The so-called Board of Peace, established by US President Donald Trump, has now begun its work[1]. This body was originally intended only to coordinate and then manage the peace process in the Gaza Strip in the long term. This peace council was indeed authorized to do so by the United Nations.

On the Way to the New Feudalism

By Hermann Ploppa

Global Research, February 27, 2026

However, a subcommittee of this new institution is taking over the administration of the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, the Board of Peace is already addressing global hotspots, and the impression that it is intended to eventually replace the United Nations Security Council[2] is not entirely unfounded.

This coincides perfectly with UN Secretary-General António Guterres’s announcement that the United Nations will be insolvent by the middle of this year. The United States, in particular, has not paid its membership dues for many years. The UN would then have to close its doors as early as July. The short, ignominious end of an institution that, for 80 years, has been the central diplomatic hub for 193 nations. Is there actually a connection between the establishment of the Board of Peace and the systematic erosion of the United Nations?

Some observers might rejoice. After all, the UN had increasingly been making negative headlines. There were repeated reports of corruption and moral failings within the UN staff. Time and again, the UN willingly allowed itself to be co-opted when the US government, through brutal sanctions, drove countries into famine and the collapse of local infrastructure. The UN’s stamp of approval also lent undeserved legitimacy to wars of aggression waged by the Western community of values in violation of international law. Nevertheless, important lines of contact still run through the UN, enabling the diplomatic resolution of conflicts at a lower level. Within the UN, states from a wide variety of systems are interconnected.

Have you ever imagined what would happen if this long-established institution were to disappear without a trace? And what would happen if it were replaced by Trump’s private Board of Peace? Frankly, it’s a nightmare. This peace council is packed with cronies from Trump’s family and his ilk. Trump is in charge for life. He can decide at his own discretion who is allowed to join his board and who isn’t. And anyone who wants to remain on the council for longer than a three-year grace period has to deposit a billion dollars with Trump in trust. This entire concept of the Board of Peace is a blatant provocation for any responsible person. Such a blatant provocation is also a test case to see how the world will react to this excess of neo-feudalism. Vietnam, still nominally communist, immediately agreed to cooperate with Trump’s private peace organization. Russia’s Putin, in turn, declared that he could imagine joining the board. The money, however, would have to be raised from Russian funds held in the US. And China has so far conspicuously refrained from participating. Which, of course, doesn’t mean that China is remaining inactive. The People’s Republic of China continues to weave its new networks of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, and the Belt and Road Initiative. It is well aware that by dismantling the UN, the US is depriving itself of an important instrument of hegemony.

The Hidden Agenda of the Disruptors of State

The world seems completely oblivious to the fact that the destructive fury of the Trump supporters is a key element in their radical reshaping of the world. It’s about a concept of unbridled investment and innovation by the techno-oligarchs of the USA. They don’t want to share with the people. Peter Thiel’s famous statement that freedom and democracy are incompatible means that the freedom of the super-rich is undermined by popular sovereignty. The consensus of all members of a society prevents the brilliant innovator-start-up entrepreneur from advancing technological progress at the pace he personally deems feasible and absolutely necessary. With this kind of democracy, the only outcome is always a compromise, not what would be performatively optimal. Democracy must be abolished so that progress can finally be made – that’s the credo of the techno-oligarchs.

This is now being made public with complete impunity. And as long as people in the country don’t take this threat seriously, or even naively celebrate it, the destruction, the disruption, can proceed unhindered. It is declared, without contradiction, that the Gaza Strip is to be used as a zone for unbridled technological and social experiments[3]. And that also means that the rightful inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians, will be expelled like the Native Americans of old. And there is also little opposition when Greenland is to be turned into an experimental field for the tech scene[4]. Gaza and Greenland are to be turned into private special economic zones.

This means that the world order built up over centuries will be torn down this year. Not that there’s any regret about the old world order. It caused far too much suffering, hunger, and mountains of corpses. It declared the arbitrary power of aggressors and imperialists to be valid law and justice. The normative power of the status quo. Free rein for the powerful.

