What if the coming food shortages are by design, a means to achieving an end that is too difficult to achieve because the problem that's been identified is "too big" to change with the choices that are available to society?
Would a crisis, would a shortage be helpful to change human consumption behaviors by increasing the price associated with those behaviors? And if so, since behavioral science-based nudges haven't been effective, the problem too large, would designing and orchestrating a massive crisis that necessarily changes the choice architecture available to humans serve as an ideal means to a desired ends?
"Climate change: “Nudge is part of the solution to almost any problem, but is not the solution to any problem.”
Climate change is one of the topics that received more attention in the New Nudge. I asked Thaler how nudges, an approach some have criticized for playing at the margins, might contribute to fighting climate change.
Thaler [12:57] : “Nudges help on climate change, but it’s too big of a problem. One of the things we say in various ways and repeat throughout the book is nudge is part of the solution to almost any problem, but is not the solution to any problem.
“I am with, I think, 100 percent of economists around the world in thinking that step one, if we want to deal with this crisis, must be to get the prices right. Economists are right about some things. If you make something free, people consume too much of it. We see that at all-you-can-eat restaurants or, even worse, open bars. Right now, emissions are free, and people are acting accordingly. So whether it’s a carbon tax or cap and trade, we’ve got to get the prices right (now, that’s easier to say than to do). "
I submit to you that this is not conspiracy. Behavioral Science-based "nudges," terms like "choice architecture" are the actual processes of achieving the changes desired by the most powerful entities in the world today. At the United Nations under Agenda 2030, shared with the goals and vision expressed by the World Economic Forum's Great Reset. There is even a Behavioral Science plan available in UN documents, developed with leading Global Behaviorists working in government agencies and private industries, especially within Big Tech. Google itself has a Chief Global Behavioral Scientist, Maya Shankar, who co-authored the UN's Behavioral Insights Achieving Agenda 2030 plan. She was formerly the head of the Social and Behavioral Science Team under Pres. Obama (now designated the Office of Evaluation Services under the General Services Administration.)
And similar teams exist in the UK as the Behavioral Insights Team and in the Covid SPI-B nudge units that developed the most oppressive liberty-sucking nonpharmaceutical intervention strategies the world has lived under since 2020, like completely ineffective and discredited lockdown policies, mandatory quarantines, and mandatory and coerced masking. Psychological tools of manipulation designed to effect a change desired by authorities.
Could the coming food shortages actually be a coordinated and orchestrated crisis designed to "nudge" people to make different choices within a "SIMPLER" architecture of fewer choices deemed "better" by a self-imagined more enlightened, smarter, benevolent elite that has struggled with using ordinary methods of persuasion to influence changes they believe will help the environment and prevent the catastrophic climate change they've been warning us about for half a century? Something to consider.
What if the coming food shortages are by design, a means to achieving an end that is too difficult to achieve because the problem that's been identified is "too big" to change with the choices that are available to society?
Would a crisis, would a shortage be helpful to change human consumption behaviors by increasing the price associated with those behaviors? And if so, since behavioral science-based nudges haven't been effective, the problem too large, would designing and orchestrating a massive crisis that necessarily changes the choice architecture available to humans serve as an ideal means to a desired ends?
"Climate change: “Nudge is part of the solution to almost any problem, but is not the solution to any problem.”
Climate change is one of the topics that received more attention in the New Nudge. I asked Thaler how nudges, an approach some have criticized for playing at the margins, might contribute to fighting climate change.
Thaler [12:57] : “Nudges help on climate change, but it’s too big of a problem. One of the things we say in various ways and repeat throughout the book is nudge is part of the solution to almost any problem, but is not the solution to any problem.
“I am with, I think, 100 percent of economists around the world in thinking that step one, if we want to deal with this crisis, must be to get the prices right. Economists are right about some things. If you make something free, people consume too much of it. We see that at all-you-can-eat restaurants or, even worse, open bars. Right now, emissions are free, and people are acting accordingly. So whether it’s a carbon tax or cap and trade, we’ve got to get the prices right (now, that’s easier to say than to do). "
https://behavioralscientist.org/five-takeaways-from-our-conversation-with-richard-thaler-about-the-past-present-and-future-of-nudge/
I submit to you that this is not conspiracy. Behavioral Science-based "nudges," terms like "choice architecture" are the actual processes of achieving the changes desired by the most powerful entities in the world today. At the United Nations under Agenda 2030, shared with the goals and vision expressed by the World Economic Forum's Great Reset. There is even a Behavioral Science plan available in UN documents, developed with leading Global Behaviorists working in government agencies and private industries, especially within Big Tech. Google itself has a Chief Global Behavioral Scientist, Maya Shankar, who co-authored the UN's Behavioral Insights Achieving Agenda 2030 plan. She was formerly the head of the Social and Behavioral Science Team under Pres. Obama (now designated the Office of Evaluation Services under the General Services Administration.)
And similar teams exist in the UK as the Behavioral Insights Team and in the Covid SPI-B nudge units that developed the most oppressive liberty-sucking nonpharmaceutical intervention strategies the world has lived under since 2020, like completely ineffective and discredited lockdown policies, mandatory quarantines, and mandatory and coerced masking. Psychological tools of manipulation designed to effect a change desired by authorities.
Could the coming food shortages actually be a coordinated and orchestrated crisis designed to "nudge" people to make different choices within a "SIMPLER" architecture of fewer choices deemed "better" by a self-imagined more enlightened, smarter, benevolent elite that has struggled with using ordinary methods of persuasion to influence changes they believe will help the environment and prevent the catastrophic climate change they've been warning us about for half a century? Something to consider.
https://www.undp.org/publications/behavioural-insights-united-nations-achieving-agenda-2030#modal-publication-download
Millions of Africans starving is a small price to pay for some affluent soccer moms to preen and virtue signal.