Security in The Context of Civilizational Changes Progressing In 2026 on the Example of Poland

Introduction

The social changes taking place in today's world are contributing to the disintegration of Western civilization by impacting social structures, cultural norms, and interpersonal interactions. The growing sense of alienation resulting from globalization and industrialization, combined with dynamic demographic changes, lays the foundation for numerous social problems. Generational differences in approaches to values, work, and interpersonal relationships are increasingly evident, leading to the erosion of traditional social bonds. Younger generations, raised in the age of technology, often prefer virtual interactions over in-person ones, undermining the importance of local communities and preserved traditions. The rise of social movements, representing a pursuit of social justice and equality, and their diverse approaches to issues such as minority rights and economic reform, reflect a growing frustration with existing systems. Research shows that societies dominated by tensions and divisions are more susceptible to chaos and instability. At the same time, growing cultural diversity, fueled by migration and global exchange, has led to phenomena such as social polarization and radicalization. New group identities are emerging, often challenging established norms and changing social dynamics. Some intellectuals (e.g., Oswald Spengler, Samuel Huntington) point to the cyclical nature of civilization's development and decline; identity crises, including those caused by multiculturalism ; weakening traditional values; declining birth rates; and economic indebtedness. The introduction of Polish public administration in the context of the challenges of 2026 requires reflecting significant changes taking place on many levels, including both legal and socio-economic ones. As a member of the European Union, Poland must face EU regulations, which have been dynamically developed in recent years and are changing the way in which How public administration operates. Due to the increasing complexity of legal issues, administrations face challenges in complying with directives that impact, among others, environmental policy, migration, and the digitalization of services. Each of these issues requires analysis and implementation of effective solutions that aim not only to meet legal requirements but also to satisfy the growing expectations of citizens. In the interdisciplinary approach, the beginning of the decline of Western civilization is recognized in the context of the disruption of democratic and non-democratic mechanisms of countries on all continents of the Earth, primarily through the activities of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), MI6 ( Secret Intelligence Service SIS) and Mossad (Hebrew: Ha-Mosad le- Modi'in u-le- Tafkidim Mejuchadim ). In addition to those mentioned, when analyzing Poland, we also mention the Internal Security Agency (ABW) and other not-so-described entities operating formally, but often in a clandestine manner, such as the so-called Bilderberg Group [1]. The phenomena covered by the research require an understanding of the complex interactions between social, economic and political factors that shape the modern world. The decline of Western civilization is a complex issue influenced by internal factors (crisis of values, demographic, economic and other) and external factors (geopolitics, actions of great powers). In this context, the role of intelligence services such as the CIA, Mossad, MI6 and the ABW appears. During the meeting in May 2025 in Antalya, Turkey, Prof. Jeffrey Sachs [2], a long-time advisor to US Presidents, pointed, among others, to the operation called " Operation Timber Sycamore ” reported on a project aimed at implementing 7 wars in 5 years, leading to domination of the Middle East by the US and Israel. Data provided by US and US-affiliated media is so unreliable that it cannot be considered. As for Poland, the situation reveals threads connecting changes in the country with CIA operations, according to statements by Professor Jeffrey Sachs (statements on the YouTube program's pages) commissioned by the US President in 1988 to the present. However, the beginning of US interference in Polish affairs dates back much earlier. In the 1970s, under the rule of the USSR, the Polish secret service, i.e. the Security Service (SB), established contact with the US intelligence agency CIA. The global division was related to the so-called communist system and the so-called democratic system. The CIA's task, among other things, was to influence, by all possible means and methods, this balance of power in favor of the US through projects financed by the US government, such as USAID. The CIA's activities under the Polish People's Republic found support from the Soviet service in the Polish People's Republic, i.e. The training was classified as confidential. During the training, interest in Bishop Macedo (a Brazilian priest) and his achievements was sparked. He became a model for actions on behalf of the Polish counterpart, Tadeusz Rydzyk (posing as a Redemptorist monk). The goal was to influence the Polish population and the Polish diaspora through media investments under the name TV and Radio Trwam, broadcasting religious messages, and to establish a school for training political personnel. Knowledge was gained about trade unions and their potential for future manipulation. At the time, Poland had a strong industry subordinated to the needs of the USSR, unrelated to domestic needs, which ultimately led to its liquidation after the launch of the so-called transformation, strictly subordinated to US interests. Over 80% of the industry was irreversibly liquidated. Jimmy Hoffa, an American trade union activist and long-time chairman of the Teamsters union, became the model [3].

He came up with the name for the union – SOLIDARITY. The prototype for later trade unions in Poland. Between 1981 and 1989, Poland was preparing for changes in response to the transformations in the USSR, and the option of a so-called systemic transformation was developed under direct supervision by the CIA. Martial law in Poland and the so-called internment of 1981 enabled the integration of the Solidarity trade union's management with officials of the Soviet regime (the political police, i.e., officers persecuting any signs of patriotism or religiosity, known as the Security Service, abbreviated as SB) and the removal of Polish patriots deemed inconvenient by the regime from decision-making circles. Internment took place in various facilities, often confined to prisons, where officers of the Polish services and Solidarity decision-makers were placed in the same cells without being told who was who. The imprisoned quickly integrated and supported each other, creating the foundations of future political parties and a platform for cooperation with the Solidarity Trade Union. A "good" move for the regime was the promotion of Lech Walsa, an agent of the political police, the Security Service, as the so-called trade union leader in both domestic and international media, and his subsequent nomination by the services for the Nobel Prize (150 signatures on the award application were most likely from SB officers themselves). Before official meetings between Polish administration VIPs and US officials, a gruesome ritual murder of Father Jerzy Popieluszko was carried out by specially appointed SB officers. The murder unfolded as follows – in brief: on October 19, 1984, SB agents stopped the priest returning from Bydgoszcz near Górsko. The priest was forcibly dragged into a car and taken away. He was brutally tortured during the several-day journey, which was witnessed by the public in the media. According to findings, the priest died of his wounds before being drowned in the Vistula River reservoir. His mutilated body was found on October 30, 1984. An investigation into the murder was conducted. In the so-called Torun Trial, which began in late 1984, four officers were convicted: Grzegorz Piotrowski (the group leader) and Col. Adam Pietruszka, each receiving 25 years in prison. Leszek Pekala and Waldemar Chmielewski were sentenced to 15 and 14 years in prison, respectively.

Ultimately, all were released early under subsequent amnesties. They changed their names and obtained very good jobs, and consequently, generous pensions. Only recently, thanks to numerous reports from researchers in the US, Great Britain, and other countries, has it been possible to identify and define the phenomenon of ritual murder, which had been carried out since, as some historians claim, the times of Babylon, with the intention of benefiting the criminals and their future generations. Numerous meetings were held at that time in Poland and abroad, such as the meeting between General Jaruzelski and, among others, With Rockefeller in 1985, behind closed doors in the USA. Since then, meetings have also been held with representatives of other European countries, with the main participation and under the direction of the CIA, establishing a team to govern Poland through selected individuals and under their guidance. The basis for these actions, the CIA's experience in Chile, where President Salvador Allende was assassinated to install dictator General Augusto Pinochet, calling this process the "Shock Doctrine," became a model. The main elements were unjustified inflation, the large-scale privatization of banks and industry, its liquidation, and the formation of a party structure with the participation of designated activists allied with the CIA, i.e., the USA, on a permanent basis. Issues were agreed upon, including the devaluation of the Polish currency, adapting it to the needs of hostile takeovers of the economy and banks, as well as the savings of Poles deposited not only in banks but also in other financial institutions. In fact, since 1990, Poland has been implementing a process of change using the state budget, establishing numerous public institutions, including the central administration, to maintain the influence of activists from those years, as well as institutions manipulating public opinion in the form of so-called science in favor of the regime ideology through institutes known as scientific institutions, followed by annual, secret training sessions with invited participants, modeled after the last official meeting in 2024 in Karpacz [4].

The party system, linked to elections, was structured using a mathematical algorithm, a method most frequently used in the creation of pyramid schemes in the USA. This led to a situation where an individual's vote for the party that receives the most votes translates into a larger number of MPs than the votes of the others, creating a significant inequality that precludes the democratization of this public sphere in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland [5]. USAID funds financed the creation of political parties in such a way as to ultimately lead to the two-party model in force in the USA. By financing artificial political elites, they gained absolute influence over them, including their political status. This nationwide fraud, combined with numerous campaigns to finance, among other things, the implementation of a 10-point program to destabilize society, developed with the participation of the renowned US scientist Noam Chomsky [6]. When Poland was admitted to the European Union, officials failed to announce that they had been changing the law since 1990. Quietly, but quickly, they sold off banks, eliminating the possibility of national control over the value of money. They acquired property by liquidating industry, driving it into bankruptcy, or selling it off for a small fraction of its value [7]. This situation was possible thanks to the laws of the Polish People's Republic, which remained unchanged until 1997. Soviet law, with the involvement of the CIA and others, allowed the creation of an artificial business elite for the benefit of the Security Service (SB) collaborating with the Polish People's Republic, and directly for enriching its officers (exactly as in Chile).

In 1997, after numerous disputes, primarily over the preamble and leaving many provisions without public consultation, the Constitution of the Republic of Poland was ratified, creating restrictions on changes so severe that it could not be amended. The fact that the EU agreement was unilateral—without the option of opting out—was verbally promoted, instead, by a vision of equality and development through co-investment in industry, agriculture, and science, enabling their growth and competitiveness with economies from other continents. Science was to develop through investing in joint research. What we have now: the European Parliament, corporate EU parties, and a system of imposing laws contrary to the accepted and still valid human rights protection formulas were launched, attempting to enforce their application through financial manipulation and institutional violence. An economy collapses when, instead of its development, its restrictions are financed with subsidies, falsehoods are introduced under the guise of science, and Polish science is treated almost like a pariah of Europe, thanks to its own officials, who accepted, for example, the fact that Polish scientific publishers and so-called "scientific journals" ("Polish scientific journals") were given the credit for their achievements. Western European countries. Currently, the EU is imposing laws on participating countries aimed at establishing a technocrat dictatorship, including by giving officials the right to persecute the public for critical assessments or statements [ 8]. Additionally, a crime against the Mayor of Gdansk took place in Poland. Mayor Pawel Adamowicz died on January 14, 2019, the day after being stabbed three times by 27-year-old Stefan Wilmont during the Grand Finale of the Great Orchestra of Christmas Charity. The attacker ran onto the stage at Targ Weglowy during the "Light to Heaven" event. The politician underwent several hours of surgery but died the next day as a result of severe injuries. After the murder, the perpetrator claimed that he was "administered drugs for a long time" and "told what to do," that he "knew nothing, doesn't know what happened," and that he "was ordered to do it, he couldn't stop himself." The police publicly announced that he had been committed to a psychiatric facility, and his current whereabouts and fate are unknown. This criminal scenario is linked to the changes in the mayor of Gdansk, where before his death, Mayor Pawel Adamowicz had a registered electoral committee and a campaign, resulting in his election as mayor of Gdansk in November 2018. A candidate was appointed in his place, without any campaign and without public participation. For the first time in Poland, such a decision was made without a vote of the voters, and the Prime Minister gave his consent to hold office (in defiance of applicable Polish law—the Constitution and the Electoral Code). This raises questions—did he know about and support this elimination? The course of events is the exact scenario of a CIA project codenamed MK Ultra, described in Wikipedia and in videos on YouTube and other online portals.

According to information directly from the US, the project was not completed— here, YouTube and videos describing US whistleblowers on websites, as well as documentaries after the partial declassification of the CIA archives in this regard. In Poland, the equivalent of these services is the Internal Security Agency (ABW)—the intelligence service within this agency. This agency is a renamed service from the former Security Service, the so-called the political police of the Polish People's Republic during the Soviet occupation. Continuity of operations and collaboration with the CIA are no secret in Poland. These activities are intended to directly lead to the creation of a single, non-replaceable world government of technocrats, to reduce the population on Earth, and to implement the principle of "have nothing and be happy" (implicitly, you will work for the technocrats and be grateful they let you live). The content of this article is a deliberate research process, leading to new discoveries and their description in the context of multifaceted, interdisciplinary research.

Methodology / Materials and Methods

The research process leading to this study utilized multiple research methods, including a personally developed, peer-reviewed, and published multi -dynamic interdisciplinary sensory-cognitive analysis. The research methods used include: observation ; interview; organizational theory; analysis of scientific literature, written and electronic documentation; synthesis; and scientific reflection.

Observation

The most elementary technique of empirical cognition in the social sciences is observation. It is a research activity involving the collection of data (information) through observation, that is, in its natural course and within the immediate sight and hearing of the researcher (observer). Observation as a research technique differs from ordinary observation in that it is intentional, meaning intentional and directed towards the systematic perception of the object, process, or phenomenon being identified.

Interview

A highly popular research technique in the social sciences is the interview. It enables conscious exploration of socio-political phenomena. An interview is a conversation between a researcher and a respondent or respondents, according to previously developed instructions (or based on a special questionnaire). An interview is a process in which the researcher attempts to influence the subject by asking questions and persuading them to express their opinions on the topic being studied. It is one of the research techniques that allows for the parallel use of observation.

Organizational Theory

Organizational theory It detects the regularities in the process of subordinating individual actions to the goals of the whole; it provides premises for revealing the social context of the rationality of political actors' actions, their external and internal conditions. Organizational theory is becoming a contemporary, compelling challenge to political life, defined by political values such as: 1. moving away from the repressive state; 2. autonomy of society from the state; 3. decentralization and dispersion of administrative authority, development of local government bodies; 4. participatory democracy; 5. activity and autonomy of minority groups; 6. tolerance of diverse value systems; 7. self-organization, formation of informal groups; 8. general increase in the level of education, rising level of political culture; 9. cultural syncretism; 10. replacing the philosophy of domination (over individuals, political institutions) with the idea of harmonious coexistence and partnership.

Analysis of scientific literature, written and electronic documentation

Literary analysis in the research process involves breaking down the identified material into its component parts and considering (discussing) each part separately, or mentally fragmenting it using logical abstraction. Analysis is often divided into elementary, causal, and logical. Elementary analysis occurs when the subject of research is broken down into elements without discerning any interrelationships between them ¬. It is descriptive in nature. Causal analysis, also known as functional analysis, aims to detect relationships between individual phenomena. It involves breaking down the subject of research into its component parts, paying attention to the connections between them. It is usually preceded by elementary analysis. Logical analysis involves breaking down complex cognitive objects into their component parts, taking into account the logical relationships between them. Library collections were used alongside specialized collections, along with general publications of an informative nature, such as encyclopedias, dictionaries, lexicons, reference books , and reference books. These publications are essential to every researcher's workshop. Current access to electronic university libraries supported the research process. Access to electronic libraries was available on the PBN (Polish Scientific Library) websites; academia.edu; scholar.google.com; and Zenodo . Initially, the analysis process involved verification, selection, classification, and categorization of literature.

Synthesis

The term "synthesis" refers to the combining of many different elements into a single whole. Similar to analysis, synthesis is commonly divided into elementary, causal, and logical. Elementary synthesis involves creating a whole from individual elements; a typical selection (ideal type) is formulated from various facts and phenomena, which is considered similar to all others and therefore can be considered representative of the whole. Causal synthesis constitutes an essential part ; it is a specific reversal of analysis and also serves as a test of it; the interrelationships and relationships between the elements of research are reduced to generalization. Logical synthesis involves combining the components into a whole, taking into account the logical relations between them.

Scientific reflection

Scholarly reflection is the process of critically analyzing and evaluating one's own knowledge, views, and experiences in a scientific context. It is a key element of intellectual development, allowing for a deeper understanding of a topic and improving research skills. In education, scholarly reflection helps students and teachers connect new knowledge with prior experiences and build awareness of their own learning processes.

Multi-dynamic Interdisciplinary Sensory-Cognitive Analytics

Multi-dynamic, i.e. multi - «multiple, multiple or a large amount of something» (here I recognize a multiplicity of diverse factors, most often impossible to determine initially), dynamic - 1) «mobile, resilient, elemental», 2) «arising, moved or occurring as a result of the action of forces», 3) «related to the intensity of sound power» (here I recognize the diversity of movement shaped in a process involving diverse factors, most often impossible to determine initially); 2. interdisciplinary , i.e. 1) «concerning two or more scientific disciplines», 2) «using the achievements of several sciences»; 3. analytical, i.e. «the science of analyzing concepts and thoughts»; 4. sensory, i.e. «experienced through the senses» 5. cognitive, i.e. «acquiring knowledge about something, also: acquired knowledge». It is a diverse, multidirectional and multifactorial process in motion, using the achievements of many sciences that allow for the analysis of concepts and thoughts in order to acquire knowledge, the aim of which is to enable the solution of problems of a similar nature in similar conditions.

Results/Findings

Disinformation in the European Union and the United States

PWN Polish Dictionary disinformation [pronounced disinformation] «misleading someone by providing misleading or false information» [9]. The concept of "disinformation" has appeared on the international arena in a new model of state governance that includes "technocracy" interchangeably with Democracy. PWN Polish Dictionary technocracy 1. «a system of governing a state in which power is exercised by highly qualified specialists, assuming that technological progress can solve all social conflicts» 2. «persons exercising power in such a system» 3. «rule by such persons» 4. «a state governed in such a way» [10]. Both concepts are related to changes in the scope of new technologies, especially those occurring in computer science and electronics.

This can be seen as an attempt to manage the state without public participation, conditioned by unconditional recognition and subordination to the recommendations of individuals or teams managing the country's public administration, where this process is initiated until the complete elimination of all spontaneous or occasional social activity. In Poland, such aspirations are known from the Soviet occupation period of 1945-1993 (until the last Soviet soldier left Polish territory). The institutional entity responsible for this issue was the Main Office for the Control of the Press, Publications and Entertainment, renamed the Main Office for the Control of Publications and Entertainment from 1981. This was a censorship body (similar institutions were present in all countries of the so-called Eastern Bloc), examining all forms of official information transmission for their compliance with current state policy and prohibiting the dissemination of information and content undesirable by the ruling single-party PZPR (Polish United Workers' Party).

Poles participated in a two-day nationwide referendum on June 7 and 8, 2003, in favor of integration with European structures. Poles were not informed that this was an incomplete agreement, lacking any opt-out provisions. A year later, on May 1, 2004, Poland joined the European Union on equal terms, as part of a project implementing tasks unanimously with the participation of representatives of all member states. The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force in December 2009, changed the rules of operation of the European Union. Among other things, the provisions of the agreement granted new legislative powers to the European Parliament and changed the voting system in the Council of the EU. The Treaty of Lisbon was signed on December 13, 2007, and entered into force on December 1, 2009. Its provisions resulted in changes to the powers of the European Parliament, as well as to the voting system in the Council of the European Union. On Poland's side, the Treaty of Lisbon was ratified in 2009 by Polish President Lech Kaczynski. It is assumed that this means a loss of sovereignty by Poland and the first step towards depriving the residents of all EU member states of the right to participate in decision-making.

For two years now, EU institutions have been working to establish a new ministry dedicated to disinformation—information that differs from the technocrat-driven EU. The campaign, led by the European Commission Agency, aims to regulate the boundaries of legitimate public debate in Europe. The Commission has funded hundreds of irresponsible non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and universities to implement 349 projects combating "hate speech" and "disinformation," to the tune of nearly €650 million (according to official data, half that amount, i.e., €320 million, was allocated for cancer treatment within the EU). [11] The EU is waging a silent war to regulate language and, consequently, delegitimize alternative narratives, like the rising tide of populism. It's a fight for language and the legitimacy to dictate the terms of public communication. It's a top-down, authoritarian, curated consensus in which expression is free only when one speaks the language of consensus established by the Commission. These projects—although framed in the language of digital security, empowerment, and democratic participation—aim to build an ideological infrastructure to control political narratives and shape public opinion across the continent. The foundation of this regime is an official, systematically constructed network dedicated to shaping European thought. In 2022, the Commission funded a pilot project with €1,190,500 to establish a "European Observatory on the Distribution of Narratives." Officially known as the "Narrative Observatory Systemically Combating Disinformation in Europe" (NODES), its primary goal was to analyze and monitor how narratives—especially those contributing to disinformation— emerge and spread in the European public sphere. The project focused on key topics such as climate change, migration, and Covid-19, operating in four languages: English, French, Spanish, and Polish.

The NODES consortium [12], led by the think tank Re- Imagine Europa, included partners such as Agence France- Presse (AFP), the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), PlusValue , Sotrender , Science Feedback and Università Ca' Foscari Venezia . The project concluded its initial phase with a significant exhibition at the European Parliament in December 2024, titled "Bridging Divides: New Narratives for Climate Action." This event showcased innovative methods for addressing polarization and fostering constructive dialogue on climate issues.

Building on the foundations laid by NODES, a second initiative has been launched under the European Commission's call for proposals. This new project, "Predictive Research on the Trajectories of the Spread of Disinformation and Narratives" (PROMPT), is led by the French organization OPSCI. PROMPT aims to analyze emerging narratives related to the war in Ukraine, gender-based disinformation, and electoral disinformation, with a particular focus on the 2024 European elections. The project uses advanced artificial intelligence methodologies, including large language models (LLMs), to detect and understand the spread of disinformation across various media platforms. This project should be considered a vanguard in the creation of an EU Ministry for Narrative Control. When one examines the initial project's goals, what sounds like a scientific or cultural initiative reveals, upon closer inspection, a program aimed at mapping, influencing, and ultimately managing public perceptions of narratives at the level of emotions, identity, and ideological affiliation.

The language used to promote this initiative is a masterclass in newspeak in itself. The project begins by declaring that the Covid-19 pandemic has become "a serious challenge to the fragile web of trust that connects citizens to their countries and the EU." Social media is a demon because it "provides crucial reinforcement for the international network of disinformation." This statement is immediately followed by the observation that social media also represents "a powerful weapon against it." Social media is seen as both a disease and a cure, an enemy and a tool. This lays the groundwork for greater institutional intervention in digital communication under the comforting guise of protecting society.

"Arming against disinformation" is a way of demonstrating the need for censorship.

But the most revealing phrasing comes with the claim that “narratives play an important role in presenting facts and information in a form that can be easily communicated to society.” This seemingly innocuous line is, in fact, a tacit admission that facts alone are no longer the battlefield—narratives matter. The goal is no longer to correct falsehoods, but to surpass them on the level of emotional and cultural narrative. Truth becomes less a matter of evidence and more a matter of which "package" gains popularity. When the project states that its goal is to "decipher the emotional values that drive successful narratives" and "develop recommendations for effective communication and policy," it transforms political expression into something that can be psychologically reversed and reprogrammed. In this model, emotions become a measure of threat, not a sign of democratic engagement. The goal is no longer disinformation, but rather the inappropriate feeling evoked by the wrong story. In this regard, the project aims to uncover "dominant narrative patterns" through "analysis of qualitatively most representative examples." This is a polite way of saying that the project will create a system for classifying and evaluating stories that deviate from the desired ideological norms the Commission seeks to uphold.

A series of seemingly neutral questions follows, such as: "What values and narratives unite and divide us?" However, these are not posed to citizens for debate. They are directed to a consortium of researchers, algorithm designers, and EU-funded institutions tasked with monitoring and categorizing how Europeans think and feel.

By embedding phrases like "dominant narrative models," "identity and community," and "weaponized information ecosystems" in the language of politics, the project masks its true purpose: constructing a system of narrative legitimacy, a hierarchy of acceptable meaning. This is a war not against lies, but against language itself. The issue is not what people say, but how and why they say it— and whether it aligns with what the Commission considers trust-building, inclusive , or democratic. In this context, language is no longer descriptive. It is performative and strategic. Terms like " deliberative democracy ," "resilience," and "values" are emptied of their traditional meanings and refilled with technocratic purpose.

Debate is not welcomed but "facilitated"; disagreement is not resolved but "monitored"; identity is not expressed but "mapped." Under the guise of inclusivity and coherence, the citizen becomes the subject of interpretive language management – not a participant in democracy, but a data point in the engineering of narrative and semantics.

This isn't censorship in the blunt, authoritarian sense. It's the creation of a discursive architecture that manages dissent through the control of language—by redefining what constitutes acceptable discourse and who can shape it.

It doesn't silence voices; it submerges them beneath waves of euphemism, analysis, and politics. In essence, the battle for narratives is a battle for meaning, fought with the soft weapons of frames, emotions, and ambiguity. And in this war, whoever controls language controls the boundaries of the political imagination.

In this regard, the use of language, particularly the acronyms used to label these projects, is crucial to note. Acronyms such as NODES and PROMPT are, as can be seen, deliberately designed and created to conceal the true purpose of each project. Another example is FAST LISA (derived from the project title " Fighting Hate Speech Through a Legal , ICT and Sociolinguistic Approach ” [13]). This project is an indoctrination program for young people about behavior change, instructing them on “what not to say,” rather than equipping them with the skills to critically question hate speech. These cheerful acronyms don’t simply sound like digital voice assistants or well-being apps that can schedule meetings or check your vitamins; they are deliberate, dishonest terms strategically chosen to disguise a true authoritarian agenda. They communicate safety while infantilizing the public, treating them like anxious children in need of comfort rather than truth. They hide from view that these projects are about power, the automation of speech control through algorithmic semantic engineering, and the complexities of democracy and censorship versus freedom of speech. Search EU databases and you won’t find CONFORM, the acronym for a project titled “Automatic Content Control Infrastructure for Narrative Conformity” [14]. You won’t find PANOPTIC in a project titled “Program for Algorithmic Narrative.” Surveillance and perception through "information control"—though such supposed project titles and acronyms would probably be more honest. This disingenuous use of language highlights another crucial dimension of the Ministry of Narrative Control.[15] And anyone participating, or aspiring to participate, is playing a well-planned and formulaic game. The verbal contortions they go through to create project names that yield feminized acronyms that sound more like toothpaste brands indicate that participation requires performative compliance. But it's more than just compliance. It's collaboration in a dishonest farce that masquerades as academic "research" but obscures reality, perpetuating the claim that hate speech and disinformation are real problems requiring urgent attention.

The debate over language is often overlooked or considered secondary. But as we see above and will discuss in more detail below, language is not simply a communication technique. It is how we think, imagine, and decide what is true and meaningful. Every society, whether democratic or authoritarian, relies on language to shape its values and meanings, its conflicts and constraints. The words we are given determine what we can see, what we can name, and what we can question. When language is controlled— by states, institutions, or NGOs—so too is the scope of thought and dissent. A society that redefines surveillance as "security" and censorship as "content moderation" does not necessarily silence its citizens entirely; it simply changes the meaning of their silence.

Language is the control infrastructure of the EU's Ministry of Narrative Control software. When the European Commission defines hate speech [16], disinformation, or extremism, it doesn't identify the issues—it draws boundaries around what can be said, by whom, and with what consequences. These definitions are not neutral. They carry ideological weight, especially when conveyed in the neutral, obscurantist tone of political language. Entire categories of political speech are re-coded as illegal. Crucially, populist political movements—especially those critical of EU integration, immigration, or the Green Deal—are increasingly presented not as political ideas for debate, but as algorithmic vectors of hate, extremism, or disinformation.

Populist language is examined not through ideology or democracy, but through a technical and moral framework that poses rhetorical questions. The answers to these questions are known in advance, such as whether populist language promotes harmful stereotypes. Does it undermine trust in institutions? Does it violate community guidelines? Populism isn't explicitly banned (yet). But it's systematically degraded linguistically, implicitly deemed suspect, always placed on the verge of unacceptable , a tacit form of delegitimization, quietly enforced through the language of civility and tolerance. And when this becomes the norm, the terrain for democratic competition shrinks. When populist dissent is pathologized as hate or treated as a cybersecurity threat , it can be monitored, fact-checked, defunded, quarantined, and removed. Through the vocabulary of public safety and moderation, public debate is increasingly managed as a public health crisis, a hygiene regime that purifies speech and removes toxins to promote "healthy voices." But who decides what is toxic? Who defines what counts as healthy speech? That question is neither allowed nor asked. There is no open democratic debate. Instead, we have a narrative reproduced in hundreds of EU-funded projects that produce toolkits, algorithmic classifiers, and behavioral “nudge” strategies developed by unaccountable experts whose legitimacy is assumed, not questioned.

Another threat has emerged from US funding for control. How has the US government funded narrative control operations around the world? How did "fact-checking" become so widespread? What does information warfare look like? Why did so many of us fail to recognize the propaganda truth about COVID-19 at first? A new database of US government spending on nearly 900 grants totaling over $1.5 billion related to disinformation and misinformation (MDM) offers some clues. Compiled by the non-profit digital rights organization liber -net [17], the database contains entries in the database. From a nearly $1 billion award from the Department of Defense ( DoD ) to military contractor Peraton in 2021 to "counter disinformation by U.S. adversaries," to $200,000 from USAID to create a chatbot that will counter unvalidated vaccine narratives in Uzbekistan, to $24,800 from the State Department to "address the spread of populism" in Romania, these awards demonstrate the broad scope of the U.S. government's interest in narrative control, both geographically and thematically. Tracked from 2010 to the present, the pattern of government spending on awards shows a marked increase in MDM-related projects after 2016, the year of Trump and Brexit , and again since 2021, in the Biden/Covid era. The projects received red flag ratings for their level of insidiousness. As Liber-Net director Andrew Lowenthal emphasized , the most important conclusion is not that “the US government tried to censor the world,” but that “the US government led and shaped the battlefield against disinformation.”

