Has Anyone Actually Looked at the MPP Platform?

It’s not really that crazy to ask for some explanations on who wrote this platform & why no one is talking about it.

Aly Alexandra
7 min readJun 17, 2022

I’m sure you’ve all heard the breaking news in the “indie media” circuit — Jimmy Dore is toying with running for president. Regardless if that actually pans out or not, my issue is hardly with Dore. Insert any chosen comedian in that space and they’d be the perfect fit for what this party is going for. If you want to listen to me dissect the abysmal and buzzword-ridden filled letter by Nick Brana, you can check out my livestream from yesterday here:

But — that’s just it — on the NATIONAL level, what does this party stand for? I’d been too busy in my past research, focused on following the money — that I glossed over some interesting talking points on the actual platform page. Let’s go through some of the interesting pieces I found and covered on my follow-up video to last night’s stream, which I will link at the bottom of the article. I understand there are a lot of emotions within this camp — a lot of hurt and disappointment. But that’s the motivating force behind wanting to showcase some of this information — I think it would be foolish to IGNORE what’s located directly on the MPP website. Not really interested in hearing excuses for why they don’t mean exactly and explicitly what they say — it’s a bit late for that.

Under their “Platform” tab, you can click “Promise and Peril of Technology,” and you’ll find the exact text that I’m referring to below. Sorry, but can we get some explanations on what they mean when they say, “Genetic engineering will allow us to create genetically-perfected children.” Excuse me? That’s not complete Eugenics talk…but okay. Keep in mind — they’ve had this up since 2019.

In case some of you reading this don’t already know, a lot of the talking points here mirror the World Economic Forum and Klaus Schwab’s “Great Reset” — y’all love that topic, right? Any idea why the People’s Party is echoing similar language? Does their candidate understand that the very same things he’s now openly questioned — the validity and efficacy of mRNA technology — is embedded within all of these discussions? The answer “It’s just a marketing platform, it’s not a real party” doesn’t cut it for me, either. There’s some serious personnel issues within this party — I think all of us understand that. My issue lies within the CONTENT within their platform. Why is that the most ignored topic?!

I understand that not everyone who considers themselves a member of the Movement for a People’s Party may not know about this — so it’s not really a direct critique on the members themselves. If anything, this is geared towards Nick and Rod Brana. What are you guys really about? What are you coordinating in terms of normalizing things like “genetically-engineered children?” Do you not understand how this doesn’t even fit in with your own statements, specifically Nick, regarding fighting the corporate duopoly? This is transhumanist progressive jargon but it means something far deeper than any type of marketing buzzwords. It’s normalizing a lifestyle where constant testing and biotech are the “savior” replacements for “big pharma” — which, sorry, MPP won’t be the cause of the downfall of big pharma. That’s been in the works.

I get that a lot of this information will go right over people’s heads — either because they don’t care at all anymore about the actual “party” or whatever it is — which, I totally get to be honest — so it will be like that, or I’ll likely be met with accusations of being a Democratic shill, but if pointing out what is stated on their own site makes me a “shill,” then so be it.

The rest of their platform is pretty standard, run-of-the-mill lefty-turned-populist talking points. For the record, I’m not mad about the idea of talking to one another outside of political parties (I never really understood why people needed advisors or templates on how to talk to people outside of their political parties, but that might just be an online discourse type of thing, because I’m pretty sure society did, in fact, talk with one another before 2016 — even if they were outside of their political party…), but I digress.

You can check out the full video I did on some aspects of the platform and how it connects directly to the big bad WEF-esque type of talking points below. I’ll pick apart his article on here on a separate post, but click below for the full stream I did last night on the abysmal letter/article that Nick Brana released earlier this week.


Before I end this — let’s take a quick look at The People’s Party vision from their own website, and who some of the players are today. They seem weak (Nick Brana, specifically — especially with that little PR mess that he got into a few months ago with being accused of sexual harassment. Nothing really came from it, but there were even more fractures that stemmed from that incident, not to mention the myriad of issues that happened over the last few years with the petitioners and other aggrieved members who attempted to make their voices heard, only to be dismissed by leaders, evangelists, and board members as “detractors…DNC operatives…” and more of the usual lines. It’s pitiful, really. It’s not so much that I don’t care for a lot of the personalities within the movement (I really don’t, I find them to be boring and they tend to repeat a lot of the same talking points that are recycled from the Bernie campaign…not a lot of critical analysis, but hey, I can’t be angry if I know what I’m engaging with at this point).


Who endorses this?


Who is leading this mess (on a national level)?

Last, but NOT least (in fact, I think he should be listed as #1 — but that’s just me):

For more context on why Rod Brana may have more influence in this racket than you might think, please check out our recent video on the World Social Forum and its’ role as the approved alternative to Davos and the World Economic Forum. The World Social Forum came to exist as the opposition to the World Economic Forum — not to stop the agendas embedded within, but just to have control over the inevitable “glorious future” ridden with the same technofascism that you hear this crowd harping on and on about. Sorry, but something is missing here.

Anyways, I just wanted to point out some strange findings on the Movement for a People’s Party’s website. You can’t really come to me, begging me to pay attention to this party, without acknowledging what’s stated directly on their own website. If you want to get people interested in this actual “party” — or whatever it’s called, you’d think that the MPP page would have information that reflects the sentiments of the members. We know this crowd, however, doesn’t really pay much attention to most of the members. In fact, they’re fine with the peasants operating within their operation to stay focused on busywork, creating statewide-organizing action committees who are typically met with silence upon approaching the national leaders when they actually need something. Reeks of NONSENSE.

Til next time,