The Manifesto

On Karl Marx plus a FREE Book Summary “The Federal Reserve Conspiracy” by Anthony Sutton

• Marx's big enemy was the middle class, the bourgeoisie. Marx wanted to seize middle class property. - Anthony Sutton

• … there takes place the proletarization of the middle classes, who are the true opponents of revolution? - Rakovsky – Red Symphony

Following on from Red Symphony.

I never understood “bourgeoisie” to mean “middle-class”, but now I see it.

I’ve had some time to think about it.

If you want to “move society” to your chosen destination, and that destination has far more centralized power than you have today, what you need is “turmoil”, or “revolution” as the Marxists prefer to call it.

Imagine an island with 1,000 inhabitants.

Let’s say that 10 of them are the Elite.

Let’s also say that the bottom 70% (in terms of wealth and income potential) are the Workers. They are the Proletariat, in Marx’s language.

That leaves 30%, or 290 to be exact that would be the Middle Class.

These I have finally come to understand are the Bourgeoisie. Of the wealth not owned by the 10 people on that island, most of it is owned by these 290 people.

Now imagine that everyone on this island was happy, or more realistically content. Why would any of these 990 people agitate for change, for revolution? They wouldn’t.

Now, if the 10 people on this island, who already control most of the wealth and power but not ALL of it, wanted more wealth and more power, and if they correctly believed that the main obstacle was the “comfortable” and not particularly “revolutionary” Middle Class, what would they need to do?

They would need to find a way to get the 700 to “help remove” the 290.

How would you do that?

You create ideology.

Ideology will change the way you think, then feel, then act.

I want to pause here, and just focus on this point.

If on this island you control the newspaper, TV channel, radio and also the social media app then you can infuse the population with ideas and thoughts, “research”, textbooks and The Science, all of which, if directed, creates ideology.

It is actually not that hard if you have the means and the will to do it.

And these 10 people on this island most definitely have the means, will and patience, to do it.

What might that ideology be?

Well, how about creating “heaven on earth?”. That sounds like a theology, doesn’t it?

The 700 work longer hours than the 290 and earn less and it is not that hard to sow and fan the flames of victimhood and blame. You can get the 700 to blame the 290.

You can create enough agitation and turmoil in the 700 to create “revolutionaries” to take out the 290.

This turmoil increases collectivism, increases centralization of power and also increases command and control of the island economy by those that “know best”.

This, I have finally come to understand is the function of Communism, or whatever other collectivist ISM you prefer to describe this movement towards Utopia and the weakening and taking out of the Middle Class.

This is the functional objective of The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx.

This stack though is about Chapter 5 of Suttons wonderful book The Federal Reserve Conspiracy.

Here is my Unbekoming Summary of the book.

The Federal Reserve Conspiracy By Antony Sutton Unbekoming Summary

131KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

The main thesis of Chapter 5, especially as it relates to the Middle Class is:

1. Marx's Opposition to the Middle Class: The chapter emphasizes Karl Marx's antagonism toward the middle class, or the bourgeoisie, aiming to overthrow their status through the confiscation of their property. This attack on the middle class is presented as a foundational aspect of Marx's philosophy and the Communist Manifesto.

2. Implementation of the Communist Manifesto in the United States: The narrative draws parallels between the tenets of the Communist Manifesto and policies implemented in the United States, suggesting that both Democratic and Republican administrations have, knowingly or unknowingly, advanced a Marxian agenda. This includes measures such as a graduated income tax and centralization of credit, which the author argues have contributed to the erosion of middle-class stability.

3. The Role of the Elite and Financial Support for Communism: The chapter outlines how, paradoxically, the communist revolution and Marx's work were supported financially and ideologically by members of the elite, including bankers and capitalists. This support is presented as evidence that communism, rather than empowering the proletariat as ostensibly intended, actually serves the interests of a ruling elite by undermining the middle class.

4. Marxist Strategy and Tactics: The text discusses the strategic approach laid out by Marx and Engels to dismantle the bourgeois society through a combination of economic, social, and political measures. This includes the proposal for despotic interference in bourgeois production methods and the centralization of economic power in the state, aimed at revolutionizing the entire system of production.

5. Marxism as a Tool for Elite Control: The chapter concludes by arguing that Marxism, contrary to its professed aims, does not favor the working or middle classes but is instead a blueprint for the consolidation of political and economic power by an elite. This is supported by historical evidence of the financial backing Marx received from the elite, suggesting that the ultimate goal of Marxist ideology is not the liberation of the proletariat but the establishment of elite control.

Now, just before we dive into Sutton’s Chapter 5, I want to take a related detour to The Queering of the American Child. This is the best book I’ve seen so far that explains Queer Theory and its Marxist roots.

I assume you would agree that Queer Theory with its theft of childhood innocence, deconstruction of normalcy and destruction of family relationships, has turned out to be an incredibly effective tool against the middle class.

Here are Lancing and Lindsay to explain:

They used Marxist theology as a launchpad for their social critiques and, in so doing, created the new flavor of Marxism that we are all dealing with today - Queer Marxism.

The basic structure of "classical" Marxism looks like this:

Society is stratified between a demiurgic dominant class-the Bourgeoisie—and an oppressed class—the Proletariat. This stratification places these classes in direct conflict with one another. The Bourgeoisie have risen to and maintain their dominant position in society by creating the idea of private property (capital) and taking it for themselves, resulting in the alienation of Man from his true and salvific socialist nature. The Bourgeoisie couches their justification for why they have private property-and others do not in an ideology called capitalism. Capitalism brainwashes people to believe that organizing society based on who has private property and who doesn't is normal, common sense, and fair. Capitalism coerces everyone to believe that "this is just how the world works." It is incumbent on the oppressed class to become conscious of "the truth" of Marxism-to develop a class consciousness and adopt socialism-and to become revolutionaries charged with taking control of society and abolishing (transcending) private property as a form of human self-estrangement. In abolishing private property, Man returns to his creative and social nature (communism).

Queer Theory was built on top of the "classical" Marxist structure: Society is stratified between a demiurgic dominant class-"normal people" —and an oppressed class—"abnormal people." This stratification places these classes in direct conflict with one another. Normal people have risen to and maintain their dominant position in society by creating the idea of private sociocultural property - "being normal" or "normalcy" – and then taking that private property for themselves, resulting in the alienation of Man from his true and salvific queer nature. Normal people couch their justification for why they are considered "normal" and others are not in an ideology called normativity (broadly) and cisheteronormativity (specifically). The ideology of normativity brainwashes people to believe that organizing society based on who is considered "normal" and who is not is common sense, natural, and fair. The ideology of normativity coerces everyone to believe that "this is just how the world works." It is incumbent on the oppressed class -"abnormal people"-to become conscious of "the truth" of Queer Theory—to develop a queer consciousness—and to become revolutionaries charged with taking control of society and abolishing (transcending) "normalcy" as a form of human self-estrangement. In abolishing normalcy, Man returns to his creative and social nature, which is intrinsically queer.

Now back to Antony Sutton.

In brief, between the American bankers and the German aristocracy Marx was well funded for the Manifesto and later writings. Why would the elite fund Marx? Simply because the entire Marxist philosophical battery is aimed at extermination of the middle class and the supremacy of the elite. Marxism is a device for consolidating power by the elite. It has nothing to do with relieving the misery of the poor or advancing mankind: it is an elitist political device pure and simple. - Antony Sutton

Chapter 5 - Karl Marx and His Manifesto

The modern welfare state such as we have in the United States has a remarkable resemblance to the Communist Manifesto supposedly written by Karl Marx in 1848. The ten points of the Marxian Manifesto, a program designed to overthrow the middle class bourgeoisie (not the big capitalists) have been implemented by successive Democrat and Republican governments since Woodrow Wilson under guidance of a self-perpetuating establishment.

Marx's big enemy was the middle class, the bourgeoisie. Marx wanted to seize property from this middle class in a revolution led by the so-called working class, or the proletariat. Unfortunately for Marx the working class has never had too much liking for communist revolution, as we saw in the Revolutions of the 1980s. In practice, communist revolution is led by a handful of communists. How can a revolution be made and kept in power by a small group? Only because communists have always had help from the so-called ruling class - capitalists and bankers. This aid and assistance has been consistent from financing Marx's Manifesto in 1848 down to the late 20th century when a David Rockefeller-dominated Administration is helping Communist revolution and revolutionaries in Central America, Angola and Mozambique.

