." It is funding for what Sutton calls "corporate socialism," which, he argues, was Wall Street's true preference.
I have not seen much of Alan Watt, but he seems to be on the money from what I have seen. My own view is that globalisation means that all organisations of the kind you mention - all organisations that are fundamentally aligned with ruling class interests - increasingly have no choice but to act in concert to keep in check a growing and restive global population.
The reason why true communism has never been implemented has been a combination of the ruthlessness of capital in dealing with revolutionaries and the fact that class consciousness has never reached the necessary level for successful revolutions across the board. A century or more of propaganda, psychological warfare, and a captured education system means that almost nobody today understands even the basics of Marxism. Without class consciousness, there can be no revolution, even when the objective conditions for it are ripe, as they are today.
Good interview. Worth noting that AmazingPolly used to (still does?) work for Media Matters (other oddnesses surround her as well) - so I'm not at all sure that she doesn't belong in camp 2 herself - or at least is a deep undercover infiltrator into camp 3.
Thanks. I recently noticed oddities with "Polly"...I find it odd that she obsessively spends so much time attacking others...there's a place for that...but how much is too much? And multiple occasions where her accusations were sloppy and some basic facts were wrong, and she never corrected herself. And now she's pushing gnosticism which really bugs me...particularly because I think she had previously identified as Christian....
But I entirely agree that gnosticism is deeply concerning - it seems to be a common thread which runs through a lot of occult activity. And huge numbers of figures who would fall into the "approved alternative narrative" camp seem to have gnostic, or at least gnostic-influenced belief system connections (e.g. New Age, Scientology, ARE etc.).
Yeah...it's unhinged behavior...but what is really strange...it seems as if chaos agents are fighting chaos agents...controlled opposition is fighting controlled opposition, lol...that is mind boggling...
Some of it is very likely deliberate - establishing credibility in the same way as the chaos agents who "fight" the mainstream media. However some of it is likely accidental - the occult works through deception - convincing people to do something for a purported reason when the real reason is something else. So many of these agents are decieved - at least to some degree - about why they are doing what they are doing, who they work for, and who is on "their" team.
I don't see much good news, sorry! (Apart from the good news that Jesus Christ brings us!). What to do? Don't have much to offer their either. We know the usual: do what you can where you're at. Apart from that, grab some popcorn and enjoy the show?
These emergencies are artificially created by the pathocracy, because they know their time is ending. It is their last stand. They have accelerated it because they know they are losing.
People think Stalin and Mao were following solutions from Marx but Marx didn’t really have solutions because he died before he could come up with them. He was good at diagnosing problems though.
As Marx describes:
"One capitalist always kills many. Hand in hand with this centralisation, or this expropriation of many capitalists by few, develop, on an ever-extending scale, the cooperative form of the labour process, the conscious technical application of science, the methodical cultivation of the soil, the transformation of the instruments of labour into instruments of labour only usable in common, the economising of all means of production by their use as means of production of combined, socialised labour, the entanglement of all peoples in the net of the world market, and with this, the international character of the capitalistic regime."
The "socialised labor" and "instruments of labor only usable in common" described by Marx perfectly describe the internet/world wide web, which is the latest and highest expression of this process.
He observes:
"Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labour at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell of capitalist private property sounds. The expropriators are expropriated."
So what has been happening with the capitalist meltdowns of 2001, 2008, and now is that this integument is bursting asunder. The captains of international finance capital have known since at least 1867 that such things happen on a regular basis. They know that these crises are getting worse because of the advanced nature of socialized labor. What they fear is that they as the expropriators will be expropriated. That's why they are literally eliminating workers and enslaving those remaining. They have done their best to hide themselves and their reasons, but things are becoming increasingly clear to people.
My opinion is that the perpetrators of this medical fraud and tyranny have known for generations that automation will make the vast majority idle, economically dependent, and looking for a way to change things, in other words, revolutionary.
They like us as sort of cute pets or farm animals, but revolution is an existential threat to them so they will do anything including perpetrate genocide to prevent it.
Things have come to a tipping point now with the internet and resulting financial chaos, so they know now this is their last chance at survival.
Insightful conversation. Thank you. Once society accepts the legitimacy of bogus wars based on big lies and legislation to be passed that is increasingly oppressive, an apparatus is put in place to label dissidents as terrorists and silence them. This is tragic and happening now. The whole system is predicated on deception and disguise. Blind allies and controlled oppositions are constantly created to distract and misdirect the masses. It is a military tactic that enables the war machine to keep the majority of the population in the dark about what is actually happening.
