If Bitcoin really is a safe-haven asset,
is it behaving like one?

The title of today’s post is not intended to be a serious question as much as it is “gallows humour”, as they say.

Since the Russian invasion of the Ukraine in early 2022, it’s been speculated that future historians may look back on that event as the beginning of WWIII. I have privately wondered (and meant to write it up in the last monthly letter, but it slipped off the radar), whether the cascading military coups throughout the CFA (Central African Franc) nations were the slow opening of a second front in what was becoming a global conflict.

As the ruling, CFA-aligned governments are being deposed, in Niger, Ghana, Central African Republic and Burkina Faso (eight coups in the past two years, so far), Russian military advisors are appearing on scene, coaching the generals. Meanwhile China is ready with infrastructure incentives and loans. That front isn’t hot – yet – but it’s – “War By Other Means”, to quote the Robert Blackwell & Jennifer Harris book by that title…

“Today, nations increasingly carry out geopolitical combat through economic means. Policies governing everything from trade and investment to energy and exchange rates are wielded as tools to win diplomatic allies, punish adversaries, and coerce those in between.”

Except for the United States, the authors lament, both of whom belong to the Council on Foreign Relations. The USA is still somewhat retrograde in that it reflexively seeks to use its military stature to either threaten or force issues – an increasingly obsolete strategy.

I’ve mentioned 5th Generation Warfare before (5GW), which is all about “war by other means” – so much so that at least one of the combatants may not even realize that they’re embroiled in a war:

“In 5GW, violence is so dispersed that the losing side may never realize that it has been conquered. The very secrecy of 5GW makes it the hardest generation of war to study. Because 5GW attacks occur below the threshold of observation, COIN in 5GW is the preemptive, system-wide, automatic degeneration of 5GW forces into more primitive gradients of warfare. The 5GW warfighter hides in the static, and the most successful 5GWs are those that are never identified.”

Abbott, Daniel H.. The Handbook of 5GW: A Fifth Generation of War? (pp. 16-17). Nimble Books LLC. Kindle Edition.

I think this has been the case in the West for decades, with the rise of far-left ideologies and bat-shit wokery permeating (infiltrating?) our core institutions (basically, Fabianism writ large).

Yet as I type this, it is still early days in a new hot war in the Middle East, which is possibly – if you listen to Patrick Byrne’s theory on how it occurred – the side-effect of a geo-economic battle between the US and Israel of all things.

What REALLY Caused Israel’s Foggy Intel? Read it Here 1st.

The MSM has the what and the why, but not the how. Let me tell you what really caused this catastrophic failure in Israeli intelligence last Saturday.

As my regulars are aware, I have spent some time this year in… pic.twitter.com/8uR0QzSupB

— Patrick Byrne (@PatrickByrne) October 12, 2023

In any case, it’s another 9/11 moment and at some point I’ll explain why I use that comparison specifically, instead of the “Pearl Harbor” references we’ve seen a lot of since the Hamas surprise attack on Israel (possibly in the monthly macro Bitcoin Capitalist if I don’t get to it here).

The mid-month portfolio review issue is intended to be a more tactical focus on Bitcoin, cryptos and the companies we own, within the backdrop of whatever is going on that affects these spaces directly.

But the dial for geopolitical tension just got ratcheted up to 11, so we have to acknowledge here that something very bad has occurred, and like it or not, it stands to become a core driver of what unfolds from here on.

Hedge fund billionaire Paul Tudor Jones appeared on CNBC October 10th, saying that it was hard to own stocks amid such geopolitical uncertainty, and citing three flashpoints: Ukraine, the Middle-East, and sooner or later: Taiwan.

In a widely circulated quote, PTJ said he liked gold and Bitcoin although he said so within the context of the two performing well in recessions, which he predicted would occur by Q1 of 2024.

I don’t necessarily know if that’s true. Bitcoin has never been in an official recession, although when we were in a “technical” one earlier this year, it was coming off the lows of a bear market nadir with a good head of steam on it, so I don’t know how much we can infer from that.

Recall, Paul Tudor Jones was arguably one of the catalysts behind “the institutions are coming” mantra of the 2020 cycle when he disclosed holding a position in it within his hedge fund.

As I’ve observed since, that wave, which included Michael Saylor, Stanley Druckenmiller and (for a while) Elon Musk, wasn’t really an institutional wave, per se – more like a vanguard of maverick billionaires. But it was a start.

It’s the inevitable, perhaps even imminent arrival of spot Bitcoin ETFs in the USA (they’ve been around here in Canada for years) that will truly lay out a carpet for institutional investors.

But the geopolitical and macroeconomic environment today is very different from anything experienced since Bitcoin emerged as an asset class.

The great bond supercycle is over, as is The Everything Bubble and likewise is the (so-called) “unipolar world”.

We’re neck deep in The Jackpot now , or what Strauss and Howe called a “Fourth Turning”.

The End of The Unipolar World (as we know it).

All bets are off, and nobody really knows what happens next. When people use the phrase “the end of the unipolar world”, they are typically thinking in terms of nation states jockeying for primacy in a presumably multi-polar world. Russia, China, Brasil, India, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel… Iran – I think this is a one-dimensional view and doesn’t fully capture the shift we are undergoing.

But for my own meaning of “multi-polar world”, the potpourri of nation states vying for geopolitical “Lebensraum” is only one layer of it. Add to that non-aligned, non-national, autonomous organizations …think supra-national Borgs like the WEF, and their polar opposite: Network States and crypto-anarchist enclaves.

Some countries may coagulate into the former (like the entire G-20) while others splinter out and morph into the latter (El Salvador).

Then factor in cartels, consortiums and corporations. Terrorist cells, organized crime, hacker networks, not to mention completely artificial entities with no human agency – like smart contracts, DAO’s, autonomous 3-D printers, weaponized drones or computer viruses.

Now imagine decentralized, anonymous (and autonomous) networks of 3-D printers cranking out kamikaze drones that take them out. pic.twitter.com/kaWClCBLQx

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) October 7, 2023

That’s the multi-polar world we are headed into, and we’re naive if we think we’re just dealing with a bunch of nationalist upstarts. In such a world, Bitcoin “the money of enemies” becomes necessity.

Where does it leave Bitcoin?

Until now it has only really had one long macro-economic cycle, with relative geopolitical stability, during which it was always theorized that Bitcoin was a safe haven asset, just like gold.

Couple problems.

One is that over the past fifteen years or so, not even gold traded like gold. It was supposed to be safe when everything else went to hell, but in the Global Financial Crisis and every other mini-crisis that tanked the stock market, gold usually tanked too.

Yes, gold took off like a rocket after the GFC bottomed, and did so a good six months before everything else. But for the most part, everything took off and highly correlated markets became the norm for the next ten or fifteen years, because “money printer go brrrr”.

That gave rise to the mantra, “it’s all one trade”. During that same cycle, Bitcoin tracked the Nasdaq for long chunks of it, and even traded like a meme stock – the right hand chart above showing correlations between BTC and Gold (top), the Nasdaq (middle) and AMC (bottom). The closer the line tracks along the top, the closer the correlation.

Now we’re in what seems like a global crisis for reals.

Bonds have had a somewhat under the radar implosion, owing to the fastest rate hike cycle in history. Stocks have done something barely recognizable, and gone down for a few months; debt is exploding at an accelerating pace, as if that was even possible; and that’s on top of: rolling energy crises, a hot war in Europe, escalating tensions between China and Taiwan and now, the Middle East erupting into war.

Gold has reacted vigorously to the Hamas attacks on Israel, and the anticipated reprisals and repercussions (a more than $60/oz move on Friday the 13th alone).

Bitcoin looked asleep, when a new hot war broke out in the Middle East. If it’s been reacting to anything since that happened it seems to be the ongoing breakdown of the bond markets. It may truly “be different this time” if the markets wake up to the reality that debt is well and truly out of control.

Granted, gold took a major dump in the weeks leading up to the Hamas attacks, and Bitcoin is still the best performing asset class of the year, so if we can infer anything, it feels like the “all one trade” correlation is starting to break down a bit.

Absent rampant money printing (on pause for the moment, to be sure), assets seem to be zig-zagging toward their own fundamental drivers and at the moment, it looks like this: fears of World War III are acting as a tailwind for gold while fears of the global financial system imploding (and possibly the inevitable arrival of CBDC’s) are what’s lifting Bitcoin.

My base case is that the latter is pretty well baked in. I’d like to hope that the former isn’t, but, as I noted earlier, we may already be past that.

My forthcoming ebook The CBDC Survival Guide will give you the tools and the knowledge to navigate coming era of Monetary Apartheid. Bombthrower subscribers will get free when it drops, sign up today.

Today’s post was an excerpt from The Bitcoin Capitalist Mid-Month Portfolio Review. TBC provides actionable intelligence on the macro forces shaping Late Stage Globalism and a tactical toolkit for growing your wealth as it plays out. Try it today here.

Follow me on Nostr, or Twitter.

I used to believe the following tenets of the Club of Rome. I did so for about four years (from the age of 22 to 26) until I woke up from ecodoomism. It is apparent that millions have been sucked into this cult and have never found a way out. Yet. Indeed, eco-doomism is the world’s leading cause of depression, suicide, sexual ambiguity,  non-replacement and cultural anomie. It is immediately the cause of policies designed to immiserate the population (viz. Dutch government putting farms out of business to control world atmospheric nitrogen levels).

Here are the doctrines of the Club of Rome, circa 1972. Look familiar?

“The Limits to Growth” contains six main messages:

1. Firstly, that the environmental impact of human society had become heavier between 1900 and 1972 due to both an increase in the number of humans and the amount of resources consumed and pollution generated per person per year.
2. That our planet is physically limited, and that humanity cannot continue to use more physical resources and generate more emissions than nature is capable of supplying in a sustainable manner. In addition, it will not be possible to rely on technology alone to solve the problem as this would only delay reaching the carrying capacity of the planet by a few years.
3. The authors cautioned that it is possible, and even likely, that the human ecological footprint will overshoot the carrying capacity of the planet, further explaining that this would likely occur due to significant delays in global decision making while growth continued, bringing the human footprint into unsustainable territory.
4. Once humanity has entered this unsustainable territory, we will have to move back into sustainable territory, either through “managed decline” of activity, or we will be forced to move back through “collapse” caused by the brutal inherent processes of nature or the market.
5. The fifth message is one of hope. The authors state that: “The challenge of overshoot from decision delay is real, but easily solvable if human society decided to “act”, meaning that forward looking policy could prevent humanity from overshooting the aforementioned planetary limits.
6. Lastly, the authors advocated for an early start – in 1972 that was 1975 – to achieve a smooth transition to a sustainable world without needing to pass through the overshoot and contraction phases.

The World Economic Forum and Klaus Schwab have followed as night follows day. They key assumptions are that the current population/ resource consumption mix is unsustainable, and the second is that a process of managed decline can smooth the transition to sustainability. I am about to say something at once paradoxical and true:

Humans have more to fear from the managers of population reduction than we do of civilizational collapse.

Because the population reduction is being planned by people who think they are doing good  and the old adage of C. S. Lewis applies, that the robber barons might have their greed satiated, and stop, but the person who tortures for you own good does so with a clean conscience and will not stop. Hence Stalin. Hence Klaus Schwab, and his minions and acolytes.

Collapses are random and bring their own correctives. They are chaotic. If the Roman Empire has to fall, it is better that it occur without central planning, administered by mad tyrants. I realize this is offensive to those who believe that civilizational change can be planned, but it cannot.

The  assumption that needs to be challenged the most is that collapse is somehow inevitable because we have gone beyond limits set by Gaia, that this unsustainability is somehow new, and that we can plan our way out of it.

We went beyond the limits set by Gaia since we domesticated animals, invented agriculture and mined metals. I would not wish to say there are no limits, but I would say that the collective intelligence of mankind has continually found solutions to the problems we have ourselves created. We went into the realm of the “unsustainable” tens of thousands of years ago. We are still in “unsustainablity”. There is no stable state.

The Club of Rome published its manifesto in 1972. It had a tremendous negative effect over time. It resuscitated the idea of a centrally planned economy when the central conceit of Marxism had collapsed: that a planned economy could prevail over the chaotic forces of the market, or of nature.

The close relationship between the idea of sustainability and the tyranny of all-wise central planners needs to be made clear.

The population bomb is diffusing itself anyway…

Regarding solutions that appear without planning, population growth is collapsing through the very process of wealth generation that has come from burning fossil fuels. Women reach a level of prosperity where their kids will survive until adulthood, and – bingo! – they produce at most two children. It is enough to make the most hardened eco-doomist pause and reconsider.

See Bricker and Ibbetson’s Empty Planet: The Shock of Global Population Decline, or more brutal yet, try David Goldman’s (known as Spengler) How Civilizations Die.

Bombthrower.com continues to blow up the clown world, disrupt MSM agitprop and trigger the fact checkers. Join the Bombthrower Mafia today and get a free copy of the Crypto Capitalist Manifesto, or join our Telegram.

World Domination in An Age for Lucifer

“This book explores a strange new spirituality about to enter into competition with other established religions. My purpose here is to convince you that its emergence is probable, if not inevitable.

I begin this exploration with an unproven assumption based on Darwinian evolutionary principles: a new predator will appear on our planet, an evolutionary prototype designed to prey on humans. Another assumption then follows: this predator will evolve gradually and incrementally from humanity, just as we apparently evolved from lower forms to prey on them.

A further assumption suggests that these predators have already appeared as evolutionary prototypes, as new humans with advanced methods of survival and new forms of spiritual expression and religious organization designed to support and advance their predation.“

— Robert C Tucker, An Age For Lucifer: Predatory Spirituality & The Quest for Godhood

Robert C. Tucker was a Canadian psychologist who worked with an organization called COMA – Council On Mind Abuse (not to be confused with his namesake, an American political scientist who covered the Soviet Union and wrote a biography of Stalin).

Our Tucker worked with “adult survivors and child victims of ritual abuse“ and spent time interviewing self-described “Satanists”. His book was more of a thought experiment, which tried to identify an impelling idea behind the ideology of a cult:

“with destructive cultism, however, I sensed something else animating these stories of Satanic activity and ritual abuse, something familiar yet unspoken. Satanism was a puzzle behind which it hid, or a myth beneath which it lived. Like cultism, Satanism seemed to point at something beyond itself“.

Tucker’s book is not about Satanism: it’s about a theorized class of spiritual predators he called Luciferians. In later chapters, Satanists are almost dismissed as cartoonish, lower order predators. They would be shunned by truly elite Luciferians. “Distant cousins”, at best.

Where Satanists pursue unrestrained ego and impulse gratification, Luciferians play the longest game of them all, and seek to attain Godhood itself. Pure power.

Tucker posits that this type of impulse would emerge out of evolutionary imperatives and that it would begin to form its own psycho-spiritual framework among participants – possibly on a subconscious level.

COMA spent much of its existence waging legal battles with the cults they sought to protect the public from. However, after a protracted lawsuit from the Church of Scientology, Tucker announced COMA’s dissolution in 1992.

But there is something in Tucker’s book, particularly how he ‘described the merging goals of cults and corporations:

“We have to recognize that cults are successful organizations with techniques now being borrowed by other successful organizations”’

Arguably one of the most successful organizations in existence today, is the World Economic Forum. World leaders are known to emerge from annual conclaves chanting the same mantra, nation states actively fund them, the WEF boasts of having penetrated the world’s governments and even the UN seems to take its cues from Davos.

In past articles, I’ve been looked at the thin scab of elites that sits atop the global cap table.

And the story so far is:

• John Maynard Keynes, from whose work the modern economic system is derived, was a Marxist.
• The super-wealthy 0.1% of the 1%  who coagulate into supra-national policy organizations are Malthusians.
• The core premise driving their ideology is a radical reductionist materialism.

While many view the Davos elites as a global, all-encompassing cabal, which Controls Everything, I could never quite bring myself to accept that description. The fact is, the world is inherently uncontrollable.

We can stipulate that people and groups can acquire outsized influence, then use it to do morally bankrupt things in order to further their own aims. We can further agree that the higher up the sociopolitical hierarchy from where these agendas originate, the more likely it is that the consequences  are borne most heavily by the plebes. Most of the time, those whose machinations were responsible for catastrophic outcomes, escape being held to account for it.

