Monday Morning Breakfast For The Brain

Good morning Deplorables, another week begins…

From Lockdowns To “The Great Reset”

Via Zero Hedge

The lockdown in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the implementation of long-held plans to establish a so-called new world order. Under the auspices of the World Economic Forum (WEF), global policymakers are advocating for a “Great Reset” with the intent of creating a global technocracy. It is not by coincidence that on October 18, 2019, in New York City the WEF participated in “Event 201” at the “high-level” pandemic exercise organized by the John Hopkins Center for Health Security.

This coming technocracy involves close cooperation between the heads of the digital industry and of governments. With programs such as guaranteed minimum income and healthcare for all, the new kind of governance combines strict societal control with the promise of comprehensive social justice.

The truth, however, is that this new world order of digital tyranny comes with a comprehensive social credit system. The People’s Republic of China is the pioneer of this method of surveillance and control of individuals, corporations, and sociopolitical entities.

For the individual, one’s identity is reduced to an app or chip that registers almost any personal activity. In order to gain a few individual rights, and be it only to travel to a certain place, a person must balance such apparent privileges with his submission to a web of regulations that define in detail what is “good behavior” and deemed as beneficial to humankind and the environment. For example, during a pandemic, this sort of control would extend from the obligation of wearing a mask and practicing social distancing to having specific vaccinations in order to apply for a job or to travel.

It is, in short, a type of social engineering which is the opposite of a spontaneous order or of development. Like the mechanical engineer with a machine, the social engineer—or technocrat—treats society as an object. Different from the brutal suppressions by the totalitarianism of earlier times, the modern social engineer will try to make the social machine work on its own according to the design. For this purpose, the social engineer must apply the laws of society the way the mechanical engineer follows the laws of nature. Behavioral theory has reached a stage of knowledge that makes the dreams of social engineering possible. The machinations of social engineering operate not through brute force, but subtly by nudge.

Under the order envisioned by the Great Reset, the advancement of technology is not meant to serve the improvement of the conditions of the people but to submit the individual to the tyranny of a technocratic state. “The experts know better” is the justification.

The Agenda

The plan for an overhaul of the world is the brainchild of an elite group of businessmen, politicians, and their intellectual entourage that used to meet in Davos, Switzerland, in January each year. Brought into existence in 1971, the World Economic Forum has become a megaglobal event since then. More than three thousand leaders from all over the world attended the meeting in 2020.

Under the guidance of the WEF, the agenda of the Great Reset says that the completion of the current industrial transformation requires a thorough overhaul of the economy, politics, and society. Such a comprehensive transformation requires the alteration of human behavior, and thus “transhumanism” is part of the program.

The Great Reset will be the theme of the fifty-first meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2021. Its agenda is the commitment to move the world economy toward “a more fair, sustainable and resilient future.” The program calls for “a new social contract” that is centered on racial equality, social justice, and the protection of the nature. Climate change requires us “to decarbonize the economy” and to bring human thinking and behavior “into harmony with nature.” The aim is to build “more equal, inclusive and sustainable economies.” This new world order must be “urgently” implemented, the promotors of the WEF claim, and they point out that the pandemic “has laid bare the unsustainability of our system,” which lacks “social cohesion.”

The WEF’s great reset project is social engineering at the highest level. Advocates of the reset contend that the UN failed to establish order in the world and could not advance forcefully its agenda of sustainable development—known as Agenda 2030—because of its bureaucratic, slow, and contradictory way of working. In contrast, the actions of the organizational committee of the World Economic Forum are swift and smart. When a consensus has been formed, it can be implemented by the global elite all over the world.

Social Engineering

The ideology of the World Economic Forum is neither left nor right, nor progressive or conservative, it is also not fascist or communist, but outright technocratic. As such, it includes many elements of earlier collectivist ideologies.

In recent decades, the consensus has emerged at the annual Davos meetings that the world needs a revolution, and that reforms have taken too long. The members of the WEF envision a profound upheaval at short notice. The time span should be so brief that most people will hardly realize that a revolution is going on. The change must be so swift and dramatic that those who recognize that a revolution is happening do not have the time to mobilize against it.

The basic idea of the Great Reset is the same principle that guided the radical transformations from the French to the Russian and Chinese Revolutions. It is the idea of constructivist rationalism incorporated in the state. But projects like the Great Reset leave unanswered the question of who rules the state. The state itself does not rule. It is an instrument of power. It is not the abstract state that decides, but the leaders of specific political parties and of certain social groups.

