The Elephant in the Womb
The Elephant in the Womb
It's altogether more more inspiring than the one in the room!
(Part One)
The ‘covid crisis’ seems at last to be receding in the rear-view mirror. Much of the world has breathed a sigh of relief and declared itself unwilling to hear any more about the subject which tormented us for three long years.
There is however, an elephant in the room. (We’ll come to the one in the womb in just a moment, for it is very much more positive and hopeful). The elephant in the room, with apologies to those who have ‘had enough’, is big and grey and unavoidable:
It ain’t over.
The reasons that it ain’t over are numerous: Disturbingly, excess deaths in countries around the world remain very high - in some countries higher than they were at the height of the pandemic,1 and nobody is quite sure why. There continue to be disturbing reports2
about rising levels of miscarriage and infant death, as well as falling fertility rates - and the cause of those things too remains uncertain. We see huge increases of mental health problems (especially in children), alarming figures for myocarditis and ‘sudden adult death syndrome’. A colossal transfer of wealth toward the top of the pyramid has taken place, and is ongoing - most specifically to small, powerful elites that were involved, from the very beginning, in the pandemic decision-making processes.3
The past three years have driven into focus a broader crisis, with older roots. A crisis of politics, ideology, institutional malaise, disinformation, social confusion and conflict, wild-fire technological development and more. One that has the potential - whether in the near-term or a little further into the future - to develop into a horror story of a type and magnitude without precedent. And nonetheless, one in which the pandemic and its politics and origins have had a very central role.
In the midst of the horror stories however, something is in gestation in society. Something big. Something good. Without naively suggesting that we are on the verge of overthrowing all the threats that assail us, we are undoubtedly witnessing the beginning of a seismic shift in human consciousness. Deep ground-swells of awareness and resolve such as the one developing in people now, have always emerged in the face of adversity, and have many times before propelled human social evolution to new levels.
On one side, political wrangling about what happened and where to go next has intensified steadily, and become entangled with other issues, from the possibility of ‘climate lockdowns’ to the supposed ‘dangers of free speech’, to the ‘exciting broader possibilities of mRNA technologies’ - over which both governments and pharmaceutical companies appear to be salivating. On the other, there has been a torrent of revelations building steadily, and increasingly making visible, for those who will see, ‘the hidden horrors’ behind ‘the visible horrors’.
One thing it ain’t is ‘over’.
A precedent has now been accepted by a large part of the population, that the government (both official and unofficial) can when it chooses, lock us in our homes, forbid us from operating our businesses, from going to school, or to church, or to the pub. That it can withhold the truth when it decrees that we will not react ‘properly’ to it, suspend the rule of law with impunity, and impose experimental medical procedures on us. But as new revelations have continued to pour out, so has public action and resolve surged in response. Both the revelations and the responses are so extensive it would be impossible to come even close to listing them all here. A general illustration will have to suffice:
Revelations from ‘lab leak’ to American back-door funding of the activities in Wuhan, from ‘the Twitter files’4 to the vast web of financial conflicts-of-interest, to the increasing flood of scientific studies showing that non-vaccine based treatment regimes did work, and lockdowns and mask didn’t, and literally hundreds of others, have seeded a vast and growing response from both courageous professionals and the general public.
These range from a series of new, independent medical networks, operating independently of the corrupting influence of both governments and 'big pharma', 5 through a building number of legal actions6 to the small number of brave parliamentarians in the UK, Australia, Canada and elsewhere,7 who are standing up and confronting the organised denial of their peers.
Further, vaccine rollouts are in many places coming to an end,8 fines levied on individuals for ‘non-compliance’, are in some places being repaid, and employees sacked for declining vaccines are in some American states being re-instated with back-pay. Potential new legislations and court judgements have been emerging which may curtail some of the recent excesses.9
But above all of these stand the many millions of ordinary citizens who are resolutely sustaining their quest, already three years old, to see behind the ‘smoke and mirrors’: Ever-growing numbers of people no longer assume that the institutions which run the world tell them the truth, or are concerned with their best interests. Admittedly that is many millions out of many billions, but at least the numbers are going in the right direction - and noticeably.
Yet while good news and progress genuinely is bubbling up, the horrors are manifold, and are amplified by the way they hide and masquerade as other things. There is growing evidence of constant and systematic lying by governments, pharmaceutical companies and media outlets. And of propaganda in schools and movies and everywhere else that it is possible to put propaganda - all of it reflecting a ‘social engineering’ mentality founded on the idea of that human beings are ‘programmable’ (and therefore, ultimately ‘ownable’). One can hardly overstate how daunting the situation is, or how far there is to go. Indeed, it is because of the extremity of the challenge that, deep in the womb of society, an elephant grows. Let’s call it a ‘counter-elephant’: If the ongoing excess deaths and revelations of deception are ‘The Elephant in the Room’, the big and obvious issue that so many seek to politely walk around as if it wasn’t there, then ‘The Elephant in the Womb’ is the great, strong and noble response to that, growing within what I would like to call ‘true society’ - by which I mean the brave members of the ordinary (extraordinary?) citizenry, and certain individuals fighting a lonely fight within government, who are operating with integrity outside the web of vested interests and agendas that has otherwise coalesced, and who will not allow the issues to be ignored.
Our elephant is being born into a hostile world precisely because that hostile world has called it forth. As is ever the case, the worse the horrors, and the worse the odds of overcoming them, the greater the courage and resolve which tends to manifest in the people.
The horrors that are developing are manifold, and amplified by the way they hide and masquerade as other things: It has been said that World War Three would be fought not on a battlefield, but in the mind. That is where we are.
And there are many other symptoms and causes for concern:
With the World Economic Forum (widely supported by its many globalist acolytes) pushing forward its slogan ‘You will own nothing, and you will be happy’ (or else!), a thousand actions small and large, all over the world, coincidentally converge to make populations poorer and powers wealthier. The agenda to deploy technology more and more in service of surveillance, indoctrination, ‘social engineering’, ‘social credit scoring’, and the removal of all individual control over money and resources becomes clearer and clearer. America fights a proxy war against Russia with Ukrainians taking the casualties on their behalf. It makes vast profits for its arms industry while it pretends to want to stop the war, and while the media spins all kinds of fantasies about what is really going on. Staunch defences are made for the right of some religions to exist and be practiced, while Christianity, for some reason is constantly slurred in television, movies and education, and even the number of Christian churches burning down is beginning to look suspicious.
