Divide and Conquer/Divide and Rule

Coffee, Other News and More. Friday, September 29th, 2023.

Divide and Conquer/Divide and Rule

Is the WEF using the old tactic of weak leaders etc of dividing us so they can rule us

Today, I thought I'd bring up a sort of an old phrase we keep hearing, Divide and Conquer. Looking into it, probably the correct phrase should be Divide and Rule.

Where did this come from?

It's probably been a principle that has been used by rulers, leaders, bosses even, going back thousands of years. But it's first attributed to Philip II of Macedonia.

Most of you would probably recognize Philip II a little more in the era if you thought of him as Alexander the Great's father.

Philip was the one that you could say started the role of joining the Greek city-states into a single entity and we all know about Alexander the Great the divide and rule to great effect. They used divide and conquer or divide and rule depending on what was needed in the lands that they had taken over.

In my opinion, it's a very weak way to govern, to rule.

I've experienced it in supervising crews that sometimes you almost have to resort to divide and rule to create dissension among the crew so that you can keep them focused on the common goal of completing the job. To me, that's the last resort way of doing things.

But it certainly seems to be what we're experiencing now in how the World Economic Forum is manipulating us, or maybe the better term is the Society of the Evil Ones, if you want.

The way they're making this big fight between the right and the left, well, it's more the right wing yelling at the left.

Granted, there's some pretty crazy ones in the left, but I don't really think they're actually part of the left.

They have,, I guess you could say used the way of the Kazarian Mafia. They are name stealers, as Cliff High calls them. They have taken over the left and promoted ideas that well frankly anyone with half a brain recognizes it's totally loony and wacky.

Won't go into those ideas but it's it's a good way to keep the division going to keep everything separated in the same way that by yelling and screaming at Trudeau who well frankly he seems to be able to leap from that public relations disaster to one that's even worse.

I can hardly wait to see what he's going to do next week. I'm sure it's going to be even more damaging.

But don't for one minute think that getting rid of Trudeau is going to solve anything. It won't.

Putting Pierre Poilievre  in won't solve anything.

If anything, my personal feeling of Pierre Poilievre  is once he gets in, you will find that he He is even worse than Trudeau .

When I look back at some of Poilievre comments , to me, misstatements that really need closer looking at. He quite proudly showed off his boots as he scraped the mud off the boots, or was that the common people? He referred to he'd been out with the common people as he scraped the mud off his boots. And I'm pretty sure he symbolically thought he was scraping the Common People Off His Boots.

I find this particular wording very disturbing if he was out with the common people, did he think he was one of the elite? And the rest of us were, well, literally no more than mud on his boots.

Granted, I think all politicians do think of us that way, maybe not all, but a great many think of us as The common people and they are the elite class.

No, they are hired by us to govern, to do certain functions and none of it is to rule over us as they seem to think is their job now in so many cases.

Now, another thing that Poilievre  said that really disturbed me was that before the recent Conservative Convention, there were a number of resolutions that were going to be brought forward and voted on.

Poilievre  actually had the audacity to say that he's not bound by the resolutions. Well, if he's not bound by the resolutions, why have a party?

I think it all boils down to this promote Poilievre  over Trudeau right now. It's all part of the divide and conquer.

In the end, I think we'll find out that the conquer part is the bigger part of the words, that there's no benevolence, no governing us for any good purpose.

And we've got to look at that.

Getting back to the common people and the elite, I'm quite convinced that all politicians or most politicians look at us that way.

I don't know if the stories are true that, We've got to the point now that anything we hear about a leader or a politician, you've hav to say, is that really true?

Just because I would like to think it was true.

The latest stories about Trudeau being caught with, or maybe went on a cocaine bender when he was over in India.

Yes, the odds are he went on a cocaine bender with his fellow, probably G7 members out in a little bit of a party and snorted up on cocaine, assuming that story is true and I by no means have any information to say it is or is not.

But I find the use of cocaine quite interesting.

Years ago, I asked a person that was no longer an user, but he'd used cocaine quite a bit.

And his comment was, cocaine is the perfect drug for politicians.

It gives you a sense of feeling you were elite and better, etc.

That pretty much describes politicians, whether they are on drugs or not. They all seem to think they're better than us and they're ruling us, not governing us. It's a big difference if you look at the difference between those two words.

It did start me thinking, though, we have laws against drinking and driving.

We have laws required for various things but for some reason politicians are not bound by these laws when they get in to make the laws to govern us and I really think that I even though our country’s first prime minister was a well-known drunk I don't feel that politicians should be allowed to

I guess I'm calling for an automatic breath test on all politicians as they enter the legislature, House of Commons, whatever. I think it would surprise you how many of them aren't allowed in that day.

But I'll go further that carded athletes are required to do drug tests on a random basis.

I think our politicians should have to do drug tests on a random basis and the results should be published so we know if they have any illicit drugs in them or drug that goes over the limit, they should be barred from entering the legislature, the House of Commons, even down to the level of the local municipal council.

Do we want people impaired on drugs or alcohol making decisions for us.

I think it's time that everyone stood up and said no.

We demand that our politicians live to the higher standard that they pretend and act like they do.