The character of the Open Conspiracy will now be plainly displayed. It will have become a great world movement as wide-spread and evident as socialism or communism. It will have taken the place of these movements very largely. It will be more than they were, it will be frankly a world religion. This large, loose assimilatory mass of movements, groups, and societies will be definitely and obviously attempting to swallow up the entire population of the world and become the new human community.
H. G. Wells, The Open Conspiracy (1928) XV.
The aim of an “inclusive economy” does not have room for authentic, organic diversity, but requires the individual to be reinvented – “fluid” – according to the needs of the market. The premise is that “identity” becomes an economic unit, as a producer-consumer: homo economicus, whose “fluidity” assures an expanding market. Hence, the Rockefeller Foundation states of one such “fluid identity”:
June marked LGBT Pride Month, and a key question emerged for the Diversity & Inclusion Ambassador Group here at The Rockefeller Foundation as we reflected on LGBT issues alongside our goal of advancing inclusive economies: Has the recent increase in attention to LGBT issues both within the U.S. and lower-income countries catalyzed greater investment in addressing the barriers that LGBT people face in developing secure livelihoods?
Jennifer Bilek, an environmentalist who woke up to an agenda at work, succinctly describes a situation that can be applied to the range of agendas promoted as “progressive”:
It’s hard to imagine a civil rights movement so indelibly tied to the capitalist marketplace that it could be used to sell fashion, makeup, hormones, surgery, cosmetology services, movies, TV series, mental health treatment, and women’s underwear, while concurrently being invested in by billionaire philanthropists, the technology and pharmaceutical industries, major corporations, and banks.
Transgenderism, a purported civil rights movement, now intersects at every juncture of the global marketplace. It is hard to remember it came out of the medical industrial complex as a term for the most intense body dysphoria. …
Transgenderism is looking more and more like Transgenderism™, when we look at the markets opening and its insidious presence in Hollywood. Whoopi Goldberg has started her own trans modeling company on Oprah’s Oxygen network, with trans models reported as the future of modeling. Supernatural Extraterrestrial and Co, a high-fashion clothing line, promotes their willingness to embrace a future of male pregnancy. A look at their new clothing line for 2019 has men strutting fashion runways in pregnancy prosthesis. …
TomBoyX is a woman’s undergarment company. It uses the term “tomboy” in its company name to denote a girl who enjoys so-called stereotypical boy activities like running and climbing trees to sell boxer shorts and comfortable underwear to women. Their message is of empowerment, not being hemmed in by feminine attire, but able to run and feel free “like a boy,” by donning clothes like his, but made for a woman’s body. In a recent ad they chose an attractive young woman with double mastectomy scars donning their boxers under a caption that reads: “This canvas was given to you but you made it your own. You crafted your own story. Share it with the world. #moretome.” …
This message is a clear glorification of chosen body disfigurement posing as self-actualization and liberation, sickness as wellness, self-hatred made into empowerment, and cutting and maiming female flesh for public consumption via uber-marketing. George Orwell must be turning over in his grave with the language of doublespeak as prime-time advertisement.
It is not just the pharmaceutical giants, the IT industry, fashion houses, Hollywood, and artists melding themselves to everything trans. Banks and investment houses are sending millions of dollars to transgender organizations all over the globe.
Men at the highest echelons of society—such as billionaire philanthropist Jennifer Pritzker and the creator of SiriusXM Satellite Radio, Martine Rothblatt—are claiming not just a transgender identity, but for Rothblatt, that of a transhumanist as well. Rothblatt believes “transgenderism is the onramp to transhumanism,” the precursor to superhumans. …
Although transgenderism is positioned under the LGB civil rights banner, it appears to have a much closer relationship to commerce and global powerbrokers who have a penchant for technological megalomania. There is plenty of money flowing to transgender organizations, but even more going to normalizing transgender ideology in the culture, in language, through media, marketing, and commerce, and by billionaires’ philanthropic funding of nonprofits and other institutions.
One has to wonder if the LGB civil rights banner has not just been strategic positioning for transgenderism to claim civil rights, currying popular sympathies already well cultivated for the LGB community, as a pretext to insert itself into the global marketplace, our schools, universities, courts, and medical establishments for more nefarious purposes.
While Bilek writes that “[i]t’s hard to imagine a civil rights movement so indelibly tied to the capitalist marketplace,” the Left has often been “indelibly tied to the capitalist marketplace,” whether as “Black civil rights,” “opposition to apartheid,” abortion liberalization, or feminism. It is akin to the advertising campaign formulated in 1928 by Edward Bernays for the tobacco industry, which portrayed cigarettes as the “freedom torches” of the “liberated,” “progressive” woman. ‘60s feminism, with its Establishment origins, diverged from the patriotic and authoritarian “suffragettes” of a prior era. Many notables such as Norah Dacre-Fox, Mary Richardson, Mary Allen, Christabel Pankhurst, and Adele Pankhurst, turned sharply Right after World War I.
The Left want an inclusive society, while the oligarchy want an inclusive economy. Both converge against tradition and organic, authentic identities. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), founded in 1921 as a nexus between academia and oligarchy, described the globalist ideology as “American internationalism based on American interests.” Richard Haas, president of the CFR, quoting his predecessor, Gelb, stated in his Foreword to the 2006 edition that one of the primary aims of the CFR is to “find and nurture the next generation of foreign policy leaders.” (ix). If the book had not been written by a CFR historian and published as an official history by the CFR, it would be dismissed as “Right-wing conspiracy theory.”
Alarmed by the rise of populism, including the Trump interregnum, Darren Walker, president of the Ford Foundation, wrote in the CFR magazine Foreign Affairs:
The world is experiencing a realignment unlike any other since the end of World War II. Nationalism and populism are surging in the United States and Europe, at the expense of liberal internationalism and democratic values. This poses a challenge to a wide range of institutions, including philanthropies committed to international development and social justice. Such foundations played a crucial role in building the liberal international order that has come under assault in recent years, and that the United States seems less willing to defend than ever before.
During much of the last century, philanthropic foundations based in the United States exported American ideals about democracy, market economies, and civil society. That mission was made possible by ideological support from and alignment with the U.S. government, which, in turn, imbued foundations with prestige and influence as they operated around the world. American philanthropies such as the Ford Foundation can no longer count on such support. Nor can they be sure that the goals of increased equality, the advancement of human rights, and the promotion of democracy will find backing in Washington.
As U.S. leadership of the global order falters, American foundations must blaze a new path.
While President Trump undertook efforts to align the USA on the non-interventionist course urged by President George Washington in his Farewell Address, the internationalist foreign policy was resumed with his ouster. An alliance of oligarchs and Leftists played a major role in the defeat of Donald Trump’s presidential re-election. One might think that the Left, with its inane talk of “world peace” and of “Yankee imperialism,” would have been encouraged by Trump’s efforts to reduce congressional spending on the National Endowment for Democracy, and his stating that the USA should no longer be considered the “world’s policeman.” But when it came down to it, the Left maintained its historic position in the service of the globalist oligarchy, while Trump was excoriated by the Establishment media as a crypto-fascist for a foreign policy that came closest to the vision of George Washington. With the election of Biden, the USA assumed the role that the globalist oligarchy feared the USA had lost.
The Global American Empire (GAE) marches on. With the Trump administration, populists and nationalists received a lesson in the managerial state. We must better understand the nature of this oligarchical regime in order to change it. Simply electing candidates is not going to change the nature of the regime.
I hope Trump 2.0 would be something different. He has had to have learned surrounding himself with neocons is a recipe for stasis, not change.
It would take a cultural revolution and then some. I seem to recall Putin remarking on Trump’s assumption to the presidency that even in that position he will find that he can do very little.
I’m reminded of what Pierre-Joseph Prouhon said having spent just over a year in the French National Assembly, “it was like washing my hands in shit everyday” and he came to the conclusion there was nothing he could do from the top down.