Tag Archives: Patrick Wood

Documentary on Technocracy – Learn What It Means for You

Posted on by

The first-ever full-length documentary on Technocracy

The Agenda: Their Vision, Your Future
Patrick Wood's avatar
PATRICK WOOD

Long in the making, it is finally released! This documentary was made in the UK, and while I sat for an interview, it shows that others around the world are getting the big picture. My works, videos, and books on Technocracy broke this story starting in 2015, and have clearly impacted each of the presenters.

In five days since its release, it has received 150,000 views, 5,500 thumbs up, and over 800 comments. It could go over the top viral if enough people share it!

I am re-posting it on Substack for posterity’s sake, in the event that YouTube decides to axe it. Here is the original link:

Please share this video especially with all the nay-sayers in your life!

Share

from:    https://patrickwood.substack.com/p/the-first-ever-full-length-documentary

The Endgame?

Posted on by

An Assessment Of The Accelerating Timeline for “You Will Own Nothing”

Patrick Wood's avatar
PATRICK WOOD
MAY 21, 2026

I am an economist, first and foremost. I’m going to give you a sobering look at the progression of Technocracy and what to expect in the future. Take it for what it is. I have been following the global elite and Technocracy for over 48 years, and since my first book with Antony Sutton, Trilaterals Over Washington, Vols. I and II, I have never pulled any punches and never watered anything down. I have been warning for 12 years that the endgame was upon us. I gave you the receipts for my thinking. Time is running out… soon.

My epic new book, The New Economics of Technocracy: You Will Own Nothing, laid bare the structure, architecture, and strategy being used to dominate the world. My earlier book, co-authored with Courtenay Turner, was released in November 2025: The Final Betrayal: How Technocracy Destroyed America.

(Patrick Wood’s Technocracy News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

If you don’t read these books, I can’t help you. There will be no discussion. For those of you who have read these books already, you should tear into this essay with determined resolution to get to the bottom of it.

To the rest of America who have fought me tooth and nail for decades (from the left and right, you know who you are), I have only one final thing to say to you: “I told you so, and I was right.” ⁃ Patrick Wood Editor.)

When Klaus Schwab declared at the 2016 World Economic Forum that “you will own nothing and be happy,” most observers treated it as aspirational futurism. A decade later, the architecture to deliver the first half of that sentence is being built in front of us — and it is being built faster than nearly anyone outside the industry has acknowledged.

I have been documenting Technocracy for almost 20 years. The pattern is always the same. The technocrats describe the future they intend to build. Critics dismiss the description as paranoia. The future arrives on schedule. Then a new generation is told the new arrangement was inevitable.

What is different this time is the speed. And the speed is itself accelerating.

I want to lay out a defensible timeline for May 2026 with the full understanding that it will look different in six months. That is not a hedge. It is a feature of the moment we are in. The compressors are themselves compressing.

The Original Estimates Were Too Conservative

Industry analysts have been forecasting tokenization timelines using growth-rate models built for human-paced engineering and human-paced legislation. Boston Consulting Group projected $16 trillion in tokenized assets by 2030. McKinsey echoed similar figures. The World Economic Forum suggested ten percent of global GDP would move on tokenized rails by 2027.

These numbers were defensible eighteen months ago. They are no longer defensible today.

Six forces have entered the picture that none of those models accounted for. Each one shortens the timeline. Stacked together, they multiply.

The first is artificial intelligence and its compounding doubling curve. The second is regulatory capture by the technocratic class. The third is the buildout of more than five thousand AI data centers as the physical substrate. The fourth is the Pax Silica Declaration binding signatory nations to American AI infrastructure. The fifth is the federal-wrapper strategy for routing around state property law. The sixth is the Bank for International Settlements as the global alignment mechanism for tokenized monetary infrastructure.

Three of those compressors I had previously misclassified as immovable constraints. They are not. They are accelerants.

The AI Acceleration

METR, an AI evaluation organization, has been measuring how long a task an AI model can reliably complete. The doubling time used to be seven months. It is now closer to four. On software-engineering benchmarks, the doubling time is under three months.

This matters because tokenization is, at its technical core, a software-engineering problem. Smart contracts must be written. Audited. Integrated with custody systems. Reconciled with off-chain registries. Connected to oracles. Hardened against exploits. Compliance logic must be embedded.

Every one of those tasks is being accelerated by AI tooling that did not exist two years ago. The TON ecosystem is already shipping AI-assisted smart-contract toolchains. Base has launched dozens of agentic AI projects executing on tokenized assets. Broadridge surveyed 900 financial-services technology leaders in February 2026 and the headline conclusion was unambiguous: “GenAI delivering now, tokenization is next.”

The build phase that should have taken a decade is being completed in three to four years.

The Technocratic Capture

The second compressor is what Harvard’s Sabeel Rahman has called the “technocratic impulse” — the regulatory posture in which legislators defer rule-drafting to the very industry they are meant to oversee.

Members of Congress cannot read smart-contract code. They do not understand zero-knowledge proofs. They cannot evaluate consensus mechanisms. Representative Ro Khanna stated the problem out loud: Congress does not have the knowledge base.

Share

Industry is happy to provide the missing knowledge. And the missing legislative text.

Big Tech alone deployed $1.1 billion in political spending through 2025 to shape AI rules and preempt state regulation. The crypto industry deployed comparable sums to pass the GENIUS Act and move the CLARITY Act through the House.

The pattern is visible in the regulatory record:

  • The GENIUS Act was drafted in close consultation with stablecoin issuers themselves.
  • The SEC’s January 2026 statement that tokenized securities “may or may not” carry shareholder rights was language requested by tokenization platforms.
  • The Department of Labor’s “asset-neutral” safe harbor of March 30, 2026 uses verbatim phrasing from industry comment letters.
  • Chair Atkins’s Project Crypto framework cites industry-developed standards like ERC-3643 as the regulatory model.
  • The December 2025 AI preemption Executive Order was prepared with substantial industry coordination.

This is not bribery. It is something subtler. The legislators are being handed pre-built solutions to problems they cannot independently evaluate. They sign because they have nothing else to sign.

This is what regulatory capture looks like when the captured do not realize they have been captured.

The 5,000 Data Centers

The reader might ask why this is happening now. The answer is partly political. But it is also physical.

The United States is in the middle of a buildout of AI data center capacity, unlike anything in industrial history. Estimates put the global figure at well over five thousand operational and announced data centers, with the United States hosting more than half of large-scale capacity.

These facilities are not just running language models. They are the physical substrate on which the tokenized economy will execute.

Every tokenized stock trade requires compute. Every smart-contract execution requires compute. Every oracle update, every compliance check, every identity verification, every agentic AI transaction on a tokenized rail requires compute.

The data center buildout is the engine room of the architecture. It is being financed by sovereign-wealth capital from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, by Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta, Oracle, and the new entrants — Stargate, CoreWeave, and the rest.

This is the part Schwab’s quote glossed over. “You will own nothing” requires somewhere for the not-owning to happen. The data centers are that “somewhere”.

Pax Silica and the Treaty Workaround

I previously assumed cross-border legal recognition of tokenized assets would set a hard floor on the timeline because treaty cycles run five to fifteen years. That assumption is already obsolete.

The Pax Silica Declaration binds signatory nations to American AI infrastructure as the operating substrate for their digital economies. Once a country is inside that arrangement, it inherits the technical standards, identity systems, compliance hooks, and settlement rails that come with it. That is not a treaty in the traditional sense. It is soft annexation through infrastructure dependency. Legal recognition follows the wire.

Then there is World Liberty Financial. The WLF deal with Pakistan for cross-border payments was not on most analyst maps a year ago. It is now operational. WLF is positioning USD1 as an upgrade to the dollar itself, deployed through bilateral arrangements with friendly jurisdictions. A stablecoin issued by a politically connected American entity is being used to settle cross-border flows in a sovereign state of 240 million people.

This is a treaty substitute executed at the speed of a smart contract. Pax Silica plus WLF plus USD1 means the cross-border problem is being solved through bilateral infrastructure deals and dollar-aligned tokenized settlement, not through the Hague or the UN.

The treaty cycle of five to fifteen years collapses to whatever the bilateral signing schedule is.

The Federal Wrapper Around State Property Law

I also previously assumed that state-by-state title statutes would slow the tokenization of sovereign property because state law moves slowly, and there are fifty of them.

That was the wrong frame.

The architects do not need to replace every state’s title system. They need a federal wrapper that leaves state title systems formally in place while allowing tokenized representations to function as the operative instruments for transfer, financing, securitization, and beneficial-interest trading.

This is the same legal trick used for mortgage-backed securities under MERS. The deed stays where it is. The economic interest moves through a parallel federal layer that the underlying state recording offices treat as authoritative. State recording becomes ceremonial. Federal tokenization becomes operational.

A federal wrapper of this kind requires one act of Congress, not fifty acts of state legislatures. With CLARITY-Act-style preemption already in motion and the precedent of the AI preemption Executive Order of December 2025, the wrapper can be deployed in a single legislative cycle.

That bottleneck is essentially removed.

The BIS Whip

The third constraint I had wrongly classified as a floor was the alignment of 195 jurisdictions on tokenized monetary infrastructure. That is not a 195-decision problem. It is a Bank for International Settlements problem.

The BIS sits above the central banks. Through Project Agorá, Project mBridge, the Innovation Hub network, and the Unified Ledger initiative, it has been pre-positioning the technical and governance scaffolding for tokenized monetary alignment for years. Member central banks are already conforming their domestic CBDC and tokenized-deposit work to BIS-published standards.

When the BIS decides the architecture is ready, it does not need 195 separate political decisions. It needs roughly two dozen central-bank governors at the table in Basel agreeing to a coordinated launch, after which the remaining jurisdictions align by default through correspondent-banking dependency, IMF conditionality, and SWIFT-successor-rail compatibility.

That is the whip. The Basel capital accords were imposed on the global banking system through exactly this mechanism. There was no global vote. There was a BIS framework, and compliance followed.

The 195-jurisdiction floor exists only as long as the BIS chooses not to crack the whip. Once it does, alignment compresses from decades to roughly the implementation window of a single coordinated rollout — call it eighteen to thirty-six months.

The Rolling Process

Now to the question that matters most. When does this hit ordinary people?

The answer is not a date. It is a sequence.

Nobody wakes up on a Tuesday in 2030 and discovers all their assets are gone. The architecture is being designed so that the losses arrive in waves. Different victims. Different asset classes. Different legal vehicles. Different demographics.

The first wave is already underway. Retail crypto users buying offshore tokenized stocks — xStocks, Robinhood EU, Kraken’s tokenized US equities — are the first generation to discover that what looks like a stock token may carry no shareholder rights, no dividend pass-through guarantee, and no recourse if the platform fails.

The next wave is stablecoin holders facing GENIUS Act compliance triggers — whitelisted-only redemption, freeze authorities, and the discovery that a “dollar token” is not a dollar. USD1 and the WLF rollout will accelerate this wave.

After that come the US retail buyers of third-party-wrapped tokenized stocks under the SEC’s innovation exemption. Synthetic exposure without entitlements. The price tracks. The rights do not.

Then come the 401(k) participants — roughly seventy million Americans — whose target-date defaults will quietly absorb tokenized private equity, tokenized credit, and crypto under the DOL’s new safe harbor. They will not be asked. They will not be told. The illiquidity and valuation losses will surface only in the next downturn.

Then pension beneficiaries. Then self-directed IRA holders. Then fractional real-estate token buyers who discover they own LLC interests, not deeds. Then conventional shareholders of Russell 1000 stocks whose governance gets diluted by third-party wrappers. Then physical property owners under the federal wrapper, whose state-recorded deeds become ceremonial. Then cash users as CBDCs and tokenized deposits become the dominant settlement layer.

That is a ten-wave sequence running across roughly a decade — but with the first six waves now compressed into the next four to five years.

Each wave’s victims look different from the last. That is the point. No common identity forms. No political coalition forms. No reversal happens.

The Revised Timeline as of May 2026

Putting the six compressors together, with the three former floors now reclassified as accelerants, gives a defensible answer for the present moment.

The original analyst estimates of 2038–2042 for 80 percent global asset tokenization are obsolete by every measure I can identify. They were drawn before the AI doubling data, before the technocratic-capture cycle of 2025–2026, before the data center buildout reached its current pace, before Pax Silica was operational, before WLF and USD1, and before the federal-wrapper strategy was visible.

My previous revision placed the saturation window at 2030–2033 with an aggressive case of 2029–2031. That estimate is now also too conservative.

The defensible May 2026 timeline:

  • Mid-case: 80 percent global asset tokenization by 2029–2032.
  • Aggressive convergence case: 2028–2030.
  • Architecture load-bearing across all asset classes: 2027–2028.
  • First six waves of dispossession substantially completed: 2027–2030.
  • Full ten-wave sequence: completed by 2032–2034.

That is the picture from where we sit today. My honest expectation is that this estimate will move forward by another six to nine months when I revisit it in late 2026. The compressors are themselves compressing. AI doubling pulls forward the technical buildout, which pulls forward the regulatory permissions, which pulls forward the next set of bilateral infrastructure deals, which pulls forward the BIS readiness window. Each loop tightens the next.

I am writing this with the explicit caveat that any reader looking back from November 2026 should expect to find the dates have moved earlier, not later.

Why It Will Be Brutal

The brutality is not in any single wave. The brutality is in the cumulative effect.

News emerged in January 2026 that all NYSE-listed stocks will be tokenized. By April, the platform was unveiled. We now know it will be launched by year-end. Formerly, such an operation would have taken years to cut through regulations, deliberation, and testing; not so with Technocrats driving the process.

A retail trader loses on a tokenized stock platform in 2026. A worker discovers their target-date fund underperformed because of illiquid alts they did not choose in 2027. A pensioner watches benefits cut as “necessary recalibration” in 2028. A small landlord finds their LLC token diluted by sponsor amendment in 2029. A homeowner finds their deed has become ceremonial under a federal wrapper in 2030. An elderly cash user finds their preferred medium quietly unusable in 2032.

Each of these is dismissible in isolation. The aggregate is the most thorough redefinition of property in American history.

The technocrats know this. They have always known it. Wyoming’s Select Committee on Blockchain spelled out the destination in 2020: once tokens are recognized as title, tokens replace physical title. That is not a metaphor. That is the statutory roadmap.

Industry voices are equally candid. A January 2026 LinkedIn analysis titled “The Programmable Square Foot” declared: “Static ownership is fading. Programmable value is taking over.” State Street describes tokenization as a process that “redefines ownership.” Better Markets warns of “shadow stocks” that look like the real thing but lack the legal substance.

Programmable. Redefined. Shadow.

These are the words of the people building it. They are not hiding what they are doing. They are simply describing it in a register that most of the public cannot decode.

Where This Leaves the Reader

I am not writing this to alarm anyone. I am writing it because the timeline has changed, and the public discussion has not caught up. And because the timeline will change again before this essay is six months old.

The legal permission to dispossess is being passed faster than the technical capacity to execute, and both are being passed faster than the public capacity to understand what was done.

Four things follow from this.

First, the window for political resistance is now measured in months, not years. The compression of the legislative cycle means the architecture will be substantially load-bearing by 2027–2028. After that point, undoing it requires a future Congress to take affirmative action against an entrenched industry, a foreign infrastructure dependency network, and a BIS-aligned monetary system. That is a far higher bar than the original passage.

Second, the rolling nature of the dispossession means waiting for a defining event is fatal. There will be no single crisis. There will be a sequence of small ones, each affecting a different population, each dismissed as an edge case until the aggregate is irreversible.

Third, the convergence of AI, technocratic capture, data center buildout, Pax Silica, the federal wrapper, and BIS alignment is the actual story. No single one of those is enough on its own. Together they are a regime change in what property means and who controls it.

Fourth, the timeline itself is a moving target. Anyone who assumes the dates I have given here will hold for two years is reading the same map the analysts read in 2024 — and that map is now wrong by a decade.

I have called this Technocracy for almost two decades because that is what it is. The 1930s technocrats believed engineers should run the economy because politicians were incompetent to manage industrial complexity. The 2026 technocrats believe blockchain architects, AI engineers, and tokenization specialists should design the rules of property and finance because politicians are incompetent to manage digital complexity.

The difference is that today’s technocrats do not need to seize power. They are invited in by legislators looking for someone to write the technical bits of the bill.

That is the pattern. That is the timeline. That is why the thesis of “You Will Own Nothing” is no longer a 2030s problem. It is a now problem with a 2028–2030 endpoint, rolling forward one wave at a time.

The question is whether enough readers will see all ten waves as a single pattern before the fourth wave normalizes the technology beyond recovery.

That is the contribution this work has to make.

I will revisit this timeline in six months. I expect the dates will have moved earlier.

Endnotes

Boston Consulting Group and ADDX, “Asset Tokenization to Grow into US$16 Trillion Opportunity by 2030,” Ledger Insights, September 11, 2022.

Rony Dahan, “Global Adoption of Tokenization: Where Institutions Are Leading,” LinkedIn, September 23, 2025.

World Economic Forum, “Tokenized World: The Future of the Economy in 2030,” BBVA, May 5, 2026.

METR, “Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Tasks,” March 19, 2025.

METR, “Task-Completion Time Horizons of Frontier AI Models,” May 7, 2026.

arXiv preprint, “Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Tasks,” 2503.14499v2.

AI Digest, “A New Moore’s Law for AI Agents,” April 8, 2025.

BlockchainXTech, “How AI Is Accelerating Web3 Development & Automation,” LinkedIn, November 16, 2025.

Crypto Briefing, “TON’s New AI-Ready Toolchain Accelerates Smart Contract Development,” May 12, 2026.

BingX, “Top AI Agent Projects in Base Ecosystem 2026,” February 12, 2026.

Broadridge, “GenAI Delivering Now, Tokenization Is Next,” PR Newswire, February 24, 2026.

K. Sabeel Rahman, “Envisioning the Regulatory State: Technocracy, Democracy, and Institutional Experimentation,” Harvard Journal on Legislation.

Public Citizen, “$1.1 Billion in Big Tech Political Spending Fuels Attacks on State AI Laws,” November 20, 2025.

Wikipedia, “Regulatory Capture.”

Forbes, Zennon Kapron, “America Is About to Have Two Stock Markets for the Same Company,” May 19, 2026.

Better Markets, “The SEC’s Embrace of Tokenization Must Prioritize Investor Protection,” March 23, 2026.

SEC Statement on Tokenized Securities, January 28, 2026.

US Department of Labor, “Proposed Rule: Fiduciary Duties in Selecting Designated Investment Alternatives,” Federal Register Doc. 2026-06178, March 31, 2026.

US Department of Labor / EBSA Press Release, March 29, 2026.

Latham & Watkins, “DOL Proposes New ERISA Safe Harbor for Alternative Investments in Retirement Plans,” March 30, 2026.

Ogletree Deakins, “DOL Unveils Proposed Rule to Remove Restrictions on Alternative Investments,” March 29, 2026.

Executive Order 14330, “Democratizing Access to Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors,” August 7, 2025.

Cleary Gottlieb, “2026 Digital Assets Regulatory Update: A Landmark 2025,” January 14, 2026.

Fireblocks, “5 Key Digital Asset Policy Changes in 2025 and What to Expect in 2026,” December 16, 2025.

Latham & Watkins US Crypto Tracker, Legislative Developments.

Americas Credit Unions, “GENIUS, STABLE, and CLARITY Acts and State Laws,” June 23, 2025.

Morgan Stanley, “The ‘GENIUS’ of Greater ‘CLARITY’ on Stablecoin,” July 17, 2025.

McGuireWoods Consulting, “Executive Order Targets State AI Regulation Through Federal Preemption,” January 19, 2026.

Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, “New Executive Order Signals Federal Preemption Strategy for State Laws on Artificial Intelligence,” January 6, 2026.

Holland & Knight, “What to Watch as White House Moves to Federalize AI Regulation,” December 14, 2025.

Pillsbury, “Real Estate Tokenization: Recent Developments in New Jersey and Dubai,” July 15, 2025.

Wyoming Select Committee on Blockchain, “Real Estate Tokenization,” May 19, 2020.

ScienceDirect, “Is the Tokenization of Property the Next Step in the Financialization of Housing?,” 2026.

Lobusto, “The Programmable Square Foot: Real Estate Tokenization and the $2 Trillion Opportunity,” LinkedIn, January 23, 2026.

Binaryx, “BlackRock’s 4-Stage Tokenization Plan Explained,” February 27, 2025.

State Street, “Digital Asset Regulation Accelerates in 2026,” March 2026.

Atlantic Council, Central Bank Digital Currency Tracker, May 13, 2026.

Financial Stability Board, “The Financial Stability Implications of Tokenisation,” October 21, 2024.

World Bank ID4D, “Tokenization.”

Canton Network, “State of RWA Tokenization 2026 Report,” December 16, 2025.

World Economic Forum, “What to Expect for Digital Assets in 2026,” January 12, 2026.

Frontiers in Blockchain, “Tokenization and the Reshaping of Traditional Finance,” February 11, 2026.

SNS Insider, “Asset Tokenization Market Size, Share & Growth Report, 2035,” September 22, 2025.

Pointsville, “Global RWA Tokenization Industry: Market Analysis and Forecast,” August 19, 2024.

Rep. Ro Khanna, statement on AI regulation, July 13, 2023.

Bank for International Settlements, Project Agorá, Project mBridge, and Unified Ledger initiative materials.

World Liberty Financial / USD1 Pakistan cross-border payments deal coverage, 2026.

Pax Silica Declaration, signatory framework documents, 2025–2026.

MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems), federal-wrapper precedent for state title law.

Brickken, “How to Tokenize Real Estate: A Step-By-Step Guide,” February 19, 2026.

from:    https://patrickwood.substack.com/p/an-assessment-of-the-accelerating?publication_id=721283&post_id=198786723&isFreemail=true&r=19iztd&triedRedirect=true&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

The New Mask of Technocracy

Posted on by

Technocracy is NOT Communitarianism

Let’s settle this once and for all…

Patrick Wood's avatar
PATRICK WOOD
AUG 18, 2025

There has been a noticeable shift in narrative over what is going on in Washington, DC. I say Technocracy. Others used to say Communism, socialism or fascism. Now it’s being called Communitarianism.

The uptake on this word to mask Technocracy is stunning. It’s unprecedented. It might be that you are getting a taste of “The Science of Social Engineering”, Technocracy’s favorite definition of them themselves from the 1930s.

When Technocrats want to shield their technocratic polices, they intentionally do so in the language of Communitarianism.

Example #1: Smart Cities

Technocratic Policy: Urban planners, relying on data analytics and technical expertise, design “Smart City” infrastructure—deploying sensors, AI, and algorithms to manage traffic, resources, and public services. Core decisions, like placement of surveillance, adoption of digital IDs, or algorithmic resource allocation, are made by unelected and unaccountable technical experts and private sector consultants with little direct citizen input.

Communitarian Framing: Policymakers frequently describe these initiatives as advancing “inclusive urban communities,” “empowering local groups,” and “building public trust through collective digital transformation.” The emphasis is on “community-driven sustainability,” “shared public spaces,” and “strengthening community ties”—even as the actual governance, surveillance, and decision-making remain centralized in expert hands.

Example #2: Public Health Policy

Technocratic Policy: National public health agencies, guided by epidemiologists and technocratic advisory boards, roll out mandatory vaccination campaigns and digital health credentials. The implementation relies on technical modeling, centralized data management, and scientific expertise, often minimizing open deliberation or individualized consent.

Communitarian Framing: The rollout is explained using phrases such as “protecting our communities,” “collective responsibility for health,” and “building resilient neighborhoods together.” Authorities stress “we’re all in this together,” “community solidarity,” and “shared sacrifice for collective safety”—presenting programs as communal responses to crisis when the driving mechanism is expert rule and data-driven mandates.

In both examples, the language of communitarianism (“collective good,” “community empowerment,” “shared values”) is leveraged as public messaging, even as the substance of the policies is totally technocratic, with centralized, expert-directed authority.

So What Is Communitarianism?

If you ever read Walden Two by B.F. Skinner, you know everything about communitarianism that you need to know. (The story ended horribly.)

Communitarianism is a political and social philosophy that places primary emphasis on the importance of community, the common good, and social relationships in shaping individual identity, values, and moral judgments. It asserts that people’s identities are molded by their social environment and community ties rather than by strict individualism. Forget about individuality, your personhood, even your soul. Communitarianism sees community as an end in itself.

Right-Think Takes Care of Free Speech

Technocratic elites or their supporters deliberately frame current governance realities as “communitarian” in order to deflect criticism, obscure their own authority, or create ideological cover for technocratic rule.

You should know from my years of critical analysis of Technocracy that Technocrats don’t give a whoop about consensus, the common good or social cohesion. They are throwing up a smokescreen to confuse you, and are using AI to do it with “right think”: that is, DARPA’s idea of Theory of Mind.

Theory of Mind AI refers to systems that can infer human intentions, emotions, and likely responses by analyzing behavior and context. DARPA’s program aims to simulate, predict, and influence decision-making by modeling individual and collective psychologies—originally intended for national security and adversary prediction, but already applied to civilian contexts.

Patrick Wood’s Technocracy News: The Quickening Report is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, systems based on these principles were used for real-time sentiment analysis and targeted messaging to adjust public attitudes, encourage compliance, and foster community-oriented behaviors. This created feedback loops, guiding both policy and public reaction by tweaking narratives and interventions for maximum “collective good”—core communitarian ideals.

By the way, Palantir (Peter Thiel, co-founder) is a master of these tactics on the battlefield and in civilian life.

Conclusion

Technocracy is NOT Communitarianism.

If you have this word embedded in your vocabulary to explain what is going on in Washington, DC, your mind has been hacked. Ditch the word “Communitarianism.”

Call it by its real name – TECHNOCRACY.

Time to Check Out Peter Thiel

Posted on by

Working to Put AI in Charge

Posted on by

Trump The Technocrat Releases ‘America’s AI Action Plan’

Patrick Wood's avatar
PATRICK WOOD

The White House has just released its official policy document, America’s AI Action Plan, defining the future of AI development. Admittedly, Trump doesn’t have any real understanding of AI, but he has totally caved in to the Technocrats he appointed in the first place. Indeed, Technocracy is being forced down our throats whether we want it or not.

The first pillar of America’s AI Action Plan focuses on removing regulatory barriers and eliminating unnecessary review processes. Superficially, this appears as a push against bureaucratic inertia, but in reality, it amounts to an explicit transfer of authority from elected bodies to expert committees and interagency working groups.

The second pillar includes a comprehensive scheme for AI literacy and workforce retraining. At first glance, investment in skill development and rapid-response training may appear benevolent. Yet the Plan prescribes a narrowly defined set of competencies—data labeling, model auditing, grid operations—determined by federal projections of industrial demand. Such top-down workforce engineering tracks precisely with technocratic ideology, which regards citizens as variables in an optimization problem. Rather than empowering individuals to shape their own vocational paths, the Plan channels labor into predetermined slots within a digital economy overseen by experts.

The third pillar of the report extends the domestic technocratic agent to the world. By exporting American AI frameworks, hardware standards, and regulatory templates to allies, the Plan seeks to cement a global regime of expert rule.

The last item on the last page of the Plan contains real paydirt for Technocracy and Transhumanism:

AI will unlock nearly limitless potential in biology: cures for new diseases, novel industrial use cases, and more. At the same time, it could create new pathways for malicious actors to synthesize harmful pathogens and other biomolecules. The solution to this problem is a multi-tiered approach designed to screen for malicious actors, along with new tools and infrastructure for more effective screening. [Remember nose swabs for COVID screening? – Ed.] As these tools, policies, and enforcement mechanisms mature, it will be essential to work with allies and partners to ensure international adoption.

Recommended Policy Actions

  • Require all institutions receiving Federal funding for scientific research to use nucleic acid synthesis tools and synthesis providers that have robust nucleic acid sequence screening and customer verification procedures. Create enforcement mechanisms for this requirement rather than relying on voluntary attestation.
  • Led by OSTP, convene government and industry actors to develop a mechanism to facilitate data sharing between nucleic acid synthesis providers to screen for potentially fraudulent or malicious customers.
  • Build, maintain, and update as necessary national security-related AI evaluations through collaboration between CAISI at DOC, national security agencies, and relevant research institutions.

Therefore, DNA screening will become commonplace across government agencies.

Who Wrote This Technocratic Screed, Anyway

Not surprisingly, the report’s lead authors are listed as Michael Kratsios and David Sacks, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio included as an official with clout.

Michael Kratsios, Technocrat

Currently, Kratsios is listed as Assistant to the President for Science and Technology. In the first Trump Administration, he served as the Chief Technology Officer (CTO). Appointed in August 2019 at age 33, he was the youngest person ever to hold the federal CTO position.

In this role, he led the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy’s efforts to advance emerging technologies—most notably artificial intelligence, 5G wireless networks, quantum computing, and data privacy—across the federal government. He coordinated interagency AI initiatives, helped develop the American AI Initiative, and convened industry, academic, and civil-society stakeholders to guide national technology policy.

David O. Sacks, Technocrat

Sacks is listed as Special Advisor for AI and Crypto. He was a co-founder and the first Chief Operating Officer (COO) of PayPal, alongside Peter Thiel and Elon Musk. As such he was a prominent member of the so-called “PayPal Mafia.” He is heavily invested in the AI industry through his company, Craft Ventures.

Sacks’ authority is questionable. He was originally listed as a “Special Advisor to the President” under a protocol that ran for 133 days, which has long expired. On this report, his title has changed to “Special Advisor for AI and Crypto.” I conducted an exhaustive search to determine that David Sacks has no current position with any government entity and is, therefore, a private citizen. So, what is his name doing on this report?

Apparently, Sacks is self-appointed to be the “Crypto and AI Czar”. Yes, self-appointed. Today’s arch-Technocrats are so sure of themselves that they don’t need official appointment to assert themselves.

from:    https://patrickwood.substack.com/p/trump-the-technocrat-releases-americas?publication_id=721283&post_id=169068711&isFreemail=true&r=19iztd&triedRedirect=true&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Technocracy Here, Technocracy There

Posted on by

Technocracy Rising: All The President’s Men

February 23, 2025 Technocracy.news 2

Patrick Wood of Technocracy.news wrote an article using artificial intelligence for a report on people who were appointed in 2025 by Trump and are considered technocrats. The shared objectives of the technocrats are AI supremacy, cryptocurrency normalization and federal privatization. The AI program concluded, “As these technocrats consolidate power, the long-term implications for regulatory integrity and public trust in governance remain deeply uncertain.”

.

The article is behind a paywall , but the audio version may be accessed here. Patrick Wood wrote this article using Perplexity.ai using a feature called Deep Research. It scoured hundreds of sources to analyze his prompt to list all of the people from the tech sector who are considered technocrats and were appointed by Trump in 2025. This included members of the ‘PayPal Mafia’ that is a group of former PayPal employees and founders who have since founded and/or developed additional technology companies based in Silicon Valley, such as Tesla, Inc., LinkedIn, Palantir Technologies, SpaceX, Affirm, Slide, Kiva, YouTube, Yelp, and Yammer.

AI reported that that the shared objectives of the technocrats are AI supremacy, cryptocurrency normalization and federal privatization. The Silicon Valley technocrats in advisory positions share a vision centered on deregulation, technological dominance and the restructuring of federal institutions to align with Libertarian-leaning tech industry priorities.

AI listed the following names of tech advocates surrounding Trump: Michael Kratsios, David Sacks, Sriram Krishnan, Bo Hines, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, Peter Thiel (who mentored VP JD Vance), Mark Andreessen, Joe Lonsdale, Ken Howery, Luke Nosek, Blake Masters, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Scott Bessent, Howard Lutnick, Emil Michael, Russell Vaught and Brendan Kerr.

The AI program concluded, “As these technocrats consolidate power, the long-term implications for regulatory integrity and public trust in governance remain deeply uncertain.”

Click here for audio link

from:    https://needtoknow.news/2025/02/technocracy-rising-all-the-presidents-men/?__cf_chl_tk=WaDrivj8HaxtXD.ztbb5iUOVM2hJUw1ibbAIJmhhclY-1740424229-1.0.1.1-qk0QQLKoZyJJZ6JqrlQI.wz8V54bCl3ehr9KOOVxoGY

Digital Earth Twin = Real Trouble for All

Posted on by

‘Digital Twin’ Of Earth Being Created To Predict The Future, Micro-Manage Everything

AUGUST 2, 2024

You can run, but you can not hide. The humongous new AI data centers, satellite networks, ground sensors, cell phones, and all the data on earth will combine to create a “Skynet” scenario to control everything, and all life forms. Driven by a lust to get to “net-zero”, this will far exceed anything related to climate change.

This simulation of satellites has now largely been fulfilled, but plans for more launches are in the works. This blanket of surveillance will monitor every square inch of the planet as systems are layered on. As the industry graphic above depicts, the payload for Technocrats lie in the “interventions.” — Technocracy News & Trends Editor Patrick Wood

By: Frost & Symons via Euronews

How do you know when a small-scale farmer in Africa, Latin America or Asia has sufficiently adapted to longer droughts or shifts in traditional monsoon seasons?

The complexity of this question means it is often left unanswered, with funding for such adaptation in developing countries dropping to around just a quarter of total climate finance provided by developed countries.

Delegates gathering at the Bonn Climate Change Conference to prepare for this year’s UN climate talks will be anticipating such questions, with COP29 already dubbed the “finance COP”.

In Baku, Azerbaijan, later this year, countries are expected to discuss a new climate finance deal after reaching the target of $100 billion (€93.2bn) a year in finance for developing countries two years later than agreed.

Historically low-emitting countries across much of the Global South desperately need more financial support to improve their climate defences across key sectors such as agriculture.

Less than 1% of international climate finance was spent helping smallholder farmers adapt to climate change in 2021, with many forced to spend up to 40% of their own incomes to cope with floods, droughts and crop pests.

However, in addition to more finance, countries across Africa, Asia, and Latin America also need ways of measuring adaptation to direct investments more effectively.

The solution that works already exists

While efforts to transition to sustainable agriculture across Europe have sparked protests among farmers this year, adapting to the evolving impacts of climate change is already a matter of survival for those in the Global South.

One emerging solution is an adaptation index, which scores resilience to climate shocks to highlight where finance for climate adaptation is most needed. Such models can quantify levels of adaptation and preparedness, giving policymakers, development agencies, investors, and donors clear guidance on where and how to invest in adaptation finance.

Water scarcity is the most common climate risk for crop farmers in Guatemala and Honduras across the different commodities.

Adaptation indices, developed at a country or commodity level, complement other work to consolidate climate data and research, such as CGIAR’s Africa Agriculture Adaptation Atlas, which provides interactive data insights and forecasts.

This new methodology is already providing actionable insights to direct adaptation funding and have the best chance of increasing the resilience of some of the world’s most vulnerable communities.

Over the past two years, the first-if-its-kind Adaptation Equivalency Index (AEI) has been developed for Guatemala and Honduras by Heifer International, Conservation International and local partners, supported by the Global Environment Facility. Guatemala and Honduras have both ranked among the top 10 countries most affected by climate change over the past decade, with heavy rains, floods, droughts and hurricanes becoming more frequent and affecting agriculture.

The index ranks the adaptation levels of the countries’ major agricultural commodities: spices, cacao and coffee.

Evidence-based investment means tangible impact

What makes this index novel is that it starts off with the farmers themselves, identifying the real-world climate threats that producers are already experiencing and anticipating, as well as their capacity to adapt.

This work has already uncovered the fact that water scarcity is the most common climate risk for crop farmers in Guatemala and Honduras across the different commodities.

Read full story here…

Sourced from Technocracy News & Trends 

from:    https://www.activistpost.com/2024/08/digital-twin-of-earth-being-created-to-predict-the-future-micro-manage-everything.html

 

Think It Over

Posted on by

The Numbered Men

A prescient poem written 50 years ago by Viv Forbes

Patrick Wood

One day while I was driving down the highway in the sun
I sat behind a milk truck just returning from his run.
His sign said “Licensed Vendor” and it made me feel secure
That only numbered milkmen could come knocking on my door.

*********
Then I saw a licensed builder with his number on the door
And a plumber with a permit which was issued by the law.
Then a hawker and publican each with his licence plate
And a licensed money lender with his number on the gate.

*********
I pulled into a café, which was licensed to sell beer
And struck up conversation with a licensed auctioneer.
He’d just been selling forfeit goods to pay the fines imposed
On a maverick hardware dealer whose late trading he’d exposed.

*********
A warm glow spread inside me as I drank a licensed beer
And I pictured the inspectors who called in every year
To check upon the numbered men and safeguard fools like me
Who’d waste their money buying things from men who paid no fee.

*********
I thought of all the union men whose cards protect their job
And dairy men whose quota scheme defends them from the mob.
The teachers who are registered, the chemists with their guilds
And lawyers with their closed cartel which keeps their coffers filled.

*********
As I sat among the numbered men it suddenly occurred
That I was just a cleanskin in a tamed and numbered herd.
Somehow I’d missed the muster when the planner combed the land
And now I was a maverick, a man without a brand.

*********
The numbered men live sheltered lives, their keeper is the State,
Their job depends less on their skills than on their licence plate.
Their future is determined and their charges are prescribed,
And the standards of their conduct are in rules and acts described.

*********
But thank the Lord for mavericks, who don’t fit in the mould,
They help distract the licence-men from getting far too bold.
Without the help of mavericks, the planners would persist
Till we all need applications for a licence to exist.

Viv Forbes
Washpool, Queensland, Australia

from:     Patrick Wood’s The Quickening Report,

Technocracy Looms? Is HumanityDoomed?

