Before we begin, this article is not in any way intended to disrespect or invalidate the very real issue of racism and inequality in modern times. Instead, it seeks to provide key knowledge and understanding to solve these problems by addressing their root causes in consciousness.
For decades, movements have tried to restore the divide between human beings, making progress in many respects, while at the same time, oppression is still alive today. The reality is that white people are predominantly more well off than other groups, like Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians. But the root cause of these problems is beyond just everyday racism and bigotry—it is a human issue that rightly effects all individuals on the planet.
Although some groups suffer more oppression than others, within a truly lawful capacity, anytime even one person is oppressed, the whole of the human race suffers. If we really want to stop this insanity and restore the balance for future generations, we must see things clearly, and not through the lens of obscuration.
Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, nefarious forces acting from behind the scenes for nearly all of human history have intentionally created social divide for the purpose of controlling the whole population. Before we can truly be free of this surge upon the human race, we must properly identify all the factors at play.
“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it” — Winston Churchill
Social justice is a growing cause in our modern times, but hardly a new idea. Civil rights movements were essentially the same meme of oppressed people seeking equality. But in our efforts to restore justice to all people, we cannot also create bigotry and injustice. And in my view, the way that social justice is currently promulgated in society actually creates more fertile ground for racism and division to thrive.
With this in mind, I want to offer some thoughts for your consideration on what social justice truly is and how a false—yet well-intentioned version—has been used to divide humanity, injecting prejudice and intolerance into society instead of reducing it.
Anecdote about the Current State of Social Justice
Let me offer an anecdote as an example of this.
I have a white male friend from a fairly well-to-do family. He is not rich, but his father built a business several decades ago that he sold when my friend was a small child, providing him an upper-middle-class lifestyle. We often discuss many topics and recently the Black Lives Matter movement came up. We both study law, consciousness and are actively seeking to restore true justice to the Earth, and as such, we’ve gained some insight into how broken our world really is from a lawful perspective.
He shared with me that on one occasion he was at a party and someone came up to him who was upset about what they thought was a racial attack against them. They were clearly offended and my friend made an effort to offer assistance. But the other person was very angry and started telling my friend that he can’t know what they have been through because he is a “white privileged man and he’s part of the problem.” The irony is that my friend is the furthest thing from a racist or bigot you could meet. He is presently working in a foundation to help restore the law for all people everywhere and sees the racial issue as a serious concern yet ultimately a human problem, not one of only race.
So the point of this story is that the person who felt offended by an encounter that my friend had nothing to do with, was pouring out their bigotry and prejudice of white people against him—who was just trying to offer some equanimity. That is to say, in the act of seeking social justice this person actually became a racist in that moment, acting with prejudice towards my friend.
Token Gesture Social Justice
But the irony is, this person probably felt justified in their actions, and that they were pioneering the cause of fighting racism. But the problem is, they were directing this energy in an unproductive way, actually spreading bigotry instead of stopping it. It is this token gesture mentality that causes well-intentioned people to be deceived into pushing intolerance while at the same time thinking of themselves as a victim of prejudice. This is no doubt part of the design of the nafarious group mentioned earlier, which has a masterful ability to manipulate the people. It is this same group which artfully uses propaganda and subliminal techniques to manufacture consent for all manner of injustices, but this is a topic for another article.
Token gestures are part of the problem with the current condition of social justice movements. In their desire to gain reparations for past harm they create the very intolerance and prejudice that they are seeking to bring an end to—a self-perpetuating cycle that affects everyone. In this instance, the only one who was pushing a racist point of view was the other person directed towards my friend—who was not saying anything racist or pushing bigotry—became the focus of false social justice.
|Image Source. Here is an example of token gesture social justice. Here, the
implication is that because she “left the ghetto” to “marry a white guy” she
is now a racist. But the inference is itself racist because the meta-message
is that those who intermarry betray their race, which is an unfounded
premise, a prejudicial belief that spreads more racism.
