UK Inquiries Act 2005

The UK government commissions inquiries over incidents where trust has broken down and the public wants answers.

Since the enactment of the 2005 Inquiries Act, the notion of the UK “independent public inquiry” has become a nonsense. Let us review the particulars:

• The govt has sole responsibility for deciding whether an inquiry is held

• Under that Act the government sets the inquiry’s terms of reference. The govt decides what is in scope and out of scope.

• The government appoints the chair and, therefore, has control over appointments to the inquiry panel.

• The government can deny the submission of evidence.

• The government can restrict publication of evidence.

• The government can withhold witness testimony.

The government has the power to review and amend the “independent” Inquiry’s findings before they are published.

• The inquiry cannot determine criminal guilt.

• The inquiry has no ability to prosecute.

There is simply no such thing as an ‘independent public inquiry’ in the UK. The very term is what the Regime would call “disinformation”. They are government inquiries.

As such, any seemingly harsh “criticism” that comes out of a UK public inquiry is actually what the government wants you to believe. For example, the first module of the UK’s Covid19 inquiry concluded that lockdown should have started earlier, thereby supporting the concept that lockdown was the correct approach albeit not implemented quickly enough. This supports the government position. The government wanted this conclusion.

The legacy media, such as the state’s faithful Guardian newspaper, are then dispatched to sell this guff to the public.

Consider this as further conclusions of the Covid Inquiry are published. You will be told only what the government wants you to be told.

The Inquiries Act came into being because Tony Blair wanted to mimic the government control of outcomes that were possible in the US that led to whitewashes such as the Warren Commission (JFK) and the Kean Commission (9/11).

They’re Coming For Your Kids

Aristotle is credited with the line ‘Give me the boy until the age of 7 and I will show you the man.’

I hope you have noticed that governments are introducing ever more legislation that inserts the state between parents and their children.

If so then I hope you realise such laws are not originating from the state but from globalist bodies such as the UN. Such policies are then legitimised at national level via new legislation.

So, let’s start by investigating the UN’s actions in this regard.

The UNFPA is the United Nations Population Fund. The UNFPA is the sexual and reproductive health agency of the UN. It works to uphold the rights and choices of women, girls and young people across more than 150 countries.

Here’s what the UNFPA are pushing in the Philippines:

https://philippines.unfpa.org/en/news/unlocking-gender-equality-philippines

This article states:

‘Among the SDG targets that we still need to work on for the Philippines is ensuring universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights in accordance with the ICPD [International Conference on Population Development] Programme of Action. We are hopeful that the country will soon pass into law the “Adolescent Pregnancy Bill,” which guarantees access to reproductive health services for adolescents without parental consent under specific circumstances.’

Let’s start our critique of this paragraph with some clarification: ‘reproductive health’ and ‘reproductive rights’ are synonyms for ‘abortion’. Globalists promote abortion everywhere. Here we see that UNFPA is promoting abortions for teenagers. But, more than that, the UNFPA is looking to ensure that adolescent girls will be able to indulge in the act of abortion without the knowledge of their parents. This will be a secret between the girl and the state. The parents don’t need to know.

Yet before a girl can have an abortion, she needs to have sex. The UNFPA will also help here:

”It is important to realize that fulfilling sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) is crucial for us to achieve gender equality. SRHR prevents severe health consequences and other vulnerabilities that women face. But it’s not just about women’s health. It’s about dismantling the power structures that perpetuate gender inequality. With comprehensive sexuality education, young people will have the knowledge to protect their health, make informed decisions and challenge gender norms and stereotypes.’

So, we see Cultural Marxism revealed in all its glory via the promotion of the liberal agenda: encourage girls to fulfill their sexuality; inform them that sex is perfectly natural and can be performed  with anyone you want (safe in the knowldge that you can later get that secret abortion); there is no need to wait until marriage to have sex; the only way to achieve equality with men is to go out to work and engage in casual sex. And this is how we challenge gender norms.

Another UNFPA initiative is ‘Adolescent Peer Champions’ where they teach adolescents about the wonders of abortion and then send them out to spread the message to all of their friends and schoolmates. Obviously,  this is another blatant attempt to subvert parental control. Here’s a link to the article:

https://philippines.unfpa.org/en/news/building-bridges-bayer-unfpa-cpd-forum-tackle-adolescent-reproductive-health-challenges-world

And here’s an extract:

‘Building Adolescent Peer Champions for SRHR” initiative. This project aims to empower young people to become advocates for positive attitudes around sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). It involves training adolescent and adult social media influencers on SRHR communication, along with mentorship for content creation…’

Let’s get teenagers to promote abortions. What a great idea. It is obvious that the UNFPA plans to turn Philippino girls into facsimiles of Western women: promiscuous career women who use abortion as birth control. They aim to accelerate this process by subverting children’s relationship with their parents. 

