Censorship Is Now Considered to Be a Western Value!

The key to ruling over a great number of people is to keep them divided. That is how empires throughout history have been ruled. In the eighteenth century, Rousseau once observed that the bigger a state or comparable political construction, the less freedom for the person. He was absolutely right!

The globalist rulers of Europe, the EU Commissars, and the extensive organizational pyramid they have put in place, ceaselessly remind all of us that Europe stands at the pinnacle of civilization and that democratic “European Values” (also known as “Western Values”) are superior. These include freedom of speech, and the inviolability of the human body. These values and rights are enshrined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

These rights may still exist on paper, but in practice they have been subverted piecemeal and hollowed out by the EU evil elite. This process has been underway since the collapse of the Soviet Union and socialism around 1990, and was accelerated during the twenty-first century.

As long as the Soviet Union existed, it was easy to keep the citizenry all over Western Europe subdued by pointing to the danger of a Soviet invasion. Therefore, after the end of the Cold War, for a while the sky seemed clearer than ever before.

The globalist elites now needed to find something else with which to keep the population subdued, so they came up with acid rain and the hole in the ozone layer. All forests would soon disappear due to acid rain and anyone who would use anything ranging from hairspray to whipped cream from a can was guilty of accelerating the end of life as we know it, because it would make the hole in the ozone layer even bigger.

These issues disappeared overnight when the three WTC towers in New York were brought down on September 11, 2001. Most definitely, this was a very elaborately planned and diligently executed enterprise, and the official narrative was swallowed hook, line and sinker by most people. Initially, that is. Very soon, however, doubts began to circulate. Modestly at first, but then morphing into a vast movement of disbelievers all over the West. In the U.S., those who refused to believe the official narrative were branded “conspiracy theorists” and the term was quickly translated into the various European languages and similarly weaponized.

Although the concept “conspiracy theorist” dated from the 1960s, when in the U.S. it was used to disqualify and socially isolate those who would not believe the official narratives on the Kennedy murders, after 9/11 it became a tool to create social division all over the American Empire. The operations against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and later Syria planted even more seeds of doubt, to the effect that a basis was laid for a profound social dichotomy: on the one hand, those who continued to trust their government, on the other hand, a growing number of sceptics.

Their numbers grew even more during the ‘Great Covid Show.’ Although statistics on who did and who did not take the jab sometimes show remarkable differences from one nation to another, it is an open question whether these statistics are anywhere near reliable. The best assumption seems to stick to the Pareto principle of 80-20, with 20% in the West not taking the jab.

The ‘Great Covid Show’ and the subsequent great power confrontation in the Ukraine have solidified the social dichotomy that is now evident all over the West. It is especially in Europe (because of its status as a region under the U.S. yoke) that this deep societal rift presents a special problem. If allowed to go unchecked, this might lead to European nations pursuing to leave the fold.

Although the European ruling elite has consistently failed to prove it is capable of independent, original thought, it seems to have understood the danger resulting from the current societal dichotomy. Yet instead of adapting its policies to the new reality in accordance with those celebrated “Western Values,” it has chosen to fight anyone who disagrees with the EU Commissars. It is reasonable to assume that the overall percentage of citizens rejecting the official narratives on anything ranging from covid to the war in Ukraine and from anthropogenic climate change to the annual rate of inflation, stands at about twenty. As long as it stays there, everything is fine and dandy, but it becomes problematic whenever that percentage would rise to thirty or even higher.

That is why new methods and techniques of thought control have been unleashed on the European citizenry. And the end of it is not yet nearly in sight. Virtual communication networks are currently the target of a wholesale attack on the freedom of speech. Ostensibly in an effort to protect minors from harmful content on virtual communication platforms and to fight the abuse of children by paedophiles, behind closed doors (remember those “Western Values”) EU Commissars have decided to impose stricter “voluntary” controls. This will mean that users eventually have to identify themselves by way of digital or facial scans, all because the public is in need of protection! Citizens need to feel safe and be protected against many dangers. Not only against child pornography, but also against hate speech. Moreover, they need to be properly informed at all times by the news that needs to consist of real information. No “disinformation” therefore!

Nobody seems to realize that the very concept of disinformation is utterly nonsensical, it is actually a non-word, a weaponized concept. Every message, each news item carries information. Some or all of it might be untrue, but it is still information. To put it differently, each and every lie also carries information. Therefore, the word disinformation is a contradiction in terms.

How anyone can reconcile the weaponized use of the term disinformation with “Western Values” such as free speech, is a mystery. Yet the EU Commissars go one step further as they intend to decree new rule, making it impossible for anyone to express what they think on virtual communication networks. A kind of full spectrum domination of activity by citizens on virtual communication platforms is being prepared.

At the same time, it is a tool for the elites to keep the public divided so as to be able to control it more effectively. This very usefulness may, however, have prevented the elites from analysing the subject more profoundly.

What can we conclude from this?

In the first place, it seems to indicate that the EU Commissars are very much afraid and that they are finally realizing that growing numbers of Europeans are opposed to their policies. At the same time, they have concluded there is no turning back. It is almost as if they are so afraid of the wrath of the citizens that out of desperation they have decided to control the speech of 450 million Europeans. Therefore, the latest decisions of the EU Commissars are a testimonium paupertatis, a proof of their utter intellectual and ethical poverty.

Any government that resorts to the kind of measures decreed by the Brussels Eurocrats is inherently weak, and implicitly realizes that its days are numbered.

yogaesoteric
December 14, 2025