It’s a zero-sum situation. The rich are robbing the poor to swell their coffers – and their bellies.
In April 2022, Oxfam reported a terrifying prospect of more than a quarter of a billion people falling into extreme levels of poverty in 2022 alone.
In its January 2021 report ‘The Inequality Virus’, it also stated that the wealth of the world’s billionaires increased by $3.9tn between 18 March and 31 December 2020. Their total wealth then stood at $11.95tn, a 50 per cent increase in just 9.5 months.
According to Oxfam’s analysis, 13 out of the 15 IMF loan programmes negotiated during the second year of COVID required new austerity measures such as taxes on food and fuel or spending cuts that could put vital public services at risk.
Oxfam and Development Finance International (DFI) also revealed that 43 out of 55 African Union member states face public expenditure cuts totalling $183 billion over the next five years.
The world’s poorest countries were due to pay $43 billion in debt repayments in 2022, which could otherwise cover the costs of their food imports. Governments across the world are now largely under the control of international creditors after COVID policies resulted in (deliberately) triggering a multi-trillion-dollar global debt crisis.
Meanwhile, oil and gas giants report record-breaking profits.
It’s similar for the world’s biggest agribusiness corporations. They have made more in profits since 2020 than the amount that the UN estimates could cover the basic needs of the world’s most vulnerable.
A February 2023 report by Greenpeace International – Food Injustice 2020-2022 – exposes rampant profiteering at a time when war and lockdowns have contributed to food insecurity across the world.
Twenty corporations in the grain, fertiliser, meat and dairy sectors delivered $53.5 billion to shareholders in the financial years 2020 and 2021. At the same time, the UN estimates that $51.5 billion would be enough to provide food, shelter and lifesaving support for the world’s 230 million most vulnerable people.
Davi Martins, campaigner at Greenpeace International, says that we are witnessing an enormous transfer of wealth to a few rich families that own the global food system. This at a time when the majority of the world population is struggling to make ends meet.
These 20 companies could literally save the world’s 230 million most vulnerable people and have billions of profit left over in spare change. Paying more to shareholders of a few food corporations is just outrageous and immoral.”
Covering the period 2020-2022 when COVID policies were in force and the war in Ukraine had begun, the report looked at the profits of 20 of the biggest agribusiness corporations and how many people have been affected by food insecurity as well as the extreme rise of food prices across the globe.
These ‘hunger profiteers’ exploited crises to gain grotesque profits. They plunged millions into hunger while tightening their grip on the global food system. One of the firms mentioned is Cargill – owned by 14 billionaires.
Together with Archer-Daniels Midland, Bunge and Dreyfus – Cargill controls more than 70% of the world’s grain trade. None of these firms are under no obligation to disclose what they know about global markets, including their own grain stocks.
The table below from the Greenpeace International report listing the 20 firms included in its study:
Greenpeace found that a lack of transparency around the true amounts of grain in storage following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was a key factor fuelling speculation on food markets and inflated prices.
Aside from manipulating markets and prices, these corporations also fuel food insecurity by pushing small-scale farmers and local producers out of the system. Smallholder farmers actually feed most of the world, unlike the type of industrial agri-enterprises global agribusiness serves (and sometimes owns).
Global agribusiness corporations never tire of telling policy makers that what they do is essential for feeding the world and ensuring food security. But the opposite is true.
They create or contribute to hunger, illness and malnutrition, displace rural communities, destroy smallholder agriculture, place farmers on seed and chemical treadmills and wreck and pollute ecosystems.
Aside from hollowing out or capturing key institutions to forward their agenda, they misleadingly conflate strengthening and expanding their global supply chains (destroying indigenous systems of production in doing so) with serving the food needs of the world (for insight into these issues, see Food, Dependency and Dispossession: Resisting the New World Order on the website of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)).
To prevent profiteering on such a grand scale and lessen the vulnerability of food supply and production to shocks (war, energy shortages, etc), a decentralised food system based on short supply chains is required. This would be based on the principles of localisation and strengthening smallholder agriculture. What this means is food sovereign communities in which local people take ownership of seeds, land and water (commonwealth) and manage what is produced and how it is produced.
Governments and policy makers need to act now to protect people from the abuses wrought by giant agribusiness corporations. Greenpeace argues that without regulating and loosening the grip of corporate control on the global food system, current inequities will only deepen further. It adds that we need to change the food system – failure to do so will cost millions of more lives.
The Greenpeace report adds further weight to calls for governments at international, national and local level to put an end to corporate control and monopoly in the food system while instituting an international trade order based on cooperation and human rights instead of competition and coercion.
Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture and is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization in Montreal. You can read his “mini e-book”, Food, Dependency and Dispossession: Cultivating Resistance, here.
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
In the past couple of years, traitor governments around the Pacific have ratified the CPTPP treaty, purportedly on free trade but in fact enslavement to trans-national capital. It explicitly prohibits farmers from saving seeds for replanting.
Over 30 years, 60 of the poorest countries paid $550 billion in principal and interest on loans of $540 billion; yet their outstanding debt remained at $523 billion. -John Perkins 2015
No one forces anyone to borrow money.
As soon as everyone accepts that not everyone on the planet is going to have the same standard of living, a lot of hands will stop wringing.
We never should have industrialized the poor areas of the world — south America and especially Africa. The population boom this century will be mostly from Africa, who are overrunning Europe with illegal migration.
Someone please tell Bill Gates to stop sending sanitary birth kits to Africa. That will solve the problem by letting nature take its course.
Another benefit of Brexit.
In one of the more shocking hypocrisies of this year so far, Charles 111, King of England – considered to be a strong supporter of organic farming and environmental causes – has given his Royal Assent to a biotechnology ‘innovation’ which will provide an open book for UK firms to alter the genome of animals and plants, so as to create novel engineered species and biotech ‘foods’.
In taking this step Charles has committed an open act of betrayal of all bona fide farmers, and particularly of organic farmers.
The Genetic Technology Precision Breeding Act 2023 was given the royal go ahead on 23rd March, 2023. *
This piece of legislation will, for the time being, be unique to the UK, as such animal and plant biotech deformations are not allowed in the EU and many other countries.
A secondary deception relates to the marketing of such novel recombinant DNA experiments.
The dark irony of King of England launching unlabelled biotech foods, animals and plants on citizens of his own country, is difficult to trump.
Charles is already in conflict with the constitution of his country by standing shoulder to shoulder with Klaus Schwab in promoting the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’. One of the main objectives of which is to render nation states obsolete and to centralise all power within the control of a small despotic elite, whose stated intention is to make all private property illegal and to re-engineer human beings into Transhuman cyborgs.
On May 6, 2023, at his coronation in London, Charles will be officially crowned monarch of the United Kingdom and its Commonwealth (colonies). A large empire.
As the centre piece of the coronation ceremony, Charles will swear ‘The Coronation Oath’, essentially pledging his allegiance to the people of Great Britain and to protecting the sovereignty of the country and its traditions.
If Charles does not break his relationship with the World Economic Forum before this point, he will be performing an act of treason. The implications of this are profound.
As yet, the British people have not woken-up to their fate. But should the truth emerge of this singularly blatant hypocrisy, the future of the British monarchy will be dark indeed.
The UK is officially recognised as a ‘constitutional monarchy’. With an unrevoked Common Law constitution stretching back to the Magna Carta of 1215, the true political power lies with the people and not with parliament. Something which has been largely hidden from public knowledge.
If there is to be a future king or queen, the country needs that person to exercise his/her rite to stand-up against the continual parliamentary usurpation of the people’s power.
The people need a monarch with some guts, some wisdom and a genuine respect for truth. Someone who will use his time-honoured constitutional powers to block anti-life legislation like The Genetic Technology Precision Breeding Act 2023; thus setting a proper precedent for Great Britain’s ‘first among equals’ to act like a real King.
*Please see this link for official UK government act. For short version scroll down to c.6, 2023 Chapter
Julian Rose is an early pioneer of UK organic farming, a writer and international activist.
He is co-founder of The Hardwick Alliance for Real Ecology https://hardwickalliance.org/ and President of the International Coalition to Protect the Polish Countryside. Julian is a strong defender of pro ecological and traditional small farmers and successfully led ‘The Campaign to Save Real Milk’ against two UK government’s attempts to ban it. To find out more and to learn about his books, visit http://www.julianrose.info
This has always been the case; anyone who studies colonialism knows of the “Doctrine of Discovery” (terra nullius or “vacant land”) or indeed that the whole groundtruth of settler-colonial capitalism is that of improvement; “to study nature with the view to command nature” is the prime scientistic principle of capital (according to Bacon, Mill et al); the native or primitive First People who previously occupied the land but did nothing to improve it; the peasant who tilled the common, but did nothing to improve; an so on; “primitive accumulation” (enclosure, eviction, jurisdiction) is predicated on a legal principle (as codification for capital) that nature cannot be owned, per se, only improved with a view to command, dominion, and controlled as in possessed as private property….
So the rich have always got rich on the codification of hunger and the globalisation of poverty; after primitive accumulation comes accumulation by dispossession; the rich countries are rich because the poor countries are poor; so now, if we want to talk of global “levelling up” the rich countries must give up their claim to ‘improvement’ as command and control of the commons, possession as private property as an ultra-colonial global civilising mission and pretty much return to agroecology themselves….
See the real problem? The High Income Countries [HICs] quite enjoy the extra income and civilised lifestyle afforded by the oecological parasiticism of a globally destructive mode of exploitation irreducible to the CEO class alone; the entire oeconomic system is predicated on improvement, patent, and so on adding surplus value to the “free gifts of nature” as exploitative “value chains” that exploit the Global South as some sort of free resource, including a free human resource (as Ecologic Unfair Exchange); whereby ‘we’ in the already overdeveloped countries get the materials and the labour for ‘our’ lifestyles for free; ‘our’ very freedom is predicated on causing poverty, malnutrition, and other unnecessary evils that ‘free trade’ is predicated upon as dehumanising improvement…. wherever ‘improvement’ now covers the entire gamut of the production of the material artefacts of ‘our’ lifestyle — ‘we’ live ‘their’ poverty as improved social structures of an overall dehumanisation process….
The premise of the article is absolutely relevant, excepting that those who benefit are the entire population of the HICs — whichever includes the UK (who basically invented and made legal the entire system as in ‘English Economics’)… When the overexploitation of the world is now causing poverty in the HICs themselves — how many people are clamouring for less possession, less private property and a return to the land as commons?
The vacant land was in need of improvement, and it was improved as possessed in such a way that the neo-European HIC core got fantastically wealthy whilst the colonised Rest got fantastically poor and the aparthood of the Rich and Poor is continually growing due to the lifestyle consumption of the 10-20%; levelling up means giving up ‘our’ lifestyle which ‘we’ temporally apprehended from the Rest (as absentee violence in possession of the material spoils) as an overall zero sum improvement which benefitted nobody in the longterm….
[…] …”without regulating and loosening the grip of ‘our’ own appetites on the global food system, and the entire overproduction-consumption cycle current inequities will only deepen further.
The term high-income country is itself deflection. Most people in such countries either struggle to get by (are miserable) or have hit the bottom.
Charity’s CEO expenses, are nothing compared to the politicians expenses and side hassle some of lot endorse.
All scumbags the lot of them.
Many charities are rotten to the core…says all you need to know about the spiritual condition of mankind.
I have realised that a lot of charities, especially ‘foreign aid’ ones are fronts for political and business interests and money laundering. And that a lot of ‘humanitarians’ are self-serving types who aren’t short of money.
Sounds very cynical but we live in a fallen world.
Prior to the ‘covid’ psyop Australia’s governing party was regarded by the electorate as the better economic managers when compared to all other parties vying for the top job…It’s focus was always on reducing government DEBT…
But the lockdowns required of it to become spendthrift, doling out money to all comers…Even age pensioners got a hefty rise…
My guess is that, come the time when all the government borrowings have to be paid back, the government will nationalise all private housing stock to sell to get the money to pay off the DEBT…
How else could Australians become renters because they (happily) owned nothing ?
Seems OG didn’t like what I said in regards to Oxfam. Off to the spam box you go.
It has been mentioned in a comment further down.
So it has…
I’ve never given much thought to the meaning of the act of voting (never voted in my adult years) and what is implicitly acknowledged in that act beyond the fact that it is a useless act. Today, I’ve stumbled upon an interesting text from Hobbes’ Leviathan on what the meaning of voting is; quite an eye-opener IMO.
