This Appendix provides a caveat to the willpower behind the central bank system as established in Goals, Motivations and Strategies of the Owners of Modern Society.

The introduction of this central bank system and its gradual propagation over multiple hundreds of years – to the point where it controls all institutions of power and is maximizing personal and governmental debt levels – raises questions about how much and to what extent this system has, over time, developed a kind of mind of its own.  How much control do fifteenth generation central bank owner descendants have over a system that was developed, established and made long-lasting by their ancestors long before they were born?  To what extent are these people simply riding trends and structures that have been established and reinforced by their forebears? 

Fabio Vighi, Professor of Critical Theory and Italian at Cardiff University, UK, argues that due to technological advancement the system has become de-facto self-perpetuating, and that it is mindlessly evolving toward totalitarianism to account for industrialization and AI trends which are in the process of making most jobs obsolete.  In other words, as wealth further concentrates in the hands of the ultra rich and the masses are left jobless and in poverty in a kind of neo-feudalism, the system will have to institute permanent lockdowns and remove freedoms (such as via upcoming CBDCs) under whatever pretexts are necessary in order to maintain social stability and lessen the effects of inflation from endless monetary printing by tampering demand, regardless of whether the central bank owners want it or not:

It is no longer the classic swing between boom and bust, or a financial cycle ending in a “Minsky moment”, for we have reached the absolute limit to capitalist expansion. It is important to reiterate that we are facing systemic implosion, not a crisis engineered by evil bankers motivated by sadism and greed. While the latter are the main attributes of the capitalist drive as such – since capital is nothing but a perverse end in itself – the current implosion reflects the historical exhaustion of the value-creating substance of capital; the fact that the fundamental ingredient of value itself – labour – is vanishing irreversibly while automated (technological) productivity takes off. It should be enough to observe that in a healthy capitalist economy the price of labour would rise. Instead, labour has been devalued for decades, which dramatically confirms that any monetary boost to the economy is without value substance, and destined to cause further misery. It is therefore inevitable that, at some point soon, capitalist reproduction will be brought back to the ground through the severe contraction of insubstantial masses of money (“bubbles”). Fictitious liquidity, created without any basis in real production, will be violently debased.

According to Vighi, the elites in charge of society are arrogant and do not understand the extent at which the reproduction of the capitalist matrix invisibly motivates their thoughts and behavior, and that, like Frankenstein and its monster, it may have unexpected and tragic consequences: 

Those sitting in the control room fail to realize the extent to which their dominance is uncertain. What they do not see is that their authority depends on a ‘higher mission’, to which they remain partly blind, namely the anonymous self-reproduction of the capitalist matrix. Today’s power lies with the profit-making machine whose only purpose is to continue its reckless journey, potentially leading to the premature extinction of Homo sapiens….And the novelty of our era is that the ‘locked-down society’ is the model that best guarantees the reproducibility of the capitalist machine, irrespective of its dystopian destination.

The extent to which the central bank owners are consciously directing this process at this advanced stage (as opposed to earlier stages when their actions were clearly deliberate) is unknown, but it would be worse if the system has become self-replicating because it would mean that power has become so diffuse that there is no one in charge; humanity hurtling toward the end-game abyss of a ruthless capitalistic process for which no one knows the endpoint and no one to press the breaks if it gets out of hand.  A horrible idea from which nightmares are made.

In the foreword to the George Schwab translation of Carl Schimtt’s Political Theology, Tracy B. Strong argues that Schmitt also foresaw the extreme dangers of technological society becoming self-replicating: 

Schmitt, with explicit reference to Max Weber, sees danger in the increasing sense of the State as “a huge industrial plant” (PT, 65). Increasingly this plant “runs by itself… [and] the decisionistic and personalistic element in the concept of sovereignty is lost” (PP, 48). For Schmitt, this is a developmental process. As he lays it out in the Barcelona lecture, the history of the last 500 years in the West shows a common structure, even though as the controlling force has changed, so also has what constitutes evidence, as well as social elite. Thus in the sixteenth century the world was structured around an explicitly understanding with God and the Scriptures as foundational certainties; this was replaced in the next century by metaphysics and rational (“scientific”) research and in the eighteenth by ethical humanism, with its central notions of duty and virtue. In the nineteenth century economics comes to dominate…and, finally, in the twentieth century technology is the order of the day. And this is at the core of his claim that ours is an age of “neutralisation and depoliticization”: whereas all previous eras had leaders and decision makers, the era of technology and technological progress has no need of individual persons….

The point of [Schmitt’s] analysis of the centrality of the exception for sovereignty is precisely to restore, in a democratic age, the element of transcendence that had been there in the sixteenth and even the seventeenth centuries— Hobbes, Schmitt believes, understood the problem exactly. Failing that, the triumph of non-political, inhuman technologizing will be inevitable.

Ted Kaczynski also agrees that the advance of technology may usurp the power of the humans nominally in control of the system: 

By that time it will have to have solved, or at least brought under control, the principal problems that confront it, in particular that of “socializing” human beings; that is, making people sufficiently docile so that heir behavior no longer threatens the system. That being accomplished, it does not appear that there would be any further obstacle to the development of technology, and it would presumably advance toward its logical conclusion, which is complete control over everything on Earth, including human beings and all other important organisms. The system may become a unitary, monolithic organization, or it may be more or less fragmented and consist of a number of organizations coexisting in a relationship that includes elements of both cooperation and competition, just as today the government, the corporations and other large organizations both cooperate and compete with one another. Human freedom mostly will have vanished, because individuals and small groups will be impotent vis-a-vis large organizations armed with super-technology and an arsenal of advanced psychological and biological tools for manipulating human beings, besides instruments of surveillance and physical coercion. Only a small number of people will have any real power, and even these probably will have only very limited freedom, because their behavior too will be regulated; just as today our politicians and corporation executives can retain their positions of power only as long as their behavior remains within certain fairly narrow limits. 

The psychological aspect of this phenomenon is explored and reformulated by Zero HP Lovecraft based on an argument from political dissident and later president of Czechoslovakia Vaclav Havel, which ties (1) elite motivations to stay in power along with (2) their ultimate powerlessness where they have to meet the changing needs of the system or be cast out from power, along with (3) the increasing structural incentives toward a virtue signaling spiral leading to the leftist singularity, as described earlier in this essay:

The elites and the masses hold each other hostage.

This is going to be a brief reformulation of an argument from Vaclav Havel. 

In the post-totalitarian world, the center of power becomes identical with the center of truth. That is to say, those people who are in power determine what is true, regardless of reality, and to be subject to power is to live within its understanding of truth. 

Ideology becomes an increasingly core component of power, which provides it with both legitimacy and coherence. The significance of phenomena no longer derived from the phenomena themselves, but from their locus within the ideological context. 

Power and ideology begin to serve each other in an increasingly vicious feedback loop, whereupon ritual itself, the ritualistic obedience to ideology, becomes the dictator, rather than any individual. Power becomes anonymous and leaders become interchangeable. 

Any person who fails to perform the rituals of ideological power is immediately ousted from the system. By performing these rituals, each person in the grip of the ideology compels others to accept the rules of the game and confirm the power which requires the rituals in the first place. 

Each person helps the other to be obedient, becoming both victims and instruments of the ideology. Everyone, at every level, from the shop-keepers to the prime minister, is involved and enslaved. By pulling everyone into its power structure, the post-totalitarian system makes everyone an instrument of the auto-totality of society. 

This is Havel’s argument. And Havel notes that there may be a degree of reluctance or even unwillingness in the complicity of the people with the post-totalitarian system of the ideology that grips them. Indeed, they may inwardly resist on some level. But in the post-totalitarian society, the higher your place in the hierarchy, the greater price of obedience and loyalty the ideology demands. 

The people with the most power in the progressive system have the least freedom. They only have the power to do what the progressive ideology demands of them, and the moment they are insufficiently compliant, everyone else around them rushes in to fill the void. 

It might be fair to say that, at the highest echelons of ideological power, the people there have moved beyond sincerity and cynicism, and having transcended this dichotomy, their only principle is to be fully instrumentalized by the ideology. 

In other words, if the ideology demands pride parades, then they will believe that instituting pride parades is the moral thing to do, because there is no daylight between the demands of power and the progressive moral understanding. 

When the hoi polloi accuse progressive leaders of cynicism, what they are really saying, and it’s a very shallow, contemptible utterance, honestly, is that they believe themselves to be even more moral than their leaders, even more dedicated to the moral understanding of power than the powerful. 

Scott Alexander…called this the fifty Stalins argument. One wishes to criticize Stalin, but the penalty for doing so is life imprisonment in a camp. The only allowable way then to express dissent is to say: 

“Stalin, he is good, but he is not enough. What we need is fifty stalins!” This is what the progressive does when she accuses woke corporate leaders of being cynical. 

She doesn’t realize she is doing this. It’s all perfectly instinctive, to complain in a way that is safe and meaningless, in a way that, if it were taken seriously, would empower the powerful even more. 

And the act of saying it causes her to believe what she is saying. This is how public declarations work, psychologically. When you make a statement publicly, it causes you to adjust your own belief of yourself, to think that the thing you have said is your real belief. 

No one is immune to this kind of social pressure from within.

Havel had warned that Soviet totalitarianism was only “‘an extreme manifestation…of a deep-seated problem that also finds expression in advanced Western society.’  For ‘there too, there is a trend toward impersonal power and rule by mega-machines or Colossi that escape human control.’ He added that these ‘juggernauts of impersonal power, whether ‘large-scale enterprises or faceless governments, represent the greatest threat to our present-day world.’”1

Being on the outside of central bank owner motivations, deliberations and strategies and having to piece it together piecemeal, it is impossible to say to what extent this self-perpetuating capitalist or technological matrix has superseded the power and control of the central bank owners.  It certainly looks like their conspiracy continues apace with few if any signs of disquiet from the outside.  That being said, this Appendix was necessary to add to properly Steelman a potential critique.

For a deeper dive into this topic, see this interview with Vighi on Youtube.

---

1 Conquest, 212.

This Appendix provides additional clarity to Goals, Motivations and Strategies of the Owners of Modern Society.

The following describes some of the modern history of the Rothschild and their allies’s targeting of their publicly-owned central bank competition for destruction: Napoleon in the early 1800s, Russia in World War 1, Germany, Italy and Japan in World War 2, and Libya, Iraq, Syria, Belarus and Burma in the modern era.  Each of these examples demonstrates that when central banks are publicly owned their economies perform exceptionally well, featuring low interest loans, state directed investments, triple digit growth rates, zero unemployment and low inflation.  Much of the following is taken from Stephen Mitford Goodson’s book A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind unless otherwise noted.  Goodson was a director of the South African Reserve Bank from 2003 to 2012 and is a descendent of the famous Mitford sisters and is well qualified to comment on such matters.

---

Napoleon the Monetary Reformer1

Napoleon was consciously mindful of the fact that money always remains in hiding and only acts through agents who are often unaware of the aims that they are pursuing.  He realized that international money stood behind every foreign enemy, every monarch and every political party, including the Jacobins, stating on one occasion that “The hand that gives is above the hand that takes.  Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.”  He set up the Banque de France in 1799, which replaced the 15 private banking houses which had been involved in the events leading up to the French Revolution.  The banks had increased the national debt to 170 million Francs and had charged rapacious rates of interest on loans to the French crown to the extent that prior to 1789, it was allocating over 50% of its budget expenditure to interest.  Napoleon made himself president of the bank, declaring that “The bank does not belong to the shareholders only; it also belongs to the state, since the state has entrusted to it the privilege of issuing money.”

Napoleon was so suspicious and distrustful of bankers that he personally supervised the operations of the Treasury lest the secrets of his monetary policies leak out and be exploited by speculators.  He was thus his own banker who controlled both the creation and distribution of money and credit, to the chagrin of the international bankers, particularly the Rothschilds, who were virtually excluded from operating in continental markets.  Napoleon made the franc the most stable currency in Europe.  After France had abandoned the loan markets of the City of London, a fog of depression settled on its fraternity of bankers and usurers.  In typical fashion the English press began to stir up trouble for Napoleon. England, under the direction of her international bankers, proceeded to bankroll Austria, Prussia, Russia, Spain and Sweden and duly declared war on France. Napoleon was forced to engage in a series of needless and senseless wars for the next nine years in order to protect France.

At the Treaty of Tilsit signed on July 7 1807, Napoleon and Tsar Alexander agreed to an alliance which made them the masters of continental Europe.  At the time France and Russia were the only two countries in Europe which were not on the usury system and were furthermore not indebted to the Rothschilds.  However, Russia was dependent on England for the importation of industrial products and England threatened to cut Russia off; Alexander was only prepared to join Napoleon’s blockade of England if France would supply Russia with the industrial goods, which France could not supply.  Therefore Napoleon invaded Russia to enforce the blockade, which failed.  

When Napoleon attempted to stage his comeback at the battle of Waterloo, he gave in and was financed by the Rothschilds along with the rest of the parties (England, Prussia and France were all financed by Nathan Rothschild, with France receiving a loan of 10 million pounds); he lost, was banished to the island of Saint Helena and then poisoned to death.

---

The State Bank of the Russian Empire2

The State Bank of the Russian Empire was founded in 1860 under the control and ownership of the Tsar.  The Russian State bank printed money at almost zero interest, as opposed to the rest of the world where privately owned central banks created their nation’s money supply at usurious rates of interest.  It comes as no surprise to find that in 1912 Russia had the lowest levels of taxation in the world.   The total direct tax rate per inhabitant that year was 26.75%, Germany was 12.97%, France was 12.35%, Austria was 10.19% and Russia’s was 2.66%.  Russia had the smallest national debt in the world.  Its vast gold reserves, the largest in the world, exceeded the bank note issue by more than 100% except for the year 1906.  Furthermore throughout this period of state banking there was no inflation and no unemployment.  Russian citizens experienced massively increased quality of life and industrial production during this period:

• After the passing of the Stolypin Act in 1906, peasants could obtain individual title with hereditary rights (Stolypin was assassinated by Mordechai Gershkovich in 1911).   By 1913 two million families had availed themselves of this opportunity to acquire what became known as “Stolypin farms.”   The Peasants’ State Bank, which was described at that time as the “greatest and most socially beneficent institution of land credit in the world” granted loans at a very low rate of interest.  Agricultural production soared as a result – its production of cereals exceeded the combined production of Argentina, Canada and the United States by 25% in 1913.  In that year Russia had 37.5 million horses, more than half of all those in the world.  Russia produced 80% of the world’s flax and provided more than 50% of the world’s egg imports.  Mining and industrial output expanded by huge margins.  Between 1885 and 1913 coal production increased from 259.6 million woods to 2,159.8 million poods, cast iron production rose form 25 million poods in 1890 to 1,378 million poods in 1913 and petroleum production rose from 491.2 million poods in 1906 to 602.1 million poods in 1916.  From 1870 to 1914 industrial output grew by 1% per annum in Great Britain, 2.75% per annum in the United States and 3.5% per annum in Russia.  During the period from 1890 to 1913 industrial production quadrupled; the increase in GDP averaged 10% per annum between 1895-1914.Distribution of newly formed farms in Grodno Governorate (1909)
• An independent study by British lawyers concluded that the Russian Code of Laws and judiciary were “the most advanced and impartial in the world.”  Elementary education was obligatory and free up to university level, where only nominal fees were charged.  Their schools were renowned for their high academic standards.
• In labor relations the Russians were pioneers.  Child labor was abolished over 100 years before it was abolished in Great Britain in 1867.  Strikes, which were forbidden in the Soviet Union, were permitted and minimal in Tsarist times.  Trade union rights were recognized in 1906, while an Inspectorate of Labour strictly controlled working conditions in factories.  In 1912 social insurance was introduced. 

In 1917, the Rothschilds, fearful that replication of this extraordinary example of freedom and prosperity would destroy their malevolent banking empire, instigated and financed the Bolshevik revolution which wrecked and ruined Russia.  By the end of 1916 the British and French armies were in danger of losing the war, with the latter army having already mutinied on the Western front.  Lord Walter Rothschild out of the blue offered to secure American intervention in return for handling over Palestine, resulting in the Balfour Declaration; war dragged on for two more years and Russia was totally destroyed, paving the way for the Bolshevik Revolution which the Rothschilds also financed and instigated.  Gutle Schnapper, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s wife, is reputed to have said shortly before her death in 1849, “If my sons did not want war, there would have been none.”3

---

Germany in World War 24

In May 1919 Adolf Hitler attended a lecture by Dr. Gottfried Feder entitled “The Abolition of Interest Servitude.”  This lecture had a decisive influence on Hitler’s thinking as he explained in Mein Kampf:

“To my mind, Feder’s merit consisted in the ruthless and trenchant way in which he described the double character of the capital engaged in stock exchange and loan transactions, laying bare the fact that this capital is every and always dependent on the payment of interest…I understood immediately that here was a truth of transcendental importance for the future of the German people.  The absolute separation of stock exchange capital from the economic life of the nation would make it possible to oppose the process of internationalization in German business without at the same time attacking capital as such, for to do this would be to jeopardize the foundations of our national independence.  I clearly saw what was developing in Germany, and I realized then that the stiffest fight we would have to wage would not be against the enemy nations but against international capital.  In Feder’s speech I found an effective rallying-cry for our coming struggle.”

When Hitler joined the National Socialist German Workers Party, Feder was the principal drafter of the party’s 25 points and monetary reform was the core essence of the program.  The following extract is from the party platform:

“Break down the thralldom of interest is our war cry.  What do we mean by the thralldom of interest?  The landowner is under this thralldom, who has to raise loans to finance his farming operations, loans at such high interest as almost to eat up the results of his labour, or who is forced to make debts and to drag the mortgages after him like so much lead.  So is the worker, producing in shops and factories for a pittance, whilst the shareholder draws dividend and bonuses which he has not worked for.  So is the earning middle class, whose work goes almost entirely to pay the interest on bank overdrafts.

Thralldom of interest is the real expression for the antagonisms, capital versus labour, blood versus money, creative work versus exploitation.  The necessity of breaking this thralldom is of such vast importance for our nation and our race, that on it alone depends our nation’s hope of rising up from its shame and slavery; in fact the hope of recovering happiness, prosperity and civilization throughout the world.  It is the pivot on which everything turns; it is far more than mere necessity of financial policy.  Whilst its principles and consequences bite deep into political and economic life, it is a leading question for economic study, and thus affects every single individual and demands a decision from each one: Service to the nation or unlimited private enrichment.  It means a solution of the Social Question.

Our financial principal: Finance shall exist for the benefit of the state; the financial magnates shall not form a state within the state.  Hence our aim to break the thralldom of interest.  Relief of the state, and hence of the nation, from its indebtedness to the great financial houses, which lend on interest.  Nationalisation of the Reichbank and the issuing houses, which lend on interest.  Provision of money for all great public objects (waterpower, railroads etc), not by means of loans, but by granting non-interest bearing state bonds and without using ready money…Wanton printing of bank notes, without creating new values, means inflation.  We all lived through it.  But the correct conclusion is that an issue of non-interest bearing bonds by the state cannot produce inflation if new values are at the same time created.”

In 1933 the National Socialists came to power and a somewhat attenuated version of Feder’s monetary reform was introduced.  From being a ruined and bankrupt nation in January 1933 with 7,500,000 unemployed persons, they transformed the country and increased citizen’s standards of living dramatically by 1939:

• The provision of adequate housing.  During the period 1933-37 1,458,178 new homes were built to the highest standards of the time.  The building of apartments was discouraged and rental payments on housing were not permitted to exceed 1/8 of the income of an average worker.  
• Interest free loans of about 5 months of gross pay were paid to newly-wed couples to finance the purchase of household goods.  The loan was repayable at 1% per month, but for each child born 25% of the loan was cancelled. The same principle was applied in respect of home loans, which were issued for a period of 10 years at a low rate of interest.  The birth of each child also resulted in cancellation of 25% of the loan.  Education in schools, technical colleges and universities was free, while the universal health care system provided everyone with free medical care.
• During the period 1933-37 imports increased by 31% while exports rose 20.4%.  This increased trade is reflected in the 76.9% rise in inland shipping and the 69.4% rise in ocean shipping.  During this period trade was greatly enhanced by barter, which bypassed the international payments system and the requirement of having to pay commission and interest on bills of exchange.  By the late 1930s 50% of all foreign trade was being conducted by means of barter transactions using offset accounting.

• During this period expenditures on roads rose by 229.5% to accommodate the 425% increase in vehicles and 622% increase in licensed commercial vehicles.
• Between 1932 and 1938 iron ore production increased by 45.4%, the index of coal production rose by 85.5% and the energy index rose by 76%.

As a result of this heightened and ever increasing economic activity, unemployment, which was at 30.1% in 1933, had been reduced to almost zero by July 1939.  In contrast the unemployment rate in the United States, which had stood at 25.1% in 1933, was still at 19.8% by January 1940.  National income in Germany rose by 434.8% while between 1932 and 1939 the index of producers goods increased by 219.6%, yet the cost of living advanced by only 4% or less than 1% per annum, a rate which would be stable throughout the 12 years of state banking under national socialism.  The German monetary policy “was non-inflationary because government expenditures, which increased the level of consumer demand, could in turn elicit a correspondingly increased quantity of disposable consumer goods.”  By 1939 Germany had become the most powerful country in the history of Europe.  Its GDP had an annual average growth rate of 11% per annum had doubled in the short space of six years of quasi-state banking.  And this was conducted without basing the economy on armaments production. The following table reveals modest levels of defense expenditure which only picked up in 1938/1939 when Germany started to feel threatened by her neighbors.

Even expenditure of 22% of national income on defense just before World War II started may be deemed as not being too excessive, when one bears in mind that Germany’s borders possess few natural boundaries and she was surrounded by hostile neighbours – Czechoslovakia, France and Poland. Germany also had to replenish the armaments which she had been forbidden to possess in terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The renowned English historian AJP Taylor wrote, “The state of German armament in 1939 gives the decisive proof that Hitler was not contemplating general war, and probably not intending war at all.”

The Rothschilds path to war: In January 1939 the President of the Reichbank, Hjalmar Schacht (a Rothschild puppet), issued an ultimatum to Hitler demanding he change his monetary policies and collapse the German economy, which had increased its GNP by 100% between 1933-1939.  Hitler was furious and rejected the recommendations as “mutiny” and sacked him two weeks later.  The Reichsbank was ordered to grant the Reich all credits requested by Hitler, which had the effect of removing from the bankers the power to deflate and destroy the German economy.  Thus only in January 1939 did the Reichsbank become an authentic State Bank.  Schacht’s dismissal also terminated the transfer of confidential information regarding all Germany’s economic developments, which he had been deviously giving without interruption to Montagu Norman, a fellow mason and Governor of the Bank of England.  But the central bank owners had the economic figures they needed for their calculations — the overall economic production of what would become the Allies dramatically outpaced what would become the Axis by anywhere from a 3:1 to a 10:1 ratio depending on category, from oil to air and naval forces to manpower to tank production to munitions, which gave them the comfort level they desired of an assured victory before green-lighting the manipulation of the world toward war. 

(On a side note, the relative closeness of the outcome of the war despite the central banker’s calculations5 was because of (1) Hitler’s strategic boldness with blitzkreig in France, which caught them by surprise, and there is a controversy over whether Stalin was only weeks away from attacking Germany when Germany attacked first in Barbarossa; and (2) the German soldier was so far superior to Russian, American or British soldiers.  Trevor N. Dupuy, a noted American military analyst, US Army Colonel and author of numerous books and articles, studied the comparative performance of the soldiers of World War II. On average, he concluded, 100 German soldiers were the equivalent of 120 American, British or French soldiers, or 200 Soviet soldiers. “On a man for man basis,” Dupuy wrote, “German ground soldiers consistently inflicted casualties at about a 50 percent higher rate than they incurred from the opposing British and American troops under all circumstances. This was true when they were attacking and when they were defending, when they had a local numerical superiority and when, as was usually the case, they were outnumbered, when they had air superiority and when they did not, when they won and when they lost.”  Many other noted historians agreed with this assessment).

A new Reichsbank law made the bank “unconditionally subordinated to the sovereignty of the state.”  Hitler was now his own banker, but having departed from the fold of international swindlers and usurers he would, like Napoleon, who in 1800 had established the Basque de France as a state bank, suffer the same fate; an unnecessary war followed by the ruination of his people and country.  It was this event which triggered World War II – the realization by the Rothschilds that universal replication of Germany’s usury-free state banking system would permanently destroy their evil financial empire.

In order to provide the Poles with a free hand which would enable them to antagonize and provoke the Germans, a deceitful offer to guarantee Poland’s sovereignty was given by Great Britain on March 31, 1939, but it was only a guarantee against a war with Germany, not invasion by the Soviet Union (who took 77,300 square miles as opposed to the 49,800 square miles ultimately restored to Germany).  During the next five months the Polish government progressively intensified the oppression, harassment of and attacks on the remaining 1.5 million ethnic Germans living in Poland.  These attacks, in which over 58,000 German civilians were killed by Poles in acts of savagery, culminated in the Bromberg massacre on September 3, 1939 in which 5,500 people were murdered.  On August 30, 1939 Hitler again offered to the Polish government the Marienwerder proposals but on the order of the international bankers, the British Foreign Secretary strongly advised the Polish government not to negotiate.  From 1939 onwards, although Germany made at least 28 known attempts at peace without conditions, they were all refused. 

---

Italy in World War 26

In 1927 Italy received a loan from JP Morgan of $100 million to meet a special emergency.  Thereafter Mussolini refused “to negotiate or accept any more foreign loans”, as “he was determined to keep Italy free from financial subservience to foreign banking interests.”  In 1931 the Italian state arrogated to itself the right to supervise the banks by means of the Institute of Italian Securities.  In 1936 the process was completed when by means of the Banking Reform Act, where the Banca d’Italia and the major banks became state institutions.  The Banca d’Italia was now a fully-fledged state bank which had the sole right to create credit out of nothing and advance it for a nominal fee to other banks.  Limits on state borrowing were lifted and Italy abandoned the gold standard.

---

Japan in World War 2

The Bank of Japan was founded in 1882 as a typical central bank, i.e. for the benefit of private banks to the detriment of the public interest.  This changed in 1932 when the Bank of Japan was reorganized into a state bank administered for the national interests.  The reform of the bank was completed in 1942 when the Bank of Japan Law was remodeled on Germany’s Reichsbank Act of 1939.  Japan had been experiencing the same traumatic difficulties caused by the artificially created Great Depression (Herbert Hoover stated in his Memoirs, “I considered for some time whether I should expose the responsibility of the Federal Reserve Board by its deliberate inflation policies from 1925-28 under European influence, and my opposition to these policies”, but he remained silent7).  However, the conversion from a central to a state banking methodology produced results which were both swift and sustained.  During the 1931-41 period manufacturing output and industrial production increased by 140% and 136% respectively, while national income and GNP went up 241% and 259% respectively.  These remarkable increases exceeded by a wide margin the economic growth of the rest of the industrialized world.  Unemployment declined from 5.5% in 1930 to 3.0% in 1938.  Industrial disputes decreased with the number of stoppages down from 998 in 1931 to 159 in 1941.

By the late 1930s Japan had become the leading economic power in East Asia and her exports were steadily replacing those of America and England.  In August 1940 Japan announced the formation of the Greater East Asian C-prosperity Sphere.  The fear that these countries would adopt Japan’s state banking methods posed such a serious threat to the Rothschild owned and controlled US Federal Reserve Bank that a war was deemed the only means of countering it.8

Henry Stimson, War Secretary and a patriarch of the CFR, wrote in his diary after meeting with FDR: “We face the delicate question of the diplomatic fencing to be done so as to be sure Japan is put into the wrong and makes the first bad move – overt move.”  After a subsequent meeting, he recorded: “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot…” The Council’s War and Peace Studies Project sent a memorandum to FDR recommending a trade embargo against Japan which he eventually enacted.  In Addition, Japan’s assets in America were frozen and the Panama Canal closed to its shipping.  FDR knew about the upcoming attack on Pearl Harbor (American military intelligence had cracked the radio code Tokyo used to communicate with its embassies, which suggested an assault would come on Pearl Harbor around December 7; in addition separate warnings were transmitted to high government officials) but no alert was passed on to the commanders in Hawaii.  FDR removed the fleet’s Admiral after he protested that it was quite vulnerable to attack, and FDR stripped the island of most of its air defenses shortly before the raid.  FDR appointed a commission to investigate what happened, headed by FDR’s friend Supreme Court justice Owen Roberts and other CFR members, absolving FDR of blame.  When this whitewash was exposed, FDR suppressed the results, saying public revelation would endanger national security in wartime.9 

In a speech on October 30, 1940, FDR declared “I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.”  But he was planning the opposite.  In 1940, at the American embassy in London, a code clerk named Tyler Kent discovered secret dispatches between Churchill and FDR, revealing the latter’s intention to bring the U.S. into the war.  Kent tried to alert the public but he was caught and spent the rest of the war in prison.  Robert Sherbowd, the President’s friendly biographer, said “If the isolationists had known the full extent of the secret alliance between the United States and Britain, their demands for the President’s impeachment would have rumbled like thunder through the land.”10

---

Central Bank of Libya11

On assuming power in 1969 al-Gaddafi took control of most of the economic activities in the country, including the central bank, which for all practical purposes was run as a state bank.  Foreign bankers were not permitted to operate.  Financing of government infrastructure did not attract interest and Libya had no national debt and no foreign debt.  Its foreign exchange reserves exceeded $54 billion, which may be compared to reserves of developed countries such as the UK and Canada which in 2010 were $50 billion and $40 billion respectively.  The official figure for inflation from 2000-2010 was -0.27% and GDP growth was 4.32% per annum.

Gaddfai was described by the mainstream media as being a “terrible dictator and a blood-sucking monster”, but the reality was that with the exception of Benghazi and its environs he had the support of 90% of the population.  The following benefits he provided explains why he was so popular: free education, students were paid the average salary for which subject they were studying, students studying oversees were provided with accommodation, an automobile and 2,500 euro per annum; free electricity, free health care, free housing (there were no mortgages), newly-wed couples received a gift of $50,000 from the government, automobiles were sold at factory cost free of interest, private loans were provided free of interest, bread cost 15 US cents per loaf, gasoline cost 12 US cents per litre, portion of profits from sale of oil was paid directly into bank accounts of citizens, farmers received free land, seeds and animals, and full employment with those temporarily unemployed paid a full salary as if employed.

Gaddafi ensured that the wealth of the country was fairly distributed to its people.  Beggers and homeless did not exist while life expectancy at 75 years was the highest in Africa and 10% above the world average.  Another major achievement was the Great Man-Made River Project, which supplied 6,500,000m of fresh water daily with costs ten times cheaper than desalinated water.  Although the central banks of Belarus, Burma, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, North Sudan and Syria do not fall under the direct control of the Rothschild banking syndicate, Libya had the only central bank run on genuine state banking lines, which exhibited the classic symptoms of full employment, zero inflation and a modern day workers’ paradise.  The question arises as to why NATO intervened on the pretext of fabricated human rights abuses, the so called responsibility to protect.  Since 1971 when the US abandoned the gold exchange standard for the petrodollar with the connivance of Saudi Arabia, any attempt to displace the United States dollar as the premier reserve currency has been blocked and opposed with violence.

Gaddafi announced in 2010 the creation of the gold dinar as a replacement for the settlement of all foreign transactions in a proposed region of over 200 million people.  Libya at that time possessed 144 tons of gold.  What was intended was not a return to the gold standard per se, but a new unit of accounts with oil exports and other resources being paid for in gold dinars.  Gaddafi crossed a red line and paid the ultimate price.

---

Iraq, Syria, Belarus and Burma12

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein of Iraq decreed that all oil payments would in the future be made in euros, as he did not wish to deal “in the currency of the enemy.”  The possession of weapons of mass destruction was a deliberately concocted hoax and it was this currency decision which cost him his life and the destruction of his country.

Belarus saw its President, Alexander Lukashenko, halt privatization, centralize power, and nationalize finance.  While Ukraine even prior to 2022 had lost 70% of it industry and sees 80% of its well educated population below the poverty line, Belorussian unemployment is 1% and her industry has grown by an average of 10% yearly since 2000.  The U.S. attempted a coup attempt in Belarus in 2021, which failed. Prior to the wars that ravaged both states, Libya and Syria were also registering double digit yearly growth, popular presidents and both countries were closing in on first world status.  Both countries had state controlled banks and state-directed investments.  The state was a partner in investment, not the result of it.  Saddam was doing the same thing until the US engineered war in Iraq.

The Burmese state bank is under the control of a major general.  The Burmese are taking no chances with foreign manipulation of their currency.  Given the country’s civil war, western sanctions and separatist movements, it has still managed to build 10 universities since 1999, several dozen dams, increased literacy to 80% and ensured that peasants own their own land.

***

Appendix B provides a caveat to the willpower behind the central bank system by discussing the rise of a self-perpetuating capitalist matrix.

---

1 Goodson, selected passages from 54-60.

2 Ibid, selected passages from 76-82.

3 Ibid, 95.

4 Ibid, selected passages from 121-136.

5 One detailed analysis argues that a 1% increase in Germany’s forces would have won them the war in Russia.

6 Goodson, 138-139.

7 Mullins, 109.

8 Goodson, 140-142.

9 Ibid, 66-68.

10 Perloff, 65.

11 Goodson, 151-154.

12 Ibid, 183-184.

Continued from Part 1…

This part offers some takeaways from this essay, which are much more about perspective re-alignment than calls for concrete action.

TAKEAWAYS AND REASONS FOR HOPE

Writing this essay has been like wiping ten layers of dirt off an old book.1  People in prior generations hadn’t suffered nearly as much virulent, pervasive, sophisticated and sustained propaganda as what we have experienced today.  Testosterone levels were higher, people were a healthy weight, average IQs were 14 points higher, they were more religious, more community oriented, and hadn’t undergone the process of media indoctrination that turned people who consumed it into zombie-like NPCs.  Today, most people don’t have a clue where to start in determining what their interests are.  As Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov observed, the West has been the victim of an extreme, long-term strategy of ideological subversion: “What it basically means is: [a deliberate effort] to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.”

This essay has attempted to explain to ideological dissidents how our elites attempt to confuse them what their interests are. It has attempted to provide mostly descriptive as opposed to prescriptive arguments, documenting each step in the chain of reasoning employed, arguing consequentially based on evidence and logic and not deontologically based on faith, for the reader to agree with or disagree with using his own discernment and conscience.

The following are some general takeaways that hopefully may be of some use.

---

Takeaway #1: A theory about society should ultimately be judged by its predictive value.  

If societal trends have been properly considered and analyzed, it should have predictive value about the future.  The mainstream perspective of history as progress, known as Whig history, woefully fails to explain the decline of America or the west generally, especially since the 1970s when average wages peaked.  Francis Fukuyama exemplifies this perspective with his 1992 book The End of History and the Last Man where he saw the collapse of the Soviet Union as the end-point of human history and the universalization of western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.  Because the predictive value of history-as-progress has been so poor for multiple generations, alternative perspectives, such as the one laid out in this essay, should be considered and judged based on its predictive ability for future events and the clarity it brings to present and past events.  (The predictive value of any theory will never be perfect; but getting as close to possible to understanding reality is a noble objective, and as Robert Browning said, “A man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?”).

For those with rigid, fixed world-views who are faced with new circumstances that go against their world-views, unless they are willing to demonstrate flexibility, admit error and update their perspectives, even if that involves difficult modifications, it can result in mental glitch-outs or breakdowns.  This has already happened to quite a few people, and as we descend further into hard living via neoliberal feudalism the phenomenon will become more common.  This can be ameliorated to an extent if a person tries to be consciously aware of the biases and assumptions that inform their views (we all have such biases and assumptions) and to be flexible if situations arise that cut against their current beliefs.

---

Takeaway #2: People respond to labels of “good” and “bad”, and the way people develop those labels is via morality tales.  

“An error which is not resisted is approved; a truth which is not defended is suppressed…He who does not oppose an evident crime is open to the suspicion of secret complicity.”  – Pope Felix III, quoted by Pope Leo XIII

This essay is a morality tale. While it describes how narratives are created, how they are disseminated, and why people believe them, at it’s core it is about a small, evil cabal that hijacks these instincts in most people in order to steal from them and murder them.  It is a tale of the masses of humanity who get bamboozled against their own interests when many just want to participate in their community, earn enough money to survive and leave a little positive mark on the world.  This cabal will start wars, they will lie, cheat and steal, they will do anything in the name of some nebulous “greater good” they pay lip service to that ultimately only benefits themselves, such as fake-concern about global warming or COVID or a Russia/Ukraine war or a 20 year Afghanistan war.  They will do anything, say anything, with a brutal end-justifies-the-means mentality every step of the way. This is a morality tale against these people.

---

Takeaway #3: Central banks need to be publicly owned.

“Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take away from them the power to create money and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money.” – Josiah Stamp, director of the Bank of England 1928-1941

The ability for a privately owned central bank to print money out of thin air and lend it at interest to the government can and will be used to steal that nation’s wealth, first slowly and then quickly; and they will use those printed funds to aggressively repeat this process in other nations.  By purchasing the media, bribing politicians and establishing enforcement organizations like the FBI, DOJ, and CIA to protect the central bank owners and punish their enemies, a deadly energy is unleashed, creating a feedback loops that ultimately crushes opposition even when the public is overwhelmingly against their actions.

That being said, central banks are likely never going to be abolished.  History shows that centralization always beats decentralization as a general principle no matter how much one would wish it to be otherwise.  Christianity beat Hellenism, in part, because Christianity was much more centralized with its regional Bishops.  Technological societies also always beat less technologically advanced societies.  Central banks were an innovation and it seems unimaginable to return to an era without them.  But central banks should be publicly owned, transparent and with regular audits.  History shows that the wealth and well-being of citizens in publicly owned central banks vastly outstrips that of countries with privately (or crypto-privately) owned central banks.  See Appendix A for details.  

In an optimal world there would also be a re-introduction of a reoccurring, periodic debt jubilee, whereby all public and private debts are wiped out. 

This issue impacts every country that has a Rothschild owned central bank, which is basically every country in the world.  Everyone in these countries has been enslaved by this privately owned central bank scheme and therefore everyone has an incentive once they become aware of it to resist this structure in order to restore their independence.  This system is so pernicious precisely because the vast majority of people are unaware of their status as slaves.  Slavery in the world was never abolished, instead it broadened to a much broader population by becoming indirect; populations slaving away with physical labor to pay interest on unbacked fiat debt created out of thin air.  Thus central banks need to be nationalized – and not just nationalized in name, but fully and completely, with robust transparency and regular, professional audits to ensure that nasty games like the falsely nationalized Bank of England don’t get played. 

This global problem requires a global solution; all the people’s of the world are unknowing slaves and they all have an interest once they identify their real interests in resisting it. Compare the scope of this argument to a dissident ideology with a narrow focus like white nationalism.  While white westerners are increasingly developing a racial self-identity as they become a hated upcoming-minority in their own countries, America is only 60% white and quite indoctrinated against racial self-awareness, and the rest of the west isn’t far behind; the white percent of the world population has declined from 25% in 1900 to only 6.5% today. Juxtapose this with pre-World War 2 Germany which was 98% white and where white nationalism was an easy Schelling point.  Therefore, the central bank approach is a much better Schelling point for present conditions, and one broadly applicable to the world.

---

Takeaway #4: Awareness of the methods and intent of media programming is crucial toward freeing one’s mind from their propaganda.

The hope of this essay is that it serves as a deprogramming tool for a small number of people who are natural dissidents but whose brains have been fogged by propaganda; to restructure one’s worldview to focus on the importance of policies that concretely promote ones family, friends, and community. The goal is not some nebulous thing as “democracy”, the chase of which has led to nothing but death and destruction in its wake. The goal is the implementation of policies that improve the social, economic, and general well being for the majority of a country’s citizens even if it takes coming at the expense of the central bank owners, and to learn to make persuasive arguments to regular people to solicit their support for such ends that doesn’t trigger their fight/flight response.

Because people learn by repetition and not one-time exposure to truth, it takes lots of time repeating ideas before it sinks in for them.  This is not a rational process and one is never going to “win someone over” with one slam-dunk airtight argument in a single sitting.  You have to wear them down over time from all angles, gradually acclimating them to the alternative until they can break out of their programming.  Therefore, dissidents should be encouraged to find communities online and offline who reinforce one’s natural beliefs instead of confuse them (which can be a challenge in an era of mass censorship and crackdowns).

If free speech is allowed, online communities always become right-leaning over time.  This Salon article explains why any unmoderated forum always morphs into pro-law and order over time – the author tries to smear the concept as “fascist”, which is a Pavlovian trigger term.2 It is the reason why the government has worked so hard to keep dissident voices from gaining a critical mass on social media; if they allow the counter-programming to be normalized, the sheer message volume will result in capturing the minds of the masses, which is not based in logic but in repetition and consensus building. 

Deprogramming from a lifetime of propaganda brainwashing is something that takes years, decades, or perhaps a lifetime to accomplish.  Reading an insane news article by a clickbait pussyhat wearer and rejecting its conclusions still plants the seeds and framing of that argument within your mind – it’s much better not to read such an article at all.  To consume content mindfully and carefully will decrease globohomo’s propaganda control over our minds, and will decrease the establishment’s ability to herd us into the exact reaction they want in their false action-reaction-synthesis dialectic. Your mind is their target. 

Once you begin deprogramming yourself, it opens the door to questioning and re-examining every official narrative with a critical, unbiased eye no matter how low-status it seems: whether it’s the moon landing or chemtrails or the poisoning of the food supply or vaccines or the public school indoctrination complex or a million other things.  Establishment narrative control was comforting because it told everyone what to believe and established consensus. But now the consensus is shattered and everyone has to make up their own minds. The hope is that a new consensus can be formed around a belief that the establishment is evil and the Rothschild central banks across the world should be disbanded.

---

Takeaway #5: Christianity was likely concocted as a Paul-led meta-narrative to undermine and destroy gentile Rome.

Christianity featured a number of cutting-edge, revolutionary memetic features that allowed it to outcompete paganism over time: (1) a Heaven vs. Hell motivational carrot and stick, compared to Hades where everyone went under Hellenism; (2) centralized regional Bishops vs. decentralized, disorganized priests under Hellenism (a core trend in human history is that centralization (almost?) always beats decentralization); and (3) it focused on raising the status of the poor masses, both spiritually and by providing charity (offering free food and shelter). 

Despite its origins, Christianity eventually found its footing and balance with a rigid, hierarchical Catholicism that tempered the worst equality impulses of the religion.  By attacking and removing the hierarchical structure beginning with Luther, the subjective, individualistic Protestants led directly to Unitarianism which in turn led to the secular Unitarian globalism that most of society believes in today, hidden under a false belief in rationalism and science.  

Because core Christian doctrines encourage believers to turn the other cheek, wait for justice in the afterlife, and emphasize the equality of mankind, and with a weakening of the hierarchical Catholicism which balanced these energies, Christianity has become too patient, deferential and afterlife-focused to forcefully oppose the central bank owners or media manipulation schemes.  Even though they are fundamentally allies in this struggle against globohomo, the rigid hierarchy of Catholicism has been hollowed out from the inside – consider the current globohomo Pope or ponder the College of Cardinals that elected him – and one may unfortunately expect many to waffle and drag their feet on any necessary reform.

---

Takeaway #6:  The end goal is a balance between the extreme energies of equality and priestliness we have today and the energies of hierarchy, nobility, and warrior-hood.  

The way a civilization works is that whatever core value animates it is pushed and pushed to a more and more extreme level, like a snowball rolling down a hill, until it results in a singularity where that value wipes out all others, or that civilization is either conquered or undergoes a transvaluation of values.  In the case of western civilization, the core value is equality (expressed currently as the push for racial, sexual, and sexual orientation equality by leveling-down any higher functioning group down to the lowest common denominator), and it will be pushed far past the point of sanity, as is already occurring, until it either results in the leftist singularity or a transvaluation of values occurs (or the west is militarily conquered).

Having unbalanced priestly vs. warrior energies one way or the other is unhealthy both for society and for one’s soul.  There should be an equilibrium between these polarities and in modern society there is no middle ground; it is pure Rothschild central bank control with slave morality and racial strife for the masses.  The ideals of inequality and master morality should be appreciated for its positive values such as its emphasis on greatness, strength, directness, honesty, nobility, and for its benefits of creating stability and accountability, while balanced with a priestly degree of equality, dynamism and other-worldliness.

Whether such a balance comes from a new secular movement, a new religion (as Spandrell argues), or a reinvigoration of hierarchical Catholicism, people are only willing to fight and die for promises of reward either in this life or in the afterlife.  Christianity and Islam offer eternal rewards for faith; Nazism offered high status to all Germans even as it ignored the question of what happens in the afterlife; Western Democracy promised higher quality of secular life due to “freedom” and rampant consumerism; communism offered “free goods”.  Removing the Rothschild private central bank cancer from humanity’s midst would drastically increase people’s quality of life worldwide.  Could it serve as a sufficient motivational Schelling point for the world to transvalue these priestly energies and regain autonomy for people worldwide?

Any major change is unlikely to come from reform of Rothschild-controlled existing institutions.  Various attempts to reform the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, Homeland Security, the university system and the media have been tried and they have all failed (such as the Church Committee).  These organizations are too institutionally corrupt and insular to accept sunlight or reform, and they protect each other from any meaningful change using all sorts of underhanded, shady, corrupt practices.  The FBI now officially denies Congress a right of oversight.3  As H.L. Mencken put it more than half a century ago, “[The Department of Justice] has been engaged in sharp practices since the earliest days and remains a fecund source of oppression and corruption today.  It is hard to recall an administration in which it was not the center of grave scandal.”4  Professor Angelo Codvevilla, Professor of International Relations at Boston University and who served as a professional staff member of the Select Committee on Intelligence of the United States Senate, specifically argues that the CIA needs to be dissolved.  One can vote for Republicans or outsiders to try to slow the establishment’s full takeover of society, but until a leader addresses the core of these issues head-on, the governmental issues plaguing society will keep rolling inexorably toward the leftist singularity.

---

Takeaway #7: Don’t despair even if things get much worse.  

This is a hard takeaway because everything looks like the forces of evil are winning and that God is non-interventionist and doesn’t care.  The reasons not to despair are that (1) the establishment really wants you to despair; the more you despair and are passive toward their agenda, thinking they are destined to win, the easier it will be for them to implement their agenda; (2) to despair is to assume you know the outcome of the future, which no one does and history is full of surprises (Spengler agrees with this5); (3) globohomo feeds off western civilization like a parasite feeds off its host, and western civilization is sick and dying; to assume a parasite can both survive and thrive after its host dies is questionable (this is the globohomo paradox: the more globohomo “wins” and levels down society to the lowest common denominator, the harder it may be for the system to continue to function because its competence level decreases); (4) globohomo is simply about materialist control over man, and we know that every ideological system of government over the past 2,000 years has failed, including Soviet communism, so western anti-white racism seems destined to fail sooner or later.  As the proverb goes, “Man plans and God laughs.”  In the grand cycle empires rise by promoting multiculturalism, which in turn decreases civic virtue, and which ultimately destroys the empire; hence empires always carry within them the seeds of their own end.  Despair plays into the hands of your enemies and you should reject it out of hand.  There is always hope.6

Furthermore, as times become more difficult as the Great Reset and neoliberal feudalism are achieved, the more people will be desperate for an answer to address it.  During times of plenty people are generally happy with the status quo and unwilling to consider change (this is part of the reason why Ron Paul’s messaging failed), but people’s quality of lives and standards of living are now decreasing drastically which increases the possibility for more radical change.  If the Great Reset is accomplished and if the Rothschilds and their allies take all the world’s wealth and centralize it, exposing themselves for the world to see (as they increasingly are) that may just be what is needed before their final unraveling.  Material wealth and spirituality have a strong inverse correlation, and weak economic times will result in an increased search for answers in God and religion. 

---

Takeaway #8:  Stop looking to anyone else to save you on an individual level.  

Based on thousands of years of history, it is a regular occurrence that group populations pay the price for actions of their leaders and forebears, and God’s laws includes a substantial amount of blood guilt; the wrongs you have caused today may not be felt until your grandchildren’s generation, no matter how much we may find such results unjust.  We collectively may have to pay a big price for the deeds of our ancestors.  Understand the rural vs urban divide between fertility rates and political orientation; conservatives living in rural areas have many more children than liberals living in cities and a much higher quality of life.  There’s a reason that pagan means “rural” or “rustic” in Latin; it’s because the pagan rural class were the most resistant to the expansion of Christianity in Roman times.  If one hopes to maintain the beliefs and traditions of Western Civilization as most of society becomes subsumed to the secular post-Christian cult of equality, being in a rural area is likely the best place you can be (well, at least until globohomo shoves as many illegal immigrants into rural areas as they can).  One should count on yourself and your family and friends, not on some far-off figure like Q, Trump, Carlson or Musk to save you.  

---

Final Takeaway: Keep believing in God and objective truth.  

The existence of evil manifested in sociopathic liberals plus their seemingly embodiment of a higher creative, destructive energy must, by the law of opposites, entail that an opposing Godly, good energy exists as well.  Even if a Godly energy didn’t exist, because people must always believe in something, the belief in a loving God protects them from putting their faith in dangerous ideologies that invariably result in the murder of tremendous numbers of people.  Pope Leo XIII said, “To suffer and to endure…is the lot of humanity.  Let men strive as they may, no strength and no artifice will ever succeed in banishing from human life the ills and troubles which beset it.”7  

Or consider Ernst Jünger.  Jünger would ask himself during World War 2 what one could “advise a man, especially a simple man, to do in order to extricate himself from the conformity that is constantly being produced by technology?” In contrast to Carl Schmitt, the answer Jünger, an atheist, eventually settled on was: “Only prayer.” For, “In situations that can cause the cleverest of us to fail and the bravest of us to look for avenues of escape, we occasionally see someone who quietly recognizes the right thing to do and does good. You can be sure that is a man who prays.” Ultimately only a recovery of a sense of the transcendent, he decided, could serve as an antidote to nihilistic modernity’s temptations. Without it, “our freedom of will and powers of resistance diminish; the appeal of demonic powers becomes more compelling, and its imperatives more terrible.”8 

Alexander Solzhnetizyn sums up how the absence of belief in God leads to a person putting their faith in dogmas that results in death and destruction, regardless of any supposedly noble intention: 

“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: ‘Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.’”  

One wrestles with how mankind can adapt itself to minimize suffering in the present and in the future by abiding by God’s will, but this globohomo oligarchy full of lies and destruction is not the way to anything but endless human suffering.  To move forward into the next chapter requires a greater awareness of the nature of propaganda among the general population, a reintroduction of hierarchy and a return to a serious belief in God.

***

Thank you for reading if you’ve reached this far. I hope this essay has been educational for your journey. This essay is and will remain free, and I may go back and update various points as time and circumstances permit.

Please note there are two appendixes: Appendix A provides a brief look at the history of central bank initiated wars, while Appendix B provides a caveat to the central bank owner system by discussing the rise of a self-perpetuating capitalist matrix.

---

1 It is a journey with no final destination; as Johann Carl Friedrich Gauss said, “It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. When I have clarified and exhausted a subject, then I turn away from it, in order to go into darkness again. The never-satisfied man is so strange; if he has completed a structure, then it is not in order to dwell in it peacefully, but in order to begin another. I imagine the world conqueror must feel thus, who, after one kingdom is scarcely conquered, stretches out his arms for others.”

2 The term “fascism” derives its name from the Italian word “fasces”, meaning the bundle of rods which ancient Roman officials carried into court to punish offenders.  Thus, fascism historically means law and order, the rule of law, and the intent to punish criminals — which is what the central bank owners wish to avoid at all cost, and why they have created a Pavlovian trigger mechanism in the masses tying the term and its underlying concepts to evil.

3 “Oversight request must be weighed against the Department’s interests in protecting the integrity of its work.” Per this link.

4 Gore Vidal, Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, 93.

5 Spengler, The Decline of the West, 140: “On the surface of history it is the unforeseen that reigns. Every individual event, decision and personality is stamped with its hall-mark. No one foreknew the storm of Islam at the coming of Mohammed, nor foresaw Napoleon in the fall of Robespierre. The coming of great men, their doings, their fortune, are all incalculables. No one knows whether a development that is setting in powerfully will accomplish its course in a straight line like that of the Roman patrician order or will go down in doom like that of the Hohenstaufen or the Maya Culture. And — science notwithstanding — it is just the same with the destinies of every single species of beast and plant within earth-history and beyond even this, with the destiny of the earth itself and all the solar systems and Milky Ways. The insignificant Augustus made an epoch, and the great Tiberius passed away ineffective. Thus, too, with the fortunes of artists, art- works and art-forms, dogmas and cults, theories and discoveries. That, in the whirl of becoming, one element merely succumbed to destiny when another became (and often enough has continued and will continue to be) a destiny itself – that one vanishes with the wave-train of the surface while the other makes this, is something that is not to be explained by any why-and-wherefore and yet is of inward necessity.”

6 On the flip side, try not to become an accelerationist, which (according to one meaning) is to hope things fall apart faster so more people will wake up, like the frog in a cooking pot.  Most of the accelerationists use magical thinking, assuming that 1. acceleration will somehow lead to collapse or overthrow of globohomo; 2. they personally will emerge out of such acceleration with their preferred political model and with much higher social status; and 3. even if they get desired collapse, that they wouldn’t starve to death or become a victim of a cannibal rape gang.  It is a naive perspective. 

7 Peikoff, 148.

8 But note that Jünger himself received criticism, although his concept of an anarch who maintains independent thought regardless of external circumstances is a powerful one.    According to Julius Evola, “Jünger…should be numbered among those individuals who first subscribed to ‘Conservative Revolutionary’ ideas but were later, in a way, traumatized by the National Socialist experience, to the point of being led to embrace the kind of sluggishly liberal and humanistic ideas which conformed to the dominant attempt ‘to democratically reform’ their country; individuals who have proven incapable of distinguishing the positive side of past ideas from the negative, and of remaining true to the former. Alas, this incapability to discern is, in a way, typical of contemporary Germany (the land of the ‘economic miracle’).” 

Continued from Deeper Societal Trends Predating the Central Banks: Part 2…

Before offering suggestions deriving from the information contained in this essay, this part first looks at commonly perceived competitors to our financial elites including Sunni and Shiite Islam, Poland, Russia and China, concluding that they are all as controlled as the West.

A PROBLEM CAN ONLY BE SOLVED TO THE EXTENT IT IS ADDRESSED

A problem can only be addressed to the extent it is known, identified and planned for.  As Chesterton said, “You’ll never find the solution if you don’t see the problem.”  A dying patient who has cancer and, as a result of that cancer, has multiple other issues affecting his health, can see improved health by addressing the symptoms of those issues by taking various drugs, but unless the cancer itself is directly eradicated the patient will still be dying even if it’s slowed down by the other treatments.

It is much the same way in politics and ideology.  Let’s consider examples of a person or group who mis-diagnosed problem and what happened thereafter:

• Trump was elected on a reformist platform; his supporters elected him to reform the excesses of society and bring it back to how it was a couple of decades ago.  His hero was Reagan and he tried to style himself that way, even copying his “Make America Great Again” slogan. The institutions he trusted were the institutions his boomer generation trusted.  He read the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post and did everything he could to ingratiate himself to these people.  Trump was small-minded with the heart and soul of a merchant, not a warrior, and simply wanted a reversion back to the “good times” of a prior generation.  His historical knowledge was absent and he stumbled from one crisis to the next with no vision.  Unable to see clearly the forces he was up against  – an entrenched civil service close to impossible to fire, a leadership of racial bolshevik partisans working to undermine the core fabric of society, Rothschild-owned central banks immune to “public pressure” with their own longterm plans, and the equality cult of supercharged crypto-Christianity – he was always destined to lose.
• The 1/6 protesters were the same way.  These people believed that America has a system of representative government and that they needed to show up and make their voice heard, to have their protest be seen in large numbers so the country could understand that the election was stolen. They were trying to solve a problem by “bringing the country back” to where it was a couple of decades ago.  By having such a fundamentally incorrect understanding of who runs America, how politics is “kayfabe” and power is centralized in a hidden, malevolent oligarchy that owns the media, utilizing D.C. institutions to frame people and events with embedded agents (they did this at Charlottesville too), they would have been well advised to stay away from such an event.
• Consider the example of Francisco Franco in Spain.  His vision for society was to keep it monarchical with traditional values and Christianity as its core.  In essence he wanted to keep society at an early 20th century level, static and frozen in time.  And he was able to keep it this way, with a sclerotic, atrophied ruling class for the time he was alive. The moment he died though, the youth, who were already heavily indoctrinated into globalism by liberal university professors, pushed Spain to join globohomo and overthrow all of their traditions, which happened immediately.  By having such a limited vision Spain under Franco was always destined to lose.Franco died in 1975; the elections of 1977 led to the liberalization of Spain and the immediate ruination of Franco’s legacy. Eventually Franco’s grave was exhumated and his remains moved to a common grave, forbidden from being draped in the Spanish flag.

There are an unlimited number of examples of those whose incorrect diagnosis of a problem rendered their efforts ineffective from the very start. 

The European blogger Kynosarges makes a similar argument, castigating the short-sightedness of right wing populism, which he believes has six major deficiencies:

1. Right-wing populists have no awareness of the depth of the [societal] problem and the necessity of a massive social transformation. 
2. Right-wing populists consider metapolitics irrelevant. They view our plight as strictly a matter of state policy, therefore solvable by the legislative and executive branches (which is understandable given point 1). 
3. Right-wing populists do not command parliamentary majorities or sole governments – neither in the past nor in the present, nor likely in the future. They are always in opposition or dependent on coalition partners who are not right-wing populists. 
4. The institutional corset of late liberalism narrows the factual scope for political action to such a degree that profound changes are impossible. 
5. Right-wing populists offer no grand designs for solutions because they lack a positive alternative framework beyond “liberalism without foreigners” (which is closely linked to points 1 and 2). 
6. Right-wing populists are objectively too slow even where they bring about changes. A critical comparison between the development of right-wing populism and demographics during recent decades clearly shows that this approach is impossible solely due to lack of time (ignoring points 1–5)…

Because of these six issues, according to Kynosarges,

[Right wing populists] have no concept of how to actively solve the problems of late modernity or liberalism. They offer no counter-culture that goes beyond reactionary ideas. They become almost apolitical when they merely retreat into their nation-state bunkers (typical for Poland or Slovakia). They lack a dynamic counter-ideal, and they are not at all equipped to propagate such an ideal to the furthest corners of the West (and beyond), as the chief enemy is (still) capable of doing.

The equation of our identity with the liberal state (e.g. the Federal Republic of Germany as the land of the Germans) inevitably leads to disappointments and at best to the realization that this state neither defends nor recognizes our identity, sometimes even destroys it. No Western constitution has a decidedly identitarian foundation, nor is there any trend in that direction. Anyway such a foundation would be incompatible with the self-concept of liberalism (universalism, egalitarianism, individualism) – the left is correct on that point! But right-wing populists believe that liberalism would only need a “right-wing” orientation to solve the problem, thanks to insufficient analysis….

Modernity can only be overcome with the experiences of modernity, not by an utterly impossible return to an earlier or pre-modern era. The profound change that is now necessary is not genuinely political but belongs to the cultural, metapolitical sphere. Such a counter-enlightenment or counter-culture requires – in contrast to the liberalist eclecticism of right-wing populists – a spiritual preparation for a new European myth that binds us to our oldest past and reconciles us with our future. Nothing less than such an attempt at European rebirth is our task and the most promising exit from political modernity.

Therefore, the solution to this supercharged equality cult can only be solved, to the extent it is possible, by addressing the heart of the matter and causing at least a partial transvaluation of priestly values back into warrior values which value strength, immediacy, and hierarchy; perhaps an equilibrium between priest/warrior values may be reached through something like a reinvigorated hierarchical Catholicism, or something new, either secular or religious.  The difficulty of addressing this core issue while relying on mostly allies with internalized lopsided priestly values (because the number of individuals who have transvalued the extreme hyper-focus on equality is very, very low) makes such a scenario difficult to imagine at this time.  It is up to the Fates how and if this is even possible at this late hour.

---

A REVIEW OF MAJOR NATIONS SEEN AS RESISTANT TO GLOBOHOMO

Before offering some suggestions and conclusions in Part 2, let’s look at the state of major nations which are publicly perceived as containing some degree of resistance to the established order – Iran, Sunni Islam countries, China, Russia, Poland and a brief look at Mormonism too. Are any or all of these ideologically resistant to globohomo? Do they possess a “dynamic counter-ideal” and if so are they “equipped to propagate such an ideal to the furthest corners of the West”, or perhaps they may “become almost apolitical when they merely retreat into their nation-state bunkers”? To what extent are they controlled, directly or indirectly, by globalist institutions?

SUNNI ISLAM

It was a question for years whether true believers of Islam (which itself has a questionable history1) would submit to globohomo, but if this data is correct (and it may not be, given the source is a compilation of establishment outlets) the trends indicate the Sunni Middle East is undergoing rapid secularization: 

Between 2012 and 2019 North Africa Muslim countries significantly liberalized, and it looks like these trends are continuing.  Even Saudi Arabia is liberalizing, allowing women to drive starting in 2018.  Other mainstream outlets have run with commentary on the same trends including the NYT and BBC. Saudi Arabia’s relationship with Israel has become much more public, and both the Saudi Central bank and the Central Bank of UAE are moving forward with globalist, anti-freedom CBDC projects.  Saudi’s artificial The Line project in Neom will give their leaders a much greater degree of control of its citizens in line with World Economic Forum “15 minute city” goals. Saudi’s efforts at de-dollarization along with the BRIC nations are likely in-line with overarching globohomo goals.

On the other hand, over 80% of people polled in the Middle East rejected homosexuality as “morally unacceptable”, showing that cultural and moral resistance is greater than elsewhere. Either way, it will be interesting to see the impact of Islam’s increasing control as it demographically swamps Europe in the upcoming decades, as history consistently shows that it will seek to attain dominance.

SHIITE IRAN

Before 9/11 there were allegedly seven countries without Rothschild owned central banks: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea and Iran.  By 2003 Afghanistan and Iraq were swallowed up, and by 2011 Sudan and Libya were also gone.  In Libya, a Rothschild bank was established in Benghazi while the country was still at war after Gaddafi’s head banker Farhat Omar Bengdara proved to be a pro-globohomo mole. 

The two countries possibly remaining, Iran and North Korea, are regularly subject to extreme warmongering propaganda by the west, and this could explain why. It is also ironic because the western establishment overthrew the Shah of Iran because of his criticism of Jews; some like author Guido Giacomo Preparata believes Iran has always been controlled, where the Western intelligence services handed Iran to Khomeini (1979) who was living in Britain before the handover, much as the British handed Russia to the Bolsheviks (and Lenin was also living in the West beforehand).

With that said Iran is arguably cut off from the western financial system, suffering difficult sanctions, and they are vehement against the “Great Satan” (America) and the “Little Satan” (Israel).  Iran lives under Sharia law, homosexuals and transgenders have no place in society, and they place a strong emphasis on the family unit.  Ayatollah Khamenei tweeted in 2020:

“Women’s nudity and exploitation for men’s pleasure led to the destruction of families & the weakening of the foundation of the family in the West. When the family is weakened and destroyed in a society, corruption becomes institutionalized in that society. #FamilyDay.  In Western culture, a woman must expose herself to men in order to be a source of pleasure for them! Is there a graver form of oppression?! They call this ‘freedom,’ and the opposite they call ‘captivity’! While on the contrary, women’s modest dress brings them respect.  The West cunningly evades discussing the issue of the family. They bring up the issue of women in every discussion but don’t discuss the family. This is because the West’s weak point & record of failures are in the sphere of the family. #FamilyDay”. 

Iran is not totally immune to the issues that weaken a country against globalization, though.  Sharia law prohibits the charging of interest for loans but unfortunately Sharia compliant banking utilizes interest-based lending in all but name.

The major cities in Iran have dramatically secularized and liberalized: much of the 2009 pro-American protests against the Mullahs arose in its capital Tehran. Iran is also pursuing CBDCs which will be used to dramatically curtail individual freedom and expand the power of the state and they went along with the false COVID narrative, so even there it is unclear how truly independent they really are.

On a side note, Tehran has a dramatic sub-replacement birthrate despite being in a supposed ultra-religious country, while the rest of Iran has a birthrate of only 2.103 and declining.  This is reflective of a rural vs city divide for political beliefs throughout the world: cities worldwide are much more liberal than rural areas and rural areas have much higher fertility than urban areas, due in part to the increased religiousness and lower cost of living of living in the countryside.  Urban areas are also known as “IQ shredders”, where the country’s smartest (on paper) people go and compete and, due to the much higher cost of living, have sub-replacement fertility.2  In other words, the smartest (on paper) people in a country are continuously outbred by generally less intelligent (on paper) people living in rural areas.  So it seems the urban vs. city divide is a powerful one even in a religious country.

WHAT ABOUT MORMONS IN UTAH AND CONSERVATIVE COUNTRIES LIKE POLAND AND RUSSIA?

The degree of support for gay marriage is a decent indicator of the extent a country is willing to resist globohomo.  Judging by the below chart, Mormons in Utah and so-called conservative countries like Poland are only time-delayed from the degeneracy and societal breakdown experienced elsewhere; these areas will sooner or later have the same results as the rest of the world.  

Utah is so skin-suited that 2012 Republican presidential candidate and Mormon Utah Senator Mitt Romney voted in favor of nationally legalizing gay marriage in 2022, even though Mormons had led the drive against it in California in 2008, only 14 years prior. 

Russia, except for gay marriage, is already considerably more liberal than Poland in many ways.  Per Anatoly Karlin, “Russians are much less religious, at least in terms of active practice, and the [Russian Orthodox Church] is less influential than the Catholic Church. Abortion is legal, while it is not in Poland – and the conservatives there now want to make these restrictions all the more total by even banning “eugenic” abortion.”  Russia has one of the highest divorce rates in the world, higher than the United States.  Russians also have much less inclination to live in a homogenous society. Just like the rest of the west, Russia is likely controlled by the world central bank owners: it has a Rothschild owned central bank (which, per Russian blogger Stanley Sheppard, is used to keep Russia deliberately impoverished3), Putin was a World Economic forum young leader, he initially rose to power as a corrupt security apparatchik firmly under the thumb of the west, he fires critics of Chabad and helps finance the west’s war to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, and Russia has been gung-ho about the COVID narrative, COVID vaccine passports and upcoming CBDCs.4  

On the other hand, Russia was reportedly suspended from the Bank for International Settlements in 2022, it has a very low debt to GDP ratio (11.9%, compared to 113.8% in the United States), and Russia remains somewhat resistant to social liberalism, but it’s ability to resist the onslaught of globohomo seems highly questionable.

For Poland, Russia, and Utah, then, these pseudo-right wing areas seem destined to lose and turn liberal over time.  This is because they have no proactive ideal for which to inspire a population, as opposed to merely reacting powerlessly to a disappeared history that will never return.  As Kynosarges stated above, these groups “have no concept of how to actively solve the problems of late modernity or liberalism. They offer no counter-culture that goes beyond reactionary ideas.”

WHAT ABOUT CHINA?

Currently China is either a peer or near-peer of the United States in terms of military and economic power.  A look at China’s post-war history, combined with its pro-globohomo policies on a wide variety of issues (COVID vaccines, lockdowns, social credit systems, CBDCs) as well as continued American financial and military elite support casts a great deal of doubt as to China’s independence, even though the specific control mechanisms by the world central bank owners are obscured.  Just a handful of examples of such support includes:

• General Milley promising to tell China ahead of time if Trump would attack them.
• Blackrock investing in Chinese military and spy companies.
• Blackstone investing heavily in China.
• US pension funds investing heavily in China.
• The Rockefeller’s bankrolling Chinese based “nonprofits” with ties to the government.
• Mitch McConnell’s wife abusing her office to help her family firm with China business and
• Hunter Biden being paid millions by a Chinese state-linked energy firm for pay-for-play favors.

This corrupt behind the scenes relationship is two-sided: Senator Dianne Feinstein had a Chinese spy in her office for 20 years; Congressman Eric Swawell had an affair with a Chinese spy; the Chinese have bought up vast swaths of American and Canadian real estate, many Communist party members are employed by western companies and a large number of former Congressmen and Senators regularly lobby (e.g. “bribe”) on China’s behalf, are also just a handful of recent examples.

Could it be this is just part of “global integration” and they’re just using each other, without China being subject to actual globohomo control? That’s what many Chinese analysts argue, and pro-Chinese bloggers such as Spandrell believe Xi has “purged” many globalist elements there over the last decade. A look at the history of U.S. and communist China relations, however, provides substantial support that this view is false and that the Rothschilds control China, although the specific control mechanisms are hidden.  Let’s briefly delve into an account of this…

A brief history of modern U.S./China relations

In 1949 the communists took over China with the help of deliberate Washington meddling.  Chiang Kai-shek, a faithful nationalist ally of the U.S., was trying to establish a constitutional republic, but General Marshall, acting on President Truman’s instructions, demanded that Chiang accept the communists into his government or forfeit U.S. support.  Marshall also negotiated truces that saved the communists from imminent defeat and which they exploited to regroup and seize more territory.  Finally, he slammed a weapons embargo on the nationalist government, just as the communists had been urging him to do.  Marshall returned home and was appointed Secretary of State.  Thanks to the U.S. embargo, the nationalists ran out of ammunition.  Congress voted to send $125 million in military aid to Chiang, but Truman held up implementation until China collapsed.5  On January 25, 1949, John F. Kennedy declared before the House of Representatives: “Mr. Speaker, over this weekend we have learned the extent of the disaster that has befallen China and the United States. The responsibility for the failure of our foreign policy in the Far East rests squarely with the White House and the Department of State. The continued insistence that aid would not be forthcoming, unless a coalition government with the Communists were formed, was a crippling blow to the National Government.” He reaffirmed this in a speech five days later, concluding: “This is the tragic story of China, whose freedom we once fought to preserve. What our young men had saved, our diplomats and our President have frittered away.”6

Our China policy then worked toward rapprochement with the communists as swiftly as the American people could be persuaded to allow it.  Every President since FDR has had a part in this continuum: 

• Roosevelt ceded Manchurian ports to Stalin during World War II and agreed to equip the Soviets’ expedition into China, where they armed Mao Tse-tung’s revolutionaries.
• Truman through his proxy, George Marshall, permitted the fall of China by truce negotiations, a weapons embargo against the nationalists, and the obstruction of congressionally mandated military aid.
• Eisenhower forced Taiwan to relinquish the Tachen Islands to Peking and interceded to prevent Chiang Kai-shek from invading the mainland in 1955.
• Kennedy also prevented Chiang from invading the mainland in 1962 when it was in turmoil and ripe for overthrow.
• Johnson terminated economic aid to Taiwan.
• Nixon visited China, breaking the ice with the communists.  That same year, despite the atrocities committed by the CCP, the Rockefeller’s had this to say: “The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.”
• Ford presided over the withdrawal of most of the U.S. troops from Taiwan, and visited the mainland.
• Carter broke relations with Taiwan, recognized Peking.
• Reagan proliferated trade with Red China and promised reduced arms sales to Taiwan.7

Step by step, our China policy followed an essentially unwavering course regardless of which party occupied the White House.  This history has a pattern, and as Thomas Jefferson once said: “Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.”8

China was then “allowed” to join the World Trade Organization in 2001.  An analysis by the nonprofit Economic Policy Institute, a labor-oriented think tank, estimated in January 2020 that the U.S. trade deficit with China resulted in the loss of 3.7 million jobs from 2001-2018, greatly furthering the de-industralization of America:

American consumers profited from cheaper, poorly made goods, but the damage to society far outweighed the benefits.  And it was intentional: “The major problem was not that China joined the WTO, but that the U.S. failed to enforce China’s commitments even though in China’s WTO accession agreement we included extremely strict and unique enforcement provisions against China,” said Barshefsky.  Despite the relative ease with which affected companies could file for safeguard measures, only three such applications were filed during the Bush administration and the president denied all three of them “on some misplaced geopolitical calculation,” Barshefsky said. The sole import safeguard imposed against Chinese imports before the mechanism expired in 2013 was the Obama administration’s 2009 imposition of duties on Chinese tire imports linked to the loss of 5,000 U.S. jobs.  

Today companies like Ford, FedEx, Tesla, and Honeywell, as well as Qualcomm and other semiconductor manufacturers that fought to continue selling chips to Huawei, all exist with one leg in America and the other leg planted firmly in America’s chief geopolitical rival. To protect both halves of their business, they soft-sell the issue by calling China a competitor in order to obscure their role in boosting a dangerous rival.  Nearly every major American industry has a stake in China. From Wall Street — Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley — to hospitality. A Marriott Hotel employee was fired when Chinese officials objected to his liking a tweet about Tibet. They all learned to play by CCP rules, including forced technology transfers.  “It’s so pervasive, it’s better to ask who’s not tied into China,” says former Trump administration official Gen. (Ret.) Robert Spalding.  Bill Gates sees China’s ascension as a “huge win for the world” – why would he say this unless he and the other elites in his class were personally benefitting from it? [Although, to be fair, George Soros seems like he may be cut out personally and is upset about it. Mark Zuckerberg, in an attempt of shocking cravenness to buy political influence, tried to get President Xi to name his child, which he declined.]

Detailed anecdotes of the preferment well-connected westerners receive attending university in China in the present day also demonstrate the heavy influence of the west on their educational system; see here.

With the Chinese elites likely controlled by globalist puppetmasters, one can only assume that if there is ever a military conflict between China and America the purpose of it would be to further the overarching Great Reset goals as well as to drive up central bank debt to unimaginable levels. Therefore the war would likely be as fake (in terms of the central bank owners controlling both sides) and as preplanned as the current Ukraine war.9

***

Part 2 of “Suggestions and Takeaways” will offer some conclusions and takeaways from this essay.

---

1 There is almost no contemporary historical evidence about the life of Mohammad, with no mention of him at all in historical texts until 70 years after his death.

2 One can even see this trend developing in Taliban controlled Kabul.

3 Per Stanley Sheppard: “Exactly the right definition…”Washington consensus”. The term was coined not that long ago, back in 1989, and essentially means how finances of the third world countries should be managed. Initially it applied to South America, but as Soviet Union was dissolved, Russia was given the status like that of Brasil or Argentina. The consensus consists of the three core principles – manage population using Darwinian principles, tightly control money supply primarily by the means of high interest rates, do everything possible to prevent internal investments in the manufacturing sector or anything else working to develop own economy and to create a favorable internal investment climate. The extent to which this consensus is applied to countries varies – Russia gets one of the harshest treatments. Now the bigger question is, how and why Russian fiscal authorities during the all out proxy war are still compliant with imposed rules? This drives many people to conclusion that perhaps this is not a real war between Russia and the West, but a make believe conflict at the expense of Ukraine designed to achieve totally different goals vs. those pronounced by Putin last February.”  His Substack is available here.

4 See Edward Slavsquat’s Substack for detailed coverage.

5 Perloff, 88.

6 Ibid, 88-89. Also see here.

7 Ibid, 207-208.

8 Ibid.

9 On a side note, at least some of the Chinese population are aware of the problem of white leftists.  They even have a term for them: “baizuo”.  According to wikipedia, “‘Baizuo’ is a popular political epithet commonly used on the Chinese internet. The literal translation is “white left” which refers to western white leftists.  According to Chinese political scientist Chenchen Zhang, the word “Baizuo” refers to those who “only care about topics such as immigration, minorities, LGBT rights and the environment”, but lack a concept of “real problems in the real world”. It is also used to describe those “hypocritical humanitarians who advocate political correctness just to satisfy their own sense of moral superiority”.  Some used this word to indicate those “ignorant and arrogant westerners” who “pity the rest of the world and think they are saviours”.  Hopefully these sentiments will continue to grow, but in the meantime, globohomo in China remains firmly in the driver’s seat.