In my attempts to debunk the claims of the underlying assumptions swallowed whole by the Branch Covidian cult; the label “conspiracy theorist” has certainly been bandied around as justification for not taking my warnings seriously. Having now proffered articles that addressed the logical fallacies and absurdities behind the COVID narrative and the evidence that points to an effort to control rather than protect public health, I was finding there were preliminary matters that seemed to serve as road blocks to gaining a hearing.

Consequently, I wrote a blog to challenge the strawman arguments that have been invented by secular and Christian leaders to mischaracterise the motivations and duty projected onto the mandate non-conforming. There seems to be one more domino to be knocked over before I can take things to the next level. My impression is that both believers and unbelievers seem to grant the presumption of goodwill to those in office who oversee the response. This includes those afforded “expert” status within government, public health, the media, and the pharmaceutical industry. This is a curious concession whether or not one asserts a belief in God.

It should be a surprise to no one that government and journalism have ranked exceedingly low with regards to integrity and ethics in countless surveys of the least trusted professions. The first set of results that showed up in my search was from “Insider Monkey” and it puts journalists in the third least trusted with politician taking the gold ribbon over car salesmen. Admittedly, some surveys put journalists higher – one as high as tenth – but these surveys are done by the journalism industry and therefore are untrustworthy.

Ah, but one might say; how do doctors, nurses and pharmacists rate? Consistently each one rates high on the trustworthiness scale with nurses coming out consistently at the apex. Anticipating the barrage of push-back from those who would argue, “But doesn’t this undermine my argument especially since politicians are largely making a point of handing over control to “medical experts” to drive this process?” This subject will be getting a much more thorough examination in a future article, but to ensure this is not an obstacle that shuts the door on the assertions I will make here, I present the following for consideration:

• Is there a medical consensus from doctors and nurses regarding these mandates and, if so, what is it?
• What happens when the process is politicized and put in the hands of government appointed elitists who may have a vested interest in adopting a particular position? Does this elevate the trustworthiness of politicians or lower the reliability of the medical and pharmaceutical professions?
• Why is it that vast numbers of front-line doctors and nurses are choosing to walk away from their careers – despite the huge financial hit of this life-changing decision?
• What is the chance that the pharmaceutical industry can be financially motivated to forgo their virtuous natures when the promise of a financial windfall will result from falling in line with a new and costly “vaccine” to be injected into the arms of every person on earth – including endless boosters?
• Might this together lead to a manufactured consensus, especially when censorship of counter-positions and harm from injections is the means adopted to squelch “vaccine” hesitancy?

The challenge I take on this time around is to convince those with an open mind – whether believers or non-believers – how the system could be so corrupted as to result in a global effort to deceive and cull the “undesirables” from the population. You heard me right: I plan to argue that the plan from those on top is that evil. I admit this assertion requires high level corruption and therefore demands a compelling case. For the observant, the evidence is all around us; however, I will be addressing how it is conceivable that we are at such a point for those who have not been so engaged. In fact, I would argue that not only was the foundation built to make such malevolence possible, but inevitable.

