Posted on by winter oak
by Paul Cudenec
[Text of a talk given on Saturday July 29 2023 to the Resistenze al Nanomondo international conference in the countryside near Alessandria, Italy]
In this debased modern world we often find ourselves in the dark.
Ours is a society built entirely from artifice and illusion, and so in this labyrinth of lies, this demonic hall of mirrors, it has become extraordinarily difficult to distinguish fact from fake, reality from spin.
Indeed, we have pretty much now arrived at a stage of complete inversion.
The best indication of something or somebody’s integrity is that they are denounced as criminals by the system and the strongest warning sign of misinformation is when a certain proposition is presented as sacred truth, protected from contradiction by a special taboo status.
The question of climate change, and so-called “climate justice”, is a prime example of this.
The truth about the issue is elusive, to say the least. Piers Corbyn, the affable English scientist and freedom campaigner with whom I shared a platform at the Real Left conference in London earlier this year, argues that there is no man-made global warming. 
He says that CO2 accounts for a mere 0.04 per cent of the atmosphere and that humanity’s contribution, 4 per cent of that 0.04 per cent, is far too insignificant to change the earth’s temperature in the way that is suggested.
CO2 levels are, in fact, not a cause of changes in temperature, but a long-term effect of those we have previously experienced, which were brought about by the activities of the sun, he insists.
Additional CO2 created during warm periods is swallowed up into the cold deep ocean and emerges elsewhere in the world 500 to 800 years later, argues Corbyn, so that the current increase in CO2 levels is an after-effect of a warm period in the Middle Ages.
On the other hand, Canadian investigative journalist Cory Morningstar (pictured), who spoke at the same event by video link, has long taken the position that man-made climate change is real enough, but that it has been systematically exploited for the distinctly non-environmentalist purposes of global capitalism.
She has been exposing this hijacking process for many years now and the mass of detailed evidence she has accumulated is conclusive.
Cory has been particularly important in demolishing the myth of Greta Thunberg as a “schoolgirl with a conscience” whose one-person school strike just happened to capture the attention of the world and lead to her addressing the UN, the WEF, and the European Parliament, as well as being featured on the cover of Time magazine, which named her a “next generation leader”, meeting Barack Obama and Emmanuel Macron and being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize…
Cory’s forensic research revealed the key role of Callum Grieve, a “communications specialist” based in New York.
Grieve worked for five years for The Climate Group, which in 2014 launched We Mean Business in order to “catalyze action around climate change and bring it back to the top of the global agenda”.
Cory reported: “The founding partners of We Mean Business are Business for Social Responsibility, the B Team, Carbon Disclosure Project, Ceres, The Climate Group, the Prince of Wales’s Corporate Leaders Group and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Together, these entities represent the world’s most powerful corporations and investors”. 
It just so happens that on the very first day of Greta’s protest on the Stockholm pavement, August 20 2018, Grieve sent her a Twitter message declaring: “We’re right behind you. Stay strong”.
Another key figure exposed by Cory was Ingmar Rentzhog, the man who spoke to Greta on the pavement on that fateful day in August 2018 and tweeted to the world about it.
CEO of the climate campaign network We Don’t Have Time, Rentzhog is also, like Grieve, a PR professional.
According to the manufactured Greta myth, he came across her protest by chance while walking to work and it was this piece of luck which ensured her voice was heard so widely.
As journalist Frank Chung noted: “Despite its name, We Don’t Have Time did have time to produce a short film about Ms Thunberg, which it posted to Facebook the next day”. 
The story of a chance encounter with Greta fell apart when Rentzhog later admitted that he had already done PR work for her mother and that he had been “tipped off” about the protest in advance.
“The commodity contemplates itself in a world of its own making”, as Guy Debord put it. 
On the Wrong Kind of Green website, Cory describes in great detail a global network of corporate-linked climate groups, including Fridays for Future, which organised the school strikes.
The European Climate Foundation, for instance, has listed its funders as including Bloomberg Philanthropies, The Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Hewlett Foundation, the Growald Family Fund and the Oak Foundation, which I will mention again later. 
I myself started digging into the issue four years ago, when Extinction Rebellion in the UK launched its XR Business website.
This, along with a letter to The Times newspaper in London, declared support for XR, as Extinction Rebellion is known, from various “business leaders”.
It was no surprise to see the name of Gail Bradbrook, one of the XR founders and director of something called Compassionate Revolution Ltd.
But others on the list were a little less expected, for a campaign group that was attracting support from anti-capitalist environmentalists.
It included impact capitalists like Seb Beloe of WHEB, which says it is “focused on the opportunities created by the transition to a low carbon and sustainable global economy”.
Then there was Amy Clarke, co-founder of Tribe Impact Capital LLP, which boasts the snappy tagline “A New Wealth Order”.
Another XR supporter was Paul Polman, until recently CEO of Unilever, the massive transnational consumer goods company.
Some of them had obvious vested interests in the “sustainability” scam, such as Samer Salty of Zouk Capital, which was manouevring to manage a £400m UK Government investment fund aimed at helping to increase the uptake of electric vehicles.
The same was true of Michael F. H. Bonte-Friedheim of NextEnergy Capital, “the leading international solar investment and asset manager”.
But perhaps most telling of all was the inclusion of Charmian Love, a businesswoman engaged in “Mobilising Movements” and “Reimagining Corporate Capital” via a website called Corporate Impact X, which is “designed to support corporations in developing high impact venturing, collaboration and investment strategies”.
The XR Business initiative did not go down too well with their grassroots activists and the website was quickly taken down.
But it was too late. The cat was out of the bag, as we say in English. The capitalist fat cat in this case!
More evidence quickly emerged of the reality behind the green facade of Extinction Rebellion, such as a 2016 article written by one of its “business leaders”, John Elkington. 
It turned out he was also involved in the Tomorrow’s Capitalism Inquiry backed by companies like Aviva Investors, Covestro, and (once again) Unilever.
In the article, Elkington enthused about the potential financial opportunities involved in what he himself called the “Sustainability Industry” – “businesses that can help drive progress towards UN’s Sustainable Development Goals”.
He wrote: “As leaders learn to ‘Think Sustainably,’ they will also need to learn to ‘Think X,’ shorthand for ‘Think Exponential’.
“In the same way that they once looked to activists and social entrepreneurs for evidence of where markets were headed, they must now engage a very different set of players.
“These new players are not happy with 1% or even 10% year-on-year improvements, instead pushing towards 10X — or 10-fold — improvements over time”.
Later, in 2020, I discovered that Extinction Rebellion UK, along with other “climate justice” groups in the UK, Spain, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands, was receiving money from Berlin-based fake-radical corporate funding conduit Guerrilla Foundation, which describes its aim as “bringing about major systemic change across Europe in line with the Great Transition”. 
Here in Italy, Ultima Generazione is funded, as its own website shows,  by the A22 network, which is itself funded  by Climate Emergency Fund in the USA, an entity co-founded by billionaire Aileen Getty of the Getty oil dynasty,  which says that it “was formed as a bridge between philanthropy and climate activism”. 
In short, it is absolutely clear that the “climate justice” movement is a manufactured one, created by the billionaire class as a PR tool that will enable them to raid the public purse, under the pretext of a climate “emergency”, and channel trillions of dollars into their own pockets.
It is not “the planet” that they want to save, but the global capitalist system, which will be able to expand into new areas, commodifying nature itself as a source of speculation and profit. 
We can see a similar phenomenon behind the transgender cult, which uses the pretence of defending a newly-discovered human right, the right to pretend to be a member of the opposite sex, to advance an industrial-capitalist agenda.
Jennifer Bilek (pictured), the American eco-feminist journalist and researcher, who, incidentally, praised your protest at the Baby Fair in Milan earlier this year, has spent the last decade examining and exposing the transgender movement. 
She has shown that it is very closely linked to the biotech industry, pointing out that “Martine Rothblatt, a transsexual, transhumanist lawyer and entrepreneur, who authored the first ‘gender bill’, writes and speaks often about ‘transgenderism’ fertilizing the ground for transhumanism”. 
Denouncing the current reality behind the LGBT+ agenda, Jennifer adds: “LGB signals human rights. The supporting characters, T+, work to obscure the industry and technology behind the façade of human rights, moving at warp speed”.
Earlier this month, I also had a little dig into the networks that promote “trans rights”. 
I first traced back an article on the supposedly “anarchist” Freedom News website to the Trans Safety Network, a member of Consortium, which describes itself as “the national infrastructure and umbrella body for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans+ groups across the UK”. 
Consortium explains that it is helped in its efforts by Traverse, which it describes as “an independent social research and evaluation consultancy”. 
But Traverse’s “independent” status is cast into doubt by the fact that it proudly announces on its own website that it works with the likes of: Arcadis NV, a Dutch engineering firm involved in building motorways and airports; Horizon Nuclear Power; Wellcome Trust, the rotten heart of Big Pharma in the UK, and Big Society Capital, the impact capitalism firm run by Ronald Cohen (pictured). 
Traverse is also “a member of Sonder, a group of organisations”, which aims to profit from the privatisation of the public sector in Britain and is, indeed, closely tied  to a company actually called Private Public Ltd, which is heavily involved in impact capitalism. 
We see a similar thing with ILGA Europe,the European region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, which describes itself as “an independent, international non-governmental umbrella organisation uniting over 700 organisations from 54 countries across Europe and Central Asia”. 
ILGA Europe enjoys consultative status at the United Nations Economic and Social Council and participatory status at the Council of Europe and can boast of some heavyweight financial backing, not least from the European Union and the Government of the Netherlands.
One of its benefactors is the Swiss-based Oak Foundation, also one of the funders of The European Climate Foundation, as revealed by Cory Morningstar, and which says it is “a group of philanthropic organisations based in various countries around the world”. 
I describe in my article how ILGA Europe is also funded by other wealthy foundations interested in what they describe as philanthropy, impact investment, fighting antisemitism and supporting Ukraine.
I found that an important role in this shadowy network of “trans rights” funding is played by the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program, which insists it is dedicated to “charitable impact through strategic and thoughtful philanthropy”  and is, of course, part of the Vanguard-BlackRock entity which so dominates global finance. 
The fact that both the “climate justice” and “trans rights” movements are false flags for corporate financial interests is not a coincidence, but part of a systematic and wide-ranging plan.
In order to be able to push their own agenda, which goes completely against the interests of the majority of the population, the rich and powerful have always needed to hide behind something else.
For many centuries, that something has been “the nation” or “the king” or “God” or “tradition” or “civilization” or “law and order”.
They have exploited people’s sense of loyalty to their homeland, their sense of decency, their fear of foreigners or of change, to rally them behind the flag of their ongoing domination.
But today they are seeking their social licence elsewhere and are instead using what might appear to be “radical” or “left-wing” principles as the basis of their manipulation.
Their exploitative investment – investment for profit – is rebranded as philanthropy, as doing good, as having a positive “impact” on society or the environment.
This new form of venture capitalism, so-called “impact” capitalism, is being championed by the world of international finance, the World Economic Forum, King Charles III and indeed Guerrilla Foundation, funders of “climate” activism.
The “wokewashing” language in which it conceals its real intentions is typified by British venture capitalist Ronald Cohen in his 2020 book, ‘Impact: Reshaping Capitalism to Drive Real Change’, which I analysed in January 2021. 
He says that impact capitalism “will lead us to a new and better world” by “helping those in need and preserving our planet”.
It will address “a variety of social issues”, including homelessness, affordable housing, community organizations, childhood obesity and mental health, not to mention “poverty, under-education, unemployment, an aging population and environmental destruction”.
And it will do this by “helping disadvantaged young people”, supporting “refugee and immigrant integration” and boosting “women’s empowerment and gender equality”.
Impact projects aim to provide “financial services for the poor” and “affordable and green housing”.
Cohen declares: “We must shift our economies to create positive outcomes”.
These “positive outcomes” are in fact the trigger for dividends in what he calls his “pay-for-success investment models”, and depend on full-spectrum real-time surveillance of all aspects of our lives using Fourth Industrial Revolution technology.
Cohen is a member of the United Nations Development Programme’s Global Steering Group for Impact Investment  and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals are closely linked to the impact project.
They define specific areas in which governments should be taking action and require them to find money to pour into these issues.
The UN steering group boasts that its “transformational impact on lives around the world” will involve “opening up $12 trillion in market opportunities”. 
All the “woke” language used to describe these various impact agendas is thus nothing but window dressing for a vast financial coup, a scam of unbelievable proportions carried out against 99.9 per cent of humanity.
The central involvement of the United Nations tells us a great deal about the nature of the entity behind this scam.
The excellent English researcher Iain Davis describes it as “the global public-private partnership”.  But I have recently come to the conclusion that although this term is helpful as a stepping stone to understanding the scale of what we are up against, it is also slightly misleading.
It is misleading because the framing of the relationship between public and private as a “partnership” is that provided to us by those involved.
In reality, the public and private are not separate entities, but one and the same thing.
Thanks to countless decades of systematic corruption, private interests have entirely taken control of all the major public institutions, national and international.
Because this corruption cannot be admitted to the public, the notion of a “partnership” is used to explain away the fact that these two facets of the same entity are pursuing exactly the same agenda.
We urgently need to see the emergence of a new international movement of resistance against this toxic entity, given that it has successfully disabled and recuperated so many existing “radical” groups.
And I believe that the first necessary step we need to take if we are to effectively oppose the corrupt global entity is to recognise its existence.
It is important to say loudly and clearly that one single worldwide criminal network, the criminocracy, is, behind the scenes, running everything from the WEF to the WHO, the UN to the EU, BlackRock to the World Bank.
We then need to put each specific branch of its activities into that overall context, so that everybody can see how they are related, part of the same overall agenda.
I am seeing encouraging signs that this is already beginning to happen. The Real Left conference in London, for instance, opposed not only the fake “green” agenda, but also smart cities, the Covid “vaccine” cover-up and other aspects of the very broad “Great Reset”.
The global power nexus itself is also realising that this is happening, hence its increasing use of insults such as “conspiracy theorist”, “reactionary”, “anti-semitic” or even “terrorist” against anyone who challenges its mendacious narrative.
We can see exactly which aspects of its domination it wishes to hide from scrutiny by the taboos it carefully constructs around these issues, designed to close down all debate with smokescreens of moral indignation and fear of political contamination.
We saw evidence of that in the smears levelled against this very event two years ago, against the special issue of the French journal Ecologie & Politique to which several people participating in this conference contributed  and against the Australian journal New Dawn, which has republished a number of my articles over recent years. 
A couple of months ago, the Inquisition pointed its finger at Crow Qu’appelle, the Canadian green anarchist behind Nevermore Media, and also at me, because we have often worked together.
An anonymous writer on the Montreal Counter Information site accused me of “propagating far-right conspiracy theories about Jewish bankers and trans people”. 
So, to dissect that: exposing the official narrative is now called propagating conspiracy theories and all conspiracy theories are automatically “far-right”; criticising the global financial system is “anti-semitic” purely because a number of individuals within that system are Jewish, and criticising the transgender industry necessarily amounts to a personal attack on “trans people”.
These same absurd and dishonest one-size-fits-all smears are wheeled out again and again when anyone steps out of ideological line.
But they are ringing increasingly hollow and I detect a whiff of panic in the air.
The Montreal article warns of “a transnational echo chamber of conspiracists who have been embracing increasingly reactionary, transphobic, and antisemitic ideas”.
In other words, they are worried that we are coming together and regrouping outside of the controlled woke-left mind-prison to begin to form a coherent long-term international resistance movement!
While Crow suspects that the article in question was written by a ‘spook’, an intelligence agent, the system depends on being able to mobilise genuine but deluded activists as its shocktroops against authentic dissent.
And I think that here there is a weakness that we might be able to exploit.
Because, in their hearts, these people, on the left, are actually opposed to corporate control – even if they don’t currently recognise its presence in the struggles in which they are involved – revelations of corporate manipulation could change their allegiance.
What is currently blocking them from listening to such revelations is that they are being told they are coming from an unacceptable and politically toxic place – “the far right”, the “fachosphère” as they call it in France.
So at the same time as denouncing corporate scams like the “climate justice” and “trans rights” movements, we need to be very clear about the position from which we are doing so.
Regarding the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, we are supposed to believe that the “alternative” position to blindly supporting Zelensky and Ukraine is to blindly support Putin and Russia.
Likewise, there are elements of the post-2020 “freedom” movement that seem to be intent on turning it into a kind of mirror image of the pro-lockdown, pro-system, left – an anti-lockdown but pro-system right.
In automatically being against everything that the fake-left says it is for, it ends up supporting the real agenda being advanced by the global system, the one they have hidden behind all the woke dogma.
We saw this recently with Robert Malone (pictured), the American scientist who apparently turned whistleblower against the mRNA “vaccines” he helped develop and is thus regarded by some as a leading dissident voice.
But in an article he published on July 18 this year, supposedly against “green colonialism”, he in fact peddled all the same imperialist “development” arguments which have long been used by the system, talking about African women being in “poverty” because they hand-wash their families’ clothes and, crucially, describing this as “a waste of human labor. Labor that could be put to better and more productive uses”. 
As authentic dissidents, if we challenge the climate narrative it is not because we don’t care about the Earth’s future or the effects of industrial society, but for exactly the opposite reason – that we can see that a “green” industrial-capitalist future would spell disaster for the natural world.
If we challenge the transgender narrative, it is not because we want to force people, in all their individual diversity, into narrow gender-based categories, but because we can see how the need for that diversity is being exploited by corporate interests and turned into a mutilation and lifelong drug dependency that represents the very opposite of personal freedom and self-fulfilment.
If we oppose 15-minute cities, it is not because we cheerlead car-culture and wouldn’t like to see a scaled-down localised world, but because we have understood that the project is a Trojan Horse to introduce the smart city digital concentration camps of the dystopian Fourth Industrial Revolution.
In parallel with our critique of the global entity, the criminocracy, we need to be advancing a positive philosophy based on values that may well, in truth, be shared by many of those who have currently been duped into following the official agenda.
A recent booklet that we brought out at Winter Oak, a collection of conversations between Crow and me, names these fundamental values as truth, beauty, nature and withness, withness being our belonging to each other, to the world around us and indeed to the cosmos as a whole. 
If these core values shine through with powerful authenticity in everything we say and do, then we can break through the system’s wall of lies and spark the flame of righteous revolt in the hearts of many millions of others.
After all, how many people out there, of whatever political background, would not prefer our values of truth, beauty, nature and withness to the system’s agenda of lies, ugliness, artifice and separation?
The world is currently in the hands of what is nothing less than a psychopathic death cult, whereas our resistance is a force for life.
We need to be aware of that and to communicate that in all that we do and say, along with the joyful conviction that despite the darkness of the current era, it is life that will, eventually and inevitably, prevail.
As the title of our booklet declares: “There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come”.
 Piers Corbyn, ‘Man-Made Climate Change Does not Exist!”, Reading University Debating Journal, September 19, 2019.