248 Comments

I have an idea. What if all of us here, all of us who care passionately for the truth to prevail (whatever it is), say a very passionate, pure-hearted prayer for just that, for the truth to prevail in the kindest manner for all of us? What if we do it with an open mind, and with the willingness to change our mind if new facts come about, as long as it's about the truth and the real spiritual honesty? I think putting our heart together to oppose the dark energy of forced domination is one thing we can do, and keep doing, and keep doing, and keep doing. The world needs us more than ever.

PS. Gratitude for all your sincere comments. It takes a village to figure things out!! And I like this village. :)

Expand full comment

May our hearts find the strength to burn bright so as to warm those around us.

May the darkness teach us but it's cold not freeze our souls.

May we find our humanity in these times of transhumanism.

May we never forget that we may lose, but God will always live on.

Expand full comment

You got it, Tessa.

I may or may not tackle Desmet's logic on my substack; depends on time, and depends on where this all goes. If people still believe this is a simple misunderstanding and that Desmet has his points, then I'll have to jump in because the way Desmet has put this all together is quite insidious-- whether consciously or not. I cannot let that go. It's important for us all to see clearly what happened, if for nothing else than to see how concepts can be shifted and realities can be constructed to present views that are quite frankly false, and that dismiss the planners (orchestration) while at the same time seeming to acknowledge that there were, indeed, planners. This is the insidious part. But the sum total is to dismiss any conspiracy, and Desmet makes no bones about that: there was only an appearance of conspiracy. No conspiracy during Covid. Do you believe that?

"... putting our heart together to oppose the dark energy of forced domination is one thing we can do." Desmet emphatically does not believe there is any dark energy of forced domination. It was all simply mechanistic psychological progression.

Next question: why is Malone buying into this? Honest mistake? Then own up and back off Breggin, who is on the right side of history.

Questions in my mind: was Desmet promoted? He's an apologist for the conspirators and makes it appear that he is NOT an apologist for the conspirators, but in the twists and turnings of his language the end result-- after the perhaps deliberate confusion-- is that he's an apologist.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Jim. Importantly, the prayer that we need is for the truth, whatever it may be. Not to have our preset idea proven. We need specifically an honest, child-like prayer for the truth, made from a pure heart and with an open mind.

I don't know what the truth is. I have an opinion, I think I am right but I always keep an open mind. As far as Desmet being an apologist, I can only repeat what I said in other comments. While I cannot say "I know for sure he is not a spy" because I don't know for sure, I think the people reading his work react to it based on their own trauma. I think it's not right to insist that one person's interpretation is correct, and another person's is incorrect, when it comes to social theories. It's language. it can be very nuanced. It can mean different things depending on the mood. Written language is by design very limited. When it was just invented, it was used for notes, references, with an implication that the bulk of the information is in the mind. So in this case, depending on what's in the mind of a reader of Desmet's work. the interperation differs. This is what I have observed.

On my end, my life has not changed this way or the other because he wrote his book or came up with this theory. Crowd mentality is not a new concept at all. Alll the fighting about it iis highly suspicious though, I see a lot of unnecessary anxiety, and this is a sign that somebody is making it happen. I am not talking about Desmet, the Breggins, or Malone.

Expand full comment

💬 Written language is by design very limited.

↑↑ 😊 ↓↓

🗨 A writer only begins a book. A reader finishes it. ~~Samuel Johnson aka Dr Johnson

Expand full comment

This is such a great quote, thank you

Expand full comment

Careful here, for you get more of what you rain praise on 😊 On a tangent but somewhat relevant ↓↓

🗨 Our mind is always stressing over little things. If you plant one little seed of doubt, your brain will create a whole garden of negativity.

Expand full comment

Concepts unfold according to their meaning.

Definitions matter.

I and others believe it's important to sort this out and to understand: logic is the sword. It cuts through to the truth of concepts and how they relate. Through making distinctions we're then free to see intuitively what's happening.

Desmet maneuvers so that he can both say "manipulation happened" and also "there was no manipulation." But his theory is clearly "no manipulation." This is why he introduces the Sierpinski triangle in chapter 8: notice what the function of this figure is. This isn't "interpretation." This is simply what's presented.

Expand full comment

I don't think that it is so clear. But again, we can disagree (and I appreciate the way we can debate honestly) but this subthread is about letting go of our preset ideas and praying for the truth to prevail whatever it is!!

Expand full comment

I don't find him to be an apologist. He had an interesting theory, I listened to some of his interviews, wasn't sure if I thought his theory was totally explanatory, and moved on. Really don't understand why everyone is making such a big deal about it. I mean, what's your theory for all the true believers out there?

