Venezuela, Greenland, Palestine, Iran: The Geopolitical Consolidation - James Corbett in Kla.TV Interview

21.02.2026 | www.kla.tv/40399

Interviewer: So great to have James Corbett back on KLA TV. James, thank you so much for agreeing to yet another interview. James Corbett: Thank you for having me on Interviewer: I would like James Corbett's take on America's strange behavior vis-a-vis Iran, Greenland, Venezuela, Cuba, and Palestine. Now, and I know that's a lot. We could do two hours. But I wonder if you want to put all of this in a nice nutshell, encapsulating the insane, well, let's just say encapsulating the U.S. stance, or do you want to take these one by one? James Corbett: Let's take them in two groups. I would say that Iran and Palestine and what is happening there definitely have a relation. And the common factor in the U.S. stance in both of those situations is, of course, Israel. And I think Israel's desire to undermine Iran as a potential regional rival fully explains why the U.S. has the stance that it does against Iran. Does anyone, anyone in the entire world believe at this point that the U.S. government is involved in trying to destabilize the Iranian regime because they care about the Iranian people and they want to see democracy flourish and blah, blah. Of course not. We are old enough to understand that that is... absolute nonsense and tosh. So what is the real answer there? Well, I think it has more to do with the the Zionist faction that is looking to create the greater Israel and recognizing that Iran would be a bulwark against the creation of such a thing and obviously with Hezbollah and other such things operating against Israel and of course in Palestine as well. And to whatever extent that Trump may or may not actually be the wheeler dealer businessman that we we understand his public persona to be and that maybe he really is just trying to get Trump-Gaza going with these casinos on the beach and whatever else is supposedly going to happen in those AI monstrosity fantasies that are being constructed by Trump's fans online, to whatever extent that that might be a thought in his head it is only there because, of course, he is in really working with his friend, his partner in crime, literally, unconvicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu. So I think that that explains that side of the geopolitical aisle. But when we talk about the Don Roe Doctrine and its various implications for Venezuela and Cuba and Greenland and other things in the Western Hemisphere, I think we have to understand this in the context of an interesting map that one could find at the Cornell Library. It has it online in very high res if you want to go download it. It's called the Technate of America. And it was a map that was produced in 1940 by Howard Scott, who was a complete charlatan who somehow or other managed to worm his way into academic and upper crust circles in the 1920s and 30s in order to create something called Technocracy Inc, which was an organization that was dedicated to the social engineering of society by technocrats, mostly engineers and scientists who would know how to precisely balance the inputs and outputs in the economy in order to stop the big swings in the economy that was, of course, the defining characteristic of life for people living through the Great Depression, wondering how are, you know, capitalism has failed, how are we going to solve this? Well, there was Howard Scott and his friend um King Hubbard, who people will know as Hubbard's Peak, aka Peak Oil, comes from a Shell Oil researcher along those lines of oil, et cetera. Anyway, he came up with the peak oil. He also wrote the technocracy study course, which is this voluminous study course about how the technocrats will rule over their technate. And so they said, we don't want governments. We don't want elected politicians. We don't want any of that. We are going to set up a technate. And the technate of America will include, and there is the map that you can go and look up online, and it includes Greenland. And interestingly, it includes part of Venezuela, and it includes Cuba, and it includes Panama, and Central America, et cetera. And all of this will be conjoined in a single unit called the Technate of America that will be stewarded over by these technocrats. Now obviously Technocracy Inc. is long, well actually it still exists, but it is a Rump organization at this point. But the idea of technocracy continues to thrive in the 21st century. And you know there are some interesting historical parallels with some of the people who make their presence known on the international stage, even to this day, like say Elon Musk, who people may or may not know, his grandfather, his Canadian grandfather, was literally a card-carrying member of Technocracy, Inc. in Saskatchewan back in the 1930s before he was run out of Canada and ended up in South Africa, where the Musk family originates from. His grandfather, Joshua Haldeman. Look that up and fact-check me. Interviewer: Okay. James Corbett: But it is true. His grandfather was a literal technocrat. And then you get Elon Musk tweeting such things as, you know, „preparing for the Martian technocracy“, Et cetera. So I think technocracy is the lens through which we have to understand this unfolding Don Row doctrine. What is really going to unfold from this is the consolidation of the Western hemisphere into this technate of America. Interviewer: Now, this consolidation, I mean, it's it's just too fantastic to imagine that it's going to happen in the very near future as an invasion of these countries. I mean, you can't foresee boots on the ground in Greenland, Venezuela are Cuba, can you? James Corbett: No, well, no, I will qualify that. But for example with Greenland. So we saw this play out, obviously, over the course of the past month. Interviewer: Yeah. James Corbett: Suddenly the World Economic Forum. The main topic of discussion is, will Trump invade Greenland? And you have NATO talking about stationing troops there and Canada was going to come to Greenland's defense, all of this craziness. Interviewer: Yeah. James Corbett: And then what eventuated is Trump announced: Well, we're not going to take it by force. And so it seemed like just another „Art of the deal“. Trump obviously getting people to talk and think along one line and then retreating so that it seems like we can cut a deal. But all of that, of course, was distraction because, in fact, the U.S. already has a military base operating and functioning in Greenland right now. It has had a longstanding post-World War II relationship with Denmark to situate American forces on Greenland, they have been operating there for over half a century at this point, 80 years or so. So the idea that there would ever need to be a full-on American invasion in order to make these things happen does seem fanciful, but that's the perhaps that's the point. No, the the military side of this is not the operative part of it. It is to some extent about securing resources, including of course the rare earth deposits and other such things that obviously Greenland has in abundance and that are sitting out there for the taking in this new mad scramble for the Arctic that's going on geopolitically, but more specifically, the securing of the resources for the Technate of America, as in for this coming political consolidation unit that is coming into view right now, And I think we've been been being prepared for the consolidation of these grander geopolitical regional units for some time now, because we've been seeing the NATO versus BRICS sort of idea of some sort of multipolar struggle taking place on the grand chessboard of geopolitics for some time. And I think we've been being prepared for the idea that it's going to be some sort of consolidation of a North American slash Western hemispheric continental regional security apparatus of some sort. Will it be literally a government that will consolidate all of these with boots on the ground? I don't think that is the most likely way of doing it. But some sort of consolidation politically, economically, and in terms of supply lines and supply chains, which is probably the operative part of this going forward into the 21st century. Interviewer: I want to preface this question with a pre-question, and that is this. Consider the two wars in Iraq and the interim when President Clinton was in power in the United States and we still had an economic embargo on Iraq. We were still had a no-fly zone. I think we still might have been bombing them. Certainly, we were blocking off many kinds of supplies, including, as far as my research, or as far as I know, medicine and food. So could you consider that that interim period was also simply a continuation of the war and the war actually did not end? James Corbett: Absolutely, yes. No, of course, the the war just took a different form. And it was, of course, concentrated on, at that time, the civilian population. And that was actually known and deliberate. Because, of course, there's that infamous clip of Madeleine Albright on 60 Minutes in the 1990s talking about the half million Iraqi children who had died as a result of the sanctions. Interviewer: Yes. James Corbett: And she said, well, you know, the the price is worth it. which of course is that infamous clip that hopefully people have seen by this point. So yes, this was just warfare by another means. Interviewer: Warfare by another means. So if we consider economic strangleholds as warfare, and then we consider the case of Venezuela and Cuba and the fact that, well, I could just list the oil tanker that was heading, I think, from Venezuela to Cuba. A country that's that's kind of in tough straits anyway and I think for them, removing one oil tanker could be quite significant. So in the sense that we have an economic stranglehold on these countries, are we at war with Venezuela and Cuba? Is the U.S. at war with Venezuela and Cuba now? James Corbett: I suppose clearly there was a state of warfare going on with Venezuela over the past few months. Perhaps that state of warfare no longer pertains simply because America has seemingly achieved its objective of being able to steer the current Venezuelan government in whichever way it wants. To the extent that the Venezuelan government now complies with American dictates, then I suppose the state of warfare doesn't exist. But the threat of warfare, of course, certainly does. And so, yes, there is still elements of an economic blockade, but that I think that is really just positioning in order to get the American corporate interests in there to take over, essentially, the the oil industry, et cetera, there. We've already seen, of course, that was what was explicitly put on the table as the reason for Venezuela the Venezuela takeover. I don't think that's the full story, but at any rate, that is contributory to it. And so as long as the the current Venezuelan government is compliant with American demands, then I think America is happy not to be involved in that warfare. Interviewer: Yes. Do you think these corporate interests will have luck in Cuba as well? Do you think that the Cuban people will be soon blessed by McDonald's and BlackRock and everything we enjoy in the United States? James Corbett: If the current administration gets its way, it does seem that that is where this is trending. And perhaps if they don't get their way, at least not in the way that they want with some sort of spontaneous people's uprising as the people start to rise up against their government um as a result of these strangulation blockades ultimately having their political effect. If that does not eventuate, then we've already seen the precedent is for the president of the United States to send in the Navy SEAL Team 6 or whoever needs to go in in order to abduct whoever claims to be in power today and do whatever else needs to be done. Can we possibly say that anything would be off the table? No, of course. I think anything that we have seen already eventuate, like, for example, in Venezuela, is very much on the table for Cuba. Interviewer: OK, now, when you say if the current administration gets its way, do American geopolitical interests align with, let's say, globalist geopolitical interests? Or is Trump somehow this guy that is, you know, anti-Davos, anti-WEF, et cetera, et cetera? James Corbett: I think any time that we try to generalize from individuals into groups, we start to run into the problem of overgeneralization. So it is not, I think, fair to talk about the the administration as a singular unit. No, it is composed of various people, various powerful nodes in a vast network. And some of those nodes have more power and influence than others. But combined, certain less powerful nodes may be able to combine in order to overpower some of the more powerful nodes. And if people want an inside look at how such operations really work within an administration, different factions can fight within the the same administration for different policies, Peter Dale Scott, a veteran, of course, researcher, Peter Dale Scott, had a a very illustrative example of that in his book „On the Road to 9-11“. There was a chapter about the the so-called Vulcans fighting with the other faction within the Carter administration. And I can't remember what pithy epithet they were given, but at any rate, they were fighting about the American foreign policy under Carter, for example. And he goes and outlines the different factions and what they wanted and who ultimately ended up winning in that fight. And of course, we know what eventuated with, say, Brzezinski and Operation Cyclone and the funding of the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan, etc. So it doesn't mean that everyone is working on the same page towards the same goal. And I think there probably are many, perhaps even most people working at that level within an administration, within a certain political nation-state unit who genuinely believe they are working in the interests of their nation-state and their nation-state's allies. Interviewer: Yes. James Corbett: But I think there are other, probably much more powerful nodes of interest in that network who operate above the nation-state level and are thinking on that globalist level. And it is the interaction of those different things. And when their agendas meet, we are more likely to see some sort of grand, deep event happen, like 9-11 or what have you. Interviewer: Okay. Okay. Last two questions are on the Trump administration. And have you heard the latest news from Marco Rubio in a press conference? James Corbett: I have not. Interviewer: Let me read you the title. You'll be impressed. Rubio exposes the 50-year plot. Marco Rubio blew the doors open on the 1977 CFR report outlining the controlled disintegration of the U.S. economy. So... Should we thank Rubio for this? Because we knew nothing about the CFR before he enlightened us today. James Corbett: Well, not if you listen to the mainstream news, I guess. Yes, I don't know. I'm intrigued. I want to know more. I am highly skeptical that this is going to be some sort of definitive takedown of the CFR or its machinations, but I'm all ears. Interviewer: Okay. I got this from a group, a pretty popular group. I think they have like close to half million viewers on on YouTube called Promethean Updates. Have you ever heard of them? James Corbett: The name rings a bell, but I'm not, I certainly don't follow them consciously, no. Interviewer: Yeah, I think they are kind of leftovers from the old... Oh, who was the guy that was on all the campuses and he'd come around and tell you about water projects from Canada and stuff? He was kind of a Roosevelt style populist. James Corbett: Oh, not LaRouche. Interviewer: Yeah, yeah. These are former LaRouches who have, I think, have taken over the LaRouche organization. And they're very, very pro-Trump these days. And they say that Trump is extremely in favor of the revitalization of the American economy. And I want to read you just a couple of quotes. Oh, by the way, do you still write a regular economics report? You used to do that, didn't you? James Corbett: For the international forecaster. I used to write the the regular weekly editorial for them. Now I write just my own editorial, the Corporate Report subscriber. Interviewer: Okay, gotcha. Well, listen to these two quotes and then I'll get your comment and and we'll finish up. According to this organization, quote, Trumponomics is reviving real economic sovereignty, end quote. Second quote, Trump isn't just talking. He is reversing deindustrialization on every front. So, I mean, that's good news. I'm an American and I'm looking forward to the reindustrialization of America. We need our jobs back. James Corbett: Well, first of all, as as the Canadian in Japan, I could give the outside