• The manipulation of language and the meaning of terms. This has entailed changing the definition of words (i.e., inclusion meaning to exclude those holding non-approved ideas), swapping out words (equity replacing equality), inventing terms (cisgender), or linking selected words to create a perception of marrying virtuous ideas (social justice). Shared language unifies a people by ensuring that we are speaking from a common frame of reference. Controlling the language allows one to frame the arguments and issues in self-serving ways. The schools have been especially pernicious in this regard while also grooming children to be activists – and we aren’t talking about the ones likely to protest outside of abortion clinics.
• The pairing of hedonistic pursuits with civil and women’s rights that painted the “patriarchy” as evil and the source of all of society’s ills. God designed the family as a source of stability with strong godly men leading their household. White Christian men in particular were dubbed the bane of civilization and the ones responsible for slavery and the oppression of women and every other form of evil. Also, we were the capitalists that fed a system of greed and ignored the welfare of the poor and marginalized. Later this expanded to the presumption of homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia, misogyny, bigotry and racism. The activist left did not simply toss their gold into a fire until this golden calf popped out. It was an orchestrated plan to take out the watchmen who were off engaged in busywork and leaving their homes, schools and churches unattended. Putting the twin bulwarks of the church and family unit out of commission has allowed for the infrastructure to overthrow any meaningful resistance or even opposition to these efforts.
• Ejecting God from our public schools and the public square. We were sold on a bill of goods about tolerance and making our schools “values neutral.” The secular premise was that believers who brought up their children to believe in God were indoctrinating them from their atheistic nature. It was an outright lie, just as how refusing to teach English to blacks or women did not mean these demographics lacked the capacity to read, but denied them access to the requisite education to learn these skills and therefore created illiterates. Removing school prayer and Bible reading while teaching evolution, socialism, critical theory, common core, etc. managed to distort, dilute and dumb down the content needed to nurture critical thinking. This encouraged children to take direction from authorities especially when expressing an opinion at odds with the teacher as doing so would result in low marks. This is all the more likely when both parents are out of the home working to pay taxes to pay for expanding government control.
• The perversion of hard sciences. The language of “scientific consensus” crept into our language, suggesting that the rigour and reliability of scientific testing could be arrived at through a show of hands. Based on this premise, the idea that the sun revolved around a flat earth would still be the required stance of all experts in astronomy. This may sound absurd, but denying funding, academic accreditation, or access to institutions based on jealously guarded ideological conclusions has a chilling effect on research and the reach and focus of research. Peer review has become much like the academic process of granting tenure in that only those holding to approved leftist creeds are considered for this honour. When science is arrived at based on appeals to emotion and preferred narratives that can no longer be questioned, then we are no longer doing science.
• Corruption of the soft sciences. Psychology, sociology, and similar disciplines have become unmoored from biblical understanding about human nature. Luminaries in the field including names such as Freud, Kinsey, Jung, Adler, Rogers, Skinner, Bowlby, et al have created competing theories based on beliefs that man is largely a product of his urges (libido), environment and/or biological wiring. Most seem to treat people according to the “tabula rasa” theory posited by John Locke who believed children are born as blank slates upon which influencers write. This has turned schools into repositories for indoctrination. At the other end, those working in the fields of counselling, psychology and social work are forced to undergo Diversity and GLBTQAInfinity training that requires affirmation of anti-biblical views of acceptable human behaviour. For this reason, I had to leave the field that I love as I was being forced to either violate my core convictions or tacitly participate in what I knew to be wrong through my silence. Neither of these were options for me.
• The politicization of morality. This is the outworking of the influences already covered. True liberals always used to argue – admittedly, often for self-serving reasons – that people should be allowed to live according to their privately attained morality. The liberation – who currently best represents true liberalism – sets their singular ground rule as to “do no harm to another person.” Outside of this, anything goes. The libertarian, despite its lack of moral compass and nebulous stance (i.e., what happens when one simply decides to deny to humanity of another as in the case of abortion?) is the closest thing we have to conservatism now in Canada based on their resistance to government control. Conservatives used to be the ones taking immutable moral stances, mocked by liberals as promoting antiquated and narrow views. Now the liberals set inviolable standards that require stringent ideological compliance based on not only one’s words and deeds, but their thoughts and perceived intentions.
• The establishment of approved social norms based on identity groups. Since the sexual revolution and new wave feminism, any woman not driven to pursue a career ahead of being a wife and mother or holding a dissenting view on abortion is a victim of the patriarchy. All blacks who don’t vote liberal (democrat), support welfare, social programs, affirmative action, Black Liberation Theology, BLM, critical race theory, and other leftist initiatives are sell-outs, Uncle Toms, Oreos, and/or Aunt Jemimas. Those holding to traditional views of marriage, sexuality, charity (as opposed to forced socialist wealth redistribution), personal (rather than corporate) responsibility, and who eschew moral pragmatism in favour of the biblical ethic regarding sin and righteousness are berated as part of the intolerant, white, Christian patriarchy. There is only one direction possible to ensure we can all peacefully “coexist” and that is for everyone to abandon the Christian ethic in favour of the movable feast of secular moral relativism.
• The implementation of cultural Marxism. For those unfamiliar with the term, cultural Marxism originated with a man named Antonio Gramsci and is often summarized as the “long march through the institutions.” The idea was that Marxism was not easily sold to free God-fearing western citizens, so subversion was necessary. This meant having leftists infiltrate and take over all the cultural institutions while demolishing the family as a foil to their objectives. This has permeated academics, science, medicine, the courts, journalism, churches, the Boy Scouts, sports, businesses – even the police, military and the letter agencies (i.e., FBI and CIA). If you look up “cultural Marxism” you are bound to be inundated with articles claiming it is a right-wing hoax. Simply look at the purge of Christians and Christian values in the culture and it is clear that their protestations are not refutations of this reality, but evidence of the process is complete.