Expand full comment

No time to explain all this now but the long and short of it is, Desmet appears to say one thing and then says another. But what he actually means, through the logic of his theory, is that there were no controllers, there was no conspiracy, there is no evil, there was no planning, and Covid tyranny just happened because we, the people, had become enmeshed in a mechanistic ideology.

Look around at the people you know. Is that really true? Are we all enmeshed in a mechanistic ideology or do we all love our family and friends despite the supposed mechanism that has supposedly enmeshed us? Were we all prior to Covid mechanistic dehumanized atoms or did we revel in our togetherness and celebrate it and enact it over and over? Look around. Frankly, I don't know what the hell Desmet is talking about because I don't see it, and I daresay neither do you. It's simply a story.

Expand full comment

Desmet is talking about how to burn a dry forest. The forest was dry, yes? The people doing this are not geniuses, they're well connected children with matches.

Desmet has also said that it's clear that there was an external force in this show.

Caesar said "divide and conquer". And so he did.

Expand full comment

Part of what I'll be getting at was "the forest was not dry." Desmet pretends that it was dry-- at present, this is my opinion. So in effect Covid lockdowns didn't exist (according to Desmet): the seeds of it were already present is our allegiance to mechanization and technology that divorced us from reality. A virus merely shunted us into that mechanistic, atomized technology more. This is what mass formation is all about and this is what the self-hypnotism was about. This is what I can see so far; I may be wrong.

Yes, Desmet constantly says there were external forces and manipulators but what Desmet giveth, he also taketh away: he also says that these manipulators were part of the very same dependence on mechanistic thinking that we all were. Important to understand that for Desmet, there was no conspiracy to take away liberties and make the state supreme, through the back door of medical necessity. That was happening anyhow!

What's Desmet's intuition? Unfold his logic and his intuition is there: that's what he's seeing and trying to sell us.

Expand full comment

And I will read your work if you write about it. But as far as the prayer, it will be a much better, more effective prayer, if we take our intellectual meanderings out of it. I think the best prayer is for the truth and for clarity in the heads of all good people, and in the kindest way.

Expand full comment

If we want clarity we must examine the concepts. There are basic contradictions in what Desmet says.

If I tell you I love everyone but then a few pages down I say that some people aren't to be loved, then I'm confusing things, aren't I? Then you have every right to ask me, "what are you saying"?

This is why we have every right to ask what Desmet is really saying. I'll try to unpack it so that everyone will understand.

Expand full comment

How I see it. Breggin/Breggin are the spiritual side and love humanity. Desmet is the scientific analyst side and I doubt he puts much deep thought into the spiritual realm. Humans are just something to be observed and studied. He comes from a part of the world that leans that way. Malone, well he worked for fedgov agencies for decades and that tends to create a little bit of "how dare you" attitude and having worked for the big machine, he went to part of that the big machine to fix it. The courts.

It's all just human nature, who we were raised by and around, our life and work experiences and paths we took. It takes a lot of introspect and courage to look back at life and recognize the things that shaped you, for better or worse and seeing the worse parts of yourself. Most people who have "made a good life" for themselves, as judged by society/culture, tend to not do that because it might cause that "good life"($$$) to come crashing down.

Expand full comment

Tessa, thank you so much for this post. It is a balm to my nerves rattled by seeing so much ugly division in the movement. I join in the prayer for the truth of the matter to clearly reveal itself and for us to reunify.

Expand full comment

Thank you Julie!!! Hugs!!

Expand full comment

Great post! As the Covid vaccinations wind down, we freedom fighters find ourselves at an impasse.

Will we keep our audiences?

Will we find another evil windmill to fight?

Why is the public not waking up?

Whose fault is this?

Should I be the purest opponent of evil, or should I allow nuance?

Should I transfer my attention from now-irrelevant authorities to some of my less-pure allies?

These questions probably do not come to just my mind only.

The result is more infighting as the "opposing covid vaccine" ice floe becomes smaller due to the public now rejecting vaccines and mandates evaporating.

Expand full comment

Thank you Igor!! I did not even think of the weakening of public fear of COVID as a factor!!

I suspect that we likely won't run out of totalitarian things to protest. More mRNA vaccines are coming, carbon zero is pure gold for trying to enforce horrible policies on a global level and for advocating for de facto neofeudalism. I thought about what I would prefer about a year ago when it seemed like "COVID measures" were easing up, and I felt like I would much rather live in the somewhat shallow and largely delusional but none the less not as feudal pre-2020 world where there is no need to protest the Great Reset. I would not mind that at all. I don't want this "problem" to exist so that I can write about it, I write about it so that it stops existing. But it seems like the wheels are turning, and not everyone realizes that in-fighting based on differences in opinion can bring the Great Reset about faster rather than stop it.

