Power, Deception, and Control, Part 2

Critiquing the Global Elite's Influence on Sovereignty and Rights

As citizens of the world and of individual nations like my beloved United States, it is crucial to remain vigilant and informed. By understanding the nature and extent of these influences, societies can begin to reclaim their autonomy. This process involves local initiatives and action, demanding rights, holding power structures accountable, and participating actively in the democratic or in America's case, the republican  process. History has shown us time and again that when people unite for a common cause, significant change is possible. It is through this unity and resilience that we can hope to address the challenges posed by these global power structures and work towards a more equitable and just world order.

When scrutinizing large organizations, particularly those international and massive non-governmental organizations, it's vital to penetrate the often-present veneer of benevolence. These entities frequently project an image of working for the greater good of humanity or the citizens of various nations. However, a deeper examination into their operations, beyond what is stated in their mission statements and public documents, reveals a more complex reality.

The 'human factor' is a crucial element in this analysis. This term refers not to the noble aspirations of humanity, but rather to its more shadowy inclinations. Acknowledging the darker aspects of human nature is essential in understanding these organizations. While they may be composed of individuals with a range of motivations, the overarching drive within these entities often leans towards self-interest, sometimes manifesting as greed, self-indulgence, or even deriving satisfaction from the detriment of others.

These organizations are not impersonal or abstract entities; they are made up of people whose decisions and actions are influenced by a spectrum of human motivations, behaviors, and ethical considerations. The human aspect within these systems is what introduces the possibility of both maintaining the status quo and fostering change or progress. However, the critical question is: Whose status quo is being maintained, and who benefits from the so-called progress?

The human factor in relation to these vast networks of organizations is complex. While there are undoubtedly individuals within these groups motivated by altruism and a genuine desire to do good, history also provides ample evidence of those driven by less noble intentions. Throughout human history, there have been instances of individuals and groups whose wealth and power were used for malevolent purposes, inflicting significant harm on humanity.

Therefore, understanding the true nature of these organizations requires a vigilant observation of their actions and intentions. It involves peeling back the layers to reveal the true motivations behind their initiatives and the actual impact of their influence. This scrutiny is not just a matter of academic interest but a crucial step in holding these entities accountable and ensuring that their influence is wielded in a manner that genuinely benefits humanity rather than serving the interests of a select few.

The human factor in these large organizations is a double-edged sword. It brings with it the potential for significant positive change but also carries the risk of perpetuating harmful practices and policies driven by self-interest. To utterly understand and potentially reshape the influence these organizations have, one must critically examine their actions, motivations, and the ethical considerations at play.

Human Influence in Think Tanks and Policy Groups in Global Affairs:

Think tanks and policy groups are often depicted as shadowy architects behind major global events, wielding far more influence than publicly acknowledged. Their reach is not limited to advisory roles; instead, they are seen as key players in shaping and manipulating international policies and conflicts. These entities, believed to be controlled by elite groups and governments, are accused of engineering complex geopolitical scenarios for hidden agendas.

Their involvement in global affairs ranges from fabricating intelligence that precipitates military interventions to orchestrating events like the Arab Spring. These actions, allegedly at the behest of Western governments and private elite interests, aimed to destabilize governments in strategic regions like the Middle East and North Africa. By providing strategic support and propaganda, they are accused of fueling political unrest to control resources and alter the geopolitical landscape to benefit Western powers.

These think tanks and policy groups are implicated in orchestrating financial and environmental catastrophes, such as the 2008 financial crisis and the Amazon rainforest fires. These events are seen as part of a calculated strategy to disrupt economies and ecosystems, benefiting a select few at the expense of many. The financial crisis, in particular, is viewed as a deliberate destabilization tactic to restructure global financial power dynamics.

Their influence is also suspected in shaping global environmental policies, where they promote agendas that benefit corporate interests under the guise of environmental conservation. These manipulations are thought to extend to social and political spheres, where they are believed to sway public opinion and government policies to align with the objectives of hidden power brokers.

Think tanks and policy groups are portrayed as a covert network, intricately involved in directing the course of global events. Their extensive influence is theorized to span across political, financial, and environmental domains, orchestrating events, and crises to serve the interests of a global elite, often at the cost of widespread socio-economic and environmental repercussions.

Central Banks and Financial Institutions: Orchestrating Global Economic Crises for Dominance

Central banks and major financial institutions are frequently implicated as masterminds behind significant economic upheavals, particularly the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997. These entities, often in conjunction with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), are accused of deliberately manipulating financial markets to trigger currency devaluations across Asian economies. The alleged motive behind this orchestration was to destabilize these economies, creating opportunities for Western corporations and banks to acquire valuable regional assets at substantially lowered costs, thus expanding their economic influence and dominance.

Beyond the Asian crisis, these financial institutions, and alliances, including the IMF and World Bank, are viewed as key players in a larger strategy for global economic control. They are theorized to systematically induce financial crises, not just as isolated events but as part of an ongoing effort to extend their influence over national economies. Their involvement in developing countries, in particular, is seen as a form of modern imperialism or economic colonialism. By enforcing stringent austerity measures and restructuring policies, they are alleged to deliberately impoverished nations, enriching a global elite while fostering dependency and social unrest among the poorer populations.

This strategic manipulation of economies is seen as part of a grand scheme for global economic governance. The goal, according to these theories, is to create a world order where a few powerful entities exert control over the global economy, shaping it to their advantage. These actions by central banks and financial alliances are viewed as deliberate, calculated moves to centralize power and wealth, perpetuating a cycle of economic crises that serve to reinforce their dominance while undermining the sovereignty and financial stability of nations worldwide.

Legislative and Regulatory Bodies: Instruments for Corporate Gain and Societal Control

They are responsible for creating and enforcing laws and regulations that govern economic and financial activities. Their decisions are often influenced by global economic trends, international standards, and policy recommendations emanating from think tanks and policy groups. These bodies play a pivotal role in maintaining the stability and integrity of financial systems, yet their policies can be swayed by external pressures and global market dynamics.

The creation and enforcement of laws and regulations are deeply human endeavors, shaped by the values, beliefs, and priorities of those in power, as well as by public opinion and social movements. Legislative and regulatory bodies have played significant roles in events and policies that have led to widespread societal and health crises. They are often depicted as being deeply entangled with corporate interests, facilitating actions that benefit certain corporations at the expense of public welfare.

In the United States, the opioid crisis is a glaring example of this complicity. Major pharmaceutical companies are accused of aggressively marketing highly addictive opioids, while regulatory bodies like the FDA are alleged to have been influenced by intense lobbying efforts from these companies. This collusion has been seen as a strategic move to create a vast consumer base dependent on these drugs, leading to widespread addiction and numerous deaths. The crisis is viewed not just as a public health catastrophe but also as a calculated strategy for profit maximization, with little regard for the devastating consequences.

Beyond the health sector, legislative and regulatory bodies have historically enacted or failed to prevent policies with detrimental societal impacts. Laws like the Jim Crow in the United States, which institutionalized racial segregation and discrimination, are seen as deliberate strategies to maintain societal divisions and control. Similarly, the lack of effective regulation in critical industries such as pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and environmental protection has led to numerous public health crises and environmental disasters. These missteps are often viewed not as mere negligence, but as calculated moves to allow certain corporations and interest groups to profit at the expense of public health and the environment.

These bodies have been implicated in facilitating industrial accidents and environmental disasters. Incidents like the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the Flint water crisis are examples where regulatory failures or oversights have had catastrophic consequences. In these cases, regulatory bodies are accused of failing to enforce safety standards or turning a blind eye to violations, leading to preventable disasters.

Legislative and regulatory bodies are often seen as instruments manipulated by powerful entities to further their own agendas. Whether it's through direct involvement in promoting harmful policies or through failure to regulate effectively, these bodies are accused of contributing to large-scale public health issues, environmental disasters, and societal inequalities, often for the benefit of private interests and at the expense of the general populace.

ESG Criteria: A Tool for Corporate Deception and Environmental Exploitation

ESG-focused entities lobby for the incorporation of sustainability and social responsibility into legal frameworks. This influence extends to financial alliances and initiatives that increasingly adopt ESG criteria in their investment decisions. Additionally, think tanks and policy groups contribute to the development of ESG standards and frameworks, shaping the discourse and practices around sustainability and corporate responsibility. 

The growing emphasis on ESG reflects a shift in human values towards greater corporate responsibility and sustainability. The concept of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria, designed to promote sustainability and ethical practices, has increasingly come under scrutiny for its misapplication and misuse by large corporations. These entities, particularly in sectors like oil, mining, and agriculture, are accused of exploiting environmental resources while craftily using the veil of ESG criteria to mask their detrimental activities.

'Greenwashing' has become a widespread practice among these corporations. They engage in elaborate PR campaigns, exaggerating or fabricating their commitment to environmental responsibility and sustainability. This deceitful tactic is aimed at misleading consumers and investors, creating an illusion of environmental stewardship while continuing practices that significantly harm the environment. This misrepresentation is not just for maintaining a public image; it is alleged to be a deeper, more insidious strategy to deflect criticism and avoid regulatory scrutiny.

Some of the most controversial allegations involve companies directly linked to large-scale deforestation, oceanic pollution, and other forms of environmental degradation. They are believed to use ESG rhetoric as a façade to obscure their ongoing harmful practices. For example, companies involved in the palm oil industry are often accused of contributing to deforestation and habitat destruction while portraying themselves as champions of sustainability.

These companies exert influence over the very standards and definitions of ESG criteria, manipulating them to fit their operations while avoiding any meaningful change in their environmental impact. This manipulation extends to influencing policy and regulatory frameworks, ensuring that ESG criteria remain favorable to their business models.

The misapplication of ESG criteria has thus become a controversial and heated topic, with accusations that it serves more as a tool for corporate deception and environmental exploitation rather than a genuine effort towards sustainability. This practice has raised significant concerns about the credibility of ESG ratings and the integrity of companies that purportedly adhere to these standards, casting doubt on the effectiveness of ESG criteria in driving real environmental and social change.

Global Economic Systems: Instruments of Inequality and Engineered Crises

The global economic system, with its intricate web of interactions and policies, has frequently been implicated in perpetuating deep-seated inequality and exploitation. Colonial and post-colonial economic policies, for instance, have a long history of facilitating resource exploitation and widening economic disparities across the globe. These policies, often implemented in the guise of development and progress, have disproportionately benefited former colonial powers and their corporate interests, leaving behind a legacy of impoverishment and dependency in many parts of the world.

Global trade practices have been criticized for being heavily skewed in favor of more powerful nations and multinational corporations. This imbalance has led to the exploitation of labor and natural resources in less developed countries. Smaller economies, lacking the clout to negotiate equitable terms, often find themselves marginalized, their local industries and agriculture overshadowed or destroyed by the influx of foreign goods and capital. This situation has exacerbated economic disparities, contributing to a cycle of poverty and underdevelopment in these regions.

To be continued…….

Written by SpartanAltsobaPatriot

References:

1. Government Officials and Policymakers: These individuals often have the power to enact laws and regulations that can directly affect the operations and policies of these organizations.

2. These funders can have a significant influence on the organization’s priorities and activities.

3. Board Members and Executives: The individuals who hold leadership positions within these organizations often have a significant influence over their strategic direction and operations.

4. This is particularly true for trade organizations and economic forums.

5. These individuals can influence these organizations through their research findings.

6. Media coverage can also influence these organizations by shaping public perception and drawing attention to certain issues.

7. International Bodies: International bodies like the United Nations can influence these organizations through their global policies and initiatives.

8. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): NGOs often work closely with these organizations and can influence their policies and activities.

9. Please note that the level of influence that these entities or individuals have can vary greatly depending on the specific organization and context

10. 5 Think Tanks That Have Successfully Impacted Public Policy - The Kolabtree Blog

11. Abelson, D. E. (2006).
    Title: A Capitol Idea: Think Tanks & US Foreign Policy
    Publisher: McGill-Queen's University Press
    Reference ID: Abelson2006

12. Abelson, D. E. (2018).
    Title: Do Think Tanks Matter? Assessing the Impact of Public Policy Institutes
    Publisher: McGill-Queen's University Press
    Reference ID: Abelson2018

13. Abelson, D.E. & C.J. Rastrick (Eds.) (2021).
    Title: Handbook on Think Tanks in Public Policy
    Reference ID: ref3

14. Braml, J. (2017).
    Chapter: Germany: The Think and the Tank
    In: Think Tanks, Foreign Policy and Geo-Politics: Pathways to Influence
    Edited by: Abelson, D. E., Brooks, S., & Hua, X.
    Publisher: Routledge
    Reference ID: Braml2017

15. Drezner, D. W. (2017).
    Title: The Ideas Industry: How Pessimists, Partisans, and Plutocrats are Transforming the Marketplace of Ideas
    Publisher: Oxford University Press
    Reference ID: Drezner2017

16. McGann, J. G. (2021).
    Title: 2020 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report. Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program
    Publisher: University of Pennsylvania
    Reference ID: McGann2021

17. Medvetz, T. (2012).
    Title: Think Tanks in America
    Publisher: University of Chicago Press
    URL: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226517308.001.0001
    DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226517308.001.0001
    Reference ID: Medvetz2012

18. Menegazzi, S. (2018).
    Title: Rethinking Think Tanks in Contemporary China
    Publisher: Springer
    URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57300-7
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-57300-7
    Reference ID: Menegazzi2018

19. Pautz, H. (2012).
    Title: Think Tanks, Social Democracy, and Social Policy
    Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
    URL: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230368545
    DOI: 10.1057/9780230368545
    Reference ID: Pautz2012