Earlier totalitarian regimes needed mass executions and concentration camps to maintain their power. Now, with the help of new technologies, it is believed, dissenters can easily be identified and marginalized. The nonconformists will be silenced by disqualifying divergent opinions as morally despicable.

The 2020 lockdowns possibly offer a preview of how this system works. The lockdown worked as if it had been orchestrated—and perhaps it was. As if following a single command, the leaders of big and small nations—and of different stages of economic development—implemented almost identical measures. Not only did many governments act in unison, they also applied these measures with little regard for the horrific consequences of a global lockdown.

Months of economic stillstand have destroyed the economic basis of millions of families. Together with social distancing, the lockdown has produced a mass of people unable to care for themselves. First, governments destroyed the livelihood, then the politicians showed up as the savior. The demand for social assistance is no longer limited to specific groups, but has become a need of the masses.

Once, war was the health of the state. Now it is fear of disease. What lies ahead is not the apparent coziness of a benevolent comprehensive welfare state with a guaranteed minimum income and healthcare and education for all. The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioral control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state.

With the measures taken in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, a big step to reset the global economy has been made. Without popular resistance, the end of the pandemic will not mean the end of the lockdown and social distancing. At the moment, however, the opponents of the new world order of digital tyranny still have access to the media and platforms to dissent. Yet the time is running out. The perpetrators of the new world order have smelled blood. Declaring the coronavirus a pandemic has come in handy to promote the agenda of their Great Reset. Only massive opposition can slow down and finally stop the extension of the power grip of the tyrannical technocracy that is on the rise.

Read the entire article HERE.

Bill Clinton Denies Frolicking With ‘2 Young Girls’ On Epstein’s Island

by Chris Donaldson/Trending Politics

Former President Bill Clinton is vehemently denying the bombshell allegation that he was seen by an eyewitness frolicking with “2 young girls” on billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s private island.

Mr. Clinton who was said to have been a guest at Little St. James Island in the Caribbean according to unsealed court documents issued his denial through a spokesperson in a statement to Newsweek magazine.

According to Clinton’s spox, Slick Willie has “never been to Little St. James Island” and had “not spoken to Epstein in well over a decade,” he said. “Well before his terrible crimes came to light.”

The damning new details are a part of a defamation case against Epstein madame and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell brought by Virginia Roberts Guiffre who is one of Epstein’s most high profile accusers.

The same man who once wagged his finger directly into the faces of Americans and lied that he “did not have sexual relations with that woman” has been dogged by his dealings with Epstein which he has been unable to put to bed.

Via Newsweek, “Bill Clinton Denies Giuffre Allegation He Went to Epstein’s Island With 2 Young Girls: ‘Never Been'”:

Virginia Guiffre, a woman who publicly accused convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein of sex trafficking, said former President Bill Clinton visited his private island. Clinton says he was never there.

In a statement on Friday, Angel Ureña, a spokesperson for Clinton, told Newsweek that the former president has “never been to Little St. James Island.”

“He’d not spoken to Epstein in well over a decade,” he said. “Well before his terrible crimes came to light.”

Ureña referred Newsweek to a statement Clinton released in July 2019, where he issued the same denial. “He’s not spoken to Epstein in well over a decade, and has never been to Little St. James Island, Epstein’s ranch in New Mexico, or his residence in Florida,” the statement read.

The recent unsealing of court documents put attention back on Clinton’s connection to Epstein on Friday. During a conversation with lawyer Jack Scarola, Guiffre said she was on the island with Epstein and Clinton.

“Ghislane, Emmy [another girl who was allegedly a regular at Epstein’s house], and there was 2 young girls that I could identify. I never really knew them well anyways. It was just 2 girls from New York,” Guiffre said.

According to the documents, Guiffre also said that orgies were held on the island and that Epstein once remarked that Clinton owed him a favor.

Epstein was found mysteriously dead last summer in his jail cell in a highly secured federal prison in Manhattan; a death ruled to be a suicide but the amazing confluence of convenient failures including security cameras that just happened to malfunction at the crucial time has led to much skepticism.

The former president took nearly two dozen trips on Epstein’s private Boeing 727 airborne sex den dubbed “the Lolita Express” in addition to the trip to the steamy exotic local that locals referred to as “pedo island” and “orgy island” where powerful political, business, academic, and media figures were allegedly filmed in compromising acts with minors.

Epstein’s “suicide” benefitted a lot of rich and powerful people including Clinton but now that Ghislaine Maxwell is in custody and the steady drip, drip, drip of damning details continuing to emerge old Bubba may not be off the hook yet.