Expand full comment

100%

Expand full comment

Thank you for what you shared in this article and in the thread of comments it generated, Tessa. I always find your articles well-worth reading because of how love-infused, light-infused they are. Thank you again!

Expand full comment

Well said! I, too, was soooooo disappointed and dismayed when I realized that CAF was backing the Breggins and that CJ Hopkins jumped on the bandwagon, too! I had just read CJ's book and Desmet's book and loved both books....didn't agree 100% with each of them but when do I ever agree 100% with someone? (sometimes with you, Tessa!!) But I don't care - I don't need to agree 100% with someone. And this finger pointing is just disgusting and now makes me totally suspicious of CAF and CJ! Did you read through the comments on CJs article where he came out with such shocking, surprising vitriol against Desmet? Woah baby. He told us all to F Off and said the ugliest things to me. ME! (I changed my username because he banned me - I did say that I sensed some self-loathing and some underlying issues that are hidden from us! Ahhh well) But, yeah, he said really ugly things to all of us. We were all totally shocked and bewildered at his attack. After all we were all there because we really loved CJs work! Ayyyyy...so crazy. Doesn't feel right and that's the bottom line. We're all on the 'same side' here and anyone who is trying to undermine that is quite simply stupid or immature or vain, in my opinion! (unless they are being coerced/bribed into being shit-disturbers) Sigh.

I, too, thought OK then - let's get CJ and Desmet to talk - that's the solution! But, alas, nope. But, I don't care really...I still only follow my inner compass of Knowing...I trust my own Discernment and the details are not important to me - what's important is that with every cell in my body and every hair on my head, I KNOW that there is nefariousness going on of the highest order and the Transhumanist, Technocratic, Billionaire Bankster Globalists are trying to implement there very anti-LIFE agenda on the world as hard as they can. I feel like that's the bottom line and all the other details are superfluous, ya know?

Thank you for this article! And that Monty Python clip was PERFECT!!! Sharing!

Expand full comment

Thank you!!! I feel a lot of love for CJ Hopkins and I believe that there was something else that was going on there. Let us extend our love to all sincere people so that clarity comes back with force, protecting us, and so that this rift heals the soonest!!! We need to remove the bad spell with love. I think this is what we the good people are for. We need to not be afraid to apply love to this horrible situation to heal it.

Expand full comment

I haven’t found any examples where “we think” wasn’t the perspective that they position from.

Expand full comment

I saw it differently, watching it from the very beginning. I hold a lot of respect for their work, but in this case, before my eyes, they went after Desmet with fervor, going for blood and insisting that he is a danger to our movement, which I also disagree with (to be precise, I have lived through enough challenges and hardship to not get triggered by other people's academic theories... this campaign was a folly). And they were speaking freely, creating a lot of division in the freedom community. The division that we could not afford. The result is devastating. It was unnecessary. I am saying it with a feeling of love for them but it was a very unfortunate choice for all of us.

Expand full comment

Late to the game but could you point me to find where B/B went for blood? I would like to read & interpret for myself.

Expand full comment

IN MOST INSTANCES, C. A. Fitts is a woman of great integrity. However, she is also an excessively liberal baby boomer who cannot understand that ethnicity plays a significant role in "Mr Global" and how this nebulous term is defined. The belief that one can assert a single working model of the NWO dynamic through the lens of finance is obtuse. She does a great deal of damage and a disservice to her following by shielding and deflecting certain subjects due to her unwillingness to address their effects directly. Thank you, Tessa.

Expand full comment

I think that she has done really important work, and I have lived long enough to not get worked up about disagreements with anyone on anything, really. And thank you BUT making problems about ethnicity never, ever, ever ends well. Never ever ever ends well. Regular people end up facing tremendous abuse and sometimes a genocide, and whoever in power of any targeted "evil' ethnicity (and they can be variations in the "villain of the day") stay in power, while underneath, there is a bloodshed. It is always a HORRIBLE idea to make it about ethnicity. So I, for one, agree with Catherine on this one, and disagree with you. Please let's not go there, it is unproductive.

Expand full comment

I agree that a fixation on ethnos is at least as potentially destructive as ignoring it altogether. My point is that Fitts is exclusively involved in the latter.

Ethnos is universal, an archetypical form. We cannot escape the realities of Nature.

Expand full comment

Fixation on ethnicity leads to bloodshed. Every. Single. Time. It is not good. It is against the love. It's utterly unhelpful. There is a theoretical world of philosophizing (I would argue that philosophizing about any topic under the sun is fine, even the most disgusting topic on Earth, as long as people know how to clear their souls from crap and stay grounded in love). But we are in this world that is how it is, and it is much better to not practice things that can lead to a bloodshed. Doing so is irresponsible. Which is to say, I may have a different opinion about this whole mass formation "controversy" than Catherine but I fully agree with her on staying away from the destructive focus on ethnic suspicions. It serves no good purpose. No good purpose at all. It does not come from love.

Expand full comment

Very well said, and wise. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Thank you Colleen!!

Expand full comment

Great article Tessa. & thanks for the links to the tyrant in the mirror & thievery posts. Yeah, we have no external enemies, just the internal habitual reactiveness to internal "discomfort" which looks outwards to explain itself. & fights court battles etc. I don't think it's part of nature's ways that we all agree with each other, on everything or just self censor when it's not the case. Perhaps it would be more realistic, humble even, to celebrate, as a miracle, when we , as small groups, large groups, societies etc do agree on something. Then let it go & get back to fighting, bossing & enjoying that. The Indians do this very well, & should be lauded as great examples. Bossing fighting enjoying life as it is.

Expand full comment

Tessa, I have an outlook that I believe is unique. It will I believe if nothing else give you a different perspective and a new lens to see the turmoil you write about. Here is the link. I am a subscriber to you so you should have my email. I love questions. I hope you will ask if you have any. For me this is the only viable solution for us all we call the Human race. And in no way do my views cancel what we call, "spirituality". which is something I do not believe we completely understand yet.

https://medium.com/@whmilk

Expand full comment

The "becoming what you fight" is a trap meant to cause people to rather be passive than risk doing some imagined wrong or other, therefore making oppressors and tyrants so much safer.

Expand full comment

I disagree. There is a fundamental difference between fighting from a place of total love (which is word that has been used treacherously many times in history but it means something really beautiful) and not fighting.

Expand full comment

I'll use a cherrypicked example:

Bombing infrastructure to weaken an enemy nation's capability to continue fighting.

If using the same methods is taken to mean "becoming what you fight", which I'd argue is the most common interpretation of the phrase, then there's no difference between the US bombing Germany, and Germany bombing Britain.

Which is, I think most people would agree, not the case due to the ideologies underlying the different parties of the conflict.

But as stated, the example is picked to get the point out in the spotlight. It harks back to the even greater philosophical trap of whether the deed in itself is what is evil (or wrong, unnecessary, bad, or even capitel 'E' evil), or if it's the reason for the deed, or the rationalisation behind the reason/deed, or the doer's various identifiers, or the consequences. *or' can of course bereplaced with 'and' in the preceding list.

For a person with principles based in ideals (or vice versa) this is a trap. For a pragmatic realist, well aware of and utilising his/hers own partiality and bias as a tool, it is not a trap. This difference in personality or outlook is often the cause of many erroneous claims of hypocrisy: for it to be so, the parties involved must also share viewpoints.

Thus my intial claim: thinking that we must be pristine and virginal in our words and deeds is a trap meant to pacify and make opposition impossible.

Another example, to embellish the firstone: It is "whataboutism" internalised as a halter and schackel for the same reason nationalism, religion and jingoism was a trap to the early working class democrats, liberals and patriots of Europe in the 19th century; it forced them to accept a soceital narrative dictated to them by the perfidious trinity of nobility, capitalists and clergy, turning what was a movement for greater personal liberty and peace into the breeding ground for the war of 1870 and 1914.

Expand full comment

Your approach of trying to remain unemotional and balanced in the truth seeking promise is too radical for some noise makers.

Keep being you.

Expand full comment

Thank you Mathew!! I feel the same way about your work. You are not afraid to say what you actually think, which is amazing and very useful to all of us.

Staying balanced in this mess sure is a challenge. Oh I am emotional, I am very emotional, but my emotion is love, and I mean it in the most realistic way. Love of all of us, love of peace and harmony, and love of the spiritual truth (that are all different sides of Love).

Expand full comment

This is what I got in my comments section, too, "please negotiate, or maybe debate".

Expand full comment

I think that it makes the most sense. Argument is a valid form of communication but everybody claiming wisdom needs to practice it, and the argument needs to be rooted in spiritual humility, not in domination. I believer that from my heart.

Expand full comment

So do I, Sister, so do I.

Expand full comment

I have never heard of Breggins, and no disrespect, I don't have personal knowledge of any of them, but I had already questioned Desmet and Malone as being sketchy for different reasons which I will skip. Mass psychosis has always been a thing. There is no need to rename it, or to suggest that it is not a common tactic of authoritarian takeovers.

Expand full comment

You are making an honest argument, and I appreciate it!!!

Expand full comment