InfoWars has blogged the attendees list at the next Bilderberg Conference. As a secretive meeting of world leaders, it occasions much conspiracy theory. Infowars apparently missed the best name on those lists of changing names, past and present: David Rockefeller. Whether past or present, his name is highlighted as "Advisory." I bet. It is truly a meeting of the powers, but who knows if it is the powers-that-be. I suspect it is a sub-committee for the powers that be, moderated by David Rockefeller. But, so what?
I wanted to learn more about these agenda items (among a dozen or so), from the Bilderberg press release:
So a priesthood of clerks then gets busy fanning out and taking temperatures to gather evidence of whether or not the agreement is doing the trick of making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
There is an alternative to all of this "multilateral" rigamarole, and that is unilateral policy setting. Simply establish free trade, and we have peace, security and prosperity. That is not going to happen because there are too many people who clamor to be oppressed, and there are enough people willing to give them oppression, good and hard. It's called libido dominandi.
In the measure there is a free market, there is that peace, security and prosperity. The best relative example extent today would be Hong Kong. It was delightful to see Chile negotiate a free trade agreement with hong Kong. Hong Kong did nothing, because it already had unilateral free trade with Chile. Chile changed some rules on their side. Both sides partied.
With a unilateral free trade program, we would have peace, prosperity and security. But we would not have exceptional wealth. Free trade has competition that keeps exceptional wealth from aggregating in few hands. With free trade we would have a very wide assortment of division of labor, specialized goods and services that just about everyone could afford with their own resources.
The opposite of free trade, capitalism, concentrates wealth in an exceptionally few hands. Capitalism is not going anywhere soon, for the majority keeps voting for their own oppression. One form of assurance to the powers that be is masses dwell on perceived conspiracies and blaming others. That assures the powers that be they are safe.
Once anyone starts talking unilateral decision making, then the end is near for the powers that be. So read this the way it is meant:
So I found the page with the agenda, on a public website, marked "press release." from the Bilderberg press release:
At the bottom of the press release, we are told:
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
I wanted to learn more about these agenda items (among a dozen or so), from the Bilderberg press release:
The key topics for discussion this year include:When I went looking for that I saw this.
- Is the economic recovery sustainable?
- Who will pay for the demographics?
In the context of a globalized world, it is hard to think of any issue in either Europe or North America that could be tackled unilaterally.Now that is interesting locution. Tentative. Like when someone who knows better, but is proposing a lie. The fact of the matter is all just actions are unilateral, they need not be negotiated. In short, as they say, "do the right thing." Negotiations among countries are only, strictly, to settle who wins and who loses. Each side details how they will harm which constituency in their own country, in a complex series of quid pro quo. USA: We'll target 2% inflation, benefitting this group group of Americans, harming that. China: We will peg the RMB to the US$, benefitting this group of Chinese, harming that. Policy is tweaked to get to some parity (and catalogued in the millions of pages of rules.). Done! There are no exceptions to this. Every negotiation results in winners and losers, decided for citizens by that country's representatives. Afterwards, each side blames the other for each country's targeted losers woes. Symmetry!
So a priesthood of clerks then gets busy fanning out and taking temperatures to gather evidence of whether or not the agreement is doing the trick of making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
There is an alternative to all of this "multilateral" rigamarole, and that is unilateral policy setting. Simply establish free trade, and we have peace, security and prosperity. That is not going to happen because there are too many people who clamor to be oppressed, and there are enough people willing to give them oppression, good and hard. It's called libido dominandi.
In the measure there is a free market, there is that peace, security and prosperity. The best relative example extent today would be Hong Kong. It was delightful to see Chile negotiate a free trade agreement with hong Kong. Hong Kong did nothing, because it already had unilateral free trade with Chile. Chile changed some rules on their side. Both sides partied.
With a unilateral free trade program, we would have peace, prosperity and security. But we would not have exceptional wealth. Free trade has competition that keeps exceptional wealth from aggregating in few hands. With free trade we would have a very wide assortment of division of labor, specialized goods and services that just about everyone could afford with their own resources.
The opposite of free trade, capitalism, concentrates wealth in an exceptionally few hands. Capitalism is not going anywhere soon, for the majority keeps voting for their own oppression. One form of assurance to the powers that be is masses dwell on perceived conspiracies and blaming others. That assures the powers that be they are safe.
Once anyone starts talking unilateral decision making, then the end is near for the powers that be. So read this the way it is meant:
it is hard to think of any issue ... that could be tackled unilaterally.Yes, hard, as in "if we think along those lines, it is the end of us..." which would be hard, a difficult thing, such change. As Milton noted, these people would rather rule in hell than serve in heaven.
So I found the page with the agenda, on a public website, marked "press release." from the Bilderberg press release:
At the bottom of the press release, we are told:
Editor's Note, not for publicationWait, what? A press release not for publication? These guys are supposed to be controlling the world and they cannot get their act together on a press release? That explains a lot.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
0 comments:
Post a Comment