tl; dr...the few don't require the entire world as a tool to control the many, since consent by the many to the suggestions of the few tempts the many to react as "one" to whatever the few are suggesting.
To this point, a lot of people laugh that the propaganda is lame and doesn't affect them, but it doesn't really matter, because the propaganda isn't for the common citizen, it is to convince government employees, journalists, CEOs, HR departments, the wealthy, etc. That segment wields a lot of power and if they believe the propaganda, that is 99% of the battle won for the banksters
to convince government employees, journalists, CEOs, HR departments, the wealthy, etc.
a) the foundation for GOVERN (to control) MENT (Latin mens, mind) represents choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law. Consenting to suggested puts one into a chain of command under those suggesting.
b) choice is situated at the center of perceivable balance (need/want), while consenting to the suggested choices of others tempts one into imbalance (want vs not want).
c) all the conflicts about suggested represent "reasoning". The few utilize suggestion to divide the many into reasoning against each other over the suggested.
d) employed vs unemployed, journalism (writer vs reader); CEO (chief executive officer) vs submissive subordinate follower; HR (human relations) vs lack of interaction among humans, departed (move from) mind vs mind moved by (inspiration perceived), the rich vs the poor etc.
All of these represent conflicts of reason shaped by consent of the many to the suggestions of the few; which gives the few the power to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and deliberately contradict (talmudic reasoning) whatever the many are reasoning over.
The many within each side of any of those conflicts will only view the opposite side, while ignoring both the contract (choice to choice aka consent to suggested) underneath; nor the contract holder outside the conflicts.
That segment wields a lot of power
Each segregated mind (segment) wields the power of free will of choice (partial) within perceivable balance (whole)...unless ignored for the suggested choices by others.
The few wield what the many willingly ignore to utilize. One cannot give free will of choice away only ignore using it, hence willingly repress the expression of choice within an impressing system.
the battle won for the banksters
a) reason represents the battle; winning vs losing represents the "banked" mind confined into a conflict caused by consenting to the suggestion (money) by others.
b) this represents value (perceivable inspiration); this represents evaluation (perceiving choice); this represents the temptation to ignore value (suggested information).
Whatever others are suggesting tempts one to ignore what perceivable nature is offering. One represents resistance (living) within temptation (dying)...others tempt one to ignore this perceivable natural order for following suggested orders.
To this point, a lot of people laugh that the propaganda is lame and doesn't affect them, but it doesn't really matter, because the propaganda isn't for the common citizen, it is to convince government employees, journalists, CEOs, HR departments, the wealthy, etc. That segment wields a lot of power and if they believe the propaganda, that is 99% of the battle won for the banksters
a) the foundation for GOVERN (to control) MENT (Latin mens, mind) represents choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law. Consenting to suggested puts one into a chain of command under those suggesting.
b) choice is situated at the center of perceivable balance (need/want), while consenting to the suggested choices of others tempts one into imbalance (want vs not want).
c) all the conflicts about suggested represent "reasoning". The few utilize suggestion to divide the many into reasoning against each other over the suggested.
d) employed vs unemployed, journalism (writer vs reader); CEO (chief executive officer) vs submissive subordinate follower; HR (human relations) vs lack of interaction among humans, departed (move from) mind vs mind moved by (inspiration perceived), the rich vs the poor etc.
All of these represent conflicts of reason shaped by consent of the many to the suggestions of the few; which gives the few the power to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and deliberately contradict (talmudic reasoning) whatever the many are reasoning over.
The many within each side of any of those conflicts will only view the opposite side, while ignoring both the contract (choice to choice aka consent to suggested) underneath; nor the contract holder outside the conflicts.
Each segregated mind (segment) wields the power of free will of choice (partial) within perceivable balance (whole)...unless ignored for the suggested choices by others.
The few wield what the many willingly ignore to utilize. One cannot give free will of choice away only ignore using it, hence willingly repress the expression of choice within an impressing system.
a) reason represents the battle; winning vs losing represents the "banked" mind confined into a conflict caused by consenting to the suggestion (money) by others.
b) this represents value (perceivable inspiration); this represents evaluation (perceiving choice); this represents the temptation to ignore value (suggested information).
Whatever others are suggesting tempts one to ignore what perceivable nature is offering. One represents resistance (living) within temptation (dying)...others tempt one to ignore this perceivable natural order for following suggested orders.