The Crux of the Putin-Xi Revolution
for a New World Order – Arresting
the Slide to Nihilism
by Alastair Crooke
November 29th, 2022
https://strategic-culture.org
It becomes questionable whether the West can
compete as a civilisational state and maintain
a presence.
The world ‘Map’ is accelerating its shift away from the
paralysed Washington ‘hub’ – but to what? The myth
that China, Russia, or the non-western world can
be fully assimilated to a Western model of
political society (any more than
Afghanistan was) is over. So
to where are we headed?
The myth of the pull of acculturation into western
post-modernity lingers on however, in the
continuing western fantasy of pulling
China away from Russia, and into an
embrace with U.S. Big Business.
The bigger point here is that former wounded
civilisations are reasserting themselves:
China and Russia – as states organised
around indigenous culture – is not a
new idea. Rather, it is a very old one:
“Always remember that China is a
civilization – and not nation-state”,
Chinese officials repeat regularly.
Nonetheless, the shift to civilisational statehood
emphasised by those Chinese officials arguably
is no rhetorical device but reflects something
deeper and more radical. Moreover, the
culture transition is gaining wide
emulation across the globe. Its
inherent radicalism however,
is largely lost to western
audiences.
Chinese thinkers, such as Zhang Weiwei, accuse
Western political ideas of being a sham; of
masking their deeply partisan ideological
character beneath a veneer of supposedly
neutral principles. They are saying that
the mounting of a universal framework
of values – applicable to all societies
– is finished.
All of us must accept, that we speak
only for ourselves and our societies.
This has arisen because the non-West... now sees
clearly that post-modern West is not a civilisation
per se, but really something akin to a de-cultured
‘operating system’ (managerial technocracy).
Europe of the Renaissance did consist of
civilisational states, but subsequent
European nihilism changed the very
substance of modernity.
The West promotes its universal-value stance,
however, as though it be a set of abstract
scientific theorems which have
universal validity.
The accompanying promise to the latter that
traditional ways of life could be preserved
under the wholesale application of these
intentionally secular western norms –
ones that demanded enforcement
by the western political class –
has proved a fatal conceit
...these alternative
thinkers contend.
Such notions are not confined to the Orient. Samuel
Huntington, in his book The Clash of Civilizations,
argued that Universalism is the ideology of the
West contrived for confronting other cultures.
Naturally, everyone outside the West,
Huntington argued, should see the
idea of ‘one world’ as a threat.
The return to plural civilisational matrices precisely
is intended to break the West’s claim to speak – or
to decide – for anyone other than themselves.
Some will see this Russo-Chinese defiance as mere
jockeying for strategic ‘space’; as a rationale to
their claims for distinct ‘spheres of interest’.
Yet, to understand its radical underside, we
should recall that the transition to civilisation
states amounts to a full-throated resistance
(short of war) being mounted by 2 wounded
civilisations. Both Russians (post-the '90s)
and Chinese (in the Great Humiliation)...
feel this deeply. Today.. they are intent
on reasserting themselves forcefully,
in uttering: ‘Never Again!’
What ‘lit the fuse’ was the moment when China’s
leaders saw – in the plainest terms – that the
U.S. had no intention whatsoever to allow
China to overtake it economically.
Russia of course, already knew the plan to destroy
her. Even the smallest amount of empathy is
sufficient to understand that recovery from
profound trauma is what binds Russia and
China (and Iran) together in a joint
‘interest’ that transcends
mercantile gain. It is
‘that’ which allows
them to say:--
Never again!
One part to their radicalism therefore, is the national
rejuvenation that propels these two states to ‘step
confidently onto the world stage’; to emerge from
the western shadow, and to stop mimicking the
West. And to stop assuming that technological
or economic advance can only be found within
the western liberal-economic ‘way’. For, it
follows from Zang’s analysis, that the
West’s economic ‘laws’ similarly are
a simulacrum posing as scientific
theorems: A cultural discourse
– but not an universal system.
When we consider that today’s Anglo-American world
view rests on the shoulders of three men: Isaac
Newton, the father of western science; Jean-
Jacques Rousseau, the father of liberal
political theory, and Adam Smith, the
father of laissez-faire economics, it
is plain that what we confront here
are the authors of the ‘Cannon’ of
individualism (in the wake of the
Protestant triumph in Europe’s
30 years’ war). From it comes
the doctrine -- that the most
prosperous future... for the
greatest number of people
comes from ------ the free
workings of the market.
Be that as it may, Zhang and others have noted that
the western focus on ‘finance’ has come at the
expense of ‘stuff’ (the real economy), and has
proved to be a recipé for extreme inequalities
& social strife. Zhang argues, contrarily, that
China is poised to evolve a new kind of non-
Western modernity that others – especially
in the developing world – can only admire,
if not emulate.
The decision has been made: The West then,
in this view, can either ‘shut up, and put up’
– or not. So be it.
Steeped in cynicism... the West sees this stance, as
bluff or posturing. What values, they ask, lie behind
this new order; what economic model? Implying
again that universal conformity is mandatory,
and thus missing Zhang’s point completely.
Universality is neither necessary, nor
sufficient. It never ‘was’.
In 2013, President Xi gave a speech which sheds
much light on the shifts in Chinese policy. And
though its analysis was firmly focused on the
causes to the Soviet implosion, Xi’s
exposition... very clearly intended
a wider meaning.
In his address, Xi attributed the break-up of the Soviet
Union... to ‘ideological nihilism’: The ruling strata, Xi
asserted, had ceased to believe in the advantages
and the value of their ‘system’ --- yet lacking any
other ideological coordinates within which to
situate their thinking, the élites slid
into nihilism:
“Once the Party loses the control of the ideology,
Xi argued, once it fails to provide a satisfactory
explanation --- for its own rule, objectives and
purposes, it dissolves into a party of loosely
connected individuals --- linked only by the
personal goals of enrichment & power”.
“The Party is then taken over by
‘ideological nihilism’”.
This, however, was not the worst outcome. The worst
outcome, Xi noted, would be the state taken over by
people with no ideology whatsoever, but with an
entirely cynical and self-serving desire to rule.
Put simply: Were China to lose its sense of a Chinese
‘rationale’, embedded for over a millennia in a unitary
state with strong institutions guided by a disciplined
Party, “the CPC, as great a Party as the CPSU was —
would be scattered like a flock of frightened beasts!
The Soviet Union — as great a socialist state as it
was — ended shattered into pieces”.
There can be little doubt: President Putin would
concur with Xi whole-heartedly. The existential
threat to Asia is to allow its states to assimilate
into soulless western nihilism. This then, is the
crux of the Xi-Putin revolution: Lifting the fog
and blinkers imposed by the universalist
meme to permit states a return to
cultural rejuvenation.
These principles were in action at the G20 in Bali. Not
only did the G7 fail to get the wider G20 to condemn
Russia over Ukraine, or to insert a wedge between
China and Russia, but rather, the Manichean
offensive targeting of Russia produced
something even more significant for
the Middle-East than the paralysis
and lack of tangible results,
described by the media:
It produced wide and open defiance of the western
order. It spurred pushback – at the very moment
that the world political ‘map’ is on the move,
and as the rush towards BRICS+ is
gathering pace.
Why does this matter?
Because the ability of western powers to spin their
spiders’ web notion that their ‘ways’ should be the
World’s ways, remains the West’s ‘secret weapon’.
This is plainly said when western leaders say
that a loss in Ukraine to Russia would mark
the demise of the ‘Liberal Order’.
They’re saying, as it were, that ‘our hegemony’
is contingent on the world seeing the western
‘way’ – as their vision for their future.
Enforcement of the ‘Liberal Order’ largely has
rested on the underpinning of an easy
readiness of ‘western allies’ to fall
into line, with Washington’s
instructions. It - therefore -
is difficult to overplay the
strategic significance
of any withering of
compliance to U.S.
diktat. This is the
‘why’ to the war
in Ukraine.
The U.S.’ crown and sceptre are slipping. The peril of
U.S. Treasury ‘N-bomb’ sanctions have been key to
induced ‘allied’ compliance. But now, Russia,
China and Iran have charted a clear path out
from this thorny thicket, through dollar-free
trading. The BRI initiative constitutes
Eurasia’s economic ‘high road’.
India, Saudi Arabia and Turkish inclusion (and now,
an expanded list of new members are waiting to be
signed up) give it an energy-based
strategic content.
Military deterrence.. has constituted the secondary
pillar to the architecture of compliance to western
models. But even that - though not gone - is
lessened. In essence, smart cruise-missiles,
drones, electronic warfare and – now –
hypersonic missiles, have capsized
the former paradigm. So too, has
the game-breaker event... of
Russia joining with Iran, as
a military force multiplier.
The U.S. Pentagon, even a few years ago, dismissed
hypersonic weapons as ‘boutique’ and a ‘gimmick’.
Wow – did they miscalculate on that one!
Both Iran and Russia, are at the forefront, in
complementary areas of military evolution.
Both, are in an existential fight. And both
peoples possess the inner resources to
sustain sacrifice from war. They will
lead. China will lead from behind.
Just to be clear: This Russo-Iranian link says: U.S.
‘deterrence’ in the Middle East itself now faces a
formidable deterrent! Israel too, will need to
ponder that.
The Russo-Iranian force-multiplier relationship, the
Jerusalem Post opines: “provides proof that the
two states … together – are better equipped to
make good on their respective ambitions – to
bring the West to its knees”.
To fully understand the anxiety lying behind The Post
opinion piece, we must first grasp that the geography
of the ‘shifting map’ towards a BRICS+ --- new
corridors, new pipelines, new waterway and
railway networks --- is but the outer
mercantilist layer to a nesting
Matryoshka doll. To unstack
to the inner doll layers is to
espy in the final innermost
Matryoshka – a layer of
kindled energy and
confidence latent
to the whole.
What is missing? Well, the fire that finally bakes the
New Order Z -‘dish’; the event that instantiates the
new World Order.
Netanyahu keeps threatening Iran. Even to Israeli ears
however his words seem stale and passé. The U.S.
does not want to be led by Netanyahu into war.
And without the U.S., Israel cannot act alone.
The recent MEK-led attempt to wreak havoc
in Iran, reeks somehow, of a ‘last
resort’ push.
Will the U.S. try some risky game-changer in Ukraine
to ‘take out’ Russia? It’s possible. Or might it try to
derail China somehow?
Is a Mega-clash inevitable? After all, what is
in prospect is not the dominance of any one
civilization, but a return to the natural, old
order of non-universal realms of influence.
There is no reason in logic for a Western
boycott to try to explode the shift –
except one:
In any assimilation to what this future portends,
the collective West inexorably must become a
civilizational state per se – simply to maintain
an enduring presence in the world. But the
West has opted for a different route (as
Bruno Maçães, commentator & former
Portuguese Secretary of State for
European Affairs, writes):
“[The West] wanted its political values to be accepted
universally … In order to achieve this, a monumental
effort of abstraction and simplification was needed …
Properly speaking, it was not to be a civilization at
all but something closer to an operating system …
no more than an abstract framework within which
different cultural possibilities could be explored.
Western values were not to stand for one
particular ‘way of life’ against another —
they establish procedures, according to
which those big questions (how to live)
may later be decided”.
Today, as the West turns away from its own key
leitmotif – tolerance – and towards weird ‘cancel
culture’ abstractions, it becomes questionable
whether it can compete as a civilisational
state and maintain a presence. And if
it can’t?
A new order may come into being following one of two
events: The West may simply self-destruct, following
some systemic financial ‘breakage’, and the
consequent economic contraction. Or....
alternatively a Russian decisive victory
in Ukraine just may be enough finally
to ‘cook the dish’.
Wow... Mr Crooke certainly knows
how to serve up a fascinating dish.
What do you think?
____________________________________
Europe cannot agree on
what the price ceiling
on Russian oil and
gas should be
November 26th, 2:34pm
https://en.news-front.info/
How strange it is! EU diplomats said.... that most
European countries, led by France and Germany,
supported a price ceiling on Russian oil and gas.
They have not yet accepted it, but simply
because they cannot agree... on what
the ceiling should be.
The only thing they are concerned about is whether
they will be able to comply with it. It has to be
respected… They are not worried about EU
energy prices, cutting down trees, about
36 000 elderly people froze to death in
England last year --- because there
wasn't enough money for high
temperatures in their
homes (this is not
propaganda, the
BBC has it).
Some in the EU are straightforwardly convinced that
we should make the ceiling no higher than $30 and
it will surely punish Russia, hurt it. Obviously,
that is what individuals from the countries
of limitrophs think – the Baltic states,
plus Poland, but they are really
discussing it with them.
Erdogan is starting to build a gas hub; Qatar sent them
and signed a long-term contract with China; Algeria is
asking to join BRICS; the U.S. says bluntly: sorry, we
will not have much gas. But stupidity is like
space – limitless.
These freaks in the European Parliament, in the
leadership of individual countries, the entire
European Commission, do not learn history,
and their knowledge is fragmentary. They
even have all sorts of Ph.D. degrees or
some J.D., but to explain to this Ph.D.
that regulating gas and oil prices...
is impossible.
The funny thing is, in the short term oil prices, for
example, will fall. They will fall, because there
will be a recession in the world, demand will
go down and prices will go down with it. And
then these idiots will decide -- why not limit
prices on everything and end inflation? For
Russian fertilizers, wheat, and then they
will decide to regulate the prices of
not only Russian products…
And maybe we, as humanitarian aid, should unload
their stupid macroeconomics textbooks, with
which we have been brainwashed? By the
way, one of the authors, is economist
Jeffrey Sachs, ---once one of the 100
most influential people in the world,
who has now, incidentally, had an
epiphany and says that the US is
the main Mordor… Everything is
mixed up…
What do YOU think?
Are you mixed up too?
___________________________________
‘Is Washington Our Ally or Not?’:
EU Officials Accuse US
of Profiteering Off
Ukraine Crisis
November 25th, 6:41pm
(Sputnik)
The allegations come as temperatures across Europe
continue to drop, and amid the bombshell revelation
by former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson this
week that the UK’s European allies recognized the
economic fallout which would accompany a long
Russia-Ukraine conflict, and sought its speedy
resolution in the spring.
European Union officials and diplomats have accused
Washington of profiteering off the Ukraine crisis via
energy and weapons sales -- and warned that the
mood is shifting against the US among its allies
on the other side of the Atlantic.
“The fact is, if you look at it soberly, the country that
is most profiting from this war is the US because
they are selling more gas, and at higher prices,
and because they are selling more weapons,”
one senior European official told a German-
owned media group --- on condition
of anonymity.
“We are really at a historic juncture…America needs
to realize that public opinion is shifting in many EU
countries,” the official added, warning --- that
skyrocketing energy costs & transatlantic
tensions over trade, risk fracturing the
Western bloc.
An unnamed US official dismissed these concerns,
assuring that American energy companies “have
been transparent & reliable suppliers of natural
gas to Europe,” that prices are set by market
considerations, and that resellers, not US
exporters, skim much of the profits off
energy deliveries destined for Europe.
European officials expressed similar concerns
regarding America’s profiteering from arms
sales, with one EU diplomat saying “the
money they are making, on weapons”
should help Washington realize: that
the profits they’re making from gas
deliveries may be “a bit too much”
...and that a discount for fuel to
Europe could “keep united..
our public opinion.”
“It’s not good, in terms of optics, to give the
impression... that your best ally is actually
making huge profits out of your troubles,”
the anonymous diplomat complained,
citing concerns in Brussels that
building up depleted weapons
stocks could take “years”
to achieve.
Another official complained about the Inflation
Reduction Act (IRA), a controversial law
passed in August, designed to curb
inflation and ramp up domestic
energy production and clean
energy, but which Brussels
has condemned.. for its
discrimination against
European goods ---- in
violation of WTO rules.
The IRA “changed everything” and has
prompted questions in Europe to the
effect of: “is Washington still our
ally or not?” the EU official said.
One French Foreign Ministry official complained
that the law amounts to.... “discriminatory
subsidies that will distort competition.”
A US official assured... that the IRA was not aimed at
undermining European industry or competitiveness.
“This is not a zero-sum game,” the official said.
“The IRA will grow the pie for clean energy
investments, not split it.”
Open Acrimony
The exchange of anonymous comments... by officials
and diplomats to media comes against the backdrop
of harsh back-and-forth remarks by officials on both
sides of the Atlantic in public regarding the IRA and
energy, with French President, Emmanuel Macron..
leading the increasingly angry rhetoric.
“Their costs of energy are so much lower, as they are
producers. They sell their gas for 3-4 times less than
we have to pay, and they have also great subsidies
from the state in some areas, up to 90 percent.
That is unfair. These are double standards,”
Macron complained, in October.
“The United States produces cheap gas that they sell
to us at a high price, and on top of that, they have
taken massive state aid measures in certain
sectors that are completely outside our
market projects,” Macron expanded,
earlier this month.
Paris estimates that the IRA could cost France alone
up to eight billion euros in investments if companies
shift operations to the US to take advantage of
the subsidies.
Hundreds of European companies, including steel and
chemical manufacturers, carmakers, pharmaceutical
companies, and food producers have already shifted
operations to the US to take advantage of lower
energy costs and state incentives, threatening
the European Union with deindustrialization
and widespread job losses.
European officials appeared to have been cognizant of
the threat the Ukraine crisis posed to their economic
well-being, as far back as the spring, with Boris
Johnson revealing this week, that there were
“sound economic reasons” for Germany to
seek a swift Russia-Ukraine peace
agreement to prevent the crisis
from turning into a long,
drawn-out conflict.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly
warned French, German... and other European
leaders of the folly of their anti-Russia policy,
characterizing EU sanctions on Russian
energy as “suicidal” and stressing that
the loss of cheap and dependable
Russian oil and gas - would strip
the bloc of its global economic
competitiveness.
Rhondda Records believes in
fighting for better leadership.
What do YOU believe in?
_________________________________
Journalist-Run, Intelligence-Linked
Operation That Warped British
Pandemic Policy
by Kit Klarenberg
November 23rd, 2022
(Strategic Culture Foundation)
Presented as an independent voice for “unbiased”
scientific advice --- iSAGE provided a channel for
media spinmeisters, spies & psy-op specialists
to influence Britain’s pandemic policy without
accountability. Leaked internal emails show
members fretting over its unethical methods.
Throughout Britain’s response to the COVID-19 crisis,
a lobbying group... known as the Independent
Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies
(iSAGE) served as a key driving force
behind the government’s most
draconian lockdown policies.
While it presented itself..... as a non-governmental
organization composed of forward-thinking health
experts, The Grayzone can reveal iSAGE not only
maintains an array of ties to the British security
state, while relying largely on political, rather
than scientific, considerations when crafting
policy recommendations.
With Winter ahead in Europe and calls for the
reimposition of COVID-19 restrictions...
growing once again — not least from
iSAGE itself - the outfit’s endeavours
provide a disturbing look at the role
of the security state and the main-
stream media -- in corrupting
British public health policy.
Nearly three years since the world first heard of
COVID-19, societies across the globe, are still
reeling: from prolonged lockdowns and harsh
social restrictions which many governments
implemented in order to supposedly “stop
the spread” of the virus. Britain is no
exception, and while the full long-
term impact of such measures
remains unknown, some
grueling effects are
already painfully
apparent.
Patients receiving care for cancer, cardiovascular, and
respiratory disease were prevented from accessing
routine treatment; rates of clinical depression, and
mobile phone addiction among university students
skyrocketed; adults of all ages report worsening
mental health conditions; and the number of
Britons seeking help for drug addiction
increased by 81% between 2020
and 2021.
Meanwhile, school closures exposed Britain’s youth,
to food insecurity and increased likelihood of falling
victim to domestic abuse, while a rapid digitization
of education, further widened learning gaps
between wealthy and low-income
students in the country.
“We were mesmerized by the once-in-a-century scale
of the emergency -- and succeeded only in making a
crisis even worse. In short, we panicked,”
lamented Professor Mark Woolhouse,
an Edinburgh University epidemio-
logist, inJanuary 2022.
As with many contemporary critics of the British
government’s initial “Zero COVID” strategy,
Woolhouse argued a targeted response to
protect the most vulnerable members of
society, such as the elderly, would have
done more to curb Britain’s death toll
than blanket, nationwide lockdowns.
“This was an epidemic crying out for a precision
public health approach and it got the opposite,”
he explained.
Behind some of the most socially destructive
pandemic policies implemented by the British
government was iSAGE, a shady organization
...founded by a Russia-obsessed Guardian
pundit, and advised by spies, behavioral
psychologists and media influencers,
without backgrounds in science
or medicine.
Founded in May 2020, by David King, a former chief
scientific adviser, to Labour Prime Ministers, Tony
Blair and Gordon Brown, iSAGE initially set out to
agitate for greater transparency around state
health policy, while providing “robust,
unbiased advice”... to the public and
government. It rapidly transformed
into a powerful, wholly unaccount-
able lobbying group, aggressively
pushing for “Zero COVID”
measures.
For almost two years, iSAGE members were a fixture
in both British and international media. Senior
politicians and pundits effusively endorsed
the group’s pronouncements... on the
pandemic, and its weekly YouTube
briefings, racked up tens of
thousands of views.
Its representatives used their popular platforms
to call for extensive control and suppression
measures, including contact tracing, mass
testing, border quarantines, lockdowns,
and the implementation of mitigation
software... in order to stop the
transmission of COVID-19.
Confusion regarding iSAGE’s name, given its obvious
similarity to the British government’s official
Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies
(SAGE) --- only increased the group’s
prominence. Very quickly after its
launch, iSAGE began to not only
work in parallel with its govern-
ment namesake, but supplant
it in the public mind.
Despite its enormous influence.... iSAGE and its
members have largely avoided public scrutiny.
Little is known about the forces guiding and
shaping its activities, or whether its
representatives.. are advancing an
ulterior agenda at odds with their
stated commitment to providing
“unbiased” scientific advice.
iSAGE pushes lockdowns “without sufficient
scientific expertise or scientific evidence
to inform it”
It was on iSAGE’s official launch date in May 2020 that
its founding objective... of securing publication of the
identities of SAGE, and its papers, was achieved.
Previously, the body’s composition, and the evidence
underpinning its decisions was entirely hidden from
public view - which stoked significant controversy,
particularly given its initial heel-dragging over the
implementation of protective COVID-19 measures.
Emboldened by this immediate success, former iSAGE
member, Allyson Pollock, claims the group “rapidly
moved away” from its initial transparency agenda
“to wanting to make policy” itself. Unknown to
the public at the time, iSAGE’s transformation
from government watchdog project into the
premier public health policy-making
activist group, prompted an
internal revolt.
“Often, [iSAGE] ended up advocating things... when it
hadn’t sufficiently thought through the uncertainties
in the evidence and the potential for harm,” Pollock,
who worked as a clinical professor of public health
at Newcastle University, alleges. She cites
“prolonged lockdowns, school closures,
and mass testing,” as examples
of iSAGE’s misguided
recommendations.
According to Pollock, the group offered policy advice
“sometimes without sufficient scientific expertise or
scientific evidence to inform it.” She expressed
vehement opposition when the group officially
adopted its “Zero COVID” position in July 2020,
believing it lacked any basis in science. Two
months later, the group declined to renew
her membership.
iSAGE’s push for Zero COVID appeared.. oddly timed,
and the group itself acknowledged total eradication
of a disease --- had only ever been achieved once in
history, in the case of smallpox. Britain was at that
point, beginning to reopen after a four-month lock-
down, in line with SAGE advice. In theory though,
as iSAGE was an entirely separate entity from
SAGE --- it was free to advocate for whatever
mitigation strategies it deemed appropriate.
In practice though, an overlap in the membership
of both bodies as well as their virtually identical
names, blurred lines between the two groups.
British government chief scientific advisor
Patrick Vallance claims he explicitly
warned iSAGE founder David King
against using any derivation of
“SAGE” for the title of his new
group, believing it would
puzzle and mislead
the public.
Despite apparently pledging to not emulate the name,
King did so anyway. The “Independent” prefix was
even more problematic, as it clearly implied that
SAGE was not a trustworthy, autonomous
organization.... while iSAGE issued
impartial, more credible advice,
by contrast.
iSAGE gathers influence by fueling confusion
As predicted, the two groups’ duplicate names
muddied the waters on public and government
messaging around COVID-19, leading to
numerous troubling -- if not outright
dangerous -- blunders on the part
of journalists, pundits, and
elected lawmakers alike.
SAGE member, Ian Boyd, claims such chaos was
intentional. In October 2021, he told The British
Medical Journal the 2 groups’ names “created
confusion... and was a device used by those
organising [iSAGE] to set up unnecessary
friction.” In the same article, another
academic, suggested iSAGE’s title
implied the body was “somehow
more authoritative than it
actually is.”
Public disorientation was compounded by the fact that
several members of SAGE also moonlighted as iSAGE
experts. Take the example of Susan Michie --- a left-
wing political activist and self-styled “behavioural
change” expert, who served with both iSAGE and
SAGE, advising the secretive governmental SPI-B
council of behavioral psychologists, that fear
-mongered the public into compliance with
official pandemic policy. Media reports on
Michie almost universally referred to her
simply as a “SAGE scientist,” creating
the impression that her comments
represented the British
government’s official
position.
Michie became a symbol of iSAGE’s advocacy for a
permanent biomedical security state. During a
June 2021 interview, she argued that social
distancing and mask mandates should
“continue forever.”
