Spiritual warfare in the age of ascension
If the ends justify the means, take a close look at the ends being offered
The last few years have been a painful gift of clarity, which is leading to acceptance and inner peace. I now understand the deeper beliefs of many friends and family, and what really motivates them, for better and worse. For some, it turns out that I do not share their spiritual outlook, and that we have fundamentally divergent concepts of how the cosmos works and how we should act within it. For others, I have found a shared ethos and deep commitment to the righteous that makes us a new family.
As someone prone to be stuck in my very over-active head, it has taken quite a while to comprehend the spiritual aspect of this war, and it is very much work in progress. It was relatively easy for me to take my honed intellectual skills from tech and telecoms, and bring those over to the Q drops and analysis of propaganda. What has taken much longer is to be able to differentiate the mind and body parts of the battle from that of spirit and heart. It has surprised to discover that questions of spirit are equally amenable to ruthless examination; it is not “woo”.
In order to bring this into better focus, consider the recent social media post of Donald Trump Jr, who stated that “Conspiracy theorists are just people capable of pattern recognition”. We don’t need to examine the veracity of this directly, but rather pay attention to its framing. It locates the problem of criminal conspiracies, and thus the solution, in the mind — “pattern recognition”. Now there is nothing wrong with recognising patterns and seeing if the dots join. That’s what an information war is about, as the enemy wants us to believe each crime is disconnected from others. But it misses the spiritual aspect, which is perhaps more important.
A “conspiracy theologian” is concerned with ends rather than means. Indeed, all theology is framed as such, which is why it has a language of teleology and eschatology to describe those ends. To be in pursuit of truth demands that we accept that there is an external reality bigger than ourselves, and that we may not yet have access to it. This objective existence is independent of what we currently perceive and believe, as well as what authorities and powers assert it to be. We align to that (divine and sacred) truth by letting go of our cherished delusions and egotistical attachment to certainty.
The “conspiracy theorists” were really those who saw an anomaly and recognised that it represented a potential knowing falsehood or orchestrated deceit. They had not only the mental capacity to deconstruct the lie, but also the spiritual fortitude to keep going as it isolated them from the “mainstream” delusion. There is a restlessness that can only be calmed via getting to a final and consistent picture of the world and your place in it. There is no value to approval, consensus, or recognition for the socially “right” answer. Indeed sacrifice may be demanded in order to stand by your right to dissent. Communists aim to demoralise you into submission to their obvious falsehoods, and may kill you for disagreement with the state.
In a spiritual war the enemy fights us by getting us to individually take on collective beliefs and behaviours about ends (i.e. ultimate direction) that they control. We then act those ends out using our means of mind and body. Evil is not creative, it can only copy, so it has to usurp our own righteous energy and fertile imagination. It is much easier to get us to believe it is righteous to “lock down” at home (the corruption of spirit) than to invent a security door for every door in the country (requiring mind and body effort).
For instance, it could be that someone is co-opted into an ecological cult (like Extinction Rebellion) because they have been fooled via fear and want to save the world (and flatter themselves as its saviour). Once you see humans as vermin ruining nature then you will invent means to harm humans, claiming to do so in their own best interest. The spiritual lens no longer sees people as individuals with differing interests and contributions, but as a group who predate on the planet.
Every wickedness at scale requires the elevation of ends over means — a spiritual reversal of the natural order. Totalitarianism avoids direct confrontation with the populace by persuading them of a threat that emphasises the group interest over the individual (like a terrible virus needs social cooperation more than personal freedoms). Once people have bought into those ends, then the means require little coercion compared to a flat-out dictatorship or police state. It does not matter how badly they override personal rights (so “terrifying suffocating depersonalising face masks save grandma from the ‘rona”). The spiritual war elevates corrupt ends over legitimate means.
Marxist ideology is a religious spirit that opposes the holy spirit, and one of many. All truth is rendered to a perspective seen through an intersectional filter of domination and submission, with persecutors and victims. The worshipper of the mind, the modern academic, positions themselves as the rescuer. The correction of the perversions of power becomes a self-fulfilling system of ends which justify the methods employed. The social justice warrior now becomes the dominator of those who are deemed “privileged”, and inevitably becomes the persecutor, thus perpetuating the cycle of violence and inequality. Everything is done in the spirit of sustainability and fairness — a “spiritualism” that is a subtle subversion of real spirituality.
Spiritual warfare requires the substitution of absolute truth and fixed morality with relativism and fluidity, in order to control the societal ends. I am now becoming aware of how I have misframed many problems, such as arguing against the poison poke with friends and family. I fell into the trap of making it a matter of the mind, by asserting that pattern recognition was better than theirs. It may be, but that is beside the point. It is completely unproductive when that person has a PhD (in any subject) and you do not, because they feel intellectually superior. What I should have said is that their approach to the problem is unholy, because it is spiritually deficient in its hunt for truth and righteousness.
That which is holy is by its nature undivided against itself; it is whole, as the clue is in the homophone. It cannot be dependent on the viewer, as that makes it less than whole, being separated by who is the observer. Spiritual warfare seeks to divide the divine via duality — so you are either left or right wing, pro- or anti-vax, or queer-friendly versus a retarded phobic bigot. It is disconnecting and likes to assign everything a symbol or classification, so that we may judge it as “liked” or “disliked” in the prevailing public (false) morality. There is no nuance, and there is definitely no question of the division being engineered by any hidden hand for the betterment of forces unseen.
