The Ministry is proud of those who have caused certain topics to become taboo, where terrorism is the fnord of our generation used to legislate a multitude of human rights violations, and where certain taboo topics are fnords for terrorism and extremism of another sort - by our own "Democratic" governments against ourselves. When any topic, hypothetical or otherwise, may not even be discussed publicly -regardless- of content, relevance to our current society or otherwise, you know The Ministry is in operation and cowardice and the evil of government-mandated despotism prevails. The Ministry prevails, as so few can overcome their conditioned fnord responses, and in other cases, a desire for personal freedom and sanity in the face of an insane world of very often cowardly humans. Yes fnord is the word of the day, see here: Falkvinge: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Falkvingoe-on-Infopolicy/~3/Npac6U8CQVo “Reminder: In government training material, “terrorism” includes peacefully disagreeing with administration policy in public” So yes, most programmed humans will miss the reasoning, the thought processes, insight and applicability to informing our world today based on nothing more than a superficial yet well programmed ("schooled" by school and MSM media), emotional reaction to any old "shock headline". The following is no exception to this rule: Essays If Hitler Had Won World War II We’d Have A Better, More Just World Today Bradford Hanson · January 29, 2017 https://nationalvanguard.org/2017/01/if-hitler-won-world-war-ii-wed-have-a-b... notwithstanding any nuggets which might be contained, for a couple random examples: - “in the final analysis, WWII was essentially a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism vs. internationalism/globalism” - “Adolf Hitler and his allies fought to preserve the concept of nationalism, not just for Germans but for all peoples the world over” This sounds rather like Russia's intentions today, with its usefully catchy "multi-polar world" byline. The revival of Russians back to "traditional Russianism" - i.e. nationalism, Christianity, and now a strong, and collective, denouncement of ideology-fueled Empire, is in fact incredibly impressive to witness from our Russkie brothers and sisters in the face of the journey of despotism they went through - Stalinism, "Communism" and essentially the complete wipe-out of their right to any religious expression at all, for half a century. Today's Russian revival evidences the virtue of the Russian's' inherent (collective) character, to come back from such atrocities as they have (unlike say Cambodia). - “Nationalism really just means the sovereignty of an ethnic people and the right of such ethnic people/nationalists — within their own bordered country — to self-determination.” - “Self-determination just means an ethnic people preserving their unique culture and heritage and pursuing their collective goals as a unique people. This applies to any ethnic peoples: Nigerians, Germans, Swedes, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Tibetans, etc.” (I would add a qualifier here - 'to the extent they, collectively and by the free exercise of their collective will, so choose to do,' - but of course we see very little in the way of actual democracy on the planet today…) And plenty more besides. One may of course disagree with certain premises underlying this essay, yet is it wise to disregard the nuggets of truth embedded therein, those insights implied and explicit? Every war happens because certain humans with authority and influence, intend for that war to happen, and intend for the confront of bullets, bombs, death, atrocity and despotism to occur in a specific (or not so specific) physical region/ area. Without the intention manifested as communications and decisions in all relevant forms, of those bankers - we should probably write (((bankers))) if we wish to communicate more accurately - and war hawks or "neo-cons" or any other noun of the year, then would we have the wars we have? Yes, it's another truism "war would not exist without the actions of those who intend such wars" - yet who amongst the general population actually proceeds to this second step in their mind when they contemplate on the reality of war ongoing - on the TV, in the papers, in our collective consciousness? Good luck pepes,