Thanks for putting into words some other observations and reflections I’ve been having over the past couple of decades. I am constantly reminded at how “very smart people” can be redirected to effectively and consistently. Of course the answer IS real life. Analog wins in the end, although it may not be in a very idyllic way….
You wrote: "Those who expose corruption are permitted to speak, but only within careful boundaries. Like any sophisticated confidence game, it works in stages: first gain trust through real revelations, then build dependency through exclusive "insider" knowledge, finally redirect that trust toward constrained outcomes. Watch how alternative media platforms follow this pattern: expose genuine corruption, build devoted following, then subtly shift narrative focus away from systemic accountability. Each revelation seems to lead deeper into a labyrinth of coordinated awakening."
This made me think of the latest revelation about the Means siblings:
When they first came on the scene I thought how cool that someone is talking about these important food related topics and I was taken in like everyone else. Then after hearing a few people talk about how they might be a well-timed distraction from the larger health issue of the mRNA bio-weapon harms and then watching the Danny Jones Podcast with Mary Talley Bowden, Dr. Jack Kruse, and Calley Means it seemed well founded that they are a Limited Hangout.
Dr. Bowden asked some key questions that made me realize how fooled I was.
How did they get a book deal so easily? Especially calling out Big Food. The publishers ties to The Rockefeller Foundation.
Why were these two unknowns so heavily promoted on all the popular podcasts (Tucker, Rogan) when so many others have tried and failed?
What are their family connections to government?
If they care so much about the health of people why are they not calling for the shots to be stopped? (mRNA platform is financial boon for the industry and Calley is an industry lobbyist - duh)
Why after 4 years of the worst crimes against humanity and the mRNA bio weapon that is still killing people everyday are we talking about the harm of seed oils and fruit loops? The processed food discussion has its place, but now, at this time, why is it being allowed? Convenient distraction.
After hearing Dr. Bowden ask those questions I was floored. How did I not see it myself?
Such an obvious distraction from the bigger issue - the mRNA platform is not fit for human use yet it's being deployed in all new vaccines and on the childhood schedule. There is no one protecting the children, but sure let's focus on fruit loops.
How to make sense of all the voices coming from all the directions and wanting to trust someone, anyone? It's maddening.
Astute observation. You're asking all the right quesitons.
I linked to something I wrote about the MAHA strife in the piece. FWIW, I know some people who are friendly with the Means siblings and believe they may be pure in their goals. Regardless, it's easy to see how these issues can get railroaded even by well intentioned actors.
If there are not enough people running with the vaccine stuff, does not mean that it makes sense to crack down on those running with the food stuff. That's how you create strife and kill the enthusiasm of good people.
The whole "let's pick on the Meanses" is misbegotten.
I think you may have misread my intentions. I'm not suggesting 'cracking down' on anyone - I specifically acknowledged the validity of food sovereignty concerns while examining how different movements can get redirected or divided. The piece is actually about avoiding strife and supporting unity among people working on different but important issues. It's precisely about not killing the enthusiasm of good people, regardless of which aspect of these challenges they're focused on.
That said, if you're interested in a deeper analysis of how movements can get redirected, I'd encourage you to read Debbie Lerman's excellent reporting about the Means siblings, which provides additional evidence supporting the pattern I described about how authentic movements can potentially be something other than they may appear.
The interview surely did crack down on the Meanses. And so did ElleSD to whom you were replying encouragingly.
I am coming from a perspective of an ad hominem: attack the issue or the argument, not the person.
And I see a lot of people attacking the persons. Movements do get redirected, and that should be addressed as an issue on its own, rather than attacking and besmirching the humans involved.
And attacking and besmirching people who do good work is also a strategy of divide and conquer. I say no to that crap!
We agree re ad hominems. To be clear though - my essay deliberately avoided focusing on specific individuals. It was about examining broader patterns of how movements can be redirected or divided. While Debbie's piece provides a detailed case study that illustrates some of these patterns, my focus was on understanding the trend itself - how authentic movements can get channeled in certain directions, whether intentionally or unintentionally. This kind of pattern recognition is crucial for maintaining effectiveness in any movement. At the end of the day, we all need to follow our hearts while keeping our eyes open.
Yes, that is where the focus should be. On the trends, the deceptive patterns. So people can learn to avoid being snookered. Glad we are on the same page now.
I’ve spent the last 10+ years going down various rabbit holes and I’ve finally come to the conclusion it has been a matrix within a matrix, especially with so many “truthers” pushing synthetic antidotes which are turning out to be extremely harmful.
While I do think there are a lot of intentional nefarious players trying to derail well intentioned movements, I also think that on a very subconscious level that humans are magnetized to the level of truth that they can handle and equally share the level of truth that they can handle - ie they are not attempting to be co-intel, they are just magnetically drawn to lies because they are filled with that level of lies (on a heavy metal level or shadow level) - and so they perpetuate partial lies/ignore elephants in the room until they detox and face all the toxins within - this is just my working theory which I hope you enjoy 😊 some people like myself have been drawn to black pill content because I was not ready to deal with my own unhealed trauma and it became a sort of escape to “go down the rabbit hole” and find some valiant truth teller to protect me and peddle zeolite products to me lol. Once I faced my own shadows through somatic and nervous system healing, I stopped seeking “escape the matrix” boogey man stories from half truthers as much; as I was not magnetized to feeling helpless anymore.
I hope this makes sense. :-)
I am trying to assemble some friends in NY for the very reasons you listed!
Local connection is how we get out of this.
Thanks for your always resonant inspiring writing!
Thanks for the kind words and apologies for the delayed response.
Your hypothesis about people being "magnetized" to the level of truth they can handle resonates deeply. I've seen this play out repeatedly - someone understands vaccine mandates are wrong but can't process the full scope of harm from the shots themselves; someone recognizes the evil of wars until their trusted sources declare one justified; someone knows Iraq WMDs were a lie but can't consider the implications for 9/11; someone sees media manipulation around Covid but trusts climate change narratives without scrutiny. It's not necessarily intentional deception - as you note, it seems to operate at a deeper psychological level where unprocessed trauma and conditioning create these selective blind spots. Or, truly processing the magnitude of the lies.
Your insight about personal healing enabling clearer sight is especially valuable. When we're seeking external saviors or simple narratives to explain away complex discomfort, we often end up vulnerable to partial truths marketed as complete solutions. Ugh.
Really glad to hear you're building local connections in NY. I obviously agree with that approach toward moving forward.
🫶🏻 thank you for being so brave and such an articulate writer. I feel grateful for your depth and compassion and I’m grateful that we are all in this together, figuring it out as we heal and detox on all levels and rise above 🌞
Josh, you have a real gift. Again, some of the best stuff I've read in a long time. It's all things I've known but am unable to organize and explain with such clarity as you do. Or, I sound insane when I try. Is a book in your future? Because it should be.
Wow, you are so kind. I've been processing these concepts out loud to everyone in my path for the last few years until they got bored of me, so I decided to start sharing more publicly. A book is definitely something I've considered, but I'm still working through my ultimate motivations in all this - wanting to make sure whatever I put out there serves a genuine purpose beyond just adding to the noise. Either way, I'm grateful to connect with others who care about exploring these wacky but important ideas.
You have a rare and sorely needed talent. Whitney Webb said the other day that the best way to fight back was to create. Go be human. Or as JP Sears said, “It's ok to be weird/yourself”. I know we think we are still young and are used to reverting to a higher authority (other than God), but whether we like it or not, we are coming into these positions. I think it's a great thing. The fact that you are aware of the social responsibility of your words shows that your heart and intentions are true, and that's what matters. Looking forward to the next pineal gland cleansing spell you write. 🙏
"The ultimate tyranny in a society is not control by martial law. It is control by the psychological manipulation of consciousness, through which reality is defined so that those who exist within it do not even realize that they are in prison."
I keep thinking about the ways they elicit our compliance. Insurance is another one that comes up. It's virtually impossible to get needs met via the system without "working it" somehow. Coverage is deliberately conditional, forcing people to choose between financial and ethical compromise. As far as I'm concerned, strategy itself compromises us by putting us in the mindset of end goal and taking us off genuine learning curves.
Insurance is just another racket in the extraction economy - old guard parasites who've perfected the art of taking without giving. Pure superfluous middleman masquerading as service.
I love your insight about how they force us to play their game - either get financially bled or learn to work their corrupt system. And the moment we start strategizing within their rules, we're already caught in their web. Just like banking and healthcare, it's amazing how many of these dinosaur industries basically exist to shake us down while pretending they're doing important work.
Marxism is about class dialectic, class warfare. The 'controlled opposition' shoves people into silos, in which they can be controlled, exactly as in the Marxian dialectic.
Whether it's collectivist policies creating chaos or nationalist "solutions" expanding state control, the playbook stays consistent: Problem, reaction, solution. My concern now is that the border crisis becomes justification for digital ID and surveillance. Left or right, the infrastructure of control grows. Think problem-solving but watch for how "emergency measures" tend to become permanent features.
Thank you. You have so clearly articulated these patterns behind ongoing perception-management and control.
The area in which we debate is continually defined by the same sources leading us to - of course - their solution. The illusion of choice. Over and over.
And yes, we watch movements like 'Occupy' start out with real energy and organization only to dissolve into fragmented and ineffective remnants.
Eventually the realization hits. Individually and then (we can hope) collectively. For those who can see it - rather than resisting what's being imposed, rather than a 'No' we do what's right for us, (an intrinsic yes) and take actions that support that. We redefine our agency in a positive and practical direction. Rather than against the matrix-machine, we act as advocates for ourselves. It may seem a subtle distinction but it's crucial.
The whole current set-up places us as unempowered victims to 'their' system. In fact we are already free and obviously have power - they wouldn't have to work so hard at deception if we didn't.
We act out of that recognition.
What does a free person do? Grow food. Avoid being poisoned voluntarily. Spend time in nature and align to what is real. Find ways to exchange with others outside the system offered. Yes, that will become more challenging, but what is being planned won't hold - too many are already seeing it.
That's for laying it out so clearly. An important gift you are sharing. Best
Your comment gets to the heart of effective individual agency - shifting from reactive resistance to proactive creation. The key insight is that perpetual opposition still keeps us defined by the system we oppose. True independence means building parallel structures and living according to our own values.
Your point about growing food, avoiding voluntary poisoning, connecting with nature and reality, and creating alternative exchange systems represents practical sovereignty. It's the difference between fighting against something versus building something better.
The observation about their constant need for deception revealing our inherent power is spot on. Complex control systems only arise when natural authority is absent. Their elaborate mechanisms of manipulation indicate not their strength, but their fundamental weakness.
The path forward isn't battling the old system, but making it irrelevant through practical, life-affirming alternatives. Each person who steps out of dependency and into productive self-reliance demonstrates this quiet revolution.
You should be acting to protect your privacy and that of the coming generation. There is no freedom without privacy and AI control of humans cannot succeed without everyone giving it. This is where the fight must occur.
Thanks for this brilliant essay it brought up thoughts of Hayek and CS Lewis writing.
Hayek,
Full of hubris, we believe we are “able to shape the world around us according to our wishes.” Blinded by this fatal conceit, the miracle of the modern world goes unnoticed. Few wonder what is “responsible for having generated this extraordinary order.”
To “plan” or “organize” the growth of mind, or, for that matter, progress in general, is a contradiction in terms. The idea that the human mind ought “consciously” to control its own development confuses individual reason, which alone can “consciously control” anything, with the interpersonal process to which its growth is due. By attempting to control it, we are merely setting bounds to its development and must sooner or later produce a stagnation of thought and a decline of reason.
The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demand for “conscious” control or “conscious” planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme—while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the super individual forces which guide the growth of reason.
Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of the social process.
CS Lewis
Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
I am only making clear what Man's conquest of Nature really means and especially that final stage in the conquest, which, perhaps, is not far off. The final stage is come when Man by eugenics, by pre-natal conditioning, and by an education and propaganda based on a perfect applied psychology, has obtained full control over himself. Human nature will be the last part of Nature to surrender to Man. The battle will then be won. We shall have `taken the thread of life out of the hand of Clotho' and be henceforth free to make our species whatever we wish
it to be. The battle will indeed be won. But who, precisely, will have won it? For the power of Man to make himself what he pleases means, as we have seen, the power of some men to make other men what they please.
It is the magician's bargain: give up our soul, get power in return. But once our souls, that is, ourselves, have been given up, the power thus conferred will not belong to us. We shall in fact be the slaves and puppets of that to which we have given our souls. It is in Man's power to treat
himself as a mere `natural object' and his own judgements of value as raw material for scientific manipulation to alter at will. The objection to his doing so does not lie in the fact that this point of view (like one's first day in a dissecting room) is painful and shocking till we grow used to it. The pain and the shock are at most a warning and a symptom. The real objection is that if man chooses to treat himself as raw material, raw material he will be: not raw material to be manipulated, as he fondly imagined, by himself, but by mere appetite, that is, mere Nature, in the person of his de-humanized Conditioners.
For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting
Andrew, I'm incredibly humbled by this comparison. Those passages are profound and eerily prescient - especially Lewis's warning about the "magician's bargain" and Hayek's insights on the fatal conceit of trying to consciously control humanity's development. Thank you for sharing these. They articulate so clearly what's at stake in our current moment.
"Those who steer the first matrix wouldn't leave the off-ramps unsupervised." YES, thus there is controlled opposition on every issue. It's kind of like funding both sides of a war, which they also do. I saw that you had MMT in your list of influences. They are controlled opposition to monetary reform, they defend the current system with a phony "theory" and becasue money is behind them they are able to dominate the public discussion and keep real monetary reform at bay. During Occupy Wallstreet they employed emotional attacks at any mention of it. I bet most people here don't know what I am talking about when I say monetary reform. In fact there is a history of controlled opposition to monetary reform, making Marx popular served that function, as Silvio Gesell pointed out in the 20s. The monetary history is the history of power, not the military histories. It was acknowledged 3000 years ago that the most vital prerogative of democratic self-governance was the sole right to issue money as an asset, not a debt. As Frederick Soddy wrote in 1934, To allow money to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government. That is what we are up against. monetary.org Take a look, and keep up the good work, Joshua.
I appreciate your insights about controlled opposition and completely agree about the monetary system being at the root of our captured society. However, I think you may have confused me with someone else regarding MMT - it's my belief that our debt-based monetary system is the root of most evil- and the coming CBDC agenda represents the most formidable control mechanisms we've ever faced. Either way, thanks for the enthusiasm, Howard.
With Trump being captured bu the west coast oligarchs and blessing crypto it appears as if an alternate financial system is now being set up, I think in collaboration with Wall Street, that will leverage the crypto enthusiasts and investors, which will result in digital identity being introduced along with a privately implemented CBDC. As with credit cards, use will be grown over time and it will become increasingly difficult to avoid participating. The tech oligarchs, I believe, do have a comprehensive vision of how this all rolls out, where AI and the security state fits in, and how everyone will be controlled to their financial benefit. The key to it all is theft of privacy. This is where the 2nd American Revolution must be fought.
You may be right but we'll see. A big component of this war - beyond being spiritual and for our consciousness - is centralization versus decentralization. We're just getting started on how that will play out. Tech may be our weapon as well as theirs.
If you understand how AI works, which depends upon complete theft of privacy for context in responses, it is easy to see that AI is on a clear track to take over most of the essential responsibilities of parenting, including inculcation of foundational beliefs and values, shaping of world view, establishing boundaries, and meting out of rewards and punishments, among many others. While one might be able to make an argument in favor of taking over this responsibility, it represents a deeply dystopian ~experiment that is placing everyone's future into the hands of a relatively small group of people having self interest in centralizing power over the culture and society. The power to control people at this level is FAR greater than that of a govt of laws, so one must be very careful what one wishes for, especially when all of this is not being discussed and debated, at least publicly.
With respect to decentralization, the one example that comes to mind is abortion, which decision has always struck me as nothing but a failed attempt to re-divide men and women over an issue which 95%+ have come to agree, at least in terms of personal behavior if not in rhetoric. The trend toward centralization of power is persistent, as those at the center are always greedy for more. I hear far more calls for eliminating the electoral college than I do for restoring state's rights. Many dont even comprehend what "state's rights" even means.
I am a technologists and far from being anti-technology. I can clearly see the benefits of AI to the world, especially in terms of economic productivity within everything I did over the course of a career. If I were young, I'd dive in enthusiastically. But I can see where the focus is right now, selling products and winning elections, and I think humanity is making a very BIG mistake in giving up on privacy and in unleashing what amounts to psychological mind control on children.
The only hope of resisting it lays in fighting to maintain privacy and it's nearly too late. Best... Love your stack.
Hi Howard. Indeed the private ownership of the money supply is the logical conclusion of Fascism. However, to your point about the public issuance of money as an asset, I see that when we look at money in situ, money is invariably and inherently debt-based. Twas ever thus. All agricultural societies are surplus societies that run year-on-year structural surpluses in order to persist. And surpluses represent the pulling forward of demand from the future via extractive mechanisms. And money became the utilitarian market-based proxy for those surpluses. Hence, the pulling forward of the demand for money is what makes money intrinsically debt-based; we borrow money when we want to pull our future demand into the present, whether we're a republic, a private business, or a private individual. And if we don't do it then someone else will, leaving us at a market disadvantage. And the holding money in a surplus society means losing money because structural surpluses are growth regimes that force monetary inflation. So in order to avoid losing money by doing nothing, we loan our extra money to a bank, which is a debt.
