Governing the Herd

Chattel, Useless Eaters, Goyim, Great Unwashed, Proles, Cannon Fodder, Plebs, Serfs, Hackable Animals – these are just a few of the terms the pseudo-elites use to describe us.

Do you ever get the sense that you’re being herded? Do you truly understand how you are governed? I began grappling with these questions back in 2017, and I’d be grateful if you’d indulge me as I share what I’ve learned so far, fully aware that there is always more to discover.

I’ve come to the conclusion that most people don’t actually understand how they are governed: how we think the way we think, how we come to believe certain things to be true, how we react in particular situations, and how we make decisions.

First, we must distinguish between structured and unstructured governance. Most people are familiar with structured governance. Take the law, for example - if you do or don’t do something, the consequences are clear. However, remember that those who make, enforce and judge the law can also be governed, meaning that outcomes can be steered in specific directions. “I was just following orders!” Sound familiar?

Unstructured governance is harder to define. It’s favoured by globalists because its flexibility allows it to be implemented across different countries and cultures. It can be subversive and even bypass elected national governments. This form of governance is a way to implement global change, though they are never forthcoming about what that change truly entails.

The following are the key mechanisms through which we are governed, both in structured and unstructured ways: The Isms, Usury, Organised Cults, Fear, Propaganda, Bread and Circuses and Education.

The Isms

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies... is a foolish idea. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years, if necessary, by the other party which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”
- Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

History shows that various ‘isms’ have been employed to govern people, such as feudalism, communism, Marxism, fascism, capitalism, conservatism, socialism, liberalism and progressivism.

I believe that since the 1990s, communitarianism - due to its legal underpinnings - has covertly become the method of governance. The subversive nature of communitarianism is further examined in another of my articles, Communitarianism for the Distracted, which can be read here.

“Communitarianism is an imposition from above masquerading as community.” “The system caters for all moods” Mark Windows - windowsontheworld.net

Communitarian governance has been employed to incrementally blur the lines between the individual and the collective, convincing you that the state and the community have a say in every aspect of your life. It’s a form of stealthy tyranny, where you are governed by your perceived 'duty to the community'. Noam Chomsky, with whom I often disagree, astutely recognised this in his book, Manufacturing Consent: "The general population doesn't know what's happening, and it doesn't even know that it doesn't know."

Many others have identified the latest agenda forwarding ‘Ism’; Stakeholder Capitalism. According to Iain Davis’ detailed analysis of the Trump administration in The Dark MAGA Gov-Corp Technate, "Stakeholder capitalism is not fascism. It is an inversion of the fascist relationship between the public and private sectors. The fascist doctrine allows the private sector to innovate but limits its authority within the framework of the political state and its institutions. Stakeholder capitalism, on the other hand, enables private corporations to use the political power of the state to further their own interests through partnership agreements. This ideology of stakeholder capitalism has taken hold of government policy worldwide and represents a logical progression towards a gov-corp technocracy."

These contemporary ‘isms’ utilise technocracy as a means of digital authoritarian control, which is set to become increasingly oppressive with the imminent rollout of Digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).

Ultimately, these ‘isms’ are merely a means to an end, designed to steer us in the same direction. As political winds shift from right to left, populists rise and fall with unfulfilled promises, and the illusion is upheld through minor adjustments in economic and social policies to align with the prevailing mood of the people. Yes, you may favour one "ism" over another, but they are all, in the end, tools for managing us. If any “ism” wins out, it’s incrementalism!

In addition to political ideologies, perhaps one of the most influential ‘isms’ to ensnare us is materialism. It binds us to our possessions, with many people defining themselves by what they own. I’m not suggesting that owning things is inherently wrong; possessions can certainly enhance our lives and expand what we can achieve. However, it’s crucial to remember that they are just objects - tools to serve us, not to control us.

Materialism may offer the illusion of prosperity, but I believe it lies at the heart of many of humanity's struggles, distorting our perception of what holds genuine value and where our true sense of self-worth comes from.

Are you governed by an Ism?

Usury

Usury refers to the practice of charging excessively high or exploitative interest rates on loans, typically far beyond what is considered fair or reasonable. It involves lending money at rates that take advantage of the borrower, exploiting their financial vulnerability.

To varying extents, though typically to a greater degree, all political ideologies - with the possible exception of anarchism - are governed by usury. As the political pendulum swings from blue to red and back again, the overall trend is that taxes rise, and the state grows larger. National governments rely on some of this tax revenue to pay interest on their debts. Ultimately, these governments are governed themselves by central banks, with the supreme authority resting in the hands of the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland. This means our entire economic system is fundamentally based on debt. So, how did we arrive at this point?

In many historical societies, including ancient Christian and Islamic cultures, usury was regarded as morally wrong and often made illegal. During the Middle Ages in Europe, the Christian Church imposed strict prohibitions against charging interest on loans, rooted in biblical teachings such as those in the Old Testament (Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:36). Charging interest was seen as sinful and exploitative, and as a result, Christians were largely barred from engaging in lending for profit.

The first group to undermine these protections for the people were the Knights Templar. In the 13th century, the Templars devised methods to bypass the ban on usury by disguising interest as 'fees' or 'service charges' rather than direct interest. Their financial acumen made them early precursors to the modern banking system. The Knights Templar still exist today in the form of Freemasonic orders.

The modern acceptance of charging interest emerged gradually as laws relaxed over time. The most notable shift occurred with the Usury Act of 1833, which effectively removed legal limits on interest rates, except in specific cases such as consumer loans. This act allowed lenders and borrowers to freely negotiate interest rates, marking the point at which usury became officially “permitted.”

In contrast to Christians, the Jewish community in the Middle Ages did not follow the same prohibitions on charging interest. Under Jewish law (Halakha), charging interest to fellow Jews was forbidden, but interest could be charged to non-Jews (goyim) under certain conditions, as outlined in Jewish religious texts such as the Talmud. Consequently, Jews became heavily involved in money lending throughout Europe, often providing loans to Christians.

While not Jewish themselves, influential families like the Medicis in Italy had close ties to Jewish financiers and bankers, especially during the Renaissance. Jewish moneylenders helped fund many of the Medici family's ventures. In cities such as Venice, Jewish families often acted as intermediaries in banking and finance for non-Jewish European elites.