Something undoubtedly is happening with regard to the food supply too, even beyond the broken supply chains which are blamed on lockdowns: Eating meat is the latest bogey-man to threaten end of the world, and the idea of eating crickets is constantly promoted. There has been a long series of accidents and disasters at food production facilities. The Dutch government (just for instance) has ordered the slaughter of half a million cows in the name of global warming, and now seeks to confiscate vast amounts of farmland. Meanwhile a certain Mr. Gates has become the biggest owner of farmland in the whole of USA. The same Mr. Gates however, apparently doesn’t want to farm - he is investing millions in ‘synthetic meat’ grown in industrial vats. Many media figures seem to support this, despite decades of evidence that every time we move food away from its natural state, we pay a heavy price in health.
And again the growing response:
A handful of courageous politicians have been emerging on both sides of the political divide, willing to vigorously work for the truth, take risks with their careers, and expose manipulations.10 The political attack on Dutch farming, already strenuously resisted for more than two years by the farmers themselves, recently culminated in the formation of ‘The Dutch Farmers Party’, so well supported by the public that it is now the biggest party in the upper house of the Dutch parliament. The new scam of ‘ESG’ is increasingly exposed for what it really is: At best a cynical ‘greenwash’ program to boost sales. And at worst, camouflage for the old fascistic principle of putting corporate business into the role of government.11 Studies have been published linking lab-grown meats with carcinogenic risks, and Italy for example is moving to ban them. Vastly more people (though perhaps still not enough) are becoming aware that the most of the big media outlets, in every country in the world, are controlled by the same small group of interests. With every passing year, greater and greater numbers of people become aware of the ‘loaded dice’ of the banking system, and even of the simple fact that technology has a dark side, as well its many conveniences, benefits and indispensable uses.
The first four months of 2023 have seen yet another vast wave of protest all across Europe, against a never-ending range of ‘New World Order’ initiatives. (Which yet again the ‘mainstream’ media is somewhat successful in making invisible).
Now that it has become indisputable that the W.H.O. is politically and commercially compromised,12 its manoeuvering for an autocratic global power-grab are being increasingly openly and directly challenged.
Everywhere ‘the lie’ is being exposed. For sure that provokes further lies in the form of smears and slanders against those who dare to challenge ‘the great orchestrated voice’ which has been booming across the land - but it starts to become so blatant that more eyes are opened - and more join the quest for truth.
It is true that as people are overloaded with more crises, more lies, more uncertainty and instability, and then more crises, more lies and more uncertainty and instability, many are just tuning out. For those people, the never-ending stream of lies just blurs into the rest of the generalised virtual reality which characterises our times, and they just shut down. Yet while media independence has been busy disappearing, while corporate and governmental power has been busy merging into one, and so many have become numb or indifferent, something else has happened: Unprecedented numbers have gone the other way - they have been woken up by the growing absurdities and dangers - and they are not showing any signs of going back to sleep: For growing numbers of people, in line with a ‘meme’ I recently saw, “The new normal is fighting back”.
Brave individuals, some of them high profile and millions of them unknown citizens, have been stepping up to say ‘No, we won’t accept this.’ And little by little, inspired by their courage, others have been joining them. It has always been that way. Those who struggled over centuries for a world beyond feudalism didn’t know that they could win. They only knew what they had to do. Likewise those who fought World War Two. And those who eventually brought an end to institutional slavery. We are in this for the long haul, and an increasing number of people are ready and willing for that.
What's more, they are already having an impact. In no small part through their constant effort, growing numbers of public figures14 have openly reversed their position on a range of covid-related controversies, and millions of citizens are questioning things which they didn’t question before, and reversing formerly optimistic views on vaccine programs. But beyond even that they are now forcing admissions from more reluctant players: The recent exposure of former UK Health Minister Matt Hancock, and senior Pfizer executive Jordan Trishton Miller are but examples.15
Let there be no doubt that there are many reasons to recognise the continuing power and successes of those who stand behind that ‘great orchestrated voice’. Nonetheless, we should be encouraged by the visible signs of the limits to their competence. ‘The Elephant in the Womb Part Two’ will look in a little more detail at the evidence of those limits. But it will also take up another key theme of our times: The developing contest between the ‘top-down ideologues’ and geniune evolution toward greater ‘agency’ for citizens, and greater participation by the pubic in its own affairs.
Part Two, that is to say, will explore the most important theme of all: The way that the still-emerging ‘warrior elephant’ has begun to make its presence felt on a practical level, the long-term contest which has thus begun, and the various forms that the ‘alternative new normal’ could take from here.
UK excess deaths were still higher at the end of 2022 than at any time during the pandemic. Australia’s level of excess death in 2022 was the highest since World War Two - and remains highly elevated in 2023. Canada had a peak of excess deaths in 2022 which exceeded the high points of 2020 and 2021, and remains high (similar to 2020/2021) going into 2023. In Latvia, death rates rose only 4% in 2020, but another 18% in 2021, with the increase being sustained in 2022. As of February 2023, New Zealand was recording its highest levels of excess death in 100 years. These are only some examples. They have been variously attributed in the media to ‘inequality’, ‘heatwaves’ and ‘ending lockdown’, but with little to no evidence being referenced.
For example, Sweden’s birth rate, having increased slightly in 2021 compared to 2020, fell by 8.3% in 2022. Similar patterns occurred in Norway and Denmark. In Lithuania the fertility rate for 2021 was 9% lower than in 2020 and 17% lower than in 2019. The Australian Bureau of Statistics recorded a 71% drop in fertility for that country in November / December of 2022, compared to a rolling 10-year average. In the UK, a Freedom of Information request to one regional health body revealed that the number of early-term miscarriages doubled in 2022 compared to the previous four years. (2065 miscarriages compared to 1083, 1021, 1060 and 1011 in each of the four preceding years). In Scotland, infant deaths doubled during the period late 2021 / early 2022 (again compared to previous years), leading to a government investigation being launched early in 2023.
Immediately before the start of the pandemic, in October of 2019, 'pandemic preparedness exercise', called Event 201 was staged in New York by the World Economic Forum, Johns Hopkins University, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as several big pharmaceutical companies and financial institutions. The exercise examined how markets, the media, the alternative media, the public etc, in the case of a global pandemic, would respond. Around the end of March 2020, economist Michel Chossudovsky made an interesting observation on the event, its timing and its participants: “…. what I am suggesting, without necessarily drawing conclusions, is that the organizations involved in the simulation, which was a detailed simulation with videos and so on examining what would happen to financial markets, what would happen to the media, to the independent media and so on – essentially the people involved in the simulation were also involved in the actual management of the pandemic once it went live”.
