The Parasite Class VS Natural Law (All We Need To Live In Peace)
The parasite class provides us with a better term to describe oligarchs. Through elite theory we can see the lies told about the oligarchy.
Iain Davis | IainDavis.com
October 8th, 2024

I deplore the blame game, so often used to divert attention from the real issue or problem. I rail against the fake binaries deliberately created to divide and rule us, and yet, in this article, I refer to billionaire oligarchs—and their establishment—as “the parasite class.” Please bear with me, I will attempt to explain this apparent hypocrisy.

A current internet search on the term “oligarchy” will repeatedly try to convince you that oligarchy relates specifically to Russia. This is complete rubbish.

An oligarch is someone who has amassed immense wealth and converted it into political and social authority. That is what an oligarch has always been, ever since humanity started calling them “oligarchs.” Russia is an oligarchy but, as revealed by almost all political theory and the thousands of years of political philosophy, science and history, so is every other nation state.

The question is how does one become an oligarch? The suggestion is that some achieve oligarch status due to their shrewd business acumen. Many people are astute in business but that alone is not enough to rise to the oligarchy. In order to be an oligarch you have to be accepted by the other oligarchs. If oligarchs oppose you, your business will probably be crushed, or at least severely restricted, and access to political authority or social influence will be stifled.

Some are hereditary oligarchs, others become fabulously wealthy by virtue of operating practical monopolies, others benefit from nepotism and others leverage their network connections. But all oligarchs achieve and then maintain their power and influence through exploitation. Whether it is wage slavery—or simply slavery—industrial espionage, lawfare, war, other forms of violence, debt leverage, economic oppression, land grabs, theft or just deceit, the oligarchy is a gaggle of robber barons.

There is nothing inherently wrong with philanthropy but oligarchs use philanthropy to engineer society in their favour, create new markets for themselves, and increase their political and/or social authority. In short, the oligarch stands apart from the ordinary wealthy by virtue, not only of the scale of their wealth but, most notably, by the unscrupulous self-serving manner in which they acquire and abuse the authority their immense wealth affords them.

We, the people, are the source of both the oligarchs wealth and the political authority they hoard. While we may glean some benefit from the activities of the oligarchy—such as employment or infrastructure investment, etc.—this relationship is far more beneficial to the oligarch than it is to us. Otherwise, the oligarchy wouldn’t bother.

The definition of a parasite is:

• An organism that lives on or in another and derives its nourishment therefrom

The definition of social class is:

• A group of people within a society who possess the same socioeconomic status.

An oligarch’s only socioeconomic peer is another oligarch. The oligarchy’s collective effect upon society is parasitic.

The oligarchy is the parasite class.

Introducing Elite Theory
The common term we are given to refer to oligarchs is “the elite.” The fact that we commonly use this language to describe the parasite class is a clear example of social engineering. Unless we break free from the linguistic chains that bind our thoughts and control how we discuss the oligarchy we will continue to be ruled by them, whether we like it or not.

The concept of the “elite” largely stems from “elite theory”: a branch of political science that sprang up in the late 19th and early 20th century. Elite theory tries to explain why society is divided between the broad mass of the people and a ruling minority who always hold power.

Elite theory supposedly provides a scientific rationale to explain why, no matter where or when we look, a tiny clique controls nearly all the resources and possesses overwhelming financial, economic and political power, which they then use to rule. Throughout history, this deleterious power dynamic has sometimes been recognised by the people—who usually opposed it once they realised it—but mostly not. We largely accept it, as if it were some sort of organic aspect of society.

Broadly speaking, elite theory has rehashed ideas that are thousands of years old. As an academic field, elite theory is yet to present anything new. It reveals that all forms of government are essentially oligarchies, but most political historians already knew that. All “elite theory” does is reinforce many of the canards we are expected to swallow.

In elite theory the the word “elite” is a polysemic term that can mean “aristocracy,” in the classical sense. It comes from the French “aristocracie,” meaning “government by those who are the best citizens.” This is derived from the Greek ”aristokratia,” meaning “government or rule of [by] the best.”

In order to avoid obviously eulogising oligarchs too much, “elite” is also used by other elite theorists to denote a “ruling class,” absent the “aristokratia” inference. The etymology of the word “elite” is formed from the French “élite” meaning “pick out, choose,” derived from the Latin eligere, meaning “choose.”

Elite theory alternately perceives “the elite” as the best among us who lead by merit or as the ruling or “political class” we sometimes choose. The political class interpretation stems from the work of Gaetano Mosca (1858 – 1941) who noted that oligarchs often gained power using coercion and violence but were particularly well organised [and funded] and thus, with control of nearly all resources, ruled.

Either way, there is a suggestion that oligarchs benefit from some kind of meritocracy. Use of “meritocracy” can be traced back to Plato (c. 424/423 – 348/347 BCE)—more on him shortly—and is now used to denote, according the Oxford English Dictionary, “a ruling or influential class of educated or able people” or “government or the holding of power by people selected according to merit.” The oligarch is either the best among us or a powerful member of a well organised clique. Or so say elite theorists and publications that serve the oligarchs.

In modern use, the word “meritocracy” was popularised by the sociologist Michael Dunlop Young (1915-2002). He used it as a ironic spoof, warning people that selecting “leaders,” based upon their social status and formal educational qualifications, was a sure-fire way of ending up with completely crap government. That “meritocracy” has come to mean something “good” disappointed him until his dying day.

The problem with the common acceptance of the word “elite,” based upon “elite theory,” is that it suggests an inevitability. As if being ordered around by a bunch of oligarchs—call them black nobs, stakeholder capitalist, banksters or whatever—is just the way it is. It is as it always has been, so get used to it. Resistance is futile!

Vilfredo Pareto (1848 – 1923) has been credited with coining the term “the elite.” He offered his “circulation of the elite” theory which posited that conflict between “elites” often sees one group supplant another at the top of the hierarchical social structure. The other aspect of “circulation” was that individuals move in and out of elite circles.

Pareto noted that the elite were human beings capable of doing good but also of committing great evil. Although he maintained that they ruled as a result of their distinguished abilities and exceptional virtues.

Wikipedia, which is useful for names, dates and official histories but little else, claims that the American philosopher C. Wright Mills (1916 – 1962), who wrote about the “power elite,” is the right guy to go to if you want to understand all there is to know about the elite. Being Wikipedia, that opinion, offered as some sort of fact, is wrong.

Mills argued that the “power elite” just happen. They are an inevitable consequence of modern bureaucratic and technological society. This necessarily places authority in the hands of those who lead its institutions. If the elite, with their control of resources, didn’t lead these institutions, Mills claimed they wouldn’t function.

Mills rejected Mosca’s concept of the “politicqal class.” Instead “the elite” circulated, as Valfredo suggested, and rose out of the corporate organisations that dominated the US economy to become the “corporate rich.”

Mills suggested a “tripartate” model of US society, broadly split into the “power elite,” the “opinion leaders” and the public. This came as a bit of a shock to 1950’s Americans who viewed the US as an “egalitarian meritocracy.”.

He said that government, local leaders and interest groups formed the “opinion leaders” and the public were powerless, clueless proles who, unwittingly, were completely reliant upon the power elite for their economic survival. The public wrongly imagined that the opinion leaders made the decisions. Whereas, Mills demonstrated, the “power elite” dominated the institutions of the economy (corporations), the military and the government. The parasite class shared a common perspective and were the real decision makers.

But, to Mills’ mind, there was no “conspiracy” to see. The power elite controlled the resources, the economy and the lives of the little people. Like Pareto, he acknowledged that they could make both beneficial and disastrous decisions, but this was just a necessary and unavoidable function of a hierarchical society he said.

In short, Mills’ take on “elite theory” was in keeping with its general trajectory. It is consistently favourable to those who like to be thought of as “the elite,” even when it criticises them. Someone’s got to be in charge and, according nearly all elite theorists, it’s “the elite.”

Robert Michels (1876 – 1936) said that the technical demands of society made oligarch leadership indispensable to the survival of an organisation. Like Mills, Mosca and Pareto, etc., Michels believed that oligarchs achieved their status because they possessed superior knowledge, skills, and wealth. Michels added that this enabled them, not only to control their own compliant networks but also dissenting groups.

While Mosca viewed the elite’s organisational skills as a tool that enabled them to form the “political class,” Michels identified the same abilities as key to transforming the political structure into an oligarchy. Essentially, he argued, political parties were ruled by oligarchs who held all the power and shaped all the policies. This left the membership and the “grassroots” party activists floundering around, wrongly imagining they had some sort of say over the direction of the party.

Nothing New
The broadly consistent “elite theory”—that a society is best managed by a small subset of its constituent members and that somehow this alleged inevitability is evidence of meritocracy—can all be traced back to the “Guardians” of Plato‘s “Republic.”

Plato believed there were three aspects to the nature of man: appetite, spirit and reason.

These elements of the “soul” or “psyche” are in constant flux within us all and are either dominant of subservient. Therefore, Plato thought, human society was split into a “tripartate” structure: the Artisans (producers), the Auxiliaries (military) and the Guardians (rulers).

Thus ordered, we can all shut up, work until we drop, die in wars or, in the case of the rulers (Guardians), order people to work until they drop and die in wars. Thousands of years after Plato’s death, the leading elite theorist C. Wright Mills would advance more or less the same theory.

Plato, who was an aristocrat from an extremely wealthy and powerful family of rulers (Guardians), thought that the Guardians (rulers) were so special—gifted in wisdom, intellect and moral virtue—that they needed to receive the best education, immense advantage and plenty of time to become the philosopher rulers. Just like Plato and his mates.

While 19th and early 20th century elite theorists predominantly focused on ruling oligarchies constricted to nation states, we now live in a globalised world (apparently) and global governance is very much on the cards. The oligarch has gone international. In truth, they always were.

David Rothkopf, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations—so no conflict of interest there—wrote a whole book about the global parasite class (oligarchs) but called them, unsurprisingly, “the Superclass.” His opinion was very much in keeping with “elite theory.”

The “Superclass” can move billions and shape global markets, they own the lobby industry and are the patrons of political careers the world over, easily able to “influence” and control government and intergovernmental policy. But, once again, the so-called Superclass are the inescapable product of meritocracy, claimed Rothkopf.

These extremely motivated and knowledgeable people—according to Rothkopf—perhaps numbering no more than 6,000 – 7,000, possess real global power. Although they often act in concert, they are “global leaders” because they just happen to be global leaders. There’s no need for conspiratorial thinking he said. It seems there never is.

If Plato’s theory had any merit, you might expect roughly a third of the population to be rulers. Yet, despite the fact that elite theory has essentially added nothing to Plato’s ideas, according to David Rothkopf, only about 0.000000875% of us end up being philosopher “Guardian” kings.

This, we are told, is just the inevitable consequence of meritocracy. There is no such thing as conspiracy.

Understanding The Parasite Class
If we really want to understand the parasite class then we can start by going back more than two and a half thousand years to the Greek philosopher and polymath, Aristotle (c. 384–322 BCE).

Aristotle—Plato’s pupil—described the “true” forms of government as “monarchy” (the rule of one), “aristocracy” (the rule of the few) and “polity” (the rule of the many). Each could govern effectively in the “common interest” he said. He also stated that each could be “perverted” by “private interest.”

A monarchy could be perverted into a “tyranny”—which Aristotle considered the worst possible form of government—an aristocracy could degenerate into an “oligarchy” (oligarchia) and the polity could be sufficiently corrupted to devolve into a “democracy.” [Mob rule] [Thats why anarchy and natural law are they way to go]

Aristotle suggested that government was commonly perverted by “private interest.” As such, it was most likely to be either an oligarchy or a democracy.

The distribution of wealth, and more importantly the political power it could buy, was key to Aristotle’s concept of oligarchies and democracies:

The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few or many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is a democracy.

He added:

Oligarchy is when men of property have government in their hands; democracy is the opposite, when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers

Aristotle’s apparent notion of “democracy”—admittedly cobbled together from the remnants of his work on the Athenian Constitution—wasn’t democracy at all. It was something closer to “representative democracy,” which is more like mob rule.

Even without the influence of “oligarchs,” mob rule is precisely what we get from our modern delusions about “democracy.” When a big enough bunch of us “elect” our favourite gang, they make the law. Allegedly they do so on behalf of the ruling throng. They then enforce “the will of the people” with threats of violence levelled against anyone who doesn’t comply.

Mob rule.

To grasp what real “democracy” is, as averse to the Aristotelian misinterpretation we imagine it to be, we need to go back more than 150 years prior to Aristotle to the Greek political reformist Cleisthenes (c. 570 – 508 BCE), who established genuine “demokratia.”

Democracy (demokratia), unlike “representative democracy,” means government by trial by jury, where randomly selected juries of the people are both the supreme legislature and the final arbiter of justice—by applying Natural law. Demokratia is genuinely the rule of “the people,” not politicians, judges or “oligarchs.”

I digress, but the point is, while Aristotle made many telling observations about political systems, he was critiquing a similar kind of “democracy” to the one that we have to endure today, not “true” demokratia.

Winding forward a century or so from Aristotle to the Greek historian Polybius (c. 200 – 118 BCE), who wrestled with the contradictions found in Aristotle’s “Politics,” we get a very dim view of the exercise of power. Polybius stated that the power afforded by wealth corrupts all political systems. Rather like Vilfredo’s circulation theory, this leads to the revolution of political structures.

Monarchies become tyrannies that rule by force and not reason. This leads aristocracies to seize power which are then corrupted and become unjust. Thus democracies rise, but they too are perverted by wealth and become “extreme democracies” led by demagogues. Ultimately creating a new kind of monarchy: the Third Reich, for example.

Political history, elite theory and political science reveals that oligarchs rule us. We don’t “elect” any of them, we never have and the idea that any of us have ever lived in a real democracy is a fiction.

More than 2,500 years ago the question was asked: should the power of a privileged group of people far exceed their size as a percentage of the population? The more or less immediate answer, from Plato et al., was a definitive “yes.” Since then, according to “mainstream” academia and a brew of specially selected commentators, with the exception of the Marxists and the anarchists, the question has never really been asked again.

Marxism and particularly anarchism are taboo—there’s a reason for that. What we are left with has moved beyond normative assertions to empirical arguments. All such theoretical musing is based on the fundamental presumption that hierarchical structures are an unavoidable necessity of human society and that these must “inevitably” lead to oligarchies.

None of this is unassailable fact. It is all just opinion which, coincidentally, serves the interests of the oligarchs who have been bankrolling academia for millennia.

Etienne de La Boétie (1530 – 1563) pointed out that political power is not the product of meritocracy but usually the result of a conquest of some kind. Either at the hands of a foreign power, an internal coup, or through the use of political “emergency measures,” in response to some perceived crisis. Force is consistently used and it invariably results in the centralisation of power in a select group or “leader.”

We accept this despotism, not because we don’t like the idea of liberty, but because we have become accustomed to being ruled and expect it.

There are only two certainties in life, right? Death and taxes!

Except one of them isn’t a certainty at all. We just believe that it is because the people who have always taxed us have taught us to believe it. La Boétie pointed out that they have engineered our consent.

This obedience enables our rulers to more easily deploy rhetoric to convince us to accept all manner of travesties. Etienne de La Boétie observed:

Rulers (. . .) never undertake an unjust policy, even one of some importance, without prefacing it with some pretty speech concerning public welfare and common good.

The French economist Claude-Frédéric Bastiat (1801 – 1850) wondered if the suggested social order was any kind of order at all, asking “is it not true that what is most notable in society is the absence of all order?”

Prior to the pseudopandemic, the oligarchs’ pharmaceutical corporations—promoted by governments as our saviours from the so-called crisis that the oligarchs’ organisations and academic institutions declared—were all found guilty of medical, scientific and financial fraud. These rulings had no impact upon them whatsoever. When instructed by the government and the oligarch owned media, the people queued up to be injected with the oligarch’s experimental [aka deadly by design] potions  concocted by some of the most untrustworthy organisations on the planet.

The international monetary and financial system is overseen by a bank that is acknowledged to have laundered Nazi gold stolen from the Jews during the Holocaust. War criminals, who lied to deceive both the public and legislatures to support illegal wars that killed millions, habitually deliver well received speeches at gala events and are frequently feted by the oligarch’s media as they continue to give us their “advice.”

The oligarchs, who lead this global system, start wars, loan the money they conjured up from nowhere to the combatant nations, then swoop upon the aftermath—with their banking corporations and their “debt restructuring plans”—to hoover up all the remaining assets for pennies. They then force the same countries to spend the money they lent them on ludicrously expensive reconstruction contracts, thus enabling their engineering corporations to profit from rebuilding the nation that they destroyed with their armaments corporations.

What sort of order is that? Where is the alleged rule of law?

Inevitable Oligarchy?
Aristotle considered a rule of law to be a “virtue.” For it to have value he thought that it must be moral, capable of administering fair justice to all. It should also be flexible and able to adapt to changing circumstances:

There are two parts of good government; one is the actual obedience of citizens to the laws, the other part is the goodness of the laws which they obey.

Like Aristotle, Bastiat recognised that the law means more than just words written on bits of paper. However, he questioned the assumption that, without the law of government, humanity would start raping, pillaging and killing each other with abandon:

Resistance to such acts would manifest itself in fact even if specific laws against them were lacking, (. . .) this resistance is a general law of humanity. (. . .) It is a far cry from a social order founded on the general laws of humanity to an artificial, contrived, and invented order that does not take these laws into account or denies them or scorns them—an order, in a word, such as some of our modern schools of thought would, it seems, impose upon us.

These “general laws of humanity” form the basis for our social interactions. This is the Natural Law that we all innately obey regardless of the additional “contrived” laws written by governments on behalf of oligarchs.

Lysander Spooner (1808 – 1887) explained why Natural Law is all we need to live in peace:

Through all time, so far as history informs us, wherever mankind have attempted to live in peace with each other, both the natural instincts, and the collective wisdom of the human race, have acknowledged and prescribed, as an indispensable condition, obedience to this one only universal obligation: viz., that each should live honestly towards every other. The ancient maxim makes the sum of a man’s legal duty to his fellow men to be simply this: “To live honestly, to hurt no one, to give to every one his due.” This entire maxim is really expressed in the single words, to live honestly; since to live honestly is to hurt no one, and give to every one his due.

We only need look at world events to appreciate that the rule of oligarchs doesn’t deliver either peace or justice. It is a worthless “social order” that, if it exists at all, no one needs. It is a so-called “order” from which only oligarchs benefit.

We can also study the principles of Natural Law to realise that the written laws of government, that form the so-called “legal system,” do not concern themselves with moral justice. They merely protect the interests of the oligarchs and are used to subjugate us—lawfare. But we already have Natural Law and no need of these “rules.”

We also know that the thing we call “democracy” is not demokratia. It is perfectly possible for us to create a “social order” which has a real rule of Natural Law, administered by us, using trial by jury as required.

So where is the claimed necessity for the rule of oligarchs? The elite theorists allege that large scale organisations won’t function unless the resources they need aren’t meted out by the oligarchs. This is complete nonsense.

The Scottish Natural Law philosopher Adam Smith (1723 – 1790), in “The Wealth of Nations,” explained how the human desire to serve their own self-interest, in the face of competition from others, led to an economic structure that didn’t need any order imposed upon it. Human nature was the “invisible hand” that created spontaneous order in free markets.

Smith’s fellow philosopher of the Scottish Enlightenment, Adam Ferguson (1723 – 1816), noted that spontaneous order was “the result of human action but not of human design.” Later the economist Friedrich Hayek (F. A Hayak 1899 – 1992), building on the idea of spontaneous order, explored pricing in a competitive free market is a means of communication.

