Simplicius
At the Davos forum recently, many waves were made by Western politicians turning away from the US and variously announcing pivots to China. One of the big MSM narrative takeaways was that Trump was ‘humiliated’ at the event by this reception from fed-up leaders.
It brings to mind a fascinating discussion regarding what exactly is happening in the West, vis-a-vis these seemingly contradictory re-orientations. Many are rightly wondering how is it that Western deep state shills like Mark Carney—a dyed-in-the-wool bankster globalist—are choosing to orient towards China, which is supposed to be the arch-nemesis of the Western globalist cabal—is there a rift, a split in the global Deep State factions?
After all, it is China that is usurping and ostensibly attempting to destroy the Western banking and finance system which is at the heart of the global cabal that controls the various arms of the Western Deep States: so how do we make sense of this seeming pivot?
First, let’s begin by contextualizing things. Mark Carney gave a ‘seminal’ speech that many are hailing as a kind of bifurcation point of the West’s geopolitical trajectory. It is a quite remarkable speech and should be listened to in full. In it he rails against the overreaching abuses of great power countries and announces the demise of the so-called Rules Based Order, and the ushering in of a new period of might-based diplomacy. But the most remarkable aspect of the speech by far, was his admission that the entireties of the Rules Based Order and system of “International Law” were in fact fictions the West used to maintain the status quo of American hegemony because it was useful to do.
Carney:
“We knew that the story about the rules-based order was partially false... We knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused and the victim. This fiction was useful [because of the goods provided by American hegemony]... So we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals. And we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality. This bargain no longer works. Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition... You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.”
The other eye-openingly salient portion of the speech was when he revolted against the dictates of his own clan by renouncing the various ‘economic weapons’ which Western nations have long wielded against the world:
The irony here, of course, is that Carney was totally willing accomplice to these very exploitations he now condemns, when it served him and his clan—which is the first clue of our discussion.
Mark Carney was Governor of the Bank of England when it froze the $5 billion worth of Venezuela’s gold that it holds
It was an act of piracy worthy of Trump + part of the UK government’s wide-ranging 20-year effort to overthrow Venezuela’s government
The gold remains frozen
Oddly, he seems to admit the West was complicit in this selective ‘fiction’ of unequally imposing its made-up ‘rules’ on the rest of the world, yet he deftly avoids personal culpability.
Most importantly, we must ask what precisely is the purpose of his speech?
We know any such lectures by major political figures are not actually coming from them—they do not sit there of their own volition and ask themselves: “What do my constituents want?” Or in this case: “What do the people of Canada want for our shared future?”
No, such speeches are written by speech writers after consultation with the teams of executives, chiefs of staff, etc., which operate as the puppeteers of each ‘administration’. These are the behind-the-scenes movers and shakers who obtain directives from the real power players, which are the money donors, oligarchs, special interest and lobby groups that represent the consolidated interests of the pyramid of finance at the top. Carney is simply the front-facing mouthpiece delivering their new dictum, a kind of glorified brand ambassador or spokesperson.
So, given his speech, what can we deduce or infer from what these controlling interests are actually trying to say, and what directions they are attempting to steer things into?
If we listen to his ‘watershed’ speech, we note a kind of subtle trickery or sleight of hand at play. On the one hand he denounces the ‘old orders’ of illusory international law and the like, but on the other hand he seems to call for the establishment of new “cooperative” orders which are essentially the same thing, or rather, follow the same “values”. It sounds almost like he’s saying, “We should ostracize the one member who went too far, while continuing the same charade as before.”
He criticizes the ‘integration’ of globalization which has led to nations becoming co-dependent—clearly a reference to the US and Trump’s coercive ‘leverage’ now being applied to various ‘allies’. His solution is then for countries to seek more “independence” from those hegemons like the US, while establishing a system of ‘a la carte’ alliances. This is a sort of vision for a decentralized ‘Rules Based Order’ run on a concept of ad hoc membership.
Again, we’re left asking: what is this signalling, precisely? Many will recall long-time conspiracy theories that the so-called London finance cabal would shift its operations to China after parasitically gutting out the American empire, and that the “New World Order” would in the future be based in the East as a kind of strategic re-orientation of the globe-ruling elites. Many will jump to the conclusion that this is exactly what Mark Carney’s speech signifies, and that China is now demonstrably within the folds of the “NWO”. In fact, Carney even ominously invoked the New World Order directly in another speech days ago which was referencing his China pivot:
We can’t deny the fact that the Western banking and finance cabal wishes it could shackle China in the way it has done to every Western nation, so Carney’s words could certainly be a hint of implied intention. But there is very little chance that China will fall for such easy wiles. It is already far too powerful to be readily manipulated with the typical economic lures and vanity tricks employed on lesser nations.