Susan Michie says we will need to wear masks and
socially distance from our fellow human beings ‘for
ever’. Remember she is a member of SAGE and
‘Independent’ SAGE. https://t.co/ewuzyvNozV
— Neil Clark (@NeilClark66) June 10, 2021
At no point did the mainstream British media
acknowledge that Michie’s background did
not necessarily qualify her to recommend
policy for a public health crisis. Rather,
a clinical psychologist represented
precisely the type of character
who could be called upon to
manipulate the public into
accepting extreme
lockdowns.
Michie was not the only iSAGE representative that
news outlets presented as a “scientist” despite
an apparent lack of relevant credentials in
epidemiology, virology -- or public health
management. Another long-time media
favorite was... iSAGE mathematician
Christina Pagel, who was promoted
as a credible expert, despite her
routinely misreading and
misrepresenting data.
On the flip side, mainstream media wrongly
characterized members of iSAGE who were
not part of SAGE as representatives of the
latter on numerous occasions. Similarly,
the press erroneously presented iSAGE
recommendations as official SAGE
advice more than once.
In May 2020, Labour party deputy leader Angela
Rayner, mistakenly declared that SAGE had
warned against the planned June the 1st
reopening of schools as “too soon,”
implying the British government
was recklessly ''discounting''
recommendations from its
own in-house scientific
advisors. She was in
fact referring to a
report produced
by iSAGE ----
not SAGE.
Conversely, SAGE’s own research cautioned that
blanket school closures would result in children
experiencing “a shock to their education which
will persist and affect their educational and
work outcomes for the rest of their lives.”
It predicted that extended periods of home
learning would gravely deepen inequalities
between pupils, and leave early-stage
learning and behavioral disorders
undetected.
As scheduled, England began to reopen schools
in September 2020 ----- although they were shut
down once again that December. Independent
SAGE representatives then steadfastly
opposed mass reopenings in Spring
2021, and regularly criticised the
move for months thereafter.
In October that year, a United Nations report
concluded countless children worldwide had
been harshly impacted emotionally and
psychologically, by school closures,
leading to greatly increased “fear
and stress, anxiety, depression,
anger, irritability, inattention”
as well as “irregular physical
activity and sleep patterns.”
A total confirmation of SAGE’s
initial warnings --- against
blanket school closures.
The UN’s withering judgement may explain why iSAGE
representatives have since deleted social media
posts in which they aggressively advocated for
keeping children out of classrooms until COVID
-19 was completely eradicated. Still, some
evidence of their advocacy remains
extant today, including a July 2020
livestream on mask mandates ----
billed as a “public consultation.”
“I don’t believe schools should be opened until we’ve
approached Zero COVID. This is a big challenge,”
David King declared in that discussion. “It means,
over to the government, ‘please lock us down,
manage the disease, bring it right down to
roughly a level of one in a million people,’
and we’ll manage to open schools
much more safely.”
Not-so-Independent SAGE riddled
with conflicts of interest
It was not until July 2021 the British media began
probing into the scientific collective with any
critical scrutiny. That month, The Daily
Telegraph revealed.. a shadowy outfit
called The Citizens was responsible
for establishing iSAGE.
The Citizens was itself led by Carole Cadwalladr, the
Russia-obsessed Guardian columnist who won a
series of high profile awards for reporting
claiming the data firm SCL-Cambridge
Analytica served as a channel ----- for
Russian meddling in the Brexit vote.
As Alex Rubinstein reported for The
Grayzone, Cadwalladr’s reporting
was comprehensively discredited
by a 2020 British parliamentary
report that found no evidence
whatsoever of Russian
involvement in Brexit.
Not the first time Facebook has had a fake
whistleblower! https://t.co/AvoRlHPtEQ
— Alex Rubinstein (@RealAlexRubi) October 6, 2021
In response to the revelation that The Citizens had
spawned iSAGE, Cadwalladr insisted The Citizens’
connection to the group had been publicly stated
on iSAGE’s website since its launch. Though her
claim was technically accurate, the link had
never been acknowledged in media
appearances by iSAGE members,
let alone by Cadwalladr herself.
What’s more, the relevant passage on iSAGE’s
website merely refers to The Citizens as a
“small support team, helping Independent
SAGE with its public events and
media activities.”
This characterization significantly downplays the
scale and nature of the relationship between The
Citizens and iSAGE. It was around the time of the
Telegraph exposé that Cadwalladr updated her
own Twitter profile to describe herself as a
“cofounder” of The Citizens, the “parent”
of iSAGE. Meanwhile, The Citizens’
Twitter characterizes itself as
iSAGE’s “founder and
producer.”
Official records of a June 2020 meeting of iSAGE’s
‘Behavioural Advisory Group’ show the organization
received significant direction and assistance from
another unacknowledged source. Zack King,
representative of PR firm Firstlight Group,
took a lead role in proceedings,
introducing “the work of
Independent SAGE to
date,” and leading a
dedicated discussion
on press relations.
Along the way, King stressed that he and Cadwalladr
“handled press issues,” and iSAGE “can use both of
them” if the organization’s behavioral scientists
wanted to “involve” the media in its activities.
“Zack and Carole work together on press side.
Most press relations are undertaken via Zack
and his PR firm,” the minutes state.
In January the next year, a blog titled, “Holding the
government to account” was published on Firstl-
ight’s website, laying out the “ambitious media
plan” the company pursued in order to “build
the group’s profile as quickly as possible”
and “grow the group’s influence” upon
launch. The proposal called for 36
weekly media and public briefings
and “countless one-to-one inter-
views and bylines.”
Within six months, iSAGE was “agenda-setting,”
Firstlight boasted --- “and this publicity
empowered them --- to drive change,”
including its “Zero COVID” approach
“being adopted by parts of the Welsh,
Scottish & Northern Irish devolved
governments.” At no point was it
disclosed that Zack King is the
son of iSAGE chief David King,
a fact the former is keen
to conceal.
Leaked iSAGE communications reviewed by The
Grayzone, indicate Firstlight was rewarded
handsomely, for its media manipulation. In
late May 2020, when Cadwalladr proposed
starting a crowd-funder for the operation,
iSAGE member Allyson Pollock, said she
was growing uneasy about the initiative.
She was “extremely anxious” re seeking
such finance for a “short-term project,”
and proposed raising funds, via other
non-public means, even offering to
contribute to expenses herself.
Pollock’s concerns were extensive. There was no
clarity, on what the money was needed for “and
how much and how long and exactly who for,”
she complained, especially given that iSAGE
members were working pro bono. Further,
the group had collectively decided to
recruit resident academics with
stable incomes plus volunteers
living off guaranteed govern
-ment financial support.
“Everyone on the committee is in employment and
some of us are on very good salaries. So, should
we not be contributing if we need to, that would
be public spirited and in the spirit of what we
are doing,” Pollock fretted. “The public are
very hard pressed at the moment and I
don’t feel at all comfortable
crowdfunding.”
David King attempted to reassure Pollock that any
sums received would not be used to enrich iSAGE
members, but to instead cover invoices to the
PR firm, Firstlight. Remuneration for
“professional expertise” would be
solicited elsewhere, he promised.
Cadwalladr also weighed in, remarking that Pollock
“won’t be aware.. of the behind-the-scenes work
that has been involved... in getting the project
this far,” including “the unavoidable expense
involved particularly in handling the media.”
What services those costs would have
covered in the midst of a national
lockdown remains unclear.
That June, The Citizens launched a dedicated
crowdfunder for iSAGE which raised £60,000.
An accompanying blurb was vague on how
donations would be spent, merely stating
it would help the organisation yo “keep
following the science.” No mention
was made.. of bankrolling a wide-
ranging media blitz, courtesy of
the son of iSAGE’s founder.
The Citizens rakes in donations from
regime change cut-out Omidyar
The decision by iSage to launch a fundraising
campaign, while the British public suffered
widespread unemployment, hardship, and
financial uncertainty – and despite wholly
reasonable & legitimate internal dissent
is rendered all the more perverse, given
The Citizens has received hundreds of
thousands of dollars from Luminate.
As Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal documented in
an investigation with Alex Rubinstein, Luminate is
an integral component of intelligence-linked US
oligarch, Pierre Omidyar’s global propaganda
and regime change network.
The 2018-2022 strategic plan of @Pierre Omidyar’s
@luminategroup lists “counter[ing]” Russia and
China & “provid[ing] critical support” to groups
in “countries in transition” as top priorities.
That’s code for supplementing US regime
change operations. https://t.co/
AXFBhAduCR pic.twitter.com/
gwPmC9da2s
— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal)
September 9, 2020
In 2020, Luminate gifted The Citizens $150,000 to
develop the “Real Facebook Oversight Board”,
and $300,000 ostensibly to produce “impact
journalism to hold government and big tech
to account.” Cadwalladr also claims... the
CIA-connected Ford Foundation provided
some support, although no record of the
donation is recorded on the
Foundation’s website.
A 2016 report on Omidyar Network activities in West
Africa underlines how the billionaire’s media assets
are used to further his commercial interests. One
passage refers to “converting passive readers to
active citizens” by sponsoring the publication of
“politically opportunistic” content, in order to
“motivate citizens and government to act.”
The report went on to cite “recent, major
successes” the billionaire’s network had
enjoyed in Nigeria, where Omidyar
effectively owns the local
tech sector.
“With the spectre of potential citizen mobilization
looming in politicians’ minds, media outlets also
have the potential to elicit government response
directly,” the report boasted. “In some cases…
government was motivated to act in order to
prevent citizen action [emphasis added],
instead of in response to it.”
Between March and July 2020, Omidyar’s personal
wealth grew by $9 billion, in no small part due to
the “Covid-proof” business interests he had
fostered around the globe. These included
expansive investments in ed-tech, digital
health & online content, which became
major growth industries.... due to
lockdown policies.
By contrast, it’s difficult to identify how The Citizens
put its lavish Luminate grants to work. Omidyar was
clearly happy with the results, however, giving the
organisation another $300,000 in 2021.
Today, the Real Facebook Oversight Board consists
of an infrequently updated Medium blog with 225
followers. There is no sign either of any “impact
journalism” from The Citizens, save for a long-
dormant Substack, and legal action against
the British government ...over its purported
failure to investigate Russian interference
in elections.
Despite their lavish Omidyar financing, Cadwalladr’s
group again turned to crowdfunding for that effort,
raising tens of thousands from the public before
its legal push was thrown out by a High Court
judge as the case was “inarguable.”
Discredited former MI6 agent Christopher
Steele advises iSAGE
The Citizens’ website, which has been ''in construction”
for most of its existence, once featured a dedicated
profile of disgraced former MI6 spy and former FBI
contractor Christopher Steele. And The Citizens
founder Cadwalladr --- has been a fervent fan of
the intelligence huckster, lionizing him despite
his ‘Trump-Russia’ dossier having been
comprehensively exposed as a fraud -
compiled with rumours and tall tales
fed to him by a single dubious
source --- for cash.
Orbis Director Christopher Steele.... moderated a
fascinating panel discussion following a special
screening of #TheGreatHack hosted by
@liviafirth and @firthcom. Thank you to
@carolecadwalla, @edwardlucas and
Mike Lerner @roastbeeftv for your
participation. pic.twitter.com/
ZQ49ZzG1rU
— Orbis Business Intelligence
(@OrbisBIOfficial) January
7th, 2020
In email exchanges with The Grayzone, Zack King,
the PR agent and son of iSAGE’s founder, initially
contended The Citizens “drew on a wide and
diverse collection of unpaid advisors before
it launched.” Christopher Steele was among
them, though according to King, he “never
played any active or other role” in The
Citizens or iSAGE.
Requests for details on the services Steele provided
for The Citizens before its public inauguration were
ignored. When asked why the group’s website
featured his profile... if he was no longer
involved in any capacity, King revealed
Steele was actually part of “a network
of pro-bono advisors we can call upon
as needed.” He therefore implied
the former spook could provide
indeterminate support at any
time, to The Citizens,
and perhaps iSage,
as well.
Steele’s intimate but mysterious involvement with an
influential outfit that shaped government policy and
public perceptions on COVID-19 is troubling, given
the power grab --- that British security and
intelligence services carried out, under
cover of pandemic prevention.
Britain’s security state merges with the public
health sector under cover of tracking Covid
In May 2020, the same month iSAGE was launched,
London rolled out an initiative called the Joint
Biosecurity Centre (JBC). The JBC... was
advertised as a state-of-the-art system
providing “evidence-based, objective
analysis to inform local and national
decision-making in response to
COVID19 outbreaks.”
Purportedly tracking the virus’ spread, in real-time, its
coronavirus “alert level” was directly modeled on the
Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre’s “traffic light”
system, established in 2003.
JBC was first led by Tom Hurd, a veteran intelligence
official who months earlier had been put forward as
the likely next MI6 chief. Hurd... soon returned to
running counter-terrorism for the Home Office,
however, and was replaced by senior GCHQ
operative Clare Gardiner. Her appointment
reportedly came at the behest of Cabinet
Secretary Simon Case, GCHQ’s former
Director of Strategy.
At the time, concerns were rising... about the growing
role of intelligence service personnel --- in managing
the pandemic - particularly given their abject failure
to sound any alarm on COVID-19 before it circulated
among the general public. But any resistance to the
integration of the security state with the public
health sector -- was comprehensively shunted
aside, when the British government replaced
Public Health England, with the Health
Security Agency, of which, the JBC
became a subdivision.
Despite the body’s enormous and constantly
expanding power, the opaque JBC, has
entirely eluded scrutiny from British
media since its launch.
Its membership, the minutes of its meetings, data,
analysis, and arguments, all remain a secret,
while it maintains the power -- to impose
restrictions if not outright lockdowns
-- without explanation or warning
at any time.
In October 2020, as Britain edged towards a second
national shutdown, parliamentarians demanded the
publication of JBC’s deliberations, evidence
sources, and key personnel be published.
On each point -- they were shut down by
the government. In justifying its refusal
to disclose members’ identities,
Downing Street... claimed the
Centre is “largely staffed by
civil servants,” meaning it
was “not appropriate” to
name them.
Given that the veteran GCHQ spy Clare Gardiner was
merely referred to as a “senior civil servant”.. in an
official press release announcing her appointment
to lead JBC, the question must be asked: is the
centre “largely staffed” by intelligence
operatives?
Gardiner left her post in mid-June 2021 without any
official announcement, and the position has been
vacant ever since. At least, no replacement has
been publicly mentioned, and no one has asked
officials for clarity. Given the enormous clout
exerted by the body to this day it's staggering
that not one single journalist or campaigner
...has demanded answers.
Indeed, contrary to their professed, principled
commitment to scientific transparency, and
their initial calls to break the wall of official
silence surrounding the British government’s
scientific advisory group’s composition, and
thinking, iSAGE and The Citizens have made
no attempt to pressure the government to
release any information on the JBC or
Health Security Agency.
As we will see in further installments in this
investigation, leaked emails absolutely
debunk the stated commitment by
iSAGE and The Citizens to
“following the science.”
thegrayzone.com
The views of individual contributors do not
necessarily represent those of the
Strategic Culture Foundation.
[or Rhondda Records]
Murky, eh? What
....do YOU think?
_____________________________________
Raids at Kiev-Pechersk Lavra