- This topic is empty.
October 5, 2021 at 4:56 pm #896swede1344Keymaster
by Julie Beal
June 25, 2013
from Activist Post Website
One must make a new system
that makes the old system obsolete.
Once upon a time, we worried about a possible New World Order. A plan to create a One World Government. We read books and watched films that gave us glimpses of what was coming.
These days we can feel it is already here, as each day the tales of tyranny come thick and fast.
Big Brother breathes hotly down our necks
Yet still there is much dis-unity among us, a fragmentation of interests, which leaves us vulnerable to the whims of those who would control us.
Going forward, exposing Agenda 21 must be our focus… because there’s a lot more to it than most people realize. Its aim is to replace our current system with (what will be called) a steady state economy.
Every single profitable aspect of nature is being priced, in preparation for this system:
food, land, water, carbon, the ocean, the atmosphere, soil formation, nutrient cycling, biomass, genetic resources, and, yes, even the tourism value of ‘a nice view’ is being priced.
This is but one of many intangibles which are said to have value in the economy, and includes a variety of aesthetic, cultural and spiritual ‘services’ provided by nature.
The Global Alliance of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities on Climate Change against REDD+ and for Life are living proof of the effects of this system, and proclaim the green economy to be,
…nothing more than capitalism of nature; a perverse attempt by corporations, extractive industries and governments to cash in on Creation by privatizing, commodifying, and selling off the Sacred and all forms of life and the sky, including the air we breathe, the water we drink and all the genes, plants, traditional seeds, trees, animals, fish, biological and cultural diversity, ecosystems and traditional knowledge that make life on Earth possible and enjoyable.
…Under the green economy, even the rain, the beauty of a waterfall or a honey bee’s pollen will be reduced to a barcode price tag and sold to the highest bidder.
At the same time, the green economy promotes and greenwashes environmentally and socially devastating extractive industries like logging, mining and oil drilling as “sustainable development.
However, Agenda 21 has even more sinister aims – part of the commodification process already includes prices being calculated for ‘Gross National Happiness.’
This involves measuring the ‘value’ provided by human capital (a corporation gets much more profit from a fit and happy worker than one who is chubby and depressed!), and social capital (such as having lots of friends!).
Measuring the ‘well-being’ of all peoples will require surveillance, and mental and physical profiling, which will then enable computer simulations to make predictions.
Prices are being put on all of these things, even though many of them are not ‘normal’ commodities; because the value of many of the new assets are only concepts, such as ‘happiness’, they are classed as ‘intangibles’. These so-called assets are wide open to statistical manipulation, as are the range of values calculated for water, air, and carbon.
For the steady-state system, defined and imposed on us by the corporate and globalist elites, we will all have to be good little consumers and producers to maintain the prescribed degree of ‘equilibrium’, and avert the ever-present danger of running out.
For this, we must be surveilled: measured and assessed for our place in the ecosystem of life.
Agenda 21 is the key to Global Government, one-world religion, one way of life, inched forward with NewSpeak incantations like sustainable development and rights and responsibilities.
The bright ideas of people with good hearts are being subverted to facilitate the ultimate in power – an “eco-fascist” techno-corporatocracy based on eco-social currencies, with the whole system run by a giant quantum computer, which alone can defend the pretense of global climate prediction, and the pretense of ‘managing’ the steady-state system, as it will be the only computer that can.
The Full Agenda
A standardized version of Agenda 21 has been popularized across the alternative media; as a result, most activists understand it to be “a document” designed, in 1992, to be a blueprint for global domination, using sustainable development and zoning.
This attack on land and property rights had a history (conservation orders, etc.) and thus immediate implications for a number of researchers, such as,
George Washington Hunt
Dr. Michael Coffman
…and many others.
Niki Raapana, and her daughter Nordica, have also worked tirelessly to explore and explain these issues in great detail – especially the communitarian zeitgeist which informs global governance, and its Fabian roots.
Raapana has personally experienced community zoning and policing.
Patrick Wood has exposed the link between technocracy and the environmental movement, and the involvement of the global smart grid. He also alerts us to the likelihood of carbon currency being introduced.
Most of the time though, the way Agenda 21 is interpreted is as a way to control humanity by defining where and how we live, through zoning and other restrictions brought about by ‘smart growth’.
