Discover more from The New Era
A Truth Crusade?
Anna Wright offers a Christian's perspective on 'truth'.
Everyone is exhausted. I’d hazard a guess even the psychopaths are exhausted. There must be a limit to how much tyranny you can dish out without hitting a wall. The time has surely come for us all to switch off the TV (and indeed every device we own), disconnect from the EDC (Evil Digital Construct) and engage in some good old human pastimes like talking, hugging, laughing, smiling, kissing, going for long muddy walks and taking mid-afternoon naps.
How about a bit of Monopoly? It might help your kids understand what’s going on in the world. Scrabble? Because, God knows they aren’t being taught how to spell at school. Operation is also an excellent game for teaching them about the human body, and the consequences of messing around with it too much. You could read some real books, too. Maybe flip open the Bible and remind yourself about the story of Jesus, about how he stood up to his would-be persecutors but ultimately let them kill him, assuming it would teach the human race never to tolerate fascism again. Hmmm…
If you’re feeling particularly adventurous, you could organise your sock drawer, or clean the kitchen cupboards. A bit of cleaning and organising is very grounding. How about some music? You could learn the lyrics to a couple of songs. I recommend “Think” by Aretha Franklin, which contains the lines: People walking around every day, playing games, taking scores, trying to make other people lose their minds… ah, be careful you don't lose yours. “Uprising” by Muse is also good, especially the bit that goes: If you could flick the switch and open your third eye, you'd see that we should never be afraid to die. Or how about that traditional ditty, “Rule Britannia”. Verses two and four are probably the easiest to commit to memory:
The nations, not so blest as thee,
Must, in their turns, to tyrants fall;
While thou shalt flourish great and free,
The dread and envy of them all.
"Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:
"Britons never will be slaves."
Thee haughty tyrants ne'er shall tame:
All their attempts to bend thee down,
Will but arouse thy generous flame;
But work their woe, and thy renown.
"Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:
"Britons never will be slaves."
And then, when you’ve had a nice rest, a good break, and your spirits are restored, it’ll be time to get back on the horse, because there’s work to be done. We need a crusade, folks; a truth crusade. The truth has been attacked. The truth has been broken. The truth has been inverted. But the truth can never be destroyed. As George Orwell wrote in 1946, “We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.” Perhaps Orwell’s most significant words, though, are contained in his letter to Noel Willmett, a fan who had written to ask why Orwell was getting his knickers in a twist about the threat of totalitarianism. Was Orwell a paranoid, deluded conspiracy theorist? Or a political commentator disguising his prophecies as fiction. (The text of this letter is reproduced as a footnote below.)
The most important part of this mission is understanding your audience. As a population we are now more divided than ever in terms of awareness level on the one hand, and degree of mRNA / DNA-vector drug dependency on the other. With respect to the latter, we now have four distinct groups: 1) no jab, 2) one jab, 3) two jabs, 4) three jabs. You should be able to identify members of these groups by their general level of health. Despite what you are told by politicians and media outlets, observational evidence will inform you that their general level of health is inversely proportional to the number of jabs they’ve taken (oh look, there’s that inversion of truth starting to show up). Regarding awareness level, let’s pop your potential audience into categories based on their potential appetite for a curated selection of podcasts as follows:
a) For newbies who are recovering from their boosters and finally thinking, “medicine should make me well not sick” (inversion of truth again, see) I recommend Bret Weinstein’s recent interview with Peter McCullough on The Dark Horse podcast. The stats on vax harms might frighten them, but it stays on topic and is broadly bipartisan, pointing only to systemic failures in our political institutions. Hopefully this will encourage them to dive into some of Brett’s other episodes; they are all fascinating. Sonia Elijah’s interview with James Delingpole is a somewhat softer introduction to the failures of our medical regulators, and if they warm to her (and who wouldn’t) they can tune in to all her interviews with the brave medical professionals and eminent academics who are being censored for speaking out and sharing their narrative-bucking clinical evidence. If you think those in this category are still not quite ready to question the jabs, you could go even softer and show them Nick Hudson’s crystal clear analysis of how the covid story lost its way in The Ugly Truth About the Covid-19 Lockdowns. A more poignant discussion on the fatal harms of lockdowns are discussed at greater length and in heart-breaking detail on the Irreverend with Christine Padgham.
