So, Andy Burnham is the new MP for Makerfield, a result that I predicted when the by-election was announced, as it seemed pretty obvious this was the desired direction of the overlords' dastardly masterplan, for reasons we shall now discuss...

Although it seemed clear from the start that Burnham would win, what's been more surprising is the comfortable margin by which he did, meaning that, even had primary opponents Reform absorbed all of the rival right-wing parties' (Restore and Conservative) votes, they still would not have beaten Burnham.

While this may mean there is not quite as much opprobrium directed towards Rupert Lowe as there could have been - had Burnham only won by a slim margin, the difference being the votes that went to Restore, Lowe is unlikely to have ever been forgiven - the Makerfield result is already being framed as demonstrating the desperate need to "unite the right", if they are to win the next General Election, and "save" us from another five years of Labour.

And this, I believe - uniting the right around Reform - is a major establishment agenda item. They need a right-wing government in place to proceed with the next intended stage of the plan. Hence, they needed a relatively crushing defeat of the sort they've just had at Makerfield to alarm people enough into galvanising them to get behind Reform (who's candidate gained over 15,000 votes and more than a third of the vote share) as "the only right-wing party in with a chance".

Although Restore did respectably for a party that is only three months old and has never contested a by-election before, gaining nearly 7% of the votes and beating the Conservatives, Lib Dems, and Greens, their performance was nevertheless a far cry from the levels of greatness promised by Restore's PR team. Guilty of dramatically inflating their own odds, Restore's head cheerleaders even seriously claimed they had a chance at winning, which of course they never did.

There is simply not a large enough appetite in this country for a hard right party (and certainly there isn't in Manchester) for such an entity to ever achieve real electoral success, meaning that only a more centre-right party is in with a chance - and that's what the Makerfield results will relentlessly be used to emphasise in Reform's ongoing campaigning.

Some see Andy Burnham's victory as evidence that Labour can win the next General Election (which is highly likely to occur well before 2029), especially if Labour enters into a coalition with the Greens and Lib Dems, but I don't see it, for these reasons:

The establishment wishes to fully and comprehensively destroy what are seen as right-wing values, such as nationalism, traditionalism, and religion. These things equip people with powerful personal and group identities, and present as competing loyalties to the state and social engineers. Hence, said state and social engineers wish to destroy them.

If the right are locked out of power for another five years, their strength and support base will grow, as people will become more and more outraged and angered by the (already weak and unpopular) leftist government, and move further right in response.

However, if a right-wing government is installed, and then goes on to do terrible, unspeakable things, it will have the opposite effect.

The best way to get rid of something is to drive it to unpalatable extremes, meaning that the twisted, exaggerated, dangerous interpretation of an idea gets conflated with the real, reasonable, moderate version.

For instance, saying:

"I think Jewish individuals are over-represented in positions of power."

Is almost always countered with:

"Oh right, so you're a Nazi who wants to round up all the Jews and kill them, are you?"

This reaction has been programmed into people on purpose, in order to make any criticism of Jewish power seem taboo, and to effectively conflate it with genocide.

Equally, what the establishment wishes to do now is conflate right-wing values with the most distorted and grotesque exaggerations of such values, as were depicted in hugely popular programming, The Handmaid's Tale (US) and Years and Years (UK).

In effect, they want to "prove" that being right-wing means being a virulently racist, misogynist, homicidal maniac, until we get to the point where people will be so horrified and disgusted by (what will be presented as) "right-wing ideology", that to continue to call oneself right-wing will become akin to calling oneself a Nazi.

"They" need a right-wing government in place to achieve that, whereby a right-wing government is installed that does such things as:

*Rounds up immigrants and puts them in dangerous death camps;

*Reintroduces the death penalty and kills people who turn out to be innocent;

*Ruthlessly persecutes minority communities such as gays and transgenders.

There is already compelling evidence to suggest Reform may do all of that, with Nigel Farage openly stating he will erect immigrant detention centres (but only in areas that didn't vote for Reform!), and that Reform has considered reintroducing the death penalty, whilst such things as Pride festivals are already being scaled back under Reform councils.

Millions of people will, of course, be entirely in favour of these things, in the moderate way they will first be introduced. Many people, quite reasonably, wish to see dramatic curbs on immigration, the worst kinds of criminals executed, and excessive LGBT propaganda curtailed.

But lulling you in with a false sense of "moderate" security is how they get you, and we saw this very clearly depicted in The Handmaid's Tale.

