Tag: globalism

Protecting the Pedos

The media abruptly falls silent when Elon Musk openly calls out the pedos at the United Nations:

On Sunday, Elon Musk left UN bosses in shock when he openly revealed a vast pedophilia network run by UN officials.

Elon Musk questioned the UN over its child sex ring during a heated Twitter dispute over whether enormous sums of money can address world hunger.

Much of the media attention has focused on Musk’s response to UN World Food Programme Director David Beasley, who said on CNN last week that if Musk donated 2 percent of his wealth, $6 billion, then he might save 42 million people who are “literally going to die if we don’t reach them.”

Dr. Eli David pointed out that the UN World Food Programme (WFP) couldn’t “solve world hunger” with a budget of $8.4 billion.

“If WFP can describe on this Twitter thread exactly how $6B will solve world hunger, I will sell Tesla stock right now and do it,” responded Musk, adding, “But it must be open source accounting, so the public sees precisely how the money is spent.”

Musk then asked Beasley “What happened here?” along with a link to an Express article headlined ‘Starving children ‘as young as NINE forced to give UN officials oral sex to get food’.

The article details a report exposing how UN peacekeepers “orally and anally raped” children in the Central African Republic and how top officials at the UN’s children agency, UNICEF ignored the scandal in an apparent attempt to cover it up.

“No one has been arrested more than a year and a half after UN authorities were made aware of the sexual abuse allegations,” the report, which was published in 2015, concluded.

Most of the media reports concerning the Twitter exchange didn’t even mention Musk challenging Beasley about the child abuse sex scandal.

The mainstream world is much more evil than most people realize. That’s why iron-fisted control of the mainstream media is so vital to the very servants of Satan who once advanced the cause of “freedom of the press” and “freedom of speech”, and who still cloak their activities under those Enlightenment banners.

The Éminence Grise

If you ever wondered why my views have tended to sound so harmonious with Chinese policy in recent years, it’s because the leading Chinese intellectual has been looking at the same things I’ve been looking at, reading the same books I’ve been reading, observing the same things I’ve been observing, and reaching strikingly similar conclusions… only he did it 13 years before I did. Of course, it’s extremely informative to observe the difference between the way Wang Huning was embraced by the Chinese elite and the way I was systematically banished and minimized by the Western elite.

At this point, like many during those heady years of reform and opening, Wang remained hopeful that liberalism could play a positive role in China, writing that his recommendations could allow “the components of the modern structure that embody the spirit of modern democracy and humanism [to] find the support they need to take root and grow.”

That would soon change.

Also in 1988, Wang—having risen with unprecedented speed to become Fudan’s youngest full professor at age 30—won a coveted scholarship (facilitated by the American Political Science Association) to spend six months in the United States as a visiting scholar. Profoundly curious about America, Wang took full advantage, wandering about the country like a sort of latter-day Chinese Alexis de Tocqueville, visiting more than 30 cities and nearly 20 universities.

What he found deeply disturbed him, permanently shifting his view of the West and the consequences of its ideas.

Wang recorded his observations in a memoir that would become his most famous work: the 1991 book America Against America. In it, he marvels at homeless encampments in the streets of Washington DC, out-of-control drug crime in poor black neighborhoods in New York and San Francisco, and corporations that seemed to have fused themselves to and taken over responsibilities of government. Eventually, he concludes that America faces an “unstoppable undercurrent of crisis” produced by its societal contradictions, including between rich and poor, white and black, democratic and oligarchic power, egalitarianism and class privilege, individual rights and collective responsibilities, cultural traditions and the solvent of liquid modernity.

But while Americans can, he says, perceive that they are faced with “intricate social and cultural problems,” they “tend to think of them as scientific and technological problems” to be solved separately. This gets them nowhere, he argues, because their problems are in fact all inextricably interlinked and have the same root cause: a radical, nihilistic individualism at the heart of modern American liberalism.

