Just in the past several years, advancements in things like AI (artificial intelligence), cashless payment systems, augmented reality and more have happened so quickly that one could argue that we are in dystopia right now – though there is still much more to come.

Unless some kind of black swan event puts an immediate stop to it, the dystopian future will rapidly become the dystopian present – and in many ways it already is.

Take palm scanning, for instance. Paying for food and other items with a swipe of the hand rather than with cash or credit used to be a futuristic concept from the Book of Revelation. However, some stores are already using it, including Whole Foods Market and its parent company Amazon at its Amazon Fresh stores.

“The palm-recognition system works by linking a user’s payment information with their unique palm print,” explains The Exposé (United Kingdom). “If you’re an Amazon Prime member, you can also link it with your Prime account – no need to fumble in the Amazon app looking for your in-store code any longer.”

“At Whole Foods, you just hover your palm over the reader once you’re ready to pay and the system will find your Prime account, apply any discounts and charge the credit card you enrolled with.”

(Related: Big Tech is currently working on erasing white people and their history from the internet.)

When reality becomes a video game

What about facial recognition systems? At the recent G20 gathering of dystopian globalist leaders in Brazil, every attendee was forced “to pass a biometric validation process by scanning their faces using Serpro’s stand devices.”

Serpro, by the way, is a Brazilian government-run data processing agency that plans to unleash facial recognition all across the land. In order to buy and sell in the near future, one will probably have to undergo a face scan, as well as pay with the swipe of the hand rather than with cash or credit.

“If they can start getting this technology in place, it will inevitably be adopted by more and more institutions,” The Exposé warns. “And then someday you may wake up and find that you can’t get a job, open a bank account or buy groceries without having your face scanned – What will you do then?”

Apple just released its infamous Apple Vision Pro augmented reality headset to “augment reality” on a continual basis, making day-to-day life more of a video game than actual reality. This will tie in well with facial recognition and palm-scanning payment systems.

“Apple claims that the Vision Pro, which starts at $3,499, is the beginning of something called ‘spatial computing,’ which basically boils down to running apps all around you,” The Exposé explains.

“And the company’s ads for it do not hedge that pressure even a little: they show people wearing the Vision Pro all the time. At work! Doing laundry! Playing with their kids! The ambition is enormous: to layer apps and information over the real world – to augment reality.”

Then there is Elon Musk’s new Neuralink brain implant chip, which will turn humans into transhumanist robot hybrids. For some reason, a lot of conservatives love Musk because he says a lot of conservative-pandering things on X, but the guy is all about destroying humanity and turning everyone into hybrid computers.

Human life is sacred, as is the natural world around us, but Musk and others like him want to destroy it by “augmenting” or “hybridizing” the natural world, humans included, with computers. Just say no, as the late Nancy Reagan once said.

Thanks to your generous support, we are building the infrastructure of human freedom and actively donating our technology to independent publishers, authors and home schooling organizations. Learn about our game-changing non-commercial AI project here. Support our ongoing efforts to preserve and enhance human knowledge by shopping at HealthRangerStore.com.

Sources for this article include:

• Expose-News.com
• NaturalNews.com

Let’s begin with Fox’s The Simpsons, which has successfully predicted the future once again.

The Simpsons predicted the Apple Vision Pro. Unreal! pic.twitter.com/xsMcIViYHz

— Not Jerome Powell (@alifarhat79) February 4, 2024

In recent days, mixed reality enthusiasts strapped on Vision Pro and attempted to integrate the headset into their daily lives.

X has countless videos of early adopters driving vehicles:

This man was arrested for using Apple Vision Pro while driving a Tesla. pic.twitter.com/42t5RShEB6

— My name is لكهن ‏ (@4SingleRahi) February 4, 2024

NEW: Tesla Cybertruck in self-driving mode + Apple Vision Pro goggles.

Isn't it scary? pic.twitter.com/zwlZlRIi4V

— InsidersHut (@InsidersHut) February 4, 2024

Early Vision Pro adopters have been walking through the streets.

https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1754315457514086771

Society is one step closer to dystopia pic.twitter.com/r5PBGgeeZS

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) February 4, 2024

Wearing the Apple Vision Pro around SoHo pic.twitter.com/U6Jq8QrOyb

— highsnobiety (@highsnobiety) February 3, 2024

This is stressing me out just from watching #AppleVisionPro pic.twitter.com/dDJjaQ1wKj

— Tobi Mülhauser (@TobiMuelhauser) February 5, 2024

And many have been doing very interesting activities while in public.

This fan was using Apple Vision Pro on courtside during the Celtics-Grizzlies game

(via @barstoolsports/ IG)pic.twitter.com/vH3J2oVOPn

— ClutchPoints (@ClutchPoints) February 5, 2024

It has only been 2 days since Apple introduced Vision Pro, and there's a frenzy surrounding it.

Here are 10 instances of individuals going overboard with their reactions:

[1] Now in Londonpic.twitter.com/niDGz0JBNY

— Priyank Ahuja (@ahuja_priyank) February 5, 2024

Apple Vision Pro is here and it's crazily good.. A revolution in progress pic.twitter.com/137LDjEhM4

— Marketing Maverick (@MarketingMvrick) February 5, 2024

I don't know if it is allowed, but if it is, how long will it take to prohibit the use of Apple Vision Pro while driving a vehicle? It is a danger not to put all five senses into what is happening.

pic.twitter.com/OiYm8vJcfE

— Raúl Ferrer (@RaulFerrerDev) February 3, 2024

People are now wearing the Apple Vision Pro headset out in public

For some reason it reminds me of people masking pic.twitter.com/4eIdvXMord

— Marie Oakes (@TheMarieOakes) February 3, 2024

Last year, Black Mirror creator Charlie Brooker was reminded of his show when he saw Apple’s Vision Pro presentation, saying: “It’s weird, it’s really weird. One of my instincts when I saw that was like, ‘Oh my God, that’s so Black Mirror.‘”

What are Smart Cities?

“Satellite city” just refers to a smaller city next to a larger one.   Think Fort Worth and Dallas.  It’s possible that Auntie got her words mixed up and meant to say “Smart City” instead of satellite city.  Or, she could have meant that Lahaina was supposed to be a satellite city for something bigger that was slated to be built.

Smart Cities are a different matter entirely. (People often use “smart city” and “digital city” interchangeably.)  TWI, a multinational engineering and consulting firm, defines a smart city as one that “uses information and communication technology (ICT) to improve operational efficiency, share information with the public and provide a better quality of government service and citizen welfare”

Engineering firms like this believe that increased data collection through the use of cameras and sensors in cities can improve citizens’ quality of life by streamlining traffic and relieving congestion.  There are projects already in place to turn places like Tokyo, Singapore, New York City, and Reykjavic into smart cities.

Smart cities aren’t a “conspiracy theory.” They’re engineering projects that have been underway for quite some time already.

Maui was actually home to an early smart city project, called JUMPSmart Maui.  American and Japanese researchers installed electric vehicle charging stations throughout the island and worked with Nissan Leaf owners to collect data about how well the charging stations actually worked.  This project explains why Maui residents have smart cities on their radar.

It’s important to note that we’re told not all smart city concepts consist of individualized data collection.  While some smart cities, like those in China, certainly can use facial recognition tech to track individuals, companies trying to sell their services in Western countries insist that data collection can be done anonymously and only be used for traffic relief.

But we must remember that this can change depending on political winds.  Our cell phone data was supposed to be anonymous, too, and yet the CDC bought the data from phone companies to evaluate compliance during lockdowns.  I see no reason to assume data about movement within cities would remain permanently anonymous and inviolate, either.

Look at the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) in London.  Mayor Sadiq Khan installed thousands of cameras across London to determine whether or not vehicles in the city comply with emissions standards, which most older vehicles do not.  Many small business owners cannot afford to simply buy new vans, but noncompliant vehicles are fined £12.50 per day.  In response, gangs of Londoners have vandalized huge numbers of traffic cameras.

Despite the promises of politicians and city planners, these cameras are not popular.

Then there are 15 minute cities

A “15 minute city” refers to a city in which a person’s home and everything they need can be reached within a 15-minute walk or bike ride.

This, also, is getting a trial run in the U.K.  Oxford has divided the city into six zones, and private cars will need permits to go into different zones, or they could face fines. While Oxford legitimately has traffic problems, residents are concerned that it will kill business in the city center because it will be so much more difficult for people to reach, and also simply push the traffic issues to surrounding areas as people are forced to change their driving routes.

British city planners claim the goal is to get more people to use public transportation.  That can work, theoretically, if you live in an area where public transportation has not become dangerous, but that is increasingly rare.

I’ve lived in cities where you didn’t need to own a car.  Depending on your phase of life, it can work out quite nicely.  But I can’t imagine it working as a parent of 2+ teenagers with disparate interests.  Being stuck in a 15-minute radius would severely curtail my children’s opportunities to learn, socialize, and develop as human beings.  And it’s a killer for small businesses.

Yet the 15-minute city concept has been heavily promoted by the C40 Climate Leadership Group, a global network of nearly 100 mayors of major cities.

Again, this is not a conspiracy theory.  C40 is a real group of mayors of real cities.  Do you live in Houston or Miami?  You live in a city run by a mayor who has made a commitment to work toward a 15-minute city.

There is a push to retrofit existing cities to a 15-minute model.  But there are entirely new communities being planned, too.

These communities ARE coming

We’ve written before about the Dutch farmer protests.  The Dutch government has been forcibly purchasing farms to meet the EU’s nitrogen reduction standards, but the Dutch know that this has less to do with the environment and more to do with Tristate City.

The proposed Tristate City will be able to house 45 million people.  Supporters include property developers, pension funds, and Utrecht’s economic board.  They believe that Dutch cities are currently too small to compete with Asian megalopolises, and they believe this will be the wave of the future.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., a group called Flannery Associates has spent about $800 million purchasing approximately 52,000 acres northeast of San Francisco, right next to Travis Air Force Base.  For years, this organization had been shrouded in mystery.  Yet, within the past two weeks, this group has come forward with a website launch for their proposed utopia.

California Forever, the parent group behind Flannery Associates, promises a vibrant town powered by solar energy, full of walkable neighborhoods, and high-paying jobs.

But Flannery did not endear itself to the community with its years of secrecy and then its aggressive buying tactics.  Their assumption that they can build a brand new city, taking as much as water as they want, has not gone over well.  Local landowners, as well as Congressmen Mike Thompson and John Garamandi, have been intensely frustrated with the project owners and do not want the utopian city to go through.

And yet the members of California Forever are powerful billionaires.  The group includes Stripe co-founders John and Patrick Collison, venture capitalist Michael Moritz, Marc Andreessen and his venture capital fund, LinkedIn founder (and Epstein associate) Reid Hoffman, venture capitalists Nat Friedman and Daniel Gross, and the philanthropist/widow of Steve Jobs, Laurene Jobs.  The project is spearheaded by former Goldman Sachs investor Jan Sramek.

Sramek may be a 36 year old investing prodigy, but he has been incredibly vague on details regarding blueprints and environmental permitting, as well as financing for the people who may actually want to live there.

In a perfect world, jumping through the legal hurdles needed for a project like this would be impossible.  The area is zoned for agriculture, and the existing communities of Solano County don’t want to change it.

Incidentally, a lot of Smart Cities are in wildfire-prone areas

And Solano County is prone to wildfires.  The LNU Lightning Complex fires, California’s 6th most destructive wildfires, torched part of Solano County in 2020.  Locals say that the fire protection in Solano County is already underfunded.  Putting a new city, planned to include massive solar farms (which are a fire risk on their own) will be putting additional stress on an infrastructure that’s already not up to code.

And you know, it’s kind of funny how people seem to keep putting up Smart Cities in fire-prone areas.  You’d think that if you were going to dump tons of money into an area to improve the technology, they’d prioritize fire safety.

Just look at Kelowna, up in British Columbia.  It was devastated by wildfires in 2003.  Experts made recommendations, at the time, to avoid such destructive wildfires in the future but longtime local residents complain that no real changes were ever made.  It’s like no one cared that much about whether or not Kelowna burned.

It’s not like Kelowna is some poverty-stricken area, either.  In fact, it has the distinction of being Canada’s first “real-world 5G smart city.”   The government was willing to dump money into fancy new cameras and a 5G network. You’d think they want to keep the area from burning down.

You might be wondering why this matters

It matters because there is a method to the madness.  Smart Cities, cities where constant surveillance is the norm, are coming.  The move into them is not organic. It’s being driven.

Climate change is being used as an excuse for us to pack into heavily surveilled cities to reduce our carbon footprint, and the mainstream media has been pointing to this year’s wildfires as an example of climate catastrophe.  The head of the UN announced this summer that we had entered an era of “global boiling.”

Global boiling has supposedly led to both the Maui fires as well as the Canadian fires. This is supposed to scare us so much that we’re ready to make drastic lifestyle changes.

Except there are a few problems with this scenario.

First of all, 2023 has had heat records broken in some areas, but other parts of the world have had unusually cool summers.  There has been a great deal of hullaballoo about the “hottest summer on record,” but averages have only barely made it past those of the 1930s.  (source)

Second, these fires have been anything but natural.  Recent evidence has come forth that Hawaii Electric turned the power off 6 hours before the string of deadly fires that destroyed Lahaina.  Whether it was a Directed Energy Weapon or good old-fashioned gasoline we won’t know for some time, and personally, I’m not sure how much it matters.   I hope as the lawsuit between Maui County and Hawaii Electric proceeds, solid facts will emerge.  For now, all we know is that there was nothing “natural” about this supposed wildfire.

Up in Canada, you can find all kinds of videos and accusations being made online about who’s responsible for the fires.  Some of them might be overblown but we know for a fact people have been arrested for arson.  Arson and climate change are not the same thing!

If you think the talk about smart cities is hyperbolic, look at the talk about climate change.  Reading the UN’s website, they treat an impending man-made climate cataclysm as a fact despite public debate from climate scientists worldwide.

Or listen to King Charles talk about how this is humanity’s “last chance” to save the planet despite the fact that the climate change predictions made in the 90s and early 2000s about what the 2020s are being proven seriously wrong.

The climate doom rhetoric is utterly ridiculous, yet we’re supposed to take everything King Charles says as gospel and dismiss Auntie?  No, sorry, not buying it.

I don’t know whether or not King Charles believes his own rhetoric.  I kind of suspect he doesn’t, considering how much beachfront property he owns.  But it is clear: the powerful groups he is part of have a vision for the future that includes more surveillance for the rest of us.

We need to be paying attention

This website is about preparedness.  An awareness of the political class’s goals will help us to see what’s coming and think about what we personally can do to keep our families happy and healthy.

What are your thoughts about Smart Cities? Are they real or just another conspiracy theory? Do you think there will be a push to move us all into them or will they just be available for those who choose to live there? What do you see as the pros and cons? Do you believe plans for Smart Cities are behind some of the horrific disasters that have been occurring? What about the massive land purchases?

Let’s discuss at our Late Prepper Substack.

About Marie Hawthorne

A lover of novels and cultivator of superb apple pie recipes, Marie spends her free time writing about the world around her. Article cross-posted from The Organic Prepper.

Congressman Thomas Massie—an electrical engineer—revealed this information while discussing with Pete Buttigieg, the Secretary of Transportation, President Biden’s plan to have 50% of cars sold in the US be electric by 2030.

The current and future grid in most places will not be able to support each home running 25 refrigerators—not even close. Just look at California, where the grid is already buckling under the existing load.

Massie claims, correctly, in my view, that the notion of widespread adoption of electric vehicles anytime soon is a dangerous fantasy based on political science, not sound engineering.

Nonetheless, governments, the media, academia, large corporations, and celebrities tout an imminent “transition” to EVs as if it’s preordained from above. It’s not.

They’re trying to manufacture your consent for a scam of almost unimaginable proportions.

Below are three reasons why something sinister is going on with the big push for EVs. But first, a necessary clarification. You no doubt have heard of the term “fossil fuels” before.

When the average person hears “fossil fuels,” they think of a dirty technology that belongs in the 1800s. Many believe they are burning dead dinosaurs to power their cars.

They also think “fossil fuels” will destroy the planet within a decade and run out soon—despite the fact that, after water, oil is the second most abundant liquid on this planet.

None of these ridiculous notions are true, but many people believe them. Using propaganda terms like “fossil fuels” plays a large role.

Orwell was correct when he said that corrupting the language can corrupt people’s thoughts. I suggest expunging “fossil fuels” from your vocabulary in favor of hydrocarbons—a much better and more precise word.

A hydrocarbon is a molecule made up of carbon and hydrogen atoms. These molecules are the building blocks of many different substances, including energy sources like coal, oil, and gas. These energy sources have been the backbone of the global economy for decades, providing power for industries, transportation, and homes. Now, on to the three reasons EVs are a giant scam at best and possibly something much worse.

Reason #1: EVs Are Not Green

The central premise for EVs is they help to save the planet from carbon because they use electricity instead of gas. It’s astounding so few think to ask, what generates the electricity that powers EVs?

Hydrocarbons generate over 60% of the electricity in the US. That means there’s an excellent chance that oil, coal, or gas is behind the electricity charging an EV.

It’s important to emphasize carbon is an essential element for life on this planet. It’s what humans exhale and what plants need to survive.

After decades of propaganda, Malthusian hysterics have created a twisted perception in many people’s minds that carbon is a dangerous substance that must be reduced to save the planet.

Let’s entertain this bogus premise momentarily and assume carbon is bad. Even by this logic, EVs do not really reduce carbon emissions; they just rearrange them. Further, extracting and processing the exotic materials needed to make EVs requires tremendous power in remote locations, which only hydrocarbons can provide.

Additionally, EVs require an enormous amount of rare elements and metals—like lithium and cobalt—that companies mine in conditions that couldn’t remotely be considered friendly to the environment.

Analysts estimate that each EV requires around one kilogram of rare earth elements. Extracting and processing these rare elements produces a massive amount of toxic waste. That’s why it mainly occurs in China, which doesn’t care much about environmental concerns.

In short, the notion that EVs are green is laughable. It’s simply the thin patina of propaganda that governments need as a pretext to justify the astronomical taxpayer subsidies for EVs.

Reason #2: EVs Can’t Compete Without Government Support

For many years, governments have heavily subsidized EVs through rebates, sales tax exemptions, loans, grants, tax credits, and other means.

According to the Wall Street Journal, US taxpayers will subsidize EVs by at least $393 billion in the coming years—more than the GDP of Hong Kong.

To put that in perspective, if you earned $1 a second 24/7/365—about $31 million per year—it would take you over 12,677 YEARS to make $393 billion. And that’s not even considering the immense subsidies and government support that have occurred in the past.

Furthermore, governments impose burdensome regulations and taxes on gasoline vehicles to make EVs seem relatively more attractive. Even with this enormous government support, EVs can barely compete with gasoline vehicles.

According to J.D. Power, a consumer research firm, the average EV still costs at least 21% more than the average gasoline vehicle. Without government support, it’s not hard to see how the market for EVs would evaporate as they would become unaffordable for the vast majority of people.

In other words, the EV market is a giant mirage artificially propped up by extensive government intervention.

It begs the question, why are governments going all out to push an obviously uneconomic scam? While they are undoubtedly corrupt thieves and simply stupid, something more nefarious could also be at play.

Reason #3: EVs Are About Controlling You

EVs are spying machines. They collect an unimaginable amount of data on you, which governments can access easily. Analysts estimate that cars generate about 25 gigabytes of data every hour.

Seeing how governments could integrate EVs into a larger high-tech control grid doesn’t take much imagination. The potential for busybodies—or worse—to abuse such a system is obvious.

Consider this. The last thing any government wants is an incident like what happened with the Canadian truckers rebelling against vaccine mandates. Had the Canadian truckers’ vehicles been EVs, the government would have been able to stamp out the resistance much easier.

Here’s the bottom line. The people really in charge do not want the average person to have genuine freedom of movement or access to independent power sources.

They want to know everything, keep you dependent, and have the ability to control everything, just like how a farmer would with his cattle. They think of you in similar terms. That’s why gasoline vehicles have to go and why they are trying to herd us into EVs.

Conclusion

To summarize, EVs are not green, cannot compete with gas cars without enormous government support, and are probably a crucial piece of the emerging high-tech control grid.

The solution is simple: eliminate all government subsidies and support and let EVs compete on their own merits in a totally free market. But that’s unlikely to happen. Instead, it’s only prudent to expect them to push EVs harder and harder.

If EVs were simply government-subsidized status symbols for wealthy liberals who want to virtue signal how they think they’re saving the planet, that would be bad enough. But chances are, the big push for EVs represents something much worse.

Along with 15-minute cities, carbon credits, CBDCs, digital IDs, phasing out hydrocarbons and meat, vaccine passports, an ESG social credit system, and the war on farmers, EVs are likely an integral part of the Great Reset—the dystopian future the global elite has envisioned for mankind.

In reality, the so-called Great Reset is a high-tech form of feudalism. Sadly, most of humanity has no idea what is coming.

Worse, many have become unwitting foot soldiers for this agenda because they have been gaslighted into believing they are saving the planet or acting for the greater good. This trend is already in motion… and the coming weeks will be pivotal.

That’s precisely why I just released an urgent report on where this is all headed and what you can do about it… including three strategies everyone needs today. Click here to download the PDF now.

Article cross-posted from International Man.

In Europe, the UK, and Australia, where free speech is not as overtly protected, governments have legislated directly. The EU Commission is now applying the ‘Digital Services Act’ (DSA), a thinly disguised censorship law.

In Australia the government is seeking to provide the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) with “new powers to hold digital platforms to account and improve efforts to combat harmful misinformation and disinformation.”

One effective response to these oppressive laws may come from a surprising source: literary criticism. The words being used, which are prefixes added to the word “information,” are a sly misdirection. Information, whether in a book, article or post is a passive artefact. It cannot do anything, so it cannot break a law. The Nazis burned books, but they didn’t arrest them and put them in jail. So when legislators seek to ban “disinformation,” they cannot mean the information itself. Rather, they are targeting the creation of meaning.

The authorities use variants of the word “information” to create the impression that what is at issue is objective truth but that is not the focus. Do these laws, for example, apply to the forecasts of economists or financial analysts, who routinely make predictions that are wrong? Of course not. Yet economic or financial forecasts, if believed, could be quite harmful to people.

The laws are instead designed to attack the intent of the writers to create meanings that are not congruent with the governments’ official position. ‘Disinformation’ is defined in dictionaries as information that is intended to mislead and to cause harm. ‘Misinformation’ has no such intent and is just an error, but even then that means determining what is in the author’s mind. ‘Mal-information’ is considered to be something that is true, but that there is an intention to cause harm.

Determining a writer’s intent is extremely problematic because we cannot get into another person’s mind; we can only speculate on the basis of their behaviour. That is largely why in literary criticism there is a notion called the Intentional Fallacy, which says that the meaning of a text cannot be limited to the intention of the author, nor is it possible to know definitively what that intention is from the work. The meanings derived from Shakespeare’s works, for example, are so multifarious that many of them cannot possibly have been in the Bard’s mind when he wrote the plays 400 years ago.

How do we know, for example, that there is no irony, double meaning, pretence or other artifice in a social media post or article? My former supervisor, a world expert on irony, used to walk around the university campus wearing a T-shirt saying: “How do you know I am being ironic?” The point was that you can never know what is actually in a person’s mind, which is why intent is so difficult to prove in a court of law.

That is the first problem. The second one is that, if the creation of meaning is the target of the proposed law – to proscribe meanings considered unacceptable by the authorities – how do we know what meaning the recipients will get? A literary theory, broadly under the umbrella term ‘deconstructionism,’ claims that there are as many meanings from a text as there are readers and that “the author is dead.”

While this is an exaggeration, it is indisputable that different readers get different meanings from the same texts. Some people reading this article, for example, might be persuaded while others might consider it evidence of a sinister agenda. As a career journalist I have always been shocked at the variability of reader’s responses to even the most simple of articles. Glance at the comments on social media posts and you will see an extreme array of views, ranging from positive to intense hostility.

To state the obvious, we all think for ourselves and inevitably form different views, and see different meanings. Anti-disinformation legislation, which is justified as protecting people from bad influences for the common good, is not merely patronising and infantilising, it treats citizens as mere machines ingesting data – robots, not humans. That is simply wrong.

Governments often make incorrect claims, and made many during Covid.

In Australia the authorities said lockdowns would only last a few weeks to “flatten the curve.” In the event they were imposed for over a year and there never was a “curve.” According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2020 and 2021 had the lowest levels of deaths from respiratory illness since records have been kept.

Governments will not apply the same standards to themselves, though, because governments always intend well (that comment may or may not be intended to be ironic; I leave it up to the reader to decide).

There is reason to think these laws will fail to achieve the desired result. The censorship regimes have a quantitative bias. They operate on the assumption that if a sufficient proportion of social media and other types of “information” is skewed towards pushing state propaganda, then the audience will inevitably be persuaded to believe the authorities.

But what is at issue is meaning, not the amount of messaging. Repetitious expressions of the government’s preferred narrative, especially ad hominem attacks like accusing anyone asking questions of being a conspiracy theorist, eventually become meaningless.

By contrast just one well-researched and well-argued post or article can permanently persuade readers to an anti-government view because it is more meaningful. I can recall reading pieces about Covid, including on Brownstone, that led inexorably to the conclusion that the authorities were lying and that something was very wrong. As a consequence the voluminous, mass media coverage supporting the government line just appeared to be meaningless noise. It was only of interest in exposing how the authorities were trying to manipulate the “narrative” – a debased word was once mainly used in a literary context – to cover their malfeasance.

In their push to cancel unapproved content, out-of-control governments are seeking to penalise what George Orwell called “thought crimes.” But they will never be able to truly stop people thinking for themselves, nor will they ever definitively know either the writer’s intent or what meaning people will ultimately derive. It is bad law, and it will eventually fail because it is, in itself, predicated on disinformation.

Article from Brownstone Institute published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

About the Author

David James, PhD English Literature, is a business and finance journalist with 35 years experience, mainly in Australia’s national business magazine.

At this point, most Americans are just barely scraping by from month to month, and in poorer countries on the other side of the world there are people that are literally starving to death.  As I have detailed previously, the UN has reported that 2.4 billion people did not have enough food to eat last year, and 900 million of them were facing severe food insecurity.  Sadly, those numbers will inevitably be even higher for 2023.

A global rice crisis has erupted, and the collapse of the Black Sea grain deal has greatly restricted the flow of agricultural goods from that part of the globe.  Food costs are spiking all over the planet, and that is really bad news for all of us.

For those of us that live in the United States, the good news is that nobody is starving at this stage.

But food prices have become extremely oppressive, and economic conditions are quickly moving in the wrong direction.

670,000 full-time jobs have been lost in just the past two months, and on Friday we witnessed the worst unadjusted payrolls report for the month of August since the Great Recession. Yes, things really are that bad.

One recent survey discovered that 61 percent of Americans are currently living paycheck to paycheck, but I expect this number to go even higher in the months ahead…

Inflation, mortgage rates over 7% and credit card APR’s north of 20% have pushed all income brackets into living paycheck to paycheck, according to a new survey from Lending Club Bank.

“In July 2023, 61% of U.S. consumers live paycheck to paycheck, unchanged from June 2023, but 2 percentage points higher than July 2022. Generally, more consumers of all income brackets reported living paycheck to paycheck in July 2023 than last year,” Alia Dudum, a money expert at LendingClub told FOX Business.

Things are particularly dire for low income workers.  That same survey discovered that a whopping 78 percent of those that earn less than $50,000 a year are living paycheck to paycheck at this point…

Lower-income workers have been the hardest hit by higher prices, particularly for food and other necessities, since those expenses account for a bigger share of the budget, studies show.

Now, 78% of consumers earning less than $50,000 a year and 65% of those earning between $50,000 and $100,000 were living paycheck to paycheck in July, both up from a year ago, LendingClub found. Of those earning $100,000 or more, only 44% reported living paycheck to paycheck.

As I discussed last week, U.S. households that are feeling financial strain are increasingly turning to debt to make ends meet, and this has pushed debt levels to unprecedented heights…

Total household debt climbed to a new high in the second quarter of 2023, reaching $17.06 trillion, with credit card debt exceeding $1 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. As interest rates stay high, costs continue to rise for expenses like housing and cars, and student loan payments resume, the amount of debt may rise, according to economists who spoke to the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“The amount of debt outstanding, and in particular the surpassing of the $1 trillion mark, is significant and worrisome,” Peter Earle, an economist at the American Institute for Economic Research, told the DCNF. “It owes to a combination of several factors. The initial response to the pandemic, which prominently included the Fed setting policy (interest) rates at essentially zero for several years, made the amount of credit and the price of taking on debt extraordinarily cheap.”

As economic conditions get worse, people are becoming more desperate.

This is helping to fuel a crime wave all over the nation, and retailers are being forced to implement extreme measures.

According to the Wahington Post, a Giant Food store in Washington D.C. is actually going to be taking all Tide, Colgate and Advil products off the shelves completely because theft has become such a problem…

In the coming weeks, a Giant Food market in D.C. will clear its beauty and health aisles of all national labels. No more Tide, Colgate or Advil, only store brands. Shoppers also will have to present their receipts to an employee before exiting the store.

It’s the regional supermarket chain’s most overt gambit against the rampant theft that’s plaguing retailers of all sizes. It’s also a potential last-ditch effort to avoid shutting down the unprofitable store on Alabama Avenue — the only major grocer east of the Anacostia River in Ward 8.

An executive for the chain told the Washington Post that the company has “no other choice” and she noted that other stores in the area have done similar things…

“We have no other choice,” Diane Hicks, senior vice president of operations said Thursday during a walk-through with officials from the D.C. mayor’s office, the Metropolitan police and fire departments, and Chamber of Commerce. She added that other nearby stores have locked up all their product on those aisles or removed them altogether. “I’ve been leaving it out for our customers and unfortunately it just forces all the crime to come to us.”

This is where our entire society is heading.

It is just a matter of time before we see armed guards stationed in grocery stores and on food trucks all over America.

Desperate people do desperate things, and right now we are seeing things happen that are absolutely nuts.

Just a few days ago, an extremely shocking incident that happened in broad daylight at a Home Depot store in California made headlines all over the nation…

Brazen thieves were caught on camera casually walking out with $9,000 worth of goods from separate California stores as lawlessness in the state governed by Gavin Newsom continues.

A group of masked thieves stormed into a Home Depot store in Signal Hill on August 27 and stole $5,000 worth of power tools in full view of shocked staff and customers.

The seven men loaded two shopping carts with expensive goods and carried as much as possible in their arms before walking out.

These sorts of robberies have become so common that I couldn’t possibly cover them all.

We really are starting to become a “Mad Max” society.

Of course the truth is that the entire world is moving in that direction.  Global supplies of food are getting tighter and tighter, and the recent spike in rice prices has created a tremendous amount of concern…

Countries worldwide are scrambling to secure rice after a partial ban on exports by India cut global supplies by roughly a fifth. Global food security is already under threat since Russia halted an agreement allowing Ukraine to export wheat and the El Nino weather phenomenon hampers rice production.

Now, rice prices are soaring, and it’s putting the most vulnerable people in some of the poorest nations at risk. Vietnam’s rice export prices, for instance, have reached a 15-year high. Even before India’s restrictions, countries already were frantically buying rice in anticipation of scarcity later when the El Nino hit, creating a supply crunch and spiking prices.

Civil unrest has already started to erupt in various parts of Africa, but if current trends continue things will get a whole lot worse around the globe in 2024.

Are you prepared for what is ahead?

Right now, a lot of people are apparently asking that question.  In fact, according to Zero Hedge the number of Americans searching for the term “live off grid” on the Internet has hit the highest level in years…

What’s piqued our interest is the sudden panic by some Americans searching ‘live off grid’ on the internet, hitting the highest level in five years. The driving force behind finding a rural piece of land for dirt cheap, buying or building a tiny home, installing solar panels, and sourcing your own food and water might have to do with the worst inflation storm in a generation while Democrat cities implode under the weight of soaring violent crime.

I have been relentlessly warning my readers that “Mad Max” conditions are coming for years.

Anyone that took an honest look at the long-term trends should have been able to see that.

Global leaders have been making absolutely disastrous decisions for a very long time, and now we are all going to reap the consequences.

What do you think? Follow or join the conversation at my Late Prepper Substack.

Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here. Article cross-posted from The Economic Collapse Blog.

A team of researchers just got a $600,000 grant from Australia’s Office of National Intelligence to study ways of merging human brain cells with artificial intelligence.

This is so wrong.

But who is going to stop them?

These scientists have already succeeded in creating a “semi-biological computer chip with some 800,000 human and mouse brain cells” that was able to play a game of Pong…

Last year, the research team created a “DishBrain” – a “semi-biological computer chip with some 800,000 human and mouse brain cells lab-grown into its electrodes,” according to New Atlas. The DishBrain utilizes lab-cultivated neurons from human stem cells. The scientists were able to train the brain cells to play the classic video game “Pong.”

The outlet added, “The micro-electrode array at the heart of the DishBrain was capable both of reading activity in the brain cells, and stimulating them with electrical signals, so the research team set up a version of ‘Pong’ where the brain cells were fed a moving electrical stimulus to represent which side of the ‘screen’ the ball was on, and how far away from the paddle it was. They allowed the brain cells to act on the paddle, moving it left and right.”

Should “DishBrain” be considered a living creature?

If so, does it have any rights?

Or can our scientists just do whatever they wish with it?

The “scientists” behind these experiments are promising that this new “technology” will have all sorts of applications once it is fully developed…

The basic idea is to merge biology with AI, something that could forge new frontiers for machine learning tech for self-driving cars, autonomous drones, or delivery robots — or at least that’s what the government is hoping to accomplish with its investment.

So what happens if we start merging “biology” with AI and the “biology” that we use starts rebelling against us?

Perhaps we should think about that before we start going down that road.

Meanwhile, another team of “scientists” in California intends to create artificial “human eggs” in a lab setting…

A California startup is trying to make human eggs in a lab with first-of-its-kind technology that would revolutionize the fertility market.

Biotech company Conception aims to accelerate and eventually commercialize in vitro gametogenesis (IVG), a process that involves making human eggs and sperm in a lab from any cell in a person’s body.

This could mean that people struggling with infertility, as well as same-sex and transgender couples, could have their own biological children for the first time.

This sort of “research” should be completely and totally banned.

But once again, nobody is going to stop them.

Interestingly, this new “fertility research” is coming at a time when many industrialized nations all over the planet are starting to see their populations steadily decline.

In fact, we just learned that every single one of Japan’s 47 prefectures “posted a population drop in 2022”…

Every one of Japan’s 47 prefectures posted a population drop in 2022, while the total number of Japanese people fell by nearly 800,000. The figures released by the Japan’s internal affairs ministry mark two new unwelcome records for a nation sailing into uncharted demographic territory, but on a course many other countries are set to follow.

Japan’s prime minister has called the trend a crisis and vowed to tackle the situation. But national policies have so far failed to dent population decline, though concerted efforts by a sprinkling of small towns have had some effect.

We are seeing this happen over in Europe as well.

In a previous article, I pointed out that the total population of the EU has now fallen for two years in a row even though throngs of new immigrants continue to pour in…

The European Union’s population shrank for a second year running last year, the bloc’s statistics office said on Monday, as the region reels from over two million deaths from the coronavirus.

According to Eurostat, the population of the 27 countries that make up the bloc fell by close to 172,000 from the previous year and over 656,000 from January 2020.

Here in the United States, the birth rate in every single state is now below replacement level.

Migration is the only reason why the population of some states is still growing.

So why is all of this happening?

Well, there are many reasons, but one of the largest is the dramatic decline in global sperm counts that “has only accelerated since the turn of the century”…

Plummeting sperm counts ‘threaten mankind’s survival’, researchers dramatically warned today.

Counts have more than halved since the 1970s.

And the decline has only accelerated since the turn of the century, according to a global analysis.

If this trend is not reversed, humanity really is headed for extinction.

Because once sperm levels get low enough, it becomes virtually impossible to have children.

So it should deeply alarm all of us that average sperm counts have been dropping by 2.64 percent per year ever since the year 2000…

Results showed the mean sperm count fell by 51.6 per cent between 1973 and 2018 across men from all continents.

And concentrations have been falling by 2.64 per cent per year since 2000, quicker than the previous drop of 1.16 per cent annually from 1972.

Average sperm counts are already in “the danger zone” in most industrialized nations.

And if this trend persists, it won’t be too long before most males cannot father children.

What do you think that would do to the global population if we reach that point? But even though we are facing existential crisis after existential crisis, we just continue to pollute our planet. In “End Times”, I wrote extensively about the horrors that are being caused by microplastics.

Well, the problem just continues to intensify at an exponential rate, because the amount of plastic that we produce continues to rise at an exponential rate.  In fact, a new study has even found massive amounts of microplastics in the Arctic…

NOT EVEN THE Arctic Ocean is immune to the incessant growth of microplastic pollution. In a new study that analyzed sediment core samples, researchers quantified how many of the particles have been deposited since the early 1930s. As scientists have shown elsewhere, the team found that microplastic contamination in the Arctic has been growing exponentially and in lockstep with the growth of plastic production—which is now up to a trillion pounds a year, with the global amount of plastic waste projected to triple by 2060.

These researchers analyzed the seawater and sediment in the western part of the Arctic Ocean, which makes up 13 percent of its total area. But in just that region, they calculated that 210,000 metric tons of microplastic, or 463 million pounds, have accumulated in the water, sea ice, and sediment layers that have built up since the 1930s.

Our water and soil are becoming absolutely saturated with microplastics.

Once it gets bad enough, we simply will not be able to survive.

But most people simply do not care about the long-term damage that we are doing. Most people just want to party today without worrying about tomorrow. But tomorrow is inevitably going to arrive, and the future of the human race hangs in the balance.

Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

Article cross-posted from End of the American Dream.

• Censorship of private communications is knocking on the door, and the first signs are here
• Companies like Google are known for censoring incoming email and their cloud storage, too
• New development: Outgoing private email not related to Google may have to pass the blackbox “spam” check before it can be sent
• In a 2018 lawsuit, T-Mobile claimed their right to use “discretion” over certain types of SMS communication over their networks
• In 2021, Biden allied groups, including the DNC, said that they “planned to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages”

In 1917, as a part of their successful military coup in Petrograd, the Bolsheviks famously made sure to, first and foremost, take control of the railway stations, the bridges, the postal office, the telephone service, and the telegraph. Taking over the communications was a critical piece of the coup.

As a Soviet kid learning history at school, I had that statement (“postal office, telephone, telegraph”) practically drilled into my head. It was supposed to demonstrate the genius strategic thinking of the Bolsheviks.

The point about taking over the communications came to my mind the other day when I was trying to send a private email, from my own domain, and it just wouldn’t even send because my server perceived it as “spam.” I had to make a few guesses and edit the text of the email in order for the server allow it to go through.

We already know that Google censors their incoming Gmail email as well as their Google Drive. And many of us have been dealing with our private emails from “politically incorrect” domains getting rejected by recipient servers, occasionally disappearing without trace, etc.

But the outgoing mail on my own domain (it’s a small hosting company, not any of those giants)? I thought it was crazy. It was a private email, not a newsletter, not a “BCC,” just a regular private email that I wrote in response to something a reader had sent. And it wasn’t rejected by the recipient — it was rejected by my own hosting company’s mail server! How crazy is that?

It wasn’t an isolated occasion, either. Recently, it started happening more often, sometimes, a couple of times a day. And I want to discuss it now, while censoring private communications still a nascent trend. It is important to be aware of this trend to and object to it in real time, or else we’ll end up living with it, which can barely be called “life.”

In my case, to figure out the issue, I wrote to my hosting company, and the explanation that I got from the technical team was that the server automatically assigns a “spam score” to each outgoing email — and if the score is high, the server won’t send it so as not to compromise the hosting company’s reputation and not to land them on the “spammer” list.

“These security rules are crucial to ensure that compromised email accounts from you or any of the other users sharing the mail server are not sending spam (or mail that is interpreted as spam by the recipients system) which will get the mail server on an RBL / Reputation list resulting in none of your email being accepted.”

“This means either there is an issue with the specific syntax or content of the email you are sending or there is something within your system environment (old software, excessive links in signature, virus, attachment mime type, link to phishing or malware site, connecting IP is on an RBL or Reputation list and any of these factors could increase the spam score of the email you are attempting to send causing it to be refused.”

“These systems are automated and work very reliably but there can always be an edge case where an email you think should go through will still trigger the filter due to the total score of the email.”

What a fascinating domino effect! And what a way to influence people’s thought! I, a sovereign citizen, had to paraphrase my private email (that, by the way, didn’t contain anything particularly outrageous in the first place but it shouldn’t even matter) in order for me to have the “privilege” of actually sending it.

Siri, what does this do to the neuronal pathways of the people who are forced to even privately talk in ways that please robots? And, Siri, do you know who controls the algorithm? And what will happen if the centrally managed “outgoing mail” algorithm starts banning certain medical information in private communications? Or flirting? Or swearing? Or any contrarian discussions about “climate”? Or anything else?

The Influence of Big Tech Algorithms on Journalism

I remember how it started — or rather, continued — in the media back in the day, in addition to the separate topic of direct media influence by the alphabets, which is also a thing. When Google and Facebook became the dominant dispatchers of traffic and the self-appointed kings of “page views,” writing in a “SEO-friendly” manner became a must if you worked in journalism.

If you worked for a media outlet, you couldn’t just pour your heart out and write like a normal human being. You had write both for the people and for the robots. You had to write as if a robot has possessed you, or else your story would get no views. And it’s not such a hard skill to learn but after you do it for some time, it eats your soul.

To add insult to injury, both traffic kings, Google and Facebook, kept changing their algorithms randomly — and the journalists had to keep up in order to ensure that their companies stayed afloat, and they kept their jobs.

And yet, by the extra crazy “new normal” standards of 2022, “back in the day” wasn’t even a bad time! At least we could more or less say things we thought. No, not all things, of course — but most things. Wow, that says something about where we are right now.

“The Healthy Apologize to the Sick”

A couple of years before COVID showed up, I wrote this innocent poem and also this, by today’s standards, very timid, warning against social media censorship. At the time, I was looking at the trends and worried that we would be rendered helpless by the algorithm, and driven increasingly crazy by irrational rules impacting our sanity and our ability to eat.

Back then, criticizing Big Tech was a lonely and unpopular affair — but booooy, did all the warming come true in the past three years — and more!

The healthy apologize to the sick,
The ones with a heart
Dance for the robots.
What is this?
Certainly, not the world I live in,
No.

Censorship of Private Texts: The T-Mobile Claim

In 2022, the news about social media censorship is no longer news. But how about the censorship of what we say to each privately, via traditionally “uncensored” media like text messages or email? Here is Wired article from 2018 that looks at a legal case in which T-Mobile claimed that they had the right to use discretion over a particular kind of text messages:

“T-Mobile told a federal judge Wednesday it may pick and choose which text messages to deliver on its network in a case weighing whether wireless carriers have the same “must carry” obligations as wire-line telephone providers.”

“The Bellevue, Washington-based wireless service is being sued by a texting service claiming T-Mobile stopped servicing its ‘short code’ clients after it signed up a California medical marijuana dispensary. In a court filing, T-Mobile said it had the right to pre-approve EZ Texting’s clientele, which it said the New York-based texting service failed to submit for approval.”

“T-Mobile, the company wrote in a filing (.pdf) in New York federal court, ‘has discretion to require pre-approval for any short-code marketing campaigns run on its network, and to enforce its guidelines by terminating programs for which a content provider failed to obtain the necessary approval.’”

“’Such approval is necessary, T-Mobile added, ‘to protect the carrier and its customers from potentially illegal, fraudulent, or offensive marketing campaigns conducted on its network.’ It’s the first federal case testing whether wireless providers may block text messages they don’t like.”

According to JUSTIA, the most recent update on the case is that “the plaintiff(s) and or their counsel(s), hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed.” Was the precedent set?

“Fact — Checking” Our Private Text Messages

Most recently, in July 2021, Politico reported a call for censoring private text messages, causing an uproar:

“Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages [emphasis mine].

The goal is to ensure that people who may have difficulty getting a vaccination because of issues like transportation see those barriers lessened or removed entirely.”

“’We are steadfastly committed to keeping politics out of the effort to get every American vaccinated so that we can save lives and help our economy further recover,” White House spokesperson Kevin Munoz said. “When we see deliberate efforts to spread misinformation, we view that as an impediment to the country’s public health and will not shy away from calling that out.”

It seems it didn’t go very far, and a year after that outrageous claim, we can still text more or less freely (thank you, dear masters, you are very kind).

But I think that censoring our private communications is where it is going — and fast — unless we object to all censorship in real time, and keep objecting to it loud and clear, now and until it goes away. Life under the “new normal” isn’t fun.

About the Author

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

• Digital identity, digital twins, programmable central bank digital currency, a social credit system, human augmentation and the Internet of Bodies (IoB). These are all part of the dystopian future being rolled out by the globalist cabal as the “solutions” to the world’s problems
• According to transhumanist propaganda, everyone will benefit from human augmentation. In reality, transhumanism is a eugenics program, differing in name only
• The post-human society envisioned by transhumanists will have no use for billions of people. Since a vast number of jobs will be eliminated and replaced by robots and artificial intelligence, the transhumanist plan requires depopulation
• A global totalitarian regime will not accept the responsibility to feed, house and provide universal basic income and health care to billions of people who aren’t useful. The logical solution is to exterminate the nonproductive and transform the rest into obedient cyborgs imprisoned within the IoB 5G ecosystem
• The depopulation requirement of the transhumanist utopia may be why nations refuse to address the extraordinary lethality of the COVID jabs

Digital identity, digital twins, programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC), a social credit system, human augmentation and the Internet of Bodies (IoB). These are all part of the dystopian future being rolled out by the globalist cabal as the “solutions” to the world’s problems.

Transhumanism has long been sold as a way to make us healthier and, eventually, immortal. Today, it’s being promoted under The Great Reset banner of “equity.” The propaganda is that everyone will benefit from human augmentation, from the richest to the poorest. In reality, transhumanism is a eugenics program, differing in name only.

Transhumanism Requires Depopulation

Anyone who thinks the globalist cabal, the wealthiest people on the planet, intend to allow “useless eaters” who gobble up “their” resources to live even longer than we do already is sadly mistaken. They have no such intent. All that talk of “health equity” is a smoke screen, a carrot, to lure people into going along with their plan for what will ultimately be the extermination of billions.

Some within this cabal, World Economic Forum (WEF) adviser Yuval Noah Harari being a notable example,¹ are openly talking about the elite’s plan for a post-human society, which is precisely what it sounds like.

A world without real humans. A world where everyone is augmented with (and in the case of the lower class, controlled by) technology. A world without belief in a higher power than the programmers and inventors themselves.² A world where robots do most of the labor, artificial intelligence makes most of the decisions, and augmented humans run the programming.

A world like that has no use for billions of people. In one interview,³ Harari discussed the Fourth Industrial Revolution (another term for transhumanism), noting that we’re now learning to “produce bodies and minds” (meaning augmented bodies, and cloud- and artificial intelligence-connected minds) and that one of the greatest challenges we face will be what to do with all the people that will become obsolete in the process.

The answer, Harari proposed, may lie in “a combination of drugs and computer games.” I don’t believe him for a second. Drugs and computer games have certainly been tools to distract and control the younger generations, but the future they’re envisioning has no room for nonproductive members.

I don’t see a global totalitarian regime accepting the responsibility to feed, house and provide universal basic income, health care and drugs to billions of people who aren’t useful to them in some way. No, the logical solution would be to exterminate the nonproductive and transform the rest into obedient cyborgs imprisoned within the Internet of Bodies 5G ecosystem.

COVID Jabs Serve a Greater Purpose

I believe the depopulation requirement of the transhumanist utopia is why just about every nation on the planet is refusing to address the extraordinary lethality of the COVID jabs.

Disability and life insurance claims have skyrocketed. Birth rates have plummeted and miscarriages and excess mortality are through the roof, yet everyone keeps pushing the COVID jabs. It appears these effects are intentional, and the only way to make sense of this chilling reality is to understand that depopulation is a necessary element of the transhumanist agenda.

There are to be two classes — the augmented “have it all’s” and the controlled subclass. Augmentation of the subclass will be for control measures only, and that will probably include the ability to terminate the life of anyone perceived as having outlived their usefulness within the system.

We’re Living in a Great Deception

Those who have looked into transhumanism and The Great Reset can clearly see how just about everything that happens is part of a plan to manipulate the masses to accept their envisioned control system. Those who refuse to look at these issues, however, cannot see it. Moreover, they cannot even imagine that something so diabolical could be true.

In the video above, Max Igan of “The Crowhouse” reviews the history of the Great Deception we’re in — the how and why people have been manipulated, for decades, into believing things that simply were not true — beliefs that shaped behavior and allowed the globalists to slowly and quietly move their long-term agenda for global domination along.

What Is the Internet of Bodies?

Just what is the IoB? The Rand corporation defines it as devices with computing capabilities that can communicate with internet-connected devices or networks that collect person-generated health and biometric data and/or can alter the function of the human body.⁴

The WEF has described it as an ecosystem of “an unprecedented number of sensors,” including emotional sensors, “attached to, implanted within, or ingested into human bodies to monitor, analyze and … modify human bodies and behavior.”⁵

Key words in that sentence include the stated goal to “modify human behavior.” The WEF doesn’t tell us who will be in charge of those modifications, but we can safely assume that it will be those who have something to gain from controlling other people’s actions and behaviors.

FDA Poised to Approve Implantable Biosensor

While all of this sounds like pure sci-fi, the U.S. Pentagon and Profusa Inc. have already developed an implantable biosensor that tracks chemical reactions inside your body, ostensibly to detect disease.⁶ As explained by Defense One, the biosensor consists of two parts:⁷

“One is a 3 mm string of hydrogel … Inserted under the skin with a syringe, the string includes a specially engineered molecule that sends a fluorescent signal outside of the body when the body begins to fight an infection.

The other part is an electronic component attached to the skin. It sends light through the skin, detects the fluorescent signal and generates another signal that the wearer can send to a doctor, website, etc. It’s like a blood lab on the skin that can pick up the body’s response to illness before the presence of other symptoms, like coughing.”

The sensor allows a person’s biology to be examined at a distance via smartphone connectivity, and Profusa is backed by Google, the largest data mining company in the world. Knowing that, it’s hard to imagine that your biological data won’t be used to boost Google’s profits and further totalitarian control through biosecurity.

Profusa was expecting to receive approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2021, but it doesn’t appear to have been approved yet. That said, the wheels of the approval process are in motion, so it’s only a matter of time.

Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Bodies

In the video above, the Wilson Center NOW interviews Richard Solash, editor of The Wilson Quarterly, and Eleonore Pauwels, director of the Anticipatory Intelligence (AI) Lab with the Wilson Center’s Science and Technology Innovation Program, about the IoB and the role AI will play in the coming “algorithmic age.”

Pauwels makes it clear that one of the inescapable facets of the IoB is that we will be under constant assessment, “under measure of computation,” in every aspect of our lives, “from what you eat, whom you date, what you buy, how much energy you use” up to and including your vital signs and genetic data.

To explain the idea behind the IoB, she suggests you begin by thinking about how the Internet of Things work, all these smart devices that are connected not only to each other, but also to a wider network, where AI can analyze and optimize all those data.

Now, add to those networks health-monitoring devices, from wearables to implants, which will share your most private data. AI will then “analyze and optimize” those data as well, and while Pauwels doesn’t state that such optimization will be carried out automatically, without your knowledge, I see no reason to assume that that’s part of the plan.

Considering all of this, the biggest challenge, Pauwels says, will be to figure out how we can maintain control of our own futures and make sure AI is “shaped to our ideals.”

IoB Is Inseparable From the Eugenicist Transhumanist Agenda

It's a no from me. https://t.co/IM9efhgnqo

— Neil Oliver (@thecoastguy) November 11, 2022

While that warning sounds rational, just whose ideals are we talking about? To believe humanity in general will have any say in the matter is naïve. We cannot think about the IoB outside of, or separate from, the eugenicist transhumanist Great Reset.

The powers pushing the IoB forward are the same ones pushing for The Great Reset, and The Great Reset’s goal is to create a one world government using transhumanism as the platform for the control of the human mind and body.

There is no circumstance, that I can see in which the ideals of the AI will be any other ideal than that of the transhumanists, the eugenicists and The Great Resetters.

AI will make decisions based on its programming, and that programming is shaped and directed by the those who aim to rule everyone else. How can AI be shaped according to human-centric ideals when they’re being funded and developed by people looking forward to a post-human society?

Recognize the Bill of Goods

The only recourse, really, to maintain control of our futures, is to reject the IoB. Unfortunately, this will not be easy. Few are willing to forgo what they perceive as convenience, and fewer still really understand where it’s all leading to in the first place.

Perhaps the best we can do right now is educate ourselves and others about the end goals. A growing understanding that all this convenience will land us in a digital prison with no possibility of escape may be the only thing that can prevent it.

It’s worth remembering that if you give up your freedom, you also relinquish your ability to protect those you love. Your children can be taken from you if you disobey. Your spouse or parents can be injured or killed and you have no say in the matter.

Canada’s Euthanasia Laws Are Ripe for Abuse

Already, Canada offers euthanasia for a variety of conditions and situations, from long COVID⁸ and mental illness⁹ to hearing loss¹⁰ and poverty “that prevents living with dignity.”¹¹

As noted by Exposing the Darkness,¹² “After two years of genocidal COVID tyranny, based on the weaponization of the public health system, deployment of weaponized psychiatry to fight dissent and eliminate mentally ill ‘useless eaters’ was expected.”

Considering Psychology Today has suggested anti-vaxxers may have a mental health problem, it’s not out of the realm of possibility to imagine a day when refusing a COVID booster puts you on a euthanasia list. For now, it’s supposedly voluntary, but we all know what a slippery slope that can be, especially when doctors are compensated for every patient they put six feet under.

In at least one case, family members have stated they suspect the patient may have been coerced or tricked into signing the euthanasia form.¹³ In 2018, an Ontario man with an incurable neurological disease released audio recordings of hospital staff trying to get him to agree to euthanasia, when what he wanted was assisted home care.¹⁴

Learn to Recognize Soft Coercion

For decades, we’ve embraced technologies with our mind set on convenience and/or safety. That’s always how they rope us in. That’s how they’ll lure us into embracing the IoB as well, digital identity and CBDC’s as well. We have to get smarter about this and start thinking long term, because those who want to enslave us sure do. They’re planning decades into the future.

The march toward CBDCs in the U.S. started last week when the the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Innovation Center, or NYIC, announced that it would be launching a 12-week proof-of-concept pilot for a central bank digital currency, or CBDC.¹⁵

It’s important to realize that we will lose everything worth living for if we continue down this path without privacy safeguards and personal autonomy rights in place. Even then it’s a risk, as few laws are foolproof. Just look at how the U.S. Constitution is being trampled, even though it’s supposed to be inviolable.

As long as the corrupting influence of the globalists remain, we can be sure that they’ll continue their efforts to hack our bodies and brains, and to come up with ways to eliminate those who oppose them.

• ¹ The Atlantic February 20, 2017
• ² Facebook Watch June 8, 2022
• ³ YouTube Yuval Noah Harari, “Drugs and Computer Games”
• ⁴ EDRM.net January 26, 2021
• ⁵ WEF, Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies, July 2020
• ^6, 7 Defense One March 3, 2020
• ⁸ NZ Herald July 16, 2022
• ⁹ Daily Citizen November 14, 2022
• ^10, 13 AP August 11, 2022
• ¹¹ The Spectator April 30, 2022
• ¹² Exposing the Darkness Substack April 6, 2022
• ¹⁴ CTV News August 2, 2018
• ¹⁵ NY Fed launches 12-week CBDC pilot program with major banks Nov 15, 2022

Surely anything that would lessen the crime rate was a good thing.

“Can you believe this bullshit!” I blurted out, as my defiant shrew ire flared up. “I think it’s a good idea,” piped in my wife.

Picture the familiar cartoon of a man clenching his teeth with the black cloud over his head—maybe with some thunderbolts cracking out of it.

So why would this bother me so much? That seemed obvious, the old “what if this gets in the wrong hands” mantra went through my head—really? “It just isn’t right!” I silently exclaimed.

First of all, it was rather fishy that these things would just come with a new car and you wouldn’t have a choice. Then of course it is quite obvious it is an infringement on privacy—there are many ways that such a thing could be “used against you.”

Oddly, that wasn’t what bothered me the most. I actually thought more about the poor criminal whose privacy would be violated rather than mine. I thought about how a world without crime would be a bore, and that it just wasn’t fair to wipe all crime out of the culture making it squeaky clean—what would we do without crime novels to read?

Am I crazy?

Dostoevsky had a word to say about utopian cultures back in 1864 (like a crimeless one). He thought a perfect world would be a disaster. In his novel Notes from Underground he says:

Now I ask you: what can be expected of man as a being endowed with such strange qualities? Shower him with all earthly blessings, drown him in happiness completely, over his head, so that only bubbles pop up on the surface of happiness, as on water; give him such economic satisfaction that he no longer has anything left to do at all except sleep, eat gingerbread, and worry about the non cessation of world history––and it is here, just here, that he, this man, out of sheer ingratitude, out of sheer lampoonery, will do something nasty.”

Here is a bit of commentary from a website discussing Dostoevsky’s work:

Notes From Underground (1864) is a blistering assault on utopianism, socialism, and Marxism based on Dostoevsky’s view of human nature. Even if a utopian society was attainable, says Dostoevsky, we would not be satisfied by endless food, comfort and pleasure. If you satisfied every human desire, we would throw it all away just for something interesting to happen, just to give ourselves a challenge to overcome and prove that we are human beings and not lap dogs. According to Dostoevsky, we would rather wallow in misery and self-pity than be handed everything on a silver-platter! It is our unique proclivity for destructive decisions that make us human, and we wouldn’t give that up for anything—even heaven on earth.”

This resonates with me. And I wonder now if I was channeling ol’ Fyodor that day in the kitchen talking to my wife.

It does make sense. I remember a while back I was watching an old Twilight Zone episode about a bad-guy criminal who gets killed, and he thinks he has more than likely gone to hell. But rather than devils dancing around and fire lapping at his feet, some nice dude in a white Panama suit greets him.

“What would you like, my friend,” the guy says…and the episode continues with this poor schmuck getting every single desire he could imagine met. He wins every poker hand, and drinks bottle after bottle of booze without getting sick, has beautiful women climbing all over him.

“I’m in heaven!” he exclaims—until he gets bored. He then begs the white-suit guy to tell him where he actually is, “This ain’t heaven is it! Tell me!” he screams. My 67-year-old memory doesn’t serve me all that well, and I can’t remember details about the show, but I think the Panama guy says, “What do you think?”—Imagine, if you will.

I remember this episode had quite an impact on me, and I decided right then and there never to pursue a life of crime.

Now, let me be clear, I am not a fan of crime.

Of course there is crime, and then there is crime. What I am thinking here is a bit more metaphoric. And I do actually believe we could live in a relatively crime-less society and do pretty well (as I write that sentence, I hear my wise voice in my head saying, “Who are you kidding?”—think of the movie Demolition Man. If you don’t know it, watch it).

But I have to admit, that sort of society doesn’t seem natural. Life, to be natural and fulfilling and meaningful has to have the dark side somewhere integrated in the experience. There must be shadow, crime, disease, discomfort, losing, disappointment, sorrow, stupidity, depression—need I go on?

Yin/Yang stuff, “you can’t know happiness unless you’ve experienced sadness”—you get the picture. As cliché as this sounds, it is sadly true.

Utopias are always actually dystopias in disguise. If you read a novel that claims to be a utopian novel, you quickly see that the society described is not all that benign. Many novels are described as dystopian literature but are presented as utopias, consider Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451.

You just can’t create a perfect society. Not only is it creepy to think about, but it simply would not work.

From an article on the Internet:

In order to find or create a utopia, you must also discover or create a dystopia. When there is a perfect place, an equally opposite place hides from within it. From the outside, utopia and dystopia can be clearly defined; a dystopia is a terrible place ruled by unrelenting dictators forcing slavery and their ideas upon the population while a utopia is a perfect, ideal place to live in for any man or woman.”

Interestingly enough we currently live in a “Utopia wanna be.” We have people believing that if we follow the agenda, which has put us through unwarranted draconian demands, we might be able to avoid disease and death.

These people generally feel at war with nature, and at peace with a distant (at this point in time) belief they could live forever if the proper science creates devices, artificial organs and tissue, brain implants and the like to transcend our sloppy and inferior flesh and blood bodies.

These people also believe we can erase crime from the culture with more militaristic police, more devices for surveillance, digital IDs, digital currency, and more control over all people so the ones who have “nothing to hide” can be separated from the ones who have committed crimes against the system (which, of course, could be anything the system deems criminal—case in point, Canada’s Trucker Convoy in the summer of ’22).

Again, not everyone on that side of the fence (sheep) think this way—some are not even sheep. Some are just frightened out of their wits, some are just blind, some are just totally unwilling to look anywhere beyond their noses, and yes, some are just stupid. But I do have to say I believe most people over there (sheep) believe that they can get through life easier if they do what the authorities say to avoid disease, death, suffering, (nature, dirt, germs, insects (unless they eat them)), hot summers and just plain, uncomfortable, living.

The “agenda” psychologically manipulates people to believe that their lives can indeed be perfect, that they can indeed avoid disease, even death, that “Zero Covid” is indeed possible, and that the state will indeed create a perfect world for them by never putting them in a position where they have to think for themselves and take responsibility for their own lives.

Needless to say, this simply will not work and will ultimately end in disaster. If we survive this ordeal we will look back and see that this was the utopia that never was—and God willing, never will be.

Article cross-posted from Off-Guardian.