Authored by Paul Lancefield via Off-Guardian.org,

Read parts 1 and 2 HERE and HERE

Now in this third article in the series, I want to link this back to what we started out discussing. How our closed and controlled Social Media services are now processing every post with an LLM.

My point today is not to prove linkages and corruption of the narrative being fed to the masses via Social Media. Such an investigation could be the subject of an entire book in itself.

Rather today, I would like to plant a seed.

Many reading this will already be in agreement with my belief we are entered into and age of Fascism 2.0. But if you are not yet aware, if you haven’t yet recognised the pervasive and consistent propaganda, my hope is you will start to notice.

My hope is that you will start to see our newspapers only carry the stories which support narratives furthering the globalist desire to fix policy-driven markets. Never the stories that contradict them. And Social Media (less so X now) similarly down regulate posts when they are critical of the policies sought. But for good measure, let me give two examples of recent news suppression matching this pattern.

Across Europe, farmers have been demonstrating. The demonstrations relate generally to costs and economic pressures on farming. And at the heart of the ill feeling we find another policy benefiting globalist within one of their subjects of interest.

Fertiliser, criticised for its carbon-intensive production, is now heavily taxed by the EU, driving up costs for farmers. As a result, many are being forced out of business, and their land is being snapped up by globalist billionaires and investment funds.

Anyone who has seen the Amazon series Clarkson’s farm will be aware just how much the farming business is currently under the cosh. But which group of people, is snapping up land from farmers all over Europe who can no longer afford to stay in business? Globalist Billionaires, and the globalist investment funds of course. The fertiliser tax alone threatens to put many farmers out of business. It forms a significant part of their outlay and is a major item on the list of reasons Farmers are demonstrating.

According to presidential candidate RFK Jr, Blackrock (via their holdings DuPont, Cargill and Monsanto) now own 30% of all agriculture land in Ukraine. Read that again. But Blackrock also push an ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) scoring system used throughout the finance industry to “weight” companies for how “ethical” they are.

To get a high score businesses need to have, for example, active Diversity Equity and Inclusion policies in place, have low impact on the environment etc. (Blackrock chair many of the main ESG scoring committees). Indeed this is another of the factors driving increased farming costs. Obtaining a “good” ESG score costs money and agriculture supplies in general are seeing cost increases because of it.

But do you think Blackrock the very company pushing these ESG scores, are volunteering to pay the increased fertiliser taxes in relation to their agriculture holdings in Ukraine? You hardly need guess the answer. They aren’t. So really, as far as the globalists are concerned, this has nothing to do with environmentalism or ethics.

I would suggest, instead, it is being used as a tool, to take everything the farmers have got. Whether this mechanism was mapped out ten years ago as part of a grand plan in a backroom in Blackrock’s boardroom can of course be debated. MacDonalds almost surely didn’t start out in business consciously aiming to make fast food addictive. But it is the system that has evolved nevertheless. And in this case it is on the back of a power imbalance, and the revenues that power welding side of the system wields is so great the outcome is only going one way.

Indeed these people are extremely well versed in how to make it go one-way. And notice how news coverage of the farmer protests and the damage being done to farming by the agriculture taxes has been minimal. The farmers protests have been substantial. The issues are profound, historic even. Tractors converging on mass on cities Europe over. Yet they are getting scant television and press coverage. Why is that?

Consider another glaring example of news suppression. This one relating to the Covid vaccines. It’s extremely significant news that the mRNA vaccines have shown a terrible safety profile. Yet those covering this had their Social Media accounts banned. Many were experienced scientists who were well regarded, well published, and who had no conflicts of interest. As the Twitter files have conclusively shown, they were rounded on, and subject to de-boosting, shadow banned or outright banned.

I’ve encountered this firsthand. I’m a lifelong conservative, and Telegraph reader, yet I have been banned from commenting on the Telegraph because I continually, politely but firmly, pointed out their hypocrisy in relation to the mRNA vaccines, and the fact The Telegraph were receiving sponsorship from the Gates Foundation. They have consistently dragged their feet on publishing verified truths about vaccine harms, despite the fact such stories are the very hight of public interest.

Attitude surveys of the public show trust in the mRNA vaccines has fallen to an extremely low level, so it’s not as though the Telegraph’s readership aren’t aware. Yet still, set against the fact their readership no longer believe the narrative, the press say next to nothing.

Lastly from early 2021 there has been a widely circulated video of a Zoom call between Dr. Andrew Hill and Dr. Tess Lawrie, which exposes, from the inside the very corruption of the scientific process that confirms how the system suppressed positive results regarding the efficacy of Ivermectin. Under US law mRNA vaccines could not have obtained the Emergency Use Authorisation required for “Operation Warp Speed” (The Trump administrations project to speed up vaccine delivery) if it could be shown an effective alternative treatment for Covid was available. The Zoom video call shows the end-to-end story. But the source of that corruption is a Gates Foundation subsidiary, and no major news outlet has touched the story.

The video in question is damning of Dr Hill by any objective measure. It’s authenticity is clear to anyone who watches it, and it provides primary, “from the horses mouth” evidence so can in no way be painted as a conspiracy theory or misinformation. By all objective measures it should have been seen by the press as a major scoop.

After all, mRNA vaccines have now been injected into a majority of the population in Europe and the US and subterfuge has been used to get them authorised. Yet all mainstream news regarding Ivermectin’s efficacy has been suppressed despite the now overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I’ve given two or three examples news that in my opinion were clear candidates for page reporting. Countless other examples exist, and in each and every case the bias falls in one direction. If the story can undermine the narrative supporting globalisms preferred policy based revenues, it simply doesn’t get published.

All-in-all the policy interventions relating to the globalist list of subjects of interest are akin to a firehose having been attached siphon-like to the pockets of the poor, the middle classes and small and medium sized businesses throughout the West.

I hope people will become aware that we have for some time in fact been living in the age of global Fascism 2.0. And unlike Fascism as it was earlier in the 20th century, Fascism 2.0 is pushed by corporate interests co-opting national government rather than national government co-opting corporate interests.

And the battle we are in right now is to stop Fascism 2.0 before we enter a new age of Feudalism 2.0. Because that is where we are headed, and rather quickly.

Earlier in this article, I referred to how LLMs are used by Social Media Firms to police content and how the monitoring capacity of LLMs is ripe for integration with external agencies. There can be little doubt plans are afoot to do this. You can be sure these plans will be dressed up in nice language filled with “caring words”.

The sentiment will be “we are worried for you because your thoughts are wrong and they’re harming you.”

So I will finish by pointing out an article in the BMJ, published this January, on how LLMs can be used to combat vaccine hesitancy. The article is set in the context of the WHO having designated such vaccine hesitancy as one of the “top 10 global health threats” (global health security, remember, being on the Globalist subject list):

“Vaccine hesitancy is a state of indecision before accepting or refusing a vaccination. It is a dynamic and context specific challenge that varies across time, place, and vaccine type. It is […] challenging to predict and harder to tackle. Additionally, the emergence of misinformation in public health, notably during crises such as the covid-19 pandemic, calls for rapid, data driven responses.”

We should not be conspiratorial. Not everything about this initiative is necessarily be bad. Paul Lancefield of four years ago would have taken it at face value and would have found little sinister about it. And indeed I’m sure there is nothing sinister about the authors – though I fear they may be a little blind to the real threat.

But for me today, it is illustrative of the role LLMs will increasingly shape our communication, influenced by the power structures that determine their messaging. The power structures that will be hooking into a Derren Brown like capacity to apply suggestion on mass scale. Some might find that comforting. In the world we live in today, I personally find the thought terrifying.