After enumerating the reasons man should be governed by an outside “Common Power”, reasons gathered – as a good empiricist – from his observations or descriptions of the England of his time partly torn by civil war and without ever going into the reasons that state of affairs itself came about; – that will change later with Hegel and his statement that “he result is nothing without its becoming,” he states that
“The only way to erect such a Common Power, as may be able to defend them from the invasion of Forraigners, and the injuries of one another, and thereby to secure them in such sort, as that by their owne Industrie, and by the fruites of the Earth, they may nourish themselves and live contentedly; is, to conferre all their power and strength upon one Man, or upon one Assembly of men, that may reduce all their Wills, by plurality of voices, unto one Will: which is as much as to say, to appoint one Man, or Assembly of men, to beare their Person; and every one to owne, and acknowledge himselfe to be Author of whatsoever he that so beareth their Person, shall Act, or cause to be Acted, in those things which concerne the Common Peace and Safetie; and therein to submit their Wills, every one to his Will, and their Judgements, to his Judgment. This is more than Consent, or Concord; it is a real Unitie of them all, in one and the same Person, made by Covenant of every man with every man, in such manner, as if every man should say to every man, I Authorise and give up my Right of Governing my selfe, to this Man, or to this Assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy Right to him, and Authorise all his Actions in like manner. This done, the Multitude so united in one Person, is called a COMMON-WEALTH, in latine CIVITAS.”
Hobbes later explains what authorizing, and hence authority means. Authority or the person authorized is
“One Person [or assembly of persons], of whose Acts a great Multitude, by mutuall Covenants one with another, have made themselves every one the author, to the end he may use the strength and means of them all, as he shall think expedient, for their Peace and Common Defence.”
Did you get that? When we vote for X, then if he gets elected, saying he or she has authority means that the voters have implicitly agreed everyone with everyone else that X bears their person, that whatever X decides to do, or whatever he has others do, it is them, the voters, the authors of the deed, X being merely the personification thereof, whose will is by implicit agreement of the voters, theirs, the voters’ will.
So, to cite an example, if Biden decides (or it is decided upon somehow) to invade some country and thousands get killed, Biden has no responsibility whatsoever in the measures he takes to carry out the invasion and in the deaths themselves, his voters (as a majority and therefore by extension the whole society) having implicitly agreed, everyone of them, to be the author of those measures, the invasion and the deaths and therefore are the sole responsible for the consequences.
If this is what voting implies and I believe that’s how it is understood by the politicians, it explains why they’re never worried of the consequences of their decisions, and on the contrary, a lot of people have for years unknowingly agreed to have blood on their hands.
Are you going to vote again?
It would be great if OG makes an article on themis matter.
This is basic social contract theory as elaborated by Locke et al; in America it’s called “Unitary Executive” — the POTOS is the Executive — who has recently consolidated the sepration of powers (cf the Patriot Act et al); the de jure Head of State is the de facto authority — not necessarily solely, but they usually have some sort of veto power; for instance; Macron is only a joint leader in theory — a “semi-president” co-ruler — I think everybody can see he answers to no-one… (in theory King Charles holds a veto power in the form of withholding the Royal Assent: not that he would ever use it
This is why Blair and Bush are not war criminals, legally at least; they are not only above the law — nationally and internationally — they are the law (especially in times of crisis; cf emergency powers, states of exception, enabling acts and so on)….
Blair corrupted the Parliamentary power structure in the UK to form a de facto executive on the American model (a Supreme Court had no precedent in the UK); anyway, it is an extremely complex matter to discern the de facto ‘sovereign’ these days, now that Montesquieu’s spirit of any juridical ‘separation of powers’ is a historical artefact….
One would do well to compare so-called democracies with the Fuhrerprinzip wherever the leader (or their puppet) is the absolute auctoritas principis for an unknown “shadow sovereignty”; when we have “extreme democracies”, “elected dictatorships” or “inverted totalitarianism” which the totemic practice of voting only serves to extend the executive power of money, as in “the best democracy money can buy”
When the choice is Sturmer or Sunak there is no choice…. One could say Hobbesian choice when only totalisation is on offer….
