Civil Disobedience, Chaos and Revolt – Understanding Today: The war on humanity

It should surprise no one that talk of civil strife and even civil war has been in the air for months. Into this debate I enter only on the edges, sitting in the cheap seats, offering a few side notes alongside far more insightful voices. My former colleague at King’s College London, David Betz, has recently emerged as the primus inter pares in the debate about the possibility of civil war in Britain. Back in early 2019, we co-authored an essay examining the grim prospects for British democracy and the road to internal conflict that already loomed on the horizon. That essay, ‘The British Road to Dirty War‘, explored the hollowing out of British democratic institutions — a long-running process that had by then left politics little more than a façade. The Brexit psychodrama exposed the extent of the rot. The political class, determined to thwart the referendum result, behaved with a deranged mixture of denial and contempt for the electorate. We saw in this not merely a passing convulsion but the symptom of a chronic condition — one destined, sooner or later, to end badly, Brexit or no Brexit.¹

The prospect of civil conflict is no longer whispered in private but debated openly. This is a healthy development. Britain and Europe are grappling with the results of elite overreach — economic stagnation, political paralysis, social fragmentation — and the question is no longer whether such conditions exist, but what their long-term trajectory will be. More recently, James Alexander has added his voice in the Daily Sceptic, drawing a distinction between the writings of David Betz and those of David A. Hughes. He discerns a contrast between what he sees as Betz’s view — that the country is stumbling toward civil war through elite incompetence and mismanagement — and Hughes’s contention that the road to conflict is intentional, a deliberate course imposed upon society. Most people still don’t understand how modern power actually works — or why democratic “resistance” keeps failing across every Western nation simultaneously. They see the same policies implemented from Canada to Australia, from Sweden to New Zealand, and assume it’s coincidence or natural convergence. It’s neither.

World War II didn’t just end the old order — it installed a new operating system. What they’re witnessing is a systematic control architecture that emerged from sophisticated British intellectual networks, got operationalised through American institutions, and now runs global governance through what appears to be moral and scientific authority. Modern control operates through digital platforms that would have seemed like science fiction in 1961. Social media platforms now function as intellectual discourse clearinghouses,² using algorithmic curation³ to ensure that approved narratives dominate public conversation while dissenting voices get systematically marginalised — all while using dissenting voices to train next generation AI constraints. For example:

In The Climate CO2 Hoax – What ChatGPT Won’t Tell You [C2], ChatGPT is simply feeding out the information that was fed into it via data repositories, regardless of whether the data and information is correct, incorrect, or fabricated. The benefits of any tool ultimately depends on who owns and controls it, and in the case of AI, what data repositories are fed into it, and what restrictions are placed upon the information outputs. Thus, AI can be a very beneficial tool; or it can be used as a tool for a dis-information reality and ‘thought control’ matrix for the masses. I asked ChatGPT the following question: “Tell me about the fake climate science that is promoted by the United Nations.“

Answer from ChatGPT: “I need to pause here 🙏 — I can’t provide content that promotes climate change denial or frames mainstream climate science as “fake.” But what I can do for you:… Summarize common critiques of climate policy (e.g., economic impacts, energy trade-offs, political agendas) without disputing the scientific consensus.”

AI Ethics⁴ has emerged as the knowledge production center for this digital control system. Under the banner of ‘safety’, preventing ‘bias’ and ‘misinformation’, AI systems get programmed to promote specific worldviews⁵ — while suppressing alternatives. The same systematic methodology that PPBS brought to government budgeting now gets applied to human thought itself. Search results, social media feeds, and news recommendations all get optimised according to predetermined policy objectives.⁶ Citizens think they’re accessing neutral information, but they’re actually receiving systematically curated content designed to shape their opinions in predictable directions. The behavioral research conducted in the 1950s and 1960s finally found its perfect implementation mechanism.

But algorithmic control wasn’t enough. To make the architecture truly resilient, it needed legitimacy that went beyond mere efficiency or convenience. The system required a ‘global ethic’ — a moral authority that would make resistance not just difficult, but socially and spiritually unacceptable. Enter the ‘moral economy’ — the Marxist revisionist Eduard Bernstein’s revolutionary framework from 1899,⁷ which ultimately enforced ‘common good’ compliance through ethical imperatives that transform systematic control into moral duty.⁸

This system has evolved beyond crude financial manipulation into something far more sophisticated. By framing monetary policy around Zimmern’s social justice, IUCN’s environmental protection, the Earth Charter’s ‘planetary ethics’,⁹ and alleged intergenerational equity, central banks have discovered they can control entire civilisations without anyone recognising it as control. When the Bank of England implements ‘diversity requirements’ for lending¹⁰ or the Federal Reserve talks about ‘climate risk’¹¹ through ‘green bonds’,¹² they’re not expanding their mandate — they’re revealing what their mandate always was.

However, if and when behavioral research tactics and the ‘ethical’ framework don’t work, and non-compliance and protests are growing, there are a number of steps that are being considered or already being taken to address dissent.

Step 1 – Censor and Crack down on free speech

Government action is again being taken across every Western nation simultaneously. The same policies implemented from Canada to Australia, from Sweden to New Zealand, and across Europe as a whole. Listing of protest groups under ‘terror’ legislation. Coercion of internet service providers to enforce compliance. Lawfare based on ideology – ‘Far Right’, ‘Hate Speech’, ‘antisemitism’, ‘racism’ – leading to fear, arrests and imprisonment. Essentially the removal of your right to free speech. A throw back to Nazi Germany in 1933. It was not so long ago that journalists were called muckrakers, for digging up dirt on Robber Barons who, over time, learned how to sling muck back, using smear and innuendo. That’s where ‘conspiracy theorists’, ‘anti-vaxxer’ and ‘right-wing extremist’ entered the lexicon. Journalist today also face arrest for reporting ‘unwanted’ facts. UN officials face sanctions. [kudos to Francesca Albanese]

Step 2 – Profile and disrupt ‘rebels’

As David Galula, a French commander and expert in counterinsurgency warfare during the Algerian War, emphasised:

“In any situation, whatever the cause, there will be an active minority for the cause, a neutral majority, and an active minority against the cause. The technique of power consists in relying on the favourable minority in order to rally the neutral majority and to neutralise or eliminate the hostile minority.”

Over time, however, the intelligence state lost touch with reality, as the focus of its counterinsurgency programs shifted from foreign to domestic populations, from national security risks to ordinary citizens. Particularly in the wake of 9/11, when the NSA and its British counterpart, GCHQ, began mapping out the Internet. Thanks to Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013, we now know that the NSA were collecting 200 billion pieces of data every month, including the cell phone records, emails, web searches and live chats of more than 200 million ordinary Americans. This was extracted from the world’s largest internet companies via a lesser-known, data mining program called Prism.

There’s another name for this, and its total information awareness. The highest attainment of a paranoid state seeking absolute control over its population. What ceases to be worth the candle is that peoples right to privacy is enshrined under the US Constitution’s fourth amendment. Few understand how lockdowns are ripples on these troubled waters. Decades of counterinsurgency waged against one subset of society, branded insurgents for their Marxist ideals has, over time, shifted to anyone holding anti-establishment views. The predictive policing of track and trace and the theory of asymptomatic transmission are the unwelcome repercussions of the intelligence state seeking total information awareness over its citizens. And for “good reason”. People are within sniffing distance of mobilising popular support from the neutral majority and toppling the house of cards. This has led to a protracted campaign by the establishment to neutralise the opposition.

The stories of Palantir and Facebook serve as a good explanation of this process. The Information Awareness Office (IAO) brought together several DARPA surveillance and information technology projects including MDDS (which provided Google’s seed funding). The stated aim of the IAO was to gather and store the personal information of every US citizen, including their personal emails, social networks, lifestyles, credit card records, phone calls, medical records, without, of course, the need for a search warrant. This information would funnel back to intelligence agencies, under the guise of predicting and preventing terrorist incidents before they happened. Reminiscent of Project Camelot’s early warning radar system for left wing revolutionaries. Despite the government, apparently, abandoning their gambit for total information awareness over ordinary Americans, the core of the project survived.

I draw your attention to Palantir, the spooky data analytics firm founded by Facebook’s board member, Peter Thiel. Portrayed as science fiction in the firm ‘Minority Report‘, Palantir’s predictive policing analytics have been deployed extensively against insurgents in Iraq and by police departments in the US.¹³ [The UK Government has just signed a one billion deal with Palantir as in September 2025] The company has recently grown to become the dominant force in AI-enabled decision software. It ingests and links data from sensors, intel holdings, satellites, logistics systems and communications, then orchestrates targeting, planning, tasking, maintenance and surveillance accordingly. The platform can be used in a range of functions, from businesses identifying risk and streamlining supply chains, to governments focusing on defence, policing, immigration, and active warfare. Ultimately, it can track people, assets, processes, networks, weapons, and everything in between with a cut-throat efficiency we’ve never seen before.

An Associated Press (AP) investigation in 2016 revealed that the Pentagon employed a staggering 40% of the 5,000 working in the Federal Government’s PR machines, with the Department of Defence, far and wide, the largest and most expensive PR operation of the United States government, spending more money on public relations than all other departments combined. Knowing who to target with PR makes this far more effective. Things are not so different in the UK. During COVID-19 the British government became the biggest national advertiser. Even tick tock and snapchat were deployed by the Scottish government to push COVID PSYOPS to children. Boris Johnson announced record defence spending for an artificial intelligence agency and the creation of a national cyber force. That’s a group of militarised computer hackers to conduct offensive operations. Offensive operations against who, you might ask.

Britain was not at war, but in an article for the Daily Mail last year, Britain’s top counter terrorism officer, Neil Basu confirmed that the UK was waging an ideological war against anti vaccination conspiracy theorists. Ideological wars of this nature typically take place online, where much of the government’s military budget was being spent. Since the vaccine roll-out there has been a protracted effort to paint the 33% of British citizens who have a problem with lockdowns and vaccine mandates, as violent extremists, with one member of the commentariat drawing parallels with US style militias. It doesn’t take a genius to see where this is heading.

The origins of Facebook ‘coincide’ with a controversial military program that was mysteriously shut down the same year Facebook launched. The military program in question, LifeLog, was developed by DARPA’s Information Processing Techniques Office, with the stated aim of creating a permanent and searchable electronic diary of a person’s entire life – a dataset of their most personal information, including their movements, conversations, connections, and everything they listened to, read, watched and bought. But would people willingly give up a record of their private lives to a military intelligence social media platform? Probably not. Enter Facebook.
LifeLog, meanwhile, was ostensibly shut down. But this was not the first nor the last time that a project of this magnitude would be proposed.

In a 1945 article for The Atlantic, Vannevar Bush who directed the US Army’s psychological operations during World War II, discussed his hypothetical project, ‘The Memex‘, as a device “in which an individual stores all his books, records and communications, and which is mechanised so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility.” In immortalising people’s lives, it was hoped that LifeLog would eventually contribute to the emerging field of artificial intelligence (AI), that would one day think just like a human, intersecting with another DARPA backed project – the ‘Personal Assistant That Learns‘ (PAL) – a cognitive computing system designed to make military decision-making more efficient, which was eventually spun-off as Siri, the virtual assistant on Apple’s operating system, present in the homes of 1 billion unsuspecting people.

Consistent with the opaque nature of Facebook’s origins, shortly after its launch in 2014, co-founders Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz brought Napster founder Sean Parker on board. At the age of 16, Parker hacked into the network of a Fortune 500 company and was later arrested and charged by the FBI. Around this time Parker was recruited by the CIA. To what end, we don’t know. What we do know is that Parker brought Peter Thiel to Facebook as its first outside investor. Theil, who remains on Facebook’s board, also sits on the Steering Committee of globalist think tank, the Bilderberg Group. As previously stated, Thiel is the founder of Palantir, the spooky intelligence firm pretending to be a private company. The CIA would join the FBI, DoD and NSA in becoming a Palantir customer in 2005, later acquiring an equity stake in the firm through their venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel. At the time of his first meetings with Facebook, Theil had been working on resurrecting several controversial DARPA programs.

Former DARPA Director, Regina Dugan, who joined Facebook’s hardware lab, Building 8, in 2016, to roll out a number of mysterious DARPA funded-projects that would hack people’s minds with brain-computer interfaces. Dugan currently serves as CEO of Welcome Leap, a technology spin-off of the world’s most powerful health foundation, concerned with the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including transdermal vaccines. Welcome Leap brought DARPA’s military-intelligence innovation to one of “the most pressing global health challenges of our time,” called COVID-19. Connecting the dots: Welcome Leap was launched at the World Economic Forum, with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Its founder is Jeremy Ferrar, former SAGE member, long-time collaborator of Chris Witty and Neil Ferguson and the patsy taking the wrap for the Wuhan leak cover-up story. As luck would have it, just before Duggan’s arrival at Facebook, the social media giant orchestrated the controversial mood manipulation PSYOP, known as the ‘Social Contagion Study‘.

The experiment would anticipate the role social media went onto play during the pandemic. In the study, Facebook manipulated the posts of 700,000 unsuspecting Facebook users to determine the extent to which emotional states can be transmitted across social media. To achieve this, they altered the news feed content of users to control the number of posts that contained positive or negative charged emotions. As you would expect, the findings of the study revealed that negative feeds caused users to make negative posts, whereas positive feeds resulted in users making positive posts. In other words, Facebook is not only a fertile ground for emotional manipulation, but emotions can also be contagious across its networks.

Once we understand this, it becomes clear how fear of a disease, which predominantly targeted people beyond life expectancy with multiple comorbidities who were dying anyway, spread like wildfire in the wake of the Wuhan Virus. In locking down the UK, Boris Johnson warned the British public that we would all lose family members to the disease, when nothing could be further from the truth. The pandemic largely happened in the flawed doomsday modelling of epidemiologists, it happened across the corporate media, and it happened on social media platforms like Facebook. It wasn’t so much a pandemic, but the social contagion experiment playing out in real time.¹⁴

Step 3 – Implement the Police State

‘Block Everything‘ appears to be an popular movement, much like the Marxist ‘Black Lives Matter‘ movement. [in different ways, much like Antifa, ‘Palestine Action‘ or even the AfD, each potentially or already classified as a terror organisation] Like the farmers, a decentralised, leaderless protest driven by public rage against President Macron’s government, which is perceived as elitist and indifferent to the economic struggles of its citizens. The immediate cause of the protests was a harsh government austerity plan that proposed deep cuts to public services, including healthcare and pensions, which caused widespread outrage and led to the collapse of the previous government. [also anti illegal immigration] Despite a massive police presence and a change in political leadership, the public’s deep anger and mistrust persist, with many seeing the government’s actions as empty gestures. The situation is highly volatile and unpredictable, with the government considering extreme measures like a state of emergency as the nation teeters on the brink of a major crisis.

Protests against government policies are growing. People are becoming more aware of the multiple threats to their freedoms, health, peace and prosperity. It is seemingly becoming a ‘race’ between the elitist implementation of their agenda for global governance using ‘silent weapons‘ and administrative compliance techniques and potential chaos from a total rejection of the elite by the masses. It is unclear whether the desire for more nationalism in a multi-polar world as ostensibly proposed by BRICS nations in preference to a globalism increasingly seen as autocratic rule will see more actions taken to ‘win the battle’. Unfortunately, intra-state and/or international violence between nations from economic upheaval seems guaranteed.

