How to Ensure That You Will Own Nothing

Unmasking the Sinister Forces Shaping the Future of our World

If you appreciate my articles, please consider giving them a like. It's a simple gesture that doesn't cost you anything, but it goes a long way in promoting this post, combating censorship, and fighting the issues that you are apparently not a big fan of.

The European Union's “Energy Performance of Buildings Directive”¹ sets stringent energy performance standards for buildings throughout the EU. This directive plays a crucial role in the EU's broader climate strategy. By 2030, the EU is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55%. By 2050, the aim is for every building, be it commercial, public, or residential, to conform to zero-emission standards. To reach these goals, the EU will introduce a variety of new renewable energy requirements that will apply to homeowners, impacting the way buildings are constructed, maintained, and renovated.

Under the new regulations, by 2035, heating systems that rely on fossil fuels will be systematically eliminated. Homeowners will be obligated to replace these with more sustainable, likely electric, heating alternatives, bearing the financial burden themselves. The estimated expense for these green energy adaptations in a typical residential home is around 100,000 euros.

This policy could inadvertently compel homeowners to relinquish their properties if they are financially unable to comply with these upgrades. In such scenarios, asset management firms might acquire these homes, converting them into rental properties.

In a separate development, on September 20, 2023, the president of the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) ratified a declaration on pandemic prevention, delegating significant authority to the WHO. This action was taken without a full assembly vote and despite the objections of 11 member states. Ordinarily, such opposition would preclude a consensus on the declaration. However, the U.N. circumvented this impasse by enabling the UNGA president, rather than the General Assembly, to sanction the declaration, a move that raises questions about procedural adherence.

---

This situation echoes a slogan previously associated with the World Economic Forum: “You will own nothing and you will be happy.”² Under this perspective, the Green Agenda, while environmentally focused, appears to inadvertently escalate living costs and complexities, potentially pushing homeownership out of reach for many. Consequently, the notion of owning a home might become less feasible, leading to a societal shift towards renting.

Under these new regulations, homeowners may find themselves dependent on the companies owning their apartments or rental properties. Starting in early 2021, major investment firms like BlackRock and Vanguard began a significant trend of purchasing residential homes in the United States. Rather than reselling these homes, they chose to rent them out, which has contributed to a decline in middle-class homeownership. Additionally, by consistently offering prices above market value, these firms have played a role in inflating home prices, making the dream of homeownership increasingly unattainable for many.

The rental market has not been immune to these changes either. As the cost of rent continues to rise, the burden on renters grows heavier, especially with the impending expenses of energy upgrades. This financial strain is forcing young adults to make difficult choices, such as continuing to live with their parents or sharing living spaces with multiple roommates. The escalating costs of both owning and renting homes are pushing more individuals towards precarious living situations, and will lead to a significant increase in homelessness.

A critical concern arises for those compelled to sell: the feasibility of selling a house that doesn't meet these new energy standards. Questions about potential penalties, fines, or even expropriation of property loom large. Such scenarios paint a picture of an increasingly regulated real estate market with stringent compliance requirements.

This situation can be perceived as a challenge to the middle class, a demographic traditionally defined by home ownership. The escalation in living costs and the heightened barriers to owning a home could significantly alter the landscape of middle-class life. If owning a home becomes a luxury unattainable for the majority, it could lead to a stark societal divide, with a clear demarcation between the very wealthy and the poor, eroding the middle class. This shift would represent a profound change in the socio-economic structure, impacting the core of what many consider the backbone of a balanced society.

We are potentially approaching a scenario reminiscent of a modern form of feudalism, which is often termed “Feudalism 2.0.” In this scenario, large international corporations might increasingly acquire residential properties.

The implications of this shift extend beyond environmental concerns; they touch on the fundamental aspects of personal freedom and autonomy. This transformation isn't about environmental stewardship; it's also about control and ownership, but not in the traditional sense of property rights. It's about a larger-scale control over individuals' living conditions.

While free content and knowledge is undoubtedly something amazing, creating and maintaining it requires a significant investment of time, money, and effort. I don't have the support of a massive media conglomerate; it's just me here. Regrettably, Klaus is still not providing me with free insects to eat. So, if you have the means and are willing to support my work by upgrading to a paid subscription, I would greatly appreciate it.

If you're unfamiliar with the concept of globalist influence, it may seem unclear who exactly is involved in orchestrating what some perceive as a global takeover. While I won't specify individuals, their identities are becoming more apparent through their public statements, business ventures, and affiliations.

This increasing transparency is partly because many involved no longer seem to conceal their roles. The organizations that are believed to be driving this agenda are becoming increasingly forthright about their objectives. A notable instance of this is the United Nations' efforts to position the World Health Organization (WHO) as a central body in global governance.

A significant document³ in this context was published by the United Nations on June 5, 2023. It outlines the organization's intention to elevate the WHO to a central role in global health governance. This intent is detailed in the “Zero Draft of the Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response.” This document, prepared for the General Assembly meeting on September 20, 2023, offers insight into the evolving landscape of global health policy and governance.

The finalized version⁴ of the pivotal document, published on September 1, 2023, subtly yet significantly indicates a shift towards positioning the World Health Organization as a key governing entity at a global level. Although the headings were removed in this final version, the underlying intent to elevate the WHO's role remains evident.

The document primarily discusses the WHO's role in dictating global pandemic prevention and response strategies. However, the scope of the WHO's influence is expected to extend beyond pandemic management. The organization is likely to venture into broader healthcare issues, advocating for the adoption of universal healthcare systems. This expansion of authority is subtly framed as an enhancement of pandemic prevention and response capabilities, as indicated in the Zero Draft's OP33 on page 11⁵ and Article 22⁶ in the final document.

The strategy appears to evolve further under the global One Health program, which extends the concept of public health to encompass various sectors, including agriculture, pollution, travel, and climate change. This could potentially lead to the WHO, or a similar entity, assuming control over diverse government functions.

Moreover, the UN's “Political Declaration” explicitly states that health is a key indicator of sustainable development. This statement directly links the WHO's expanded authority in managing pandemics to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda 2030.

The increasing disregard for established rules, guidelines, laws, and treaties by governments and global organizations is heightening concerns about the state of democracy and the rule of law worldwide. A recent incident that underscores this trend involves the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) and its handling of a declaration on pandemic prevention.

The UNGA president approved this declaration, the same document discussed earlier, without conducting a full assembly vote. This action was taken despite objections from 11 member states: Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.

Francis Boyle, a bioweapons expert and professor of international law at the University of Illinois, who also drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, highlighted the significance of these objections. According to Boyle, the dissent of these 11 nations should have prevented the declaration from being adopted by consensus, a process that could potentially elevate it to the status of customary international law, which seems to be the intent behind the declaration.

Boyle shared his insights with The Defender⁷, stating, “They could not get it through the UNGA as a Consensus Resolution because of the 11 objecting states.” He added that there appears to be an effort to misrepresent the situation by having the UNGA president, rather than the UNGA itself, approve the declaration. This move is a departure from traditional democratic procedures and a manipulation of the usual legal and diplomatic processes.

---

In the past few years, particularly the last three, there's been a notable shift in the openness with which certain global power structures, often referred to as the “Deep State” or “global mafia,” have communicated their intentions. The concept of a “New World Order” or a “One World Government” has been a topic of discussion for decades, finding its way into white papers, reports, and even popular media like movies and entertainment, as well as being hinted at in various tabletop exercises.

The question arises: why would such plans be disclosed rather than kept secret, to prevent public resistance? There seems to be a specific strategy behind this apparent transparency. I suggest that the push for global governance involves a form of mass mind control, designed to condition people to accept a loss of personal power. This conditioning is to promote three key psychological states:

1. Loss of Memory (Amnesia): Forgetting historical context and personal histories.

2. Loss of Will or Initiative (Abulia): Diminishing personal agency and the drive for self-determination.

3. Loss of Interest in Personal Health and Well-being (Apathy): Ignoring or undervaluing one's own health and societal well-being.

These conditions are considered essential for the successful implementation of a global government system. The methods employed involve the subversion of sacred symbols and archetypes, appealing to lower instincts and desires, and fostering compulsive urges that are at odds with higher conscious values. The purported aim is to hinder individual spiritual growth and stifle societal spiritual evolution, keeping people focused on more base or materialistic concerns.

The use of symbolism by what some refer to as the “cabal” might also reflect a dimension of ego-driven megalomania, serving as a means to assert dominance. This display of power is not just for their own reaffirmation but also acts subconsciously on the masses, while subtly mocking those they consider inferior.

An intriguing aspect of this group's symbolic communication is the inversion of commonly accepted meanings. For instance, the hammer and sickle, iconic symbols on the flag of the former Soviet Union, are widely recognized as emblems of the working class, symbolizing industry and agriculture and representing the idea of a workers' utopia.

However, from a historical standpoint, these symbols have older, deeper meanings. The sickle is associated with Saturn, a mythological figure who used a sickle to separate Earth from the heavens, thereby assuming dominion over the material realm. This occult interpretation presents Saturn as the architect of the physical world, a theme that resonates with the cabal's alleged preoccupation with material control and dominance.

The hammer, in this context, is said to symbolize the destruction of matter, representing an apocalyptic force that aims to dismantle the last vestiges of divine will in humanity. This interpretation suggests a process where mankind devolves, descending into a post-human state.

Thus, when viewed through an occult lens, the hammer and sickle symbolize not a utopian union, but rather a dystopian division, emblematic of a tyrannical elite's efforts to sever humanity's connection with the divine and lead it towards destruction. This occult reading presents a contrast to the mainstream understanding, offering a deeper, more ominous layer of meaning.

---

The concerns raised in this article extend beyond the erosion of human rights and traditional freedoms, such as unrestricted travel. There's a deeper fear that these changes could lead to a significant loss of wealth and the ability to accumulate it in the future.

This perspective suggests that the aim is not solely to restrict homeownership and the related opportunity to build generational wealth. The introduction of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) is seen as a potential tool for greater financial control. With a CBDC, there's a fear that individuals will not earn interest on their savings, and taxes could be deducted automatically. More control over how and where money is spent, including the possibility of expiration dates on funds, could prevent long-term savings and financial planning.

The overarching concern is that these measures, justified under the guise of environmental sustainability, could contribute to the creation of a subservient class without rights, freedoms, or financial independence.

Adhering to these "green" initiatives is perceived as a step towards impoverishment and loss of autonomy, not just for the current generation but for future ones as well. Once such a global system of control is established, reversing it could be extremely challenging.

The fear extends to the potential for governmental overreach, such as the ability to seize bank accounts, limit access to essential services, and enforce movement through digital surveillance. The integration of AI, digital identity systems, CBDCs, and unified ledger systems is seen as a pathway to unprecedented control over individual lives and choices.

The true power to shape this world has always lain in your hands. Choose well!

Advocating for solutions and taking action is crucial in this situation. We are not just capable of addressing these issues; it is our duty to do so. Passive acceptance isn't an option. It's a time for conscientious disobedience.

The trend of making home ownership unaffordable, under the guise of environmentally-driven upgrades like additional insulation and solar panels, is not a genuine upgrade. It's a mechanism that could lead to a massive wealth transfer, stripping people of their homes. This isn't just about home improvements; it's about the fundamental right to own property.

Ownership is a pivotal concept. Removing it shifts the balance of power, potentially leading to a new form of feudalism where the few control the resources needed by the many. This situation calls for a collective stand against such changes. It will undoubtedly have consequences and require sacrifices from each of us. But if we collectively resist and refuse to comply, the impact of our numbers against the few can bring about change.

This is a call to find the courage within ourselves and stand firm. There will be challenges, but through unity and perseverance, we can overcome them. We must not lose hope or relent in our efforts. Together, we can prevail in this struggle.

Did you find value in reading this? While the majority of my content is available for free, a subscription for full access is only $7 a month.

We often find ourselves more readily giving money to large corporations that provide little real value and treat us poorly, rather than supporting small creators. I believe the approach should be reversed.

Your support is immensely valuable to me and helps sustain my work.

1. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2023/739377/EPRS_ATA(2023)739377_EN.pdf

2. https://web.archive.org/web/20220818143555/https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/8-predictions-for-the-world-in-2030/

3. https://www.un.org/pga/77/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2023/06/Zero-draft-PPPR-Political-Declaration-5-June.pdf

4. https://www.un.org/pga/77/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2023/09/PPPR-Final-Text.pdf

5. https://www.un.org/pga/77/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2023/06/Zero-draft-PPPR-Political-Declaration-5-June.pdf

6. https://www.un.org/pga/77/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2023/09/PPPR-Final-Text.pdf

7. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/united-nations-approves-pandemic-declaration/