Posted on by

Derrick Broze Exposes The Technocratic State With Patrick Wood

POSTED BY: DERRICK BROZE VIA ACTIVIST POST JULY 16, 2023

Please Share This Story!
Author and researcher Derrick Broze absolutely nails Technocracy to the wall. This is Chapter 13 of his book, How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State, and is accompanied by an excellent 34 documentary that explains every facet, from the 1930s through today. This is a must-read article and a must-view documentary. Please share widely.⁃ TN Editor


Up to this point we have focused our attention on the various individuals and institutions which make up The Pyramid of Power. As we near the top of the Pyramid and edge closer to the looming question, Who is on top of the Pyramid? we must first stop to examine the philosophy which appears to be guiding the actions of the inner circle.

Over the years, researchers of the ruling class have typically fallen into one of three categories: Those who believe the guiding philosophy is Communism, those who believe it is a fascist ideology driving the psychopaths at the top, and, finally, those who see the most danger coming from Nationalist authoritarians.

Now, it’s not hard to see why some would believe the threat is Communism, Fascism, or even Nationalism. History shows us the violence, betrayal, tyranny, murder, and starvation wrought by the Russian Bolshevik revolution, and other Communist revolutions inspired by the Bolsheviks. Also, we have seen the violence and death brought by Hitler’s Nazis and Mussolini’s Fascists. And history has also shown us that tyrants will use the cover of traditionalism and national identity to enforce their police state measures, as with the Franco dictatorship in Spain.

These historical events are all worthy of further inspection, and we will do so in an upcoming chapter, but for now it’s important to understand that while some researchers fall into this dichotomy of Communism vs Fascism, there are also those who believe this narrow focus misses the mark when it comes to the actual guiding philosophy of the Pyramid of Power.

If it’s not right-wing nationalism, or left-wing Communism we should fear, what is the actual philosophy that underpins the actions of the Ruling Class?

Understanding Historical Technocracy

For the rest of the excerpt, go to:  https://www.technocracy.news/derrick-broze-exposes-the-technocratic-state-with-patrick-wood/

Let’s Learn a Bit About Technocracy

Posted on by

The Pressing Dangers of Technocracy

August 10, 2020

Dr. Mercola, Guest
Waking Times

Patrick Wood — an economist, financial analyst and American constitutionalist — has devoted a lifetime to uncovering the mystery of what is controlling most of the craziness we’re currently seeing, and which has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

He’s written two books on this topic: “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation” and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.” I was intrigued by his work as my own approach is to seek to understand the foundational cause of any given problem.   …

Wood’s foray into the ideology of technocracy began with a chance meeting with Anthony Sutton at a gold conference in the early 1970s. Sutton has written several books about political science, primarily about the Trilateral Commission, which Wood had studied from a financial angle.

They developed a relationship and eventually wound up collaborating on a newsletter and two books, “Trilaterals Over Washington: Volumes 1 and 2,” which have recently been re-released.   …

Definition of Technocracy

So, what is “technocracy”? As explained by Wood, technocracy is a movement that got started in the 1930s during the height of the Great Depression, when scientists and engineers got together to solve the nation’s economic problems. It looked like capitalism and free enterprise was going to die, so they decided to invent a new economic system from scratch.

They called this system “technocracy.” It was to be a resource-based economic system. Rather than basing the economic system on pricing mechanisms such as supply and demand, this system is instead based on energy resources and social engineering. In a nutshell, under this system, companies would be told what resources they’re allowed to use, when, and for what, and consumers would be told what to buy.

“They actually proposed to use an energy script instead of money, and let energy be the determining factor on what was produced, bought and sold, and consumed, and so on. 

…

‘Technocracy is the science of social engineering. The scientific operation of the entire social mechanism, to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.’

First off, you’ll see that it’s the science of social engineering. That ought to be enough to make the hair stand up on the back of your head, because who wants to be scientifically engineered by somebody that you don’t know, somebody that doesn’t know you, but rather has this idea that they can reform you, remake you?

But most importantly, you see the economic aspect that they had in mind, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism — that’s all the people in society — to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.

This was an economic system from the get go, not a political system. And what’s really important to see in that — the big takeaway here — is that technocracy viewed politics and politicians as an unnecessary, irrelevant, and even just a stumbling block to getting on down the road with society.

They proposed to get rid of all the politicians. Just dismiss them. Dismiss the Senate, the Congress, all the elected officials.     …

Scientists Stand Above All Other Individuals

As explained by Wood, the technocrats “had this crazy idea that they were better than everybody else.” This philosophy and mindset can be traced back to Henri de Saint-Simon, a French philosopher from around 1800. Saint-Simon is considered the father of scientism, social sciences, transhumanism and technocracy.

He said in one of his essays, “A scientist … is a man who foresees. It is because science provides the means to predict, that it is useful, and the scientists are superior to all other men.” This was the mindset of technocrats in the 1930s, and it’s the same today. In essence, science is used to manipulate society and keep the economic engine running.

Top Technocrats Rescued Through Operation Paperclip

While technocracy began in the U.S., the first country to ever implement it was Nazi Germany under Hitler. …

When technocracy first began in the U.S., it was a membership organization. At its peak, there were more than 500,000 card-carrying, dues-paying members in the United States and Canada. Incidentally, the head of technocracy in Canada was the grandfather of Elon Musk, founder of Tesla and SpaceX. Around the same time, a technocratic organization also got started in Germany.

“As Hitler rose to power, he realized that the technocrats, as an organization, would be competitive with him becoming a dictator. So, he outlawed the Technocratic party in Germany. …It was discovered later by historians that these technocrats, who were banned from meeting, were actually very active during the course of World War II, during Hitler’s reign. They were the statisticians, the mathematicians, the physicists, the engineers for business and so on; that really enabled Hitler’s expansion and dictatorship.

…

After the war … a top-secret operation [took place] in the United States … called Operation Paperclip, which brought some 1,200 of these top scientists and engineers from Germany to the United States. They sanitized their resumes and installed them into positions of scientific prowess in the United States, like at the national technology agencies.

So, the very same people that were helping Hitler do what he did, completely bypassed the Nuremberg trial. …

Beauty and the Beast

The Trilateral Commission’s co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Columbia University professor, brought the concept of technocracy into the Commission in 1973, with the financial support of David Rockefeller.

