In Part 1, we discussed the nature of “world order” and global governance. We learned the crucial difference between the Westphalian model of equal, sovereign nation-states—a mythical ideal, never an actuality—and the various attempts to stamp a world order on that template.
In particular, we considered how the UN has been the leading organisation promoting global governance and how its founding Charter facilitates the centralisation of global power.
We observed that the UN has undergone a “quiet revolution” that has transformed it into a global public-private partnership (UN-G3P).
Latterly, we have seen the rise of a prospective multipolar world order that some say opposes the hegemony of its unipolar predecessor. This new model of global governance will apparently be led by allies Russia and China, the two countries that head up the multilateral partnerships of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).
The multipolar world order is predicated upon a more prominent role for the G20 rather than the G7. Thereby strengthening Russia’s and China’s positions as permanent members of the UN Security Council.
Whereas the existing unipolar world order established a system of global governance that enables UN-G3P oligarchs to influence policy agendas of nation-states around the world, the new multipolar world order is designed to advance the power of those oligarchs even further—by transforming their influence into absolute control.
Look no further than the Russian and Chinese governments, where the marriage between the political and corporate state is complete. We will address this in detail in Part 3.
Who Wants A Multipolar World Order?
We ask: who wants a multipolar world order?
The short answer: everyone.
The longer answer: everyone who has sufficient power and influence to change global governance.
The multipolar model isn’t being pushed solely by the Russian and Chinese governments, their oligarchs and their think tanks. It’s also being promoted by the erstwhile “leaders” of the unipolar world order.
Consider this remark by German Chancellor Olaf Sholtz. His speech, set within the context of Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine—which every member of the Western establishment lambastes for the cameras—was given at the World Economic Forum’s 2022 Davos gathering:
I see another global development that constitutes a watershed. We are experiencing what it means to live in a multipolar world. The bipolarity of the Cold War is just as much part of the past as the relatively brief phase when the United States was the sole remaining global power[.] [. . .] The crucial question is this: how can we ensure that the multipolar world will also be a multilateral world? [. . .] I am convinced that it can succeed – if we explore new paths and fields of cooperation. [. . .] If we notice that our world is becoming multipolar, then that has to spur us on: to even more multilateralism! To even more international cooperation!
Western central banks, too, have looked toward the multipolar model. In a 2011 round table discussion at the Banque de France, then-French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, who subsequently became the head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and then was appointed President of the European Central Bank (ECB), said:
Our starting point is to create the conditions to achieve two closely intertwined objectives, i.e. strong, sustainable, and balanced growth, on the one hand, and an orderly transition to a world that is multipolar in economic and monetary terms, on the other. [. . .] The G20 reached agreement [to] promote the orderly transition from a world where a small number of economies, with their currencies, represent the bulk of wealth and trade, to a multipolar world where emerging countries and their currencies represent a growing if not predominant share.
That same year, Mark Carney, then Governor of the Bank of Canada, delivered a speech to the Canada Club of Ottawa, during which he said:
We meet today in the midst of another great transformation—one that is occurring more rapidly than most recognise. The financial crisis has accelerated the shift in the world’s economic centre of gravity. Emerging-market economies now account for almost three-quarters of global growth. [. . .] [W]eakness in advanced economies and strength in emerging economies [. . .] determines the global economic outlook. [. . .] This shift to a multi-polar world is fundamentally positive, [but] it is also disruptive.
Still a third speech in 2011, this one by Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, who was representing the Executive Board of the ECB, emphasised the potential of the multipolar world order. Smaghi noted that, in order to move towards the new world order, an economic, financial and policy shift was required. Bemoaning the lack of progress in the financial and policy fields, he suggested:
[W]e have a multi-polar economic world, but no multi-polar financial or policy world yet. [. . .] [H]ow can we improve the functioning of the international monetary system? The first avenue is to start building a new institutional framework[.] [This] will have to be designed for this new multi-polar world. [. . .] The second avenue involves implementing policies consistent with the transition to a more complete multi-polar world, in all its dimensions. [. . .] A more balanced multi-polar world also requires deeper financial and economic integration in Europe[.] [. . .] The G20 is thus destined to become an over-arching grouping, capable of tasking institutions like the IMF, World Bank or FSB with specific mandates but also to give guidance on politically sensitive issues, in the way the G7 operated in the past.
The World Economic Forum, which describes itself as the international organisation of public-private cooperation, has been advocating the potential of a multipolar world order for some time.
For example, in 2019 it published an article by Credit Suisse’s Global Head of Investment Strategy & Research, Nannette Hechler Fayd’herbe, who advocated investment in “emerging markets.”
Credit Suisse is one of the nine global investment banking giants that collectively comprise the Bulge Bracket. The opinion of its head of strategic investment is notable:
In 2018, we moved closer to the multipolar world that looks set to replace the bipolar US-Russian geopolitical regime that emerged from the Cold War. China’s ascent as a serious economic and geostrategic rival for the US, and its growing assertiveness with programs like “One Belt, One Road” or “Made in China 2025”, has strengthened its influence on the world stage. [. . .] From an investor standpoint, the newly emerged multipolar world brings national champions [—companies in large countries with a sizeable domestic workforce in strategic sectors—] and brands into focus, including emerging market consumers.
Even the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), whose elitist members are ardent pro-NATO US foreign policy supremacists, accepts the imminent arrival of the multipolar world order.
Stewart M. Patrick, the CFR senior fellow who defined the International Rules Based Order (IRBO), wrote in 2021:
[T]he Western-led order was on its heels well before Trump, knocked off balance by rising geopolitical competition from China and Russia; a shrinking collective share of global GDP among the member states of the high-income Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; and public disillusionment with globalization, particularly after the financial crisis. These weaknesses remain. [. . .] The Cornwall summit [G7 summit] will also allow observers to gauge the G-7’s political cohesion and global relevance in an ideologically diverse, multipolar world.
A final example: Speaking at a White House business convention on 21st March 2022, US President Joe Biden said:
We are at an inflection point, I believe, in the world economy[.] [. . .] [I]t occurs every three of four generations. [. . .] Now is a time when things are shifting[.] [T]here’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it and we’ve got to unite the rest of the free world in doing it.
What’s going on? Why would the architects of the unipolar hegemony obligingly accept being replaced by multipolarity—and offer to help make the transition? Why, no matter where you look, even in the most hawkish Western think tanks, is there universal acquiescence to the emergence of a new multipolar world order?
You could argue that this is the only realistic perspective.
Still, the lack of any resistance at all is conspicuous. It suggests that there is more to this baffling contradiction than meets the eye. Indeed, these statements we have quoted, and many more like them from other Western power brokers, reveal, more than acquiescence to a multipolar world, a clear rationale for the creation of a “new world order.”
The point is, if the current holders of global power wish to retain control, then transition to the multipolar world order is required. They understand that the multipolar system is the necessary next step in the evolution of the unipolar order.
Throwing the Dollar Reserve Currency Away
As if to hammer home the fact that the dollar-backed unipolar world order is over, Jerome Powell, Governor of the US Federal Reserve (the Fed), said in April 2022:
The US federal budget is on an unsustainable path, meaning simply that the debt is growing meaningfully faster than the economy. And that’s by definition unsustainable over time.
He then added a reassuring, but ultimately empty caveat:
It’s a different thing to say the current level of the debt is unsustainable. It’s not. The current level of debt is very sustainable. And there’s no question of our ability to service and issue that debt for the foreseeable future.
If the gods were perfectly aligned, geopolitics didn’t exist, universal peace and joy sprang forth and the world ran smoothly and predictably, then Powell’s reassurances may have been plausible. But that is not how the world works. Nor are Powell’s imaginary “ifs” any basis for a sound global reserve currency. His admission was the salient point.
The US government debt-to-GDP ratio currently stands at an estimated 137.2% of GDP. The cost of the COVID-19 countermeasures and the West’s sanction response to Russia’s military action in Ukraine—including the vast sums the US and some European countries have invested in Ukraine’s supposed militarisation—has only made the situation worse.
Spiralling government debt is nearly as bad in every other major Western economy. It stands at 103.7% of UK GDP and in the Euro Monetary Union (Eurozone), it eclipsed 100% of GDP in 2021.
The economic, financial and political basis of the unipolar world is rapidly evaporating.
As central bankers like Powell (US), Lagarde (EU), Andrew Bailey (UK) Elvira Nabiullina (Russia) and Agustín Carstens (Bank for International Settlements) know, as do all the other major players like Carney (UN), there is every reason to question how long the US can service its debt obligations—that is, repay the minimum required amount.
America’s only option is to keep the metaphorical money printing presses running, which can only lead to further inflation and eventual economic ruin.
As the US economy sinks, so does the dominant global reserve currency and, apparently, the financial power of the Western-aligned oligarchs. This looks likes deliberate self-destruction.
Just two days after the launch of Russia’s so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine, the governments of the US, UK, Canada, and the European Union—the core of the G7—announced that they had decided to freeze the Central Bank of Russia’s $630 billion foreign currency reserves.
While the US administration has done this kind of thing before, it did it to Afghanistan two weeks earlier, taking the wealth of a major developed nation and a fellow member of the UN Security Council sent very clear signals to the rest of the world.
Countries hold foreign currency reserves for numerous reasons, but chief among them is to hedge against the economic impacts of crises of various kinds.
If, for example, the currency of a nation is devalued, holding reserves of a stable foreign currency ensures that it can maintain levels of international trade in the short term. For some markets, notably the global oil market, trade is overwhelmingly conducted in the current leading reserve currency, the US dollar.
As there is no single, overarching framework of “international law” adjudicating reserve currency, if ever the concept of an “international rules based order” were applicable it was to the agreed role of the US dollar as a global reserve currency.
Regardless of the morality of the Russian government’s military action or its human cost, the Western unipolar clique, in seizing Russia’s reserves based purely upon a foreign policy disagreement, announced to the world that their IRBO was completely meaningless.
The only reason nation-states agree to holding a dominant global reserve currency, beyond economic force, is that they trust the stability of that currency. If those currency reserves are seized whenever the issuing state feels like it, then that currency couldn’t be more unstable and has lost credibility as a viable reserve.
Despite the claims of the Western politicians and their mainstream media (MSM) propagandists, the whole of the world is not united in its condemnation of Russia’s military action in Ukraine. Beyond North America, Europe and Australasia, censure is notable for its absence. By grabbing Russia’s reserves, the so-called IRBO more or less openly declared to the rest of the world that its US dollar, as a global reserve currency, was dead.
Vladimir Putin was apparently right to observe:
Imposing sanctions is the logical continuation and the distillation of the irresponsible and short-sighted policy of the US and EU countries’ governments and central banks. [. . . ] The global economy and global trade as a whole have suffered a major blow, as did trust in the US dollar as the main reserve currency. The illegitimate freezing of some of the currency reserves of the Bank of Russia marks the end of the reliability of so-called first-class assets. [. . .] Now everybody knows that financial reserves can simply be stolen.
He also dropped in some virtue signalling, praising the Russian private sector for its “sustainable development” efforts:
I would like to thank the business community and the teams at companies, banks and organisations, which are not only responding effectively to sanction-related challenges but are also laying the foundation for the continued sustainable development of our economy.
The NATO-aligned nation-states behind the sanctions also decided to progressively cut Russian commercial banks out of the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) network.
This is the international financial communication system that enables banks and financial institutions to notify each other of international fund transfers using a standardised set of codes.
Both Russia and China have prospective alternatives to the SWIFT system. Russia developed its System for Transfer of Financial Messages (SPFS) in 2014 and China its Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) in 2015.
According to the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) SPFS has expanded rapidly in response to the sanctions. Potentially both systems could supplant the West’s, but CIPS appears to be the most likely replacement for SWIFT.
The G7’s claimed objective for these sanctions was to sever the Russian Federation’s access to global markets, but the world is a big place. All the sanctions did was curtail Russia’s ability to trade its energy and other key commodities such as grain and palladium—vital for the manufacture of semiconductors, with the West. Primarily at the West’s own expense.
Russia and China have long sought to “de-dollarise” their economies and have forged numerous bilateral trade agreements outside of the dollar system. With the sanction, the West handed the Russian Federation one of its major monetary foreign policy objectives on a plate. A strange kind of punishment.
This year the IMF reported that countries around the world have increasingly diversified their foreign currency reserves over the past two decades. In the last quarter of 2021, the dollar share of global reserve currencies had already fallen to below 59%. The sanctions against the Russian Federation provided a massive boost to Russian and Chinese ambitions to reset global reserve currencies for the benefit of their own economies.
In June 2022, following the sanctions, the BRICS nations announced their plans to establish a new form of global reserve asset based upon a basket of BRICS currencies. This is a direct challenge to the special drawing rights (SDRs) that the IMF allocates to nation-states. Based upon the underlying value of the currencies in the “basket,” they can be exchanged, like any asset, for goods, services, or commodities—or redeemed for currency.
Multipolar Global Governance Is Different Because Reasons
It is easy to believe, as some do, that the Western oligarchs are in danger of losing their power base. Many of the people who hold such views also contend that the current world order is dominated by these same oligarchs. We have to wonder what they think globalist oligarchs do with all that power and authority. Simply sit idle and watch it slip away as the world turns around them?
In reality, they haven’t been idle at all. As witnessed by their statements and actions, they have been making preparations to move to the new multipolar system for decades.
To illustrate: in 2009, global investor, currency speculator and oligarch George Soros told the Financial Times:
[Y]ou really need to bring China into the creation of a new world order, a financial world order. [. . .] I think you need a new world order that China has to be part of the process of creating it and they have to buy in. They have to own it the same way as, let’s say, the United States owns the Washington consensus, the current order[.] [. . .] I think the makings of it are already there because the G20, in agreeing to peer reviews, effectively is moving in that direction. [. . .] As long as the renminbi is tied to the dollar, I don’t see how the decline in the dollar can go too far. [. . .] [A]n orderly decline of the dollar is actually desirable. [. . .] China will emerge as the motor replacing the US consumer and [. . .] China will be the engine driving it [the world economy] forward and the US will be actually a drag that’s being pulled along through a gradual decline in the value of the dollar.
According to representatives of the Russian and Chinese governments, the multipolar world order, supposedly led by them, will empower the G20, rather than the G7, to manage “global economic governance.” No surprises there.
Further, the stated objective is to supposedly reinstate an “international law-based world order” that will enhance “genuine multipolarity with the United Nations.” The UN Security Council will continue to play “a central and coordinating role,” with the objective of promoting “democratic international relations” and “sustainable development across the world.”
This global agenda is virtually indistinguishable from the one promoted by the unipolar IRBO. The claimed difference is that Russia and China will lead a BRICS-centric multipolar order which does more than pay lip service to international law and multilateral agreement. Allegedly, the multipolar model will abide by international law and focus upon collective decision making.
The belated pushback by some US states against BlackRock’s investment strategy in US pension funds is only a minor irritation for the global corporate titan. While they have pressured the US economy to “decarbonise” they have not taken the same approach in China.
BlackRock, and the Western oligarchs who invest through it, decided to make an enormous investments in China’s “state owned” hydrocarbon giant PetroChina.
The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) is among the largest “fossil fuel” energy companies in the world. It deals in both gas and oil and PetroChina is its publicly listed arm.
In 2021 BlackRock was the first foreign company “allowed” by the Chinese government to launch a mutual fund in China which aims to achieve “long-term capital growth” for Chinese investors. The capital growth will come from BlackRock’s commitment to “sustainable development.” This was met with consternation by the Western MSM, and disgruntled oligarch George Soros, who claimed this was a huge blunder, adding:
The BlackRock initiative imperils the national security interests of the U.S. and other democracies because the money invested in China will help prop up President Xi’s regime.
China’s authoritarian style of technocratic government suits BlackRock. Speaking to Bloomberg’s Erik Schatzker in 2011, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink infamously said:
Markets don’t like uncertainty. Markets like, actually, totalitarian governments where you have an understanding of what’s out there and, obviously, the whole dimension is changing now. [. . . ] with the democratisation of countries. And democracies are very messy, as we know in the United States[.]
This followed the 2010 comment of George Soros that “today China has not only a more vigorous economy, but actually a better functioning government than the United States.” So perhaps his little spat with BlackRock is surprising.
As mentioned in Part 1, oligarchs are not a homogenous group of automatons that all think with one mind. They are collectively committed to long-term goals but often disagree on how to achieve them.
While BlackRock’s investors apparently see China’s technate as advantageous, Soros has always sought to destabalise nation from within, through various revolutionary means, and then use his wealth to instal the system he wants. His apparent backing for violent revolt in Hong Kong and his financial crimes, directed against Chinese companies, hasn’t endeared him to China’s oligarchy.
But upsetting your partners is no reason to loose sight of the long game. Having publicly slated the Chinese government, calling Xi Jinping “the most dangerous enemy” of democracy in 2019, Soros backed NGO’s like the Sunrise Movement and ActionAid USA wrote an open letter to the US administration in 2021 urging closer cooperation with China on the oligarchs’ shared ambition of sustainable development.
Post Russia’s war with Ukraine and the West’s sanction response, BlackRock’s PetroChina investment doesn’t look like such a monumental mistake now. The spike in oil prices saw a huge surge in profits for PetroChina, as it did for nearly every other oil and gas company. But BlackRock’s Chinese investment strategy is astute for other reasons too.
With energy flows suddenly being directed away from the West and towards the East, moves such as the multibillion dollar deal between Russia’s “state owned” Gazprom and China’s “state owned” CNPC will further improve BlackRock’s bottom line.
Pushed by the sanctions, Gazprom and CNPC will conduct their business in the ruble and the yuan. The consequent underpinning of their currencies strengthens the BRICS plan to challenge the primacy of the dollar as a reserve currency. With its Chinese mutual fund in operation, not only will BlackRock investors capitalise on their PetroChina deal, they are also well placed to take advantage of the likely shift in the International Monetary and Financial System (IMFS).
