Crisis Update: The Random Duels With Probability
Or demoralisation, from Aldous Huxley and HG Wells, to Yuri Bezmenov
Putin speech imminent on the direction of war in Ukraine.
Ohio chemical poison threat prefigured - then media goes silent.
Incompetence, social disintegration, reverse evolution or destablisation?
(2,500 words or 12 minutes of your company).
Feb 20, 2023
Apologies are due for the slow pace of reporting at the beginning of February. A visit was necessary to Batumi on the Black Sea, the author’s first journey since the lockdown of March 2020. Will bring you some updates from the historic Nobel-Rothschild oil port.
Russian president Vladimir Putin is expected to deliver an update on the war in Ukraine in his state of the nation address on Tuesday, Feb 21. The Kremlin’s spokesman has already announced that the content of the speech in the “current circumstances” will require the usual list of attendees to include “other categories.”
Perhaps anticipating or seeking to overshadow that speech president Joe Biden flew unannounced into Kyiv just 24 hours before, touting another half-billion dollars, and more javelins and Howitzers.
Like the balloons, shot down with $400 million air-to-air missiles, the scent of distraction is unmistakeable.
The Ohio chemical spill and blast according to specialists in the handling of hazardous materials, such as Donald Laucks of Texas, broke practically every rule in the hazmat book. This includes incompetence in the Environmental Protection Agency, the Norfolk Southern rail company and the response (or not) by hazard teams.
Rather than risk a tank exploding, sending shrapnel into the air, they decided to drain the cargo of vinyl chloride into a ditch and set it on fire, polluting the air, waterways and soil in the Ohio river valley that supplies a tenth of the country’s water.
Cornell university emeritus professor Murray McBride said vinyl chloride is “highly mobile in soils and water.” He urged farmers to check their wells and test farmland.
The strange coincidences from the movie White Noise (2022) concerning similar events in the very same state have not gone unmissed; nor the roll out of a wearable “MyID” health app just days before the spill of carcinogenic vinyl chloride.
East Palestine Fire Department hosted a “sign up event” on Jan 26, for the QR scan and RFID touch chip. “East Palestine is known as ‘The Place to Be.’ It is way ahead of the curve on a program to provide better treatment for anyone in the event of an emergency,” wrote local news media.
Yet since the disaster mainstream media and politicians have been curiously reluctant to discuss the event.
The news from around the globe is overwhelming. Incompetence is evident on a scale that is driving societal disintegration.
Is it a generational blip, the result of sloppy schooling, poor parenting and nefarious nutrition that is evidenced by falling performance and even IQ; did “good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times,” as the post-apocalyptic author G. Michael Hopf describes the cycles of history; should we anticipate reverse evolution, a change such as caused snakes to lose their legs, deep sea creatures to go blind and birds to lose the power of flight? Are we at war, in the final stages of a long-term plan begun under the Soviet Union to defeat the West through psychological warfare and “demoralization,” as described by the defector Yuri Bezmenov?
It is not the first time that writers and poets have warned against the degeneration of society. The very word was the title of Max Nordau’s bestseller Entartung (Degeneration) of 1892–1893. Present day commentators focus on Nordau’s attack on Oscar Wilde, and the fact that Mein Kampf and its associated programmes drew heavily on similar themes of disability and deviance.
Nordau’s work illustrates the cultural impact of social Darwinism, but the debate pre-dated Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species (1859) and the starting point (always a subjective choice) might be pinned to the Enlightenment debate in the late 1700s over physiocracy, or the economic and social primacy of agriculture and landholding. It foreshadowed the Arts and Crafts movement of a century later in its criticism of the debilitating products of industrial production, top-down, centralized control, including the guilds while still favouring free trade. 
Its stress on freedom of trade and movement (what became the migration of Europeans) while envisaging people and culture tied to the land might seem contradictory at first: how can people attached to the land move freely; have not herder-nomads and farmer-villagers been rivals down the aeons? Yet this concept of migration and a people tied to the land is consistent with concepts from Zionism to Blut und Boden.
The countervailing political movement to separate people from land is a central plank of the United Nations and the globalists. Examples below, but an accounting on the fingers yields the following:
the diminution of residential rights of birth and citizenship replaced by biometric ID;
the replacement of physical wealth by an expiring digital currency, rationing and vouchers;
the billionaires’ bid to control resources while corralling the masses into 15-minute cities;
the pressure on farmers to relinquish their land;
the permanent health emergencies as a pretext for a new social order;
the political encouragement of migration – an expedient not yet fully understood.
Whatever the pretext — environmental, demographic, alimentary, geopolitical rivalry, or globalist appeals to “interconnectedness” and the need for a “rules-based international order” — the prescribed outcomes remain the same.
Exhibit number one is Peter Sutherland, former head of the Bilderberg Group, founding chief of the World Trade Organisation and UN champion of migration.
Sutherland famously called on European states not to be biased towards “highly skilled” migrants, but to accept anyone regardless of their abilities:
“We still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others, and that is precisely what the European Union should be doing its best to undermine.”
See Moneycircus, Aug 2022 – From Argentina To A Street Near You
The topic of migration has been used to inflame political discourse and demonize anyone who defends the prior social order — however mild or benign — and more specifically to undermine concepts of “land of birth,” the sense of belonging or ownership of place or culture, while amplifying a manufactured crisis, trumpeted through state media, to justify the expansion of the security state, the trampling of rights won over centuries, and the imposition of a “new normal” or a “new order.” 
This should be clear as day after three years of “two weeks to flatten the curve,” the vastly disproportionate response to a coronavirus flu using medical emergency to crush civil rights, the merging of public health with military countermeasures, and the refusal to repeal emergency “preparedness” legislation even though the infection fatality rate has been shown to have been exaggerated to justify a political power grab.
Throughout history rulers (Herodotus, Caesar, Tacitus) have relied on imagery of hordes of barbarians in order to contrast the protective role of the state. 
Sometimes, as under the Third Reich, a virus or parasite was cast in the role of barbarian in the form of the infected or the less able.
After 9/11 the Afghan and Arab were used to spook domestic populations with the War on Terror, but state security has since switched its focus to the home front: the FBI and Department of Homeland Security in May 2021 said the threat is now the enemy at home. 
This role is now played by migration, especially across the unregulated U.S. southern border, creating the rationale for the framing of citizen extremists.
Although we are told the issue in play is xenophobia, or the failure of Western populations to share the benefits of their lavish lifestyle, at base this is about ownership: not your ownership of an English “semi” or a Texan acre but a grab for the resources beneath it.
We can argue from our political preference or knowledge if humans are bad for the Earth, if carbon dioxide is a poison rather than an essential nutrient for plants, if population growth should be allowed to decline organically since fertility is already widely below replacement level, and whether the deafening megaphone of alarmism — climate temperature and gas, viruses, hunger, inequity or the neocon’s “Russia, Russia, Russia” — is really just the pressure of a salesman forcing us into a decision that leads to buyer’s remorse.
One clue that should place us on alert is that the sales pitch varies yet the product is always the same.
Miseducation and rights
A second clue is that governments nowadays rely on psychological manipulation to nudge the population into managed outcomes where the prescription has been written in advance: the need to give up liberty, privacy and bodily integrity for the common good; instead chaining the masses to Common Pass and bio-identity in which their physical and biological existence is dependent on the digital rationing of rights.
The flu is one of the only universal ailments whose origin, much less cure, is barely understood: the gripe, with which humans lived for centuries, until a would-be revoutionary named Tedros — with less medical nous than Che Guevara who at least trained as a medical doctor — hailing from Ethiopia and installed by the Clinton Global Initiative fronting for the Gates foundation, in all likelihood fronting for the Rockefeller foundation which promoted invasive chemical medicine which it produced from its petroleum business — was recast as an existential threat to extract trillions from governmental preventive health measures.
In the process the majority of citizens gave up the rights their ancestors had won at the cost of blood and treasure.
What are the five rights? If you search on Google the top-ranking answer is categorical: “the right patient, the right drug, the right dose, the right route, and the right time,” as articulated by Jerome Osheroff, MD, in 2007.
Google confuses a citizen’s rights for a petro-pharmaeutical dose. Quelle surprise — but likely not a mistake given that Google’s parent company Alphabet is heavily invested in the injectables.
Do you sense that big tech and its military-security state partners are gaslighting you?
Tweak and search for fundamental human rights and Google persists in looking the other way: “dignity, fairness, equality, respect and independence.”
This is “doubleplus ungood” and alien to anyone raised in previous decades, who was schooled to believe in freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and the right to petition the government.
Down page, it at least mentions the Kenyan constitution of 2010 which enumerates the right to life, freedom from discrimination, security of the person, freedom from slavery or forced labour, and freedom of conscience, religion, belief and opinion.
The controllers — whether you believe that politicians hold the reins or the oiler-bankers — do not like the idea that history is cyclical. This is reflected in academia which through its teaching upholds the status quo.
In the field of history and archaeology, unorthodox individualists like Graham Hancock have faced a lifetime of hostility for suggesting that catastrophic events may interrupt the linear, progressive and universalist ascent of man, and that humans have in the past been forced — and crucially, have succeeded — in starting all over again.
The reader can see how inconvenient this is to rulers who claim to protectthe population from existential crises, demanding the people give up their rights in order to be saved from annihilation.
Establishment historians have tended to ignore how often crises of identity have been used as the occasion to redistribute wealth. They concede such dispossession occurred under the Third Reich but it is far more common than that.
A bigger example was the Reformation and the dissolution of the monasteries. Henry VIII’s land grab and the “sale” of the church produced the formation of capital and division of labour on a scale that brought modern markets into being. The release of those assets created impetus that imposed a new means of exchange.
This necessitated whole-of-society repression since, during the reigns of Henry and his daughter Elizabeth I, much of the population had been born and baptised Catholic. This fact did not change, however much Gloriana claimed that she would not “make windows into men’s souls.”
This repression was undertaken by the origins of the British security state, the spy regime of Sir Francis Walsingham, credited as daddy by the nation’s intelligence services.
It’s been almost 500 years but the owner-investors have not forgotten that.
Today we witness a social reprogramming as ambitious as the Reformation. The moniker or name is irrelevant — great reset, new normal, build back better — the ambition has been laid out in layman’s terms, free of jargon: a world in which you will own considerably less; in which your place in society will effectively be determined by scores and credits (whether social or carbon) and the mechanism underpinning your status will be irresistible and unchangeable (call it surveillance capitalism, the security state, artificial intelligence, minority report or Little Britain’s “computer says”).
It is an example of how the power of the state, captured for the financial and social benefit of a clique, can bring into being a new order. The French and Bolshevik revolutions are obvious examples.
Managed outcomes have unintended consequences however, perhaps even more so than the more organic process of production to meet a need, because the manager-bureaucrat always looks to fulfill and perpetuate his own interest.
This interest begins and ends with dividing and depriving the productive classes who would, being left free to act, meet the needs of their neighbours. Instead Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev and Kaganovich did their best to kill off the most productive of the peasantry in a Russia where, in 1917, the peasantry represented 97 per cent of the population.
Why: because the Bolsheviks only controlled a few cities and their survival depended on starving the overwhelming, self-sufficient, majority of the population into submission.
Ivan Illich warns in Disabling Professions (1977) that occupations are structured to control our lives and that the limitations on human creativity are ultimately imposed by the very owners who now tell us we’re “useless.”
“No-one in industrial society suffers more from this fragmentation than industrial workers. We pay a double price: we sacrifice our lives on the job to obtain demeaned leisure.”
See Moneycircus, Apr 2022 – The Arc Of Yuval Noah Harari and his covenant with Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum
And so we come to the present day when forces just out of sight, seek to disrupt the business cycle. Why might they do that, you ask. Consider the possibility that instead of standing on the brink of a new era of innovation, we are really at the end of an era.
“The waterwheel gave way to the steam engine, steam to oil as the era of the combustion engine arrived. That era is now ending though not under its own steam (excuse the pun) but by an arbitrary decision to restrict the use of oil. Although the telegraph came later we see the parallel trajectory of data over wires which evolved from Morse code, to voice, to facsimile machine to internet. With censorship we are witnessing arguably the end of that particular cycle.”
See Moneycircus, Sep 2022 – Two Elizabeths And The Eclipse Of Europe
The owners, instead of seeing a new vista of profitable production, are bereft of ideas and in desperation seek to discard the mass of consumers who no longer profit them. They seek to hold onto the only thing that in a post-industrial society would still secure wealth and position: direct control and rationing of the Earth’s natural resources.
In such conditions they would look to history to build an unscalable wall between their own enclave and the proto-society outside. This concept was describe in detail in the work of the globalists’ chief imagineers, Aldous Huxley in Brave New World, and H. G. Wells in The Time Machine.
Moneycircus is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
 Richard Gray, 2007 – Economic Value-Theory and Literary Culture in Late-Eighteenth Century Germany: The Debate over Physiocracy
 Gaspar M. Tamas, Open Democracy, Sep 2001 — What is Post-fascism?
 Bret Devereaux, Foreign Policy, 2007 – Hard Times Don’t Make Strong Soldiers
 FBI, DHS, May 2021 – Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism
Thank you MC for your brilliant analysis. I very much appreciate your eloquent writing style and the depth of knowledge from which you source key quotes and inspiration.
I hope you don't mind but I noticed two small typos. Beneath, "Miseducation and rights" – "...revo[l]utionary named Tedros..."
In your last paragraph, second sentence, "This concept was describe[d] in detail..."
One view of Wells’s Time Machine is that it satirizes both Darwin and Marx.
Darwin because the time traveller finds that the future is not a continuation of evolution but a reversal which eventually “winds down” all the way back to the sight of a crab on a beach.
Marx because the “revolution” of the future achieves a reversal of the current class structure in which it is the brutish underlings who rule over an ineffectual elite.