Farmers are in trouble worldwide, as the cost of both fuel and fertiliser are soaring, and in some places neither are available at any price. Even in Russia – a major energy producer – deliberate destruction of their energy infrastructure by NATO-controlled Ukraine has had a significant impact. Inputs needed in eastern Russia are being sent to cities in the west. Russian grain exports that typically feed many other countries will be well down. In Western Australia farmers are also losing out to cities, because governments don’t want people in the cities to riot over lack of fuel. People haven’t yet felt the much impact from the war because they are being shielded from those effects as countries reallocate resources from agriculture and burn through their stored reserves. There’s no general sense of crisis, so there has been little demand destruction. People are not feeling the need to conserve, but this simply means the real crisis will hit much sooner and harder than would otherwise have been the case. Our global elites want this to happen, because they want people desperate, and having a polycrisis it all at once is their chosen method for achieving this. It will be used to force the implementation of technocratic control over people and critically over the food supply.
What’s being planned is a hostile takeover of food production by the largest players in the agricultural sector. People are to be separated from the ability to feed themselves by themselves, and all decision-making is to be made top-down. All the major agricultural companies are connected to the WEF, and the WEF agenda is all about top-down control of every aspect of life. The food aspect of that agenda is to deprive ordinary people of nutrious natural food – especially meat, eggs, and dairy – and force unnatural and nutritionally deficient veganism, along with insect protein and fake meat made of toxic seed oils and starch. This is of course a recipe for weakening a population that they wish to reduce substantially.
The plan is to impose centrally controlled technocracy on the food supply system. However, the major players want to avoid liability for the terrible outcomes that are so predictable, so they’re setting up and funding small companies to do the dirty work for them, and to act as a liability shield. These ‘start ups’ are simply off-shoots of all the big players, staffed by them as well as finaced by them. They’re the parties that will be doing genetic modification, tampering with seeds, and creating the frankenfoods that people will be expected to eat. These people never waste a good crisis, and they’ll create one if necessary to force the scaling up that they want to achieve.
One major aspect of the plan by the elites to control farming is to get farmers into debt, so that leverage can be used against them to force them to comply with the new agenda. Farm credit is to be expanded in order that farmers can purchase expensive new equipment (electrified machinery, drones, smart irrigation systems etc), genetically modified seeds with significant requirements for expensive inputs, and ‘bio-stimulants’ like nitrogen-fixing bacteria genetically engineered to have no off-switch. This is the economic hitman approach where loans are made with fancy promises of productivity, but when the promises prove hollow and the debt cannot be repaid then the farm is forfeit. For instance, self-driving electric tractors would be an extremely expensive and useless nightmare.
All food production is to be entered into a single registry, so that informal food production can also be centrally controlled in accordance with standards set by the big players, and enforced by them through various forms of leverage. The powers that be want to know who farms what, where, with what inouts and with what methods. This is all to be fed into a single database so control can be obtained over co-ops, communes, homesteads, and traditional farming. There are to be shared soil standards, forcing small farmers to comply with what the big players consider to be healthy soil, but is actually not healthy at all. This would prevent many vastly better systems, such as regenerative agriculture, and force the use things like bio-stimulants. Access to crop insurance can be made conditional on compliance sith ‘best practice’, as defined by the Big Ag companies. Guaranteed off-take of crops also boxes farmers in, as they would then have only one purchaser, which would then have all the bargaining power. The point is to eliminate family farms and independent farming busineses, turning them into “managed nodes in a blockchain supply chain”, as Christian Westbrook describes here. Comprehensive surveillance would be implemenented, which would facilitate insider trading by those with early access to crop information. The system would be an extractive and exploitative public private partnership.
Christian points out that Russia survived the collapse of the Soviet Union through decentralised food production. The centrally controlled collective farms failed, as uninformed centrally controlled systems tend to do, often catastrophically. People fed themselves by growing food wherever they could, often at their dachas (country cottage properties) if they had access to one, or on apartment balconies if necessary. 40% of the food supply came from these micro-farms, and most people made it through the crisis as a result. The opposite approach is to be implemented now, and it will be a disaster like that of the Soviet collective farms. Decentralised food production can create a sharing mindset with less emphasis on scarcity. When less fear permeates society, it changes how people relate to each other, very much for the better. The opposite would happen under the system being implemented by our selfish and benighted elites.
In the US, the warmongering company Palantir is now aligned with the US Department of Agriculture, and has been given permission to consolidate and control all agricultural data, under the pretext that farming is now a matter if national security. There is to be “one farmer, one file”, with complete surveillance by a company that is a bad actor with an anti-human agenda. This kind of attsmpt at total central control has had tragic consequences many times in the past. For instance, in the 1930s, farm collectivisation in the Soviet Union caused a famine that killed tens of millions of people. Similarly during China’s Great Leap Forward, Mao’s regime created a famine that killed at least 50 million people. The head of Palantir, Alex Carp, says “I need more data so my enemies wake up scared.” Today humanity is his enemy.
My country of New Zealand is at the far end of a long and vulnerable supply chain for imports, including for fertiliser. While New Zealand produces about a third of its nitrogen fertiliser demand domestically, from its Taranaki gas deposits, it remains heavily dependent on imports from the Gulf region, and those are no longer available. Prices will inevitably climb during high demand season, and usage is very likely to fall, with a corresponding impact on yields of crops and carrying capacity for pastures. The critically important dairy industry would be particularly badly affected. Given that one of the WEF priorities is the elimination of animal agriculture, this is likely of no concern to those who dictate policy to our government. What passes for leadership in this country has already considered importing foot and mouth disease from Indonesia, so as to have an excuse to cull cows, sheep, and pigs, and fearmongering around bird flu could provide an excuse to cull chickens and turkeys as well. New Zealand is so far following the same unfortunate path of war on farming as other western countries, and has been doing so quite enthusiastically. There seems to be no understanding of the impacts to come.
It’s possible that the elites behind the WEF may fail early in their attempts to impose technocracy, given that maintaining (let alone increasing) socioeconomic complexity is a function of surplus energy, and the world is looking at an energy deficit in comparison with previous demand. However, even if they ultimately fail, a great deal of damage will already have been done. Many countries, including New Zealand, will have to become as self-sufficient as possible as quickly as possible. Both imports and exports are likely to decrease drastically as supply chains fail for lack of energy. The potential good news is that if New Zeland and Australia no longer produce so many agricultural products for export, the carry capacity can be used instead to produce for the local population, and this could be far less fertiliser dependent. Of course the loss of imports and exports would also mean a major drop in material prosperity. Those who benefitted disproportionately from globalisation also suffer disproportionately as the globalised economy fragments, but what remains is a decent resource base. What will be required is the will to redevelop it in a very different and more localised form, and the ability to get expectations in line with what a new reality can hope to deliver.