Price “signalled,” to both the producer and the consumer, the shifting underlying costs of materials and production. Left unfettered by interfering oligarchs, this enabled human beings to cooperate, producing the highly complex systems we are familiar with today, without any control from a superfluous oligarchy.

Spontaneous order is a reality, as exemplified in the wonderful 1958 essay “I Pencil” by Leonard E. Read (1898 – 1983). Later extolled by the economist Milton Friedman (1912 – 2006).

In “I Pencil,” Read examined how the humble pencil is made. The manufacturing process requires a vast global network. Yet nowhere in this sprawling international supply chain is anyone compelled to do anything.

From the first person perspective of the pencil, Read wrote:

Neither the worker in the oil field nor the chemist nor the digger of graphite or clay nor any who mans or makes the ships or trains or trucks nor the one who runs the machine that does the knurling on my bit of metal nor the president of the company performs his singular task because he wants me. [. . .] Their motivation is other than me. Perhaps it is something like this: Each of these millions sees that he can thus exchange his tiny know-how for the goods and services he needs or wants. [. . .] There is a fact still more astounding: The absence of a master mind, of anyone dictating or forcibly directing these countless actions which bring me into being. No trace of such a person can be found. Instead, we find the Invisible Hand at work.

This is how most of our “global economy” functions. To those, like the elite theorists and the oligarchs, who say that spontaneous order is impossible, we can safely say: we know it work[s] because we use it every day. It is how most human interactions already operate.

So what is this ridiculous idea that we need a bunch of violent robber barons to hoard all the resources so that they can control when and where we are allowed to use them? On what planet is it “inevitable” that a tiny clique of entirely self-appointed rulers simply has to command, not only the planet’s economy and its monetary system, but its distribution networks and political processes too?

Imagine the explosion in technological innovation if research and development wasn’t controlled by oligarchs. Think about the genuine advances in medicine and healthcare if oligarchs didn’t own the whole sector and weren’t running it for their own ends. Consider the solutions we would find to the many problems we face if academics, scientists, engineers, philosophers, architects, teachers, builders, journalists and everyone else in society was free to explore their interests and their passions and talents without having to work towards an artificial agenda created to serve the ambitions of the parasite class.

Despite everything they have done to us, and continue to do, we have no right to harm the oligarchs. Where crimes have been committed they should face justice, just like the rest of us. But that justice needs to be better than any justice we could every expect from them. Otherwise what have we achieved?

The biggest lie we have swallowed is that the oligarch is special—the “elite.” They are not, they are just human beings exactly the same as the rest of us, with all the same qualities and failings.

Aristotle and Polybius understood that the problem is, and has always been, that great wealth empowers people politically. When immeasurably wealthy people act in their own self interests what is their purpose? It cannot be simply to accrue more wealth. Why do you want more of something you already have in excessive abundance.

The oligarchs self-interest is served by extending their power. This isn’t an argument against wealth, it is an argument against a political system led by those whose primary goal is to control and exploit everyone else.

Collectively, we are equally responsible for our oppression at the hands of oligarchs. We have passively allowed them to rule from behind the curtain while knowing full-well they were there.

We cannot absolve ourselves of our responsibility for what they have done. Nor can we avoid the responsibility to end the parasite class’ pernicious system, any more than we can exonerate ourselves from our duty to construct a better one.

https://iaindavis.com/the-parasite-class

https://cdn.getmidnight.com/6908ab1f9a9e....40-PM.png

Accelerationism + Dark Enlightenment
Iain Davis | IainDavis.com

In this article we are going to explore “accelerationism” and its roots in “the Dark Enlightenment.” We need to do this because surprisingly a commitment to accelerationism—following the philosophical path laid by the Dark Enlightenment—is a powerful influence on both the left and the right of the political spectrum. In order to examine these ideas, we need to pick apart some pretty impenetrable texts and this won’t be easy. So, if you are ready to start wrestling with some quite alien and seemingly bizarre concepts, read on.

The term “accelerationism” is attested in economics from the mid-1970s, and in the sense of hastening the onset of technosociety from the early 2010s, as a new coining attributed to Benjamin Noys, an English professor of Critical Theory. It is in that latter usage, just a decade old, that I use the term in this article. So it comes as a bit of shock to discover that accelerationism is already seemingly everywhere.

Accelerationism has apparently been adopted by many of the most powerful people and institutions on the planet. It is widespread and influential.

When the World Economic Forum signed its Strategic Partnership with the United Nations, it claimed that the purpose was “to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. In his 2021 letter to shareholders, the CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, referred to acceleration seven times: for example, “the pandemic has also accelerated deeper trends”, or “the reallocation of capital accelerated even faster than I anticipated”, and “momentum continues to build, and in 2021 it will accelerate—with dramatic implications for the global economy”. The UK Government has numerous policy Accelerators,  and politicians often talk about accelerationism. For example, his statement on the alleged British economy’s growth plan, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer (UK Finance Minister), Kwasi Kwarteng, said:

    [W]e are publishing a list of infrastructure projects that will be prioritised for acceleration[.] [. . .] I can announce that we will accelerate reforms[.] [. . .] We will liberalise planning rules in specified agreed sites, releasing land and accelerating development [. . .] for ten years, there will be accelerated tax reliefs for structures and buildings.

During the pseudopandemic, the World Health Organisation established its Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator. The UK Ministry of Defence established its Defence and Security Accelerator (DASA) in 2016 as a public-private partnership for the “exploitable innovation” of defence technology.

Speaking in 2020, Joseph H. Davis, Chief Economist for the global investment giant Vanguard, wrote an article, pre-empting Fink’s sentiments, discussing how “the pandemic has accelerated some trends already in place”. In a section he entitled The Future Accelerated, he wrote:

    (T)he pandemic functioned as a call option on employers’ incrementalism. No longer could work-from-home arrangements serve as controlled experiments in productivity; they became indispensable. Ready or not, employers for the most part have successfully enabled secure and efficient work from home and redefined team dynamics. (. . .) COVID-19 has also accelerated the challenges facing restaurants and brick-and-mortar retailers. E-retail and food delivery, already growing in popularity before the pandemic, have become essential to consumers worried about face-to-face interaction.

Davis’ statement reveals a bit more about this notion of accelerating. Most of us think of it as the present participle of the verb “accelerate”; simply an adjective to describe motion and little more. But Fink and Davis appear to be among those who ascribe a different meaning to the notion. “Accelerating” to them also implies disruption; a catalyst for change accomplished in leaps and bounds rather than by steady progress.

When we then discover that “accelerationism” is a distinct socio-political philosophy, it is reasonable to ask whether all of these “accelerators” are, in fact, based upon an ideology. Is there more to this concept of “acceleration” than meets the eye? Does use of the term by people like Schwab, Fink, Davis and Kwarteng mean more than just “quicken”?

The Accelerationist Left
In his useful exploration of accelerationism, the Guardian‘s Andy Beckett outlined the core beliefs of its exponents, the accelerationists:

Accelerationists argue that technology, particularly computer technology, and capitalism, particularly the most aggressive, global variety, should be massively sped up and intensified [. . .]. Accelerationists favour automation. They favour the further merging of the digital and the human. They often favour the deregulation of business, and drastically scaled-back government. They believe that people should stop deluding themselves that economic and technological progress can be controlled. They often believe that social and political upheaval has a value in itself.

He also provided his view of what accelerationism is not:

Accelerationism, therefore, goes against conservatism, traditional socialism, social democracy, environmentalism, protectionism, populism, nationalism, localism and all the other ideologies.

Beckett wrote about the activity of radical accelerationists at the the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit (CCRU) of Warwick University during the mid-1990s. It would be easy to discard the drug-fuelled musings of these cyber-punk iconoclasts, seeking as they did to deconstruct everything from politics and society to economics and philosophy, as little more than nihilistic navel-gazing. That would be a mistake.

It is evident that the ideas of CCRU “thought leaders” like Professors Sadie Plant and Nick Land have gone on—thanks largely to those who have continued to promote them, such as Mark Fisher and Alex Williams—to have a profound impact upon global policy agendas. While often this association goes undeclared and unnoticed, accelerationism pervades, as we shall see, the strategic planning of the globalist think tanks and those who form them.

Accelerationism has been attacked by some for being on the political right, an expression of “popularism” favoured by the so-called “alt-right” or even by the “far right.” We will explore the reasons why in a moment. Yet it has also been picked up by the Left, especially what we might call the environmentalist left; somewhat contradicting Beckett’s observation.

In 2013, in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis, and building upon the work of the CCRU, Canadian academics Alex Williams and Nick Srnicek wrote the Accelerationist Manifesto. The Manifesto declared that the authors’ interpretation of accelerationism was the only feasible response to what they called the “breakdown of the planetary climatic system”:

    (T)oday’s politics is beset by an inability to generate the new ideas and modes of organisation necessary to transform our societies to confront and resolve the coming annihilations. (. . .) We believe the most important division in today’s left is between those that hold to a folk politics of localism (. . .) and those that outline what must become called an accelerationist politics at ease with a modernity of abstraction, complexity, globality, and technology. (. . .) (A)n accelerationist politics seeks to preserve the gains of late capitalism while going further than its value system, governance structures, and mass pathologies will allow. (. . .) The choice facing us is severe: either a globalised post-capitalism or a slow fragmentation towards primitivism, perpetual crisis, and planetary ecological collapse.

Williams and Srnicek claimed that there was no option but to act towards achieving globalised post-capitalism. They saw accelerationism as key to saving the planet but were also opposed what they identified as the accelerationism of the neoliberal hegemony:

    If any system has been associated with ideas of acceleration it is capitalism. (. . .) In its neoliberal form, its ideological self-presentation is one of liberating the forces of creative destruction, setting free ever-accelerating technological and social innovations.

They suggested that Schumpeter’s “creative destruction” was purposeless unless the “post-capitalist” direction was clearly defined. Neoliberal accelerationism, they said, was nothing but a “brain-dead onrush”. Instead, accelerationism should be “navigational” and based upon an “experimental process of discovery”. Therefore, the problem was the misinterpretation of accelerationism by the right-wing, capitalist neoliberals.

Williams and Srnicek urged that the Left’s response to this should not be to discard, but rather to adapt what they claimed to be the unavoidable economic forces and political philosophies that were inextricably embedded within modernity, including neoliberalism:

    Accelerationists want to unleash latent productive forces. In this project, the material platform of neoliberalism does not need to be destroyed. It needs to be repurposed towards common ends. The existing infrastructure is not a capitalist stage to be smashed, but a springboard to launch towards post-capitalism.

Like all accelerationists, the pair placed great emphasis upon digital technology and, in particular, computer modelling:

    Economic modelling is — simply put — a necessity for making intelligible a complex world. (. . .) The tools to be found in social network analysis, agent-based modelling, big data analytics, and non-equilibrium economic models, are necessary cognitive mediators for understanding complex systems like the modern economy. The accelerationist left must become literate in these technical fields.

As society must be transformed to avert a climate catastrophe, the pair said that the “transformation of society must involve economic and social experimentation”. This would enable the left to create a “sociotechnical hegemony” that would reprogramme “production, finance, logistics, and consumption” to be “reformatted towards post-capitalist ends”.

The gargantuan effort of transforming everything could not be achieved by any one nation state, multinational corporation or population. Everyone with sufficient means must be involved:

What is needed — what has always been needed — is an ecology of organisations(.) (. . .) A positive feedback loop of infrastructural, ideological, social and economic transformation, generating a new complex hegemony, a new post-capitalist technosocial platform. (. . .)
(T)he accelerationist Left must think more seriously about the flows of resources and money required to build an effective new political infrastructure (. . .) whether from governments, institutions, think tanks, unions, or individual benefactors.
Paul Mason

The modern architects of the New Left, whose ideas are expressed through people like Paul Mason and Aaron Bastani, have become increasingly uncomfortable with the term “accelerationism”. This perhaps partly explains why Andy Beckett claims it is absent from “environmentalism (. . .) and all the other ideologies”.

Paul Mason—widely thought to be an state intelligence asset—in particular, rails against what he sees as the anti-human elements of the “sociotechnical hegemony”. Instead, he advocates his concept of the “networked individual”, liberated by technology but not exploited by it.

Williams and Srnicek have also distanced themselves from, and now even refuse to mention, accelerationism. Yet all of these left-leaning thinkers have clearly incorporated many of the central tenets of accelerationism in their work.

Employment will in their vision be replaced by technology, as human beings live by means of some form of Universal Basic Income (UBI.) The traditional class structure will become irrelevant; consequently, the class struggle is rendered meaningless. Class inequality will dissolve, to be replaced by a metropolitan monoclass of intellectually and creatively free individuals, all benefiting from an equitable redistribution of resources, as capitalist “wealth” and “property” become anachronisms.

All of this will be to the benefit of the general good, enabling society, as a whole, to avert “the coming annihilations”. An AI-driven technological utopia is possible, we are assured, as we make the necessary and inescapable adaptations. There will be no scarcity and no need for the acquisition of additional means.

As Paul Mason wrote, “information technology makes Utopian Socialism possible”. We will own nothing and we will be happy. Others of this persuasion have called the vision the Conquest of Bread, fully automated luxury communism, or luxury communism now.

To be fair to the accelerationist Left, they are not suggesting that the envisaged utopia will just happen. They concede that the political and regulatory environment must be conducive to the creation of the post-capitalist society. They must be delighted that it very obviously is.

So why, having resurrected the fringe philosophy of the CCRU, are they so squeamish about the ideology underpinning their own current worldview—the more so, given that their dream of an accelerationist transformation is underway?

The Accelerationist Right
The post-capitalist Left’s collective shyness about openly acknowledging its accelerationist roots appears to be based upon its adherents’ intense dislike for those whom they consider their enemies. They have not abandoned accelerationist principles; they just despise the other people who have also adopted them, and therefore pretend that they aren’t on the same trajectory.

In 2009, Peter Thiel, the billionaire venture capitalist of PayPal and Palantir Technologies fame—or infamy, depending upon your perspective—whose connections to the intelligence agencies and the deep state and the Republican Party in the US are multifarious, wrote The Education of a Libertarian. In the wake of the financial crisis, Thiel’s opinion was that the prospect of achieving the libertarian goal of a free market was “grim indeed” and that trying to win over “the body politic” was a “fool’s errand”.

Thiel said that US financial crash of 1920–1921 was the last time that government had not stifled Shumpeter’s creative destruction. Thiel believes that a sharp deflationary recession is a good thing. He claimed that the roaring economic decade of the 1920s was the result, though notably not the 1929 Wall Street Crash it ultimately produced.

He said that ever-increasing government intervention would bring about a totalitarian catastrophe, and called the notion of capitalist democracy an “oxymoron”, adding that “social democracy” was the product of an “unthinking dēmos“. Since, in his view, both democracy and politics had failed completely, he concluded that “the great task for libertarians is to find an escape from politics in all its forms“.

In 2012, Nick Land, the former CCRU head, published his sprawling treatise on accelerationism, The Dark Enlightenment. Arguing that the process of “enlightenment” is built upon supposedly “self-evident” concepts which, once discovered, can never be cast off, Land suggested that an inescapable socio-political “vector” results. He opined that, while people may benefit from the associated “progress”, the destination of the process of enlightenment is “a new dark age”.

If we know that the vector is terminal, the only logical position, Land asserted, is to react against the alleged illumination of democratic progress:

Democracy’s relentless trend to degeneration presents an implicit case for reaction.

The “neoreactionary” (NRx) has to pursue the lessons of the Dark Enlightenment in the hope of breaking free from the inexorable path towards “totalitarian catastrophe”. Picking up on Thiel’s ideas, and calling their expression a “milestone”, Land writes:

For the hardcore neo-reactionaries [NRxs], democracy is not merely doomed, it is doom itself. Fleeing it approaches an ultimate imperative. The subterranean current that propels such anti-politics is recognizably Hobbesian, a coherent dark enlightenment, devoid from its beginning of any Rousseauistic enthusiasm for popular expression.

The Dark Enlightenment rejects the “social contract” because that alleged agreement condemns everyone to “democratic politics”. This can only ever deliver a “sovereign power” that runs the “democratic state” for its own ends, at everyone else’s expense. The only “democratic” mechanism, along the vectored path, is politics, which is itself leading all of us to our “doom”:

(T)he dynamics of democratization (are) fundamentally degenerative: systematically consolidating and exacerbating private vices, resentments, and deficiencies until they reach the level of collective criminality and comprehensive social corruption. The democratic politician and the electorate are bound together by a circuit of reciprocal incitement, in which each side drives the other to ever more shameless extremities of hooting, prancing cannibalism, until the only alternative to shouting is being eaten.

Land was here expanding the ideas enunciated by the software engineer and internet entrepreneur Curtis Yarvin, who wrote under the pen name of Mencius Moldbug. As Moldbug, Yarvin started writing his various “unqualified reservations” in 2007. In 2013, Yarvin (alias Moldbug) received start-up funding from Peter Thiel for Urbit, his decentralised peer-to-peer (P2P) network technology company.

Thiel, Yarvin and Land are among many who believe that “sovereignty” is solely defined by political power exerted over others. Consequently, Land claims that such sovereignty “cannot be eliminated, caged, or controlled”. The monetary power of supreme capitalists is also an unavoidable reality, and therefore the task is to identify “who[m] capitalists pay for political favours”. This so-called “mapping” of real power will enable clarification of the “ruling entity” that comprises the “truly dominant instance of the democratic polity”.
Nick Land

The “dominant instance” is therefore considered by those of the neoreactionary persuasion to be an amalgam of a malleable “democratic” polity with a corrupting element of private capital. This dominant instance is infused with an unimpeachable morality, founded upon the universal “progressive” truths of the prevailing “democracy”. Yarvin declared that this socio-political structure expressed itself through “the Media-Academic complex”, creating an invincible “ruling entity” he called “the Cathedral”.

Yarvin suggested that an account of the Cathedral should be made by quantifying its “administrative, legislative, judicial, media, and academic privileges”. These elements could then each be given a monetary value and subsequently “converted into fungible shares”. He named the process “neo-cameralisation” (meaning reorganising the chambers).

Thus understood, the Cathedral could eventually be transformed into a corporate structure called “gov-corp”. This would be owned by capitalist stakeholders and run as a business:

(I)t is essential to squash the democratic myth that a state ‘belongs’ to the citizenry. The point of neo-cameralism is to buy out the real stakeholders in sovereign power, not to perpetuate sentimental lies about mass enfranchisement. (. . .) Once the universe of democratic corruption is converted into a (freely transferable) shareholding in gov-corp, the owners of the state can initiate rational corporate governance.

According to the accelerationists, the Cathedral is infested with a postmodern “central dogma” affording misplaced but “absolute moral confidence”. Consequently, nothing is more intolerant of dissenting views or less inclusive: the “secularised neo-puritanism of the Cathedral” deifies the “evangelical state” and all opposition to it is heresy.

Land dubbed the widespread, societal acceptance of this supposedly irreproachable, postmodernist certainty “Modernity 1.0”. He contended that the economy underpinning this “evangelical” society must rely upon economic growth, which always exceeds population growth. Therefore, Land says, the Cathedral is an inherently destabilising and self-contradictory force.

The technological capacity “accelerating development” does provide the necessary growth, but it is then almost entirely consumed by “the rent-seeking special interests” of the extant Cathedral. The fruits of that growth are swallowed by the stakeholders before anyone else gets a taste.

