Please Share This Story!
Birds usually keep to their own species. Eagles don’t fly with sparrows, nor buzzards with geese. Technocrats are like that and underscore the saying, “Birds of a feather flock together.” Tyrants and Big Tech love and esteem China, not because it is a communist dictatorship, but because it is a Technocracy! This article nails it.

For further insightful analysis, TN recommends following and subscribing to James Corbett on The Corbett Report. ⁃ TN Editor

I’m sure by now you’ve all seen the clip of Justin Trudeau admitting that he “admires” China’s dictatorship “because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime,” but here it is again.

Given the absolutely unprecedented and utterly chilling events that have just unfolded in Canada under Prime Minister Trudeau’s watch, it’s no surprise that his bone-chilling admission from 2013 has been making the rounds online once again.

But this is not some kind of one-off slip of the tongue or out-of-context “gotcha” moment. Time after time, (mis)leader after (mis)leader from around the world has confirmed their lust for China’s dictatorial powers. In fact, it’s not just the (mis)leaders who covet the Chinese authoritarian system; businessmen, pundits, think tank bigwigs and everyone else in the so-called “Superclass” are equally batty for Beijing’s style of governance.

On the surface level, there is a perfectly obvious explanation for this phenomenon: these globalist thugs are all wannabe tyrants. If a ChiCom system gave them the power to “turn their economy around on a dime” or do anything else on their wish list, they would adopt it without a second thought.

But, as usual, there is an even more important layer to this story that is being neglected by almost everyone. You see, China is not just any type of dictatorship. In fact, it isn’t even communist. When you understand the principle that the Chinese government is really operating on, you start to understand why China has been built up as the rising new superpower of the 21st century and what that means for the future of humanity.

Tyrants Love China

Trudeau’s love affair with China did not start or end in 2013, of course. The Canadian PM’s determination to kowtow to the Chinese at every opportunity is a well-known fact of Canadian political life and has resulted in a series of pathetic attempts to curry favour with Xi and the Chinese government. Lowlights include Trudeau’s invitation to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to participate in winter exercises with the Canadian Armed Forces, his threatening a charity group for daring to attempt to bestow an award on the president of Taiwan and his promise to bestow a “Made-in-Canada” COVID bioweapon “vaccine” on the Canadian people. That promise turned out to be a lie in every respect: the “Canadian” company developing the vaccine was not even Canadian, but a Chinese firm with connections to the PLA. (The outright fabrications emanating from the PM office in that affair were so outrageous that even the CBC had to cover them.)

But it’s not just Trudeau and his WEF-“penetrated” Canadian cabinet that have a penchant for China’s glorious dictatorship.

Biden has repeatedly bragged that he “traveled 17,000 miles” with Xi when he was vice president—a claim that not even the Bezos Post fact checkers could support—and had his own “Trudeau moment” at a CNN Town Hall last year, praising the Chinese dictator-for-life out of the blue as a “bright and really tough guy” in a bizarre, unscripted diversion from the teleprompter.

Former German chancellor Angela Merkel’s consistent defense of Xi’s dictatorship and her push to increase EU investment in China earned her the (dis)honour of being called “old friend” (lăo péngyŏu, a title reserved for revered globalist fellow travelers like Henry Kissinger) by Xi in a parting phone call between the two (mis)leaders last year.

Even Putin—who many in the “alternative” media falsely believe to be an anti-globalist—has overturned half a century of Sino-Russian political tensions to forge a close working relationship with Xi and lay a Sino-Russian foundation for the BRICS’ phony opposition to the New World Order. Not only do Xi and Putin go out of their way to call each other besties (Putin particularly relished giving Russian ice cream to the Chinese dictator for his 66th birthday), but, as I’ve pointed out time and time again, they have collaborated in creating an “alternative” system of globalization that is, in reality, just the same old NWO vision dressed up in different clothes.

Similarly, all of the (mis)leaders of the (un)free world have likewise lined up to ink deals with the ChiCom dictatorship and lavish praise on Xi while giving obligatory lip service to their supposed “concern” about human rights in the country. Macron? Check. Johnson? Check. Bennett? Check.

