“Only by restoring the broken connections can we be healed.”
– Berry Wendell
[ “In order to restore our ancient connected mind and lifestyle, we must unplug from globalist socialization and return to local independent production.” –Ray Songtree ]
Donald Trump’s candidacy – with its simplistic policy positions [such as enforceable borders and US no longer being world’s policeman] and its undercurrent of racism and sexism [as character assassination by thousands of globalist owned venues including all mainstream networks] – left most of us [in the globalized propaganda blur] believing he couldn’t possibly win.
[Helena Norberg-Hodge has been mind programmed like everyone who listens to globalist owned corporate media, which was very much threatened by Trump. However, he too is in the globalist club, but to a lesser degree. Since all local communities have a common enemy that pushes globalization, and since this bankster led colonial juggernaut also constantly still smears Trump, Helena should have asked “Why?”
But instead, she was indoctrinated and didn’t notice that Hillary’s grotesque past was not mentioned by the same media she allows herself to be programmed by. Racist? Ben Carson, a colored man, is going to be head of HUD in Trump’s administration. Racist? Is it wrong to name criminals as immigrants, if there are criminals who immigrate? Sexist? Nothing Trump has done or said comes close to Hillary’s support of her serial rapist husband and her own attacks on the rape victims when they demanded justice. No one hates women more than Hillary Clinton who also personally uses women sex slaves. Does LocalFutures support a criminal like Hillary Clinton, member of CFR, Bilderberg, and Trilateral Commission, over Donald Trump? ]
[Rather than using the image above for her article, Helena could have chosen this image below. (article).
[Trump would have won by a bigger count, but as with Clinton’s sabotage of Bernie Sanders, led by pedophile John Podesta to steal Sanders’ nomination, Hillary’s campaign tried to steal votes from Trump, and now has even hired Green Party candidate Jill Stein to do their dirty work. ]
Now his victory is a visceral shock [for the CNN, BBC and Reuters baby bottle feeders] from which many have still not recovered.
[US popular vote… There are 3,141 counties in the United States.
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.
3,084 local communities vs. 57 local communities.
Apparently, Helena Norberg-Hodge, would not have been viscerally traumatized by the election of career criminal Hillary Clinton with her very long bloody body count. Hillary Clinton is a murderer. Defeat of Clinton is a celebration for those who understand that nationalism is a step toward re-localization and away from globalization.
Clinton’s long grooming since high school by globalists shows in her early support of Walmart.
“During six years (1986 -1992) as a member of the Wal-Mart board of directors, Hillary Clinton remained silent as the world’s largest retailer waged a major campaign against the labor unions seeking to represent store workers.”
In her 2012 Rio speech she goes on to fully endorse the notion that there are not plural local futures, but one global future for “we.” Are there individuals? Are their individual communities? Are there individual nations?
Perhaps Helena should study why Russia is so hated by globalists? Could it be because Russia is stepping back toward nationalism and toward it’s own local future and health? Russia is now moving toward non-GMO. ]
To better understand what happened [with the election?] – and why – we need to broaden our horizons. [Now we will see her New Age, We Are All One, horizons.] If we zoom out a bit, it becomes clear that Trump is not an isolated phenomenon; the forces that put him in the White House have been growing throughout the Western world for some time. [It is the awakening of justice, as colonization is now attacking the middle class.] Earlier this year, the Brexit vote in the UK was also based on fear and narrow-minded nationalism, not on a sophisticated critique of EU economic policy.
[This is a false statement from a prejudiced and arrogant mind set. Like Hillary, she is putting down half of the citizens of UK as unsophisticated, or “deplorable.”
First of all, does Helena even know what the origin of EU is? Who organized the idea?
British citizens are not only criticizing economic tyranny. Their grievances are with corruption itself, always worse with a taller hierarchy.
Doctors Without Borders refused all EU funding, observing that it could not take money “from institutions and governments whose policies do so much harm”.
British people are fighting for their identity.
If Helena supports EU, then she supports cultural obliteration, the opposite of plural local futures. Which does she want? Does she want one future, singular, for one assimilated world, organized by one “fair” global government run by secretive elites? Or does she want diverse unique cultures? Brexit was a healthy rejection of EU policies, which includes ending all racial distinctions through “mobility” and open immigration.]
