I often write about the mass psychological manipulation within media culture; the manufactured “Consensus Reality” which is programmed into the populace through various media organs. It’s a constant struggle between those who want a good, honest, and fair world versus those who use mendacious rhetoric for the sake of their own profit and aggrandizement. We saw this with 9/11 – the inflation of Osama Bin Laden into an existential threat (rather than a disgruntled CIA asset) so that Bush could eviscerate the constitution, and launch a war against Iraq (despite that country having no connection to the group in question). We saw this with Syria, and Bashar al-Assad – a conflict in which the United States was funding Al Qaeda, marketed as a war about freedom, or something, when the reality was nothing more than an argument with Russia over which country would benefit from a proposed oil pipeline which would allow access to the Mediterranean. And we’re seeing it with the Covid-19 hysteria – a disease so deadly that you need to be tested to know if you have it.

I typically find myself opposing the mainstream narrative, but that’s only half of the story. You can’t have a good hero without a good villain, and full-spectrum-dominance requires not just the control of the corporate media, but also the opposition. Ideally you can both gaslight them into extremism, and fragment them into separate groups. Take advantage of the mainstream programming which is still kicking around in their minds so that they can be harnessed and yoked to one of your own agents.

Enter Dr David Martin.

I was recently linked to a video of his titled “The Illusion of Knowledge” which claims to expose the groups, individuals, and motives behind the current manufactured crisis. It does nothing of the sort. The entire video is a rhetorical ploy meant to target the Boomers, taking advantage of generational beliefs and cultural traits with a rhetorical mastery that would make a used car salesman blush. Much of what he claims is factually incorrect, and even when he gets things right he throws shade on the wrong people, employing a modern connotation on a word which meant something completely different in the 19^th Century; still other times he throws out statements in such a manner that most of his audience are all but guaranteed to misinterpret it.

The result is a neutralized audience. The people who want to understand the facts behind the Covid power grab, who could have been alerting their friends and family to the dangers, are now thoroughly misled. Some will come off as sounding crazy to those who are familiar with the scientific principles which Dr Martin mangles; others will spend their time tilting at windmills. Either way, the opposition has successfully been captured, and can now be trotted out as proof that anybody critical of Dr Fauci is just a wacko.

I can’t speak to Dr Martin’s true motives. Sometimes he comes across as a charlatan, looking to sell books and inflate his ego. Other times I wonder if he’s a true believer, high on his own supply, one of those rare “conspiracy theorists” we’re warned about. And then there’s the times I scent a dark energy behind him, a whiff of Luciferianism…

But whatever the reality – whether he’s a conscious agent of the system, or merely a convenient fool who’s doing their work for him – he’s very convincing, and so I’m writing this article to shine light on his manipulations. I’ve watched that video twice, and what follows is an extensive breakdown of the major bits of dishonesty throughout it. I cover not just the outright falsehoods he stated, but also the psychological triggers which are directly targeted at the Boomer generation.

Breaking down The Illusion of Knowledge

The video purports to be a historical expose of centuries-old trends which are only now coming to a head with Dr Fauci, and The Great Reset. It just so happens that century-spanning trends, and their effects on the modern day, are precisely what I got my first degree in: History, with a focus on Early-Modern technologies and social developments.

These are important conversations that too few people have. We’re still processing the invention of the printing press, let alone the development of public health organizations! History is full of ‘idiosyncrasies’ which aren’t taught in High School civics classes, and to understand where we are, you need to know where we came from. Far too often, however, intelligent conversations about historical facts are dismissed as ‘conspiracy theories’. Partly this is because the person criticizing it learned their history from Marvel comic books; but more often than not, it’s because of people like Dr Martin who sensationalize and misrepresent, creating an incoherent mess in the minds of those who listen to him.

I sat down to listen to his lecture twice; the second time I took notes (they wound up being over 1000 words in length). Explaining the myriad of ways he’s wrong is going to be difficult, so I’ve decided to separate it into five sections. First we’ll start with the statements that are just plain false. Then we’ll cover the statements that are techinically true, but phrased in such a manner that it’s easy to misunderstand them. Next we’ll cover his scientific illiteracy – after that we’ll cover some particularly manipulative rhetorical language (stuff that means “Evil” in 21^st century terms, but meant something far different in the 19^th century), then – we’ll mention the few things he’s not completely wrong about – and finally we’ll finish off with the false-liberation he’s selling, and explain how it’s nothing more than a different form of enslavement.

Let’s begin, shall we?

Blatant Falsehoods

At the 6 minute mark, he brings up the Treaty of Ghent, the peace agreement between the United States and Great Britain which ended the war of 1812. He makes a couple of wild claims about it – first, that it put the United States into perpetual servitude to Great Britain – and second that it had something to do with fur trapping rights. Quite simply: it didn’t. It was a status quo ante bellum treaty – meaning “Everything goes back to the way it was.” Nor does it mention anything about fur. Interestingly enough, it’s the treaty responsible for some of the border weirdness between the US and Canada, as well as the ongoing ‘conflict’ between the two nations as to who owns a couple of crappy islands off the coast of Nova Scotia – but his claims are utterly absurd. I have no idea what he’s talking about – read the treaty here, if you need to see it for yourself.

Also, I should note that he completely fails to tie this non sequitur to ANYTHING else in the presentation. Even if it was true, so fricking what? Great Britain never comes up again; all it does is spin up your paranoia.

At the 9 minute mark, he introduces the closest thing to a consistent thesis that he has throughout his presentation. To paraphrase: “It’s not the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, or the Rothchilds, or Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who you should be looking at – the banks are just the fall guys for life insurance companies!” To support this, he presents the claim that from 1883 to 1893, the life insurance companies made up a larger portion of America’s GDP than coal, steel, and manufacturing combined.

I’ll be frank, I couldn’t find any economic numbers from that era; I also didn’t look that hard. Because there’s an important event which happened at that time: the Great Market Panic of 1893. Let’s just accept his claim for sake of argument. So what? The economy crashes, but life insurance stays stable, so it winds up becoming a huge part of GDP for a few years.

So what?

In today’s world, the entire insurance industry makes up 3% of GDP (and that’s a peak due to Covid lockdowns crashing everything else). That’s not nothing, but it’s hardly the boogieman he’s making it out to be. He also mentions that there were tons of unclaimed life insurance policies during the Great War. This is true – but so what? I’ll bet if you dug deep enough you could find a connection to John D. Rockefeller, the robber baron of Standard Oil – but we already know that guy’s an asshole, why confuse matters with this life insurance red herring?

Moving on.

Speaking of John D. Rockefeller, he comes up again at the 28 minute mark. Supposedly he’s the villain responsible for creating the CDC’s predecessor, the Office of National Defense Malaria Control Activities. Quote: “Understanding Malaria was not about public health, it was about economics.” You see, Rockefeller only wanted to cure malaria to improve the efficiency of black slaves (we’ll get back to the ideological aspects of this later). There’s two huge problems with this claim: first, Rockefeller was a young man of 25 when slavery was abolished in America, without the power and influence he’d one day accrue. So no, the man never did anything to improve the economics of slavery. Making that claim is like claiming that Hitler was somehow involved in killing Christ. The second problem with this claim? The Office of National Defense Malaria Control Activities wasn’t founded until five years after his death!

What in God’s Holy Name is Dr Martin even talking about?

Then there’s his claims – right at the start of his lecture, then later on at the 105 mark – that “the cabal” (he never defines which cabal in this lecture, but maybe he explained it somewhere else) tried to recruit him, and he told them to sod off like the true maverick he is! He even wrote a book about it, “Coup D’Twelve”! Grain of salt though: it’s listed as fictional…

This is not how things work.

Yes, there are cabals. Yes, there are recruitment rituals. We all know that Jeffery Epstein didn’t kill himself. But you don’t get the invite to Lolita Island until they already know you’re down for the corruption. The way he describes it is about as believable as a Saturday Morning PSA about drug dealers. “Reefer madness! Hello fellow High School students!” He’s telling you a story to make himself sound cool; the cabals don’t work anything like how he’s describing.

He also brings up “Wrongful Life” at the 48 minute mark. He tries to connect this to life insurance companies, claiming that it’s “When you live too long for your insurance!” No… wrongful life is a lawsuit you can make against a medical professional, if they cause your baby to be born with a severe handicapped. It’s entirely unrelated. Google it if you don’t believe me.

Convenient Misapprehensions

This section will be a bit more subtle. Several times throughout the presentation he makes statements that are technically true – but without the proper context, misinterpretation is all but guaranteed.

The first occurs right at the start, 5 minutes in. He brings up Dr. Edward Jenner, who invented the smallpox vaccine. He mentions that ‘vaccine’ comes from the French ‘vache’, or ‘cow’ – but fails to explain anything more than that. The viewer is left with the impression that Dr. Jenner considered other humans to be herd animals to be tested upon (speaking of, the term ‘herd immunity’ was coined a century later, after studies on… herds of animals). The reality is that Dr. Jenner’s vaccine was developed from Cowpox, ergo the naming convention. Despite Dr. Martin’s raised eyebrows, there’s nothing sinister about this.

At 11 minutes in, he says, quote: “They’ve done an amazing job of never letting you realize that they’re behind it all. And by all – I mean all.” But he fails to specify who they are or what it is. The Illuminati? The Deep State? The Entertainment and Sports Programming Network?

It’s a masterful rhetorical flourish; a form of Cold Reading. He allows the audience to project their own preconceived notions onto his speech. If, for example, he’d said “The Freemasons!” – that might challenge certain audience members who happen to be a part of said prohibited organization (prohibited for Catholics, anyway). By keeping it vague, he keeps everyone in agreement; they see in him what they want to see.

At the 27 minute mark, he states, quote: “[The people of the 1930s thought] it was perfectly acceptable to build asylums, to kill people, to castrate and sterilize people.” Uh-huh. And we don’t? Last I checked, we have prisons; we have asylums for the criminally insane; and we chemically castrate convicted sex offenders. He phrases this as if there’s been some sort of major societal shift since the ‘bad old days’ before we became enlightened. There hasn’t. We locked people in rape-cages back then; we lock them in rape-cages today.

The statement is a complete non sequitur whose impact is entirely reliant upon the listener being ignorant of both the present day, and the different historical context. As recently as the 1940s, public executions were a form of public entertainment. In America. In Blue states. Shocking, yes – but other than that, people were pretty much the same. Comparing 21^st century suburbia to a 1930s sanitarium is enough to give you whiplash; but you’d have the same effect if you compared one of today’s maximum security prisons to a bucolic 1930s farmstead.

To equate the two is fundamentally misleading

Finally, at the 16 minute mark he claims, quote: “Defective human entered our vocabulary in 1914.” I don’t feel like looking this up, so accept it for sake of argument. So what? You think medieval people didn’t have a word for village idiot? Or cripple? Just because we started calling them defective in 1914 doesn’t mean we didn’t recognize physical and mental infirmities before that.

Are we allowed to call somebody with appendicitis defective, and in need of surgery? Or are they just fine the way they are, made in God’s image, and their septic shock is just part of his mysterious plan?

Thank God my optometrist recognized my eyes as defective, else I wouldn’t be able to see.

The Monolith of Eugenics & Racism

Eugenics? Boo!

Oh yeah?

Racism? Boo!

You don’t say?

Hitler double-plus ungood!

Uh-huh, are we done yet?

Unit 731 was a crime against humanity!

Huh; and here I was thinking that nobody had heard of that particular atrocity… (Do yourself a favour and don’t look it up.)

In this section we’re going to be discussing some heavily taboo topics – taboo to the modern mind, anyway. And we need to keep in mind an important saying: “The past is a foreign country.” There are parts of history which are shocking to us moderns; just as there are parts of modernity that would be shocking to our ancestors. Usually the shock occurs when an institution is taken out of context, and the ‘complementary’ institution which mitigates its tyranny is left out of the picture. For example:

“In India they have arranged marriages.”

Boo!

“But both bride and groom are expected to earn their partner, and both have the right to say no.”

Oh, I guess it’s not so bad then.

Yeah; same thing with eugenics.

The Father of Eugenics was Sir Francis Galton, a cousin to Charles Darwin, who was inspired by the latter’s discovery of Evolution. Let’s start off with a quote from Sir Galton so we can here what he meant when he coined the term:

Man is gifted with pity and other kindly feelings; he has also the power of preventing many kinds of suffering. I conceive it to fall well within his province to replace Natural Selection by other processes that are more merciful and not less effective. This is precisely the aim of Eugenics.

At its inception, eugenics was nothing more than the application of good animal husbandry practices upon the human population. We’d long known of Mendelian Genetics (and the problems with incest); Darwin demonstrated that not only could good breeding prevent bad combinations – it could also develop into entirely new combinations. This was Galton’s focus: not castration, not murder, not human experimentation – what he proposed was organizing society in such a manner that the morally good, the smart, the industrious be afforded the opportunity to have more children, and – only later in his career – that those who proved to be criminal misfits, or severely handicapped from birth, should be discouraged from reproducing.

The most tyrannical thing he ever said in regards to eugenics was that violent criminals and rapists should be locked away from polite society.

Galton was a psychometrician – one of the first psychometricians, and a pioneer in the field. And he’s been vindicated by modern science. It turns out that most traits are heritable; IQ, height, personality, longevity – all of these are heritable to one degree or another. And so are a variety of illnesses.

Sir Galton was no villain. He’s closer to a saint.

Beginning in 1914, however, a new group took on the term ‘Eugenicists’ – these are the ones we hear about today. Starting in California, and exporting their ideas to the Nazis during the 30s, this group was possessed of the same arrogance which we see in people like Dr. Fauci today. While the eugenics of Sir Galton promoted a light touch and humility in one’s approach, these new technocrats were happy to burn and slash their way through the populace. They were so awful that they tarnished the entire field – even Darwinian evolution is frequently demonized, because of the sociological theory of “Social Darwinism” adopted by the likes of John D. Rockefeller.

It might seem as if I’m picking nits here, rehashing political battles from a century past which are of no relevance in today’s world, but recall the whole point of Dr. Martin beginning his lecture with the discovery of the Smallpox vaccine in 1803: history matters!

We are currently living in a highly dysgenic environment. There is strong evidence that the European IQ has dropped about 15 points since the mid-19^th century. Our best and brightest are either dying in pointless wars, or getting indebted to student loans during their most fertile years; meanwhile, the worst amongst us are being subsidized to breed out of control. This is a disaster of existential significance!

But the moment you try and bring it up, expect to be called a Nazi by the very same technocrats who are currently engaged in human experimentation.

This twisting of history which Dr. Martin engages in harms the good, decent, and true, while empowering the liars and manipulators. The problem with Dr. Fauci is not that he’s a eugenicist – he’s not! – the problem is that he’s a technocrat, playing around with forces he doesn’t even begin to understand.

But shouting “Eugenics, boo!” is a great way to manipulate a generation raised on WWII propaganda movies. He’s happy to keep you in the dark, and play to your historical prejudices.

The other bit of rhetorical chicanery he engages in is his pointless accusations of racism. It’s a running theme throughout his speech, and yet another attempt to play to the Boomer’s vanity – after all, the Boomers hoped to end racism; it’s a major part of the generational narrative.

He starts out accusing Rockefeller of being racist – as noted above, he gets his facts completely wrong here, but let’s play along – sure, Rockefeller was a huge racist. He only invented the Office of National Defense Malaria Control Activities because he wanted his Black slaves to pick cotton faster. So what? Why do we care what his motive is? If a scientist cures cancer because he wants to get rich, does the cancer survivor give a damn?

Next he brings up the Tuskegee experiments, wherein government doctors deliberately infected Black Americans with syphilis to study the effects of penicillin on the disease. Sure is awful what government technocrats will do to a vulnerable population, isn’t it? But of what relevancy is the ‘racism’ here to us now, in the present day?

(Incidentally, he also tries to imply that penicillin is evil and racist, that they only invented it to empower Big Pharma, and that they used it to treat syphilis because… we’re embarrassed to talk about sex or something? Go to the 21 minute mark in his video if you want to hear the incoherent ramble for yourself; despite his point having all the sharpness of a rotten pear, he manages to get the crowd to laugh and cheer for this. He’s one hell of a public presenter.)

Finally, he gives one last anti-racist ‘atta-boy!’ to the Boomers in the audience: at the 30 minute mark, in reference to Tuskegee, he says (paraphrased) “It’s it funny that we’re marching for Black people’s rights, while also experimenting on them?” WOAH MAN YOU JUST, LIKE, BLEW MY MIND!

So let’s recap here: Rockefeller was a robber baron who (probably) hated Black people. The people behind Tuskegee experiments hated Black people, too. Adolf Hitler – well, actually he had a lot of respect for Black people, and took a dim view of America’s segregation policies… but he hated Jewish people! Ergo Dr. Fauci must hate Black people too! Because Melinda Gates said we should vaccinate Black people before White people (23 minute mark)! And racism is bad!

Boo Dr. Fauci! Boo Melinda Gates! Boo Hitler! Boo Eugenics!

But none of this has anything to do with mRNA technology, The Great Reset, or Gain of Function research! This is just pandering propaganda to the Baby Boomer generation, for whom these issues are hot buttons which make up a huge part of their self-identity.

And hey, I’m not attacking Boomers for having these things as part of their cultural identity. It is what it is. If Dr. Martin had been targeting Gen X, he would have included quotes from The Simpsons. For the Millennials, he would have made comments about a living wage. Neither would have been remotely relevant to the topic at hand, but it would have ingratiated him with his audience.

The point is, he’s playing you by playing to your conceits. You want the smoking gun for all of this? At the 50 minute mark he congratulates his audience for now ‘knowing’ about how life insurance companies control the world, while making fun of the ‘Woke’ Millennials with their smart phones, who don’t know nuffing about life insurance.

Trust me, if somebody walks up to you and says, “You’re the cool one, not like those other generations!” …you’re being played, son.

Scientific Illiteracy

It was bad enough when he misrepresented Sir Galton (whose work isn’t much different from that of Dr. Jordan Peterson – if you’re going to denounce Galton, you should also denounce him) – and it’s no accident that he failed to mention Darwin, even though the Galton/Darwin pipeline is obvious to anybody who’s studied the History of Science (but Darwin is a darling in certain circles).

It was bad enough when he implied that Dr. Jenner, who in fact saved millions of lives with his 1803 Smallpox vaccine, was some sort of tyrant that liked experimenting on herds of humans.

It was bad enough when he suggested that penicillin was some sort of evil plot to undermine traditional medicine, and they only used it to treat STDs (they didn’t)…

…but when he starts going after living scientists whose reputations have been ruined by political correctness, because they had the temerity to speak harsh truths, out of a desire to help millions of people? That’s the sort of cheap-shot that really takes the cake.

Let me tell you about Dr. James Watson, co-discoverer of DNA, alongside Dr. Crick. He’s a man who’s made a number of bold statements, many of which stirred up great controversy, but all of which were based upon scientific facts about human biology, or they’re harmless opinions that are non-PC, but which many people hold nonetheless. Feel free to research him yourself – but the statement which destroyed his reputation in academia was the following.

1. The average IQ of Sub-Saharan Africa is 75 (this is a well-established fact).
2. The diet of most Sub-Saharan Africans lacks many nutrients; and malnutrition is shown to lower IQ (also a well-established fact). Ergo:
3. If we helped Africa by supplying them with fortified wheat, we would likely see a 10 point IQ jump in a single generation, and this would lead to a measurable increase in prosperity within African nations.

That is what got him booted from polite circles; a desire to see children well-fed, and Africa prosperous.

Dr. Martin claims that he is a eugenicist. And that he’s evil. And that he only invented DNA to do even more evil.

Where do I even begin with this one…

Imagine that a living organism is a tapestry. And the knots holding it together are chromosomes. And that the threads making up the knots are DNA. Got that?

“BuT sTrInGs ArEn’T a TaPeStRy!?!”

Seriously. That’s his argument. 30 minutes in, quote: “You do not have DNA. You have chromosomes…. It wasn’t really a photograph it was an x-ray photograph…. DNA is not a product of Mother Nature, it is a model of human manipulation.”

Bucko. Let me try and explain. We’ve known for a long time that there’s some sort of information within us that causes ducks to lay duck eggs, and chickens to lay chicken eggs. Thanks to Mendel, Darwin, and Galton, we know that it’s not just species, but individual family lines which are encoded. Eventually we discovered cells, then the building blocks of cells, but we didn’t know what they were made out of – how that information was encoded. It’s as if we had all these different tapestries, then we started noticing that there were similarities between some, and differences between others – almost as if there were different manufacturers – and then finally a couple of geniuses managed to unravel all of the knots, and discovered: “Great Scott – these tapestries are made out of COTTON! We finally figured out the secret ingredient!”

He then goes on to state that chromosomes are paramagnetic wound coils of conductive material (technically true, but he doesn’t know what paramagnetic means). “They are quite possibly antenna, they are quite possibly not chemistry at all.” (Note: manufacturing antennae is a subset of chemistry). The vaccine is intended to screw up your cellular antennae by clouding them with spike proteins (which are a form of evil eugenicist antennae), thus preventing you from receiving the wisdom of the cosmos.

Really, he says that. 33 minute mark. Go ahead and check for yourself. All I can say is… well:

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/5hfYJsQAhl0″ title=”YouTube video player” frameborder=”0″ allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture” allowfullscreen></iframe>

At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
~Billy Madison (1995)

What he (sort-of) Got Right

1. Technocrats

Despite mistakenly calling them ‘eugenicists’, he is right to condemn the many technocrats, both past and present, who lead us into horrors through their midwittery and moral arrogance. Michael Crichton’s novel Jurassic Park specifically as a warning against men like Dr. Fauci; the dinosaurs are simply a dramatic stand-in for the wreckless use of genetic engineering, such as Gain of Function research.

“They don’t have intelligence. They have what I call ‘thintelligence.’ They see the immediate situation. They think narrowly and they call it ‘being focused.’ They don’t see the surround. They don’t see the consequences.”
~Michael Crichton, Jurassic Park

Unfortunately, he’s unable to distinguish between real scientists who’ve advanced our knowledge, and the technocrats who like to play cruel games with our lives.

2. Medical Patents & Copyright Law

He brings up Dr. Jonah Salk, who famously refused to patent the polio vaccine – “Who owns the patent on this vaccine? Well, the people, I would say. There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?” Funny that the polio vaccine is implied to be good while penicillin is implied to be bad…

A major problem we’re dealing with in the present day boils down to corporations, rent-seeking patents, and the perpetuity of Intellectual Property. It’s stifling creativity, and creating a situation where the profit motive drives all – and there’s often more profit in treating the symptoms than curing the illness. The developments in this direction have led to a nightmarish situation where real scientific advancement is stymied by the peer review process, where a marginal improvement is more likely than a paradigm-shifting act of genius, and resulted in an academia largely devoid of persons with an IQ over 135.

Unaccountable corporate bureaucracy has become the new normal.

3. The Irresponsibility of Insurance

While he’s wrong about “Big Insurance”, he is right that the insurance model of mitigated risk kills responsible behaviour. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure; but suggestion prevention could offend clientele (or even lead to a lawsuit!), better to follow the official Best Practices, and purchase whatever drugs are on the recommended list.

We’ve developed a culture of litigious irresponsibility, where patients expect to have a magic pill which can cure all. Instead of taking responsibility for our own health, we demand perfect security in an uncertain world; inevitably we’re sold that security, our healthcare treatment suffers, all while extreme risks are being perpetrated on us by a group of technocrats who are legally insulated from the consequences of their actions.

He’s not completely wrong about everything (only about 4/5^ths of the objective claims he makes are false); but the overall pattern he tries to paint is a schizophrenic mess.

The Keys to Enshacklement

So I’ve spent the last 5000 words explaining how atrociously, amazingly wrong Dr. Martin is about just about everything. Hopefully I did a good enough job, and you’re seeing him for what he really is… charlatan? Fool? Or… disinformation agent?

I’m certainly not making any definite claims as to what his motivations are. He is definitely wrong about many of the statements he makes, but as to why he’s wrong – who the hell knows?

The point of this final section isn’t to debunk any of his statements, but to examine the psychological tricks he put into his presentation; the promise implicit in the title of his video – that you’ll be granted hidden, occult knowledge. When somebody tells you this, it’s almost always a bad sign; but when they follow it up by promising you that you can have your cake and eat it too? Well, that’s when I really start to suspect that there’s more going on than scientific illiteracy, or a man getting high on his own supply – but let me simply describe the false promises, and leave the judgment up to you.

At the hour mark he begins discussing the Alchemy of Evil; throughout this he constantly plays the old schlock paradigm of “Nature Good, Technology Bad.” He even extends this to Christ’s temptations in the desert – specifically the part where Satan tells Christ to throw himself off of the Temple, that Angels will catch him before he hits the ground. Dr. Martin says that Satan viewed the Angels as technology… so, what, Temples are not a product of technology?

“They paved paradise, put up a parking lot…” yes, yes, our society is suffused with noisy, shiny, crap, and we’ve lost our touch to nature. Nothing cleanses the soul like getting away from the swollen city breeze, garbage bag trees, whispers of disease, and acts of enormity… but this ridiculous black and white thinking where technology causes nothing but woes, and nature is nothing but goodness and light?

Hey, wait a minute – isn’t he giving that lecture in an air conditioned conference centre? And aren’t you reading this on some sort of electronic device?

(Shout out to my fans reading this in the post-apocalypse, I trust that your parchment was faithfully transcribed before the bombs dropped – but hey, even parchment is a form of technology, right?)

Or, more to the point: Gain of Function research is bad for humanity, but so are zoonotic viruses.

The problem is not technology; the problem is technology wielded recklessly and irresponsibly. And that, my friends, is a statement that not only indicts Dr. Fauci, but also indicts many of us as well. Don’t blame the scientists for giving you what you want. What have we done to employ our technology responsibly?

Second, he makes attacks on hierarchy. This is a subtle theme running throughout his lecture – and a popular promise that revolutionaries have been making for a centuries now. “Come the revolution, all the serfs shall be equal!” Hierarchies are natural; they’re necessary; they are not a human invention. Trying to free yourself from hierarchy entirely is a guaranteed method of becoming enslaved.

The problem is not hierarchy, it is bad hierarchy. Throw it out, and you’ll only have a hierarchy form which is far worse, and far more vicious.

It’s no accident that ‘revolution’ means ‘coming full circle’.

Nor is it an accident that shortly after decrying hierarchy, he calls himself a prophet, and the audience his army.

Finally, he denounces Joseph Campbell’s Power of Myth and the Hero’s Journey. He describes it as ‘The idolatry of identity’ and instead promotes the ‘Prophet’s journey.’

There’s some subtle messaging going on here. If you’ve read The Fourth Turningby Strauss and Howe, then you know that the Baby Boomers are a ‘Prophet Generation’. As for the ‘idolatry of identity’ – do I need to spell out how this is an obvious attack on the Instagram generation?

He’s not wrong about modern movies, and narcissism culture; the current Hero’s Journey has been cut short. Modern movies end as soon as the hero defeats the villain. But if you’ve bothered to actually read Campbell’s work, then you’d know that half the story is missing. Upon defeating the villain, the hero realizes that he is the villain. Everything dark and evil that he hated in his enemy exists within himself as well. And from that point onward – from the depths of the underworld back up to the overworld – he must transmute the evil into the elixir, and return to civilization to help heal it with his new found wisdom.

