Naming The Names

Who gets the right to destroy you anonymously?

If you wonder how apparently diverse institutions began to operate in Lockstep in February of 2020: every newspaper and television station, school, university, district council, government department, company executive, non-profit or charity and every political party…

If you wonder how they knew just what to do — without debate, legislatures dispersed so soon.

If you question where they derived their claims to authority, these run-of-the-mill functionaries who suddenly exerted official power of life and death, at least to kill your business and extinguish your child’s education… Read on.

Lockdown, Antwerp, 2020, by Koen Jacobs

Oct 21, 2021

Are there identifiable people behind the synchronization of government which pursues identical interests during Event Covid? Government has apparently been hijacked. By what and whom to be decided.

As Iain Davis told James Corbett, his book Pseudo Pandemic: New Normal Technocracy is largely aimed at the open minded who still need convincing there's a plot afoot. [1]

Patient and methodical, Davis explores the mechanisms by which corporate agendas are implemented simultaneously in different countries. He identifies the United Nations-level Global Public Private Partnerships as the mechanism by which corporations and tax-exempt foundations determine — and profit from — government policy.

As a journalist I used to write about less exalted public-private partnership (PPP) or private finance initiative (PFI) which were a simple answer to infrastructure. Motorways financed by tolls, for example, or hospitals on build-and-operate contracts. They could be badly drafted, even fraudulent, but the logic seemed to address the problem of growing government deficits by bringing private money to the table.

What we’ve seen during Event Covid is that money is suddenly no object. Trillions can be magicked for The Great Reset that were never available before. It has become clear that what we thought of as government debt is really just a matter of collateral.

It’s been 50 years since money was an independent store of value. Instead banks now create credit against an asset and — so long as we’re talking about the private central bankers like the Federal Reserve or Bank of England — it doesn’t matter to them how many zeros they add so long as they get the asset or a controlled government that can levy tax (labour) from the people.

Public Private Partnership or PFI thus indeed comes close to what its critics allege: privatisation by stealth because the asset is real. The money is not.

Real people, flesh and blood, begin to emerge from the fog of management speak and the faceless engineers of process.

Who they?

"People tend to couch the ideas of the supreme or stakeholder capitalist being some kind of Blofeld," Davis tells Corbett. "There is a tendency to think they are all-powerful people but they are not... They get things wrong just like we all do but it is possible to trace the lineage of how the policy has flowed from a centralized point."

Davis says his tome expanded as the pandemic developed and he followed the spider’s web of interests. The connections are seemingly infinite.

Journalists tend to shy away from naming names. Not only for fear of lawsuits (Britain’s libel laws favour the complainant) but because it seems churlish to point a finger and lazy as a short-cut to explaining how the world works.

It is hard to avoid the faces of Covid, however: the politicians and bureaucrats who are so quick, loud and unquestioning, when faced with something that kills no more people than the flu. Have we accused the correct institution — did we get their names right? I suggest they have outed themselves.

One is the World Economic Forum (WEF) that plays a coordinating role. Its Forum of Young Global Leaders has 1,400 members and alumni from more than 120 countries. You will recognize many of them because they have been vocal leaders of Event Covid.

Notables include premiers Jacinda Ardern and Dan Andrews, Emmanuel Macron, Sebastian Kurtz and Angela Merkel. Its members in the digital sector include Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Jack Ma, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Boris Nikolic, Brent Hoberman and Sanjay Gupta; in finance Larry Fink of BlackRock and Kristalina Georgieva of the IMF, former Bank of England chief Mark Carney, Sergei Guriev, Benjamin Goldsmith. In health, they include Scotland’s health adviser Devi Sridhar, Joseph P. Kennedy III, Wyclef Jean, Tulsi Gabbard, publisher Miguel Forbes and environmental activist David de Rothschild.

I’m sure there aren’t many names there that you don’t recognize. Do they take orders? Some do, in the manner of a made man, a golden boy, a girl wonder, raised up by unseen hands to a position of prominence. We’ve all seen it happen but correlation is not causation.

Prince Charles launched The Great Reset in June 2020, to coincide with Klaus Schwab's book of the same name that was already printed and ready to go. Charles said he represents, or speaks for The Investors, with funds worth trillions of dollars that have been pledged to the Corporate Leaders Group that stands behind the City of London’s Green Horizons project and many others.

Names and labels don’t tell us much if we don’t understand their raison d'être — even if it’s the lofty Bilderberg Group which Prince Charles first attended with his father.

The impasse

Businesses wouldn’t destroy themselves, politicians wouldn’t lay waste to their own economies, I hear you say.

That depends on their predicament:

• pension crisis — governments can’t pay, won’t pay

• banking crisis — asset bubble cannot levitate forever

• industrial crisis — looming mass unemployment

• energy crisis — man-made but no less real

• pollution crisis — most toxic waste is industrial

• corporate crisis — regulators turn a blind eye to monopoly

• nation state crisis — corporations out-play countries

One may add or subtract to that list but the problem can be summarized in a few sentences. The public finances are broken — governments and many companies cannot pay the pensions they promised the people. Central banks have used the power granted them to create money in order to seize an ever-greater share of assets through the mechanism of repeated boom and bust — with each bust, the bankers are bailed out by the taxpayer, while they collect on collateral and sweep their winnings from the table, before launching another boom. We face hyperinflation or financial collapse.

In the process the central banks have enabled a digital-financial complex that now offers to resolve the government’s dilemma (bankrupt welfare state and pension insolvency). The digital financiers would do this by defrauding the people. Under cover of economic chaos the people may even be pushed, by starvation or breakdown of public services, to civil war. The solution will be universal basic income in return for digital passports and biometrically-shackled slaves.

The words are not mine. Listen to the World Economic Forum and see if you cannot hear the proposal to dismantle the economy to the benefit of the richest oligarchs, unleashing chaos in food, energy and information networks, then unleashing the vulture-doves of the United Nations to airlift, like drones, a humanitarian solution.

Rivals for power

This is not simply regulatory capture — in which corporations take over the government agencies that are supposed to regulate them. Social institutions have been seized: universities and the guilds from which they emerged; fraternities, business clubs and trade organizations — I notice that Rotary International now calls itself an international service organization.

Vague descriptions like that are often a giveaway: Common Purpose is a “not-for-profit organization founded in 1989 that develops leaders who can cross boundaries. This enables them to solve complex problems both in organizations and in cities.”

On-the-job training courses have become ideological, separating the workforce into the independent and compliant. Services like education, social work, psychiatry and psychology have become politicized with an explicit agenda of social engineering.

I explore the capture of social institutions in my series Rivals for Power about the forces behind Event Covid: (1) Guildsmen Trap us in the Middle Ages; (2) Bankers Infected the Economy; (3) Vengeance, Feuds and Memory; (4) Spies, Dupes and Charities, The Tax-exempt Foundations. See also the article, BBC Flirts With 'Deeper Authority'.

If you wonder how these apparently diverse institutions began to operate in Lockstep in February of 2020: every newspaper and television station, school, university, district council, government department, company executive, non-profit or charity and every political party. If you wonder how they knew what to do — without debate: legislatures were soon suspended. If you question where their authority came from, these run-of-the-mill functionaries who suddenly claimed official power of life and death, to kill your business and your child’s education… Read on.

Group think

It is more than process management — aligning with an organization's strategic goals, designing and implementing process architectures — and all that gobbledygook of bureaucratic life. That may suffice on the C-Suite but to keep so many levels across unrelated industries in Lockstep requires an ideology.

Often in history ideology serves to cloak a small band of protagonists or to build legends of mass appeal for a putsch by groups that in reality have far more elite connections, like the Bolsheviks or the NSDAP.

Outcomes management is the mantra for this new orthodoxy. Control would otherwise be impossible. It allows stakeholders, owners and vested interests to get what they want. It imposes rigid conformity, a path to an outcome from which any deviation is an error. Most importantly it operates through a kind of mind control.

At its simplest, it severs outputs from outcomes. We no longer output a better car, creating outcomes like convenience, connectivity and even happily-unforeseen outcomes like new services.

In the corporate bureaucracy, outputs align with the interests of stakeholders. The machinery is not the lathe or even the chalk board but the imprinting of the mind: public information programmes, workshops, leadership and diversity training. Thus there is no room for initiative or unsolicited input from the lower orders but only technocratic diktat. This is very clear from a cursory reading of Schwab’s Reset.

It requires a certain grey mindset that associates actuality and verity with authority and consensus — and which fears to stray.

Give me the youth

Some university lecturers today pride themselves on manufacturing activists. [2] As this places more focus on identity politics than the reality of economic relations, I would argue this is just another elevation of process and mind-formation over sweating one’s labour in the material world.

Interaction with the Earth, physically or consciously, must precede the attempt to change it. Universities circumvent this with another definition of activist. They are creating vectors of control, trained to transmit social outcomes. While the instruction is liberal all is fine and dandy. Their definition of progressive, however, is fluid. One day the instruction, the consensus, may change.

That’s to put it politely.

On a superficial level identity politics seeks to replace class consciousness. It's also a nefarious means for the securely employed, especially in the media and academia (doing the bidding of their billionaire grant donors), to dominate the conversation, to wrest the Megaphone from the worker and deny him a voice. That is why the parade of victimhood is so crucial to woke politics. Who appoints the victim? Not objective economic reality but the media and academics. They grant 15 minutes of morose posturing and pouting and then the Megaphone is whisked away to another faux martyr to take his turn, as genuine as any well-heeled, prancing, red caped Greta at Extinction Rebellion, a "diversity" author with a publishing contact or some millionaire Me Too actress. That's not too deny the latter have a cause but they should acknowledge they have appropriated time, space and attention from people less advantaged than themselves. Worse, their narcissistic attention grabbing is bourgeois neuroticism. It can change nothing.

By wresting agency from the individual in the name of the in-group versus the out-group, identity politics does the oligarch’s bidding.

Outcomes are a very real battle between vested interests, in which ideological purity or consensus of interest is seen to add weight to a decision, while lowering the perceived value of individual will and skills — which become a negative, adding to the cost and complexity of every decision. Outputs no longer drive outcomes; in fact, they are not allowed to.

Trying to think of an acronym I happened upon MOOM: managed outcomes-outcomes management. According to Google that also stands for made out of milk and it is the Persian word for asphalt. All very appropriate. Moom faintly invokes NASA: nice and safe attitude.

Lest you think I am being harsh on lecturers, the WEF has its own activists: Global Shapers. With more than 13,000 members, the Global Shapers Community spans 448 city-based hubs in 150 countries and ows allegiance to Papa Klaus, who founded his youth division in 2011.

The talk of environmental justice, positive change, clean ups, tree planting and convenience stores is a blend of local community politics and international, global issues but it is too broad to form a political movement. It rather creates a pool of potential graduates to the Young Global Leaders programme.

The annual report of Global Shapers for 2019-2020 is light on substance and more of a marketing brochure. That defines GS: a way to sell the WEF and for the WEF to identify people useful to its agenda. Global Shapers are, one assumes, free to choose their specialism but each of these campaign issues has been carefully reframed to be corporate-friendly.

Incidentally, if you wish to know more about Schwab’s skeletons, Johnny Vedmore did a one-off research project [3]

Naming names

Identity politics and managed outcomes are related to a third concept much-touted nowadays: equity.

Perhaps there is a reason why oligarchs and billionaires promote all three. Has the corporate become ideological? Has business transformed from the generating of dollars and cents to a higher calling. Yes! In the minds of billionaires it is inevitable that they entwine identity and wealth: they invest their souls with their money, which becomes their overweening ambition. They need to believe they are deserving of their wealth — and they mean to keep it to themselves.

This leads to the strange inconsistency of The Patriarchy. The same people who finance tendentious research into gender and privilege are, by and large, male, bewhiskered billionaires.

Clinton and Gates to the WHO

The WHO is not a government body. It is an agency whose biggest funder is Bill Gates, with a chief, Tedros, installed by the Clintons and the Rockefellers. Its power lies in its ability to influence governments to open the sluice gates.

What we are exploring is therefore not a choice of style of policy making nor a collection of individuals. It a multi-generational bid for corporate control and thus worth of respect.

There is no surprise that the GPPP began in the health sector, giving control of the WHO to the pharmaceutical companies. We shall begin with a modern example and then look to its roots.

The Clinton Global Initiative met in September of every year from 2005-2016 around the time of the UN General Assembly in New York. They would invite journalists to rub shoulders with presidents and billionaires who would announce their “commitments to action” which were pledges — though not actual cheques. [4]

On the back of this hot air, governments would be tapped for real money. AIDS soon became the biggest trough and Corey’s Digs estimates that the flow of cash from governments, by 2020, at $90 Billion from such founts as the Presidential AIDS fund PEPFAR. Much of it was routed through the Clinton and Gates foundations. Billions even found their way to George Soros in Ukraine.

The late Richard Holbrooke, former UN ambassador and president and CEO of the Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS told Philanthropy News Digest: “I think what you're seeing is the beginning of what you might call the first super NGO...with overlapping interests and a great deal of resources.” [5]

These efforts soon bore fruit. One of the policies of CGI was a $25 million foreign aid programme for East Africa run by Tedros Adhanom, then health minister of Ethiopia, with ample sponsorship by the Obama administration, JP Morgan, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. This provided the platform for Tedros’ later elevation to the WHO.

Many companies that had pledged money to the CGI went on to lobby the State Department for contracts under then Secretary Hillary Clinton.

The money-go-round operates in various ways. On the WHO’s say-so, governments release a flood of taxpayer cash to corporations (big pharma) or to charities (run by foundations run by corporations). The formula is basically: Gates or Clinton says HIV AIDS needs billions > WHO gives its imprimatur > governments send $$$ > Gates and Clinton.

You might ask why the provision of health services requires that Clinton, Gates or Rockefeller be the middle man? Not only do they get their hands on government aid and donations — they own the companies that will profit from the drugs, foodstuffs and pesticides, too.

They’ve found a way to profit twice! Take the donations/taxpayer money to make the product, then sell the product back to the taxpayer. Or, in the Clinton’s case, just take the money.

Filthy feller, lovely lucre

The roots of the public-private partnership in health go back at least a century to the capture of medicine as described by E. Richard Brown in Rockefeller Medicine Men: Medicine and Capitalism in America. The kerosene king had started out selling counterfeit snake oil but once the technology of "cracking" petroleum arrived, the ingenuity of his fellow Germans led to petrochemical-based pharmaceuticals.

Rockefeller became the biggest name in U.S. pharmaceuticals by using the power of his endowments to gain control of medical schools. He promptly banned traditional medicine. Simultaneously he became a force in the media. It is not just a curious parallel that today we see big pharma, the medical profession and the media in cahoots. It is very largely the same interests.

The vast profits to be made set off a rivalry between the U.S. and Britain on the one hand, and Germany on the other. That quest for wealth was to shape the 20th century.

Government, for all its big budgets and burden on taxpayers, cannot compete with private foundations. These are the playthings of families and wealthy individuals. Through think tanks, the big four auditors and their consultancies, and the banks and private equity, corporate forces make government policy.

Examples at random include George Soros' well-documented and lavish funding of selected U.S. District Attorneys, having realized how the political machine — and electoral process — can be controlled through the judicial system.

There is Bill Gates' development of Common Core and successful effort through the teachers' unions, academics and politicians to foist it upon the U.S.. The powerful influence of billionaire families like the Pritzkers set the gender debate, as explored by Jennifer Bilek. [6]

Hands to the tiller

It goes much deeper than the revolving door between government and the private sector. Catherine Austin Fitts explains how defence contractors control computing and IT systems, including information and payments. Private banks run the financial systems.

Governments are no longer sovereign: their information and payment systems are now run by banks and corporations and they restrict what they allow politicians to see.

When she was number two in charge of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in the 1990s contractors flat out denied her access to information. It is worth quoting her at length:

"Sovereign government no longer controls the information and payment systems. They are run by the defense contractors who report to a shadow government. The NY Federal Reserve and member banks operate as depositors. So they run the bank accounts and financial systems and the defence contractors run the information and payment systems. Between them they report to the shadow government or themselves...

If the middle class is going to reassert authority that means control of the digital systems — the sovereign government, the president, the officials do not control them. They control the appropriations."

There is one deeper and more troubling feature of heist by organised crime. Unlike Lucky Luciano and Meyer Lansky, today’s dons have absorbed the lessons of Freud and Bernays. They employ the skills of Marc Bernays Randolph, founder and CEO of Netflix. Whether Randolph knows it or not he helps to sculpt the cranium that accepts the Great Lockdown.

In summary, the degree of mind control that accompanies Event Covid, the Lockdown and the momentous transfer of wealth that is taking place in its shadow, makes the propaganda machine of the Third Reich look like playtime.

Moneycircus, Rivals for Power, Part 1 — Guildsmen Trap us in the Middle Ages

Moneycircus, Rivals for Power, Part 2 — Bankers Infected the Economy

Moneycircus, Rivals for Power, Part 3 — Vengeance, Feuds and Memory

Moneycircus, Rivals for Power, Part 4 — Spies, Dupes and Charities

Moneycircus — BBC Flirts With 'Deeper Authority'

[1] Iain Davis — In-This-Together Com

[2] Jerusha O. Conner — The New Student Activists

[3] Johnny Vedmore, Feb 2021 — Schwab Family Values

[4] Influence Watch — Clinton Global Initiative

[5] Philanthropy News Digest, 2006 — Efforts of Gates, Clinton Foundations Increasingly Overlap

[6] Jennifer Bilek, The Federalist, 2018: Who Are the Rich, White Men Institutionalizing Transgender Ideology?