Why not continue this series? You've made a great start into the subject and all is set for a deep dive into cabal's mentality. The question of their overall number is definitely an interesting one, but I wouldn't necessarily agree that it's put us in position of a huge disadvantage.
Why? Let me begin by saying that although numbers are from the domain of precision and exactness, we can definitely deduct that the overall number of cabal is minuscule. Just by following the money and looking at the most wealthy we arrive at the estimate of about 1% of the whole population size. But not all wealthy people are cabal's members, so we might cut that down to 0,5%. Out of those half percent we should also exclude complete and obvious peons, such as Musk or Bezos or Branson et al., who are merely acting as fronts for the cabal's families as true owners of the business corporations. These puppets are not the ones calling any shots, they don't decide pretty much about anything except for maybe what's on their breakfast menu and what shoes are they'll be wearing today. So we can again heavily cut that number down to, say, 0.1% of the entire world's population.
Then we should also estimate what's the size of the entire human population so we could extrapolate the size of the Immanis. I'd posit that there are definitely not 8 billion people inhabiting Gaia at this moment. As much as I've traveled around and had an opportunity to observe the globe from high up while flying around, we live in a huge world that's very sparsely populated. Some cities may actually concentrate the population at one place, but that's not near the average per square km. My educated guess would be that the number of Sapiens at this point is 2 billion at the most. Which in turn gives us the estimate of about 2 million of Immanis that actually count.
Out of these 2 million, we should focus on those who are occupying their highest ranks in planning department and societal order in general - I'm pretty sure only small percentage from their own ranks are dealing with surviving strategies of parasitism and speciesism, while the majority of the spoiled brats are too busy reinventing the definition of hedonism on weekly basis. So I would hypothesize that we're looking at maybe a few thousand of Immanis generals and planners - those who are definitely and restlessly working against Sapiens'.
I still believe that the most important issue is about naming these rare beasts and finding out where they live / hide. Even if I told you that the exact number of cabal is 1.574.631 individuals, this doesn't represent any real solution to the problem. If the main goal is to remove them as parasites and regain the control of our societies, then I'd focus on investigating who they are so I could unmistakably identify them when the opportunity arises. The side effect of creating such a list would be, of course, counting their number as we'd been writing them down. Both issues solved by doing one task. I'd call that extremely pragmatic and efficient.
That sounds like a very reasonable estimate. 0.1%, I mean. As for the total Sapiens population being only 2 billion I'm not so sure about that but I do admit I'm just going by official statistics there. I've never really looked into that to be honest.
I do also agree with you about creating the list, and actually if I were to attempt to ascertain their numbers this would, in fact, be the method I would use, rather than simply start with estimates of percentages.
Obviously, if this question was to be the main subject of Part V then you've just written the first chunk of it for me! Thanks!
I should definitely keep going with the series, though, you're right. I guess I was just a little mentally/emotionally exhausted after all that dark stuff. As I'm sure you can appreciate. I'm really glad you're liking it, though - my underlying intention was to raise really interesting questions which might not have been considered yet, instead of getting caught and lost in endless analyses of their methods, important though it is to understand the methods.
Oh - by the way - did you get that the caterpillar is of the Monarch variety?
I love all those exposures of their meanest agents :) I always had a feeling they might have looked frightening and your expose has confirmed my deepest fears. No, the Monarch nominations has escaped me. I'm not surprised by its name though as they seem enchanted by any creature capable of morphing into something else...
You also make a good point about pawns (or minions, even) and frontmen like Musk & Bezos etc. I think this is a very nuanced point which is often missed by people who lump the whole 'multipolar world order' and 'Great Reset' etc. together. They don't make a distinction between the pawns and the cabal, I mean, instead mistaking the two groups to be one group. Of course they have a whole range of methods to keep these minions loyal (bribery and blackmail and threats and, yes, a kind of mind control - ImpObs mentioned this kind of thing in a comment to the previous part, if I recall), but they don't necessarily turn them into Immanis. They simply corrupt them, which is not the same. A lot of humans are, indeed, weak in that way - spiritually so in particular, and readily turned into sociopaths. But sociopaths are not the same as psychopaths.
This, in my view, does indeed put a whole new light on the 'they're all in it together' hypothesis, and likewise suggests that the cabal are not, as it happens, as powerful as they would like people to think they are. This has been one my overarching points about the stuff that I have been writing about, and is probably the real reason why I do have objections to the 'all in it together' hypothesis. Because as I say I do think it's far more nuanced than people think.
See - I love your comments because you are already giving me food for thought and material for consideration in part 5! Thank you!
One more thought - the impression of their power and all-mightiness is the consequence of their control of real manpower - armies, intel agents and mercenaries. Which also touches on the psychology of "soldiers" subspecies of Sapiens'. However fascinating this is, it's also worrisome how many individuals willingly want to be a part of the armies around the world and involved in harming another human being. The notion of Sapiens' having hardwired principle against harming another Sapiens is not that general trait across the population, apparently. This deviation from the normal Sapiens mentality is very likely some species' cross-breed feature, transferred from Immanis to us, I reckon.
The issue of interbreeding is obviously a fascinating one and requires serious consideration. It would explain a fair bit, I think, as you suggest.
I have another essay from my Paschats site about soul ages (which I may reproduce here on Substack at some point), and how the vast majority of humans alive today would be very young compared to the minority who have been reincarnating for 300k years (given massive population increase, but only from a few thousand years ago - before then, the global population was less than 1% of what it is today - so that's how few old souls there are). Being spiritually immature, shall we say, makes them very vulnerable - in the same way children are vulnerable - to manipulation, especially through fear. The woman I quoted at the start of the essay has written extensively about the harmful and traumatic effect of 'religion' (i.e. Judaeo-Christianity) on children - one of the links I gave (about demon pretending to be a god) takes you to a very good essay by her on this subject. It all ties together.
"If you are wondering how Immanis survived, in that respect, then simply consider that they developed parasitism as the adapted mechanism of choice."
You nailed it right on the head with your Circe #1 exposee. If one starts to look at this "species" from the perspective you describe, then everything in this world makes sense. The horror perpetrated by this strain of "humanity" fits the description of the Homo Immanis perfectly well. It does not suffice to call the globalists just parasites, but one has to look at them in evolutionary context and understand that this species is not what most human beings are. Just like the orangutang is not a human being. It may look somewhat like a human being, but it is not. And so is the Homo Immanis NOT a human being, although it looks pretty much the same.
Out of a lack for better, I refer to these "fellow humans" as parasites, or psychopaths myself, but it does not cover it. Even a psychopath is to some extent capable of knowing the difference between right and wrong, and what his actions are causing another person. As we know, some psychopaths will actually confess, in courts and such, that what they did was wrong. But Homo Immanis does not have such feedback system. You may well be right about the amygdala; it certainly warrants investigation.
As for your reference to the London Dungeon, it is a good and vivid example of the horror Homo Immanis is capable of, and which capability still existst in their brain, as we are witnessing in other forms of horror nowadays throughout the world.
If it were possible to eradicate Homo Immanis, the world would be a manageable environment; manageable to the extent that living is truly a pleasant experience - unique and shortlived. Homo Immanis is the evolutionary parasitic force that destroys the natural strain, that we call the Homo Sapiens, the majority of human creatures that populates the world. However, HS is not capable of fighting off HI. That's another discussion, the why not, and equally important to your thesis (if you have not already covered it, I still need to read part 2 and 3!)
Thanks for taking your time to explain all this, it is long overdue. Humanity needs to be realistic about the life forms that it is intermingled with. What an eye opener it will be....
Why not continue this series? You've made a great start into the subject and all is set for a deep dive into cabal's mentality. The question of their overall number is definitely an interesting one, but I wouldn't necessarily agree that it's put us in position of a huge disadvantage.
Why? Let me begin by saying that although numbers are from the domain of precision and exactness, we can definitely deduct that the overall number of cabal is minuscule. Just by following the money and looking at the most wealthy we arrive at the estimate of about 1% of the whole population size. But not all wealthy people are cabal's members, so we might cut that down to 0,5%. Out of those half percent we should also exclude complete and obvious peons, such as Musk or Bezos or Branson et al., who are merely acting as fronts for the cabal's families as true owners of the business corporations. These puppets are not the ones calling any shots, they don't decide pretty much about anything except for maybe what's on their breakfast menu and what shoes are they'll be wearing today. So we can again heavily cut that number down to, say, 0.1% of the entire world's population.
Then we should also estimate what's the size of the entire human population so we could extrapolate the size of the Immanis. I'd posit that there are definitely not 8 billion people inhabiting Gaia at this moment. As much as I've traveled around and had an opportunity to observe the globe from high up while flying around, we live in a huge world that's very sparsely populated. Some cities may actually concentrate the population at one place, but that's not near the average per square km. My educated guess would be that the number of Sapiens at this point is 2 billion at the most. Which in turn gives us the estimate of about 2 million of Immanis that actually count.
Out of these 2 million, we should focus on those who are occupying their highest ranks in planning department and societal order in general - I'm pretty sure only small percentage from their own ranks are dealing with surviving strategies of parasitism and speciesism, while the majority of the spoiled brats are too busy reinventing the definition of hedonism on weekly basis. So I would hypothesize that we're looking at maybe a few thousand of Immanis generals and planners - those who are definitely and restlessly working against Sapiens'.
I still believe that the most important issue is about naming these rare beasts and finding out where they live / hide. Even if I told you that the exact number of cabal is 1.574.631 individuals, this doesn't represent any real solution to the problem. If the main goal is to remove them as parasites and regain the control of our societies, then I'd focus on investigating who they are so I could unmistakably identify them when the opportunity arises. The side effect of creating such a list would be, of course, counting their number as we'd been writing them down. Both issues solved by doing one task. I'd call that extremely pragmatic and efficient.
That sounds like a very reasonable estimate. 0.1%, I mean. As for the total Sapiens population being only 2 billion I'm not so sure about that but I do admit I'm just going by official statistics there. I've never really looked into that to be honest.
I do also agree with you about creating the list, and actually if I were to attempt to ascertain their numbers this would, in fact, be the method I would use, rather than simply start with estimates of percentages.
Obviously, if this question was to be the main subject of Part V then you've just written the first chunk of it for me! Thanks!
I should definitely keep going with the series, though, you're right. I guess I was just a little mentally/emotionally exhausted after all that dark stuff. As I'm sure you can appreciate. I'm really glad you're liking it, though - my underlying intention was to raise really interesting questions which might not have been considered yet, instead of getting caught and lost in endless analyses of their methods, important though it is to understand the methods.
Oh - by the way - did you get that the caterpillar is of the Monarch variety?
I love all those exposures of their meanest agents :) I always had a feeling they might have looked frightening and your expose has confirmed my deepest fears. No, the Monarch nominations has escaped me. I'm not surprised by its name though as they seem enchanted by any creature capable of morphing into something else...
Yeah - I'm sure you won't be surprised to hear that every CIA Director is a pug. At least, according to my Yasenevo Dossier anyhow.
Most of the good guys are cats and sexy girls.
You also make a good point about pawns (or minions, even) and frontmen like Musk & Bezos etc. I think this is a very nuanced point which is often missed by people who lump the whole 'multipolar world order' and 'Great Reset' etc. together. They don't make a distinction between the pawns and the cabal, I mean, instead mistaking the two groups to be one group. Of course they have a whole range of methods to keep these minions loyal (bribery and blackmail and threats and, yes, a kind of mind control - ImpObs mentioned this kind of thing in a comment to the previous part, if I recall), but they don't necessarily turn them into Immanis. They simply corrupt them, which is not the same. A lot of humans are, indeed, weak in that way - spiritually so in particular, and readily turned into sociopaths. But sociopaths are not the same as psychopaths.
This, in my view, does indeed put a whole new light on the 'they're all in it together' hypothesis, and likewise suggests that the cabal are not, as it happens, as powerful as they would like people to think they are. This has been one my overarching points about the stuff that I have been writing about, and is probably the real reason why I do have objections to the 'all in it together' hypothesis. Because as I say I do think it's far more nuanced than people think.
See - I love your comments because you are already giving me food for thought and material for consideration in part 5! Thank you!
You're very welcome.
One more thought - the impression of their power and all-mightiness is the consequence of their control of real manpower - armies, intel agents and mercenaries. Which also touches on the psychology of "soldiers" subspecies of Sapiens'. However fascinating this is, it's also worrisome how many individuals willingly want to be a part of the armies around the world and involved in harming another human being. The notion of Sapiens' having hardwired principle against harming another Sapiens is not that general trait across the population, apparently. This deviation from the normal Sapiens mentality is very likely some species' cross-breed feature, transferred from Immanis to us, I reckon.
The issue of interbreeding is obviously a fascinating one and requires serious consideration. It would explain a fair bit, I think, as you suggest.
I have another essay from my Paschats site about soul ages (which I may reproduce here on Substack at some point), and how the vast majority of humans alive today would be very young compared to the minority who have been reincarnating for 300k years (given massive population increase, but only from a few thousand years ago - before then, the global population was less than 1% of what it is today - so that's how few old souls there are). Being spiritually immature, shall we say, makes them very vulnerable - in the same way children are vulnerable - to manipulation, especially through fear. The woman I quoted at the start of the essay has written extensively about the harmful and traumatic effect of 'religion' (i.e. Judaeo-Christianity) on children - one of the links I gave (about demon pretending to be a god) takes you to a very good essay by her on this subject. It all ties together.
"If you are wondering how Immanis survived, in that respect, then simply consider that they developed parasitism as the adapted mechanism of choice."
You nailed it right on the head with your Circe #1 exposee. If one starts to look at this "species" from the perspective you describe, then everything in this world makes sense. The horror perpetrated by this strain of "humanity" fits the description of the Homo Immanis perfectly well. It does not suffice to call the globalists just parasites, but one has to look at them in evolutionary context and understand that this species is not what most human beings are. Just like the orangutang is not a human being. It may look somewhat like a human being, but it is not. And so is the Homo Immanis NOT a human being, although it looks pretty much the same.
Out of a lack for better, I refer to these "fellow humans" as parasites, or psychopaths myself, but it does not cover it. Even a psychopath is to some extent capable of knowing the difference between right and wrong, and what his actions are causing another person. As we know, some psychopaths will actually confess, in courts and such, that what they did was wrong. But Homo Immanis does not have such feedback system. You may well be right about the amygdala; it certainly warrants investigation.
As for your reference to the London Dungeon, it is a good and vivid example of the horror Homo Immanis is capable of, and which capability still existst in their brain, as we are witnessing in other forms of horror nowadays throughout the world.
If it were possible to eradicate Homo Immanis, the world would be a manageable environment; manageable to the extent that living is truly a pleasant experience - unique and shortlived. Homo Immanis is the evolutionary parasitic force that destroys the natural strain, that we call the Homo Sapiens, the majority of human creatures that populates the world. However, HS is not capable of fighting off HI. That's another discussion, the why not, and equally important to your thesis (if you have not already covered it, I still need to read part 2 and 3!)
Thanks for taking your time to explain all this, it is long overdue. Humanity needs to be realistic about the life forms that it is intermingled with. What an eye opener it will be....