Any war waged by a pathocratic nation has two fronts: the internal and the external. The internal front is more important for the leaders and the governing elite, and the internal threat is the deciding factor where unleashing war is concerned. In pondering whether to start a war against the pathocratic country, other nations must therefore give primary consideration to the fact that such a war can be used as an executioner of the common people whose increasing power represents incipient jeopardy for the pathocracy. After all, pathocrats give short shrift to the blood and suffering of people they consider to be not quite conspecific. Kings may have suffered due to the death of their knights, but pathocrats never do: “We have a lot of people here.” Should the situation be, or become, ripe in such a country, however, anyone furnishing assistance to the nation will be blessed by it; anyone withholding it will be cursed.
Pathocracy has other internal reasons for pursuing expansionism through the use of all means possible. As long as that “other” world governed by the systems of normal man exists, it induces into the strivings of the non-pathological majority a certain sense of direction. The non-pathological majority of the country’s population will never stop dreaming of the reinstatement of the normal man’s system in any possible form. This majority will never stop watching other countries, waiting for the opportune moment; its attention and power must therefore be distracted from this purpose, and the masses must be “educated” and channeled in the direction of imperialist strivings. This goal must be pursued doggedly so that everyone knows what is being fought for and in whose name harsh discipline and poverty must be endured. The latter factor effectively limits the possibility of “subversive” activities on the part of the society of normal people.
. don't even try for a moment to use me if it is not useful for me), but I think the big picture is more important. As I have already had occasion to point out, to be sure, the interview topics were agreed upon, with little excursion allowed. And certainly, aside from the inevitable adjustments to make the interview as fluid as possible, carlson's cameras were not the only ones in the room. So no editing that was not agreed upon was possible. Of course, opportunities for more incisive incursions were there. But they were not taken for obvious reasons. For example in front of putin's sacrosanct assertion about the role of elites in the united states, it could have been discussed how HE manages his oligarchs in Russia. Which for the audience would have been very useful, also and especially in relation to the hot topic of the known state's operations in Palestine. But all that was off limits by decision of both sides. I repeat. Given the basic conditions, sine qua non, an in-depth discussion was not possible. Anyway that bastard 
www.worldgovernmentsummit.org
