"In the West, public policy has been privatised" by Stephen Karganovic

 

Click here for Exit the Cuckoo's Nest's posting standards and aims.

Source: Strategic Culture Foundation

In the West, public policy has been privatised

Stephen Karganovic

July 29, 2025

Gates and his fellow psychopaths do not need the informed consent of their intended victims.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Gerald Celente was slightly but forgivably off when he quoted Mussolini on the definition of fascism to the effect that it denotes the fusion of state and corporate power. That is technically correct, except that the “corporations” Mussolini referred to originally are not the exactly same as the corporations that Celente has in mind. Mussolini was referring to collective entities representing the various sectors of society. In the system he proposed the state would play a central role in controlling these corporations and mediating their disputes. In theory at least, Mussolini’s system was intended to create a unified, harmonious society where class conflict would be eliminated through the integration of workers, employers, and the state.

When Celente refers to corporate power, he does not mean entities representing and acting on behalf of a cross section of major professional, craft, trade, cultural, and economic segments of society. He is referring to an essentially different type of “corporation,” as found in Western capitalist societies, with a specific relationship to state structures. Such corporations are disinterested in social harmony since they are business enterprises engaged in the predatory pursuit of material gain and frequently they transcend state boundaries.

The definitional nuance is significant for at least two reasons. Firstly, much as in practice the Corporatist system advocated by Mussolini diverges from its theoretical model, its postulated objective was to achieve a measure of social harmony and cooperation. That objective is completely foreign to the agenda of corporations which operate within the liberal capitalist system today. Secondly, corporations as the term is currently used manifestly are not subordinate to the state, as would have been the case under classical fascism, but increasingly assert their dominance over it. If comparisons may be drawn between the contemporary state and its interaction with corporate entities, on the one hand, and the classical scheme of fascism as described by Mussolini on the other, the picture we get today is of a reversal. The state has lost its attribute of controller and referee and is no longer empowered or asked to mediate between conflicting social interests. It is instead marginalised and replaced by private corporate interests and their agenda as the predominant power.

If such a role reversal may still be regarded as “fascism,” so be it.

An important feature of that arrangement, evidence of which we can observe all around us, is that some of the most fundamental functions of the state have been usurped and are being exercised by private corporate, often transnational, entities. Those private entities set the public agenda and through their control of the media determine the bounds of public discourse on all issues of significance. Unlike governmental organs, which theoretically are endowed with some semblance of democratic legitimacy, the corporate entities which have usurped their functions do not submit to any form of public supervision, other than the control exercised by their stockholders.

The global depopulation agenda, symbolised by the “golden billion” meme, since further reduced to a mere 500 million helots, is being insistently promoted by some of the wealthiest and most influential members of the world corporate elite. In contrast to Planned Parenthood, a related organisation that is supportive of their agenda, the elite are no longer seeking merely to slow down population growth. They advocate the application of “active measures” designed to achieve a more radical goal: to drastically reduce the world’s population. The philosophy behind it was crudely articulated by Yuval Noah Harari of the World Economic Forum as “getting rid of useless eaters.”

Professor Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research has warned that physical extermination on a vast scale is precisely the plan that is being pursued by a powerful cabal of corporate billionaires. In an article originally posted on 29 September 2021 but republished recently, Prof. Chossudovsky states that “for more than ten years, meetings have been held by billionaires described as philanthropists to reduce the size of the world’s population, culminating with the 2020-2024 Covid crisis.”

He recalls the 26 May 2009 Wall Street Journal report headlined “Billionaires Try to Shrink World’s Population,” disclosing that “billionaire philanthropists met behind closed doors at the home of the president of The Rockefeller University in Manhattan. This secret gathering was sponsored by Bill Gates. They called themselves ‘The Good Club’. Among the participants were the late David Rockefeller, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey and many more. The emphasis in their discussion was not on population growth (i.e. Planned Parenthood) but on “Depopulation”, i.e. the reduction in the absolute size of the world’s population.”

According to the Sunday Times, which also reported on that meeting, “the philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.”

The referent of the deceptive euphemism “change” was subsequently made plain by Bill Gates in a lecture he gave a few months later, in February 2010:

“First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent.”

What according to Gates is the purpose of vaccines and health care: to preserve or to extinguish human lives?

The question is appropriate because according to Gates’ statement the demographic “change” that he and his fellow corporate moguls are working to impose consists of an absolute reduction of the World’s population, in the initial phase of the order of at least 680 million to 1.02 billion. How can such a population reduction be achieved? Will the 680 to 1.02 billion excess human beings (useless eaters) slated to die voluntarily commit suicide in order to meet the numerical quotas set by Bill Gates’ psychopathic programme?

That is highly unlikely. But Gates and his fellow psychopaths do not need the informed consent of their intended victims. They have at their disposal all the required scientific instruments to realise their homicidal objectives without seeking anyone’s permission or approval.

