Money Flow Trading Method along with Risk Management

World News

https://finviz.com/news.ashx?v=2

World Futures

https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Forex Prices

https://finviz.com/forex.ashx

Cryptocurrency Prices

https://finviz.com/crypto.ashx

Bond & Notes Charts

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=BONDS&p=d1

Charts 10 Year Notes

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=ZN&p=d1

Charts 5 Year Notes

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=ZF&p=d1

Charts GOLD

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=GC&p=m5

Charts DJIA DOW 30

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=YM&p=m5

Charts 2 Year Notes

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=ZT&p=d1

Charts USD

https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=DX&p=m5

Charts Euro EUR/USD

https://finviz.com/forex_charts.ashx?t=EURUSD&tf=m5

Charts British Pound GBP/USD

https://finviz.com/forex_charts.ashx?t=GBPUSD&tf=m5

Charts YEN USD/JPY

https://finviz.com/forex_charts.ashx?t=USDJPY&tf=m5


Benjamin

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...t-very-rapidly

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/w...in-540x415.png

Virtually every piece of hard economic data is telling us that the U.S. economy is slowing down dramatically. Many of the pundits have been warning that we could officially enter recession territory later this year or next year, but these numbers seem to indicate that it could happen a whole lot sooner than that. But the stock market has been surging over the last two months, and at this point stocks are off to their best start to a year since 1987, and as long as stock prices are rising a lot of people are simply not going to pay much attention to the economic alarm bells that are ringing. But everyone should be paying attention, because things are really starting to get bad out there. The following are 18 really big numbers that show that the U.S. economy is starting to fall apart very rapidly…


#1 Farm loan delinquencies just hit the highest level that we have seen in 9 years.
#2 We just learned that U.S. exports declined by 4 billion dollars during the month of December.
#3 J.C. Penney just announced that they will be closing another 24 stores.
#4 Victoria’s Secret has just announced plans to close 53 stores.
#5 On Thursday, Gap announced that it will be closing 230 stores over the next two years.
#6 Payless ShoeSource has declared bankruptcy and is closing all 2,100 stores.
#7 Tesla is also closing all of their physical sales locations and will now only sell vehicles online.
#8 PepsiCo has started laying off workers and has committed to “millions of dollars in severance pay”.
#9 The Baltic Dry Index has dropped to the lowest level in more than two years.
#10 This is the worst slump for core U.S. factory orders in three years.
#11 We just witnessed the largest decline in the Philly Fed Business Index in more than 7 years.
#12 In January, sales of existing homes fell 8.9 percent from a year earlier. That was the third month in a row that we have seen a decline of at least 8 percent. This is an absolutely catastrophic trend for the real estate industry.
#13 U.S. housing starts were down 11.2 percent in December compared to the previous month.
#14 Compared to a year earlier, home sales in southern California were down 17 percent in January.
#15 In December, home sales in Sacramento County fell a whopping 22.5 percentcompared to a year earlier.
#16 Pending home sales in the United States have now fallen on a year over year basis for 13 months in a row.
#17 More than 166 billion dollars in student loan debt is now “seriously delinquent”. That is an all-time record.
#18 More than 7 million Americans are behind on their auto loan payments. That is also a new all-time record, and it is far higher than anything that we witnessed during the last recession.


It appears that “the recovery” has finally come to an end. After seeing all of those numbers, there is no way that anyone can possibly claim that economic conditions are “getting better”.


And even though the official government numbers are highly manipulated, we never even had one “boom year” throughout the entire “recovery”.

The final numbers for 2018 are now in, and last year was the 13th year in a rowwhen U.S. GDP growth was below 3 percent.

The last time we had a “boom year” when economic growth was above 3 percent was all the way back in 2005. That was in the middle of the Bush administration.
We have never seen a bad streak like this before in modern American history. The following comes from CNS News…

But prior to the current 13-year period when real GDP has failed to grow by 3.0 percent in any year, there has been no stretch (in the years since 1930) when the United States went as long as five straight years with real GDP failing to grow by at least 3 percent.

Even though the Federal Reserve pumped trillions of dollars into the financial system over the last decade, and even though we added nearly 12 trillion dollars to the national debt, the best that the authorities have been able to do is to stabilize the system for a while. Now it is starting to sputter once again, and many believe that the next crisis will be far worse than the last one.


By contrast, the Great Depression of the 1930s featured some really bad years, but following those bad years the U.S. experienced a tremendous economic boom…

By contrast, after the stock market crash in 1929, the United States saw four years of negative annual GDP—1930 (-8.5), 1931 (-6.4), 1932 (-12.9) and 1933 (-1.2). But then in the nine full years from 1934 through 1942, real GDP grew by an average of 9.75 percent.


We should have had some boom years too, but we didn’t, and now things are going to get bad again.

The Democrats are going to blame the Republicans and the Republicans are going to blame the Democrats, but all of that arguing isn’t going to solve anything.

What is coming next has been a central focus of my work for a very long time. The last recession was very painful, but it did not fundamentally alter life in America.
This next crisis will.


The “Everything Bubble” is bursting, the “Perfect Storm” is coming, and all of our lives will never be the same again.


But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t hope. In fact, once things really start getting crazy hope is going to be one of the major themes in my work because people are really going to need it.


There will be great challenges, and life will be very different, but that doesn’t mean that life is over.

America is about to experience the consequences of decades of exceedingly foolish decisions, and the pain will be extreme. But difficult times also offer an opportunity for dramatic change, and that is something that we will need to embrace.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/wp-...epared-Now.png

About the author: Michael Snyder is a nationally-syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is the author of four books including Get Prepared Now, The Beginning Of The Endand Living A Life That Really Matters. His articles are originally published on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream and The Most Important News. From there, his articles are republished on dozens of other prominent websites. If you would like to republish his articles, please feel free to do so. The more people that see this information the better, and we need to wake more people up while there is still time.

Benjamins, is this the right time to buy Gold( physically )??

Because of the safety and the leverage Silver is the better asset to hold. You can buy it in Toronto and the amount is up to you. I buy for my clients and my corporation in blocks of 100 ounces from Kitco in Montreal only RCM Royal Canadian Mint 100 ounces of Silver. Talk with you soon.

You can buy in smaller amounts if you like.


Benjamin

Wow, 100 ounces!!!, today’s price per ounce is $1285.80X100=$128,580.00.,

I cannot afford it, first I wish to make some money here in forex & stock under your mentoring, then I can think.

Now a days, I can hardly meet my both ends.

Mr. Benjamins, could you plz throw some light on “ Double Edge Sword “, in forex.

That was 100 ounces in Silver not Gold. Silver is the better insurance and investment.


Benjamin

Just Google it as I will now do.

https://www.nasdaq.com/investing/forex-leverage.aspx


Benjamin

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2...5kZJpDdjhkshFQ

March 1, 2019
US Socialists Silent As Trump-Russia Collusion Lie Implodes—But Whose True Cost Of Will Be Measured In Exploding Nuclear Bombs
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers


A foreboding new Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) report circulating in the Kremlin today bashing the United States for its clumsy policy on Venezuela, alarmingly notes that the socialist-led Democrat Party controlled mainstream propaganda media establishment in America has begun banning all news coverage related to the exposure of the Trump-Russia collusion fairy tale being all based on lies—but are lies that have nevertheless, and needlessly pushed the world’s two largest nuclear weapons powers to the brink of total war as evidenced by new polling showing that 52% of the American people now see Russia as a “critical threat” to the United States for the first time since the Gallop pollsters asked the question in 2004—and before these collusion lies were vilely spread in 2016, saw only 39% of them saying that they considered Russia a threat—and made more catastrophic by Democrat Party leaders supporting these lies—the two most powerful of whom contending to be the next president are now exhibiting full socialist-communist attributes—who are former Vice President Joe Biden, who was just brutally forced to retract his statement that Vice President Mike Pence is a “decent guy” as it didn’t conform to his party’s strict ideology of personal destruction—and US Senator Bernie Sanders, who in a video he tried to keep hidden, shockingly praised the Soviet-style bread lines he expects his nation’s citizens to submit to once he takes power. [Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/biden1.jpg

According to this report, during this past week, the two most dominant headlines in newspapers and news broadcasts the world over were US Air Force General John Hyten, the head of the US Strategic Command (STRATCOM), warning the US Senate Armed Services Committee that the United States is unable to down Russia’s advanced hypersonic nuclear armed missiles—and the nuclear armed nations of India and Pakistan being on the brink of a nuclear holocaust—neither of which the US mainstream media bothered to tell the American people about with their, instead, choosing to display as their top story the Democrat Party’s desperate attempt to turn a convicted liar into a hero.

By choosing to continue lying to the American people about President Trump, this report details, the US mainstream media, aided by their socialist Democrat Party allies, were able to collapse their nation’s nuclear disarmament talks with North Korea—a shameful and despicable act only noted by Washington Post opinion writer Charlie Jane Anders, who in her article titled “Pop Culture Needs To Go Nuclear Again”, explained how the American people, their entertainment industry and, most importantly the US mainstream media, joined to together at the height of the Cold War to prevent World War III—and who, in part, wrote:
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists set the infamous Doomsday Clock at two minutes to midnight in January 2018, making this our closest call since the 1950s.


Gaukhar Mukhatzhanova with the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies says the risks are increasingly multipolar.

They include the Trump administration's more aggressive nuclear posture review, the abandonment of key arms treaties with Russia and Iran, tensions between the nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, and the weakening of international institutions such as the United Nations.

Frighteningly, says Tom Nichols, a professor with the U.S. Naval War College, decisionmakers - and the public they are supposed to answer to - don't seem to realize how unstable the situation really is.

Pop culture was once full of mushroom clouds and nuclear winters. From the somber warnings of “On the Beach” to the satirical absurdism of “Dr. Strangelove,” mass media continually sounded the alarm about where we seemed to be headed.

Authors such as Kurt Vonnegut and performers including Prince and Tom Lehrer obsessed about our tendency toward self-destruction, as did director James Cameron in his movie “The Terminator.”

Nuclear Armageddon provided conveniently heightened stakes for storytellers, but those fantasies made Americans aware of a genuine threat.

“Popular culture was an important factor in shaping people's perceptions and levels of concern about nuclear war,” says Martin Pfeiffer, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of New Mexico who focuses on nuclear weapons.

“The Day After” was watched by 100 million people, and many people credit it with contributing to President Ronald Reagan's change of heart on nuclear disarmament.

Cold War pop culture also demonstrated a perfect response to an existential problem. Works including “WarGames,” “Terminator” and “Strangelove” illuminated the abhorrent logic behind choosing to launch such unthinkable weapons, as well as the computer systems that might automate such a choice.

Post-apocalyptic movies such as “Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior” and “The Day After” forced people to imagine the misery of life after a nuclear strike.

Those two approaches, combined with decades of activism, helped build public support for the policy changes that made a potentially civilization-ending conflict less likely.
It's hard to imagine the enormity of nuclear war - which is why books, movies and TV shows were so vitally important in helping us visualize the worst scenarios.

But now that the risk is high once again, many of us are in denial about the peril.

We need activism, but we also need new stories, to push us to confront this nightmare before it's too late.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/biden2.jpg

Instead of pushing the American people to confront the nightmare of a nuclear holocaust before it’s too late, however, this report says, the US mainstream media and Hollywood elites, working in lockstep with their socialist Democrat Party overlords, have worked overtime these past nearly three years to insure that Russia will bomb the United States back to the stone age should it ever sense these maniacs might get their hands on power—and is more than justified because of these malign forces having done everything in their power to convince the American people that Russia interfered in 2016 with their presidential election.


The device used to convince 52% of the American people, in just three years, that nuclear armed Russia is their “greatest threat”, this report explains, is now infamously known as the Trump-Russia Dossier—whose creator of, former British spy Christopher Steele, admitted under oath in a London courtroom he was paid millions-of-dollars to create it for Hillary Clinton who intended to use it to challenge her election loss against President Trump.


The two main lynchpin claims made in the Trump-Russia Dossier, upon which it either stands or falls, this report notes, was its comically claiming that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen traveled to Prague-Czech Republic in order to coordinate with Russian intelligence operatives who would help win the election for Trump—and was because, even more laughably, Russia had a video of Trump peeing on prostitutes while he visited a hotel in Moscow he has never been to—the first claim Cohen shot down in flames during his under oath testimony this week when he stated “I've never been to Prague”—and his, likewise, admitting the truth that no “pee tape” of Trump in Moscow has ever existed.


Still not being told to the American people about British spy Christopher Steele by either their US mainstream media or socialist Democrat Party, this report details, is that for over 30 years, this ex-MI6 operative, known as the “Cambridge Communist”, has repeatedly compiled untrue salacious dossiers to destroy people—the first recorded one being against Cambridge Union Vice President Lance Forman whom Steele demonically smeared by accusing him of supporting apartheid—but whose true and sordid facts about will be put on full display for the entire world to see sometime between mid-October and mid-December when Steele is placed on trial for his lies in London—a glimpse of which can be seen as soon as 14 March in the US after, yesterday, he lost his fight in a US Federal Court to keep secret his under oath testimony.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/biden3.jpg

Most astonishingly, though, this report says it’s important to note, is that a small cadre of newly elected Democrat Party members of the US Congress—who call themselves “Blue Dog Democrats” because they come from States where Trump is popular—have begun to turn on their socialist leaders and support the Republican Party—such as this past week when 26 of them joined Republicans in amending a gun grabbing piece of legislation to add a provision requiring that ICE be notified if an illegal immigrant seeks to purchase a gun—but that immediately caused them to be called behind closed doors by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of the Democrat Party, where they were savagely threatened and berated—most particularly by “socialist darling”, and new comic book heroine, US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who yesterday vowed to these “Blue Dog Democrats” that if they ever voted with the Republicans again, she’d place them on her “hit list” and destroy them in the next election—a threat this demonic socialist is able to carry through with, as evidenced by her having just moved to place her entire staff outside the confines of financial disclosure laws so they can make hundreds-of-millions of dollars unseen by the American people.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/biden4.png

Socialists in America want nothing less than the death of President Trump, his entire family, and all who support him.

In knowing how close total global nuclear war is to becoming a reality because of the malign actions of both the US mainstream media and their Democrat Party overlords, this report concludes, top Trump official Larry Kudlow, just hours ago, sounded a clarion call to the American people stating “I ask you to join President Trump and me and the rest to put socialism on trial and convict it”—and is a battle President Trump intends to win as evidenced by his Republican National Committee (RNC) having just announced its team to lead him to victory in 2020 and their having reached a landmark agreement to reshape their party’s fundraising apparatus and close the financial gap that devastated them in the 2018 midterms—the staggering power of which can be seen in the Federal Election Commission data released on 28 February 2019 showing the RNC has raised an astonishing nearly $325 million—as opposed to the Democrat National Committee (DNC) during this same raising only $176 million—and comes at the same time Trump, by himself, has entered the 2020 election cycle with a massive fundraising lead over Democrats of more than $129 million, too—and is why, today, the socialist-led mouthpiece for the Democrat Party, the Washington Post (and in knowing how close their destruction really is once Trump begins his counterattack) is grimly warning that the United States “is on the verge of civil war”—with their further stating:
With the report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III reportedly nearly complete, impeachment talk in the air and the 2020 presidential election ramping up, fears that once existed only in fiction or the fevered dreams of conspiracy theorists have become a regular part of the political debate.

These days, there’s talk of violence, mayhem and, increasingly, civil war.

A tumultuous couple of weeks in American politics seem to have raised the rhetorical flourishes to a new level and also brought a troubling question to the surface: At what point does all the alarmist talk of civil war actually increase the prospect of violence, riots or domestic terrorism?

Speaking to conservative pundit Laura Ingraham, diGenova summed up his best advice to friends: “I vote, and I buy guns. And that’s what you should do.”

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/biden5.png

March 1, 2019 EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.

[Note: Many governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the manybucatastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human beings right to know the truth. Due to our missions conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their ‘agents’ has been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit us, and others like us, that is exampled in numerous places, including HERE.]

[Note: The WhatDoesItMean.com website was created for and donated to the Sisters of Sorcha Faal in 2003 by a small group of American computer experts led by the late global technology guru Wayne Green (1922-2013) to counter the propaganda being used by the West to promote their illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq.]
[Note: The word Kremlin (fortress inside a city) as used in this report refers to Russian citadels, including in Moscow, having cathedrals wherein female Schema monks (Orthodox nuns) reside, many of whom are devoted to the mission of the Sisters of Sorcha Faal.]

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/econo...kGE1EmLpWxPvg/

GDPNow Initial Estimate of 1st-Quarter GDP: 0.3 Percent
https://imageproxy.themaven.net/http...Nk27_uNLYhShVg
https://imageproxy.themaven.net/http...%3Fversion%3D0


by Mish
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.38)]-edited[/color]


The GDP Now initial forecast for 1st-quarter 2019 GDP is a minuscule 0.3%.
Once again we see a huge discrepancy between the Atlanta Fed GDP Now Model and the New York Fed Nowcast Model for first-quarter GDP.

The former is 0.3%, the latter 2.26%.

Pat Higgins at GDP now writes: "The initial GDP Now model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the first quarter of 2019 is 0.3 percent on March 1. The initial estimate of fourth-quarter real GDP growth released by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis on February 28 was 2.6 percent, 0.8 percentage points above the final GDP Now model now cast released the previous day."


A check of the GFP Now spreadsheet has first quarter real final sales at 0.9%. That is the true bottom line estimate of the economy. The model estimates Change in Private Inventory (CIPI) at -0.6%. Inventories net to zero over time.

I will start a spreadsheet comparing GDP Now to Now cast in a couple weeks. One data point does not make for a good graph.


Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Silver Stocks Remain Buoyant as Merger Mania Heats Up

David Erfle
Friday March 1, 2019

Kitco Commentaries | Opinions, Ideas and Markets Talk

(Kitco News) - The silver space has been beaten down for so long, most speculators who have attempted to bottom fish this tiny sector have given up and moved on. After silver prices crashed and stayed low for what seems like a decade, the sector has been basically left for dead. The current silver bear market began after a speculative blow-off top reached nearly $50 per ounce back in April of 2011.

This relentless selling of the metal is now 17 months longer than the 1980 – 1986 bear market, which also followed a blow-off top to the $50 region.

With the volatile metal still trading below $16, this silver bear is now into its eighth year and requires a monthly close above $21 to technically complete its 5-year basing pattern. This would be a 35% move from current levels and appears miles away when taking into account what the numerous false breakouts over the past seven years has done to the psyche of silver speculators.

Moreover, when the nearly 50% move higher in gold’s little sister peaked in mid-2016 at $20 per ounce, the quick burst of enthusiasm for all things silver turned into yet another false hope during what has now become the longest bear market in silver future’s trading history. I believe there is a strong possibility this was the final blow responsible for ridding the sector of most of the staunchest long-term bulls, creating a final capitulation bottom last November.


The recent divergence of silver stocks in the face of both lower gold miners and declining silver is another reason to believe we may have carved out a significant bottom. While gold has been correcting a nearly 15 percent move higher since hitting a one-and-a-half-year low last August, many of the silver equities have maintained most of their recent gains and appear “sold-out”. In fact, many of the individual silver juniors I own and/or track have stubbornly held on to their recent gains as the metal has retreated further below $16 this week.


SILJ, the PureFunds Silver Junior ETF, is consolidating its recent gains with decreasing volume and has been slowly outperforming the GDX since tax-loss selling ended late last year. This highly volatile sub-sector has historically been the first to sell-off before a longer-term correction ensues in the precious metals complex and could be a signal of silver having made a significant bottom last November.

Furthermore, silver has been experiencing something of a supply issue lately. According to reports, the U.S. Mint has suspended silver bullion coin sales after the mint ran out of 1-ounce American Eagle silver coins on Feb. 21st. This is encouraging from a longer-term standpoint and can be considered as another supporting factor for the continuation of the intermediate-term recovery in both gold and silver.

Meanwhile, gold is beginning to show signs of vulnerability as a key resistance area was tested and has been reversing from $1350 since last week. The price appears headed to a test of the formerly strong resistance region of $1300 - $1309, as the safe haven metal closed out its first losing month yesterday after a 4-month winning streak. This argues in favor of the “pause that refreshes” for the gold price to continue in the very near term.

However, the action of the gold miners during this sell-off should provide investors with clues as to how deep this healthy correction may go. The selling in the GDX so far has been normal after becoming short-term overbought last week. There is some support at the $21.50 level, with critical support at its 200-week moving average just below $21. As long as the global miner ETF remains in its uptrend above this important trendline, accumulation in the complex is recommended during this weakness.

Three global miners, which combined make up nearly 25% of the GDX, have been in the news recently in a battle of takeovers, hostile bids and saber rattling. Earlier this week, Barrick Gold announced that it has made a proposal to the Newmont Mining Corporation Board of Directors to merge with Newmont in an all-share transaction, saying a combination of the two would form the world’s best gold company with unprecedented potential for value creation.

Although a few major shareholders have backed the proposal, I am hard pressed in seeing a hostile bid below market value by Barrick being successful in taking over rival Newmont, which has out-performed it on a large scale since the last time both companies considered merging in 2014. Barrick’s share price is down 25% since that time, while Newmont’s is up over 65%. Contrary to this hostile bid, the recently proposed Newmont/Goldcorp merger may eventually be completed as Newmont management has instead said it favors proceeding with its planned acquisition of Goldcorp Inc.

No matter how this scenario plays out, I expect the divestment of both Newmont and recently discussed Barrick assets to create a few more mid-tier miners and drive more acquisitions of large scale/low cost development projects with blue sky potential. The news has also been bringing more attention from generalist investors to the undervalued and pretty much forgotten sector, while putting the spotlight on how desperate major miners are becoming to grow their rapidly depreciating reserves.

In the meantime, markets continue to reflect the political and economic events, as there are more than a few issues that are likely to keep gold firmly above $1250 per ounce. Accordingly, gold’s recent price action has been a response to the volatile year that lies ahead. Brexit, which may or may not happen at the end of March, is going to cause some kind of turmoil, while the European Union continues to face a myriad of political and economic problems with their membership. Not to mention the Fed’s growing monetary policy controversy, along with the slowdown in global growth rates.

Based on all of these issues, continuing to concentrate on accumulation of the best in breed juniors during this correction is recommended. While the GDX is consolidating its recent gains, deep value opportunities remain in the sub-$500M market cap growth-oriented producers, high-margin project developer/explorers, and cashed-up, early stage micro-cap juniors. If you require assistance in choosing the best quality juniors to invest, please stop by my website and check out the subscription service at http://juniorminerjunky.com/

By David Erfle Contributor to Kitco News
[email protected]

Here is the link to the original Kitco post:

https://www.kitco.com/commentaries/2019-03-01/Silver-Stocks-Remain-Buoyant-as-Merger-Mania-Heats-Up.html

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...siT9qlE_O0pxsA

Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,
Longtime Automatic Earth friend Alexander Aston talks about finding himself at Oxford at a point in time when the British themselves appear overcome by a combo of utter confusion and deadly lethargy, and one can only imagine what it must be like for ‘foreigners’ residing in Albion, who face large potential changes to their lives and know there’s not a thing they can do about it, not even vote.


I like the observation that the entire British political system, the place where decisions are made, is the size of a small village. That’s a visual we can all relate to. It’s a physical limit as well as a mental one. I’m all for sovereignty and self-determination, but how’s that going to work if you can’t even see the boundaries of your own territory?


Guys, it’s 4 weeks to D-Day today. How about we call off the landing, get a few pints instead, and talk? First round’s on me.
Here’s Alexander:
Alexander Aston: I arrived in the UK in 2015 to undertake interdisciplinary research at the University of Oxford. I am a child of the Empire, a cultural product of Britannia’s oldest colonies in the British Isles, her most important colony now turned empire as well as one of her youngest, Zimbabwe. The UK is both an intimately familiar society and yet one that is also strangely alien for me, like a wealthy, often charming and deeply abusive parent that sparks both self-recognition and rejection.


The ‘leave’ referendum occurred close to a year after I arrived in the UK and is one of the few political events over the past few years that surprised me. I suppose that I assumed, given the power and wealth afforded to UK elites by the EU, that those who benefited so greatly from the status quo would do anything to manipulate or fudge the results. Nonetheless, history decided to swerve, and over the past four years, I have watched the inhabitants of this island stumble into an profound identity crisis. Having spent a good portion of my life in Greece, I do not have particularly warm and cuddly feelings toward the European Union and was never a natural ‘remainer’.


The single markets and the long peace are significant achievements, and the ability for Europeans to move freely and form new discourses, relationships and endeavours has value that is impossible to quantify. The EU is technocratic, unaccountable and enthralled to a neoliberal ideology that knows only how to extract wealth from the most vulnerable and concentrate it in the hands of the most powerful. I have lived in Athens, I have family in Greece, I have seen well enough the true costs of EU membership.


What strikes me most in my experiences of the United Kingdom are the incredible levels of cognitive dissonance demanded by its media, politics and economics in order for the society to function. I live in one of the most expensive and unequal cities in the entire country. I am surrounded by the grandeur of powerful and wealthy institutions that are older than the Aztec empire and filled with some of the most powerful and elite humans on the planet and their heirs in waiting. Every time that I enter a building, go to a lecture, meet with a colleague, or sit for some grand meal in one of the colleges I must walk past dozens of human beings that are cold, hungry and occasionally dying on the streets.


This is in a country that provides social housing and millions in basic income to a single family, where it is accepted that the most vulnerable people are relentlessly bullied into poverty through cuts, inspections and ever increasing demands of performance. In a country where the Beatles and J.K. Rowling all started their careers on the dole. I don’t know the answers to our predicaments, but the conversation is extremely lopsided and blind to the real misery it is creating. Every time I walk through Oxford, I am filled with a profound sense of guilt and remorse, I marvel and benefit from the treasures surrounding me and I wonder… is this the best we can do? Are these the limits of our social imagination and creativity?


Shortly after I arrived, Jeremy Corbyn was elected to the leadership of the labour party. It was an early prefiguration of the political disruptions that were about to sweep the world. The neoliberal managerialism of New Labour had lost control, and its partisans wage an increasingly desperate guerrilla war with no small amount of aid from the establishment media.


Long before Brexit was a reality I became aware of the repetitious delirium of innuendo, slander and fear-mongering through which the media managed the perspective and narrative in the country, much like the American system but with its own uniquely British aesthetics and sense of authority. This somnambulant fever has only grown as the country has tripped and stumbled through the unexpected circumstances and self-engineered traps of austerity, political deadlock, and delusions of grandeur.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...extanic600.jpg


Trending Articles
An Arms Race Begins: Deadly AI Tanks - The U.S. Military's…

The United States military is going to attempt to build deadly artificial intelligence-driven tanks. Dubbed Project…

https://c5x8i7c7.ssl.hwcdn.net/creat.../dslogo_sm.png

Day in and day out we are subjected to a litany of failure by one of the most incompetent governments in history while the media clucks, puffs and turns a path of ruin into mere spectacle. Yet, day after day we find ourselves in a state of inertia, nothing seems to change as the country hurtles towards historical rupture. The dissonance created between a seizing political system, PR firms masquerading as journalists and a dysfunctional economy requires that the people of the United Kingdom smooth over, ignore or forget the increasing contradictions of their lived experience.


Anthropologically speaking, the nuance of British culture that has perhaps had the most profound impact upon me is the detail to which the English are able to infer region, class and schooling through the voices of their fellow citizens. The subtle encoding of social hierarchies into the dialects and accents of the United Kingdom to degrees that I have never experienced in the rest of the Anglophone world. Despite my ignorance about many intricacies of British linguistics, one thing I do feel relatively confident about is that even though the English have the vast majority of the wealth and power in the United Kingdom, the Celts have received the warmer sense of humour.


For me, one of the few truly positive possible outcomes of Brexit is the potential for Irish reunification and even the chance of an emerging “Celtic sphere” to provide a new counterbalance in the British Isles. The partition of Ireland stems from one of the deepest and oldest wounds inflicted by the British Empire. It is an ironic twist of fate that the Tories now find themselves dependent upon the Unionist partisans and descendants that they so eagerly fostered to maintain dominance over Ireland. The United Kingdom’s mythology of itself has run headlong into the contradictions at the heart of its empire. The country that is partitioning itself from Europe finds its politics paralysed by an older act of partition.


The contradictions of Brexit have riven the political parties and the governing process has ground to a halt. It is an intractable predicament, the interests of the Unionists, Capitalist Utopianists, Neoliberal reactionaries, Political Elites, Nationalists, Independents and Socialists are all pulling in different directions. Consensus is only achieved in moments of near universal rejection, yet with no ability to pass any meaningful legislation the Tories only coalesce in obstinate refusal to change the situation.


Meanwhile the ship of state drifts towards a political, economic and moral abyss. What I can say from my time at Oxford is that the political masters of this country are indoctrinated with an imperial hubris in a political system that operates like a small village. The institutions of power here produce all too many children with no experience of the daily struggles of common people, that are all together convinced as to their entitlement to rule over millions with a PPE degree in hand.
The country is in an intractable prisoners dilemma, the logic of which makes a no-deal outcome highly possible. My fear with a no deal is that this would result in a bond shock, and with economic disruptions in Ireland, the Benelux, a France mired in a political crisis and the financial precarity of Italy all create excellent conditions for an absolutely roaring debt calamity. Yet, the UK blithely dithers on as Theresa May puts on her best performance of Neville Chamberlain and tries, tries again. The fact is that the government has lost all political legitimacy and Parliament is an omnishambles.


Those that lead us are so committed to their own narratives, so convinced of their acumen and power, so insulated by their privilege that they will sacrifice the health and prosperity of this nation in the absolute conviction that they are right and that all their problems are the fault of stupid people that don’t listen and do what they are told. The folks in the ERG think they only need sit on their hands and they can, they will, find themselves in a libertarian Aristocracy sea steading off the shores of Europe.


The London centric remainers think that they can paper over the past four years with a second referendum and that all can go back to normal and Brexit can be safely tucked away as a terrifying aberration. I am reminded of the H.L. Mencken quote that “for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.”


The only pathway I can see to restoring political legitimacy at this point is a general election. Only after an extension of article 50 and a new government has negotiated an alternative deal is it really feasible to begin speaking about holding further referendums that won’t cause great harm to democratic society. Citizen assemblies would need to be formed and plans for three referenda drawn up, a choice between Mays and the Alternative deal followed by a decision between the winning deal and a no-deal option which would culminate in a final choice between a popularly demanded type of Brexit and remaining within the European Union.


I, as the rest of us, have no idea where our current moment in history will lead. However, there are a few things that I feel confident are occurring. The long twentieth century that began in 1914 is at the end of its cycle. Whatever comes next will be something new, a difficult and demanding opportunity for profound creativity and the chance to step out of the long shadow of our past. In all ecosystems, diversity generates resilience. It is the reason and the strength of building consensus. Yet we cannot build consensus if we refuse, alienate and straw man the voices of others and refuse to examine and discuss the contradictory predicaments in which we find ourselves.


Those that lead us are blind, they are blind because they are true believers and they lack either the wit or compassion to imagine something different beyond more wealth extraction and violence. We have seen Neoliberalism’s Capitalist Utopia and it has failed. Only open and honest discourse coupled with pragmatic action will allow us to navigate to a new shore. I feel strongly about these things, that and that no matter what ones political persuasion, voting for the Tories should be beneath anyone’s dignity at this point.


To be awake from this collective dissonance we must approach our predicament with humility and honesty. Without a democratic commitment to an open and honest discussion, pragmatic decision making processes and a functioning political system capable of mitigating the worst damage, this country will become a mere serfdom ruled by Lilliputian lords.

“For we each of us deserve everything, every luxury that was ever piled in the tombs of the dead kings, and we each of us deserve nothing, not a mouthful of bread in hunger. Have we not eaten while another starved? Will you punish us for that? Will you reward us for the virtue of starving while others ate? No man earns punishment, no man earns reward. Free your mind of the idea of deserving, the idea of earning, and you will begin to be able to think.”

– Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed

PLEASE LISTEN AND COMMENT - THANK YOU !!!

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29

Authored by James Grant, op-ed via MarketWatch.com,
Last Monday, the Federal Reserve embarked on a yearlong listening tour to discover the concerns of the American people. The whole shebang of modern monetary methods - manipulated interest rates, levitated asset values, the supposed necessity of a 2% inflation rate - is on the table for constructive criticism.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...s/im-57005.jpg


William McChesney Martin, top left, the Fed’s boss in the ‘Fifties and ‘Sixties, probably wouldn’t have liked the policies of the central bank’s current chairman, Jerome Powell, bottom right.

But you know how it is with constructive criticism. The friend who asks to hear it really doesn’t want any. So it is with Richard H. Clarida, the Columbia University economist turned vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.

In a Feb. 22 speech, Clarida invited the public’s comments as the central bank undertakes a top-to-bottom reappraisal of the way it does business. Then he said this: “The fact that the system is conducting this review does not suggest that we are dissatisfied with the existing policy framework.” A comprehensive description of that framework duly followed. So admirably clear was his message that it might have curled your hair.

It might, indeed, except for 10 years’ familiarity with once-heretical ideas. “Quantitative easing” seemed wild-eyed enough at the time it was hatched in 2008. Who objects now?

Clarida acknowledged no doubts. He said that radical monetary policy has worked, that it will continue to work, and that it may well become more radical. He contended that low interest rates are here to stay and that new policy “tools” must be sharpened and kept at the ready. As to potential adverse consequences of administered rates and the mind-control games meant to “anchor” our collective expectations of the future, he mentioned none.

The Mike Pence of the Fed, Clarida was pushing no novel agenda of his own. His interest-rate worldview is the institutional one. It springs from the contention that the natural level of rates since the financial crisis has naturally and irresistibly fallen.

Certainly, rates are astoundingly low - Bank of America Merrill Lynch recently was able to count $11 trillion of bonds worldwide quoted at yields of less than zero. Clarida said that the decline in the so-called neutral rate of interest “is widely expected to persist for years.”

Just who has made bold to forecast the course of this conceptual rate of interest (you can’t see it and you can’t trade it), Clarida didn’t say. But he did warn of the consequences of its collision with the so-called zero bound.

At zero percent, he said, the Fed would be hard-pressed to ensure that the inflation rate stays put in the neighborhood of 2%. That you can’t have no inflation, the vice chairman takes as a revealed truth.

Creditors, and any who lived through the Great Inflation of the late 1960s through the early 1980s, might disagree. They might prefer an inflation rate of nil.
William McChesney Martin, the longest-serving Fed chairman, said in August 1955, “We can never recapture the purchasing power of the dollar that has been lost.” Martin, who, in the Great Depression, witnessed an actual, virulent deflation, was nonetheless adamant that defending the integrity of the currency was job No. 1.


Whether the policies of the current Fed, led by Jerome Powell, are well or poorly advised is, to a degree, a matter of opinion. But the value proposition confronting today’s bondholders is a question of fact. At a 2% rate of inflation, the real, after-tax return on a 2.68%-yielding 10-year Treasury note is hardly enough for the tip jar.


Nor are the monetary-policy options now under discussion calculated to improve the lender’s odds.Batting around big ideas, the policy makers are weighing the advisability of seeking to deliver a 2%-plus rate of inflation over the course of the business cycle. Shortfalls from the target in recession would be neutralized by overshoots during the subsequent expansion. “Persistent inflation shortfalls carry the risk that longer-term inflation expectations become poorly anchored or become anchored below the stated inflation goal,” Clarida tried to explain.

Yet the term “persistent inflation shortfalls” from that 2% target exactly describes the post crisis record of Fed policy making. Still not doubting their ability to control events, the mandarins keep searching for a bigger bag of tricks.

Clarida broached the idea of establishing a “temporary ceiling for Treasury yields at longer maturities by standing ready to purchase them at a preannounced floor price.” It was, in fact, how the Fed operated during World War II. Listening to the economist talk about emergency measures, it’s easy to forget that the nation is no longer fighting a two-ocean war.


This column would opine that artificially low interest rates never fail to store up trouble - facilitating leverage, they promote not growth, but larger balance sheets. It would opine, further, that the central bank is playing with fire by actively seeking to depreciate the dollar, a currency that, whatever its current lofty status in the world, is a piece of paper of no defined value. And it is our opinion that the Federal Reserve should at least consider the appealing course of letting the market alone.

As for the absence of anything resembling a margin of safety in vast portions of today’s fixed-income markets, it’s no opinion, but a most worrisome fact.

The financial lawyer on my research team found more than 120 entities that own these dangerous "Asset Backed Securities."
I'm sure you'll recognize the names:

JP Morgan Chase
TIAA-CREF
The State of Florida
Blackrock
Vanguard Group
T Rowe Price
Wells Fargo
UBS
Pacific Life Insurance Company
Prudential Financial
Hartford Financial Group
Swiss RE
Transamerica Investment Services
Allianz SE
Deutsche Bank
MMM Healthcare
Macquarie Group
Goldman Sachs
Invesco LTD
Bank of New York Mellon
Eaton Vance
Regions Bank
Zurich Global
People's United Bank
Franklin Resources
Massachusetts Mass Mutual Insurance.
Merrill Lynch
When the Debt Jubilee arrives, the problems with all this bad consumer debt will hit at once.

Everyone will freak out.

And that's the biggest problem—the uncertainty.

No one will know for months how it will all get sorted out. So the markets will react violently.
In The American Jubilee, I'll show you the various ways it could play out.

One proposed scenario comes from Rob Johnson, a former banker, who now runs the Institute of New Economic Thinking. He says:
"You call a month-long bank holiday for the twenty largest banks, and that holds everything in place while the regulators mark down the assets and see how everybody's losses will affect everyone else.

"Then you wipe out stockholders, wipe out management, possibly some of the unsecured debt... Once everybody has taken their hit and you've wiped out existing stockholders, then the government comes in and properly, transparently recapitalizes all of them. As these new institutions gain a footing, eventually they can be sold back to the private market."

No one can know exactly how it will be done, but through one mechanism or another, the government will seek to reset the financial system... and they will start by wiping out trillions of dollars in bad debt.

Car companies, homebuilders, credit card companies, insurance firms, banks, other lending institutions, and any business operating with leverage, will take a huge hit.

Stocks will fall considerably. Banks will close. There will be hundreds of billions in losses.

In fact, at the end of the day, I believe the losses at an institution like Wells Fargo could be enough to start a bank run.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29

Authored by Bryce Coward via Knowledge Leaders Capital blog,


In Part 1 of this series we talked about the lagged effect of interest rates and money growth, AKA “financial conditions” broadly speaking, on economic growth. We noted that changes in interest rates tend to impact economic growth with about a 2 year lag and changes in money supply tend to impact growth with about a 6 month lag. As such, the more than doubling in long-term US interest rates from mid-2016 to mid-2018 will be felt through the remainder of 2019 and the drop off in the monetary base thanks to Fed balance sheet shrinkage will be felt at least through the summer of 2019. This implies that the slowdown in US econ data is really just in its infancy and that the stock market may have gotten slightly ahead of itself in discounting a V-shaped recovery in the econ data.

Indeed, it may useful to remind oneself of this fact on days like today when the market is up in part due to a positive surprise from the Caixin China PMI (it came in at 49.9 vs expectations of 48.5). After all, the other Chinese manufacturing PMI that was released just Wednesday disappointed as did today’s US manufacturing ISM.


Monetary phenomenon aside, we observe ample confirmatory indicators from the supply chain that all is not well despite China’s months long easing campaign and the easing of Fed forward guidance.Specifically, it’s the beginning of the global supply chain that not only remains palatably weak, but also points to a further slowdown in US economic data. Of course, the fact that US economic data would lag economic changes in countries at the very beginning of the supply chain makes sense, since the US as the world’s largest consumer is located at the end of the supply chain.


Taiwanese new export orders are a perfect example. New orders are the among the most forward looking series for any country’s economy and tend to lead hard data by about a quarter. When we compare new export orders from a country like Taiwan that produces semiconductors and other electronic components (i.e. piece parts of end use consumer goods) to US economic growth, it follows that the Taiwan export orders series should lead US growth by some healthy margin. And indeed it does. Taiwan new export orders lead the US ISM by six months and are making a b-line toward the 2016 lows. If the relationship holds then the weakness we observed in today’s US ISM print should continue through July at the earliest.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...c1-768x567.jpg


What’s more, Taiwan export orders aren’t an outlier. We get the exact same message from Singapore new electronics export orders, albeit with a slightly smaller lead time of four months.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...c2-768x567.jpg


And it’s not just the government data that are pointing toward weak orders, we observe it in the corporate data too. The next chart shows the US ISM overlaid on Samsung’s inventory to sales ratio (inverted on the right axis). Samsung’s inventory to sales ratio is clocking in at the highest level since 2011, implying weak end use demand for semiconductors and electronic components. No surprise then that Samsung’s inventory to sales ratio leads the US ISM by about 5 months.

Earlier this week, Bloomberg wrote an article titled "" in which the author argued that due to creeping concerns about…

https://c5x8i7c7.ssl.hwcdn.net/creat.../dslogo_sm.png
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...c4-768x549.jpg


And then there are indicators from Australia, which as a main global supplier of raw materials is one of first to feel changes in economic activity of it’s customers (i.e emerging market countries). For years, the boom in Australian exports to the emerging markets has fueled growth and speculation in Australian housing as incomes grew and wealth was accumulated. That’s all changed with the lessening of demand for those same raw materials.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...c3-768x567.jpg



It’s no surprise then that changes in Australian housing indicators lead US economic growth by about six months. The message Australian housing is sending is that US data are set to continue to weaken at least through the summertime.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.ne...ent-of-ulster/

Author’s note: 90% of this was written before the election. Yes, I know you all think President Trump is going to make everything bad go away. I have something on how he can start to do that here. If he does permanently move the United States towards White nationalism, this article describes 1965-2016. If he doesn’t, we shall have to struggle through the ongoing consequences of that period all the more.


You think you live in a free country. The United States is some unique and historically transcendent place, where out of nothing arose a great and powerful country without precedent or parallel. Your rights and liberties are more precious to you than any other people on earth and no government is more respectful of those innate possessions than your own. In terms of politics, the United States of America has never experienced the dark episodes of wicked and oppressive governance that have plagued other nations. It can’t, because it is exceptional. Your government is elected, so it would be impossible for it to do anything so terrible and destructive to its own constituents as, say, forcibly and permanently displacing them in the name of utopian goals. We have nothing to learn from the past except that we are better than it. We are a proposition nation of ideas, not one of heritage and history.


This is the whig mindset that leads many otherwise smart people to reject concepts like occupation government or the White genocide meme at face value. Detractors frame these as conspiracy theories, which mentally associates them with all sorts of crankery. Admittedly, the Alt-Right takes a bit of poetic license in describing these phenomena at times, but rhetoric aside, they express important truths.


The first of these truths is that of hostile governance—most Americans do disapprove of Congress, but does that indicate its malevolence? This is a relative question of course, for if one believes the government acts against his interests, then that government is seen as adversarial at best and a mortal enemy at worst. And if this government is so egregiously against the majority of the population, despite its claims to be an instrument and representation of the people, then it follows that some anti-majoritarian clique must be occupying it rather than rightfully possessing it. Occupation government is quite simply rule by a hostile elite pursuing interests contrary to those governed. And hostile elites pursuing interests contrary to those of their charges have been around for a long time.


This then carries over to the second “conspiracy.” I prefer the term White minoritization, though I understand where promoters of the White genocide meme are coming from. If every year you went into a forest, cut down an evergreen tree, and planted two oak saplings, is that deforestation? Is it evergreen genocide? Well no, right? Won’t the forest be bigger (and better) in the future? This is the root of the tension over the meme—replacement masks destruction. There are more trees in the forest than ever before, but is it in the best interest of an evergreen forest to be replaced with an oak one? Possibly for the owner of the land, but certainly not for the evergreen trees. They get wiped out. The owner has his own agenda regarding the kind of forest he wants, one totally different from what would be in the Darwinian interest of the evergreens.


That’s a good analogy, in my opinion, of what’s happening. Most population growth in the United States has come from the planting of new trees, from non-white immigration. There is no campaign of extermination, just the promotion of conditions which render it unnecessary. As the White population shrinks in proportion to the growing non-white population, it can’t quite be called genocide in the ovens-and-concentration-camps sense, but in the long run it will of course lead to the ousting of Whites from their geographic niches. This is a consequence of policy, and therefore it can be rightly said that the US government works against the White interests of self-preservation and posterity. For us to become a minority—an experience we are constantly told is horrible and oppressive—is not in our interest. We want to thrive and avoid such harms. Such interests are inherent to a people or any living being, so for the government to oppose them implicates it as run by a hostile elite.


It is an observable phenomenon that ever since the 1965 Immigration Act, or (((Hart-Celler Act))), undid 200 years of eurocentric immigration policies, the US government has continued to support a variety of measures which in practice (if not explicitly in declaration) make the country less Whiteeach year. The United States was nearly 90% “non-Hispanic White” in 1960; now we’re down to almost 60%. Those who advocated for the abolition of our national origins-based immigration system said it wouldn’t change the ethnic composition of the United States. Now their successors say that change was a good thing. And their successors will say the United States has literally always been a non-majoritarian diversity cornucopia. If these people have their way, there will come a day when the average “American” thinks the country has always been 25-25-25-25, White/Black/Latino/Asian.


Whenever you hear politicians or business leaders praise the values and virtues of diversity—which always means less White people—they are declaring their support for this process. When they talk about the morals and goodness and industriousness of immigrants, they are referring to a class of people who are overwhelmingly non-white and whose numbers are growing. The ruling caste loves this. Some, such as Vice President Joe Biden, have the nerve to give speeches literally celebrating the end of the White majority. Others like former Florida Governor Jeb Bush are more nuanced, simply saying immigrants have “better families” than we do. This is a hostile elite. They are planting a new forest, not stewarding the existing one. We must ask why.


Third Worldism as the Religion of the Ruling Caste
The US government opposes the existence of a White majoritarian society, and it makes little effort to hide this. System sycophants can of course protest that this is not the case at all—that the government is just promoting equality and diversity, and that opponents of equality and diversity (and immigration, legal or illegal) are racists and bigots—but the result is still less White people. That’s what actually matters, the result. And if you care about that, you are treated like a two-headed person at best, or a terrorist at worst. If you want to save Tibet from population replacement by the Chinese though, then that’s very upright and good of you.
Framed in terms of genocide, replacement sounds conspiratorial because there is slim official acknowledgement of the desired impact for these policies to have on the European American population. Very, very few people in power go on the record explicitly calling for there to be less White people, and when they do it gets little coverage for obvious reasons. That Whites are becoming a minority is acknowledged as a fact and lauded as progress, but it is not overtly called for. President Barack Obama hasn’t said he wants to see less White people around; it is only noted that there will be less of them and that such an outcome would be good. But if we talk of demographic change in terms of holy diversity and sacrosanct equality, our greatest qualities as a nation of immigrants that is open to anyone who wants to come here and make a better life (especially those from the global south who outnumber Europeans by billions), suddenly things sound very different.


And familiar. Did any bells go off? If you’ve ever been through higher education, watched basic cable, joined the armed forces, had a white collar job, worked for a large corporation in any capacity, read an op-ed in major newspaper, or really interacted with any mainline institution in the United States, you’ve almost certainly been trained to celebrate diversity. Trained by those in power that to embrace and adhere to this belief system is the path to moral enlightenment and social mobility. This does not sound like a call for genocide at all but rather a religious vocation, a cause to be taken up.


Pursuing diversity is a righteous goal that only nasty and brutish people of rude inclinations oppose, such as rednecks, blue-collar Whites, or other lower-middle class people of European descent. The eloquent and charismatic Obama is a champion of diversity, is he not? Who in their right mind is opposed to there being less White people? And diversity is good for the economy too! You can actually sell Homo oeconomicus his own slaughter, for the last man has no ambitions beyond compliance.
Language has both the power to enlighten and obfuscate, but no matter what we call this, it means Whites becoming a minority. Academically this radical racial shift is referred to as the third demographic transition—the demographic cliff nearly all White countries have plunged off as their fertility rates sink below replacement levels (2.1 children per woman). At the same time, the share of foreign-born and non-European peoples in White countries is hitting record levels. What can be the end result of this if not a world where Europe and the Anglo countries become non-white, while Africa remains African and Asia remains Asian? This is an issue no government wants to formally address and something they won’t have a conversation about with their constituents. But it matters to these governments, as they’ve enacted policies that promote the third demographic transition. Therefore they must be held accountable for the consequences.


Maybe this still sounds crazy to you. What kind of government would go out of its way to replace its own native-born people with outsiders, and for what purpose? I would say any government that is motivated to and not prevented from doing so. In our case the motivation is the ideology of third worldism—the belief that people of color and their interests are morally superior to those of Whites. And there is no prevention, because outside of the government, all of its personnel feeders in the business, media, and academia spaces are on board with third worldism as well. Diversity is their credo, and celebrating diversity is their equivalent of going to church. The leader of a religious service is sometimes called the “celebrant,” by the way.


Third worldism became the dominant paradigm of the left, replacing class during the overlapping decolonization and Cold War eras. White political control over the colored world was seen as morally wrong, and it wasn’t long before White political control over the (currently) White world became morally wrong as well. This baseline of anti-Whiteness evolved from the Puritanism of old New England and from cultural marxism—the postwar brand of marxism associated with the ((((Frankfurt School)))—which won the battle for control of the institutions (the left dominates schools, media, pop culture, etc.) while capitalism/democracy/neoliberalism won on the map (collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the USSR). In other words, liberal democracy won a political battle while marxism won a metapolitical war. Some on the right were cognizant of this during the 1980s and 90s, bemoaning the “culture war,” but they were completely routed because they gave battle on the left’s terms. And the left’s terms were that any sort of White ethnocentrism was wrong, while non-white ethnocentrism was righteous.


