Majorityrights Central > Category: Global Elitism

The polity is shaped towards our race-replacement by its own deep history of ideas but also, of course, by the history of events which are inextricably linked to those ideas.  The sum of them all constitutes an enormous bulwark against change, pressing us, as people interested in change, to the inevitable conclusion that any serious assault on the citadel of Western elitism and political power must mean a revolution on no mean scale.  A simple change to national politics alone will, in the longer term, be constrained and, finally, erased by the continuing effect of these foundational forces.  Many, and quite possibly all of them, would have to be swept away, too.

I’ve made some rather slipshod efforts in the past to draw up a chart supplying some relational context to these forces.  This time, as part of the working up of a new article for PA’s site, I’ve tried to get everything in, including the elements aiming at control of the future of all humanity.  Doubtless, it’s always possible to keep expanding the range of entities, and I might have missed something important.  Anyway, if there is improvement to be made, do please say where.

So here we are at the dawn of what many nationalists, indeed all people who love freedom, suspect may prove a decisive year.  Across the white world governments are doing things that we would have thought unthinkable only a short time ago.  In Australia people are being incarcerated for the sin of preserving the sovereignty of their own bodies, as guaranteed under international law.  In Austria, Germany, France, and Italy those who refuse the gene therapy injection are losing their livelihoods and their ability to go outside of their own home.  Holland and the Republic of Ireland are moving in the same direction.  Others will follow.

At the moment America and Britain are relatively free.  The British political Establishment is hampered by about one hundred rebel Tory MPs. The Prime Minister’s popularity is gone.  There are local authority elections in May, which cannot bode well for the governing party.  There are signs that the media’s pro-vax unanimity may be cracking.  That part of the public which is double-vaxxed, meanwhile, is showing resistance to the third shot, and those who have taken it will surely show resistance to the fourth (due in Spring).  It is hard to see non-whites, only a quarter of whom have been jabbed even once, coming on-board with the agenda.  Knowledge of the mildness of Omicron and its potential for creating herd immunity is widespread.  Likewise, publicity about the incidence of serious vaccine injury is eating away at public conformism.  This war is not lost.  It is only just beginning.

Two nights ago these thoughts were much in the minds of nationalist podcasters Millennial Woes and Morgoth, when they conducted a mammoth four-hour live show to round off the 2021 Milleniyule.

Milleniyule, an intensive series of nightly, live discussion between Woes and principal internet nationalists across the last three weeks of December, has established itself as a staple of the year-end for the modern generation of MSM refuseniks.  I managed to catch some snippets from various shows, including Greg Johnson, Academic Agent, and The Iconoclast.  But I made a point of listening to the whole of Woes’ conversation with Morgoth, which I commend to you:

Of course, everything that was said was really only analysis of the new world of Power that is unfolding daily before us.  It is different to the old world - obviously, the liberal modernity we are so used to but also the coming world of the old banking elites and their Judaic project (only it’s not the coming world now).  But nationalists in Britain have only begun waking up to the tech globalist world, and its climate- and Covid-based methodologies, over the last few months.  I know from personal experience that it is still very hard to get people, especially those who are heavily invested in the Single Jewish Cause (or, for Al’s sake, the Main Cause), to understand the change which has taken place.  Clear expositions of why the debt-model is losing ground, and why the parasitic banker is being replaced not by the parasitic tech billionaire but, shockingly, by you and me ... by all of us ... as parasites entirely dependent on government and corporations for everything in our lives, including spending money ... clear expositions of that do not cut through.  Many nationalists love their hatreds too much to give them up to reality.  It does not bode well for us.

How ironic it is that we, who alone had the balls to face the racial truth, should be refusing to keep up with the libertarians of UK Column and the Marxists of the Occupy movement, who were cottoning on long ago.  Here, for example, is Iain Davis’s excellent and thought-provoking chart of the new power dispensation:

We nationalists are still reliant on the likes of Davis to understand the very thing we seek to overcome.  Let’s do the analysis and start thinking creatively.

Why do corporations whose business model is constructed on mass production and mass consumption think they can continue to survive in an age of reduced and reducing population and “sustainability”?  Who will buy Fiats and Fords when no one owns a vehicle?

Owning a car is outdated ‘20th-century thinking’ and we must move to ‘shared mobility’ to cut carbon emissions, transport minister says
Owning a car is outdated ‘20th-century thinking’, junior transport minister says
Trudy Harrison, 45, said the UK should move to ‘shared mobility’ to cut emissions
Almost 80 per cent of UK households own at least one car, latest figures showed

Owning a car could become a fad of the past, a government minister claimed this week.

Junior transport minister Trudy Harrison, 45, told a sustainability conference owning a car was outdated ‘20th-century thinking’ and the country should move to ‘shared mobility’ to cut carbon emissions.

Ms Harrison, who is also a former parliamentary private secretary to Boris Johnson, said the UK was ‘reaching a tipping point where shared mobility in the form of car clubs, scooters and bike shares will soon be a realistic option for many of us to get around.’

She told a virtual audience at shared transport charity CoMoUK what the country needed was a move away from ‘20th-century thinking centred around private vehicle ownership and towards greater flexibility, with personal choice and low carbon shared transport’.

And so the deceitful drip-feed of the bad news about the future continues.

Car-owning is just one area of dispossession slated for the little people.  According to the infamous (now deleted) WEF article everything ... even the clothes on our back ... will be rented from a corporation.  Consumption will crash.  Manufacturing will die.  So why do no major manufacturers or industry bodies resist?

Well, the car manufacturers, certainly, seem to expect continued high-volume sales of their products to the rental markets of the smart city pod-scape and the blob-on-a-bed of the metaverse.  As some deluded management geek wrote at Forbes:

Customer loyalty will gradually move from brand and dealerships to integrated and convenience-driven services and associated mobility options. New business models of pay-per-use and subscription-based mobility will be the way forward.

But there isn’t any customer loyalty to the manufacturer in pay-per-use.  The pleasure of ownership leads to an entirely different qualitative expectation from that of mere utility, where competitive pressures and the absence of customer loyalty will inevitably lead to low-quality, throw-away products with minimal profit potential.  So why are the car producers - or, indeed, any of the quality-oriented life-style mass-producers - eagerly going along with a fake “sustainable” market system that they can’t survive?  They’re not mad environmentalists.  Their chief executives are not paid to crash the company.

One wonders if the real reason is peer pressure at the Davos forum and the other nests of globalism, and cowardice and fear about standing out from the lemming-herd does the rest.

Continuing the Morgoth theme, this video builds on an article written here, advancing it by the addition of Morgoth’s unsurpassed cultural-historical critique.  It even mentions the Craig series of James Bond films!

I would like to be able to say that, finally, one of us has been granted access to the golden temple of the respectable, and we’re going mainstream, baby.  But not yet.  Not quite.  James Delingpole, “libertarian-conservative” and freedom junkie though he is, hasn’t been entirely respectable himself for a few years now.  He is too much the enfant terrible of climate scepticism - a role he has honourably discharged for a dozen years - and, latterly as executive editor of Breitbart London, far too far right, doncha know.  His discovery of Davos and The Great Re-Set has, of course, tipped him over into Tin-Foil World, from which there is no coming back.  James is lost to liberal reason and the literati dinner party circuit forever.  He is about 40% “there”, from a nationalist perspective.  But one should say that none of us are sufficiently informed to be more than, say, 60% or 65% of the way, and actually none of us really knows what 100% would be, because the boundaries keep expanding.  Who knew anything very much about the Re-Set even two years ago.

Anyway, James gave a very kind and entertaining hearing to Morgoth, not diving too deep because that’s not the way these interviews work, but deep enough to satisfy.  A lot of typically Morgothian bases were covered ... Tolkien, Spengler (he was good on Spengler), lots of cultural analysis and analysis of the “power” in power elitism, the left, the Re-Set, the football.  Morgoth acquitted himself well and demonstrated that a Northumbrian bloke from a building site can parley with as much intellectual authority as anyone.  As James said, he stood up his arguments.

There was one slightly scary moment when Morgoth mentioned the tribe, and one could see James pondering his Breitbart earner.  There was one other moment when James just possibly revealed a liberal paternalist’s abiding contempt for nationalism; but it passed quickly.  But that aside, it was a convivial chat about hugely important matters, and I enjoyed it.  I just wish that the doors to the wider world would start to open now; but I suspect that in the present febrile climate they are probably closing on James too.

You can listen to the interview, all 1 hour and 2 mins of it, here:

https://odysee.com/@JamesDelingpoleChannel:0/morgoth:d

As every thinking nationalist should know, the dominant modus of thought informing selfhood in the West is liberalism.  But one could be forgiven for thinking that its time as the epochal Idea, the organising system of the European life, is past.  Certainly, the will of the eponymous “individual” of Enlightenment philosophy, by name the Common Man, is no longer unfettering.  The Third Worldisation of the urban space, the marginalisation of European masculinity and the africanisation of the European genome, the homosexualisation of marriage, the trans-sexualisation of what it is to be a woman, the toxification of white skin, the forced mass vaccinations of the Covid era, the utterly shameless electoral fraud in “the greatest democracy on earth”, and shortly, we are to believe, the enslaving Great Re-Set ... all of this is happening only because the common will has been assiduously suppressed and the common opinion traduced and demonised.

No, the great arc of liberal thought has come to rest in the neoliberalism and the weaponised neo-Marxism of the Western political class and the corporate elites they represent.  These things never belonged to Europe’s peoples.  They only ever belonged to elites.  The only will unfettered by them is theirs.

Historically, these elites have by no means been monolithic in form or singular in their interests.  They are human beings, after all.  They shift generationally and, because they are opportunists and hustlers, always with the flow of political possibility.  There is a natural tension between worldviews, not least those of Jews, always mindful of their ethnic struggle for Olam Ha-ba, and WASPs totally unmindful of that or, of course, of their own peoplehood, and simply, mechanically given to modernity and a narcissistic, even sociopathic individualism extending no further than their own epidermis.

Importantly, there has, too, always been a tension between banker and producer ... between money-as-debt which, by its nature, seeks to extend its suzerainty over the loanee, to enslave and own him, and the principle of progress and techne, which seeks to free its own creative hand from such blind and selfish constraint.  This latter (which, in modern parlance, has been an ideological “thing” since the time of the Russian Revolution) has turned out to hold the winning historical ticket.  If only for the sake of clarity then, let us attempt to delineate it from the old money-based power of the Jewish banking families and the old Anglo-American Establishment, which may or may not have an attachment to tauroctony and masonic symbology, and which is in serious and seemingly final retreat.  Of course, we can do so most succinctly by defining it as a power centred (now) on Davos and grounding itself in the interests and potentials of science-led industries, the American social media platforms, hedge funds, asset managers and, increasingly, FinTech.

Asset-holding, it turns out, is this new elite’s means of eradicating the bankers’ web of debt.  Accordingly, there is an on-going tectonic shift of personnel and institutions towards Davos as it becomes ever clearer that the fiat system, as a guarantor of value and a bestower upon global elites of wealth and agency, will founder on the hard reality of asset-value.

We could say that banking parasitism is giving way to predatory corporatism.  Perhaps another way to look at it would be through the lens of personalities, so the Rothschilds and the European royal houses versus the Rockefellers and the US political Establishment.  Another would be methodological, so supra-nationalism and immigrationism versus the smart mega-city and inclusiveness (both pairs being destroyers of the natural human fundamentals as they express in nation, kind, home, love).  Yet another would be Marxism versus scientism; and another the New World Order versus Sustainable Development.  We might even identify one more in the priest-class of Judaism’s Olam Ha-ba versus Homo davosian, the wired transhuman of the fourth industrial revolution.  Or we could lighten up a bit, and contrast and compare the doomed Merkel and her sad little, pyramid hand signs with the business-like photocalls of the mischling technocrat Schwab.

While we are in a lighter mood, and following the heavy hint of the stage design, the Bregenz sequence from Quantum of Solace, written some time after 2006, contains elements quite specific to what would later become the Davos stratagem:

A conspiracy hidden in plain sight, the corporate language, the manipulation of Washington, the participation of the Deep State, the ownership and control of strategic assets- indeed, in this case “the world’s most precious resource” (and so wholly fitting to the real-world contest with fiat money).  It’s not a bad attempt at making an ageing spy movie franchise relevant to the modern age.  A little further into the movie we learn that to advance its criminal cause Quantum hawks a fake environmentalism, complete with talk of global deforestation and soil depletion.  It deplores corruption in government while corrupting government; and we see how “acting out of necessity” drives the other governments into an alignment of interests with it.

Well, something changed Boris Johnson from a breezily triumphant, newly re-elected prime minister in December 2019 confidently telling Downing Street staff he would not have them going off to Davos the following month “to drink champagne with billionaires” into a catatonic, serial witterer about the Great Re-Set, saying only a few days ago at the G7 conflab amid the delights of Cornwall that “We must build back better with a global economic recovery based on greener and fairer foundations.”

This is politician-speak for total submission to the Davos agenda, which is the UN 2021/2030 agenda, and which amounts to a bare-faced lie told to the weak by the powerful not just so the powerful can rule over them - even in perpetuity - but so that they can make the whole Earth and the future of everything their own.  They’re doing it, too.

The news that we are all destined to give up meat-eating for bug-crunching does not seem to be going down terribly well with the Telegraph commentariat.  Following a comment-free article dated 1st February titled The best insect snacks for environmentally conscious snacking and written by an avant garde environmental snacker-person called Jack Rear - yes, where do they find them? - the Globalist Tendency on the DT editorial team invited some Yoruban female with a few hours of journalism training to pose the burning or, certainly, roasting question on all our lips: When will insects be on our supermarket shelves?

Again there is a definite shortage of bug-happy commenters excited about the disappearance from their diet of a tender fillet steak or juicy lamb chop.  Instead, among the handful of Telegraph readers who can be bothered to comment at all there is this guy:

Carpe Jugulum 28 May 2021 10:28PM

I teach biology in a sixth form college and regard myself as being logical .............. until it comes to eating insects.
Food ‘security’ can foxtrot oscar. The day will not dawn when I find myself crunching a locust butty complete with locust intestine contents.
The authors of this nonsense presuppose and accept bug munching will be a consequence of an ever rising population. Perhaps it will be the spur to removing all procreation subsidies and unskilled immigration?
Threaten the public with Kentucky Fried Cricket or a Big McMealworm burger and I doubt you would find them receptive.

... and this one:

Joseph GRM B 28 May 2021 3:18PM
I’m saving the planet by eating my birdie num-nums, living in my pod, and consoooming my social media and my racial cuck porn. I own nothing and I am HaPpY. Clown world.

... and all the rest are decidely bug-negative.  What could possibly be putting them off a “food” they would normally prefer to squelch underfoot?  Don’t they want to cut methane emissions?  Don’t they understand that Net Zero is inevitable?

The idea that the planet will be “saved” if only we all do as we are told and eat wriggly, crawly, buzzy creatures with six legs farmed by the customary mega-corporations has been around for a couple of decades.  So it didn’t originate with the Davos set.  But it was certainly making headway in the private jet community by 2013 at least, when the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN stuck its sticky finger in the maggot pie.  Only two more years passed before we serfs could really celebrate protein diversity, as wikipedia informs us:

The World Edible Insect Day, being held on 23 October, was introduced by Belgian entrepreneur Chris Derudder in 2015 to raise awareness globally for the consumption of edible insects, with a focus on Europe, North America, and Australia.

This seems to be Climate Chris.  You know your hobby-horse has arrived when it gets a “World Day”.

The moral zombies who believe they should dictate the future of the world (because, well, they want to and they have all the wealth and own all the politicians) then moved on to the problem of how they are going to shut down First World livestock farming, carpet-bag the land, and force us all onto the required diet of Pygmy delicacies.  Last December they alighted upon pet food as a handy accustomising strategy.  Well, it’s not as if Fido will notice.  Not that they would give a damn if Fido did.  They don’t give a damn about any living thing but themselves.  And their agenda.  When we Talmudic cattle are being force-fed the bug-filth and are trying to squeeze the resultant gunk out of our intestines, they won’t be dining on it themselves, anymore than their travel to vital international conferences in faraway luxury resorts will be inconvenienced by the kerosene ban on the rest of us.

They are “leaders”, you see.  Fido’s doggy dignity is collateral damage.  You are surplus population.

Today the DT’s lead journalist on economics Ambrose Evans Pritchard posted a piece on the mounting nervousness of the world’s billionaires as they contemplate possible future neckties.  The article itself isn’t exactly incendiary.  It begins:

Davos Man is trembling. The cosmopolitan superclass is scrambling for ways to share a little of its income stream – as a prudent insurance policy – before the bottom half of western democracy takes matters into its own hands.

The new doctrine is enshrined in the Davos Manifesto, the digital billionaires’ answer to the Communist Manifesto of 1848. The cardinal code is ‘stakeholder capitalism’, otherwise known as looking after your workers, and agreeing not to trash society, or the local water system, or the planet.
There has been something grotesque about a lockdown crisis that has ravaged small firms and the manual self-employed even as the well-to-do accumulate trillions of excess savings. The Nasdaq 100 index is 40pc higher than before the pandemic. Listed global equities have risen in value by $24 trillion since March. The owners of wealth have made out like bandits.
.
“We’re on the brink of a terrible civil war. The US is at a tipping point in which it could go from manageable internal tension to revolution,” says Ray Dalio, founder of the world’s biggest hedge fund, Bridgewater Associates. Words no longer suffice. The pie will have to be divided.

Davos men and women know in their hearts that the economic dispensation of the last 20 years has been gamed by their caste, adorned in the ideological bunting of globalist virtue.

They know that staggering inequalities have festered, to the point where the average chief executive of an S&P 500 company earns 357 times as much as the average non-supervisory worker. The ratio was around 20 in the mid-1960s. It was still 28 at the end of Ronald Reagan’s term, which is an amazing thought.

Which is all fine and dandy.  But it doesn’t actually deal with the issue at hand, which is the keen desire among perfectly unexceptional British Tories to see “the bandits” brought low, as witnessed by the following not at all unusual comments from the subsequent thread:

READ MORE...