Spiritual energies conveying the will-to-synthesis and the will-to-power have been directly impacting post-Atlantean humanity on the first quarter of each century since 1825. Both higher and lower expressions of these impacts are to be expected, as energies are impersonal. It’s up to humanity to choose how to use them.

During the 19th century, several notable initiatives emerged as remarkable demonstrations of the human will-to-synthesis. The Concert of Europe, established after the Napoleonic Wars, aimed to foster stability and cooperation among nations. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement emerged as a humanitarian force, providing aid and support to those in need. In 1889, the Inter-Parliamentary Union was founded, promoting dialogue and collaboration among parliamentarians worldwide. Additionally, the World Trade Organization facilitated international trade through its efforts.

However, not all expressions of these spiritual energies were positive. The widespread colonial expansion by European powers, fueled by the desire for power and resources, resulted in numerous negative consequences. This included conflicts in the Middle East and other regions, illustrating the complex interplay between higher expressions of will-to-synthesis and the will-to-power, and the potential for negative outcomes when driven by self-interest and domination.

In the 20th century, specifically in 1925, the impact of these energies had far-reaching consequences. It not only marked the rise of Fascism, a political ideology that emphasized authoritarianism and nationalism, but also witnessed the establishment of the United Nations, a global organization aimed at promoting international cooperation and preventing future conflicts. These events exemplified both the lower and higher expressions of the same energies, albeit with a heightened intensity that shaped the course of history.

As we approach the year 2025, there is a growing recognition of the higher expressions of the will-to-good, rooted in the concept of world goodwill among individuals who genuinely seek positive change globally. However, it is disconcerting to observe that fascist ideologies are gaining momentum across the world. From the alarming resurgence of far-right parties in Europe to the troubling spread of white nationalism in the United States, these trends pose significant threats to our collective well-being. This post aims to shed light on the risk identified by The Economist as “the biggest danger to the world in 2024,” urging us to critically evaluate and address these concerning developments.

In the 38 years since the predictive guide was first published, “no single person has ever eclipsed our analysis as much as Donald Trump eclipses 2024,” the article begins. It goes on to ponder what a Trump victory would mean for the world and claims that parliaments and boardrooms the world over are filled with “despair” at what may come:

A second Trump term would be a watershed in a way the first was not. Victory would confirm his most destructive instincts about power. His plans would encounter less resistance. And because America will have voted him in while knowing the worst, its moral authority would decline. The election will be decided by tens of thousands of voters in just a handful of states. In 2024 the fate of the world will depend on their ballots.

Trump would move his MAGA Republican allies into “the most important positions” in government, the article predicts, and Trump would be “unbound in his pursuit of retribution, economic protectionism and theatrically extravagant deals.”

https://www.redlakenationnews.com/story/2023/11/20/politics/the-economists-world-ahead-guide-declares-donald-trump-the-biggest-global-threat-in-2024/118378.html

---

Fascism

1. Definition and Classification

Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian political ideology that centralizes power, suppresses opposition, and strives for a dictatorial government led by a single leader. It often utilizes a powerful nationalism narrative, advocating for ethnic purity and the suppression of political dissent¹.

There are different types of fascism that have been identified over the years. The two primary forms are Italian Fascism, led by Benito Mussolini, and German National Socialism (Nazism), led by Adolf Hitler. Other variations include Spanish Falangism, Brazilian Integralism, and Japanese Statism². Each of these types shares common elements but also has unique characteristics defined by their cultural and historical contexts.

2. History and Cycles

Fascism first emerged in Italy following World War I, amidst social unrest and fears of communist revolution. Mussolini capitalized on this turmoil, establishing the first fascist regime in 1922³. Similarly, in Germany, Hitler rose to power in the wake of economic instability and national humiliation after the Treaty of Versailles.

Fascism tends to emerge in cycles, typically during periods of intense social, economic, or political upheaval. It often exploits societal fears and uses propaganda to gain support, promising stability and order while blaming societal ills on marginalized groups⁴.

3. Social Determinants and Predictors

Several social factors can predict the rise of fascism. These include economic instability, political polarization, societal unrest, and perceived threats to national identity⁵. Additionally, the presence of charismatic leaders who can manipulate public sentiment and exploit societal fears greatly contributes to the rise of fascist movements.

4. Current Trends

Currently, there’s a growing concern about the resurgence of neo-fascist ideologies around the world. From the rise of far-right parties in Europe to the spread of white nationalism in the United States, there’s evidence that fascist ideologies are gaining traction⁶. However, it’s important to distinguish between far-right populism and fascism, as the latter involves a total rejection of democratic principles and institutions.

5. Contrast with Authoritarianism, Monarchical Rule, and Populism

While all these ideologies share a centralization of power, they differ significantly. Authoritarianism is a broad term for any political system where power is concentrated in the hands of a leader or a small elite, but it doesn’t necessarily involve the nationalist and racial elements of fascism⁷.