Let's start with the 1848 Manifesto. Marx wanted to seize middle class property. In the Manifesto, Marx phrased the objective like this:

In the first instance, of course, this can only be effected by despotic interference with bourgeois methods of production; that is to say by measures which seem economically inadequate and untenable, but have far-reaching effects, and are necessary as means for revolutionizing the whole system of production.

To bring about this "despotic" seizure of middle class property, Marx laid out a ten-point program of "measures" as follows:

These measures will naturally differ from country to country. In the most advanced countries they will, generally speaking, take the following forms:

1. Expropriation of landed property, and the use of land rents to defray State expenditure.

2. A vigorously graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of the right of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all émigrés and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralization of the means of transport in the hands of the State.

7. Increase of national factories and means of production, cultivation of uncultivated land, and improvement of cultivated land in accordance with a general plan.

8. Universal and equal obligation to work; organization of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Agriculture and urban industry to work hand-in-hand, in such a way as, by degrees, to obliterate the distinction between town and country.

10. Public and free education of all children. Abolition of factory work for children in its present form. Education and material production to be combined.

As we shall see later, Marx's ten points for destruction of the middle class have almost been completed in the United States. The 16th Amendment, for example (the income tax) is an archaic political concept that goes back some 4,000 years in history to the time of the Pharaohs in Egypt.

The Pharaohs and their elitist advisors had the notion that the entrepreneur, the businessmen, and the workers of Egypt who produced the wealth of that civilization somehow were not competent to manage that wealth.

These elitist advisors and Pharaoh said, "Look, we're going to force you people to do what we know you should. Because after all, were omnipotent, we are standing up here looking down on all of you and we can decide what is best for all. Much better than each of you can individually decide for yourselves. We're going to force you to have a government retirement program, so that when you reach retirement age you can retire with some dignity. We're going to force you to do what we know you should do, because we know you won't do it if left to your own devices. Also, we're going to force you to have a government food storage program. We're going to store grain in the government granaries because we know that you are not competent - you are not capable of storing food by yourselves.

“Furthermore, we know you can't take care of your health so we're going to force you to have a government medical program. We know health is important and we know that you don't have the responsibility or capability for looking after yourselves. We're going to force it on you for your own best interests.”

The method used to accomplish these objectives was to withhold a fifth part of the production of Egypt. If you go back and read the Old Testament it says, "That the Pharaoh had decided to take up a fifth power of the production of Egypt and to store it in granaries for the benefit of all."

The modern day proponent of the Pharaoh's philosophy is none other than Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto. The Manifesto has become the most significant economic document of the 20th Century. The significance lies in the unfortunate fact that the Manifesto is the economic guiding light of our leadership today, of the executive branch of our government and in most cases the leadership of both parties in this country who work to support and bring about the measures of the manifesto.

Basically what the Manifesto states is that when you have implemented these 10 programs in any free enterprise system, "capitalism" will have been destroyed and a communist state established in its place. This is what Marx wrote:

Strictly speaking, political power is the organized use of force by one class in order to keep another class in subjection. When the proletariat, in the course of its fight against the bourgeoisie, necessarily consolidates itself into a class, by means of a revolution makes itself the ruling class, it forcibly sweeps away the old system of production.

Item 2 of Marx's Manifesto reads as follows: A heavy, progressive, or graduating income tax"

This became the 16th Amendment of the United States Constitution, the law of the land in our country since 1913.

Later on in 1913 we saw the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. Interestingly enough the idea for that program is in Karl Marx's program in the Communist Manifesto as Item 5 and is possibly the most important point in the Communist Manifesto. Item 5 reads as follows: Centralization of Credit in the hands of the state by means of a National Bank with state capital and exclusive monopoly.

In other words Marx proposed a scheme exactly like the First Bank of the United States and the Federal Reserve Act with establishment of a fractional reserve central banking system on the model of the earlier European central banks.

Karl Marx as a Plagiarist

Marx was a brilliant fellow. He was no fool. Marx knew that if he could place under the control of a small group of men the ability to control the supply of money and credit of any nation, he could boom or bust those economies almost at will. By having foreknowledge of economic and monetary policies, billions of dollars of wealth could be transferred from one group to another, from the suffering middle class to the ruling elite. To do this required propaganda and in the mid-19th century the pamphlet was an effective means of propagandizing.