It’s more likely that Carney’s speech represents an act of desperation from these Western elites. They know that they need to consolidate power as much as possible, and that they need to stay in the game: Carney references this specifically by stating that ‘Middle Powers’ need to work together to get a seat at the table and avoid being “on the menu”. Further, he even openly admits the new vision revolves around a realpolitik kind of pragmatism dubbed “value-based realism”, as coined by Finland’s Alexander Stubb.
When you add it all together, the vision becomes more clear: the elites appear to understand that in order for them and their order to survive, they need to maintain a ‘seat at the table’—or in other words, retain some semblance of power and influence. And right now the only way to do that is to embrace “realism”—rather than dogmatic and illusory thinking—which in this case means opening up to China. In other words: temporarily embrace your enemy if it means surviving a little while longer.
The reason they are not calling the previous ‘Rules Based Order’ completely dead, but simply in the process of dying, is because they likely believe they can still wait out this “temporary” American period of chauvinistic resurgence. If only we can bide our time, they think, by letting China keep us afloat, eventually this dangerous American “phase” will pass and our two Deep States will again unite into one proper Western Imperial Order—like the good ol’ days!
It’s possible they also believe that by pivoting to China they can help “starve out” the Trump administration, shortening its grip on power. In other words: the more business they re-orient to China, the fewer economic goals Trump is able to hit, weakening his standing and facilitating his unpopularity and—hopefully, in their eyes—the demise of his entire movement.
To some extents, the “rupture”—as Carney called it—proves that the “elites” are not entirely a monolithic cabal with precisely uniform marching orders. There are various emergent properties that naturally stem from their shared interests which happen to align them along convenient vectors most of the time. But in those gaps, there is room for many of these top elites to diverge in their thinking. This was recently underscored by a viral video of BlackRock’s Larry Fink explaining how countries which avoided mass-migration might actually be best-positioned for future growth and prosperity contrary to prevailing theories of yesteryear. This would seem to fly in the face of conventional theories of elite power dynamics and their assumed uniformity.
We know that Trump’s administration is likewise knee-deep in the globalist ‘swamp’ despite portraying themselves as rogue political disruptors. Yes, in many ways Trump was a schismatic because he rebelled against some of the Deep State’s motions, while keeping fully in line with others. As explained before, much of the global conspiracy is emergent in its nature, rather than being totally centrally controlled. There are various overlapping interests which flow naturally together toward mutual goals, but there are many areas where the various arms disagree. Think of the mafia: the families sit down to work things out and make agreements as much as possible on dividing up the various territories of their dominion. But there are many disagreements which lead to violent internecine conflicts where top families are forced into major episodes of bloodshed.
Similarly here, Trump and his clan have many overlapping interests with the wider global Deep State, most notably when it comes to Israel and the general prolongation of Western supremacy over the world. But he didn’t see eye-to-eye with them on certain cultural aspects. For example, it seems within the global Deep State itself there are competing factions, one of which does not agree with the mass-Kalergification of the Western world as the largest social-engineering and genetic displacement project in world history.
Trump appears to want a return to a status quo ante, where the global financial system’s terminal ails are dusted over with the ‘glitz’ of an ersatz economic boom. But he is no longer reading the room because the new generation of observers and political activists are increasingly hip to the fact that something is fundamentally wrong with the entire system on which all global commerce and civilization is based. Trump wants to return to the ‘golden days’ which can never be restored because they were artificially engineered by kicking a can down the road—but that can has reached a deadend, and people can feel it in their gut.
This is the underlying reason for the factional splits in the so-called global Deep State: no one even at the very top truly knows how to right this ship of runaway fiat and the resultant social and geopolitical unraveling taking place, and so each faction now desperately stabs out on its own with different high-risk experimental forays, causing internal friction to swell.
Granted, beneath the layer of disorder they remain faithful votaries of their financial leviathan, and will always game-theoretically side with each other when it advances the overall cause. But it is simply the case that now, perhaps for the first time ever, there are deep disagreements over how to proceed into the unknown of their own making.
No comments:
Post a Comment