In this article I describe in what way the role of police can be benign, and about the strength and weakness of anarchism.

On the role of police and anarchy

I thought: let me be spontaneous and respond to a ridiculous tweet! It was a tweet from a lady, who stated that everyone must necessarily vaccinate, for the Greater Good, and that people who refuse are selfish. According to her logic, you sometimes have to do things you don’t want to, for the Greater Good. So I responded with: “Please give up your life! By donating of all your organs now, you can save 10 people! Do it for the Greater Good! If you won’t, you’re selfish.” So I held up the proverbial mirror directly to her, to show where her faulty logic leads. And, yes, then it becomes clear that the Greater Good doesn’t matter all that much, and you certainly shouldn’t use it to force other people to do things they don’t want.
But of course Twitter smelled blood! Not at her tweet, because “vaccines = good”. But at my tweet. The incredibly stupid people working there (I call them ‘twitter twats’) must have thought I really wanted this lady to give up her life. It’s another clear example of not being allowed to use your shadow, to make something clear to someone. Something that half the world suffers from, unfortunately. These are definitely people who think that you should only say sweet things to each other. That we should all cuddle up with each other in some kind of love paradise, where we should tolerate and encourage untruth and moral decay. For the greater good. And that we should deny our principles, to accommodate each other, so that we all love each other eternally and never be angry with each other anymore. A world in which each person has his own (subjective) truth, which you must always respect, so that we can all be one. A very unbalanced view. The folks at Twitter won’t be surprised I’m saying this, because they know damn well what they are doing, especially at the top of the company.

The Twitter police actually handle things just like the regular police. If someone calls or complains about something (just like this Twitter lady probably reported my tweet), they show up like obedient slaves to do something about it, no matter how wrong the person calling or complaining is. It’s when they often say, “Your behavior is problematic!” Or “You make people uncomfortable!” Whereas no one can guarantee that you won’t ever make anyone uncomfortable! That’s ridiculous! Sometimes hearing the truth IS rather uncomfortable.
What often occurs when one person is threatened by a large group of people on the street and law enforcement is called, that this person is then ordered to leave the area, even though they have every right to be there. It’s actually the aggressive and threatening crowd, that needs to be punished. And so the enforcement role of the police always ends up focused at the wrong people. It is then said, “you are disturbing the order”, while it is the aggressors who are all targeting one man, who are disturbing the order. It’s so disgusting! And it happens constantly. Just let a man who speaks out against the violence of Muslims towards their non-Muslim fellow man walk through a neighborhood (in his own city and country!) in which many Muslims live. There are several videos of this on YouTube. This person then has to defend himself against dozens of aggressive Muslims, who as usual absolutely cannot stand criticism and try to impose their Antichrist energy on him. Then the police are called, and instead of the aggressive Muslims being dealt with, or arrested, this man who is completely civilized but just criticizes the Muslims, is arrested for disturbing the peace. It’s maddening! Would these policemen really be so backward, that they fail to see they are depriving these aggressive Muslims of a punitive treatment that would most certainly be right and proper?! And then people continue to claim that “evil is inherent in man” and “it’s just how man is”. No, not when it isn’t treated properly! It’s ridiculous! If a policeman really had guts, he would say to those dozens of aggressors, “This man is allowed to criticize your behavior, but you are not allowed to physically attack him! Whoever physically attacks this man will simply be arrested.” That’s working actively to change behavior in these people, but apparently the police aren’t interested in that! Which is stupid! Because if you don’t tackle it, then it will fester, and in the long run you will get one group of the population against another, purely because the problems that exist are not called out or are just neglected. And so in the end, humanity gets what it deserves, including these police officers. So yes, don’t expect me to clap for them, because they are generally mostly cowards, who just show up as slaves to follow orders, without thinking for themselves! But I hope that by providing this example I clarify how the police could play a benign role instead of an malignant one.

Lots of people in the U.S. have a nasty habit of thanking veterans by saying “Thank you for your service!” Also, veterans often get special treatment when buying products, or subscribing to certain services. Veterans are generally held in high esteem in the U.S. After all, “they fought for our freedom,” which is absolutely the biggest nonsense. The imperialist wars the U.S. fights abroad have absolutely nothing to do with the freedom of Americans. Lots of in their eyes “dangerous” countries are fully surrounded by U.S. bases. Who actually is the aggressor then? It always gets spinned like the U.S. government is acting out of self defense, and that these countries in Africa and Middle East are about to attack the Free World, which is pertinent nonsense. The official story of 9/11 is nonsense too and the US government fully cooperated in organizing the attack (read: David Icke - Alice In Wonderland And The World Trade Center Disaster) and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were not present either. It is often the leaders of countries that take a stand against the West’s perverted liberal culture and U.S. foreign policy, and that want to escape the yoke of the dollar, who are removed from the throne, or in many cases assassinated. We all remember the words of the psychopathic Hilary Clinton about Muammar Qaddafi: “We came, we saw, he died!” (based on the Latin Veni, vidi, vici!). The soldiers who are deployed to all these countries really think they are doing something heroic, but they are being fooled outrageously hard, something they do realize sometimes after sitting at home with PTSD after a deployment. Who did you serve do you think? The American people? Or rather the corrupt politicians? And who do you think is more morally culpable for the victims being created? The corrupt politicians? Or the military itself? The military itself bears more moral blame, because they actually carry out the action as blind order followers, not the corrupt politicians. But they are probably made to believe that they only kill ‘bad guys’.
You also often see those videos where soldiers arrive at home and surprise their children, whom they have abandoned, at their school or sports club. “Dad, what did you do abroad!?” “I fought for your freedom, child! And I brought democracy to the country!” which usually means throwing bombs on brown children. Sometimes countries are better off with dictators. Forcing so called progress too hard brings a lot of destruction unfortunately.
If you really want to be a patriot and fight for your own country, you shouldn’t obey the government to fight. No, you use your voice to say NO, the “lost word” according to Mark Passio.

I used to follow American YouTubers Adam Kokesh and Larken Rose (Larken Rose was also taken over by the Dragons), Anarcho-capitalists who opposed any form of statism. Statism is actually the belief in government. And government is the monopoly on violence. The two gentlemen oppose government because government is made up of people who have been given the task of behaving immorally, to fight the immoral in ordinary people. I linked to this Image earlier, where you can clearly see the difference in denomination between when you do something and when the government does the same thing. Kokesh and Rose want to move toward a world where we can vote for plans by giving money, and where it is not the government’s job to coordinate, say, the building of roads (the most common example), but simply of street pavers taking responsibility for their own tasks. It is often assumed that without government, people would not organize themselves, or be able to manage their affairs, but they say that is nonsense. It is precisely when there is no government that people are challenged to take responsibility themselves. Apparently people are too immoral to be free in the world, but we give these same immoral people, in the role of law enforcement the task of being the example of morality, which is of course ridiculous. Kokesh and Rose therefore believe that the populace should be armed so that they can unitedly defend themselves against the evil that possible governments would do to the people if they seized power, which of course we have seen very often in history. They then want to leave the various tasks of government to the market. If you need security, you don’t call the police, you call one of many competing security companies, which you can choose freely.

A video that explains the concept of real anarchy well is “What anarchy isn’t” on Larken Rose’s channel. I recommend everyone to watch it, because there are many misconceptions around the concept of anarchy, which is often confused with absolute chaos.
Anarchy as shown in the video seems appealing, but there would be problems implementing it. My opinion is, when the government harms its people, the people are already too late to intervene, and are often even complicit. The government is only doing what the people ask for. And the people clearly have a very passive attitude. That’s a problem, in my opinion. They are so indoctrinated the government only does good, that they fail to see they sometimes do absolutely evil things. They also do good, but not because they care, but because the people massively demand it. The people have therefore ultimate control, though they do not realize it. I’ve said it before, but I’ll repeat it again: there are actually two major groups in society. The followers of the mesopotamian Enki versus the followers of his half-brother Enlil, which in Biblical terms amounts to Lucifer versus Satan. The Luciferic people fight against the evil done by the government, but don’t realize that in doing so they themselves become a personification of evil. And the Satanic people take the attitude of “Govern me harder, Daddy!” and thus personify an even darker form of evil, for they blindly encourage the state in its evilness, i.e. they enjoy it! So the Satanic people can use some of the knowledge and morality that the Luciferic people have, although in practice they will oppose it, which is a great pity. And the Luciferic people in general could use some understanding of why the state does what it does (to empower us), although in practice they will oppose this as well, which again is very unfortunate.

Anarchists feel that they do not need to be governed by anyone. They are not necessarily against hierarchy, but they do not want an immoral government that is going to tell them what they can and cannot do, while this government itself is guilty of kidnapping (arresting) and robbing (taxing) people. All laws can be derived by applying the non-aggression principle, and the right to self-defense, up to lethal force if necessary. In practice, it often turns out that they do not tolerate being told what to do by anyone, and therefore they often lack adaptability. There are also an awful lot of atheists in the anarchist community who have thrown God out as the baby with the bathwater. For a time I called myself an anarchist, but one who tries to be faithful to the principles of the Christ figure. Christian anarchism has been written about, though. Leo Tolstoy is the best known Christian anarchist.

Some anarchists take responsibility for their own physical defense rather than passing it off to a police force or security firm. But if they would really listen to their opposition and their opposition to them in a balanced way, then there is no need to defend yourself physically against anything. You then use your voice (the Word) as your defense, and so does the other person. The evil influence of the State will eventually, when confronted and perfected by the Luciferic part of the people in the future, cause people to intuitively teach even more the soft teacher of this Satanic energy to each other, so that the opposition to the State, which is the hard teacher, will disappear, and there will be a real benign balance in interactions between incoming and outgoing energy, without having to physically defend yourself against anything. The fact that Democrats in the U.S. are eager to take guns away from the people is a frightening prospect to a large portion of Americans, but it could bring about great progress in American society, because people would be challenged in this way to defend themselves by using their voice (the Word), and it certainly takes pressure off the police, who wouldn’t have to anticipate violent situations as much and could then also actively take guns away from criminals in a targeted way. So it could provide a loving softening in society, without necessarily slipping into the false morality of most Democrats. But then again, there is so much resistance, so it would get bloody either way, because the problem is that people don’t want to learn from each other and persist in the extremes of Democrat versus Republican.

If you reason that evil is also a form of the Divine, and therefore serves a God-inspired function, then you begin to understand why the rulers of this world consider anarchism such a dangerous movement, and therefore try to discredit it, because if this philosophy were actively encouraged, then (Satanic) evil would not have a chance. It would no longer be able to perform its transforming role. For as you know if you have read my previous articles, evil is 2-fold. Mankind would polarize to one side, the side of ‘good’ but would actually become evil in it. It is precisely the opposition that exists between ‘the good’ and ‘the evil’ in man that allows one to learn from each other, and ultimately to walk the middle path, the way of Christ, which integrates both sides. There is a great development plan for mankind. But if man knew the power of anarchism, this plan would most certainly be in jeopardy. Everyone would arm themselves against the evil influence of governments, upon which a new evil would arise in man, one that is not under the control of the Angels/Demons/Aliens. Balance would no longer be possible. Although some evil entities or people will mainly want to cause as much harm as possible, and are not concerned with what is good for humanity; at the highest level, however, they ARE concerned. At the highest level, it is reasoned that the Satanic governments, corporations and institutions do exactly what the grand plan requires. As nasty as this sounds; it is a temporary thing and stopping it has everything to do with learning from your opposition, for those peo ple you maybe hate so much most certainly have something to teach you. And vice versa, you also have something to teach them, don’t you…?

share this article: