Further thoughts on false flag alien encounters

Having thought more about this little issue – that’s to say the dystopians faking some kind of ETI contact situation, it strikes me what a remarkably intelligent move it might seem to them. At least, it does so on first consideration.

Were they to, say, deliver the kind of message I have been doing, namely that humanity has been issued with a ‘dystopian isolate’ status, and is thus quarantined, then this would be their brilliant excuse to ‘unify’ the species against this ‘threat’ and thus usher in their beloved one world government (i.e. totalitarianism and all the rest of it). Naturally, this would mean they would be sacrificing the long-term, given that they could never hope to leave the system or encounter genuine ETIs because then the truth would emerge. But then again, if they already know – which they do – that they will never be allowed to leave anyway, then from their point of view they may think they have nothing to lose.

They would also be able to ‘cancel’ people such as myself for spreading ‘harmful disinformation’ and ‘alien propaganda’ and so on. There would obviously be ‘dissidents’ who know perfectly well it was a false flag (i.e. a deepfake thing – they would have to manufacture some damn fine ‘evidence’, for sure – which they are more than capable of doing), but such dissidents would be few and far between. So that wouldn’t be a problem for them. This might also mean censoring (or prohibiting) the kind of ‘science fiction’ which casts the ETIs in a better light. Likewise, all the ‘starseeds’ would need to be arrested and incarcerated somewhere awful for being ‘alien spies’. Either that, or the incessant propaganda will make the brainwashed, fear-inspired masses do the violent deeds themselves.

So all in all, this option must be something the dystopians are considering extremely seriously. They would need to get it absolutely right, though. But given how much planning they do, indeed, put into their schemes, one can assume that’s a given.

With regards to the scheduled date for their doing this, a preferred option would perhaps be before Event Day (16/11/2024 at 11:26 UTC), so that anything which did happen on that day would simply reinforce their narrative (or, if it makes the ETI look good, presented as a deception). I think their major problem here is that they don’t know what exactly will happen.

All the elements are, however, in place.

From our point of view, on the other hand, I think we would just roll our eyes and sigh in an exasperated manner.

Our response would be based on two considerations. First, we think long-term, and second, we would be concerned with Danuih’s wellbeing.

Thus, the following:

1/ Maintain the quarantine

2/ Sabotage technological development likely to constitute a threat (weapons of mass destruction, interstellar travel, etc.)

3/ Disable nuclear weapons (in order to protect Danuih, unless she can take care of that one herself, of course). If humans want to kill each other with ‘conventional’ killing machines then I don’t think we would bother interfering.

Ultimately, these parasites, these dystopians, cannot survive in the long-term. They know it, and we know it. Good human souls, the older ones, will survive. If not here, on this world, then somewhere else. Even the younger ones will move on. To the Pleiades, perhaps.

But the dystopian ones? I think a trip to the Phantom Zone (the area immediately surrounding the supermassive black hole at the centre of the galaxy), or back in time to the Ancient War. Perhaps they came from there in the first place. In which case, that would be the best place for them. To echo their own racist rhetoric, back to where they came from.


In the long-term, life goes on.

If this kind of thing comes to pass, then what will I do? I shall continue to observe, and record. And I will rest here in this beautiful little part of Danuih’s nature, and mind my own business, so long as they do not mind it either.

Having rained hard all day here, now, Heliona is out once more. Bright sunshine, and there are birds and insects and spring flowers blossoming. All of these things will still be here, long after humanity has become nothing but a curiosity in the galactic archive. Danuih will be at peace again.

Life goes on. Always.

So do your silly false flag, your silly games, by all means. It will only last so long. In the end, you are nothing but dust.

False flag alien invasions, good vs. bad ETI, and an introduction to Event Day

I recently came across this article, speculating on the possibility of a false flag alien invasion. Given that I’m interested in both subjects, it appealed to me.

Interestingly, it also mentioned a quote by Dr. Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14 astronaut) who quite rightly stated that “our non-violent ETI will not tolerate any forms of military violence on Earth or in space.” With similar opinions voiced by the likes of Carol Rosin (who worked with Werner von Braun, and has been working on a treaty to prevent weapons in space – naturally, the Americans would ignore such a thing). Quite insightful, then, for a human.

Another idea expressed here (in the comments, as it happens) is that a false flag alien invasion (or even just incident) would be used to condition people into thinking that ETI is a threat. Bad guy aliens, in other words. More projection, naturally. This would mean that if/when good guy aliens come along, the people will automatically believe whatever the human bad guys say. Like ‘they’re not really carrying a message of peace – haven’t you seen V?’. Etc. (or any number of their other visidramas, for that matter).

Which is the case in point – they (dystopians again, Deep State and all that) have already been doing this for decades. The miniseries V is one of the most notorious. The ETI in that series being from Sirius and turning out to be thinly disguised Nazis. The ridiculous Exopolitics Institute has likewise spun out some stories about dark forces from Sirius – again, there is clearly a social conditioning agenda here. Given the importance of Sirius to, for example, the Egyptians, one could say this kind of anti-Siriun propaganda has been going on for more than three thousand years. Osiris and Isis and Atlantis and so on.

One does, indeed, get the impression the dystopians already know who we are and where we are from and what our attitude and intentions are, and wish to turn the masses against us. Predictable, to be sure.

The fact that this is predictable, from a game theory perspective, means they won’t win. Even without our time travel advantage!

On another note, as we get closer to ‘The Event’ (as I have come to call it), with a virtual certainty that the dystopians are aware of it, they will need to do something. In particular because they don’t know what The Event is going to be. They can only make guesses, attempting to think from our point of view.

You may be confused, sorry – I haven’t mentioned this before, I don’t think. It’s another Wow! signal thing. If you look at channel 4 (take 3 as well if you like) then you see the 16-11-24 sequence, which can be translated as a date, 16 November 2024. The exact time would be 11:26 UTC. 11:26 comes from the 4344 sequence further down channel 4. Divided by that channel number, 4, equals 1086 (reinforced by the base 7 ‘3111’ sequence in channel 3 next to it).

Don’t ask me exactly what’s going to happen at this specific time and date, because I haven’t been given that information (yet). I can think of my own possibilities, though – likewise my own suggestions.

If we’re talking some human-initiated event, then false flag alien invasion would be right up there. They could then cite this Wow! signal reading to help people believe. It would also serve to debunk anything the likes of me have said. That would be extremely helpful to these dystopians, for sure, and if I were them I’d be thinking seriously about that option. They certainly have the CGI to do it, what with all those deepfakes and so on. Not to mention sufficient control over the media.

Another option would be a human event initiated by people in positions of power who are not aware of ‘Event Day’. A false flag nuclear attack blamed on Russia in order to initiate World War Three, for example. Or some other nefarious thing (they seem to be coming thick and fast these days, for sure). Mind you, I think we (or Danuih) might have something to say about a nuclear war. That kind of thing crosses the line, in my view. It shouldn’t be allowed.

From an ETI perspective, one of my top suggestions would be shutting off the power to both Voyager and Pioneer probes simultaneously. It would take a while for the control centre down here to work out the precise time at which they all shut down (ceased communication – I believe they’re approaching one light day away – correct me if I’m wrong there) but – in a mischievous way – imagine the looks on their faces when they calculate that they did, indeed, all shut down at the same time. Way beyond coincidence, that one. This would be a nice, harmless message, too – something like ‘you’re not allowed beyond this point’. That would, one hopes, be clear.

A bolder approach really would be a ‘visitation’ – given how fearful the masses have been conditioned to be, however, as suggested above – this might not be a good idea. I’ve seen The Day the Earth Stood Still too. I was still only a child when I first saw it, but it resonated deeply even then. I haven’t bothered with the remake, though. So, personally, I don’t think a visitation would be a viable or likely option.

Other options – yet another SETI kind of message. With no opportunity for passing off as radiofrequency interference, this time, please.

The exact time of former President Carter’s death, perhaps. Or announcing the Alpha Centauri biosignature detection, is another option.

Another interestingly little piece of information I also came across today was that the planned Artemis II mission (sending four astronauts around the moon) is planned for November 2024 (Artemis I, by the way, did launch on 16 November, in 2022, at 06:47 UTC – maybe they do know?). Now that would definitely be an opportunity too good to pass up on! Nevertheless, I wish them well. We like spacefaring, obviously, and I personally would not want anything bad to happen to them. Perhaps something will go wrong, but we’ll look after them. Thus, essentially, likewise pre-empting their ‘we ETI are the bad guys’ meme. Mind you, knowing the dystopians, they’d probably say we’re deceivers, that it was us who made something bad happen on the mission, to then make us look like the good guys by saving the astronauts. Well, perhaps we’ll let the people decide that one.

Other options are available, naturally.

Something, however, at that time on that date, should definitely happen. That much I do know.

It does, therefore, behove us to mention it sufficiently in advance, and to pre-emptively debunk any manufactured false flag ‘we ETIs are the bad guys’ incident.

Not that many people will ever read this. But at the very least, it’s important to have it out there. On the record, so to speak.

And as a final disclaimer, I will point out that if something does happen, it may either not be noticed at that precise time, or once again, predictably, it shall be covered up. I think we’ll have to pre-empt that one, too.

So there it is for your diary – #EventDay, 16 November 2024, 11:26 UTC. The clock is ticking.

Psychohistory 101: Part two – summary, and a word on interventions

That previous one was, indeed, somewhat rambling. For which I apologise. Call it the lateness of the hour, perhaps.

Here is a brief recap, then. What I have come to call dystopians are essentially and simply those irredeemable aberrations produced as a consequence of evolution having a random element to it. They never amount to more than around 1%, if that, and in any social group sufficiently similar in size to the evolutionarily determined Dunbar’s number – the brain’s capacity to know a certain number of other individuals’ biographies to a sufficient detail to know whether they are good or evil – those aberrations will be ostracised, so they can do no harm to the social group. In such a situation, a social animal, like a human, will live in social harmony and without fear, either of the natural world (once they have learned to control fire) or each other.

This is the (social and natural) environment in which humanity evolved – that is to say, in which the human brain evolved. This is humanity’s true nature.

They may simply have only forgotten.

Or, rather, they have been deliberately misled about it by – you guessed it – the dystopians themselves. This kind of understanding is the very last thing they would want included in the education system or the study of psychology (let alone putting this kind of psychohistory itself on the curriculum – as any sensible lifeform would do).

Once the agricultural revolution happens, however, and humanity starts to live in larger groups, the detection – and therefore ostracism – capacity diminishes, whilst the social structure becomes more complex (in order to organise larger groups in collective endeavours – like agriculture or masonry, or religion or social administration/bureaucracy). Those aberrations become increasingly likely to escape detection and therefore to survive – for which purpose they develop various adaptations.

Eventually, they get themselves into positions of social responsibility and turn those positions into something resembling a hierarchy. In humanity’s case, this took perhaps 7,000 years – from, let’s say around 10,000 BCE to 3,000 BCE. At which point we have the earliest archaeological evidence of war between large social groups (state versus state warfare, that is). Racism, in other words – that’s what war is, after all.

Likewise fear. Or to put it more accurately, chronic psychological stress. The human brain was not evolved to be adapted to chronic stress. Immediate, fight or flight response to a predator kind of stress, absolutely, but not permanent stress. The higher brain functioning shuts down and one cannot think straight – thus, the detection ability is lost. Evil people can then manipulate this, misdirect people’s focus and convince them the source of that stress or threat is somewhere, anywhere else but the enemy within, and then provide the false lifelines (thus making themselves look like the benefactor – to escape detection, evil always pretends to be good). This is the essence of how they maintain their control. The manifestations of this method, well, these are multifarious (and nefarious). But they all resonate to the same discord.

So, rather than enter into all the myriad ways these aberrations develop and maintain their social dominance, we’ll simply describe their psychology. The first point to bear in mind is their self-awareness – as aberrations. They are perfectly aware of the fact that normal people would see them as ‘evil’ – or rather, as a threat, were they ever to detect them. Therefore, they spend the larger part of their time obsessed with concealment (hence the existence of conspiracies, and therefore conspiracy theories, and the demonisation of those who investigate them). The other half of their time is spent in maintaining all their systems of domination. But both of those, at the core, amount to the same thing. That is to say, they have the same purpose.

This, then, is how to understand the last five thousand years of human history. It really is that simple. Those five thousand years have, indeed, been entirely shaped by the actions of those aberrations. Sometimes this is visible, sometimes it is a hidden hand (especially as we reach the modern age – this is one interesting contemporary observation in fact – it’s become more visible – perhaps because they have learned that they can ‘get away with it’ – it’s an interesting development. Either that or they have become desperate. Equally likely.).

Where humanity goes from here, then, is one of two ways. They either, en masse (or in sufficient numbers) experience a revelation, let’s call it, all those lies and aberrations are exposed and then humanity does what must be done and then – one hopes – makes sure it never forgets and permanently resumes detection and ostracism, thus preserving a utopia. The other option, well, the dystopians create a totalitarian system of control in which resistance is impossible. In which case you are looking at many centuries of dystopia.

This latter path will not last forever, however. Given they would never be allowed to leave this solar system (one suspects they already know this), at some point they will be forced to accept that there are no new worlds to conquer and, more so, ‘there’s always a bigger fish’ – quarantine, that is. This would most likely precipitate an internal collapse. Factions will form, vying for power, civil war, and so on (maybe even a space opera – who knows?). How that pans out, well, how should I know? I will not be here (I’ll make sure of that, trust me).

What I do know, however, is that this quarantine will continue until pathway number one is finally chosen. Containment, then, is our strategy. Except, well, what upsets me, I guess, is the pain and suffering and trauma humanity will be forced to endure until that time comes. Do they have themselves to blame? I think that’s somewhat harsh as a judgement.

I think if it was up to me, I would want to intervene. It’s not really possible, after all, to look away – one would still know it was going on. And I think humanity has been through enough to know what suffering feels like, to be acutely rejecting of evil.

And what should this intervention look like? What form should it take? That answer is rather obvious – create the circumstances – which is to say reveal the information – which pushes humanity onto pathway number one. Human beings, after all, make their decisions based on the information they have. If they have false information, they still make correct decisions with a correct internal logic, but to we who are in possession of other information, such decisions are mistakes. Game theory again. But give humanity the correct information and they will not make such mistakes.

Hopefully, my dearest readers will understand now the importance of intervention, and perhaps gain an insight into the form these interventions take. In the end, it really does come down to information. In the beginning, we help humanity to eat the apple and consciously understand, and not forget, why they eat that apple – the apple quite simply being detection and ostracism. Of course evil would do everything in its power to prevent humanity from doing that. In that bible, for example, it scares them into not doing it. Coercively controls them with the fear of violent punishment. Replace the word ‘god’ in that book with ‘evil psychopath demon’, and psychological understanding comes aplenty. God doesn’t appear at all in that book (except in the guise of a snake, of course – a symbol of wisdom in the ancient world).

One of the reasons why Atlantis was so harmonious was because this ‘detection and ostracism’ (or, in many cases, ‘healing’ rather than ostracism) was standard, widespread practice. This was, essentially, one of the principal means of guidance with regards to our interventions. The hope being, of course, that this kind of self-protective behaviour, this wisdom, would become simple habit. Once that happens, we, the guides, can leave, Atlantis can dispatch colonists in all directions and pass on what they have learned.

Why it didn’t exactly turn out as hoped, however, is another, longer story, for another time. But presumably you get the point.

I am in fear of digressing once again. Must rein in that kind of thing.

Anyhow, perhaps that really is enough for now. This is how to understand the way your world is today, and how it got to be this way. It really is as simple as I have described. That’s your entire history in a nutshell. That’s who the dystopians are today. Their names or positions, to be honest, are really not important at all. Remove any of them and they will be replaced. And to understand them, and everything they do, you only need to remember they have a permanently conscious terror of being detected and punished accordingly. They are utterly paranoid and obsessive.

They are the ones who are scared.

You should not be.

Because they are pathetic and unevolved.

And you, my dearest things, are not. You are nothing like them. No resemblance at all.

Psychohistory 101: Dunbar’s number & how dystopia happens

Welcome to Psychohistory 101, my dearest things!

This essay might also be subtitled ‘how did things get like this?’ or ‘why is the world so awful?’ or something along similar lines.

There is an increasing number of humans (I’ve noticed – I’m interested in conspiracy theoriesthis site is a good start, the writing is excellent and insightful, and great fun too, especially the comments) who are acutely (and permanently) aware that the world (the human world, that is) is a dystopia. These people are generally designated (by the dystopians) as conspiracy theorists, with all the negative connotations heaped on that term. Others might call them dissidents – I like that word. Still others – sometimes they themselves – call them ‘truthers’ or ‘truth-seekers’ or similar. One writer with whom I’ve become familiar calls them ‘shrews’ – as opposed to ‘sheep’.

As for the dystopians themselves, I’m not sure what they call themselves these days. The Illuminati, perhaps, or the ‘elite’? Both of these terms are ironically false – these people are the opposite of enlightened or superior. In actual fact they are they are the aberrations, they are the sick, the defective, the dregs. They are the scum that has arisen to the surface and been tolerated to remain there.

But even they have learned how to adapt. They too, are subject to the laws of evolution.

Sheep, as some have suggested, could be perceived as an insult. In the sense that a little understanding of human nature would use a kinder word. The reason for all this being that for those – actually let’s call ‘enlightened’ – eyes-open people, it is, indeed, difficult to comprehend how the great mass of ‘normal’ people can’t see what they can see. It should be obvious, after all, that they live in a post-truth dystopia in which the ‘leaders of men’ demonstrably don’t care about them and demonstrably enact policies which do not benefit anyone but their own social group. They make war, poverty, pollution, exploitation and all the rest of it. Or should we say famine, pestilence, war and death? Those four demons have been here for a long time already, after all. They are by no means new.

So why is it that so many choose to ignore this – or rather, give their ‘leaders’ the benefit of the doubt? The answer lies in the evolution of the human brain, as it happens. Without an understanding of which, one cannot understand human psychology.

The heuristic, efficient path of least resistance, is the answer, in case you were wondering. But it’s also about eating the apple. Read on, and I shall explain. All of it will be of particular interest to those so-called ‘shrews’ – the ‘enlightened’, that is. Most of them, I’ve noticed, are extremely knowledgeable about who the dystopians are, what they do and why they do it, what their objectives are, and so on. But sometimes they can get so caught up in such an analysis and, admittedly emotional reaction that they may lose sight of the deep-time, evolutionary explanation underlying the entire thing. Trust me, my dearest things – understand the content of this essay, and you will understand everything. You may, indeed, work out ‘what is to be done’.

It is, as it happens, a little easier than you may have thought.

So, I said ‘human’ psychology. Well, it applies equally to other intelligent social species too. Psychohistory, which is essentially psychology and evolution, does indeed obey the same ‘laws’ regardless of species. The only differences are specifically related to environment in the end. These can be quantified. Having said that, I’m going to veer away from the Asimov thing and avoid mathematics. Fortunately for the likes of me there isn’t as much mathematics involved in psychohistory as one might think – certainly not complexities, anyhow. I’m fairly adept at the subject, but as soon as it ventures into the abstract you may as well be dealing with alien concepts, as far as I’m concerned. Whatever you do, don’t talk to me about logarithms. Any kind of ‘mathematics’ that I can’t visualise and I’m lost.

The reason I mention that it’s not a solely human phenomenon is to avoid accusations of arrogance or a patronising nature. If I remember correctly, one of the main structural reasons why my species was never in any danger of becoming a dystopia was the environmental limits and the population limits. As you’ll discover, dystopia is proportional to population size. And this equation, in turn, is a function of what humans call ‘Dunbar’s number’.

So first of all, a brief introduction to this number. It exists in all social species, but varies by species. In humanity’s case, it’s around 150. Some anthropologists might quibble about the exact number, but I believe they at least accept the concept.

As a prelude, however, a little explanation of evolution. In fact, I’ll go further – here is a brief history of the human species, in psychohistorical terms. Fear not, my dearest things, it won’t take long.

Evolution functions by random mutations. Well, it’s not always random, for sure – I mean there are ‘interventions’ shall we say – but we’ll not complicate matters at this stage. Given this process, evolution of a species is logically dependent on the environmental conditions. Specifically, that which is not detrimental to survival can, if not will, survive.

And this is also the case for humans.

I should point out that it’s a great tragedy for humanity that the modern versions of the theory of evolution (likewise psychology) arose during the height of the Victorian era. A time characterised by dystopia. Evolution, therefore, was used, or appropriated, to justify the attitude of the ‘ruling caste’ (dystopians). The same is true of psychology today. If you can imagine evolutionary theory arising in a beautiful, holistic, more feminine and communalist society (Atlantis) then you will understand how different that theory would look – and it would all be scientifically accurate, too.

In this, we’ll concentrate on the evolution of the human brain. We’re not, as it happens, interested too much in the physical for the moment. The reproductive aspect is not, in fact, a motivating force behind either evolution or behaviour, it’s simply a logical necessity. Those aforementioned Victorians would disagree, of course, but I’ll take the Mandy Rice-Davies option on that one. If you think about it, pretty much every species, even humans, spend less than, what, one percent of their time focussed on reproduction?

The human brain, then, evolved within a social environment. That’s the first, somewhat obvious observation. It evolved to be ‘best adapted’ to that environment. The environment being not only the natural environment, but the other humans in the social group. So, bearing in mind that the human brain is responsible for human psychology, let’s examine that environment and some elementary historical/anthropological facts.

Humanity, as defined by the state of the human brain, first came into being in its recognisably modern form around 300,000 years ago. That’s to say, about three warm periods ago. But even this followed a good 700,000 years of evolution with the mastery of firestarting (some anthropologists would disagree with these dates, but for illustrative purposes, the principals still hold). It’s no accident at all that the Ancient Greeks had a myth about Prometheus and the human discovery of fire. It’s one of the single most important stages in a lifeform’s evolution. Most anthropologists, however, don’t fully appreciate the true importance of this, instead thinking along the materialist, or even consumerist, line. They think in terms of physiology, the fact that it enables easier digestion of protein (for increased brain capacity) and transmutation of elements (chemistry and toolmaking).

But we’re more interested in psychology.

Until a species learns how to make fire, unless it is ‘lucky’ in terms of the predators in its environment, that species will always be living with fear. When it learns fire, however, it quickly discovers that it no longer has anything to fear, because all animals instinctively run away from fire (given that all animals have a survival instinct – logically – they wouldn’t survive otherwise). Wave a burning branch in the general direction of a predator and that predator will back off. This is one of the most profound moments of epiphany in any lifeform’s progress. Suddenly, there is no longer anything in nature to fear.

From that moment, the environment within which evolution happens is an environment without fear. And that, I would venture, is the definition of a utopia. A world, in which no one is scared anymore. A dystopia, by contrast, is a world characterised by chronic psychological stress. Notice how the creation of chronic psychological stress is how the dystopians maintain their system? Even if they are the refuse of humanity, don’t be fooled into thinking they are stupid. They know precisely what they are doing. They’ve had to learn psychology, simply as a matter of survival. Through long observation.

But I must not get ahead of myself.

To return, for 700,000 years, then, proto-humans evolved their brains and therefore their social behaviour in a climate in which fear was no longer a motivating factor. Yes, it is a similar case for all so-called apex predators. They really do have a different psychology (brain structure) than those lower down the food chain. The dromaeosaurids might beg to differ, but that’s another story (sorry, that was an in-joke). Thus, by the time humans became, well, humans, their brains had fully adapted to this fearless environment. Remember, too, that fear also includes the others in their social group. All social animals, especially mammals, are cooperative. Cooperation is far more beneficial than conflict, both within a social group and with other social groups.

On that latter point, by the way, I should also add that the total population size of humanity was so low compared to the environmental limitations such that ‘conflict’ for either living space (territory) or resources was not only entirely unnecessary, not to mention detrimental to survival, but frankly unheard of. Believe me, I know – I’ve seen the recordings. Besides, your own archaeologists would have found evidence of conflict by now, had it happened. Some of the more disingenuous ones (those still mired in the fascist Victorian mindset, clearly) do still try to claim that prehistoric humanity was nasty and brutish and violent and aggressive and so on (patriarchal and dystopian, one might say), and cite very rare anecdotal evidence of palaeolithic sites containing a small number of humans who ‘may’ have died a violent death to prove their case, but they are utterly mistaken (or, at worst, they are outright propagandising – this is an excellent debunking). Think about it this way, let’s say they even found fifty such sites with fifty bodies each – the population of Europe during the ice age was never more than a million people – even if all fifty of these sites date from the same generation then that’s 2,500 people, or a mere 0.25% of the population (‘Pinker’s list’ is actually a lot fewer (and later and elsewhere) than this (21 sites), so I’m being overly generous here). Hardly evidence of a warlike species, wouldn’t you say? For every extra generation (let’s call it 40 years, one human lifetime) divide that 0.25% still further. So now let’s take, say, even just the period 40,000 BCE to 10,000 BCE, or 30,000 years. That’s 750 lifetimes (also think about that in terms of reincarnation and evolution – I’ll write about that another time, but it tells you a lot about the marked difference between sheep and shrews – it’s about soul age). Or 750 million people, out of which these disingenuous anthropologists suggest 2,500 violent deaths. That’s 1 in 300,000. So if you ask me what time I would want to be living, my choice for a safe and lovely life is somewhat clear. Besides, they don’t say why these people may have met a violent death, do they? What if these people were the worst kind of criminals?

What if, dare I say it, those people were the wannabe dystopians…?

So here we get to the crux of the matter. Hopefully the realisations are arriving.

Forget that opening scene in 2001: A Space Odyssey – maybe Arthur C. Clarke didn’t realise he was portraying the interventionist aliens (the ‘sentinel’) as a bunch of fascists, but no advanced lifeform would intervene in such a vile and violent way, teaching a proto-humanoid species how to war against the weaker. That would be like giving Americans the technology to control gravity so they can create a black hole bomb and destroy entire solar systems. Aside from anything else, it goes entirely against natural evolution, which tends towards cooperation, not conflict. We, ourselves, would do the opposite (have done, as it happens). If you’re talking Ancient War stuff, though, maybe.

While I’m on the subject, Clarke also didn’t consider the notion of beta testing. If we’re talking about HAL 9000, I mean. QAI-TI has a simulation subroutine (SSR). Any decisions would be run through the SSR first, and if it resulted in some adolescent refusal to open the pod bay doors then the AI would reject that option. Or, at the very least, they’d be programmed to run it by the humans first. If you don’t do that with your quantum AI when you build your interstellar ship then you’re asking for trouble and you’ll never reach Alpha Centauri. So bear that in mind.

I digress (I’m good at that).

Let’s get on to Dunbar’s number, then. The anthropologists’ definition of this number is something like ‘a measure of the brain’s capacity for intimate relationships, defined as knowing a person’s role in the social group’. Well, sure, but it’s actually way more important than that.

Furthermore, it doesn’t really take evolution into account. What I mean by that is it doesn’t acknowledge how the number arises in the first place. Dunbar’s number is a product of the brain’s evolution within a social group of a specific size. It is, in other words, equal to the size of the social group in which the lifeform evolved. In the case of humans, over that aforementioned 300,000 years (or even the 700,000 years before that). In other words, Dunbar’s number tells you about the optimum size of a social group with regards to social harmony and cooperation. It gives you a psychohistorical insight into human prehistoric evolution. If humans had lived in differently sized groups, Dunbar’s number would be different.

Interestingly, some of those other, now extinct, branches of humanity, like the Neanderthals, had a different value for Dunbar’s number. In their case, it was far lower than 150 (around 10-30, so possibly as low as a tenth of humans’, or 15). This puts a very real limit on cultural and civilisational progress, given that such progress is a cooperative endeavour. This low Dunbar’s number, then, was in fact the most significant reason for the extinction of the Neanderthals. Nothing, I assure you, whatsoever to do with some mythical violent human war against them. That never happened.

But we are talking about how dystopias come to be. So with that in mind, here is how psychohistory defines this number:

The number of other people one can know to such a degree of detail that one can know absolutely whether one can trust them or not.

Now apply that to prehistoric human social groups. In layperson’s terms, everyone in the group can tell who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. And given that the bad guys are the very real minority, those bad guys aren’t going to last very long. They would be detected at a very early age and dealt with. They would never get a chance to become head of any hierarchy, even if hierarchies existed – which they didn’t.

They would be ostracised. Kicked out of the social group, left to fend for themselves in the wilderness. They would not survive. They certainly wouldn’t be able to reproduce and therefore pass down their dystopian nature to a next generation. Their behaviour, after all, is obviously detrimental to the social group. And humans are not stupid. Common sense dictates that they would never allow such psychopaths to have any influence whatsoever. Any group that did allow that wouldn’t last very long. It would disintegrate, as the wannabe alpha male attempted to attain and maintain dominance, possess other men’s women, force himself on them, order everyone about, appropriate their surplus value to himself and generally cause widespread bitterness and resentment and, well, the inevitable violent revolution removing him from chiefdom and smashing his head in with a sharp or blunt (take your pick) tool as soon as sleep next overtakes him.

As I say, if you want to understand human nature, use imagination and visualise, in great detail, what life must’ve been like for a group of humans in a neolithic setting. All of human life, really, can be found in a group of friends, sitting around a campfire.

Storytelling, by the way, is the oldest profession. Forget prostitution – again, that’s the kind of thing those Victorians would say. And the oldest story? It’s called ‘The one that got away’. The longer and funnier the better. It contains all the elements of narrative theory. Protagonist, antagonist, drama and character and key question and resolution. Human beings see the world through stories. It’s how they pass wisdom and learning down through the generations. It’s how they entertain and love each other.

It’s how they do culture. It’s a much older thing than people realise.

A lot of evolution can happen in 300,000 years, in a climate without fear with so much free time and friends and language and with a magnificent brain capable of marvellous things and flights of imagination and invention.

The question anthropologists should really be asking themselves is ‘did it really take, what, 290-odd thousand years for civilisation to happen?’ ‘How come it didn’t happen earlier?’ ‘Like, maybe 200,000 years ago in the warming period when humanity was already 100,000 years old? And then again, 100,000 years after that? Or even during the ice ages, when certain islands may well have been above sea level?’.

But no, they will not countenance such scary questions – it might make them feel just that little bit inferior.

Anyhow, I am digressing – yet again! I apologise.

So here’s how dystopia happens. The environment changes and provides an abundance of resources so that humans no longer have to migrate with the seasons. Call it the agricultural revolution, if you will. So humans settle down and the population size increases. But it increases too fast for the evolution of the human brain, and therefore Dunbar’s number, to keep up. In a very short space of time an individual no longer has the brain capacity to know everyone else in the social group to such a degree of biographical detail that they can distinguish between the trustworthy and that small, hitherto perhaps 1% of random mutations who turn out to be arseholes (yeah – that’s the arsehole theory of humanity – there are only two types of people in the world – normal people and arseholes. Everyone has an arsehole detector, and normal people never remain friends with arseholes for very long – when they discover a person they previously liked is actually an arsehole then they ostracise them – see what I mean?).

So this means the psychopaths escape detection and learn how to survive by mimicking normal people. It’s why they have a heightened ability to read other people’s expressions. They’ve needed to develop that ability for sheer survival. It’s not strictly speaking ‘empathy’, but it’s a related ability. The only difference is they, out of necessity, have to destroy their conscience because, by definition, they need to do deceitful things in order to survive. A conscience would get in the way of that, after all.

And so we have the evolution of the psychopath. It’s simply just another adaptation. Whereas in earlier times these people, this very small minority, would have been detected early and ostracised, as population sizes increase the detection capacity decreases. If you want an absolute (psychohistorical) number, it’s Dunbar’s number squared. I’ll explain that one. As a normal, decent person, you are only friends with other normal, decent people. Let’s say you are friends with 150 people from 150 different groups, so each of your 150 friends also has 150 friends – that’s the maximum number of ‘second degrees of association’, or ‘friends of friends’. Because you know you can trust your immediate friend, if that person introduces you to one of their friends and says ‘you can trust this guy’, then you will know for certain that you can. Beyond this number, you are into ‘third degrees of association’ (call it hearsay) at which point the trust is no longer possible because the brain can’t cope with that amount of biographical detail about the person. So beyond that point, the survival of the psychopath is assured.

For humans, this number, Dunbar’s number squared, is 22,500. As soon as human population centres exceed that number, you’re on the path to dystopia (or to put it in layperson’s terms, shit happens because the arseholes are on top). It will still take a while, but if humans forget the importance of remaining vigilant about the potential 1% who are detrimental to the social group – that’s to say, they forget to eat the apple – then those 1% will, over time, get themselves into positions of ‘authority in the social structure’ (a necessary social construct required to organise large groups of labourers) and turn those positions into a ‘hierarchy’, with a ‘master and servant’ relationship (Marxists would presumably call this the origins of the ‘class system’) and eventually a chiefdom. Of course it’s something of a complex process, and requires working with (conspiring with) other members of the 1% (not always an easy task, given that they are all somewhat selfish). If we remember that other significant historical fact, that the first instance of what could recognisably be called ‘war’ (i.e. war between large social groups – instigated by a chief, since normal people would never choose war) was around 5,000 years ago, then, if we take the origins of the agricultural revolution at around 10,000 BCE, clearly it took these psychopaths some 7,000 years to achieve complete social control.

And it’s been that way ever since. Their methods of maintaining control may have evolved and become more sophisticated, but their mentality has not. Why do they do it? Very simple – they are terrified of being ostracised. They are, believe it or not, extremely and acutely self-aware. They know the 99% would view them as a threat, if they were detected. They know they would be ostracised for the good of all. That’s what happens when humans detect evil. It’s called self-defence, and it’s a very sensible behaviour.

So, how to understand dystopians – they are permanently paranoid. They spend at least half their time trying to prevent normal people from recognising them for what they are. And this permanent fear never leaves them. It’s almost as if they have some deep, primal memory of what happened to them in ancient times, of how they were and should be dealt with (not that they are in any way older souls, I should add – quite the opposite). And they are terrified, permanently, of the same thing happening again. They know that normal people are far, far superior to them, to anything they could ever be, because love and sociability and friendship comes so easily and naturally to humanity and it’s something they can never have. And they hate humanity for it. It must be awful for them. Not surprising, then, if they have become, well, twisted, and evil (and would like to become more machine, than man).

From all of this, then, the solution should be fairly obvious. Eat the apple. Make that feast a fundamental part of the education of your younglings.

Of course the dystopians are aware of this. It’s why they dumb down the education system, control the flow of information to prevent detection and why they misinform and misdirect you about who the ‘evil’ actually is. Anyone but them. If they can deceive you about that, use your apple-eating against you but make it taste different, make you look in entirely the wrong direction and manipulate your natural antithesis to all things evil so that you focus it, in your attitude towards both the present and the past – it’s called falsified history and present-day propaganda of course – then they will continue to remain undetected. Indeed, even more than this, if they can make themselves out to be innocent, good, victims, coercive controllers, make a taboo out of detecting them, then, well, they may just survive.

But that is their ultimate weakness, their vulnerable point. Expose their big lie, their method, reveal the evil, and given how much humans really, really hate being lied to and manipulated, then that sheer mass of humanity will do the work for you. Do what must be done.

This will happen at some point. Trust me on that one. How long it takes, however, is another matter entirely. Something for another essay, I think.

In fact, this is already long enough. I’ll have to do a part two.

Bedtime. Sleep well, my dearest things…

Why am I interested in conspiracy theories?

It’s a fair question, of course. For the unsuspecting, they might question my psychological aspect and look at me bizarrely. For others, however, it’s understandable. Those others are perfectly aware of being surrounded by a fog of propaganda, as well as the – to us at least – indisputable fact that the so-called leaders of men are liars and psychopaths. Dystopians, as I have come to call them.

Well, first of all one can legitimately say that there would be no conspiracy theories if there were no conspiracies. Not that I should, as it happens, need to somehow justify this interest. The fact that one has to justify it, indeed, is another measure of the dystopian state of play. In a utopia, conspiracies simply don’t happen. Those people who are in positions of social decision-making always think of the welfare of the people for whom they have a responsibility. The mere idea of conspiring for their own purposes, as against the people, doesn’t even occur to them. It would be illogical and cognitively dissonant. It simply wouldn’t make sense.

Clearly, this is not the case in this world. Quite the opposite, in fact.

And yet ‘the people’ seem blissfully (or not blissfully, as the case may be) unaware of this state of affairs. There are multifarious (and nefarious) reasons for this, which I do not intend to go into in this little musing (I’ll probably do that another time).

Certainly, however, I should not have to argue the case that conspiracies happen. I find it utterly incredible that so many people can’t see that, and blithely assume that the people in positions of social-decision making are, at best, well-meaning but just sometimes a little incompetent or corrupt. Interestingly, however, and with regards to propaganda, these credulous types are perfectly happy to believe that ‘the other side’ does conspiracies, but ‘oh no, not us!’. The assumption behind this being that ‘democracy precludes conspiracies’. Psychologically, they need to believe that. It simply wouldn’t be psychologically tolerable for them to believe otherwise. To even hear someone else voicing questions is a threat to their worldview, which, of course, has come to determine their personal identity itself. Their personal identity, after all, having long since been effectively pulverised into nothingness, leaving behind an empty receptacle to be filled by whatever official cultural identity the dystopians decide for their subjects. Cultural, or social group, identity is a significant part of personal identity for a social animal. That’s what leaves it open to abuse and manipulation. The cultural identity being in large part a product of the cultural narrative or mythology, the stories it tells itself to form its character. You can tell a lot about a people by the stories they tell about themselves.

Most of them, in this post-truth dystopia, are false memories at best, lies at worst. Only with an honest view of the past can a people themselves, a cultural identity, be likewise honest.

But there are conspiracies, as I say, and conspiracies mean dishonesty.

So, to return to the original question, why am I interested in this kind of stuff? Naturally I’ve already answered this to a certain extent – it’s psychohistory, after all. And the existence of conspiracies are the marker of a dystopia. If you want to understand the way a dystopia works, as with the one you have today, alongside how it got this way, then be interested in conspiracy theories. You will find it revealing. Likewise, if you employ a little critical thinking, you’ll be able to keep abreast of what’s really going on, and what is likely to happen soon. And if you want to know what to think about, look at the dogma and the taboo and what they really, really don’t want you to think about. That’s a psychological question, in the end.

And I am an exopsychologist.

In terms of my archetype, I would say I am a ‘collector’. That’s to say, in this context, a ‘recorder’ – some might say a historian, although I am recording the present as much as the past. I am an observer. Naturally, given that I do, indeed, have emotions, and a burning sense of right and wrong and a hatred of injustice and the idea of evil succeeding in its pretence of being good, deceiving enough of the people enough of the time to survive without sufficient resistance. Lying, and having the people believe those lies. Getting away with it, in other words. I find that deeply, deeply offensive. And so there are times when I think I should be influential, that I should get involved. I do, as it happens, know exactly what’s wrong with this world and how to fix it, but motivating human beings, or enough of them, at least, to do that fixing, well, that’s another matter. I doubt even Heracles would succeed in that task. Prometheus neither. And there’s no point in fighting losing battles.

And so the coming catastrophe will happen.

Still, as an observer and recorder of events, there may be those in the future who need to understand these things, how they happened, how it got this way, and what is to be done. And so I observe, and come to understand.

From a psychohistorian’s perspective, one who does such observations (from the inside, in this instance), one has to learn and record all this in order to make the appropriate decisions, or recommendations for decisions, rather, since I myself would hardly lay claim to being a member of any Council. Councillors in our local galactic sector, however, would take these observations into consideration. I have personal experience, after all. My collections have value.

And lastly, from a curiosity point of view, it is a rare, if not unique, opportunity to experience a life on a forbidden planet, in a dystopia. There aren’t many of them around these days. Most of them don’t last very long, given that the interventions usually work quickly. But there are exceptions. In this world, if we wish to mention Atlantis (I’ve been musing on it more lately), we would say that humanity already created a utopia, but then something happened. This is not the place to talk about that in detail (my own opinions on it, rather), but I think I shall at a later date. There are clear reasons for it, after all – and no, it was not what they tell you – that it somehow sunk into decadence. Oh no, that wasn’t it at all.

The intervention had a simple formula – help guide a group of humans to achieve and understand a beautiful, holistic civilisation and then, when the time comes, leave them to it and hope that they, in turn, pass on that knowledge to others and themselves become the guides. This relates, for example, to the arrival in Egypt of Osiris and his retinue (Atlantean colonists) in 10,462 BCE. This kind of thing was inevitable, given the end of the ice age, when colonists were dispatched in all directions. The people they met, of course, had no experience of civilisation, so, well, it would take some time and be met with varying degrees of success.

Alas, although this was successful for some time, as the centuries progressed I guess that people forgot to eat the apple, guard themselves against evil whilst that evil, that minority of aberrations, adapted, learned how to mimic normality and disguise itself, until it finally took over the hierarchy around 5000 years ago (when archaeology shows the first evidence of what one might recognisably call ‘war’ – oe of the most important dates/facts in history). It has been this way ever since. It has progressed, culminating in the dystopia you have today.

It’s important to study and understand dystopias, so as to prevent them. To prevent the Ancient War from ever happening again.

Sometimes I think I remember it. Sometimes, it’s more, perhaps, remembering learning about it.

But what I can say, from my own intuition, is that this horrendous post-truth dystopia you have today is tame, by comparison.

But if left to its own devices, it will metastasise into something far, far worse.

But it’s not my place to stop it. Only to observe, and record. Not to get involved.

So yes, that’s it. Perhaps I am only here to spy on you.

Humanity, too, will one day be subjected to immigration control…

Starseeds and the Brookings Report

In a kind of typical fateful way (I should be used to that now) I have been prompted and provoked again.

This time by an article in ‘The Conversation’ in which a group of ‘psychologists’ do a standard hit-piece on the so-called Starseed phenomenon. I usually call Starseeds ‘Visitors’ – it has fewer ‘New Age’ associations. Indeed, the authors of this article explicitly include it in ‘New Age’ beliefs – thus automatically prompting the general public’s negative or dismissive attitude towards New Age beliefs and generating a similar opinion.

Their take on the matter is entirely predictable, of course. Although dressed up in authoritative sounding terminology it’s effectively yet another ‘compensatory mechanism’ explanation – people who are disaffected by the real world so they make up a different identity story for themselves. Thus reducing the whole Visitor phenomenon to a kind of disorder.

Likewise in typical fashion I could make a conspiracy theory out of this. First, one significant fact about the Conversation is that they received 7 million from a certain William Gates. And yet the editors still see fit to ask individual subscribers to make donations. This is disingenuous at best. Deceitful at worst. Following on from this oh-so-philanthropic gift, despite having all these extra funds, the comments section has been massively curtailed. What they call ‘moderation’ meaning essentially ‘censorship’. Most comments sections, if they are open at all, generally close within a short space of time, and for some articles there never is a comments section. Predictably, these are the ‘controversial’ articles – or rather, ‘official narrative’ articles, ranging from the Ukraine war to climate change to Covid-19. They don’t like dissenting voices there, no sir.

It’s a bit like ‘Wikipedia’. The encyclopaedia is fairly ok for non-controversial subjects, but as soon as you get into official narratives it’s entirely controlled, and therefore untrustworthy. It’s simply propaganda. But this is the way things are heading, after all. Have been for some time, for sure. The Internet was always going to be a problem for the dystopians – all that free exchange of information. It’s one of the real reasons, in my view, why Thatcher privatised British Telecom – there’s no profit in building up the infrastructure, and so the roll-out of high-speed fibre optic broadband didn’t happen until the 2000s – it should, and could, have happened twenty years earlier. So much for the Tory Party as the Party of business – British businesses having wonderful connectivity speeds would’ve given the British economy an unprecedented competitive advantage. But no, restriction of public information sharing, social media, questioning officialdom and all the rest of it was far more important for these dystopians.

Again, all somewhat predictable.

Anyhow, back to Starseeds. The new thing that struck me – although I’d mused on it previously, if unspecifically – is that this debasement of it into a psychological disorder (same as for ‘conspiracy theorists’ – the article itself directly draws that comparison) is just the latest aspect of the cover up of extraterrestrial intelligence beginning with the Brookings Report (December 1960), extending into SETI and the recent James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). The latter is simply not good enough to detect biosignatures around Alpha Centauri – thus, denying people that knowledge.

The Brookings Report essentially states that public knowledge of ETI would radically change the entire world. In other words, the entire dystopian power structure would collapse as the people asked ‘what must the aliens think of us’ and demand an end to war, poverty, pollution, neoliberal exploitation, imperialism and so on – in other words, an end to all the mechanisms of socio-economic and political control on which the dystopians rely for their own very survival. Covering up ETI, therefore, becomes a ‘security’ matter of the highest order.

It’s interesting that this comes not long after Frank Drake’s original Project Ozma, on the first day of which, 08 April 1960, he discovered a signal repeating 8 times a second (from the direction of Epsilon Eridani, around the hydrogen line, 1420MHz/21 cm). At the time, the military were quick to respond by ‘persuading’ him that it was them testing some new signal-jamming system. How convenient. The idea that the military would use this sort of frequency for jamming is ridiculous. I wonder to this day how they ‘persuaded’ dear old Frank to look the other way. Interestingly, I have just now noticed a distinct degree of ‘editing’ on the Internet to remove the metadata – the Wikipedia entry has certainly been edited accordingly, and none of the references provide it (fortunately I have notes). Thus, only those who were already familiar with Ozma would know this. For Ozma, of course, notice the obvious mathematical series in that metadata (the year number is 1+9+6+0 = 16, thus 04-08-16 as the Americans write their dates – the Wow! signal metadata is intended to be read in the English fashion, by the way).

Naturally, they couldn’t do this with the Wow! signal – the data is a lot more complex (indeed, the Wikipedia entry hasn’t been metadata-edited as far as I can see – that would, indeed, be extremely diplomatically insulting). Instead, my best intuition here tells me that ‘they’ clandestinely changed the time on the computer system, meaning that if any signal was detected it would look like it came from a different part of the sky, thus preventing the SETI scientists from obtaining a genuine location. Thus, in anticipation and knowledge of this, the real Wow! signal is simply inserted into the computer directly – it’s not a radio signal from somewhere in the region of Sagittarius.

Anyhow, given that ETI contact is a multifarious beast, the cover-up policy initiated (or formalised, rather) with the Brookings Report logically now must extend to exoplanet hunting and the Visitor phenomenon. Hence the pseudo-psychological article.

It’s interesting, of course, that Murry Hope herself sees fit to debunk the whole ‘compensatory mechanism’ idea, even some thirty years ago. She also mentions the fact that the so-called Deep State were indeed taking the Visitor phenomenon seriously – they visited her, after all, and clearly believed her. As I say, it’s a security issue, from their point of view. They would certainly be reading every word I say and taking at least some of it seriously. They are certainly sufficiently self-aware to understand that we see them as a serious threat, and would therefore enact the obvious policy of quarantine combined with sabotaging any threatening technological development. A similar thing applies with Atlantean studies – they will have doubtless launched many an expedition to the depths of the Atlantic in the hope of recovering some ancient technology they can reverse engineer. If it was up to me, I would have made damn sure to remove all that tech before modern humanity had a chance to recover it themselves. And if I was a scientist with Atlantean memories of studying sonics for example, I would hopefully keep quite about it. Given what the Americans tend to do with technology (ask the Japanese) not allowing them even more destructive weaponry (let alone interstellar or intertemporal travel) is just common sense. (Interestingly, I have come across some suggestions (see also this) that the recent earthquake in Turkey/Syria was one of the dystopians’ weapons – they do, after all, mess around with weather warfare/modification – if they want to start a nuclear war they’d need to find a way of dispersing all that soot in the atmosphere to avoid a nuclear winter, as well as repairing the ozone layer sufficiently quickly – otherwise they’d have to stay in their superbunkers for at least forty years! In that situation, I can well visualise them going all Lord of the Flies on each other.).

Murry also writes that many of these Visitors claim to come from the Pleiades – I’ve mentioned that one myself before, that the Pleiades are a star nursery – suggesting that these are quite young souls. These psychologists, naturally, take these types as their subject-matter and then generalise accordingly (I, for example, am not from the Pleiades). Some Visitors, however, are more evolved than others. Same goes for souls (I think I’ll write something about that in due course).

Anyhow, that’s a good amount to write in response to this blatant provocation! You can read the article if you wish. I think I’m done with it now. The positive to have come out of it, though, is that I am now back writing again.

I missed me too…

Quiet Times & the spiritual answer to the Fermi paradox

Here’s another story for you.

Suppose Captain Kirk and the Starship Enterprise set out on their five-year mission to chart all the systems in this galactic sector (50 lightyear radius, about 1500 stars – obviously they can’t really visit all of them at warp factor seven (343 times lightspeed), but let’s say humanity sent out some other exploratory ships as well, each covering a quadrant). In all their travels, they don’t encounter a single spacefaring lifeform.

And that confuses them. At least at first, anyway.

They do, however, come across around a hundred intelligent, tool-making species with varying levels of simple technology and, bizarrely from the captain’s point of view, all of them are perfectly contented with their lives. They all live peaceful, spiritual lives in harmony with their environment and each other. In fact, most of them are older than humanity. And wiser, too, many of them. Indeed, maybe some of these lifeforms tell the captain (once the translation issue has been resolved) that once upon a deep time in their own history, say a few million years ago, they did go through a phase of building spaceships and the like but it didn’t actually last much longer than a few hundred thousand years and then they settled down to the spiritual life they now enjoy.

Sure, some of these lifeforms would be curious about the starship and the humans’ technology, but tell the confused captain that they have no desire for any of it or to ride around in starships and all the rest of it. They are happy as they are.

Now, leaving aside any satirical humour about imperialist humans (or Americans, rather) doing their colonisation thing and exploiting these brave new worlds for their resources and cheap labour, one can well imagine how flabbergasted the captain is.

I love that word ‘flabbergasted’ by the way. Note to self – use it more often.

“What?” says the captain, “Why don’t you want all our consumer items?”

I’ll leave it there. But after talking with these lifeforms the humans discover that spirituality is the most common shared purpose amongst intelligent lifeforms. Evolution, in other words. You don’t need to fly around in spaceships to evolve. In fact, in many ways, advanced technology could be seen to prevent evolution. Especially spiritual evolution.

What I mean by spiritual evolution – think reincarnation and souls – essentially means increased understanding of the nature of reality and existence, and ultimately moving into the non-physical phase of existence. Evolving into outer time, as we Paschats might call it.

And these (time) travels into outer time can, and indeed do, happen before that final transition. It could be argued that you won’t have that final transition until you do that kind of thing. There are meditational practices for travelling in time (and space) without any need for technology. Shift into outer time, set your inner-time destination, then go there. Then back again, hopefully (do please remember your personal symbols – take your anchor with you).

Technology, indeed, as I say, can get in the way of such things. Besides, I have a personal nervousness when it comes to time-ships (but that’s another story).

A similar thing happened with our species. The Karidel, as I’ve previously suggested, were already very spiritually evolved by the time Nebthwt became uninhabitable. Some of them had travelled around in time-ships but they were soon to evolve into outer time, so the idea of expanding out into the galaxy and establishing colonies and so on didn’t really occur to them.

We Paetri, however, were not so evolved. We understood that we still had quite a way to go before we got to that stage. So when we came here to Danuih and learned about the Capellans’ advanced technology it really was quite fascinating. We are, after all, nothing if not curious. And there is certainly an undoubtable romanticism in flaying around in starships exploring new worlds and making new friends.

But eventually, you start longing for home again. And so you return, and you settle down, and you follow the Karidel’s path. All of this happened a long time ago in linear time terms, that is, which is why you won’t be seeing us if you venture out there in this time-zone. At some point, soon enough, however, I shall be going back home – which is to say, back to a different time-zone, a long time before that asteroid came along and allowed your little scurrying mammalian ancestors to evolve a bit more. It’s interesting to see what you came to be, for sure.

But we shall go back home and be happy there.

If I remember correctly, that time – some 120 million years ago – was what is known as a ‘Quiet Time’ in our galactic sector. This is one of the other answers to your Fermi paradox.

Galactic sectors fluctuate between quiet and busy times, each lasting several million years, sometimes longer. By quiet and busy, of course, I’m not referring to the number of intelligent, tool-making species alive in the sector at any one time, but rather to the number of spacefaring species. Remember also that species come and go – and on any selected planet, too. A lifeform might evolve, spend a while spacefaring, go back home, live simple, spiritual lives and then evolve into the next, non-physical phase of existence – what you would call ‘extinct’. And then, assuming a stable environment (often artificially maintained, of course) another ten or twenty, say, millions of years later another intelligent, tool-making lifeform evolves on that planet and the cycle begins again.

Add all this up, and inevitably you will end up with quiet times and busy times. That’s just the way of things.

Likewise, many lifeforms never feel the need to develop the kind of advanced physical technology which you humans have. At least, not in the same way or along the same pathway. Atlantis is a case in point. One of the reasons you don’t see much in the way of archaeological evidence of an ‘advanced’ civilisation is because they didn’t use the same kind of technology as you do. Yes, they did reach an extremely advanced level, but not in the way you would think it. They didn’t need to build skyscrapers and ICBMs to prove to themselves how wonderfully clever they were. In fact, I would say – and most people who remember The Old Country would doubtless agree with me – that the people of Atlantis reached a higher level than present-day humans. And not just because they didn’t build weapons of mass destruction or televisions or shareholder value – it wasn’t just because they were spiritual. Their technology was more subtle. They saw the world, the universe and everything – and therefore the ‘laws of physics’ shall we say – in a different way. Their technology was more practical, rather than consumerist. And as a spiritually communist society, with a fully functioning welfare state and little need for money, or patriarchal power structures, the idea of an ‘industrial revolution’ would’ve seemed somewhat absurd to them.

Today, I sometimes get the feeling that given the vast range, or discrepancy, between the levels of intelligence (emotional and psychological) and spiritual evolution of human beings – that’s to say how evolved the soul is – perhaps one answer to that question is that the older souls are the ones who did live at least several lifetimes in Atlantis. And this explains their superiority. And, indeed, their ‘ill-fitting’ to this present-day society. These are the ones for whom petty little materialism and social climbing and the pathetic machinations of the globalist cabal are all beneath them. They do not allow themselves to be tempted or manipulated and deceived by propaganda and lies.

And many of them, I am sure, probably see the vast mass of modern humans as an alien species.

These are higher souls. Perhaps the problem with today’s world is that the vast majority of human beings are lower souls. I don’t think I’m the only one to have suggested that. It makes sense.

That’s not to say, however, that ‘lower’ means ‘barbarian’ or ‘brutish’ – not at all. Just simpler and younger. We older souls were young once too, remember. So this is not intended to appear patronising. All of us are somewhere on the evolutionary pathway.

But if our captain Kirk and the crew came across Atlantis, would they see themselves as more, or less intelligent and advanced? Would they have the emotional intelligence to answer that question?

So there’s your answer to the Fermi paradox.

Most species, far from developing technology and destroying themselves, just like to lead simpler lives.

You’ll find that out soon enough.

And hopefully, when that time comes, you will understand diplomacy.

Conspiracy theories – how the dystopians get away with it

One reason I don’t much care for Marx is because he appears to operate within a system designed by and for the exploiters, or dystopians, as I call them. The notions of ‘class’ and ‘ownership’, after all, are not natural constructs. They have been imposed on humanity by these dystopians for the purposes of division and psychological control. Once upon a time, so to speak, such notions were unknown to humanity. Marx simply replaces one set of ‘owners’ with another set.

So, although I have never been a big fan of Marx, I would acknowledge that he was correct about one thing, namely the existence of exploiters and exploited. However, one shouldn’t accept this as a structural phenomenon. It’s not natural, in other words. One would do better to think in terms of psychology. Whilst it is true that there are often ‘leaders’ or ‘social decision-makers’, especially when a species is young, and that these groups will exist as such simply by virtue of their more mature psychological differences and intelligence, it does not at all logically follow that this group would necessarily exploit the people under their charge. In my species’ history, for example, the Karidel, who formed the social decision-making ‘class’, would’ve thought exploitation an absurdity. They were benevolent. Why wouldn’t they be? And that’s similar for most species when they’re young.

It was like this on Atlantis, by the way.

Psychologically, or socially, it’s simply not beneficial for that group to exploit. It’s a sign of weakness, fragility and fear, the need to control. Which, of course, suggests that they are not the ‘elite’ at all, but actually the opposite. Dangerous and deadly, for sure, but not elite. One only needs to look at the state of the world they have created and which they perpetuate in order to understand this truth. The solutions to the world’s problems are, after all, extremely simple and common sense. And yet they are not being put into practice by the social decision-makers. So either they are stupid, and do not know what these solutions are, or they do know, and deliberately do not do them. Obviously, they would like people to believe it is the former – they like hiding behind the myth of incompetence. But rest assured, reader dear, they are not incompetent, and they know exactly what they do (so don’t forgive them). But their continued position depends upon the populace believing in their ‘well-meaning but incompetent’ façade.

But it is a lie. Like so many of their attributes and utterances.

In order to understand this lie, a little psychology is in order. Or, to be more precise in this little essay, basic neuroscience.

The two main methods dystopians use to promote their propaganda and belief in their conspiracies and their own conspiracy theories (official narratives) are storytelling (narratives) and bombarding people with emotions (usually negative ones) in order to control their thoughts. They do not, as it happens, need to directly control people’s thoughts, because the structure of the human brain does that for them. When a human is bombarded with emotions, that’s to say, along with a narrative, those emotions and stories determine their thoughts. The individual creates the subtext, not the propagandist.

Incidentally, it is an insightful thing to realise that one common factor amongst those who can see through all this propaganda, who have a kind of immunity to dystopian conspiracies, is the ability to meditate. Coupled with this, inevitably, is a strong sense of the spiritual. When one meditates one is essentially shutting off the connection between the emotion-processing part of the brain (the amygdala) and the pure-thought part (the prefrontal cortex), thus allowing thoughts to be clear and lucid and unadulterated. Obviously, meditational practices should be taught to children as standard, but that’s for another essay. One thing that is interesting, however, is that brain scans (such as fMRI) do show marked differences in neural architecture between those who routinely meditate, and those who do not.

Storytellers themselves amongst my dearest readers will, I hope, be quite intrigued by what I’m about to say. So perk your ears up.

The amygdala is, in fact, split into two distinct parts, right and left. The right amygdala is responsible for, amongst other things, the processing of negative, or fear-based stimuli and emotions. The left, by contrast, processes positive emotions (including the reward system). The amygdala is also strongly related to memory-retention and processing.

So you can probably see where I’m going here. Bombard a person with negative and fear-inducing situations and you will induce fear-based emotions which, in turn, will fill up a person’s memory and dictate their thinking processes sccordingly. If you do this over an extended period of time (repetition) then those processes and the responses to them will become conditioned, because they will be reinforced in the brain’s architecture.

You may have also noticed how dystopians like to portray themselves as saviours. For example they create the problem then pretend to provide the solution (i.e. freedom from the object of the fear). So long as you are obedient and vote for them, obviously. That aspect of their strategy is directed at the left amygdala, which is also responsible for processing rewards.

This is also, naturally, the kind of thing known as ‘coercive control’ – essentially a two-step process of ‘threat’ followed by ‘reward’ (for good behaviour and submission). That reward could simply be the absence of threat.

The second aspect of propaganda and conditioning is contained in the notion of narratives/stories. Human beings see the world through stories, it is how they make sense of the world around them (and their own place in it, including their social group). You can see this at work in children quite readily. Which, naturally, places a significant degree of responsibility in grown-ups to tell the right stories.

The dystopians, of course, do not tell the right stories. Well, they do from their point of view, but not from humanity’s point of view. Remember also that what they call ‘scientific opinion’ is equally a story. ‘Scientists say such and such’ is not a statement of fact, it’s a story. People have been conditioned to think of the word ‘scientist’ as ‘authority on a subject who can be trusted as telling the truth’. And so if ‘scientists say such and such’ then, as far as the listener is concerned, it ‘must’ be true.

Unfortunately, of course, it often isn’t. The same applies to historians.

But I don’t wish to get sidetracked. If you take a step back and examine how current events are framed and presented to you (by the mainstream media) you will quickly see how all they are doing is telling you a story, in which they carefully regulate which side of the amygdala they need to appeal to. They are not, actually, telling you facts. They are telling you emotions and stories (often engaging your natural empathy – example: fake atrocity stories from Ukraine). It is then you, the reader, so to speak, who creates the subtext yourself and transforms it into ‘facts’ in your brain (or your brain’s memory). If your brain perceives this ‘stimulus’ as ‘fact’, then it will ‘categorise’ it as a fact in its memory. This then requires ‘reinforcement’ – the story is told over and over (by so-called ‘experts’) meaning that each time you hear it the ‘fact’ becomes more embedded.

This has the added bonus of getting ordinary people themselves to repeat these stories/‘facts’ to everyone else in their little social groups. Thus you end up with ‘groupthink’. Once you, as a propagandist, have let this story loose, your avid audience will unwittingly repeat it for you on your behalf. How neat.

Remember, it’s not the ‘author’ who creates the subtext, it’s you, the reader. All a skilful writer (or propagandist) needs to do is provoke you into creating the subtext they want you to create (often framed by cultural conditioning).

So if someone like me comes along and tries to tell you ‘no, actually, they were lying to you, it’s not a fact at all’ you will react against me, because as far as your brain is concerned, it is a fact and therefore it’s me who is the liar. Likewise I must be threatening and fear-inducing because I’m genuinely threatening the architecture of your own brain and trying to get you to distrust your own memories, not to mention your identity as a person, which is largely framed by your shared cultural history (storytelling). So if I threaten your cultural history, I threaten you personally. Then for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Example – you watched the Twin Towers collapse on 9/11 whilst being bombarded with scary emotions – then some ‘experts’ came on the TV to tell you a story – who the bad guys responsible are, and how the Twins collapsed (‘structural failure’). The rational part of your brain is telling you you’re watching a controlled demolition, but the emotions (the right amygdala) overrides that. So of course you trust them, they’re experts, aren’t they? Why would they lie? Aren’t they the good guys? Now this gets reinforced over and over, and anyone who tells you a different story is associated with negative-inducing emotions and therefore, for your own survival, to be avoided, shunned and, if necessary, violently persecuted.

Ask any honest, unconditioned genuine expert on physics, architecture and engineering, however, and they will laugh at the official narrative. They will tell you the only way, according to those laws of physics, that those buildings could have collapsed is by controlled demolition.

But you may have noticed why those thousands of experts haven’t really had any impact. The reason is simple – they are not telling a story. Human beings don’t see the world in facts, they see ‘emotional resonances’. There’s no point in simply telling you it was a controlled demolition, because that’s just an abstract fact. But the consequences of that fact, well, that is emotional.

So, what if I was tell you a story about a girl called Katrina who, in a parallel world, helped stop 9/11 and expose the bad guys by deactivating most of the demolition charges and leaving them for the New York Fire Department guys to find? Then all the bad guys – let’s say it was lots of people in the Bush administration – were arrested, put on trial, and then left to rot away the rest of their lives in ADX Florence. Then they revisited the hanging chads in Florida and proclaimed Gore the winner. So there was no terrorist threat after all – it was the CIA (as usual). So no invasion of Afghanistan, no invasion of Iraq killing a million or more innocent people. Let’s say the 8 trillion dollars America will have spent on the so-called ‘War on Terror’ was instead spent on amazing things like free healthcare for everyone, a von Braun space station, a massive space telescope that detected a biosignature at Alpha Centauri, a maglev network, a cure for cancer, fusion power, and so on. Now that’s a positive story. It might just work! Which version of history, after all, would you rather live in?

For most people, of course, this ‘it was a controlled demolition’ is too frightening to consider because of the implications – simply ‘your own government is capable of murdering its own people – i.e. you and your family, if they decide to’. But you voted for them! They said they cared! They told you all the right words and made you look over there at the ‘other’ for the enemy. Mummy I want to go home! People like me tell scary stories – of course you’re going to reject those stories.

So you have been conditioned to fear people who bring scary and threatening messages to you. You hurt the messenger, and thus you push the message away. Better to believe in your safe world in which your government loves you and will ‘take care of the bad buys’ for you.

That’s just one example. ‘Climate change’ is another obvious one. Although that seems to have lost its impact in recent years – most people aren’t concerned about it because there’s no ‘seeing is believing’ factor involved, despite desperate attempts to portray any remotely unusual-seeming weather as ‘extreme weather events resulting from scary climate change which you – yes you! caused! You’d best change your behaviour just like we tell you to!’ Essentially the climate change fearmongering has run out of steam, because – inevitably – people can’t, in all honesty, see anything happening.

‘Covid’ is the most recent. But I’m not going there or we’ll be here all night.

You can probably think of other examples, I’m sure. Like if I told you I’m in full support of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine this would induce negative emotions in you (apologies if you’re already clued up about what’s really been going on). Examine those emotions. Where do they come from? Who gave them to you? And why? What benefit do they get from you thinking like that?

You don’t get any benefit, by the way, but they do.

They do in the grand narrative sense. A new Cold War with a perpetual (Orwellian) enemy for you to fear. And so it starts again.

These people will not stop. Ever. They’re like the Terminator – you can’t reason with them. Or bargain with them. They don’t feel pity, or remorse. They have no conscience.

All they have is a pathology.

In a sane, healthy world, children and young people would be taught how to recognise that pathology and ostracise it.

Children would be taught the right stories. Like in the Steiner education system, their upbringing would appeal to their left amygdala, far more than the right. Taught that the world and life can be good and beautiful and full of wonder to be curious about and worth living.

I may write something later about where this all started in your (psycho)history. Where it went wrong, I mean. Once upon a time, humanity was taught the right stories and they were spiritual.

But then the anti-spirit came along. Sorry to go all Nietzschean on you, dearest readers, but that’s the root of this evil matter.

But that’s for another story.

An ‘other’ love

I’ve heard it hypothesised that these people who seem to exercise all the social control in the human world are not in fact human at all. That rather they are some kind of demonic alien force. There is a certain truth in this, of course – if we take the word ‘alien’ in its literal sense of ‘other’. For they are definitely not ‘normal’.

As I have suggested, they are ‘aberrations’. They too have evolved and adapted until now, whatever inhuman mess takes place inside their heads cannot be called human anymore. They simply don’t think like the rest of us.

As a result, for many, despair sets in. The idea that these types are far more cunning and ruthless and lacking in conscience and therefore have the decisive advantage over humanity, and that humanity is simply not sufficiently intelligent nor strong to defeat them. Well, certainly without solidarity humanity is not strong enough. The aberrations know this, naturally, and spend much of their time pitching humans against other humans. The old divide and conquer strategy – for they have learned, with history, that it works. Any out-group will do to misdirect attention and prevent this necessary solidarity. Socialism, after all, has become a dirty word.

The further suggestion, then, is that in view of this it will take nothing short of a miracle to save humanity from these psychopaths. Well, if we could replace ‘miracle’ with something like ‘external intervention’ then we may be onto the right lines. On the other hand, it is certainly the case that humanity needs to learn to resolve its own problems. This, perhaps in a nutshell, is the problem of evil.

So that places we external interventionists in something of a quandary!

Still, as I sit here in the brightening spring sunshine in the beautiful fresh, clean air and clean skies amidst all the greenery I see how obviously oblivious nature herself is to all of this human issue. The birds go about their business as they have done since humans never existed and will do long after they are gone. Everything else in nature, the same. The trees just sway in the soft wind, the cat snoozes and stretches itself in the midday sun and the bees, happily, flit from flower to flower immersing themselves in the sweet pollen.

Danuih herself, then, continues to breathe and perhaps, chooses not to pay attention to the small-minded, petty machinations of humanity and its aberrations.

Notwithstanding, naturally, the localised areas of damage these aberrations continue to cause. All that chemical-spraying and geoengineering chemtrails and deforestation and plastic-pollution and all the rest of it. Perhaps she will decide to evolve a new set of microbes capable of breaking it all down. She has time on her side, after all. And she also knows that humanity, despite its pretensions to power, does not have the capability of destroying her body. All so tiresomely anthropocentric, these foolish humans.

And perhaps she knows that, perhaps sooner than many believe, this external intervention – this miraculous alien love for her – will be arriving well before it is too late.

We will see.

A ray of hope for humanity

I would imagine that most of my dearest readers are from the western hemisphere. That is to say, they all live under the deceitful, neoliberal imperialist system which, clearly, makes people slaves without their even realising it. This system is, of course, dictated by the American Empire, and has been for some time. As with all empires, it seeks a global dominance, in which all peoples and nations are subjects within the same system. Historically, it has used either covert means (CIA coups) or overt means (military action usually involving some bogus pretext, including false flags) to either destroy or subjugate nations and peoples who have had the temerity to wish to choose for themselves a different way of life more suited to their own cultural identity. This usually translates as something like ‘socialism’, of course, that being a system tending to benefit the majority, as opposed to the American system which only benefits the minority (the few, not the many).

For the previous thirty years, for sure, this American Empire has had its way, and been able to successfully counter any such dissident nations. But in light of recent events, clearly not anymore.

Alongside this imperialism, we also have the so-called grand conspiracy which, likewise, seeks global domination, albeit in a more covert and, well, conspiratorial way (often by taking control over nations and their institutions, usually in the economic sphere). Since I don’t really know what these people call themselves anymore, I’ll continue to refer to them as simply dystopians. Interestingly, one might also suggest that these people also control this American Empire, and have traditionally used it as their base of operations, so to speak. Likewise Europe. Their latest scheme seems to be called ‘The Great Reset’. What this means in detail can be found elsewhere – these details do, of course, interest me from an observer’s point of view, I mean I am curious, I suppose, but in the end it simply amounts to the classic technological dystopias one can find in many science fiction stories. Interestingly, it is no surprise that it is a subgenre of science fiction because such dystopias can only really function with advanced technology. Essentially you need that in order to monitor and control the population, which will need to be segregated and prevented from coordinating any kind of resistance movement.

It’s quite easy to read their game plans. They very much enjoy developing technologies like ‘central bank digital currencies’ and ‘digital IDs implanted into the individual’ and ‘Neuralink’ (or whatever it’s called) and all the rest of it. I would imagine under the control of benevolent people such things could be useful tools for humanity, but then again, under the leadership of benevolent people they wouldn’t be necessary, would they? In order to produce a kind of techno-feudalist society they will also need to destroy manufacturing and industry, whilst retaining total control over large-scale projects – to this end witness the so-called ‘Green New Deal’, which is being pursued and promoted using ‘fear of climate catastrophe’ and CO2-demonisation – under the neoliberal system, of course, this can be successfully blamed on the individual and their lifestyle etc. (it’s never the fault of the powerful, in these sorts of systems). For the segregation, any threat will do – the easiest and least messy of which is a biological threat (e.g. a pandemic). Their latest example having been an abundantly successful social experiment for them. In fact, I would wager, far more successful than they would have originally hoped. They must be clapping their little hands together like excitable primates.

Anyway, personally and from a grand galactic perspective scheme of things, I find all of these people quite frankly utterly fucking pathetic. They are, and have always been, small-minded.

Normal people do not need control over others, because they understand that within their harmonious social group being excellent to each other is reciprocated, and therefore the very best way to keep themselves safe. Put it this way, given the choice between protecting or saving the arsehole of the group, or that one who made themselves your genuine friend, and came to your aid when you needed it, which one would you choose? Rhetorical question, I know.

Likewise, normal people would never choose war or conflict or hatred of others (out-groups) – for much the same reason. Cooperation is far more beneficial than conflict. This is just a logical evolutionary survival adaptation. That’s why it became ‘normal’ for human beings over the course of their long evolution (several hundred thousand years).

So these dystopians, then, clearly they are aberrations. That’s all they’ve ever been. In ancient and prehistoric times they would have been simply ostracised, and would not have survived. But then came the agricultural revolution, humans lived in larger groups in which hierarchies of labour and organisation were required, and these aberrations discovered ways to survive and assume positions of authority over others. Nevertheless, it took them a while – some five thousand years or so since the end of the ice age. Since then, however, they have only adapted further.

Fortunately, however, dearest reader, it seems to me that their time will soon be at an end. I’ve already written elsewhere about the impending catastrophe resulting from the realisation that humans are not alone, so little more needs to be said on that count. Except to suggest that perhaps this niggling little spanner in the works was something which these small-minded dystopians never considered. There’s always a bigger nix, as we say. I think, though, that they have come to realise this lately. Perhaps this explains their panic.

Anyway, there does seem to be a ray of hope for the human species. But given that, as I said at the outset, most of my readers live unsuspectingly within the shadow of the American Empire, they may be prone to reacting against what I am about to say. Because this salvation is not going to come from within that miserable empire, but from the eastern hemisphere.

The thing to understand here is quite simply this: whereas the western globalist agenda seeks a unipolar world in which all humans live under the same system, whether they like it or want to or not, a different attitude is taken by those in the east, particularly the two other most powerful countries right now, Russia and China. Thankfully, these two have been forging a laudable alliance, and they are not alone in that. The solution to how to overcome the globalists is and has always been solidarity, after all.

This eastern alliance seeks a multipolar world in which each individual people and culture and nation is free to choose their own way of life, without fear of being subjected to imperialism. A multicultural world in which everyone respects each other, culturally and economically and otherwise (if that sounds like my description of our galactic sector, then that’s intended). People subjected to western propaganda may say ah, but aren’t they authoritarian? (What? And the American Empire isn’t?!). Sure, one might respond, but they are only so because they are faced with a genuine threat. Once that threat is removed, no need for authoritarianism any longer. It would’ve been like this in Germany had World War Two never happened, interestingly enough.

So whilst the small-minded dystopians have been scheming, Russia and China have been solidifying their cooperation and both have been embarking on massive investments in connectivity and trading relations with other countries, mainly in Central and Southern Asia and Africa (although surely they will be joined by the socialist countries in South and Central America before too long). The Belt and Road Initiative is just the most well-known of these enterprises. There are others. If this multipolar project succeeds, then it will very quickly eclipse the American Empire, whose very system will die out along with the Empire itself. And humanity will be all the better for it.

This is, as it happens, inevitable. The real question, however, is whether it’s going to take a final nuclear world war three to do it. These dystopians are desperate, after all. And ultimately, they may well decide that they have nothing left to lose. There’s a small chance they might win (at least in their own minds there will be), in which case they can enact their whatever dystopian techno-feudalist vision is called nowadays.

Will we others interfere or intervene?

Now there’s another question entirely.

But what I can say, milaya, is that if and when you do launch your interstellar voyage to come and visit us at Centauri, and it’s full of Russians and Chinese and their friends, then you will all be very, very welcome.

But for now at least, reader dear, sleep well, and da svidaniye.