It seems BlackRock possesses almost magical powers of prescience.
There is no hint that the multipolar world order will do anything the tackle the inordinate power of the private sector oligarchs who dominate the United Nations’ global public-private partnership (UN-G3P). Neither they nor their investment portfolios are confined within national borders. Any nation-state can be an investment vehicle and international relations are just part of their strategic financial planning.
The global mechanisms and partnership networks that “act as a force multiplier” for the globalist oligarchs are not at risk. In terms of global governance, from the oligarchs’ perspective, the shift to the multipolar model is simply a change of middle management.
The oligarchs’ policy agendas, including the creation of a new global economy built upon debt–based sustainable development and natural asset classes, set within a $4 quadrillion carbon-neutral IMFS, remain firmly on track. Far from a threat, the multipolar world order is crucial. Without it, the theft of our natural resources and the capitalisation of nature cannot proceed.
Recently, Larry Fink, speaking at the Clinton Foundation’s Global Initiative seminar, said:
If we are going to change the world, there’s just not enough money that is going in to the emerging world. We must change the Charters of the IMF and the World Bank if we are going to get there. [. . .] There’s huge pools of capital but that capital is not equipped[.] [. . .] Its up to the equity owners [. . .] basically the G20, they have to have a desire for doing this. [. . .] If we can do that, the amount of capital that is going to go into the emerging world, into Africa [for example], will be extraordinary. [. . .] there is that opportunity in the next few years to do this and then we will have, not just a tectonic shift in the developed world, but a tectonic shift in all of the world.
Perhaps Larry is thinking of the kind of reforms that the BRICS, exploiting the pseudopandemic, suggested in 2021. Collectively the BRICS stated priorities for reform of the IMF and the World Bank included “innovative and inclusive solutions, including digital and technological tools to promote sustainable development” and stregnthening nations’ capacity to tackle problem relating to “terrorism, money laundering, [the] cyber-realm, infodemics and fake news.”
The hegemons of the multipolar world order would also like to see “reform” of the UN Security Council by increasing “representation of the developing countries,” such as Brazil, India or South Africa, thereby swinging control in the BRICS favour. They also recognised “the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda as a comprehensive, indivisible, far-reaching and people-centred set of universal and transformative targets.” All of this will supposedly improve “the system of global governance” they said.
The only perceptible difference is that the BRICS “emphasized the urgency of revitalization of the UN General Assembly so as to enhance its role and authority.”
As we discussed previously, under the UN Charter, the General Assembly doesn’t have any “authority.” Yet the BRICS envisaged reform of the General Assembly will be “in accordance with the UN Charter.” If the BRICS statement doesn’t make any sense that is because it doesn’t.
Clearly BlackRock and the BRICS are on the same page, but leaving that aside, this new model of global governance, headed by China and Russia, while the same as the existing model, will be better presumably because Russian, Chinese and Indian oligarchs are nicer people than their Western counterparts. We will explore that assumption in Part 3.
Just like the IRBO, the multipolar world order has signalled its intention to maintain the censorship agenda. The commitment to reform the IMF and the World Banks is firmly based upon an unshakeable commitment to “sustainable development” and Agenda 2030—thus Agenda21—which suits BlackRock, Vanguard and the rest of the global-public-private partnership perfectly.
In order for this new model of G20 based “global governance” to have a bite and not merely a bark, a global tax system is required.
To this end, in December 2021 the G20 and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) finalised their “Two Pillar Solution To Address Tax Challenges.”
Supposedly designed to stop the tax avoidance of “multinational enterprises” (MNEs), which it won’t, the impetus for this nascent global tax system has largely come from the G20.
Unsurprisingly, the BRICS core of the multipolar world order are all signatories to the first concerted effort to legislate a single, unified global tax system into being. It seems that the new world order will fund itself into existence just as all empires do—by taxing the people.
Changing the Neighbourhood
The Western, unipolar, debt-ridden world order is economically and financially spent and, for the UN-G3P, is approaching its used by date. The current IMFS, first established with the Bretton Woods Agreement and maintained by the subsequent petrodollar scheme, is finished. It finally pegged out in 2008 with the global financial collapse. Since then it has been kept on life support simply by printing—digitally speaking—trillions of dollars.
Little of that money found its way into the real economy that you and I inhabit. The bulk of it has been siphoned off to prop up the financial markets while the move towards the multipolar system progresses.
This excess supply of the US dollar, the current leading global reserve currency, will keep eroding—and ultimately destroy—its value. Consequently, the US economy in its present form, along with significant swathes of the Western economic order, is degrading.
As noted by BlackRock, the existing drivers of financial exploitation are tapped out. Now that Western economies have reached their limits of growth, new sources of global economic stimulus are required.
Neither Russia nor China have become the world’s engine for growth by chance. China is energy hungry and Russia is energy rich. Collectively they lead the world in military technology and China leads the world in manufacturing which Russia is happy to fuel with its oil, gas and coal.
Despite the enmities of the past, the leadership in both nations not only recognised the mutual benefit of a closer partnership, they forged one.
If capable, all nation-states engage in industrial espionage. It is silly to claim that Russia and China don’t. Equally silly were the comments of the former director of the US National Security Agency (NSA) and then head of US Cyber Command, Gen. Keith Alexander, who, when speaking about China’s technological development, told a 2015 US Senate Armed Forces Committee:
All they’re doing is stealing everything they can to grow their economy. [. . .] It’s intellectual property, it’s our future. I think it’s the greatest transfer of wealth in history.
Tax and inflation are the greatest transfers of wealth in history, but that wasn’t the end of Gen. Alexanders blunders. Contrary to his claims, the Western public-private partnership has done everything it possibly can to assist China’s development.
In 1970 Zbigniew Brzezinski published Between Two Ages: America’s Role In The Technetronic Era. He recognised that private sector power had already exceeded that of governments and saw the a merger of the political and corporate state as the logical way forward in an emerging world dominated by digital technology:
The nation-state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multi-national corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.
In 1973 Brzezinki joined the oligarch David Rockefeller in the formation of the Trilateral Commission (think tank). Their objective, with a mind to US led public-private partnership dominance, was to invigorate development in the East, with a particular focus upon China. Recounting their initial purpose and subsequent evolution, the Commission says:
[T]here was a sense that the United States was no longer in such a singular leadership position as it had been in earlier post-World War II years. [. . .] , and that a more shared form of leadership [. . .] would be needed for the international system to navigate successfully the major challenges of the coming years. [. . .] [T]he enduring effects of the financial crisis that began in 2008 has been felt in every nation and region. It has fundamentally shaken confidence in the international system as a whole. The Commission sees in these unprecedented events a stronger need for shared thinking and leadership by the Trilateral countries.
In 2009 delegates from the governments of China and India joined the Pacific Asian Group of the Trilateral Commission. Hence trilateralist George Soros’ promotion of greater involvement for China in the creation of a “new world order” in the same year.
Efforts to shift the centre of global power eastward began in earnest in the 1980’s. Guided by the policy trajectories advised by the Trilaterlists and other globalist think tanks, the West notably stepped up its efforts to bolster China’s economic, financial and technological development.
Between 1983 – 1991, Western foreign direct investment (FDI) in China increased from $920M to $4.37Bn. In 1994, in terms of US overseas investment, China ranked 30th. By 2000, it was 11th, as Western multinational corporations quadrupled their FDI into China between 1994 and 2001. By 2019, it had eclipsed $2.1Tn.
The pseudopandemic saw an initial 42% slow-down in global FDI, but not in China where it grew again by another 4%. Consequently, China overtook the US to temporarily become the world’s leading recipient of foreign direct investment.
While the private sector drove the modernisation of the Chinese economy, the public sector in the West encouraged China to embolden its global political presence.
In 1979, the US granted China full diplomatic recognition; in 1982, the commitment was reaffirmed in the third joint communiqué; in 1984, Beijing was permitted to purchase US military hardware; in 1994, the Clinton Whitehouse intervened to scrap the cold war embargo on the export of “sensitive technology” to China (and Russia); the 2000 US – China Relations Act was signed by President Clinton (a member of the Trilateralist Commission), establishing further improvements to trade relations; In 2003 the US supported China’s entry into the World Trade Organisation and soon thereafter the Bush administration established permanent normal trading relations (PNTR) with China and, in 2005, then Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick, called on China to take its place as a “responsible stakeholder.”
A 2019 report by the World Bank, titled Innovate China: New Drivers of Growth, noted the depth of the West’s G3P commitment to Chinese development:
Governments in other high-income countries have supported specific technologies and industries, particularly by targeting research and development (R&D). In the United States, government agencies such as the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the National Institutes of Health provided critical financing for key technologies. [. . .] These policies are complemented by support for key enabling technologies and industries—such as the space, defense, automotive, and steel industries—including through various funds, such as the European Structural and Investment Funds (five funds worth more than €450 billion) and Horizon 2020 (€77 billion for 2014–20).
Bringing his enthusiasm for the multipolar world order with him, then Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, and now UN Special Envoy for Climate Action & Finance, spoke at the G7 Central Bankers symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, in August 2019.
This remarkable speech, shocking to anyone who believes that politicians run the world, more or less laid out where the world order is heading:
[A] destabilising asymmetry at the heart of the IMFS is growing. While the world economy is being reordered, the US dollar remains as important as when Bretton Woods collapsed[.] [. . .] In the medium term, policymakers need to reshuffle the deck. That is, we need to improve the structure of the current IMFS. [. . .] In the longer term, we need to change the game. [. . .] Any unipolar system is unsuited to a multi-polar world. [. . .] In the new world order, a reliance on keeping one’s house in order is no longer sufficient.
The neighbourhood too must change. [. . .] [A] multi-polar global economy requires a new IMFS to realise its full potential. That won’t be easy. Transitions between global reserve currencies are rare events. [. . .] [I]t is an open question whether such a new Synthetic Hegemonic Currency (SHC) would be best provided by the public sector, perhaps through a network of central bank digital currencies. [. . .]
[A]n SHC might smooth the transition that the IMFS needs. [. . .] The deficiencies of the IMFS have become increasingly potent. Even a passing acquaintance with monetary history suggests that this centre won’t hold. [. . .] Let’s end the malign neglect of the IMFS and build a system worthy of the diverse, multi-polar global economy that is emerging.
In a nutshell, according to Carney: The “world economy is being reordered,” the dollar only remains “important” in the short term and “we”—the G7 central bankers—need to improve the IMFS by changing “the game” to suit a “multi-polar world” because the unipolar system is unsuitable. “The neighbourhood” (the Earth) must change to realise the potential of a “multi-polar” IMFS.
This requires transforming “the global reserve currency” to some sort of “Synthetic Hegemonic Currency,” perhaps based upon “central bank digital currencies” (CBDCs).
China, thanks in part to Western assistance, leads the world’s developed economies in CBDC technology. It began seriously testing CBDC in 2014, and started rolling it out in cities like Shenzhen, Chengdu and Suzhou in 2020. This year, China extended use of the digital yuan, called e-CNY, as it surged ahead in the race to become the first cashless major economy.
Russia aren’t far behind. Russia 12 leading banks began technical trials of the digital ruble in 2021 prior to its official launch on the 15th February 2022, just nine days before the “special military operation” began in Ukraine. The First Deputy Chairman of the CBR, Olga Skorobogatova, said:
The digital ruble platform is a new opportunity for citizens, businesses and the state. We plan for citizens transfers in digital rubles [to] be free and available in any region of the country[.] [. . .] The state will also receive a new tool for targeted payments and administration of budget payments.
More than that, adoption of CBDC in a cashless society, where no other form of payment is “permitted,” enslaves every citizen to the state. CBDC is both programmable money and a liability of the central banks. Not only does it always belong to the central bank, and never the user, it can be programmed to function as they see fit.
Russia has already installed the legal framework to make this a reality.
In 2019 Vladimir Putin announced amendments to Russian federal law that enables the Russian state to outlaw the use of cryptocurrencies. In a “cashless society” these could potentially be a form of alternative currency.
As yet, the legal amendments have had little effect. But, if and when Russia moves to a cashless control grid the regulatory platform is ready and waiting.
According to the NATO think tank, the Atlantic Council, as 105 countries representing 95% of global GDP explore CBDC, “the G7 economies, the US and UK are the furthest behind on CBDC development.”
It seems strange that the unipolar IRBO is apparently lagging so far behind again. Especially given that fact that some of its leading “thinkers” would like to see “a network of central bank digital currencies.”
Still, in its search for a Synthetic Hegemonic Currency, it may come as some relief to the leaders of the IRBO that, as noted by the Atlantic Council, “many countries are exploring alternative international payment systems” and that the “proliferation of different CBDC models is creating new urgency for international standard setting.”
While it is evident that China are leading, perhaps the IRBO and the Central Bank of Russia can take some consolation in the NATO think tank’s assessment:
The trend is likely to accelerate following financial sanctions on Russia.
The neighbourhood is certainly changing.
Building the New IMFS
Russia is the third–largest oil-producing nation after the US and Saudi Arabia and the second–largest producer of natural gas after the US. But since US domestic energy consumption far exceeds Russia’s, it is the second–largest oil exporter, after Saudi Arabia, and the leading natural gas exporter in the world. Russia also possesses the largest gas reserves on Earth.
In 2018, the Shanghai International Energy Exchange started trading oil futures denominated in the Chinese yuan (CNY). All that was required, in order to make the yuan a full-blown petroyuan, was for crude oil exporters to widely accept it as payment. China has been paying Russia and Iran for oil using yuan since 2012, but the sanctions this year moved the credibility of the petroyuan to a whole new level.
The Russian Federation has not only massively increased its oil exports to China, becoming its leading oil supplier, but is accepting payment in renminbi (RMB). The CNY is the principle of account for the RMB. Globally, as a direct consequence of the West’s sanctions, the petroyuan is now a practical reality.
Venezuela, too, has already agreed to accept the petroyuan. If Saudi Arabia accepts the petroyuan, as seems increasingly likely, the yuan will also have taken a leap forward as a potentially dominant global reserve currency.
Perhaps it is just a coincidence that both the pseudopandemic and the war in Ukraine have resulted in nation-states the world over committing to policies that precisely facilitate the transition to the multipolar world order. That both of these world-changing events just happen to “reshuffle the deck” exactly as desired by the global parasite class is certainly uncanny, if not downright unbelievable.
Nonetheless, as the centre of power moves eastward, maybe the new world order will ultimately deliver on the promise claimed by some—namely, that Russia and China really are standing up to the insidious Great Reset. Could it be true? We live in hope.
Despite the fact that the Western public-private partnership has played a pivotal and seemingly intentional role in this polarity shift, perhaps the Russian and Chinese governments are determined to create a better world order for us all, as some commentators suggest:
[A] higher geopolitical reality is being born which will have a much greater benefit to [. . .] humanity more generally if it is not sabotaged. [. . .] A potentially beautiful new future driven by the re-awakening of the spirit of the Silk Road is being painted before our eyes.
When we conclude this series with Part 3, we may just discover that the wondrous vision of a “beautiful new future” led by China and Russia is a realistic prospect.
Or perhaps not.
You can read more of Iain’s work at his blog IainDavis.com (Formerly InThisTogether) or on UK Column or follow him on Twitter. His new book Pseudopandemic, is now available, in both in kindle and paperback, from Amazon and other sellers. Or you can claim a free copy by subscribing to his newsletter.
Follow us on Telegram for regular updates & commentary
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
So, from the ongoing detailed examination of the structural specifics of the model/models of global governance that quench the thirst of many, let us see something concrete on the question of this uniform future planned in different places, so that the vessel broken into its components and examined under the microscope does not stand empty.
Especially for the friends with the red thumbs, who I hope will once again respect comenatra (while staring Zen Buddhists at the outside of the walls of the vessel hoping to see its contents).
October 13, 2021. Russia launched its fourth industrial revolution Center after an agreement between the WEF and the Russian government.
“The Russian Federation and the World Economic Forum announced the Fourth Industrial Revolution Center Russia. The center is an autonomous non-profit organization that hosts the ANO Digital Economy and will be a platform for Public-Private Cooperation.”
With key points announced in the short communication:
“Artificial intelligence and IoT are key areas of focus for the new centre.
Policies and frameworks will be shared and scaled through the Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution’s global network.”
On February 27, Klaus Schwab (Founder and Executive Chairman, WEF) and Borge Brende (President, WEF) condemned Russia’s actions, in a brief statement on the website of WEF, which, at the bottom, states that:
“The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.”
Clearly, well-known and repeatedly repeated. And this, together with the fact that for some time Putin’s business card was not removed from the web site, and together with all previous cooperation, was put forward as an argument for doubting continued cooperation.
So, let me continue to bore and torment the ” red thumbs order” and others. 😍
Analytical report of the draft decree of the president of the Russian Federation “On the strategy for the development of nature-like (convergent) technologies”
“As you can see, already in the first stage, until 2026. the developers are planning to develop a nuclear energy similar to nature. However, the depletion of Natural Resources in the Russian Federation for the already existing traditional nuclear energy has not been reported anywhere. It should be remembered that the task of developing traditional nuclear energy was once justified by the import of nuclear waste on the territory of our country. Since the authors of the strategy say nothing about the processing of this waste, it turns out that they want to finally turn Russia into a dumping ground for radioactive waste. Given this waste to be processed and natural reserves, the need to create nature-like nuclear energy in the foreseeable future is not justified by developers. They will also create hybrid and biosimilar materials for Regenerative Medicine. Of particular concern are their plans to develop and create hybrid technical systems of Biosensors and brain-computer interfaces. The brain-computer interfaces created so far are divided into four main groups.:
Speech interfaces brain-computer;
Cyborg control interfaces (live microchipping);
Interfaces for rehabilitation.
As for the penultimate group, the Cyborg was created by surgically connecting a portable micro-stimulator to the antenna nerves of a living cockroach. With the help of special micro-stimulation, the Cyborg can be controlled remotely to rotate left and right. The intention to move can be obtained from the human brain through a brain-computer interface.
