"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." -Vladimir Lenin
Click here for more articles about The Kunlangeta. Some more active conversation about topics such as this can be found at the RTE Locals channel.
I find it interesting that I've encountered so many people in the Medical Freedom Movement who think that vetting people is a waste of time, so I wanted to write at least a brief article explaining the importance of investigating the backgrounds of people who might gather the power or money from a large following.
If it didn't exist, we wouldn't have a name for it. Just the existence of the opening quote by Lenin should tell the story: be wary. It takes time and discernment to distinguish between a genuine leader or politicians (ha), and an affinity scam.
There is a long history of large-scale operations that go mostly undiscussed outside of the ghettos of the internet. But you should be aware of COINTELPRO. Also, revelations by Tom O'Neil that the Charles Manson story seems likely to have been controlled by government agencies, twisted, and used to end the days in which the different classes in California broke bread together, culturally.
But ultimately, most examples of controlled opposition lack evidence of certainty, or get paved over in thorough propaganda efforts. As a result, pointing toward them as examples invites getting muddied in debate before getting to the meat of the point: we cannot be so naive as to think powerful actors do not deploy opposition control during any important conflict of interests.
In light of that, can anyone educated in history really think that the intelligence agencies and corporate-banking complex haven't studied methods of controlling their opposition for decades or centuries? Do we even know how far back Western [quasi]-control over China began?
I'll try to keep this short and sweet (relative to the task). Much of the reason that people have a hard time recognizing the presence of controlled opposition is that people project their own value systems onto others. People are constantly looking for their "own tribe", and when they hear the right words, eloquently spoken, they assume sincerity. Part of this is the problem of the escape of the Kunlangeta from the community. The smartest and most talented of the Kunlangeta want to be ungoverned, and they manage this by governing everyone else from guru perches.
Not recognizing the values of role players among the personality types in a community—or believe that these values might be simulated by artificial intelligence (good luck getting enough monkeys to power that paradigm)—the Kunlangeta fall prey to notions of superiority and immortality. They cannot even fathom the community itself as an important part of evolutionary forces. As a result, they do not easily find value in the humanity of most of the tribe's members. The psychopaths will often torture, kill, enslave, dehumanize, and at times brainwash others to be tactical servants.
Or, if the Kunlangeta do recognize the ways in which they are fundamentally out of sync with humanity, they choose the life of power now over the progress of civilization—even their children's children's civilization. This is likely why their narcissistic masks involve coopting the notion of progress, as in progressivism.
Communities become more and more locked into supporting their Kunlangeta out of fear—both reprisal from their own Kunlangeta, and also the greater fear of being subject to the whims of some other tribe's Kunlangeta. This is what game theorists call a prisoner's dilemma. Put simply: people sell out all the other tribes before pushing their own Kunlangeta off the ice.
Do you doubt that the Kunlengeta know all of this? Their very existence is [literally and essentially] the "Satanism" of most all world religions for a reason. And the smart, powerful Kunlangeta are more aware of this than everyone else is—their power and existence depends on it. And they remain invisible while having their networks put pressure on people for merely talking about their hypothetical existence.
Do you think that, after all we've seen, experienced, and researched, most or all of this we've experienced since early 2020 wasn't planned?
Such planning would be such a magnificent undertaking involving a confluence of most of the world's great powers. You should conclude then that they would plan their opposition well. The Kunlangeta may be short on empathy, but they do not rise to positions of power without their rationality intact. And for this reason, you should do your due diligence with anyone you lend your power—particularly if they could conceivably occupy an important slot in your conscience.
Excellent, thank you.
"...can anyone educated in history really think that the intelligence agencies and corporate-banking complex haven't studied methods of controlling their opposition for decades or centuries? Do we even know how far back Western [quasi]-control over China began?"
These are the questions 'up' now, and we need them. We are playing catch up.
“People are constantly looking for their "own tribe", and when they hear the right words, eloquently spoken, they assume sincerity. “
Yep. It’s the dynamic behind “Who do you want for president”. Mouthing the “right” platitudes with a barely-plausible simulacrum of sincerity will get you far, irrespective of your capacity to actually deliver. That reality is plainly evidenced in DC.
The coarse but sincere truth-speaker, who might actually be able to achieve what he promises, is kicked to the curb.
It’s style over substance, and I think it’s more-or-less related to the phenomenon of people drawing moral or practical lessons from movies: the drama, style and color of presentation bear far more weight than the actual intellectual content, which, in most cases, is lightweight at best.