The leftist establishment has been working hard to demonize and vilify their political opponents for as long as they have existed.
Some will argue that the history of their tactics have origins in the Fabian Society (circa 1880), or even to before the founding of the Roman Empire. But we can track the most egregious wave of leftist slander either to the speech in which Hillary Clinton called half the country “deplorables,” or to the effort by Obama supporters to smear all of his political opponents as unreformable racists.
It’s important for us to recognize the fact that this tactic has been applied incrementally over many years. It is, in fact, called “incrementalism,” and it is a distinctly Fabian Society-derived method of ideological subversion. Further “incrementalism” is also cynically referred to as “progressivism,” but if you tell your leftist friends that, you can expect them to cut ties with you.
It’s important to understand this if we are to comprehend how our culture came to the point where the CEO of a company like Pfizer could publicly call people who do not trust the company’s China Virus jabs “criminals.” The fact that the following quote has not hit mainstream news and stoked intense outrage is a direct consequence of Fabian-style incrementalism.
In an appearance at the Atlantic Council, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said, “Those people are criminals. They are not bad people, but they are criminals because they have cost millions of lives, literally.”
For anyone to say such a thing in the United States of America is indefensible. But for a powerful chief executive officer to say such a thing in front of a recognized Globalist think tank whose mission statement is “shaping the global future together,” is monstrous.
Our argument here is that the Overton Window had to be moved for Bourla to say such a thing and to not be run out of public life on a rail. We contend that this has been done incrementally over a long period of time.
As an aside, please consider what type of organization would be happy with progress toward a goal that spans decades, even centuries. What kind of people would be satisfied with Fabian-level pacing?
The only rational answers to such a question will boggle the mind, and threaten to shatter all conventional views of history.
Even still, we know these groups exist. We know their goals are aligned with the sorts of things groups like The Atlantic Council openly aim to achieve. For more clarity on this topic, we recommend searching YouTube for Bill Cooper’s description of the early history of the Philosophers of Fire.
Bourla went on to say, “The only thing that stands between the new way of life and the current way of life is, frankly, hesitancy to vaccinations.”
This statement is truly monstrous.
Let’s start with the simple conflict of interest problem it presents us with.
For the CEO of a company to suggest that people who do not want to buy the product his company is selling should be subject to criminal prosecution is outrageous. For this statement, he should be forced to resign, to give up his stock in the company, and to retire from corporate life completely. It is tantamount to inciting armed robbery of half of the world’s population.
Second, what does he mean by “the new way of life”?
Without a doubt, he means the plan referred to by leftist leaders all over the world as “Build Back Better.” This is the New World Order’s vision of a world economy in which World Economic Forum Executive Chairman and Globalist leader, Klaus Schwab, says the average person will “own nothing and be happy.”
For further clarity, consider the fact that parents who protest critical race theory in public schools have been called terrorists by the federal government. Consider the fact that a man whose daughter was raped by a transgender student was arrested for attempting to hold the school which tried to cover the incident up accountable. Consider the case of Kyle Rittenhouse who is being tried for murder in a clear case of self-defense.
It has now come to light that the FBI intentionally withheld video evidence that proves Rittenhouse fired in self-defense only. We have seen that video, and it not only proves Rittenhouse’s innocence, it also proves the federal government is engaged in an open political and legalistic war against the average American.
Do not believe for a moment this is not a war on freedom.
Because it is.