Kautilya (also called “Chanakya”) was a royal advisor thousands of years ago in ancient India. And his writing is considered as an important precursor to much modern thought. Wikipedia notes: He is considered the pioneer of the field of political science and economics in India, and his work is thought of as an important precursor ...
George Washington considers the following as important: B+, Crimes, Espionage, European people, India, Leo Strauss, Neo-Conservative, Niccolò Machiavelli, Philosophy, politics, Politics of Italy, Sedition, SPY
This could be interesting, too:
James Picerno writes China Posts Smallest 2020 Loss For World’s Major Equity Regions
Barry Ritholtz writes Detroit to Incheon, South Korea 3X a Week
James Picerno writes Comparing The Year-To-Date Damage For US Equity Factor Returns
Bob Lefsetz writes Right Now
Kautilya (also called “Chanakya”) was a royal advisor thousands of years ago in ancient India. And his writing is considered as an important precursor to much modern thought. Wikipedia notes:
He is considered the pioneer of the field of political science and economics in India, and his work is thought of as an important precursor to classical economics.
2,300 years ago – in the 4th century B.C. – Kautilya advocated the use of false flag attacks:
The brother of a seditious minister may put forward his claim for inheritance. While the claimant is lying at night at the door of the house of the seditious minister or elsewhere, a fiery spy … may murder him and declare “Alas! the claimant for inheritance is thus murdered (by his brother).” Then taking the side of the injured party, the king may punish the other (the seditious minister).
The king may send a seditious minister with an army of inefficient soldiers and fiery spies to put down a rebellious wild tribe or a village, or to set up a new superintendent of countries or of boundaries in a locality bordering upon a wilderness, or to bring under control a highly-rebellious city, or to fetch a caravan bringing in the tribute due to the king from a neighboring country. In an affray (that ensues in consequence of the above mission) either by day or at night, the fiery spies, or spies under the guise of robbers … may murder the minister and declare that he was killed in the battle.
While marching against an enemy or being engaged in sports, the king may send for his seditious ministers for an interview. While leading the ministers to the king, fiery spies with concealed weapons shall, in the middle enclosure of the king’s pavilion, offer themselves to be searched for admittance into the interior, and, when caught, with their weapons by the door-keepers, declare themselves to be the accomplices of the seditious ministers. Having made this affair known to the public, the door-keepers shall put the ministers to death, and in the place of the fiery spies, some others are to be hanged.
While engaged in sports outside the city, the king may honor his seditious ministers with accommodation close to his own. A woman of bad character under the guise of the queen may be caught in the apartment of these ministers and steps may be taken against them as before.
A sauce-maker or a sweetmeat-maker may request of a seditious minister some sauce and sweetmeat by flattering him–“thou alone art worthy of such things.” Having mixed those two things and half a cup of water with poison, he may substitute those things in the luncheon (of the king) outside the city. Having made this event known to the public, the king may put them (the minister and the cook) to death under the plea that they are poisoners.
When there arises a quarrel among seditious persons, fiery spies may set fire to their fields, harvest-grounds, and houses, hurl weapons on their relatives, friends and beasts of burden, and say that they did so at the instigation of the seditious; and for this offense others may be punished.
Spies may induce seditious persons in forts or in country parts to be each other’s guests at a dinner in which poisoners may administer poison; and for this offense others may be punished.
500 years ago, Machiavelli wrote:
In order to keep the power, one has to use terror sometimes.
Machiavelli and the father of the Neo-Conservative movement – Leo Strauss – also advocated false flag terror as a political tool.
Strauss, an admirer of Machiavelli, believed that a stable political order required an external threat and that if an external threat did not exist, one should be manufactured. Specifically, Strauss thought that:
A political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat . . . . Following Machiavelli, he maintained that if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured.
Leaders throughout history have also acknowledged the political “benefit” of false flags:
“This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
– U.S. President James Madison
“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler
“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin
These are not just ideal words … presidents, prime ministers, congressmen, generals, spooks, soldiers and police from around the world have admitted to false flag terrorism.