Britain Today.

[BIAD]

Are the elites of Britain under any threat?  At all?

It's a difficult question to answer because of the manner of social-control being under-minded by the
deliberate ignorance of the masses regarding the pandemic. There's a doubt -just a faint one, that
their work through the media hasn't just not worked in this particular instance and could be a muffled
call that the same public are not listening.

But how?
Their initial reality was that nobody believes the mainstream media anymore, but I believe it's now
dawning on the high Elites that the deliberate obliviousness of the public to the warnings spoken from
up on high is largely due to technology, namely the internet.

Cell-phones have become indispensable and so has social media. Television companies and news
outlets rely on it today because of the cross-chatter to sculpt narratives. You'll notice how narrow views,
dumb-down discourse and straw opinions are regularly trotted out on MSM and on ratings-yearning
YouTube political discussion sites,

In many of these political forums, the people who are discussing such topics are unaware that these
very issues are generated from the media as investments for further conversation. Sowing the seeds
for further crops, if you will.

Of course, the data-mining of peoples' privacy is standard and yet, to lead a society in a manner that
will keep the public's attention on 'the small things' in politics like basic human failings and distinguishable
attributes of people from all walks of life, it's been believed for a long time that to be a leader is to know
what your followers want.

The political use if the internet assures that what the public thinks it wants, in actuality, is what the Elites
want. Before the internet, this calculated manipulation was solely in the hands of the physical media.

The older folk on this website may recall the placid perception of television, the days when the majority
of the public looked to -what they thought were dependable news like Cronkite and Ed Murrow. In their
very living rooms, these average-looking guys invaded the public's privacy and steered peoples opinions
with information carved to suit the transmitter and the receiver.

You know the usual guff, women and children shown to play on emotions, a 'Man-Bites-Dog' story at
the end of a news presentation to offer that their world isn't a bad place and sprinkled throughout the
articles is that someone is in charge, someone is watching whilst you sleep and they know better.
Why do you think these one-dimensional mouth-pieces get paid so much?!

But the internet didn't lure away the generations that should be stuck in front of their televisions or reading
the newspaper over the breakfast table, it was just there during their growing-up. Young individuals talking
across telephone lines and typing their opinions on subjects of mild interest, found an affinity with those they
corresponded with and discovered they had other compatibilities.
But young people become adults.

But for a long time, the mainstream media smiled at this strange conduit and any message of vague-doubt
was never heard and certainly never reached the ears of the ruling classes. It was business as usual, any
questions that a public needed to be asked were always modelled to make sure the answer was what the
second estate required, and the increasing amount of opposing-discourse remained mere twaddle of
undeveloped minds.

Then came Brexit and then came Trump.
For the UK establishment, the sea-change was believed to be manageable and with the right words of fear
and aloof rhetoric, the dozy peasants would believe that a mistake had been made and that they'd just put
their children's future in jeopardy.

Young people were trotted out on the screen and with a certain manicured accent, they explained their
concerns of leaving the loving-arms of the European Union. The only problem was that their examples of
woe involved what most of the working-class couldn't afford and these affluent references were already
known by the same less-fortunate strata of society via their interactions on the internet!

It was the cell-phones that had given the proletariat access to a world where their own position in society
was measured by someone else and they didn't like it. Once the direct question was asked of the public
(and I still believe that explicit 'In-Or-Out' appeal came from the Royalty), the dye was cast and the United
Kingdom left the EU.

The establishment media has shown it's true colours and decided rather than take over these internet talk
-arenas, they demand these forums to be closed down. They cannot afford to unnaturally evolve as it would
imply uncertainty that anything that came before a change was unshakable.

They also know that they cannot infiltrate all these conversation groups because if they error, break cover
and it is seen, then whole game is exposed and any residue of ambiguity will be blown away forever.

That's why we currently use expressions like 'IMHO' because the evidence is sparse of such a scheme to
prove such a studious design. The corroboration isn't there like there was a clandestine meeting of all the
media companies around the world, the public don't need some 'movie-style' proof that such Machiavellian
agreements were made, the very behaviour of the Journalists is enough evidence that something is wrong.

Nobody wrote or said anything nice about Donald Trump. All the major UK broadcasters and newspapers
habitually used the expression "in spite of Brexit" when reporting something negative on the dissolution of
the EU/UK affiliation.
It seems that they too, never wrote or said anything nice about a choice from a majority who could also be
customers.
Strange no?

I suppose the real question to answer first is who are the true Elites of the UK and if they have such power
to control society, did they fail miserably? To intrigue ourselves with that, we'd need to start with the East
India Trading Company.