Category Archives: the plutocracy

Eating Bugs

There’s been some discussion lately, around and about, relating to a push to normalize the eating of insects by humans. Mealworms, etc. One reference here.


One does have to wonder, though, why? Why on earth would there be any sort of campaign to do this?

There are various theories, of course. One of the more interesting ones is that it’s part of a campaign of psychological warfare against the public, similar to transgenderism and pedophilia normalization. If they can get you to accept the unacceptable, that has a demoralizing effect which makes you easier to control. It also serves to prove (to them) that you are controllable, so it occurs to me that some of the motivation here might simply be the elite wanting to test the limits of their power.

However, at least in relation to the eating bugs question, I also think there’s something more mundane (and therefore dangerous) going on.

The shift from meat eating to plant eating to bug eating is probably about maximizing profitability. Meat is the least profitable means of food production, due to how long it takes for animals to grow, the expense of feeding them, keeping them safe and healthy, butchering them and keeping the meat frozen. Plants, particularly cash crops, are more profitable, for a variety of reasons. However, growing food plants still requires large tracts of land which deteriorate over time, and large investments relating to things like irrigation, weed control, fertilization, harvesting (even mechanical harvesting), and transport. Most plants other than dried grains are also highly perishable.

Bugs, on the other hand, could potentially feed on garbage (or, perish the thought, human remains) while being kept in a great big bucket or tray, which could then simply be dumped out to “harvest” them. Potentially, each local landfill (or morgue) could be turned into a “food” production facility. Yikes. Presumably, due to the quickness of the insect life cycle, production could also be easily scaled in order to meet variable demand, which would help to keep storage costs minimized. Producers also wouldn’t have to deal with problems associated with weather variation of the sort that’s decimated a lot of grain growers this year.

Financially, it sounds like a huge win, if you don’t care how disgusting and offensive and evil it is. I also have questions relating to nutritional value. If bugs were such a great nutrition source for the human body, obviously we would have been eating them all along, but we don’t do that, so obviously they are not all that great. Relying on such a non-optimal source as the primary staple in the human diet, therefore, is a really bad idea. But you know whoever is behind this certainly doesn’t care, and is certainly going to make every effort to bury potential health risks. They already do that, have been doing it for decades, and look at how unhealthy the population is as a result.

For now, I’m in wait-and-see mode, mainly because I don’t see much that I could do to help the situation. I rely primarily on meat from small producers, and so far the increased popularity of veganism just means more meat available for me. I realize, though, that it’s a slippery slope. If we reach the point where small meat producers start going out of business because of declining sales, then I’m in trouble. A bigger danger, though, is that of moral panic. If meat producers start having to worry about being assaulted or vandalized by “activists,” that would motivate a lot of them to voluntarily go out of business, and would have a disproportionate effect on small producers. Moral panic could also motivate legislatures to enact stupid laws and regulations designed to suppress meat production, “for our own good.” Keep an eye on California, they are the bellwether. Whatever stupid foolishness is next going to seize the country, it’ll probably happen first in California.

Scary times.

A French bank run would be a very bad idea…unless you’re a globalist

I hear tell that there’s a possible “bank run” in the works in France. The Yellow Vests are apparently considering it as a way to cause problems for the elite, a way to get them to accede to some Yellow Vest demands.

I don’t think it’ll work. In fact, I think such a move could actually play into globalist hands in a big way, particularly when you consider moves in recent years towards a “cashless society.”

Most transactions are now electronic, which means that, from the perspective of the banking system, they are not withdrawals at all, but simply transfers from one account to another. You can buy as much food as you want, or gas, whatever, and the system doesn’t lose any funds at all. All that happens is the number in one account (yours) gets smaller and the numbers in the merchant accounts get bigger.  As long as everything balances out, the system continues to work.

Cash seems different because the banksters can’t control who possesses the banknotes or where they are spent, nor can they even keep track of these things. So, from that perspective, cash appears to be “out” of the system. This is an illusion, however, as we’ll see in a moment.

The traditional scenario of a bank run is when people withdraw too many banknotes all at once, causing the banks to run out, thereby eroding trust in the system to such a degree that people attempt to withdraw their money even more quickly. A snowball effect ensues which can risk collapsing the entire system. The Yellow Vests are proposing that they create this situation artificially.

Assuming, however, that the immediate response to the threat of a bank run isn’t to simply slap a weekly limit of 100 euros on withdrawals, another possible response on the part of the banksters could go this way:

First, simply wait for it to happen. Wait for most or all of the cash to be withdrawn. Then, call up lapdog Macron to declare a state of emergency. Once declared, his first action would be to wipe out the value of all the banknotes by prohibiting all banks from accepting cash deposits. (The banks could certainly take that action on their own initiative, but it would be better for them to have Macron be the scapegoat.) Once this is done, anyone with large amounts of cash is stuck holding piles of now worthless paper.  Meanwhile, people who hadn’t withdrawn lots of cash would still have their accounts full, would still be able to buy groceries, fuel, and so on, but anyone with cash instead of money in the bank would be screwed. The banksters/globalists could leave things that way indefinitely and, not only would they have the cashless society they wanted, but any blame for it would rest on the Yellow Vests for making it “necessary.” Checkmate.

Nowadays, cash is only worth something because the banks say it is.