I posted here a few months ago. I’ve written white papers for U.N. commissions, for the Trilateral Commission...

I posted here a few months ago. I’ve written white papers for U.N. commissions, for the Trilateral Commission, and for the cosmetics industry as a lobbyist. I have nothing better to do, so I’ll repost some of the info I gave last time.

A seeming contradiction in globalism is that between it’s seemingly “socialist/leftwing” elements and its being advanced by multinational corporations and neoliberal elites. But, this process of globalization is driving toward the creation of the ideal consumer, not the ideal producer. The continuity of production is treated as a given, and this is largely due to automation. With automation handling the vast majority of formerly non-skilled labor production, the goal of the global economic system is the maintenance of the ideal consumer to purchase these commodities. The obvious problem is that these consumers have to have liquid capital to spend on the automation-produced goods. The “socialistic” solution is controlled wealth distribution to allow for product consumption. This might not seem to make sense—redistributing wealth from producers to consumers, so that they can purchase that production—but this cyclical process helps integrate consumers into the consumption process via credit, debt accumulation, and eventually with the onset of cashless society, directed and monitored spending.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-Tdu4uKSZ3M
youtube.com/watch?v=73WWpKyuWL4
youtube.com/watch?v=FXWjv1XXbcA&t=10s
youtube.com/watch?v=A7m0saghsmU&t=5s
youtube.com/watch?v=kGiYxCUAhks
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

The other leftist element, identity politics, is a way to co-opt democratic competition. Politics in the twentieth century carried economic weight. The goal was to de-economize politics, so that the citizenry could carry on with democratic politics, but it would not effect the global economic system’s operation. So the population can have political battles, sometimes even substantive, over cultural/identity issues like abortion, gay rights, race, gender, etc., but the outcome would not affect economic activity. In effect, politics was transformed into entertainment, with real administration being transferred to the supranational level—the IMF, World Bank, European Union, etc. This transformation of politics and economic administration largely took place in the late twentieth century.

Lastly, my joint work with the cosmetics industry and U.S. intelligence pertained to the “commodification of identity.” Pre-capitalist forms of identity (race, ethnicity, religion, culture, etc.) pose a threat to the global economic system because these identities provide a basis for popular-democratic resistance to the process of global consumption. There has been a concerted effort to replace traditional identity with post-modern, commodified identity, so that identity consists of purchased consumer products that an individual uses to define himself or herself. This process would also necessitate, as much as possible, the elimination of non-commodified identity, or in other words, the creation of a neo-homogenous population.

I was a part of an effort by U.S. intelligence going back to the late 1980s to target Brazil for preliminary experimental efforts. Again, the goal was the commodification of identity to replace traditional identity constructs and the creation of a neo-homogenous population. The racial integrationist aspect has been largely successful. The white-identifying Brazil of the mid-twentieth century was by the 2010s majority non-white, not due to demographic change but due to biological racial integration and identity reconstruction.

My work specifically had to do with commodifying “femininity” or “female beauty,” so as to undermine tradition, culturally specific, white-centric ideas of female beauty and to replace them with racially non-specific, commodified forms of female beauty. This would both fuel the process of racial integration and open a market for cosmetic improvement, furthering the goals both of U.S. intelligence and the cosmetics industry, for whom I worked. The campaign involved reducing female beauty to a set of non-racial, easily definable characteristics: the breasts and the buttocks. The “big booty” trend in Brazil makes beauty an acquirable traits rather than something “natural.” Women of color who would have been excluded from social beauty can now acquire it by simply acquiring the right traits, for purchase through the cosmetics industry. Thus, women of color have a higher likelihood of being found attractive, and racial integration is also advanced.

The Brazilian strategy commenced in the United State with the beginning of the Obama administration. The Trump movement (and the Bernie movement for that matter, with its opposition to neoliberalism) was unforeseen, which you could have probably discerned. Otherwise, the predicted completion of U.S. Brazilianization was approximately 2050. This is still the target, though with new flexibility extending to the end of the century.

I apologize if anything I’ve talked about is hard to understand. I got used to using a very specific language in describing these ideas. Also, for those who are going to argue about this lowering global IQ, though I disagree that that’s a given, it doesn’t matter regardless. Being an ideal consumer does not necessitate high or even above average IQ, and the two might even be inversely correlated.

sure ill bump

Hey this looks political.

sage

Nigger

Bumping

So tell us how to fight it CIA nigger.

