________
Source: Tessa Fights Robots
Where do we go from here?
By Tessa Lena | October 28, 2020
The peasants are getting fat, and they are breeding! Oh no.
Where do we go from here?
By Tessa Lena | October 28, 2020
What is "the Great Reset"?
The Great Reset is a massively funded, desperately ambitious, internationally coordinated project led by some of the biggest multinational corporations and financial players on the planet and carried out by cooperating state bodies and NGOs. Its soul is a combination of early 20th century science fiction, idyllic Soviet posters, the obsessiveness of a deranged accountant with a gambling addiction—and an upgraded, digital version of "Manifest Destiny."
The mathematical reason for the Great Reset is that thanks to technology, the planet has gotten small, and the infinite expansion economic model is bust—but obviously, the super wealthy want to continue staying super wealthy, and so they need a miracle, another bubble, plus a surgically precise system for managing what they perceive as "their limited resources." Thus, they desperately want a bubble providing new growth out of thin air—literally—while simultaneously they seek to tighten the peasants' belts, an effort that starts with "behavioral modification," a.k.a. resetting the western peasants' sense of entitlement to high life standards and liberties (see awful “privilege”).
The psychological reason for the Great Reset is the fear of losing control of property, the planet. I suppose, if you own billions and move trillions, your perception of reality gets funky, and everything down below looks like an ant hill that exists for you. Just ants and numbers, your assets.
Thus, the practical aim of the Great Reset is to fundamentally restructure the world's economy and geopolitical relations based on two assumptions: one, that every element of nature and every life form is a part of the global inventory (managed by the allegedly benevolent state, which, in turn, is owned by several suddenly benevolent wealthy people, via technology)—and two, that all inventory needs to be strictly accounted for: be registered in a central database, be readable by a scanner and easily ID’ed, and be managed by AI, using the latest "science." The goal is to count and then efficiently manage and control all resources, including people, on an unprecedented scale, with unprecedented digital anxiety and precision—all while the masters keep indulging, enjoying vast patches of conserved nature, free of unnecessary sovereign peasants and their unpredictability. The king's world feels far more predictable and relaxed when the chaos of human subjectivity is contained for good.
Plus, as a potentially lucrative aside, a bunch of these tightly managed "assets" can be also turned into new financial instruments and traded. Game on!
In other words, it's an "efficient" global feudalism that goes much farther than its medieval brother since the scanner is all-seeing: every person, every mineral, and every berry is digitally tagged and tracked. Under that framework, every peasant has a function that is derived not from the mystery of life, and not from their inner calling—but from AI, the master of efficiency and the servant of the king. Ideally, the peasants can be convinced that it’s good for them (or necessary to be safe, see "contact tracing") and that this is what progress and happiness are like—but if not, there are other ways, from classic violence to virtual prisons to "morality pills."
The reform in question is meant to disrupt all areas of life, on a planetary scale: government, international relations, finance, energy, food, medicine, jobs, urban planning, real estate, law enforcement, and human interactions—and it starts with changing the way we think of ourselves and our relationship with the world. Notably, privacy is a huge thorn in the collective eye of our "great resetters"—and—as I am typing this, they are pushing their sweet talking points about how privacy is really an outdated concept—especially when it comes to people's medical data, sheesh—and that we simply cannot move forward with the bright future if silly people keep clinging to their privacy.
I will briefly go over different elements of this slippery reform in a sec—but to sum it up, the desired end result is a giant, joyless, highly controlled global conveyor of everything and everybody where privacy is tremendously expensive, dissent is unthinkable, and spiritual submission is mandatory. It's like a 24/7 medicated reality, except the medications are both chemical and digital, and they are reporting you back to the mothership, which can then punish you for bad behavior by, say, blocking your access to certain places or by putting a hold on your digital bank account—perhaps without any human intervention at all.
Thus, on a sensory level—as it relates to money and power—this conveyor is an attempt of the super wealthy to organize and monetize their "assets," including people—more efficiently than ever before. On a theological level, the initiative is shaped by transhumanism, a formal belief system rooted in a pathological feeling of being repelled by all things natural—and a resulting view of biological forms as defective robots, which are made perfect, serial killer perfect, by merging with machines in a way that redefines the meaning of being alive and defies death itself.
I would like to stress that we should never underestimate the importance of subjective feelings and theology in the shaping of historical events. Our entire history is a sum of subjective choices—where the choices of the more powerful and the more driven weigh more. And religious reform, which typically stems from various powerful individuals’ subjective preference for what the big picture should be like, has been a driver of large-scale social, economic, and cultural changes on this planet for centuries. What we are looking at here is a new religion—and as much as I want to believe in the general cleanliness and rationality of the system—on the higher level, we are not dealing with a rational, scientific, honest, benevolent—or even misguided—attempt to make things better. When it comes to the masterminds of the Great Reset, we are dealing with a combination of standard greed—and the emotional pathology of restless, rotting madmen who are freaking out over the maintenance of their property in this new era, and who resent their biological nature as such and want to be gods. Sadly, the crazies are rich and well-connected, and they can hire a million underlings to put on a convincing, feel-good, rational external-facing presentation about their new religion. And to bribe the media. And politicians. And academics. And campaign organizers. And non-profits. And let's not forget my brethren, the artists, who, out of starvation and indignity, will then create beautiful, artful, moving ads for anything that pays. And by the time the circle is complete, we have a brand new public opinion and technically, still a "democracy"! If only those conspiracy theorists went away…
So, who are the people leading this, and how coordinated is this effort?
From the looks of it, it seems to be the usual suspects: top capitalists of the world, historically wealthy dynasties from different parts of Earth, members of secular and religious royalty, billionaires, etc.—in other words, it’s the people who have enough money to feel like this world is theirs, the 0.0001%—and maybe also the people immediately under them who are seeking upward mobility. Some familiar faces, some faces we've never seen.
Obviously, they are not a monolithic mass, and I am sure that they don't agree with each other on everything and probably compete over who gets to eat more peasants. There is certainly rivalry between the American and the Chinese elites, for example, or between the American and the Russian elites—as well as between different individual super sharks. But all in all, even as they compete, they have shared interests and shared messaging, and there is more strategic camaraderie and common ground between them than between any of them and any of the peasants. For example, none of them is likely to turn down the idea of creating a new class of financial assets to make money off! In addition, they also have advisers—who, in turn, are competing with each other for the highest pay, trying to push their ideas through. All subjective, yet also extensively—and expensively—coordinated in areas of their shared interests.
And currently, the "winning" concept of the day seems to be a world filled with abbreviations: AI, 5G, IoT, and so on. A world where the money is digital, the food is lab-grown, where everything is counted and controlled by giant monopolies, and the people are largely deprived of free will. A world where each element of nature and each living being is either a data host, or a source of energy—or both. A world where the flow of the peasants' everyday is micromanaged by ever-monitoring, ever-nudging AI that registers thoughts and feelings before the people even get a chance to make those thoughts and feeling their own. A world where living itself is outsourced to the machine, and a human being is essentially a meat suit.
Now, I don't think that this exact vision will ever come true in full. It is likely to implode before it gets half-way there—and some of what I just described is no more than daydreaming of a very broken mind. But the powerful crazies are trying their best to make this nightmare reality. Thus, the danger is not in being overtaken by suddenly self-conscious AI but in the disruption of normal life and in the utter misery that the crazies may cause to our minds and bodies as they rush to slice and dice the world, using various convenient catch phrases such as "global health crisis” or “climate change."
And yes, there is definitely coordination and continuity, as there is continuity in dynasties and philosophical trends. Some of it is more ephemeral, and some of it is more concrete. On the ephemeral side, the vision of the "resetters" is related to the futuristic ideas that were popular in the early 20th century, to the dream of a global corporate monopoly that propped up the bolshevik revolution of 1917, and to the overall crave of controlling the world with technology, something that was attempted and failed in the Soviet Union in the 60s—using the language very similar to today's. On the concrete side, the Great Reset (which by the way is very well coordinated, to the extent that both Biden and Johnson are using the same coded words put forward by the WEF) grows out of the post-WWII efforts to maintain a "correct" power balance in the world, with "correct" financial interests reaping the benefits.
The "sustainability" language, which is an important pillar of the Great Reset marketing kit, was initially created as a part of various United Nation's programs—such as "Agenda 21" and "Agenda 2030," and I am sure that during the production of those programs, both elements—conspiracy and benevolence—were present. Both are sets of extremely dry and boring documents about resource management and justice, which read like something written by a tired, square Soviet teacher with a good grasp of bureaucratic terms, written mostly to justify the paycheck of the bureaucrats and the existence of the United Nations. What's interesting about the latter is that typically, the UN is pretty useless, meaning that people get together, talk, come up with long bureaucratic documents and non-binding resolutions—and then nothing of essence happens. But not this time. Not now. The program’s on! So it must be important to somebody who's paying. And yes, I am cynical. In everything that happens, there is always a combination of good intentions, greed, ambition, personal relationships, financial interests, delusions, and so on. Politicians talk to financiers, generals talk to politicians, somebody is somebody else’s uncle, and this is how things get done. Unfortunately, the less straightforward the top-down messaging, and the more abundant the propaganda, the less the value of good intentions, and the easier it is for villains to pull off utter absurdities.
And of course, initiatives of such great magnitude may go through very long and quiet "planning phases," during which the desired ideas are being planted in the heads of the desired people through private conversations, small meeting, funded research, industry conventions, and the like. So by the time the "action" button is pressed, it feels like a trend is already there. And let me repeat again, absolutely everything in history is a result of subjective choices made by subjective people. The way everything in history happens is that people get together, decide what they want to do, and do it. When important people act, the impact is more visible. So, in a way, everything is a "conspiracy," because everything comes through human agency. And often, the important people cover up their deeds, that shouldn’t be a radical idea.
And yes, by now, the top power holders in the West have figured out that it's more cost-effective and less labor-consuming for them to just bribe the media "of record," the scientists, the academics, the politicians, and even the "controlled opposition"—and have them convince the peasants—than to police everything and everyone by force. And by the way, while the pinnacle of this tower is a conspiracy in earnest, in a sense of it being a coordinated effort where the masterminds are acting in general alignment with each other, without disclosing their true long-term goals to the peasants—the rest of the tower is probably the usual human stuff, multiplied by the lack of the old-fashioned, moral sense of responsibility. The usual human stuff is a medley of ambition, hustling, greed, carelessness, arrogance, and even good intentions. The closer to the bottom, the more ignorance and the better the intentions—because most people do believe that they are doing good—but it doesn't change the tragic trajectory of the "resetting" cavalcade.
Okay but maybe hold on, there is a real crisis, and the rich have woken up because they want to live? What if there is no conspiracy per se, and they have simply realized that the planet is a mess, and now they want to address the issues of overpopulation and pollution because there really are too many people on the planet who are all over-consuming and polluting? What do you say to that?
I am glad you asked, so let’s talk about that.
It is absolutely true that the soulless, utilitarian approach to nature, to life, and to other living beings has been extremely destructive—with the most immediate, most visible destruction outsourced to "third world countries" and to the less financially fortunate people in the West. (See landfills, Cancer Alley, and unhealthy, poison-filled non-organic foods). It is true that massive consumerism and the use disposables (brought to us by more or less the same parties who are now scolding people for consumerism) have created a lot of messes. It is true that our oceans and lungs are full of plastic, that the amount of chronic disease is skyrocketing, and that many species are dying off. It is true that our soil, our food, and our bodies are tainted with highly toxic glyphosate. It is true that usually, decades pass between the time manufacturers realize the toxicity of their product and the time when saying so in a conversation stops being a conspiracy theory. All true. However, it is also true that the people who are pointing fingers at social ills and telling us that we need a Great Reset are from same camps and lineages that have caused it in the first place. It is true that underneath the language of their marketing brochures, there is toxicity and havoc that greatly exceed what we have today. Thus, they are either idiots or liars—and I am afraid it is the latter. However rich, they are not even remotely morally qualified to fix anything in this world. And whatever we choose to do to heal our relationship with nature and with each other—it definitely isn't the technofascist, neofeudal Great Reset.
A metaphor: If the leader of the Rapists Party came up with a Platform Against Rape that didn’t stop the raping but that rebranded the very act by saying that if one uses a pink dildo made of recycled plastic to penetrate, then it's not rape… would you think it's a platform against rape in earnest?
Please go to Tessa Fights Robots to read the entire essay.
________
More:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.