globalization promotes starvation

Initially, globalization was encouraged to support the developing countries, but forty years after it was promoted by the New World Order Jerri maintains that the generous and sustainable nations that took it onboard are now sinking into potential starvation status themselves

“Globalization became a loud and insistent mantra since the 1970s simply because without co-operation, millions of people would have starved,” says Jerri, “and, right now, with an global excess population of over 2 billion people, half of which live in Europe, it is not just little black, brown or yellow people that are at risk but big, fat white people as well (who may as well eat up while the food lasts!)”

“Seventy-two nations are sustainable, reasonably food secure, capable of feeding their own populations, but 91 nations – including, incredibly, the generous European nations that opened their borders to immigration – are now unsustainable and rely totally upon the sustainable nations to feed them.”

“Rather than staving off starvation, globalization promotes starvation and a multitude of other problems,” says Jerri. “And it is particularly useless if the globalists pushing it refuse to address the underlying causes of poverty and starvation out of fear of upsetting the major religions.”

“These are the same causes that brought my Irish ancestors unstuck – too many people depending on not enough arable land – and are easily addressed by contraceptives, delaying marriage, saving money and stocking up on emergency food.”

“Rather than admitting that the policy naively devised to promote global harmony will ultimately lead to global food wars -- and immediately doing something to avert widespread starvation – the globalists are either incompetent idiots, or they are totally evil and fully intend to wipe out half of the world’s population by withholding food when it suits them to do so.”

See also:

• emigrate to a food secure nation!
  
• Echoes of Ireland’s Starvation
  
• time to stock up on food?
  
• one child is enough
  
• go forth, multipy and starve
  
• are we a plague on the earth?
  
• Europe Risks Starvation?

a global chinese curse!

When people think about welfare they think about the unemployed,single mothers, the disabled and the aged but Ellissa points out that by far the biggest slice of taxpayer funds is spent on corporate welfare, and with the Global New World Order coming into existence these hidden welfare recipients are going to be shaken out of their comfort zones and forced to compete on the open market.

"In its free trade agreements, the USA seeks to remove all barriers to government purchasing markets," says Ellissa, "and what this means is that corporations which have enjoyed a crony relationship with governments are going to lose their preferential treatment (their corporate welfare payments) and their God-given right to be baled out of occasional financial difficulties."

"Look at it this way," explains Ellissa. "Single mothers receive an allowance for raising children that one day will become productive members of society, and unemployed people receive an allowance to assist them to find productive work."

"Nobody who works and pays tax likes the idea of their money going into supporting these so-called parasites," says Ellissa, "but if they knew how much of their tax money was going towards supporting the corporate parasites there would be a revolution."

"Corporate welfare is money paid to individuals who run companies that organize the provision of goods and services to governments," says Ellissa. "It is welfare because these individuals are middle-men. The government could just as easily deal directly with the primary producer of goods and services but because the middle-man is a crony, part of the Old Boys' Network,he gets the contract and is kept off the unemployment queues."

"Anyone can set up one of these corporations," says Ellissa, "but without a close relationship with someone in government you won't get anywhere. Even if government purchasing projects are sent to Tender, they always go to the Old Boys. The whole system is rigged."

"I know all this because I worked for a guy who ran one of these corporations,"confides Ellissa. "He and I worked out of a poky little downtown office and you'd never believe the dodgy deals he did, the fat government checks he received and the thin tax he paid. When I worked out that I was paying more in tax from my wage than he was paying in total, I moved on in disgust. It gives me great pleasure to know that he, and guys like him, will soon lose their preferential status."

"In the new world order, this preferential treatment in government purchasing deals is going to be abolished," says Ellissa. "A free trade agreement means the abolition of all corporate welfare, and no signatory nation to a free trade agreement can ban competition on any grounds."

"As Canada is already discovering in its legal battles with Ethyl (a US chemical company) and United Parcel Service (UPS, a US corporation) even publicly owned services are under fire," says Ellissa, "and if a national postal service can be seen as a violating monopoly because it uses its public infrastructure to cross-subsidize services then it's not just the small welfare corporations that are at risk but the whole public infrastructure of education, health, electricity, roads and water."

"Free trade guarantees competition and, flowing on from this, more efficient and cheaper goods and services," says Ellissa. "The cosy partnerships governments have traditionally had with their preferred corporations -- the ones receiving welfare -- are being eroded, and this is a very good thing."

"Perhaps what is not good about free trade is that it will lead to the privatisation of essential services, such as health and water, that most of us believe are better managed by us (the government) than by a private company,"says Ellissa. "However, in that we have elected some very strange people to lead us and there is no guarantee that our electoral system is 100%foolproof, perhaps privatization will prove to be far better in the long run -- as long as it comes with plenty of competition."

"All of these changes mean that we will be paying less tax -- at least I hope so!" laughs Ellissa, "but paying more for services that will be provided directly by private companies in competition with each other rather than subsidized by taxpayer money as they are now."

"So, along with the corporate welfare guys, like the one I once worked for, all of our public servants now in lifelong taxpayer provided jobs, will soon be seeking work in the private sector," says Ellissa. "It's going to be interesting times ahead we'll be living in!"

"And that, if you didn't know already, is a Chinese curse!"


Ellissa's story first appeared as hello free trade, goodbye corporate welfare and is reprinted with permission.

narcissists and psychopaths in government

Gladys is from an older generation that despises the New World Order for not only spawning governments that dictate rather than do our bidding but also for providing the narcissists and psychopaths among us with a niche they would never have found decades ago.

"We've all come across these people in our private lives," says Gladys. "The narcissistic store clerk who tries to influence you into buying something they think would be better for you, because they say so; or the psychopathic check out clerk at the '10 items only line' who counts every item and aggressively refuses to allow you to buy the 11th item in your basket. Putting people like this in REAL positions of power over us is what dictatorships do, not democratic governments."

"Narcissists -- those possessing a personality disorder marked by an overestimation of their own appearance and abilities and an excessive need for admiration -- are drawn to positions of power like moths to a flame," says Gladys, "and governments with an agenda to push appear to deliberately recruit these flawed individuals because of their personal characteristics. Who better to change our behavior than the narcissists who childishly demand that the world revolve around themselves and that others alter their behavior or appearance to conform with theirs."

"Got too many fat people, smokers or slackers? Call in the narcissists," laughs Gladys. "Who better than the narcissists, addicted to complete domination over whatever space or situation they find themselves in -- believing themselves to be more special than anyone else, and more perfect in every respect -- to whip people into shape."

"They think in black and white terms, you're with us or against us, there is no middle ground," says Gladys, "and being masters of character assassination -- of playing the man rather than the ball -- they can be ruthlessly cruel in trying to make everyone conform to their impossibly perfect standards."

"Unlike narcissists -- whose excessive need for admiration can be controlled somewhat by consistent ridicule -- psychopaths are truly dangerous people," says Gladys, "and the fact that they are fast taking up more and more positions of power within our governments, removing our freedoms and leading us back to slavery, is something all of us should condemn."

"Psychopaths have a personality disorder marked by aggressive, violent and anti-social thoughts and behaviours," says Gladys, "and their worst trait of all is a complete lack of remorse or empathy. They are the hatchet men and woman that governments might employ for short periods in national emergencies, but certainly should NOT employ in positions of permanent employment where they can gain totalitarian control over others, enrich themselves by fraudulent means and engage in abuse of law-abiding citizens with impunity."

"Without a cause to inflame their passions, both narcissists and psychopaths are dangerous, but should they actually espouse the cause of their political masters -- which would be likely, taking into consideration why they were employed in the first place -- the power they have been given can have disastrous effects on the rest of us."

"Take any issue -- obesity, guns, smoking, global warming, whatever," says Gladys. "Rather than attacking the industries whose products produce the undesired effects, these people have been given free reign to attack the consumers instead -- peaceful, law-abiding citizens, often vulnerable people without the resources to fight back."

"It is our behavior -- our consumption of these products or irresponsible use of them -- that is at fault," explains Gladys, "and it is their job to teach us a lesson in good behavior by massive and expensive public education onslaughts, reinforced by personal attacks -- name-calling, bullying, bizarre accusations, domineering intrusions, assaults on democracy, discrimination and the use of force if necessary."

"It has nothing really to do the cause, whatever it might be -- causes come and go -- but everything to do with power," says Gladys. "In political systems set up to protect us against dictators, how is it that our governments are employing these crazies to crush us and force us to do their bidding?"

"What sort of democracy are we living in where these narcissists and psychopaths are given power to brazenly demand all right of control over public and private property as well as the private lives and personal choices of others?"

"How are we supposed to defend our democratic rights against people who are pathologically incapable of understanding or caring about human values and feelings and the future consequences of their actions?"

"As the saying goes," sighs Gladys, "the lunatics are now in charge of the asylum."

"We can rid ourselves of their political masters -- those responsible for hiring them -- at election time," says Gladys, "but how can we rid ourselves of these monsters who now just about rule our public service and all the advisory bodies out there -- and, conceivably, can even rig elections to ensure their political masters remain in power?"

"Narcissists and psychopaths, by nature, have no respect for democratic principles and will use the system, unashamedly, for personal gain," says Gladys. "Do we wait until they expose themselves -- by doing something so outrageous that they're forced to resign -- or do we demand, right now, an ongoing psychological assessment of all people in public employment and root them out before they do more damage?"

smoking and boiled frogs

Deira, a closet smoker, likens the slow but spectacularly successful gains of the anti-smoking movement over the freedoms of smokers to boiling water and cooked frogs.

"I honestly believe it is far too late to undo the damage," says Deira. "We did nothing but grumble when they turned on the heat 25 years ago -- and increased the heat a degree higher with each passing year -- and now we're cooked."

"I'm a closet smoker because I'd lose my job, my home and respect in the community if my secret habit became known," confides Deira. "I never smoke outside my home and even then I only smoke in the kitchen next to the exhaust fan over the cooker so that my neighbors can't smell the cigarette smoke and get me evicted."

"I notice more and more smokers are now coming out angrily demanding restitution of their rights," says Deira, "but they're wasting their breath -- what remains of it after years of smoking -- and can't possibly catch up with the spectacularly successful efforts of the anti-smoking movement in changing community values."

"The anti-smokers are now in government -- from the top right down to the lowest minion of the public service," laughs Deira, "and no pro-smoking political party will ever gain the ground that the anti-smokers took from them years ago."

"Don't they get it?" laughs Deira. "The time to have stood up and spoken up for smokers' rights was 25 years ago when the anti-smokers coughed their first disapproving cough."

"It's like everything else that's gone to the dogs in our community," sighs Deira. "We stood by in a spirit of tolerance and fair play and let them take away our rights one by one."

"Sure, it was fair to have non-smoking areas -- people who don't smoke shouldn't have to put up with smoky rooms," says Deira, "but who would have thought that in giving them these areas they would take away ours?"

"Sure, it was fair to have warning labels on cigarette packs -- tobacco companies need to protect themselves from litigation," says Deira, "but who would have thought that these labels would turn into ugly, gory graphics of diseases no smoker I know has ever had or is likely to have?"

"Sure, it was fair to increase taxes on cigarettes -- the health risks of smoking need to be paid for," says Deira, "but who would have thought they would deny us medical help when we needed it?"

"Sure, it was fair to smoke outside in the snow and sleet when there's nowhere else to smoke," says Deira, "but who would have thought they would then deny us this place to smoke when summer came and they wanted to be outside?"

"Sure, it was fair to smile and act chastised when someone you knew voice their disapproval," says Deira, "but who would have thought that total strangers -- even people who sell you cigarettes -- now have a God-given right to sneer at you?"

"I could go on and on," sighs Deira, "but I got the message years ago and I am angry that smokers who were in positions of power years ago chose to ignore what was going on and did nothing to stop the situation getting worse."

"A whole generation of young, vigorous people raised on anti-smoking propaganda are now in those positions of power," says Deira, "and I have nothing but contempt for all those old fogies, pushed out to pasture and stripped of their rights to smoke, bleating on to each other about civil liberties."

"No pro-smoking politician or activist will ever be able to preach to anyone other than fellow-smokers," says Deira, "and since so many of us are now closet smokers, who are they kidding about being able to turn the tide?"

"The tide's gone out and it ain't ever coming back in!"

"Nobody can have a reasonable discussion about freedom to smoke with any of these young people in positions of power," says Deira. "They have been brainwashed -- literally fed with anti-smoking propaganda since they started school -- and every time I have tried to put forward my position, with reasonable evidence, I have been contradicted with propaganda and abuse. It's like trying to argue with a religious fanatic -- you just don't bother!"

"What really hurts about these anti-smokers in positions of power is that they do not wish to make smoking less harmful by encouraging the tobacco industry to come up with a benign cigarette -- and they do not wish to delve into the myriad of reasons why anyone would take up smoking in the first place," says Deira. "They just want to stop everyone from smoking, and that's that. They know best. They're God or God's on their side."

"Even those who make their living off smokers -- the tobacco companies, the club and bar owners and the tobacco shops -- are bowing to the New World Order and meekly accepting the government's bullying tactics, telling them what they can and cannot do on their own premises," says Deira. "They are diversifying, trying to find a new way to make money. Not one of them, as far as I know, has come out in front of the media and supported the smokers who support them -- but then what media would give the time of day to lost causes?"

"Damn it," curses Deira, "even when you get online and try to find a site that supports smokers you check out their links and find that they are moles for ASH."

"Face it guys, you're cooked," laughs Deira, "and NO, you're not welcome to come join me in a closet smoke under the kitchen exhaust fan."

"If you had been on the ball, doing your job and protecting our rights over the past 25 years -- rather than partying and enjoying the perks of power -- I wouldn't have been forced into becoming a closer smoker. Okay?"