As this destruction is mindlessly tolerated by the neo-Puritans’ faith in Cathedral democracy, Land described this sickness as “demosclerosis” (the hardening of the masses so that they are incapable of accepting change). He claimed it was a fatal condition. Offering some predictions on where all this is heading, starting with his concept of “postmodernity,” he wrote:

    Postmodernity. Amounting essentially to a new dark age, in which Malthusian limits brutally re-impose themselves, this scenario assumes that Modernity 1.0 has so radically globalized its own morbidity that the entire future of the world collapses around it. If the Cathedral ‘wins’ this is what we have coming.

Realistically, for the Cathedral to continue enjoying the fruits of its democracy, its current stakeholders must consume ever more. Land envisaged that they would have to move beyond Modernity 1.0, spreading their gluttony globally.

Land identified the opening-up of China as key to preserving the stakeholders’ feeding frenzy. In 2012, he predicted that Modernity 2.0 would be based upon the necessary dissolution of the pax Americana world order, thereby inviting other states to the dining table. This would defuse Anglo-American power but would also transmit demosclerosis to others:

Modernity 2.0. Global modernization is re-invigorated from a new ethno-geographical core [the East], liberated from the degenerate structures of its Eurocentric predecessor, but no doubt confronting long range trends of an equally mortuary character. This is by far the most encouraging and plausible scenario (from a pro-modernist perspective), and if China remains even approximately on its current track it will be assuredly realized.

For the accelerationists, the Dark Enlightenment offers a would-be solution. As Modernity 1.0 and 2.0 are understood only to be heading towards the same point of annihilation, with the 2.0 iteration simply kicking the can further down the road, Schumpeter’s creative destruction (a term also bandied about in Britain’s misnamed Conservative Party) should be accelerated and propelled to brutal heights in order to smash the Cathedral to pieces. Like the short, sharp shock of the 1920 financial crash as set against the prolonged agony of the post-1929 Depression, this, it is held, will be preferable to the slow, drawn-out suffocation of Modernity 2.0.

According to Land, a subsequent “Western Renaissance” will then be born:

    Western Renaissance. To be reborn it is first necessary to die, so the harder the ‘hard reboot’ the better. Comprehensive crisis and disintegration offers the best odds.

The darkly enlightened accelerationists acknowledge that the deeply entrenched self-interest of the Cathedral stakeholders renders the “vector” immovable. Only the Cathedral’s final implosion enables gov-corp to facilitate Western Renaissance:

    (I)t’s already absolutely clear that none of this is going to happen short of an existential civilizational cataclysm. Asking politicians to limit their own powers is a non-starter, but nothing less heads even remotely in the right direction.

Therefore, the committed neoractionary should take a pragmatic view and hasten the Cathedral’s demise:

    Because competition is good, a pinch of Western Renaissance would spice things up, even if — as is overwhelmingly probable — Modernity 2.0 is the world’s principal highway to the future. That depends upon the West stopping and reversing pretty much everything it has been doing for over a century, excepting only scientific, technological, and business innovation.

Thus, the only part of Western civilisation that the neoreactionary considers worthy is its “scientific, technological, and business innovation”.

It is with the proposed solutions revealed by the advocates of Dark Enlightenment that things start to become very “dark” indeed.

In the task of mapping “sovereignty” in order to evaluate the Cathedral and assign a share price to its functions, the population is practically irrelevant:

    Insofar as voters are worth bribing, there is no need to entirely exclude them from this calculation, although their portion of sovereignty will be estimated with appropriate derision.

The Dark Enlightenment logically advocates that the “owners of the state” are those who already have sufficient means to “buy out” the Cathedral’s “stakeholders”. While Land stops short of saying so, this implies that the current “stakeholders”, through neo-cameralisation—the “formalization of political powers”—will simply become the major “shareholders” of the Western Renaissance delivered by gov-corp.

Thiel’s “unthinking dēmos“, who aren’t worth bribing because their share of sovereignty is derisory, simply become the “not very bright” customers of gov-corp. Land asserts that gov-corp would be an improvement upon destructive democracy because the primary business of this corporate state would be to maximise collection of “sovereign-rent” (taxation) from gov-corp’s dullard customers (the population):

Gov-corp would concentrate upon running an efficient, attractive, vital, clean, and secure country, of a kind that is able to draw customers.

The customer, then, is an NPC (non-playing character) whose only purpose is to act as a cash cow—although money won’t exist—for the neoreactionary shareholders (stakeholders) of global gov-corp. The Dark Enlightenment promises that we can “become intelligible” once we are “subsumed into the technosphere, where information processing of the genome — for instance — brings reading and editing into perfect coincidence”.

As “technoplastic beings” (meaning entities capable of being reformed by technology), in a world where “biology and medicine co-evolve”, we can all prostrate our children before gov-corp as we collectively undergo “precise, scientifically-informed transformations”. When we cross the “bionic horizon”, we can finally kill God and abandon the “essence of man as a created being” as we sacrifice our humanity to embark upon our “new evolutionary phase”.

https://iaindavis.com/wp-content/uploads..._08-54.png

The Accelerationist Pragmatists
As published political philosophies go, the prophecies of the Dark Enlightenment and the theories of the post-capitalist Socialist Utopians could easily be discarded as turgid drivel. But if we consider them in light of current events, the policy agendas of the globalist think tanks, and the political strategies and policies of governments, an uncomfortable reality dawns: accelerationism is everywhere.

There is a significant overlap between both the radical left’s and the radical right’s interpretation of accelerationism. Both advocate the extreme application of Schumpeter’s “creative destruction” as the only viable solution to approaching catastrophe. For the Left, it is the alleged climate disaster and the associated societal collapse; for the Right, it is the economic and financial implosion, and accompanying moral decay, that is held to be hardwired into modern democracy.

Both advocate global solutions for global problems. Nothing less than the total transformation of international economic, financial, political and social structures can save us, we are told. We, too, need to be transformed into a new cybernetic species, as this is our evolutionary destiny and the only way we can adapt to the demands of ultramodernity.

Both imagine an all-powerful state where we are controlled minions, and both wave away class antagonisms, although notably the Left is reluctant to admit this openly for the meek surrender it is. Nonetheless, the socialist utopia of enforced idleness (no work) and Universal Basic Income (UBI), as we abandon all notion of a ruling class and instead submit to parochial lives under state “care”, is practically indistinguishable from our envisaged enslavement as customers of gov-corp (a term defined below).

Equally, both philosophies make the same fundamental error and both are consequently worthless, but for different reasons. While the Left defends “democratic values” with considerable secular neo-puritanical zeal, and the Right’s conspicuous brain-dead onrush attacks “democracy” wholeheartedly, neither wing understands what democracy is.

They both incorrectly assume that “representative democracy” is democracy—which it isn’t.

Real democracy decentralises political power to the individual citizen, devolving “sovereignty” to the each and every one equally. The sovereign citizen has agency in, and a responsibility for, everything.

Representative democracy, which both Right and the Left wrongly imagine “democracy” to be, is a system designed to centralise political control and authority, thereby limiting sovereignty to the select few who claim the power to wield it. The accelerationist Right’s insistence that individual sovereignty can never overcome the Cathedral forces everyone to accept a condition of learned helplessness. The Left’s enthusiasm for reimagining power, without ever doing anything to tackle power, is both disempowering and naïve.

This leads the right-leaning accelerationists to conclude that “democracy” is the source of economic, social and moral collapse. What they really mean is that representative democracy is the alleged culprit. They assume inevitability without even knowing what the available solutions are.

Conversely, the accelerationist leftists believe that democracy—meaning representative democracy—has been corrupted and needs to be fixed. In fact, “representative democracy” is functioning exactly as designed, rendering their dream of purifying it an utterly pointless task. They too overlook the obvious solution: democracy.

As I write, accelerationism is being deployed as a strategy across the planet by people who couldn’t care less about either the right- or the left-wing perspective. For them, the left-right divide is simply another handy tool for literal population control; its ideological exponents nothing but proverbial “useful idiots.”

Neither the Left nor the Right are going to get what they want. Accelerationism is firmly in the hands of the globalist accelerationist pragmatists: the stakeholders.

As they do with with all political philosophies and economic ideas, the stakeholders are cherry-picking aspects of both theoretical wings, keeping what works for them and discarding what doesn’t.

Another example of this is the stakeholder approach to “civil society”. The intellectual leaders of communitarian civil-society theory, like Amitai Etzioni, see it as a way to increase democratic accountability. However, the intrinsic design flaws in communitarian theory allow the holders of power simultaneously to embrace it, improving their own public relations, and to exploit it to disenfranchise populations.

This selective, stakeholder adaptation of accelerationism is why we face both the alleged climate catastrophe and a crowing defence of “democratic values” during the simultaneous creation of gov-corp, in the form of stakeholder capitalism, while economic, military and monetary power shifts eastwards. It also explains why the “existential civilizational cataclysm” is underway, in the form of a series of interdependent crises, while the Cathedral isn’t distressed by them at all but rather thrives.

While the “post-capitalist” utopia of the “sociotechnical hegemony” is avidly reprogramming “production, finance, logistics, and consumption”, what is emerging from the transformation is gov-corp, ushering in a new form of extreme predatory capitalism. While Left and Right bicker, the accelerationist pragmatists are surging ahead.

For example, writing for the World Economic Forum in January 2022, the Chairman of Siemens and formerly of Maersk, Jim Hagemann Snabe, wrote “The Great Acceleration: what we need to do to tackle climate change“. Using the accelerationist tactic of claiming an existential threat, the argument for caution was thrown aside to be replaced by disruptive accelerationism:

2021 was the first year of the Decade of Action proclaimed by the United Nations — a decade that, the idea goes, will bring about a sharp acceleration of sustainable solutions for the world’s biggest problems. (. . .) While most companies and countries have set net-zero targets for 2030 or earlier, many of them are hesitating to switch to green technologies because they are legitimately concerned that markets are not yet ready for such a radical transformation (. . .) they’re waiting for a price on carbon. (. . .) (W)e don’t have time for that when it comes to fighting climate change. (. . .) (W)e should take a leap of faith. We should act now(.)

Snabe’s reference to the “price on carbon” belies the Net-Zero scam. The “radical transformation”—code for accelerationism—has nothing to do with “reducing” carbon emissions. Rather companies like Siemens and Maersk offset their carbon emissions by investing in green infrastructure projects or adopting “net-zero” energy solutions, such as so-called green ethanol.

As the world plummets into a food crisis, yet another to be exploited by the accelerationist pragmatists, maize is being used to make fuel for ships. It is claimed that this biofuel reduces the ship’s “carbon footprint.” Predictably, these calculations ignore the energy required to grow the crop in the first place, let alone the subsequent inefficient conversion of that biomass into fuel. When this is accounted for, so-called “green ethanol” has a greater carbon dioxide footprint than the equivalent “fossil fuel.”

Food prices surge; people go hungry; and carbon emissions, at best, stay the same. Meanwhile, Siemens and Maersk can declare themselves exemplars of “net zero”, as they play their part in deepening the numerous crises while entering the new carbon bond market, which is estimated to achieve market value of $100 trillion ($100,000,000,000,000) by 2030.

Snabe’s eulogising of Maersk’s transition to green ethanol illustrates a quintessential accelerationist plan in action. Based upon predictive models of catastrophe, the consequent “infrastructural, ideological, social and economic transformation” creates real collapse—which is then used to justify “a new complex hegemony”.

But why stop there?

As pointed out by the President of the WEF, Børge Brende, “we” also need to figure out how to accelerate and strengthen the global economy. The world’s economy is, of course, said to be under threat. The inflation crises, weak growth and the climate disaster all combine to produce a situation whereby, according to Brende, “the global economy could face unprecedented consequences, potentially shrinking by up to 18 percent in the next 30 years”.

Drilling the accelerationist mantra into our tiny minds, he adds:

    This does not include the devastation that our planet would face in terms of biodiversity loss and loss of human life.

The Cathedral is moving on to Modernity 2.0 to spread “demosclerosis” globally. The WEF multi-stakeholder partnership claim they can save us from “biodiversity loss” and death. They have a plan and “if China remains even approximately on its current track it will be assuredly realized”:

Many advanced economies have promising forecasts, such as China which saw its exports jump by over $675 billion last year — a 26 percent increase on the year before. (. . .) China experienced a record $179 billion of investment flowing into the country, amounting to a 20 percent year-over-year increase. (. . .) (W)we need to empower digital transformation (. . .) The digitization of the global economy is why China’s 14th Five Year Plan has called for the “core industries of the digital economy” to account for 10 percent of the country’s GDP by 2025, up from 7.8 percent in 2020. (. . .) This is why we must move away from a zero-sum mindset, in which global actors believe prosperity can only come at the expense of others. As China’s President Xi Jinping said at the World Economic Forum’s Davos Agenda in January: “The right way forward for humanity is peaceful development and win-win cooperation.”

The accelerationist pragmatists have learned from the pseudopandemic, because Covid-19 was a test of social responsibility. We performed well, jumping through all the required hoops on command, readying ourselves to receive our conditional rewards.

Consequently, the accelerationist pragmatists are hopeful that we, as technoplastic beings, will easily adapt to our personal carbon dioxide allowances, which will be delivered by “advances in emerging technologies like AI, blockchain and digitization”. These will ensure that we are properly tracked and that our “ethical choices for consumption of product and services” are controlled appropriately.

The global public-private partnership will “curate” us into “smart cities” where the AI grid will allow the “stakeholders” to pull the “the levers of cognitive enablement and social norms”. Gov-corp will provide the unthinking dēmos with “tailored and timely advice on how to reduce their lifestyle emissions”.

You might hope to escape this dystopian nightmare. The accelerationist pragmatists know of your human aspirations, long anticipated in science fiction, and that is why “all stakeholders across the value chain” are coming together to “contribute towards achieving a net-zero future by leaving no-one behind“.

In one sense, the accelerationists are right. All of this is inevitable—if we continue to sleep-walk through our lives imagining that mummy and daddy state will look after us. They are also right that this is an emergency and that we must act. But they are the threat, and the cataclysm is of their design.

It is true, we do have a choice. We can remain supine and accept our “scientifically-informed transformation”, or we can rise like lions and rage against the machine. It really is up to you.

You are not alone, there are 7.8 billion of us; but the choice is yours alone, and hoping someone else will make it for you guarantees our collective accelerationist future.

https://iaindavis.com/the-dark-enlightenment

Is Social Media Actually "Media," Or Is It Something Else?
October 30, 2024

By placing search/social media in the bucket of newspapers, radio and TV networks, perhaps we've obscured their true nature as "Digital Marketing Mechanisms."

Language is a funny thing. If we don't have a word for something, in some way it doesn't exist. When we find a word in another language that describes this something, we borrow the word, for example schadenfreude from German and tsunami from Japanese.

If we use an existing word to describe something novel, we may mis-categorize it, in effect obscuring its true nature. For example, calling a whale a "fish" makes a certain kind of sense (an animal that lives in the sea), but it doesn't capture the fact that the whale is a mammal, not a fish.

Which brings us to social media, and the possibility that it isn't actually "media" at all, and we've obscured its true nature by mis-categorizing it as "media." This distinction isn't merely academic; it has significant real-world consequences.

Let's begin with the "media" that existed when the the US Constitution was drafted and ratified. "Media" wasn't a word in usage at the time, and what we understand today as "media" was understood as "the printed word" in newspapers, flyers, posters, periodicals and books. This is the origin of the Constitution's focus on "free speech" and the "free press": Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

The two concepts are intimately bound. Free speech includes public gatherings and oratory as well as all printed words, but the printed word attracts most of the legal wrangling around the meaning and limits of "free speech," a topic I explored in A Contrarian Clarification of "Free Speech".

The point of my post was that the constitutional definition focused on the government's restriction of free speech, not the private suppression or censorship of "free speech." As I explained, a private enterprise such as a newspaper is not obligated to provide a platform for everyone who wishes to exercise their "right to free speech." The newspaper can print whatever "letters to the editor" or "commentary" its owners / managers choose.

Now we have many other forms of media: radio, films, television and now the Internet, with its vast array of "printed" word, audio and video content.

In what we might call traditional media, the owners / managers publish / post content generated by their staff or other professional content creators: journalists, talk-show hosts, filmmakers, etc.

Social media is something different: all its content is created by its users. Yes, social media platforms have news feeds from traditional media, but this is a sideline to their core model, which is in effect a global message board that is open to any registered user. Unlike a Web1.0 message board / forum, whose audience was limited to the membership of the board / forum, social media platforms offer each user who posts content a potentially global audience.

The potential to build an audience of hundreds, thousands or even millions is addictively attractive, and so social media platforms (and their cousin, search) have billions of users.

This is novel. Is it "media" or is it something else? As I noted in my previous post, "free speech" is muddied when it comes to search and social media, as the government is limited by the Constitution in its capacity to restrict what's posted on social media, but there are few (if any) Constitutional restrictions on what private enterprises can restrict on their media outlets / platforms / search results.

Next, let's consider the revenues and data collection of traditional media and social media. Traditional media was limited to display ads in print, and the equivalent broadcast ads on radio and TV. These forms of media did not have the capacity/tools to collect reams of data on every user, and then use this data to sell adverts that target specific audiences--for example, surfers who have traveled to Southeast Asia to surf.

The resort on the beach in Indonesia will have far better results from adverts targeting surfers who have already demonstrated a willingness and ability to travel to Southeast Asia to surf compared to a broadcast advert that may theoretically reach a million people, of whom only a tiny percentage will be a target audience for the resort. The resort's marketing will pay a hefty premium for this data-rich targeted advert capability.

Search is also novel. Is it "media" or something else? Search engines purport to crawl the entire Web and present the most relevant answers / results to one's query. But this too is a data-collection revenue-creation mechanism, for the auctioning of search results--pay the search company money, and your product / service will be placed at the top of the search results--is lucrative.

This ability to target the audience based on detailed data collected on their web activity increases the value of the resulting advertising greatly. Consider the scale of digital adverts: the top three US corporations (Alphabet/Google, Meta/Facebook and Amazon) collect $320 billion in digital advertising revenues:

https://www.oftwominds.com/photos2024/di...s10-24.png

Compare this to traditional-media newspaper revenues: circulation revenue is about $11 billion and newspaper adverts, print and digital, total around $5 billion, for a total of $16 billion, roughly 5% of search/social media advert revenue.

Search/social media is free to users, but this "free access" is in effect a trade for the user data that generates a third of a trillion dollars in revenue. This "trade" also seems novel, both in form and in scale.

Would it be more accurate to describe search/social media platforms as Marketing Mechanisms that solicit user-created search/content to generate revenues rather than as "media" platforms?

The distinction is critical, for "free speech" is not a blanket carte blanche for marketing. If we remove search/social media from the category of "media" and create a new category Digital Marketing Mechanisms (DMM), then this new category necessarily requires a new regulatory structure and very different legal interpretations and protections of "free speech."

As we all know, it's very tempting for governments to "request" (or require) private-sector search/social media platforms restrict what's visible to the public to "approved" information. If a private-sector company restricts what it publishes at the "request" of the state, where are the Constitutional limits on state censorship? It seems they've been skirted by this "cooperation" of public / private power.

By placing search/social media in the bucket of newspapers, radio and TV networks, perhaps we've obscured their true nature as Digital Marketing Mechanisms, novel, complex devices more like a digital Antikythera Mechanism than an inert printed page protected as "free press."

https://www.oftwominds.com/blogoct24/soc...10-24.html

A Contrarian Clarification of "Free Speech"
October 25, 2024

A social media company has the right to decline publishing my opinion, but the government's ability to restrict what the social media company publishes is restricted by the First Amendment.

We all know what "free speech" means: it's our right to say whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want, as long as we're not libeling someone. Well, actually, no, that's not what "free speech" means. Here's the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

For an overview of the immense body of jurisprudence regarding the limits of "free speech," here's a good place to start: First Amendment Fundamental Freedoms Analysis and Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

In essence, the first amendment prohibits the federal government from "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press," in other words, censorship. The Founders were seeking to limit the powers of the state to restrict pushback from the citizenry against state policies or decisions.

But this doesn't mean "everything is protected as 'free speech.'" For example, a drunk in a bar who shouts, "You're worthless, you suck!" at other patrons is not protected by the First Amendment.

"In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, the Supreme Court unanimously sustained a conviction under a state law proscribing any 'offensive, derisive or annoying word addressed to any person in a public place'... 'the use in a public place of words likely to cause a breach of the peace,' words 'by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. Accordingly, such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.'"

Yet by some strange bewitchment, the "right" to shout "You're worthless, you suck!" online is now considered "protected" as "free speech." As the Court clearly stated, "free speech" is intended to protect an exposition of ideas as a step to truth, not content-free abuse.

The First Amendment does not obligate privately owned media to provide a forum for everyone to shout "You're worthless, you suck!" If the drunk wanders from the bar to the Heritage Foundation and demands they publish his "opinion," the Foundation is under no obligation to comply.

The newspaper is not obligated to print the drunk's "letter to the editor," nor is the radio station or TV network obligated to provide a forum for his "opinion."

On occasion a reader expresses discontent that I don't have a "comments forum" on my website, on the presumption that everyone paying to host a website is somehow obligated to also pay the expenses so everyone else can use their privately funded site as a public forum for their opinions.

What the First Amendment says is that government cannot restrict anyone from hosting a website, though what they post publicly is subject to Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. Other cases reflect the Court's view that the issue with "free speech" is government actions that restrict free speech, not the right of privately owned enterprises to choose what they publish / post publicly.

My response to those expecting that a privately funded "forum" for their "opinion" is a "right": pay for your own server / website and then you can post whatever opinions you wish to. That's the limit of free speech: you're free to carry a sign in public places (with certain restrictions), publish your own newspaper, start your own website or media platform, or give speeches from soapboxes, but nothing obligates a media corporation to publish your "opinion" or provide an unrestricted forum for everyone's opinions.

In other words, a social media company has the right to decline publishing my opinion, but the government's ability to restrict what the social media company publishes is restricted by the First Amendment.

What obscures this distinction is the Big Tech platform's profit-driven fear of alienating the users they're trying to addict by clarifying what their "community standards" actually mean. It would be refreshing if social media / search platforms stated what they consider acceptable and unacceptable in clear, simple terms.

For example, "the owners and management of this site hold values generally described as (progressive, conservative, libertarian, etc.) and we have the right to decline to publish opinion and content that conflicts with our values." At least the political reality would be in plain sight rather than being cloaked by phony claims of neutrality.

It would be refreshing if a Big Tech corporation stated, "We retain the right to judge whether a comment or post offers an exposition of ideas as a step to truth or is content-free opinion of slight social value" instead of pandering to the claim that they're pursuing "free speech" rather than "free enterprise," an enterprise enriched by shouting "You're worthless, you suck!" as often as possible, to spur "engagement."

What the First Amendment clearly restricts is government censorship by proxy, that is, government "requesting" social media corporations limit what is posted based on standards selected not by the owners but by the government. I often complain about being shadow-banned, but what I'm complaining about is not the right of these platforms to refuse to publish my content; that is their right, just as it's my right to refuse to provide a public forum for everyone else to post their opinion.

What I object to is the mealy-mouthed, cowardly way the media giants hide their guidelines, out of fear of reducing their precious profits. But the First Amendment doesn't require media corporations to state their guidelines. Newspapers have the right to decline to publish opinions submitted by readers that the editors disagree with or don't want to promote, and there's no obligation for them to explain every refusal.

If we disagree with the media company's decision, then our "right to free speech" boils down to peaceful public protests or starting our own newspaper / website / platform / radio station / channel.

The concentration of media is another issue: there are negative social consequences of monopolies and cartels dominating media platforms. But that's a topic for a future essay.

https://www.oftwominds.com/photos2024/me...ation2.jpg

https://www.oftwominds.com/blogoct24/fre...10-24.html

Starving Cancer Of Its Sugar (glucose) + Oxygenating The Body | Diet | Warburg + Vodder
The Marshall Report | diannemarshallreport.com

As stated by Otto Warburg nearly a century ago, “cancer is a metabolic disease, a fermentation caused by malfunctioning mitochondria, resulting in increased anabolism and decreased catabolism. Treatment should, therefore, aim at restoring the energy yield. To decrease anabolism, glucose (sugar) uptake should be reduced”.

Warburg hypothesized that cancer growth is caused by tumor cells generating energy (as, e.g., adenosine triphosphate/ATP) mainly by anaerobic breakdown of glucose (known as fermentation, or anaerobic respiration). This is in contrast to healthy cells, which generate energy mainly from oxidative breakdown of pyruvate. Pyruvate is an end product of glycolysis and is oxidized within the mitochondria. Hence, according to Warburg, cancer should be interpreted as a mitochondrial dysfunction.

Note: the mitochondria of the cell is where energy is stored from the light emitting diodes from the sun that allows cells to multiply and divide. Without the full spectrum lighting from the sun, living cells can’t function. And now you know why they got rid of full spectrum incandescent light bulbs!

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-131.png

This is also why “MED-BEDS” will assist the body to heal. It’s all about light emitting diodes that replicate the full spectrum of the sun that go all the way into the skin down to the bone. (Along with other positive physiological changes it creates within cellular action.)

Today, we look at other factors that were not known to Warburg that also contribute to cell death, and how the body works to reestablish homeostasis – i.e. put the body back into its natural balance and be healthy again. But, those who paid for such research from men like Warburg and others, were always searching for the way to mingle with all of that, as in the days of Noah where they mingled seeds of man, beast, and living plants. And then there were also the goals of how to control free will through controlling ones mind. The same ones who funded research on the body, were the ones who funded the new field of psychiatry… the right leg of philosophy and a new method of mind control.  A new form of religious confession… tell your shrink what you are thinking and your deepest secrets and allow them to get thoroughly inside your head. Try the pills and a bit of hypnosis. Tavistock Institute wants to find the easiest, fastest methods to herd the sheep for the ones who rule the world from the shadows.

Let’s take a deeper look into Warburg…       

Warburg came from a family history of biologists. He was observing the breakout of what they called cancer during the NAZI rise and during a time of bio-warfare research. When we start to connect the dots it appears he was studying a bit more than finding a cure. Or was he? Perhaps his research was first funded by those who wanted to understand the mysterious inner workings of the body and how to clone it, alter it, or all sorts of “its”.  When we look at the NAZI concentration camps we can imagine all sorts of “its” that might apply. The fact that he won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work and was awarded an honorary doctorate by Oxford University, well that all appears to be quite the achievement, yet he was frustrated by the lack of acceptance of his ideas? In a nutshell, we are speaking of his ideas of healing people by oxygenating the body and starving cancer cells of sugar. He was known to quote Max Planck’s words, “Science advances one funeral at a time”.

Otto Warburg had traits despised by the Nazis. It is said he was Jewish and gay (although he never admitted it). Because of his having two Jewish grandparents, he wasn’t well favored by the Nazi party, and fell into the category of “first degree Mischling”.  Yet, he still worked at the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for the Advancement of Science in Berlin. What do we understand of that type of research? Just asking. 

The story goes that Warburg was aware that he served a special role for the Nazis, who greatly feared cancer and believed the Nobel laureate’s research offered hope in curing a disease that Hitler himself was reportedly obsessed with to the point of hypochondria. His research on cell metabolism is said to have kept him safe during those years, but, later his research for cancer cures was disregarded. Why was it disregarded if the NAZI party was so fearful of getting it?

The question is, were they more concerned how to give it than to cure it? Were they more concerned how to make money off a cure that would accomplish another goal, like persay, depopulation? Or learning more how to manipulate DNA? Mingle seeds of man?

In 1918, Warburg was appointed professor at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Biology in Berlin-Dahlem (part of the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft). By 1931 he was named director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Cell Physiology, which had been founded the previous year by a donation of the Rockefeller Foundation to the Kaiser Wilhelm Gesellschaft (since renamed the Max Planck Society). Read more about Warburg and his suppressed studies: Otto Heinrich Warburg – Wikipedia

At the same time we have the wonderful and literally earth breaking discoveries of Nikola Tesla. Who was also supplied with nefarious funders and had all sorts of mysterious secret backers and supplied with patents on his nightstand every morning ready for him to pick up and go to the lab to assemble and put to the test, while his German agent would file the good ones for him. What a system of monopoly on invention from within the gatekeepers of the U.S. patent office itself? It is what it is.

Recall this big fat dot called “Operation Paper Clip” where after WW II the NAZI scientists were brought into the US and given new backgrounds. They were placed in US underground research facilities and NASA where rocket science comes to mind with a lot of questions.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/importanc...stin-croft
The Impor­tance of Oxy­gen in Tumors: Accel­er­at­ing Oncol­o­gy Research (linkedin.com)

Today in research labs they still control cancer cell growth studies through oxygen. When they want to speed up the cancer growth they do so by depriving oxygen and when they want to slow the cancer growth they add oxygen. This is in our face and yet they deny oxygenation is any sort of cure that they can achieve inside the body. At the same time they push sugars as good and have daily requirements of it for health, and put it in most all processed foods, along with all sorts of toxic ingredients. The medical field never restrict sugar for anyone medically except those who have diabetes. And sugars lead to low oxygenation in the body. i.e. Excess blood sugar decreases the elasticity of blood vessels and causes them to narrow, impeding blood flow. This can lead to a reduced supply of blood and oxygen, increasing the risk of high blood pressure and damage to large and small blood vessels.

In a nutshell: Dr. Warburg studied the metabolism of cancer tumors and the respiration of normal cells. He discovered normal cells have respiratory enzymes that allow the cell to turn oxygen into energy. However, if there is a low oxygen environment, the cells will be damaged. In order to survive in the low oxygen environment, the cells will “devolve” into simple cells that convert energy, not from oxygen, but from fermentation. The cells will use the fermentation mechanism to convert body sugars (glucose) into a weak form of energy. That conversion from cells that turns oxygen into energy to cells that turns sugar into energy is a defense mechanism that allows the cells to survive in a low-oxygen environment. The cancer cells cease to do anything else beneficial for the body. They are only trying to survive and, in that state, they do the only thing they are capable of doing, and that is growing.

The cause of cancer is a low oxygen environment. A low oxygen environment is caused by environmental toxicity that raises the acidity of the body, which can be caused by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, poor diet. The remedy is to raise the pH (potential hydrogen) of the body through a proper diet and homeopathic herbs and vitamins, thus increasing the oxygen level; this supports the immune system and destroys the cancer cells. However, Warburg’s discovery does not make any money for the patent medicine firms (Big Pharma) and so it has been relegated to obscurity.

Today, the idea of starving cancer of its sugar (glucose) and oxygenating the body are back in the treatment options for healing cancer growths. Cancer is a metabolic disease.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwhRskOPwVk

The research of Warburg was just the beginning of understanding the wonders of the lymphatic system and how the body heals itself. (Regardless of how that research may be used in nefarious ways, it is a valuable key to understanding good health).  In the same era, we have the work of Dr. Emil Vodder, born in Copenhagen, Denmark, and his revolutionary discoveries of the lymphatic system that led to the discovery of DNA and insights on how the body heals itself.

Through Dr. Vodder’s research, he was convinced that the human being is a biological unit. Based on papers from BERNARD, CARREL and DRINKER he realized that lymph as the environment of life is omnipresent. Dr. Vodder quoted Drinker with his insight that: “the lymph system is the most important organic system for the life of human beings and animals. And here I want to add a comment from the great radiologist and lymphologist Prof. Dr. Horst Weissleder who once mentioned: “it has to be assumed that the majority of our diseases originate from microedemas in the loose connective tissue”.

In order to understand the agreement in these statements one has to know that at the time of Drinker and Vodder, the interstitial fluid of the loose connective tissue was called lymph. When you consider that the lymph – say loose connective tissue – as the environment of life is changed by microedemas it is easy to be understood that this is the reason for many diseases.

In 1929 when Vodder treated his patients, he gained experience and put forward his own hypotheses that seemed bizarre at that time. He palpated swollen lymph nodes in the cervical region in patients suffering from acne, migraine or sinus problems. He had the vision that the real cause of these pathologies was congestion in the swollen “lymph glands” – today we call them lymph nodes. The lymph nodes could not comply with their task to cleanse the tissue. His reflection was whether it was possible to decongest the nodes by an adequate massage as if one would open the floodgates of a dam and drain the excess water in order to normalize the situation.

Dr. Vodder applied circling pumping movements of the skin, and a light massage to assist the lymph flow and carefully assist the toxins out of the body through the pathway of elimination that the body uses naturally to be carried out of the body.  He treated swollen lymph nodes in the neck even though it was a complete taboo to touch the lymph nodes. He discovered that the lymph nodes worked as little safety valves to trap toxins from going throughout the body. It was the body’s way of stopping the disease from spreading throughout the body. While trapped in the lymph nodes the body could go to work to rid it instead of spreading.  His life’s work was dedicated to researching the anatomy and physiology of the lymph vessel system and how to heal the body from disease through what he called “Manual Lymph Drainage”. (Manually assisting the lymphatic system in the body to help it rid itself of the toxins causing infection and illness.

Dr. Vodder always saw the human as a whole. His thesis was, “if one part is sick the whole human being is sick”.

Vodder only gave whole body treatments with special dedication to the affected area. For some reason, western medicine approaches the body mechanically and treats body parts separately, like a car. In so doing, we never get to the root of what is causing the illness, nor all the cascade affecting other body parts. For example, someone having symptoms of Carpal tunnel disorder in the hand would be referred to a surgeon by their general practitioner who would then be looking at how to fix the hand with possible surgery. Where a chiropractor will relieve the hand symptoms by adjusting C4 in the neck. I know this, because it happened to me.

So, to approach root causes of illness, we must look at how the body functions and do our best to help it function the way it was designed to function.

The point is we have had biologists, doctors and researchers discover breakthroughs that promote health and for some reason… they have been either ignored, shut down, or silenced.  Today, as people are waking up, they are looking at finding ways to eat to live, and looking at what is in the food, the medication, the treatments, and looking at alternatives for their own health. COVID actually woke many people up to how the system worked. Especially when everyone was diagnosed, with COVID, regardless of if they had symptoms or not. In hospitals across the world, everyone was dying from COVID regardless of the symptoms. Everyone getting the same vax that led to sickness, death and or permanent injuries.

This led to people looking at other diagnosis like cancer. And asking… how do we know for sure and is there any other way to treat it? Well, the body is a marvelous machine that has everything within itself to heal… we need to know how to assist it.

Which bring us to “Simplicity in eating healthy…” Facts about Mucoid Forming Foods and the God given herbs of the field!

Mucoid Forming Influences: About Dietary Change…

Although excessive consumption of mucoid forming foods and inadequate levels of intestinal lactobacteria are the principal causes of a toxic colon, it is not recommended to immediately switch to a totally non-mucoid forming diet, in fact as you will see, that would not at all be healthy. Both the body and the psyche need time to adjust to any dietary change in order to make it a lasting lifestyle change. Remember you are assisting your body to function like it was designed to function, not punishing yourself… sometimes our minds tend to think we need that chocolate iced donut and to not have it is a punishment of sorts? That’s common in dieting. You know… the splurge that leads to returning to the same old patterns that got you depleted in the first place. Smile.

Remember, a pendulum that swings far in one direction will eventually swing far in the opposite direction. If you rush into abruptly eliminating foods from your diet, then you will eventually feel so uncomfortable that you will begin eating those same foods again. (Except for processed sugars – stop that.) In changing your diet, the object is to avoid the pendulum effect. Be gentle with yourself. Never try to eat in a way that feels forced. Make a firm resolution to improve your diet and look for good ways to spice it up with healing herbs.

Unless you have had a life-threatening diagnosis and are mentally committed to doing whatever it takes to heal… it may be difficult to change. It’s like taking an aspirin when you don’t have a headache… you won’t really feel any difference and see no need to take it. It is what it is. However, for example when you do have pain caused by inflammation… you will feel the benefits of an anti-inflammatory diet (void of sugars) quickly and stay committed to eating the foods that help your body heal.

There are some things that you need to cut out all together and those are all GMO and processed foods with additives and preservatives and all processed sugars – these are just toxic to your body. You will learn how to make nutritious sweets as you go along with foods like raw honey, maple syrup, black strap molasses, stevia and other substances, but for now… depending on your health concerns, that is what will determine the direction you take on addressing what foods to eat and not to eat. For now… we are looking at a way of eating that helps our bodies detox and improve our lymphatic immune system, digestive system, and respiratory system by increasing oxygen levels through increased blood flow.

Before we go any further, mucoid forming foods can be eaten… the rule of thumb is to avoid the mucoid forming foods that your own body can’t process well. Mucoid forming foods can cause histamine reactions which are mucus producing causing phlegm production. This is a natural body process to eliminate what is causing the histamine reaction. We will also note that every person’s body type is different and allergens/histamine reactions vary according to a person’s body type. Some people can thrive on a carnivore diet, while others cannot.

It is important to point out now, that our bodies need fats, and butter, ghee and lard are healthy fats. Although these are mucoid forming… they are needed for a healthy body. Remember for our body to break down fat soluble vitamins it needs healthy fats to do that. Without fats in our diet, our bodies cannot break down and uptake vitamins A, D, E and K. All of what is presented here is to be taken with common sense, and adapted to your own body and what it needs to thrive. There is NO ONE SIZE FITS ALL!

Watch this video interview with Dr. Goldkamp to understand what you are eating and why everyone needs to look at what works for them. It’s not always what it looks and sounds like. As we discussed in part 1, stress is the number one killer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEMH-7LRZLA

Our body needs fats. Fats play a vital role in our health. There are healthy fats and manmade fats that cause harm to our arteries and are toxic to our bodies like margarine which is actually one molecule away from being plastic. Our body breaks down good fats to be used for energy, and to help in a vast array of body functions. For example, when women go through menopause their estrogen production from the adrenal glands stops. The body then adjusts to this process by adapting itself to making estrogen from fat cells. Which, appears to be why God made females with an extra fat layer that males don’t have. Smile. Good fats are also needed for brain health, which our brain is made up of a lot of fat cells. Note: There is no such thing as good and bad cholesterol levels, that has been proven in courts to not be true. It has been proven that people suffering from dementia do not have high cholesterol. People with high levels of cholesterol do not get dementia.

Listen to Prof. Tim Noakes – who is also the man who fought the medical field and Big Pharma and won the cholesterol debate in court trials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtmK8ZBsUJg

There is no good or bad cholesterol, that was always a lie… it was sugar all along that caused heart disease, among other issues. Prof. Noakes won his court case and kept his license to practice and the Heart Association. Australia even issued a public apology to the people for their part in pushing cholesterol misinformation.

Listen below to Prof. Noakes explain low carb and high fat and how the body works. He is one of the men who did not back down and exposed the deception behind those who profit off of illness – i.e. Big Business, Big Food and Big Pharma.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-wjEnsEXI0

Our body needs lots of protein to build muscle and assist in cellular energy. Lack of protein leads to poor oxygen levels, fatigue and sickness.

Beef is a complete protein and contains all the needed amino acids and all the B vitamins including B-12, among so many other nutrients. It is also a high mucoid-forming food but don’t let fact that mislead you. As you will see our body has its own way of breaking down foods to upload what is good and get rid of what isn’t good for it. Some things may sound contradictory, but the body is amazing. For example, plain yogurt provides good bacteria needed in the gut to assist in fighting off bad bacteria. Yet yogurt is highly mucoid forming. So, don’t panic and start cutting out foods that are needed for good health. And don’t fall for isolating foods based on one aspect of the food itself… our bodies know how to break things down and use them in ways man is still discovering.

So… that being said… here are some of the main foods that are mucoid-forming…

Dairy products from cow’s milk, whether pasturized or raw are the most mucoid-forming of all foods. This includes milk, skim milk, butter, cheese, cottage cheese, cream, yogurt, kefir, ghee and whey. Every one of these are mucoid forming. However, goats milk is substantially less mucoid forming than cows milk.  Flesh foods – meat, fish, fowl, and eggs are almost as mucoid forming as cow’s milk and dairy products. They usually affect the respiratory system less, but the total amount of mucoid is still quite high.

It is important to know the difference between nonsense and truth about what we eat and need from meat and other foods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvdRjtL_I0g

Remember also that our bodies do a good job on breaking down our foods and separating the nutrients it needs from the things it does not need, as well as countering other factors by creating its own free radicals (via B-cells for example), to get rid of things that cause imbalance and shouldn’t be there. Refer to Part 2 “Part 2 We’re In This Up To The Finish Line – There’s NO Going Back! – The Marshall Report (diannemarshallreport.com)  So, it appears that a lot of the mucoid formation hype has been stressed to scare people into becoming vegans, which is not a healthy lifestyle for the body. Did you know that spinach is also high in mucoid?
https://diannemarshallreport.com/part-2-...going-back

Plant foods vary from highly mucoid forming to totally non-mucoid forming. Before classifying them according to mucoid-forming activity… let’s classify them in food groups.

First let’s take the edible portions of plants and define them as either vegetables, fruits, mature seeds, or sprouts. Vegetables are edible roots, trunks, stems, stalks, leaves, flowerbuds, flowers, succulent immature seeds, and single celled organisms.  When a seed is enclosed in a tender, juicy, edible medium, that medium is termed FRUIT. Seeds normally eaten along with the fruit they are imbedded in are considered part of that fruit. Mature seeds are divided into oily seeds, grains, and pulses. Oily seeds include all nuts, coconut, and other nutlike seeds such as sunflower, sesame, and pumpkin seeds. Grains are the mature dry seeds of plants belonging to the natural order of grasses. Example are wheat, rice, rye, corn, barley, oats, triticale, and millet. For nutritional purposes, we also classify buckwheat as a grain, although the plant does not belong to the grass family and is more commonly called buckwheat groats.  Pulses are the mature dry seeds of pod-bearing plants. These include all beans, lentils, mature dry peas, etc. A sprout is the initial developing stage of a new plant obtained when a seed begins to grow. A sprout becomes a vegetable when it is no longer customary to eat the entire plant as a single unit.

We need to know how the body works so we don’t fall for opinions as facts. Most vegetables and pulses are mucoid forming.

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-134.png

They love to tell us healthy foods like eggs and bacon are bad and put them on lists like this one calling them their “List of Pus, Acid, and Mucus Forming Foods”. When you read this article, you only have a few foods that are eatable and of those good luck getting any nutrition for health. List of Pus, Acid, and Mucus Forming Foods – Mucus Free Life No fats allowed and we told you above why the body needs fats. Watch out for food gurus who are going green.
https://www.mucusfreelife.com/mucus-form...ruth11.com

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-135.png

Beware of those who push extremes without real facts of how the body works and what it needs to function as a whole unit to be healthy.

Now, back to our real food classifying…. Maple syrup, yeast, and spirulina plankton are classified as vegetables. String beans, cucumbers, okra, eggplant, zucchini, all melons and all squashes are fruit. Fresh corn on the cob is a vegetable, but corn meal, corn bread, corn chip, and corn tortillas are all grain products. Fresh peas in their tender, juicy state are a vegetable, but mature dry peas such as are used in making split pea soup are a pulse. Wheatgrass is a vegetable.

Soy beans are the most mucoid-forming of all plant foods. Their mucoid-forming activity is similar to that of meat, fish, and eggs and comes close to that of dairy products. The susceptibility of soy products to putrefaction is also similar to that of meat. Notice how quickly tofu or soy milk will spoil. Soy beans have gained a lot of attention as being nutritionally suitable plant food substitute for dairy products and meats. But they are only a substitute in respect to protein and other nutrient content, not for being non-mucoid producing.

After soybeans in mucoid-forming activity are all other pulses. There is a substantial gap in mucoid forming activity between soybeans and the other pulses, even so, the mucoid-forming activity of the other pulses are considerable. Even buckwheat similar to the pulses in mucoid forming activity.

So, you see if we just look at the mucoid factors in foods… we will truly be on our way to eating the bugs that Klaus Schwab has ready for us all to eat!

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-136.png

It’s time to look at foods and what our body does with them. And not isolate the foods into categories of eat this and don’t eat that, with the exception of processed foods, GMO’s, preservatives and toxic poisons that don’t belong in any food source, and processed sugars.

Each person needs to eat for their own body type.

Most all fruits are mucoid free, exceptions are gas-ripened bananas and sulphured fruit, which are mucoid-forming due to the man-made processes to which they have been subjected. Almost all bananas sold in this country, including most sold in health food stores, have been gassed to induce ripening. On sporadic occasions one may be able to find a non-gas ripened bananas at certain health food stores. Except for figs and dates, all dried fruit should be considered to be sulphured, unless specifically labeled otherwise.

Food supplements are often mucoid forming. All protein powders, except for 100% pure yeast and spirulina plankton are highly mucoid-forming due to their inclusion of soy, milk, egg, or meat derivatives. Many popular “yeast” powders are highly mucoid-forming because they contain up to 50% whey. Tableted vitamins, minerals, digestive enzymes, etc., may also possess a degree of mucoid-forming activity.

But another factor to consider is your own body and how it is functioning… we need to eat for our body and its needs. We can’t stress that enough. Listen again to Prof. Noakes. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOVuMSO7ztA

And now, warning, warning, we are now going to discuss how the body eliminates waste through the colon…and all that crap!

Herbal foods will often alter the mucoid content of one’s stools. There are herbs that will lessen the mucoid present in one’s stools. There are also many other herbs that while not mucoid-forming themselves, will cause old mucoid present in the body to be eliminated. This may result in increased mucoid in the stools. The jelly like consistency of psyllium husks makes one’s feces cling together even when a totally non-mucoid forming diet is being eaten. Many spices possess varying herbal properties, but it is important to note that the gelatin capsules that are so widely used for encapsulating powdered herbs possess a residue of mucoid-forming activity.

It’s not just what we eat, there are also Airborne Mucoid-Formers

Airborne pollutants are generally all mucoid-forming. A sensitive person on a nearly or completely non-mucoid-forming diet can notice a significant mucoid response due to breathing smoggy air, factory pollution, chem trails and second hand smoke. The mucoid response to airborne pollutants is frequently more easily noticeable in the respiratory system.

Not to mention chemicals sprayed directly onto crops, such as round up that also runs into the soil and into water supplies.

So what can be done with all of the mucoid-forming foods we consume? How do we counter all that?

The answer is in the intestinal lactobacteria…and adding herbs and foods that help control mucoid content.

A healthy population of lactobacteria within the intestinal tract far surpasses anything else known as far as controlling the mucoid content of one’s stools is concerned. In fact, it is generally not possible to obtain a non-mucoid stool without a healthy population of lactobacteria in the intestinal tract. The presence of these lactobacteria promote bulky, well-lubricated stools as well as more frequent bowel movements.

The lactobacteria and putrefactive bacteria in the intestinal tract contrast with and counteract each other in various ways. Lactobacteria live on carbohydrates, whereas putrefactive bacteria live on protein. Putrefactive bacteria do not grow well in the acidic medium produced by lactrobacteria. However, the metabolization of protein by the putrefactive bacteria produces ammonia, which neutralizes the acidity produced by the lactobacteria. It therefore takes a vigourous growth of lactobacteria in the intestinal tract to finally predominate over the putrefactive bacteria.

A high protein diet will always produce large amounts of putrefactive bacteria in the intestinal tract even when the diet contains substantial amounts of carbohydrates as well. So, finding herbs and vegetables that assist with countering putrefactive bacteria is an answer, such as adding yogurt with Lactobacillus acidophilus to help the body fight off putrefactive bacteria. There are many, many foods and herbs that can help with this.

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-137.png

The bowels will normally be slow to move unless the contents of the colon has reached a certain acidity. The colon is in fact a bacteriological fermentation chamber, and it is as if the body judges when the ferment is mature by the acidity within the colon. When the colon contains large amount of lactobacteria together with relatively low levels of putrefactive bacteria, the acidity will be such that the bowels move at least two times per day. When such is the case, the feces will have spent a relatively short period of time in the colon, and so will have a high water content, making them soft and bulky when expelled.  The actual rule of thumb for healthy digestion is for your body to eliminate what you have eaten approximately an hour after you have completed your meal.

When food is swallowed, it goes first to the stomach where it is held for a while in a highly acidic medium while protein digestion begins. The high acidity is not essential to the protein digestion, but does act to destroy most of the bacteria present in the stomach. When food leaves the stomach and enters the small intestines, the live bacteria count is nearly insignificant and the body then reverses most of the acidity towards alkalinity. As the food travels through the small intestines, the bacterial count increases very slowly. Not until the food residue empties from the small intestines into the colon is it ordinarily exposed to large populations of bacteria.

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-138.png

There are many prebiotic foods and herbs deserving of special mention for their ability to promote the growth of lactobacteria in the intestinal tract, but these three are a must have.

The first one of these is the ONION. It provides the best enhancement of lactobacteria growth. One medium to large size onion must be eaten daily to obtain a good effect, and it does not matter whether it is cooked or raw.

The second food is CABBAGE. Cabbage selectively feeds lactobacteria; they thrive and grow quickly on it. At the same time, cabbage tends to suppress the growth of putrefactive bacteria when eaten daily for several days and provided sufficient lactobacteria are present in the body

Cabbage not only counteracts intestinal mucoid, but also sizably reduced the putrefactive odor of one’s bowel movements. To obtain a noticeable effect, it is necessary to drink ½  to 1 cup of cabbage juice two to three times per day. You can sweeten it with maple syrup or honey if desired. Whole cabbage has the same effect as cabbage juice. For serious detoxing, eating one pound of cabbage per day will have a sizeable effect.

The third food is FLAX SEED.  Flax seeds are nature’s tiny powerhouses. These oval-shaped seeds come from the flax plant and are an excellent source of healthy omega-3 fatty acids, fiber, and phytochemicals. Flaxseed oil promotes the growth of beneficial bacteria Lactobacillus, Allobaculum, Desulfovibrio, and Bifidobacterium and dis-favoring the growth of Actinobacteria, Bacteroides, Proteobacteria, and Streptococcus.

These seeds have a nutty-taste and you can eat them whole, ground, or cold-pressed in the form of flaxseed oil. Add flax to various dishes and recipes to enhance their nutritional value.  That being said, flax seeds can be hard to chew and if they pass through your digestive tract unbroken, your body doesn’t receive the full nutritional benefits so it is best to eat them after some process of grinding—in a blender, coffee grinder, or food processor to break up the seed, making it easier for your body to digest.

It’s best to keep flaxseeds in an airtight container—such as a glass jar—in your refrigerator. When possible, buy whole flaxseeds (they have a longer shelf life) and grind your flaxseeds at home as you need them.

Flaxseeds are loaded with dietary fiber (almost six grams for two tablespoons!), flaxseeds can help promote regular bowel movements and keep your digestive system functioning smoothly as their high fiber content acts as a prebiotic, providing nourishment for the bacteria in your gut. Flaxseeds also contain lignans, which have antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. These compounds can also help balance hormones, enhance digestion, and support a diverse microbial community for a healthier gut environment. Flax seeds also absorb nano particles like radiation, engulfing them so the body can carry them out through the colon.

Read more of the wonders of Flaxseed: Flaxseed Bioactive Compounds: Chemical Composition, Functional Properties, Food Applications and Health Benefits-Related Gut Microbes – PMC (nih.gov)

There are many prebiotic foods that help your body to function at optimal levels and fight off pathogenic gut bacteria that cause inflammation and disease.

https://i0.wp.com/diannemarshallreport.c...ge-139.png

Listen to Professor Knoakes as he explains the 10 Key Ideas that the Diet Dictators Have Hidden!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyzkv5uFGt8

We need to look at our bodies for ourselves and take responsibility for our own health. At this time in the global controlled storm, we can no longer trust the system and it’s researchers who are owned by their KM Oligarch philanthropists. Just saying.

Dr. David Harper, Nutrition Researcher, promotes a high fat diet to kill cancer cells and other disorders and of course no sugar.  Listen to what you aren’t going to hear from Big Food or Big Pharma.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYs4wt5dg9Y

Pretty much Harper is validating the things we have been sharing and explaining many things we haven’t talked about.

We are presently in a world system that appears to be designed to make money off of sickness. The Bible tells us that unclean spirits cause sickness and disease. Jesus healed the sick by casting out evil spirits. When you are aware of what is in our foods… and how your body works, that is a powerful defense to end many man-made diseases that come with lethal toxic jabs and treatments!

Matthew 10:1 Spirits 1And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.

Now all that being said, the herbs of the field are for healing; by adding herbs and spices to our diet, we are assisting the body to function healthy!

The key here is to listen to your body and choose the foods that your body responds to and assist in healing. Don’t buy into any fad diets that no generation of people ever ate before. You may have some trial and error… but, you will find what is best to help you feel alive, alert, with increased energy, less pain and or pain free and well. 

https://www.truth11.com/starving-cancer-...rg-vodder/

Free Radicals + The Wonders Of Hydrogen Peroxide
The Marshall Report | diannemarshallreport.com

FREE RADICALS ARE an atom or group of atoms having at last one unpaired electron. “When excess free radical activity occurs in our bodies, we end up with having more cells destroyed than we can create. With cell death, we have tissue death; with tissue death we have organ death; with organ death, we have body death. It all begins at the cellular level with free radicals.” Comment by Zane Baronowski, a well known writer.

Free radicals are floating atoms that can enter our bodies through the skin, or by breathing them in like gaseous molecules from gasoline. They can enter into our bodies by being present in what we are eating, and can also be created internally. Some we cannot smell or see, like oxygen, or nano particles in the air, others we can smell such as gasoline molecules, in short free radicals are floating atoms that come in contact with, and or enter into our bodies. Some do good (like oxygen) and some do harm to healthy cells. Our body fights off free radicals every second and even makes its own free radicals known as antioxidants to destroy those that enter our body that do damage. It’s another battle between good and evil.

Facts on Free Radicals

Our bodies produce free radicals to attack invading organisms.

Leukocytes (white cells in the blood) produce a natural hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). They do this from a specialized part of themselves that function like an organ, an organelle, called a peroxisome. They send out a layer of H2O2 which surrounds and destroys harmful microbes. The H2O2 breaks down into water and oxygen. This form of oxygen is a free radical. Therefore, it is unstable, and it attaches to the most unstable structure around it, a virus or harmful microbe. It disrupts them electrically, and this kills the bacteria or disrupts the virus, and the white cells digest the remains. Any left-over peroxide is neutralized by the catalase, an enzyme also produced by the peroxisome. The cycle of defense is complete. This is our immune system at work.

Cancer is caused by Anaerobic Cell Respiration –

“Cancer, above all other diseases has countless secondary causes, but there is only one PRIME CAUSE. The prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the normal oxygen respiration of body cells by ANAEROBIC (lacking oxygen) CELL RESPIRATION.” By Otto Warburg, twice Nobel Laureate.

“Lack of cellular oxygen supply is probably the most common cause of cell injury and may also be the ultimate mechanism of damage.”  Robbins and Coltran (W.B. Saunders) Pathologic  Basis of Disease.

J. B. Kizer, a Biochemist/ Physicist, at Gungnir Research, Portsmith, Ohio said, “Since Warburg’s discovery, this difference in respiration has remained the most fundamental and only physiological difference consistently found between normal and cancer cells. Using cell culture studies, it has been found that normal oxygen tension actually maximized the growth of the cancer tissue, and that high oxygen tensions were lethal to cancer tissue, 95% being very toxic, whereas normal tissue were not harmed by high oxygen tensions. Some normal tissues were found to require high oxygen tensions and it does seem to demonstrate the possibility that if the oxygen tension in cancer tissues can be elevated, then the cancer tissue may be able to be killed selectively, as it seems the cancer cells are incapable of handling the oxygen in a high oxygen environment.”

They have known for a long time that cancer cells cannot live in a highly oxygenated environment. (We won’t go into all the deep state and Big Pharma interference in cures here, but we will cover some facts on how the body actually functions based on sound research.) This is a vast subject so we will just do a basic overview of how our body fights free radicals that cause cell damage.

Don’t get overwhelmed with all the many lists of what to do on the internet. There are many foods and herbs that help your body fight off cancer cells in the body. These top ten, are a doctor’s opinion. Smile. The main thing to remember is no sugar, no GMO’s, no corn oils, and monitor the natural sugars found in good foods.

Some of the best herbs are Ginger, Turmeric, and pepper… we also need to look at adding complete proteins so if you can’t get good beef, look at Quinoa which is a seed grain that has everything in it that is found in Beef – all the amino acids, iron, B vitamins, etc.

When starting any new way of eating, and supplementing… you will find a blizzard of ideas. Each person needs to look at their own body and what it needs. Knowing the basic principles of how the body works is the first step. Listening to your body and how it feels is just as important and to me, it is part of the first step. Eat what your body is needing, and after you have detoxed and are in balance… eat healthy and avoid the toxic foods.

Target your foods to your own body’s symptoms. For example, if you are having a lot of mucus, runny nose and coughing up phlegm, you want to avoid foods that are mucus forming. Some of the foods on the good list are mucus forming or do nothing to reduce mucus in the body.

But also remember, some mucus is necessary to keep your body healthy. Mucus, or phlegm, is a thick, slippery substance secreted by glands and cells in your body. It’s important to your immune system because it traps microorganisms, dirt and other particles that shouldn’t be in your airway.

But here is the catch 22 – Histamine reactions

Your immune system releases histamines to defend against invaders, typically allergens like food, pollen or dust. Source: U.S. Library of Medicine. And when your immune system fights allergens, you can have symptoms like — congestion, runny nose or post -nasal drip from excess mucus. Especially when trapped toxins are released back into the lymphatic system to be removed as waste.

Also, when your immune system triggers an inflammatory response to fight off illnesses like colds, flus and sinus infections, your body overproduces mucus to defend itself. It’s a natural process of eliminating body waste. Whatever is in the body that it has to get rid of… you can expect to have congestion and runny nose when your body starts to loosen it up and get rid of it. (When the mucus is clear there is no infection, and most likely to be your body’s histamine reaction to ridding the things it has to eliminate.)

Which bring us to Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2)

Hydrogen Peroxide is not only important to the body’s normal function, but it’s oxidizing ability can be used to oxidize weak protozoa, and yeast, inhibit viruses, oxidize fatty deposits on the arterial walls, increase oxygen tension between cells, stimulate oxidative enzymes, return elasticity to the arterial walls, dilate coronary vessels, and regulate membrane transport. (From the IBOM Newsletter, Vol. 1, No.2, April 1987.)

Hydrogen by itself is a colorless, highly flammable gas. It is the most abundant element in the universe and the lightest of all gases.

Oxygen is a colorless, odorless gas, that comprises about 45.6% of the earth’s crust, and at present 20.95% of our atmosphere. It combines with most elements, and is required for respiration, and most combustion.

Hydrogen (H) and Oxygen (O) are two gasses necessary for life. Combined with carbon and nitrogen’s they form proteins. Combined with carbon, they form carbohydrates. Combined with each other, they make water and if you saturate water with extra oxygen, you get hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). Oxygen along with other gasses is the breath of life. All these elements and compounds exist in our blood. The creation and dissolution or “yin and yang” of existence is exemplified by hydrogen and oxygen.

Facts on Hydrogen

Hydrogen is associated with the properties of solidification, integration, and concentration. It brings together a matrix of energies, evolving these energies into solid forms. If the hydrogen characteristic properties are allowed to continue on unchecked, then the form gets denser and denser. Finally, extreme hardness settles in. These properties are the ones that bring the form of our bodies into existence out of the DNA. It builds cells and if left unmodulated, makes them hard and brittle. These effects are balanced by the action of oxygen.

Facts on Oxygen

Oxygen is associated with dissolving, disintegrating, and deconcentrating. Oxygen represents the opposite pole of creation being the fluid substance that hydrogen builds life forms from at the beginning and after they have lived their useful life, erasing the created forms back to a fluid state. Oxygen keeps cells clean and flexible and removes unneeded structure.

Note: Although there are 70 or so ingredients that make up the human body there are four basic ingredients that make it up. These are carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen. Nitrogen is the basic component of the protein part of our body. The protein part of our body makes up all of our cellular structure. The hydrogen part solidifies the protein structures we term it anabolic. It builds up the human body, which is good. Oxygen is catabolic. It tears down, but more important it cleanses. Oxygen destroys the side product or metabolites of anabolism, the building up processes of the body. We need a proper balance of these two for the human body to properly function as it should.

Generally speaking, in our bodies, hydrogen makes things hard, oxygen softens them up. Remember this as it is a key to our subjects.

Example: The industrial food processors using hydrogen to thicken vegetable oil into margarine, and nature using the rapid oxidation process of fire to decompose something quickly. In our bodies, they perform similar functions – the hydrogen gives our bodies structure and the oxygen burns the food that is used to make the structure, as well as cleaning up afterwards (metabolized waste).

As you get closer to sea level, you have a higher concentration of oxygen. As you get up higher and reach high altitudes, you have a lesser concentration of oxygen. The air becomes thin, less oxygen concentration.

How Hydrogen and Oxygen Affect Health–

A clean body is more flexible. If there is not enough oxygen, then both the solidifying function and incomplete combustion occur to excess. Leftover incomplete combustion byproducts collect in our cells. We say that the body is toxic or has a buildup of waste products. Under these conditions, the immune system has a hard time fighting off disease. All the cells and fluids have become “dirty”. In other words, if our body’s oxygen level drops too low, then we don’t have much energy. If a chronic low oxygen condition is allowed to continue, we can’t manufacture healthy cells, “burn” energy or remove the “ashes (metabolized waste). Under this increasing stress, the immune system tries harder and harder to do its’ job but is so overwhelmed from trying to clean out the “dirt” or “toxins” that illness might result.

At this point we shall refer to the body and its’ immune system.

Peroxisomes – Human Cells Produce H2O2

Every cell contains small bodies within the cell. These bodies have various names, depending on what they do. Some are called the nuclei, some are lysosomes, some mitochondria. They have all kinds of different names. Inside, one is called a peroxisome.

The specific purpose to this peroxisome in the cells of your body is to produce hydrogen peroxide. Why? To assist the immune system.

White Cells: The first line of defense in the body is your white cells. Your white cells act as little soldiers to engulf things in your body that shouldn’t be there. Those may be bacteria, protozoa, or yeast. The complexes, the things that cause you to have allergy reactions, the viruses. Hydrogen Peroxide inhibits a virus action. White cells close around a particle, whatever that particle is. Peroxisomes first come out of the white cells, and then they go into a compartment in the white cell, right along with the particles that the white cells have eaten. All of a sudden, the engulfed peroxisomes and particle disappear. Why they disappear is because the peroxisome produced hydrogen peroxide in it to destroy that particle. This is your first line of defense. Our own bodies produce hydrogen peroxide as a part of the immune system to kill off the complexes or free radicals that cause harm to our cells and sickness.

Consequences of Low Oxygen –

If our air supply (oxygen) is cut off, the waste products can not be burned at all. First there is brain damage, and if continued long enough, we expire (die). If body oxygen levels are maintained at proper levels, the feeling of well-being might be continued (such as feeling refreshed after exercise when oxygen levels are increased). Consider also that most older people are “brittle” when it comes to their body parts. They usually have built up waste products in their cells, and don’t get enough exercise . Most have eaten a lifetime of hydrogenated oxygen deficient foods, (GMO’s, etc.) and are short breathers. They are not getting enough oxygen and the solidifying characteristics of hydrogen are dominating. We are not saying here that this applies to all older people, just that this is a major issue in many and now also in middle age (and any age) due to toxins (free radicals/floating atoms/gaseous molecules) that are now found in our food, water and air that is oxygen depleting to our bodies.

How We Arrive At A Low Oxygen Level–

Body oxygen levels can drop for a variety of reasons, the obvious ones are injury or disease. Air should have about 20%  oxygen, but in the cities it can drop to 10%. Ancient air bubbles that were trapped in amber have been analyzed as containing twice as much oxygen as we now have in our air. Tap water looses oxygen from chlorine and from not being aerated. Antibiotics kill friendly aerobic bacteria that produces H2)2 in the body. Processed and hydrogenated foods cause the circulatory system to spend more time hauling out toxins than carrying oxygen.

“In a 24 hour day the adult male uses approximately 8 pounds of oxygen.” A Schatz, discoverer of streptomycin in Cancer News Journal, v12, n2, p.6, June 1977.

The average man consumes 6 to 8 pounds of oxygen, 4 pounds of food, and 2 pounds of water. More oxygen goes into our bodies than the other two combined.

Read: Pulse Oximeter Archives | 123checkup

Hydrogen Builds and Oxygen Dissolves–

Too much oxygen can destroy, balance is needed. In the Merck Index, the chemical synonym for Hydrogen peroxide is hydrogen dioxide. It is 94% oxygen. When hydrogen peroxide is applied to wounds it foams and gives all kind of activity signs. The oxygen that is trapped in the hydrogen peroxide molecule is released when it comes in contact with bacteria. This is an oxidative reaction. The bacteria is destroyed by this oxidative reaction. Infection does not occur.

H2)2 is naturally produced in the body. Our cells produce H2)2 all the time. There is a part of the cell called a peroxisome which produces H2O2 in order to get rid of viruses and bacteria and other contaminating substances that might get into the cell. The peroxisome literally causes the bacteria to disintegrate or explode.

When we infuse H2O2 into the body, there is a substance called Cytochrome C that slows down the H2O2 process of breaking down into hydrogen and oxygen and literally preserves it. We can preserve H2O2 in the body for up to 20 or 40 minutes after infusion. Generally 35% food grade H2O2 is used, diluted down to .075% to 1 and ½%. One of the products of active acidolphulous when functioning in the intestine is hydrogen peroxide. The bacteria use this to control their natural enemy “Candida Albicans”.

With H2O2 more is not better. Overuse can do the opposite. Use common sense. Concentration levels of H2O2 are the difference between harm done to cells and benefits to cells.

Note: Whenever you have lipid peroxidation you are going to have cell, RNA, and DNA breakdown. But, this is how it peroxidizes diseased cells and their DNA, along with harmful free radicals. It creates other free radicals to destroy them. Dr. Gerard Sumen stated, “Higher organisms have enzymes that repair RNA and DNA and bacteria and viruses do not. This is why only the lower lifeforms dies from Hydrogen Peroxide therapies and human cells are unaffected.

Which bring us to pH – Potential Hydrogen–

pH is the abbreviation for potential hydrogen. A scale representing the relative acidity or alkalinity of a solution in which a value “7.0” is neutral. Below 7.0 is acid, and above 7.0 is alkaline. The numeric pH value indicates the relative concentration of hydrogen atoms in the solution compared with that of a standard (one molar) solution. It is equal to the negative log of the hydrogen ion concentration expressed in moles per liter.(As defined by Mosby’s Medical Dictionary.) Note: Molarity is used to express the concentration of a solution. Also known as molar concentration, molarity is the number of moles of solute (the material dissolved) per liter of solution.

Cells change intracellular pH when they are exposed to externally applied agents including: growth factors, hormones, neurotransmitters.

Cells have a variety of mechanisms available to regulate its pH and create its own buffering power. Complex solutions, like blood, contain multiple buffers. Buffering power is a coefficient that can be used to convert a change of pH into a change in the amount of proton equivalents moved.

Example of Intracellular pH Regulation: Mitochondria: The mitochondria is the cell’s “powerhouse” where energy from the light emitting photons of the sun are also stored. It’s what causes cells to multiply and divide. One of its major roles is the production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) which is a compound consisting of the nucleotide adenosine attached through its ribose group to three phosphoric acid molecules. It serves to store energy in muscles, which is released when it hydrolyzed to adenosine diphosphate.

The electron transport chain in the mitochondrion translocates protons from the mitochondrion to the cytoplasm across the inner mitochondrial membrane. This proton extrusion creates an electrical and chemical gradient for proton influx into the mitochondrion. The H (hydrogen) ion influx occurs through a membrane-bound ATPase which produces ATP upon passive proton flux back into the mitochondrion. This is known as the chemiosmotic hypothesis.

The extrusion of H ions to establish a proton gradient renders mitochondria relatively alkaline to the cytoplasm by about 0.,5 pH unit. Thus, intramitochondrial pH in the average cell is about 7.5. In addition, this pH gradient is maintained in the face of considerable acid loads, indicating that mitochondria can probably regulate their internal pH independent of cytoplasmic pH.

Intercellular pH Regulation–

    Virtually all of the H (Hydrogen) ions within a cell are buffered by reversible binding to weak acids and bases, resulting in a low free hydrogen ion concentration.
    Cytoplasmic pH is an important aspect of the intracellular milleu and can affect nearly all aspects of cell function.
    In most cells, pH is maintained at a value of about 7.0
    Changes in pH can effect many cellular funtions. (Cell metabolism; cross-linking and polymerization of cytoskeletal elements such as actin and tubulin; lose of muscle cell ability to generate tension (muscle fatigue); promotion of cell growth and proliferation.
    Many pH-regualting transporters move an osmotically active ion, in exchange for a buffered ion. The buffered ion is osmotically invisible. This exchange mediates the net movement of solute into or out of a cell. (*A solute is a substance dissolved in a solution). This net movement of solute will be accompanied by a net water flow and result in a change in cell volume. Thus, many pH regulating transporters, in addition to contributing to pH regulation, can mediate the regulation of cell volume.
    Cells have elaborated highly regulated mechanisms to control pH.

Common sense… read the labels and know what you are buying. When in doubt… put it back on the shelf!

When I started this to share about our bodies, I thought it would be a simple thing, but it has turned out to be a lot more complicated than I had imagined in my mind. There is so much to share, and we haven’t hit the tip of the iceberg yet. I will do a part 3, as there are many more things to share. But ponder this much for now. We haven’t even gotten into foods yet, well, maybe a little bit. Smile.

The approach I am attempting to take here is to show how our body works, based on the most reliable information, from notes and teaching materials gleaned over the years from my past mentors who pioneered teaching how the body works to professionals in the Aesthetic Industry. When you know how the body functions… then you can take care of it. You will then be able to think things through and make good choices. Otherwise, you are just guessing and gullible to believe anything, and that is why we are in this dilemma today. When you know how the bio research, big food and big pharma industry functions… you can bet you need to fact check where their sources are and be able to spot the deceptions based on their own double standard of acceptable practice. Standards may be acceptable, but they are not always helpful. Just saying.

https://www.truth11.com/untitled-1675/

The Golden Hour: What to Do in the First 60 Minutes of SHTF
By Clark Barnes
October 30, 2024

Many people are convinced that civilization as we know it will collapse or, at best, experience a prolonged interruption. Very few of those people are actually planning for it and even less are preparing for it in advance. For those of us actually preparing we have forums, books, videos, and meetings to help us get ready for SHTF.

A few are even likely hoping for it for various reasons. What if this collapse occurs in a matter of minutes as well it might in various SHTF scenarios; nuclear war, terrorism, EMP, pandemic, conventional war, civil unrest becoming civil war? I am sure you can add a few to this list. Using the Golden Hour concept from trauma medicine I am proposing a few unusual ways of handling the first hour of SHTF.

In this Golden Hour things you do and do not do will have a profound effect on your chances of a decent survival outcome. The Golden Hour is getting a major trauma victim to a trauma center within an hour. Survival rates plummet by minute 61. What will you do in the first 60 minutes of a sudden SHTF? I expect disagreement and hope the comments will give me some good ideas.

SHTF Happens and you are at Home
Reacting rather than data gathering is the key to all of these situations. As humans used to experiencing normal conditions the sudden ending of the normal is a shock and many react to it by standing still and trying to find out what is going on. The lights go out, you check your phone, you look out the window, and you try to find your battery radio and the flashlights. You are in bed and the loud bang shakes the house violently and the power goes out. You use your phone, you turn on the TV, and you go outside to find out what is going on. You might even go through these actions several times!

I am not saying these responses are always wrong. Geography, etc. has an input into your plan which is a pre-written plan. If you are hundreds of miles from cities then your response might be different especially if you have large volumes of water stored. What I am saying is get moving early and start using the Water Bob, the clean rain barrels from storage within minutes of any alert that normal no longer might exist. Finding out what has happened is a secondary concern to preparing to survive. Who cares if Russia has attacked the USA or if it was a terrorist bomb? Listen to your gut not to CNN.

Even worse is leaving the home to collect wife (or husband) and kids. During the opening hour you have to prepare the home for a possible prolonged end of normal life. The wife (or husband) and kids have a plan and they will use it. It might be to hunker down and wait for you knowing it might be a day or two or come home immediately but they know it and you know it. Fight the very human desire to gather the loved ones immediately at the time of crisis unless is your plan and they know it. If you (or they) are at home then the preparing of the home is the best thing you can do for them in the opening hour. You have no idea how long the water or electricity will last.

Obviously if your children are young you need a plan to collect them but do you need to go immediately? If yes, then go. But the decision is a logical one not an emotional one. Emotional reactions to sudden shocks often lead to faulty decision-making. It might be best to protect your food and water supplies while the electricity and water remain on before heading out to collect your child from school. An hour or two’s delay in setting out means they get to eat and drink for sure.

If it is a temporary thing you have at worst wasted the water bob and will have to buy a new one (people say you can reuse it but I am not sure water safety is worth the risk). Other things you may consider doing during the first hour is nailing tarps over your raised garden beds and moving supplies into the house or bug out vehicle. What you do not want to be doing is chatting to neighbors or wasting time trying to get information. Something bad seems to have happened so deal with it. How much you know about it is a human desire but preparing is the essential thing in the first hour.

SHTF Happens and you are on the Road
This is the hardest of all situations to experience sudden SHTF yet it is the most common one in society. Motor Vehicle Collisions (they are not ‘accidents’) kill and maim many people each and every day.

However in a sudden SHTF of major local, national, or international scope what is your plan if you are in the vehicle? If the vehicle works get fuel as soon as possible and buy food and water in the first gas station you see using cash but only if it is safe and uncrowded. Then get home or to the preplanned bug out location using the vehicle. Do not delay at all. In sudden SHTF people literally drive miles in one direction, usually to collect family, and then end up being directed the opposite way by Police. When they finally get home it is burned down or looted. As ever everyone in your family know to stay in place or come home in an SHTF and when to do so. You are not their savior. Your role is to trust them and the written and discussed plan.

Some SHTF scenarios will see the vehicle fail or be blocked in its progress. Abandon the vehicle immediately gathering all useful supplies and get moving away from people and towards home or the bug out location. Drive alternative routes if possible but a vehicle is not going to last long in a major SHTF so try not to be attached to it! Again chatting to people, trying their phones, and wondering what is going on is pointless. It is bad and that is all you need to know. Use the sides of highways to move away from the groups of scared, annoyed, and confused people on the road. No need to walk up the exit ramps as you have the physical ability to use less usual routes. You always have a paper map however basic and a get home bag in the car.

Transit by boat, plane, or train in a sudden SHTF is problematic. In your Golden Hour gather supplies, learn exits, and start thinking how best to get out and home. Water in train, boat, and plane washrooms is not drinkable but empty a recycling bin and fill up those bottles with it. You should have a few water purification tablets on you at all times. Do not bother washing out those bottles. People are not really that infectious (this advice is NOT to be followed in a pandemic) and you can easily get 10 liters or more of okay water stored up in the first few minutes of the SHTF while everyone else is shouting into dead phones. By Day Two you will be very happy you did this in those first few minutes.

As a rule I never travel by boat other than short ferry rides and I cannot see a good outcome in SHTF on a cruise ship but if you cruise at least carry your own flotation vests and survival kit.

Experiencing a sudden and dreadful SHTF on a plane might be interesting. If it falls out of the sky then all the prepping you have done will hopefully be used by your loved ones. However diversion and being kept in an airport is more likely in a sudden SHTF. Carry cash in large amounts and try to carry some cash that can be used in the countries you are flying over or near. If the power is on and you can use credit cards to immediately start an alternative route home. In 9-11 people were stuck in Canada for up to four days when they could have got home via train and bus if they had started immediately. A few hours later and there were no seats available! If a small nuclear war is the cause of air travel suspension imagine how long you might be stuck somewhere and how likely is it you will be well treated?

If a SHTF is likely I’d advise you to call sick and stay at home even if you have a cruise booked but SHTF can happen with almost no warning and what you do immediately can make or break your survival chances.

SHTF Happens and you are at Work, School, or the Mall
Ideally using your preplanned route(s) and get home bag you will immediately start home. If the car park is a mess or the car will not work immediately abandon it after getting the supplies. In a sudden and serious SHTF roads and car parks likely will be both slower than walking and less safe.
kenya-attack-army

If it is a chemical or nuclear SHTF you might need to shelter in place. Know where the washrooms are especially those deep in the building and infrequently used. If mushroom clouds bloom on the horizon people will mainly rush to their cars and attempt to flee home not that home is a magically safe place. Go to the nearest couple of recycling bins, open them, and carry the trash bags loaded with cans and bottles to the washroom (preferably one on a lower level). Dump them out and start filling them with tap water. Don’t bother cleaning them out. Try to get 50 litres or more. Do this immediately and you can store up 4 weeks’ worth in minutes. Store it in a cubical, lock it, and climb out. At this point try to buy food as you head for the car but do not if it will take time. At the car grab everything useful and back to the washroom. Bunker in and trust your loved ones are similarly safe.

It is unlikely people will use the washrooms in Malls and schools in these scenarios especially those out-of-the-way ones. If they do all your stuff is in a locked cubical. Food and warmth are not the priority in the Golden Hour but water and security are. Consider breaking all the lights in your washroom after securing the water and jamming the door. Consider breaking all the lights in the corridor outside and pulling stuff into it. Initially people will not take hard routes.

Looting supplies is reasonable once people have gone and Security has left. Before then the chances of getting into trouble makes it not worth the risk. Most fast food places have the food (such as it is) in the back. Mall, workplace, and School offices have lockers and many will have something to eat inside if you take your time looking through them. At work know who keeps food at their desks (you do I hope!). Most people will grab their keys and bags and flee towards home leaving behind a lot of food and useful items.

