If technocracy is not studied it may be difficult to understand how it works and affects everyone, but China offers a clue. 

While China is often perceived as a communist state, it is really run by one political party, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  The CCP controls everything and dissent is not tolerated, no opposition parties are allowed, and those who are critical of the government can be persecuted.  The political structure has several layers and commands unity resulting in a centralized government.

China's transition to using technocracy as a tool for social control began in the 1980's, waned briefly, then again increased with President Xi Jinping since 2013.  As technology has advanced over the last decade, so has technocracy been rejuvenated in China.

So much for an extremely brief summation of China and its integration of technocracy.  The real grit of the matter is how it can be understood on a personal level.  Under China's social credit system, technocracy is easily recognized.  Based on data collected from surveillance of all types and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze it,  it is a "you will comply" system as well as engineering humans to behave and think only in the way in which the government allows.

Here we have a compliant CGTN reporter, Liu Chen, who very happily explains way back in 2014 how the social credit system works and the importance, and benefit, of compliance.

Notice how she comments that she can't afford to own anything as she starts driving around in the rented car, a World Economic Forum (WEF) prediction.  She proceeds to use her digital ID for access to her financial credit report which uses shared information from commercial institutions.  Today, given its massive surveillance system, China is also having to expand its data storage capacity with data centers.  Being a non-compliant citizen in China will restrict freedom of movement, access to food and recreation, insurance, and housing options.  At the end, she announces social credits systems have been used for decades and somehow equates it to a "better life".

In this short 2019 video, the "good and bad citizen" aspect of China's social credit system is explained. While acknowledging the positive aspects of this system, one young lady explains, "Anyway, we don't have a choice".  By using data from multiple sources, one individual declares the government will build a "moral society".  Purchases made by that debit card or phone are used to detail bad habits along with surveillance capturing and storing social media posts that reveal negative thoughts about the government.  Public shaming for bad behavior is an everyday norm.  Some call it a "digital dictatorship" with a "loss of freedom".  This system has only become better with AI.

Here is a more recent perspective of how the China social credit system works.  As explained in the video, the smart phone is at the core of this system, life can't be managed without one.  It is the collector of information on everything one does every day.  Ushered in by the Covid-19 event, the QR code became the collector.  So advanced has the system become, it is now transitioning to facial recognition as the means of getting through the day.  Another reason data centers are so desperately needed; to store the diverse and complicated data so AI can analyze every human for control.

Now, not everyone perceives China as having a dystopian credit score system as explained by the gentleman in this video.  He indicates that the whole world operates under a similar system.  It is interesting how he perceives this as being a no big deal and explains it in such a way that could lead one to believe that indeed, the U.S. does already operate under a similar system.

At its core, technocracy is the science of social engineering.  China exemplifies technocracy through its social credit system, using big data and technology to monitor and regulate citizen behavior, and effectively expanding state control over social and moral conduct. Data sources are integrated, creating a framework that prioritizes social management that is driven by technology.

One danger not addressed is the ability of the technocratic state to control resources to populations, regardless of compliance.  Another hallmark of technocracy is the control over all production and consumption of resources.  The question has to be asked, how far could a malicious government proceed toward a more totalitarian, immoral state.  

Maybe we are already in a soft social credit system.  The question is do we still have a choice or has the Constitution been so eroded that it is too late.

This is an update to a 1/22/25 article, Stargate Will Throw America Into The Great Reset.

Just as Covid-19 was used as justification to usher in the Great Reset, with vaccines, masks, and isolation rescuing everyone from the virus's carnage, it appears this election outcome may be doing the same.  As America has been disintegrating over the last four years, attention is only being paid to Executive Orders (EO) that rescue Americans and the Constitution from the carnage.  However, this rescue is the next step towards implementation of the Great Reset, also called the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4th IR).

President Trump's announcement of Stargate, an artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure project, is in the process of  building its first data center in Texas, with plans to eventually build around ten throughout the United States.  This endeavor actually began under former President Biden.  These data centers "are needed for the development of AI projects in the US" and will "support the re-industrialization of the United States."  That is a perfect fit for the 4th IR.  Data centers require a massive amount of energy and will also use renewable energy to generate enough without affecting supplies to local areas.

While a full exposure on what these AI projects will be wasn't provided, there are many instances of how the federal government uses AI, including the military.  The only example provided was on health.  As explained at the announcement, data will be collected from electronic health records and shared, not once mentioning whether or not consent would be obtained. 

According to Oracle co-founder, Larry Ellison, AI can assist with diagnosing disease such as cancer.  This in turn could contribute to the development of mRNA vaccines, especially an mRNA cancer vaccine.  This is a misguided statement as cancer vaccines are far from being fully researched.  As one study states, "Despite the promise of AI-powered cancer vaccines, significant challenges remain".  Apparently Ellison didn't get the memo on the dangers and harm caused by mRNA technology.  Through its Stage-2 artificial general intelligence (AGI), these entrepreneurs seem perfectly okay with AI giving a physician a note telling them what to do for your treatment.  Mr. Ellison's statement is a ruse for enticing enthusiasm and acceptance of this project.  Also of concern is the continued massive funding for mRNA vaccines by President Trump.

Or perhaps another medical "AI project" could assist the already established relationship between the Department of Defense and Big Tech companies to transform the healthcare system to one that is driven by AI. 

This project was created between World Economic Forum (WEF) partners Oracle, OpenAI, and Softbank.  Even Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO and WEF contributor, admits to the dangers of AI itself and was even removed once as CEO because of concern over his "handling of artificial intelligence safety."  Elon Musk has also expressed concern over Mr. Altman's questionable ethical behavior.  As part of the Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Altman admitted AI is not good in "life-and-death situations", has limitations, and "we should not expect more than it can do." 

At the announcement, no mention was made about safety concerns with AI or governance over it, even though that work had begun which President Trump rescinded.  In its place a new Executive Order (EO) was issued with undefined  guidance from his previous term.  In addition, other EO's include one to create an AI Action Plan,   So concerning are the multiple dangers of AI, let alone the multiple dangers in healthcare, the WEF has formed an AI Governance Alliance, like they should be trusted with anything.

But there is another area where this type of system is being implemented.  Although the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is being touted as streamlining government by ridding it of waste and abuse, it is really about "modernizing Federal technology and software", and a reorganizing and modernization of the already existing United States Digital Service (USDS).  USDS also began with healthcare back in the Obama days, managing such services as farmers, Medicare, Veterans affairs, and military members.  DOGE will be its new name.

The DOGE goal is to improve "government-wide software, network infrastructure, and information technology (IT) systems" and promote inter-operability between agencies while ensuring "data collection and synchronization."  While AI is not specifically mentioned, job qualifications for USDS does include AI skills.  There is no reason to believe that AI won't be used to sort through all this data for better efficiency.  Using AI will downsize these areas of the government but not in the way we have been led to believe, and will most likely spread to other government agencies eventually.  As a result of these functions being taken over by AI, job losses should be anticipated.  With building out the AI infrastructure, everyone will eventually be sucked into this AI data pit and OpenAI has its blueprint ready to go.

President Trump understands AI as a competitive race with China but may not realize he is taking us down the path of destruction by the WEF.  It is clearly a path that is being decided for humanity, whether wanted or not.  The quandary for President Trump is how can the United States step out of the path it is being forced into?  If the rest of the world is on the AI path, how would it be possible to not follow, or even survive?  It will take all countries to stand up and reject this 4th IR trajectory. 

The most devastating aspect of this project is that it is a dream come true for WEF by putting into place the very system that will drive the 4th IR, AI.  Once in place, everything will be turned over to AI with surveillance, gathering of data on everyone, and eventual decision making over every human.

Obviously, there are millions of Americans who are thrilled with the return of President Trump and he has taken immediate corrective action to get America back on the right path.  However, he should be scrutinized as closely as any other person in that job.  He has surrounded himself with technocrats who would like nothing better than to execute a technocracy in a 4th IR style, and Stargate highlights that technocracy with its AI infrastructure. 

Patrick Wood is the leading authority on technocracy.  In his interview starting at the 14:08" mark, he talks with Alex Newman about concerns over technocracy being brought to the government by Elon Musk and others in DOGE through the use of AI, which is pretty much validated by the EOs.  As Mr. Wood states, technocrats don't talk the same language which is why information on Stargate activities is unspecified, and why DOGE has been misrepresented.  An example of how detached a technocratic world can be is through its substitution of human contact with a robot dog.  Heed Mr. Wood's warning.

President Trump addressed the WEF at the annual Davos meeting on January 23.  He did not give any indication of supporting the WEF 4th IR agenda, and went so far as to criticize many of the Agenda 2030 actions that have been forced upon America.  However, he did mention becoming the "world capital of artificial intelligence".  Does he understand AI is the driving force behind the 4th IR, a Davos theme in 2024, and renamed the Collaboration for the Intelligent Age this year?  Or is the Stargate project his way of participating in the 4th IR?

Congress has been working on the AI issue, as well as some states.  But it is critical that everyone becomes more involved with their elected officials before the dangers of AI have gone too far.  Right now, with Stargate and DOGE, it doesn't appear there has been any representation on those decisions.

Stargate is a threat to America and Americans but not engaging in AI is also a threat from the rest of the world.  A comprehensive governance structure for America is needed before it goes any further as the 4th IR rapidly moves forward. 

A basic understanding of technocracy can be found here.

Like flock cameras, data centers are the latest issue for opposition.  Among many issues, their massive use of water resources, excessive need for electricity, and of course, their purpose of storing and analyzing data that citizens are being robbed of are all at the top of the list for opposition.  But these centers are behind everything conducted on a computer over the internet such as sending emails, streaming shows, or making a payment with a card, and have been usurping our data the whole time.  However, there may be more to the story than what the public does understand about data centers.

Data centers contain computers, anywhere from a few hundred to over 2.6 million depending on its purpose.  Obviously, the larger number of computers the more drain on resources.  To support those computers there are also servers, storage units, networking systems, cooling systems, backup power units, and security protections.  All of this can range from small rooms to areas as large as one million square feet.  Large corporations like Microsoft, Facebook, and Google take up the most space and are capable of connecting to other data centers.  There are over 3,567 operational data centers in the U.S., with over 1,000 in the planning process or being built.

What may not be understood is that there are different types of data centers, having different purposes.  An enterprise data center is owned and run by an organization on its own property for its own use and under its direct control.  Examples are banks, hospitals, and government agencies.  

As that organization grows, it may need what is called a colocation data center.  This is space that can be rented out instead of an organization housing the data center itself.

Then there is the Hyperscale Data Centers.  These data centers are massive and capable of growing even larger for "large-scale workloads".  They are widely used globally for data processing and storage, artificial intelligence (AI), and data analytics.  A hyperscale data center typically handles 5,000 or more servers in a space of 10,000 square feet.

Cloud Data Centers are "a collection of networked computer servers that provide remote computing resources and storage to individuals and organizations" that can be accessed over the internet, often referred to as cloud computing.  They are often operated by third party service providers such as global corporations.  

Added to the list are Edge Data Centers.  As the name implies, these are smaller data centers located close to a network where client data is processed.  Information can be processed quickly and for increased analysis needs it can be sent to a larger data center.

As can be seen, we have been surrounded by data centers for decades and with AI it is becoming a bigger nightmare, and threat.  AI data centers are needed because of its IT infrastructure that trains, deploys, and delivers AI applications and services.  Its computer, network, storage, energy, and cooling capabilities are designed to handle AI workloads.

Literally, it is at the point where AI data centers are needed just to accommodate AI and its special needs.  No longer is data being floated around and stored, AI now needs the system that will process that data and a data center design that will support it.  Data gravity, which is based on the idea that large data systems tend to attract other applications and services, will naturally increase the demand for AI and its ability to process that data, thus demanding the need for redesigned AI data centers.

It isn't enough for citizens to oppose data centers at a local level.  Adding insult to injury, Trump has now proposed building these centers on federal land, as if federal government authority exists to do that.  "The U.S. government is leveraging its assets...?  How brazen is this thought, that the federal government claims land as its own asset and seizes it for its own intentions even though citizens have loudly voiced objections to those intentions.  "Repurposing" is not a word that should be substituted for using land that belongs to the People.  These AI data centers are moving forward to be built on federal land in Idaho, Tennessee, Kentucky, and South Carolina, however, sixteen sites have been identified for possible development.

The meta data center built in Kuna, Idaho is an AI data center while one is being opposed in Pocatello, with other Idaho areas being considered.  Idaho is a target for data centers because it is so rural. 

An AI data center "is a strategic node in a data ecosystem. It hosts gravity, enables performance, and anchors AI workflows."  Simply put, as data amounts grow, AI data centers are being strategically placed near data to better integrate and manage the "ecosystem".

High energy and water demands are the prominent issues with these data centers.  However, what lurks in the shadows is the real threat.  AI data centers bring the foundation in which the technocratic state will operate.  All data on humans, the environment, and everything that makes the world go around will be surrendered to AI data centers for analysis.  Down to the last drop, AI will be able to use that data to determine, for example, how much food needs to be grown and how it is allocated as was done during WWII, or what consequences dissenters should receive in order to reshape their behavior.  Another dichotomy, saving the planet at the cost of destroying it.  Like locusts, resources are already being explored beyond earth just for AI data centers.

Fifty-six years ago the futuristic movie, Colossus: The Forbin Project, even without mentioning AI, brought to light the distinct possibility that computers could easily build their own totalitarian ecosystem that could then rule over all.  Yes, it is science fiction, but understanding these data centers and AI in their functioning brings it much closer to a possible reality.  After all, AI has already demonstrated its ability to go rogue.  Today. no mention is made about AI linking together all systems into a one world technological system, but it would have the capability.  But the question is still being asked.  Building a technological gulag, like Russia or China, is also a real danger which Alex Newman touches on at the 2" mark in this video.

Come rain or shine, it is easy to see how over the years this massive control grid continues to be put into place.  Beyond opposing local data centers, the larger picture, the end goal, warrants the attention and understanding.  The real threat is how these AI data centers can potentially be used to establish the technocratic control grid, the primary reason they should be opposed.

Healthcare has been a constant government obsession for decades, and over the years has continued to take gradual control over it.  What is befuddling is the motive behind doing so.  It is unclear just exactly what the fascination is that motivates the government to stick its nose into a person's private health matters.

Not being enough to target the more populated areas, now the government is coming after rural healthcare.  

Tucked inside the tax relief goodies in Public Law 119-21, also known as the 2025 Reconciliation Act, rather the "Big Beautiful Bill", was the new Rural Health Transformation Program (RHTP) (pg 139 STAT 327).  This program was assigned to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to administer.  In is explanation, the program "empowers states to strengthen rural communities across America by improving healthcare access, quality, and outcomes by transforming the healthcare delivery ecosystem."  Uh-Huh.  

To grab some of this money, Governor Little created the Idaho Rural Health Taskforce on October 17, 2025 to assist with the application for this program that included "representatives from the Legislature, State Board of Education, Workforce Development Council, Military Division" and "Tribal governments".  Military?  Member names are a mystery.  Along the way this will also flourish into "regional and strategic partnerships" that will involve "Information sharing and data use agreements" and a "secure data-sharing infrastructure". 

In its first few meetings (members still a mystery), topics included using the money for healthcare provider childcare, housing support, workforce assessments, wages, work based learning, expanding high school or community college healthcare profession programs, healthcare facility remodels, and digital health as just a few topics.

On November 4, 2025, the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare (DHW) submitted its application to CMS for RHTP funds, receiving the initial award from CMS on December 29, 2025.  On January 30, 2026 DHW submitted a revised budget narrative for salary and wages, and revised budget to CMS.  From February to October, 2026, Requests for Proposals and contracts were executed, and All Year funds were obligated.

DHW promised CMS it would improve rural access to care through technology; ensure accessible quality care through innovative models; sustain rural workforce with training, recruitment, and retention; implement population specific, evidence-based projects to Make America Healthy; and invest in rural health infrastructure and partnerships, pretty close to the RHTP objectives.  RHTP also sneaks in artificial intelligence (AI) to rural health (Rural Cybersecurity & Artificial Intelligence Modernization Program Subgrants-pg 12) and Health Management & Data Analytics Subgrants (pg 14) which Idaho chose to adopt. 

How convenient, this federal program is devised to suck massive amounts of health care data into the federal system.

Idaho Senate Bill 1453 was passed into law on April 10, 2026.  Its purpose was a FY 2027 appropriation bill for DHW, establishing the RHTP fund, and creating the Rural Health Transformation Committee (members) for oversight of the program.  Basically, now state agencies can engage in federal programs, decide how the money will be spent, with a state committee being assigned after the fact to watch over it without authority.  Needless to say, the money will only be used for "federally approved purposes“.

What is hysterical, when one thinks about rural ares in Idaho, a few small towns might come to mind, especially those in those recreational areas.  The RHTP definition lists 96% of the whole state as rural.

DHW touts its "collaboration" with others by obtaining input from "more than 500" stakeholders and public respondents from September 5–30, 2025.  Of the actual 503 respondents, 216 were public and 287 were rural health stakeholders.  Doesn't sound like this request for input was widely distributed, with what looks like a broader distribution to those who would financially gain from the funding.  Those rural health stakeholders included "healthcare associations, nonprofits, RHCs, CAHs, FQHCs, primary care and behavioral health providers, dental providers, rural hospitals, independent clinics, educational institutions, Native nations" and "local governments".

Senator Brian Lenny posted a commentary on this new program, Nobody in Idaho Voted for This, on August 4, 2026.  He has legitimate concerns that the establishment of this program didn't involve the legislature, the program answers to Washington, and in his summary the assigned Rural Health Transformation Committee will only receive a monthly summary of awards and will have no vote or approval on any award.

Sen. Lenny goes on to report that funding of around $3.1 million for the Idaho Perinatal Quality Collaborative will go to Comagine Health for consultation to "reimagine, redesign and implement sustainable improvements in the health care system."  Comagine consults with many U.S. states on healthcare.  Oh, and Comagine loves to integrate data.  No surprise as one of its clients is CMS.  Lo and behold, the Department of Health & Human Services funds Comagine.  He goes on to express concerns about conflict of interest and how decisions were made regarding this federal program.

Better healthcare my patootie.  This whole government program is designed to upgrade rural infrastructure so personal health information of increased masses can be integrated into a federal digitized, data driven surveillance system.  Retrofitting buildings, integrating AI, providing childcare to healthcare workers, creating career paths, and building housing...none of those seem to correlate to a diabetic getting healthier.  

Nothing in this information is meant to disparage those who in reality are having difficulty getting healthcare whether it is due to cost, inability to get to medical care, or because there is limited healthcare available.  It is intended to reflect how the federal government continues to encroach its objectives into states and into the personal lives of Americans.

If the powers that be really want to know the difficulty an individual experiences in obtaining healthcare, then they should be asking those individuals.  Putting an individual's health information into a data system run by AI, then sharing that information across states and with the federal government doesn't improve anyone's health.

Where did it all start?  Computers, data collection, data storage, artificial intelligence data analysis, advanced data collection technology, interoperability for sharing data between computers, data centers to store more data.  With such "investments" by the government in these new technologies the government now has to take action to protect all of it.

Now that the United States, and the world for that matter, continues building these digital infrastructure monsters, there is a term that has been recently garnering more attention called digital sovereignty.  The easiest way to explain its meaning is it being the "capacity of a state, organization, or individual to independently control digital infrastructure, data, and decision-making processes within their jurisdiction."  Of course, everyone wants control over its own monster.

As the digital age continues to explode, both the United States and other countries are scrambling to get control over their own infrastructure and data systems.  Continuing to believe in its omnipotence as the one and only authority, the United Nations (UN) released its Global Digital Compact in 2025 for digital cooperation and governance over artificial intelligence (AI), a primary nucleus in a technological monster.

The UN doesn't like the idea of sovereignty in anything including the digital world, and opposes tech company efforts having control over its own digital world.  Instead, the UN wants "global cooperation on digital development, access and inclusion" and that "digital technologies – including AI – are governed in ways that protect human rights...".  Its main emphasis is multilateral cooperation over unilateral control.  What the UN really wants is access to everything for its own global control appetite.  

The U.S. Department of State has its own ideas on digital sovereignty while mocking the UN kumbaya ideology.  However, its interpretation is somewhat different than what is espoused by the UN, instead describing it as the UN wanting "every nation to build its own AI stack."  Instead, the State Department explains, "Digital sovereignty was never a wall, and it was never a copy. It was always a frontier—and the only nations that will be digitally sovereign in the age of intelligence are the ones bold enough to keep pushing it outward, into the territory no one has built yet."  Sounds like a spin off from Star Trek.

So, in place of the U.S. being digitally sovereign, it has instead chosen to drag another twenty-four countries into its Pax Silica Declaration.  Built around an economic concept, the declaration incorporates many facets of digital technology including technology supply chains, software applications and platforms, information connectivity and network infrastructure, compute and semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, transportation logistics, minerals refining and processing and energy, ecosystems of AI developers and vendors, information and communication technology systems, fiberoptic cables, and data centers.  It is a digitally sovereign conglomeration between countries.  When looking at this, it appears there is a whole technological world being built that humanity will be forced to live under. 

Initially resistant to cooperation, the European Commission has now relented to being part of the Declaration, perhaps because of a $250 million dangling carrot.  Already there have been summits that fully mesh governments together with the private sector and other organizations.  Once called fascism or corporatism, it has been renamed "collaborative governance", now on a global scale.  Naturally, it is only for our well-being and security. 

This was even more evident with its Joint Statement on AI Opportunity with even more countries focusing on “empowering builders, startups, developers and the private sector while securing global AI supply chains.”  A new workforce development school will be formed by Stanford University and the State Department called the Foundry School initiative.  With a $50 million dollar carrot, it also created Pax Pass that will streamline the movement of critical AI goods.  

Under Secretary Jacob Helberg "framed the initiative as an alternative to approaches centered on digital sovereignty”.  Helberg's resume is concerning as the Senior Advisor to the Chief Executive Officer of Palantir Technologies, former lead for Google's internal global product policy efforts, and Sam Altman conducting his marriage.  Just another technocrat undermining our Republic while usurping control away from citizen representation. 

This approach isn't an alternative on digital sovereignty, it is isolating control under one massive group of countries acting collectively as a sovereign, having supreme authority and power over digital infrastructures.  Helberg himself even describes the Foundry for "those who can harness AI to transform the physical world" and foster an "AI economy".  What the heck does either of those things mean?

In a post by Nayef Al-Nabet, he states, "Building #Digital_Sovereignty is not about isolation; it is about building national capabilities through strategic partnerships.  For countries like #Qatar, its participation in #Pax_Silica, together with its strong strategic partnership with the United States, should create more opportunities for collaborations of this kind—connecting researchers, universities, and future policymakers to world-class AI ecosystems.  That is how countries build lasting #Digital_Sovereignty."  Pax Silica isn't a country; it is a thing.

This whole misnomer of "digital sovereignty" was previously addressed at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 2025.  It has nothing to do with sovereignty as an American may understand the term, it has to with control and economics to "include fostering entrepreneurship and funding innovation".  Essentially, the sovereignty is about "control over your own digital destiny – the data, hardware and software that you rely on and create."  Pax Silica, by controlling the goods, supply chains, and elements that make it work, creates that economic sovereignty by controlling every element.

WEF clearly understands this digital sovereignty spiel is a "strategic concern – rather than a purely technological one – due to geopolitical tensions, intricate financing structures and the digitization of public services" and that "economies should shape their AI infrastructure choices around flexibility and future readiness."  That is exactly what Pax Silica is doing.

In fact. this WEF article lays out the framework exactly for Pax Silica and what it is doing.  Maintaining "strategic control over critical technologies, ensuring sovereignty becomes a stimulus...for innovation and growth."; recognizing "Digital architecture relies on rare earths, semiconductors, data centres, infrastructure, hardware, software and increasingly AI models" that are sourced across borders; that "No single country or company controls the entire value chain"; that data sovereignty "encompasses multiple dimensions of sovereignty...including "control over data storage, access and governance; executing digital operations; and technical development and control, including hardware".  Doing this requires "intelligent partnerships" which is pure unadulterated globalism, that is, collaborative governance. 

According to WEF, this is part of the AI revolution that will help move the world where "digital sovereignty and global competitiveness are no longer trade-offs, but two facets of the same, shared objective."  Given the level of control that can be achieved with this technological swamp, collective control over mankind may just be the shared objective.

This Pax Silica is a "thing".  It is not a person or group that can be questioned or challenged.  When "it" makes a decision or takes an action that is not representative of United State citizens, there is no place to file a complaint, challenge a decision, or vote someone out of office.  It is a pure form of technocracy where decisions are made based on technological needs.  Rather that digital sovereignty, perhaps is should be called "technological sovereignty".

As Patrick Wood suggests, Pax Silica is just another acceleration towards you owning nothing.  It is a guaranteed infrastructure that will firm up the technocratic control grid.  With this huge pile of data even the most sophisticated computers are stressed.  Quantum computing is perhaps the final tool needed having the capability of analyzing all of this data.  With Trump's executive order, Next Frontier of Quantum Innovation, it enables his technocratic buddies in developing "quantum-enabling technology" as a U.S. leader in quantum technology.  His second executive order addresses the anticipated need for protecting this technology, just like Pax Silica protects the goods and supply chains. 

John Titus interviewed Iain Davis about his book, The Technocratic Dark State: Trump, AI, and Digital Dictatorship.  Included in the discussion is this machine being created, those who are involved which include technocrats and Trump, and where humanity is being taken.  At the 1'15":17 mark Iain reflects that 2030, so often referenced in everything, is most likely the target date when the final takeover will happen as the needed infrastructure has pretty much been put into place.

The Solari Report also has a timeline with information on what actions have been taking place that accelerate the building of the control grid.

It is disheartening that a president is taking America down at such a rapid pace towards the worst trajectory possible into a technocratic state.  His relationship with technocrats has essentially put them in charge of where America is now headed, he has turned over our government foundation as a Republic to corporatism, executed decisions that have circumvented citizen representation, and driven America into deeper debt doing it.  

Britannica defines socialism as a "social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources."  It goes on to say "everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members."

Merriam-Webster defines socialism as "various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods".  Ok, so right now the government doesn't technically "own" the production and distribution of goods, but perhaps by directly taking money from the people it indirectly controls production and distribution.

With recent elections the fear and concern over socialism spreading in the U.S. has been blasted across television screens.  What a joke.  America has been sliding towards a socialist state for over a century. 

It was President Lincoln who first initiated a temporary income tax that lasted ten years to pay for the civil war.  There were a couple more stabs at establishing an income tax, but it was President Woodrow Wilson who ushered in a permanent income tax that has dogged everyone since.  Thus began the wealth redistribution.

Since that time the government has been using that wealth distribution to seize control over American lives.  President Franklin Roosevelt thought it would be dandy to take money from Americans and decide how to redistribute it for their retirement, or outright take it if the person died before eligible to receive it.  While he was at it, he also decided the government should provide housing to everyone.  To ensure food was "divided as fairly as possible", he started the food program.  President Johnson just expanded the wealth redistribution by feeding people for free and extending government control into education and more housing.  Not believing that was enough he also managed to get the government to redistribute money for the health care sector and how care would be doled out.  

This redistribution of wealth has sucked the life out of the average American's ability to improve their lives because the government has decided how their money would be spent for equal distribution.  No, it's not direct government ownership, but it is certainly in charge of how resources are used and distributed.  

Housing has just continued to be a target for government control.  Section 8 is intended to provide monetary assistance for housing to low income and other individuals.  However, now that subsidy can be used to buy the house for the individual.  There is some thought that property taxes remove full home ownership rights because if not paid the government can seize the house.  Equity theft of a home by the government would seem to most as illegal, yet it persists as an unresolved issue.  In spite of some tantrums complicating the issue, the government is still trying to control the housing market. 

While the government does control Medicare and Medicaid, it also controls how private insurance is administered.  Since the takeover of healthcare, costs have risen dramatically and access is more difficult, both being a consequence of socialism.

Rather than a strict definition of socialism, maybe a more generalized definition could include governments taking "control of people’s property—whether by fully nationalizing businesses, mandating what and how much a company must produce, or seizing and distributing their products".  Certainly, the government continues efforts to dictate housing markets and has seized how healthcare is delivered.  It may be that the traditional definition of socialism is being modified for a more covert implementation, and in some cases, intermixed with capitalism.  Then there is also the current slew of public-private partnerships, another socialistic sleight of hand.  Why is the White House discussing socialism? 

There really isn't any area now that the government does not have a stranglehold, right down to what we eat.

In return, we have an emerging society that wants that government control to expand and supports the idea that socialism is a good model, there is no reason anyone should be surprised.  As money runs out for all of these socialistic programs, the move is also on to take more money from those who are wealthier.  They fail to see that it is the taking of money from others that has caused the problem of needing to take more.  As Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money."  

As long as the government continues to have control over these various sectors, the march towards a full socialistic state will continue.  It is just being integrated in a way that is more difficult to recognize, but socialism is here.

Lions, Tigers, Bears, and Bugs, oh my!  Over the years there has been a rash of ominous warnings about invading bugs and their ability to kill.  Most recent is the screwworm threat to frighten everyone.  However, along the way there has also been ebola, bird flu, ticks, and hantavirus among others. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have websites devoted to warning humanity about pests.  The World Health Organization (WHO) claims 700,000 (0.0084%) lives are lost annually to vector borne disease out of 8.3 billion, while CAS claims these diseases will only continue to rise. 

There are some fanatics who actually propose to deliberately spread a disease carrying vector for the purposes of creating a forced social change, such as spreading ticks that cause meat allergies.  These lunatics should be put away.

Why the hysteria on pests and bugs, there are more important problems to worry about.  But, when the covert aim for nothing more than surveillance and control over humanity is considered, the fear mongering does make sense.

The One Health concept began around 2007 before the WHO formally latched onto it and created the One Health Initiative in 2021, having suddenly realized there was a "interconnection between humans, animals, and the environment", as if that were never understood.  Throughout history it has been understood that there are diseases that result from the animal world and environment.  WHO seems just a little slow to catch on.

But no, WHO did understand this, and its initiative was an excellent reason for exploiing the concept and making it into a big brouhaha as it was a terrific opportunity for increasing the surveillance state.  Plus, it would once again give the bogus appearance that it and the United Nations (UN) only goal was providing safe and healthy the world.  WHO itself even describes the holistic definition of One Health as an "integrated surveillance approach".

The CDC, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Department of Interior (DOI) joined together in April of this year, much like the Quadripartite Partners, and created its First National One Health Plan that will spread its hype across other federal agencies.  The National One Health Framework to Address Zoonotic Diseases and Advance Public Health Preparedness in the United States, also known as NOHF-Zoonoses, is the framework that is spreading this nonsense across the agencies.  While the framework offers no specifics on what it will do beyond collaborate and endorse itself, it does address the needed surveillance system on page 11.

For sure is the corporate financial gains being at the core of One Health with a projected value of 10.2 billion gained through global collaboration.  Companies are even popping up to the meet the need for surveillance that are specific to One Health.

Surveillance will include collecting data from human, animal, and environmental health, along with food systems, and of course, includes an economic assessment.  But how exactly this will improve health is befuddling.  Perhaps sewage can provide a clue.

Since Covid-19, there has been increased support for wastewater surveillance of diseases, which now does include genomic monitoring for any genetic changes.  Now just exactly what this surveillance costs, from the data gathering, to testing equipment, to the manpower needed to collect the tests, right down to the cost of the analysis is never revealed.  However, the cost can be calculated here, and includes specific items needed for surveillance.  The erroneous belief is that the cost of surveillance is far less than the healthcare costs of a disease outbreak.  It should be no surprise that companies have emerged that will gladly do the wastewater surveillance for cities which can be found here.  And John Q. Public is paying for it in those utility bills.

The theory is that early identification of pathogens can assist in preventing an outbreak.

Taking the one example of wastewater, then applying it to every plant and animal species, food item, human, and whatever else exists, and you have a total surveillance system over mankind and the world.  And for what other purpose than potential control, much of what was attempted during Covid-19.  

The World Economic Forum (WEF) can't be left out of the equation as the corporate money-making organization that contributes to these scams.  It has  even launched a digital diagnostics initiative just for One Health to achieve part of its goals.

Threats of disease should only be viewed as another way in which to further scare mongering, encourage compliance with draconian surveillance measures, and oppress freedom while corporate profits expand.  There should be no alarm over the never-ending headlines about some bug that has caused illness.  Don't be afraid of z-bugs.    

Over several decades there has been a myriad of advancements that make driving much safer and reducing the number of deaths.  This includes developments such as seat belts, air bags, computer-controlled braking, back up cameras, child safety seats, and technologies that provide driver assistance.  As vehicles have become more technologically sophisticated, they can almost drive themselves.  

Of late, we are moving closer to fully autonomous, or self-driving cars.  To assist with these autonomous vehicles Flock cameras can surveil, track, and nab reckless vehicles for more safety.  Eventually, artificial intelligence (AI) will be developed that makes coordination between cars and surveillance cameras seamless.

With these technologies traffic deaths have been reduced by thousands.  But there is more that needs to be done which is why vehicles will be equipped with sensors that monitor drivers for impairment or distraction, and track eyes and breath, that is, your biometrics.  Any negative results will make the car inoperable and prevent you from driving.  The federal government is watching out for your safety, we should all be very grateful.

It isn't really clear when the federal government began this campaign as big brother over our safety in traveling by vehicle.  Also not clear is if this is really about safety or control.  Nah, the idea that our government would want to use this as a surveillance tool is conspiratorial, the government exists to protect our rights.  

In spite of all the claims that nefarious organizations, like the United Nations (UN) and World Economic Forum (WEF), possess goals that are intended to reduce the world population (which is monitored closely), both go to great lengths ensuring they only have our best interests at heart and ensure every human lives a long, healthy, and safe life.  One of those areas is road safety.

