Some people have wondered why I go on the attack against some groups and occasionally individuals when by superficial appearances, they appear to be on the same side I'm on.  And it is true that I don't disagree with everything they say.  The reason I go into attack mode is because of the subversive and dishonest agenda beneath the rhetoric.  For example, masquerading as a Constitutionalist when the agenda they are promoting serves the interests of the Globalists who have a goal of breaking our nation.  They use a storyline or mythology that appears to be one thing, but when you follow the logic of the storyline to the logical conclusion, it serves another purpose other than the stated.   This commentary is an attempt to lay out a logic chain from the top where the real objectives are clear - through to the story lines used to gain support by deceptive means.      

First, one has to consider regionalization.     On the grand chessboard of the world, the Globalists have defined five or so regions roughly based on continental boundaries. Within the continent, there are separate nations with a hierarchy of governing structures right down to the town level - right down to your property.  This has to occur in iterative steps but the ultimate goal is to replace the existing government - whatever the structure - with a managerial layer over multiple jurisdictions. The iterative process executes steps for continual roll up to a higher level of managerial authority.  The overlay of a management structure disempowers elected representative government. 

Start out with Municipal Planning Organizations (MPO).  They were designed to be cross jurisdictional, managerial units for transportation planning.  Makes sense.  But over time, it begins to make sense to have joint operating agreements for other areas of government besides transportation.  In this way, the managerial layer is built.  

The federal government is driving the creation of the managerial layers and they mandate that the states do the same thing for various purposes at the state level - so that you end up with a regional managerial layer.   

To build the managerial layer requires that people with power, give up that power so you have to give them something in return - something they want more than the power they already have.  That's easy with the decision makers, most of them you can just buy off.  But for the community - at various levels from top to bottom, you have to concoct storylines or a myths for why you are doing what you are doing.  And you have to have "actors" or community leaders who are professional prevaricators that convey the myths to the community.  The leaders can be upstanding in the community - or they can be counter-culture.  Depending on the size of the project, there can be both. 

In the above example, there is a direct connection between the objective and the target community.  But for large projects involving large groups of people, some of the storylines are asymmetric - meaning that the storyline is not directly connected to the objective, but it serves the same purpose as a storyline with a direct connection to the objective.

The leaders of both the direct and asymmetric storylines use strategies within the sphere of their myths to build a support base for their myth.  Libertarians use the messages of freedom, taxation, oppression, constitution etc. to build their support base but for the true Libertarians, the goal is to break up government entirely and we all go solo with our six-shooters in the setting of the old west.  The storyline threads of Libertarians all derive from that vision.  It serves the interests of the global technocrats to break up the United States as a nation - replaced by management units within the regional structure.

The Mexican people have been taught that California belongs to Mexico.  This is not true but it doesn't matter.  The myth serves the purpose of the Leaders of the Myth to build the support base for breaking off California and the Southwest into a regional management unit - serving the purpose of the global technocrats. 

In the southern states, there is a group of powerful southerners - descendents of the civil war revolutionaries who have wanted to break away from the United States since the war ended.  Their Myth Leaders use language and concepts that build their support base for breaking off from the United States without saying it directly but still serving the purpose of the global technocrats.

Those three groups have different storylines, different constituencies but they serve the same master plan. 

Another requirement for the master plan of the global technocrats is that they break the nation's economy and financial system.  To serve this purpose, you have the Leaders who promote the Jekyll Island, evils of the Federal Reserve storyline.  They focus on the creation of the federal reserve but never discuss the reason why a central bank was established - which is that local currencies didn't work because of the counterfeiters and banks and storekeepers far away from the origin of a local currency wouldn't accept the money so you couldn't have commerce beyond a certain number of miles. 

A companion storylines to serve this requirement is the "Sovereigns on the land, off the grid, out of the system, because you are slave by trickery of law under the Commerce Clause".   Recently, I read a part of the storyline on this one because a radio talk show host, Phil Pozderac quoted from it on his program POZitively Unconstitutional .  This storyline is posted on the Rumor Mill News website, "The Matrix and the U.S. Constitution".  Pozderac's storyline uses the Constitution but then he instructs that the way to get out of the U.S. System is to use International Law. Specifically what caught my attention was when he referenced the "International Law of Nations".  In a search for a codified edition of the International Law of Nations, I found a copy of the 'Global Sovereigns Handbook'.  So Pozderac is POZitively Globalist and he uses a twisted, marxist version of history as a storyline to promote the agenda of the global technocrats to break nations.  

For people who operate at a higher level of intellect than the "Sovereigns on the Land", there are groups like the Club for Growth.  Their storyline is over taxation and over regulation - you need "freedom from the tyranny".  Their funders are billionaires who will benefit greatly from the global system and breaking our nation.  They focus on the election system - providing funding and support for politicians who pledge to never raise taxes and to always vote the way the Club wants them to vote.  In other words, they buy politicians and if their trained monkeys don't perform, they turn around and support the opposition.   As Grover Norquist famously said, "he wants to make government so small it can be drowned in the bathtub".  The strategy is to starve the government of funds so that it collapses and the storylines are built around that objective.  Since this group has big money backing, they have lots of story lines, professionally fabricated and packaged.  But the agenda serves the global technocrats agenda of breaking the nation. 

Any aspect of life that draws the interest and attention of large numbers of people that are a potential support base for an agenda becomes a target for the carnival hawkers of a storyline.  Using demographics and public opinion surveys, storylines can be fabricated to match the belief systems of the targets.  As stated above, the storylines can be direct - or they can be asymmetric.   As I think about it in these terms, the fabrication of storylines is actually an artform based on statistical analysis of the population including history, culture and income and attitude. 

This begs the question, "how does one tell the difference between a Myth Maker with a Yarn and an honest citizen who is a true believer but doesn't see the underlying agenda"?   That's difficult to discern in some cases, and very easy in others.  But in general, answering the following questions is a good start, 1) How much financial support are they getting and from whom if you can find out. 2) Are they a Johnny One-Note?  Harping on the same subject day after day, year after year?  3) Are they open to new information and do they adjust their position based on new information or do they resist despite evidence?   

Vicky Davis
May 19, 2010