Nearly everyone knows the epic tale of the Trojan horse. As I grew up without a classical education, I did not learn about this tale of deception until I was an adult. In fact, I experienced and observed this phenomenon in my own life . . . LONG before I ever knew the literary reference.
Switching to more recent and relevant context, from malwarebytes.com, Trojans are defined as “programs that claim to perform one function but actually do another, typically malicious. Trojans can take the form of attachments, downloads and fake videos/programs.”
The Coronavirus paradigm reflects the iconic Trojan horse tale, but has been inverted. It’s a virus of paradox — a Trojan virus, if you will. So, whereas Trojan computer viruses are seemingly benign programs that hide more malicious intent, this novel virus has been portrayed as malicious, but may be more of an exaggeration, and potentially even a misrepresentation of a threat. Whether or not you believe that there is a manufactured pandemic, or subscribe to the notion, “Never let a crisis go to waste,” both perspectives are consistent with a Trojan virus, as it has hacked the minds of nearly the entire global population. It’s the epitome of malware, whether conceived in a computer lab, or as a thought-form, or otherwise. It has been brought to life, and has brought the world to its knees — at the behest of the “scientific” elite. It has even affected those of us who seem immune to its mind-altering impact.
Richard Brodie, in Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme, discusses how the Trojan horse method of programming sneaks into our psyche and “pushes our buttons” through the use of memes and NLP techniques such as “embedding” and “anchoring.” As a certified NLP practitioner, I am sensitive to noticing when such techniques are being weaponized. In the instance of the COVID-19 scenario, I posit that the masses have been infected through highly effective meme-spreading techniques (AKA memetic software), designed to re-program their behaviors.
So what’s the real deal with this Trojan virus that is programmed with virions of fear and submission? What is hiding inside its outer spiked veneer? The Trojan virus serves as ideal cover to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), including Society 5.0. This has been discussed by several researchers.
The foremost researcher on technocracy is Patrick Wood. As Wood profoundly states in Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, “The dark horse of the New World Order is not Communism, Socialism or Fascism. It is Technocracy.”
While those on the left see Fascism, and those on the right see Communism, what lies much deeper is what unites all elites — that of Technocracy. Technocracy unites nearly every country, and every leader of the modern world. It is the universal thread of oppression. I implore you (rarely do I insist) to watch Patrick Wood’s most recent interview, “The Global Elite & The Coronavirus Coup D’état.” As serendipity would have it, I had written most of this essay prior to watching this comprehensive discussion, so it came at an opportune moment. Wood also mentioned Parag Khanna (around the 23 minute mark), whose books I had recently purchased for research in this regard.
Parag Khanna, a leading global strategist and a Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum, exemplifies the technocratic ideology. In his book, Connectography: Mapping the Future of Global Civilization, Khanna gleefully states, “With the rise of the global sensor network dubbed the ‘Internet of Everything’ (Internet of Things + Internet of People), our maps will perpetually update themselves, providing an animated view into our world as it really is — even the five thousand commercial aircraft in the sky and the more than ten thousand ships crossing the seas at any given moment. These are the arteries and veins, capillaries and cells, of a planetary economy underpinned by an infrastructural network that can eventually become as efficient as the human body.” Khanna added, “Eventually, we may not need satellites at all for positioning and navigation with the advent of lower-cost but extremely accurate Quantum-Assisted Sensing that determines location by measuring the impact of the earth’s magnetic field on atoms.”
In Khanna’s previous book, How to Run the World: Charting a Course to the Next Renaissance, he lays out his “cutting-edge manifesto for diplomacy in a borderless world.” When he wrote this book in 2011, he expressed, “Some now fear a breakdown of our global order, but isn’t it scarier to realize that the present order has already been broken for years? It’s the kind of moment the philosopher Karl Popper had in mind when he argued that tearing down our existing order and constructing a new one from scratch might lead to a more workable system.” Khanna continued, “Henry Kissinger said it best: ‘You do not design a new world order as an emergency measure. But you need an emergency to bring about a new world order.’ Finally, there is a global debate under way about how to redesign the way we run the world.”
One more highly relevant and timely point Khanna makes, “North and South, public and private, West and East: All the new power centers are present within the WEF’s [World Economic Forum] activities, making it the world’s only organization truly devoted to mega-diplomacy. Whereas the United Nations and World Bank speak of ‘reform’ as a code for strengthening themselves, the WEF creates the space for thinking about a genuine redesign of how we run the world — always partnering governments, businesses, and organizations . . . The WEF will never get any credit — but who cares?”
In Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Klaus Schwab (Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum), stated “Finding solutions for the governance challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution will require governments, businesses and individuals to make the right strategic decisions about how to develop and deploy new technologies. But this will require taking a stance on societal values and getting better at creating mechanisms for collaborative action . . . multinational corporations and nation-states will have to become more effective at building formal and informal international agreements.”