Even barter markets are debt-based. Goods are perishable, and seasonal, and have production lead times. My neighbor's chicks may be hatching during the two months or so when my milk goats are dried off, so one of us must be in debt to the other for a period of time if she needs to offload her chicks as soon as they are born.
That money must be a debt is a myth perpetrated by those who profit from it. There are examples throughout history of debt-free money. Lincoln's greeenbacks were issued not as a debt but as a permanetly circulating asset which is why the bankers hated them so becasue when issued debt began to dissappear from the economy as Henry Carey, Lincoln's economic advisor, described. Read what the bankers association said about them. The Bandbury Pound was another example. Money was an ancient innovation to pay debt, requiring debt to be paid with debt is a twisted abuse of monetary authority called usury, once banned by all religions before they were corrupted. The monetary history is the history of power. monetary.orgmonetaryalliance.org
Thanks Howard. I get that public banking is politically preferable to private banking. I agree with your recounting of the tug of war between public and private banking. I often recommend Bill Still's "The Money Masters" documentary as one of the most important documentaries for early-stage Red Pilling.
I just explained why money itself is a structural representation of debt. There's political theory of money and then there's situational, dynamic reality. It's like the difference between in vitro experimentation and in vivo reality. The academic field of study that deals with in vivo reality is classical cultural anthropology which is a systems theory of human ecology. I'd be happy to respond to any counterarguments you may have regarding money as structural debt.
"...a deeper conflict unfolds silently across the planet - a war for the freedom of human consciousness itself. This is what World War III looks like - not just bombs and bullets, but the systematic engineering of human perception."
Cheering from my keyboard that more people are realizing this. For me the biggest hit between the eyes was the same revelation you had about the Q-movement, that the managed expectation was to actually do nothing. That magic white-hats were supposed to swoop in and save the day at the last moment. Talk about Alice in Wonderland! They successfully diffused the red-blooded-American instinct of taking matters directly into hand, so I guess that is job well-done to the narrative managers.
I apologize for the delayed reply. Thank you for the thoughtful comment.
The hard part of most people re Q is realizing that it's not nothing. LIke any good dialectic people look at it in binary terms: nonsense or savior. I don't hear enough discussion about whether it could be something else, say a highly sophisticated intel op.
Your observation about Alice in Wonderland is a powerful metaphor on a number of levels.
I was thinking of writing a whole piece about that topic. The beauty of Q is that for all the hype, it absolutely delivered on the key area of 'Awakening'. Even today the 'Q clock' is predicting events in the news, and the slow drip of information coming to light continues to match up to the many 'reveals' from years past. My problem with the dialectic is of course that even the white-hat option that Gen Flynn and others paint as 'awakened' or 'red pilled' is not real freedom. So in many ways it has always just offered false hope to those of us truly interested in getting out from under the boot.
Well, Mr. Stylman, each new article in this series, reinforces it as quite a tour de force.
Tangentially, I would add that the reversion extant after revelation of deceit, is scalar. We can observe the same mechanism of action within localized organizations. It appears to be a matter of incentives. A reasonable prior is that each pursues their own self-interest. Systemically, this places revelation of deceit and corruption within a peculiar niche reserved for statistical outliers.
When a system is properly designed, instantiated and initiated, it is axiomatically self-correcting. This appears to be the result of atomized incentive structures. More concisely, perverse incentives render deceptive practices "profitable."
Sorting this profitability is a function of understanding prerogatives within command-and-control structures. Within private industry, fraud is profitable on an individualized scale. In organizations without a profit motive, fraud preserves reputation, which is the foundation of institutional power.
But you knew this already.
Where wealth and influence concentrate, predators and parasites congregate. The selection criteria for pivotal command and control structure emplacement, incentivizes expression of traits correlating with that congregation.
Some predators and parasites are born, others are made, both categories find their metier within incentive structures.
Many thanks for yet another thought-provoking exposition. Hope you consolidate this series into a book; I'll scrape together a sufficiency of the filthy lucre to obtain a copy, should you do so.
I'd argue that the system isn't broken - it's working exactly as designed. The concentration of wealth and power, the selection for predatory behavior - these aren't bugs, they're features.
As for the book - I've thought about it. My friends and family are getting tired of my schtick so I decided to start publishing to see if anyone else might be interested - I'm glad you are :-)
It's your unique perspective that provides the value. The various aspects have their own body of literature, but correlating those aspects requires a certain..... delicacy, shall we say?
That delicacy is a function of verification and avoidance of the more hyperbolic assertions extant within the conspiratorium. It isn't obvious how to refine the correlation credibly into fundamental patterns of human personality traits and behaviors.
I would say that you're one of a small handful of analysts and writers today, that can walk that tightrope. At least, so it seems to me thus far.
Timing, also, is of the essence. Public interest in this type of writing, is at an all-time high. Strike while the iron is hot, would be my recommendation. The book writes itself, as a natural outcome of the essays.
I know I must sound like a lunatic to most people - a few years ago I would have thought so myself. But once you start looking deeper, you can't unsee what you've seen. Funny how reality keeps pulling the rug out from under your carefully constructed worldview.
As far as the book goes, while I'm flattered, I'm still trying to understand my role in all this. Thanks for the vote of confidence, either way.
"I know I must sound like a lunatic to most people"
The erudite are enmeshed within their priors, Mr. Stylman, wholly invested. To them, your observations are threatening.
"Most people" lack a frame of reference with which to understand the correlations. To them, your observations can be intellectually intimidating.
I say "can be," but I'll reiterate my assertion that your unique perspective renders the material more accessible than most.
I think your role will only be understandable in retrospect. You will act according to your nature, and only time will reveal the relative importance of your contribution.
Thanks for putting into words some other observations and reflections I’ve been having over the past couple of decades. I am constantly reminded at how “very smart people” can be redirected to effectively and consistently. Of course the answer IS real life. Analog wins in the end, although it may not be in a very idyllic way….
