Multipolarity As World Government 3.0 & Its Pied Pipers

“BRICS” has been around for over a decade. The term “multipolarity” on the other hand, has been bandied about for at least over half a century. “BRICS multipolarity” is sold as a counter-weight and dialectical response or solution to Western imperial globalism. But is it really? It has been my belief for years that BRICS multipolarity is nothing more than the next logical progression and iteration of Western-directed globalism toward the long-planned and desired East-West convergence into a singular World Federation, World Government, and/or World State by the transnational class, which is principally stationed in the West, but has long-since penetrated the East. We are witnessing the onboarding of the East into the Western globalist-led one-world government, not the other way around. For centuries the Third World or Global South have been disenfranchised by Western empire. Now has come the time to incorporate the Global South into the Western empire to at last complete the project for proper and total world empire. There are no good guys here, no good actors. Every nation state is run by an oligarchic cartel and mafia, penetrated by the international class. Ask any average citizen of any country and many will tell you that yes, their government is corrupt and run by an oligarchy that extracts as much as it can for itself and cares nothing for its citizenry. That has been my experience living in America, Croatia, México, Kazakhstan, and visiting Russia. The sleight of hand at play is to capitalize on the genuine feelings of righteous indignation, discontent, and disenfranchisement from the Global South as regards what Western empire has done to it for centuries, and provide them with a believable narrative and buy in where they’ll be convinced of their own accord to wittingly (or unwittingly) join the final sprint toward world empire and convergence of East and West. In other words, convincing them to buy the rope with which they’ll hang, along with the rest of us. Dr. Martin Erdmann makes the case that we’ve remained under Roman rule for the past two millennia. Following the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the early 5th century, the Eastern Roman Empire, centered in Constantinople, endured until 1453. It exercised enormous power over the known world at the time. It was replaced by an even more powerful empire ruled by the “New Romans,” as they called themselves. Their descendants continue to have a significant influence on world politics to this day. Babylon became Rome followed by the Holy Roman Empire and Venetians (New Romans), morphing into the age of empires (e.g. Dutch, French, Spanish) and ultimately the British Empire (new global Rome). Pax Britannica gave way to Pax Americana (or the Anglo-American establishment) and today we might dub it the Anglo-American-EU Empire and/or latest iteration of Pax Romana. The CIA and State Department financed over fifty percent of European integration. We’ve come full circle. Monnet’s Action Committee was also given financial backing by the CIA and the US State Department. The Anglo-American establishment was now committed to the creation of a federal United States of Europe. What’s more, Austrian academic Wolfgang Streeck correctly points out that the EU is an empire. The model for world federation and world government has always come from the West. Erdmann continues making the case that we are under a new global Roman Empire. During the war against the League of Cambrai, the Venetian oligarchy realized the futility of pursuing a policy of world domination from a tiny city-state in the middle of the northern Adriatic lagoons. On December 10, 1510, the representatives of the French king, Louis XII, and the Holy Roman emperor, Maximilian I, formed a league and signed an alliance treaty. Pope Julius II, Aragonese King Ferdinand the Catholic, Hungarian King Vladislav II, and English King Henry VIII joined the league. The league intended to destroy Venice’s claim to supremacy over the known world by annihilating its mercenary army. In response to this extremely threatening situation, the Venetian oligarchy transferred its family wealth, philosophical worldview, and political methods to states such as England, France, and the Netherlands. The Venetians soon concluded that England and Scotland were the most suitable locations for the new Venice, which would be the center of a new global Roman Empire based on military control of the seas. This policy required oligarchic rule and weakening the political system by eliminating all opposition. If the British-inspired League of Nations was World Government 1.0, and the American-inspired United Nations was World Government 2.0., well then we’re on our way to World Government 3.0. World Government 3.0 looks to be a global network state with its foundation in regions, in other words, a multipolar world. The Soviet Union may have been a beta test of technocracy by the Anglo-American establishment (see the work of Anthony Sutton or Richard Poe on the Western-backed nature of the Bolshevik Revolution). In fact, the USSR was already running Davos-esque 15-minute “smart” or “scientific city” experiments. Several Soviet architects envisioned a future where everyone would live in a district which resembles the current 15-minute city concept. The European Union, which builds upon the model of the Soviet Union (Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky dubbed it “the New European Soviet), as well as the Western-backed Third Reich (Dr. Rath has exposed its “Nazi roots”), is the model technate for regionalism and blueprint for world union. Mark Corner explains how once the EU is fully regionalized, the rest of the world will follow. In fact, the EU is helping to finance and advise policy in other regions in order to help them exactly replicate the EU model. We’ve seen the EU finance and advise the African Union project as well as ASEAN. The EU has just signed a massive trade deal with MERCOSUR which is part of that very birthing process, where Brussels serves as midwife. We have seen countless leaders call for copying the model of the EU to their own region. Former Mexican president AMLO called for copying the EU and making a North American Union. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador proposes the creation of a union in the Latin American continent like the European Union (EU). AMLO considered, that as the European community was created and later the European Union, “so we need a kind of union and integration with respect to the sovereignty of all countries to strengthen us as a commercial economic region in the world.” He went on to say that he will personally ask his U.S. counterpart, Joe Biden, to promote the creation of an ‘American union’ of all the countries of the continent, similar to the European bloc made up of 27 states. El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele has done the same for Central America. “The time has come for us to unite Central America, with open borders or some kind of community of nations like the European Union,” Bukele said. “The new generation will make it happen because the divisions created 200 years ago no longer mean anything to them. As have leaders in South America (e.g. Rafael Correa). “With his victory, the four largest economies in Latin America for the first time in history will be led by leftist governments: Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and Colombia. That totally changes the geopolitical balance in the region. I am almost certain that with Lula CELAC will be strengthened and Unasur will recover. Lula is a great integrationist. It is what we proposed 15 years ago, it is part of the new regional financial architecture that was one of the fundamental objectives of Unasur. There is a traced path there, which is the European one. The European Union should serve as an example for us: there are 27 countries with different political systems, religions, culture, history and languages that killed each other by the tens of millions a few years ago and decided to unite. I always say that Europe will have to explain to its children why they joined and we Latin Americans will have to explain to our children why we took so long.” Putin’s Eurasian Union is modeled on the European Union. In 2015 the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) became the latest version of integration in the post-soviet space, bringing together Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan in a Union, taking the European Union as its model. Replication of the EU in the Middle East is currently underway. If we go deeper into history, one can even argue that the United State of America was the initial occult and Masonic “New Atlantis” project (see Francis Bacon) and model for federation to be replicated to the rest of the world. Kings, kingdoms, and monarchies had to be removed as forms of government as they were not conducive to the creation of a technocratic and truly world state. Instead, the “democratic” republican model was concocted by oligarchy as the new operating system for peoples and nations. Constitutional federated republics could then be replicated the world over with the end goal of the world itself rolling up into one final world federation. The electoral process may have always been under full control and management of the oligarchy. In the 18th century Freemason George Washington declared: “Someday, following the example of the United States of America, there will be a United States of Europe” We can continue with further examples of how regional integration, which I can conceive as a synonym for multipolarity, has long been a project of the West. The 1930s technocracy movement produced this 1940 map of a North American Technate. It is possible that the Technate of America was intended to be the first, but was shelved due to setbacks, while WWII provided the oligarchy with the opportunity to launch the first technate in Europe as the EU. In 1939 Clarence Streit proposed unifying North America and Europe into an Atlantic Union, which would serve as the first phase toward integrating the rest of the world into world union. This movement is still alive and well, operating through The Streit Council. In fact, France’s Foreign Minister recently called for the implementation of Streit’s Atlantic Union by suggesting Canada join the EU. A recent piece from The Streit Council brainstorms the challenge of integrating China into the “supranational federal republic (SFR)”. This is yet more evidence that the drive for globalist world government is coming from the West, not the East, and that the problem is the integration of the East. The crux of the matter is that any nation being absorbed and integrated by the Borg must not only relinquish economic but political sovereignty, which, once given away, cannot be clawed back. Streit Council argues the West can threaten China economically in a bid to get it to assimilate politically, which is exactly what we are seeing Trump do with tariffs, in an attempt to get Beijing to integrate and give up political sovereignty. The SFR could pursue a policy of gradual decoupling, by slowly raising trade barriers and repeatedly destabilizing the economic relationship in mild to moderate ways. But this is unlikely to force China, all at once, to adopt any set of rules. In 1942 Maurice Gomberg self-published a regionalized map of a world commonwealth, in the vein of what the Anglo-American Rhodes Round Table was after. In 1974 the Club of Rome published its map of a “multilevel model” of a regionalized “world system” divided into ten parts. They argue that… “regionalization was made in reference to shared tradition, history and style of life… There exists a need for the establishment of larger communities of nations in the developing world to create a better balance of political and economic power as well as of cultural influence among the world-regions.” Sounds very much like the BRICS multipolarity movement of today and its discussion of “civilizational states/commonwealths”. Finally, former British Intelligence agent Nicholas Hagger, and proponent of world government, agrees with my thesis and argues in his 2023 publication The Golden Phoenix: Russia, Ukraine and a Coming New World Order that the Western New World Order, which he calls “the Syndicate,” “sought to create a New World Order since Nelson Rockefeller called for world federalism in his book The Future of Federalism (1962). The Syndicate has levelled down the West and levelled up the East to create an authoritarian New World Order. The Syndicate, which control the central banks of both sides and all the oil and gas, want an authoritarian New World Order – the Chinese one with Russia and the West in it. The Syndicate may have encouraged the US/EU, Russia and China to have their own separate New World Orders without sharing that these are to be combined into one authoritarian New World Order. A Brief Look at BRICS & Multipolarity The movement for world government has largely been driven by the European and Anglo-American establishment, as is clearly evident. It is my belief that the current driver’s seat of globalism is Euro-Anglo-American (Washington, London, Brussels), with the intention of bringing the Global South into the fold. The very nature of BRICS multipolarity is globalist, supranational, and part of the integration process of world federation, thus it is de facto part of the same program. In 1877, Cecil Rhodes admitted to the conspiracy for world government AND incorporation of the Third World into it. Sound like the BRICS project yet? “Why should we not form a secret society with but one object the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire. To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom, and of colonisation by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the Islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the Islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire, the inauguration of a system of Colonial representation in the Imperial Parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed members of the Empire and, finally, the foundation of so great a Power as to render wars impossible and promote the best interests of humanity.” British imperialist H.G. Wells, who moved in the same circles, was another major proponent of a “democratic socialist world state”. Now to examine BRICS itself. Pentagonpedia (Wikipedia) states that “BRICS” is a Russian doctrine from the late 1990s, specifically the “Primakov doctrine” from 1998. For those interested, "Multipolarity" is a concept born by Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov (1998-1999). The "Primakov Doctrine" fosters strategic partnerships like BRICS, while rejecting "neocolonial" Western economic models. 🧵 https://t.co/bpoJxHEtkJ — Renee Nal (@ReneeNal) March 8, 2026 Primakov called for a “Multipolar World” and “New International Order (NIO)”. Yet how different is his NIO from the “New International Economic Order (NIEO)” which was formulated via the UN by the Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, Ford Foundation, and Club of Rome? One 1979 article suggests the construction of a fairer world order via the UN and a… “decentralized planetary sovereignty. The UN would be restructured…as the center of a functional confederation of international organization. Others see the NIEO not as a turning point but as an adjustment in an established ongoing hegemony, the coopting or embourgeoisement of the Third World.” BRICS essentially is the compromise between East and West for world integration, as stated above. It represents a victory by the East in the sense that the West understands it must capitulate on some elements of hegemony in which it has heretofore been reticent, and pool wealth and power with Eastern power centers. It is the “coopting” of the Third World (Global South). The Soviets or Russians have always also been globalist minded. They are a competing faction for world government and/or simply want a good seat at the table of world domination. Something which former British Intelligence agent Nicholas Hagger also discusses in his writings, that there is a Russian and Chinese New World Order agenda, albeit which appears to be weaker than the Western Syndicate. Primakov, together with other Russians, attended the Dartmouth Conferences which were all stocked with many Western globalists such as Brzezinski, Rockefeller, and Al Gore, through whom these Western ideas of global federation could permeate Moscow. Indeed, Moscow slowly began to liberalize and Gorbachev was eventually the catalyst to bring the entire Soviet edifice down. If you talk to many Russians, they’ll tell you they overwhelming believe Gorbachev was a traitorous Western agent tasked with this action. I met Gorbi back in 2017 on a “citizen’s diplomacy” mission alongside 30 other Americans with Sharon Tennison’s Center for Citizen Initiatives. For the record, all expenses were paid out of pocket by myself! I saw it as a great opportunity to visit Russia, promote peace, love and understanding, and of course gain further authority for myself in my field as an educator, being a history teacher. We met other Russian luminaries including Vladmir Pozner. Unfortunately, I had only a brief personal minute or two with Gorbachev as did the other Americans, and was too nervous at the time to politely and directly ask him about how far along world government we were. The focus of the discussion with him had been the budding New Cold War. Through his Green Cross International, Gorbachev was an advocate for environmentalism (now climate changeism, as I call it) which would serve as the pretext for the very world government he was subsequently proposing. Integration of the Global South into world federation obviously would have to be sold to the Global South BY the Global South so as to defuse any suspicion of it being a Western plot. The word “multipolarity” has been appearing in the preeminent publication and mouthpiece for globalism, the Council on Foreign Relations’ “Foreign Affairs”, since at least the 1970s. In 1972, CFR laments Moscow’s lack of multipolarity: This is not the code of behavior we would like Moscow to observe. But multipolarity is not Moscow’s game, or interest. Any orderly international system needs a hierarchy. But the relations of the top to the bottom, and the size of the top, vary. In the future world order, these relations will have to be more democratic, and the oligarchy will have to be bigger. Historically, what requires a new policy is not the passing of the bipolar era but the end of a unipolar one. A single world system must still be the goal. Of course, in the new monetary order, there should be a modicum of decentralization. Can an international system as diverse as this one function effectively without the active participation of all its members, even if one grants both the wisdom of “decoupling” the great powers’ contest from the internal tribulations of the developing countries, and the risks of paralysis, corruption, or waste present in more “democratic” world institutions? Can community-building proceed in such a way as not to seem a neocolonial device through which the rich and strong perpetuate their hold on the poor? Tomorrow’s dialectic will have to be that of a complex balance, both global and regional, allowing for a fragmentation of the strategic- diplomatic contest under the nuclear stalemate, and an emergent community in which competition will, of course, persist, but where mankind ought, perhaps, slowly to learn to substitute games against (or with) nature for the games between what Erik Erikson has called “pseudospecies.” In 1973, the CFR pushed a downsized United States and multipolarity: The bipolar order is passing and defies restoration, though certain of its features persist- notably, the formal alliances and the habits of zero-sum strategic thinking. But recalcitrant allies, third forces and crosscutting institutions are too prevalent. So there remain the practical alternatives of a multipolar balance of power or a pluralism of unaligned states. We are asking, then, whether the United States can live in a situation of general unalignment which its own conduct would materially help to establish. In 1976, the CFR calls for multipolarity and bringing in the Third World (Global South): …the acceptance of multipolarity, the need for preserving one’s guard, the recognition of the claims of the Third World. The introduction of true multipolarity within as well as without the Western alliance must be acceptable, even welcome. In 1979 the CFR stated it was America pushing multipolarity: The early 1970s saw an American effort to nudge the world toward multipolarity. In 1988 Nixon wrote “in what has become a multipolar world” and in 1989 CFR declared “the multipolar world [was] now emerging”. In 1990: The world after the Cold War will not resemble any world of the past. From a “structural” point of view-the distribution of capabilities-it will be multipolar. But the poles will have different currencies of power-military (the Soviets), economic and financial (Japan and Germany), demographic (China and India), military and economic (the United States)-and different productivities of power-demographic power is more a liability than an asset, the utility of military might is reduced, only economic power is fully useful because it is the capacity to influence others by bringing them the very goods they crave. Moreover, each of these poles will be, at least to some extent, mired in a world economy that limits its freedom of action. There are many more examples in the CFR archives. How is it possible that multipolarity is some “Russian Primakov doctrine” when we can see it has been germinating in the Euro-Anglo-American establishment for decades prior? Then we have the actual coining of “BRIC(S)” which came after Primakov. BRIC was purportedly coined by Goldman Sachs’ Jim O’Neill in 2001, but everyone fails to mention his 2003 report co-author Roopa Purushothaman who helped cement BRICs. Purushothaman is a WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM GRADUATE and YOUNG GLOBAL LEADER. So which is it, a Russian plot or a Western globalist scheme? Or both? James Corbett has also chimed in over the years. Who is contending that the AIIB or the BRICS’ New Development Bank is in any way competitive with the Bretton Woods institutions (IMF/World Bank)? Certainly not anyone involved with any of these institutions. No, these institutions do not view themselves as competitive. It is only various media pundits who have speculated that these new banks are in fact some sort of challenge to the so-called “Washington consensus.” What none of these experts has bothered to report (for obvious reasons) is the remarkable fact that the Vice President of the NDB is also an Executive Board member of the IMF, who then went on to pledge cooperation and joint action between the NDB and IMF. Also missing from this narrative is the fact that the NDB’s chief, Kundapur Vaman Kamath, is a former staffer of the supposed NDB “rival” Asia Development Bank. Or there’s Jin Liqun, widely tipped to be the head of the AIIB, who also happens to be a former Vice President of the Asia Development Bank and alternative Executive Director of the World Bank. But even this is not as much of a challenge to the Bretton Woods institutions as it appears at first glance. Although Beijing is obviously seeking to bolster the yuan as an international settlement currency, this is not being done in an effort to make the yuan itself a world reserve currency in