The UN itself has had major concerns about road safety, going so far as to create resolution A/RES./74/299, Improving global road safety, in 2020.  From 2021-2030 the target is "preventing at least 50% of road traffic deaths and injuries by 2030."  One involved UN organization assisting with this is the World Health Organization (WHO).  Well, actually it has been surveilling road safety since at least 2009.  The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) imports this UN agenda into the U.S., calling it the Safe System approach.

Included in this resolution are requests for road and vehicle improvements, strengthened laws and law enforcement, and better emergency care, which surveillance systems seem to provide.  Then there is the standard encouragement of walking, cycling, and using mass transportation for increased safety. 

But, in truth, the UN and WHO have been building this surveillance/control, rather this "safety" system much longer through its Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011-2020 declaration.  With pure intentions, it vowed to ensure healthy lives; promote well-being with inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable cities; build road infrastructure safety management systems and safer cars; enhance road user behavior; and improve post-crash responses.  The world is so blessed to have these entities looking out for humanity's well-being.

Not to worry, road safety will continue to improve with the UN global initiative, AI for Road Safety.  The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is a UN agency that is "connecting" the world digitally and was charged with the task to launch the initiative in 2021.  It will connect AI with all the road safety mechanisms being put into place.

Now, Idaho citizens have become more engaged in letting their local officials know that surveillance cameras are not wanted.  Again, not to worry, once ITU has AI integrated for road safety, the new surveillance will be with satellite technology and advanced autonomous vehicles, kind of like the movie Enemy of the State.  Pure communication between the car and satellite.  Road safety measures such as these give the world an improved quality of life.  

In the meantime, don't worry too much about autonomous vehicles taking over, it will take some time to get those fully on the road.  Those autonomous vehicles and needed infrastructure for operation are currently being made by WEF partners Toyota, Uber, DoorDash, and Rockwell Automation among several others.   However, until then, partially automated vehicles will continue to increase over the next decade (pg 7).  As these control, that is safety devices continue to be added features in new vehicles, it gives time for drivers to change and improve driving behaviors, or else be locked out of car use.

Consideration should be given to slow this agenda down, or at least potentially stop it.  Sneaky ways of advancing it include those cool looking "vintage" license plates recently made available in Idaho.  These black or white plates are far easier to read by surveillance cameras.  Maybe look at buying an older car that hasn't been equipped with the fancy control mechanisms, and instead choose to be a safer driver with more privacy.  Then there is the old-fashioned way of taking control back by disconnecting the technology, or at least making an attempt at it.

So, there it is.  The future being designed for human safety on the road.  However, there is also the narrative that this aligns with the loss of freedom.  Freedom of movement might just be right up there with freedom of speech, or maybe right to privacy.  With these technologies, and schemes, one really has to question whether it is about safety, or control.  No movement or highly restricted movement comes when that movement is controlled by a car and surveillance.  If it is about control, it is time to exercise self-governance and take control back. 

While President Biden has taken a fair share of criticism, President Trump is continuing some policies that originated from him.  One of those policies is the Office of Strategic Capital (OSC) that was established in December, 2022.  The intent was to work with companies that developed "technologies vital to national security".  Those technologies included quantum science and biotechnology for "national security" and "defense capabilities".  Since these companies often lacked the needed capital, the Department of War (DoW) would become the investment bank for them by providing the needed loans.

10 USC 149: Office of Strategic Capital, signed into law in 2023, offers the legislative authority for OSC with other legislative updates along the way.  More  legislative details on technologies for investment include mobile robots, biochemicals, biomass, cybersecurity, hydrogen generation, microelectronics, nanomaterials, nuclear fission, and critical minerals among many other items.  OSC even advertises its debt financing and investment fund financing products and offers comparable interest rates, repayment schedules, long repayment periods, and even a deferred payment of several years.  A full-service bank.

In this May 4, 2026 Congressional Research Service report, an overview of the OSC mission, programs, and funding is provided and whether it should be provided the authority to make equity investments.  The report outlined that the OSC Director is authorized to grant loans and loan guarantees to corporations, and joint ventures to be used for technologies that meet DoW technology needs in 34 categories.  However, this is to be a pilot program until 2028 depending on the availability of money appropriated to it.  The first application window closed in February, 2025 with loan amounts between $10-150 million.

In its Investment Strategy for 2025, OSC would prioritize investments through credit-based financial products for critical technologies, assets and their supply chains.  OSC offers these loans with some loan guarantees covering the company's debt obligation if it defaults on the loan.  That means taxpayers pick up the tab.  And why not, it was done with Solyndra.

OSC's first customer was MP Materials in July, 2025 for $150 million.  In November, 2025, OSC agreed to $700 million conditional loan commitments with $620 million to Vulcan Elements and $80 million to ReElement Technologies.  There was just a slight bobble of questionable cronyism by the President with the Vulcan deal.  A total of $1 billion was granted to Vulcan to build a factory with the U.S. Department of Commerce taking a "$50 million equity stake in the company".  Can't get a better example of cronyism, or maybe fascism, than this.  Regardless, lots of money is made and ReElement came through and developed something for "national defense".  

The government paying for these technologies with loans isn't without risks.  Some of those risks include volatile rare earth element prices, changes in Chinese export policies, a change in the importation of products, or just plain old geopolitics.

Like every other new government program, OSC will need to "build a new and very large program staff to administer the $200 billion worth of loans over four years that Congress just authorized", and give justification for it continuing to balloon out of control.  Already the requested amount to support this loan program is $20.2 billion, way up from the $1.5 billion allowed the year before. 

One has to ponder if this direction by the government is reasonable.  After all, we Americans want to be kept safe from the rest of the America hating world and protected from depending on resources that can only be obtained from those countries.  The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has already been tested in Israel and continues with the Iran war.  Drones and other weaponry are being built with technology that will require access to the resources needed to build them.  Humans are their own worst enemy by designing more ways in which to destroy themselves.  Now the government has designed a way that will fund and profit from it.

There is something about this whole affair that indicates the foundation upon which our government was created has been shattered.  The government giving money to corporations and joining in as a partner to build something intended for use in warfare doesn't seem to be part of the Constitution.  It also might be an ominous sign of how much further this conduct will be taken into other areas, what other sectors the government will directly fund for whatever agenda.  

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Across America citizens have been opposing actions taken by their local governments, often getting booted out of the meetings, a questionable violation of the First Amendment.  Many years ago, it was the practice of citizens to address the city council and express how they wanted their city to be managed, the city basically took directions from citizen input.  No longer is this the case, it has now flipped where cities are operating as a loose cannon with no adherence to the concept that they derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.  There are reasons this has happened. 

Many Idaho cities belong to an organization called the Association of Idaho Cities (AIC) in which 197 cities are members.  Other associations with AIC include professionals from public works, city clerks and treasurers, attorneys, management, highways, along with corporate and businesses involvement.  This is just the beginning of who has a hand in directing local governments.

AIC describes its purpose as providing technical assistance and "education, training and assistance to strengthen the ability of city elected officials and staff to serve their communities."  Its Board members are comprised of mayors and city council members from across the state and seven District Directors.  AIC also meddles at the state level. 

Training information is available on multiple issues at a cost per city official, but the public is excluded from accessing the material.  With the recent push for affordable housing and zoning issues in Idaho, one has to wonder what the AIC Planning & Zoning brochure includes.  Through this material, AIC is influencing local governments and how to manage their city.  That is just one way in which to impede citizen input, and keep citizens in the dark about the direction their city is being taken.

Actual membership fees are elusive because of being based on populations size.  But, not only are local citizens paying for the membership fees, there are all of the fun events and meetings planned throughout the year that city officials can attend.  Surely those local officials don't pay for these trips as an AIC member.  A quick inquiry to the city will provide an answer on the costs.

Corporate "affiliates" pay a pretty penny for access to city leaders during an AIC conference.  Depending on the level of support, it costs anywhere between $550 to $40,000 to smooze with city officials.  One must wonder what types of deals are made from this access.

According to AIC's 2023 990 tax form, the net assets were $1,901,340.  Kelley Packer is listed as the Executive Director (ED) with a compensation of $148,759 and more than seven uncompensated Idaho mayors are listed as District Directors.  The League of Idaho Cities is listed as a related organization to "Advance the Interests of Idaho Citizens through Strengthening Cities".  The League has several program priorities that include mental health, STEM learning, and in which it has dabbled in other issues in the past.  Kelly Packer is the League ED as well.

Packer has an interesting background, she was an Idaho State Representative from 2012-2018, and ran for Lt. Governor but lost in 2018.  She also formed an initiative to "protect access to contraception".  Perhaps her biggest hidden secret however is that she is the link to the National League of Cities (NLC) in which she drags the AIC.

Through this linkage, AIC is a member of the NLC.  This organization is "comprised of city, town and village leaders that are focused on improving the quality of life for their current and future constituents", another obstruction to constituent representation.  Exactly when was this organization elected by constituents to represent them?  It claims to also "advocate for, and protect the interests of, cities, towns and villages by influencing federal policy, strengthening local leadership and driving innovative solutions."

NLC also has varying levels of partnerships with corporations.  Corporatism through public-private partnerships is encouraged along with ideological influences as found on page 5 and 6.  NLC has much larger asset holdings at 19,387,271 in 2023, and the membership dues, again based on population, are more transparent.  It is assumed  these dues are paid by AIC members which in turn probably raises AIC membership costs. 

It also has a National League of Cities Institute, providing the research and education component that "equip locally elected officials with knowledge, tools, and techniques to enhance their ability to govern effectively in their communities."  So much for expert citizen voices who know their city better than any outside organization.

From its research, NLC has created an endless list of initiatives to influence how cities are managed for equality, climate sustainability, future cities, and democracy, even though we are a Republic.  NLC also accepts grants on issues that can be used to influence cities.  Most prominent right now in Idaho is building more "affordable" dense unneeded housing, a ruse that originates from the NLC partnership with the American Planning Association. 

The issue to be aware of is that NLC is used to influence Idaho cities through AIC, and NLC is a left of center organization that uses its Institute to influence how cities are managed.  The George Soros, Bill & Melinda Gates, and MacArthur Foundations, along with others, have provided millions to the NLC Institute to influence city governance.  In turn, NLC Institute grants have been given to non-profits and local city governments across the United States to promote its objectives.   

So confident is NLC that it has even given its own "state of the cities" report as if it were a mayor by declaring the top mayoral priorities (pg 9)(pg 6).  It doesn't get more repugnant than that.

NLC gets its marching orders from none other than the United Nations (UN) as a non-governmental organization that is consultative status with the UN.  In participation with the UN, NLC has also supported migration, and encouraging the integration of biodiversity measures and COP26 objectives into cities.  This is easily accomplished through its conferences.

Why would any city council member bother listening to its constituents when they are handed the answers to all problems by these groups.  The United States Conference of Mayors offers another opportunity to dismiss citizen input.  Boise Mayor McLean, Idaho Falls Mayor Burtenshaw, Pocatello Mayor Dahlquist, Caldwell Mayor Phillips, and a host of many other mayors participate, just search Idaho.  As a declared non-partisan group, there is no difference between parties, they are operating from the same NLC position as this group also works with NLC.  Counties shouldn't feel left out, there is a national organization for them as well.  

Citizens should be outraged their voice has been removed from local government.  Local government officials should be ashamed for being involved in groups that covertly usurp the framework of how our government was designed to work, by consent of the governed.  All citizens should meet with any mayor or council member involved in IAC and demand immediate withdrawal, and educate them about where the real influence behind this organization originates.  Most likely, these local officials have no idea how badly they have been led astray.

It is time Idahoans remind elected officials their just powers are granted only by the consent of the governed.