Well said. This is why the truth must penetrate like an arrow, or perhaps a nuclear weapon, into the heart of a control system that is wholly premised on deception.
Great interview guys, I have to say after watching this and Omniwar that I would love to see a presentation on Sabbateanism, the Frankfurt School, Marxism, Cultural Marxism, and their relationship with the Technocracy. Patrick Wood describes Marxists as useful idiots for the Technocrats and I have heard it said the whole paradigm for the modern left is rooted in Sabbateanism, which inverts everything to precipitate the return of the Messiah. So who is using who, this engineered chaos has very supernatural roots.
https://merylnass.substack.com/p/from-national-security-to-biosecurity/comment/57082532
"A topic that is virtually never allowed to be addressed within the hallowed halls of academia is any suggestion that the official narrative of 9/11 may not be entirely true. Self-respecting professors will not only avoid this topic like the plague, but will also prohibit anyone from discussing it in their presence, as if fearing they could be stigmatized as a “conspiracy theorist” by association. Whenever I raised pesky questions about 9/11 with my ex-husband, a scientist and professor at a top-ranked university, his curt reply, “I don’t believe in conspiracy theories,” ended the conversation. Kind of a bizarre thing to say, coming from a scientist, isn’t it?
But if inquiring minds persist, what should a principled professor do? What would Johan Galtung do?
On February 17 this year, the visionary mediator, writer, researcher and father of Peace Studies, Johan Galtung, transitioned to the ancestors, prompting heartfelt accolades from many whose minds he ignited and lives he touched, including this one by my adopted Burmese brother, Zarni, who recently joined Galtung as another worthy nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Galtung’s consistent goal was positive peace, not just the absence of war but presence of dignity, uplift and self-determination for all people, where inevitable conflicts can be transformed creatively and nonviolently. Always practical, he issued these five commandments for conflict transformation:
Try to see a conflict from above: the actors, their goals, their pursuits, their clashes. Including you. You may need outside help.
Try to be evenhanded. Try to see yourself or the other side of yourself as clearly as you see the others. Again, you may need help.
The legitimacy test: be judgmental about goals and pursuits, ends and means, including your own. What is legitimate–legal, compatible with human rights, with basic human needs–what is not?
Look at all those legitimate goals and pursuits and put your joint creativity to work: what are the minimum changes needed for a compelling vision, with maximum accommodation of all legitimate goals?
Enact that vision. And if it does not work, back to No. 1. Try again. And again…and again… Perseverance is the key."
--from
The Johan Galtung Approach to Taboo Topics
https://propagandainfocus.com/the-johan-galtung-approach-to-taboo-topics/
BTW...I've interviewed Johan Galtung twice! You can check the archive.
I have read both David Hughes books on the Covid Operation and the Deep State. Have listened to several interviews and agree with much what he lays out. I am confused by his support of Karl Marx and Communism as a workable political model. Where can one find an example of Marxism implemented as the governing structure where millions of people were not murdered. To my assessment it’s just another name and model for a totalitarian system. “New boss same as the old boss.”
Went only listen to people who actually lived under the rule of communism to understand it was no picnic. It was just a new group who wanted power and control over the rest. It’s just dressed up as your rights until you don’t have rights anymore because they’ve taken you to the Gulag. Please read Alexander Solzhenitsyn for clarification.
I don't believe there has ever been an actual Marxist regime. What went under the name of "communism" in the twentieth century was anything but.
Marxism strives for the abolition of all classes. The murderous communist dictatorships of the twentieth century did the opposite: they used brutal means to ensure that the working classes remain suppressed, partnering with the West where necessary to do so.
Thank you for your reply. I have re-examining the mainstream history and I have questions about the sincerity of Marx and Engels. Some authors that I have read maintain that Marx and later Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin were funded by London banking elites.
If the social structure was collapsed by emotionally manipulating the working classes against the existing system then the resources and wealth of nation would just move to new bosses. Control would move from monarchs to the administrative state.
The idea that everyone would benefit equally in a communist state has never occurred to my knowledge. These nations still have a two tier system. From my understanding all communist countries have been repressive, brutal and totalitarian towards the very people they claim to want to free from oppression.
The West has had a perception of freedom and liberty compared to other nations. But the Covid Operation clearly proved that is an illusion. Loss of rights, loss of employment if one did not take an experimental gene therapy shot, lockdowns, been fined for being outdoors, and not standing 6 feet apart, forced to wear masks that don’t stop anything, and never could, having government authorities pour cement into the gas tanks of truckers in Canada, who dared to say “enough” to government decrees that abused the people they are pretend to work for. A deep investigation into how the global operating system actually works brings to light that much of the global population is subjugated by the few.
Thank you.
Who are the authors that allege Marxism was always a front for London banking elites, what is their evidence, and why should we trust them?
Marxism is not about "emotionally manipulating" the masses. That is what propaganda is for. Marxism is about empowering the working classes to bring about a classless society in which the only purpose of the state is the administration of things, not people.
All "communist" countries to date have indeed been as you describe. Which is the opposite of what Marxism stands for.
A global capitalist system in which the many are exploited by the few is precisely what Marxism predicts in the absence of revolution.
Hello and thank you again for your response.
On pages 222 of de Gorlevitch he lists “ the threefold origin of the financial resources, which helped to organize and bring about the Russian revolution.” In pages 223 to 227. He discusses how the revolutionaries were assisted financially. On page 223 and 224 he writes “ the real money primarily came from certain British and American circles, which, for a long time past Hedlund, their support to the Russian revolutionary cause”. He also mentioned Trosky‘s book My Life ( need to verify by reading the book) where Trotsky collaborates that funds were received from certain British financiers. I have other sources I have to investigate but it seems certain historians are giving different accounts. I always am curious when there are different accounts to a single event. Much like the Covid agenda of a dangerous virus and safe and effective shots and the minority pointing out the manipulation and fraud.
You have mentioned that there are three narratives that are presented to the public. The main stream narrative, the allowed alternative narrative created for those who recognize that somethings are not quite right and lastly the narrative that’s suppressed. I agree that’s where one may find more accuracy as to what is happening.
Also, it’s in the interest of big money to infiltrate populist movements in order to control them from within. I’m just wondering if there wasn’t some infiltration of the Bolshevik Revolution by those who wanted to manage outcomes and ultimately introduce another agenda that was not in the original intent of the movement. Lenin died, Trosky left Russia and Stalin’s communism was not what the average person expected and most likely would not have supported.
I will read Das Kapital again and explore Lenin and Trotsky. The principles of communism all sound great when I was in university but I threw it all out when I learned of the millions who were persecuted or killed by communists regimes. Of course, the capitalist system is not the answer with its continuous brutal wars that traumatize populations into compliance with takeover and hypnotize the rest of the world into believing that “war is peace”.
Whatever, the social, political, or economic model, if that model requires exploitation, persecution, or murder of innocent people, then it goes from right to wrong.
Thank you for your commitment to the truth and your courage. It’s not easy to stand up. Your bravery is much admired. The world needs heroes right now, and your work helps those of us who are trying to wake people up with tools to make that process possible.
Very good spot re: pages 222-227! That does indeed seem like plausible evidence of foreign funding for Lenin and Trotsky.
The question then becomes: was this a question of big money infiltrating populist movements in order to control them from within, or was it something else?
Gorlevitch cites Lenin: "I am frequently accused of having won our revolution with the aid of German money. I have never denied the fact, nor do I so now. I will add though, that with Russian money we shall stage a similar revolution in Germany."
Taking money off capitalists to further the cause of communism is not necessarily to be controlled by them. All sides had a shared interest in overthrowing Tsarism, so a deal was reached. I think this is very different from claiming that Marxism was some kind of front for Anglo-American banking interests.
It is certainly true that Wall Street and Moscow became intertwined during the 1920s - the Soviet ambassador to the US even shared the same address as some of the major bankers (120 Broadway). But as I mentioned in a previous post, it would be misleading to characterise the Soviet Union as a "Marxist" regime in any meaningful sense, despite its "Marxist-Leninist" ideology.
The question is: are the principles of Marxism to blame for the horrors of 20th-century communist dictatorships? Given that the October Revolution and the wave of communist uprisings after WWI were effectively strangled at birth, I would say not. The fact that Stalin tried to wipe out the rump of the October Revolution gives the lie to right-wing claims that Marxism inevitably led to Stalinism, as does the history of the Fourth International.
Rather, I would claim that Marxism, with its analysis of class relations, is indispensable to making proper sense of history and politics, not least the global class war that is now being waged by the transnational ruling class against the rest of humanity.
Thank you for kind remarks at the end.
Thanks for allowing this exploration.
The authors I have read are Antony C Sutton - Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution and Arsene de Gorlevitch - Czarism and the Revolution. Some other authors assert that the banking elite supported the Bolsheviks but I believe they cite the above authors. I do not know if either author has primary documents that demonstrate proof of bank information. I also not sure if what these authors assert is accurate.
I have also listened to lectures and read the work Alan Watt, an independent researcher, who explains how many global organizations who appear to have opposite interests actually work together to usher in the NWO. He has been piecing the puzzle from several decades. Watt explains the roles of The Tavistock Institute, WEF, Fabian Society and dozens of other groups that work in concert.
What I am curious about is why revolutionaries have failed over and over to implement communism as Marx envisioned. Did Capital undermine a successful implementation of communism and supported communist puppets or were the leaders of communist revolutions just using the ideals of the communist model to get popular support and then once in power adopted totalitarianism? I can not understand why it never worked out as envisioned.
I am
My pleasure.
The de Gorlevitch book makes no reference to the City of London or Anglo-American finance.
Sutton claims that Trotsky was given $10,000 to travel from the US back to Russia in 1917. If true, that is problematic, but we also have to remember that Sutton was part of the rabidly anti-communist Hoover Institute, writing in the middle of the Cold War. As far as I know, he is the only source of this claim; I have not seen any independent verification.
Otherwise, we have to remember that, even if the October Revolution was genuine (as opposed to funded by outside interests), it was strangled at birth by the intervention of 14 (I think) different countries getting involved with the White Armies during the ensuing civil war. The cost of the war effort skewed money away from social concerns and led to policies such as the New Economic Policy, which had obvious capitalist elements. By the time Stalin took over in 1922, the bureaucracy was serving itself rather than the people.
Trotsky's principles of permanent revolution and proletarian internationalism imply that revolution must be international and ongoing, taking place in country after country. This is not what happened, however. Despite a wave of communist uprisings after the end of WWI, most were brutally put down. The October Revolution was not enough to spark a chain reaction of revolutions, and hence it was quickly subverted. Hence my contention that there has never really been a genuinely "communist" country in the true Marxist sense. On the contrary the Fourth International was forced into exile, and the Great Purge wiped out the rump of the October Revolution. Marxism was the enemy of the Stalinist bureaucracy and should in no way be treated as synonymous with Soviet communism, as per lazy right-wing stereotypes.
There does seem to be extensive evidence of Wall Street funding the Soviet Union (which came into being in 1922) and the rise of Hitler, etc., as Sutton lays out in his trilogy. I draw on that evidence in my own work. But that is not funding for "Marxism." It is funding for what Sutton calls "corporate socialism," which, he argues, was Wall Street's true preference.
I have not seen much of Alan Watt, but he seems to be on the money from what I have seen. My own view is that globalisation means that all organisations of the kind you mention - all organisations that are fundamentally aligned with ruling class interests - increasingly have no choice but to act in concert to keep in check a growing and restive global population.
The reason why true communism has never been implemented has been a combination of the ruthlessness of capital in dealing with revolutionaries and the fact that class consciousness has never reached the necessary level for successful revolutions across the board. A century or more of propaganda, psychological warfare, and a captured education system means that almost nobody today understands even the basics of Marxism. Without class consciousness, there can be no revolution, even when the objective conditions for it are ripe, as they are today.
Good interview. Worth noting that AmazingPolly used to (still does?) work for Media Matters (other oddnesses surround her as well) - so I'm not at all sure that she doesn't belong in camp 2 herself - or at least is a deep undercover infiltrator into camp 3.
Thanks. I recently noticed oddities with "Polly"...I find it odd that she obsessively spends so much time attacking others...there's a place for that...but how much is too much? And multiple occasions where her accusations were sloppy and some basic facts were wrong, and she never corrected herself. And now she's pushing gnosticism which really bugs me...particularly because I think she had previously identified as Christian....
I hadn't picked up on the Gnosticism angle - sort of stopped listening to Polly after uncovering a bunch of info (this link covers some of it pretty well: https://www.hopegirlblog.com/2024/03/19/full-disclosure-pollys-government-psyop/).
But I entirely agree that gnosticism is deeply concerning - it seems to be a common thread which runs through a lot of occult activity. And huge numbers of figures who would fall into the "approved alternative narrative" camp seem to have gnostic, or at least gnostic-influenced belief system connections (e.g. New Age, Scientology, ARE etc.).
Yeah...it's unhinged behavior...but what is really strange...it seems as if chaos agents are fighting chaos agents...controlled opposition is fighting controlled opposition, lol...that is mind boggling...
Some of it is very likely deliberate - establishing credibility in the same way as the chaos agents who "fight" the mainstream media. However some of it is likely accidental - the occult works through deception - convincing people to do something for a purported reason when the real reason is something else. So many of these agents are decieved - at least to some degree - about why they are doing what they are doing, who they work for, and who is on "their" team.
My thoughts exactly! Some are compartmentalized...and also, let's not forget the simpleton grifters!
Outstanding interview - thank you.
Well, I'm tempted to ask... Is there any good news?... but more importantly... What are those of us to do who are cognizant of what is transpiring?
I don't see much good news, sorry! (Apart from the good news that Jesus Christ brings us!). What to do? Don't have much to offer their either. We know the usual: do what you can where you're at. Apart from that, grab some popcorn and enjoy the show?
And What a show it will be!
Of the academic world he is one of the few "David versus Goliath" warriors out there. Great interview!
These emergencies are artificially created by the pathocracy, because they know their time is ending. It is their last stand. They have accelerated it because they know they are losing.
People think Stalin and Mao were following solutions from Marx but Marx didn’t really have solutions because he died before he could come up with them. He was good at diagnosing problems though.
As Marx describes:
"One capitalist always kills many. Hand in hand with this centralisation, or this expropriation of many capitalists by few, develop, on an ever-extending scale, the cooperative form of the labour process, the conscious technical application of science, the methodical cultivation of the soil, the transformation of the instruments of labour into instruments of labour only usable in common, the economising of all means of production by their use as means of production of combined, socialised labour, the entanglement of all peoples in the net of the world market, and with this, the international character of the capitalistic regime."
The "socialised labor" and "instruments of labor only usable in common" described by Marx perfectly describe the internet/world wide web, which is the latest and highest expression of this process.
He observes:
"Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labour at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell of capitalist private property sounds. The expropriators are expropriated."
So what has been happening with the capitalist meltdowns of 2001, 2008, and now is that this integument is bursting asunder. The captains of international finance capital have known since at least 1867 that such things happen on a regular basis. They know that these crises are getting worse because of the advanced nature of socialized labor. What they fear is that they as the expropriators will be expropriated. That's why they are literally eliminating workers and enslaving those remaining. They have done their best to hide themselves and their reasons, but things are becoming increasingly clear to people.
My opinion is that the perpetrators of this medical fraud and tyranny have known for generations that automation will make the vast majority idle, economically dependent, and looking for a way to change things, in other words, revolutionary.
They like us as sort of cute pets or farm animals, but revolution is an existential threat to them so they will do anything including perpetrate genocide to prevent it.
Things have come to a tipping point now with the internet and resulting financial chaos, so they know now this is their last chance at survival.
It is their emergency, not ours.
The Covid insanity was unleashed because *the yellow vests were winning*.
I'm pleased to see David Hughes gets this.
Insightful conversation. Thank you. Once society accepts the legitimacy of bogus wars based on big lies and legislation to be passed that is increasingly oppressive, an apparatus is put in place to label dissidents as terrorists and silence them. This is tragic and happening now. The whole system is predicated on deception and disguise. Blind allies and controlled oppositions are constantly created to distract and misdirect the masses. It is a military tactic that enables the war machine to keep the majority of the population in the dark about what is actually happening.
Well said. This is why the truth must penetrate like an arrow, or perhaps a nuclear weapon, into the heart of a control system that is wholly premised on deception.
I mean Camp 3. It's true I haven't heard of you David A Hughes until recently and I have been on this BS since about day 30 ie April 2020.
Me: Category 3 all the way.
Man bear pig jibberish. That's my comment. You keep sending posts. So I am responding.
Great interview guys, I have to say after watching this and Omniwar that I would love to see a presentation on Sabbateanism, the Frankfurt School, Marxism, Cultural Marxism, and their relationship with the Technocracy. Patrick Wood describes Marxists as useful idiots for the Technocrats and I have heard it said the whole paradigm for the modern left is rooted in Sabbateanism, which inverts everything to precipitate the return of the Messiah. So who is using who, this engineered chaos has very supernatural roots.
The thing is that pcr tests are being done now in hospitals and you can be labeled covid patient with or without any symptoms whatsoever.
The Bursting Integument
https://tomg2021.substack.com/p/the-bursting-integument