Monthly Archives: January 2012

Carbon Credits: The Domestication of the Human Species

2012: Crossroads for Humanity

Part I: The nature of the global crisis

Ch 1: Prognosis 2012

The elite agenda for social transformation

Richard K. Moore

Table of Contents: 2012: Crossroads for Humanity

Whatever the exact date, all the threads will come together, geopolitically and domestically, and the world will change.   It will be a new era, just as capitalism was a new era after aristocracy, and the Dark Ages followed the era of the Roman Empire.   Each era has its own structure, its own economics, its own social forms, and its own mythology.   These things must relate to one another coherently, and their nature follows from the fundamental power relationships and economic circumstances of the system.

The accuracy of the prognosis, as prediction, is of course impossible to know in advance.   However each part of the prognosis has been based on precedents that have been set, modus operandi that has been observed, trends that have been initiated, sentiments that have been expressed, signals that have been given, and actions that have been taken whose consequences can be confidently predicted.

Historical background — the establishment of capitalist supremacy

When the Industrial Revolution began in Britain, in the late 1700s, there was lots of money to be made by investing in factories and mills, by opening up new markets, and by gaining control of sources of raw materials.   The folks who had the most money to invest, however, were not so much in Britain but more in Holland.   Holland had been the leading Western power in the 1600s, and its bankers were the leading capitalists.   In pursuit of profit, Dutch capital flowed to the British stock market, and thus the Dutch funded the rise of Britain, who subsequently eclipsed Holland both economically and geopolitically.

In this way British industrialism came to be dominated by wealthy investors, and capitalism became the dominant economic system.   This led to a major social transformation.   Britain had been essentially an aristocratic society, dominated by landholding families.   As capitalism became dominant economically, capitalists became dominant politically.   Tax structures and import-export policies were gradually changed to favor investors over landowners.

It was no longer economically viable to simply maintain an estate in the countryside: one needed to develop it, turn it to more productive use.   Victorian dramas are filled with stories of aristocratic families who fall on hard times, and are forced to sell off their properties.   For dramatic purposes, this decline is typically attributed to a failure in some character, a weak eldest son perhaps.   But in fact the decline of aristocracy was part of a larger social transformation brought on by the rise of capitalism.

The business of the capitalist is the management of capital, and this management is generally handled through the mediation of banks and brokerage houses.   It should not be surprising that investment bankers came to occupy the top of the hierarchy of capitalist wealth and power.   And in fact, there are a handful of banking families, including the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, who have come to dominate economic and political affairs in the Western world.

Unlike aristocrats, capitalists are not tied to a place, or to the maintenance of a place.   Capital is disloyal and mobileit flows to where the most growth can be found, as it flowed from Holland to Britain, then from Britain to the USA, and most recently from everywhere to China.   Just as a copper mine might be exploited and then abandoned, so under capitalism a whole nation can be exploited and then abandoned, as we see in the rusting industrial areas of America and Britain.

This detachment from place leads to a different kind of geopolitics under capitalism, as compared to aristocracy.   A king goes to war when he sees an advantage to his nation in doing so.   Historians can ‘explain’ the wars of pre-capitalist days, in terms of the aggrandizement of monarchs and nations.

A capitalist stirs up a war in order to make profits, and in fact our elite banking families have financed both sides of most military conflicts since at least World War 1.   Hence historians have a hard time ‘explaining’ World War 1 in terms of national motivations and objectives.

In pre-capitalist days warfare was like chess, each side trying to win.   Under capitalism warfare is more like a casino, where the players battle it out as long as they can get credit for more chips, and the real winner always turns out to be the house — the bankers who finance the war and decide who will be the last man standing.   Not only are wars the most profitable of all capitalist ventures, but by choosing the winners, and managing the reconstruction, the elite banking families are able, over time, to tune the geopolitical configuration to suit their own interests.

Nations and populations are but pawns in their games.   Millions die in wars, infrastructures are destroyed, and while the world mourns, the bankers are counting their winnings and making plans for their postwar reconstruction investments.

From their position of power, as the financiers of governments, the banking elite have over time perfected their methods of control.   Staying always behind the scenes, they pull the strings controlling the media, the political parties, the intelligence agencies, the stock markets, and the offices of government.   And perhaps their greatest lever of power is their control over currencies.   By means of their central-bank scam, they engineer boom and bust cycles, and they print money from nothing and then loan it at interest to governments.   The power of the banking elites is both absolute and subtle…

Some of the biggest men in the United States are afraid of something.   They know there is a power somewhere, so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.     — President Woodrow Wilson

The end of growth — capitalists vs. capitalism

It was always inevitable, on a finite planet, that there would be a limit to economic growth.   Industrialization has enabled us to rush headlong toward that limit over the past two centuries.   Production has become ever more efficient, markets have become ever more global, and finally we have reached the point where the paradigm of perpetual growth can no longer be maintained.

Indeed, that point was actually reached by about 1970.   Since then capital has not so much sought growth through increased production, but rather by extracting greater returns from relatively flat production levels.   Hence globalization, which moved production to low-waged areas, providing greater profit margins.   Hence privatization, which transfers revenue streams to investors that formerly went to national treasuries.   Hence derivative and currency markets, which create the electronic illusion of economic growth, without actually producing anything in the real world.

If one studies the collapse of civilizations, one learns that failure-to-adapt is fatal.   Continuing on the path of pursuing growth would be such a failure to adapt.   And if one reads the financial pages these days, one finds that it is full of doomsayers.   We read that the Eurozone is doomed, and Greece is just the first casualty.   We read that stimulus packages are not working, unemployment is increasing, the dollar is in deep trouble, growth continues to stagnate, business real estate will be the next bubble to burst, etc.   It is easy to get the impression that capitalism is failing to adapt, and that our societies are in danger of collapsing into chaos.

Such an impression would be partly right and partly wrong.   In order to understand the real situation we need to make a clear distinction between the capitalist elite and capitalism itself.   Capitalism is an economic system driven by growth; the capitalist elite are the folks who have managed to gain control of the Western world while capitalism has operated over the past two centuries.   The capitalist system is past its sell-by date, the banking elite are well aware of that fact — and they are adapting.

