Sunday, 30 October 2022

How cynical is electioneering nowadays?

While Truss keeps the office chair at Number 10 warm from her replacement, Britain’s opposition parties are lining up for an election.

One political party has already starting campaigning for a seat for the national Parliament. It has sent out a campaigning flyer to its target constituency’s voters.

The Parliamentary constituency in question is in the south of England. It has been a safe Tory (the blue mafia) seat since forever, typically polling more than 50% of the votes cast for the Tories. The seat is so safe, that it is not a viable seat for either the Loo-Brush Party (the red mafia) or the Groans (the green mafia). So, up turns the Libellous Demarcates (the orange-yellowish mafia), thinking that they are the only ones who have a chance at unTorying this Parliamentary seat.

The campaign for the Libellous Demarcates appears to have started with a survey.

Yes. A survey.

A political party is supposed to represent us ordinary plebs. But the Libellous Demarcates appear not to know how to represent what for whom. The Lib Dem mafia need to survey us ordinary plebs, to find out how to make us ordinary plebs fall for the mafia’s media messages (i.e. lies), while the mafia’s narrative remains confined to the mafia’s preferred tropes. The survey appears below.

The survey is accompanied by a covering letter. This is where the disingenuity starts, straight from the opening paragraph.

The covering letter

The opening paragraph opens with, “This Conservative Government has lost touch with the challenges you and I face on a daily basis.” No excrement, Sherlock. “Out on the doorsteps, local people are worried about what the future holds for our country and our community.” Worried? No. Angry? Oh, yes.

“The cost of living emergency is devastating and only likely to get worse. NHS waiting times have never been higher. Trust in politicians and their integrity is at an all time low.”

OMG, there is soooooo much to unbundle already that I feel an entire symposium of applied psychology might be in order. Here’s the short version:

  • yet another “emergency” on top of the pseudo-emergencies already manufactured on pure lies, made particularly convincing by military-grade applied psychological techniques, is a sure-fire way to prove that the author of the survey has no integrity. The discourse of this mafia’s flyer is thus compliant with the narratives of the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, so this mafia offers no solution, it offers only more of the same.

  • NHS waiting times are almost certainly a consequence of the NHS having functionally ceased to exist as a service provider of health care. The private health care sector is the only available fallback, and private health care providers need to profit from their trade to remain operating at all. Reselling drugs – vaccines in particular – is a key income stream for such health care providers in the UK (especially as British patients either can’t, or won’t, pay). Trust in, and integrity of, even local general practitioners is likely at an all time low (e.g. you can’t get an appointment for a kidney problem, or a heart problem, that’ll be done by telephone in three months time, but you can drop into a doctor’s surgery unannounced right now to have an injection of some drug, without consultation or risk assessment). So, for this mafia to whinge its usual trite trope about NHS waiting times is proof that the author has indeed “lost touch with the challenges you and I face”. One would have hoped a Parliamentary candidate to have gone beyond the tropes, but, alas, no. Objectivity and integrity of a wannabe politician apparently must have their limits.

Later in the letter, “As [constituency’s] next MP…” Hold up: don’t you need to be elected first? Or do you have an inside track on whether the constituency will deploy Bidenesque “counting” methods at the next selection? Did you mean to write, “As a candidate for [constituency’s] next election…”? Or did your consultant applied psychologist advise you that if you write it as a fait accompli already, then you would convince more of the sheeple to vote for you when the time comes? Assuming the sheeple remember at the time of the selection.

The covering letter turns to the survey. “… could [would?] you [kindly?] take a few minutes to complete and [to] return this survey?It’s your chance to tell me what change you want to see – locally and nationally.” Punctuation and lack of space after the question mark is at it appears on the covering letter. Seriously. This mush wants my vote, but apparently can’t be bothered to proof-read a document published in his/her/its name, or even realise the differences between spoken English and written English. What do they teach in schools nowadays?! Oh wait, that might be in the survey…!

The survey

Real-world context

To re-cap, here is what is going on the world. UK government policy is doing its bit to implement it.

  • banksters have printed so much money since 2008 that the western financial system is on the verge of constant collapse, but has failed to do so because the underlying economy is more resilient than the central planners had expected. This is why they want central planning, because they know best. How very dare reality fight back! Banksters’ central bank digital currencies will enforce such central planning, whether reality likes it or not.

  • drugsters have printed – literally, 3D-printed, at least in part – a collection of novel mRNA and mDNA drugs and have pushed these drugs into open society, without even properly completing phase one trials. The drugs are thus untested and now untestable (there is no control group within the scope of the drugs’ trials). Meanwhile, aged-standardised, all-cause mortality rates are higher than in prior years, even during the summer of 2022 compared to 2021 and 2020. An amazing co-incidence? A correlation? Or causation?

  • ageing populations worldwide, and birth rates falling below the replacement rate. These trends had set in years ago and have been predictable for decades. We won’t know what impact the rollout of the drugsters’ dodgy drugs might have on our ability to react to sudden changes in population numbers (in this context, “sudden” means within ten years).

  • corporatists have recognised that the continuing centralisation of all law and regulations means that He Who Has The One Controls Them All. This is the global public-private partnership, a means of thieving the global commons into private hands, resulting in neo-feudalism for us ordinary plebs. Anti-democracy and zero accountability is the name of the game.

  • incremental moves towards centralised technocracy look challenging from an honest democratic perspective, so we need lots of emergencies, many at once, cluster after cluster, continuously, in series and in parallel, the more contradictory the better, so that the ordinary plebs will throw their brains out of the window, and give all of their freedoms away so that we have a nice Great Reset and impose One World Global Governance For The Benefit Of Corporations. Emergencies are all carefully engineered to such end. Emergencies include:

    • a climate emergency (apparently, carbon dioxide has magical powers way beyond the laws of thermodynamics, so be scared);

    • a health emergency (apparently, coronaviruses are always deadly, how our species has survived for millennia without allopathic medicine is a complete mystery, must be luck, so be scared);

    • a debt emergency (apparently, we can just buy everything on debt and it’ll be fine, the Greenspan Put of 1992 is still a thing, Japanese history from the 1980s is a Far Right Climate-Denying Conspiracy Theory, nothing to see there, we’re not supposed to notice);

    • a food emergency (food production capacity has been cut progressively for nearly a decade now, lockdown provided a cover story under which to accelerate the cuts, we’re not supposed to notice yet, but the time for us to notice officially is close at hand);

    • an energy emergency (fuel and energy production capacity has been cut progressively for a few decades now, caused mainly by a failure of governments to define frameworks for energy policies, lockdown provided a cover story under which to accelerate “maintenance schedules” all to happen at once, and today we even have another cover story – the proxy-war in Ukraine – to excuse a failure of gas supplies. We’re not supposed to notice shortages of energy just yet, but we are supposed to believe that everything is Russia’s fault well in advance of our official date on which we are allowed to notice energy shortages).

    • an emergency emergency. Well, maybe not, but let’s have a few more emergencies anyway. Why not? The more, the merrier.

  • the uneven, hockey-stick all-cause mortality spikes of 2020, 2021 and 2022 tell us a story of systematic medical malpractice, deployed as a form of apparent democide.

  • plutocrats understand just enough about the slow change to the behaviour of our sun since 1859, combined with the reducing power of the Earth’s magnetic field as the magnetic poles move to prepare for something bad. For example, Jeff Bezos has dug some sort of Bond-villan underground liar in Valley of the Rising Sun, state Colorado, United States.

  • mainstream media hides all of the above context under the cover of a well-planned, saturating, distracting blizzard of “emergencies” (see list above), complete with celebrity endorsement, for the entertainment of the ordinary plebs.

The actual survey

So, guess what’s in the survey?

The survey comprises 28 questions, with sections on:

  • the cost of living;

  • healthcare;

  • education;

  • environment;

  • “your views”.

The questions in the survey follow. Which of these questions squarely (not tangentially) address any part of the major real-world context above?

  • Q1. How concerned are you with the cost of living? (scale 0 to 4)

  • Q2. Which of the following are you most concerned about? [yes, the English really is that bad].

    • Food prices, energy bills, fuel prices, business costs, tax rises, bus and rail fares, other.

  • Q3. Do you think the Government has done enough to support people struggling with the cost of living? (yes/no)

  • Q4. Has the cost of living criss had a particular impact on your life that you’d like to tell us about?

  • Q5. Have you or a member of your family visited A&E in the past two years? (yes/no)

  • Q6. If so, did you or they travel to A&E in an ambulance (yes/no)

  • Q7. If so, how long did the ambulance take to arrive?

    • less than 10 minutes, less than 30 minutes, less than 1 hour, between 1 and 2 hours, more than 2 hours.

  • Q8. Are you registered with a local NHS dentist? (yes/no)

  • Q9. Have you ever had to pay for private treatment because you couldn’t access that treatment through an NHS dentist? (yes/no)

  • Q10. Have you been able to register with a local GP? (yes/no)

  • Q11. On average, how long do you have to wait to get an appointment with you GP?

    • same day, less than a week, more than a week, more than a fortnight.

  • Q12. In your experience, are GP waiting times getting longer or shorter? (longer/shorter)

  • Q13. Are you concerned about the affordability of social care services you or a loved one might need to use? (yes/no)

  • Q14. Please use the space below to tell us about recent experiences with a local health services that you would like to tell us about.

  • Q15. How well do you feel local schools are being supported with “catching up” children after COVID? (scale 0 to 4)

  • Q16. How concerned are you about the availability of provisions for pupils with special educational needs? (scale 0 to 4).

  • Q17. Do you feel confident that children in your community can travel to school safely? (yes/no)

  • Q18. Do you think the Government is doing enough to support local teachers? (yes/no)

  • Q19. How would you rate the state of local roads, pavements and paths? (scale 0 to 4) Please give locations of any specific problems.

  • Q20. How important is it to you that our local countryside is protected? (scale 0 to 4) [protected from whom or from what? survey doesn’t ask]

  • Q21. How concerned are you about raw sewage being dumped in local rivers by water companies? (scale 0 to 4)

  • Q22. Do you support the Lib Dem campaign to oppose the environmentally damaging expansion to [a local airport]? (yes/no)

  • Q23. Do you think the Government is going enough to address climate change and protect our local environment? (yes/no) What more do you think should be done to protect our local environment?

  • Q24. Which of these issue are most important to you and your family?

    • education/schools, NHS and social care, public transport, crime, lack of housing, climate change, public services, cost of living, jobs/economy, congestion, protecting green spaces, local farming, road repairs.

  • Q25. Which party did you support at the 2019 UK General Election?

    • Libellous Demarcates, Tory, Loo-Brush, Groan, Other [names changed to protect the guilty]

  • Q26. Who do you plan to vote for at the election to choose our next local MP? [really?!]

    • Libellous Demarcates, Tory, Loo-Brush, Groan, Other [names changed to protect the guilty. What about “any independent candidate”?]

  • Q27. Which would you prefer: a Tory MP or a Lib Dem MP? (Tory/Ibidem)

  • Q28. [Candidate] and the Lib Dem team are fighting to get a fairer deal for [constituency] after years of Tory neglect. Can you help our campaign to improve our area?

    • I will put up a poster at election time, I will deliver leaflets, I will knock on doors, I will make a donation (please make cheques payable to [constituency] Lib Dems or donate online)

  • Your name, your email address, your phone number.

Comments on the survey

The UK’s national Parliament is the supreme lawmaking authority in the UK. It can make, unmake and amend any legislation it wants. It can sign the UK up to international treaties; it can revoke UK membership of international treaties. It can strike-down government actions, including those undertaken unilaterally by government under the Royal Prerogative. A member of the UK Parliament should therefore be a high-level job with a high-level, or strategic, mindset, so as to be able to hold the criminal enterprise a.k.a. government to account.

But apparently not for this mafia.

The questions about the cost of living are pitching towards increasing welfare payouts (of course), with no regard to how banksters’ inflation have caused price hikes in both assets (yay! we’re rich!) and commodities (boo! we’re poor!), including food and energy.

The questions about health care remain locked in the paradigm that the NHS is worth keeping in its current (sabotaged) state, as if only a few tweaks to policy outcomes matter. The questions reveal no new thinking to solve issues such as:

  • the deliberately-engineered debilitating framework in which management of NHS service delivery progressively decays;

  • re-framing the system, or dumping it and starting afresh, or even creating a parallel health care service;

  • the World Health Organisation’s Pandemic Preparedness Plan, which would eliminate any local health care provision unilaterally, in all 198 member nations of the United Nations;

  • the huge spike in all-cause mortality co-incident with lockdown after Mar2020 (and not before).

  • the mass injuries and increasing all-cause mortality starting from the year of the coronavirus vaccine rollout (from Dec2020);

  • whether General Practitioners have a financial conflict of interest against their patients’ medical needs (“Do no harm, but make profit first”);

  • whether the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has a conflict of interest between the regulation of drugs and the bulk of its income derived from interests in common with those of drugs companies.

The questions about education completely miss the mark. The major issues for school children today – if not their parents – is how schools are teaching children to feel based upon a series of ideologies based on pseudo-science. Schools should be teaching children skills and how to think (not what to emote). “Catching up” with disruption caused by lockdown might have been a past issue. Schools are pummelling young brains with propaganda about climate change, transgenderism, transhumanism and a taught reliance on electronic gadgetry in preference to useful, practical and social skills.

The questions about the environment also completely miss the mark. All of the topics in the questions are regulated by central government in one way shape or form, yet the delivery of the topics’ policies are the responsibility of local authorities, even though the local authorities can do only what central government has said they can do. In addition, for the avoidance of doubt, national government can over-ride local authorities in many different ways. The regulatory model is designed to lock-out the demos. Thus, the survey’s questions are fatuous all by themselves, all the more so for appearing in a flyer for a candidate of a national Parliament, whose nexus with these issues (if elected) is going to be nearly zero.

Does the survey address the issues that the covering letter raised?

Does the survey demonstrate that the Lib Dems are in touch “with the challenges you and I face on a daily basis”? No, clearly not. That the Lib Dems think a survey is relevant, useful – even as a campaign tool – demonstrates that the Lib Dems are either as equally as complicit as the Tory government, or that the Lib Dems are even clueless than the Tories about how the real world works.

Does the survey point towards how to solve the cost of living emergency? No. The nearest it gets is, “More welfare! More of somebody else’s money!” How do we fund that, then? “You racist!!”

Does the survey point towards how to repair the NHS? No. The survey’s questions don’t even get to the racetrack, let alone start the race.

Does the survey help to increase trust in politicians, or help to improve the integrity of political parties? No. On the contrary, by comprehensively missing the point on absolutely everything, this survey and covering letter demonstrates that the sole offer is more of the same.

This campaign survey is thus cynically disingenuous.

Politics in the UK seems irretrievably broken, as it has been since 1997.

But, hey, that’s all the fault of Brexit, right?

Sunday, 23 October 2022

Tory leadership nonsense continues

Erm, who blinked?

One minute, Liz Truss had been selected into office. She goes and meets Brenda, who dies days later, passing the Crown to her Weffist son, Chaz. A month after that, Truss has quit office.

Something was quite bonkers about Truss’ selection “manifesto”, which was to invoke some sort of low-tax regime to stimulate spending, to “grow” the economy, while price-hikes – fuelled by endless inflation (money printing) – continue to pound supermarket shelves and petrol pumps.

It has always been chronically against the public interest to practice any form of Keynesianism, but to implement a double-botched version of Keynesianism was always going to be stupidly against the sinister vested interests that profit (at the expense of ordinary plebs) from the Keynesian orthodoxy.

Some feeble-minded sheeple criticise Truss for giving in too quickly. Other sheeble-minded feeple criticise Truss for wilfully disobeying her (presumed) careful indoctrination by the World Economic Forum/Rockefeller Empire. Both sheeple are wrong. Truss simply had to string things out.

Sure, the Weffists on the Tory backbenches could have done a slicker job, but even Tory Weffists fight like cats in a sack given half the chance. The fall of Truss says more about the disjointed nature of the Tory Weffists than it does about anything else. Ultimately, they all agree on UN Agenda 2030. The clowns have simply made the obvious – that the world is run by unaccountable Weffist plutocrats – even more obvious.