Seems like a catch 22; the more dark people there are, the less money there is to spend on trivial things like cosmetics.

But I'll bump your thread, because I remember (you)

Well, at least I can take comfort in the fact that the apparent opposition to globalism is so ineffective that they can't even understand their supposed opponent. This is why you'll lose.

HEY FAGGOT! aryan tits or gtfo

There's no particular reason why people and peoples can't be treated as raw materials. Extract, refine, create maximum value, extract value, dispose/recycle. All social and economic trends from the 18th century onward has been moving in that direction. The best part is that humans are a self-renewing resource that decreases in scarcity over time.

Seems a great idea on paper.
I have to ask though, what's the point?
Once your consumers are not also producers then why even have them? At best you are only transferring money from one wealthy entity another. And that's assuming both entities aren't owned by the same group.

>There's no particular reason why people and peoples can't be treated as raw materials.
For what purpose?
You will die in 50 years.

First, I'm not with the CIA, I'm a lobbyist for the cosmetics industry who cooperated with the CIA, and also used to advise international commissions and task forces. You're already fighting it. I don't know that it'll last, but there is resistance to globalization.

That's why neoliberalism has had to embrace some redistributionary measures. The neo-homogenous population receive controlled liquid capital in the form of credit to spend on commodities. This credit, through debt, then ties them to the consumption apparatus. In other words, the more they spend, the more dependent they are on the system that allows them to spend. Eventually, there won't be any motive in collecting the debt as money, because the point is for them to be able to spend and maintain a semblance of normalcy. The debt will be collected in the form of lifestyle concessions, which will (1) address climate change by reducing carbon emissions and (2) further the goals of identity reconstruction, biological integration, and population pacification. It will also allow the flow of information to be controlled via where money is allowed to be spent.

Thanks Col. Steele

im too bored to read all of it now

can someone plz screencap

tl;dr?

It's a way to achieve population sustainability in the wake of the global crises of climate change and automation, which cannot be addressed at the national level. It's actually a humanitarian solution to an inevitable problem, when you analyze the alternatives.

You're effectively asking why we should keep non-productive people alive. That's frankly the inhumane attitude.

I'm ready to go to war for this. I'm prepared to destroy the world for this. The way I see it, it's victory or extinction. I'm not alone.

And I'm afraid that you would fall under the category of being a CIA nigger since you worked for them. No cooperation about it, you did their dirty work.

He's saying what we already knew, the Jew tries to craft different identities than the only true identity, race in order to create a population that can not resist effectively dominance and supra capitalist control that is antagonist to the people.

...

To those who allege that this strategy will lower global intelligence, it seems that the thread's two Scandinavians are apparently the least literate.

>land identity
>cultural identity
>class identity
>intelligence identity
etc.. all the meaningless nonsense that do not define you.

Culture works to serve the race, family, individual and such for a biological purpose and not an arbitrary one.

your goal is already achieved, its called brazil and it sucks major balls

you always underestimate the Sup Forums waaagh

>state identity
>religious identity
all nonsense, that have no definition nor are YOU, only your race are YOU and define you and your future.

youtube.com/watch?v=-Tdu4uKSZ3M

not nice of you user...

but quite funny

ourz dakka dakkas de best

A people that are not bound by blood and are unique biologically have no reason to care for the group and so are more easily dominated and pacified.

youtube.com/watch?v=73WWpKyuWL4

>brazil
>pacification

>uncontrolled mass murder and crime
>Judge Dread police
>1984 corrupt government
>rampant drug use and no go zones

ok

all you have done is class segregation and which ethnicity is usually higher in liquid and social capital.

Next thing you are going to tell me south africa is the end game lmao

I fucking KNEW the kikes were behind the primitive, ape like ass obsession (that you can clearly see gets worse with the more blacks in a society, big surprise.)
Tits were, are and always will be the Western Man's fetish. Fuck you ass lovers for going along with this shit.

All Orks is equal, but some Orks are more equal dan uvvas.

Superb entry. Who is up next in the meaningless buzzword blog post competition?

>t. guy who can't summarize his own text

But as I've already asked here (), what is your alternative?

The global transformations I've outlined will be hard to swallow for many and will be a truly epochal shift in world history, but the new system is likely the only way to achieve a balance between sustainability and human life amid ecological and technological crises.

How do you get that kind of job?

>2050
Why do something you won't be alive to reap the benefits of? That only makes sense if you care about more than just yourself.

>power of Sup Forums memes
Now, where’z we gunna get enough red paint ta make a sumfing as ‘uge as dis Kill Kroozer go fasta?

>ecological

fuck off retard

Brazil can not mount effective resistance, as they are all individuals and have no reason to oppose global capital domination as they have no biological purpose but only self interest which allows the capitalist system to work.

>My work specifically had to do with commodifying “femininity” or “female beauty,” so as to undermine tradition, culturally specific, white-centric ideas of female beauty and to replace them with racially non-specific, commodified forms of female beauty. This would both fuel the process of racial integration and open a market for cosmetic improvement, furthering the goals both of U.S. intelligence and the cosmetics industry, for whom I worked. The campaign involved reducing female beauty to a set of non-racial, easily definable characteristics: the breasts and the buttocks. The “big booty” trend in Brazil makes beauty an acquirable traits rather than something “natural.” Women of color who would have been excluded from social beauty can now acquire it by simply acquiring the right traits, for purchase through the cosmetics industry. Thus, women of color have a higher likelihood of being found attractive, and racial integration is also advanced.
You can't like both? Are you autistic?

We'll survive like we always have. The sacrifices made to "survive" in the way you've outlined are not worth it. I'd rather be in control of my own destiny than be smothered from history for the sake of people who are not my own and who don't respect me, my family's, or my people's memories and achievements.
I will not build up this world for people who hate me. Having an alternative means nothing to me. I have faith.

didn't mean to quote the larper.

>the two might even be inversely correlated
No shit. Could it be possible that it is easierr to influence dumb people with asinine ideas?

You just get sucked into it. I was a history undergraduate student at a top 20 American university. I impressed a professor of mine who was working at a think tank called the Baker Institute. He worked with several members of the Bush the Elder administration. He wrote me a letter of recommendation to start working there. The Baker Institute is in Houston, so I started doing consulting and lobbying for people at the Houston medical center, which is how I got involved in the cosmetics campaign. Eventually, that work and my work at the Baker Institute writing policy papers got me a consulting job with the Trilateral Commission through contacts that I met while working in both places. For them, I wrote papers summarizing a lot of the work I'd done and giving advice for future courses of action.

>You're effectively asking why we should keep non-productive people alive. That's frankly the inhumane attitude.

Of course its inhumane. Those willing to do the required things to amass the amount of power necessary to do this aren't humane. But if the actually goal really is to slow climate change and protect the environment, then the most logical thing is to get rid of the millions who contribute nothing. And that is why I ask the question.

Those in charge rarely have any issue in sending underlings to die. For any old reason. Why would they change now?

Here's my theory based on your info:

The purpose of the welfare state and globalization is to suck the wealth From the middle classes.

Yes via this process a few new billionaires will be made. But in the end they will be absorbed into the power structure. The rest of the population will eventually be left penniless, with no ability to amass wealth, and with tightly controlled communication, they will be unable to gain enough power to challenge the elite.

At first attrition will be tried, to lower their impact. If that does not work they will simply have us killed. After all, if all the work is automated, why keep around billions who waste resources?

Unless one is a crazy cat lady, at some point the kittens get thrown in the river.

>I apologize if anything I’ve talked about is hard to understand. I
Nothing is hard to understand, you've just parroted the far-left. They have been making these arguments for decades, since the 1960s at least, that capitalism reduces everyone to a rootless consumer.

This.
It's like watering down Chomsky and running it through a buzzword converter.

Have you no shame in trying to racemix whites into extinction? Taking intelligent white blue eyed blonde humans perfected over thousands of years and turning them into mexicans and niggers? I hope you burn in hell

Who mounted effective resistance against complete dominance of capitalists exploitation of individuals?

Germany, Italy, and Europe places of the white race which were racially pure which could mount an offensive and defense against global capitalism domination.

>but the new system is likely the only way to achieve a balance between sustainability
Food production is sustainable any resource is not needed nor wanted that is easily expendable.
>human life amid ecological and technological crises
Farming/fishing is sustainable and any luxury poses no threat to anything, any non renewable resource has no reason to care to not be exploited.

in a real sense, the "freedom cat" is out of the bag. the people are used to being free (or at least having some appearance of it) and what you're describing is a rigged game in no uncertain terms. instead of calling neoliberalism, you should call it neofuedalism.

from the perspective that freedom of will and choice are the best human goods, this plan isn't even humanitarian. sure, it preserves some life, but what value of life are human cattle?

in short, it's seems to be a philosophically dishonest and morally bankrupt ideal.

to circle back around to the original point: even in the face of a semblance of freedom/democracy the west has record lows of voter participation and agitation is growing by the year. how does the plan account for that? you can only sell so much lipstick and ass implants to keep people happy.

final thorn to consider - what to do of Russia?

>why keep around billions who waste resources?
Those billions create resources.

Your worldview if fucked up. Your reasoning makes sense in a purely profit driven aspect. Instead of letting nature takes its course, your group chooses to play puppeteer beginning with brainwashing young children into a warped reality. Using climate change and automation as a justification is just trying to convince others that you are trying to do good. The reality is you are just pursueing shekels fist over fist.

It's not that, it's that over the last few years nearly everyone is sounding like an african, obsessing over ass way more than tits.
It's clearly becoming the more popular thanks to people like OP's work, turning us into apes, it's as much a loss of identity going from tits to ass as anything else.

All that they care about is dominating the world, everything else is propaganda and you could attempt to achieve what they want but it will be denial unless they achieve their true objective, world domination.

youtube.com/watch?v=-Tdu4uKSZ3M

I forgot to mention something I mentioned last time. The commodification of female beauty has had an adverse side effect that was not initially intended. When femininity was reduced to a collection of acquirable products, biological men were also effected by our advertising campaign and began to "purchase" femininity. The result has been the explosion of transsexualism in Brazil over the last twenty years. This was not a coincidence because, when the same strategy was implemented in the U.S. beginning in 2009, the explosion in transsexualism followed suit. This was not initially intended, but has been adopted for its benefits. Embracing men as the targets of feminine advertising broadens the consumer base, though not substantially. There is no reason for biological men to be excluded from purchasing the commodities of female beauty and its advantages.

For now they do.
Once total automation comes along they will not.

John Henry had to work himself to death to "win". That's what we face eventually against machines.

I don't pay attention to niggery if they don't pay attention to Aryanity.

How could you dominate the world and take all resources when the people are organized around race and have resources to serve their race?
Through military force and it's impractical.

And so my question of why there's suddenly so many trannies in brazil has finally been answered..

I get what you're saying and it makes sense. How the fuck do we stop identity politics? And how the fuck can we profit from, or stop, automation?

Jokes on you. As someone who has worked intimately with the IPCC and UN apparatus regarding climate change, i can assure you that you're on the wrong side of the fence if you think the climate boogyman will be propoed up much longer to support your agenda. In my professional experience, the very people who scream and shreek about the climate in dire straits are the very people actively partaking in sedition, treason and other lies and half truths to keep their funding in order and their jobs safe.

Yes, you are pointing to exactly where the problems are. Neoliberal technocrats aren't gods. And as to Russia, yes, they are a problem. Other retrograde countries have largely been co-opted through their elites, like China and Saudi Arabia. Russia, however, is pursuing its own national path, which is detrimental to the global system.

Thank you for your posts, user, very interesting. I was hoping that someone would eventually come along with some some real arguments in favor of globalization, so that I understand the opponent.

I have some major disagreements, though. While I understand (I think) the sustainability problem, I highly doubt that sustainability will be possible when the human civilization consists of non-productive idiot consumers. Why do I disagree? Because that's not how humanity has come this far.

Your argument on what is "humane" would make more sense if we accepted that humanity has gone all the way they can go, and not much more progress is needed. But I can't agree with this. Frankly, at any prior point in time one could argue that we have progressed as much as we needed. "Hey, we have tools and we can cook food now, why progress any more?".

But this has not been correct ever and it only shows how some leaders lacked imagination and vision. So allow me to prefer a civilization of intelligent, hard-working, productive and creative humans, who can keep on improving things (and improving themselves, first and foremost).

Lastly, the tribes in America thought they were doing well until the Europeans arrived and then they got BTFO. On these grounds, I find that it is our responsibility to endorse a competitive civilization (competitive towards any other civilization that may appear), which is not what you are describing.

>All that they care about is dominating the world,

And they cleverly have two major, seemingly opposed, paths to get there. Communism and global capitalism.

Interesting that both require the destruction of identity beyond the individual. And both leave all but the powerful in poverty.

