Roger Stone and the Conservative Dark Art of Political Conspiracy in the United States

Published Thursday, 13th December, 2018 | By Susan AKA Peacefull

This is a dark web. It is fascinating to look into the eyes of a political operator and learn of the story he must tell himself to justify the evoking of hatred and being hated. This is an individual who takes pride in destroying opponents and is quick to state it is legal. In a fully functioning democracy where laws are actually created for good governance and social stability, what this gentleman does would be a crime. I witnessed in the video below how he incites hatred, division, deceptive stories and the psychological and likely physical abuse of people. He is the man they call in when they want to win. I am contemplating the reality of ‘winning’ which drives the American psyche as if they don’t win they lose. They cannot bear to be losers. Yet someone has to lose in any contest and it is what it is. Yet they attach their reputation, their lives on how they are seen and their ability to win the race. No-one seems to care whether it is ethical or not, the main outcome is winning. This is a critical point. This is what let’s them off psychologically when they hurt or harm others. The main thing is they get the job done. I feel the military mindset here. It is referred to as war. It also resonates with what I have witnessed here in Australia, like an awakening for me, the war between the Right and the Left. Today I understand this conflict more clearly. I can see how it undermines democracy and it is evident how it prevents our civilisation from solving the most intractable problems. It definitely translates into the Cold War scenario as it is a root or sponsoring thought. Property rights which has been embedded in industrialisation is anchored in the Right or Conservative expression of power. This machination perceives power as success and success as material wealth that gives them a sense of freedom from want. Yet the real freedom has nothing to do with wealth, it comes from openness to infinite possibilities. It is the freedom to love, to feel, to expand, to explore, to learn, to experience. A persona like Roger Stone would see this as left wing pinko stuff as he would put down anything resembling the true beauty of humanity as for him this is the profile of a ‘loser’. I have lived with nothing yet I feel I have everything, as my life is open to possibilities not closed in silos of structures that profile worldviews. My liberation comes from the ability to be free in any moment no matter outer circumstances. When I watched this film I contemplated how he would feel if he lost everything. I believe he would become depressed as he hooked his personal value to ‘winning’ and being seen as an insider, close to powerful people, influencing history (politics) with ruthless detachment to those he harmed. He would be profiled as psychopathic which is the norm in mindsets tasked with an objective and to leave feeling to the side. This is clearly seen as weak. Yet the feeling aspect of our intuitive nature is what enables us to balance with others, to meet in the middle, to feel empathy – in fact it is a natural ability to harmonise with the world which is the very natural selection that our species inherited. The patriarchal order devalues the feminine as is clear with the #MeToo phenomena as women break free (I hear Eddie Mercury here) from the bondage and shackles of the female weakness they are smeared with. It is not true as feelings and emotions are essential for a functional human. I recall in the baby houses in Russia the orphans were crying. I was told if they didn’t get love they would either go insane or die. That is how biologically important the feeling, empathetic, humanitarian aspect of our species is. The mess we are in worldwide is due to the imbalance between the masculine and the feminine.

Roger Stone would be a masculine masculine who gets what he wants and calls this winning. My perspective is that it is not about winning/losing it is about what serves you and what does not. Anyway, nonetheless he played a part in revealing the dark side of politics, that democracy is a farce and the fact the people have no say their emotions are simply manipulated to ensure the gain of the few over the many.

This video below will inform about the rise of the Conservative moment from a basis of corruption. This is why it is falling apart today. I note he calls himself a Libertarian, I have come across this and it is, in my view, not about freedom. Here is an overview from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-libertarianism

Here is a quote:

“…Right-libertarianism (or right-wing libertarianism, and usually simply referred to as libertarianism in the United States and other countries)^[1] refers to libertarian political philosophies that advocate negative rights, natural law and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.^[2] Right-libertarians strongly support private property rights and defend market distribution of natural resources and private property.^[3] This position is contrasted with that of some versions of left-libertarianism.^[4] Right-libertarianism includes anarcho-capitalism and laissez-faire, minarchist liberalism…”

The key word is ‘anarcho’, this is anarchist. No government. The definition is: “Anarcho-capitalism is a political philosophy and school of anarchist thought that advocates the elimination of centralized state dictum in favor of self-ownership, .…” Lassaiz faire was the invisible hand to allocate resources fairly (lower prices, Adam Smith) but today it is code for market power where the market seeks to influence the removal of regulators perceived as a cost to production and an impediment to what they want to do.

