You go into a lot of detail, but most of it strikes me as slightly wrong.
Not everything is part of some global conspiracy to control the masses. As you point out: delaying problems inevitably leads to collapse. Any secret cabal in power must realize this.
1. I have never argued there needs to exist a cabal in order for the Mad Max outcome to occur. The
logic for the coming collapse is purely mathematical and the repeating historical pattern that socialism never aborts until a collapse forces it too (and understanding why it can't abort).
2. If the Bilderberg group is real (and I've seen Alex Jones' videos of the super rich entering the annual conference), then collapse is the best possible outcome for them. As it allows them via their control over government to increase their power. As they have been quoted as saying, "never waste a good crisis to get some favorable legislation or other results" to further increase their iron-grip on all things.
Global warning is real, and appears to be happening in my life-time. We are seeing more and more snow-free days. When I was a kid, snow-free Decembers were rare in Edmonton. In the last 15 years, we have come close to something like 5 "brown Christmases".
More cold and ice means less snowfall. You are obviously not a scientist.
Ironically, I believe the conspiracy that electric cars are being held back by battery patents on NiMH batteries. As a result, they remain expensive and in limited supply.
And where is your science to support that?
If you knew enough about energy density and chemistry, you would realize batteries can not compete with hydrocarbon fuels for transportation.
This conflicts with the theory that smart meters are control measures. (Electric cars can make very interesting use of smart-meters).
Huh? What kind of logic is that? Not.
Just because electric cars could help drive adoption of smart meters, doesn't logically constrain that if there was a conspiracy to stop electric cars that there must not be a conspiracy to promote adoption of smart meters for evil intent.
I don't believe in IP. I believe if you can't protect it, it isn't yours. I don't believe in "rights". Your right is only what you can economically accomplish. Ultimately the reality eventually always ends up at what is economic.
This leads to devices designed to betray the users.
You have not articulated a connection. Were you thinking IP == closed source, and open source is more security vetted?
The rabbit hole goes so deep that the thought of setting up a VPN service users may rely on for their safety sickens me. Because modern computers are inherently insecure, sometimes actively made that way: there is no easy way to prove your infrastructure is not back-doored.
It doesn't sicken me. It is a reality that we must contend with. Apparently you aren't aware of Information Theoretic Security.
The thinkg is, we need to risk setting up privacy-enhancing infrastructure. We need to start auditing our routers, NICs, keyboard and storage firmware. We need to start proving software (especially embedded software) is written correctly.
Agreed.