“Brzezinski wrote this book called ‘Between Two Ages — America’s Role in the Technetronic Era.’ It caught Rockefeller’s eye. And so, Rockefeller and Brzezinski became like the beauty and the beast. They went on to form the Trilateral Commission, which declared, from Day 1, that they wanted to foster a new international economic order.

…

The Trilateral Commission more or less took over the Jimmy Carter administration, and has dominated the political structure ever since….

Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton were all members. Within two weeks of his inauguration, Barack Obama appointed 11 Trilateral Commission members to top-level positions in his administration, equivalent to 12% of the Commission’s entire U.S. membership.1 …

What the technocrats are doing is making an end run around national sovereignty. Rather than a frontal assault on the system, which has never been successful, they’ve simply eroded national sovereignty piece by piece.

Their last great power grab in the U.S. was the 9/11 tragedy. It allowed them to push through the Patriot Act, which sacrificed many of our freedoms in one fell swoop. They’re in the process of doing it again with the current pandemic. It’s quite clear the pandemic is being used to move us toward an authoritarian tyranny.

However, the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a platform that will dwarf their 9/11 power-grab and radically increase their ability to continue to erode our civil liberties and control our society. If you find this line of reasoning interesting, I think you will enjoy the video below from Really Graceful, which reviews whether or not you’d even notice if you were living under tyranny.

Technocratic Infrastructure

It’s also crucial to understand that the only reason they’ve not yet been able to overtake the U.S. is because of our Constitution. We’re the biggest barrier worldwide to implementing technocracy, which is why there’s been so much focus on dismantling the freedoms of Americans. …

Rule by algorithm. Operation by algorithm. This is the big predominant thing we see today. When something doesn’t fit into the algorithm, you’ll hear the term ‘Science says.’ We should do that thing.”

To give you just one rather hilarious real-world example of the technocratic “science says” strategy, here’s a sentence from a recent article in The Sun:3 “People who refuse to wear a face mask to reduce the risk of coronavirus have lower cognitive ability, new research has found.”

Not only is it laughable because it’s illogical, it’s also completely irrelevant, since there’s not a single well-designed study showing that mask wearing lowers the spread of viral infections. For the scoop on this, see my interview with Denis Rancourt.

Rule by Algorithm

Initially, science is used to issue suggestions, but those suggestions rapidly turn into mandates. We’ve repeatedly seen that with vaccines, for example. But the COVID-19 pandemic has also revealed there’s a much larger plan that includes implantable digital identifications, medical records and vaccine passports, digital currency and banking — all of which will ultimately be tied together so that algorithms and automation will be able to keep everyone in line, everywhere, all the time. …

Data Is the New Oil

In her book, “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” professor Shoshana Zuboff exposes the stunning capacities currently available to surveil, analyze and manipulate our behavior. It’s crucial to realize that as bad as it is today, the predictive power of technology is advancing at an exponential rate, which means their ability to manipulate behavior is increasing at a pace we cannot fully comprehend.   …

What’s the Ultimate Goal?

For instance, years ago, if you searched for a holistic medicine topic, many of my articles would appear at the top of your search. In June 2019, Google quietly started to eliminate Mercola.com from search results. I discussed this in “Google Buries Mercola in Their Latest Search Engine Update, Part 1 and Part 2.”

“You haven’t done anything different. You’re still doing exactly what you did, but Google is treating you as a non-person now,” Wood says.

Google has this power to present information that it wants you to hear or see, and they can manipulate minds and mindsets. …  It’s just amazing. They even said, internally, that they believe they have the power to take the 2020 election away from Trump because of this very feature. Well, wait a minute.

If any person or organization sets themselves up intentionally to overthrow the government of the United States, I think there’s a term for that. It’s called sedition….

 

It doesn’t really have to do with a class of people that they’re censoring, it has to do with the topics that are being censored. That’s the key thing here to understand. One of the key topics today that they are so in love with is this idea of global manipulation of the human [gene] pool, to get the medical hooks into your body.

This is social engineering at its extreme, where they’re not only engineering the society around you, the environment around you, they also want to engineer you personally….

Sustainable Development Isn’t What You Think

Wood also explains why “sustainable development” goals, which sound like a good thing, really aren’t. The United Nations has declared that sustainable development is going to be the new economic system of the future. It’s a resource-based economic system based on energy.

“A couple of years ago, the head of climate change at the UN, Christiana Figueres, gave a press conference in Europe and she said, ‘This is the first time in the history of mankind that we’re setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.’

…

Their vision for the future of society is this sustainable future where they will control all the resources and all the consumption. In other words, they will tell businesses what they’re allowed to build and they will tell consumers what they’re allowed to consume. …

This is the science of social engineering here. They have the science, you just have to follow and do what they tell you to do. ….”

Taking Back Local Government Is Key

Importantly, what the technocrats are doing is making an end run around national sovereignty. Rather than a frontal assault on the system, which has never been successful, they’ve simply eroded national sovereignty piece by piece. Wood also reviews what we can do to save our republic and thwart the steady march of technocracy:

“I believe very strongly that local activism is the only way to rebuild our country, if there is going to be any rebuilding at all. Local activism — because this is how they got us. They built [the technocratic system] from the bottom up. We cannot tear their house down from the top down. It’s simply is just not going to happen. They’re too powerful,” Wood says.

 

One of the most important elected local officials that you should concern yourself with is your sheriff. They are responsible for enforcing tyrannical edicts from local, state and federal government, and if they choose not to, government has no power. City councils also have a lot of power. They can pass binding resolutions to protect citizens against the technocratic agendas. …

What is Agenda 21? It is the keystone document for Sustainable Development. It was developed in 1992 at the Rio de Janeiro conference of the United Nations’ first Earth summit. This became the agenda for the 21st century. The doctrine that came to be known as Agenda 21 came from a book written by Trilateral Commission member Gro Harlem Brundtland, called “Our Common Future.”

Citizens for Free Speech

We cover a lot of information in this interview, so be sure to listen to it in its entirety, or read through the transcript for more. Also consider picking up one or both of his books, “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation” and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.”

Wood’s nonprofit organization, Citizens for Free Speech, is another excellent resource where you can learn more about your constitutional rights and how to communicate your ideas to others. For a small donation, Citizens for Free Speech also offers a laminated No Mask Card that you can wear on a lanyard, explaining your First Amendment Right to disobey local mask mandates.

from:    https://www.wakingtimes.com/2020/08/10/the-pressing-dangers-of-technocracy/

Check out the link for the full article