The modeling of the human and Final victory of materialism

The modeling of the human
The roots of today's transhumanism go back a long way historically. Part 2/3.
By Birgit Naujeck
[This article published on 5/6/2022 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/die-modellierung-des-menschen-2.]

Despite the totalitarian approach, the Plandemie and the war in Ukraine, which the West is partly to blame for, give us prospects and hope for a better future. More and more people in the West are realizing their disenfranchisement by the Deep State. While the U.S.-led West pushes a unipolar paradigm of world government, depopulation and zero-sum thinking, a program of controlled pandemics and wars, a multipolar alliance has formed that is in the process of organizing the sovereign nation-state around a paradigm of long-term thinking, scientific optimism and win-win cooperation. Recognizing these two opposing paradigms is more important today than ever to prevent the nevertheless very disturbing spirit of the Great Reset architects who are now driving society into a "fourth industrial revolution" in the belief that automation and artificial intelligence will make most of humanity obsolete. World Economic Forum star philosopher Yuval Harari has repeatedly described this prospect: "Technology can transform human society and the meaning of human life in many ways, from the creation of a global useless class to the rise of data colonialism and digital dictatorships."

The 19th century state system is indisputably described as a multipolar system; multiple states shared equal power on the world stage. Equally undisputed, the second half of the 20th century is described as bipolar, a term from the Cold War era. The world was divided into a Western Hemisphere, led by the USA, and an Eastern Hemisphere, led by the USSR. After the revolution of citizens in East Germany in 1989, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, it seemed clear that the U.S. was the only remaining superpower since the early 1990s. In this context, the U.S. professor and author William Wohlforth already speaks of a monopolar or unipolar system.

The 19th century coming to an end

The fact that we are repeatedly facing a crossroads of world systems has to do above all with the breakthroughs in science and statecraft at the end of the 19th century, which led to the new petrochemical/electronic age. Scientists in atomic physics such as Marie Curie, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Antoine Becquerel, Max Planck, Albert Einstein and so on changed the concept of energy, matter, space and time. The foundations of Malthus's law of population that had held true until then were thus destroyed; human inventions exceeded the limits of nature - the priesthood of controlling population growth from above, from nations, was ripe for the mothballs.

Robert Thomas Malthus is infamous for his statement that a widespread collapse of the food supply would be helpful because it would wipe out the poor. His fictional scenario was later called the Malthusian catastrophe. Malthus is significant because his ideas led to the rise of a new field of science that eventually determined the course of human history for over 200 years. Charles Darwin, an admirer of the concept of the Malthusian catastrophe, developed the theory of evolution. One of its main tenets was "survival of the fittest."

A cousin of Darwin, Francis Galton, developed biometrics in the 1870s to track racial characteristics and genetic development, as well as to decide who should be allowed to reproduce. The world's wealthy classes, and especially the world's monarch families, already obsessed with procreation and filled with a deep contempt for the lower classes, pounced on the new science and began to impose their goals with extreme vehemence around the world.

Galton himself saw an opportunity for humanity to progress from Darwin's theory of evolution with basic social principles applied to Social Darwinism. The Darwin-Wedgewood, Galton and Huxley families were so obsessed with their new theory of social design that they vowed to reproduce only within their families. They erroneously predicted that they would produce supermen in just a few generations. The emerging pseudoscience merely provided the bogus justification for inbreeding, which had been common among elites for millennia. The experiment of the families mentioned above amounted to a disaster. After only a few generations of incest, many of their offspring died at birth or were physically or mentally disabled.

Disinterested in the Empire policy of eugenics, there was an explosion of scientific research and invention on the European continent and in the new U.S. republic, accompanied by a growing popular interest in these subjects.

A widespread private empire had grown up around the British East India Company, consolidating its control over global finance and trade across the seas. This empire saw the rising optimism of the population as a mortal threat to its power. It feared above all the development of the nation-state as a vehicle for scientific progress. Such progress, however, would give nations the economic power to resist the empire. Above all, the spirit of progress itself would change the people and make them unwilling to submit to any system of tyranny. The leading forces of the British Empire sought solutions to meet the existential challenge: the system of Hobbesian "zero-sum" geopolitics (1) could not be undermined.

In addition to all this, strategic alliances, such as between Russia and the U.S. (2), occurred during this period, which meant another defeat for British forces both in the City of London and on Wall Street, in the slaveholding of the U.S. South, and in British Canada. A new global system was building as statesmen adopted the "U.S. system of political economy" (3) to extricate their nations from the manipulation of empire. While the U.S. system was a fundamentally open system based on limitless technological progress and the subordination of money to national sovereignty, the British system was fundamentally closed and based on the worship and control of money by private financiers, debt bondage, and speculation. Plainly put, while one focused on production, the other merely plundered parasitically.

Henry C. Carey made this dichotomy clear when he foresaw the global nature of the coming American Civil War in his 1852 work Harmony of Interests: "Two systems are in store for the world; the one aims at increasing the proportion of persons and capital engaged in trade and transportation, and therefore at diminishing the proportion engaged in the production of commodities which are traded, with necessarily diminished returns to the labor of all; while the other aims at increasing the proportion engaged in the labor of production, and diminishing the proportion engaged in trade and transportation, with increased returns to all, giving good wages to the laborer and good profits to the owner of capital (. ..). The one strives for impoverishment, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other for increasing wealth, convenience, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization. The one strives for universal war, the other for universal peace. The one is the English system; the other we may proudly call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised whose tendency has been to improve and at the same time to equalize the condition of men throughout the world" (page 41).

Carey elaborated his theory of economics as just not a zero-sum system in his anti-Malthusian treatise Unity of Law by pointing out that all should benefit from the development of mental and physical powers.

In 1890, William Gilpin, in his book Cosmopolitan Railway, presented in-depth studies of railroad projects that would connect all parts of the world as part of a new culture of scientific and technological progress for all. Gilpin specifically noted that this system would be financed by national banks that would create long-term productive credit, protectionism, and universal education for the benefit of all; a book about a future postcolonial world.

Carey, Gilpin, and others painted a future for all, regardless of skin or eye color, gender, place of residence, age, et cetera. Everyone should be able to exercise their right to participate.

The response of the empire

However, the British Empire would not and did not go down without a fight; a new imperial grand strategy was formulated at the ideological nerve center of Cambridge and the Royal Society.

In 1865, a group of scientists led by Thomas Huxley (4), Joseph Hooker (Darwin's closest friend), and Herbert Spencer (founder of Social Darwinism and co-editor of the Economist) formed the X Club (5). The mission was clear, to reform British global imperial strategy. The goal: to formulate the science of limits into the basis of an oligarchic economic science for the elite that followed Thomas Malthus' mathematical principle of population growth.

Malthus and the later leaders of the X Club believed that nature provided the ruling class with certain means to accomplish this important task-namely, war, famine, and disease-and Malthus explained this in detail in his "Essay on Population" (1799): "We should facilitate the operations of nature in producing this mortality, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to hinder it; and if we fear the all too frequent visitation of the terrible form of famine, we should zealously encourage the other forms of destruction which we impose upon nature. In our cities we should narrow the streets, crowd more people into homes, and court the return of the plague."

The X Club's endorsement of Darwin's theory of natural selection was not so much a scientific decision as a political one in this regard, as Darwin later admitted in his autobiography that his own theory had grown directly out of his study of Malthus's writings: "In October 1838, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic investigation, I happened to read for pleasure Malthus on population, and being prepared by long observation of the habits of animals and plants to understand the struggle for existence which was going on everywhere, it at once became clear to me that under these circumstances favorable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavorable ones destroyed. The result would be the formation of a new species. So here at last I had a theory to work with."

By universalizing Malthus to all living creation, the X-Club blurred the qualitative difference between humans and apes, which was beneficial to an empire that could control humans only if they adopted the law of the jungle as the standard for moral practice and identity formation, rather than anything actually moral.

Huxley soon decided that the group should start a magazine to spread their propaganda. Nature (6), founded in 1869, contained articles by Huxley and several members of the X-Club. The deeper purpose of the X-Club and its magazine was aimed at redefining all branches of science based on a statistical-empirical interpretation of the universe that denied the existence of a creative reason in man and nature.

Science was transformed from the limitless exploration and perfection of truth into a mathematically sealed science of limits.

In order for the new imperial strategy to be implemented, new think tanks were needed:

The Fabian Society (7), founded in 1884 by eugenics-minded Marxists led by Sidney and Beatrice Webb and George Bernard Shaw, soon attracted other figures, including Thomas Huxley's disciple H.G. Wells, Lord Halford Mackinder, John Maynard Keynes, and Lord Bertrand Russell. But Tussy Marx also found herself on the membership list early on. For the education of talented members of the global elite, the Fabian Society founded the London School of Economics. Its political arm is and was the Labour Party it founded; all previous Labour government leaders belonged to the Fabian Society.

In 1902, a second think tank, the Round Table Group (8), was founded in Oxford under the leadership of Lord Alfred Milner and George Parkin; it grew out of the secret society Cecil Rhodes' Society of the Elect. Throughout the Anglo-Saxon Commonwealth, people moved very quickly to implement branches of the Round tables - as described by Professor Carrol Quigleys in Anglo-American Establishment. Funding for this group came from Cecil Rhodes' estate, and its mission was explained in Rhodes' 1877 will:

"Let us establish the same kind of society, a church for the extension of the British Empire. A society which should have its members in every part of the British Empire, working with one aim and one idea, we should place its members in our universities and schools and watch the English youth pass through their hands, only one perhaps in a thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an aim, he should be tested in every way, he should be tested to see if he is persevering, eloquent, regardless of the trifles of life, and if found to be so, then elected and bound by oath to serve his country for the rest of his life. He should then be supported by society if he has no means, and sent to that part of the realm where he is needed."

The Rhodes Trust settled at Oxford, where young talent from across the Commonwealth was brainwashed on Rhodes Scholarships and grew into a new generation of imperial high priests guided by Rhodes' edict to establish a new Church of the British Empire. These think tanks would coordinate British policy with a twofold goal:

Destruction of all creative open systems thinking in political economy and science; subjugation of the race to a new global feudal order directed by a master class.

In his manifesto, Imperial Federation (1892), the man who would later become co-founder and director of the Rhodes Trust-George Parkin-wrote of the inevitable collapse of empire unless the corrosive forces of sovereign nation-states could be destroyed: "Has our capacity for political organization reached its utmost limit? For the British people, this is the question of all questions. In the whole range of possible political variations in the future, there is no question of such far-reaching importance, not only to our own people but to the whole world, as whether the British Empire shall remain a political unit (...) or whether it shall yield to disintegrating forces and allow the stream of national life to be divided into many separate channels."

These new think tanks wasted no time in putting a new grand strategy into action. Two of the most important figures to guide the application of the unimaginative science of empire were the future leader of the Fabian Society and Cambridge apostle Lord Bertrand Russell and his colleague David Hilbert, who in 1900 launched a new project to try to contain the entire universe in a very small mathematical box devoid of any creative vitality. The disciples of Russell and Hilbert named this box "cybernetics" and "information systems theory." The later foundation for the development of transhumanism, artificial intelligence, and the fourth industrial revolution was laid.

Sources and Notes:

(1) The fear that there is not enough to go around was shaped in the 19th and 20th centuries when hard industrial labor dominated life and workers often had no choice but to follow the wishes of employers. Work was a necessary evil back then, and wealth had to be redistributed so that not only entrepreneurs, big landowners and their children had the chance to live a fulfilled life. From that time also comes the belief that a poorer person can only gain if something is taken away from a richer person. In this worldview, everything is directed from the top down, including corporations, because they choose the workers who they then exploit. The idea that people choose their own employers or even start their own companies hardly plays a role in this debate. In politics, this old thinking appears almost everywhere: in tax policy, the question of retirement age, the minimum wage, the return of white-collar workers to full-time employment; but also in questions of population growth and immigration. Again and again, the zero-sum policy comes into play: someone has to give something so that someone else gets more.

(2) In recent history, methods of the American system have been tried in opening up the Arctic for mutual development and cooperation, beginning with the sale of Alaska to America in 1867 by Tsar Alexander II to Abraham Lincoln's allies. These same forces orchestrated the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway and strongly promoted the Bering Strait Railroad Tunnel linking the two great continents, which came into being at the turn of the century. Early designs for the Russian-American rail link were published in 1893 by Governor William Gilpin of Colorado, and were again supported in 1905 by the soon-to-be-deposed Tsar Nicholas II. Russia revived this project in 2011.

(3) The "American System of Political Economy" is first mentioned in 1791 by Alexander Hamilton - then Secretary of the Treasury of the just-founded United States - in: A Report on the Subject of Manufactures to Congress. It goes back to cameralistics. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, for example, dealt with this in his treatise "Societät und Wirtschaft".

(4) Although Huxley led a hard and early impoverished life, he was admitted to Britain's most prestigious scientific association, the British Royal Society, at the age of 25. This remarkable twist of fate in a society with rigid class barriers based on birth shows that Huxley was supported by powerful patrons. When Thomas Huxley was 17, he attended a formal grammar school for only two years. Before that, at age 13, he was apprenticed to various surgeons at age 15. While his peers attended Oxford or Cambridge, Huxley cared for the poorest of the poor in the London slums, who were dying of typhoid, venereal disease, malnutrition, and alcoholism. Later, with funds borrowed from his family, Huxley completed medical school, where he showed promise and won prizes in anatomy. However, his poverty prevented him from completing his education and becoming a licensed physician.

(5) How does an empire deal with this problem when the leading families are, at best, amateurs in science? In the 1830s and 1840s, the desperate view in Britain, the seat of the Empire, was that all was lost if scientific optimism could not be countered. So a new pseudoscience was created to destroy that spirit. To this end, a group of intellectuals was recruited from the lower classes who had the drive and discipline that the leading families and their members lacked. This grouping gave full support and freedom of thought to set in motion a new imperial strategy.

(6) During the 20th century, Nature Magazine earned an ugly reputation as a proponent of deductive/inductive models of thought that destroyed the careers and lives of many creative scientists. One such scientist was immunologist Jacques Benveniste (1935 to 2004), who endured a 15-year witch hunt by Nature Magazine as punishment for his discoveries about "water memory and life," that is, how organic molecules configure the geometry of H2O molecules and imprint their information on water - see documentaries Water Memory and Luc Montagnier. Today, the legacy of Alexander von Humboldt, Karl Erst von Baer, Georges de Cuvier, and Jacques Benveniste is alive and well with Luc Montagnier and teams of international researchers who have taken theoretical, experimental, and clinical work on water memory to a revolutionary new level with the opening of a new school of quantum optical biophysics: Montagnier sheds new light on COVID-19 and the future of medicine. Montagnier described the coming revolutions in biology by saying, "The day we admit that signals can have tangible effects, we will use them. From that moment on, we will be able to treat patients with waves. So this is a new area of medicine that people naturally fear. Especially the pharmaceutical industry (...); one day we will be able to treat cancers with frequency waves." With Montagnier's bold call for an international scientific crash program of harmonic wave therapy to treat COVID-19, and with the new alignment of nationalist systems in the midst of the multi-polar alliance led by Russia and China, there is a serious chance that the new paradigm of win-win cooperation espoused by Henry C. Carey, Lincoln, and other people may indeed flourish once again.

(7) On a winter afternoon in February 1891, three men in London were having a serious conversation. Consequences of the greatest importance for the British Empire and for the world at large were to flow from this conversation, for these men were about to form a secret society which was to be a major force in the formulation and conduct of British foreign policy for more than fifty years.The three men engaged were already well known in England. The leader was Cecil Rhodes, who met with the journalist William T. Steadand Reginald Baliol Brett aka Lord Esher, friend and confidant of Queen Victoria and later the most influential advisor to King Edward VII and King George V. The three men were already well known in England. The three drew up an organizational plan for their secret society and a list of founding members. The organizational plan called for an inner circle to be known as the "Society of the Chosen" and an outer circle to be known as the "Society of Helpers." Within the Society of the Chosen, real power was to be exercised by the leader and a "Junta of Three." The leader was to be Rhodes, and the junta was to consist of Stead, Brett, and Alfred Milner. In accordance with this decision, Milner was admitted to the Society shortly after the meeting described above. After the end of the First Boer War and Rhodes' death, the secret society was "re-established".

