The Blackmail Black Pill: Thoughts on Reading Whitney Webb’s One Nation Under Blackmail


I discovered the work of Whitney Webb by accident, when I stumbled upon a podcast interview she gave to Glenn Beck. Before the interview was over, I put both volumes of her meticulously researched and documented work, One Nation Under Blackmail, onto my Goodreads to-read list. This work is getting most of its attention from those who have not read it, I assume, because of its titular subject of Jeffrey Epstein’s pedophile ring servicing the rich and powerful global elite. However, the books are much, much more.

The books themselves are not so much about Epstein’s operation as they are about the networks that gave rise to his operation. Those networks, by-and-large, are unknown to average members of the public and consist of a vast web of links between various intelligence agencies, the national security state, high finance, organized crime, art and fashion, and what appears to be normal, quotidian politics.

I’m not interested, for this post, in going into great detail summarizing or recapitulating the nature and content of those networks. For that, you can look to Webb’s own work, either in her books, her website, or her podcast. Instead, I want to focus here on my own reaction to the picture of American and global politics that forms based on her work.

In terms comprehensible to Reddit-based political discourse, Webb’s work in One Nation Under Blackmail is a sort of black pill, but not of the incel variety. Instead, what her work helps anyone willing to pay attention to see is that what most people take to be the socio-political environment is really just a shell, a front, a staged, choreographed production that exists to keep the public from understanding that the actual people behaving like nihilistic incels are the people we elect, the people we buy our clothes from, the celebrities we yearn to be like, the wealthy elites whose ostensible rags-to-riches rise we hope to emulate. These are the people who are so nihilistic that power and control is all they understand. These are the people whose real personalities are so toxic and off-putting that they naturally fall prey to traps such as Epstein set–because nobody with a healthy personality would want to voluntarily be in a relationship with them. Unless, of course, such a relationship furthered their partner’s own nihilistic yearning for power, wealth, and influence.

What’s more important is the realization that virtually no one–no one–who navigates these elite circles is untainted by these nefarious networks. Think of your favorite politician–chances are, they’re implicated. Think of your favorite pop star–likewise. That businessman whose public persona is that of the up-from-the-bootstraps innovator whose genius compelled him to succeed against all odds. Yes, they’re probably complicit, on some level, in a web of networks that, at base, is nothing more than an organized, criminal enterprise. An organized, criminal enterprise–I might add–that sees you and me as nothing more than the productive class that supplies the labor (and tax revenue) necessary to further its own ends.

This revised black pill is important in our current moment for several reasons.

One reason relates to the influence that Donald Trump has had on conservative politics over the last six years. Because my own political instincts lead me in the direction of what is probably best described as a form of right-wing libertarianism and historic classical liberalism, it’s often tempting and all too easy to focus my criticism on left-wing, progressive causes, people, and organizations. But it’s just as important to pay attention to consistency in one’s application of values and beliefs when it comes to causes, people, and organizations one is more inclined to support.

Although I never once cast a ballot for Donald Trump, generally speaking, I was supportive of much of his domestic policy agenda pre-COVID. However, when a person like Donald Trump comes along and is capable of rousing the populist passion and support that we saw within Republican and conservative circles, it’s important to do a reality check. Although many people seem to believe that Donald Trump embodies some kind of conservative messianism–that he’s a consummate political outsider willing to take on things like “the Deep State”–what Webb’s exposé demonstrates is that once one gains access to the circles that enable one to seriously consider becoming president, one is already implicated in layers upon layers of corruption. Simply stated, Donald Trump was never a political outsider, a fact demonstrated at the very least by some of the men he chose to occupy cabinet level positions. Even aside from that, Donald Trump is heavily implicated in the elite networks that don’t just merely influence presidents but that actively make them.

Similar observations can be made about other major Republican and conservative leaders. The Bush family’s connections are well known, from the CIA to the royal family of Saudi Arabia, and from Nazi Germany to a globalization agenda that benefits nations like China to the detriment of the United States. Neither George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, nor the tagalong Jeb are in any meaningful sense conservatives in the classical liberal sense. And as Webb has pointed out in various places, they are linked to the same intelligence-crime-blackmail networks as other major political families.

Certainly, though, at least good ol’ Ronald Reagan wasn’t involved in such things. I mean, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” is a classic! Ronald Reagan had class! Watching films of his speeches on YouTube is to be taken back in time to an era, not that long ago, when American leaders valued things like ethics, freedom, and down-to-earth, man-of-the-soil humor. Except Ronald Reagan’s rise in American politics was made possible by the same networks that used the “talents” of men like Jeffrey Epstein.

I really meant it when I said no one is free from being implicated and entangled in the webs of influence that Webb (a pun!) documents in her two-volume work.

This is why I call her exposé a black pill. Not because I am encouraging you to become a nihilist, but because I want you to see that all the people you are inclined to look to as America’s political saviors are nihilists who crave nothing other than power and control.

