All Episodes
Previous Next
May 15, 2024 - Epoch Times
41:46
Parliament Member Exposes Carbon Tracking, AI Money, Dangers of Globalist Government
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Is there any discussion in Parliament?
No, there is no discussion in Parliament.
Parliaments are theatre settings which serve to give people the impression of democracy and rational deliberation.
There is absolutely no intelligent exchange of arguments in Parliament.
Parliament really is a show institution.
And behind the scenes the decisions have already been made, and then you get all these actors that can claim to be representing their voter base or whatever, and at the end of the day, precisely the thing that was proposed before is going to pass through, maybe with one or two minor, micro changes, merely to indicate, to give the impression that we've listened and so on.
While traveling around the Netherlands last year and speaking with the farmers who were getting kicked off their land, we had the opportunity to sit down and interview a member of the Dutch parliament, Mr. Terry Bidet.
Terry is a bit of a unique member of parliament, though, given the fact that the political party he founded is one of the only, if not the only, party in Europe which explicitly opposes the United Nations Agenda 2030.
So, Terry, thank you so much for joining us.
Can you start by introducing yourself or maybe people who are not familiar with Dutch politics as well as your party?
Thank you.
Yeah, I'm Thierry Baudet.
It's a French name, but I'm Dutch and I'm the founder and leader of the political party Forum for Democracy.
It was founded as a think tank in 2015 and then in 2017 I participated in the elections.
I won seats in the Dutch parliament.
And Forum for Democracy now is the largest party in terms of members.
Membership is over 60,000.
And the governing party, the Liberal Party, has less than 25,000 members.
So that gives you an impression of what a significant following we have.
And we are the only political party who explicitly oppose the Great Reset, the Agenda 2030, the expropriation of the farmers, the COVID conspiracy, and so on and so forth.
So I think we really have a unique position in the Dutch political landscape.
Why do you actually think that is?
Because I've spoken to a lot of Dutch farmers and people in the countryside, maybe not in the cities, and it seems like a lot of people oppose the Great Reset and Agenda 2030.
Why do you think you're the only political party explicitly opposing it?
Well, lots of people oppose elements of the Great Reset.
For example, mass migration movements.
For example, supranational legislation.
For example, the expropriation of the farmers.
But there's only one political group, which is mine, that calls out the Inherent connectedness of all those phenomena.
There is a single agenda behind it.
And people are very hesitant to name it for what it is.
A great reset.
A globalist takeover plan.
Because they're very afraid to be called conspiracy theorists.
And people tend to shy away from exposing the agenda that's behind all these separate phenomena.
A question that might be in a lot of people's minds is in terms of terminology and how they all relate to another.
How does Agenda 2030, the Sustainable Development Goals and the Great Reset, how do they all interrelate to one another?
Right, so the Agenda 2030 is basically a set of principles that have been drawn up and agreed upon by the United Nations.
And the content of that Agenda 2030 is 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
They have been made explicit, SDGs.
17 Sustainable Development Goals, which taken together, things like no hunger, like clean drinking water, like education for everyone.
But if you think about them through what they mean in practice, what you arrive at is a global, bureaucratic, quasi-socialist government.
And that is what we call the Great Reset.
So Agenda 2030 sets the principles that we call SDGs, and the 17 SDGs together imply world government.
You know, one of the interesting things is that it has this kind of very socialist-slash-communist veneer, which is that it has very good-sounding packaging.
End world hunger is a good example.
You mentioned that.
Who wouldn't want to end world hunger?
But if you dig down deep into it, it seems like to actually implement it, you would need to give up a lot of authority, whether it's national authority or even personal authority, to a state actor or even an international actor.
Absolutely.
My favorite example of this rhetoric element of socialism is equal opportunities.
If you think seriously about equal opportunities, it means destroying families.
And that's precisely what happened in Soviet Russia during the high days or the low days of Stalin.
That's what they tried to do.
They tried to destroy family structures to give people equal opportunities.
So again we see that the road to hell is paved with good intentions or at least with good rhetoric.
Why does equal opportunity equal the destruction of families?
Because families create better or worse opportunities for an individual.
If an individual is born, a child is born into an affluent family where lots of connections exist and people have people that they know and they get opportunities, then of course they have a better chance in life than someone who is born maybe in a not so affluent family with perhaps an instable marriage and so on and so forth.
The very place that we're born is meaningful for our opportunities and chances in life.
This is a fact of life.
And anyone who aspires to a society with freedom, with individual liberty, will have to, at some point, accept those inequalities.
Inequalities are part of life.
And if we try to get away with those inequalities and differences between people, then what you end up at is a totalitarian society.
And that's precisely the road we're on.
We're on the road to serfdom.
We're on the road to totalitarianism.
It's global totalitarianism.
And it always masquerades with these beautiful, equal and inclusive and so on slogans.
So, I wanted to kind of back up and maybe discuss the way it manifests specifically here in the Netherlands.
So, let's circle back to about a year ago when politicians were already discussing possible global food shortages.
That was the kind of what was happening across the world.
And yet, shockingly to a lot of people, The Dutch government, the Dutch parliament, floated this idea that would essentially wipe out 30-50% of the farmers here in this country.
Yes.
How could that happen?
It can happen because this is precisely how the globalists have managed to take over national parliaments and national governments.
It's the same thing that happened during COVID, right?
They had a couple of years of exercises where they exercised with a global pandemic outbreak and then, hey, all of a sudden there was this global pandemic and they already had the script and they knew what to do and all countries aligned and they all submitted to the judgments of the World Health Organization and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and so on.
So this is the way these people work.
They do practices, they do rehearsals, and then they implement these policies.
And I'm seriously expecting global famine to...
All right, just to pause here for a super quick moment.
Listen, it's obvious that the financial system is not looking too great.
After being pumped up with trillions of virtually free government dollars for many, many years now, well, the stock bubble might actually burst in the near future.
And in that process, unfortunately, it could take away the nest egg of anyone who happens to be exposed to it.
And so, consider taking this opportunity to diversify into something which is beyond the grasp of Washington D.C.
and Wall Street, physical gold and silver.
And the best company to use, in my opinion, is the sponsor of today's episode, American Hartford Gold, who I should mention is also my own personal gold and silver bullion dealer.
And besides myself, they have thousands of 5-star reviews from other Americans, and they also have an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
And working with them is rather simple.
They have a huge selection of coins, bars, and rounds to choose from.
They have super friendly staff who you can call and they can set up either gold delivery directly to your doorstep or they can even set you up in a gold IRA.
And then lastly, best of all, if you tell them the Romans sent you, they will throw in a free gold coin with your first qualifying purchase.
So give them a call.
The number is 866-242-2352.
That's 866-242-2352 or you can simply text Roman to 65532.
I'll also throw a link to their webpage.
It'll be down there in the description box below.
But more specifically, maybe for people who have never heard about what happened here, what actually led up to that?
Like, what is this nitrogen debate really all about?
Right.
So the excuse, as it were, to disown and expropriate the farmers in the Netherlands is that cattle, especially, emits nitrogen oxide.
And nitrogen oxide, and this is a very, it's a technical legal thing, but nitrogen oxide is a fertilizer.
It's a natural fertilizer.
So what happens, that the terrain in this country becomes more fertile, therefore we get more trees.
If you get more trees, you get less clover, moss and hay, which are typical vegetations that grow on terrain that is poor with fertilizers.
And in the 1990s, the European Union had agreed that the Netherlands must maintain a certain percentage of hay, clover and moss.
Therefore, the current situation, where we have a little bit more nitrogen oxide emission because of the flourishing of Dutch farmers, leads to a change in the Dutch environment, which is in conflict with EU regulations.
And what Dutch politicians have then done, they've spinned this as bad for nature and bad for the environment.
But it's not bad for nature or bad for the environment.
It's simply that it changes a little bit.
We've got a little bit more trees and a little bit less clover and hay.
So basically there was a choice for Dutch politicians.
They could have said, look, European Union, we're the largest net contributor to the EU budget.
We're really sorry, but we're not going to live with these absurd standards from the 1990s anymore.
That was option A. Great options, no problem.
Option B was to disown and expropriate 50% of our farmers.
That's what they've chosen.
In my mind, there really isn't any excuse for the thing they've been doing, other than that they're following a script where they are thinking as globalists, they're thinking already from the perspective of a global, bureaucratic, quasi-totalitarian System of governing, system of rule.
And they just like food chains to become more international, for the Netherlands to become more interdependent.
So it will become ever more difficult for sovereignists like me To break away from that global structure.
So to me, it's really an exponent of the same mindset that gave us the euro currency, that gave us mass migration, that gave us supranational legislation, and now the fantasy of global food chains.
So what you're saying is that 22-23 years ago, The Netherlands, the Dutch government, signed an agreement with the EU to protect three specific types of vegetation that thrive in low nitrogen environments.
Exactly.
Since then, the farmers have been just growing.
That's one of your biggest exports, I guess.
So, of course, it's a big industry here.
And over time, the nitrogen level has changed, which is not necessarily in and of itself a bad thing.
It just changes the type of vegetation that thrives, right?
Exactly.
But instead of just accepting that reality, they're choosing to stick with this old agreement and kick out I've been wondering about this for many years.
Yeah, we're currently at 40%.
Yeah, that's the level we're currently talking about.
But is there any like...
By the way, your summary is 100% correct.
This is exactly what has happened.
But is there any thinking among the minds of the people in parliament saying, "Hey, this is not an appropriate response"?
I've been wondering about this for many years.
Is there not any thinking in their minds?
What are they thinking?
And my view is that a very significant part of politicians are simply following orders, following the mainstream.
We have to do this because they have decided that we must do it, therefore we will do it.
However, there's a small group of people who do feel that this is a larger trend.
And it's my conviction that they are globalists.
So they believe that interdependence, increased interdependence, will break populist resistance.
And farmers obviously are a great source of populist resistance.
They have a connection to the land.
They have family companies that have been owned by generations.
They have a natural inclination to be patriotic, to be nationalistic.
And so it's part of a grand strategy to create a global citizen.
To move this progressive revolution forwards.
And they support that, because they believe in Homo sapiens 2.0.
They believe there's going to be a new human being, a post-revolutionary human being.
If you think about it, I really think there are lots of scary similarities with the original communist revolution, where they attempted to create a new type of man as well.
And we're in the midst of a recurrence of that So you're suggesting that the farmers, because I thought maybe it's because they own a lot of the land, but you're suggesting it's also because they hold a lot of these traditional values and they're sort of like a thorn in the side of the globalist plan.
It's both!
Recently there was a negotiation with the Dutch Minister for Agriculture.
representatives of the farmers and the Minister for Housing.
And it is absolutely true that the Minister for Housing has announced, the Netherlands currently has about 17 million inhabitants, that he believes we're going to have about 20 million inhabitants in a couple of years.
And that's almost exclusively because of immigration.
Because the Dutch native population is stable or slightly declining even in numbers.
So there is this vision of the Netherlands becoming even more of an immigration country.
And of course, where are we going to find the land?
That's a win-win situation, isn't it?
They destroy populist resistance and also they realize their targets of mass immigration and internationalization and you know the corollary of that, the side effect that they also like very much is that it becomes increasingly difficult if you have more and more and more immigration In such numbers, in such a rapid period of time, to speak of the Dutch identity, the Dutch national identity.
Because, hey, you're going to live with people from all over the place, right?
There's not going to be a Dutchman anymore.
So, I think this is just a convergence of all these things that they believe in, which carry the same central message, which is the central message of We're moving towards a global super state governed centrally with no democracy to speak of and we're creating a new kind of A person, the global, deracinated, unuprooted individual.
Wow, so you said the plan is to have 20 million... Yeah, 20 million inhabitants in a couple of years.
So that's an additional 3 million, so that's close to a 5% increase in the population with just immigrants.
That's huge.
No, it's more than a 15% increase actually, from 17 million to 20 million.
So it's huge.
That's right, wow.
But this has been happening for so many decades and not just in the Netherlands.
This is another indication which brought me to the conviction that we're dealing with a plan here.
I wouldn't necessarily call it a conspiracy, because they're rather open about it.
They're honest about it.
They say precisely what they want to do, what they want to achieve.
Every Western country is going through the same phases of revolution.
Where systematically, slowly but surely, our sovereignty is being dismantled.
Our national cultures and identities are being diluted through mass immigration.
Our economic structures are being taken over by the climate change mystique, which ultimately will lead to a personal carbon dioxide.
budget that will register through smart households and smart cities precisely how long you take a shower, how much meat you eat, how much you drive your car and so on and so forth.
It will all be registered through a digital ID which will be connected to a central bank digital currency where every individual dollar or euro you spend is labeled so they can track every single payment that you make.
And that will be registered through an artificial intelligence algorithm on a global level.
And we already see how the current dictatorship in China is very far in realizing this already.
The technology is there.
The conviction of our leaders is such.
They do not believe in individual freedom, in human liberty.
They believe in technocracy on a global scale.
This is happening right now and I'm very honored that you're interviewing me.
I'm always so, I feel so warmed by international friends and allies that I meet.
But frankly I feel that my party is pretty lonely in Europe because we are the only ones, not even just in the Netherlands, but in Europe, who explicitly say this.
This is an agenda.
This is not just something, I think it was Franklin Roosevelt who said, in politics, nothing ever happens by accident.
If you don't, if you weren't involved in the decision making, then you're just out of, you weren't part of the room where things were being decided.
But I mean, this was 80 years ago, 90 years ago when Roosevelt said this.
And we're now, this is, A moment where so much more international structures have been created, and all these countries are implementing the same policies.
This is not a coincidence.
This is not an accident.
This is an agenda, and we have to stop it.
Wow.
So, you know, when you were just talking about that just now, I was thinking how if this is not an isolated incident, this is part of a more Yeah.
you know, larger design, right?
So, okay, so you kick these farmers off the land. - Yeah. - You have corollary movements happening, I'm sure here, but definitely in America, of kind of reduction in the amount of meat.
They say beef takes up too many resources in terms of the land and it's too polluting.
And at the same time, there's this push towards manufactured meat, fake lab-grown meat, eating bugs, things like that.
Because obviously you need to replace the protein that you're not going to get from beef from somewhere else.
So it seems like there is this kind of globalist design on what the future of life would be like.
Is that something you agree with?
That's correct.
And I'll tell you another thing.
Testosterone is not part of that plan.
Can you talk a bit more about that?
We're dealing with a group of people that see human life as essentially a logistical problem.
There are all these individuals that have their own ideas and plans and they set up political parties and they write books with, you know, that's very impractical.
They feel that they should be in charge, they have the rational outlook of how we should live, of what our lives should look like and this In this entire, this grand scheme of things, of course testosterone is a big problem.
Because testosterone is the creative hormone.
It's the hormone of masculinity.
It's the hormone that makes people become angry.
It makes people start to fight.
It makes people desire freedom.
And of course testosterone and eating meat are very intimately connected.
If you eat vegetarian food, your testosterone level declines significantly.
If you share a car, If you're not reinforced as a sovereign individual, your testosterone levels will decline.
This has been researched very extensively in the social sciences.
And I don't think anyone disputes it.
So, we are gradually turning into cattle.
We're turning into being governed by a huge administrative state.
And there are people behind the scenes Who like that, who support this.
And I think the people in politics, national politics, are essentially the fall guys.
They have to take the hits for implementing these policies, but they don't design them themselves.
And for me, the moment when I realized that was during the COVID period.
And that's what my latest book is about, really.
It's appearing in English in a couple of weeks, actually.
The COVID Conspiracy, the Great Recent and the Globalist Takeover.
That's the title, because I think COVID showed us how
deeply coordinated this agenda really is and how connected all these things are and perhaps up until COVID it was still possible to believe that this was just an ideological delusion and it was just something that they they had this trauma of the second world war and they were afraid to be you know too nationalistic and they felt that the European Union had some economic benefits and so on and so forth but now it was clear that governments were willing
To impose policies that were not justifiable scientifically, from a healthcare perspective and so on, in any way economically.
It was just disastrous.
It was unfounded and it was designed, it was used.
To create a QR society where the first elements of a social credit system were first tested on the population.
And now they're moving on with their next steps, with the global famine, with the expropriation of the farmers, with the personal carbon dioxide budget and so on.
So this was for me the moment when I realized that.