• Stoking emotional fragility. The left has taught people to be proud of their victimhood status. We were introduced to concepts like microaggressions (translated: “You hurt my feelings), safe spaces, trigger words, political correctness, “silence is violence” (the exact opposite of reality), free speech zones (formerly known as everywhere), a right to not be offended, hate speech, therapy pets, and compelled speech (including the forced duty to wrongly identify one’s sex based on their “felt gender”). The rates of those in therapy have gone through the roof and now over 56% of “liberal women” identify with a mental health issue. This suggests a staggering level of fragility which was nowhere to be found under a nation guided by Judeo-Christian values. Worse yet, all are now forced to mollify the proclivities of the mentally ill by relinquishing the right to restore a healthy perspective. There is no path to reason under such a structure.
• Excusing leftist violence while projecting malevolence onto law-abiding citizens. While churches and small businesses were being shuttered for the public good, massive leftist protests were either ignored or encouraged. Burning, vandalism, theft, and shades of violence up to and including murder were all justified based on social justice grounds. This effectively not only sent the message that gathering was only permitted for those seeking to radically undermine the country, but ensured that reasonable people were cloistered away and made fearful of standing up against the chaos. Police have been coming out in full force to ensure the mandates are enforced while absenting themselves or even cheering on riots and anarchy. Christians and conservatives have allowed themselves to be divided over mandates and through social isolation, thus nullifying any meaningful unity and thus rendering it unequipped to call out or stand against tyranny. I am one of many who has seen their church transformed through these mandates.
• Denying the reality of man’s true nature. The irrefutable fact that we are born with a propensity to sin has been abandoned for a lie was that people are “inherently good.” To prove this, the secular left got rid of God while engaging in moral preening about the superiority of the “compassionate liberal.” Satan uses guilt as a cudgel and the radical left have been happy to serve as his agents. God says we are to love the sinner and hate the sin. Progressives tell us that love means endorsing behaviours strictly denounced by God and they condemn anyone not embracing their unbiblical standards. This inverts moral truth, makes love conditional, and replaces the duty to obey God with the obligation to accede to an “enlightened” vision where obeying God is unchristian. This has led many in the church to become defensive or compromise to show they aren’t among the hateful mob who take scripture at face value. This means they fail to live up to both components of the “greatest commandment.” Those who don’t know they are born with a sin nature in need of Christ will not repent or find their way to God.
• The unequal application of law. This was covered in my previous post, but bears mentioning in the context of this argument. When you know you can face sanctions, charges, fines, jail, job loss, closing of your business, constraints on your freedoms, having your license to practise revoked, limiting your ability to buy or sell, or any number of other punishing restrictions means that compliance is what matters, and not health or truth. If the government passed a law banning churches from meeting, but the enforcement was on par with vacationing politicians, we would doubtless see far more civil disobedience. Knowing the risk of massive fines and/or imprisonment for holding church or failing to adhere to all mandates takes the type of courage exhibited by the persecuted underground church in communist countries. Incidentally, what are the chances we will show such courage when comparatively minor demands are sufficient to cow believers into submission?
• Creating government dependence. The vast expansion of social services and the assumption that government can micromanage increasing spheres of our lives have diminished us as individuals. In fact, the state has replaced what was the role of fathers, mothers, and ultimately God. The grasping powers over our movements and what we must place on and take into our bodies was the culmination of creeping authoritarianism that individuals and the church had long ago failed to push back against. As Gerald Ford famously said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” It’s not like they have been secretive about their socialist vision or animus toward the church.
• The coordinated suppression of speech not approved by government. Government, social media, mainstream journalism and their allies have been engaging in a deliberate misinformation campaign. Indoctrinated twenty-somethings have been empowered to act as designated “fact checkers” to ensure that only leftist approved narratives get out. When only state-approved stories are reported according to the desired spin and others don’t see the light of day; you have successfully created reality. In essence, “journalists” and social media platforms dictate what may or may not be reported. When challenges to the narrative are proffered, they are censored or moved to more fringe media sources. Mainstream platforms are then emboldened to paint stories that don’t meet their paradigm as “fake news” and “conspiracy theories” because they would otherwise receive widespread coverage. Consequently, anyone not willing to suss out the facts by digging into alternative media only hear the propaganda and the public gaslighting* is complete.
• Actively ensuring that the top level workers are not the most qualified, but those who serve an agenda. Hiring quotas are tacit admissions that a business is not interested in the calibre of the worker, but their conformity to an ideology. Hiring only a woman, black, homosexual, trans, etc. to fill a quota is a promise that you are not seeking the most qualified person. This extends to ideological conformity as a conservative black man or woman would never be hired due to their “problematic views.” This has lowered the quality of student, employee and/or worker and ensured that only ideological conformists rise to the top. Many, if they can survive post secondary school with dissenting views, are increasingly less likely to rise in the ranks, let alone even find a job.
• The creation of the expert and “elite” class. Our assumption that we are being instructed by the smartest and most enlightened among us is foolhardy at many levels. As mentioned, the system set up to create and ensconce idealogues into the higher positions while grooming lower-level workers with the same mindset and taught to follow orders without questioning. Anyone with the temerity to challenge the status quo is likely to be ostracized or even face firing – both of which have happened to me. Those we have been compelled to follow are not the top experts, but the politically-connected or savvy. This explains why we are given talking points about the safety of the inoculations and need to wear masks, socially distance, and submit to lock-ups. They don’t offer evidence, but are to be extended the assumption of rigour and public concern. It is dissenting voices who cite facts, evidence and statistics.
• Exploiting social pressure to push for conformity. Arguably, this has been the fruit of all the above initiatives. I can tell you that I and many in my current circle have paid a huge price for our resistance. We have lost friends, family, church communities, jobs, and run the real risk of being outed to officials if we step out of line. We have not excluded others, but have effectively been cast out by those we had been close to. Grandparents have not been allowed to see grandchildren and children have been put into care or placed with the parent willing to get jabbed – and have the children jabbed as well. “Never again” has become nothing but a slogan from a distant past – now bereft of meaning. Many who grew up under oppressive regimes have been warning that the “free” nations they moved to are looking much like the circumstances they left. The church has largely been tacit enablers or overt agents of the state participating in the marginalization of brothers and sisters in Christ.

Now I will venture into what necessarily falls under the category of the hypothetical. For this segment, I am furnishing a list of questions that relate to the implications of how far the corruption can go when there are behind the scenes considerations that are outside of the public purview. Some are actually not speculation, but they should be self-evident. This article is focused on making a logical case for the corruption of society that can lead to tyranny.

Here are the questions:

1. What influence can be expected when powerful people are in a position to bribe, blackmail, threaten, intimidate, or otherwise apply Mafia-level coercion by making select office holders an offer they can’t refuse? Keep in mind that churches and large swaths of people are complying simply out fear of being fined, jailed, or losing a job or not being able to eat out while others do it simply to travel or visit friends and family. Now compound those stakes many times over and consider whether godless leaders might put their own life, health, power and creature comforts over the welfare of faceless citizens. As Stalin famously said, “A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.”
2. Does the prospect of malevolent intentions increase or decrease if a certain multi-billionaire with huge investments in vaccine programs has already spoken publicly about his concern that the planet is overpopulated by roughly 95% and a vaccine for a global pandemic could be useful in thinning the herd?

• Imagine you are a member of a bunch of global elitists who have been meeting clandestinely to discuss various theories of depopulation, trans-humanism, and one-world government with you wielding great power. Now, what if those plans have been memorialized in publicly accessible material under names such as “The Great Reset”, “Agenda 21” and “Agenda 2030.” Could an orchestrated health crisis be exploited to usher in your utopian pipe dreams by disempowering and turning people against each other to distract from your ambitions for global control based on the belief that you “shouldn’t let a crisis go to waste?”

1. Might there be an effort to exploit a pandemic to bring in large scale control of the public if you happen to be a Prime Minister who is a committed anti-Christian socialist and has expressed his “admiration … for China[‘s] … basic dictatorship” because of how it permits them to “turn their economy around on a dime?” Let’s also say this hypothetical P.M. has also spoken about how this situation has provided an opportunity for a great reset. What do you say now, eh?
2. Is it possible that the bureaucrat tasked with leading the global response to COVID might play fast and loose with the welfare of individuals when he oversaw horrendous AIDS experiments on black and Hispanic foster children resulting in torture and death, locked boxes onto the heads of beagles and had their vocal chords removed to stop the yelping while sand fleas ate them alive, and placed the scalps of aborted human foetuses on the backs of mice – to name a few of his illustrious forays into “science.” What if this man, who meekly claimed that to criticise him was to attack “science” had reason to cover up the fact that he funded the very type of research (gain of function) that led to the COVID outbreak, at the same Wuhan lab, and provably lied to congress about this under oath? Might this cause reason to question his ethics and motivations?

The fact that we might see the pursuits of these controlling elitists with an unquenchable God complex as bat crazy doesn’t mean they aren’t serious and don’t have the determination and mechanisms to bring about their dystopia. If you doubt, simply give a read of Romans 1 as all of these oligarchs are enemies of the Christian faith and power hungry.

Incidentally, my more outrageous claims can be researched online, but be sure to use “Duckduckgo” or some other search engine than “Google” due to the above-mentioned censorship. Also, the final culprit has been exposed in a recently released book written by Robert Kennedy Jr. – not a conservative ideologue.

My next article will address why knowing what is true on this issue is so profoundly important.

*Gaslighting is psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one’s emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator. – Merriam-Webster Dictionary