A most interesting feature of the brief Manifesto has been almost universally ignored by academics, i.e., that the Manifesto doesn't favor the working class at all and it certainly doesn't favor the middle class which is targeted for elimination.

The Manifesto is a blueprint for elitist control. The Manifesto favors takeover of political and economic power by an elite. And when we look at the source of the assistance given to Marx, it is clear that the benefits to the elite were obvious even in the 1840s.

Marx was certainly paid to write the Manifesto, as we shall see later. Furthermore, the Manifesto was plagiarized from an obscure French socialist named Victor Considerant, and his work, Principes du Socialisme: Manifeste de la Democratie au Dix Neuvieme Siecle, published in 1843. The second edition of Considerant's work was published in Paris in 1847, a year before the Manifesto and while Marx and Engels were living in Paris.

The plagiarism was spotted by an even more obscure writer, W. Tcherkesoff, and published in precise detail in his Pages of Socialist History (Cooper, New York, 1902).

Let Tcherkesoff explain Marx's plagiarism in his own words:

I felt myself stupefied, indignant, even humiliated, when, about a year ago, I had occasion to read the work of Victor Considerant, "Principles of Socialism: Manifesto of the Democracy of the Nineteenth Century," written in 1843, second edition published in 1847. There was reason for it. In a pamphlet of 143 pages, Victor Considerant expounds with his habitual clearness all the bases of Marxism, of this "scientific" Socialism that the parliamentarians desire to impose upon the whole world. Properly speaking, the theoretical part, in which Considerant treats of questions of principle, does not exceed the first 50 pages; the remainder is consecrated to the famous prosecution that the government of Louis Philippe brought against the journal of the Fourierists, "La Democratic pacifique," and which the jurors of the Seine quashed. But in these 50 short pages the famous Fourierist, like a true master, gives us so many profound, clear, and brilliant generalizations, that even an infinitesimal portion of his ideas contains in entirety all the Marxian laws and theories -including the famous concentration of capital and the whole of the "Manifesto of the Communist party." So that the whole theoretical part, that is chapters one and two, which Engels himself says "are on the whole as correct today as ever," is simply borrowed. This "Manifesto," this Bible of legal revolutionary democracy, is a very mediocre paraphrase of numerous passages of the "Manifesto" of V. Considerant. Not only have Marx and Engels found the contents of their "Manifesto" in the "Manifesto" of V. Considerant, but the form and the titles of the chapters have also been retained by the imitators.

Paragraph two in the second chapter with V. Considerant bears the title: "The present Situation and '89; the Bourgeoisie and the Proletarians." "The Bourgeois and the Proletarians," is the title of the first chapter with Marx and Engels.

V. Considerant examines different Socialist and revolutionary parties under the name of Democracy and his paragraphs bear the titles:

Stagnant Democracy; Retrograde Democracy;

The Socialist Party in the Retrograde Democracy; The titles with Marx and Engels are:

Reactionary Socialism

Conservative and Bourgeois Socialism  

Critical Utopian Socialism and Communism

Would not one think all these titles belonged to the selfsame work? When comparing the contents we shall see that in reality these two manifestos are identical.

Line by line Tcherkesoff demonstrates Marx to be a common thief. The great Marx, the adored Marx, rates no more than a third-rate school boy!

There can be no argument concerning the massive influence of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels on world history. Yet, by contrast, the secondhand nature of Marxist ideas and arguments have always been overlooked.

How about Marx's collaborator - Frederick Engels? The sloppiness of Engels' work has been documented in the introduction to Condition of the Working Class in England by W. O. Henderson and W. H. Chaloner (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1958).

As far back as 1848 Bruno Hildebrand compiled a detailed criticism of Engels' book and particularly his biased interpretation of British government reports. Engels wanted to prove a case and distorted the facts to make the case. Further pointed out by Henderson and Chaloner, "Engels' vivid imagination was sometimes used in lieu of facts." For example, on page 118 of Henderson we find:

In evidence before a Parliamentary inquiry the Nottingham coroner stated that one druggist had admitted using 13 cwt. of treacle in a year in the manufacture of Godfrey's Cordial. But in the 1887 edition of Engels this became "used thirteen hundredweight of laudanum in one year in the preparation of Godfrey's Cordial."

Laudanum is of course tincture of opium and far different from treacle. The implication is that the children of the working class were being drugged.

