What is all this verbiage by Project HumanbeingsfirstTM really all about? Is there a reductionist and simplified explanation at the level of a 'poor-man'?
Yes. In the simplest terms: 'Might defines right'.
This leads to “Hegemony is as old as mankind”.
That in turn leads to the following psychological pathocracy – some call it empire:
If we don't have real enemies then we have to create or imagine some, and yell 'we are being attacked' in order to, principally:
a) justify one's hegemonic barbarianism upon others; and
b) motivate an unwilling plebeian peoples into sacrificing for the conquests of the oligarchic elite.
Euphemistically, today as the winning empire, this is called “imperial mobilization”.
Grotesquely, for previously defeated empires, it is called “quest for Lebensraum”.
That's all there is to it.
All which follows is only in further examination of how that is accomplished under the veneer of “democracy”, because, in the absence of such deception, “democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization”. That quoted statement was made by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book: The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives.
This “quest for Lebensraum” (German word for acquiring more space as an imperative), ahem, “imperial mobilization” of the ruling oligarchy, the ubermensch (German word for superior, above all others), just happens to be the age-old quest for one-world government in disguise.
It is to be achieved piece-meal, incrementally, one fait accompli at a time, one fabricated crisis at a time, one manufactured war at a time, one real or imagined pestilence at a time, and one catastrophe at a time.
The psychological pathocracy of modern statecraft requires continuous threats, crises, and uncertainty, to corral the democratic instincts of the modern public into accepting the unpleasant totalitarian agendas of the ruling oligarchy.
The solution presented for addressing each uncertainty is the next baby-step towards centralized global control of all humanity in a global empire of the financial oligarchy.
That world order, the new world order, as we can already perceive even in its initial stages, is governed with moral relativism wherein, legal opinions as those proclaimed by a United States Justice before its Supreme Court, prevail:
'Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.'
The term 'oligarchic elite' refers to people who are several notches above – and more hidden from public view in their enormous wealth and their secretive exercise of 'social engineering' – than what is typically understood by the term 'ruling elite', or simply the 'elite'. The latter often refers to the generally affluent 1% of any society, more interested in being rich and running corporations than in 'social engineering', and many among them can be found in the Forbes' richest people listing.
But one will never see a Rothschild, or David Rockefeller listed in Forbes billionaires list. That's perhaps because they are trillionaires, with all their massive wealth legally hidden behind private tax-exempt foundations, and in their opaque ownership of private banks, which in turn own many a private central bank! They can muster vast sums of private monies for 'social engineering', and administer untold funds through their tax-exempt foundations and think-tanks. They are the proverbial 'king makers' who craft 'errand boys' to do their policy bidding.
To unmask them all before fait accompli is Project Humanbeingsfirst's imperative – i.e., before it's all a done deal.
Ex post facto, narrators can rehearse the deceptions and their disentanglement all in the comforts of one-world government. And of course laugh their way to fame and fortune just as today's narrators call it erudite scholarship to openly rehearse the settlement of the Americas and the genocide of millions of its indigenous peoples.
Even the sixth graders in elementary schools today throughout the North American continent learn of the choice between the gattling-gun (force) and the small-pox laden bacteriological warfare (treachery) magnanimously offered to the indigenous natives, without batting their own eye-lids or offering a few tears in compensation.
Detachment from history and from previous generations who inflict crimes upon the 'lesser humanity', the 'untermenschen' (German word for 'lesser peoples'), evidently washes away both the evidence and the guilt. But not the bold and often truthful narratives which become openly public, and their bearers lauded scholars and touted academics.
In the transition to the modernity of today, the euphemisms have become considerably refined with the march of Western civilization. It is now the more egalitarian choice between “democracy” (euphemism for force) and “revolution” (euphemism for treachery) under the dialectical “either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”, that is being magnanimously offered to the indigenous natives along the “arc of crisis” in the “Global Zone of Percolating Violence”. The objectives unfortunately remain the same as in antiquity – by hook or by crook usurping what does not belong to one. The two quoted descriptive phrases are once again Zbigniew Brzezinski's, respectively from a January 15, 1979 Time magazine article titled 'IRAN: The Crescent of Crisis', and from Brzezinski's already mentioned 1997 book.
Thusly, in the case of our modernity as well, perhaps only our progeny might also bear truthful witness to the crimes and sham of intellectualism of their hypocritical ancestors – scholars, leaders, military-men, holy-men, politicians, teachers, news-bearers, both in the West and the East, on the left and the right – who hath proclaimed to stand for truth, but who only aided and abetted vile hegemonic power with their own convolutions and confabulations. Modernity du jour is entirely unwilling to unravel their confusing and deceptive narratives.