What better way to create this initiative than a global pandemic? It would seem to check all the necessary boxes of inclusion on such a grand scale. One vital clarification is that this event, and the extensive planning that gave rise to this operation, goes far beyond any one political party, or any one governmental entity. The panoptic scope of this has been evidenced in the writing of both Khanna and Schwab, and needs to be acknowledged.
I could write an entire treatise on Schwab’s book alone. It is a detailed blueprint for what is to come — how the controllers plan to “reform the physical world” through blockchain, the Internet of Things, AI, robotics, biotechnology, neurotechnology, virtual and augmented realities, geoengineering and space technologies. As Schwab conveys with conviction, “Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies will not stop at becoming part of the physical world around us — they will become part of us . . . Today’s external devices . . . will . . . become implantable in our bodies and brains . . . We will become better able to manipulate our own genes, and those of our children.” Schwab’s entire work centers around the concept that this change in society cannot happen in an incremental fashion, but that it MUST be disruptive to the status quo, and it must be revolutionary.
What I found most disturbing in the book was how casually Schwab discussed “altering the human being.” In his own words, “The lines between technologies and beings are becoming blurred, and not just by the ability to create lifelike robots or synthetic organisms. Instead, it is about the ability of new technologies to literally become part of us . . . we may begin to integrate digital technologies into our bodies . . . the future may see curious mixes of digital and analog life that will redefine our very natures . . . These technologies will operate within our own biology and change how we interface with the world.”
Is anyone familiar with Neil Harbisson, the world’s “first cyborg?” Harbisson claims that it would be better for the environment and the planet, if we re-design humanity — as a new species. This seems to align perfectly with what the technocratic controllers want. Is this the type of life we want? For those who wish to dig deeper into their plans to re-engineer humans (including the eradication of viruses), read Regenesis: How Synthetic Biology Will Reinvent Nature and Ourselves by George Church.
Both Harbisson and Church embody the doctrine of transhumanism, which seems to be married alchemically to Technocracy. While I won’t delineate the creed of transhumanism in this essay, I suggest that its roots trace much further back than Technocracy. David Livingstone, in his prolific and well-resourced book, Transhumanism: The History of a Dangerous Idea, provides much evidence to support the notion that science has achieved an almost cult-like status — rooted in mysticism and the occult. Livingstone expounds on the influence of the occult and the Age of Enlightenment, and in particular, the role of the Rosicrucian-based “Invisible College,” and its impact on scientism that is propped up by faith — no different than any other religion. Suffice to say, after reading Transhumanism, I wonder if the notion of Technocracy may itself be another Trojan placed in our consciousness to further deceive and encrypt the ulterior motives of its architects.
Additional Trojan horses packaged within Technocracy, for example, include cashless and coinless currency (cryptocurrency), and purportedly “safer” vaccines embedded with nanotechnology. These advanced technologies will support the transhumanist agenda, with one potential end goal being the creation of the artificially connected “Global Brain.” Listen to this recent discussion with Ben Goertzel (CEO and founder of SingularityNET) with respect to their intentions.
This New World Order agenda is no longer an amorphous theory. It has been laid out transparently in immense detail by the controllers. Their plans are proceeding at an exponential rate.
BEWARE of Trojan horses. They are EVERYWHERE.
Addendum (added 7/23): I neglected to include this short presentation, “Looking Forward to the End of Humanity” (only 20 minutes long), by James Corbett. It is essential viewing, in my opinion.
References for further reading/listening:
Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order by Patrick Wood
School World Order: The Technocratic Globalization of Corporatized Education by John Klyczek
“How The ‘Great Reset’ Is Targeting Our Children & Plans To ‘Reimagine’ Humanity”
“A Disturbing Glimpse Into The Future: Bill Gates, Elon Musk & The 4th Industrial Revolution”
20 thoughts on “Trojan horse here, Trojan horse there, Trojan horses everywhere”
Enjoyed this! What would stun the average person is the extent to which seemingly innocent content…memes, commercials, trends…are actually triggers of programming that had been planted long ago.
It is the old Manchurian Candidate concept, where if you have the subject adequately programmed, you can trigger them however you want. So many things are likely triggers. I see something like a typical Pop Culture video, and I feel deep pity that people don’t realize how they are being tampered with.
This guy got released from prison (made big headlines), then immediately had this video released (got huge views). Did they allow him to record this in prison? And just watch for the programming triggers.
This ‘It Girl’ has videos that are absolutely dripping with such triggers. Shameless.
Seriously, watch these videos. It’s unbelievable. These videos are classic examples of such things, but all forms of media are corrupted in the same way. The film ‘Joker’ is a classic example. Also the film ‘Won’t You Be My Neighbor’…I felt uncomfortable the extent to which my emotions were being manipulated. We are all constantly being manipulated, and 99.9% of the population is totally unaware.
