4 Comments
Aug 14Liked by Sean M. Brooks, Ph.D.

Before the Club of Rome “Limits to Growth “ (1972) was the "REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN: ON THE POSSIBILITY AND DESIRABILITY OF PEACE" With introductory material by Leonard C. Lewin. 1967 https://ia801603.us.archive.org/10/items/pdfy-A5uQx1ByqfwWuHma/Report_from_Iron_Mountain%201967.pdf

This secret group of NWO parasites brainstormed on what could be use as a substitute for war – which apparently was not as effective at decreasing the population to the extent they wished.

“SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FUNCTIONS OF WAR: MODELS The following substitute institutions, among others, have been proposed for consideration as replacements for the nonmilitary functions of war. That they may not have been originally set forth for that purpose does not preclude or invalidate their possible application here.

ECONOMIC. a) A comprehensive social-welfare program, directed toward maximum improvement of general conditions of human life. b) A giant openend space research program, aimed at unreachable targets. c) A permanent, ritualized, ultra-elaborate disarmament inspection system, and variants of such a system.

POLITICAL a) An omnipresent, virtually omnipotent international police force. b) An established and recognized extraterrestrial menace. c) Massive global environmental pollution. d) Fictitious alternate enemies.

SOCIOLOGICAL: CONTROL FUNCTION. a) Programs generally derived from the Peace Corps model. b) A modern, sophisticated form of slavery.

MOTIVATIONAL FUNCTION. a) Intensified environmental pollution. b) New religions or other mythologies. c) Socially oriented blood games. d) Combination forms.

ECOLOGICAL. A comprehensive program of applied eugenics.

CULTURAL. No replacement institution offered.

SCIENTIFIC. The secondary requirements of the space research, social welfare, and / or eugenics programs.

SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FUNCTIONS OF WAR: EVALUATION The models listed above reflect only the beginning of the quest for substitute institutions for the functions of war, rather than a recapitulation of alternatives. It would be both premature and inappropriate, therefore, to offer final judgments on their applicability to a transition to peace and after. Furthermore, since the necessary but complex project of correlating the compatibility of proposed surrogates for different functions could be treated only in exemplary fashion at this time, we have elected to withhold such hypothetical correlations as were tested as statistically inadequate. Nevertheless, some tentative and cursory comments on these proposed functional "solutions" will indicate the scope of the difficulties involved in this area of peace planning.

ECONOMIC. The social-welfare model cannot be expected to remain outside the normal economy after the conclusion of its predominantly capital investment phase; its value in this function can therefore be only temporary The space-research substitute appears to meet both major criteria, and should be examined in greater detail, especially in respect to its probable effects on other war functions. "Elaborate inspection" schemes, although superficially attractive, are inconsistent with the basic premise of a transition to peace. The "unarmed forces" variant, logistically similar, is subject to the same functional criticism as the general social-welfare model.

POLITICAL. Like the inspection-scheme surrogates, proposals for plenipotentiary international police are inherently incompatible with the ending of the war system. The "unarmed forces" variant, amended to include unlimited powers of economic sanction, might conceivably be expanded to constitute a credible external menace. Development of an acceptable threat from "outer space," presumably in conjunction with a space-research surrogate for economic control, appears unpromising in terms of credibility. The environmental pollution model does not seem sufficiently responsive to immediate social control, except through arbitrary acceleration of current pollution trends; this in turn raises questions of political acceptability. New, less regressive, approaches to the creation of fictitious global "enemies" invite further investigation.

SOCIOLOGICAL: CONTROL FUNCTION. Although the various substitutes proposed for this function that are modeled roughly on the Peace Corps appear grossly inadequate in potential scope, they should not be ruled out without further study. Slavery, in a technologically modern and conceptually euphemized form, may prove a more efficient and flexible institution in this area.

MOTIVATIONAL FUNCTION. Although none of the proposed substitutes for war as the guarantor of social allegiance can be dismissed out of hand, each presents serious and special difficulties. Intensified environmental threats may raise ecological dangers; mythmaking dissociated from tar may no longer be politically feasible; purposeful blood games and rituals can far more readily be devised than implemented. An institution combining this function with the preceding one, based on, but not necessarily imitative of, the precedent of organized ethnic repression, warrants careful consideration.

ECOLOGICAL. The only apparent problem in the application of an adequate eugenic substitute for war is that of timing; it cannot be effectuated until the transition to peace has been completed, which involved a serious temporary risk of ecological failure.

CULTURAL. No plausible substitute for this function of war has yet been proposed. It may be, however, that a basic cultural value-determinant is not necessary to the survival of a stable society.

SCIENTIFIC. The same might be said for the function of war as the prime mover of the search for knowledge. However, adoption of either a giant space-research program, a comprehensive social-welfare program, or a master program of eugenic control would provide motivation for limited technologies."

IMHO - they have checked most of these boxes. As the saying goes "War is when your government tells you who the enemy is - Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself"

Expand full comment
Aug 14Liked by Sean M. Brooks, Ph.D.

When I was in grade school - they had the duck and cover crap to put us in a state of fear. In HS there were always bomb threats - but I think those were by students who wanted out of exams. They needed some real incidents so they can go for the guns. I believe they have always used something to scare the masses or to get them on the side of the government.

Expand full comment
Aug 15Liked by Sean M. Brooks, Ph.D.

Thank you, informative!

Expand full comment
Aug 13Liked by Sean M. Brooks, Ph.D.

Fascinating, disturbing read. Thank you.

Expand full comment