Authored by Christopher Roach via American Greatness,

In dealing with his enemies in the Deep State, President Trump could follow one of two paths. One would be the path of peace, reconciliation, and forgiveness. This would certainly be easier in the short term and also garner approval from insiders and the media. Alternatively, he could seek to clean house and punish the worst and most insubordinate offenders from his first term.

Which path Trump should take all depends on whether one believes the last eight years were normal partisan squabbles or if one believes that something monumental happened: the obstruction of democratic self-government by a technocratic Deep State.

I believe it is the latter for reasons I have explained before at length. In short, Trump was not allowed to govern, nor treated as other presidents were during his first term. The problem began before Trump, as entrenched bureaucratic interests have worked quietly to control more cooperative and less independent presidents, like Barack Obama and Joe Biden. But the resistance to Trump reflected a mature, ideological, and increasingly self-conscious managerial class that believed they were entitled to rule without regard to electoral results.

Trump was a threat to business as usual.

Thus, a cabal of intelligence agencies cooperated to stop him from making changes to foreign policy or scrutinizing the outsized military-industrial complex. Contrary to the media’s dire pronouncements, these insiders were the real threat to democracy and self-government.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, was one of the worst offenders.

As documented in Bob Woodward’s book Peril, Milley spent a lot of time after the 2020 election caballing with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and reassuring her that the military would resist certain orders from President Trump.

He met with the small group of officers who control our strategic nuclear forces and demanded they pledge to get his approval before executing any launch orders, even though, as head of the Joint Chiefs, he is merely an advisor and is statutorily excluded from the chain of command.

Finally, and most controversially, he was telling his counterpart in China that he would let them know if an attack or other action was coming from the United States. He defended this as normal “deconfliction” communications, but these secret talks took place without authorization from either the Secretary of Defense or the president.

All of Milley’s actions took place after he earlier joined with a group of retired officers to impede Trump’s use of the military to stop nationwide riots around June of 2020. Milley sent out an implied message to the troops suggesting that they could ignore any order to deploy, even though active-duty troops have been used in such a capacity repeatedly, including during the 1992 L.A. Riots.

As he reminded the whole nation by using the term “white rage,” Milley is typical of the new class of liberal senior officers who take part in the culture wars, cleave to one-half of the partisan divide, and act like they are beyond the control of the president whom they serve when they disagree with his politics.

Milley’s bad behavior was particularly egregious because of his role.

The Joint Chiefs are supposed to serve as military advisors. They are statutorily excluded from the ordinary chain of command to maintain institutional separation between advisory and command roles. This arrangement is designed to contribute to increased trust and candor between the Joint Chiefs and the president.

Secret talks with partisan opponents of the president, unauthorized back-channel communications to enemies, casual comparisons of the president to Adolf Hitler, and pseudo-idealistic suggestions that troops should disobey the orders they find disagreeable undermine that trust for obvious reasons.

Some have argued this might all be permissible in extremis and as part of the right of service members to resist illegal orders. But too much is made of this right. This defense is only supposed to apply to a very narrow set of self-evidently illegal orders, typically involving war crimes. Whether the government properly approved the use of troops to stop a riot is not such a case. Normally, the military must follow orders without delay. This distinguishes it from slower and less energetic civilian institutions.

There are a great many controversial—but legal—orders. Likely the most controversial would be an order to use nuclear weapons. The protocols on nuclear launch authority give exclusive power to the president to order a launch—a necessary, though admittedly dangerous, power to account for the fast timelines associated with a possible enemy first strike.

Perhaps this authority should be pulled back—I believe it should, particularly for cases of non-retaliatory uses of these weapons—but this was the established policy stretching back to the Cold War. More important, it was firmly established when Milley took it upon himself to undermine Trump’s authority by secretly demanding a loyalty oath from the officers in charge of our nuclear arsenal.

Milley did what he did because he was afraid of his own shadow and convinced himself that Trump was losing it and about to become a dictator.

In his supercilious and adolescent phrasing, we were facing a “Reichstag moment.”

The military is not part of the Constitution’s system of checks and balances. The military and the entire executive branch are subordinate to the president. He is their source of authority and is the boss, having attained his authority from an election involving the entire American people.

Once upon a time, liberals worried that a conservative, authoritarian military might thwart a liberal president and his policies. But these fears proved to be completely overblown. The military was, until a decade or so ago, a self-consciously nonpartisan institution. Even as it trended more conservative during the Clinton years, there was no insubordination akin to Milley’s performance.

