Really comprehensive breakdown of how governance moved from legislative visibility to infrastructual inevitability. The UNESCO biosphere conference connection to zoonotic framwork is particularly sharp—that wasn't just foresight, that was layering in the public health justifcation decades before the mechanism could run at scale. I remember during lockdowns thinking "how did this coordination happen so fast" and the answer is it didnt; the plumbing was already there. The parameter control question is the right one to push; once enforcement is conditional access rathr than punishment, reversal becomes unaffordable.
Also in 1941 the Council on Foreign Relations (US Chatham House) published the following piece in its Foreign Affairs magazine. It's as if they laid out the stakes, identifying where it would lead (a little global war along the way or not) and the conscious decision to ignore the cautions it provided was made.
"The totalitarian conception of the relation of science to the state is remarkably elastic. When political expediency so determines, the whole concept is modified. "
"This Nazi and Soviet pursuit of "rebels" may seem absurd, but actually it is logical. An artist or a scientist in Germany and in Russia serves the state. He therefore cannot separate his politics from his strictly professional activities. If he departs from the prevailing official ideology he automatically becomes an anti-Nazi in Germany and a counter-revolutionary in the Soviet Union."
"It was also charged that Soviet materialistic works on cosmology "have been suppressed by the enemies of the people." In other words, because Marx and Engels were saturated in Victorian materialism, which followed Newton in picturing the universe as a colossal machine instead of a problem in higher geometry, all the experimental and observational evidence that supports relativity must be rejected.
How does science like this tyranny? A few bold spirits still survive in Germany and Russia, but, on the whole, there is a remarkable pliancy of the scientific mind in both countries."
"The Russian gift of recantation, which marked the trials of Party members accused of adherence to Trotsky, manifests itself in science as well as in politics.
Back of the ideologies of the dictators, back of the professional pliancy, is something more than political expediency, something more than blind obedience. Long before the world ever heard of Mussolini and Stalin and Hitler it was in a state of social unrest. The revolutions that overthrew the Romanoffs and the Hohenzollerns, the upheavals that gave British labor new rights and privileges, were expressions of dissatisfaction with the social structure. To say that the dictators emerged because science and technology had taken possession of society and stamped it with a pattern utterly different from that which the égalitarians of the eighteenth century knew is an over-simplification. There are psychic factors that cannot be ignored -- inner drives, national traditions, habits of life. Yet if the dictators are to be overthrown, if democracy is to be preserved, the part that science and technology played in the rise of democracy cannot be ignored. Research produces not only change within science itself but social change. The democratic method is to adapt social change to technological change. The dictators are trying to do the contrary.
In considering the relation of science to the dictators we must bear in mind that the human mind is intrinsically no better than it was 10,000 years ago. It simply has acquired new interests under social tension. In the Middle Ages social tension expressed itself so strongly in religion that there were 110 holy days in the year; a new ecclesiastical architecture was evolved; all Europe rose to the spiritual need of wresting Jerusalem from the "infidel." Today, however, it means more to our society to discover how the atom is constituted than that a new ecclesiastical architecture is developed, more that the mechanism of heredity is revealed than that savages in Africa are converted to Christianity. Perhaps its pragmatic attitude has led science to ignore essential ethical values. But the point is that science dominates our society, and that if our society wants science it must choose between totalitarianism and democracy. There can be no compromise."
"When the business man and the inventor were freed from this aristocratic fetishism, machine after machine appeared, and with the machines came mass production and mass consumption of identical goods. Without standardization mass production is impossible. To have cheap, good clothes we must all dress more or less alike. To bring automobiles within the reach of millions we must have the assembly line. To live inexpensively in cities we must eat packaged foods, dwell in more or less standardized homes, bathe in standardized bath tubs, and draw water and gas from common reservoirs. Mass production has brought it about that the average life in New York is hardly different from the average life in Wichita. The same motion pictures brighten the screen, the same voices and music well out of loud-speakers in every town, identical cans of tomatoes and packages of cereals are to be found on all grocers' shelves, identical electric toasters brown identical slices of bread everywhere, identical refrigerators freeze identical ice cubes in a million kitchens. If gunpowder made all men the same height, in Carlyle's classic phrase, mass production has standardized behavior, pleasures, tastes, comforts, life itself.
Mass production and labor-saving devices have created a social crisis. We cannot have mass production and mechanization without planning. Engineers and their financial backers are planners. Dictators are planners. Whether they know it or not, most corporation executives and engineers are necessary totalitarians in practice. Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin clearly have the instincts of engineers. Their states are designed social structures."
"Often enough we hear it said that mechanical invention has outstripped social invention -- that new social forms must be devised if we are to forestall the economic crises that are brought about by what is called the "impact of science" on society. Communism and Fascism are social inventions, intended among other things to solve the economic problems created by technological change under the influence of capitalism. They attempt to answer a question: Are the technical experts and their financial backers to shape the course of society unrestrained, and even to rule nations directly and indirectly, as they did in France, and as they do in part in Great Britain and the United States? The totalitarians say that a capitalistic democratic government cannot control the experts, the inventors, the creators of this evolving mechanical culture. They therefore have decided to take control of thinking, above all scientific thinking, out of which flow the manufacturing processes and the machines which change life.
But science is more than coal-tar dyes and drugs, electric lamps, airplanes, radio, television, relativity and astrophysics. It is an attitude of mind -- what Professor Whitehead has called "the most intimate change in outlook that the human race has yet experienced." If Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin are to rule, that scientific attitude will have to be abandoned when it conflicts with the official social philosophy. But if it is abandoned there can be no Newtons, no Darwins, no Einsteins. Science will be unable to make discoveries which will change the human outlook and, with the outlook, the social order. If the world wants to preserve science as a powerful social force for good the research physicist, chemist and biologist must be permitted to work without intellectual restraint, i.e. to enjoy the fundamental freedom of democracy."
"An essential to this progress has been that the scientist has not demanded that his theory be considered "true." He does not profess to know what the truth is. A theory must work. It is an expedient. When it ceases to work it is thrown overboard or modified. This method of merciless self-examination cannot be followed in a society where the result of each investigation is predetermined for extraneous reasons. Democracy flounders before it arrives at satisfactory solutions of its social problems. But it is better to flounder and progress than to follow the philosophy of a dictator and to remain socially and scientifically static."
Grok explains why this account is suspended on X: "There is no publicly available information identifying specific posts that directly caused the suspension or removal of @_Escapekey_
.The account was known for long-form threads and detailed research exposing mechanisms of global financial control, including:Natural Asset Companies (NACs) → and the financialization/securitization of nature
Digital IDs and programmable CBDCs as tools for centralized control
Supranational governance structures bypassing national sovereignty
"Stakeholder capitalism," BlackRock/WEF influence, and "turnkey tyranny" infrastructure
Historical patterns of institutional inversion and enclosure of commons
These topics often challenged powerful entities (e.g., NYSE, Intrinsic Exchange Group, BlackRock, WEF, UN-linked initiatives) and aligned with narratives labeled as controversial or mis/disinformation by platforms.Followers frequently describe the account as "ridiculously censored," "shadowbanned to invisibility," or "removed" without warning, with many redirecting to the author's Substack (escapekey.substack.com) where the same in-depth work continues uninterrupted.X's enforcement is often opaque, and suspensions for such content can stem from accumulated reports, algorithmic flags, or policy violations (e.g., against "coordinated harmful activity" or spreading "misinformation" on finance/governance). No official statement from X or the author pinpoints a single triggering post—it's likely the cumulative body of work that exposed sensitive power structures."
oh i wasn't suspended. i took it down myself, as there was absolutely no point in posting; no-one who didn't follow me ever saw my posts. my account visibility further had become so incredibly compartmentalised that only the very same accounts ever reacted, and retweets did quite literally nothing. To make up the gap in visibility, bot impressions were used in a grand scale, I'm sure.
yet, i kept going back there, even though i knew it was pointless. so i deleted the account, thus ensuring i only put effort in on platforms where i could Ctrl-P, Save to PDF and take all work with me with relative ease, should I need to migrate platform again.
which is, essentially, where we are today, because I observe the same yet again. no need to delete the account this time, however, I just see no need to lead on this platform anymore.
I continue to envision increasing entropy as this is rolled out, and that it will ultimately be the entropy which cannot be turned off. There will certainly be those that will be eager to comply. But the numbers of those who will not comply seem to be growing. For all the talk of One World Order, I do not perceive that the disparate bad actors currently running things across our planet are all united behind this, unless of course it is their clade that is doing the global governing. Time will tell
As long as we continue in the sensationalism of ego-mind, we will live in the delusion of ''scientific'' imagination. Indeed, we will live in the ignorance of body-mind sensing; ''lost in the space'' of an ''apparently'' infinite universe. Indeed, imaginary science will continue in ignorance that motion-energy is Divine Thinking/Imag-I-Nation. Inevitably, in this state of separation, we will remain vulnerable to the fantasies of the most psycho-narcissistic mentality.
We must re-focus to Real Education in its actual role to ''bring out from within''. For sure we have many forms of media available to present our ''Wholiness'' and dismiss the lies and false values of the ''hollywood mindset''. With an evermore complete understanding that the universe is ever-manifesting within the omnipresence-omniscience-omnipotence of the Divine, genuine awe and gratitude will raise our heart frequencies.
In effect, we will be re-connected to the Truth of the Beauty and Goodness that is our Divine Source and ''Nature-in-waiting''.
As Nisargadatta Maharaj makes clear:
"The point is that man freed from his fetters is morality personified. Such a man therefore does not need any moralistic injunctions in order to live righteously. Free a man from his bondage and thereafter everything else will take care of itself. On the other hand, man in his unredeemed state cannot possibly live morally, no matter what moral teaching he is given. It is an intrinsic impossibility, for his very foundation is immorality. That is, he lives a lie, a basic contradiction: functioning in all his relationships as the separate entity he believes himself to be, whereas in reality no such separation exists. His every action therefore does violence to other 'selves' and other 'creatures,' which are only manifestations of the unitary consciousness. So Society had to invent some restraints in order to protect itself from its own worst excesses and thereby maintain some kind of status quo. The resulting arbitrary rules, which vary with place and time and therefore are purely relative, it calls 'morality,' and by upholding this man-invented 'idea' as the highest good–oftentimes sanctioned by religious 'revelation' and scriptures, society has provided man with one more excuse to disregard the quest for liberation or relegate it to a fairly low priority in his scheme of things."
Really comprehensive breakdown of how governance moved from legislative visibility to infrastructual inevitability. The UNESCO biosphere conference connection to zoonotic framwork is particularly sharp—that wasn't just foresight, that was layering in the public health justifcation decades before the mechanism could run at scale. I remember during lockdowns thinking "how did this coordination happen so fast" and the answer is it didnt; the plumbing was already there. The parameter control question is the right one to push; once enforcement is conditional access rathr than punishment, reversal becomes unaffordable.
Also in 1941 the Council on Foreign Relations (US Chatham House) published the following piece in its Foreign Affairs magazine. It's as if they laid out the stakes, identifying where it would lead (a little global war along the way or not) and the conscious decision to ignore the cautions it provided was made.
Science in the Totalitarian State
Foreign Affairs, January, 1941
https://web.archive.org/web/20181125112623/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1941-01-01/science-totalitarian-state
(Selected Excerpts)
"The totalitarian conception of the relation of science to the state is remarkably elastic. When political expediency so determines, the whole concept is modified. "
"This Nazi and Soviet pursuit of "rebels" may seem absurd, but actually it is logical. An artist or a scientist in Germany and in Russia serves the state. He therefore cannot separate his politics from his strictly professional activities. If he departs from the prevailing official ideology he automatically becomes an anti-Nazi in Germany and a counter-revolutionary in the Soviet Union."
"It was also charged that Soviet materialistic works on cosmology "have been suppressed by the enemies of the people." In other words, because Marx and Engels were saturated in Victorian materialism, which followed Newton in picturing the universe as a colossal machine instead of a problem in higher geometry, all the experimental and observational evidence that supports relativity must be rejected.
How does science like this tyranny? A few bold spirits still survive in Germany and Russia, but, on the whole, there is a remarkable pliancy of the scientific mind in both countries."
"The Russian gift of recantation, which marked the trials of Party members accused of adherence to Trotsky, manifests itself in science as well as in politics.
Back of the ideologies of the dictators, back of the professional pliancy, is something more than political expediency, something more than blind obedience. Long before the world ever heard of Mussolini and Stalin and Hitler it was in a state of social unrest. The revolutions that overthrew the Romanoffs and the Hohenzollerns, the upheavals that gave British labor new rights and privileges, were expressions of dissatisfaction with the social structure. To say that the dictators emerged because science and technology had taken possession of society and stamped it with a pattern utterly different from that which the égalitarians of the eighteenth century knew is an over-simplification. There are psychic factors that cannot be ignored -- inner drives, national traditions, habits of life. Yet if the dictators are to be overthrown, if democracy is to be preserved, the part that science and technology played in the rise of democracy cannot be ignored. Research produces not only change within science itself but social change. The democratic method is to adapt social change to technological change. The dictators are trying to do the contrary.
In considering the relation of science to the dictators we must bear in mind that the human mind is intrinsically no better than it was 10,000 years ago. It simply has acquired new interests under social tension. In the Middle Ages social tension expressed itself so strongly in religion that there were 110 holy days in the year; a new ecclesiastical architecture was evolved; all Europe rose to the spiritual need of wresting Jerusalem from the "infidel." Today, however, it means more to our society to discover how the atom is constituted than that a new ecclesiastical architecture is developed, more that the mechanism of heredity is revealed than that savages in Africa are converted to Christianity. Perhaps its pragmatic attitude has led science to ignore essential ethical values. But the point is that science dominates our society, and that if our society wants science it must choose between totalitarianism and democracy. There can be no compromise."
"When the business man and the inventor were freed from this aristocratic fetishism, machine after machine appeared, and with the machines came mass production and mass consumption of identical goods. Without standardization mass production is impossible. To have cheap, good clothes we must all dress more or less alike. To bring automobiles within the reach of millions we must have the assembly line. To live inexpensively in cities we must eat packaged foods, dwell in more or less standardized homes, bathe in standardized bath tubs, and draw water and gas from common reservoirs. Mass production has brought it about that the average life in New York is hardly different from the average life in Wichita. The same motion pictures brighten the screen, the same voices and music well out of loud-speakers in every town, identical cans of tomatoes and packages of cereals are to be found on all grocers' shelves, identical electric toasters brown identical slices of bread everywhere, identical refrigerators freeze identical ice cubes in a million kitchens. If gunpowder made all men the same height, in Carlyle's classic phrase, mass production has standardized behavior, pleasures, tastes, comforts, life itself.
Mass production and labor-saving devices have created a social crisis. We cannot have mass production and mechanization without planning. Engineers and their financial backers are planners. Dictators are planners. Whether they know it or not, most corporation executives and engineers are necessary totalitarians in practice. Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin clearly have the instincts of engineers. Their states are designed social structures."
"Often enough we hear it said that mechanical invention has outstripped social invention -- that new social forms must be devised if we are to forestall the economic crises that are brought about by what is called the "impact of science" on society. Communism and Fascism are social inventions, intended among other things to solve the economic problems created by technological change under the influence of capitalism. They attempt to answer a question: Are the technical experts and their financial backers to shape the course of society unrestrained, and even to rule nations directly and indirectly, as they did in France, and as they do in part in Great Britain and the United States? The totalitarians say that a capitalistic democratic government cannot control the experts, the inventors, the creators of this evolving mechanical culture. They therefore have decided to take control of thinking, above all scientific thinking, out of which flow the manufacturing processes and the machines which change life.
But science is more than coal-tar dyes and drugs, electric lamps, airplanes, radio, television, relativity and astrophysics. It is an attitude of mind -- what Professor Whitehead has called "the most intimate change in outlook that the human race has yet experienced." If Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin are to rule, that scientific attitude will have to be abandoned when it conflicts with the official social philosophy. But if it is abandoned there can be no Newtons, no Darwins, no Einsteins. Science will be unable to make discoveries which will change the human outlook and, with the outlook, the social order. If the world wants to preserve science as a powerful social force for good the research physicist, chemist and biologist must be permitted to work without intellectual restraint, i.e. to enjoy the fundamental freedom of democracy."
"An essential to this progress has been that the scientist has not demanded that his theory be considered "true." He does not profess to know what the truth is. A theory must work. It is an expedient. When it ceases to work it is thrown overboard or modified. This method of merciless self-examination cannot be followed in a society where the result of each investigation is predetermined for extraneous reasons. Democracy flounders before it arrives at satisfactory solutions of its social problems. But it is better to flounder and progress than to follow the philosophy of a dictator and to remain socially and scientifically static."
Truly thought provoking. Thank you so much.
Grok explains why this account is suspended on X: "There is no publicly available information identifying specific posts that directly caused the suspension or removal of @_Escapekey_
.The account was known for long-form threads and detailed research exposing mechanisms of global financial control, including:Natural Asset Companies (NACs) → and the financialization/securitization of nature
Digital IDs and programmable CBDCs as tools for centralized control
Supranational governance structures bypassing national sovereignty
"Stakeholder capitalism," BlackRock/WEF influence, and "turnkey tyranny" infrastructure
Historical patterns of institutional inversion and enclosure of commons
These topics often challenged powerful entities (e.g., NYSE, Intrinsic Exchange Group, BlackRock, WEF, UN-linked initiatives) and aligned with narratives labeled as controversial or mis/disinformation by platforms.Followers frequently describe the account as "ridiculously censored," "shadowbanned to invisibility," or "removed" without warning, with many redirecting to the author's Substack (escapekey.substack.com) where the same in-depth work continues uninterrupted.X's enforcement is often opaque, and suspensions for such content can stem from accumulated reports, algorithmic flags, or policy violations (e.g., against "coordinated harmful activity" or spreading "misinformation" on finance/governance). No official statement from X or the author pinpoints a single triggering post—it's likely the cumulative body of work that exposed sensitive power structures."
Taking flak means you're over the target!
oh i wasn't suspended. i took it down myself, as there was absolutely no point in posting; no-one who didn't follow me ever saw my posts. my account visibility further had become so incredibly compartmentalised that only the very same accounts ever reacted, and retweets did quite literally nothing. To make up the gap in visibility, bot impressions were used in a grand scale, I'm sure.
yet, i kept going back there, even though i knew it was pointless. so i deleted the account, thus ensuring i only put effort in on platforms where i could Ctrl-P, Save to PDF and take all work with me with relative ease, should I need to migrate platform again.
which is, essentially, where we are today, because I observe the same yet again. no need to delete the account this time, however, I just see no need to lead on this platform anymore.
Where will we find you? I only see you here.
ill still be here, but it wont be my lead platform. i dont support censurious platforms, and substack is no better than twitter.
I continue to envision increasing entropy as this is rolled out, and that it will ultimately be the entropy which cannot be turned off. There will certainly be those that will be eager to comply. But the numbers of those who will not comply seem to be growing. For all the talk of One World Order, I do not perceive that the disparate bad actors currently running things across our planet are all united behind this, unless of course it is their clade that is doing the global governing. Time will tell
Wait till people realise zoonotic spillover isn't a thing.
Oh wait, I forgot we don't get to ask questions now.
As long as we continue in the sensationalism of ego-mind, we will live in the delusion of ''scientific'' imagination. Indeed, we will live in the ignorance of body-mind sensing; ''lost in the space'' of an ''apparently'' infinite universe. Indeed, imaginary science will continue in ignorance that motion-energy is Divine Thinking/Imag-I-Nation. Inevitably, in this state of separation, we will remain vulnerable to the fantasies of the most psycho-narcissistic mentality.
We must re-focus to Real Education in its actual role to ''bring out from within''. For sure we have many forms of media available to present our ''Wholiness'' and dismiss the lies and false values of the ''hollywood mindset''. With an evermore complete understanding that the universe is ever-manifesting within the omnipresence-omniscience-omnipotence of the Divine, genuine awe and gratitude will raise our heart frequencies.
In effect, we will be re-connected to the Truth of the Beauty and Goodness that is our Divine Source and ''Nature-in-waiting''.
As Nisargadatta Maharaj makes clear:
"The point is that man freed from his fetters is morality personified. Such a man therefore does not need any moralistic injunctions in order to live righteously. Free a man from his bondage and thereafter everything else will take care of itself. On the other hand, man in his unredeemed state cannot possibly live morally, no matter what moral teaching he is given. It is an intrinsic impossibility, for his very foundation is immorality. That is, he lives a lie, a basic contradiction: functioning in all his relationships as the separate entity he believes himself to be, whereas in reality no such separation exists. His every action therefore does violence to other 'selves' and other 'creatures,' which are only manifestations of the unitary consciousness. So Society had to invent some restraints in order to protect itself from its own worst excesses and thereby maintain some kind of status quo. The resulting arbitrary rules, which vary with place and time and therefore are purely relative, it calls 'morality,' and by upholding this man-invented 'idea' as the highest good–oftentimes sanctioned by religious 'revelation' and scriptures, society has provided man with one more excuse to disregard the quest for liberation or relegate it to a fairly low priority in his scheme of things."
Brilliant, thank you!