Of course, it looks increasingly likely that Donald Trump is not going to be the 2024 Republican nominee. Instead, it looks like Ron DeSantis is the new rising star who will, no doubt, play the part of reformer. But if Webb’s work exposing the deep, entrenched networks that actually govern the United States is any indication, his role will be just that: a part played in the theater of American politics. The networks that created every other American president will remain in place and, in all likelihood, will continue uninhibited in the case of a President DeSantis, should such an eventuality occur. More likely, should there be a President DeSantis, it will not be in spite of but because of those networks.

The ultimate and final lesson is this: There is no political savior coming to reclaim and restore the American republic. Even if such a savior existed (and I don’t think he or she does), it’s unlikely–if not impossible–that he or she would ever even win a primary election, never mind set foot in the Oval Office.

So what’s the alternative?

The first step is one that motivates most of what I read and write: Realize that this is a spiritual contest, not just merely a political one. This is an observation that Webb herself takes note of in her interview with Beck, linked above. Unless and until the public recognizes this, little else can be done. Politics are by nature theological.

The second step–really step 1.5–is to reject a politics of despair. The realization of step 1 is to also realize that we–the truth tellers–are not alone in this fight. “For our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world powers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavens” (Ephesians 6:12). And in that case, “if God is for us, who is against us?” (Romans 8:31).

Fighting the good fight politically by necessity requires one to “take up the full armor of God” (Ephesians 6:13). These networks, documented meticulously and in detail by Whitney Webb, have not so much rejected the people as the true rulers of society but, like the children of Israel who yearned for a king so they could be like the other nations, they have rejected God as their ruler (1 Samuel 8:7). Their own proclivities to do only that which is right in their own eyes (Judges 21:25) lends itself to their own drift into spiral that leads inevitably to authoritarianism and totalitarianism: “Give us a king!” I’m not convinced that we–though armed with the truth–can defeat this spiral.

Either way, we must continue to commit to the truth. Whitney Webb has demonstrated her own such commitment in One Nation Under Blackmail, for which she should be commended. We should all resolve that she, and others like her, should not fight this fight on behalf of the truth alone.

2 responses to “The Blackmail Black Pill: Thoughts on Reading Whitney Webb’s One Nation Under Blackmail

  1. A farrago of nonsense from someone who can utter the stupidity that “Ronald Reagan had class!” shows how believers have no idea what the word “nihilism” means.
    Obviously, though, and I mean this with all sincerity, WordPress is being taken over in all of its corners by you clowns, and I should really get off.
    Where can I go where I don’t have to engage with you fools? I don’t need much in the way of “social media,” even some so-so media, but it is there no escape from your Rushbo like?

    1. I know coming into contact with ideas that may disagree with your own is hard. But I believe, and I think history supports my belief, that coming into contact with contrarian ideas is important for one’s intellectual and spiritual growth.

      I also can’t believe that I have to say this, but you do know that you don’t have to engage with anyone who you find to be a fool, especially online. If you don’t like the ideas I write about, you are free to ignore them and go on about your life. Ah, the blessings of liberty!

      I might add also that someone capable of employing an obscure and uncommon term like “farrago” should also be capable of recognizing hyperbole and sarcasm. That Ronald Reagan is viewed as probably the last American president with class is an ubiquitous sentiment among the paleo-conservative and neo-con crowds of the American right (c.f., Dinesh D’Souza’s gushing biographical sketch of Reagan). That doesn’t mean I agree with them, but you probably don’t care because your response demonstrates that you are neither inclined nor capable of engaging ideas that are outside whatever (very) narrow scope of knowledge you claim to possess.

      Nihilism, since that appears to be your primary concern, is constituted by several different ideas that generally range from extreme epistemic skepticism, particularly as it relates to morality and ethics, a rejection of objective morality generally, and an affirmation that being is at base meaningless. It has prompted several responses in the philosophical and theological literature, perhaps the most influential of which has been existentialism in one form or another because existentialism, unlike positivism and idealism, agrees on some level with nihilism’s assumptions. Importantly, from my perspective, there is a major, influential thread of Christian existential literature. If you think I’ve misrepresented nihilism, then feel free to make an actual argument rather than the nearly unintelligible drivel that you let spew on to your screen when you wrote the comment on this post.

      I mulled over not responding to your comment, but since you were “kind” enough to engage–however shallow and unenlightened that engagement may have been–I concluded that I ought to return your kindness with a response. However, I am undecided on whether to allow your comment to appear publicly on the post in question since I am interested in helping anyone who happens to stumble across my blog to get smarter and better informed, not dumber and even more detached from reality. Needless to say, your comment tends toward the latter. I’ll allow it to remain publicly visible long enough for you to read this response.

      All that being said, I harbor no hard feelings. I hope you find whatever it is you’re looking for, and I mean this with all sincerity, I hope God grants you wisdom and discernment in that quest.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: