Tag: globalism

Tony Blair Calls for Global Agreement on Social Media Speech Restrictions

Fresh off the crackdown on so-called “keyboard warriors” over social media posts connected to the recent anti-mass migration riots, leading leftist politicians in Britain are beginning to demand for new speech restrictions on the internet.

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose neo-liberal Labour Party government enacted some of the strictest speech laws in modern British history, has joined the chorus of commentators demanding a new crackdown on social media.

Speaking to LBC Radio this week, Blair said: “The world is going to have to come together and agree on some rules around social media platforms.

“It’s not just how people can provoke hostility and hatred but I think… the impact on young people particularly when they’ve got access to mobile phones very young and they are reading a whole lot of stuff and receiving a whole lot of stuff that I think is really messing with their minds in a big way.

“I’m not sure what the answer is but I’m sure we need to find one.”

Keep reading

Competing Powers Shape Our World?

In the grand theater of global affairs, where power, influence, and wealth intermingle, a narrative emerges that is as compelling as it is unsettling—a narrative that suggests a world shaped not by the democratic will of the people, but by the hidden machinations of a powerful elite. Could it be that the events we see unfolding on the world stage are not merely the result of chaotic happenstance or the bumbling of incompetent leaders, but rather the deliberate moves of a carefully orchestrated game, one that we, the common folk, are scarcely aware of?

This idea, though provocative, finds its roots in a persistent undercurrent of speculation and cautious observation. For decades, political analysts, conspiracy theorists, and concerned citizens alike have hinted at the existence of a global power structure—one that operates beyond the reach of governments and the scrutiny of the press. The notion is not new, but it is one that bears revisiting, especially in an era where the lines between truth and fiction, reality and conspiracy, have become increasingly blurred.

The Dialectic of Control

At the heart of this theory lies the concept of dialectic control—a strategy purportedly employed by the elite to manipulate public perception and steer global events. This tactic involves the creation of crises—economic downturns, political conflicts, wars, even pandemics—that induce fear and uncertainty among the masses. In such moments of crisis, the populace, desperate for stability, is more likely to accept solutions that, under normal circumstances, would be met with resistance.

The elite, according to this theory, do not act out of mere opportunism but out of a systematic and calculated plan to consolidate power. They recognize the potential in chaos; they understand that in moments of crisis, the human psyche is malleable, open to suggestions that promise safety and order. But these solutions often come at a cost—a gradual erosion of freedoms, a subtle shift in power from the many to the few.

Keep reading

Globalists Are Trying To Escalate The Ukraine War Into WWIII Before The US Election

The purpose of NATO involvement in the Ukraine War has, to me, always appeared obvious. Ukraine has nothing to do with the interests of the western public, nothing to do with the security of Europe and nothing to do with the economic advancement of the United States. Yet, NATO and the globalists have been politically interfering in the region since at least 2014 and preparing the ground for an eventual war with Russia.

To be clear, I don’t favor Russia any more than I favor Ukraine. The Kremlin has long had its own ties to the globalists, as I have outlined in numerous articles. How deep those ties go is up for debate – Maybe the honeymoon is over and Russia is truly done trying to get a seat at the globalist table. What I do know is that western elites want a world war and they have done everything in their power to start one.

Look at it this way: What if you were to make a list of all the covert and overt NATO operations in Ukraine and then flipped script? What if Russia was pursuing all the same agendas of destabilization, control and arms proliferation in Mexico (as the Soviets did in Cuba in the 1960s)?  If the US invaded Mexico preemptively it would be completely understandable.

Whether or not Putin is acting in the best interests of Russia doesn’t really matter. The war was inevitable anyway because NATO made sure it was impossible to avoid. But what purpose does such a proxy war serve? Well, it doesn’t serve much purpose at all…unless the goal is to instigate a wider world war between the East and the West. In that scenario the globalists benefit greatly.

They get a scapegoat for the economic collapse they’ve already set in motion. They multiply the global fear factor and make the public desperate for the political elites to step in and solve all their problems. And, they can get rid of their domestic enemies (conservatives and patriots) by accusing them of “working with Russia” to undermine the war effort if they dare to rebel against unconstitutional mandates.

