Time and again, the World Economic Forum
(WEF) and its global collaborators have "predicted" the future with
stunning accuracy, sometimes years in advance, and then when the
predictions come true they pretend as though they had nothing to do with
it.
It's worth remembering, then, that WEF founder Klaus Schwab, during
the May 2022 meeting in Davos, clearly stated that the future doesn't
just happen, it is "BUILT — by us," referring to himself and the other
attendees in the room. So, make no mistake, they truly believe they have
the right to decide the fate of the world, and that you and I have no
say in the matter.
That fate was in June 2020 formally announced under the banner of "The Great Reset," by Schwab himself.1
This "build back better" scheme involves the complete reorganization
and restructuring of all parts of society, including finance, industry,
education, "social contracts," the energy sector and the food system.
As far as the food system is concerned, the WEF envisions a food
system that doesn't include animal foods or require a large land
footprint. In fact, for several years now, the WEF has promoted the idea
that we should get used to eating bugs2,3,4 and drinking reclaimed sewage. As just one example, in mid-October 2018, the WEF posted on Twitter:5
"Good grub: why we might be eating insects soon."
Bugs, Sewage and Cannibalism — The Cabal's Plans for You
The WEF's many predictions are now
rapidly turning into reality, and its selfish agendas are, of course,
hailed as brilliant and necessary by its media allies. For example, in
February 2021, Time magazine6
insisted we really ought to eat more bugs to save the planet, and in
May 2021, Bloomberg announced that "The Future of Water Is Recycled
Sewage, and We'll All Be Drinking It."7
Indeed, California has already started its toilet-to-tap transition.8 July 23, 2022, The New York Times9,10
then took the WEF's dystopian projections to a whole new level,
announcing that the time to consider cannibalism is now upon us:
"An image came to Chelsea G. Summers: a boyfriend,
accidentally on purpose hit by a car, some quick work with a corkscrew
and his liver served Tuscan style, on toast. That figment of her twisted
imagination is what prompted Ms. Summers to write her novel, 'A Certain
Hunger,' about a restaurant critic with a taste for (male) human flesh.
Turns out, cannibalism has a time and a place. In the
pages of some recent stomach-churning books, and on television and film
screens, Ms. Summers and others suggest that that time is now ... Can
you stomach it?"
The NYT writer, Alex Beggs — who also writes for the food magazine,
Bon Appétit — goes on to list several recent TV shows and films
featuring cannibalism in a romanticized light. Well, how else do you
brainwash people — especially young people — into accepting the
unacceptable if not by glamorizing it through the magic of
tell-a-vision? And it's working. A Reddit message board dedicated to the
Showtime series "Yellowjackets" has 51,000 members.
"The show's tension is in the knowledge that you know cannibalism is
coming, but when? And why?" Beggs writes. The show, no doubt, mirrors a
tension the elitists of the world actually want to emerge in real life.
"What in the world are you talking about?" you may ask. Let me put it
bluntly and not beat around the bush: The WEF and its allies are
manufacturing food shortages, which in some areas may progress into
actual famine, and they want you to know that when that time comes, it's
OK for you to eat your neighbor.
You'll be saving the planet, and yourself. Cannibalism is a "win" for
the world, so don't be squeamish. Heck, you might even enjoy it, and
there's no need to be riddled with useless guilt. You're still a good
person.
That's the subliminal message being broadcast through these articles,
books and TV shows that normalize cannibalism, and it's not by
accident. Need I remind you that the NYT deputy managing editor, Rebecca
Blumenstein, is a WEF member?11 She knows what's coming.
And then, of course, there's the fact checkers insisting The NYT "did not publish an article that normalizes cannibalism,"12
which is basically proof that it did just that. Those of us who read it
did not misunderstand its unstated purpose. The New York Times has also
written glowing tributes to Marina Abramovic, whose “art” involves
graphic references to cannibalism.13
Lab-Grown Human Steak
In addition to books and TV shows that glorify cannibalism, there's
lab-grown human steak, and vegan meat designed to taste like human meat.
Starting with the former, in December 2020, steak grown from human
cells was featured as "art" at the Design Museum in London, U.K.14
The creator of the "Ouroboros Steak" — a reference to the ancient
alchemical symbol of the snake that devours its tail and is reborn from
itself — claimed the installation was a critique against the meat
industry, and arose from spending a year "imagining how climate change
might impact the future of food consumption."15
He was reportedly upset about the fact that "the focus quickly became
centered on accusations that we were promoting cannibalism." At the
time, The New York Times reported:16
"'Ouroboros Steak' examines, but does not promote,
auto-cannibalism as a satirical take on the increasing demand for meat
products around the world, which scientists have warned will likely
contribute to carbon emissions and reduced biodiversity.
The designers hoped that shocking audiences with the
suggestion would trigger an examination of environmental responsibility
and the clean-meat industry, which has promoted itself as producing
'kill-free' food, although most companies heavily rely on fetal bovine
serum harvested during the slaughter of pregnant cows for cell
cultivation."
While the designers may have had pure intentions, the end result is
still something that benefits the depraved agenda of the global elite.
It's also worth noting that livestock — raised in a regenerative
fashion, and not in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) —
actually have a very positive impact on the climate.
Are They Trying to Normalize Cannibalism? Absolutely
Taking the human steak idea a step further, a company called BiteLabs
claims to be selling artisanal salami made from lab-grown celebrity
flesh.17
According to their website, they intend to collect biopsy samples from
celebrities, isolate the muscle cells, and then grow the celebrity meat
using a proprietary bioreactor.
The lab-grown flesh is then cured, dried, aged and spiced according
to Italian tradition. It’s unclear whether any celebrities have signed
up to become salami, but the company does appear to be real. New York
Grub Street wrote an article about the startup in 2014.18 IFL Science19 followed up in January 2022, noting that “It’s perfectly possible” to create salami from cloned celebrity meat.
Other examples of an ongoing effort to normalize cannibalism include a
2018 article discussing the benefits of teenage blood plasma,20
said to have rejuvenating effects. A 2.5-liter order was said to cost
about $8,000 at the time. In a bit of predictive programming, the film
“Soylent Green” — in which the protagonist realizes the government food
being handed out is made from humans — was set in the year 2022.21 And then, there’s Katy Perry (below).
Vegan Burger Made to Taste Like Human Flesh
Continuing the parade of cannibalism-normalizing trends, in June
2022, a vegan burger said to “taste like human meat” won a silver award
at the annual Cannes Lions festival of Creativity.22,23
The human meat burger, made from soy, mushrooms, wheat protein,
plant-based fats and a secret spice mix, debuted during a 2021 Halloween
festival in Stockholm, Sweden.
The video above was the ad for that event. While they state that "no
humans were injured in the development of this product," one obviously
wonders how they came up with the taste profile for human meat in the
first place.
Perhaps they invented it, and it actually doesn't taste anything like
human flesh. Who'd be able to tell the difference? Either way, this is
yet another example where the idea of cannibalism is embraced and
lauded.
'Cannibals Against Climate Change'
Coincidentally, another Swede, professor Magnus Soderlund, made
headlines in 2019 by suggesting "humans should become cannibals to fight
climate change, because eating human flesh is more 'sustainable' than
the meat industry."24
He even insisted cannibalism was a more sustainable option than a diet
of insects. While his concept didn't grow legs right then and there, it
seems someone, somewhere, took note of his insane ideas.
While cannibalism has indeed featured on and off throughout human
history, it was typically — although with some notable exceptions — a
measure of last resort. People ate family members and neighbors to
survive famine.25
To suggest that the most advanced human civilization in known memory
start eating each other "to save the environment" is unreasonable in the
extreme. We have regenerative farming methods that would ease most of
our environmental concerns. There's absolutely no reason to jump from
industrial farming all the way to cannibalism.
Green Agenda Seeks to Normalize Lowered Standard of Living
Much of the supposed "inspiration" behind the promotion of unnatural
diets is said to come from a desire to save the planet. While that's
admirable, it's important to realize that the entire "green" agenda — as
it is currently promoted — is nothing but a ruse, a scare tactic, to
bring people to the point of accepting living conditions that would
otherwise be unacceptable, such as eating a diet of bugs, drinking
reclaimed sewage water and even, apparently, cannibalism.
The green agenda is based on cherry-picked flawed ideas, such as the
idea that nitrogen fertilizer is a pollutant that must be reined in by
eliminating farming. Without farmers, what will we eat? The
technocratic, transhumanist-loving cabal's answer: Weeds, bugs and,
possibly, each other.
It sounds wild and crazy, but they really do want to get rid of as
many people as possible, and no strategy is ethically off-limits, be it
the promotion of abortion, the elimination of fossil fuels without
having a workable replacement, the mandating of experimental gene
transfer injections, insect diets, reclaimed sewage water or
cannibalism.
By the way, a number of U.S. states have also adopted alkaline hydrolysis26
as an alternative to cremation, where dead bodies are dissolved and the
water from the process is flushed down the sewer. What could possibly
go wrong by combining the flushing of water used to dissolve human
remains into the sewer and then repurposing that same water into
drinking water? Even if mostly symbolic, this too is a form of
cannibalism.
Why Are the Elitists' 'Answers' so Gross?
If you're like most, you're probably wondering why everything the
technocratic cabal presents as "the answer" to our global woes is so
darn gross and dehumanizing. The simple answer is that we're not human
to them. We're a commodity, like cattle, that exist for their benefit
and exploitation. They're "above" the rest of us. We may not have a
caste system, officially, but there are two classes in this world.
Before farmers realized that mad cow was created by the feeding of
bovine parts back to cattle, this practice was commonplace. And, frankly
speaking, the technocratic elitists see us the same way. Why not feed
useless eaters back to the ones that still have some worker-bee value?
To them, that's just plain rational.
It's efficient, and technocracy is based in large part on the
efficiency of any given system. Robots are more efficient than humans,
hence robots are the better choice. Artificial intelligence is more
efficient than the human intellect, and hence they want to merge with
it. What to do with useless humans, is the question. And the answer is
to get rid of them, in whatever way works, without raising the ire of
too many peasants.
Celebrities Embrace Bug Diet
For now, the normalization of cannibalism is still in its infancy.
But the fact that bugs are on the menu — now, today — is undeniable.
Celebrities, of course, have a role to play in any successful social
engineering project, and in the video above, the actress Nicole Kidman
takes one for the team.
"Three million people in the world eat bugs, and I'm one of them,"
she says, wolfing down a number of different insects, some live and
others fried for a crispy crunch. You can bet your bottom dollar that
the fried ones were fried in seed oils. My skepticism of her genuineness
aside, research has concluded that celebrities can indeed "persuade
people to eat insects." As reported by PsychReg.org:27
"Using celebrity endorsements in adverts for
insect-based foods can increase people's willingness to include insects
in their diet, finds new research from BI Norwegian Business School
(BI), Chuo University, Miyagi University, and Oxford University.
To combat and prevent a global food crisis, we need
to explore alternative protein sources. The UN has urged people to
consider the consumption of insects as they are nutritious, sustainable,
and readily available worldwide. However, many struggles with the
concept of eating insects ...
The findings showed that celebrities' perceived
trustworthiness, knowledge about insect-based foods, and appropriateness
are crucial factors in increasing people's willingness to eat insects.
However, different genders responded differently: For
men, ads featuring actors or athletes were most effective, while only
actors effectively influenced women. In comparison, musicians did not
appear to be as influential. Using musicians in ads made women less
willing to consume insect-based foods ...
'Our findings demonstrate that celebrity endorsement
can be a very effective strategy to increase consumer interest in eating
more insects, as long as the right celebrity is targeted at the right
gender.'"
Obviously, this research is not languishing in a hidden drawer. The
technocratic Great Reset adherents are putting the findings to work.
Examples of celebrities espousing the deliciousness and healthiness of
bugs include Drew Barrymore, Robert Downey Jr., celebrity chef Gordon
Ramsay, Salma Hayek and Angelina Jolie, just to name a few.28
Other Types of 'Cannibalism'
While cannibalism is now being approached in a more head-on manner,
humans have been ingesting and taking in other humans in other ways for
many years. For example, human aborted fetal cells are frequently used
in the development of vaccines.
And, while human cells are not present in the final product, DNA
fragments and cell proteins can still be present. To learn more about
this process, see this article. A short excerpt reads as follows:29
"Apart from any moral conflict one might have over
the use of aborted fetuses for vaccine production, we need to remember
that DNA from the aborted fetuses actually ends up in vaccines as a contaminant ...
Independent research30
has found that vaccines manufactured in human fetal cell lines contain
'unacceptably high levels of fetal DNA fragment contaminants,' These
fragments, while in trace amounts, are still biologically active once
injected into the body of another individual via vaccine.
Vaccines elicit systemic immune activation and
inflammatory responses, which increases the likelihood of foreign DNA
uptake into the host's genome. And in fact, it has been found that fetal
cell DNA can spontaneously integrate into the genome of the vaccinated
person."
Other products that use aborted fetus parts in their development
include cosmetics, pharmaceutical drugs and flavor enhancers found in
many foods and beverages.31 Is the use of aborted fetal cells in these kinds of products justifiable?
When Ends Justify the Means, Bad Things Happen
Surprisingly, according to Human Life International (HLI),32
a supposedly pro-life, Catholic organization, it is justifiable if it's
"in the service of humanity." HLI believes vaccines are in the service
of humanity, so therefore the use of aborted fetal cells in the
development of vaccines is acceptable. Cosmetics, however, cannot save
lives, so therefore, the "disgusting practice" of using fetuses in the
creation of cosmetics should be opposed.
It seems to me that this is really splitting hairs. HLI is basically
saying that the ends justify the means, even if otherwise deemed
abhorrent and potentially unhealthy (as injecting another person's DNA
fragments can be). By that rationale, cannibalism could be justified in
the name of environmental protection (as some people insist), and I
really don't think we ought to go there.
As mentioned earlier, we have good, solid solutions for our
environmental concerns. Regenerative agriculture — which includes and
indeed requires livestock — is the way to go if we really want to clean
up the globe, reduce water consumption and normalize weather.
The notion that our only way out is a diet of insects and cannibalism
is foolishly ignorant in the extreme, and needs to be opposed at every
turn. Those are not foundational solutions in the least. They are tools
to enslave, denigrate and dehumanize humanity, invented by people who
see every steak on your plate as something that has been stolen from
theirs.