The bifurcated Hero’s Journey is narcissism. The complete Hero’s Journey is the cure to narcissism. And anybody who’s out there pretending to be a prophet could really use a dose of that elixir!

In Disney’s Pinnochio, the eponymous puppet visits Pleasure Island. There he’s free to smoke and drink, scrap with other boys, smash up expensive manors, and play with all the toys he wants. The only problem is that this infinite freedom comes with a price; the boys who fall prey to this temptation turn into jackasses, and are then sold into bondage. Dr Martin’s constant promises of ‘secret knowledge’, while explaining nothing, promising that you can have your cake and eat it too, while playing to your own vanity (using specific, generational triggers) – well, let’s just say that from where I’m sitting, it’s got the same energy.

Concluding Thoughts

The past two years have Red Pilled a lot of people. Reality isn’t what we were told it is – the government doesn’t work the way we thought it did – the responsible scientists in charge aren’t that responsible – we’re not sure who to trust, or whom our politicians work for.

It’s good that so many people are waking up, but it comes with its own set of problems: a lot of people have been hit with so many Red Pills, so darned fast – that their heads are still spinning, and they don’t know which way is up. Two dozen extra-strengths Red Pills thrown in your face, each with a sodium-ion core, is enough to knock anybody on their ass.

There’s a Dr. Fauci quote that’s recently been discovered, from 2016. It goes as follows:

To sustain the funding beyond the crisis we need to increase public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures such as a pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage, to get to the real issue. Investors will respond at the end of the process if they see profit.

A lot of people are touting this as some sort of ‘smoking gun’, but it’s nothing of the sort. The reason I’m bringing it up because – Red Pill time: this is how the sausage is made.

There’s a scene in the movie Fight Club, where the protagonist describes what he does for a living:

Narrator: A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one.

Woman on Plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?

Narrator: You wouldn’t believe.

Woman on Plane: Which car company do you work for?

Narrator: A major one.

Ugly ain’t it? And true. But knowing that doesn’t change anything.

The same thing goes for the Dr. Fauci quote above. Imagine, for a second, that Dr. Fauci isn’t a mad scientist with an IQ only slightly higher than the fever you get after taking his jab – pretend for a moment that he’s a certified genius and humanitarian, who has found the cure for the common cold, and if he can only implement it, we’ll have no more grandmas dying of the flu right before he holiday season. How would he go about giving humanity this Christmas Miracle?

1. Employ the media to hype up the danger of the latest flu season,
2. Use the hype to pressure governments to distribute his Christmas Miracle,
3. Build off the success of his Miracle to attract investors, so that he can toss in an Easter Miracle as well – I can hear the headlines already: St. Fauci, the bringer of the Easter Miracle!

All that quote proves, I’m afraid, is that he’s a savvy businessman.

Anyway, let’s get back to what happens when a huge number of people overdose on Red Pills, all at once.

Imagine that we’re a herd of dumb cattle (guys like Dr. Fauci certainly do), and one day a storm knocks down the fence along one side of the paddock. Up until now, the occasional cow would escape – wandering off one by one, into the wilderness, sink or swim – but now we’ve got five hundred head wandering in the hills.

The owner rushes out right away, of course, to herd as many of them back into the paddock as he can. Meanwhile, cattle rustlers hear about the opportunity, and try and poach some of the wandering herd. Others get utterly lost, and fall of a cliff.

But some of them – some of them wander out on their own, following neither their old owner, nor the poachers who promise them an easy life – some of them wander until they find the Aurochs, and rejoin their ancient tribe.

From where I’m sitting, Dr. David Martin looks like one of the poachers. Heck, he could even be a recently hired field hand who’s working for our old owner. He seems like an expert in corralling Boomers specifically; they send out different people for the Gen Xers and the Millennials.

But whatever he is, he sure as hell ain’t an Auroch.