We keep doing what we've been doing.
A revolt against social justice being inserted fucking everywhere 3 Years ago snowballed into Us Electing /ourguy/ into office as the most powerful Man in the World.
Just think of what we can achieve over the next three years after doing THAT
Nothing is out of our reach.
I suggest we Meme Mass Deportations of third worlders from White Countries so that by 2020 they're all finally gone back to where they're from & euthanised on the way over.

Automation cannot be stopped. You can profit by it in a few ways. Either get involved in being part of developing or maintaining the tools that are needed or find a career and skillset that cannot be duplicated by automation.

*Sterilised

I want to believe we can stop it. OP just makes me feel so empty to see it all laid out.

>blah blah
TOO LONG DIDN"T READ WALL OF FUCKING TEXT

why don't you get mexico to pay for that fucking wall m8

They serve one cause the replacement of racial people identity with arbitrary identities, class, personal capital acquisition etc..

Climate change being real or not does not matter.
It's being excuse to reduce the ability of people to amass wealth (i.e. Power)

>neofuedalism

That's the goal.
Both the left and right paths lead there.

I member you from before.

shouldn't have used a whore as your pic

makes the whole thread feel like bait

Careful, senpai. With great power comes great responsibility

>The Trump movement (and the Bernie movement for that matter, with its opposition to neoliberalism) was unforeseen

sure it was

once TOTAL automation comes along there would be no more engineers.

then that tells me that a growing alliance with Russia and heightening tensions along lines of old identities is a good thing.

if the globalists are using neo-identities to erase the old ones, and are doing so by controlling agitation, then nationalists would do well to make the agitation uncontrollable. Especially while we maintain a demographic advantage.

Correct.
Just the Zorgs of the world, and the few people they keep around for amusement.

What would you suggest I have used?

I frankly don't care too much about automation because I use resources only to fuel the happiness of my race and it's cultural, economic, and spiritual uplifting, and not to concerned with power leverages possible.

youtube.com/watch?v=FXWjv1XXbcA&t=10s

level up user. you don't start the game by fighting the end boss.

If personal interest mattered we wouldn't have reproduction and we should sterilize everyone in the world.

I see literally no problems with Deporting all 3rd worlders.
All you have to do is explain to the normies & let them see that they bring third world problems.

If race didn't matter then it wouldn't be what we give to the world to continue through our reproduction.

youtube.com/watch?v=A7m0saghsmU&t=5s

So just to be clear your proposed solution to overpopulation, climate change and global inequality is consumerism?

I can't really argue that free trade has gone some way to making the world a more peaceful place. If you think about it, most wars since ww2 have been started by or involved the US and their pro-activeity in promoting liberalism (as in economic) around the world. But I also find it depressing, that consumption and increasing gentle guiding from TPTB is the best you think we can expect.

Actual sustainability (as in less consumption) and technological - and human - advancement seem much more noble goals.

So who is behind all this? Is it the jews or the reptilians?

>Actual sustainability (as in less consumption) and technological - and human - advancement seem much more noble goals.
The white race should expand as much as much as possible we will find a solution to anything, our purpose is to continue our race to our strength, everything else be damned.

It's been neo-fuedualism in the making since 1913...and we became subjects to the financiers of the crown ... what 1864 or so... thanks for waking up a hundred years later Mr. Winkle

Put the thread in your watchlist or use the snipping tool in Windows. I thought Nordics were supposed to be intelligent ?

I am a neoliberal. Thank you very much.

Tell me realistically what is wrong with us reproducing exponentially in the hundreds of billions, our population will remain consistent with our ability and skill, if we can feed our children then we can and should expand.

There should be no should, should doesn't exist, there is only CAN.
youtube.com/watch?v=73WWpKyuWL4

>My work specifically had to do with commodifying “femininity” or “female beauty,” so as to undermine tradition, culturally specific, white-centric ideas of female beauty and to replace them with racially non-specific, commodified forms of female beauty.
Is the feminization of men also part of your work?

We're just getting started

The question should be how much CAN we do our purpose, reproducing US.

That answer would be the amounts of land, and fishing waters we can use for our glorious destiny.

youtube.com/watch?v=kGiYxCUAhks

tldr go away

You're assuming that we aren't colonizing space in 100 years. This isn't even necessary, and may actually be counter productive.

The worst thing we could do for the environment would be the kill off whites. They are literally the only race that has even given two fucks about the well-being of Earth's flora and fauna.