Interview with esc

From the Clearinghouse Protocol to Climate Fraud: Mapping 130 Years of Systematic Control

I'm deeply grateful for the opportunity to interview esc, whose groundbreaking research represents some of the most important work being done in the world today. Through meticulous investigation, esc has revealed the architecture of the operating system that underlies our totalitarian control grid—not as conspiracy theory, but as documented reality. What esc exposes isn't just another layer of corruption or manipulation, but the fundamental code that runs the entire system of global governance, hidden in plain sight yet invisible to most.

The most profound revelation in esc's work is the discovery that ethics sits at the very heart of this operating system. This isn't ethics as we traditionally understand it—genuine moral principles guiding human behavior—but ethics weaponized as the primary control mechanism. Once you see this pattern, you cannot unsee it: every expansion of control comes wrapped in moral imperatives, every loss of freedom is packaged as virtuous necessity, every dissent is reframed as a moral failing. Healthcare workers fired for "ethics violations," companies forced into ESG compliance, scientists silenced for challenging consensus—all manifestations of the same ethical control architecture that esc has systematically documented.

What makes esc's research methodology so compelling is its extraordinary rigor and breadth. Drawing from primary sources—often obscure texts and documents that few researchers would think to examine—esc connects seemingly disparate elements across decades and domains to reveal the unified pattern beneath. From Ralph Barton Perry's eight-volume blueprint for a "moral economy" to the mathematical validation of the Tree of Life control pattern, from the clearing house financial architecture to the coordinated environmental deception, esc's systematic documentation leaves no room for dismissal as speculation. Each connection is receipted, each pattern proven, each revelation backed by the architects' own words.

At this stage, as esc emphasizes, awareness is the key—helping people see the system for what it is. This framework has profound implications for understanding every aspect of our controlled reality. For my own work exposing the fraud of virology, esc's ethics trap framework provides the missing piece: virology doesn't need to be scientifically valid when it can be ethically mandated. The system doesn't require truth, only moral authority to enforce compliance. The same pattern reveals itself in childhood vaccination—mass poisoning and disease creation wrapped in the moral imperative of "protecting our loved ones." The technical mechanism (injecting toxins) hides behind the ethical cover (community protection, caring for the vulnerable). Once you see this dual-layer architecture, the entire medical control system becomes transparent. Every person who grasps these patterns, who sees through the ethical manipulation and understands the control architecture, weakens the prison walls. The following interview offers a rare glimpse into one of the most important minds of our time—someone brave enough to look where others won't and systematic enough to document what they find.

Please subscribe to esc’s substack and share this interview far and wide.

With thanks to esc.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. | esc | Substack

1. Esc, could you please tell us about your background and what initially sparked your interest in investigating global governance systems?

I questioned the Covid-19 scamdemic upon the day it was called. It just didn’t appear real to me. The total associated cost would far surpass the 2008 financial crisis, that was obvious to me when Boris Johnson announced to us that “we must stay at home”. I wrote about this in my first ‘real’ substack post; Red Flags.

escapekey.substack.com/p/red-flags

Further, in May 2023, Jikkyleaks posted a thread on Heidi Larson, and I thought I’d dig up a few links to contribute, and I was absolutely astonished by the quantity of material I could dig up, it was just never-ending. And just as I thought I’d come to an end, I discovered her husband was Peter Piot, and that then led to another bottomless pit. One of the major issues wrt tracing back these sorts of things, is establishing a sort of ‘solid ground’ so to speak, something you know will not majorly shift in understanding. Sure, you have the foundations and their grants, but the issue with them is that there are so many of them, and they do grant money for speculative or even altruistic causes. They have to, because it drowns the signal in noise, and that makes those grants less reliable. Besides, tracing through the grants is hard, because there are so many of them, and when you begin your journey so to speak, the first thing you need to establish is solid ground, and those grants… But if you wish to go this route, probably an excellent starting point is Ted Turner’s UN Foundation, the early grants. He funded a fair amount of work relating to putting the finishing touched upon ‘stakeholder governance’ through the World Commission on Dams.

escapekey.substack.com/p/world-commission-on-dams

2. Your work reveals that the same "clearinghouse protocol" used in 19th-century banking now appears everywhere - from carbon credits to social credit scores. Can you explain why this particular control mechanism is so effective?

Because it addresses an actual need, which allows the solution a veneer of democracy. The clearinghouse in 1772 (iirc) originally addressed a logistical requirement, but the imposition of Bank of England power in my understanding really only became pronounced when the Bank Charter Act of 1844 succeeded in eliminating currency competition. That Act established a long-term monopoly on currency, and it also required full gold backing of currency - and this favoured the BoE, as their vaults were large compared to the competition at the time.

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-clearinghouse-protocol

The model then was shifted global through the Federal Reserve, then the BIS, while Carnegie’s focus on ‘peace’ led to Hague 1907, which then leads to Versailles. But it was with the Second World War that this framework was taken seriously. Meanwhile, politically, Bernstein, GDH Cole, Woolf (‘international government’) and Zimmern implemented it in the League of Nations, and the United Nations carried forward this structure, eventually leading to its official implementation in the third world through ‘the third system’, then full global implementation through ‘agenda 21’, before Wolfgang Reinicke in 2000 told us how it could be organised through the ‘trilateral commission’ and monetised by the likes of the WEF through his ‘trisectoral networks’. So in other words, the central banks played their hand impeccably. Meanwhile, the same principle was ‘sold’ to the people under the term, ‘subsidiarity’, which promises to ‘decentralise to the lowest appropriate extent’, which of course centralises allegedly global matters such as ‘global warming’ - which, for the record, is a scam (‘climategate’). It is absolutely impossible to model what they claim they can; it’s yet another case of a ‘black box’ taking control. And IIASA-associated Soviet international, Nikita Moiseev, was keenly aware in the 70s, yet persisted.

escapekey.substack.com/p/international-government

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-third-system

escapekey.substack.com/p/agenda-21

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-trilateral-commission

escapekey.substack.com/p/trisectoral-networks

escapekey.substack.com/p/climate-modelling

escapekey.substack.com/p/climategate

escapekey.substack.com/p/planetary-boundaries

I include these links to highlight that this is not some random ‘conspiracy theory’ of mine - this is an impeccably precise path that I have taken great care in documenting with high quality sources, often the very primary documents of origin.

3. The 'Four-Move Playbook' you've documented - crisis, intermediation, conditionality, control -seems to repeat everywhere. Can you walk us through how this played out with the “pandemic.”

That’s quite a large question to address in a Q&A, and perhaps I should write a substack post on this. But the four stages, in essence, describe

A) Crisis - which then automatically leads to a solution which - by complete coincidence - already has a solution, or as the case was wrt the scamdemic, many solutions just waiting to be deployed.

B) Intermediation - essentially, a ‘crisis’ ‘expert panel’ which in this particular case refers to the WHO, GAVI, the Gates Foundation, the World Bank, CEPI and others. These all claimed neutrality, of course, that’s part of the scam - but all ‘solutions’ strangely centralised information, vaccines, funding, policy and so forth.

C) Conditionality - unless you locked down, nations would have no access to World Bank grants and so forth. But there are many examples here; vaccine passports were a condition of movement (vaccine passports are digital ID in disguise, see Alan Gelb, Feb 2021), then there’s the pressurisation of international policy in relation to the IHR, emergency laws (eventually turned into the outrageous Pandemic Treaty)…

D) Control - the new conditionality architecture such as vaccine passports (digital ID), global health surveillance such as track-and-trace, policy harmonisation (thus eliminating national sovereignty), pandemic frameworks and so forth, all of these gradually became permanent fixtures, and some even pushed the goalposts considerable - such as the Pandemic Treaty, which under One Health provisions now in essence have cleared the road wrt lockdowns due to ‘black box’ modelled ‘pandemic potential’ crisis, all because an otter feels under the weather for a few days. If the ‘black box’ model predicts the otter’s temporal illness leads to 7 trillion deaths in Latvia thus calling for full societal lockdown, how can you realistically challenge it?

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-pandemic-treaty

4. Your research shows that many 'emergency solutions' existed years before their triggering crises. What's the most revealing example of this pre-positioning you've uncovered?

I’ve documented this through a number of posts; in ‘the black box’ I outline how it works, in ‘Dialectics by Design’ I outline how this was built to progressively establish the technocracy, and in ‘the crisis infrastructure inventory’ I take speculative guesses wrt the next crises they will call, by highlighting all the ‘solutions’ they’ve carefully and very slowly rolled into place.

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-black-box

escapekey.substack.com/p/dialectics-by-design

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-crisis-infrastructure-inventory

But probably one of the more interesting is the case of AvesTerra in the Georgetownian Dystopia. This outlines track-and-trace having been in development since 2011, with a former defense contractor being responsible for its development, justified under the AIDS crisis. This tech just fortunately was up and running by 2018. Pure coincidental, of course. Lucky us!

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-georgetownian-dystopia

5. The Tree of Life pattern appears throughout your work - from ancient mysticism to modern corporate structures. You've mentioned this is mathematically optimal for control systems. Can you explain why this pattern keeps recurring, and whether understanding its mathematical nature reveals any vulnerabilities?

Because it works, would be my guess. It probably aligns with how human reasoning actually functions. When first experiencing something new, you probably do tend to think ‘what can I do with this’, before next thinking ‘would this be structurally compatible with what we already have’ before moving on to thinking about impacts on me versus everyone else, thus leading to a conceptual understanding of what moral position one should take on an issue. This then went through Bogdanov and became systems theory in its more condensed ‘Great Chain’ 4-layer version (ie Erich Jantsch’s purposive-normative-pragmatic-empirical), with Bogdanov addressing each layer in separation with empiriomonism, proletkult, and tektology.

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-tree-of-life

escapekey.substack.com/p/connecting-the-metaphysical

escapekey.substack.com/p/alexander-bogdanov

6. Your research shows the Cambridge Apostles 'influence spanning from Keynes to modern technocracy. What was their core insight about power that made their approach so enduring?

I don’t know if they had a core insight on power, it was more that this society represented the creme of the crop of young British scientists. It was announced ideal place for the few to corrupt, because the likes of Keynes, Woolf, Russell and others were genuinely brilliant, regardless of how little enthusiasm I personally have for their ideals. You can further here add the Bloomsbury Group, who focused more on cultural aspects. But the Apostles, in my book, were the more devastatingly effective (there’s overlap between these groups, and also with the Fabian Society).

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-cambridge-apostles

escapekey.substack.com/p/a-general-theory

7. You write about "dual-layer architecture" - control mechanisms wrapped in moral justification. This seems to be why people accept systems that work against their interests. Can you give an example of how this operates in everyday life?

Sure. Covid-19 served a great many examples of ‘soft’ coercion; Vaccine passports were touted as a solution to ‘protect the vulnerable’, but soon you couldn’t travel without them. Lockdowns were to save lives, but you’d be fined if you disrespected the principle. Soon, climate policy will be enforced this way as well, it certainly is already a moral call which typically is how it begins. It’s always the same - one layer presents a ‘moral call’ (care, inclusion, equity, sustainability, …), which is then followed by a layer of coercion. In terms of climate policy, this will soon rear its head through micro-nudges through CBDC transactions. At least, that’s their plan - you being penalised financially for not playing ball.

8. Ralph Barton Perry's eight-volume blueprint from Harvard outlined a "moral economy" where all human values could be measured and managed through institutions. Today we see this in ESG scores and "stakeholder capitalism." What is it about reducing ethics to metrics that makes control so much more effective than traditional authority?

Well, it leads to a system which requires global surveillance. And that global surveillance is destined into ‘indicators’ (HDI indices, SDG indicators, Aichi Targets, …), which are then easily compared to reference values. For instance, we have SDG indicators which focus on child survival - if the surveillance data indicate deaths are above a centrally controlled threshold, then that’s considered ‘bad’. The ‘ethical’ solution here thus is bringing this down, and anyone standing in the way of these sweeping policy changes are then declared ‘unethical’ or ‘immoral’, and the MSM will smear them at every turn. This leads to a situation where disagreement becomes impossible, because no politician realistically can stand up and publicly disagree. And the media, similarly, refuse to even carry the conversation. But it furthermore is extremely convenient from the perspective of wanting society to be run by computers. Because taking public health surveillance data (or biodiversity, or climate, or health, or education, or…) and comparing to a reference value is a task a computer can execute with ease. In fact, should you take a number of indicators and compare as a vector, computers are far better at this than humans, which then leads to dot products which can be claimed to be outputs of ‘computational ethics’, which can then be shifted into policy - without a single human having a say over this process. The logical end point is managed humanity. The Total Human Ecosystem, as Zev Naveh (and Frank Egler) called this.

