2026-05-19
If we for a moment make the working assumption that the current world Humpty Dumpty (the UN the WEF and all its unaccountable hangers on) is doomed to spiritual and actual collapse, then we must look forward to a new phase of earth habitation that is not dominated by private unaccountable interests.
This is so far removed from the structures under which we have grown up into adults that the form that such a world might take isn't intuitively obvious. Take away the bosses and what would we have?
We would have a workforce that still knows how to do what it has always done - create and sell product. What we wouldn't have is the super-rich oligarchs who invest in projects that may or may not align with the aspirations of the people but with those of the current ultimate owners (Black Rock, State Street, Vanguard and some others).
So we would need a new method of appointing the Boards of Directors of productive companies according to whoever the new "owners of the business" are deemed to be.
So new ownership would not necessarily need to lead to instant catastrophic change - it would be possible to run productive enterprises under continuity of management schemes in a nation under military government for a time, whilst ownership and commercial direction is sorted out for the future.
The current pyramid ownership schemes (whereby conglomerates are holding companies that simply control the financials of profit and investment) could be reconfigured by devolving control downwards by redistributing their assets among their producer companies. It's an option. Whether it's the least messy option is another question!
We can't have the world screeching to halt just because the relatively tiny top level of commercial control has collapsed. Nor can we have a world where the top level of control is simply nationalised into a vast remote and absolutely unaccountable government bureaucracy ...
Fully indoctrinated establishments based upon racketeering between "private enterprises" "charitable foundations" government agencies and "regulators" would of necessity have to be broken up. New businesses based on provision of true health advice (rather than corporate profits by government regulation) should be made legal and encouraged - take away the vipers nest of revolving doors and back-handers, and there would be money aplenty to support new start-ups, and the market would sort the wheat from the chaff.
Which brings us to the small matter of government. Small government, which doesn't deem itself authorised to poke its controlling nose into every corner of the peoples' lives unless the people make specific demands of it and are prepared to fund the means to do so. Would that not be a revolution?
Ok - My objective is not to say what must be done - but simply to indicate that there are transitions ahead that must and could be planned for. I have neither infinite wisdom nor unlimited knowledge and capability, but if we start to throw some ideas out there, then perhaps collectively we can think big enough to cut the seemingly impossible down to manageable size.
After all, a total unmanaged collapse is not a recommendation ... but may be approaching.
And the proffered control by unaccountable technocratic "Computer says no" AI would clearly mean the end of freedom.
