AGENDAS: The Fascist Takeover of the Internet

Let me ask you a question.  How often have you heard the term ‘fascist’ being used to attack someone?  In our society, this is a very powerful attack.  In many ways, it is akin to being called a racist or a ‘homophobe.’  This term is not the property of any one political orientation; it is used by people on all sides of the political spectrum.  So, please, let’s set aside any political emotions that we may feel in connection to this word.  In fact, let’s grant that everyone we have ever heard using it mean well.  Let’s just assume they are trying to protect individual rights and liberty.  Now let me ask you another question.  Of the people you can remember using the term ‘fascist,’ how many of them actually understand what the term means?  How often have you thought about it?  Do you know what it is or how it manifests itself in the ‘real world?’  Well, in the event that you have never really thought about it, let me explain what fascism is and how it works by using a very clear example that just happens to be in the news today: Net Neutrality.

First, let’s take a look at what ‘fascism’ actually means and how it manifests in practice.  Defining ‘fascism’ is a difficult task.  Even the ‘experts’ disagree as to what it is and what it means.  However, since the term was coined by Benito Mussolini, I would think that, if there is an authority as to what the term means, it would be Mussolini.  Mussolini defined fascism this way:

“Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merge of state and corporate power.”

Now, if you pay attention to the news, the term ‘corporatism’ should be familiar to you.  It is often used in place of the term ‘crony capitalism.’  The general idea is that ‘big business’ has bought the government.  However, this is not quite accurate.  The reality is that fascism is a corrupt co-operation between business and the government, but it is not business in charge of that relationship, it is the government.  Once again, Mussolini explains that the State is supreme:

Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State … Liberalism denied the State in the interests of the particular individual; Fascism reaffirms the State as the true reality of the individual.

Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived in their relation to the State.

This sentiment was recently echoed by Chris Cuomo when he said rights are granted by the State, not by our Creator.  This means that true fascism sees the government as the highest point of the pyramid.  Under this relationship, government allows business to exist, but only so long as business does what the State tells it to do.  Here again, Mussolini explains this very clearly:

The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and useful instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.

State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management.

So, fascism is more easily defined by its characteristics.  In this case, we are looking for an all-powerful government that allows private business to operate semi-autonomously — so long as that business ultimately answers to the State.  In addition, the State also controls all other social institutions.  This is because fascism can only exist in an environment where the government controls the schools, media and any other institution that might inform the people of what is really happening.  Fascism must not have an opposition voice.  Now, let’s look at the issue of Net Neutrality to see if it fits this model.

We start with the Mark Lloyd,  He was associate general counsel and Chief Diversity Officer at the Federal Communications Commission of the United States from 2009-2012.  One of the most important pieces in understanding what Net Neutrality is all about is found in a video clip of Mark Lyod explaining that the government must seize control of the media before it can successfully gain control over private business and the nation:

Now, if you are intellectually honest, and you pay attention to what is called ‘the main stream media,’ then you know there is a clear bias in the media.  An astute observer will find that even FOX News protects the core agenda of those who have control of our government.  This means our media is already on the side of the government and, by definition, this means our media is propaganda.  So Mark Llyod is talking about those sources that do not bow to the government, and most of those sources have had to turn to the Internet to get their message out.  There is much more to support this, but Llyod is the best single piece of evidence that reveals the government is actually after control of all sources of information.

Next, we have the fact that individual businesses are looking to the government to help protect them.  Companies such as NetFlix are trying to get something for nothing.  They see Net Neutrality as a means of gaining access to the Internet without having to pay the Internet providers for the services they use.  This means that NetFLix is giving its support to the government and Net Neutrality for their own financial gains.  Then Internet providers are doing the same.  They see Net Neutrality as a way of preventing any new competition from entering the market.  Once again, the government is using monetary greed to buy the support of big business. Make no mistake: the government will give some preferential treatment to these companies, but it will come at the cost of huge campaign contributions.  Even then, the government will still have the final say in anything these large corporations want to do.  In short, the short-sightedness of greed and fear is driving big business to sell itself to the government.

