Discover more from A Lily Bit
Striving for Localization
Countering the Dystopian Vision of the Great Reset and Embracing Sustainable Futures
On June 21st, the global community will come together to commemorate World Localization Day. This significant event, initiated in 2020 and orchestrated by the non-profit organization Local Futures, emphasizes the importance of localizing supply chains and reestablishing our bonds with nature and community. Its ultimate objective is to unite the worldwide localization movement, empowering it to drive profound systemic transformations.
Local Futures, established under the guidance of Helena Norberg-Hodge, encourages us to envision a world that starkly contrasts with our current reality. In this alternative vision, the majority of our food is sourced from nearby farmers, guaranteeing year-round food security. Additionally, the money we spend on everyday goods remains within the local economy, circulating and benefiting the community at large.
Instead of our earnings being swiftly funneled to remote corporate headquarters, we are prompted to imagine a scenario where local businesses flourish, offering abundant and meaningful employment opportunities. This transformative perspective prioritizes the strengthening of local economies, fostering resilience, and nurturing a sense of interconnectedness within communities. By embracing this vision, we aspire to create a more sustainable and prosperous future, where the benefits of economic activity are felt locally and contribute to the well-being of all.
In this context, small farms emerge as pivotal players. Their significance lies in their crucial role within local markets and networks, operating with short supply chains. They contribute to food sovereignty, foster diverse cropping systems, and promote healthier diets. Small farms prioritize the nourishment and well-being of communities, rather than catering solely to the interests of distant big businesses, institutional investors, and shareholders.
The Covid-19 lockdowns and the conflict in Ukraine serve as poignant reminders of the vulnerabilities within our existing food system. They underscore the urgent need for decentralized, regional, and locally owned food systems that are resilient to future shocks. By embracing shorter supply chains, these community-oriented systems can effectively navigate unforeseen challenges and disruptions. This realization emphasizes the timeliness and criticality of prioritizing localized and community-driven approaches to ensure food security and resilience in the face of adversity.
The publication titled “Towards a Food Revolution: Food Hubs and Cooperatives in the US and Italy” provides valuable insights into establishing sustainable support systems for small food producers and enhancing food distribution. It highlights the significance of alternative and resilient food models, as well as the importance of community-supported agriculture.
The concept of localization encompasses the revitalization of local economies and communities, as well as the restoration of cultural and biological diversity. Central to this vision is the “economics of happiness,” which prioritizes well-being over the relentless pursuit of GDP growth that often leads to alienation, conflict, and misery. By shifting our focus to holistic prosperity and fostering interconnectedness, we can cultivate a future where people thrive, communities flourish, and the environment thrives.
This article is free. And so are most. However, your support as a paid subscriber enables me to continue producing high-quality, independent journalism on this important topics. As an ad-free platform, I rely on the support of my readers to keep this content accessible and free from external influence.
The need to strive for localization is particularly crucial because billionaire globalists have a bleak and oppressive future planned for humanity. Their agenda stands in stark opposition to the values highlighted above.
Central to this dystopian future is the widely publicized concept of the Great Reset. This initiative signals a departure from the principles of liberal democracy, ushering in an era of authoritarianism. Simultaneously, there is an unrelenting push towards a distorted version of the ‘green economy,’ supported by the rhetoric of ‘sustainable consumption’ and the ‘climate emergency.’
The real agenda behind this approach is concerning, and it involves consolidating power in the hands of the few and reducing individual freedoms. The focus is on perpetuating a false narrative of sustainable development, which serves to obscure the true nature of their objectives. As a result, it is crucial to prioritize the localization of our food systems and economies, empowering communities and ensuring a sustainable, equitable, and just future.
The concept of the Great Reset represents a significant shift in the trajectory of capitalism, signaling its potential end-game. Advocates of this idea acknowledge the need for an economic and social system to undergo a fundamental reset, leading to a “New Normal” that may bear little resemblance to traditional capitalism.
Capitalism's Profitability Paradox
It has become increasingly evident that capital cannot sustain its profitability solely through the exploitation of labor. This realization has been apparent for some time now. There is a limit to the surplus value that can be extracted before reaching a point where the surplus becomes inadequate.
Historian Luciana Bohne highlights that even before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, certain sectors of the economy were experiencing closures due to insufficient growth. The growth rates were well below the minimum threshold of 3% necessary to sustain the viability of capitalism. This trend occurred despite decades of targeting workers and implementing corporate tax cuts as part of broader economic policies.
These observations underscore the inherent challenges faced by the capitalist system. They reflect the growing recognition that the traditional mechanisms of economic growth and labor exploitation are reaching their limits. This realization calls for a reevaluation of our economic structures and the pursuit of alternative models that prioritize sustainability, equitable distribution of resources, and long-term viability.
The prevailing economic system has been propped up by various measures for quite some time. To sustain consumer demand amid stagnant wages, credit markets were expanded, and personal debt was facilitated. This approach was accompanied by the promotion of financial products such as derivatives, equities, and debt, fostering speculative capitalism that provided the wealthy with avenues to accumulate wealth through financial instruments. Unproductive rentier capitalism, characterized by profit-seeking through ownership and control rather than productive activity, also grew in prominence. Additionally, large-scale stock buybacks and massive bailouts supported by taxpayers further influenced the dynamics of the system.
Furthermore, within the capitalist framework, there exists a tendency for the overall rate of profit to decline over time. This trend, as highlighted by writer Ted Reese, has been apparent, with the estimated general rate of profit decreasing from around 43% in the 1870s to approximately 17% in the 2000s.
These observations shed light on the structural challenges inherent in capitalism. The reliance on debt, speculative practices, and unproductive economic activities, coupled with the declining rate of profit, calls for critical examination and potential reconfiguration of our economic systems to ensure long-term sustainability and a more equitable distribution of resources.
The 2008 financial crisis was of significant magnitude, but by late 2019, an even more substantial economic collapse loomed on the horizon. Numerous companies struggled to generate adequate profits, experiencing a decline in turnover, reduced profit margins, limited cashflows, and heavily leveraged balance sheets. Consequently, economic growth had already begun to stagnate before the massive stock market crash in February 2020.
According to Fabio Vighi, a professor of critical theory, a coalition of influential entities consisting of the Swiss Bank of International Settlements, BlackRock (the world's most influential investment fund), G7 central bankers, prominent politicians, and other undisclosed participants engaged in clandestine discussions during late 2019. Their objective was to prevent an imminent and severe financial catastrophe.
Following the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Federal Reserve implemented an emergency monetary program, injecting hundreds of billions of dollars weekly into financial markets. Subsequently, lockdown measures were enforced. Despite misconceptions, the stock market did not crash due to the implementation of lockdowns. Instead, Fabio Vighi argues that lockdowns were imposed in response to the financial market collapse.
Many questioned the rationale behind shutting down the global economy to combat a pathogen that posed a significant risk, primarily to the elderly and chronically ill. However, the lockdowns provided an avenue for the Fed to infuse financial markets with newly printed money, known as Covid-19 relief, without causing hyperinflation. Vighi asserts that the lockdowns reduced economic activity, resulting in a decrease in demand for the newly created money (credit) in the physical economy and curbing the spread of the financial crisis.
Through the utilization of lockdowns and restrictive measures, numerous small businesses were forced to cease operations, and significant segments of the pre-COVID economy were brought to a halt. This deliberate process can be seen as a controlled demolition of specific economic sectors. Meanwhile, companies like Amazon, Microsoft, Meta (formerly Facebook), and the online payment sector emerged as clear beneficiaries, shaping the trajectory of the “New Normal” that lies ahead.
The current surge in inflation has been attributed, in part, to the avoidable conflict occurring in Ukraine. However, it is important to note that this explanation only offers a partial understanding of the situation. The conflict and subsequent sanctions appear to be significantly impacting Europe, potentially leading to self-inflicted economic damage or the impoverishment of large sections of the population.
Nevertheless, the substantial infusion of “going direct” helicopter money directed towards the financial sector and global conglomerates, justified as Covid-19 relief, was bound to have consequences once the global economy resumed its operations.
The possibility of implementing comparable extraordinary monetary policies, akin to lockdowns, cannot be disregarded in the future. These measures could be justified under the guise of another “virus” or potentially justified by the need to limit human activity in response to a “climate emergency.” The reasoning behind this is that increasing interest rates to manage inflation could swiftly disrupt the debt-laden financial system, which essentially operates as an inflated Ponzi scheme, ultimately leading to a catastrophic collapse of the entire economy.
The Great Reset: A Cloaked Agenda of Control and Austerity
Proposing lockdowns, restrictions, or implementing measures such as mass unemployment and programmable digital currencies to meticulously regulate spending and alleviate inflationary pressures could be presented as crisis management strategies. The term “programmable” refers to the government's ability to dictate spending limits and impose restrictions on expenditure.
To establish such extensive control, governments might seek to legitimize their actions by advocating for reduced consumption under the banner of “sustainability.” This approach aligns with the well-publicized slogan of the World Economic Forum (WEF) that promotes the idea of “owning nothing and being happy.” By propagating this narrative, governments aim to shape public opinion and garner support for their control-oriented measures.
Similar to the positive spin given to neoliberal globalization in the 1980s, the concept of the Great Reset is also being presented in a favorable light, portraying it as a promising vision of a technologically advanced utopian future.
During the 1980s, in order to validate the agenda of deregulated neoliberal globalization, governments, and the media collaborated to initiate an ideological campaign. This campaign emphasized the importance of “free enterprise,” individual rights, and personal responsibility while downplaying the significance of the state, trade unions, and collective action in society. It aimed to shift public perception away from the role of these entities and promote a narrative favoring market forces and individualism.
Presently, we are witnessing another ideological shift where the significance of individual rights, such as the freedom to make choices regarding personal medical interventions, is being portrayed as undermining the broader societal needs. In a striking reversal, individual freedom is now being portrayed as a potential threat to “national security,” “public health,” or “safety.”
A state of near-permanent “emergency” arising from public health concerns, climate crises, or conflicts, such as the ongoing situation in Ukraine, conveniently places populations in a perpetual “war footing.” Under such circumstances, notions of individual liberty and democratic principles can be overshadowed by an emphasis on the “public interest” and protecting the population from potential harm. This shift paves the way for a gradual progression towards authoritarianism, as the focus shifts from safeguarding individual rights to prioritizing collective well-being.
Similar to the 1980s, the current messaging is primarily motivated by economic factors. Neoliberalism, with its focus on privatization, deregulation, and the exploitation of workers, has led to a situation where markets heavily rely on continuous financial interventions to stay afloat.
According to the World Economic Forum, their vision entails the public “renting” everything they need, disguised as promoting “sustainable consumption” and “saving the planet.” However, in the WEF's perspective, this notion appears to serve as a veil for imposing permanent austerity measures on the majority of the population. It essentially strips away the right to personal ownership and implies a future characterized by ongoing economic constraints for the masses.
Imagining a Future of Oppression: The WEF's Vision of a Controlled Society
Earlier, readers were asked to imagine a future based on principles of localization. Now, let's imagine a future being promoted by the WEF, a high-level group promoting elite interests, led by Klaus Schwab, a self-proclaimed globalist and transhumanist.
In this future, you will be unemployed and confined to your high-rise apartment, receiving food deliveries through an online platform, paid for with your programmable universal basic income digital money. Your food will come from farms endorsed by Gates, operated by driverless machines, monitored by drones, and saturated with chemicals to produce crops from patented GM seeds for industrial “biomatter” processed into something resembling food.
Imagine a future where you consume artificial food, devoid of the fulfillment that comes from productive work and genuine self-fulfillment. Yet, this won't be perceived as a problem. You can spend your days immersed in Zuckerberg's envisioned metaverse, living virtually. In this world, you'll be content without property, existing within the confines of mass unemployment and relying on state support. Your life will be tracked and controlled through health passports and exclusion from financial systems using programmable currency.
