We need to say ‘no’ to everything that diminishes our humanity

The intensity of dehumanization is increasing, so keep saying "I do not consent!"

We are living in a global regime that is actively seeking to dehumanize us in every way possible. This has been going on for eons, but we saw it massively and clearly displayed starting in March 2020 with the “Covid-19” plandemic, supposedly caused by a nonexistent “virus.” All of its protocols, policies, and mandates were assaults on our humanity—designed to isolate us from each other and strip us of our freedoms to move, to speak, to maintain bodily autonomy, and to be together with people of our own choosing.

Many of us said “no” to these efforts to circumscribe our lives. Most, sadly, complied.

Most of those protocols and policies have been suspended, but they are waiting in the wings to be reinstituted. Another plandemic may be just around the corner, if the self-styled rulers of the world can succeed in convincing the populace that “bird flu” or some other version of a fake “viral” pathogen is on the loose.

We will be required to say “no” again, and again, and probably again.

All the things that are dehumanizing

Meanwhile, public health policies are not the only dehumanizing circumstances in the world today. It is time for us to say “no” to other encroaching developments and moves by the power elites to build on the degree of compliance that they achieved from much of the population around masks, jabs, “social distancing,” and all the rest.

I’m talking about things like CBDCs, artificial intelligence (AI), “15-minute cities,” proliferation of 5G towers, spraying in the skies, and efforts to move our lives online and away from direct contact with other humans through practices like telemedicine and remote education.

15-minute cities are portrayed ideally and appealingly, but what if the church or school or medical clinic or specialty business or yoga studio or food club drop site or plant nursery you want to go to is not in your district? Will the needed variety of businesses and stores magically spring up in each district? What if your friends live across town in other districts? Etc.

Some of these we can simply decide not to do, as we previously decided not to wear a mask or not to get a jab. Others are happening on a large scale and are decided by people who are far from us, so that we may not have an option to keep ourselves away from the impacts. And still others haven’t happened everywhere yet, but are being rolled out in test locations and will likely at least be tried in more places.

We need to be ready to say “no” to all of these things.

Boundaries protect values

To me, it’s a boundary issue—putting boundaries around our humanity, our human-ness, with all that entails, to protect it from further assault. Meredith Miller, a holistic coach and author, is well-versed on how to see and deal with narcissistic abuse and suggests that being clear on what we value and then setting boundaries around those values are essential actions to avoid being dominated by a narcissistic abuser. Her discussion of boundaries relates not only to individuals who experience narcissistic abuse in relationships or family systems, but to everyone in the world today. We are all dealing with narcissistic abuse on a mass scale.

In a multi-part set of in-depth interviews with Substacker Margaret Anna Alice Through the Looking Glass, Miller lists “clarity of boundaries to protect what matters” as a sign of self-esteem and the number-one characteristic of those who rejected the coercive abuse of the “Covid-19” regime.

A person with healthy self-worth has a high degree of immunity to abuse. Self-worth comes from a) knowing what one’s personal values are, b) having a clear idea of what those look like in real life (these are called standards), and c) protecting those with boundaries. (Dissident Dialogues: Meredith Miller (Q&As #1–4))

Each time you enforce a new boundary to protect your values, your self-worth rises. We learn boundaries in real time as we are tested by people and life. It’s best to set these up mentally in advance. Dissident Dialogues: Meredith Miller (Q&As #5-7))

Many of us didn’t have our values clearly thought through in regard to issues raised by “Covid-19” before March 2020, but some at least managed to clarify them and get our boundaries in place to protect our humanity. But the plandemic was only the most recent and perhaps most obvious dehumanizing move on the part of those who want to control everything. Efforts have been underway for a long time to chip away at our self-esteem as humans, to gradually induce us to accept conditions of life that are anti-human and that disempower us, and even to replace our own values with “anti-values,” as Miller describes.

We are also living in a society where anti-values have been promoted through cultural ideology for decades before we ever heard the word “COVID.” Many people’s values were already degraded, distorted, or even completely absent. For example, in the ideology of entitlement, people might believe everyone else owes them or other people should be forced to sacrifice for their comfort. (Dissident Dialogues: Meredith Miller (Q&As #1-4))

Dehumanizing narratives abounding

The disproven germ hypothesis and its corollary that “viruses” exist and cause disease, concepts which have dominated the narrative about sickness and health for over 120 years, are very relevant examples of degradation of our human values and installation of “anti-values” around “the greater good.” Through these false narratives, we have been misinformed about what sickness is, and our responsibility and control and even our right of say-so over our health and our own bodies have been eroded.

In addition, our connection to nature and the earth has been buried through education and propaganda that induces us to believe that we are not part of nature and to accept as “normal” high levels of pollution and extreme damage to our planet through logging, mining, manufacturing, and other destructive activities of industrial society. This destructive activity also impinges on our health, and we accept a lower level of vibrancy and a shorter lifespan than our human bodies are designed for.

Narratives and stories going back much further than that have told us that unless we are born into the “upper class,” we are “less human” or even “less than human.” Most of us would say we don’t accept this in our modern day and age—that’s feudalism, isn’t it?—but these distinctions are still in place in society, and you can bet that those pulling the levers of the global regime still believe it and are still working it. There are many more ways in which our humanity has been eroded over time. These are only a few.

Time to polish up our ‘no’

There’s a lot to say “no” to, and we need to polish up our “no” now, because it is needed. And, as Miller advises, we need to be clear about what we value so that our “no” is a clear boundary and we are strong and confident in asserting our non-consent. It might be a useful exercise to consider what values that you hold are being transgressed by each item in this list of things to say “no” to. I’ve included mine after each one.

CBDCs

We can say “no” to central bank digital currencies by simply not using them, as long as they are offered as just an option and not the only option with a “health passport” documenting our vaccination status as a requirement. We can help to forestall that offer by using cash whenever possible and using credit less. If CBDCs become the only option, our “no” will need to take the form of working with others, probably in a small group, to ensure that everyone’s needs are met when we do not have access to currency, especially if cash is banned. It is not too soon to start building these connections with others. But I think it’s also possible that enough people continuing to use cash and saying a firm “no” to “digital wallets” could forestall CBDCs altogether.

My values: freedom to use my financial resources and live my life as I choose, bodily autonomy, living as locally as possible and having direct interaction with other humans to meet the basic needs of life.

AI

AI has been around for quite a while, powering search engines and such, but is now showing up everywhere—usually framed as an “assistant.” I strongly urge you to resist using AI to help you do research, write a marketing plan or a college paper or an email or a Substack article, or create an image. Using AI to make work that involves our own brain and creativity “easier” is a very slippery, very steep slope. Any use of AI that outsources your innate human capacities to robots—writing, thinking, or creative output of any sort—makes you de facto transhuman, without the need for a brain chip. You’ve just turned over one of your most precious, innate, individual powers to a machine to do that human thing for you.

Creativity is our human superpower, and it is the very thing that the dehumanizers most want to incapacitate. Also the phrase “use it or lose it” is applicable here. If we don’t use our innate power to think through a problem and describe it in words, and then work through a solution—write that marketing plan, paper, or email, or determine search terms and places to look for resources, etc.—we will lose that power very quickly.

Photo by Glenn Carstens-Peters on Unsplash

Although some say that AI could be positive for humanity, if it were not in the control of those who have dehumanization or transhumanism as their goal, I have serious doubts about this. It doesn’t seem like a neutral tool to me, for reasons I have outlined above.

My values: being fully human means I control, develop, and use my creativity and my own mental powers. I deeply value my own ability to think, and the insights that come when I work hard via my own awareness and attention and struggle to find the right words for what I want to say. I will NEVER turn this precious capacity over to robots. NEVER.

Digitizing our lives

The convenience of receiving services or conducting meetings online is very seductive. I have especially felt this, as I have been car-free since 2006. Being able to visit with friends and have meetings using online platforms has allowed me to stay in touch with people I would otherwise probably not talk with, and has prevented me from missing meetings that I couldn’t get to without a car.

But I feel it’s important to resist this in every way we can, since it is part of the effort to move our lives from the real world into the virtual world. We get more accustomed to sitting in front of a computer instead of going somewhere to meet with people in person, and we even get accustomed to interacting with our computer instead of with people, and then it becomes easier and easier to move more of our lives online until we have digitized ourselves. I do balance my almost daily use of online interactions with frequent in-person meetings and gatherings.

Photo by May Gauthier on Unsplash

Remote education is also a very helpful development, since it doesn’t require travel and enables people to take classes that they wouldn’t otherwise be able to take. But again, to me, this kind of digital substitution for real-life experience needs to be embarked on with eyes wide open, because it is a part of the globalizers’ agenda and it does subtract something from our full humanity.

My values: the human-ness of being in the physical presence of others. We are a social species with electrical and magnetic fields, and we need touch, eye contact not mediated by a screen, and resonance with others’ auric and heart-energy fields.

15-minute cities

Dividing cities into districts in which, supposedly, residents can get everything they need within a 15-minute walk is one of the features of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset (see graphic above). While its proponents justify it through appeals to environmental protection and reducing traffic—it’s just good urban planning, don’t you see?—it is really the creation of an open-air cage where residents are literally prevented from going outside the “district” in their cars by barriers in most of the streets, and are fined for passing too many times through the streets that are left open.

The plan to institute this concept in Oxford, UK, last year was massively resisted.

The plan has not yet been implemented in Oxford, but is beginning to be in a few other cities around the world, including Paris, Barcelona, and Shanghai, and is in the works in Buenos Aires, Portland, and Milan, among others. I’d have sworn I saw videos from Oxford of cars defiantly driving over barriers that were set up to keep the districts separate—the actual bars of the open-air cage—but I can’t find any of those videos now. They may have been from another city where residents said “I do not consent” to living in a cage. A good way to say “no,” if this concept comes to your town.

My values: freedom of movement, freedom to live my life as I choose, an organic and local business marketplace that is freely accessible.

5G towers

This to me is one of the most heinous things being done by the self-styled rulers of the earth. The harmful effects of 5G on all living things are well known, yet the proliferation of EMF-emitting towers continues, as does the propaganda narrative that they are perfectly safe. The expansion is sold to us as enabling “faster downloads” of movies, but we know that the real reason is to create the “Internet of things.” This abhorrent project links up all of our laptops, cell phones, and other communication devices with everything else in our lives that has a computer chip: our vehicles, our “smart” appliances, smart TVs, and smart meters, our wearable tech such as Apple watches and Fitbits, and anything else that can be made with a chip in it.

Photo by Kamil S on Unsplash

With this interlinking, we are not only enmeshed in signals, but all of the things in our home are able to report on our energy and appliance use, as well as sending our biodata such as heart rate, blood pressure, hours of sleep, and walking steps to a dashboard somewhere. It also allows a switch to be flipped remotely to turn off our power or heat to impose “rolling blackouts” supposedly needed to “conserve energy.”

So one obvious way to avoid this enmeshment and surveillance is to say “no” to smart appliances, smart TVs (I’d sugget saying “no” to TV altogether to avoid programming), and wearable tech. Drive a pre-computer car. Opt out of any smart meter that is offered to you. Use your cell phone less, keep it on airplane mode more often, and consider living without a smart phone. This is a pretty radical step, and it’s one I’m not willing to take yet, but I think about it. I’ve heard it can be done.

Contracts: ‘silence is acquiescence’ so our ‘no’ must be explicit

For the proliferation of towers, though, we are cut out of the decision altogether. Even city governments are—supposedly—not able to control or stop the communication companies from putting up towers. But there are ways we can have an impact.

I’ve been learning how everything is done in our world via contracts. We are supposedly given a chance to say “no,” and if we don’t, we are considered to have said “yes.” “Silence is acquiescence” is a legal maxim. We may never have explicitly been offered a contract to allow 5G towers and EMFs all around us, but we have implicitly agreed to the implicit contract by using cell phones and other devices that operate on those frequencies.

Cal Washington and his group InPower have had success in using “Notices of Liability” to address 5G as well as aerial spraying, smart meters, and vaccine mandates. His work is based on contract law and “conditional acceptance” of an offered contract, if the proposed installation or mandate or activity can be proven not to cause harm. This video explains it briefly (less than 3 minutes) and rather charmingly.

For more on InPower and how Notices of Liability have caused a number of public officials to step down from their positions of decisionmaking authority over 5G and other intrusions—a first step to stopping these things—check out Washington’s website.

‘I do not consent’

As individuals, we can also energetically revoke our consent when we see a 5G tower or the paths of chemtrails overhead. When I go for a walk in my neighborhood and pass a 5G tower (which are approximately on every other block), I make sure I am in an awareness of my sovereignty and not in a victim mentality, and look directly at it or point at it and say, “I do not consent.” I do the same thing with chemtrails. This may seem ineffectual, but I believe that the resonance of withdrawing consent does have a certain power toward the thing non-consented to. More important, it strengthens my own value and the boundary I set for it as well as reminding me of my sovereignty and the importance of valuing myself as a human being.

Aerial spraying

The Notice of Liability process has been used against aerial spraying as well as 5G. Refer to the InPower website for more. Revoking consent energetically to the spraying is a positive act. Simmering and diffusing white vinegar to disperse chemtrails and the clouds they form may sound crazy, but many are doing it and having results. Other techniques include using pyramids, copper hamonizers, electroculture antennas, and certain sound frequencies. FWIW! I haven’t tried any of these but I know some who have, and their evidence seems amazingly strong. Check out this Telegram channel to see the results being obtained by people who are doing this.

My values for saying “no” to both 5G and aerial spraying: bodily autonomy, my right not to be involuntarily exposed to harmful technology, community values over corporate profit and global domination.

Keep your values and boundaries strong

Thank you for reading, and for caring—about yourself, other people, the earth, and the future. Thank you for having strong values and enforcing your boundaries. Thank you for taking whatever actions you take to say “no” to what is dehumanizing, and to revoke your consent in any places that you have given it either actively or implicitly. Opportunities to courageously say “no” are already plentiful, and more will likely be showing up any day. We will need to be strong, and be ready.

More reading

Deep thanks to Margaret Anna Alice for her extended interview with Meredith Miller, which I found an enlightening, helpful, and affirming read about the narcissistic abuse that the world’s population has suffered during the past four years, and is still happening.

Dissident Dialogues: Meredith Miller (Q&As #1–4)

Dissident Dialogues: Meredith Miller (Q&As #5–7)

A reflection by an Oxford resident on where the 15-minute-city concept fails.

Oxford 2024

Christine Massey keeps holding their feet to the fire, and now has another confession, this time from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, that they have no evidence of the “H5N1 virus,” a “bird flu” strain recently in the news and about which fear is being raised over its purported “jump” to cows.

"H5N1": Canadian Food Inspection Agency still can't find valid evidence that it exists

Also on “bird flu,” Peter Imanuelson reports on the WHO’s lie, trumpeted abroad by mass media, that a Mexican man’s death was caused by H5N2, a “new strain of avian flu.”

Media caught LYING about bird flu death