Still others supporting Net Neutrality are doing so political reasons.  These people believe they can buy a seat at the table which will ultimately control the flow of information.  Look up the list of political and special interest organizations supporting Net Neutrality and you will find many of the same names that pushed for Obamacare.  For the most part, the agendas of these organizations are all Socialist or Marxist in nature, and like all such ideologies, they can only survive as long as they control the free flow of information.  It is this control of information that allows them to influence the vote.  In conjunction with the schools, the propaganda system can and does shape and direct public opinion, which then translates into votes.  The problem is, these people manipulate the vote by through propaganda.  This is because they do not believe in democracy any more than they believe in a republican model of self-governance.  Here again, Mussolini explains it best:

“Democracy is talking itself to death. The people do not know what they want; they do not know what is the best for them. There is too much foolishness, too much lost motion. I have stopped the talk and the nonsense. I am a man of action. Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy. You in America will see that some day.”

Again, if you pay attention to the news, these words should remind you of someone else:

This attitude should not surprise us, but what might surprise many is that it did not start with Obama, nor did it start with Mussolini.  Actually, one of the first world leaders to use such words was Woodrow Wilson!  Wilson is put forth as a great President in our schools and colleges, but it is because he advanced such thinking, not because he championed individual rights and liberty or the rule of law.  But Wilson is the subject of another post.  What we need to understand here is that our government is currently putting together the fascist formula in its attempt to pass Net Neutrality.

They have said they want to control the media.  They need to do that so they can ‘fundamentally transform America.’  Once they have control of the schools and all forms of information, they can support this transformation by changing our history and our traditions.  Corporate America has agreed to support these efforts because they believe it is in their best financial interests.  And the activist side of America has thrown in for what they believe they can get out of their support in political terms.  But there is one last piece to this formula: the presentation of a crisis.

Google “Save the Internet” and you will find this last group of people.  They are painting Net Neutrality as a crusade to save the Internet.  The problem is the Internet is not threatened by anyone or anything — except the government and those supporting Net Neutrality!  But they are presenting Net Neutrality as a ‘crisis’ for a reason:

This is part of the formula: create a crisis and use it to push people to act without thinking.  At the risk of being repetitive, I want to quote another well-known fascist who clearly explained this tactic.  Only, this time, I am going to quote a more famous fascist who openly said he learned his trade from Woodrow Wilson:

“The war made possible for us the solution of a whole series of problems that could never have been solved in normal times.”

–Joseph Goebbels

If you follow my blogs, then I hope you are starting to see the connections here.  Net Neutrality is fascism in action, therefore, we can tell the ‘good guys’ from the ‘bad guys’ by looking at who is supporting it and who is opposing it.  But we can also look at the bigger picture behind Net Neutrality.  Net Neutrality is all about control over other people.  This is a clear violation of Natural Law and it can only exist for so long before Nature will re-assert itself and its laws.  When that happens, society undergoes a massive upheaval.  These upheavals are never good for the ‘little guy.’  Now, the people pushing these lies to us claim that there is no such thing as Natural Law and that they are using ‘science’ to ‘progress’ humanity.  But they know they are lying.  I have told you many times: if you know where to look, they admit to their lies.  So let’s look to one of these famous fascists to see whether or not he supports my argument in this post, as well as the argument I just made in my last paragraph:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

“We have made the Reich by propaganda”

–Joseph Goebbels

Let me ask you one last question.  Are you hearing me now?


11 thoughts on “AGENDAS: The Fascist Takeover of the Internet

    1. True, but when the government is evil, they WILL make it so you have plenty to hide. I mean, how long before I — a Christian — have to consider hiding my faith or facing the penalty? And anyone who thinks we are not heading in that direction… Well, I have a bridge to sell you — cheap 🙂

    1. LOL, I thought the Matrix was all about metaphors? 🙂

      The point is, Goebbels was full of it. The NAZIs made so many things illegal that it was impossible for anyone to be found innocent. Therefore, EVERYONE had something to hide, so everyone was constantly worried.

      This state already exists in the US. On average, every one of us — yes, EVERYONE — commits 3-5 FELONIES every day — EVERY day. So, once the government decides it ‘wants you,’ all it has to do is arrest and charge you. When this starts to happen on a big enough scale, everyone will realize they have something to hide, and we will all live like the Germans did in the 1940’s. Just re-read Orwell’s 1984. He was not warning us to avoid that world, he was telling us that world was coming whether we like it or not.

  1. How did you know that I read 1984?? LOL. Must we learn to accept this totalitarianism as it is beyond our control?

    1. Well, unless we can duplicate the formula of our founding fathers, then yes — as I do not see human nature changing any time soon. But I do not see us replicating our founders’ formula, either — as we have rejected the corner stone of their foundations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s