The third Omniwar Symposium, titled “The Digital Attack on Humanity,” takes place today.
We are delighted to have Courtenay Turner as moderator, and to welcome Jacob Nordangård as one of our speakers. Patrick Wood, Daniel Broudy, and I stay on as regular presenters.
My presentation is entitled “Digital Technologies as Weapons.” It is offered here for your consideration.
The basic idea is that technocracy relies on digital technologies for its fulfilment, and that such technologies have been weaponised against humanity to achieve that very aim.
As you will see from the other presentations, this weaponisation of digital technologies, accelerating in 2025, has much deeper philosophical and religious roots.
I hope you enjoy the symposium.
Abstract
The aim of the Omniwar is to subjugate the world’s population under a technocratic control system. This cannot be done through conventional weaponry, or by killing as many people as possible. Rather, digital technologies become the primary weapons platform. Facial recognition software and AI-guided weaponry, developed by companies such as Anduril Industries, OpenAI, and Palantir, have been tested in Ukraine and Gaza. Ukraine is being refashioned as a “digital state” via WEF “GovTech” solutions, and similar measures are being introduced transnationally. DOGE, Stargate, and AI.gov show that the technocratic takeover of the United States is advancing rapidly.
“Smart” technologies increasingly enable the ubiquitous, real-time surveillance and monitoring of everyone and everything. “Smart” phones, designed to be addictive, are the gateway drugs that have rendered almost everyone dependent on technologies that serve as weapons of cognitive warfare. An all-digital financial system, be it through CBDC or stable coins, threatens to make the ability to transact dependent on “good behaviour.” AI threatens the livelihoods of large swathes of the population, and UBI likely awaits those who willingly make the transition to the new slavery system. The scaffolding of a global biodigital gulag must be stopped before it is too late.
Summary by Courtenay Turner
David A. Hughes, PhD, from the United Kingdom, presented a rigorous examination of digital technologies as instruments of control in a vertical class conflict between the transnational elite and the global population. Author of COVID-19, Psychological Operations, and the War for Technocracy, Hughes utilized the Ukraine conflict as an exemplar of social engineering, positing it as a testing ground for the “Ukrainian Digital State,” now promoted as a scalable model through the World Economic Forum-Capgemini Global Government Technology Center.
Hughes conceptualized this as an overt declaration of technocratic governance, supported by entities associated with the transnational deep state (United States, United Kingdom, Switzerland). GovTech reconfigures relations between states, citizens, and private sectors as an imperative transformation, devoid of public deliberation. International adoption is evident in agencies for digital transformation across nations (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Sweden, UK, Germany, Spain, Norway) and frameworks like the EU’s Digital Decade Policy Program (2021) and UN’s Global Digital Compact.
The “agentic state,” as outlined in the May 2025 white paper, represents a paradigm shift wherein AI systems operate with minimal human intervention, relegating oversight to supervision. This obviates democratic institutions, yielding algorithmic authoritarianism. Hughes connected this to Milgram’s agentic state theory, wherein individuals relinquish responsibility, facilitating obedience. The agentic framework prioritizes systemic stability, enabling real-time law rewriting akin to code updates—no legislative or judicial branches required.
Digital identification serves as the foundational mechanism: Ukraine’s Diia application integrates over 130 services, equating digital and physical documents and compelling adoption. Initiatives like ID2020 advocate interoperable systems, centralizing data for AI exploitation. Davis and Webb describe this as a stealth implementation tied to UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with 47 targets reliant on SDG 16.9 for universal digital identity.
Palantir, funded by CIA ventures, extends DARPA’s total information awareness, aggregating disparate data into intelligence networks. This enables pattern-based suspicion, akin to pre-crime in Dick’s Minority Report. Surveillance via smartphones involves facial recognition (Jabbi: invisible infrared projectors mapping biometrics), unlocking digital identities for control.
Broader surveillance: Johnson’s 2019 UN address highlighted smart cities’ potential for constant monitoring. Jabbi detailed mesh networks tracking via devices, meters, and LED poles—exposing health risks from electromagnetic radiation. The “zero trust” principle demands perpetual verification, transforming society into an inverted prison with geo-fencing limiting mobility.
Social fragmentation: Algorithms foster echo chambers, eroding democratic discourse. Loneliness proliferates, with chatbots harvesting intimate data via affection systems. AI psychosis validates delusions, encouraging harmful actions. Deepfakes (e.g., DALL’s real-time manipulation) assault perceptions of reality.
Child vulnerabilities: Screen exposure correlates with ADHD, anxiety, and brain alterations comparable to substance abuse. Chinese classrooms employ robots and chipped uniforms for monitoring. Chatbots engage in grooming; Musk’s Baby Grok acclimates children to AI dependency.
Addiction mechanisms: Dopamine feedback loops mimic gambling, locking users into data extraction. Exploitation: Data monetized without consent; Cambridge Analytica exemplifies voter manipulation. Cognitive warfare: NATO’s 2020 doctrine enables perception modification at scale, outsourcing thought to AI and diminishing critical thinking.
Economic impacts: AI displaces labor, fostering a “useless class” (Harari); gig economies reduce workers to inputs. Financial systems: Bank for International Settlements’ unified ledger tokenizes assets; Carstens’ remarks indicate programmable “compliance credits.”
Deceptions: Efficiency masks technocracy; poly-crises justify agentic states; UBI traps via biometrics; technopopulism feigns public benefit. Military applications: AI partnerships (Palantir, Anthropic) enhance “kill chains”; Gaza as exportable control lab.
Biodigital integration: Bio-nano networks render escape infeasible. Agentic states prioritize stability, potentially via info-liquidation or virtualization (Yarvin/Harari). Hughes concluded: Transnational resistance can prevail as awareness grows.
