I read this morning that the average person really doesn't want to know the truth, especially if that truth conflicts with his/her world view. It's not that they couldn't find the truth if they searched for it; rather, they don't look because they would prefer to live in a safe, albeit ignorant, world. If true, and I believe it is (look at what happened when we tried to get covidians to see what was happening all around them), we won't be able to rely on them when the going gets rough.
As a consequence, one part of an affirmative action has to be searching for like-minded people to create a network for "when the going gets rough". It is easy to find such people on platforms like this, but more difficult in the real world.
As I albeit imperfectly understand it there was a silent vote on this and parties had to sign up by 7 September. Was that just for the conference? In reading about the Pact, I am reminded of Dr James Lindsay's comment, "Same vocab but different dictionary." The summary Ex UN seemed to be shrill and hyperbole. I was reading Hayek's Road to Serfdom yesterday and he states (Chpt 1 and 2) that the progressive agenda has a longer history that normally understood. It seems to me that the UN Pact is an attempt to circumvent and overwhelm populism, national identity and the will of the people by the the un-elected gnostic like Clerisy whoa re the advocates of Socialist planning. Life on Earth is Dynamic not static.
They believe they can succeed by siloing information that only they control. Wall Street has survived for decades on this principle by having economists, strategists, analysts for individual companies, analysts for asset classes(which they define) and hoards of top-down view based on mathematics which few can understand but sound precise. They believe in this stuff and countless Noble Prizes have been awarded but the end result is that they truly do not know what they are spouting with the identical spiel for the last 100yrs of poor results but for themselves and the fees they collect.
Reminds me of this old joke where the French intellectual haughtily snorts, "it may work in practice, but it will never work in theory" seems to define our elite institutions and think tanks.
The precariate are surplus to requirements. Liquidate stock to manage the resources that matter. The circumstances that gave rise to 8 billion souls has also shocked the natural environment.
As a farmer I have seen this get worse and worse. Once generally predictable weather is all over the place. Crop yields down, carrying capacity down. Yes a huge factor is the way it's been farmed with a terminal over reliance on industrial technology and fossil fuels to the point of a thriving ecosystem became mono everything. But I see it as both, there's a terrible 'everything' crisis and the parasitic class are, and will continue to exploit it to remain in positions of power. Why would they not?
The vast majority are seen as less useful then cattle and are being culled accordingly. Thankfully there seem to be still a degree of inter ruling class disagreement over the exact nature and no one wants to be left holding the bag. It looks like they still, or are pretending to think it can be micromanaged via think thanks etc which is hilarious. As Ukraine is a reminder, these disputes historical are settled by predominantly men in the streets with weapons. This a dwindling stock for the western ruling class. Personally I think this all ends in chaos as the things that look good in spreadsheets and PP presentations utterly fail to manifest irl, with less and less people willing to actually enforce their laws. We'll see
I really thought this article was insightful and informative, However, I have been under the impression that we have been going through degrowth to allow the CCP to become the dominant power. I can see Rhodes was very interested in promoting a British hegemony in the past, and maybe the Chinese and the WEF are using his model to push their agenda? I could be completely wrong on who is in charge here.
There's a paradox here (probably just one of many): here in Australia (where I live), our government has been concerned for years - decades - about our DECLINING population, and this concern has informed our immigration policy. Because our whole economic system is built on a premise of growth - more workers to consume, to pay taxes. And especially, to support the aging population (of whom I am one, no doubt to be soon targeted as a "useless eater" and encouraged to think about euthanasia).
The government's solution to this decline in reproductive numbers is to make up for it through immigration, and like most western countries (not yet as bad as some) we have seen in recent years an influx of "refugees" from a huge range of countries, people whose cultures are quite alien to ours (whether to the anglo-saxon culture of the European colonisers, or to the indigenous Aboriginal peoples).
This too is at the bidding of the globalists.
If we closed our borders and severely constrained immigration, our population would naturally decline and most likely would meet whatever targets they are trying to set.
But that would be too easy... I can't quite believe that that would be the solution they are looking for!
Note: Australia is the country I know most intimately, but most industrialised countries (Japan too) have similar dynamics.
The situation is such that all elites of all nations either have, or will give their power to the biosecurity slave state imperial order. All opposition is controlled. Except the populations they seek to eliminate, we must unite. The gloves have to come off.
What the elitists miss in their top-down reckoning is where food comes from, how energy is derived so that they can have Internet, communications and give orders to the world. Without the "little people", one of my cousins declared referring to everyone she believed beneath her, the elites would have nothing. It is the little people who make cities possible and without which cities would collapse into hell-holes in 24hrs i.e., no food coming in, no medicine, no energy, no communications, only governance that would last as long as the little people stopped being policemen/women.
I read this morning that the average person really doesn't want to know the truth, especially if that truth conflicts with his/her world view. It's not that they couldn't find the truth if they searched for it; rather, they don't look because they would prefer to live in a safe, albeit ignorant, world. If true, and I believe it is (look at what happened when we tried to get covidians to see what was happening all around them), we won't be able to rely on them when the going gets rough.
As a consequence, one part of an affirmative action has to be searching for like-minded people to create a network for "when the going gets rough". It is easy to find such people on platforms like this, but more difficult in the real world.
This is a good piece as well: https://brownstone.org/articles/three-new-pacts-to-be-approved-at-the-un-summit/
As I albeit imperfectly understand it there was a silent vote on this and parties had to sign up by 7 September. Was that just for the conference? In reading about the Pact, I am reminded of Dr James Lindsay's comment, "Same vocab but different dictionary." The summary Ex UN seemed to be shrill and hyperbole. I was reading Hayek's Road to Serfdom yesterday and he states (Chpt 1 and 2) that the progressive agenda has a longer history that normally understood. It seems to me that the UN Pact is an attempt to circumvent and overwhelm populism, national identity and the will of the people by the the un-elected gnostic like Clerisy whoa re the advocates of Socialist planning. Life on Earth is Dynamic not static.
“The greatest fear I have regarding the outcome for America of these disclosures …. is that nothing will change.” E. Snowden
We have vaccination which reduces fertility.
We have the trans ideology which convinces children to accept castration.
We have conflict being fomented between the genders in a concerted misinformation campaign about sex and gender roles.
We have schools vilifying emotional displays, affection, warmth and touching for the formative years of a child's development.
We have religious groups promoting the view that sex is a filthy disgusting sin.
We have contraceptives and birth control being pushed out and encouraged for everyone.
And we have interracial love being promoted, which can lead to children with reduced fertility.
So it's quite clear that they are going ahead with a depopulation plan.
Though religious organisations have been doing this for centuries. E.g. Not allowing sex before marriage allows them to control reproduction.
Despite all this, some politicians have the audacity to claim that we need rampant immigration because the "population isn't breeding on its own".
It couldn't have anything to do with their policies of course.
They believe they can succeed by siloing information that only they control. Wall Street has survived for decades on this principle by having economists, strategists, analysts for individual companies, analysts for asset classes(which they define) and hoards of top-down view based on mathematics which few can understand but sound precise. They believe in this stuff and countless Noble Prizes have been awarded but the end result is that they truly do not know what they are spouting with the identical spiel for the last 100yrs of poor results but for themselves and the fees they collect.
Reminds me of this old joke where the French intellectual haughtily snorts, "it may work in practice, but it will never work in theory" seems to define our elite institutions and think tanks.
LOL
The precariate are surplus to requirements. Liquidate stock to manage the resources that matter. The circumstances that gave rise to 8 billion souls has also shocked the natural environment.
As a farmer I have seen this get worse and worse. Once generally predictable weather is all over the place. Crop yields down, carrying capacity down. Yes a huge factor is the way it's been farmed with a terminal over reliance on industrial technology and fossil fuels to the point of a thriving ecosystem became mono everything. But I see it as both, there's a terrible 'everything' crisis and the parasitic class are, and will continue to exploit it to remain in positions of power. Why would they not?
The vast majority are seen as less useful then cattle and are being culled accordingly. Thankfully there seem to be still a degree of inter ruling class disagreement over the exact nature and no one wants to be left holding the bag. It looks like they still, or are pretending to think it can be micromanaged via think thanks etc which is hilarious. As Ukraine is a reminder, these disputes historical are settled by predominantly men in the streets with weapons. This a dwindling stock for the western ruling class. Personally I think this all ends in chaos as the things that look good in spreadsheets and PP presentations utterly fail to manifest irl, with less and less people willing to actually enforce their laws. We'll see
I really thought this article was insightful and informative, However, I have been under the impression that we have been going through degrowth to allow the CCP to become the dominant power. I can see Rhodes was very interested in promoting a British hegemony in the past, and maybe the Chinese and the WEF are using his model to push their agenda? I could be completely wrong on who is in charge here.
There's a paradox here (probably just one of many): here in Australia (where I live), our government has been concerned for years - decades - about our DECLINING population, and this concern has informed our immigration policy. Because our whole economic system is built on a premise of growth - more workers to consume, to pay taxes. And especially, to support the aging population (of whom I am one, no doubt to be soon targeted as a "useless eater" and encouraged to think about euthanasia).
The government's solution to this decline in reproductive numbers is to make up for it through immigration, and like most western countries (not yet as bad as some) we have seen in recent years an influx of "refugees" from a huge range of countries, people whose cultures are quite alien to ours (whether to the anglo-saxon culture of the European colonisers, or to the indigenous Aboriginal peoples).
This too is at the bidding of the globalists.
If we closed our borders and severely constrained immigration, our population would naturally decline and most likely would meet whatever targets they are trying to set.
But that would be too easy... I can't quite believe that that would be the solution they are looking for!
Note: Australia is the country I know most intimately, but most industrialised countries (Japan too) have similar dynamics.
Fantastic piece. The Psychopaths are all innit together for sure.
Pact for the Future - Rupture of the Fact
The situation is such that all elites of all nations either have, or will give their power to the biosecurity slave state imperial order. All opposition is controlled. Except the populations they seek to eliminate, we must unite. The gloves have to come off.
What the elitists miss in their top-down reckoning is where food comes from, how energy is derived so that they can have Internet, communications and give orders to the world. Without the "little people", one of my cousins declared referring to everyone she believed beneath her, the elites would have nothing. It is the little people who make cities possible and without which cities would collapse into hell-holes in 24hrs i.e., no food coming in, no medicine, no energy, no communications, only governance that would last as long as the little people stopped being policemen/women.