Digital Direct Democracy, episode #3 __ Communist Concerns __

In this episode, I continue to lay out “The Problem” so that readers will better appreciate “The Solution” in future episodes. BING Copilot continues to be my trusty assistant.

Distinguishing Traditional and Modern Communism

Traditional and modern forms of Communism exhibit notable differences. Let's delve into these distinctions:

Ownership of Means of Production:

Traditional Communism: In the past, traditional Communist regimes aimed to collectively own and control the means of production (such as factories, mines, and mills). The state directly managed these resources.

Modern Digital Communism: In the contemporary context, the concept of ownership has evolved. Modern Digital Communism extends beyond physical assets to include both human and non-human forms of "capital” to be leveraged by politicians, central planners and enforcement bureaucracies for their “productive purposes”. This encompasses not only factories and machinery but also digital infrastructure and intellectual resources.

Human Ownership vs. Loyalty:

Traditional View: Historically, Communism was associated with state ownership of people, akin to master-slave relationships. However, modern Communism diverges from this notion.

Modern Perspective: Instead of directly "owning" individuals, modern governments focus on securing the loyalty of their employees. Many government workers and beneficiaries of its largess are counted upon to refrain from opposing political priorities or "biting the hand that feeds them." This self-censorship ensures alignment with ruling authorities’ interests.

The Honey Pot Analogy

Imagine a “honey pot" as a metaphor for the container of political and economic power. Within it, you will find both "pixified money" (my term for ‘public wealth’ that was magically transformed from our property as pre-tax personal or corporate earnings) and the authority (rules encoded in legislation) to allocate privileges. Size matters: as the honey pot grows, so does the influence of its custodians to wield the power it contains to achieve specific political goals.

An historical context: early 20th-century Communist Russia had a relatively small honey pot compared to today. Our modern, ubiquitous and expansive digital landscape requires enormously more ‘power resources’ to achieve the global ambitions of the ‘power elites’. Compared to Stalin’s Russia, the stakes are infinitely larger for the winners of the game of power politics.

Government leaders as Honey Pot custodians:

Today's government leaders effectively control the honey pot. They can distribute its substantial resources for their own purposes. Financial resources, a major component of the honey pot, are strictly managed by laws and regulations according to political priority.

Some people suspect that financial giants like BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard are the richest and most powerful institutions on earth. Others believe that the real wealth is held by the pension funds which invest their assets via the services offered by those companies. Canada’s top ten pension funds by size, for example, invest the retirement assets of Canadians under the direction and regulation of the federal and provincial governments. The collective size of those holdings belies where the true wealth resides and it’s within the reach of government actors.

“As good as gold”. When I was a boy in the 1960s, Fort Knox was famous as the secure repository America’s gold bullion stock. Presidents like Eisenhower and Kennedy were respected and considered trustworthy as the men who were chosen in democratic elections. They were deemed worthy, by the “majority” of citizens, to direct America from the pinnacle of national power. Today, that pinnacle is less obvious or trustworthy.

World Economic Forum (WEF) members are one element of a growing “One World Order”. Some influential figures, like Canada's Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, serve as honey pot custodians. Freeland, a WEF Board of Governors member, balances her fiduciary duties to that Board while shaping Canada's annual federal budget as Minister of Finance. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, also a WEF member, supports and encourages these budgetary decisions. Additionally, Canadian Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, is also seasoned WEF participant and power broker who provides monetary advice to Freeland.

How much influence do global entities such as the WEF, United Nations, the World Health Organization (W.H.O) and others have in shaping the national governance and destinies of countries like Canada? How much do Canadians care about these influencers?

Loyalty for sale

It’s not overly simplistic to suggest the net result of leveraging one aspect of the honey pot - Canada's Magic Money Tree - is to buy systemic loyalty and political power.

It also goes without saying that the influence of those ‘One World Order’ institutions could not produce the desired results without the agreement and collaboration with national governments like Canada’s.

In the realm of modern finance, Canada's central bank wields a remarkable power—the ability to conjure money seemingly out of thin air. With this financial wizardry, they are able to fund essential government operations and its strategic “investments”. Treaties and accords (the Paris Climate Accord, for instance) are the ‘honey pot’ instruments signed by government leaders to legally secure that cooperation. The central banks conjure the ‘pixified money” that greases the skids to move initiatives forwards.

Decades ago, central banks were an enigma to most citizens. Not so today. Their "magic money tree” function is no longer a mystery thanks to men like US Senator Ron Paul who promoted an “Audit The Fed” campaign in the 1990s. He helped Americans to better understand the true nature of banking after the gold standard was abandoned in 1971.

The Abundant Fruits of the Magic Money Tree

Subsidizing Federal Entities: The Trudeau Government enjoys an unending supply of funds. Central banks generate money at will, ensuring that federal departments, crown corporations (such as the CBC), and numerous agencies thrive. These financial resources flow freely, enabling the government to support its various endeavors on ever growing levels of credit and public debt.

Bribing for Loyalty: The "pixified money pool" and the “magic money tree” both serve as a potent tools for securing loyalty. Rank-and-file, tax-funded public sector employees receive regular nudges towards political allegiance towards the politicians and public administrators who promise and deliver wage increases and employment perks. Of course, these outcomes are often facilitated by labor union leaders who are well known for claiming these “successes” to justify the ongoing existence of their existence.

Bribes also work in external spheres of government ‘influence’ comprising a crony network of “partners’. They too expect to receive ‘loyalty incentives.’ Legacy media corporations are an example. In 2018, Justin Trudeau unveiled the annual $595 million "media bailout fund." Ostensibly created to help the industry to survive Internet competition, it raised widespread and legitimate questions about journalistic independence. These concerns remain to this day as the “bailout” continues. Would corporate media executives risk offending the very hand that feeds them?

Election Dynamics: The Honey Pot Effect

As elections loom, citizens who typically exchange loyalty for honey pot "gifts" usually remain steadfastly loyal to the most generous promises made and kept in the past. The generous use of OPM (‘other people’s money) by the federal Liberal Party, and the Ontario Liberal and NDP parties, accounts for much of their past vote-garnering success. This is especially true among those who benefit from this transfer of wealth the most. At the polls, the fact that their appreciation translates into votes is a powerful testament to the honey pot's influence.

Justin Trudeau's strategic political advantage is clear. It will last as long as he remains the most powerful custodian of the honey pot, flanked by people like Jagmeet Singh, Chrystia Freeland and Steven Guilbeault. Trudeau is an expert player of "the bribery game" by skillfully leveraging the honey pot to secure an unrivalled election advantage. Liberal party leaders have always been adept players of this game which explains their historically unprecedented grip on power. Only when caught with their hands inappropriately in the honey pot did voters elect to dethrone them.

Why “Digital Communism”?

As discussed, modern Communism transcends mere ownership of physical assets. It masters the loyalty game, leverages enormous amounts of digital and Human Resources, and it enables an elite class to exert strategic influence within a national and international ‘honey pot’ paradigm.

This ‘Digital Communism’ is my term for this dynamic interplay that is actively shaping our world. In this intricate dance of money, loyalty, and power, the magic money tree continues to cast its spell over Canadian politics.