The colossal benefits to certain software, tech and pharmaceutical companies, as well as giants like Walmart and Amazon are obvious, but the hard numbers are even more impressive. In May of 2023, Robert F. Kennedy Junior reported that “during lockdown there was a four-trillion-dollar shift in weatlth from the American middle class to this new oligarchy”.
'The Twitter Files' is a name given to the extensive information released to the public by Elon Musk when he took over Twitter. It included a great deal of evidence of collusion between government, intelligence agencies a the 'pre-Musk Twitter' to control what could be said and by whom on that platform.
Dr. Richard Amerling, a former head of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons recently stated that “The current system is so corrupt that we have to start from scratch and build something alongside, as an alternative”. Accordingly, many of the top medical professionals in the world have already begun to do exactly that. The past couple of years has seen the birth of numerous truly independent medical organisitions such as The World Council for Health, America’s Frontline Doctors, The Canadian Covid Alliance, The World Doctors Alliance, The Front Line Critical Covid Care Alliance, and others.
Again a small number of examples:
The Indian High Court has filed an international case in which Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla (CEO of the Serum Institute of India, and board-member of the GAVI vaccine alliance) are charged with mass murder under Section 302, 115, etc. of the I.P.C. because of Section 120(B), 34, 109, etc. of the I.P.C.
An international group of around 100 lawyers supported by 100s of medical experts, led by German lawyer Reiner Fuellmich (who has led successful class actions against both Volkswagen and Deutschebank) has begun legal proceedings against the CDC, WHO and the Davos Group for fraud in relation to both PCR testing and orders issued to doctors to label any comorbidity death as a COVID death, as well as violations of Nuremberg in imposing experimental medical procedures.
The government of Thailand, after receiving extensive reports of deaths, heart problems, paralysis and spontaneous abortions, bravely set a far-reaching legal precedent by paying out extensive compensations to victims. The government's focus on the issue has been intensified since the King's 44 year-old, formerly fit and healthy daughter, shortly after her third shot, developed heart problems and fell into a coma. A major class action against Pfizer now looks likely.
A two-day ‘Covid Litigation Conference’ has been staged in Atlanta, Georgia.
10,000 Australian citizens are claiming against their government for vaccine injuries.
In the U.K., former policeman Mark Sexton has filed complaints at various police stations demanding that vaccination stations be investigated as crime-scenes. And a case has been filed with the International Criminal Court against alleged perpetrators of crimes against humanity, genocide, and violations of the Nuremberg Code. The case is brought by a group of activists which includes former Pfizer chief scientist turned whistle-blower Mike Yeadon and astro-physicist Piers Corbyn (brother of former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corby). Named defendants in the action include Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, former UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock, World Economic Forum head Klaus Schwab and W.H.O. head Tedros Adanhom.
In January 2023, a lawsuit was filed against ‘The Trusted News Initiative’ for collaborating to censor news in violation of both anti-trust laws and the U.S. constitution. ‘The Trusted News Initiative’ is a self-confessed industry partnership, and member organisations named as defendants in the lawsuit include Reuters, the BBC and the Washington Post. The action is brought by a group of plaintiffs which includes Senator Robert. F. Kennedy, the non-profit ‘Children’s Health Defence’, the science website ‘Trial Site News’ and a variety of independent journalists and medical doctors.
In March of 2023, the same group of plaintiffs filed a further action against the defendants including the US government and various federal agencies, alleging that they “waged a systematic, concerted campaign” against constitutionally protected free speech.
Those who have heard of none of these might reasonably wonder why these factual realities have not been mentioned in their regular news sources.
From late 2022 UK parliamentarian Andrew Bridgen began to raise in the house the question of highly elevated levels of excess death which were and are still ongoing - as well as the growing number of vaccine-related injuries and deaths. When he scheduled sessions in which he could present data for review, virtually no other MPs chose to attend. In January 2023 reasons were found, temporarily, to suspend Bridgen. Subsequently he claimed he had also been approached and asked what his silence would cost. In March, Bridgen again had a scheduled parliamentary session to raise such issues in the house. As he got up to speak, MPs on both sides of the house rose to leave. When two MPs on the opposition benches remained in their seats, a member from the government side crossed the aisle and with his head lowered, spoke inaudibly to them. They then got up and left. Dr. John Campbell, continuing his three-year long Youtube commentary on all things pandemic-related observed that it looked “almost as if the opposition is obeying exactly what the government benches have told them to do”. Despite this however, Bridgen is not entirely alone in is courageous determination simply to examine data and ask questions. Esther McVey MP, and Sir Christopher Chope, have also supported the call for honest examination of evidence. And former minister David Davis has stated in a 2023 interview that when he saw world class scientists being censored online, he reached the point where he understood that something was wrong.
Many countries are ending the rollout of some or all covid vaccines. Two counties in Florida have banned their use. Idaho has a bill in progress (no. 154) to ban their use.
New York State’s proposal for laws giving the state power to detain citizens in camps on the mere potential of having an infection has for now been blocked by a court ruling. Florida governor Ron DeSantis is moving to permanently ban vaccine mandates. Democrat presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is promising to end the unconstrained public advertising in which pharmaceutical companies freely engage, which in turn will stop the flow of 5 billion dollars a year from those companies to the media - which at present destroys any possibility of neutral reporting on such matters.
For example George Galloway, Tulsi Gabbaard, John F Kennedy Junior and Baroness Claire Fox on the left, Andrew Bridgen, Rand Paul, Kristi Noem and Sir Christopher Chope on the right. (Transcending the fruitless and counter-productive old game of believing that only one political ‘side’ can ever be rigth about anything is a core orientation of ‘World in Transition’).
'ESG' stands for 'Environmental, Social, and Governance'. It is a recent trend for big corporations to step into the world of politics and claim to be foremost concerned with the good of the people - while continuing, naturally enough, to actually put its own interests first. The exposure of its real nature is especially clear in Vivek Ramaswamy's recent book 'Woke, Inc'.
Anybody seriously interested in evaluating the truth of this assertion will find numerous sources of evidence. A particularly impactful example is offered here.
As plans continue for the W.H.O. to assume powers over national governments everywhere, they are increasingly directly confronted and called by their proper name. (Bureaucratic tyranny). The plans have recently come under attack in the small (but growing) independent media, the UK Parliament, the European Parliament, by leading doctors, in by a press conference given by a group of US congressional representatives, and elsewhere.