Capitalism is a vehicle that helped bring the bankers to absolute power, but they have no more loyalty to that system than they have to place, or to anything or anyone else.   As mentioned earlier, they think on a global scale, with nations and populations as pawns.   They define what money is and they issue it, just like the banker in a game of Monopoly.   They can also make up a new game with a new kind of money.   They have long outgrown any need to rely on any particular economic system in order to maintain their power.   Capitalism was handy in an era of rapid growth.   For an era of non-growth, a different game is being prepared.

Thus, capitalism has not been allowed to die a natural death.   First it was put on a life-support system, as mentioned above, with globalization, privatization, derivative markets, etc.   Then it was injected with a euthanasia death-drug, in the form of toxic derivatives.   And when the planned collapse occurred, rather than industrial capitalism being bailed out, the elite bankers were bailed out.   It’s not that the banks were too big to fail, rather the bankers were too powerful to fail.   They made governments an offer they couldn’t refuse.

The outcome of the trillion-dollar bailouts was easily predictable, although you wouldn’t know that from reading the financial pages.   National budgets were already stretched, and they certainly did not have reserves available to service the bailouts.   Thus the bailouts amounted to nothing more than the taking on of immense new debts by governments.   In order to fulfill the bailout commitments, the money would need to be borrowed from the same financial institutions that were being bailed out.

With the bailouts, Western governments delivered their nations in hock to the bankers.   The governments are now in perpetual debt bondage to the bankers.   Rather than the banks going into receivership, governments are now in receivership.   Obama’s cabinet and advisors are nearly all from Wall Street; they are in the White House so they can keep close watch over their new acquisition, the once sovereign USA.   Perhaps they will soon be presiding over its liquidation.

The bankers are now in control of national budgets.   They say what can be funded and what can’t.   When it comes to financing their wars and weapons production, no limits are set.   When it comes to public services, then we are told deficits must be held in check.   The situation was expressed very well by Brian Cowan, Ireland’s government chief.   In the very same week that Ireland pledged 200 billion Euro to bailout the banks, he was asked why he was cutting a few million Euro off of critical service budgets.   He replied, “I’m sorry, but the funds just aren’t there”.   Of course they’re not there!   The treasury was given away.   The cupboard is bare.

As we might expect, the highest priority for budgets is servicing the debt to the banks.   Just as most of the third world is in debt slavery to the IMF, so the whole West is now in debt slavery to its own central banks.   Greece is the harbinger of what is to happen everywhere.

The carbon economy — controlling consumption

In a non-growth economy, the mechanisms of production will become relatively static.   Instead of corporations competing to innovate, we’ll have production bureaucracies.   They’ll be semi-state, semi-private bureaucracies, concerned about budgets and quotas rather than growth, somewhat along the lines of the Soviet model.   Such an environment is not driven by a need for growth capital, and it does not enable a profitable game of Monopoly.

We can already see steps being taken to shift the corporate model towards the bureaucratic model, through increased government intervention in economic affairs.   With the Wall Street bailouts, the forced restructuring of General Motors, the call for centralized micromanagement of banking and industry, and the mandating of health insurance coverage, the government is saying that the market is to be superseded by government directives.   Not that we should bemoan the demise of exploitive capitalism, but before celebrating we need to understand what it is being replaced with.

In an era of capitalism and growth, the focus of the game has been on the production side of the economy.   The game was aimed at controlling the means of growth: access to capital.   The growth-engine of capitalism created the demand for capital; the bankers controlled the supply.   Taxes were mostly based on income, again related to the production side of the economy.

In an era of non-growth, the focus of the game will be on the consumption side of the economy.   The game will be aimed at controlling the necessities of life: access to food and energy.   Population creates the demand for the necessities of life; the bankers intend to control the supply.   Taxes will be mostly based on consumption, particularly of energy.   That’s why they’re pushing for carbon taxes and carbon credits.

Already in Britain there is talk of carbon quotas, like gasoline rationing in wartime.   It’s not just that you’ll pay taxes on energy, but the amount of energy you can consume will be determined by government directive.   Carbon credits will be issued to you, which you can use for driving, for heating, or on rare occasions for air travel.   Also in Britain, the highways are being wired so that they can track how many miles you drive, tax you accordingly, and penalize you if you travel over your limit.   We can expect these kinds of things to spread throughout the West, as it’s the same international bankers who are in charge everywhere.

In terms of propaganda, this carbon-credit regime is being sold as a solution to global warming and peak oil.   The propaganda campaign has been very successful, and the whole environmental movement has been captured by it.   In Copenhagen, demonstrators confronted the police, carrying signs in support of carbon taxes and carbon credits.   But in fact the carbon regime has nothing to do with climate or with sustainability.   It is all about micromanaging every aspect of our lives, as well as every aspect of the economy.

If the folks who are running things actually cared about sustainability, they’d be investing in efficient mass transit, and they’d be shifting agriculture from petroleum-intensive, water-intensive methods to sustainable methods.   Instead they are mandating biofuels and selling us electric cars, which are no more sustainable than standard cars.

With food prices linked to energy prices, and agriculture land being converted from food production to fuel production, the result can only be a massive increase in third-world starvation.   Depopulation has long been a stated goal in elite circles, and the Rockefeller dynasty has frequently been involved in eugenics projects of various kinds.   Genocide through imposed poverty is already a model being pursued successfully in Africa, and biofuels are systematically expanding that program.

Just as taxes on tobacco don’t stop smoking, cap-and-trade markets will not stop oil consumption.   There will be an illusion of carbon reduction, based on phony accounting, where replacing a rainforest with a plantation is counted as a positive, when it should be counted as a negative.   No one is talking about replacing highways or cars, and new oil fields are still being opened up.

The fact is that elites are not concerned about global warming. They know it’s not really a problem. Even I was able to figure that out, simply by looking at the publicly available temperature data: Climate science: observations vs. models.

‘The War on Terrorism’ — preparing the way for the transition

The so-called War on Terrorism has two parts.   The first part is a pretext for arbitrary abuse of citizen’s rights, whenever Homeland Security claims the action is necessary for security reasons.   The second part is a pretext for US military aggression anywhere in the world, whenever the White House claims that Al Qaeda is active there.

I emphasized the word ‘claims’ above, because the terrorism pretext is being used to justify arbitrary powers, both domestically and globally.   No hard evidence need be presented to Congress, the UN, or anyone else, before some nation is invaded, someone is kidnapped and tortured as a ‘;terrorist suspect’, or some new invasive security measure is implemented.   When powers are arbitrary, then we are no longer living under the rule of law, neither domestically nor internationally.   We are living under the rule of men, as you would expect in a dictatorship, or in an old-fashioned kingdom or empire.

Part 1: Preparing the way for a new social order

In a very real sense, the terrorism pretext is being used to undo everything that The Enlightenment and the republican revolutions achieved two centuries ago.   The very heart of the Bill of Rights — due process — has been abandoned.   The gulag, the concentration camp, and the secret arrest in the night — these we have always associated with fascist and communist dictatorships — and now they are not only functioning under US jurisdiction, but being justified publicly by the President himself.

Is there really a terrorist threat to the homeland, and would these measures be a sensible response to such a threat?   People are strongly divided in their answers to these questions.   Quite a bit of hard forensic evidence has come to light, including links to intelligence agencies, and my own view is that most of the dramatic ‘terrorist’ events in the US, UK, and Europe have been covert false-flag operations, providing the pretext needed by elites to pursue their agenda.

From an historical perspective this would not be at all surprising.   Such operations have been standard practice — modus operandi — in many nations, though we usually don’t get proof until years later.   For example, every war the US has been involved in has had its own phony Gulf of Tonkin Incident, or its Weapons of Mass Destruction scam, in one form or another.   It’s a formula that works.   Instant mobilization of public opinion, prompt passage without debate of enabling resolutions and legislation.   Why would the War on Terrorism be any different?

As regards motive: while Muslims have only suffered as a result of these dramatic events, our elite bankers have been able to create a police-state infrastructure that can be used to deal with any foreseeable popular resistance or civic chaos that might emerge as they prepare the way for their post-capitalist future.

With the collapse, the bailouts, and the total failure to pursue any kind of effective recovery program, the signals are very clear: the system will be allowed to collapse totally, thus clearing the ground for a pre-architected ‘solution’.   Ground Zero is the metaphor, with the capitalist economy as the Twin Towers.   And the toxic derivatives show us that the collapse is a controlled demolition.

By ‘total collapse’ I mean things like major disruptions in essentials, such as food, water, electricity, or fuel.   If there’s a war with Iran, for instance, the gulf shipping lanes would be blocked, and global oil supplies would be seriously curtailed.   If the war escalates, there would be much more serious disruption.   Or there could be a collapse of the currency, so no one is able to buy food.   A ‘terrorist attack’ could take out key hubs, and bring down electrical power and communications.   A total collapse means there’s a collapse of civil order, requiring the implementation of martial law.

Maintaining order in a time of collapse, when for example there might not be enough food to go around, will be a nasty business.   People may get quite unruly if their families are starving.   Harsh measures may be required.   In order to deal with a collapse scenario, Washington has come up with a new disaster-response protocol, that we saw tested in New Orleans and in Haiti.

The protocol begins with the assumption that there will always be civil disorder, and that establishment of robust martial-law control is the first priority.   Thus the first-responders are battle-hardened troops or mercenaries, trained and equipped for insurgencies, rather than doctors and rescue teams, bringing food and water and medical supplies.

The protocol continues with the premise that every disaster should be seen as a Shock Doctrine opportunity…

What can we gain out of this disaster?
What can we get by with, under cover of disaster, that we normally couldn’t get by with?
Do we want to clear out the riff-raff and redevelop the place?
Do we want to reduce the size the local population?

When the Shock Doctrine potential is identified in the situation, then that becomes the order of business.   Providing assistance to the victims may or may not be part of the business, as we saw in New Orleans and in Haiti.

In New Orleans the objective was to clear out the ‘riff-raff’, and in Haiti it was population reduction.   When people are pinned under rubble in an earthquake, the first 48 hours, and 72 hours, are absolutely critical points, as regards survival rates.   When the US military systematically blocked incoming aid for those critical hours, turning back doctors and emergency teams, they systematically sealed the fate of many thousands who could have been saved.

The remainder of the protocol has to do with media coverage.   The problem is to show the disaster on TV as it happens, without people noticing how grossly it’s being mishandled, from a humanitarian perspective.   This is the most difficult part of the operation — the psy-ops part — and in both New Orleans and Haiti the media coverage accomplished what it was intended to accomplish.

Total collapse, plus the Shock Doctrine, is an ideal formula for re-engineering society.   Consider how Japan and Germany were socially and politically transformed by the postwar reconstruction process.   Those were exercises in social engineering, as were the preceding transformations under Mussolini and Hitler.   Although the outcomes were quite different, in each case a total collapse / defeat was the preamble to reconstruction.

A total collapse of the capitalist economy is simply the application of a proven formula, but on a global scale.   The second part of the formula will be some new social order, or perhaps some old social order, or some mixture. Something appropriate to a non-growth, command economy.

That’s Part 1 of the War on Terrorism: it has enabled the creation of the police-state infrastructures required to deal with the collapse of society, and to provide security for the reconstruction process.

Part 2: Preparing the way for global domination

So far we’ve been looking mainly at the West, and the plans of Western elites regarding a post-capitalist regime.   We now need to bring Russia and China into the picture.   Both nations have resisted being tamed by the Western banking elite.   They still make their decisions on the basis of their perceived national interests.   They are also working very closely together, economically and militarily.

If the world goes on, business as usual, it is only a matter of time before China eclipses the West economically, and Russia and China together dominate geopolitics.   Strategic thinkers have long talked about the ‘Grand Chessboard’, about how Eurasia, with its land mass, population, and resources, is the natural power center of the world.   In a very real sense, their time has come.

However, for obvious reasons, this business-as-usual scenario is not to the liking of our Western banking elites.   They intend to intervene in the natural course of events, as they have so often in the past, as they did with the two world wars.   They do not intend for their power base to be eclipsed by Russia and China.

The US has surrounded Russia and China with military bases, and it is setting up a ring of anti-missile systems around their borders.   Meanwhile the Pentagon is spending trillions developing a first-strike capability, with space-based weapons systems, control-of-theater capability, forward-based ‘tactical’ nukes, etc.   The anti-missile systems are an important part of a first-strike strategy, reducing the ability of Russia or China to retaliate.

These elaborate military preparations are not in response to any threat from Russia or China.   Those two would be quite happy to see a stable, multi-polar world.   They’d be quite happy to support substantial nuclear disarmament globally.   The Pentagon’s war preparations mean only one thing: the Western elites are not going to give up their position of global dominance.

The War on Terrorism has been essential in justifying the astronomical military budgets required for these massive military deployments.   Besides, the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are themselves part of the encirclement strategy, as well as serving to control oil sources and pipeline routes.

There may or may not be a World War 3, but all of these preparations make it clear that our banking elite intend to preside over a global system, by hook or by crook.   If they wanted a peaceful arrangement, a splitting of the third-world pie, so to speak, it could have been easily arranged at any time.   It is only our elite bankers who are obsessed with world domination.

It is possible that nuclear war is a ‘desired outcome’, accomplishing depopulation, and making the collapse even more total.   Or perhaps China and Russia will be given an offer they can’t refuse: Surrender your economic sovereignty to our global system, or face the consequences.

One way or another, the elite bankers, the masters of the universe, intend to preside over a micromanaged global system.   The collapse project is now well underway, and the ‘surround your enemy’ project seems to be more or less completed.   From a strategic perspective, there will be some trigger point, some stage in the economic collapse scenario, when geopolitical confrontation is judged to be most advantageous.   It’s a multi-dimensional chess board, and with the stakes so high, you can rest assured that the timing of the various moves will be carefully coordinated.   And from the overall shape of the board, we seem to be nearing the endgame.

Prognosis 2012 — a Neo Dark Age

2012 might not be the exact year, but it’s difficult to see the endgame lasting much beyond that, and the masters of the universe love symbolism, as with 911 (both in Chile and in Manhattan), KLA 007, and others.   2012 is loaded with symbolism, eg. the Mayan Calendar, and the Internet is buzzing with various 2012-related prophecies, survival strategies, anticipated alien interventions, alignments with galactic radiation fields, etc.   And then there is the Hollywood film, 2012, which explicitly portrays the demise of most of humanity, and the pre-planned salvation of a select few.   One never knows with Hollywood productions, what is escapist fantasy, and what is aimed at preparing the public mind symbolically for what is to come.

Whatever the exact date, all the threads will come together, geopolitically and domestically, and the world will change.   It will be a new era, just as capitalism was a new era after aristocracy, and the Dark Ages followed the era of the Roman Empire.   Each era has its own structure, its own economics, its own social forms, and its own mythology.   These things must relate to one another coherently, and their nature follows from the fundamental power relationships and economic circumstances of the system.

In our post-2012 world, we have for the first time one centralized global government, and one ruling elite clique, a kind of extended royal family, the lords of finance.   As we can see with the IMF, WHO, and the WTO, and the other pieces of the embryonic world government, the institutions of governance will make no pretensions about popular representation or democratic responsiveness.   Rule will be by means of autocratic global bureaucracies, who take their marching orders from the royal family.   This model has already been operating for some time, within its various spheres of influence, as with the restructuring programs forced on the third world, as a condition for getting financing.

Whenever there is a change of era, the previous era is always demonized in mythology.   In the Garden of Eden story the serpent is demonized — a revered symbol in paganism, the predecessor to Christianity.   With the rise of European nation states, the Catholic Church was demonized, and Protestantism introduced.   When republics came along, the demonization of monarchs was an important part of the process.   In the post-2012 world, democracy and national sovereignty will be demonized.   This will be very important, in getting people to accept totalitarian rule

In those terrible dark days, before the blessed unification of humanity, anarchy reigned in the world.   One nation would attack another, no better than predators in the wild.   Nations had no coherent policies; voters would swing from one party to another, keeping governments always in transition and confusion.   How did they ever think that masses of semi-educated people could govern themselves, and run a complex society?   Democracy was an ill-conceived experiment that led only to corruption and chaotic governance.   How lucky we are to be in this well-ordered world, where humanity has finally grown up, and those with the best expertise make the decisions.

The economics of non-growth are radically different than capitalist economics.   The unit of exchange is likely to be a carbon credit, entitling you to consume the equivalent of one kilogram of fuel.   Everything will have a carbon value, allegedly based on how much energy it took to produce it and transport it to market.   ‘Green consciousness’ will be a primary ethic, conditioned early into children…

Getting by with less is a virtue; using energy is anti-social; austerity is a responsible and necessary condition.

As with every currency, the bankers will want to manage the scarcity of carbon credits, and that’s where global warming alarmism becomes important.   Regardless of the availability of resources, carbon credits can be kept arbitrarily scarce simply by setting carbon budgets, based on directives from the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), another of our emerging units of global bureaucratic governance.   Such IPCC directives will be the equivalent of the Federal Reserve announcing a change in interest rates.   Those budgets set the scale of economic activity.

Presumably nations will continue to exist, as official units of governance.   However security and policing will be largely centralized and privatized.   Like the Roman Legions, the security apparatus will be loyal to the center of empire, not to the place where someone happens to be stationed.   We have seen this trend already in the US, as mercenaries have become big business, and police forces are increasingly federalized, militarized, and alienated from the general public.

Just as airports have now been federalized, all transport systems will be under the jurisdiction of the security apparatus.   Terrorism will continue as an ongoing bogey-man, justifying whatever security procedures are deemed desirable for social-control purposes.   The whole security apparatus will have a monolithic quality to it, a similarity of character regardless of the specific security tasks or location.   Everyone dressed in the same Evil Empire black outfits, with big florescent letters on the back of their flack jackets.   In essence, the security apparatus will be an occupying army, the emperor’s garrison in the provinces.

On a daily basis, you will need to go through checkpoints of various kinds, with varying levels of security requirements.   This is where biometrics becomes important.   If people can be implanted with chips, then much of the security can be automated, and everyone can be tracked at all times, and their past activity retrieved.   The chip links into your credit balance, so you’ve got all your currency always with you, along with your medical records and lots else that you don’t know about.

There is very little left as regards national sovereignty.   Nothing much in the way of foreign policy will have any meaning.   With security marching to its own law and its distant drummer, the main role of so-called ‘government’ will be to allocate and administer the carbon-credit budget that it receives from the IPCC.   The IPCC decides how much wealth a nation will receive in a given year, and the government then decides how to distribute that wealth in the form of public services and entitlements.   Wealth being measured by the entitlement to expend energy.

In a fundamental sense, this is how things already are, following the collapse and the bailouts.   Because governments are so deeply in debt, the bankers are able to dictate the terms of national budgets, as a condition of keeping credit lines open.   The carbon economy, with its centrally determined budgets, provides a much simpler and more direct way of micromanaging economic activity and resource distribution throughout the globe.

In order to clear the way for the carbon-credit economy, it will be necessary for Western currencies to collapse, to become worthless, as nations become increasingly insolvent, and the global financial system continues to be systematically dismantled.   The carbon currency will be introduced as an enlightened, progressive ‘solution’ to the crisis, a currency linked to something real, and to sustainability.   The old monetary system will be demonized, and again the mythology will contain much that is true…

The pursuit of money is the root of all evil, and the capitalist system was inherently evil.   It encouraged greed, and consumption, and it cared nothing about wasting resources.   People thought the more money they had, the better off they were.   How much wiser we are now, to live within our means, and to understand that a credit is a token of stewardship.

Culturally, the post-capitalist era will be a bit like the medieval era, with aristocrats and lords on top, and the rest peasants and serfs.   A definite upper class and lower class.   Just as only the old upper class had horses and carriages, only the new upper class will be entitled to access substantial carbon credits.   Wealth will be measured by entitlements, more than by acquisitions or earnings.   Those outside the bureaucratic hierarchies are the serfs, with subsistence entitlements.   Within the bureaucracies, entitlements are related to rank in the hierarchy.   Those who operate in the central global institutions are lords of empire, with unlimited access to credits.

But there is no sequestering of wealth, or building of economic empires, outside the structures of the designated bureaucracies.   Entitlements are about access to resources and facilities, to be used or not used, but not to be saved and used as capital.   The flow of entitlements comes downward, micromanaged from the top.   It’s a dole economy, at all levels, for people and governments alike — the global regimentation of consumption.   As regards regimentation, the post-capitalist culture will also be a bit like the Soviet system…   Here’s your entitlement card, here’s your job assignment, and here’s where you’ll be living.

With the pervasive security apparatus, and the micromanagement of economic activity, the scenario is clearly about fine-grained social control, according to centralized guidelines and directives.   Presumably media will be carefully programmed, with escapist trivia, and a sophisticated version of 1984-style groupthink propaganda pseudo-news, which is pretty much what we already have today.   The non-commercial Internet, if there is one, will be limited to monitored, officially-designated chat sites, and other kinds of sanitized forums.

With such a focus on social micromanagement, and because of various indicators, I do not expect the family unit to survive in the new era, and I expect child-abuse alarmism will be the lever used to destabilize the family.   The stage has been set with all the revelations about church and institutional child sexual abuse.

Such revelations could have been uncovered any time in the past century, but the media spotlight turned on them at a certain time, just as all these other transitional things have been happening.   People are now aware that widespread child abuse happens, and they have been conditioned to support strong measures to prevent it.

More indicators…  Whenever I turn on the TV, I see at least one public-service ad, with shocking images, about children who are physically or sexually abused, or criminally neglected, in their own homes.

And there’s a TV series about social workers, where they dramatize the conflicts between parental powers and the powers of the state, as regards children.   There is a sense in which the series seems ’balanced’, in that social services sometimes makes mistakes.   But the main message of the series is that social workers have ’good hearts’ and ’integrity’, and ’know about children’, whereas parents are a mixed bag, and are in some cases really bad.

It is easy to see how the category of abuse can be expanded, to include parents who don’t follow vaccination schedules, whose purchase records don’t indicate healthy diets, who have dubious psychological profiles, etc.   The state of poverty could be deemed abusive neglect.

With the right media campaign, abuse alarmism would be easy to stir up.   Ultimately, a ‘child rights’ movement becomes an anti-family movement.   The state must directly protect the child from birth.   The family is demonized…

How scary were the old days, when unlicensed, untrained couples had total control over vulnerable children, behind closed doors, with whatever neuroses, addictions, or perversions the parents happened to possess.   How did this vestige of patriarchal slavery, this safe-house den of abuse, continue so long to exist, and not be recognized for what it was?   How much better off we are now, with children being raised scientifically, by trained staff, where they are taught healthy values.

Ever since public education was introduced, the state and the family have competed to control childhood conditioning.   In religious families, the church has made its own contribution to conditioning.   In the micromanaged post-capitalist future, with its Shock Doctrine birth scenario, it would make good sense to take that opportunity to implement the ‘final solution’ of social control, which is for the state to monopolize child raising.   This would eliminate from society the parent-child bond, and hence family-related bonds in general.   No longer is there a concept of relatives.   There’s just worker bees, security bees, and queen bees, who dole out the honey.


This has been an extensive and somewhat detailed prognosis, regarding the architecture of the post-capitalist regime, and the transition process required to bring it about.   The term ‘new world order’ is too weak a term to characterize the radical nature of the social transformation anticipated in the prognosis.

A more apt characterization would be a ’quantum leap in the domestication of the human species’.   Micromanaged lives and microprogrammed beliefs and thoughts.   A once wild primate species transformed into something resembling more a bee or ant culture.   Needless to say, regular use of psychotropic drugs would be mandated, so that people could cope emotionally with such a sterile, inhuman environment.

For such a profound transformation to be possible, it is easy to see that a very great shock is required, on the scale of collapse and social chaos, and possibly on the scale of a nuclear exchange.   There needs to be an implicit mandate to ‘do whatever is necessary to get society running again’.   The shock needs to leave people in a condition of total helplessness comparable to the survivors in the bombed-out rubble of Germany and Japan after World War 2.   Nothing less will do.

The accuracy of the prognosis, as prediction, is of course impossible to know in advance.   However each part of the prognosis has been based on precedents that have been set, modus operandi that has been observed, trends that have been initiated, sentiments that have been expressed, signals that have been given, and actions that have been taken whose consequences can be confidently predicted.

In addition, in looking at all of these indicators together, one sees a certain mindset,
an absolutist determination to implement the ‘ideal solution’,
without compromise,
using extreme means,
and with unbridled audacity.
World wars have been rehearsals for this historic moment.
The police state infrastructure is in place and has been tested.
The economy is in the process of collapse.
The enemy is surrounded with missiles.
Arbitrary powers have been assumed.
If not now, the ultimate prize, then when will there be a better opportunity?

Our elite planners are backed up by competent think tanks, and they know that the new society must have coherence of various kinds.   They’ve had quite a bit of experience with social engineering, nurturing the rise of fascism, and then engineering the postwar regimes.   They understand the importance of mythology.

For example there is the mythology of the holocaust, where the story is all about extermination per se, and the story is not told of the primary mission of the concentration camps, which was to provide slave labor for war production.   And some of the companies using the slave labor were American owned, and were supplying the German war machine.   Thus does mythology, though containing truth, succeed in hiding the tracks and the crimes of elite perps, leaving others to carry the whole burden of historical demonization.

So I think there is a sound basis for anticipating the kinds of mythology that would be designed for leaving behind and rejecting the old ways, and seeing the new as a salvation.   There is a long historical precedent of era changes linked with mythology changes, often expressed in religious terms.   There will be a familiar ring to the new mythology, a remixing and re-prioritizing of familiar values and assumptions, so as to resonate with the dynamics of the new regime, and demonize the old.

The nature of the carbon economy has been somewhat clearly signaled.   Carbon budgets, and carbon credits, are clearly destined to become primary components of the economy.   As we’ve seen with the elite and grassroots supported global warming movement, the arbitrary scarcity of carbon credits can be easily regulated on the pretext of environmentalism.   And peak oil alarmism is always available as a backup.   As elite spokespeople have often expressed, when the time comes, the masses will demand the new world order.

The focus on control over consumption, resources, and distribution is implicit in the emphasis on energy limits, is latent in the geopolitical situation, as regards depletion of global resources, and is indicated by the need for a new unifying paradigm, as the growth paradigm is no longer viable.

The nature of the security apparatus has been clearly signaled
by the responses to demonstrations ever since 1998 in Seattle,
by the increased use of hardened-killer mercenaries at home and abroad,
by excessive and abusive police behavior,
by airport security procedures,
by Guantanamo and renditions,
by the creation of a domestic branch of the army, dedicated to responding to civil emergencies,
and by the way Katrina and Haiti have been handled.

The limited role of national governments, being primarily allocators of mandated budgets, has been clearly signaled by long-standing IMF policies in the third world, and by the way the bankers have been dictating to governments, in the wake of the over-extended bailout commitments.   The carbon entitlement budgeting paradigm accomplishes the same micromanagement in a much more direct way, and is the natural outcome of the push toward hard carbon limits.


Part I: The nature of the global crisis


1   Prognosis 2012
the elite agenda for social transformation

2   The Grand Story of humanity

3   The story of hierarchy

Part II: A grassroots response to the crisis


4   The emergence of localism

5   A framework for achieving economic transformation

Facilitating the emergence of democratic empowerment

Abstract: The previous chapter presented a framework for economic development, but only at an abstract level.   In any particular community, there is a lot of planning to be done, and many choices to be made, in order to achieve the potential of the framework  . In this chapter we look at how local citizens can be invited to participate in the planning process, and how this participation can grow into a full-fledged democratic process at the community level.

Part III: Global transformation as an organic process

7   The emergence of community empowerment

Abstract: When a community has created a resilient and prosperous local economy, and has developed processes that maintain community coherence while enabling ongoing community evolution, then we can say that the community has empowered itself to govern its own affairs.
Local elections become a process where a slate of officials are elected unanimously, and the functions of the official government are effectively integrated into the community’s self-governance processes, as was always supposed to be the case in a democratic society — the government responding to the will of the people.

8   A viral model of cultural transformation

Abstract: The basic premise of the localization movement has always been that society could be transformed by transforming one community at a time, as regards achieving sustainability, local self-sufficiency, etc.   Expanding on that premise, if community empowerment can be achieved in a few seed communities, we could expect that widespread interest would develop in other communities.
The model, particularly the processes that enable community coherence, might with some real likelihood go viral, leading to a grassroots cultural transformation on a society-wide basis.   Only some such viral process, based on some appropriate seed, can hope to transform a society which has become so tightly controlled from the center by unaccountable elites.

9   An organic global society

Abstract: The coherence that exists in our current societies is imposed from the center, by laws, taxes, government policies, etc.   It is a coherence based on uniformity and conformance to rules.   In a natural ecosystem coherence emerges spontaneously through the voluntary interaction of autonomous organisms.   Organic coherence is based on diversity and on spontaneous responses to changing circumstances.

An empowered community operates as an organic system, its coherence emerging through the voluntary interaction of autonomous citizens.   If every community in the world were empowered in this way, and if each community is an autonomous political unit, then we would have an organic global society.   Coherence in such a society emerges from the voluntary interaction of autonomous communities.   It is a coherence based on diversity and on spontaneous responses to changing circumstances.


Filed under Uncategorized

America’s Last Chance

Global Research, January 15, 2012


America has one last chance, and it is a very slim one. Americans can elect Ron Paul President, or they can descend into tyranny.

Why is Ron Paul America’s last chance?

Because he is the only candidate who is not owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military-security complex, Wall Street, and the Israel Lobby.

All of the others, including President Obama, are owned by exactly the same interest groups. There are no differences between them. Every candidate except Ron Paul stands for war and a police state, and all have demonstrated their complete and total subservience to Israel. The fact that there is no difference between them is made perfectly clear by the absence of substantive issues in the campaigns of the Republican candidates.

Only Ron Paul deals with real issues, so he is excluded from “debates” in which the other Republican candidates throw mud at one another: “Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.” “Romney loves to fire people.”

