Comments on The Open Conspiracy by H. G. Wells
By Alan Mercer
(From The Open Conspiracy and Other Writings, 1933, Waterlow & Sons Ltd., London)
(Continued from Part 8)
The twisted double-speak continues:
“The raw material of the earth should be for all [collected together by an elite and the remnants doled out to keep people in line] … not to be with withheld from exploitation for the general benefit of any chance claims to territorial priority of this or that backward or bargaining person or tribe.” (p. 40)
So his attitude towards “all” is clearly expressed. Resources are to be distributed by an authoritarian structure that holds in contempt different ways of life – different opinions, property rights and sovereignty. If we get anything, it will be doled out on their terms. Lucky us.
“But when we have stipulated for the replacement of individual private ownership by more highly organized forms of collective ownership, subject to free criticism and responsible to the whole republic of mankind, in the general control of sea and land, in the getting, preparation, and distribution of staple products and in transport, … “
“And if we add to that the necessary maintenance of a money system by a central world authority …, and if we conceive credit adequately controlled in the general interest by a socialized world banking organization, we shall have defined the entire realm from which individual property and unrestricted individual enterprise have been excluded.” (p. 41)
So, don’t worry, that’s all they’re going to take over! Almost everything. And Wells desperately tries to explain how beyond all of those areas of life, individuals – I suppose the ones who still survive the takeover – will be free “to exploit their abilities as they wish”. Sure they will. Oh, thank you, thank you so much for allowing us to do whatever is on your short list of exceptions to tyranny! He weaves in a lot of fluff about how his world money system will be fair to workers, money will retain its value, blah blah blah. So he mixes in a little honey with his nasty medicine.
In fact, we are born with freedoms and rights inherently. We either believe that or we are doomed. The State or the future World State just interferes with that reality and pretends to be bestowing or allowing us to have a little freedom. It also pretends to represent us. In reality, one person has just as much value and inherent power as another, uniform or not, government or not.
A lot of what he is talking about is already reality and has worsened gradually over time. Most of us have never have had true property rights and control. Look at the money system we are forced to use. Look at the income tax. Look at the property tax. Who do you think originated these taxes? The Open Conspiracy of course. It’s all long term. Here he describes the feudal nature of the “utopia”, and tarts it up as usual:
“If the individual landowner or mineral-owner disappears altogether from the world, he will probably be replaced over large areas by tenants with considerable security of tenure, by householders and by licensees under collective proprietors…” (p. 41)
Just like now. Really. We’re used to this already. Even the so-called “owners” have few rights, because property taxes, other taxes, zoning, “Greenbelt Acts” and “Clean Water Acts” undermine their control of their property and the fruits of their labour. And there are so many laws to break, so many ways to fine us, so many ways to have real assets confiscated by inspectors of different kinds. People are living in dreamland and are not paying attention to what is in the legislation being passed in countries like Canada and the U.S. Mostly, it’s because we think the mainstream media would have warned us, but that’s not their job apparently. And apparently also it’s not the job of the public education system to criticize our faith and blind trust in government. No, of course not.
He waffles over the question of democracy again, about whether “collective bodies” will be
“elected bodies or groups deriving their authority from other sanctions. Their scope and methods of operation, their relations to one another and to the central bureau of intelligence, remain also to be defined”. (p. 41)
This terminology reminds us of the later Central Intelligence Agency, although it’s obvious Wells is talking about a broader and more universal collection of economic and resource data than we normally associate with the function of spy agencies. The close Anglo-American connection between British and American intelligence services, along with some very interesting details, is portrayed in the movie “The Good Shepherd“.
In my opinion, just as the U.S. military and NATO has the planet and space itself carved into zones, the naming of the Central Intelligence Agency gives the impression that the American ruling class Establishment (creators of the UN also) has already long ago set things up for a world government to take over U.S. intelligence and military infrastructure from wherever it leaves off.
Ch. IX “No stable utopia is now conceivable”
Wells paints the picture of a world managed according to a regime grounded in population control policies:
“…steadily changing conditions involving continually enlarging and exhilarating opportunities [for the few]. Mankind, released from the pressure of population, the waste of warfare [no “warfare” between nations, just putting down rebellions] and the private monopolization of the sources of wealth [the word “monopolization” is twisted into attacking the opposite: independent control of our own resources], will face the universe with a great and increasing surplus of will and energy.”
“Change and novelty will be the order of life…”
We’ve been living “change” all our lives, and listening to “change” slogans all our lives, as the Open Conspirators fund and direct the change they want to see. And the cliches come out our ears. We will learn to “LOVE our change or else … we go the way of the dodo, blah blah blah”. Or we are told to “ADAPT TO CHANGE, or go the way of the dinosaur, blah blah blah”. All these threats we’ve heard in seminars and media all our lives, from people telling us how we must adapt to not having the old ways, the old factories, the old traditional structures, as they scrap everything we used to believe in and hold onto. Why can’t we be in control of how things are done around us? Why do we have to adapt to someone else’s agenda? All of this change we go along with because well-funded think-tanks and media tell us it’s supposed to be this way. And where is it all headed? H. G. Wells spells it out.
Value for value. If you appreciate this post, please donate a small amount to encourage more research and commentary.