Technocracy Ascending

DavidIcke.com | Sam Fenny

Parts 1-4

Jesse Smith | TruthUnmuted.com

Part 1: Why It’s Crucial to Understand the End Game

Major shake-ups are occurring across the global stage. History is replete with examples of breaks with the past from major political, economic, technological, and social upheaval. Throughout the ages, many self-serving individuals and groups have positioned themselves as rulers, financiers, benefactors, and thought leaders to steer change toward preferred outcomes. From the Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt to the Jacobin and Napoleon-led French Revolution in the late 18^th century, societal transformation has been constant as one form of government replaces another.

We have now arrived at yet another historical inflection point. The desire for political and economic reconstruction is being demanded globally as the gap between the ultra-wealthy and everyone else continues to accelerate. In recent years, populism has taken flight by inspiring the masses to reject the rule of “the elite” and chart a new course. However, without scrutiny, this movement and its key figures could be just as dangerous as the establishment they are attempting to usurp. In fact, what we are witnessing is not populism in its truest sense but techno-populism or technocracy, as it has been called since its inception in 1920.

Technocracy originated in the winter of 1918-19 when Howard Scott formed a group of scientists, engineers, and economists that became known in 1920 as the Technical Alliance — a research organization. In 1933 it was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York as a nonprofit, non-political, non-sectarian membership organization.” – The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

What is Technocracy?

Historically, technocracy has not been well received. In fact, many who accurately comprehended its goals viewed it as a threat to democracy and the debt-based economic order run by the central banking establishment that has dominated the last century. Technocrats railed against this “Price System,” arguing it alone was to blame for the inequalities and inefficiencies of society. There is definitely some truth to their claims.

Under the Price System at its best there is not a single field of endeavor where the best technical standards are allowed to prevail. In other words, poverty, waste, crime, poor public health, bad living conditions, enforced scarcity, and low load-factors, are every one the direct and necessary consequences of the Price System… What we have tried to make clear is that it is the Price System itself, and not the individual human being, which is at fault.” – Technocracy Study Course, Technocracy Inc. 1933, p.176

Technocracy can be defined simply as an impersonal and scientific method of managing all aspects of a society. Its primary concerns deal with how energy is produced and used. But it goes much deeper than this. One of the best explanations can be found in an issue of The Technocrat magazine from September 1937, where it states:

Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population of this continent. For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem. There will be no place for Politics or Politicians, Finance or Financeers, Rackets or Racketeers.”

The technocratic dream is revolutionary in scope, envisioning a total reorganization of industry, government, and law and order. They readily admit their intent is to socially engineer all of society, seize control of the production and distribution of all goods and services, and rid the world of rule by politicians and (traditional) financial controllers. The U.S. Constitution is also viewed as a relic, completely unfit to serve as a basis of governance and human rights.

Another job which has been neglected far too long is the rebuilding of our governmental machinery, from the village level right up to Congress. It cannot be avoided much longer, simply because the country has outgrown the constitutional clothes which the Founding Fathers tailored for it nearly two centuries ago. They have become as anachronistic, and as impractical, as a Pilgrim’s costume on an astronaut.” – Edith Chamberlain, The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

Technocrats make no pretense about maintaining a representative form of government be it a republic (as the USA was founded as) or democracy (what the USA has become). Its goal is to establish a scientific dictatorship to initiate and control all societal functions. Technocrats distanced themselves and were highly critical of fascists, communists, socialists, and other political movements but don’t have a problem with their own totalitarian style of rule termed a Technate.

Technocracy finds that the production and distribution of an abundance of physical wealth on a Continental scale for the use of all Continental citizens can only be accomplished by a Continental technological control, a governance of function, a Technate.”
– Technocracy Study Course, Technocracy Inc. 1933

Figure 22.1 from the Technocracy Study Course illustrates the point above revealing that technocracy is simply another form of top-down rule with a Continental Director having total authority of all societal functions.

A December 1964, issue of The Technocrat magazine further explained that:

Technocracy holds that all decisions pertaining to the functional operation of the society — the production and distribution of goods and services, research, and governance — should be made by technical men and women. This does not mean that the technical people should leave their technical positions and go into politics, law, business promotion, public relations, and moral philosophy. Rather, it means that the scientists, technologists, engineers, and technicians shall continue to operate as such and that the decision-making of the society be moved into their functional realms.”

Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C. Form the Seat of Modern Technocracy

Regardless of one’s comprehension of technocratic plans, a monumental reshaping of governments, economies, and societies is occurring, but not by elected representatives, constitutions, creeds, or the will of the people. Power is now concentrated in the hands of an exclusive class of scientists, technologists, engineers, and technicians—many of whom also happen to head multi-billion-dollar corporations.

We are also finding that technology has made people more isolated and infringes upon privacy with consequences yet to be realized. When we see the relationship between tech companies and government flourish, we are ultimately watching the implementation of a full-fledged technocracy.”
– Pendleton, Joseph. Californication: The Rise of the American Technocracy (p. 20). The Conservatarian Press.

Silicon Valley is the seat of modern technocracy. Big Tech is the euphemism for which it’s currently known. The World Economic Forum defines this dynamic as public-private partnerships (PPP).

Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Marc Andreeson are some of today’s most prominent techno-populists. Many believe they are modern day Justice League type heroes leading the world to newfound freedom (or at least in the United States). All were major contributors to Donald Trump’s reelection campaign in 2024. Vice President-Elect J.D. Vance has deep connections to Peter Thiel, indicating how close technocrats truly are to running the country.

Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, and Sam Altman are also among the many tech gurus aligning themselves with the newly elected Trump administration. These endorsements indicate that for now, technocrats are content with using politicians and the political system to quietly transform the government into a full-fledged Technate from the inside out and vice versa.

It is the man who has command of the technical information who makes the real decisions in the functional phases of modern life. He is the only one who understands what needs to be done and how to do it. The politicians and financial manipulators who pretend that the right of decision is theirs are helpless without the technical men.” – The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

Something else technocrats correctly understood was the sham of voting and elections. Perhaps this is another reason why they stayed hidden in times past, realizing the populace was not ready to accept this truth.

In the United States, it is generally assumed that the people vote for the kind of government they want, but that is not exactly true. Technically, they do not even vote directly for their president; they vote for electors who, in turn, are tacitly committed to vote for indicated candidates, the exact rules varying with the different states. Moreover, the public has little voice in choosing the candidates; it usually ends up with their having a choice between two men chosen by the respective political party ‘machines.’ And they have less choice concerning the policies of the president. Once elected, the president is under no real obligation to heed the desires of the people and often acts contrary to his campaign promises.” The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

Would Donald Trump have been “reelected” without the help of the aforementioned technocrats? Now that he will resume the Presidency, will he be more beholden to the people or his big moneyed investors from Silicon Valley?

Why is Technocracy Ascending Now?

Technocracy has long been resisted by traditional powers and was originally conceived only for the North American Continent. Today, technocracy is rising from the ashes like the Phoenix legend to become a global force to be reckoned with. I believe this is largely because of the pending economic meltdown. The debt-based, fiat currency system is at the end of its life cycle and the central bank establishment is looking for new ways to maintain control of the monetary system. They have joined ranks with the technocrats who were correct in predicting that the system would crash (though it has yet to take place due to manipulation tactics keeping it at bay).

If the human race on this Continent is to survive the crash of the Price System, Technocracy will have to be put into practice.” – Technocracy in Plain Terms, Technocracy Inc. 1939

By adopting technocracy, the banking elite not only can retain control over the monetary system, they will also cement their rule over all industries, natural resources, governments, institutions, and people.

Technocracy Wouldn’t Exist Without Advances in Technology

Big Tech products are ubiquitous and thought to be indispensable in our ultramodern, future-oriented world. AI, robotics, and the Internet of Things (IoT) are touted as catalysts that can lead to a future of ease and prosperity for all. These technologies and more are considered part of the Fourth Industrial Revolution aka Industry 4.0, where the shift to digital technologies will supersede past ways of conducting business, communicating, and governing with one major caveat: the potential to overtake humanity itself and render humans as “hackable animals” and “useless people.” Consider the following statements from some of the world’s most prominent thought leaders.

“Technologies that are emerging today will soon be shaping the world tomorrow and well into the future – with impacts to economies and to society at large. Now that we are well into the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it’s critical that we discuss and ensure that humanity is served by these new innovations so that we can continue to prosper.”
– Mariette DiChristina, (former) Editor-in-Chief of Scientific American, and chair of the Emerging Technologies Steering Committee

“We must develop a comprehensive and globally shared view of how technology is affecting our lives and reshaping our economic, social, cultural, and human environments. There has never been a time of greater promise, or greater peril.”
– Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum

“Now, fast forward to the early 21st century when we just don’t need the vast majority of the population… Most people don’t contribute anything to that, except perhaps for their data, and whatever people are still doing which is useful, these technologies increasingly will make redundant and will make it possible to replace the people.”
– Yuval Noah Harrari, Author, Historian, and Philosopher

“Probably none of us will have a job.”
– Elon Musk (referring to the rise of Artificial Intelligence)

Paradoxically, technocracy claims to enable widespread prosperity while also rendering the lot of humanity replaceable, useless, and without meaning. How can this be? To technocrats of yesteryear, there was not much difference between human beings, dogs, pigs, and cars. The belief that humans are the capstone of all creation and made in the image of God was routinely mocked and discredited. In a chapter entitled, The Human Animal, the Technocracy Study Course further elaborates on its base view of humanity, stating:

The developments in the fields of physiology, biochemistry and biophysics, chiefly since 1900, are at last bringing us down to earth. Attention has already been called to the fact that the human body is composed chemically of the ordinary substances of which rocks are made. So are dogs, horses and pigs. In an earlier lesson, while discussing the ‘human engine,’ we pointed out that the human body obeys identically the same laws of energy transformation as a steam engine. This also is true of dogs, horses and pigs. These facts might lead one to suspect that human beings are very far removed from the semi-supernatural creatures they have heretofore supposed themselves to be…

When we observe a human being we merely perceive an object which makes a certain variety of motions and noises. The same is true, however, when we observe a dog or a Ford car.”

Modern technocrats also view the human as mere biological material that can be manipulated as needed, as evidenced by World Economic Forum Founder and Chairman Klaus Schwab:

This Fourth Industrial Revolution is, however, fundamentally different. It is characterized by a range of new technologies that are fusing the physical, digital, and biological worlds, impacting all disciplines, economies and industries, and even challenging ideas about what it means to be human.”

Contemporary technocracy has now merged with transhumanism forming a dangerous combination, as noted by author Patrick Wood, who wrote:

Technocrats see science and technology as the answer to improve and control society; transhumanists see the same science and technology as the answer to improve and control the human condition.”
– The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism (p. 19). Coherent Publishing, LLC.

Why You Should Care About the Rise of Technocracy

Hopefully all the dots are starting to connect, enabling you to see where all of this is heading. Technocracy’s ascendance is a threat to all of humanity. Technocrats promise a utopian existence where abundance is the norm and work is optional, if not completely unnecessary. The self-appointed leaders believe they know best how to manage the world’s resources and its people. To accomplish these lofty goals, the social structure will have to undergo drastic changes which include redefining work and wages. The following excerpt from the Technocracy Study Course provides a detailed overview of what this entails.

“If the production is to be non-oscillatory and maintained at a high level so as to provide a high standard of living, it follows that consumption must be kept equal to production, and that a system of distribution must be designed which will allow this. This system of distribution must do the following things:

1. Register on a continuous 24-hour time period basis the total net conversion of energy, which would determine (a) the availability of energy for Continental plant construction and maintenance, (b) the amount of physical wealth available in the form of consumable goods and services for consumption by the total population during the balanced load period.
2. By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
3. Provide a continuous 24-hour inventory of all production and consumption.
4. Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced, and where used.
5. Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.
6. Allow the citizen the widest latitude of choice in consuming his individual share of Continental physical wealth.
7. Distribute goods and services to every member of the population.

In short, the goal of technocracy is to micromanage everything you do, produce, and consume through nonstop surveillance. This was not technically possible with the crude paper methods proposed by early technocrats. However, it is becoming achievable with the advent of digital technologies such as biometrics, Big Data, geospatial intelligence, digital currency, AI, and 5G. In a Technate, there will be no free-market economy where the average person could obtain wealth by starting a business or embarking upon a lucrative career path. Instead, technocrats promise each person a share of the overall wealth produced through the issue of Energy Certificates.

Under a technological administration of abundance, there is only one efficient method—that employing a system of Energy Certificates…These certificates are merely pieces of paper containing certain printed matter. They are issued individually to every adult of the entire population. The certificates issued to an individual may be thought of as possessing some of the properties both of bank cheque and of a traveler’s cheque. They would resemble a bank cheque in that they carry no face denomination. They receive their denomination only when being spent. They resemble a traveler’s cheque in that they possess some means of ready identification, such as counter-signature, photograph, or some similar device, so as to establish easy identification by the person to whom issued, and at the same time remain absolutely useless in the hands of anyone else.” – Technocracy Study Course, p.230

Today, Energy Certificates could take the form of Universal Basic/High Income payments issued in the form of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) or some other form of digital currency. Corporate transactions could be conducted via carbon credits. Regardless of the mechanism of financial transfer, the individual will be totally dependent on the Technate with everything one does requiring a digital ID.

The American dream of upward mobility, already heading toward extinction, will receive the knockout blow in a technocratic regime. Instead, compliance and energy usage will determine your level of prosperity. Property rights will also go out the window as the plan is to revolutionize housing into energy-efficient units with little variety and few manufacturers. This could occur today through the combination of an economic crisis wiping out individual wealth and mass printing of 3D houses fit for the technocratic era.

As envisioned, technocracy is no better than communism, fascism, or socialism. It’s just another power grab by individuals who believe they are smarter than the rest of us, with a promised utopia that will never materialize.

These prognostications may seem far-fetched now, but the rest of this series will spell out in detail how close the technocratic fantasy is becoming a reality. It is important for people everywhere to understand the implications of what is taking place and not be fooled by wolves in sheep’s clothing proclaiming a new golden age of humanity is imminent. The question is, a golden age for who? Cui bono?

Source: https://truthunmuted.org/technocracy-rising-part-1-why-its-crucial-to-understand-the-end-game/

Technocracy Ascending

Part 2: Trust Me, I’m a Technocrat

Jesse Smith | TruthUnmuted.com

Part 1 [above] of this series detailed a brief history of the movement started by Technocracy Inc. in the 1930s to completely transform North America into a scientific dictatorship. Their vision of a technocratic regime required all industry, resources, and governance be managed by scientists, engineers, and technicians.

Today, many aspects of their original plans are being executed through intentional collaboration between Big Tech, government, and NGOs, with power continually shifting toward present-day tech titans. The questions this installment seeks to answer are: (1) who authorized today’s technocrats to act in humanity’s interest, (2) what is their overarching world view, and (3) what are they hoping to accomplish?

Though they would argue, technocratic governments trend toward elitist rule. How could they not since technocracy’s core tenet posits that only the best and brightest (and often wealthiest) in STEM-related fields are fit to run society? Technocrats are averse to all political systems, believing they alone possess the knowledge and skill required to achieve the “common good” in all societies. Nevertheless, they often work behind the scenes within all forms of government to achieve their means. While promising equality, their rule can be more accurately described as a technical oligarchy, hence the need for extreme caution.

Such an organization has no precedence in any of the political forms. It is neither a democracy, an aristocracy, a plutocracy, a dictatorship, nor any of the other familiar political forms, all of which are completely inadequate and incompetent to handle the job. It is, instead, a Technocracy, being built along the technological lines of the job in hand.”
– Technocracy Study Course, 1934. p.234

Early technocrats recognized that the world was trending toward greater levels of technological advancement. As a result, most would become dependent on these innovations for essential needs.

In the present, as contrasted with the past, the great majority of the population is in a position of absolute dependence upon the uninterrupted operation of a technological mechanism.”
– Technocracy Study Course, 1934. p. 211

Technocrats thought the best way to provide goods and services was to commandeer the equipment needed to produce basic necessities. They created a system where equal distribution of goods and services would be fostered by substituting money for energy costs. To fully institute this radical transformation, technocrats needed ownership and oversight of the railways, power plants, telecommunications systems, factories, farms, etc. This system was described fully in the Technocracy Study Course published in 1934. The end products to be attained were:

“(a) a high physical standard of living, (b) a high standard of public health, (c) a minimum of unnecessary labor, (d) a minimum of wastage of nonreplaceable resources, (e) an educational system to train the entire younger generation indiscriminately as regards all considerations other than inherent ability—a Continental system of human conditioning.” (emphasis added)

As touched on previously, technocrats believed the “price-based” economic system would crash and burn, leaving a trail of disaster in its wake. They viewed the Great Depression as proof of capitalism’s imminent demise. With full confidence in their plans to reengineer the (North American) continent, they boasted that:

“Technocracy will not perish. After the inevitable collapse of our stupendous financial and political structure, after the many palliatives have been tried and have failed, it will still remain. Technocracy is the one workable answer to the frightening dilemma in which we find ourselves.”
– Technocracy in Plain Terms, p. 6

Some of the initial plans of Technocracy Inc. in the 1930s have been adopted well beyond North American borders and gone through several iterations before arriving at what we are today. Many of their boasts have been proven accurate and threaten to plunge the world into a neo-feudal state worse than anything that has preceded.

Why is Trust Shifting Towards Technocrats?

Technocracy becomes a form of salvation after societies realize that democracy doesn’t guarantee national success. Democracy eventually gets sick of itself and votes for technocracy.”
– Parag Khanna, Technocracy in America: The Rise of the Info State, 2017, p. 21

Technocracy (the system) and technology (the tools) are the hand and glove of the new order being established across the planet. Throughout the world, politicians and leaders are summoning the help of technocrats to help fix broken economies and governments.

Technocracy has previously taken root in or is currently being advocated for in countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, China, Italy,India, Singapore, Lebanon, France, Pakistan, Indonesia, Mexico, Sudan, Tunisia, Ghana, and Nigeria among several others. Hamas and Fatah have agreed to install a technocratic government to manage the Gaza Strip after warfare has ceased. Technocrats in the Caribbean nation of Saint Lucia are collaborating with German officials to secure funding for damages resulting from the so-called climate change crisis. Technocrats in Iran have advocated for the end of hostilities with the United States, believing they can collaborate with the incoming Trump administration, who has also surrounded himself with technocrats for his second term.

Illustration appearing in a 1933 edition of The Technocrat magazine titled “Technocracy A Bloodless Revolution”

Pew Research conducted two recent surveys indicating that satisfaction with democratic governments is declining among wealthy nations with more people critical of their effectiveness. In addition, Pew has also confirmed public attitudes are becoming increasingly favorable to technocratic regimes citing that, “Majorities in two-thirds of the (twenty four) countries surveyed say this would be a good way to govern.” Pew added that, “Since 2017, the number of technocracy supporters has gone up in most of the countries surveyed.”

Technocracy starts out with the facts at hand which indicate what the next most probable state of society will be, and whether that state will be desirable from the standpoint of people’s opinions or not, has nothing to do with the question. However, and fortunately, it all seems to be highly desirable, even to the most skeptical.”
– Technocracy in Plain Terms, p. 9

If surveys are reliable indicators, public trust has seemingly shifted from democratic governments to trust in CEOs, tech wizards, and scientific scholars. But is the nature of this shift an organic occurrence or something that’s been carefully manufactured?

Manufacturing Trust in Technocratic Saviors

One of the main purposes for this series is to show that technocracy is not a new concept and didn’t just arrive on the scene with familiar names such as Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. Despite the seemingly noble intentions of early technocrats, humans lusting for money and power have a way of pouncing on fresh ideas that can expedite their plans.

Theorizing that the world was in a transition to a new fourth era, the late Zbigniew Brzezinski anticipated in 1970 that:

Another threat … confronts liberal democracy. More directly linked to the impact of technology, it involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled and directed society.Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control” (emphasis added).
– Brzezinski, Zbigniew. Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, Viking Press, 1970, pp. 252-253.

In a prior article written for Encounter, a British literary magazine secretly funded by the CIA to promote American foreign policy agendas, Brzezinski wrote:

“In the technetronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason” (p. 19, emphasis added).

“At the same time, the capacity to assert social and political control over the individual will vastly increase” (p.21, emphasis added).

“Power will gravitate into the hands of those who control the information and can correlate it most rapidly. Our existing post-crisis management institutions will probably be increasingly supplanted by pre-crisis management institutions, the task of which will be to identify in advance likely social crises and to develop programmes to cope with them. This could encourage tendencies during the next several decades towards a technocratic dictatorship, leaving less and less room for political procedures as we now know them” (p.21, emphasis added).

Brzezinski wasn’t just some prescient academic, but an active member of a secret cabal working to bring his prophecies to fruition. If you simply substitute the term “technetronic” for technocracy, it all becomes clear. Consider the similarities between Brzezinski’s statements and those of Technocracy Inc.

“Technocracy is the science of social engineering…”
– The Technocrat, 1937, p. 3

“Technocracy does not concern itself with human emotions or antagonisms, or political dogmas or beliefs… Technocracy stands for reconstruction and a new form of control…”
– Technocracy in Plain Terms, p. 14

“If the people of North America—the rich as well as the poor, as none are immune— are to escape the stark horror of famine and barbarism which may follow this crash, Technocracy will have to save them. Only Technocracy can do it—Technocracy, the scientific control of all social functions.”
– Technocracy in Plain Terms, p. 6

“All scientific indicators point to the probability that the next social state shall be a Technocracy.”
– Wilton Ivie, The Technocrat, December 1964, p. 5

The world Brzezinski described has almost fully arrived, but increasingly positive attitudes toward technocracy do not reflect a grass-roots phenomenon. Mindsets are being deliberately engineered to produce a new form of social control, as both Brzezinski and early Technocrats explained. Emotions are being manipulated and reason is being controlled to crush traditional values and beliefs under the boot of an elite agenda stealthily taking hold of governments and industries. The (purposely arranged) chaos plaguing the world has opened the door for technocrats offering solutions to achieve fiscal stability, social cohesion, and comfort and ease in a high-tech utopia. Many are taking the bait.

If asked who authorized them to enact such broad and revolutionary changes, most technocrats would answer that you and I did. Though you may vehemently oppose their agenda, your consent is implicit through the gaggle of government and NGO representatives acting on your behalf. The world view of technocrats puts them at the top of society, functioning as owners and operators while paying lip service to ideas like democracy, equality, and justice. The game has been rigged and many have been seduced into cheering for the “fixers,” ignorant of the real plans to create a more controlled and surveilled society, just as Brzezinski foresaw in Between Two Ages:

…it will soon be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and to maintain up-to-date, complete files, containing even most personal information about the health or personal behaviour of the citizen, in addition to more customary data. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities” (emphasis added).

How Technocrats Pulled Off a Silent Coup

Technocracy’s end game was already revealed in Part 1. Future installments will detail current plans designed to bring us to this stage. But before discussing the present situation, a continued analysis of the past is in order.

Brzezinski was a professor at Columbia University, a school with deep connections to the Rockefeller dynasty and a launching pad for their foray into pharmaceuticals and allopathic medicine. In a curious connection, Technocracy Inc. was also established at Columbia University’s School of Engineering in 1931 by founders Howard Scott and Walter Rautenstrauch. Technocracy may have begun on a college campus in New York City, but it began to spread rapidly even after its heyday in the 1930s-40s when it boasted half a million members.

As a Rockefeller protégé, Brzezinski helped David Rockefeller, CEO and chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank (now JP Morgan Chase and branch of the Rothschild banking cartel), establish the Trilateral Commission in 1973. The Trilaterals sought to create a “New International Economic Order” with greater collaboration between the U.S., Europe, and Asia. This collaboration served to benefit the Rockefellers and their wealthy clique through the adoption of favorable policies and agreements. It broadened global trade and created conditions allowing the techno-oligarchs to exploit the abundant natural resources of territories once inaccessible.

President Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzeziński aboard Air Force One

The Trilateral Commission achieved a silent coup with the Carter administration of the late 1970s. President Carter, Vice President Walter Mondale, and Brzezinski serving as National Security Advisor were all members, but the penetration went much deeper.

As of 25 December 1976, therefore, there were nineteen commissioners, including Carter and Mondale, holding tremendous political power. These presidential appointees represented almost one-third of the Trilateral Commission members from the United States.”
– Sutton, Anthony and Wood, Patrick, Trilaterals Over Washington, 1978, The August Corporation, p. 2

The Rockefellers were fierce advocates for world government and instrumental in founding the United Nations to achieve that purpose after their initial plan for a League of Nations failed. In addition to their Standard Oil dynasty, the Rockefellers influenced public health through a long time partnership with the World Health Organization.

Through the Rockefeller Foundation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Family Fund, and Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors they have financed scores of NGOs, universities, and businesses extending their influence around the world. They were also instrumental in the creation, funding, and/or leadership of elitist organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Bilderberg Group, and The Club of Rome pushing ideologies such as eugenics and population control, global religion, and global governance while meeting in secret.

David Rockefeller. Credit: Digital Commons @ RU

Regarding his role in advocating for world government, David once stated:

“But [today] the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.”
– 1991 speech at Bilderberg meeting in Berlin

Confirming his complicity in attempting to form a world government, he wrote in his Memoirs:

“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are … conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Affirming the alignment with technocratic goals, Brzezinski wrote:

“Technological developments make it certain that modern society will require more and more planning. Deliberate management of the American future will become widespread, with the planner eventually displacing the lawyer as the key social legislator and manipulator …. How to combine social planning with personal freedom is already emerging as the key dilemma of technetronic America…” (emphasis added).
– Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, p. 260

The Rockefellers and their minions were not alone in these pursuits as the wealthy titans of the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries joined them in creating other philanthropic institutions like the Ford and Carnegie Foundations. However, their altruism was just a guise to obtain greater power and influence.

The major philanthropic foundations created by America’s ‘robber baron’ industrialists and bankers were established not to benefit mankind, as was their stated purpose, but to benefit the bankers and industrialist elites in order to engage in social engineering. Through banks, these powerful families controlled the global economy; through think tanks, they manage the political and foreign policy establishments; and through foundations, they engineer society itself according to their own designs and interests.”
– Andrew Gavin Marshall

Even AI is hip to the globalist’s game. At the 2023 Annual Trilateral Commission meeting in which an unnamed speaker declared 2023 to be “year one of this new global order,” attendees asked ChatGPT to create a poem about the organization. The following is one of the entries:

“In secret meetings, you plan and conspire,
To create a new order, of which you aspire.
Your goals are unclear, but some see the end,
As a world government, with you as its friend.”

Technocracy Ascending, a Fait Accompli?

Is technocratic governance a fait accompli too powerful to resist? As previously established, technocracy is all about control. Control of resources, government, economies, goods and services, data, and people. Proponents do not hesitate to conduct mass surveillance, engage in mind control, and employ propaganda to steer human behavior. They justify strict control and pervasive surveillance as methods to quell civil unrest as societal conditions continue to deteriorate. Until a critical mass of people are both aware of and actively resistant to the technocratic agenda it may continue largely unabated, but it is far from an undefeatable foe.

Many technocrats view themselves as saviors and authorized themselves to fix the myriad problems humanity faces. Believing they are possessors of the “one workable answer,” they’re attempting to fashion a world unaffected by the capriciousness of the human condition. They despise spontaneity and unexpected outcomes, instead preferring a scientific, fact-based worldview that reduces inconsistencies and variables that occur with current governance models. Their solutions depend on the expanded and efficient use of snake oil digital technology and data and the overt or implicit consent of the people.