Right-wing extremism [re-localization] is on the rise [in reaction to globalization] in many other parts of the world – even in my native country of Sweden, where racism was all but absent during my younger years.
[Her memories was before forced immigration. Sweden is now the rape capitol of world. Does she know this? Is she out of touch with her own homeland? Does she have a homeland? Does she support the destruction of Sweden by sending the victims of a NATO’s wars into local communities and destabilizing them so “we can all be ONE”, as EU dictates?
I, who have been to Nepal and Tibet, and who resonated with LocalFutures, must now ask if Helena Norberg-Hodge is another multi-cultural change agent, however I hope she is just uneducated, as evidenced in her essay where she has not even investigated who created ISIS, and thus, who created the refugee crisis.]
If we zoom out even further, a broader pattern emerges. Almost everywhere in the world, unemployment is increasing, the gap between rich and poor is widening, environmental devastation is worsening, and a spiritual crisis – revealed in substance abuse, domestic assaults, and teenage suicide – is deepening.
[She is not asking who is supplying the drugs. The purpose of US in Afghanistan includes securing Opium production. Destabilization of youth is a key goal of the elite. Again, her horizons are very narrow.
The gap between rich and poor can only increase, as the rich want “growth” by allocating as little as possible to everyone else. The gap cannot close as long as the dominant culture worships material success. And the gap will grow wider as too many people keep reproducing, as dictated by sexual experimentation in Illuminati run Music Industry. The elite want chaos. This will enable more crisis which will justify more “order.”]
By looking from a global perspective it becomes apparent that these many crises – including the rise of right-wing [localization] sentiments – share a common root cause: an increasingly corporatized and globalized economic system that is devastating not only planetary ecosystems, but the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
[She is still dreaming of a utopian system as an alternative. Sadly, Helena has not studied the Rothschilds, so she does not understand the global economic system or its goals. Corporations only survive based on their credit, that is their debt to the international banksters. Helena knows this but then blames the corporations and not the central banks that control them all.
The goal of the banksters is not monetary, the goal is singularity, the opposite of diverse local futures. The goal is total control, all peoples chipped, all indigenous ways destroyed. This is not a consequence, but a goal.]
Over the last three decades, governments [as dictated by Rothschild IMF to their bought off, blackmailed or threatened leaders] have unquestioningly embraced “free trade” treaties that have enriched global corporations [who are only the structural components of the control system] while impoverishing their own citizens. By allowing corporations to move unfettered around the globe in search of the lowest wages, these treaties have put workers throughout the industrialized [consumption worshiping] world in competition with workers in the global South who will accept a fraction of a dollar per hour [because land concentration supported by the banksters has uprooted these people who are starving and willing to do any factory job to eat. Helena is forgetting this is organized.]
This is not a contest that [former wage slave] workers in the North can win. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) resulted in a net loss of 680,000 American jobs, and the Permanent Normal Trade Relations deal with China led to a net loss of another 2.7 million jobs. These job losses are a direct result of increasing global competition through corporate deregulation. [NAFTA was a Bill and Hillary Clinton initiative. Would she have liked Hillary to win?]
Donald Trump Says NAFTA Was the Worst Trade Deal Ever Signed , and has and continues to kill American jobs.… – fortune.com
At the same time, the infiltration of big business throughout the global South – most often with the support of [bribed and threatened leaders of] national governments and backed by international financial institutions [The Rothschilds] – has eliminated many of the livelihoods that local economies in those countries once provided. With locally-adapted ways of life systematically undermined by economic policies geared towards the big and the global, millions of desperate people in the South [everywhere] find themselves with just two options: to accept minimal wages and appalling working conditions in industrial metropolises, or to migrate.
It is estimated that, as a direct result of heavily subsidized corn flooding the Mexican market under NAFTA, 2.4 million small farmers were displaced, and subsequently funneled into crowded urban centers or across the border to the US.
So the loss of jobs in the US and the migrant crisis in the South are two sides of the same coin. But instead of looking at the flawed rules [created by Rothschild UN, WTO, IMF and World Bank] of the global economy that are behind both problems, people have been encouraged to point the finger at the cultural “other”.
[Helena thinks there is a utopian global system that must be better than the existing global system, because after all, we should all be ONE and not have boundaries between plural cultures because boundaries would be divisive, racist, and non-progressive.]
As worldwide competition for increasingly scarce jobs has increased, so have divisiveness, fundamentalism and racism.
[Boundaries would insure respect. But rather than boundaries, globalists fund conflict because chaos and strife will more quickly bring about a global police state, trained in Israel. For example, Muslim Brotherhood was created by MI5, British Intelligence. Al Qaeda and ISIS created by CIA and Mossad. Perhaps she doesn’t even know about 9/11 created to bring about War on Terror, all planned in advance? George Soros has funded Black hate in US. Why? For more chaos and strife. Racism is a weapon honed to perfection by the globalists, not an organic response. Boundaries are not divisive. Boundaries define quality.]
Until recently, corporate-funded media and think tanks have steered [and funded] both grassroots activism and high-level policy-making away from consideration of the economic root cause of our social and ecological problems. [And what exactly is the root cause? She hasn’t thought it through.] The global economy was treated [sold to us] as “evolutionary” or inevitable, and the policies promoting it went unquestioned [in the globalist owned media]; the crises escalated, and the only ‘solution’ offered was to double down on more of the same: more economic growth, more development, more deregulation. [She is mistaken. TPP strictly regulates to the point of replacing national laws. TPP doesn’t deregulate, it regulates nations to not have their own boundaries and sovereignty.]
As people’s lives and the natural world deteriorated, it’s no surprise that disenchantment with the political process became widespread.
[Then why was she surprised that a local futures candidate like Trump would win in over 3000 US counties?]
Nonetheless, the trade treaties – notably the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – were a hot topic during the recent American elections. First and foremost, this represents an important victory for the people – for the grassroots – whose voice is finally being heard. While the mainstream media has propped up Donald Trump as the figurehead of opposition to the trade treaties, [They did not prop him up, rather they understated Hillary’s long support of TPP] we need to keep in mind that the first cross-sector demonstration against the TPP in the United States was in June 2010 — five years before Trump announced his candidacy. Resistance to the trade treaties has come from diverse people’s movements from around the world, and is growing stronger day by day.
[And Trump speaks for these people, but Helana can’t give him that. Trump made TPP a hot issue, not Hillary.]
Corporate rule is not only impoverishing people worldwide, it is fueling climate change [which she has not studied], destroying diverse ecosystems and cultures, undermining community and accelerating the spread of consumerism. [Again she has bought the globalist indoctrination.]
These are undoubtedly scary times. Yet the very fact that the seemingly distinct crises we face are linked can be the source of genuine empowerment. Once we understand the systemic nature of our problems, the path towards solving them – together, rather than one by one – becomes clear.
[Here she walks down the slipper slope, away from plural local futures, and toward one world government. Empowerment and “together” are opposites. Empowerment is YOUR sovereignty, not everyone ‘s similar sheep demeanor. Empowerment means your production, not solving issues of everyone else’s consumption.]
And that’s why the anti- trade treaty movement has been dubbed “the movement of movements”. By targeting the trade treaties [as Trump has] and campaigning for the reregulation of global businesses and banks [What? Why not unplug?], we not only resist the increasing corporatization of our planet [She is mixed up. A regulated corporateocracy is just one world government. Local futures means ditching imports altogether and de-globalizing], we can actively begin to reverse the negative effects of economic globalization in our own communities. We can start to bring the economy home – to localize – by reweaving the social and economic fabric at the local level.
[The new regulations she encourages empower the system. Local communities can do more something more powerful. They can unplug.]
In many areas of the world, from the USA to India, from China to Australia, people are beginning to do just that: they are forming local business alliances, starting local finance initiatives, exploring locally-based education and energy schemes, and, most centrally, building a local food movement. All of these efforts are based on the principle of connection and the celebration of diversity.
[No, they are based on the principal of independence and sovereignty, rather than “togetherness.” She is very mixed up. She supports these movements but does not support Brexit or Trump or Russia or Iceland. She wants communities to be diverse, but nations not to be “isolationist.”]
In communities around the world, the profound environmental, economic, social and even spiritual benefits of reconnecting locally [by disconnecting globally] are becoming clear for all to see.
[Again and again she is mixing themes. These benefits are only seen on the local level. “Clear for all to see.” What does that mean? Who is this “all”. For those that unplug from globalized disenfranchisement, there is a local opportunity which is more of a responsibility than a “benefit.” She is an academic, romanticizing about people who are the salt of the Earth. Local tribesmen don’t care what anyone anywhere else is doing, because they have their own distinct future, their own local future.]