Several Jewish families rose to prominence in finance, including the Cohens, Chavels, Pisans, and Baruchs. However, it wasn’t until the 18th century that perhaps the most influential banking dynasty emerged - the Rothschilds. Founded by Mayer Amschel Rothschild in Frankfurt, the Rothschild banking empire grew to become the most dominant force in global finance. As of 2025, the Rothschild family's estimated wealth is believed to be around $15.7 trillion - quite a return on money lending without producing anything of tangible value.

It's also worth noting that in 2025 many of the most influential global banks benefiting from usury and operating in financial hubs such as the City of London, New York, and Shanghai are not Jewish-owned. One example of this is JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Let’s return to central banks. Most operate under hybrid models, blending state and private influence, with significant sway held by private interests. The US Federal Reserve, for example, is entirely privately owned and controls the US dollar - the world’s dominant currency.

The Federal Reserve was established in 1913 after a secretive meeting at Jekyll Island, Georgia, where a group of powerful bankers, including J.P. Morgan and representatives of the Rockefeller and Rothschild interests gathered to plan its creation. This meeting aimed to grant these financial elites’ control over the U.S. money supply, setting up a system that, over time, would cause inflation and steadily devalue the dollar.

Subsequently, many countries, including the UK, abandoned the practice of backing their currencies with gold and other tangible assets, justified outwardly by the pressures of war. This shift, influenced by the aforementioned banking families, allowed governments to print more money.

• In 1931, the UK officially abandoned the gold standard, driven by the economic pressures of the Great Depression and financial instability.

• In 1933, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt ended the gold standard domestically, making it illegal for citizens to own gold and requiring them to exchange it for paper currency.

• In 1944, the Bretton Woods System was established. This agreement pegged international currencies to the US dollar, which remained convertible to gold at $35 per ounce. As a result, the US dollar became the world’s reserve currency.

• In 1971, US President Richard Nixon ended the dollar’s convertibility to gold, effectively dismantling the Bretton Woods system. From that point onward, most currencies were allowed to float freely, backed solely by the trust in their governments. A system known as fiat currency.

These monetary policies that followed effectively enabled the creation of money out of thin air, fuelling inflation and creating the debt-based system. The consequences of this are clear: the working and middle classes grow poorer, while the wealthy elite accumulate more assets.

Even in countries where central banks are state-owned, such as the UK, there are questions of accountability. The Governor of the Bank of England, for instance, is not part of the elected government. Why is he not directly accountable to the public? Instead, he seems to answer more to the City of London Corporation and follow the lead of the Federal Reserve.

In 1995, Richard Werner designed an experiment, which he conducted in both the UK and Germany, to test how money is created within the banking system. Werner hypothesised that commercial banks, rather than merely lending out deposits they receive from customers, actively create money when they make loans.

He proved his hypothesis that loans create deposits, not the other way around. When banks issue loans, they effectively create new money. This is a fundamental principle of modern banking. The money a bank lends out does not come from existing deposits; instead, banks create new money on their balance sheets by recording a loan and crediting the borrower's account with the loan amount. In this way, new money is created out of nothing.

Further to this, David Rogers Webb, in his book "The Great Taking," identified that the shift from tangible ownership of securities to electronic abstractions has diminished personal autonomy and bolstered centralised institutions. He demonstrates that central banks are orchestrating a large-scale acquisition of assets through the manipulation of debt and financial systems. This process allows central banks and major global institutions to gain control over securities, bank deposits, and properties financed with debt, leading to an increased centralisation of economic power.

So, knowing that the financial system is rigged, what can we do? 1. Gain as much understanding of their system as possible to navigate it, and 2. Clear any debts you have as soon as possible.

Are you governed by debt?

Organised Cults

This isn’t so much a criticism of religion per se but rather a reflection on how it’s true providence becomes obscured when highly organised. I’m a Christian who doesn’t attend church, choosing instead to contemplate why we’re here in my own way, guided by the most authentic texts I can find. Organised religion often diverges from faith in its purest form. True spirituality is about inner peace and connection with the divine, yet institutionalised religion frequently distracts from this by creating divisions, hierarchies, and centres of material power.

History shows us that religious differences have long been used as a pretext for war and conflict. While faith may preach peace, in practice, it has often been manipulated to divide and conquer. Religious institutions are not merely spiritual bodies; they are political entities that exert significant influence, shaping not only the beliefs of individuals but also the dynamics of entire communities. A recent example is the Church of England, with its former leader, Justin Welby, regularly inserting himself into political matters while neglecting to address pressing issues within the Church itself.

As interest in traditional religions has waned in recent decades, those in positions of power have promoted ‘New Age Movements’ as a replacement - merely repackaging old systems of control. In many of these movements, spirituality is commercialised, attracting grifters who turn it into a commodity for personal gain. People are sold a shallow sense of enlightenment, while the power structures behind these movements quietly exploit them. The cult-like nature of such groups often encourages followers to suspend critical thinking, embracing oversimplified worldviews detached from reality. This leaves individuals vulnerable to manipulation, as their thoughts and emotions become subtly controlled, and they stop questioning the narratives fed to them.

The Big Club. In the western world the most influential cult movement, which claims to be secular even though it worships a ‘supreme being’ is Freemasonry. It binds its members through blood oaths, functioning as a form of behind-the-scenes governance. The purpose of “societies with secrets” like the Freemasons is not merely to exert control over the world’s financial and political systems but also to shape public perception, ensuring their worldview prevails while keeping the herd in ignorance.

One must exercise caution when examining Freemasonry, as there are numerous false whistle-blowers and attempts at misdirection in this field. However, there is no doubt that its influence is extensive, permeating every level of society. Its symbolism is ubiquitous, and Masonic lodges can be found in towns and city districts throughout the country. Members occupy positions in the police, military, intelligence services, civil service, education, and NHS Trusts, forming a network that extends from local to national politics and the judiciary.

"While the local Masonic lodges may appear to be just benevolent organizations or social clubs, they are the building blocks of a global network of control, all working toward the same agenda, often without the members themselves fully understanding the larger picture." - Alan Watt, Cutting Through the Matrix

The Freemasons are an ancient society, dating back hundreds of years, with many key figures among the global elite counted within their ranks. Operating as a brotherhood behind the scenes, they have long worked to shape the world according to their vision, playing a key role in events such as the French Revolution, the American Revolution, and the Russian Revolution - and many believe they are now behind the latest upheaval, ‘The Great Reset.’

Those at the very top ensure their beneficial system remains intact, regardless of what happens in the wider world.

There are openly acknowledged to be three lodges linked to the UK Parliament: The New Welcome Lodge (5139), which primarily caters to Labour MPs; the Gallery Lodge, which is for political journalists; and the Canongate Kilwinning Lodge, based outside Holyrood, serving Scottish MPs.

Below is a brief, and by no means exhaustive, list of Freemasons who have influenced the governance of British society. Naturally, due to the secretive nature of the brotherhood, compiling definitive lists is notoriously difficult, especially when it comes to areas such as the police and judiciary.

Politics:

· Winston Churchill (1874–1965) Studholme Alliance Lodge (No. 1591) in London. Churchill, the British Prime Minister during World War II, was an active Freemason. He was initiated in 1901 and remained an active member for his entire life.

· Harold Wilson (1916–1995) St. John’s Lodge (No. 3426) in London. Harold Wilson, who served as the British Prime Minister in the 1960s and 1970s, was known to be a Freemason and participated in various Masonic activities during his political career.

· Sir Edward Heath (1916–2005) St. James's Lodge (No. 3730) in London. Sir Edward Heath, the British Prime Minister from 1970 to 1974. Operation Conifer, led by Chief Constable Mike Veale and published in 2017, concluded that there were seven child abuse allegations serious enough that Heath would have been interviewed under caution had he been alive.

· Alec Douglas-Home (1903–1995) Royal St. George's Lodge (No. 1686) in London. Alec Douglas-Home, who served as Prime Minister of the UK in the early 1960s, was a member of the Freemasons and associated with prominent lodges.

· Michael Howard (1942–Present) Ramsgate Lodge (No. 548). Michael Howard, former leader of the Conservative Party, was known to be a Freemason, and his membership in the Ramsgate Lodge was widely reported.

· Tony Blair (1953–Present) Lodge of St. Andrew (No. 1929). Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister from 1997 to 2007. Blair is also listed as a Knight of Malta, an order of the York Rite of freemasonry. His Masonic affiliation has been a subject of public discussion, though he has kept information of his association with Freemasonry suppressed.

· David Cameron (1966–Present) Oxford University Lodge (No. 2878). David Cameron, the former British Prime Minister from 2010 to 2016, has been reported to have been inducted into Freemasonry during his time at Oxford University.

· Tim Fortescue (1916 – 2008) Lodge of St. John (No. 1409) which is based in Bristol. He became a Freemason in the early 1950s, and his involvement in Freemasonry was well-known in political circles. He gave an extremely telling interview in 1997, when describing his role as a Tory Whip, he said: “Anyone with any sense who was in trouble would come to the whips and tell them the truth, and say now, “I’m in a jam, can you help?” It might be debt, it might be a scandal involving small boys, or any kind of scandal which a member seemed likely to be mixed up in, they’d come and ask if we could help. And if we could, we did. We would do everything we can because we would store up brownie points. That sounds a pretty nasty reason but one of the reasons is, if we can get a chap out of trouble, he’ll do as we ask forever more.”

Media:

· David Dimbleby (1938–Present) The Lodge of St. John (No. 3436). David Dimbleby, a well-known Freemason and renowned British broadcaster and former host of Question Time. For many years this was the most influential political TV show in the UK.

· Jimmy Savile (1926–2011) The Lodge of the Royal Arch (No. 2872). Jimmy Savile, the British TV personality and DJ, was a well-known Freemason. His involvement in Freemasonry was widely reported, although his legacy became tarnished following the revelation of his crimes after his death. Savile was a paedophile and his masonic connections to the police protected him whilst he was alive.

· Dennis Bardens (1911–2004) was a keen Freemason and a member of several lodges in England, primarily meeting at Great Queen Street (No. 6) in London. The British writer and journalist played a pivotal role in founding the influential BBC television programme Panorama.

· Sir Alfred Dyer (1865 – 1947): Past Master of the Hastings Lodge (No 8695) A distinguished journalist and editor of the Hastings & St Leonards Observer, Dyer was actively involved in Freemasonry and recruiting other journalists into the craft.

Royalty:

· Edward VII (1841–1910): Royal Alpha Lodge (No. 16) in London. Edward VII, who became King of the United Kingdom in 1901, was also a Freemason. He was a member of the Royal Alpha Lodge, one of the most prestigious Masonic lodges in London.

· Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (1921 – 2021): Antiquity Lodge (No. 2) The late husband of Queen Elizabeth II, was an active member and was initiated into Freemasonry in 1952.

· Prince Edward (1964 – Present): Royal Alpha Lodge (No. 16), a cousin of Queen Elizabeth II, is a prominent Freemason. He is also a member of Windsor Lodge (No. 1754) and was initiated into the Masonic Order in 1986.

· Duke of Kent (1935 - Present): Lodge of St. James (No. 1112) A very high level freemason, he is also the Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE), a position he has held since 1967.

· Lord Louis Mountbatten (1900 – 1979): Lodge of St. John (No. 1409) The last Viceroy of India and an influential British royal figure, was a Freemason. He was initiated into Freemasonry at the Lodge of St. John in Malta, in 1929.

Military:

· Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery (1887 - 1976): The Royal Army Lodge (No. 2205) (later becoming a part of the Army and Navy Lodge) Bernard Montgomery, one of the most famous British military leaders of World War II, was a Freemason and an active member of the Freemason community.

· Field Marshal Lord Roberts (1832 – 1914): Lodge of Honour (No. 2718) Field Marshal Lord Roberts, a prominent figure in the British Army during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was initiated into Freemasonry and was an active member.

· General Sir Michael Jackson (1944 – 2024): West Kent Military Lodge (No. 1422). Served as the Chief of the General Staff from 2003 to 2006.

· Air Chief Marshal Sir Hugh Dowding (1882 – 1970): The RAF Lodge (No. 4496) One of the key leaders during the Battle of Britain, was known to be an influential Freemason within military circles.

On April 27, 1961, President John F. Kennedy delivered a speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City, in which he stated: "The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings." This remark did not endear Kennedy to the powerful elites, including John Edgar Hoover, a 33° Freemason from Columbia Lodge No. 3 and Director of the FBI. Just two years and seven months later, Kennedy was assassinated.

It's important to bear in mind certain facts that Freemasons openly acknowledge. Once you become a Freemason, you remain one for life. Although you may stop attending meetings, you can never truly leave once you have taken the oath. Furthermore, once you’re a member, loyalty to the brotherhood takes precedence over all else, which, inevitably, can only lead to corruption.

There is a lodge in every town and city district across the Western world, and the true purpose of Freemasonry is closely guarded at its highest levels. The lower levels serve as little more than a benign front, with members often engaging in charity work alongside benefitting from career advancement and contract opportunities. While this may be considered low-level corruption, it’s still corruption nonetheless - and it only grows more pervasive as the selected ones ascend to higher degrees.

I urge you to consider whether this opaque system of control is beneficial for society?

So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. - Matthew 10:26

The cult of the NGO is now an additional layer of governance which has been introduced since the late 20^th century. Those who work within these organisations see themselves as change agents, yet these modern bourgeoisie are viewed by those who govern them as 'useful idiots' - driving policies whose true objectives they fail to understand.

There’s also a small group to consider: the cowardly 'Ketman' within the system, those who fail to challenge the lies. Ketman, as described by Czesław Miłosz in his book The Captive Mind, is a term with origins in Islamic traditions. It refers to the way individuals cope with a system steeped in hypocrisy, going along with falsehoods for personal gain or to conform. Morgoth’s Review provides an excellent analysis of this concept in relation to contemporary UK politics in The Portrait of a Manager.

It's important to note that this sector, which produces little of tangible value, represents billions within the zombie economy. Furthermore, those working in this sector are handsomely remunerated, with the average CEO salary for a think tank in the UK ranging from £80K to £150K.

There’s an ever-expanding army of NGOs operating in the UK, including think tanks, activist groups and charities, which form an embedded network influencing policies without public consent. Here are just a handful (out of many hundreds) of the most influential NGOs, both at national and local government levels, that are frequently cited in white papers:

​ · Demos – CEO: Polly Curtis. She has highlighted the importance of collaborative governance and public engagement in achieving the organisation’s goals, which include promoting economic and racial justice. Demos is also working with other NGOs, such as the Basic Income Earth Network, to advance the Universal Basic Income (UBI) agenda. It’s other major focus is to promote and introduce ‘Citizens Assemblies’ which it is doing so in partnership with Involve UK.

· The Fabian Society – General Secretary: Joe Dromey. Its key objectives include promoting equality, advocating a socialist approach to sustainable development, and fostering international cooperation through collective action. Affiliated with the Labour Party, the Fabian Society plays a significant role in shaping its policies.

· Apolitical – CEO: Robyn Scott. This global platform is dedicated to supporting public servants in building effective and sustainable governments. It is currently collaborating with the UK Government to train one million civil servants in AI, backed by $5 million in funding from Google.org.

· Involve UK – CEO: Sarah Castell. Main funder is George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. Involve collaborates with various organisations to design, facilitate and lobby for more Citizens Assemblies. These assemblies have been criticised for being rigged to achieve pre-determined outcomes.

· Trilateral Commission – Founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission is an international, non-governmental organisation dedicated to strengthening cooperation between the United States, Europe, and Japan (hence the "trilateral" aspect). Its primary focus is lobbying and addressing global challenges, including economic policy, security, and political issues, particularly those affecting relations between these three regions. Notable UK politicians who are current members include Keir Starmer, Peter Mandelson, Rory Stewart, David Miliband, Sajid Javid and Alok Sharma.

· The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) – CEO: Professor Becky Francis, who is currently on secondment with the UK government to develop a new compulsory national curriculum. Although it’s not yet been released, the stated aims of this curriculum include:

1. Making the curriculum more inclusive by integrating the histories and contributions of diverse cultural and ethnic groups, fostering a broader understanding of society.

2. Expanding subject areas beyond traditional academic disciplines to incorporate fields such as digital education and sustainability.

· Nuffield Trust – CEO: Thea Stein. An independent health think tank dedicated to improving the quality of healthcare in the UK through evidence-based research and policy analysis. It played a key role in supporting ‘nudge’ public health messaging and recommended measures to encourage widespread vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic.

· Chatham House (Royal Institute of International Affairs) – CEO: Bronwen Maddox. Chatham House plays a highly influential role in shaping both global and national policy discussions. Its research and analysis are widely referenced by governments, international organisations, and policymakers worldwide. The institute is particularly secretive and well known for the Chatham House Rule, which allows individuals to speak freely at meetings and conferences, with the assurance that their comments will not be publicly attributed to them.

· Tony Blair Institute for Global Change – CEO: Catherine Rimmer. The institute focuses on promoting sustainable development and governance through global cooperation. Its key areas of policy advocacy include the implementation of digital IDs and the expansion of digital technologies to control education systems.

· ARC (The Alliance for Responsible Citizenship) – CEO: Baroness Philippa Stroud. Co-founded by Jordan Peterson, ARC is a right-leaning think tank that seeks to influence the policies of centre-right political parties worldwide.

· Just Stop Oil – Co-founder Roger Hallam, an environmental activist, also co-founded Extinction Rebellion and Insulate Britain. Ironically, the organisation’s largest funder is Aileen Getty, granddaughter of Getty Oil tycoon Jean Paul Getty. Known for its use of non-violent civil resistance to demand an end to new oil, gas, and coal projects, Just Stop Oil receives significant media coverage.

· HOPE not Hate – CEO: Nick Lowles. Funded by government grants and private investors such as the Paul Hamlyn Foundation and the Barrow Cadbury Trust, the organisation works to equip local communities and groups to combat hate at a grassroots level. It also seeks to influence national debate through briefings, training for public policy figures, and lobbying for legislation such as the Online Harms Bill, which aims to regulate online speech.

· Tavistock Institute of Human Relations – CEO: Dr Eliat Aram. Although not officially a government agency, the institute has received substantial funding from government bodies and private organisations, allowing it to play a key role in shaping public policy. Its main services include change consultancy, executive coaching, and professional development, underpinned by its social science research.

· World Economic Forum (WEF) – CEO: Klaus Schwab. The WEF is funded through membership fees paid by the world’s 1,000 largest corporations. It maintains a strategic partnership with the United Nations and aims to transition the world towards 'Stakeholder Capitalism' through what it terms ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution’ or ‘The Great Reset’. King Charles III is a notable advocate, and Keir Starmer famously stated in an interview that he prefers Davos to Westminster.

I ask you to consider this simple statement: If we got rid of all the lodges and NGOs, the world would be a better place!

Are you governed by a cult?

Fear

War, pandemics, cyber-attacks, financial collapse, terrorism, immigration or ‘le spectacle principal’ climate change. Governments have long known maintaining a state of ‘Permacrisis’ is an effective suppressant for the general public. When in a state of fear many lose the ability to think critically and are distracted from other events which may actually be more significant. Carol Quigley wrote in Tragedy and Hope; "War, by its very nature, tends to accelerate the development of technology and organization, and to produce social and political changes that might otherwise take decades to accomplish."

The agenda-forwarding covid crisis was used to get national governments, in lockstep, to enact sweeping changes, sometimes with little public scrutiny or resistance. They capitalised on this permacrisis to justify emergency powers, implement surveillance measures, control the flow of information, limit personal freedoms, enhance state control and oversee the biggest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the elites in known history.

When discussing how governments use fear one is often met with the statement “they wouldn’t do that!”. Well, here’s some evidence to suggest that they would:

Operation Gladio refers to a covert NATO project that involved the establishment of secret "stay-behind" armies in Europe during the Cold War. Its purpose was to prepare resistance networks in the event of a Soviet invasion or communist takeover. The operation began after World War II, primarily in Western Europe, and was organised by the CIA in coordination with NATO, along with intelligence agencies from the United Kingdom and other Western nations.

Governments set up false flag events, killing their own citizens, to blame Left-Wing Extremist groups: This also helped fuel anti-communist sentiments to steer the public mood and justified increased government crackdowns.

The operations often aimed to destabilise democratic governments and create chaosism to Influence Politics in Italy and Belgium. ‘Order out of chaos’, a mantra famously associated with Freemasonry, particularly the Scottish Rite. In this context, it appears as the motto "Ordo ab Chao," This represents the idea that the world, often seen as chaotic and in disarray, can be governed more effectively by using chaos as justification to implement desired change.

The Italian government officially acknowledged the existence of Gladio in 1990, after a series of investigations revealed connections to right-wing paramilitary groups involved in violent incidents during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, such as the:

· Piazza Fontana bombing in Milan on December 12, 1969. A bomb exploded in a bank, killing 17 people and injuring 88.

· The 1972 Peteano Bombing: In this case, a bomb exploded near the Italian village of Peteano, killing three Italian police officers. While initially blamed on left-wing extremists, later investigations revealed that members of right-wing paramilitary groups, including those with ties to NATO's Gladio networks, were responsible for the attack.

· The 1980 Bologna Train Station Bombing: On August 2, 1980, a bomb exploded in Bologna’s main train station, killing 85 people and injuring more than 200. Initially attributed to left-wing terrorists, the bombing was later linked to right-wing extremists with connections to Gladio. In this case, the attack appeared to be an attempt to create fear and chaos, possibly to prevent the growing influence of left-wing political movements in Italy.

· The 1974 Bombings in Brussels: In 1974, a series of bombings in Belgium, especially the Terrorist bombing in Brussels, targeted left-wing and pro-communist groups. The bombings were carried out by right-wing extremists who were suspected of having ties to the Gladio networks. Like other attacks, these bombings aimed to escalate tensions and portray the left as violent and extremist, thereby justifying a crackdown on left-wing groups and strengthening the position of NATO-aligned forces.

· The 1985 "Double Agent" Scandal: In Belgium, a false flag operation was also reported in which NATO's stay-behind network infiltrated the ranks of left-wing organizations. One well-known incident involved the use of double agents to create the illusion that left-wing extremist groups were responsible for violence, even though the agents involved were actually working for NATO or linked entities.

The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a supposed attack on U.S. Navy ships by North Vietnamese forces in August 1964. This incident led to the escalation of the Vietnam War. It was later revealed that the attack had been misrepresented and exaggerated, with evidence suggesting that the second attack was fabricated to justify the U.S. involvement in the war. In 2005, the U.S. government admitted this by releasing declassified documents that revealed the Gulf of Tonkin incident was exaggerated to increase support for military action. This admission confirmed that the initial reports were misleading and played a crucial role in escalating the Vietnam War.

Do you still think governments wouldn’t kill their own citizens? I ask you to look into more recent events with a critical mind. And to be frank, if you still believe the official government narrative for 9/11 and the 7/7 London tube bombings, you are being steadfastly governed.

The attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7th is an example of an allowed event that has raised significant questions, especially regarding the justification for extreme retaliatory measures. While the situation is historically complex, how many of the facts presented in the Double Down News report below were left out of mainstream news coverage?

It’s been repeatedly demonstrated that governments and influential groups exploit fear, exaggerate crisis narratives, and use them to make citizens more inclined to accept extreme measures, heightened surveillance, and the erosion of civil liberties, all under the guise of 'for your safety.'

Do you allow fear-driven narratives to govern your thinking?

Propaganda

Let’s start with a famous quote from Edward Bernays’ book Propaganda; “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

Every time you watch television, check your phone, read a newspaper, or glance at a billboard, someone is attempting to influence your thoughts. Algorithms can even tailor propaganda specifically to you. The media is complicit in this, as they are often controlled by their financial backers - whether corporations or even your own government, orchestrating coordinated messaging. Other culprits include NGOs and privately funded campaign groups, such as 'Hope Not Hate' and 'Extinction Rebellion'.

Propaganda is often remarkably subtle, a passing comment from your favourite TV personality or the use of the most potent lie: omission. At its most effective, it convinces people they’re making their own choices, leading them to act in ways they might never have considered. Mass media amplifies propaganda, reaching vast audiences swiftly and repeatedly. It’s woven into the very fabric of the system. The constant bombardment of information leaves little room for critical reflection.

Propaganda fosters a sense of belonging, shaping identities by aligning individuals with a larger group or cause. It diminishes personal responsibility, as people feel their actions are driven by a higher purpose; “We’re all in this together!” Agitation propaganda seeks to provoke action, often through emotional appeals and catchy slogans, constantly repeated by those programmed. Paradoxically, the more educated a society, the more effective propaganda becomes. Educated individuals tend to consume more media and believe they’re immune to influence, making them even easier to sway.

Of course, those who govern us make us pay for our own propaganda. The Nudge Unit, officially known as the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), was established by the UK government in 2010. It applies principles of behavioural science to subtly influence public behaviour, often without individuals realising they are being steered towards a particular choice. The unit’s goal is to use behavioural economics and psychology to create policies that encourage so-called beneficial behaviours - without the need for direct coercion.

And if you believe we have a free media, think again. The BIT works directly with the media and is actively seeking greater control over what you see and hear through legislation such as the Online Harms Bill.

Key Aims of the Behavioural Insights Team

1. Messaging and Public Communication

   • BIT advises governments and organisations on how to frame messages in the media to shape public behaviour.

   • This includes crafting news headlines, public health campaigns, and political messaging to maximise compliance and engagement.

2. Social Norms and Persuasion Tactics

   • BIT applies behavioural science techniques to media campaigns, using nudges such as:

     • Emphasising majority behaviour to encourage conformity e.g., "9 out of 10 people pay their taxes on time".

     • Using emotional appeals and fear-based messaging, particularly during crises e.g., COVID-19.

3. Collaboration with Journalists & Broadcasters

   • BIT provides training and insights to journalists on how to incorporate behavioural science into their reporting.

   • It works with TV, radio and digital platforms to shape narratives

   • BIT conducts A/B testing on social media to determine the most effective ways to frame content.

   • It advises on algorithmic adjustments to promote certain narratives while amplifying influencers who support them.

The only true defence against propaganda is self-awareness and critical thinking. Recognising how these tactics operate is the first step in resisting their influence.

Does propaganda govern you?

Divide and rule

This method of governance is as old as time. The concept of "divide and rule" or ‘divide and conquer’ is often attributed to various historical rulers and empires as a strategy to maintain control over diverse and potentially rebellious populations. The idea is to create divisions or exacerbate existing divisions among people whether along ethnic, religious, political, or social lines in order to prevent unified opposition to the ruling power. Frequently employed by The Roman Empire the "divide and rule" strategy played various tribes, factions, or ethnic groups against each other. The Romans would often allow local rulers to maintain their authority, but only if they cooperated with Roman control. This kept the local populations from uniting against the empire.

During the period of imperialism, the British Empire is often cited as a prime example of "divide and rule" tactics. In India, for instance, the British used religious and caste divisions to prevent a unified rebellion against colonial rule. They played different groups such as Hindus and Muslims against each other, exacerbating tensions and making it easier to gain overall control.

Labour vs Tory, Republican vs Democrat, Catholic vs Protestant, Christian vs Muslim, Jew vs Muslim, West vs East, Right vs Left, woke vs anti-woke, progressive vs conservative, Brexit vs Remain, Israel vs Palestine, Ukraine vs Russia, black vs white, gay vs straight, North vs South, town vs country, Man Utd vs Liverpool, Beatles vs Stones.

Pick a side, any side, as long as it’s one of our infiltrated and collectivised groups. Often this situation is deliberately amplified through politicians, media and NGOs using the tactic of Hypernormalisation to create a distorted or simplified version of reality because it’s easier to deal with than confronting the complexity and uncertainty of the real world. This phenomenon often arises in situations where systems or institutions fail to provide clear, honest answers or solutions, leading to confusion and disillusionment. People then begin to accept the simplified version of events because it seems more manageable, even if it’s not true.

Are you governed to always pick a side?

Bread and Circuses

The phrase "bread and circuses" comes from the Latin term panem et circenses, coined by the Roman poet Juvenal in his Satires (circa 100 AD). It refers to a superficial means of appeasing or distracting the masses, typically with food and entertainment, to prevent them from addressing more serious social or political issues. Over time, it has become a well-known metaphor for the use of entertainment and material comforts to pacify people, particularly in times of political or social unrest.

Elite insider Aldous Huxley in his book Brave New World said: "The World State's motto is 'Community, Identity, Stability.' But the population is kept content with distractions, pleasure, and comfort, much like bread and circuses in ancient Rome."

In 2025, there is a televised football match every night, a 24-hour news cycle pumping out fear and divisive narratives, and all manner of distraction entertainment just a few button presses away.

It’s not a surprise, given their key role as a control mechanism for the elites, that freemasons were heavily involved in the creation of organised sport. The Football Association (FA) was founded on October 26, 1863, in London, England. The first official meeting of the FA was held at the Freemasons' Tavern in London, where 12 clubs and schools agreed to adopt a unified set of rules for the sport. Cuthbert Ottaway and Ebenezer Cobb Morley, both prominent freemasons, were the most influential figures in its set up.

The founders of most major British clubs were freemasons with Manchester United FC’s (Newton Heath), John Henry Davies just one example.

Several prominent early figures in the development of cricket, particularly those involved in the establishment of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) in 1787, were Freemasons. The MCC, which became the sport's central authority, had ties to Freemasonry, with members of the club often involved in Masonic lodges. For instance, William Clarke, one of the key figures in cricket's early development, was a known Freemason. John Lillywhite another Freemason, played a key role in the development of cricket and was involved in the early years of the sport's formal structure. Thomas Lord, the founder of Lord's Cricket Ground in London, was another figure who had Masonic connections. Lord's remains one of the most famous cricket venues in the world. Thomas Lord's establishment of the ground in 1787 was a key moment in the sport’s development and is still considered the home of cricket.

The Duke of Kent, Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE) and president of the Lawn Tennis Association 1969 - 2021.

As a sports fan and someone who’s played amateur football and cricket all my life, alongside spending countless hours watching professional sport, these discoveries are somewhat difficult to swallow. I still believe sport offers great health and social benefits, and I encourage my sons to participate in it. I continue to love sport and still allow it to govern some of my time, but I now view professional sport through a very different lens, fully aware of how it’s been corrupted and used as a tool of control.

