Who are ‘they’, and who is oppressed by ‘them’? ’They’ are the most ubiquitous group by nomenclature, and most evasive by identity, i.e. they are omnipotent and omnipresent, though not able to be accurately corralled for their misdoings. They are a mysterious font of all the worlds’ injustice—past, present and future. They are wantonly obscure, self-serving and cruel, operating with a covert agenda, influencing all levels of society from their privileged position. ‘They’ are the invisible enemy of common accord and, to vanquish this ephemeral force, means an opposing social force must be applied, invisibly perhaps?
Could it be? Is society so blind, and the few, so selfish? Are ‘they’ a political group, an elite cabal, or the contemporary equivalent of the Gestapo? Are they philanthropists moonlighting as bioentrepreneurs, or Star Wars cosplay pranksters proffering feel-good financial advice to the less fortunate? They faked the moon landings, they want you eating bugs, they track your every word, and they have a fluid identity. Perhaps ‘they’ actually are the reptilian shapeshifters that conspiracy theorists bang on about, disguising themselves in so many forms.
This stuff is all a bit confusing, so it’s no wonder peeps is their bios in a bunch. Are we being oppressed? Or, are we, oppressing them? The finger of blame is busy, particularly on the battlefield of social media, where we, are all experts, and they, are all to blame. Who is the enemy here, and just how does one transition from a normie, to a crackpot? Do we need to worry about the state of global politics, the state of the economy, the deep state, or the state our children are in? ‘You must believe our science’, the experts say. For them, state leadership has all the tools to dictate happy living, gender is subjective, transhumanism is a conspiracy, diversity is the hallmark of a free thinking capitalist society, and having a cock n’ balls is no limitation to womanhood. Finding the reliable markers along the foggy path of rational sense-making is becoming a full-time enquiry.
One thing all this haze does do, is provide a mesmerising distraction from any stuff of substance in our lives. Bickering over Building 7, or dead-naming an Olympic swimmer who had their dick nixt, have roughly the same value, which, on the scale of zero-to-bollox, generates likes; but on a scale of ‘let’s get on with it’, rates somewhere in-between, ‘I’m pathetic’, and, ‘please cut my dick off, I’m so bored with this shite’. There are innumerable ways to contribute in this world of ours, yet, a fair slice of human energy is being skimmed off, much like the harvested screams of sleeping children in Monsters, Inc. Whilst we are captured by this dazzling haze, ‘they’ will continue to distort the narrative of this soggy-bottomed world, grandstanding their own magnificence, with distractions that masquerade as virtue.
So then, pick your poison! You can drink the trans-social Kool-Aid, or just go about your lives as if it’s not really happening. Gulp down big brothers’ carefully prepared messaging, and relegate one’s fate to the false idol of fraudulent attention pedlars, or, take a dip in the sullied waters of confusion realignment? Down either path lay the happenstance strewn about by fortune, which has then been carefully rearranged to guide the traveller along narrow corridors, ‘safe spaces’ that provide the illusion of choice. Those narrow corridors are the blinkers which channel the gaze, whilst outside, the puppeteer fiddles fate to feather his own nest, either by nudging narratives, or inflaming ideology.
To be perfectly frank/francis, there are two distinct modes being highlighted here. One is the lack of definition when conspiracy theory, or its originators, are discussed. The other, is the pronouns picnic, the wonky wokeism that has seeped into all areas of society during the past decade. The former is a deep state distraction, derived to deflect attention from the JFK assassination, and now used widely as an effective tool to suppress any persons holding opinions contrary to state narratives. The latter is a social contagion spawned within academia, leeching out via the corporatocracy, and is now beguiling more than just youth with a cultish fervour bordering on bonkers. Both have elements of social control, mind control, and a peppering of no self-control. Both are herding the flock—one is the wolf minding the sheep while the shepherd sleeps; the other is the shepherd playing dress-ups, so he feels like he fits in, wilfully ignoring the wolf. One masquerades as the gatekeeper to keep society safe, on a ‘need to know’ basis. The other is a wrapped-in-cotton wool safe space, where nobody gets hurt, cos they are shielded from the Bogeyman. One has history, the other is histrionics. Distinguishing either, from the other, oppressor from oppressed, is hard work. Good luck!