Marx's Financial Backers

Where did Karl Marx get his money? How did he live? On investigation we find that funds came mainly from four sources, and each of these four sources can be linked to the ruling elite in Germany and the United States.

The conduit for financing the printing of the Manifesto was none other than Louisiana pirate Jean Laffite, who was, among his later occupations, a spy for Spain and a courier for a group of American bankers.

The evidence for this twist in modern history has been ignored by modern historians although the documents, authenticated by Library of Congress and other sources, have been available for some 30 years.

It is extraordinary that the first academics to report this source of financing for Marx were written in French, not English! It was a French book by Georges Blond entitled Histoire de la Filibuste that contains the remarkable story of Karl Marx as a friend of Jean Laffite the pirate who "financed the printing of the Manifesto of the Communist party." Where did Blond get his information? It originated in two privately printed books published in New Orleans by Stanley Clisby Arthur, Jean Laffite, the Gentleman Rover and The Journal of Jean Laffite. These books contain original documents describing meetings between Marx and Laffite and the method used to finance the Manifesto.

Now of course if you look up the name Jean Laffite in the Encyclopedia Britannica, you will learn that Laffite died in 1823 and therefore could not possibly have financed Marx in 1847 and 1848. Unfortunately the Britannica is wrong, as it is on many other points. Laffite went underground about 1820 and lived a long and exciting life as courier for American bankers and businessmen.

Laffite's courier and underground work for American bankers is noted in The Journal:

We employed four men as secret officers to spy and report every pertinent conversation and to make verbal reports about any new happenings. We carried out our secret missions very well. We had only two ships operating under private contract with banking interests in Philadelphia. We decided, and took our oath, never to visit saloons or travel the same route twice, or ever go back to Louisiana, Texas or Cuba or any of the Spanish speaking countries.

In the same Journal under date of April 24, 1848 we find the note:

My interviews were brief, but direct. I lived at the home of Mr. Louis Bertillon in Paris and sometimes hotels. I met Mr. Michel Chevreul, Mr. Louis Braille, Mr. Augustin Thierry, Mr. Alexis de Tocqueville, Mr. Karl Marx, Mr. Frederic Engels, Mr. Daguerre and many others.

Then Laffite goes on to the eye-opening statement:

Nobody knew the real facts about my mission in Europe. I opened an account in a bank in Paris, a credit in escrow to finance two young men, Mr. Marx and Mr. Engels to help bring about the revolution of working men of the world. They are now working at it.

So here we have it. Jean Laffite was the agent of American banking interests and arranged for the financing of the Manifesto. In The Journal the reader will find other prominent names, i.e., Dupont, Peabody, Lincoln and so on.

While Jean Laffite was in Brussels he wrote at length to his artist friend De Franca in St. Louis, Missouri about financing Marx. Here's the translation of the letter dated September 29, 1847:

I am leaving Brussels for Paris, in three or four weeks I will go to Amsterdam, then enroute for America. I have had a number of conversations with Mr. Marx and Mr. Engels, but have refused to participate in the conferences with the other debaters to compose the manifest, because I do not wish to be identified with the other men.

Mr. Engels is going with me to Paris so that I may prepare a schedule to finance Mr. Marx and him, for a long time in advance, to proceed with their manuscripts, and to put in texts "Capital and Labor." From the beginning it seemed to me that the two young men are themselves gifted and endowed, I firmly believe, with the highest intelligence and that they merit this is justified by the statistic research in the discovery on "La Categorie du Capital," Value, Price and Profit.

They have penetrated a forgotten time in the exploitation of man by man without halt. From the Serf, of the Feudal Slave, and the Salaried Slave, they discover that exploitation is at the base of all evil. It has taken a long time to prepare "The manifests for the workers of the world." A great debate took place between the two young men and others from Berlin, Amsterdam, Paris, and others from the Swiss Republic.

I am enthused in regard to the manifests and other prospects for the future, as I heartily support the two young men. I hope and I pray that the projects may become joined in a strong doctrine to shake the foundations of the highest dynasties and leave them to be devoured by the lower masses.