b) For the “double vaxxed” who are waking up to the fact that “two jabs to freedom” was a big fat lie because their Christmas skiing holiday in the French Alps ain’t happening, as well as for all those poor “rare-but-real” jab casualties who are facing permanent disability as a result of serious adverse events, there might be a window of opportunity in which you could bring to their attention the government’s plans for digital IDs. If they are beginning to see the light regarding “vaccine passports” and are open to the suggestion that these are the gateway to total digital control over our lives, encourage them to listen to Jeffrey Peel’s interview on the Corona Stories podcast and the inimitable Bob Moran’s opening address to The New Era’s debate on digital IDs.
c) For those who eschewed these experimental drugs off the bat, or had such a bad reaction to their first shot they vowed never to touch them again and cannot fathom why others are not using their rational judgement to say no, encourage them to watch Matthias Desmet interviewed by Dan Astin-Gregory on The Pandemic Podcast. If they are able to process the steps to mass formation without hiding under the bed, and they begin to understand why people seem gripped by a common psychosis, and almost hypnotically possessed, then the natural next stop is the brilliant Kate Wand’s most chilling video to date: Lockdown, the Line Dividing Good and Evil, which centres around what Hannah Arendt called, “the banality of evil.” This viewing requires a strong stomach.
d) For those who have been wide awake from the start but seem to be missing a few pieces of the jigsaw, the most comprehensive and grounded piece has to be Iain Davis on the Delingpod. He explains how everything we need to know about what is currently going on is in the public domain. It’s all there for the taking; only our inner fears and cowardice prevent us from engaging with it. In so many ways, it is a truth too terrible to confront.
This was a hard shortlist to curate; it contains a mere sprinkling of the rich and valuable content floating around in cyberspace at the moment. These people will be among the many who are eventually awarded Nobel Prizes for their services to humanity. If nothing else, for soldiering on against the juggernaut of defamation and censorship they have been subjected to. (The song that goes, I get knocked down, but I get up again, you are never gonna keep me down,always plays in my head when I think of these defenders of the truth.)
The ethos of what is being said in these interviews is also reflected in books on the shelves of libraries the world over. Fortunately, no one has ever managed to burn them all. Our past and recent history contains a tsunami of truth that is hovering over us, moments away from crashing down over the baseless lies and the dodgy data designed to push drugs.
One critical factor distinguishes people who tell the truth from people who tell lies. People who tell lies always claim to know everything there is to know, to be omniscient. People who tell the truth know there is always more to discover, but also that we can never deny evidence, no matter how uncomfortable and challenging it is. People who tell the truth know that there is only one omnipotent, omniscient oracle. Most of them call this “God”.
Sadly, of course, there will always be those you cannot reach, no matter how many times you try. Those who will not wake up, who will get every single injection they are ever told to take, who will mask and jab their kids, stay home, refuse to hug loved ones and close their businesses, and who would – literally – stop breathing if commanded to do so by their government, cannot be saved by us. Do not think ill of these poor souls, they simply do not have the strength and courage to look evil in the face, let alone stand up to it. Pray for them. God will forgive them and help them in the end.
Most people believe we are in an epidemiological crisis. We are not. Some people believe we are in an existential crisis. We are not. We are in an epistemological crisis. The story of the enlightenment is cracking. The story that human beings can have perfect knowledge, that human beings can have total control over nature, that human beings can even have ultimate power over their own mortality, is falling apart. The idea that the existence of God is simply a whimsical spiritual belief no longer holds. Even if you conclude, by way of intellectual argument, that God exists, as C.S. Lewis did, it’s still not the whole story. The whole story is that God – and all that God means, i.e. the human condition, the agreement to die on condition of being awarded life – is the only logical truth. The reverend in my church said in his sermon last Sunday that God was evident on earth only once, in the form of Jesus. Since then, because we cannot see him, we can only feel him and that is why we call it “faith”. I challenged him afterwards. I said, “What you say is not true, of course we can see God on earth. We see God every day. God is humanity. God is not simply a belief, he is a truth. I am; therefore, God is. I see God in every human face I set eyes on. And when you cover your face in a large black mask, you cut off my connection to God. You deny me God. God made you in his image to share his truth with the world. Do you not see how you are suffocating that truth, you are diminishing God, every time you cover your face?” He did not answer. But God did, in the warmth he created in my heart after I spoke those words.
Whether you signed up or not, simply by knowing the truth, you are a member of God’s Army, and to be leading this truth crusade is your purpose and your duty. This is not a war that can be fought with weapons, it is a war that will be fought and won with words. You must live and breathe the truth every day, and in every way, no matter how much you suffer as a result. You must speak to people anywhere and everywhere, whenever you can. Speak to your delivery drivers, speak to people on trains, speak to people in shops and in bars, and in taxis. Speak to people at work, at home and in passing on the street. Speak to the dogs, and the birds and the horses. Speak to the wall. Just don’t stop speaking. Don’t stop speaking truth. Truth is all we have and all we have is truth, because all we are… is truth.
Letter from George Orwell to Noel Willnett in 1944
To Noel Willmett
18 May 1944
10a Mortimer Crescent NW6
Dear Mr Willmett,
Many thanks for your letter. You ask whether totalitarianism, leader-worship etc. are really on the up-grade and instance the fact that they are not apparently growing in this country and the USA.
I must say I believe, or fear, that taking the world as a whole these things are on the increase. Hitler, no doubt, will soon disappear, but only at the expense of strengthening (a) Stalin, (b) the Anglo-American millionaires and (c) all sorts of petty fuhrers° of the type of de Gaulle. All the national movements everywhere, even those that originate in resistance to German domination, seem to take non-democratic forms, to group themselves round some superhuman fuhrer (Hitler, Stalin, Salazar, Franco, Gandhi, De Valera are all varying examples) and to adopt the theory that the end justifies the means. Everywhere the world movement seems to be in the direction of centralised economies which can be made to ‘work’ in an economic sense but which are not democratically organised and which tend to establish a caste system. With this go the horrors of emotional nationalism and a tendency to disbelieve in the existence of objective truth because all the facts have to fit in with the words and prophecies of some infallible fuhrer. Already history has in a sense ceased to exist, ie. there is no such thing as a history of our own times which could be universally accepted, and the exact sciences are endangered as soon as military necessity ceases to keep people up to the mark. Hitler can say that the Jews started the war, and if he survives that will become official history. He can’t say that two and two are five, because for the purposes of, say, ballistics they have to make four. But if the sort of world that I am afraid of arrives, a world of two or three great superstates which are unable to conquer one another, two and two could become five if the fuhrer wished it. That, so far as I can see, is the direction in which we are actually moving, though, of course, the process is reversible.
As to the comparative immunity of Britain and the USA. Whatever the pacifists etc. may say, we have not gone totalitarian yet and this is a very hopeful symptom. I believe very deeply, as I explained in my book The Lion and the Unicorn, in the English people and in their capacity to centralise their economy without destroying freedom in doing so. But one must remember that Britain and the USA haven’t been really tried, they haven’t known defeat or severe suffering, and there are some bad symptoms to balance the good ones. To begin with there is the general indifference to the decay of democracy. Do you realise, for instance, that no one in England under 26 now has a vote and that so far as one can see the great mass of people of that age don’t give a damn for this? Secondly there is the fact that the intellectuals are more totalitarian in outlook than the common people. On the whole the English intelligentsia have opposed Hitler, but only at the price of accepting Stalin. Most of them are perfectly ready for dictatorial methods, secret police, systematic falsification of history etc. so long as they feel that it is on ‘our’ side. Indeed the statement that we haven’t a Fascist movement in England largely means that the young, at this moment, look for their fuhrer elsewhere. One can’t be sure that that won’t change, nor can one be sure that the common people won’t think ten years hence as the intellectuals do now. I hope they won’t, I even trust they won’t, but if so it will be at the cost of a struggle. If one simply proclaims that all is for the best and doesn’t point to the sinister symptoms, one is merely helping to bring totalitarianism nearer.
You also ask, if I think the world tendency is towards Fascism, why do I support the war. It is a choice of evils—I fancy nearly every war is that. I know enough of British imperialism not to like it, but I would support it against Nazism or Japanese imperialism, as the lesser evil. Similarly I would support the USSR against Germany because I think the USSR cannot altogether escape its past and retains enough of the original ideas of the Revolution to make it a more hopeful phenomenon than Nazi Germany. I think, and have thought ever since the war began, in 1936 or thereabouts, that our cause is the better, but we have to keep on making it the better, which involves constant criticism.