Don’t forget to book your tickets for our upcoming “Case against the WEF” conference this Saturday, featuring radical speakers, thinkers and ideas on a leftist approach to the challenge of surveillance capitalism.
Given what one already knows about the neo-fascist plan to install a one-world government on the planet, it is safe to say that this does not augur well for democracy (which is a deliberate understatement). Klaus Schwab, the founder and CEO of the World Economic Forum (WEF), has made it explicit that their ‘New World Order’ (NWO) is envisaged in neo-fascist terms, in so far as he has referred to the WEF as a partnership between the corporate and government sectors – with its unmistakeable echo of Benito Mussolini’s conception of fascism. From what one knows, how should we picture the future they have in store for humanity? This is not to say that they will necessarily succeed in engendering such a future, of course.
The obvious image that comes to mind – and one that has been invoked several times as interpretive lens for what is occurring around us – to grasp the probable character of the emerging ‘society of control’ (As Gilles Deleuze would call it), is that of George Orwell’s dystopian society of Oceania, as conjured up in his well-known novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four (or 1984), first published in 1949. Looking back, Orwell’s vision was uncannily accurate as an adumbration of the future against which he implicitly warned his readers, specifically as far as surveillance of citizens is concerned.
The centrepiece for surveillance in the society of “Big Brother” – whose simultaneously avuncular and menacing visage accosts one on virtually every street corner – is the ubiquitous bi-directional “telescreen”, which ‘sees’ the inhabitants of Oceania and whose broadcast images are seen by them. The ‘telescreen’ is a futuristic incarnation of Jeremy Bentham’s design of a ‘Panopticon’ in the 18th century – a prison planned to give wardens constant visual access to prisoners’ cells, inducing in them the awareness that they could, potentially, be observed at any time, and hence the inclination, to monitor their own behaviour – and it anticipates current widespread surveillance systems, which received a fillip during the Covid-19 (pseudo-) ‘pandemic’.
To be sure, even before the advent of Covid-19 there were clear signs of the United States being determined to emulate and surpass the example set by China in its deployment of AI-enhanced surveillance, as investigative reporter, Whitney Webb argues in an article that appeared in 2020. China is probably the most surveillance-saturated country in the world today, and if the WEF has its way, all the member countries of the United Nations would be on a par with the Chinese in the not-too-distant future, and at a level which would dwarf the surveillance of people in 1984.
It is further generally known today that, apart from cameras in public places, the smartphone would be the chief means of maintaining surveillance of human behaviour and movement in the future digital society; that is, if Schwab’s ideal of having a microchip implanted in every person does not surpass phone tracking by then. Crucial for social control, however, will be the ‘digital passport’ that will be imposed on everyone. This is indispensable for the digital financial system that is intended to replace the fractional reserve system, which is teetering on the brink of collapse at present. Inseparable from this is the Central Bank Digital Currency system (CBDC) that will replace the fiat money system.
As Melissa Cuimmei explains, the quest for universal digital passports, with which CBDCs will be integrated, serves the sustained attempt on the part of the WEF to have young children ‘vaccinated’ en masse. To be able to assimilate children into the digital control system in large numbers, this is imperative – after all, children are the adults of tomorrow, and the surveillance net has to capture them. CBDCs are probably the most sinister component of the entire surveillance system, in so far as these digital ‘currencies’ will replace cash and the money one has in the bank at present. In fact, at a specific time a ‘Central World Bank’ switch will be flipped, and all the funds in one’s familiar bank accounts will vanish, regardless of the amounts involved.
Everyone will receive a limited amount of digital currency every month, but this will differ fundamentally from ordinary dollars or pounds – it will not be money for symbolic exchange, as we know it. It will be programmed currency, that is, like financial ‘vouchers’, which cannot be used at will, but in a strictly limited and prescribed way, such as only for certain kinds of food, and only within a certain circumscribed spatial area (such as a demarcated square in a ‘15- minute city). Cuimmei also stresses that the refusal to comply with this transition to digital currencies is the only way to stop this financial prison from becoming a reality.
Catherine Austin Fitts – another redoubtable opponent of the transition to neo-fascist surveillance control – has provided guidelines regarding the steps one should take to resist the coming financial transformation, such as using cash, as far as possible, using reliable local banks instead of large international banks (which serves to decentralise financial power), restricting one’s dependence on digital transaction options in favour of analogue wherever possible, and strengthening independent communities by supporting small local businesses instead of large corporations. It seems, then, that there are ways of fighting back against the present attempt to surpass Orwell’s model of a ‘control society’; and it would not at all be surprising if the unscrupulous planners of a digitally controlled society have taken it as their point of departure.
Another source of reliable information is the Redacted website of Natali and Clayton Morris, where one gets the news, for example, of the World Health Organisation (WHO) forging ahead with their plans concerning internationally mandatory ‘vaccine passports,’ which comprise another building block in the extensive digital network of control that the globalist predators are in the process of establishing. Just how restrictive the implementation of such a system would be, is clear from what is written on the website listed above (below the video):
The World Health Organization is pushing for global vaccine passports at the same time they are pushing for global pandemic powers through the CA+ treaty we have been discussing. Reclaim the Net published dozens of edits to this document from various countries. This would establish vaccine passports that would be digital and paper records of your health records, your travel history, your vaccination status for ALL vaccines and an assessment of your threat level based on various data points about you.
These would be readable and shareable by all WHO countries across the globe and it could be used to stop you or your luggage from crossing borders. This gives WHO nations the power to detain you, stop you, require a medical exam on the spot, quarantine you and place you under observation. They could also take possession of your luggage or other possessions. These powers are being justified because countries could not validate one another’s Covid tests or vaccines during the pandemic.
Such a colonisation of the spatiotemporal coordinates of every individual’s life would make 1984 look like kindergarten. But 1984 is by no means the only fiction that one may employ as heuristic for comprehending the current situation; at least three other such fictions present themselves for doing so: Plato’s myth of the cave in Book 7 of his Republic; Aldous Huxley’s futuristic dystopian novel, Brave new World (1932), and Sidney Lumet’s black comedy – if not tragicomedy – of 1976, Network. In the latter there is a particular scene that functions as a mirror for what is happening today, when the current transition to a ‘new world order’ is understood ontologically (in terms of different orders of ‘being’ or ‘reality’) as incrementally inserting society into a predominantly digital sphere, with all it entails. The scene in question shows the ’mad prophet of the airwaves’, Howard Beale (Peter Finch) being lectured to (‘arraigned’, if you will) by the Communications Corporation of America chairman, Arthur Jensen (Ned Beatty) on Beale’s putative inadmissible tampering with the ‘laws of nature’ on his popular television programme, where he routinely encourages viewers to become ‘mad as hell’ about what is happening in America. Jensen informs Beale that there are no more individuals, or nations, but only corporations that have replaced them, and that living in accordance with the immutable laws of an interconnected financial system is unavoidable.
The inexorable, ineluctable character of the (at the time) ‘new world order’ – which Jensen elucidates forcibly to the hapless Beale – and which was philosophically articulated by Jean-Francois Lyotard in his The Postmodern Condition (English translation, 1984), resonates with the currently emerging ‘new world order’ touted by Klaus Schwab as ‘the great reset’. The point is that, whether or not Schwab and his fellow neo-fascists succeed in installing their version of the ‘new world order’, after the events of the last three years there is no returning to the societies that predated the supposed ‘pandemic’. A digital future awaits us, and whether that will be one that accommodates authentically human needs depends on whether we can take the necessary action to ward off the NWO assault.
The pertinence of Plato’s myth of the cave – probably the first instance of someone imagining the structure and psychological function of a movie theatre – for today is readily apparent. In this well-known parable Plato’s spokesperson, Socrates, depicts a race of people in a cave, shackled and facing away from the cave opening towards the cave wall. Between them and the cave entrance there is a road along which creatures move, and behind the road there is a fire, which casts the shadows of the moving beings and objects on the cave wall. Because they cannot see behind themselves, these people take the shadows on the wall to be real, and argue about the merits of trying to discern what they are. When one of these creatures manages to free him- or herself from their shackles and laboriously make their way past the road and the fire to the cave entrance, they encounter the sun-lit world outside, which they initially cannot see because the sunlight hurts their eyes.
When at last their eyes have become accustomed to the sunlight, the truth dawns on them about the ‘real’ world and the world of shadows inside the cave that they had erroneously taken as being ‘reality’. Excited by their discovery, this newly ‘enlightened’ person goes back into the cave to share their discovery with their fellows, but – because the cave language is adapted to the articulation of shadows – he or she faces the difficulty of having to find the (non-existent) words to describe what they have seen outside, and could therefore easily be seen as being insane by the other cave-dwellers. In fact, language has probably always been the touchstone of a person’s sanity – think of the implications of the etymology of ‘barbarian’, from the Ancient Greek word, bárbaros (babbler), an onomatopoeic term for non-Greek speaking people, with the implication that such people spoke an incomprehensible, rebarbative gibberish, which branded them as supposedly inferior to Greek-speaking people.
