Isn’t it strange for a person who advocates globalization of everything and everyone?

Isn’t it strange for a person who advocates globalization of everything and everyone?

Peter Akopov

What do the just-released American film Don’t Look Up, the multibillion-dollar fines issued in Russia by Google and Facebook (renamed Meta), and the latest statement by Bill Gates have in common?
The fact that in all three cases we are talking about the fight against the omnipotence of BigTech, that is, global IT corporations. This omnipotence provokes resistance, including from sovereign states, as in the case of fines in Russia, which in fact are only a way to force supranational monsters to reckon with national interests and legislation. Because if you do not curb the “global dreamers of a better future” (this is how they serve themselves, although in reality they dream of posthumanity, transhumanism, in which, in fact, the division of humanity into different biological species will occur), then they will rather quickly build on the planet digital concentration camp. Unless, of course, due to their greed, life on Earth does not end in disaster even earlier, as in a wonderful satirical movie “
But what does Bill Gates have to do with it? Is he also for control of the Internet giants? He himself is considered almost the main adherent of globalization and transhumanism, suspected of being involved in the emergence of the coronavirus and plans to chip humanity, so that his name has long become synonymous with the concept of “world conspiracy.” And what: bees against honey?
The other day, the founder of Microsoft wrote on his blog about “Reasons for Optimism After a Difficult Year.” A kind of forecast for next year – in general, quite optimistic: the pandemic will finally end, the metaverse (that is, virtual reality, three-dimensional reality with digital avatars) is approaching. But all this can be prevented by one big problem – it is she who most worries Gates in the coming year.
This is the problem of misinformation and people’s distrust of the actions of the authorities. And something must be done about this, because it is governments that must play a major role not only in combating the current pandemic, but also in countering global warming and working to prevent a new pandemic (Gates always says that it can be much worse than the current one)… But governments can only succeed if people trust them, Gates writes:
“If your people don’t tr-ust you, then they won’t su-pport major new initiatives. And when a major crisis hits, they are less likely to follow the directions needed to weather the storm.”
Who is to blame and what to do? Blame, according to Gates, the media and social networks – the growing distrust of the people in governments is largely due to politically biased headlines and social media activities, writes the billionaire. And this leads him to believe that governments may need to regulate online platforms to effectively counter misinformation that undermines citizens’ trust.
This is presented as reasoning out loud, and not the point of view of Gates – because then he writes that he does not know how to cope with this difficult problem, that is, disinformation, “which is so deeply rooted in the Web.” But these caveats should not be misleading: in fact, Gates says that national governments are losing to global networks and something needs to be done about it. That is, take the networks under the control of national governments?
Isn’t it strange for a person who advocates the globalization of everything and everyone? Why on earth did Gates care about the sustainability and efficiency of sovereign states? He, in theory, on the contrary, should benefit from undermining trust in the state and power as such, the process of delegitimizing national states? Why is he, in fact, calling for the opposite?
There are two explanations for this: strategic, glo-bal and tactical – American.
Strategically, globalists are losing their positions – the victorious tread of globalization has failed, and, despite the revolutionary development of technology, the economic and political advancement of the idea of “a single world without b-orders and nations headed by a single control center” is now impossible. This do-es not mean that its supp-orters have surrendered and admitted defeat – no, they are simply muffling the propaganda of globalization for a while. Moreover, the coronavirus has shown that the weak power of national governments is now disadvantageous to supranational elites.
If the fight against coronavirus will lead to a total crisis of confidence not only in the authorities, but also in the elites, then who will replace the national elites? Brave, honest and smart managers of global corporations, the best people of the supranational elites? They do not exist (including in the mass consciousness), and in general, globalists now have neither the capabilities nor the strength to take over the le-vers of control. Therefore, in the event of a “uprising of the masses,” the commissars of globalization ca-nnot even dream of any sei-zure of power from the current national managers – ev-erything will slide into chaos.
And it is absolutely unnecessary for any elites, including supranational ones: even a strong, that is, a “bad” national state (which sooner or later can be used to build a “united humanity”) is better than chaos and anarchy of troubled times. Or, even worse, the rise to power of the anti-globalization counter-elite. So the collective Gates not only agrees that the pandemic, even in the West, has strengthened the role of national governments and their capabilities – it has already bet on it.If the fight against coronavirus will lead to a total crisis of confidence not only in the authorities, but also in the elites, then who will replace the national elites? Brave, honest and smart managers of global corporations, the best people of the supranational elites? They do not exist (including in the mass consciousness), and in general, globalists now have neither the capabilities nor the strength to take over the levers of control. Theref-ore, in the event of a “uprising of the masses,” the co-mmissars of globalization cannot even dream of any seizure of power from the current national managers – everything will slide into chaos.
And it is absolutely unn-ecessary for any elites, inc-luding supranational ones: even a strong, that is, a “bad” national state (which sooner or later can be used to build a “united humanity”) is better than chaos and anarchy of troubled times. Or, even worse, the rise to power of the anti-globalization counter-elite. So the collective Gates not only agrees that the pandemic, even in the West, has strengthened the role of national governments and their capabilities – it has already bet on it.
There is, however, one more explanation, much more utilitarian, tactical, but from this, perhaps, even much more important. The Gates do not want to lose America – the very base from which they build their global plans. And there is a threat of this – and the threat is not at all theoretical. No, this is not about America’s loss of its global influence, but about the banal loss of control over the United States by the globalist elite. After all, what does Gates write about in that same post?
That the problem of misinformation and mistrust is “extremely important to resolve as soon as possible,” because without rapid intervention, Americans may be more likely to elect politicians who publicly promote mistrust.
Translating into Russian: in November 2022 there will be elections to the American Congress. If it is bad to fight disinformation, then the Republicans will win, regaining control over both houses of parliament. And not just Republicans – but Trump’s party, which will pave the way for the victory of the ex-president (or his protégé) already in the presidential elections in 2024. And this should not be allowed in any case, be-cause Trump, who has retu-rned to the White House, cannot be isolated as easily as it was during his first term. Trump’s second term is unacceptable for globalists precisely because during it a real consolidation of all counter-elite forces, that is, opponents of the globalist project, can occur. And they will try to really push the current, predominantly globalist-minded elites, from the levers of power in the United States – that is, to carry out a real revolution from above.
So Bill Gates is thinking about both the distant and the near future, urging to put a barrier on the path of disinformation as soon as possible, which undermines confidence in the authorities and opens the way for Trump. However, in Am-erican reality, the opposite is true – although, of course, there is disinformation, and in huge quantities. But they began to use it on an unpre-cedented scale just against Trump – and this was done by the indestructible block of media and government officials, Internet corporations and the “Washington swamp.” The American elite tried to drown Trump in an endless stream of disinformation (only “Russian connections” are worth what), while not thinking at all how much damage such a campaign damages American confidence in state institutions in general.
And now he is only reaping the fruits of his work, trying to turn back the clock and “solve the problem” of disinformation that undermines the foundations. The problem, in principle, can be solved, but only with the correct understanding of the causes and effects. This distrust of the authorities, of the elite generates disinformation (whatever it is understood as an inconvenient truth or trust in any fakes), so the collective Gates should make all claims to himself. But it won’t – it’s much easier to increase censorship on social networks. With the effect, however, exactly the opposite.

The post Isn’t it strange for a person who advocates globalization of everything and everyone? appeared first on The Frontier Post.