“The truth movement’s over!”
“The awake community’s been destroyed by in-fighting!”
“People need to get over their differences and unite if we’re ever going to win!”
How many times have we heard the above soundbites in the last four years, with these sentiments becoming ever-more amplified recently, especially by self-appointed “leaders” (more on them later)?
Too many to count. So, please, let me be emphatically clear, so there is absolutely no room for ambiguity… they are all a load of old rubbish.
Perhaps not the most sophisticated or articulate of rebuttals, but sometimes you need to call a spade a spade, or, indeed, a spoon a spoon, as in the famous ‘Matrix’ observation that, instead of fixating on your control over the spoon and its ability to bend to your will, realise there is no spoon. You can’t control the spoon, you can only control yourself.
Equally, there is no “truth movement”: there are just many different and distinct individuals who agree on some things, and disagree (often vehemently) on others; who have different values, priorities, and goals; who get on some of the time and sometimes (again, often vehemently) do not.
This is exactly as it should be, because the alternative is the exact antithesis of all we claim to be fighting for – freedom, self-determination, and personal autonomy. Such concepts depend wholly on preserving the sovereignty of the individual and rejecting collectivist schemes – all collectivist schemes.
Trying to shoe-horn millions of people, from radically different backgrounds, with a cornucopia of different interests and perspectives, and with vastly varying ideas about how they want to live and what the world should look like, into the same extremely narrow and limiting category, just because they all agree – for instance – that vaccines are dangerous, is ludicrous madness. Sinister collectivist (pardon my profanity, but in the interests of straight-talking…) bullshit, which – and here is the key point – is only ever pushed by those who have a nefarious agenda, namely, wanting control over others (albeit sometimes unwittingly – e.g., controlling people often do not realise they have this tendency: it often only becomes clearly apparent when they are given some degree of “power”).
The people I see bemoaning “the death of the truth movement” are primarily wannabe gurus who love the limelight, and who want to control the narrative to various degrees – and many of these types therefore delighted in the brief period in 2020 when they could easily wow a crowd simply by standing on a stage and regurgitating a few soundbitey slogans:
“No more lockdowns!”
“Ditch the masks!”
“We do not consent!”
And be met with roars of approval – and deluged with adoration – from a whipped-up, high-energy crowd as they did so.
I’m not criticising this, by the way: it was a necessary preliminary stage in forging a longer-term resistance, much as the deeply delirious “in love” stage is a necessary preliminary stage in forging a longer-term romantic relationship – but you don’t expect said stage to last. It’s the rocket launch to get things going, but is undesirable and unsustainable in the long-term, as the relationship matures and the rose-tinted view of your beloved starts to wear off. Then you need to – not split up (although that might sometimes be for the best) – but mature, move forward, and be more realistic.
I wrote a piece further expanding on this analogy, back in 2022, called ‘The Truth Movement Falls Out of Love”, in which I explained that “the truth movement” is the same as ever it was: that it hasn’t “ended” because it never “began”, not as any kind of collectivist, unified “we are one” force; rather, it is largely ‘newbies’ (those who got involved in 2020 and after) mourning the end of this ‘first flush’ stage, and thinking that signals “it’s all over”… But that isn’t true at all.
What happened in 2020 was unprecedented, and galvanised a large number of previously rather disparate and loosely connected people to come together in a way they had never had reason to before. I’d been “awake” since about 2012 (or at least, that was when I read my first David Icke book cover to cover…), and had developed an online community of similarly disposed friends, largely through Facebook. But I’d never met most of them… until 2020.
Mostly, we lived hundreds of miles apart and so had never found the incentive to spend the time and money it would cost to meet IRL – but 2020 gave us that incentive, and at the first large London protest, I was delighted to finally meet in person people I had formerly only known online (and had in some cases been speaking to for up to seven years).
Yet because I’d been moving in these circles for a number of years before “Covid”, I knew the immense energy and “love-in” of early 2020 wasn’t a real reflection of “the resistance”, and that this level of energy, excitement, and apparent unity would soon ebb away – it’s natural and inevitable, just as the infatuated, swooning, “only have eyes for you” early stage of a romantic relationship also wears off and (if the relationship is to last) matures into something more realistic and sustainable.
Anyone who has ever been in a long-term relationship can confirm this, and can also confirm that sustaining a long-term relationship with even ONE person, is not an easy, effortless walk in the park that could just happen with any old person, provided you agreed (for instance) that vaccines are dangerous: you need a far higher level of compatibility than that, and even then, you need to continually invest in the relationship in terms of communication, reviewing mutual values and goals, and so on.