You wrote: "Those who expose corruption are permitted to speak, but only within careful boundaries. Like any sophisticated confidence game, it works in stages: first gain trust through real revelations, then build dependency through exclusive "insider" knowledge, finally redirect that trust toward constrained outcomes. Watch how alternative media platforms follow this pattern: expose genuine corruption, build devoted following, then subtly shift narrative focus away from systemic accountability. Each revelation seems to lead deeper into a labyrinth of coordinated awakening."
This made me think of the latest revelation about the Means siblings:
When they first came on the scene I thought how cool that someone is talking about these important food related topics and I was taken in like everyone else. Then after hearing a few people talk about how they might be a well-timed distraction from the larger health issue of the mRNA bio-weapon harms and then watching the Danny Jones Podcast with Mary Talley Bowden, Dr. Jack Kruse, and Calley Means it seemed well founded that they are a Limited Hangout.
Dr. Bowden asked some key questions that made me realize how fooled I was.
How did they get a book deal so easily? Especially calling out Big Food. The publishers ties to The Rockefeller Foundation.
Why were these two unknowns so heavily promoted on all the popular podcasts (Tucker, Rogan) when so many others have tried and failed?
What are their family connections to government?
If they care so much about the health of people why are they not calling for the shots to be stopped? (mRNA platform is financial boon for the industry and Calley is an industry lobbyist - duh)
Why after 4 years of the worst crimes against humanity and the mRNA bio weapon that is still killing people everyday are we talking about the harm of seed oils and fruit loops? The processed food discussion has its place, but now, at this time, why is it being allowed? Convenient distraction.
After hearing Dr. Bowden ask those questions I was floored. How did I not see it myself?
Such an obvious distraction from the bigger issue - the mRNA platform is not fit for human use yet it's being deployed in all new vaccines and on the childhood schedule. There is no one protecting the children, but sure let's focus on fruit loops.
How to make sense of all the voices coming from all the directions and wanting to trust someone, anyone? It's maddening.
Astute observation. You're asking all the right quesitons.
I linked to something I wrote about the MAHA strife in the piece. FWIW, I know some people who are friendly with the Means siblings and believe they may be pure in their goals. Regardless, it's easy to see how these issues can get railroaded even by well intentioned actors.
Eh. No.
If there are not enough people running with the vaccine stuff, does not mean that it makes sense to crack down on those running with the food stuff. That's how you create strife and kill the enthusiasm of good people.
The whole "let's pick on the Meanses" is misbegotten.
I think you may have misread my intentions. I'm not suggesting 'cracking down' on anyone - I specifically acknowledged the validity of food sovereignty concerns while examining how different movements can get redirected or divided. The piece is actually about avoiding strife and supporting unity among people working on different but important issues. It's precisely about not killing the enthusiasm of good people, regardless of which aspect of these challenges they're focused on.
That said, if you're interested in a deeper analysis of how movements can get redirected, I'd encourage you to read Debbie Lerman's excellent reporting about the Means siblings, which provides additional evidence supporting the pattern I described about how authentic movements can potentially be something other than they may appear.
https://debbielerman.substack.com/p/cia-central-casting-the-means-episode
The interview surely did crack down on the Meanses. And so did ElleSD to whom you were replying encouragingly.
I am coming from a perspective of an ad hominem: attack the issue or the argument, not the person.
And I see a lot of people attacking the persons. Movements do get redirected, and that should be addressed as an issue on its own, rather than attacking and besmirching the humans involved.
And attacking and besmirching people who do good work is also a strategy of divide and conquer. I say no to that crap!
We agree re ad hominems. To be clear though - my essay deliberately avoided focusing on specific individuals. It was about examining broader patterns of how movements can be redirected or divided. While Debbie's piece provides a detailed case study that illustrates some of these patterns, my focus was on understanding the trend itself - how authentic movements can get channeled in certain directions, whether intentionally or unintentionally. This kind of pattern recognition is crucial for maintaining effectiveness in any movement. At the end of the day, we all need to follow our hearts while keeping our eyes open.
Yes, that is where the focus should be. On the trends, the deceptive patterns. So people can learn to avoid being snookered. Glad we are on the same page now.
What a great read! I find myself trying to address these ideas constantly with others, but with nowhere near the clarity that you've provided here.
This is so spot on to where my mind has been at.
I’ve spent the last 10+ years going down various rabbit holes and I’ve finally come to the conclusion it has been a matrix within a matrix, especially with so many “truthers” pushing synthetic antidotes which are turning out to be extremely harmful.
While I do think there are a lot of intentional nefarious players trying to derail well intentioned movements, I also think that on a very subconscious level that humans are magnetized to the level of truth that they can handle and equally share the level of truth that they can handle - ie they are not attempting to be co-intel, they are just magnetically drawn to lies because they are filled with that level of lies (on a heavy metal level or shadow level) - and so they perpetuate partial lies/ignore elephants in the room until they detox and face all the toxins within - this is just my working theory which I hope you enjoy 😊 some people like myself have been drawn to black pill content because I was not ready to deal with my own unhealed trauma and it became a sort of escape to “go down the rabbit hole” and find some valiant truth teller to protect me and peddle zeolite products to me lol. Once I faced my own shadows through somatic and nervous system healing, I stopped seeking “escape the matrix” boogey man stories from half truthers as much; as I was not magnetized to feeling helpless anymore.
I hope this makes sense. :-)
I am trying to assemble some friends in NY for the very reasons you listed!
Local connection is how we get out of this.
Thanks for your always resonant inspiring writing!
Thanks for the kind words and apologies for the delayed response.
Your hypothesis about people being "magnetized" to the level of truth they can handle resonates deeply. I've seen this play out repeatedly - someone understands vaccine mandates are wrong but can't process the full scope of harm from the shots themselves; someone recognizes the evil of wars until their trusted sources declare one justified; someone knows Iraq WMDs were a lie but can't consider the implications for 9/11; someone sees media manipulation around Covid but trusts climate change narratives without scrutiny. It's not necessarily intentional deception - as you note, it seems to operate at a deeper psychological level where unprocessed trauma and conditioning create these selective blind spots. Or, truly processing the magnitude of the lies.
Your insight about personal healing enabling clearer sight is especially valuable. When we're seeking external saviors or simple narratives to explain away complex discomfort, we often end up vulnerable to partial truths marketed as complete solutions. Ugh.
Really glad to hear you're building local connections in NY. I obviously agree with that approach toward moving forward.
🫶🏻 thank you for being so brave and such an articulate writer. I feel grateful for your depth and compassion and I’m grateful that we are all in this together, figuring it out as we heal and detox on all levels and rise above 🌞
Josh, you have a real gift. Again, some of the best stuff I've read in a long time. It's all things I've known but am unable to organize and explain with such clarity as you do. Or, I sound insane when I try. Is a book in your future? Because it should be.
Wow, you are so kind. I've been processing these concepts out loud to everyone in my path for the last few years until they got bored of me, so I decided to start sharing more publicly. A book is definitely something I've considered, but I'm still working through my ultimate motivations in all this - wanting to make sure whatever I put out there serves a genuine purpose beyond just adding to the noise. Either way, I'm grateful to connect with others who care about exploring these wacky but important ideas.
You have a rare and sorely needed talent. Whitney Webb said the other day that the best way to fight back was to create. Go be human. Or as JP Sears said, “It's ok to be weird/yourself”. I know we think we are still young and are used to reverting to a higher authority (other than God), but whether we like it or not, we are coming into these positions. I think it's a great thing. The fact that you are aware of the social responsibility of your words shows that your heart and intentions are true, and that's what matters. Looking forward to the next pineal gland cleansing spell you write. 🙏
Soooo good. And exactly what I've been thinking about!
Teachings from the Pleiadians
"The ultimate tyranny in a society is not control by martial law. It is control by the psychological manipulation of consciousness, through which reality is defined so that those who exist within it do not even realize that they are in prison."
Barbara Marciniak
Great post.
"The way out of their matrix is with eyes wide open and feet planted firmly in local soil."
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
I keep thinking about the ways they elicit our compliance. Insurance is another one that comes up. It's virtually impossible to get needs met via the system without "working it" somehow. Coverage is deliberately conditional, forcing people to choose between financial and ethical compromise. As far as I'm concerned, strategy itself compromises us by putting us in the mindset of end goal and taking us off genuine learning curves.
Insurance is just another racket in the extraction economy - old guard parasites who've perfected the art of taking without giving. Pure superfluous middleman masquerading as service.
I love your insight about how they force us to play their game - either get financially bled or learn to work their corrupt system. And the moment we start strategizing within their rules, we're already caught in their web. Just like banking and healthcare, it's amazing how many of these dinosaur industries basically exist to shake us down while pretending they're doing important work.
Brilliant synthesis - thank you 🙏
Marxism is about class dialectic, class warfare. The 'controlled opposition' shoves people into silos, in which they can be controlled, exactly as in the Marxian dialectic.
Individualism is the response.
Whether it's collectivist policies creating chaos or nationalist "solutions" expanding state control, the playbook stays consistent: Problem, reaction, solution. My concern now is that the border crisis becomes justification for digital ID and surveillance. Left or right, the infrastructure of control grows. Think problem-solving but watch for how "emergency measures" tend to become permanent features.
Thank you. You have so clearly articulated these patterns behind ongoing perception-management and control.
The area in which we debate is continually defined by the same sources leading us to - of course - their solution. The illusion of choice. Over and over.
And yes, we watch movements like 'Occupy' start out with real energy and organization only to dissolve into fragmented and ineffective remnants.
Eventually the realization hits. Individually and then (we can hope) collectively. For those who can see it - rather than resisting what's being imposed, rather than a 'No' we do what's right for us, (an intrinsic yes) and take actions that support that. We redefine our agency in a positive and practical direction. Rather than against the matrix-machine, we act as advocates for ourselves. It may seem a subtle distinction but it's crucial.
The whole current set-up places us as unempowered victims to 'their' system. In fact we are already free and obviously have power - they wouldn't have to work so hard at deception if we didn't.
We act out of that recognition.
What does a free person do? Grow food. Avoid being poisoned voluntarily. Spend time in nature and align to what is real. Find ways to exchange with others outside the system offered. Yes, that will become more challenging, but what is being planned won't hold - too many are already seeing it.
That's for laying it out so clearly. An important gift you are sharing. Best
Thanks for the kind words.
Your comment gets to the heart of effective individual agency - shifting from reactive resistance to proactive creation. The key insight is that perpetual opposition still keeps us defined by the system we oppose. True independence means building parallel structures and living according to our own values.
Your point about growing food, avoiding voluntary poisoning, connecting with nature and reality, and creating alternative exchange systems represents practical sovereignty. It's the difference between fighting against something versus building something better.
The observation about their constant need for deception revealing our inherent power is spot on. Complex control systems only arise when natural authority is absent. Their elaborate mechanisms of manipulation indicate not their strength, but their fundamental weakness.
The path forward isn't battling the old system, but making it irrelevant through practical, life-affirming alternatives. Each person who steps out of dependency and into productive self-reliance demonstrates this quiet revolution.
You should be acting to protect your privacy and that of the coming generation. There is no freedom without privacy and AI control of humans cannot succeed without everyone giving it. This is where the fight must occur.
Thanks for this brilliant essay it brought up thoughts of Hayek and CS Lewis writing.
Hayek,
Full of hubris, we believe we are “able to shape the world around us according to our wishes.” Blinded by this fatal conceit, the miracle of the modern world goes unnoticed. Few wonder what is “responsible for having generated this extraordinary order.”
To “plan” or “organize” the growth of mind, or, for that matter, progress in general, is a contradiction in terms. The idea that the human mind ought “consciously” to control its own development confuses individual reason, which alone can “consciously control” anything, with the interpersonal process to which its growth is due. By attempting to control it, we are merely setting bounds to its development and must sooner or later produce a stagnation of thought and a decline of reason.
