There are clearly multiple entities, multiple cabals, sometimes as allies, other times vying for an upper hand against one another.

Yes and no. There is evidence to support it to some extent, but the larger level play is completely controlled by a single entity. They can vie for resources, fight over control of oil wells, e.g. a "gentlemen's bet" you might say, but the larger level play, the Hegelian Dialectic that is designed to lead towards their Utopia is never challenged by these "gentlemen bets".

There is a single entity that controls the world. One. I'm not saying it's one person, I am saying it is one group, working in unison, without dissenters (at least none that live) towards one goal. That single group has controlled all "oppositions", all acting as controlled opposition, working towards that goal of Utopia, for at least a hundred plus years. Before that, there may have been more than one genuine player, but they were still all part of the same aristocracy. Even then, I don't think they were genuinely in "opposition," but, rather, had different ideas of how to accomplish Utopia. In all cases, that same Aristocracy was intended to end up on top, or rather, remain on top.

There are clearly multiple entities, multiple cabals, sometimes as allies, other times vying for an upper hand against one another.

Yes and no. There is evidence to support it to some extent, but the larger level play is completely controlled by a single entity. They can vie for resources, fight over control of oil wells, e.g. a "gentlemen's bet" you might say, but the larger level play, the Hegelian Dialectic that is deigned to lead towards their Utopia is never challenged by these "gentlemen bets".

There is a single entity that controls the world. One. I'm not saying it's one person, I am saying it is one group, working in unison, without dissenters (at least none that live) towards one goal. That single group has controlled all "oppositions", all acting as controlled opposition, working towards that goal of Utopia, for at least a hundred plus years. Before that, there may have been more than one genuine player, but they were still all part of the same aristocracy. Even then, I don't think they were genuinely in "opposition," but, rather, had different ideas of how to accomplish Utopia. In all cases, that same Aristocracy was intended to end up on top, or rather, remain on top.

There are clearly multiple entities, multiple cabals, sometimes as allies, other times vying for an upper hand against one another.

Yes and no. There is evidence to support it to some extent, but the larger level play is completely controlled by a single entity. They can vie for resources, fight over control of oil wells, e.g. a "gentlemen's bet" you might say, but the larger level play, the Hegelian Dialectic that is deigned to lead towards their Utopia is never challenged by these "gentlemen bets".

There is a single entity that controls the world. One. I'm not saying it's one person, I am saying it is one group, working in unison, without dissenters (at least none that live) towards one goal. That single group has controlled all "oppositions", all acting as controlled opposition, working towards that goal of Utopia, for at least a hundred years. Before that, there may have been more than one genuine player, but they were still all part of the same aristocracy. Even then, I don't think they were genuinely in "opposition," but, rather, had different ideas of how to accomplish Utopia. In all cases, that same Aristocracy was intended to end up on top, or rather, remain on top.

There are clearly multiple entities, multiple cabals, sometimes as allies, other times vying for an upper hand against one another.

Yes and no. There is evidence to support it to some extent, but the larger level play is completely controlled by a single entity. They can vie for resources, fight over control of oil wells, e.g. a "gentlemen's bet" you might say, but the larger level play, the Hegelian Dialectic that is deigned to lead towards their Utopia is never challenged by these "gentlemen bets".

There is a single entity that controls the world. One. I'm not saying it's one person, I am saying it is one group, working in unison, without dissenters (at least none that live) towards one goal. That single group has controlled all "oppositions", all acting as controlled opposition, working towards that goal of Utopia, for at least a hundred years. Before that, there may have been more than one genuine player, but they were still all part of the same aristocracy. Even then, I don't think they were genuinely in "opposition," but, rather, had different ideas of how to accomplish Utopia. In all cases, that same Aristocracy was intended to end up on top.

There are clearly multiple entities, multiple cabals, sometimes as allies, other times vying for an upper hand against one another.

Yes and no. There is evidence to support it to some extent, but the larger level play is completely controlled by a single entity. They can vie for resources, fight over control of oil wells, e.g. a "gentlemen's bet" you might say, but the larger level play, the Hegelian Dialectic that is deigned to lead towards their Utopia is never challenged by these "gentlemen bets".

There is a single entity that controls the world. One. I'm not saying it's one person, I am saying it is one group, working in unison, without dissenters (at least none that live) towards one goal. That single group has controlled all "oppositions", all acting as controlled opposition working towards that goal for at least a hundred years. Before that, there may have been more than one genuine player, but they were still all part of the same aristocracy. Even then, I don't think they were genuinely in "opposition," but, rather, had different ideas of how to accomplish Utopia. In all cases, that same Aristocracy was intended to end up on top.