25 June 2021 “Brain-computer interfaces: an overview of modern achievements”
However, experiments in this direction are unlikely to be limited to cockroaches, and if such experiments are not banned, sooner or later people will turn out to be experienced cockroaches. Miguel Niculesis implanted several electrodes in remote areas of the brain, first in rats and then in monkeys. 9 July 2015 The Russian United instrumentation Corporation has begun testing a non-invasive neural brain-computer interface that allows you to control biological robotic exoprostheses with the power of thought. The neural interface is currently being tested. After their completion, a decision will be made for serial production of robotic exoprosthesis. (ru.wikipedia.org/ -> Neurocomputer interface)
According to the degree of penetration into the biological tissues of the body already distinguish invasive (deeply penetrating) and non-invasive (interacting only with the surface of the body, but not penetrating) brain-computer interface (BCI). Noninvasive BCI are safer and easier to use, but have bandwidth limitations. Invasive, due to the direct contact of multi-electrode arrays with noise-free neural ensembles and additional filtering barriers, make it possible to read high-resolution signals and locally stimulate nerve tissue to transmit feedback signals to the brain. Technology has been developed not only for individual use, but also for performing collective tasks with the help of brain networks.
Brain-computer interface: the future is in the present. Research work on medical technology. Olga Sergeyevna Levitskaya, M. A. Lebedev
Another direction is additive technologies for the creation of separate biosimilar and artificial biological objects. Additive production (from the word additivity – added) is the After-process construction and synthesis of an object with the help of computer 3 D technologies. Alexander Firtman, director of Science, Technology and education of the “Skolkovo” Foundation believes that their first distinguishing feature is digital design and modeling:
“These are technologies that make it possible to create digital twins not only of the product itself or, as we used to just convert the drawing into digital, using the computer programs that allowed us to form the image of the object, no, today the processes that take place in this object and modeling its life cycle and how it will be used – all of this translates into numbers and only then brings really great benefit. Of course, materials are the second key element of advanced manufacturing technologies. Creating new materials is a core business for any industry. Without new materials today, it is very difficult to move to the production of new products. But today, materials must be developed in the same way that structures are developed. That is, in many ways in digital form it should be possible to develop materials and design at the same time. (…) And, of course, here we will have to work with the regulatory framework, change the certification process itself, carry out digital certification of materials by first checking them by codes and comparing them with the material data we have.”
“Additive technologies – what it is and where it is used 18 September 2019
Advanced production technologies will become one of the priority areas for the development of Science, Engineering and Technology in Russia.”
What is Skolkovo?
On Sept. 28, 2010, then-President Dmitry Medvedev signed a law “On the Skolkovo Innovation Center,” giving rise to the project’s managing entity, the not-for-profit Skolkovo Foundation. Charged with providing the catalyst for the diversification of the Russian economy, the Skolkovo Foundation’s overarching goal is to create a sustainable ecosystem of entrepreneurship and innovation, engendering a startup culture and encouraging venture capitalism.)
It is obvious that in this case we are dealing with a very thin line separating the intensification of the design of this or that object, where one should be up to date, with the desire to save money on studying all the properties of this or that material, the full-fledged tests of which some figures seek to replace digital modeling. It can hardly be expected that this line will be followed in the market economy. However, if this digital certification is extended to materials that directly or indirectly affect human life, these additives may cause more harm than good.
(With giving a few “live links”, there is a “pending” comment, as it says in the site’s rules; so – with “dead” links that come to life after being placed in your browser.)
(2. is “pending)
“In addition, the strategy, already at its first stage, aims to create a first-generation home neuromorphic processor and implement pilot projects for its application in the real sectors of the economy and the military-industrial complex.
“In a broad sense, a neural processor is a specialized class of microprocessors that are used for hardware acceleration of artificial neural network algorithms, computer vision, voice and image recognition, machine learning, and other artificial intelligence methods. The class of neural processors may include types of chips of different design and specialization, in particular one of them is neuromorphic processors. Unlike traditional computer architectures (von Neumann), the logic and design of neuromorphic processors were originally highly specialized for the operation of impulse neural networks. ( … ) The goal of developing neuromorphic CPU architecture is to achieve the ability to parallel information processing with power consumption limited to tens of Watts. To do this, memory and processors must be combined (memory calculations). Neuromorphic processors, by virtue of their inherent architecture, are better suited for cognitive applications based on probabilistic models, dynamic and self-programming behavior than for precise calculations.
“Neuromorphic processors as a subspecies of neural network accelerators [Part 2]”
“One example of this type of technique is the neuromorphic system BrainScaleS , which was developed at the University of Heidelberg. It is an accelerated neuromorphic calculation based on analog neural circuits that exceed thresholds. One of its possible applications is indicative: “the extremely high speed of the system BrainScaleS is predetermined for its use in areas where” compression ” is needed over a long period of time to a few days or even hours. For example, long-term learning tasks, such as simulating several years of Child Development, where a 10,000-fold acceleration could potentially turn years into hours.”
“The brightest designs for neuromorphic processors [Part 3]”
“Another recently created sample in the West is also interesting. On January 18, 2022, BrainChip announced the start of sales of its Akida neural network processor. According to the developers, this product is the first commercial among neuromorphic AI chips that can provide the advantages of ultra-low power consumption and performance compared to traditional approaches. AI has continued to evolve over the past few years, it is expected that artificial intelligence in the field of peripheral computing will occupy a large part of the market. This is known as artificial intelligence of things. (BrainChip Akida (neuromorphic processor)) The technology of neuromorphic processors will contribute to the creation of artificial intelligence with all the unpredictable threats associated with it. “Neuromorphic processors, by virtue of their inherent architecture, are better suited for cognitive applications based on probability models, dynamic and self-programming behavior than for precision computing.“
“Neuromorphic processors as a subspecies of neural network accelerators [Part 2]”
For the second stage, which should last from 2027 to 2032, it is already planned to begin the formation of separate nature-like scientific and production clusters. The authors of the Strategy do not even try to get rid of the bird’s newspeak and begin listing the priorities of this stage with the transfer of the results of the first stage to the economy. At the second stage, they are going to make us happy by creating an artificial cell and an artificial virus. The developers do not explain why it is necessary to create an artificial cell. Apparently, they do not even suspect that by their actions in this direction they can easily create a threat of an intraspecific struggle between natural and artificial cells, which, as any biologist knows, is the most brutal kind of struggle. …Whether our people need it and whether it is necessary to spend many millions, and, quite possibly, billions of budget money on it is a rhetorical question.
Similarly, nothing is said about the need to create biorobots, but two points below, among the priority tasks, the creation of energy supply systems for biorobots due to energy processes in living organisms is declared. Apparently, watching the first part of the fantastic film “The Matrix” did not pass without a trace for the shaky psyche of individual individuals who were eager to transfer what they saw on the screen into real life as soon as possible. The peculiarities of the psyche clearly did not allow these individuals to even raise the question of what results such an experiment could lead to, let alone think about the answer. However, it would be unfair to accuse them of a complete break with reality. Listing the risks that jeopardize the achievement of the goals of the Strategy, its creators put three threats to achieve their cherished goal in the first place:
– lack of awareness among the population of the essence and scale of big challenges and the need to respond to them;
– the lack of ideas in the public consciousness about nature-like (convergent) sciences and technologies, and their importance for overcoming “big challenges”;
– the lack of an adequate understanding of nature-like (convergent) sciences and technologies in the scientific community and the sphere of public administration of the Russian Federation, and the relevance of their development (p. 23).
As you can see, the Strategy developers still realize that not only ordinary people, but even their fellow scientists regard all these transhumanistic fantasies as the ravings of a madman. However, instead of drawing appropriate conclusions from this and at least correcting their position, the authors of the Strategy perceive this as a threat, for the elimination of which they intend to significantly change the consciousness of not only the whole society, but also the scientific environment.
To achieve this goal, the first, the most priority task of the first stage, they called it the creation of a “System of training and support of highly qualified personnel in the field of convergent (nature-like) technologies” (p. 13). The name chosen by the authors of the Strategy to designate the sciences and technologies they need so much is very characteristic and, as it is now customary to say, iconic. The very first definition given in this document has already been cited above:
“Convergence of sciences and technologies is integration, fusion of sciences and technologies, their methods and approaches, which allows to obtain results that are fundamentally unattainable within each of the converging sciences and/or technologies separately.”
The only thing that can be achieved with the current education system is the education of self–confident semi-scientists who have picked up terms from various sciences and thoughtfully talk about their convergence.
.. It should be noted that long before the authors of this Strategy, A. Chubais was one of the active propagandists of the idea of convergence of technologies back in 2012. In an interview with RBC, he then said: “The theory closest to me is the one that predicts the era of convergence, synthesis of nano-, bio- and information technologies”
“Anatoly Chubais: On the threshold of a new technological order”
It is clear that Chubais did not come up with this theory himself – first he, and then with a ten-year delay, the developers of the document in question only repeat the fantasies of Western transhumanists. However, in our conditions, the theory of convergence of technologies can lead to the destruction of the remnants of domestic science, in which the authors of the Strategy are directly interested, so that none of the specialists point out the unrealistic and disastrous nature of their plans. If this happens, the danger of destruction will hang over the entire nature of our country.
According to the plans of these individuals, at the second stage, work continues on the creation of neuromorphic brain-machine and brain-brain interfaces, anthropomorphic robotic devices, which are joined by the development of biocomputing technologies. Biocomputing is a biological field in artificial intelligence focused on the development and use of computers that function as living organisms or contain biological components, the so—called biocomputers. Biocomputing organizes calculations using living tissues, cells, viruses and biomolecules. Deoxyribonucleic acid molecules are often used, on the basis of which a DNA computer (Biocomputing) is created.
As you can see, in order to realize their crazy plans, digitizers invade the very foundations of life on our planet, creating enormous risks to all living things. Further, their plans include the development and creation of neuromorphic artificial intelligence systems capable of self-learning without connecting to data storage and processing centers.
Endowing artificial intelligence with the quality of mobility, so that it can no longer be stopped by a simple shutdown, repeatedly increases the threat to humanity in the event that experiments with artificial intelligence for one reason or another go wrong and it gets out of control of its creators.
Finally, the formation of the basic elements of a nature–like technosphere is planned for 2033-2037.
As part of the technological reproduction of systems and complexes of wildlife, first of all, they are going to create a nature-like nuclear power industry, the absence of the need for priority development of which has already been mentioned above.
In second place they have cyberphysical additive manufacturing complexes (“Internet of everything”). The latter concept is defined by computer experts as follows: “Internet of Everything (IOE) is the integration of people, processes, data and things into network connections”
So once again we are dealing with another transhumanist fantasy about combining people, things and computer networks into a single whole that can be easily controlled from the outside. In light of this, it becomes clear why the creation of medical systems based on technologies for correcting the psychophysiological sphere of a person is in third place. Whether or not there will be any positive medical effect is unknown, but the psychophysiological sphere of a person will undoubtedly undergo the most significant correction, since it will be impossible to create a cyborg or an appendage of the “Matrix” without the most significant change in the human essence.
Apparently, at this stage, the potential of socio-humanitarian technologies will be fully used to modify the spiritual world of individuals in connection with its social functions as part of the above-mentioned NBICS technologies. Confident in their impunity, the experimenters do not even hide their plans and openly declare elsewhere:
“In order to intelligently and effectively use the possibilities of nature-like (convergent) sciences and technologies, a radical transformation of the consciousness of man himself as a social being is necessary. This is possible only on the basis of combining nano-, bio-, information, cognitive technologies with the achievements of socio-humanitarian sciences and technologies” (p. 7).
No one is going to ask the consent of the person himself for such a “radical transformation”, in any case, there is not a word about this in the Strategy. This alone makes this Strategy an unconstitutional document, since Article 21 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation unequivocally states:
“No one can be subjected to medical, scientific or other experiments without voluntary consent.”
Here we are talking about a global monstrous experience, slowing down over our entire society by distraught transhumanists acting as spiritual receivers of the German Nazis.
There’s a comment from a while ago in the spam folder that starts with “5.”. If the administrators want to reanimate it… if not – health be.
(Either way, later / tomorrow I will continue with this; it goes to the end; then- the links. And so.:))
After 3 attempts, “number 5” always goes directly to the spam folder. Yeah, well, okay. That is it; one must be satisfied with a little. As it is said:
“A man not only with comments in the OffG will live, but also with every word of God.” 😎 😇
“Ich mochte ein eisbaer sein, am kalten multi polar.” -Grauzone
World order – whether bipolar, multipolar or unipolar – is predicated on the need for power. But an uncomfortable historic truth is ignored: power is an illusion. That is why every empire has eventually faced its own demise – the war it does not want. That is why mankind is in the brink of world war.
Seems the term “world order” is always misspelled. It’s actually spelled world odor…
I shall steal that from you.
mordor? eau de Mort? lol
Iain D seems to believe that multi=uni. And I guess maybe the border and resource wars are imaginary since the only ‘real’ power is the financial accounting system. Sure. Probably was bankers who blew up Russia and Germany’s pipeline. You know, Fuck the EU we have a banker ready to take the reins. Just be sure to kill the journalists who tell the truth. Iain should be safe and sound.O yes and those droughts and the ever growing hurricanes and the dry rivers- those are imaginary too. By asserting the dominance of bankers Uber allis I would suggest some key aspects of biological and political realities have to be ignored. No need for healthy air or water , we’ll just drink crypto, breathe gold reserves; order consent of the governed from the bankers online catalogue. Ok, I’m jumping around in this comment like the raging helter skelter troubles plaguing civilization, but I have a point that I would like to make about the delusional fragility of the system being described here. I would like to suggest that big brother is not so much exposed as the emperor with no clothes by this way of thinking as numbly worshipped.
I have to laugh at the notion that the Chinese gooberment has a handle on anything at all. I’ve watched a number of Chinese “Ghost cities” films since early 2011. Follow up videos often indicated that these hamster cage cites were haphazardly built by Chinese mafia cartels, and often exist for many years with neither commercial nor residential tenancy.
No matter how glorious these cities may appear, many buildings are already crumbling into ruin. Land development cartels are not effectively controlled by the “totalitarian” governments of China, because Chinese civilians and business interests have indebted themselves on the “sure bet” of eventual profits.
Regardless of the finely sifted narratives offered by official media, foreign investment companies have no intention of paying off the attached costs of massive debts. When pressed, they simply file bankruptcy through various international bank settlement mechanisms such as the Bank for International Settlements and life goes on…
The Secret behind China’s Ghost Cities
May 14, 2022
The Secret behind China’s Ghost Cities – YouTube
The Great Reset will not converge on China, Russia, the United States, or any other Nation. The reset is a juggernaut headed toward extinction. Let’s dance!
Hope you’re right.
This unsustainable debt that every country has is owed to….who? If the countries owed it to each other they could just swap debts around till they were liquidated. So that can’t be it. Hey they must be owed to banks and we know they magic credit out of nothing. So….we owe the banks just what they gave us…..nothing…hang on, there’s interest to pay….. what’s 10% of nothing? What’s 30% of nothing? Even more nothing!
The debt is owed to the Owners of the MONETARY SYSTEM…
The owners of the banks, but who owns the owners, aye that’s the rub.
The royal dynasties and bloodlines from ancient Rome.
The small hat brigade.
Yup. Don’t mention these facts to Christians or royalists…
There’s no rub… There is no one above the Secular Ruling Families that OWN the Banks, the FRS, the BIS, the ECB, the BoE!
The only multipolar world that will work, and that will defeat these serried ranks of cold energy – aka evil – is the world of the sovereign individual, and the great shift taking place – and it’s already well under way – is the dawning to awareness that is mankind’s next massive shift, as surely as the Lagardes, the Gates’s and the dismal rest are headed to failure in their ambitions.
Any other discussion of mulitpolarity is simply shifting the old furniture of greed and parastism about.
To serve is not a psychopath’s long-term ticket to power. It never was.
Imposible: inter medial nation states give individuals the most chance to stay true to their different paths.
Daytime TV medical soap instructs viewers on how to be a real groovy and with-it parent:
Strange young man wants to sleep with your 14 year old daughter? And in your own house too? “No fucking way!” …. oh hang on, “He’s” one of THEM. Literally. “He” is a “they”. Oh well that’s OK. Furthermore, your own daughter gleefully tells you that “FYI”, she’s “pansexual”! (Is that the same as Panorama-sexual? Or does it mean she wants to wrap her legs round a frying pan? Does she know what it means? Does anyone?)
But you don’t want to seem “out of touch” or “a hater” so you just go along with it …. until a niggling question penetrates your skull: If this “they” don’t want to have sex with your daughter, then what do they want? A “sleepover”? For the “girls”? But … only one of them is a girl. The other is a “they”. What do “they” want?
Even more pressing question: Why is anyone paying a license fee for this crap?
So these guys are actually letting your kids sleep with pedos at this point. I hope they all took the bloody vax.
you slap that fukheid out your home and send yer dochter tae the convent, or conventicle, lol
You’ve had climate destroying cow farts, planet threatening meat, gender redefined as “yeah whatever”, a sniffle portending instant death … and now …
Are you …. (ominous music) … sleeping … too long?
In depth biomedical waffle-de-do with exciting new buzz term TIB. What can it mean? Tendential Irritable Biomorph? Transcendental Idealist Barometer? Nay! It means Time In Bed!
Brilliant! Translation into letters makes anything sound impressive. I had an attack of SMB the other day i.e. Scratching My Bum.
And for those actually paying attention, the above three really scary bullet points amount to pretty much the same thing said three times.
· TIB may lead to dementia
· Even if TIB doesn’t lead to dementia, it may lead to something that looks awfully like dementia.
· Since this is so clearly THE TRUTH, we’d better monitor it!
