Deglobalize or Die: A Declaration of Global War on The Globalists TPS-0123

I'm giving equal time and attention to the center, the left and the right, as it were and of course being selective with my own biases, picking and choosing what voices, what sources of news and analysis from each of those lanes.

The more perspectives I digest the more confusing it gets, and the harder it is for me to define, to intelligibly compare any of these things. So I'm gonna try to verbalize it because there's a lot going on.

I want to get past the rhetoric and tribalism and seek common ground. Because to me, the higher purpose is to take responsibility for the state of ecology.

If rights are gonna be fought for, then obviously human rights, civil rights.

I'm skeptical and hesitant to lend any credence to even the concept of rights, because to me, it's a relative term of being governed and having to ask people who aren't your parents, who you're not even related to, asking them to give you rights as if you don't already have them.

So to me, I use the term a natural power, or natural freedom. It doesn't matter to me what the words are. It's just semantics at a certain point, I always felt it was disempowering to petition the state for rights.

We don't have many other options because there aren't many stateless areas left on earth, or people within states who are free and self sufficient enough to not have to buy into or pay into the tithing to the king with taxes.

We're all pretty much stated now. Stater's gonna state, and we're all pretty much stated. You can do what I'm doing, which is slowly extricate and disentangle from every last tentacle that you can possibly identify utnil you get to the point where you really understand the extent of where that grip goes, and how no matter how far away you go, no matter how self sufficient you become, what is left is still a death grip.

So you have all kinds of different perspectives on freedom and autonomy and the role of the state.

So I try to simplify it? How do I understand it? Sort through the cults of personality and the group think and the dogma, indoctrination and all that.

I wanna be able to, from a bird's eye view, just identify the absurdity of all very rigid ideologies. Make fun of everybody, but still maintain a position of being just generally hostile and critical towards authoritarianism, which now more than ever there's nowhere to hide from it. In the left or the right, the authoritarianism seems to be the tendency just of cults of personality.

How charismatic or pushy leaders, although going back all the way to school playgrounds, playing King of the Hill, and the high school jocks, nerds and cheerleaders. There's just always dominant personalities that shape the attitudes and the values, because they control some form of capital, whether it's popularity on the school ground or capital as adults in various stations in life, where people have political power and social clout and whatnot.

Try to see through all of that and see everybody is basically full of BS, including yourself.

I came from, I would say, the next since the Vietnam War and civil rights protests, in the cycles of mass movements within the United States.

Zooming out, it seems like, I was lucky enough to catch the cyclical wave of resistance 20 to 30 years ago.

I don't know exactly how you would bracket the peak of the anti Vietnam war and the peak of civil rights movements.

I've heard that, you can define a generation by what people were doing in their early twenties, and that's such an interesting way of thinking about it.

When we talk about a snake eating a rodent and what it looks like as they're swallowing it, for this lump to go through, that's a metaphor in talking about population and some kind of outlying parameter, whether it's numeric or otherwise.

This glut that occurs, moves along the timeline and to me that symbolizes just the inertia, the momentum of people in their twenties, what their values are, what their convictions are, what they're willing to fight for or fight against at a time when they have maximum self-perceived invincibility, maximum hormonal fuel, if you will.

And at a time in the development of the brain and the nervous system, where social bonding and identity and fitting into a group and having very positional identitarianism that is concentrated in a human life span in those early twenties years.

It also coincides with being on campus for a lot of people who go to college, as I did, and all of those, it's a perfect storm with all of those internal factors, all the chemical, biological, neurological factors that make it the peak of your politicization potential, your potential to be mobilized into resistance.

And you can afford it if you have a pretty much a free ride the way I did in college. I took on a tiny bit of debt, Which included copious amounts of cigarettes and beer. I was able to spend my free time partying with intellectuals inside and outside of the student body, because it was Eugene, Oregon with a vibrant aging hippie population and environmentalist, an ecological forest defense movement rooted on Earth first and more radicalized offshoots of that.

So multiple generations of environmental, radical, extremist thinkers, and then a recruitment base of young, gung ho college student, environmental activists who, who were maintaining student groups that had been around for probably decades and sustaining those school funded groups.

There would be some infrastructure for this, for the maintenance and the growth, the sort of scaffolding to always be there to help build the next generation of forest offenders and human rights activists.

I was blessed to be situated in space and time to be at a university that was very sophisticated, intellectually, in terms of shaping the minds of warriors at the time when they're most receptive and most energized, are motivated and free in terms of availability.

To go to conferences and workshops and join organizations and volunteer. The priority was resistance and not dropping out. I did well, I got straight A's and had above 4.0 GPS and still was able to do that be engaged in all these activities because I didn't have to work thanks to those grants and scholarships and a little bit of loans to be fair.

Back in my day, catching the wave of movements of resistance, I don't know if we would have believed that it would all be kind of clumped together under this title at the time, but because there were all kinds of different political ideologies, we all thought that it was our proprietary revolution that anyone could join. But they had to discard any other system of beliefs, lest they be harangued for not drinking the Kool-Aid, flying the flag of us versus them. So we would have said, it's our such and such revolution. We wouldn't have said it's a generation in their prime doing what all generations do in their prime, which is pick a cause and try to end up with an emergent property.

Despite their best efforts to tear each other down, end up in some broad category where they're all doing the same thing.

So if we would have said there was a labor movement, a women's movement, a gay movement, a civil rights movement, an anti war movement, immigrant movements, all these different brackets of people in their prime fighting for what was to be fought for in that time.

Mostly that does appear to be the radical left fighting against the grinding gears of capitalism and the defenders of it, which are stereotypically right wing, conservative business owners.

We're not even factoring in secular versus Christian or religious, which is all intertwined. So you have this collusion and perverse bedfellows of poor people, rich people group together against their fundamental prerogatives in terms of governing.



If the bosses and the profiteers, the capitalists wanna drive down wages and the poor people wanna form using unions and strike in order to have higher wages, but they set all that aside to prevent women from having abortions, it really distorts the simple binaries, the black and white dichotomies of class war.

What's happening Now, this term populism is interesting, because if you conserve the interests of the elite, and yet you can manipulate and speak to the underdog and galvanize them under banners of hyper religiosity, then you can basically short circuit class war.

I don't wanna get ahead of myself, because I'm trying to build this brick by brick here in terms of setting up the point where those more emergent properties of analysis can make sense.

But just to frame myself now, having spoken about my understanding of movements within at least US history.

Let me break down civil rights more than what you would typically think of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, and all of the leader who fought for rights and autonomy and safety and security, and a fair shot at the so called American Dream and everything else.

You have Black Panthers, along with all different types of groups in the South. I'm not gonna enumerate all of the different groups I'm aware of across the spectrum, but it's quite immense.

It's very important to me also to acknowledge the American Indian Movement.

I suppose you you could group the uprisings of the American Indian movement within civil rights. But to me it transcends that category. Because it is truly the oldest struggle of the Western Hemisphere since the Columbus era.

It often gets minimized and overlooked because of the ratios of population numbers, as if because they've been tucked away in reservations, they're somehow out of the scope of shaping historical events, that they've already been marginalized so much that you have to look for the pockets of resistance. But it is still everywhere. And certainly I don't think people in the United States have much, of a clue about how raging the indigenous resistance movements are in Canada and south America.

It's so interesting to think about indigenous resistance from Canada to the US, through Mexico into Central and South America, and all of the different shades of language colonization and blood colonization, and what the state of affairs is for the last first peoples actually still living on the land and living by the old ways.

I didn't have an ethnic battle to fight, other than to acknowledge my white privilege and to step back when asked to, or when I was conscientious enough to say let women and people of color take up space in movements and in discourse.

I felt like I don't belong on this continent and I was made to feel like I don't belong on this continent and rather than shout, they will not replace us. I shouted, if I'm here and I can't afford to leave, I'm gonna be of service and help the people who are more oppressed. After all, I wouldn't be the only warrior to have a mantra of liberate the oppressed.

There's something intrinsic about the visceral, non academic, street level, gut level, this is wrong, this is tyranny, this is exploitation, where the deepest wounds show me where to apply myself.

I will surrender the microphone and the bullhorn and if I had it, I would surrender money in order to serve the movements where the wounds were deepest.

I was on the low end, not trailer trash, but close enough, lower middle class, barely even suburban-ish, but certainly not sheltered and not rich and very much latch key poverty line.

Still, none of the deeper wounds of indigenous and people of color, women...

So I guess that makes me an advocate for the lower class and then those most abused within it.

So I guess I'm a leftist liberal, bleeding heart, that's what they called it.

Then you have animals and the environment, not in any particular order of hierarchy, but in the terms of who's being abused by those with power and money, who form parties and manipulate politics in order to protect themselves from liability for all of that abuse and to be able to perpetuate it at larger scales.

So the word that I have been working up to is the unlikely word that I wouldn't have thought would define the times, but the term that define the times, in my generation's era of resistance, it was anti globalization.

We used the term anti globalization because we organized events and conferences. the World Trade Organization protest, the Battle in Seattle.

I was there and I wasn't there to put flowers in gun barrels, I'll tell you that much.

But luckily, I was Intelligent in my operational judgment, and was able to evade, being corralled into mass arrest, and was able to escape and evade batons, couldn't get past the whatever it was, it felt like it had to be nerve gas, couldn't avoid being guessed, but did avoid blunt force trauma and arrest, was able to hold the line and other things that don't need to be spoken of.

But that was the Woodstock for the anti globalization movement.

That kicked off a whole series of anti globalization mass protests around the world, the further away from the United States, the more violent they got because there's more of a tradition of street battle mainly in Europe, where there's some sort of chivalry, where they don't just lock you up for 25 years for j-walking at a protest. It's such a police state here that there's really no honor in street battle. They'll just mangle your life and fine you and put you in prison forever if you dare to fight back against over zealous, brutal police.

You don't have the respect as a warrior that you would get in places in Europe where the police are happy to be just as lawless as you are.

If they corner you in an alley, they're gonna knock your teeth out and maybe not even bother to take you in to book you and arrest you. They'll just have fun being a gang bludgeoning people. They're used to being lit on fire with Molotov cocktails as well, and being pelted by rocks. It's not a fair fight, but legally speaking, for some reason, it's treated more like a sport because of the history of labor movements and green movements and just a healthier relationship with people's popular rebellion all throughout Europe.

So I always said to myself, man, I'm in the wrong country. I could not afford to be an anti globalization protest follower. A lot of people in my time, they were like following the Grateful Dead.

My generation, those who could afford it, were going protest hopping from one to the next across the world. I was very jealous, cause I only got to go to local little mini street protests.

But I did get to go to WTO, the Battle Seattle, which was cool, and the Battle in La, too, I got to be at the DNC protest, which was all part of that continuum. That was a lot of fun. And I was lucky again to escape the worst of the brutality, and yet hold the line. So that's me being nostalgic about back in my day. But the reason why I even go into any of that is to try to understand these tendencies now, the how these tendencies sort of interact over time.

So if we're literally about 25 years later, damn, where are we all now? We need to have a reunion, the anti globalization movement 25 years later?

It's worth acknowledging that the momentum of that movement, it could have been more successful, but for 9/11, essentially empowering the government crackdown on organizing with the new department and new budget and carte blanche Patriot Act powers to extinguish pretty much all resistance to the administration and its prerogative.

So that was the end of that, it was a chilling effect. I actually lived with someone who was one of the first leftists to be convicted under the Patriot Act.

The dragnet targeted everybody, including us relatively benign and powerless, tactically disadvantaged leftist youth.

Extinguished with a sort of soft power, the threat of increased sentences, the threat of, almost like a Rico act for protesting, which, as a matter of fact, is timely in the news now even, but the anti globalization movement was over as fast as it started, but we were exposing what was happening with NAFTA and GAT and these free trade agreements.

To summarize, it was the idea that there was a coalition being built between between the labor movement which is not generally radically leftist. There was a coalition building effort between the victims of globalization in the United States, all the fronts of the environmental movement. The victims of progress in terms of nature and the land.

The poor working class, the workers themselves, the industrial workers, factory workers, manual laborers, whose wages would be driven to the bottom in competition with free trade partners around the world who had lax environmental and labor laws so that they could be exploited. Their natural resources and their human capital could be exploited to degrees that American civil rights and environmental rights activism had mitigated.

They raised the minimum wage and made it more costly to run a strip mine and run a warehouse where you had to take care of and protect the health of your workers.

There's the EPA, there's OSHA, there's all kinds of regulations that add up in terms of the cost of doing business in the US.

So factories started closing down, popping up in the border of Mexico, outsourcing and downsizing. You had Michael Moore documenting a lot of the early stages of globalization and global free trade, being this Orwellian term that kind of white washed and even sometimes green washed the worst atrocities of capitalism. They were turning the security forces of the world into death squads defending corporate pillage, it was very clear, and it was affecting people in ways that were undeniable.

If you were working class, but you were not typically radically leftist, you would start to get the point, get the idea. Maybe the boss doesn't have my best interest in mind. Maybe my church is just here to tell me that it's all god's plan for me to be poor. I shouldn't rebel. Depending on which church you're in, there's churches that are certainly far more rebellious.

But it was an interesting time for there to be this ven diagram, where typically conservative people had common ground in the street battling to prevent the global race to the bottom of regulation and wages.

After a certain point I didn't wanna spend all my time becoming an expert in all these fields that you'd would have to be an expert in to understand what terms like neo-liberalism and neo-cons mean.

For each new generation, it's all the next iteration of words rooted in the deeper critiques that span longer periods of time before Marxism, before Luddism, going all the way back to the most primal resistance against colonization.

I look at globalization, going all the way back to the time of the seafaring explorers working for kings and queens, looting the earth at the point of swords on horseback to enslave indigenous people and to extract gold.

Go back in time further and it's the nature of empire to conquer and colonize, and all of the terms that we apply to that behavior now, I think they just make it more confusing.

Jared Diamond, Howard Zin the works of scholars who really put it in a broader historical perspective. To me, it's all one fight. That's all, you choose the side of the people, what John Trudel said, there's a way to live with Earth, and there's a way not to live with Earth. We choose the way of Earth. That's about as simple, straightforward as it can be. That's not confusing to figure out.

Where are your biological waste products going? Where's the packaging of your products going? What's the legacy of the materials that you use on a daily basis? How many trees had to be cut down for you to have shelter? What are you doing to repair and build soil with your biological waste products and with your hands in order to be a subsistence gardener or hunter gather, being a part of a food chain where you're actually serving the immediate ecology?

To me, it's as simple as that, anything that's abstracted from human ecology at a that primal scale, for me, it's all corrupt, it's all bastardized, and it all leaves a toxic legacy, and it's not sustainable.

So whether you're on the left or the right or the center, if you're not living of Earth in balance and harmony with wisdom and limits to your ingenuity, to mess with nature, to create shiny, flashy things, to fill landfills with and to corrupt the minds of young people with infinite streams of apps and scrolling. If that's the best humanity has accomplished, the greatest achievement, and in its wake, it leaves nothing but a wasteland and a smoldering cinder that we have to go to Mars to escape...then that's to me, an epic fail.

So call it deep ecology, or primitiveism, or whatever you want. I don't really even care about those labels anymore, although I used to be very religious about the flags that I flew in my peak.

But here we are, 25 years later, since the birth and the rapid rise and fall of the anti globalization movement, which was unsuccessful.

I'm the last person who's gonna cry about there being no manufacturing sector in the economy, of the US being gutted and outsourced because of globalization, and the failure of the anti globalization movement, which I blame on 9/11, and not the movement itself. But here we are 25 years later. And the US economy, for one, is over leveraged and has outsourced labor.

We're mostly in a tertiary service industry oriented economy that's now being replaced by AI, so we're essentially obsolete and useless as consumers.

Of course, the wealth disparity, the funny thing all along, is that I did not know...

I only learned recently, I'm surprised to slip by, after all my leftist scholarship, that there were times in American history where the highest percentage of taxation was far higher than it's ever been in my lifetime.

So really, the ruling class has nothing to complain about. And all of the chicanery that's engaged in for them to avoid all taxes to create offshore tax shelters, shell games and whatnot.

They got it good. But then you have an aftershock of anti globalization movement post financial collapse in 2008 which was, the occupy wall street and then occupy main street all over the country I don't know how far out around the world but we are the 99%.

It wasn't always that drastic of a wealth disparity, even though there have been times and places under feudalism…

Is the wealth disparity now better or worse than in the most extreme feudal times, where you had no rights and no land ownership by the peasants?

But interestingly, they lived better, healthier, probably sometimes longer lives, even as feudal peasants, all throughout the world, just because it was all organic and it was all down to earth, and they were living and working with the soil and in the land and in villages, so arguably, a better life.

Now, we have probably just as abysmal of wealth disparity, if not more, in certain places and we have a toxic, psychologically, mentally, socially damaged fabric of society, and then a toxic wasteland of genetically modified and chemically sprayed foods that give us cancer and keep us obese and in the hospital, falling apart and living miserably, dare I say.

So ironic enough, you could have been more technically legally powerless and more financially exploited in earlier generations, yet be living more like in the Garden of Eden in terms of your human ecology.

And there were a lot of places in feudalism where they didn't care what you believed. There was no enforcement of a religion. The government was not surveilling and peering into every aspect of life.

It was like once a year, once a season, give us this much weight of your harvest, and we will see you next year.

You don't show up with what you owe, you don't give us what we need. You're gonna have problems. So give us what we asked for to go fight our wars and pax Romana. That's empire surprise, surprise.

So now what I think is funny and cute and adorable and absurd is how it's been popularized within the libertarian and to some degree so called right wing...this word that I'm hearing more often now, which is globalist.

So if there's to be a globalist, there has to be a thing such as globalism, because there has to be an ISM for you to be an IST, I think is how that would work.

So now that I'm studying more of the wealthy left, the establishment of libertarians who are not bleeding heart leftists, they don't want socialism because they want to preserve their wealth, and they want a minimal state that will at least provide them the physical security for their property and their assets but nothing more. I'm not trying to be crude or reductionistic.

I'm learning from everyone now, I'm not closed off the way I was in my little cult back in the day.

Now I'm very interested because of my aging, and maybe maturing because I've matured intellectually and because I have something to lose financially.

I have more time in my day to stomach libertarian rhetoric.

Because now I kind of understand, I'm not in the highest tax bracket, for sure, but I also am not dead broke. I'm a landowner. Now, I'm not a landless peasant.

So with things to lose, I think about government overreach and eminent domain and property taxes and all the things that make you wanna engage politically in a different way, other than just tear it all down and we're gonna squat and we don't care about anything, I mean, we care about everything and so therefore we care not to comply with anything because we're in full rebellion, full resistance, and we got nothing to lose, lock us up, break our teeth. We're gonna give it all because we have no choice.

I'm certainly still in the lower class. I just have a little tiny nest egg and a little tiny postage stamp to try to live my own cabin in the woods.

But it's a truckstead in the desert, instead of a cabin in the woods.