perspective to say, at the very least, I don't care about America first. But actually, given that the the general economic understanding of the public is that we live on some fixed pie, and so you better take as much of that pie as you can for yourself in order to screw everyone else, or if you end up screwing everyone else, who cares? If that is the general economic understanding, then I should be against America first. No, it should be Japan first, Canada first, whatever, something like that. But that isn't my understanding of economics anyway. Having said that, I think that the LaRouche-ite understanding of economics is sadly hobbled by a number of problems and including, I mean, as an example of the symptom of their underlying failure to understand economics, you will note that Laroushites think that Alexander Hamilton was some great defender of America and American interests. And they like the idea of a central bank and the United States going into debt in order to finance itself. Because that is a good thing for the American system of economics that the LaRoucheites propound. So I think that shows a fundamentally flawed epistemology, a fundamentally flawed understanding of economics that goes right to the heart of it. Having said that, on the other side of things, I am a believer in human freedom and that voluntary choices amongst consenting adults is the way forward for humanity and that that would be the ultimate thriving of all of humanity, including, of course, the field of economics. But if you really look into the term economics and what that means and where it comes from, perhaps that's the entirely wrong way of framing what it is that we're interested in. So I will proffer a different word for people out there who are interested. Look this one up. It's catalactics. And if you look up about catalacsy rather than economy, you will find a very different way of understanding the reconciliation of humans that come together in the in the Agora, the marketplace of old and what that means in terms of fostering human cooperative thriving rather than trying to reduce things to economic terms. So that's that's a little homework project for people out there who are interested. Interviewer: Thank you. Now I just have to ask another question. Of course, you are a big, big fan of volunteerism among individuals. And I assume you are also in favor of voluntary interaction among nations too. And something that that upsets me and surprises me is so many, not so many, but a few of my friends who are, let's say on the freedom dissident side, still can lick their chops a bit when they think about how gas prices might go down if we take over Venezuela or something like that with no thought to do the Venezuelan people want this, you know. James Corbett: Yeah. Interviewer: I have visions of that that famous American general who wrote „war is a racket“. Butler, Smedley Butler saying we shouldn't have our if these countries don't want us in there, we shouldn't be there, period. James Corbett: Right. Well, again, yes, I am a believer in human freedom and human voluntary interaction. But because of that, then I don't talk in terms of nations and I don't talk about Venezuela as if it's a kind of a singular unit. Again, I think that's overgeneralization. So I think the real answer to this is is understanding and respecting private property amongst individuals. And so, and that solves a number of these supposed quandary on the geopolitical space or the economic space or what have you, the socio-political space. The open border versus closed border debate is a false binary because there, of course, the real answer is private borders. I own my property and I can decide what happens on it and who is or is not allowed on my property. I cannot decide what happens on your property because you own that. And with private borders, suddenly there isn't the question of this gigantic line on a map that's been drawn in some boardroom thousands of miles away from us and decided by people based on some contract that we didn't sign. No, we own the property that we own and we set the rules and boundaries for our property. And that is all that we have the right to do. And no one else with any shiny badge or hat has the right to come and restrict or to permit whatever happens on our own individual private property. And nor do we have the right to go in and intrude on other people. So again, the question of Venezuela and what it's going to do with its oil is not about some thing that's being drafted between individual states. No, it's between individual human beings and who ultimately owns what property in order to decide that. Now that is an incredibly thorny question because of course unraveling all of that means, well, how do we decide at this point in human history who gets to decide who owns what natural resources of what parts of the planet? And I will admit that that is not going to be a easily solvable problem. But I do know that we are thinking of these problems in the wrong context and thus we will always arrive at the wrong answer. Interviewer: Okay. Okay. Well, James Corbett, thank you so much. We're out of time. And this is a quick one, which I'm sad about, but I wish you all the best. And please come on again someday. James Corbett: Thank you for having me on

von -

Quellen/Links: James Corbett‘s website, the Corbett Report: https://corbettreport.com/
More on Technocracy: https://corbettreport.com/qfc-technocracy/
https://www.kla.tv/Technocracy-en
https://digital.library.cornell.edu/catalog/ss:34227574
More about Elon Musk: https://corbettreport.com/musk/
https://www.kla.tv/38847