Mr. Marx advises and warns me not to plunge into all America with the manifests because there are others of the same kind for New York. But I hope that Jean or Harry will show the manifests to Mr. Joshua Speed, and he, in his turn, can show them to Mr. Lincoln. I know that nothing else can confuse it, as it would have the same chance. Its reception at Washington would be a sacred promise that the path that I am on is in conformity with the policy at present pursued in the Republic of Texas.

Mr. Marx accepts some of my texts on the communes that I was forced to abandon some time ago, weighing carefully rules and regulations not based on a strong foundation, as so-called pure and simple Utopia, without preamble or body, without an apparent base to build on. I was in accord with the two young men at this date, apropos of my Utopian dreams of the past.

The sacrifice was made to preserve the great manuscript that was composed and its constitution, to endure forever with the radiance of the stars, but not for those in power to abuse or exploit.

Oh! to my dismay; I have agreed to the abuses practiced in the last part of the same year after the Dragon was eradicated and utterly abolished. I have described my second commune which I was forced to break up and abandon to the flambeau March 3, 1821, I then took the resolution to withdraw without convert. I am no longer aiding those who are opposed to my principles.

I must stop. I will bring several manuscripts and the manifest. I hope that Jules and Glenn are progressing at school with Miss Wing and Miss Burgess. I know they have much patience as teachers. Glenn is not as strong as Jules.

The second source of American financing for Karl Marx came from Charles Anderson Dana, Editor of the New York Tribune owned by Horace Greeley. Both Dana and Greeley were fraternally associated with the Clinton Roosevelt we cited in Chapter Three and with his Roosevelt Manifesto for dictatorial government. Dana hired Marx to write for the New York Tribune. This Marx did, in over 500 articles spread over ten years from 1851 to 1861.

Marx's prime source of German funds came from his associate Frederic Engels, son of a wealthy Bremen cotton manufacturer and subsidy provider to Marx for many years.

More surprising is the subsidy to Marx from the Prussian elite. Karl Marx married Jenny von Westphalen. Jennys brother Baron Ferdinand von Westphalen was Minister of the Interior in Prussia (overseeing the police department) while Karl was under "investigation" by this same Prussian department.

In other words, Marx's brother-in-law was in charge of investigating subversive activities. Over the years the von Westphalen family strongly supported Marx. For 40 years the Marx's maid, Demuth, was paid by the Westphalens and in fact Demuth was personally selected for the job by Baroness Caroline von Westphalen. Two of Karl Marx's early essays were actually written in the von Westphalen estate at Kreuznach, and money from the estate was left to Marx. 

In brief, between the American bankers and the German aristocracy Marx was well funded for the Manifesto and later writings. Why would the elite fund Marx? Simply because the entire Marxist philosophical battery is aimed at extermination of the middle class and the supremacy of the elite. Marxism is a device for consolidating power by the elite. It has nothing to do with relieving the misery of the poor or advancing mankind: it is an elitist political device pure and simple.

---

Thank You for Being Part of Our Community

Your presence here is greatly valued. If you've found the content interesting and useful, please consider supporting it through a paid subscription. While all our resources are freely available, your subscription plays a vital role. It helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. Please make full use of our Free Libraries.

Discover Our Free Libraries:

Unbekoming Interview Library: Dive into a world of thought-provoking interviews across a spectrum of fascinating topics.

Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Explore concise summaries of groundbreaking books, distilled for efficient understanding.

Hear From Our Subscribers: Check out the [Subscriber Testimonials] to see the impact of this Substack on our readers.

Share Your Story or Nominate Someone to Interview:

I'm always in search of compelling narratives and insightful individuals to feature. Whether it's personal experiences with the vaccination or other medical interventions, or if you know someone whose story and expertise could enlighten our community, I'd love to hear from you. If you have a story to share, insights to offer, or wish to suggest an interviewee who can add significant value to our discussions, please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com. Your contributions and suggestions are invaluable in enriching our understanding and conversation.

Resources for the Community:

For those affected by COVID vaccine injury, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment as a resource.

Discover 'Baseline Human Health': Watch and share this insightful 21-minute video to understand and appreciate the foundations of health without vaccination.

Books as Tools: Consider recommending 'Official Stories' by Liam Scheff to someone seeking understanding. Start with a “safe” chapter such as Electricity and Shakespeare and they might find their way to vaccination.

Your support, whether through subscriptions, sharing stories, or spreading knowledge, is what keeps this community thriving. Thank you for being an integral part of this journey.