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-total-human-ecosystem

9. Your work documents how the 1972 US-USSR environmental cooperation agreement preceded the environmental movement, and how Soviet scientists who hid massive ecological disasters were simultaneously designing UN monitoring systems. What does this reveal about the relationship between environmental science and environmental policy?

Oh that’s simple. That it’s all fraud, and that environmentalism was fabricated as a battering ram, starting realistically with Keeling and Plass in the 1950s, accelerating through the Conservation Foundation and the horribly corrupt LBJ administration in the 60s. In ‘the missing link’ I systematically outline why it is completely impossible that the established narrative is anything but outright fraud. The section beginning with ‘Well, in that case, please do answer me these questions:’ in essence works to outline the sheer absurdity of it all, even down to the alleged ‘acid rain’ claims in Scandinavia, which discounted Yuri Izrael’s massive plume covering a 2000-kilometer stretch in the Western parts of the Soviet Union, which the IIASA just astonishingly didn’t realistically factor into their calculations. But there are 15 questions, and the only realistic conclusion here is that it’s all fraud.

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-missing-link

escapekey.substack.com/p/deception-day

escapekey.substack.com/p/a-climate-chronology

escapekey.substack.com/p/inaugurated-in-dallas-part-4

10. The term "stakeholder" appears throughout your research as a key deception. Who are the real stakeholders in this system, and why does the language matter so much?

Well, I haven’t yet answered this question, so you’ll have to be patient. In the meantime, do read up on how the ‘stakeholders’ are picked in their ‘inclusive’ (ie, ‘exclusive’) and ‘participatory’ manner. I’ve left plenty of hints, however. But are you aware that ‘stakeholders’ who ‘fail to agree’ are ‘iterated’ (ie, replaced)? Because ‘agreement’ is very, very important. And are you aware that ‘stakeholders’ can be both chosen in advisory and decision-taking capacity? And are you aware that all decisions reached can be overridden top-down (ie, subsidiarity)? Another is the order in which ‘stakeholders’ are selected. For instance, the Lancet Covid-19 commission, covered in the post on Jeffrey Sachs… of the 6 first members, not a single one was a health specialist. Not one. Yet, four were SDG specialists. What does that tell you?

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-stakeholder-selection-process

escapekey.substack.com/p/switching-sides-the-story-of-jeffrey

11. You've documented that during the Cold War, both sides were developing identical control architectures - from RAND in the West to Bogdanov's Tektology in the East. If capitalism and communism were secretly converging on the same technocratic endpoint, what was the Cold War actually about?

From 1945-1953 it might have been real. I don’t think Stalin was meant to come to power - I think Bogdanov was meant to take power. That would explain why Lenin was deeply distrustful of him, why he bulldozed his Proletkult movement, yet he never eliminated him - why? Because certain powers were protecting him? During Stalin, VOOP were further protected. And Khrushchev clearly saw the environmentalism vector. But - speculating - Khrushchev was a notoriously unstable character, and following the Cuban missile crisis which led to JFK’s distrust of the PPBS/centrally planned systems, Khrushchev probably didn’t align with the narrative, and was thus removed from power. Everything following Khrushchev then aligns, not only with the PPBS, May 23 1972, IIASA/Moiseev development, but finally with Gorbachev whose late 1980s speeches gives it away. ‘To feel responsible for the world’s destiny’ was one of those substack posts that I could not believe didn’t gain further traction, because Gorbachev lays it out, himself, in great detail. In order to fuse the East and West under the claimed environmentalism, the Soviet threat must appear to vanish. That he stated in iirc a speech of his in November 1987, just a few years before the Soviet Union allegedly perished. And this then aligns perfectly with Golitsyn’s Perestroika Deception (though Golitsyn didn’t realise that environmentalism was the vector).

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-missing-link

escapekey.substack.com/p/to-feel-responsible-for-the-worlds

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-green-perestroika-deception

12. You've documented how the same people rotate between the IMF, central banks, climate organizations, and tech companies - what you call "personnel recycling." What's the most egregious example of this revolving door that you've uncovered, and what does it tell us about how the system maintains continuity?

Mark Carney and Andrew Bailey are both bad, bad cases. Also, I wish more people would read ‘In Tandem’ because it gives it away. And it outs the Fabians as fronts of the BoE.

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-financial-stability-board

escapekey.substack.com/p/in-tandem

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-fabian-societys-keir-starmer

13. For someone who sees these patterns clearly, what's the most effective form of resistance that doesn't just feed back into the system?

At this stage, awareness. Awareness of what’s going on. So few even realise how it all works, how can you resist when all you have is a few memes calling Klaus Schwab evil? This will become more of a focus in future posts of mine, but I begun addressing this issue in ‘Plato’s Cave’. In ‘Broken Mirror’ I address how responsibility is being stripped through ‘black box’ filtering.

escapekey.substack.com/p/platos-cave

escapekey.substack.com/p/broken-mirror

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-black-box

14. What aspect of this control architecture do you think is most vulnerable to disruption right now?

The centrality of ‘ethics’ and ‘morality’ which runs through it all. When people realise that they are being emotionally exploited through ‘moral reasoning’, then it’s game over. The Earth Charter is fundamentally about a planetary ethic, Hans Kung launched the global ethic drive in 1993, the collapse of Enron led to a global business ethic thus ESG/CSR and so forth. I personally snapped to this probably around January-February 2024 (‘the ethical approach’), later summarised as ‘global governance through global ethics’. I was initially amazed at how no-one would even challenge this. Not even idiots calling me ‘conspiracy theorists’ would throw mud. This initially puzzled me, but it then gradually dawned upon me that they don’t even want the discussion in the first place because it’s the very cornerstone of their plans. Everything travels through what’s allegedly ‘ethic’. And why? Because the best kind of dictatorship is the one you agree with, because it makes you feel ‘righteous’. Cue all those who attacked you for disagreeing with protocol during the scamdemic, in the process refusing to discuss, and just incessantly appealing to alleged authority an purely emotional points of debate.

escapekey.substack.com/p/a-global-ethic

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-earth-charter

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-enron-code-of-ethics

escapekey.substack.com/p/the-ethical-approach

15. You're actively investigating new connections. What patterns are you seeing emerge that suggest where this system is headed next, and where can readers follow your ongoing work?

I think my investigative work is coming to a conclusion. I keep track of the elements of the scam that I’m yet to address, and I have 3 articles under development that should make the case clear. After that, it’s tightening the overall argument, and making it more easily publicly consumed - because a lot of my substack posts have been fairly complex, and - of course - very long. I never focused on memes which gain traction because they’re easily understood and appeal to emotion, mainly because I never felt they explained a thing. I don’t think I’ll spend much time on this approach because I’m not much of a comedian. However, what I can do is make content more accessible, while pointing in the direction of more complex posts for in-depth explanations. Hopefully, that’ll gain more traction. The other track is beginning to discuss strategies to derail their plans. This is not to be understood in committing crimes, but rather making people aware of what they unknowingly participate in. The first step in this regard was announced through ‘Plato’s Cave’. Once people snap out of their daydreams about how ‘good’ it is that the WHO ‘protect’ us, the game is up. Question what’s declared ‘ethical’, and why all ‘solutions’ to ‘ethical problems’ always lead to the same clearinghouse ‘expert’ panels. As for their future plans - I took a speculative guess in that regard in ’12 simple steps to rule the world’ Finally, substack is my primary platform. Otherwise, I’m on telegram.

escapekey.substack.com/p/platos-cave

escapekey.substack.com/p/12-simple-steps-to-rule-the-world

escapekey.substack.com

t.me/escapekey

I appreciate you being here.

If you've found the content interesting, useful and maybe even helpful, please consider supporting it through a small paid subscription. While 99% of everything here is free, your paid subscription is important as it helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. It also helps keep it free for those that cannot afford to pay.

Please make full use of the Free Libraries.

Unbekoming Interview Library: Great interviews across a spectrum of important topics.

Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Concise summaries of important books.

Stories

I'm always in search of good stories, people with valuable expertise and helpful books. Please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com

Baseline Human Health

Watch and share this profound 21-minute video to understand and appreciate what health looks like without vaccination.