The Tory selection process chunders on. (Yes, chunders, not chunters; not a typo). Mordaunt – whose policy selection, assumptions and presentation blatantly reveals “woke” psychopathy – has declared her intention to run, presumably representing the punishment of a country that voted for Brexit. Sunak, who came second last time, has said he is also going to run, yet Sunak was the one who started to blab about the not-so-hidden UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF in the last week of the selection process. This could have been a genuine vote-winner for the Tory party in the country at large, but the menace of an open debate must have freaked out the WEF so – surprise, surprise – Truss ended up winning the selection process. Hmm. Might there have been a Bidenesque “count” of the votes behind the selection process?

And then there is the return of Boris. So far, Boris has returned from vacation, not yet Number 10, but he too has announced a willingness as a candidate for the Tory selectorate. Boris was very good for the WEF and its interests (at the expense of us ordinary plebs), so if Boris is to return, the WEF will need to sort out the discontent amongst the Tory backbench Weffists. However that could be done.

Irrespective of which muppet sits in Number 10, the WEF will remain in charge.

With the benefit of hindsight, and recent knowledge about the WEF, it looks clear that Brexit was simply an exercise to launder the control of the UK away from the European Union and more directly under the control of the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The identities of the UK’s “handlers” have changed, but the inconvenient fact remains that the UK is still handled by unaccountable sources of influence (or political control). It is the “double-coffin lid”.

Meanwhile, the European Union continues to make itself as unattractive as possible. The Union has become a lot uglier than it was prior to the referendum. The European Commission recently announced that it was ready to return to mandatory masks, covid passports and compulsory injections relating to the on-going covid scamdemic. The impact of the injections is now plain to see in the age-standardised, all-cause mortality statistics throughout the western world, including those of Euromomo. The Commission needs a cover story for this oncoming tsunami of drug-induced death. Helpfully, it co-incides with a self-inflicted energy shortage, caused primarily by the European Union boycotting Russian fuel supplies, because America said so (“sanctions”). So, lots of causes of premature death, to get the population down and save the planet from man-made global warming. And lots of choice for plausible deniability. All very UN Agenda 2030.

Probably for this sort of analysis can one find comments on the interweb from voters for remain asking themselves, “What was I thinking at the time?!” This is in stark contrast from the silence from most voters for leave: leave voters cannot point to any particular benefit from Brexit as at today, and those leave voters who understood the nature of global governance recognise the double-coffin lid. The same threat of psychopathic, unaccountable technocracy remains in situ. Brexit, it turns out, was nothing more than a false choice of two escalators to the same destination.

Even so, there are still some Remainiacs out there shilling for a return of the UK to the European Union, in spite of the European Union’s fraudulent policy choices, about which even European Parliamentarians toothlessly complain! Hardly a good advertisement for a return to the EU, is it?

The issues of the day set out at remain in place. One addition to the list is the creation of the proxy war between the United States and Russia in (and on top of) Ukraine. Although the collapse of energy generation capacity has been a long-term policy – witness the lack of useful policy by the UK government over the decades – the liars in the mainstream media now want to brainwash us into thinking that the war in Ukraine is the root cause of fuel shortages in Europe… not even the suicidally stupid policy choice by the Europeans to agree with the Americans about “sanctions” against Russia.

The Americans have taken physical steps to ensure that Russia cannot supply Europe (easily, if at all) by blowing up gas pipeline Nord Stream 1. Russia won’t care; it’ll find another buyer for the gas, even if the buyer is India and intends to re-sell it to Europe at a mark-up. Europe won’t care; it needs the gas at whatever currency price. America will be happy; a higher market price in Europe for gas means a more viable market for American exports of liquefied gas.

Along the way, the WEF, the United Nations and the banksters will take incremental steps towards their dystopian totalitarian regime of central bank digital currencies, that prohibit trade of ordinary plebs outside the arbitrary, false and capricious choices of the technocrats.

But, hey, that’s all of the fault of Brexit, right?

Sunday, 5 June 2022

Queen’s 70th jubilee: a reflection

2022 is the 70th year of Queen Elizabeth II’s reign. Her jubilee is an occasion to reflect on a selection of geo-political events over the past 70 years and speculate about their impact on the Queen’s portfolio and the royal family’s likely location in the global pecking order.

The use of facts in this blog post are entirely co-incidental. Developments on any theoretical portfolio is pure, idle, armchair speculation.


It ought be stated at the outset that Liz II didn’t exactly ask for the job of being Queen. She was simply born at the right (wrong?) time to the right (wrong?) parents. She was probably groomed for the job from birth and, and, by all accounts, had the words, “Duty, duty, duty!” drummed in her incessantly. So, she got the job.

But what was the job? Like most of her predecessors, the space in which her job operated had shrunk before she started it. British monarchs since Liz I have inched progressively away from being an operational monarch to being a ceremonial monarch. At least on the surface.

To sceptics, the past few years have proven beyond doubt that influence and power have moved away from being visible to being invisible. Public figureheads are simply tools, pulled by strings controlled by opaque and anti-accountable powers. There is every reason to think that Liz II has probably benefitted from the same pattern of politics. But at the same time, oligarch corporations control the Western world nowadays, for which no-one individual perceptibly controls any single mega-corporation. This blog post summarises the key movements in western-global governance, and plots a line to Liz II where it might be plausible to to do so.

“The Firm”

Liz II has been substantially a ceremonial monarch in the eyes of us ordinarily plebs (as filtered by the mainstream mass media). Yet, Liz II has met weekly with her Prime Minister, the agenda of which meetings are never publicly discussed. So her role isn’t entirely ceremonial. She appears to have a supervisory function, too. If nothing else, it suggests that Liz II’s management of “the Firm” – the royal household – is sufficiently broad to take tips from insiders and return tips back as a fellow insider.

An indication of how successful Liz II’s strategy might have been for the Firm is that her heir Chaz recorded a woke, on-message performance in favour of the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset”. On the positive side, it confirms that the Firm is still well connected and has a reasonable degree of leadership within the global elites. On the negative side, it confirms that power and influence needs to step in front of the television cameras, to be public, to sing for its supper. It’s not quite debasement of monarchy, but it certainly isn’t the power behind the curtain. Understanding this choice to appear in a marketing video needs nuanced context about how governance works in the modern world, a few clues to which appear later in this blog (section, “A new, new world order, v4.4 possibly, is anybody keeping count?”).

World matters: setting opportunities or reacting to opportunities?

Liz II has observed seismic changes in Britain’s economic and political landscape.

The 1950s-1960s

In her coronation year of 1952, Britain still notionally had an empire. The jewels of the crown had already gone by 1952, leaving Liz II’s Firm with a portfolio of “decline management” and “find new opportunities”. The starting point was quite low. War had ruined prior investment opportunities, around which Liz II’s father would likely have made some changes to the portfolio to limit its losses (and find profits in the war industry). Finding new opportunities in 1952 would require some imagination. Food rationing was still in operation for the ordinary plebs of Britain. Ferrous metals were in impossibly short supply, which made building new towns (replacement housing for the plebs, e.g. Hemel Hempstead, Stevenage, Harlow, Northampton, etc) a sporadic affair. The immediate post-war era was supposed to be a new beginning into a New World Order: it had to be seen to work for the plebs, otherwise it would make life much harder later on.

By the late 1950s, Britain had re-established itself as a renewed industrial powerhouse, producing a wide range of manufactured goods, including electronic goods, the new toy on the block.

Of course, it didn’t last. Idiotic foreign policy resulted in the debacle of the Suez crisis in 1956, imploding the credibility of both Britain and France, much to America’s political gain (Acheson: “Britain had lost an empire and had yet to find a role”). Macro-economic mismanagement – which we now know was central banksters’ business plans – resulted in the devaluation of the pound in 1964. Rigging the exchange rate in such a way should ordinarily be considered a failure by the central planner; in 1964’s UK, it was a mere “correction” in the course of managing the unruly economy. How very dare the economy try to run itself, as if the economy knows better than an expert technocrat!

In addition to the import-cost disadvantage created by the devaluation of the pound, Britain's comparative advantage in manufacturing was more than undermined by Britain’s comparative self-inflicted comparative disadvantage of distribution networks and a lack of quality control. The once-successful marketing gimmick of “Made In Britain” was eventually replaced by an equally successful marketing gimmick of “Made In Germany.”

Still, Britain’s productivity sustained both a population mini-boom, which, in turn, contributed to economic growth. Liz II’s inside track would have given her plenty of advance notice about profitable investments. This period was a productive period for genuine reasons, too, so investments could be more-or-less sound. The currency was almost just about credible, too. So, all good then. Until the 1970s.

The 1970s

In France, President Charles de Gaulle, mindful of the devaluation of the pound in 1964, suspected that the Bretton Woods monetary system was less than honest about how convertible a sovereign’s debt holdings were for the sovereign’s gold deposited with the Americans. Presumably, Liz II should have had the same concerns, but no facts about such concern has ever reached the public’s mind. Perhaps her Prime Ministers were giving her insider trading tips about how the American banksters were going to scam the world, thereby create a superb opportunity for banksters to fleece the plebs, indirectly via sovereign governments.

In 1971, France demanded a return of its gold. The Americans reneged on the deal, immediately terminating the convertibility of sovereign debt securities back to sovereign gold, scamming the world. Shortly thereafter, the Americans did a dodgy deal with the House of Saud to ensure a dual monopoly of US dollars for Arabian oil, with no anchoring of value of USD to oil (or vice versa). Instead, fundamental influence of the value of USD would be derived from demand for oil. The petrodollar was born. Currencies were now entirely fiat. No currency would ever be a useful store of long-term value ever again. This would undermine the basis of any long-term family portfolio, including that of Liz II’s Firm.

At the same time, Liz II’s jurisdiction took the single largest step towards dissolving the concept of the United Kingdom (“UK”) as a sovereign political entity. She consented (“Royal Assent”) to the UK joining the European Economic Community (“EEC”). Thus started a long, multi-decade process of converting the UK’s particular mash-up of half-baked statutes, over-stewed case law and poorly understood common law into something closer to a civil code style of law, more compatible with the anti-democratic, technocratic, regulatory state sought by the EEC.

The legislative freedom of Parliament was thus permanently crimped. This triggered a few wails by Parliamentarians at the time; yet, by 2022, no Parliamentarian wanted the honest job of scrutinising legislation any more, with some members of Parliament thinking that GBP 80k pa for a “part-time” job is fair remuneration for doing less than absolutely nothing!

The Treaty Establishing the European Community (“TEC”, since 2009, the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union, “TFEU”) is fundamentally a ratchet mechanism: when the Community acts in a field of regulation, it locks the local parliament out permanently, until the Community completely removes its acts from said field of regulation. This is the basic method of globalism, and is the essence of the “rules-based order” (i.e. “our rules, our profits, your costs”). As at 1971, Parliament still had a fair scope of power, but over time, as the EEC regulated in more and more areas, Parliament would have a smaller and smaller field in which to operate. Liz II might have been a ceremonial monarch at the outset of her reign; from 1971 onwards, her Parliament was also set to become ceremonial, too.

With the petrodollar in operation, and the UK Parliament crimped by EEC law, the dual monopoly of central banksters and the “oiligarchy” were now able to co-ordinate their next move with significantly less impediment than would otherwise have been the case. The US Federal Reserve undertook its own implementation of the “structured disintegration” tool of the 1972 Trilateral Commission. Unsurprisingly, in 1976, an “oil crisis” magicked itself out of no-where, resulting in rollocking stagflation throughout the world economy.

Meanwhile, running parallel to the UK’s accession to the EEC, Britain had its own self-inflicted “crises” – the three day week being the most notorious example – to soften the ordinary plebs up for more regulatory punishment at a later date. By 1979, Liz II’s governments had allowed such ill-discipline and decay in public life that household rubbish bags piled up in public areas (rubbish collectors had been on long-term strike).

One tributary reason for industrial strife was the decimalisation of the British currency on 15 Feb 1971, determined by Decimal Currency Act of 1969. What a wonderful opportunity for a fleecing of the plebs. And thus it was so. In old currency half-penny was converted to 0.208 new pennies; an old shilling was converted to 5p. The purchasing power of any portfolio, or household budget, denominated in GBP slumped, obviously impacting poorer households disproportionately greater than richer households and corporations. The banksters must have been very pleased with themselves.

Liz II would have had a sound inside track on the above macro developments, plots, schemes and initiatives, so would have been able to dodge the costs and exploit any profitable micro-opportunities along the way.

The 1980s

Society changed significantly in the 1980s. The progressivism of the 1960s had collapsed into the disobedient and anarchic punk era of the 1970s. With British public (dis-)services trying hard to sabotage the lives of ordinary British plebs with self-interest and ideology (how very 2022!), by 1979, communitarianism within Britain was an impossible message to sell. “There is no such thing as society” became a mis-quoted phrase that many an ordinary pleb could easily visualise. The plebs wanted to take charge of their own lives, because, after all, they couldn’t even trust bin collectors. The plebs couldn’t even trust the trains to commute reliably to work, and when the trains did run, the insides of the windows were filthy, typically carrying a good few sneeze-blasts that had accumulated over the months. The scene was set for a new individualism to take over. Banksters licked their lips in anticipation: individualism makes divide-and-rule easier, therefore fleecing the plebs would also be easier.

One final trigger was required, which was to raise interest rates to punishing levels to quash rising prices (and help to destroy the purchasing power of fiat currencies at the same time).

The recession of the 1980s, in particular the bankster’s policy response of jacking up interest rates to fleece the plebs (again), made it politically plausible to promote “supply-side reforms”, i.e. the removal of prior protections for historic vested interests. The reforms enabled a greater degree of access by all individuals, including their corporate associations, into a wider variety of markets. A fresh supply of unwitting suckers was being allowed into financial marketplaces (“If you see Sid, tell him”), like lambs to a multi-decade slaughter. The yuppie era was born.

This was a time of “creative destruction”. It was never described as a “Great Reset”, but, to those whose interests were still wed to the financial and political configuration of the 1960s, it would have felt likely similar. Smart old money – more accurately, tipped-off insiders, such as Liz II’s Firm – would have seen this “opportunity” being engineered well in advance, so would have had plenty of notice to position themselves to profit.

Energy was also a major agenda item for the 1980s. The British coal industry saw a bitter struggle between socialists/communists (played by the National Union of Miners) and crony-capitalists (played by the UK Govt). The battle – if one could call it that – was the miners’ strike of 1983-84. Only a few minds had figured it out at the time, but the 1980s were the first decade where diminishing returns on energy investment – even in real terms – were properly felt. Novel policy decisions (novel, at least, in the UK) in matters of nuclear energy took place, partly as a response to providing a substitute energy source to reduce demand for coal (thus to disempower the striking miners), and partly to meet the disingenuous “environmental” concerns (in reality, “anti-human” concerns) by now programmed into governments around the world by lobbyists of the 1968 Club of Rome and 1972 Trilateral Commission.

The financial liberation of the 1980s enabled rapacious, rapid and rabid financialisation. Money was easier to make by gambling on financial markets rather than investing in the real world (it was to get even easier in the 2010s). De-industrialisation accelerated; sub-contracting became the only viable method of continuous production of goods, and to keep the costs of working capital barely under control, “just-in-time” supply chains started to form.

The banksters needed more profit and power than that, though. A useful enabling act for the banksters would be greater opportunities for “trade” to happen on terms for which bankster meddling would be easy. Cue the Single Market Act 1986, the initial adoption of the European Economic Area (“EEA”) into the the EEC. The framework of regulatory state was already in the TFEU, but now the EEA formalised a version of the same mechanism for the definition of goods and the terms of trade of those goods. From this year onwards, international standards would be set behind closed doors, adopted by the European Commission on the EEA’s behalf, with no democratic accountability, and rubber-stamped into enforceability throughout the EEA, completely bypassing domestic parliaments. Crony-capitalism thus had a superb regulatory tool to enable protectionism, both from foreign (extra-EEA) competition, but more importantly, from domestic (intra-EEA) competition. A slow, incremental process would standardise many products, opening up a degree of substitutability between products around the world, giving the illustration of consumer choice (the choice would actually be between only brands), at the expense of real choice (i.e. a choice between differently functional products and standards) and entrenched monopolies protected by product regulations. Naturally, government mis-sold the EEA to their plebs as a superb business opportunity. Well, to be fair, it was a superb business opportunity. Just not one for the plebs.

Liz II would have continued to enjoy her insider tips from those shifting the scenery, blowing the smoke and tilting the mirrors. The 1980s would have been a wonderful time for portfolio opportunities. That said, Liz II would also have needed to shift the basis of the Firm’s portfolio to plug into the regulatory state that the western world (Europe in particular) was developing. Ultimately, the opportunity arising in the 1980s for an elite portfolio was a shake-up of how to place two-way bets and costless hedges.