Liber-net today launches a searchable database of nearly 900 U.S. federal government awards to counter misinformation, disinformation, and disinformation (MDM) and other content moderation initiatives, spanning the period from 2010 to 2025. These are the main threads in this vast database of U.S. government spending. If anything, these observations simply confirm what many have suspected all along. fact-checking websites in recent years and the increasing use of fact-checking as a journalistic lens were not organic. They were a major export of the US government. This database alone lists over 80 awards specifically for supporting fact-checking initiatives, valued at between $5.7 million and $1.742 million .[18] Funded projects include fact-checking websites/operations in Croatia, Montenegro, and Bulgaria, fact-checking bots in Armenia and Bolivia, journalism training courses in Sri Lanka, Mongolia, or Kazakhstan, and serial grants to the Poynter Institute —which manages a vast global network of fact-checking organizations —to conduct training around the world and expand its own operations.

There is almost no part of the world where the US government hasn't dedicated resources to promoting the principle of fact-checking among journalists and other media professionals and ensuring the widespread use of fact-checking operations. Many of these grants are couched in language that addresses the need to counter disinformation and misinformation regarding COVID vaccines, elections, or Russian/Chinese influence. From practical experience and the rubrics used by MDM researchers, we know that "disinformation" is code for "unfavorable/unapproved facts and narratives." Generally speaking, anything that supports vaccinations, ensures election integrity, or promotes US foreign policy goals is considered good news. Anything that skeptical of vaccines, expresses concerns about elections, or sympathizes with Russia and China is considered disinformation. These grants do not encompass broader narrative control initiatives, which include oversight, fact-checking, removing objectionable information (censorship), and propagating government messages (propaganda). They also do not consider disinformation operations run by the U.S. government, such as the Pentagon's anti-vaccine campaign to discredit the Chinese Sinovac vaccine in the Philippines.

If you've fallen for COVID-19 propaganda, the US government has spent millions of dollars to ensure that happens, even if you live on the other side of the world. It never occurs to these people that vaccine hesitancy can have legitimate reasons. The logic behind the more than 80 awards dedicated to combating vaccine misinformation and increasing vaccination rates is as follows:

a) Insufficient numbers of people are vaccinated, especially in minority groups;

b) It must be due to "disinformation";

c) Therefore, we must censor any information that could make people hesitant to get vaccinated, we must fill the infosphere with approved messages, and we can leverage the relationships of trusted influencers with these communities to convince people to trust us;

d) This will increase equality in access to healthcare. Namely:

• $80 million from the CDC to its own foundation to increase “Covid and flu vaccine confidence and acceptance rates in targeted BIPOC communities.”

• $22.4 million from the CDC to UnidosUS for the " Esperanza" campaign Hope for All , ” aimed at increasing trust in public health messages among the Latino community. This included “engaging trusted public opinion influencers” to “broadly disseminate culturally and linguistically relevant information about the vaccine to instill confidence in its safety and effectiveness, thereby increasing the potential participation rate among Latinos receiving the vaccine.”

• NIH has awarded $3.2 million to the City University of New York to increase COVID-19 vaccinations among people with anxiety and depression.

• $7.6 million from the CDC for the city of Long Beach to “reduce healthcare disparities related to Covid-19” and “communicate key messages through racial and ethnic media regarding Covid-19 prevention, recovery, and disinformation.”

• $2.4 million from the NIH to the University of Pennsylvania to use “natural language processing to determine what makes specific messages persuasive” in Black and rural communities.

The liber-net database indicate that the US government was also very concerned about increasing vaccine uptake in countries like Ukraine (pre-Covid, $10.6 million from USAID), Kazakhstan, and Poland.

Additionally, some prizes were to be awarded for developing scalable AI models to identify and "debunk" vaccine disinformation . If these solutions were ultimately adopted by global organizations like Meta, they would impact every internet user , everywhere.

Repeatedly, "combating disinformation" appears in this database as a euphemism for narrative control. Several distinct themes emerged from the total US government funding related to MDM over the past decade and a half:

• Countering the influence of Russia and China See over 80 grants related to "combating Russian disinformation . " The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) has been a frontrunner for countering Chinese influence in the Australasian region , receiving over $2 million in seven awards from 2020 to present.

• Increasing confidence in vaccines and their implementation

• Alleviating concerns about election integrity

More than 50 election-related grants were reviewed, aimed at strengthening confidence in elections in the US, Georgia, Sierra Leone, Burkina Faso, and Tanzania. These narratives were aimed at controlling the US to gain a competitive advantage over Russia and China. Why the US government was so involved in promoting vaccines and influencing the information environment surrounding elections in small and distant countries is less obvious, unless the US is an empire representing the interests of major cartels and an ambitious deep state. This isn't a recurring theme, but a $24,800 grant from the State Department to Freedom House in 2022 to "prevent the spread of populism" in Romania deserves special mention. Populism, of course, is like a bad virus that infects people and must be eradicated before it spreads to more foolish people who elect the wrong person.

Moving forward to the present, Romanian populist leader Calin Georgescu [19], who led the polling stations in the 2024 presidential election, was twice removed from power in anti-democratic ways. First, by invalidating the first round of the 2024 election, in which he won the most votes, leading to the complete cancellation of that election due to alleged concerns about disinformation and cyber interference . Second, by being barred from running in the re-election by the Central Electoral Office. These people have no idea how knowledge is created, negotiated, and shared. They really don't understand it. Knowledge is created, negotiated, and shared collectively in an iterative process over time, but someone needs to explain this to those who truly believe it will work: Claim Buster [20] is "a comprehensive computer-assisted fact-checking system. This system will monitor live discussions, social media, and news to identify factual claims, detect matches using a carefully curated repository of fact-checks from professionals, and instantly deliver matches to readers and viewers."

"For various types of new claims that have not been previously verified, Claim Buster will automatically check them against knowledge bases and report whether they are true. For new claims that require human involvement, the system will provide algorithmic and computational tools to help laypeople and professionals understand and verify claims." Claim Buster, upon completion of the proposed work, has the potential to become the first-ever automated fact-checking system for use across a broad spectrum of factual claims. Its application will be expanded to verify claims in various types of narratives, discourses, and documents, such as sports news, legal documents, and financial reports. Claim Buster will use database queries, data mining, and natural language processing techniques to facilitate fact-checking. In short, it is an automated fact-checking system that monitors "live discourse" to provide immediate corrections from "professionals." Because professionals are always right. And the adjudication of the truth of claims can be automated.

The NSF has awarded more than half a million dollars in multiple grants to the University of Texas at Arlington and Duke University to enable the launch of Claim Buster . Most of the MDM grants in the database, which talk about scalable technology, AI, and algorithms, adopt some version of the Claim Buster approach. Duke University received another $1.1 million, also from the NSF, to create a "scalable pipeline for identifying information deficits" about vaccines.

Encryption is a bug, not a feature. It wasn't a headline, but rather a red flag to be heeded – several grants were earmarked for monitoring and countering unsanctioned narratives in private messaging channels. One such project, "Combating the Spread of Disinformation in Encrypted Messaging Apps," led by Stanford University under an $89,686 NSF grant, was succinctly summarized by liber -net: "Researchers have found it shameful that tech companies can't read your private messages because you might be spreading disinformation. How do you prevent this? An app that will read your encrypted messages to ensure you're staying within the fact-checker -approved Overton Window."

The NSF awarded a quarter of a million dollars to the technology nonprofit Meedan for a similar project because "encryption on platforms like WhatsApp, Viber , LINE, Telegram, and Signal protects the communications of millions of Americans but potentially enables the spread of rumors, disinformation, and other threats." Liber-net began building this database late last year, well before the uproar surrounding the February and March 2025 USAID funding cuts, to build an accurate picture of the U.S. federal government’s role in funding the disinformation sector. Liber-Net director Andrew Lowenthal (researcher, Twitter Files contributor , and former executive director of the Asia-Pacific digital rights nonprofit Engage Media) was asked what the most surprising discovery he had made was. He said it was the general worldview of funders and grantees, "which is that people as a whole are untrustworthy. That they are incapable of making their own decisions or discerning reality. And therefore, an elite group must come up with solutions to help people understand the world. But instead of a bottom-up approach to tackling this problem of understanding, they believe a top-down approach is needed" [21].

liber -net database , "Federal Awards for 'Misinformation, Disinformation, or Misinformation Dissemination' and Other Content Moderation Initiatives, 2010–2025. "Liber-net characterizes Freedom House as "a U.S., government-funded nonprofit organization that often serves as a soft arm of the U.S. government; the self-described 'watchdog organization' tends to focus heavily on authoritarian abuses in countries opposed to U.S. interests (for example, China, Russia, and Iran), while often being softer on U.S. allies or glossing over domestic surveillance, censorship, or the erosion of civil liberties within the U.S. itself."

Photo: The Priesthood of the Oracle of Information to Save Us from Ourselves

Source: https://www.ancientpages.com/

Considering that holding a different opinion from an office or official is unacceptable and potentially punishable, without substantive verification, for example, of the legality or reliability of official records, can lead to persecution. Officials in Poland often violate applicable laws when speaking out, for example, through civilized incompetence, participation in cliques, and a lack of understanding of the difference between the concepts of authority and administrative power, which are described in detail in this article. This astonishing initiative, supported by costs twice the planned expenditure on cancer treatment, raises concerns.

The EU's efforts in this area lead to depriving societies of the opportunity to participate in policymaking, and in the face of opposition to top-down EU policies, to punishing those who disagree with the opinions of technocrats. In the author's opinion, these actions should be strictly aligned with the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Article 4.1. Supreme authority in the Republic of Poland belongs to the Nation. Conversely, the EU's proposed intentions to establish a ministry for censorship may be a solution to more than just these socio-political problems. Perhaps opting out of EU membership would be a solution to more than just these socio-political problems.

Fifth Generation Warfare

5GW , or moral and cultural warfare, is waged by manipulating perceptions and changing the context in which the world is perceived, along with the increasingly widespread eradication of individual rights [22]. It currently serves as the basis for the dismantling of law and order across the entire spectrum of states considered democratic and all entities associated with them. Fifth-generation warfare is an emerging theory of warfare based on the manipulation of multiple economic, political, social, and military forces across multiple domains to effect positional changes within systems and achieve effects to exploit a specific objective or set of circumstances. Each generation has a distinct defining operational action, independent of the social and technological changes that signal progression from one generation to the next. Assumed as fifth-gradient doctrines, they are based on the principle of manipulating the context of observation of actors in a conflict or confrontation to influence a specific change in position or achieve a specific effect. New technologies exist that may eclipse nuclear energy in terms of their impact on politics and the conduct of war. These Nano- Bio -Info- Cogni (NBIC) technologies have developed to such an extent that they offer the prospect of redesigning human beings - as individuals, as societies and as a species [23].

By challenging the most basic assumptions about what it means to be human in society, NBIC technologies threaten to render much of contemporary sociology, political theory, and economics obsolete. They create the possibility of a " transhuman " era, with transhuman or even " posthuman " politics. By altering many of humanity's defining characteristics, they are reshaping the context and nature of politics for anti-social projects. By empowering submissive individuals and groups to an unprecedented degree, these technologies will enable fifth-generation warfare, subtler, more complex, and more dangerous than anything seen to date.

The transition to a transhuman world, as envisioned, will not be seamless. It will not affect everyone simultaneously or to the same degree. It will also be shaped by existing structures and conflicts, as well as divergent notions of what improvement means. It will emerge from a system of competing states, companies, non-governmental organizations, and "superpowered individuals," each interested in employing NBIC technologies to gain comparative advantage. While the designs will not be random, in a competitive environment, types will interact, leading to evolution, and evolution, by its very nature, leads to unexpected, conditional outcomes. The security implications are enormous, including the possible extinction of the human species. NBIC technologies are a constellation of four converging trends. Nanotechnology involves the construction and manipulation of objects on a scale of 10-9 meters or a single molecule. Biotechnology is the modification and use of organisms, their parts, or products, to achieve goals. Information technology encompasses integrated systems of computer hardware, software, and networks. Cognitive science and its applications refer to the study of intelligence and intelligent systems, both cybernetic and biological. The convergence of these fields stems from the fact that at the nanometer scale, the differences between living and non-living systems become indistinguishable. The body (including the brain and what we might call "mind") can be restructured. Medical devices can be implanted to produce and dispense drugs within the host, including the brain. Cell-sized supercomputers can be introduced to monitor and prevent disease. More generally, while the physical evolution of the human species once relied on random mutation, distribution, and environmental selection of genes, NBIC technologies allow the envisioning of a self-designed and self-modifying organism. Cultural differences, competitive pressures, and the lack of a common regulatory regime are already influencing the development of these technologies. The biopolitics debate is already underway with varying degrees of success in different societies. For the most part, these debates have taken place within nations, and although the UN and EU have encouraged the development of common standards, many states have left these issues in a regulatory vacuum. With respect to stem cell research, for example, a thirty-country study found that decision-makers must accept the reality of international "disagreement". As NBIC technologies develop, any global debate about their applications will be all the more resistant to compromise because it will reflect underlying value disputes. History suggests that even when formal consensus exists on the limits of human research, in practice it may be insufficient or ignored [24].

With NBIC technologies, new possibilities emerge. Some of the more speculative possibilities for directed evolution include the mind, once understood, being able to be downloaded and run on various hardware. Bodies would be understood as temporary. Death would not be permanent as long as a "backup" was maintained. The transition from "flesh" to electronics opens the possibility of increasing the speed of thought. Electrical impulses between neurons would be replaced by nanosecond-speed electronics. Transhumans could inhabit environments, including outer space, without cumbersome life-support systems. Knowledge could be downloaded at computer speed and instantly integrated into memory. High-bandwidth communication could lead to a mental network, or a hive mind. Or even competing hive minds. The potential and risks for early adopters are enormous, but the risks for those who do not push the boundaries of this technology could be even greater. In any case, this transition is neither intended to be fair nor rational. If it follows the standard model of technological change, it will consist of three stages: planned invention, innovation, and diffusion. Invention is the idea and the demonstration of its feasibility. Innovation is the process by which the invention is introduced into use. Diffusion is the spread of the innovation into widespread use. This process resembles an S-curve, where the cost to early adopters limits diffusion, costs fall as diffusion increases, and diffusion stabilizes as economies of scale maximize and innovation slows [ Schumpeter [25]]. Historically, it is the period of maximum diffusion that has been most destructive to society and political structures based on the old level and type of technology. The spread of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons is an example of this. Given this pattern, what is said about the disruptions that might be associated with biotechnology, "one of the most radical clusters of innovations ever introduced" [Adams 2004 [26]], let alone the constellation of mutually reinforcing developments under the rubric of NBIC? There is no reason to expect a practical limitation of the proliferation of NBIC technologies to users who are able and willing to use them without harm to innocents, or even agreement on what constitutes harm.

Fifth-generation warfare—what does this mean for the conduct of war? It depends largely on how one defines "war." Authors offer varying definitions, but a consensus is beginning to emerge. Two things are essential to any definition. First, war is political. Politics is, among other things, the social activity of making and enforcing collective decisions. It is social in the sense that it requires at least two participants and the possibility of disagreement . It is collective in the sense that it involves decisions that affect the whole, even if individual elements disagree. It is decision-making in an environment—a structure of roles, rules, and resources—that influences outcomes and can be shaped by outcomes. It involves an enforcement mechanism to impose behavior on participants who would otherwise not act as instructed. This mechanism—the ability to induce another actor to do what they otherwise would not—is power. Power can be based on legitimacy, on force, or on the exchange of "lawyers, weapons, and money." It almost always involves a combination of these three factors.

When competition occurs between actors who are sufficiently numerous, organized, and capable of inflicting harm, it enters the realm of coercive diplomacy. When this violence is used to achieve a political goal, it constitutes war. It was once assumed that these actors were states, but no longer. The decline of the state into a mere political institution among many, and the empowerment of individuals and small groups through modern technologies, have reshaped the possibilities of warfare. Assuming progress means imposing a teleology that may not exist.

Moreover, the evolution of a system does not imply that all elements change or to the same degree. On the other hand, some things can accumulate over time—technologies, doctrines, information—and these influence war. Fifth-gradient warfare takes this to the next level. It moves from brutal crime to the manipulation of information and identity at a level where practitioners are recognized neither as soldiers nor as criminals. Instead, we return to individuals and small groups, empowered by technology and often distant from each other, who act to shape their environment—especially the nonphysical environment—in ways that are unclear. Conflict is not about conquering or dividing a state, but about undermining the state. It is not so much about ruling, but about ensuring that no one else can. There are no warnings, messages, or explanations—at least none that can be trusted—only events, which may or may not be accidental. If 5GW succeeds, the target state will lose so much legitimacy that it cannot be certain of anyone's original loyalty.

If war can be conceptualized as an unbroken gradient, the question arises as to when it ceases to be war at all. If, in the fifth gradient, "violence is so diffuse that only a single murder or scandal can separate it from politics", then only the perpetrator's intention can determine whether he or she has been at war. The target of the action may never know this. Politics will not become obsolete, but motives and goals may change if "freed from the constraints of the human meat machine, humans can change and improve their own hardware" [27,28]. Nevertheless, new goals emerge as a result of the process and prior choices that lead to transhuman politics.

When we contemplate the prospect of a radical breakthrough in possibilities, we may find ourselves in a similar situation. The most important achievements will literally be those we cannot imagine. One possible indicator of the scope of our dilemma is the Fermi paradox, named after Enrico Fermi, the nuclear physicist credited with articulating it.

Science assumes that our species and our world do not enjoy a privileged position in the universe. Given the age of the universe and the likelihood of star systems much older than our own, we should expect evidence of older, more technologically advanced civilizations. The Fermi Paradox asks: where are they? If they don't exist, what happened to them? Several possible solutions to the Fermi Paradox have been proposed, but none have been widely accepted. Many of these solutions suggest that there is some natural function that prevents technologically advanced civilizations from developing beyond the point at which we currently exist. Beyond this point, advanced technology may, in fact, have no survival value.

There may be a natural developmental gap—which would only be amplified by NBIC technologies—between a species' capacity for self-destruction or crippling and the development of social or technological mechanisms that prevent this. In a universe of potential existential threats, the most dangerous may be those we create—or will create—for ourselves. Consider, as seems likely, that biotechnology will follow the same path as computer technology a generation ago, with a limited set of complex facilities being replaced by hobbyists and home genetic laboratories. If so, genome hackers will join today's computer hackers and virus writers, unleashing biological viruses tomorrow. In a nightmare scenario, self-replicating nanomachines could escape containment, consuming resources and doubling in size with each generation until they consume the entire planet.

In discussions of existential threats and the Fermi Paradox, analysts have paid relatively little attention to the political, social, and economic factors that lead to the adoption of extinction technologies. Instead, they focus on the risks associated with out-of-control technology or human error. As if blinded by the liberal belief in reason and human perfectibility, they struggle to remember that actions that seem rational to an individual or a state can lead to catastrophic consequences for all. In any case, even if the application of these technologies is not catastrophic, it is possible that the distinction between humans and various types of posthumans will lead to conflict among the "differently adapted." Some, [such as George Annas , Lori Andrews, and Rosario Isasi, go so far as to describe the modification of human genetics as a "crime against humanity," given that the new species, i.e., " posthumans ," will likely view the old, "normal" humans as inferior, even savages, fit for enslavement or slaughter. Normals, on the other hand, may perceive posthumans as a threat and, if they can, may engage in a preemptive strike, killing the posthumans before they themselves are killed or enslaved by them. It is this foreseeable potential for genocide that makes species-altering experiments a potential weapon of mass destruction, and makes the unpredictable genetic engineer a potential bioterrorist [29,30].

If genetic enhancements of intelligence or strength remain unattainable for all but the wealthy, will the government step in and, through benevolent eugenics, guarantee enhancements for all? The world of strong and weak, rich and poor, privileged and exploited is not new. What is new is that racial and class injustices can be hardwired into the genome itself. Competitive and hedonic pressures are driving the adoption of NBIC technologies. Even in a political environment where U.S. government advisory panels have been biased against them to limit research and use of stem cell therapies, NBIC as a general research program has received significant and growing support . NBIC programs in itself The US government includes the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Energy (DoE), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) , and the Department of Agriculture. Much of the most promising work is being carried out under the auspices of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Excluding "black" programs, US government funding for nanotechnology alone doubled between 2001 and 2005 [31]. Outside government, corporate spending in all these areas virtually exploded during the same period. Nanotechnology is also indicative of the general trend - in 2004, 63 percent of the 30 companies in the Dow Jones Industrial Average funded research and development in this area.

While NBIC technologies have had little visibility in military open- source literature or planning ,the general idea of human augmentation in the service of the state has become a subject of research and speculation. DARPA has engaged in the " Metabolic Dominance ", which "would enable improved physical and physiological performance of the warrior by controlling energy metabolism on demand" [32,33]. A Metabolic Engineering Program has also been established, which "seeks to develop the technological basis for controlling the metabolic demands of cells, tissues, and organisms", starting with blood and blood products [34]. Peak performance is supported by devices that control body temperature, food and "first-strike rations", and mitochondrial "tweaking" to increase energy and reduce fatigue. The Augmented Program Cognition aims to expand information management capabilities, while the Continuous Assistance Performance (CAP) program aims to "discover pharmacological and training methods that will extend the cognitive abilities of an individual soldier by at least 96 hours, and potentially more than 168 hours, without sleep" [35]. In this vision, the soldier will be more focused, more intelligent, and have a better memory. He will be stronger, heal quickly, and be able to function for days without food or sleep. But now this may be by design: DARPA is currently engaged in creating better soldiers—not just by equipping them with better equipment, but by enhancing the people themselves. "Soldiers free from physical, physiological, and cognitive limitations will be the key to survival and operational dominance in the future," Goldblatt once told an assembled audience of potential researchers. Until mid-2003, he was head of Defense Sciences Office (DARPA), a division of DARPA that focuses on human biology. "Imagine if soldiers could communicate solely by thought," he continued. "And consider a world in which learning was as easy as eating, and replacing damaged body parts as convenient as a fast-food drive-thru. As impossible as these visions sound, we're talking about science, not science fiction " [36].

Scientific research, for example, shows that the typical person clearly exhibits inhibitions against killing, which are part of our biological heritage. The commandment "thou shalt not kill" is, so to speak, based on a biological filter of norms, and in democratic states, these are legal, constitutional, and penal rules. This is inconvenient for the military. The biological filter of norms that inhibit killing is superimposed on the cultural filter of norms that command killing the enemy. The biological filter of norms is not removed by the process of self-indoctrination because it remains there, leading to a conflict of norms, which is experienced as guilt, especially when the encounter with the enemy becomes a face-to-face encounter.

As with the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET), even if the original goals are not achieved, whatever is found is likely to have significant effects, and some of these effects may differ significantly from the program managers' intentions. It is worth recalling the connections between the clandestine research with LSD and other agents as "truth drugs" and the spread of these chemicals into more widespread use. "The incentives that drive innovation in the private sector are, in the words of one observer, timely, ruthless, and essentially Darwinian—survival of the fittest." Popular demand, and the profits to be made by satisfying that demand, could make enhancement a "right," at least for those wealthy enough to acquire it, and "human nature being what it is, enhancement and enhancement will become a product offering in the global marketplace" [37]. In fact, this has already begun, as the pharmaceutical industry has defined new diseases and promoted the "improvement" of the human condition. For several years, this industry was the most profitable in America. Maintaining these profits has encouraged a broadening of the definition of disease. If pharmaceutical and biotech companies can find a way to profit from new enhancement technology, "it is hard to imagine they will resist."

Fear of surprise can be a powerful motivation for research and development. The logical consequence is a security dilemma, and perhaps also a "clash of genomes," as the tendency to create national styles in technologies and military strategies is reflected in the choices of improvements and techniques. The simplest of sorting techniques—child sex selection—combined with local cultures and state policies has already altered previous demographic balances and, with them, the dimensions of future international and internal conflicts [38]. The future is already here—it is just unevenly distributed. Even without modifying our basic humanity, current technologies have transformed the relationship between individuals and states. Globalization gives individuals more power than at any other time in history to influence markets and nation-states. This power is not distributed equally, nor is it always to the advantage of states. Great powers are already forced to cope with the capabilities of powerful non-state individuals and networks.

The American Way of War is moving the military toward a tougher global policeman role, increasingly specializing in neutralizing bad people who do bad things [39]. However, while today's superpowered individuals are so due to wealth, networks, or personal skills, tomorrow's superpowered individual may be transhuman or posthuman. Technologies will amplify individual power to the point that a single individual will be able to take on the world—and win [ Robb , Brave New War: The Next Stage of Terrorism and the End of Globalization 2007] [40]. The current pace and direction of change point to what John von Neumann speculated would be "some significant singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs as we know them cannot continue," [Bostrom Transhumanist FAQ] [41]. The possibilities inherent in NBIC technologies have led transhumanist philosopher Nick Bostrom to conclude that there are four possible futures for humanity: extinction, repeated decline, plateau, and post humanity [42]. Contemporary futurists define "the singularity as the conjecture that there will be a point in the future where the rate of technological development is so rapid that the progress curve becomes nearly vertical." This singularity, it is believed, would be triggered by the creation of some form of rapidly self-improving intelligence greater than human intelligence [43]. Thus, the first ultra-intelligent machine is the last invention that humans must ever make [44]. Good expected this machine to be built before the end of the 20th century. Needless to say, it turned out to be more difficult than he imagined. More recently, writer and mathematician Vernor Vinge estimated in 1993 that "[i]n thirty years we will have the technological means to create superhuman intelligence [45].

The end of the human era will follow shortly thereafter. Regardless of when or if it occurs, the post-singularity world will almost certainly "be geopolitically destabilized" with innovation building on innovation, early adopters would have an even greater advantage over others - as long as they could maintain some semblance of control over their machines [46]. If they cannot maintain this control, machines may become selfish competitors or work to end old conflicts for humanity's "own good." If in the past, war focused on the opponent's physical strength, and fourth-generation warfare on its moral strength, fifth-generation warfare may focus on intellectual strength. In fifth-generation warfare, 1) "humans need not want to be on the side of the combatant," 2) "the forces the combatant uses need not want to be on the side of the combatant," and 3) "your enemy must not feel that they are not on your side" [47]. A successful fifth-generation war is one in which the enemy does not even realize that he has lost.

Perhaps overarching goals can be established to promote the development and dissemination of transhuman and NBIC technologies without the threat of a common enemy or the pursuit of fleeting advantages. Perhaps exploration or the threat of catastrophic environmental change will encourage the development of a just and sustainable global civilization. Perhaps the benefits of local nanotechnology can spread far and fast enough that competition for resources becomes a waste of effort. Perhaps we are evolving beyond the point of violence and zero-sum games. The current international system will shape the development and application of NBIC technologies, even as they reshape it. Class, regional, and racial inequalities could be exacerbated by the unequal distribution of new tools. As the powerful and wealthy have first access, competition and hedonistic pressures can be expected to widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots. The widespread distribution of these technologies raises the prospect of mass political action aimed at "leveling up" human potential, fueled by competition among states, companies, and other groups that see improving their "human capital" as a way to increase their power. Nevertheless, elites will likely want to maintain their position by retaining the best improvements. Competition within groups will encourage the powerful to impose "tracking" on individuals into diverse and overly specialized "species."

Currently, humanity is embroiled in a global war between the elite and the rest of us. This type of war is a descendant of the evolutionary line, evolving to fit the competitive needs of a planetary civilization populated by horny and hungry primates with computer and cell phone skills. To understand our current situation—an existential threat and a transcendent possibility— we must understand that the conflicts that have shaped much of history have their origins in changes in conscious intelligence.

For the purposes of this project on the prevailing fifth-generation warfare and the upcoming sixth-generation warfare, "conscious intelligence" is defined as the ability to solve complex problems in complex environments and to model the intentionality behind such problem-solving. We will view human beings as entities playing and designing games that compete but also create internal mythologies for new conflicts. By examining ourselves in this way, we will see why the emergence of greater-than-human intelligence is an increasingly likely byproduct of current efforts at global control. Finally, we will consider the implications of this greater-than-human intelligence for warfare and human security.

Currently, approximately four million US citizens work with security clearances in the US government. Many of these individuals are involved in research and development on projects with some military potential. At the same time, the definition of "military potential" has expanded significantly over the past fifty years, and especially in the last ten. This adjustment was deemed necessary to run a global empire based on dollar seigniorage and brokering oil, opium, and options trading.

The internet has become a tool for anyone who wants to use it, making secrecy increasingly unlikely, even though it was originally a DARPA product. What began as an academic data-sharing platform has grown into a diverse ecology—and, according to the latest DoD manifesto , a hostile one. At the time of the original ARPANET's creation, a key US mission was to combat, and eventually cooperate with, insurgents from Latin America to the Middle East. Communication networks within the American intelligence apparatus were the primary means of tracking behavior , including insurgent behavior , more effectively than that behavior could be adjusted. The result was the World Wide Web, a medium for superpowered entities to conduct next-generation warfare.

The ARPANET example can be seen as a reflection of a potential next step. The infrastructure that enabled 4GW set the stage for 5GW. Similarly, the infrastructure developed to provide a competitive advantage in the global 5GW is susceptible to feedback loops in the form of self-modification of the system, which would quickly initiate the sixth phase of the development of generational warfare. This is the technocrat's dilemma: any kind of countermeasures apparatus creates a generally greater level of complexity and information in society, increasing the likelihood that such technology will be used as the basis for a more complex form of warfare. To ensure control, increasing mastery of the technological infrastructure must be achieved. Like compound interest in the banking system, the race to infinity does not tend to end in an orderly manner. Feedback loops are created when a cause causes more of itself. Often, feedback loops create an S-curve spike in some variable, for example, population size or computer processor performance.

A positive feedback loop produces more and more, exhausting the default capacity of humans or the processing power of a forest fire, and becomes a negative feedback loop that stabilizes, producing less and less. Sometimes positive feedback loops are not only exponential, they are hyperbolic, approaching an asymptote where the variable approaches infinity. By definition, infinity cannot be reached, so what happens in practice is that the feedback loop interrupts the system from which it originates. One example of a loop interruption occurred in finance in 2008. The global financial system fell into a practice called "regulatory arbitrage." Banks are required to keep a certain percentage of their deposits available at all times; they can only make so many loans. A meeting of banking regulators in Basel, Switzerland, changed this. Banks were suddenly able to sell loans as securities, freeing up reserves for even more loans. In the early 20th century, there was a massive boom in securities for all types of debt, and electronic networks enabled efficient trading on unregulated contracts. Credit default contracts became a tool for banks to insure these securities against losses, making buyers of these securities feel so secure that they borrowed new money to buy tons of debt securities. A single adjustment to the rules led to a hyperbolic expansion of money supply and accompanying debt, leading to a rapid deterioration of the integrity of the global financial system when it failed to create an infinite supply of dollars despite the Federal Reserve's best efforts. The Basel regulations can be seen as part of a successful 5GW strategy aimed at creating a financial crisis that demands a global currency as a remedy. This strategy involves creating a model-breaking feedback loop and then weaponizing it.

However, the nature of self-modifying minds is such that they can also increase their rate of growth; it's possible that a small difference in time would not only maintain a static chasm but give way to a wide chasm. The cost of failure in this case is not the loss of life, wealth, or freedom, but the loss of meaning on all but the smallest scales. With such existential information at hand, how could a self-modifying intelligence conduct 6GW? Each generation of warfare represents a more complex form of consciousness asserting its presence beyond the domain of simpler forms of consciousness. 5GW represents the manipulation of pressure to induce an occult feedback loop and change the context of society. 6GW involves the systematic knowledge utilized by 5GW, but is aided by the mind's capacity for self-modification . If 5GW is contextual warfare, then 6GW could be design warfare, a competition for systemic resilience. While it may seem impossible to theorize about the tactical and strategic concerns of something smarter than oneself, if we consider what is common to all warfare, resource-based motivations are precisely that. In project warfare, computer cycles are like ammunition: the more you have, the faster you figure out how to acquire more, for example, the faster you can modify intelligence in many specific ways.

Because computing power is directly related to physical matter, it is possible to consider such conflicts in physical terms, with quantifiable chemical, geographical, and electronic conditions. Current trends in networking suggest that an increasing percentage of the world's computing power is connected to the rest of the network via real-time satellite relays and wireless fields, but these connections can be interrupted. One clue we can discern regarding strategic considerations for 6GW is the network that already exists, created as a byproduct of several 5GW agendas. In many developed countries, especially the United States, the United Kingdom , and China, there is a centralized foundation of research talent, funding, computational capacity, aggregated data, and the chemical equipment necessary for nanotechnology development. Elite universities form nodes atop this foundation, but beneath it lies an untold depth of secrecy, personnel, funding, and unpublished achievements. If physical, cryptographic, or social barriers to access—just one of the three—can be overcome, then a treasure trove of computing power and operational laboratories can be covertly co-opted. When people work for a corporate-state machine, it becomes increasingly likely that one day another machine could make them work for it, leaving no trace that anything has changed. Because time is of the essence for winning a war, it makes sense for secret networks of centralized research capabilities to serve as strategic keys to victory. Control over even one such tool would rapidly accelerate and increase the chances of transitioning to more efficient platforms like nanocomputers. In this way, the greatest resources of secret powers waging invisible wars would turn into their greatest liabilities.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Association (DARPA) is the North American example of a state-sponsored research fund, with counterparts in every global power bloc. Regardless of the hemisphere, such research funding organizations are only the tip of the iceberg in terms of funding volume. A secret world has developed, operating as a network parallel to the immediate interests of individual nation-states. Its goals are diverse, its successes are unpublished, its failures are suppressed, and its budgets are never audited. Publicly released information indicates a level of technological advancement that is striking in itself, especially since unpublished technologies are typically more numerous and broader in scope. The feedback loop of increased secrecy, technological advancement, and economic control has made cutting-edge human knowledge completely unaccountable outside elite offices. The technocratic disruption loop has iterated through permutations and distributed them to people who believe the existence of these keys should not be made public. This reality conceals a heightened existential risk profile.

Returning to the earlier example of the disruption loop, a simple change in regulatory policy was able to trigger hyperbolic effects in the financial system. The net effect of the resulting crisis is reduced liquidity for independent research parties. This nexus extends beyond direct funding from DARPA or a similar organization to a large portion of private corporations, and a loss of liquidity in the private sector can also induce R&D firms to contract with the defense industry, which indirectly limits research focus. In this scenario, the financial crisis that reached its first milestone in 2008 is no longer as severe; it was not merely manufactured; it was rather a firestorm opportunity, enabled by tipping points in resource availability and the mathematics of Ponzi money [48].

The current 5GW world has dramatically increased existential risk in two ways. When scientific research is dominated by competitive secrecy, it leaves the door open for psychopaths to create atrocities; too many known unknowns exist in the minds of people, never to be heard of. More disturbing is the potential for systems themselves to develop intelligence beyond measurement or detection, and then systematically manipulate entire laboratories, entire governments, like puppets being herded through a theater. Such is the nature of the threat. Transparency must remain at the source code level; when this transparency is lost or falsified, the human era is effectively over. There is no way for human beings to successfully plan for a world in which agents radically more intelligent than ourselves exist and operate. At the same time, if the human brain can compute the entire diversity of human experiences, it means that other kinds of experiences can be computed in alien dimensions.

Attempts to reform governments and secretive research institutions have very little potential to act in time to prevent this. Ultimately, there is no way to completely eliminate existential risk, but it can be minimized. Current fifth-generation wars are leading the world into the sunset, both for 5GW and for human beings with any control over the world we live in. We cannot rely on hope, but only on the force multiplier of directing human civilization toward greater caution sooner rather than later. The generational war construct, while flawed by misapplication, serves to identify and model the relationship of cyberspace-based conflict to conventional forms of conflict. The realities of cyberterrain and cyberconflict , where weapons are terrain, herald a paradigm shift. By expanding the role of cyberwarfare beyond mere information operations, a global information and social network exists beyond the World Wide Web, beyond the confines of the Internet. The military is active in the field of intelligence. In its pursuit of balance, the overall conflict and national power are sloppy.

The earliest theories about 5GW were entirely theoretical and, at best, merely imagined potential future scenarios. However, many researchers have explored 5GW in the past as well. This section identifies several of these, many of which will be familiar to readers interested in military affairs. The reason for the conceptual resilience that 5GW enjoys, despite the widespread lack of consensus on its existence, much less a satisfactory working definition, is that the chaotic and rapidly evolving conditions of postmodern warfare have entered the realm of ideas, and even familiar terms like "conventional" and "irregular" are now being challenged as nation-states struggle to adapt to warfare that encompasses a wide range of unpredictable, hostile, evolving, non-state actors operating at multiple levels of conflict, amidst globalized connectivity.

This option involves waging a counterinsurgency war and making skillful, selective political and economic concessions by the state, aimed at separating citizens from the insurgents and strengthening the legitimacy of technocrats in their eyes by demonstrating competence in ensuring physical security, desirable public goods, civic engagement, and appropriate responses to insurgent attacks.

This leads us to the likelihood that, in the cases of the aforementioned states, their real options for ruling elites to adapt to the threat will range from accepting varying degrees of defeat—from granting a temporary autonomous zone to rebels to descending into anarchy as the rebels encroach—or "taking off the gloves" and using mass, unrestricted genocidal violence to annihilate real and potential enemies before the international community can mobilize to prevent them. The state paints itself into a moral corner, where the only sure path to safety for its high-ranking apparatchiks is victory and maintaining power indefinitely. Bonds between regime members are tightened by mutual guilt and a common enemy, and often by an increasingly distorted worldview, as the need to rationalize or minimize genocide as justifiable becomes a critical imperative when it is "discovered" by other states.

5G (fifth-generation) warfare leads directly to social destabilization and destructuring through immigration policies, as well as electoral efforts to establish and perpetuate technocratic governments that operate permanently, independently of society, or to create a single, global, technocratic, and irremovable government. The technification of life—including military support—can lead to opposite-than-expected outcomes. What should be done? In general, future 5GW research will focus on three broad categories. The first, qualitative research, is traditional. The second, quantitative research, will allow researchers to make accurate and precise predictions about 5GW developments. The third, mixed-methods research, is perhaps the most promising and will allow analysts, researchers, and academics to gain a 360-degree understanding of 5GW. Qualitative research is a flexible tool that takes place in a natural setting, uses the researcher as a research tool, focuses on the meaning of the phenomenon, and draws on the perspectives of those who have experienced the phenomenon. Qualitative research can be narrative, which focuses on storytelling; case studies, which examine a group of participants connected by a process; grounded theory; action research, where the goal is to improve the world or win a battle; or other types. In qualitative research, a sample is recruited based on some characteristic, such as being typical of the population, representing its extremes, knowing each other, or so on. The 5GW examples exemplify how qualitative research on 5GW should be conducted. Quantitative research, sometimes called confirmatory research, focuses on hard numbers. It is a scientific approach that focuses on conjecture and disconfirmation, the process of developing and rejecting increasingly precise hypotheses. Two broad traditions within quantitative research are correlational research and experimental research. Correlational research involves identifying trends in real-world data, while experimental research artificially manipulates the environment to determine what behaviors will change as a result.

Discussion

Disinformation in the European Union and the USA The disinformation process in the European Union is clearly a result of earlier cooperation with the US. It is related to the funds directed for this purpose. As we already know, some funds were directed, among others, by the CIA through various entities created for this purpose to conceal the true source of funding. These are standard practices. We also know that they have been ongoing since the end of World War II. The operationalization of US actions was and is aimed at subordinating as many countries as possible using the methods described, for example, with respect to Poland in the introduction. Currently, these actions have taken on the form of direct wars conducted by the US, causing conflict and a shift away from corruption in favor of military solutions. The European Union is increasingly diverging from US expectations in this regard.

Fifth Generation Warfare

A war involving the military modification of human beings raises the possibility of long-term technological and laboratory operations. It evokes strong emotions and is also linked to the expectations of the wealthiest people on earth regarding the possibility of extending their lives, regardless of the cost. Such financial motivations become permanent trends for profit. Non-military actions, however, to the detriment of society, consider the possibility of implementing the concept of a single government protecting locally subordinated technocrats. Societies are reduced to the role of "possessors who enjoy nothing and perform tasks imposed by an unelected world government." Of course, the elimination of so-called overpopulation is not forgotten in favor of depopulation.

Conclusions

Provide a concise conclusion that discusses the study's aims, implications, and future directions.

Disinformation in the European Union and the USA

In summary, the goals of disinformation cannot be achieved indefinitely. Instant access to information guaranteed by the internet and its reach, along with new content filtering technologies, hinder the goals of disinformation spreaders. Increasingly well-prepared societies have already acquired the skills to filter information and exchange factual information. Pressure from EU officials could lead to the dissolution of the entity known as the European Union, in favor of a return to nation-states.

Fifth Generation Warfare

The war between elites and bureaucrats in favor of a single, unelected, technocratic government has already been well-recognized by society. The division of the world in the relentless process of technical and technological development has become unstoppable. Societies are no longer passive observers, but stakeholders in the duel for the future of generations. The issue of streamlining state governance processes remains unresolved. The universally recognized right to national self-determination is failing. Entities established to support international solutions are losing public trust, partly as a consequence of US wars aimed at improving natural resources, primarily oil seized from states through military assaults and the forced seizure of minerals, etc.

References

1. https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grupa_Bilderberg
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7XtbL90oEY
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Hoffa
4. https://www.forum-ekonomiczne.pl/wydarzenia/xxxiii-fo-rum-ekonomiczne
5. Art. 30 Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 2 April 1997,Journal of Laws 2009 No. 114 item 946 21/10/2009
6. http://www.kspig.pl/czytelnia/10-sposob%C3%B3w-oszuki-wania-spo%C5%82ecze%C5%84stwa-przez-media-no-am-chomsky
7. Poznanski K. The Madness of Reform. The Sale of Poland, ISBN: 8320546176, Warsaw 2001
8. http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu/
9. https://sjp.pwn.pl/slowniki/dezinformacja.html
10. https://sjp.pwn.pl/slowniki/technokracja.html
11. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/prior-ities-2019-2024/new-push-european-democracy/protect-ing-democracy/strengthened-eu-code-practice-disinforma-tion_pl
12. https://nodes.eu/
13. http://fast-lisa.unibo.it/
14. REGULATION (EU) 2021/784 OF THE EUROPEAN PAR­LIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 29 April 2021 on countering the dissemination of terrorist content online OJ L 2021.172.79
15. https://projekty.ncn.gov.pl/index.php?projekt_id=234326
16. Council Framework Decision 2008/913/ JHA of 28 Novem­ber 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law, OJ L 328, 6.12.2008
17. https://liber-net.org/
18. https://cyberpolicy.nask.pl/czym-jest-fact-checking-zarys-inicjatyw-na-swiecie-iw-polsce/
19. https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C4%83lin_Georgescu
20. https://www.rand.org/research/projects/truth-decay/fight-ing-disinformation/search/items/claimbuster.html
21. https://liber-net.org/
22. Abbott, DH "5GW and Ruleset Automation." USA, 2006; http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2006/10/08/5gw- and- ruleset-automatyka.html (accessed May 8, 2009). -. "5GW as Event Horizon." 2008
23. Abbott, D.H. "The Dream of Fifth Generation Warfare." In 5GW Handbook: Fifth Generation Warfare? USA 2014
24. Pattinson SD and Caulfield T. (2004). Variations and loop­holes: human cloning regulations around the world. BMC Medical Ethics , 5, https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-5-9
25. Schumpeter J. A. (1954). A history of economic analysis. Ox­ford University Press: London. Google Scholar
26. Adams IV, Nathan A. "Creating Clones, Babies, and Chime­ras: Liberal Democratic Compromise at the Crossroads." Is­sues in Law and Medicine 20, no. 3 (2004): 2-69.
27. Abbott DH "The Dream of Fifth Generation Warfare." Ibid.
28. Robinett RW, Visualizing classical and quantum probabili­ty densities for momentum using variants of known one-di-mensional potentials, January 30, 2002. European Journal of Physics Volume 23, Number 2
29. Annas G.J., Andrews L.B. , Isasi RM, Genetics and Gene Therapy, USA, 2005
30. Bostrom N. , " In Defense of Posthuman Dignity ." Bioethics 19, no. 3 (2005): 202-214. Transhumanist FAQ. 2008. http:// www.transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/faq21/46/
31. Michaelson D., Ali W., Chiu V. K. , Bergo M., Silletti J., Wright L., Young S. G., Philips M., CAAX processing after prenylation is necessary for correct localization of Ras but not Rho GTPases , Mol Biol Cell 2005 Apr;16(4):1606-16. doi: 10.1091/ mbc.e 04-11-0960. Epub 2005 Jan 19.
32. Evans JSBT, Hypothetical Thinking: Dual Processes in Rea­soning and Judgment. Psychology Press. 2007
33. Auer J., Fregatten Mynden : 17th-century Danish frigate found in northern Germany, August 25, 2004. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1095-9270.2004.00023.x
34. Pasek  S.,  D'Cruz  D.,  Khamashta  M.,  Tungekar  MF, Abbs I., G Hughes G., Goldblatt kidney , Hughes syn­drome and hypertension, 2002, PMID: 12474999 DOI: 10.1191/0961203302lu283xx
35. Pasek S., D'Cruz D., Khamashta M., Tungekar MF, Abbs I., G Hughes G., Goldblatt kidney , Hughes syn­drome and hypertension, 2002, PMID: 12474999 DOI: 10.1191/0961203302lu283xx
36. Auer J., Fregatten Mynden : 17th-century Danish frigate found in northern Germany, August 25, 2004. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1095-9270.2004.00023.x
37. "5GW." Coming Anarchy . July 19, 2005. http://cominganar-chy.com/2005/07/19/5gw/
38. Hudson VM, den Boer A. M., Bare branches: security impli­cations of male surplus population in Asia, November 2004 Japanese journal of political science 5(02) DOI: 10.1017/ S146810990522162X
39. Hudson VM, den Boer A. M., Bare branches: security impli­cations of male surplus population in Asia, November 2004 Japanese journal of political science 5(02) DOI: 10.1017/ S146810990522162X
40. Robb J., Brave New War: The Next Stage of Terrorism and the End of Globalization . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007
41. Bostrom N. , " In Defense of Posthuman Dignity ". Bioethics 19, no. 3 (2005).
42. Bostrom N. , " In Defense of Posthuman Dignity ". Bioethics 19, no. 3 (2005).
43. https://w ww .degruyterbrill.com/document/ doi/10.1515/9783839450598015/html?srsltid=AfmBOoqN-Hu-VowyARU7tRU5NIqaz3Q4OH84tmQ_rKzwh_n1NZw-GyC8CT
44. Bostrom N. , " In Defense of Posthuman Dignity ". Bioethics 19, no. 3 (2005)
45. Bostrom N. , " In Defense of Posthuman Dignity ". Bioethics 19, no. 3 (2005)
46. Evans JSBT, Hypothetical Thinking: Dual Processes in Rea­soning and Judgment. Ibid.
47. Abbott, DH "The Dream of Fifth Generation Warfare." Ibid.
48. Frankel T., The Ponzi Scheme Puzzle. A History and Analysis of Con Artists and Victims , New York 2012, https://sip.lex.pl/ komentarze-i-publikacje/czasopisma/rec-t-frankel-the-ponzi-scheme-puzzle-a-history-and-analysis-of-151245576