“The real cell of society in the United States is the individual,” he finds. This is so because the cell most foundational (per Aristotle) to society, “the family, has disintegrated.” Meanwhile, in the American system, “everything has a dual nature, and the glamour of high commodification abounds. Human flesh, sex, knowledge, politics, power, and law can all become the target of commodification.” This “commodification, in many ways, corrupts society and leads to a number of serious social problems.” In the end, “the American economic system has created human loneliness” as its foremost product, along with spectacular inequality. As a result, “nihilism has become the American way, which is a fatal shock to cultural development and the American spirit.”

Moreover, he says that the “American spirit is facing serious challenges” from new ideational competitors. Reflecting on the universities he visited and quoting approvingly from Allan Bloom’s The Closing of the American Mind, he notes a growing tension between Enlightenment liberal rationalism and a “younger generation [that] is ignorant of traditional Western values” and actively rejects its cultural inheritance. “If the value system collapses,” he wonders, “how can the social system be sustained?”

Ultimately, he argues, when faced with critical social issues like drug addiction, America’s atomized, deracinated, and dispirited society has found itself with “an insurmountable problem” because it no longer has any coherent conceptual grounds from which to mount any resistance.

Once idealistic about America, at the start of 1989 the young Wang returned to China and, promoted to Dean of Fudan’s International Politics Department, became a leading opponent of liberalization.

He began to argue that China had to resist global liberal influence and become a culturally unified and self-confident nation governed by a strong, centralized party-state. He would develop these ideas into what has become known as China’s “Neo-Authoritarian” movement—though Wang never used the term, identifying himself with China’s “Neo-Conservatives.” This reflected his desire to blend Marxist socialism with traditional Chinese Confucian values and Legalist political thought, maximalist Western ideas of state sovereignty and power, and nationalism in order to synthesize a new basis for long-term stability and growth immune to Western liberalism.

Of course, what works for China will not work for the West. Among other things, a Western nation cannot turn to Confucian values it never had. As Lee Kuan Yew reminds us in his memoirs, different peoples must construct their own forms of government that are suited to their customs and culture. But even though Wang’s precise prescription is not an option for us, that does not mean that his diagnosis of the West’s problem being the neo-liberal world order and its rejection of traditional Christian values should be ignored.

Nor does that mean that a Western form of Neo-Authoritarianism designed to restore Western values and Western nationalisms should not be pursued with the same vigor that China has constructed its post-Maoist system, and with a similar confidence of success. The more important question for Americans is: precisely what should American Neo-Authoritarianism look like?

DISCUSS ON SG

Globohomo Fears the Tradwife

Satan’s little servitors are worried about the declining appeal of one of their greatest weapons, feminism:

THE GEN Z GIRLS REPPING THE ‘TRADWIFE’ LIFE

Mention the word “tradwife” and you might imagine the 1950s archetype: A “traditional wife” in a dress and an apron, smiling at her husband and three kids while presenting a gleaming beef roast at the dinner table, pleased as ever in her domestic domain.

How TikTok and a Gen Z aesthetic are selling a lifestyle used to justify misogyny and white supremacy in America

For a swath of right-wing American men, that image is part of a fantasy of how things “used to be,” in the good ol’ days before antifa and Black Lives Matter and feminist YouTubers ruined everything. The tradwife symbolizes stability — at least for those who imagine social change as an attack on their identity and being. It is the “submissive and breedable” meme, made unironic by chauvinism. It is, ultimately, a hatred of women going their own way.

Which made it all the more surprising when Mariel Cooksey began noticing the Gen Z women and girls actively repping the tradwife aesthetic and lifestyle online. Cooksey, a researcher at the Institute for Research on Male Supremacy, decided to study why and how this rhetoric spreads, and found that teen girls are being attracted to the movement thanks to an evolution in how tradwife ideas are marketed and presented.

They ruin. We build. They cohabit in sterility. We marry and multiply. They die off in the present. We show up for the future.

They lose. We win.

Reject feminism and show up for the future.

DISCUSS ON SG

Kneecapping the Tech Giants

The Prometheans are furious with Xi and the CCP for refusing to permit the financialization of the Chinese economy. Because, um, they’re afraid of losing power to Alibaba, Huawei, and TenCent or something:

Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China, is currently kneecapping his country’s most successful private companies.

