What’s the key to our side winning this war?

How do we defeat our enemies? What’s their most vulnerable point? Why was controlling social media so important to them?

Does Goliath, like Achilles, have a point of vulnerability that the Good Guys or underdogs (like David) should attack?

At another forum, I posted a question that might generate some discussion in my Reader Comments section.

My premise/assumption is that we’re in the midst of a battle between “good and evil” and that the future of mankind could hang in the balance depending on what side prevails in this existential battle.

Here’s my question expressed two ways:

What hypothetical event is most likely to be the decisive battle and allow “our side” to prevail?

As someone else commented, if this is a battle of David vs. Goliath, where is Goliath most vulnerable?

I think these are important questions because the best answer would show us where we should focus our efforts and resources. That is, if X event is the potential game-changer, we should do everything we can to make X come to pass.

I could list dozens of hypothetical events that might suffice to debunk obviously false and harmful narratives (about unexposed Covid scandals and unexposed scandals that have nothing to do with Covid).

I even think my niche of Covid research - “early spread”  - if conclusively proven could do the trick. 

If most citizens of the world belatedly learned a novel coronavirus was spreading months before our authorities and experts said was possible, these citizens would have to conclude this was NOT a “deadly” virus … which would mean the world did not have a real “public health emergency” that required lockdowns and then mandated experimental mRNA injections. 

But my real goal is NOT to prove early spread. My real goal is to prove that our trusted experts and authorities are hopelessly captured or corrupt … and, therefore, should no longer be trusted. 

If the majority of the world population reached this conclusion, one assumes there would be a massive grassroots’ movement to purge these officials from their leadership positions (and bring them to justice). 

If this happens, these people and organizations would lose their control and would not be able to continue to harm so many people and destroy the key parts of our culture that made America a free and good place to raise a family.

The world would be a much better place if citizens learned this truth about their “leaders.” Our side would … “win.”

The great silver lining of our Covid times is it allowed far more people to identify the true villains of our times. As long as these people and organizations remained unknown, it would be impossible to expose them.

Today, larger swaths of the population do know that the vast majority of our “trusted” authorities should NOT be trusted. Many more people are now questioning “authorized narratives” they’d never previously questioned.

The key narrative-changing event would be (much) larger numbers of people reaching the conclusion they’d been duped about some important narrative that was not the truth after all.

If this happened, the same people might question other narratives they’d always thought were true and could not be challenged.

That is, one important “truth bomb” would quickly lead to the detonation of many more belated truth bombs. This would lead to real change (not the politicians’ campaign cliche-version of “change.” In fact, this type of change would no doubt result in most politicians being expelled from elective office, never to run again).

The biggest game-changer might be if Internet users

were allowed to say whatever they wanted to say.

Mike Benz’s recent interview with Tucker Carlson greatly influenced my thinking on the question of what was “the most important thing” to the world’s real rulers. 

Benz, a former official at the U.S. State Department, makes a persuasive case that the world’s real rulers  - probably about 10 years ago - became extremely alarmed that the world wide web could be used to debunk or scuttle all of the programs our Shadow Rulers were intent on implementing.

The work-around for the Deep State was to capture the key companies that previously allowed “free speech” on the Internet. Basically, any person with potential influence was banned, bullied, censored or de-monetized and thus could not contribute speech that challenged false narratives.

Just as importantly, millions of users on these popular speech platforms learned they should “self censor” (at least if they wanted to be able to keep posting cute pictures of their children and grandchildren on these platforms). 

Legions of people picked up on the speech that was now taboo or off-limits. More disturbing, plenty of world citizens voluntarily participated in the project to bully or harass neighbors or posters who persisted in posting non-authorized speech that challenged the official narratives.

Forums like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Google and Reader Comment sections in the Legacy Media that should have allowed open debate were co-opted (incentivized) to protect the official government, WEF/globalist/Deep State point of view.

Contrarians aren’t just contrarians on one topic …

When one thinks about the exponential growth of the “Censorship Industrial Complex,” one probably thinks about the importance of censoring alleged Covid “disinformation.” 

