Malone vs. the Breggins: My Take
by Tessa Lena | Dec 3, 2022
What are my thoughts about the latest iteration of the schism between Malone and the Breggins?
Somebody posted this Monty Python episode about the “splitters.” I think it’s fitting.
I am more than a little disappointed with the whole thing but I want to think through it slowly. Why slowly? Because I wholeheartedly despise the use of the “agitation” as a tool of domination. Agitation serves a different purpose than truth-seeking, and my actual, real, honest to my soul, purpose is truth-seeking. There is lots of noise in the world, there are lots of whips and carrots. But the “compass” always lives inside, and I am going to talk about this by using my compass.
Let me start by saying that I have great respect for the work of the Breggins. And Malone. And Desmet. The development of my thoughts about life and COVID didn’t greatly depend on any of them, it came from different sources—but I have great respect for their contributions. And I think they are all sincere even in this schism. I am saying these words despite the fact that saying them a few weeks ago and not taking sides seemingly cost me the support of Catherine Austin Fitts, who was one of the first people to support me after I published my “Great Reset for Dummies.” That hurt a little.
But I think that life fixes misunderstandings, and there was probably no malice to that, and so my heart is light, my conscience is clear, and my love is there. And in the meanwhile, I am hopeful that every party to this snake pit who is talking about fighting a spiritual battle gets humble. Otherwise, what battle are we fighting exactly? The battle to get the last word in the conversation? That’s a different battle.
So here is the plot how I see it.
I think that out of the three specific parties (the Breggins, Malone, and Desmet) nobody is “controlled opposition.” That is what I think of it right now. I could be wrong, and if I see any evidence that satisfies my senses, I’ll change my mind, but that is what I think right now. I think all of them are sincere—and following their inner logic. I think that there might also be not-so-well-intended people trying to put fog into other people’s heads, and—thanks to the presence of bad habits in the good people—they are temporarily succeeding.
I think that the Breggins sincerely believe that Desmet and Malone are spies and devils, and so they’ve applied all the fervor of the “fighting the devil” variety toward fighting Desmet and Malone. They went for blood, it seems. I found it heartbreaking.
Similarly, I am not delighted with the fact that Malone is now suing. But what do you expect when you start a bloodbath? A “thank you” letter?!!!
I pray that the fog in everybody’s heads gets kicked out, and the Breggins, Malone, and Desmet all talk to each other and stop confusing and dividing people who have, to be honest, better things to do that to worry about in-fighting.
Back when it started, I offered to all of them to talk it over it on my podcast. Results: crickets from Desmet, and honest reactions—that I respected and appreciated—but none the less no enthusiasm for dialogue from Malone and the Breggins. I tried. I respect their free will, and perhaps my pleas have planted a seed, or not—I don’t know—but I tried to the extent that I could, and, again, my conscience is clear. Here is another recent offer from Dr. Emanuel Garcia. Let’s pray it happens.
There are two different issues: let’s please not conflate them.
Issue #1 is the ‘situational awareness” and determining who is and who isn’t on “our side.”
(Also: What is “our side”? How do we define the proverbial “spiritual battle”?)
Issue #2 is how we fight our fight without becoming the very thing that we are fighting against.
Identifying bad actors
Surely, amongst us, there are spies and bad actors. We live on Earth—not in a fantasy land—so they are surely in existence. And I suspect that there is a very minimal overlap between the people who are usually accused of being agents in our circles, and the ones who actually are agents. Those who are agents are masters of mimicry, and you wouldn’t be able to tell in most cases.
There are also cold-blooded tricksters, pretending to be do-gooders. Not agents. Just cold-blooded tricksters with ice-cold eyes and very sweet and righteous language. They are spiritual charlatans trying to trick good people.
The latter are here to test our senses. They wouldn’t be here without the universe’s approval. They are here to test our senses, our love, and our courage. They are here to tempt us to lose our balance—either in the direction of trusting them, tricksters, or in the direction of becoming poisoned by fear and acting against our interests.
Life is what is has always been. Yes, this is a spiritual battle, but it means an actual spiritual battle (self-discipline, humility, love, and courage), not a yelling match over talking points.
And in practical terms, it is as unhelpful to trust a charlatan as it is to be paranoid. There is no formula. We need to allow our hearts to guide us case by case, and we need our senses. And our prayers, said from a place of love. Not fear.
Defining features of a good fight
Now, the other issue is how we go about protecting ourselves from the “bad guys.” If we protect ourselves from the monster by turning into a monster then we are ourselves no longer on “our side.” We’ve crossed over. The monster is energy, it stays alive as long as somebody feeds it. And by the way, we don’t have to be agents to accidentally walk over to the dark side and hang out there while still thinking that we are “fighting the good fight.” All it takes is a marriage of fear and ego. And then the bad guys, the actual predators, temporarily win, until we figure it out.
By now, everyone and their dog has called each other “controlled opposition.” But academic disagreements are not proof of anybody being a bad actor. Being a bad actor is something different.
And yes, we are most certainly allowed to have different takes on any situation. We are allowed to passionately argue. But the moment we give ourselves the permission to use the tools from the monster toolkit to fight the monster… well, we have two monsters fighting.
A peace of mind
I was upset about this schism a couple of months ago when it just started but now I am just observing and praying for the wisest resolution. The history keeps unfolding. That is our real-time education. We are much better off when we don’t rely on external leaders but look for answers in our own hearts.
Again, I am taking no sides in the lamentable schism. I don’t have enough information to take sides, and I feel loving toward all parties to the conflict, despite the fact that I don’t agree with their choices.
I think it’s all very tragic but paradoxically, I am not tormented. My organ for torment has gradually, then suddenly, fallen off in the course of the past three years. I am at peace. The past three years have taught me to enjoy every moment and every breath and every day with clear skies and normal clouds, no matter who is mandating what and who in the freedom community is publicly calling whom controlled opposition.
It’s everybody’s own responsibility to confront their bad habits. And when a lot of people start doing that, miracles will happen. But people first have to go through something, in a mysterious way, and become compelled to confront their bad habits. It’s a part of the journey.
So, at this moment, I have accepted the fact that we are collectively stepping into the same pile of brown stuff and doing the exact same thing that people have done many times before us. Naively, in early 2020, I was hoping for a different trajectory this time around–but the history is unfolding like it’s unfolded many times prior: a splash of pure unity in reaction to pressure—followed by a maze of very old and trivial bad habits: ego, professional rivalry, fear, dogma, and fear-based missionary crusades of different flavors. “You are with us or you are against us.” “Shoot the traitor.”
And yes, of course, there is real control opposition, and real agents, but the latter are only capable to causing lasting trouble if their tricks land on good people’s bad habits. Otherwise, bad actors’ harm is short-lived. (It’s kind of like that germ and terrain thing.)
I think that child-like honesty and purity of the heart is the only thing that can save us—but the miracle has not yet happened. Like I said, lots of people use the phrase “we are in a spiritual battle” but what some seem to really mean is “we are in a battle for having the last word in the conversation because we are obviously right and they are obviously bad actors”—which is a different battle.
And so the history, indeed, keeps unfolding. And this lawsuit now is just a logical, not good at all but logical, continuation of the public bloodbath that the Breggins—sincerely—have started. Blood is what happens when you start a bloodbath. No surprise there.
The real underlying problem, to my senses, is the reliance on the methodology of domination, the methodology that was used, in this case, originally by the Breggins, and then by Malone, to fight the “good fight.” That methodology is not suitable for fighting the good fight. Personally, I am far more interested in what kind of energy people side with than their talking points. Talking points are trivial, the energy is the essence.
I strongly believe that the good fight has to come from the purest part of our soul, or else what we are fighting is not the good fight—the fight for love and spiritual freedom—but the fight for who has the last word—which, again, is not the same fight, no matter how anti-devil the fighter-for-the-last-word is feeling.
In this particular case, the Breggins could have said, if they were so inclined, “We disagree with Desmet’s theory. We think he may be up to no good. Please be careful.” Please correct me if I am wrong but I don’t think there was a “we think” qualifier. I think it was an all-swords-out crusading affair. And that, to me, was what changed the course of the freedom movement, and not for the better. And now Malone is suing. Who won so far? Your proverbial devil, that’s who—cuz we are more divided than ever, to the joy of the real and the imaginary bad actors.
I believe that what distinguishes the good guys from the bad guys is not the isms, and not the talking points. It’s the feeling of love, an insistence on doing things from love and not from fear (which is one of the hardest things to do in a world that is unfair and broken). It is also the respect for other people’s right to choose what they choose for themselves when they walk their journey.
And I think that we are all responsible for defeating the tyrant in the mirror. I have personally faced that tyrant. When I saw the face of that tyrant, I was very embarrassed. And I told the tyrant in the mirror to get packing and leave my quarters in a great hurry. It is much easier to be happy without that tyrant offering up bad ideas.
Am I holding my breath for immediate peace? No. I think that the history will continue unfolding how it usually does until we remember what it’s all about. Each journey has its time, and we are in the middle of a journey. But this very second—right now, without waiting—we can choose to do our thing with love, and our journey will be sweeter.
Subscribe to Tessa Fights Robots
© 2021 FM Media Enterprises, Ltd.
This is a very good post and I agree.
It’s a pretty wildly nerdy and autistic thing to call someone “controlled opposition” over the ‘mass formation’ hypothesis!
Desmet and Malone do not deny that there are bad actors conspiring — ‘M.F.’ just describes how bad actors can get a cascade of compliance rolling.
We should all agree on that and move on.