5/6/19: SCARCITY – TOO LITTLE TOO LATE
SCARCITY
TOO LITTLE TOO LATE
MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS
Wildlife and habitats are declining at an “unprecedented” rate worldwide which directly threatens human beings according to the study.
Up to a million species of plants and animals are at risk of extinction, a greater number than ever before in human history.
Many could vanish within decades.
Scientists warn that the natural world is deteriorating faster than ever as a direct result of human activity, eroding “the very foundations” of economies, livelihoods, food, health, and quality of life worldwide.
According to their assessment, a huge transformation is needed across the economy and society to protect and restore nature, which provides people with food, medicines, and other materials, crop pollination, fresh water, and quality of life.
Without such “transformational change”, the damage will continue or worsen up to 2050 and beyond, posing a direct threat to human well-being around the world, the study said.
It will also undermine existing global efforts to tackle poverty and hunger, improve health and curb climate change.
Every time I hear the words, “curb climate change,” I can’t help but hear a loop that echoes with eerie music and thoughts of the earth sizzling and watching people collapse in the streets.
I also wonder about what magic panacea exists that the United Nations has that doesn’t include a New World Order and a new green economy.
To them, that would solve everything but it is also interesting to know about why we are being told that with all of our advancements we are now on the verge of extinction.
It can be said that we are on the verge of a perfect storm of calamities, including earthquakes, famines, flooding, and drought – it is a never-ending cycle on this violent planet. Even though mankind has adapted to many of these events throughout time – it appears that as advanced as we are in the 21st century, we are told that we are about to meet our demise.
This has been repeated over and over again in the framed narrative. We are reminded every day that we are watching the climate change and that severe weather is the result of our industrial age.
We are told that the planet is heating up triggering feedback loops of runaway climate change. If this continues we are told that we can kiss most of our civilization goodbye.
The technocrats are telling us that scorching heat waves and cataclysmic fires will spark food riots, famine and mass migrations of millions. An explosion in insects will trigger widespread outbreaks of typhus, cholera, yellow fever, dengue, malaria and a host of long-dormant or even novel pathogens, unleashing epidemics reminiscent of the Black Death which killed as many as 200 million people in the 14th century.
Once-teeming metropolises would become watery ghost towns: Picture Manhattan, Tokyo, São Paulo underwater, sparsely populated colonies of hardy survivors who eke out vampire-like subterranean existences, emerging only at night when the temperatures dip into the low triple digits.
The forecast calls death by tomorrow and Armageddon by the weekend – this could be the end of life as we know it.
In all of the doom and gloom forecasting, there is no report of how the earth is a complex system that has been able to renew itself. There is also no report on how people over the centuries adapt to extreme weather conditions over time.
It appears that there are many people that have patents on environmental solutions and geoengineering projects are encouraging the masses to fear adaptation and ignore the complexity of our planet.
The narrative has been hijacked and many people are unaware of what is called the Hegelian dialectic for moving consensus thought towards a solution that benefits the elite.
In 1847, the London Communist League (Karl Marx and Frederick Engels) used Hegel’s theory of the dialectic to back up their economic theory of communism. Now, in the 21st century, Hegelian-Marxist thinking affects our entire social and political structure. The Hegelian dialectic is the framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to a predetermined solution. If we do not understand how the Hegelian dialectic shapes our perceptions of the world, then we do not know how we are helping to implement the vision. When we remain locked into dialectical thinking, we cannot see out of the box.
Hegel’s dialectic is the tool which manipulates us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. Every time we fight for or defend against an ideology we are playing a necessary role in Marx and Engels’ grand design to advance humanity into a dictatorship of the proletariat. The synthetic Hegelian solution to all these conflicts can’t be introduced unless we all take a side that will advance the agenda. The Marxist’s global agenda is moving along at breakneck speed. The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought.
When we understand what motivated Hegel, we can see his influence on all of our destinies. … Hegelian conflicts steer every political arena on the planet, from the United Nations to the major American political parties, all the way down to local school boards and community councils. Dialogues and consensus-building are primary tools of the dialectic, and terror and intimidation are also acceptable formats for obtaining the goal. The ultimate Third Way agenda is world government. Once we get what’s really going on, we can cut the strings and move our lives in original directions outside the confines of the dialectical madness. Focusing on Hegel’s and Engel’s ultimate agenda, and avoiding getting caught up in their impenetrable theories of social evolution, gives us the opportunity to think and act our way toward freedom, justice, and genuine liberty for all.