the same way that the dollar is today. Instead, this is being done in service of a policy goal outlined by People’s Bank of China Governor Zhou Xiaochuan in 2009 that is seeking to establish the “Special Drawing Rights” currency basket as the new world reserve currency. The BRICS are an artificial creation of a US investment bank. Thus, what does it even mean to ask whether the interests of “Russia” and “China” align with the interests of the “US”? Surely these nation-state entities do not have interests in and of themselves. The people in positions of power in those countries have interests, but we would be better served in narrowing the scope of the question by identifying them in particular. Do the interests of Gazprom and Rosneft align with the interests of BP or Royal Dutch Shell? Sometimes, in certain contexts, yes. In other contexts they would be rivals. Similarly with JPMorgan and HSBC and the Bank of China, or the various central bankers at the Bank for International Settlements, or the members of the Trilateral Commission. Their deliberations have very little to do with amorphous national interests and everything to do with jockeying for personal position and control of the global economic and political chessboard… In short, the rise of China as an economic and military power has been facilitated by a small group of oligarchical families working in close conjunction with businessmen, politicians and financiers representing oligarchical interests in the West, specifically in the US… If what we are combating is, as I posit, essentially two (or more) gangs competing for turf, then it is self-evident that we gain nothing from supporting one gang over another other than the vague hope that the other gang will treat us more kindly. He continues: The BRICS are a phoney opposition literally created by Goldman Sachs whose pseudo-alternative institutions are run by the very same bankers and bureaucrats they pretend to oppose. The cold war of the 21st century is being engineered in the exact same way that the cold war of the 20th was. And, as always, whichever “side” wins this “fight,” the oligarchs and their systems of control will come out on top. Riley Waggaman has painstakingly demonstrated how Russia is globalist through and through, while living in Russia. And as a result, he has been kicked out of Russia by the FSB! If we step even further back in time, there is evidence to suggest modern China has had close ties with Western globalism since the outset. The late Anthony Sutton had produced much material on this angle. A recent Substack article has done a wonderful deep dive and concludes: To surmise, with the likes of Anthony Sutton already having covered the Skull & Bones prevalence in setting up China for its opening to US corporatism in the 1970s, this piece was intended to show that this was not just capitalist opportunism, but part of an agenda that goes back much further (further, even than the 1911 Xinhai Revolution, which Sutton also correctly points out the Yale connection to). In this regard, it is the opinion of the author that the communist reign of Mao Zedong was but a business phase in a long-term plan, with Mao’s purpose being to enact nothing short of a mass cultural erasure project to sever China’s connection to its old world. This project, once carried out, made China ripe for the setup as a powerhouse on the global stage and to become the ringleader in today’s dialectic of BRICS vs the Liberal International Order. A dialectic which, if it is carried out in full, ultimately ends in a London-funded Belt and Road Initiative building a global smart city prison grid from the rubble. To all the Cold Warriors and “Pentagon Active Measures & Influence Networks” as I refer to them (we’ll get to them in a moment), who argue the laughable inverse, that China and Russia are behind the plot for world domination, the evidence is to the complete contrary. Modern China and Russia have been backwaters economically and technologically speaking compared to the West. There is no snowball’s chance in hell Beijing or Moscow were in any capacity to plot world domination, except perhaps the Soviet Union at its peak, but even that is a stretch. Modern China had clearly been a backwater as a result of its civil war and Mao’s communist policies until it opened up to the West in the 1970s and received a massive technology transfer. The Chinese admit it themselves! And do not get me wrong, I’m not speaking ill of any peoples or civilization, I’m separating the historic Russian and Chinese civilization from their 20th century communist iterations. In 2022, The Rio Times editorial board pointed out that Western globalism penetrated and made the East. Anthony C. Sutton has also proven, based on facts, that it was Western bankers, corporate elites, and politicians through whose help the Bolsheviks were able to seize power in Russia. It is also proven that during the Cold War, the same elites maintained close relations with the Warsaw Pact states, giving both loans and material support. These ties and cooperation between the Western and Eastern elites are increasingly forgotten today, and for some, it is hard to imagine that the West created its own enemies. Mikhail Gorbachev, the leader of the Soviet Union who is widely credited with its disintegration and thus the creation of the “new Russia,” is an example of how, behind the curtain, elites from the East were pursuing the same interests in the form of a New World Order and centralized global government, as Western politicians such as former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, advisor to French President Mitterand and “discoverer” of Macron, Jacques Attali, and oligarch Bill Gates did and continue to do. When we look at today’s alternative media, it is curious that the misleading East-West enmity has been so manifested, and the past cooperation of East and West has been forgotten. There is no reason to speak of hostility between East and West. Eastern governments are linked to and subject to the influences of the same globalist institutions as Western governments. In the behavior of Putin, Xi, Nazarbayev, and other Eastern heads of state and politicians, an anti-globalist thrust is not discernible in any way. They all supported the agenda of the IGE and are quite visibly part of this grouping themselves. It is time for people to realize that mere rhetoric is meaningless and the truth is much more likely to be: the New World Order will come from the East, and the collapse of the USA will be the final precursor for it. What’s more, the Eastern globalist and supranational multipolar bloc is being used as leverage and as an excuse and pretext in the dialectic to argue that the West must now also integrate into a supranational bloc! I have even seen reports suggesting we must advance the Technate of America “because China”! “We need to start thinking in a North American Region. We need that in order to confront China.” Solange Márquez Espinoza The CFR writes The United States now faces the prospect of an emerging Eurasian military-industrial bloc. China and Russia use institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS, a group named after its first five members—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—to provide a veneer of legitimacy to their plans. The United States cannot ignore it. Washington must unify its alliances by investing in cross-regional ties. The East Approves of World Government For years I have been arguing that BRICS multipolarity is technically the recalibration, reconfiguration, and upgrade of global governance or world government. Then I came across this recent article in which the Chinese literally say it themselves! Xi Jinping has even unveiled his own plan for world government known as the Global Governance Initiative (GGI)! Sounds very anti-globalist, doesn’t it? What it’s ultimately about is giving the Global South a seat at the table of world government. The only qualm, as it often is between cartels or mafias, is determining who gets what size of the pie. Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Lula, Modi, and the rest are fully globalist in mindset and ideology. We have seen how all the BRICS nations have been implementing technocratic totalitarian tyranny, just like in the West. There’s no Social Credit System in China say the China sycophants? That’s pure semantics. OK, fine, but in China there is an Algorithm Ghetto and Electronic Concentration Camp just like the one being installed in every nation on planet earth as we speak! The Euro-Anglo-American globalist empire found it too time-consuming and physically taxing to literally take the entire planet. So they’ve switched strategy to penetrating the Global South (e.g. Confessions of an Economic Hitman), bribing and enticing it into cooperating, and thus delegating imperial responsibilities of the world state to each respective mafia cartel. One High Priest of both Globalism and Multipolarism, Jeffrey Sachs, repeatedly has made the case for world government based on regions (multipolarity). Jeffrey Sachs on May 3rd, 2025: “We need a global government, that’s the UN! We need a regional government, that’s the EU!” Some of the projects BRICS World is promoting includes a common currency such as The Unit. One of BRICS’ main cheerleaders, Pepe Escobar, describes it: “Glazyev stresses the need to “ensure a full-fledged switch to national currencies in mutual trade and investment within the EAEU and the CIS, and further – within the BRICS and SCO, the withdrawal of joint development institutions from the dollar zone, the development of their own independent payment systems and interbank information exchange systems.” When it comes to financial innovation – compared to the current structure of the international financial system – The Unit is in a class of its own. The Unit is essentially a benchmark token – or an index token; a post-stablecoin, digital monetary tool; totally decentralized; and with intrinsic value anchored in real assets: gold and sovereign currencies. Yet, The Unit is LITERALLY the re-branding of the 1940s Western globalist one-world supranational currency known as the “bancor”! The bancor was a supranational currency that John Maynard Keynes and E. F. Schumacher conceptualised in the years 1940–1942 and which the United Kingdom proposed to introduce after World War II. The name was inspired by the French banque or (’bank gold’). This newly created supranational currency would then be used in international trade as a unit of account within a multilateral clearing system—the International Clearing Union—which would also need to be founded. In fact, as soon as I heard about The Unit, bancor IMMEDIATELY came to mind. Then, other analysts confirmed it. It most closely resembles Keynes’s proposed Bancor: a non-redeemable, basket-anchored settlement unit designed specifically for international clearing. Multipolaristas, (Paid) Pied Pipers, & “Foreign (& Domestic) Influence Operations” When I began my podcast first as Dissident Thinker in 2012, then as Geopolitics & Empire in 2015, I wanted to and still wish to speak with intellectuals from all walks of life beyond any Overton window. My few unwritten rules and guiding principles were that either they had to have some expertise on a subject I wished to know more about or that we tacitly generally agreed on at least one of my principles which include: anti-totalitarianism (e.g. communism, fascism, globalism, technocracy), anti-war, pro-free speech, pro-liberty, diplomacy, cordiality, etc. And yes, sometimes I would invite guests who held an ideology antithetical to mine. It is obscene to accuse anyone of subversion based on dialogue alone. I have interviewed guests hailing from the Pentagon and Military-Industrial-Complex, politicians, diplomats, Russians, Chinese, Indians, wealthy investors, academics, journalists, authors, and dissidents, among others. I have wittingly and unwittingly interviewed “Pentagon influence operators,” does that make me CIA? I have unwittingly interviewed potential “foreign influence operators,” does that make me a Russian agent? I have wittingly interviewed globalists, does that make me a globalist? Why not have an audience with an array of actors, including sometimes an ideological adversary? That way we can know where they’re coming from. There is this Orwellian idea today being floated by the “Pentagon active measures” group that simply having a conversation with someone is “platforming” or “promoting” them. A framing I patently reject. I have been able to respectfully interview globalists who could at times give us nuggets of insight regarding the road they were taking us down. In any case, during the day I was a high school teacher and university adjunct, often flying by the seat of my pants while learning the art of podcasting, which had been my moonlight passion project and hobby until 2024, when I ventured out on a limb to try podcasting full-time with the help of listeners and subscribers. I discovered that large swathes of the new media and podcast space have become Laurel Canyon 2.0 (coined by Steve Poikonen, if I’m not mistaken), a realization that I have only fully come to terms with in recent years. Dave McGowan’s book “Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon: Laurel Canyon, Covert Ops & the Dark Heart of the Hippie Dream” suggests that the rock music scene of the 1960s and beyond was effectively manufactured by the Military-Industrial-Complex in conjunction with occult societies and the British Tavistock Institute, among other clandestine actors. In fact, occultist and musician Jaz Coleman of Killing Joke, who I once saw perform in Chicago in 2003, admits to the fact. “My whole perception of rock music has been influenced by people I’ve met who were involved with the Tavistock Institute. Basically the whole rock revolution was manufactured by the Tavistock Institute in the first place. They financed the first Beatles tour of America, to study the behavioural patterns of young people. The whole goal was to break up the family unit. I’ve given my life to the liberating possibilities of rock music and experimental music, but I have to also be aware that it was created by the Frankfurt School Of Psychiatry. The whole thing has been manufactured from day one. But you have to see the first album in context…All those songs were written in 1979 but recorded in 1980, and two things influenced us. One was the house in which we met; it was psychiatrists who worked at the Tavistock Institute, so we had a good lesson in what was to come, from what they told us. The other big influence was Brzezinski’s book, Between Two Ages, which talks about the emergence of a technocratic state. These two influences affected day one of our recordings. The corporate takeover of the world was mapped out and planned by the CFR after the war. They could see the goal of world dominion, and now you’re witnessing the final stages of it. On that first album, you can see our fears of the new technotronic fascist state. Here he is on the steps of Tavistock paying homage. And in another revealing interview, he says: “When I was an 18 year-old I read the book by Brzezinski that came out in 1970 called “Between Two Worlds”. And in this book, Brzezinski basically outlined the coming technocracy. When I met Big Paul, it was in a house that was owned by The Tavistock Institute, and it was all Tavistock people in that house, and those people basically, they called themselves “industrial psychologists”. So we had a good idea of what was coming because of the people around us. When our lives are ruled by corporations, this is fascism, this is the fascism my father fought against in the last war. And now it’s here. Rule by corporations is here with us. And I hate it. My life is over, so the thing that makes me dangerous now is I don’t give a f*ck. I’m glad that I’m moving to Switzerland…so I can be closer to Klaus!” For the past few years, I’ve been pointing out how it was interesting that the rock scene died down in the late 1990s and early 2000s, just as the internet and social media were coming of age. My thesis is that social media and podcasting or “alternative media” (kind of sounds like “alternative rock” doesn’t it?) are the New Laurel Canyon, stocked with occultists and agent provocateurs. Billy Corgan recently confirmed my thesis. There are numerous “influence operators” in the “independent” media space. There are loose tribes of which some come to mind including: MAGA Neocon Zionist Conservative Inc. (think Benny Johnson), “Anti-Globalist” New Age Hippie Gnostic Anarchist Theosophic (think Anarchapulco), Pentagon Active Measures & Influence Operations, and the multipolaristas (as I call them). There are many solo operators, like myself, who have at times wittingly and unwittingly floated through all these spaces and beyond. I believe that there are also good, innocent, and well-meaning people that can be involved in any of these different groups. Yet, there are also nefarious actors. I would like to add the caveat that I believe the actors in this space, including myself, fall along a wide spectrum, and that it is difficult to definitively ascertain who falls where, in most instances. Yet there are many signals and patterns that give possible clues. I believe motivations in alternative media run anywhere from: - actors who are truly independent, genuine, each having the right to their own worldview, and well-intentioned in their labor who at times may make mistakes (don’t we all?) - followed by those who, although well-intentioned, succumb at times to human nature (e.g. greed, ego, narcissism) which leads them to make minor compromises in exchange for money and status (e.g. clout, clicks, followers, fame) - another group who is able to obtain financing from sources that are ideologically aligned with their work, there is technically nothing wrong with that - a final group which has little scruples and/or is either operated maliciously by government(s) or directly under the tutelage of some information operation The criteria for judgement can be highly subjective and a bit of a gray area. Now back to BRICS. I’ve dubbed the cheerleaders of BRICS multipolarity as multipolaristas. Some are paid pied pipers. Over the past several years patterns have emerged and visible networks have formed. I am certainly not throwing everyone in this camp under the bus. As with any tribe or club, there are both witting and unwitting as well as well-meaning and not-so-well-meaning participants. Some of the signals I’ve noticed include a rapid seemingly inorganic rise in follower count on different social platforms, paid trips to the East, and a general narrative adherence to the West being bad, the East being good, and avoiding the subjects of globalism and totalitarian technocracy or framing technocracy as a public good, in a strange statist or Stockholm syndrome sort of way. I believe the governments of both East and West are equally sinister, and implementing the same globalist, technocratic, totalitarianism. The most recent multipolarista example is “Professor” Jiang Xueqin. The “Political Economist” Substack makes the strong case for him being “a CIA-created doppelganger”. Xueqin has also been pushing new age and Gnostic ideas. Here Xueqin is on Tucker Carlson, who although does some interesting work, I believe is part of the Laurel Canyon 2.0 globalist influence network. Xueqin is promoting a “New (International) Economic Order”. Well, that sounds a lot like globalese for multipolar globalism. As I stated earlier, it was the CFR, the Club of Rome, and the Trilateral Commission pushing for a “New International Order,” “New Economic Order,” and/or “New International Economic Order”. Others have argued that because he is pushing Pax Judaica, it’s not terribly difficult to form a connection to who might have helped manufacture his persona. Among the multipolarista crowd, many of whom I’ve interviewed, range the likes of Brian Berletic, Pepe Escobar, Danny Haiphong, S.L. Kanthan, Matthew Ehret, Carl Zha, to name but a few. I have found they generally focus on traditional geopolitics and are dismissive of or don’t appear to mention globalism and technocracy, and tend to play up the East to the extreme. They are all very intelligent in their own right and I have found I share many of their views when it comes to geopolitics and empire, however I diverge when it comes to globalism and multipolarity. Adjacent to them could also be included the Judge Napolitano and Glenn Diesen type networks. Again, I’m bunching them together because of narrative. Beyond that, I don’t know. I’ve interviewed Glenn once and think he’s a cool guy and means well. The speed at which some of them have risen and their access to certain guests does raise eyebrows. Yet, I can’t unsee some of the following things that I have seen. Enter Mystery Bagman A bit of context is warranted before proceeding, I believe. My last teaching contract ended in the summer of 2021 and for about half a year, I coasted and wondered what would be my next move in life. I had decided I was going to attempt to podcast full-time. I remade my website in December of 2021 which cost me nearly $5,000 USD, and opened up a membership option directly via the website, using PayPal and Stripe as payment processors. In the meantime, I had been asked for an interview on Rick Munn’s TNT Radio show in March of 2022. Soon after, I was offered a full-time gig on TNT Radio based out of Australia, conducting three hour-long interviews daily. I would essentially be doing what I had been doing as a hobby with Dissident Thinker and Geopolitics & Empire since 2012, but on a paid daily live basis. Because of my heavy TNT Radio workload, Geopolitics & Empire was once again put on the backburner. However, my next experience in deplatforming the following month put a few things into perspective. You see, back in February of 2021 I had been terminated on Patreon. This was around the same time (February 2021) the Associated Press did a hit-piece on Dr. Francis Boyle specifically regarding his appearance with me on Geopolitics & Empire. What was interesting was that, in hindsight, one of the authors of the article, David Klepper, had contacted me in July of 2020 asking to interview me: “hoping to learn a little bit more about you – where you’re located, how long you’ve been doing this, how you came to have Boyle on your show, etc.” At the time, I immediately felt a red flag, and ignored his email. This was the first time I had ever been contacted by mainstream media (MSM). Seeing how MSM had treated people over the years, I figured there was nothing to be gained speaking with them. I had assumed he was maliciously planning a hit piece on me. Which turned out to be true. His subsequent article published a few weeks later was a hit piece on conspiracy theorists. Apparently, in 2019 he had also helped launch the AP’s ‘misinformation team’ to “expose false info”. Most important, his AP hit piece was co-written with the Atlantic Council, NATO’s think tank or NATO’s “brain”. Then, out of the blue, in April of 2022 when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) unveiled its “Disinformation Governance Board” under Nina Jankowicz, I was banned from life from PayPal (which I call PentagonPal). Kim Iversen and Matt Taibbi covered my deplatforming. In trying to piece exactly what had happened, I visited Jankowicz’s Twitter account for the first time ever and discovered I was preemptively blocked. Hmm, rather strange. It was through Mike Benz’s work that I was able to piece together what was going on. An entire “Pentagon Active Measures & Influence Network” was created between the Pentagon (Military-Industrial-Complex), DHS, and NATO among numerous other alphabet agencies. The DHS had created a sub-agency, CISA, to effectively launch a real-life Ministry of Truth, which would be fed through its various networks (e.g. NATO’s Atlantic Council). Under this new system, Americans who lawfully expressed true opinions that the regime didn’t like were considered “non-kinetic” threats attacking the government. …in September 2020 that formally posited DHS transition from a counterterrorism focus to a focus on “non-kinetic” threats such as social media misinformation. Incidentally, September 2020 is exactly when CISA formally began its censorship partnership with EIP. In October 2020, the Atlantic Council hosted a livestream discussion of this new proposed domestic censorship role for DHS with three former DHS Secretaries (and that discussion has some remarkable moments). Virtually every senior figure at CISA and across the other EIP entities involved in censoring the 2020 election has directly participated in Atlantic Council events, tying the networks together personally and professionally… …any US citizen posting what DHS considered “misinformation” online was suddenly conducting a cyber attack against US critical infrastructure. That was the legal framework under which DHS – and CISA particularly – drew their jurisdiction… …it was through EIP that DHS built the infrastructure for its current role as government coordinator of takedowns and throttling of US citizen speech online.” What this proves is that the American and European governments are active in malicious, unethical, and what should be deemed illegal information operations against their own innocent and law-abiding citizens. Back to TNT Radio. From March 2022 until March 2024, I conducted 1,000+ interviews before I found the workload becoming oppressive and decided to call it quits on the Ides of March 2024. I had been doing two jobs at once, both producer and host. I sought the venerable Jason Bermas as my replacement. In any case, by then I had seen the writing on the wall financially for TNT Radio. I estimated they didn’t have long, and indeed, some six months later TNT Radio went off the air. Finally, in this second attempt, for the first time in my life, I had decided to try doing Geopolitics & Empire full-time, and took a leap of faith leveraging Substack as my membership infrastructure (because of the PayPal deplatforming as well as technical difficulties I was having with the WordPress membership software). It was a drastic pay cut, but managed to pay the bills, and I thought I’d give it time. Then weird things began to happen. Other TNT Radio hosts were having spats with management. A public spat ensued between TNT Radio and TNT Radio host Jerm Warfare regarding someone named “Marcel”. You see, even before accepting the TNT Radio gig, I had wondered if the gig was meant to divert my attention from some of the groundbreaking work I was doing at Geopolitics & Empire. Or if it was part of some operation. I wasn’t the only one thinking along those lines, colleagues and even listeners wondered the same thing. During my two years at TNT Radio, I never suffered any censorship and generally was able to interview whomever I liked. So I did find it to be a genuine and well-meaning operation. It simply was difficult to monetize. Then, in the summer of 2024 I received an email from…Marcel (Jahnke). At the time, I had no knowledge of him other than that he had apparently been an investor in TNT (as stated publicly by TNT). It wasn’t until others began discussing and writing about him that I began to realize that I may have been the target of an influence operation. Slowly I began to put two and two together and was amazed at how far and wide his net was cast. He wished to speak with me and we organized a Zoom call. As regards the conversation, which was not recorded, my memory is quite vague and I can only recall generalities. From the little I can remember, my interpretation of the talk is that I believe he said that he was a supporter of alternative media and was against many aspects of globalism or empire and Covid lockdowns, etc. It appeared he may have been offering some vague future opportunities regarding my podcast on various platforms. If I recall correctly, he had suggested he could help me register my podcast as a business. I stated I’d be happy to have the podcast distributed elsewhere, but that Geopolitics & Empire would always remain self-hosted first, under my domain and control. I also wondered if he might gain control over Geopolitics & Empire through equity and the business formalization process, had I decided to do that. After the call, I had no further contact from Marcel, yet he did become a paid subscriber of the Geopolitics & Empire Substack. I have since given Marcel a “forever comp” on the membership. Then I began to discover that Marcel had been involved with filmmaker Robert Cibis of OVALmedia whose operation had been derailed. Though there is dispute as to who is at fault there. Numerous people offer their help or donate generously so that production can continue. But as in any good dramaturgy, the first turning point will soon come in Cibis’ history – in the form of a rich patron who introduces himself to the filmmaker as Marcel Jahnke. When the rich major investor offers his financial help in the summer of 2020, Cibis also believes in the joint attitude to see evidence that everything will go well. As a sum, he mentions 500,000 euros, which corresponds to an average budget for a six-part television documentary. The big investor does not even shrug his eye and even transfers 100,000 euros more. In return, he is to be involved in the film revenues in percentage terms. A short time later, the generous “supporter” smears another sugar bread and offers to finance technology with a total value of 370,000 euros, but in the form of an interest-free loan. Cibis wants to equip several studios in Berlin, Rome, Paris and Vienna with the equipment. Organization and planning take three months, valuable time that he cannot use to produce his film project. Then the loan agreement is presented to him, with strange formulations that make him stubborn for the first time. The skepticism grows when the financial “supporter” suddenly wants to exchange the two previous investments for a company share. This type of sabotage or takeover, if it was the case with OVALmedia, is known as “black-shelving”. Was TNT Radio like OVALmedia “black-shelved”? The former head of TNT Radio has also begged the question. Mike: “And the revelations are coming out left, right and centre, that there are a number of independent media who are being paid to come out with a particular sort of narrative…” Then I discovered that Marcel had become the Director of multipolarista Matthew Ehret’s Rising Tide Foundation. Matthew has been on numerous (I’m assuming expenses paid) trips to Russia and has written for Strategic Culture Foundation which the U.S. government alleges to be a Russian military-intelligence front, which is why U.S. citizens were banned from contributing to it under threat of high financial penalty and incarceration. In an audacious attack on free speech, journalists and writers based in the United States have now been banned by the US federal authorities from publishing articles with Strategic Culture Foundation. If US-based writers defy the ban, they have been threatened with astronomical financial penalties of over $300,000. The prohibition has only emerged in recent weeks. It follows earlier moves by the US State Department and the Treasury Department accusing SCF of being an agent of Russian foreign intelligence. No evidence has been presented by the US authorities to support their provocative claims. The Editorial Board of SCF categorically dismisses the allegations. In a statement, the editors said: “We reject all such claims by the US authorities that the journal is an alleged Russian intelligence operation. We have no connection with the Russian government. We provide an independent forum for international writers to debate and freely critique major topical issues of world importance.” I have no problem believing SCF to be a Russian front, it does ideologically serve that purpose, but it also does have good wide-ranging analysis. Furthermore, it is also the perfect pretext to manufacture an American police state at home and dismantle civil liberties (e.g. free speech). A 21st century McCarthyism. Ehret is also a Dean at the strange American University of Moscow, founded by the late Edward Lozansky, which some people say is non-existent and a cutout organization. I had interviewed Lozansky back in 2019 to get his take on the New Cold War. Another fun fact is Ehret was among the three of my very first guests on my first day at TNT Radio. He also subsequently was given a program on TNT Radio. Back to Marcel, I discovered that he now ALSO owns a nice chunk of UK Column (UKC)! And that multipolaristas who apparently had been brought on to TNT Radio, like Carl Zha, were subsequently brought over to UKC. Jeremy Nell (Jerm Warfare) was also brought over from TNT Radio to UKC. Carl Zha is someone who openly has promoted BRICS multipolarity as well as Chinese technocracy. Here he is promoting 15-minute cities. David A. Hughes came out with his own analysis of Marcel and these types of influence operations. To which Jerm Warfare has responded. Someone also discovered that Marcel had been attempting to make inroads with some of the anti-globalist anarchist crowd, such as Derrick Broze of Conscious Resistance. Marcel had donated to Derrick’s documentary and Derrick confirmed to me that he had no recollection of having any interactions or conversation with Marcel. Did I dodge a bullet? It is difficult to come to a hard conclusion, but where there’s smoke, there’s fire. My gut tells me there is a visible multipolarista network pushing (globalist) multipolarism which has support from various power centers. Some of my colleagues have even wondered if this financial and online support doesn’t just come from the East, but that it might also be coming from Western centers of power, because after all, it’s a joint initiative and operation. One strange interaction I had with a multipolarista, who came out of nowhere with a massive X following, who is a contributor to various Russian, Chinese, and otherwise BRICS-world media, was S.L. Kanthan, who I’d interviewed in early 2024. Much of his analysis when it comes to Western globalism gels, but he does tow the BRICS multipolar line. Subsequently, he had invited me on an X space with another American expat. I noticed he framed the talk incorrectly, very much favoring the BRICS multipolarity angle (“Extreme Censorship in USA — Chat with TWO Americans in exile”), alleging I was forced to flee America, which was not the case. I simply ended up abroad due to wanderlust. I can go back home to America any time I like. What was odd during the talk is that I began to criticize BRICS technocracy, and then he began to pretend he couldn’t hear me. My internet connection was optimal and there were no issues with my equipment. The other guest and listeners could all hear me except for Kanthan. I wonder if he truly had a technical issue on his end or merely pretended not to hear me as a form of censorship. Then we have all the Scott Ritter, Doug MacGregor, Andrei Martyanov, and Larry Johnson types. I’ve interviewed most of them. Some people suggest that much of their analysis has been inaccurate up until now, but serves to prop up the multipolar narrative. ♱ Rurik Christwalker ♱ has a wild thesis suggesting some of them to be part of U.S. information operations, with unclear objectives. Perhaps to promote the globalist multipolarity narrative in general? To create the boogeyman of multipolarity so as to warrant a stronger reaction from and more funding for the Military-Industrial-Complex? To serve, again, as pretext for bringing in further censorship measures? Pentagon Active Measures & Influence Operations Speaking of censorship and “active measures.” To quote Mark Crispin Miller: “Once you start encouraging people to think critically about subjects that have been deemed taboo by the deep state, you become a sort of unperson.” Somewhere back in time, around 2023, an anonymous account known as “The A.C.E.R.B.I.C. Nerd” and Dan Collen, a Canada VICE journalist who also works for an NGO financed by the Canadian government, began to attack me. They would go through my Geopolitics & Empire and TNT Radio interviews cherry picking screenshots of guests they didn’t like, namely multipolaristas, like Matthew Ehret. What a coincidence! At first they tried to make me out to be some sort of “neofascist Nazi” far-right white supremacist extremist. I fought back immediately. How could I be Nazi since my grandpa was a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp? What’s more, some Geopolitics & Empire listeners were so perturbed I wouldn’t “name the Jew” that they began calling me “Jewpolitics & Empire”! The final nail in the coffin was me explaining it was simply impossible for me to be what they slandered me as: what kind of neo-Nazi moves down to Third World México, marries a brown person, and literally becomes a Mexican? Add to that the fact I’m untermensch (a Slav). Case closed. They also attempted to try and make me out to be a Russian agent because I had interviewed Matthew Ehret as well as some of the LaRoucheites. On a side note, I do believe the LaRouche movement is connected to the BRICS multipolarity movement. The LaRouchites have some interesting analysis, yet ultimately I diverge from them because they promote globalist supranational multipolarity. Eventually, after I beat them back, they shut up. And in 2024, they returned, as a new and improved network. In July of 2024 this new network produced a hit piece on me openly and unashamedly full of lies and slander. My gut told me that this was clearly a security state operation. This was further confirmed when the next month, in August of 2024, Scott Ritter’s home was raided. Ladies and gentleman, we have a pattern formation! To top it off, the final nail in the coffin was the Tenet media fiasco. This network, which continues to knowingly lie about me, is growing. And attacking more earnest podcasters and writers. For example, they attacked James Corbett and Riley Waggaman with entirely invented facts. Riley was kicked out of Russia, for crying out loud. They do however live up to their name of “Disinformation Governance Board”. I don’t exactly know what their game is, I can only surmise. They appear clearly to be towing the Pentagon line and narrative, that’s for sure. They also appear to be attempting to muddy the waters and disguise the true roots of globalism, which is centered in the West, as I have been explaining. This Pentagon influence network says that Beijing and Moscow are behind the plot for communist globalist one-world government (via multipolarity). They are signalling a new phase of crackdown and have even issued me a veiled threat. They may be front running a new wave of DHS-NATO-esque censorship on the homefront, effectively attempting to police thought and speech. Call it Disinformation Governance Board 2.0. The following is just a short list of members that appear to be part of this network, if you check their accounts, you’ll be able to create a wider map since they repost each other: https://x.com/JamesAFulk (formerly https://x.com/EyesofRepublic) https://x.com/Restitutor_ https://x.com/onetallorfour https://x.com/eyepatch_man https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree https://x.com/vctrcmrnlr https://x.com/hl_shancken https://x.com/barmiyeh3975 https://x.com/ReneeNal Endeavor News once asked me for an interview, but I did not respond because I could see they were part of this malicious network. https://x.com/EndeavourNews I had previously interviewed Jeff Nyquist because I thought there had been something to the Golitsyn theory. Given his relationship to this network, I’m increasingly coming to believe the Golitsyn theory was a Pentagon PSYOP. I found it strange that when I interviewed Nyquist right before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, he knew the invasion was going to happen, he said they would invade a week or two later and they did. https://x.com/JRNyquist His activity and commentary has had an uptick, he’s colored his hair, and does a show with “Candor Intelligence” based out of Germany. https://x.com/Recentr3 Then there are a number of what I considered “friendlies” reposting this network which has knowingly lied about me. I met Trevor Loudon at the 2023 American Freedom Alliance (AFA) conference and bought all his books, if you can imagine. Then interviewed him on TNT Radio. He is reposting this network. https://x.com/TrevorLoudon1 I also met Stephen Coughlin at AFA, spoke with him, got his card, and subsequently asked for an interview, and never got a response. https://x.com/S_Coughlin_DC I am (was?) a huge fan of Michael O’Fallon but to my dismay, found him to be reposting this network. https://x.com/SovMichael As well as James Lindsay. https://x.com/ConceptualJames And as of late, Courtenay Turner has been reposting much of this network which has both lied about me and threatened me. https://x.com/CourtenayTurner I cannot help but be convinced that this network is part of some security state operation. Conclusion These “patriot games” have all rather become dull and tiresome. Particularly for little old me who works for peanuts. I haven’t seen a check from Vlad, Xi, or the Pentagon since I started recording conversations with people on the internet 14 years ago. All I have seen is persecution from my own American and European governments. And as the Ministry of Truth expands and police state measures fall into place for thoughtcrime, this underpaid and thankless task honestly becomes less attractive as time goes by. Yet, every time I consider throwing in the towel and disappearing into the woods, curiosity keeps me going. Globalist H.G. Wells was right when he said: Countless people…will hate the New World Order…and will die protesting against it…we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents. Originally posted at Geopolitics & Empire Thanks for reading... You can help us keep doing what we do. Every little helps and is hugely appreciated. For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE. TRUMPS ACTIONS COMPLETELY EXPLAINED BY HIS DONORS. For example, Elon Musk & the Melon family. What the Mfg Industrial Complex, the Financial Industrial Complex, & the Technical Industrial Complex want. (The MIC, FIC & TIC) I would advise that we COPY the podcasts on the Peter MacCormack Show. I can’t imagine that they won’t be blocked sooner or later. This is the first one that I have heard & it’s the most explicit, shocking presentation of the Power Structure. I lasted about a minute. There’s an element of truth to the above in that it’s the military intelligence operation behind Trump 45 who control the Epstein files. This operation was run by Christian Zionists (i.e. Pompeo, Pence, etc). In 2016 they counter-hacked the election in key states – thereby enabling Trump to win. With Pompeo becoming CIA director they took control of the Epstein files along with other stuff – e.g. Weiner and Hunter Biden laptops. And in January 2021 they shut down DC with 20k National Guard so as to extract a lot more files. However, they don’t even come close to controlling the world. This is because they’re locked in a clash-of-the-titans battle with the Monolithic and Ruthless Conspiracy (i.e. Kissinger’s Multipolar World Order). For instance, they had to change their plans around mid-2023 when fake-MAGA (Carlson, Kirk, etc) tried to usurp the Trump campaign (see below); and dealing with that challenge took up most of 2025. They’re now pushing ahead with implementing the Abraham Accords across the Middle East. — Tucker Carlson DESTROYED Mike Pence’s Campaign With One Question Valuetainment Jul 19, 2023 In this short clip, PBD and Dave Rubin react to Tucker Carlson Destroying Mike Pence’s Campaign With One Question. I can see Iran striking RAF Fairfield – if there missiles can reach, apparently they have missiles that can reach 4,000 miles away. “B-2 Spirit stealth bombers take off from RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire to strike Iranian missile sites. Tankers refuel American fighters at RAF Mildenhall. Long-range aircraft fly from Diego Garcia, a British territory Iran targeted with missiles on March 21. The runways are British. The fuel is British. The airspace is British. And on March 31, the Prime Minister stood in Wolverhampton and said: “This is not our war and we are not going to be dragged into it.”” Petrol Hikes Due To USA+israeli – Iran War Sri Lanka~ 26% UAE~ 30% USA~ 36% Pakistan~ 40%… Japan~ 20% Bangladesh~ 18% Israel~ 18%o France~ 17% UK~ 15% China~ 15% Russia~ 10% Saudi Arabia~ 10% Nepal~ 10% Can any one confirm the increases in your countries and how much? The UK number looks about right, though it varies. We have also had various petrol stations shut down, since our government vowed it would stamp out profiteering. Effectively meaning smaller suppliers can’t put their prices up even though they are having to pay more at source – ergo they are forced to shut down. Completely accidental result of the government action you understand, and not at all a way of creating shortages without being blamed for them. They are just silly billies who didn’t realise this would inevitably happen. Silly question, perhaps, but doesn’t Saudi Arabia have its own domestic oil production and its own refineries? Why then would closing Hormuz affect its domestic petrol prices? Allegedly Iranian missiles have damaged some of their refineries. I would be surprised if the damage were very extensive. Probably just enough to provide a few photos for the media and blogosphere and an excuse to join in the price gouging. Diesel prices increases dwarf those for petrol since the start of the ‘war’. Which is all rather handy since diesel vehicles have been demonised by the Net Zero crowd. Never mind that road transport and haulage ie trucks run on it and deliver most of everything we need. Transport costs rise therefore so does the price of everything else. You will drive less, you will eat less, you will freeze (or boil), you will not go on holiday, nor eat out, nor buy new clothes, furniture, home furnishings, home improvements, cars… Your overlords gave you a few years post-Covid 1984 to enjoy life but now they are tigthening the screws again. Welcome to the New Normal Part II. All true I believe, but let’s hope they stumble again like last time. I am sure they were forced to call a premature halt to their plans in 2022 and Russia was leaned on to invade Ukraine to start a big distraction and blow smoke over the obvious high levels of east-west co-operation we had been witnessing. We can only hope there’s sufficient push back from the 99% to halt the plan a second time. But the divisive war stories of course make that a lot less likely. Without a doubt the Ukraine war was a planned narrative switch just as Covid-1984 was losing traction. It was a seamless transition. Out went the Plandemic and its props, such as masks, testing kits and vakzines. What was left of the Branch Covidians who were accustomed to anti-social media virtue signalling were joined by a horde more overnight to “I stand with Ukraine” and buying up every Ukrainian flag available. Funny, how there were so many to buy. Those Chinese factory owners must have