Some, not all, social justice movements are nothing more than half-cocked token efforts that actually push more intolerance than stop it. As a society, we’ve learned to see words like racial slurs as absolute evidence of racism, instead of the way the word is used itself. In our world today, if someone from a socially subjugated group says they are the victim of racism, and we do not unquestionably support this position, we are now labeled racists as well. But true racism and prejudice are beliefs that someone is lesser-than because of their race, creed, or social class. Simply questioning the claims of someone who says they are the victim of racism is not—in and of itself—a racist act. Yet this is exactly how many so-called social justice warriors conceive of racism.
Social Engineering and Social Justice Movements
The propagandist of this world know all too well how to manipulate people to cause them to miss the mark. We’ve been conditioned over the past 60 years (since the first major civil rights movements began) to focus on surface level behavior like name calling as an indication racism exists. We’ve even been taught to believe that the mere absence of racial diversity is racism, that if there isn’t enough artificially maintained heterogeneity then there must be some horrible bigot involved that needs to be fought against.
But true intolerance transcends race alone. It is the belief that one person is superior to another, justified by some invalid and arbitrary excuse. In this sense, prejudice has been bread into the fabric of society itself through the careful work of social engineers, where almost everyone is trying to present themselves as better than someone else. Consider that in our egocentric world, the way we measure our successes in life is largely dependent on recognizing another person’s failures.
We say life is a competition, meaning there are winners and losers. We teach our children to compete against each other in school; the one who earns the best grades is clearly more superior than their peers. The person with less money is inferior to the person with more. The guy with more material things is better than his brother with less. The overweight girl isn’t as good as her skinnier friends. And the list goes on and on. Seemingly, everywhere we look, intolerance and prejudice—is not only actively taking place—but intentionally maintained and pushed onto newer generations.
Society as a whole has enculturated the masses to accept a spectre of racism, an ultimately false version that serves the agenda of hidden forces, the very same criminal syndicates that use false flag attacks to start wars, of which, nearly every conflict in the past 100 years was made possible by propaganda and social engineering.
Understanding Prejudice (Pre-Judgement)
The word prejudice means to pre-judge, to draw a conclusion about someone or something without performing due diligence. For example, if you see someone on the street that is begging for money, and assume that they have no skills in life whatsoever, then this is an example of prejudice. Or, if you see someone who is black in the city, and assume they have criminal tendencies, then this is an example of prejudice. These instances highlight that the core issue of all prejudice is ignorance. That when we lack true knowledge and understanding about something we can only draw half-cocked conclusions.
For many of us, we learn about prejudice by learning about history. During the early history of the United States, black people were considered inferior to whites, and as such, forced into abject slavery. But this is only an example of prejudice. Prejudice itself is—which I will say again here for clarity—the act of judging or making a conclusion about something without investigation or true knowledge. In this sense, anytime we believe something to be true without a valid reason based on investigation, without actually knowing why, we are acting with prejudice—pre-judgement. In other words, prejudice is a false judgment because, without investigation, there is no valid or supportive basis to draw from.
A food critic can’t judge a meal to be bad if they haven’t tasted it yet.
A moviegoer can’t tell their friends a film is bad without seeing it yet.
A teacher can’t grade their student without performing an evaluation.
But, to be clear, we can make these pre-judgments but they won’t really mean anything without the supportive experience to back them up. They won’t have integrity.
Would we listen to a movie critic who never saw any of the films they critiqued?
Would a doctor stay in business if they offered advice without examining a patient?
Would an engineer be successful at designing buildings if they never tested their plans?
Clearly not. Most people would not want to work with those who rest their conclusions on half-truths and dubious claims.
|Image Source. Prejudice is also known as willful ignorance. And those who
follow it are likened to the blind leading the blind.
Integrity is the word for describing the opposite of prejudice, the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles. In this case, if we really want to solve the problems of intolerance and injustice, of prejudice and racism, we need to have integrity. We need to know for certain that racism exists before we wield the sword of social activism, else we become the very thing we are trying to stop.
With this definition of prejudice firmly understood, it should become clear that any social justice movement that does not perform their due diligence to ensure the people targeted are truly deserving of it, then they become the very thing they are trying to fight against. Given this, consider the Black Lives Matter movement in how it interfaces with the people. Are the people coming under attack actually racists? Are they really pushing prejudice?