Beyond that, they also get an opportunity to send young men (who might rebel) off to the meat grinder in Ukraine so that there’s no new generation of freedom fighters to deal with. World War III is a win-win-win for the Davos crowd, as long as it doesn’t go full-on nuclear holocaust and wipe out their carefully crafted surveillance states.

But how do they turn the proxy war into a world war without looking like the bad guys? That’s the trick, isn’t it?

Keep reading

The U.S. Regime’s Plans to Control the World

The U.S. Government’s plans to control the world are displayed not merely by its lie-based invasions, such as against Iraq in 2003, and against Libya in 2011, and against Syria in 2012; but also by its coups, such as against Honduras in 2009, and against Venezuela in 2012 and again in 2019, and against Ukraine in 2014; and by its sanctions, such as against Iran, Venezuela, Russia, Iraq, and Syria; all of which kill and destroy millions of people, and produce tens of millions of refugees, etc.

An excellent example of the planning that the U.S. Government devotes to expanding still further its empire — the lands that it controls, America’s colonies or ‘allies’ — was provided in a 28 February 2023 hearing by the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on ‘Defense’ (Aggression):

Betty McCollum, the leading Democrat on the Subcommittee, addressed the U.S. Secretary of ‘Defense’ (Aggression), Lloyd Austin: 

As General Milley [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] said, we don’t go to war alone. So if we include Australia, Canada, NATO, you know, all the great powers that we work with, we would have a multiplying effect that neither China or Russia has.

    Would that be a fair statement, Secretary Austin or General Milley?

    Secretary Austin: That is, in fact, correct, Ranking Member McCollum. We will always fight with our allies and partners. And, again, the capability that they bring to the table magnifies our overall capability. So you could expect that in any instance we would be able to draw upon some of their capability as well. So we work on a routine basis to make sure that we are interoperable and make sure that—-

    Ms. McCollum: Thank you. Thank you.

    I would like you to, a little, go into more importance on the recent–on February 2, the agreement that you signed with the Philippines, whichever one of you gentlemen want to answer that.

    President Marcos seems to have made some deliberate decisions to align more closely with the United States’ interests and away from China. Could you kind of tell the committee more about this agreement with the Philippines and how you see it enhancing our efforts in the region, because I think this goes back to the whole question of the multiplying effect of having resources that China and Russia do not have, and if there are any other nations in Indo-Pac that you see wanting to align more closely with the United States. …

    Secretary Austin: Well, I was, as a matter of fact, out in the Philippines and engaged the President on this particular issue. And I was really pleased that the President made the decision to move forward and increase the number of sites where we could work along with the Philippine forces to increase interoperability and develop their skills as well. And it is actually a benefit to them, as you know. So this really is a significant movement forward. …

    General Milley: Just two points. One is you are correct on the allies and partners, Australia, Japan, but there are many other countries there as well, to include European countries. We have done exercises with the Brits and the French also in the Asia-Pacific region. So they are force multipliers.

    Secondly is our sub force, which is rarely talked about, and I am not going to talk about it in detail right now, but our sub force is incredibly–submarine force–incredibly capable and very deadly and extremely lethal. So those two pieces I think would make a huge difference and help deter any kind of aggression by China.

    The last thing is the Philippines, but the Philippines and other countries in that region, they sit astride the key sea lines of communication that China relies on for their international access to the Middle East oil, et cetera, et cetera.

    So those allies and partners of ours are fundamental. …

Keep reading

UN votes to adopt roadmap for global tax convention

A “landslide” majority of countries at the United Nations voted to approve ambitious parameters for a new global tax convention that could herald a fresh approach to taxing multinational corporations and the super-rich.

Following three weeks of discussions in New York, on Aug. 16, 110 countries voted in favor of adopting the “terms of reference” that will guide future negotiations for a legally binding framework convention on international tax cooperation — a sort of “global constitution” under which rules, known as protocols, are set.

Eight countries rejected the scoping document, including Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States, all of which are members of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Forty-four countries abstained from the vote, including all European Union members and Argentina, the sole participating Latin American country to vote against the draft text.