However, the same same skeptical and independent thinkers who were prevented from posting criticisms of the accepted wisdom on Covid topics are the same people who’d be most likely to criticize other false narratives.

If I’m banned from posting on Facebook because of my contrarian Covid thoughts (or the algorithms make sure my posts reach only a few of my followers), nobody’s going to see my posts on, say, the J-6 outrage or the rigged 2020 and 2022 “elections” or how preposterous it was that “Russia” hacked the 2016 election or any of my contrarian views on Climate Change or my warnings about coming digital currency and universal digital IDs, etc.

Again, if you are a “contrarian”, you’re probably skeptical of all the agendas our ruling elites are planning. It really doesn’t matter why you were banned, all that matters is that your speech won’t reach as many people as it would have if Facebook simply allowed free speech. 

That is, the real great threat to our Shadow Rulers is intelligent people who would seek to block the programs of our Shadow Rulers. (And our leaders really only want two things - to remain in control and to achieve even greater control in the future).

This event changed everything that followed …

According to Mr. Benz, the seminal event in our times might have been the grassroots effort to push Brexit - which was an effort of citizens who didn’t want to be ruled by bureaucrats in Brussels.

The leaders of the Brexit movement organized and spread their anti-globalist messages  on the Internet and social media. When this movement resonated with people across the continent (and world), our Shadow Rulers identified the real threat - the Internet that allowed free speech.

Thinking about this makes me realize our adversaries are much better at identifying threats and then neutralizing these threats than our side is.

In a nutshell, someone in the CIA or the Deep State identified a threat (e.g. the Internet) and quickly came up with a solution to neutralize this threat … thus ensuring their continued control. 

All they had to do was completely capture Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Google, etc. (They’d already captured the mainstream media news organizations). They also had to create a massive Censorship Industrial Complex to identify, monitor and sanction tens of millions of people like myself. 

It therefore follows that if “our side” wants to defeat their side, we’d need widely-popular social media sites that simply allow our side to make our best arguments - uncensored, in a way that our arguments could go viral if they resonated with enough citizens.

Said differently, we need to identify what the “evil” side doesn’t want to happen… and then try to make that happen.

In my opinion, this thought exercise explains why a key battle in this existential war is the effort to shut down or sabotage X and its owner Elon Musk.

Until Musk acquired then Twitter, Twitter was also completely captured and “playing ball” with the Censorship Industrial Complex.

(Many people believe X is still not a “free speech” haven. However, I do believe the forum is “night-and-day” compared to Twitter pre-Musk ownership.)

Indeed, Tucker Carlson’s hour-long interview with Mr. Benz was published on X. Furthermore, this interview DID “go viral” as it has been viewed by approximately 30 million people.

As I’ve written in previous essays, one “game-changer” event would be if a few important “truth-seeking” captured organizations suddenly became uncaptured. At least to some extent, this has already happened at X. It seems clear to me that the Powers that Be are not amused by this development. 

Facebook got the carrots; X got the stick …

Indeed, I think it’s interesting to contrast the massive increase in the stock value of Meta (Facebook) and its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, to that of the stock valuation of X under Musk’s ownership.

The net worth of Zuckerberg - who did “play ball” with the State and the Deep State - has increased more than just about any person on the planet in recent years. That is, it literally pays to promote the agenda of those who want more control.

Corporations suffer no sanctions for advertising on rampant and enthusiastic censor Facebook, but would be targeted for destruction if they advertised on X, which does not promote censorship to nearly the degree of other social media companies. 

Thinking about the future, it seems clear the Powers that Be will double, triple and quadruple down on its Censorship programs to expand the speech that’s labelled dangerous “disinformation” or speech authored by dangerous “extremists.”

This has to happen if they are going to finish any of the unfinished agendas of the Deep State. This also has to happen if these people and organizations wish to remain free and not end up in the same jail cells where they deposited, say, Julian Assange.

***

If readers have any thoughts on where “our side” should focus our efforts to win this existential battle for freedom, please opine in the Reader Comments section.