Additionally, bodily autonomy becomes a thing of the past, thanks to a mandatory vaccination agenda intertwined with emerging digital-biopharmaceutical technologies. The proposed pandemic treaty by the World Health Organization signifies a concerning step in this direction.
The potential implementation of this envisioned “New Normal” would indeed be oppressive, but it is important to recognize that the existing “Old Normal” that continues to prevail is also far from praiseworthy. Global inequality has reached alarming levels, while environmental destruction and human displacement continue to escalate. Dependency and dispossession are deeply entrenched within the system, affecting individuals as well as local, regional, and national communities.
Regardless of whether we embrace the “New Normal” or cling to the “Old Normal,” these issues will persist and likely worsen. It is crucial to acknowledge the urgent need for fundamental change and to seek alternative approaches that address the root causes of these problems, promoting fairness, sustainability, and social justice.
Embracing Localization and Cooperation: A Path Towards Sustainability and Autonomy
The heavily promoted “Green Economy” rests on the principles of commodifying nature, accomplished through privatization, marketization, and assigning monetary value. Banks and corporations, operating under the guise of “stakeholder capitalism,” will shape the agenda, often serving the interests of powerful global entities. Concerns arise regarding the potential weakening of environmental protection laws and regulations in order to facilitate private capital.
In this proposed system, the banking sector will engage in “green profiling” and issue “green bonds,” while global corporations will have the ability to offset their environmentally harmful activities through practices like protecting or planting forests elsewhere, typically encroaching upon indigenous people's lands. Additionally, there may be investments in industrial agriculture, featuring herbicide-resistant GMO commodity crop monocultures that are deceptively portrayed as “climate-friendly.” It becomes a form of imperialism concealed within a green veneer.
Relying on the same mindset and interests that have contributed to the current state of the world does not appear to be a wise course of action. The concept of "green" being promoted often serves as a lucrative market opportunity, prioritizing profit-making and potentially reinforcing compliance with the proposed “New Normal.”
To forge a better future, we should instead embrace the principles of localization. One valuable source of inspiration lies in the economic and social relationships found in tribal societies, such as India's indigenous peoples. These communities possess knowledge and value systems that prioritize long-term, genuine sustainability by harmonizing with nature's boundaries. They emphasize principles of equality, communal living, and sharing, rather than fostering separation, domination, and competition.
By adopting and integrating these principles into our approach, we can strive towards a more sustainable and equitable future that respects the interconnectedness of all beings and prioritizes the well-being of both people and the planet.
Self-sufficiency, solidarity, localization, and cooperation stand as the antidote to the perils of globalism and the authoritarian control imposed by programmable digital currencies and unaccountable, monopolistic AI-driven platforms. These values promote a decentralized and participatory approach, empowering individuals and communities to reclaim autonomy over their lives.
By embracing self-sufficiency, we reduce our dependence on centralized systems and regain control over our basic needs. Solidarity strengthens our collective bonds, fostering empathy and support for one another. Localization emphasizes the importance of local economies and resources, nurturing resilience and sustainability. Cooperation enables us to work together towards common goals, sharing knowledge and resources for the benefit of all.
These principles provide a counterbalance to the top-down dominance and surveillance ambitions of certain technologies and systems. They restore privacy and freedom, ensuring that every aspect of life is not dictated and monitored by external forces. By embracing self-sufficiency, solidarity, localization, and cooperation, we can build a more just, inclusive, and harmonious world.
If you found the information provided insightful please consider becoming a paid subscriber for more in-depth insights on various topics.
If you don’t want to commit to a paid subscription but still wish to support me, you can donate an amount you choose here. Most of my content is free to read, so it is greatly appreciated. Thank you!
If you do not wish to make a contribution of any kind, please leave at least a like. It costs you nothing and helps others see this post. Thank You :)