I could go on, but you get the idea. At a certain point, the spectacle of political puppet after political puppet lining up to shower accolades on Xi Jinping and the Chinese government is so overwhelming that it gives the lie to the idea that China is really an enemy of the West.

So what’s really going on here?

The Western Propaganda Line On China

At this point, we’re faced with a seeming paradox.

On the one hand, China is portrayed as such a threat to the international order—menacing its maritime neighbours and repressing its Uyghur minority even as it grows in military might and geopolitical clout—that entirely new groups (the “Quad”) and treaties (the TPP) have to be devised to contain it.

On the other hand, the world (mis)leaders are falling all over themselves to prove how close they are with President Xi and to cut deals with the Chinese government.

As usual, there is a simple explanation for this seeming contradiction that most people can immediately understand: money. You see, the Chinese are buying off politicians. That’s why all of these globalists are lining up to bestow praise on and ink treaties with the ChiComs.

And, also as usual, there is some truth to this explanation. The Chinese are active in international influence operations, employing every trick in the book: not just bribery, but the creation of lucrative “scholarship” programs to recruit foreign researchers, the use of double agents in sensitive positions, and, of course, the good ol’ honey trap.

But while financial (or sexual) motivations may be enough to explain the Sinophilic behaviour of certain politicians and researchers, it is not enough to explain the phenomenon of the past 40 years. As I have documented in the past, the rise of China to its position of economic, geopolitical and military prominence did not happen overnight and it did not happen as the result of a handful of bought-and-paid for politicians. Rather, China has been carefully and intentionally built up as a major player in the emerging multipolar New World Order by the same gaggle of globalists who have overseen the global financial and geopolitical for the past 50 years.

But why?

To get a handle on this question, it’s fruitful to take a look at what it is that the globalists see in China. We can gain insight into the answer by looking at a curious, recurring theme in the controlled establishment media propaganda about China. I call it: “China Is Horrible! . . . But Wouldn’t It Be Nice?”

This theme can be seen in just about every piece in the controlled corporate media about the evils of the Chinese government and its treatment of its citizens. In a nutshell, they expose the unbelievably Orwellian control that the ChiComs assert over every aspect of citizens’ lives, decry it as tyrannical . . . and then point out how effective this autocratic system is in managing the Chinese economy and building Chinese military might and geopolitical clout. The effect of such propaganda is always to remind the reader that China is The Enemy and deserves our Two Minutes Hate—but that it would be nice if our loving, Western, “democratic” governments assumed some of those powers, too.

Trudeau’s now infamous expression of “admiration” for the Chinese dictatorship is one example of this theme, but the propagandists over at The New York Times provided perhaps the quintessential expression of this idea in a recent article, “Living by the Code: In China, Covid-Era Controls May Outlast the Virus.”

The piece opens by noting the plight of Xie Yang, a human rights lawyer who decided to travel to Shanghai to visit the mother of a dissident even after local authorities warned him against taking the trip. On his way to the airport, officials changed Xie’s health status on his government-mandated health code app from “green,” meaning that he was free to travel, to “red,” prompting airport security to attempt to put him in quarantine.

The rest of the article walks a delicate line: it accurately documents the egregious abuses of human rights enabled by the biosecurity surveillance grid erected by the Chinese government, but it is peppered with constant reminders about how effective this grid is at “containing” the scamdemic. The Chinese government, it tells us, has become “emboldened by their successes in stamping out Covid.” And, we are told, the government-mandated health code app is “key to China’s goal of stamping out the virus entirely within its borders.” These controls “have really produced great results, because they can monitor down to every individual,” the article quotes a Chinese dental worker as saying. The Times even asserts that the government’s “success in limiting infections” has led to “widespread support” for the measures.

In other words: China’s tyranny is horrible! . . . But wouldn’t it be nice?

Once you notice this particular propaganda ploy, you will see it everywhere in mainstream discussions about the Chinese “menace” that is supposedly the greatest “threat” to the free world. And once you do notice this trick, you will begin to understand the real reason that the globalists have worked so closely with China for decades: not because they are adherents of communism, but because they see China as an experimental laboratory in which to perfect a new form of governance for the planet.

This is precisely what David Rockefeller meant when he wrote his infamous ode to Chairman Mao in an August 1973 New York Times op-ed, “From a China Traveler“:

The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.

It is not that Rockefeller was a secret (or not-so-secret) communist. In fact, it turns out that the Chinese system of governance isn’t really communism at all.

China Isn’t Communist

So if China isn’t communist, what is it?

The answer is simple: China is a technocracy.

Now, either you’re a poor, lost normie who has somehow stumbled upon this editorial and has no idea what that statement means or you’re a follower of the independent media and you already have a pretty good grasp of what “technocracy” is. If the former is the case, I would recommend you explore my archives on the subject to better understand of what technocracy is and how it serves as the governing principle of choice for globalists in the 21st century.

To summarize, there are two ways to understand what technocracy is. There is the straightforward and innocuous definition supplied to the public, which holds that technocracy is simply government by a scientific and technical elite. And then there is the hidden assumption upon which this definition is based: namely, that the “scientific and technical elite” is beholden to the “Superclass” from whom they derive their funding, their research cues and their values. “Science,” after all, is merely a process, and technology is merely a means of applying scientific knowledge in the pursuit of some specific goal. But whose goal? In this way, we see that technocracy is not the benevolent rule of an enlightened scientific class, but the use of that class by the ruling oligarchy to more effectively manage the human population.

That China is a technocracy is not a controversial observation. It has been made by a number of scholars, including Liu Yongmou, a professor of the philosophy of science and technology at Renmin University of China. In a 2016 article in Issues in Science and Technology entitled “The Benefits of Technocracy in China,” Yongmou details how technocracy was imported to China under the moniker “expert politics” by Luo Longji, a politician and intellectual who studied under the original technocrats at Columbia University in the 1920s. This system of governance was initially eschewed by Mao, who favoured devotion to the party over technical expertise, but has flourished in the post-Mao era, culminating in the last three presidents of China—Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping—all having originally studied engineering.

This is no trivial detail. The technocratic mindset is everywhere apparent in the Chinese system, where the citizenry is treated as unruly variables in an otherwise harmonious equation, variables that can only be tamed by rigorous logic and ruthless algorithmic strictures. Hence the laundry list of heartless, inhuman, but doubtless “efficient” techniques for managing the population. The techniques, spearheaded by the Chinese, range from the world’s most pervasive facial recognition network to the vast social credit system, which regulates citizens’ behaviour by barring them from public transit or by blocking their access to higher education or well-paying jobs if they do not comply with government dictates.

Is it any wonder, then, that China was the first country to roll out the QR code-driven, smartphone-hosted “health pass” that enables the government, if it chooses, to prevent any individual from passing any government checkpoint at any time? Or that the Western media—let alone (mis)leaders like Trudeau—would so openly lust after those powers?

As Patrick Wood—the author of multiple works about the hidden history of technocracy—accurately summarizes in his article entitled (appropriately enough) “China Is A Technocracy“:

China is a full-blown Technocracy and it is the first of its kind on planet earth, thanks to the clever manipulation and support of Western elites like the Trilateral Commission. [. . .] In conclusion, the clear and present danger to world domination is not any kind of Marxist derivative, but rather neo-authoritarian Technocracy. Living under such a system will be far more oppressive and painful than Socialism, Communism or Fascism.

It is important to understand this, because if we do not see that China is no more communist than the United States is “free” and “democratic,” then we will never understand what this strange love/hate dance about the new China bogeyman/frenemy is really about.

The global power elite are perfecting their techniques for controlling the human population and China is the technocratic laboratory where they are testing those techniques. This is why Trudeau, the mainstream media and all of the other organs of the establishment “Superclass” really admire China.

This weekly editorial is part of The Corbett Report Subscriber newsletter.

To support The Corbett Report and to access the full newsletter, please sign up to become a member of the website.

Read full story here…

This post was originally published on this site