Birgit Naujeck, born in 1963, did not grow up in the GDR (east Germany), but was socialized by it. She worked for many years in different countries as a project manager in information technology. The nature and environmentalist currently lives on the Rhine, but is already working on realizing her childhood dream: a life in nature with animals and humans. From her opposition to technocracy, she clearly opposes 5G, transhumanism, any eugenics, and the disembodiment of our language, which leads to the rewriting of history and gender.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


The natural normality
We have the right to live in an analog world in which we are neither monitored nor exposed to a health-damaging radiation load.
by Anke Kern
[This article published on 5/6/2022 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/die-naturliche-normalitat.]

Countless articles and books have been written by brave people and published by more brave people during the Corona era, since the worst of all epidemics began to ravage this country in the spring of 2020. This crisis has revealed that there are very special people in all sectors of society in our homeland. Now, among other things, we have at our disposal extensive expertise about what has happened and what future the actual rulers have envisioned for their subjects. Of course, everything is for our own good. But is there perhaps still something missing in knowledge? Possibly something very important?

Lao Tzu, which translates as "old master," is said to have left us numerous words of wisdom, including this one: "Before you set out to improve the world, go through your own house three times." Also, the message of being responsible not only for what you have done, but also for what you have failed to do. These may be good beginnings for developing real awareness and real coming to terms with a crisis for a future worth living.

The rulers in times of patriarchy always wanted to rule over others and expand their power. Every means was and is right for them. The history of mankind has shown that.

Money rules the world, not governments. But what is the role of the ruled? Do we have to submit to them, or do all people perhaps have a natural right to a long, healthy and fulfilled life in peace, freedom and justice on this wonderful water planet Earth, which gives us the basis in abundance for everything we need?

Is it our lot to obey the orders of the rulers unconditionally, or is there something we can contribute ourselves to a peaceful change towards a "new earth", so that one day we will no longer be forced to live externally determined lives and work predominantly for others?

Using the key technology for a "smart" future, in which there is to be more and more surveillance as part of the "new normal", an attempt is made here to draw attention to something.

The expansion of surveillance technology in the shadow of "Corona".

Numerous 4G transmitting stations (LTE) have been upgraded to 5G during the crisis, as well as new transmitting stations built and so much more in preparation for "smart" cities and 5G down to the milk can. Those in political office, who for years have denied health protection or a precautionary policy and unquestioningly put the health of the population at risk through the increasingly intensive electromagnetic contamination of our living environment, allow the poisoning of Mother Earth with glyphosate and so much more, now pretend to suddenly have a great interest in protecting our health.

Exactly those who for years have not answered open letters and cries for help from people who have become ill from radiation exposure, who consistently ignore doctors' pamphlets and international serious study results, are we now supposed to entrust our health to? How ignorant, naive, easily fooled or believing do you have to be to do this? Isn't it the case that trust has to be earned? Have people in political office ever really earned trust?

5G on Earth and, thanks to Elon Musk, in space - who actually allowed him to broadcast every corner of this planet with tens of thousands of 5G satellites? - is unfortunately the consequence of 2G to 4G, as preparation for total surveillance in real time. 6G would be the next step. Step by step, until there is no turning back? The age of technocracy has long been planned by the rulers. They have made no secret of this.

Former U.S. government advisor Zbigniew Brzeziński is quoted in the book "The Think Tanks" by American political scientist and journalist F. William Engdahl as saying: "The technetronic era is characterized by the gradual emergence of a more controlled society. Such a society will be dominated by an elite unconstrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to ensure almost continuous surveillance of every citizen and to keep up-to-date files in which even the most private information about the citizen is recorded. These files can be immediately accessed by the authorities at any time." This statement comes from Brzeziński's book, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, published in the 1970s.

In the meantime, the rulers have been able to win over almost all people with more than clever marketing strategies to enthusiastically participate even in the construction of the surveillance structure.

Now they are everywhere, the ugly steel monstrosities on the roofs, in nature and along the streets ... To be accessible and monitorable at any time and everywhere by microwave radiation, even in the last corner of a nature reserve, seemed and still seems to be the highest happiness of most people. The price, also the health price, which they and all of us have to pay for this wish is unknown to them, for whatever reasons.

The pharmaceutical companies profit. So many are also unaware of the suffering of other people who have become ill with hypersensitivity due to the technically generated EMF (electromagnetic fields) and who have long been unable to live their lives as they would like. The suffering of other living beings, such as trees, bees, insects and birds, due to EMF is unknown to many. Only those who wanted to know, know about it. How did this strange disinterest in the subject come about among most people? Because knowledge about the dark side of this radiation technology exists in abundance.

How the rulers have deliberately manipulated their subjects into disinterest was impressively demonstrated by Professor Dr. Reiner Mausfeld based on his lecture in October 2017 at the Pleisweiler Gespräche. It can be found on the NachDenkSeiten. So the manipulators have managed to turn most people into spectators and consumers who do not ask questions. So aunt Erna was quite happy when she could finally send a picture of her dachshund Waldi by pulsed radiation to aunt Herta standing in the middle of the forest by 3G (UMTS). How this is actually possible did not interest her.

So this not-knowing, not-wanting and participating has led to the fact that we are now all together exactly at the point where we are with regard to the topic of surveillance. What really comes under the heading of "digitization" and what a "smart" phone is for should now have become clear to many. In the new normal with smart cities and smart houses, microwave technology and the "smart phone" end device play a very special role. Did the rulers only have to seduce people into being unable and unwilling to act without it, so that one can move on to the next step, namely to be unable to act without it?

How do really conscious people act on a "new earth"?

What makes a truly conscious person? Is it perhaps a person who strives for knowledge because he wants to know how to live consciously and as a mature person? Who also wants to live health-consciously, i.e. who takes responsibility for his own health and that of his children, as well as for the preservation of the natural foundations of life? Who feels responsible for everything he says and does, i.e. cultivates a sense of responsibility? Who is interested in more than just himself and looks beyond his own horizons?

Even the example of microwave communication technology, called "mobile communications," can tell you whether someone is living a conscious life and who could still use a little practice. Example: In the organic supermarket, a woman stands with her young daughter in front of a food shelf. Both are wearing mouth-nose protection, which cannot protect against viruses, and the mother is holding a phone to her head while talking to someone. Does she know that the pulsed microwave radiation from her active phone can, for example, cause her own red blood cells and those of the people around her to clump together, massively disrupt cell communication and open the blood-brain barrier, which has been proven by numerous studies for many years? How come she doesn't know this and acts irresponsibly? Because as an unconscious woman she is not aware of her responsibility, also towards herself?

But everyone does it that way, they say. No, not all of them. There are conscious people who strive for knowledge and whose knowledge has flowed into their being, that is, into responsible action.

There are people who do not participate in harming life, but consider life as sacred, as a divine gift. They strive for knowledge, out of love for life in harmony with nature and as part of it, sometimes making mistakes and knowing that they will be lifelong learners.

Are these perhaps the very people needed for a "new earth" in a "natural normality"?
How do we escape from an anti-life technocracy?

Maybe it is already too late, but maybe not. Maybe the child has not yet fallen too deep into the well, and we can still pull it out in time. So how do you start if you don't want total surveillance, which wouldn't exist in a true liberal democracy and a truly functioning constitutional state, as part of a new normal? You go through your own house three times and start with a first step. You could start by only switching on the high-frequency radiation (mobile radio, WLan, Bluetooth) of a microwave phone when you really want to use it, because you don't need it for taking photos and making films. This is usually so easy to turn on and off with the help of a few settings.

At the same time, you should make sure to keep your distance from other living creatures when your "cell phone" is on. There is a lot of literature about why you should do this. One finds answers for example in the again published books "5G - the secret danger" of the Umweltmediziners Dr. med. Joachim nut/mother and "5G Wahn(Sinn)" of the physics professor Dr. Klaus Buchner and the physician Dr. med. Monika Krout, in the remarkable work "world under river" of the US scientist Arthur Firstenberg as well as on different Internet sides, as for example "kompetenzinitiative.net" as well as "diagnose-funk.org".

And if you want to help stop 5G, if that's even possible, you could support the recently launched EU-wide citizens' initiative at "SignStop5G.eu/en". One doesn't have to work with harmful WLAN on the PC/laptop either, one can wire. One can even connect the microwave phone with the cable to the Internet. For this you need an adapter. Surprisingly, you can even have faster Internet. Step by step away from radiation, towards cable and increasingly back into an analog world, using the Internet mindfully as well as predominantly cash, sometimes writing a letter on nice stationery with a fountain pen and so on, is possibly the beginning of the end of the plans of the rulers.

"Right to analog life with social participation (...), that is, a right to be able to live without a smartphone," says professor Ulrike Guérot in her new, explosive book "Who is silent, agrees". Yes, we have that and also a right to live without forced radiation, which is now making life hell for many a person affected by hypersensitivity due to the additional 5G. There are people who are now actually fighting for their survival through this radiation terror. Nobody has the right to impose this hell! Also highly sensitive and ill people have a right to live.

We need people for a new earth, especially also in political offices, in the ministries and in the authorities, who are sincerely and honestly interested in the well-being of all, also in the preservation of natural bases of life and whose task it is to stand up for exactly this on their own responsibility. Now, at the latest, is indeed the time to consider how we want to live.

Humans and nature are not negotiable commodities, but life, which is sacred!

Anke Kern, born in 1962, worked as a business economist (FH) in the commercial department of a research company after graduating in business administration. As a mother, she learned another profession and taught people how to care for life (yangsheng) for almost 20 years until spring 2020. Since 2003, she has been working on health and environmental issues, especially microwave technology, giving lectures, initiating projects, and more.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Final victory of materialism
The Corona incident is the culmination of a conventional medical rollback that seeks to marginalize alternative cures such as homeopathy once again.
by Roland Rottenfußer
[This article published on 5/5/2022 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/endsieg-des-materialismus.]

It had already been the dominant medical ideology for a long time: orthodox medicine and its doctrine of the human body as a complex machine in need of occasional repair, based on the materialistic paradigm. But that is no longer enough for her. She wants to determine not most medical interventions, but all. "You shall have no other demigods (in white) beside me!" Just as it is not enough that a whopping majority of 60 or 70 percent of people are vaccinated. Yes, even at 90 percent there would still be a need for intensified manipulation until even the last bastion of otherness has fallen. In another context, this is also called totalitarianism. The attacks on homeopathy, anthroposophy, alternative practitioners and "esoterics" are increasing. Likewise, the aggressiveness with which the campaign is conducted. Clearly, a lot of money is at stake, especially "preventive medicine" - culminating in the process of vaccination - has tasted blood. There the professional food competition must be eliminated.

The empire drives a zero-alternative medicine strategy. And obviously the calculation works out ...

"Shit in their singing bowls." This tasteful slogan - first used by "anti-fascists" against the Corona opposition, brought it to cult status. With it above all "the Esoterik" was addressed, epitome of the unseriösen and thus despicable. Singing bowls are actually therapeutically effective props that gently vibrate the body of those treated with them. Placed on the belly and struck with a clapper, they tickle pleasantly. They sound good and take you to "exotic" realms. One should not expect miracles from them. But why this hatred, this contempt, why this coarse name-calling?