The implications of Plato’s fable for today are clear: anyone who has freed her- or himself from the normalising chains of the contemporary Orwellian ‘newspeak’ (of conspiracy theories, lockdowns, ‘safe and effective vaccines’, and so on) that bind them, having discovered the clear ‘sunlight’ of what is actually happening behind the veil of misinformation masquerading as information, faces the same communicational dilemma of getting through to the ones staring at shadows on the mainstream media’s cave wall. This constitutes what Jean-Francois Lyotard called a ‘differend’ – a situation of incommensurability between two or more parties, where the ‘phrases’ (idiom, discourse) of each is fundamentally incompatible with those of the other(s), and no ‘successful’ mutual communication can occur.
Huxley’s dystopian novel, Brave new World (1932), set in a World State of the future, constitutes yet another mirror for current events – not merely regarding the routine ‘conditioning’ of citizens and the chemical means (‘soma’) through which they are controlled by inducing a ‘happy state’ whenever there is the possibility of emotions rising (think of Prozac and other ‘tranquillisers’ today). What strikes me as especially relevant – given what I have argued above regarding the need to resist CBDCs and their concomitant digital surveillance and control – is the fact that this fictionally projected world is divided between the society of control and the areas where the ‘excluded’ live – the (free) ‘savages’. It is one of Huxley’s strokes of genius to name the son of a woman living in the excluded zone (whom she had from a dalliance with a ‘vacationing’ member of the ruling elites), John (the) Savage, given that, when John is taken to dystopian ‘civilisation’, he becomes the character by and through whom the ethical status of this society is judged. (Lest I spoil the novel for those who have not read it, I shall not divulge any more.)
Why is the ‘exclusion’ of certain people from the eponymous Brave New World pertinent for what we are witnessing around us today? In the exemplary investigative newspaper, The Exposé, we read:
We know that the globalist intelligence services have partnered with big tech to build us a digital prison to enforce social credit score-controlled Central Bank Digital Currencies.
We know that they seek to control our genetics through genetic vaccination, our money through CBDCs and our carbon footprint through social credit scores and our movement through 15 minute cities.
The plan according to Bill Gates is that those who are non-compliant will be ‘excluded’.
You will be left to live your life with no means of paying any bills or buying or selling anything for money. They will steal every penny you have ever earned if you fail to comply.
Those who do comply will be forced to collaborate with this new segregation and exclusion as globalist slaves. Those who refuse will be inmates in a concentration camp with no facilities at all, managed by those who comply and collaborate…
One could add Michel Houellebecq’s dystopian novel, The Possibility of an Island (2005), which may itself be indebted to Huxley’s novel, as prophetic adumbration of what the globalist elites are planning for the rest of us, to the above; anyone who is interested in reading it would readily perceive the similarities and differences, and how it echoes today’s events. Particularly the manner in which the ‘Daniel clones’ dispose of the ‘excluded’ when they venture too close to the clones’ exclusive compounds is a chilling reminder that the globalists regard the rest of us as ‘useless (that is, disposable) eaters’.
Need one say more to emphasise the gravity of the situation? Hermeneutically speaking – that is, given the interpretive role of ‘foreknowledge’ when approaching a given situation – these fictional instances can function as heuristic mirrors only for those who have seen through the fog of disinformation intended to cover up the evil machinations of our would-be neo-fascist rulers. And once these malicious manoeuvrings have been uncovered, it is not sufficient to wonder in paralysed disbelief, how ostensibly human creatures are capable of planning and executing such a wicked scheme. What is urgently needed now is action. Resist CBDCs, resist the planned WHO ‘pandemic treaty’ that will give it complete power over citizens of member countries; resist any further ‘vaccinations’ by all means possible.
Like the fictional Na’vi humanoid inhabitants of James Cameron’s Avatar (1 and 2), who, together with all the animals on this fertile moon, rise up towards the end of the first movie as if interconnected by a life-giving neural network, to rid themselves of the destructive presence of the ecologically rapacious humans, those of us who know what is occurring around us, should interconnect with one another, resist and dispose of the cancer threatening our existence.
One thought on “A surveillance society of exclusion?”
I think you mean BIG MUTHA!
As in fucking Mother Earth.
Comments are closed.