Shadow Of Knowledge. Part 4. Trump As A Trump Symbol Of The Threat - Alternative View

Shadow Of Knowledge. Part 4. Trump As A Trump Symbol Of The Threat - Alternative View
Shadow Of Knowledge. Part 4. Trump As A Trump Symbol Of The Threat - Alternative View

Video: Shadow Of Knowledge. Part 4. Trump As A Trump Symbol Of The Threat - Alternative View

Video: Shadow Of Knowledge. Part 4. Trump As A Trump Symbol Of The Threat - Alternative View
Video: You Will Wish You Watched This Before You Started Using Social Media | The Twisted Truth 2024, March
Anonim

Part 1. Forward to scientific conspiracy theories.

Part 2. Or back to pure Machiavellianism?

Part 3. From Clausewitz to Stirlitz.

While the political elite operates outwardly with threats (and temptations as their flip side), inside the country it relies not only on the army, financial institutions and special services, but also on the non-political “middle” part of the “policy” - production, trade, law enforcement. In different countries and in different epochs or moments of crisis, the balance of these basic resources differs, as does the balance of political resources and deficits based on them - threats from outside or threats from outside.

The domestic political balance of power depends, first of all, on the foreign policy context. If at the global level militarism and mutual military threats are growing, then within each of the countries the military-political elites prevail. Militarists of all countries, threatening each other, thereby unite and help to threaten other wings of the political elite in each country. The external threat of war is also an instrument of political struggle within the country. Bankers (or their counterparts, like party secretaries in the USSR) can always be expropriated due to the military threat, and the special services can be mobilized and subordinated to the military leader, as was done, for example, at the beginning of 1941 by Stalin. However, even before the implementation of this measure, its very possibility affects political competitors, at first provoking the alliance of special services and party secretaries against the generals,as in 1937, and then, due to the growing external threat, to split, purge and re-subordination to the pre-war leadership.

So, not only in foreign policy, but also within the political elite, the balance of mutual threats is the subject of activity - intrigues, setups and other methods of political games. However, for the non-political part of the "polis" and for the masses, all these games of mutual weakening, re-subordination and even partly destruction must be justified by an understandable ideology, as a necessary fight against evil. This is also why the attempt by liberal Russian financiers in 1915-17 to use the military threat and crush the imperial militarist elite ended in a general collapse. While the Bolshevik ideology of suppression of financiers gave political support to the militarists in alliance with the newly-minted "party secretaries".

Let's move on from the historical classics to modern examples. For example, why would Trump start "trade wars" against his closest allies? And what is this irrational political trade? When the consent of the same Europeans to zero duties, which Trump himself insisted on, is immediately rejected as insufficient. Instead of fixing the achieved success, the requirements are sublimated, as if it is not the result that is important, but the process itself. Trump's actions appear chaotic and irrational when judged by conventional non-political standards or even the political standards of non-financial elites.

If we analyze Trump's work in terms of threats as a political tool, then everything looks much more rational. First of all, the election of the US president from the two most "frostbitten" and decisive contenders in itself serves to increase the threats to external players. If the figure of Trump or the same bitch Hillary did not suit the elite at all, especially financial ones, they would not even be allowed to participate in the primaries. The problem is that the dollar system, the pyramid of debts, has caused more and more doubts among financial and trading partners. To paraphrase a joke of humor, they don't give a dollar in the face for a dollar yet, but they don't take a dollar in the face without a threat.

Promotional video:

Of course, the demonstration of this threat to bomb or substitute a harsh blow is taking place on the members of the world community that are least valuable to the Western elites, like Syria, Yemen, or the same used. The temptation of holders of dollar-denominated assets not only to dump, but to question the overestimated estimates of American securities or arms contracts - has generally been overcome. Again, the large US debt holders are not themselves interested in an uncontrollable fall in asset prices. So Trump is quite successful in working for the financiers of all countries, united by the threat of this fall. However, what does Trump himself and the nationally oriented part of the US elite get in return? In addition to curses and threats of impeachment, designed, among other things, to keep Trump within the given framework of globalist politics.

If Trump, like that same Einrend Atlant, keeps the globalist "firmament" from a rapid collapse, then the main beneficiaries of his policies are the same "banksters-pirates" who initially bet on Hillary. And even now they sleep and see how they could replace Trump with their henchman. These are the bankers-owners and beneficiaries of the "printing press" of the FRS and at the same time the IMF, the oligopoly of rating agencies and audit companies. The basis for their former and still persisting financial and political power was always the threat to give or not give relatively cheap big money on credit. This is generally the basis of banking power - to divide not only private clients, but also the state into worthy and unworthy lending at low or at least average rates. Everything else is ruin or involvement in credit bondage to complete market competition.

Politically motivated sanctions and Trump's "trade wars" - on the one hand, do not completely undermine the foundations of power of the financiers from the IMF and Fed. However, the question of dollar loans, ratings or other assessments of borrowers is being transferred - secondly, after the question of trade barriers for some and sanctions for others. Thus, an acceptable balance is maintained between globalists and nationalists, at least in the republican part of the establishment. Sanctions and threats of trade wars are still needed for discipline in the ranks of financiers in all other countries (as well as Chinese party secretaries). But the same threats are needed for the return of industries and jobs in the United States, and for the promotion of expensive goods and weapons to foreign markets by far from non-market methods.

By the way, this is the very moment of differentiation of the previous, pre-Trump era, when financiers completely got along with their own “market” methods of political influence. Only the “invisible hand of the market” in the person of GoldmanSachs analysts and rating agencies, auditors of “court” auditing companies itself evaluated, divided and dominated the financial market. Meanwhile, today the irrationality of Trump's "trade wars" includes their justification for the interests of "national security." Is this import of passenger cars ?! But this means, first of all, that it is not the Ministry of Finance, which is close to both wings of the banksters, but the National Security Council, that is, the elite of special services, that is responsible for the implementation of "trade wars".

Previously, the "pirate" financiers relied heavily on the militarists subordinate to them, capable of blocking the trade of any disobedient countries. However, in addition to the financialization of defense corporations and joint cutting of military budgets with bankers, the degradation of the quality of the military-industrial complex and the army, this militaristic support of banksters-"pirates" was undermined by the build-up or restoration of military forces in China, Russia and Iran, as well as the reorientation of Turkey. All of this, of course, with the shady assistance of a rival wing of bankers-money-changers based in London. Because otherwise the inevitable unification of the exchange rates of currencies tightly pegged to the dollar by the banksters-“pirates” deprived the “money changers” of the very foundation of their financial power.

Among other things, "trade wars" against closest partners such as China, Europe and even Canada - allow determining and controllably raising prices for key commodities - not only metals. Previously, this honorable duty within the framework of the division of labor between the two wings of financiers belonged to "money changers". And in this case, too, "trade wars" do not undermine the very old instruments of financial power of the "money changers", but make them dependent on the political position of "financial control" as a new arbitration branch of financiers, relying on the elite of the special services. The same mechanism, which is very important, will make it possible to manageably reduce the value of the dollar in relation to liquid goods. And this is perhaps the main medium-term task of the entire global elite - to prevent either deflation or hyperinflation, to manageably leave the debt pyramid in 15-20 years.

The mechanism of financial sanctions against Russia, Iran, Turkey, and in the future, probably, also China, India, all the BRICS countries, the “money changers” of the Prolondonian wing, can help to solve this main task faster. This pushes one after another, but neatly and gradually, important countries from the dollar-based power circuit of the banksters-“pirates”, preventing the restoration of full power and fixing for a long time the split between the two wings of the financial elite, which means the need for an arbitration function of “financial control”.

Already now, the Europeans have begun, following Russia and China, to plan the creation of another analogue of SWIFT, separated from the dollar system, to carry out operations with Iran and other countries under financial sanctions. The next step could be the actual bifurcation of the dollar system and the dollar itself in two - “internal”, which settlements go through correspondent accounts in US banks, and “external”, sanctioned, but at the same time “cryptocurrency”, settlements on which are carried out with a discount through a certain single for BRICS or SCO clearing center. Of course, the Anglo-Saxon money-changers cannot help but create smuggling gateways in order to exchange an external dollar for an internal one.

So the irrationality of Trump's "trade wars" has its own political logic of creating new threats that devalue competitors' instruments of power.

Continuation: Part 5. Threat to all threats.