The 1990s

In 1989, the alleged collapse of the Soviet Union – as opposed to its re-birth in the west at western hands starting from 1997– provided the perfect opportunity for the EEA to push eastwards, which subsequently happened. As the unified Germany demonstrated, the wider EEA re-confirmed: while the west de-industrialised, the east won lots of supposed investment and… remained poor. Wow. Who’d have thunked that? (The answer is banksters’ financial embezzlement, of course, fleecing the masses via monetary policy, creative balance sheet accounting, tax avoidance (remember, who lobbies for the design of tax law?) and currency (mis-)management.)

The globalists created another opportunity for a fleecing of the masses, the development of the next stage of European political union, the Single European Currency. In 1993, the EU brokered the Maastricht Treaty, which set the groundwork for the Euro to become a thing on 01 Jan 1999. Ordinary plebs of the Eurozone got a sudden taste of price hikes overnight.

The UK establishment didn’t want to be in the Eurozone. Why would it? In the Rhodesian world-view – which has defined long-term foreign policy in the UK since the ~1890s – the whole point of the Eurozone was to cripple Europe with an unworkable “one-size-fits-all” monetary regime, complete with optics that made it look like Germany could pull the strings, but which actually would expose Germany to the seeds of its own financial plight (a series of “crises” of smaller players would do the trick; Greece was the first smaller player and its “crisis” was engineered in 2007-2008).

Nevertheless, the UK establishment realised that there was a journey to be had to avoid joining the Eurozone, along which lots of suckers (the outsiders) could be forcibly fleeced to the profit of the gamers (the insiders), who knew how to rig the system. Thus, Liz II’s UK government joined the Exchange Rate Mechanism (“ERM”) and, presumably with deft co-ordination, George Soros bet against the GBP’s survival between the narrow bands of permitted exchange rates of the ERM. This was obviously a one-way bet, because the UK govt & Bank of England were obviously playing to lose to meet their politico-fleecey objectives. Soros made an absolute killing from the markets (lots of gullible outsider gamblers bet against Soros The Insider, quite a foolish thing to do). The UK government technically “lost” the gamble, but it course it only loses other people’s money (which is also good news for banksters). Additionally, because of the need for GBP interest rates to rise to 15%, a crescendo of distressed mortgage holders (all ordinary plebs, of course) defaulted, triggering foreclosures and fire-sales by mortgage companies of real assets at undervalues. Bad news for the honest ordinary plebs who wanted to participate in the “property-owning democracy”. Good news for banksters and other insiders who just created a large opportunity to scoop up real assets at a distressed undervalue. Vulture capitalism at its most typical. “Oh dear,” said the UK establishment to anybody dumb enough to listen, “We’ve just learnt that the Eurozone is not for us. Thanks, but no thanks.” No mention at all of the “collateral financial murder” done to millions of ordinary UK plebs.

Liz II – an insider – would likely have been on the right side of this trade.

The 2000s to the 2020s: now it gets serious, much faster and on many more fronts

In 1997, the globalist era cranked up a few notches. A bubble of the valuation of tech stocks grew and collapsed; another fleecing of the gullible outsiders. K’ching.

The old, original oligarchy of the banksters, joined by the oiligarchy in the 1910s, was now joined by the tech mafia in the 2000s. The world elite became in an unstable arrangement between three corporate oligarchs: banks, energy and data corporations, each trying to secure supremacy over the other two, while all three totally co-depended on each other. All three were thus in a continuous game of rock-paper-scissors. Let’s call this group the “Central Oligarchs”. The only two things they could agree on was: i) to think of inventive ways of fleecing the plebs; and ii) constant obfuscation of what they were getting up to. The age of officially-sanctioned disinformation – the War Against the Plebs – had started.

A new, new world order, v4.4 possibly, is anybody keeping count?

The rolling instability between the three corporate oligarchs resulted in some degree of impediment to other interests in the global corporate world. Other wanna-be oligarchs joined in, and formed their own structures (non-governmental organisations) to act as middlemen between at least one of the corporate oligarchs and any number of governmental organisations. This extended network of the elite’s oligarchy, as it evolved from 2000 to 2020, is probably best named as the Global Public-Private Partnership (“GPPP”).

A confusion of non-governmental organisations, each jockeying for the levers of secular technocratic power, now sought to dominate global proceedings, and steer the ideology of globalism to the best interests of the corporation in question. At the centre of it initially was the Bilderberg Group, which, by 2019, seemed to have since delegated some ground to a wider range of corporations represented by the World Economic Forum (“WEF”).

Somewhere in this oligarchic mix was Liz II’s the Firm. By the 2000s, it was now becoming quite obscure as to whom was in charge of whom. It seems likely that the Firm might have had substantial minority shareholdings in a number of corporations (presumably through the usual mix of pettifogging offshore trusts, to hide the ownership trail from prying eyes). Thus, it seems unlikely that the Firm would have over-riding influence over any of the GPPP. Rather, the Firm would probably be no more than a favoured consultee, but even then amongst only those sub-interests who depended upon support from the Firm to grant “permission” to make, or to take, an opportunity.

The GPPP is a structure to develop policies and practices whose ultimate aim is to fleece the plebs, but the structure also has the potential to fleece the “junior” or “poorer” members of the insider’s club. All of a sudden, the determination of one’s insider status just got suddenly much more fiat.

The extension of the global regulatory, anti-democratic model

Meanwhile, worldwide reforms accelerated. The “Brussels Effect” – the method of the TFEU and the EEA – became mainstream globally after 2009, as UN institutions fell into line with orders coming from outside the UN umbrella. In what-was-left-of-soveriegn-nations, domestic preparations provided legislative frameworks, readily compatible with this new, embryonic one-world-single-government technocratic order, ready to receive the pre-scripted laws that would simply slot into the framework with no further domestic scrutiny or even local adaptations to make the script enforceable under local law.

The UK government did likewise, reforming significant chunks of constitutional law to bring UK law into line with globalist requirements. The UK’s by-pass of any form of democratic accountability was so successful for globalist insiders that Parliament passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 without even a whimper and the UN Migration Pact was adopted without even a blink.

The whole point of the Brussels Effect is strip away personal and democratic accountability from policy choices. Doing so makes it so much easier for the rule-makers to fleece the plebs.

War Against the Plebs part 1: the development of wokeist media

The War Against the Plebs accelerated in another front from the 2000s onwards. The dogma of “political correctness”, developed as a psychological propaganda weapon in the Western context by the Frankfurt School in the 1920s, had been a niche distraction in the 1980s. But in the 2000s, Western academic institutions industrialised political correctness, systematically replacing received truth with contrived false wherever theoretically possible. Wokeism was properly born in the public’s mind.

The 2000s and 2010s saw the consolidation of the ownership of mainstream media outlets, concentrated in the hands of insider corporations. As this happened, the media outlets fired investigative journalists, replacing them with wet-behind-the-ears “graduates” with duhgrees in anti-subjects such as “Media Studies”. Journalism ceased to be investigative; instead, it was simply the applied psychological re-writing of corporate press releases. All propaganda, zero honesty. By the late 2010s, the “news” provided by the mainstream media was wholly propaganda, often pure wokeism. Liz II’s own UK govt participated in promoting wokeist ideology, via the British Broadcasting Corporation.

This framework for permanent gaslighting would ensure the plebs were always ready to comply eagerly with “new” policy choices that would ultimately fleece the plebs… fully with the consent of the plebs, “because it makes us safe.”

The impact on the portfolio of Liz II’s Firm is mixed. On the one hand, wokeism as a form of fear mongering propaganda is useful to pen the plebs into a fixed position where they can be fleeced repeatedly and remorselessly, even if, by doing so, it becomes a game of rapidly diminishing returns, ultimately a zero-return game. On the other hand, Liz II’s Firm would need to rely more than ever on insider tips, to be able to distinguish true from lies. And if the insiders are themselves addled, there is no way of properly trusting the insiders’ tips. The worst case would be that the Firm also started to believe the lies. The War Against the Plebs thus exposes the elites themselves to at least some collateral financial damage.

Climate change (formerly known as man-made global warming)

Another political triffid spore planted in the 1960s erupted into flower in the 1990s and become core to western-global policy choices in 2010s.

This invasive plant was the insane, issue-illiterate, physics-denying pseudo-science of “man-made global warming”. Slowly and steadily, it grew its tentacles into the body politic, to steer pervasively for crazy, pseudo-scientific policy choices through the member nations of the United Nations.

The insane, issue-illiterate, physics-denying pseudo-science of “man-made global warming” was eventually found to be a false forecast for the wrong reasons, so the propagandists re-named their campaign “climate change”, to make the lies sound more plausible.

The Central Oligarchs realised that repeating this lie would eventually cause feeble-minded people to think it true, specifically that “climate change” was: i) something mankind could influence fundamentally (hint: it can’t); and ii) gonna kill us all if we did nothing (hint: it won’t). It provided a superb cover story into which the plebs would readily buy. In reality, the policy achievements were to financialise emissions of carbon dioxide, on the false pretext that carbon dioxide will boil us all alive, but on the truth that carbon dioxide is an inevitable result of all forms of human energy generation, distribution and consumption. The Central Oligarchs simply used “climate change” as a cover story for converting energy, and its related meta-data, into another tradable, fiat currency! The opportunities for multiple fleecing of the plebs for the same basic transaction appears to be limitless! Happy days!

By the 2010s, a former Bank of England governor talked about Environment Social Governance reporting as mandatory condition on any corporation to qualify for any financing (lending, investment, capitalisation, etc), noting that those applicant corporations that chose to dissent would somehow be made bankrupt.

The impact of this on the portfolio of Liz II’s Firm is unquantifiable, but the safest course of action would be to trade energy and “carbon emissions” just like any other fiat currency, as and when the mechanisms would become available to do so. There would be no point in being filthy rich in, say, GBP or USD if you had insufficient watts or cm³ of CO2 to afford such investment. The second-order impact is equally profound: to buy a big house, you would need to be able to afford the bills, which would be inflated for their energy consumption and their ¨carbon emissions¨. Sure, these charges would be convertible to a fiat currency, such as GBP, but the message would be the same: the cost of ownership would be artificially and unnecessarily higher than objectively necessary. The price for believing in the falsehood of the "green” economy would be much reduced returns on investment, irrespective of diminishing returns on investments that happen over time anyway.

Nine-eleven: the destruction of the World Trade Centre, New York City

In Sep 2001, a collection of forces successfully destroyed the World Trade Centre in New York. The official story blames Al Qaeda. How many people still fall for the official story?

Nevertheless, event was a pretext to justify significant moves towards a police state in America – a process which Obama completed in later years – and additional impediments to international travel by the plebs.

As usual, the impediments were not obvious, because the real work was constructing only the framework through which additional impediments would be arbitrarily switched on or off on a fiat. This framework would be another tool for later use to fleece the plebs, in particular to impede their freedom of movement, and thus their ability to flee financially from the financial fleecing.

With the right insider connections, and in particular the right combination of the right trusts in the right jurisdictions, Liz II could ensure the Firm’s portfolio was held harmless for financial restrictions similarly introduced alongside the travel restrictions. It seems highly unlikely that Liz II would ever need to photocopy her passport and email it to her bank for “Know Your Customer” regulations.

Expansion of the Chinese Communist Party franchise into the New World Order

In Dec 2001, Chinese joined the World Trade Organisation, which enabled further financialisation of the world economy, ending up in the 2020s with China being the world’s sole manufacturer… to the extent that some Chinese businesses thought that China was too expensive for manufacturing, and started to sub-contract to Vietnam…!

By 2020, it had become clear that the Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”) had more than just a toe in the door in numerous globalist bodies. In 2022, the CCP was elected to the board of the World Health Organisation (“WHO”), at a time when the WHO had proposed a new instrument that would use the Brussels Effect to order arbitrarily any actions for fiat scamdemics. This instrument would itself be a wonderful way to fleece the plebs.

Liz II’s Firm would probably need to think hard about how to manage the risks that CCP poses for any form of governance and the traditional understanding of the rule of law. The challenge for the Firm is that the CCP typically doesn’t distinguish between insiders and outsiders in the western sense. Instead, one is either a servant of the CCP, or an enemy of the CCP (in the Mao’s tradition, which seems to be trajectory on which Xi is currently set), there are no alternatives. At some point in time, the west is going to have to wake up to the odious truth that a Western idiot invited a monstrous cuckoo into the nest. But, of course, the distress of slowly discovering-but-not-quite-discovering the odious truth presents opportunities to fleece the plebs. Hmm. Can’t really turn nose up at that, can we? The Western elites – specifically the GPPP – will defer the right actions until the last possible moment, and even then probably be too late to act at all; the CCP will outsmart the Western GPPP. At this point, kinetic war is all that would be left for the Western elites to restore their freedoms. And kinetic war is another greater way to fleece the plebs. Just can’t lose at this game, right?

The 2008 credit crunch and blockchain technology

In 2007-2008, the banksters cracked the whip again, co-ordinating a “credit crunch” between financial institutions. This was the financial bust that most of us alive today still feel, even if we don’t understand how.

At the time, the banksters’ solution was more of the same poison that created the situation in the first place: institutional addiction to excessively-printed fiat currency. At this time, it should have been obvious that the banksters’ really needed to destroy the monetary system for their own profitability and, at the same time, to create a “scorched earth” policy in the event that the policy gamble failed (“If we can’t steal it from you, then you ain’t keeping anyway!”). Banksters depend upon transfer of economic wealth via interest payments on debt, but the risk the banksters take is that the debt never goes bad, so it is always in the banksters’ interest to magic funny munny out of thin air to keep the interest repayments going, creating the illusion of creditworthiness. This is also known as “fraud”.

The “credit crunch” was the single big event of our lifetimes at which any dreams of a centrally-planned world economy should have crumbled, with honest brokers accepting that no such central plan would ever serve any range of vested interests. Unfortunately, no such awakening by the plebby masses took place. Faith in “leadership” remained, and remains, high. No amount of fleecing the plebs seems to shake the plebs’ faith in authority!

Prompted by the engineered “credit crunch”, some in the IT crowd began to understand (at last!!) the psychopathic business model of the Central Oligarchs, the banksters in particular. In 2008, a white paper published under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto succinctly demonstrated a concept of encryption that resolved the double-spending problem in the context of peer-to-peer digital cash transactions. From 2008 onwards, a growing number of individuals – albeit still a small number of individuals – began to understand how the world’s monetary system was already a form of financial feudalism, even without a fixed digital identity and a social credit scheme tacked onto the digital identity.

Banksters realised the dire threat to their monopoly if the plebs were able to perform economic transactions without currencies that the banksters themselves controlled throughout their monopoly of currency creation. The banksters’ initial reaction was to demand abolition of crypto-currencies on the grounds that they “facilitated money-laundering” (pot, kettle, black?), “undermined the integrity of the financial system” (more pot, kettle, black?) and “created volatility” (still more pot, kettle, black?!). Were any of this true, the City of London would have been using Bitcoin since the day Bitcoin's public blockchain went live. As it is, the City of London uses fiat currencies, because fiat currencies enable money laundering quite well enough for those with the right insider connections; Bitcoin would be surplus to requirements.

Over time, the Central Oligarchs realised that the Bitcoin blockchain was designed to comply with money laundering traceability, that a blockchain technology was likely the best driver of their own Central Bank Digital Currencies (“CBDCs”), and could be extended to a regime of “Know Your Customer” well beyond today’s requirements. Blockchain technology could thus facilitate the linking of CBDCs with other permissioned blockchains – a pleb’s vaccine records, his social credit score, his carbon emission score, his energy consumption score, and so on – thus permitting an irreversible form of feudal totalitarianism.

Feudal totalitarianism? What a great way to fleece the plebs. K’ching.


In 2016, the UK voted to leave the European Union. At the time, this was seen as a massive kick in the teeth by the plebs against the establishment, to the extent that the then Prime Minster chose to resign instead of implementing the result of referendum that he had brought about.

At the time, none of us could really put a finger on why the Prime Minister called the referendum in Feb 2016. Amongst the plebs, there was just a gulf between those who felt the referendum was long overdue, against those who resented a heap of gammons exercising a democratic privilege. To the insiders, the choice was a curiosity: the EU was developing in a rigid way that favoured all of the GPPP’s vested interests, including those of UK Govt and Liz II’s Firm’s interests. But, of course, in 2016, none of us plebs connected the dots between the 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine and the planned interruption to the oil and gas supply from Russia… to Europe. Insiders knew that, politically, the UK had put itself in an impossible situation; somehow, the UK needed an unrelated method by which to leave the EU so as to be isolated from any decisions relating to Europe’s response to a lack of energy. The least worst choice was for the UK to leave the EU. Having “lost” his referendum, the Prime Minister resigned so quickly that he had disappeared even before the dust landed. As at 2022, with the benefit of some hindsight, the apparent shift in UK policy was clearly on a trajectory that us gaslit plebs didn’t detect. More about Ukraine later.

Even so, the ultimate act of European solidarity was the UK to bail out when it had the chance: an irony, even a pure hypocrisy, on so many levels, it makes one’s head spin.

The starter gun for hyperinflation

By Sep 2019, the inevitable consequence of ruinous monetary policy by the US Federal Reserve triggered the US Federal Reserve’s intervention in the overnight re-purchase market.

The intervention was not accompanied by a fleecing of the plebs, at least not directly. This indicates that something fell out control, something happened off-script, some insider in charge of keeping their eye on the ball momentarily lost sight of the ball.

The intervention averted a “credit crunch”, at least in public, but size of the bailout was orders-of-magnitude greater than that which would have saved Lehman Bros in 2007.

Objectively, the Federal Reserve’s intervention in the re-purchase market represented the final failure of the centrally-planned economic world order from 1945. From Sep 2019, the final end-game of the 1945 world order started. From here onwards, it became imperative for the GPPP to hype up a series of mass panics to keep the eyes of the plebs attracted towards irrelevance, diverted from seeing what relevant things were set to happen in plain sight.

In the immediate term, the US Federal Reserve now needed a plausible excuse to print USD to infinity and beyond. The GPPP saw to it that the US Federal Reserve didn’t have long to wait.

The coronavirus scamdemic

One month after the US Federal Reserve’s closet bailout, in Oct 2019, Event 201 took place. Ostensibly a drill for how to handle a global pandemic, it became clear in Dec 2019 that it was actually the final dress rehearsal of the imminent fraudulent, pseudo-scientific stupidity: a scamdemic of SARS-COV2, COVID19 and related mandates and lockdowns. This was the next distraction to keep the plebs’ eyes off the ball.

Since 2020, the world has been in a rolling cascades of artificial slow-downs, shut-downs, lock-downs and fear mongering, with little or no evidence to substantiate the variously insane pseudo-scientific claims that somehow a mere coronavirus could ever be the next bubonic plague (coming soon: lockdowns because “climate emergency”).

From this fraudulent, pseudo-scientific stupidity has flowed a never-ending stream of “mandates” to impede normal life, particularly in the Western world and in China.

The lockdowns were the primary strategic objectives of the lockdowns, which in turn depended upon the scamdemic narrative (“We’re all gonna die!!!”) as a suitable cover. The cover story worked an absolute treat: between Jan 2020 and Mar 2020 (the official start of the mainstream media disinformation campaign to the date of lockdowns being imposed), ordinary plebs chose to lock themselves down. Airlines, previously running full aircraft, now found themselves at only 25% capacity. The propaganda was so effective that it made the next stage of the fleecing so much easier.

With “lockdowns” would come “economic hardship”, for which the “solution” was to flood with world with currency (print, print, print) and devise really easy methods of throwing at the plebs. In Canada and most of Europe, employers opened their wallets and saw government pour currency into them, on the pretext of “job protection grants”. The US chose a bankster-led solution, whereby obtaining a loan when your business was apparently insolvent (!) would be made very easy (!!), for which you would separately beg for loan forgiveness (!!!). No prizes for guessing who in the US got the loans and the loan forgiveness. What a lovely fleece.

But the scamdemic’s narrative was too idiotic to sustain; it lingered on – sadly, with much public support – until it collapsed unceremoniously in Jan 2022 when life insurance companies began to report huge, hockey-stick-graph-like jumps in all-cause mortality numbers in 2021 (the year of the “vaccine”) compared to any pre-scamdemic year, and 2020 (the year of the supposedly deadly virus). The life insurance companies were the final straw: governments around the world had been obfuscating reports about adverse vaccine reactions and simply lying about “covid infections”. But the few outsiders with brains recognised the pattern in the number and reversed the obfuscation, revealing extremely unpalatable truths about the eugenic enterprise that had been unleashed onto the plebs.

Eugenic enterprise? Yes. The theory of man made global warming has its roots in the Malthusian belief that “There are too many humans on the planet, so cull the excess.” And, of course, the greater number of human beings, the greater volume of carbon emissions. Bad thing. But the practical policy choices to deal with overpopulation are not terribly popular. Volunteers to commit suicide “to save the planet” would be insignificantly low, and setting mass murder factories tends to be considered a bit criminal. The hybrid solution is to tell the plebs that they must take this drug right now, because it’s an emergency, so don’t think about it, and it will save your life. Of course, it’s a lie. Never mind. The plebs just need to shut up, pay their taxes and take their drugs.

Another series of opportunities sprung from the scamdemic. One such opportunity was to “discover” a range of “animal covids”, to justify the mass slaughter of privately owned smallholdings and household chicken coops (primarily to deprive some plebs of nutritional independence). A major opportunity was to develop an industrial process, whereby the time taken from “detection” of “pathogen” to the day a drug would be available to magic it all away would be only 100 days (“the Drug Train”).

Since the inconvenient truth of vaccine adverse reactions emerged, the share prices of the pharmaceutical companies that mis-sold the coronavirus vaccines have fallen significantly. It looks like financial analysts, even those within the GPPP, are adding up the cost of contingent (and possibly criminal) liabilities.

For the portfolio of Liz II’s Firm, the scamdemic, its “vaccine” rollout and the subsequent Drug Train could have been very profitable, if and only if they had insider information about when to buy what, and, crucially, when to sell it. This required a trading strategy, not an investment strategy (not that one can truly invest when the fiat currency in which the investment is denominated is itself a lie). But the costs are potentially very high. The insiders themselves would need to be absolutely sure that any injections they received – whether in private on in public – were wholly placebos, with not one single nanoparticle of the “active” ingredients meted out to the plebs. After all, there’s no point managing a portfolio if you suddenly become tomorrow’s Soylent Green.

War Against the Plebs part 2: the exercise of wokeist media

From 2019-2022, wokeism reached its zenith. It was in this period that mainstream media broadcast only quarter-truths and falsehoods. History was apparently racist, with statutes of yesterday’s elites being toppled for having installed the very regime that wokeist censors now used to censor their political opponents. Masks were safe and effective. Vaccines were safe and effective. Your sex was something you picked on a whim, instead of a reality with which you were born. Men could get pregnant; women had sperm (and, importantly, without also exuding toxic masculinity; only true men could ever exude toxic masculinity). Whiteness was an unconscious bias which trumpeted its own supremacy. Transphobia became the new hate crime. Social media platforms censored anything that challenged the approved narrative.

Just as Orwell had warned, black became white, good became bad, up became down, love became hate, and so on. It was clear that Orwell’s warning in his book 1984 was now used by the GPPP as a user guide.

The wrong think of the establishment was epitomised by a black vicar in the Church of England stating in 2022 that he didn’t believe that England was institutionally racist, only for the Church of England to suspend the said black vicar. All of a sudden, having the “correct” skin colour no longer entitled the speaker to challenge the approved narrative.

Enabling acts by the UK, preparation as an authoritarian state

Over the same period 2019-2022, the UK govt drafted a number of bills that the UK Parliament rubber-stamped and Liz II rubber-stamped with Royal Assent.

In total, five bills amounted to enabling acts for authoritarianism, criminalising a whole range of behaviours irrespective of their context or ostensible purpose. UK law now permits the police to perform criminal acts as part of their operational matters. UK law now considers a hate crime to be determined entirely by the “victim”, with no requirement for evidence from the “victim” of the “harm” allegedly done.

UK law is set to mandate a registration of all entities and individuals that pertain to act as a journalist, whereby they must register with the state, be subject to content regulation, or otherwise be deemed criminal disinformers (prosecutable without much evidence; the defendant must prove their innocence, of course)

The UK has now become Honecker’s Deutsche Demokratische Republik combined with the film Minority Report. Hmph. Canadians think they have it bad. Still, at least we are all converging towards one set of centralised psychopathy, aren’t we? Makes us nice and safe.

To survive financially this environment, Liz II would need to be very careful in how she would invest. In short, the investible universe would shrink significantly and permanently as a consequence of such authoritarianism. Combined with the “green” finance agenda enforced by the banks, the effect of UK law would be to criminalise freedom of thought, and therefore taking the risk of creating a business. Thus, the future numbers of financial opportunities would be significantly less than of today. This would reduce the scope and scale of investment diversification, intensify the concentration of funds to a narrow range of beneficial owners, increase the overall risk of holding investments… and expose the portfolio to a jolly good bankster-led fleecing. Um. At this point, Liz II might wonder what value being an insider might be.

The War in Ukraine and energy shortages

The next distraction was Ukraine.

Preparations for setting up Ukraine as a useful distraction started in 2012, leading to the US-sponsored Maidan Coup in 2014. From 2014 onwards, fascist forces set about bullying the Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine, in an attempt to goad Russia into military action. As a result, the state of Ukraine volunteered to be the fall guy in a proxy war between Russia and the United States of America.

The USA used economic sanctions to isolate Russia financially from everything, to the extent of making it impossible for Russia to repay its debts on time. But Russia supplied a lot of energy, especially to Europe. The USA’s sanctions were thus functionally sanctions on Europe, supposedly an ally of the USA. The USA appeared to have set out to destroy Europe. It was quite clear why Brexit had to happen as early as it did.

Meanwhile, Russian propaganda reported that Russia had found alternative customers for its oil and gas, finding that, overall, the resulting deal was more profitable to Russia than would have been the case by still trading with Europe.

The USA’s sanctions to interrupt supplies of energy and food (wheat, in particular) set in motion rollocking price rises of basic commodities, common to the world economy. In the west, it is the 1970s all over again. In north Africa, the consequences are far more severe, as we shall find out perhaps by Nov 2022 (if not earlier).

The propaganda makes it look like the West is defending Ukraine from Russian aggression. The actions on the ground suggest that, in reality, the West and Russia co-operated on this propaganda war from the start, using Ukraine as the fall-guy. We can be confident to think that, because the Russian president is himself an alumni of the World Leader’s Programme of the WEF. Russia’s action is playing the WEF’s script in Ukraine: the cessation of fuel and food supplies is a necessary, if insufficient, step towards the Great Reset.

Price rises, or any other form of currency debasement negatively impacts all portfolios, irrespective of whether they are held by insiders or outsiders. This price inflation not bode well for Liz II’s Firm. If only Liz II had access to a different currency in which to hold the Firm’s investments.

End of the petrodollar regime

In 2022, the House of Saud reneged on the dodgy deal with the US to sell oil exclusively in US dollars. The Saudis started talking to the Chinese about selling oil to the Chinese in Chinese Yuan.

The American reaction was subtle – by American standards – even if visible at all. It was almost as if the US Federal Reserve consented to the end of the currency monopoly in exchange for the commodity monopoly. This is in stark contrast to US reactions to prior oil states selling oil outside the US dollar: e.g. Libya 2011 (Colonel Gaddafi offered to sell oil for physical gold; the US killed Gaddafi), Iraq 2003 (Hussein, feeling betrayed by the US as a result of his entrapped invasion of Kuwait, offered to sell oil for European Euros; the US invaded Iraq and killed Hussein).

This has a pervasive effect on everybody’s portfolio, especially a long-term portfolio such as Liz II’s Firm, because undermining the US dollar – the reserve currency – would also undermine the relative and absolute valuations of all other fiat currencies. The solution would be to diversify currency holdings and investments denominated in any fiat currency, with an exposure to currencies currently under sanction. But even so, all currencies are fiat. Valuations are exaggerated, because of fiat currency printing. Fiat currency is “backed” only by debt. And central banksters want to replace the fiat currencies with something that they can rig all over again, walking away from the debt that underpins the US dollar, dumping losses onto the holders of the fiat currencies and crippling (or subjugating) their “partners” in the Central Oligarchy. Amongst the holders of these fiat currencies are our plebby pension schemes… and the portfolio of Liz II’s Firm. What sort of insider trading would be required to protect the value of the fund? What sort of trading would be required to dodge the fundamental collapse of the portfolio when fiat currencies collapse in value? What insider tips help with the timing of who is going to do what to engineer such collapse?

Conclusion and forecasting remarks

Liz II has seen all of these changes. As an insider, her Firm might have had some influence in how these scams played out, but more likely her Firm would have benefited primarily from being tipped-off about each scam well in advance, so as to ensure the Firm’s assets were sold out of harm’s way. Yet, as the GPPP grew, the relative influence of the Firm must have diminished, meaning that, at some point in the near future, the Firm would just be another private fund, prime for fleecing, just like any outsider pleb would be fleeced.

Policy choices since 1997 have all achieved incremental, strategic gains towards socialism amongst the elite – an unstable alliance, a temporary truce in the making – and neo-feudalism for us ordinary plebs (“You will own nothing and be happy!”). This is indeed a “fourth turning”, after all. But there is a fundamental weakness in the plan behind those policy choices, which is a schoolboy error of having failed to account for the energy consumption required to realise the plan. Yet if the plan fails, the losses to the elite will be very significant, no matter the proportionately worse losses inflicted on the plebs. Worse, the plan looks like it is betting the western farm on a single energy plan cooked up by insane, issue-illiterate, physics-denying pseudo-scientists yabbering about “climate change”. It’s a helluva risk if the insane, issue-illiterate, physics-denying pseudo-scientists are wrong! Has Liz II positioned her portfolio to survive collapses of her fiat currencies, her legal systems, her energy supplies and wider plebby society from which regular fleecing has been profitable? We won’t know, of course, but there are few options left as at 2022 to hedge one’s bets.

Liz II inherited a portfolio of “decline management” and “find new opportunities”. What portfolio will she bestow to Chaz?

Since 1913, the year in which the US Congress granted a total monopoly of USD creation to the US Federal Reserve, the GPPP and its predecessors engineered various ways to fleece the plebs to keep capital gains flowing into elite portfolios, but the underlying cause of the decline to manage remained unchanged: no fiat currency supports store-of-value for long-term wealth. Fiat currency only supports theft behind the scenes, from outsiders to insiders. Frankly, there ain’t much wealth left to steal.

So it looks like Liz II shall bestow to Chaz a portfolio that remains in “decline management” mode. However, Chaz is likely to have many fewer opportunities to make good profits. This is partly because reducing growth of the human population (and especially an absolute sudden reduction in the human population between 2021 to 2031, if it happens) will diminish the opportunity and profitability of fleecing the plebs. This is also partly because, if the Great Reset happens, then central banksters will use central bank digital currencies to cut insiders out of the loop automatically, in turn because there will no longer be a class of insiders that the banksters shall need to retain power. This means that Chaz will need harder protections from portfolio losses than Liz II ever needed, and a greater stomach for singing for his supper, to preserve his insider status, and also a means of either coping with, or substituting, a CBDC.

Chaz may or may not understand any of this. But we can observe that Chaz’s performance in the WEF’s promotional videos about the Great Reset indicates at least an awareness of how exposed Chaz feels the portfolio might be, unless he participates in something. Worse, both Chaz and his heir Will-I’m-Not continue to speak in favour of the “green” agenda, in spite of its insane, issue-illiterate, physics-denying, pseudo-scientific narrative. Are they both engaged in public-facing deceit to fleece the plebs, or have they too started to believe the systemic lies of their own elite chums?

Liz II, now 96, is close to the end of her reign. There is even speculation that she might abdicate, effectively retire from a lifelong vocation. At this year’s jubilee celebrations, she made one cameo appearance on the balcony of Buckingham House, visibly reliant on a walking stick, and cancelled her booked performances elsewhere, sending her kids in to deputise for her. But even here, Liz II had the good media savvy to play to the cameras, tapping her cup and saucer to the beat of Queen’s (of course) “We Will Rock You”. Liz II has come a long way in public relations since needing to be told – ordered! – to visit Lynmouth in 1952. She even allowed her image to jump out of a helicopter with 007 James Bond at the opening ceremony of the Olympics in 2012, one of numerous understated and softly humorous cameo appearances that she allowed in later life. Liz II will know that the last impression in the public eye would be the one that matters to her reputation. But for all of the playful media events, business is still business. The Firm will go on.

But, hey, it’s all the fault of Brexit, right?