1/5I've written white papers for the United Nations, the Trilaterial Commission, and for the cosmetics industry on replacement migration and population integration.First, the idea that "the global agenda" is leftist or communist or somehow related to the neo-Marxism of the Frankfurt school is misguided. The organizations I've worked for over the years see the number one priority as the maintenance of global economic integration and open markets.In collaborating with the intelligence community, I've found their goals to be extremely anti-left and very concerned with maintaining global commercial institutions.This is the reason the CIA worked so far to defeat communism; it was a threat to a unified global market.What many of you have picked up on is the New Left elements of the global agenda. But this is a misunderstanding. The system apparatus from 1945-1980 was the Keynesian welfare state, which successfully integrated potential opposition from the left and right into the system. The New Left (born out of the Frankfurt school) strongly opposed the welfare state, which they correctly saw as a method of ensuring the working class did not succumb to revolutionary tendencies, and mobilized identity activism against it (Women's Liberation, Black Power, etc.).The solution to this threat was the co-optation of identity politics, and the movement of economic administration to supranational institutions (WTO, IMF, World Bank, EU). That way this new mobilization would not threaten the global economy but could be allowed to manifest without state repression (as Nixon tried from 69-73).
(désolé j'ai fail la mise en forme de celui-là...)
2/5You're also picking up on the visual integration strategies of sublimating resistance to global capitalism. The left has been largely dealt with by focusing leftwing economic agitation into non-threatening identity activism. The right, and ethnic sectarianism especially, still poses a threat to global economic administration.Hence, the open borders and integrationist strategy of visual, sociological, and biological integration. The end result should be an outcome resembling Brazil (which ties into my work with the cosmetics industry, if you're curious), a neo-homogenous population of interchangeable human producer/consumer units that would be organized at a nation-state level, but be more easily integrated into international administration, lacking any pre-capital factors (race, ethnicity, history, religion, etc.) that could serve as the basis for nation-level democratic agitation against supranational institutions.The current wave of nationalism was unforeseen because many expected demographic change had already progressed too far and that leftwing elements had been too integrated into identity-based politics rather than economic populism. We are responding accordingly and advocating a framework of civic nationalism that can serve as a building block to international community by furthering the domestic task of visual, sociological, and biological integration of national communities. Civic nationalism, when successfully co-opted, will help further eradicate intra-national divisions and, coupled with pro-integrationist public-private advertising (propaganda), will progress the goals of creating a neo-homogenous, non-racial society.
3/5The goal is to transform the nation-state into a local level of administration without primary sovereignty. In other words, the needs of maintaining global economic integration is primary, and national governments are local administrators who ensure that this primary objective is carried out. Nations cease having exclusive interests.This part: "people without any history to be easily organized in international groups without any conflicts" is quite accurate. Sectarian resistance is one of the biggest problems today. The ultimate goal is a global Brazil, if you will.(...)The division you're talking about was coming whether it was orchestrated or not. If you think your average college professor isn't just a naive ideologue, you're mistaken. The solution to the agitation and division that came in the 1960s/70s was to (1) shift economic administration to the global level so it was no longer subject to domestic politics and fights between groups and (2) the co-optation of identity politics, sublimating it into non-economic concerns. The goal was to de-politicize the economy and to de-economize politics.The ultimate goal, however, is a global common market and the elimination of pre-capital identity. Identity is to become a collection of commodified consumer objects, where identity categorizations lose their racial/ethnic/racial specificity and become objects that can be assumed through voluntary consumption.(...)This is also why I brought up Brazil. The vast majority of our efforts were aimed at Brazil, which was a test case of sorts. The result was one of the highest rates of plastic surgery in Brazil (success). But a side effect, which is actually really interesting, was the explosion of transsexuality, because when female sexuality was transformed into several acquirable commodities, then men also became consumers of these commodities. That was unforeseen.
4/5Take economic concerns out of politics by channeling rightwing energies into "culture war" politics and leftwing energy into "identity politics." This way, politics does not threaten fundamental economic change.Then, economic administration was to be separated from politics through moving economic administration to the supranational level (WTO, IMF, EU, etc.) and through privatization.Right now, cultures are associated with peoples and their histories. You can't sell "whiteness" or "blackness" to someone who isn't of that race. But, if these racial/ethnic categories were to become blurred and eventually eliminated, cultures would become a consumable goods, i.e. non-racially definable people purchase their culture through consumer products.There is no global conspiracy to control everyone through a global government. It's just powerful multinational corporations and their international organization partners trying to ensure global economic integration, create a situation where there is no domestic-level resistance from pre-capital forms of identity and organization, and, lastly, to profit, as I helped the cosmetics industry do.Many of my clients were in interracial relationships themselves and believe in racial equality and their own project of global integration. You're assuming that they're far more cynical than they really are. They want to make money, but they fundamentally believe that races are equal and something to be overcome.Historically speaking, National Socialism was a bigger threat than communism because it combined economic resistance to global economic integration with ethnic/pre-capital sectarianism.
5/5The culture war-identity politics system collapsed over the course of 2015-2016, necessitating a transition to the new system of co-opted civic nationalism. Again, this is just starting to be said, and there are obviously many people too rooted in the old system to change, but it is a strategy with potential.In short, the rhetoric produced to preserve the system became semi-autonomous and now poses a threat to the system that helped create it.Civic nationalism as a way of changing the rhetoric of pursuing the same ends to make them palatable again. For instance, instead of the Reaganesque rhetoric of "cutting taxes so people can keep more of their own money," a civic nationalist rhetoric of "cutting taxes so our country is internationally competitive and we can bring jobs back home." The end goal is the same, but it's presented with a new argument. This can be applied in multiple ways and can ultimately be used to marginalize the very economic nationalism you're talking about as harming our NATIONAL economic competitiveness.
Sans Modération.------------Respecter les autres est la base de l'échange.Il faut beaucoup d'efforts pour construire et peu de bêtise pour détruire.Ni insulte, ni incivilité, ni appel à la haine raciale ne seront acceptés. Je supprimerai les commentaires en comportant.