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.
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
Liz II has observed
seismic changes in Britain’s economic and political landscape.
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.”
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.)
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
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
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 –
A new, new world order, v4.4 possibly, is anybody
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,
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
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
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
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.
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?
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”).
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
The War in Ukraine and energy shortages
The next distraction
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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,
also a means of either coping with, or substituting, a CBDC.
may or may not understand any of this. But we can observe that
Chaz’s performance in
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?