Leo Fernevak on Nostr: A few thoughts on U.N. Agenda 21 and how Bitcoin reverses authoritarianism. As a ...
A few thoughts on U.N. Agenda 21 and how Bitcoin reverses authoritarianism.
As a starting point it is reasonable to believe that all individuals attempt to solve problems, at least from their own understanding of how things work.
Central planners will favor authoritarian solutions while voluntarists will favor compelling win-win arguments that can inspire people to be convinced of something.
Politicians tend to align with the 'ethics' of the Trolley Problem; that if they believe they can help the many (or the planet), that this warrants sacrificing some groups of people.
In 1992, 178 nations signed up for Agenda21.
The Trolley Problem however, is deeply unethical; the assumption is that it is virtuous to sacrifice some for some believed 'greater good'. We have seen this tried time and time again throughout history with devastating consequences.
To start with; how could central planners possibly know that X will happen if Y is not sacrificed?
There are both corrupt assumptions combined with plausible power motives mixed into this mental model.
The U.N. Agenda21 can set policy in 178 countries for the simple reason that they signed up for this global policy program in 1992. Coordination in policy between nations is therefore built in.
The fractional reserve banking system is a global, ticking time bomb. Most governments favor a new system of CBDC's to keep their power intact, as well as expanding their control tools.
Governments basically have two choices:
1. Allow free agency and liberty for all. This is the free market path.
or
2. Restrict liberties and use coercion, force or herding via narratives to keep control. This is the central planning path. CBDC's are required to achieve this.
If government bureaucrats are attempting to 'solve' the problem of complete management of society, as they are inclined to do - that's their own, believed main purpose of central planning - then the implementation of social credit score systems appears to them as tempting tools of absolute control. As Jabba Carsten the BIS banker like to say: absolut kontroll.
If 178 nations chose the central planning path in 1992 by signing up for U.N. Agenda21, it's not unreasonable to think they saw it as the only possible path forward for governments to stay in control as the economic system of printing money and growing national debts was heading toward certain catastrophy.
This doesn't excuse governments for pursuing a central planning path.
In 2009, money that cannot be inflated was invented, solving the problem of how to end moneyprinting. Bitcoin became the alternable to dystopian central planning.
Yet, moneyprinting + CBDC's keep governments in control, so there is a clear power motive involved. CBDC's are also necessary for social credit score systems and carbon allowance restrictions, as per the U.N. Agenda2030 goals.
As the Club pf Rome observed: they imagined that there was a need for a global, cross-national threat that could pull nations together to reach unified policy agreements.
They came up with (false) climate concerns as a unifying threat. This is the building block of U.N. Agenda21; climate alarmism.
Zooming out, the Trolley Problem is visible:
1. Belief in a climate disaster that is always 5-10 years ahead.
2. Belief in the justification of sacrificing X, Y or Z in order to avoid the believed doomsday scenario.
What could go wrong when power ambitions enter this equation. Secondly, what could possibly go wrong even if we assumed no power ambitions, naive though as that would be.
The Trolley Problem is unethical at its core. It assumes that central planners are all-knowing & incorruptible, while they justify their power by assuming that humans are greedy and incompetent. Greed certainly have a way of rising to power.
It is in this context that we need to understand the authoritarianism of Covid-19, lockdowns, movement licenses, Covid-passports, mandated injections and movement-regulating discrimination. Discrimination based on whether or not an individual have injected a poorly tested product with obvious risks of side-effects that the government demand to force upon individuals via false narratives, coercion, threat or force.
Movement licenses are clearly goals by themselves; to tie your liberties to central databases - social credit scores - which can and will be used to centrally manage your options in life based on your compliance with the fickle beliefs and whims of either incompetent or malevolent central planners, often times both.
This is also one of many reasons why Bitcoin matters. Bitcoin is the only monetary protocol that can bring down the emerging CBDC control tools and the social credit systems that depend on CBDC's, while also preserving the savings and freedom of everyone to transact without discrimination.
Witout moneyprinting and CBDC's, social credit systems have no future. Bitcoin solves core systemic problems of central planning tyranny and overreach.
As a starting point it is reasonable to believe that all individuals attempt to solve problems, at least from their own understanding of how things work.
Central planners will favor authoritarian solutions while voluntarists will favor compelling win-win arguments that can inspire people to be convinced of something.
Politicians tend to align with the 'ethics' of the Trolley Problem; that if they believe they can help the many (or the planet), that this warrants sacrificing some groups of people.
In 1992, 178 nations signed up for Agenda21.
The Trolley Problem however, is deeply unethical; the assumption is that it is virtuous to sacrifice some for some believed 'greater good'. We have seen this tried time and time again throughout history with devastating consequences.
To start with; how could central planners possibly know that X will happen if Y is not sacrificed?
There are both corrupt assumptions combined with plausible power motives mixed into this mental model.
The U.N. Agenda21 can set policy in 178 countries for the simple reason that they signed up for this global policy program in 1992. Coordination in policy between nations is therefore built in.
The fractional reserve banking system is a global, ticking time bomb. Most governments favor a new system of CBDC's to keep their power intact, as well as expanding their control tools.
Governments basically have two choices:
1. Allow free agency and liberty for all. This is the free market path.
or
2. Restrict liberties and use coercion, force or herding via narratives to keep control. This is the central planning path. CBDC's are required to achieve this.
If government bureaucrats are attempting to 'solve' the problem of complete management of society, as they are inclined to do - that's their own, believed main purpose of central planning - then the implementation of social credit score systems appears to them as tempting tools of absolute control. As Jabba Carsten the BIS banker like to say: absolut kontroll.
If 178 nations chose the central planning path in 1992 by signing up for U.N. Agenda21, it's not unreasonable to think they saw it as the only possible path forward for governments to stay in control as the economic system of printing money and growing national debts was heading toward certain catastrophy.
This doesn't excuse governments for pursuing a central planning path.
In 2009, money that cannot be inflated was invented, solving the problem of how to end moneyprinting. Bitcoin became the alternable to dystopian central planning.
Yet, moneyprinting + CBDC's keep governments in control, so there is a clear power motive involved. CBDC's are also necessary for social credit score systems and carbon allowance restrictions, as per the U.N. Agenda2030 goals.
As the Club pf Rome observed: they imagined that there was a need for a global, cross-national threat that could pull nations together to reach unified policy agreements.
They came up with (false) climate concerns as a unifying threat. This is the building block of U.N. Agenda21; climate alarmism.
Zooming out, the Trolley Problem is visible:
1. Belief in a climate disaster that is always 5-10 years ahead.
2. Belief in the justification of sacrificing X, Y or Z in order to avoid the believed doomsday scenario.
What could go wrong when power ambitions enter this equation. Secondly, what could possibly go wrong even if we assumed no power ambitions, naive though as that would be.
The Trolley Problem is unethical at its core. It assumes that central planners are all-knowing & incorruptible, while they justify their power by assuming that humans are greedy and incompetent. Greed certainly have a way of rising to power.
It is in this context that we need to understand the authoritarianism of Covid-19, lockdowns, movement licenses, Covid-passports, mandated injections and movement-regulating discrimination. Discrimination based on whether or not an individual have injected a poorly tested product with obvious risks of side-effects that the government demand to force upon individuals via false narratives, coercion, threat or force.
Movement licenses are clearly goals by themselves; to tie your liberties to central databases - social credit scores - which can and will be used to centrally manage your options in life based on your compliance with the fickle beliefs and whims of either incompetent or malevolent central planners, often times both.
This is also one of many reasons why Bitcoin matters. Bitcoin is the only monetary protocol that can bring down the emerging CBDC control tools and the social credit systems that depend on CBDC's, while also preserving the savings and freedom of everyone to transact without discrimination.
Witout moneyprinting and CBDC's, social credit systems have no future. Bitcoin solves core systemic problems of central planning tyranny and overreach.