‘Controligarchs’ lays bare a nightmare society the globalist elites have in store for humanity

Journalist Seamus Bruner has published new details on globalist plans to dominate every aspect of our lives, including our food, movement, and transactions

A newly released book gives a fresh, well-documented look into the nightmarish, dystopian society that billionaire globalists are shaping for humanity, in which our every movement and transaction will be tracked, our food will be restricted, and our perception of reality will be heavily manipulated.

Controligarchs: Exposing the Billionaire Class, their Secret Deals, and the Globalist Plot to Dominate Your Life is a thoroughly researched book by investigative journalist Seamus Bruner detailing the global game plan of what he refers to as a new class of oligarchs. They are distinguished from ultra-wealthy elites of the past by the unprecedented level of control they can exercise over the masses through technology, not just over one nation, but over the whole world.

Bruner shows how the globalist elites plan to impose a new kind of serfdom by controlling nearly every facet of our lives, with different billionaires specializing in different areas, beginning with what is most personal to us — our bodies.

After giving a bird’s eye view of the globalists’ plans through the lens of the Great Reset, Bruner dives into each of the globalists’ main levers of power over society, which exert control, respectively, over what goes into our bodies; over home energy use and transportation; over local politics and law enforcement; and over information access and perception.

The journalist first shows how Bill Gates, who already exercises massive sway over world health policy through the World Health Organization (WHO) and investments in vaccines, is also heavily investing in a root source of health: the food supply.

Bruner explains in his book that the “takeover of the food” is accomplished by “controlling the intellectual property of food production through trademarks, copyrights, and patents.” This has already been seen in Gates’ funding and control of seed patents, and in his push for patented synthetic fertilizers, discussed by Bruner, which have caused considerable damage to health and small farms around the world.

The next phase of Gates’ food power grab, which has already begun, involves tighter control over farming through land and water grabs, as well as a push to replace meat consumption with that of synthetic and bug protein.

Bruner emphasizes in his book the importance of control over the water supply, writing, according to the New York Post, “When Gates buys tens of thousands of acres, he is not just buying the land — he is also buying the rights to water below ground. In addition to farms (and the irrigation) and fertilizer, Gates has been hunting for sizable interests in water and water treatment — a crucial component when seeking to control the agricultural industry.”

The journalist also examines how Gates and the “tech oligarchs” are pushing meat alternatives, ostensibly for the sake of the climate.

Gates has invested millions in companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods, which have already received more than two dozen patents for their synthetic meat and dairy products, and have more than 100 patents pending, according to Bruner. The alternatives aren’t popular now, but about two-thirds of Americans are reportedly willing to try it.

Breitbart reports that Controligarchs also documents the efforts of Mark Zuckerberg to make the Metaverse, a virtual reality platform linked to the internet and operated by Zuckerberg’s Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook), “the most addictive product in history.”

Meta and three of its subsidiaries have already been sued by the attorneys general of dozens of U.S. states for having “knowingly designed and deployed harmful features on Instagram and Facebook to purposefully addict children and teens.”

In comparison, the Metaverse, which has been described by the World Economic Forum’s Cathy Li as a kind of virtual world that will “become an extension of reality itself,” and which is designed to feel real with the help of virtual reality (VR) headsets and sensors, has the potential to become far more addictive than mere social media.

While it is still in the process of being developed, progress is steadily being made toward its widespread use. For example, last Thursday, Meta announced a new strategic partnership with China’s Tencent to make VR headsets cheaper and more accessible, according to Breitbart.

And this summer, Apple announced that it would release its own set of augmented reality glasses, called Apple Vision Pro, next year in the U.S.

The plans for the Metaverse get wilder — and for some, creepier. Meta AI researchers are working on a synthetic “skin” “that’s as easy to replace as a bandage,” called ReSkin, as well as “haptic gloves,” so that Metaverse users can “literally feel and grasp the metaverse.”

If it indeed becomes commonplace, as is planned, the Metaverse has enormous implications for society. Perhaps the most serious is that, as John Horvat II has observed, people will feel free to carry out “every fantasy, even the most macabre,” and perceive that they can do things to others “without consequences.”

“Such a lonely world disconnected from reality and the nature of things can feed the unfettered passions that hate all moral restraint. A space like this can quickly go from Alice in Wonderland to insane asylum,” Horvat noted.

Activities performed “in” the Metaverse would also be monitored by the platform’s administrators, drastically diminishing privacy for all Metaverse users.

The assimilation of everyday activities into the World Wide Web via the Metaverse also raises the question of whether any speech performed while “plugged in” to the Metaverse can be regulated by its administrators. Such unprecedented regulatory power would resemble that of a global government, which is an explicit goal of the World Economic Forum, a major supporter of the Metaverse.

