The Dark Elite (Part Four)

It would be easier (especially for someone sitting on the sidelines, like me) to say who the Dark Elite are not than who they are. They are not “mainstream media” and “fake news”. Though our Fourth Estate has indeed assumed much too aggressive a role in shaping public policy, and though its sympathies overwhelmingly veer in the direction of creating a highly centralized utopia, none of this group, it seems to me, can credibly be visualized as pulling the strings of puppets on the national stage. At most, the owner of a communications empire—preferably one who has made his broadcast domain part of a vast conglomerate—might be a member of some covert Star Chamber; but this person’s vast wealth and his influence over other sectors of the economy would supply the ticket for admission. The people who directly persuade us, before their microphones or cameras, to take comfort in the emerging totalitarian state are not among that state’s architects. In the phrase supposedly used by Lenin, they are “useful idiots” who champion the abrogation of our freedoms because they identify egotistically with the cause of creating a brave new world.

Still less are Hollywood’s movers and shakers suitable collaborators for an enterprise that aspires to rule the world. Again, unless a major producer also has his finger in several other entrepreneurial pots, his job is essentially meretricious, no matter how much lucre it spills into his bank account: that is, he is more slave to public taste than engineer of public opinion.

As far as established political parties, I should say that Republicans are more likely to be source material for a twenty-first century illuminatus than Democrats. The reasons for this are simple. With their superior appeal to “the masses” (which does not always translate into real benefit for ordinary people), Democrats are more conscious of “image”. They enjoy applause and live for celebrity. Once they discover how much loot is also to be harvested in the corridors of power, their heads are more readily turned away from the hidden heart of the magnetic force field. They would rather bask on a Caribbean island in a lobbyist’s company than explore the underground vaults of NSA’s new megaplex in Utah. Among this latter type, one is more likely to find Republicans. They have cut their professional teeth in boardrooms and back rooms. They know how to dress, how to be discreet, and how to blend into the wallpaper when necessary. The hard part for them is being flamboyant enough to get elected, in the first place, as the electorate grows more YouTube-addicted.

This is not to imply that politicos of any stripe are very likely to sit on the Board of the Knights Templar. As with publishers and film producers, they would almost certainly require connection with some other avenue of power to receive the initiation: banking and finance, energy production, and defense contracting are three of the private-sector ties that our elite-eligible may have formed before entering public office. But these avenues are little traveled now. Most congressmen come to DC by way of the bar and the bench. In other words, they know how to design and manipulate legalese to reach a desired objective through a squid-like ink screen. While this can be a useful survival skill, it doesn’t get you to the top of the food chain. Honestly, I doubt that most of our elected representatives have any idea where the greatest power ultimately resides, any more than a little pilot fish carries around a full mental image of the shark’s jaws under which he comfortably feeds.

Many have proposed George Soros as a prototype for the Goldfinger-like character who darkly subverts the mechanisms of nations as if he were toying with pawns on a chessboard. My initial reaction is to concur—perhaps because the world of high finance is so alien to me. (Tacitus writes, omne ignotum pro magnifico est: a very free translation might be, “We like to imagine that all the boxes we can’t find are in the closet we can’t open.”) On the other hand, Soros is very visible, and a characteristic of our kind of shady figure might almost be that you can be sure X is not one if you’re convinced he is. Soros’s money, besides, has not been spent with particular efficiency. He has unlimited amounts of it to meddle in other nations’ affairs, but the horses he backs come croppers far more often than they visit the victory circle. He also has no apparent connection with high tech: and this, I believe, is an indispensable quality in our Shadow King.

I like bankers as prospects… but they need to have a mine of pixie dust somewhere in their portfolio. William Gheen once wrote me (in defense of his support for Donald Trump) that Ted Cruz was disqualified in the struggle to “drain the swamp” because his wife Heidi had worked for Goldman-Sachs. The suspicious, however, are not those who engage in pursuing material profit; they are those invested in materially engineering the future of our species for the “betterment of all concerned”.