As IF Times

A few months ago, an ‘organic’, but somehow well orchestrated national protest consumed all the media headlines with the catchy slogan of  ‘No Kings’.  This of course was not a protest against kings per se, but was targeting the policies of one individual they considered to be acting as a king, that is, Donald Trump.

It sounds good; a protest against someone who autocratically imposes his will upon his subjects and who restricts the rights and privileges of his people.  But as in all protest movements by the left, there is usually more thought put in to creating the jingoistic war cry than the actual substance of the underlying cause.  Take for example, Black Lives Matter, a movement intended to galvanize a particular constituency politically but which was entirely non-sensical.  In reality, the movement was all about Black Lives Better and this movement was used as a sledgehammer to cow the larger population against pushing back against obvious racial crimes.  Objective crime statistics over decades showed that Blacks were disproportionately represented in crime statistics as a percentage of population.  This fact is blithely ignored by the deluded movement.

On to the No Kings protest.  Recently, the present Regent of the UK, King Charles, paid a state visit to the United States, a former vassal colony but one that turfed the Brits in an independence war exactly 250 years ago.  In fact, this can be considered the preeminent No Kings protest because the colonies decided that they really did not care for the way the Kings and Queens were running things, especially by imposing non representative taxation and thus they fought a war to have…no kings.

America was the first nation ever in history to endow its own citizens with the ability to rise to the level of their own efforts, without the advantage of birthright as has been (and still is) the case in most nations until then.  Mere citizens could be elected to high office solely on their appeal to their constituents, not because they happened to be the scions of rich dudes from past conquests.

The very notion of someone being entitled to rights, privileges, wealth and power just because their ancestors won some battles centuries ago is absurd in this modern age….or should be.  Most monarchs today live their privileged lives solely through the support of taxes by their loyal subjects and are largely ceremonial in their positions, much like vases in a curios cabinet…and just as useful. They really are human museum pieces representing an archaic history which, while amusing, is of no real consequence to anyone today.  Of course, people still sit in rapt attention when these regents make a well-crafted speech, but the fact is, it’s like consulting a magic 8 ball as far as any real wisdom is concerned.

Let’s pick on King Charles as an example. On his recent visit to the United States, he made a speech about the historical connection between the UK and the United States and their shared history and traditions.  This is somewhat reminiscent of a spouse talking about their romantic history before the acrimonious divorce.  Many residual royalists swooned in reverence at his articulate delivery as compared to the oaf sitting in the President’s office.

The reality was that the visit was not a social call.  It was a personal plea to have the United States continue to deliver military funding to the European cause since the Europeans are in dire straits.  Under Charles’ watch, the UK’s influence had collapsed in the realms of industry, of trade and of the military.  Their role as a finance capital is in serious jeopardy. The nation itself is on the verge of civil war not helped by the King’s embrace of Muslims.  This civil war will be inflamed by the speech made by Charles in the weeks after his visit announcing that the UK will implement nationwide digital ID’s.  Apparently, this was so that ‘everyone would be equal’.  This might have been taken more seriously had he not been wearing a jewel encrusted crown, wearing an ermine cape, sitting on the regal throne.

The pearl clutchers and hand wringers in the United States are in perma critique mode as to their own nation without understanding that the US is still the freest nation on earth.  This is in no part due to the help of globalists who are tirelessly trying to bring their own brands of kings and queens with their associated levels of inequality back to the US.

We can see this brand of ‘Royal’ behavior in the nation to the north, Canada, still a vassal state to Britain. We can observe that elections are manipulated, certain people are given more rights than others and speech is increasingly being stifled with the help of compliant state media.  They even have the King’s representative whose position is like the vase in the cabinet mentioned earlier but nonetheless commands a royal salary, allowance, housing and oh, a pension for life, informing the public that they need to tighten their belts. Where are the No Kings protestors?

The public have hopefully become fatigued by the protest flavor of the day, telling them how and what to think. The collapse of credibility of mass media has made the bleats of the day as just so much noise.  Ironically, they are correct in this particular bleat, they just targeted wrongly.  We don’t need Kings.

link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Milgram

Why do people in societies behave the way that they do? If you consider the myriad of choices that people must make on any given day, from the trivial to the consequential, it’s logical to assume that most will act in ways that would be most self-serving. That seems logical….but real life experience shows that this is not necessarily the case.

The societies I am referring to aren’t those run by notional despots with all kinds of surveillance and controls on their populace.  We can understand the motives of people in those states.  No, what’s more puzzling is the behavior of people in what are accepted as ‘free’ societies, ones in which citizens are supposed to expect some level of self-determination over their lives.  Aren’t people allowed to freely vote for their rulers here?

A quick survey will reveal that these types of societies are rapidly disappearing. Where once you could say categorically that ‘western’ nations were the ones with explicit freedoms, this is certainly not the case anymore. In Europe, both the UK and France have implemented strict prohibitions on what can be said both in public and online and in the case of the UK, even to thoughts! These kinds of restrictions were once thought to be characteristics of autocratic regimes such as China, Russia or North Korea.  In those surveillance states, citizens are spied upon, their speech is limited and the concept of personal rights is non-existent.

However this form of citizen behavior control has made its way into the toolkits of most heretofore free Western nations.  Canada is the most recent example of this erosion of freedoms.

Recently, the Canadians held an election after a prolonged period in which the previous ruler had destroyed virtually all the sacrosanct Canadian traditions of freedom and ethical behavior on the part of government. Finally, the nation could end their 10 year nightmare.  This nightmare included a collapse of virtually every metric of national performance, the skyrocketing of debt, the explosion of illegal immigrants, housing crises in every city, the proliferation of criminal activity and the crushing of personal freedoms.

But, thanks to the relentless and effective gas-lighting campaign by all media outlets (taxpayer supported) a large part of the population apparently voted to keep the same guys in office; the equivalent of ‘please sir, may I have another’.

Even casting aside the rumors of election manipulation, this kind of behavior is not organic.  It is planned.

Politicians and media may be un-liked by the majority of the population, but they are not guileless. At the very core of their being, they know what a very insightful psychologist named Stanley Milgram discovered over 50 years ago in a series of perhaps surprising studies on human behavior, especially in the field of obedience behavior.  He found that if a subject can be convinced that harmful actions on his part are not his fault, then he will continue to perform such actions and separate himself emotionally from those actions just because an authority figure instructs him to do so.  Thus, even as electric shocks applied to control subjects caused obvious distress, the subjects continued to apply them when instructed to do so.

His experiments were driven by an examination of the treatment of Jews by Germans during the Second World War, but what he discovered was that this behavior was not confined to Germans.  It had implications for all populations.

We saw this implemented on a large scale very recently with the massive Covid-19 psyop in the 2020-2023 period.  Doctors and other professionals continued to press on with harmful vaccinations because of the enormous pressure from peers and ‘authorities’.  What chance did the average citizen have of refuting the tidal wave of mandates?

In the case of the recent Canadian elections, naïve people were convinced that US President Trump imposed a more serious existential threat to the nation than 10 years of an inept Liberal government.  With the aid of virtually all media outlets, the story was effectively sold to a large part of the voters.  The knowledge derived from Stanley Milgram worked as it always has and the same government that had been applying electric shocks to the populace was returned to power.

We can expect to see more of this kind of incongruent behavior as time goes on because those in positions of influence are quite aware of Milgram’s work…even as the public is not.  Policies and laws don’t need to have any merit or make any sense, they just need to be sold. When you observe populations acting against their own existence, someone is harnessing Milgram.