Harris, Biden, and the Plan for Universal Incarceration

Updated: Oct 21, 2020

It wasn't an accident. There's a reason why Harris and Biden were selected for this moment in history — why, in 2020, of all years, these two persons have been brought to the front of the crowd.

They both share a key skill that's crucially important for the Agenda going forward.

Think about it for a moment. What do the two of them have in common?

What aspect of their careers are are they both known best for?

What did they accomplish in public office?

What issues did they champion the most?

What is the common thread running through their main achievements?

What is the most unique skill that they both share?




They're both very, very good at incarcerating people.

At putting people in prison.

They don't just do it. They enjoy it.

They relish it.

They made careers out of it.

They're both key figures in the prison-industrial complex. They are two of the private prison industry's biggest champions in government. (Click here to learn more about that industry, if you're not already familiar).

Joseph Biden architected the war on drugs. His 1994 crime-bill set up the system of no-knock warrants, SWAT assassinations, civil asset forfeiture, and the merging of incarceration and profit.

He played a key role in creating the system wherein prisons are owned by private corporations, whose revenue is determined by the number of inmates they're able to incarcerate, and wherein state and county governments must keep a quota of inmates in their prisons, or else be financially penalized for "failing" to incarcerate "enough" people.

He also authored the Patriot Act (not just supported, but authored it), which "legalized" warrantless searches, indefinite detention without criminal charges, torture, and a whole host of unconstitutional power-abuses.

He has maintained close relationships with the people running this industry, throughout his time in government. He knows how the system works. He's cozy with them. If anyone can be entrusted to upgrade the system, from mass-incarceration into something exponentially more grotesque (we'll get to exactly what that is, in just a minute), without feeling any moral pangs of conscience, it's him.

And if Biden is the carceral state's architect, Kamala Harris is its most enthusiastic servant. One of them, at least. Certainly one of the most photogenic, who ticks all of the identity boxes (female, person of color, descendant of immigrants, etc). If you're looking for a champion of mass-incarceration who also happens to be "exciting" from an identitarian perspective, there's probably no one in America who fits that job description better.

During her career as a prosecutor, she became famous for putting innocent people in prison, and keeping them there - often while displaying an uncanny zest for the process.

Her abuses are many, and have been catalogued by many writers.

One example that stands out as particularly horrifying is the time she argued, in court, against paroling prisoners - nonviolent ones - as part of a statewide prison reform process, for the sole reason that they would no longer be performing free labor.

"A federal judge ordered that all non-violent second-strike offenders be eligible for parole in California in an action against constitutional prison crowding. Kamala Harris, then the Attorney General of California, disagreed with the decision. She argued in court that by releasing these inmates early, prisons would lose “an important labor pool” (Los Angeles Times, “Federal judges order California to expand prison releases,” 11.14.2014). Despite pitching herself as a lifelong champion for criminal justice reform, Harris had advocated that the need to keep nonviolent offenders as slaves outweighs their constitutional rights."


Original quote source:


What kind of person wants to keep people in prison just to work?

What kind of person — when asked the question, "Should we parole this man or woman from prison?" — puts their thinking cap on and considers all the free labor that person is performing, and would no longer perform if paroled — and weighs their paroling in light of the profit-reduction it would inflict upon whichever company the poor soul has been getting 10-cents-an-hour to stitch textiles for?

What is it called, when you deprive someone of liberty, in order to force them to work for you?

What is that called?

What kind of person makes a career out of this?

And what kind of person responds (on repeated occasions) to the question of how she can justify imprisoning people and ruining their lives for using cannabis, by bursting out into laughter?

What kind of person laughs about criminally prosecuting poor and destitute mothers for their children's absence from school?

Not only does it - but finds it funny to do it?

It's a person without empathy.

Without a conscience.

Someone who is willing to lock up anyone, at any time, for any reason.

Someone who will not resist if presented with an Agenda for a staggeringly gruesome new type of incarceration, but will instead participate enthusiastically in setting it up.

What is this "new wave"?

What is this "Universal Incarceration"?

We can already see the beginnings of it in the medical martial law declared this year, and the subsequent placement of entire populations under house-arrest.

In the USA, many state governors announced that it was just about illegal to leave your house, with hefty fines as punishment. They eventually eased up, but only because of public defiance — particularly armed defiance, like that seen in the Michigan Statehouse.

They realized the difficulty of imposing such a system with such immediacy, and shifted to a strategy of baby-steps, starting with mask mandates and isolated incidents of apartment-building lockdowns.

So far, this kind of thing has been limited to a few incidents. In the USA, that is.

But in other countries — those without an armed populace — we can see what the Agenda looks like at a somewhat more... advanced stage.

Australia has announced that police no longer need a warrant to go into your home, for the purpose of "testing" you for Covid. Stopping the spread is so important, it justifies the abolition of centuries of civil rights.

Their state of Victoria has imposed a nearly complete house-arrest of its entire population, with literal tanks in the streets.

Meanwhile, Australia and Britain have both announced the creation of Medical Police forces.

Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have made it mandatory to submit to "tests" when demanded. No test = arrest.

Meanwhile, in an act reminiscent of Germany in the 1930's, New Zealand has opened up camps, where all "positive" cases are brought, with or without consent, and then incarcerated for as long as it takes to "test negative."

Don't believe that? Here's their health minister saying it on video:

"I am now directing medical officers of health, that all confirmed cases are to be managed in quarantine facility."

Notice how he says, "all."

All positive cases.

All means all.

It doesn't mean "except for those who don't want to come."

It means all.

The second person speaking in the video is their prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, whom we were told is "nice and compassionate" because she's a mommy. And as you can hear above, she confirms everything we're saying here. A transcript:

"What if someone refuses to be tested? Well they can't now. If someone refuses, in our facilities, to get tested, they have to keep staying. So they won't be able to leave after 14 days, and they have to stay on for another 14 days. So it's a pretty good incentive, you either get your tests done, and make sure you're cleared, or we will keep you in a facility for longer. So most people will look at that and take the test."

In other words, your body is government property. They own the inside of your nasal passages, and your veins. You will submit to their test - or they will put you in prison, and keep you there until you take a test, AND it's negative. (And "until you test negative" really means "as long as we want", since the PCR tests can be manipulated to produce a positive result, whenever the testers want.

If they don't like you, they can test you, by force.

If the fake PCR test shows "positive", they can imprison you.

Once imprisoned, they can keep you for as long as they want (because you'll need a "negative" result in order to leave, and the PCR tests can be manipulated to never show negative).

Here she is, directing her country's military to "ensure compliance" - i.e. to arrest people and drag them to the camps.

Think she's not serious? These camps are guarded, and escapees are hunted down.

Canada's Justin Trudeau, and his health minister Teresa Tam, have announced plans to do the same.

The governments of Canada, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, France, Spain, and many other western countries have announced that this system will continue for a long, long time, and that we'd best get used to it. It's here to stay. It's the "New Normal."

And the U.S. Democratic Party is ideologically aligned (at least on these types of issues) with the ruling parties of these other nations, and professes the same agenda.

Governors who are members of that party have kept their states under lockdown since March, with no plans to lift it, and they repeat the same stock phrases as Trudeau, Ardern, and the rest of them. Biden says he'll make a nationwide mask mandate. Governors Newsom, Cuomo, Wolf, Murphy, Whitmer, Brown, Inslee, Northam, and Walz have repeated all the key stock-phrases as the rest, like "New Normal" and "no freedom until a vaccine."

"This is going to be transformative. On a personal basis, on a social basis, on a systems basis. We're never gonna be the same again. When do we get back to normal? I don't think we get back to normal. We get to a New Normal."