Until very recently, the CPC permitted the growth of domestic tech giants, including Alibaba , a Chinese analog of Amazon ; Tencent , a massive tech conglomerate; Xiaomi, an artificial intelligence company tied to the military but better known for its smartphones; Huawei, a controversial global leader in 5G networks; and Baidu, one of the world’s largest AI companies. Leaders watched these firms create massive numbers of jobs and improve consumers’ lives, and challenge their American and European competitors.

But now, the CPC fears them. In late 2020, Beijing’s regulators abruptly scuttled the initial public offering of Ant, an internet payments company that spun out of Alibaba. The stock offering was poised to be the largest IPO in history, giving China the sort of bragging rights you would have expected party bosses to relish.

This wasn’t a one-off. In spring 2021, Chinese regulators issued a $2.8 billion antitrust fine to Alibaba. And regulators have cracked down on the ability of Chinese firms to list their shares in the United States—once a rite of passage for Chinese companies that signaled international legitimacy.

That very legitimacy has become a problem for the CPC, which is cracking down on China’s Big Tech precisely because they present an alternative governance structure in Chinese society—one that knows the people of China better than the CCP itself. The Communist Party of China has always insisted on a paramount rule—the party’s own absolute hegemony—and these Big Tech companies threaten that.

For years, China-watchers in the West clung to the conviction that the CPC needed strong economic growth from the private sector to survive in power. Growth meant increasing prosperity, and prosperity bought domestic peace: It implied proof that the Party provided for the people. Now, the Party fears that that legitimacy will rest with its true source—the technology companies that have become billboards for Chinese pride and the governance structures that made them so.

This is a bizarre and self-serving interpretation of why the CCP is preventing China’s biggest companies from growing in paper terms rather than industrial terms. It’s not the tech companies they fear, but rather, the banks behind them. Michael Hudson, one of the few economists in the world who actually understands the significance of debt, explains the real reason China is preventing its business interests from expanding freely in an interview:

Michael Hudson: Well, George Soros’ dream is that China would do what Yeltsin did to Russia – that it would privatise the economy, really carve it up and let US investors buy control of the most profitable heights. In that way, the foreign investors would be able to sort of get the profits of Chinese industry, Chinese labour, and it would become the darling stock market of the world, just like Russia’s stock market was the leading booming stock market of 1994-96. China would be run to benefit US investment bankers. Soros is furious that China is not following the neoliberal policy that the United States is following. It’s following a socialist policy wanting to keep its economic surplus at home to benefit its own citizens, not American financial investors. For Soros, this is a clash of civilisations. His proposed strategy is to stifle the Chinese economy by putting sanctions against it, to stop investing in it so as to force it to do to itself what Yeltsin did to Russia.

Ross: Let’s hear it in his words. He says: ‘The BlackRock initiative imperils the national security interests of the US and other democracies because the money invested in China will help prop up President Xi’s regime, which is repressive at home and aggressive abroad. Congress should pass legislation empowering the Securities and Exchange Commission to limit the flow of funds to China. The effort ought to enjoy bipartisan support’. He’s not mincing his words, is he?

Michael Hudson: He thinks that China actually needs American dollars to build its factories and invest. He thinks that somehow China’s balance of payments is going to fall apart without the US market, without US investors telling President Xi what to do. The Chinese government won’t have a clue as to what to invest in and how to let the ‘free market’, meaning George Soros and BlackRock and other companies, operate. So he’s living in a dream world where other people need us. It’s like a guy who doesn’t realise his girlfriend doesn’t need him anymore….

The United States is driving Europe, Asia and now Africa as well, into a unified, consolidated unit outside of itself. It’s very self-destructive. It thinks like George Soros, that if we stop investing in Asia and other countries, that will force them to knuckle under to the US. But what it’s doing is it’s driving them altogether into the Belt and Road Initiative.

What China’s doing is creating a precondition for a profitable industrial economy over a large area to benefit from. It’s participants are going to need transportation. You’re going to need ports. You’re going to need roads. You’re going to need pipelines and is focusing on the interconnections, on the infrastructure.

