Why would they do that? Please explain their reasoning.
1 Like
I suppose an analogy would be that a controlled demolition is better than just waiting for a building to fall down at some unknown point in time, the people can be evacuated in an orderly fashion thereby averting casualties. In the analogy of course itâs not people they are worried about itâs their wealth and power that they want to protect.
Crises are also a great opportunity to advance various agendas such as introducing further totalitarian global governance.
I can only speculate of course though, you would have to ask them why if you really want to know, Iâm just going by what they are doing and implying (I believe) that they are going to do 
2 Likes
I just read where (I think) Soros has warned about cyber-hacking. And havenât they even had one of those convoâs about it already?
Thats a pretty sure sign that this is the next crisis theyâre planning to orchestrate and exploit.
2 Likes
If they crash the economy they hurt themselves.
Who are they? What is their money invested in? How will they preserve their wealth? If there are is no food to buy, where will theirs come from? If there is no energy for sale, how will they charge their Teslas?
In Third World countries a tyrant and his henchmen (and their henchwives) simply pocket foreign aid. If the First World becomes impoverished, from where will aid come for its own tyrants?
A âcontrolled crashâ? Is such a thing possible? How?
Our rising and risen tyrants are not clever (except at rigging elections). They are strikingly lacking in foresight. They donât even seem to understand that they are scuttling the ship they are sailing in.
3 Likes
They have crashed the economy, they have âlocked us downâ, they have driven businesses to the wall, and they e.g. BlackRock have managed to get richer in the process as articles Iâve shared before here show.
They are all the people and corporations associated with the WEF I would say, in a very general way. Their money is invested very widely in all sorts of things all over the world. There will not be no food to buy, rather there will be food shortages and rationing that the most wealthy people can easily survive thanks to their immense wealth. They donât want to destroy the economy they want to crash it and then âbuild it back betterâ (better for them with yet more wealth and power accumulated in their hands).
The political figureheads are certainly not clever, they put their lives at risk furthering the agenda of the rich, but I think the richest people are. The richest are however not intelligent or perhaps are certainly not humane, and though their actions may bring them the increases in wealth and power that they crave they will not bring happiness, as the world they are trying to create will be greatly culturally and morally impoverished, and I suspect the very innovation that has enriched them till now will be stifled.
3 Likes
Yes, Iâve wondered about this, too, and I think youâre right. What theyâre doing is âcounter productiveâ for everyone but them - at least in the short term.
They profit off the inflation and the destruction of small business, and as long as they gain wealth and power from it, they donât care how it affects the rest of us.
They want to return to a feudal system, anyway - where they rule over us like serfs.
3 Likes
Your answers are not concrete enough.
Please tell me exactly where their food and energy will come from. In what sort of industries, where, Black Rock will invest.
The economy has not been crashed. Not yet. A crashed economy is Venezuela, Zimbabwe. People starved, but the tyrants survived because of the First Worldâs prosperity. If the First World economy crashes, tell me how the wealthy benefit? Not in vague terms but with examples, please.
2 Likes
I can throw in one example - big businesses putting smaller businesses- their competition - out of business, to gain a monopoly.
In the same way, Globalist companies like Blackrock want to put national companies out of business in order to gain a monopoly on them.
So they crash the economy till only they - the bigger ones - survive, and control the others.
2 Likes
Yes, they do that. But every industry needs customers. If there are no buyers, because the people have no money to buy anything, the great monopolies cannot sell their products. Every industry is dependent on other industries. (How many others is farming dependent on? If Jeanne were here, she would tell us - she has listed some in the past - but she is away on a cruise. Anyway, the answer is, a lot.) If energy is not produced, or is only produced at uneconomic cost, no raw materials are dug up or cut down or extracted. Manufactures slow and stop. Imported goods remain unloaded on ships near harbors, and perishables rot. Trucks are not driven, or only driven at such vast expense that the goods they move become prohibitive in price and remain unsold, and perishables rot. Governments resort to the printing press, hand out money, but only for a limited time as the value of the currency becomes inflated to the point of uselessness. So from where will come the profits of the monopolists?
2 Likes
It is now proposed that even ships should be battery driven. The essential raw material of the battery is lithium (main source, Australia). Advantage of converting from petroleum to batteries? âLower emissionsâ (if that is an advantage at all). Disadvantage? Economic. Estimates of energy use for lithium-ion battery cell manufacturing: around 50â65 kWh of electricity per 1 kWh of battery capacity, not including other steps of the supply chain, such as mining and processing of materials. !!!
3 Likes
We need Trump back. The man who accomplished jobs âunder budget, ahead of scheduleâ, and to a high standard of excellence. The leader who knows we must have energy-independence and how to ensure it. Who urged American manufacturers to bring their factories and jobs back to the US from abroad. The man who made the nation prosperous, advanced the disadvantaged, loves America. The man who achieved real progress - though he was bound in chains, had heavy weights attached to him, had doors closed and bolted against him, was sabotaged, denigrated, lied about, thwarted in every conceivable way. Our Hercules.
3 Likes
Yes! Its great to think what he could have, and may still, accomplish if heâs given the chance.
Those chains and weights need to be tied to the opposition.
The only thing I can surmise about these global monopolies is that they intend to orchestrate a âcontrolledâ crash, or decline, until they gain full power - and then re-start it all (Great Reset) under their own control. At that point they may even take away âclimateâ restrictions, since those are their own bogus, unnecessary invention, and return to full production, with serf labor, of course.
3 Likes
It is puzzling to me. The only rationale I can think of is that there are people, in positions of great power and influence, who actually believe that the Earth is suffering such huge environmental degradation; from over population, huge resource extraction and catastophic climate change, that incremental change is no longer an option. I do not know who these people are to the extent that I could name them, but clearly the UN, the WEF, the Davos crowd, the EU and Washington DC bureaucracies are full of them.
They do not believe that they will be significantly impacted by a âcrashâ, whatever specifically that means, and that the sacrifice of others is a small price to pay (omelettes etc.) . We do know that many of these people believe that the maximum sustainable human population of the world is 500 million, so approximately 7 billion people have to âdisappearâ, and over a fairly short time span (25 years?) And the growth in population has to be stopped, and reversed.
This degree of hubris is unbelievable, but we have seen decisions of this type take place before; Wannsee conference?
It is conceivable to me that this is happening, and that stopping it will require a political miracle, or catastrophe. Even if I was sure that it was happening, there isnât a thing I could do about it.
2 Likes
There are people, well qualified in the field, who believe that the Covid vaccination program is a population control device, in that the âvaccinesâ have the side effect of suppressing the human immune system. Dr Elizabeth Eads, for instance, believes that millions of people will contract AIDS by the end of 2022. This will make them highly susceptible to diseases such as cancer.
To me this is bewildering to say the least, but there has to be a reason why OTC remedies were banned, and not just in the US, but across the western world. Was this to make sure that the population could be stampeded through panic into getting the "vaccineâ?
What about the orchestrated hounding of any experts who disagreed with the official policy?
Duck, etc!
2 Likes
Shortages of food for INFANTS now begin:
3 Likes
Thatâs where they may be making their biggest mistake I think, because they may have underestimated public dissent and growing awareness of what they are really up to . Perhaps the word crash is the wrong one though, you may have a point there, perhaps we should be expecting something more like a controlled recession or series of recessions. That is after all what we have already seen since the start of 2020, a deliberate throttling of the economy by authoritarian political policies, but now these are being relaxed and the economy is bouncing back at least if the MSM are to be believed:
Bill Gates is the biggest farmland owner in the US remember, and Jeff Bezos is another one buying farmland, and media mogul Ted Turner owns 2 million acres according to this:
I think you might be missing my key point, which is that a reset (letâs call it that) (of some sort and severity) is inevitable because of the out of control, ever increasing, national debt. They expect a reset is therefore coming anyway and they prefer a managed reset to a chaotic one that could spiral out of control, and lead to all sorts of unexpected consequences.
Itâs not so much a matter of profiting from the chaos (although BlackRock have managed to grow so far) as protecting their existing wealth, and also introducing much tighter controls over our (increasingly pseudo) democracy. Thatâs why all these mega-rich people are buying farmland right now (itâs a trend that is too large to not be significant I believe), and probably other assets that will always hold value even in the severest recession.
As for energy well again there wonât be no energy, it will just become much more expensive (as is already happening). You donât have to worry about the price of petrol at the pump though, or the price of energy to heat your home, when you have hundreds of billions of dollars, itâs simply not an issue at all. Itâs only the struggling poor people trying to make ends meet, the gilet jaunes, that have to worry about that.
2 Likes
You cannot have missed my point about the interdependence of industries.
So you envision a new aristocracy of landowners living on their vast self-sufficient estates ⌠with serfs doing the onerous work?
Back to feudalism?
1 Like
No not serfs in a medieval sense, robots and scientists and technicians more likely. There are already some mind-bogglingly clever machines involved in farming, and with someone like Gates running farms I think we can be confident that trend will accelerate; âsmart farmsâ I suppose will be the phrase.
Iâm trying to understand the thinking of these mega-rich people, Iâm not claiming to know exactly how they all think, and I also donât for a moment imagine they all think exactly alike (Elon Musk does seem to have quite a few maverick opinions in particular).
What does seem to be universal among that strata though is the idea that computers will increasingly make not just ordinary workers but a lot of middle class people as well redundant, and in the not too distant future, so a lot of people will become mere âuseless eatersâ (a phrase Iâm hearing a lot among dissenters now). George Bernard Shaw gets mentioned quite a bit as well (short clip):
Perhaps we might suspect that the real âdriverâ behind a lot of what they have been doing to us since early 2020 has really been aimed at population reduction - the lockdowns really did further impact the already low fertility rate in the West, even the MSM has reported on that, and maybe there is even something in the claims that the jabs were actually designed to damage fertility.
I do somewhat suspect the real motivation behind all this is not what the propaganda says, i.e. itâs not really coming from genuine concerns about climate change at all, but rather there is an idea that the masses of useless eaters need to be controlled and reduced because their existence cannot be justified in economic terms any more.
NB. Please note of course that these are not my ideas, this is an attempt to understand how they think
Remember how âessential workersâ become a phrase during the lockdowns (e.g. medical staff, supermarket workers, lorry drivers etc. were allowed to work as normal) while everybody else was âlocked downâ. Through this kind of controlled series of invented crises they can keep the essential things going, seize the opportunity to introduce more authoritarian measures with each one, and each time further curtail the âexcessesâ of âpopulismâ e.g. via the âOnline Safety Billâ preventing dissent about the jabs, while really avoiding the uncontrolled collapse that would occur if they just let the debt continue to get bigger until eventually people stopped buying bonds.
2 Likes
Hereâs a good example, a rice planting machine that must have replaced a lot of field workers:
3 Likes
The machines are marvelous.
Now try tracing all the industries involved in their production. (Remember how many are involved in just the making of a pencil - as demonstrated in the famous essay, âI, Pencilâ.) How many are still producing their pieces in a crashed economy?
The machines make mass-production possible. For one farmerâs family? Well, yes, just for him and his wife and kids and the scientists, experts, technicians and their wives and kids who live on the estate. Because there is no mass-distribution in a crashed economy.
How self-sufficient can even the most self-sufficient American farm get to be?
2 Likes