This, however, tells only half the story. Apart from communitarianism, smart growth and smart grids, and One Religion for One World, Agenda 21 entails quantifying natural, human, and social capital.
1. Creating a brand new economy from the new capital assets
2. Surveilling our well-being
3. Social pressure to be well, be nice, and live sustainably
4. De-growth (in the West), to ensure balance and avert ‘scarcity’
5. Ownership of all resources, and even concepts
6. Genetically modified organisms
7. Staggeringly large biomass monocultures, such as algae
8. The façade of community – biozones will feature specialized production clusters, to maximize efficiency. (Source)
9. Identity management (Source)
11. Statistical Majik
It’s time now to bring all these threads together, and to see Agenda 21 as the blueprint for the ‘steady state system’, a concept which stems from Fabianism, and has evolved to encompass ecological economics, and the technocratic method.
Throughout, we see the influence of the Rockefellers and the Club of Rome – a self-indulgent dogma for the elite, designed to engineer their very own Utopia.
Man’s conquest of Nature, if the dreams of some scientific planners are realized, means the rule of a few hundreds of men over billions upon billions of men.
There neither is nor can be any simple increase of power on Man’s side. Each new power won by man is a power over man as well.
C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (1943)
The Steady-State System
Agenda 21 is but one strand of a global effort to entirely alter the global system.
Our lives are to be scientifically micro-managed in order to ensure ‘balance’ – births are to equal deaths, consumption is to equal production, or at least, that’s what we’ll be told. It’s called a ‘steady state’ system, and nature, and the global stock of human capital, are already being commodified in preparation for this system.
The fiat economy is to be replaced with regional, and global, currencies based upon the exchange of energy.
The ‘science’ of caring for the earth, and for each other, will be our new religion. This means counting your carbon as well as your calories, and foregoing self-interest for the sake of future generations.
Earth is being incorporated, and stock taking will entail monitoring all transactions which may affect the overall balance; this requires technocratic management of (the new) capital assets, of identities, and of energy, aka ‘the smartgrid’ and the ‘internet of things’.
The techno-corporatocracy will be overseen by a quantum super-computer, whose decisions cannot be questioned, since there will be no computer more powerful than it.
This has already been achieved by the ‘global warming is all about carbon’ heist – the science is settled. From now on, it’s all a question of optimization. Or so they say.
The powerful bankers and corporations who promote the Green Economy have been busy acquiring land and other forms of natural capital for decades, such as through ‘debt-for-nature swaps’.
The Smart World Order will use this natural capital to create a perpetual stock of assets, and profit from huge GM biomass monocultures, which can be used to make fuel, paint, plastic, etc., and perpetuate the myth of maintaining a ‘balanced ecosystem’, such as through the Cradle to Cradle® scheme. 
Most of these monocultures will be in the ‘developing world’, where the infrastructure is being upgraded, to make the production line more efficient. As this is achieved, the workers need to be kept just as ‘happy’ as their Western counterparts, as this is an essential requirement of optimal production.
As Alan Watt has described, all we need is a smart-phone, so we can be kept happy and distracted from our ‘austerity’, but tracked and traced for the global economy and homeland security.
Thus the owners and over-seers will continue their rampage of destruction, and call it caring for the earth.
The theories of the steady state economy will merely be used to justify and control further plunder of the earth’s resources. There’s no doubt, after all, that the earth is being despoiled, so it is all the more shocking that the billionaires and very-unsustainable corporations have been allowed to control the green agenda, and milk it for all it’s worth.
We’re never going to know when we’re ‘in equilibrium’, because we will never be able to find out.
The knowledge will be in the hands of the quantum controllers,
the ones who are profiting from controlling that information
and the ones who own the natural resources
Although most of the people who have advanced the environmental movement to its current state are likely honorable and caring, it is untenable to claim the same can be said of the hordes of mega-rich who have financed and promoted the cause.
They have taken the ideas of people with passion, and used them to extend, promote, and defend the consolidation of power that comes with the acquisition of natural resources.
Re-read the Georgia Guidestones with the steady state system in mind!
 In a TED talk (below video)on quantum computing, Michelle Simmons indicates the power of these computers, measured by ‘qubits’:
“30 qubits is more powerful than a supercomputer but… 300 quibits would be more powerful than all the computers in the world connected together”.
This indicates the advantage held by Google, NASA, and the non-profit Universities Space Research Association (USRA) who are now running the new 512-qubit D-Wave Two quantum computer. (Source)
 Articles to follow this will,
(i) explain and critique steady-state economics
(ii) postulate on ‘the next revolution’, based on natural capital and biomass for the ‘circular economy’
(iii) attempt a full history of Agenda 21, a sort of ‘before and after’ (over a century), which sets it in context, explaining how it came about and, more importantly, who has funded it
 There is even scope to classify nuclear energy as ‘renewable’; so beware of the label ‘cleantech’!
 The Cradle-to-Cradle® design, part of the ‘circular economy’ idea, includes biomass in its certification, and is used to excuse planned obsolescence.
by Bruce E. Levine
October 11, 2012
from AlterNet Website
Bruce E. Levine is a clinical psychologist and author of Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite (2011).
Shoppers, students, workers, and voters
are all seen by consumerism and behaviorism the same way:
passive, conditionable objects.
The corporatization of society requires a population that accepts control by authorities, and so when psychologists and psychiatrists began providing techniques that could control people, the corporatocracy embraced mental health professionals.
In psychologist B.F. Skinner’s best-selling book Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971), he argued that freedom and dignity are illusions that hinder the science of behavior modification, which he claimed could create a better-organized and happier society.
During the height of Skinner’s fame in the 1970s, it was obvious to anti-authoritarians such as Noam Chomsky (“The Case Against B.F. Skinner”) and Lewis Mumord that Skinner’s worldview – a society ruled by benevolent control freaks – was antithetical to democracy.
In Skinner’s novel Walden Two (1948), his behaviorist hero states,
“We do not take history seriously,” to which Lewis Mumford retorted, “And no wonder: if man knew no history, the Skinners would govern the world, as Skinner himself has modestly proposed in his behaviorist utopia.”
As a psychology student during that era, I remember being embarrassed by the silence of most psychologists about the political ramifications of Skinner and behavior modification.
In the mid-1970s, as an intern on a locked ward in a state psychiatric hospital, I first experienced one of behavior modification’s staple techniques, the “token economy.” And that’s where I also discovered that anti-authoritarians try their best to resist behavior modification.
George was a severely depressed anti-authoritarian who refused to talk to staff, but for some reason, chose me to shoot pool with. My boss, a clinical psychologist, spotted my interaction with George, and told me that I should give him a token – a cigarette – to reward his “prosocial behavior.”
I fought it, trying to explain that I was 20 and George was 50, and this would be humiliating. But my boss subtly threatened to kick me off the ward. So, I asked George what I should do.
George, fighting the zombifying effects of his heavy medication, grinned and said,
“We’ll win. Let me have the cigarette.”
In full view of staff, George took the cigarette and then placed it into the shirt pocket of another patient, and then looked at the staff shaking his head in contempt.
Unlike Skinner, George was not “beyond freedom and dignity.”
Anti-authoritarians such as George – who don’t take seriously the rewards and punishments of control-freak authorities – deprive authoritarian ideologies such as behavior modification from total domination.
Behavior Modification Techniques Excite Authoritarians
If you have taken introductory psychology, you probably have heard of Ivan Pavlov’s “classical conditioning” and B.F. Skinner’s “operant conditioning.”
An example of Pavlov’s classical conditioning? A dog hears a bell at the same time he receives food; then the bell is sounded without the food and still elicits a salivating dog. Pair a scantily clad attractive woman with some crappy beer, and condition men to sexually salivate to the sight of the crappy beer and buy it. The advertising industry has been using classical conditioning for quite some time.
Skinner’s operant conditioning? Rewards, like money, are “positive reinforcements”; the removal of rewards are “negative reinforcements”; and punishments, such as electric shocks, are labeled in fact as “punishments.”
Operant conditioning pervades the classroom, the workplace and mental health treatment.
Skinner was heavily influenced by the book Behaviorism (1924) by John B. Watson.
Watson achieved some fame in the early 1900s by advocating a mechanical, rigid, affectionless manner in child rearing. He confidently asserted that he could take any healthy infant, and given complete control of the infant’s world, train him for any profession. When Watson was in his early 40s, he quit university life and began a new career in advertising at J. Walter Thompson.
Behaviorism and consumerism, two ideologies that achieved tremendous power in the 20th century, are cut from the same cloth.