But hey just think – sleep! The one fucking activity you do when you can actually get away from all this fucking crap is now …. a source of anxiety!
I spose you know it’s a lie. People who usually get less than 7 hours are at risk or dementia. And your body releases most growth hormone while you are sleeping and BEFORE midnight, making early bedtime healthy.
To increase health don’t eat for 3 hours before bed & skip breakfast; your body & brain benefit from a daily long fast.
Of course it’s a lie. They hate sleep because people dream when they sleep. And the parasites can’t control dreams. Or at least not yet.
The difficulty – and frankly I’m not up to it – is finding something put forth by the Media and its hangers-on in Academia and The Science that isn’t insane.
sleep deprivation is the most basic torture.
That’s just incredible. Idiocy outside of any list that I really admire!
6, 7 or 8 long posts, which – unlike of this another long, excellent by the way (congratulations), documentary article by this sympathetic uncle Ian; part of a series of 3 parts; and unlike the all 5 (or 6) parts of Ibro, and unlike the all 6 parts on “war” – clearly, accurately and unequivocally show, quoting a document describing Russia’s monumental transhumanist (and much more) strategy, that Russia is planning and already doing the same thing, which is the essence of the goals of globalist transhumanists.
This national strategy is a few signatures from activation.
She describes, already ready to begin to be realized, the most sinister transhumanist things we have read and seen in fiction dystopian books and movies.
Directly from Russia. Translation – of the draft decree on strategy, signed in the midst of the “war in which Russia separated itself from the WEF” – which you will not find anywhere in Western alternatives.
After, I don’t know how many, maybe at least 20 or 30 parts of the series shortly before (IRBO) and after “the war,” in which Ian Davis describes contractual relations at any high level, and which show global cooperation between Russia and their hypothetical enemy.
And (more) we are on “showing clear cooperation”; No, not showing, but pointing; Yes, but not clear; Maybe they are playing together, maybe they are pursuing common interests; No, everyone is looking to their advantage; nothing shows that they are playing together… And all this ambiguity, in which there is a common game, and cooperation, and a cunning struggle for power over the NSR, or 5D chess; and even doubts about a real confrontation, with Good Russia, because “it is not really that and proves nothing.”…
Very nice materials from Ian, accurate, comprehensive, with links to sources, with links in context and everything else; I like them, thank him, and he seems a very calm, pleasant person in the photo. And…after all this stuff, we’re still on “Russia may be complicit, but…they can’t participate.”
Is there something shocking in Russia itself, something to come? Ian? Is there an imminent move towards transhumanism? Recorded? A draft decree, a few signatures from a decree? Ian? He doesn’t know. Ian? He doesn’t know? Or is the guaranteed transhumanization of the Russians not big enough for Ian’s global vision? Not important enough among all these GP3, IRBO and other global collaborations?
Or will this draft decree on the activation of an entire prepared strategy (and I can also tell you, and I will post later, where it starts) not be signed to an effective decree? You want to bet, Ian? (Better not; if he knew where things were going, he’d know you’d lose the bet.) Will we wait for the decree to become de facto, to begin to act effectively on it in Russia, to expand, to start the world to speak (if it speaks at all, then in these times..) and then to have evidence on which we can stand and on which we can reason? Ian?
“14 June 2022 The Ministry of Science and higher education of the Russian Federation (Ministry of Education and science of Russia) published a draft decree of the president of the Russian Federation “On the strategy for the development of nature-like (convergent ) technologies”. This draft decree is planned not only to approve the strategy for the development of natural (convergent) technologies, but also to oblige the Government of the Russian Federation to approve within 6 months, in agreement with the Presidium of the council under the president of the Russian Federation for science and education, an action plan for its implementation and to recommend to the state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to be guided according to the provisions of the strategy in carrying out their activities in this field, providing for the introduction of the necessary changes in the state programs of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation”
Will it work? Bet?
Nowhere else in the West, which is incredible.
And on each of these posts, which are half of the analytical report, there is a total of one +, and 6-7 cons to every. 😂
Who put them on the work of the people whose translation this is? Why? Can you explain? Tell me? Because I’ve commented on too many and too long posts, and you automatically put a minus? So you don’t read what it says? (As in Davis ‘ previous article, gonvernment.Ru, information that is nowhere in west, and again cons, and one+) to me-OK, I fucked your stupid thumbs up and down, and to the information itself why? If someone else had posted it, would it still be a minus? Or you read it, you understand it, and you say it is…what? Unimportant, unnecessary? Because already…we know that? Or does it not need to be added that there is a recorded strategy for the transhumanization of Russia, on one signature from implementation? Stupid bastards. etc….
(I even suspect that Ian himself, and perhaps a moderator, has given me minuses, no wonder.:))
And when you take the whole situation and look at it as a whole… super funny. 😅
Where is your information” exactly in the ten”, directly from Russia, this is what I ask, dears? Retoric:)
😆 How are you, Nix, dear my frend?
So-so dear boy- sauntering down Terminus Road with a song in my heart.
? so much time sucking puree?
be succinct, synoptic, concise, ha, that the OG world might absorb, or give link(s), otherwise wordiness looses value..
you elicit minus with blowing patter.
why not just recommend riley?
You think I’m exaggerating when I say there’s no such thing anywhere in the West? Riley, who has articles on similar topics, has also not written about it. For various reasons, not only because his focus is mainly elsewhere.
I will give all possible links after I finish posting the shortened version (which is still long). To have it here, to stay, to know that I posted it. Against the thumbs down, authors who don’t mention it, and…pro-Russian trolls like you! 😉 😆
If I tease you, don’t read me. Are you logged in to the forum? I’m not, but I wonder when you log in, Don’t you have an “ignore” option?
(Moderators, ban this perky boy, rubberheid 😜 )
Excellent article by Iain Davis: There are a few glitches in the world order program.
Refer to George Orwell’s 1984 for lessons in Double-speak.
Multipolar world order = Monopolar world order.
Public-private partnership = Private monopoly
Global development = Planned entropy
“Beautiful new future” = Hell on Earth
Addendum- TRANSHUMAN= trancehuman zombie.
Whilst your’ll being bamboozle with looking above, this is happening to the lower caste where it is tested on.
27 SEPTEMBER, 2022
Extending Covid-19 related provisions that enable wider and extended use of video and audio live links in courts and tribunals in Northern IrelandNew statutory rule extends provisions for six months to 24 March 2023
New regulations have been issued in Northern Ireland that extend Covid-19-related measures that allow for the wider and extended use of video and audio live links in courts and tribunals in the region.
Made on 23 September 2022, the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Extension of Provisions Relating to Live Links for Courts and Tribunals) Order (Northern Ireland) 2022 (SR.No.227/2022) extends the operation of provisions in the Coronavirus Act 2020 which allow greater use of video or audio live links by all or any courts or a statutory tribunal (under Part 1 of Schedule 27 to the 2020 Act) for a six month period until 24 March 2023.
NB – the order is the second to be made in relation to these provisions using powers within the 2020 Act designed to accommodate an extended pandemic situation beyond the initial proposed two year period ending on 24 March 2022.
The first extension, under SR.No.24/2022, extended the provisions from 24 March 2022 to 24 September 2022.
In addition, the new regulation apply the same extension to provisions which facilitate public participation in legal proceedings if, and when, live links are used, while also protecting those proceedings from unauthorised recordings or transmission (Part 2 of Schedule 27).
SR.No.227/2022 is available from legislation.gov.uk
I don’t dare edit the post, as it will go into spam so here are the links.
Jesus Mary and Joseph, you have three comments here all plugging your stuff and you’re still complaining? What the hell is your problem?
Sorry in advance if I missed some points, my graphics card struggles and skips.
The opposition of unipolar to multipolar is a bit of a misnomer, because multipolar in practice means several trade blocs, while unipolar means the same, with a dominant one.
The phrase used to argue for unipolar and multipolar is a “rules-based international order” but this means different things to each camp.
Besides the impetus for one or other does not come from banks. Who are banks anyway (they represent merely interest groups). There are the privately owned banks and the intergovernmental banks, the World “development” Bank and the lender of last resort, the IMF. The private banks, using the IMF/WB as their tools, have pried open other regions. Such as Richard Werner observed in Asia in the 1990s.
I have argued that the rules-based international order is interoperable or exchangeable with Sustainable Development Goals which are by definition restrictive and attainable only by the richest countries, just as only the biggest companies can afford to comply with Environmental and Social Governance.
That’s cornering the market by another name. See Moneycircus, Sep 8, 2022 – Opinion: Not Enough Minerals For Green Energy
It is not as if it is one versus many. Free trade and removing the obstacles to (Western) capital finance is always the stated objective, whether it is couched in the words of eliminating barriers, global governance, the Rockefeller buzzword of interconnectedness or Soros’ equity.
The matter is not “free trade” — for that is a slogan — but what the policy means in practice. Take the development of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) which was a set of principles. When it was replaced, contracting parties became members of a governing institution, the World Trade Organization (WTO). Then the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) set global rules for trade — German minister for economic affairs Sigmar Gabriel called TTIP “a lever that allows us to steer globalisation.”
Some researchers say the TTIP is about allocating market share to trade blocs such as the EU or the Americas. It represents another retreat from multilateralism. Anything but free trade, you see.
And who is “us.” If it is the EC and U.S who insist on higher environmental standards (and consequently, production costs) how do they avoid losing market share — why, by controlling it. “The creation of blocs implies that countries will be treated less equally in the future.”
See Moneycircus, Aug 16, 2022 – From Argentina To A Street Near You
Thus in globalist parlance, the setting of rules is called “liberalisation” and “liberalisation will not be extended to all WTO members automatically; rather, it will be limited to certain trade partners” and developing countries that can’t keep up with liberalisation will be excluded.
Ultimately it’s the in-group versus those who are not allowed to participate. Humans have been forever thus.
Your spam is
Comment was accepted. I changed it and added an apostrophe to Soros (I don’t dare do it now, it might imply some determinism).
Who on Earth calibrates your spam filter!
Your sense of entitlement is breathtaking. You continually use us as free ad space for you low traffic site, and we are very happy for you to do so.
But please, at least have the grace to not to be abusive while doing so.
I rescued your comments from spam btw. You’re welcome
Jeez Sophie – MC has been a valued contributor to most discussions on this site in the “ early days”.
He has gone walkabout since punting his own site, but everyone has to make a living and I still think he adds great value.
I miss his contributions to O-G.
F.W Endgahl in a later article in 2022 stated “ Why on Earth Does George Soros Want Xi Jinping to Go ?
Here is his take on it.
I care not who soros is or what he wants so what for fuck sake. I read Xi visited the UK previous to this sars2 once. He probably also visited other European countries. Iam guessing that’s why the restrictions would quite naturally appear foreign to British Citizens.
And I don’t give a Flying Fuck whatsoever who this Endgahl is.
For his Take on Anything!
Ya Bloody Idiot!
You ID Cronies are all the Stupid Same Fucking Useless Link collective dummies.
Are you a Man!
What do YOU THINK????
“ What do YOU THINK ??” You have not demonstrated to me this cognitive function so far !
I recently finished Engdahl’s book Manifest Destiny: Democracy as Cognitive Dissonance.
Coming out of the 1970’s the CIA’s reputation was so great, they wanted to create some distance between them and their operations, so they jobbed them out to NGO’s. This happened during the Reagan administration, organized by ex-DCI George HW Bush who ran Reagan’s foreign policy. Goerge Soros brought in to do destabilizing and coup work for teh CIA. He started with Poland (the Solidarity movement was CIA). Then Russia, then Yugoslavia, Ukraine, etc. Goerge Soros is CIA.
The EU brought to its knees by the Straussians
by Thierry Meyssan
“A US grouping, constituted around the thought of the philosopher Leo Strauss, controls from now on both the Secretariat of Defense and the Secretariat of State. After having organized many wars since those of Yugoslavia, they imagined the one in Ukraine. It is now manipulating the European Union and is preparing to deprive it of energy sources. If European leaders do not open their eyes, their alliance with Washington will lead to the collapse of the Union’s economy. There is no point in believing that Europeans will be spared because they are developed. The Straussians wrote, as early as 1992, that they would not hesitate to destroy Germany and the EU.”
UHC2030: The United Nations’ Global Public-Private Partnership For Healthcare
“The commitment to population reduction is central to “sustainable development.” Everyone needs to grasp this. Sustainable development means reducing our number.”
End Central Banks, Thierry Meyssan doesn’t see thru the last veil; he thinks sanctions are about strengthening US unipolar world. He’s stuck in a state-rivalry world view which is unlikely to be determinative now.
Meyssan says “the United States” but I think it’s an image, a metaphor for the dominant power.
Meanwhile, the Nord Stream pipelines have been sabotaged by persons/ countries unknown except of course in the West to paraphrase the Sun its Putin wot done it.
It has been a unipolar world for a long time. Lord R is currently the pole.
Changes are driven by the central banking cartel rather than temporary nation states such as Russia and China. Both these nations were changed irrevocably by the bankster driven revolutions in 1917 and 1948. China prior to that was subjected to the opium trade and the opium wars. The banksters big break was the discovery of the Americas by bankster funded Columbus. The huge inflow of gold and silver from the new world increased the wealth of the West enormously and permitted it to colonize, loot and plunder and enslave the rest of the world. When the colonies were wrung dry they were cut loose. The upheavals of the 20th century facilitated the creation of Israel. Late in the twentieth century it was decided to reinflate the once great nations of China and India as sweat shops perhaps because high labour costs in the West was making industry unviable. China makes everything now and the citizens choke on the smog that resulted. China kicked off the greatest con in history, the plandemic and the rest of the world went along. Proof that the world is centrally controlled and that centralization had reached it’s zenith.
Ironically the power that the bankers have accumulated over millennia had to be used to dismantle the world economy which they realized was unsustainable. The Cree saying quoted by someone below says it all.
Yes. And the unipolar – multipolar designations are meaningless. World trade ownerships have been monopolar since before Columbus “discovered” the Americas. The ownership/slave agenda has changed very little since 1307.
See: Unam sanctam – Wikipedia
See: Romanus Pontifex – Wikipedia
The Ottoman and Hapsburg empires simply moved the financial centers around on the great chessboards of avarice and oligarchy. Then we have this: >
The “New World Order” is simply a repackaging of old-world order elitist dreams. The banking and market crashes of 1929 were promoted by the same idealists and money changers listed in other historical eposes’. It is (perhaps) instructive to read the entire document…
The creation of Christianity by Philo Judaeus and his banker brother Alexander Alabarch was a significant milestone for the unipolar world order. Others involved were St Paul and the next generation of Philo’s family. Both Philo and his brother had access to the Roman emperors and their families. They were also connected (later by marriage) to the Herod’s of Palestine. Philo and his family were based in Alexandria. Philo was in Rome when Caligula was assassinated and I suspect he was involved in the plot.
Excellent analysis. Much of the “Christian” mythos is only early fabrication of Masoretic doctrine. Certain ethnic groups paved the ways to Hell… Perhaps Cicero was referring to this group.
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known, and he carries his banners openly.
But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor – he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.
He rots the soul of a nation – he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city – he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.”
– Cicero, 42 B.C. –
In 2021, FW Endgahl wrote an article related to the strange argument over China
between BlackRock and George Soros. It related to China verging on a collapse of their house/ condominiums building program which he believed was about to instigate a huge financial loss for all those involved.
Moreover, it related also to the Belt and Road Initiative which had consumed vast amounts of cash in order to finance it which was causing severe strains within the Chinese economy.
Soros was having a spat with Blackrock because he was cautioning restraint.
Here is a detailed article from F.W Endgahl about it .
Are you FW Engdahl’s dad or something? Holy shit every other link is to something he wrote.
Iain on rich planet interview.
You alluded to the standard
shilalt media response ‘that trump was wild card’ or something along thoses lines..
Yet with this article you reply back to commentators who think (lack of it) that china and Russia are not necessarily in lockstep with the agenda or actually fighting this east west war. The admin usually also pipes in and points a few things out which i agree with.
How ever Your contradicting yourself with Your Trump statement on the rich planet interview..
My Favorite part of the interview was you suggesting writing to your MP.
I think I need to look back through my writing, and interviews, to find the suggestion that I must have made at some point that the whole world is under the uniform control of a single entity that speaks with one mind and represents just one perspective. I don’t think I ever have, but people often claim that I have so perhaps I did.
If memory serves, after saying Trump may have been a wildcard, which I maintain that he may, I then said it’s not as if he has any power to change anything. Quite clearly, following his election, there was a continual and concerted effort from many quarters, notably the intelligence agencies, to hobble his Presidency, just as there is now to stop his potential re-election.
This is an observation, not a defence of Trump or the red vs blue party political system. Personally, given his surprise election in 2016 (are you saying it wasn’t?) I doubt if that will be allowed to happen again. But who knows?
As for writing to your MP, I also said we need to use all peaceable means of protest at our disposal. Personally I won’t be writing to mine, primarily because I don’t have one (I don’t vote) but if people want to express their views to the alleged decision makers who am I to discourage them?
The value is in their awareness of the need to protest and the fact that they are willing to do something about it. Something I support, regardless of my opinion about its effectiveness.
You may need to read or reread Catte Black Fake Binary.
From the early 1990s, and the dismantling of the Soviet era Warsaw Pact, Russia has been proposing a European-wide defense arrangement, a peace dividend expected from the end of the Cold War… Such an arrangement would have removed all reasons for NATOs continued existence…Russia was constantly rebuffed…NATO is the US warmongers stalking horse…No way was the US going to agree to NATOs dissolution…Three decades later, and the US is within striking distance of its goal…
NATO provides an umbrella for the US to pursue its destructive take-downs of other countries…NATO provides US Presidents with a way to conduct wars without any Congressional oversight. NATO is a work-around of the restraints Congress can impose on war-making by Presidents…
The thumb barometer is uniquely accurate. Measure like a clock of NWO. Super accurate, tick-tock, it’s coming up and there’s no return of the arrows.
It’s like everything else, you know. Just like anything unpleasant, damaging, weighing on you, you remove from yourself if you can. The principle is exactly the same.
That was by design. They began building it in the 70s. Zbigniew Brzezinski was a primary architect, even writing books about technocracy, which is their current form of shit-stain they call a government. If you look up his comments on China, you won’t find a bad word.
They built China for this purpose and they are the designated new Law. They never stole military or Industrial secrets from the west; it was all given to them.
Whatever war or conflict that arises, China is scripted to end on top. The sociopaths at the top have no problem sending our family members off to fight some scripted bullshit to push an agenda, but they won’t send theirs.
What is curious with off-guardian, is that there are few articles on the human caused climate change scam. While it is the mother of all scams..
[We have published FOUR articles specifically about the climate change scam in 2022 alone, together with numerous briefer mentions of it. In 2021 we published TWELVE articles on the topic. As this commenter could easily discover by researching the category – ed.]
All the evidence to ban Blackrock operating anywhere in the West, not to mention putting all the Blackrock executives in prison without trial, exist.
They believe in totalitarianism, they believe in enriching China and their investors whilst impoverishing the whole of the Western population pretty much.
So they can be punished in a quasi-totalitarian manner, not even with a show trial. Locked up like Julian Assange they can be, all their assets stolen, just like Russia’s sovereign assets were stolen.
Take every last cent of Larry Fink’s wealth and make him work as a debt slave, 7 days a week, until he drops down dead.
Would you enjoy that kind of totalitarianism, Mr Fink??
Locked up like Julian Assange ? So they can have conjugal relations and procreate with their attractive femake attorneys ? That is hardly punishment.
You come over as a sadist trying to find a moral hook for your sadism. You just want to stick it to people. Your posts are full of wanting to hurt people, kill them, torture them. I think you get off on it. Your latest about treating Americans like the Nazis treated the Jews is just fucking sick. You need help
I think it is YOU that needs help. Maybe you could give Larry Fink a big hug for his wonderful embracing’s of human freedom… He’s an asshole. Get over it.
Rhys, exactly so, sir. Dispossess the murdering billionaires. We cannot survive while they own 90% of everything. Expose the means by which they’ve stolen it.
Two colleagues yesterday bitched about how they can’t get their boosters. Really getting on their high horse. Marvellous. Even the vax pushers have lost interest. The BOOH! outfits have practically fallen off. But still the jabbed demand to be jabbed!
Still plenty of delusional sheep where I live. Good kindly honest Christians, they are, too. I didn’t waste time arguing with them over the evidence, I just told them I hadn’t been vaccinated, didn’t want to be vaccinated, wasn’t going to get vaccinated. There was still an attitude of resentment, not quite outrage, but certainly non-verbal signals that I wasn’t a reasonable human being….
And where I live, right in this little neighborhood, it’s the opposite-full of imbecile atheists They are generally imbeciles, like atheists, and now they will be saved from their torments.
Christianity and Marxism sparang from the same source.
Wasn’t Christianity a branch of Marxism? Since Christian Engels broke away from the international?
Rhys, when I run into somebody who’s dogmatic I usually try not to sound so cocksure myself, “I don’t know, have you seen what VAERS or what the ONS says? It’s kind of surprising. the ONS (or the Harvard study or whatever) should be good right?”
“I don’t know why the MEDIA doesn’t report this.” I always make the media the bad guy cuz it’s an excuse why the dogmatic person doesn’t now.
It’s not as personally rewarding to pretend to be even a little unsure, but it persuades a lot of people to look at the flyer I’m offering that has a few links on it.
The MSM are ramping up the “deaths by winter flu” reports. I mean, it is the season and coupled with energy issues/lack of heating etc, it’s bound to be worse than previous years.
No mention of the 4th/5th/6th round of clot shots many taken alongside the seasonal flu jab just to mix it all up.
My sister-in-law just had her 4th + flu and happily reported an awful 12 hours of achy pain and a sleepless night “that proves it’s working”. Gawd ‘elp them !
I suspect the pull of covid lies in the theatrical potential. It’s not a question of what folk believe. It’s what they’re prepared to go along with so they can act the dying swan. “I’m ready for my close up now!”
The problem is DF, the majority who have already been Jabbed are not learning by their mistakes regarding what’s being passed off as “vaccines” and their potentially cumulative toxic effects. They are going back for more of the same crap after they APPEAR to have come through the first phase experimental jabs relatively unscathed with mild (as to be expected in some cases) reactions. But they are NOT all mild adverse reactions as is now fairly well established, some are very serious, and some have resulted in death.
As you may already know, the effects of these experimental chemical and nucleic acid bioweapons are complex and need not be repeated here, suffice to say they will not have the same effect on ALL members of a population whose constitution, susceptibility or predisposition along with other factors can vary widely.
Indeed, these experimental “vaccines” have turned out to be the silent weapons in this quiet war, along with all the other restrictions and regulations that have and will continue to be imposed on the complacent and obedient majority of the population. That is, until they learn to ORGANIZE and RESIST.
Sophie, my comment has gone into spam again.
We are on the cusp of WWiii. Urge European citizens to force their countries to immediately withdraw from NATO (or at least give notice of withdrawal if US actions aren’t halted)
US helicopters, drones & subs simultaneously exploded 3 strings of the two Nordstream pipeline– the day after 2500 Germans demonstrated for their govt to open Nordstream 2.
A few days earlier there was attempted sabotage of the Russian/Turkish pipeline.
Citizens of Britain & America must meet w each other & stop this. It will be much worse for us all if it continues to an actual declaration of war– and we are nearly there. Think how much the powers TPTB will thereby increase their control.
Or maybe this is just the same fear porn agenda being engineered by those engaged in shifting us into the “new world order”?
These guys don’t want a nuclear war because it harms them as well as us, but they probably would like you to be distracted by fear of one while they gradually impoverish and imprison you.
Who said nuclear? Altho I wdn’t put it past them to use a few tactical nukes to frighten us into a UN world.
I am only making the point that they are escalating and they’re doing it cuz it aids THEIR balance of power against US.
That’s WW3 nonsense in any Era. A world War requires forgein National deportations being one obvious example. Your being irresponsibly alarmist. Imo
The WSWS still fanning the fires of fear:
One has to surmise that the vast majority of the victims had their shots.
‘Long Covid’ or collateral damage from experimental drugs?
They do seem triggered by the whole circus. I can well believe that the illness leaves a variety of effects, and also by the jab which seems far worse. The paper says that about 1% were jabbed by ‘Tzero’ which presumably is bullshitspeak for Jan 2021 and not the start of the trial.
Groundhog hour still. Charts, nice colours, lots of BIG WORDS. And this:
“the continued need for multipronged primary prevention strategies through nonpharmaceutical interventions (for example, masking) and vaccines to reduce–to the extent possible–the risk of contracting SARS” etc.
Masks and vax! Masks and vax! From now till the end of time! Here’s to the revolution, comrade!
🎵Old Big Macapitalism had some pharms
EI, EI, O
And on their pharms the sheep followed
EI, EI. O
With a bleat bleat here and a bleat bleat there
There were sick sheep everywhere 🎶
Notice that the “pharmaceutical intervention” being sold is the jab approved under “emergency”, not any of the (proprietary) pills since approved that invalidate the “emergency”.
Goal of sanctions & war isn’t the weakening of Russia or the strengthening of the US to a unipolar world. The target of sanctions, like of the covid op, is primarily those who have the greatest ability to fight the Great Reset/NWO — citizens of the developed countries who have a tradition of democracy and a higher standard of living.
Apparently they’re taking the war up another notch:
BOTTOM OF SEABED ATTACK ON THREE NORDSTREAM PIPELINES
“The damage that occurred simultaneously on the same day in the three submarine pipelines of the Nord Stream system is unprecedented,” Nord Stream AG said in a statement, released by local media .
Only special forces could do this.
“The target of sanctions, like of the covid op, is primarily those who have the greatest ability to fight the Great Reset/NWO — citizens of the developed countries who have a tradition of democracy and a higher standard of living.”
Penelope, I respect you. But, I’m sorry, what are you saying? The citizens of developed countries who have the greatest ability to fight the great reset??:) And the refusal to voluntarily prick yourself with nano-biotech-destroying immunity-clotting (and not to say what else), is it included in this struggle? Because people “without traditions of democracy”, with a low standard, and “low ability to fight the reboot”, from the East, and a large part of the undeveloped world, were stabbed 2 times less, somewhere 3, and somewhere even fewer times than Western fighters with resets, you know? Even though they were under no less pressure to do so. If the current struggle is a criterion, the West is dead. Don’t make me laugh. In the east of the developed, with democratic traditions and the possibility of struggle in the West, there are not so many dumb and easy people. Instead, there are many more people trained to deprivation and lied to by the authorities who may not buy into the lies about children that Westerners have bought into. And that’s what they did.
What abilities are we talking about? Any previously unrevealed? I think not only me, but most here, not to say almost everyone, seem to think the exact opposite, which they have written many times.
“higher standard of living.”
That is what it was, it is still, and I have no reason to think it will not be in the future, the greatest weakness of the Western people and some part of the emigrants living in the West. Because when the 2020 test came, under the pressure of the reboot, the question arose, “How do I keep it,” and also, “how do I regain my old freedom to use my standard,” and “how do I ensure that it is not threatened in the future.” The authorities said, ” by pricking yourself and following the measures.” And how many of them did and agreed?
Africa is helpless to affect Ukraine war escalation, as is the Global South, as are the citizens of any dictatorship where they are politically constricted– like China and Russia.
Those who are best positioned to stop it are citizens of US, UK, Europe, Australia, etc.
Maybe the Scandinavian countries COULD show some moral leadership. Doubtful Japanese will stick out their necks after Abe’s assassination just for trying to keep a modicum of independence in Japan’s political system.
If you see a US citizen in the street, spit in their face. Tell them to go home if they don’t want to be the 21st century Jews.
The irony completely evades you doesn’t it.
You really are so fucking disgusting, and if that’s you in the photo you look like a perv. You fantasize about having the guts to hurt people don’t you, creep.
you already understand the war is just a cynical means for both sides to push the Great Reset which they are both equally invested in. So why the hell do you still think the sabotage has to be real?
Don’t you get it yet? They’re all on the same side and they control all the info outlets. They’ve made it obvious even to an idiot they don’t need a real war or a real pandemic or real fucking sabotage any more. They can just make them up. It’s quicker and it works.
People need to break the spell of believing the news is about reporting events. It’s like watching a soap and thinking the writers are trying to inform you about what’s really going on in the world. No. They’re job is to keep you entertained and get you to buy a fake version of what’s going on that will keep you obedient. Their storylines are all about marketing the elite agenda. That’s all.
‘ Only special forces could do this.’
Them and Hollywood
Not to forget, Hollywood.
Kind of funny that at the time that OffG publishes an article about that those who control the news, control the world and that there is no multipolar world order, that we get this nordstream miracle through the media in which supposedly country a wants to attack country B.
I mean, you can’t have it both ways. Either the Nordstream miracle happened or it didn’t happen.
Why call it a miracle?
A) why is there so much ‘gas’ in a pipeline that was not operational yet (NS2) or dysfunctional (NS1)?
B) Why is no one (except the meanstream media through their channels) allowed to have a closer look at the miracle (spoiler alert: because it’s a miracle!)
tradition of democracy and a higher standard of living
Sorry, but knowledgable you repeating this mantra only shows the power of propaganda.
:- Democracy is no less a joke in the West than in any neo-colonial satrapy.
:- As for standard of living, you must have overlooked the homeless. Though US and UK tried to hinder them, UN Special Rapporteurs stated in 2018 that both were basket cases. Every other person is homeless in extreme weather, hanging on desperately to a horrid job, or faced with murderous criminals or enforcers.
The mention of the Treaty of Westphalia requires comment because one of the countries that was not party to that treaty was England. England has always stood apart from Europe and has always encouraged forces that leave it economically divided. The British Empire grew primarily as an economic empire, it was initially largely a private enterprise (“East India Company”) and its not surprising that when one of its major colonies decided to declare Independence that its founding charter reads like Articles of Incorporation. (The US is, of course, the successor to the UK, profiting mightily from WW2 in terms of money and influence.)
Money itself isn’t nationalistic, it accumulates around the most accommodating host. What’s upsetting the contemporary apple cart is that nations like China recognize the reality of ‘the world order’ and seek to accommodate rather than confront it. They just won’t let the tail wag the dog — they have had ample experience with colonialism over the last 100 years or so and would prefer to be the masters rather than the slaves. This has caused concern in the West and an attempt to reinstate the Cold War — sanctions, bad press, military maneuvers and so on — although I don’t think its having too much effect. Russia has also decided post 1990s that maybe they don’t want to go full Central America so pressure has been applied systematically to them, culminating in what is a full blown proxy war. Like with China its not worth reading too much into the diet of propaganda that we’re fed — actually, its so blatant that I fear for our side because our response is loud, unwavering but generally weak and almost insulting.
Multipolar used in a sentence – examples from Miriam Webster:
”China and Russia share a similar vision for a multipolar world less dominated by the United States, one that emphasizes economic relationships and noninterference in other countries’ politics, including human rights violations.
— Jennifer Jett, NBC News, 15 Sep. 2022
Beijing and Moscow certainly harbor ambitions for a new multipolar world.
— Simone Mccarthy, CNN, 14 Sep. 2022
Under globalization the idea was that democracy would spread out from the democratic countries to the rest of the world, now, in a multipolar, contested world, democracy is simply one of a number of competing models or sets of values.”
— Mike O’sullivan, Forbes, 27 June 2022
The looters and pillagers aka politicians, asset fund “managers”, billionaires etc having turned our economy into a train wreck with their throughly corrupt ways now, and without bothering to ask the general population, are planning to ratchet the system to ensure yet more wealth streams to themselves.
The real question is “why do we need any of them?”
And how do we get rid of them ?
Their favourite theme of “you will own nothing and be happy” should be the objective for them. Turn the tables on them and freeze all their assets.
“The oligarchs’ policy agendas, including the creation of a new global economy built upon debt–based sustainable development and natural asset classes, set within a $4 quadrillion carbon-neutral IMFS, remain firmly on track. Far from a threat, the multipolar world order is crucial. Without it, the theft of our natural resources and the capitalisation of nature cannot proceed.”
“Perhaps Larry is thinking of the kind of reforms that the BRICS, exploiting the pseudopandemic, suggested in 2021. Collectively the BRICS stated priorities for reform of the IMF and the World Bank included “innovative and inclusive solutions, including digital and technological tools to promote sustainable development”
“the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda as a comprehensive, indivisible, far-reaching and people-centred set of universal and transformative targets.”
Something about that, very concrete. Long, but quite interesting. (It may be boring for some, I have no idea.)
Excerpts (in parts) from:
Analytical report on the draft decree of the president of the Russian Federation “On the strategy for the development of nature-like (convergent) technologies”
14 June 2022 The Ministry of Science and higher education of the Russian Federation (Ministry of Education and science of Russia) published a draft decree of the president of the Russian Federation “On the strategy for the development of nature-like (convergent ) technologies”. This draft decree is planned not only to approve the strategy for the development of natural (convergent) technologies, but also to oblige the Government of the Russian Federation to approve within 6 months, in agreement with the Presidium of the council under the president of the Russian Federation for science and education, an action plan for its implementation and to recommend to the state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to be guided according to the provisions of the strategy in carrying out their activities in this field, providing for the introduction of the necessary changes in the state programs of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. As you can see, the document is quite serious, designed to determine the development of our country in this area both at the federal and regional level.
In the draft itself, the status of the Strategy for the Development of nature-like (convergent) Technologies is defined as follows:
“The Strategy defines the key principles, goals, objectives and main directions of the state scientific and technical policy in the field of the development of convergent sciences and technologies as the main tool for creating a nature-like technological basis of the economy of the Russian Federation (nature-like technosphere).”
The strategy also defines the mechanisms, methods and Means for achieving long-term goals and priorities for sustainable development of the Russian Federation and ensuring national security through the formation of new natural technologies based on the convergence of Sciences and technologies included in the natural resource cycle of nature.
The strategy is aimed at the realization of the national interests of the Russian Federation in the global world of the 21st century in accordance with the strategy for scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation, approved by a decree of the president of the Russian Federation of December 1 2016 № 642.
The strategy is being developed in the context of the need to solve the main national tasks, find answers to global development challenges, and ensure safe and sustainable socio-economic development of Russia in the long term” (p. 3-4). The next section says: “Based on the Strategy, documents in the field of state scientific and technological policy can be adjusted in terms of goal setting and prioritization of development directions.
The provisions of the Strategy should be taken into account when adjusting the Strategy of Scientific and Technological Development of the Russian Federation, the activities of existing national projects and programs, State programs of the Russian Federation, Federal Scientific and Technical Programs and the most important innovative projects of national importance, as well as when preparing reports of the Government of the Russian Federation on the directions of state scientific and technical policy for the medium and long term, when drafting the messages of the President of the Russian Federation on the situation in the Russian Federation, other reports and documents of high importance for the state policy in the field of science and technology development” (p. 4-5)
So, the Strategy for the development of nature-like (convergent) technologies, if approved, is designed to directly influence the most diverse aspects of the scientific and technological development of the country in the medium and long term, determining the goal-setting and priorities of this development.
