This is why I think the thinking about "globalist takeover conspiracy" (not mocking) needs some consideration. The actor states have no logical reason to surrender power. I think it's more about corporatism and extraterritorial policy groups like WEF (which go directly back to corporatism) than any day where the US government, of its own volition, decides to let China and India tell it what to do.
So the WEF (and/or similar shadow groups) are the semi invisible puppet masters, letting the corporate/government players fight (maybe even if its just for the enjoyment of the overlords to watch the gladiatorial games). And the rest of us are simply NPC pixelated background noise. (?)
I for one, am ready for this Star Trek episode to end. But how does one side extricate itself from the script, without being consumed by the other characters in this tragic comedy? (Mutually Assured Participation ?)
The events of the past ten to twenty years are removing more of the veneer of doubt over multiple former conspiracy theories.
And as I've said before, the fight for the restoration of humanity will be colossal.
There is an inevitable degree of 'delenda est' in this. Public health will never shrink. Executive government will never shrink. Taxation will never shrink. Anything that's linear is ultimately unsustainable- we will all eventually be civil servants paying 100% income tax with every single human behavior falling under public health guidelines. And as much as a lot of us want to howl "that's exactly the point of what they're doing," and I get that, it isn't sustainable if they were to achieve it. (There would be no purpose after a certain point.)
Massive population reduction as a goal is starting to seem less out there- there isn't really any other logical end game. What are you going to do with 8 billion slaves?
That is the paradox. It will never change, and it is not sustainable are two truths which cannot coexist. That is the friction that is bringing all this to light.
Since you mentioned Star Trek, I'm reminded of an episode my husband showed me years ago- I don't remember which series it was, he watched them all.
The Alien Planet of the Week had a society where something like 90% of the population were lawyers and everything in society revolved around litigation- even bartenders and stuff were licensed attorneys.
After the episode, as I often would when we'd see "theme alien" episodes, I started pondering how unsustainable that was. Eventually, if everyone is a lawyer, no one is a lawyer. Who's hiring all these lawyers if they're lawyers themselves? Are the people who are not lawyers the permanent underclass? If they're the only people that would need to hire lawyers, wouldn't they need to be wealthy for the whole thing to work?
And so on.
As to your statement, I agree that something must and will change, but I think we've backed ourselves into a place where it is a 'delenda est.' These systems have proven themselves resilient and designed to never shrink, reduce, or be mitigated..
Depopulation has been their goal for decades. ItтАЩs mentioned in many documents going back that far. Anyone who has any hesitation in believing that hasnтАЩt done even an iota of research on it. They make no bones about their goals.
Globalism = at a minimum, compelling the international community to govern itself by laws arrived at collectively (not unanimously).
Our globalists don't seem to be behaving in a very globalist manner.
The framework for globalism is a tripartite.
Oceania, Eurasia, Eastasia.
The rest of the disputed territories are the irrelevant killing fields of their chess board.
This is why I think the thinking about "globalist takeover conspiracy" (not mocking) needs some consideration. The actor states have no logical reason to surrender power. I think it's more about corporatism and extraterritorial policy groups like WEF (which go directly back to corporatism) than any day where the US government, of its own volition, decides to let China and India tell it what to do.
So the WEF (and/or similar shadow groups) are the semi invisible puppet masters, letting the corporate/government players fight (maybe even if its just for the enjoyment of the overlords to watch the gladiatorial games). And the rest of us are simply NPC pixelated background noise. (?)
I for one, am ready for this Star Trek episode to end. But how does one side extricate itself from the script, without being consumed by the other characters in this tragic comedy? (Mutually Assured Participation ?)
The events of the past ten to twenty years are removing more of the veneer of doubt over multiple former conspiracy theories.
And as I've said before, the fight for the restoration of humanity will be colossal.
There is an inevitable degree of 'delenda est' in this. Public health will never shrink. Executive government will never shrink. Taxation will never shrink. Anything that's linear is ultimately unsustainable- we will all eventually be civil servants paying 100% income tax with every single human behavior falling under public health guidelines. And as much as a lot of us want to howl "that's exactly the point of what they're doing," and I get that, it isn't sustainable if they were to achieve it. (There would be no purpose after a certain point.)
Massive population reduction as a goal is starting to seem less out there- there isn't really any other logical end game. What are you going to do with 8 billion slaves?
That is the paradox. It will never change, and it is not sustainable are two truths which cannot coexist. That is the friction that is bringing all this to light.
Something must and will change, sooner or later.
Since you mentioned Star Trek, I'm reminded of an episode my husband showed me years ago- I don't remember which series it was, he watched them all.
The Alien Planet of the Week had a society where something like 90% of the population were lawyers and everything in society revolved around litigation- even bartenders and stuff were licensed attorneys.
After the episode, as I often would when we'd see "theme alien" episodes, I started pondering how unsustainable that was. Eventually, if everyone is a lawyer, no one is a lawyer. Who's hiring all these lawyers if they're lawyers themselves? Are the people who are not lawyers the permanent underclass? If they're the only people that would need to hire lawyers, wouldn't they need to be wealthy for the whole thing to work?
And so on.
As to your statement, I agree that something must and will change, but I think we've backed ourselves into a place where it is a 'delenda est.' These systems have proven themselves resilient and designed to never shrink, reduce, or be mitigated..
Depopulation has been their goal for decades. ItтАЩs mentioned in many documents going back that far. Anyone who has any hesitation in believing that hasnтАЩt done even an iota of research on it. They make no bones about their goals.