As you suggest, first the code is fed to us, then it is relentlessly triggered. This is the purpose of nearly all popular culture entertainment.
Then, Transhumanism is the next frontier. A topic we should probably discuss more. People who resist will likely end up being seen as an inferior species. And that might actually be true. We have already seen in Resolving the Tokarski Phenomenon that elites are probably already capable of Gattaca-like engineering of their children.
Great post, very thought-provoking as always.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“While those on the left see Fascism, and those on the right see Communism”
I don’t understand this reference. Fascism is the collusion/merger of Big Government and Big Business. Communism and Fascism are both far-left ideologies as they involve the heavy hand of The State.
another way of looking at made-up nouns….
I appreciate you raising this point, and I can understand where you are coming from. The notion of The State being left or right has been hotly debated. Similarly, the question of whether Fascism is left-wing or right-wing has also been debated, as it may have had its roots from the left, but has adopted more far-right views. We have been conditioned in the US to perceive the left-right spectrum in a linear fashion, and to only consider if an ideology is left or right simply by “how much” role the government has. This may be limiting in its scope. If you imagine the political spectrum as a circle, with the extreme left and extreme right meeting to complete the circle at the juncture of The State, then you can see how both may arrive there -not simply by the amount of government, but as determined by the values of said government. Far-leftist discourse (represent mainly by academics) calls out Fascism. They are typically comfortable there, as they point to the role of corporate power (Corporatocracy), and they highlight that Fascists typically writhe in the face of any form of egalitarianism (which far-leftists typically promote). They place Fascism at the extreme right wing due to its social policies and moral values, and therefore, point out that it has a different cultural agenda. Sheldon Wolin (who wrote Democracy Inc) would epitomize this perspective. So, returning to the circle metaphor, one can navigate the more extremes of either side, but eventually he/she will arrive at the same place – The State. The State may be neutral – neither left, nor right -OR it can be seen as BOTH left and right (a synthesis). This is where the Hegelian Dialectic comes in, and is being used to control our perceptions. As someone who has spun all around the “circle” of the left-right spectrum, I suggest transcending ALL left vs. right discourse. It is an ouroboros trap in my opinion. The enemy is neither left, nor right.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I appreciate your response and suspect we’ll end up agreeing to disagree.
“We have been conditioned in the US to perceive the left-right spectrum in a linear fashion”
In my experience, the exact opposite is true. The circle-type spectrum has been pushed relentlessly. I was taught and have heard my entire life that Hitler and Mussolini were far-right dictators. The Nazis were National Socialists. Besides just being in the name, socialism was widely espoused by that government, which can be seen if one reads the propaganda material and speech transcripts from that time period. Also, you pretty much supported my view that people have been conditioned to view the spectrum as a circle by saying that those on the left see Fascism and those on the right see Communism. If people were conditioned to believe in the linear model, then this statement wouldn’t really make sense as it implies the left sees Fascism as right-wing.
Anarchy is another term that is used improperly as part of the circle-type spectrum that keeps people confused. A lot of street protesters, whether organic or not, have been called anarchists, which makes no sense at all in most cases as many (such as Occupy Wall Street & engineered groups like Antifa) promote big government ideas. An = without. Archon = leader. Anarchy = no leader/government. Thus, anarchy is clearly a far-right ideology. A scale that goes in a circle doesn’t make much sense IMO. A thermometer wouldn’t be very useful in measuring temperature if it was a circle in which the high end and low end came together.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, it seems one very small aspect we do agree on is the definition of Anarchy. It seems we may also agree somewhat that “anarchist” groups promoted in the public eye (such as Occupy and Antifa) are engineered – for the very purpose of increasing the supposed need for control by government. They serve to prop up the corrupt system. However, as I consider myself a holistic anarchist (voluntaryist), I do consider the notion that anarchy being far-right is still one-dimensional and oversimplified. The philosophies among many fellow anarchists (who I have met over the years at various public events/conferences) seem, in ideology and practice, to overlap and combine into varied political, economic and cultural perspectives. For example, there are anarcho-communists (left wing) as well as anarcho-capitalists (right wing). For those who are more “purist” within anarchy circles, left and right carry very little meaning, and in fact, become obsolete. The “cleanest” form of anarchism promotes cooperation (not necessarily equality) and rejects all forms of coercion, including military and police, and all forms of top-down enforcement/control. I have yet to observe any “far-right” thinking individual reject these institutions, as all evidence I have seen indicates that those of a far-right mindset fear chaos would result without some level of control (even if minimal).
Trump’s Operation Warpspeed clues us all in that the vaccine and everything about this event was preplanned long ago. As we watched it happen to all of us, and talked about it while it was happening to all of us, they already had the answers and the time frame. That includes people in your local communities as well.
Quite a sad state of affairs, isn’t it?
Here is some good information on the history of geoengineering aka “weather modification”: