The last few years we faced a remarkable shift in the way the global population is being indoctrinated, forced to compel with largely unsubstantiated storytelling by international organisations, governments and ignorant servants of the latter. We are stuck in a global simulacrum (a fake, created reality)!
The corona pandemic has accelerated the power grab of the Western elite on its citizens and governments. A power grab that has been evolving in an ever increasing speed since World War 2. However, the phenomenon is not new at all. History teaches us that politics, business, and elite networks have always tried to enforce their own rules on society (see Historical Perspectives). Unfortunately, the impact of today’s collusions bound to have more far-reaching consequences as this paper argues.
Organisations as the WHO, UN, World Bank, IMF, and many of the likes blindly seem to follow the World Economic Forum narrative of ‘stakeholder capitalism’ as promoted by Klaus Schwab (Schwab 2021). The latter promotes the intensive cooperation between governments, corporatist organisations, and big industries for their mutual benefit, disregarding humanity.
It has never been so obvious to the bald eye as we see today. Nonetheless, a majority of the population does not have a clue what is unfolding above its heads, and there is a reason for it. We can call it the Psychological Shifting Baseline-syndrome when governments, step-by-step, impose ever more stringent measures without the population realising their rights and freedoms are taken away from them. Nowadays, people get overwhelmed by one-sided narratives , it has become almost impossible to follow-up on the excess of fearmongering strategies launched, wether it be about luring pandemics or climate change.
Good science is based on dialectics, theses – antiheses – synthesis, and even then, nothing is set in stone. Science evolves by allowing contradictory debate. Science is never settled. Per definition the truth or consensus cannot exist in academia (Saltelli et al. 2023). Whoever claims otherwise is promoting dogmatic thinking instead of critical thinking. Once the earth was considered flat, and the sun revolved around our planet. Today, opposing voices are systematically being censored (Liester 2022), especially in the west. Nonetheless, voices in the Global South claim to face the same problem, which is true, except these struggles mostly remain an internal affair. The current western censorship will have a profound impact on the whole world. Pure censorship and circumvention of constitutional rights, and international human rights, especially for dissenting scientific voices (Shir-Raz 2023) has now become standard practice in the Northern hemisphere.
The western capitalist neoliberal system has imposed a nonsensical 40–60 hour workweek (depending on which country you live) on humanity, installed ‘the fear of missing out’ leading populations to aim for the same car as their neighbours, extended expensive holidays, anything to get socially accepted and keep the economy afloat. Meritocracy as fuel for profit.
How did we get this far? In the 1970s, prices rose in the West due to economic decline (Ortiz 2020), and women were motivated to start working as well. Ideal for Big Industries, as now two wages could be spent on commercial markets. Prices have never stopped rising ever since, but wages didn’t follow at the same pace. For kids, ‘pre- and afterschool care was provided to facilitate both parents to work for the assets of the happy few. The end of work-life balance became the standard. When school is over in high-income countries, parents start running around with their kids for sports and leisure activities so as to remain socially connected and accepted by friends and schoolmates. Dinner has to be served too, and parents, consequently, drop dead as a fly at 10 p.m. on a couch for some brainless entertainment. The latter is provided by the’stakeholders’ that are ruling the world.
If a government asks you to comply with yet another new law, mostly based on misplaced ‘safety’ or ‘convenience’ arguments, you might initially have some second thoughts, but you will comply as your mental status is preoccupied with the ‘fight for survival’, getting things organised in daily life, paying for loans, bills, and other expenses. In low- and middle-income countries, the strategy is basically the same. The one living in poverty also experiences daily stressors. Survival mode for the masses shuts down the receptive brain, leading to the massive number of mental health issues the global population is facing.
Narratives as on the pandemic, climate change, the transgender agenda, sustainable development goals, green deals, and net zero are thrown around at high speed.
Every time, the population wonders what is happening, but they habituate to these new narratives and ideologies. For instance, all the public cameras in the western public domain were officially installed for ‘safety reasons’, they appeared about 15 year ago. There was some initial reflection among citizens and media: ‘Could it be infringement of our privacy?’. But governments never backed off, they kept selling the same old ‘safety’ story. Citizens stopped questioning the narratives, and the global elite took it a step further. The Psychological Shifting Baseline-syndrome. Nowadays, you get filmed in the west, leaving the house until you reach home again at night. As such, following China’s footsteps.
The same happened during the pandemic. The WHO, and their stakeholders enforced one unscientific approach after the other: lockdowns, curfews, face masks, school closures, e.g (Chaudry et al. 2020, Gibson 2022, Jefferson et al. 2023, Mittal 2023). Albeit the pandemic is considered over by the WHO, the enforcing of measures, vaccines and restrictions are still present today. The psychological shifting baseline-syndrome at work. As the media is suppressed in telling you the whole story, many still believe the pandemic had the potential to wipe out humanity. Well, the chance of dying when infected from Covid-19 is less than 0.03% (Pezullo et al. 2023), and since the mRNA vaccinations have been deployed, we have seen a rise in excess all-cause mortality that no mainstream media outlet dares to cover in the west (Rancourt et al. 2023). The elephant in the room. Moreover, 3.400 peer-reviewed publications have pointed in the direction of potential DNA transcription, imprints of Spike-protein in organs, spikes and myocarditis, IgG4 induction which may lead to turbo cancers, and serious adverse effects of which some even lead to death (Alden et al. 2022, Fraiman et al. 2022, Irrgang et al. 2023, Polykretis et al. 2023, Uversky et al. 2023, Yonker et al. 2023).
But the Nobel Prize for medicine went to the developers of the mRNA platform for their contribution in enabling the mRNA vaccines to hit the market fast with ‘Protective Effects of 95%’, which later was found to be fraudulent, and the claim that the vaccine ‘saved millions of people’. Nothing is further from fact-based than this statement; as we know, the IFR is 0.03%. Even being older and having underlying diseases does not have to lead to complications, and there is no clinical epidemiological data to support this at all. Moreover, we are facing an excess all-cause mortality rate since the start of this vaccination campaign that doesn’t get any support for being researched. Some independent studies have already shown a strong correlation. Further research is absolutely required.
(Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman, Nobel Prize winners for mRNA vaccine. Clearly trusting the efficiency of their own vaccine very much. Why else would you wear a face mask?).
Baselines shift constantly, day by day. And finally, people might be waking-up to a reality that they’ve never wanted for their children, but then it will be too little, too late!
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
Most people in most countries are led to believe they live in a democracy. Nothing is further from the truth. The whole system is built around the perception of representative elections. In reality, only a few top politicians are in control. The ‘backbenchers’ (some of you) have to follow party guidelines; in this case, only a few people decide how votes have to be organised when new legislative proposals are put on the table in parliament. If a politician doesn’t comply with the party guidelines, he or she will lose power, diplomatic perks, and prestige. Unfortunately, it is in human nature to preserve societal advantages. It becomes difficult to contend with any rules that may compromise a career.
Rome and Greece weren’t built in one day, but they are still the references when it comes down to the origins of democracy. They both collapsed when self-righteousness and moral superiority led these empires to implode. But was this a democracy to start with?
No, it wasn’t.
In 7 BC, the Greeks created the Boulé. 500 citizens were elected amongst the population, sided by magistrates. The latter being ‘men of esteem’, nobility, and perks often passed on from father to son. The Romans installed a similar house of ‘democracy’, a Senate consisting of civilians and, again, (lifelong) nobility. As such, it could be seen as a monumental shift, as people were now allowed to take part in lawmaking. However, these civilians could speak out, but from the beginning, they lacked the political network and sphere of influence of the noble establishment. Nobility wasn’t subdued to elections, but civilians were. The bigger and longer-term presence remained a huge advantage for the nobility in safeguarding their own wishes, assets, and influence. Moreover, both the Greeks and the Romans convened behind closed doors, de facto disregarding the voice of the many (Lazar 2006, Raaflaub 2014).
(Roman Senate)
Research shows us that the Icelandic Vikings’ ‘Althing’ was the closest we ever came to a real (proto-)democracy, starting in the year 930. Chieftains were chosen directly by the community they were part of. They were not, as we have seen in movies, the ones who ‘ruled solely’. These ‘primus inter pares’ were obliged to follow the lead of the masses in procuring or safeguarding interests. When important decisions had to be made, they organised a public gathering in an open space. Every citizen could participate in the debate, form an opinion, and vote. Lawmakers were considered people who, by historical inheritance, knew about the way previous generations handled disputes and which punishments were considered adequate. During Althings, convicted civilians could also be heard and defend their cases in public, and the gathering could decide to relieve or diminish a particular convict from his original sanction (Fladmark and Heyerdahl 2015).
(Althing)
The fact that Vikings gathered in open space and everyone had the same weight of voice in the debate is considerably different from the Senate/Parliamentary structure we still find today. In many countries, a great deal of ‘nobles’ have lost any connection with their constituency. Leading to a de facto separation of power within society. Modern slaves and their masters.
In the 10th and 12th centuries, three Italian banking families (Bardi, Perruzi, and Di Medici) emerged from local parishes to obtain power over the European continent and far beyond. They were the first to see the benefit of lending money to local and international governments, and heads of state. In the volatile middle ages, money was the key driver of wars and ever-enduring expansion. The Catholic Church was mighty back then, having created a sphere of influence as far as its reach allowed. They were in the driver seat to support or disband heads of state to their liking. Popes were the ultimate rulers, and their straw man was required to uphold power and influence at royal courts. Creating a God-fearing mass helped a lot in maintaining control. Today, God has been replaced by big industry, consumerism, the fear of missing out, and false narratives (Holler and Rupp 2021).
(Family Di Medici)
By sponsoring the crusades of the Catholic Church, the Di Medici banking family succeeded in controlling several popes to safeguard their own wealth, business, and monetary success. Moreover, the Di Medici’s eventually produced four popes themselves, all Di Medici relatives. Popes LEO X, LEO XI, CLEMENS VII, and PIUS IV were all pushed up the throne by means of manipulation, bribes, murders, and blackmailing (Holler and Rupp 2021). The masses often didn’t have a clue.
(Upper left: LEO X, Upper right: CLEMENS VII, Lower left: PIUS IV, Lower right: LEO XI)
The Di Medici’s were the first to use ‘networking’ as a tool to achieve progress and spread their ideology. Knowing they didn’t have any efficient way of communicating over long distances, they created a two-fold pathway to control their extensive network. A direct and an indirect path of contact. Everyone who wanted to move up the social and economic ladder had to pass through Di Medici’s sooner or later (indirect contact). As such, they were able to control and grant access to different stakeholders meeting up without losing sight of what their plans were. By knowing all the details of everyone, on a personal level and on a business level, everyone was vulnerable to blackmail.
The Di Medici’s also kept their enemies, or whomever they considered untrustworthy, close to their daily affairs. Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer! Even so close, their potential treats literally got seduced into working alongside Di Medici’s. Anyone who dared to act against Di Medici’s interests was easily expelled, either by threatening the alleged or by simply banging or killing them. Ambitious people were very aware of this phenomenon, but in need of Di Medici’s power, they complied and played a long game to safeguard their own interests. By fearmongering, removing social cohesion, and thrusting amongst their ‘allies’, they were able to stay in control (Holler and Rupp 2021). Does it ring a bell?
The US has been a leading force in promoting the neoliberal capitalist model throughout the world for more than a century. As the most powerful nation on the globe, they used their intelligence and military industrial complex to supersede other nations under the narrative of ‘promoting democracy’. In hindsight, it was often no more than protruding economic colonialism to support their industries to sell their products everywhere or to hijack resources, hence safeguarding their own interests (Johnstone and Mcleish 2020).
In the wake of two world wars, the US launched the idea of global institutions, officially to prevent future wars (peace and security) and facilitate international cooperation among nations. In 1945, the UN was launched, backed by 51 countries, most of them from the Western hemisphere. As the US claimed to be decisive in ending the Second World War, many countries wanted to become allies of the most powerful nation on earth. This narrative gave the US the opportunity to set out the principle guidelines for global peace; at least, that was the sales argument.
In reality, the UN and its later subsidiaries (WHO, World Bank, IMF, etc.) were no more than vehicles to facilitate the installation of US imperialism. In the following years, almost every country on earth joined the UN; it was either that or be left out totally. Moreover, within these intergovernmental organisations, powerhouses were always in Western countries. Countries from the Global South had nearly no impact on any decision-making, which still remains a fact to this day (Puchala 2005).
The sphere of global influence stretched out to five different power blocks: big industry (capitalists), politics, supranational organisations, corporatism (NGOs), and media. Creating leverage between all these players led to economic growth and the expansion of US influence all around the globe.
(interplay of five powers, own image)
Although the US kicked off the UN and funded it big time throughout history, it cannot be seen as more of a bribe-off for their own imperialistic behaviour. Countries reluctant to subdue US imperialism were forged into the (proxy) wars by means of false flag operations, while the UN remained relatively silent on these matters (Puchala 2005, Ortiz 2020).
Since 1798, the US has launched a staggering number of 469 wars throughout the world, of which 251 have been induced since 1991 (Norton 2022)! The recent potential involvement in the wars in Ukraine, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and Yemen since a few days are still under research.
(Map representing all countries where US has deployed military action, Norton 2022, Tufts University)
Many US adversaries were summoned by another US imperialist vehicle, namely the International Tribunal of the Hague, founded for prosecution against war crimes. Never has one of the western allies or the US itself been summoned for the massive number of wars they started as a consequence of’special ops’ or ‘coup d’etats’. A scientific article on the global US’s interference comes to these conclusions (Wood 2019):
“This paper challenges the claim that the U.S. is indeed promoting democracy, arguing that it is instead pursuing national objectives to increase hegemony.”
“By constructing various actors as threats to themselves, the
West or the world, the U.S. has been able to justify its aggressive pursuit of foreign policy objectives in the Middle East”
“The U.S. has directly and indirectly participated in various conflicts in the region –
beginning with the Afghan-Soviet war and ending with the Syrian civil war”
“Bush launched the global War on Terrorism following on from the 9/11 attacks… there is evidence that the U.S. government had knowledge of an attack of similar magnitude, which suggests that 9/11 was allowed to happen so that threats in the Middle East could be neutralized in retaliation.”
“If the U.S. did intentionally avoid stepping up their security to
stop a potential terrorist attack on home soil, then it again demonstrates how it disregards the humanitarian consequences of its actions so long as they aid imperialism”
“UN is also cautious of relying on local police forces so the profit-driven PMSCs
have marketed themselves to the UN by offering services that otherwise may be a struggle
to provide.”
CONFLICT OF INTEREST AS THE NEW STANDARD
Within the last few decades, a few western hedge funds and big industries developed a monopoly by means of mergers and acquisitions of competitors, centralising all economic power in the hands of mostly American, happy few. Big investment players like BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, and UBS collide on a daily basis with leaders of international states and supranational organisations in order to shape their agendas towards more centralization of power and might. Some tend to take an indirect approach to gaining more wealth and power.
That became very clear during the ‘pandemic’ with the example of Bill Gates overpowering the WHO financially. Financing vaccine development, facilitating distribution efforts of the vaccines in the Global South, and plain collusion with governments in the EU and the US All of these launched under the ‘goodwill’ umbrella of global health, safety, and philanthropy. Let’s call it what it really is: philanthrocapitalism. Hence, investing so-called philanthropic money to gain ROI through the backdoor. Politico investigated the abovementioned topic and their conclusions were flabbergasting as you can read in their article:
As discussed above, the measures taken during the pandemic didn’t have much scientific basis. Lockdowns, curfews, face masks, school closings, and even the vaccines are heavily contested within the scientific world. Mainstream media, as one of the five powers, are part of the huge collusion we see today. Most people are still unaware that about 100.000 scientists across the globe demanded debate, questioned, or even disproved the narratives claimed by the WHO and governments. Mainstream media is not allowed to cover this issue at all, let alone give a forum to these scientists. The obvious collusion can be found, just one example, in the person of James ‘Jim’ Smith, former CEO of Thomson Reuters (Press Agency), Board of Directors of Pfizer and the World Economic Forum.
Conflict of Interest: collusion of press, vaccine and WEF
The WHO colluded with government agencies around the world in discrediting other viewpoints. In many countries, big tech was forced by governments to intervene on social media to deplatform, ridicule, and frame dissenting voices (Timotijevic 2020, Liester 2022). Factcheck organisations were launched and heavily sponsored to push the WHO narrative. Factchecks mostly relied on reproducing the narrative of governmental agencies. Even science, and scientific papers were suppressed under the wing of corrupted politicisation (Abbasi 2020).
A fascistic rhetoric was used (Bell 2023), just as it was used decades ago during world war 1 & 2 (Szollosi-Janze 2017). Opposing voices were set aside as conspiracy theorists, and rightwing idiots, others were fired from their jobs or totally canceled. Remember, more than 3.400 peer-reviewed papers already pointed out concerns about the used measures, strategies, and vaccine adverse effects.
The rhetoric about climate change is as heavily manipulated as the pandemic. Same tactics. Thousands of researchers are shouting in the desert as it appears polar bears are thriving again, ice caps are not declining, and carbon dioxide is not the issue. But none of that is in your daily news.
Prof Happer on Climate Science
(Prof William Happer, Princeton University, on climate science – Sky News Regional Australia)
The pandemic offered the big players the ultimate chance to advance the western hemisphere towards a totalitarian technofascist system based on digital IDs encompassing personal health status, vaccination status, bank accounts, resumes, consumption behaviour, climate impact, and the rest of your individual details. At least, that appears to be the ultimate goal proposed by the EU and the WEF (obvious collusion). Deployment is imminent.
The EU launched its Digital Services Act in August 2023, a plain censorship law that only allows the EU narrative to be published anywhere. Any other view of reality shall, de facto, be considered misinformation or disinformation. Begging the question: Who will decide what is misinformation or disinformation? All big tech companies are now obliged to censor anyone who dares to set forth a different viewpoint than that allowed by the non-elected EU government. The UK followed with an analogue law in September. Free speech, individual freedom, and personal views are no longer safeguarded in huge parts of the West. Constitutional and basic human rights are violated, and the judicial system mostly remains silent. Your country may follow soon.
End of September, Belgium’s federal parliament (the political center of the EU) was the first to permanently install the ‘Passenger Locator Form/Travel restrictions’ law. A leftover from the pandemic. This law can be activated anytime, whenever the government feels necessary, and for whatever reason they can shove under the umbrella of global health or climate change.
AIM FOR WORLDWIDE POWER GRAB BY UN, WHO, and WEF
Two major international organisations are currently so deeply engrained and influenced by big industry they have practically subdued to their requests and agenda’s, pushed by lobbyist. A third party, the World Economic Forum facilitates this ‘take-over’, as is scientifically described (see WEF Chapter). Throughout history, these three organisations have primarily been funded by western countries. Governments of the Global South were always undervalued, underrepresented, and disregarded at this supranational levels. The west always knew better.
· The UN and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs-Agenda 2030)
A personal friend of mine is a MD (and MPH) who used to work for the UN for over 15 years. He was involved in the development of some SDGs. Initially, the SDGs were developed from a philanthropical ideology to change things for the better, especially for those countries still fighting poverty, patriarchy, sustainable development, e.g.
Once the SDGs were officially launched in 2012, Big Industry and the Club of Rome were already lobbying their way in, to recuperate these SDGs as they saw a huge opportunity to create new economic growth after the global financial banking crisis in 2008.
As scientific research by Pedersen (2018) describes:
“With the SDGs in place, businesses now have a much clearer set of long term global priorities with political tail wind, and the alignment between policy makers, civil society and the private sector is much stronger.
The SDGs are a great gift to business!”
Ever since, the SDGs have been pushed in all agenda’s. Even Universities are pushed into that direction with funding and grants that liaise to research on the SGDs, hence, indoctrinating students and staff blindly.
Massive amounts of money have been invested in the development of meat substitutes; mass bug meat production is a cheaper alternative; even printed meat and fish are on the menu today in the West. As these developments touch on SDGs 1, 2, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 17, you may wonder why farmers are put under pressure to give up their production and these food alternatives are pushed onto markets globally.
Climate change is scientifically quite a robust statement. However, ever since the SDGs, all human activities are being related to these changes. Independent science points out that most climate change issues are most probably related to natural phenomena. Latest research shows that ice caps are growing, sea level is not rising, polar bears have never been as flourishing as today, and carbon dioxide appear to be at an all-time low. Independent research shows that the planetary stance of the Sun in relation to Earth (the Milankovitch Orbicle-Cycle) might have an huge impact that is consistently disregarded by the IPCC, and understudied in research. The IPCC, another vehicle from the UN, that has to keep the false narrative afloat (Hansson et al. 2021). Research on the IPCC points out the flaws in their methodologies used and the results presented, as they lack transparency. However, the mainstream media keeps feeding humanity with one-sided narratives, and opposing scientists have to be shut down.
As the western countries have little resources left and their ‘for profit agenda’ squeezed the life out of their own local industries over the last decades, by shifting productions to the Global South, they now end up eating their own tail. So, a new economy has to be started in the west. Here comes the green transition!
A new economy based on so-called Net Zero investments. The whole of western society is forced towards buying electrical vehicles, insulating houses, solar and wind energy, less cattle, less meat (glued perfectly to the previous meat substitute statement), a shift towards newly built industries, re-training of technical personnel, e.g. This transition can be coupled with technological advances such as modelling systems and AI. Are you starting to see the bigger picture?
The collateral damage liaised to cobalt and lithium mining for your electronic batteries is staggering.
These are just two examples on how humanity is being fooled and tricked by the implementation of the SDGs.
Let’s move on to the WHO.
· The World Health Organization and the ‘One-Size-Fits-All’-approach
Up until the pandemic, the WHO was struggling to be of any relevance in safeguarding global health. With a reputation of being no more than a fancy online library, they pushed medication and vaccination strategies, for which quite a lot did not have any scientific backing. It remains an issue for poor countries to invest huge amounts of money in health care systems. For decades, the impoverished South was the ideal market to test pharmaceutical products and get rid of expired pharmaceutical overstocks.
The pandemic came as God’s gift for western governments, the WHO, bigpharma, and major investors. The declining western neoliberal capitalist model is in need of two things. More return on investment and money in your private bank account It will be the only way to withstand the economic growth and international takeover by the Global South. In the beginning of 2020, Asia surpassed the GDP of the West for the first time since the 17th century’s Silk Route. A major economic power shift occurred!
Enter Covid-19!
Within 8 months a vaccine was produced, based on a new platform, mRNA.
The interplay between all the western big players had to create advantages for all stakeholders (expect the citizen of course). The mRNA vaccine is patented, so a huge profit can be made by western big pharma whereas traditional (live attenuated vaccines) are not so profitable anymore due to expired patents. By means of fearmongering, the WHO succeeded in pushing these vaccines worldwide through local governments, for a disease with an Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) as low as 0.03% under 60. Yes, comparable to the regular flu.
It was shouted over the rooftops that 6 million people (or more) passed away during the total duration of the crisis. Well, the same is most probably true for every influenza outbreak since a hundred years, this accounts for 650.000 mortalities a year (Iuliano et al. 2018). Remember, the broader population was nester tested for Influenza when ill. With an IFR of 0.10%, the flu must have killed more people than we ever assumed.
Anyhow, for western governments seeing their intrinsic power decrease over time towards overarching organisations, and by a growing economic blocks in the Global South (BRICS, CIVETS, VISTA, ASEAN, e.g.) this was an excellent way to regain and exercise power over their citizens again. The WHO claimed the driver seat and became relevant again, and all the stakeholders worked together to make their agenda’s work out to the max.
The whole approach was also the ultimate prove that our allopathic medical model is on the verge of collapse due to its reductionistic ways of diagnosing and treating patients. The WHO, forced by big pharma, only promotes ‘One-Size-Fits-All’-approaches. If one is familiar with the human body and has some public health knowledge, it is known that 80% of health is constituted by social determinants, biomedical treatments and therapies only contribute for 10 to 20% to overall health and wellbeing, but it costs our societies billions per year.
You cannot treat all patients with the same one-sided approach. COVID-19 is strongly related to age and underlying diseases. So why did children needed to be inoculated knowing they were not the drivers, and transmission didn’t stop with a vaccine? Why did the WHO (and Bill Gates) wanted to push the vaccine in Africa? A continent with an average age of 25 that would never have a huge challenge with this virus? Why the same approach in the EU while the average age is between 45 and 50? Just doesn’t make any sense. Every human body is different in genetics, immune response, hormonal responses, underlying diseases, family histories, e.g. A one-size-fits-all just doesn’t work.
The WHO, coerced by big money (Gates and his organisations, Big Pharma, politicians, and civil servants who blindly trust the game they are playing) would like to take over Global Health by changing the International Health Regulations via Amendments that might lead to one institute governing global health. The most insane step against health we have ever seen. We are in desperate need of more medicine that addresses local social determinants, not less.
The WHO could receive unprecedented powers to declare pandemics at will, install lockdowns and new vaccine mandates…all of this with the power of international law, and not necessarily backed by substantiated dialectics. October presents itself with the 5th Meeting on the IHRs. In a worst case scenario this will lead to yet another renewed power grab from the western countries, desperate to regain power over the Global South in countering the western economic decline.
Politicians of the Global South supporting this new WHO treaty might become responsible for their own ensuing economic demise, and the introduction of a newly packaged form of western colonialism, and imperialism ending the sovereignty of their nation states. The current economic growth of the Global South combined with its wish for less western influence is, paradoxically, the best protection safeguarding freedom and humanity in the west. Multipolarity forms a huge barrier against this attempt to global world dominance by the west. This will require caution on behalf of the heads of state and their respective governments in the Global South. It will also be essential to push for an international agreement (checks and balances) on development restrictions of AI, technological control systems, and robotics in ways that safeguards humanity’s future.
As Pedersen and Brincker (2021) argue, based on the work of Wiener in 1950:
“The paradox is that as we extend our powers through informational control systems we simultaneously open the door to being controlled and constrained by these very systems that we create. Weiner and others saw both this conflict and also “the need for anthropologists and philosophers” (p. 182) to help us understand our humanity and guide the value and uses of cybernetics. Wiener’s anticipated worries has to do with the obvious power of control systems to control human lives, but also with the temptation of humans to control other humans through these systems. The construction of digital interaction possibilities is creating opportunities to connect all the while it opens the door for unprecedented manipulation mechanisms, and the open question remains – who and how are we going to handle the new digital worlds of our own creation?
Conspiracy theory you said? Well, the Belgian government just voted the pandemic Passenger Locator Form, and the Covid-19 travel restrictions to be put into permanent law. The government can pull this card now anytime they want. The Dutch government, at the same time, reached an agreement with 20 stakeholders and signed the GLOBAL HEALTH PACT. The Netherlands wants to take the lead in supporting a global health structure (One Size Fits All), more international pandemic preparedness, and mitigate the impact of climate change on global health (remember, interconnecting everything to gain control and profit).
Belgium and The Netherlands have been the front runners during the pandemic in the EU, and are the center of EU political governance, may I remind you the EU Government is ran by an unelected people. Belgium’s Prime Minister Decroo, and Dutch Prime Minister Rutte are both Young Global Leaders formed by the World Economic Forum (Klaus Schwab’s WEF). As Schwab stated proudly: “we penetrate the cabinets”.
Enter the WEF!
· KLAUS SCHWAB’s STAKEHOLDER CAPITALISM IDEOLOGY (WEF)
The invention of the internet and the subsequent development of social media have opened up global communication. For those willing to investigate, it is easy to find that our world has been shaped throughout history towards ‘stakeholder capitalism’, heavily promoted by the World Economic Forum. Stakeholder capitalism can be defined as politics, big industries, and corporatism working together for their own goals and benefits, subduing humanity even further in a stray jacket. Many think Klaus Schwab is the founder of this paradigm, but nothing is further from the truth. He just recites history and implements a very old realm to push his personal ideology.
Klaus Schwab is nothing less than an ideologist whose dream of a global government controlling the world’s population is getting closer by the day. His WEF is sponsored by over 1000 corporations seeking political influence. Two Swedish scientists were able to attend the WEF meetings and describe their findings in the Journal of Global Governance in 2021. An interesting read, titled ‘Discretionary Governance: Selection, Secrecy, and Status within the World Economic Forum’. Let’s explore this scientific article by Garsten and Sobrom (2021).
Schwab started his campaign for global dominance in 1971 in Switzerland. The way Schwab pushes his agenda is nothing short of the same tactics that Di Medici’s used in the 12th century. With the WEF, Schwab invites high-ranking politicians, business leaders, opinion makers, selected press, and influencers that (partially) support his narrative.
Invitees are extremely well vetted before they are allowed to participate. Every guest is chosen for a certain reason and agenda. Guest are called ‘actors’, and most of them are western men. Schwab has promoted these meetings since the early years as ‘high profile, only for top brains, exclusive to the happy few’. Actors engage in these events under the illusion of being someone of consequence in global governance. By bringing people together who are all made to feel ‘important’, a group dynamic emerges and is being facilitated by secret meetings and the upholding of the Chatham House Rule (no word leaves the meeting room).
Addressing actors as ‘important’, ‘of value’, ‘top brain’, and lured into secrecy boosts the ego until they blindly follow and promote Schwab’s ideology. Also, the network is used to help one another. I scratch your back when you scratch mine. Hence, an actor feels unique and lifted above the masses. High-ranking businessmen get direct access to world leaders, and vice versa. This also explains why officials from all these supranational organisations easily shift from one entity to another. All infesting the system with the same narrative on every level.
More than 600 WEF ‘screeners’ follow the actors 24/7, the whole year round, to evaluate how they ‘perform’ within society. Critique on the WEF leads to a ban. Once banned, the network dries up, and the network considers you a traitor. Often, banned people end up losing everything they have ever worked for. This fear-based mechanism is a copy-paste of manipulation and leveraging assets, as we have seen before in different historical contexts.
McNeill (2023) further argues the WEF is ambiguous and lacks any accountability which cast doubt on their overall legitimacy. This research concludes by stating: “It (cfr. WEF, SB) has clearly sought to increase the power of corporations in global governance at the expense, inter alia, of multilateral organisations such as the WHO.” The WEF is also a founding member of CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), way up their ally to secure control over the masses.