Many people think about using coins to raid vending machines. Maybe this is a good idea but water is from the washroom taps and the recycling bins and lining up slowly buying chocolate bars might make you a target. In a sudden SHTF it is more than likely you can use your small crow bar from your get home bag to access the vending machines the next day. You are going to be sitting in dark for at least a week but I’d try to do this for four weeks. Then you go home. Radiation will hopefully not kill you in four weeks but likely will the first day.

Many places have drapes and carpets that you can cut up to make sleeping ‘bags’ and this is the sort of re-purposing you need to do in SHTF. Keep active and do whatever you need to do to optimize your survival chances.

The hardest part is not fleeing but thinking, planning, and acting. Prepping is a state of mind as much as anything and I hope this article gets you thinking a bit. Much of it is arguable so please argue!

There’s a dark undercurrent suggesting that the elite’s end goal is to force-feed humanity food sources like bugs, feces, and — as some are now alleging — human remains. This isn’t just a change in diet. It’s a direct attack on our autonomy, health, and humanity itself. By gradually desensitizing the public to consuming grotesque food sources, the elite seek to reshape our food culture, redefining what is acceptable for humans to eat.

https://earlking56.family.blog/2024/10/2...s-of-shtf/

https://youtu.be/hBMoPUAeLnY?si=ApWiH5VQfFP_hIpd

https://www.mediafire.com/file/ksltt2z2g...rchive.zip

The Phil Schneider Archive. Contains all known audio, videos, transcripts, and several HTML discussion threads.

Dulce Base - Part One ｜ Mystery Beneath the Mesa
Dulce Base - Part Two ｜ War Beneath the Mesa
Phil Schneider - 1995 Rare Audio Recording
Phil Schneider - Area 51 Road Trip
Phil Schneider - May 1995
Phil Schneider - August 1995
Phil Schneider - September 1995
Phil Schneider - August + September 1995 (Audio Fix)
Phil Schneider - November 1995
Phil Schneider Discussion - Al Bielek
Phil Schneider Discussion - Al Bielek Radio Interview
Phil Schneider Story - Cynthia Drayer January 2010
Phil Schneider The Dulce Wars
Ron Rummel - News Clip About His Death ft. Phil Schneider
Ron Rummel Murder Case Review
Secret Underground Bases, UFOS, Dumbs, w⧸ Phil Schneider (Death Suspicious), William Thompkins & others
The Mysterious Life and Death of Phil Schneider - Darcy Weir
The Mysterious Life and Death of Phil Schneider Video
The Phil Schneider Story
The Underground Story of Phil Schneider
The Underground (2021)

https://www.mediafire.com/file/fdmftx2zy...eBooks.zip

https://cdn.getmidnight.com/6908ab1f9a9e...12x612.jpg

The Great Multipolar Reset: Globalist Vampires in Bed With The BRICS
The Great Globalist Blood-Sucking Vampire Multipolar Reset

    Klaus Schwab and his army of vampires are bringing all the barbarians to the bargaining table and giving them everything they want, in exchange for unswerving loyalty and obedience to the WEF’s dystopian vision of a technocratic global police state.

009 | WorldNotEnough.com

One thing that is consistent about the blood-sucking globalist vampires—they have an irresistible urge to tell you what they are going to do. Their policy of hiding things in plain sight works as a psychological tool for them, because it paralyses opposition by instilling the belief in the inevitability of a narrative.

A case in point, on the World Economic Forum website, it states in plain English: “The geopolitical landscape is undergoing a profound transformation, giving rise to a world order that is both multi-polar and multi-conceptual.”

This idea of a profound transformation is central to the Great Reset thesis, advocated by Klaus Schwab and his army of useful vampires.

Do the globalist vampires really drink blood and eat babies? I really don’t know because they never invite me to any of their Satanic blood-drinking, baby-eating parties …

Roseanne Barr has some thoughts on the subject though:

    Roseanne Barr tells Tucker Carlson that the elites are secret vampires that drink blood and eat babies.

    She assures the audience that she’s not crazy and learned of this from people who were in various mental institutions with her… pic.twitter.com/qEvf2ifcLH
    — AG (@AGHamilton29) September 27, 2024

One article on the WEF website, in the members only Geopolitics section, an anonymous author (probably Klaus Schwab) does some WEF-splaining:

    “As global power has shifted, the differences in norms and values among geopolitical heavyweights have become more glaring. The period following World War II, first characterized by the bipolarity of the Cold War and then the unipolarity of US hegemony, has given way to a phase in which power is more diffused. At the centre of this upheaval is an evolution of the respective roles played by the US and China, and a changing relationship between these two economic behemoths. Patterns of influence, cooperation and competition are also changing among a broader group of countries that includes Russia, India, a number of states in Europe and the Middle East, and the Global South (which includes much of Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia). Decades ago the political scientist Francis Fukuyama predicted that in the wake of the Cold War, liberal democracy would prove to be ‘the’ model for governance in these places.”

The mention of Francis Fukuyama is a reference to his book The End of History, where he argued that the neo-liberal order of American democracy was the final stage of political evolution. The end of the Cold War in 1990 meant that humanity had reached “not just ... the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: That is, the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”

This alleged ideological plateau implies a further expansion of the American rules-based order. It means that the American Empire would continue to expand and exert its dominance over the world until liberal democracy had conquered the whole planet—and then voilà, the United States of the World. He further elaborated, however, that the European Union, rather than the contemporary United States, more accurately reflects what the world might resemble at the end of history.

In other words, an economic alliance with loose borders, parliamentary democracy, a single market and a common currency among its member states. The United States of the World would have a single legal framework that applies to all member states. National sovereignty would be handed over to the global parliament of elected officials who would practice democracy and civil rights for all global citizens.

Though it is true that the EU is a model for the World Economic Forum, the WEF is not naive enough to follow Fukuyama’s hegemonic democratic model, for the simple reason that the WEF have no interest in democracy or the civil rights and freedoms that go with it.

On the contrary, according to Fukuyama’s teacher, Samuel P. Huntington, there is an alternate model that more closely aligns with the WEF’s realpolitik plans for world takeover.

Huntington wrote a short essay that became a book, The Clash of Civilizations, debunking his former student’s hypothesis. Huntington taught at Harvard and Columbia for 50 years and was special adviser to the Carter and Reagan administrations. He was a member of the Rockefeller Trilateral Commission, along with his fellow elitist, Zbigniew Brzezinski who wrote a blueprint for American hegemony, The Grand Chessboard.

In Clash of Civilizations, Huntington argued that the world was not cruising over a neo-liberal plateau, but rather, evolving into a multipolar civilizational model. He proposed that the world would evolve into several power blocks, divided, yet huddled together in religio-ethnic “poles.”

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_14...0x643.jpeg

Endorsed by realpolitik grandmaster, Henry Kissinger—who called it “one of the most important books to emerge after the Cold War”—Huntington’s multipolar Clash became the new foreign policy of the WEF. Zbigniew Brzezinski gushed that it was, “An intellectual tour de force: bold, imaginative, and provocative. A seminal work that will revolutionize our understanding of international affairs.”

Brzezinski wrote the Foreward to the 2011 edition, where he revealed he was initially sceptical of Huntington’s “ambitious scope,” but eventually was won over to the multipolar camp, claiming, “I came to realize that his grand thesis and overarching synthesis provided insights vital not only for understanding world affairs but intelligently shaping them.”

This statement is a complete reversal of his earlier position, that he argued in his magnum opus, The Grand Chessboard in 1997:

    “In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”

The WEF’s Great Multipolar Reset encourages collusion, it is a merger of vassals, and an active strategy of joining the barbarians together. Instead of imperial conquest and confrontation, there is cooperation and collaboration among the tributaries. Klaus Schwab and his army of vampires are bringing all the barbarians to the bargaining table and giving them everything they want, in exchange for unswerving loyalty and obedience to the WEF’s dystopian vision of a technocratic global police state.

What could go wrong?

The second part of the deal, which has far greater implications for America and the West: The WEF are guaranteeing that America will be brought to its knees. The West has created enormous anger through decades of wars, invasions, interventions, sanctions and covert manipulation of nations. The Global South and the BRICS are only too happy to sign on the bottom line under these terms.

The destruction of America and the West is being accomplished by several nefarious methods:

1    Funnelling taxpayers’ dollars into useless wars of attrition such as Afghanistan, and now the Ukraine. These money laundering schemes enrich banks, weapons manufacturers and oil companies.
2    Flood the West with immigrants. Millions of these immigrants are Muslim refugees that were displaced due to the American wars in the Middle East. Muslim anger is pitted against the anger of the declining working class as witnessed in the UK with recent riots and protests. This anger will serve as more fuel on the fire to increase spending on more useless wars of attrition. See #1
3    Neglect development and infrastructure. America has not put serious money into bridges, tunnels, sewage, power plants and transportation for decades. China has 46,000 kilometres of high speed rail, compared to USA which has none.
4    Send all the jobs and factories oversees to China, Indonesia, India and other Asian countries. This began in the 1970s when Kissinger went to China and made a deal with Mao Tse Tung to turn China into the world’s factory.
5    Transfer the wealth of America to the globalists. This happened in two phases so far—in the subprime mortgage crash in 2008 and during the pandemic when the big box stores stayed open and the lockdowns bankrupted thousands of small businesses.
6    Flood the West with inexpensive, toxic opioids like fentanyl, MDA, ketamine, ecstasy, salvia and GHB. Make marijuana legal, very potent and easy to get, in order to create a sub-culture of homeless people and disaffected, marginalized youth.
    Create intense polarization on social media to deflect social unrest away from the architects of the controlled demolition of Western Civilization. Keep the left and the right in a state of perpetual fury through false flag trigger events, such as the opening ceremonies of the Paris Olympics that was intentionally designed to trigger conservatives, Christians and anyone else that still has morals and sanity.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_14...4x477.webp

FUKUYAMA WAS WRONG, HUNTINGTON WAS RIGHT

Returning to the Clash—the short version is that Fukuyama was wrong, Huntington was right.

The reason Huntington was right is because he had the foresight to observe the organic direction the world is heading. Political evolution is an unstoppable force, like all evolutionary processes. There are forces of nature that cannot be resisted or defied: gravity, death, evolution, time and taxes to name a few.

The human race has evolved from primitive tribes, clans and market villages, to city-states, to feudal monarchy, and then to the Westphalian nation-state system. We are witnessing the collapse of the Westphalian system, which is being replaced by a series of transnational power blocks who will align themselves according to their pre-existent geographical locations, that have evolved over thousands of years due to ethnicity, race and religion. Nations have little choice in our globalized world to band together in economic blocks, in order to compete economically, and defend themselves militarily.

These emerging economic blocks roughly coincide with Huntington’s map:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_14...0x378.webp

These multipolar mega regions will be further subdivided into local regions. In one of his last speeches, UN Secretary General Ban Kim Moon spoke directly about regionalism:

    “The drafters of the United Nations Charter recognized the importance of regional action. And the drafters of the 2030 Agenda also took that appreciation for the pivotal role of regionalism to a deeper level for the 21st century. World leaders recognized the crucial role of regional cooperation in implementing and assessing progress. Regionalism is being harnessed in addressing issues like trade, food and energy security, climate change, connectivity and the outbreak of health epidemics. I am proud that we have strengthened our partnerships with regional organizations such as the African Union, the League of Arab States, ASEAN, and the European Union. Of course, the UN Regional Commissions are central to our work. Every day, they promote regional cooperation and integration and extend their expertise for socio-economic development.”

The Russian think tank Valdai Club has created a new R20 (Regionalism 20) that will oversee the financial development (translation: financial control) of the G20 regions. From their website:

    “Earlier this year the Valdai Club advanced an initiative to strengthen the global governance framework via creating a platform for cooperation among regional integration arrangements, regional development banks and regional financing arrangements. The main rationale for this idea was the need to promote greater horizontal coordination among the various regional arrangements, while at the same time improving the cooperative linkages between regional and global multilateral institutions. The G20 may be seen as the optimal vehicle for promoting such cooperation, with the new framework of regional cooperation designated as R20 (regional twenty) that brings together the largest regional players across the world economy.”

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_14...x1382.jpeg

The Valdai Club is attended every year by President Putin and a host of other alternative darlings, such as chain-smoking Sergei Lavrov whose daughter went to school at Columbia, lives in New York and doesn’t speak fluent Russia. Lavrov also keeps a mistress in London because nothing says anti-globalist quite like having a mistress in the globalist West.

Other alternative darlings, like Pepe Escobar wax enthusiastically about the new R20. From Escobar’s article in 2018:

    [Programme Director of the Valdai Club] Yaroslav Lissovolik, former Duetsche Bank and IMF official, at the essential Valdai Discussion Club, which he directs, proposed a horizontal format to coordinate trade and infrastructure integration: namely, an “R20” – as in Regional 20 – that “would bring together the largest regional heavyweights in the world economy represented by 10 regional blocks.”

    This “connectivity track” within the R20 format, as Lissovolik describes it, might become the essential platform interlocking many current infrastructure projects, from the vastly ambitious – and well funded – Chinese-led New Silk Roads, or Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to the still quite vague Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC), driven by Japan and India.

    It’s not about nations; it’s about regional trade blocks. They might well become the uber-building blocks of a post-G20 world after a definitive, world system-shattering moment is brought upon us: when the petroyuan eclipses the dollar.

Looks like the Valdai Club and WEF hired the same interior decorator ...

If the BRICS multipolar world is supposed to be at odds with the WEF globalist agenda, it seems very odd and/or horrific that they are actively collaborating together.

The WEF website hosts a plethora of Valdai Club articles:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_14...77x743.png

UNIFIED COMBATANT COMMAND AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY

In a similar fashion to Huntington’s Map, the United States military has divided up the world into 6 zones or “areas of responsibility.” This is used to define an area with specific geographic boundaries where the US military has the authority to plan and conduct operations.

These 6 zones roughly correspond to Huntington’s civilizational map, although Huntington subdivides USEUCOM into Russia and Europe. He also subdivides Asia into India, China, Southeast Asia—Australia is lumped in with the West.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_14...20x975.png

The Pentagon’s white paper for its overall military policy is FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE. Full-spectrum dominance also known as full-spectrum superiority, is the US military’s achievement of control over all dimensions of the battlespace, effectively possessing an overwhelming diversity of resources in all areas including terrestrial, aerial, maritime, subterranean, extraterrestrial, psychological, and bio- or cyber-technological warfare.

The US military defines it, “The cumulative effect of dominance in the air, land, maritime, and space domains and information environment, which includes cyberspace, that permits the conduct of joint operations without effective opposition or prohibitive interference.”

Resistance is futile peasants!

The Pentagon, DARPA, NSA, CIA and the 14 Eyes, have spent decades infiltrating, undermining and subverting virtually every nation on Earth. The pandemic revealed the full extent of the power and reach of the so-called New World Order. Every country on Earth complied with the draconian and unscientific lockdowns, mask-wearing, social distancing and forced vaccine rollout. It can be stated without hesitation that the pandemic was the largest propaganda campaign, the largest covert operation and the most deceptive hoax in human history.

“The onrush of a conquering force is like the bursting of pent-up waters into a chasm a thousand fathoms deep.”

~ Sun Tzu, The Art of War

THE NEW EXPANDED BRICS EMPIRE CREATED BY GOLDMAN SACHS

Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates recently signed up to the BRICS. This year, it was Russia who hosted the annual summit. In an interview with TASS, the Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation on Foreign Policy, Yuri Ushakov, explained:

“The abbreviation BRIC — Brazil, Russia, India and China — was the first used in 2001 by Western analyst (Jim O'Neill from Goldman Sachs), who explored the potential for economic development of developing countries and came to the conclusion that it was these four states who will determine the direction of development of the world economy and politics in the 21st century. Thus, in fact, he involuntarily anticipated the creation of our association.”

Jim O’Neil was the chairman of the globalist think tank Chatham House, previously known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs. O’Neil, who is a certified Baron, shared in an interview how he created the BRIC model: “I wrote a paper called Building Better Global Economic BRICs. It showed you couldn't run the world properly without having these guys more involved.”

The Brazilian government website readily agrees that, “The idea of the BRICS was formulated by Chief Economist at Goldman Sachs, Jim O'Neill, in a 2001 study entitled Building Better Global Economic BRICs.”

During a CNN interview, Baron O’Neil was asked, Did the BRICs resist being grouped? he obligingly answered, “They've all been in their own way extremely flattered. I've met many senior people in all these countries as a result of it, and they're all delighted that we chose to put them on the global map in this way.”

So delightful and flattering.

The enemy of the my enemy isn’t really my friend, if my enemies are in bed together.

https://off-guardian.org/2024/10/23/the-...the-brics/

Archbishop Viganò endorses Trump, tells Catholics abstaining ‘means allying oneself with the enemy’
In an open letter addressed to American Catholics, former U.S. nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò argued that Donald Trump is the 'only possible choice' in the upcoming presidential elections and that his Democrat opponent Kamala Harris 'obeys Satan.'

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has thrown his full support behind Donald Trump as the next president of the U.S. and called upon American Catholics to vote for Trump on November 5 as a moral imperative.

In an open letter addressed to Catholics in America, Viganò, the former apostolic nuncio to the United States, urged the faithful to vote for Trump as the “only possible choice” for president to oppose the “deep state” and protect “future generations,” echoing his previous claims that only Trump stands in the way of a “globalist coup.” The archbishop suggested that “voting for Kamala Harris,” on the other hand, “is morally inadmissible and constitutes a very grave sin,” adding that to abstain from voting would not be “morally possible,” since “in this war declaring oneself neutral means allying oneself with the enemy.”

Viganò, who is a long-time supporter of Trump’s political candidacy, argued in his Tuesday letter that a vote for Trump “means firmly distancing ourselves from an anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, and anti-human vision of society” while at the same time noting “serious problems” with the former president’s declared positions on both abortion and “assisted procreation IVF,” which he said “a Catholic cannot agree with.”

Indeed, Trump has stated that he would oppose a federal ban on abortion and would mandate insurance coverage for in-vitro fertilization (IVF), both of which practices violate natural law and the explicit doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Viganò wrote that Trump, whom he said “is paying with his very life for his fight against the deep state” in refence to recent assassination attempts, represents “the only possible choice to counter the globalist coup that the woke Left is about to implement definitively, irreparably, and with incalculable damage for future generations.” The prelate added that if Catholics were to assist in placing Trump back in the White House, it must become for him “the premise for a more incisive commitment to the defense of life from conception to natural death, the traditional family, the right of parents to educate their children, and to the defense of the Christian faith and the cultural identity of the nation.”

In contrast, the archbishop stated that Kamala Harris, whose party supports abortion through all nine months and aggressively pushes the LGBT agenda, is “an infernal monster who obeys Satan” and argued that a potential Harris presidency would usher in an era of “slavery” which would promote “everything that directly opposes the faith and morals of the Catholic Church.” Describing such a scenario as “the most ferocious dictatorship,” Viganò said America under Harris would suffer “moral, social, and economic destruction.”

Harris recently declined to show at the annual Al Smith Memorial dinner, a Catholic fundraising event which typically sees the Republican and Democrat presidential candidates put aside partisanship to attend the charitable event. Critics roundly condemned Harris as “anti-Catholic” for the no-show and criticized her pre-recorded speech as “purposely” offensive.

During his speech at the dinner, Trump blasted Harris’ snub as “very disrespectful” to Catholics and used the opportunity to call upon Catholics to vote for him this election cycle. Trump also told Raymond Arroyo ahead of the event that he likes the Catholic Church “a lot.”

In concluding his Tuesday letter, Viganò emphasized that “Our Lord must return to reign, and the first way to make Him reign is by obeying His holy law and living in His grace.”