Monarchical rule, on the other hand, derives authority from a hereditary line and may or may not be authoritarian. It often lacks the mass mobilization component and the dictatorial aspirations inherent in fascism⁸.

Populism, meanwhile, is a political approach that seeks to disrupt the existing social order by rallying the common people against elites. While fascism can employ populist rhetoric, it differs in its violent suppression of dissent, its dictatorial aspirations, and its emphasis on ethnic or racial purity⁹.

In conclusion, understanding fascism is crucial to safeguarding democratic institutions and values. By recognizing its characteristics and societal predictors, society can better guard against its resurgence.

Footnotes

1. Stanley, J. (2018). How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them. Random House. ↩
   
2. Paxton, R. O. (2004). The Anatomy of Fascism. Alfred A. Knopf. ↩
   
3. Ebner, M. (2011). Ordinary Violence in Mussolini’s Italy. Cambridge University Press. ↩
   
4. Mann, M. (2004). Fascists. Cambridge University Press. ↩
   
5. Finchelstein, F. (2017). From Fascism to Populism in History. University of California Press. ↩
   
6. Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2017). Populism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. ↩
   
7. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Lynne Rienner Publishers. ↩
   
8. Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press. ↩
   
9. Müller, J.-W. (2016). What Is Populism?. University of Pennsylvania Press. ↩
   

---

Project 2025

Project 2025 is an initiative by The Heritage Foundation aimed at preparing for a conservative victory through policy, personnel, and training. The project’s goal is to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left by establishing both a governing agenda and the right people to carry it out on Day One of the next conservative administration¹.

The project builds on four pillars:

1. Policy Agenda: This comprehensive guide will offer specific proposals for every major issue facing the country, drawing from the expertise of the entire conservative movement.
   
2. Personnel Database: The project aims to identify conservatives from all walks of life across the country to serve in the next conservative administration.
   
3. Training: To transform this talent pool into effective conservative administrators, the project will offer workshops, seminars, online videos, and mentorship, led by experts who have served in prior administrations.
   
4. 180-Day Playbook: This playbook will outline actions to be taken in the first 180 days of the new administration to bring quick relief to Americans suffering from the Left’s policies¹.
   

The Presidential Transition Project, under the umbrella of Project 2025, has been making significant strides, with recent announcements of additions to the Presidential Administration Academy, reaching 75 coalition partners, and continuing development in preparation for the next Conservative President¹.

Footnotes

1. Project 2025 ↩ ↩² ↩³
   

---

Project 2025 Key Objectives

Project 2025, an initiative by The Heritage Foundation, aims to prepare for a conservative victory through policy, personnel, and training. It has several key objectives that include restoring integrity, uprooting bureaucracy, and prioritizing the fossil fuel industry¹².

1. Restoring Integrity: Project 2025 aims to restore integrity by ensuring that taxpayer money is used efficiently and effectively. For instance, one of its plans includes ceasing public funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which they argue will lead to conservative taxpayers not subsidizing what they perceive as a left-leaning organization³.
   
2. Uprooting Bureaucracy: To counter bureaucratic inefficiencies, Project 2025 is working on a plan to recruit tens of thousands of conservatives to replace existing federal civil service workers². It believes that such a move will streamline operations and reduce unnecessary bureaucratic procedures⁴.
   
3. Prioritizing the Fossil Fuel Industry: The project seeks to prioritize the fossil fuel industry over clean energy alternatives. This includes proposals to bar funding for the UN’s Green Climate Fund and radically boost fossil fuel consumption⁵⁶. However, this aspect of the agenda has faced criticism, with opponents arguing that it neglects environmental concerns and the need for sustainable, clean energy solutions⁷⁸.
   

It’s important to note that these plans have faced opposition, particularly in relation to prioritizing the fossil fuel industry over clean energy. Some polls indicate that voters reject this aspect of the Project 2025 plan in favor of President Biden’s clean energy plan⁷.

Footnotes

1. Project 2025 ↩
   
2. Wikipedia ↩ ↩²
   
3. Heritage ↩
   
4. Project 2025 Mandate For Leadership ↩
   
5. The Guardian ↩
   
6. People’s World ↩
   
7. Climate Power ↩ ↩²
   
8. Data for Progress ↩
   

---

The “Restoring Integrity” aspect of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 aims to ensure accountability and justice within the U.S. government, including within the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)¹².

1. Department of Justice: The project proposes to restore the integrity of the DOJ by ensuring consistent litigation¹. This could involve implementing more rigorous checks and balances and increasing transparency in the department’s operations. However, the specifics of how these changes would be implemented are not detailed in the available sources.
   
2. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): The Heritage Foundation suggests giving the FBI a “hard reset”¹. This could potentially involve restructuring the organization, reducing administrative offices³, and decreasing headquarters staff to improve efficiency and effectiveness. They argue that such changes would help fix perceived issues within the bureau and restore public faith in the institution⁴³.
   