In some cases, I have no doubt that they are—because, as was already mentioned, racism and intolerance is really happening. But those who support this movement have been manipulated to a large degree into reacting without thought to anyone they think is to blame. In some cases, activists have attacked people simply for being white, having money or being a member of law enforcement. But in doing so, they act with prejudice (pre-judgement) unless they explicitly know beyond a shadow of a doubt that racism occurred.
Even if racism and intolerance is present, the solution is not to react with more intolerance and fuel more division. In our desire to bring justice to the dark places of this world, an eye for an eye will only sow the seeds for revenge and reactive measures. We need to understand how to resolve problems between individuals, which is an agency of true justice. Solving the core problem needs to be the focus, not just making ourselves feel good by throwing tomatoes or contributing to token measures that don’t affect real change. We need only look at the past 60 years of history in this respect to see that well-intentioned groups haven’t really solved the problem of intolerance, not that they haven’t made great strides in the act of trying.
Resolving Controversy and Cooperation: Natural Law, Harm, and Justice
From a lawful perspective, when an individual is harmed by another, justice is needed to restore the balance. Contrary to popular belief, true justice is not arbitrary fines, prison sentences or political sanctions against a social class. True justice is a restoration of public trust, honorable dealings amongst two or more parties and an equitable end to controversy for all involved. In other words, justice is ultimately a way for people to settle their differences and find ways to work together again as nature intended—although you probably won’t find this meaning in a law school or statutory code. But if one studies the truth long enough, and acknowledges the inalienable rights inherent in all free-will beings, then it becomes clear that this is exactly what justice truly is.
In light of this certainty, any effort to restore social justice of one class, race or group is no small task. The reason being is that intolerance, bigotry, and racism—although directed at a specific social class—is truly a human issue. While those on the front lines of such attacks suffer directly, the whole of the human race is injured when even one person is harmed, racism being no exception. From a lawful perspective, we each have a responsibility (ability to respond) so as to defend the rights of our fellows, regardless of who they are—race, sexual orientation, or religious affiliation. Thus, true justice isn’t for just one person, group or race, it is for all people and beings everywhere. It is this final conclusion that highlights the inadequacy of social justice movements in modern times.
The problem with most—but not all—social justice movements is that in their efforts to provide fairness to a specific group they actually promote division of the human race. For example, by focusing only on social justice for black people—especially if the solutions offered are to create a privileged class—then this lays the foundation for another generation to feel maligned and underappreciated. Affirmative Action is one such example of this; but to be clear, this isn’t to say that it didn’t have a positive impact on the lives of subjected people. The point is that society is filled with prejudices, but how we deal with them needs to be considered very carefully.
For example, instead of an individual being accepted by a university, job or institution on the merits of their accomplishments and innate potential as a conscious being, they are selected because of their race or sexual orientation so as to create the impression or the appearance of diversity—but this is an illusion. If one removes the social group from the equation, this “solution” is just another form of racism.
That is to say, injecting artificial diversity into a place where prejudice prevents heterogeneity from organically developing, doesn’t actually solve the core issue, it just masks it behind a veil. Although Affirmative Action provided greater opportunities to some of the victims of prejudice the primary causes were left unaddressed, and this had the effect of placating the masses who were rightly indignant at the current state of affairs. It was a token gesture of justice that didn’t actually resolve the core problem.
In the early part of the 20th-century, whites were considered superior to other races and wereprivileged in that they had an easier time gaining entry into various positions in society. And by all accounts, this is still taking place in many forms. It is a clear cut example of social injustice, as almost everyone agrees. So how could reversing the situation actually solve the core problem? It doesn’t. This is eye-for-an-eye justice, revenge by any other name. Harming others for harm they have suffered isn’t true justice. And because the people who directly perpetrated the crime are not the ones being punished, it isn’t even logical within an eye-for-an-eye system. By this I mean, pushing Affirmative Action on to the current generation for injustices of the previous one is experienced by them as just another form of social injustice—because that’s exactly what it is.