This section might actually be better titled “Booze and Circuses,” as alcohol has long been used to pacify populations. I could also examine the impact of drugs, pornography, and video games in pacifying and fragmenting societies, but this is self-evident. However, it is worth considering who has allowed their proliferation and for what purpose.

In 18th-century England, particularly in the cities, gin became widely available and affordable, leading to what became known as the ‘Gin Craze’. While this was more a public health issue than a direct method of pacifying the population, the widespread consumption of gin can be seen as a means of controlling the poor, who were its primary consumers. During times of economic hardship, gin offered an escape from their difficult lives. In some cases, it helped to prevent large-scale unrest, as the distracted and inebriated poor were less likely to protest.

The Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union made extensive use of vodka in social and political life. Vodka consumption became so ingrained in Russian culture that it was used as a means of distracting the populace from harsh realities. The Soviet state, in particular, benefited from the fact that alcohol consumption was widespread, and authorities sometimes allowed or even encouraged it to maintain social order, suppress dissent, or dull people's awareness of their circumstances. Soviet leadership even had a vested interest in the production of vodka, as it was a major state-run revenue source. In many parts of the Soviet Union there was often not enough food, but there was always plenty of booze!

To be clear, I’m not criticising those who regularly enjoy a few pints at the local pub. In fact, it’s a tradition we should strive to preserve. British pubs are places where information is shared and ideas exchanged. They’re also spaces where people can unwind, have a laugh, and ridicule those who try to control us. It’s hardly surprising, then, that globalist policies are making running a pub as a viable business almost impossible.

The main advantage the elites gain from their “bread and circuses” is distraction and the harvesting of public energy. Just imagine if football and alcohol were taken away from the British public for any length of time - where would all that energy and attention go? And what might be achieved if it were directed towards scrutinising the elites and their behaviour?

Do you have vices which govern your daily life?

Education

This section particularly resonates with me, as I’m a secondary school teacher. Hopefully not the stereotypical kind, though I can appreciate the irony that some might see me as part of the problem.

Education systems across the Western world each have their differences, yet over time, they share a common trend: increasing centralisation. Many schools began as faith-based institutions - both public and private - or as specialist schools, offering a diverse range of choices. However, as time has passed, this diversity has diminished, giving way to homogenisation and a cultural shift towards mediocrity, where conformity is prised over excellence, and discomfort in learning is avoided.

In the UK, two key milestones enabled the centralisation of the education system:

1. The Education Act of 1944 (Butler Act): This was a pivotal moment, introducing free secondary education and establishing the framework for modern schooling. It set up the tripartite system, dividing students into grammar schools, secondary modern schools, and technical schools. Over time, this system with the later introduction of comprehensive schools was the start of the homogenisation process.

2. The Education and Inspections Act 2006: Another significant piece of legislation introduced by Tony Blair’s Labour government, this Act allowed schools to form 'partnerships' with external organisations and build 'federations', grouping schools together. This set-in motion what is now known as the Multi-Academy Trust (MAT) system, a form of collectivisation through public-private partnerships and template-driven communitarian governance.

It is far easier to govern 1,346 Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) in England (as of January 30, 2023) than it is to manage over 24,000 individual schools. The largest MAT by pupil headcount is the United Learning Trust, which, in the 2022-23 academic year, managed 79 schools with a total of 57,287 pupils.

As of writing this, in the UK we await a new national curriculum which is to be made compulsory for all schools. Although we don’t know the details of this, the direction is clear, yet more centralised top-down control of what children are to be taught. In the US they’ve had ‘Common Core’ brought in and Charter Schools which centralised control away from the individual states. The EU also steers its member states to fall in line with the directives from UNESCO.

These centralised systems have facilitated a shift in education philosophy away from a focus on traditional, academic knowledge to a more ‘globalist’ and ‘progressive’ agenda, driven by UNESCO and the United Nations and transformed schools to create a compliant, non-critical, and easily controlled populace. Go to any school’s website, look up their ethos and values and you will come across the words ‘global citizen’.

These systems have also introduced Behaviourism Experts to influence how students are managed. The use of psychological techniques emphasising conditioning and manipulation over teaching, critical thinking or intellectual rigour has diminished students' ability to think independently. Curricula have been deliberately simplified and reduced to ensure that students are less able to think critically. If you don’t believe me, just compare today’s exam papers with those from 30 years ago. Education has increasingly become about behaviour modification and social engineering, driven by the introduction of subjects like Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education.

This shift can be traced back to Julian Huxley, the first Director-General of UNESCO. In his 1946 work UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy, Huxley laid out the guiding principles and vision for the newly formed United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. The primary goal was to develop a "world culture" that transcended national boundaries, fostering a sense of shared purpose among all people. Huxley believed international cooperation required global planning and governance. He envisioned UNESCO as a cornerstone of a future "world government," coordinating collective efforts to manage global challenges. Huxley was also a proponent of "Scientific Humanism" and saw eugenics as a means of applying evolutionary principles to human society, aiming to improve public governance.

So, who is responsible for implementing these ideas, largely without the consent of the public? It’s clear that the ‘Long March Through the Institutions,’ inspired by Antonio Gramsci and Rudi Dutschke, was largely successful. In the late 1960s, they sought radical social change in Western societies and began a gradual infiltration of key institutions with Marxist advocates - or at least sympathisers. Gramsci referred to this as the ‘war of position.’ However, by the 1990s, I believe the situation became more nuanced, as insightfully identified by sociologist and author Stuart Waiton in his writings.

Waiton argues that these ‘New Elites,’ who now occupy key positions in politics, education, NGOs and media, shape societal norms, values and discourses in ways that often prioritise their own interests and worldview, driving a form of Cultural Hegemony. He highlights the role of universities in creating and promoting these new elites. According to Waiton, many of these elites come from educational backgrounds that reinforce their sense of superiority and entitlement, particularly within fields like the media, academia and the arts.

Waiton challenges the meritocratic narrative often promoted by the new elites, which suggests that those who succeed in society do so based on talent and hard work. He argues that this meritocracy is a myth, as social and cultural capital play a significant role in securing positions of power, thereby reinforcing inequality. A clear example of this is the implementation of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) targets worldwide. Mediocrity is often promoted over genuine ability, as the groupthink of these new elites must be protected, which is evident in the all to obvious decline of competence across aforementioned sectors.

