(To listen to this article in audio format, please visit my YouTube channel.)

... So said a BBC headline to describe today's supposedly grand historic event, inadvertently (or maybe not) giving us a clue into what's really going on here, and that - as ever - if you really want to understand the message of the world stage show, your attention needs to be, not on the performers, but on the man behind the curtain...

It is most revealing to note two recent news items concerning the guest list for today's Royal show: the first, "King Charles snubs the grandchildren of late Queen's cousins in Coronation invites", and the second, "Emma Thompson, Ant and Dec, and Katy Perry attend King's coronation service".

When one considers that the whole point of monarchy is "keeping it in the family" - that wealth, prestige and power are passed down exclusively along family lines, with blood ties being the key binding thread woven through centuries of monarchic rule - doesn't it seem a little odd that Charles would exclude his own family from such a significant ceremonial event in favour of, er, Ant and Dec?

But it's not odd at all when we examine the obvious reason for it: unrelated Ant and Dec, Emma Thompson, Katy Perry and co all made the cut, whilst close cousins did not, because actually, this event isn't about family at all: it's about business, and Charlie and his showbiz pals are in the same one: entertainment. They're all actors and performers, taking part in the grand world stage show, and the point of the show (as it always is) is to manipulate the masses.

Every person who has a prominent role on the world stage and who appears on screens a lot, is a character actor inhabiting a scripted role and playing a produced and directed part, and high-profile Royals are no exception (not incidentally, one particularly high-profile Royal married a Hollywood actress, because a particularly skilled performer was required for her role). Their lives as beamed to us via our many and various screens are not "real" - they're staged by actors. That's why the crossover between showbiz and politics is and always has been so immense - and that, when they say "politics is showbusiness for ugly people", they mean it literally (with apologies to the increasingly photogenic new breed of smarmy Westminster types who do keto and work out).

Politics is theatre every bit as much as the movies are, and famous actors and high-profile politicians wield a comparable amount of social power - and often have strangely entwined backstories. Note that Canadian PM, Justin Trudeau, and phenomenally well-known 'Friends' actor, Matthew Perry, grew up together: they went to the same school and the latter's mother worked for the former's father. It's not "a coincidence" - it's because they were born into the same big club, and were being trained up from childhood in the same kind of ways for their future roles as comparably powerful men. Why did the Friends' cast get paid $1 million per episode each? Because of the extraordinary social power actors (of all stripes) have to manipulate the mass mind.

So, back to the coronation in our post-Corona Nation: what is the purpose of this particularly extravagant and opulent display of wealth, at a time of grave austerity and when more people are struggling to make ends meet than ever before?

That. That's the point. The whole point of it is to rouse those of us (well, at least those of us who are not NPCs) into a state of absolute incensed outrage at the inequality, the unfairness, the brutal, rank hypocrisy of it all - how come our country doesn't have the money to feed hungry children or warm freezing pensioners, but it has the money for gold carriages for professional parasites?

That's how you're supposed to respond, because don't forget, the fact that Charles' coronation is happening directly after the hardest winter in memorable history, where millions were genuinely having to make a choice between heating and eating, is not "a coincidence". it's planned: like everything on the world stage, scripted, produced and directed, years in advance (how did "they know" the Queen would die when she did, to make way for Charles' coronation now? Because they stage the exit from the world stage of high-profile performers, just as soap operas do when they kill characters off. Remember what David Bowie's ex-wife said about his alleged "death" - that "he staged his passing rather well"? I'm not saying the Queen isn't dead (though it's interesting to note ChatGPT doesn't think she is), just that she almost certainly did not die when the media said she did, it was just announced at that time for strategy reasons).

Let us always remember that the cost of living crisis is all engineered and by design, just like the fake pandemic was, and just like the Royal Variety Show currently saturating our screens is. Everything is playing out exactly as the ruling classes have determined well in advance, because they don't want a monarchy any more, and they want the incensed public to call for its abolition - it's the age-old political tactic of "problem-reaction-solution", otherwise known as the manufacture of consent.

One of the ruling classes' key end goals is a One World Government, and monarchies have always been in the way of that, so they are to be abolished, simply because that's what the social controllers now want - but, like many other seismic events that are likely to occur over the next few years (such as having an "anti-vax" president), the fall of the monarchy will be made to look like a "victory for the people", when it's nothing of the sort.

While I hope it goes without saying that I loathe the concept of monarchy and many of its current constituent members, I'm nevertheless under no illusions that things would be any better without one (after all, the USA is famously republic and it is certainly faring no better socially or politically than we are in the UK).

So, that's the first desired goal of Charles' lavish hat ceremony - to enrage the masses so they call for his head - and hat (and there's certainly been some interesting predictions from the eerily accurate Nostradamus on that score).

A related second goal is to demonstrate the new, highly sinister and draconian, powers granted to the police to crush dissent and protest. Under the new Public Order Act, police are now effectively allowed to prosecute thought crimes, and can arrest those who appear as if they "might" cause a disruption. Anti-monarchy protestors at today's coronation were told in advance they would, amongst other things, be arrested for mentioning Prince Andrew or the sex abuse cases relating to him.

As of 1pm on the day of the coronation, several arrests have already been made, with one protestor being arrested for shouting, "who elected him?"

Harry Stratton, director of the 'Republic' anti-monarchy group, who organised some of the protests, and saw six of his colleagues arrested, said:

"These arrests seem like the work of a police state. It's not acceptable. We are only saying that we don't believe in the monarchy and we're doing it peacefully. How can they arrest six people who are just on the way to a peaceful protest?'

I warned of these changes back in January, when Rishi Sunak declared to the world's media that "the right to protest is not absolute". I wrote:

"The latest unelected UK Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, has declared that the fundamental democratic principle of the right to protest is "not absolute", and that he intends to quite dramatically undermine it. Issuing an amendment to the already spectacularly sinister Public Order Bill - passed by MPs last October - Sunak's offices said on Monday that they intended to "broaden the legal definition of 'serious disruption'" and allow police to pre-emptively intervene in protests before "chaos erupts." The alleged* (*false) reason for this is to stop protests "disrupting others' daily lives".

So are we clear on that? Police can use their powers of dispersal and arrest to prevent protesting before it has even started, merely on the suspicion that, theoretically, the protest might end up becoming "chaotic" and therefore "disrupting others' daily lives" (and who determines what 'chaotic' means in this situation? After all, the average family home with young children in it is 'chaotic' - are we going to start arresting the nation's five-year-olds for their "disruption to others' daily lives?" I jest, but I shouldn't give the psychopathic establishment ideas...).

We have gone full Orwellian "thoughtcrime" now and this is - to put it mildly - a tad concerning..."

Today's ceremony marks the first significant occasion where these powers have been put into practice, and this is in effect a trial run and a warning for the wave of much more vociferous protesting that I predict is to come, once more about the injection harms is revealed, and the cost of living crisis further intensifies.

We are moving towards a much more conservative and authoritarian social climate, and liberal democratic values, such as free speech and the right to protest, are not compatible with that, so they are being erased. As people kick back against this - as the velvet glove is well and truly removed from the iron fist - the state has now given itself the power to arrest, prosecute, and imprison such dissidents for "re-education".

Please note that, at the current time, several new low-security "mega prisons" are shooting up all over the country. They're not for existing prisoners to be moved to, and they're not for violent offenders. They're not so much about punishing hardened criminals, as rehabilitating those who have lost their way, or so their glossy PR says.

So who could these institutions possibly be for? As I wrote in January...

"In 2021, one of the UK's biggest ever prisons opened its doors. HMP Five Wells (Wellingborough) is a privately-run establishment, and falls into the 'category C' of jails, meaning it does not hold the most dangerous prisoners. It is described as a “modern, efficient prison estate that is fit for the future” and will have a clear focus on rehabilitating offenders. Note that this prison is the first of six to be completed under the same guise, plus five new community prisons for women, and that they will all be fully SMART-enabled.

So, who are all these non-dangerous prisoners that the UK government decided in recent years needed large facilities to contain and "rehabilitate" them? Please note that when new prisons open, old ones don't typically close down, so this isn't about relocating existing prisoners - it's about detaining new ones. If all the plans are completed successfully, they will create over 13,000 new prison placements. Mass incarceration has already risen 60% in the last 30 years, and is predicted to rise another 23.7% by March 2026.

I suggest, then, that one primary purpose of all these new prisons is to contain and "rehabilitate" (e..g, re-educate) furious state dissidents who take to the streets in protest at what the government has done to them. It is no secret that our corrupt and tyrannical establishment, like all corrupt and tyrannical establishments, wants to neutralise dissenters, but it has to do so under the sheen of legitimacy - e.g., it has to actually make them look like criminals.

I am quite confident, therefore, that there is no risk of shady operatives storming our houses in the middle of the night and dragging us off to state facilities for our anti-establishment sentiments, because this is too risky, obviously illegitimate, and very labour intensive. The neighbours would notice. It would explicitly reveal the state as wholly corrupt and lose the veneer of legitimacy that they need to maintain to keep hold of their power.

However, in a protest situation, it is quite easy to frame people as violent and criminal, simply by sending agent provocateurs in (as the establishment always does at large protests) to stir the situation up, so the police go in heavy-handedly and start making blanket arrests. They know you're a state dissident because you're there, hence making this a much quicker and easier way of identifying and capturing state threats, than going through the email and phone records of 67 million people.

These protests will be televised on all the mainstream channels, and seen as horribly violent and dangerous, therefore much of the public will support the mass arrests. Those arrested will struggle to appeal the charges against them, as the new anti-protest laws will frame them as guilty, even if they didn't actually engage in any violence themselves. Hence, it is quite plausible to imagine such people will end up in one of the six new SMART mega-prisons, where they will be "rehabilitated", e..g., reeducated and coerced into accepting "state-friendly" beliefs."

We can see the beginnings of this new tyranny emerging today, with even completely peaceful protestors, "guilty" of nothing more than publicly airing their views, being arrested en masse. This is a clear warning sign of what is to come.

In effect, the purpose of the coronation is two-fold - to rile and goad you into protesting against it... and then arresting you when you do.

While there's no doubt the monarchy will fall, this will be nothing to do with the protests against it, but rather, the Royals' demise will be used as a cynical strategy to disarm us into complacency, by making us think we've won an important victory - similar to Trump winning the US election, and Elon Musk buying Twitter - these are all soap opera twists meant to manipulate us into feeling like there are people on our side fighting for us. In reality, none of it is "real" and all these people are - all anyone who appears on a mainstream screen a lot is - are actors: professional deceivers and modern-day wizards, paid by the owners of the big club to bewitch us.

So, as always, we must not focus on the screen, on the celebrities and the stars, but rather, on the far less visible writers, producers, and directors. Always look for the man behind the curtain, because when it comes to anything that happens on the world stage - he's always there.

Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader-funded, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you would like to make a contribution of any size, please do so through...

1. BuyMeACoffee for one-off or monthly donations
2. Patreon, for monthly pledges
3. Direct bank transfer, for either monthly or one-off donations, to Nat West, a/c 30835984, s/c 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA

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

(If you'd like to comment on this article, please visit Facebook or Instagram.)