It’s difficult to pinpoint the origin of the Doom’s Day Cult that is imposing a fascist reign of technocratic tyranny on the U.S. and in fact, the rest of the world but a good place to start is in 1956 when M. King Hubbert, a U.S. Geologist predicted that oil production in the lower 48 would peak at around 1970. Short hand for this prediction is “peak oil”. It’s not known if his prediction was based on the idea that oil is a “fossil fuel” meaning that it was the result of decaying vegetation and animals from prehistoric times but given the timeframe of his prediction, it’s pretty safe to assume that. Today however, the depths at which oil is found negates the idea of oil as a fossil fuel and is instead a product of the geothermal forces of the interior of the earth itself. Regardless, “peak oil” became the rallying cry of the sayers of doom.
In 1966, Kenneth Boulding, a U.S. economist published a paper titled, The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth. Boulding’s paper was “the first explicit application of the law of conservation of matter to describe the physical limits to growth”. In other words, the earth’s resources wouldn’t support continued economic expansion of national economies based upon the utilization of natural resources. He said that we were in a transition stage from earth as an open system with unlimited resources to earth as a closed system with diminished, limited resources. Boulding is considered to be a founding intellectual in the field of ecological economics. In 1956, he wrote a paper titled, “General Systems Theory: The Skeleton of Science” which formed the basis for his later work on the environment and economy – ecology.
Kenneth Boulding wrote his books at the early stages of the information age. Clearly, his theories were based on the potential for efficiencies and conservation that were possible with the spread of computer technology and systems in all areas of business and industry.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) established within the Executive Branch, the Council for Environmental Quality. “This statute recast the government’s role: formerly the conservator of wilderness, it now became the protector of earth, air, land, and water. The law declared Congressional intent to “create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony”, and to “assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings…”. … Having cleared all its statutory hurdles, on December 2, 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency would at last open its doors. http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/guardian-origins-epa
Russell Train was appointed to be the first Chairman of the Council for Environmental Quality. Train was at the time, the Under Secretary of the Department of the Interior. He was co-founder of the World Wildlife Federation and in 1965 was President of the Conservation Foundation, which was founded and funded by Laurence Rockefeller.
William Ruckelshaus from Indiana was the first Director of the EPA. Professor Lynton Caldwell of Indiana was the person who is acknowledged to be the author of NEPA. In a book titled, The National Environment Policy Act: An Agenda for the Future, Caldwell claims that NEPA is one of the most copied laws in history – meaning that this legislation has been passed by nearly all governments in the UN system.
Club of Rome
In 1969, David Rockefeller funded the Club of Rome which in turn sponsored a project at MIT to demonstrate the use of computers for modeling population growth, depletion of natural resources, industrialization, food production and environmental degradation. Because of the stature of the principals, Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King, co-founders of the Club of Rome, the output of the MIT project, the book, Limits to Growth published in 1972 was presented publically at the Smithsonian Institute. It was translated into 30 languages and 10 million copies were sold. This book provided the fodder for a “save the earth” radical environmental movement – funded to a large degree by the Rockefellers.
In 1991, the Club of Rome published a report titled, The First Global Revolution. In the foreword, speaking about the book, Limits to Growth, was written:
“The Club was widely criticized for what was seen as advocacy of a zero growth economy. This was never our intention. We fully accepted the pressing need for material growth of the poor countries of the world, but warned readers about the consequences of an unthinking pursuit of growth by the industrialized countries, depletion of the world resource base, deterioration of the environment, and the domination of material values in society”.
Recently, a newly discovered 1967 Joint Hearing of Congress on the Reassessment of U.S. Foreign Policy at which Aurelio Peccei testified as an expert witness revealed Peccei’s purpose along with Alexander King and David Rockefeller (who also testified), as being exactly what was stated above in the 1991 report. The objective was the transfer of productive capacity and wealth to undeveloped countries through U.S. Trade Policy.
Aurelio Peccei was an Italian Economist who wrote his master’s thesis on Lenin’s New Economic Policy and he studied at the Sorbonne and in the Soviet Union for a time. At the Hearing, Peccei testified:
“To promote trade to the benefit of developing countries, in the magnitude which would be required, we must accept in practice not only principle, the need for an international redistribution of labor and production”.
The point of including this here is to demonstrate that while there really are some tree-hugging environmentalists, the money and political power behind the environmental movement has a different objective. The “environmental movement” spawned the present “efficiency movement” the core of which is the smart grid. The collective efficiency of smart grid with it’s computerized choke hold on the economy and over our lives constitutes the pinnacle of success in evolutionary revolution – exactly as described in a 1938 article in TIME Magazine titled, COMMUNISTS: Rain Check on the Revolution in which the author wrote:
“Most important, they have swerved from a concept of immediate world revolution to one of evolution toward revolution.”
In 1974, Peccei was the originator of a project initiated in 1974 called ‘Reshaping the International Order’ (RIO). The purpose of the project was to answer the question, “what new international order should be recommended to the world’s statesmen and social groups so as to meet, to the extent practically and realistically possible, the urgent needs of today’s population and the probable needs of future generations”. In a 1976 article in TIME magazine titled, Theory: Club of Rome Revisited the subject was about a conference in Philadelphia sponsored by the First Pennsylvania Bank where Peccei promoted the idea of “one-worldism” through a “a trilogy of efforts”. The goal was to attain global peace and prosperity through economic interdependence. The first of the efforts was the RIO report published in 1976. It included the following recommendations:
- Create new international monetary reserves to finance development in Third World countries.
- Reduce tariffs on industrial products sold by developing nations
- Set up new international agencies to subsidize the conservation of resources
- New controls on multinational companies so that they heed the needs of the countries in which they do business, as well as their own welfare.
The article continues:
“Such moves would obviously substitute international planning for the workings of the free market.” The Club aims to help that planning with a computer model, developed by Edouard Pestel, professor of engineering at West Germany’s Hannover University and Mihajlo Mesarovic, director of the Systems Research Center at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. Concentrating on ten separate world regions, the model is fed data—population growth, food production, climate changes, energy supplies, etc.—that can permit economists to test scenarios for various situations. West Germany, for instance, is already using the model to find out how to transfer some industrial production to less-developed countries without harming its own economy.
Will people actually go along with such changes in growth patterns? The Club’s third effort, a sociological investigation of human goals, optimistically indicates as much. Explains Philosopher Ervin Laszlo, now working at the U.N.’s Institute for Training and Research: “The materialistic growth ethic is not an immutable expression of human nature.” Beyond this possibility of altruism, however, the Club of Rome holds out the motivation of simple self-interest. If nations do not act to equalize resources, Club members warned in Philadelphia, mankind would rush lemming-like to the disasters so well publicized by Limits to Growth.
Re-read the last sentence: If nations do not act to equalize resources, Club members warned in Philadelphia, mankind would rush lemming-like to the disasters so well publicized by Limits to Growth.
With the benefit of hindsight – that sounds more like a threat than a prediction based on depletion of resources.
In 1965 in Buenos Aires, Aurelio Peccei gave a lecture at the National Military College in which he said the following:
I shall give two examples to underline how very different a society can be which is set up for the future. M.I.T. of Boston is studying a project for making the electronic computer a public service, like the distribution of energy: a large city or regional centre would be set up; each user would submit to it his problems using a simple typewriter and the telephone; he would obtain an immediate answer, just as today the light comes on at the turn of a switch. Another example is electronic industrial design, also under study: the designer will use a luminous pencil to draw what he wants on screen like that of television, and the computer will interpret the drawing; according to need it compares it with designs in the magnetic archives (or library), translates it into a drawing correct in every detail, at the same time it produces a tape containing in the greatest possible detail all the geometrical elements of the piece which is to be made; the tape is passed to the governor of the numerical control machine tool and guides it in the automatic production of the piece required.
These may seem dreams, but before many years they will be reality. Let us remember though: they will be the reality where there exist not only perfect company, but also perfect national organization, top-efficiency throughout the whole system. For all practical purposes the temporal advantage already mentioned acquired by the United States acquires a powerful multiplier in the nation’s structure and organizational capacity.
What Peccei described of course, was the early conception of the Internet, Computer-Aided Designs (CAD) and computerized manufacturing. But more important than that, was the second paragraph that reveals the essence of the conflict and the objective of what we used to call communism – “perfect national organization, top-efficiency throughout the whole system”. Obviously, computer systems and automation are keys to ultimate control with mankind marching in militarized lockstep on a mission to achieve maximum efficiency in the business of … of what? Business? Life? What? The conception of people as objects in a perfectly tuned and efficient engine is without doubt the most heinous and wicked vision imaginable. There is no life in it. There is only the obligation to march in step.
Redefinition of Sovereignty
The Club of Rome’s report, Reshaping the International Order was published in book format in 1976. The following is a very important excerpt from it.
There are several points that become key to understanding our situation today plus one point from the Time Article that define the method of subversion:
- Functional Sovereignty
- Interwoven national and international jurisdiction in the same territorial space
- Decision-making at the local level
- New controls [and benefits of monopoly] on multinational companies so that they heed the needs of the countries in which they do business, as well as their own welfare.
The significance is that they constitute strategies of subversion of national governments and deception in lines of authority through the use of special interest groups that supposedly represent the interests of citizens when in fact, they are merely front groups for totalitarian control coming from the global level. The parasitic environmental groups that have seats at the tables of power are the implementation of the phony system of local control.
The idea that multinational corporations would consider the needs of countries and people in addition to their own welfare is just plain stupid. It’s doubtful that even Pollyanna would be that naive. Corporations exist to make money for their shareholders and for the keymen of the organization. Whatever opportunities they have to exploit people, resources, political systems – it doesn’t matter. There is only one goal. Money. Regulation is the only thing that makes them act with a modicum of decency.
The use of systems methodology for reorganization of our economy and government constitute, de facto, the implementation of totalitarian systems of control on functional lines. QED. NERC – the North American Electric Reliability Corporation is an example of functional “sovereignty” just as Peccei described it. NERC covers the U.S., Canada and Mexico and they were given authority to establish reliability codes and enforcement powers over the most critical – of our critical infrastructure – the electric transmission grid and bulk power production.
In order to accomplish “functional sovereignty”, new virtual jurisdictions are created by contract. This is generally referred to as regionalism but that term is only marginally useful because it still implies territorial jurisdiction. Functional Sovereignty is a monopoly on a function with a potential jurisdiction limited only by logistics. If the logistics permit, the functional monopoly can be global. With computer control systems and telecommunications, logistics for just about everything can be global making the Club of Rome’s plan a logical strategy for world domination by System.
Functional sovereignty as a policy is the reason why the banking and financial industries turned into criminal enterprises. Under a system of functional sovereignty using the concept of industry “self-government” and corporations defined as persons with rights is the reason for the massive thefts and criminal activities by “corporate citizens”. Alan Greenspan’s libertarian philosophies were put into practice allowing the banks and Wall Street to be self-regulating. Enough said on that. We all know the outcome.
The semantical problem of what to call a functionally sovereign jurisdiction was solved by the redefinition of the word “market”. In newspeak, a “market” is a functional monopoly. One of the key strategies of the subversive plan for “reshaping the international order” is linguistic deception. Words are carefully selected to give one impression by the common understanding of the word, while the redefinition of the word or term means something different. The intent of this strategy is to deceive leaving us with the problem of trying to discern if the user of the language actually understands what he or she is saying or if they just think they do.
In 1972, the United Nations sponsored a conference in Stockholm producing the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. The conference was headed up by a socialist from Canada named Maurice Strong. In 1992, at the UN Conference on Environment & Development at RIO – also called the “Earth Summit”, Strong is quoted as having said:
“current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system including the United Nations.”
He also said:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring about?”
And haven’t U.S. Trade and Economic Policy along with the redesign of government, transfer of sovereignty to functional monopolies and the imposition of collectivist systems for “perfect efficiency” been bringing about the deindustrialization and collapse of western civilization – ushering in corporate led, one-world, totalitarian system of control – exactly as Aurelio Peccei described and Maurice Strong verbalized?
This table includes the top and bottom 10 of the Current Account Balance table in the CIA World Fact Book, Country Comparisons. The definition from the source: “Current account balance compares a country’s net trade in goods and services, plus net earnings, and net transfer payments to and from the rest of the world during the period specified. These figures are on an exchange rate basis.
At the end of World War II, the United States was at the top of the plus side. U.S. Trade Policy – especially from the 1960’s forward has been to destroy American domestic industry by ever
increasing cheaper imports. The wealth of the United States which includes more than just money was transferred to the exporting countries – creating the deficit – exactly as Aurelio Peccei described it for the purpose that Maurice Strong verbalized.
In 1973, the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) cartel comprised of mostly Arab nations imposed an oil embargo on the United States – not because of peak oil. Rather, it was because of U.S. military aid to Israel. Curiously, this alleged embargo only affected California where claims of shortages were made and the lines at the gas pumps made national news. It was found after the crisis that the shortages were engineered but the spectacle of the event provided propaganda value for the doomsayers of peak oil and more importantly, for the fake environmental front for the communist international.
In 1972, the United States had a healthy, vibrant economy. Now, some five decades later, we stand at the edge of the abyss. The American people have been betrayed by leaders using “free trade” agreements to export our productive capacity in rotations while building an international system of law and institutions designed to break the developed nations of the world while building up the undeveloped nations – into what increasing is revealing itself to be a global totalitarian system of oppression and control through the incremental devolution of national sovereignty to a system of functional sovereignty.
There is no greater evidence of the treasonous war on the American people using radical environmentalism, trade agreements and now – national and global collectivist systems of “perfect efficiency” such as the smart grid. The deregulation of critical infrastructure businesses that serve the essential needs of the entire rest of the economy is proof positive of regulatory capture by Doom’s Day forces hostile to the American way of life.