Introduction to Real Left, the Errors of the Pro-Lockdown Left and the Case for a Meta-Materialist Politics to Confront the Transhumanist Threat

Transcript of talk given by Emily Garcia at the Third International Conference of Freie Linke Zukunft (Free Left Future)

This is the first of a series of transcripts we will be publishing from Freie Linke Zukunft’s Third International Conference held in Erfurt, Germany from 31 July-2 August.

Freie Linke Zukunft — which developed out of an earlier group founded in 2021 in response to the pandemic event — explain their raison d’etre as follows in an online editorial:

“The task today is to build—entirely from scratch—a genuine Left that transcends specific factions and is grounded in social realities. All currents are welcome here, provided they distance themselves from the neoliberal ‘identity Left’—a faction that, visibly to all, sided with the ruling class during the ‘pandemic year’ of 2020.”

Furthermore, there is unanimous opposition to the regime of a state of emergency and to the overt seizure of power by the most aggressive elements of monopoly capital. There is also a clear awareness that a free and socially just society must be built—one in which the exploitation of human beings by other human beings comes to an end.”

Their online publication Magma offers an English language section.

---

Introduction to Real Left

Real Left was launched at the beginning of 2021 by the editors of an online journal called Marxist World, only one of whom is still active in the group. It was originally set up under the name Left Lockdown Sceptics, as the main focus at the time was anti-lockdown critique from an anti-Capitalist lens. Left Lockdown Sceptics published articles on a website by the same name. We changed our name in 2023 to Real Left, since lockdowns were by then generally perceived as an historical event. The name change also reflected the fact that our critical analysis had by then broadened to encompass the whole of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, of which the lockdowns were of course, just a symptom.

In the summer of 2021, we held our first conference in London which around fifty people attended. Since then we have continued meeting in person generally several times a year, building a real-life community of leftist dissidents. These events have been well attended and well received, particularly our annual conferences. Through our hosting of a number of such meetings and the publication of hundreds of articles, we have disseminated consistently high quality analysis, commentary, and occasional investigative journalism on what is both the most critical and the most neglected political issue of our age: the struggle against high tech technocratic totalitarianism, or digital enclosure.

That people are able to access such censored and marginalised information, opinion, and community rooted in shared egalitarian and pro freedom values –– free of the usual concessions to establishment power that are adopted by those who either seek more mainstream funding or endorsement, or who have failed to decolonise their own consciousness from domination and extraction based control systems like Capitalism, or Zionism –– this matters: and we have created a space for it. We have also collaborated with other grassroots initiatives in the freedom movement, including doing an interview for the UK’s “The Light” newspaper, which has a decent circulation of tens of thousands.

Real Left’s challenges, on the other hand, remain steep. Since the early days of the group’s inception we have failed to expand significantly in numbers, and consequently our impact has been limited to the admittedly modest scope of the activities I have just now highlighted. No doubt because genuinely grassroots and egalitarian anti-fourth-industrial revolution resistance represents a potentially significant counterforce to the rollout of the ruling classes transhumanist agenda, we are censored into oblivion through repressive algorithms on social media platforms. This appears to also now be the case on substack, where we have struggled to gain followers over the past couple of years.

The errors of the Pro-Lockdown Left

In the UK the large and energetic resistance to lockdowns spontaneously emerged in reaction to the aggressive Covid fearmongering propaganda campaign and immediate attacks on people’s human rights. It also occured in the total absence of the entire organised left (i.e. trade unions, socialist political parties and publications etc) –– as far as such a left can still be said to exist after a five decade war of attrition by the forces of Neoliberalism.

On a quick side note, in the UK (and I believe Germany was the same) the organised/legacy left, with few exceptions, irredeemably disgraced themselves during the Covid psychological operation by backing the diktats of the ruling class. They uncritically swallowed the preposterous fairytale that –– for the first time in the history of global capitalism –– those with the power to enact (or refuse) a cessation of normal economic activity for an extended period were prepared to put aside profit making for the nobler purpose of “saving granny.” Since then there has been no largescale awakening amongst this led-by-the-nose left demographic. We could perhaps adapt the often quoted aphorism coined by Gil Scott-Heron’s 1970s protest song/poem, “The revolution will not be televised”, to “The revolution will leave the legacy left behind!”