The project also advocates for the dismantling of what it refers to as “weaponized intelligence agencies”⁵. It argues that there has been an erosion of constitutional safeguards by U.S. intelligence agencies and seeks to correct this.

However, it’s important to note that these proposals have been met with criticism. Opponents argue that the project could potentially undermine established institutions and policies⁶. These perspectives represent the views of the Heritage Foundation and its Project 2025, and there are differing viewpoints on these issues.

Footnotes

1. Heritage.org ↩ ↩² ↩³
   
2. Heritage.org ↩
   
3. Heritage.org ↩ ↩²
   
4. Heritage.org ↩
   
5. Heritage.org ↩
   
6. Mother Jones ↩
   

---

The “Restoring Integrity” part of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 aims to restore faith in the executive branch of the U.S. government by ensuring that it functions based on conservative principles and values¹². The project argues that this can be achieved by putting the right people in the right roles³⁴.

However, some critics have raised concerns that this could potentially lead to an overpowering Executive branch, thereby upsetting the balance of power among the three constitutional branches of government – Executive, Legislative, and Judicial⁵. This concern stems from the belief that if one political ideology dominates the executive branch, it could potentially dictate policy and exert undue influence over the other branches⁶.

In a worst-case scenario, critics worry that if the checks and balances system were to fail, there could potentially be a shift towards an authoritarian regime, where power is concentrated in the executive branch⁷. This would be a significant departure from the democratic principles upon which the U.S. government is founded, including the separation of powers and checks and balances.

It’s important to note that these are potential concerns raised by critics and not stated intentions of the Heritage Foundation or its Project 2025. The foundation asserts its commitment to constitutional principles and the preservation of American liberties¹².

Footnotes

1. Heritage.org ↩ ↩²
   
2. Heritage.org ↩ ↩²
   
3. Heritage.org ↩
   
4. Heritage.org ↩
   
5. The Atlantic ↩
   
6. The Washington Post ↩
   
7. The New York Times ↩
   

---

However, history has numerous examples of charismatic leaders who have used the guise of “restoring integrity” to centralize power and establish authoritarian regimes.

1. Benito Mussolini – Italy: Mussolini, a charismatic leader, came to power in Italy in 1922 with the promise of restoring the country’s political and economic stability¹. He gradually dismantled democratic institutions, consolidated power within the executive branch, and established a totalitarian regime¹².
   
2. Adolf Hitler – Germany: Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany in 1933. He leveraged his charisma and promises of restoring Germany’s integrity after the hardships of World War I and the Treaty of Versailles³. Hitler gradually centralized political and military power, ultimately establishing a totalitarian regime⁴.
   
3. Hugo Chávez – Venezuela: Chávez won the presidential elections in 1998 on the promise of combating corruption and poverty⁵. His charismatic leadership and popular support allowed him to consolidate power, rewrite the constitution, and reduce the influence of opposition forces⁶. His government is considered a model of modern authoritarianism⁷.
   

These examples illustrate how charismatic leaders can use the idea of “restoring integrity” to win public support, consolidate power, and establish authoritarian regimes. Although these historical examples do not necessarily predict future events, they should serve as warning signals of potential danger. Not all tropical depressions become category 5 hurricanes, but they should be closely monitored.

Footnotes

1. Britannica ↩ ↩²
   
2. History.com ↩
   
3. Britannica ↩
   
4. History.com ↩
   
5. Britannica ↩
   
6. BBC ↩
   
7. Freedom House ↩
   

---

There is only one way in which this focused evil will which is responsive to the Shamballa force can be overcome, and that is by the opposition of an equally focused spiritual Will, displayed by responsive men and women of goodwill who can train themselves to be sensitive to this type of new incoming energy and can learn how to invoke and evoke it.

You can consequently see why there was more than the casual use of a current word in my mind when I talked to all of you in terms of goodwill and of the will-to-good. All the time I had in my thoughts not just kindness and good intention, but the focused will-to-good which can and must evoke the Shamballa energy, and use it for the arresting of the forces of evil. -Source: The Externalisation of the Hierarchy (quoted text written in April, 1942)

cited in https://hierarchicaldemocracy.wordpress.com/2023/11/17/goodwill-in-times-of-war/

---

Rachel Maddow’s Prequel traces the rise of a radical strain of authoritarianism that has been alive and well in America for the better part of a century. Taking readers back to the early days of World War II, Maddow, with her inimitable wit and humor, introduces us to a clandestine network of far-far-right American radicals, united by one goal: to overthrow the U.S. government and install authoritarian rule. Through a series of sophisticated and shockingly well-funded efforts—including an astonishing amount of support among serving members of Congress—these extremists would bring America into a much closer flirtation with fascism than we want to remember. Through the heroic resistance of journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens, their goal was never achieved…but the seeds of extremism were planted and have reached forward through history into our present. As we navigate through our own disquieting times, Prequel offers a roadmap from U.S. history, marked both with heroics to emulate and traps and pitfalls to avoid.

---