Why does it seem the most crazy countries in the world right now all speak English (UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the US)? Well the Poles and the Germans are pretty close too... I am guessing the UK never really lost control over its vassal states including the US...or at least managed to re-establish it from the City of London. Someone pointed out the other day that technically the largest country on earth is not China, it is the British Commonwealth. I looked it up - 56 countries, 33 small states, and 2.5 billion people! The Queen on paper is still head of state in these countries despite the trappings of democracy, something an Aussie acquaintance pointed out many years ago. The fact the UK exerts some control over most of these countries is disturbing.
If we look into the history of the British Empire, and the transition of hegemony to the Americans during the two world wars, there's a lot of data for 3D material reasons for the craziest countries being Anglos. The book
Conjuring Hitler is a good one in this respect, speaking about the two world wars and the way the Anglos (and certain shady characters in particular, like Bank of England chief Montagu Norman and the Dulles brothers) played everyone like fiddles.
Post-WW2, the Anglo countries - but also many non-Anglo European countries - had some very good times through the plunder and utter destruction of other peoples. As Lobaczewski wrote, these good times make weak men (aka psychologically abnormal deviants being their rise to power), and these weak men create bad times (aka they use that power to normalize pathology). That's the point we're at now in the hysteroidal cycle in the West, where ponerization is quickening. Luckily, there's enough common sense here keeping it at least somewhat in check. We're haven't seen a blue-haired Stalin just yet.
There's a deeper question though - why the British? What gave them ascendancy in the first place?
For that, it's hard to trace exactly where the fire started, but one point that's good enough for me would be Britain becoming the workshop of the world in the Industrial Revolution. It became industry leader, technological leader, and thus also military leader in a very short period of time. I went through Hobsbawm's book
Age of Revolution recently, and it was a great read in that respect. Once the British had overwhelming superiority, maybe it was a case of simple greed taking over, which doesn't hesitate to use violence to fulfill its aims.
But there is also the 'theological reason', though, or the hyperdimensional reason for the craziness of the Anglosphere. For some reason the Anglos were chosen to be the attack dogs for the PTB. Maybe due to the potential of Nordic 'power centres' in the lineage, corrupted and weaponized.
The C's have said that the one key strategic concern of 4DSTS is to destroy the true Semitic line. The Nazis (propelled by the Brits and Americans) were anti-Semitic, yes. But that anti-Semitism was not what it seems. The Nazi hatred in actual practice was what we might call 'true anti-Semitism' - it was directed mostly at the slavic peoples, the true Semites. Not to downplay the suffering of the Jews at the hands of the Nazis, of course, but many more millions of Russians were slaughtered in the two world wars, probably disproportionately targeted for death, in line with 4DSTS plans. This Russophobia appeared on the scene - seemingly out of the blue, and with no clear reason - back in the 1800's. I think it was an egregore:
(Navigator) Do "egregores" exist as Stavish describes them? A being created from the thoughts of a group of people which then takes a consciousness of its own, and needs to be fed from time to time, and being either positive or negative.
(L) Okay. That's basically what Stavish's main egregore definition is...
(Andromeda) Basically like a group attachment.
A: He is close except it usually happens from the top down. That is, a being can influence a group of people to take certain actions and thereby establish a feeding pool for itself.
Q: (L) Okay. But still can human beings create a being, like Stavish described?
A: Not really. Such a creation is more a function of FRV and will dissipate upon breakup of the group.
Q: (L) But for a period of time there is something that is drawing and recycling energy within a group.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) But it has no persistence or autonomy...
A: No.
Q: (L) Okay. So, in the cases that Stavish talks about where it's more prolonged and it seems like it changes and begins to become demanding and basically rebels, what is that?
A: Usually 4D STS using a group of people to feed and plant ideas into 3D. Note that often the eminence grise in such groups is a psychopath and you can read current studies to see how the morphing works.
Q: (L) So I think that might be referring to Lobaczewski when he describes how psychopaths within a group can shift the direction, the ideas, and then change the ideology and all that?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Right. Okay.
It could also have been undergrounders who were the impetus for the Industrial Revolution, for instance, coming to the surface with new technologies in Britain, which was sure to give them a world advantage. Hard to say how much in history is scripted, and how much is more or less natural. I'd be willing to be that just like the advent of Agriculture, the Industrial Revolution didn't occur all on its own.
Clearly an escalation is coming though. All the signs are there. Project Ukraine will not be allowed to fail, even if it means making the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable for 300+ years. Although given how pathetic the West is, I would not be shocked if Russia and China got off a first strike and the West got so caught with their pants down they could not retaliate. This appears the scenario that Deagel predicted over a decade ago...eerily enough for 2025. All part of the script...
An escalation is already here, I think, what with all the attempted assassinations and deaths of numerous world leaders recently. It depends on how fast the escalation escalator goes now, or what one means by escalation. A hot war between superpowers isn't on the table I think. And Russia and China will not strike first, as they have no reason to start WW3.
