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 NATO would no longer be a defensive alliance against Russia - that is obsolete.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
๐จ๐งต THREAD: Braver Angels says they're bipartisan and just bringing people together. Their own leadership coordinates with an anti-Trump political infrastructure network.๐จ
This thread is not about BA's members. Many are sincere, and I thank @wilksopinion and @JohnRWoodJr for communicating with me.
This is about the infrastructure steering them: IMIP.
On August 18, 2025, Harry Boyte, a former Democratic Socialists of America board member, YES, that DSA announced Maury Giles' new role as Braver Angels CEO on video and their shift in strategy from depolarization to civic action:
"David has put together a featured plenary at the National Conference on Citizenship... which will be a launch of a new stage for Braver Angels that some of us have been working on for a while."
IMIP is the Inter-Movement Impact Project. It coordinates BA's strategic direction. Its own May 2025 document quotes David Brooks approvingly:
"Short term: Stop Trump. Foil his efforts. Pile on the lawsuits."
Braver Angels' members are bipartisan. Their leadership is adjacent to anti-Trump infrastructure. This thread has all the receipts.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread.๐
@wilksopinion @JohnRWoodJr IMIP's own document from May 5, 2025 quotes David Brooks and calls for a nationwide civic uprising:
"Short term: Stop Trump. Foil his efforts. Pile on the lawsuits. Turn some of his followers against him."
Then: "IMIP has been working to help answer [this] since late 2017."
@wilksopinion @JohnRWoodJr Walt Roberts runs IMIP. June 30, 2025:
"We've adopted Rachel Kleinfeld's strategy number four as our thing... a broad-based, multi-stranded, pro-democracy movement."
Flood the country with NGOs (including Braver Angels) is strategy #4. What are the other four strategies?
I appreciate you engaging, sincerely. You're one of the few people in this space who actually responded, and your tone was decent. So I want to return the courtesy... and this is my first multi-part Hello.
You wrote: "Is any organized effort that involves people working from across the aisle necessarily a conspiracy?"
No. It isn't. And I haven't called it one. I've called it what it is: a funded, coordinated, strategically managed field.
Let me start with you.
You are the National Ambassador of Braver Angels. Braver Angels pulled in $5,651,273 in 2024, up from $958,681 in 2019... mostly from major foundations.
But your public videos repeatedly frame it as a "grassroots" or "national citizens" movement.
These two things cannot both be true. A $5.6 million-per-year operation funded predominantly by major foundations is not a grassroots citizens movement. It is a professionally managed nonprofit. There is nothing wrong with that... unless you describe it as something it isn't.
(2/4)
Now, here's where it gets interesting. And here's where I think you may genuinely not know the full picture.
In the above video clip, you say:
"We are in this moment where the depolarization movement I think is beginning to coalesce. I mean, I think you and I are in a position to sort of feel it. Braver Angels, Millennial Action Project, all of the amazing organizations in New Pluralists, National Conversations Project."
You named New Pluralists by name. So let's talk about what New Pluralists actually is.
In 2017, Mark Gerzon, president of the Mediators Foundation, consultant to the United Nations Development Programme, distinguished fellow at the EastWest Institute, organized a private meeting of major political funders at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund's Pocantico Conference Center. Representatives of both the Koch and Soros networks were in the room. The project was co-launched by Stephen Heintz, President of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Out of that meeting came the New Pluralists.
Today, New Pluralists is a funder collaborative, not a standalone nonprofit. It is fiscally sponsored by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors. Templeton, Hewlett, Einhorn, Fetzer, Klarman, Lubetzky, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund are all partners. MacKenzie Scott gave $4 million. The stated goal is $100 million over a decade.
Braver Angels is listed as one of approximately 60 "Field Builders." So is Tim Shriver's Dignity Index. So is Horizons Project. So is David French.
The same foundations that fund the New Pluralists collaborative also fund Braver Angels directly. Templeton gave $1.26 million to Braver Angels. Hewlett gave at least $75,000 plus undisclosed seed funding. They are also governing partners of New Pluralists. The money goes to the funder collaborative AND to the organizations the collaborative funds. It is the same pipeline.
You described this as "a moment where the depolarization movement is beginning to coalesce." New Pluralist's strategic plan describes it as a $100 million coordinated investment in field infrastructure. Both descriptions are accurate. The difference is yours sounds organic. Theirs sounds like what it is.
(3/4)
You wrote: "I do know Tim Shriver. He and I did a Braver Angels podcast together."
Good. Then you know who runs the Dignity Index.
The Dignity Index is operated by Project Unite. Its theoretical framework was developed by Donna Hicks, a Harvard specialist in international conflict resolution. Its framework was designed for mediating foreign wars. Then it was applied to scoring American political speech on a 1-8 contempt-to-dignity scale. In Utah. And it was piloted at UVU, the same campus where Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
One of the official websites to come out of the Biden White House's "United We Stand" summit was dignity[.]us. That URL now points to the Dignity Index.
Braver Angels has a formal partnership with the Dignity Index. You announced it. The pledge: "connect all 124 Braver Angels alliances" with Dignity Index training.
You wrote in your thread: "The Dignity Index, as I understand it, is meant to be a tool for holding all politicians accountable."
With respect... "as I understand it" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. The Dignity Index was built on a foreign conflict resolution framework, launched from a White House summit that identified populist movements as domestic threats, and piloted in the same Utah institutional ecosystem that was hosting MWEG conferences for three consecutive years at UVU. None of that requires a conspiracy. All of it is documented. Most of it is on their own websites.
๐งต๐จ THREAD: Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University. Within TWO HOURS, leaders of 7 "bridge-building" organizations assembled on a conference call. Why so fast? Because UVU was THEIR campus. ๐จ
This is Maury Giles, incoming CEO of Braver Angels, admitting on camera at the National Conference on Citizenship:
"Within two hours of the assassination, a group of us, all Utahns, we gathered on a call. We'd become friends over the last 5 years through our work in the community. And we also happen to be leaders in seven different national organizations that work in civic renewal."
Two hours. Seven national organizations. But this wasn't a spontaneous reaction to a tragedy. This was a network protecting its home turf. Because UVU wasn't just the place where Kirk was shot. It was the institutional center of the entire bridge-building / Dignity Index apparatus... and had been for years.
And the kicker?
These seven national organizations don't hide their own intent: replicate color revolution tactics in the United States. And, yes, that includes MWEG - Mormon Women for Ethical Government.
I have the receipts... they all admitted this on camera.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
MWEG on their own GROW video:
"UVU has sponsored for us for the past three years so that we can have it there on their campus."
UVU SPONSORED their annual conference for three consecutive years. UVU is not a neutral venue in this story. It's a partner.
A speaker on MWEG's own Civics Learning Week video from 2023 admits she got a faculty position at UVU partly BECAUSE she was involved with Braver Angels... the same organization whose incoming CEO organized the two-hour call after Kirk was killed.
๐งตDC JURY POOL THREAD: DC students can't read. But they can convict.
DC spends more per student than anywhere in America, $31,629/year.
Most kids can't read at grade level.
But DCPS found the time to make progressive activist training mandatory for every student, grades 6-12.
Those students become DC jurors. Full receipts below.
As always, patience as I pull together the thread. ๐
DC is where federal cases against political figures are tried. All 1,400+ January 6 prosecutions. Stone. Bannon. Navarro. Trump's own federal indictment.
The jury pool draws ONLY from DC residents.
DC voted 92.1% for Biden in 2020. 5.4% for Trump.
The DC Circuit ruled in 2024 (US v. Webster) that this political composition does not make DC juries unfair.
That case effectively foreclosed ALL venue challenges for Jan 6 and politically sensitive federal cases.
๐งต THREAD: How mass immigration came to Japan's shores
๐ saw a lovely cultural exchange between Americans and Japanese this past week, which got me wondering how and why Muslims came to Japan... so I spent the weekend looking into it.
Japan went from officially having "no immigration policy" to a formal system with a cap of 820,000 foreign workers. Japan's Muslim population has gone from ~110,000 (2010) to ~420,000 (end of 2024). There are now 149 mosques.
The bill that created this was passed at 4:00 AM in December 2018. The opposition called it a "carte blanche." Deliberations were compressed. It passed anyway.
What I found:
๐น Three consecutive foreign ministers trained at American universities.
๐น A foundation run by a Trilateral Commission member and a former US intelligence chief.
๐น A $69 million fellowship network seeding 69 universities in 44 countries.
๐น A UN framework signed the same month as the 4 AM vote.
๐น Sixteen bilateral labor agreements managed through a single coordinating body.
๐น A Japan-specific immigration program drafted by a Japanese national while he was interning inside the US Senate.
In July 2025, a party that didn't exist before COVID won 14 seats and finished third in the popular vote. By February 2026, the LDP won its biggest parliamentary majority since 1955, running on tighter immigration.
Unfortunately, Americans and Japanese have more in common beyond love of BBQ. They have the mass migration problem in common. Receipts below. ๐
As always, patience as I pull together the thread.
Japan's Muslim population:
2010: ~110,000
2024: ~420,000
Nearly 4x in 14 years.
Mosques: 4 in 1980. 149 as of 2024.
This is not organic. Someone built a pipeline.
The Specified Skilled Worker program. SSW.
Original cap (2019): 345,000 workers.
New cap (March 2024): 820,000 workers.
The law that created SSW passed at **4:00 AM** on December 8, 2018.
The opposition called it a "carte blanche." Deliberations were rushed.
๐งตTHREAD, NO KINGS IN THE SENATE?: The Helsinki Commission, the almighty foreign democracy operations arm of Congress
The No Kings crowd marched today against the one branch of government where you can actually see who's in charge. They should try the Senate.
At 3 AM on Friday, Thune passed a funding bill by voice vote. Funded everything except immigration enforcement. Just completely gave into the Democratic demands.
Inside that Senate sits a body called the Helsinki Commission. No FOIA. No Inspector General. No records retention policy. It operates in permanent darkness, and what's hiding in there makes the 3 AM vote look transparent.
Look at the two images below.
Left: the booking photo.
Right: the knife Capitol Police seized.
A Helsinki Commission staffer drew this on a Capitol Police officer. March 8, 2019. He was arrested and booked. He was never fired. He was also photographed in Ukrainian military camo at a command post near Bakhmut. Investigators documented $87,400 in cash.
Both parties buried it. The Ryan Routh assassination attempt connection sits in plain sight. The same NGO network running today's color revolution marches connects to the same Helsinki Commission infrastructure.
Receipts below.
As always, patience as I pull together the post. ๐
@shellenberger This photo shows Parker at a Ukrainian military command post near Bakhmut, wearing Ukrainian camo, studying operational maps. According to the investigation, he made 7+ trips to the war zone. I could find no evidence these trips were formally authorized by Congress.