‘High-profile reversals of position’ could be a very long list. Once again, some examples will suffice:
UK media figure Piers Morgan has publicly disavowed his former zealotry in support of lockdowns and vaccine mandates, and confessed to have been wrong.
Dr. John Campbell, who presented scientific updates on the pandemic on weekly basis through the whole three years, to millions of YouTube followers, changed his perspective gradually but radically from around the middle of 2022. By early 2023 he offered his followers a public apology saying ‘I got it wrong’, and declaring that while he’d assumed that public health institutes were trustworthy and working in the public interest, and that he’d come to realise that that is not the case.
In Canada, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has apologised for discrimination against the unvaccinated, and Ontario councillor Anne Tessier said of the vaccine mandate “I believe that this policy was mistakenly adopted 12 months ago… with all my heart, I extend my apologies to those who were affected negatively”
German |Health Minister Karl Lauterbach has admitted that the level of injury and death caused by the covid vaccines is higher than for other vaccines, and acknowledged the need for compensation. While playing down the problem as statistically still quite rare, he without knowing it, acknowledges numbers which even at their under-reported levels, were in fact twice the level at which the Canadian government (one of the toughest pro ‘covid measures’ governments in the world) had prohibited further use of the Astra Zeneca vaccine.
Dr. Robert Malone, a lifelong vaccine scientist who is actually an mRNA patent-holder, was himself double-vaccinated with covid vaccines. Having later become outspoken about the problematic nature of those products as the situation developed, he declared himself to deeply regret the earlier decision.
UK cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra, who began as a vocal campaigner in support of covid vaccines, later revised his position on the basis of emerging data and now campaigns for greater recognition the number of deaths and serious injuries that are emerging in the wake of the vaccine program.
The recent revelations of deeply disturbing behaviour by UK Health Minister Matt Hancock and Pfizer executive Jordan Trishton Walker (and the networks of people with which each was associated) are only two of a great many. Some of these scandalous revelations are likely part of what has come to be known as a ‘limited hangout’. It is a strategy long known to miscreants and criminals of all kinds, in which culprits, unable any longer to hide everything, ‘hang out’ one or two of their own to take the flack - but keep it carefully staged with the aim of giving public a small hint of the truth and justice they seek, but limiting the extent of it. Taking a bit of hit over here, while keeping plenty hidden over there.
Thus for example, the January 2023 leak of ‘Whatsapps’ sent and received by former UK Health Minister Matt Hancock (earlier found guilty of flagrantly disregarding the distancing rules he was imposing on the rest of the country): As a whole, the messages (dating from Hancock’s time in office) gave a picture of cynical manipulation and deliberate wish to maximise fear. In one message for instance Hancock had said that his objective was “to frighten the pants off everyone”. And in another, he asked the Department of Health’s media advisor, Damien Poole “when do we deploy the new variant?”.
Yet while politicians and media companies who had themselves extensively participated in such behaviour, and in many cases still do, were happy to join the general condemnations of the terrible Mr. Hancock, they ensured that there was not much discussion of the motives, or of who else knew (both in politics and the media), or of the newly-taboo subject of on-going excess deaths, or the key decision makers in the UK government who were making decisions on vaccines whilst being in possession of lucrative shareholdings in the companies making them.
The orchestrated focus on the ‘Hancock leaks’ even extended far enough to enable the media to remain silent on another issue which emerged very shortly afterward: Senior Pfizer scientist Jordan Trishton Walker admitting in a clandestine recording that the company was involved in the deliberate cultivation of viruses for which they would then be able to provide vaccines. Shocking, but verifiably true.
Source: World In Transition
The Elephant in the Womb (Part Two)
The Push for Parallel Institutions
Part One of this essay proposed that the ‘Elephant in the Room’ as of 2023 is that the consequences of the ‘pandemic years’ are far from over. Highly elevated death rates are (for some reason not fully understood) still with us, and the mad ideological / anti-democratic attempts to ‘remake the world’ along globalist / authoritarian / technocratic lines - which have clearly piggy-backed on the pandemic - are still yet gathering pace.
Part One however also proposed the emergence of a second elephant: A deep ground-swell of public response which I called ‘The Elephant in the Womb’. A growing awakening to the deeper social and institutional malaise that has been brought into focus by all that arrived on the same train as ‘covid’.
It ended with the suggestion that while those who stand behind that ‘great orchestrated voice’ which booms across the world continue to enjoy significant power and success in their objectives, we should nonetheless be encouraged by the visible signs of the limits to their competence.
Let’s go.
We could start by daring the question of whether there have been, and are, hidden agendas behind what has been happening, Suggestions on that front have ranged from the relatively mild and opportunistic to the extreme and sinister.
It is very hard to comprehensively prove or disprove any of them of course, no matter where on that spectrum they sit. The thing about secret agendas is… they are secret. But there is enough in the air that one can hardly blame people for suspecting manipulations. To declare myself, I see the balance of evidence as suggesting nefarious activity, but I also believe the kind of action that is needed to be the same irrespective of that conclusion. We’ll come to that. Meanwhile, let me suggest that probably most people today would accept, in any case, and by any interpretation, that what has been happening in the past three years is something more than merely ‘trying to contain the damage caused by a virus’.
Given the plausibility, at the very least, of their existence it would make sense next in our mental explorations to ask to what extent any such nefarious plans might be succeeding or failing. One can presently read intelligent and informed support for both the ‘succeeding’ and ‘failing’ arguments.
The ‘succeeding’ argument tends to note that the penetration of institutions can be seen to be broad and deep, and that the past three years have provided the perpetrators with great deal of feedback about which kinds of manipulation, coercion, disinformation, sowing of confusion, governance-by-fear, etc work well and which work less well, as well as establishing how those strategies relate to the extent to which the people can be made to accept the surrender of their freedoms.
The ‘failing’ argument tends to note what has not gone well for them in the past few years. The scale of public as well as expert push-back has been huge, and in 2023 is still growing. Pfizer lost its legal bid to keep it documents hidden for 75 years.1 The fact that the massively orchestrated push for mandates, vaccine pass/ports, prohibition of travelling, working and socialising without one, etc has, several years on, not succeeded. (That could change of course, but let’s take such victories as we can, and draw strength from them), the already-mentioned shakiness of their attempt at total control of the information-sphere, the fact that there is still, at least for now, enough openness in the internet and smart-phone world, and certainly enough smartness in the people, that they are losing the propaganda war (even if in many places they are for now winning the legislative war). They may have succeeded in testing a lot of essentially nefarious strategies, but along the way, the covert plans are now not nearly so covert.
Perhaps most critically, the 'failing' argument tends to point out that all indications suggest that the would-be controllers of the world have for a long time been falling behind schedule: As far back as the 1960s, Carrol Quigley, a renowned historian, wrote of a secretive international anglophile network2 seeking to impose its will on the world. Quigley declared that not only was he sympathetic to the goals of that network, but he felt that they were so close to fulfilment that there was in any case little need for further secrecy. Yet an earlier book3 that he wrote contained such sensitive information that he was not able to get it published at all until the 1980’s. And today, forty years later, the plans it describes are still not fulfilled.
Further messages on 'limits of competence' have come down from Antony Sutton, another historian who spent long years researching themes of hidden agendas, and who documented copious evidence of their existence.4 Reassuringly, Sutton concluded that it was common-place for the hidden powers which he researched to miscalculate and to get into trouble with their plans.
Similarly, the thinly-disguised strategy for world-government which is Agenda 21 (now Agenda 2030) has constantly fallen behind its target dates.5
Succeeding or failing? True that there are ‘nefarious plans’ afoot, or not true? In certain ways, it is better not to ask. That is, we should ask, in as much as we’d like to feel our way toward truth (and please share your views on it in the comments), but we should perhaps not, in our responses and actions, give much weight to such speculative answers as we find ourselves able to formulate: Either way, what is happening is happening. Either way, the old ways are no longer fit for purpose in a dramatically changing world - and that fact, ultimately, is why we find ourselves everywhere in crisis: The growing failure of ‘the old’ is the reason why such twisted calamities as are everywhere erupting become possible, irrespective how much by accident and how much by design.
And with that we come to the most important element of what it is that is in gestation: People everywhere are talking about ‘a new way of doing things’. Public figures and everyday people alike are increasingly heard to say such things as ‘we need to move to some kind of new form of government’, or 'we need new institutions in which the people can participate, and which can better hold government and corporations to account'.
Unprecedented numbers of people have woken up, and they are showing no signs of going back to sleep. They are beginning to realise that a system which enables all the money, all the communication networks, all the food supply, transportation, media, education et al, to be controlled by the same small group of people (frequently involved in a system of revolving doors between corporations and government), is an insanely bad system, that the old game of left vs. right only serves the people who pull its strings, and that for any number of other reasons it is time not for intensifying and extending the old conceptions of the world, as the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organisation and others seek to do, but to change them.
The great opportunity of these dark times is that people everywhere are speaking of exactly that. There is a hunger for something which can begin to overcome the toxic merger of government with the corporate world, re-animate true cultural life, reverse the trend toward surveillance, technocracy and de-humanisation. Something which can go beyond the desperate hope of rescuing the now-failing old forms of democracy and instead lead toward the emergence of entirely new ones.
All the other things mentioned here and in Part One, the awakenings, the reversals, the realisations about everything from extent of media manipulation to the loaded dice of the banking system, and all the rest of it, are really so many tributaries flowing into that.
I have argued elsewhere that what is needed is a third set of social institutions, able to mediate between governmental and corporate worlds, and hold both to account. It is encouraging (and in the circumstances natural) that tentative signs of their birth are becoming visible. And while new kinds of dialogue have begun to take place among a small handful of visionary politicians, it is happening, much more where it really needs to happen - outside of established political structures. High profile scientists, philosophers, psychologists, journalists and entertainers are speaking of the need for new ways of doing things - and they are not referring to the plans of World Economic Forum, W.H.O., ‘woke corporations’ etc!! Those represent the ‘death throes’ of the old way of doing things. Comedian turned political / social commentator Russell Brand is pulling online audiences of over six million with his regular musings on such themes.
Above all, people I know, and people you know, are talking more and more of the need for ‘some kind of new form of government’, ‘some kind of new form of politics’, or ‘some kind of new form of economics’. In short, the need for ‘new ways of doing things’.
Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come, and here are some of the ways it is manifesting:
New Options:
It was already apparent before 2020 that old ways of doing things are in decline, and accordingly ‘parallel institutions’, have for quite some time been spontaneously emerging: As people have awakened to the exploitation, indoctrination and sheer ineffectiveness of what is passed off as an education system, many millions of children around the world have been home-schooled, and not infrequently have ended up better educated and more independent in their thinking than those who are submitted to ‘the machine’. Crowd-funding has in principle begun to offer a more direct way for people to choose how they want their social contributions to work in the world. Open-source software has given an alternative to enriching corporations which are part of a great infrastructure working against our interests. And currencies like Bitcoin have emerged to offer a genuinely independent means of exchange.
It goes without saying that most or all of those are vulnerable to being constrained or shut-down by ‘the usual suspects’, but the trend is an organic one, born at the conjunction of need (breakdown of the old) and opportunity (and increasingly aware and capable public). It is therefore a trend that, no matter the difficulties, is not going to stop.
The Power of Juries:
The principle of the citizen’s jury doesn’t only have a lot of new and untapped potential. It is also vested with old and disused powers which are not well understood, but are beginning to be. British constitution expert William Keyte has been getting airtime with claims that there exist important constitutional laws, founded in the Magna Carta, of which knowledge has been sytematically and gradually educated out of the people - including most legal professionals. He notes:
“it’s not good for a political power to have a citizenry which is properly aware of its consitutional powers”.
Keyte claims that juries, and not elections, are the basis by which the people are sovereign over government. How so? Because juries in fact have the power not only to judge whether ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ a law has been broken, but to decide whether that law should be applied in a given case, and even whether the law was a reasonable one in the first place. That’s a lot of power. Asserting that a similar principle was taken over into U.S. law, Keyte cites 19th century American philosopher and lawyer Lysander Spooner who wrote that unless government power be absolute, then:
“the government can exercise no power except such as substantially the whole people, through the jury, consent that it may exercise”.
6
Strikingly, a precedent in 1986 in Wisconsin, USA, established the continued validity of such jury powers.7
And also related to the capacity of people to put limits on government power, former U.S. judge Andrew Napolitano has just in the past couple of months published a major new treatise on the use of natural law principles to restrain government.8
What of the new potentials of juries?
When a group of Australian academics, investigating (in 2021) the system-failures that were brought to light by the ‘covid crisis’, one of recommendations for change which they put forward (with some degree of detail on the practicalities) was the idea that people in high public office - which could mean heads of public health bodies for instance, but also perhaps of educational institutions, and even central banks, police forces and others - should be appointed by some kind of citizen’s jury.9
And when the London School of Economics sought public input for a potential new UK constitution, sometime scholar of jurisprudence Malcolm Ramsay (who is a reader of this Substack, and a Substacker himself) submitted a thoughtful and detailed proposal suggesting that appointing people to public office is in fact less of a problem than having a means for a dissatisified public to remove them, and duly outlined a possible jury system with that function.