It turns out that while the country was on the lookout for right-wing military extremists, the military had few defenses from leftist partisanship. Whether classified as treason or mere insubordination, a similarly corrosive performance risks repeating itself during Trump’s second term.

In the immediate aftermath of the election, the left seems to realize it is unwise to resist openly and violently, as they did for much of the Trump administration. But I believe, at the moment, they are merely regrouping and working on a strategy they believe will work.

The military, which retains prestige because it is still perceived as a nonpartisan repository of patriotic rectitude, will likely loom prominently in these plans, just as it did during Trump’s first term. As we know, the military and Milley lost all qualms about using the military domestically when they flooded the zone with armed National Guardsmen to create a Green Zone for Biden’s 2021 Inauguration.

This unhealthy politicization and leftist partisanship among the military’s senior leadership must be stopped.

The military should return to its role as a neutral instrument of national power. But this means it must chiefly be controlled by the elected president in the manner he directs. In order to restore healthier civil-military relations, there must be a dramatic and symbolic reset reminding the military and the rest of the country that Trump has full executive powers as president.

In order to accomplish this, Mark Milley should be recalled to service, court-martialed, punished, and publicly dishonored in order to prevent a resurgence of the corrosive principle of leftist military partisanship during Trump’s second term.

Israeli leaders and military officials are reportedly engaged in high level briefings over fast-moving events in Syria, which have seen Turkish-backed Islamists based in Idlib rapidly capture the major cities of Aleppo and Hama in less than a week.

Defense Minister Israel Katz and IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi are carefully monitoring the situation across the border as the jihadists move south. “The IDF is following events and is preparing for any scenario in attack and defense,” the military said.

“The IDF will not allow a threat near the Syrian-Israeli border and will act to thwart any threat to the citizens of the State of Israel,” it added. Of course, Israel has long directly contributed to destabilizing Syria through frequent airstrikes and at various times in past years supporting an anti-Assad insurgency.

There have been some unconfirmed reports that one option Israel would consider is creating a buffer zone inside southern Syria in the scenario of some kind of state collapse, and should Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) make it to Homs and eventually Damascus. Some analysts have accused Israel of covertly supporting HTS’ ongoing rampage across the northern half of the country.

According to one Israeli report:

Channel 12 reports that Israel is preparing for the possibility that the Syrian army may collapse in the face of rapidly advancing rebel forces.

The report says Israel has been surprised by the weakness of the Syrian army, as it continues to swiftly lose ground to the jihadist-led fighters. The report adds that Israel has sent a strong warning to Iran not to send weaponry to Syria that could reach the hands of the Hezbollah terror group in Lebanon.

And an unnamed US official has told Axios on Thurdsay at a moment the HTS insurgents are in control of the central city of Hama, “The Syrian military forces are not really fighting.”

The official added, “We don’t think the regime is in immediate danger, but this is the biggest challenge for the Assad regime in the last decade.”

The last 12 hours have seen reports emerge of a Syrian Army counteroffensive around Hama, with some military bases on the outskirts having been taken back by national forces.

Syria’s state forces have secured Hama and are preparing to repel future attacks

Working in tandem, Syrian ground troops and Russian air forces have reportedly inflicted heavy losses on terrorists in the north pic.twitter.com/MrsrqLtI88

— RT (@RT_com) December 5, 2024

How did the security situation in the Aleppo area unravel so quickly? How or why did the Syrian Army retreat so rapidly?

* * *

Below, a prominent and longtime Syrian commentator who goes by Bassem gives a quick bird’s eye view explanation…

External:

1) Russia got distracted with the war in Ukraine and resources diverted there.

2) Hamas idiotically went on suicide mission in October 2023 and dragged Hizbollah into the conflict indirectly and exhausted them.

3) Israel weakened Iran in Syria past few years.

Internal:

4) Assad did nothing to improve the lives of locals. Electricity for few hours a day, not enough fuel for daily matters, corruption, made the lives of Syrian business community hell (customs, etc), to name few.

5) all the while opposition was rebuilding, changing their message, training, even Ukrainian intelligence came in to support them with intelligence and drone technology.

* * *

We should add that US and European sanctions have devastated the Syrian economy and infrastructure, which have without doubt negatively impacted the Syrian Army’s general readiness and morale. And the US military has been occupying Syria’s oil and gas fields in the east for years at this point. Part of Washington’s purpose has remained to squeeze Damascus of energy resources, further weakening the Syrian state.

The average American household allocated $9,986 – or 13% of their total expenditures – toward food in 2023. But what does that spending reveal about the nation’s eating habits?

Visual Capitalist partnered with Brazil Potash to create this chart, which uses data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, to show a breakdown of what Americans eat.

A Breakdown of Food Groups Consumed

In 2023, food eaten away from home made up an average of $3,933 per household, representing a substantial 39% of total food spending.

On the home front, the largest share of spending went to miscellaneous food items such as sugars, oils, and non-alcoholic beverages, amounting to $2,469. This is a significant 15% uptick from the previous year.

Meanwhile, spending on meat, poultry, fish, and eggs fell by 4% to $1,164. However, not all livestock farming saw a decline in spending, as dairy, the smallest share of spending, increased by 13% year-over-year.

Lastly, cereals and baked goods experienced the largest yearly increase, a 17% surge totaling $830.

Where Potash Comes In

U.S. food prices increased by 5.8% in 2023, influencing the spending habits of American consumers in various ways.

This is where potash comes in as a solution to food inflation.

Potash is a potassium-rich mineral used as a fertilizer to boost crop yields and support food production. Its use supports stable food supplies and affordability on a global scale.

You too can get involved in solving global food inflation and cultivate returns in your investment portfolio.

Donald Trump has named David Sacks as the “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar,” according to a Thursday night post on Truth Social.

“He will work on a legal framework so the Crypto industry has the clarity it has been asking for, and can thrive in the US,” Trump said in the post, adding that Sacks will “guild policy for the Administration in Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness.

“David will focus on making America the clear global leader in both areas.”

The feeling is mutual David…

I’ve long followed and appreciated @zerohedge for of its irreverent market analysis. I never understood why it was censored — until now. It was at the behest of Big Pharma. https://t.co/AkYfzLGXL2

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) January 16, 2023

If a country’s average doctor visits are high, it could be easy to assume the population isn’t healthy. At the same time not going enough may seem like there’s an accessibility issue.

As with most sociological data, the devil is in the details. And differences in payment systems, insurance plans, and how healthcare is delivered all play a part into why going to the doctor is more common or not.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao, tracks the number of in-person doctor visits per year by country. Data is sourced from the OECD, as of 2021, or the latest year available. Figures are rounded.

Nurse Practitioners are Easing Patient Loads in Some Countries

At the top of the list, South Koreans visit the doctor the most, around 16 times a year on average. These visits are helped by the country’s famously fast and efficient healthcare sector.

Like the U.S., South Korea has a fee-for-service system which allows patients to access what they need—but with very little wait times.

However, unlike the U.S., its national insurance program covers over 70% of the medical bills, lessening individual costs.

On the other hand, Americans really don’t like visiting the doctor, averaging just two visits a year, one of the lowest in the world.

The OECD states that a large majority of the population faces high co-payments, which reduces regular checkups.

More importantly, nurse practitioners and other healthcare professionals play an outsized role in treating patients, especially those with chronic conditions, which means actual doctor visits fall.

This difference in health care delivery explains also why the Swedes, Canadians, and Finns don’t go to the doctor as much either, as they rely on other medical staff for most of their health-related needs.

As the world ages, the need for more doctors is only increasing. And some countries are able to attract them from across borders. Check out Europe’s Reliance on Foreign-Trained Doctors to see which ones are most successful.

Authored by Jesse Smith via TruthUnmuted.org,

Major shake-ups are occurring across the global stage. History is replete with examples of breaks with the past from major political, economic, technological, and social upheaval. Throughout the ages, many self-serving individuals and groups have positioned themselves as rulers, financiers, benefactors, and thought leaders to steer change toward preferred outcomes. From the Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt to the Jacobin and Napoleon-led French Revolution in the late 18th century, societal transformation has been constant as one form of government replaces another.

We have now arrived at yet another historical inflection point. The desire for political and economic reconstruction is being demanded globally as the gap between the ultra-wealthy and everyone else continues to accelerate. In recent years, populism has taken flight by inspiring the masses to reject the rule of “the elite” and chart a new course. However, without scrutiny, this movement and its key figures could be just as dangerous as the establishment they are attempting to usurp. In fact, what we are witnessing is not populism in its truest sense but techno-populism or technocracy, as it has been called since its inception in 1920.

Technocracy originated in the winter of 1918-19 when Howard Scott formed a group of scientists, engineers, and economists that became known in 1920 as the Technical Alliance — a research organization. In 1933 it was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York as a nonprofit, non-political, non-sectarian membership organization.” 

