Michael Edwards
Activist Post

As tyranny continues its march out into the open, it is increasingly becoming cloaked in green.  Under the guise of saving humanity, a chorus of recent announcements within elite circles, think-tanks, educational institutions, and the halls of science are calling for drastic measures to stop the planet’s inevitable implosion from an overshot carrying capacity.

A U.N policy paper recently outlined the building blocks for a world government that would enforce a “heavy-handed” approach toward humanity’s impact on the environment, as this new epoch of The Anthropocene Age has begun to negatively alter the planet in irrevocable ways.

A rather infamous book, from a rather infamous group called The Club of Rome, is making a reappearance as humanity hurtles toward demise if its stewardship is not turned over to technocrats.  Limits to Growth (1972) is nothing short of a blueprint for population reduction and neo-feudalism; or, as Yale economist Henry Wallich stated at the time of its release, its implementation means “consigning billions to poverty.”

It appears that this plan has been green-lighted by the elite, as recent MIT research validates the conclusions drawn by Limits to Growth at this crucial time when we see the world economy imploding, and a jack-booted green police ready to hit the streets.

According to MIT, we are headed toward a guaranteed planet-wide economic collapse and “precipitous population decline” if we do not heed the words of The Club of Rome.

Austerity riots and suicides are filling the streets throughout Europe, as draconian measures are being taken to curb runaway debt.  This debt has provably been created by the Ponzi scheme of international banksters who have employed a loan-shark framework that is only paying dividends to those in position to buy up deliberately collapsed assets for pennies on the dollar.

The global elite continue to ignore that the problems which have been generated across the globe have very little to do with true resource shortages, unsustainable economies, or overpopulation; but rather the centralized control, mismanagement, and outright theft by corporate entities using globalization as a means of reducing sovereignty and self-determination.

Resource-rich countries in places like Africa and those in the Middle East have long been targeted for plunder by colonialists and have never been rightly permitted to exist free of outside manipulation.

This stratagem has now entered the West, where we are seeing Europe looted in similar fashion, and the resulting strife is used to divide and rule.  It is the coordinated agenda of a network of think-tanks, NGOs, and international financiers well-versed in the methods of divide and conquer that form the real government of the world.

When one begins to piece together the scope of this deliberate looting, and the inevitable call for solutions from the very same players who should be held responsible, one might conclude that any of their calls for intervention based on humanitarian ideals should be judged a complete scam.

At or near the center of a web which has been woven using academia, top economists, mainstream media propaganda, climatologists, anthropologists, NGO’s, think-tanks and human rights groups — well meaning, and not-so well meaning — is The Club of Rome.

First, it is important to understand the genesis of The Club of Rome and its philosophy, as it might demonstrate an inherent misanthropy that should make us skeptical of their calls for sustainability, true equality, or the betterment for individuals who comprise the human race.

Problem-Reaction

The Club of Rome think-tank is likely to have been conceived in 1965 at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy at an international conference called “The Conditions of World Order.” Twenty-one “scholars, writers, and scientists” met to discuss the role of “intellectuals” in the formation of a new world.

It was their larger follow-up meeting of 75 people in Rome, 1968 when the group formally took the name, The Club of Rome, which has come to comprise the very top echelon within all fields relating to human development and politics.

Despite its trappings of being devoted to a better world for all mankind, it is overwhelmingly staffed by those born and bred from mega wealth, and those who have a stated worldview that is not compatible with many of the Club’s purported goals.

This worldview was encapsulated in a follow-up book to Limits to Growth, called The First Global Revolution, which 21 years later laments and chastises the failure of wider humanity to aggressively implement the Club’s previous suggestions, while openly touting manipulation as a way toward global unity.

There are many key passages in this book that give a clear indication of the mindset leading us through the present into the future, but a particularly striking section comes when they discuss the “limits of democracy:”

Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything, and is unaware of its own limits.

(…)

In its present form democracy is not well suited for the tasks ahead.

(…)

We overlook (psychologically speaking, we deny) our ignorance and say we lack the political will.  The crucial need is to revitalize democracy and give it a breadth of perspective that will enable it to cope with the evolving global situation. In other words, is this new world we find ourselves in governable?  The answer is probably not with the existing structures and attitudes. (page 71-72, online edition)

This is an interesting statement in light of the one made by University of Oregon Professor, Kari Norgaard, who recently suggested that those who believe that man-made climate change is a hoax should be treated as mentally defective racists.  In a letter to Obama, she stated:

‘Policymakers should not wait for public opinion to take necessary action,’ she writes, adding, ‘Public opinion does matter in a democracy, but this is a time when following it would be a serious mistake.’ (Source)

And of course, “policymakers” are very often not even the democratically elected governments themselves, but international institutions and councils — like the Club of Rome.

In order to justify such rapid movement taking place outside the framework of democracy, a threat so vast and so all-encompassing that mobilization against it must be swift and aggressive is to be sought.  The Club of Rome sought it … and they found it, by their own admission:

The common enemy of humanity is man.  In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted together.  But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we already have warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome.  The real enemy is humanity itself.  (page 75, online edition)

Read Full Article

FOLLOW SET YOU FREE NEWS: