Anomalies

Anomalies are often the key to truth: the annoying aberration of a fact from one’s view of the world can lead to new insights that completely overturn your reality.

Here’s an example of things not being anomalous. Yesterday’s UK press described Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s press conference as an “unhinged rant.” One has got used to MSM’s shotgun accusations of “bizarre rants,” for example regarding Donald Trump, meaning “a pretty reasonable statement, but we know you won’t check for yourself.”

Of course, one can’t check out Lavrov’s performance easily, because amidst the impassioned complaints in the media that Russia is censoring the news from its people, the West has closed down Russian sources like RT so that we won’t hear misinformation. And we’re not even at war yet. Only it’s possible to find the press conference, with translation, with a bit of effort, and if you do you will find that Lavrov speaks soberly – even boringly – and answers questions with much fact (as far as I can tell, consistent with the recent history that our media are avoiding discussing) and little rhetoric. Of course he puts a pro-Russian spin on it, but the averagely intelligent person should be able to handle that and make a judgement. Were they permitted to in the free democratic world, that is.

All this is consistent with the observation that what we, in Britain, are encouraged to soak up is highly emotional propaganda for one rather precarious version of events, which works because all other views are censored. This accords with all we have seen in connection with COVID over the last two years, and of course it opens up the question of whether the two narratives serve the same agenda, and if so what that is.


Well, one part of the answer to that involves the World Economic Forum and its Great Reset Agenda. Klaus Schwab’s book of that title laying out the program for a new world order came out a mere two months after COVID became a thing, taking the pandemic as the catalyst. And as we’ve discussed here many of the world’s major players in totalitarian COVID policy including Trudeau, Macron, Ardern, Merkel and Bill Gates have come through its “Global Leaders” programme. Furthermore its major censors on Google, Amazon, Facebook and Twitter, and a host of other influential people, are WEF sponsors. “My God, the spiders are everywhere.”

At face value, the hoped-for agenda is a global politico-corporate coalition – essentially a world government – which will control the proles by the velvet glove of digital media, providing a soma virtual reality on the one hand and social control on the other. So far, so consistent and utopian, or dystopian, depending on how much you buy into it. In fact, relatively few buy in – the thing works because only a powerless minority bothers to find out what’s going on, whilst the majority are happy with a soma media that keeps silent or, if pushed, dismisses the whole Great Reset as a conspiracy theory, despite the books and the annual Davos junket.

On this narrative, Putin’s actions over Ukraine are a spanner in the globalist works. The Great and Good want a peaceful transition, now, to the new world order in which we own nothing, and are happy. But Putin, in the astonishingly prescient words of John Mearsheimer in 2015 (important to hear in full), is a nineteenth century man who sees the world as an anarchic place in which nations have to protect themselves, rather than a 21st century globalist who believes that history is over and that the globalist power-capital hegemony (shorthand “democracy”) will inevitably prevail over all.

Now on this view, clearly Putin must be stopped, just as other nationalists like Assad, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi and so on (Trump, perhaps?) needed to be cleared out of the way. But the logic of the position is that the weapons of proxy war, employing dispensable locals, combined with trade sanctions and the equivalent of cancellation culture at a national level, will lead quietly to “yesterday’s man” being ousted by his people – perhaps with a little help from the CIA, which has much experience of engineering colour-revolutions, including in Ukraine itself in 2014. A Third World War would not seem to be on Klaus Schwab’s radar.

But I heard of an anomaly yesterday, which raises all kinds of questions in my mind. I’ve been avoiding the news coverage of the war as much as I did COVID – it’s depressing enough when everyone around you unites around the “Ukraine democratic and good, Russia rapacious and mad” mythology (even most of those who saw through the last two years of fear-programming). But it seems that Boris Johnson, in a recent fact-filled and closely argued <\sarc> press conference, was upstaged by a Ukrainian reporter laying into him for not instituting a no-fly zone that would certainly, even on the most optimistic analysis, start World War III.

Such an … unhinged rant… might be understandable from a local woman in fear for her country, especially if she shared the overtly Nazi, Russiophobic, ideology of many of those close to power in western Ukraine. Though it would be highly unprofessional behaviour for a reporter, perhaps the crisis situation would be seen as mitigation.

But it turns out that she is not a reporter at all, but a left-wing activist who is, astonishingly, a product of the WEF Young Global leaders programme: A Jacinda Ardern in the making. The fact that this is relevant is shown by the fact that the independent journalist who uncovered the truth had his Twitter account shut down within hours. We were not supposed to know she is a WEF stooge, and therefore it seems likely that she was speaking on their behalf, or they would presumably have disowned her.

Two big questions strike me from this.

The first is, who was she trying to persuade? Boris Johnson, who stood patiently and listened until she finished? To all appearances he is already fully on board with the WEF programme – did he not ape its mantra in entitling the 2021 Conservative Conference “Build Back Better”? And if not him, was her real target the emotionally racked-up public of the West? Does the WEF want the proles to apply pressure to their governments to start a nuclear war with Russia, especially since nuclear-armed China has expressed more sympathy for Russia’s cause than for NATO’s?

Or was the message something more subtle and byzantine, simply intended to sow confusion and discord, rather than actually to persuade, for reasons that, perhaps, Klaus Schwab can fathom, but I cannot?

The second big question is why, across the board, the globalist WEF agenda continues, apparently, to operate entirely in lockstep. Contrast this with the United Nations (with many of the same players), where factions and disagreements abound. On Ukraine, we can see this in the strategic abstentions and vetos that show that, American behind-the-scenes pressure apart, the “global community” condemning Russia consists of the US, UK, EU and very few others. Broadly, there is an inexplicit east-west divide on the issue. Despite the mealy-mouthed political pretences of agreement, there are enough criticisms of NATO, of the US, and so on, even within the alliance, to show that nineteenth-century human tribalism is alive and well.

But nobody in power – nobody – ever publicly criticises any aspect of the WEF or of Klaus Schwab’s utopianism. In this instance, the WEF links of the “reporter” have simply been shut down, rather than Johnson saying that she was not speaking on its behalf, still less that this was unwise territory for the organisation to encroach upon.

But the same unnatural unanimity is true more widely. No global leaders in the West condemned the totalitarian and unconstitutional actions of Justin Trudeau, nor of the other Western leaders riding roughshod over basic human rights. One also never hears a single proviso, or critique, of even the most Communistic aspects of the WEF programme. Despite the belated disapprobation of China over its role in producing, and mismanaging, a novel viral pandemic, not an eyebrow was raised by any of our politicians over genocidal Chairman Ji’s being the lauded keynote speaker at WEF Davos 2022 – “The Great Narrative.

Even Vladimir Putin has not condemned the WEF outright, though he has approached it by calling out Western globalism. He attended Davos this year, I believe, and according to Schwab in 2017 he too is an alumnus of its world leaders programme. Curiouser and curiouser.

It’s hard to entertain even the possibility that the whole Ukraine business is a hyper-byzantine WEF shell-game – though I’m more amenable to that idea if Satan, rather than Klaus Schwab, were the trickster behind it. In his hands, even villains are useful idiots believing they are independent operators.

Drawing back from the wheels within wheels within wheels rabbit hole, though, don’t you get the impression that the WEF is operating as a religion, or more precisely a secret cult? It’s as if all those who attend Davos have taken a vow of secrecy about its affairs, and would no more criticise it than a Moonie would criticise Sun Myung Moon. Or if not a vow of secrecy, sworn in blood on an inverted cross, then the kind of personal, hypnotic, devotion to Klaus Schwab (of all people!) engendered by people like Jim Jones.

It’s all a bit far-fetched, I know – but what can we make of a WEF young leader calling for all-out European warfare against the East? Has someone been reading 1984 as a textbook (requiring there to be both Eurasian and Eastasian empires in order to be permanently at war)?

Or maybe the whole lot of them really are Freemasons.

About Jon Garvey

Training in medicine (which was my career), social psychology and theology. Interests in most things, but especially the science-faith interface. The rest of my time, though, is spent writing, playing and recording music.
This entry was posted in Politics and sociology, Theology. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply