Find UFOs, The Apocalypse, New World Order, Political Analysis,
Alternative Health, Armageddon, Conspiracies, Prophecies,
Spirituality, Home Schooling, Home Mortgages and more, in:
Those people who have any doubts about where the narrative is headed for global economic stability simply have not been paying attention lately.
As I pointed out in my pre-Brexit referendum article, “Brexit: Global Trigger Event, Fake Out Or Something Else? “the story being scripted by the globalists is one of the “failures and crimes” of conservative movements. I predicted that the Brexit would pass based on this language used by international financiers and elites leading up to the vote.
The vast majority of analysts in the mainstream and in the alternative media refused to acknowledge the possibility that a successful Brexit actually works in FAVOR of the globalists, because it provides them a perfect scapegoat for a financial crisis that has been broiling for years and is now ready to burst into flames. I find still that many people will not dare to consider the idea that a successful conservative resurgence is actually part of the plan for globalist institutions. Many argue that the elites just don’t have that kind of pervasive control over the system, or that I am attributing “too much power and ability” to them.
I find this argument rather naive but also interesting, because many of the people who claim the elites do not have such influence were also the same people who argued before the Brexit that the elites would “never allow” the U.K. referendum to pass. So, do they have extensive influence, or don’t they? This kind of selective blindness to the game being played prevents a whole host of otherwise intelligent people from grasping reality.
These folks need to finally admit to themselves that they were half right; the globalists would not allow the passage of the Brexit, UNLESS, a successful Brexit actually works in their favor.
In my post-Brexit analysis I said that the meme of bumbling and destructive conservatives and “populists” would continue into the U.S. election, and so far it would seem this is exactly the case. In numerous mainstream articles globalists have been openly telling us exactly what is about to happen.
I find that the same naivety that developed during the Brexit campaign has also developed around the Trump campaign. Too many in the liberty movement will not entertain the idea that a Trump win is in the cards. Yet, the elites are using the same language in reference to the Trump campaign that they used before and after the Brexit.
Bloomberg’s latest report on the annual meetings of the IMF and World Bank showcase numerous warnings by the elites:
“The global economy has benefited tremendously from globalization and technological change,” the IMF’s top advisory panel said in a communique released on Saturday after meeting in Washington. “However, the outlook is increasingly threatened by inward-looking policies, including protectionism, and stalled reforms.”
“The IMF warned in its latest economic outlook that rising political tensions over open markets and free trade could undermine a recovery already lacking a growth engine.”
“In a rebuke to those advocating a turn away from trade, the members of the IMF panel redoubled their commitment to “maintain economic openness and reinvigorate global trade as a critical means to boost global growth.”
Barron’s reiterates the predictive programming, insinuating that a loss of faith in globalism and the financial elites will lead to disaster.
“Leaders gathered at the International Monetary Fund/World Bank annual meeting didn’t mention Donald Trump by name this week, but they warned the anti-trade and populist movements fueling his presidential campaign, as well as Brexit, could further slow already anemic economic growth.”
“…Populist movements have not fallen on deaf ears, with German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble noting during a panel on the global economy that: “More and more, people don’t trust their elites. They don’t trust their economic leaders, and they don’t trust their political leaders.”
Globalists are telling us what is about to happen.
I continue to hold to the position I always have — that Donald Trump is going to be ALLOWED into the White House, and that this will be a prelude to economic crisis. The stage is being set for a grand finale to our ongoing financial collapse. The great villain behind the whole disaster will be revealed, and we will be told that the villain is us.
By “us” I mean conservative movements in general, though, the mainstream media and globalist spokesmen refer to us more often today as “populists”, or maybe “deplorables.” Those people who think this brand of “conspiracy” is too far fetched because it requires an inordinate level of political and economic control have not really thought the situation through.
Fact – central banks and international financiers have already created the conditions necessary for economic instability. Fact – these same elites have staved off a larger or more immediate collapse over the past eight years through the use of fiat stimulus measures, market rigging and the manipulation of public perception. Fact – the elites can easily initiate an immediate collapse if they wish by simply refusing to prop up the system any longer. Fact – the elites have showcased the ability to stifle conservative movements in the past through interference and co-option (Tea Party, anyone?). Fact – they can also give conservative movements an opportunity to gain momentum by removing some of this interference.
The truth is, at this point globalists do not need expansive or intricate control over the system in order to cause a crisis or to place conservatives in the historical hot seat. All they have to do is step aside and let the train wreck happen. And, of course, they have to position themselves as prognosticators and saviors once the crisis event occurs.
The argument also arises that “people would never take the bait;” that the masses will not be fooled by the banking cabal into scapegoating conservatives for a crash the elites created. One can only hope. However, possession is nine-tenths of the law in the minds of many, and the mainstream has already conditioned the public with the notion that the mere presence of anti-globalist conservatives in positions of political authority will negatively affect market psychology.
Of course, this notion relies on the admission of certain truths. For example, the globalists would have to admit that the fiscal system they have held together is so tenuous and fraudulent that it depends solely on false public perception and false investor assumptions. In order to blame conservatives for the destruction of the global economy, the elites will have to tell the truth about the frailty of the system before they can lie about who broke it.
This may not matter. When people are facing national or international calamity with the potential to hurt them personally, critical thinking and logic tend to go out the window.
There is also the power of distraction to occupy the minds of the masses while a crisis is taking shape, and what could be more distracting than the Trump vs. Clinton U.S. election? I have to say, I don’t think I have ever witnessed or seen a historical accounting of an election more psychotic than the election of 2016. It is truly the most divisive event in over a century, and this is why I consistently compare it to the Brexit referendum.
The tone is very much the same, with citizens on the Left side of the political spectrum being lured into rallying in support of globalism as if it is a prerequisite to peace and harmony, while citizens on the Right side of the spectrum are portrayed as knuckle-dragging isolationist barbarians hell-bent on urinating in the punch bowl and ruining everyone’s global prosperity party.
Brexit supporters were painted as older, selfish, potentially racist and out of touch with the changing times. Brexit opponents were painted as young, educated and victimized by older generations taking away the supposed future benefits of globalism.
Trump supporters are labeled as older, mostly white-centric, uneducated and fearful of the changing times. They just “don’t get” that it’s 2016. Trump opponents are elevated as the academic and worldly class battling to prevent another Hitler.
During the lead up to the U.K. referendum, polls indicated a wide margin in favor of the anti-Brexit crowd and the assumption by almost everyone was that the Brexit would fail.
The lead-up to the U.S. election is also rife with polls indicating in most cases a margin of victory for Clinton over Trump. Of course, only a complete idiot would take polling numbers seriously in light of what happened during the Brexit.
The Brexit campaign witnessed what appeared to some to be an unrecoverable black swan event – the killing of British MP Jo Cox. Almost everyone claimed that the murder of Cox by an apparently pro-Brexit assailant meant that the Brexit was doomed (I actually argued that the murder would be forgotten in a week and that the Brexit would pass anyway).
The Trump campaign has witnessed its own kind of “black swan” event with the release of recordings from eleven years ago in which Trump is heard making “lewd remarks” about women. It is surprising to me how many conservatives (let alone liberals) have been declaring Trump’s candidacy effectively “over” due to the scandal. These people are dupes.
Once again, I argue that the Trump tapes will be forgotten in a week and that they have no bearing whatsoever on the election. They are nothing more than bread and circus. Beyond the fact that really, almost no one cares what Trump said a decade ago, I argue that this election has already been decided. I argue that the globalists want Trump in office, just as they wanted the passage of the Brexit. I argue that they need conservative movements to feel as though we have won, so that they can pull the rug out from under us in the near future. I argue that we are being set up.
Again, the elites are openly telling us what is about to happen. They are telling us that if “populists” (conservatives) gain political power, the system will effectively collapse. To what extent is hard to say, but let’s assume that the situation will be ugly enough to influence the masses to reconsider the ideal of globalism as a possible solution. The elites are fond of the Hegelian dialectic and the philosophy of “order out of chaos,” after all.
The only way to counter this developing lie is for liberty champions to first accept the idea that our political victories might be ultimately meaningless and that we are being allowed to take charge of a ship that is already sinking. Only then can we distance ourselves from an exponential fiscal disaster by distancing ourselves from the narrative.
Perhaps I am wrong, and in November we see a dismal Trump performance and a Clinton victory. But if we see a “surprise” Trump election win, just as we saw a surprise Brexit win, then it may be time to consider that the surface of this situation is not what it appears.
You can read more from Brandon Smith at his site Alt-Market.com. If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.
~~~
10 Things We Should Be Doing Instead of Obsessing Over the 2016 Election
Here is a list of 10 things Americans should have been doing to strengthen their communities and empower themselves sociopolitically, economically, and technologically over the past 2 years instead of having obsessed over the ultimately irrelevant process known as Election 2016.
It is ultimately irrelevant because regardless of who wins, just like in 2008 when Barack Obama took office, all of the abuses and wars raging now will continue, and all the wars meant to begin under the previous president will be justified and executed under whoever the new president happens to be.
Imagine if you accomplished even one of these 10 things in the list below over the past 2 years, and if many more did so as well. What a world we would live in instead of clinging to the false hope of some establishment representative finally “changing things” for us instead of just stringing us along for another 4 years…
1. Start a local organic farm: takes about 1-2 years if you seek guidance from others already doing it.
2. Visit your local makerspace/hackerspace to learn a new skill: can take as little as 1-2 weeks to learn a new skill.
3. Use that new skill to start a local business, replacing/disrupting an established monopoly: 1-2 years.
4. Replace a percentage of your power consumption with solar.
5. Replace a percentage of your big-retail food with food grown locally and sold at your local farmers’ market.
6. Visit your local community lab to learn more about disrupting big-pharma monopolies.
7. Grow a fraction of your own food in your own part-time hobby garden.
8. Go online and teach yourself a new skill for free instead of wasting money (and ending up in debt) on a formal education: or learn IT skills on YouTube regarding almost any topic from 3D design to programming.
9. Buy a 3D printer and start your own 3D design and printing service: would take about 2 years to learn everything and get good enough at it to provide a basic service for friends, family, community, and colleagues.
10. Start your own blog about politics, technology, farming, gardening or anything else constructive and empowering to create networks, share information, and inspire others to break free of the current Wall Street-Washington controlled paradigm.
None of these will transform the world overnight. However, none of the problems we face were created overnight nor will they be fixed overnight. Our problems weren’t created by a single person nor will they be solved by a single person or single solution.
It will take lots of effort along many fronts by many people to create the world we want to live in – but only if we are committed to building that world ourselves, with our own two hands, instead of constantly deferring this responsibility to others how have demonstrated they have no intention of doing so.
~~~
Time to Pay Attention — In the Last 48 Hours, Humanity Just Moved to the Brink of World War
Months of disquieting and needless escalation between the United States and Russia over Syria and the Asia-Pacific theater has quickened feverishly to near outright hostility over the past 48 hours, and — considering semantics from both ends suggestive of antebellum blame-casting — it’s past time to pay attention.
Indeed, though a few analysts still dismissively liken the tensions to so much blustery rhetoric, a growing number contend obstinate U.S. posturing about Russian aggression hasn’t been taken so lightly by President Vladimir Putin and his rapidly amassing allies.
Additionally, it now seems the U.S. has backed its incessant finger-pointing with the subtle language necessary to undertake what could best, if ironically, be termed a ‘defensive first strike.’
While full-scale nuclear war might indeed be an outside possibility at this early date, the specter of full military engagement is quickly materializing on several fronts. To understand how we arrived so near this precipice, a series of events and statements over the previous month should be considered contextually with those of the last two days.
After officially accusing the Russian government on Friday of attempting to influence the presidential election by hacking into and leaking documents from the Democratic National Committee servers — which, despite fast efforts to save face, undoubtedly tarnished the reputations of party members and nominee Hillary Clinton — President Obama offered an alarming statement Tuesday giving that accusation sharp teeth.
“There are a range of responses that are available to the president and he will consider a response that is proportional,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest, quoted by Reuters, told media aboard Air Force One. “It is certainly possible that the president can choose response options that we never announce.”
Speculation on an unnamed option largely centered around some form of cyber response, given the original accusation of hacking — however, it must be noted, two years ago the Obama administration deemed hacking an act of cyberterrorism and an utmost security priority — ‘terrorism’ being of critical relevance given the ongoing war against it.
Notably, U.S. officials have previously asserted cyber attacks, in some cases, could elicit a military response.
Without unassailable proof the Russian government hacked the DNC, any putative ‘response’ by the U.S. — proportional or not, cyber-oriented or not — would inherently be an aggressive first strike. Given the dispute over definitive evidence tracing the hack to Russia, any follow-through could conceivably be considered an act of war and/or terrorism.
As such, an actual response of any nature has been posited unlikely — however, in consideration of last week’s belligerent remarks by U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, downplaying the potential for a response could be foolhardy.
“The strategic resolve of our nation, the United States, is being challenged and our alliances tested in ways that we haven’t faced in many, many decades,” Milley told attendees of an annual meeting of the Association of the United States Army.
“I want to be clear to those who wish to do us harm … the United States military — despite all of our challenges, despite our [operational] tempo, despite everything we have been doing — we will stop you and we will beat you harder than you have ever been beaten before. Make no mistake about that.”
Milley went on to note Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran have “revised their own doctrines” and “are rapidly modernizing their military today to avoid our strengths in hopes of defeating us at some point in the future.”
Quoting an unnamed senior Russian official, Milley advised “Russia can now fight a conventional war in Europe and win.”
Whether or not Russian military would wind up fighting in Europe could be an entirely moot issue, as NATO has been amassing thousands of troops in Eastern Europe under the premise of protecting nervous nations from possible invasion. That assemblage of troops has been cited by Russia as posing an aggressive nuclear threat — which officials from the U.S. and its allies have laughed off as absurd.
“Across the Atlantic, we’re refreshing NATO’s nuclear playbook — to better integrate conventional and nuclear deterrence, to ensure we plan and train like we’d fight, and to deter Russia from thinking it can benefit from nuclear use in a conflict with NATO,” U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter stated September 29.
Russian Foreign Ministry officials responded by reiterating the perception of American aggression, as quoted by the Washington Post, “Carter’s statement means that if Russia comes under attack from U.S. allies, the Americans will be ready to back it and threaten to use their nuclear weapons against us. We would like to think that Washington understands the meaning of such statements and their possible consequences for international security and stability.”
On Tuesday, a startlingly broad ‘recommendation’ published in Znak, Russian state officials and government workers were advised to immediately pull family members from study abroad programs — or any other endeavors — in Europe to return to the motherland. Translated by Zero Hedge and cited by Znak, political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky — albeit noting the controversy of the recommendation — said, in part, “this is all part of a package of measures to prepare the elites for some ‘big war’ even if it is rather conditional …”
Also on Tuesday, Putin abruptly canceled a planned trip to Paris over the unraveling situation in Syria.
Russia also issued two altogether unambiguous admonitions last Thursday, stating continued U.S. endeavors in Syria could lead to all-out war.
“I would like to caution Washington’s colleagues to carefully consider the possible consequences of such plans,” said Russian Major General Igor Konashenkov in a statement, adding, “I remind U.S. strategists that air cover for the Russian military bases in Tartus and Hmeymim includes S-400 and S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems, the range of which may come as a surprise to any unidentified flying objects.”
Observers rightly focused on the latter portion of the previous statement as a warning to the United States that Russia would not hesitate to strike first, ask no questions later — since it would be justified in defending ally Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s troops in a sovereign nation by request.
However, the second warning — after the U.S. bombing of Assad’s troops in mid-September flared contention — constitutes, in actuality, the greater portent.
Konashenkov, as Underground Reporter noted, “made clear Russia has a number of servicemen and aid workers in several communities in Aleppo, and that ‘any strikes on territories controlled by the Syrian government will create a clear threat’ to Russian citizens.”
Dropping all pretenses, he added, “I am warning anyone, that after the U.S.-led coalition jets bombed positions of the Syrian government forces on September 17 in Deir ez-Zor, we will take all necessary measures to prevent other American ‘mistakes’ against the Russian military or other military facilities in the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic.”
China, which had originally intimated support for Russia over the U.S. quest to oust Assad, has fomented its alliance in recent days. According to one analyst, there “is no question that there is correlation, coherence and coordination between Russia and China on the Syrian issue.”
Russia has similarly indicated it would back China over the intricate territorial dispute in the South and East China Seas, particularly in defense against meddling by the United States and its ally South Korea — who will shortly deploy the U.S.’ Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) amid contention from both rival nations, as well as its citizenry.
Although THAAD ostensibly could only be deployed in a defensive capacity, China and Russia criticize its proximity to the Chinese border as an act of direct aggression. On Tuesday the two nations announced plans to hold their second joint anti-missiles drill in 2017. According to a nationalist outlet cited by Reuters, Chinese Major Gen. Cai Jun stated,
The United States’ blind development of anti-missile systems that exceed demand and its search for absolute unilateral military superiority inevitably damage global strategic equilibrium and gravely harm major powers’ strategic trust.
* * *
One article could not do justice to the multi-fronted, labyrinthine conflict as it now stands, but with the current situation described by some as more dangerous than even the Cuban Missile Crisis — which nearly drew the U.S. into the first nuclear war — it would perhaps be advisable to focus on swiftly-unfolding international news rather than exhaustively debating lesser-evilism.
As former Soviet Union leader and Nobel Prize-winner Mikhail Gorbachev cautioned Monday,
I think the world has reached a dangerous point.
Claire Bernish writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.
~~~
Emerson, Lake & Palmer - Karn Evil 9 - 1st Impression - Part 2 - YouTube