But the world we live in today is proof positive of one thing: nobody is in control of anything. Further, these esoteric under-currents we explore below are bringing us back around to one of those times  when the people who think they’re in charge won’t get a walk.

However, like Tucker, I look at agendas like Stakeholder Capitalism, The Great Reset or The Great Narrative (or whatever it’s being called these days), and sense something behind it. “Something that points beyond itself”.

Years ago, in what feels like another life-line (a.k.a “Before Covid”), I was supposed to be writing  a book about the dangers of techno-utopianism. In it, I was already recognizing transhumanism as a kind of religion, and deemed it one of the four ideological pillars of techno-utopianism (the other three being: AI, technocracy and fully automated luxury communism).

Very early in my work on that, I concluded that techno-utopianism was ultimately a Luciferian construct. Not necessarily literally Lucifer, but that the aspiration to “usurp God” was Luciferian in character (the plan was for the final section of the book to propose a counter-framework called “techno-realism”, based on humanity’s hyper-adaptability as a superior approach to central planning).

When we seek to shape the world through technocracy – not to mention reality itself through transhumanism and AI – we are pursuing a uniquely eschatological event known as “The Singularity”: a point in time when our technology becomes the base layer of reality.

It is probably not the first time we thought we were capable of leveraging our gizmos into Godhood. The legend of Babel hints at a prior iteration, one that didn’t end well. We don’t know for sure where mythology borders pre-history, but whatever happened most certainly left deep grooves in our collective psyche.

When you consider the positioning and branding of the WEF, with their certitude and paternalism, it all makes a lot more sense when viewed  as a cult instead of a cabal. Cultists know all, they have the inside track – and most importantly, they claim moral authority over us all by Divine Right.

The stated objectives of the World Economic Forum:

From their institutional report “to stakeholders”, the WEF pursues  three Phases of Interaction:

Our activities drive communities through three phases of interaction, each resulting in increased impact:
1) stimulating dialogues and generating insights;
2) shaping agendas and developing influence; and
3) catalysing initiatives and generating impact.

…which in that characteristically banal WEF-speak, is a dog whistle for world domination.

They feel no compunction about it.  An Age for Lucifer posits the emergence of a type of human whose beliefs hold the adherents to be higher up the spiritual food chain than everybody else. Literally a breed above.

The key component of Luciferian metaphysics is predation.

“reality is layered from the physical to the spiritual. Pure power thrums only in the higher reaches of the spiritual domains. The higher dominates the lower. Spirit determines matter, not the reverse… Elitism is of the essence here; only powerful spiritual adepts and Luciferian masters deserve to occupy the higher realms and to enjoy the the benefits found only there.”

If we replace all instances of “spiritual” in the above passage with “intellectual”, then we have an accurate model for the ideological framework of “Davos Man”, because the entire elite ontology (or what passes for it) rests upon radical material reductionism.

And materialism, at its core, is pure nihilism.

There is no spirit. We have no souls. There is only matter, and lower humans are merely “hackable animals”.

Everyone has likely seen this montage, but it does capture “The Essential Harari”, who I personally think talks about all this in more of a descriptive than prescriptive timbre. But he is undeniably a Davos darling and when you get him going, he has that pronounced Dr. Strangelove-style glee.

Through the utter domination of what is intellectually permissible – and with expert technocratic oversight – matter can be subjugated to models …and elites can ascend to Godhood. All in a metaverse of their own making.

Cabals are self-serving and mundane. And while Davos Man is certainly that, a cabal is missing that essential element that makes for full-throated commitment – that thing that “points beyond itself”. Participants in a cabal will abandon it the moment it ceases to serve their interests… but cultists will double-down. They will burn themselves alive and eat their children. They are ideological berserkers.

The WEF is by no means the world’s first world domination cult. It has been said that the Nazis were also better understood as a cult than a political party, as per Peter Levenda:

the Nazi Party [not being] a political party the way most of us would understand it, but a cult, still remains the best characterization of the Nazi phenomenon that I can find. It also goes a long way toward helping us to understand how it could have survived the way it did, and still influences the ideas and actions of peoples and political leaders around the world.
— Peter Levenda, The Hitler Legacy

The organizing principle of the cult describes what we see happening more than a mere cabal. Had the Nazi’s simply have been just  a cabal, they would have scattered with the collapse of the German military, but as many have researched (Levenda, Farrell, Marrs, et al), Nazism survived WWII, precisely because of their cult structure:

Nazism began as a cult, and survived as a cult. As an idea it is vague enough to attract a collection of philosophies and political movements around it, each seeing in the Nazi archetype a version of their own belief system; as a cult, it has the power to communicate viscerally to its followers through an elaborate symbol

But as we will now explore – being structured as a cult is only one side of it. The cult has to have some kind of secret sauce that gives it power, something that yet again, points beyond itself…

“The demon of world domination has spoken. He has proclaimed a great secret: the world can be dominated… Modern society is charged with a magical current which in all men creates the same thoughts. The masses expect great things of their rulers. And for that reason, great things are easy”.
— Konrad Heiden, Der Fuehrer, 1944

What is this thing “that points beyond itself?”

I frequently say that the reason I think Bitcoin ultimately prevails, and industrial-era central planning fails, is because the former has sprung forth from a higher order of intellectual abstraction than the hierarchical, centrally-planned one.

This is all part of an inexorable progression, an unfolding, if you will. It distinguishes itself from a techno-utopian singularity, in that it is not something we’ve seized control of and are expertly managing, it’s something coursing through us. Impelling us, in fact all living things, forward.

I’ve never found a great word to describe this “thing beyond itself” that runs through everything; obviously it’s the inspiration for spiritual movements throughout the ages, for mythological constructs.  I’ve always just called it “The Great Externality”. It’s the indescribable (“the Tao which can be explained is not The Tao”), and ineffable. It can be experienced as “I am”, but if you try to put that into a Ted Talk it’ll probably stiff.

When I talk about how the architecture of intellectual abstraction has shifted from centralized to networked, that’s just a surface attribute. I’ve never really done an adequate job of explaining the fundamental change in the level of intellectual abstraction and how important that is. Jean Gebser called it the aperspectival world in “Ever Present Origin”, his exhaustive study of the evolution of consciousness itself.

“The condition of today’s world cannot be transformed by technocratic rationality, since both technocracy and rationality are apparently nearing their apex; nor can it be transcended by preaching or admonishing a return to ethics and morality, or in fact, by any form of return to the past.

 

We have only one option: in examining the manifestations of our age, we must penetrate them with sufficient breadth and depth that we do not come under their demonic and destructive spell.

 

We must not focus our view merely on these phenomenon, but rather on the the humus of the decaying world beneath, where the seedlings of the future are growing, immeasurable in their potential and vigor”

Gebser wrote Ever Present Origin in 1949; it wasn’t translated into English until 1985. He understood that crises of modernity were brought about not by differing political views or even economic incentives, but in collisions between successive iterations of consciousness itself. Humanity, according to Gebser, arced over three broad phases of Unperspectival (we could barely differentiate our own minds from the wider experience of the world), Perspectival (linearity and rationality) and into Aperspectival (what comes next – a level that integrates those which came before).

Perhaps one way to make the analogy is to frame it as the layering of dimensional orders:

In the Unperspectival world, our minds basically merged with reality; we were largely undifferentiated as self-aware creatures. It was a zero-to-one dimensional existence:

‘The initial, archaic structure is zero-dimensional; it is thus spatial and temporal, although our present mentality, if it grasps this at all, will see this in a paradox. It is origin; only in a terminological sense is it a “first” structure emanating from that perfect identity existing “before” (or behind) all oneness or unity which it initially might have represented. It is akin, if not identical, to the original state of biblical paradise: a time where the soul is yet dormant, a time of complete non-differentiation of man and the universe.’

Over the Perspectival Era, we became self-aware and to underwent individuation, straddling two-to-three dimensional constructs. I’ve mentioned before W R Clement’s “Quantum Jump”, which described the Enlightenment as a leveling up in mental abstraction. The discovery of perspective in art both impelled and signified this jump.

The fiat, technocratic era, is essentially the tail end of this Perspectival mindset – and what comes next contains yet another higher-order dimension, an axis into an Aperspectival construct… like a hypercube.

How high does the dimensional ladder go?

In theoretical physics, string theory posits that our universe exists in ten dimensions.

A ten dimensional hypercube? Who on earth comes up with this stuff?

Anyway, this thing that points beyond itself isn’t arising from within the 3D construct that materialists assume forms the edges of existence. It comes from one level beyond.

There are phenomena that exist in this larger, super-reality that when experienced here, from within the perspective of our limited awareness, we struggle to contain within our senses. We may experience them as egregores or morphic fields, even a zeitgeist.  The Russian mystic Vedim Zeland’s concept of “The Pendulum” has aspects of both absorbing and channelling thought energy:

An energy pendulum is created when a group of people begin to think in a certain way and then:

“their thought energy finally unites into a single current. When this happens, as if in the middle of an entire ocean of energy, a separate, independent energy-information structure is created which is referred to as an energy pendulum. Eventually this structure begins to live its own life and subjugate to its laws the very people who created it.

The structure is referred to as a pendulum because the more people-adherents that feed it with their energy, the more powerfully it sways”
— from Vadim Zeland’s ‘Transurfing’

A pendulum is self-perpetuating with a single imperative: to draw as much energy into itself as possible. More importantly, it is agnostic about the energy charge – it doesn’t matter if people are in harmony with the pendulum or opposed to it. Both poles create the energy that the pendulum craves.

This is why the New Thought philosopher Neville Goddard’s advice about the need to renounce evil rather than resist it, is so important.

There is a great difference between resisting evil and renouncing it. When you resist evil, you give it your attention; you continue to make it real.

 

When you renounce evil, you take your attention away from it and give your attention to what you want.

 

Now is the time to control your imagination and give your energy to what you want.”

— Neville Goddard, The Power of Awareness

Pendulums can be benign or malevolent – the conditions that bring them forth make it so.

The world’s great religions can be seen as super-pendulums. Movements and cults could be minor ones.  In any case, once the pendulum has formed, active opposition to it only has one effect: to give it more energy and amplify it.

Techno-communism as typified by the WEF, and crypto-anarchism as embodied by Bitcoin, are both pendulums.

This is why taking up arms against the WEF doesn’t hurt the WEF – it strengthens it. And this is also why Bitcoin is an anti-fragile honey badger.

Pendulums feed on the energy of both their adherents and opponents, but their centre of gravity forms an axis through our experiential world and anchors them into The Great Externality. In Mark Stavish’s Egregores: The Occult Entities That Watch Over Human Destiny he describes it as

“more than an autonomous entity composed of, and influencing the thoughts of a group of people, it is also home or conduit for a specific psychic intelligence of a nonhuman nature connecting the invisible dimensions with the material world in which we live. This, in fact, is the true source of power of the ancient cults and their religious-magical practices”.
(emphasis in original)

The WEF pendulum is distinctly Ahrimanic. 

Ahriman is traditionally an evil spirit of chaos from Zoroastrianism, however I’m drawing on the work of the Austrian mystic Rudolf Steiner, who had been trying to warn us of the coming Age of Ahriman almost exactly a century ago.

From lecture GA 191 delivered on 1 November 1919, Dornach (excuse the length):

Whenever preparation is being made for incarnations of this character, we must be alert to certain indicative trends in evolution. A Being like Ahriman, who will incarnate in the West in time to come, prepares for this incarnation in advance. With a view to his incarnation on the earth, Ahriman guides certain forces in evolution in such a way that they may be of the greatest possible advantage to him….

 

The right stand can be taken only by recognising in one or another series of events the preparation that is being made by Ahriman for his earthly existence. And the time has now come for individual men to know which tendencies and events around them are machinations of Ahriman, helping him to prepare for his approaching incarnation.

 

It would undoubtedly be of the greatest benefit to Ahriman… if the vast majority of men were to regard these preparations for the Ahriman-incarnation as progressive and good for evolution. If Ahriman were able to slink into a humanity unaware of his coming, that would gladden him most of all. 

Here’s the punch line:

One of the developments in which Ahriman’s impulse is clearly evident is the spread of the belief that the mechanistic, mathematical conceptions inaugurated by Galileo, Copernicus and others, explain what is happening in the cosmos.

Pure materialism. Pure reductionism. Pure Harari.

Steiner warns that:

“The consciousness of those human beings whom I have called devourers of soul and spirit is in a condition of dimness…; for by not accepting the spiritual into their human nature, they drive straight into the Luciferic stream everything they introduce … What men eat and drink without spirituality goes straight to Lucifer!”

Here Steiner is talking about spiritual predation and warning those who think they’re the predators, are actually the prey for the egregores they serve. (Ahriman and Lucifer were two separate incarnations in Steiner’s cosmology, yet they worked in concert across the three thousand years that separate their physical incarnations in earthly terms).

This materialist undercurrent that forms the basis of our conventional paradigm is anchored in this, and it cleaves our earthly existence away from our souls. Is it any wonder why reductive, technocratic impulses and hyper-normality increasingly permeate our elite institutions?

“Too little attention has been paid to the fact that politics lures disordered, Messianic personalities into positions of power”.
— Rees-Mogg & Davidson, The Sovereign Individual 

It isn’t so much  cognitive incoherence afflicting the psyches of those both attracted to and ensnared within the corridors of power, as aperspectival madness – a term coined by Ken Wilber, the integral theory philosopher who has picked up the baton from Gebser here in the West.

Wilber used the phrase in his 2017 ‘Trump in a Post-Truth World’, which is arguably a book from the left about excessive wokery and Trump Derangement Syndrome. We’re seeing these types of infections of the psyche play out in escalating waves, going under different names:

Hyper-normality; TDS; …apersepectival madness.

“Mass Formation Psychosis” being most recent.

Of course, our expert overlords are having none of it…

Some day they will inform us that “Experts say there is no higher-order reality” (string theory having been stricken down by MSM fact checkers).

But this soul sickness that threatens to overrun the world is the result of ignoring these higher order constructs, and of attempting to pack reality into a 3-dimensional, materialist box. Everything has to warp just to attempt to fit it all in there.

Pick Your Pendulum

The Party at Davos is increasingly being regarded as a malevolent and controlling force on society, and with ample justification.

Yet they seemingly wield so much power and wealth; how can one hope to counter their influence?

By actively going out there and resisting the WEF, you are giving your energy to it.

The key is to put your energy into what you want, not what you don’t want.

The counterbalancing pendulum to the Luciferian-inspired fully automated luxury communism of the WEF  is a distinctly Promethean construct – an impulse that had been building for decades, perhaps longer, and then revealed itself during the Global Financial Crisis.

That emergent impulse manifested in Bitcoin. I’ve described elsewhere the seemingly preternatural circumstances behind its emergence and the mind-boggling synchronicities I’ve personally experienced around it.

That trend has continued.

We’ve already had certain warnings  of the similarities between CBDCs and Revelations-style “number of the Beast” prophecies even before the freakishly numbered WIPO Patent 2020/060606 which described implantable digital-currency systems:

(Owned by Microsoft, btw.)

After that previous article, I wound up on Sats Radio where Moses made me aware of Revelations 2:17:

“Anyone with ears to hear must listen to the Spirit and understand what he is saying to the churches. To everyone who is victorious I will give some of the manna that has been hidden away in heaven. And I will give to each one a white stone, and on the stone will be engraved a new name that no one knows except the one who receives it.”

You mean everybody gets their own private key? Kinda sounds like it.

So on one side, we have an implant or a mark on the hand or head “without which one cannot buy or sell or conduct business of any kind” – while on the other there’s this group of the victorious who have possession of their own private keys.

As I said in the other article, I don’t subscribe to Biblical prophesy in the literal sense that it predicts the future. What I do believe is that we exist in a multi-faceted reality that transcends the material, 3-D reduction, which conventional thought insists upon. These mythologies attempt to describe something glimpsed in hyper-dimensional constructs from beyond linear time.

Sidebar: Life is but a dream

(Here’s an analogy for how I look at these concepts: think of a dream. My guess is whatever is happening in them, is happening at light-speed. The reason I suspect this, is because you can experience a dream in which you seemingly pass hours, or even a lifetime – and then your snooze goes off, again. It’s been ten minutes.

When you’re still asleep, let’s say something starts to happen in the dream, usually a sound but maybe it manifests in other ways. It’s when you wake up that you realize your dream was reacting to something external to it, something happening in your waking world, like the doorbell ringing or a loud truck driving by.

When we wake up we have a hard time parsing what we experienced in the dream state – my theory there is because we dream in a super-dimensional construct with at least one extra axis – so of course it would be near impossible to unpack what happened in the hypercube back into 3D experience.)

I went on that tangent because I often suspect something like that is happening with synchronicities. Even prophesies or premonitions may be akin to this: an incursion into our waking world from some stimulus originating from a higher dimensional order outside of our conventional state. It would be exceptionally hard to make any sense of it because we’re missing a dimensional axis when we even try to think about it.

Our collective thought energies are responding to higher-order impulses, and we create or join pendulums. Those pendulums are further shaped by larger, underlying morphic fields and act as filters or bridges to The Great Externality. We gravitate into benign, healthy pendulums or malevolent self-defeating ones.

If we persistently engage in contemplative or spiritual practices, we may garner enough self-awareness to recognize these larger currents and make conscious decisions about which ones to put our energy into.

Conventional material reductionism would have it that our minds are just something our brains are gassing off, and there’s nothing more to it. But there is more to it than that, a lot more – and we aren’t consciously choosing what to think or how to steer our own evolution, as much as we’re akin to iron filings arranging ourselves in line with one magnetic field or another.

If we’re really aware, we can make a conscious decision around which one to align with. The majority of people just go with whatever ones they get swept up in.

Digesting it all

There will never be path function where the WEF either loses their power or reforms their ideals. The only option is irrelevance (which is why I’ve always told the cancel-culture and deplatforming crazies that the one, true magic bullet for killing a truly indefensible idea, is indifference).

The Party at Davos is under the impression that they are the vanguard of neo-Darwinist evolution – when it’s looking instead like they are functionaries of a larger morphic field that is distinctly Luciferian or Ahrimanic in character. This field encapsulates transhumanism, techno-Marxism, technocracy and social credit.

The antidote in our age is to choose a life path of radical sovereign individuality, and to embrace the Promethean impulse that gave rise to Bitcoin, public cryptography, and decentralization. This field is expressed through crypto-anarchy and network societies, yet with a grounding in spiritual expression, contemplative practices, family, community and tribes.

So when the next Davos meeting comes around, don’t bother picking up a placard and demonstrating in the streets; stack some sats and orange-pill your friends, family, neighbours and colleagues. That’s how we win.

I cover macro tensions between the globalists and sovereign-individual extensively in The Bitcoin Capitalist Letter, along with a tactical focus on CBDCs, pending legislation, digital assets and crypto stocks. Get the overall investment / macro thesis free when you join the Bombthrower mafia. Follow on Twitter here,  Gettr, or join the Bombthrower Telegram

Ironically, the push toward carbon-rationing and CBDCs is based on the same insight by sound money advocates: Fiat is worthless.

Let me tell you a parable about value. It’s about how the “thing” that everybody assumes has value can change over time, and by the time it changes, people have completely lost touch with the original measure of value.

In the early 00’s, easyDNS was getting ready to move our servers out of our physical office and into an actual data colocation center in downtown Toronto.

When we got our first cabinet, we were billed in terms of how much rackspace we were using, and what our bandwidth consumption was. In those days, the servers were trying to pack themselves into smaller enclosures and compress the data payloads to reduce bandwidth. There were 2U boxes, the bleeding edge stuff coming out was 1U, and if you were a dinosaur from late-90’s, you might have some legacy 4U servers, which were costing you a fortune to rack.

What was missing from that equation?

Power. There were no power costs, or if there were, they were negligible to the point where I can’t even remember having them. The power costs were just built into the price of the rackspace and bandwidth.

Fast forward 20 years, and it’s inverted completely. The number one cost when you provision new cabinet space these days is typically your power commit. Then bandwidth and transport. Now the rackspace is practically a throw-in. In many cases, what people think of as “servers” today are just virtualized images that don’t even take up any physical space.

What changed? The world did.

Who cares? Mostly nobody.

What I mean by this, is nobody thought that switching to charging for power consumption instead of rackspace was a big deal. The overall economics of the space changed, and as a result so did the pricing model. In other words, the underlying value commodity switched from Thing A (physical space) to Thing B (power). Other than adapting to it, nobody really cared.

The same thing happened with “money” -and it’s about to happen again

Money used to be backed by gold (Thing A) and then by a national currency exchangeable for gold (Thing B). In practical day-to-day terms, most people didn’t care and continued to use whatever they had in their wallets for currency.  Thing B even became the global reserve currency.

Then in 1971, it switched again and that reserve currency could no longer be exchanged for gold (Thing A) while Thing B would henceforth be …nothing. It was supposed to be temporary. 

People continued to use the reserve currency to denominate exchange and found that using nothing to back the value of the currency actually made life better, for awhile. At least for those who were in close proximity to the people who were able to mint more of this new “nothing money” out of thin air (they’ve come to be known as Cantillionaires).

Since all the other currencies were backed by the reigning reserve currency, this meant that they were now all backed by Thing B as well. And Thing B was nothing.

There were people who sounded the alarm that the the new Thing B (nothingness) was unsuitable for backing a currency, let alone a global reserve asset. Over time, they warned, it would create ever-increasing wealth inequality, blow up serial asset bubbles followed by ever worsening financial crises and probably end in a hyper-inflationary blow off.

They were dismissed as cranks and conspiracy theorists. In more recent times, right-wing extremists or Kremlin stooges.

Even so, as ignorant and retrograde as these people were and still are, today even mainstream commentators and anointed experts realize we’ve more-or-less run out of runway for having a global reserve currency backed by nothingness.

The fiat currency era is essentially over.

Goldbugs knew it wouldn’t last and invested in gold for centuries. They still do today. Now there is also Bitcoin, which captures the same mechanism: in this case using energy to back currency.

But globalists and central bankers are in a conundrum.

There is the realization that the fiat era, backing money with nothing is about to hit the wall.

But even central bankers know they can’t print energy out of thin air.  It would render Cantillionism obsolete overnight, and we can’t have that.

What is needed is some basis to backstop that currency that has some kind of value, a perceived scarcity or cap attached to it, in order to reestablish faith and legitimacy in the “money”. Further, it needs to be something that can be controlled and distributed from within the central bank / state mechanism – it must be entirely outside the influence of market forces.

Finally, it has to have an ideological pillar that can be used to shape public opinion around its acceptance.

The New Thing B is Carbon

The last legs of the failing monetary system will see another of these transitions where the value medium shifts from Thing A to Thing B.

There will at least be an attempt to implement one. Whether they get it out the door before  the monetary end-game plays out remains to be seen.  The destruction of the current system has been so accelerated by the ubiquitous mishandling of the Covid pandemic by policy-makers that the current system may come off the rails entirely before a new one can be implemented (subscribers of my premium newsletter have been getting our coverage on CBDCs and how far behind the curve nation states and central banks are in actually developing them. This why I think, ultimately, they try to go with something that already exists, like WEFereum Ethereum).

But the plan from on high is that we will go from pricing goods and services based on their input costs of production and distribution (Thing A), to pricing privileges and consumption based on their perceived carbon emissions (Thing B).

We’ve all seen the latest think piece out of the World Economic Forum, characteristically shrouded in their benevolent-sounding euphemisms, pushing for individual carbon rations and justifying it that because the world’s population sat still for, and complied with, global lockdowns. They suggest that the plebes are ready to accept having their individual carbon footprints metered by unelected bureaucrats and opaque AI-driven algos.

The WEF piece linked to a 2021 paper by Nature that mapped out Personal Carbon Allowances, and the impetus to define one’s  “fair share” of carbon emissions and the “setting of acceptable levels of carbon emissions”.

When you set aside (for a moment) the totalitarian implications of this,  it does make a certain amount of sense. In its own way, it proves the point that hard money advocates have been making for decades, if not centuries: fiat money is valueless.

Beneath all this climate alarmism driving the move to carbon rationing, there lies an implicit admission, conscious or not, that for money to be viable it has to denominate an economic trade-off.

You cannot print value ex-nihilo. In so doing these last 50 years (since the commencement of the fiat era in earnest), we’ve gotten to a world where the price of capital – and thus, time, if you read Edward Chancellor’s latest book (and you should) – is nominally zero, which collides with the reality of the finite (or with the laws of physics – as somebody like Doomberg would say).

The central bankers of the world made one big divide-by-zero error, and the result is what we actually see playing out across many dimensions, right now. Bitcoin and the coming CBDCs are both reacting to the same thing, but what’s different about them is who would be served by the adoption of one mechanism over the other.

What’s important to understand is that, similar to the Cantillion Effect, when the underpinnings of a monetary system transition from Thing A to Thing B, the outcomes are non-neutral. One example of this is the Gini Coefficient, which is a measure of wealth inequality.

In the chart below via @WTF_1971 we see how after a period of secular decline under the Bretton Woods system, it suddenly reversed and blasts off right at the inflection point where the global monetary system abandoned its last link to hard money (Thing A) and the fiat era began (Thing B).

All indications are that the coming CBDCs will be carbon-based, social credit schemes, and they are being promoted and implemented by the same vested interests who profited and consolidated unimaginable wealth throughout the prior 50 years of the fiat era – the Cantillionaires.

This path is ultimately doomed, because as I frequently point out, it seeks to extend an industrial era worldview (top down, centrally planned and linear), onto a new architecture: one that is decentralized, self- organizing, adaptive and non-linear.

Because it’s one iteration behind in the level of mental abstraction, it’s like breeding faster horses in an era of cars. No matter how good you get at it, you’re still playing the game on an obsolete playing field and will ultimately be unable to compete on the new one (if you’re wondering why I frequently reference the level of mental abstraction as being such a game changer that ensures the eventual supremacy of networks over nations, I refer you to a relatively obscure book by W R Clement called “Quantum Jump: A Survival Guide For the New Renaissance“).

The only advice I can offer for navigating the coming transition is to be as financially independent and resilient as possible. Do not allow yourself to become reliant on government entitlements and if you are now, figure out a way to end that reliance immediately. That these systems will become tightly coupled with CBDCs and carbon footprint rationing is a foregone conclusion.

You’re going to have to be ready for at least a transitionary period where the lifestyle choices you take for granted today will be priced in terms of carbon credits in the future. If you are reliant on government entitlements, get used to eating plant-based protein patties. If you aren’t, get ready to have to pay more for those Wagyu burgers. A lot more.

Hold as much of your wealth outside of the state run banking system as possible. Bitcoin (off the exchanges, I also like Monero), hold gold, silver, and own cash-flow producing businesses, and multiple revenue streams. If you have a job, start a business on the side. If you own a business, start another one.

Start connecting with people and tribes who are opting out of the current system, because the one we’re in now is either going to come off the rails entirely or try to go full CCP in the near-term.

Outside of China, no major nation has anything else ready

Imagine if you will, persistent double-digit inflation, energy costs soaring, shortages causing blackouts across Europe, bond yields spiking uncontrollably, supply chains grinding to a halt while sovereign debt crises erupt the world over…

Then one Friday after the markets close, heading into a long weekend, an emergency broadcast occurs in which the President, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the Speaker of the House appear on national TV to announce  that pursuant to the Statutory Bail-Ins provision of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Bill, a banking holiday would take place over the following week. During that holiday, certain bank liabilities would be converted into FedCoin (FED), an ERC-20 token on the Ethereum blockchain, at the rate of 10 FED per $1.

Every depositor would have an NFT issued to their Social Security Number – and that would give them access to their FedCoin via the Sign-On-With-Ethereum protocol. Depositors would have to “stake” their Ethereum to access the “full benefits” of FedCoin, however any sub-optimal social behaviours, (such as being behind on current vaccinations, or running your air conditioner too cool) could result in “slashing” – having a portion of their staked assets “burned”.

Similar announcements are being made elsewhere: in Canada Prime Minister Freeland and her Finance Minister Steven Guilbeault announce the creation of LOONCoin, invoking the The Bank Recapitalization (Bail-in) Conversion Regulations from 2018 while in Australia they refer to Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill of 2017.

Across the G-20, each leader is calling their national initiative part of The Great Restructuring…

We’re into the Endgame for Late Stage Globalism and things are moving fast. Decades of increasingly centralized, fiat-based plunder are now coming to a head and the system is unraveling quickly:

• Energy costs are skyrocketing thanks to ESG-inspired shortages.
• Inflation rates exceeding the stagflationary 70’s are hitting across the board and in some areas (Turkey, Argentina, Sri Lanka, Lebanon) verge on hyper-inflation .
• The global bond markets could come unglued at any moment as trapped Central Banks are trying to hike into a global recession.
• Geo-political tensions (even amongst NATO allies) eerily reminiscent of the months leading up to 1914, when the world “sleepwalked” into the first industrial scale global war.
• Political and cultural elites the world over have never been more unhinged and detached from reality.

Many commentators are positing a monetary end-game scenario in which the Fed and other central banks really do lose control of the bond market, the 150 to 300 trillion (depending on what you include) global debt implodes, and the financial system itself enters the collapse that has been serially postponed since the dotCom bust….

The mini-parable in the opening paragraphs outlines the situation many of us who are skeptical of the current system anticipate: that there will be an inevitable move toward Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). It will be seen as a way to extend the lifespan of fiat-based financial system by a few critical decades while presenting an irresistible mechanism for asserting China-style social control in a way previous authoritarians could only dream of.

There have been plenty of government white papers issued (which we diligently cover in The Crypto Capitalist Letter), which uniformly outline the aspirations of CBDCs, namely:

• Expiry dates on “cash”.
• Negative interest rates on savings.
• Programmability over where, when, who and why money gets spent
• Transaction level reporting, tracking and taxation
• Quotas, limits and restrictions
• Ability to add or remove funds remotely by central authorities

There’s only one problem…

No nation or central bank outside of China is anywhere close to actually deploying a national Central Bank Digital Currency that is capable of doing these things.

For awhile it looked like maybe Facebook’s Diem would be at least a temporary FedCoin, until Facebook scrapped the project (they’ve since sold the intellectual property to Silvergate Bank).

But in practical terms, nobody is ready. The countries that have deployed a home-rolled CBDC have flopped (i.e, Nigeria, Venezuela,) even China’s Digital Yuan debuted during the Olympics to ho-hum reviews.

A national CBDC would be impossible to develop in secret and then spring on a population out of nowhere. Whatever gets adapted to be the rails for globally inter-connected CBDCs will leave footprints, big ones. People who pay close attention to Bitcoin, crypto-currencies, digital assets and blockchain would hear about it and see it coming from a long way off, and nothing that’s known to be in development (like Canada’s Project Jasper) is ready (or stalled).

However, the financial system is now coming unglued so quickly that there probably isn’t time to develop national CBDCs from scratch anyway, at least not for an advanced G-20 economy.

The solution may be to co-opt an existing crypto-currency that is already deployed, already has market share and a brand, and is more or less signalling an amenability to the notion.

Enter Ethereum: The Preferred Crypto-Currency of Central Banks (and The WEF)

The advent of Bitcoin was a shot across the bow of all central banks and fiat money.  We see, for example, a near visceral reactions toward the threat posed in various Bank of Canada documents (obtained via an ATIA request):

At the supra-national and NGO level, everybody from the World Bank, to the IMF to the World Economic Forum is somewhat hostile toward Bitcoin. WEF articles about Bitcoin typically end with “problems” associated with it and what the alternatives are , going so far to declare in 2017 that by 2020 “Bitcoin would consume more power than the entire world does”.)

Fact check: #Bitcoin did not consume more power in 2020 than the entire world did in 2017. @wef pic.twitter.com/1nTwi99Xgp

— Mark Jeftovic, The C̶r̶y̶p̶t̶o̶ ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) September 5, 2022

So it is interesting to notice a crypto-currency that these international bodies and central banks are not openly hostile to, and that has always been Ethereum.

The main thrust of Canada’s CBDC development has been (thus far) “Project Jasper”, a partnership between the Bank of Canada, Payments Canada, R3 and the big banks, and note that Phase 1 was built atop Ethereum:

(Phase 2 was to be built on Corda “a leading Distributed Ledger System for regulated industries”).

So far Norway and Israel have started their CBDC development using Ethereum. In 2021 a Chinese banking official made the case for deploying a CBDC on Ethereum, and in at the WEF meeting in 2020, one of the Ethereum co-founders and Consensys CEO Joseph Lubin presented a white paper making the case for Ethereum to be the rails for CBDCs.

“As the World Economic Forum meets in Davos for the 50th time, it does so against the backdrop of a sea change in the mechanics of money

Below we provide both an overview of CBDC and a concrete example of how a CBDC might be implemented on the Ethereum blockchain. We believe that Ethereum is the best-suited blockchain network for the kind of maximally secure, global-scale, interoperable settlement platforms that CBDCs require. But we are well aware that there are many other possibilities”

To be clear, I am not one of those people who thinks the WEF is some all-powerful cabal that Controls Everything, because the reality is that the world is inherently uncontrollable at a macro level (we live in an out-of-control world, and for many, the prospect of that is more terrifying than dystopia).

But what happens in Davos doesn’t stay in Davos. The WEF agenda truly does exert outsized influence (at least for now), and they do set tone for what is fashionable among technocrats, authoritarians and the sundry Malthusians that permeate elite circles.

Ethereum (or maybe “CBDETH”) is well suited for the use case of global CBDCs:  different ERC-20 tokens can be issued for multiple uses:  stablecoins, UBI, food stamps, carbon quotas, social credit – all underpinned by Ethereum on the base layer. One that has a proven track record of being willing to switch monetary policy on-the-fly, and isn’t afraid to hard-fork itself out of a jam.

For the push into Digital-IDs, ERC-721 style NFTs are well suited. Your Bored Ape not only telegraphs how cool you are, it can signal if your COVID boosters are up-to-date, for all to see, on the blockchain.

At first glance this runs counter to what I’ve been saying in The Crypto Capitalist (our premium letter) for over a year. My theory was that in the future, the way you would be able to differentiate between a decentralized, digital bearer asset and a CBDC would be whether it would be possible to self-custody your private keys or not.

Maybe I was wrong about that, since anybody can hold their own wallets for Ethereum.

However, we should expect that the plebes would be incentivized to custody their private keys with banking partners of the CBDETH system (“safely and effectively”). There might even be incentives for doing that, like extra meat allowances, or permission to take an additional flight each year.

The Ethereum ecosystem is already telegraphing a willingness to comply with central state dictums: embracing OFAC compliance with a hamfisted stab at protocol level transaction censorship, rather than arguing about it too much. The coming move to PoS is flat out ESG-inspired (this is not the place to argue the energy policy of PoW other than to say that the alarmism around it is based on pure ignorance and FUD; but at a minimum I would recommend Alex Gladstein’s “Hidden Costs of the Petrodollar” and Nic Carter’s “Last Word on Bitcoin’s Energy Consumption“)

After The Merge (a.k.a Ethereum’s Great Leap Forward), if we can envision a scenario where most of the ETH is locked up in centrally operated validators, and a huge chunk of the system having already enacted protocol level transaction censorship, it would be perfect. Outwardly it could be the branded as a decentralized, inclusive digital money while in reality being highly concentrated and censored at the transaction level.

Similar to how the WEF brags they’ve “penetrated the cabinets” of many world governments, the Venn diagram of WEF and upper echelons of the Ethereum Foundation already intersect in a few places. In addition to the aforementioned pitch by Ethereum co-founder Joseph Lubin, the Ethereum Foundation’s Executive Director is “an agenda contributor” to the WEF.

The there’s the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance is a who’s who of big tech, Wall St and corporate big wigs, including JP Morgan, Microsoft, Accenture, Bank of New York Mellon, Ernst & Young and even Fedex Corporate Services Inc.

Contrasting Ethereum with Bitcoin

With EIP 1559, Ethereum ostensibly adopted a “ultra-sound” monetary policy where the supply of ETH would actually plateau and then begin to decline as more ETH gets “burned” than minted. However even this update, combined with the looming switch from Proof-of-Work to PoS shows: The Ethereum core devs have no issues radically restructuring its underlying fundamentals to suit the winds and the whims of it’s circumstances.

From its initial ICO to insiders, launching with an unlimited supply, to bailing themselves out after their DAO was hacked, Ethereum has a “whatever it takes” approach that is the opposite of an immutable, hard asset with a finite supply like Bitcoin.

If circumstances arise where an infinitely expandable money supply is desired or required, they can just change the system again. And again.

Contrast with Bitcoin, which is truly decentralized, with an immutable hard cap that cannot be changed. If there are dissident factions, like during the  Blocksize Wars, for example, it gets settled with a hard fork where users choose which way to go and market forces settle the rest.

On that note there is even already  a Proof-of-Stake version of Bitcoin.

So if we truly value democracy over coercion, and if Proof-of-Stake is demonstrably better than Bitcoin core’s Proof-of-Work, then we should see “Bitcoin-2” flippen Bitcoin in due course (similarly, and this is my main beef with The Merge, the more democratic way to undertake it would be with a user-selected hard fork, leaving both chains and options available afterward).

Of course, nobody seriously expects Bitcoin2 to do that. Nor does anybody expect Ethereum to postpone the merge or do it in a more democratic manner . But we can expect Bitcoin to be the one, immutable digital bearer asset in the coming era of Central Bank Digital Currencies.

Conclusion

In The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto, I built on my previous work around The Great Bifurcation and theorized a coming two-tier society. I posited that UBI would be inevitable and the rails would be a CBDC that doubled as a China-style social credit system. Everything that’s unfolded since then has reinforced that belief.

What I may have not foreseen was what the rails for CBDCs could very well be Ethereum, or a co-opted version of it. Beacon Chain (the post-merge chain) may be that version.

It’s too early to say how to feel about that. I’ve always had a soft spot for Ethereum, and admired what they’ve done in decentralized naming with ENS. My main business has been involved with that effort for some time. I guess watching it position for mainstream / corporate / government  acceptance is somewhat disorienting.

(Maybe it’s a good thing that the fiat-era’s last ditch iteration of state-sponsored money will have to be, out of necessity, built on something beyond their absolute control… another marker of the decentralized revolution?)

However, where Bitcoin reached escape velocity and broke the “here to stay” barrier through sheer honey-badger belligerence, Ethereum seems to be getting there by “playing the game”.

That’s also not to say that with our investor hats on, there aren’t going to be huge gains to be made within the Ethereum ecosystem even if it goes that way. If Ethereum becomes the rails for global CBDCs (CBDETH), owning the infrastructure components of it (oracles, validators, exchanges, dapps, naming platforms) would be the analogous to owning a small slice of the Federal Reserve, or the global ACH payments system.

But I stopped thinking of Ethereum as immutable some time ago, and certainly not as a digital hard asset, the way I do Bitcoin.

The folks at The World Economic Forum, led by Klaus Schwab, never tire of “reimagining” everything. From food chains, digital identity, healthcare, even reimagining capitalism itself, everything seems to be on the table. Our betters at Davos have taken it upon themselves to make every aspect of our lives fair game for being reimagined, reconstituted, recalibrated, reordered and reset. Always along top-down technocratic lines they dream up at their exclusive, invite-only confabs.

I don’t know about you, but I can’t remember asking nor empowering anybody else to reimagine my own life. I figure that’s my job. Shouldn’t we tell these guys not to worry about it – “We’ve got this” ?

They seem undaunted and proceed to reorganize the world anyway.

Maybe we should return the favour and reimagine The World Economic Forum and the self-appointed elites who populate its ranks…

Reimagining Klaus Schwab

Herr Schwab makes it hard not to imagine him as a SPECTRE-ish super villain straight out of a James Bond flick:

But that’s not re-imagining him. To re-imagine means to change, transform, turn something that is into something it isn’t because you prefer it that way.

So if we were to reimagine Klaus Schwab then perhaps we could start at the beginning, with Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab who was a military industrial contractor to the Nazi regime during world war 2.

According to investigative reporter Whitney Webb, the elder Schwab:

“led the Nazi-supported German branch of a Swiss engineering firm into the war as a prominent military contractor. “

That company, Escher-Wyss, used slave labour in Nazi efforts to develop an atom bomb. Years later, when Schwab sat on the board of directors, he approved an initiative to help the Apartheid era government of South Africa in their pursuit of an a-bomb.

In this era of open talk about reparations, perhaps reimagining Klaus Schwab could prescribe that the World Economic Forum pay reparations to descendants of Nazi-era slave labour (concentration camps) and for their part in reinforcing Apartheid in South Africa.

Finally, given that Schwab was a protege of Henry Kissinger, who is considered by some to be a war criminal in his machinations toward multiple countries around the world; perhaps reimagining Klaus Schwab should also include some manner of Truth and Reconciliation process toward the countries and populations to which Schwab’s intellectual mentor inflicted so much pain and suffering.

Reimagining Carbon Footprints of The Elite

That the climate crisis requires a massive reordering of all our lives seems to have been already decided. When see some of the various pronouncements coming out of the myriad climate conclaves, including Davos, you’ll see they’re pushing for:

• Individual carbon footprint tracking
• Energy rationing (carbon taxes)
• Elimination of meat from our diets (“Contextualizing meat consumption”)
• Eventual elimination of private vehicle ownership
• Elimination of single-family homes (“upzoning” single-family areas)

If one were to reimagine the World Economic Forum in terms of showing leadership and resolve for this ostensibly unprecedented crisis, then the logical and noble move would be to eliminate the most carbon intensive forms of travel and conspicuous consumption first.

Private jets and super-yachts would have to go, immediately, and with no exceptions. Private jets could be melted down for scrap metal and reused, as per the UK Fires memo on Absolute Zero 2050. All super-yachts could be permanently moored in third-world nations and repurposed as low income housing.

As of 2016 there were an estimated 10,000 super-yachts (over 28 meters) in the world, with 150 more being built every year. If a single super-yacht could be upzoned to house 50 low income families, we could provide permanent shelter for 500,000 families globally. Everybody needs a home, nobody needs a super-yacht. By re-contextualizing yacht and private jet ownership we can ameliorate the housing shortage in a carbon-neutral manner.

All Davos meetings and super-summits could be held via remote video conference from this day forward, which would further reduce carbon footprints of holding such meetings.

Finally, any Davos or WEF attendee who endorses or promotes action plans emanating from these proceedings should be legally bound to bringing their own consumption patterns in conformance to the recommendations, even before any such recommendations become policy.

That would mean: getting rid of internal combustion vehicles, private jets, yachts, second, third, forth, fifth or sixth residences, and stop eating meat.

Reimagining CBDCs and Social Credit

Make no mistake Central Bank Digital Currencies will be the lubricant for which WEF inspired social credit programs are implemented.

WEF talking points always include politically correct buzzwords like “inclusion”, “diversity” and “empowerment”, so what better way to reimagine CBDCs than to pivot the entire conversation toward a global, neutral digital currency that already exists and has no barriers to entry for anybody in the world?

I am of course talking about Bitcoin, which exists now and already ticks all of the inclusion, diversity and empowerment boxes. Even better, it provides absolute inalienable rights to those who hold it, who could argue with that?

Reimagining Constitutionally Enshrined Human Rights

Speaking of human rights, the Davos crowd always pays them lip service in everything they do. The latest Schwab book “The Great Narrative” formally endorses the human rights as laid on in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

one all-encompassing value framework has been ratified by the 193 Members States of the United Nations: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.135 Its 30 articles detailing an individual’s “basic rights and fundamental freedoms” and affirming their universal character as “inherent, inalienable and applicable to all human beings

form the bedrock of a universal value system. This book embraces humanistic values that unequivocally prioritize freedom, human dignity and a quest for the common good.”

So let’s look at what those universal human rights actually are. If we look at the UN declaration of Human Rights, particularly Articles 12:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 17:

1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Then in reimagining the WEF we could posit them enforcing these globally ratified rights on their own membership and exclude or banish heads of state from any country that violated these rights over the past few years of lockdowns: namely Canada, Australia, the United States, the UK, almost every Eurozone country and any other nation that locked down their population, forced vaccinations, deplatformed dissenters or espoused the redistribution of wealth (property) in any way.

Reimagining “The Great Reset Fourth Industrial Revolution Grand(iose) Narrative”

Reimagining other people’s lives is fun. Once you have everything all figured out for everybody else it can be hard to understand why anybody would resist it. We’ve clearly laid out an inclusive, restorative, empowering set of principles for the Party of Davos to live by, so why won’t they do it?

They won’t do what we reimagine for them, naturally, so how come it feels like there’s a certain expectation that we’ll subserviently comply whenever they want to “re-contextualize” our basic rights?

The reality is nobody has any moral authority to reimagine anybody’s life but their own. That’s actually the objective point of the entire UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Thinking that one big super-brain or council of wise-persons can figure out the best way for over 8 billion independent minds and bodies to live is beyond imagination, it is pure delusion.

The main downside is by believing it is so, they cause a lot of damage. This technocratic mindset is what writes the pages of history: a small cadre of self-appointed elites think they have it all figured out, and then whammo – inflation, wealth inequality, civil breakdown, economic ruin and tyranny. Trying to control the outcome for all effectively bakes-in the chaos.

There is really only one thing anybody can control, which is their own reaction to whatever happens to them. That’s it. But it takes an act humility to realize that. For the Davos crowd, humility is a liability.

Fortunately there is another narrative rising: the decentralized revolution narrative. It’s the freedom to act unilaterally regardless of what anybody else thinks, and doing so without violating anybody else’s rights to do the same. This gives rise to a noble alchemy, a positive feedback loop.

It is the basis from which free markets and capitalism itself are born. It’s what launched the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the Renaissance and the Industrial and Information revolutions.

We can set up an agreed upon set of rules of what all 8 billion of us can’t do to each other. We have those kinds of rules already, handed down throughout the generations. But we can’t decide what anybody else should do without inducing them through a mutually agreed upon exchange of value.

The World Economic Forum is a last gasp of industrial age, late stage globalism. They may exert undue influence now, but it may have already passed its zenith.

Reimagine Yourself

Given that the Davos crew won’t have themselves reimagined, especially by us plebes, what we can do is really the only thing practical within the confines of incarnate reality: we can reimagine ourselves.

In my previous post about protecting oneself from “Davos Man”, I quoted Neville Goddard, one of the preeminent thinkers from the Golden Age of New Thought. His books “Awakened Imagination” and “The Power of Awareness” provide the antidote against those who would cast your life in their own mind’s image (the Tarcher reprint edition has them both)

Here is the secret that those who would rule over others don’t want you to know: It’s that imagination is an actual super-power. One bestowed on all of us.

Imagination is the very gateway of reality. “Man,” said Blake, “is either the ark of God or a phantom of the earth and of the water.” “Naturally he is only a natural organ subject to Sense.” “The Eternal Body of Man is The Imagination: that is God himself, The Divine Body. Jesus: we are his Members.”

I know of no greater and truer definition of the Imagination than that of Blake. By imagination we have the power to be anything we desire to be. Through imagination we disarm and transform the violence of the world. Our most intimate as well as our most casual relationships become imaginative as we awaken to “the mystery hid from the ages,” that Christ in us is our imagination. We then realize that only as we live by imagination can we truly be said to live at all

It’s curious that Schwab and company frequently use that word “re-imagine“. Once you understand the true power of imagination, as described by Goddard, that it encapsulates the underlying creative power of the universe, then the act of re-imagining another’s life is a type of predation. It is vampirism, both economic and spiritual. At scale it manifests as mass formation psychosis.

The Party at Davos (more like a coven, perhaps) would have you believe that power is  theirs, they are literally Priests of the Temple  in the church of Late Stage Globalism.

But the reality is that everybody has this superpower. If you use yours, you ordain your own destiny. If enough people take control of their own psychic and mental temple, the one within, then the rulers of the darkness of this world lose their power.

Without actively taking charge of your own thoughts and goals, your entire life will be something that just happens to you. When you are pursuing your own ideals and controlling your own thoughts you are expressing the universal life force in your own unique way. That doesn’t mean you are able to “command reality”, which is actually what the Davos crowd is attempting.

But what goals and aspirations you do attain will be in spite of what the Klaus Schwab’s, the Party of Davos and the World Economic Forum think you should do, instead of what they permit you to do.

If enough people do this: take the command of their own destinies, become as Sovereign Individuals, live in pursuit of their own goals and aspirations, then it won’t really matter what external groups from a waning era think.

Also see:

• How to Protect Yourself From Davos Man
• The Big “Takeaway” from COP26: Meat

You can learn more about the overall thesis behind the coming Monetary Regime Change by joining the Bombthrower mailing list.  Wherever you are on the path to being a Sovereign Individual, Bombthrower can help you navigate the terrain. (Gettr, Twitter, Telegram)