been pyschic 🤔 The Ukie production was intense for a few months and then it peaked. I think it was too far away in a sense – Slavs killing Slavs. Also, it only affected natural gas prices and availibility in Europe. Although the lack of Russian gas has added more scenery to the stage for the current energy scarcity excuses from the current ‘conflict’. This time the controllers have a better stick with which to beat the serfs – oil and gas. Also, it is in the Middle East, which is always a good show, where the stars of the show, the two I’s along with Uncle Scam ensure high octane emotions and polarisation. In my view, either the controllers will bring down the curtain on this show soon or we are in a for an epic long drawn out production where they will milk it to bring serious economic pain to the serfs on a worldwide scale. Is that Jordan Henderson artwork in the opening picture? I have asked and it is from Hrvoje’s original on Substack, so he will be able to say. Discernment and being able to read the articles online about the people who done Morić a bad turn its a simple process, how did the organization or individuals treat people before? What is there background? This is not hard to find. What is being said now by Morić has been said years ago by many who been used by them. I dont believe Scott Ritters home got busted by the police. GOOD NEWS FOLKS: Danny and ErikNielsen first again with the good news: Russia breaks US blockade on Cuba and deliver 730 000 barrels of fuel to the old Havana cars of Cuba. https://youtu.be/sOAwt6TP-es https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-let-russian-oil-tanker-deliver-fuel-cuba US MILITARY SEEKS CONSCIENCE OBJECTOR STATUS Center on Conscience and War reports 1000% increase in inquiries about conscientious objector status. “Mike Prysner, the center’s director and an Iraq war veteran, said the narrative about conscientious objectors has changed over the past two decades — n perception and in the political consciousness of service members. He said most recent callers have referenced the Feb. 28 bombing of a girls elementary school in Minab, Iran, as a turning point. “I haven’t heard from a single caller who said, ‘I’m scared of dying in a war I don’t believe in,’ ” said Prysner. “All of them are scared of killing people in a war they don’t believe in.” Bad conscious is a killer. BITS OF WAR NEWS, mostly trivial Strait of Hormuz can remain largely closed; it’s off the table. From White House. –WSJ — Trump Airport miniconference: (paraphrase) We’re mostly in agreement. To demonstrate sincerity they gave us 10 boatloads of oil as a gift; now they’ve given us 20 more. –John Helmer, reliable journalist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfAcNkHEdWY Iran denied this, of course. — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=773DkHznh3Q Trump lying news conference 3-31 I’d say in 2-3 wks we’ll be finished w the war [But they’re already mostly in agreement?] There’s a poll shows I have 100% approval rate, and another one says I have 92% approval rate, but they don’t report that. —- White House says Trump cd ask Gulf states to pay for the war. –Aljazeera Top Iranian Aragachi confirms contact w US, but no negotiations. March 31. –Aljazeera April fools joke? Probably true mental illness. Please do look at this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU2py056D9U&t=368s Ipso facto:BRICS term invented by Goldman Sachs. :Finacilazation of western economies has depleted the purchasing power parody to the proles : West Asia has been totaly in total destabilisation since the Sykes Picot. { East India Company took over Persia in the 1700 with the help of the Britsh Merchant Marines. { 1800 China is starting to implode and the likes of the East India Company And Sassons are milking it : Bankers always hedge their bets : Larry Fink failed financier not once not twicew but three times in his life has filed for bankruptcy is now the head of Black Rock which has a force majuere control of global finances. Hrvoje — the author–says: “Then we have all the Scott Ritter, Doug MacGregor, Andrei Martyanov, and Larry Johnson types. I’ve interviewed most of them. Some people suggest that much of their analysis has been inaccurate up until now, but serves to prop up the multipolar narrative.” I’ve been listening to all of these sources — although only for a month– but I can’t see any way in which they “prop up the multipolar narrative.” If the author means by multipolar a multi-sovereign world in which US and/or Israel respect the sovereignty of other nations, each of these people express passionate adherence to this idea. If the author means they “prop up the multipolar narrative,” meaning they support Federating nations together & sacrificing part of their sovereignty I’ve not yet heard any of them say so. MacGregor did say that a particular group of nations would need a security organization. He spoke against any sort of confederation w Canada. Well, I’ll continue to listen. Possibly there’s confusion over the meaning of “multipolar.” Or maybe its just the usual howling over anything. Nothing is good enough for the boomer. yeah, maybe so. ✅ I think he means that by uncritically accepting the war stories as basic conflicts of ideology or territorial gains, and by promoting one side as being essentially better, ie anti-imperialist they are being deceptive to their readers. They also tend to wax lyrical about how much better Russia, China etc are than the west and put across the idea they are above the corruption of the West, to frame the conflicts as moral wars of good against evil, and to stay silent about subjects like BRICS being managed by the same banking cartels that dominate the West. They also either ignore or special plead about the role of Russia, China and Iran during covid, their commitment to CBDCs and more. In short they do propaganda for the “east is better” myth that is a major component of what you could call the erzatz multipolar world agenda. James, I agree 100% that looking exclusively at the actors at the bottom of the pyramid while ignoring the controllers is wearing blinders & therefore can be seen as misdirection. But both Danny Haiphong & MacGregor do mention (altho not stress) the connection to military industrial complex. I’ve not heard any of them speak admiringly of Russia or China, but then I’ve only a month of listening to them– for the war news. I’ve long thought Putin’s mentor was Kissinger & Russia’s not becoming more democratic. The very week that the Bric’s banking system was announced I looked up the personnel & so never believed it was opposed to the establishment system. As for China, one need only reflect on the fact that TPTB exported US industry to China. James Corbett’s articles about the Chinese meeting w American financiers in the Rockefeller boardroom to start that transfer makes all transparent– particular when you see one of the paybacks in the form of the Chinese one-child policy. I still think it’s false to describe MacGregor, Andrei Martyanov, and Larry Johnson types as propping up the multipolar narrative. Also, all my alarms go off when I hear the word “multipolar” being demonized as meaning “federated in such a way as to eliminate full sovereignty.” Thank you very much for your comment. Sorry to go on so long; I’m starved for “conversation” w people who are able to make fine distinctions– and it is so very necessary that our understanding should be as exact as we can make it, and that we should disseminate it broadly. Those talking heads will keep you well stocked up with chickenfeed to peck over and go around in circles. If that is your thing, enjoy. I can’t say about Ritter yet – but, the rest are part of the QAnon Club. QAnon – Wikispooks Actually, I think Ritter is the least sincere of the lot. I see what you’re trying to get at but this quote and similar – and the article effectively claims the same – I argue is simply not supportable in the geopolitical evidence. What you’re referring to – and what most people mix up with direct political power – is economic investment and levels of acceptance. In other words, for example, US Asset Manager (eg, BlackRock) investing in Chinese military companies. It happens, it’s real. This mainly benefits two parties: the class with the capital doing the investing (whom I believe you refer to as ‘supranational’) and China. US security – and aligned interests – at the national level are undermined. None of that means that China/Xi is being controlled politically – or ceding any power at all. What you say is by design, I say is in reality a failure to understand the long-term consequences of short-term actions of self-interest. Western governments have allowed neoliberal capitalist dogma – in combination with Transnational Capitalist Class pursuits – to undermine their own national interests. China does not allow such things. This is one of the key differences that defies a conclusion of ‘they’re all controlled or ‘in it together’. I would doubt my own points on this as soon as evidence shows that actual political control is being ceded by China (or others) in the interests of the USA, or a Global One World Government. You say we would not see it from our distant perspective, but I disagree. It would be highly visible and the changes would be unmistakeable. We’d witness a series of dramatic transformations across its domestic and foreign policy; the dismantling of state-owned enterprises in favor of a fully open market economy – like the West; relinquishing control over key industries. It would be a seismic shift and a clear ceding of state power by China. The point is, it’s just not possible to have China become not-China without it being completely obvious that it’s happening. Instead we see the opposite happening time and again. We witness actions taken by Xi that highlight assertion of authority and control in response to capital pushing too far, and a willingness to retaliate when he perceives that his actual power is perhaps being undermined – See the ‘Jack Ma’ saga (co-founder of Alibaba). Ma gave a public speech comparing the Chinese state-dominated banks to “pawn shops”, essentially challenging the authority of the CCP. The reaction was swift and unequivocal: cancelled IPO, anti-trust investigations, Ma disappeared from public view for months and billions of dollars of investors’ money was lost. China’s state-owned enterprises are getting larger, not smaller. Privatisation has been effectively halted. That’s not a signal of things moving the way they should in your scenario. China welcomes private investment, but only if it serves their national interests and strategies; the opposite of what has happened in Western nations for decades – and we’re seeing the results of that short-sightedness in the geopolitical sphere today. I would happily entertain the idea that this class/group of capitalists run everything – they all work together across all nations, the enemies aren’t really enemies and there’s one goal in mind: a big shared pie of One World Government. However, the twists and turns we have to go through to make it true mean it’s the least likely option to explain what’s really going on. The simplest, most evidence-based observations are usually the right ones – we don’t need to contort the world to something it likely isn’t. Power exists in pockets, some much larger than others and it takes different forms – and the players are all there that we name, no doubt. However, the actions they take and the plans they make are highly unlikely to be controlled and monopolised across all nations. Ah crap. Apologies Hannah; I thought I’d clicked ‘reply’ to your comment to me earlier. I’ll try again! We’ve seen what unregulated corporate capitalism does to the lives of the working class. And it is criminal. Xi is on to their evil ways. Good on him. A threat or an observation, I hope its the former. Jvnior (@Jvnior): “https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f6a8.svghttps://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f1e8-1f1f3.svg BREAKING: CHINA THREATENS ISRAEL. “If israel uses a nuke, it will no longer be a country”” | nitter.poast.org From the link: “China can’t even dare Taiwan….the war they can it’s only trade war” Dear Isnotreal… they are totally bluffing, we think you should absolutely do it. Use it to show them who’s boss. I mean you are “Gods chosen people” so he will totally not let anything happen to you. Go ahead and use it. I agree. Israel should show China who is the boss. Who direct the US bully all over the world. Come on Israel, go and get them! Scotland: “No, this isn’t true as presented. The speaker is Victor Zhikai Gao, VP of a Chinese think tank (not an official gov spokesman or “China”). He warned in an interview that Israel using nukes (vs Iran or anyone) would mean its “demise as a country.” Official Chinese statements call for ceasefire/de-escalation in the region but make no such threat. The post exaggerates it as a direct Beijing warning.” –from Ask Grok Sorry. Thanks for that – that’s why I added the word observation – because it could be interpreted as well, as an observation – that using a nuke would greatly reduce Israel’s diplomatic weight around the globe. Never forget the Lebanese armed forces – half their salaries are paid for by the USA, another kick in the stomach for the US taxpayer – anyway the squatting Zionists, want to crush Hezbollah – so they’ve conjured up a plan to take the Beqaa valley in Lebanon, which is effectively the beating heart of Hezbollah, lets see how it pans out. MonitorX (@MonitorX99800): “https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f1f1-1f1e7.svghttps://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f1ee-1f1f1.svghttps://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/26a1.svg– Lebanese Armed Forces have abandoned their positions in the town of Ain Ebel, Bint Jbeil direction in southern Lebanon after an Israeli offensive.” | nitter.poast.org Maybe nitter.poast.org isn’t a good source? Tell you one thing you cd try to research: I heard that “It’s now legal for Israel to execute jailed Palestinians as terrorsts– including children. ” I’ve no idea if this is true, but I’m too tired. Yes Penelope, they (Israel’s) gave it the thumbs up in their parliament (Knesset) yesterday – it passed by majority, they can now, what they call legally, execute Palestinians, and claim they are terrorists. There are many women and children in prison in Israel – who may now be executed due to this, and I’ve also read that – this so called law was passed to protect settlers now colonising the West Bank, from the rightful owners the Palestinians fighting back against it. Thanks for the info, Scotland– altho I’m not sure that I want that in my consiousness. How absolutely horrible. Seems all very CGI. This proscribed headchopper has been all over the place recently, he’s had a warm welcome in Brussels, Israel and now London – Syria will be used as a route for the Zionists and the American troops to enter Iran. MonitorX (@MonitorX99800): “https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f1ec-1f1e7.svghttps://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f1f8-1f1fe.svghttps://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/26a1.svg– UK PM Keir Starmer welcomes the new Syrian President Al Sharaa.” | nitter.poast.org Moral bankruptcy all over the West. A pity, we had something….in the ancient past. Erik, even in the 50s & 60s we were still really Good. I sometimes think that when people encounter enough toxins to deteriorate their bodies that it’s difficult to sustain their souls and the Will to support the Good. When TPTTB stepped up their war on our health they diminished our ability to feel outrage, and especially our ability to enact it. By proscribed headchopper, I suppose you mean the guy given a make-over who blames al-Assad for every mass grave found. Indeed al Jolani, is now the darling of the West – Western leaders have been falling over themselves in the rush to greet him – even the UN sent a delegate to warmly shake his hand. The US recently removed the $10 million dollar bounty on his head. US removes $10 million reward for Hayat Tahrir al Sham leader – FDD’s Long War Journal Yip you got it. To those of us who lived in Asia and had eyes to see, none of this comes as a surprise. The more chest thumping the local nationalists and religious zealots engage in, the more likely they are to send their kids to private, often international, English-language schools. Followed by unis such as the Jesuit-run Georgetown. For royal scions, Sandhurst is an absolute must. And their brides should be white or at least mixed – as are countless local celebrities. A quick look at Wikipedia reveals that the 1950s pro-independence, anti-colonialism warriors were typically law graduates from the Inner Temple – the good ol’ City of London. So, more theater. And going back even further, the real UK movers and shakers often have a direct ancestor who was a military commander in the colonies – India, Malaya, Burma. (Again, look up British celebs’ bios. Cliff Richard. Liz Hurley. Joanna Lumley. The list is endless.) Those locales were clearly hotbeds of everything from shady investments to intel and all the way to masonic lore and trauma-based mental conditioning. Why does a Malaysian-born starlet like Michelle Yeoh win an Oscar, you may have wondered? Well, I just told you. Also, the colonialists would establish governance patterns in one place – e.g., Palestine – and then copy & paste them wholesale in other places. At times transporting entire cohorts of policemen and such from Punjab to Malaya, for instance. I could go on for weeks. This is the real Asia. A story that defies most mainstream narratives. P.S. The heavy reliance on special mercador / comprador classes also deserves mention. Chinese merchants all over Southeast Asia. Indians in Africa. These were mercantile, apolitical, and very useful for the colonialists in terms of accumulating capital and building out infrastructure. Perhaps their dealings were a preview of the neoliberal world where money and technology override any group identity, and where migration trends can be manipulated at will. I have trust issues, so I’ve never watched any of the mentioned names. My theory on the BRIC is different. Like a Masons’ hierarchy structure, some of the BRIC are allowed more of a say. Look at the countries that are in more poverty than others. I share those trust issues, fathom. After the monstrous multiple betrayals we experienced over covid it’s very hard to return to any trust for the betrayers, in fact I think it would be foolish to go there. But at the same time we did see that a few people continued to resist and tell the truth, so I do also continue to place my trust in them. The headline hungry parasites are coming out to feed: https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/laura-loomer-warns-of-worse-than-911-terror-attack-suggests-false-flag-scenario-amid-iran-conflict/ar-AA1Zlj4M The West European technate wants less travel shocker: https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-urges-europeans-to-travel-less-to-avoid-spiraling-energy-costs/ Any resemblance to the 2020 lockdown is of course purely non-coincidental. I have to be honest and say I feel quite overwhelmed reading this very comprehensive and very lengthy article, and will need to reread it. A number of people you mentioned on here I’ve already distanced myself from, and in fact, no longer listen to them. Call it gut instinct, or a sense that something was off about them, and with some they appeared too slick and it became noticeable they wouldn’t cover certain topics. Who to trust anymore and what agenda’s are these people really pushing under the guise of being “alternative media”? How many genuine dissidents are still out there who are on platforms like YouTube, X, and Facebook? I also agree with what you said about BRICS and also on Russia. All countries that signed up for Agenda 2030 and who were fully on board with the convid pysops, are definitely part of the globalist agenda to bring in a digital panopticonic gulag based on an AI surveillance state and the erasure of our freedoms, including freedom of movement. Thanks Hrvoje. I’ve listened to most of them, but only the past few weeks– to get Iran war news. They seem to be OK for that and I’ve not heard any of them speak of a global govt. Prof Jiang’s interesting for supplementary analysis as he uses something he calls “Game Theory”. I’ve no problem with his mention of “Multipolarity” as I interpret it to mean Multi-Sovereignty in which each nation partakes of the power of sovereignty, rather than being cowed by a unipolar US. I’ve listened to 4 of his programs & haven’t heard him mention global govt. Within the US, govt needs to be more decentralized– that is, more of the important decisions need to be taken at the local level. The individual cd not possibly have any control over a global govt and of course we oppose that. It’s the fact that so many of those who betrayed us utterly during covid are also, with a few exceptions, the ones most vociferously and uncritically promoting the various war narratives that makes me most wary of them. It’s hard to see how anyone can avoid seeing the obvious high level cooption of most BRICS nations into the covid scam, and impossible to believe anyone could not see how this must make us very skeptical of these highly convenient and strange wars that seem tailored to assist with the agenda we got to know about courtesy of Schwab and WEF. And yet the likes of Ritter, Ehret and too many others don’t just reject these factors, they either ignore or misrepresent them, or present frankly absurd and unbelievable labyrinthine arguments about “bio weapons” and other nonsense simply to avoid having to admit that the BRICS were just as deep into the covid lie as the West. Why are they doing this Penelope? I don’t like to think badly of people, but I believe these people are either deep in denial – or worse. Either way, I find it hard to put any weight on their “analysis” of these wars when so often they simply repeat bulletins from various war ministries or press agencies without question or criticism. They seem to entirely believe anything, however implausible, coming from the BRICS nations, as if they truly believe only the West has propaganda or covert agendas. How can one deal rationally with such a POV? Note to self: This is the best Off-guardian article Ive read for ages. Well-researched, reasoned and formulated. Oh come on, it’s 20,000 words of butt hurt. Would rather read Iain or Colin or Kit any day All articles deserve merit, the author has taken his time and researched into the subject/s, to bring it to you – if you have nothing good to say about the article – don’t say anything at all. Today we have a bipolar world with the US and PR China, as disrupters Trump and Xi messed up Kissinger’s One World Government of ruthless worker exploitation in China via Mao and rogue capitalism from Wall street. Apple % co loved it; max profits for zero environmental complaints inside China. What all above and below should be supporting is more poles than two: Russia, India, an EEC etc. So Trump and Xi ARE working together — to defeat capitalism? Wow that’s great info bruv, thanks. People seem to be struggling with what “all in it together”, multipolarity, NWO means. They see “fake war” and assume that means no bombs, no death. And they keep assuming that even after being told otherwise a lot of times. But let’s try once more. Let me quote from an X poster – “Geopolitical conflicts and alliances between