In a compilation of texts (see here) authored by scholars and scientists and also published by Global Research, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts and Dr. John Campbell show that the tools necessary to implement the nefarious population reduction scheme are available, were used during the recent fabricated global health emergency, and will most likely be used again when required.

The depopulation agenda that is being pursued by the corporate cabal of the rich and powerful is but one, though exceedingly perverted and gruesome, facet of measures deliberately designed to the detriment of billions of human beings. They are pursuing that agenda self-confidently and with a sneering sense of impunity. The agenda fits to a “T” the criminal plan to destroy human life that is denounced in the Genocide Convention.

Indeed, one of the leading ideologues of this and other monstrous plans, billionaire “philanthropist” Bill Gates, who has a long record of investing world-wide in projects whose ultimate common denominator is organised mass homicide on a hitherto unimaginable scale, was recently sued by a number of private parties in the District Court of Northern Netherlands for acts of genocide, biological warfare, and crimes against humanity. Unsurprisingly, “Gates never showed up. He didn’t send lawyers. Instead, he arrogantly dismissed the Dutch court like a medieval king waving off the peasants. But the judges didn’t flinch. They ruled that the case against Gates will go ahead,” political analyst Jim Ferguson has stated, praising the court’s decision.

Of course, whilst the court’s readiness to hear such a landmark case is a significant step toward establishing accountability, that does not guarantee that the merits of the charges will be properly heard or adjudicated. The disparity in power and influence between the Plaintiffs and the Accused is too pronounced and will probably determine the further course and outcome of the proceedings.

However, this Dutch court’s willingness to bring an accused of Gates’ calibre in the dock and to hear evidence assembled against him does, ever so slightly, restore trust in the integrity of at least some parts of the judicial system. It should send a resonant message to “philanthropic” corporate killers everywhere that even if these proceedings ultimately do not result in an effective conviction the day of reckoning, in some form, inexorably draws closer.

"The depopulation agenda, Part 2: Creating food scarcity" by Stephen McMurray

Click here for Exit the Cuckoo's Nest's posting standards and aims. 

Click here to sign the People's Proclamation and send it to everyone you know.

Source: TCW

The depopulation agenda, Part 2: Creating food scarcity

This is the second in a series tracing the history of population control through to present day depopulation ambitions and intent. You can read Part 1 here. 

HENRY Kissinger, one of the most influential politicians of the last 50 years, who said ‘the elderly are useless eaters’, considered the idea of using food to control the population. In his 1974 ‘National Security Study Memorandum 200’ he outlined a number of countries of strategic importance for the US that he claimed had problems with population growth that might give them more economic and military strength. He advocated birth control programmes for those countries and suggested that if they did not do this willingly, withdrawing food aid to them may act as an incentive to make them comply.

Using food as a weapon is not just an idea. Russia did it in Turkestan in 1917, where they took control of food production and distribution, resulting in starvation and a drastic reduction in the indigenous population. The US and Canadian governments slaughtered the buffalo population to starve the indigenous people into submission.

Now there is concern among many including economists, Wall Street veterans, farmers and citizen groups that controlling the food supply is once more being implemented to control and reduce the population. The FBI have warned that there are cyber-attacks designed to shut down farms.  

It is claimed by powerful groups like the UK’s Climate Change Committee and the International Panel on Climate Change, and the governments they influence, that the main factor exacerbating the so-called ‘climate crisis’ is CO2. In reality, CO2 is essential to all life. If CO2 levels are drastically reduced, plant life, which requires CO2 for photosynthesis, will be reduced and therefore the whole food chain will be affected. In fact a recent report claims that pursuing Net Zero could lead to half the world suffering from starvation.

Is this why so many governments in the world are intent on achieving Net Zero?

In addition to the fake ‘climate crisis’, we now have the fake ‘nitrogen crisis’. Nitrogen is one of the main elements of commercial fertilisers and is an essential nutrient for plant growth but at excessive amounts can be a pollutant and, according to the climate crisis zealots, can cause global warming. The EU’s Integrated Nutrient Action Plan aims to reduce nitrogen fertiliser by 20 per cent. The UN want to reduce all nitrogen ‘waste’ by 50 per cent by 2030. Some of the people targeted by the plan to reduce fertiliser usage are the Dutch farmers. The tyrannical government in the Netherlands plans to compulsorily purchase up to 3,000 farms in order to reduce nitrogen emissions and to cut cattle numbers by 50 per cent. As the Netherlands is the biggest food exporter in Europe, it won’t affect only the Dutch but have a devastating impact on the food supply for the rest of Europe.

But is there actually a nitrogen crisis? Just like the so-called climate crisis, the evidence is ambiguous at best but the statistics are manipulated by those in power to suit their own ends. It’s not as if they aren’t aware of the consequences of drastically reducing the use of commercial fertiliser: they only have to look at Sri Lanka.  Food prices rose by 80 per cent and there were massive shortages resulting in thousands of desperate people laying siege to the president’s palace and the president having to flee the country.

Analysing current events, is it all just due to a set of unrelated circumstances that there appears to be a threat to the availability and cost of our food, or is there something more disturbing going on?

It may be worth noting that as farmland is being forcibly sequestered from farmers, Bill Gates is now the single biggest owner of farmland in the US. As the elite are trying to reduce meat consumption, Gates has investments in synthetic meat. As the US suffered severe baby formula shortages, Gates had invested in artificially produced breast milk. It would certainly appear that the elite are determined to monopolise and therefore control the food supply.

Other events suggest a planned assault on the food supply. In the US, since 2021, 96 facilities involved in food production have been damaged or had their poultry or livestock destroyed. The destruction of food processing plants is not limited to the US. In the UK fires have broken out at facilities in Ealing, Gillingham, Bury St Edmunds, Bradford, Stoke-on-Trent, Harlow and Kilkeel, Northern Ireland. In fact, it appears to be a global phenomenon.

In addition, we have the UK and other governments ordering the slaughtering of millions of poultry due to alleged outbreaks of bird flu. Supposedly there have been 174 outbreaks of bird flu in the UK since October 2022. They are diagnosed using PCR tests that we know from the Covid era are totally unreliable. On the subject of Covid, the world’s government-imposed lockdowns also had a negative and totally foreseeable impact on the food supply chains.

Recently, UK supermarkets suffered from shortages of an ever-expanding list of fresh fruit and vegetables. The media initially tried blaming it on adverse weather in Spain and Morocco from where we import the produce. However, other reports have suggested it is also because UK farmers, who grow their produce in greenhouses, can’t afford to heat them because of the high cost of fuel. It’s interesting, therefore, that the government  has been giving farmers lump sum payments to leave farming altogether and to give up their land so it can no longer be used for agricultural purposes – thereby reducing the amount of land available for food production – when they could have been offering more financial help to farmers and food producers to increase our food security. 

We must also ask why the energy costs are so high. Contrary to the mainstream media blaming it and everything else on the war in Ukraine, it is because of the government’s obsession with Net Zero. They have been drastically reducing our coal production and planning to close all coal-fired electricity plants by October 2024, and no longer encouraging any investment in fossil fuels. Instead, we are relying ever more on the totally unreliable renewables sector.

Our coal production dropped by 44 per cent between the third quarter of 2021 and the third quarter of 2022 but our imports increased by 34 per cent. So the government are deliberately reducing our own coal supplies to reach Net Zero targets whilst importing more to make up the shortfall, making a mockery of their environmental claims while ensuring the British public pay more for their energy. For the same period, gas exports increased by 369 per cent: why wasn’t this used domestically instead to reduce the soaring energy bills everyone, included, food producers, faced last year? Moreover, our electricity exports increased by 771 per cent and yet we were being warned of potential blackouts, and electricity bills for both businesses and households were exorbitant.

The cost of energy is inextricably linked to the price of food as high energy costs for the farmers and transporters equals high food prices and now shortages. At this point it is worth highlighting another quote form Henry Kissinger: ‘Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.’

The question must be: are all these events that are negatively impacting the food supply being orchestrated? A recent paper published by Leeds University may be enlightening. It is entitled ‘Rationing and Climate Change Mitigation’. The authors suggest that rationing of both food and fuel would be helpful to prevent climate change. They praise how successful rationing was during the war and believe it would be a great idea to re-introduce it. They admit that the public are unlikely to go along with this idea if they think resources are plentiful, so what do they suggest? If there is no scarcity of resources then the illusion of scarcity of something else must be created. To this end they claim there is a scarcity of carbon sinks. So we won’t be permitted to use all our resources, not because they are not plentiful, but because our planet cannot absorb the carbon produced by humans utilising them.

The authors realise that the public will need to be re-educated to believe in this fake scarcity: ‘Rationing in this context may require a public information campaign to help people to recognise the scarcity of carbon sinks, to make it clear that we would not be introducing rationing-in-the-face-of-abundance.’

They will also need to make us feel guilty: ‘Second, this may also need to be supported by moral argument – highlighting the moral imperative to consider future generations or at least the current younger generations.’

It sounds suspiciously like the behavioural psychology from the Covid era. This time, though, instead of making us believe that we must comply with restrictions in case we kill granny, they want us to believe that carbon dioxide will kill everyone and if we don’t comply, we will kill young people.

Of course, their plan would be made a lot easier if the government created a real scarcity, which is what they go on to suggest. They want the government to close all coal mines, stop all oil exploration and severely restrict any sale of fossil fuels. They admit that this will cause scarcity and it will be a problem initially. To overcome this, they suggest the government resort to the usual propaganda about saving the lives of future generations and eventually the gullible public will buy it.

They also advocate deliberately creating food shortages: ‘In addition to stricter regulations on fossil fuels, regulation could also target other areas. For example, carbon-intensive farming methods and factory-farmed livestock could be banned – which would clearly have impacts on food supplies.’

Does this not sound more like our current reality than a mere suggestion for the future?

In Part 3 we will examine how vaccines are causing fertility issues.

Stephen McMurray is a member of the Free Speech Union and an ardent truth-seeker.