Jun 1, 2013

Science Confirms We Fringe: Who Runs the World?

Look, see how the globe is become a pretty shiny ball of progress through innernetz!
Look, see how the globe is become a pretty shiny ball of progress through innernetz!
But the “elite” TED speaker still can’t use the “C” word

By: Jay

First, watch the TEDtalk lecture at the bottom.  If you recall, this study mentioned in the below lecture was going around the web, especially on “conspiracy” sites, a year or so ago.  What the study shows is the ownership of shareholders and corporate networks.  Now, while you think we live in a “free market” system under capitalism, the study shows we absolutely do not.  This is the siren song we fringe thinkers and researchers have been saying for years.  The speaker is right that perhaps the data in relations to systems analysis has not been analyzed before, but his conclusions are old hat to us in the reality community.

The transnationalist entities are linked and basically run the world.  The influence of the shareholders amounts to running the planet.  146 top players can control half the world’s wealth and resources.  To point this out is not “communism,” since I have shown numerous times that “communism” and “socialism” are not real movements, though the anti-establishment energy they channel is very real.  Communism and socialism are control mechanisms to divert anti-establishment furor into movements controlled by the transnationalist/globalist interests the TED talk speaker mentions at the bottom.  The speaker also fails to mention that all these top “TNCs” are behind the speakers who frequently appear on TED talks, like Bill Gates and Al Gore.

But keep in mind, they are not capitalists.  Capitalism always takes the blame for the machinations of entities that want to stamp it out.  They are not, strictly speaking, socialist, either.  Gore and Gates, for example, are billionaire monopoly capitalists that intend on imposing a Fabian technocratic socialism on everyone else, while ensuring privatization for the top.   In essence, we are under the worst system imaginable for 99% of the globe.  99% of the populace still cannot figure out that their whole spectrum of existence has been weaponized to rid them from the face of the earth.  Even the TED talk pseudo elites are unable to figure out the British model of divide and conquer eugenics that still runs the world.  I have tried and tried and tried to hammer this home to friends and readers, yet few have caught on.

The corporations the speaker mentions are actually the source of the Green Movement, originally an “anti-capitalist” strand that descends from Marx and Engels who were the first to write on the divorce of man from nature that was caused by “ownership” and “exploitation.”  Darwin can be thrown in as well, since the basis of Marxism was partly Darwinism, yet minus the Anglo racial superiority.  The “alienation” of man from a state of pure nature was supposed to be reconciled through the proletarian revolution, leading to the stage of universal state communism prior to libertarian freedom through the withering away of the state (in classical Marxism).  However, all of this morphed into the monstrosity we see today: corporate socialism, or fascism.  There are no longer any nation sates, only subsidiaries of the Tyrell Corporation and the Umbrella Corporation.

Further bad news I must bear is that the global agenda has been streamlined, as you can extrapolate from the speakers that frequent TED, as well as other “top players” he mentions.  The speaker even says it’s “not a conspiracy,” yet we know it is, and we have more credibility than he does, since we’ve been singing this tune for years!   They are going to kill 80-95% of the population, and in order to get there, the present system must explode.  I have written elsewhere about how the system feeds off of its own contrived crises, and in order for a global phoenix to rise from the ashes, the global economic order must crash.  “Psshha!” you say.  ‘These corporations stand to make too much money.  They’d never collapse their own system.”  Foolish young lad, the name of the game is not “money.”  The “money” is all based on a central bank fiat model: it’s not real.  And before you brush aside my claim that imploding their own system to create a new order out of the chaos as far-fetched, recall 9/11.  And after you recall 9/11, which was a sort of prelude to the coming era, consider entities like Enron, or the BCCI, which served the elite purposes, and then were imploded.  If you create the money, it’s no loss to your holdings to loot and plunder a front.
No, no, dear reader, the name of the game is death, not dollars. Megadeath, and I don’t mean the metal band.  Depopulation is the name of the game, and that will be accomplished after the present order has been demolished.  When it is demolished, there will be further regimented depopulation, with the goal of eventually achieving “sustainability,” which is the fraudulent “Green” term for basically no one.  The scientific socialist establishment that works for the “TNCs” will (in their minds) wipe out the false social constructs of “nations,” establishing their elite republic.  But that is a good ways down the road: in the meantime, fraud and corruption must run rampant, while all existing traditional orders (family, state, classical education, religion, etc.) are to be demolished through psy ops, infiltration and internal factionalism.

The green movement has even made its way into all the mainline religions–nevermind that its marching army is a bunch of former communists and Soviets, all marching to the tune of their corporate sponsors, with a horde of tree-huggers and hipsters at the bottom of the pyramid that can’t figure out what gender they want to be.  Maybe the SmartCity will choose your gender for you, if you’re not determined to be guilty of pre-crime, as the loving CEO of IBM has planned for you.  While you’re worried about your 401k and your petty football game, Megadeath is fast approaching.  Where will the cheerleaders be, then?  Will we still get our cappuccinos in green-friendly totes?  Dollars are old school, given that the implementation of the Internet was all along designed to move the world to a cashless control grid.  And you thought Bitcoin would save you.  I always ask hopeful innerwebz capitalists if they think DARPA and the Pentagon “gave” the world the Internet because they think they’re nice.  I think that question has not occurred to a lot of people.  Julian Assange was right when he said all the Internet *is* a huge spying and surveillance grid.  It was given to the masses for a reason: entrapment in that web, like a spider entraps its prey.  No, I must bear more bad news: Innerwebz was given to track and trace and store everything.  Everything.

While you watch your Pentagon-run news for idiots, you are being soft-killed

So, the system is not your friend, and it will not protect you or fix things, as things implode.  And before you call me a Marxist, dear baby boomer reader, remind yourself of what Quigley says down under.  Down under this sentence, that is.  Carroll Quigley.  You see, all this is why Dr. Carroll Quigley in his famous Tragedy and Hope said decades ago how the world system actually works, far predating this TED talk pseudo-elitist:

“The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole… Their secret is that they have annexed from governments, monarchies, and republics the power to create the world’s money…  -Ibid., pg. 324


“It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called “international” or “merchant” bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks. This dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world. They could dominate the financial and industrial systems of their own countries by their influence over the flow of current funds through bank loans, the discount rate, and the re-discounting of commercial debts; they could dominate governments by their control over current government loans and the play of the international exchanges. Almost all of this power was exercised by the personal influence and prestige of men who had demonstrated their ability in the past to bring off successful financial coupe, to keep their word, to remain cool in a crisis, and to share their winning opportunities with their associates. In this system the Rothschilds had been preeminent during much of the nineteenth century, but, at the end of that century, they were being replaced by J. P. Morgan whose central office was in New York, although it was always operated as if it were in London (where it had, indeed, originated as George Peabody and Company in 1838).”


“In effect, this creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way, not by note-issuing banks but by deposit banks. Deposit bankers discovered that orders and checks drawn against deposits by depositors and given to third persons were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited to their own accounts. Thus there were no actual movements of funds, and payments were made simply by bookkeeping transactions on the accounts. Accordingly, it was necessary for the banker to keep on hand in actual money (gold, certificates, and notes) no more than the fraction of deposits likely to be drawn upon and cashed; the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were made by creating a deposit for the borrower, who in turn would draw checks upon it rather than withdraw it in money, such “created deposits” or loans could also be covered adequately by retaining reserves to only a fraction of their value. Such created deposits also were a creation of money out of nothing, although bankers usually refused to express their actions, either note issuing or deposit lending, in these terms. William Paterson, however, on obtaining the charter of the Bank of England in 1694, to use the moneys he had won in privateering, said, “The Bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.” This was repeated by Sir Edward Holden, founder of the Midland Bank, on December 18, 1907, and is, of course, generally admitted today.” -Ibid, 48-9