Gladly in the mainstream press in the past two years chains of association were formed in the following way: "Among the demonstration participants" were cross-thinkers, Corona deniers, conspiracy theorists, esotericists, Reich citizens and right-wing radicals. The inner proximity between all these groups did not even have to be seriously proven by the authors - it was enough to bring them vaguely into a context, according to the motto "A little dirt always sticks".

If, as a media consumer, one were to hear the word combination "florists, Stalinists and pedophiles" a hundred times, one would probably unconsciously solidify the impression that the flower arrangers must be quite horrible people.

Real knowledge of the nature and the different varieties of "esotericism" is by far not as widespread as the inflationary use of the term would suggest.

All the above-mentioned embodiments of evil - from the vaccination opponent to the tarot card reader to the UFO believer - naturally have one thing in particular in common: the irrationality factor. They all make a mockery of the principle of the reasonable and provable, in which the decent citizen has found his comfort zone and from which he is accustomed to suck his unshakable sense of superiority. The reasonable person stands with his nose held shut in front of everything that seems intangible and blurred in a fog of speculation, belief and hunch. "Nonsense!" he blurts out apodictically, while his eyebrow raises disapprovingly. He reads "Psiram," is boosted, flushes a lot of money into the coffers of the pharmaceutical companies through his drug consumption, and calls for a kind of faith dictatorship of the unbelievers - heresy persecution included.

Allgäu in Schwurblerhände

In recent times above all the alternative-medical branch "of the Esoterik" provided for furore. In a region probably not coincidentally very sympathetic to the author, the Bavarian Allgäu, a true Schwurblernest seems to have formed. Thus the web page of the radio station Allgäuhit interviewed the sect commissioner of the Protestant regional church, Matthias Pöhlmann. This sees "a clear connection of esoterischen groupings and vaccination opponents". In an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung, Pöhlmann had claimed: "We have in Bavaria and especially in the Allgäu a real Eldorado of esotericism and Reichsbürgertum." Often esotericism is understood as a "form of spiritual creativity," he said. "But that esotericism can mix with anti-democratic and anti-Semitic tendencies, the Allgäu is unfortunately an example of that." Evidence for this unhealthy mixture of spiritual irrationalism and anti-Semitism remains the sect commissioner guilty. He particularly detests the thesis "If you strengthen the immune system, you don't need vaccination." Pöhlmann considers this to be an "anthroposophical thought," as if the immune system were a sectarian invention of Rudolf Steiner.

The repression of the "irrational" in public debate goes partly hand in hand with open hostility to democracy and freedom.

The science journalist Mai Thi Nguyen-Kim can stand for this new attack on liberal values with her pithy sentence "Science is not democracy". After all, we can't have a vote on whether the equation 2 + 2 = 4 is true or not, the influencer seems to want to express with this. Facts are facts. And what facts are is not determined by the personal taste of the individual, nor are they determined by majority decisions, but by scientific research results. Science is known to be "in flux". The dominant view of the world is constantly changing, and today's incontrovertible truth is tomorrow's ridiculed error. Also, "science" does not actually exist. There are conflicting opinions even on the basis of empirical research.

Faith war against Globuli

But there can be no doubt about one thing: The empire is currently fighting back on a massive scale. For decades it looked as if time would work for alternative therapies. A new way of thinking, trained in holism, spirituality and quantum physics, seemed to favor homeopathy and other forms of energy medicine. Demand for "gentle" healing methods grew, and health insurance companies expanded their offerings accordingly. A good ten years ago, however, the pendulum swung: starting in England, "skeptics," politicians and scientists waged a war of annihilation against homeopathy. The arguments were the old ones: There was "nothing in homeopathy," and its efficacy had not been proven. Economic arguments were added: In times of tight budgets, there was no money left for "charlatans. Full steam ahead for a monoculture of orthodox medicine?

In February 2010, passers-by in several English cities were treated to a grotesque spectacle: around 400 activists poured the entire contents of small medicine jars down their throats - homeopathic globules of the remedy "Arsenicum album". They wore shirts with the inscription "Homeopathy - there is nothing in it" and announced their action as "globule suicide". With this drastic demonstration, British supporters of the skeptic movement wanted to prove that homeopathic remedies had no effect on the organism. They described the healing method as "dubious and absurd pseudoscience".

The claims of the opponents of homeopathy even have a kernel of truth: In remedies from dilution 10²³ upwards, not a single molecule of the active ingredient is found. However, homeopaths do not claim anything else. They regard their art of healing as energy or information therapy. Electromagnetic information makes the globules effective according to the teachings of Samuel Hahnemann. A "proof" for the inefficacy of Homöopathie did not furnish the whimsical activists anyway. It is true that, according to homeopathic doctrine, high potencies can cause certain symptoms in people who do not belong to the constitutional type appropriate to the remedy; however, the "globule suicide" only proves that the test subjects did not immediately feel such symptoms - or did not admit this.

"The great illusion"

As transparent as the action in England may have been - it proved to be a dangerous part of a coordinated campaign that intended nothing other than the destruction of homeopathy. It began in England in 2005 with a media smear campaign led by the international medical journal The Lancet. It cited the so-called Egger study from Switzerland, an evaluation of 108 double-blind studies on homeopathy. About 100 physicians signed a resolution defaming the method, founded 200 years ago by Samuel Hahnemann, as "witchcraft." The second wave followed in 2010, when the House of Commons Science Committee called for the removal of all government funding for homeopathy. The campaign received support from influential skeptic organizations that generally agitate against religion, esotericism and everything "unproven."

In Germany, the campaign only gained momentum in 2010, when the SPD's health policy spokesman, Karl Lauterbach, called for homeopathy to be banned as a health insurance benefit. Today, the name sends an (un)pleasant shiver down one's spine. At the same time, it was the first time that today's chief apocalyptic of the federal government made me feel uncomfortable.

The CDU was only too happy to take up Lauterbach's suggestion. The elective tariff for homeopathy had only been introduced at the time to accommodate the SPD and the Greens. Der Spiegel" took the same line and published an extensive cover story: "Homeopathy, the great illusion". Although there were considerable objections to the Egger study from a scientific point of view, many papers in Germany also uncritically repeated its conclusion that homeopathy had been definitively disproved. Studies to the contrary, such as the Health Technology Assessment Report, which gave homeopathy a good report card, received hardly any media attention.

Empty coffers - homeopathy is to blame

In all the campaigns mentioned, the killer argument of "empty coffers" was used. "In times of growing cash shortages, it is irresponsible to burden the health budget with spending on quackery," the British doctors' resolution said. For decades, health politicians had been on their knees before the pharmaceutical industry and its return-oriented pricing policy for medicines. The consequences were now to be borne by homeopaths and people who valued this form of treatment. If there is a cost explosion in the health care system, then this is certainly not due to homeopathy. Globules are so cheap that homeopaths usually give them to their patients. Most treatments are still paid for by the patients themselves. As a result, homeopathy, like many alternative therapies, still has the status of upper- and middle-class medicine. For the growing lower class, it remains difficult to pay for an initial anamnesis for 150 euros, for example. If the elective tariffs offered by some health insurers for homeopathy were now also banned, this would be tantamount to forcing broad sections of the population to convert to conventional medicine.

The argument that no generally accepted proof of the effectiveness of homeopathy has been produced to date also seems unconvincing. Is it to be expected that something becomes "generally accepted" that attracts the competition and the jealousy of influential power groups? The battle between different healing concepts is about sinecures and the biggest slice of the billion-dollar health market pie. The homeopath Carl Classen, who is particularly committed to the rehabilitation of his art, therefore rightly asks: "Who is served by the SPD's health policy diversionary maneuver?" He suspects shadow battles of the allegedly so unimpeachable serious orthodox medicine: "The pharmaceutical industry suffers from the fact that fewer and fewer newly developed drugs survive the 'placebo vs. verum' test required for approval. Even blockbuster drugs like Valium or Prozac fail in today's double-blind studies."

Faith war of methods

Money interests aside, however, the conflict between medical concepts is also about a matter of faith. Says Carl Classen, "Behind the scenes, it's not just about the economic interests of the pharmaceutical industry, but just as much about the rearing up of a materialistic worldview that is reaching its limits and yet wants to bring everything under its control." Classen examines the psychodynamics of the skeptic movement. "To some people, the existence of a greater reality is apparently frightening." Is man, then, a spiritual being who denies and represses this very spiritual part of himself? For some contemporaries this seems to be true. The homeopathic approach virtually offers itself as a whipping boy, as the embodiment of everything that the "reasonable" man of modern times abhors. "Homeopathy, through its high dilutions, evidently holds the uncomfortable social role of challenging prevailing worldviews and paradigms head-on and offensively" (Classen).

Above all, the view that matter is a collection of tiny but solid particles came to its limits. This has long since been disproved by quantum physics. Physicist Hans-Peter Dürr therefore said, "We have abolished matter." If one examined atoms and electrons more closely, everything blurs into a fog of probabilities, oscillation and energy. Human beings, too, can be seen as a "vibrational field" interacting with other vibrational fields - for example, that of a homeopathic remedy.

"The world is information" - such a view seems more contemporary than the materialistic idea that the universe consists of larger or smaller "things".

So there is something to be said for the information therapy of homeopaths. Is it not conceivable that with the taking of the remedy healing information is fed into the vibrational field of man, that thus "vibrational alignment" takes place?

A virologist "proves" homeopathy

The French Nobel Prize winner and virologist Luc Montagnier claimed at a conference in June 2010 to have perhaps found proof of the effectiveness of homeopathy. Yet his research originally had nothing to do with homeopathy. Rather, Montagnier was interested in a detection method for viruses and bacteria. The researcher discovered that solutions containing the DNA of a virus or bacterium emit "radio waves in the low frequency range. This affects the water molecules, causing them to arrange themselves into a special "nanostructure." Even if the original trigger, the DNA, were removed, Montagnier said, the water molecules would retain their frequency signature. In homeopathy, too, the explanatory model is known to be that water stores the information of a substance with which it has come into contact. Even if the original substance is no longer chemically detectable, the information remains in the water.

This explanatory approach may not pass as "definitive proof in favor of homeopathy," but it does make it clear that serious research results can come to completely different conclusions. So it is not true what anti-homeopathy zealots claim: namely, that the end of homeopathy is inevitable because scientific reason always wins in the end against lies and charlatanry. Rather, the following statement is true: What is considered "reasonable" depends on the spirit of the times and the level of knowledge of the contemporaries. And this changes with an expanding consciousness. Even if some would like to cling forever to the conventional medicine monoculture of the post-war period.

Studies are tricked

In our time, still dominated by the rational-materialistic paradigm, the scientific study has a fetish function. If it is still underpinned by statistics and columns of figures, the astonished layman makes the sign of the cross. The so-called Chang study (Chang et Al., 2005) clearly shows how ingenious the unserious often disguises itself as seriousness. It first compared 110 homeopathic and 110 orthodox medical studies. The result: both methods are equally effective. However, since it could not be what was not allowed to be, the study was modified once again. It was decided that only "large" studies would be accepted, i.e. those with a sufficient number of participants. Strangely enough, the number 88 was chosen as the threshold value. Homeopathy advocate Dr. Volker Schmiedel exposed this as a transparent maneuver. There is a headache study with 88 test subjects in which homeopathy came off very badly. Chang and his colleagues wanted to evaluate this study. If the threshold had been set at 100 or even 80 participants, homeopathy would have done just as well as conventional medicine.

By the way, this equality also corresponds to my personal experience. I have experienced both successes and failures with homeopathic treatments and with the use of antibiotics. What speaks for the homeopathic treatment is that it did not poison me - and that it would be cheaper if the health insurance paid for it. Doctors often do not sell a cure, but only the hope for one. Unfortunately, inadequately informed patients often apply double standards: if homeopathy fails, the accusation of charlatanism quickly comes into play; if conventional medicine fails, they think that the illness is particularly persistent or that they themselves have done something wrong.

Perhaps homeopathy is even lucky in that it sometimes does not work. If it were infallible, it would probably have been banned not only as a health insurance benefit, but altogether.

Barbara Rütting, who was once a Green Party politician, aptly said, "Only sick people bring profit to the pharmaceutical giants, not healthy ones."
Hunt for alternative practitioners

Of course, this statement is also now historically outdated. Even more profits are made by millions of healthy people who are seduced or, if necessary, forced into pharmacological prevention - i.e. "vaccination". Conversely, this means that every "refuser" tears a small hole in the bulging bank accounts of the pharmaceutical profiteers. They therefore regard as a personal enemy anyone who, as a doctor, alternative practitioner, scientist or interested layman, warns against the injection or even expresses doubts. Certain professional groups are even regarded as "pockets of resistance" in the fight against everything that is not approved by orthodox medicine. Markus Söder let it be known in December 2021 that especially in Bavaria there are many "esoteric and alternative healing methods". He specified: "Half of all welfare practical men in Germany for example are in Bavaria." He remained guilty a proof for this.

This opened the hunting season on alternative and complementary healers, on all those who avoid synthetic medicines wherever possible and rely on the self-healing powers of patients, on information therapy and natural ingredients of remedies.

Because of the institution-related compulsory vaccination, alternative practitioners are currently under pressure. There is a threat of de facto professional bans especially for those for whom the medical-philosophical foundations of their healing art are not negotiable. Although the campaign is officially not directed against alternative medicine per se, but against "vaccination refusal," the orthodox medical guardians of faith could kill two birds with one stone with their action. The intersection between the two groups is likely to be large. If the state power gets serious with the occupation-referred vaccination obligation, vaccination-skeptical "fanatics" are effectively taken from the traffic, while the cooperating ones may mercifully still massage a little, pick herbs and prescribe sugar globules, as long as they do not harm the profit intentions of the Pharmaindustrie thereby noticeably.

Conventional medicine counterrevolution made flesh

Karl Lauterbach sees as health minister obviously its hour come to make the dubious Kügelchen medicine the Garaus. At the very least, the insubordinates are to be dried up financially. In March 2022, he tweeted: "Science is used to fight pandemics and cure diseases. We need more science in treatment, not less. Homeopathy has no place in modern medicine." This makes a connection that probably wouldn't have been immediately obvious to everyone otherwise: homeopathy as a hostile force in the fight against pandemics.

The suggestion is that if the patient chooses the "wrong" treatment method, this not only endangers the success of the treatment in the individual case, but the virus could also spread unchecked. The homoeopathic patient as a public health pest.

And - reproach of all reproaches! - homeopathy is not "modern". Mankind had thus progressed from stone-age methods to modernity to ever more effective, because more scientific, methods of treatment, which had reached its historical peak in Lauterbach's mRNA vaccination. The nightmare of the supporters of a medical monoculture would thus be a kind of permaculture of healing methods: crisscrossing but complementary methods of health protection. Here elderberry tea and vitamin D3 to strengthen the immune system, there Pulsatilla vulgaris as a constitutional remedy. In addition, regular yoga exercises, organic whole food according to the Ayurvedic dosha type and - God forbid! - a singing bowl massage. In addition, but only if there is no other way, sometimes a conventional headache tablet or antibiotics.

In former times this was also called "complementary medicine". Ideally, none of the medical directions fights or despises the other. The basic principle would be mutual support and complementation. But that is now a thing of the past. Analogous to the fantasy classic "Highlander - There Can Be Only One," the motto is: There can be only one sole-sanctifying method, only one ruling medical philosophy. And Karl Lauterbach is its prophet. The hyperactive talk show matador is not - as his job title suggests - responsible for people's health in general; rather, he is a fundamentalist representative of a certain healing direction. But since this has dominated the public sphere for many decades, it is no longer seen as a specific choice among many, but as purely self-evident.

And now? No more permaculture, bright yellow canola fields sprayed with herbicides wherever you look, stretching to the horizon. The wishes and priorities of the patients themselves, their intuition and bodily feeling, apparently play the least role. Everyone is to be blissfully happy according to the wishes of the medical truth-tellers. This is not the time for lazy compromises; orthodox medicine is marching at full speed towards final victory.

Roland Rottenfußer, born in 1963, studied German and worked as a book editor and journalist for various publishing houses. From 2001 to 2005 he was editor at the spiritual magazine connection, later for the "Zeitpunkt". He currently works as an editor, book copywriter and author scout for Goldmann Verlag. Since 2006 he has been editor-in-chief of Hinter den Schlagzeilen.