Source: The Daily Bell
Viewpoint: The internet is broken – we need to start over … Last
year, the level and ferocity of cyber-attacks on the internet reached
such a horrendous level that some are now thinking the unthinkable: to
let the internet wither on the vine and start up a new more robust one
instead. On being asked if we should start again, many – maybe most –
immediately argue that the internet is such an integral part of our
social and economic fabric that even considering a change in its
fundamental structure is inconceivable and rather frivolous. I was one
of those. However, recently the evidence suggests that our efforts to
secure the internet are becoming less and less effective, and so the
idea of a radical alternative suddenly starts to look less laughable. – BBC/ Prof Alan Woodward, Department of Computing, University of Surrey
Dominant Social Theme: Look, can we talk? The
Internet is paedophiles’ best friend and a virus manufacturer besides.
If we get rid of it, we’ll all be a lot safer. And especially the
children. Good Lord, the children! The children!
Free-Market Analysis: It is clear to us by now that the Anglosphere power elite
is increasingly desperate to shut down the Internet any way it can.
This article posted at the BBC (whether or not the author understands
he’s been enlisted on behalf of a larger Western elite agenda) is a good
example of a sub dominant social theme within the context of this aim.
The power elite wants to run the world, and what we call the Internet Reformation has badly dented their plans. How does one run a secret, super-duper conspiracy to create a New World Order when one’s every move is plastered on the Internet the very next day?
It’s next to impossible. The elites have invested heavily in making
their global operations “user friendly.” They’ve tried to pretend that
increasingly authoritarian Western governments and global facilities such as the IMF and UN have agendas that are entirely supportive of human rights and individual prosperity.
Nothing could be further from the truth. What the Internet has shown
us with increasing clarity over this past decade is that Western banking
elites and their enablers and associates will stop at nothing in their
quest for ultimate power.
They wish for one-world government (the UN), a one-world military (NATO), a one-world court (the recently formed Soros-sponsored International Criminal Court), a one-world central bank (the IMF), etc.
The exposure of the elite’s goals and its methodologies – its
dependence on the corrupt counterfeiting practices of central banks for
the trillion-dollar torrents of capital necessary to build world
government – has led to an upswell of indignation and scrutiny around
the world.
As a result, many of the elite’s dominant social themes are beginning
to founder and fail. The elites had high hopes apparently for
installing a carbon currency around the world based on the fraudulent
message of global warming. But the Internet helped reveal emails that exposed the fraud.
The so-called war on terror
has long been revealed to be both fraudulent and unpopular. Creating a
so-called long war to generate the kind of chaos that is necessary to
move the world toward global governance is perhaps a good idea from an
elite standpoint … but not one that has worked out well.
As elite memes
have degraded, the attacks on the Internet have stepped up. This
article from the BBC is a good example of the kind of spurious
justifications that are now being put forward to create a groundswell of
support for the removal of a (somewhat) free and independent Internet.
We need to understand the root of the problem. In essence, the
internet was never intended to be a secure network. The concept was
developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) as a
means of allowing a distributed computer system to survive a nuclear
attack on the US. Those who designed the Internet Protocol (IP) did not
expect that someone might try to intercept or manipulate information
sent across it.
As we expanded our use of the internet from large, centralised
computers to personal computers and mobile devices, its underlying
technology stayed the same. The internet is no longer a single entity
but a collection of ‘things’ unified by only one item – IP – which is
now so pervasive that it is used to connect devices as wide-ranging as
cars and medical devices …
While not a popular view, I think that the current internet can
only survive if adequate global governance is applied and that single,
secure technology is mandated. This is obviously fraught with the much
rehashed arguments about control of the internet, free speech, and so
on. Then there is the Herculean task of achieving international
agreement and a recognised and empowered governance body …
I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle. We can have
areas of the internet that are governed by a global body and run on
technologies which are inherently secure, and we can have areas which
are known to be uncontrolled. They can coexist using the same physical
networks, personal computers and user interface to access both but they
would be clearly segregated such that a user would have to make a clear
choice to leave the default safe zone and enter what has been described
as “the seediest place on the planet”.
This article is composed within the parameters of a typical elite
dominant social theme. These are the promotional memes that the elites
use to create ever-more authoritarian government. The idea is to
frighten people into giving up control to specially prepared globalist
entities.
In this case, the Internet itself is presented as a scary place, “the
seediest place on the planet.” It is not, of course. It is, at root,
simply a collection of electrons, and most of the abuses of privacy are
likely taking place at the behest of Western intelligence agencies.
This is the part of the story that Dr. Woodward leaves out. Whether
it is Facebook, Google, YouTube or Yahoo, US, European and British Intel
agencies have apparently penetrated every part of these electronic
facilities and are aggressively (and usually illegally) mining personal
data from them.
One could make the argument, in fact, that without the intelligence
abuses, the Internet would not have nearly so many difficulties. The
chances are that many of its vulnerabilities were put in place by the
very agencies that now claim the Internet is an unsafe place.
How the Internet’s electrons came to be characterized as “unsafe” is a
puzzle we will leave to future historians. But what is more certain to
us is that the Internet Reformation is beginning to have a significant
impact on the elites and their plans for a New World Order.
Articles like this one, when combined with recent US legislation
aimed at shutting down the current Internet using the tool of copyright
violations, begin to provide us with a sense of the panic that the
elites must be currently feeling about the exposure of their activities.
Conclusion: It also seems to confirm our hunch that
the Internet was not some sort of elite plot to impose technological
dominance on people but a Hayekian example of spontaneous social order.
The old men who must run the affairs of the Anglosphere elites
apparently didn’t see it coming and still have no idea what to do about
it.
