A Letter to Darwin K. Hoop I

On "controlled opposition thinking"

Aug 11, 2022

Letters from Vienna #80

Dear Darwin,

I’m on holiday, trying to focus on a novel, and last night went to a movie (which, since the Lockdowns has become something of a luxury) and thus didn’t have time to answer your charges in full (the film: “Anaïs in Love”/“Les Amours d'Anaïs” (2021)[1], starring Valeria Bruni Tedeschi is much to be recommended by the way!). Given the fact that your criticism is harsh I’m sure you won’t take umbrage if I reply in kind.

You say that “it’s very easy to go overboard with controlled opposition thinking and I think it’s a major mistake of over-interpretation,” to which I reply: “The issue isn’t whether you’re paranoid, Darwin. I mean look at this shit. The issue is whether you’re paranoid enough.”[2]

I’d recommend you watch (if you haven’t done so already): “The Century of the Self”[3]. “The Truman Show”[4] is by no means an exaggeration! Nor, for that matter is: “Wag the Dog”[5]. We need to question everything and this requirement, this necessity, is more urgent than ever before!

Zionism, Darwinism, and Marxism

“Zionism, Darwinism, and Marxism” you continue “are radically different things”. Yes, but they have a number of characteristics in common: all three are fundamentally anti-religious (Zionism is designed to undermine Judaism while the other two are constructed to destroy Christianity) and all three seem to have emerged as a form of malware from the murky depths of the Global Deep State (what Thomas Mann called the “Illuminati/Free Masons”).

All three are programmed for destruction, all three are “progressive” (toward what? The reign of Satan?) and all three have successfully furthered the aim of the “revolution from above” (see Kerry Bolton); this is exactly what we’ve been experiencing for over a century now.

Of course: the popular notion of “Darwinism” is the Darwinism propounded by T. E. Huxley and has little to do with the original thoughts. I must confess I found Darwin’s original texts horribly dull but a friend, who actually took the time to study them, told me that there’s a vast gap between what Darwin actually wrote and what is popularly understood to be “Darwinism” today. I, for one, believe him.

Huxley’s “Darwinism” is in fact merely a hypothesis and there’s NO proof whatsoever that we’re descended from apes (that all too famous: “missing link” has never been found!). Yet the belief that we’re basically animals makes it much easier for the powers that be to treat us like cattle (I agree with Dean Henderson that the “Protocols of Zion” (which I suspect originated in the Sabbatean/Frankist corner of the Satanist Deep State) have to be taken very seriously indeed and form something of a blue print for what is currently happening.). This explains why the powers that be are able to talk of the “great cull” as if it were nothing and above all else: why they’re able to carry it out. Darwinism, in short, is the intellectual framework for the ongoing “Genocide by Jab”.

Freemasonry

“Freemasonry” you write “means very different things to different people”. From what I’ve researched: “Freemasonry” forms a “secret religion”[6] and is one of the key instruments of the Deep State (others include the Jesuits, the BIS, the UN, the IMF etc. etc.). This explains why and how the Deep State is able to micro-manage its business.

It’s no accident that Freemasons can be found at the heart of the American (which is why Washington DC is modelled after Freemason principles)[7] and French Revolutions and why their involvement and agency has been so thoroughly covered up (I learned NOTHING about it at university! The French Revolution, as taught at my Alma Mater, simply remained a mystery!).

At the very top of the tree are the infamous Illuminati of course and this is why Thomas Mann rightly used the formula: “Illuminati/Free Masons” (who he rightly blamed on the outbreak of World War One (which by no means contracts the brilliant book: “Hidden History” by Gerry Docherty & James McGregor). If one studies Pike and, as I do, takes the Pike letter of August 15, 1871, seriously one can gain an invaluable insight into what is currently happening.

Communism, Socialism, and Anarchism

“Communism, socialism, and anarchism” you opine “greatly precede Marx. All of these facts are lost on far too many people in the truth community and capitalism stands unchallenged as a beacon of freedom when it has never been anything but a weapon of enslavement and perpetual class war.” Yes, obviously all three precede Marx and he simply hitched his wagon to their trail. Nevertheless, none of these ideologies are to be trusted. As I wrote at the beginning: we need to question EVERYTHING! The very use of the term “capitalism” is Marxist, which shows the degree of brain-washing. “Capitalism” (per se) has never existed and is merely a critique.

“Ideas”, you note “must always stand or fall on their merit”. There are two points to this: every idea must be examined on a philosophical level (using the approaches of Wittgenstein or Popper for example) and each and every idea must be studied in a historical context. What happened after an idea or an ideology was introduced? Who introduced the idea or ideology? One has to study them as if they were a disease! Thus, why does an idea simply appear out of nowhere (much in the same way that the “AIDS virus” (which doesn’t exist) or the COVID-19 virus (which also doesn’t exist) simply materialized out of “nowhere”!)?

“Most critics of communism, Marxism, and Darwinism know nothing at all about them.” It’s true that I haven’t studied any of them in any depth but I’ve experienced the result of the former when I visited Hungary in the 1980s! I realised that they were NOT good ideas and that their theories didn’t work (I didn’t realise that they were never intended to do so!). Nor had I read Sutton & Quigley and obviously knew nothing of the “Deep State”. I’m also experiencing the result of the latter now! Those[8] who are most effective in their criticism of the ongoing Lockdowns, Genocide by Jab etc. are those who argue that we are fundamentally spiritual beings and not mere cattle to be slaughtered!

“That is, they are expressing conditioned responses.” In my case: I protest most loudly. I have done a lot of research and can provide citations for why I believe what I do! “The response is not rational.” This is certainly not the case in what I have just written! “A thought leader (which one are you referring to? I do not acknowledge ANY “thought leader”) has said “don't go there” so they don’t. Many of these people cannot be so much as asked to read definitions of these things. To me, this is a very dangerous, anti-truth reflex that is not unlike what we see from our courtier and cultist vaks fascist friends. Most of these arguments further are completely lacking in intellectual discipline and are closed to disconfirming evidence.”

Against these harsh words I respond: please do a good deal more research! I can provide a reading list of you require one. I am a trained historian and what I write is usually so academically sound as to border on pedantry! Others, such as Cynthia Chung, prefer a “visually stimulating” read while neglecting the plodding, dull, academic spade work which is necessary. I, by contrast, am extremely thorough and am extremely proud of having a “philosophically trained mind”.

The UN

“The UN is blatantly anti-Marxist, pro-business, pro-capitalism, pro-fascism, and pro-plutocracy. Let’s take a look at two core Marxian principles, principles I can see no plutocrat capitalist risking. EVER:

1) giving the means of production to workers, and

2) abolition of class.

How these two Marxian principles (Marxism is a bit different) would delight the ruling class I cannot imagine.”

You confess your fault: a lack of imagination (as well as a lack of research I might add). If one studies the historical facts or even confines oneself to the writings of someone like Imre Kertész for example (who experienced both Nazism (he was in Auschwitz) and Communism, and who saw NO difference between them!) or to the writings of Victor Klemperer (who saw NO fundamental difference between Nazis, Communism & Zionism (which is why he didn’t move to Palestine)) one finds out that “the means of production” were never given to workers! Name me one, single example! Nor was “class abolished” (as Orwell rightly pointed out).

There are examples[9] however of workers running factories and working on a horizontal basis as opposed to a hierarchical one. This is, I might add, an (“anarchistic” (the absence of lords)) ideal worth striving for. There is NO need whatsoever for a boss.

I have had very positive experiences with a number of organisations which worked using a “primus inter pares” principle. In the case of one organisation: it fell apart the minute one person tried to assert their will and subjugate the others! This, however, is what didn’t happen in any single “Communist” country! This is also the reason for the Kronstadt rebellion, when the sailors discovered to their horror that the Bolsheviks they’d fought and died for weren’t interested at all in equality or democracy but rather slavery and tyranny.

But I’m rambling, wish to eat breakfast and will write more when time permits…

All the best,

Michael

[1]