Thanks, specially for this: “This is why Blair and Bush are not war criminals, legally at least; they are not only above the law — nationally and internationally — they are the law (especially in times of crisis; cf emergency powers, states of exception, enabling acts and so on).”
I don’t know how many people know that elected representatives are above the law and can do whatever they want without legal consequence for their person. An eye opener really.
Oxfam forgot to mention their revenue was up too, they turned over 400mil. Ah yes, charities, the biggest scam of all. Because the average joe on street could not imagine a bunch of people to be so low that they would use a “charity” as a tax haven/laundromat to cleanse/steel money tax free. Taking advantage of the gullible plebs once more.
Oxfams CEO Danny Sriskandarajah (a WEF Young Global Leader) and link to the Gates Foundation according to his wiki, pays himself 121k and thats before he claims “other expenses” on the company credit card. Not to mention the phone, car, office and travel expenses paid for by the “charity” (aka public donations). A that’s just what he declared.
When I make a donation I like to know 100% of the money is going to the cause intended. You will say, “well, the people who run the charity have to be paid”. If this is true then it a “business” that donates some of it’s “profits” to a cause. Personally I would rather give direct to someone in need on the street, at least I know were it goes to then.
All these scum bags hide behind “charities”. They not only use them to steal, they hide behind them to give them credibility. Only the lowest of the low.
Further, out of curiosity I just did a little more research on a long list of “charity’s” CEO’s. It’s amazing how many of them are coincidently linked to the WEF and many have been Knighted. Funny how you never see these jobs advertised in the newspaper.
The true charity workers are the ones doing the door knocks and running the shop fronts on behalf of the criminals who run them. These people do the work for FREE. That’s what charity is. When one is willing to do something for another for FREE. No payment, no favour in the bank, no front page spread on the news paper. Free.
Some of the free workers think they are doing God’s work. See the churches as an example of wealth accumulation from the gullible.
Profiteering truly is a crime against humanity.
Govts aren’t going to start representing the people who voted for them or enact laws protecting against predatory entreprenurial practices. There’s no profit in it.
Are we to suspend belief and pretend no govt minister anywhere holds shares in the same hypocritical corporate entities as the rest of the vultures?
“To represent the people” may not be the great thing we’ve always thought. I may be wrong but a government representing the people doesn’t mean the government doing what the people wants; it means that whatever the government does is implicitly agreed upon to be what every person who voted for the government wants.
If this conception of a representative government is correct, it changes everything.
Wealth itself, or prosperity are not the enemy. The stark and unhealthy disparities in its distribution result from theft, largely coordinated by governments which have so proven to be corrupt everywhere that even the viability of republics/democracies is highly questionable now.
Ultimately it falls to our own individual and collective moral fiber to cure this problem, just as it does with every other one. For better or worse, the wait seems to be over where that’s concerned.
Wealth and prosperity are never the enemy of the wealthy and prosperous.
And make no mistake, all of us in the “Western” world are immensely wealthy compared to the laborers who toil all day in a resource environment so that the “West” can bestow upon its citizens the wealth and prosperity inherent in exploitation of others.
That the bestowers keep the lion’s share for themselves doesn’t really change the exploitation dynamic.
’74 four day week. You investing Dollies know Shit!
If I recall correctly after wandering the net and reading far too much. Aren’t big strings attached to any debt cancellation. Like ownership of your soul?
Dr. S. Matthew Liao, “a bioethicist” has a “dead serious” proposal. He “believes that solving climate change starts with the individual. That’s why he suggests we turn humans into cat-eyed, meat-allergic, semi-genius, hobbit people”.
At this point you should really be saying to yourself, “They call us conspiracy theorists and define that as being loony. Meanwhile this bit about transforming everyone into “cat-eyed, meat-allergic, semi-genius, hobbit people” is … sane?
Now get a load of this:
“There are lots of ideas on the table when it comes to fighting the environmental impact of humans and technology.”
“Ideas on the table”? What table? Whose ideas?
No matter. Prepare yourself for the humungous howler here:
“As we move further and further into a world where there is vast scientific consensus, and a paradoxical public resistance to that idea, these ideas are getting weirder and weirder.”