Let’s consider the main postulates from which this Strategy proceeds. Why it was needed at all, its developers tried to answer in a special section entitled by them “General characteristics of big challenges, the answer to which the Strategy is designed to give.” In the Avian newspeak, which is a poor translation from English, in which the authors of the Strategy speak, big challenges are defined as “objectively requiring a response from the state, a set of problems, threats and opportunities, the complexity and scale of which are such that they cannot be solved, eliminated or implemented solely by increasing resources” (p.2). As we can see, threats and opportunities are piled up here, although they are different phenomena that require different, sometimes radically opposite means of response. Even more puzzling is the final criterion – the problem cannot be solved solely by increasing resources. However, completely opposite situations again fit this criterion – from an objective lack of resources to ineffective leadership, when even with an overabundance of resources, instructions coming from above make it impossible to solve a particular task. It is obvious that in these two cases it is necessary to act absolutely differently: in the first – try to find a replacement for certain resources or change the technology, in the second – just change the management. The developers of the Strategy thoughtfully call it big challenges and are going to solve all these challenges according to their algorithm.
The critical dependence of the authors of the document on Western methods is eloquently evidenced by another “bird” term mega-science (p. 10, 11, 13), which they did not even bother to translate from English. As one of the justifications, they point out that in the USA there is a program of the National Science Foundation and the US Department of Commerce called NBIC – “Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information technology and Cognitive science”. In other countries, similar convergent programs are known by the abbreviations GRAIN (Genetics, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence and Nanotechnology) and BANG (Bits, Atoms, Neurons, Genes), and the NBIC of the US program is called “Converging Technologies for Improving Human Perfomance”, and the NBIC of the European Union program is “Converging Technologies for the European Knowledge Society) (CTEKS). “In these conditions,” the authors of the document insist, “ensuring sustainable socio-economic development and national security of the Russian Federation become dependent on the ability of the state to stimulate and ensure the processes of creation, development and use of convergent sciences and technologies as a tool of nature likeness” (pp. 8-9).
The authors of the Strategy are so used to mechanically adopting Western experience, without thinking about its content or the need for our country, that they did not even bother to compare the availability of natural resources of the European Union and the Russian Federation, which inevitably leads to the question of the expediency of mechanically copying the European approach and the need to stage a grand experiment on nature and man. Apparently, the developers of the document wrote it before the start of the special operation in Ukraine [:)], which follows from their next passage: “The fact that Russia is now firmly integrated into the international scientific community is of great importance for the development of research and development in the field of nature-like (convergent) sciences and technologies. Our country plays a key role in all major international scientific projects (ITER, CERN, XFEL, FAIR, etc.). (p. 10)”.
Despite the fact that relations in the world have changed dramatically after the start of the special operation in Ukraine, leading to the curtailment or significant restriction of contacts between the West and the Russian Federation in all areas, including scientific and technical cooperation, the authors of the Strategy did not even bother to bring the text of the document in line with the changed international situation. [:)]
“The noosphere is a new, evolutionary state of the biosphere, in which scientific and technological human activity becomes a determining factor in the development of the biosphere” (p. 2). From it, in basic concepts, a bridge is thrown to the final desired goal of the entire Strategy: “The nature–like technosphere is a part of the noosphere created by man on the basis of nature-like technologies” (p. 1).
This very concept was formed from others-(in Greek) “mind” and “ball”, i.e. literally “the sphere of reason”, which is understood as a hypothetical form of interaction between society and nature, within the boundaries of which reasonable human activity becomes the determining factor of development. For the first time, this term itself was introduced in 1927 by the French scientist E. Leroy, who had previously listened to V.I. Vernadsky’s lectures, after which his friend the Catholic Jesuit philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin also began to use the new concept. Leroy understood the noosphere as a “thinking” shell of the planet, formed by human consciousness, based on Plotinus’ ideas about the emanation of the One (an unknowable Primordial Essence identified with the Good) into the Mind and the world Soul, with the subsequent transformation of the latter back into the One.
As we can see, initially it was not a natural-scientific, but a philosophical concept, and its interpretation even among two friends was quite significantly different. For example, Leroy proceeded from the natural evolutionary origin of the mind. Since the concepts of “mind” and “reason” were different in ancient philosophy, Leroy recognized instinct, reason and reason as stages of the evolutionary development of mental activity. In his opinion, many animals also have reason. Reason, as the highest form of mental activity, is peculiar only to representatives of developed humanity, and even then not to everyone. Hence, the noosphere, according to Leroy, is only in the formative stage.
Teilhard de Chardin, as a Catholic philosopher [-and Jesuit, and darwinian -], believed that there was an impassable gap between the instinct of animals and the mind of modern man. Reason is given to man not by an evolutionary path, but suddenly, “between two individuals” and transcendently, that is, from above. Accordingly, the noosphere, according to de Chardin’s ideas, begins with the emergence of reason, that is, the appearance of Homo sapiens, or even a little earlier.
We see that each of the three scientists who were the first to introduce the concept of the noosphere into science understood it in their own way, and the range of fluctuations in its values is quite large – from spiritual to geological evolution. The authors of the Strategy do not specify which of its theorists they follow, but from the definition they give it becomes clear that they adhere to the position of V.I. Vernadsky. Why the opinions of E. Leroy and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin were ignored on this issue is completely unclear. (..)V.I. Vernadsky and even P. Teilhard de Chardin (reluctantly, but logic demanded) connected him with the socialist organization of people’s lives, expanding the tasks of overcoming the spontaneity of nature to overcoming the spontaneity of the development of society. (..) The essence of the updated view of the noosphere, which we intend to defend here and which seems to respond more adequately to the situation, is as follows: this teaching carried elements of utopia from the very beginning; it intertwines axiological and ontological approaches without any distinction between them.(..) The noosphere as harmony is a scientific analogue of socio-political utopias such as communism and other earlier dreams of paradise. In accordance with the spirit of the times, they now rely on science”.
(..after a long multi-faceted analysis of the concept of the noosphere..) …Concluding the consideration of this issue, it should be stated that the idea of the noosphere is at best only an unproven scientific hypothesis, in which every major researcher puts his own meaning. In the worst case, we are faced with unscientific utopian dreams. To base on such a shaky foundation a Strategy for the development of the country’s economy and the radical transformation of nature, society and man is an irresponsible and criminal adventure that must be decisively stopped.
The developers of the document also give a general analysis of the state of affairs on our entire planet: “The global challenge of the XXI century is the need to ensure the sustainable development of civilization.”
The basic condition for such development is a sufficient amount of energy and other resources.
At the same time, in the context of globalization, new countries and regions are being involved in technological development, which leads to an increasingly intensive consumption and destruction of resources.
The inclusion of countries such as China and India into the “active technological players”, as well as the accelerating development of technologies based on classical principles, lead to a resource collapse.
In particular, the development and widespread adoption of digital technologies will inevitably lead to an explosive increase in energy consumption. According to the International Energy Agency, by 2025, the share of energy consumption by the network infocommunication sphere (terminal devices, user network equipment, network communications, data centers) without industrial information and computing infrastructure will exceed 30% of global electricity production, which will create serious energy resource constraints for the digital economy in the near future.” From all this, the following conclusion is drawn: “The cause of the crisis is the antagonism of nature and the technosphere created by man” (p.5).
Already from the very first line we see the favorite mantra of globalists of all stripes about sustainable development, which is declared not even a big, but a global challenge of our century. Then follows the well-known statement of environmentalists about the destruction of resources, from which, however, does not follow the obvious conclusion about the need to ban the export of these dwindling natural resources from our country. The fact that this very simple conclusion is not made by the authors of the Strategy immediately shows that they are not primarily concerned about the gradual reduction of natural resources in our country.
The conclusion of the International Energy Agency on the impasse of the digital economy due to energy resource constraints is very important. However, instead of calling for the immediate abandonment of the diligently pursued in recent years by the Government of the Russian Federation course to create a digital economy in our country and hold accountable the initiators of this policy, the document offers a completely different way out of the artificially created impasse:
“A way out of the crisis is possible only by creating a technosphere based on nature-like technologies that reproduce systems and the processes of wildlife in the form of technical systems and technological processes integrated into the natural resource turnover.”
The meaning of creating such a nature–like technosphere is to restore the natural self–consistent resource turnover – a kind of “metabolism” of nature – disrupted by today’s technologies, torn from the natural natural context, and the transformation of nature into a direct productive force” (p.6).
At the very beginning of the document, the General Provisions define what the authors of the Strategy understand by nature–like technologies: “Nature-like technologies are technologies that reproduce systems and processes of wildlife in the form of technical systems and technological processes integrated into natural resource turnover. Convergent NBICS technologies are tools for creating nature-like technologies.”
The paragraph above gives another important definition that clarifies what convergent NBICS technologies are:
“Convergence of sciences and technologies is the integration, fusion of sciences and technologies, their methods and approaches, allowing to obtain results that are fundamentally unattainable within each of the converging sciences and/or technologies separately. Currently, convergent sciences and technologies include a group of NBICS technologies (nano-, bio-, information, cognitive, socio-humanitarian technologies), but the list is open and can be expanded later.”
Accordingly, nanotechnology is understood as a technological culture based on the possibility of direct operation of atoms and molecules in order to obtain fundamentally new substances, materials, structures and systems having predetermined properties.
Biotechnologies are the integration of biological and engineering sciences, which allows using the capabilities of living organisms or their derivatives to create and modify products and/or processes for various purposes.
Information technologies – processes, methods of searching, collecting, storing, processing, providing, distributing information and ways of implementing such processes and methods.
Cognitive technologies are a group of technologies focused on the study of consciousness, intellectual, in particular cognitive activity of a person and increasing his intellectual capabilities.
The definition of the latest NBICS technology is very important:
“Socio-humanitarian technologies are the processes of research and modification of the spiritual world of an individual in connection with its social functions and manifestations” (p.1-2).
We see that the red thread in the constructions of the authors of the Strategy is the provision that nature-like technologies, to which they refer nano-, bio-, information, cognitive, socio-humanitarian technologies, and this list may be expanded in the future, should be integrated into natural nature or, as they say, into natural resource turnover, which, in fact, is the same. In other words, they are going to put a grand experiment on nature and man as a part of this nature, by introducing genetically modified, nano-created materials into everything that comes to their mind, etc.
The mention of information and cognitive technologies in the same place, and with regard to the latter, it is emphasized that they are aimed at increasing human intellectual capabilities, unequivocally indicates that one of the directions of future experiments will be the neural network and, in particular, the implantation of a chip (chips) into the human brain as one of the favorite topics of modern transhumanists.
The definition of socio-humanitarian technologies directly speaks of plans to “modify the spiritual world” of a person, and “in connection with his social functions.” Apparently, the strategy developers are not going to ask the person himself if he wants to eat GMO food, implant a chip and allow some outsiders to modify their spiritual world, including themselves in a society tightly controlled with the help of information technologies.
One does not need to be a prophet to understand that the implementation of even a part of these monstrous projects can lead to terrible catastrophes and irreversible consequences for nature, society and man.
part 6, after part 5 from 7:11AM who ‘pending’ (if it doesn’t show up, no problem, alive and well; maybe not; still, these minor posts would overshadow terribly important and informative comments, so it’s understandable:):):))
For obvious reasons, the authors of the Strategy do not advertise their plans regarding the manipulation of genetics, but even their stated intention to create and modify products using biotechnologies inspires serious concerns. Scientists have long been sounding the alarm about the threat of genetically modified plants and products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their composition.
(next a long explanation of the harm of GMOs – plants, animals..)
…It is difficult to assume that all these problems were unknown to the authors of the Strategy, but they still included biotechnologies among the nature-like (convergent) sciences that will be developed within the framework of this program.
The creators of the Strategy dream of convergence of various sciences and technologies, in particular nano- and biotechnologies.
However, the developers’ plans are far from being exhausted by nano- and biotechnologies alone, as further analysis of the text of the document convinces us, in which three stages of the Strategy implementation are clearly distinguished:
Stage 1. Formation of the scientific and personnel base for the development of nature-like (convergent) sciences and technologies (2022-2026).
Priority tasks of the stage:
– creation of a system of training and support of highly qualified personnel in the development of convergent (nature-like) technologies;
– creation of the core of the new generation mega-science experimental base for the study of systems and processes of wildlife (a fundamentally new promising source of synchrotron radiation “SILA”, superior in technical characteristics to existing and projected international sources of synchrotron radiation, combining the capabilities of a synchrotron radiation source and a free electron laser; neutron sources);
– creation of a unique laser complex for the study of extreme light fields based on the use of laser radiation sources with a peak power of 200 KW with the ability to perform world-class research in the field of convergent technologies using quantum electrodynamics, nuclear optics and modeling of astrophysical phenomena;
– the deployment of a broad front of fundamental research of systems and processes of wildlife, primarily energy processes in a living cell, metabolic processes, brain structure and activity;
– development of new nature-like energy technologies, including technologies of nature-like nuclear energy;
– development and creation of hybrid and biosimilar materials and structures that make up the elementary (component) base of nature-like technology of the first generation, primarily materials for regenerative medicine, new generation medicines and means of their targeted delivery;
– development and creation of combined (hybrid) technical systems and technological processes using natural components, primarily biosensors, biofuel elements, brain-computer interfaces, additive technologies for creating separate biosimilar and artificial biological objects, nuclear medicine and radiation therapy technologies;
– creation of the first generation of the domestic neuromorphic processor and implementation of pilot projects for its application in the real sectors of the economy and the military-industrial complex;
– search for available developments in the field of nature-like (convergent) sciences and technologies ready for industrial development.
As a result of the implementation of the first stage , there will be:
– an experimental base has been created, mainly, providing comprehensive fundamental research of systems and processes of wildlife;
– scientific foundations have been created for the formation of nature-like equipment and technologies of the first generation;
– experimental (pilot-industrial) samples of nature-like equipment and technologies of the first generation have been created;
– the core of the interdisciplinary education system has been formed.
Stage 2. Creation of technological foundations for the beginning of the formation of separate nature–like scientific and production clusters (2027-2032).
Priority tasks of the stage:
– transfer of the results of the first stage to the economy;
– research and technological reproduction of individual objects and processes of wildlife, primarily in the field of:
• synthetic biology (artificial cell, artificial virus);
• biophotonic devices;
• additive manufacturing technologies and equipment for the creation of synthetic biological materials and artificial organs from them;
• new generation medicines and means of their targeted delivery;
• energy supply systems for implantable devices, artificial organs and biorobots due to energy processes in living organisms;
– development and creation of neuromorphic brain-machine and brain-brain interfaces, anthropomorphic bioprostheses, anthropomorphic robotic devices;
– development and creation of neuromorphic artificial intelligence systems, including those with the ability to self-study without connection to data storage and processing centers;
– creation of a fully functional (including the training function) domestic neuroprocessor with characteristics that are not inferior or superior to foreign analogues;
– development of biocomputing technologies;
– creation of prototypes of components of nature-like nuclear power;
– development of an interdisciplinary education system.
As a result of the implementation of the second stage , the following will be created:
– pilot production of equipment and technologies created at stage 1;
– technological foundations for the beginning of the formation of separate nature-like scientific and industrial clusters as structure-forming elements of the nature-like technosphere.
Stage 3. Formation of the basic elements of the nature–like technosphere (2033-2037).
Priority tasks of the stage:
– transfer of the results of stages 1 and 2 to the economy;
– technological reproduction of systems and complexes of wildlife, first of all:
• nature-like energy systems, including nature-like nuclear power;
• cyberphysical additive manufacturing complexes (“internet of everything”);
• medical systems based on technologies of correction of the psychophysiological sphere of a person;
– formation of basic elements of anthropomorphic biorobotonics, including communities of anthropomorphic biorobototechnical systems;
– creation of ultra-large neurocomputers based on the developed neuroprocessors, approaching the human in their cognitive capabilities;
– creation of a new generation of artificial intelligence systems with cognitive capabilities, providing approaches to the creation of “strong” artificial intelligence;
– development of an interdisciplinary education system.
As a result of the implementation of the third stage, separate nature-like scientific and production clusters will be formed as structure-forming elements of the nature-like technosphere (p.12-16).
..in continuation of the ‘pending’ comment below:
Deputy Director of MD Information Systems, MIPT lecturer Konstantin Shurunov [obviously – in the role of the good boy, the “opposition”, bringing the discussion back within the boundaries of “reason and morality”,imo]:
“I would start with the question – what is property? The real owner of the value (or your information) is the one who can destroy it. The one with the switch in his hands. Now our businessmen understand that they did not have any property outside the Russian Federation. And now TNK monopolies are ruling in this area, they really want to get state power. They have scattered their data centers all over the world and consider themselves a source of property and a source of new laws being adopted.
Now megacorporations want to get a place in the UN, they intend to become new states. And we do not need to bend under this, we must remember that the state is the only protection of Russian citizens against the interests of corporations and other states. And we should take any innovation with great caution, especially not to adopt laws under it.
Actually, laws have always been a codification of moral principles. Morality is an important mechanism of evolution. And megacorporations and the United States together with them want to abolish the centuries-old order based on laws, introduce their own rules instead, separate morality and laws, create their own closed spheres and replace the state. We should not let them do it,” Shurunov said.
The moderator Sinitsyn emphasized towards the end of the round table: “We are not here to ban (all metaverses)…” So their message is quite clear – they have issued a start, and now they are preparing to meet again. Note that the lion’s share of speakers are the very lobbyists of meta– and other AI and neuro-products, who need to implement everything as soon as possible.
It remains for us to recall once again the main slogan of the authors of the metaverse “Clouds” from the short film of Sberbank where everything is told honestly and frankly. The monotonous voice of a human robot broadcasts: “Our planet is howling in pain: environmental disasters, global warming, all this is suffocating, it is dying, save the Earth, save the Earth … Clouds – cleanse the Earth of yourself, cleanse the Earth of yourself.”
“It remains for us to recall once again the main slogan of the authors of the metaverse “Clouds” from the short film of Sberbank where everything is told honestly and frankly. The monotonous voice of a human robot broadcasts: “Our planet is howling in pain: environmental disasters, global warming, all this is suffocating, it is dying, save the Earth, save the Earth … Clouds – cleanse the Earth of yourself, cleanse the Earth of yourself.”
A little useless information to distract from understanding exactly what’s going on and finding the answers:
A new threat to Multipolarity – urgent wartime discussion of extremely important issues for the future of the conservative tradition, Christian culture and values of Russia threatened by unipolars globalists!!!
“The Federation Council is the “upper” chamber of the Federal Assembly, the Parliament of the Russian Federation.” – council.gov.ru/structure/council/
19 September 2022
The Federation Council discussed the legal aspects of the regulation of metaverses
The opinion of ordinary citizens from an alt-media about the event.
“Surprisingly, Moderator Sinitsyn started with the problems of “life” in virtual reality, which the media and experts are crying out about:
“The environment of the metaverse prototypes is based on exploitation, aggression, destruction, disregard for the norms and rules accepted in society. And this is the basis to talk about what ethics and morality should be in these metaverses, how and by what it should be regulated. Experts believe that digital payments, education, art and much more will all become part of our everyday life. Enterprises of various industries are engaged in creating digital doubles, we even know one global company that is recognized as extremist (we are talking about Meta, ex-Facebook, banned in the Russian Federation), it changed its name to show a new direction of its activities.
It is very important here who will set the rules of the game and on what basis he will give himself such a right. In Russia, which aspires to become a leader in technological development, this topic cannot be avoided. We understand that our society and legislation are very conservative, but nevertheless, we need to move forward, we need legislative consolidation of a technological breakthrough,” Sinitsyn said.
Andrey Neznamov, Managing Director of the AI Regulatory Center of Sberbank PJSC, did next:
“In Russia, this is one of the first discussions on the topic. And now I will tell you about the trends that exist in the world today. The main legal problems of metaverses are digital assets, protection of PD, cross–border transfer of PD. There are new crimes, and transactions at the civil level, extremism, antitrust regulation… The most tectonic level is the clash of jurisdictions of different states in the metaverses.
We can highlight the examples of China and Japan, where associations of companies operating in metaverses have been established, they already publish their own rules, they have a separate committee on metaverses. There is no uniform regulation of the topic in the USA, judicial precedents decide everything there. The European Parliament recently released a document on the risks of meta, in Europe they are generally cautious about the topic. An important role here is played by the global initiative of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers on the ethics of augmented reality “Metaverse and its management” (2022)”
It is no coincidence that the Sberbank expert mentioned the IEEE organization, which is actively moving the “digital transformation” of humanity together with the UN, the WEF, the World Bank, etc., entangling the planet with 5G/6G communication standards. And of course they propose to open everywhere “regulatory sandboxes” for experiments on disenfranchised citizens, as mentioned by Neznamov.
“We need to form relationships in the metaverses…,” Neznamov stressed. Why is it necessary, who is “us”? Obviously, rhetorical questions.
Vice-President of Rostelecom (actively lobbying collecting biometrics of Russian citizens) Boris Glazkov, also the head of the Smart City direction of the Interdepartmental Working Group under the Ministry of Communications of the Russian Federation on the preparation of the draft federal program “Digital Economy”, began to lament that we still do not have a domestic alternative metaverse.
“It’s bad if someone offers our citizens an alternative version of reality, and this is not our alternative. We must develop an alternative version of reality for our citizens …”, – said Glazkov. And here again the question is – why should we introduce everyone into the virtual, like drug addicts, people have no more cases in real life?
“There is a risk of monopolization of metaverses – they all seek to lock themselves in and stop the free flow of users. And with regard to PD, of course – the digital footprint that a person will leave with the operator of the metaverse is a huge array of PD, incomparable with the information left on digital platforms. The task of the metaverse is to devour the user’s time as much as possible, not to let him go, and also to get him hooked on his digital financial products. In China, there is a precedent for strict regulation of the time spent by children and teenagers in games. This is an adequate reaction to the trend, but at the same time we are seeing a sharp decline in the Chinese gaming industry market. There is no alternative product from the metaverse series in our country yet. I think we need financial support, the creation of subsidies for our players who are developing our own product. And foreign metaverses will have to be strictly regulated,” Glazkov said.
Senator Sinitsyn here inserted his five kopecks, and of course he could not help but refer to the author of a completely non-conspiracy plan for reformatting people, set out in the treatise “Covid-19: The Great Zeroing”:
“The notorious Klaus Schwab has an opinion that there are two approaches: to ban everything that is not officially allowed or to allow everything that is not prohibited. I hope we will be able to find a third way – not total bans.”
Of course, why ban it if you’re going to legalize everything here? Vladimir Statut, head of innovative projects at ISG Neuro, a member of the NTI working group (office of transhumanists under the leadership of the chief foresight officer of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov), went especially far in voicing the plans of technocrats. Actually, all this was also described back in 2014 by Messrs. Peskov and Luksha in Education-2035, as well as by the authors of the Neuronet roadmap:
“Already in the coming years, a new challenge awaits us – a person interacts with the metaverse using an avatar, but the emergence of new brain-computer interfaces is gaining such momentum that a person’s avatar begins to be subjectivized. And we need to understand what is the level of automation of your avatar, how much it is a part of you. We must introduce new standards – how to determine the level of subjectivization of a person’s “digital avatar”.
And we will soon be talking not only about the cross-border data transfer, but about the cross-border transfer of citizens. And a person can say – “and I am not a citizen of Russia, I only eat here, but I live in completely different worlds.” You have to understand that metaverses give you dopamine and serotonin – so it’s very difficult to resist their effects.
I would recommend that the working group think about how we will move away from an AI-based avatar to a person who, in general, is merged with the metaverse.”
That is, Mr. Statut proposes to formalize at the legislative level the COMPLETE departure of a person into the virtual world, with a brain connected to a computer, so that for sure. Will it be wildly good and fun for such “gone over the edge” from this? The Statut and the transhumanist clique are convinced that yes. For them, this is technical progress.
Writing a book, 3 vol.? Looking for a publisher?
The poor soul is always anxious that it should not be too much; and is always anxious to save as much effort as possible; lives with the idea of saving – this is the cunning Supreme strategy of his life.
So now he will be zeroed in, so that he will not suffer any more; they will help him to get rid of his little sorrows and save his sorrows.
I said, Are you ready for the slaughterhouse, rechenmacher, my dear sheep? If the Shepherd is in the mood, you can get lucky for one quick fu** before the knife;)
Look, look, there’s no red thumb on this post!! 😵
Please, dear super-smart, struggling, with high standard, a lot of knowledge, and so on, Westerners, someone put, because I can’t vote against myself and I’m going to spoil my collection of red thumbs.
Rest now. (and forever)
That’s a lot of material….
Russia is in the envious situation of having a lot of resources for its population. In our part of the world, “the West”, we tend to be net consumers of resources (even when we have the resources we’re always looking for the cheapest — most exploitable — which invariably means looking at what others have). Our present global situation effectively boils down to “Russia** having a plan and us not” — its not that we can’t plan but our singleminded focus on short term profit means that any plans for the long term tend to be more pie in the sky than substance.
I think a lot of the discussion about futuristic scenarios — virtual worlds, for example — are just froth, diversion (amply lampooned in the movie “Idiocracy”). These technologies might well be useful but unless people have a sustainable environment to live in — food, shelter and so on — then they’re meaningless.
(**Also China, of course — in fact the present scenario would not be possible without them.)
Are you talking about the Metaverse? All due respect, but did you see:
“14 June 2022 The Ministry of Science and higher education of the Russian Federation (Ministry of Education and science of Russia) published a draft decree of the president of the Russian Federation “On the strategy for the development of nature-like (convergent ) technologies”. This draft decree is planned not only to approve the strategy for the development of natural (convergent) technologies, but also to oblige the Government of the Russian Federation to approve within 6 months, in agreement with the Presidium of the council under the president of the Russian Federation for science and education, an action plan for its implementation and to recommend to the state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to be guided according to the provisions of the strategy in carrying out their activities in this field, providing for the introduction of the necessary changes in the state programs of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. As you can see, the document is quite serious, designed to determine the development of our country in this area both at the federal and regional level.”
..To which 5-6 morons put a negative thumb. What did they put a minus on?(And now I see that there is a whole one + …fo all long posts put together) Minus, for having something translated ready-made that is nowhere in the Western media – alternatives or mainstream-that will blow up Russia in a very short time and everyone in the world will be discussing it? But that’s another topic..
Russia hasn’t mastered the art of marketing yet, it seems. The quote you made requires considerable parsing and thought to divine its meaning. Since the English language world has been steeped in anti-Russian propaganda since at least the 1850s (except maybe for a short period around 1914-15) you won’t get people to spend the time on a piece, it will just dismissed as “Russian propaganda”. So if there’s an initiative that we need to know about it should be translated into a concise set of materials — people don’t want information, they want affirmation with anything that contradicts the flow having to be introduced very carefully and gradually. (…and, of course, it will be instantly dismissed as “Russian propaganda” regardless so be prepared for that!)
Much of the mass media in the West is aimed at a an elementary school reading level. By design.
Rather, I would say: Western mind deficiency – solution
But, come to think of it, a lot of them took the decision in their shoulder.
And this is good, because not only will the techno-totalitarian power move its center to the East, but the concentration of living population will remain there.
I really appreciate the depth of your research and knowledge and interesting way of writing Iain. But my concern with your work, and that of so many who are anti the WEF and new world order, is that there seems to be a fear of change to the status quo.
Is that because you all have vested interests in maintaining a nice life even if it is commenting from the sidelines? For real change we, as I said in my previous comment on your first post on this topic, are going to have to sink a lot lower, loose a lot more, be face against the wall, to see how real change needs to happen – by us going through massive change in our own ways of seeing, expecting, and living. This is the only way to undermine the powers that be – stop buying, using, accepting what they hand out.
I don’t think that, for example, opposition to CBDCs means that anyone has forgotten all the arguments against fiat currencies. It’s simply saying that the one alternative that’s being offered is even worse and, because those with enormous power and wealth are steering the world into it, it might be a good idea to focus some attention there
Most people would, I suspect, favour a return to pegging currencies to something of tangible value. It might be noticed that the gold standard was discredited in the UK by Rothschild stooge Churchill returning the UK to it on the eve of the Great Depression which it’s obvious now was planned and known to be coming.
It’s the same with the family – opposition to the elite’s planned deconstruction of the family isn’t a desire to return to the nuclear family, merely a statement that that’s better than total atomisation. The older tradition of extended families is much the best option. The extended family is of course entirely incompatible with “flexible labour markets”.
This isn’t of course to argue a return to older traditions is always the answer and couldn’t be weaponised to march us into neo-feudalism. However it is to realise that the world’s turned upside down (to borrow a phrase) when the elite reveal themselves to be the true revolutionaries. A prerequisite of a new world order is the demolition of the old. In those circumstances, suport for tradition becomes oppositional and conservatism, despite many of its proponents not truly grasping it, becomes an oppositional force. It’s why the UK Conservative Party has had little to do with conservatism for about half a century.
What you’re talking about, Carolyn, if I understand you correctly, in my opinion, is going down like going up. This is the next level, to which can pass only trained in many and varied asceticism, who has already connected (not in words) with what he does not like in himself, with his pain, etc., This is a special harvest for selected people, you can say “spiritual elite”. The rest will tremble to the last, most irresponsible, and will hate their misery, but in fact – themselves. Because, as we know, there is a solution down here and nowhere else. And there’s always something you can do here, but if you can’t, there’s horror. Well, the reward for that attitude has already been given.
Unless I’m wrong and you’re really talking about currencies and conservation.
Thanks Caroline. I am certainly not against changing the status quo. I have written quite a bit on ways that we might change it for our benefit.
My problem, and the issue I am trying to highlight, is that all the faith placed in the new “multipolar world order” distracts our attention away from those efforts. If we continue to place our faith in political leaders, no matter who or where they are, imagining that they can, or will, make thing better, then we are wasting our time, in my view.
Not because of any resistance to change, but precisely because that change further consolidates the status quo. Which, personally, I oppose.
The one thing we know for sure is, there is a shift, a major change in the works. We’ve seen it since 9-11. The 2008 economic crash was the flashing warning sign. It is no longer a secret, the unipolar neocolonial arrangement is unsustainable. The old Bretton Woods hegemony that was the foundation of the US empire is falling apart. The US ruling class as the writer said, created their main competition via technology transfers, investment and financial inclusion before the dawn of the twenty-first century.
The US and their NATO/EU alliance are losing their influence even with threats of Western sponsored color revolutions or their overt toppling of governments like they did in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and recently Ukraine. We are seeing the consequences of those geopolitical actions playing out in front of our faces now. Were they deliberate, did the ruling elites know this was going to happen, did they plan this? Is this part of the New World Order/Great Reset?
What we are seeing is the globalist overlords coming together in the shadows to reconfigure the global financial and governance system; they have to because the current Bretton Woods systems are about to implode due to debt, fraud and contagion. Only by “partnering” with the BRICS oligarchs and the “leaders” of emerging economies can the Western shot callers hold onto what they have to ensure a truly global reordering and still have a crucial say and stake in how this plays out.
True. The financialization of the economy these past 40 years has finally hit a wall. Russia and China at least have recognized the wisdom of continuing to invest in new infrastructural development and education. Unlike the West, they do not fear an educated citizenry, but encourage open system innovations.
Finance Capitalism: Agent of Chaos and Theft
“Finance capitalism is not based on surplus value like industrial capitalism was. In fact, it destroys industry and in this cannibalizing of industrial capital, it basically dries out the economy and makes it unable to break even or even to function and in the United States today, for instance, if you look at the balance sheets of corporate revenue much of it is spent on stock buybacks. You buy back your own stock or dividend payouts. Only eight percent of corporate earnings are spent on new capital investment research and development: factories, machinery, and means of production to employ labor.”
“They’re led by financial engineers of the chief financial officer and the ideal of these corporations is to make money financially not by industrial investment….. so on the narrow microeconomic level finance capitalism is a way of basically selling out a company and giving the proceeds to the stockholders and the bondholders but as a political system, because it is so destructive of the economy as you’ve seen in the United States and you’ve seen in Britain through de-industrializing it, it becomes belligerent in an attempt to make other countries just as equally paralyzed by making these countries pay tribute to the U.S. and England and the financialized economies by means of financial engineering, by means of debt service, by means of selling their mineral resources, their public utilities, their land, their roads all to foreign investors–basically to who borrows the money that’s just simply created in the U.S. and to save all of their money in their central bank reserves in the forms of loans to the U.S. treasury holding treasury bonds, which is how the international monetary system worked until just a few months ago when everything changed.”
Yes financial piracy and fraud have changed with the new technology, the rampant greed and hubris of the overlords are taking the whole system down which is why they need a new reset a techno-fascist reconfiguration so they can own and control the world after their engineered collapse via war, policy induced famine, casino financial implosion and political depravity and corruption. We live in interesting times.
so destructive of the economy
It is a lot clearer if like Prof. Micheal Hudson, you distinguish between the productive economy and the financial one.
Bretton Woods was discarded around 1970 as it constrained the financial markets too much. This gives us a clue to the thinking involved, though — digging back a bit further we find that BW, Keynes and the like were all dedicated to making the system sustainable, they drew lessons not just from the Great Depression but previous boom/bust cycles, recognizing that the only way forward was to smooth out the bumps using government (and international) regulation.
So the regulations were gradually dropped as ‘too confining’, ‘old’, ‘redundant’ and so on and the result was inevitable. Economies move rather slowly so there’s a period of time when you can get a real boom after you deregulate and before the consequences of deregulation kick in. The problem, though, is that every time you go through one of these cycles you destroy wealth. We been used to duicking these consequences by mooching off other countries — by forming economic empires where our prosperity is built on the the backs of other’s poverty. I’d suggest that “they’re now onto us” — the less well off have figured the game out, in no small part due to the unintended consequence of the Internet and migration knocking down the walls between societies. In the past with our superior western technology (read — weapons) we might be seen as invulnerable. Not so much now — they know we all have feet of clay.
I think the reason why our elites haven’t adapted that fast, they’re still carrying on business as usual, is the same reason as they say that generals always prepare to fight the last war. We’re trying to convince ourselves that with the application of sanctions here, a police action or two (or proxy war) there we can just carry on as usual once we’ve got the latest bit of trouble out the way. This just isn’t working anymore and there’s a serious danger that the entire facade will crumble.
I have to say, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve read all of this information.
What In The Actual F….. To even suggest that, after watching what China & Russia have and continue to do to their own citizens …. honestly, man that’s fully off a cliff rainbow unicorn loop de woop woop speculation.
Why not concentrate on what the likely plan is, and particularly delve into the “Or perhaps not.” bit as far as that can be done. Just askin, for a friend.
That’s why I prefaced that attempt at irony with “When we conclude this series with Part 3.”
I did get the attempt at irony, however these days I suspect I’d probably break something in my face attempting a wry smile in acknowledgement of it.
I look forward to part 3.
Strategically the most valuable “human resource” for Russia in a “wartime” situation? (In relation to the”beautiful new future”?)
Latest news from Russia; part of an article, with abbreviations. (This media, on the one hand, is firmly against digitalization, biosecurity, etc., and on the other, believes that they are imposed by the “pro-Western column in Russia”, believe that there is a real war, so they support Putin, too. Well, that is.:)Even better; imagine, since they say so…)
“The Ministry of digital transformation, predictably, turned out to be the only agency that fully incorporated the administrative resource to free the “serving people” of the brave new world, who are approaching the digital transformation from globalists, from military duty and obligations to protect the national interests of the country.
Minister Maksut Shadayev even promised to personally deal with the cases of mobilization of IT specialists and specialists from related fields (with one of the 195 specialties listed in the order of the Ministry of digital development), so that his children-“witnesses of digitalization” – will never know what the battle for the Russians is on the front line.
In fact, any employee of an officially accredited IT company with a special Higher Education (this includes employees from the banking sector, mobile and internet operators) will avoid being called to the front, where our country is currently fighting an existential battle. At the same time, many teachers, doctors and representatives of other – much more significant, in our opinion, social professions, receive summonses regularly. Thus, the pro-schwaabs Government clearly shows us which “contingent” of the population is most valuable to it.