The Metaverse may very well be a consolation prize for the restriction of real-life movement and activity, which is planned for all human beings regardless of their participation in the virtual world, according to Bruner.

Bruner shows that the globalists envision a world in which “your every movement” is “tracked and traced by electric vehicles and a smart power grid,” according to Schweizer, with which your thermostat can be turned off without your consent.

In fact, Bruner unveils a $1.2 billion plan by Jeff Bezos to “spy” on citizens using their “smart” homes, which have already been launched by Amazon.

Worse, all “transactions and affiliations” are to be “linked to digital currencies and IDs,” notes Schweizer, plans that have been in the works for years by global bodies such as the European Union (EU) and WHO, as well as nations worldwide.

Most recently, the Group of 20 (G20) — the 19 most influential countries on earth plus the European Union — has endorsed proposals to explore development of a “digital public infrastructure,” including digital identification systems and potentially a centralized digital currency.

Bruner’s description of the globalist plan for our lives is not speculation by any stretch but is based on thorough documentation, including financial filings, corporate records, and admissions from the very globalists themselves. This makes his book a valuable tool not only for those already acquainted with the Great Reset and its accompanying tyranny but for skeptics.

Bruner has advised, “jealously guard your wallet,” “jealously guard your personal data, especially that of your kids,” and “talk to your legislators and Congressmen and tell them to ban your taxpayer money from funding these initiatives.”

Up Next

Court ruling on plastics ban welcome news for Canadians

Don't Miss

Strike Two for Guilbeault – Federal Court Overturns Plastics Ban

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

The gun ban and buyback still isn’t worth it for taxpayers

National / 43 mins ago

Chrystia Freeland apparently was told last Friday via Zoom call that Canada’s prime minister had lost confidence in her and she was being replaced by Mark Carney

Business / 4 hours ago

Declining Canadian dollar could stifle productivity growth in Canada

Business

The gun ban and buyback still isn’t worth it for taxpayers

Published on December 18, 2024

Todayville

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Gage Haubrich

Even worse than the cost is the simple fact that the policy isn’t making Canadians safer. Trudeau banned the initial list of 1,500 guns in 2020, meaning that it’s illegal to buy, sell or use them. In every year since, violent gun crime in Canada has increased.

Right from the beginning, experts have told the prime minister that his gun ban and buyback will divert resources away from fighting crime rather than making Canada safer.

Instead of changing course, the Trudeau government announced it’s diverting even more taxpayers’ money to its failing gun policy policy.

And it’s an expensive diversion.

The federal government recently announced an additional 324 models of firearms are now prohibited and being added to the buyback list. That brings the total makes and models banned to almost 2,500.

Even though Ottawa hasn’t confiscated a single gun yet, costs have already begun to pile up for taxpayers. Since 2020, when the ban was first announced, the government has spent $67 million on the program. By the end of the fiscal year the government is likely to increase that number to about $100 million, according to government documents.

The projected costs of this scheme have been a problem from the start. In 2019, the government said the buyback would cost taxpayers $200 million. But according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, buying back the guns could cost up to $756 million, not including administrative costs. Other government documents show that the buyback is now likely to cost almost $2 billion.

Those costs do not include the newly banned firearms. And it looks like the government has plans to expand the list even further. That means even more costs to taxpayers.

Minister of Public Safety Dominic Leblanc, who is charge in charge of the gun ban, hinted during the press conference the popular SKS rifle might be added to the ban list next. There are estimated to be a million of those firearms in Canada.

That means the costs to taxpayers could soar and even more people could lose their guns. The PBO report estimates that there were about 518,000 firearms banned on the original list. Adding the SKS could more than double the projected $756 million it would cost to confiscate the guns.

The government tried to ban the SKS before. It was included in an amendment to Bill C-21 that would have seen it banned along with a lot of hunting rifles. The Assembly of First Nations immediately passed an emergency resolution opposing this amendment at the time.

“It’s a tool,” said Kitigan Zibi Chief Dylan Whiteduck about the list of rifles that would have been banned. “It’s not a weapon.”

The government backed down on that amendment. There is no doubt it would encounter similar resistance from Indigenous hunters if Ottawa reimposed it.

Even worse than the cost is the simple fact that the policy isn’t making Canadians safer. Trudeau banned the initial list of 1,500 guns in 2020, meaning that it’s illegal to buy, sell or use them. In every year since, violent gun crime in Canada has increased.

And international examples confirm the pattern. New Zealand conducted a similar, but more extensive, gun ban and buyback in 2019. New Zealand had 1,216 violent firearm offenses in 2023. That’s 349 more offences than the year before the buyback.

All of this only confirms what experts have said from the beginning: This cost a lot of money, but won’t make Canada safer.

The union that represents the RCMP says the buyback “diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”

“The gun ban is not working,” said the president of the Toronto Police Association. “We should focus on criminals.”

Academics who study the subject also agree.

“Buyback programs are largely ineffective at reducing gun violence, in large part because the people who participate in such programs are not likely to use those guns to commit violence,” said University of Toronto professor Jooyoung Lee.

Everyone but the prime minister can see the obvious. The costs for this program keep ballooning and taxpayers have every reason to worry the tab is only getting bigger. Yet our streets aren’t safer. Trudeau must scrap this ineffective and expensive gun buyback.

Business

Declining Canadian dollar could stifle productivity growth in Canada

Published on December 18, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Steven Globerman and Lawrence Schembri

The Bank of Canada’s decision last week to lower its policy rate by 50 basis points increases the gap between the U.S. Federal Reserve’s policy rate and the Bank of Canada’s rate to approximately 130 basis points. While this gap might close somewhat if the Federal Reserve lowers its rate at its meeting this week, a substantial U.S. premium will still exist.

Since borrowing rates are tied to policy rates, interest rates in Canada will remain well below those in the U.S. for the foreseeable future. This gap will continue to put downward pressure on the value of the Canadian dollar against the U.S. greenback, as investors favour higher-earning U.S. dollar-denominated assets over Canadian dollar assets. President-elect Trump’s threatened trade actions against Canada could also exert further downward pressure on the loonie, especially if the Bank of Canada responds to Trump’s actions by making additional rate cuts. For context, it took $1.33 Canadian dollars to purchase one U.S. dollar on January 1, 2024, compared to $1.43 Canadian dollars on December 13, 2024. This represents a substantial depreciation in the Canadian dollar’s value of approximately 7.6 per cent over the period.

What effects will a declining Canadian dollar have on the Canadian economy?

In short, it will increase demand for domestic output and labour and put upward pressure on inflation via higher import prices, and it could also lower productivity growth and further hurt living standards.

Why the impact on productivity?

Because Canada imports most of its machinery and equipment (including information and communications technology) from the U.S. and other countries, and investment in this type of physical capital helps drive productivity growth. A declining Canadian dollar makes capital equipment imports more expensive, thereby discouraging investment and slowing productivity growth. A declining Canadian dollar may also shelter domestic firms from foreign competition, which could dampen their incentive to invest in productivity-enhancing assets, even if they price their output in U.S. dollars.

Hence, if the Canadian dollar remains weak against the U.S. dollar and other currencies, it may be more difficult to reverse Canada’s productivity woes. Again, productivity—the amount of GDP per hour of labour the economy produces—is key to improving living standards, which have been on the decline in Canada. From July to September of 2024, the economy grew by 0.3 per cent yet per-person GDP (an indicator of living standards) fell by 0.4 per cent (after adjusting for inflation).

Canada also indirectly imports technology via direct investments made by U.S.-based companies in their Canadian subsidiaries. While a declining Canadian dollar makes it cheaper for U.S. companies to buy assets in Canada, it also reduces the U.S. dollar value of profits earned over time in Canada by American-owned companies. This phenomenon, combined with an unstable Canadian dollar, might discourage inward foreign direct investment and associated technology transfers by increasing the financial uncertainty of such investment.

To be clear, this is not a criticism of the Bank of Canada’s move last week to help lower domestic interest rates given the Bank’s primary mandate to meet its inflation rate target of 2 per cent. Rather, governments—including the Trudeau government—must enact policies to encourage business investment in productivity-enhancing assets.

For starters, policymakers should reduce business tax rates and the tax rate on capital gains, to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship. They should also dramatically reduce the regulatory burden and other barriers to entry and growth, especially those faced by small and medium-sized businesses. And the federal and provincial governments should increase competition in the domestic economy by reducing interprovincial trade barriers.

For example, the provinces could adopt a policy of “mutual recognition” so the standards and licencing requirements in one province would be accepted by all provinces. Provinces can also unilaterally eliminate self-imposed trade barriers (as Alberta did in 2019 with grazing permits for livestock). Of course, due to resistance from special interest groups that benefit from internal barriers, such reforms will not be easy. But the economic risks to the Canadian economy—from even the threat of a trade war with the U.S.—could generate support among Canadians for these reforms. Indeed, reducing interprovincial barriers to trade and labour mobility might be the single most important thing that governments in Canada could do to improve productivity.

With Canada’s lower inflation rate, weaker labour market and weaker economic growth outlook compared to the U.S., lower interest rates in Canada seem appropriate. Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem wants to see economic activity pick up to absorb slack in the economy and prevent inflation settling below the bank’s 2 per cent target. Clearly, the Bank should focus on inflation and domestic economic conditions. But policymakers must do their part to create a better environment for investment and innovation, the keys to productivity and increased living standards for Canadians.