Technocracy here we come

Wake up to technocracy

by Niall McCrae

‘You’ll own nothing. But you’ll be happy.’ So begins the sermons by the World Economic Forum, visualising our future. Some commentators fear the march of communism, while others warn of rental capitalism run by Big Tech.  Yet neither of these explanations is satisfactory. What is driving the global elite, and where are they taking us?   

The Covid-19 outbreak has had significant impact on human rights, as governments have taken an authoritarian approach, purportedly to suppress the virus. However, citizens worry that their lives will never return to normal. History shows that power is not readily relinquished by those who wield it. 

The ‘new world order’, still derided as conspiracy theory by politicians and the mainstream media, is transparent in the plans of the WEF, with its Great Reset and Fourth Industrial Revolution. Indeed, Klaus Schwab, head of the WEF, has used the term for the radically reformed society that he and fellow globalists envisage. 

Our world is being recreated as a technocracy. An elite will preside over the collectivised masses, using the tremendous and terrifying advance of technology to monitor and manage everything that we do. To the technocrats, human beings are capricious, wasteful, selfish and argumentative; they lack the objective rationale of computer programming and machines. Everything will work better, but for whose benefit? 

In a fascinating interview with James Delingpole, Patrick M Wood, author of Technocracy Rising: the Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, explained how technological totalitarianism began with various movements after the carnage of the First World War, which challenged Christian faith. While the communist experiment of the Soviet Union appealed to left-wing intellectuals, it had little purchase on the common folk of Western nations, where Enlightenment values of freedom and democracy prevailed. 

A path was taken in another direction. Technology was rapidly progressing, suggesting the possibility of a more orderly and efficient society, should science be harnessed to a grand secular strategy. The website of Technocracy Incorporated, an American organisation unknown to most people on this side of the Atlantic, describes its mission: – .  

‘Technocracy began 1919 in New York city in an organization known as the Technical Alliance of North America.  This group included highly regarded men and women in science, education, architecture, mathematics and medicine.  In 1933, after it was obvious that technology was going to replace manual labor in many areas Technocracy was formed to provide information on how to create a plan, a blueprint of sorts to have an economy based on the best utilization of the technology available to make decisions for the good of society and the environment. We have that plan and it is viable.’ 

Technocracy Inc had a vast membership in North America in the 1930s. Members were distinguished by their coats and suits of a particular shade of grey; they also bought cars in that colour, with orange hub caps. Although it declined into obscurity after the Second World War, Technology Inc is significant because its agenda matches that of globalists today. It eschewed politics and was anti-capitalist. The main objectives were organisation of all industry into a few centrally-planned corporations, equal state income for all (now known as the universal basic income), and political government replaced by bureaucracy led by experts. Ideology was dismissed as a futile endeavour. 

Wise men warned of our predicament. The dystopian novel Brave New World was Aldous Huxley’s imagining of technocracy. In the 1940s, with the internet a distant dream, George Orwell’s 1984 presciently described a society controlled by video surveillance, while The Abolition of Man by CS Lewis warned: – 

‘What we call Man’s power over Nature turns out to be a power exercised by some men over other men with Nature as their instrument.’

In his classic I and Thou, philosopher Martin Buber lamented the loss of meaningful interaction to impersonal bureaucracy and rationalism. He differentiated relationships as instrumental or commitment. The former is ‘I-it’, which objectifies the other person for the purpose of transaction, whereas ‘I-thou’ engages in the subjective world. As the essence of our being is relational, overbearing structures and systems are a threat to human existence. 

Imagine an old lady with her shopping trolley. In the past she went to various small shops in her local high street: the greengrocer, butcher and baker. Now these have gone, replaced by a Tesco Express. Instead of being served by a friendly face and exchanging pleasantries about families or the weather, she is confronted by a machine that chastises her for putting an unidentified object in the packaging area. If she finds this dehumanising, that’s because it is.   

Of course, it would be Luddite to reject technology, which has transformed our lives. There was nothing nefarious in Lyons’ tea houses introducing the first national computerised system, in the introduction of bar codes, or the distance-defying facility of e-mail. But the internet has proved to be a double-edged sword, as we become captives of social media. As Marshall McLuhan predicted in the 1960s, electronic communications would undermine relationships and communities, causing an identity crisis. Today, people spend most of their time indoors staring at a screen, rather than socialising in real time and space. Society is being atomised, and this weakens resistance to the emerging world order.  

As James Corbett of Corbett Report stated, Covid-19 has enabled a technocratic coup. A contagious disease has taken the agenda much further and faster forward than was possible with the climate change alarm. Cicero said that health is the highest law, and the globalists have exploited fear by calling an emergency with people actually dying.  But what is the motive, and whose hidden hands are shaping our fate?  

In his book Covid-19: the Great Reset, Klaus Schwab saw an irresistible opportunity. But we should look back to another organisation that set in train the technological revolution that would override democracy and freedom. The Trilateral Commission was founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller to create a new economic order, initially involving USA, Europe and Japan. Rockefeller was inspired by Professor Zbigniew Brzezinski at Colombia University, whose book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era in 1970 forsesaw a orld ‘that is shaped culturally, psychologically, socially, and economically by the impact of technology and electronics’. 

The Washington ‘deep state’ is dominated by Trilateral Commission members. Here, several Tory ministers and Keir Starmer have contributed to its work towards world government. Vote Labour or Conservative, you’ll get the same policies, because the real power is not in the demos. Look at Boris Johnson, a man who projected Churchillian resolve and irreverence to global institutions and ecological puritanism, now spouting the WEF slogan ‘build back better’. He seems to have been reprogrammed.  

Artificial intelligence, a cashless society and digital identity chips inserted by vaccination programme – the technology is here already and is now being rolled out with little resistance from the ordinary people, who have been duped into accepting unprecedented constraints on their lives. A three-week lockdown in March was followed by mandatory masking, social distancing and a plethora of petty regulations with no definite end in sight, as the much-heralded vaccine will not guarantee immunity or prevent transmission. The virus and vaccine are means to an end. Now the WEF is warning of a new chaos requiring robust global intervention: a cyber virus. And like Event 201, a pandemic exercise conducted by the WEF two months before Covid-19, the planning has been done.      

Instead of being agents of free association, we will be reduced to the status of ants, digital slaves under constant surveillance, bereft of liberty, rights and privacy. Our very humanity is at stake. Patrick M Wood urged an uprising before it is too late. But beware: protests are predicted, and as we have witnessed in London, Melbourne and Berlin, a heavy-handed riot policing strategy awaits those who try to take their freedom back.