Ok so here's a breakdown of what I picture so far.

*The simplest most surfacy breakdown is about Hegelian dialectics vs deeper vectors. It's basically like this. The enslavers don't care if we have a bunch of disagreements, as long as the disagreements are perverted mixtures of truth and lies on both sides. It's easy to make opposing views that are all polluted meaninglessly. But sticking to one vector like remote viewing, evading the typical dialectics, are more effective than getting drawn in. So for example: The "Epstein coalition" vs "the axis of resistance" is an example. It's oversimplified, and they just want you picking a side.

*The next layer is the more independent style of function vs the centralized hosts. This is food independence, independent multi-media (and A.I. sovereignty), and militias vs the ancient authorities that are all based upon the ancient pantheons (that are clearly advertised to this day in their major buildings)

*The next layer is the UAP direct wars. The Secret Space Program doing craft recovery, vs freedom fighters trying to deliver messages and bring in security.

*Finally this is a less talked about layer. It's the death traps vs death independence. The idea behind this is that even though the death traps exist, those that are more equipped with the knowledge upon death will be more capable of navigating their environment after death.

---

Each layer needs to have a certain level of critical mass. If we don't evade Hegelian dialectics we never approach the critical truth. If we don't peel away from centralized authority we don't apply the knowledge we've learned and the media manages to slam the critical truth shut because of centralization. If we don't move onto the greater realization about Disclosure we keep our resistance on a very blind level. And finally if we don't look at afterlife as a serious front in the war we don't get the final objective of defense.

At that point the enslavers realize they can't really distract us, they can't pool us together, they can't minimize the bigger picture, and even if they kill us they still have to contend with our resistance.

This is why the ETs need our psychological commitment and not just our physical protection.

For many I'm probably stating the obvious but for me it's been worth gathering this together in one post.

Benevolent civilizations would probably try to offer strategies that work with or without their help. They might supply ammunition but they want you to reverse engineer them for the population. They might supply vehicles, agriculture, but they want the knowledge available to the population.

The freedom-fighters (alleged, I know) perhaps offer themselves as tribute for the secret space program because even though it's hostile: they tend to be more sloppy about keeping secrets.

But it makes sense that the better path is probably one that assumes the hero might not be there

Ah you know I should add some other layers like

*Uncontracting vs complacency

*Burrowing societies vs bunker busters

This war paradigm is quite multifaceted but not really beyond human comprehension even in our zombified state

I still consider myself amongst the zombies.

Truly liberated humans are capable of remote viewing the way that they're capable of making a peanut butter sandwich.

Until this capacity is reliably proven, there's only a handful of humans that are "awake."

Luckily, there is a middle ground. Discernment is half the battle. Realizing what a garbage joke this planet's narrative is is certainly a level of "awake."