What we call “the left” as a shorthand has hegemonic influence. Its cultural marxist paradigms about race, religion, gender, sexuality, hierarchy, justice, and morality are totally ascendant as a result of decades of accelerating “progress.” It is impossible to name a single culture war issue which the mainline right and nominal adversary of the left—movement conservatism—hasn’t folded on. It can’t furnish a principled opposition to it, because it isn’t opposed to it on principle.


If you keep professing to believe in equality, how could you oppose it? Everything is ultimately the same (equal). Gay marriage, for example, is now a conservative value because to privilege heterosexual monogamy and the nuclear family would be inegalitarian. Not matrimony, but sodomy is a sacrament of the established church. Transgenderism, the current cause célèbre of the left, is not far from being adopted on the mainline right. Mestizos are lauded as “natural conservatives” by mainline Republicans despite their voting Democrat by a large majority. Conservatives want the illegal population of 11-30 million mostly mestizo migrants to be made into full citizens with voting rights even though they will vote Democrat. Because after all, it would be wrong to side against brown people.


Liberals, conservatives, and even libertarians in this country adopt so many of the same core values in the end, it is a wonder anyone bothers to distinguish them. And all are typically third worldists—all love appealing to diversity and expressions of equality. Yet we still get nominally distinct political parties—like any elite, ours have their own internal disputes that lead to factionalism. Economic policies, trade agreements, and levels of military spending are something to bicker over, but what binds them together is their commitment to the civil religion of third worldism. Both left-neoliberals (Democrats) and right-neoliberals (Republicans) hate nationalism, as we are going to see increasingly made more explicit on both sides of the Atlantic.


In the United States, the third worldist paradigm is perhaps best highlighted by the cliches that “Diversity is Our Greatest Strength,” the “white privilege” meme, and the insistence that “All Lives Matter” is a colorblind and therefore racist statement. Yes, if you believe All Lives Matter, rather than specifically those of a single grievance-mongering tribe (Black Lives Matter), you are a racist. This might sound odd, but keep in mind that much of academia, subscribing to theories of anti-whiteness, believes that non-white people cannot be “racist” because they “lack privilege and power.” So from this set of ideas, it is obvious that a White person trying to be inclusive towards all people by dropping racial markers in proclamations of equality and social justice is in fact an evil racist.


Because it was never about equality. It was about the primacy of color, third worldism. Someone who refuses to acknowledge this is a heretic all the same as someone who actively rejects it. And it is our true strength as Americans that we are are an ethnically diverse (less White) country. Once we have a colored majority, the evil spectre of racism (White political power) will finally be extinguished. This is essentially what our leaders tell us.
For third worldists, racist is a marker used to identify diversity heretics, White skeptics. A racist is someone who rejects third worldism. Always keep this in mind and pay attention to who is saying it to whom.


The Influence of Idea Systems on Society
The ideas a society organizes itself around matter as much as its genes and environmental conditions. In the past, they often merged with religion or were wholly contained inside it, though contemporaries don’t like to think of their “beliefs” as religious. Self-identifying progressives (third worldists in practice), for example, are disproportionately atheist relative to the rest of the US population, and would scoff at the idea of there being a progressive “religion.” But their deeply held ideology is far from being the first post-theist ism to claim an organizing role in society (and one which ironically functions as a 1:1 substitute for religion).

It was not always believed that the purpose of our society was to uplift people of color and sexual minorities. Certainly the Founding Fathers did not believe that. Nor did the Puritans who landed on Plymouth Rock. Nor did the English aristocrats who settled the tidewater South. Nor did the Scots-Irish who headed out into the frontier to homestead on Indian hunting grounds. Well, maybe some of the Quakers of the Delaware Valley did. Undoubtedly, the German, Irish, Scandinavian, Slavic, and Italian immigrants to the United States brought varying levels of ethnocentrism with them and did not see non-Europeans as objects of moral reverence. For most of our history, we did not assume that having in-group interests was wrong.

How people view cosmic order and their own role in society, as well as the roles of others, highlights the importance of ideas—be they divine or manufactured. Ideas are what mark entire eras off from one another: e.g. Classical, Medieval, Early Modern, Modern, Interwar, and Postwar. And often we can associate religions (Pagan, Catholic, and Protestant) or ideologies (rationalism, fascism, cultural marxism) with these eras. We can expect a society then, where people have certain ideas, to reflect those ideas in practice and not just in theory.

Third worldism, as an idea system, shapes the West. It reigns politically and metapolitically. You can find it anywhere from affirmative action policies in the multinational corporate and academic world, to refugee resettlement programs in the American Midwest, to California’s “sanctuary cities,” to the H1B1 visa programs that directly recreate 19th century coolie labor (importing Chinese and Indian migrant workers), to permitting gang-rapes of British girls by Pakistani men out of fear of being labelled racistfor investigating them, to the attitude France takes towards mass migration from its former colonies in the Afro-Islamic world. (States like Algeria were granted independence as European-excluding nation-states while France adopted a sort of ethno-pluralism and multiculturalism veneered with linguistic supremacy).


In any conflict between Whites and non-whites, we are obligated to lose, anywhere on earth. Especially on immigration, housing, and freedom of association, all of which are necessary to maintaining a European-majority society. We are told to tolerate the harmful demographic effects of mass immigration such as terrorism and crime, the building of (non-white) public housing in (White) suburbs, and “anti-discrimination” measures that target Whites, because otherwise we are racists.
And of course, we are told that diversity is inherently good, to the point where people are often incapable of defending it when pressed. Name benefits of it other than food and music? The better question would be why you are even asking that question. It’s a dangerous one. It divides people!


But how could the government have the audacity to do this—morally disenfranchise an entire population as heretical and bigoted inferiors, and then attempt to replace them over time for ideological reasons?

How could our elites hold quasi-religious attitudes so vastly distinct from and antagonistic towards the majority group?

How did third worldists come to rule White people?

And how are they able to get away with it?

The best way to explain the fundamental struggle of our times, I think, may be through historical allegory, because sometimes the facts of the matter are just not enough to sway people.


The Ulster Plantation
If you’re Irish, British, interested in the ethnography of Appalachia, or well-versed in European history, you have probably heard of something called the Ulster plantation, which is a pretty good example of what I am talking about. Ulster is the northernmost region of Ireland, and unlike the rest of the island, most of it remains part of the British state. Northern Ireland is Britain today because of 17th century policies giving confiscated Irish land directly to British (English and Scottish) colonists and undertakers, following the violent conquest of the island. In other words, it was a part of Ireland not merely ruled by British people, but one which they sought to make British through colonization and mass migration. It is thus entirely possible for a hostile government to impose its will over a people and territory with the intention of subjugating them through state-sponsored demographic change, especially when its religion or ideology is institutionally privileged and backed by a monopoly of violence.


Plantation, quite simply, has been done before with fairly good success, and without being labeled a conspiracy. Elite Protestants cooperated to displace Catholics in Northern Ireland. Now, plantation was a kind of conspiracy, as it involved a clique of dedicated men working working together to achieve a goal that was broadly opposed. In the original Latin, the word conspire simply means “to breathe together,” which has mutated to the current negative connotation of plotting (against), and to the frequently misused label of “conspiracy theory,” used to shut down criticism of the hostile elite’s actions. That it was not done in secret doesn’t make it any less sinister, but suffice to say the label of conspiracy theory for claims that Whites in the West are being demographically displaced is hugely inaccurate.


What follows will be a brief overview of the history of the Ulster plantation, given in the hope of providing context to our present disaster. The planning, execution, and legacy of plantation, I think, should dispel any notions that the White nationalist narrative of what is happening to the United States is a crank conspiracy theory. This stuff has been done before, and no one alive then would have called you crazy for thinking it was happening. What makes our situation different is that our elite mainly speak in euphemisms about what they are doing, and their victims have been taught to support it and to suppress their own ethno-centrism.


I must insist though that this not be treated as a rigorously balanced and nuanced narrative of Irish history, because it is neither my goal to write an academic history here nor am I allotting the space necessary to perfectly capture it (moreover, is such a thing as balanced Irish history possible?). You can find that elsewhere, and while I think more people should study Irish history as an example of what we want to avoid happening to ourselves I am indeed a polemicist. My intention is to draw attention to the phenomenon of state-sponsored demographic change—plantation—that combines the pen and the sword, and how it is driven by ideology.


The planting of Ulster, or the Ulster plantation, is an odd euphemism. In American history, when we think of plantations we imagine vast agricultural holdings worked by African slaves (and White debtor-slaves) to produce cash crops for export. But the original English usage of the word plantation was much closer to the Roman colonia, a settlement of transplanted soldiers and their families in a conquered province. It was about planting metropolitan people in a colonial territory to better integrate it and bring it under state control. By changing the identity—ethnic and religious—of a territory to conform to the dominant identity, in theory colonizing removes one of the biggest pretexts for rebellion. Resettlement makes the territory easier to govern as the population should be more loyal. It also satisfies a righteous moral duty one might feel, perhaps to God, to Progress, or to Civilization itself.


Making Ulster British and Protestant rather than Irish and Catholic was thus in the government’s rational self-interest. Making America diverse (non-white) must be in someone’s interest as well. Governments don’t enact policies for the hell of it.


The Ulster plantation had the long term success of Anglicizing the most Gaelic part of Ireland, and secured the loyalty of the province. To give the most recent example of this, Northern Ireland today remains so wedded to Britain that its more Protestant counties voted in tandem with England and Wales to leave the European Union while the Catholic-leaning ones voted to remain, leading to a majority leave vote. The metropolitan policy prevailed in the North, just as it prevailed in last century’s referendum on which Irish counties wanted to join an independent Catholic-majority Ireland.


