I have a concept which I want to share for discussion
I'll call it the Pareto rule of repression, the idea that a certain threshold percentage of opinion must be in place before a repressive policy can be carried out and if that threshold is not met, the policy will be a failure.
For the purposes of explanation. I'll use 90% as an example of this threshold and demnstrate why the MSM and the narrative is so important
I'll also use vaxxed versus unvaxxed, although other differences could be used such as race, religion, or politics, support for foreign intervention etc.
The cabal as hoping to use the vax in order to lockdown society, remove dissenters and institute their "new normal" and they damn near succeeded, but they didn't..
Why?
In my opinion, they had camps built for vax refusers and they would have murdered us in the camps and blamed covid which would further that narrative.
I think the cabal did not reach the threshold of support they required, let's call it 90% where they could retain a functioning society while removing the unvaxxed. There were just too many of us and society would have collapsed without us, both politically and technologically. They need the higher fraction of society to carry out the repression on the lower fraction and if the ratio isn't high enough, the higher fraction do not do it.
The story Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift has a non emotive example of a societal rift where people are divided over which way up to eat their boiled eggs and they will go to war over it. My contention is that the Lilliput MSM and shadow government would need a threshold of let's say 90% of broad end egg eaters in a mixed society before they would repress the pointy enders and 75% just wouldn't cut it, the minions would not comply.
I think that we escaped vax tyranny and genocide because the unvaxxed had a high enough percentage that the cabal plan was just not possible and that white hat, anons and generally awake people tipped the balance.
It's all about the percentage, the MSM, manufacturing consent and narrative.
An awake population cannot be oppressed and would not oppress.
Another point that interests me is the vast difference between our viewpoint and their viewpoint. They actually made their plans hoping to avoid open war and still getting themselves from point A to point B by means of propaganda and various deceptions. They lied to themselves that they could remain anonymous and "safe" while they carried all of this out. Whereas we look at their point A and point B and ONLY see that it would take open war for them to get there. "Open war is upon you whether you would have it or not!" ~ Aragorn.
You mean they didn't think they would trigger a significant reaction but we think they always would? Not sure I agree with the second point.
I always like a LOTR quote because I see the story as such an allegory for the plan.
Just stumbled across this. Not sure how Tolkein's involvement in Signals Intelligence has escaped my notice. https://rumble.com/v15o085-episode-13-the-lord-of-the-rings-and-the-all-seeing-eye..html
Interesting. Thanks.
I can see where that would come into the story.
I am a HUGE LOTRs fan. So much deep goodness in those tales. I see their villians leaning over their tables of toy soldiers planning and scheming how to get to where they want to get without so much as ruffling their own feathers or being late to dinner whereas one of us takes one look at their battlefield and says "that ain't happening!"