I have presented a couple of UNFPA articles that focus on the Philippines but similar initiatives are underway in every country in which the UN operates.

Why does the UNFPA promote sex and abortion? Well, speculation is always a matter of guesswork but we can be sure that it is not because they want tennage girls to be happier and healthier. Triangulating statements from other Globalist organisations, we can surmise that the UN wants to significantly reduce the global population and promoting careers, casual sex and abortion is the way to do it. Look at how successful this strategy has been in the West.

I would also speculate that the UN wants to destroy the nuclear family as a way of reducing resistance to Globalist’ policies: again something that has been very effective in the West.

There are plenty of examples of intrusion into parent-child relationships at a national level, starting with Scotland.

The SNP (Scottish National Party), let’s remember, is the party that tried to appoint a Named Person, or state-registered guardian, for every single child. This ‘point of contact’ would have had ultimate responsibility for the child’s welfare – presumably because parents are thought incapable of supporting, advising and protecting their children without expert intervention:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/02/23/why-is-the-snp-so-obsessed-with-teenage-sex/

At the ‘Teacher of the Year’ ceremony held at the White House in 2022, President Joe Biden gave away what progressives truly believe:

“There’s no such thing as someone else’s child. No such thing as someone else’s child. Our nation’s children are all our children.”

He also said:

“They’re all our children. And the reason you’re the teachers of the year is because you recognize that. They’re not somebody else’s children. They’re like yours when they’re in the classroom,”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-claims-school-children-don-234147454.html

In 2021 Quebec Bill 15 was introduced as part of an overhaul of the Youth Protection Act.    

The Bill removed the Parental Primacy law that names parents as the primary caregivers and decision makers for their children. In reference to Bill 15, Quebec Minister Carmant said:

“Science shows us that things have changed; one does not necessarily need a biological family: the child must be in a loving environment. That’s what’s really going to move our work forward this fall.”

https://www.michaeljournal.org/articles/societal-debates/item/quebec-calls-into-question-parental-primacy

Here’s a frightening story about a mum in Australia whose 6 year old son was seized and placed into foster care after she questioned her son’s leukaemia treatment:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12092001/Perth-mum-questioned-sons-leukaemia-treatment-taken-placed-foster-care.html

California always leads the way with any initiative that gives the state more power. Here are brief details of 3 Bills:

Bill AB1078 was approved as legislation in 2023:

Instead of heeding parent concerns, school administrators and teachers unions are stepping up their campaign to sideline parents. Nowhere is that more apparent than AB1078, a bill introduced by  Assemblyman Corey Jackson (D-Riverside) that would strip local school boards of their authority over the curriculum taught in their school district.     

AB 1078 would require school boards to receive approval from the state board of education before removing any instructional materials or books from classrooms and school libraries or “ceasing to teach any curriculum.    

”The bill is an attack on parents and school boards pushing back against the teacher unions’ drive to teach Critical Race Theory and inappropriate sexualized curricula in K-12 schools.”

Bill AB 665, was signed into legislation in 2023. Included in legislation ostensibly about extending mental health care to lower-income California youths, is a provision that effectively would terminate parents’ rights over their kids as soon as they turn 12.     

The California Family Council warns that this bill

“would allow children as young as 12 years old to consent to being placed into state funded group homes without parental permission or knowledge.”     

As long as a mental health professional signs off on it, the kids can go to such a group home—and it doesn’t matter what their parents think.  

  https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/04/07/california-bill-would-let-12-year-olds-leave-home-without-parents-ok/

Bill AB957 dating from 2023 was ultimately not passed into legislation:   

Under AB957, parents who refuse to participate in transgenderism by pretending that their child is a different gender could be guilty of failing to provide for the “health, safety, and welfare” of their child—therefore losing custody to another parent or the state.        “Gender affirmation” isn’t defined or explained in AB 957 or any other California law, drawing concerns over interpretation.     Susannah Luthi, who covers California for The Washington Free Beacon, pointed out:

“The bill makes no distinctions regarding the age of a child, how long a child has identified as transgender, or affirmation of social transition versus medical sex-change treatments.”

Here’s an article about the
Oregon Department of Education advising schools to keep students’ ‘Gender Identity’ hidden from families:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/oregon-advises-schools-to-keep-students-gender-identity-hidden-from-families_4969789.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge&src_src=partner&src_cmp=ZeroHedge

The regime is on your side, kids.

