Given the current media focus on extra-terrestrial life, an article with a non-human focus seemed fitting... It's not about "the aliens" per se, who it seems will not be making their official debut quite yet, but rather, the world stage is being primed for their appearance, as it has been for many, many years via the spectacularly successful supernatural offerings of Hollywood. Some of the most enduring and beloved family films of all time - e.g., ET - and some of the most cult and popular TV shows - X-Files - have one very clear and uncompromising message: aliens are real, your government covers them up, but one day, soon, they will make contact...

We are being primed for the alien invasion through our screens, just as we were primed for the Covid "pandemic" (and the concept of "pandemics" generally) in the same way. 'Outbreak', 'World War Z', 'Contagion' (which a younger friend told me was screened to his geography class when he was at school in around 2015, and which Matt Hancock later confirmed he 'based his pandemic response on') - these are all about manicuring the mass mind to accept that deadly diseases spread when people breathe on each other are a real thing we need to fear. If this concept had never been introduced to us via film, none of us would ever have believed it, because it flies in the face of all our direct, lived experience. In short: if "deadly pandemics transmitted by breathing" were a real thing, then, in such a highly mobile and transient society as ours, we'd all be constantly sick, and highly public facing jobs like working hospitality or in the arrivals lounge of Heathrow airport, would be more dangerous than being on the frontlines in a war zone.

Obviously this is not the case, and there is scant little evidence to suggest those who work in public facing roles are more at risk from so-called infectious diseases than those who work alone at home. After all, we never did see those "supermarket workers all drop dead from Covid" headlines, did we, despite the fact shop workers worked consistently and around hundreds of potentially "infected" people a day, throughout "the pandemic".

So, the point is, when the ruling classes desire our investment in a phenomenon that is not real, they use the powerful hypnotic might of screens, and project their desired reality into our minds. They have been pushing the "alien invasion" trope for decades, using TV and film, because, in the very near future, they are going to stage an alien invasion using holographic technology. This is so-called Project Bluebeam, a secret US intelligence plot exposed by an investigative journalist in the 1990s.

The supposed "UFOs" being reported in the media right now are further priming us for this "alien invasion", which will be staged for the purposes of uniting the world under a common force. The force may be presented as for good ("we are an advanced species here to help you, but you must do what we say"), or for evil ("humanity must unite as one to defeat these evil invaders"). Either way, the end goal is to join the world as one as per the One World Government agenda.

It seems to me not a coincidence that non-human entities are hitting the headlines, just as that other non-human entity- ChatGPT - is shooting to meteoric prominence, and as missing person cases are once again a hot talking point (gee, if only there was some way of always tracking a person, always knowing where they are and if they're safe, like, I dunno, a micorchip or something... and wow, isn't that nice Elon Musk coincidentally working on such a thing right now?!).

Because the theme of all these things is the same: that the age of the natural, organic, untampered with human is over. We are moving into the age of aliens, AI and transhumanism. Humans are out of date. They need an upgrade.

This has been illustrated to me with particularly stark clarity in recent weeks, as I have been assisting someone I know well (and you probably do too, if we're Facebook friends, but I am protecting his modesty...), who we will call Nick, look for a job. After many successful years working in the social care industry, including running his own company, just over a year ago, Nick's fixed term contract came to an end. He'd been given every indication it would be renewed (as this is what had happened on two previous consecutive occasions for the same company) in the form of a promotion to a management role.

This didn't happen. Why? Well, his employers explained they couldn't simply give him the management job - that wasn't "procedure" - it had to be put out as a vacancy for others to apply for, but - the strong insinuation was - this was just a formality as the job (and all Nick's colleagues agreed) had his name all over it.

So, Nick attended the interview, which included an intensive preparation period where he had to develop an interactive presentation to deliver, and then travel fifty miles - this despite the fact that all the people on the panel knew him well and had done for years, socially as well as professionally.

He completed the interview, delivered the presentation, and felt it had gone as well as it possibly could have done, with the panel members obviously impressed with the detail that had gone into his answers and the presentation.

Days passed and he heard nothing back, but eventually got a phone call. He hadn't got the job. Why? Because in one specific question, relating to running a social care company, he hadn't provided enough detail about a specific process. Another applicant had.

"We know you've actually run a company and done these things successfully," the telephoning colleague said. "And the other applicant hasn't actually done them in practice. But he described it better theoretically, so we have to give the job to him."

"But doesn't my actual experience count, even if I didn't quite remember to mention everything in a stressful interview situation?" Asked a baffled Nick.

"No," said his colleague brusquely. "We can't take that into account, Everything has to go on the interview and how many points you get per answer."

"But... can't you take into account that you actually know me and based many of the company's existing procedures on what I pioneered and developed?"

"No."

So, reeling as he was, Nick set about looking for a new job. A few weeks of fruitless online applying followed, and then an appointment with a recruitment company, who initially forgot he was there, so left him sitting in a corridor for half an hour, then eventually realised and apologised and said he'd have to come back another day... so he did (reluctantly). He completed all their forms and an interview, and was told they'd be in touch if anything suitable came up.

He never heard from them again, so returned to scouring online advertisements. Eventually, a job came up that sounded perfect: it matched his skills and experience exactly, so he put together a (lengthy and detailed) application that resulted in his being called for interview, so once again the intensive preparation period began - forensically studying the company, arranging appointments with former colleagues with relevant experience, putting together a 20-page document covering 'essential' and 'desirable' queries that might come up in interview.

The day of the interview arrived, incurring the usual travel and related expenses (it being in a city about a 90 minute drive away). The interview went exceptionally well. By the end, Nick was laughing and joking with the interviewers. They were obviously incredibly impressed by his skills, experience, and enthusiasm, and were responding very positively to his thoughts and suggestions - when he mentioned something about risk assessments, one of the panel said, "right, we should give him the job here and now just for mentioning those!". Nick said it almost felt more like consultancy than a job interview, as they were making notes of things he suggested, saying these were things they had not thought of and would try.

Nick felt confident this time. The interview had gone so well, the panel had clearly been so impressed, that surely, after a few false starts, this was the opportunity he had been waiting for.

The phone call came the next day. He knew immediately from the tone in the interviewer's voice - he hadn't got the job.

The interviewer - the company's CEO - was apologetic. Almost wheedling. He actually said the words, "I wanted to give you the job and was looking forward to working with you".

But?

But they used a "point scoring system", and on a single question, another applicant had scored two more points than Nick by mentioning two key "buzzwords".

"Is that it?" Asked Nick.

"Yes," said the interviewer, clearly with more than a hint of embarrassment. "I mean, it's the closest I've ever seen it. Like I said, I was looking forward to working with you, but we have to go by procedure. We have to go by the points."

So just to be clear on this: skills, experience, personality, character - even the preferences of the actual humans conducting the interview - count for nothing. Only "points" do.

This is how a non-human entity such as an AI would approach recruitment. Using buzzwords and numbers, check boxes and algorithms. There's nothing human about it, and that is entirely intentional and by design

"To be honest," said a stunned Nick. "I think that's a bit of an inhumane approach."

"Well, so do I," agreed the interviewer, with half an embarrassed laugh, before adding (and he actually said this, I heard him). "But unfortunately, that's how the Matrix works."

This approach to recruitment - sidelining character, skill, creativity, experience in preference of using numbers, boxes, and buzzwords is necessarily designed to disadvantage humans, and to advantage AI. Computer software can be perfectly programmed to deliver exactly the desired buzzword at exactly the desired time. A human being, especially in the artificial and stressful environment of an interview, cannot.

We are rapidly moving towards a time where human beings will need to be able to convincingly emulate AI in the workplace in order to compete, and as the cost of living crisis continues to escalate and wages continue to fall, competition is going to become ever more fierce.

So, if the disappearance of cute little Maddie isn't enough to convince you to get yourself chipped... if the alien abduction of Nicola Bulley isn't (hey, you never know, two psy-ops with one stone, and all that...), maybe the fact that you can't get a job without one - without a brain-chip enabling you to mimic perfect point scoring AI - will be.

It sounds like science fiction for now and I very much hope that's where it stays. If anyone working in recruitment is reading this, if anyone is pushing the "point scoring as prime" approach, please realise where it is likely going, and that it won't be long until - not just your candidates are encouraged to be more robot-like - but you are, as well. Just as AI can give perfect point-scoring responses, it can also perfectly detect them in an interview situation. Like cashiers directing people to the self-checkout, like teachers striking and leaving children to learn online, don't do the overlords work for them by making yourselves redundant, because the robots can do it "better". The robots can do being robotic better, but is that what we really want?

It is urgent we now ask ourselves what kind of future we want to strive for - a formulaic and precise one with a perfect point score - or a creative, unpredictable, imaginative, flawed, and all too fully human one?

Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader-funded, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you would like to make a contribution of any size, please do so through...

1. BuyMeACoffee for one-off or monthly donations
2. Patreon, for monthly pledges
3. Direct bank transfer, for either monthly or one-off donations, to Nat West, a/c 30835984, s/c 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA

Your support is what enables this site to continue to exist, and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.

Read more articles below

Nicola Bulley: In Ye Loyal Club?

Miri | 11 Comments | February 7, 2023That being an almost-perfect anagram of her name... (unfortunately, since I coined it, internet sleuths have correctly deduced it doesn't […]

The most dangerous thing about 15-minute cities?

Miri | 9 Comments | February 3, 2023How much they will appeal to many. Just imagine the scene, currently all too common up and down the UK: […]

Dragon slayers don't flinch

Miri | 16 Comments | February 2, 2023It's not every day that a multimillionaire celebrity makes a video about me comparing me to the Nazis, so on […]

Midwinter's Massive Missives Mapped

Miri | No Comments | January 31, 2023As we come to the end of another month of massive missives, I thought I'd do a little recap of […]

Those who forget history...

Miri | 6 Comments | January 30, 2023A theme we have seen gathering ever-more momentum recently is the invalidation and elimination of women* (*adult human females) from […]

"This is not crying wolf... the wolf is at the door."

Miri | 10 Comments | January 28, 2023So states the suitably sinister headline in the Daily Mail, referring to the fact that leaps in artificial intelligence (AI) […]

No Sex, No Booze, No Books

Miri | 14 Comments | January 25, 2023No, this is not just clickbait (although I will be interested to see if such a title does garner more […]

How To Become Controlled Opposition

Miri | 17 Comments | January 23, 2023It is not a new phenomenon for me, nor I suspect for some reading this article, to be accused of […]

Letter to local council re: truth, transparency, and accountability

Miri | 7 Comments | January 21, 2023(For previous correspondence, please see here and here.) Dear Kirklees Council, As a tax-paying resident of Huddersfield, I have corresponded […]