Moreover, Woodworth (2023) states in the research paper titled: “How the World Economic Forum damages the credibility of climate science”, the following:
“Since the WEF was a catalyst in the rush to judgment on COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates, this suggests that the WEF is primarily guided by political motives, not by science. In fact, the way the WEF approaches the climate issue—as an excuse to restrict freedom without promoting renewable energy sources—makes evident the true motives of the WEF. As a result of the WEF’s political use of the climate issue, the validity of climate science has been tarnished in the public mind.”
In ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’, a book Schwab co-wrote early on in the pandemic, he warns his WEF actors of a declining western economy, losing up to 30% of western GDP, and a 30% rise in unemployment by 2030. He proposes a shift towards a ‘Green Economy’. A green deal that citizens have to accept. To facilitate this, it is important to warn the global population of the potential disastrous effects of climate change. Hence, propagating climate fear to get the Green Deal launched Where have we seen or heard of this strategy before? A recent opinion piece published at Al Jazeera comes to the same conclusion.
Schwab promotes AI, wearables, and robotics but warns of the consequences for the population. A decline in GDP and rising unemployment may destabilise society. In turn, this leads to monetary uncertainty. He sees a potential uprise in the population. To counter this, bank accounts should be transferred to central banks, and central bank digital currencies have to be launched. This, combined with a digital ID that encompasses your whole life, gives you the ultimate social credit and control tool over an entire global population. To counter unrest, it’s proposed to use helicoptermoney, or conditional basic income, to ease the population’s burden. If this gets combined with your social credit score, governments could raise or diminish that ‘extra income’ depending on your ‘behaviour’.
The latter can be extrapolated following a quote derived from Schwab’s Great Reset:
“In this messy new world defined by a shift towards multipolarity and intense competition for influence, the conflicts or tensions will no longer be driven by ideology but spurred by nationalism and the competition for resources
If no one power can enforce order, our world will suffer from a ‘global order deficit’.”
Schwab and his acolytes apparently fear a multipolar world and call for a unipolar world government whereby all sovereign nation states transfer their powers to supranational organisations before the Global South takes over. At least, that is how I interpret this statement.
In facilitating the further build-up towards global governance, AI is considered one of the major solutions by the WEF. This is a dangerous discourse, in my opinion. AI can only develop based on what is being put into it as information. If this is distorted or one-sided, the response of AI will not be appropriate at all. You should ask the current online AI tools how safe and efficient the mRNA vaccines are. You only get to see the narrative of the WHO—the 3.400 peer-reviewed articles that claim serious issues are suppressed. The same manipulation can be detected when using online search engines, especially Google Scholar, which is commonly used by scientists. It also explains why scientists often get stuck in the same paradigm and assume ‘consensus’ on a certain issue as they are not confronted with sufficient dialectics in their own research.
I urge you to find a dissenting academic article on Climate Change or the vaccines.
These articles are hard to find, suppressed by a guided AI-algorithm. Pose the same question in other scientific search engines or public engines like Brave or Yandex, and totally different results come forward.
Dr. Patrick Brown, a climate researcher, admitted in the Wall Street Journal to have manipulated his recent climate research to get it in line with the narrative that top-scientific journal ‘Nature’ supports to get his study published. And it got published. It wasn’t the truth he published…
Excerpt of the article in the Wall Street Journal:
“Scientists were aghast last month when Patrick Brown, climate director at the Breakthrough Institute in Berkeley, Calif., acknowledged that he’d censored one of his studies to increase his odds of getting published. Credit to him for being honest about something his peers also do but are loath to admit.
In an essay for the Free Press, Mr. Brown explained that he omitted “key aspects other than climate change” from a paper on California wildfires because such details would “dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell.” Editors of scientific journals, he wrote, “have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives.”
Nature’s editor, Magdalena Skipper, denied that the journal has “a preferred narrative.” No doubt the editors at the New York Times and ProPublica would say the same of their own pages.”
What we really have to fear is research on Artificial Intelligence in health care. This can only lead to more ‘one-size-fits-all’ approaches, and wrong diagnosis. AI is totally dependent on what information is programmed into it. Research suggest that in between 50% to 80% of biomedical research is not falsifiable meaning there is no secure proof of these proposed scientific treatments (Ioannidis 2005, Fanelli 2009, Lose and Klarskov 2017).
Most research is limited in nature as all variables at play cannot be studied at the same time. As AI has to be fed with ‘science’ to produce an outcome it is clear when it gets loaded with ‘misinformation, the results will be wrong. AI might as such only respond to current very well-described symptoms and does not have any insights on an individual’s epigenetics, genetics, family constellations or personal physiological responses. Every human body differs totally from another on a biochemical response level. Unless, we all get chipped like animals and subdue all our private information into AI, this will never lead to better health care. Is this the transhumanist world that we want for ourselves and our children?
WHERE IS OUR WORLD HEADING?
Many supranational organisations clearly aim for a full digitalisation and control of humanity. The EU is now following the example of China by installing a digital ID that encompasses all your personal details. The last bridge before you give up what is left of personal integrity. The combination of a digital ID and CBDC will lead to full control over personal assets, which the government will be able to block or, worse, may enforce a citizen to spend money as they please.
Moreover, technological advancement was promoted as a solution for more efficient governance. It has been sold to enhance convenience for the customer or citizen. Nothing is further from the truth. The time individuals spend nowadays to get administrative issues solved through government, be it commercial websites, is unseen in history. In many cases, these platforms are incapable of dealing with specific requests. If, for one reason or another, you are unable to provide the requested information, you end up being stuck. The lack of human agency, where it is possible to vocalise personal issues, is now often the reason people feel dehumanised. You must have encountered this yourself! Do we call this progress? It is nothing less than turning humans into numbers and dehumanising them in favour of technology.
I want to conclude with the EU as prime example of how the world is evolving in a dystopian way. The EU takes the lead in dismissing local governments and their sovereignty. The EU Commission, the de facto government of the Union, is non-elected and biased by the conflict of interests and collusion of the powers that be.
Citizens of Europe are unable to vote for these technocrats. Members of the EU parliament are elected, but have little to no impact on legislative processes. It is no more than a large group of retired national politicians that get paid a lot to sit, listen, and debate without the ability of steering legislative work.
Guy Verhofstadt is one of the EU’s leading harbingers, former prime minister of Belgium, and member of the European Parliament since ages. Dumped at the EU Parliament after his disastrous reign over Belgium, he is a strong proponent for technofascism promoting technological enslavement. In a public address at the EU parliament in 2018, he appealed loudly to all member states to give up their sovereignty towards a centralized (non-elected) EU Government. Even academia points out that the general sphere is to subdue nation states, all under the disguise of economic reinforcement, safety, and equity. The pandemic made his words resonate even stronger now that the EU had the ability to show its real strength, outplaying nation states with the (mis-)handling of the pandemic.
The EU now promotes a clear push towards a non-elected technofacist supranational government that subdues the nation-states’ particular cultural identity and creates some more centrally imposed uniformity. This is a first step towards the roll-out of a global government, global health care, digitalization of individuals, social credit systems, and one-size-fits-all in every aspect of life. Hence, human technological enslavement.
The Global South still remains more or less untouched by this evolution. However, times are changing fast. I often get the question of why BRICS, ASEAN, and Latin American countries seem to develop a counterforce against the colonialist and imperialist behaviour of the west on the one hand, but do they still commit to the G-20, UN, WEF, WHO, and the World Bank?
As we live in a globalised world where trade is still the main source of economic growth and stability, it seems that the economy has to play two sets of cards at the same time. As a member of humanity, I can only urge the Global South not to follow, sign, or implement any restrictive measure that leads to freedom restriction, deterioration of the right to self-determination, or degradation of personal integrity.
Most countries on earth defend human rights within the framework of nation state constitutions. However, the last few years we have seen a tremendous amount of infringements towards these basic rights. Freedom of speech, academic freedom, personal freedom, right to self-determination are just a few examples of violations that the global population had to encounter.
Your future votes will be decisive. Do we want a world build around freedom, self-determination, love, personal growth, fun, pleasure, endeavor, mental ease, progressive, equitable, creative, and honest? Or do you vote for one-size-fits-all, technological enslavement, freedom restrictions, loss of personal integrity, abolishing self-determination, and human dignity, just becoming a plain number in a digitalized world?
If you choose the latter, three options are available. We can go for a Star Trek approach, were the ‘Federation’ will become a global government in which you can all wear the same uniform, drive or fly the same vehicles, eat printed food, and your personality will be reduced to functionalities serving a technological power. A Star Wars-like realm is another possibility were humanity faces the choice to comply and join the system by giving up any personal self-development, or you opt (it won’t be a choice) to become an outlaw, being chased by the system until your final days? Third option, if the world totally collapses as so many high-valued civilizations before us already did, we will possibly be left in a Mad Max-scenario where different tribes end-up fighting each other all day for necessary resources to survive.
I am starting to regret having children! This is not the world I envisioned for them growing up. But, you can still make a change towards a dignified and humane world. Put a stop on technological advances that lack checks and balances, in safeguarding humanity! We urgently need morals and ethics to come back in play. We need to seek for a new worldwide system of checks and balances, guarded by the global population. The role of supranational institutes should be limited to solely data collecting, and policy recommendations that remain free for all sovereign states to implement, or not.
It’s your choice, and you have to choose now! Vote for change and depoliticise or abolish all imperialist organisations, in favour of your own future, your children’s future, the future of the west, and for global humanity!
We are in need of sovereign states in a multipolar world backed by checks and balances to facilitate freedom for all! It’s your call!
ALDÉN, M., OLOFSSON FALLA, F., YANG, D., BARGHOUTH, M., LUAN, C., RASMUSSEN, M. & DE MARINIS, Y. 2022. Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line. Current Issues in Molecular Biology, 44, 1115-1126.
BELL, D. Pandemic preparedness and the road to international fascism. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, n/a.
CHAUDHRY, R., DRANITSARIS, G., MUBASHIR, T., BARTOSZKO, J. & RIAZI, S. 2020. A country level analysis measuring the impact of government actions, country preparedness and socioeconomic factors on COVID-19 mortality and related health outcomes. eClinicalMedicine, 25.
FANELLI, D. 2009. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PloS one, 4, e5738.
FLADMARK, J. M. & HEYERDAHL, T. 2015. Heritage and Identity: Shaping the Nations of the North, Routledge.
FRAIMAN, J., ERVITI, J., JONES, M., GREENLAND, S., WHELAN, P., KAPLAN, R. M. & DOSHI, P. 2022. Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults. Vaccine, 40, 5798-5805.
GARSTEN, C. & SÖRBOM, A. 2021. Discretionary Governance: Selection, Secrecy, and Status within the World Economic Forum. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 27, 540-560.
GIBSON, J. 2022. Government mandated lockdowns do not reduce Covid-19 deaths: implications for evaluating the stringent New Zealand response. New Zealand Economic Papers, 56, 17-28.
ORTIZ, R. J. 2020. Oil-Fueled Accumulation in Late Capitalism: Energy, Uneven Development, and Climate Crisis. Critical Historical Studies, 7, 205-240.
HANSSON, A., ANSHELM, J., FRIDAHL, M. & HAIKOLA, S. 2021. Boundary Work and Interpretations in the IPCC Review Process of the Role of Bioenergy With Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in Limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C. Frontiers in Climate, 3.
HOLLER, M. J. & RUPP, F. 2021. Power in Networks: The Medici. Homo Oeconomicus, 38, 59-75.
IRRGANG, P., GERLING, J., KOCHER, K., LAPUENTE, D., STEININGER, P., HABENICHT, K., WYTOPIL, M., BEILEKE, S., SCHÄFER, S., ZHONG, J., SSEBYATIKA, G., KREY, T., FALCONE, V., SCHÜLEIN, C., PETER, A. S., NGANOU-MAKAMDOP, K., HENGEL, H., HELD, J., BOGDAN, C., ÜBERLA, K., SCHOBER, K., WINKLER, T. H. & TENBUSCH, M. 2023. Class switch toward noninflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Sci Immunol, 8,eade2798.
