Warfare Transformed: The Escalation of Ideological Subversion and the Emergence of Fifth-Generation Warfare in the Digital Epoch
THE GREAT BRAINWASHING
Who was Yuri Bezmenov?
Yuri Bezmenov, also known by the alias, Tomas David Schuman, was a former KGB agent who defected to the West. Born in 1939 in the Soviet Union, Bezmenov was educated in the fields of Indian culture and language. His KGB career began with a focus on propaganda and disinformation, with his work involving the spreading of Soviet influence in India through cultural and informational means.
After becoming disillusioned with the KGB and the Soviet system, Bezmenov defected to the West in 1970. He escaped to Greece and eventually settled in Canada, where he began speaking out against the Soviet Union and its methods of subversion. Bezmenov is best known for his lectures and interviews in which he detailed the tactics used by the KGB for the ideological subversion, demoralization, and destabilization of target societies. According to Bezmenov, this process aimed to weaken and destabilize nations from within, making them susceptible to Soviet influence or control without the need for direct military action.
His work has been cited by various anti-communist and conservative thinkers and has gained renewed attention in recent years through social media and online video platforms, where his interviews and lectures are often referenced in discussions about political and cultural subversion. Bezmenov's insights into psychological warfare and the tactics of ideological subversion remain topics of interest and debate.
Ideological Subversion:
"Ideological Subversion" is a concept often associated with the methods used by intelligence and propaganda agencies, such as the KGB during the Cold War, to weaken and destabilize enemy countries from within by undermining their cultural values, moral norms, and societal cohesion.
The goal of ideological subversion is not immediate political overthrow but rather a long-term process aimed at changing the population's collective understanding of reality, thereby rendering a society incapable of defending its core beliefs and interests.
Yuri Bezmenov outlined this process in several stages:
Demoralization: This initial phase involves the gradual undermining of a nation's cultural values, historical narratives, and education systems. It is achieved through the infiltration of educational institutions, the manipulation of media and cultural narratives, and the promotion of ideologies that conflict with the nation's traditions and principles. The demoralization process is lengthy, often taking a generation to complete, as the goal is to alter the perceptions and beliefs of an entire population.
Yuri Bezmenov is famously quoted for his insights on the process of demoralization, particularly as it relates to ideological subversion. One of his most notable quotes on the subject is:
"The process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To rid society of these people, you need another 20 or 15 years to educate a new generation of patriotically minded and common sense people who would be acting in favor and in the interests of United States society."
This quote highlights Bezmenov's view on the depth and permanence of demoralization once it has taken root within a society. According to him, the process is so thorough that reversing it would require a generational shift in education and values. He emphasized the long-term nature of demoralization, suggesting that it can't be quickly undone and requires sustained, concerted efforts to counteract. This perspective underlines the strategic, far-reaching approach that adversaries might use to weaken a nation from within, focusing on altering the foundational beliefs and attitudes of its population over an extended period.
Destabilization: After demoralization, the next stage focuses on destabilizing the nation's political and economic systems. This involves promoting social unrest, encouraging divisive political movements, and exacerbating economic problems. The aim is to create a climate of uncertainty and conflict, making governance more difficult and weakening the country's social fabric.
Yuri Bezmenov discussed the concept of destabilization extensively, describing it as the second stage in the process of ideological subversion. While he provided numerous insights into how this process works, one quote that encapsulates his view on destabilization is not as directly quoted as his remarks on demoralization. However, Bezmenov explained destabilization as follows:
"Destabilization of the nation refers to the process where the aims of the subversion, such as economy, foreign relations, and defense systems, are put into motion. It takes only 2 to 5 years to destabilize a nation. The next stage is crisis. It may take only up to six weeks to bring a country to the verge of crisis."
This explanation reflects Bezmenov's perspective that destabilization is a relatively quicker phase compared to demoralization. It targets the essential structures of society, including its economic stability, political relationships, and defense capabilities. By undermining these areas, the society becomes vulnerable to external manipulation and internal collapse, setting the stage for a crisis that can lead to significant changes in power or policy. Bezmenov's analysis suggests that destabilization is a critical phase where the effects of ideological subversion become more visible and impactful, leading to a state of turmoil and uncertainty.
Crisis: This stage involves precipitating a crisis that leads to a significant disruption of society. Such crises can take various forms, including economic collapses, political upheavals, or social conflicts. The chaos and instability provide an opportunity for a change in power or the implementation of radical policies that would have been impossible under normal circumstances.
Yuri Bezmenov spoke about the crisis stage as a pivotal moment in the process of ideological subversion, although direct quotes specifically addressing the crisis stage are less commonly cited than his discussions on demoralization and destabilization. In the context of his overall narrative, the crisis phase is described as a short but critical period where the conflicts and problems that have been building during the demoralization and destabilization stages come to a head, leading to significant societal, political, or economic upheavals.
Bezmenov outlined that during the crisis stage, a society is forced to deal with a situation that has become so problematic and untenable that it demands immediate resolution. This could manifest in various forms, such as political coups, significant civil unrest, economic downturns, or other national emergencies. The crisis is engineered to be so severe that it justifies drastic measures, potentially including the suspension of normal civil liberties, the imposition of martial law, or the complete overhaul of the government structure.
While Bezmenov did not provide a succinct quote about the crisis stage akin to his remarks on demoralization and destabilization, his lectures imply that the crisis is a turning point where the subverter can capitalize on the chaos to implement a new system of governance or influence. The crisis is meant to break the will of the population to resist because of the extreme challenges they face, thereby making it easier to steer the society towards the goals of the subversion campaign.
Normalization: The final stage is characterized by the establishment of a new status quo that aligns with the subverter's goals. After the crisis, measures are taken to normalize the situation, often involving the installation of a government or policies that are amenable to the subverter's interests. At this point, the subverted society is said to be incapable of returning to its original values and beliefs, having been fundamentally transformed.
Yuri Bezmenov did discuss the concept of "normalization" as the final stage in the process of ideological subversion. Bezmenov's discussions on normalization often emphasized how, after a period of chaos and crisis, the changes that occur can be presented as beneficial or necessary for the recovery and future stability of the society. This could involve the consolidation of power in the hands of a new leadership, the implementation of policies that significantly alter the country's direction, or the adoption of ideologies that were previously foreign or marginal.
While Bezmenov's lectures and interviews provided a comprehensive overview of the ideological subversion process, the essence of his commentary on normalization is the portrayal of this phase as the culminating point where the subverted society accepts the new reality as the standard, thereby completing the subverter's goals of fundamentally changing the society from within.
Ideological subversion is a form of psychological warfare that targets the foundational aspects of a society's identity and coherence. It is distinct from traditional espionage or military confrontation, as it seeks to achieve its objectives through subtle, more insidious means.
Targeted Societies of Ideological Subversion:
Yuri Bezmenov discussed targeted societies, particularly focusing on his experiences and observations related to the operations and goals of the KGB in its efforts to subvert and destabilize countries during the Cold War. He frequently referenced the United States and other Western democracies as primary targets for Soviet subversion tactics. Bezmenov highlighted various methods used to influence these societies, including the infiltration of educational institutions, manipulation of media, and the promotion of divisive social movements.
One of Bezmenov's key assertions was that the Soviet Union and its intelligence agencies were not just focused on traditional espionage but were deeply involved in ideological warfare aimed at undermining the moral and social fabric of their adversaries. He spoke about the long-term strategy of demoralization, which was designed to weaken a society's commitment to its own values and beliefs, making it more vulnerable to external manipulation and control.
Bezmenov's discussions often revolved around the effectiveness of these subversion strategies in eroding the foundations of Western democracies from within, without the need for direct military confrontation. He argued that by promoting ideological confusion, moral relativism, and a lack of commitment to foundational principles, targeted societies could be brought to a point where they were incapable of effectively opposing Soviet aims.
Bezmenov’s interviews and lectures are filled with analyses of how these subversion tactics were being applied, particularly in the United States, during the period of his public speaking in the 1980s. He emphasized that the ultimate goal was not just to influence foreign policy or achieve specific political objectives but to fundamentally change the character and direction of targeted societies.
What is 5th Generation Warfare?
Fifth-generation warfare (5GW) represents a concept in military strategy that involves a highly decentralized approach and often includes the use of non-traditional forces and tactics. Unlike previous generations of warfare, which ranged from massed national armies engaging in set-piece battles (first-generation) to the focus on maneuver and indirect approaches (fourth-generation), fifth-generation warfare is characterized by its emphasis on information, subversion, and operations conducted by a network of small, often non-state groups or individuals. The goal is to achieve strategic objectives without engaging in open, conventional military conflict.