“There is its own mechanics of bringing the decision of the General Staff not to involve an IT company in the draft to the military enlistment offices. It is clear that the military enlistment offices themselves are now overloaded and in full steam. What can we do for those who fall under the postponement, but have already received subpoenas. There is an urgent notification format — government telegrams. I can sign these. Therefore, if employees of some IT companies have already received subpoenas, you can not wait for anything – I can send a telegram to a specific military enlistment office with reference to the decision of the chief of the General Staff and a request not to call SPECIFIC people from specific IT companies that fall under the reservation,” Shadaev wrote on the morning of September 24 in one of the Telegram channels, related to the Ministry of Finance.
cnews.ru/news/top/2022-09-24_glava_mintsifry_vzyal_na_lichnyj?ysclid=l8ka0yzjx1496549414 ; t.me/s/mintsifry
Thus, by order of the Ministry of digital development and the corresponding decision of the Ministry of Defense , a significant part of IT specialists and workers in some other industries are not subject to the partial mobilization announced by Russian President Vladimir Putin on September 21, 2022. . This applies to all who have higher education in the relevant specialties and fields of study, currently working full-time (verbatim quote from the Ministry of Defense ):
– in accredited IT organizations operating in the field of information technology and involved in the development, development, implementation, maintenance and operation of solutions in the field of information technology, software development and maintenance of information infrastructure
– in Russian telecommunication operators and those involved in ensuring the stability, security and integrity of the functioning of communication facilities, data processing centers, as well as means and public communication lines of the Russian Federation
– in system-forming organizations in the field of information and communications, as well as their interdependent persons who are the founder and (or) editorial office and (or) publisher of a registered mass media and (or) broadcaster of a TV channel, radio channel and involved in the production and (or) distribution of mass media products
– in organizations that ensure the stability of the national payment system and financial market infrastructure, bank liquidity management, cash circulation.
On September 26, the Ministry of Finance, by its order, clarified the list of specialties that fit the criteria for exemption from mobilization for IT and communications specialists, taking into account their education. The list includes 195 areas of specialist training.
As we can see, the most cosmopolitan-minded digitalists are freed from the protection of the Motherland and the Russian people, for most of whom the homeland is where the owner of the IT project pays more. Now they have become the most valuable personnel for the state. Will the remaining digitalists in the rear be able to build a truly sovereign country with independent public administration, will national security, cultural characteristics and traditional values of Russia be their main priority? This is a rhetorical question. Shadaev and Mishustin told us everything about their human choice. We once again testify that patriotism and the global “digital transformation” of all countries of the world according to the patterns of the UN, the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, etc. are incompatible. They do not need defenders of the Fatherland, they will protect only their consumables – the builders of their worldwide electronic concentration camp.”
Two words – Covid nineteen. Multipolar, unipolar, they’re all the same, we’re humans, dammit Jim! The world is the rich against the rest of us, that’s unipolar. We don’t need no stinking Silk Road, we need to get on road to Freedom and Liberty. Who’s with me!
Ah, hell with it.
This article is too long to be telling readers what they already know.
Though multipolar may be better for we the people in theory, it doesn’t hold much promise for our freedom. South Africa, being a BRICS member, is already on board with the central bank controlled digital currency, our enslavement system.
I think the multiple power bases will only be squabbling over the spoils of the world but are united in their ideal of wanting to classify us and everything on the planet as “assets.”
If SA is part of the solution, I hate to think what the problem is..
China is the answer to everything.
Tony Bliar is the answer to everything.
Michael Bloomberg is the answer to everything.
’42’ is the answer to Everything.
NO! ! am Sparticus!!
A Global, Digital Doomsday Book.
“How dare you tell us our BRICS saints are power-hungry elites, just like the West’s, Iain? We need heroes to cling to.” 😀
Professor Michael Hudson, has written many in depth articles and books about China. For example, America’s Neoliberal Financial Policy vs China’s Industrial Socialism.
He states in one very telling segment “ The US – China confrontation is not simply a national rivalry but a conflict of what Western economies since classical antiquity have treated as privately owned rent yielding assets: money and banking ( along with rules governing debt and foreclosure), land and natural resources, and infrastructure monopolies. “
Furthermore, Hudson stated that “ The United States hoped that China might be as gullible as the Soviet Union and adopt neoliberal policy permitting its wealth to be privatized and turned into rent- extracting privileges, to be sold off Americans. “ .
Additionally, he quoted what the what the US/ Wall Street/ City of London had to say “ China’s economy is incompatible with the main premises of the global system embodied today in the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and a long list of other free trade agreements….”
Well worth reading.
You seem to just keep asserting the same belief system completely oblivious to any facts to the contrary.
Have you read the full text of Professor Hudson’s article, an economist with a very long distinguished record ?
Have you read/ watched any of his very impressive, very knowledgable array of articles, books podcasts about China ?
If you have, please explain exactly what it is you disagree about his work on China !
Yes. He doesn’t really engage with reality does he.
You have not answered any of the questions I asked.
Please give specific references and quotes that you contend and referenced answers as to why !
The role of China in the GR and pandemic scam has been well covered and is not disputed or deniable. You and your source just ignore these realities, just as you ignore Russia’s role in the same.
““ China’s economy is incompatible with the main premises of the global system embodied today in the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and a long list of other free trade agreements….””
Downright hilarious. China’s elite is one of the controlling entities of these key global organization/agencies, as with the WHO, which it worked with (as well as with Big Tech and Big Pharma) to initiate Operation “Pandemic” and push it around the world. China has more billionaires than any other nation. It is fundamental to 4IR. Hudson has been spreading disinformation for a long time. This, from 2010.
I suggest you read your own source more thoroughly.
This was written by “my underground twin brother.” I am perfectly aware of the contents. 😀
RE: Nonetheless, as the centre of power moves eastward, maybe the new world order will ultimately deliver on the promise claimed by some—namely, that Russia and China really are standing up to the insidious Great Reset. Could it be true? We live in hope.
I don’t understand Ian’s framing here. Why is it that these are the only options – China and Russia oppose the Great Reset or they are really in league with it?
There’s another possiblity, that is, geopolitics still matters and Russia and China are doing what’s best for them with the tools available. What we have is a global war going on, mostly economic but a war nonetheless. (It is a vertical war as well by all ruling classes against their own populations.)
As people here are well aware, none of the pandemic measures had ever been used in a pandemic before, they were not recommended, even by the WHO’s own documents as recent as the Fall of 2019. However, when countries go to war, they place restrictions on their own populations, removing civil liberties. Governments’ Covid restriction measures are nearly all characteristic of wartime, not a health emergency.
Since this is a global war, the restrictions are global too. The propaganda of a global health emergency is so effective, it would not make much sense for Russia and China to invent another narrative to impose wartime measures on their own populations. So, the adoption by Russia and China of deadly plague narrative, does not mean that they are controlled by the WHO, but rather as a propaganda vehicle its too good to pass up.
So, you’re not in favor of the principle of parsimony, then? 😉
The principle of parsimony is otherwise known as Ockham’s Razor – all things being equal the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Your above explanation happily ignores that parsimony. 🙂
Let me make sure I understand: Is the argument being put out by Ian Davis as well as yourself that either Russia/China are all on board with the Great Reset or oppose it and are the last hope for humanity? (To put it crudely.)
The first enemy of any ruling class is its own population. They don’t care about your welfare, period. They either subdue their population (as in an authoritarian government) or they mesmerize their population via ideology and demonize the non-compliant (totalitarian states, aka “democracies”). Anybody thinking that the Russian or Chinese ruling class cares more about their population (more than controlling them and profiting from them, that is) than Western “democracies” might as well have been born yesterday.
I don’t see this as the “simple” answer (per Occam’s Razor) but rather a simplistic one. I see it as a straw-man argument (being so easy to refute). Rather I see Russia’s ruling class and China’s ruling class acting in their own self-interests like all great powers always have. They have used the Pandemic TM for their own purposes just as our and every other ruling class has.The Russo/Sino ruling class are no more our allies than our own.
> Rather I see Russia’s ruling class and China’s ruling class acting in their own self-interests like all great powers always have. They have used the Pandemic TM for their own purposes just as our and every other ruling class has.
No, that is not “my” argument. Quite the opposite. I agree with your assessment of the Russo/Sino ruling class and that of our own. What I am trying to highlight is that the ruling class of both East and West have many shared goals. I further suggest that they are more than happy to collaborate on those shared goals. But equally this does not mean that they share all goals.
As you say they each have their own interests, which is why I highlighted Soros’ spat with BlackRock and the Chinese. But, while seemingly at loggerheads, Soros, BlackRock and China’s oligarchy are all equally committed to “global financial governance” and “sustainable development.” It seems to me that they are vying for primacy within one, overarching, system.
I think so, too. What exactly is this system, in your opinion? Do you have an opinion that you can share now, before the 3rd and subsequent parts of the series?
I have a very serious feeling-backed up by things that I will keep to myself; at least this is not the place to share them – that on the edge of Occam’s razor we shall not find the concrete outlines of the general system over which they are contending for power.
I think you’re hedging your bets and contradicting yourself. You basically set out the case that there is a global elite that’s been running the world for decades and playing “nation states” like puppets in a Punch and Judy show, overseeing appointed leaders, managing boom and bust. You say these people are manufacturing the final end of the nation state.
How does this fit with nation states having leaders who are vying with each other for power? Doesn’t seem to fit to me. The ‘vying’ is part of the puppet show right? Getting people worked up and taking sides.
I appreciate your point and hope this goes some way toward clarifying what I mean. Forgive me if this is not already clear.
At the risk of engaging in reductionism and simplistic thinking I am going to elucidate my position using a simple example. I hope you can appreciate that I would otherwise have to write another article at this juncture.
In any corporation, or similarly large organisation, there is a management structure. Competition between those vying for promotion can be fierce. They all seek to advance their own interests and increase their own “authority” within the corporation (in our example).
Above the managers sits the board. They too engage in “boardroom politics” as they also seek to advance their own positions, perhaps hoping to become CEO (in our example).
Above the CEO sit the trustees and the beneficial owners, and arguably the major shareholders (investors). They also seek to extract maximum leverage from their own positions, once again, primarilly for their own benefit.
There may be many conflicts between different interests, resentments grow, alliances are formed and power-plays made.
But none of those people want to see the business of the corporation fail. Despite their rivalries, they all collaborate in ensuring the success of the corporation.
They are all committed to maximising profits, the reach of the corporation and its power and influence in the market.
I suggest to you that “global governance” works, and was always intended to work, in precisely the same way. It is based upon a very real (not theoretical) hierarchical, compartmentalised structure within which there are many competing interests but all are committed to the success of “global governance” and, in particularl, to “global financial governance.”
I hope this explains my view.
Thanks Iain, hard to see how anyone can continue to misunderstand after this very clear explanation
Ok, let me try to explain in a way accessible to you.
You are promoting divergent explanations for a non-divergent phenomena, thusly –
You reasonably assume all ruling elites take care of their own interests. Fair enough.
But then you go on to assume those interests to not be unified or dovetailed even though their lockstep adherence to a single agenda strongly suggests their interests are significantly unified, at least currently and in the most meaningful ways.
You then go on to infer, on the basis of ZERO stated evidence, a series of assumptions about why their unified actions need not necessarily imply unified interest.
You even distort the extant evidence in order to justify this inference (eg you describe China as “adopting” the plague narrative, when it manifestly instigated it; you do this purely to justify your argument that the appearance of unity is not actual).
This assertion of a belief based purely on hypothetical qualifiers for which no data exists flouts the parsimony principle.
I hope this is clear enough for you.
Of course we must avoid reductionism and simplistic thinking, but misrepresenting evidence or assuming qualifiers that have no evidential basis is simply distortion.
My response in italics.
Ok, let me try to explain in a way accessible to you
Thanks for not being snotty.
You are promoting divergent explanations for a non-divergent phenomena, thusly –
On the contrary, it is your explanation that is “divergent.” You assume that for the first time in history, geopolitics no longer matter. To be fair most Western countries, have lost their sovereignty to the US empire/Globocap. That’s not a new phenomenon, it’s just totally obvious in the last 2 years.
You reasonably assume all ruling elites take care of their own interests. Fair enough.
But then you go on to assume those interests to not be unified or dovetailed even though their lockstep adherence to a single agenda strongly suggests their interests are significantly unified, at least currently and in the most meaningful ways.
Indeed, the ruling class of all nations share many interests (e.g. they all want to control us), but that doesn’t mean they don’t compete with each other, those powerful enough to do so, that is. China and Russia are powerful enough to do that.
You then go on to infer, on the basis of ZERO stated evidence, a series of assumptions about why their unified actions need not necessarily imply unified interest.
See link below.
You even distort the extant evidence in order to justify this inference (eg you describe China as “adopting” the plague narrative, when it manifestly instigated it; you do this purely to justify your argument that the appearance of unity is not actual).
The plague “narrative” has been around at least two decades. See chapter 12 of RFK Jr’s book on Fauci, “Germ Games.” Military planners have done numerous pandemic scenarios since 2001, all which feature lockdowns and wartime-like restrictions as a primary characteristic of the exercises. Again, as I said earlier, until 2020, lockdowns were never part of epidemic or pandemic preparedness health authority policies. Even in popular culture, the pandemic narrative was well established years ago, e.g. the movie Contagion.
China did “instigate” the lockdown policy, but that is not what you wrote. The West has an entire pandemic institutional infrastructure in place (the WHO, Gavi, NIAID, CDC etc.), what could be called the virus/vaccine industrial complex, scientific researchers all with a tunnel vision focus on mono-causal pathogens that must be a new virus.
This assertion of a belief based purely on hypothetical qualifiers for which no data exists flouts the parsimony principle.
I’m not sure what mean here. There’s all kinds of evidence that the Great Game is still afoot. The Ukraine conflict can be traced to 1991 where Gorbachev and the H.W. Bush administration agreed that NATO would not move “1 inch further eastward.” The US wasted no time violating that agreement and doing just that (recall the dismemberment of Yugoslavia). Even Trump had the most bellicose policy (until Biden that is) toward the Russian Federation since the end of the Cold War. The US has been engaged in provocative military exercises around the South China sea going at least back to the Obama administration. If the world’s ruling classes including Russia and China are all best buddies now, raking in the wealth expropriated from their own working classes, why would we even need a military power like the US, let alone engage in numerous (expensive and deadly) proxy wars?
I hope this is clear enough for you.
Of course we must avoid reductionism and simplistic thinking, but misrepresenting evidence or assuming qualifiers that have no evidential basis is simply distortion.
What did I distort? I prefaced my remarks by asking if I understood the argument. Btw, I got a much more respectful and nuanced reply from the author, Ian Davis.
Perhaps it’s a question of framing? I think Iain Davis’ answer to Red Pill Reader (above) really helps frame this, and together with Sophie’s analysis you can see that BOTH scenarios can coexist. And we have ample evidence for both of them.
It’s also very important to note, in order for both scenarios to coexist, one must be subservient to the other, and there needs to be a containing, hierarchical structure beyond sovereign nations. The ‘corporation’ as David puts it.
Since Covid it’s been very apparent to me that we’re living in such a scenario. A global Disneyland, if you will.
Or maybe the Truman show: the hasty facades erected by seemingly unconnected people, allowing an unbroken illusion to take place. Covid ‘death counters’, masks, fear, the same applied psychology, tailored to local demographics etc. etc.
Disneyland calls all its staff ‘cast members’, whether they’re dressed as a mouse, a duck or other costumed distraction, or whether they’re issuing tickets to the many rides,
The ‘cast members’ know they’re there to create an illusion, shepherding the normal people down pre-assigned gangways. If they’re Micky they inhabit the role. If they’re a ride operator they blend tastefully into the background, they don’t draw attention to themselves.
The cast members actually like Disneyland, some of them have wanted to work there their whole life. They bring their families there as punters themselves. When on the job, however, they embrace their part, they maintain the illusion, they aren’t perpetually pointing out to visitors that it’s not a real mouse and that it’s actually theme park. It’s an agreed pretence on everyone’s part.
The reason such a huge, colossal, astronomical amount of resource is spent on mollifying the ‘normal people’, on prevention rather than cure, is because the keepers of the theme park are perpetually maintaining this illusion. They need our custom, they need us to ride the rides etc., or the system suffers a short illness and drops down dead.
Many argue this nearly happened during Covid. Too many people witnessed the system in its unflattering, lockstep reality, and more and more stopped riding the rides. They’ve been hastily erecting geopolitical facades ever since, while the Covid script plays out behind them, unstoppable at this point.
The thing that people struggle to wrap their head around, perhaps, is how much like a Jurassic Park/Westworld/Truman show-style illusion this is. That the ‘cast members’ can tweak the lights, turn up the wind (this is metaphor, I’m not talking about weather modification lol), make day night, or night day. Much of what we, the normal people, see is a soundstage. A simulacrum.
And much as at Disneyland, normal people are complicit in maintaining this illusion. They suspend their disbelief, willingly.
I enjoyed Ed Curtin’s piece The Banners of the King of Hell Advance, in which he explores this issue and discusses Baudrillard amongst other things. A2.
… pars-ya-money? Tongue-in-cheek? Freudian … 😉
I can see your point. Russia and China have their very own traditions of totalitarian control systems being pressed onto their citizens. But why go back to those bad old times when you can just implement WHO plans that have been drawn up years ago (2012/13 in Germany).
And it seems to me that geopolitics as a driver of events is being seriously underrated.
Fiat finance in the world of funneled smoke and manipulated mirrors.
Just as statistics were imagined for the pseudo-demic, so too with the fiction of currencies and control.
The hydra and the octopus…
“Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”
And no power purifies.
You can use electricity to power a distiller which will purify water.
tell us something we don’t know, ; )
Why did you think this was worth saying?