Check out daily articles by Chris aka Donn Marten at Trending Politics HERE.

Goodbye, Suburbia: If Biden Wins, Democrats Plan to Absorb Suburbs Into Cities

Via The New American

It’s not what politicians say they’re going to do that you most have to worry about, and this isn’t just because they’re notorious for breaking promises. It’s that it’s what they don’t say they’re going to do, but do anyway once in power, that’s far worse.

A good example is the Democrats’ plan to destroy the suburbs, which they see as bastions of white privilege/supremacy whose rise has occurred at cities’ expense.

Unbelievable? Well, know that this plan was already initiated in 2009, by Barack Obama, who instituted a “regulation that federalized local zoning and land-use policies,” as the Wall Street Journal recently reported. President Trump rolled back this regulation July 22, but a Joe Biden presidency would resurrect it and more, delivering to suburbs the coup de grâce.

Being used as a cudgel is the 1968 Fair Housing Act, which “requires recipients of federal block grants to certify that they ‘affirmatively further fair housing [AFFH],’” the Journal further informed. “In 1996 the Clinton Administration issued 170 pages of guidance interpreting those four words, and lawsuits proliferated.”

In fact, a suit targeted my county, Westchester, just north of New York City. As a result, 10 out of every 50 units in a new condominium building not far from my residence had to be “affordable housing.”

It turned out that it wasn’t Section 8 housing — a.k.a. diversifying safe neighborhoods with criminals — so we’d dodged a bullet in this case. But the Democrats haven’t dispensed with their Equality™ goal here: redistributing suburban tax money to the cities, and crime and other city social ills to the suburbs.

The National Review’s Stanley Kurtz explained this well last month in “Biden and Dems Are Set to Abolish the Suburbs,” writing (as presented at American Thinker):

Obama’s radical AFFH regulation puts every part of progressives’ “abolish the suburbs” strategy into effect (as I explain in detail here). Once Biden starts to enforce AFFH the way Obama’s administration originally meant it to work, it will be as if America’s suburbs had been swallowed up by the cities they surround. They will lose control of their own zoning and development, they will be pressured into a kind of de facto regional-revenue redistribution, and they will even be forced to start building high-density low-income housing. The latter, of course, will require the elimination of single-family zoning. With that, the basic character of the suburbs will disappear. At the very moment when the pandemic has made people rethink the advantages of dense urban living, the choice of an alternative will be taken away.

That’s all bad enough. But on top of AFFH, Biden now plans to use Cory Booker’s strategy for attacking suburban zoning. AFFH works by holding HUD’s Community Development Block Grants hostage to federal-planning demands…. AFFH also forces HUD-grant recipients to sign pledges to “affirmatively further fair housing.” Those pledges could get suburbs sued by civil-rights groups, or by the feds, if they don’t get rid of single-family zoning. The only defense suburbs have against this two-pronged attack is to refuse HUD grants….

The Booker approach — now endorsed by Biden — may block even this way out. Booker wants to hold suburban zoning hostage not only to HUD grants, but to the federal transportation grants used by states to build and repair highways. It may be next to impossible for suburbs to opt out of those state-run highway repairs.  Otherwise, suburban roads will deteriorate and suburban access to major arteries will be blocked.

Summing up, Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson said earlier this month (video below. Relevant portion begins at 1:47), “Towns will be ordered to abolish zoning for single-family housing because single-family homes, needless to say, are ‘racist.’ …You won’t see projects being built in Aspen or Martha’s Vineyard or anywhere else Eric Holder vacations, but in your neighborhood? Oh, yeah.”

Read the entire article HERE.

‘Do As They Say’: Minneapolis Police Tell Residents To ‘Be Prepared To Give Up’ Personal Belongings To Robbers

Via The Daily Wire

Minneapolis Police informed residents of the city’s embattled 3rd Precinct to prepare for the giving up of their personal belongings to potential robbers, and advised them to do as criminals say for their own safety.

According to a July 28 email provided to Alpha News MN that was also forwarded to The Daily Wire, the Minneapolis Police Department offered “prevention tips” to residents hoping to avoid being a victim of the skyrocketing cases of robbery and carjacking that have plagued the city since George Floyd’s death in May.

“Robberies and Carjacking’s [sic] have increased in our Precinct,” the email begins. “Cell phones, purses, and vehicles are being targeted. Some victims have been maced, dragged, assaulted, and some threatened with a gun. Most of these crimes have occurred north of 42nd St. E. 100 Robberies and 20 Carjackings have been reported to 3rd Precinct Police in July alone. Downtown and Southwest Minneapolis have seen an increase as well. We want those who live and work here to be safe!”

