The Secretive Societies

Chapter 1: The Psychology of Secrecy

 

 

 

Group Secrecy

 

For some reason or another, each of us needs to keep secrets from others. Sometimes our motives are innocent and selfless, but sometimes they are destructive and selfish. Sometimes people join secretive societies because they enjoy keeping secrets or are independently wealthy and simply have nothing better to do with their time. The desire for a person to belong to a group, especially a group of social elites or like-minded thinkers, can supersede whatever inhibitions he or she may have about being left out of the crowd. Whether secretive or not, it is the group, not the individual, that determines the purposes and policies of its meetings, as well as the requisites for membership.

Whatever the reasons, individuals who belong to secretive societies are perpetually engaged in a lifestyle of secrecy. They rely on the secrecy of their respective groups to protect them from adverse consequences for their actions, and the same groups also rely on their individual members to keep the secrets and enable the groups’ continuance and the furtherance of its goals. The trust which is generated by people who out of necessity keep secrets amongst themselves effects an emotional bond as well, and as a result, it is often difficult to distinguish from a fraternal order and a traditional secret society. This has been the case since the beginning of the mystery schools of the ancient Luciferian religions, and has continued within them right into the present day.

Just as there are degrees of initiation into the secret societies, so too are there degrees of initiation into the secrets which they protect. As we have seen in The World At War and The Secrets of Lucifer, and contrary to the imposed beliefs of the lower level initiates, the individuals at the top of the secret societies’ hierarchies make concerted attempts to convince the lower initiates that the real secrets and the real purpose of the societies are revealed at each successive initiation, and that these initiations are based on merit. In fact, just like Freemasons, the Illuminati consider their system and the scope of any given initiate’s capacity to rise within that system to be based entirely upon individual merit. However, in both systems, the individuals occupying all the key positions are actually pre-selected based on nepotistic factors like inheritance and the deliberate exclusion of anyone with a different point of view.

This trait is universal because the Order of the Illuminati are behind the power base of virtually all secret and open societies, and certainly all those worth mentioning in the context of globalization. The trend toward world government is therefore the underlying concept and unifying characteristic of group secrecy. More specifically, the goal of the Illuminati is the externalization of their hierarchy over the whole world as dictated by Alice Bailey and others. The pre-established spiritual hierarchy is therefore the real (realized) hierarchy, regardless of whatever degrees individual Masons and Illuminati achieve in their respective societies.

Some societies, particularly the open societies, are also based directly on aspects of the spiritual hierarchy which are based primarily on geographical location. Each area is subdivided by categories of influence under the same Luciferian hierarchy. For example, the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations and the Royal Institute for International Affairs operate out of and create the Illuminist policies governing the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth nations. The RAND (Research and Development) Corporation and the Council on Foreign Relations have equivalent roles in the United States, and they have all been created and controlled by exactly the same people, most of whom have been Europeans. Similarly, organizations such as the Carlyle Group and the Morgenthau Group which hold all of the tangible top-level policy-making power in the United States and Great Britain are represented by the greater international Bilderberg Group.2 Meanwhile, the Lucis Trust acts as an official consultant to the United Nations Economic and Social Council, thanks to an endowment by David Rockefeller, who also created and manages the Council on Foreign Relations.

The need for secrecy at meetings of corporate boards such as the Carlyle Group and Bilderberg Group is simple and obvious. Were the details of their subversive activities ever recognized by the larger population, there would be, in the words of Henry Ford, “a revolution before tomorrow morning.”3 The Bilderbergs even denied their own existence until recently, despite having been reported on by the magazine Spotlight for half a century.4 Considering that the Bilderbergs represent the political and economic superpowers of the world, there are some who think that all political and financial crises around the world are created behind the Bilderbergs’ doors. Despite the bad press their secrecy generates (as it is not in accordance with the will of “the people”), it will always continue. They do whatever they want, and their only fear is exposure.

The present book is intended to show the differences and similarities, as well as the common membership, of the secretive societies and the open societies. It is understood that the reader has already read The World At War and The Secrets of Lucifer and has a general understanding of what members of secretive societies believe and what their goals are. It is not understood, however, that the reader has a similar understanding of the open societies. That being said, this is not intended to be a comprehensive resource for information on all secretive societies, or even an exhaustive list of them, but is intended to show how they all work together in a universal web of concerted effort to the end of globalization.

The reader will undoubtedly see, probably for the first time, that the so-called secret societies and the open societies are one and the same. There is, after all, nothing secret about the secretive societies; if there were, it would be impossible for an outsider to report on them. As it is, they are all secretive, meaning they keep their secrets from the uninitiated. A concerned individual would have far more trouble gaining admittance to or acquiring the minutes of a board meeting of the Federal Reserve Board or the Trilateral Commission than he would those of the local Masonic lodge or Phi Beta Kappa chapter, yet few people take the time to recognize the implications of this, and the imposed illusion of self-determination through democratically elected government stifles inquiry into the nature of power.

 

 

Cognitive Dissonance

 

The gods give us paranoia so that we may occasionally glimpse something of the truth. Socrates5

The ancient Greeks who gave us our modern methods of logic and deduction were not averse to recognizing and reducing their psychological inhibitors, such as the need to belong to a group, when that same need stifles independence or when the logic of that group conflicts with reason or with the individual’s values. Socrates, of course, the most prominent “conspiracy theorist” of his time, is known for having been sentenced to death for “impiety” and teaching “liberal” (unconventional) views to the youth of Athens.6 So was Pythagoras, the patriarch of Socrates’ anti-secret society, but unlike Pythagoras, Socrates accepted his fate because he would not compromise his values, which happened to include an obligation to fulfill his “contract” with the state that persecuted him. Despite the criticism of their peers, contemporary philosophy and conventional analysis have vindicated these men as eloquent and inspiring truth-seekers.

Today societies continue to repress progressive thinkers in favor of lies and traditions. This happens in a number of ways, the most common of which are denial and ridicule, even in the face of the presentation of clear and insurmountable evidence in support of the unconventional views. This is generally the policy which all people resort to, to some degree, when confronted with information they have not already learned and accepted. However, far from being limited to mere skepticism and denial, the lies and traditions are also supported by two types of untruths used to preempt exposure to the truth which come not from society in general, but from the ruling class: disinformation and misinformation.

Disinformation is the propaganda of the controlling group to make its subjects believe the truth is false and vice-versa. It is a deliberate and perpetual lie perpetrated by several or many individuals who have a shared interest in keeping the truth secret. A well-known example of disinformation is the United States government’s ridiculous tale about Islamic hijackers crashing planes into the World Trade Center on 11 Sep 2001 with the intent of inflaming the Western world against Islam. So thoroughly has this officially sanctioned story been discredited by scientific analysis and incontrovertible proofs that it is a wonder anyone still believes it. Anything which the American government can possibly repeat concerning its position, or else further invent to corroborate the story is necessarily disinformation, because there is no truth to it, and because the government is well aware of this fact.

Misinformation is the propaganda intended to make the subjects follow a diversionary line of thinking, usually in reaction to events which were unwanted or unforeseen by the controlling group. It does not necessarily constitute a lie, but certainly a half-truth, because the most relevant details are excluded from the official story in order to effect a desired result which would not otherwise come about. Journalists call it “spin.” Sociologists rightly point out that the events themselves do not matter in the scope of politics nearly as much as the way in which they are presented to the masses by the spinning media. A well-known example of misinformation is Japan’s bombing of Pearl Harbor as a pretext for America’s involvement in World War Two (the important detail being the American government’s foreknowledge of the event, which it denied).

These two methods of maintaining the imbalance of information between the controlling group and the controlled group are facilitated by the masses’ inability to believe the unbelievably true, and by targeting and marginalizing fringe thinkers, even if that means creating a straw man argument by way of a shill (or stooge). In modern times, the true conspiratorial interpretation of history has been denounced through associations with virtually irrelevant and unfalsifiable theories regarding, for example, secret moon bases and shape-shifting lizard-people. In the past, similar means were employed which put into doubt the now undisputed notions of the existence of UFOs and extraterrestrials. Humanity’s paradigm is now at a point where misinformation has overcome scientific rigor, and where the fringe groups and ideas have begun to represent, in the minds of the majority, all paradigms not sanctioned by the controlling group. The modern school at Athens, now spread abroad over the Internet, is being represented by New Age pundit sophists like David Icke and Alex Collier rather than Plato or Aristotle.

More often than not, those who instigate and encourage wild and unreasonable notions of world government takeovers are themselves agents of the conspirators. Their inside knowledge may make them appear to be excellent researchers, but in truth is just as likely to be the result of indoctrination and subversion. Nearly all serious conspiracy research falls into the category either of disinformation or misinformation, as the researchers have become convinced in one way or another of the Luciferian ideologies they have studied, the anti-Masonic propaganda which opposes them, or even, as is often the case, in their own special status as prophets. Those in the latter category (and there are many) make themselves known by announcing who they think they are, and failing to present some other kind of message which would give some measure of credibility to the announcement.

Internationally, respectable conspiracy circles have been heavily influenced by men such as Michael Tsarion, Drunvalo Melchizedek, Jordan Maxwell and the so-called “prophet” Jah, all of whom disseminate true and useful information distorted by their false interpretations.7In America, conspiracy researchers are led by Alex Jones, whose version of conspiracism is so dangerously close to advocating the antithetical ideology of Zionism that people are finally starting to catch onto the fact that he is a shill (but not before he inundated the Internet with his material and became very rich in the process).8 Only a few years before Jones became the first face of conspiracism, that role belonged to moviemaker Michael Moore whose half-hearted financially-driven attempts to explain events are tainted by irrelevant conclusions predicated on a partisan political bias which is utterly useless and counterproductive to any conspiracy-based agenda. Not much has changed since then, except the face and the political bias behind it.

Fortunately for the enemies of the New World Order, the unconscious masses have begun to wake up in proportion to the disastrous consequences of allowing the Luciferians to perpetrate their agenda with impunity. However, it is too late to defeat them, ideologically speaking, and there is no logical reason for believing that their defeat will ever come according to what is already known to conspiracists. Furthermore, most of those who think they are awake are not, and could not possibly be bothered to act as though they were. Due to the sheer overwhelming power of the opposition and those they have programmed, conspiracists often succumb to fear or frustration. It is believed that the truth will set them free, but (New Age gurus excluded) the freedom they attain is not that which they have envisioned. The urgency of conspiracists is then perceived as fear or paranoia regardless of how reasonable it may or may not be, decreasing their chances of being accepted by the ignorant masses. Either way the conspirators have their way.

Paranoia is “a psychosis characterized by systematized delusions of persecution or grandeur usually without hallucinations; a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others.”9 All conspiracists are by this definition paranoid, and as there is no logical basis for attacking the truth of the conspiratorial view of history, they are ascribed a categorical mental illness by psychiatry, formerly known as ‘pure paranoia’ but now called ‘delusional disorder,’ apparently in order to justify the employment of the poor logic which concludes that theirs is not simply a common sense interpretation of facts and events.10 ‘Paranoid’ is also in psychiatry to describe a certain type of schizophrenia which presumes that the diagnosed thoughts are, in fact, delusional. This requires the psychiatrist to deny the reality of the patient with equally self-deluded conceit.

The categorical definition of all paranoia (even apart from schizophrenia) as mental illness presumes that the subject’s perception of threat of harm or persecution is false (delusion). However, schizophrenia and persistent “delusion” cannot be distinguished except arbitrarily, and the inconsistencies of the psychiatric establishment regarding this issue have led many intelligent people to question the legitimacy of the entire profession. When the paranoia is based on reason (i.e., when the perceived culprit actually does intend some measure of harm, and this can be proved, as in the case of the NWO), the refusal to accept the disinformation and misinformation of the controlling group is the individual’s catalyst for learning the truth. When the gap is finally bridged, one truth leads to another, and somewhere in between the lies and the fringe of theory, the truth is discovered where it has always been. Seekers should be able to distinguish between paranoia and mere anxiety as easily as disinformation and truth, but this is not always the case.

Most cases of paranoia in search of truth are blown so far out of proportion that their diagnoses are as unreasonable as the logical errors which produced them. Our collective 3D understanding of the universe is so infinitesimal that it is absurd for some humans to actually claim to understand the machinations of the brain to the point of ascribing a diagnosis of mental illness to anyone who has an intuitive fear of harm, subjection to external forces or spiritual understanding, regardless of the circumstances. In times when men have been less arrogant and in cultures with little or no interest in the quack science of psychiatry, people with paranoia and schizophrenia have often been venerated or feared. Whether Illuminists, Christians or Buddhist monks, such men have become spiritual leaders—prophets and saints of the religious traditions.

The famous Trojan princess Cassandra has bequeathed her name to a mental disorder informally called Cassandra syndrome. The reason mainstream psychiatry has not accepted this diagnosis is that it actually describes a case where the victim of paranoia is vindicated because her delusions were not false, and Cassandra has therefore become an archetypal tragic hero or martyr in posterity. No one listened to her good and true advice, so it is actually the entire culture that is insane and which perishes as a result of its own foolishness. Real cases of Cassandra syndrome are effectively damning of the idiocy of whole societies, and we are now living in an age when there is not just one, but a thousand Cassandras shouting in the streets and being ridiculed for it. Of course, these Information Age prophets do not need the oracular gift of prophecy to discern the future of the present Troy; all it takes is some common sense and a sufficient desire to effect positive change. It seems that the one thing the human race has not learned from history is that we have not learned anything from history; Cassandra syndrome will never go away simply because not all people are idiotic as individuals, but all groups of individuals are idiotic.

 

 

Disinformation

 

The fact that the internationalist conspirators have had to continually lie to accomplish their goals since the inception of their philosophies and control mechanisms is proof that theirs is a false ideology by their own standards. (It would be foolish to judge them by any other standard, as other interpretations are antithetical and lack sufficient understanding of the Luciferian means and objectives from the philosophical point of view. Most conspiracists fail to give them enough credit and are quick to judge and condemn. The exceptions are those few who, after carefully considering the validity of their own beliefs and opinions, as well as educating themselves about the subject, begin to believe that the subversion of the truth is necessary or, if they come to agree with it, morally acceptable.) The Luciferians know well that the opposing ideologies, which are various attempts at reaching the truth, are their own fabrications, and summarily refer to them as maya (‘illusions’). Misinformation exists to perpetuate the old lies, and disinformation exists to create new ones, which is to say, new illusions for the masses to put their faith in.

Misinformation can consist of anything from a newspaper headline intended to achieve a desired effect to a regular two-hour radio program which purports to expose the truth but deliberately avoids it. Mainstream media are generally responsible for all misinformation, but it is perpetuated on any level of interpersonal dialogue. Not all media are conscious of the fact that they regularly lie to their audiences, and policy control happens almost exclusively on the executive and editorial levels; most writers covering current events are simply perpetuating lies because of a wrong interpretation resulting from a controlled education and popular consensus. Writers who interpret the events correctly are blackballed and forced to pursue another career, as Weishaupt was keen to accomplish when he modernized the protocols.

Disinformation acts as a control device against the dissemination of correct interpretations which see past the misinformation that accounts for all spun “news” (as opposed to information about current events). With a variety of groups and ideologies to choose from, the creation of new ones makes it harder for an individual to pick out an accurate one from the rest. In the grand scheme of the internationalist agenda, it does not matter how absurd the ideology is, or even what is taught, so long as it finds an audience.

The only purpose of disinformation is to subvert the truth. In recent years, disinformation outlets have been unable to completely silence new media which are genuinely committed to reporting true facts by utilizing services provided by the Internet. (On the other hand, anyone can be bought, even if they do not realize that using the standard currency amounts to that, and it is the controlling group which issues the currency. Money is still the only thing that matters when it comes to the dissemination of information.) The reason for this is the equal time given to opposing ideologies and the obvious common sense nature of the truth in the face of ridiculous and xenophobic conspiracy theories used as pretexts for wars which people do not want their governments to wage in the first place.

In most New World Order countries, partisan politics have become so polarized that it has actually become popular to espouse certain truths of conspiracism in order to defame hated politicians or discredit their legitimacy. When Richard Nixon stole the presidential election of 1968, it took a huge amount of negative press to convince the American population that there was anything characteristically wrong with him. Had pictures of him sitting and smiling among his devil-worshiping friends at Bohemian Grove already surfaced, then perhaps he would not have received his party’s nomination. In contrast, when George W. Bush’s handlers stole each of his elections, the force of partisan sentiments drove hordes of angry Democrats to question and challenge their legitimacy. However, due to the Hegelian misinformation scheme in American politics, the Democrats on the street had no idea that their own candidate (in the case of Bush’s re-election) was a member of the same secret society as Bush, and that their efforts, even if successful, would have therefore been absolutely impotent from affecting a change.