The faction that goes on to form the brutally repressive and misanthropic Republic of Gilead initially presents itself as entirely moderate and sensible, simply invested in scaling back some of the dangerous excesses of liberalism, and protecting families and traditional values. They seem entirely reasonable, modern, and convincing.

Then they take power.

As soon as they're in power, the velvet glove is well and truly ripped off the iron fist, and the Gilead government introduces the most authoritarian and tyrannical regime imaginable, where dissenters are routinely executed, rape is commonplace, and women have fingers removed if they're caught reading.

I'm not saying Reform will go quite that far... But it will go far enough (the eerily prophetic Years and Years, covering a "fictional" Britain from 2019-2034, is a good primer for this), meaning that, after a few years of such rapacious right-wingery, the UK public will be horrified, terrified, and appalled, and oust them - as is shown in aforementioned predictive programming - in revolutionary outrage.

Then the far-left Lib-Lab-Green coalition can sweep to power and induct us into global communism, as is outlined in change agent John Lennon's 'Imagine' (no countries, no possessions, no religions, because just look what these evil right-wing fixations drive people to - that will be the framing).

So, that's why I think Reform will win the next General Election, and also why Andy Burnham was meant to win Makerfield.

Burnham himself is almost certainly an intelligence asset: not only is he a member of the WEF, but - after graduating from Cambridge University in the 1991 - he has a significant gap on his CV where he claims he was unable to find a job.

A Cambridge degree 35 years ago (at a time when only about 15% of the population went to university at all, never mind a top tier institution like Cambridge) was basically a golden ticket to walk into the industry of your choice, so this is not an especially convincing story. Far more likely that Mr Burnham was engaged in something during this period of "unemployment" that he prefers not to publicly convey, such as intelligence training. Indeed, he was able to complete a three-month unpaid internship apparently directly after this "unemployment" period had elapsed, replete with lengthy commute, so he must have been getting money from somewhere. The dole?

Maybe.

Or maybe not.

Hence, I believe that Burnham, as an integral establishment asset, has agreed to be an essential "effigy": to initially sweep to power in Makerfield, and then to leading the country (it is widely anticipated he will oust the loathed Starmer as PM), where he will intentionally behave diabolically so as to proverbially go up in flames, and have no chance of winning a General Election.

It is very probable that in the lead up to this election (which could take place as early as this year), we will see a sudden spike in "immigrant crime" and otherwise hideous, high-profile criminality that is designed to outrage the public.

The left in general, and Labour in particular, are seen as wishy-washy and a soft touch on both immigration and crime, so enough of these incidents can push even the most staunch Labour supporters into reconsidering their views:

"Enough is enough and we need a party that's going to take a hard line on crime. Even if I don't agree with them on anything else, I'm voting Reform to keep our streets safe."

So, that's my analysis: Burnham was meant to comfortably win this election, precisely so that he can catastrophically lose the next one, and the subsequent stage of the agenda can unfold. It's all planned and scripted, but that doesn't mean inevitable: as always, they require our cooperation and consent to get what they want.

When people say the establishment rigs the elections, yes, they do, but not, in general, by shredding or adding votes. Rather, they rig elections psychologically, by manipulating the electorate into doing what the establishment wishes them to do, but believing that is their own free choice - and even that they are being rebellious or revolutionary.

Many Reform voters believe "the establishment doesn't want Reform, they want Labour", and this of course makes Reform more attractive to anyone with remotely anti-establishment views.

The reality is that the establishment wants Reform. The establishment is Reform. Of course, it's every other mainstream party too, but that doesn't mean the parties are indistinguishable. The next desired arm of the agenda cannot, I believe, be fulfilled under a Labour or left-wing administration. They need a populist right-wing party in power for the reasons discussed.

Will they get it? Probably. But knowing what they want and why, and how it's likely to unfold, helps us stay insulated and uninfluenced by its most nefarious effects.

Thanks for reading! This site is entirely reader-powered, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, making it truly independent. Your support is therefore crucial to ensuring this site's continued existence. If you'd like to make a contribution to help this site keep going, please consider...

1. Subscribing monthly via Patreon or Substack (where paid subscribers can comment on posts)

2. Making a one-off contribution via BuyMeACoffee

3. Contributing in either way via bank transfer to Nat West account number 30835984, sort code 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA (please use your email address as a reference if you'd like me to acknowledge receipt).

Your support is what allows this site to continue to exist and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.