The Plandemic, Project Lockstep and Bullshit Jobs
The late, brilliant David Graeber, who died far too young, is, perhaps, best remembered for his book on bullshit jobs.
Mattias Desmet, who came up with a theory of Covid compliance linked to mass formation (or, at least, popularised it), was intrigued by the sheer huge numbers of people who, seemingly bored with their empty lives (and their bullshit jobs), suddenly found a raison d’etre with the arrival of the pandemic that wasn’t.
All this came to mind when I came across the suggestion that a nondescript Democrat politician called Jamie Raskin had said that Trump would never reach the White House, despite his thumping election win, because the Congress wasn’t going to certify his election victory. As soon as you put this into a search engine, you will find literally dozens of denials of this from people who now go by the job description of “fact checker”.
Some years back, I was astonished when I discovered that Facebook employed fifteen thousand fact checkers. I was equally dismayed to discover that one of my former employers, RMIT University, had entered into a partnership with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to join the fact checker game.
The web site states:
RMIT ABC Fact Check determines the accuracy of claims by politicians, public figures, advocacy groups and institutions engaged in the public debate.
It is a partnership between RMIT University and the ABC combining academic excellence and the best of Australian journalism to inform the public through an independent non-partisan voice.
Yes, they actually say this. Presumably with a straight face.
Now there is another bullshit job, right there. Copywriter for bullshit web sites. Anyone who knows anything about RMIT will raise an eyebrow at the suggestion of academic excellence. (I was the exception). The best of Australian journalism? This copywriter doesn’t get irony, clearly. An independent, non-partisan voice (missing a comma)? RMIT and all the other Australian universities, dependent on Big Pharma money as well as ours, flipped the bird at independence during Covid.
So, this is what tens of thousands of people do with their lives now.
They are cadres in a never-ending ideological war. This is what we are reduced to. Talk about getting down in the weeds. That the political class considers it worthwhile to employ people – are they paid for this? – to bother to refute a story buzzing around that a random Democrat would suggest denying Trump his victory says much about the current human predicament.
On the one hand, it bespeaks a pathetically unserious society. For an unserious society, we are. On the other, it confirms that, today, wars are not only fought between countries but are now mainly prosecuted by ideological tribes engaged in a war of ideas and narratives. Using fifth-gen warfare techniques.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_warfare
Either way, it pronounces the Enlightenment dead and interred.
If this doesn’t make us sad beyond measure, I don’t know what would. Bullshit jobs, undertaken for the objective of embedding hatred, control and conflict. And permanent revolution. Being down in the weeds is just part of the job description for the twenty-first century field operative. What do you want to be when you grow up? A leftie fact checker! This is a thing now, it seems.
As I recall, David Graeber didn’t know about or talk about ideological bullshit jobs. Post-Covid, psyop warfare takes Graeber’s thesis to another, far more sinister, level. The worry about bullshit jobs 1.0 was that they were simply a waste of human resources, connoting an economic desert. Turbo-charged bullshit jobs 2.0 are something else.
There is another example of a recent fact-checker bullshit jobs moment, far more sinister. It concerns the plandemic and the Rockefeller Foundation. Plandemic sceptics should pay attention.
Of course, the Rockefeller Foundation, back in the 1950s, determined that one of the paths to a new world order was via a pandemic. A global problem demanding a global solution, that would curtail freedom and national sovereignty. The backstory is conveniently described here.
See also:
Well, in 2010, the RF indulged in some early era pandemic planning. Under the cover of “scenarios development”. It had the benign title “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development”. These things often do have benign names. Like sustainability. And scenario planning was coming into its own, round about then. I was exposed to this, ironically, at RMIT University. Talk about a bullshit occupation and career.
The Gateway Pundit has noted:
Here is a relevant portion (Page 19) – keep in mind this was published in 2010:
China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.
Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems – from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty – leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.
At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty – and their privacy – to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability.
It is a real document and now with the help of the World Economic Forums network it has been but into action.
Source: The Gateway Pundit Telegram channel, 30 May 2022.
Pretty accurate scenario planning as it turned out, n’est-ce pas?
The Rockefeller Foundation itself has some interesting (butt covering) comments on this, in the spirit of damning conspiracy theories and maintaining its innocence in pandemic planning, for the good of humanity:
In 2009, The Rockefeller Foundation conducted an exercise to explore the future of technology in development and identify ways to better respond to emerging challenges. The results were captured in a report that includes several plausible scenarios that could impact millions of people around the world. One such scenario, “Lockstep,” described a fictional pandemic that would infect 20% of the world in 2012, killing eight million people in just seven months.
Now that we’re well into a real pandemic, we see some chilling similarities between our current Zoom-centered world and Lockstep. The report predicted that telepresence technologies would “respond to the demand for less-expensive, lower bandwidth, sophisticated communications systems for populations whose travel is restricted.” Other predictions were off, including the emergence of MRI technologies to detect abnormal behavior with anti-social intent.
While baseless posts have circulated recently calling the exercise part of a “diabolical plan for world domination,” we see it as further evidence of the importance of scenario planning in helping governments, institutions and others navigate near-term decisions that can have long-term impact. Our hope then – as it is now – was to focus on what we don’t know so we could make better plans to address a real pandemic, such as the one we’re facing today. (Emphasis in original).
https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/insights/perspective/innovating-for-a-bold-future/
Emboldened, no less. Well, they would say that. Baseless posts? World domination? Well, if it quacks like a conspiracy … They think we are stupid, as Aaron Kheriaty often says. The fact checker class is in play, as always. Bullshit jobs 2.0.
By the way, if you want to track down the full text of the scenario, good luck. The fact checker sector is on this case! There is a determined effort to hide the document and to suggest that anyone who wants to talk about it is up to no good. They do not want anyone to see this.
Those who believe in the plandemic, a very plausible hypothesis (of course), will not find anything remotely surprising here. Simply think Event 201. It is pandemic planning disguised as scenario pseudoscience. The latter provides plausible deniability for the perpetrators. Scenario planning seamlessly becomes government policy. It is what happened in 2020. We should be always reminding ourselves of what occurred, why it occurred, and what has transpired since. Just look down the highway to Canberra, as we speak. The MAD bill is simply another link in the plan.
The plandemic adjacent class embedded in our allegedly democratic government is working hard to ensure that saying these things will shortly be illegal. George Orwell called it memory holing.
Meantime, we should take the Rockefeller Foundation, circa 1950s, at its word. They did and do mean business.
Paul Collits
15 November 2024
This is a great article with video of Harry Vox on Operation Lockstep.
Lockstep needs to be much better known. It shows that the Scandemic was a complete con job which had been planned years in advance.
https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/operation-lock-step
Excellent article Paul. I will not only share this one, I will also save it.