The corona crisis has already taken a very high toll and caused deep damage in our societies and our economies, the extent of which is yet to become apparent. We have seen its impact on productivity, on unemployment, on social cohesion and on political division. However, there is another very worrying trend that has been accelerated under the veil of fear and confusion that the pandemic has spread. The war on cash, that was already underway for almost a decade, has been drastically intensified over the last few months. Over the last years, and as the war on cash escalated, we’ve gotten used to hear certain arguments or “reasons” on why we should all abandon paper money and move en masse to an exclusively digital economy. These talking points have been repeated over and over, in most western economies and by countless institutional figures. “Cash is used by terrorists, money launderers and criminals” is arguably the most oft-repeated one, as it’s been widely employed in most debates about the digital transition. Just a couple of years ago, it was also used by Mario Draghi, to support the decision to scrap the 500 euro note. We didn’t get any specific information or data about how many terrorists were actually using this high-denomination note, but we do know a lot of law-abiding citizens were using it to save, as did small business owners for their operational liquidity needs.
It doesn’t require too dark an imagination to realize the gravity of the concerns over the digital yuan. China is a true pioneer when it comes surveillance, censorship and political oppression and the digital age has given an incredibly efficient and effective arsenal to the state. Adding money to that toolkit was a move that was planned for many years and it is abundantly clear how useful a tool it can be for any totalitarian regime. The ability to track citizens’ transactions, access their financial data, control and freeze the account of anyone that presents a potential threat, it all opens the door to the ultimate oppression: total control over private resources, over people’s livelihoods and their capacity to cover their basic needs. If we accept that digital currencies are inevitable and arguably their emergence has been accelerated by the corona crisis, the real question is who controls them, who issues and distributes them, and who determines their value. We stand at a historic crossroads and the answer to these questions can determine the kind of future we’ll wake up to. It can be a very bleak one, if the power remains with governments and centralized institutions. In this scenario, money will retain all the flaws and vulnerabilities of today’s fiat currencies, only its digital nature will amplify them to an unimaginable extent. The privacy violations of today will become simply unstoppable, a mere fact of life, while disastrous monetary policies, like negative rates, so far only cushioned by the individuals’ ability to sidestep them through physical cash, will be forcibly and uniformly transmitted throughout the economy.
Had the Declaration of Independence been written today, it would have rendered its signers extremists or terrorists, resulting in them being placed on a government watch list, targeted for surveillance of their activities and correspondence, and potentially arrested, held indefinitely, stripped of their rights and labeled enemy combatants. This is no longer the stuff of speculation and warning. In fact, Attorney General William Barr recently announced plans to target, track and surveil “anti-government extremists” and preemptively nip in the bud any “threats” to public safety and the rule of law. It doesn’t matter that the stated purpose of Barr’s anti-government extremist task force is to investigate dissidents on the far right (the “boogaloo” movement) and far left (antifa, a loosely organized anti-fascist group) who have been accused of instigating violence and disrupting peaceful protests. Boogaloo and Antifa have given the government the perfect excuse for declaring war (with all that entails: surveillance, threat assessments, pre-crime, etc.) against so-called anti-government extremists.
COVI-PASS will determine whether you can go to a restaurant, if you need a medical test, or are due for a talking-to by authorities in a post-COVID world. Consent is voluntary, but enforcement will be compulsory. Through the magic of Internet meme culture, most Millennials will be familiar with the famous opening scene of the 1942 film, “Casablanca,” where two policemen stop a civilian in the “old Moorish section” of Nazi-occupied French Morocco and ask him for his “papers.” The subject is taken away at once after failing to produce the required documents. The cinematic exchange has been used ever since as a popular reference to the ever-encroaching hand of the state, which is now on the verge of attaining a level of control over people’s movements that puts the crude Nazi methods to shame. A British cybersecurity company, in partnership with several tech firms, is rolling out the COVI-PASS in 15 countries across the world; a “digital health passport” that will contain your COVID-19 test history and other “relevant health information.” According to the company website, the passport’s objective is “to safely return to work” and resume “social interactions” by providing authorities with “up-to-date and authenticated health information.”
People around the world are already being judged and denied access to financial services because of their social media data — and they don’t even realize it. By now many of our readers are aware of the ongoing roll out of a nationwide social credit system in China. Starting in 2009, the Chinese government began testing a national reputation system based on a citizen’s economic and social reputation, or “social credit.” This social credit score can be used to reward or punish certain behaviors. The idea is that the state can give or takeaway points from a social credit score in order to engineer good behavior from the people. By late 2019, Chinese citizens were losing points on their score for dishonest and fraudulent financial behavior, playing loud music, eating on public transportation, jaywalking, running red lights, failing to appear at doctor appointments, missing job interviews or hotel reservations without canceling, and incorrectly sorting waste.
We are told the Face Diaper mandates being imposed by the Gesundheitsfuhrers are necessary to “stop the spread” of WuFlu. In fact, they are necessary to stop the display of disagreement with the Gesundheitsfuhrers. The undiapered aren’t a threat to public health. They are a threat to the power of the Gesundheitsfuhrers, who need to create the image of general sickness in order to maintain the fiction of its reality. Without which, their power to rule by decree – for the sake of public health – loses its puissance. But if everyone is diapered up, it looks very scary out there. And very scared people are very easy to herd. It is noteworthy – or should be – that Face Diapering was hardly “practiced” (the new virtue-signaling verbiage) when it was most rational to do so. Which was three months ago – when no one knew much about the WuFlu other than what the Gesundheitsfuhrers were telling them, which was that millions were going to die. Not a bad reason to put on a Face Diaper . . . If it was so. Of course, it wasn’t – it isn’t – so.
The idea of killing off large segments of the population is nothing new, as eugenics has been a desire of the elite since ancient Greece and Rome, but the actual term eugenics was not first used until 1883 by Sir Francis Galton. As time passed and human progress accelerated during the early 20th century, the popular term eugenics lost its previous popularity among the herd, and was relegated to secret meetings of the eugenicists of the time. Although the elite’s desire to control life and death did not diminish, the manner in which it was discussed was forced to change. Today, population control is a euphemism for eugenics, and is a term that can be manipulated to promote ideas not readily accepted by the masses. Evil and deceitful people have changed little, but the ways in which they promote their ideas have become much more sophisticated. Real agendas are mostly hidden and certainly more sinister than imagined.
Black Lives Matter has been dominating the headlines for weeks and there has been a lot of speculation regarding the funding of this organization with many fingers quick to point at George Soros. So the million dollar question is … Did George Soros fund Black Lives Matter? Yes, he absolutely did and we share the details in this report. But George Soros is not the only source of funding for Black Lives Matter. In fact, Soros and his funding is just another spoke in the wheel of a massive, well-financed and politically motivated campaign with the desired goal of transforming the world by destroying the current system of control in order to roll out a new system of control. This certainly seems like a recurring theme right now, as the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the central banks and governments around the world are preparing for the ‘Great Reset’ and a global paradigm shift. So let examine who exactly is funding Black Lives Matter and why?
You’re likely aware that I’m a libertarian. But I’m actually more than a libertarian. I don’t believe in the right of the State to exist. The reason is that anything that has a monopoly of force is extremely dangerous. As Mao Tse-tung, lately one of the world’s leading experts on government, said: “The power of the state comes out of a barrel of a gun.” There are two possible ways for people to relate to each other, either voluntarily or coercively. And the State is pure institutionalized coercion. It’s not just unnecessary, but antithetical, for a civilized society. And that’s increasingly true as technology advances. It was never moral, but at least it was possible, in oxcart days, for bureaucrats to order things around. Today it’s ridiculous. Everything that needs doing can and will be done by the market, by entrepreneurs who fill the needs of other people for a profit. The State is a dead hand that imposes itself on society. That belief makes me, of course, an anarchist. People have a misconception about anarchists. That they’re these violent people, running around in black capes with little round bombs. This is nonsense.
Did you know the normal human virome contains a multitude of different viruses, including many strains of coronavirus? And did you know that some of these viruses sound scary – the type people normally associate with disease – even though the person carrying them may be completely healthy and/or asymptomatic? As discussed in previous articles, the word virome (similar to the word microbiome for bacteria) refers to the community of viruses that naturally and usually live within us. Far from causing harm, they form a vital part of our bodies and immune system, existing in symbiosis with us and playing an important role in our healing response. The COVID coronavirus event has exploited people’s ignorance over the nature of the virus and the nature of disease. This is an opportunity for us to educate ourselves, to come out of fear, to understand the base assumptions and deceptions behind the COVID propaganda, and to be prepared when the New World Order (NWO) controllers try to pull their next trick in Operation Coronavirus, the 2nd wave.