From my perspective there are two possibilities (binary). Either we live in an organic world, or we do not.
I suppose it's possible that there is a partially organic world, but that suggests that there is a partially hidden world of control. And if there is a partially hidden control system, why would it's extent ever stop? It's like a metastatic cancer you don't know about. Why would it stop? At some point such a hidden mechanism would have to have grown from smaller to bigger, but at some point it would have to have completed itself to "total control." Thus, the most likely case is either we live in a completely organic world ("cancer free"), or it has been completely controlled for a long time (we are already dead and we just don't know it, because all information is managed and fed to us, keeping the illusion complete). The only third option is that we are currently in the transition zone, but that would be the least likely case by far, and the evidence STRONGLY suggests that the "fully controlled world" is the one we live in; think 1984.
(Coincidentally, the author of 1984 was an agent of (paid for and controlled by) the CIA/DOD. His false premise was that a "fully controlled world" would be seen by it's completeness (One Voice) if only a person would look. What he didn't imagine (or didn't write about) were the mechanisms of how controlled opposition works (One Voice, multiple controlled mouths in "opposition"), which is, coincidentally, how the CIA operates by their own account.).
Indeed, I've written a book on the topic. It's not statements of "what I think," but a list of evidence that shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that our world is completely controlled on every possible level (EVERYTHING is controlled opposition).
I have theorized along similar lines. the duality also manifests in the Good/Evil paradigm. I believe the Asian yin/yang paradigm also touches upon this. so that at it's fundament, duality is even expressed in our genetic make-up. So for example, just as we cannot have man without woman, we cannot have good without evil - life is suffering, and the evil should teach us to be good - if you get what I mean. This is why the Utopia dreamers are indulging a fantasy, based on a distorted, siloed versions of heaven - it has been extrapolated to mean that heaven, or Utopia, is the only destination (provided you adopt their brand of politics, of course). In Heaven, nobody suffers. Problem is: Hell was always part of the original picture. By pretending that Hell cannot be, the Utopia dreamers are playing at being God, and even God did not manage to remove Lucifer completely (or maybe he never intended to in the first place).
Similarly, one would think that we can't have control without controlled opposition (even as it is an intelligence construct), as the controllers try to control the organic decentralized life via such an artificial mechanism. the problem with this flawed theory is that he organic-ness happens just outside the controller's grasp. [Heeeheee]. The issue here is that the population is awakening to the ruse. Pepes can just about smell the glowing feds these days, when they come online with their narratives. You can gauge the ineffectiveness of the ruse by the speed at which the mocking starts in the comment sections, and the fact that the comment section is controlled in its own right. Censorship is the globalist's last stand.
The true, organic opposition appears subtler, as it is drowned out by the controlled opposition in a virtual world, simply because the latter is louder. However, organic opposition is far more ancient and stronger, as is based on relationships, and what is currently termed networking. You see, the controlled opposition is one-dimensional. It has only one point of control - e.g. Reuters.
For an example of how relationships are the difference: witness how fast FB community groups will rally around the 'right' thing, or how groups can have activists who are mocked openly, or that some arsehole starts doxxing, and then swiftly gets banned.
My point is, the pepes are standing up. As an example of organic resistance, my son recently stopped a bullying session on facebook (would you have?), after he found out that the lady who was being dogpiled (she was a contestant in a beauty pageant) did it for her family - and her father was dying from cancer, so her claim to fame meant a lot to them - pictures of her parents crying because she got into the finals. He flagged the posts which were literally saying that she was ugly (she was not, one of his retaliatory comments was: She is prettier than your wife) and got the ugly behaviour removed, and then he sent the girl a supportive message. Within minutes the ugliness was righted. It was a small step for man and a leap for mankind. Note that he is not a moderator or anything, just a member of the public. So you see, one can turn their censorship into a weapon to fight back. Just make a decent, moral case, and the fat comtollers can't disagree. If FB don't react properly, they will face consequences - just like Noblesse Oblige was a thing. And so, we circle back to the medieval Good/Evil paradigm.
Ridiculous false dichotomy.
You've presented a claim, but it's a claim without support. It's nothing but a meaningless statement without elaboration.
I think it is fairly obvious there are more than only the two possibilities as you have presented them.
Maybe. But maybe not.
From my perspective there are two possibilities (binary). Either we live in an organic world, or we do not.
I suppose it's possible that there is a partially organic world, but that suggests that there is a partially hidden world of control. And if there is a partially hidden control system, why would it's extent ever stop? It's like a metastatic cancer you don't know about. Why would it stop? At some point such a hidden mechanism would have to have grown from smaller to bigger, but at some point it would have to have completed itself to "total control." Thus, the most likely case is either we live in a completely organic world ("cancer free"), or it has been completely controlled for a long time (we are already dead and we just don't know it, because all information is managed and fed to us, keeping the illusion complete). The only third option is that we are currently in the transition zone, but that would be the least likely case by far, and the evidence STRONGLY suggests that the "fully controlled world" is the one we live in; think 1984.
(Coincidentally, the author of 1984 was an agent of (paid for and controlled by) the CIA/DOD. His false premise was that a "fully controlled world" would be seen by it's completeness (One Voice) if only a person would look. What he didn't imagine (or didn't write about) were the mechanisms of how controlled opposition works (One Voice, multiple controlled mouths in "opposition"), which is, coincidentally, how the CIA operates by their own account.).
Indeed, I've written a book on the topic. It's not statements of "what I think," but a list of evidence that shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that our world is completely controlled on every possible level (EVERYTHING is controlled opposition).
The love between my child and I is engineered by those in control? They do a good job and I'll keep subscribing.
I have theorized along similar lines. the duality also manifests in the Good/Evil paradigm. I believe the Asian yin/yang paradigm also touches upon this. so that at it's fundament, duality is even expressed in our genetic make-up. So for example, just as we cannot have man without woman, we cannot have good without evil - life is suffering, and the evil should teach us to be good - if you get what I mean. This is why the Utopia dreamers are indulging a fantasy, based on a distorted, siloed versions of heaven - it has been extrapolated to mean that heaven, or Utopia, is the only destination (provided you adopt their brand of politics, of course). In Heaven, nobody suffers. Problem is: Hell was always part of the original picture. By pretending that Hell cannot be, the Utopia dreamers are playing at being God, and even God did not manage to remove Lucifer completely (or maybe he never intended to in the first place).
Similarly, one would think that we can't have control without controlled opposition (even as it is an intelligence construct), as the controllers try to control the organic decentralized life via such an artificial mechanism. the problem with this flawed theory is that he organic-ness happens just outside the controller's grasp. [Heeeheee]. The issue here is that the population is awakening to the ruse. Pepes can just about smell the glowing feds these days, when they come online with their narratives. You can gauge the ineffectiveness of the ruse by the speed at which the mocking starts in the comment sections, and the fact that the comment section is controlled in its own right. Censorship is the globalist's last stand.
The true, organic opposition appears subtler, as it is drowned out by the controlled opposition in a virtual world, simply because the latter is louder. However, organic opposition is far more ancient and stronger, as is based on relationships, and what is currently termed networking. You see, the controlled opposition is one-dimensional. It has only one point of control - e.g. Reuters.
For an example of how relationships are the difference: witness how fast FB community groups will rally around the 'right' thing, or how groups can have activists who are mocked openly, or that some arsehole starts doxxing, and then swiftly gets banned.
My point is, the pepes are standing up. As an example of organic resistance, my son recently stopped a bullying session on facebook (would you have?), after he found out that the lady who was being dogpiled (she was a contestant in a beauty pageant) did it for her family - and her father was dying from cancer, so her claim to fame meant a lot to them - pictures of her parents crying because she got into the finals. He flagged the posts which were literally saying that she was ugly (she was not, one of his retaliatory comments was: She is prettier than your wife) and got the ugly behaviour removed, and then he sent the girl a supportive message. Within minutes the ugliness was righted. It was a small step for man and a leap for mankind. Note that he is not a moderator or anything, just a member of the public. So you see, one can turn their censorship into a weapon to fight back. Just make a decent, moral case, and the fat comtollers can't disagree. If FB don't react properly, they will face consequences - just like Noblesse Oblige was a thing. And so, we circle back to the medieval Good/Evil paradigm.