Keep reading

UN Is Accelerating The Three Outcome Documents For The Summit Of The Future, Namely The Pact For The Future; The Declaration On Future Generations; And The Global Digital Compact – Silence Is Consent

We have not heard anyone mention this yet, and think it’s very important that everyone is up to speed on the details right now, so we assembled this information for you all. We’re at your service!!!

The following information has been made available on the three outcome documents for the Summit of the Future, namely the Pact for the Future; the Declaration on Future Generations; and the Global Digital Compact:

Pact for the Future: 

It is expected that Rev 3 will be released on 26 August and will be put under silence until 29 or 30 August.

The delay is due to the Co-facilitators attempting to deconflict the silence process with those for the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration on Future Generations. 

Keep reading

Fascism 2.0 – Globalism and the subjects of interest

In this second article in a series of three, I’m going to set the developments we have seen regarding Social Media censorship in the context of globalist power structures and suggest there is growing evidence the narrative manipulation we information consumers have been witnessing is in service to a globalist cause.

It’s important, I think, when having this kind of a discussion, to avoid falling into the trap of talking about a conspiratorial nebulous “they” without adequately defining who “they” are because such thinking leads to imprecise and ill justified reasoning and can, quite rightly, lead to the accusation of conspiracy theory style thinking. So I will define exactly what I mean by globalism and globalists. Your own definition may differ, but this is what I mean.

Globalists possess extreme wealth, typically in the billions, and can live anywhere in the world they choose. They have diversified international business interests, often shared with other globalists, and frequently receive invitations to events like Davos from the WEF.

The people we are speaking of inhabit a rarified and incestuously small community. Additionally with the arrival of the Internet, Globalism has been transformed, with the opportunity for ad-hoc co-opting of the powerful greatly enhanced. As the world has shrunk, the most influential power brokers have drawn closer together, breaking down barriers of geography and physical location.

Globalists are in the enviable position that they, unlike the common citizen, are able to leverage tax and legislative competition between countries. So for example Ireland’s GDP leapt after Ireland in 2003 quite deliberately introduced the EUs most competitive corporation tax rate (12.5%). The influx of tech businesses to Dublin brought an immense boost to the Irish economy and boosted Irish GDP to enviable levels. Globalists can pick and choose where they do business.

Keep reading

“An Era of Shock Events” Is Coming, Says WEF

The world must brace for “an era of shock events,” according to the World Economic Forum.

In a new opinion piece posted on the Forum’s website, Professor Maha Hosain Aziz, of New York University, says that the coming decade will be “shaped by heightened global risk and unpredictable shock events.”

“Anything can happen in our post-pandemic era,” Aziz claims.

He goes on to list three potential “shock events” that could happen soon.

The first is the emergence of a “new global extremist group,” which the professor claims could use AI to create a new kind of terrorism.

“With the world distracted with multiple major wars and leadership in decline, this could be an opportunistic time for a new extremist group to make its mark—and maybe not face as many consequences. Perhaps, it will even leverage AI tools to kick off a new phase of terrorism.”

The next potential “shock event” is a deliberate “cyber pandemic.” Aziz points to the recent Crowdstrike outage, which crippled computer systems worldwide, as an example of the chaos and damage a large-scale cyberattack could cause. The outage cost Fortune 500 companies $5.4 billion alone.

“Imagine if a bad actor did this—on purpose and an even grander scale?”

Professor Aziz’s final prediction is that a small island nation could sink under the ocean due to climate change.

Keep reading

A System Reset Seems Imminent

The idea the world would be better served with a single “World Currency” has been growing and looms as a real possibility in the near future. Many people see this as a major part of the “endgame” or something that will constitute a needed reset to a global economy and financial system that has gone off track. Throughout history, before an economic collapse, the masses and society tend to believe things are financially stable. Only after the economy goes over the edge of an abyss and is in free-fall does reality set in. It is not by accident that blinders have been placed upon us but it is the result of distractions being thrown in our path by those wishing to hold onto their power over us. It is wise to remember that when things do become critical, those in power will not be kind to us but that we will be thrown under the bus without a thought.

Over the last one hundred years, equity markets have been a primary tool used by the public to measure the economy. In some ways, the stock markets have become a kind of switch the elites can push at any given time to energize the masses distracting them from the dangers lurking in their economic future. When markets rise despite warnings from negative fiscal indicators, the masses become optimistic. During every upswing of stocks the elites claim they see the “green shoots” of prosperity, however, these shoots seem to always turn brown and die. We have been leaping from one recession to another even though central banks claim they now hold the key to generating true and honest growth.The truth is the current stock market bolstered by easy money and stock buybacks is a poor reflection of the real economy and what is happening in many areas across a broad swath of the world.

History indicates that establishment economists trained and educated in the ivory towers of academia are perhaps the most useless of all analysts and perpetually wrong. Only independent analysts have ever been able to predict anything of value when it comes to our economic future and that is because they have the advantage of not being blinded by the propaganda and brainwashed by lies flowing from those in control. Time and time again it has been proven the appearance of prosperity means nothing if the fundamentals do not support the optimism. A bullish stock market, a high dollar index, and low unemployment mean nothing and are unsustainable if generated by false methods and fiat money.We have seen time and time again throughout history that fundamentals matter.

The markets cannot hide from true price discovery forever.The stock market with its boom and bust cycles has proven to be a false indicator of what is really unfolding.Manipulation by the central banks has rendered this indicator of economic health useless. The problem we face is the horrible options in fiat money, massive debt, and the growth of international businesses have all come together in an explosive way. The banking elites are positioning themselves to avoid blame for this disaster while the rest of us are being sold on the most elaborate recovery con-game ever conceived and perpetuated by those with the most to gain.

Keep reading

Global Government is No Conspiracy Theory

We live in an age that is gesturing towards global government. This is not a conspiracy theory; it is something which perfectly respectable politicians, academics, policymakers and UN officials routinely talk about. What is crystallising is not exactly a single world Government, but rather a complicated mixture of aligned institutions, organisations, networks, systems and fora which has sometimes been given the fancy name of a ‘bricolage’ by international relations theorists. There is no centre, but rather a vast and nebulous conglomeration.

This does not mean, though, that global government (or ‘global governance’, as it is more commonly known) is emerging organically. It is being purposively directed. Again, this is no conspiracy theory; it is something that the people involved openly discuss – they hide their plans in perfectly plain sight. And this has been going on for a long time. In the early 1990s, when the Cold War had drawn to a close, the UN convened something called the Commission on Global Governance, which released a final report – called ‘Our Global Neighbourhood‘ – in 1995. It makes for fascinating reading as a kind of ‘playbook’ for what has followed in the field in the 30 years since – establishing as it does a clear rhetorical and argumentative pattern in favour of the global governance project that is repeated to this day.

The basic idea is as follows. In the olden days, when “faith in the ability of Governments to protect citizens and improve their lives was strong”, it was fine for the nation-state to be ‘dominant’. But now the world economy is integrated, the global capital market has vastly expanded, there has been extraordinary industrial and agricultural growth and there has been a huge population explosion. Ours is therefore a “more crowded, interdependent world with finite resources”. And this means we need “a new vision for humanity” which will “galvanise people everywhere to achieve higher levels of cooperation in areas of common concern and shared destiny” (these “areas of common concern” being “human rights, equity, democracy, meeting basic material needs, environmental protection, and demilitarisation”). We need, in short, “an agreed global framework for actions and policies to be carried out at appropriate levels” and a “multifaceted strategy for global governance”.

This is not difficult reasoning to parse. The central argument can be summarised as follows: global governance is necessary because the world is globalising, and that brings with it global problems that need solving collectively. And the logic must be impeccable in the minds of those who are engaged in the global governance project, because what they say has remained essentially the same ever since. Hence, if we fast forward from 1995 to 2024, we find world leaders finalising a revised draft of UN Secretary-General António Guterres’s proposed ‘Pact for the Future’, a memorandum of guiding principles for global governance which will be the culmination of his ‘Our Common Agenda‘ project, launched in 2021. While there is a bit more meat on the bone in this document than there may have been in Our Global Neighbourhood in terms of policy, we see a more-or-less identical argument playing out.

Keep reading