We must wait a 100 years, or perhaps only 20, before anyone who is a somebody will again truthfully proclaim how new 'smallpox laden blankets' were used to fashion one-world government. Before then, it is all to be dismissed as 'conspiracy theory'.
This is why, as had been self-servingly predicted by the Council on Foreign Relations in 1974:
'... it will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.'
That, in the simplest of terms, is Modernity Simplified to the level of a 'poor-man' (i.e., one with limited ability, or time, to carefully read, write, and reason about the times one lives in).
Read minimal expansion upon this basic explanation in The Poor-Man's Guide to Modernity here.
I am the Washington Post oped editor and our opinion writers and editorial board all seem to think that we are about to be run over by 'militant Islamists'! Can you kindly explain all this in its most simplified form for our brilliant minds?
I am a brilliant Washington Post columnist and I assert: “Pakistan, with its two dozen nuclear weapons, popular and official support for Kashmiri and Taliban terrorism, and political instability, is ultimately a greater threat to world peace than Afghanistan and Iraq combined.” How do you respond?
I am a Jew living in exile and I am only trying to return to my ancestral Eretz Yisrael not from three thousand years ago, but from where the “Jews from various Moslim countries in the last 60 years that Israel has been an independent state” have been forcibly expelled – “The Jews are no settlers of colonialism”!
I am a well informed rational American and you seem to be just as fixated with Zbigniew Brzezinski's nonsense of “Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization” as the rest of his detractors. May one point towards Democratic Israel, where its Jewish peoples are not only willingly participating in the barbaric conquest of Palestine, but also serving in the IDF to do it themselves?
But our President is really worried that: “At this moment, somewhere in the world, terrorists are planning new attacks on our country. Their goal is to bring destruction to our shores that will make September the 11th pale by comparison.”
I am an editor for the New York Times and we do a pretty comprehensive job of analyzing the 'global war on terror' for the Americans and the world as “all the news that's fit to print”. We however do not support anti-American and anti-Semitic gratuitous BS espoused in such crap as “We should not forget that the U.S. itself is a leading terrorist state” and the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world today”! That's all Iranian propaganda against our country!
I am the largest corporate owner of NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NYT, Reuters and Associated Press, and my personal self-interests and ideological alliances do not influence the objectivity in the newsroom where the editors and reporters are hired based only on their professional skills and not their ideological bent that is suited to my self-interests. I don't write their editorial or hiring policies; how can I ever influence the newsroom? Those who allege otherwise are only maliciously slandering our wonderful freedom of the Press!
Okay okay you finally convinced me! Thanks for your efforts – but... but... but... what can I do? I am just too busy trying to pay my bills and I don't like street protests and all that hooliganism! Besides, I am a law abiding person and like my-self and my-country very much. I just want to make it a bit less un-just and a bit less barbaric upon others! Do you have any immediate suggestions that can have any efficacy?
I am a 'hectoring hegemon' and I think “You bunch of losers” must 'Get real': “The world is lucky we didn’t unleash a nuclear arsenal on several different countries, and what would the rest of the world be able to do about it”?
I am an ordinary American and how can I make America a truly great empire for all its real peoples, and also for all the world's real peoples? I actually want us to be a benign empire that benefits everyone, not a barbaric one of Daarth Vaider! What steps should I take today that can lead to substantial difference within my own lifetime – say in 5 years, 10 years, and 20 years?
I am a fair-minded ordinary Westerner who believes in democracy, and I wonder how comes so few American intellectuals actually propose any effective infrastructure solutions to the barbarianism of 'empire' that they all freely talk about using their precious Western freedoms? These thinking gadflies mostly keep rehearsing histories ex post facto, writing terrific books on what is already a fait accompli, and making speeches full of truisms and moralizing sermons. Most have become fabulously wealthy peddling their dissent – from bestsellers to speaking fees to Hollywood productions to entire businesses – laughing their way to the bank as they glibly describe the crimes of empire. But hardly anyone proposes effective solutions, or works on building advocacy programs, institutions and infrastructure frameworks that can have any measurable impact on policy-shifts towards fairness. I have yet to encounter a well funded effective think-tank or influential lobby-group for 'peace and justice' in any Western country – whereas there are literally hundreds constructing the hegemonic policy instruments of empire. The empirical efficacy of these supposed gadflies to averting the multifaceted crimes of 'empire' since the end of WWII – from 'Truman Doctrine' to 'Bush Doctrine', from neoliberalism to neoconservatism, and from staged client-states to staged terror events as covert-ops – is exactly and precisely ZERO! Is the famed Western 'dissent-space' really the empire's own gigantic red herring to effectively deliver to its conscionable peoples only incremental faits accomplis of hegemony by keeping them on various treadmills that lead nowhere? How can I tell? Is there a simple touchstone I can use to ascertain who is shilling for whom, and why these gadflies don't “sleep with the fishes” as the genuinely real threats to power often do?