Oceania, Eastasia, and Eurasia are just fabrications created by the ruling Party to deceive & control the populations. Wars = engineered as catalysts for sweeping societal changes (major stepping stones, or milestones on the road to total enslavement) on the world stage that would otherwise be unthinkable to the public. These transformations serve only the globalist rulers (not tied to nations).” No, this does not mean there is no bloodshed. It means the bloodshed does not happen for the reasons being advertized. It means the warring sides have agreed that killing a few of each other’s 99%-ers is a useful “sacrifice” right now for what they probably would call “the greater good”. They see us as children who need to be led into a fully controlled, managed, impoverished, surveilled existence with lies and fakery, because if they told us the truth we “wouldn’t understand”. They know that we can’t be persuaded to give up our freedom and go cold and hungry without a “good” reason, so they create one. Covid was the first try. Now it’s war, with climate change as an add-on. Basically they’re throwing stuff at the wall until enough sticks for them to get us compliant and on board. ? they see us as lesser than animals. There horses get treated better than some of us humans American author best known for his 2004 book,Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. ? John Perkins. Had a copy for about twenty years. Imagine the Billions Trump The Resolute’s close associates will make funding the rebuilding of Iran after Trump The Resolute destroys Iran’s de-sal plants and energy infrastructure… There’s killings to be made from Disaster Capitalism’s rampages… https://escapekey.substack.com/p/kushner-and-witkoff The Iran ‘Build Back Better’ Project sponsored by Trump & Co… Jesus man stop with the Trump derangement. It’s not about Trump. Trump is just the disposable clown programed to get the Left to hate him and the Right to excuse anything done in his name. Focus on the guys pulling his strings. Name the names.? My money is on Svengali. I don’t think we’ll ever know names. That’s the point. And indeed what good would it do to know names? You might as well ask for the names of the cogs in a machine or the microcircuits in a computer. The power structure is very ancient and the individuals functioning inside it at any one time are all entirely replaceable. Even at the most rarified reaches. The Kissinger World Order: it’s just a rebranding from “New” to “Multipolar” – and it’s pushed by Alex Jones and Zero Hedge! — https://web.archive.org/web/20210802152229/https://www.newswars.com/kissinger-warns-washington-accept-new-multipolar-global-system-or-face-a-pre-wwi-geopolitical-situation Newswars Monday, August 2, 2021 Kissinger Warns Washington: Accept New Multipolar Global System Or Face A Pre-WWI Geopolitical Situation By Zero Hedge Saturday, April 10, 2021 Kissinger’s career is washed in blood when we remember his backing of Pakistan during Bangladesh’s War of Independence despite the massacre of hundreds of thousands of people and mass rape; orchestrated a military coup in Chile to remove democratically elected Allende in favor of the Pinochet dictatorship; tacitly supported Indonesia’s mass killing of hundreds of thousands of East Timorese; and, blessed Turkey’s invasion of northern Cyprus that led to 200,000 Greek refugees without a right of return – among many other things. However, his most recent statement about the U.S. and the international system is actually a mature proposal that would be beneficial for world peace if the Biden administration accepts his advice that the global order is changing. It is unlikely that Washington is ready to unilaterally end its hard and soft power aggression as it falsely believes it can maintain a unipolar order. It is always difficult for Great Powers to accept that the world has changed, especially when it is to their detriment. The behavior of the Biden administration, which deliberately uses threatening and inappropriate rhetoric, demonstrates that it will not rationally accept a multipolar world system, especially since Russophobia and Sinophobia are on the rise. By the way, many of the innocent people killed or raped during the 1971 Bangladesh War of Independence were Hindus—especially women. That is something often mentioned in accounts from survivors and researchers, though it is not always widely discussed outside the region. Even today, Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan still face various forms of persecution and discrimination. As someone who follows South Asian history/news quite closely, I find it surprising how little this aspect is known internationally compared with other genocides. It does make one wonder how narratives are shaped, what receives global attention, and what remains largely outside the public conversation—at least until more information eventually comes to light. On a broader note, it sometimes feels as though the international system is heading toward another period of major conflict before a truly multipolar world order emerges. History has shown that large shifts in global power often come with upheaval, though one can only hope that such transitions might occur without the catastrophe of another world war. The Killing of Intellectuals in the Shadow of Henry Kissinger, in an old Bangladeshi newspaper. Nixon didn’t get much concessions from Indira Gandhi so he turned to desperate Mao. and Brandon O connell? An real American should never accept less than the whole but the all thing! Adolf Hitler was financed primarily by Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, and the Bank of England. American and English bankers were behind WWI and WWII was basically a continuation of the WWI. A common refrain is “all wars are banker’s wars”, almost an axiom. So, if that’s applied to the present situation, Iran is a banker’s war. Who controls the banks? “I know, know! Pick me!” Think about what you’re actually saying here. The Jews financed Hitler, who proceeded to disenfranchise Jewish people and murder many of them, whose deaths the wealthy Jews then exploited for political gain. Supposing you’re right, and I’m not saying you’re not, you have to confront the fact wealthy Jews (the bankers) had absolutely no problem exploiting and murdering non-wealthy Jews (the 99%), just as wealthy Gentiles have no problem exploiting and murdering non-wealthy Gentiles. So, are Jews the problem here? Or are wealthy exploiters the problem? And do the 99% of Jews not have more common interest with the 99% of Gentiles than either have with the wealthy exploiters? Is it more helpful to define these exploiters by their religion or ethnicity, or by their wealth? Yep. The 1% are alive and slaughtering, despite the ‘Occupy’ fiasco. They have two things in common: Insatiable greed and psychopathy. What if the the whole thing was a fabricated history? And exploited to create the country called Israel. You’re on the right track. I would be genuinely interested in your answer to Lindisfarne’s question, which you entirely ignored. I’ll copy/paste for clarity. “So, are Jews the problem here? Or are wealthy exploiters the problem? And do the 99% of Jews not have more common interest with the 99% of Gentiles than either have with the wealthy exploiters? Is it more helpful to define these exploiters by their religion or ethnicity, or by their wealth?” In order, generally yes, sort of also, and no, not Israeli Jews. I think there is a zionist problem on the planet and it needs to be addressed. I also think there is a wealth disparity problem on the planet and it needs to be addressed. I think if you look at the history of Jews and financialization over the centuries, you’ll find your answer. Fantastic article. The best ever. I have one reservation though: Propaganda often relies on keeping a word with favorable connotations, while changing the concept for which it stands. It’s generally better to defend the concept that the propagandist wishes to blur– by insisting upon a correct definition of the word & its concept. If they begin to define freedom as censorship, surveillance, guaranteed income, etc it’s obvious that we ought not give up the word “freedom.” Instead we insist upon a correct definition, context and understanding of the concept for which the word “freedom” stands. Perhaps we ought do the same thing about “multipolar.” It actually means the opposite of unipolar & it means that many, or at least more than one has power, that all power is NOT centered in just one country. Multipolar is deceitfully being used to refer to a Federation in which all lose a part of their power. Further, the context is that these Federations are to become a single global govt– radically opposite from “multipolar.” Most people will hear the word “multipolar”‘ as opposite to unipolar & therefore feel positive towards it. I think it wd be best to defend the word/concept/definition– and to point out the propagandist’s deceit. “Hear. Hear !” Well said… But most have never looked up the meaning of a word in a dictionary. Subconsciously they absorb the current meaning of a word by its usage, especially by how the words are used by the corporate propaganda media…. When this media begins to (subtly) give a word a (slightly) different meaning most are not conscious of it… You get an idea of how the process works when you read people who’ve never read in their life anything Marx* wrote expound their knowledge of his writings… Their knowledge seems to come to them magically – out of the air… ** e.g Yes, I’m still trying to figure that out. Not sure what I’m supposed to be rooting for here. The author’s message is: They are all bad. His subtext is: China and Russia too. Maybe he can convince by writing an article twice as long. LOL, made me laugh, man. Havent you noticed ? Off-g is saving on postage stamps – only one delivery per week. So naturally the articles are gonna be longer… (Though 0ff-g will lose those with short attention spans, AHDH etc)… Where did OG say that? So you gonna discriminate us only because we have AHDH? You must be either a racist or a self-hating doo.! ADHD, goof. ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). AHDH (attention hyperactivity disorder howling). Recognize it, accept it. Feel empathy. Hey Man, I think it’s ADHD. And just when you were making your point (giggle). I tell you, I’m suffering from ADHD myself w all the too-much that’s happening. I remember when there was this magazine (remember them? all glossy and all?) back in the 80s, I think it was called Spy, that used to, you know, satirize celebrities and politicians and policies and whatnot, they usual fare, and it was mildly funny. But then, they slowly slid over into bad-mouthing the magazine publishing industry, other magazines, their editors and writers, byzantine magazine publishing deals, etc, etc. until the majority of their articles were, essentially, for all intents and purposes, about themselves. ‘I’ve been thinking a lot about that question that you [Jeffrey Epstein] asked Bill Gates, “how do we get rid of poor people as a whole,” and i have an answer / comment.’ – Hollywood producer Barry Josephson… Well, just in case Trump The Resolute goes ahead and destroys Iran’s de-sal plants and energy infrastructure. i’m getting in extra vittles – mostly canned muck – because that dastardly deed will usher in huge food shortages, causing mass starvation. I’m sure They will exploit the situation to cull a lot of us poor folk and, as A Useless Eater, i’m not gonna go down easily… I’m gonna thumb my nose at Them down to my last can of canned muck ! https://trendcompass.substack.com/p/ridding-the-world-of-poor-people NB “Canned Muck” is what Alf Garnett was paid to call any other brand than Campbells canned ‘foods’ in an old Aussie TV advert… Hey les, what’s canned “muck”? Oh, my bad, didn’t read the end. Figured. Anyway, I had 48 cans of canned vege’s and black bean soup delivered today. Ya, shit’s getting real. May not be nutritional, but sure is Tasty !! You could get away with aspersing competition in the days before woke. Campbells was calling all competition to its canned ‘foods’, ‘canned muck’. The problem with poor people is double. Poor people dont have money to give, why we the rich need to give them some = double up. Thats why poor people is a BIG problem. Note it is claimed that he is wrong quoted and has denied he said it.. But the reference nevertheless fits into what we see and hear in our reality. This is what Jacques Attali is said to have said in 1981 book, who was then an advisor to François Mitterrand: “The future will be about finding a way to reduce the population. We start with the old, because as soon as they exceed 60-65 years, people live longer than they produce and that costs society dearly. Then the weak, then the useless that do not help society because there will always be more of them, and above all, ultimately, the stupid. Euthanasia targeting these groups; Euthanasia will have to be an essential tool in our future societies, in all cases. Of course we will not be able to execute people or build camps. We get rid of them by making them believe that it is for their own good. Overpopulation, and mostly useless, is something that is too costly economically. Socially, too, it is much better when the human machine comes to an abrupt standstill than when it gradually deteriorates. Neither will we be able to test millions upon millions of people for their intelligence, you bet that! We will find or cause something a pandemic targeting certain people, a real economic crisis or not, a virus affecting the old or the fat, it doesn’t matter, the weak will succumb to it, the fearful and stupid will believe in it and seek treatment. We will have made sure that treatment is in place, treatment that will be the solution. The selection of idiots then takes care of itself: You go to the slaughter by yourself. ” [The future of life – Jacques Attali, 1981] Interviews with Michel Salomon, Les Visages de l’avenir collection, éditions Seghers. “ Off topic …. The latest psy-op in Derby, UK. Note the lone shoe – an oft-used prop in the rapidly expanding psy-op industry. https://gemmaodoherty.substack.com/p/derby-car-drill-code-for-15-minute Anyone who uses phrases like “Jew K” is either knowingly working for the intelligence agencies and aiding in getting all alternative media labeled “white supremacist” or is being unknowingly controlled by intel agents for the same end, or is too stupid to get out of their own way. Whichever she makes her substack into a honeypot. I have to agree with you Pamela, though I do believe most terror attacks are now fake. I only need a single shoe in the photo to believe in my government. The EU is multipolar: the old members bicker and bicker with the newer members; the eastern ones bicker with the western ones. Keeping up with who’s the latest to demand ‘reparations’ from another is an effort. And Greece got stomped on when its multipolar friends ganged up on it a few years back. (Not much heard from Greece since)… “It’s better to have him in the tent pissing out than having him outside pissing into the tent”(LBJ ?) If memory serves the Europeans didn’t really vote in the EU, but it was accomplished thru some form of trickery– rather reminiscent of the Federal Reserve. I voted for EU solely because I could get more in EU, than in my own shithole country. No, the EU is a federated structure in which each formerly-sovereign country lost a LARGE part of its sovereignty. PART 2 – (part 1 should be nearby somewhere!) Here’s a reading that, in my opinion, fits the observable evidence at least as well: What if the West is genuinely losing relative power, and the narrative that ‘this was all planned’ is itself a response to that loss? Think about what that framing achieves. ‘We planned this’ is far more comfortable than ‘we were outcompeted’ because: The East has no real agency in the story the piece relays to us – it’s either a Western creation or a Western puppet. The counter-reading is simpler: Western unipolarity peaked in the 1990s and has been declining since. China’s rise is real and largely the product of Chinese strategic decisions. Russia’s pushback against NATO is driven by genuine security interests. The Global South’s turn toward BRICS is rational self-interest. Trump’s tariffs aren’t part of a grand conspiracy; they’re the flailing of a hegemon that lost its manufacturing base and is struggling to compete. If the author’s core thesis is correct, we should see BRICS nations voluntarily surrendering political sovereignty. We should see Putin and Xi reducing their personal power. We don’t. We see the opposite. What we can actually see is escalating real resource competition – rare earths, chips, energy pipelines. We see Western institutions losing ground in the Global South. We see NATO expanding and military postures hardening. Doesn’t that pattern fit genuine decline being managed, rather than a secret plan being executed? None of this means I’m asserting the author is wrong on much of what he details – in fact I have no doubt at all that his experience and knowledge far outpace mine. Western elites did fund the Bolsheviks. They did transfer technology to China. They do use multilateral institutions to project transnational power. But the leap from ‘Western elites have historically shaped global development’ to ‘everything happening now is their plan’ is one of faith and unsupported by the evidence – regardless of experience and knowledge. To be clear, I’m not stating that the author has a deliberate agenda to push a ‘Western cope’ narrative. I don’t believe they’re intentionally trying to disguise the organic decline of Western hegemony as some brilliant, 5D-chess master plan – that would be pure speculation on my part. But the alternative view – that Western decline is substantially real and unplanned, and that the East’s rise represents genuine agency rather than Western stage management, is a coherent position supported by observable evidence. The piece neither explores it nor appears to consider it. That omission, in a thesis built on the demand that we question every narrative, is worth questioning in itself. In summary: The very real possibility is not that of the conclusion of the piece, but is instead that we see the West is simply losing control of a chaotic, genuinely competitive multipolar world – a collision of rival oligarchies, all scrambling to survive a transition they can’t fully control – and narratives to influence our perspectives on this will continue to come at us thick and fast. Good points Observe. The Chinese are renowned for their long term planning, while the West is more obsessed with short term economic balance sheets. After all, it took a while to build the Great Wall. Absolutely Johnny, and you’re point is well founded – As Kissenger elaborated in his book ‘On China’ – and I’m very much simplifying in summary but along the lines of: USA strategy is akin to Chess = hierarchical dominance and direct confrontation leading to total victory, shorter game. Versus China strategy of ‘Go’ (weiqi) = Encirclement, power of position, cumulative victories, longer game. I think the important point is always to remember that whatever the outcome, it appears there has been – for a very long time – and continues to be, a class with the capital to invest in all sides and for whom the identity of the winner matters less than the rules of the game that follow. Though there’s probably an argument to say that this class would prefer a messy multipolar world where they can play all sides. That a world in which China is the head would be their least favoured outcome because China controls and discplines investment – in fact severely punishes anyone stepping out of line; capital becomes a tool of the state. Multipolarity on the other hand is a dream for transnational capital – leverage, competition and the race to the bottom that capital loves. To be fair, any unipolar hegemon restricts that, but a Chinese one in particular would effectively capture it. I’m not sure how from our distant perspective we would see Xi and Putin losing personal power, even were it happening. But I also disagree that this would be a necessary part of the “multipolar” world. I think some other commenter recently spoke of it being a federal structure with much local autonomy granted, provided the local warlord played by the big boss men’s rules. I think of it as being like a collection of local dons who all rule their own patch while also being answerable to the Godfather. If they play the game they reap much personal power and reward, but if they don’t they are replaced quickly. I think we all know that structure already applies in the West, but the surprise for us during covid was to see it also infiltrated the east more than we ever imagined, and the other discovery was that the US president was just another local don and the real power existed at a higher tier we had previously not guessed at. What they call a “supranational” level of power equally managing east and west. So while I appreciate your thoughtful points I don’t entirely agree with them. I do believe the West is losing control as you say, but by design of the higher tier of power that has decided to dissolve the US empire and make the most powerful BRICS nations the new first world. I see what you’re trying to get at but this quote and similar – and the article effectively claims the same – I argue is simply not supportable in the geopolitical evidence. What you’re referring to – and what most people mix up with direct political power – is economic investment and levels of acceptance. In other words, for example, US Asset Manager (eg, BlackRock) investing in Chinese military companies. It happens, it’s real. This mainly benefits two parties: the class with the capital doing the investing (whom I believe you refer to as ‘supranational’) and China. US security – and aligned interests – at the national level are undermined. None of that means that China/Xi is being controlled politically – or ceding any power at all. What you say is by design, I say is in reality a failure to understand the long-term consequences of short-term actions of self-interest. Western governments have allowed neoliberal capitalist dogma – in combination with Transnational Capitalist Class pursuits – to undermine their own national interests. China does not allow such things. This is one of the key differences that defies a conclusion of ‘they’re all controlled or ‘in it together’. I would doubt my own points on this as soon as evidence shows that actual political control is being ceded by China (or others) in the interests of the USA, or a Global One World Government. You say we would not see it from our distant perspective, but I disagree. It would be highly visible and the changes would be unmistakeable. We’d witness a series of dramatic transformations across its domestic and foreign policy; the dismantling of state-owned enterprises in favor of a fully open market economy – like the West; relinquishing control over key industries. It would be a seismic shift and a clear ceding of state power by China. The point is, it’s just not possible to have China become not-China without it being completely obvious that it’s happening. Instead we see the opposite happening time and again. We witness actions taken by Xi that highlight assertion of authority and control in response to capital pushing too far, and a willingness to retaliate when he perceives that his actual power is perhaps being undermined – See the ‘Jack Ma’ saga (co-founder of Alibaba). Ma gave a public speech comparing the Chinese state-dominated banks to “pawn shops”, essentially challenging the authority of the CCP. The reaction was swift and unequivocal: cancelled IPO, anti-trust investigations, Ma disappeared from public view for months and billions of dollars of investors’ money was lost. China’s state-owned enterprises are getting larger, not smaller. Privatisation has been effectively halted. That’s not a signal of things moving the way they should in your scenario. China welcomes private investment, but only if it serves their national interests and strategies; the opposite of what has happened in Western nations for decades – and we’re seeing the results of that short-sightedness in the geopolitical sphere today. I would happily entertain the idea that this class/group of capitalists run everything – they all work together across all nations, the enemies aren’t really enemies and there’s one goal in mind: a big shared pie of One World Government. However, the twists and turns we have to go through to make it true mean it’s the least likely option to explain what’s really going on. The simplest, most evidence-based observations are usually the right ones – we don’t need to contort the world to something it likely isn’t. Power exists in pockets, some much larger than others and it takes different forms – and the players are all there that we name, no doubt. However, the actions they take and the plans they make are highly unlikely to be controlled and monopolised across all nations. Back in my TV-Watching Days i’d often watch The Boxing. I understood that the opponents neither liked nor disliked each other – they werent love matches’ At the start of each fight the opponents would give each other The Evil Eye, tap gloves in a friendly gesture, then the fight was on… And after they’d earned their pay punching shit out of each other to decide who was Top Dog, and one was nominated The Winner, they always hugged each other, said a few nice words to each other, and that was it… It didnt take much to figure “They’re all in it together !” PART 1: This piece was a compelling read – and that’s precisely why it demands some interrogation. I enjoy dissecting rich arguments like this, and I like to share my thoughts when the original premise and conclusions are worth exploring – and this piece certainly is. Whether I can agree with the author’s position or offer alternative points, it matters, because always – despite many commenters’ beliefs and apparent buy-ins without deeper inquiry – there is something to dissect, perspectives to assess, and logic to be tested to see if other positions are possible within or without the framework of the original thesis. So, I want to give you some food for thought at least, even if you’re ‘all-in’ on the author’s conclusions. My basis for critique: With this basis in mind, I raise these bones of contention with the piece: 1. The author rightly notes that all nations are run by oligarchies. But oligarchies are fiercely competitive. Putin and Xi already have near-absolute control over their own massive populations, militaries, and resources. A World Government would require them to submit to outside rules, shared committees and diluted power. Historically, dictators and oligarchs don’t voluntarily surrender their sovereignty just to get a ‘seat at a larger table.’ Sure, they can and do share economic interests, like international banking and investment – and you’ll find no disagreement from me that capital is amoral and borderless; that profit-seeking routinely undermines national strategic interest – but that’s a very far distance from ever agreeing to share a government. 2. The author highlights that the West, Russia, and China are all moving toward technocracy, digital IDs, and surveillance states. But this doesn’t mean we must conclude they’re reading from the same secret script. It may simply show that authoritarian control looks the same everywhere because the technology is the same. In other words, nations are converging on similar systems because those systems work to maintain power, not because a hidden ‘Syndicate’ is forcing them to. 3. The theory in the piece is set up so that it can’t be proven wrong – and that’s where it runs into quite some trouble. If East-West cooperation proves the plan, and East-West conflict also proves the plan (because it’s theatre), and critics of multipolarity are Pentagon ops, and supporters of multipolarity are paid pied pipers, and Western decline is deliberate levelling, and Eastern rise was engineered – then nothing can disprove the thesis. When every possible aspect is twisted to confirm it, we’re no longer dealing in logical analysis – we’re dealing in beliefs. 4. By arguing that all sides are fake, all resistance is manufactured, and everyone is controlled opposition, the author – perhaps inadvertently – creates one of two mindsets the ruling class loves: either total apathy or total paralysis. If there are no real geopolitical shifts and no genuine alternatives, most people will give up. If you don’t want to give up, it doesn’t matter because who are you going to turn to? They’re all in on it. 5. If Western hegemony is already widely seen as oppressive and overreaching – and all of us here know that view is growing by the day, even in mainstream discourse – why would its architects need an elaborate fake East-West plot to disguise world government? The author says the Global South needs to feel that multipolarity is their own idea. But this gives so little credit to the Global South’s political classes that it’s hard to sustain. They don’t need to be tricked into joining BRICS. They join because it offers development financing, trade alternatives, and leverage against the dollar system. After decades of IMF ‘structural adjustment’, the motivation to join is obvious without any hidden hand required. Wonderful analysis. Except it does not mention once the usual suspects, who are the drop of ink in the international bowl of water. Your selling the exact same negative view point. If your going use other peoples works, then credit them accordingly. 2004 book,Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. John Perkin. You’re joking, right? There were many people highly critical of neoliberal structural adjustment programs (SAPs) long before Perkins arrived on the scene with his mea culpa. I was teaching critically on this subject in my university classes in the years before his first book. I disagree on your second point. As mentioned by TRT, much was long known and suspected about neolib strategy in this regard and I wasn’t thinking of any book in particular while musing about it. On your first point.. Well, look, I dont think that in the grand schemes of any hegemon our wellbeing is of ultimate concern. Regardless of outcome we will get a settlement that isn’t true freedom by any measure and may be better or worse or the same – in terms of standards of living – depending on who holds the controls. But, in the context of the article and my response – if there’s negotiating to be done and compromises to be made – then its likely more worthwhile if people have some idea of who holds power and some clarity, if possible, about the present state. I’d say that the paramount concern, though, is for us all to take care of our local, more influenceable lives and each other – all the better to be as prepared and resilient for whenever required. I very much applaud your reasoned analysis although I don’t wholly agree. Please continue to post such thoughtful comments! And the last line of that dangerous song? 🎼 And the world will live as one. Is this the ‘one’ John imagined? “Imagine no possessions” – hmmm now where have we heard that before? I predict in 6 months we’re going to know exactly who is doing what and when. We’ll know all the collaborations, what goes on in the secret meetings, how they synchronize their agendas, how they fake virtually everything, and even when they all shit and eat. And we’ll know all that because we all have cell phones and computers and use the internet and stuff like that. We’re getting really close to hitting the old nail on the head. And then we’ll know enough to take em down. Take em out, man. Can’t wait, this is getting exciting. Freedom is just around the corner, baby! Instead of being butt hurt and sullen because the article upsets you why not point up what you disagree with and why? Do you think he’s wrong in thinking all nations are run by gangsters answerable to supranational power structures? What’s the alternative you favor? I am genuinely interested to know. I’ve made my position clear previously. It was a sarcastic comment on the continued effort by this blog to claim they’re all in it together and the Iran war is fake and it’s all for the Great Reset. Yes, I think that’s bullshit and very compartmentalized thinking. I think every nation shops at the same fucking store, but that doesn’t mean they’re all in on some grand conspiracy to create the New World Order. There are those seeking that, i.e., primarily the zionists which goes back to before WWI, look it up, and the NWO is only possible if there is control of almost everything major, like the media, big Pharma, big Ag, political systems, etc., and there is only one element that is approaching that capability, the zionists. As far as an alternative. I’m in favor of a global people’s revolution against the rich bastards, especially the zio’s, that control us and a global manifesto for real democracy. There is only one answer as ever for the human race. We all have only one life to live. The issue is freedom. That should be the goal. The French and Russian revolutions were supposed to be people’s revolutions, yet didn’t work out great for the people. Run in the opposite direction if you see the term ‘revolution(ary)’ thrown in there. It will be a steered and controlled event or organisation with the very people you think you’re revolting against running the show. Same as ‘grassroots’, now a co-opted term used by astroturf outfits. Well, how about a non-controlled revolution then. Or we can just sit on out butts debating who controls what while they laugh all the way to the bank. Which is what we do now. I mean, if everything is coopted, then there’s no use in doing anything, right? Of course do something. Very few people here are interested in solutions -you and I have had this discussion before. Remember the agenda is global to local. Therefore… I also said the way to achieve things is to do it locally. Find out where community meetings are taking place, it is these that are being steered to get local buy-in for Agenda 2030 policies. Also, go to your town hall meetings, school board meetings etc. Make local people aware, throws spanners in the works of the agendas. Or else you can just wait for the controllers off the shelf ‘revolution’. 😂 I enjoy your sarcasm Albert – I can be quite the sarcastic bastard myself sometimes – it makes a point very well when needed! Wow! What can I say? Thank God he has experienced this maze of insanity and can clearly recite it back to us. As we can see, many here are also susceptible to intellectual and ideological intrigue. As am I. There is no lack of loose threads to pull on and become absorbed into endless interconnections, conflicts and intentions. For me, this description of spies and counter spies reads like a John le Carré novel. As I remember in the seven part TV adaptation of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy, the main character, George, is caught and trapped in one of these nets of intrigue, and his wife says, “Poor George…”. Is she involved somehow? The possibilities are endless and unprovable. Le Carre himself believed wholeheartedly in the mission of MI6 and anti-communism and probably would approve of the real world description we have from Moric.My personal take is we now live in a CIA/MI6 confusionist ether of “non-kinetic” psyop-psych warfare that screens and dilutes meaningful opposition. A vast misdirection of any thought of public self-governing energy. It’s a counter-insurgency op that benefits all the PTB so they all invest in it heavily. And, there’s lots of money to be made by the capitalist ideologue players. They all want more, more, and more, mfkg money, like all in their “class”. And this is an ideal way to have endless fun adding millions to their millions while keeping the inferior weakies in their cubicles. The point of all this confusion, besides disabling confusion, is to create an environment where people are unable to envision just exactly what it is they do want to replace this worldwide oligarchic cartel capitalist totalitarianism. All the veiled packaging… republics,”democracies”, communism, socialism, conservatism, liberalism, libertarianism, dictatorships, “strong-manisms”, terrorism, is just so much plastic wordplay to further confuse and bamboozle the undecided. And the mandatory wars and armaments waste are the ultimate “strange attractors” (coined in String Theory) to make it all, come to the boil. Thank you, Hrvoje Morić, for bringing this conundrum so clearly into focus. For me, what I think we need to do is: 1) stay aware of the manifestations of this massive psyop and, 2) maintain the majority of our consciousness and creativity coming up with viable decentralized, self-sufficient, regional and localized self governing societies of public consent. Imho. When people are confused they dont know how to act, cant decide what to do. For Example: Sowing confusion about the mounting evidence that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer was deliberately employed by the US tobacco industry for decades in order to stay legislators from restricting / banning cigarettes. The industry paid Scientists to produce research that created doubt about the evidence of a link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. The doubts they created enabled the industry to continue making a killing for many decades… Sowing confusion to undermine confidence that would lead to actions has become the main function of the corporate propaganda media. (President Trump The Resolute is a master of the method)… From a 1969 Tobacco Industry Internal Memo: ‘Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with “the body of fact” that exists in the mind of the general public.’… Simply, “Create doubt” … I just saw a movie from 1949 where Kirk Douglas mentions cigarettes causing cancer. Love the LeCarre analogy. If I had not read/watched LeCarre, and the endless spy/cia/mi5/6, I don’t know if I would understand how deep the “deep state” goes. Nor would I have believed it. But I do believe it. People can be ruthless. Individually and collectively. And when they don’t want to get their hands dirty for the cause, they hire those that will. Or blackmail those that will. Of course, just when you think you’ve figured it out…. Exactly Judith! That is the point I keep trying to make. Don’t get caught up in their false dramas, no matter how pertinent they seem. There are infinite solutions to what the PTB want to make us believe are intractable problems. The confusion they create is a constant Kryptonite forcefield that is impenetrable. It’s also like a magnet for people to imagine as possible to untangle and unravel into reform. It’s not and never will be. The best part, the easy part, like the Zen of not-doing, is the fact that all of the problems that need to be changed, reconfigured, redone, newly create, are wide open. We can turn our backs on their Spectacle 45° of reality and pick from the remaining 270° of reality where there are zero issues fogged by intrigue and ambiguity about solutions. Within this 270° mess of a “civilization” they tell you… “Oh, we just can’t do that” and walk away. It’s up to us to come up with solutions they cannot squirm out of while having full public observation of the exchange. Believe me it’s coming. The PTB have fkd up everything so obviously, it’s in everyone’s face. Inescapable. I don’t want to make a 100 paragraph bucket list of plausible solutions here. They are obvious. Here’s a few of them archived… https://sandys.art/peoples_policy+budget_directives_ballot_2018.html When you point these obvious solutions to them, they say, “Oh, we just can’t do that”. That’s right THEY can’t, THEY won’t, because they and their constituents lose their exclusive Casino-Cloud-Utopia-for-the-top-5%. The idea that this super minority class of human beings can dictate reality to 95% of humanity is OUR first ideological wall to breach. The PTB have created a mindset among the public that these obvious good-solutions are doomed because… “that will never happen”. If “management” says “Oh, we just can’t do that” and the “employees” say “that will never happen”. It will never happen. However, they are NOT management. We are NOT employees. This is, by their own propaganda, a “democracy” of public consent. WE DO have right & own the whole thing. THEY are supposed to do the bidding of humanity, that’s why they are ALLOWED authority. We have the right, we have the mass, of authority making consent and can withdraw that consent with wet signature finality. The most important thing here is we have no other option. They, any leader class, has proven themselves permanently deadly and dysfunctional within capitalist authoritarian culture that now prevails on Earth. We are self-ruled through what we think is real and possible. A spine fortifying epiphany that needs to happen, sooner than later. “a spine fortifying epiphany”. I love it. O.G. and all its authors have promoted most of the indie lot with which Hrvoje has fallen out with, and most of the indie lot have all promoted O.G. I found you via them. Seems like a “pissing contest.” I won’t be told who I can watch ; you’re acting like MSM. Can’t you do the amicable thing and call each other to discuss it rather than try to get members of the audience to pick sides by defaming each other? What awesome levels of introspective narcissism it must require to turn this entire 10,000 word article about geopolitics and media by a man you don’t even know into some sort of attempt to control what telly you watch. That made me laugh, though I do dislike to see any kind of sniping. Oh contrare, there are huge sections concerned with bad-mouthing alternative publications and their writers and publishers. Dear Off Guardian I have changed my email. Fillylilly Unlike you lemonsour, I wont be rude. The comment clearly explained that being alternative and different means being professional and not airing your linen in public so readers start getting paranoid that everyone is shill. What is the point of not being like MSM media when you’re just going to act like them?? So much for listening to one another and discussing a variety of viewpoints to find a solution…. In fairness did you comment on the articles Hrvoje quotes where he was persistently defamed, and did you tell them they were “acting like the MSM”? If not are you not being rather one-sided? You understand the point made Hannah. “acting like the MSM”? is the issue. Professionalism is what is needed. O.G. and all its authors have promoted most of the indie lot with which Hrvoje has fallen out with, and most of the indie lot have all promoted O.G. I found this site via them and they held you all in high-esteem. Firstly, I need to be clear I don’t work for OG and am not affiliated with them in any way. I’m just a private person, so please don’t assume I’m speaking for them. I did understand your point of course, and I don’t entirely disagree, but it seems to me that in order to be truly fair it should apply to both sides. According to the citations made by Hvroje he has been fairly comprehensively slandered and misrepresented by certain people and publications, and he is simply responding in this article. So if he is guilty of “acting like the MSM”, then surely they are too? I’m sorry but that was my only point. I don’t work for OG and have no idea about any internal politics. Fwiw I have read some fairly slanderous public attacks on them from some people, including one mentioned in your article, but I don’t want to get into a back and forth there as it’s really not my place! Hmm… this was an interesting article to read. I do agree with the basic premise! However, I have to disagree with you that this is COMPLETELY intentional. In reality, big business is an international enterprise and global leaders have to meet the needs of their respective in order to provide jobs for their peoples. That being said, I do think big business is intentionally pushing for this even as popular guest speakers on mainstream Youtube, newspaper, media sources are like ‘puppets’ who will only determine how the ‘face’ of this new global order will appear. It is also important to note most, if not all, of the alliances you noted in this article have been prompted by opportunism from different priorities at different points in time (e.g. Tucker Carlson and the interview with Prof. Jiang). For instance, due to a certain viewpoint, they will platform for them based on whatever agenda that they have as well as who their viewpoint serves. This can occur due to n number of reasons, be it socio-cultural, economic, religious, etc. So, in an effort to create a multipolar world, there will definitely be a lot of bloodshed, as recent events show us today. My main question, though, at the end, is this: what will this multipolar world look like? A lot like the world today? Or a different beast entirely? And, if the elite continue to control stuff behind the scenes, despite public protests after the Epstein Files (of which still has NOT been fully released yet!), how can people fight back so, they can have a future in this multipolar world? There is so much narrative warfare today so, people would have to truly unite in the most ideal scenario. I have a feeling that whatever world will come up, after this one, will be beyond my wildest imagination. I just hope it will be a good one. ‘I just hope it is a good one’ … Great epitaph ! Weird scenes in the (global) canyon 2.0. is a good description of the miasma of the internet. Wow. An article about everything all at once. FYI “The Soviets or Russians have always also been globalist minded.” Trotskyism was globalist. Stalinism was nationalist. ‘everything all at once’ A good description. If writing is to be accessible to those who have been raised on a diet of soundgrabs Twitter feeds the message will not get through. Almost from the first bat, I noted ” … That has been my experience ….., and visiting Russia.” Lets revisit the state of play in the Russian Federation, after the collapse of the USSR, in the 90s and early 2000s. The economy was in freefall having contracted approximately 40%, the Ruble to Dollar exchange rate had gone from about 1:1 to approaching 4000:1, life expectancy for men was 57 years of and old women were begging on the streets since their state pension was almost worthless. ” The Russian mortality crisis of 1990–1995 represents the most precipitous decline in national life expectancy ever recorded in the absence of war, oppression, famine, or major disease. (PDF) Demographic Implications of the Russian Mortality Crisis Moreover, Moscow resembled Chicago of the 1920’s. Indeed, the City of London/ Wall street marionettes were economically raping the Russian Federation to the point it was verging on total collapse which has been the goal of the West for centuries. “..Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s real crime was not stealing Russia’s assets for a pittance in the bandit era of Yeltsin. His real crime is that he was a key part of a Western intelligence operation to dismantle and destroy what remains of Russia as a functioning state… .. at the tender age of 40 had risen to become the richest man in Russia worth some $15 billion by fraudulent acquisition of state assets during the lawless Yeltsin era. In an auction run by his own bank, Khodorkovsky paid $309 million for Yukos. In 2003 the same company was assessed as worth $45 billion, and not owing to Khodorkovsky’s management genius… ..In 1998, Khodorkovsky had been let free in a US case where he was charged with helping launder $10 billion with his own bank and the Bank of New York. He had very influential friends in the US it appeared… .. Khodorkovsky built some impressive ties in the West . With his new billions in effect stolen from the Russian people, he made some powerful friends. He set up a foundation modeled on US billionaire George Soros ’ Open Society, calling it the Open Russia Foundation. He invited two powerful Westerners to its board—Henry Kissinger and Jacob Lord Rothschild. Then he set about to develop ties with some of the most powerful circles in Washington where he was named to the Advisory Board of the secretive private equity firm, Carlyle Group where he attended board meetings with fellow advisors such as George H.W. Bush and James Baker III.. .. However, the real crime that landed Khodorkovsky behind Russian bars was the fact that he was in the middle of making a US-backed coup d’etat to capture the Russian presidency in planned 2004 Russian Duma elections. Khodorkovsky was in the process of using his enormous wealth to buy enough seats in the coming Duma elections that he could change Russian laws regarding ownership of oil in the ground and of pipelines transporting same. In addition he planned to directly challenge Putin and become Russian President. As part of the horse trade that won Putin the tacit support of the wealthy so-called Russian Oligarchs, Putin had extracted agreement that they be allowed to hold on to their wealth provided they repatriate a share back into Russia and provided they not interfere in domestic Russian politics with their wealth. Most oligarchs agreed, as did Khodorkovsky at the time. They remain established Russian businessmen. Khodorkovsky did not. Moreover, at the time of his arrest Khodorkovsky was in the process of negotiating via his Carlyle friend George H.W. Bush, father of the then-President George W. Bush, the sale of 40% of Yukos to either Condi Rice’s former company, Chevron or ExxonMobil in a move that would have dealt a crippling blow to the one asset left Russia and Putin to use for the rebuilding of the wrecked Russian economy: oil and export via state-owned pipelines to the West for dollars. During the ensuing Russian state prosecution of Yukos, it came to light that Khodorkovsky had also secretly made a contract with London’s Lord Rothschild not merely to support Russian culture via the Open Russia Foundation of Khodorkovsky. In the event of his possible arrest (Khodorkovsky evidently knew he was playing a high-risk game trying to create a coup against Putin) the 40% share of his Yukos stocks would pass into the hands of Lord Rothschild…” The Real Crime of M. Khodorkovsky, by F. William Engdahl Grand Deception The Browder Hoax Alex Krainer Grand Deception The Browder Hoax Alex Krainer : Alex Krainer : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive Finally, lets look at this claim as well in regards to The Russian Federation, ” ….. many will tell you that yes, their government .. cares nothing for its citizenry. “ I would suggest that those who lived in the RF in those times compared to of recent years could sharply disagree with this line. Russian Federation GDP | $2.11T (Est.) | +2.2% growth | (2025) | Economic Data 2010-2025 | Economic Data Encyclopedia No offence, but what does any of that have to do with whether or not the Russian government is coopted by the multipolarists (if that’s a word!). Don’t get me wrong I know all the stuff you are mentioning and I must have recited it a zillion times to people caught up in the anti-Putin hysteria in the 2010s. In fact I started reading OffGuardian back then in around 2014 because it was always reliably cutting through the NATO lies and getting some sanity going. But to me that whole thing changed in 2020 with covid. It was like the blinders came off and I realized an awful lot of the NATO v BRICS stuff was probably just more propaganda to get us to think they were far more in opposition than they were. To me the evidence is overwhelming that, despite these wars we get told about, there are deeper interests, like pushing for world government, that unite both sides. I don’t see how what happened in the 1990s or 2000s changes that. That was a long time ago. Things change in politics, power switches hands and alliances get made and broken. We have to stay up to date and not dwell in the past. Dont tell fibs! “But to me that whole thing changed in 2020 with covid…” Russian Military Reveals New Details About US Biolabs In Ukraine The Russian Federation provided necessary documents which evidenced financial, scientific, technical and personnel support from the United States to the dangerous researches on the territory of Ukraine. The laboratories there carried out operations with components of biological weapons, and where studies of pathogens of particularly dangerous and economically significant infections were carried out. Within the meeting of the UN Security Council, Moscow asked 20 questions about the violation of the requirements of the Convention by Kiev and Washington. As a results, Moscow did not receive any clear answers to its questions… ..Then, Western countries sabotaged the vote on the Security Council resolution on the international investigation of the activities of US biological laboratories… ..As a result of military operations in Ukraine, Russian specialists gained access to a number of Ukrainian biological facilities, in particular to laboratories in the cities of Rubezhnoye, Severodonetsk, Kherson. Russia also achieved the official documentation from these facilities… ..So far, four facilities in the DPR and LPR were checked by Russian specialists. ..On September 12, 2023, lawmakers publicly demanded from the head of the department, William Burns, detailed materials for the work of a special subcommittee aimed to investigate the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic. The US reports available to the Russian military “Assessment of the risk of emerging infections from insectivorous bats in Ukraine and Georgia” revealed that coronavirus studies were conducted from 2016 to 2020. The report notes, “… that during the work on the territory of Ukraine, individuals of bats were identified migrating up to 800 km deep into countries such as Hungary and Russia …”. The Russian military drew attention to the fact that bioinformatics specialists were involved in the research in Ukraine. Their duties included editing and combining the genomes of identified pathogens. That is, research traditionally associated with enhancing the functions of dangerous viruses… We have repeatedly noted that the artificial origin of COVID-19 is evidenced by the uncharacteristic variability of gene variants for most coronaviruses, significant differences in mortality and contagiousness, uneven geographical distribution, as well as the unpredictable nature of the epidemic process as a whole. It is also difficult to explain the high degree of readiness of US manufacturers of mRNA vaccines for the pandemic of a new coronavirus infection, which suggests collusion between various US government agencies and the so-called “Big Pharma”. The spread of the new coronavirus infection has led to a significant increase in the profits of biotech corporations due to the creation of vaccines and medicines against coronavirus, as well as to the increased dependence of developing countries on the United States and the creation of conditions for their further implementation of dual-use programs… ..Thus, the list of persons involved in the military biological dossier includes persons who influenced the investigation of the causes of the COVID-19 pandemic, including employees of government agencies, officials of medical and pharmaceutical companies: Russian Military Reveals New Details About US Biolabs In Ukraine Oh brian, I’m sorry but your replies are so long and there are so many of them so close together I can’t follow anything in them. Could you make them a little briefer? Unfortunately, the answers required detailed explanation in order to respond to ” they are all in it together ” concepts which are constantly being pushed here without proper redress. There was no covid pandemic, only (a) chemical attacks (such as dilute sarin) in China, Iran and Italy (b) totalitarianism turned up a notch globally (c) big profiteering from covert contracts. “Bio-weapons labs” are an important target for money from the black budget of the imperial Defence/War department, just as on dud armaments. Two decades ago, it already had 1,300 centres rated at safety level 3 domestically, besides 12 at level 4. In 2022, it had ~336 bio-weapons centres in 30 other countries. The failures and violations at the centres, some at the same time as “”epidemics”, include defective protective apparel, failure to destroy waste, escaped test animals and theft. Officials even sold infected cattle repeatedly. Over 2005-2012, 1,059 known leaks or thefts of pathogens occurred. “.. I don’t see how what happened in the 1990s or 2000s changes that…” CIA: Undermining and Nazifying Ukraine Since 1953 by Wayne Madsen The recent declassification of over 3800 documents by the Central Intelligence Agency provides detailed proof that since 1953 the CIA operated two major programs intent on not only destabilizing Ukraine but Nazifying it with followers of the World War II Ukrainian Nazi leader Stepan Bandera. CIA: Undermining and Nazifying Ukraine Since 1953, by Wayne Madsen You see, I don’t see how Mr Madsen talking about the nazification of Ukraine since 1953 is a riposte to Matt’s point that geopolitics change over the years and we need to stay up to date. I mean that’s true is it not? Russia may well be coopted into multipolarity now but was not 30 years ago, no? It’s a continuation of policy. Put simply the Western centuries old strategy to dismember Russia. And it’s funny, iron-ic-ally funny, how many of the usual suspects are involved in this “Naziism.” it follows the same purpose as any system which wishes to impose a Neo-Feudalism system ! Like you I would like to praise Russia’s new image with VP. But many details show, as you also say, a blurred picture. Many of Russia’s key figures are Liberals of the worst kind. Here is a link about the 100% surveillance of Russian families and their children, and the State’s power to grab children on insinuations or gossip or rumours about children not being treated well in traditional families. It is as if Russia is trying to copy paste the worst sides of Western Liberal Policies. https://katyusha.org/oczifrovka/semi-pod-ugrozoj-profilaktiki-ot-minprosveta-yuvenalnaya-baza-dannyix-zarabotala-pochti-vo-vsex-regionax-rossii.html Lets look at another point regarding innuendo relating to some of the alternative UK media source ie UK Column. ” Back to Marcel, I discovered that he now ALSO owns a nice chunk of UK Column (UKC)!” He owns a minority shareholding here are the figures UK Column is the trading name of Akita Media Limited, which is owned by Brian Gerrish (30%), Mike Robinson (30%), Charles Malet (20%) and Marcel Jahnke (20%) Moreover, how does his minority shareholding effect editorial content and selection of writers ? Perhaps, it might be in the presenters and columnists who have written for it. UK Column News Presenters eg Ben Rubin, Vanessa Beeley, Mark Anderson Writers eg Dr Piers Robinson, Johnny Vedmore, Niall McCrae About The UK Column | UKColumn Now, if the writer has concrete evidence to prove that Jahnke dictates or influences content and direction of the site please present it ! Akita Media was only set-up in January 2020, two months before the Plandemic really kicked off. It was during the Plandemic when UK Colon really came into the limelight and donations (monthly subscriptions poured in) creating a useful database of ‘anti-vax’ dissidents. I can’t find any info regarding its trading name prior to that date. Akita? A Japanese dog breed and a prefecture in Japan. Why choose that name? Coincidentally or not, Putin was gifted an Akita dog in Japan by the Akita prefecture government in 2011. https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/world/russia/20250119-233916/ We all know that the UK Shillum presenters and its editorial angle over the years constantly has shilled the multipolar world order, including inviting guests such as Vanessa Bealey, Patrick Henningsen and others to promote it even harder. The name Akita seems like a nod and a wink to ensure that those who need to know understand that the UKC is not some genuine anti-establishment threat but is merely fulfilling a role in the bigger agenda or it is straight up mocking its audience. It is a limited hangout performing a sales and marketing role to a section of the mainly British public who are fed-up with Western imperialism and their governments in general. Not forgetting Gerrish is ex-Royal Navy, Mallet is ex-police and British army and Alex Thompson is ex-GCHQ. All would have signed the Official Secrets Act and yet we are to believe that they all decided to go rogue and become dissidents. An unlikely bunch if ever I saw one. “…We all know that the UK Shillum presenters and its editorial ..including inviting guests such as..” Hmm, OffGuardian must be in on the act since they have had writers such as Niall McCrae, post articles both on here and UK Column. Eg Stirrings of rebellion in unhappy Britain – OffGuardian I like UK Column. Don’t believe you rolling rock. I USED to be a fan of UK – watched every show for months during 2021 and early 2022, the same with listening to 21st Century Wire. Then in mid-2022 after the Ukraine ‘war’ had been front and centre for a few months I realised that they were both selling multipolarity as a solution. They were using a technique known as demoralisation to chip away at the current system in the West by identifying and reinforcing its faillings to gain support for the multipolar NWO. It was always there even during the Convid era but I had chosen not to notice it. The failings of the West were pointed out by Solzhenitsyn over 50 years ago ! Sure, after he left the Soviet Union. His critique of the Soviet system, the gulags and labour camps was why he fled to the US. After his move, it wasn’t expected that he would criticize his new hosts, but he did. Anyway, not everyone is going to read his literary works and speeches. Far easier in a world where keeping it simple has a greater effect, for outfits like UK Colon which has more mass appeal, rather than the likes of Solzhenitsyn, to drive the message home. Besides, AFAIK Solzhenitsyn was not selling the multipolar NWO as a solution. “Sure, after he left the Soviet Union…” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn criticized the West for its moral decay and spiritual emptiness even before leaving the USSR, expressing concerns that Western societies were losing their values and civic courage. He believed that the West’s pursuit of material prosperity often overshadowed the suffering of others and warned that it could lead to a similar fate as that of totalitarian regimes. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Center — Solzhenitsyn Was Right The cultural development of ideas given priority includes the feedback loop of cultural analysis. Intellectual elitism underlies and enables the usurp of relational communication by structural corruption which operates ideological capture as cultic identities framed in currencies or frameworks of control. The form in which control occurs is entirely secondary to the underlying operating system. The belief that we are free thinking is a mask set over internalised structures of programmed or ‘incentivised’ behaviours. The tension between individual and collective is a living balance point. There is neither without the other, just as there can be no self without other—yet there is a self-lessness or unselfconscious awareness that some have called Self, others ‘no-self’ and of course every kind of symbolic reference – and yet the Living cannot itself be possessed, defined, patented, predicted and controlled. Thus we engage in a false sense of self-possession when we invest or identify in symbols, models or narratives OF reality as being real in and of themselves. Thus a derivative persona seeks or is assigned autonomy. But it’s a split mind masking and distancing from a feared and demonised life – cast out to others, world and to body as a limit, a cage and a death or reset. Polarity can be recognised as the matrix of embodiment or expression. But true polarity is complementary and mutually self-reinforcing. The balance points which are not fixed – are recognised within the living. The resort to sleepwalking in structures or systems of predictive control or ‘programmed reaction’ effectively assigns balancing need to external controls – by which we become ever more alienated from the feeling of being – which is not ’emotional states’ of identity conflict but the living sustenance and guidance for unfolding fulfilment. The world as we conceive and be-live it is a masking adjustment layer of distortion. But it is also a result of desire and intention – as an ongoing focus of attention ‘through an Overton Window’. An aspect of the split mind is a capacity to say one thing and mean something else—as evidenced by behaviours that reveal what we actually believe – including what we believe is we need to believe – relative to underlying core self-beliefs that run prior to a capacity for reflection and so are only recognisable as choices and beliefs when brought to awareness rather than masked by thinking. An insider ‘economic’ control system runs not just the framing of finance, but that of science -such as the models that are funded, developed and protected as a human operating system. It offers a masking diversion in exchange for systemic sacrifice. I always find your philosophical/spiritual perspective interesting and thoughtful, Binra; though it sometimes takes me another read or two before the totality of the message is revealed to me – my lack, not yours. Essentially, I hear you; the entire debate – the author’s thesis, my own and others’ responses, multipolarity, hegemony, all of it – is happening inside a managed framework, one that the system itself constructs and that we feed back into. Everyone in the argument, regardless of position, is operating within it and we mistake this for independent thought. The real ‘control system’ isn’t a world government, BRICS, or Western hegemony – it’s the deeper, inner operating system that makes us identify with narratives about reality rather than engaging with reality directly. In other words, we are all arguing about which cage design is real while missing that the true cage is the act of identification with any model at all. But what if I don’t identify with any model? What if I just enjoy Hegelian dialectic and hearing interesting perspectives on world affairs? I don’t propose political discourse as a truth of reality per se, but as witness to the system’s behaviours and exploitation – as recognition of what it does, or does not – and to think about how that may impact the practical realities of living within it. I – along with many I expect – would very much like to exit the system – we know it doesn’t love us or care for our wellbeing – but at what cost? Isn’t it reasonable to say that we must deal or live with the ‘reality’ of the system and at the same time ensure that it doesn’t dictate our identity and overlay what is our true reality, that of what we are despite the system? Perhaps it is better – in terms of our wellbeing, our precious time alive – to disengage from talking about what the system effectively wants us to be talking about, here in this place and others – I sometimes wrestle with that and wonder if this is simply addiction – but then all things that we enjoy are in effect addictive. I guess it boils down to how much it has a negative material – or perhaps spiritual – impact on each of us to take part in the game as we do. I do have a feeling – because once the thought bites it is difficult to shake, and the thought has been with me for some time – that I will eventually leave behind all such comment arenas as this, as many do for similar reasons no doubt – where our real selves are not really present and we engage in superficial system-talk and fail to recognise that there might be other ways in which we can engage with each other that don’t involve system-directed subjects and boundaries. In no particular order: God – if you have faith – family, friends, love, hope, joy, peace and each other – all are more worthy of our time and thoughts than this – I am sure on that we all can agree. Perhaps, one day, places like this will fall silent by our choices to realise the fruitless, self-imprisoning nature of its construction – no offence, Kit! But that damned hegemonic system, man. I just can’t stop talking about it! Firstly – thanks for a real meeting of mind – engaging in shared exploration and experience of ‘human being’. Releasing the model or map so as to Be the experience as a self-revealing or unfolding fulfilment of value or meaning is a curious ‘letting’ rather than an active ‘getting’. Our ‘thought systems’ can substitute for Living appreciation – or to put it another way, we can appreciate our own thinking or self-imaging of life to the exclusion or discarding of real relationship. (The archetype of Narcissus as trapped in reflections given priority of worth frames life a pale and unworthy or corrupted copy of its ‘Ideal’. Yet on such ‘special love’ is an identity shaped to seek or avoid accordingly. We do not meet our terms and conditions met (in the world so framed) for more than moments that are ‘snatched away’ even as they are attained. Structure-derived identity is part of the ‘space-suit’ or ego-adjustment for the focus in human experience. Limitation serves a focus in a specific unfolding and sharing of value. By giving focus to what truly moves us, we align in true purpose – and all else aligns as we accept. ‘Falling asleep’ in such a world – or diversionary distraction – simply ‘goes with the territory. Mind is Always active, and we can and do follow or fall into a flow or train of thought – as an expression seeking or unfolding fulfilment. At the point of release, awareness ‘rises’ as never having been away – but the experience holds the trace of having on some level ‘lived’ our thought. rather than seek to escape from a ‘trick of the mind’ I invite willingness and curiosity as to what is in truth moving within. the fascination with guilt or horror and an addictive or page-turning attention for ‘what happens next’. Yet beneath the surface are ancient themes that go back before possibility of recall. An Apocalypse or Revelation (unveiling) is set in time or periodic at the end of a Cycle – and so our ideas about it are associated with running out of time or indeed of place to escape, mask or hide self-illusion from its inevitable and ultimately merciful undoing Living in the meanwhile or pending tray can be very dramatic! It can also drain and overwhelm – such as to seek compensatory substitutions for love, that easily lead to a lack of true self-appreciation and masking ‘medications’ against a ‘world gone wrong’ – where at least some of the pain can be pushed out from the heart to the body of a world of separate things and forces. While I find and share a sense of worth in living terms – I will release the stricture of structures that effectively gaslight the creative desire and curiosity back into a cage of guilt, penalty and sacrifice – as the Only Reality – or ‘the way it works’. This cage as I see it – is entirely fed and supported by the intensity of the desire or wish to escape it, break it, expand or overcome and remake it. But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked. “Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.” “How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice. “You must be,” said the Cat, “or you wouldn’t have come here. ~ Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland If I did not share in the ‘ego’ I would not be able to let it be repurposed to serve rather than lead – or suffer to be led astray. Understanding the ‘world’ might better be recognised as perspectives or of course ‘blinkers’. Multiple perspectives are not in competition when we see they are never the Elephant in the room – but by definition a partiality. If we look for conflict, we find it – even under the search for truth and freedom. Only a qualitative appreciation of living relationship can embody a true renewal of culture. All else is derivative and cannibalistic or parasitic. The urge to organise or structure love sets up a false sense of possession and control. But form follows function – which is purpose. If you find joy in something then surely there’s at least a baby in the bathwater – if not a growing of a greater embrace? Where do the themes being explored as experience resonate and find relevance to who we are now accepting ourselves to be? Or ‘where do I stand within all that is unfolding life?’ The balance point to my understanding is a felt discernment within the living. The attempt to enforce balance externally operates a system of judgements arising from dead concepts and mapping representations of an adjustment layer. We are literally explicating the ego to the Big Screen of the World to accuse and attack, escape or overcome it. Another name for the deceiver is the accuser. Anyway – your response is a welcome engagement in a forum that is often a dumping ground or kettle for opinionated frustrations. Yet I hold the what we give from and receive at the heart is active in the whole – because the heart is the orchestration or alignment of the whole – not a pumped up self-delusion. Well, I will say one thing about this particular article, it sure has motivated some good long thoughtful comment discussion. Appreciated. Thanks, Binra, the feeling is mutual and it’s healthy to have a bit of meta conversation from within the cage. It’s an interesting path we’re treading and I’m curious about the contradiction – at least my perception of it – in your reply versus original comment. Initially, you lean clearly toward a fairly uncompromising position – that all political/structural debate operates within a managed framework of control… that identification with any model is itself a cage. I completely agree with that and replied as such. I then took that to its logical conclusion – having considered it in a similar context before (the ‘thought that bites’) – that leaving the places we know bind us from a more nourishing life is as obvious as it is difficult. Our shared compromise – that partaking without identifying is the key – may seem reasonable, but if I scrutinise the thought, it feels a little like an excuse dressed as reason; hence the conclusion that letting go is best. In your last reply, I think you soften your original point and almost back away from it. I’m not sure if that’s intentional or a subconscious walking back because you felt I’d gone too far in suggesting leaving by the open cage door. Essentially, you say: ‘don’t try to escape – if you find joy in it, there’s “a baby in the bathwater.” The desire to leave the cage feeds the cage.’ If wanting to leave feeds our entrapment and the trap is created by putting ourselves in it… we are very much stuck! Which may bring us back to the key being the importance of not identifying with the elements of the cage construct, but that leaves us with ‘an excuse dressed as reason’ not to leave again. It’s a loop of inaction. I appreciate that you emphasise that the desire to leave is what matters – a sort of fight or flight urge in the face of being somewhere we know we would better off not being – but how do we know that this emphasis is not another excuse dressed as reason? In truth, should we just be leaving, not wondering if our desire to do so is weak enough that it means we should stay? In a world of fulfilment, love and truth – of actions or experiences of life and each other that we should be engaging with – system-talk led by the system within the caged framework of the system has to be fairly close to the bottom of the list. I imagine that’s as true for you as it is for me, or any of us here. But we persist. I indulge in the politics because I find it interesting and sometimes it feels ‘needed’ – ‘better to be aware, awake to the possible turns of the narrative than not’, we tell ourselves. So I read about it, I talk about it, but I acknowledge from a deeper perspective that it cushions us from reality, offers illusory control from fear and replaces… living. So we all make a compromise, to a greater or lesser degree, about how much of our time we spend not living. Consciously or not, your last reply may imprison you longer in the very cage your first reply warned about – in seeking to hold to the elements of the cage that bring you the same false(?) fulfilment with which it tempts all of its prisoners. This conversation between you and I isn’t usual in a place like this, and as much as I ‘enjoy’ the political debate and revelation, this is probably closer to real, unmanaged discourse – two prisoners discussing how, why – or even if – they should exit the cage. Does this less common, more philosophical interaction give us reassurance that there is no reason to leave? Now, it could be said that this discussion is simply being overthought and is a fanciful distraction with little substance to warrant the words – and I would disagree; because I think it represents in microcosm the, arguably, intentional en masse push of humanity from their common lived spaces into digital rooms – the better to profit from, manage and control us. So the metaphor of the cage is more real even than it first appeared and the perspective of the discussion changes to see us as quiet voices debating escape, in a little cage of many cages in an enormous, worldwide prison – one from which we have the liberty to walk away, but for our own illusory capture and the inconvenience of a world now built around the very thing we would leave. A prison within ourselves that we tell ourselves we need, and so we enter and we stay. In essence, I believe you had it all correct the first time – you just, as we all do, stopped short of the open door. PS. Loved the Alice in Wonderland quote. Language can serve communication. The form of linguistic habits can shape identifications that conflict with or block communication. As such language can become an explicated ‘tool set’ of assumptions running subconscious to the ‘self and world’ they deliver, reflect or reinforce. The covic op offers a cultural reference for understanding that fear can run as belief, given power by defences and countermeasures of an attempt to escape, overcome or mitigate and manage the threat. There simply is and was no ‘covid’. Yet many be-live a world in which covid and the Pandora’s box of its tool-set frame them in fear, running as security and control. The bi-tech tool set is a convergence of masking ‘solutions’ that protect the lie by masking, denying and projecting feared truth. Note that fear of truth is always a projected fearful expectation of pain and loss acted from as real. I’m suggesting that we are never IN the cage so much as phished by a way of thinking and seeing that runs as masking survival strategy relative to conflicts we are trained suppress or divert by solving them on others. As if the cause can be addressed to divert pain, penalty or sacrifice. Guilt framed blaming narratives find mutual and social reinforcement. ‘Rationalised’ self justifications’ express or explicate our particular hates and fears. Orwell’s Room 101 was a literary device to outpicture your deepest fears. It had to become specific to be written and he used the head trapped in a cage of rats for his protagonist. Fear of the unknown – usually capitalised- holds the arena for the projection of our deepest terrors. Thus to find willingness to look on fear and guilt— on terror set in hate or disgust must meet the ‘self-experience’ that has been pushed down or walled out to protect and persist (in) a split off ‘self’. The Overton Window of a limited and managed focus is in some ways like a shaped explosive. The shock of terror that splits the mind is framed in the specific ‘entry point’ of formative experience along with proclivities of underlying resonances that can be seen as ‘themes’— unfinished business or a path of interest that calls while the interest finds fulfilment. I sketch toward a simpler recognition level of defences set in complexity and obfuscation. I think that some understanding can release the mind of its persistence in reaction to its own projected thought, and thus ‘meet’ or uncover and be uncovered as ‘the terrain’. I often use ‘Field’ of Relation as metaphor to shift from relationships framed by a judgemental dictate to Get or Get Rid Of – a self. The body identification can when examined be revealed a projection of a split mind, yet to rest in communication through the body and thus through all body or world – is where the form becomes transparent to or one with the Spirit – or wholeness of Purpose. Music offers a living metaphor for transparency of true participation. Nothing is denied or excluded by a free-willing focus in the love that we are – but forget by thinking to protect its form against change. I stayed on this point because regardless the experience of a split or conflicted sense of self, I am not limited or defined so in truth. Truth as a truly shared living recognition, shows you you are free. But fear tells you you must do what it says to become free. Discerning truth from self-illusion cant be difficult but that we want shifting parts of both and lose capacity to reliably determine one from the other. How can this not run a fragmented and conflicted attempt to put Humpty together again? Sufficient unto the day be the evil thereof – for me – means living this day and attending and being the moment at hand – for this is always nigh – not past or future or never comes the day. What is it to be the life I am in living terms, rather than persist in dead concepts that protect from ‘loss of face and control’? Of course time rushes in to reset the ‘world order’, but to a willingness of honouring the qualities of life – we are never actually put back in the same timeline, but have a shifted perception. The growing of conscious willingness though what had run dark as a mind of active and reactive assumptions, is a releasing of self-illusion to re-cognition. If the split mind must first map and define the Problem as the precondition to applying ‘solutions’, then the power is set in the mind-framing of the Problem – and all else follows therefrom. Pretending there is no problem is just one facet of a problem protected – as is seeking unified Models or myths by which to define all problems therefrom. The specific address of what the problem really is—or represents— runs counter to the mind set in solutions. If lovelessness (by any name) was recognised as unwanted or meaningless, it would not be persisted in as if it can yet give us what we think we lack or need. But attempts to do or force love are masks of lovelessness bought into as ‘solutions’ that give temporary or short term belief in relief. Of myself I can not – because I am not ‘of myself’. If a spiritual or religious symbol doesn’t serve, I can can say I am of a field of relation that can only be given witness by extension and exchange. One of the caveats to unfolding insight is that this is also taken in by the ego of a control mindset – as a means for extending control. The ‘solutions’ are misapplied to others and world that are actually addressed within ourselves. Then ‘good ideas’ become masks for loveless agenda drive by moral pretences masking over a toxic debt conflict seeking ‘solutions’ by which to escape, buy time, or lock down in denials that run as lies given power set in grievance. It isn’t that structure is bad or evil but that identifying exclusively in structure runs ideological capture – regardless the particular form or position. I see ‘Giving to God as is due unto God and unto Caesar as is due unto Caesar’ as not making a god or giving priority override to structures or systems of dead or blind concept. As we recognise our mistake we bring it to correction within a living will —or a willing alignment. Guilt and Terror shut down the mind. (I’m thinking here of Peter denying the Master he loved as the recognition of holiness while the cock crows – until he remembers that Jesus told him he would, as a gift of love and not as a curse. Remembering love is not of a past or future. Yet is the uncarved block on which or from which to build or go forth. This is not a structure or system, but a covenant within the Living—that structure can not see. Multipolarity As World Government 3.0 & Its Pied Pipers The same pied pipers in the comment section all say the same thing, as if they’ve been paid to say it. Is this really a comment board or an appreciation society for low-confident MAM media personalities? Where are all the different comments that make a site alternative? Multipolarity As World Government 3.0 & Its Pied Pipers all claim this is a move from the West to the East. This is not free thinking ; this is cloned collectivism logic of thought. Control has always been centralized, with its lackeys in each country doing its bidding. It’s the same format we see with the MAM media, which is exactly how the government is run. The article, which was very long-winded, has said nothing that hasn’t been said by others. The bets are on in the UK to forecast snow over Easter and it is looking promising. On the subject of BRICS , multipolarity and pied pipers, I just had a peek at Moon of Alabama (MoA) to see what Bernhard and his groupies are up to. They should rename it MIA, since I bet some of its fanbase haven’t been seen in the outside world for years. Thread after thread plus open threads bloviating over the ‘War on Iran’. An endless stream of comments since it started, now in excess of 20,000. At least Bernie must be happy; since 2022 with the start of the Ukie ‘war’ he was able to come out from behind his sofa, take off the triple masks and not need to take his 8th booster of the ‘imperialist’ Big ‘harma corporate cocktail courtesy of Pfizer and Moderna. A bit disappointing that he didn’t at least boost his anti-imperialist credentials by popping over to Moscow or Beijing for filled syringes of Sputnik V or Sinopharm – to at least show solidarity with the BRICS ‘anti-imperialists’. There is a thriving cottage industry on the alt-media circuit with so many of these sites and Gootube channels (don’t forget to like, share and subscribe) hosting geopolitical ‘experts’ and armchair generals who must all have repetitive strain injuries and stacks of empty Kleenex boxes from all the excitement. The fans sipping their skinny lattes, slurping diet Cokes and munching on bags of full fat Doritos as they eagerly await for the latest chickenfeed to go pecking at – an endless task, a bit like picking up fluff from a brand new carpet. They should really stick to playing Call of Duty, it’s less scripted, more realistic and a lot more shit gets blown up. Meanwhile, right under their noses, in nearly every local town hall across the world along with civil society groups, the enablers and change agents ensure that the wheels of UN Agenda 21/Agenda 2030 continue to roll forward. The walls of the digital gulag and its technocratic micro-management of every aspect of the multipolar world order groupies lives (along with everyone else’s) continues to be built and yet they are too busy playing war games to care. Once the roof is on and the doors are shut from the outside it will be too late. Gathering no moss there RR. Oh my what a treat this was. A masterful overview of the current world situation plus a breakdown of the strange machinations going on in the alt media landscape. I’m grateful to Hrvoje for articulating doubts and concerns I’ve long held myself, since the beginning of the so-called pandemic, when so many erstwhile heroes of ours fled the field and revealed themselves as nothing more than paid propagandists. They had looked like anti-establishment good guys until the moment the supposed differences between east and west evaporated. As soon as Western propaganda aligned with eastern propaganda we were forced to see our heroes had only been anti the establishment of one side! I do believe now that many such as the egregious Matthew Ehret are just as corrupt as any at CNN, but simply working for the “other side”, whatever that means these days. They are all promoting multipolar globalism, which as Hrvoje says so rightly, is a cover story for a global empire, with perhaps a pivot point somewhat further east than Washington. All the state-paid journalists, whether paid by east or west are trying to lead us to the same destination by different paths. Why else do they all so studiously refuse to see the global imperialist writing on the wall? This perfectly encapsulates it I intend to send it to all my terrifyingly smug and willfully blind friends (I live in upstate NY in a pleasant bedroom community, so you can imagine the friends I have). They won’t pay any attention as they are used to my “crazy conspiracy theories”, but I live in hope. At least my husband agrees with me. (Completely off topic but I love upstate NY. Just spent the weekend at Lake Placid for the first time. What beauty. So good for the soul.) Great article – many thanks. It’s good to see more and more of the alternative seeing through the tremendous lie of BRICS as an anti-imperialist strategy. Excellent and informative article – big business is really running the world, and ALL governments will eventually fall into line – a one world government will mostly represent big business interests, with some other NWO faces on the board – eventually China and Russia and all other nations will fall into line and be absorbed into the NWO. We are still going through a phase of resistance, from the likes of NK, but China will when the time comes – whip it into line – the plans been in the pipeline for a long time now, dissolving the UN is also on the agenda, infact Trump with his US taxpayer funded Peace Board is trying hard to replace the UN with it, currently the UN is railing that very few nations are paying their UN fees, and the UN might fold. The EU is as has been mentioned ran by authoritarians in Brussels – the slacking of border crossing in EU nations is one of the steps to making the continent, a one nation state – at first controlled by Brussels, then later by the NWO government – but we’re not there yet – there’s still resistance to the authoritarians in Brussels, and indeed by many nations around the globe. For me we still have way to much liberty for the PTB to utterly impose their agendas, its a slow but steady (due to some folk knowing what’s going on and trying to rally against it) push to keep adding restrictions aimed at the masses, a huge step will be Digital ID’s and their CBDC’s. Of course, if the war on Iran escalates further restrictions aimed at the masses can be implemented using the war as an excuse to do so – I’m just a wee bit surprised that, Western governments haven’t already done so. Make no bones about it – mass culling via many innocuous routes is already in place, via medicines food water etc, especially in the States its a long term plan – the remaining humans that are left will be workers (unpaid) and live live slaves some to used for the amusement of the NWO hierarchy and their sycophants. The final push – will see a global war between us (the masses) and the NWO’s forces which will include all the latest drones, missiles and robot fighting machines, but no one alive today needs to worry about seeing the final war, I foresee it being at least 100 years down the line. “Eventually”? You obviously didn’t read the “excellent and informative” article too closely. China and Russia have been in line and absorbed into the NWO since at least 2020, and in China’s case probably much longer than that since building up Chinese industry has been the passion project of certain elites for decades. And why on earth do you think China was picked to head up and kick off the covid psyop if they were not already on board? No, they are 100% in the NWO camp, and why wouldn’t they be since the NWO is built round making them wealthier and the rest of us poorer. When I say ” them”, I mean the Chinese elites of course. The 99% of Chinese etc will be no better off than us, or at least not by much. The idea of a physical war between the defenseless 99% and the armed to the teeth 1% seems unlikely. They already are at war with us for one thing, but it’s a mind-war, which we at least have a small chance of winning. No I don’t believe that China is fully onboard with the NWO’s plans just yet, yes they are well down the road on controlling their population – you have the Social Credit System, but from what I’ve read Digital ID isn’t yet compulsory – of course like the West, much of the Chinese population is already carrying around with them a (phone) a tracking instrument that knows their names and locations. Right now I believe, in China there’s a battle going on between big business and the government over who really holds sway in the country much of the West has capitulated and big business now runs the West, China’s eventual fall to big business will be a defining moment – as will Russia’s. Like I said in my previous comment – big business will rule the world, there heads will sit on the NWO government. It really does seem that 2020, The “Pandemic”, was the litmus test. They may all be vying for the biggest share of control, resources, wealth, etc, but over-all, they are all in it together. Fascismo invented by Benito Mussollini. !919 founded newspaper left the Italian socialist party and in his paper coined the phrase LO STATO INCORPORATO the corporate state.Historical context is these were the final months to the famous BIENNIO ROSSO. Two years of rolling strikes throughout the industrial north. In Lenin writings in what is to be done he coins the phrase the State incorporated. Two faces of the same coin. China is the modern example. China has been running a deficit of circa 300 percent. What keeps China afloat mass production to consumption ratio. The numbers eventually will come to China like all others. Math is math numbers ad up and post modern economics do not, It is all fugazi telling us proles that zircon are really diamonds. POST SCRIPTUM: 1950 Germany and Italy sign a treaty PATTO D.ACIO steel pact the first semblance of European Union. Hitlers Map of SS Germany 1943. Look at it and its almost exactly like the EU map of today. DOCIUS IN FONDO Who funded . Hitler who funded Mussolini. follow the money. who funded Trotsky who funded Lenin. Who funded Israel .