Today's systems of NGOs isn't accidental - it was laid out in a vision 30 years ago by none other than George Soros.
I joined @MikeBenzCyber on a livestream last night, where he was kind enough to walk us through the basics.
As my bio says, I am just a tool builder. I am not a historian or academic. The information in this thread is common knowledge for many. It wasn't for me.
I want to walk you through an essay which Mike pointed me to- a chilling essay written in 1993 by George Soros, "Toward a New World Order: The Future of NATO"
The essay lays out a new mission for NATO after the cold war. NATO would no longer be a defensive alliance against Russia - that is obsolete. Instead, it would proactively go out and shape other countries into "open societies." "[๐ต๐จ๐ป๐ถ'๐ ๐๐๐] ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐."
Soros re-defined peace and security not as absence of war, but in terms of how many countries are "open societies."
In other words, NATO's new mission: if a country doesn't adopt Western-style capitalism and liberalism, NATO should step in... politically, economically, and eventually, militarily.
๐ง What is an "Open Society?"
The term was coined by philosopher Karl Popper and expanded in this 1993 essay. Soros, of course, would go on to build a coalition of NGOs and interfere in the US Elections under his "Open Society Foundation" banner.
Here are the elements of an "Open Society" in theory:
๐นDemocracy
๐นFree markets
๐นCivil rights
๐นMinority protections
๐นTransparency
๐นA "global" rules-based order
In practice, Open Society means something very different. Let's go through the essay.
Translation:
You're an open society if you accept our interpretation of pluralism and Western values. Otherwise, we'll label you "closed," even if your people elect their leaders or protect cultural traditions. And this gives us pretext to justify military actions on you.
Translation: We pour aid into countries that remake themselves in Soros' image. And no amount of money is too much to accomplish that- because, again, we have redefined "peace" to mean "as many countries follow the Open Society model as possible."
And if aid fails, then military intervention is next.
Take a moment to think about this.
What do you think this means for anyone who is opposed to foreign aid?
They are agents of "closed societies."
They are a threat to national security.
Ergo...
They are a threat to democracy.
This point is perhaps the most ironic one. A "Democracy" according to George Soros is not decided by its own citizens. Instead, NATO's new mission is to impose their own ideology on others and build countries which agree with Soros.
Translation - if bribing a country with endless amount of foreign aid doesn't work to transform them from inside out, then NATO will intervene. And that's exactly what NATO did with Bosnia in 1994.
Translation: NATO's new job is not to defend member states, but to expand its presence eastward and actively shape the internal politics of neighboring states, especially the post-Soviet bloc.
This isn't a theoretical essay. Washington implemented the playbook.
๐๏ธ 1994: Partnership for Peace launched
๐๏ธ 1999: NATO admits Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic
๐๏ธ 2004: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria join
๐๏ธ 2008โ2022: Ukraine, Georgia seek NATO pathway
๐๏ธ 2023: Finland joins NATO, Sweden follows
Why did everyone go along with this model? Simple. Enormous amounts of money was involved. Here's a list who benefited:
๐งโ๐ผ NGO Networks (Open Society Foundations, USAID, NED)
โ More influence, more contracts, more justification for expansion
๐๏ธ Bureaucrats & Diplomats
โ Career advancement via โdemocracy-buildingโ missions
๐ฐ International Donors & Foundations
โ Steer reforms through grant-making power
๐ณ IMF & World Bank
โ Lend to reforming nations in exchange for austerity + influence
๐ข Private Equity & Multinationals
โ Buy up privatized industries on the cheap (telecoms, oil, infrastructure)
๐๏ธ Western-Aligned Politicians
โ Receive aid, praise, and protection... even if theyโre corrupt or undemocratic
๐ Post-Communist Oligarchs
โ Enrich themselves through Western-advised privatization
๐ฐ Journalists & Activists
โ Funded by Western grants, shielded from local accountability
๐งโ๐ซ Professors & Think Tanks
โ Get fellowships, scholarships, media access for pushing "open" values
๐ฑ Big Tech
โ Enter new markets post-liberalization (data access, censorship tools, ad revenue)
๐๏ธ Mainstream Media
โ Shape narratives, control legitimacy labels: โreformerโ vs โstrongmanโ
And if you dare to cut off that money spigot... in other words, if you practice any kind of populist principles or try and assert agency for your own nation:
FINAL NOTE:
Don't confuse George Soros's model of NATO promoting "open societies" with being anti-communist.
Soros didn't oppose the Soviet Union because it was communist.
He opposed it because it was nationalist. It resisted foreign influence and maintained centralized control over its own ideology and borders.
His vision of an "open society" blends left-wing radicalism (identity politics, anti-tradition, anti-sovereignty) with globalist structures (NGOs, Western institutions, and transnational finance).
The more you read his writings, the clearer it becomes that "Open Society" is a circular label for regimes that accept Soros-style politics.
Anyone who resists this framework is cast as an enemy of "democracy." And if you're MAGA, that means you.
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Their codes of ethics, practice standards, certification rules, and policy priorities now embed SDG language: without public debate or member votes.
Here are the receipts. ๐
And as always, patience as I pull this thread together:
American Nursing Association (ANA) -- representing over 4 million members, states in their 2025 Code of Ethics that "Nurses and nursing organizations work toward the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations (UN)"
The UN SDGs are a comprehensive political framework which endorses unfettered migration. American Medial Association policy H-65.938 endorses the UN SDG in that.
AMA represents almost 300,000 health care professionals.
๐งต THREAD: NCRI's Analysis: How Abuse of ๐'s Platform boosted Nick Fuentes
A few days ago, @elonmusk got "ratioed" by Nick Fuentes.
The air quotes are intentional. There was nothing organic about the ratio.
This morning, Network Contagion Research Institute (@ncri_io) released a forensic breakdown of how Nick Fuentes' sudden rise over the past year was driven by synthetic amplification, foreign engagement clusters, and coordinated raid behavior.
I read the full report and asked NCRI some clarifying questions about their methodology. The findings are staggering.
As always, patience as I pull this thread together. ๐
@elonmusk @ncri_io The topline claim: Fuentesโs "influence" did not emerge entirely organically. Instead, it was manufactured by unusually fast, unusually concentrated, and unusually foreign engagement patterns, the kind normally associated with coordinated manipulation networks.
๐งต THREAD: What is the International Rescue Committee?
Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the accused, worked for the International Rescue Committee.
He is also being reported as working for the CIA.
Given this, is the International Rescue Committee a CIA front? I'm going to do a deep dive here.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread:
The first thing that jumps out when analyzing the IRC is its government grants. Out of its nearly 1.5 billion dollars, it has nearly a billion in grants. Their USAID grant in Afghanistan went towards "Accessible and Quality Basic Education (AQBE) Activity."
Yeah, sounds like intelligence work.
If I'm reading this right -- I am not sure I am reading this -- it seems like almost all of their government grants are from the USA. This is fairly unusual for a charity NGO of this size; often humanitarian NGOs will be co-financed by foreign governments.
๐งต THREAD: CAIR accused of abusing federal funds in report
A few days ago, Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) put out a damning report on Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); specifically, the California branch. I took the time to independently verify their claims -- and can affirm they are quite damning.
CAIR, if you remember, is a Muslim Brotherhood front and was recently declared a terrorist organization by Governor Abbott.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread.
The report opens with a startling claim - that CAIR-CA has abused millions of dollars.
Here's a prior thread where CAIR got exposed as being tied to Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas:
Let me repeat. A literal revolutionary Communist who went to Cuba attempted to bring the "Revolution" back to the United States, then her group deleted their website right before Charlie's assassination.
That's how you know the Dignity Index will never be used against the left.
๐งต๐จ THREAD: How Mormon Women for Ethical Government fits into a State Departmentโbacked effort to remake America ๐จ
Every Utahn needs to read this and be aware of the coup that's happening within their borders.
Recently, Mormon Women for Ethical Government (MWEG) secured a court victory and a safe Democratic seat in a new map through a judge's ruling.
The Utah legislature must impeach the judge -- not only because of their activism, but also to send a message: Utah will not permit outside backed NGOs to infiltrate and succeed in their plan to turn America into a democracy.
That's right. Mormon Women for Ethical Government is not who they seem to be. They are part of an "interfaith" ecosystem to infiltrate Utah and LDS and transform America from the bottom up.
I have the receipts.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
The short version is: The group coordinating everything is the Inter-Movement Impact Project under the Thriving Together US framework, funded by and executed by ex-USAID employees. Their goal: carry out One Common Purpose through NED director Rachel Kleinfeld's paper, and transform America into a true democracy from the bottom up by changing primary laws, creating "fair" anti-gerrymandering, forcing equitable representation, expanding the House, putting limits on the SCOTUS, countering disinformation, and much more.