Wait a minute, what about influential and well funded Western organizations like Amnesty International and the Human Rights Commission who work for the betterment of common man? And what about all those awesomely funded Western think-tanks like the global crisis groups and various NGOs that operate in many developing countries to take up liberal causes of their oppressed peoples. Are you calling them red herrings too? How can I tell? Is there a touchstone or metric I can use to adjudicate whether they are also effectively shilling for 'empire' in various guises?
I am a fair-minded Jewish American and I find all this anti-Semitic talk of “The Rise of the Jewish Empire” and the “The Jewish Conquest of America” nauseating. What do empires have to do with being 'Jewish'? Call the American instincts for hegemony criminal if you prefer to 'call a spade a spade'. But calling it 'Jewish' is genuinely anti-Semitic!
I am an American peace activist and you are preaching to the choir – but “I do not believe that the US will attack Iran during this Bush administration. I believe that it is the judgment of the powers that be (as articulated by Brzezinski on behalf of his patron, David Rockefeller) that Bush pursued their goals, but did so in such an inept manner that he has to be curbed. The Iraqi Study Group was put in place to help manage things, but when Bush wouldn't cooperate, he was forced to replace Rumsfeld with Gates. Brzezinski's comments before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee were not, in my opinion, encouragement for a false flag attack to justify an attack on Iran. Instead, it was a warning, a preventative step. When one publicly reveals a criminal plot, then it becomes impossible to carry it out.” In favor of this truism, let's just ignore the Mein Kampf of the Third Reich – that was an anomaly of history!
Why would anyone in the advanced West, let alone the super sophisticated peoples of America, want to read a book like “Prisoners of the Cave” written by some unknown Pakistani plebeian that hasn't even been published?
I am Pakistani ruling elite and I so want to understand what this 'war on terror' is really all about and why Pakistan is being destabilized – the big picture. But I am just too busy and don't have time to read a lot.
I am a Pakistani journalist and I witnessed poor Benazir Bhutto being blown up by the Al Qaeeda! I know who killed her. “Why is it difficult to believe that the same Islamist network that tried to eliminate President Musharraf, Shaukat Aziz, Aftab Sherpao and Benazir Bhutto on October 18 may be responsible for her murder on December 27?”
I am a genuinely patriotic Pakistani politician and I think Al Qaeeda is more than just real; it is the biggest threat to humanity since Hitler. I too believe 'that the fight against militants is “our war”, not just America’s war'!
I am the famous patriotic Pakistani Black-Coats and I know all about 'rule of law' and legalism, including international law, Pakistani law, signing the PCO, not signing the PCO, the role of Pakistani judiciary in aiding and abetting Pakistani military dictators and then protesting in Black after the hearty meal of 900 mice, crime and punishment, pirates and emperors, and of course, all about the proper functioning of a working democracy which serves its peoples rather than the imperial interests. As I am well read in both Machiavellian and Orwellian state-craft, and especially in the 'technique of infamy', I judicially assert that this 'Al Qaeeda' menace is for real and that they will indeed hijack our 'loose nukes'! We must relentlessly wage a war of terror upon this “very petri dish of international terrorism” and I will not permit any challenges to this governmental policy in my patriotic court rooms!
I am a brilliant Pakistani academic, a notable scientist, an astute political thinker, a prominent gadfly, a Human Rights activist, and Bin Laden is certainly for real! He magically carried out 911 from his cave in Afghanistan just like the Pentagon says it did; and Al-Qaeeda is an enormous 'threat from within' to Pakistan and to the rest of the world just like the White House says it is! And yes I am a gadfly – look, I even call what America is doing to the world “imperialism”. In this 'war on terror', we are faced with an epic battle “Between Imperialism and Islamism”!
I am a brilliant Washington Post columnist and I assert: “Pakistan, with its two dozen nuclear weapons, popular and official support for Kashmiri and Taliban terrorism, and political instability, is ultimately a greater threat to world peace than Afghanistan and Iraq combined.”
- ### -
URL for this FAQ2008: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/10/faq2008.html
This is the unified version of the 2008 FAQs at URLs: