Killing you softly with condescending compassion
The good old days of universal love for all human beings irrespective of colour, creed or caste are coming to an end with a cruel twist. The new breed of eugenicists, allied with the world’s tech giants, like to appeal to an illusory kind of environmentally friendly boutique progressivism that delivers a carefree green utopia for the chosen few and planned obsolescence for everyone else. Deceptive advertising entertains us with visions of shiny happy multicoloured people sharing a post-industrial paradise of luxuriant college campuses and theme parks, interspersed with pristine nature reserves, solar and wind farms powering hyperactive underground data-centres connecting and monitoring all sentient human beings. It lures the trendy professional classes into a false sense of moral superiority over the reactionary great unwashed whose failure to adapt will quietly consign them to the history books.
In the meantime, the managerial classes have resorted to time-honoured divide-and-rule tactics by guilt-tripping the settled working classes for their intolerance of newfangled rival underclasses, whether defined by ethnicity, migration status, sexual identity or disability. In times of plenty with opportunities galore for most resourceful citizens to thrive as valued members of cohesive communities, there was no need to obsess with diversity, equality and inclusion, only to care for the unlucky few who fell by the wayside owing to significant social and physiological handicaps. As the current debt-driven economic model becomes more unsustainable by the day with diminishing returns on unfunded government expenditure, something will have to give way with the weakest inevitably bearing the brunt as more and more workers fail to find a niche in the era of smart automation. If you cannot grasp the logic behind AI-assisted solutions, your paid job may soon become superfluous, further raising the IQ bar in the cognitive professions. You may stay in the new Garden of Eden the techno-patrician class has planned for you on universal basic income, but only if you know your place and do not rock the boat. It’s very much a case of one rule for thee and one rule for me.
The priorities of regional governance teams only make sense once you realise their end goal is to phase most of us out with plausible deniability over the next two natural generations, which explains the authorities’ focus on shaping young minds. While Sir Keir Starmer grandstands on the world stage striking deals with his Davos chums, at home his team neutralises discontent by throwing shiny baubles or cheap gimmicks to the masses while failing dismally to provide the infrastructure and social framework people need. He trades fishing rights for faster passport checks for British citizens at European airports because policy advisors think the plebs care more about inexpensive holidays in the Sun than keeping alive rooted multigenerational concerns. Likewise, his team believe you care more about getting new subsidised obesity injections on the overrated NHS than keeping family farms safe from predatory investment bankers, biotech multinationals, renewable energy giants and property developers. They want obedient consumers with limited autonomy or critical thinking skills, but happy to receive social credits in the form of universal welfare in exchange for their acquiescence with a new form of digital feudalism.
Engineered Hostilities
As the world as we knew it falls apart, different sets of opinion leaders can stir up trouble by scapegoating rival groups of commoners for heinous crimes and degeneracy. The liberal intelligentsia may take pride in their tolerance of ethnic diversity, but they openly belittle the native working classes with accusations of intolerance, lack of education and bigotry, blaming some of the most underprivileged in society for their own misery. By contrast, another set of populist influencers both on the fringes of the mainstream media like Fox News in the States or GB News on his side of the Big Pond as well as well-funded alternative media outlets like Rebel News, tap into growing nativist resentment by highlighting the criminality, incompatible customs and corruption of identifiable ethno-religious groups. The narrow focus on Muslims endears the captive audience of Western malcontents to the Israeli cause for an Arab-free Jewish homeland. Yet behind the scenes we see many of the same movers and shakers pulling the strings of political actors on both sides of the Palestinian and mass migration debates.
In late 2023, Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly expressed intentions to facilitate the voluntary migration of Gazans, stating, “Our problem is [finding] countries that are willing to absorb Gazans, and we are working on it.” Other Knesset members urged Western nations to accept Gazan refugees, drawing parallels to Europe’s acceptance of refugees during the Yugoslav and Syrian civil wars. Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, supported this idea, describing it as a humanitarian solution for Gaza’s residents. In short, Netanyahu wants to offload his country’s Arab problem on Europe despite fostering alliances with critics of mass immigrations such as Viktor Orbán. The plot thickens further when we look at the close collaboration between the various Soros foundations, championing both open borders and the Palestinian cause, and refugee charities. David Miliband had few qualms about supporting the 2003 UK/US occupation of Iraq, largely an extension of Israeli foreign policy objectives, as junior minister and later as Foreign Secretary before accepting a job as CEO of the International Rescue Committee. This well-funded NGO came later into the public eye at the height of Syrian refugee crisis, triggered by a civil war between allies of Al Qaeda and ISIS and the Syrian government. Israel, the US, UK and other Western administrations were not neutral this conflict. They armed and trained the head-chopping rebels via their spurious rescue workers, the White Helmets. Indeed in 2018, Israel helped evacuate fleeing ISIS-allied militants. This seems a very odd move from a government that wants to protect its citizens from the excesses of Islamic fundamentalism, unless you believe depopulation through endless fragmented proxy wars is in the long-term interests of the chosen few or rather your survival strategy is to let your adversaries kill each other.
Many may prefer to believe in a rift between the pro-Palestinian left, supported by the likes of George Soros, and the pro-Israel right. In reality, the Israel lobby practically owns nearly all key Democrat and Republican politicians in the US, but outside North America and guilt-ridden Germany, Israel has lost the battle of hearts and minds. The aim was never to create a secure Jewish homeland living in peace with its neighbours, but to trigger a series of destabilising proxy wars and unsustainable migratory flows, raising tensions on the ground among indigenous Europeans and newcomers and requiring higher levels of surveillance.
It comes as little surprise that the Tony Blair Institute has finally got its way with digital ID in the form of the proposed BritCard mobile app. It aims to integrate various identifiers such as passports, driving licenses, biometric data and national insurance numbers, allowing users to prove their identity for government services, work, renting and accessing benefits. It is already being marketed as a tool to clamp down on illegal immigration and unauthorised workers. In all likelihood, while not initially mandatory for UK citizens, banks, public venues and online services will require it.
The authorities may often seem incompetent, but they know how to play on contradictory fears to justify greater surveillance for the common good.