China: The World’s First Technate – Part 1
Iain Davis
We are being rapidly transitioned into a new system of centralised, authoritarian global governance. This system is designed to be a technocracy and it is truly totalitarian.
Totalitarianism is a form of government that attempts to assert total control over the lives of its citizens. It is characterized by strong central rule that attempts to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and repression. It does not permit individual freedom. Traditional social institutions and organizations are discouraged and suppressed, making people more willing to be merged into a single unified movement. Totalitarian states typically pursue a special goal to the exclusion of all others, with all resources directed toward its attainment, regardless of the cost.
That “special” goal is sustainable development and no cost, either financial or humanitarian, is too great to tackle the alleged “climate crisis.” In reality, climate change is simply the excuse for sustainable development and it is through the global policy commitment to “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) that technocracy is being installed.
A technocratic society is called a Technate and the world’s first Technate has emerged in China. In this two part exploration we will look at how this system was constructed, who was behind it and why technocracy is now being foisted upon all of us.
These articles are drawn largely from my 2021 publication Pseudopandemic. It is free to subscribers to my blog.
Global Technocratic Governance
In order for global technocracy to be rolled-out, authority needs to be centrally controlled at the global level. Governments, intergovernmental organisations and multinational corporations have collaborated to form a global public-private partnership (G3P) for this purpose.
Throughout the 20th and 21st century the G3P network has sought to construct global governance. In turn, global governance enables the worldwide distribution of the technocracy that governments then convert into national policy commitments. Many components of global technocratic governance have already been established.
The World Heath Organisation (WHO) delivers global governance of public health; global access to technological development is meted out through the World Intellectual Property Organization; the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) works to coordinate economic policies between nation-states and global trade is monitored and controlled through the trade agreements overseen by the World Trade Organisation.
The Bank For International Settlements (BIS) coordinates global monetary policy and the flow of capital; the direction of education, academia, the sciences and cultural development is steered through the U.N Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the seizure of the global commons and the “financialisation” of nature—through natural asset companies and other mechanisms—is nearing completion.
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are centrally controlled through global governance, primarily by the U.N Development and Environmental programs (UNDP & UNEP). The necessary global scientific consensus on climate change is centrally administered and the appropriate research funding streams allocated, by the U.N’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The powerful individuals, pushing the G3P project forward, are a collective of mass polluters, robber barons, land grabbers and the world’s leading exponents of worker exploitation, market manipulation, monetary extortion (usury) and oppression. They form what would otherwise be considered a criminal cartel but have greenwashedtheir reputations through their commitment to so-called “sustainable development.”
Often referred to as the elite, a more fitting description is “the parasite class.”
The G3P has managed to convince billions that it is committed to sustainable, net zero, environmentalism and wants to “save the planet.” It is actually determined to empower global governance and enforce technocracy upon humanity through SDGs and the associated policy Agendas. Regardless of what you think about the causes of climate change or the level of risk it presents, SDGs do nothing to address it and are designed to serve no-one and nothing other than the G3P and its interests.
In order to requisition, commodify, audit and ultimately divide up the Earth’s resources among themselves, the stakeholder capitalists, at the heart of the G3P, also need technocratic control. Once humanity figures out what has happened, technocracy will enable the G3P to shutdown resistance through literal population control.
Every human being will be individually monitored by Artificial Intelligence (AI) networks which will punish or reward them, depending upon their behaviour. Biosecurity and environmental concerns are set to provide the justification for this enslavement.
Much like the quack pseudo-science of eugenics, which many G3P “thought leaders” seem to believe, Technocracy was the social science certainty of its day. Like eugenics, while it has subsequently faded from public consciousness, it is still avidly pursued by the G3P’s compartmentalised hierarchy.
Technocracy
In 1911, arguably the worlds first management consultant, Frederick Winslow Taylor, published The Principles of Scientific Management. His publication came at the culmination of the Progressive Era in the United States.
This was a period marked by the political activism of the US middle class who mainly sought to address the underlying social problems, as they saw them, of excessive industrialisation, immigration and political corruption. So-called “Taylorism,” fixated with the imminent exhaustion of natural resources and advocating efficient “scientific management systems,” was in the spirit of the age.
Taylor wrote:
In the past the man has been first; in the future the system must be first. [. . .] The best management is a true science, resting upon clearly defined laws, rules, and principles. [. . . ] The fundamental principles of scientific management are applicable to all kinds of human activities, from our simplest individual acts to the work of our great corporations.
Taylorism advocated science driven efficiency reforms across society. An efficient system should not be run by politicians or religious leaders but by “experts,” such as engineers, scientists, logistical experts, economists and other academics. The focus should always be on systemic efficiency and the proper use of precious resources, including labour.
Though Taylor’s ideas were influenced by Social Darwinism he wasn’t a eugenicist. However, his ideas were adopted by eugenicists. It “fitted” with their belief in their unassailable right to rule.
Just as they could optimise and control the human population, so they could employ the right experts to make socioeconomic and industrial systems more efficient. They could promote this as being for “the public good” while at the same time consolidating their own power and reaping a greater financial harvest from a more efficient industrialised society.
Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management chimed with the theories of economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblan. He proposed that economic activity wasn’t just a function of supply and demand, utility, value and so forth, but rather it evolved with society and was thus shaped by psychological, sociological and anthropological influences.
Both Taylor and Veblan were focused upon improving the efficiency of industrial and manufacturing processes. However, they also recognised that their theories could be extended to the wider social context. It was the more expansive application of their ideas that beguiled the parasite class.
Veblan famously spoke about “conspicuous consumption” to describe how the affluent displayed their social standing through their ability to engage in pursuits and buy items that were essentially purposeless and wasteful. This “conspicuous leisure” and “consumption” cascaded down through the class structure, as those aspiring to signal their own status emulated the wealthy.
He argued that this was a major contributory factor toward unacceptable resource waste and inefficiency. Consumer society ultimately produced more goods and services than it needed simply to meet the artificial demand created for, in his view, avoidable and unnecessary social demand.
Veblan was strongly opposed to this inefficient use of resources which he blamed on the “business classes” and financiers. He valued their contribution to the industrial age but felt they were no longer capable of managing modern industrial society.
Initially, Veblan argued that the workers must therefore be the architects of the necessary social change that would create economic and industrial reform. Later, in the Engineers and the Price System he shifted his focus away from workers, as the drivers of change, towards technocratic engineers.
Thorsten Veblan
He called for a thorough analysis of the institutions which maintained social stability. Once understood, he opined, those with technological expertise should reform the institutions and thereby engineer society and improve efficiency. Veblan referred to these social change agents as a “soviet of technicians.”
In 1919 Veblan was among the founders of the John D. Rockefeller funded private research university in New York called the New School for Social Research. This soon led to the creation of the Technical Alliance as Veblan joined a small team of scientists and engineers, notably Howard Scott, to form a fledgling technocratic organisation.
Howard Scott
Scott didn’t like Veblan’s description of a soviet of technicians, reportedly calling it “a cockeyed thing.” The clear association with communism probably wasn’t welcome from a PR perspective, and Scott felt it undermined what he was trying to achieve with the technocracy movement.
Veblan’s involvement with the Technical Alliance was relatively brief and some have suggested that his contribution to technocracy was minimal, accrediting Scott as the great mind behind it. Regardless of the extent of Veblan’s personal involvement in the movement, his socioeconomic theories permeate technocracy.
In 1933 the Technical Alliance reformed after an enforced hiatus, prompted by Scott’s exposure as a fraudster—he falsified his engineering credentials. The group renamed themselves Technocracy inc.
Despite his public humiliation, Scott was a skilled orator and remained the spokesman for Technocracy inc. He worked with, among others, M. King Hubbert who would later become globally renowned for his vague and generally inaccurate “peak oil” theory.
Scott and Hubbert collaborated to write The Technocracy Inc study course to formerly introduce the world to technocracy. At the time, the proposed technocracy was technologically impossible and sounded pretty crazy. However, we are certainly more familiar with these ideas today.
Hubbert wrote:
Technocracy finds that the production and distribution of an abundance of physical wealth on a Continental scale for the use of all Continental citizens can only be accomplished by a Continental technological control, a governance of function, a Technate.
The Technate, a technocratic society initially envisaged to encompass the North American continent, would be administered by a central planning body formed of scientists, engineers and other suitably qualified technocrats. Technocracy would require a new monetary system based upon a calculation of the Technate’s total energy usage. People would be allocated an equal share of the corresponding “energy certificates” (as a form of currency) denominated in units of energy (Joule):
[I]ncome is granted to the public in the form of energy certificates. [. . .] They are issued individually to every adult of the entire population. [. . .] The record of one’s income and its rate of expenditure is kept by the Distribution Sequence, [the envisaged ledger of transactions]. [. . .] so that it is a simple matter at any time for the Distribution Sequence to ascertain the state of an unknown customer’s balance. [. . .] Energy Certificates also contain the following additional information about the person to whom issued: whether he has not yet begun his period of service, is now performing service, or is retired [where service to the Technate is rewarded with Energy Certificates] [. . .] sex, [. . .] the geographical area in which he resides, and [. . .] job at which he works.
A new price system was envisaged with all commodities and goods priced according to the energy cost of their production. Purchases made with “energy certificates” would then be reported back to the appropriate department of the technocratic central planning committee. The transactions would be catalogued and analysed, enabling the central planners to precisely calculate the rolling energy balance, between energy production and consumption, for the entire Technate.
In order for this system to work, all consumer’s energy expenditure (including all daily transactions) would need to be recorded in real time; the national inventory of net energy production and consumption would have to be constantly updated, around the clock; a registry of every commodity and product needed to be scrupulously maintained, with every individual living in the Technate allocated a personal energy account. This would be updated to record their energy usage and personal net energy balance.
Hubbert & Scott made it clear that, for technocracy to work, an all pervasive energy surveillance grid would be required. All citizens would be individually identified on the grid and every aspect of their daily lives monitored and controlled by the technocratic central planners.
Technocracy is a totalitarian form of surveillance based, centralised authoritarian governance which abolishes national sovereignty and political parties. Freedoms and rights are replaced with a duty to behave in the interest of a common good, as defined by the technocrats. All decisions about production, allocation of resources, all technological innovation and economic activity is controlled by a technocracy of experts (Veblan’s “soviet of technicians”).
In 1938 in Technocrat Magazine vol. 3 No. 4 (to give it its technocratic specification) technocracy was described as:
The science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.
For the parasite class, and their G3P stakeholder partners, technocracy was an irresistible idea. Technocracy potentially enables the precise engineering of society through the control of resources and energy through the mechanism of a linked, centrally planned and monitored, economic and monetary system.
The Technocracy inc Study Course claims:
The significance of this, from the point of view of knowledge of what is going on in the social system, and of social control, can best be appreciated when one surveys the whole system in perspective. First, one single organization is manning and operating the whole social mechanism. This same organization not only produces but distributes all goods and services. Hence a uniform system of record-keeping exists for the entire social operation, and all records of production and distribution clear to one central headquarters.
In order to control everything all the parasite class would need to do is whisper in the ear of a few hand-picked technocrats. There would be no need to corrupt politicians or orchestrate international crisis anymore. While in the 1930’s the Technate was an impracticable proposition, it was still something to inspire the G3P and a goal to work towards.
Scott Speaking at a Technocracy inc. Rally
The Technocratic Opportunity
Understanding that technological development would eventually enable the Technate to be realised, in 1970 Professor Zbigniew Brzezinski (1928 – 2017) wrote Between Two Ages: America’s Role In The Technetronic Era. At the time, he was a professor of political science at Columbia university, where Scott had first met Hubbert in 1932. He had already been an advisor to both the Kennedy and Johnson campaigns and would later become National Security Advisor to US President Jimmy Carter (1977 – 1981).
Brzezinski was a significant influence on late 20th Century US foreign policy, far beyond his years in the Carter administration. The Democrat counterpart to Republican Henry Kissinger, he was a centrist and his deep dislike of the Soviet Union often placed him on the right of Kissinger on related issues. He supported the Vietnam War and was instrumental in “Operation Cyclone“ which saw the US arm, train and equip Islamist extremists in Afghanistan.
He was a member of numerous policy think tanks including the Council on Foreign Relations, The Center For Strategic & International Studies, Le Cercle and was a regular attendee at the annual parasite class soiree, the Bilderberg conference. In 1973 he and David Rockefeller formed the Trilateral Commission policy think tank. Brzezinski was very much part of the Deep State milieu and the G3P.
Zbigniew Brzezinski (March 28, 1928 – May 26, 2017)
Between Two Ages is a geopolitical analysis and practical set of policy recommendations born from Brzezinski’s view that digital technology would transform society, culture, politics and the global balance of political power. It also provides us with a clear view of the mindset of the parasite class.
Brzezinski didn’t reference technocracy directly, perhaps wary of its rather sketchy reputation following Scott’s disgrace. However, he did describe it in detail throughout the book:
Technological adaptation would involve the transformation of the bureaucratic dogmatic party into a party of technocrats. Primary emphasis would be on scientific expertise, efficiency, and discipline. [. . .] the party would be composed of scientific experts, trained in the latest techniques, capable of relying on cybernetics and computers for social control.
He theorised about, what he called, the “Technetronic Age” and offered a vision of the near future, from the perspective of the 1970’s. Brzezinski predicted that this Age would arise as a result of the Technetronic Revolution. This would be the “third revolution” to follow the industrial revolution. Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, would later call this the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
Brzezinski wrote:
The post industrial society is becoming a ‘technetronic’ society: a society that is shaped culturally, psychologically, socially, and economically by the impact of technology and electronics—particularly in the area of computers and communications.
He then went on to describe what he thought life in the Technetronic Age would be like for ordinary men, women and their families. He foretold how political and industrial control would be replaced by psychological control mechanisms, such as the cult of personality, steering us towards behaviour change. Our lives would be managed through computing power and, in the parlance of today, led by science:
Both the growing capacity for the instant calculation of the most complex interactions and the increasing availability of biochemical means of human control augment the potential scope of consciously chosen direction. [. . .] Masses are organized in the industrial society by trade unions and political parties and unified by relatively simple and somewhat ideological programs. [. . .] In the technetronic society the trend seems to be toward aggregating the individual support of millions of unorganized citizens, who are easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities, and effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.
He also explained how technology would enable extensive behaviour modification and manipulation of the population. He foresaw (suggested) how this could be weaponised:
It may be possible—and tempting—to exploit for strategic political purposes the fruits of research on the brain and on human behavior. [. . .] one could develop a system that would seriously impair the brain performance of very large populations in selected regions over an extended period.
Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote enthusiastically, through a paper-thin veil of caution, about how a “global scientific elite” could not only use extreme, all-pervasive propaganda, economic and political manipulation to determine the direction of society, but could also exploit technology and behavioural science to genetically alter and brainwash the population.
Describing the form of this society and the potential for technocratic control, he wrote:
Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control.
He claimed that the “Technetronic Age” he described was inevitable. Therefore he asserted that the future of the United States (and the planet) must be centrally planned. These planners would eventually displace “the lawyer as the key social legislator and manipulator.”
As is so often the excuse, warning that others—he meant the Soviet Union—wouldn’t hesitate to embark on this dark social engineering path, this therefore necessitated the urgent need for US geopolitical strategists to develop this network of planners (technocracy) first. This would be done by fusing government with academia and private corporations (the G3P).
He stated that political parties would become increasingly irrelevant, replaced by regional structures pursuing “urban, professional, and other interests.” These could be used to “provide the focus for political action.” He understood the potential for this localised, technocratic administrative system:
In the technetronic age the greater availability of means permits the definition of more attainable ends, thus making for a less doctrinaire and a more effective relationship between ‘what is’ and ‘what ought to be.
He also suggested a redefinition of freedom. Liberty would be achieved through centrally planned public commitment to social and economic equality. The “public good” thus defined by the technocrats.
The positive potential of the third American revolution lies in its promise to link liberty with equality.
Brzezinski recognised that it would be impossible to impose world government directly. Rather it should be gradually constructed through a system of global governance comprised of treaties, bilateral agreements and intergovernmental organisations:
Though the objective of shaping a community of the developed nations is less ambitious than the goal of world government, it is more attainable. [. . .] It [global governance] attempts to create a new framework for international affairs not by exploiting these divisions [between nation-states] but rather by striving to preserve and create openings for reconciliation.
One “opening” that he was particularly interested in was China. Tensions between Russia and China had continued to rumble on and, as Brzezinski wrote Between Two Ages, they had spilled over into a border conflict. He saw that the Sino-Soviet split had created an opportunity to shape China’s modernisation:
In China the Sino-Soviet conflict has already accelerated the inescapable Sinification of Chinese communism. That conflict shattered the revolution’s universal perspective and—perhaps even more important— detached Chinese modernization from its commitment to the Soviet model. Hence, whatever happens in the short run, in years to come Chinese development will probably increasingly share the experience of other nations in the process of modernization. This may both dilute the regime’s ideological tenacity and lead to more eclectic experimentation in shaping the Chinese road to modernity.
These ideas were firmly in Brzezinski’s mind when he and committed eugenicist David Rockefeller, whose family had been bankrolling technocratic initiatives for more than 50 years, first convened the Trilateral Commission. They were eventually joined by other so called “thought leaders” like population control expert Henry Kissinger, Club of Rome environmentalist Gro Harlem Brundtland, US presidents like Bill Clinton, and the president of the Council on Foreign Relations Richard Haass, who more recently wrote World Order 2.0.
Constructing The Technate In China
Mao Zedong’s “great leap forward” saw 40 million people brutalised and starved to death in just three horrific years (1959 – 1961). Apologists claim this was all a terrible mistake but it was nothing of the kind.
In the certain knowledge that food supplies were running out, in 1958 Mao said “to distribute resources evenly will only ruin the Great Leap Forward” and later the same year:
When there is not enough to eat, people starve to death. It is better to let half the people die so that others can eat their fill.
In his zeal to create a communist utopia, Mao presided over a system that seized food from starving millions and exported it to fund his political reforms and determination to rapidly industrialise the economy. It wasn’t an error or an unfortunate oversight. While many were so terrified that they submitted fake reports of surpluses that didn’t exist, it is clear that the leadership of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) knew exactly what the human costs were. They just didn’t care.
Mao and Rockefeller’s view of the Great Leap Forward
Nor did David Rockefeller, as evidenced by his 1973 op-ed for the New York Times. He and his Chase Group banking empire delegation had visited Maoist China. In his account of the trip, Rockefeller dismissed the mass murder of millions as “whatever.” It was the product of genocide that Rockefeller was interested in:
One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony. [. . .] There is a very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese revolution it has obviously succeeded, not only in producing a more efficient administration, but also in fostering. [. . .] a community of purpose.
The Trilateralist Rockefeller could see the opportunity the Chinese dictatorship presented the parasite class. In full agreement with Brzezinski, he wrote:
Too often the true significance and potential of our new relationship with China has been obscured. [. . .] In fact, of course, we are experiencing a much more fundamental phenomenon. [. . .] The Chinese, for their part, are faced with altering a primarily inward focus. [. . .] We, for our part, are faced with the realization that we have largely ignored a country with one-fourth of the world’s population.
The “we” Rockefeller referred to was not us. He meant the G3P and his fellow “stakeholder capitalists” and Trilateralists.
The totalitarian order in China impressed him as he hoped it would. He wasn’t the first Trilateralist to see the technocratic possibilities in China. The sheer scale of the market was an enticing prospect and the promise of the “Technetronic Age” raised the real potential to build the world’s first Technate.
Completely discounting the appalling loss of human life, Rockefeller wrote:
The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history. How extensively China opens up and how the world reacts to the social innovation. [. . .] is certain to have a profound impact upon the future of many nations.
The Great Leap Forward
The G3P’s task was to crack open the Chinese market while supporting ongoing totalitarian rule. China would need help with its economic development and technical support to build the technological infrastructure necessary for technocracy to work. This process had already begun, but with Rockefeller, Brzezinski, Kissinger and others committed to the cause, the target of constructing a Technate was firmly in the Trilateral Commission’s sights.
The Trilateralists set about assisting China to develop both economically and technologically, while remaining careful to avoid applying too much pressure for political reform. Totalitarianism was a system they supported and wanted to exploit. In their 1978 Paper No. 15 on East-West Relations they suggested:
To grant China favourable conditions in economic relations is definitely in the political interest of the West.. there seems to exist sufficient ways for aiding China in acceptable forms with advanced civilian technology.
In the same paper the Trilateralists announced that they weren’t entirely averse to helping China modernise their military capability, though they stressed this should only be for defensive purposes.
They accepted that a modern, militarised China might turn to expansionism and seek to regain territory it historically claimed as its own, in particular Taiwan. They judged this was a reasonable risk to take.
They were playing the great game. Human lives were of no concern.
In Part 2 we will look at how they set about constructing the world’s first Technate in China.
Iain Davis is an author, blogger, researcher and short film maker. You can read more of Iain’s work at his blog IainDavis.com (Formerly InThisTogether), 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.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
Democratic socialism is a lie.
Democratic socialism is a contradiction in terms.
Democracy and socialism, as socialism is currently known cannot go together, because the one cancels the other.
Democracy has to be destroyed in the very process of bringing socialism in, the so-called socialism cannot be brought in without murdering democracy.
Democratic Socialists trying to become the perfect woke people have instead all become retarded fascists.
Working as enforcers for the criminally insane globalists who control the WEF, UN, NATO, WHO.
Playing the great game.
As Democracy dies screaming.
Human lives are of no concern.
“When there is not enough to eat, people starve to death.
It is better to let half the people die so that others can eat their fill”
Mao Zedong.
All these Marxists trying to become the perfect authoritarians have become pathologically sick.
US/UK/Five Eye terrorist states are supporting Nazis in Ukraine at the expense of their own peoples lives and well being.
For a US/EU/UK/NATO proxy war of aggression against Russia, who lets not forget had been the decisive factor in destroying the Nazi war machine and beating Hitler in WW2.
This betrayal shatters all human decency and is a total disregard of the international rule of law.
Why did Churchill, the US, the free West and a whole generation of humanity bother to sacrifice their lives to fight the Nazis if now we are all just to be lead to the new Nazi death camps created by Schwab, Gates, Von der Leyen, Biden, Sunak and all the co-conspirators!
We now have millions slaughtered by their global mRNA eugenics agenda.
Yet nobody is being held to account, prosecuted, executed?
The world demands justice, Nuremberg 2.0 now!!!
Criminally insane politicians who think that they were born to dominate the world and destroy humanity.
The chosen people of destiny.
Are these people what our whole history is about?
Is nobody going to stop these psychopaths?
Humanity cannot be sacrificed to their political games.
We have once again allowed the criminally insane to rule the world, because we have become completely oblivious of who we are.
In this world, billions of fools exist, and they are always ready to believe, always ready to fall into the trap of believing anybody, of believing in any ideology.
Belief has many names, millions of names, there are thousands of beliefs, you can choose.
Belief makes you a part of a bigger crowd than you, and there is a feeling of elation when you are a part of something bigger, a nation, an organized religion, a political ideology.
Then you are not a tiny human being.
A great energy comes to you and you feel elated.
Euphoria is felt.
That’s why, whenever a country is at war, people feel very euphoric, ecstatic.
Suddenly their life has a meaning, they exist for the country, for religion, for civilization, now they have a certain goal to be achieved, and a certain treasure to be protected.
Now they are no longer ordinary people, they have a great mission.
Belief is the bridge to control the individual from the crowd.
Belief is the bridge to remote control you from society.
Belief creates dreams, but it cannot create reality.
Belief cannot deliver reality to you because all belief is a hindrance.
All Belief blocks and distorts reality.
Belief basically means that you have believed before knowing, you are deceiving yourself.
All believers are deceivers, they have lied to themselves.
Whatsoever you believe, you project.
Belief is a projection that covers reality.
It is just like a projector in a cinema, you see something on the screen which is not there.
The projector is hidden behind, but you never look at the projector, you look at the screen.
The projector is at the back, and the whole game is going on there, but you look at the screen.
The whole game is going on in your mind, and a mind filled with belief always goes on projecting things in the world, it sees things which are not there.
This is the problem!
The mind which believes is always vulnerable and always provides an opportunity to be exploited by the cheaters, the politicians and the priests, and remember always the globalist cheaters are all around.
Don’t be a projector, don’t be an active mind.
Let your mind be completely passive, receptive.
Don’t project anything from the mind into reality, otherwise you will distort it.
Simply allow reality to enter the mind and you be a passive watcher, a passive witness.
Then, whatsoever the case is, you will know.
Then that which is will be revealed to you, and only that can lead you to maturity, to growth, to intelligence.
Truth is not an object, you cannot believe in it, you cannot worship it.
Truth is not a thing but the clarity of perception.
Truth is not without but within.
And everybody has been seeking it without, hence everybody is missing it.
Truth is not an object that you have to find, search for or seek.
Truth is your subjectivity.
Truth is the one who is seeking, truth is not the sought, but the seeker themselves.
To think of truth as something outside is to miss from the very beginning.
Truth is not an object but an awakening in you.
it is an awareness within you, it is intelligence functioning at its optimum.
You cannot see truth, it is not a thing.
You cannot grasp truth, it is not a thing.
You cannot give or take truth, it is not a thing.
It is your inner eye, your inner perception, what the Hindus call the third eye.
To be the seer, alert and awake is to be true.
Drop the mind if you want to know the real.
Put aside the mind if you want to penetrate into the truth.
The truth is always there, but your mind is standing in-between.
Put aside the mind, make a window and look, and everything, the very mystery of life, becomes unveiled before you.
With the mind nobody has ever been able to know the truth.
Without the mind anybody can know the truth, because the mind is the only barrier.
The mind must cease for the truth to be.
If you have nothing else but mind, it is difficult, very difficult to put it aside, arduous, but it happens if you go on trying.
In the beginning the glimpses will be there for only a few seconds.
But even those will give you a new dimension.
For a few seconds the mind stops – there are no thoughts, and then suddenly, as if there is lightning, the whole world of mind disappears and the world of the real is revealed.
These lightning flashes will happen to you, and then, by and by, you will get settled into the state of no-mind.
No-mind is consciousness and mind is unconsciousness.
It is time that individual consciousness be raised, that people be made alert and aware that the question is no longer of communism or democracy, Russia or America.
The question is politics or Truth.
Religious consciousness means receptivity to the joy the universe is made of.
Any intelligent person is of necessity going to be religious.
Politics is only for idiots.
Its day is finished.
We have to begin a new history in which there will be no place for politics.
We want to get rid of all this retardedness, this mediocrity.
We want the earth to become free from all division, tyranny, war, exploitation and violence.
The real question is –
Peace or Mind?
No-mind or Mind?
Consciousness or Unconsciousness?
Truth or Darkness?
Are You the solution or part of the problem?
Note that the whole program also consists of the destruction of independent private capitalism, to be replaced with public-private partnership, combined with social responsibility in the form of stakeholderism.
This means government and private companies in bed with each other, the government forcing all unwilling private enterprise into compliance, and forcing independent private enterprise to comply through social responsibility programs.
I have actually seen many anti-WEF people, who could as well be in favour of the WEF, as they hold the same hostile ideas about independent private capitalism (you know: private capitalists all day have foam comming out of their mouth from greed). Also these people are often in favour of government taking action to restrain private capitalism. Well, now they have their way, what are they complaining about?
Add to that, it is the electorate at large who helped to create all the statist/socialist big governments throughout the twentieth century, which are now expanding their grip… monsters of their own creation, coming after them to have them for lunch.
US regime checked by strategic swing to Shanghai
By Pepe Escobar cross-posted on PressTV Iran
“Iran has joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), marking the culmination of a steadfast process that lasted 15 years.
Iran has also applied to become a member of the expanding BRICS+ [the C is for China] which by 2025 will be the G20 that really matters.
Iran is already part of the Quad that really matters: alongside China, Russia and India. The Islamic Republic is deepening its strategic partnership with the first two, and increasing bilateral cooperation with India.
Iran is a key Chinese partner in the “New Silk Road”, or Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).”
Richard Haass said in Foreign Affairs magazine a few years ago that the model of capitalism should be….. China. Absolutely grotesque
PS Informative, historic article…thank you. I find the five icons at the top of the page distracting as I’m scrolling thru the article. Would you consider putting them at the bottom of the article?
Brilliantly satirical essay backed up by anecdotal evidence, on the collusion between the upper classes of China and EU$A to bequeath their privileged lifestyle to their offspring through the Global Education System:
“Of my hundreds of Chinese classmates during undergraduate education at Fudan University in Shanghai and Peking University in Beijing, none took the annual University Entrance Examination, or rather: Most participated but did not get the highest marks. Instead, they received school recommendation letters… schools, of course, where their parents—mayors, doctors, foremen, party officials—bore considerable influence.Only the science majors are hard to cheat, but that is everywhere in the world the same, isn’t it? So, scientists do not rule a society [except when they are trotted out by the real rulers to blind the public with “The Science”].
Society is ruled by humanists—politicians, lawyers, bankers, culture makers, artists, businessmen, writers, and historians.
[Like the West] the ruling caste in China are intermarried, and they have privileged prep schools so that their offspring don’t cross paths with the general population. Likewise, a recommendation from the right school counts more than high marks in the open entrance exam.]
As for foreign students, those from the U$A just apply and walk into “top university” PKU. You have read this correctly. You just bypass 1.4 billion Chinese, pay maybe a symbolic $4000 study fee, and, voila, you are now a Peking University affiliate. This is what I mean by hidden knowledge and the hidden world.”
https://thesaker.is/finis-sinarum-why-i-think-china-cannot-win-this/
“In the certain knowledge that food supplies were running out, in 1958 Mao said “to distribute resources evenly will only ruin the Great Leap Forward” and later the same year:
In his zeal to create a communist utopia, Mao presided over a system that seized food from starving millions and exported it to fund his political reforms and determination to rapidly industrialise the economy.”
Thanks for this, and for the horrific photo; and for the info that Mao’s policy of “starving one half to nourish the other half” was approved by Rockefeller in his zeal to create a capitalist utopia.
Maurice Strong found safe haven in China….
Is this best explained by:
1) China being a workers’ paradise?
2) China being a very ancient civilisation based on very different values and interests?
3) China being an independent Superpower rival to the West?
4) China being a Rockefeller-controlled Technate?
I urge readers to read this essay, because it contains valuable information, but to read it with caution, for the following reasons:
1) China is an official enemy of the UK and its senior partner the USA: Mr: Davies lives secure inside the empire’s nuclear umbrella, secure in the sense that he doesn’t have to worry about his country being invaded, like his country did to Iraq or destabilized, as the UK/USA 2014 coup d’état in Ukraine:
Any attack on a UK ‘official enemy’ is seen as a ‘positive’ by the UK deep state
2) Mr: Davies proceeds via ASSERTION, for example his assertion concerning the Great Leap Forward (believe it or not there are many viewpoints on the subject): Any writer who proceeds via assertion is asking for your belief based on faith, not reason, that is asking to be accepted as a priest
3) Mr Davies ignores the key difference between China and the UK/USA: China’s government controls its currency and its banking system, while in the UK/USA PRIVATE BANKERS control the currency and the banking system: The economist Michael Hudson has written extensively about how that key difference allows China to concentrate on productive industrial capitalism while the UK/USA concentrate on non productive financial capitalism: This has a huge effect on the living standard of the working and middle class:
That said, as I said at the beginning, the essay is worth reading and worth considering Davies’ point of view: But with caution:
Good to see someone who has read Brzezinski. Davies’ thesis falls at the first hurdle. As WW2 finally comes to end with the definitive defeat of the Anglo-American empire in Ukraine the emerging world order will be multipolar. Davies rejects this but I’m convinced he will be proved wrong when all the global institutions he mentions, the UN system, the BIS, the WTO plus the World Bank and the IMF are replaced or reformed. I also expect a new paradigm in science and culture to emerge with the rejection of the anglophilosophy and Western cultural and scientific hegemony stemming the collapse of US prestige. We already see this quite dramatically in Russia’s rejection of wokeism and the death of the Green agenda. The real problem we have in the West is reversing our own suicidal course and creating the basis of viable society. The grandiosity of the fourth industrial revolution will be the first thing to go as we descend into economic and social chaos
https://off-guardian.org/2022/09/22/multipolar-world-order-part-1/
https://off-guardian.org/2022/09/27/multipolar-world-order-part-2/
https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/19/multipolar-world-order-part-3/
https://off-guardian.org/2022/10/25/multipolar-world-order-part-4/
Chapter and verse! I’ve read them Iain, I just don’t agree with them. The NWO is an Anglo-american project as H.G.Wells and Brzezinaki made clear. The latter was right to proclaim the failure of the project in that CFR speech in 2010. He spent his last years going on about Global warming, the last great hope but that is now also dead in the water!
1984 2.0 was planned in PR China by Xi Jinping & co(vid):“The largest quarantine camp in China’s Guangzhou city is being built. It has 90,000 isolation pods. ”
Impressive industrialism from the CCP but now their own population is revolting against this level of inhumanity,
I hope Ian Davis keeps up with the latest developments in the PRC: he might have to modify part 2 or create part a 3!
Principles of Scientific Management chimed with the theories of economist and sociologist Psychology, sociology and anthropology regulate supply, demand, utility, and value, etc.
Managed societies require centralized decision making; adequate technology, accurate real time data, sensory system monitoring [surveillance] and continuous feedback of all significant data. Informed decisions evolve better managed societies. Evolution is a function of trial and error. Learning is discovering which trial works best.
One can look at the nation state system (256 nations) as a set of societies designed to homogenate and to study differently managed experimental societies. Globalism is a expression of governance designed to implement the best outcomes discovered from those experimental societies under one management. The question is what management system is best for whom?
Thanks again Ian for yet another massive article.
The relentless bigots of social scientism, constantly supreme, consistently revolted and polar opposite to ‘natural law’
Evilness starts with something that sounds beautiful on the surface to trap people in a Trojan horse kind of situation. (e.g. Environmentalism, fighting a virus, fighting terrorism, fighting drugs, fighting fraud)
My father-in-law’s first cousin Ed (a descendant of a great grandfather that fled to the west just after 1900. He was a government sponsored homesteader.) wrote me several letters in the 1980s outlining all of this.
Gives me chills.
After rekindling a relationship with his children after he died we learned that they had thought he was a crazy conspiracy lunatic and apologized after I described his letter writing campaign.
After his children rejected his ideas he redirected his efforts towards me. I described him once before. Cousin Ed eventually hand built an off the grid log home in rural Washington State when he was in his 80s. The family still owns some of the land his and my father-in-law’s grandfather originally homesteaded.
Ed was an avid member of the John Birch society which promoted many of the same ideas presented here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society
Kind of wild, I thought. The man felt compelled to pass on what he had learned to someone. Anyone. Anyone who would listen as a warning.
It was wild enough to get my attention and compel me to verify some of what he was saying.
Here we are…………
Iain lives in cockoo land.
Next week my colleague will have his first work do Xmas party in 3 years subject to people feeling ok and well.
They may even have to be tested to be sure, Just in case to be on the safe side- company rules. THIS IS THE U.K
According to lain who lives in Portsmouth – China: is The World’s First Technate.
Beam me up Scottie
I don’t think Lain lives in cuckoo land…….. These are very old ideas. The current tyranny we are enduring should be proof enough. Don’t you think?
China is indeed the world’s first Technate, they’re the first country to introduce a social credit system and cashless society, although we are starting to see the later concept being introduced in most European countries, China remains the world’s first Technate per excellence.
The Chinese Technate was short circuiting yesterday…
How could this happen? It would have required a huge army. How were so many people brainwashed (and brainwashed with an imported doctrine) to commit such genocide?
Just read about that. Mao Zedong thought he knew everything about everything including farming and food production. He thought that sparrows would eat the crops so ordered every sparrow killed. They were the natural pest control and so bugs ate the crops, thus not enough food. Parallels today’s leaders without actual life experience doing anything…academia taught. They do not understand how things really work which is why the plan will fail, ultimately…but the human cost will be great.
https://www.visiontimes.com/2022/06/26/alina-lipp-german-journalist-charged-bank-frozen-ukraine-reporting.html
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/brazilians-protesting-jair-bolsonaros-defeat-reportedly-have-bank-accounts-frozen/
Maybe there’s a bit of a pattern emerging?….
That pattern goes back to Merry England. Henry V11 of England fined his opponents rather than killing them. Today even our bank accounts can be frozen and our safe deposits are no longer safe. Bank robbery is no longer a profession of private practitioners: it has become government policy.
“You will own nothing and be happy — or else!”
Footnotes, please.
PEOPLE are not “the herd”. At least 30% of humanity in the developed countries is awake as to what is happening.
I hope you are doing something besides demeaning name-calling; it is YOURSELF you are demeaning with such behavior.
Looks like an upfront quote from the future global president, Our Divine Supreme Leader Klaus Schwaab. All hail his excellency……I wish I was joking!
A French Politician of ZOG extraction, his name escapes me at the moment … said that this was going to happen a few decades ago. point being … it is not as though we haven’t been warned repeatedly.
it is unfortunate that a seeming MAJORITY don’t want to know. I just pity their children …
> “the world’s first Technate has emerged in China”
ahem .. isn’t it odd how our China fear mongers conveniently forget about Snowden and PRISM, NSA. Five Eyes etc.
The USA is the formost techno Surveillance and Control state.
The USA is, for all in the world, +the+ danger to freedom. And will be until it finally withers and dies.
Iain appears on U.k shillum.
enough said!
UK fifth column don’t you mean ophiap?
The one overriding feature of Technocracy, Technate, or any other totalitarian system is that it cannot work.
Human nature stands in its way. Brainwash people any way they wish, they will never extinguish the human wish to have things, to be more successful than their neighbors, and most of all to find ways around the “System” – whatever that “System” happens to be.
The fact that the “Parasite Class” actually believes it can work establishes beyond a doubt their insanity.
People like a challenge, however small. In a Technate all challenges have been excised. Because the nutcases who man such a monstrosity cannot imagine social perfection failing to appeal to people.
That’s ‘Winston Smith talk.’ – and he got his comeuppance for it , didnt he !
What works on paper, or in a novel, won’t necessarily work in reality.
Reliance on have and needs surely is a dependence on where you happen to be, belong.
Therein lays one major cross section of controlling web driven markets. People will always…I’m sorry but such a generalisation is simply not true. Perhaps a more realistic approach is providing a retro step by Nation approach, instead of this or that Uni- late ’60’s feeling on digital stereotypes.
A Technate won’t abolish ‘challenges’ – but it will limit their solutions to within the Technate paradigm.
There is however the same paradox that was levelled at Marx’s dialectics – how can this be ‘The Final Revolution’ (Huxley’s term) without destroying their own destruction/creation motor? Or to put it in Frankfurt School terms, the critique must be critiqued (and the critique of the critique critiqued).
Perhaps the masters will have ascended to such levels they needn’t worry about such things?…
I’m all too familiar with people wanting to ‘have things’ (aka covetousness, acquisitiveness) and be more successful than their neighbors (aka envy), less so with this being human nature. Is this something hereditary, perhaps like Richard Dawkins’ selfish gene? Where’s the evidence-based science for social Darwinism?
It seems there’s ample anthropological and cross-cultural examples of less competitive, more cooperative social relations, learned just like what gets called human nature, arguing a case for long-term survival and genuine sustainability, and against making virtues of vices or betting that narrowly conceived self-interest doesn’t itself produce the idiocy underlying adaptation to a social system ultimately inimical to most anyone’s interest, by reason of apathy for anything beyond the private world of accumulation and possessive relations with dead objects which governs one’s habits of living.
It’s hard for me to imagine that what is in fact a past paradigm of the perverse relations with the living world which capitalist class culture has colonized among its human resources is now the source of human liberation from the present imposition of a new feudalism governing more scientifically managed behavior patterns of whatever’s left of labor. People may like a challenge, but what kind? Whether I’m supposed to get ahead of the Joneses or play video games as a useless eater, neither seems challenging so much as neurotic or obsessively self-preoccupied.
Is moral identification with traditional parasite classes, not unlike nationalist identification with classic imperialism, our only antidote to technocracy and globalism? Besides, since when has what works, or pragmatic reality, with which sanity claims to associate, provided that much of a check upon psychopaths, and the all too many brainwashed who follow their lead, going along to get along? That systemic abuse in class-based society and history littered with corpses is taken as normal, the way things are, human nature, argues for the madness of civilization, and against perpetuating its lies.
Human nature ..will never extinguish the human wish to have things, to be more successful than their neighbors, and most of all to find ways around the “System” – whatever that “System” happens to be.
<=Maybe, but I think that mind set it is a matter of experience in the crucible (and the sub crucibles) that matured you after birth that determines that wish. The better way to look at humans is their behaviors are expressions of their experience. Humans are born to better the society they were born into. Their purpose in life is to leave for the next generation a social system and quality of life better than the departed found it, when the departed arrived to the earth for their extended stay (lifetime).
Virtue signalling is a form of having – and “having nothing” will be promoted as a virtue.
Another great piece of informative work. If only such an understanding came with a solution.
https://iaindavis.com/inalienable-rights/
So then why did China ban national vaccine mandates?
Why are they working so hard on SCO, BRICS and all the alternatives to the globalist outfits?
IT’S A DECEPTION EXERCISE, just like Perestroika was. It serves to delude the easily deluded minds of the West that a GLOBAL TAKEOVER has strong and viable opposition.
As Mr Davis has outlined previously, the BRICS offer an alternative version of globalism, not an alternative to globalism.
Davis writes from his cubbyhole in the UK and speaks no second language. He has no clue about what is going on in the outside non NATO world.
He literally just recites the soundbite narratives.
So does this mean Davis’s research is in error in some way?
China appears to have been a target for many people/institutions inside of NATO, most of whom don’t speak Asian languages either I’d bet, wishing to trial or observe a technocratic system in operation. Davis is bringing this to our attention, it’s all there. If he’s in error then please be specific.
If you think his work on BRICS is in error then cite where.
Lets have an actual discussion, without resorting to sneering tactics, sweeping dismissals or other such things. Thank you, A2
Much of the information presented by Davis is old. I pointed this out in an earlier post. The John Birch Society presented much of the same information over 1/2 a century ago. A distant cousin sent me a copy of a paperback book which outlined their ideas. The modern internet had not been invented. They have a web page now: https://jbs.org/
History usually is 🤷♂️
My meaning: Others have been writing about this for much longer than he………. Does he credit them?
Links to all sources are in the articles.
I know. Not happy with Sam’s snarkiness. Many of the ideas are as “Old as the Hills”. I did not perceive it fully in that context. I did go back and look at your links, however. I do appreciate your having taken the time to produce it in another context.
I hope you will find part two interesting. I’m sure you can appreciate it is difficult to express complex political discussions without providing the historical context. Part 2 won’t make any sense without it.
It is often a case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t. People like Patrick Woods, James Corbett, Mathew Cole and others have done a lot more work on this than I have. I stand on their shoulders and hope I can add something to the conversation, that’s all.
Mainly I just want people to be aware of what is happening as I believe technocracy is being installed globally. People need to understand what it is before they can see it I feel.
They eased back on immunization early late February ’20 apart from remote regions. China’s health systems judged from afar appear amazing imo.
There’s been forced local vaxxes since Sept 2021. Nat’l vaxx mandate, announced July 6, 2022, had to be rescinded the next day due to backlash.
Inform yourself better. Some power hungry freak in the Beijing municipality tried to have a municipal mandate for Beijing. That’s when the national government stepped in and said mandates would not be allowed anywhere in the nation.
The breathless stories of “forced local vaxxes since Sept 2021” have mostly come from places like Human Rights Watch etc. which stayed totally silent on the REAL mandates in Canada, Italy, several US states, France, Germany etc etc.
mangojuice, thank you for the correction. Do you have a link that shows the Beijing-issued mandate wasn’t official & rescinded due to backlash? My source was merely the US controlled media.
However, it’s been long reported without contradiction that China’s restrictions have been similar to those in the worst US States:
“From July 11, people will need to show proof of vaccination to enter a wide range of public places in the Chinese capital, including cinemas, libraries, museums, gyms, stadiums and training centers, a city health official told a news briefing Wednesday.”
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/07/china/china-covid-beijing-vaccine-mandate-intl-hnk/index.html
That’s from CNN Hong Kong
In the spirit of this article, a Corbett-style refresher course on China and the New World Order would be most appropriate:
https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-297-china-and-the-new-world-order/
Do Chinese technocrats hate their own people as badly as the British establishment? The BBC has just announced that will be the UK’s first Children’s Capital of Culture – Pure mockery! Rotherham, of all places! They are rubbing our noses in it!! https://www.youtube.com/shorts/d5FMuDjPqKk
Their population policy says yes. They love the Chinese so much there will soon be a whole lot less of them.
The issue is really deeper – they don’t understand “their own people” in the way you do.
Media rectal roundup:
“Happy Birthday, Omicron” – NY Times
(A provocation to the wrathful concerned Left who will reliably hit back with “How dare you trivialise this horrific ongoing tragedy!”)
“Are we ready for the approaching loneliness epidemic?” – Financial Times.
(Note how this “loneliness epidemic” is not mooted as a possiblity but blandly stated as unavoidable.)
“How to Navigate Climate Change During a Cost-of-living Crisis: What It Really Means to Live Sustainably” – Spillmag
(Pulling out all the stops on all the memes!)
“Climate Change from A to Z The stories we (?!) tell ourselves (?!) about the future. ” – New Yorker.
(This then leads on to the unexpectedly low key: “Climate Change Resists Narrative – and yet some accounting of what’s happening is needed.” Climate change “resists narrative”?! Actually it resists truth!)
THE MACHINE STOPS: https://youtu.be/SWiBicmWuNg
OffG serialised this book a couple of years ago. It shows succinctly just where technological and globalist civilization is headed.
Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2022-11-23. G-20: Global Jab PPs So ‘You Can Move Around’. SBF’s parents bought 19 properties $121M over past 2y (blog, gab, tweet).
Call it a “technate” or any iteration of technocratic. The label is irrelevant. Financial stratification works the same no matter what label is applied.
Land development cartels (controlled by European banking mafia) 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.
The Secret behind China’s Ghost Cities
May 14, 2022
The Secret behind China’s Ghost Cities – YouTube
Same as it ever was…
Paul, Thank you. Interesting and very weird.
Say what?
You really are the only honest ACTOR.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1595244471268278272
Within the last month, the
mostly fakeimmigration videos photos appear.Within the last month, the welfare state is being mentioned.
Like clockwork the CCP videos which seem suspect to say the least and the articles by the same people who sell (blame) the Immigrant and welfare state.
Seem’s organised and convenient to shift the blame from top to bottom or them over there.
One could even say, that nudge of CCP evil, Immigrants Evil, Welfare people useless would be something the Intelligence services pushes..
We have seen this with the Alex Jones, U.k Column etc etc message over the past 5 years They dont Represent the People they push parasites narrative.
No-one within my group of friends has even visited China, I very much doubt Iain has either, but the shill is. lesser of two evils = Fake binary and aint we lucky!
I can fully agree with this analysis.
I would label it differently though: not “China” but the CCP became the first Technate, most recently under Xi Jinping with his Weibo and Covid apps trying to stifle revolt on the individual level. The CCP went off this course under Jiang Zemin temporarily.
Seeing the spontaneous uprisings this week in a few Chinese big cities does give me a glimmer of hope that 100% authoritarianism does have practical limits: Homo sapiens has not lost its animal survival spirits.
The phrase “Theatre of war” is not accidental.
“Scott’s exposure as a fraudster—he falsified his engineering credentials.Despite his public humiliation, Scott remained the spokesman for Technocracy inc.” He worked with M. King Hubbert globally renowned for his vague and generally inaccurate peak oil theory.”
Precursors of fraudulent Con-19 spokesmen for “The Science”.
Their ancient Greek precursors were Plato’s enemies, the Sophists, who taught Elite youth how to argue more like a Lawyer rather than a Philosopher ie, to persuade the hearer rather than to find the truth.
Often referred to as the elite, a more fitting description is “the parasite class.”
“Elite”: from the Latin, to “Elect” or choose. As in French, “Les Elus”, the Chosen People.
The real Elite are chosen by a consensul, for special ability or service to the community. The false so-called Elite are self-chosen.
https://iaindavis.substack.com/p/the-parasite-class
A French Ambassador wrote a memoir in 1937 in which he recorded the following from Otto Kahn of Kuhn, Loeb & Co and big pal of the Warburgs and the Schiffs:
“Our essential dynamism makes use of the forces of destruction and the forces of creation, but uses the first to nourish the second… the organisation for revolution is evidenced by destructive Bolshevism and for construction by the League of Nations which is also our work. Bolshevism is the accelerator and the League is the brake on the mechanism of which we supply both the motive force and the guiding power. What is the end? It is already determined by our mission”.
Kahn loved the Occult, at least partly for the same reason. He financed Crowley and the German writer Hans Ewers who penned both THE STUDENT OF PRAGUE and ALRAUNE (both filmed multiple times).
If you read a bit of Crowley it is clear, that though he is a futurist, he’s not a fan of communism
Great Veblen quote on “the canon of honorific leisure”
“A better illustration, or at least a more unmistakable one, is afforded by a certain king of France, who is said to have lost his life through an excess of moral stamina in the observance of good form. In the absence of the functionary whose office it was to shift his master’s seat, the king sat uncomplaining before the fire and suffered his royal person to be toasted beyond recovery. But in so doing he saved his Most Christian Majesty from menial contamination.”
He manages to shoe in his favourity bogeyman China into the end.
I love how he talks about the brutality without a mention of the Opium Wars or the context that led up to the revolution.
Nor does he mention any of China’s achivements in the last 40 years. Davis is still stick in 1973.
And the admins are out in force to shut down any criticism…
According to Godfree Roberts at unz.com, the 40 million figure is also vastly exaggerated.
Look I agree with some of what you say here- Iain’s treatment of Veblen here is pretty poor, Veblen was a complex character and this article does nothing to help someone accurately understand Veblen’s thinking, writing or his historical arc.
But your point about the admins shutting down any criticism is rubbish. I’ve never seen a comment censored here and I’ve never seen any admin shut anyone down even when someone pushes back hard against them- which I have done on occasion.
This is one of the most open forums on the internet I’ve seen in over a decade of commenting in such places.
My posts are regularly removed.
Yes, he’s writing as if Mao is still alive.
On the topic of different societies:
The original Lost in Space has this entertaining exchange:
Robot: “I am not programmed for free will.”
Dr Smith: “Oh I wouldn’t worry about it. It’s vastly overrated.”
What is interesting isn’t so much Dr Smith’s retort as the paradox in the Robot’s statement. You could go so far as to say that every society “programmes” its members into “free will” i.e. the “free will” that the society presents. For us, that means being programmed as a wage slave consumer. It is clear that the Reset is now attempting to reprogramme us for a completely different society – and one in which the population numbers are going to be reduced.
https://shoah.org.uk/target-china-by-f-william-engdahl/
The technocratic enablers are heading at warp speed to a self-inflicted oblivion. It’s going to be Biblical!
If only that was the case. Technocracy is only one of six attack vectors encircling us which are gradually squeezing the life out of us.
It’s like watching a horror movie in slow motion with a blind audience.
The religion is Medical Materialism and its primary sacrament is vaccination. Strike at the foundation of the religion and the whole edifice comes crumbling down.
‘We are control freaks. Because we are control freaks, we have to be in total control.
In order to gain total control, we must devise a thesis that the only way to ensure ‘mass prosperity’ is to follow a path that only we can deliver.
Because only we can deliver it, we must be in control.
The fact that we are control freaks is totally incidental to the scenario that we end up in control.’
China is not my enemy.
This piece isn’t pointing fingers at an ‘enemy’ in such a simplistic way, not even indirectly. Please read pieces all the way through. Thanks, A2
Read between the lines. The picture at the top of the article is the first clue.
The picture is not intended to imply anything other than illustrate the article title. As the person who chose the picture I can speak from some authority. A2
Speaking of pictures, the one showing dead people is not of the great leap froward. It’s been taken much earlier.
I chose the header image and switched in a higher resolution photograph of Howard Scott, all other images were compiled by the author.
With regards the photo you mention, can you provide a link to your source? I did a reverse image search and it came back with very little.
For all correction suggestions, please cite them clearly so we can forward them to the author and amend if necessary.
Thank you very much. A2
Here’s the link:
https://www.sohu.com/a/311053855_120054329
You’ll have to unfold the article to get to the picture. The description says it is from the Shaanxi famine in the 18th year of the Republic (1929). I don’t know if that’s correct, but if you look at the clothes of those people standing in the photo, you’ll notice they don’t match the communist era.
And Iain certainly doesnt have all the answers but he has the balls and the tenacity to put his thoughts and endless hours of research out there to get you all talking.
China is a role model.
Yeah, you seem to have 100% missed the point
Could you kindly explain (or at least point to) the point. I too seem to have missed it.
China is not the enemy of the western globalists. They are BFFs. If the globalist cabal is your enemy so is China
Nor mine.
Neither was Islam my enemy during the “Clash of Civilizations” engineered by the conspiracy of Con-911 that led to “The War of Terror”, “Shock and Awe” and “The Coalition of the Killing” that killed 3 Million Muslims –the same Anglo-Zionazi Capitalist conspiracy that is now warring against Russia and China, with open threat of nuclear Armageddon.
Well somebody is given the world is collapsing about our ears.
Nor mine
Thanks Ian. A great article and I look forward to part 2.
The men of this parasite class are so very obsessed with control. They must be extremely frightened as well they might be. When attempts to control are extreme, the opposite polarity is triggered – lack of control.
Just like too much yang will turn into yin.
The laws of the Universe/Nature will always remain supreme.
The laws of Nature and the Universe are the unknowns for the technocrat class, thats why they desire the ‘evolution’ of transhumanism
Are the billionares’ underground bunkers and yatchs free of 5G? I want them to share the benefits of 5G too.
Iain,
So Thomas says what I think below. Can you explain why so many articles, one should be enough, if you are a good writer…
What do these people have in common ?
Who are they, you, OffG controlled by ?
Offg is controlled by no one. Try to spot a good thing while it lasts. 😅 A2
That’s some top notch stupidity there.
One article- that’s it? What if new evidence or discoveries come into play?
Are you ever going to address the substance of anything?
Street Music
https://www.bitchute.com/video/1Ue66IpOXstK/
Some analysts maintained it was the growing power of the technical strata of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union that propelled Gorbachev into office, and the need for Perestroika…
The Technate most likely will use 5 Year plans – like those used by the Soviets, except , instead of plans to increase production they’ll be plans to increase degrowth…
Though there’s a feeling of Panic about…They may have ditched ideas of 5 year plans, as the global economic crash seems to be hurriedly approaching quicker than they’d planned for…
Ummm … they’re the ones causing the crash. They have to destroy the economy first before they can ‘build back better.’
I think this is an important interview and should be shared far and wide. It’s a good summary of where we’re at and the road ahead.
https://rumble.com/v1w1fcn-aman-jabbi-the-final-lockdown-street-lights-that-kill-in-smart-cities-cbdc-.html