2.3. The system's agenda

When it becomes clear that governments are actively fighting against their own population in the midst of intense international rivalry, it raises questions about their purpose: shouldn't governments serve their population?

And if they don't, what are their plans?

Is there a conspiracy?

To address this point immediately: there is no mysterious global conspiracy.

First, as we have seen, there is no global unity: two blocks oppose each other and many countries simply try to remain non-aligned. There is nothing to suggest a unified global government working in the shadows!

Second, because nothing is really hidden. Certainly, organizations like the WEF give a general direction to Western policy, but it's not a conspiracy, it's an assumed vision! Similarly, in China, control and repression measures, or economic strategy, are not hidden.

Finally, in either system, the motivations of individuals and organizations remain the same: domination, power and money provide enough justification for the system's operation that there is no need to add a conspiracy.

So let's review these motivations; this will allow us to continue to illuminate the contours of the system.

The stakes of the war against the people

Why is the system fighting against its population?

Can we talk about international threats?

The first attempt at explanation stems from the conflict between the major international blocs. After all, in light of the elements presented earlier, isn't it normal for states to monitor their population to guard against attempts at external influence? We see the intensity with which the Western bloc organizes coups, takes power or at least influences elections wherever possible; the threat of external influence is real.

But what is the reality of this threat on the Western side? Are Westerners dreaming of Chinese society today? Even if the American Dream is fading, global cultural victory is neither Chinese nor Russian today, and no one seriously believes these countries have the power to significantly influence elections in a Western country.

On the other hand, how effective are the measures taken if we are talking about determined agents, with almost unlimited means? Does gun control really discourage terrorists? Does the health pass scare viruses? Does internet censorship prevent foreign agents from communicating? All of these measures are actually completely useless against a real enemy... But they work very well to control the population.

The target is therefore inside: it is the citizens that are targeted, especially those who are aware of the totalitarian system unfolding. Whether it is against the construction of an airport, the introduction of the health pass, imposed environmental policies or mobilization against corrupt politicians, citizen mobilization is the real threat that the system must face. The system is afraid of what questions it and it is against that that the system deploys its weapons.

Is it for our own good?

The argument here is that people are too stupid to govern themselves. The system therefore protects them against their will, be it against nasty terrorists, evil viruses, or infernal global warming. The system works for our own good!

This is how the Great Reset is presented: as a plan to preserve humanity from its own stupidity. Certainly, it will impoverish 99% of the population (or eliminate them), but it may reduce CO2 emissions a bit! The remaining percent of the population, of course, will continue to get richer...

Therefore, we must ask whether the Great Reset is sincere or just a facade used to give a presentable aspect to the establishment of a totalitarian society. In truth, one must be very naive to believe in the optimistic scenario, and the following points should help dispel any doubts.

Control of the financial system

Do all measures to control the financial system aim to repress or deter fraudsters, or perhaps just facilitate transactions? Let's be serious.

Money is the ultimate means of control. Its control is therefore the ultimate means of repression, as well as the guarantee to protect those who possess the most.

To this end, a whole arsenal is put in place:

The latest example is the EU AML rulebook, which aims to control cash and cryptocurrency transactions in Europe.

On the one hand, it becomes impossible to dispose of a significant amount of untraceable money freely, and on the other hand, the system can cut an individual or organization off from the financial system, which amounts to a virtual death sentence. We have already seen this possibility exercised in Canada against mere protesters, so it is clear that this weapon will become a major tool of the system in the fight against the people.

In parallel, the system is preparing a greatly improved version of transaction control through so-called "CBDC - CCDC" (Central Bank Digital Currency) digital currencies. The ability to program money offers tremendous means of control!

And conversely, if the programmability of money allows for the strengthening of population control, it will also allow for even more financial flows to be freed from citizen control, allowing them to prosper beyond any democratic control.

As a people, we have probably not yet fully realized the importance that control of money already has. When this control is accentuated through the CBDC - CCDC, it will be too late. We return here to our main theme: the real battle of this century is the battle for the freedom and decentralization of the Internet and its derivative protocols. The problem is not programmable money, but its use by a centralized and undemocratic power!

The End of Politics

The system needs political power to deploy its totalitarian arsenal. The recent election of a non-aligned figure like Trump in the United States traumatized the system, and now all measures are being taken to prevent such a situation from happening again in the Western world. They want soft, aligned governments that obediently participate in the implementation of the system.

Left or Right?

How to elect these governments? A widely used solution is to create confusion in the minds of voters. Thus, the traditional separation between left and right is maintained, which no longer makes any sense. This fosters general confusion about political ideas, leads to false debates, and incorrect identification of proposed political choices.

Moreover, this makes it possible to offer only a choice between aligned candidates or "dangerous extremists" on the far left or right, which has the double advantage of leaving no chance for alternative candidates while proving to the extremes that our "democratic" system still works.

However, we can feel that the traditional analysis no longer works in our Western societies. The distinction between a left that would defend the interests of the most modest and a right that would protect the interests of the bourgeoisie is objectively non-existent.

The Only Question

The only real political differentiator that remains, and which is totally absent from the debate, is the desire to participate in the system or not. There is no other real political differentiator: either you are with the system, or you are with the people!

And when people refuse the system, as was the case in the European referendums of 2005 in France and the Netherlands, the system forces its way through and imposes the extension of its powers despite everything. Did you say democracy?

Refusing the system means giving a chance to the freedom of peoples and their right to determine their future. Playing the system's game means accepting the war against the people and the establishment of a totalitarian system.

Here is the real political debate, and more and more we see it emerging: Canadian truckers, Dutch farmers, overthrow of Sri Lanka's leaders... Everywhere people rise up, often without even realizing it, against the system that is unfolding. And everywhere the response is the same: police repression, non-existent or biased media coverage, strengthening of control and censorship policies.

But in the meantime, the media endlessly recycle topics manufactured from scratch: purchasing power, COVID, Ukraine, weather... The real question: "Do we want a society of permanent control?" is totally eclipsed, if not censored.

And here is the plan of the system: to reach the point where public political issues and current debates are only counter-fires, where real decisions are made at other levels, and where governments only locally implement a policy decided by institutions that have no democratic legitimacy.

Control of Information Networks

And to achieve this goal, beyond controlling the content of political debate, the fundamental issue is the control of the container: the internet, its exchange platforms, its protocols. Controlling the messenger means controlling the message. And to control technology, political power must be wielded, to the greatest extent possible, at an international level. The loop is complete.

The different international blocs are developing independently their solutions for controlling networks, deploying borders on the internet, their own hardware and tools to eliminate undesirable content.

The system's efforts are therefore focused as much on technological solutions as on propaganda aimed at keeping the system's pawns in power: the Great Reset, the WEF's model of society, integrates digital control tools with a Western-style social credit model: passes, CBDC - CCDC, digital identities, everything is preparing us for the society of permanent control that China is showing us as an example.

We are going to become users of a digitized and cloistered system that can unplug us at any moment. In this society, political debate will be non-existent. It is already difficult to make alternative ideas exist today; tomorrow they will simply be invisible. And that's exactly the goal.

So why is the system fighting?

We have seen that it is not necessary to talk about a conspiracy. The system is simply fighting for its development... Or its survival! The technological revolution it is trying to appropriate and transform into a means of control could just as easily cause its downfall, which is why its actions are so violent.

If people became aware of the democratic potential of digital tools, we could cut the grass from under the system's feet and put these tools at the service of the population, not the other way around.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. We have exposed the characteristics of the system, examined its motivations and projects, now let's see how this system is being implemented concretely in the Western world.

Next page