The Technocratic Dark State: Part II – The Macro and Micro Dynamics of Technocracy
“The Dark Lord Sauron forged in secret, a master ring to control all others.” – J. R. R. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings
In Part I, using Iain Davis’s latest work – The Technocratic Dark State – I discussed what Technocracy is, delving into some of the ideology behind the movement. In this second part, again reviewing Iain’s work, I will examine the macro- and micro-level dynamics underpinning technocracy. At the end of Part I, I said I would ask some basic questions about Bitcoin in Part II. However, in order to keep this second part more digestible, I have decided to address specific money matters in Part III.
How is technocracy being pushed at the macro level?
“…For within these rings was bound the strength and will to govern each race. But they were all of them deceived, for another ring was made. In the land of Mordor, in the fires of Mount Doom, The Dark Lord Sauron forged in secret, a master ring to control all others. And into this ring he poured his cruelty, his malice, and his will to dominate all life. One ring to rule them all.” – J. R. R. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings [Emphasis added]
Infrastructure for implementing technocratic policy has been cemented at the global level for some time. The UN fully embraced the public-private partnership model of international governance in 1998 when the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, addressed the World Economic Forum (WEF). Disingenuously invoking peace and prosperity, he asserted that these two goals could no longer be guaranteed by engaging only with governments, and that the business community would now be included in the UN’s formal partnerships.[1] Stripped of the customary PR spin, he was in fact formalising transnational capital’s paramount role in forging the New World Order.
The WEF formally consummated its partnership with the UN in 2019 to, in the WEF’s words, “jointly accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. Included in the usual suite of policy pabulum is “digital cooperation” to “meet the needs of the Fourth Industrial Revolution” (4IR). Isn’t it comforting to know that not only is humanity at the sharp end of, yet again, another top-down ruling class revolution, but the WEF and UN have assured us that they are dedicating all their waking hours to keeping it on track?
This is crucial to understand: the WEF and the UN share a joint passion for digitalisation in all spheres of life.
In the same year that the WEF and the UN were consummating their unholy alliance, the UK Government was doing the same thing with its own formal WEF partnership agreement. Again, the 4IR, technological innovation, and AI and machine learning were the buzzwords plastered all over the press release.
One of Trump’s first acts on taking office was to announce a $500-billion public-private infrastructure project in Texas called ‘Stargate’, whose goal is to accelerate (that word again!) the development of AI systems.
However, the pièce de résistance, and the Trojan Horse, of the global public-private partnership heist is the UN’s Agenda 2030, spelt out in its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Filled with platitudes about saving the planet and safeguarding human rights, Agenda 2030 is a blueprint for a global fascist takeover of the entire planet by the global oligarchy. Human enslavement is masquerading as human rights, and monetising the world’s natural resources is masquerading as stewardship of those resources.
The SDGs are undergirded by an imperative to advance digital technologies, which is why the public-private partnership is so crucial to achieving the global digital dystopia of the mouthbreathing Machiavellis. They are terrified by an increasingly restive global population posing a threat to the concentration of evermore wealth in the bloodstained paws of the ruling corporatocracy.
While rightly highlighting vast wealth inequalities, the UN disingenuously bemoans the fact that “4 billion people still do not have access to the Internet”. Advocating FaceBook accounts for all while doing absolutely nothing to halt a war that will cause global starvation due to fertiliser supply chain shocks is insulting and evil drivel. The UN is a vital ally of the global mafia hellbent on binding the world in digital chains. It is run by the UN Security Council, which in turn comprises the most powerful nations on earth. Those nations are, in turn, beholden to the corporate interests that run them. The logic of these relationships is inescapable – the UN is no different to captured political parties issuing edicts in the West on behalf of the plutocracy. The UN is part of the same racket.
The UN has in fact proved itself to be an invaluable vehicle for issuing global policies that are implemented by captured national governments, using International Law as cover. If a policy is passed down from the UN machinery of SDGs, it doesn’t even have to be debated in Western parliaments. It often doesn’t even require legislation, by virtue of UN Treaties which have more authority than local law. As long as it’s got the word ‘sustainable’ attached to it, it’s a done deal.
The cause of wealth inequality is uncomplicated, and as old as time itself – the exploitation of the many by the few. Far from rectifying that, internet access desired under SDGs will only reinforce inequality through digital ID, and tokenisation of the economy and natural resources, more on which shortly. Why on earth should we trust an organisation that wants everyone to have internet access, but has done absolutely nothing to halt genocides and illegal wars of aggression? Worse still, this organisation, posing as the champion of the poor, partners with the very global corporatocracy that is responsible for the wealth inequalities it alleges to decry. We have learnt nothing from decades of decay if we continue to expect solutions to global poverty to emanate from institutions which now embody the same consciousness that caused the problem in the first place.
15-minute smart cities are also part of the SDG framework. These involve geofencing human populations using a combination of the Internet of Things (devices whose usage is governed by AI tech), and real-time digital surveillance of each individual’s energy and consumption.