The shopper, the student, the worker, and the voter are all seen by consumerism and behaviorism the same way: passive, conditionable objects.
Who are Easiest to Manipulate?
Those who rise to power in the corporatocracy are control freaks, addicted to the buzz of power over other human beings, and so it is natural for such authorities to have become excited by behavior modification.
Alfie Kohn, in Punished by Rewards (1993), documents with copious research how behavior modification works best on dependent, powerless, infantilized, bored, and institutionalized people. And so for authorities who get a buzz from controlling others, this creates a terrifying incentive to construct a society that creates dependent, powerless, infantilized, bored, and institutionalized people.
Many of the most successful applications of behavior modification have involved laboratory animals, children, or institutionalized adults.
According to management theorists Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham in Work Redesign (1980),
“Individuals in each of these groups are necessarily dependent on powerful others for many of the things they most want and need, and their behavior usually can be shaped with relative ease.”
Similarly, researcher Paul Thorne reports in the journal International Management (“Fitting Rewards,” 1990) that in order to get people to behave in a particular way, they must be,
“needy enough so that rewards reinforce the desired behavior.”
It is also easiest to condition people who dislike what they are doing.
Rewards work best for those who are alienated from their work, according to researcher Morton Deutsch (Distributive Justice, 1985). This helps explain why attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-labeled kids perform as well as so-called “normals” on boring schoolwork when paid for it (see Thomas Armstrong’s The Myth of the A.D.D. Child, 1995).
Correlatively, Kohn offers research showing that rewards are least effective when people are doing something that isn’t boring.
In a review of the literature on the harmful effects of rewards, researcher Kenneth McGraw concluded that rewards will have a detrimental effect on performance under two conditions:
“first, when the task is interesting enough for the subjects that the offer of incentives is a superfluous source of motivation; second, when the solution to the task is open-ended enough that the steps leading to a solution are not immediately obvious.”
Kohn also reports that at least 10 studies show rewards work best on simplistic and predictable tasks.
How about more demanding ones? In research on preschoolers (working for toys), older children (working for grades) and adults (working for money), all avoided challenging tasks. The bigger the reward, the easier the task that is chosen; while without rewards, human beings are more likely to accept a challenge.
So, there is an insidious incentive for control-freaks in society – be they psychologists, teachers, advertisers, managers, or other authorities who use behavior modification.
Specifically, for controllers to experience the most control and gain a “power buzz,” their subjects need to be infantilized, dependent, alienated, and bored.
The Anti-Democratic Nature of Behavior Modification
Behavior modification is fundamentally a means of controlling people and thus for Kohn,
“by its nature inimical to democracy, critical questioning, and the free exchange of ideas among equal participants.”
For Skinner, all behavior is externally controlled, and we don’t truly have freedom and choice.
Behaviorists see freedom, choice, and intrinsic motivations as illusory, or what Skinner called “phantoms.” Back in the 1970s, Noam Chomsky exposed Skinner’s unscientific view of science, specifically Skinner’s view that science should be prohibited from examining internal states and intrinsic forces.
In democracy, citizens are free to think for themselves and explore, and are motivated by very real – not phantom – intrinsic forces, including curiosity and a desire for justice, community, and solidarity.
What is also scary about behaviorists is that their external controls can destroy intrinsic forces of our humanity that are necessary for a democratic society.
Researcher Mark Lepper was able to diminish young children’s intrinsic joy of drawing with Magic Markers by awarding them personalized certificates for coloring with a Magic Marker.
Even a single, one-time reward for doing something enjoyable can kill interest in it for weeks. Behavior modification can also destroy our intrinsic desire for compassion, which is necessary for a democratic society.
Kohn offers several studies showing,
“children whose parents believe in using rewards to motivate them are less cooperative and generous [children] than their peers.”
Children of mothers who relied on tangible rewards were less likely than other children to care and share at home.
How, in a democratic society, do children become ethical and caring adults? They need a history of being cared about, taken seriously, and respected, which they can model and reciprocate.
Today, the mental health profession has gone beyond behavioral technologies of control. It now diagnoses noncompliant toddlers with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and pediatric bipolar disorder and attempts to control them with heavily sedating drugs.
While Big Pharma directly profits from drug prescribing, the entire corporatocracy benefits from the mental health profession’s legitimization of conditioning and controlling.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.