I know there is no right answer, and secret societies can't all be publically known.
Just wondering who/what people think is the top of the bad guy stairs.
Example: Deep State, when I think of the ultimate highest group, it's the one in control of the US.
I'd assume this is an individually specific answer but truthfully I know 'they' are the evil powers and principalities of this world. 'They' come in every packaging imaginable and some at higher concentrations than others at certain times but it's all the same song and dance and God knows their steps. Ask Him about it maybe?
I've already explored Him. For me, They took what makes Him beautiful and manipulated Him into dogmatic, war mongering, make believe distraction from our unique spirituality.
They, could be demons. They also could be something else
Aka dog/god + ma/matter. What if what you call "god" isn't matter (solid) but immaterial (fluid), and what if your consent to suggested (word) tempts you to ignore perceivable (sound); while holding onto suggested solid within perceivable fluid?
What if words tempt one to want to hold onto meaning (information); while sound needs to be let go of (inspiration)?
a) MONGER aka merchant aka "to trade"...what if ones consent to the suggestion by another implies mercantile contract law between buyer (consent) and seller (suggestion)?
b) What if offer (perceivable) generates offered (perception) with "free" will of choice? What if others suggest currency to distract ones perception from perceivable "current", hence tempting ones "free" will of choice to bind itself to suggestions by chosen ones. Suggestions like RELIGION (Latin religio; to bind anew)?
c) What if choice can only exist within perceivable balance (need/want)? What if choice can be tempted through suggestion into self inflicted imbalance (want vs not want)?
What if this conflict of imbalance is suggested to ones consenting choice as "reason/logic" aka reasoning about suggested information, while ignoring perceivable inspiration and logic aka logos aka suggested word over perceivable sound aka spell-craft?
What if others get permission by ones consent to rebrand conflicts of reason (want vs not want) into for example...truth vs lie; good vs bad; belief vs disbelief; us vs them; rich vs poor; soccer vs football; left vs right; black vs white; cola vs pepsi; capitalism vs communism; trump vs biden; israel vs hamas; ukraine vs russia; vaxxed vs unvaxxed; love vs hate; big mac vs whopper; mario vs sonic etc.?
Demon aka DAI (divider) MON (provider)...what if being implies division (life) within provision (inception towards death)? Angels aka angles imply perpendicular to base-line...could ingredients (life) within base-line (inception towards death) shape perpendicular angles suggested by kike aka kikel aka circle?
What if holding onto suggested implies a perpendicular angle for temporary growth (life) within ongoing loss (inception towards death), and what if the resulting conflict of reason implies circular logic, hence reasoning against one another about suggested information, while never finding conclusion to conflict, yet spending ones resistance within endless conflicts of reason...much like a snake eating its own tail (ouroboros allegory).
English Language was high jacked centuries ago, any analysis with be heteroscedastic with intended but hidden subversion of modern languages anyway, just give up
Aka RANDOM; noun - "motion without direction". Being alive implies directed within motion from inception towards death.
Motion implies velocity (always directing forwards), while the momentum (inception towards death) of ongoing motion generates temporary resistance (life) at its center.
Momentum implies balance within motion, and the center of balance implies choice, hence ones "free" will of choice within "dom"inance of balance aka free-dom...random represents the suggested inversion thereof.
Ones consent to suggested (words; information; fiction) tempts one to ignore; deny; hide perceivable (sound; inspiration; reality).
Nature moves sound forwards; those within tempt each other to hold onto suggested words, while ignoring to resist being an instrument moved within sound. If an instrument resists sound it "resonates", while ignoring to resist implies "dissonance".
Example: suggested "insane person" tempts one to ignore being in sanus (within sound) and per sonos (by sound). Adapting to perceivable sound implies PHONETICIAN (from phonic; sound), while ignoring it for suggested definitions implies DEAF PHONETICIAN.
Another example...if I suggest having a box and you consent, then your consent permits me to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) what's in the box. That box represents your mind/memory, and your consent gives my suggestions the permission to enter information into it.
Only nature gives all (perceivable) to each one (perception)...others tempt one to hold onto suggested, which when consented to, tempts one to give up.