If you really believe that ‘decarbonisation’ is going to save the planet, you’ll need to explain to me why investors are licking their chops at the prospect of a $22 trillion carbon market by 2050.[2] Even if you thought that reducing carbon emissions per se was a worthwhile pursuit – and it’s not – why would you endorse the ‘markets’ trading pieces of paper with a value of $22 trillion? Do you imagine that poor kids in the Global South walking 5 miles a day to collect fetid water from a broken well are going to see even one penny of that ‘decarbonising financial innovation’?
Trump’s Stargate initiative aims to spend $500 billion, while Apple alone plans to spend $500 billion on data centres in the next four years. There are numerous other projects one could cite, but these two alone represent $1 trillion of investment in digital data processing. Not food, or other concrete investments that would actually uplift the lives of poor people, but data processing. This represents a level of madness that defies description, and the UN, which claims to care about global poverty alleviation, has hitched its wagon to this.
In 2023, data centre energy consumption in the state of Virginia alone accounted for 21% of the total power consumption, which exceeded domestic consumption at 18%. On this measure alone, our overlords have told us that data is now more important than people. In Pennsylvania in 2025, the sharp rise in electricity demand from data centres caused energy prices to increase by about 15%, roughly double the national average. U.S. data centre electricity consumption tripled between 2014 and 2023, and is set to triple again by 2028 from the 2023 base.
All of this provides a key insight into why you should be highly sceptical of the official climate change narrative. Those pushing the scam don’t believe it themselves. If the real aim of the ruling class, their subservient governments, and the UN was to throttle carbon emissions, then how do we reconcile this with the planned exponential expansion of carbon emitting AI data centres. And how does trading $22 trillion of ‘carbon credits’ actually reduce carbon emissions?
As if all of that was not insane enough, there’s the Natural Asset Company (NAC) tokenisation scam, which is the truly jaw-dropping coup de grâce of the digital-Sustainable Development fraud. Fraud is in fact a pathetically inadequate word to describe the literal planned theft of the world’s entire natural resource base by the global oligarchy. There are no words to describe such a crime because nothing comparable in history has occurred. But this is not only imminent; Grand Theft World has begun. How will the heist work?
Let’s start in the US, where Trump has signed a Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) Executive Order whose stated objective is to “leverage returns [on the nation’s assets] to promote fiscal sustainability”. Included in the assets to be leveraged are “natural resource reserves”.[3] Iain posits that this is the next big financial scam that could simultaneously resolve the West’s debt burden, while handing over natural resources to the oligarchs.[4]
NACs were launched in 2021 on the New York Stock Exchange. They seek to generate financial returns by valuing a natural asset based on the “ecosystem services” it produces. Once valued, the related services are then monetised.[5] What are “ecosystem services”? Well, food, fresh water, the air we breathe, good soil, plant and wildlife habitat…you name it. If it’s natural, it’s monetisable! What could go wrong?
Valuing and monetising nature is in fact a way of creating a rationing and allocation system that will be out of our hands, and firmly in the hands of the Sovereign Wealth Funds doing the valuing and monetising. Bathed in the language of sustainability, this is nothing short of an audacious plan by the global oligarchy to steal the planet’s entire natural resource base. Is the SDG mafia at the UN in on it? Iain points out that “numerous SDG targets demand that natural ecosystems have a corresponding financial asset value ascribed to them. Forests, for example, are transformed…into ecosystem carbon sequestration services (ECSSs).”[6] Again, just ask yourself whether putting a forest on an asset portfolio on the New York Stock Exchange has anything to do with protecting that forest, or exploiting it for profit?
What is the projected value of tokenised natural assets in the world? $4,000,000,000,000,000 – that’s four quadrillion US dollars[7], or four thousand trillion. To repeat – monetising mother nature is the sort of thing the UN is happy to promote while doing absolutely nothing about war, genocide, and looming famine caused by war. It has partnered with the WEF, whose members include active participants in the military industrial complex. Palantir is part of that complex and will also help the UN to further its Digitalisation agenda.
In summary, the data digitalisation push that is so integral to global technocracy is being imposed from the uppermost structures of global governance and policy-making, including the UN and the WEF. This is one important aspect of the macro machinery driving technocracy.
Another key facet of the macro stratagem underpinning global technocracy is the multipolarity fraud that I’ve been banging on about for some time now. This is one of the most important points Iain makes in his thesis.
Iain’s research reveals that in 1956, the Rockefeller Fund instructed Henry Kissinger to commission a report on how to enhance the authority of the UN, which itself was the brainchild of the Rockefellers. The Report concluded that strengthening UN global governance was best achieved by dividing the world into smaller manageable regions under an international body of growing authority, this being the UN.[8]
This was followed in 1973 by the Club of Rome’s report titled “Regionalised and Adaptive Model of the Global World System”, which proposed a division of the world into ten “Kingdoms”, synonymous with blocs or poles.[9] Multipolarity was midwifed in globalist institutions many eons ago. This seems contradictory to the aim of centralised global power unless you grasp the counterintuitive paradigm of first decentralising in order to re-centralise. The 200 or so countries in the world will be far easier to tame once they have been divided into ten regions, with each country subordinate to the policy and financial systems of its regional head.[10]
It’s straightforward hierarchical delegation. Management 101 really. Provided all 10 monetary and financial systems are interoperable – that word is one of the most commonly used in BIS and other global technical circles – then each region’s currency can be integrated on a global unified ledger. It’s the central and transnational bankers’ dream come true – one ring to rule them all.
The European Union, a single currency and trading bloc now 32 years old, provides a tried and tested template to be rolled out globally. The Chatham House website states that the institutions and structures of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), comprising Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan “are modelled on EU structures and Russia has billed the EEU as a partner for the EU in a proposed free-trade zone ‘stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok’.”
And nor are the panjandrums in the corridors of unipolar power resisting multipolarity. On the contrary, in 2011, the then French Finance minister, and now head of the European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde, said[11]:
“Our starting point is to achieve an orderly transition to a world that is multipolar in economic and monetary terms…the G20 reached agreement [to] promote the orderly transition to a multipolar world.”
The World Economic Forum is also enamoured of multipolarism. Emphasising the decentralise-to-recentralise paradigm, it refers to the regional approach to globalisation as “targeted re-globalisation”.[12]
Pepe Escobar will almost certainly be awarded a Russian and Chinese Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in a Political Docudrama, but don’t confuse the theatre of the multipolaristas[13] with real life. Sorry folks, but multipolarity is not an organic reaction by the BRICS bloc to throw off the yolk of Western oppression. BRICS vs the West is a scripted Punch and Judy show, written and directed by Transnational Capital. The sooner we all come to terms with the implications of this, the better, and the implications have been clearly spelt out in Iain’s book, and summarised in this article!
How is technocracy being pushed at the micro level?
While all of the above global financial scams have been designed to transfer unimaginable wealth and control of resources to our inglorious global Luciferian oligarchy, all the while masquerading as resource stewardship, there are two easy-to-understand components of digital control that are being constructed to shackle every single person on the planet, apart from the handful of oligarchs and their entourage of bougiecrats who lick their boots for money and status.
The first is Digital ID. This is actually a UN/WEF sine qua non, which tells you how vital it is to the ruling class. UN SDG goal 16.9 aims to “provide legal identity for all” by 2030.[14] Calling it “legal identity” is of course an infuriatingly disingenuous obfuscation, because even a San bushman hunting and gathering in the Kalahari desert has “legal ID” in today’s world. It’s a ridiculous proposition on its face. Why has ‘legal’ identification suddenly become a problem for the human race after hundreds of thousands of years? Of course, “legal ID” is code for Digital ID.
They need a way to ensure that all critical services that humans rely on, whether accessed online, or in the real world, can only be accessed on presentation of a digital identifier unique to each individual. This means using biometric data – typically facial recognition. At first gradually, and then suddenly, we will reach a point where society will be closed to you unless you have a digital ID. You will be unpersoned. As the SDG goal implies, without this ID, you will not be ‘legal’ in basic social and economic interactions. If public transport cannot be accessed without Digital ID, movement is greatly restricted. The possibilities for exclusion are endless.
The second component of digital control has the potential to work with Digital ID to produce the Biblical nightmare of the mark of the beast. This involves the rollout of some form of digital currency, which has already begun. Digital currencies will be programmable, meaning that usage can be restricted in specified ways. Programmability will depend on interaction with Digital ID. Thus the combination of digital ID and programmable money will grant the public-private partnership hitherto unimaginable ways to control the behaviour and movement of entire populations in real time. In short, a Social Credit System. Think back to the definition of technocracy in Part I – law by algorithm.
Speaking at a roundtable on Central Bank Digital Currency, Bo Li, former deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China, and current deputy managing director of the IMF, said[15]:
“By programming CBDC, […] money can be precisely targeted [to] what kinds of [things] people can own, and [the way] this money can be utilised.”
This is a clear statement of intent from the highest levels of the International Monetary and Financial System to transform the function of money from a medium of exchange into a medium of control.
Neither Digital ID nor digital currencies on their own are difficult concepts to grasp in terms of the threat they pose to privacy and freedom. When combined, it is even easier to understand the diabolical nature of the threat to us, and the incentives for a psychopathic ruling class to deploy a monetary Social Credit System as the ultimate population control tool. When we add into the mix the appetite for the Internet of Things – ‘smart’ devices whose operation is in the hands of a centralised authority, as opposed to the individual who owns or operates the device – and ‘smart’ cities which are designed to saturate the population with these digitally controlled devices, we will have then entered the digital gulag. This will be a life mediated entirely by digital devices, and ruled by algorithm.
If we walk blindly into this cage, the key to its door will not be willingly handed back to us.
[1] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 93.
[2] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 139.
[3] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 329.
[4] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 338.
[5] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 330.
[6] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 331.
[7] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 337.
[8] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 363.
[9] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 364.
[10] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 354.
[11] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 355.
[12] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 365.
[13] Patented by Hrvoje Morić at Geopolitics & Empire.
[14] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 204.
[15] Iain Davis, The Technocratic Dark State, The Papercutmagazine.com, 2025, Pg. 238.
Comments are closed.