Since a large selection of the Epstein files was released a short time ago, most of the discussion centered on scandalous issues such as pedophilia and cannibalism, the topic of "50 Shades of Jeffrey Epstein" being, of course, quite titillating to a certain large portion of the public. But it is important to understand that the pedophilia and the cannibalism are essentially a smokescreen behind which hide much more important Epsteinian initiatives, supported by such magnates and luminaries as Bill Gates, formerly of Microsoft, German AI expert Joscha Bach and MIT linguistics mafia head and tired old political radical Noam Chomsky.

Yes, of course, cannibalism and pedophilia took place: the Epstein gang ate babies and sexually exploited boys and girls they purchased from, among others, their friend Vladimir Zelensky of the former Ukraine. But that's just to stock the buffet and the boudoir. These are just the typical perversions of people who feel unrestrained by any sense of public morality: they may display some modicum of decency toward their own ilk; as far as everyone else — for them they are just human toys, game animals, or biological robots. Five centuries of continuous colonialist exploitation and slavery form the basis of the operating system of all Western elites, along with racism, fascism and eugenics. So, what lay beyond the buffet (human infants, yum!) and the boudoir (hello, Lolita!)? Let's take a peek inside Epstein's lab and see what was on the slab.

The topics under discussion centered on genetics, cybernetics and the architecture of globalist control. Very rich and very influential members of Epstein's informal club were not at all shy in discussing what amounted to techno-fascism as their choice globalist regime for the XXI century. The newspaper Berliner Zeitung opened its éxposé with the title "Climate change as a means for fighting overpopulation: what did a Berlin researcher discuss with Epstein?"

In their lengthy emails, Bach, Epstein, and others discussed technical and philosophical concepts that went far beyond typical academic topics and touched on the fields of "racial realism" and eugenics. Bach claimed, among other things, that black children in the US exhibit "slower cognitive development" that they "will never catch up" intellectually but demonstrate "faster motor development." He criticized studies that attributed these differences to social factors as insufficiently substantiated. Bach also expressed provocative views on gender roles to Epstein: he claimed that women find abstract systems like mathematics "inherently boring" because, unlike social relationships, they do not attract "social attention."

In one message, Bach described fascism as "probably the most effective and rationally rigorous way" of organizing society. These reflections were complemented by discussions of whether climate change might be "a good way to solve the problem of overpopulation"—an exchange that American media classified as a discussion of "population reduction." The bitter irony is that this discussion was held between a German and a Jew. When the correspondence surfaced, Bach declared that it was "simply the style of intellectual communication" accepted in these circles. Indeed, if infant flesh and raping underage girls is copacetic, why not toss in a little fascism and eugenics to spice things up?

There are some interesting historical antecedents to such open and uninhibited intellectualizing. Take, for instance, a scientist named Alfred Rosenberg. He didn't kill anyone either — he simply engaged in intellectually provocative conversations, particularly with Adolf Hitler, about the inferiority of Jews and Slavs. So why was Alfred the intellectual sentenced to hanging at the Nuremberg Tribunal after poor Adolf was driven to suicide by that horrible Red Army rolling into Berlin? Not to compare mice with men, but shouldn't something similar be arranged for Joscha now that poor Jeffrey has been driven to suicide just like poor Adolf was? I am just musing...

But it seems that the ultimate solution to the planet's overpopulation problem was not the sole preoccupation of this circle of like-minded baby-munchers and Lolita-fanciers. They also gave a great deal of thought to ways of eliminating poverty. Epstein asked his friend Bill Gates: "How do we get rid of poor people entirely?" Exactly one year earlier, in February 2010, Bill Gates publicly stated: "Now if we do a really good job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent." This quote is still to be found on the internet in spite of arduous efforts at whitewashing it out of existence. Gates repeatedly stated that the world is overpopulated and we are exhaling too much CO2. And then, around 2017, three years before the coronavirus pseudopandemic hit, Gates and Epstein launched into a discussion of a "pandemic simulation."

This discussions turned out to be most fruitful. Not only a new, manmade virus was crafted, but vaccines were engineered, supposedly to immunize the populace against this virus but really aimed squarely at poverty reduction through its lethal long-term side effects. The virus was something that healthy human immune systems could cope with; its purpose was to induce people to agree to be injected with a poverty control vaccine. A conspiracy theory, you might think? This is not a conspiracy at all, but a publicly announced scheme for promoting poverty reduction concepts of an informal group of very rich intellectuals united by a common vision and devoid of any human morality. But then came Vladimir Putin and on February 24, 2022 he killed Covid19 by starting the Special Military Operation in the Ukraine. One good artillery barrage, you see, is worth a dozen fake viruses. Suddenly the world looked up and was forced to pick what was real over what was fake. Mind control broke down. The World Health Organization was shown the door. The spell was broken.

Zooming out a bit, how do we classify the informal intellectual baby-eating child-raping community that was centered on Jeffrey Epstein? Furthermore, how do we explain the fact that the Epstein files were released? After all, the rich and the powerful have plenty of ways to keep facts about themselves hidden. Just look at the extreme and mostly successful efforts by Bill Gates to whitewash his poverty reduction plans: if you search for them, you will find nothing but missing web pages and strenuous denials

One theory is that the publication was an act of exhibitionism. Let's assume for the purpose of exposition that we are dealing with a sect of devil worshipers; and it just so happens that devil worshipers are loathe to commit their abominations in secret. Their rituals require publicity and notoriety. They don't just want to rape and kill children; they want everyone to know that they're raping and killing children — to know this, but to be unable to do anything about it because it is Satan who reigns supreme. Throughout the West, rank and file pedophiles can get 20 years for just talking to children online or for watching child pornography. Meanwhile, members of the elite can rape minors almost openly and get away with it.

Before the publication of the Epstein files, it was possible to speculate about the vile proclivities of Western elite. Rumors and gossip created an aura of mystery around the dark and hidden secrets of those in power. But now a truly horrific side of life has been revealed in all of its shameless nakedness. You can now know for sure that Bill Gates and Bill Clinton fucked girls, boys, and tortured children. And you won't be able to do anything about it. Half of you will still vote for Democrats drawn from the same rotten pack of cards as Clinton, convincing yourselves that "this time will be different." And you will still use the rotten Windows operating system which Gates had created because you are too lazy to switch to Linux, which supports fewer of the video games to which you are addicted.

With this development, demonic Western power reaches a completely new, truly diabolical level. Now we'll know for sure that after the next summit in Washington or Brussels they'll have dinner and then go to torture children and maybe even kill them. They might even publish reports about it, passing them off as AI slop. It's no wonder that they all let themselves be photographed cavorting with minors. They were driven by an overwhelming desire to let everyone know that they're allowed to do anything they want.

In the end, it will all come out, down to the most sensitive and the most revolting details. And, most importantly, no one will be held accountable for much of it. The elite will hang out their blood- and shit-stained underwear for all to see, and everyone will gag from the stench but won't be able to turn away from it. After all, if you're still human, you have to exterminate this scum — strangle and slaughter these degenerates, purge them with fire, regardless of the consequences. The knowledge that Evil is being perpetrated, uncontrollable and unaccountable, eats away at the brain and kills the soul. But that is too much to ask of a generation of internet-addled conformists who will take all of this information into account and do nothing. And the Western elites — the degenerates who sold their souls and bodies to Satan, know that they have nothing to fear.

Zooming out even more, this informal intellectual baby-eating, child-raping community is an example of a recurring phenomenon called an "anti-system". Here's what Grok can tell you about it:

<grok-ai>

In his passionary theory of ethnogenesis, Lev Gumilev introduced the concept of an "anti-system" as a special kind of human community. By his definition, it is a "systemic entity of people with a negative worldview" — a sharp rejection of the material world, life as such, and complex systems (ethnicity, nature, the state, tradition). The main goal of an anti-system is the "simplification of systems to the point of their complete destruction" (reducing the density of systemic connections to zero), since its proponents perceive existence as suffering and non-existence as a blessing. Anti-systems typically arise in zones of ethnic contact (chimeras), from people with a split/disrupted worldview, often with a futuristic mindset (the future is more important than the present and the past).

The main historical examples of anti-systems that Gumilev himself directly or indirectly cited:

• Gnosticism (in its various forms)

• Marcionism

• Manichaeism (a classic example of a life-denying ideology)

• Paulicianism

• Bogomilism (the Bogomil heresy)

• Catharism (the Albigensians)

• Certain currents of Ismailism (especially its radical branches)

Gumilev believed that these teachings were successive and essentially represented a single, long-lived anti-system of the Gnostic-dualistic persuasion.

He also considered the following manifestations of anti-systemic behavior:

• Oprichnina (a state within a state in 16th-century Russia during the reign of Ivan IV "The Terrible")

• Various revolutionary movements, in the broad sense, especially the radically destructive ones

In later interpretations by Gumilev's students and followers, the list is often expanded to include Freemasonry, some totalitarian sects, radical left- and right-wing movements of the 20th century, and modern globalist life-denying ideologies.

In short, according to Gumilev, anti-systems are not comprised of enemies of the system or dissidents; these are precisely "life-denying ideological constructs" aimed at the destruction of complex positive systems (ethnicity, culture, biosphere).

</grok-ai>

To complete the exposition on anti-systems, they share one great similarity: their members fail to breed. Indeed, look at the large number of childless members of Western elites, many of whom are, in addition, gay. Another marked tendency of anti-systems is their spontaneous self-destruction. Of course, they can cause massive damage until they self-destruct, so it is better to destroy them as soon as they appear. In the case of Western elites, it is clearly too late to do that. At this late hour, it may take a few precision strikes with Russian tactical nukes to eradicate this infestation, as Prof. Sergey Karaganov continuously advises Putin to do. But Putin, a devout Christian and a careful Gumilyov reader, would be more inclined to simply set up a cordon sanitaire and wait for nature to take its course and the anti-system to self-destruct, as anti-systems always do, eventually.

[Hat tips: Igor Maltsev, AChT]