In similar vein, multiple suggestions are being made (examples here and here) that the principle of ‘social credit scoring’, in which we are coerced into certain types of behaviour by social and financial penalties when we step outside of what the ‘social engineers’ wish from us, be turned back upon those in power, and that a means be set up by which we score them, and remove them when we are not happy.
New Media:
Propaganda outlets like the Guardian, the Telegraph, the New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN are losing credibility and viewers / readers en-masse, and many of the best independent journalists who used to work for them have gone independent. Real journalists like Sharyl Atkisson, Bari Weiss, Seymour Hirsch, Matt Taibbi and Megyn Kelly have all shunned / denounced their former employers and now work independently. Other new independent journalists, previously unknown, are emerging too. Some of them10 show almost unheard-of levels of objectivity and neutrality. The growing ‘alternative media’ sector is breaking stories that the ‘controlled interests’ don’t want to talk about, and giving the public the opportunity to choose, and financially support, its preferred sources at journalist-level.
Substack itself (and I say this with a prayer that it is able to hold out against take-overs by people with other values) represents a new departure, with its commitment to direct relationships between writers, political analysts, historians, scientists, journalists, poets and writers of all kinds and their audiences, with no ‘corporate interest’ inserted between them. And indeed, aside from journalistic sources of notable integrity, the platform has attracted many writers committed to precisely the quest for genuinely new social vision. Their thinking is diverse, but a common theme runs through many, and that theme, again and again, is the decentralisation of power. Some notable examples of this that I’m aware of are Ellen Brown MaryPoindexterMcLaughlin Posthumous Beyond Reason Dr Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD Paul Kingsnorth Celia Farber and
Threatened with losing their power to shape what we all think, the old media increasingly set up ‘fact-checking bureaus’ to negate all who do not agree with them, or who publish stories that they did not want to mention. The latest of these (May of 2023) is ‘BBC Verify’ which smells like a desperate last attempt to convince people that the corporation speaks the truth, following months of its London HQ being besieged by thousands of protestors, sick of its endless propaganda.
Contesting the Political Fraud of ‘The Science’:
The politicised idea of ‘the science’ meanwhile, the reported absolutes which cannot be argued with, and which allegedly oblige politicians to implement extreme policies, is increasingly called out as ill-conceived, manipulative and downright fraudulent. The publication of scientific papers is entirely controlled by commercial interests,11 most of what is published is not in fact replicable,12 and top scientists are increasingly criticising the turning of science into ‘scientism’,13 a pseudo-religious parody of what it is supposed to be. Some have gone so far as propose that this trend, if not challenged, must inevitably lead to totalitarianism.14 There is some way to go overcome the might of the propaganda on this one, but more and more authentic scientific voices are joining the battle. And some of the public too are beginning to understand the fraud that is being perpetrated.
New Organisations:
In January of 2023, psychologist Jordan Peterson announced (on the Joe Rogan show) the launch of a new endeavour called The Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) bringing together around 2000 influential thinkers and actors around the world to:
“develop a vision that would be an alternative to the globalist woke utopian nightmare that threatens to engulf us all”.
Refreshingly, The ARC puts getting the questions right ahead of getting the answers right. It also solicits your opinion on them.
One critic15 has suggested that Peterson’s enterprise amounts to ‘meet the new boss, same as the old boss’. The concerns raised - potentially dubious investment sources,16 supporters of the ‘net zero’ ideology17 and ‘smart cities’,18 participants who are World Economic Forum ‘young leaders’19 etc., are real enough. But I see also reasons to suspend judgement: Peterson’s good intentions seem certain and he has good credentials as an authentic voice against the many forms of back-door tyranny that have been in progress.
Diverse voices are incorporated. For instance on one side Nicholas Batterham, chair of the Net Zero Australia project, and on the other former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot who has been very outspoken against the ‘global warming’ orthodoxy, and John Anderson who has declared the science ‘unsettled’. And in the middle, Bjorn Lomborg and Michael Schellenberger who broadly accept the principle of ‘anthropogenic warming’, but do not believe it is the ‘end of the world’.
Investors in ‘new media’ companies,20 and specifically ones which seem willing to challenge the ‘great orchestrated voice’ which otherwise booms across the lands, are involved.
Other participants also bring very welcome views: Vivek Ramaswamy is virtually a one-man exposé of the cynicism and potential for tyranny that lurks in ‘ESG’.21 Niall Ferguson meanwhile is perhaps somewhat ‘establishment’, but also argued vigorously for the motion that ‘the Liberal World Order is Over’ in a high-profile public debate in 2018.22 Artists,23 philosophers,24 pastors25 and social workers26 also take their place in the line-up. (It is a line-up by the way which has an overall conservative bias, so let’s have that on the table and people can react to it as they will).
We come to the question of the World Economic Forum. You will not hear me speaking in favour of the WEF. At all. But since the very impressive Tulsi Gabbard has also been named a WEF ‘young leader’, I cannot see that in itself as an automatic disqualification from ‘authentically progressive vision’.
On the basis of all this we might keep an open mind on The ARC. Let’s wait and see.
In 2016, the New Chartist Movement was set up in the UK with the aim of educating on already-existing common law and ‘restoring the rule of law to the British People’.
In February 2020, just as the ‘covid crisis’ was beginning, the Holistic Alliance for Real Ecology (HARE) was established in the U.K. HARE’s objective is to:
“counteract the current abuses of the democratic process by upholding the practice and virtues of Common Law; putting an end to the private debt-creating central banking system; and promoting real ecology in place of the current corporatised, fear-based and lie-ridden ‘green’ version being promoted by the corporate globalists’ through their so-called ‘Green New Deal’”
As well as to:
“counteract the 5G roll-out and the Covid-19 multi-impositions, whilst at the same time undertaking research and activism towards the establishment of a new and genuinely Green Society [in accordance with the late great truth warrior Professor David Bellamy] that embraces a spirit-led vision of truth, justice and freedom”.
HARE is under the stewardship of long-time organic farmer and environmental warrior Sir Julian Rose, and is also working in collaboration with the ‘New Chartist Movement’, already mentioned above.
In 2021, advocacy from the Public Banking Institute, devoted to the creation and expansion of publically-owned community banks, led to 18 public banks bills being introduced in nine state and cities and at federal level in the U.S.A.
The push for parallel institutions is also reflected, due especially to many grotesque interventions and distortions during the pandemic years, in newly independent organisations in the medical world. One of the by-now countless high-profile scientists to have spoken out against those distortions is Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a Thai-born former chair of medical microbiology at the University of Mainz in Germany, who in 2020 declared:
“Let’s not be naive. Science is just as corrupt as politics”. 27
Another is Dr. Richard Amerling, a former head of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons who in 2022:
“The current system is so corrupt that we have to start from scratch and build something alongside, as an alternative”. 28
Accordingly, many of the top medical professionals in the world have already begun to do exactly that. The past couple of years has seen vast numbers of top medical professionals organising themselves into truly independent organisitions such as The World Council for Health , America’s Front Line Doctors, The Canadian Covid Alliance, The World Doctors Alliance, The Front Line Critical Covid Care Alliance, The Unity Project, The Global Health Project, and others.
As of 2023, there are even moves to establish entirely parallel government structures. British (or English) Entrepeneur Jason Noble, disturbed to learn certain realities about the banking system and numerous other long-standing legislative ‘sleights of hand’, was inspired to dig deeper. And he and his collaborators have discovered something rather amazing. The ‘Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States’, an international treaty signed in 1933, established various criteria for ‘being a country’, as accepted as part of customary international law. These included having a leader, having a parliament, and having mutual working agreements at a functional level with other countries. There were others, but those three are striking in that England has none of them. Scotland and Wales for example do. But England has no parliament, no national leader, and no trade agreements with other countries. Conclusion: No country called ‘England’, according to the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States’, exists.
Noble and his collaborators are therefore in the process of establishing ‘The Republic of England’, drawing on precedents such as the Atlantic Charter to make provision that its people (who may now sign up to be members of the new republic) will rule themselves, and will determine the conditions for the establishment of its parliament and other effectively parallel institutions.
I have one more ‘new organisation’ to mention. Falun Gong has been so mercilessly smeared and persecuted (up to the point of imprisonment, torture and death of many of its members), precisely because the spontaneous emergence of a peaceful, spiritually-based movement of tens of millions is so terrifying to the power-brokers. What has happened there since the turn of the millennium however is also a sign of the times. It will not be the last such outbreak of spontaneous goodwill and fellowship.
Most Essential of All - A New Conceptual Framework:
What may seem to be lacking is a way of seeing the many and diverse sources of instabilility, and the many and diverse responses to them, as part of a single phenomenon, in which relationships between multi-faceted problems and multi-faceted responses can be drawn out, and in which coherent principles can be identified.
I propose however, that it only seems to be lacking. Consider if you would the following hypothesis:
The madness and breakdown and confusion are direct consequence of the old understanding of world and mind according to the simile of a machine. The old world-view is reaching its inevitable end-point and manifesting all kinds of horrors in order that we can see more clearly the folly of it.
The ‘new paradigm’ (which I have written of here) of participative knowing, complex systems, emergent dynamics, distributed consciousness, and the truly human world which becomes possible with all that, has long been growing beneath the surface, and is by now unassailable. It remains largely invisible only because ‘old think’ is so deeply institutionalised that it mostly precludes the spread of anything except itself.
The renewed vigour with which ‘the old guard’ defends the mechanistic world-view, and all the limited and problematic thinking that goes with it (simplistic cause and effect, no free will, moral relativity, no meaning, ‘uploadable consciousness’, militaristic control metaphors for everything) is above all an existential reaction to its own inevitable demise.
Even the basis for a new conceptualisation of social structures already exists. It exists as in the form of an archetypal (perennial) pattern of evolution between ‘culture, state and commerce’, which provides some genuinely coherent principles for evaluating and integrating the various ways forward that are increasingly emerging from all quarters. That too I have touched upon before - though I’ll have a lot more to say, perhaps more convincingly, before I’m done.
Toward a Real New Normal:
The new options, new organisations, and new conceptual framework that have been described above are just some those things that can be seen as concrete steps toward something genuinely different. If we factor in the ongoing dissent toward ‘the old’, the picture is even more emphatic: ‘Boiled frog’ and ‘red pill’ have become a standard part of the international lexicon. Mass protest is a constant in countries all over the world, and the media blackout does not change that fact. In some of those countries the population is now in a state of almost permanent open revolt against their governments, and the anti-democratic New World Order that they represent. (For example France, Holland, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Brazil) Canadian citizens raised 2 million dollars in a few weeks in support of the nation’s truckers contesting Trudeau (until the latter seized the bank accounts of both the protestors and those who had offered them financial support). Companies from BlackRock to the BBC (as mentioned above) have seen their headquarters under virtual siege by protestors. A mass-migration is in progress from big-name propaganda companies to the alternative media and the handful of free-speech platforms. More and more people are understanding how the banking system, the media, education and so-called ‘public health’ are being weaponised against them. Even the nonsense that ‘machines can be conscious’ is now rejected by a majority. And a torrent of well-researched new books29 is revealing all kinds of previously under-recognised realities - and finding appreciative audiences.
It is clear indeed that something big is growing in the people of the world. It is outnumbered, yes. It is being born into a hostile world, yes. It’s success in the immediate future is highly uncertain. Yet I feel its presence growing. I feel its resolve growing. I feel its understanding deepening.
While various miscreants and apologists, being recently exposed to the light, have glibly proposed of the pandemic years that, ‘well, mistakes get made, let’s move on’, the emerging elephant, quite rightly, is having none of it.
The regular media, now in historically unprecedented degree ‘a tool of the powers’, tighten their blinkers and respond with ‘Elephant? What elephant'?’
But the elephant, undeterred by the odds it faces, still comes.
Pfizer’s attempt to keep its very extensive documentation on the development and testing of covid vaccines from the public for 75 years was prevented by the courts. As a result, hundreds of thousands of pages of documents were made public. A world-wide team of of 2500 volunteer biostatisticians, nurses, physicians, lab clinicians, cardiologists, pathologists and medical fraud investigators, working in 6 teams, went to work. While it will likely be sometime before the analysis is complete it, what has already been established is that:
Pfizer knew in November 2020 that the vaccine did not stop covid.
Within a couple of months of starting the rollout, Pfizer had to hire 2400 staff merely to process the paperwork for the ‘adverse event’ reports that had started to come in.
In the first three months there had been over 1200 known deaths out of 42,000 adverse events.