America doesn’t build infrastructure these days unless it’s monopolised. This is the political fight going on in the United States now. President Biden has a infrastructure plan that he’s scaled down from six and a half trillion to three and a half trillion. And essentially the bulk of the Democratic and Republican Party said if we can’t privatise infrastructure and make it a rent-extracting monopoly, we’re not going to do it, and we’re going to block the government from doing it. So in the United States, they’re going to have high priced infrastructure, high-priced health care and high-priced education while China is going to have low-priced transportation, low-cost infrastructure, free education, public health care. And you’re going to have a very high-cost United States unable to compete with the rest of the world. All it can do is make military threats or financial threats. If it tries to impose sanctions as it’s imposed on Russia, China and other countries, these are going to serve as protective tariffs for foreign countries.

When President Trump put sanctions on agricultural exports to Russia, it was a windfall for Russia. They developed their own agriculture and Russia is now the largest grain exporter in the world. Senator McCain characterised Russia as a gas station of atom bombs, but it’s a gas station with the largest farm sector in the world, and is developing an industrial integration with China and the rest of Asia. It’s a Eurasian world island as Mackinder called it a century ago, and it is becoming the economic focus of the world, leaving the United States as the high cost economy with no visible means of support, because we’re not doing our own industry anymore. We’re not competing with China. We’re letting China do all of the industry, and all of a sudden we’re dependent on it. This does not bode good for prosperity in the United States or Europe and other areas that are satellites of the US economy.

There isn’t any conflict between the USA, Russia, and China. The real conflict, the real war that is probably the true cause of the Covid plandemic and the vaccine regimes, is a global one between the One World Prometheans and the nationalists. But whereas the nationalists were successfully suppressed in North America and Europe by 70 years of relentless propaganda and immigration, they have the upper hand in China and Russia. And they have learned from what was done to the American people. Taking economic advice from globalists is about as good an idea as taking candy from a creepy middle-aged man driving a van with no windows in the back.

DISCUSS ON SG

Is Plan B in Effect

Whatever the long-term damage from the Covid vaccines turns out to be over time, it’s clear that the plandemic was a complete failure with regards to depopulating the planet. But there are some reasons to suspect that the global depopulationists may have a Plan B that is already being put into place.

  • Bill Gates’s GAVI published an article on 22-Apr-2021 titled “The next pandemic: Marburg?”. There have been numerous Mainstream Media articles highlighting an upcoming threat Marburg and referencing the WHO in recent months.
  • Marburg Virus is a relatively rare haemorrhagic fever which was first described in 1967, there have only been a total of 376 related deaths, and only 16 deaths since 2005.
  • Primerdesign developed a one-step Real-Time PCR test genesig® in 2018 for Marburg haemorrhagic fever. Why would they develop a test in 2018 for an illness which has not had a major outbreak since 2005?
  • Soligenix, are currently rushing to trial a ricin-rich vaccine RiVax® for Marburg haemorrhagic fever. RiVax has Fast Track designation for the prevention of ricin intoxication by the US FDA. Approval of ricin toxin vaccine will utilize the FDA Animal Rule to eliminate the phase 1, 2 & 3 trials. Why such a rush now, to trial a vaccine for which there has only been a total of 376 deaths since 1967 and only 16 deaths since 2005? The main component of the Rivax vaccine is Ricin is a lectin and a highly potent toxin produced in the seeds of the castor oil plant.
  • Soligenix shareholders include BlacRrock Fund Advisors, Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC, etc.
  • Ricin is a lectin and a highly potent toxin produced in the seeds of the castor oil plant. Ricin is very toxic if inhaled, injected, or ingested. It acts as a toxin by inhibiting protein synthesis. It prevents cells from assembling various amino acids into proteins according to the messages it receives from messenger RNA in a process conducted by the cell’s ribosome (the protein-making machinery) – that is, the most basic level of cell metabolism, essential to all living cells and thus to life itself.
  • A paper titled Asymptomatic Infection of Marburg Virus was published by the NIH in January 2021.

These are good questions. And it makes sense to assume that they’re going to keep trying to depopulate the planet until they succeed. The obvious question raised is: how long are people going to permit these lunatics to keep talking openly about their plans to eliminate the greater part of the human race before everyone decides to stop them?

DISCUSS ON SG

The Devil’s Children Fear Xi

For the benefit of all the Boomers, retards, and civnats who don’t understand that China is not simply RED CHINER full of damn commies who jes’ wanna invade the USA because they hate us for our freedoms, it might be helpful to observe how the wrath of globohomo and its servitors is particularly reserved for the very powerful Xi Jinping, who unexpectedly succeeded Hu Jintao as China’s leader, after which he proceeded to kick Silicon Valley out of his country while jailing over 100,000 party officials, from the highest level to the lowest, in the largest anti-corruption campaign ever waged in the history of Man.

That is why the global media has waged an unstinting personal campaign against him that is now growing to a fever pitch courtesy of Rupert Murdoch in the aftermath of the recent submarine deal between the USA and Australia.

Under the headline ‘China’s the main game. Removing Xi is how to play it’ commentator Paul Monk, writing in The Australian, speculated that the only way to avoid a devastating conflict with China is to facilitate a coup and suggested it should be on the agenda at the upcoming Quad conference between Australia, the US, India and Japan – described as Asia’s NATO.

“Xi needs to be removed from power and a broad path to democratic reform opened up at long last in China,” says Monk. “The Communist Party must make the shift to democratic rule that Taiwan and South Korea made from the late 1980s. The Quad should openly call for such a transition.”

In support of his suggestion, he cites a recent article from former Aussie PM Kevin Rudd in which he suggested the Quad could “provide a rallying point for all those concerned about Xi’s jingoism and arrogance”.

Warming to his topic, Monk declares, “Xi must go, and with him the reactionary dictatorship and hubris he espouses. This must be our stance. It must be the stance of the Quad. It must be the mantra of all those seeking a peaceful, prosperous future for Asia and the world.”

This is total nonsense. There is no way to avoid conflict with China. China’s entire military strategy has been aimed squarely and specifically at undermining US military hegemony, even at the expense of its ability to wage regional war against its neighbors, since 1991, but China’s leaders have considered the USA’s encouragement of “a shift to democratic rule” to be war even before Deng Xioaping officially declared it to have replaced the Soviet Union as China’s primary threat.

Despite the Bush administration’s efforts, Deng’s comments about the United States changed dramatically beginning in 1989. Throughout most of the 1980s, as a review of his Selected Works makes clear, Deng would occasionally chide the United States for democratic arrogance or for interference in Taiwan, yet he did not refer to the United States as a threat. After 1989, he frequently denounced the United States in ideological terms. For example, in a private talk with several members of the CCP Central Committee just two months after his meeting with Scowcroft, Deng said there was now “no doubt that the imperialists want socialist countries to change their nature. The problem now is not whether the banner of the Soviet Union will fall—there is bound to be unrest there—but whether the banner of China will fall.”

The sentiment became a common feature of Deng’s remarks, even his public ones. “The West really wants unrest in China,” Deng declared later that same month, “it wants turmoil not only in China but also in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. The United States and some other Western countries are trying to bring about a peaceful evolution towards capitalism in socialist countries.”

In Deng’s mind, this threat to China was a form of warfare. “The United States has coined an expression: waging a world war without gunsmoke,” he argued. “We should be on guard against this. Capitalists want to defeat socialists in the long run. In the past they used weapons, atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs, but they were opposed by the peoples of the world. So now they are trying peaceful evolution.” In a meeting with Richard Nixon after Tiananmen, Deng declared that the “United States was deeply involved” in “the recent disturbances and the counter-revolutionary rebellion” of the students and that “some Westerners” were “trying to overthrow the socialist system in China.

In a November 1989 address, he warned, “Western countries are staging a third world war without gunsmoke.” Then, in a talk with a visiting Japanese delegation, Deng elaborated on Western responsibility for the Tiananmen incident. “Western countries, particularly the United States,” he argued, “set all their propaganda machines in motion to fan the flames, to encourage and support the so-called democrats or opposition in China, who were in fact the scum of the Chinese nation. That is how the turmoil came about.”

Not only was the United States responsible, in Deng’s view, but its objectives were hostile: “In inciting unrest in many countries, they are actually playing power politics and seeking hegemony. They are trying to bring into their sphere of influence countries that heretofore they have not been able to control. Once this point is made clear, it will help us understand the nature of the problem.”

THE LONG GAME: China’s Grand Strategy to Displace American Order, Rush Doshi

The reason globohomo fears Xi, and the reason a petty third-rate power is talking utter nonsense that provides China with a legitimate cause of war against it, is because Xi is, like Putin, a nationalist whose objectives are completely opposed to the satanic globalists who presently rule the United States, Britain, Australia, and Israel. Unlike Putin, Xi may not yet be viewed as a good guy in conventional Western terms, but he is appears to be the most bitter and formidable enemy of Mankind’s true enemy.

DISCUSS ON SG

A Pandemic of the Vaccinated

In every age group from 20-79, the percentage of the confirmed Covid cases are “fully vaccinated” exceeds the percentage of the population that is “fully vaccinated”.

This means the fake vaccines are literally worse than nothing. And remember, the Antibody Dependent Enhancement that is created by the “vaccines” don’t merely enhance Covid-19, they will enhance all similar viruses, including the common cold virus.

This isn’t just logic applied to scientific data anymore. This isn’t just theory. This is now the published medical reality from a sample size of 18,678 confirmed Covid cases. The fake vaccines will not protect you, and contrary to the government and media propaganda, they will render you more susceptible to infection, hospitalization, and possibly, death, than simply doing nothing.

If you chose to get vaxxed, if you choose to submit to the boosters, you’re knowingly playing Russian Roulette, you just don’t know how many chambers are loaded. And, at this point, you’ve confirmed that you’re literally too stupid to survive on the basis of anything but sheer luck and the kindness of strangers who profit by injecting graphene into your body. Regardless of how it plays out, it’s impossible for me to harbor any sympathy for the vaxxed; it’s not as if people weren’t repeatedly screaming “don’t even think of doing it” for months before the first fake vaccines were made available to you.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Inherent Evil of Inclusivity

I’ve written previously on the evils of tolerance and equality. In his latest article, Archbishop Vignano explains why inclusivity, as defined by the wicked forces of the neo-liberal world order more accurately described as “globohomo”, is also inherently evil.

At this point, it is necessary to clarify what is meant by the “New World Order,” or rather what its creators mean, regardless of what they say publicly.

Because on the one hand, it is true that there is a project, that certain people conceived it and are charged with carrying it out; but on the other hand it is also true that the inspiring principles of the project are not always disclosed, or at least they cannot be openly admitted to be closely related to what is happening today, since such an admission would arouse opposition even from those who are the most peaceful and moderate.

It is one thing to impose the “Green Pass” with the excuse of the pandemic; but it is quite another to recognize that the purpose of the passport is to accustom us to being tracked; and still another to say that this total control is the “mark of the Beast” of which the Book of the Apocalypse speaks (Rev 13:16-18).

The reader will forgive me if, in order to demonstrate my argument, I must resort to using quotations of such gravity and wickedness that they arouse bewilderment and horror — but this is necessary if we are to understand what the real intentions of the architects of this plot really are, and the true nature of the epochal battle they are waging against Christ and His Church.

In order to understand the esoteric roots of the thought that lies at the foundation of the United Nations, once longed for by [19th-century Italian political activist] Giuseppe Mazzini, we cannot fail to consider characters such as Albert Pike, Eliphas Levi, Helena Blavatsky, Alice Ann Bailey, or other disciples of Luciferian sects.

Their writings, published since the late nineteenth century, are quite revealing.

Albert Pike, a friend of Mazzini and a fellow Freemason, gave an address in 1889 in France to the highest levels of Freemasonry, which was then reprinted on 19 January 1935 by the English journal The Freemason. Pike declared:

    That which we must say to the crowd is, we worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition […]. The Masonic religion ought to be maintained in the purity of Luciferian doctrine by all of us who are initiates of the highest degrees. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay [sic] [the God of the Christians] whose deeds prove his cruelty, perfidy and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion of science, would Adonay and his priest calumniate him?

    Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also God. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to light to serve as its foil as the pedestal is necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive… the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil.

This profession of faith in the divinity of Satan is not only an admission of who the real Great Architect that Freemasonry adores is, but also a blasphemous political project that passed through the ecumenism of Vatican II, whose first theorist was Freemasonry:

    The Christian, the Jew, the Moslem, the Buddhist, the follower of Confucius and Zoroaster can unite as brothers and join together in prayer to the only god who is above all the other gods (cf. Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, ed. Bastogi, Foggia 1984, vol. VI, p. 153).

 And the identity of the “only god who is above all the other gods” has been well explained in the preceding quotation.

In another letter, Pike wrote to Mazzini:

    We will unleash the nihilists and atheists and provoke a formidable social cataclysm that will clearly demonstrate to the nations, in all its horror, the effect of absolute atheism, the origin of barbarism and bloody subversion. Then citizens everywhere, forced to defend themselves against a world minority of revolutionaries, […] will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, finally revealed to the public’s view; a manifestation that will be followed by the destruction of Christianity and also of atheism, which will be conquered and crushed at the same time! (cf. Letter of 15 August 1871 to Giuseppe Mazzini, Library of the British Museum, London).

It will not escape notice that the “great heresy of separativeness” sounds curiously in agreement with the ecumenism condemned by Pius XI in his Encyclical Mortalium Animos, an ecumenism that was adopted by the Declaration Dignitatis Humanae and recently merged into the doctrine of “inclusivity” formulated by those who allowed idolatrous worship to the pachamama to be offered in Saint Peter’s Basilica.

It is clear that the term “separativeness” intends to designate in a negative key the necessary separation of good from evil, of true from false, of the right from wrong that constitutes the criterion of moral judgment of human behavior.

“Inclusivity” opposes this distinction, allowing oneself to be deliberately contaminated by evil to adulterate the good, equating the true and the false in order to corrupt the former and give legitimacy to the latter.

Considerations on the Great Reset and the New World Order, 6 September 2021

And if you’re still tempted, for some inexplicable reason, by the vaccines, do keep this statement in mind.

No one will be part of the New World Order unless he carries out an act of worship to Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he receives Luciferian initiation.
—David Spangler, 1978

Now, I’m not certain that getting vaccinated is regarded as a Luciferian initiation as far as these wicked people are concerned. But the way they are attempting to push it on everyone, by hook, by crook, or by mandate, in an manner that is more evangelistic than both the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses combined, suggests that they consider it to be something of the sort.

Don’t accept their attempts to include you. Insist on separativeness and standing apart. Refuse to submit to their Order and to their orders.

DISCUSS ON SG

An Induced Economic Coma

Fabio Vighi explains why the fake pandemic was necessary in the eyes of the global elite, and how it is less a well-orchestrated plan to take permanent control than a desperate measure of last resort to attempt to salvage some vestiges of the neoliberal world order:

Joining the dots is a simple enough exercise. If we do so, we might see a well-defined narrative outline emerge, whose succinct summary reads as follows: lockdowns and the global suspension of economic transactions were intended to 1) Allow the Fed to flood the ailing financial markets with freshly printed money while deferring hyperinflation; and 2) Introduce mass vaccination programmes and health passports as pillars of a neo-feudal regime of capitalist accumulation. As we shall see, the two aims merge into one.

In 2019, world economy was plagued by the same sickness that had caused the 2008 credit crunch. It was suffocating under an unsustainable mountain of debt. Many public companies could not generate enough profit to cover interest payments on their own debts and were staying afloat only by taking on new loans. ‘Zombie companies’ (with year-on-year low profitability, falling turnover, squeezed margins, limited cashflow, and highly leveraged balance sheet) were rising everywhere. The repo market meltdown of September 2019 must be placed within this fragile economic context.

When the air is saturated with flammable materials, any spark can cause the explosion. And in the magical world of finance, tout se tient: one flap of a butterfly’s wings in a certain sector can send the whole house of cards tumbling down. In financial markets powered by cheap loans, any increase in interest rates is potentially cataclysmic for banks, hedge funds, pension funds and the entire government bond market, because the cost of borrowing increases and liquidity dries up. This is what happened with the ‘repocalypse’ of September 2019: interest rates spiked to 10.5% in a matter of hours, panic broke out affecting futures, options, currencies, and other markets where traders bet by borrowing from repos. The only way to defuse the contagion was by throwing as much liquidity as necessary into the system – like helicopters dropping thousands of gallons of water on a wildfire. Between September 2019 and March 2020, the Fed injected more than $9 trillion into the banking system, equivalent to more than 40% of US GDP.

The mainstream narrative should therefore be reversed: the stock market did not collapse (in March 2020) because lockdowns had to be imposed; rather, lockdowns had to be imposed because financial markets were collapsing. With lockdowns came the suspension of business transactions, which drained the demand for credit and stopped the contagion. In other words, restructuring the financial architecture through extraordinary monetary policy was contingent on the economy’s engine being turned off. Had the enormous mass of liquidity pumped into the financial sector reached transactions on the ground, a monetary tsunami with catastrophic consequences would have been unleashed.

As claimed by economist Ellen Brown, it was “another bailout”, but this time “under cover of a virus.” Similarly, John Titus and Catherine Austin Fitts noted that the Covid-19 “magic wand” allowed the Fed to execute BlackRock’s “going direct” plan, literally: it carried out an unprecedented purchase of government bonds, while, on an infinitesimally smaller scale, also issuing government backed ‘COVID loans’ to businesses. In brief, only an induced economic coma would provide the Fed with the room to defuse the time-bomb ticking away in the financial sector. Screened by mass-hysteria, the US central bank plugged the holes in the interbank lending market, dodging hyperinflation as well as the ‘Financial Stability Oversight Council’ (the federal agency for monitoring financial risk created after the 2008 collapse), as discussed here. However, the “going direct” blueprint should also be framed as a desperate measure, for it can only prolong the agony of a global economy increasingly hostage to money printing and the artificial inflation of financial assets.

At the heart of our predicament lies an insurmountable structural impasse. Debt-leveraged financialization is contemporary capitalism’s only line of flight, the inevitable forward-escape route for a reproductive model that has reached its historical limit.

A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY: SYSTEMIC COLLAPSE AND PANDEMIC SIMULATION, 16 August 2021

There are a number of implications that follow from this interpretation of events. First, the attempt to blame China for the “China virus” are almost certainly false. China has been at war with the neoclowns and the banking elite as well as with their government and military tools for the last 20 years, but it took until 2013 and Xi Jinping unexpectedly consolidating his power in the CCP for the elite to realize it. What we’re experiencing appears to be fallout from the global war between the Sino-Russian alliance and the neoclown-occupied West; notice how there have been no lockdowns in China, Russia, or any of the nations allied with them.

Second, unlike Xi and Putin, Donald Trump never succeeded in breaking free of the globalist influence. This is hardly a surprise, in light of the 2020 election fraud and the way he inexplicably permitted himself to be constantly surrounded by hostile Deep State figures, but it does explain the constant alarm with which the media and the corrupt institutions regarded his administration.

Third, this radical treatment is not a viable long-term solution. The economic forces that have stretched the neoliberal world order and the global economy to a breaking point have neither been addressed nor have they disappeared, they’ve merely been held at bay for a period of time. When the emergency structure fails – and it will fail – it is unlikely to the point of inconceivability that the same parties who have resolutely refused to address the core problems will have done anything but make the situation worse.

Fourth, there will be more lockdowns, shutdowns, and other attempts to interfere with the economic forces that are putting pressure on the central banks to write off bad loans and deflate the credit market. The entire effort is focused on refusing to let organizations that are only financially viable on paper go bankrupt; it’s an attempt to prop up the entire global economy with nothing more than word spells and will. But this sort of magickal thinking failed in the real world of Afghanistan and Syria, and sooner or later, it will fail in the markets too.

Fifth and finally, I am more convinced than ever that the entire neoliberal system, including the political entity known as the USA, will fail within 12 years, as I first predicted 17 years ago. There is nothing, literally nothing, to suggest that the historical trends I observed then concerning the lifespan of currencies will not play out according to the historical norms.

DISCUSS ON SG