And speaking out is perhaps the only thing we can really do, but we have to speak out, we have to speak the truth and to call it for what it is.
Let me ask you, because this is something I've always wondered about, and you have this unique position because you're actually in parliament speaking with these people.
Is it the case that those members of parliament who are pushing more towards this globalist agenda, do they just agree with the underlying principles that this is where society is going, this is for the betterment of the world, maybe there's a climate crisis that we need to address, and they just have that shared ideology and they're moving along with the stream, and or is it the case that there's actually someone at the top telling them like, hey, this is the policy you need to adopt in your country next for us to reach that next step?
There's a third option, which is a sociological response of people, where they're not exactly thinking for themselves, but they're not exactly taking orders either.
It's a sort of, it's a group thing.
And I think the best metaphor to understand this is to look at flocks of birds, for example.
The herding instinct of cows when they're in a group.
And you see there seems to be an invisible hand.
guiding them.
And sometimes it's a couple of dogs barking here and there on the side.
And you see the sheep or the cows or with the birds it's the wind and the sun and they respond to it.
But it's a quasi-organic move.
And in the background there are ideologues.
Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum is a place where ideological argument is being expressed.
And there are more Places like that.
I'm not a World Economic Forum fundamentalist.
I think it's just one among many places where they make these globalist plans.
At the national level, my conclusion is that these people, I see them daily, they are Group thinkers.
They are the kind of people that I have encountered in so many places in my life.
I've seen this often when you have a cash machine in the street.
You know, when you get your bank pass.
And there are two cash machines.
I'm sure anyone has this experience.
And there's a line in front of one cash machine.
And the other cash machine does not have a line.
But people instinctively start lining up behind the line.
And very few people actually walk up to the next cash machine and say, hey, I'm going to cash here, I don't have to stand in line.
There's something about human nature which inclines and politics, democratic politics, Recruits those people that they just want to be part of something.
And they walk off, they go to international conferences, they come home again.
They're like, oh, well, this is going to be the direction that we're going to follow.
Dutch Prime Minister, for example, during COVID, he was not...
He was not going to read 15 books about viruses, respiratory viruses, about lockdowns.
He wasn't going to study for himself.
Look, what's really in these vaccines?
What's mRNA?
How does it work?
No way.
That's what I did.
I just ordered books, started reading, and then I came to a position And that's the position that I took.
But they just have a phone call with Boris Johnson.
He calls Emmanuel Macron.
He's like, oh, well, what's the WHO saying?
Let's do it like that.
That's how these people work.
So they're not exactly This is the conclusion of your question, the real answer.
They're not exactly taking direct orders.
And they're not exactly ideologues themselves either.
They just move with the flow.
They just go with the flow.
And that's also how the journalists respond to them.
Because the journalists are very lazy as well.
They think what's in the New York Times is what's happening in the world.
That's what journalists in the Netherlands think.
So like, oh, what's happening in Brazil?
Well, let's read the New York Times, you know?
That's how they... And then they just type it over.
They follow that.
And this is a shocking conclusion that I've come to, which is that it's apparently so easy to manipulate the world into terrible things.
It's very easy to make people do terrible things, because most people don't think for themselves.
So in the scenario you laid out, who are the sheepdogs in that case?
Would it be like Klaus Schwab and whoever controls the WHO?
And who's the shepherd?
We don't know.
That's the thing behind the curtain.
And everybody I've spoken to who's been calling these people out and who've been seeing the larger picture, everyone says, look, there's still a level there somewhere.
And we just haven't gotten there yet.
But you think there is a shepherd.
It's not just some invisible hand.
Completely invisible.
You mean non-existent and spontaneous?
Well, who knows?
In my book I explicitly leave that open.
I say this is happening.
We have to oppose it.
We have to fight it with everything we've got.
I think there is probably at least one more layer of power and of agenda setting that we were not aware of yet.
Even if it doesn't, that shouldn't be the argument that we fight on.
It's happening, it's clearly happening.
There are ideologues, there are people who are lackeys, who are henchmen, who are executing the program, the orders.
We have to save civilization.
I wanted to circle back to the farm issue because I spent some time actually traveling the country and speaking with the farmers and maybe half a dozen told me about the fact that they have a system now.
Because the problem that they expressed to me is that when the cow poops and pees, when that's mixed together, that's when the ammonia Well, this is a very good indication of the thing I've been trying to say.
what creates this nitrogen problem.
Well, there's a piece of technology that can actually separate those two.
And they told me that if the parliament was actually to help the farmers implement this technology, it would cost less than the amount that has been earmarked to buy out all the farmers when they go out of business.
And yet that discussion is not being had.
Why?
Well, this is a very good indication of the thing I've been trying to say.
It's never been about nitrogen.
Rather like the COVID policies have never been about healthcare.
When it was shown beyond any doubt that lockdowns cause more health problems than that they save.
Still, they pushed on with it.
It's the same with this.
Even if you would accept the premise that nitrogen oxide is a problem, then of course you're going to take into account every possible way to reduce it, including the thing you just mentioned about separating poo and pee.
And another example, of course, is because nitrogen oxide is not just emitted by cattle, it's also emitted by traffic.
It's also emitted by building houses.
So what are you going to do if you're rational about this?
You're going to limit immigration, right?
That's a very logical thing.
If you're serious about nitrogen oxide, then you're going to reduce every element that causes nitrogen emission.
This has not been the case.
They've simply targeted the farmers because that's the agenda.
And they took this quasi-argument, this excuse for doing so, in a nitrogen oxide narrative, which is neither believable nor the problem itself, because you can solve it in other ways.
So, you're exactly right.
It was very good that you were circling the country.
It's funny that we need international journalists to do that for us.
Why aren't our mainstream journalists doing this?
Why aren't any major television programs talking about this?
It's a very scary question to ask.
Prior to coming here, I read a lot of the headlines and the underlying articles in Dutch translated.
And a lot of them seem to just put it into like dialectical terms.
Farmers protest safety regulations.
Farmers protest climate policies.
It just seems like if you're just following that narrative, you're like, oh, the farmers are just against good climate.
They're against clean environment, right?
Does that lead to the people here being extremely apathetic?
Because it seems like you have the red scarf hanging on your window, I noticed, that shows that you're in solidarity with the farmers.
Yes.
And you get outside of the city, a lot of people have that.
They have the upside-down Dutch flag flying.
But here in Amsterdam or in The Hague or in the big cities, that's not the case.
People seem to either not know, not care.
How do you actually foresee this playing out?
Will there have to be no food in the supermarket before they actually start noticing what's happening?
Well, my fear is that People are going to be apathetic about this.
My fear is that people are going to be made very tired of the endless
antagonistic discussions as they're being presented rather like you say so we have the farmers where they have their economic interests and then we have the climate interests and how we're going to deal with this and so on so people are not going to be invited I fear to see the larger picture and because they don't see the larger picture they don't really understand what they have to oppose what they have to fight and the result as you rightly say is apathy it's like it's sort of
Tiredness, it's like, what's his name, Winston Smith at the very end of 1984.
He just drinks his gin at the bar and sort of...
These are forces that are beyond my control.
I'll just live my little life.
And that's precisely where they want us to be.
So that's my fear.
My fear really is, I'm rather pessimistic about large groups of people rising up and really stopping this.
On the other hand, what I do feel that is happening, is there's a sort of a parallel society of the awakened.
Being created as we speak and that's an international society.
It's an international community of people from the United States, from the Netherlands, from maybe Asia, other places and we are connecting in a level to an extent that we never were able to connect before.
So really there's a series of crisis The COVID crisis, now the farmer's crisis in the Netherlands, but there are other crises in other places.
And there is a group of people that is, wait a minute, what's happening here?
Let's think of other ways to pay each other, cryptocurrencies for example.
Let's think of other ways to organize ourselves.
Let's set up our own schools, our own parallel food chains.
Let's see how we can use technology and other things that we have at our disposal To escape from this globalist nightmare that's being realized in front of our eyes.
And that does make me very hopeful.
And I'm always so happy when I'm meeting international people, not just you as a journalist, but also friends.
I receive emails, I try to travel as much as I can to meet people.
That really is the most hopeful thing that I've experienced in my life.
That's great, because you sounded very pessimistic earlier, but you do see hope on the horizon.
I am very pessimistic about the larger trend that we see.
At the same time, I also feel that because what they are aiming for is so contrary to human nature, because I believe human nature wants to be free.
There's a very, very deep desire in all of us.
But we're just being lured into this consumerist, pacifist, There is no discussion in Parliament.
on existence and but there has to at some point there is going to be a breaking away from that trend but I'm not just I'm just not sure how soon it will be there and in the meantime we have to continue with our parallel micro societies I believe is there any discussion in parliament because no no not there is no discussion in parliament now
parliaments are our theater settings which serve to give people the impression of democracy and and rational deliberation There is absolutely no intelligent exchange of arguments in Parliament.
Parliament really is a show institution.
And behind the scenes the decisions have already been made.
And then you get all these actors that can claim to be representing their voter base or whatever.
And at the end of the day, precisely the thing that was proposed before is going to pass through, maybe with one or two minor, micro changes, merely to give the impression that we've listened.
Just a surface level manifestation of a different agenda, right?
Exactly.
That's my conviction.
It's been my conviction ever since the COVID pandemic was played out and I saw the same irrational policies being implemented in countries all over the world.
At almost the same time, they imposed irrational lockdowns, irrational mouth masks, face masks, irrational vaccination, irrational QR codes.
And I've started to see the pattern, and now I see the same thing happening with the farmers here in this country.
It doesn't even take much of a critical thinking mind to just assume, I understand like, when the US and Europe exported all their manufacturing to China, well, lo and behold, China, their pollution went through the roof and our pollution got reduced.
Globally, nothing changed.
In fact, it might have actually gone up, right?
So likewise, If you expropriate all these farmers, well, you're not going to eat less beef.
No one here is going to eat less meat, less cheese.
It's just going to have to be grown somewhere else.
And the Dutch farmers are some of the most productive and lowest emitters among farmers in general.
So the person who's going to take up that task is probably going to emit more nitrogen.
So it's like, it's worse for the planet and the EU.
Right.
But it's good for the globalists because it increases our interdependence.
And that's the real aim here.
That's the real point.
They are trying to create a world where no single country and ultimately no single individual will be able to act on their own.
"You will own nothing but you'll be happy" means you have to borrow your car, you have to lend your house or rent it.
Your food is not produced in your own region anymore, but you're dependent on global food chains and so on.
So this is what we're heading for.
We're heading for a world of what they call interdependence, but I call it global slavery because we're going to be living under a globalist bureaucracy, a technocracy that cannot be voted out of office and you cannot control them.
We'll have more and more censorship on the internet so we won't be able to express ourselves freely and that's just going to be the future if we don't stop the Great Reset.
Last question.
If, let's say, you're able to speak to the farmers here in this country, or let's say the corollary people getting dispossessed or waking up in other countries, what would you tell them?
How do you get out of this?
First, try to see the larger picture.
This is not just about farmland.
It's not about pollution.
Immigration problems are not just about immigration.
The climate change story is not just about climate change.
The COVID narrative was not just about COVID.
See the pattern.
Realize that this is a global agenda that's being pushed on us.
And if each of us only fight for our own small interests, then we're not going to be able to fight them off.
We're not going to be able to beat them.
So we have to see that we're all in the same boat, essentially, and we have to be Have solidarity with one another.
We have to see that none of us are each other's enemies.
We are being played out against each other, of course.
They're going to go to the farms and say, look, we really understand your position, but just don't associate yourselves with the COVID mad people or don't stay away from the anti-immigration lobbies.
That's what they're trying to do.
So they're going to divide us, try to divide us and then rule over us.
And we have to resist that.
So that's the first point.
See the pattern and build a broad alliance.
Secondly, the only way to stop this is to no longer participate in it.
So if you, on the one hand, as a farmer, protest against these large corporations taking over your land, or the government taking over your land, stop cooperating with them.
Do not negotiate with government.
Do not sell your stuff to international food corporations.
Go on strike.
Set up your parallel food chains.
Make sure that you Continue what you like doing, but without using their technology, without using their financial instruments.
See if you can develop a way to get paid through a cryptocurrency, for example, rather than through traditional banks.
Get off the grid!
So, one, build broad alliances to get off the grid.
That's my advice.
▲
Export Selection