I have gained a fresh understanding of the Q operation by reexamining it through a spiritual lens. I have written many times in the past on how the question of “who is Q?” creates a logical trap for the corrupt mass media. For them to go there, and Q to be “official” (especially military), would force examination of all Q’s claims. For them not to seek Q’s identity exposes them as only having an agenda, not journalism. If you could prove to me that Q is a cunning ruse of some mischievous teens in a basement I would recant it all right away! But they do not, as they cannot.
What the Q operation is doing is reestablishing the very idea of a fact, and its material relevance to society. That is a spiritual quest in a society that is abused and lost due to Satanic forces at work. There is no dispute that there is a Q source, since its essential truth is denotational: the Q drops provably exist, and someone operationally put them there, no matter what the intention. It might take the (staged) arrest of Donald Trump (and/or his family), and a show trial, to force “ask the Q” into the forefront of the public’s attention. Once the identity of Q becomes material to the proceedings, it is impossible to escape the need to get an answer. Facts exist and do matter!
It has been notable that my former tech industry associates are quick to laugh at myself for being a “QAnon believer” (and yes, I still read those mailing list emails, even if I don’t say anything). They have no concept that “QAnon” is a synthetic target invented by the media to distract from Q (and the drop data), and tarnish anons (i.e. critical thinkers and open source researchers) with character assassination. If you asked them who Q is they would shrug it off; belief in their fabricated narrative and false reality makes the need for such facts irrelevant. Their interior feeling of knowing (mind) trumps the exterior desire for knowledge (spirit).
This is easily framed as being an issue of logic (and its failure), but it is better seen as a spiritual matter. If they cannot identify who Q is, and this suggests that have been hoodwinked, then they are “not right”, which is another way of saying “wrong”. These words of “right” and “wrong” to a legalistic mind come over as being moral judgements, when they are not. The self-righteous, prideful, and arrogant are unable to confront their unrighteousness of denouncing those who went to source data and investigated diligently. They lack the spiritual skills of forgiveness, grace, mercy, compassion, and humility to backtrack.
As such, Q is a means of fixing the spiritual deficit, not just the pattern seeking logical one. The existence of a singular “factual fact” — who is Q? — is a way of leading those lost in relativism back to the divine. This is not about persuading those who have rejected empiricism and logic that they should fix their thinking, but rather to help them reconnect with the spirit of seeking immutable truth bigger than themselves. It forces the separation of the internal belief system, and the public narrative “QAnon”, from the harsh reality of Q and the identity of Q. This may take a court drama the likes of which we have never seen before to force the matter.
At the end of the day this war is between those who believe in unalienable individual rights, and those who buy into a collectivist outlook where the ends justify the means. For example, in my previous newsletter TV Licensing wrote to me effectively stating that their remit to raise funds for public service broadcasting trashes my individual rights including that of presumption of innocence. Legislation and group needs render any questions of morality and individual rights moot in their paradigm. They can only relate to me as a dead persona, not a living man. That’s a spiritual problem.
The spiritual war is between those who see each individual as divine and sacred, and those who see us as just “evolving” minds and bodies being melded with technology. The human traffickers of all kinds wish to use us for labour, body parts, or sex; their collective interest as our master defines our privileges as slaves. They use contracts to entrap us in a “horizontal”, where right and wrong are defined by honourable conformance to agreement with each other and their law. That consensus leads to atrocities when mass psychosis takes over. What we actually seek (if we wish to be free) is the “vertical”, and a covenant with the almighty at the individual level.
We have been sold the fake and malleable idea of “human rights” that can be merged with “social contracts”, “social credit scores”, and “social obligations”. It leads to technofascism and tyranny of the worst kind, since ultimately the state and its legislation displace all other forms of logic and morality. There is not, and cannot be, a mind or body answer to a spiritual problem; better means, even pattern recognition, fundamentally fail to address a deficit in our choice of ends. I have made this error in the past, and it has taken a lot of work to see how I was worshipping my own mind, and not the creator of all that there is.
The only way out of the “horizontal” world of the mind (and its amoral contracts) is the “vertical” edification of the spiritual (and veneration of the sacred). This means that the (spiritual) ends matter, and they do not ever justify the (mind and body) means. To believe in the sacred implies acceptance of a reality distinct from narrative, and a morality that is not defined by personal desire or preference. The hive mind does not dictate the physical matter, and that is where we have got lost. Holiness is the quest for singular truths and morals that are independent of the individual and their ideas or perspectives.
Once we realign to the highest, then the worldly tension and trouble will naturally shrink. There is a reason why theatres have a stage, and this is to ensure that the drama is contained to the narrative space only! The drama has flooded into our world because the sacred is designed out of our workplaces, culture, families, law, and even churches. Whatever the problem in the “horizontal” world, the ideal is always to transcend it by “going up”. Stop asking what is right, and do what is righteous. They are not the same!
The difference — between mind and spirit — is crucial, but not widely understood. The former is a means, the latter is the ends to which it is applied. Which one is in charge and drives your life is everything. We went through an enlightenment of the mind in the past, and now we need an ascension of the spirit. We’ve overdone the cognitive patterns, now it’s catching up with the loving prayer. This is a process of raising our spiritual standards — and by its nature depends on nobody else, at least in the temporal world.
No agreement or contract is required. No permission is necessary or possible. No barrier or gatekeeper holds you back. The narrow way of the higher spiritual path is open to everyone at all times. The context of a spiritual war makes this non-optional. The death of those who were spiritually lax ends any debate over the matter; the broad path of elevating the mind and body over spirit leads to danger and disaster.
So what is stopping you (and me) from ascending?
Future of Communications is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.