To better understand Fifth-Generation Warfare, this a very brief summary of the prior generations of warfare. Fifth-generation warfare (5GW) reflects a strategic evolution emphasizing stealth, cunning, and network-based tactics over direct military confrontation. Its predecessors include the first-generation warfare, characterized by linear formations and close-range combat; the second generation, marked by the advent of indirect fire capabilities; the third generation, known for maneuver warfare, operational art, and the combined arms approach; and the fourth generation, which shifted focus towards asymmetric warfare, insurgency, and psychological operations aimed at undermining an opponent's morale and will to fight. Each generation represents a response to the changing nature of conflict, driven by technological advancements, socio-political transformations, and the strategic imperatives of the times.
Key Characteristics of 5GW include:
Stealth and Secrecy: Operations are highly clandestine, making it difficult for opponents to identify the attackers or even recognize that they are under attack. This could involve cyber attacks, disinformation campaigns, or the use of proxy forces.
Decentralization: The actors in 5GW are often decentralized networks without a clear hierarchical command structure. This makes it hard to counter them through traditional military means, as there is no clear target to strike.
Use of Technology: 5GW heavily relies on emerging technologies such as cyber capabilities, drones, and social media to spread propaganda, conduct surveillance, and carry out attacks indirectly.
Psychological Warfare and Information Operations: Influencing the perceptions and attitudes of populations and decision-makers becomes a primary objective, often more important than physical confrontation.
Blurring of War and Peace: In 5GW, the lines between a state of war and peace are blurred. Actions are taken in peacetime that could be considered acts of war, but without a formal declaration of hostilities.
Non-Traditional Combatants: 5GW does not rely solely on state actors or traditional military forces. Instead, it may involve civilians, hackers, private corporations, or international non-governmental organizations as key players in the conflict.
Fifth-generation warfare represents a shift towards more asymmetric, unconventional conflict methods where the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, battlefield and non-battlefield, is increasingly ambiguous. The complexity and indirect nature of 5GW make it a challenging environment for states accustomed to conventional warfare paradigms, requiring adaptive strategies and new forms of defense and security measures.
The roles of Anonymity and Ambiguity in 5GW:
Anonymity and Ambiguity are central elements of fifth-generation warfare (5GW), playing crucial roles in how conflicts are waged and perceived in this highly unconventional and decentralized approach to warfare. These elements contribute to the effectiveness of 5GW strategies in several key ways:
Anonymity
Deniability: Anonymity allows actors to conduct operations without being directly linked to them, providing plausible deniability. This makes it difficult for opponents or the international community to attribute actions to any particular state or group, complicating responses and retaliations.
Protection of Combatants: By operating anonymously, individuals and groups can avoid direct retaliation, sanctions, or legal repercussions. This protection extends to both physical safety and cybersecurity measures, allowing combatants to operate without fear of immediate reprisal.
Psychological Impact: The inability to identify the attacker can cause confusion and fear among the target population and decision-makers. This uncertainty can be more paralyzing than the threat of a known adversary, as it complicates defense strategies and crisis management.
Ambiguity
Strategic Uncertainty: Ambiguity in the motives, capabilities, and identities of attackers leaves targeted individuals, organizations, and nations in a state of strategic uncertainty. This makes it challenging to formulate effective countermeasures, defense policies, or diplomatic responses.
Blurring Legal and Ethical Lines: Ambiguity complicates the application of international law, including laws of armed conflict and rules of engagement. When it's unclear whether actions constitute acts of war, terrorism, or criminal activity, responding within legal and ethical frameworks becomes problematic.
Flexible Tactics: The ambiguous nature of 5GW allows for a wide range of tactics, from cyberattacks to disinformation campaigns, without clear links to warfare. This flexibility enables 5GW actors to adapt quickly to changing situations and exploit vulnerabilities in ways that traditional military forces cannot.
Both anonymity and ambiguity serve to enhance the asymmetry of 5GW, making it a potent strategy for non-state actors, small groups, or even individuals to exert influence, cause disruption, or achieve strategic objectives against much larger and conventionally powerful adversaries. These elements fundamentally challenge traditional notions of warfare, security, and international relations, requiring innovative approaches to defense, intelligence, and policy.
The correlation between Yuri Bezmenovs "Ideological Subversion" and “5th Generation Warfare”:
The concepts of Yuri Bezmenov's Ideological Subversion and Fifth-generation warfare (5GW) are interconnected, sharing several strategic principles and objectives, particularly in their focus on non-traditional, indirect methods to undermine and destabilize adversaries. While Bezmenov's ideological subversion primarily emphasizes the manipulation of societal values and perceptions to weaken an enemy from within, 5GW expands upon these ideas with the added dimensions of technological warfare, anonymity, and the use of decentralized networks. Despite these differences, both approaches aim to achieve strategic objectives without resorting to conventional military confrontation. Here's how they correlate:
Psychological and Information Warfare:
Bezmenov's Ideological Subversion: Targets the psychological fabric of a society, aiming to change the population's collective understanding of reality, thereby demoralizing and destabilizing from within. It relies heavily on information manipulation, educational infiltration, and media control to alter perceptions and values.
5GW: Utilizes advanced information technology to conduct cyber operations, disinformation campaigns, and influence operations at a global scale. The aim is to sow confusion, distrust, and fear, leveraging the anonymity and reach of the internet to influence perceptions and decisions covertly.
Use of Non-Traditional Actors
Bezmenov's Approach: Highlighted the role of non-state actors, such as intellectuals, academics, and media professionals, in spreading subversive ideologies without apparent ties to a foreign adversary.
5GW: Emphasizes the role of a diverse array of actors, social media influencers, podcasters, radio personalities, X (Formerly Twitter) Space Host/CoHost, including hackers, private corporations, NGOs, and even unwitting civilians, in conducting operations. This decentralization and variety of actors blur the lines between state and non-state warfare, complicating attribution and response.
Strategic Goals Without Direct Confrontation
Ideological Subversion: Seeks to weaken a nation's resolve and coherence, making it vulnerable to influence or control without the need for military invasion or overt political coercion.
5GW: Aims to achieve strategic objectives (e.g., political destabilization, economic disruption) through indirect means, exploiting vulnerabilities in information systems, societal divisions, and critical infrastructure with minimal physical engagement.
Long-Term Orientation
Bezmenov's Model: Describes a multi-stage process that unfolds over generations, emphasizing the slow, cumulative effect of subversive activities on a society's core values and institutions.
5GW: While potentially quicker in achieving specific tactical objectives due to technological acceleration, it similarly focuses on long-term strategic outcomes, employing a persistent, evolving approach to conflict that adapts over time and can persist across generations.
Blurring of War and Peace
Ideological Subversion and 5GW: Both strategies blur the traditional boundaries between a state of war and peace. In Bezmenov's model, societies are undermined without recognizing they are targets of warfare. In 5GW, the ambiguity and anonymity of actions make it difficult to ascertain when acts of war (e.g., cyberattacks, economic sabotage) are occurring, as they are often conducted outside the framework of declared hostilities.
In summary, Yuri Bezmenov's concept of ideological subversion and the principles of fifth-generation warfare are correlated in their strategic emphasis on indirect, non-traditional methods of conflict that prioritize psychological, informational, and societal manipulation over kinetic military action. Both approaches demonstrate a shift in modern conflict towards battlespace domains where perceptions, beliefs, and social cohesion are the primary targets, aiming to subvert and destabilize adversaries from within without clear lines of confrontation.
MainStream Media is critically important to the success Ideological Subversion and 5GW in the United States of America:
The role of mainstream media in the United States is critically important to the concepts of ideological subversion and fifth-generation warfare (5GW), given its significant influence on public opinion, societal norms, and political discourse. Media outlets have the power to shape narratives, prioritize certain topics over others, and frame issues in a way that can align with or against particular ideological perspectives. This capacity makes the media a key battleground for both ideological subversion and 5GW operations, where control over the narrative can lead to profound effects on national cohesion, policy direction, and public sentiment.
Ideological Subversion and MainStream Media:
In the context of ideological subversion, mainstream media can play a pivotal role in several ways:
Shaping Public Perception: Media outlets influence how the public perceives domestic and international events, including the portrayal of political ideologies, social movements, and government policies. By emphasizing certain narratives over others, the media can subtly shift public opinion in ways that either support or undermine societal values and national interests.
Demoralization: As described by Yuri Bezmenov, demoralization is a critical phase of ideological subversion, where the goal is to erode trust in national institutions and values. Mainstream media, through selective reporting or biased coverage, can contribute to this demoralization by amplifying societal divisions, highlighting failures without context, or undermining the legitimacy of democratic processes.
Normalization of Alternative Ideologies: Media platforms can introduce and normalize ideologies that are counter to traditional American values, gradually shifting the Overton window—what is considered acceptable public discourse. This can include presenting radical ideas as mainstream or marginalizing moderate and conservative viewpoints, thereby reshaping the ideological landscape of society.
5GW and MainStream Media:
In the realm of 5GW, where warfare extends beyond the physical battlefield to encompass the information and cyber domains, mainstream media's impact is multifaceted:
Dissemination of Disinformation: Media outlets can be witting or unwitting participants in the spread of disinformation, whether by foreign state actors or non-state entities engaged in 5GW operations. The rapid news cycle and the competition for clicks and views can lead to insufficient vetting of sources, making the media a vector for information operations designed to mislead, polarize, or destabilize.
Amplification of Social Divisions: By focusing on contentious issues in a manner that emphasizes conflict and division, the media can exacerbate social tensions. This plays into the hands of 5GW strategists who aim to destabilize society from within by exploiting existing fractures, such as racial, economic, or political divides.
Cyber Operations and Information Warfare: Media platforms can also be direct targets of cyber operations, with hacks, leaks, and manipulated content being used to influence public opinion or discredit entities. The strategic leaking of information to media outlets is a tactic in 5GW that relies on the media's reach and credibility to achieve specific operational goals.
Anonymity and Ambiguity: The complexities of the information environment, including the role of social media and the proliferation of news sources, add layers of anonymity and ambiguity. These factors complicate the public's ability to discern truth from manipulation, a state of affairs that 5GW actors exploit to sow confusion and distrust.
In conclusion, mainstream media in the United States is a critical component in the strategies of both Ideological Subversion and 5GW, given its profound influence on public opinion and societal norms. The ability to control or influence media narratives offers a powerful tool for shaping the ideological and political landscape of the country, making media a key arena for contemporary forms of conflict and competition. The interplay between media practices, public perception, and strategic information operations underscores the complex challenges facing democratic societies in preserving the integrity of their informational ecosystems.
Smith-Mundt Modernization Act:
Now understanding, Ideological Subversion and Fifth Generation Warfare, the analysis of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act is imperative. The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act raises several concerns regarding the potential for government-produced content to influence domestic opinion under the guise of transparency and global information sharing.
To begin with, the original Smith-Mundt Act was wisely instituted to protect U.S. citizens from being subjected to government propaganda — a safeguard that recognizes the fundamental importance of a clear boundary between state-sponsored content intended for foreign audiences and the information consumed by the American public. This distinction is crucial for maintaining a free and independent press, which is a cornerstone of American democracy.
The Obama era modernization act, while ostensibly aimed at adapting to the realities of the digital age and the global flow of information, effectively dilutes these protections. By allowing materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (now the U.S. Agency for Global Media) to be available within the United States, it opens the door, intentionally or not, to the potential use of government-produced content to shape domestic public opinion. This is particularly troubling in an era where the lines between information, influence, and propaganda are increasingly blurred in addition to U.S Government overreach into big tech social media to censor, de-platform, remove and hide content under the labels of mis-information, dis-information or sometimes with no explanation.
While the act was presented as an effort to enhance transparency and ensure that American taxpayers have access to the content their money supports internationally, this rationale overlooks the fundamental issue at stake: the potential for misuse of government resources to conduct domestic influence operations. The trust placed in government agencies to refrain from exploiting this access to influence American citizens is naive given the recent revelations of the Twitter Files and current court case of “Missouri v Biden (Murthy v. Missouri).” History and human nature suggest that powers granted are often powers used, and not always with the public's best interests at heart.
Critics of the modernization act, including many conservatives, argue that the act lacks sufficient safeguards to prevent the misuse of government-produced media for domestic propaganda purposes. The claim that the legislation does not change the mandate of involved agencies is of little comfort when the potential for abuse exists. This is not merely a hypothetical concern; in the context of increasing political polarization and distrust in media, the ability of the government to disseminate content originally intended for foreign audiences to Americans could further undermine public trust in both the government and the media if any trust is left.
The ongoing debate around the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act reflects deeper concerns about government transparency, the integrity of the information ecosystem, and the preservation of individual liberties against state overreach. For many American conservatives, the act is seen as a step away from the principles of limited government and individual freedom, towards a scenario where the state has greater power to influence, if not directly control, the flow of information within its own borders.
In summary the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act is a contentious piece of legislation that, despite its intentions, potentially compromises the foundational American value of a free and independent press. It raises immediate and legitimate concerns about the balance between transparency and the risk of domestic propaganda, highlighting the need for vigilance and robust safeguards to protect the integrity of public discourse in the United States.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the exploration of Yuri Bezmenov's Ideological Subversion, Fifth-generation warfare (5GW), Smith-Mundt Modernization Act and the critical role of mainstream media within these contexts, reveals a nuanced landscape of contemporary conflict and societal manipulation that transcends traditional military engagements. This analysis underscores the sophistication and depth of strategies employed to destabilize and influence societies, highlighting the seamless integration of psychological operations, technological advancements, and media dynamics in shaping the geopolitical and social order.
The concept of ideological subversion, as articulated by Bezmenov, delineates a methodical process aimed at eroding the foundational values and beliefs of a target society. By embedding itself within the cultural and informational infrastructures, this strategy seeks not just to challenge but to replace the ideological underpinnings of a nation, rendering it vulnerable to external influence and control. The insidious nature of this approach lies in its long-term orientation and its exploitation of the target society's internal contradictions.
Fifth-generation warfare further expands the arsenal of non-traditional conflict, emphasizing the role of anonymity, ambiguity, and decentralized networks. It represents an evolution in warfare that leverages the digital landscape to conduct operations that blur the lines between war and peace, combatants and non-combatants. The utilization of cyber tactics, disinformation, and the strategic manipulation of information flows illustrates a shift towards battlespaces where cognitive and informational dominance are paramount.
The mainstream media's influence and arguably alternative media rise in the United States emerges as both a vector and arena for these strategies, given its profound impact on public perception and societal norms. The media's capacity to shape narratives, amplify divisions, and serve as a conduit for disinformation places it at the heart of efforts to manipulate societal outcomes. This dual role of the media, as both target and tool of ideological subversion and 5GW, underscores the challenges facing democratic societies in maintaining the integrity of their informational ecosystems and public discourse.
This comprehensive examination of ideological subversion, 5GW, and media dynamics highlights the imperative for robust defenses against these forms of manipulation. It calls for a multi-faceted approach that includes enhancing media literacy, independent research at the individual and grassroots level, reinforcing true democratic institutions, and fostering a resilient civic society capable of withstanding the corrosive effects of these strategies. As these non-traditional forms of conflict continue to evolve, understanding their mechanisms and implications is crucial for developing effective countermeasures. The safeguarding of our Republic and societal cohesion against such insidious threats necessitates a concerted effort from governments, civil society, and individuals alike, emphasizing the critical importance of vigilance, education, and collective resilience in the face of these modern challenges.
Reflecting on the past two decades through the lens of United States history, one could argue, in the vein of Bezmenov's theories, that we've potentially entered the 'Crisis' stage. With scenarios like a second pandemic, escalating border tensions/inavsion, the looming threat of World War III, and U.S financial instability shaking our foundations, it's a pivotal time that begs the question: How ready are we?
Alpha, An excellent well researched and articulated post. Everyone needs to read and understand this information. Once you understand the information you presented, it exposes the accelleration Trump created to expose the intended agenda against We The People. The treason committed by various agemcies and administrations that are for the most part unconstitutional in their creation. We have entered the digital 1776 era!
Most people have an inherent reaction to fight the existing creations in an attempt to eliminate the existing. R. Buckminster Fuller had a much better way to deal with these types of conflict. Ignore the existing and build a better system that makes the old system obsolete! While many may think it nieve to ignor the existing. We need to remember the laws of nature and the Laws of Nature's God. Energy flows where focus goes!! Weather that is an individual or a country! Chaos is creation and we need to become comfortable within the chaos, to move through it with confidence instead of fear.
If you understand your enemy as the Art of War describes, our enemies are based in fear! When you learn to face your fears, they melt away proving the phrase "The only thing you have to fear is fear itself." Our enemy built it's foundation of the sands of fear. Embrace the Love, Love conquers fear! When you walk your day in Love you gain a confidence and fear is eliminated by creation! Love is creation and it creates within chaos. When we gain this internal knowledge we walk our day in the confidence of Love. Not the fleeting desperation of fear.
Excellent post, I can't wait for part 2.... Peace...
Great post Alpha, this very well written and informative article. It is thanks to Obama Revising The Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 in 2012 that has us in the mess we are currently fighting our way out of, the Uniparty removed all the safety guardrails and protections it provided to the American people. They can now legally "Program" American citizens by use of propaganda and Opinion to run a "Color Revolution" on the American people.