Now with this in mind, it does not discount the very real injustices currently alive and well in society today, directed at the very social groups we are discussing here. That is to say, we can highlight the fallacy of current social justice movements without invalidating the very real need for true justice for subjugated people everywhere.
In short, instead of Black Lives Matter, it should be ALL Lives Matter, if the goal was to finally solve the social injustice problem for good. But as the following article implies, that isn’t the esoteric or covert desire of hidden forces behind the scenes.
Divide and Conquer
While overtly, those who support the Black Lives Matter movement probably feel as though they are helping to make the world a better place—and that intention should not be ignored—the reality is by focusing on only one group, instead of all people, they are actually feeding more energy into division and racism. And this is exactly what the would-be masters of all races want.
The Cabal, Illuminati, New World Order—or whatever name you want to give them—have been using the technique of divide and conquer on the human family for all of modern history. Antiquity is filled with bigotry, racism, and social injustice, where one group is harmed and then that group seeks vengeance against their oppressors, which in turn causes more harm and a desire for more vengeance.
When will enough be enough? When will we finally realize as one people that we have been deceived into fighting amongst ourselves?
George Soros is a well-established Cabal agent within awakening circles. Given his financial contributions to Black Lives Matter, as outlined below, in addition to countless historical accounts and evidence of social engineering by despotic elites, we can safely conclude that this latest social justice movement is yet another attempt to foment racial war and division—to further divide the human family for continued enslavement by hidden criminal syndicates.
The human family, like the nuclear family, is homogeneous in that each person is a member of the same species, yet diverse in that they are individuals with unique attributes. The dichotomy of the human condition is that we are all different yet fundamentally the same. Within a nuclear family—in an ideal form—each individual recognizes both their similarities and differences, ultimately working as one group, one clan and one house for all within it to find their proper place in life.
Is it really so difficult to imagine all of humanity can do the same? That we can each support each other like brothers and sisters to ensure all people have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
Proof of One Human Family
As one last point in this discussion, consider that from a genetic standpoint we literally are one human family.
The ancestral Adam and Eve were discovered via genetic testing methods in 2013. Researchers used the Y chromosome of men and the mitochondrial DNA of women to trace genealogy back to a time range of 60,000 to 150,000 years. All men share a common genetic ancestor along with all women from around the same time in history—although researchers suspect these two never actually met.
In another study, researchers used mathematical calculations to answer the question: if everyone has two parents, and each parent has two parents of their own, and so on—how far back in history does one need to go to find a common ancestor for everyone on Earth? Here’s what the team found:
“The fact that everyone has two parents means that the number of ancestors for each individual doubles every generation,” Ralph said. “By using basic mathematics, we can calculate that ten generations ago each individual had a thousand ancestors, and 20 generations ago they had a million and so on.
“But when we get to 40 generations ago, in the time of Charlemagne, we arrive at a trillion ancestors and that is a problem because we now have more ancestors than there were people. Thus one can deduce that a lot of those ancestors must be the same person.” (Source)
So from a genetic point of view and a mathematical point of view, we really are one gigantic human family.
We only have to go back 1000 years (according to the second study) to see that everyone is linked by common ancestors. So given this scientific perspective, there really is nothing dividing humanity but false ideas pushed by would-be controllers. And the tragedy suffered by all people everywhere is that some of us actually believe this to be true, and act on it to create injustice in our world.
Remember, prejudice is pre-judgement, meaning the truth is, almost everyone has accepted a false belief in a prejudicial way. We didn’t perform our due diligence to realize we’re actually a single human family. Had we done this, we would have acted with integrity and never accepted the divide and conquer program of racial division and hatred. The fact that these things are pushed on to us as social dogma doesn’t in the least reduce the horrible price of accepting these beliefs without question. But thankfully we always have the chance to change our ways and restore integrity and honor to ourselves and the human family.
So why focus on only our differences when there is an ocean of common ground to unite us?
If we really want to solve the core problem and ensure our children grow up in a world of true social justice, we need to defend the rights of all lives and all of humanity as if we are brothers and sisters—because we actually are, and science has proven it.