Originally posted by squandered
reply to post by JR MacBeth
I've read the names, but they don't mean much to me...
Bankers mainly. Puppet masters behind the wars. Connected to the British royalty along with the Vatican. Free Masons and Jews and other sects...
The billionaire (as I described her) supposedly doesn't rate as elite, even though $1b may be correct. I've had this conversation with a friend who
believes in Aliens and Illuminate. I'm not sure if I can cut her, (but she's not on your list) as she has a hand in all the highest circles,
constantly rubbing shoulders with world leaders. Her money is new, but it's derived from high level investments. She swaps jobs constantly just for
interests sake. I must say of all the people I've met she is the most 'above the law'. Nobody can blag like she can.
Okay, I give up. I discredited myself enough. No need to explain.
NB: of course you don't "know" the billionaires if you're in England. I new such people there too, but obviously the class regime is much more
Thanks squandered, yes, you understand the distinction I was trying to make.
The "Elite" with the capital "E" I usually talk about has little to do with today's growing class of "billionaires", the ones we read about in
magazines, many who are "self-made", or who had humble beginnings, such as Warren Buffet, or Sam Walton, etc.
While there is no doubt that anyone, regardless of their background, who has considerable wealth also enjoys the power that goes with it, they are
still not to be compared to the class you refer to in your first paragraph, "royalty", the Vatican, etc.
Of course, it's not quite as simple as finding those with revered noble titles, nor is it as simple as laying all evil at the doors of the Vatican.
As far as getting into "aliens", I actually don't think it's necessary to go there. Not that such a thing is impossible, but it's just that
there is enough evidence with a more mundane approach, and considering Occam's Razor, maybe the aliens can come out later.
For now, what I find very interesting is that the "real culprits" are so seldom mentioned. Just look at this thread. Here we are supposed to be
concerned with a topic that suggests that an "elite" hates white culture, and consequently is now doing nasty things, such as launching a vile PC
campaign, and yet, people seem mostly satisfied with vague notions, when it comes to really pin-pointing who's responsible.
I don't say this to put-down others who honestly feel that things are as simple as the wealthy, acting wealthy. That's not entirely false
obviously, but it's a long way from getting to the bottom of it.
SO, I'll now lay out a bit of my opinion concerning the culprits who may be behind much of what we are complaining about in this thread.
They are exactly the people who we read about in our history books. In some ways, this "story" about ages gone-by, is a story about "them". Is
it any surprise that we learn about kings and queens, and popes instead of paupers?
For the most part, we're reading "family" history, not about some vague "European" family, as in a brotherhood of related peoples. No,
"European history", which increasingly became a more global history, as they more or less conquered the world, is a history of A family, as odd as
putting it that way may sound to some.
Primarily through the spread of the Church in the New World through Spain, along with the transmission of the cultural values that went right along
with it, and together with the sprawling British Empire, also vigorously spreading it's cultural values; what was once "European" history could now
be accurately seen with deep footprints, worldwide.
"Who" is this "family"? They are the Nobles of course!
Perhaps a big let-down to some, arriving at something so old, and tired, is
certainly not as exciting as "reptilians", or what not. Also, if this was true, it does somewhat undermine the more progressivist paradigms that
seem to almost dismiss this old element as irrelevant today, as humanity "evolves", as humanity has thrown off the yoke of old, etc.
But "what if" it was STILL, the very same people for the most part, who even today retain tremendous power? Even though they have us all so
fascinated with ourselves, our "progress", our modern technology, our constant entertainments...Shouldn't we ask ourselves the obvious question:
Did they really give up their vast power, as we assume? If so, why? What would have made them "choose" to step back, and allow the common man
I may have skipped past an important point, at least for those not very familiar with the ways of our "noble" masters. I referred to "A" family.
In fact we will find that they are exactly that, with all the noble European clans very much intermarried, very much related, very much...FAMILY.
I hear the protests now: "But they have fought each other!" "The English were ENEMIES of the Spanish!" "What about the World Wars??"
Well, I'm sure I'm not about to convince the world of anything that our masters have spent so much time and resources removing from the popular
Religionists often like to joke about the Devil's neatest trick, convincing the world that he doesn't exist.
It's something like that. Today, we certainly hear of royal frolics and foibles. Europe remains very interested in any and all things that the
nobles are up to. Americans may not realize this, but some of this "romance" remains even for colonists, who still adore the British Royals, at
least, with many still practically in love with the deceased Diana.
Again, "what if" this is more than just a circus show, this noble getting that one prego, the next one dumping that one, yet another photographed
nude on some beach, blah, blah, blah?? Of course this is seemingly all we have to focus our attention on, but why should it be otherwise? Yes, the
paparazzi may run around taking pictures, there's obviously a market for it, but have these nobles really shared with us what they're up to in their
private lives? Does a photo with a topless princess make us think that they are just like we are, perhaps disarming us in the process?
I'm certainly not suggesting that they're "more" than human, they're not gods, but it's not too unreasonable, I think, to imagine that the
majority of their concerns are not for public consumption. Indeed, even the nouveau riche know enough to keep their business concerns as private as
possible. Of course, considering the magnitude of the crimes most are up to, this simply makes good sense. Or perhaps you just imagine that New
York's Mayor Bloomberg is just a nice Jewish boy?
All of this goes "double" we might say for those who have been handed tremendous responsibility, as the baton is passed to them from the previous
generation. Yes, this "multi-generational" factor is actually something to focus on, if we are to understand this issue better.
As I make distinctions between the billionaires of today, versus those of noble extraction, one of the most important issues (after we recognize the
family relatedness), is the fact that these dynasties have been centuries in the making. We are not looking at Adnan Khashoggi (oh, that's right, no
one remembers this "richest man in the world" anymore), we're not looking at Bill Gates, or Warren Buffet.
These last two are very interesting by the way, let me take a small side excursion. Notice how both of these characters are at the forefront of
magnanimously giving away their fortunes? No, they aren't about to go broke in the process, but both have been given audiences with true
power-brokers, and the connections can be made. When Buffet lands in a helicopter on a Rothschild estate, and comes out a few hours later, we can
probably assume he was there for more than just an orgy!
Why is it that the Rothschild clan can go back centuries, and yet nouveau riche Buffet is seemingly told to divest himself? Oh I know this is perhaps
too much speculation, but I suppose it's more important to these individuals to have future generations remembering their generosity, instead of
having to deal with their progeny too much, who could perhaps become "competition" to the real "lasting" powers, at some future time.
There are other historical instances and indications of a rather selfish elite that prefers, for whatever reasons, not
to allow too much
riff-raff into the bloodlines. Look at Napoleon. Like Alexander the Great, occasionally an unstoppable figure bursts in upon (their) history. But
let's really look at Napoleon...The man who conquered his world, declared himself "emperor", had the Church even bowing before him...but only for a
little while. This guy ended up on Elba, as we recall. And yet, for a relatively brief time after, his heirs retained some power, but in the long
run, it certainly did not last.
So back to the multi-generational issue. I realize this is already long, but I would like to leave the reader with something to consider. "If" we
were an heir to a dynastic fortune, centuries in the making, what would that "look like"? Would we simply be given a pat on the back, and a short
bit of advice from mother and father to at least try not to contract a venereal disease, as we romped about with our immense fortune?
Hardly. If we were heirs to the kind of wealth and power I'm speaking of, it would quite likely come right along with everything necessary for us to
RETAIN that wealth and power. We could perhaps see the advice we would receive, passed down through so many generations, as part of our family
"responsibility". It would be more than just "stay our of trouble", it would be more like, "YOU are now charged with conducting yourself like a
Windsor (or insert your favorite noble here). You will be watched your whole life by the commoner. You are to be an example. You must never
embarrass the family..." Etc. Hopefully not too much of a stretch, and yet there would surely be more...
"The commoner is not capable of life without us." "We are charged with leading the world." "God / Destiny has chosen us to rule..."
In short, within the "family traditions" you inherit, as one of the august nobles, you might find a whole range "advice", some of which might even
shock the simple world of the commoner! And yet, if such advice was not conveyed to you in an effective manner, you might fail to pass the baton to
that next generation. Of course I dare not launch into the very effective ways they have developed over the centuries to impress upon their children
such important things, that would be for another thread!
There is so much more to this, and I haven't even really touched on institutions such as the Vatican yet!
Probably a good place to stop, since nothing else has lasted quite as long as the Vatican, and they help make my point.
Let's forget the "billionaires" getting so much press. Who cares what "The Donald" is doing?! Let us call these perhaps the "ephemeral
" of elites (small "e"), who a century from now may very well be gone. A hundred years form now, few may know the names of Trump, and
Buffet, but everyone will surely know the name of Windsor (or whatever this bunch of chameleons has renamed itself at that point...my guess, something
like Chang-Windsor-Gothe, etc.)
Well, a lot more than my two cents, but take it for what it's worth...