The gatekeeping imposed by these ‘New Elites’ has created a significant disconnect from the working class, who find that progressive or neo-left-wing values are out of touch with the everyday struggles and concerns of ordinary people. This disconnect has led to increasing alienation and resentment between the two groups, which is now playing out in what is often referred to as the "culture war."

Gatekeeping, which begins in schools, conditions us to stay within our lanes. The Overton window - the range of acceptable opinion - serves as a key tool to govern the masses. Anyone who steps outside this constructed boundary is swiftly and aggressively attacked. Programmed responses are quickly deployed, such as: conspiracy theorist, far-right, populist, racist, anti-vaxxer, homophobe, misogynist, climate denier and the ultimate shut-down label: anti-Semite.

These new elites tend to share similar ideological perspectives and promote a uniform set of values and ideas, often discouraging dissenting opinions. This groupthink leads to a lack of critical diversity in thought and a tendency to marginalise those who challenge the prevailing norms. As a result, there has been a narrowing of perspectives and a less open-minded approach to societal issues, with individuals who do not conform to the elite’s worldview being dismissed, ignored and increasingly censored.

General Konstantin Petrov’s analysis goes beyond the psychological phenomenon of groupthink. He identifies egregors, a concept where a collective consciousness or energy is created by a group of people, with their shared thoughts forming a kind of "hive mind" that can govern and influence the group.

"Throughout history, egregors have been used to manipulate populations into supporting wars or conflicts. Leaders tap into collective fears, hopes, and anger to create a powerful egregor that binds people to a cause, no matter how destructive it may be."………"Awareness is key to avoiding the trap of an egregor. When people are conscious of how they are influenced by these collective energies, they can break free from the control of external forces and think for themselves." - General Konstantin Petrov

A recent example of a societal egregore was when seemingly rational individuals felt compelled to enter a pub or restaurant wearing a mask, only to remove it once seated. Speaking from personal experience, not only did they comply without question, but many also reacted with hostility towards anyone who challenged or refused to partake in this blatant absurdity. We have to consider whether becoming trapped in such an egregore is the result of conditioning that begins in school.

So, returning to the issue of schools, what can we do? Clearly, a move towards decentralised school systems is necessary; however, that seems unlikely to happen in the near future. Parents essentially have two options: 1. Home educate. 2. Allow their children to use the current system as it stands, taking advantage of the positive aspects that still exist, but intervening by preparing them for the indoctrination techniques they will encounter, and deprogramming them at home when necessary.

If we consider education at its very core, beyond the basics of learning to read, write, and maths - all of which are essential - the best education comes from within. It must be self-driven, arising from a personal desire to acquire new skills or discover new information. This should be a decision made by firstly the parents, then the individual, not by others.

Are you still governed by what you learned, or didn’t learn, at school?

Self-Governance

The solution is actually quite simple. As individuals, we can move away from allowing others to govern us and instead embrace self-governance. We must take personal responsibility for understanding what drives us, how we respond emotionally, and how we process information to make sound decisions.

No man is an island, and engaging with existing governance systems is necessary to some extent. However, this must be done with our fully informed consent. Human behaviour is a reflection of both innate tendencies and external influences; understanding this interplay is key to personal growth.

I believe humanity stands on the brink of profound changes to our civilisation. Perhaps we are approaching a point of collapse - whether it unravels over 100 years, like the Roman Empire, or occurs within a matter of months, as with the fall of the Soviet Union, is uncertain. Those who can self-govern, adapt quickly, and let go of material possessions or long-held beliefs, when necessary, will be best equipped to navigate these shifts.

The imminent arrival of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), digital IDs, and Universal Basic Income (UBI) represents the ultimate tool of governance and a significant test for humanity. As the world moves ever more towards ‘Artificial’ (the clue is in the name - not the real thing) Intelligence, we should instead seek a return to Divine Intelligence.

Will you accept this level of technocratic governance?

As a libertarian, telling others what to do goes against my instincts. However, if I could offer one piece of advice, it would be this: prioritise taking full responsibility for the governance of our two most precious assets - time and health.

Acknowledgements and References

I would like to thank three people in particular who I am indebted to, and have heavily influenced this work:

· Mark Windows and his shows on windowsontheworld.net

· The late Alan Watt through his talks on cuttingthroughthematrix.com

· The lectures of the late General Konstantin Petrov which can be found here.

Articles & Papers:

Davis, Iain. 2021. The “New Normal” & the Civil Society Deception

Davis, Iain. 2025. The Dark MAGA Gov-Corp Technate - Part 1 & 2

Morgoth’s Review. 2025. The Portrait of a Manager

Waiton, Stuart. 2020. The New Class and the Well-being State. In The Future of the Welfare State.

Waiton, Stuart. 2024. Elite Hatred and the Enforced Knee-Taking of the Aware ‘Class’

Books:

Bernays, Edward. 1928. Propaganda

Ellul, Jacques. 1965. Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes

Griffin, George Edward. 1994. The Creature from Jekyll Island

Huxley, Julian. 1946. UNESCO: Its Purpose and Philosophy

Lawrence, G S. 2014. Dissipation of the Darkness - History of the Origin of Freemasonry

Miłosz, Czesław. 1953. The Captive Mind

Webb, David Rogers. 2023. The Great Taking

Williams, Paul. 2015. Operation Gladio: The Unholy Alliance Between the Vatican, the CIA, and the Mafia

Werner, Richard. Greenham, Tony. Ryan-Collins, Josh. 2014. Where Does Money Come From?: A Guide to the UK Monetary & Banking System

Quigley, Carroll. 1966. Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time

Lists of Freemasons:

Denslow William R. 1961. 10,000 Famous Freemasons; A-D; E-J; K-P; Q-Z

United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE): The UGLE provides information on notable Freemasons throughout history, including British figures. ugle.org.uk

Wikipedia: The "List of Freemasons" page on Wikipedia includes a category specifically for British Freemasons, offering a detailed overview of individuals associated with Freemasonry in the UK.

Internet Lodge: This Masonic lodge offers a curated list of famous English Masons, highlighting their contributions and affiliations. (Access to this website is restricted)

Internet Lodge - Masonic Links