Technocratic intervention in society has often been a short-lived experiment, much to the chagrin of the utopian hopium brokers. To remedy this, a more comprehensive long-term plan was devised, merging technocracy and environmentalism to accelerate the shift of global wealth and societal control upward. This global movement threatens to upend all of society by the year 2030.

Part 3 [below] will expose this dangerous conspiracy.

Source: https://truthunmuted.org/technocracy-ascending-part-2-trust-me-im-a-technocrat/

Technocracy Ascending-Part 3: Green Sustainable Slavery

Jesse Smith | TruthUnmuted.com

As detailed in Part 2 of “Technocracy Ascending,” David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the Trilateral Commission achieved a great deal in moving the world toward a new international economic order and global governance (i.e., a new world order). Brzezinski understood the decline of nation states was a necessity for advancing a global order where the private banking cabal and transnational corporations assumed political dominance. In his book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, Brzezinski stated that:

The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.”

Technocracy Inc. was one of the early movements campaigning for centralized control at the expense of democracy. Though their initial aim was to transform the North American continent into a scientific dictatorship, the Rockefeller clan pushed these ideas globally. Working through their vast, interwoven network of corporate, academic, political, and philanthropic institutions, they advanced the globalist mindset with the United Nations (UN), often energizing the ideas and formulating the strategies. More on the UN’s role will be discussed later.

While their agenda grew popular with elites of all stripes, they needed a way to sell the scheme to the masses and accelerate the groundswell for sweeping worldwide changes. Like the original technocrats, they sought a bloodless revolution and used fear and chicanery to usurp power.

Technocracy Inc. used the stock market crash of 1929 and resulting Great Depression to recruit those fearing total economic collapse into their camp.

Technocracy… is being hailed as a solution to an economic condition which now threatens to disrupt our economic civilization… figures indicate that unless a vast change is made in the political and economic system of this country, we may soon face a collapse of our present social structure, the downfall of currency, and utter chaos.”
– The Technocrats’ Magazine, 1933

Decades later, the Rockefeller cabal turned to environmentalism and the threat of planetary destruction to enlist zealots fearing complete societal collapse. In the 1969 Rockefeller Foundation report, they boldly announced their claim, stating that:

Man is now degrading his environment at a terrifying rate. The cumulative effects of advancing technology, massive industrialization, urban concentration, and population growth have all combined …not only to create imminent danger to the quality of human Iife, but even to pose threats to life itself.” p.5

Coopting a Grassroots Movement

The Rockefeller coterie conspired to reshape the world and gain greater control of its wealth, resources, and people under the guise of saving the planet. Their challenge involved getting the populace to support the destruction of free market capitalism, nationalism, and democratic principles without noticing the end goal: the establishment of a global dictatorship ruled by public-private partnerships (PPP). The method of choice to undo the global order was none other than environmentalism.

Their brand of environmentalism differed greatly from the grassroots movement spawned by indigenous and disenfranchised peoples that campaigned against the poisoning of air, water, and land. With good intentions, these activists stood against nuclear fallout, harmful pesticides, pollution, and destruction of natural habitats perpetrated by megacorporations in the energy, transportation, defense, and manufacturing industries.

To crush the grassroots effort directed against industry titans (which accelerated after the 1970 Earth Day event in the U.S.), Rockefeller-influenced environmentalists stealthily shifted the blame for catastrophic ecological damage onto each individual. They first sounded the alarm that an ice age was soon to overtake the earth. Later, they claimed that modern conveniences like vehicle ownership and cheap energy powered by so-called fossil fuels contributed to dangerous increases in the earth’s temperature. Over the past fifty years, they have cleverly induced both individual and collective guilt, leading to attempts to dial back gains achieved through industrialization and technological advancement.

Rockefeller-captured institutions and governments agreed on a plan to march the world toward technocracy by undoing the “man-made” evils triggering global warming through a novel concept called Sustainable Development. The sustainability initiative was born in conspiracy and continues through an endless series of research, conferences, books, speeches, reports, propaganda, agreements, treaties, legislation, and collusion within the public-private sphere.

While it is true that the literal term of “Sustainable Development” was not coined by the original Technocrats, most would be jealous that someone else beat them to it. The fact of the matter is that Sustainable Development is conceptually identical to Technocracy’s “balanced load.”

In short, the heartbeat of Technocracy is Sustainable Development. It calls for an engineered society where the needs of mankind are in perfect balance with the resources of nature.”
– Wood, Patrick. Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, Convergent Publishing. Kindle Edition, (pp. 80-82).

M. King Hubbert was an original member of Technocracy Inc. and a major contributor for the Technocracy Study Course discussed in part 2. Hubbert believed in peak oil theory and thought that earth’s resources and energy were finite and if exhausted or destroyed, man would cease to exist.

Growth, growth, growth — that’s all we’ve known… World automobile production is doubling every 10 years; human population growth is like nothing that has happened in all of geologic history. The world will only tolerate so many doublings of anything — whether it’s power plants or grasshoppers.”
— M. King Hubbert, 1975

Marion King Hubbert, Source: Postcarbon, Fair use

His theories would later lead to demands to transition the world to a new “green” economy based on sustainability principles.

Engineering a New Green Economy

Whether acknowledged or not, the counterfeit green movement adopted Hubbert’s ideas and called for a restructuring of the global economy, altering the function of industries and individual corporations to fit this new economic paradigm. Seemingly out of nowhere, as Brzezinski noted, the Rockefeller-financed shift to a “green economy” was sold to environmental organizations like Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and society as a whole under the guise of saving the planet, preserving wildlife, and creating a more just world. However, when the altruistic façade is removed, it amounts to a technocratic takeover facilitated through a gargantuan civil society network operating within local, state, and national governments to upend democratic pillars.

The green scheme was designed to strip away individual freedom, wealth, property, and resources. In short, the purpose of climate agenda policies was to shift the world to “a more controlled and directed society” as Brzezinski noted in Between Two Ages. In Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order, Patrick Wood later explained that the sustainable development agenda “is not about the environment but rather about economic development.”

Wood’s point can be seen in Principle 8 of the 1992 Rio Declaration at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), where it indicated:

To achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.”

By 2009, calls for a green economy rooted in technocratic concepts began to permeate the universal political landscape. In 2011, the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) pushed the concept further, stating:

In its simplest expression, a green economy is low-carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive. In a green economy, growth in income and employment are driven by public and private investments that reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services.”
– “Towards a Green Economy,” UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), 2011, p. 16

Technocrats relish efficiency often at the expense of human freedom, dignity, and prosperity. Despite the fluffy UN jargon, the green economy is designed to punish wealthy nations by deliberately lowering living standards. Theoretically, the shift would help poorer nations advance economically. However, those in impoverished nations rarely benefit as wealth has continued to shift upward, benefitting the top one percent. As of 2024, Investopedia noted that “there are 2,781 billionaires in the world with a cumulative wealth valued at $14.2 trillion.”

The green economy has nothing to do with the environment, it is simply a wealth redistribution scheme where the poor and middle classes in all nations are fleeced by multinational corporations and private banks. This fact has even been acknowledged by a former working group co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), who stated:

First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole” (emphasis added).
– Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-chair, UN IPCC, 2010

Financing and Controlling the Global Technocratic Shift

The Rockefeller foray into environmentalism was a multi-pronged attack aimed at subverting the goals of environmentalists wanting to protect the planet from being dumping grounds for disease-causing toxic waste. Largely unbeknownst by the public, they poured millions of dollars into research, opinion and policy shaping, and education. From this flurry of activity, a new ideology was born proclaiming that mankind itself, through mere existence, was responsible for planetary degradation—not greedy, irresponsible, and corrupt corporations.

In addition to previously noted organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Bilderberg Group, Rockefeller family members created and/or funded The World Bank, United Nations, Aspen Institute, International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), UN IPCC, and the Club of Rome.

Each of these deeply interrelated organizations plays a key role in pushing Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), the theory that human activity in industry and agriculture causes the earth’s temperature to rise due to increases in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO₂) and methane.

This ideology was further cemented into the minds of men in The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome published in 1991. Under the heading “The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man,” it states:

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself” (p. 115, emphasis added).

Through their philanthropic and venture capital arms including the Rockefeller Foundation (1913), Rockefeller Brothers Fund (1940), Rockefeller Family Fund (1968), and Rockefeller Philanthropic Advisors Inc. (1991) they contributed (at least) hundreds of millions to dozens of environmental organizations. Some of the most prominent included the Tides Foundation, World Resources Institute, Worldwatch Institute, Wildlife Conservation Society, National Resources Defense Council, Alliance for Climate Protection, Environmental Defense Fund, National Resource Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists.

Through a 1974 Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) grant leading to the creation of the Worldwatch Institute (whose mission was to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world), the Rockefellers extended their goals “beyond traditional stewardship and conservation to predicting and ameliorating environmental crises.” This was largely accomplished through the publication of Worldwatch’s State of the World doomsday reports issued from 1984 to 2017, where they attempted to identify the world’s most pressing environmental challenges.

Through their Quality of the Environment program also launched in 1974, the Rockefellers helped pioneer climate research at U.S. universities such as the University of Michigan, University of California at Davis, Pennsylvania State University, and Utah State University. They also played a key role in convening early climate conferences. Through foundation Fellowships in Environmental Affairs, they supported researchers who were instrumental in forging the alleged scientific consensus on man-made global warming. Those who opposed the theory often had their careers and lives destroyed by deliberate sidelining, censorship, and cancellation of grants and other funding.

The technocratic climate agenda steadily advanced through these NGOs operating in clandestine unison, but it took another Rockefeller minion to propel the faux climate crisis to the forefront as the most pertinent issue facing the world. His name was Maurice Strong.

Maurice Strong, The Green Apostle

I knew that what was said to be driven from the bottom up, from the grassroots, was actually being driven from the top down. I had come to this conclusion by following the interconnections among the NGOs active on the Agenda. Many of the NGOs shaping this environment debate were connected, like pearls on a thread. A central figure in all of these organizations was Maurice Strong, the secretary general of the Rio Summit.’”
– Dewar, Elaine, Cloak of Green, James Lorimer & Company, 1995, p. 251

High school dropout Maurice Strong was born into a poor family in Manitoba, Canada in 1929. At age 18, he met UN treasurer Noah Monod and stayed with him for a brief time in New York City. Monod helped Strong get a job at the UN as a junior officer in the Security Section. During his time in New York, Monod also introduced him to David Rockefeller and Strong soon became a protégé. By his late 20s, he became a multi-millionaire from employment in the oil industry and went on to have one of the most extraordinary business and political careers of all time.

Strong was a Rockefeller (and Rothschild) made man through and through. In addition to his connection to David, Strong also forged close relationships with his brother Laurance and Steven Rockefeller, grandson of former U.S. Vice President Nelson Rockefeller.

Laurance, the third son of John D. Rockefeller Jr., is most remembered as a devout conservationist. He served as a longtime trustee, president, and chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF). He was also a member of the CFR, Trilaterals, and Bilderbergs, which Strong was also connected to. Laurance was a founding member and trustee of The Conservation Foundation established in 1947. In 1985 the organization became affiliated with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) started by transhumanist and eugenicist Julian Huxley, and fully merged with it in 1990. Strong, a lifetime affiliate, served as the WWF’s Vice President in 1977, serving under Prince Philip, who once said that if he were reincarnated, he wished “to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

The Rio meeting was organized by the UN, with Maurice Strong as his Secretary General. It was attended by 172 countries, including 108 Heads of State and Government, as well as 400 representatives of non-governmental organizations. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Strong came to know Steven Rockefeller as a member of the Earth Charter initiative, which Strong created as part of the Earth Council during his stint as Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Highlighting Strong’s work in advancing the global environmental agenda, Steven wrote:

In the mid-1980s, he became a member of the World Commission on Environment and Development. The Commission’s report, Our Common Future, put the concept of sustainable development on the international agenda, and it included a recommendation that a new universal declaration or charter be drafted with the ethical imperatives and basic principles to guide a worldwide transition to a sustainable future…” (emphasis added).

Former Soviet Union leader Mikhail Gorbachev, a staunch globalist and founder of The Gorbachev Foundation and Green Cross International, was an instrumental partner in drafting the charter. It was launched in 2000 with the support of hundreds of organizations and thousands of individuals. The document served as the building blocks for constructing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Furthering his partnerships with shadowy banking elites, Strong collaborated with Edmund de Rothschild in creating the World Conservation Bank, which later became the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Since its inception in 1991, the GEF has “provided more than $26 billion in financing and mobilized $149 billion for country-driven priority projects relating to climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.”

Strong also has deep connections to Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum (WEF), serving a long tenure as its co-chairman. Schwab, himself a protégé of both David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger, also credited Strong as a major influence, writing:

He was my mentor since the creation of the Forum: a great friend; an indispensable advisor; and, for many years, a member of our Foundation Board. Without him, the Forum would not have achieved its present significance.”

As founder and current co-chairman of the WEF, Schwab is recognized as the architect of globalist ideas like Stakeholder Capitalism, the Great Reset, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In 2019, the WEF launched a strategic partnership with the UN to accelerate adoption and funding for Agenda 2030 which spawned from Strong’s leadership as a member of the Brundtland Commission, head of the 1992 Rio climate conference, and role in creating Agenda 21, its precursor.

Strong was the key figure spearheading the international environmental movement from the early 1970s until his passing in 2015. As the preeminent mouthpiece of global green technocrats, he advocated for the collapse of nation states, lowering the living standards of rich countries, and Malthusian-influenced population reduction to “save the planet.”

In the 1992 essay “Stockholm to Rio: A Journey Down a Generation,” published by the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Strong suggested that nations would have to surrender sovereignty to global dictates, saying:

The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security” (emphasis added).

Two years earlier, Strong gave an interview where he described a “fiction book” he desired to write, asking:

Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
– Interview in West Magazine, 1990

He reiterated the need for international degrowth in a September 1, 1997 edition of National Review magazine, proclaiming:

If we don’t change, our species will not survive… Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.”

While serving as Secretary General of the Earth Summit, he commented that:

…current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable.”

Regarding population control, Strong is credited with saying:

Either we reduce the world’s population voluntarily or nature will do this for us, but brutally.”

He was able to spread his green gospel while holding key positions in a laundry list of organizations including the Aspen Institute, Rockefeller Foundation, Rothschild Foundation, International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), UNEP, IUCN, World Future Society, Lindisfarne Association, Temple of Understanding (Lucis Trust), and many more.

By now it should be obvious that Strong was a part of a powerful machine advancing an agenda that has deeply affected billions of people. His relations with globalist organizations like UN, WWF, and Club of Rome solidify his place atop the throne of those pushing the global environmental scheme.

The Club of Rome and the “World Problematique”

“The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”
– The Club of Rome, 1974

Strong was also an influential figure within the Club of Rome, the organization owing its existence to co-founders Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King in 1968, along with funding from the Rockefellers. The Club brought together an assembly of bureaucrats, scientists, and business leaders with Rockefeller, Rothschild, and Soros connections.

Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King, Source: Wikimedia Commons

In the early days, members discussed their plans at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy. Peccei, King, and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau would later co-establish the Canadian Association for the Club of Rome (CACOR) in the early 1970’s followed by associations in many countries worldwide including the U.S.

The Club of Rome posited that societal collapse was imminent due to “a cluster of intertwined global problems, be they economic, environmental, political or social,” defining them as the “World Problematique.” Their proposed solutions to man’s role in destroying the environment was dubbed the “World Resolutique.” Many of their recommendations derived from MIT computer models (prone to human error and bias) as discussed in The Limits to Growth report of 1972 and 1977’s Goals for Mankind.

Interdependence, population reduction, and a new global economic system were common themes in Club reports and publications. They would reappear in myriad publications, speeches, papers, articles, books, and meeting agendas. Consider the following excerpts from both the first and second reports to the Club as common examples (emphasis added throughout):

If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.

Without such a goal and a commitment to it, short-term concerns will generate the exponential growth that drives the world system toward the limits of the earth and ultimate collapse. With that goal and that commitment, mankind would be ready now to begin a controlled, orderly transition from growth to global equilibrium.”
– The Limits to Growth, The First Report to the Club of Rome, Universe Books, 1972, pp. 23, 184.

The transition from the present undifferentiated and unbalanced world growth to organic growth will lead to the creation of a new mankind.

Now is the time to draw up a master plan for organic sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all finite resources and a new global economic system. Ten or 20 years from today it will probably be too late…

A world consciousness must be developed through which every individual realizes his role as a member of the world community… It must become part of the consciousness of every individual that “the basic unit of human cooperation and hence survival is moving from the national to the global level.”
– Mankind at the Turning Point, The Second Report to the Club of Rome, Signet Books, 1974. pp. 9, 69, 154.

In 1995, the UNEP echoed these ideas in its Global Biodiversity Assessment, writing:

The problems associated with population growth and distribution and loss of biodiversity are reaching critical proportions in many parts of the world… population increases are likely to lead to higher deforestation, degradation of land and loss of biodiversity… A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be one billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2-3 billion would be possible” (p. 773, emphasis added).

The Club of Rome has continued to produce doomsday literature promoting global governance and a new economic structure throughout their history. A small sampling of their many publications includes:

• Beyond The Limits to Growth (1989)
• Globalization and Culture (2000)
• Humanity At the Crossroads (2001)
• World Economic and Environmental Order (2001)
• Globalization, Governance and Sustainable Development (2002)
• A New World Order Without Ideologies (2003)
• Sustainable Development and Governance (2004)
• Globalization And Civil Society (2005)
• Rethinking Civilization (2006)
• Towards A Global Ethic (2006)

In 2017, Dennis Meadows, co-author of the Limits to Growth report, argued that most of the world’s population must be wiped out if the rest were to maintain a high standard of living, saying:

If we have a very strong dictatorship which is smart … and [people have] a low standard of living… But we want to have freedom and we want to have a high standard of living so we’re going to have a billion people. And we’re now at seven, so we have to get back down.”

The Club’s methodical work over the decades has led to many of the policies and technologies now being thrust upon society presumably “for the common good.”

Agenda 21 + Agenda 2030 = Global Technocracy

The applied doctrines of Agenda 21, Sustainable Development and the energy Smart Grid that have resulted from Trilateral interactions testify to their ideological grounding in historic Technocracy.”
– Wood, Patrick. Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, 2014. Convergent Publishing. Kindle Edition, (p. 44).

Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced — a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level” (emphasis added, Source).

The plan put in place by men like Maurice Strong and organizations like the UN and Club of Rome to completely restructure the world is unprecedented in scope. Similar plans originating with Technocracy Inc. in the 1930s were often criticized and rejected. However, the Rockefeller-influenced ideologies of man-made climate change, global governance, and a new international economic structure won over many who might have resisted these ideas in the past. If all their plans are successfully implemented, individual rights and national sovereignty will be annihilated.

Since its inception, many have tried to describe Agenda 21, but the best definition comes from the late Rosa Koire, author of Behind the Green Mask. Koire’s book is a must read for a detailed understanding of how Agenda 21 is implemented in local communities. While peering behind the green mask, she defined the agenda as follows:

UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL.”

In less than fifty words, Koire perfectly penned the nightmare that is Agenda 21. Despite the noble pretense, it’s simply an all-encompassing plan to control every aspect of human life and nature from cradle to the grave. It is the global extension of the “scientific control of all social functions” as described by early technocrats. To many, what’s transpiring on the world stage resembles fascism – to others communism – and to some, socialism. But the ring that rules them all is technocracy.

Agenda 2030 is the overarching plan to implement what began in Agenda 21. Its goal is to have all mechanisms of societal transformation and control in place by the year 2030. It is the ultimate bait and switch designed to dupe humans into voluntarily giving up their rights to save the planet from climate-related disasters, though predictions of doom never materialize. Sustainable Development ideologues have created a de-facto religion surmising that the earth is dying, natural resources will soon become extinct, and there are way too many people living. These factors have increased CO₂ in the atmosphere from all the breathing, farting, and farming causing the earth’s climate to be out of whack, spelling doom for us all. See how this all works now?

Now that the green mask has been completely removed, the “worldwide inventory and control” plan Koire mentioned should be evident. It is you and I that need to be reined in to save the planet. We are the CO₂ emitters that need to be controlled and, if possible, eliminated! As I’ve stated previously:

Today’s climate crusade is not a grassroots, bottom-up movement. It’s a top-down initiative seeking to redistribute wealth upwards and privatize all biodiversity and natural resources. Its real goal is captured in the infamous phrase, ‘You will own nothing and be happy.’

The good news is that many are now seeing through the mask of the environmental movement and are aggressively resisting. However, today’s technocrats have stepped up their efforts to seize control and are actively embedding themselves in every facet of society, including government.

Part 4 [below] will explore this developing phenomenon where populism and technocracy have seemingly merged with the current Trump administration.

Source: https://truthunmuted.org/technocracy-ascending-part-3-green-sustainable-slavery/

Technocracy Ascending-Part 4: All the President’s Men

Jesse Smith | TruthUnmuted.com

In Technocracy Ascending Part 3, the dots were connected linking together technocracy, UN Agenda 2030, and the environmental movement. This installment investigates how technocracy is encroaching upon American government under Donald Trump.

“America has an ideology, superior to both communism and fascism; it is the militant ideology of a technological imperative —Technocracy.”
– Howard Scott, Technocracy Inc., The Technocrat, June 1951

Before the formation of Howard Scott’s Technocracy Inc. in 1933, its precursor, the Technical Alliance, sought to document the wastefulness of the capitalist system through its Energy Survey of North America. Despite discovering that the continent was rich in natural resources and capable of producing an abundance of energy, Scott had no practical way to achieve his scientifically governed Technate. Instead, he awaited societal collapse due to a failing economic system, which of course never occurred to the degree he envisioned.

What differentiates today’s technocrats from their predecessors is their willingness to utilize the political process to achieve similar goals. Scott was so apolitical he refused to engage with government to create his Technate, which doomed Technocracy Inc. and other offshoots to historical oblivion. Its official demise came on July 1, 1947 during the Operation Columbia media debacle when its members cruised the roads in their trademark gray cars, forming a motorcade from California to Vancouver.

Technocracy’s corpse was later resurrected by globalist visionaries like David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski (as detailed in parts two and three). At times over the last half century, it has briefly taken root in many countries, especially during crises. Within the past two decades, it has slowly picked up in the U.S. Now, it’s rapidly accelerating to a fever pitch as a technocratic cabal has coalesced in Washington with a very specific agenda.

Technocracy: An Antiquated Fantasy or A New Order for the Ages?

The great seal of the United States has two sides, both legal; the one we are most accustomed to on public documents has the predatory eagle embossed upon its face. The time has come to turn over the great seal of the United States which on the reverse side says ‘Annuit coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum’— Time Makes Way for a New Order of the Ages.”
– Howard Scott, Technocracy Inc., The Technocrat, June 1951

During his campaign, Trump and Republican Party representatives signaled that he would lead America to a new golden age. Trump declared it during his acceptance speech and reiterated it during his address to Congress in early March.

During the Republican National Convention last July, the stage behind Senator Tim Scott boldly displayed the reverse side of the great seal of the U.S., featuring the phrase Novus Ordo Seclorum. After Trump was elected, his senior advisor Elon Musk posted a photo to his X account celebrating the victory at Mar-a-Lago, invoking the exact same phrase in the caption.

Were these occurrences mere coincidence or could they be connected to Howard Scott’s call to announce a “New Order of the Ages”? Though much conjecture has gone into interpreting them, it’s worth investigating the possible connection between the Trump administration and Scott’s technocracy movement.

The “Broligarchy” Descends on the Potomac

The “Broligarchy” from left to right: Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Sundar Pichai, Peter Thiel, Sam Altman, Sergey Brin, and Tim Cook.

Trump’s second term commenced with a whiz-bang, pleasing many of his supporters and angering his many critics. On his first day in office, he issued a staggering 26 executive orders (EO). Within his first 30 days as president, Trump issued 73 executive orders. As of this writing, that number stands at 92 total EOs. The shock and awe strategy to create chaos, confusion, and massive damage has moved from Middle Eastern battlefields to the White House.

In addition to the exorbitant number of EOs, the Trump regime has been taken over by technocrats much like the Carter presidency was overrun with Trilaterals. During the inauguration ceremony, Trump was flanked by a who’s who of Silicon Valley elites including Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Sundar Pichai, Sam Altman, Sergey Brin, and Tim Cook.

Prior to retaking office, he met with several of these CEOs, the CEOs of Microsoft and Nvidia, and even Bill Gates at his Florida estate. Musk, Cook, Zuckerberg, and Bezos are four of the five wealthiest people in the world, worth a total estimated $1.35 trillion. Campaign contributions also poured in from venture capitalists (VC) like Marc Andreeson, David Sacks, Doug Leone, and Joe Lonsdale of Palantir. Throughout his reelection bid, Trump gained the support of dozens of key figures in tech and finance including Palmer Lucky, cofounder of Anduril and Oculus; WhatsApp co-founder Jan Koum; hedge fund manager Bill Ackman; and Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, co-founders of Gemini crypto exchange and alleged co-founders of Facebook.

It should be noted that many of the tech titans now aligned with Trump strongly opposed him during his first term. Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook even banned him from their social platforms. This time around, it seems many are aligning with Trump’s policies and vision for America, as there is plenty of money to be made from new government contracts.

Google recently kowtowed to Trump’s wishes by repealing a policy that prohibited the company from using its AI technology for weapons, renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America, and eliminating portions of its DEI programs. Likewise, Meta has curtailed its DEI programs, jettisoned its fact-checkers, and installed Trump ally and UFC CEO Dana White as a board member. Washington Postowner Jeff Bezos refused to allow the left-leaning newspaper to endorse Kamala Harris for the presidency.

The collusion between Big Tech and the Trump administration is meant to carry out a specific agenda, one that removes pesky regulations and paves the way for lucrative contracts to develop massive AI data centers and computer chips, avoid costs associated with tariffs, and more.

Trump’s Staff is Stuffed with Peter Thiel’s ‘Counter-Elite’ Technocrats

In addition to the external tech contingent, some 13 billionaires (whose net worth totals at least $460 billion) have been appointed by Trump, with his cabinet alone worth $7 billion. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and Education Secretary Linda McMahon are all reported billionaires. Many other Trump administration employees are at least multimillionaires.

While far from ultra-wealthy, JD Vance owed his U.S. Senate seat to billionaire Peter Thiel, who funded his campaign to the tune of $15 million in 2022. It’s not a stretch to say that Vance wouldn’t have become Vice President without Thiel’s appeals to Trump on his behalf. The Theil/Vance relationship is well documented dating back to 2011, when Vance met the tech entrepreneur following a talk Thiel gave at Yale Law School. Vance later became a partner at Thiel’s Mithril Capital in 2015 and launched Narya Capital, his own VC firm in 2019 with financial backing from Theil, Marc Andreeson, and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

Thiel was a part of Trump’s 2016 transition team and donated $1.25 million to his campaign. He also provided $250,000 of additional funding in 2018 to Trump’s joint fundraising committee. In addition, Thiel gave over $35 million to 16 federal Republican candidates including longtime acolyte Blake Masters in 2022. He steered clear of Trump’s reelection campaign in 2020, but did endorse him in 2024, albeit lukewarmly.

In addition to Vance, Thiel has several affiliates who are now part of Trump’s government. David Sacks, who worked with Thiel at PayPal, is now the White House “AI and crypto czar.” Jim O’Neill was the managing director of Thiel’s Mithril Capital and is now the deputy secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Michael Kratsios, current director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, was Thiel’s CFO at Clarium Capital Management and a principal at Thiel Capital. PayPal alum Ken Howery now serves as Trump’s ambassador to Denmark.

I think that Peter Thiel is secretly the most important person in Silicon Valley. He’s this behind the scenes player, who is behind so many of the really important things that have happened over the last two decades.”
– Max Chafkin, TIME

Thiel’s wealth is valued at close to $16 billion. Many of the aforementioned tech bros also have deep ties to Thiel. He’s the co-founder of PayPal along with Elon Musk, Max Levchin, and Luke Nosek. Thiel also co-founded Palantir, the giant data mining company funded by In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital firm and whose first client was the CIA. Since its establishment in 2003, Palantir has obtained contracts from over a dozen U.S. government agencies including the FBI, DHS, NSA, CDC, and more. Palantir CEO Alex Karp recently stated how the software is used to kill enemies (possibly referring to its use by Israel in the Gaza war) and “cut the heads off” of those resisting the company’s attempts to remake the U.S. government.

Peter Thiel speaking with attendees at the 2022 Converge Tech Summit in Scottsdale, Arizona. Photo by Gage Skidmore

Thiel and his cohorts also funded and helped establish companies such as Facebook, SpaceX, LinkedIn, Yelp, YouTube, and Stripe through his Founders Fund VC firm. The Thiel Foundation and Thiel Fellowship dole out grants to young people supportive of his vision of “technology as salvation.”

He believes that government should be replaced by technology, the U.S. dollar must be replaced with digital currency, and that corporate monopolies are desirable and good. Furthermore, he’s a Bilderberg steering committee member along with Alex Karp, funder of companies like Clearview AI (facial recognition) and Anduril (autonomous weapons), and beneficiary of multimillion dollar intelligence, health, and military contracts for Palantir. He once stated:

We could never win an election on getting certain things because we were in such a small minority, but maybe you could unilaterally change the world without having to constantly convince people and beg people and plead with people who are never going to agree with you through technological means, and this is where I think technology is this incredible alternative to politics” (emphasis added).
— Peter Thiel

Once a libertarian, Thiel later abandoned the ideology, stating in a 2009 essay that he no longer believed “freedom and democracy are compatible.” As the recognized head of the “PayPal mafia,” his views over time evolved from the fringes of conservativism to what is known as Dark Enlightenment.

A Primer on Dark Enlightenment

In 2014, Justine Tunney, Occupy Wall Street activist and Google software engineer, petitioned the White House to arrange for the retirement of all government employees, give the tech industry all administrative authority, and appoint then Google CEO Eric Schmidt as the CEO of America. The petition addressed to President Obama further stated, “It’s time for the U.S. Regime to politely take its exit from history and do what’s best for America. The tech industry can offer us good governance and prevent further American decline.”

The ideas and suggestions Tunney petitioned for were shaped by her reading of Curtis Yarvin, an influential blogger writing under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug.

Curtis Yarvin in the garden of St Paul’s Cathedral. Photo by David Merfield

Curtis Yarvin was born in 1973 and attended Brown University from 1988 to 1992. In the 90’s he attended U.C. Berkeley but dropped out to join a tech company and become a software engineer. Yarvin was strongly influenced by Silicon Valley’s libertarian culture and Australian School economic theorists like Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard. He later formed his own ideas and began writing as Mencius Moldbug on the Unqualified Reservations blog, where he is credited for founding the Neoreaction (NRx) movement focused on reevaluating democracy and securing effective government. Yarvin is esteemed as the “philosophical master” of the alt-right movement.

Moldbug is full of controversial ideas. In his world, feudalism is good while democracy is vilified. Human rights aren’t actually rights, but services. Corporations mirror kingdoms with high IQ (perhaps even cyborg) CEOs functioning as sovereign actors. Corporate power is society’s organizing force rather than the power of the people. Existing elite rulers are resented and must be replaced. Perhaps his most salient thought pertaining to the present circumstances came during his 2012 presentation on rebooting the US Government where he blurted out, “If Americans want to change their government, they’re going to have to get over their dictator phobia.”

The term “Dark Enlightenment” was coined by Nick Land in an online manifesto written in 2012, in which he quotes Mencius Moldbug. Land is a British academic who traded his job as a philosophy professor at Warwick University in 1998 for work pioneering experimental cyber culture as part of the “Cybernetic Culture Research Unit.” After later emerging as a right-wing political figure, he began writing about anti-democratic themes. While espousing his thoughts on replacing democracy, Land wrote:

Firstly, it is essential to squash the democratic myth that a state ‘belongs’ to the citizenry… Unless ownership of the state is formally transferred into the hands of its actual rulers… the democratic farce will continue… Once the universe of democratic corruption is converted into a (freely transferable) shareholding in gov-corp the owners of the state can initiate rational corporate governance, beginning with the appointment of a CEO… Gov-corp would concentrate upon running an efficient, attractive, vital, clean, and secure country…”

Land is also known for popularizing the concept of accelerationism, which journalist Andy Beckett described as those who:

…argue that technology, particularly computer technology, and capitalism, particularly the most aggressive, global variety, should be massively sped up and intensified — either because this is the best way forward for humanity, or because there is no alternative. Accelerationists favor automation.”

Land and Yarvin have taken the technocratic ideas of Howard Scott, radical for their time, in wild new directions. Yarvin’s concept of Patchworks suggests that the federal government, or “the cathedral,” should be broken up into smaller entities and controlled by tech corporations. The corporations would be governed by sovereign joint-stock companies given carte blanche to wield complete authority. His philosophy of neo-cameralism argues that states are really businesses that own countries and should be fiscally responsible, efficient, and minimize waste. Yarvin’s ideas on deposing democracy are ruthless, and at times Machiavellian. His lack of regard for philosophical opponents has led to repeated calls for their removal from government and positions of authority.

Yarvin’s influence on Peter Thiel is undeniable as reflected in the following statements.

“The best entrepreneurs know this: every great business is built around a secret that’s hidden from the outside. A great company is a conspiracy to change the world; when you share your secret, the recipient becomes a fellow conspirator.”
– Peter Thiel

“A startup is basically structured as a monarchy… We don’t call it that, of course. That would seem weirdly outdated, and anything that’s not democracy makes people uncomfortable.”
– Peter Thiel

Thiel believes great companies can conspire to change the world and should be structured as monarchies. He’s all in on complete corporate control. As his companies continue to pioneer data collection and pervasive surveillance, his contractual involvement with military and intelligence agencies is laying the groundwork for a techno-feudal state. As if the march to dystopia couldn’t get any weirder, Thiel even backed Yarvin’s startup company Urbit, which reporter Jessica Klein identified as “a [blockchain-based] peer-to-peer network made up of personal servers that aims to let users genuinely own their own digital identities.”

Upending Democracy and Installing a CEO Dictator

Image posted by The White House on Feb. 19, 2025

Many of Trump’s policies and overall vision for Making America Great Again (MAGA) align with the tenets of Dark Enlightenment and were published in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 transition plan. Trump’s power doesn’t derive from MAGA supporters in flyover states, but from Silicon Valley and Wall Street billionaires bent on dismantling the current bureaucracy in favor of a CEO-led corporate government. Yarvin calls this role the “Delegate” of the sovereign corporation who “exercises undivided sovereign authority, as in divine-right monarchy.”

In 2022’s The Butterly Revolution, Yarvin wrote about Trump’s role if reelected, predicting that:

“Trump himself will not be the brain of this butterfly. He will not be the CEO. He will be the chairman of the board—he will select the CEO (an experienced executive). This process, which obviously has to be televised, will be complete by his inauguration—at which the transition to the next regime will start immediately.

For Trump, being President will be exactly like it was—all the photo-ops and more—without any papers to sign, “decisions” to “make,” etc. The CEO he picks will run the executive branch without any interference from the Congress or courts, probably also taking over state and local governments. Most existing important institutions, public and private, will be shut down and replaced with new and efficient systems.”

In this scenario, it seems as if Elon Musk is playing the role of the CEO Yarvin discusses. Perhaps this is why he changed his official Tesla title to Technoking, mirroring Howard Scott’s dreams of a continental director for his North American Technate. Musk’s connection to technocracy links back to his grandfather Joshua Haldeman, who became a leader of Technocracy Inc. in Canada during the 1930s. When Canada banned the organization in 1940, Haldeman was arrested for his involvement. Apparently, he was known for expressing undemocratic, racist, and even anti-Semitic views, and in 1950 moved his family to South Africa where he defended the apartheid regime.

As Trump’s senior advisor and leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk is firing federal employees at will, attempting to shut down entire agencies, and installing Yarvin’s “new and efficient systems” in the form of AI and potentially blockchain technology to run most government functions. Really, it’s hard to tell the difference between Musk’s “Dark Maga” and Land’s “Dark Enlightenment.”

DOGE layoffs soar, Source: MSN

Musk’s moves are straight from the Yarvin playbook termed RAGE: Retire All Government Employees. In a 2022 podcast interview with Jack Murphy, JD Vance also promoted the RAGE plan, declaring:

“I think that what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people… And when the courts stop you… stand before the country… and say the chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.”

Later in the Butterfly Revolution, Yarvin mentions that Trump (acting as an American Caesar) must construct an alternate regime to replace the current one that “must appeal to all populations in the country.” He further elucidates that Trump should broker peace and end all civil wars, race wars, gender wars, and culture wars. Trump’s speeches at campaign rallies, the RNC, addresses to the nation, and executive orders have reflected parts of this strategy, though he’s yet to broker peace and stop the culture wars, and in some cases has exacerbated them. Yarvin further stated that, “The energy of the alternate regime must be unlimited. In power, it must be ready to reorganize all of public life—to change America as much as Atatürk changed Turkey.”

Arguing that the U.S. Constitution allows presidential dictators, Yarvin urges Trump to be truthful with voters regarding the intentions for authoritarian rule in Politics of the Deep Right, writing:

“Imagine giving the President power to hire or fire, fund or defund, organize or reorganize any department in DC. Imagine making Donald Trump the literal CEO of the executive branch…

The only form that can power a regime change is democracy. But the only form that can operate the next regime is monarchy… Politically, democracy is required because only democracy has the political power to put a monarchy in place. That is: winning an election, with a mandate to truly rule…. What’s cool is that this is actually completely legal. Even if it wasn’t, we could do it any time…

In 20th-century terminology, therefore, a healthy US monarchy will be “isolationist.” It will abandon its current empire—not at all unlike Gorbachev discarding the Soviet empire—and lovingly tend its own garden.”

Right on cue, Trump is isolating America by alienating European allies, bullying neighboring countries like Canada and Mexico, bidding to retake the Panama Canal using the military, attempting to annex Greenland, trying to secure minerals from Ukraine, and threatening to take over Gaza. His actions are reminiscent of the CEO of a major company gobbling up the competition until there is no competition left!

Understanding the ideas behind Dark Enlightenment may explain why Trump implored Christians to vote for him, proclaiming that after this time “You won’t have to do it anymore…You got to get out and vote. In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not going to have to vote.”

It could also explain why Musk retweeted a post regarding Trump’s “clear mandate from the people.” In Trump’s mind, this “clear mandate” gives him unlimited authority to do whatever is required to transition America’s constitutional republic into a modern day monarchy.

Trump is barely two months into his second term and a republican think-tank called the Third Term Project is seeking ways to have him remain in office beyond his current stint, which expires in 2028. They’re working on amending the Constitution to enable this possibility. Their promotional items depict Trump as a Roman Caesar.

Coincidentally, Musk posted that “America is New Rome” last November. Is Musk envisioning the Trump administration as the equivalent to Augustus’ Pax Romana (Roman Peace) that was run on slave labor and featured aggressive territorial expansion? Or is he in favor of the society where Caesars ruled with an iron fist and dissent could result in removal and/or execution? Or is it a blend of the two? Trump’s forays into limiting free speech for criticizing Israel and labeling Tesla vandals as domestic terrorists provides clues as to where we’re heading.

Techno-feudalism and Surveillance

Is Trump really fighting the deep state and draining the swamp? Or is he just replacing one set of swamp creatures with another?

Like a bull in a china shop, technocrats have begun tearing apart many elements of U.S. governance structure while installing the mechanisms to create a techno-feudal state. The best example is the $500 billion Stargate Project Trump announced in January.

Stargate’s goal is to build colossal data centers for AI infrastructure and create new forms of personalized mRNA vaccine technology for treating cancer and anything else they dream of. The partnership with Larry Ellison’s Oracle, Sam Altman’s OpenAI, and Masayoshi Son’s Softbank will build its first mega data centers in Abilene, Texas with more to follow in other states. Other partners include multinational corporations Microsoft, NVIDIA, and Arm.

Trump’s Stargate announcement coincided with the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2025 conference in Davos where the theme was “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age.” During his speech to the Davos crowd, Trump asserted that the U.S. will be the “world capital of artificial intelligence and crypto.” It’s essential to point out that increased AI development is seen as the key to advancing the United Nations’ goal of bringing about global AI governance. The WEF’s AI Governance Alliance is also working toward the same goal for business and industry.

Trump’s deregulation policies and overturning of Biden’s executive order on AI could allow Big Tech and other industries to go unchecked, leading to potentially dangerous consequences regarding human freedom, health, and prosperity.

Trump wants to “drill, baby drill” to get the necessary energy to fuel the move toward AI-powered everything and increase cryptocurrency mining. Stargate and other major efforts to build AI data centers is part of the move to create a complete control grid where digital currency and digital identity take center stage. Stargate partner Larry Ellison not only wants all the world’s health data in a single, unified platform, but also voiced his approval of an advanced surveillance state in a company chat session, where he mentioned:

The police will be on their best behavior because we’re constantly watching and recording everything that’s going on…Every police officer is going to be supervised at all times… Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re constantly recording and reporting everything that’s going on.”

It may come as no surprise that Yarvin is fully on board with this surveillance nightmare too. In Patchworks, he describes how it could work in the San Francisco area (aka “Friscorp”), writing:

All residents, even temporary visitors, carry an ID card with RFID response. All are genotyped and iris-scanned. Public places and transportation systems track everyone. Security cameras are ubiquitous. Every car knows where it is and who is sitting in it, and tells the authorities both. Residents cannot use this data to snoop into each other’s lives, but Friscorp can use it to monitor society at an almost arbitrarily detailed level.”

He also echoes the sentiments of Mark Zuckerberg, Klaus Schwab, and Yuval Noah Harari regarding life in the digital realm or metaverse, asserting that:

The best humane alternative to genocide I can think of is not to liquidate the wards—either metaphorically or literally—but to virtualize them. A virtualized human is in permanent solitary confinement…This would drive him insane, except that the cell contains an immersive virtual-reality interface which allows him to experience a rich, fulfilling life in a completely imaginary world.”

A Call to Vigilance

The new order of technocrats is playing both the long and short game in their attempt to own all resources, transform the government into an AI techno-monarchy, control the new digital currency, and place all citizens under continual surveillance.

If you believe in MAGA, is this what you voted for? Does Trump’s reshaping of the government into a CEO-led tech corporation meet your approval?

Trump is like a magician using sleight of hand to lull people into false hope. With one hand, he’s busy showing his supporters how much winning he’s doing by taking out his woke leftist opponents. With the other hand, he’s busy dismantling the American republic, mocking the Constitution, and helping his techno-oligarch buddies get rich off the fire sale of the U.S. economy.

Though Trump may have kept some of the many promises his constituents desired, he must be held accountable for Constitutional and other violations, lest we continue the march toward Yarvin’s vision of a U.S. corporate monarchy. It’s time to stop indulging in left vs. right political theater and take a long, hard look at what’s really happening. Blind loyalty to a man, movement, political party, or ideology spells society’s death knell. Don’t let it happen!

Part 5 will explore the themes of technocracy for the common good and the promised age of abundance.

Source: https://truthunmuted.org/technocracy-ascending-part-4-all-the-presidents-men/

Original Article: https://davidicke.com/2025/04/02/technocracy-ascending-part-4-all-the-presidents-men/

Note: Comments placed in [ ] are added by Truth11.com editor.  For example; [Flu]

Related:

The Dark MAGA Gov-Corp Technate

DavidIcke.com Technocracy.news UnlimitedHangout.com Ian Davis | IainDavis.substack.com What does the title of this article—not to mention each unusual word in it — even mean? This is not a rhetorical question. We urgently need to understand each term. A precise political philosophy underpins each. A combination of

Truth11.com

Technocracy | The Brave New World of 2030

ActivistPost.com Don’t fear Communism, Socialism, or Fascism. Technocracy will be a scourge by comparison. As I have been beating the drum about Technocracy for over 15 years, others are starting to get it. Scientific dictatorship run by AI will destroy what it means to be human, making life

Truth11.com

Technocracy will kill all political systems, economic systems, educational systems + destroy what it means to be human

DavidIcke.com | Richard Willett TN Editor All who think we are fighting Socialism, Communism, or Fascism are in for a rude awakening when they are all thrown under the bus by Technocracy. All socialists, communists, and fascists will be there too. Technocracy is a scourge on humanity, destroying the souls

Truth11.com

Technocracy Depends On The Digitalization Of Money | Global CBDC Rollout Continues Apace

Technocracy.News This editor has been forecasting for at least twenty years that the dollar is not the issue: It is the entire worldwide fiat system of all currencies. The dollar will not “crash and burn,” as others have claimed. The CBCD system is poised to destroy all fiat paper

Truth11.com

Technocracy Is Constructing AI-Powered Control Grid To End Freedom

Technocracy.News Leo Hohmann | LeoHohmann.com Leo Hohmann explores censorship, banking, and AI, but it is much bigger than that. Technocracy seeks to take over the entire planet. The late Rosa Koire saw it as “the blueprint, the comprehensive plan of action for the 21st century to inventory and control

Truth11.com

Technocracy: Digital Public Infrastructure For “One Earth, One Family, One Future”

Jacob Nordangård, PhD | The Pharos Chronicle At the G20 leaders’ meeting in India, under the motto “One Earth, One Family, One Future”, the new concept Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) and the NGO One Future Alliance were launched. These initiatives intend to increase the interconnectedness of the data-based systems with the

Truth11.com

Technocracy’s Control Freak Agenda Is Rapidly Moving Forward

DavidIcke.com | Sam Fenny The future is here, and if you enjoy being dominated by control freaks you are going to love it. “Digital identification” is one of the primary areas the globalists are focusing on right now, and as you will see below, the radical changes that are now

Truth11.com

Technocommunism Digital I.D. Scheme: The WEF’s Blueprint For Planetary Slavery • This is a technocratic eugenics and control program • Do NOT comply

BlackListedNews.com The sociopaths at the WEF are telegraphing their crimes against humanity global digital ID scheme in plain sight; to wit: This is the social credit score blueprint that will be run by A.I. All facets of life for anyone complying with this smart phone to “vaccine” nanotech

Truth11.com