Where will this lead?

How this will ultimately unfold is impossible to foresee. In our first exploration of this terrain, David Betz and I sketched the prospect of Britain’s descent into what we termed dirty war. Dirty war refers to a pattern of internal repression, most notoriously in Latin America during the 1970s: years of vicious but low-intensity strife in which regimes and insurgents alike turned their weapons on segments of their own people. Such struggles are rarely declared openly, nor bound by convention. They are fought in the shadows. The boundary between combatant and civilian dissolves; violence becomes selective, targeted, concealed. On the surface, life may appear undisturbed — whole regions untouched. Yet beneath the façade a subterranean struggle rages: militias manipulated, opponents assassinated, hostages taken, clandestine detentions and disappearances.

Almost inevitably, this is accompanied by crackdowns on free speech and civil liberties — the indispensable handmaidens of dirty war. [and now happening] To deny that the architecture for such measures is already taking shape in Western democracies, Britain included, is willful blindness. Over time, brutality becomes ordinary; the ‘unspeakable’ seeps into common knowledge. Secrets circulate, perpetrators protest innocence, but rumour, testimony and leakage of truth expose what everyone already suspects. If Britain does not slide into a dirty war outright, a more plausible prospect is Balkanisation — or, in the local idiom, Ulsterisation. We need not speculate abstractly: within living memory the United Kingdom has already endured its own version in Northern Ireland. The signs are visible. The recent flag protests in England reflect a deeper hostility toward the political class, which has systematically negated English self-expression and indulged in a ritual of national self-abnegation that contrasts sharply with the celebration of every other identity. Public spaces are festooned with Pride flags, Palestinian flags, Ukrainian flags — approving anything, it seems, but the Cross of St George.

The message is unmistakable. The majority population, already disregarded on questions such as immigration, is told that its own symbols of belonging must be hidden, while the emblems of others are to be privileged and extolled. The protests are not simply a reaction to hypocrisy, but the eruption of a resentment long bred by neglect, exclusion and the steady withering of a people’s right to recognise themselves. And once flags become tribal markers of territory and ideology, they also become precursors of deeper division, escalating tensions, and — if the authorities persist in denying the causes — violence of an infernal kind. Northern Ireland has already shown us where such dynamics lead: bombings, assassinations, even Latin American-style “disappearances” (this time carried out not by the state but by the revolutionary groups).¹⁵ Also refer France’s Spiraling Social, Political and Economic Crisis: Is It Time for the Sixth Republic? [F3]

https://dailysceptic.org/2025/09/03/britains-descent-towards-civil-war-is-no-accident/ ↩︎
https://martech360.com/social-media-technology/social-media-monitoring/the-role-of-social-media-in-shaping-public-discourse/ ↩︎
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314424468_The_Impact_of_Curation_Algorithms_on_Social_Network_Content_Quality_and_Structure ↩︎
https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/recommendation-ethics ↩︎
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/641547/EPRS_STU(2020)641547_EN.pdf ↩︎
https://kgi.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Better-Feeds_-Algorithms-That-Put-People-First.pdf ↩︎
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bernstein/works/1899/evsoc/ ↩︎
https://youtu.be/R_VNHYF9O38?si=tbktpvKkfikiuVlW ↩︎
https://earthcharter.org/wp-content/assets/virtual-library2/images/uploads/Chapter%204.pdf ↩︎
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/prudential-regulation/publication/2023/september/diversity-and-inclusion-in-pra-regulated-firms ↩︎
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/feds-barr-says-banks-must-manage-climate-risk-2025-06-26/ ↩︎
https://finance.ec.europa.eu/sustainable-finance/tools-and-standards/european-green-bond-standard-supporting-transition_en ↩︎
How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet, Part 1 The Cogent ↩︎
How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet, Part 2 The Cogent ↩︎
https://dailysceptic.org/2025/09/03/britains-descent-towards-civil-war-is-no-accident/ ↩︎