Pfizer knew in May 2021 that the vaccines had caused heart damage in 35 minors
While Pfizer were claiming that the materials in the vaccine remain local to the injection site, they knew that was not true. They knew that the materials bio-distribute in 48 hours to the brain, liver, adrenals, spleen and ovaries. And that there is no known process by which the body is then able to digest or remove them.
While the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) was adivising the public that side effects could include ‘fatigue, chills and swelling at the injection site’, the documentation already showed that the side effects also included strokes, lung-clots, hemorrhages, leg-clots and neurological disorders, and joint problems.
And very much more - see here.
All of this was well known to the US Government, which via the FDA and CDC had full access to the the Pfizer documentation from the beginning.
Naomi Wolf, who was instrumental in publishing the analysis described it as ‘evidence of the greatest crime against humanity in the history of our species’.
Specifically, the Rhodes/Milner network. Quigley wrote of them extensively, and of the privileged access he was given to their documentation. See ‘Tradgedy and Hope’, Carroll Quigley, 1966.
‘The Anglo-American Establishment’, Carroll Quigley, 1981.
See ‘The Wall Street Trilogy’, Antony Sutton, 2018. (A consolidation of three smaller books originally published in the 1970s).
After failure to achieve its original target date of the year 2000 (the beginning of the twenty-first century), it has now had to morphed into ‘Agenda 2030’.
‘An Essay on Trial by Jury’, Lysander Spooner, 1852
In 1986 a Wisconsin jury found that a defendant had violated the law, but successfully asserted that the law should not, in the case they were considering, be applied. (Highly recommended viewing here).
‘Freedom’s Anchor: An Introduction to Natural Law Jurisprudence in American Constitutional History’, Andrew Napolitano, 2023
See ‘The Great Covid Panic’, 2021, by Paul Fritjers, Gigi Foster and Michael Baker. (Pages 229 - 334)
For example Freddie Sayers, chief presenter for ‘Unherd T.V.’ - an ‘alternative media’ outlet born in 2017, and a great exemplar of serious, diverse, pluralistic and neutral journalism and debate.
A single company, Elsevier scientific publishing, publishes half a million scientific papers every year in more than 2,500 journals world-wide. The company is controlled by a ‘philanthropist’ called Paul Hamlyn, one of the biggest ‘grant-givers’ in the world. Elsevier also owns ‘The Lancet’.
In 2005 Dr. Jonn Ioannides, recognised as the most cited scientist in world, felt moved to publish an essay entitled ‘Why Most Published Research Findings are False’. In 2022 psychologist Mattias Desmet referenced a series of findings showing economics research not replicable in 50% of cases, cancer research not replicable in 60% of cases, and bio-medical research not replicable in 85% of cases. (See ‘The Psychology of Totalitarianism’, Mattias Desmet, 2022).
World-renown biologist Rupert Sheldrake makes a very compelling argument that science has degenerated into pseudo-religious ‘scientism’ here. And historian Niall Ferguson declared in June of 2021 that “One of the odder things that the pandemic has revealed was that the people who talk most about 'The Science' are in fact anything but scientific. In their approach they are in thrall, in fact, I think, to some version of religion, without even being aware of it”.
See ‘The Psychology of Totalitarianism’, Mattias Desmet, 2022.
‘Amazing Polly’, a Canadian researcher and commentator whose comments on The ARC can be found here.
In particular Legatum, an investment fund which lends several of its personnel to The ARC, and apparently has Rockefeller ties.
Nicholas Batterham
Riva Melissa Tez
For example Congressional representative and former U.S. Navy SEAL Dan Crenshaw.
For example Alan McCormick, Chairman of GB News, and Sir Paul Marshall, founder and owner of Unherd T.V.
‘ESG’ is a new coroporate buzzword. It stands for ‘Environmental, Social, Governance’. Under its banner, the corporate world seeks to wash its public image by presenting an altruistic face, and putting right the wrongs of the world. In practice the levers of immense wealth get used to intervene in social dyanmics without electoral accountability, while corporate intersts inevitably continue to come first. It’s real nature and consequence are well explored in ‘Woke, Inc.’ by Vivek Ramaswamy, 2021.
The Munk Debate Series: Is the Liberal International Order Over?
For example French-Canadian carver Jonathan Pageau, specialised in symbolism and iconry
For example James Orr, Associate Professor of Philosophy of Religion at the University of Cambridge
For example Agu Irukwu, Senior Pastor of Jesus House for all Nations, London.
For example Erica Komisar, clinical social worker, author and psychoanalyst.
See ‘Coronavirus False Alarm?’, Dr. Sucharit Bakhdi and Dr. Karina Reiss, 2021.
A Handful of the Most Relevant and Most Recent :
‘The Revolt of the Public and The Crisis of Authority in the New Millenium’, Marin Gurri, 2018
‘Ideological Constructs of Vaccination’, Mateja Cernic, 2018
‘Hate Inc.: Why Today’s Media Makes Us Despise One Another’, Matt Taibbi, 2019
‘Slanted: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism’, Sharyl Atkisson, 2020
‘The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense’, Gad Saad, 2020
‘Undoctrinate: How Politicized Classrooms Harm Kids and Ruin Our Schools―and What We Can Do About It’, Bonnie Snyder, 2021
‘The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health’, Robert F. Kennedy Junior, 2021
‘One Nation Under Blackmail’, Whitney Webb, 2022
‘Lies My Government Told Me’, Robert Malone, 2022
‘The Psychology of Totalitarianism’, Mattias Desmet 2022
‘Superabundance: The Story of Population Growth, Innovation, and Human Flourishing on an Infinitely Bountiful Planet’, Marion Tupy, 2022
‘Davos Man: How the Billionaires Devoured the Word’, Peter Goodman, 2022
‘Technopopulism: The New Logic of Democratic Politics’, Chris Bickerton, 2022
‘The Bodies of Others: The New Authoritarians, COVID-19 and The War Against the Human’, Naomi Wolf, 2022
‘Woke, Inc.’, Vivek Ramaswamy, 2022
‘The Anglo-Venetian Roots of the Deep State’, Matthew Ehret, 2023
‘Serious Adverse Events’, Celia Farber 2023
‘Vax / Unvax, Let the Science Speak’, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., 2023
‘Pfizer Documents Analysis Reports’, Amy Kelly 2023
‘Freedom’s Anchor: An Introduction to Natural Law Jurisprudence in American Constitutional History’, Andrew Napolitano, 2023
Source: World In Transition
Comments
Post a Comment