The Making of Northern Ireland
The Ulster plantation was a place, an event, and a process that lasted decades. I have to start somewhere, so it shall be the Nine Years’ War (1594-1603). In short, the Gaelic chiefs of Ulster, led by Hugh O’Neill revolted against England following the Tudor conquest of Ireland, which itself followed centuries of sporadic warfare between the Gaels and the Normans. The Irish defeat led to total English control of all Ireland and the imposition of English feudalism—ending the patchwork of English landlords, towns and castles surrounded by Gaelic chiefdoms—which sharply curtailed the Gaelic elite’s sovereignty and landholdings. Unable to accept this new order, in 1607 the chiefs and their retainers due to both local rivalries and Crown intrigue exiled themselves from Ireland to mainly Spain and France, in what is known to historiography as the Flight of the Earls. This was followed by another failed (and punished) Gaelic chiefs’ rebellion under Cahir O’Doherty. Ireland was thus devoid of native elite and leadership, as its ancient families were living abroad in the courts of Catholic Europe hoping to find backers for their claims, imprisoned, or dead. And with their lands no longer directly held, there was now a power vacuum to be filled.


Under English law, the Gaelic chiefdoms were forfeited and much of the land in Ulster passed directly to King James I of England (who was also King of Scotland and began the process of their unification). James was neither Irish nor Catholic, and it is safe to consider the (Protestant and English) Crown that reigned over Ireland and its appendages (such as the nobility and the Church of England) a hostile elite relative to the Gaelic-speaking Catholics (who were Ireland’s majority until the Great Famine). Within the context of modern Europe, this is common sense—Protestants and Catholics had little tolerance for one another and were often violently opposed. Plantation occurred in the same century as the Continent’s savage Thirty Years’ War after all. Notably, James was not particularly fond of the Gaelic Scots either, considering them almost as savage as the English regarded the Irish. But the Irish were doubly objectionable to England, as both Gaels and Catholics, both barbarian and papist.


Thus Ulster came under the possession of a foreign hostile elite both in terms of sovereignty (ruled by the king of England) and local land ownership (directly owned by the king of England). But the feudal system didn’t really allow for the Crown to personally hold such vast tracts of land indefinitely, nor was it advantageous for the king to be the absentee landlord of Ulster, having much more important duties as the ruler of all England, Scotland, and Ireland. And as Ulster’s local aristocracy had been destroyed, a new one had to be created for feudalism to work. This presented an opportunity to restructure sovereignty in Ulster, tabula rasa style.


Thus, it was decided to parcel Ulster out in the form of land grants to English and Scottish people drawn from James’s supporters and soldiers, speculators, undertakers who were obliged to bring over British tenants, the (Anglican) Church, investors in London, Trinity College Dublin (Anglican), and others, while a measly tenth of the land would be granted to obedient local Irish nobles. In doing so, the hostile elite in London created a hostile sub-elite of sorts in Ulster, and affected demographics by planting English and Scottish settlers to displace the native Irish. This would create both horizontal and vertical loyalty in the long-run.


In 1610, James set plantation into motion, which would have consequences lasting to the present day, namely a Protestant majority in Northern Ireland that identifies as British and wants to remain separate from Ireland. James’s government had in its official proclamations wanted the native Irish expelled from land grants not held by Anglican church or Irish collaborators. Nominally, the Scottish and English landlords were obliged to evict the Irish within two years, replace them with British tenants, and fortify their holdings with castles in three years. Most of Ulster would then be ethnically “British” in less than a generation, creating a union of James’s two favored kingdoms, England and Scotland, in the third, Ireland.


This didn’t materialize consistently at all. While the Gaelic chiefs had been exiled, many natives forcibly displaced, hundreds of Irish footsoldiers deported to Sweden, and others turned to banditry in the hills and bogs, the Irish were not wholesale expelled from Ulster. The narrative that they were, relying only on the intent of the Crown and not what happened in practice, is patently false, though there was still a great metapolitical loss in addition to political and territorial. Most of the Ulster Irish were retained as tenants of the new hostile elite, but they had lost their leadership caste, indigenous legal system, and the primacy of native language and religion in their own homeland. The peasantry were no longer kinsmen of their chiefs and ruled by their ancestral clans, but thralls of foreign hostile overlords and local collaborators.


Fast forward a few decades and ethno-religious war returned once more to Ireland. From 1639-1653, the Wars of the Three Kingdoms took place in England, Scotland, and Ireland, ending with the removal of the Stuart dynasty from the throne and the ascension of a Puritan republican government headed by one Oliver Cromwell. In Ireland, roughly four factions fought one another at some point or another during the wars, all products of the convoluted system of English rule.

Representing Catholic Ireland were the so-called Confederates, a merger of the Old English (descended from pre-Stuart English Catholic settlers) and the Gaelic Irish, while their primary enemies were Cromwell’s parliamentarians, Irish Protestants, and Scottish covenanters (Presbyterians in Scotland and Ulster). In the lands of the Ulster plantation, the Irish and British sides massacred one another and committed reprisals. It burned a lasting fear of the colonized Irish into the minds of the Ulster planters.


You may have noticed that the Irish Protestants, Cromwell’s (English) parliamentarians, and the Scottish covenanters are disaggregated in these wars, despite their natural affinity as non-Catholic British people. That is because diversity was not their greatest strength. Planting both the English and Scots in Ulster had not yet successfully integrated the province into Britain at that time. The Ulster Scots sided with the Scots against the English parliamentarians (who were Puritans rather than Presbyterians), and against the Catholic Irish. They all fought one another.


As you might have guessed, the English parliamentarian faction won and Cromwell executed Charles Stuart. All three kingdoms were merged into one parliament. Ireland was finally pacified in 1653, and a tenth of the population is estimated to have died. Over 30,000 Irish soldiers went into exile, again in mostly France and Spain. And around 12,000 were deported to the English Caribbean as slaves. The war radically altered direct landholding in Ireland, and as a result of Cromwellian policies almost 90% of the land was owned by non-Catholics by 1660 while before the wars it had been mostly held by Catholics (not all of Ireland had been planted like Ulster was).


The parliamentarians could not pay their veterans in cash, so they created a land bank from the Irish conquest. Only the western province of Connacht was set aside for natives, like an Indian reservation. Hence the saying, “to hell or Connacht.” In fact, today it is mostly along the west coast that one can still find monoglot Gaelic speaking communities. Because the island was poor and remote relative to England, most soldiers did not want Irish land grants and often sold them to wealthier Protestant landlords in Ireland, further enriching the established hostile elite that governed the island.


Later in the 17th century, the infamous Penal Laws would be passed, severely limiting the autonomy and religious freedom of Catholics, as well their ability to participate in cultural, economic, and political life. This came after the almost total destruction of their indigenous aristocracy. It left the Irish at the mercy of a conquering hostile elite, who stripped them of their ancient land and made efforts to eradicate their culture. The Ulster plantation brought all of these currents together into one program, one with a lasting legacy.


So to recap, the British government—collectivized at the time as the Kingdoms of England and Scotland in personal union under the Stuart dynasty, and later the Cromwellian protectorship—after costly rebellions in conquered Ireland sought to decouple the Irish from Ulster (and Ulster from Ireland) by settling it with Protestants from Britain. This plantation had the long-term result of creating a “Northern Irish” identity built around loyalty to the British government, Protestantism and anti-papism, and of retaining most of the province of Ulster as an integral part of the British state (the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). Most Protestants there identify as British and not as Irish.


Long after Britain became ethnically de-nationalized in the postwar era as a multicultural state, the Northern Irish remained staunchly attached to a tribal identity that no longer mattered to their metropolitan cousins, that of the British Protestant. This identity, clashing with that of the Irish Catholic, most recently flared up in the 1970s-1990s in a conflict over those most timeless of issues, land and politics. And naturally, ‘the Troubles’ were resolved in favor of the ruling majority and Northern Ireland remains part of Britain.


To reiterate, plantation was so successful that the values of the mother country at the time of plantation have better survived in the colony than the metropolis. The Ulstermen are more British than the British themselves, in a sense. This in a land where settlers had a long history of “going native,” whether Danish, , Norman, or pre-Reformation Scots and Englishmen.


The agency of plantation rested in the hands of a staunchly anti-Catholic and anti-Gaelic hostile alien elite who acted almost 400 years ago to make sure the lands they conquered in Ulster would become non-Catholic and non-Gaelic, thereby joining them permanently to their patrimony in Britain and making them easier to govern. The split between Anglicans and Presbyterians was ultimately overcome in conflict against Catholics. And for all its ‘Troubles,’ Northern Ireland has certainly been easier for the British to govern than all Ireland. Britain finally ceded those Irish provinces after centuries of conflict and wars that at times decimated the Irish population by the double digits, as well as costing British blood and treasure.


Due to sheer Protestant numbers in Northern Ireland, the power of the British state and military, and the weakness of the Irish Republic and its renunciation of claims to the North, there is credibly speaking no threat at all of Ulster being violently overtaken by the Catholic Irish and separated from Britain. None. Even the threat of terrorism has been almost entirely defused, and terrorism to be sure is a small price to pay for avoiding open warfare. The Ulster plantation, even with its ups and downs that I have omitted, continues to be a success and a lasting legacy of the anti-Irish elite who ruled the province beginning in the 1610s.


The Judeo-Saxon Plantation of America
So how does this relate to the United States? Well, as I wrote earlier, the United States is governed by a hostile elite and functions as an anti-white entity pursuing policies that will minoritize the White population within our lifetimes. White children are already a minority and Whites overall will become a minority in the 2040s. If nothing changes, this almost certainly ensures that the electorate will be White-minority in less than a century, making it impossible for any sort of pro-White government to be elected. We’re being planted by third world settlers and their Judeo-Saxon undertakers. WASP elites and overseas Israelis—and people who have assimilated to their worldview—are the greatest champions of liberalism, anti-racism, diversity, mass immigration, and globalism; and they form the priestly caste of third worldism. Are Hillary Clinton and (((George Soros))) not ideological, political, and economic bedfellows?