But dropping out of society, disengaging from it, and just trying to stay away from all of its risks and liabilities and battles that I think are mostly polishing the brass and the Titanic anyway.

But I have a privilege to say that because I can afford to drop out, I know how to grow food, and I can afford to buy the food I can't grow yet, so I don't have to beg anymore, and I don't have to succumb to the police brutality that is heaped upon landless peasants, beggers and homeless encampments on the street.

Although that is exactly where I came from. I just happened to be a working class car dweller in LA on skid row, but I came from skid row.

To be a squatter on my own land with meager means and literally no shelter other than a truck camper that I built with bamboo. I had a friend in the hood who had the means to chop up the frame of a ladder rack for the back of my truck and we welded together my little rambo bamboo camper I've lived in for five years now, mainly on the street, on the side of the road, but still being gainfully employed doing permaculture design and installation in the city.

But as they say, for most people, there's only one way to have upward social mobility, and that is to work without paying rent, meaning live in your car or live under a bridge, but still have a job, because you need to save up if you wanna invest or have compounding interest, or even buy land.

The way I did it, I levered up my upward social mobility by making a sacrifice of being unsheltered, beyond mostly living in a car, and then eventually being gifted a truck, and then eventually having an ability to buy a four wheel drive off road 10 cylinder, three quarter ton truck that force multiplied my truck steading experience. I was able to then get the supplies I needed to have a decent start on this land.

I'm still dependent on the outside world's economy, but less and less every day because I catch all my own rainwater. I'm growing a percentage of my food, but not nearly enough. That's gonna be the main struggle for me, the continuum to go from growing a small percentage to a hundred percent of my food.

At that point, as long as my shelters hold up, I'm not gonna need much from the outside world. I'm not gonna care too much about a lot of its problems.

But of course, I will always be affected by them. I'll always be subject to the laws and the taxes and the pollution, even though I'm far away from most of it. At least I got out of the city finally.

So what is globalism? And what are globalists? And what does that have to do with what happened to anti globalization?

That's where it's interesting is this ven diagram, poor leftists and rich rightists. I guess I don't hear that often, but I don't know why not. Because if you're leftist, obviously there's rightest, the left wing, the right wing, the poor, the rich.

Suddenly what used to be called anti globalization is now the conspiracy theories about the so called globalists.

How do you compare those? Is it apples and oranges? Or what? What is this semantic, sort of a collision?

It's hard to explain but I feel like I have consumed enough intelligence about what the globalists are doing and what the anti globalists are doing, that I can make some form of sense out of it.

The rhetoric that I'm hearing is very conspiratorial. Back in my day, we were called the anti globalization movement, but I don't think I ever heard anyone say it's the globalists that are the bad guys, that are the the villains, to us there was still this socialist terminological paradigm or baggage to say, the bosses.

What were all the different movements in the streets of the WTO? What was on their signs? It wasn't stop the Globalists. It was stop globalization.

But who was behind globalization? The Wizard of Oz? What was going on?

So the socialist would say, it's the bosses, or more broadly speaking, the left and Marxists would say, the capitalists, the CEOs.

I think the bosses was more archaic and more modern at that time.

I could also be the CEOs, stop the CEOs. They're overpaid. They're extracting all of the wealth off the backs of their laborers, and creating these free trade agreements in order to extract from all of the rest of the world with no limits.

I think at that time, it was just CEOs and the politicians that were bought off.

So what's coming to mind is what someone who I would consider a very academically rigorous and very respectable anti globalist...I listen to a lot of anti globalists now, a lot of them I think are conspiracy theorists, with an ideology of conspiracy action figures that they like to play with in the sandbox of circular logic and half baked critiques and unrigorous social science.

I still learn from them. I'm entertained by them but there's a lot of anti globalist conspiracy nuts out there who are very loud and outspoken, and I find those types mostly entertaining.

I'm actually more interested in not just the entertainment value, but in the real rigorous social science. So there's one one fellow who I consider to be the most respectable, reputable PHD who is an anti globalist.

There are a few actually, to be honest, but I'm not gonna give out any names right now, I'll say the one that I respect the most has critiques of the establishment that have elements all across the political spectrum of left and right.

To him, it doesn't matter so much what the tradition is, whether it's grouped within the left or the right, it's just, how do we understand this? What are the globalists doing? How do the globalists strategically play off of us. They don't pledge allegiance to any nation. They're not nationalist. Religion was discarded hundreds of years ago as the merchants in Europe realized that the decree of the king and the lack of a rule of law and religion, hyper religiosity and all its divisiveness, those are essentially all bad for business.

So dissolve nationhood, dissolve ethnicity, dissolve religion, dissolve borders. So that you could have an infinite marketplace to sell to an infinite capital resource base to exploit for that purpose of commodifying everything.

So shedding nationhood, national identity, shedding borders to create a global singularity of slave consumers and a regulatory landscape that is controlled by a small group of a cabal of of billionaires, those who are afraid of them, and those who are controlled by them and in their pocket.

So this gentleman, he would say, the donor class, and I don't know how widely that term is used because I only really hear him saying it so I don't know if he takes credit for it but that's where I heard it first and where I've heard it the most so the donor class...that's a different way of saying the ruling class. That's what we would have said on the streets, on the protest signs, down with the ruling class, down with the bosses, down with the CEOs.

We weren't saying down with the globalist. We weren't saying down with the donor class. But it all means the same thing. Politicians pimp poor people into war and the ruling class, or the donor class, pimp politicians into doing their bidding.

So it's a pimpocracy then, if you will, if you want, and I definitely don't want it but that's seems to be what it is.

Kleptocracy is a good term, oligarchy makes sense, but it's not that catchy of a term. So I'm gonna go with pimpocracy, then there's the tech bro-ocracy, the tech broarchy. That's kind of what the billionaire donor class is looking like.

They've got these meetings, they've got their forums…

I guess I'm comfortable saying it if the globalists figured out the way to co-opt what they're calling ESG and now they're ruffling the feathers of the libertarians and the more conservative right that doesn't wanna be melted into a melting pot with people of racial diversity That they don't care for, or orientation diversity that they don't approve of.

What's best for the bosses, the ruling class, the globalists, the donor class, what's best for them is a melting pot of enslaved consumers.

The conservative and libertarian anti-globalists have many unrelatable laments against globalism. Something I can relate to is heat stroke and heat exhaustion, being worked or working yourself almost to death.

I was my own ruling class, my own boss, I got no one to blame but me for how hard I worked myself almost to death in the heat last summer.

But that's not just me. In fact, I have it easy, because I get to rest and be in a state of riding the edge of heat exhaustion, 24/7 heat exhaustion, and just monitor my vitals so that I don't die of heat stroke.

That just means not working. But if I do try to work, or if I do have to work, I risk dying of heat stroke. That goes for all of the farm workers, all of the industrial laborers in warehouses there have not been retrofitted with AC because the bosses don't care to do "people care" and provide for the needs of their workers. So they get to drop dead and be forced to operate a hundred percent capacity and be forced by the heat down to a 25 % or less potential capacity, as you experience what's called heat syncope, which is a sort of catalyst for heat illness of all kinds.

That's what I've been suffering through. I suffer for three to four months of heat syncope, which basically causes you to have lethargy and immobilizing, sometimes extremely excruciating lack of blood pressure. It got so bad for me after an injury where I lost a lot of blood into to internal bleeding. I couldn't stand, I couldn't walk, I could barely sit up.

But I had to survive like that for two months, until the heat broke and I got a resupply. It was organic spinach powder and vitamins that luckily, I was able to nurse myself back to health with.

And I was walking again, slowly but surely, after two months, and then after about three months, by the time I was in the middle of the fall I was back to a hundred percent.

It's funny, the libertarians and conservatives that are against the globalists and fear authoritarian regimes to enforce green living and green energy and green everything because of climate change and global warming.

I studied the history of the term hegemony and you learn about what the European white colonizers were doing in order to co opt resistance. If the globalists can co opt the green left and sort of sign their freedom away, and sign their autonomy away, end up being beholden to contracts with the cult of the globalists, because they thought their interests were being served, because we're all going green now.

But really if the green agenda has been co opted by the billionaire class for their own sort of vain, narcissistic wannabe heroics of being green and being delegates of environmental progress...certainly there are a number of billionaires I'm aware of who sort of seem to be green washing to cleanse their own soul of the guilt of being obscenely powerful.

If you were to relinquish that power and give it to the center, the left and the right to solve problems that are on this planet...

It's not rocket science, here's the simplest way I'll put it, money goes from dumb people to smart people. And it's the smart people, whether they're smart and hard, like the Navy Seals and MARSOC and the Rangers, all the different elite units that are smart and hard.

Because if you're hard and not smart, you get to be the bottom of the barrel.

You don't wanna just be hard, meaning, brave and willing to be a pawn for the smarter people who either don't fight anymore or never fought a day in their life.

But you fight for them, and you defend their wealth. You defend their empire.

You defend their offshore oil drilling stations and mines in pirate infested waters and rebel infested nations throughout the Fourth World and the Third World.

There are standards in place to sort out where you're gonna be in the stack, the social hierarchy, I say money goes from dumb people to smart people, and the smart people can afford the smart and hard people, and just the hard people.

But it's the rich people who have the security forces. It's the rich people who direct the commandos and, and those commandos, whether for cartels or for the global war on Terror...

You can be a guerrilla, leftist commando, but you're not gonna have the money. It's it's gonna look like the Chiapas Zapatistas versus the US backed Mexican military death squads.

Peter Zeihan is probably one of the most astute scholars of geopolitics, and how the militaries of the world grease the wheels of capitalism.

Your works cut out for you if you're poor working class and you want to rebel against the security forces that the elite play chess with on this geopolitical chess board of planet Earth.

So from globalization to anti globalization to globalism and anti globalism, and there's one word that I haven't mentioned yet, which I will accredit the way I credited donor class.

I'll mention Peter's name because he's in a category where I feel comfortable mentioning his name, but the idea of de-globalization, something that he's studying, and he's sort of cataloging the decline of Western civilization, decline of the US empire, in the world of retraction from globalization for various reasons.

I guess I'm extra glad I didn't get my skull crushed by a baton at the Battle of Seattle in 1999, fighting against globalization, because 25 years later, it would de-globalization would start to happen on its own.

It would start to unravel, and the empire would be overstretched, fighting too many wars on too many fronts.

It would be inflating its currency. It would be experiencing discord internally, political and religious divisions will be exploited from the outside.

We will be imploding as an empire from the inside out, creating power vacuums and imbalances that would make us easier and easier and easier to be toppled by foreign adversaries.

Definitely the American empire is in decline, its decadences causing it to collapse under its own weight. I think that's pretty obvious.

The peak of US power was the end of the Cold War, were the only significant counter balancing force of geopolitics in the world as a superpower collapsed.

If that was the bipolar world of the US versus the USSR and everyone else was below and everyone succumbed to the economic prerogatives and trade routes of the two dominant empires who were in a Cold War with each other, the peak of the American prowess was the fall of the Soviet Union.

Since then, drunk on prosperity, we tried to bite off more than we could chew on that Monopoly game board that spans the globe, or the chess board that spans the globe, and we made a lot of enemies, and we spent a lot of blood and treasure.

Now we have a lot of disabled veterans and an abysmal recruitment rate and an abysmal sort of standard of fitness and preparedness tactically for war, so that we're just more vulnerable than ever, and our enemies have only gotten stronger and more allied.

So the shrinking of the American empire, its prowess, it's just a result of the decadence and the over extension.

If the globalists had been defeated by the anti globalization movement and we would have kept jobs at home, there would be more social safety. There would be more cohesion. There wouldn't be a need for extreme socialism or Marxism.

The democracy could have just been fine. A democracy, capitalist democracy that was more self contained within its borders and solved its own problems and did not get over leveraged into outsourcing and overstretched itself, kind of leaving the average working person in the dust with less and less net worth, and then spending blood and treasure to distribute warriors and kind of burning out and wasting and grinding down and destroying your smart and hard.

Bring the troops home because the war is at home and it doesn't need to be a bloody war. It needs to be a war of civil engineering and doing what they did after the dust bowls, put the military to work digging swales, permaculture style, without even knowing what it was.

But yes, tactical permaculture, that's is my flag now.

It's not anti religious, not anti conservative, not anti military, but it is anti militarism. It's anti bigotry. It's just simply about the design charette. Let's all show up as stakeholders at the table, the table top exercise of Operation Heal America, if you want.

Everyone's got their operation name, everyone's got their organization, whether it's for profit, nonprofit, and everyone's got their party line.

For me, it's just as simple as, those of us who are certified permaculture designers, who try to see things through a non metaphysical and an earth science positivism lens... this substance is toxic in concentration, this measure, or this countermeasure, will help to remediate the soil...These weeds will accumulate toxins and pull them out of the soil so it's more safe to grow food in...

That's the kind of human ecology realism, the practicality of permaculture, that avoids over emphasis on Boogie Men and pointing fingers.

It's about not caring so much about what the bad guys did or what the bad guys are doing, but what you can do as a good person focusing the majority of efforts on solving the problems nearest to us, the ones that we're creating, the ones that were affected by, and not spending an excessive amount of time obsessing over conspiracy theories of globalist boogie people.

I said to myself once a long time ago, even before I got very into permaculture, just as a leftist revolutionary guerrilla warrior in my early twenties.

At one point it dawned on me, I said, we do not have a land base as a movement.

We're not like the Zapatistas, we're wandering mostly white American leftists trying to shack up to the cause of animal rights, or the cause of people of color or indigenous people.

I was a member of a sub culture of white american radical leftists without a real cohesive land based ethnic movement to call our own and we just became these volunteer mercenary activists who sometimes we're welcomed and sometimes we're not welcomed in the campaigns and movements that we shacked up to you in order to find our souls and feel connected and feel worthwhile as colonizers and settlers.

Some people more or less motivated by guilt and shame. Some people more just wanting to express their resistance energy while they had it. That was me, what are you rebelling against, what do you got?

I wore out my welcome here and there. I'm still welcome in some places, but for me, it's very personal now, because I have my own little piece of land. I'm a white refugee, a white drop out.

There were a lot of settlers from Europe who failed to impose their methods of agriculture on the Americas, and they eventually became refugees and joined Native American tribes. That happened a lot.

Soldiers went AWOL and joined Native American tribes. I'm not trying to join any tribe. I'm not trying to be Mr Red Road walking white man with a feather and a pipe. No, that's not me. I've done a lot of time and service in to a lot of Native American causes and organizations, and I knew my place, and it was as a delegate of the rebels and dropouts from within the American Empire of mainly white folk. So where does all this lead? Where does it all end up?

For me, It's just about the realization I had in my earlier life was that we don't have a land base. We don't have a real ethnic struggle. We're just wandering mercenaries and if we wanted to have anything like the dignity and the pride and the resolve that you would have as an indigenous land defending warrior, then the best you can do would be to be a guerrilla gardener in your own neighborhood.

Whether you're sleeping in a dumpster or sleeping in a sky rise, clean up your own neighborhood with permaculture and if you can afford land at any scale, clean that land up and become land based, have a reason to die and defend your land, because it's what sustains you. Don't just eat out of dumpsters and don't just work for the man and have a meager existence, but work for the land.

That's my agenda. That's what I'm doing and with my permaculture training materials that I still have lots of, I have no excuse to fail, other than my own weakness or own stupidity.

I like to think I'm smart and hard, but I chose not to join the Navy Seals or the Army Rangers, I chose to unite with the warriors that we're not serving empire, but we're resisting empire.

However dumb I may have started, I think most of us can achieve a level of smartness and hardness to be warriors and for me that is to be an eco-warrior. To operate within the spheres where I can have the most influence and not the least.

So I said to myself, I'm only gonna criticize the system with food energy calories that I grow myself. Until then, I'm gonna shut up, not because I shouldn't have a voice, not because I shouldn't be begging for rights and begging for handouts and begging for wealth redistribution, sitting in a protest, occupying some street corner...

It's all fine and good, but I decided, for myself to change. It was easy to complain, it's hard to make a living off the land, but you're allowed to do that even in a community garden. So there's no excuse no matter how poor you are. And I can speak from that perspective, no matter how rich you are, and I can speak from having a tiny bit of wealth, a micro fortune compared to what I've had most of my life.

I can talk to rich people. I can talk to poor people.

I understand the monetary system and finance enough now to speak from both perspectives. And I'll tell you what, I was right when I made that decision, when I said, I'm not gonna waste a lot of energy complaining, I'm not gonna eat out of a dumpster or eat cheap, toxic food that I bought with a paycheck working for the man.

I'm not gonna complain with that food energy. I'm gonna apply that food energy to learning how to grow my own food.

And once I've grown my own food, I will be happy to spend the energy from the food that I grew myself to criticize the system.

But you don't bite the hand that feeds you. If I'm sucking at the teet of the system for every calorie that I burn to survive, then I will be the first to die when the system collapses.

If you don't grow your own food, you're gonna go down with the system that you're trying to take down.

So again, tactical permaculture.

There's pride and dignity and power in going back to the land and learning how to fight and learning how to defend the land.

If people just did that and stopped being co opted into the agendas of whoever, and signing your soul away, selling your soul to the devils of the globalists, if you will, like saying, I wanna be green, but I guess that means I gotta sell my soul to the globalists. Then I'll get top down greenness, no bottom up, grassroots or even clover or rice roots or sugar roots, that's a grass too. I grow lemon grass. So how about lemon grass roots?

To conclude, globalization was countered by the anti globalization movement. Then globalists co opted the anti globalization movement, until de globalization put us all in our place.

I'll either see you at the soup line, or I'll see you with picks and shovels out there, working some defensible area of land that you and your community can subsist on, no matter what.

DIY vs regreening from the top down. Until we're the ones directing the smart and hard elite special forces operators, so that they're operating on our behalf not to disable Middle Eastern empires of oil, but to disable the kleptocrats within Western nations...

Imagine one day of Special Operations to disable the Globalists, if you want, if you will.

When the smart and hard, elite military warriors, who have been out there losing lives in battle, the elite warriors come back from the hinterlands to the core of the empire. disgusted at the excesses taken by the Kleptocrats that were using the warriors as pawns, there is this cycle.

I'm optimistic that the cynical veterans will join forces with the oppressed that need to be liberated within their own nations, even their own children.

Come home from being a Special Forces operator in theaters of war abroad, and liberate the oppressed, your own children who are obese, addicted to social media and killing themselves with opioids...Your work is cut out for you.

I look up to those operators I just think it's sad that despite all their best and most honest efforts to liberate the oppressed abroad, they come home after 20 years fighting the global war on terror to find their own children and families and communities being terrorized and being abandoned by the Globalists who are happy just to see everyone ground down into a state of disempowerment.

Maybe there's a lot to talk about as we repair the earth and plant trees and dig swales.

Maybe there's a lot to talk about between those of us who aspire to be smart and hard and not be pimped within the pimpocracy of the globalists.