Read the entire article HERE.

Exposing the maskerade: The questions every American should be asking about indefinite mask mandates

Via The Blaze

“Just shut up and wear a mask” is not science, ordered liberty, or constitutional governance

The trope of “just shut up and wear a mask” is not science, ordered liberty, or constitutional governance. It’s what they do in North Korea. We need real debate on the effectiveness of masks, the type of masks, the situations in which they are worn, the duration of time, the benchmarks that need to be met to measure effectiveness, and the process for promulgating these rules. We are no longer 24 hours into an emergency. We are four months into this virus, and it’s time to function like the representative republic that we are.

There are numerous political and scientific questions any thinking person should be asking at this point:

• Why did the CDC, World Health Organization, and such luminaries as Fauci and Surgeon General Jerome Adams so emphatically dismiss the effectiveness of masks, then flip 180 degrees to the point where they shame people who don’t wear them, without ever explaining what changed? While we learn more about the virus every day, the micro-biology of the particles hasn’t changed, and the premise that non-professional masks worn by non-trained professionals run the risk of counterproductive cross-contamination did not change.
• The suggestion that this is needed to protect others raises the obvious question: If me not wearing a mask transmits the virus to others who are wearing a mask, then is that not an admission that masks do not work to stop a respiratory virus that is microscopic and gets through the mask? Garbage in, garbage out. It makes no sense to suggest it doesn’t penetrate the transmitter’s mask from inside-out, especially with the air pressure of a cough or sneeze, but can penetrate the mask of the receiver through suspended molecules that are stagnant without pressure pushing those molecules outside-in to the receiver. If anything, the opposite should be true – it should be more effective for protection of yourself.
• How can mask-wearing work when everyone just stores them in their pockets to collect bacteria, as our government officials predicted from day one?
• How could kids ever keep it clean and not collect more bacteria, and where is the evidence that children are even a vector for viral transmission? My home county is mandating that even two-year-olds wear masks. How can anyone suggest that children can keep them clean, and where is the evidence that young children are a vector for transmitting the virus, when numerous studies from other countries have shown the opposite?
• Mask-wearing in all of the major cities – from Los Angeles to Miami – has been in place and followed by pressure and community shaming for months. Compliance in most of these places has been off the charts, according to the NYT. Yet the virus is still spreading more than before the mandate. The virus is now spreading in Japan, Hong Kong, and the Philippines, which have near universal mask-wearing. At what point does the mask cult have to provide evidence of the effectiveness of these unconstitutional mandates, and at what point do benchmarks have to be met to maintain such a draconian and life-altering requirement?
• Do masks that are continuously reused, cross-contaminated, and not properly disposed of become a trap to further transmit the virus or become retainers for other pathogens – or at the very least for bacteria, which are larger than viruses – that can harm the mask-wearer and others alike?
• What are the known side effects to one’s health after wearing these masks for hours on end in the heat, especially for children in school? Does long-term mask-wearing lower oxygen levels and compromise our immune systems?
• Do masks cause people to touch their faces more often, the exact opposite of what was originally the desired result?

Read the entire article HERE.

Cities Protecting Statues By Disguising Them As Karl Marx

Via The Babylon Bee (Satire)

U.S.—Looking to protect their statues and other municipal monuments, cities and towns across the country have begun disguising their statues as Karl Marx.

City councils all over are ordering Karl Marx wigs and putting them on Teddy Roosevelt, George Washington, Christopher Columbus, and other statues. The move has proven extremely effective at deterring Antifa and other extremist groups, who are only looking for statues of old hateful white guys to destroy and not statues of communists.

“As soon as enraged rioters see the statue isn’t of a dangerous, murderous madman whose ideas killed hundreds of millions but is just of Karl Marx, they move on,” said one city council member in Illinois as he put a Karl Marx wig and beard on a statue of Abraham Lincoln. “Well, first, they bow respectfully to their hero and then move on.”

Plaques on the statues with controversial quotes from the Founding Fathers are also being covered up with Marx quotes like “Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution!” and “Workers of the world, unite!”

Some towns are reporting that Che Guevara chin stubble and a beret also work wonders at saving the monuments.

Check out all of the Bee’s takes on politics and culture HERE.

Be sure to subscribe to Def-Con News to get Breakfast For The Brain in your morning mailbox.