The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demand for “conscious” control or “conscious” planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme—while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the super individual forces which guide the growth of reason.
Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of the social process.
CS Lewis
Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
I am only making clear what Man's conquest of Nature really means and especially that final stage in the conquest, which, perhaps, is not far off. The final stage is come when Man by eugenics, by pre-natal conditioning, and by an education and propaganda based on a perfect applied psychology, has obtained full control over himself. Human nature will be the last part of Nature to surrender to Man. The battle will then be won. We shall have `taken the thread of life out of the hand of Clotho' and be henceforth free to make our species whatever we wish
it to be. The battle will indeed be won. But who, precisely, will have won it? For the power of Man to make himself what he pleases means, as we have seen, the power of some men to make other men what they please.
It is the magician's bargain: give up our soul, get power in return. But once our souls, that is, ourselves, have been given up, the power thus conferred will not belong to us. We shall in fact be the slaves and puppets of that to which we have given our souls. It is in Man's power to treat
himself as a mere `natural object' and his own judgements of value as raw material for scientific manipulation to alter at will. The objection to his doing so does not lie in the fact that this point of view (like one's first day in a dissecting room) is painful and shocking till we grow used to it. The pain and the shock are at most a warning and a symptom. The real objection is that if man chooses to treat himself as raw material, raw material he will be: not raw material to be manipulated, as he fondly imagined, by himself, but by mere appetite, that is, mere Nature, in the person of his de-humanized Conditioners.
For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting
and impious.
Andrew, I'm incredibly humbled by this comparison. Those passages are profound and eerily prescient - especially Lewis's warning about the "magician's bargain" and Hayek's insights on the fatal conceit of trying to consciously control humanity's development. Thank you for sharing these. They articulate so clearly what's at stake in our current moment.
I thought the initial quote was written by Frank herbert perhaps I’m incorrect
"Those who steer the first matrix wouldn't leave the off-ramps unsupervised." YES, thus there is controlled opposition on every issue. It's kind of like funding both sides of a war, which they also do. I saw that you had MMT in your list of influences. They are controlled opposition to monetary reform, they defend the current system with a phony "theory" and becasue money is behind them they are able to dominate the public discussion and keep real monetary reform at bay. During Occupy Wallstreet they employed emotional attacks at any mention of it. I bet most people here don't know what I am talking about when I say monetary reform. In fact there is a history of controlled opposition to monetary reform, making Marx popular served that function, as Silvio Gesell pointed out in the 20s. The monetary history is the history of power, not the military histories. It was acknowledged 3000 years ago that the most vital prerogative of democratic self-governance was the sole right to issue money as an asset, not a debt. As Frederick Soddy wrote in 1934, To allow money to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government. That is what we are up against. monetary.org Take a look, and keep up the good work, Joshua.
I appreciate your insights about controlled opposition and completely agree about the monetary system being at the root of our captured society. However, I think you may have confused me with someone else regarding MMT - it's my belief that our debt-based monetary system is the root of most evil- and the coming CBDC agenda represents the most formidable control mechanisms we've ever faced. Either way, thanks for the enthusiasm, Howard.
With Trump being captured bu the west coast oligarchs and blessing crypto it appears as if an alternate financial system is now being set up, I think in collaboration with Wall Street, that will leverage the crypto enthusiasts and investors, which will result in digital identity being introduced along with a privately implemented CBDC. As with credit cards, use will be grown over time and it will become increasingly difficult to avoid participating. The tech oligarchs, I believe, do have a comprehensive vision of how this all rolls out, where AI and the security state fits in, and how everyone will be controlled to their financial benefit. The key to it all is theft of privacy. This is where the 2nd American Revolution must be fought.
You may be right but we'll see. A big component of this war - beyond being spiritual and for our consciousness - is centralization versus decentralization. We're just getting started on how that will play out. Tech may be our weapon as well as theirs.
If you understand how AI works, which depends upon complete theft of privacy for context in responses, it is easy to see that AI is on a clear track to take over most of the essential responsibilities of parenting, including inculcation of foundational beliefs and values, shaping of world view, establishing boundaries, and meting out of rewards and punishments, among many others. While one might be able to make an argument in favor of taking over this responsibility, it represents a deeply dystopian ~experiment that is placing everyone's future into the hands of a relatively small group of people having self interest in centralizing power over the culture and society. The power to control people at this level is FAR greater than that of a govt of laws, so one must be very careful what one wishes for, especially when all of this is not being discussed and debated, at least publicly.
With respect to decentralization, the one example that comes to mind is abortion, which decision has always struck me as nothing but a failed attempt to re-divide men and women over an issue which 95%+ have come to agree, at least in terms of personal behavior if not in rhetoric. The trend toward centralization of power is persistent, as those at the center are always greedy for more. I hear far more calls for eliminating the electoral college than I do for restoring state's rights. Many dont even comprehend what "state's rights" even means.
I am a technologists and far from being anti-technology. I can clearly see the benefits of AI to the world, especially in terms of economic productivity within everything I did over the course of a career. If I were young, I'd dive in enthusiastically. But I can see where the focus is right now, selling products and winning elections, and I think humanity is making a very BIG mistake in giving up on privacy and in unleashing what amounts to psychological mind control on children.
The only hope of resisting it lays in fighting to maintain privacy and it's nearly too late. Best... Love your stack.
Hi Howard. Indeed the private ownership of the money supply is the logical conclusion of Fascism. However, to your point about the public issuance of money as an asset, I see that when we look at money in situ, money is invariably and inherently debt-based. Twas ever thus. All agricultural societies are surplus societies that run year-on-year structural surpluses in order to persist. And surpluses represent the pulling forward of demand from the future via extractive mechanisms. And money became the utilitarian market-based proxy for those surpluses. Hence, the pulling forward of the demand for money is what makes money intrinsically debt-based; we borrow money when we want to pull our future demand into the present, whether we're a republic, a private business, or a private individual. And if we don't do it then someone else will, leaving us at a market disadvantage. And the holding money in a surplus society means losing money because structural surpluses are growth regimes that force monetary inflation. So in order to avoid losing money by doing nothing, we loan our extra money to a bank, which is a debt.
Even barter markets are debt-based. Goods are perishable, and seasonal, and have production lead times. My neighbor's chicks may be hatching during the two months or so when my milk goats are dried off, so one of us must be in debt to the other for a period of time if she needs to offload her chicks as soon as they are born.
I don't like money. It's unsustainable.
That money must be a debt is a myth perpetrated by those who profit from it. There are examples throughout history of debt-free money. Lincoln's greeenbacks were issued not as a debt but as a permanetly circulating asset which is why the bankers hated them so becasue when issued debt began to dissappear from the economy as Henry Carey, Lincoln's economic advisor, described. Read what the bankers association said about them. The Bandbury Pound was another example. Money was an ancient innovation to pay debt, requiring debt to be paid with debt is a twisted abuse of monetary authority called usury, once banned by all religions before they were corrupted. The monetary history is the history of power. monetary.org monetaryalliance.org
Thanks Howard. I get that public banking is politically preferable to private banking. I agree with your recounting of the tug of war between public and private banking. I often recommend Bill Still's "The Money Masters" documentary as one of the most important documentaries for early-stage Red Pilling.
I just explained why money itself is a structural representation of debt. There's political theory of money and then there's situational, dynamic reality. It's like the difference between in vitro experimentation and in vivo reality. The academic field of study that deals with in vivo reality is classical cultural anthropology which is a systems theory of human ecology. I'd be happy to respond to any counterarguments you may have regarding money as structural debt.
"...a deeper conflict unfolds silently across the planet - a war for the freedom of human consciousness itself. This is what World War III looks like - not just bombs and bullets, but the systematic engineering of human perception."
Cheering from my keyboard that more people are realizing this. For me the biggest hit between the eyes was the same revelation you had about the Q-movement, that the managed expectation was to actually do nothing. That magic white-hats were supposed to swoop in and save the day at the last moment. Talk about Alice in Wonderland! They successfully diffused the red-blooded-American instinct of taking matters directly into hand, so I guess that is job well-done to the narrative managers.
I apologize for the delayed reply. Thank you for the thoughtful comment.
The hard part of most people re Q is realizing that it's not nothing. LIke any good dialectic people look at it in binary terms: nonsense or savior. I don't hear enough discussion about whether it could be something else, say a highly sophisticated intel op.
Your observation about Alice in Wonderland is a powerful metaphor on a number of levels.
I was thinking of writing a whole piece about that topic. The beauty of Q is that for all the hype, it absolutely delivered on the key area of 'Awakening'. Even today the 'Q clock' is predicting events in the news, and the slow drip of information coming to light continues to match up to the many 'reveals' from years past. My problem with the dialectic is of course that even the white-hat option that Gen Flynn and others paint as 'awakened' or 'red pilled' is not real freedom. So in many ways it has always just offered false hope to those of us truly interested in getting out from under the boot.
Love your whole series so far.
Well, Mr. Stylman, each new article in this series, reinforces it as quite a tour de force.
Tangentially, I would add that the reversion extant after revelation of deceit, is scalar. We can observe the same mechanism of action within localized organizations. It appears to be a matter of incentives. A reasonable prior is that each pursues their own self-interest. Systemically, this places revelation of deceit and corruption within a peculiar niche reserved for statistical outliers.
When a system is properly designed, instantiated and initiated, it is axiomatically self-correcting. This appears to be the result of atomized incentive structures. More concisely, perverse incentives render deceptive practices "profitable."
Sorting this profitability is a function of understanding prerogatives within command-and-control structures. Within private industry, fraud is profitable on an individualized scale. In organizations without a profit motive, fraud preserves reputation, which is the foundation of institutional power.
But you knew this already.
Where wealth and influence concentrate, predators and parasites congregate. The selection criteria for pivotal command and control structure emplacement, incentivizes expression of traits correlating with that congregation.
Some predators and parasites are born, others are made, both categories find their metier within incentive structures.
Many thanks for yet another thought-provoking exposition. Hope you consolidate this series into a book; I'll scrape together a sufficiency of the filthy lucre to obtain a copy, should you do so.
Thanks, Ted.
I'd argue that the system isn't broken - it's working exactly as designed. The concentration of wealth and power, the selection for predatory behavior - these aren't bugs, they're features.
As for the book - I've thought about it. My friends and family are getting tired of my schtick so I decided to start publishing to see if anyone else might be interested - I'm glad you are :-)
We are interested and starving for truth. Write the book. 🙏
It's your unique perspective that provides the value. The various aspects have their own body of literature, but correlating those aspects requires a certain..... delicacy, shall we say?
That delicacy is a function of verification and avoidance of the more hyperbolic assertions extant within the conspiratorium. It isn't obvious how to refine the correlation credibly into fundamental patterns of human personality traits and behaviors.
I would say that you're one of a small handful of analysts and writers today, that can walk that tightrope. At least, so it seems to me thus far.
Timing, also, is of the essence. Public interest in this type of writing, is at an all-time high. Strike while the iron is hot, would be my recommendation. The book writes itself, as a natural outcome of the essays.
I know I must sound like a lunatic to most people - a few years ago I would have thought so myself. But once you start looking deeper, you can't unsee what you've seen. Funny how reality keeps pulling the rug out from under your carefully constructed worldview.
As far as the book goes, while I'm flattered, I'm still trying to understand my role in all this. Thanks for the vote of confidence, either way.
"I know I must sound like a lunatic to most people"
The erudite are enmeshed within their priors, Mr. Stylman, wholly invested. To them, your observations are threatening.
"Most people" lack a frame of reference with which to understand the correlations. To them, your observations can be intellectually intimidating.
I say "can be," but I'll reiterate my assertion that your unique perspective renders the material more accessible than most.
I think your role will only be understandable in retrospect. You will act according to your nature, and only time will reveal the relative importance of your contribution.