A Project Humanbeingsfirst Document: FAQ2008

FAQ2008

Modernity Simplified

What is all this verbiage by Project Humanbeingsfirst^TM 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.

A further minimalist expansion of some of these fundamentals to explain modernity in the present context is here. A more detailed expansion is here. FAQ is here and here. See Welcome letter.