Recommended Posts

“Ontario locking down the economic engine of the country 28 days maybe more, that once laughable crazy Liberal e-mail from October is getting scary correct.”

Is this leaked info really Trudeau’s crazy COVID plan for 2021? You decide …

Posted by canadian report on October 14, 2020 02:17
Tags: COVID-19 restrictions, LPC Strategic Committee Leak
Categories: POLITICS RECENT POSTS

Dear REMOVED,

I want to provide you some very important information. I’m a committee member within the Liberal Party of Canada. I sit within several committee groups but the information I am providing is originating from the Strategic Planning committee (which is steered by the PMO).

I need to start off by saying that I’m not happy doing this but I have to. As a Canadian and more importantly as a parent who wants a better future not only for my children but for other children as well. Th look e other reason I am doing this is because roughly 30% of the committee members are not pleased with the direction this will take Canada, but our opinions have been ignored and they plan on moving forward toward their goals. They have also made it very clear that nothing will stop the planned outcomes.

The road map and aim was set out by the PMO and is as follows:

– Phase in secondary lock down restrictions on a rolling basis, starting with major metropolitan areas first and expanding outward. Expected by November 2020.
– Rush the acquisition of (or construction of) isolation facilities across every province and territory. Expected by December 2020.
– Daily new cases of COVID-19 will surge beyond capacity of testing, including increases in COVID related deaths following the same growth curves. Expected by end of November 2020.
– Complete and total secondary lock down (much stricter than the first and second rolling phase restrictions). Expected by end of December 2020 – early January 2021
– Reform and expansion of the unemployment program to be transitioned into the universal basic income program. Expected by Q1 2021.
– Projected COVID-19 mutation and/or co-infection with secondary virus (referred to as COVID-21) leading to a third wave with much higher mortality rate and higher rate of infection. Expected by February 2021.
– Daily new cases of COVID-21 hospitalizations and COVID-19 and COVID-21 related deaths will exceed medical care facilities capacity. Expected Q1 – Q2 2021.
– Enhanced lock down restrictions (referred to as Third Lock Down) will be implemented. Full travel restrictions will be imposed (including inter-province and inter-city). Expected Q2 2021.
– Transitioning of individuals into the universal basic income program. Expected mid Q2 2021.
– Projected supply chain break downs, inventory shortages, large economic instability. Expected late Q2 2021.
– Deployment of military personnel into major metropolitan areas as well as all major roadways to establish travel checkpoints. Restrict travel and movement. Provide logistical support to the area. Expected by Q3 2021.

Along with that provided road map the Strategic Planning committee was asked to design an effective way of transitioning Canadians to meet a unprecedented economic endeavor. One that would change the face of Canada and forever alter the lives of Canadians. What we were told was that in order to offset what was essentially an economic collapse on a international scale, that the federal government was going to offer Canadians a total debt relief. This is how it works: the federal government will offer to eliminate allpersonal debts (mortgages, loans, credit cards, etc) which all funding will be provided
to Canada by the IMF under what will become known as the World Debt Reset program. In exchange for acceptance of this total debt forgiveness the individual would forfeit ownership of any and all property and assets forever. The individual would also have to agree to partake in the COVID-19 and COVID-21 vaccination schedule, which would provide the individual with unrestricted travel and unrestricted living even under a full lock down (through the use of photo identification referred to as Canada’s HealthPass) .

Committee members asked who would become the owner of the forfeited property and assets in that scenario and what would happen to lenders or financial institutions, we were simply told “the World Debt Reset program will handle all of the details”. Several committee members also questioned what would happen to individuals if they refused toparticipate in the World Debt Reset program, or the HealthPass, or the vaccination schedule, and the answer we got was very troubling. Essentially we were told it was ourduty to make sure we came up with a plan to ensure that would never happen. We were told it was in the individualsbest interest to participate. When several committee members pushed relentlessly to get an answer we were told that those who refused would first live under the lock down restrictions indefinitely. And that over a short period of time as more Canadians transitioned into the debt forgiveness program, the ones who refused to participate would be deemed a public safety risk and would be relocated into isolation facilities. Once in those facilities they would be given two options, participate in the debt forgiveness program and be released, or stay indefinitely in the isolation facility under the classification of a serious public health risk and have all their assets seized.

So as you can imagine after hearing all of this it turned into quite the heated discussion and escalated beyond anything I’ve ever witnessed before. In the end it was implied by thePMO that the whole agenda will move forward no matter who agrees with it or not. That it wont just be Canada but in fact all nations will have similar roadmaps and agendas. That we need to take advantage of the situations before us to promote change on a grander scale for the betterment of everyone. The members who were opposed and ones who brought up key issues that would arise from such a thing were completely ignored. Our opinions and concerns were ignored. We were simply told to just do it.

All I know is that I don’t like it and I think its going to place Canadians into a dark future.

Vancouver, Canada·Posted Today, October 14

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We are in deep trouble folks. I just had a conversation with my step daughter who is university educated and prides herself on being aware of what's going on in the world. I asked her what she thought about the "Great Reset" that Liberals/socialists/communists are promoting.

To my astonishment she knew nothing about it. This is a 30 something adult who lives in Ottawa and has a partner that's has his sights set on being a politician some day. (Yeah..I know. Crazy )
 

....and she had no idea what I was talking about. I have been preaching for years that I fear for the future for my grandchildren. That fear suddenly became a cold chill that ran down my spine.

I gather most that frequent this forum were born sometime before 1980 ish...IMO, if we don't spread the word at a minimum in our own circles, the Proclaimed Socialists of this world will totally transform any semblance of normalcy as we know/knew it, systematically eliminate our histories and  bankrupt us personally through economic dependence on governments.

Its either step up to the plate time or be ready to be steam rolled into submission. 

Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

To your point, Jaydee, I don’t think that Canadians are looking at the government with a critical eye, don’t realize that the opposition or parliament has been effectively muzzled and are not aware of the ramifications of Trudeau’s policies or actions....we have a group of friends that are mostly blue with the exception of one “red” couple. I mentioned that I could not excuse Trudeau for what he did to VA Mark Norman...he had no idea what I was talking about!!!

Yes, I think the country is in trouble...because of an uniformed, naive public.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, st27 said:

Yes, I think the country is in trouble...because of an uniformed, naive public.

I couldn't agree more.

Most of the hardcore liberal voters I know don't follow current events at all but can parrot most liberal talking points and it's done without any depth (issue knowledge) whatsoever... last time around "Shear was a white supremacist" and that's all there was to it. 

These are all educated people. In fact, it seems to me that as education levels increase, people present as more inexperienced, more apathetic, and more susceptible to accepting those talking points as fact. They quickly revert to t-shirt slogans when challenged at the most basic level.

To me, this stands as proof of the inability to connect simple dots:

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6218882081001#sp=show-clips

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 12/30/2020 at 9:00 AM, boestar said:

and now you understand how hitler was elected Chancellor of Germany.  history repeats indefinitely

 

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/1/18/2009147/-To-understand-what-happens-next-with-QAnon-it-helps-to-look-back-at-past-cults

To understand what happens next with QAnon, it helps to look back at past cults

What’s the difference between a cult and a religion? Scale. Every religion begins somewhere in a basement or a backyard or a barn with a small group of people and some scrap of received wisdom. Most of them end that way. But occasionally an idea, a leader, a concept, just … catches fire. It spreads, and adapts, and invariably mutates as it passes from that original founder or founding group out to a larger set of believers. 

When that happens, when a cult crosses over to religion, it becomes hard to kill. Just the sheer number of believers means it’s extremely unlikely that something is going to happen one day to make everyone involved just abandon those beliefs. 

 
 

Before we dip into QAnon, let’s look first at another fairly recent cult, turned religion, turned cult, turned … religions.

In 1831, a farmer in upstate New York began telling his friends and family that, through a careful reading of the Bible, he had determined the world would end sometime in 1843 or 1844. To his great frustration, no one who knew William Miller paid much attention. After all, Miller, like most of his neighbors, had spent most of his life as a deist, with only a vague belief in a naturalist god. He only took up reading the Bible when after the War of 1812, a British shell killed another man while leaving him unscathed—which Miller took to be a miracle. It never seemed to occur to him to ask why the other man was undeserving.

Though those who knew him were decidedly unimpressed by how he turned selective quotes and some extensive calculations into a prediction that the End Times were coming, once Miller published those predictions in a small Baptist newspaper the following year, he quickly began to garner attention. A small pamphlet summarizing his views went out faster than he could print it. Within two years, Miller was launching a tour of cities and towns across the Northeast, attracting enormous crowds at every almost every stop. Just seating the people who flocked to hear his predictions required the construction of a special “stadium tent” that seated 4,000. In less than a decade, he had over 100,000 followers.

By 1840, Millerism was a national movement and the Millerites were publishing their own weekly and even daily newspapers. In those papers, other voices came to the fore. Miller had hesitated to give an exact date for when the world would end, or exactly what would happen when it did. But there were several voices among his followers who were willing to provide their own dates, made by their own obscure calculations. Eventually, these followers more or less dislodged Miller from the leadership of his own movement, and he was not in attendance at a great “camp meeting” when the date of Oct. 22, 1844 was definitively set for the end of the world. That date was set by a man named Samuel Snow, who had once been a vocal atheist only to be converted to the cause after reading Miller’s pamphlet.

In preparation for the day, Millerites gave away homes and farms. They left families and friends. On Oct. 22, many gathered together on rooftops and hillsides, waiting … and nothing happened. 

Following “The Great Disappointment,” some did leave the movement. In fact, tens of people not only abandoned Miller—they left Christianity altogether. But smaller groups persisted. Some decided that the prophecy wasn’t so much wrong as misunderstood; Oct. 22 had represented the date for some event in heaven, not on Earth. Others thought the date was simply wrong, but that the idea of a soon-to-be-realized End Time was exactly right. Those groups survive today as the Seventh-Day Adventist Church and Jehovah’s Witnesses.

So William Miller is still responsible for thousands of pamphlets. Some of which get left at your door.

How does QAnon shape up against this history? The QAnon movement began on Oct. 28, 2017 with a post on 4chan from someone claiming to have “Q level” security clearance. This obscure access, limited to the Department of Energy, somehow allowed the mysterious “Q” to pass along cryptic information that the nation was in the "Calm Before the Storm." The first post on that thread was this:

HRC extradition already in motion effective yesterday with several countries in case of cross border run. Passport approved to be flagged effective 10/30 @ 12:01am. Expect massive riots organized in defiance and others fleeing the US to occur. US M's will conduct the operation while NG activated. Proof check: Locate a NG member and ask if activated for duty 10/30 across most major cities.

Absolutely none of what was predicted happened. Later in the same thread, Q predicted that “the storm” would come on Nov. 3, 2017. Nothing happened on that day. Nothing happened on any of the days on which the thread predicted everything from a car bombing in London to a mass suicide of never-Trumpers to the arrest of Pope Francis. Over the last four years, “Q” made predictions about all manner of things, from the resignation of tech leaders to more dates for indictment of Hillary Clinton. Absolutely none of it came to pass.

it didn’t matter. As the predictions failed, the movement grew. Over time, each message from Q became more and more cryptic. The messages included references to the Pizzagate conspiracy, made claims that all mass shootings are fake, and painted the Mueller investigation as something created by Donald Trump to lure Democrats into a false sense of security while Trump collected the information needed to bring them down. Messages became embroidered with slogans, with apparently unconnected phrases, and with strings of nonsense letters or numbers. Q dismissed all the false predictions under a blanket claim that it was necessary to hide his real information. In all of the phrases, and letters, and numbers, Q followers began to “discover” messages that made the conspiracy vast enough to include everything from surviving Nazis to a hollow Earth.

That growth was spawned by a kind of selective pressure that looked for the most “interesting” possible interpretations of each message. For interesting you might also read “outlandish.” The most completely off-the-wall interpretations, the ones that pushed for the most obscure, difficult to see, double-twisting back somersault connections—those were the ones that were rewarded by more attention and more follow-up. In fits and starts, almost every conspiracy theory ever conceived became woven into the QAnon quilt.

All of this was certainly at the cult level when QAnon followers began becoming a presence at Trump rallies in 2018. But it’s past that point today. It’s not just a full on religion, it’s a religion on the brink of transformation.

Though QAnon grew up with Trump as the central figure and Q as the primary source of truth, both of those things seem to be slipping. Q has barely posted since the election. Trump has failed to “lock her up,” or conduct the long predicted mass arrests, much less reveal the secret network of world-spanning child transport tubes. QAnon supporters are no longer accepting that the next prediction will finally be the one that comes true.

In a way, what happened on Jan. 6 was a reaction to a second great disappointment. QAnon followers are just beginning to realize that, no matter what they call their short-lived insurgency, there will be no storm. The Krakens are all dead. And Donald Trump is going to have to go back to scamming people as a private citizen.

Then what? What will likely happen over the next year is the same thing that happened to the Millerites: Many people will leave the movement in disappointment. In fact, it’s likely that’s already happening. Except that’s not all that visible because the people who remain are the most adamant, the most vocal, the most violent, and the least likely to admit that the movement was ever in error.

If Trump resumes what he was doing before 2016 election, with regular rallies and perhaps some form of his own broadcast or social media network, there’s little doubt that a portion of QAnon will continue to center around him. But it will only be a portion. 

QAnon as a cult/religion has lost its center. It will fracture. However, it’s very unlikely to go away. The core ideas—that there is some elite group that secretly controls the world and carries out terrible practices with impunity—is a very, very old one. It certainly goes back to the blood libel. And even that was surely not the first form of the basic conspiracy theory. Because this idea is immensely satisfying to believe. A decade from now, QAnon may be larger and more powerful than it is today. It may also be completely unrecognizable, with that core idea wrapped in all new layers.

After all, there are now almost 19 million Seventh-Day Adventists and 8 million Jehovah’s Witnesses. Both groups came from just a handful of stubborn Millerites after the majority of the movement had decamped in disgust.


If you’re interested in William Miller, his predictions, and his cult turned religion, I covered this topic at length 10 years ago on this site for a book that I was writing at the time (which I never finished). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Our rights all disappeared last March and the people of this once proud and free society don’t seem to care the slightest so long as we are promised to be kept a little safer from the scary virus. We are all now sick until proven healthy

Federal government faces imminent lawsuit over unlawful confinement of returning Canadian travelers

Jan 29th, 2021

 

OTTAWA: The Justice Centre today announced that immediate legal action is being prepared against the Trudeau government over the declaration that Canadian residents will be subjected to mandatory quarantine, at their own expense, after returning from international travel, regardless of their negative COVID status. These measures are a blatant violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the right to enter and leave Canada, the right to liberty and security of the person, the right to not be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned, the right to retain legal counsel, and the right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.

Entire article here:

https://www.jccf.ca/federal-government-faces-imminent-lawsuit-over-unlawful-confinement-of-returning-canadian-travelers/

Edited by Eddy
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eddy said:

Our rights all disappeared last March and the people of this once proud and free society don’t seem to care the slightest so long as we are promised to be kept a little safer from the scary virus. We are all now sick until proven healthy

Federal government faces imminent lawsuit over unlawful confinement of returning Canadian travelers

Jan 29th, 2021

 

OTTAWA: The Justice Centre today announced that immediate legal action is being prepared against the Trudeau government over the declaration that Canadian residents will be subjected to mandatory quarantine, at their own expense, after returning from international travel, regardless of their negative COVID status. These measures are a blatant violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the right to enter and leave Canada, the right to liberty and security of the person, the right to not be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned, the right to retain legal counsel, and the right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.

Entire article here:

https://www.jccf.ca/federal-government-faces-imminent-lawsuit-over-unlawful-confinement-of-returning-canadian-travelers/

I have never been a fan of the rights of one being more important than the rights of the majority....if the the rights of the "one" might / would harm others. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

“Critics of the Great Reset, such as Furey and Murphy, have argued that there is a very real concentrated push by international organizations and governments to use the pandemic as an opportunity to implement an environmental and economic agenda that could involve fewer freedoms and more social control for everyday citizens.

“Things are getting more and more out of the hands of the regular person,” said Furey.

“To me the Great Reset, the big problem with it is that it’s ignoring the key lessons of the 20th century while simultaneously seeking to erase the gains of that century. The phrase the ‘Great Reset,’ good heavens, it sounds like Mao’s Great Leap Forward. It sounds like those five year planning things that Stalin came up with and those didn’t end too well.”

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
 
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau virtually attended a United Nations meeting focused on international debt architecture and financial liquidity on Monday, where he expressed concerns over the financial woes being faced by emerging economies.

Appearing alongside the UN's Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness, Trudeau said that the ongoing crisis on climate change and the economic challenges that come with it have been "made worse" by the pandemic.

Trudeau speaks: "Several countries have already defaulted, a significant number of emerging economies face serious fiscal challenges, and many developing countries are in debt distress. This comes on top of the economic effects of ongoing emergencies like climate change, which have only been made worse by the pandemic."

"Truly building back better," said Trudeau, "means creating jobs and growing clean, resilient economies. It means ensuring the legacy of this crisis isn't one of rolling back progress for anyone."
  • This is not the first meeting between Trudeau, Guterres and Jamaican Prime Minister Holness.
During a September UN virtual meeting, Trudeau announced $400 million to humanitarian aid spending "to trusted partners on the ground fighting COVID-19," saying that "Canada believes that a strong, coordinated response across the world and across sectors is essential. This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset."

The "reset" quote drew significant ire and criticism from Conservative politicians and pundits, including Former Conservative Party Leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis, who wrote for The Post Millennial that: The goal [of the reset] is to usher in a new way of doing things around the world, where governments play a more active role in wealth generation and distribution, while somehow simultaneously attempting to not stifle ingenuity and innovation.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Great Nonsense Of "The Great Reset"

“The Great Reset” is the latest deceptive euphemism for totalitarian socialism that is being promoted by yet another group of wealthy corporate elitists who think they can centrally plan the entire world economy.  They are essentially the ideological heirs of Frederick Engels and his intellectual puppet Karl Marx.  “The Great Reset” follows in the rhetorical footsteps of such euphemisms for socialism as “economic democracy,” “social justice,” “liberation theology,” “progressivism,” “market socialism” (an oxymoron, like “jumbo shrimp” or “military intelligence”), “environmentalism,” “fighting climate change,” “sustainable development,” and “green new deal,” to mention just a few.

 

The main figure of this movement is wealthy German engineer Klaus Schwab, founder of the “World Economic Forum,” who champions what he calls “transhumanism,” the integration of nanotechnology into the human body so that humans can be controlled remotely by the state. As Ron Paul has noted, “Included in Schwab’s proposal for surveillance [of every citizen] is his idea to use brain scans and nanotechnology to predict, and if necessary, prevent, individuals’ future behavior .  This means that anyone whose brain is ‘scanned’ could have his . . . [constitutional] rights violated because a government bureaucrat determines the individual is going to commit a crime.”

Placed in the hands of politicians, this would create a level of totalitarianism the Soviets could only have dreamed of.  In other words, Schwab is reminiscent of that famous twentieth-century German who also fantasized about creating a master race and ruling the world.

This is nothing new, Antony Mueller points out, as eugenics, which was all the rage among so many ruling class elitists of the early twentieth century “is now called transhumanism.” Among the most prominent late nineteenth-and twentieth-century eugenicists were H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, Charles Darwin’s son Leonard, John Maynard Keynes, Irving Fisher, Winston Churchill, and Bill Gates, Sr.  Bill Gates, Jr. is an enthusiastic funding source for “transhumanism” research and, like his father, is fond of eugenics.

During a recent “Ted” talk Gates, Jr. complained that “The world today has 6.8 billion people . .. that’s headed up to about 9 billion.”  Have no fear, he said, because if “we” do “a really great job on vaccines [with anti-fertility drugs? Poisons?] health care, reproductive health services [including abortion?], we could lower that by perhaps 10 to 15 percent."  That in turn will lower carbon dioxide levels on the planet and address “climate change” as well, said Gates.

Keynes was treasurer of the Cambridge University Eugenics Society and director of the Eugenics Society of London.  He called eugenics “the most important and significant branch of sociology” [Eugenics Archive].  Irving Fisher, icon of the Chicago School of Economics, literally wrote the book on the subject, entitled Eugenics.

When he was the British Home Secretary (1910-1911) Winston Churchill advocated “the confinement, segregation, and sterilization of a class of persons contemporarily described as the ‘feeble minded’” [International Churchill Society].  His stated goal was “the improvement of the British breed”.  Accordingly, he supported “compulsory detention of the mentally inadequate”; the “sterilization of the unfit”; and “proper labor colonies” for “tramps and wastrels.”

 

World Government, Anyone?

Antony Mueller also wrote of how the first attempt to create some kind of global governing institution to centrally plan the world was the League of Nations (1920), followed by the United Nations in 1945 under the leadership of Stalin, FDR, and Churchill.  Although Churchill was fond of citing F.A. Hayek, especially The Road to Serfdom, FDR was essentially a fascist whose domestic policies differed very little from fascist Italy and Germany, and of course Stalin was a mass-murdering communist.

Churchill was voted out of office and replaced by the socialist Labor Party’s Clement Atlee in 1945.  The three “allied powers” of World War II were then led by two socialists and the political heir to FDR’s economic fascism, Harry Truman.

The U.N. immediately created UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and the World Health Organization (WHO), whose stated goal was to “manipulate human development.”  Eugenicist Julian Huxley was the first director of UNESCO who lamented that Marxism’s attempt to create a new type of human (“socialist man”) had already failed because it lacked a “biological component.”

Neo-Malthusianism and the Birth of “Environmentalism”

[S[ocialism . . . is . . . the society that must emerge if humanity is to cope with . . . the ecological burden that economic growth is placing on the environment . . . .  [C]apitalism must be monitored, regulated, and contained to such a degree that it would be difficult to call the final social order capitalism.”

– Robert Heilbroner, “After Capitalism,” The New Yorker, Sept. 10, 1990

The above quotation by socialist economist, the late Robert Heilbroner, was written in the context of an article that lamented and mourned the worldwide collapse of socialism in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s.  The great debate between capitalism and socialism was over, he said, and Ludwig von Mises was right about socialism all along, said a man who had spent the past half century promoting socialism in his teaching, speaking, and writing.  But do not despair, he told his fellow socialists, for there is one more trick up our sleeves, namely, the Trojan Horse of achieving socialism under the guise of “environmentalism.”

The basic strategy was then, as it is now, to constantly frighten the gullible public with predictions of The End of the World from environmental catastrophe unless we abandon capitalism and adopt socialist central planning. This has always been the one constant theme of the environmentalist movement (not to be confused with the conservation movement which is actually interested in the health of the planet and the humans who occupy it) since the 1960s.  It ignores the fact that the twentieth-century socialist countries like the Soviet Union and China had by far the worse environmental problems on the planet, orders of magnitude worse than in the capitalist countries.

In 2019 the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) published “Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions” by Myron Ebell and Steven Milloy.  The study is a compilation of reprints of newspaper and magazine articles that illustrate the seemingly never-ending false scare stories spread by the “environmentalistS” and their media puppets.  The real founder of the modern environmental movement was entomologist Paul Ehrlich, not Rachel Carson, author of the widely-cited novel, Silent Spring.  Ehrlich was supported by a group of wealthy socialists known as “The Club of Rome.”  His book, The Population Bomb, was incredibly successful, selling millions in just a couple of years, warning that the entire world will soon be destroyed by capitalism unless it is ended NOW and “severe” regulatory measures are taken.

The first article displayed by CEI was from the November 17, 1967 Salt Lake Tribune announcing that Professor Paul Ehrlich of Stanford said the “time of famines” is upon us and will be “disastrous” by 1975 because of over-population.  Such talk was a resurrection of the hoary, thoroughly-discredited Malthusianism of the nineteenth century, cloaked in the words of “modern science.”  Birth control may have to be made “involuntary, said Ehrlich, and accompanied by “putting sterilization agents into staple foods and drinking water.”  The Catholic church needs to be “pressured” by government to support his, said Ehrlich, who became one of the most celebrated, rich, and famous academics of the twentieth century.

The New York Times quoted Ehrlich on August 10, 1969, as predicting that “unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam n 20 years.”

Ice Age Hysteria of the ‘70s

Global cooling that would create a new ice age was the next scare tactic.  An April 18, 1970 Boston Globe article quoted “pollution expert” James P. Lodge, Jr. as saying “air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the next century.”

Ehrlich chimed in, naturally.  An October 6, 1970 Redlands, CA Daily Facts article quoted him as predicting that “the oceans will be . . . dead . . . in less than a decade” because of pollution caused by capitalism.  And they will be frozen over.  A July 9, 1971 Washington Post article quoted a Dr. S.I. Rasool of NASA and Columbia University who said that pollution will cause an average temperature drop of as much as ten degrees that “could be sufficient to trigger an ice age!”

On December 3, 1972 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration sent a letter to President Nixon predicting a “global deterioration of climate” never before seen by “civilized mankind” that would lead to a new ice age.

A January 29, 1974 article in The Guardian was headlined, “Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast.”  This was followed by a June 24, 1974 Time magazine article warning that “telltale signs are everywhere” that we were already in a new ice age.  Global cooling hysteria was still alive and well in 1978.  A January 5, 1978 New York Times article was headlined, “International Team of Specialists Finds No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend in Northern Hemisphere.

Pivoting on a Dime:  Global Warming Hysteria

By 1988, after more than a decade of warnings of a new ice age unless capitalism is destroyed failed to produce the desired result, many of these same “scientists” and bureaucrats all of a sudden began warning of an earthly apocalypse caused by global warming.  The “greenhouse effect” of pollution was discovered/invented, with nationwide warnings like one in the June 24 Miami News declaring that “’88 On Way to be Hottest Ever as World Temperatures Up Sharply.”  James Hansen of NASA warned in the Lansing State Journal on December 12, 1988 that Washington, D.C. would “go from its current 35 days a year over 90 degrees to 85 days a year” and “the level of the ocean will rise” by as much as six feet.  “Rising seas could obliterate nations,” a “U.N. official” informed the Associated Press on June 30, 1989.  In reality, as CEI points out, is that the number of 90+ degree days in Washington, D.C. peaked in 1911 and continues to decline.

By 2000 the mantra of the global warming hysterics included predictions that “snowfalls are now just a thing of the past,” and “children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” The Independent announced on September 12, 2015, quoting another environmentalist “expert” from the University of East Anglia.

By 2013 “the Arctic will be free of sea ice” predicted James Hansen in 2008, as reported by The Argus Free Press of Owosso, Michigan.  In the same year Al Gore informed us that “the North polar ice cap would be gone,” as reported by the Associated Press on June 24, 2008.   For such predictions Massachusetts Senator ed Markey designated Hansen as “a climate prophet.”

The renowned atmospheric scientist Prince Charles told The Independent on July 9, 2009 that “the price of capitalism and consumerism is just too high.”  The planet will be destroyed by 2017 if capitalism is not essentially destroyed immediately, said the mega-wealthy prince whose preferred method of travel is by gas-guzzling Rolls Royce and private jet.

Former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown outdid the prince by informing The Independent on October 20, 2009 that “we have fewer than fifty days to save our planet from catastrophe.”  When New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez publicly announced in 2019 with perfect certainty that the world will end in in twelve years, she was referring to a 2018 United Nations “study” of “climate change” that said the same thing.  The world will likely end in twelve years, said the U.N. bureaucrats, unless the U.N. is given vast new governing powers over all countries of the world, and vast sums of additional tax revenue.

NONE of these widely-touted and celebrated predictions came true.  Birds did not even disappear from the planet as predicted in Silent Spring.   capitalism was not replaced by worldwide socialist central planning; so the environmental “scientists” pivoted on a dime once again and adopted the language of climate change.  It now does not matter whether the climate’s temperature is increasing or decreasing; either will cause a “catastrophe” that can only be avoided by replacing what’s left of capitalism with some kind of worldwide socialist central planning, they inform us.

A quarter of a century of “climate change” hysteria has still not led to the desired result.  The next step in this more-than-a-century-old political crusade for worldwide socialism, therefore, is “The Great Reset.”

The Great Nonsense of The Great Reset

Klaus Schwab holds doctorates in engineering and economics, although he seems ignorant of the most elementary economic concepts when he contends that the entire world economy can somehow be stopped by a god-like hand, push-button style, and “reset” and “built back better,” one of his favorite slogans.   He is the founder of the “World Economic Forum,” touted as an organization that promotes “Public-Private Cooperation.”  As Ayn Rand once said, however, whenever the private sector “partners” with government, government is always the senior and controlling partner.

Schwab seems totally unaware of how the institutions of capitalism have evolved over the centuries by ingenuity and efforts of millions and were not magically set or reset by any single man or government committee.  Money evolved on the free market and did not originate from governmental edits. Even language evolved, and was not invented by any government bureaucracy.  There is no recognition at all in any of Schwab’s books that he understands (or cares) anything about the spontaneous order of markets, the importance of private property and free-market prices, the economy-smothering effects of government bureaucracy, or the economic reasons for the inevitable failures of socialism.  Like all other socialist ideologues, he does not even bother to address the critics of socialism as he blindly makes his case for world socialism.  It can work, he insists, if only he and his corporate elitist comrades could be in charge.

The “logic” of The Great Reset can be stated in a syllogism:

1) Socialism has failed disastrously everywhere it has been implemented;

2) Everyone knows this;

3) Therefore, what the world needs is more socialism on the biggest scale ever.

Schwab is an engineer and believes that world society can be socially “engineered” by corporate elitists like himself.  The Soviets would label this kind of thinking “scientific socialism.”

Destructionism

Like all socialist ideologues, Schwab’s starting point is what Ludwig von Mises called “destructionism.”  All socialists, Mises said, advocated the destruction of the existing institutions of society, especially capitalism, the family, and religion, all of which form a barrier between the individual and the controlling dictates of the state. Only then can society be “reset” to create a socialist utopia.  For “Socialism is . . . the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created.  It doesn’t build; it destroys.  For destructionism is the essence of it . . . each step leading towards socialism must exhaust itself in the destruction of what already exists.”

This is why Schwab, Gates, Biden, and other proponents of “the great reset” so enthusiastically celebrate the lockdowns that occurred during the so-called pandemic of 2020 and declare that it is time to “build back better.”  Destroy what exists, they tell us, and then trust them to “build back” the entire planet “better.”  In fact, they were caught on video at their annual World Economic Forum meeting in early 2021 cheering a video of empty city streets and closed-down businesses caused by the government-mandated lockdowns that plunged literally millions into poverty worldwide. The lockdowns are “improving cities around the world,” said Schwab.  They may even moderate “climate change,” he triumphantly chortled.  The unemployed and impoverished residents of those devasted cities would obviously disagree with this rosy scenario.

A “team of researchers” at the University of East Anglia, an institution that is notorious for its “studies” of global warming/cooling/climate change hysteria, has also chimed in to advocate a “global lockdown” every two years to supposedly reduce carbon dioxide emissions as required by the “Paris Climate Accord.”  These lockdowns would not be related to any virus but would simply be designed to intentionally destroy much of the world economy, leaving millions in abject poverty, causing untold illness and death, for the sake of “fighting climate change” and of course, to achieve their real objective of destroying capitalism and adopting a version of worldwide socialist central planning.

Abolition of Private Property

The Word Economic Forum (WEF) socialists reveal themselves as classic Marxists in the sense that many of them call for the abolition of private property which, coincidentally, was the first plank of the ten planks of The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels.  Former Danish Minister of the Environment Ida Auken was given a platform at a WEF event to explain her definition of “a good life” that entailed the abolition of private property:

“Welcome to the year 2030 . . . . I don’t own anything, I don’t own a car.  I don’t own a house.  I don’t own any appliances or any clothes . . . someone else is using our [house] whenever we do not need it . . . .  I have no real privacy . . . everything I do . . . is recorded [by the state].  All in all, it is a good life.”

Auken here is obviously dreaming of “a good life” where governments own all property and rent or lease everything to their subjects.  Of course, that means that politicians will decide for you what you need.  There would be no such thing as consumer sovereignty any more than there was in the Soviet Union (apart from the black markets).  And as Hayek famously said, in such a system the only power worth having would be political power.  Bribery, corruption, and rent seeking run amok would be pervasive in any such society.

They want to spy on your every move, using the latest nanotechnology which probably means implanting devices into your body.  There will no privacy, and that’s all good with Ida Auken and her WEF colleagues.

Auken speaks fondly of how, if she wasn’t “using” a room of her house, it would be perfectly fine for strangers to occupy it in her absence.  Government-approved strangers, of course.  This is eerily reminiscent of how the Soviets socialized housing and forced strangers to live in extremely cramped spaces in communal housing.  It is easy to imagine an Auken army doing the same in the name of “sustainability.”

After receiving criticism of this outrageous view, Auken attempted to soft pedal and disguise her true beliefs by saying that such a world was not actually her “utopia” but only what she believes is the inevitable.  This is another old socialist gimmick – to argue that socialism is inevitable, and it is therefore futile to oppose it.  Her argument that she was just explaining an inevitable future is not believable.

In fact, the inevitability gimmick is the main theme of all of Schwab’s books on the subject.  They tend to go into excruciating detail about the digitalization of life, nanotechnology, etc., portray it all as “inevitable,” and then make a pitch for why this supposedly means that centralized political control of all societies is necessary .

Exactly the opposite is true, however.  As Hayek pointed out in almost all of his life’s work.  The more complex society becomes, the greater is the need to rely on voluntarism, private property, and free markets, the only known means of achieving an effective use of knowledge in society.  Complexity requires the use of many minds (and bodies) to make effective use of increasingly complex knowledge in order to advance.  Not only many minds, but many minds in a regime of economic freedom is necessary — again the polar opposite of “the great reset” ideology.

The Soviet Union had many brilliant people but they were largely forbidden to apply their talents in a way that would improve the lives of their fellow citizens.  They were viewed by the state instead as tools to aggrandize the state, not to serve the citizenry. To deny this is to engage in what Hayek called a “fatal conceit.”

The “Stakeholder” Subterfuge

The WEF elitists also employ another subterfuge as a means of essentially abolishing private property.  They do this by advocating the replacement of corporate shareholders with “stakeholders,” which includes just about every type of group of individuals in any community which are said to have a “right” to affect corporate decision making on a day-to-day basis.  Such groups usually involve various left-wing political pressure groups such as labor unions, environmentalists, the “civil rights”/affirmative action lobbyists, ad infinitum.  Libertarians and free-market economists never seem to appear on the lists of “stakeholders” that are espoused by leftist stakeholder theorists.

Public choice economics teaches us, however, that such large groups tend to be disorganized because of their size, diversity, and consequently high decision-making costs and are therefore rarely effective.  It would also subject corporate decision making to profit-destroying bureaucracy and indecision, effectively turning corporations into versions of say, the Department of Motor Vehicles or the U.S. Postal Service in terms of efficiency.

The “stakeholder” advocates surely understand this, which is why they propose that people such as themselves serve as unelected spokesmen for all the various “stakeholders.”  This will require the heavy hand of government to empower them to order corporations to do as they say, not as their customers and shareholder owners say.  It is de facto nationalization, in other words, an effective abolition of private property in corporations.

In addition to offering no clue that he understands elementary economic principles, Schwab also seems completely clueless about the long history of classical liberal ideas such as private property, free markets, limited constitutional government, decentralized government, the rule of law, and much else.  Or, he simply doesn’t care because he is a megalomaniacal tyrant.  He is no different, in other words, than all the other twentieth century socialists who were either ignorant of these things or openly attacked them as barriers to their totalitarian intentions.

Moreover, Auken’s utopian daydream is reminiscent of the late nineteenth century book, Looking Backward, by Edward Bellamy.  This was another utopian socialist daydream in the form of a novel whereby one Julian West falls asleep in 1887 and awakens 113 years later in the U.S. in the year 2000 when the country had been turned into a socialist utopia.  Auken apparently believes it would only take a single decade to achieve her (and Schwab’s) socialist utopia, however.

The Great Reset as Super Fascism

The World Economic Forum claims to exist in order to promote an integration of private enterprise and the state.  This is a perfect definition of economic fascism.  Economic fascism in Mussolini’s Italy and Nazi Germany allowed ostensibly private enterprises to exist (unlike the Russian socialists), but only if it was subjected to a totalitarian regulatory regime that forced all production to serve “the common good” as defined by the political ruling class, not the ruled. Consumer sovereignty was not at all a concern.  Schwab uses this same language of “the common good” to describe his “great reset” agenda.

It is basically a plea to turn the entire world economy into a version of Chinese fascism.  In the past several decades the Chinese communist government allowed more and more private enterprises to exist, but they are all still very heavily regulated, regimented, and controlled by the state.  Of course, the same can be said of the U.S. economy; it’s all a matter of degree.  As Robert Higgs has said, the American economic system is a system of “participatory fascism,” by which he meant a combination of economic fascism and democracy instead of dictatorship.

After claiming that the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” in the form of the “digitalization” of just about everything is inevitable, and arguing that that means there is a need for the most centralized government the world has ever known, Klaus and his associates drag out the same tired, old socialist platitudes that Leftists have been promoting for generations as the alleged answers to all of society’s problems.  They advocate shutting down more and more of the world economy with more lockdowns (destructionism); a huge expansion of the catastrophically-failed welfare state with the unlimited printing of money by central banks in order to hand out “universal basic income” to everyone; the eventual abolition of beef in order to fight “climate change” allegedly caused by cow flatulence; the abolition of virtually all other kinds of meat, replacing it with grass and insects as part of the average diet (presumably not their diet, however); the abolition of the energy industries and their replacement with windmills and solar panels; communal housing, Soviet style; the “leveling” of wage differences by regulating labor markets essentially null and void, which would create communistic chaos; and the effective nationalization of whatever is left of private society with a 400% increase in taxation (for starters).

There is supposed to be no opposition to this recipe for totalitarian utopia because it is all being done in the name of “equity and inclusion” (the mating call of Leftists everywhere), “sustainability,” and “the common good.”  To oppose this latest proposal for a totalitarian world order is, therefore, to be an enemy of society.  The “common good before individual good,” by the way, was also the explicitly-stated theme of the 1920 Nazi Party Platform.  According to the World Economic Forum crowd this is the “new” ideology that is supposed to lead us all through the twenty-first century’s “Fourth Industrial Revolution.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/great-nonsense-great-reset?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+(zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero)

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Jaydee said:
 
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau virtually attended a United Nations meeting focused on international debt architecture and financial liquidity on Monday, where he expressed concerns over the financial woes being faced by emerging economies.

Appearing alongside the UN's Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness, Trudeau said that the ongoing crisis on climate change and the economic challenges that come with it have been "made worse" by the pandemic.

Trudeau speaks: "Several countries have already defaulted, a significant number of emerging economies face serious fiscal challenges, and many developing countries are in debt distress. This comes on top of the economic effects of ongoing emergencies like climate change, which have only been made worse by the pandemic."

"Truly building back better," said Trudeau, "means creating jobs and growing clean, resilient economies. It means ensuring the legacy of this crisis isn't one of rolling back progress for anyone."
  • This is not the first meeting between Trudeau, Guterres and Jamaican Prime Minister Holness.
During a September UN virtual meeting, Trudeau announced $400 million to humanitarian aid spending "to trusted partners on the ground fighting COVID-19," saying that "Canada believes that a strong, coordinated response across the world and across sectors is essential. This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset."

The "reset" quote drew significant ire and criticism from Conservative politicians and pundits, including Former Conservative Party Leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis, who wrote for The Post Millennial that: The goal [of the reset] is to usher in a new way of doing things around the world, where governments play a more active role in wealth generation and distribution, while somehow simultaneously attempting to not stifle ingenuity and innovation.

so the pandemic made it worse....

Well the number of aircraft flying in Canada is around 15% of pre pandemic so its not aviation causing the problem

Traffic on the roads is around 50% of pre pandemic so its not vehicular traffic

Warmer than the last winter this year so its not gas heating causing the problem

So which sector is actually causing the problem?  Likely all the hot air being expended by Trudeau.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cbc.ca/news/gopublic/tattleware-privacy-employment-1.5978337

It happens incrementally and at slow but continuous rate, before you know it, it actually effects YOU....a bit like a very small hydraulic leak on a very long flight. You thought it was about using a toilet.... nope, it was always about access to sports scholarships. When young college age women were warned about this they said "it's like a toilet like," and screamed epitaphs at anyone who could look 3 moves into the future.

Lost on people is the notion that all of this will eventually get down to you....THAT'S YOU PERSONALLY. When you throw other people under the bus of indifference (and it's always with a t-shirt slogan), they simply won't be there for you when you get trampled. So I say, if you don't like it get another job.... see how that works?

We aren't tracking airplanes and vehicles here now (for safety/efficiency) we are tracking the movement of individual people..... think about that for a second. 

I don't have a smart phone, I use one of those waterproof, indestructible flip phones (because I need it). Simple, basic and tough as nails. I've fallen off two roofs, dropped it in a bucket of paint, felled a tree on it and it once jumped off a floating dock.

Take note now because this is what you don't want..... I don't care because it doesn't effect me.  I do have a question though: WTFDYTWGTH?

Now personally, (and before I let them fire me for refusing) I would strap that phone to a dog and go for coffee. And I'd do that at each of the off hours cleaning venues until they fired me for cause. Maybe I'd name the dog Hoover and subcontract him.

 

 

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.