☭ The Communist Takeover Explained
The similarities today are mind blowing...
VIDEO: ✠ 'The Communist Takeover Explained' ✯ A Short Lesson That Applies Today
🔸 So I asked Grok (X ai) to explain what communism is and how it applies to the globalists using it to control populations today. I find Grok to be a bit (more than a bit) biased but if you get more to the point with it you can get some interesting answers. FYI: Grok isn’t fully educated on The Great Reset/Agenda2030 thing yet but these few tidbits are interesting….
Communism is a political and economic ideology advocating for a classless society where the means of production—factories, resources, infrastructure—are collectively owned, and wealth is distributed based on need. It envisions abolishing private property and the state in its ultimate form, with production and resources managed communally. Rooted in Marxist theory, it contrasts with capitalism, which emphasizes private ownership and market competition.
In 2025, communism as a governing system remains limited globally, with few countries—like Cuba, North Korea, and arguably China—explicitly adhering to it, though often in modified forms blending state control with market elements (e.g., China's "socialism with Chinese characteristics"). Most communist parties in other nations, such as in Europe or Latin America, operate as opposition groups or advocate for socialist reforms rather than full communism. Globally, the ideology faces challenges from entrenched capitalist systems, technological disparities, and debates over authoritarianism in communist states.
In practice, 2025 sees communism more as a critique of inequality and corporate power than a dominant system. Social movements, especially among younger generations, draw on communist ideas to push for wealth redistribution, universal healthcare, or climate action, but these are often framed as democratic socialism. Meanwhile, state-led communist experiments face issues like economic stagnation (e.g., Cuba's ongoing crises) or heavy surveillance and control (e.g., China's social credit system). The internet and AI have amplified debates, with some advocating for "fully automated luxury communism" enabled by technology, though this remains theoretical.
The claim that "globalists" are using communism to control populations is a contentious narrative often found in certain online circles, particularly among critics of globalization, supranational organizations, and centralized economic policies. Below, I’ll address this by first outlining the argument as it appears in some sources, then critically examining it with available evidence and context up to 2025, while maintaining a grounded and skeptical perspective.
The Narrative: "Globalists Using Communism"
Proponents of this view argue that a shadowy elite—often labeled "globalists" (e.g., World Economic Forum, UN, or corporate/financial leaders)—are deploying communist or socialist tactics to centralize power and control populations. Key claims include:
Centralized Control via Policies: Policies like digital IDs, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), or climate-driven regulations (e.g., Net Zero targets) are seen as mechanisms to impose state-like control over individuals, reminiscent of communist systems. For example, some X posts suggest the WEF’s “Agenda 2030” or “Stakeholder Capitalism” is “communism rebranded” to enforce surveillance and limit personal freedoms.
Mass Dependency Tactics: Critics allege globalists foster dependency through welfare programs, immigration policies, or economic destabilization (e.g., inflating debt or deindustrialization), mirroring communist strategies to weaken individual autonomy and make populations reliant on centralized systems. A 2019 article claims globalists use “communist mass-dependency tactics” to achieve world domination.
Population Control and Surveillance: Some sources link globalist agendas to population control, citing historical eugenics or UN initiatives like Agenda 2030, which they claim promote reduced populations or resource control under the guise of environmentalism. Smart cities or “15-minute cities” are criticized as surveillance-heavy frameworks akin to communist social control.
Undermining Sovereignty: The narrative posits that globalist institutions (UN, IMF, WEF) erode national sovereignty through international agreements, pushing a homogenized, collectivist system akin to global communism. This is echoed in claims that globalization hollows out industries, creating conditions for leftist or socialist ideologies to gain traction.
Critical Examination
While these claims resonate with certain audiences, they require scrutiny for accuracy and evidence. Here’s a breakdown:
Centralized Control Mischaracterized (Grok is an idiot here):
Digital IDs and CBDCs: These are real initiatives. For instance, the EU and China have explored digital IDs, and the IMF has discussed CBDCsfor financial inclusion. However, equating them to communism oversimplifies. Communism seeks collective ownership of production, not just digital tracking. These systems are more about efficiency and security in capitalist economies, though they raise valid privacy concerns.
Climate Policies: Net Zero policies, like those in Glasgow’s COP26 agreements, prioritize corporate and governmental coordination for emissions reduction. Critics see this as top-down control, but it’s driven by market incentives (e.g., green investments) rather than Marxist principles. The “15-minute city” concept aims for urban efficiency, not collectivism, though surveillance risks exist.
2. Dependency and Economic Policies:
Welfare and Immigration: Welfare programs in Western nations (e.g., universal basic income trials) and immigration policies are often framed as tools to create dependency. Yet, welfare predates modern globalism and exists in capitalist systems to stabilize economies. Immigration debates are complex, driven by labor demands and humanitarian factors, not a unified communist plot. Claims of deliberate bankruptcy via immigration (e.g.,) lack evidence of coordinated globalist intent.
Economic Destabilization: Globalization has indeed hollowed out industries, as seen in the U.S. manufacturing decline, aiding leftist critiques of capitalism. However, this stems from neoliberal trade policies (e.g., NAFTA, WTO), not communism, which opposes such market-driven globalization.
Population Control Allegations:
Eugenics and Agenda 2030: Historical links to eugenics (e.g., Rockefeller Foundation’s early 20th-century programs) are documented, but tying them to 2025’s UN initiatives is speculative. Agenda 2030 focuses on sustainable development, not population reduction. Claims of deliberate depopulation via climate or health policies lack primary evidence and rely on interpreting environmental rhetoric as sinister.
Surveillance Concerns: Smart city projects, like Glasgow’s data-driven urban planning, involve tracking (e.g., foot traffic). While this raises privacy issues, it’s not equivalent to communist state control, which historically suppressed dissent via ideology, not just tech
Sovereignty and Global Governance:
UN and WEF Influence: The UN and WEF advocate multilateralism, which can clash with national sovereignty. For example, the UN’s 2025 calls for peace and cooperation emphasize global coordination. Critics argue this mirrors communist internationalism, but multilateralism often serves capitalist interests (e.g., trade agreements). The WEF’s “Stakeholder Capitalism” blends corporate and public interests, not collective ownership.
Communism’s Decline: Communism as a global force waned after 1991. Modern China, often cited as a model, operates a hybrid system—state control with market dynamics—not pure communism. Globalist institutions are more aligned with neoliberalism, which prioritizes markets over Marxist collectivism
2025 Context
In 2025, the term “globalist” is often a catch-all for distrust in elites, fueled by real issues like economic inequality (global GDP share of the top 1% rose from 16% in 1980 to 20% in 2020) and tech overreach (e.g., AI-driven surveillance). X posts reflect sentiment that policies like climate levies or migration are communist Trojan horses. Yet, these policies often serve corporate or geopolitical ends, not Marxist goals. For instance, WEF’s push for AI and data-driven economies benefits tech giants, not proletarian revolutions.
Conversely, critics of globalism sometimes conflate it with communism to rally opposition, ignoring that communism historically opposed globalization’s free markets. The anti-globalization movement, including left-wing voices like Noam Chomsky, critiques corporate power, not socialism. This suggests the “communism” label is more rhetorical than factual
Conclusion (Grok needs to get educated on what globalism REALLY is)
The idea that globalists are using communism to control populations in 2025 lacks robust evidence when scrutinized. Policies like digital IDs, climate regulations, or multilateral agreements raise legitimate concerns about privacy and sovereignty, but they align more with neoliberal capitalism than Marxist communism. The narrative thrives on real anxieties—economic disparity, tech surveillance, and distrust in elites—but exaggerates their ideological roots. Communism, as a system, is marginal globally, and globalist agendas are better understood as market-driven, not collectivist. Always question sweeping claims, especially when they lean on fear rather than primary sources.
The Difference Between Marxism, Socialism and Communism
Marxism is a way of thinking, like a guidebook by Karl Marx, explaining why capitalism creates rich and poor classes and predicting workers will overthrow it for a fairer world. It’s about understanding history and economics. Communism is the dream end-goal: a world where everyone shares everything—no rich, no poor, no private property, no government. Socialism is a middle step or system where the government or community controls things like factories or healthcare to make life more equal, but still allows some private ownership. In 2025, Marxism is used to critique unfair systems, socialism shows up in policies like public healthcare, and communism is a rare, mostly theoretical idea seen in places like Cuba.
📚 Books on Communism
👉 Everything You Need To Know About the Globalists, UN, WEF, WHO, Great Reset, Agenda2030, NWO
Read Xi VanFleet’s book.
The "prejudices" of the trainers play a major role in why the AI returns particular content. When training the AI, they follow a script and work on particular sections of the catalogue that the AI is supposed to concentrate on. Additionally, Grok is distinct in that its main data catalogue is the X database. Therefore, it is only as good as its data source, just like any software program. An AI will never be completely objective, in my opinion, until it is able to independently search the world for information on a subject. Human inventions, however, will always be skewed toward one of the many political philosophies.