Here’s details of a  Bill in Virginia that charges parents for not supporting their child’s ‘Gender Identity’:

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2022/10/virginia-democrat-announces-bill-that-charges-parents-for-not-supporting-childs-gender-identity/ref/8/

Here’s an example from the UK:

‘FOI responses collected by Policy Exchange showed that 72 per cent of secondary schools are now teaching that people have a gender identity that may be different from their biological sex…’    

‘Nearly half of secondary schools are allowing children to self-declare their gender without parental consent, an investigation has found…’

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/30/secondary-schools-allow-children-self-declare-gender/   

And let’s not forget the UK ‘Child and Families Act (2014) that places the welfare of the child above all other considerations. All other orders rescinded. Parents expendable.

During the 2021 campaign for Virginia governor, the Democrat candidate Terry McAuliffe stated parents have no control over what their kids learn in school. In a debate against the Repubcilcan challenger, Glenn Youngkin, McAuliffe told us how he really felt:    

“I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/10/terry-mcauliffes-war-on-parents/

What motivations are behind such legislation? Its definitely about reducing the global population but it’s also about control. Liberal democracies are becoming increasingly indistinguishable from authoritarian states and authoritarian states impose very tight controls on their citizenry. Citizens must perform the loyalty tests the state would have them perform. There is no room for dissent in such regimes. The state knows that instilling the mantras of Liberal societies in children is the best way of farming a compliant population. It’s indoctrination. Nothing outside the state.

Postscript:

The following, related,  thought occurred to me a couple of weeks after posting this article:

The entire Leftist philosophy is built upon the premise of the ‘blank slate’, ie that all humans are the same and that it is only nuture that makes us different. It follows from this that Leftists all differences – ie ‘inequalities – between us can be expunged if the govt becomes responsible for our upbringing. Hence, the increasing role governments are taking in parenting.

Post-script: the day after posting this piece, I read this article:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/christian-parents-lose-final-appeal-after-swedish-state-took-daughters-following-false-abuse-claim

For Those That Haven’t Figured It Out Yet

1) Smart meters are the means by which your access to energy will be limited during the coming energy transition when there won’t be enough energy for everyone.
2) The WEF, Bilderberg Group, The UN, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and all other elitist forums meet for the purpose of furthering their interests, not yours.
3) The price of gold is at record highs because there is a growing feeling that there is going to be an economic collapse during which stocks, shares and deposits will be seized in line with recent ‘bail-in’ legislation.
4) Ditto for cryptocurrencies.
5) No one ever gets into trouble for lying at the behest of the Establishment.
6) The perpetual demonisation of Russia by Western politicians and media reflects the West’s desire to wage war on Russia, not Russia’s desire to wage war on the West.
7) Fascism is a left wing ideology built around central planning. Hitler and Mussolini were both socialists.
8) Digital IDs are the foundation stone of the intended social credit system in the West.

9) Every piece of legislation the govt introduces to protect our safety, removes aspects of our freedom.

10) ‘Sustainability’ is a synonym for ‘restrictions’.

11) Anthropogenic Climate Change is just money, power and politics.

12) You should never use any type of plastic in the microwave

13) The c19 response was nothing to do with health.

14) Internet censorship laws are not about protecting children. They are the means by which the govt seeks to control the online narrative.

15) The main purpose of regulations is to push SMEs out of business by introducing burdens that large corporations are better able to absorb. When the SMEs are gone the big companies then lobby to reduce the regulations.

16) Ditto the main purpose of ‘Employment Rights’.

17) The UK govt has more unchecked power than any British monarch ever had.
18) There are a number of Global Stakeholders, each of whom has more influence on UK government policy than all of the British electorate combined.
19) ULEZ’s; LTN’s; 15 minute cities etc are not about improving air quality or traffic flow. They are about setting up the surveillance infrastructure for ‘Smart Cities’ and reducing freedom of movement.

20) Global bodies such as the UN (Inc WHO, IPCC) are exaggerating / inventing ‘global threats’ in order to accrue more powers to oversee ‘global solutions.

21) Billionaires don’t set up Foundations because they want to be philanthropists. They do it so they can wield political influence without participating in the vulgarity of winning elections.
22) Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) on UK homes will be used to squeeze private landlords into selling their rental properties to Corporate landlords.
23) People are not all the same.
24) Progressivism is a trojan horse for Communism.

25) The reasons the people are given for going to war (security, democracy, freedom, WMD’s etc.) are never the real reasons (resources, regional primacy, strengthen domestic political position,  geo-political strategy etc.).

26) If something is being presented as a ‘global crisis’ for which only global solutions are possible, then it is a scam.

27) Most Western govts are engaged in a war on farming because farmers are de-centralised and independent. Centralised farming is the objective.

28) Western countries are no longer democracies representing the wishes of their electorates but oligarchies representing the wishes of Stakeholder Capitalists.

29) ‘Surveillance capitalism’ is the reason Tech companies are setting up billion dollar data processing centres to run the apps that you use for free.

30) Corporatism in the 2020s allows the govt to outsource functions of the authoritarian state – such as de-banking and censorship – to private companies yet stand behind the excuse that private companies can do what they want.

31) During Covid19 the govt told you that compliance was the best way to end the covid restrictions whereas, in fact, covid restrictions ended because of increasing non-compliance. If we were totally compliant, we would have covid restrictions to this day.

32) Liberal Democracy is collapsing. It will be at its most dangerous as it struggles to survive.

33) Billion dollar data centres are being built to manage the coming surveillance state – CDBCs, Digital IDs, facial recognition, social credit system, geo-fencing etc.

34) 1930s-style ‘corporatism’ was comprised of Public Private Partnerships where the corporations were subordinate to the govts. 2020s-style corporatism is comprised of Public Private Partnerships where the governments are subordinate to the corporations.
35) A new socio-economic political system is being built around us: technocracy.
36) Socio-economic political systems cannot be designed, they have to evolve. Designed systems always fail.

37) The Establishment is instigating the conditions for societal collapse in order to create the opportunities under which it can implement a new socio-economic system.

38) Public private partnerships are the definition of ‘fascism’.
39) The bulk of practical politics in 2026 is devoted to social engineering in order to make the populace accepting or even clamouring for the policies that the government have already decided to roll-out.

40) The vaccine passports that many Western countries tried to implement in 2020, were just an under-hand attempt at introducing a digital ID.
41) ESG is a social credit system for companies to ensure that all large companies are brought into alignment in advance of The Great Reset and that most SMEs will collapse.
42) Things will make more sense if you assume the government is lying at all times.
43) Most Regulators have been captured by the industries they are supposed to be regulating.

44) The govt achieves compliance by promoting their objectives as moral choices.

45) The integrity of nation states is being dismantled as a necessary step towards global governance.

46) The dictum of practical politics in the 21st century is not to represent public opinion, nor even to appeal to public opinion but to control it.

47) Global stakeholders have decided that public consent is optional. Consent can be fabricated when necessary.

48) Social media platforms are surveillance and censorship engines for the government.

49) We don’t learn the lessons of history. We learn the lessons of history that suit the purposes of the ruling class.

50) Paying people not to work during the covid lockdowns was a mass-scale UBI experiment.

51) Govts regularly follow the Hegelian dialect of ‘problem, reaction, solution’ to achieve their objectives. The govt creates or encourages a ‘problem’ which causes a ‘reaction’ of fear or anger in the people. The govt then steps forward with the ‘solution’ that was the intended objective.

52) All First World countries are now systemically left wing
53) Western countries are falling into chaos because their govts are following global policies rather than national policies.
54) 19th and early 20th century eugenics theory and practise never went away. It was just re-branded as ‘environmentalism’ and ‘health’ policies.

55) The new cold war is over resources, not political ideology.

56) Cultures are not all the same.

57) Global stakeholders promote transgenderism because it allows them to introduce policies that, superficially, are about supporting vulnerable teens but are really about subverting parental control of their children.

58) Global stakeholders also promote transgenderism because it plants the seed that anyone can be anyone which is a forerunner of their plans to roll-out transhumanism whereby anyone can be anything.

59) All Global Stakeholders want the global population to be a fraction of current levels. Bear that in mind when you next hear the UN make references to ‘Reproductive Health’.

60) Government regulations are written with the input of the Major Players from the industry being regulated. Therefore, the major players push for regulations that will give them a competitive advantage over their smaller rivals.

61) Quantitative easing is a process for transferring money from the poor (inflation) to the rich (inflated asset prices).

62) If there were no conspiracies among  the Global Elite then there would be no whistleblowers yet we have Assange and Snowden among hundreds of others (Mordechai Vanunu, Herve Falciani; Dr David Kelly; Professor Francis Boyle; Virginia Giuffre; Simon Andriesz; Jim Minnery etc etc) proving that conspiracies exist.

63) Monitoring “hate” is one of the hallmarks of a totalitarian regime.

64) Surveillance is a hallmark of a totalitarian state.

65) The assent of government to the primary power within a nation always leads to the destruction of religion as the government demands no competitor vying for the minds of men.

66) Since WW2, all Western governments have been embarked on an agenda to undermine every aspect of communitality – the family, religion, communities.

67) The censorship of dissent is a leading indicator that the Goverment is running a propaganda campaign to promote a latent agenda.

68) Wokeness is a manifestation of women’s collective mindset that emerged approximately 10 years ago as a consequence of women reaching a critical mass in academia, media and politics.

69) Corporations don’t have ‘values’, they have speech codes.

70) Corporations will adopt any ‘corporate value’ that will help the govt and the media leave them alone.

71) There are no rich, low energy countries.

72) A country that can make little can do little.

73) The State is the monopoly of all monopolies having singular control of currency, banking, media, education, health, pensions, justice, use of violence, laws, roads, infrastructure projects, natural resources, civil registry, police, armed forces, basic services, labour negotiation.

74) The British institutions of government protect their own authority at the expense of honest inquiry and suppress the very feedback that they need to properly function.

75) Social media bans on children are not about protecting children, they are about controlling adults.

76) The responsibility of govt used to be about protecting our freedoms while we were responsible for our own safety. Now government has taken over responsibility for keeping us safe and tramples over our freedoms to do so.

77) We are told that Russia and China are our enemies. No, they’re not. Our enemies live among us.

78) Anything censored by MSM and Social Media organisations is probably true.

79) Progressive liberal post-national globalism is the elite consensus of the current era.

80) Managed decline is UK government policy.

81)  A global crisis soon be brought about that will give Western governments an unmissable opportunity to further their technocratic agendas.

82) Everything on the government’s wish list – digital ids;  CBDC’s; further suppression of speech; surveillance grids; social credit systems – will all be implemented in due course because there’s nothing to stop them.

It’s Hard To Disagree With Jeffrey Sachs

Jeffrey Sachs (born November 5, 1954) is an American economist and public policy analyst. He is a professor at Columbia University and is director of the Center for Sustainable Development at the university.

A number of Sachs’ political assessments have struck a chord with me over the last 5 years, such as he delivered during his interview with Tucker Carlson last year (2025).

However, I felt this one was worth transcribing and posting on ny blog, for both future reference and the benefit of any readers of this blog who may not be familiar with Sachs. I do not know the context of what prompted these comments, nor where they were delivered. Two links that show these words being spoken live by Sachs are attached below.

Here we go:

‘The 10 richest Americans have $2.3tn of wealth. That’s a lot for 10 individuals. That’s not 10 companies. That’s not 10 clans. That’s 10 people. But they also happen to own a lot more.

They own the White House.

They installed the Vice President.

They determine US govt policy.

They will own the cryptocurrencies which will become our main currencies.

They own all of the big platforms on which we communicate.

They own YouTube, of course, which is the channel where I’m able to say, sometimes, things that are not to the US government’s liking but I don’t know for how long.

They own my email address.

They own the full knowledge of every keystroke I’ve made in the last 10 years, no doubt.

They own my privacy.

They own the newspapers like the Washington Post, owned by Jeff Bezos.

They will own TikTok, shortly because Larry Ellison is buying it on behalf of of Benjamin Netenyahu and Ellison will give it to his son as a nice gift. He’s already given to his son Paramount Studios, Paramount Nedia and CBS News.

It’s quite a world and that’s just 10 or so Americans. So were in a very strange concentration of power, I think the likes of which we’ve never seen before. It has already destroyed democracy. We are democratic in form only but we don’t have a sensible non-democratic system. We have a privatised system which is quite different.

In China, which is not a democracy, it is a technocracy, and the business sector is subordinate to the government, clearly as Jack Ma found out. In the US, it is the other way around which is that the government is subordinate to the particular class of the Big Tech sector. So, we’re in a governance adventure as well. The difference of the utopian and dystopian vision of AI is politics. Whether there will be general well-being will depend on how we use surplus. If all the surplus goes to the top then we will have mass-impoverishment.’

Reading this makes me think of the WEF declaring that by 2030 we will own nothing.
And it makes me think how all assets are now taxed so the little people can’t make money. And I think how the rich tie their money up in trusts and other protective instruments so that they don’t pay inheritance tax.
I think how energy is becoming ever more unaffordable.
I think how SMEs are being squeezed by business rates, energy prices and regulation
I think how all legislation is increasingly authoritarian. And I think how Global Stakeholders are planning to tokenise all natural assets so that normal people can no longer enjoy them.

We can’t go on like this. Can we?

Here are the links:

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ugcPost-7429182520014897152-uJwS

YouTube:

https://youtu.be/4Ub1MApLNbo?si=crDG-BEhc6xl2lNr

The sound is a bit iffy in places on the YT link.

Context is Everything

Greater Israel

The Movement for Greater Israel was a political party that gained momentum in Israel in the 1960s and 1970s subscribing to the idea of a ‘Greater Israel’.
There are many different opinions as to the boundaries of a Greater Israel.

In 2024 Daniella Weiss said “We know from the Bible that the real borders of Greater Israel are the Euphrates and the Nile”

In August 2025, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview with i24NEWS that he was on a “historic and spiritual mission” and that he is “very” attached to the vision of Greater Israel, which includes Palestinian areas and possibly also places that are part of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon.

In February 2026, Mike Huckabee, the United States Ambassador to Israel, told conservative talk-show host Tucker Carlson in an interview that it would be “fine” if Israel took over the entire middle east.

In the meantime remember  Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon and now…Iran

Best regards,
The Critical Thinker

The Technate Of America

The new Cold War isn’t about Ideology — it’s about resources
This explains why Elon Musk is pushing a 90 year old socio-economic system called ‘Technocracy’

In 1940, a map labelled the
“Technate of America” was published by ‘Technocracy Inc’. The Technate was to be a single, centrally managed continental system covering the United States, Canada, Greenland, Central America, the Caribbean, and large parts of northern South America.

The Technate of America (1940)


This was not fringe fantasy.
Technocracy Inc was founded in 1932 by academics associated with Columbia University, in direct response to the Great Depression.
Their philosophy was that markets and democratic politics had failed.
Their solution was to replace both with a system run by engineers, scientists, and technical experts making decisions based on data, efficiency, and physical constraints — especially energy.

In 1937, the group defined technocracy as:
“The science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services… as a scientific, technical engineering problem.”

The objective was a centrally planned state and pointedly, “No imported political philosophies, including Democracy, are in any way applicable.”

Technocracy was not merely a governance theory — it was a resource strategy.
The movement argued that the United States could not be secure unless it was fully self-sufficient in energy and raw materials. That required territorial expansion.
Hence the Technate:
Canada. Greenland. The Caribbean. Central America. Parts of Colombia, Venezuela, and the Guianas.

With that context, recent statements and actions by Donald Trump regarding Greenland, Canada, Venezuela, Cuba, and the Panama Canal read differently. Less impulsive. More structural.

Technocracy also proposed abolishing money entirely, replacing it with energy credits, issued at birth and allocated according to system capacity.
Ninety years later, global elites promote carbon credits — same logic, different wrapper.

There is also a personal through-line.
Joshua N. Haldeman served as head of Technocracy Inc in Canada from 1936 to 1941 before emigrating to South Africa.
Haldeman’s grandson is Elon Musk who financially supported Trump’s presidential campaign to the tune of $288m.

The same Musk who once tweeted:

“Accelerating Starship development to build the Martian Technocracy”


Is all of this mere coincidence? Or is technocracy the plan?

One Day The Truth Shall Be Known, But It Is Not This Day

Last week, I published this piece on LinkedIn where it was silently removed within a couple of hours which just confirms what I had written: that it is still to soon for The Establishment to allow the truth about the C19 vaxx to be freely discussed.  The fact that I write ‘vaxx’ rather than the correct word shows that it remains doubtful whether criticism of the C19 medication is allowed on any platform. (Although my ‘vaxx’ subterfuge did not fool the censorship algorithms at LinkedIn).

I wrote this piece to promote a news story in the Daily Sceptic – link below – about a study that had confirmed the harm caused by the gene therapy drugs. Thus, 5 years later, ‘The Science’ will still not allow the science to be discussed. It will probably never be fully allowed but some kind of limited hangout will one day be issued that will accept that the first versions of mRNA were a bit clott-y (but that’s all been resolved now).

Anyway, here is my piece that was too hot for LinkedIn:

‘One day, we will look back at the c19 vaxx rollout with horror.  Politicians will promise that ‘lessons must be learned’. Inquiries will be commissioned.

However, today is not that day. It is too soon. Those responsible are either still in power or are looking to cash in on lucrative sinecures within the Globalist system.

At least 10 more years need to pass before the Power Structure will allow a partial version of the truth to be revealed. No one will be held accountable. We will be told that it was a ‘difficult time’ and ‘officials did their best with imperfect knowledge’.

Promises of compensation will be made but any claims will be bogged down in lethargy and blame shifting.

It’s the same old script.

I’m sorry for all those who fell for it and suffered the consequences.

Best regards,
AF’

https://dailysceptic.org/2026/02/16/proof-at-last-that-excess-deaths-are-caused-by-covid-vaccines/

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09246479261426743

Rights Come With Responsibilities. Who Knew?

Women are not very happy. This is well documented. Politically, the single ones are moving to the far left. The ‘Karen’ phenomenon has been identified and documented.  Women are not having babies.

In this piece I am going to propose that the state of mind of Western women in 2026 is a direct result of the extra responsibilities that have been placed on women over the last 100 years.

Have the developments of the last 100 years been too much for women to handle?

For millenia, womens’ responsibilities were to look after the home, to keep alive as many babies as possible and have dinner on the table. That sort of thing. Anything outside the front door was their father’s, then their husband’s,  responsibility. Obviously, I have simplified matters for the sake of brevity, but readers can fill in their own understanding of the gender divide that existed for all of human history up until the twentieth century.

Then we (men) gave women the vote. In the name of Equality. Now women were expected to follow politics and international relations so they could vote responsibily. That is no small matter.

When you don’t follow Politics, it is easy to assume that the right decisions are being made after careful consideration of the situation by lots of intelligent, knowledgeable people, i.e. men. However, women would have discovered that politics is actually full of mistakes, inconsistencies, hypocriticality, deviousness, vested interests and bad decisions. Politics is messy in many ways, and it becomes frightening when you add modern weaponry into the mix. 

Women would have seen how fragile and arbitrary the whole political process is. And it was a process women had no control over. ‘No wonder our sons keep going to war’, they would have realised. And, yet, we expected women to come up to speed on all of this and to use their votes wisely. Thus, an area of the patriarchy that women were previously not expected to follow, let alone participate in, became open to women.

Then, in the aftermath of a second World War – one World War is unfortunate, two is careless – we (men) said women should go out and have careers. In the name of Equality. Women should have careers on top of their other responsibilities. So now women had to deal with the very different group dynamic of mixed gender workplaces.  Women, as mothers in the tribe, traditionally did not participate in overt hierarchies but now they had to navigate such hierarchies in the workplace. Not to mention managing the sexual politics at work (which men had to adapt to also). Plus, how to balance work and childcare.

So now women are following politics and World events whilst also having a career, looking after their children and ensuring dinner is on the table. Needless to say, the birth rate started dropping.

Then we (men), invented birth control pills. In the name of Equality. Now women could engage in sex in the same way that men did – without care or consequence. Women were told to play the field, to beat men at their own game. It was time for women to show their independence by sowing some wild oats, so to speak. Of course, casual sex doesn’t suit or benefit women as much as it does men. Before the ‘Sexual Revolution’, sex was a trump card for women. A card to be played very rarely and for maximum benefit. For that reason, men lusted after women in ways that women could use to their advantage.  However, post birth control, women were told to engage in as much casual sex as they could, regardless of the fact that it wasn’t in their best interests. Consequently, women’s trump card became worthless, devalued through sex inflation. Women also had to navigate the new sexual politics: after how many dates should they have sex? What kind of sex? What boundaries should they set? Did they have the strength of character to police such boundaries? Should they make the man also take precautions? How would they handle a man telling his friends about their encounter? How would a woman handle her social circle – or her parents – finding out? How to avoid being called a slut? This minefield became entirely womens’ responsibility to navigate. Women played men at their own game and lost. Women gave men what they wanted – sex without commitment – and then complained that men wouldn’t commit to them anymore. The way that women made use of their sexuality changed entirely in a very short space of time.

The result of sex is pregnancy. An unexpected pregnancy inside marriage is one thing, an unexpected pregnancy outside of marriage is a very different problem that was solved when we (men) allowed legal abortion, so that women had further control of their fertility. In the name of Equality. This came to be seen as a human right and certain women pushed for less and less regulation over this process.  But this control was yet another responsibility that fell on women. Women now had to work out the etiquette of abortion: who was the father and then decide whether or not to inform that man. Women had to decide whether to raise a baby alone in a society that no longer valued babies and with a man who had not expected sex to produce a baby. If women resorted to abortion, then they had to live with the consequences of that decision in ways that the man didn’t. Few women disclose their abortion histories. For most women, abortion is a guilty secret that they have to come to terms with. I imagine that an abortion affects women for longer and deeper than most men would consider. Meanwhile, the birth rate is continuing to fall.

We told women they could be anything they wanted to be. Women were wives and mothers for millions of years and then, all of a sudden, you are told ‘Nah, forget all that mothering stuff. You can be anything you want to be’.  That’s a hell of a mindrush, right there. Where do you even begin to make a decision like that? And the birth rate fell a bit more.

Being just a wife and mother is now so disregarded and financially impossible in our society that it is barely considered. So, now, women can’t be what they are best at, what they have evolved to be good at. Motherhood is now just an ‘optional extra’ for those that can find the time, money and energy.

Then we (men), invented the internet. At which point all of the horrors of the world became visible to women. Plus, the internet meant that women could network with other women at scales that had never before been possible.

Now the most strident of the Feminists started to assert themselves on a much greater scale. They wanted to assert their own views on politics according to female values. Equity, inclusion, diversity, fairness, safety – all started appearing in the political lexicon and all originating from women’s collective mindsets. The Great Awokening had begun. Critical Race Theory. Critical Gender Theory. Hate Speech laws. Extreme Feminism. Cultural marxism was all the rage.

In short, nen allowed to be the authors of their own lives. They have the same rights as men.

Yet, we now have a situation where women are angry and unhappy. Rather than draw the obvious conclusion that swapping female responsibilities for male responsibilities is contrary to their natural instincts and is making them unhappy, feminists have decided it is men’s faults that they are unhappy. They seem to feel that  the unhappier they are, it must still be The Patriarchy oppressing them in some way. Feminists are totally responsible for the decisions they have made yet they dont want to accept that responsibility, hence they look for someone to blame: men!

Liberal women still don’t realise that rights come with responsibilities and women don’t appear to be coping very well with the responsibilities they have accrued over the last 100 years.

Objectively,  it is clear that women are not oppressed. What is more likely is that women, collectively, are showing signs of stress. This stress is accentuating female disposition towards anxiety and neuroticism.

Emotional and mental signs of stress include anxiety, irritability, restlessness, feeling overwhelmed, sadness, depression, difficulty concentrating, forgetfulness, racing thoughts, poor decision-making, and mood swings.

These traits certainly explain the ‘Karen’ phenomenon. I would suggest they also explain the number of women resorting to mood stabilisers.

Women are confusing stress with oppression. The last 100 years have not been kind to women but they need to appreciate the real reasons for their unhappiness. They have been given everything they wanted and it hasn’t made them happy.

I’m not saying that women should not have been given the vote, but everything that has happened to women since then can be traced directly back to that action.

How many women would give up all of these responsibilities they have accrued over the last 100 years? Very few, would be my guess (in large part due to the fact that women have been placed in competition with men for decades now and no longer wish men to have autonomy over them). I get it: you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube. However, I cannot see any way that this situation is going to improve.

Whatever is happening to women appears to be accelerating. I fear what women will become given another couple of generations.

Postscript:

I came across this Tweet recently that backs up my argument

The Globalists Have Lost Interest in Climate Change

Bill Gates now says Climate Change is not an existential threat.

The WEF turned their backs on Climate Change at Davos 2026.

Larry Fink’s annual letter to investors in 2025 made no mention of Climate Change for the first time in years.

The last couple of COP meetings have been damp squibs with no targets or agreements made.

Can you determine why the Globalists have gone cold on the concept of man-made Climate Change?

It’s because their new toy is AI and they realise that the amount of energy needed to power AI – not to mention the associated Smart Cities surveillence grids – is incompatible with expensive, intermittent energy from windmills and solar farms.

Observe as they continue to engineer a ‘repositioning’ on this issue over the next couple of years.

Of course, it is possible that the Globalists will split into two groups and a splinter group – led by Al Gore, no doubt. He is not going to give up that Golden Goose so easily – may continue to bang the Climate Change drum but, for now, the Climate Change grift is over.

You see, it was never real. As with all Globalist’ agendas, it was merely a means to an end.

Nick Hudson On How To Spot A Global Scam

I saw this 2 minute YouTube video a couple of years ago. The simplicity of Nick’s ‘rules of thumb’ really cut through at the time and I stored the video in my ‘Keep’ folder. I watched it again recently and The simplicity of Nick’s guidance atill cut through so i decided to produce a transcript of Nick’s words and post it here.

Here is the video link:

Here is the transcript:

‘The general rule of thumb that I believe everyone should adopt is that, if any problem is being presented as a global crisis, then it is a scam. And the pattern that we are confronted with is really the fabrication of global crises: the presentation either of non-existent problems or small, local problems as being general global crises. That fabrication, followed by the assertion that the only solutions that are permissible are global ones that require a global authority, global control. That is the general pattern we are up against.


The covid policy response was one of those. Look at countries like Sweden or Tanzania who tried to push back against the orthodoxy, the new orthodoxy.

And the climate crisis, the climate change crisis, is another example where we are told that the biggest threat to the world is this molecule, CO2, and that an increase in the level of this molecule will cause an increase in temperature and that the temperature increase will be bad for us and that the only thing we can do is consume fewer fossil fuels and less energy. That’s fitting the pattern exactly.


The other thing you can observe is instead of presenting science as an evolving, ongoing activity, it is presented in terms of static knowledge. Consensus. And you see the cancellation and censorship of dissident voices rather than engagement with them.


These patterns are proof of a scam. That is what people need to understand. Whenever something is presented as “The Science”, as a consensus, it IS a scam. You do not have to go and get involved in the minutiae of the scientific principles and the models and the measurements at all. You can know with absolute certainty that you are dealing with a scam when dissent is suppressed.

The Libertarian Alliance

For Life, Liberty and Property

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Cutting edge science you can dice with

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

True Masculine Value

Being a man of value in a world increasingly hostile to authentic masculinity: Redpill, Marriage, Fatherhood, Counter-Feminism.

Atticus Fox

PJ O'Rourke meets Bill Hicks

Discover WordPress

A daily selection of the best content published on WordPress, collected for you by humans who love to read.

The Atavist Magazine

PJ O'Rourke meets Bill Hicks

Longreads

Longreads : The best longform stories on the web

WordPress.com Blog

News, Tips & Website Tutorials

Create your own website, free on WordPress.com.Create your own website.
Start free