JEFFERSON, T., DOOLEY, L., FERRONI, E., AL-ANSARY, L. A., VAN DRIEL, M. L., BAWAZEER, G. A., JONES, M. A., HOFFMANN, T. C., CLARK, J., BELLER, E. M. & ET AL. 2023. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
JOHNSTONE, P. & MCLEISH, C. 2020. World wars and the age of oil: Exploring directionality in deep energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science,69,101732.
LAZAR, N. C. 2006. Making emergencies safe for democracy: the Roman dictatorship and the rule of law in the study of crisis government. Constellations,13, 506-521.
LIESTER, M. B. 2022. The Suppression of Dissent During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 11 (4): 53-76.
LOSE, G. & KLARSKOV, N. 2017. Why published research is untrustworthy. International Urogynecology Journal, 28, 1271-1274.
MCNEILL, D. The World Economic Forum: An unaccountable force in global health governance? Global Policy, n/a.
MITTAL, R., BREUER, K. & SEO, J. H. 2023. The Flow Physics of Face Masks. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 55, 193-211.
NORTON, B., 2022. U.S. launched 251 military interventions since 1991, and 469 since 1798. Monthly Review.
Fletcher Center For Strategic Studies, 2022. MIP Research, Tufts University.
IULIANO, A. D., ROGUSKI, K. M., CHANG, H. H., MUSCATELLO, D. J., PALEKAR, R., TEMPIA, S., COHEN, C., GRAN, J. M., SCHANZER, D., COWLING, B. J., WU, P., KYNCL, J., ANG, L. W., PARK, M., REDLBERGER-FRITZ, M., YU, H., ESPENHAIN, L., KRISHNAN, A., EMUKULE, G., VAN ASTEN, L., PEREIRA DA SILVA, S., AUNGKULANON, S., BUCHHOLZ, U., WIDDOWSON, M. A. & BRESEE, J. S. 2018. Estimates of global seasonal influenza-associated respiratory mortality: a modelling study. Lancet, 391, 1285-1300.
PEDERSEN, C. S. 2018. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a Great Gift to Business! Procedia CIRP, 69, 21-24.
PEDERSEN, E. O. & BRINCKER, M. 2021. Philosophy and Digitization: Dangers and Possibilities in the New Digital Worlds. SATS, 22, 1-9.
PEZZULLO, A. M., AXFORS, C., CONTOPOULOS-IOANNIDIS, D. G., APOSTOLATOS, A. & IOANNIDIS, J. P. A. 2023. Age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly population. Environ Res, 216, 114655.
POLYKRETIS, P., DONZELLI, A., LINDSAY, J. C., WISEMAN, D., KYRIAKOPOULOS, A. M., MÖRZ, M., BELLAVITE, P., FUKUSHIMA, M., SENEFF, S. & MCCULLOUGH, P. A. 2023. Autoimmune inflammatory reactions triggered by the COVID-19 genetic vaccines in terminally differentiated tissues. Autoimmunity, 56, 2259123.
PUCHALA, D. J. 2005. World Hegemony and the United Nations. International Studies Review, 7, 571-584.
RAAFLAUB, K. A. 2014. Why Greek democracy? Its emergence and nature in context. A companion to Greek democracy and the Roman Republic, 23-43.
RANCOURT, D.G., BAUDIN, M., HICKEY, J., MERCIER, J. “COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere”. CORRELATION Research in the Public Interest, Report, 17 September 2023.
SALTELLI, A., STURMBERG, J. P., SAREWITZ, D. & IOANNIDIS, J. P. A. What did COVID-19 really teach us about science, evidence and society? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, n/a.
SCHWAB, K. 2021. Stakeholder capitalism: A global economy that works for progress, people and planet, John Wiley & Sons.
SHIR-RAZ, Y., ELISHA, E., MARTIN, B., RONEL, N. & GUETZKOW, J. 2023. Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics. Minerva, 61, 407-433.
SZÖLLÖSI-JANZE, M. The scientist as expert: Fritz Haber and German chemical warfare during the First World War and beyond. One Hundred Years of Chemical Warfare: Research, Deployment, Consequences, 2017. Springer International Publishing, 11-23.
TIMOTIJEVIC, J. 2020. Society’s ‘new normal’? The role of discourse in surveillance and silencing of dissent during and post Covid-19. The Role of Discourse in Surveillance and Silencing of Dissent During and Post Covid-19.
UVERSKY, V. N., REDWAN, E. M., MAKIS, W. & RUBIO-CASILLAS, A. 2023. IgG4 Antibodies Induced by Repeated Vaccination May Generate Immune Tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein. Vaccines (Basel), 11.
WOODWORTH, E. How the World Economic Forum damages the credibility of climate science. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, n/a.
YONKER, L. M., SWANK, Z., BARTSCH, Y. C., BURNS, M. D., KANE, A., BORIBONG, B. P., DAVIS, J. P., LOISELLE, M., NOVAK, T., SENUSSI, Y., CHENG, C. A., BURGESS, E., EDLOW, A. G., CHOU, J., DIONNE, A., BALAGURU, D., LAHOUD-RAHME, M., ARDITI, M., JULG, B., RANDOLPH, A. G., ALTER, G., FASANO, A. & WALT, D. R. 2023. Circulating Spike Protein Detected in Post-COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Myocarditis. Circulation, 147, 867-876.
WOOD, R. 2019. Promoting democracy or pursuing hegemony? An analysis of US involvement in the Middle East. Journal of Global Faultlines, 6, 166-185
Disclaimer
The views and analysis expressed in this content (video, blog, article, etc.) are solely that of the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of humani-well, the organisation, or other associated parties.
Medical disclaimer: you should not rely on the information on this website as a replacement for seeing a doctor or other qualified healthcare provider for a diagnosis or treatment. Nothing in this publication should be interpreted as a substitute for the advice of a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult a medical professional before using any information contained in this publication.
Next to guiding this bunch of great people at Humani-Well, Sam covers a broad range of topics. From biomedical issues to societal impact analysis. HIs biggest strength? Being a 'generalist, and master of none'.
Know More
