We knew the world was
changing in radical ways, but we never thought it would happen this
After closely following the steady construction of a global control grid after 9/11, it was still difficult to see exactly where it was all going and why.
Many of us knew the
surveillance infrastructure would be permanent, and there was
undoubtedly some speculation of an emerging supranational global
government, but still no clear endgame in sight.
That article, "Technetronic Enslavement - Life Inside the Matrix of Control," was published in New Dawn 156 (May-June 2016).
Since then, my suspicions have been
validated and questions answered through the emergence of the
globalists' Great Reset agenda.
...right down to where we are allowed to travel, if we are allowed to work, what we can buy, whether our children can attend school, and even who we are allowed to meet.
The level of control even
extends to the mandating of masks and what experimental injections
we are expected to receive in order to 'win back our freedoms' and
return to normal life.
Many countries have gone
so far as to suspend parliament, delay elections, and impose a
semi-permanent state of emergency.
Still, even in those
countries, the level of public compliance to public health policy
edicts was almost shockingly seamless.
countries like the UK and others appeared to take cues from China
early on, copying all of its symbolic policy moves, including the
use of lockdowns to supposedly 'stop the spread' of the virus.
Only in preparation for war have we seen this level of rapid societal and economic reorganization, the shuttering of institutions and services, and suspension of rights.
This fact alone is
worrying as countries invoked their fusion doctrines, resiliency
measures, and international network routes are already prepared for
an ongoing global upheaval.
Western politicians and media pundits accuse China, at the very least, of being responsible for a reckless 'lab leak' of an engineered coronavirus out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or at worst deliberately releasing a viral bioweapon that has killed three million people and devastated the global economy.
Regardless of whether any of that is even remotely true, the reality is that a generation of Westerners are now conditioned to view China with suspicion, or worse, as the enemy.
Elites prefer a bipolar world rather than a multipolar one.
For starters, a bipolar Cold War is much easier to physically control and administer. More crucially still is the management of intellectual and political life in a bipolar world order.
During the US-led post-WWII liberal world order, political thought and philosophy were built up and maintained around a bipolar worldview and predictable power dynamics.
It naturally lent itself to a fairly tight cadre of realist academics and intellectuals who fashioned the global political conversation along East vs. West, and Capitalist vs.
Communist ideological discourse.
This same intellectual syndicate, led at the time by international relations scholars like Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama, declared "the end of history" following the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The Western liberal and free-market model had prevailed, they proclaimed, and for another few decades, the bipolarists performed a victory lap which ushered in an era led by a neoconservative and neoliberal unipolar phase of US and NATO-led domination of various global regions.
And like the previous Cold War, there will be a contested or disputed zone somewhere in between that serves as a convenient 'away' pitch for a protracted ideological, military and proxy conflict between these two great powers.
One way to maintain a bipolar world order, and not allow it to develop into an uncontrollable, unpredictable multipolar world order, is to cripple the countries within the contested zones - in effect, weakening and even destroying emerging tiger economies and emerging markets.
The object is not necessarily to bomb them into submission, although the West tried this over the last 30 years.
Rather, it is to cripple them through economic sanctions or 'green' climate change regulations, preventing their development towards first world nation status.
Economically weakening a country allows for the creation of a perpetual state of dependency on aid, resource extraction by foreign powers, leading to continuous political instability and a constant brain drain of its best and brightest who would usually form the vanguard of any future populist movement.
This has been the neocolonial formula for managing target nations for much of the post-WWII epoch.
of George Orwell's dystopian novel 1984
are Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia.
'Disputed territories' are also indicated.
INSET: Map of Mackinder's "World Island" theory
with the central focus being
the pivot area of Eurasia.
We'd see a return to Halford Mackinder's "World Island" theory which saw the strategic imperative of controlling (or disrupting) a unified Eurasian landmass.
This might also extend to the BRICS nations bloc (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), and also the newly codified "Axis of Resistance" comprising,
While Belt and Road is global and primarily for the benefit of China and stakeholder nations along those trade and transport lines, its emergence serves as unwelcome competition to the predatory Western internationalist model.
This could signal a return to Great Game grand strategy, pitting Western sea power against a Chinese-led operational control of the Eurasian landmass - the chief objective being the disruption of resource acquisition by China, and fracturing high-volume Belt and Road travel and commerce routes.
In this new bipolar world
order, many geopolitical routes and clusters might eventually become
part of a "disputed zone," not unlike the very one depicted in
George Orwell's geopolitical map in the classic dystopian novel
Russian political analyst and philosopher
...to name a few.
But if the great powers
are intent on preventing the unification of the World Island and
forcing the world back into a bipolar paradigm, then it's likely
that Eurasia's shatter-belt nations, the Middle East and Far East,
could once again play a part in a cycle of instability and conflict.
Or, as Orwell famously said,
Over the last 40 years, China has been allowed to develop, but only to a point where it does not threaten the global political and cultural stronghold maintained by the Anglo-American control mesh of Five Eyes intelligence and NATO military alliances.
From that viewpoint, economic and political gains are acceptable so long as they are confined to Asian wealth creation and prosperity.
But the moment those gains are transformed into economic dependence of Western nations on Asian and Eurasian powers like China and Russia - the geopolitical alarm is tripped and the West's rapid response mechanism springs into action.
Western imperialists know
that economic dependence would precede political subservience.
Certainly, this was a major source of friction throughout the Cold War (1947–1991), with instability from proxy wars of that period still enduring to the present day. Russia's Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project is a prime example.
The United States and its allies made it a top priority to disrupt the joint Russian-German energy venture that will bring clean and affordable Russian gas to Europe.
A series of regime change operations, proxy wars, false flag events, and all-out propaganda, was waged against Moscow to trigger economic sanctions and ultimately derail the pipeline.
The thought of Germany
becoming dependent on Russia and developing good bilateral relations
is the stuff of horrors for the Anglo-American alliance which relies
on constant East-West tension to keep NATO relevant and
well-resourced as a military confab and extend its commercial
interests through Europe and into the former Soviet states.
After WWII, traditional colonial powers became post-colonial powers and took on self-appointed custodial duties of planetary management, including 'climate' and environmental oversight of what they refer to as the 'global commons'.
By all accounts, this is Brzezinski's great Technetronic era, only much more green in its rhetoric and governance, designed, we're told, to save the planet by stopping anthropogenic (man-made) global warming, otherwise known as climate change.
Fear of population growth
has been with us for a long time,
at least since Thomas Malthus' predictions
which later proved wrong
as other factors were not taken into account.
What this meant was that humans would be unable to produce enough food to sustain themselves.
wherever you find 'overpopulation' discussions, you find eugenicists
directing the conversation from the shadows through lavish funding
by foundations and civil society organizations, or under the
increasingly dubious guise of 'public health'.
Beginning in 2020, Bill Gates Jr has been leading,
When asked about safety concerns, Gates dismissed critics saying that the world did not have time to do proper safety testing and that any collateral damage must be priced-in for the "greater good."
Interestingly, before the
'pandemic', many of Gates' media appearances focused on global
population management. 3
He wrote other books obsessing about overpopulation, including the,
In one interview, Johnson opined that he would like to reduce the population of Britain substantially, flatly stating,
To call him a committed Malthusian would be an understatement.
It would be useful to know how much of the father's radical worldview is responsible for son Boris' enthusiasm for adhering to the UN and World Economic Forum (WEF) Great Reset agenda, adorned with shiny new straplines like "Build Back Better"...
During this global 'pandemic' crisis, the ascendancy of Big Tech, Big Pharma and BioTech industries has created an extremely soft-landing pad for,
These advances are certainly in development, but adoption is a slow and tedious process.
Technocrats are taking advantage of Covid to gain a velocity unattainable outside of a staged crisis like a global 'pandemic'. Social engineering, specifically a system of 'social credit' scoring, is now ready for implementation in the West.
Elite technocrats look enviously at the Chinese social credit system in which citizen behavior is assigned a score logged on a central database where officials can restrict privileges like,
This is not unlike Oceania's citizen scoring system depicted in Orwell's 1984.
The idea may already have
gained a foothold in the West through the new 'Vaccine Passport'
system being aggressively pushed by governments and corporate
The imposition of such a system is a hard break from the post-enlightenment era of constitutional republican and democratic governments, giving way to
The collective will or greater good can be whatever the state deems it to be, through the same process of manufacturing consent as outlined in Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's seminal text of the same title. 6
The weapons of information warfare used to prosecute wars on foreign soil are now fully deployed against the citizens of Western countries.
In this way, Orwell's
dystopian fiction is the playbook for what authorities have done in
practice from the beginning of
the Covid crisis.
Founder and executive chairman
of the World Economic Forum,
BBB is pure woke technocracy and seeks to put a cap on any development which is not 'green'.
At this year's  G7 Summit in Cornwall, England, British PM Boris Johnson raised a few conservative eyebrows when he declared that BBB would mean,
While this brand of woke identity politics was known to be present in the WEF material, it was still shocking to hear such progressive post-modernist proselytizing coming from a Tory PM.
This could also be viewed as an attack on the family itself - the fundamental pillar of any community, state or nation. In this regard, the Western-led drive towards a woke reset is an affront to the nation-state and prelude to an amorphous borderless globalist order.
Of course, there will be
borders, but perhaps only as exclusion zones - and accessible if a
global subject is carrying the correct track and trace digital ID
or Vaccine Passport.
Only with new advances in digital technology, data sharing, satellite and surveillance networks, could such an insidious web be implemented.
This has been achieved in
the following ways - the closure of borders, the normalization of
Covid testing and digital IDs, the demonization of physical cash and
adoption of a cashless society, the final goal being the intentional
collapse of the real economy leading to Central Bank-issued digital
Should an 'elected' leader pursue any genuine populist or traditionalist policies, they would be summarily removed by the real power centre:
This system will be formally adopted,
The EU Parliament is the beta test for such a system, with MEPs elected in their respective member states, sent to Brussels, but they have no actual power to propose new laws.
Rather, an unelected European Commission (EU civil service) ultimately drafts and proposes legislation, which MEPs are allowed to rubber stamp.
Despite the undemocratic nature of the EU, there seems little or no protesting from member states. Under this system, change is not a grassroots or bottom-up political effort but a top-down exercise micro-managed by 'experts'.
To date, this is the closest model of embryonic global government, and they've had 30 years to fine-tune it before expanding to other global regions.
By definition, it is a functioning technocracy.
These plans are being
the United Nations and Wall Street
level (led by
BlackRock), with the new
multi-trillion dollar green bond markets, carbon credit trading, and
other collateralized green futures and instruments, sold to the
public by way of celebrities like
This constriction will continue, and governments will print up even more money for corporate bailouts and to pay the burgeoning ranks of the unemployed and underemployed not to work.
This is a price worth paying for the globalists because the inevitable inflationary cycles that are now set in motion will only negatively affect the lower and middle classes by robbing them of their savings and purchasing power.
The elite and mobile globalist class will not feel the negative economic impact, and in fact have seen record gains for those in the favored digital and 'essential' industries.
Thanks to generous government 'stimulus' money over the last year, the net worth of the billionaire class grew by a quarter to well over $10 trillion and counting. 8
These are the new robber barons of the early 21st century, the superclass who will have the liquidity and capital to buy up the remaining assets tied to the old economy and invest in and own the ground level of the new green economy.
Rockefellers, Morgans, and Carnegies of the last industrial revolution and oil
boom, today's tech lords are set to dominate this New World Order
for at least the next 100 years.
The New Normal helped solidify their position and wipe out prospective competitors for a generation or more.
Schwab and the high priests of technocracy are excited about the destruction brought by lockdowns.
For many, this is a return of feudalism, but on a new global scale.
The WEF technocrats call for a 'fair' Great Reset, run under the new banner of 'stakeholder capitalism' and always in the woke spirit of 'equity' and utopian-sounding global citizenship.
The reality is that the top of this new 'sustainable' pyramid will be a hardened corporatist fascist layer dominated by top transnational corporations and government bureaucracies, while the bottom majority will have a collectivist, communitarian system imposed upon them.
In the words of the Great Reset proponents,
That is the future which technocrats are planning for.
The answer to this
question may lie in a study of 20th-century fascism.
According to the social psychologist Erich Fromm (1900-1980),
The authoritarian conscience in its extreme form, he said, is not about following the commands of a charismatic, authoritarian figure.
Morality is determined by conformism.
The Covid crisis, with its tightly-wound government and corporate partnership prosecuting the 'pandemic', has elevated the virtue of conformity with religious zeal.
This is now fully
internalized by traumatized members of the public.
According to Fromm:
This explains the power of self-policing behavior.
With individual rights and liberties stripped by the state, the individual is subsumed by the hive...
Thus far, the global
on terror has spanned some 20 years.
Whether or not SARS-CoV-2 is the bio-threat the government, media and pharma cartels insist that it is, we can be sure that a real war has been waged on our rights and freedoms.
We can predict the
prospect of a new global war on bio-terror, and an international
bioweapons 'arms race' which will drive the new cottage
Finally, after the biowar and cyberwar, there remains the final geopolitical specter, the sum of all fears - thermonuclear war.
This could take on a very different tone than the mutually assured destruction (MAD) model that ballasted the US vs. USSR Cold War of the 20th century.
Today's world is one of low yield 'tactical nukes' which could spark a number of scenarios with unforeseen reactions and outcomes.
An asymmetric tactical nuclear war would be more chaotic and likely converge conventional military conflict and continuous cyberwar and bio-threats.
Under these circumstances
- real or imagined - locking down whole countries and regions as
'exclusion zones' could become routine.
In many different ways, the architects of this chaos have declared war on humanity...
We are here now.
This is life inside the New World Order...