The mindlessness repels.

More importantly, only Ron Paul respects the US Constitution and its protection of civil liberty. Only Ron Paul understands that if the Constitution cannot be resurrected from its public murder by Congress and the executive branch, then Americans are lost to tyranny.

There isn’t much time in which to revive the Constitution. One more presidential term with no habeas corpus and no due process for US citizens and with torture and assassination of US citizens by their own government, and it will be too late. Tyranny will have been firmly institutionalized, and too many Americans from the lowly to the high and mighty will have been implicated in the crimes of the state. Extensive guilt and complicity will make it impossible to restore the accountability of government to law.

If Ron Paul is not elected president in this year’s election, by 2016 American liberty will be in a forgotten grave in a forgotten grave yard.

Having said this, there is no way Ron Paul can be elected, for these reasons:

Not enough Americans understand that the “war on terror” has been used to create a police state. The brainwashed citizenry believe that the police state is making them safe from terrorists.

Liberals, progressives, and the left-wing oppose Ron Paul, claiming that “he would abolish the social safety net, privatize Social Security and Medicare, throw the widows and orphans into the street, abolish the Federal Reserve,” etc.

Apparently, liberals, progressives, and the left-wing do not understand that privatizing Social Security and Medicare and destroying the social safety net are policies that many conservative Republicans favor and are policies that Wall Street is forcing on both political parties. In contrast, a President Ron Paul would be isolated in the White House and would never be able to muster the support of Congress and the powerful interest groups to achieve such radical changes. Moreover, Ron Paul has made it clear that a welfare-free state cannot be achieved by decree but only by creating an economy in which opportunity exists for people to stand on their own feet. Ron Paul has said that he does not support ending welfare before an economy is created that makes a welfare state unnecessary.

Candidate Paul cannot take any steps to reassure Americans that he would not throw them to the mercy of the free market, because his libertarian base would turn on him as another unprincipled politician willing to sacrifice his principles for political expediency. If libertarians were not inflexible, candidate Paul could endorse Ron Unz’s proposal to solve the illegal immigration problem by raising the minimum wage to $12 an hour, so that Americans could afford to work the jobs that are taken by illegals.

Economist James K. Galbraith is probably correct that Unz’s proposal would boost the economy by injecting purchasing power and that the unemployment would be largely confined to illegals who would return to their home country. However, if Ron Paul were to treat Unz’s proposal as one worthy of study and consideration, libertarian ideologues would write him off. Whatever liberal/progressive support he gained would be offset by the loss of his libertarian base.

Why can’t libertarians be as intelligent as Ron Unz and see that if the Constitution is lost all that remains is tyranny?

In short, Americans cannot see beyond their ideologies to the real issue, which is the choice between the Constitution and tyranny.

So we hear absurd accusations that Ron Paul, a libertarian “is a racist.” “Ron Paul is an anti-semite.” “Ron Paul would favor the rich and hurt the poor.”

We don’t hear “Ron Paul would restore and protect the US Constitution.”

What do Americans think life will be like in the absence of the Constitution? I will tell you what it will be like, but first let’s consider the obstacles Ron Paul would face if he were to win the Republican nomination and if he were to be elected president.

In my opinion, if Ron Paul were to win the Republican nomination, the Republican Party would conspire to refuse it to him. The party would simply nominate a different candidate.

If despite everything, Ron Paul were to end up in the White House, he would not be able to form a government that would support his policies. Appointments to cabinet secretaries and assistant secretaries that would support his policies could not be confirmed by the US Senate. President Paul would have to appoint whomever the Senate would confirm in order to form a government. The Senate’s appointees would undermine his policies.

What a President Ron Paul could do, assuming Congress, controlled by powerful private interest groups, did not impeach him on trumped up charges, would be to use whatever forums that might be permitted him to explain to the public, judges, and law schools that the danger from terrorists is miniscule compared to the danger from a government unaccountable to law and the Constitution.

The reason we should vote for Ron Paul is to signal to the powers that be that we understand what they are doing to us. If Paul were to receive a large vote, it could have two good effects. One could be to introduce some caution into the establishment that would slow the march into more war and tyranny. The other is it would signal to Washington’s European and Japanese puppets that not all Americans are stupid sheep. Such an indication could make Washington’s puppet states more cautious and less cooperative with Washington’s drive for world hegemony.

What America Without the Constitution Will Be Like

In the January 4 Huff Post, attorney and author John Whitehead reported on the militarization of local police. Some police forces are now equipped with spy drones. Whitehead reports that a drone manufacturer, AeroVironment Inc., plans to sell 18,000 drones to police departments throughout the country. The company is also advertising a small drone, the “Switchblade,” which can track a person, land on the person and explode.

How long before Americans will be spied upon or murdered as extremists at the discretion of local police?

Recognizing the privacy danger, if not the murder danger, the American Civil Liberties Union has issued a report, “Protecting Privacy From Aerial Surveillance.”

The ACLU believes, correctly, that liberty is threatened by “a surveillance society in which our every move is monitored, tracked, recorded, and scrutinized by authorities.”

The ACLU calls on Congress to legislate privacy protections against the police use of drones. I support the ACLU because it is the most important defender of civil liberty despite other misguided activities, but I wonder what the ACLU is thinking. Congress and the federal courts have already acquiesced in the federal government’s warrantless spying on Americans by the National Security Agency. The Bush regime violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act many times, and all involved, including President Bush, should have been sent to prison for many lifetimes, as each violation carries a 5-year prison term. But the executive branch emerged scot free. No one was held accountable for clear violations of US statutory law.

The ACLU might think that although the federal executive branch has successfully elevated itself above the law, state and local police forces are still accountable. We must hope that they are, but I doubt it.

The militarization of local police has received some attention. What has not received attention is that state and local police are also being federalized. It is not only military armaments and spy technology that local police are receiving from Washington, but also an attitude toward the public along with federal oversight and the collaboration that goes with it. When Homeland Security, a federal police force, comes into states, as I know has occurred in Georgia and Tennessee, and doubtless other states, and together with the state police stop cars and trucks on Interstate highways and subject them to warrantless searches, what is happening is the de facto deputizing of the state police by Homeland Security. This is the way that Goering and Himmler federalized into the Gestapo the independent police forces of German provinces such as Prussia and Bavaria.

Homeland Security has expanded its warrantless searches far beyond “airline security.” The budding gestapo agency now conducts warrantless searches on the nation’s highways, on bus and train passengers, and at Social Security offices. On Tuesday January 3, 2012, the Social Security office in Leesburg, Florida, apparently a terrorist hotspot, became a Homeland Security checkpoint. The DHS Gestapo armed with automatic weapons and sniffer dogs demanded IDs from local residents visiting their local Social Security office.

Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said staff were not informed their offices were about to be stormed by armed federal police officers. DHS officials refused to answer questions asked by local media and left with no explanation at noon, reports

The DHS gestapo justified its takeover of a Leesburg Florida Social Security office as being an integral part of “Operational Shield,” conducted by the Federal Protective Service to detect “the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities.”

One wonders if even brainwashed flag-waving “superpatriots” can miss the message. The Social Security office of Leesburg, Florida, population 19,086 in central Florida is not a place where terrorists devoid of proper ID might be visiting. To protect America from the scant possibility that terrorists might be congregating at the Leesburg Social Security office, the tyrants in Washington sent the Federal Protective Service at who knows what cost to demand ID from locals visiting their Social Security office.

What is this all about except to establish the precedent that federal police, a new entity in American life, the Federal Protective Service, has authority over state and local police offices and can appear out of the blue to interrogate local citizens.

Why the ACLU thinks it is going to get any action out of a Congress that has accommodated the executive branch’s destruction of habeas corpus, due process, and the constitutional and legal prohibitions against torture is beyond me. But at least the issue is raised. But don’t expect to hear about it from the “mainstream media.”

Americans in 2012, although only a few are aware, live in a concentration camp that is far better controlled than the one portrayed by George Orwell in 1984. Orwell, writing in the late 1940s could not imagine the technology that makes control of populations so thorough as it is today. Orwell’s protagonist could at least have hope. In 2012 with the erasure of privacy by the US government, protagonists can be eliminated by hummingbird-sized drones before they can initiate a protest, much less a rebellion.

Never in human history has a people been so easily and willingly controlled by a hostile government as Americans, who are the least free people on earth. And a large percentage of Americans still wave the flag and chant USA! USA! USA!

The Bush regime operated as if the Constitution did not exist. Any semblance of constitutional government that remained after the Bush years was terminated when Congress passed and President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act. One wonders how the National Rifle Association, the defender of the Second Amendment, will now fare. If there is no Constitution, how can there be a Second Amendment? If the President, at his discretion, can set aside habeas corpus and due process and murder citizens based on unproven suspicions, why can’t he set aside the Second Amendment?

Indeed, it is folly to expect a police state to tolerate an armed population.

The NRA is very supportive of the police and military. Now that these armed organizations are being turned against the public, how will the NRA adjust its posture?

Many NRA members, pointing to the “Oath Keepers,” former members of the military who pledge to defend the Constitution, and to police chiefs who support the Second Amendment, believe that the police and military will disobey orders to attack citizens. But we already witness constantly the gratuitous brutality of “our” police against peaceful protesters. We witness military troops all over the world murder citizens who protest government abuses. Why can’t it happen here?

If you don’t want it to happen here, you had better figure out some way to get Ron Paul into the Presidency and to get him a cabinet and subcabinet that will support him.

Meanwhile, the police state grows. On January 4, 2012, the Obama regime announced by decree, not by legislation, the creation of the Bureau of Counterterrorism which will among other tasks “seek to strengthen homeland security, countering violent extremism.”

Take a moment to think. Do you know of any “violent extremism” happening in the US? The regime is telling you that it needs a new police bureau with unaccountable powers to “strengthen homeland security” against a nonexistent bogyman.

So who will be the violent extremists who require countering by the Bureau of Counterterrorism? It will be peace activists, the Occupy Wall Street protesters, the unemployed and foreclosed homeless. It will be whoever the police state says. And there is no due process or recourse to law.

Given the facts before you, you are out of your mind if you think Ron Paul’s rhetoric against the welfare state is more important than his defense of liberty.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following.

Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research.  Global Research Articles by Paul Craig Roberts

Leave a comment

Filed under Law/Geopolitics/ Politics

US may be behind Mars probe failure: Russia

MOSCOW, January 17 (RIA Novosti)

MOSCOW: Russia on Tuesday said the failure of its Phobos-Grunt probe for Mars could have been caused by radiation from US radars, in its latest allegation of Western interference in its space programme.

“There is such a theory,” Yury Koptev the head of the scientific committee of state technology company Russian Technologies told the RIA-Novosti news agency.

“To test (the theory), an equipment block similar to the one on Phobos-Grunt will be exposed to radiation from the possible unintentional exposure to American radars,” said Koptev, a former head of Russian space agency Roscosmos.

Roscosmos is currently looking into the possible causes of its latest major space mishap, after the probe, which was launched in November, met an inglorious end Sunday when it crashed back into Earth over the Pacific Ocean.

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said Tuesday that most of the agency’s failures were aftershocks following the industry’s dark period of the 1990s, when poor funding could have led to production of faulty equipment.

“If we confirm the fact of a foreign influence on our space equipment over the part of Earth we cannot see, we will come to different conclusions,” he told Interfax in apparent reference to the West.

Roscosmos mentioned the possibility of foreign interference last week when the current agency chief Vladimir Popovkin openly asked why its failures often occurred when craft were over the western hemisphere.

“I do not want to blame anyone, but today there are some very powerful countermeasures that can be used against spacecraft whose use we cannot exclude,” he told the Izvestia daily on January 10.

Phobos-Grunt was one of the more high-profile mishaps costing $165 million and carrying also a Chinese satellite it was supposed to release in the Mars orbit.

It struck less than three months after an unmanned Progress supply ship bound for the International Space Station crashed into Siberia.

Russia also lost three navigation satellites as well as an advanced military satellite and a telecommunications satellite in the past year.

Leave a comment

Filed under Conspiracy/Coincidence