As the scale and pace of [formal] economic activity are reduced, anonymity gives way to face-to-face relationships, and to a closer connection to Nature. The bonds of local interdependence are strengthened, and a more secure sense of personal and cultural identity begins to flourish. People feel connected to others, rather than in competition with them.
[She was singing a nice song until the last sentence of above paragraph. Becoming local means responsibility, and I am not responsible for your way, and your way may impinge on my way, so that is why we both have boundaries. In Helena’s utopian fantasy, there are no boundaries, we are all ONE, and so we are free of competition. In fact there is never any injustice in utopia. Hello?]
At the same time, localized economies are good for the environment: they increase the number of jobs, not by increasing consumption, but by relying more on human labor and creativity and less on energy-intensive technological systems – thereby reducing [mined] resource use and pollution. And shifting from global to local promotes “re-wilding” and the restoration of biodiversity.
[She is correct in long run. In short run, too many local people will deforest the land in order to cook their next meal. She sings a nice song, like John Lennon. Imagine.]
By spreading economic and political power among millions of individuals and small businesses – rather than in a handful of corporate monopolies [under the control of the Rotshchild Bank of International Settlements in Basel Switzerland]– localization also has the potential to revitalize the democratic process. Political power is no longer some distant impersonal force, but is instead rooted in community.
[Communities don’t vote; Communities are guided by charismatic individuals, usually elders. Again she is mixing things up. Democracy places power in a controllable blackmailable hierarchy with rules, rather than in the living emotion of the tribe.]
“If voting made any difference they wouldn’t let us do it.” – Mark Twain
[Helena is trying to bring a local message to mostly urban readers. She is also trying to be very congenial. Richard Heinberg is same. Fuzzy warm is not the situation on the ground. There will always be opposition because the universe is made of change. Competition is endless, and no utopia will ever exist to ever make it go away.]
Localization is sometimes painted as élitist – another plum for the already privileged peoples of the global North, but offering little for the less prosperous South. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, it is only by weaning themselves from dependence on an exploitative global market while increasing national and regional self-reliance that countries in the global South will be able to find lasting prosperity.
[Again the utopian religion. The idea that there is a shining future “lasting permanent prosperity” if “we all” just get it right.
Rather, in each of our local future lives, there is only endless adaption and struggle. By talking the way she does, she might win readers who like nicely penned words, but that is not what grows corn.]
Moving towards the local requires more than simply working on the ground within our own communities: [That is the only thing that will work, the rest is a new permutation of the same global system] we also need to do the hard work of pushing for change at the national and global levels. [She is making a big mistake. Supporting anything global is supporting one world government.] Treaties need to be re-written, regulations amended, taxes and subsidies reassigned, environmental and human rights strengthened.
[She still wants a utopian society. One singular fair future. Instead, what we need is less government, less zoning, less transportation, less communication, less imports, less exports, and the chance to be left alone.]
Unlike the narrow isolationism sought by Donald Trump [and all communities that want their own local unique diverse future], opposition to globalization requires cross-border cooperation [no it does not!], while revitalizing local economies demands collaboration and a willingness to learn from others.
[Revitalizing local economies means buying local! No collaboration needed. What people do in Zimbabwe doesn’t matter to people in Finland or Panama. She sounds very much like a communist or a Kissinger devotee. There is no diversity without isolation. No one needs anything except to be left alone and not be exploited.]
The American people have made it perfectly clear that they want fundamental change. [Away from CIA trained Obama globalization.]
Trump may offer the illusion of such change, but little more.
[We will see, step by step, what he does. He does not seem ready to break with Rothschilds, and if he made that obvious, they would kill him and his family. Would Helena have been happy with warmonger Hillary?]
Our task [Wrong. Local futures means you and I have different tasks] now is to show that there is a genuinely different way: a path towards wholeness and sanity. [Wrong, many ways, many paths, many versions of sanity. She sounds like a globalist.]
The rapidly-growing localization movement is an unstoppable force [as exemplified by Trump and Brexit].
It is still in its early days, but it is already providing hope and sustenance to millions of people around the world.
[The machine is unsustainable and inhuman. Unplug!]