– The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

What is Technocracy?

Historically, technocracy has not been well received. In fact, many who accurately comprehended its goals viewed it as a threat to democracy and the debt-based economic order run by the central banking establishment that has dominated the last century. Technocrats railed against this “Price System,” arguing it alone was to blame for the inequalities and inefficiencies of society. There is definitely some truth to their claims.

Under the Price System at its best there is not a single field of endeavor where the best technical standards are allowed to prevail. In other words, poverty, waste, crime, poor public health, bad living conditions, enforced scarcity, and low load-factors, are every one the direct and necessary consequences of the Price System… What we have tried to make clear is that it is the Price System itself, and not the individual human being, which is at fault.”

– Technocracy Study Course, Technocracy Inc. 1933, p.176

Technocracy can be defined simply as an impersonal and scientific method of managing all aspects of a society. Its primary concerns deal with how energy is produced and used. But it goes much deeper than this. One of the best explanations can be found in an issue of The Technocrat magazine from September 1937, where it states:

Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population of this continent. For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem. There will be no place for Politics or Politicians, Finance or Financeers, Rackets or Racketeers.”

The technocratic dream is revolutionary in scope, envisioning a total reorganization of industry, government, and law and order. They readily admit their intent is to socially engineer all of society, seize control of the production and distribution of all goods and services, and rid the world of rule by politicians and (traditional) financial controllers. The U.S. Constitution is also viewed as a relic, completely unfit to serve as a basis of governance and human rights.

Another job which has been neglected far too long is the rebuilding of our governmental machinery, from the village level right up to Congress. It cannot be avoided much longer, simply because the country has outgrown the constitutional clothes which the Founding Fathers tailored for it nearly two centuries ago. They have become as anachronistic, and as impractical, as a Pilgrim’s costume on an astronaut.” – Edith Chamberlain, The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

Technocrats make no pretense about maintaining a representative form of government be it a republic (as the USA was founded as) or democracy (what the USA has become). Its goal is to establish a scientific dictatorship to initiate and control all societal functions. Technocrats distanced themselves and were highly critical of fascists, communists, socialists, and other political movements but don’t have a problem with their own totalitarian style of rule termed a Technate.

Technocracy finds that the production and distribution of an abundance of physical wealth on a Continental scale for the use of all Continental citizens can only be accomplished by a Continental technological control, a governance of function, a Technate.”

– Technocracy Study Course, Technocracy Inc. 1933

Figure 22.1 from the Technocracy Study Course illustrates the point above revealing that technocracy is simply another form of top-down rule with a Continental Director having total authority of all societal functions.

Figure 22.1 – Technocracy Study Course

A December 1964, issue of The Technocrat magazine further explained that:

Technocracy holds that all decisions pertaining to the functional operation of the society — the production and distribution of goods and services, research, and governance — should be made by technical men and women. This does not mean that the technical people should leave their technical positions and go into politics, law, business promotion, public relations, and moral philosophy. Rather, it means that the scientists, technologists, engineers, and technicians shall continue to operate as such and that the decision-making of the society be moved into their functional realms.”

Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C. Form the Seat of Modern Technocracy

Image: Adobe Stock

Regardless of one’s comprehension of technocratic plans, a monumental reshaping of governments, economies, and societies is occurring, but not by elected representatives, constitutions, creeds, or the will of the people. Power is now concentrated in the hands of an exclusive class of scientists, technologists, engineers, and technicians—many of whom also happen to head multi-billion-dollar corporations.

We are also finding that technology has made people more isolated and infringes upon privacy with consequences yet to be realized. When we see the relationship between tech companies and government flourish, we are ultimately watching the implementation of a full-fledged technocracy.”

– Pendleton, Joseph. Californication: The Rise of the American Technocracy (p. 20). The Conservatarian Press.

Silicon Valley is the seat of modern technocracy. Big Tech is the euphemism for which it’s currently known. The World Economic Forum defines this dynamic as public-private partnerships (PPP).

Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Marc Andreeson are some of today’s most prominent techno-populists. Many believe they are modern day Justice League type heroes leading the world to newfound freedom (or at least in the United States). All were major contributors to Donald Trump’s reelection campaign in 2024. Vice President-Elect J.D. Vance has deep connections to Peter Thiel, indicating how close technocrats truly are to running the country.

Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, and Sam Altman are also among the many tech gurus aligning themselves with the newly elected Trump administration. These endorsements indicate that for now, technocrats are content with using politicians and the political system to quietly transform the government into a full-fledged Technate from the inside out and vice versa.

