Trained for Auction

At first, it seems like a social development, a need, and solution to help with the requirements of the country. With too many people over here, so they are relocated over there. Sounds simple and practical. And that’s what I initially thought when I learnt of the orphan train movement in the US. I’ve already written a couple of articles around it – Just Passing Through and A Train of Thought, looking at some stats and other possible suggestions around it.

But when asked if I knew anything about Detroit specifically or about it crossing into Canada, I thought I would revisit the subject. And on first glance at the geographical areas involved, it just looks like a very easy route for these ‘relocations’ that went on. Trafficking them in plain sight. An older, more public version of what we hear of today, where it is not so public, of shipping containers and elaborate networks treating them as A Commodity. Just as they did before, but eventually people start asking questions, or noticing. So it goes underground. Literally.

I can’t help thinking, though, that the stat of 50,000 babies going missing in Ireland at end of 1700’s could be part of it, discussed in A Rather Dark Enterprise. Marked as died, but with no evidence of it, and at first, I assumed it to be true. Why would anyone lie in the records about babies perishing? Unless perhaps, they were taken and relocated. And with the Irish famine issue forcing many over there as well, it wouldn’t seem so odd that many have Irish roots, just perhaps some of them are even darker than they are told. And with many records of that time lost or deliberately destroyed, some will never know.

The numbers vary in the records, they say 200,000 orphans were taken by train all over the American mid-west, in some articles, they say up to 250,000. That’s a big variation, and makes you wonder if they just struggled with accuracy, or as with today, fabrication of numbers up or down can be of benefit to someone. I saw an article the other day about a couple of brothers who ran an orphanage, and it turned out that they were lying about their placements, stealing the money, keeping children in basements and this wasn’t discovered for quite some time. That’s just one case, affecting dozens of children. But really, the whole thing is completely unsavoury to me, and reads like a precursor to the setup we have today.

Of creating orphans to then ‘help’ by having orphanages, stigmatising single parenthood and restricting people’s ability to feed their family so they can deem them unfit and then take their children into ‘care’. And then ship them off to be sold/purchased in an auction style affair. Where people would gather in towns to bid on whatever they were looking for. A new child for the family, a new labourer or maid. Because they wanted workers and fodder for their schemes, and needed a way or a cover to obtain them and to freely move them around. So, this weird social scheme ran from the 1850’s through to 1929. That’s quite a substantial time to be having such a shortage of labour that you need to keep procuring children. At the same time, we are told that millions of people were relocating to the US, and Canada. Surely, they were having children? But why was it they needed children anyway? Millions of adults were there, constantly breeding. We are also told that millions of slaves were there by this time, also there to be workers and breeding the next generations.

Through that same time period of course there was a civil war thrown in, and various other changes. Yet they also found the time, despite the shortage of people and general workers, to build many of those huge and spectacular ‘founded’ buildings that litter each state. The massive neoclassical post offices, schools and universities, asylums, court houses and more. Clearly there was a surplus of funding, architects, construction specialists, stone masons, craftsman and more for that, but no-one to work on a farm. What rotten luck. But that’s ok, because they decided children’s public auctions would be a good fix for that. Clearly the orphan train model wasn’t going to be able to last forever, but it seems to have ended in 1929, just as the Great Depression kicked in. And from stories and the odd photograph of that time, they say it was so harsh, many people were forced to sell their own children to survive.

A middleman temporarily removed from the equation of how they can part you from your offspring. But it seems they just regrouped and after that decade of dust and doom came a new business model, same as with Europe. The destabilisation of war and disease, and control over your livelihood, food and family, to make sure they have systems in place to keep their commercial enterprises afloat and well stocked. Which unfortunately needs to have the appearance of systems for us, for our health and for our safety, and for the stability of society, allowing some to operate in the open and others to carry on unseen and undisturbed. Like much that has gone on and goes on, we only see what we see, and know what we know, but it seems there is so much more…

(c) MKW Publishing

A Social Tool of Leverage

The strange restrictive world of the impending digital prison is sparing no area of technological society. The new target and current media driven agenda is social media bans for under-16’s. To help control what they digest and have access to, apparently, and to steer them away from everything someone has deemed ‘undesirable’. I have already written in Social, But Not Really about how weird social media is from my perspective, about how it is a strange grouping of people and ideas you would not normally ‘meet’ in real life or have such opportunity to be involved in, listen to or being able engage with if you did stumble upon something inappropriate for your age.

And lots of that happened when you were a child, but you were excluded because you weren’t old enough, grown up enough or mature enough to be part of it. I’m sure many remember times like that, where you felt it was unfair that someone else got to exclude you, decide for you and ultimately get to have an influence in shaping what experiences you were allowed to take part in. Parties you couldn’t go to, rides you couldn’t go on, things that were deemed ‘not for you’. It didn’t change the want to be involved, of course, just the reality of age and time holding you back, and the rules.

And now we have had an entire generation brought up on the internet and social media, but now the cat is out of the bag, they want to control it. And really, children have been allowed to do all sorts of things until someone decided otherwise. Usually having to convince the masses of it being a good idea. And on some things, I can see that was true. As discussed in Compensating, But For What Precisely?, when they ‘abolished’ slavery, it only counted if you were under the age of 6, you were old enough to work for an apprenticeship then it is said. The age of consent has changed somewhat recently in the UK from being 12 for hundreds of years. Spending decades turning children into mini adults, with Social Status, responsibilities, standards and expectations of conformity. Now, they seem to be hell-bent on infantilising adults, as discussed in Holding Us Back. Treating the entire population as if they have guardianship over your very personhood, while ironically, acting like Spoilt Brats themselves.

But wanting to restrict all children up to the age of 16 from social media is a strange one, which does indeed appear to be a trojan horse to get some kind of digital ID going for younger generations. I wondered if social media was in fact waning for people anyway, and the interest and engagement isn’t quite what they say it is, or want it to be. Maybe trying to make it appear more attractive to youngsters by restricting it, or at least hoping for that. But no fear, they have decided to go for registering all children at birth with a digital ID, because of course, babies will need bank access, or to be able to login to some kind of services. The obsession with Monitoring and influencing everyone, and what they think and do, definitely seems quite out of control now, and appears ultimately sinister and devious whichever way you try to approach it. And in the meantime, we all get dragged through the technological insanity of net- zero, land grabs for data centres, economic suicide, crippled infrastructure, wars and whatever else they can think of to distract and distress people with. I don’t think we’ll be getting off this rollercoaster just yet…

(c) MKW Publishing

Weather We Do

It is still a large and growing topic quite in debate. The Weather.

Man-made climate change on one side, and the apparent fight against it with net zero and all sorts of ‘crazy’ ideas put forward that will apparently halt the peril heading our way, mainly involving taking your money. And geoengineering on another, with the fight also happening against that with all sorts of ‘crazy’ ideas put forward on what they are doing and again, what peril may come our way. And while each side fight each other, and dismiss each other for various reasons. It dawned on me. Isn’t it the same thing? Geoengineering in essence, is man-made climate change. It’s the same problem and fight. So, to deny one, must mean you deny the other? Many people who shout about climate problems caused by human and animal existence, say they do not believe there could be direct dangerous manipulation with intent (by way of aircraft) couldn’t affect the whole weather system as well as more local ones. Yet, they believe or agree that humans and industry, and cows farting not intending to affect it, can. Go figure.

We’ve been told for years we affect things, the o-zone layer being a big one in my childhood. Letting us know through strategic placements that what we do on a small scale, will have massive repercussions. So, spraying one can of hairspray will destroy the earth, but constant pumping and dumping into the atmosphere and oceans by industries and technologies never seems an issue. As we have seen, those who tell you should do something, do not do it themselves. ‘Fly less’ they say, while all flying in private jets to a location to apparently discuss the need for people to… fly less, it would be hilarious if it wasn’t so destructive and hypocritical.

But it does boggle my mind that some are still denying the existence of weather programs, ideas, models and experiments. Often conveniently saying, ‘they wouldn’t do that’ or, that happened years ago, it’s not now. Strangely overlooking the point, that many nefarious and sinister things have taken place, that we often don’t get to hear of for decades. Some example covered in An Experiment, But A Big One, More Than Sinister and Experimental, or Just Mental?, so it does seem as though perhaps it’s an issue with more than one problem.

People are in denial that those in charge may want to harm them, then that leads to denial about possible programs in place that may be primed for that, and further denial of even giving thought to it. Perhaps fear and paranoia stop people giving it extra thought. It All Starts To Unravel goes into what may inhibit some people from giving thought to these types of things, or accepting of even hearing what others say without having a meltdown or episode over even the idea of it. But as far as I can see from my previous articles – A Change in The Weather, Sunny, Sort Of, What’s Behind It? Weather It’s A Good Idea and It’s A Cover Up, there should be no dispute over if they can, of that there is evidence aplenty, it perhaps should be over if they do…

(c) MKW Publishing