As some may have seen my previous post showing off a document that was released by the Rockefeller Foundation.
In 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation released a study chronicling four simulations: "Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.”
It was published in May 2010 in cooperation with the Global Business Network of futurologist Peter Schwartz. The report contains various futurist scenarios developed by Schwartz and company.
For convenience here is my previous post of the entire document for your reference, since I will be dissecting some information in it.
Read My Post here
Alternatively here is an archive of this document
Read Archived PDF
"Lockstep" is one of the four simulations in this document:
"The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers."
You can find more on page 18.
Although his simulations are not one hundred percent, there are many points in his summary that are spot-on, and that is a bit concerning.
Well...
The Rockefeller Foundation was founded in 1913 as the primary philanthropic vehicle for the charity of Standard Oil billionaire John D. Rockefeller, Sr. (1839-1937). Its projects over the past century have included funding medical research, supporting the “Green Revolution” of agricultural production innovation, and backing controversial population control movements. The Foundation Center reports that in 2014 the Rockefeller Foundation was the 16th largest U.S.-based foundation by total assets, with assets in that year of $4.24 billion. [1]
Rajiv Shah, the Rockefeller Foundation’s current president, is an alumnus of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) from the Obama administration. The organization’s former president, Judith Rodin, sought appointment to the President’s Council on Global Development during the Obama administration; she did not receive the appointment. Emails later reported on by Politico illustrated her closeness with Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation as she sought the appointment. [2]
In this document, there is a page, the first after the index, where Judith Rodin says
"One important — and novel — component of our strategy toolkit is scenario planning, a process of creating narratives about the future based on factors likely to affect
a particular set of challenges and opportunities."
That is like saying, The Simpsons are not the only ones that can predict the future when what this document is outlining are things that are oddly comparable to things that have happened since its publication.
She also states
"We believe that scenario planning has
great potential for use in philanthropy to identify unique interventions, simulate and
rehearse important decisions that could have profound implications"
I'm not to keen on what the intent could be from a globalist standpoint as she says "simulate and rehearse decisions", but it is certainly a red flag in my book.
As you read this you will probably get the understanding that I do not support globalization, let alone any government at all, so of course statement like this one in the middle of her "Letter" in this document bothers me...
"The results of our first scenario planning exercise demonstrate a provocative and engaging exploration of the role of technology and the future of globalization"
One thing I would like to point out, In the introduction of this document, it brings up the world’s poor and vulnerable populations as if they want to do something good for the people when really they want nothing more but to practice their eugenics on them or practice their scenarios on them. One thing that I can say is that Globalists typically have a view on an ever-growing population that leads to my conclusion in that.
As per this document, they define Lock Step as a world of tighter top-down government control and more
authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing
citizen pushback and begin to outline a scenario that sounds pretty similar to something that is happening now with the COVID-19 issues.
The only things that are really different are the years in which they write about in the scenario.
From saying things like
"The United States’s initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the
spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but
across borders."
To saying
"The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping
the spread of the virus far earlier than in other
countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery."
All this just being thought up as a scenario?
I would have to suggest maybe think about this for a minute and understand that sometimes is it possible they could be either lying to us or just making it happen. Why you ask?
Across the developing world, however, the
story was different — and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders.
They must find solace in warning us first, but since we must be too stupid to see it coming is probably what makes it right for them to do.
“IT IS POSSIBLE TO DISCIPLINE AND CONTROL SOME SOCIETIES FOR SOME TIME, BUT NOT THE WHOLE WORLD ALL THE TIME.”
– GK Bhat, TARU Leading Edge, India"
For now i'm pretty finished writing for the day. I encourage you to read this document. Part two will come soon I think.