“Let Christ reign in your hearts, in your families, in your communities, and throughout the entire United States of America: this is the only way to peace, harmony, and prosperity for your nation,” the prelate added.

American Cardinal Raymond Burke also weighed in on the upcoming election, publishing advice to the faithful to “pray and fast” ahead of casting their vote.

Offering counsel on “how to vote in good conscience” this November 5, Burke said – alongside prioritizing prayer and fasting that America “will once again serve the good of all its citizens” – Catholics should “study carefully the agenda of each candidate” to see whether they “will limit” evils, “even though he or she espouses morally objectionable programs and policies.”

While lamenting the “desperate situation” of U.S. politics, owing to “the agenda of both major political parties” being “so fundamentally objectionable,” Burke said that Catholics should vote where they find “even the smallest ray of hope” that their vote could positively impact the common good.

“If there is even the smallest ray of hope to effect some change in view of effecting ever greater change for the common good, it is not right for us to fail in responding to the ray of hope,” the cardinal wrote, stressing that abstaining from voting is only justified “if no candidate provides any ray of hope of serving, at least in some part, the common good, especially in what pertains to human life, marriage and the family, and the practice of religion.”

Unlike Viganò, Burke made no direct indication of which candidate Catholic voters ought to choose on election day.

Editor’s note: The following text is not an endorsement from LifeSiteNews of any political candidate for office.
Open Letter to American Catholics

The great march of mental destruction will go on. Everything will be denied.
Fires will be kindled to testify that two and two make four.
Swords will be drawn to prove that leaves are green in summer. 

— G.K. Chesterton, Heretics, 1905

Quote:Dear faithful American Catholics,

I am addressing all of you, a few days before the presidential election that will call millions of American citizens to the polls.

Even in conditions of relative normality, the exercise of the vote is your moral duty, through which you cooperate in the first person in choosing the person who will lead the nation for the next four years.

But in this coming electoral round – just as in 2020 and indeed much more so – you are not simply called to choose between two candidates who happen to be on different political sides but who both nevertheless have the common good at heart in compliance with the Constitution and the law. No; in this election you must choose between two radically opposed ways of conceiving the government of your nation: you are called to choose between democracy and dictatorship, between freedom and slavery.

On one side we have candidate Donald J. Trump, who, despite serious problems in his positions – especially in the matter of abortion and assisted procreation – has as his objective the common good and the protection of the fundamental freedoms of citizens. In Donald Trump’s America, every Catholic can practice their faith and educate their children in it without interference from the state.

On the other side we have a candidate and a party that promotes everything that directly opposes the faith and morals of the Catholic Church. In Kamala Harris’ America, Catholics – but also Protestants – are considered fundamentalists to be marginalized and eliminated, and their children are considered the property of the state, which arrogates to itself the right to lead them astray from an early age in both body and soul. Trump’s America can become great and prosperous again. Harris’ America is destined for invasion and for moral, social, and economic destruction: the most ferocious dictatorship.

Look at your country! Your cities have become dumps filled with derelicts and criminals, drug dealers and addicts, prostitutes and robbers. Your schools are dens of indoctrination and corruption from kindergarten onwards. In your courts, criminals are acquitted and innocents are imprisoned: new ideological crimes are prosecuted, while illegality is tolerated and encouraged. In your hospitals, multinational corporations rule, and you are their guinea pigs to be exterminated or made chronically ill so that you will be their perpetual clients.

Farmers, ranchers, and fishermen are persecuted and forced to fail, while the land is grabbed by unscrupulous corporations who transform it into endless photovoltaic systems and wind turbines to power their data centers and server farms where they collect all your data, your movements, your purchases, and your political preferences. They have gone so far as to tamper with the climate by means of sophisticated geoengineering operations and devastating arson in order to make the global warming fraud credible and impose the green transition, the increase in the cost of energy, and electric cars and scooters. And all this is done based on evidence that consists of lies without any scientific proof, but which are propagated through the servile collaboration of the regime media, ever ready to label any dissenters as conspiracy theorists.

But what until yesterday was dismissed as the result of conspiracy theories is now admitted by the government itself. They take away your sunlight; they poison you by seeding the clouds; they overwhelm your villages and your fields with deadly hurricanes; they kill your livestock and dry up your crops with induced droughts and devastating fires. They aim to control the entire food sector, to force you to eat only what they make available to you. This is what the Agenda 2030 calls for, which has been imposed without any vote by the United Nations and the World Economic Forum.

In these four disastrous years of the Biden-Harris administration, we have had a puppet in the White House and a corrupt and incompetent vice president who has never stopped lying and deceiving voters about her past and her future. Power is managed by the criminal deep state – whose names and faces we now know – that is responsible for the destruction of your great nation. And to ensure that the crisis is endless, new war scenarios are continually opening up, in conflicts that no one actually wants, except for those who make enormous profits from them, sacrificing human lives and compromising international stability.

You have seen what the Democrats, that is, the woke far Left, have been capable of in four years. Imagine what they will be able to do if, instead of Biden’s numerous stand-ins, his vice president is elected – in the most scandalous and unimaginable fraud – with her entourage of LGBTQ+ ministers, rigorously woke, sold out to China or the World Economic Forum, sponsored by George Soros or Bill Gates, manipulated by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. At that point, dear American Catholics, you will not only have to go to a different rally – as Kamala would like – in order to say “Christ is the Lord”, because saying that will be considered hate speech, and praying in front of an abortion clinic an act of terrorism.

Do not think that these are remote hypotheses: wherever the woke Left takes power, it establishes the most vicious, anti-human, and anti-Christian dictatorship that humanity has ever known. And we know that every time the Left has come to power, it has never left through democratic means.

Donald Trump and Kamala Harris: we are not talking about two visions that are a bit different but still part of the normal political back-and-forth. No; we are talking about two diametrically opposed and irreconcilable worlds, in which Trump fights against the deep state and is committed to freeing America from its tentacled grip, while on the opposite side we have a corrupt and blackmailed candidate, an organic part of the deep state, who acts as a puppet in the hands of warmongers like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, of self-proclaimed “philanthropists” like the criminals George Soros and Klaus Schwab, or of characters like Jeffrey Epstein and Sean Combs. Their program is that of the global Left, the World Economic Forum, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and ultimately the program of Vanguard, BlackRock, and StateStreet. Their agenda is dictated by the financial oligarchy that controls humanity to the detriment of the people: an elite that operates not only in the United States but also in Canada, Australia, Europe, and wherever politics is held hostage by their investment funds and their pseudo-humanitarian organizations dedicated to the obliteration of Western Civilization.

Behind these people – by now we should know this – are people devoted to evil, united by the satanic hatred against Our Lord Jesus Christ and those who believe in Him, mainly against the Catholic faithful. We want Christ to reign, and we proclaim it with pride: Christ is King! They want the Antichrist to reign, whose tyranny is made of chaos, war, disease, famine, and death. And the more emergencies and crises planned and created by the globalist elite increase, the more that elite has a pretext to impose new limitations, new restrictions of fundamental rights, and new social controls.

Joe Biden, the current “president,” is a servant of this subversive elite and widely blackmailable for the scandals and crimes committed by himself personally and also by his family, beginning with his son Hunter. His “vice president,” Kamala Harris, is equally subservient to the same deep state. And the Democratic Party, to which they both belong, is the expression of the woke ideology that plagues all the parties of the global Left.

Candidate Donald J. Trump, while certainly taking some serious critical positions that a Catholic cannot agree with, represents for us, dear American faithful, in this specific historical moment, the only possible choice to counter the globalist coup that the woke Left is about to implement definitively, irreparably, and with incalculable damage for future generations.

Voting for Donald Trump means firmly distancing ourselves from an anti-Catholic, anti-Christian and anti-human vision of society. It means stopping those who want to create a hellish dystopia that is even worse than the one announced by George Orwell. And it also means – do not forget – giving him our vote of confidence, so that President Trump knows that the massive vote of Catholics and Christians that brought him back to the White House must become the premise for a more incisive commitment to the defense of life from conception to natural death, the traditional family, the right of parents to educate their children, and to the defense of the Christian Faith and the cultural identity of the nation.

I repeat: the choice is between a conservative president, who is paying with his very life for his fight against the deep state, and an infernal monster who obeys Satan. For a Catholic, there can be no question: voting for Kamala Harris is morally inadmissible and constitutes a very grave sin. Nor is it morally possible to abstain, because in this war declaring oneself neutral means allying oneself with the enemy.

People around the world are beginning to understand the threat that looms over them and their children’s future, and you Americans have understood it too. But even if this time it will be more difficult for the deep state to repeat the fraud of 2020, you must not think that it will resign itself to defeat so easily.

Let us therefore prepare to prevent possible attacks and civil war scenarios from being used to impose martial law and new restrictions, after the attempts on his life from which President Trump providentially escaped.

But let us not forget, dear faithful, that human energies alone are powerless in the face of this infernal display of forces. We proclaim that Christ is King – this means that Our Lord must return to reign, and the first way to make Him reign is by obeying His holy law and living in His grace. Let Christ reign in your hearts, in your families, in your communities, and throughout the entire United States of America: this is the only way to peace, harmony, and prosperity for your nation.

Think of how many of you Catholics there are in the United States! Vote without hesitation, and pray that Our Lord will enlighten American citizens in making their choice and grant victory to those who, at least, have no problem proclaiming that Christ is Lord.

May God bless you all, and may the Virgin of Guadalupe, she who is the patroness of the United States and all the Americas, and Saint Michael the Archangel, protect you.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop,
former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America
October 22, 2024

https://rumble.com/v5hw1ga-cyber-attack-...prep-.html

PerfectSociety
2 weeks ago
Get ready before 28-10-2024!

Iran and Russia are strategic allies [4][5][6] and form an axis in the Caucasus alongside Armenia.
wiki/Iran–Russia_relations

An Israeli strike on Iran could hurt the Harris campaign in its final stretch if gas prices soar
Business Insider on MSN.com 05-10-2024

Opinion - Israel and Iran are on the path toward a catastrophic war
The Hill on MSN.com 05-10-2024

Correction: At 41 minutes not Brenton Tarrant (Christ Church shooter) but Aaron Bushnell who set himself on fire to end the genocide in Palestine is meant.

xuandeliubei
Verified
1 week ago
The Gematria of that date is disturbing and it would seem to agree with it being the big day.
(for example, between September 11, 2001 and the date covid 19 was announced as a pandemic, it was exactly 6666 days. The number of days between September 11, 2001 and October 28, 2024 is exactly 8448 days. 84 and 48 are highly symbolic numbers in Gematria. "William Henry Gates" (Bill Gates's full name) is equal to 84, also "Mark Zuckerburg (who was also born in 1984), "masonry", "Jesuit",  "the Jesuit order", "Obama" also equal 84 in Gematria. Obama was born on 8/4, and last year, the Obamas produced a film about the electric grid going down.

In Gematria, a number is considered to have the same meaning regardless if written frontwards or backwards (I.e., 48 and 84 will have the same meanings).
"Evil", "tree", "tree of life", "freemason", "Sephirah", "as above so below", "illuminati", "freemason", "propaganda", "hoax", "false flag", all have a Gematria of 48. And of course, the date itself, October 28, is Bill Gates's birthday. It is also the birthday of the man who created the first polio vaccine. Bill Gates's 1-year birthday, October 28, 1956, is the same day Elvis Presley got his first polio vaccine.
A movie called, "Inferno" was released on October 28, 2016. "Inferno" is about a billionaire who wants to depopulate the earth with a virus.

Also, October 28, 2024, is exactly 4 years, 33 weeks from the date Covid19 was announced as a pandemic (March 11, 2020). 433 is the 84th prime number.

Quote:The Side Of Christ And The Side Of The Antichrist | A Current Assessment Of Global Events From Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
https://cdn.getmidnight.com/6908ab1f9a9e...-times.jpg

Dear and distinguished friends,

Allow me first of all to thank Doctor Stephen Frost for the invitation he has extended to me to speak to you. Along with Doctor Frost I also thank all of you: your commitment to fighting the psychopandemic propaganda is commendable. I am well aware of the difficulties you have had to face in order to remain consistent with your principles, and I hope that the damage you have suffered can be adequately repaired by those who have discriminated against you, depriving you of work and salary and labeling you as dangerous no-vaxxers.

I am pleased to be able to speak and share with you my thoughts about the current global crisis. A crisis that we can consider to have begun with the pandemic emergency, but that we know has been planned for decades with very specific purposes by well-known personalities. Stopping at the pandemic alone would in fact be a serious mistake, because it would not allow us to consider the events in their full coherence and inter-connectedness, thus preventing us from understanding them and above all from identifying the criminal intentions behind them. You too – each with your own expertise in the medical, scientific, legal or other fields – will agree with me that limiting yourselves to your own discipline, which in some cases is extremely specific, does not fully explain the rationale for certain choices that have been made by governments, international bodies, and pharmaceutical agencies. For example, finding “graphene-like” material in the blood of people who have been inoculated with experimental serums makes no sense for a virologist, but it does made sense for an expert in nanomaterials and nanotechnology who understands what graphene can be used for. It also makes sense for an expert in medical patents, who immediately identifies the content of the invention and relates it to other similar patents. It also makes sense for an expert in war technologies who knows about studies on the enhanced man (a document of the British Ministry of Defense calls him “augmented man” in transhumanistic terms) and is therefore able to recognize in graphene nanostructures the technology that enables the augmentation of the war performance of military personnel. And a telemedicine expert will be able to recognize in those nanostructures the indispensable device that sends biomedical parameters to the patient control server and also receives certain signals from it.

Once again: the assessment of events from a medical point of view should take into account the legal implications of certain choices, such as the imposition of masks or, even worse, mass “vaccination,” made in violation of the fundamental rights of citizens. And I am sure that in the field of health governance the manipulations of the classification codes of diseases and therapies will also emerge, which have been designed to make the harmful effects of measures taken against COVID-19 untraceable, from placing people on respirators in intensive care to watchful waiting protocols, to say nothing of the scandalous violations of regulations by the European Commission which – as you know – has no delegation from the European Parliament in the field of Health, and that is not a public institution but rather a private business consortium.

Just in the past few days, at the G-20 Bali summit, Klaus Schwab instructed heads of government – almost all coming from the Young Global Leaders for Tomorrow program of the World Economic Forum – about the future steps to be taken in view of establishing a world government. The president of a very powerful private organization with enormous economic means exercises undue power over world governments, obtaining their obedience from political leaders who have no popular mandate to subject their nations to the delusions of power of the elite: this fact is of unprecedented gravity. Klaus Schwab said: “In the fourth industrial revolution the winners will take it all, so if you are a World Economic Forum first mover, you are the winners” (here). These very serious statements have two implications: the first is that “the winners will take it all” and will be “winners” – it is not clear in what capacity and with whose permission. The second is that those who do not adapt to this “fourth industrial revolution” will find themselves ousted and will lose – they will lose everything, including their freedom. In short, Klaus Schwab is threatening the heads of government of the twenty most industrialized nations in the world to carry out the programmatic points of the Great Reset in their nations. This goes far beyond the pandemic: it is a global coup d’état, against which it is essential that people rise up and that the still healthy organs of states start an international juridical process. The threat is imminent and serious, since the World Economic Forum is capable of carrying out its subversive project and those who govern nations have all become either enslaved or blackmailed by this international mafia.

In light of these statements – and those of others no less delusional than Yuval Noah Harari, Schwab’s adviser – we understand how the pandemic farce served as a trial balloon for imposing controls, coercive measures, curtailing individual freedoms, and increasing unemployment and poverty. The next steps will have to be carried out by means of economic and energy crises, which are instrumental to the establishment of a synarchic government in the hands of the globalist elite.

And here, dear friends, allow me to speak as a bishop. Because in this series of events that we are witnessing and will continue to witness, your commitment could risk being thwarted or limited by the fact of not being able to see its essentially spiritual nature. I know that two centuries of Enlightenment thought, revolutions, atheistic materialism and anticlerical liberalism have accustomed us to thinking of Faith as a personal matter, or that there is not an objective Truth to which we all must conform. But this is the fruit of a propaedeutic indoctrination, one that happened long before what is happening today, and it would be foolish to believe that the anti-Christian ideology that drove the secret sects and Masonic groups of the eighteenth century had nothing to do with the anti-Christian ideology that today drives people like Klaus Schwab, George Soros, and Bill Gates. The driving principles are the same: rebellion against God, hatred for the Church and humanity, and destructive fury aimed against Creation and especially against man because he is created in the image and likeness of God.

If you start from this evidence, you will understand that it is not possible to pretend that what is happening before our eyes is solely the result of profit-seeking or the desire for power. Certainly, the economic part cannot be disregarded, considering how many people have collaborated with the World Economic Forum. And yet, beyond profit, there are unstated purposes that stem from a “theological” vision – one that is turned upside-down, it’s true, but still theological – a vision that sees two opposing sides: the side of Christ and the side of the Antichrist.

There can be no neutrality, because when there is a clash between two armies, those who choose not to fight are also making a choice that affects the outcome of the battle. On the other hand, how is it possible to recognize in your noble and high professions the admirable order that the Creator has placed in nature (from the constellations of stars to the particles of the atom) and then deny that man is also part of this order, with his moral sense, his laws, his culture, and his discoveries? How can man, who is God’s creature, presume to not be subject himself to eternal and perfect laws?

    Our battle is not against creatures made of flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and Powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, against the spirits of evil that dwell in the heavenly places (Eph 6:12).

On the one hand, there is the City of God – the one Saint Augustine writes about – and on the other hand there is the city of the devil. We can say that in this era the city of the devil is clearly identifiable in neo-Malthusian globalism, the New World Order, the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the European Union, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and in all those so called “philanthropical foundations” that follow an ideology of death, disease, destruction, and tyranny. And also in those forces that have infiltrated the institutions, which we call the deep state and the deep church.

On the other front, we must recognize that the City of God is more difficult to identify. Even the religious authorities appear to have betrayed their role of giving guidance to the faithful, preferring to serve power and propagate their lies. The very people who ought to be protecting and sanctifying souls are scattering and scandalizing them, calling good Christians rigid fundamentalists. As you can see, the attack is on several fronts, and thus it is a mortal threat for humanity, striking at both the body and the soul.

And yet, precisely at a time when it is difficult to find authoritative points of reference – both in the religious sphere as well as the temporal one – we see an ever-increasing number of those who are understanding, opening their eyes, and recognizing the criminal mind behind the evolution of events. It is now clear that everything is linked together, without having to dismiss those who say so as “conspiracy theorists.” The conspiracy is already there: we are not inventing it, we are simply denouncing it, hoping that people wake up from this suicidal narcosis and demand that someone put an end to the global coup. The operations of social engineering and mass manipulation have demonstrated beyond any doubt that this crime was premeditated, and how it is consistent with a “spiritual” vision of the conflict that is now unfolding: it is necessary to take sides and fight, without giving in. The Truth – which is an attribute of God – cannot be cancelled by error, and Life cannot be defeated by death: remember that the Lord, who has said of Himself, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life,” has already defeated Satan, and what remains of the battle serves only to give us the opportunity to make the right choice, to choose to do those actions which place us under the banner of Christ, on the side of Good.

I trust that this great work you are undertaking will soon bear its expected fruits, putting an end to a time of trial in which we see how the world will become if we do not turn to Christ, if we continue to think that we can coexist with evil, lying, and self-worship. After all, the City of God is the model of those who live in God’s love, self-control, and contempt for the world; the city of the devil is the model of those who live in self-love, conforming to the world and despising God.

I thank you and bless you all.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

https://tapnewswire.com/2024/10/19/the-p...globalism/