Published On: Tue, May 5th, 2020

Surveying the triangulation of UK Government’s Covid-19 tyranny, Nazism, and the Collective of “Equals”

Share This

When UK Government declared that it would have the entire population of Great Britain and Northern Ireland stay at home, except for a few reasons which could serve as excuses, it declared everyone deserving of being quarantined. For this to appear to be reasonable, it had to have everyone believe that not a one person was immune from the new disease, and every person was capable of transmitting it to each other. It didn’t matter if a person was ill or not, he could be an asymptomatic carrier.

So, observance of lockdown depended on perception of Covid-19 as both potently deadly, and virulently contagious. Covid-19 is neither, but the illusion was promised by the (fatuously inaccurate) Imperial College modelling, incessant fearmongering by politicians and corporate-media, and then delivered by a sleight of hand of immense scale. At the time of writing, intensive care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland have seen 7542 Covid-19 patients in the whole duration of the so-called pandemic (according to the latest ICNARC audit). This is the best indicator available to us regarding the true scale of Covid-19 illness, and also of death: 2496 to date. Until certain definitive information is available, it can’t be known how many of these were due to a specific respiratory illness complicating to pneumonia that can be called Covid-19 proper. What is known as a fact, however, is that 95% of “Covid-19” deaths in hospitals occurred to people who had pre-existing medical conditions. Although these people had tested positive for a SARS virus [or were clinically diagnosed], it is also a fact that the PCR tests by which results were obtained were unreliable (we have this on the good authority of the US Centers for Disease Control). So, it appears to be the case that 95% of Covid-19 deaths were in facts expirations by other illnesses – deaths that would have happened anyway, or deaths that transpired, ironically, both by non-treatment of patients (the full scale of a Do Not Resuscitate scandal is yet to emerge) and also by treating them (for instance, with superfluous ventilation treatment).

With the idea established that anyone could catch what was eventually termed “coronavirus” (because death by Covid-19 is actually very specific), when a non-hospitalised person developed symptoms, although they could have had one of any number of real minor ailments, they could assume it was Covid-19. When they then delivered themselves into the hands of the NHS, an erroneous PCR test could confirm the assumption. The SARS-COV-2 PCR test detected a presence, not an infection – and then it was also capable of producing a positive result that disguised infection by another virus (we have this on the good authority of the US Centers for Disease Control); in short, for example, a person could have a mild cold, or the flu, and yet become a Covid-19 case.

If such a person was taken to hospital, put into intensive care, and died because of the treatment, it would feed into the myth of Covid-19 as being a killer of healthy people.

So, although Covid-19 appears to be a specific illness that was not a mass murderer, by the propaganda, and the impression of the lockdown itself, and then the production of death at NHS hospitals, it was awarded a reputation of being one. With the illusion of death came the fantasy of contagion: lots of death means high rates of contagion, would be the assumption. In fact, the rate of reproduction has never been known, even if scientific experts to the UK Government make claims to appreciate it – but, of course, the facts have never mattered. It’s the phantom menace in the idea that counts. Everyone could get the coronavirus, and as such they weren’t to go out lest they caught it or unwittingly spread it. Everyone was a suspect. And when they had no choice but to venture out of doors, they had to behave to type; they were expected, and pressured (by colour of law) to conduct themselves as if they were in a vast prison.

Recently, an article appearing at FBEL explained how the “disease” that UK Government wanted to stop the spread of was in fact behaviour contrary to the diktats of a technocracy. To illustrate, a comparison was made with the society portrayed in the film, Equals. The reader should refer to that article because the broadening of the comparison to take place here relies on that previous knowledge. We will begin by noting that, in the film, fear of a disease also plays a central role in a system for behavioural control.

The Collective, which is the name of a society of citizenry which goes by the name of “equals”, has been made afraid of contracting a disease called Switched On Syndrome (SOS) – and this has happened even though individuals in the society are supposed to have evolved away from having emotions, which are a characteristic of a more primitive human. The situation reveals that the Collective does not escape suffering from the usual hypocrisies that always are a feature of totalitarian societies. Evidently, emotion is good if it serves the maintenance of the system.

The fact of the fear of SOS is made clear to the viewer of the film. When Silas announces to his work colleagues that he is a stage one SOS sufferer, his colleagues agree to have him moved away from the main production office, to have him dine in an area away from the main group, and to use a mug labelled with his name so that no one else can use it from a communal collection of mugs by mistake. One of Silas’ colleagues would have him wear a facemask [in fact, Silas suggests it himself (edit, 6.5.20)].

While the face covering is thought by others to be extreme, if it were enforced it would merely be another emblem of a new individuality that Silas’ illness has granted him – and in fact, it could be said that SOS introduces a way of life that is individualised. This reaction of his colleagues to Silas is assumed to be universal in the society, and as such we might conclude that the tendency to be repelled is why the Collective in fact, through its voices of authority robotic propaganda bulletins, is told that SOS is not contagious. And yet, the irrational behaviour that etches out an individual from the similitude is tolerated. Presumably, the reason for the toleration is that the irrational fear is worth the price – especially since marginalisation can be felt to be an additional punishment for contracting SOS, and a further motivation to volunteer into the hands of the medical tyranny, which is the behaviour that the system relies on to survive.

Indeed, the fear of SOS that prompts the behaviour comes from the promise of imminent death if it is untreated or goes to a stage too far, and at least imprisonment for an undefined period (no one seems to be released) that presumably ends in death. It is inculcated by incessant and relentless bulletins asking the equal to be aware of their having symptoms, and in the case of doing so, report to their doctor immediately.

If the reasons for not handing oneself over to a system and a procedure that can only inevitably destroy, not restore the patient, are not compelling enough, the Collective is told about a long hoped for cure that is always only around the corner.

What we may have noticed, then, is that, like a person’s potential relationship with Covid-19, a citizen in Equals always has the potential to contract SOS – and maybe this makes so little sense that they have created a compensatory unofficial belief system whereby the disease must be contagious. This is interesting, because the Covid-19 hoax actually relies on people not understanding the nature of the disease – hence why the risk of contagion is a similarly sized, fear-inducing bogeyman. Another similarity between the two scenarios is that presentation at a medical facility, because one is informing on one’s own symptoms of Covid-19, is to volunteer into a process that could introduce the risk of death.

There is also direct comparison to be drawn between the messaging to the population in the Collective and to a real population in respect of Covid-19 in respect of the survival of the system. In Britain, people have been locked down to spare the NHS; they are explicitly told that their behaviour will have a direct impact on NHS performance. A particular message in Equals presents a similarity across the two scenarios:

The Collective runs on everybody doing their part. Report suspicious activity to Health & Safety. Health & Safety is here to help.

To readers of a certain age, the “here to help” portion will ring a bell. This is what Reagan told Americans they were to beware of when it was announced by Government to be its intention. Here to help in fact means here to control, and an equal in the Collective plays his part by assisting Government in controlling. As for Health & Safety, it can’t be called police, because there is no crime other than unsanctioned behaviour. Put it like this: if doctors are an interface with the medical tyranny that is voluntary, Health & Safety is an interface that is not. At the heart of the system is the DEN, or the Defective Emotional Neuropathy facility, where that which would be dangerous to the system is forcibly contained, and offered the opportunity to commit suicide to spare the Collective from carrying out murder (which it would have to ultimately do).

It is quite possible to compare the NHS with a place where death is produced as a matter of societal control. The NHS, because of its practice of using destructive allopathic medicine, is the place where corporate-government makes money through population management (please see the FBEL article, The beneficent NHS, where corporate-government makes a buck from population control). But there is much more to the NHS as a component of the control grid of UK Government, and this is approached in the FBEL article, Dr Strangelove: or how I learned to stop worrying about the sale of the NHS. The British are told to play their part to help the Collective run, like the equals in the film.

Moreover, we can compare the NHS and the DEN because both are devices that connects criminality to death. With the DEN it is obvious, but with the NHS, one has to start with the notion of the institution as the Temple (see the article linked to immediately above), and how being cured is testimony to not being a social deviant. Never has the concept of NHS as Temple been so clear as in this time of Covid-19. The reader, like the author, might have taken the time to trawl through Twitter and see how people who fervently believe in Covid-19 would deny medical treatment to those who aren’t devoted to the cult. In other words, the unbeliever is not deserving of salvation: death is sin, and sin is deviance. Now, this is not to say that NHS care is to be regretted if it is denied, but instead to demonstrate an expression of the NHS as Temple as it has been inculcated, and as it naturally manifests. Even clearer than all this is how the UK Government produced regulations, to appear to be enforceable by police, to spare the NHS. In other words, the crime of being a suspect unbound in the greater prison would result in illness and death in the NHS. Crime is linked to death.

Although in Britain the first wave of “Covid-19” is over, and although the disease, in reality, has not killed more than 3000 people, a second wave is promised, and was promised from the outset. Clearly, it is a device to provide a pretext for continued, but scaled-down, lockdown measures. Generally, it is to be expected that the main difference will be access granted into the wider prison; i.e. social distancing will be maintained, and will be bound to send some more small businesses to the wall because of cost to implement, or loss of competitive edge. A vaccine and robotisation of the work force must be mid to long term objectives in what has been an economic attack to further a control grid.

What we could be seeing is the mother of all power grabs to re-establish the total Freemasonic technocracy that has been long desired by adherents to the belief in their own potential god-hood even before H.G. Wells produced a plan for one during the Second World War. Some people will know this as Agenda 21, and the establishment of centrally planned economies and smiley-faced dictatorship in the name of ecological sustainability. When H.G. Wells fronted the wishful thinking of a committee of likeminded technocrats, at least it was framed as being done in the interests of the “Rights of Man”. The reader is asked to read the FBEL article, The socialist “Rights of Man” – towards a New World Order, which will save a lot of space in this piece.

In short, there will be universal credit, and lifetime welfare dependency on Government, with everyone working for Government. The population will be propagandised, and severely restricted in private intellectual endeavour and exploitation of property rights, with no opportunity afforded to own capital – all this amounts to competition to the centrally planned economy – with decisions about what people can buy and how much can be purchased made by Government. Opposition to the system would be deemed to be mental deficiency, and criminal activity.

Now, the reader will have noticed that British alternative media likes to call the lockdown fascist, and this is an allusion to a political tendency on the right side of the political spectrum, with its association with capitalism. In the midst of the muddling of terms, the Nazis are held up as a paradigm of right-wing evil. We are going to put aside the fact that right represents anarchy of individuality – a term that can’t even remotely be applied to the government of 1930s Germany – versus statism (and, by necessity, authoritarianism) of the left wing. We are also going to pretend not to notice that the Nazis had the word “socialist” in their name.

The important factor above all other considerations is that the Nazis created a technocracy borne out of Freemasonic religion. The reader is invited to go to the archive on this site housing the Mystery Babylon radio broadcasts made by William Cooper, and listen to episodes 39 to 41. From those crucially informative pieces of work, the essential summarised point that needs to be made here is that the Nazis used junk science to legitimise a philosophy for enabling a technocracy. The same could be said of what the UK Government does – Covid-19 in fact being an acceleration of something that is par for the course. It’s a huge clue that the UK Government calls its star chamber, who essentially rule the country via the current quickening of medical tyranny, SAGE (scientific advisory group for emergencies). In the ideology that formed the configuration of Nazism, the Armanenschaft was a spiritual council of the wise, or the hidden superhuman hierarchy, as Rosicrucians would call it (see here), that provided justification for rule for technocrats who had evolved to communicate with them (or be them). So, if we want to call the lockdown fascist, let’s understand that it has nothing to do with capitalism.

Indeed, the FBEL reader is asked to remember some simple rules which cuts through the deliberate muddling of terms. The more capitalists there are, then the fewer there are who can be socialised. To be a capitalist is to own capital. To be socialised is to be capital. Capitalists can be many, socialists must be few, but the socialised must be the masses. If the reader doesn’t get the gist, here it is spelt out: the evil global-capitalism, so hated by British alternative media, that would implement centrally planned economies and smiley-faced dictatorships is in fact socialism, is in fact technocracy borne out of Freemasonic religion.

This brings us now to an expansion of our understanding of the society in the film, Equals. The Collective is all to obviously a technocracy borne out of Freemasonic religion. The glaring sign pointing to this fact is the expressly specified significance of space exploration to the society. The reader can find a fuller exploration as to why space travel, or the aspiration to it, is crucial to a technocratic control grid in the FBEL articles, Hairspray, wire and harnesses; NASA’s role in the NWO (here), and The science of the age versus technocratic “magic”; there can only be one outcome (here). To summarise, a god can escape a designation of fate bestowed on him because of the relationship between him, dwelling on the earth, and the stars and planets [according to ancient pseudoscience]. Before space travel was declared as being possible, this was a matter of symbolism. These days, space travel has come to be about creating the impression of technocratic potential for godhood; technocrats have to rely on the ancient science of the confidence trick, and so things are no different for them than they were for the builders of the pyramids.

Silas, the male protagonist of the film, explains through dialogue that the citizenry of the Collective are taught to expect that deep space exploration will bring about an understanding of ultimate reality. This is not overtly explained, but the meaning is clear to anyone who is familiar with Luciferianism, the religion of Freemasonry, the philosophic basis of technocracy. Contrarily, he decides, through his relationship with Nia, the female protagonist, and through finding himself, that the ultimate reality is in being human. This is a powerful anti-technocratic message, which is not to be unexpected, given that the entire film is about defying and denying technocracy.

But at the same time, Equals can help us visualise a ecologically sustainable “Plannedopolis”, or a “political utopia” of the sort envisioned by H.G.Wells, that comes into being and sustains itself through medical tyranny.

There are little points to make, like how equals in the Collective do not cook for themselves. They have meals delivered in boxes. While this is to do with the decisions being made for an individual (regarding choice and portions) there is also an aspect of denying the creative urge. Likewise, there is no art in terms of decor, either personally (clothes), or in a dwelling. This is rather significant because of its intrinsic connection in Renaissance thinking (and ultimately Aristotle) with expression of the nature of the man, or the individual. Moreover, if a society were to inspire individual aspiration to create one’s own clothes or furniture, then here would be means to own capital. This is why even cooking is an everyday skill to be supplied otherwise it will subvert. Every job must be done by those authorised to do it – and in fact, job allocation is a centrally determined activity. We could also point out that travel is only by public transport, and that it can be denied subject to status.

Now let us briefly compare to the coming Plannedopolis in Britain stemming from application of medical tyranny via the Covid-19 hoax. The key feature would be the end of capitalism and the expansion of welfarism, which will amount to decisions made, services supplied, and every facet of life, not least anyone’s career, authorised by Government – or, in fact, denied. What if, for instance, the UK Government requires the population to take a vaccination (the promised “cure” for Covid-19), and without complying, an individual would not be able to ride a train, or allowed to work, or even served food. Today there is news that 6.3 million people are now on the government payroll through the furlough scheme. That’s a quarter of all British employees. 800,000 employers made their people vulnerable to it – but of course, with the UK Government closing down the economy, they had little choice if they wanted to survive. This is a particular significant point of fact from the Breitbart coverage linked to:

While in 2020 under the coronavirus emergency over 50 per cent of the adult population is in the employment of the state, in 1920 less than eight per cent were in receipt of tax money.

This is exactly the sort of thing H.G. Wells was plotting to accomplish.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
Displaying 1 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. jamie says:

    Another great article, now all we need is for it to be read by another 20 million people.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>