Today the dialectic is active in every political issue that encourages taking sides. We can see it in environmentalists instigating conflicts against private property owners, in democrats against republicans, in greens against libertarians, in communists against socialists, in neo-cons against traditional conservatives, in community activists against individuals, in pro-choice versus pro-life, in Christians against Muslims, in isolationists versus interventionists, in peace activists against war hawks. No matter what the issue, the invisible dialectic aims to control both the conflict and the resolution of differences, and leads everyone involved into a new cycle of conflicts.
When you speak about a shadow government, you have to tread lightly since no one can really pinpoint who is in the background dictating policy. We always tend to think of some noir-type of control, with shadowy figures in smoke-filled rooms meeting somewhere in Switzerland. While the romanticism can entertain the conspiracy-minded, the shadow government conducts its business openly with a few of the same players.
This way there can be meetings behind closed doors to discuss policies and ideas that are quite simply enabling continuity of world government instead of a sovereign government that we believe we are a part of.
Many believe that the idea of a deep state is simply a fabrication provided by the Trump administration to spin conspiracy theory about the undermining of the current administration.
However, there is a Deep State conspiracy that goes beyond that of undermining the sitting president. It is a conspiracy to render the entire world into a crisis state where the fate of humanity is at stake.
I know that sounds a bit dramatic but as far back as the Franklin Roosevelt administration there were failed coups that were organized by Nazi sympathizers and the conspiracy to overthrow world governments was carried out behind the scenes.
In the 1960s there was a deep state conspiracy involving criminal elements of our government, the CIA, the FBI perhaps even people associated with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all in the service of the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about.
This cabal might have conspired to kill John F. Kennedy because he was going to sharply change the direction of American foreign policy.
The people considered Kennedy a man of peace; however, a full and lasting peace achieved through peaceful means was a red flag for those who pocketed money from the business of war.
In terms of the military-industrial interests, there had to be a demand for their products and there had to be wars or ‘police actions‘for those products to be bought and sold. Thus, preparation for warfare and some form of warfare had to continue. Mind you, all of these proposed wars had to be done while carefully avoiding a nuclear exchange.
That was a dilemma. However, for those who were making decisions in the background, the new direction was simple: it was merely an old idea made new again. It was the ideal of a dawn of a new age, a world government that would enforce new international and worldwide law with a newly formed militarized police force that would put all of those great war mechanisms to good use.
By 1963, it was proposed that there needed to be a committee that would meet in secret to come up with alternatives to war, without bankrupting the Military Industrial Complex. This was once again part of the 1961 proposal to rein in the Communists and go into an era of peace with them.
This committee consisted of 15 experts in various academic disciplines who were selected for their expertise in their various fields. The first and last meetings were in an underground nuclear survival retreat called Iron Mountain.
1963, of course, was the same year that President John F. Kennedy made an astounding statement. On November 13, while speaking at Columbia University, President Kennedy stated, “The high office of the President of the United States of America has been used to foment a plot to destroy America’s freedom, and before I leave office, I must inform the citizens of their plight!” Ten days later, President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed.
The committee that met in secret were planning ways to continue various plans for war and chaos to destabilize world governments and crash economic stability. The goal was to set the table for a socialist world government.
The Iron Mountain Report was submitted to President Johnson in 1966. Johnson claimed that the plans that were discussed in the report would take a generation and a half to fully implement. The plan was abandoned.
The “Report from Iron Mountain” was leaked to the mainstream press in 1967. It argued that though world peace was a nice idea, the economy of war was such a vital part of global stability that there had to be other crisis that would have to be generated in order to fill the “ceasefires and “peacetime” so that governments could profit and maintain their wealth.
The report was literally a blueprint of proposed manufactured crises that the government could employ during peacetime in order to keep the war and military busy and the people demanding protection from threats. The report claimed that a gradual implementation of such crises would guarantee the need for basic social controls. There are those who believe that the proposals in the report have been employed for over 50 years conditioning the American people for acceptance of a New World Order.
The report detailed ways to create or manufacture crises that could be substitutes for war, literally a way to keep the military in business due to public demand over the fear of being harmed or killed.
The report actually admits that war or crisis is a “general social release.” According to the report:
“It provides ‘the release and redistribution of undifferentiated tensions’. In other words, it is a type of therapy. It is a ‘generational stabilizer’ that enables the “deteriorating older generation” to “maintain control of the younger, destroying it if necessary’. It clears ideology. It is a basis for international understanding. However, there are noted substitutions for war, that when gradually brought into society can have the same effect.”
This is pointed out as a “silent weapon” strategy which in turn creates a form of war that has no exchange of gunfire or bombs. According to the report, one of the silent weapons that a government can use on its people is a complete destabilization of the economy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reYJTGvIKOI
“Economic surrogates for war must meet principal criteria. They must be “wasteful,” in the common sense of the word, and they must operate outside the normal supply-demand system.” — Report from Iron Mountain
This leads to a failure of government social programs and could create a social war that has to be kept from escalating by a militarized police force.
The Report from Iron Mountain also proposes that the United States be disarmed and it will be carried out in three stages. Internal security forces provided by the United Nations will honor and enforce a treaty that will be signed where guns must be surrendered by citizens in order to maintain peace.
The Iron Mountain Report also states that in order for this to happen there will also have to be a focus on religious authority and their ability to convince their flocks to follow the law. However, there is also a section that states that if the religious authorities’ rebel there would have to be a way to expose religious organizations as corrupt and this way there would be no agonizing over the moral obligations of a government to religious freedom. If religion does not comply with the obligations of disarmament then they will be exposed as corrupt and there will be violence between sectarian factions.
This will create a need to protect those who worship and there will be and should be declarations by various religious authorities to disarm the citizenry.
This is a Hegelian way to disarm the public – exploit mass shootings in relatively safe spaces, create a reason to enforce disarmament, ask for help from the churches — if they do not comply, then exploit violence against the various religions. This will force religious authorities to encourage disarmament.
Another way to keep the people caught up in crisis is to feed them with all sorts of doomsday scenarios according to the Iron Mountain Report.
It states:
Another alternative to war, and a crisis that could spark a demand for government protection and unity with a World Government would be a manufactured “space menace.”
“It has been hotly argued that such a menace would offer the “last, best hope of peace,“ by uniting mankind against the danger of destruction by “creatures” from other planets or from outer space. Experiments have been proposed to test the credibility of an out-of-our-world invasion threat; it is possible that a few of the more difficult-to-explain “flying saucer” incidents of recent years were, in fact, early experiments of this kind.
If so, they could hardly have been judged encouraging. We anticipate no difficulties in making a “need” for a giant super space program credible for economic purposes, even were there not ample precedent; extending it, for political purposes, to include features unfortunately associated with science fiction would obviously be a more dubious undertaking.”
There are threats that are far more pressing with regard to space anomalies and near earth objects that if detected could be used to urge world governments to work on eliminating the proposed threat.
Finally, another silent weapon in the quiver for government is an environmental doomsday scenario according to the Iron Mountain Report.
“Nevertheless, an effective political substitute for war would require “alternate enemies,” some of which might seem equally far- fetched in the context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species.
Poisoning of the air and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power.
But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis for a solution.”
Keep in mind that both Kennedy and Johnson allegedly knew of the report and several other reports that were submitted as alternatives to war, alternatives that would be manufactured over time. Johnson believed that it would take at least a generation and a half to have full impact on the people.
Statistically, a generation is about 30 years. Add another twenty years of chaos building and you get 50. The new generation would have to be convinced that an alternative form of government would have to be implemented in order to save the planet from scarcity and extinction.
The proposal was first created in 1961. Johnson received in 1966 and the public was aware of the report in 1967.
Proposals of a gradual bankrupting of the system, a three-stage disarming of the world, a manufactured environmental doomsday and the announcement of a “space menace” are all part of our lives today. It has been in our literature, our news stories, and it is deeply rooted in the mass consciousness.
The question is are we really in the brink of extinction or is all of the talk about doomsday events in our future a product of Deep State greenwashing and fabricated threat assessments that are being used as condition tools for a global superstate?
Disarmament, space threats, incurable diseases, scarcity, and Climate disruption were listed as a “basis for a solution for control.”
While many of these threats are very real the exploitation of such threats are effective in moving the transition to world government, inevitable.
What it all boils down to is that according to the technocrats we are our own worst enemy.
No matter what you call it, sustainable development, comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth; it all boils down to the ideology of Hegel: Problem – Reaction – Solution or Thesis – Antithesis – Synthesis.
It simply thing that those who are behind the problem are the same people who spark a reaction and provide a solution that supports their agenda.
https://soundcloud.com/groundzeromedia/scarcity-too-little-too-late-may-06-2019