You’d think that the blatant admission that these ideas are getting weirder and weirder would explain the (AHEM!) “paradoxical resistance”.
The fact is that there is no “vast scientific consensus”. This is a code for what the parasitical overclass want. Which means that the “paradoxical resistance” is anything but paradoxical.
(The “paradoxical resistance” embodies a link to a predictably unreadable spew of number crunching.)
Anyway – to get back to our Liao man – you will be happy to hear that he reckons all those Big Plans to alter the Earth’s atmosphere are a bit too risky … so he recommends fooling around with humanity itself.
So, who are these “improved humans”? Well they are tiny people who can see in the dark, take pills to “feel empathy” (?!), work superhuman hours, and don’t eat meat.
In short, the eugenicist super-exploiter’s wet dream.
Like the rest of them with endless funding Liao’s hubris outweighs his capacity to think straight, he’s mentally ill and doesn’t know it.(maybe he does) These Psychopaths need to be stopped.
Think about all his students, his superiors who employ(ed) and pay him, and all the journalists who obey and admire this guy enough to write about him.
What about them?
I did. Like I think about all the other minions surrounding evil and cheering it on. All of them are to blame. I hope non of them get a free pass when their input is no longer of use.
No government is going to save you. Only we can save ourselves by refusing to comply and refusing to participate in their bullshit vision of society. Shop local, don’t buy new, make do and mend, don’t get in debt, pay in cash, ditch the smartphone.
I agree 100% Bob!
And give TV the flick as well.
Fuck ALL the Government, the Genie is already out of the bottle. Tor and Monero. Become ungovernable.
Sorry Colin, there’s a pile on underway, and I’m joining.
Governments are the ones who were meant to keep the corporate world at arms length from any direct impact on the citizenry. They have utterly failed in that regard and in many respects are entirely indistinguishable from the very corporate identities they are meant to guard us from, vis a vis, government regulatory bodies.
I know you know this.
Much of the above content is quite true, but Oxfam and Greenpeace are just typical fake NGOs with a very dodgy record serving corporate globalist interests.
Oxfam was even running sex parties where poor black kids were forced to have sex with animals for food. If they had a shred of integrity, they would have disbanded and closed down after that.
It’s the same story with all these fake NGOs. They all serve corporate globalist interests and deserve zero respect and deference. Save The Children was running bogus vaccination campaigns in Afghanistan and Pakistan, obtaining intelligence to target US drone strikes wiping out entire villages. The Red Cross received $500 million to provide emergency housing following the Haiti earthquake. All they actually built was 12 scruffy prefabs. Where the money goes, nobody knows. They seem to have been actively involved with the Clinton child trafficking ring. In Syria, they transported weapons for terrorists in their vehicles. Amnesty International took a leading role in the propaganda campaign to justify the bombing of Libya. It fabricated stories about Gaddafi giving viagra to gangs of blacks to commit mass rapes, and admitted lying about it afterwards, when black migrant workers had been lynched from lamp posts. Human Rights Watch is just another regime change outfit endlessly shilling for bombings and invasions. It justified the war in Afghanistan as a war for women’s rights, and tried to incite the bombing of Syria. Roth at HRW was like a parrot. Every time he opened his mouth, all that came out was “barrel bombs! barrel bombs! barrel bombs!”
Nobody should give these organisations a penny. They get all they need from the CIA and the State Department.
Exactly right. Well done Paul, every single word you wrote is true. On the spot.
But unfortunately it shows again and again that hypocrites and liars are a 4/5 majority of us.
What should our little team do in this mess?
I dont buy Catherine’s “use cash on fridays”, other proposals as “make your own garden”, “stop borrowing money from blackstone”, “make a poster and walk around capitol hill”.
Good question, E. I wish I had an equally good answer.
Firstly, it’s not an excuse for tight fistedness. There are charities that are worth supporting, particularly smaller local ones, food banks, raising money for local schools, churches, hospitals and hospices. I’ve seen myself the good they do to help individuals, though it sometimes seems like a drop in the ocean. Generally speaking, the smaller the better. The only large charity I think worth supporting is the Salvation Army. Even charities like Guide Dogs for the Blind are highly dubious, though that might surprise some. If you ever see the recruitment pages of the Guardian, it is full of charity fund raising jobs, £50k plus car plus benefits. And there are foreign charities abroad worth supporting. I supported one I visited in Africa building and running a primary school. Local families could not afford 20p a week school fees or to buy pencils. Even a small amount of support in money or time can make a difference.
