Icke's implicitly anti-semitic model of reptilian aliens.
As I said in the Immanence of Myth,
"...Zecharia Sitchin has written several books about the “true” origin of Sumerian mythology: aliens. Th is, or the mythology of planet Niburu, is a wonderful modernization of ancient mythic elements, but considered as empirical fact, one may as well buy into the hollow Earth theory. Th e author David Icke takes it a step further: aliens, or reptilians, exist in the world today and control the world economy. Though there is some truth to the argument from ignorance “the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence,” that doesn’t mean either of these scenarios are even remotely likely in a factual or historic sense..."
Studies have shown, interestingly enough, that empathy is a trait that gets reduced in the wealthy classes. One can only imagine that in the top 1%, many of them must have a downright reptilian disposition. It isn't much of a stretch. They don't need to originate from a far off planet X on some massive elliptical orbit: the worst atrocities humans have suffered have been, with the exception of plagues and natural disasters, at the hands of other humans. There is something especially awful about these cruelties, because they could have been averted.
What kind of cold-bloodedness does it take to order the genocide of millions, as has happened time and again throughout history, often for no crime other than having the misfortune of being born in a politically unfavorable spot? That such genocides are often carried out by obedient proles, by the lower classes themselves, that the lower classes often tear themselves apart, and burn their own homes when they riot, is a further bewildering horror - but all of it begins with the reptilians, the cold snake eye that feels no need for mother's breast, for warm companionship or compassion. It kills, hunts, and grows without those feelings, such that we are all more than a little surprised when we discover that the coldest of butchers loved puppies, or enjoyed playing with children.
This leads us to an associated issue, of the personal psychology of the tyrant. Do they differ between different political and social systems? It would seem at first that the obvious answer would be yes. In the theoretical extremes of free market capitalism and communism, the flaw of the former is an over-emphasis on the individual to the point that it produces cold, unempathic, self obsessed people that are fixated on consumption, whereas communism produces a lack of personal freedom, and de-motivated, inherently socially repressed individuals without any sense of self-worth.
But that doesn't seem to play out at the top levels. It would seem that the top 1% remain the same in many ways the world over. A look at the homes of communist dictators shows that there are some inherent psychological necessities that supersede this dichotomy of cultural structure - they look more or less the same, barring cultural differences, as the palaces of their capitalist or even monarchist counterparts.
Perhaps they are reptilians after all.
Pre-order a copy of The Immanence of Myth, published by Weaponized. (Or sign up to be notified of its release on Amazon.com)