Dystopian Manipulation ‘WILL NOT PREVAIL’

Dystopian Manipulation ‘WILL NOT PREVAIL’

Peter Kopa, Prague, September 17, 2026

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yagML3eS-4g

What we do know is that God directs history for our eternal good; we also know that in the end He will not allow evil to triumph. Over the course of twenty centuries, there have been reasons in each one to think that everything is falling apart, and yet the Christian West has always emerged victorious. Like the Hebrews after crossing the Red Sea, we are distressed as we watch the Egyptian armies approach…

The Great Conspiracy for World Power

We are witnessing an intense media campaign by the “mainstream media” regarding the state’s total surveillance and control of citizens, in collusion with the economic elites. Behind this are the globalists who seek to destroy all culture, morality, institutions, and convictions, in order to then establish their new dystopian world order, in accordance with the 17 goals of the 2030 Agenda set forth in Davos. These goals were adopted verbatim by the UN and the EU, which means that virtually all official bodies and institutions have been infiltrated: https://thinktanklatam.org/la-amenaza-globalista-i/

The media has succeeded in desensitizing people to the danger of digital control. Added to this is the fact that citizens are unwilling to step outside their comfort zones to stand up against this threat. Western leaders and economic elites are following the Chinese model, https://thinktanklatam.org/china-intenta-controlar-el-mundo/ where the vast herd of 1.4 billion people, without realizing it, has already lost a large part of its freedom due to the enormous digital apparatus that shapes them according to the totalitarian interests of the Communist Party. The insidious nature of the system lies in the fact that people think it’s a good thing because they’ve been brainwashed by so many years of confinement within the media bubble.

In the West, a similar process of digital penetration is in full swing, though there are differences between countries. Digital penetration isn’t so bad in and of itself and could even be useful for greater freedom and prosperity. The big problem is that this system began to be implemented secretly, as Snowden revealed on June 15, 2013, which raises the suspicion that there is a “cat in the bag.” And that cat has now escaped.

Furthermore, given the intentions to establish a single global power center and considering the Davos Forum’s mantra—“You will have nothing and be happy”—along with its 17 goals, one cannot help but conclude that this is something very evil: the dismantling of the family, the open promotion of abortion, of everything “woke,” of gender ideology, the glorification of same-sex families, the introduction of sexual practices to children as young as eight, etc. https://thinktanklatam.org/5152/. Even both world wars were provoked, in part, by this dark cloud.

The Official Justification

Under the pretext of improving national security, preventing terrorism and crime, combating fraud, and enhancing administrative efficiency, the state abuses its power without first informing the people and in violation of the constitution. This is because data collection is massive and indiscriminate. Databases are combined, and opaque decisions are automated without judicial authorization, transparency, or avenues for appeal.

What the State Can Learn Today

“Surveillance” does not depend on whether someone is the direct target of spying. It grows when many ordinary actions—using a phone, traveling, paying taxes, receiving benefits, crossing a border, or appearing on camera—become data that can be accessed, cross-referenced, and analyzed.

The decisive factor is interoperability: each isolated file offers a partial picture; when connected, a much more complete profile can be formed. The OECD reports that governments are expanding the use of AI in administrative processes and in risk and fraud detection; its 2023 Digital Government Index found that 70% of the countries analyzed used AI for internal processes, although only 33% used it for policy design and implementation.

The United States at the Forefront

The United States possesses exceptionally broad capabilities due to its combination of foreign intelligence, technology procurement, commercial data, and border surveillance. Revelations about PRISM and XKeyscore showed how agencies could access or analyze communications data on a global scale.

PRISM and XKeyscore are two well-known secret mass surveillance programs run by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), which were publicly revealed in 2013 by Edward Snowden. [1, 2], causing an unprecedented scandal and outcry. The immigration and border security sectors currently employ some of the most intrusive tools: biometrics, license plate readers, geolocation, drones, social media analysis, and data analytics systems. A 2025 investigative report described the expansion of these capabilities to target immigrants, visitors, and students, and noted that the federal government had invested $7.8 billion since 2020 in immigration technologies through 263 companies.

This does not mean that everyone in the U.S. is personally monitored by an agency at all times. It means that there is an infrastructure capable of producing, purchasing, retaining, or correlating large amounts of data, and that it can be activated selectively—or, in certain programs, based on broader criteria—depending on authority, purpose, and legal framework.

The European Union Is Not Trustworthy

The EU has a dense digital infrastructure for administrative and border control purposes, but it also has significant legal safeguards: the General Data Protection Regulation, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, national courts, the Court of Justice of the EU, and the European Court of Human Rights. However, this does not eliminate abuses; rather, it introduces checks and balances, obligations of proportionality, and avenues for challenge that are rarely utilized. At the same time, the EU reacts with great reluctance to protests.

The most controversial issue in Europe has been whether the widespread retention of communications data is compatible with fundamental rights. The debate has focused on metadata—who communicates with whom, from where, and when—because it allows for highly precise profiling of an individual even without accessing the text of messages or calls. The European Parliament itself emphasized that smartphones and tablets make it possible to extensively monitor citizens’ digital communications.

Furthermore, European border and migration systems are collecting increasing amounts of biometric and movement data. The political trend is toward greater information-sharing among law enforcement, immigration, and judicial authorities, presented as a mechanism to combat terrorism, organized crime, document fraud, and irregular immigration.

Specific Consequences at the Personal Level

This threat is being implemented in Brussels, London, Australia, and at the United Nations (UN). I quote Citizengo.com, Madrid:

You wouldn’t need to be arrested to be silenced. Your payment could be blocked. Your passport could stop working. Your posts could simply disappear. An algorithm could flag you as dangerous before you’ve even broken a single law. At that point, surveillance is no longer about watching you. It becomes the power to punish you, until you think and act in the “correct” way. So the question keeps coming back: how much control are you willing to give up before there’s no longer any practical way to opt out?

The more we rely on digital money, the easier it is to track everything you buy. And when digital money becomes something you depend on, whoever controls the system gains enormous power to decide whether you can spend, where you can spend, and how. And you know, from my last message, what happens when they have a complete picture of you and decide they don’t like what they see. Frozen accounts. Expulsion from the banking system. Punishment for having the “wrong” ideas. And when all your money depends on that system, where do you go if the control system says no?