Bait and Switch By People Who Want to Depopulate The Planet
Canada thought that health care experts would create a better system, but they turned to a group backed buy depopulation obsessed foundations like the Rockefeller, Ford and Bill and Melinda Gates. Disaster was the result.
Our documentary Rationed State started when Orange sent me a Power Point presentation from the Canadian health care system along with the news that there was a Baby Tylenol shortage in Canada. Since the US was still having persistent problems with baby formula production and families were in a panic with no formula on the shelves, my instincts were already on alert level.
“Community of Care” is what got Canada in trouble Zee,” my co-host O said. “This presentation is from the same group who re-organized Canadian health systems in 2018, before the COVID pandemic. ButI think there’s more”
Compassionate North York is the framework adopted to provide “sustainable” healthcare for Ontario. This presentation is the standard nonsense that you see so many times in corporate settings: good graphics, poorly selected phrases attempting to give emphasis to ill conceived concepts, and of course the message that this new way of managing health systems will be far different than measures that floundered miserably in the past. In a sense, we weren’t smart years ago, and despite being the same people we’re smarter because we have a new process. Process is the goal, not the outcome. Yes, I hear your eyes rolling too.
I’ll take you through this presentation and pick it apart. It won’t be painful, the thinking it demonstrates is rudimentary, and having seen the results just 4 years later we have evidence of it’s failure. That’s just one of my objectives. We’ll highlight the key language that should be the warning signs, and expose who is behind this “framework” of superior thinking. Hint: there are many foundations all run by the same people. The usual suspects.
Compassionate North York’s is:
North York Toronto Health Partners (NYTHP) is pleased to share our first Strategic Plan for creating a strong and sustainable local health system and healthy community.
… [North York Toronto Health Partners] developed a Shared Purpose, Compassionate North York. Together, we embraced Collective Impact – a structured approach to collaboration to address complex challenges and achieve transformational change.
First clue is staring at us in the face: strong an sustainable. The assumption is that all else was garbage and about to fail. What you are about to receive from the elite gorup – ignore the fact that they are the same group who got you into trouble – is better, robust, more efficient, benefits more people.
Second clue is Collective Impact. One of my pet peeves is when morons use adjectives to add emphasis to a dumb ass concept. Collective Impact for a group is nonsensical. When you are on a boat that is about to sink, the impact is affecting everyone: you’re all going in the water. No need for Collective. It’s word salad.
I hate word salad.
But what is “Collective Impact”? There’s more consultant word salad to explain that Collective Impact is a set of steps that assist with analysis, allowing you to achieve transformational change. Another red flag. This business types like this word, to them it means you get a company of really effective people. Don’t fall for it. Remember Obama’s transformational hope and change? It’s the same thing.
Throughout this presentation you then see this phrase: shared purpose.
Wait, aren’t we all on the same team so doesn’t “purpose” alone describe our goals? No. Shared is there as a trigger to make you associate working to the good for a collective. This is reinforced throughout the text. While it pisses me of as a nonsensical phrase, it’s part of the hypnosis that is being attempted hear to get you to reflexively say “this is for the group, we share in the outcome.
Let’s look at the Guiding Principles, there’s more warning signs here.
Goal 1: Commitment to shared purpose and improvement in our system. YAAAYYY Shared Purpose, so glad we don’t rely on purpose as a team. The community will be co-desiging the future of care. Huh? Co-designing? Why not just “designing”? More deceptive language. Or are there experts lurking here who will “guide” this design?
Goal 2: Distributed leadership, shared responsibility. Again, the importance of group is emphasized, but when you look at the results of the Baby Tylenol shortage you see the HUGE failing here. Distributed leadership really means little or NO responsibility – it’s an escape hatch allowing people to blame the failings of the SYSTEM instead of taking responsibility. Things are so bad with this system today in Canada you have to see a doctor in order to get Baby Tylenol.
Goal 3: Coordinated and collaborative action. People move like an amoeba. One organism.
Goal 4: Driving Innovation. Here many of us think technology and efficiency but amazingly the presentation tells you that this is about shifting mindsets and behaviors to accelerate change. Think out of the box, and the answer just might be more collectivized action.
Goal 5: Commitment to diversity, inclusivity an equity. Big red flag for spread the misery. The phrase “enable all people the access to the care they need.” This is directly from the goals laid out of Daniel Callahan. But remember Callahan warned that in order to get equitable results you would need to change your definition of care, start living with less. Too bad they didn’t tell Canada that this meant you couldn’t access normal staples of society such as Tylenol.
One more slide, and we’re done. The nonsense word Collective Impact is back, but it’s important.
Condition One: common agenda. It’s group think, one size fits all on steroids. “Shared vision change with common understanding and mutual plan”. This issue here is the problems of a rural county are much different than those of a metro area, and they require different solutions. But with this you have one governing entity, one approach and the governing committees from ALL regions have to agree first.
Condition Two: Shared Measurement. Obsession with data collection.
Condition Three: Mutually reinforcing activities. What does that even mean? Sounds like they are trying to disguise that the one size fits all solution will be attempt to solve all problems, and solutions for a subset of people will not be permitted. Sounds efficient, doesn’t it?
Condition Four: Continuous Communication. But the goal here is to ensure there is collective action, collective goals. The process is more important, without nothing is produced. That’s been the common response by group think people for decades.
Condition Five: Backbone Support: Okay. Well here’s where the catch is introduced. You see managing collective impact means you need a team of …
TECHNOCRATS
We’re going to stop dissecting the presentation, we have enough now to tell us what’s in store. Despite the one size fits all failure of health system during COVID and yet another complete failure with Baby Tylenol shortages, you now have a team of people specifically trained in the word salad nonsense we just went through, obsessed with data and charts, who will centrally change mindsets to solve problems. Perhaps the change in mindset is convincing you that sustainable health care really means rationing and that you will have less? Did less really mean no Tylenol at all?
We’ve talked about technocrats before, they are heroes of Klaus Schwab, the WEF and the Great Reset. The Great Erasure Team. They sold this to Canada again and again, with horseshit presentations wrapped in colorful wrapping paper.
One last point about this presentation that angered me yet I wasn’t surprised. In the Canadian presentation there was a tiny footnote regarding Collective Impact. Curious, I followed the link https://collectiveimpactforum.org/what-is-collective-impact/. Of course there is all the Great Reset language of sustainability, shared purpose. But shockingly there is talk of population “change”:
Collective impact is a network of community members, organizations, and institutions who advance equity by learning together, aligning, and integrating their actions to achieve population and systems level change.
This isn’t a consulting group with a methodology focused on improving health, this is a group whose fundamental goal is POPULATION CHANGE. Like Dennis Meadows, they want less people on the planet.
But then I traced to the founders and supporters of this concept, their companies and their partners. Here are the pages:
https://www.fsg.org/about/funders-partners
https://www.aspencommunitysolutions.org/funders-supporters/
Who is behind this? Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundations.
Canada thought they were getting data scientists and superior thinking from consultants and experts, but in the end it is the same bait and switch by the Great Reset and depopulation elite. See what catching a few red flags and following up on your instincts can prevent disaster? Sadly Canadians fell for the Power Point of Lies and the Community of Care, and can’t even get baby Tylenol. That’s not sustainable.