The Court Poets of the Dark Enlightenment

This new world order has already spawned its own court poets and ideologues. These panegyricists of real-world Trumpism unashamedly declare: Democracy is evil. Everything must return to the feudal system. Not, of course, based on agriculture and animal husbandry, but on digital technology and cryptocurrency. Elected rulers and a constitutional order stifle progress. What’s needed are leaders with the powers of absolutist kings.

The abrupt disempowerment of the nobility during the French Revolution was a profound shock for them. They repeatedly plotted revenge and sought to restore their former power. However, for a long time, they had to contend with an increasingly assertive bourgeoisie. They had to endure the fact that even people from the lowest strata of society rose to positions of governmental responsibility. The nobleman Gustave Le Bon argued, using pseudoscientific language, that the concentrated power of the masses was like an unpredictable predator that could only be observed from a cautious distance. The Austro-Hungarian nobleman Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises is considered the founding father of the market-radical Austrian School. Many of his writings dealt with the perceived evils of the communal economy and the common good. His student, Friedrich August von Hayek, developed the strategy by which the market-radical neofeudalists were able to regain discursive hegemony within four generations. Hayek and the US economist Milton Friedman actively advised dictatorships on how to most effectively abolish the social economy. However, during the lifetimes of these market-radical disruptors, states were still so powerful that their elimination and replacement by neo-feudal monarchies was inconceivable.

This changed as nation-states, increasingly and successfully, undermined public finances and public institutions from within through market-radical cliques. Many national economies are now insolvent and ripe for demolition. This is the hour of the anarcho-capitalists. The American Murray Rothbard declared that the state has no right to extract money from the rich and capable and shove it down the throats of supposedly unworthy idlers. Rothbard’s credo:

“The ultimate libertarian program can be summed up in one sentence: the abolition of the public sector, the transformation of all activities and services provided by the state into activities that are voluntarily carried out by the private sector.”[5]

Hans Hermann Hoppe, born in Peine, Lower Saxony, Germany, took a further step toward contempt for the state. Hoppe is little known to the general public. However, he is the personal guru of the oligarch Peter Thiel – and also of the ideologues of the dark Enlightenment, as we shall see. Hoppe quite openly takes a step backward into the Middle Ages when he states:

“The institution of the modern, post-medieval state itself represents a grave error. We would be better off today, in terms of welfare and freedom, than we actually are, had we never adopted the democratic model.”[6]

And to add insult to injury:

“If it absolutely has to be a state, then monarchy is still the lesser evil compared to democracy. For a monarch views the entire state as his private property. Therefore, the monarch is careful to cherish and maintain his property. In contrast, the administrator of a democratic state has no personal connection to the stolen goods of tax revenue. He is also not liable for mishandling the ‘bad news’ entrusted to him. Since he wants to be re-elected, he distributes much and abundantly from the spoils to everyone. State bankruptcy and inflation are typical symptoms of democratic malaise.”[7]

It’s always convenient in these circles to blame problems like national debt and insolvency on democracy – and to conveniently forget that precisely this debt was driven to extremes by free-market-radical politicians like Ronald Reagan or George Bush Jr. It’s like shooting someone in the leg and then shouting: “Look, he can’t even walk! What does he want?”

Curtis Yarvin alias Mencius Moldbug

However, it was left to an American prodigy, who completed a university degree as a teenager, to formulate the blueprint for the Trumpian world revolution. The prodigy’s name is Curtis Yarvin. Today he looks like an aging rockstar. Of course, Yarvin also comes from the Silicon Valley scene. He maintained a blog under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug. A “best of” compilation by Yarvin, aka Moldbug, was published in 2008 under the title: “Patchwork – A Political System for the 21st Century”[8]. In other words: Patchwork – A Political System for the 21st Century.

Yarvin sketches the world here as a patchwork of small kingdoms. Even the cover of his essay collection features a map of the German petty principalities from the early modern period. The world is to be recreated through privately owned cities and special commercial economic zones. In these zones, there is no longer a democratically elected government. A manager, a CEO, takes the place of the president or mayor. Instead of a treasurer, there is an accountant. And the citizen is no longer a citizen, but a consumer and shareholder in the privately run city-corporation. This city-consumer cannot participate democratically in shaping and changing the community. Instead, he can simply cash out his share and buy into a differently managed city-corporation that appeals to him more.

It sounds bizarre. But it’s already being practiced in many places around the world today. Back in 2008, however, it was pure speculation. Today, Yarvin wields immense influence in oligarchic circles and was even a guest of honor at Donald Trump’s second inauguration. The man is extremely influential. His philosophy of running cities and regions purely according to private-sector criteria is now known as neo-cameralism. In his essay, Yarvin, also known as Moldbug, outlines his ideas using a hypothetical model for the city of San Francisco, which he aptly calls “Friscorp”—a portmanteau of San Francisco and Corporation, meaning: a business enterprise. Moldbug is convinced that only those who can buy their citizenship with money have a place in Friscorp. What do you do with the propertyless in Friscorp? Yarvin/Moldbug raises the question:

“There are quite a few people presently in San Francisco who do not meet the second constraint, are pretty iffy on the first as well, and have no labor skills to speak of. What do we do with them? Sell their slums out from under them, obviously; demo everything, spray for roaches, rodents and pit bulls, smooth the rubble out with a bulldozer or two, and possibly a little aerial bombing; erect new residential districts suitable for Russian oligarchs.”

Sounds familiar when we consider what just happens in the Middle East? With the exception of Russian oligarchs. But Yarvin goes further:

“As Delegate of San Francisco, what should you do with these people? I think the answer is clear: alternative energy. Since wards are liabilities, there is no business case for retaining them in their present, ambulatory form. Therefore, the most profitable disposition for this dubious form of capital is to convert them into biodiesel, which can help power the Muni buses.”

And Yarvin calms things down: “Okay, just kidding.”

So, let’s laugh …

“The best humane alternative to genocide I can think of is not to liquidate the wards—either metaphorically or literally—but to virtualize them. A virtualized human is in permanent solitary confinement, waxed like a bee larva into a cell which is sealed except for emergencies. This would drive him insane, except that the cell contains an immersive virtual-reality interface which allows him to experience a rich, fulfilling life in a completely imaginary world.”

For that Elon Musk with his company Neuralink already delivered the technical solution.

But the wealthy clients of this urban service have nothing to laugh either. Because they themselves will be under the strictest observation:

“All residents, even temporary visitors, carry an ID card with RFID response. All are genotyped and iris-scanned. Public places and transportation systems track everyone. Security cameras are ubiquitous. Every car knows where it is and who is sitting in it, and tells the authorities both. Residents cannot use this data to snoop into each others’ lives, but Friscorp can use it to monitor society at an almost arbitrarily detailed level.”

Very cozy. Security, Yarvin clarifies, takes precedence over freedom. The unwanted have-nots are, as mentioned, locked away in a virtual world:

“I like virtualization because it can be made to scale. I don’t think there is any scenario under which San Francisco is burdened with more than a few thousand wards. Many other regions of the earth, however, contain large numbers of human beings whose existence may well prove an unequivocal liability to the owners of any ground on which they would reside. If so, they can be virtualized, creating giant human Wachowski honeycombs of former bezonians, whose shantytowns can be cleared and redeveloped as villas for retired oil-company executives.”

If we look around at the world today, not just in the Gaza Strip, we see the full spectrum of Anglo-American arrogance and contempt for humanity in action. The new elite wants to live in their sick sphere, undisturbed by ordinary people. These disruptive ordinary people must be eliminated. The new technocratic elite should be able to rule unchecked. Then all evils would disappear, if only capable high achievers were in charge, operating at full throttle.

However, a significant proportion of the modern-day feudal lords chosen by Trump to be the new rulers of this world are individuals who play a role in the Epstein files.

It’s hard to imagine that this group of people can really move us forward.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

This article was originally published in German by Manova.

Hermann Ploppa is a political scientist and journalist. Ploppa recently published the book “Der Neue Feudalismus – Privatisierung, Blackrock, Plattformkapitalismus” (The New Feudalism – Privatization, Blackrock, Platform Capitalism). As Amazon does not yet stock the book, it is best to order it from the author at: [email protected]. Visit the author’s blog here.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/way-new-feudalism/5917011