Organisations like Offg and UK Column are worth supporting if you can. They may only be minnows compared to the MSM, but they can have an effect out of all proportion to their size. If that were not the case, we would not see such a panic on the part of the Establishment in their efforts to close down the Internet and impose rigid censorship, with the burgeoning well heeled Marianna Spring type Disinformation Brigade. This is a sure sign they are rattled.
Nobody believes them or their media any more. 1,500 years ago, St. Augustine said that the truth is like a raging lion. It doesn’t need any protection – all you have to do is turn it loose. The truth will out, eventually.
But it is depressing the way so many people fall for the same old lies hook, line and sinker time and again, whether it is Covid or Ukraine or whatever. Close friends and relatives just looked at me as if I were mad when I questioned official narratives on both. But I think Augustine was right – nobody now believes the lies that were told over Iraq, and before long the same will apply to covid and Ukraine.
I would never vote in elections, or draw up petitions. Some people think it is possible to vote tactically, but to me it’s just playing their game of lesser evils.
When the big players fail, new groups may emerge to fill the vacuum that are worth supporting, like say the Gilets Jaunes or the Canadian Truckers or the Dutch BBB. Though you have to be careful, as all too often they fall victim to astroturfing, co-option, subversion and agents provocateurs.
I think very radical change is on the cards nationally and globally, but I have more questions than I do answers unfortunately.
Thanks for your endorsement 🙂
This is a woefully naive statement when governments are corporations themselves. here is an example from dun&bradstreet.
The ‘citizens’ have also been fraudulently converted (ie. without informed consent) into ‘legal fictions’ to secure the private Central Bank loans that must be paid back with interest..
Practically everything has been moved into the commercial jurisdiction overseen by the judiciary (private BAR members), who also may be found here on dun&bradstreet.
As soon as naive parents sign the childs birth certificate it is doomed and in the grip of the parasite class until death.
A child has an universal right to know who is his/hers father and mother, its birth place and belonging, and the father and mother has the right to know their child
This can only be done by some society recognized formality.
Please remember the Bankers want us to believe the whole world and our whole life is about excel sheets and their stupid usury loans and fiat money. Its not.
My regrets. We have other concerns in our lives than banks.
My comment had nothing to do with the child knowing who his / her parents are. It’s the fact the birth certificate signs you into corporate bondage. While many don’t know this because it’s a corporate con would best look how to break that arrangement if they value their children or themselves as parents.
How exactly does this corporate bondage work?
Forgive my skepticism; but when something comes along which defies logic – such as merely signing a birth certificate (and that may not be the case in every state, province, etc.) – it requires more than simply word of mouth.
Isn’t it usually a public figure, like Clerk of Court, who signs birth certificates (at least here in the USA)? And not the parents?
A registrar signs it as well as parent. And so is born your legal fiction – your ‘person’. That person is who the ‘authorities’ (corporations) deal with via contract law. It’s the only way they can ‘legally’ interact with you. They would have no power over you in common law.
Sorry. Your links fail to search the relevant list. Here’s a list I downloaded years ago: >
Dun & Bradstreet registered numbers:
Agencies: United States Government – 052714196
US Department of Defense (DOD)-030421397
US Department of the Treasury-026661067
US Department of Justice (DOJ)-011669674
US Department of State-026276622
US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS)-Office of the Secretary-112463521
US Department of Education-944419592
US Department of Energy-932010320
US Department of Homeland Security-932394187
US Department of the Interior-020949010
US Department of Labor-029536183
US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD)-Office of the Secretary-030945779
US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)-931691211
US Transportation Security Administration (TSA)-050297655
US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-056622429
Bureau of Customs & Border Protection (CBP)-796730922
Federal Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE)-130221646
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-057944910
National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA)-003259074
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)-079933920
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-364281923
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-037751583
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-020309969
US Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC)-003475175
US Public Health Service (USPHS)-039294216
National Institutes of Health (NIH)-061232000
US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)-927645465
US Food & Drug Administration (FDA)-138182175
US Internal Revenue Service (IRS)-040539587
Federal Reserve Board of Governors (Fed)-001959410
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)-878865674
National Security Agency (NSA)-617395215
US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)-167247027
Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms & Tobacco (BAFT)-132282310
Federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-926038563
The list goes on and on. Corporate racketeering and syndication is overt theft, period.
In due course (and not too far away) individuals will have their debts wiped clean, their credit scores duly applied and will be provided with a UBI to stay at home, rent/hire what they need, own nothing, be happy and betrothed to their government.
Similarly, whole countries will have their debts cleared on the basis that the World Bank/WEF/UN/etc etc will provide them with seeds, food, pharmaceuticals etc as long as they toe the line…….a line that may well include “population control”.
Perhaps there’d be fewer people in extreme poverty if Oxfam spent their funds helping them instead of producing a woke dictionary.
Nothing has happened in 50 years. Same picture, same scams, same text.
That’s why you have to not to be diverted by domestic propagandist “Bleeding Heart Propaganda”.
”Governments and policy makers need to act now to protect people from the abuses wrought by giant agribusiness corporations.”
Governments and policy makers have brought these abuses on people. They are in the business of saving the World Economy (= WE).
The cost of covid was estimated 11 trillion dollars by the WEF in October 2020. Other estimations ranged at the same time from 10 to 22 trillion US dollars, perhaps in the USA alone. It’s not cheap to kill the poor and make the rich richer. But money is no problem because it is made out of thin air by banks, simply putting numbers as a loan on a computer. Easy.
The money system in this world includes governments and policy makers.
They are killing people.
And those criminally insane are planning to offer their solutions to the problems that they caused. Problems like poverty and malnutrition. Their solution is the same, vaccines.
”Malnutrition vaccines for an imminent global food catastrophe”
Present governments are controlled by these greedy scumbags. Global taxation is required on all billionaires / trillionaires to remove the majority of their ill gotten gains. Just dreaming.
No can’t do that your part of global conglomerates you’ll definitely be below zero. They are Bank 24/7 so are you, you buy sell trade every day and night your alive They are not. Your Card is Business, just figured that out?
Your commercialised property of Corporations that frettted over personal priivacy while infiltrating privacy of other Citizens.
It isn’t only the corporations/governments; it’s our everyday participation to the system of all of us. Capital and the State are nothing without us. A worldwide withdrawal from the prevailing economic practices is needed. Easier said than done, specially if there are still people who think it’s incompetence, mismanagement, misallocation of ressources, etc so just replace this set of figures by others… And the rest of us tend to believe this discourse and say: “Yeah let’s hang this and that one [and bring to office this and that other one.]” The State may even spare us the trouble and stage trials where this replacement is done to calm the population down.
So, sadly this has to go on until all the consciences are radically changed.
Never ascribe to incompetence that which can be equally or more rationally explained by malevolence.
Apparently, historians can’t agree that Marie Antoinette actually said: ‘Let them eat cake’ but then she, and her slimy ilk, don’t need to make such arrogant statements.
We all know what those Turds are thinking anyway. It’s written all over their smirking faces and reflected in their warmongering, bloodthirsty, self- serving policies.
The interesting thing about Marie Antoinette’s comment, is that she wasn’t being mean or facetious . Ms Antoinette was so out of touch with reality, she thought the peasants should simply shift their baking habits toward cakes rather than bread. No clue that the problem was lack of wheat…
The quote is often misinterpreted.
..inside caked bread ovens.. no matter we were all illiterate simpletons back then especially colonial wogs.
“Governments and policy makers need to act now to protect people from the abuses wrought by giant agribusiness corporations.”
In other words the people (and systems) who helped these corporations get where they are (and benefited from the kickbacks which is the only reason they helped them) are now supposed to stop them and fix everything. Not a solution I have any faith in I’m afraid. Not even if you ask them really really nicely. Did you see what the 2023 budget looked like in the UK? All about helping those in need it was not, by any stretch of the imagination.
Just as the pharma ghouls pumped out lethal “vaccines” to “save” people from a non-existent threat, the food vultures now want to transfer eating habits over to poisonous insect intake.
Or cancer cells, yay!