I should however briefly mention an honourable exception to my suggested maxim about the left’s anti-revolutionary character. And that is the important analysis and direct action initiatives coming out of the anti-imperialist left since 2023. At our conference last year Real Left spotlighted the importance of the anti-Zionist movement –– the leadership of which has come largely from grassroots activists, not institutions or political parties of the left –– in the wider class struggle. And we will be doing so again this year.  

From my perspective one major problem afflicting those on the left –– and by that I mean not ‘liberals’, but those who identify as anarchists, socialists, materialists, and Marxists –– is that they have failed to update their analysis to comprehend the Capitalist system as it operates today. Their critiques are fossilised at the Neoliberal stage of Capitalism, when we have already moved into the Stakeholder Capitalism era. Orienting oneself correctly in the class war without an understanding of this shift is the equivalent of trying to find one’s way to Erfurt today using a 1750 map of Prussia.

A concrete example of such blind blundering would be the far left’s response to any hesitancy to shut-down businesses and civil society in 2020. They denounced the Johnson government’s (slightly) slower off the starting gun and (fractionally) more lenient lockdown response in comparison to some other European countries as, “putting the economy before lives.”

The false assumption underlying such a wrong headed position is that the billionaire class continue to require the proletariat to go out to physical places of work to provide their (exploited) labour and to buy stuff in brick and mortar shops in order to accrue profits for the rich. But in reality the Capital owning class have come up with a superior system of extraction (at least from their perspective). One that requires us to stay in, order in/online and plug in –– specifically to the superfast broadband enabled Internet of Things which was laid cable by cable on the deserted streets that those early days of lockdown gifted the telecommunications companies.

The transition to stakeholder Capitalism in fact necessitates all of the following:

• The displacement of most of the physical economy by online commerce/activity.
• The conglomeration of business ownership into the hands of the super-rich and the decimation of independent small business. (See the documented gargantuan wealth transfer that occurred over 2020-2022 from the 99% to the 1%.)
• A major expansion in ambient intelligence/ubiquitous surveillance, or the ‘smartification’ of cities (and homes).
• A widescale acceptance of technology replacing former spheres of primarily human activity across the economic, educational, and social spheres and in the provision of public services.
• The replacement of a legacy liberal civil liberties/human rights framework with the principle of individual rights as subservient to a preeminent collective good –– as determined by experts who serve the establishment (technocratic communitarianism). 

Every item I’ve just listed was hugely accelerated by the ‘pandemic containment’ measures, but we are supposed to dismiss this as incidental?! Covid was the goose that laid the golden egg for the ushering in of the Big Data Economy, of which the automatons of the managerial class tasked with implementing this transition make no secret in public documents.

I relay this is in fairly granular detail in the third article in my series “The Great Health and Social Care Reset for the Big Data Economy”. The next articles – as yet unpublished – would likely be of more relevance to a German audience. (The articles comprising part one are very specific to the UK NHS transformation program.)

In these subsequent articles I detail a number of pieces of circumstantial evidence that indicate that the Covid vaccinations contain military developed graphene based nano tech components, to link humans into the Internet of Bio-Nano Things –– an extension of the Internet of Things into the biological domain –– for the purposes of control, surveillance, manipulation/modification and biological engineering of humanity at a mass scale. (Sidenote: there are other dissident researchers who have come to a similar conclusion. I do not mean to suggest that I am making an original claim here, only that I’ve attempted to evidence this through some primary sources.)

The case for a meta-materialist politics to confront the transhumanist threat

I mentioned in my introduction my affinity to the life’s work of Rudolf Steiner. Steiner –– who died over 100 years ago –– presciently anticipated the challenge of transhumanism, or mechanical occultism, as he sometimes termed it. His writings and lectures hold a wealth of wisdom on practical ways that we can meet this challenge.

Whilst allowing for its contributions to the advancement of culture through technological development, Steiner vigorously opposed scientific materialism as the dominant philosophy of the age, on the basis of its inability to penetrate into the deeper spiritual realities which underlie all outward phenomenon, including into the true soul/spiritual nature of the human being. He also warned in strong terms against the disastrous consequences of (atheistic) materialism on the unfolding of current and future civilization. Again, prophetically in light of the ‘pandemic’ event, he specifically warned against

     “. . .the danger threatening mankind if what today calls itself science is allowed to lead the way and to insinuate itself into realms where concepts become realities.” (The Karma of Materialism. Lecture 2)

Discoveries of quantum physics have since provided confirmation for the insights of Steiner (and those of ancient metaphysical traditions) and overturned assumptions of classical Newtonian physics through demonstrating, for example, the interconnected, probabilistic, and observer-dependent nature of reality.

This brings me onto a second problem of the legacy left as I see it, which concerns not only, what they think (or more accurately fail to grasp) as I previously set out, but the prior cause of such errors of thought: how they think.

Anecdotally, most socialists outside of pro-freedom spaces that I have encountered are atheists, whereas only a minority of people in the Great Reset resistance share this same attachment to a godless universe. In fact, I have observed this pattern consistently enough to feel justified in making the claim that a worldview that recognises the reality of some form of higher power or divine order (not necessarily, and in fact not usually, in a traditionally religious sense) tends to provide some immunity to falling prey to manipulation by ideologies rooted in abstract materialistic/atheistic concepts, and its (many) illusory fears or superstitions: the phobia of ‘germs’ or viruses, and the terror of death being particularly relevant to this case. 

The ‘head-bound’, dead thinking of the hardened atheist-materialist, divorced from the warming and enlivening wisdom of the heart, proved deeply susceptible to the propaganda of false authorities over 2020-2022, to terrible effects. Steiner said:

   “The salvation of our time can only come about if—specifically regarding everything meant to fertilize social life, such as the sphere of law and the life of the state—thoughts intervene that stand in living connection with the spiritual world.” (The Karma of Materialism. Lecture 1)

Such ‘living thinking’ could neverdeny the vital healing effects we experiencein a loving embrace or hand hold, and acquiesce to eschew physical contact with loved ones, or vulnerable elderly, grand-children etc, until such time that an external authority arbitrarily pronounced such life-imbuing touch no longer dangerous/potentially deadly (!)

The fact that the Great Reset resistance –– the only cohort who stood against tyranny during the egregious attacks of this period let us not forget –– overwhelmingly is spiritual in orientation, (at least in the UK) I argue, points to the necessary evolution of political struggle in the 2020s.

The transhumanist digital-biological life fused control grid (which Steiner characterised as the Eight Sphere) is intended as an omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent web, which ultimately would eliminate the possibility of human free will.

I can only understand the deeply evil nature of this threat as an adversarial attempt to mimic and usurp the ever-present, all knowing, and all powerful qualities of source or the Godhead, of which we are all a spark, and through ensnarement into this counterfeit virtual kingdom or empire to disconnect us permanently from our Creator endowed spiritual nature.

Marx gifted us with many very valuable insights into class relations and the nature of capitalism. But I believe he was wrong about dialectical materialism being the driving force of world evolution. The true impetus underpinning the history of human civilizations, rather, is the evolution of human consciousness, and the tensions between forces that seek to either forward, or retard, this development.

The fact is that many of us active in this struggle have already intuited that we are on the battleground of a spiritual war between good and evil powers and principalities, who are fighting over the destiny of the collective human soul. Whether humanity will evolve to the next stage with a deeper capacity for Christ-like love; win the freedom of an inwardly developed morality; and save the ‘I’ of our “I am that I am” from descent into the abyss, or whether we will fall into the realm of sub-human, yet hangs in the balance for each of us.

There is nothing be gained in denying the gravity of what is at stake on this battlefield on which we have chosen to take up (metaphorical) arms, or in avoiding theological or apocalyptic framings to attempt to appear more persuasive to comrades that we have, in reality, already moved beyond.

Advocating for the adoption of such perspectives should not be misconstrued as a manifesto to become solely meditating navel gazers however. What is needed most at this time is courageous and concerted action: as long we are physically embodied in this material realm, there is essential work to be done that only we can do.

On the contrary, I contend that the embrace of such hitherto taboo perspectives in political spaces can provide much needed strength and courage from imparting conviction of the importance of this struggle and our role in it, which will endow us with the capacity to persevere with this work despite the testing times that very likely lie in store.

To conclude then, I hold that the progression of the millennia long class struggle of the people against the powers must embrace the Zeitgeist of our post-mechanistic age. We must recognise ourselves not merely as economic agents engaged in dialectical struggles, but as embodied spirits answering a calling on behalf of world karma to stand up for truth, goodness, and beauty in order that the rightful destiny of all living things to exist and evolve in love and freedom becomes manifest.

In this way I believe the revolutionary left (ourselves!) may be renewed and invigorated to most accurately name and effectively confront the satanic bio-digital convergence project, of which the legacy left has proved itself incapable.

Moreover it is likely to also render us a more attractive force to those within the Great Reset resistance at large, given the inhering radical and spiritual tendencies of the rank-and-file (in distinction to the managerial class self-appointed ‘leadership’ factions). This may thereby help to win sympathy for our proposed solutions regarding egalitarian revolution, and enlist more to our number.  

The practical implementation of such an overarching philosophy leaves a lot to be discussed, and I hope this is a conversation (or debate!) that we can get into now. I would also like to raise the question of how our two sister groups, (and perhaps others that I am aware of in Europe and the USA) may mutually expand our reach and support one another’s work through future collaborations of various kinds.

I would like to close with a final quote from Steiner in the spirit of encouragement for the significance of our mission as the ‘leftist remnant’, despite our small numbers and (quantitatively) limited or obscure nature of our work:

     “We must clearly realise that, from a certain perspective, the smallest and the greatest things we can do are equally important for the whole. Life presents itself as a mosaic composed of individual stones. The person who places a single stone is no less important than the one who conceived the design for the mosaic. In terms of what may be called the divine-spiritual world order, the smallest thing is just as significant as the greatest. If we grasp this, it can save us from much of the dissatisfaction that might otherwise easily arise in life.” (The New Spiritual Age and the Return of the Christ)

Thank you kindly for listening.

Summary of post-talk discussion

It was noted by several comrades that there were a lot of ‘Steiner people’ in freedom movement/most people involved in Steiner initiatives (Waldorf schools, biodynamic farming, etc) did not fall for Covid psy op. One comrade suggested this indicated there was “something right” in their thinking. It was countered that people were thrown out of these institutions for non compliance with MRNA injections or mandates. I noted that the same problem prevalent across society applied: the leadership was corrupted did not reflect the attitudes/desires of the rank and file members.

One comrade who identified as atheist expressed a desire to work together with “Steiner people” as allies and stressed the importance of tolerating and not ridiculing their beliefs. Another who identified as agnostic raised that there is much unknowable, even in seemingly material phenomenon, giving the example of invisible processes mediating between our watering of a plant and its growth.

The Catholic workers movement mentioned as historical example of spiritual-radical political movements. And one comrade made the point that there was openness to spiritual or metaphysical conversations, criticism of technology, and conventional medical approaches within political spaces in the 70s, which subsequently died out.

Points of contention included the rejection of a monotheistic world view, since, as one comrade put it, a single godbeing who is all knowing and all powerful, (lording over a world full of suffering) would itself would be evil. There was a preference for animism as spiritual belief system. (My note: anthroposophy is in greater alignment with animism than is probably conveyed in my poorly sketched snapshot of this worldview.)

Another comrade stated that the economic sphere is the primary driving force of social life. This was responded to by another with point that belief systems/consciousness — whether rooted in atheistic explicit or implicit atheistic assumptions — exist a priori, and itself direct, economic logic.

It was argued that Marxist theoretical tools when properly applied should lead one to the correct conclusions regarding the Covid conspiracy (i.e: nothing further need be added.) And that a Marxist humanism, with its emphasis on autonomy and self determination — and also based on the primacy of the human — can instill the urge to defend the human against such transhumanist attacks.

Someone raised that there may be different interpretations of the findings of quantum physics mentioned, which do not support metaphysical/mystical worldviews.

Issue was taken with term “technocratic communitarianism”: fascism was preferred. Also the idea of a “managerial class”: which, this speaker felt, is not a class per se but a subcategory of the working class.

One comrade described the talk as a “very surprising perspective at a Marxist conference”, “in a good way”. Another said he was interested to look into Steiner with whom he wasn’t previously familiar. And a third expressed that she had wished to discuss the “point of Steiner more intensely” had there been more time. Overall the ideas were met with sympathetically, to an unexpected degree, and I thanked comrades for receiving the talk in such a cordial and thoughtful spirit.