Here is another important word ‘minarchism‘ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state I note no welfare state – the words that come to me are ‘go eat cake’ or indifference, they don’t care about the people. Here are words associated with minarchism “first place, power”, “method of government”, “empire, realm”, “authorities” (in plural: ἀρχαί), “command”. It is about totalitarianism. So when they say liberarianism, the spin doctors are speaking of their own freedom to do what they want. I found this part particularly interesting …

“…Another common justification is that private defense and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough…”

This effectively means privatisation and representation of those that pay. This is why there is a drive to sell off public assets, to privatise/contract out public service and render them inefficient so they can be sold off. I saw in my own experience when I couldn’t access a lawyer given poverty and the other side could, that I was put in a position of disadvantage as the lawyers don’t just represent a person they use dirty tricks (not unlike good ‘ol Roger, or what we term rogering) to win. So fairness goes out the door, injustice is the mainstay (like feudal times) and yes please eat more cake oh bottom dwellers (laughing here).

Good luck with that fantasy. What they don’t get is that the whole system can only survive if the middle class does. I’ve just had inspiration… Artificial intelligence … ah they will use AI to get rid of the need for the middle/lower classes, this is how total power is gained and imagined by libertarians. Population control will be on the agenda, given climate change. It is a values free zone. Then we get hit by an asteroid, an act of God. That one you can’t buy at any fire sale. I will add on a spiritual note karma. All karma really is is an energy response spiritually – what you put out comes back. What the libertarians do not see is that they are part of a larger cosmic worldview. They have come in to have an experience and life is expansive and unlimited. They can never have full spectrum dominance as they do not have the power to control all things and non things. There is a spiritual reality that many feel when they engage with the pinko part of their life, and we are here to experience, we are actually not in control. You would have to look at some of my videos to understand this fully. We are all here to explore. No-one can control in truth. But by all means give it a go and see what happens, it is bound to turn out very different to what you believe. This is how a paradigm ends, till the end it believes it has control. Yet it never did.

I was able to learn more about Trump, I haven’t had the chance to deeply look at him. However, I knew he was a disruptor of the establishment. This is a Risk Management strategy. After the Roger Stone documentary I realised that disrupter was the strategy to differentiate from the establishment. In truth he is a person who bullies to get his way, he is a person who gets what he wants as he has come from wealth and privilege (didn’t experience a real ‘no’ or if he did he forced ‘yes’). He is another that has to be ‘right’ as his sense of identity as powerful comes from getting what he wants. He sees any form of dissent as disloyal. I know someone like this well. It is a mental health issue where they cannot face being wrong as they feel vulnerable. So they fight to be seen as right no matter what it takes. Again, if he lost everything the little boy would be there, frightened and vulnerable as the true state of play (I can say that as a Fool). This one hides the insecure child as he creates a tantrum to get his needs met one way or another. I think of the blimp in Europe, funny depiction of a big baby. He is a masculine male with little emotional intelligence to perceive how others may feel or navigate the emotional landscape, he is young spiritually. He enjoys sacking them as it feels powerful and he wants to send fear into others who may be disloyal or strip down his insecure image he holds up. All people who bully are fragile inside. The charade played with Roger re: sacking/resigning was to move him away from politics as the by-line was about corruption and clearly Roger is corrupt, so he had to not be part of Trumps visible campaign team. Instead he operated through his colleagues in the background so they could (drum roll) win. I noted he said he wins either way. This is a person feeding off power and identifying with it as himself as powerful. In truth it is money and group think that shape shifts his environment favourably or unfavourably, it is all about perception not real power. It is indeed the fake world that Donald speaks of as a projection onto other fake realities he knows well.

The Stone philosophy is described as a info wars conspiracy theory approach. The philosophy is to: win at all costs, destroy the left (feminine), cultivate power, strategise to destroy the enemy, going after journalists, demonisation, bullying and covert abuse, powerful PACs, ruthless exploitation to enrich and winning. The winning is about addiction, they are addicted to power, it is in truth a mental health issue.

Real power has no desire to control. There is no need for power as the person has it. I feel it as love. It is like fulfillment (no emptiness). There is no craving to be seen, to be important, to be popular, to be successful as you have arrived. The feeling I have is zero point. I don’t care or need the approval of others to feel alive. I am already feeling this as I create moment by moment. This is living in the Now.

So to the video for the fun of it, this is why politics is seen as dishonest and completely unrelated to what people want. I thank Roger Stone for his part as he expresses the disconnected power broker perfectly. He is the mirror to others, what sort of world do you want? Does democracy have value? Each get to choose. What is of real value?

The filmmakers.