In all cases where the candidate is pre-selected, whether for a position in an open society or in a secretive one, the secret of management and synthesis trumps the insufficient reasons employed by the ignorant masses to depose them. This is only the case because people are trained to believe that they think for themselves when in fact they clearly do not, even if they are capable of it, which most are not. The fact that they are so trained automatically assumes this much. To get a different perspective, one must experience a foreign culture wherein there are no stigmas and biases against the truth. In such societies (which are rare), education being followed by the conspiratorial interpretation of past and present events is the norm, not the exception.

This is especially true where the branding of a person as “unpatriotic” for acknowledging the subversion of his government usually does not conflict with Third World societal values, which are more concerned with preservation of self than with preservation of the State, the God of the Hegelian Idealists and all nationalists. In such places where the ruler is not complicit in the internationalist conspiracy, love for that ruler and love for that country are remarkably more palpable and consistent among the population. The fact that a ruler does not conform the values of his society to those of the rest of the world creates an atmosphere of genuine (as opposed to externally imposed) love for country. The same ruler’s legitimacy is not put into question, in contrast to those of the countries under the control of the NWO.

The NWO only have limited means for perpetrating their madness over such societies as this. This, combined with the age-old lust for wealth and power, is essentially the reason for the military conquests of the last few centuries. Wherever possible, the conquest is exclusively ideological and represented by a nation’s integration into the world economy. Some astute researchers of the globalization movement have pointed out that no two countries with a McDonald’s at the time of the campaigns have ever fought against each other.11

This, of course, is just a surface representation, and a more accurate depiction would be to say that no two countries with similar or identical economic situations have fought each other since the birth of the NWO, because a house divided against itself cannot stand. Without exception, the intended enemy is always created out of a country with a poorer (less indebted, less inflated) economy by a country with a wealthier economy, and after the conflict, the necessary changes are made to make the countries relatively equal through the creation of the central banks controlled directly by the NWO puppeteers. The misinformation and disinformation serve to make the masses believe there was some other reason for the conflict, and for the creation of new ones which normally consist of securing the new ideologies against conservative sentiment. The false ideologies are therefore literally backed by the strong arm of the world’s superior militaries and economies.

 

 

 

 


 


2
The Morgenthau Group’s influence is visibly demonstrated through the Club of Rome, which it created. For more information about the Carlyle Group, see chapter 2.

3 “Henry Ford Quotes,” Brainyquote, http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/h/henry_ford.html.

4 “Bilderbergs,” http://www.4rie.com/rie%203.html.

5 Frater Choronzon, “The History and Development of Secret Societies in the Western Tradition,” 22 Oct 1990, http://freespace.virgin.net/ecliptica.ww/book/secsoc.htm (expired).

This paper can now be found at www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Secret_Societies.htm. The quote is only attributed to Socrates. This assertion appears to have made its way into the public domain through the fictional Illuminatus! Trilogy by Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea. Others have asserted that it originally comes from Plato.

6 “Socrates,” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates.

7 I have enough respect for Tsarion’s intelligence and diligence to not really think he belongs in a list with the others, but in my opinion he is too obsessed with the New Age religion of the Illuminists to give an objective or practical assessment of the international conspiracy. Maxwell is listed because of his influence. As far as I am concerned, he is about as credible as Zechariah Sitchin, and he should not be writing or speaking to audiences at all.

8 This is not intended to discredit or defame Jones, but rather to claim that regardless of his intentions, his syndicated program has served to inflame conspiracists led by another fabricated ideology. See chapter 5. Jones’ fault is that he is too passionate and is going to find himself in trouble sooner or later. If he were to have his way, I would imagine that an armed conflict (civil war) would soon take place between many Americans and their government, which is obviously what the Illuminati have intended all along with Pike’s “formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil,” against which “the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization.” As far as I’m concerned, this battle is already lost; if Jones is not actually a shill, as Cooper was apt to point out, then he (like the vast majority of conspiracists) is at least a fool for wanting to fight it. The only worthwhile thing that a conspiracist can do, in my opinion, is help to set the record straight so that the human race does not make the same mistakes again. Cassandras are made from conspiracists who cannot accept that we are all individually responsible not only for ourselves, but for the rest of humanity as well. This is essentially a control issue, and it is “the truth” which will ultimately set us free.

9 “Paranoia,” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/paranoia.

10 “Paranoia,” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia.

11 Thomas L. Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization, Anchor Books, New York, 2000, p. ix.