It is the man who has command of the technical information who makes the real decisions in the functional phases of modern life. He is the only one who understands what needs to be done and how to do it. The politicians and financial manipulators who pretend that the right of decision is theirs are helpless without the technical men.”

– The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

Something else technocrats correctly understood was the sham of voting and elections. Perhaps this is another reason why they stayed hidden in times past, realizing the populace was not ready to accept this truth.

In the United States, it is generally assumed that the people vote for the kind of government they want, but that is not exactly true. Technically, they do not even vote directly for their president; they vote for electors who, in turn, are tacitly committed to vote for indicated candidates, the exact rules varying with the different states. Moreover, the public has little voice in choosing the candidates; it usually ends up with their having a choice between two men chosen by the respective political party ‘machines.’ And they have less choice concerning the policies of the president. Once elected, the president is under no real obligation to heed the desires of the people and often acts contrary to his campaign promises.” 

– The Technocrat, Dec. 1964

Would Donald Trump have been “reelected” without the help of the aforementioned technocrats? Now that he will resume the Presidency, will he be more beholden to the people or his big moneyed investors from Silicon Valley?

Why is Technocracy Rising Now?

Technocracy has long been resisted by traditional powers and was originally conceived only for the North American Continent. Today, technocracy is rising from the ashes like the Phoenix legend to become a global force to be reckoned with. I believe this is largely because of the pending economic meltdown. The debt-based, fiat currency system is at the end of its life cycle and the central bank establishment is looking for new ways to maintain control of the monetary system. They have joined ranks with the technocrats who were correct in predicting that the system would crash (though it has yet to take place due to manipulation tactics keeping it at bay).

If the human race on this Continent is to survive the crash of the Price System, Technocracy will have to be put into practice.”

– Technocracy in Plain Terms, Technocracy Inc. 1939

By adopting technocracy, the banking elite not only can retain control over the monetary system, they will also cement their rule over all industries, natural resources, governments, institutions, and people.

Technocracy Wouldn’t Exist Without Advances in Technology

Big Tech products are ubiquitous and thought to be indispensable in our ultramodern, future-oriented world. AI, robotics, and the Internet of Things (IoT) are touted as catalysts that can lead to a future of ease and prosperity for all. These technologies and more are considered part of the Fourth Industrial Revolution aka Industry 4.0, where the shift to digital technologies will supersede past ways of conducting business, communicating, and governing with one major caveat: the potential to overtake humanity itself and render humans as “hackable animals” and “useless people.” Consider the following statements from some of the world’s most prominent thought leaders.

“Technologies that are emerging today will soon be shaping the world tomorrow and well into the future – with impacts to economies and to society at large. Now that we are well into the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it’s critical that we discuss and ensure that humanity is served by these new innovations so that we can continue to prosper.”

– Mariette DiChristina, (former) Editor-in-Chief of Scientific American, and chair of the Emerging Technologies Steering Committee

“We must develop a comprehensive and globally shared view of how technology is affecting our lives and reshaping our economic, social, cultural, and human environments. There has never been a time of greater promise, or greater peril.”

– Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum

“Now, fast forward to the early 21st century when we just don’t need the vast majority of the population… Most people don’t contribute anything to that, except perhaps for their data, and whatever people are still doing which is useful, these technologies increasingly will make redundant and will make it possible to replace the people.”

– Yuval Noah Harrari, Author, Historian, and Philosopher

“Probably none of us will have a job.”

– Elon Musk (referring to the rise of Artificial Intelligence)

Paradoxically, technocracy claims to enable widespread prosperity while also rendering the lot of humanity replaceable, useless, and without meaning. How can this be? To technocrats of yesteryear, there was not much difference between human beings, dogs, pigs, and cars. The belief that humans are the capstone of all creation and made in the image of God was routinely mocked and discredited. In a chapter entitled, The Human Animal, the Technocracy Study Course further elaborates on its base view of humanity, stating:

The developments in the fields of physiology, biochemistry and biophysics, chiefly since 1900, are at last bringing us down to earth. Attention has already been called to the fact that the human body is composed chemically of the ordinary substances of which rocks are made. So are dogs, horses and pigs. In an earlier lesson, while discussing the ‘human engine,’ we pointed out that the human body obeys identically the same laws of energy transformation as a steam engine. This also is true of dogs, horses and pigs. These facts might lead one to suspect that human beings are very far removed from the semi-supernatural creatures they have heretofore supposed themselves to be…

When we observe a human being we merely perceive an object which makes a certain variety of motions and noises. The same is true, however, when we observe a dog or a Ford car.”

Modern technocrats also view the human as mere biological material that can be manipulated as needed, as evidenced by World Economic Forum Founder and Chairman Klaus Schwab:

This Fourth Industrial Revolution is, however, fundamentally different. It is characterized by a range of new technologies that are fusing the physical, digital, and biological worlds, impacting all disciplines, economies and industries, and even challenging ideas about what it means to be human.”

Contemporary technocracy has now merged with transhumanism forming a dangerous combination, as noted by author Patrick Wood, who wrote:

Technocrats see science and technology as the answer to improve and control society; transhumanists see the same science and technology as the answer to improve and control the human condition.”

– The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism (p. 19). Coherent Publishing, LLC.

Why You Should Care About the Rise of Technocracy

Hopefully all the dots are starting to connect, enabling you to see where all of this is heading. Technocracy’s ascendance is a threat to all of humanity. Technocrats promise a utopian existence where abundance is the norm and work is optional, if not completely unnecessary. The self-appointed leaders believe they know best how to manage the world’s resources and its people. To accomplish these lofty goals, the social structure will have to undergo drastic changes which include redefining work and wages. The following excerpt from the Technocracy Study Course provides a detailed overview of what this entails.

“If the production is to be non-oscillatory and maintained at a high level so as to provide a high standard of living, it follows that consumption must be kept equal to production, and that a system of distribution must be designed which will allow this. This system of distribution must do the following things:

1. Register on a continuous 24-hour time period basis the total net conversion of energy, which would determine (a) the availability of energy for Continental plant construction and maintenance, (b) the amount of physical wealth available in the form of consumable goods and services for consumption by the total population during the balanced load period.

2. By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.

3. Provide a continuous 24-hour inventory of all production and consumption.

4. Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced, and where used.

5. Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.

6. Allow the citizen the widest latitude of choice in consuming his individual share of Continental physical wealth.

7. Distribute goods and services to every member of the population.

In short, the goal of technocracy is to micromanage everything you do, produce, and consume through nonstop surveillance. This was not technically possible with the crude paper methods proposed by early technocrats. However, it is becoming achievable with the advent of digital technologies such as biometrics, Big Data, geospatial intelligence, digital currency, AI, and 5G. In a Technate, there will be no free-market economy where the average person could obtain wealth by starting a business or embarking upon a lucrative career path. Instead, technocrats promise each person a share of the overall wealth produced through the issue of Energy Certificates.

Under a technological administration of abundance, there is only one efficient method—that employing a system of Energy Certificates…These certificates are merely pieces of paper containing certain printed matter. They are issued individually to every adult of the entire population. The certificates issued to an individual may be thought of as possessing some of the properties both of bank cheque and of a traveler’s cheque. They would resemble a bank cheque in that they carry no face denomination. They receive their denomination only when being spent. They resemble a traveler’s cheque in that they possess some means of ready identification, such as counter-signature, photograph, or some similar device, so as to establish easy identification by the person to whom issued, and at the same time remain absolutely useless in the hands of anyone else.”

– Technocracy Study Course, p.230

Today, Energy Certificates could take the form of Universal Basic/High Income payments issued in the form of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) or some other form of digital currency. Corporate transactions could be conducted via carbon credits. Regardless of the mechanism of financial transfer, the individual will be totally dependent on the Technate with everything one does requiring a digital ID.

Technate of North America ID Card – Source: Technocracy Technate Picture Archive

The American dream of upward mobility, already heading toward extinction, will receive the knockout blow in a technocratic regime. Instead, compliance and energy usage will determine your level of prosperity. Property rights will also go out the window as the plan is to revolutionize housing into energy-efficient units with little variety and few manufacturers. This could occur today through the combination of an economic crisis wiping out individual wealth and mass printing of 3D houses fit for the technocratic era.

As envisioned, technocracy is no better than communism, fascism, or socialism. It’s just another power grab by individuals who believe they are smarter than the rest of us, with a promised utopia that will never materialize.

These prognostications may seem far-fetched now, but the rest of this series will spell out in detail how close the technocratic fantasy is becoming a reality. It is important for people everywhere to understand the implications of what is taking place and not be fooled by wolves in sheep’s clothing proclaiming a new golden age of humanity is imminent. The question is, a golden age for who? Cui bono?

Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times,

Chinese state-sponsored hackers compromised at least eight U.S. telecommunication companies, a top White House official said on Dec. 4.

Anne Neuberger, deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technologies, provided an update on the Chinese threat actor group called “Salt Typhoon” during a press briefing on Wednesday. The threat group is believed to have hacked into the communications of senior U.S. government officials and prominent political figures, she said.

“We don’t believe any classified communications has been compromised,” Neuberger said.

The Chinese hacking appeared to target a relatively small group of Americans, she added, with only their phone calls and texts compromised.

The telecommunications companies that were breached have responded, but none of them “have fully removed the Chinese actors from these networks,” according to Neuberger.

“So there is a risk of ongoing compromises to communications until U.S. companies address the cybersecurity gaps the Chinese are likely to maintain their access,” Neuberger said.

In October, the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) identified the Chinese hacks, saying at the time that an investigation was underway.

In late November, Neuberger and White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan hosted telecommunications executives for a meeting to share intelligence and discuss how the U.S. government and the private sector could work together.

Neuberger said President Joe Biden has been briefed multiple times on the issue. The White House “has made it a priority for the federal government to do everything it can,” she added.

Additionally, Neuberger pointed to efforts to improve cybersecurity in multiple sectors including rail and energy, after the 2021 ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline.

“So, to prevent ongoing Salt Typhoon type intrusions by China, we believe we need to apply a similar minimum cybersecurity practice,” Neuberger said.

Also at Wednesday’s press briefing, a senior administration official said Salt Typhoon’s activities started at least a year or two ago. Additionally, the official said a “couple dozen” countries have been impacted by the Chinese hacking.

The FBI and the CSIA issued a joint statement on Nov. 13, revealing that Chinese hackers had compromised the networks of multiple telecom companies and stole customer call records and private communications from “a limited number of individuals who are primarily involved in government or political activity.”

On Tuesday, the FBI, the CISA, the National Security Agency (NSA), and international partners published a guide on best practices for protecting communication infrastructures.

CISA Executive Assistant Director for Cybersecurity Jeff Greene conceded on Tuesday that he didn’t have a timeline on when Chinese hackers could be purged from U.S. telecom networks.

“It would be impossible for us to predict when we’ll have full eviction,” Greene said at the time.

In September, the Justice Department announced that the FBI had taken down a botnet associated with “Flax Typhoon,” a threat group operating through the Beijing-based Integrity Technology Group. The botnet consisted of more than 200,000 consumer devices—such as network cameras, video recorders, and home and office routers—in the United States and elsewhere.

Another Chinese threat group, “Volt Typhoon,” began targeting a wide range of networks across U.S. critical infrastructure in 2021. The group, which was dismantled by a multi-agency operation in January, had maintained “access and footholds within some victim IT environments for at least five years,” according to CISA.

On Dec. 3, Rep. Laurel Lee (R-Fla.), a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said her legislation, officially known as the Strengthening Cyber Resilience Against State-Sponsored Threats Act, will combat the Chinese Communist Party’s growing threats against U.S. critical infrastructure.

“The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will continue to exploit and undermine our national security every chance they get. We must stand up against foreign adversaries,” Lee wrote on the social media platform X.

If enacted, the legislation (H.R.9769) would create an interagency task force led by CISA and the FBI to deal with cybersecurity threats posed by China’s state-sponsored cyber threat groups. It would also require the new task force to inform Congress of its findings every year for five years.

Behold – the American dream.

Where a fair and equal society allows anyone the ability to fashion the life they want, providing they’re willing to work for it.

A cornerstone of that dream is that each generation does better than the last, building and benefiting from growing economic opportunities.

But this does not necessarily hold true for all Americans.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao, compares the real household income of 27-year-olds from two generations: those born in 1978 and those born in 1992, both raised by low-income parents. All figures are in 2023 dollars.

ℹ️ 27 is the earliest age at which estimates of adult incomes can be measured. Only the 50 largest metros were considered in this analysis. Low-income is categorized by percentile groups.

A positive percentage change implies economic mobility, allowing us to see the cities where adults had a chance to better their circumstances, and to what extent.

Data is sourced from a study conducted by Opportunity Atlas in partnership with the Census Bureau.

Where is the American Dream Still Alive?

Southern cities in Texas, Tennessee, and North Carolina did see upward mobility between generations in the lowest income group, with real wages improving 5-7%.

For example, in Brownsville, Texas, those born to low-income parents in 1992 earned an average of $33,000 at age 27. This is around $2,000 more than their 1978-born peers at the same age, the highest increase across all 50 metro areas.

In contrast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, saw real incomes decline across generations. The 1978 cohort earned a similar salary to their peers in Brownsville ($31,200), but a generation later, incomes dropped to $27,200.

In fact, only 12 of the 50 saw real income growth across generations for this economic class. And five of them were in Texas. This means that in 38 cities real wages fell between generations.

Zooming out, the average household income at 27 across the nation (for those born to low-income parents) dropped by 4%.

This class difference is important. Because when looking at the highest income percentile, the average income between generations increased 5%.

Wondering where wages adjusted for the cost of living are the highest in the country? Check out Mapped: Median Income by State for a quick overview.

Authored by Stacy Robinson via The Epoch Times,

Fifty-four Democratic members of Congress have signed onto a letter asking President Joe Biden to lock in future climate change initiatives by disbursing the promised funds before he leaves office.

The letter urges the move to “avoid future politicization or manipulation of climate programs,” before President-elect Donald Trump and a Republican-led Congress take over in 2025.

The president can do this “by working over the next few weeks to obligate funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” the lawmakers said.

“Obligating” the funds would make it more difficult to redirect the money, likely requiring an act of Congress to do so.

The lawmakers seek funding for programs across a broad range of governmental agencies, including the departments of Energy, Agriculture, and Housing and Urban Development, the Treasury, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Postal Service.

Even if Biden declines to take this step, dismantling the Inflation Reduction Act might prove tricky. The GOP will have a very slim majority next year, and this past August, a group of 18 House Republicans asked Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to leave some aspects of the program in place, as some of the tax credits were beneficial to their constituents.

The request comes the same day the Biden administration announced it had “supported more than 23,000 climate-focused conservation contracts” through funding from the Inflation Reduction Act.

Another $19.5 billion will be granted over the coming years for “climate-smart agriculture and forestry mitigation activities,” the statement said.

John Podesta, senior adviser for international climate policy, told Reuters on Dec. 3 that the Biden administration had crossed the threshold of $100 billion in grants through this legislation.

Signatories of the letter included Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), sponsors of the 2019 Green New Deal resolution, which called on the federal government to take a broader role in tackling climate change.

That resolution was brought to the Senate floor by then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, but failed. All Republicans, joined by four Democrats, voted no. The other Democrats voted “present.”

Similar resolutions have been tried since, without success. Ocasio-Cortez earlier this year announced a rebranding of the program as the Green New Deal for Public Housing.

Co-sponsored by another signer, Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), that program seeks to secure $162 billion to $234 billion to renovate public housing units, making them more energy efficient and generating “green” jobs in the process.

Companies that imported millions of Southeast Asian solar panels could have to pay tariffs on them “ranging from 30% to more than 230%”, according to a new report from Bloomberg. 

Companies have until December 3rd to install the panels, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection has pledged strict enforcement to prevent stockpiling, potentially exposing importers to audits, inspections, and billions in backdated tariff costs.

Tom Beline, a trade attorney and partner in Cassidy Levy Kent’s Washington office, told Bloomberg: “That bill will shock a lot of people.” 

The issue stems from a 2022 tariff holiday ordered by President Biden to ease the impact of a trade probe that slowed solar projects. The Commerce Department later found manufacturers were dodging Chinese solar tariffs by assembling products in Southeast Asia.

While tariffs were extended to these nations, Biden delayed enforcement until June. To address a surge in duty-free imports, the administration set a December deadline for using the panels.

Bloomberg writes that federal regulators have warned importers for months that they must prove panels are “utilized” or face retroactive tariffs, rejecting loopholes like destroying panels or temporary warehouse installations.

Despite a last-minute push, analysts estimate 30 to 40 gigawatts of imported panels remain unused—over two-thirds of the U.S.’s annual panel demand. BloombergNEF data shows more than 30 gigawatts failed to meet the deadline.

Tim Brightbill, a trade lawyer and partner at Wiley Rein, said: “Given that the domestic industry is still facing a price collapse and a surge of imports that have left years of inventory still in warehouses, the enforcement of this circumvention regime remains extremely important to the domestic industry.”

Most manufactures told Bloomberg they weren’t stockpiling or didn’t comment. Art Fletcher, Invenergy’s executive vice president for domestic content said: “All modules that we imported into the US have been deployed at project sites to meet domestic energy demand across the country, including a de minimus number of modules being held on site for parts and maintenance.”

But the crackdown adds uncertainty for solar developers, compounding trade probes, concerns over renewable tax credits, and former President Trump’s tariff policies.