There is an ethno-religious component to the American plantation, just as there was in Ulster. Much of the government and most of our institutions are in the hands of this elite brahmin caste who follow the syncretic civil religion of third worldism, which is of Jewish-Calvinist origins. They are analogous to the British planters of Ulster who ascribed to Protestant supremacy, except far worse. Their attachment to moral preening, compulsion towards social signaling, attitude of victim-glorifying righteousness, love of commerce, neurotic fear of the folk, and contempt for dissidents echoes throughout our media, academia, and political culture with a fiery zeal towards purging the people and cultures which are deemed to produce “authoritarian personalities” and “racist” heresies.


It is from their hatred for the goyish provincial folk dwelling outside of the coastal strongholds of New York-Washington and California, the populist and isolationist Amerikaners, that this hostile Judeo-Saxon elite supports White minoritization. It is morally good for them to ensure we are replaced, just like Gaelic Catholics were something to be replaced by English and Scottish people living in the towns and pales of settlement in Ireland and Ulster. They passed the (((Hart-Celler Act))) in 1965, converting the United States into a plantation. An immigration policy open to the world means the country will soon resemble the world, not a national community but one of anomie.


The Ascendancy hates and fears us, even though we pay its taxes, serve in its armies, and run and sustain its managerial state. We are to be broken electorally, politically, morally, socially, biologically, economically, and culturally as a force in the United States to prevent another Irish rebellion or Holocaust. It has been decided in practice that a multicultural and alienated Anglophone Brazil is preferable to the risk of White nationalism. And in such a society, Judeo-Saxons could retain their upper caste position more easily, since folkish Whites—the only existential threat to their power—would be a minority.


This is eerily similar, in my view, to the British domination of Ireland and the Ulster plantation. Hostile elites usurped Ulster from its native ruling caste and then planted it with foreign settlers, who came to constitute a majority that still consider themselves British. We may soon be dealing with a similar outcome, as our third-worldist Judeo-Saxon elites plant us with people who in no time at all will very much consider themselves loyal third-worldists, adopt the English language, participate in the system of governance, loyally work the land and the cubicle for their masters, and ensure the world’s most powerful Empire remains firmly in their hands for perhaps centuries to come. They will wave the flag and come to redefine what it means to be an American. And we will be made to watch from the bogs, played off against one another as collaborators are given scraps and dissenters are cast out. Weimerica will be a country of strangers in a strange land, and we will be the most alienated of all.


We have our own Penal Laws to follow as well. Freedom of association among folkish Whites is illegal through anti-discrimination and disparate impact legislation, and one can be denied most forms of formal and profitable employment for refusing to swear the oath of diversity. We don’t need test acts or popery acts because these are enforced through custom by civil society. Racists, or those who reject third worldism, are hated indigenous tenants of the American plantation.


The story of the Ulster plantation and the integration of Northern Ireland into Britain is not just a grievance to be blindly nursed by Irish ethno-nationalists against Britain or memed by Irish-American ethnic snowflakes while a larger specter haunts all of Greater Europe. It is a case study and cautionary tale of what happens if we lose within the next few decades. You really only get one lifetime to turn these sorts of things around, and when you lose, you lose hard. Plantation took decades in Ulster but has lasted centuries.


Quite frankly, it will be a brutally difficult and herculean task to ever become sovereign again as a people if America is successfully planted. State-sponsored demographic change by a hostile elite is not new and it has a proven track record of doing irreparable damage. It is a multi-pronged assault of both soft power and implied hard power, and represents the dominant role the left plays in America’s metapolitics. If diversity is our greatest strength, then who is that we? “Less White people” is not our greatest strength as White people, not any more than the Protestant Ascendancy was the greatest strength of the Catholic Irish. It is the creed of the invader and his settlers. Anyone who takes their side is a traitor and a collaborator, and deserves whatever he gets when the spring finally snaps in the shopping mall with a gay disco in the basement that we call America.


We did not conquer a continent for this.
Quite simply, the elite running this “country” want new serfs. They don’t like us. Arguably they never did. Whether gazing out from a Norman castle, a great Southern manor house, or a Manhattan penthouse, they’ve preferred that their labor force have no Faustian spirit, no quarrelsome demands for autonomy, and no unity. Their intermingling with the Jews hasn’t helped our position any more than it did in the Middle Ages or the colonial era. They brought the Negro here. They now bring the H1B1 and the illegal, making a mockery of the statutes of the “Constitution” they tell us to revere. They feel safer with this labor, and it saves them money. One could view all American history as a struggle between the European peasant and the paranoid aristocrat, who having joined forces with the Jewish financier now seeks to create a utopian plantation. One where diversity miraculously maintains stability and eradicates the threat of national awakening.


When we are told our society is just a “nation of immigrants” or the product of waves of immigration, and that those narratives are the reason why we cannot criticize immigration, we are being sold an institutional justification for what the elites are doing, by the elites themselves. And these elites by the way, never try to “deconstruct” blackness, Asian identity, or Hispanic identity. No, it is only Whiteness which is a problem (and which also apparently doesn’t really exist since various European immigrant groups to the United States were at different times not welcomed as equals in this country). Are we to believe that because in the 1890s WASPs did not like Italians or Irish people that White people have never really existed and do not exist in the current year? Are we to believe that we do not exist? Because if we do believe that, well that would be really convenient now wouldn’t it? It would be convenient for the largest potential opposition group to White demographic destruction to believe it didn’t actually exist in the first place. It would be extremely beneficial for them to be atomized and alienated from one another so they never form a front against the Judeo-Saxon planters and their third world helots.


We will never forget what has been perpetrated against us. We will never forget the world’s most powerful Empire. We will never forget our valor and our splendor. We will never forget the conquest of a continent, the building of a new Rome, or landing on our own moon. We will never forget our Destiny. We will keep you up at night, watching the countryside from your windows and nervously petitioning the Leviathan for a bigger garrison. We will hold fast and defeat you, because you will ultimately leave us no choice.


Posted at Atlantic Centurion, December 18, 2016: Planting America: State-Sponsored Demographic Change and the Precedent of Ulster


COMMENTS FROM BENJAMIN: For anyone with the intelligence to read this whole article that I have read many times since I found it now it becomes CLEAR where we are coming from and what the CONFLICT and the HATRED in the USA and other parts of the World is all about.

This knowledge will not change anything for now however most importantly it will let you understand it. The great HATRED and ANGER against President Donald John Trump and his supporters of good moral fiber is all about keeping the statis quo and keeping US all as slaves. That will NEVER happen to me and hopefully not you either.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29

In Fed Chair Powell's semi-annual testimony to Congress, the former lawyer underscored the fact that the Fed is nearing the end of its balance sheet reduction process. He reiterated that the Fed expects to end balance sheet runoff “later this year” and added that many key details had been worked out. He said: “My guess is we’ll be announcing something fairly soon.”


The announcement was, and was not a surprise.

It was not a surprise because the Minutes of the January 29-30 FOMC meeting had already made it clear that the Fed will end its balance sheet reduction program or Quantitative Tightening (QT) earlier than had been previously envisaged, perhaps as soon as this year, nearly one year ahead of schedule and expectations, which until recently had clustered around 2020.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...0at%20halt.jpg


Where it was a surprise is that initially the Fed expected that its process of balance sheet reduction, which did not involve outright sales of securities and only maturities and redemptions, would have minimal impacts on financial markets (instead of full-blown QT it was more like QTlite). However, as Q4 began and balance sheet reduction ramped up to its maximum permissible pace of $50BN per month on some occasions, the equity market weakness and volatility that unfolded during the period appeared to be more than just a coincidence, particularly in the market’s mind (from its September peak, the S&P 500 had plummeted to a bear market by Christmas Eve).


To be sure both bond and stock markets were delighted by the Fed caving to the demands of "market participants", and quickly priced-in this fact. However, as BMO's Ian Lyngen writes in an extensive analysis overnight, further market movements related to the end of QT will depend on timing and the final details.

To be sure, following the Fed's tacit admission of an early end to its balance sheet runoff has brought renewed risk appetite to markets. The S&P 500 is up 11% YTD.

The LEMBI index of local currency emerging market bonds is up 5% and the Treasury-to-BBB spread has narrowed by 25bps. With the markets presumably having priced in at least the confidence aspect of the end of QT, future price responses will depend on the details of what the Fed ultimately announces.

The most crucial detail for markets is the end-date of the program. When the Fed announces the end date and whether or not the Fed will ‘taper’ the end of portfolio runoff are secondary, but noteworthy factors for markets. As we reported last week, Goldman is confident that during its March meeting the Fed will announce that the Fed will end the runoff by the end of Q3. Other details that will have an importance to at least some markets include whether and how fast the Fed transitions its MBS portfolio into Treasury instruments, how the Fed transitions the duration of its portfolio and specifically whether it will move back into purchasing T-bills.

Below, BMO lays out the market impact of four of the most likely scenarios and some of the technical issues confronting the FOMC as it prepares to communicate its final plans. In other words, this is the way QT ends:
Estimating the End Date

Most strategists, FOMC members and BMO itself, estimate the underlying demand for reserves at around $1 trillion. This level (and its subsequent growth over time) reflects total banking system assets and regulatory changes that require banks to hold larger buffers of high-quality liquid assets, of which interest-earning deposits at the Fed (a.k.a. reserves) are a key component (around 30%, on average). In other words, as excess reserves are reduced to around $1 trillion by the end of 2019, put a different way, QE3 and QE2 will have been undone and only the effect of QE1 will be left (see Nordea chart below to the left).
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...0sheet%201.jpg


The Fed has also messaged that they would like a cushion over the $1 trillion to avoid active reserve management. That buffer will likely be initially set at $200 billion. This results in a $1.2 trillion "target" with reserves currently running at just above $1.6 trillion. Note that they were $2.8 trillion at their peak in October 2014 and $2.2 trillion when QT started in October 2017.

Given the scheduled maturities of Treasuries (and the current $30 billion monthly cap), estimated MBS redemptions (and the current $20 billion monthly cap), and projected currency growth, BMO estimates the $1.2 trillion reserves target will be hit in September. This assumes that Treasury deposits at the Fed return to recent levels after being temporarily drawn down due to a delay in lifting the debt ceiling (which will have the temporary impact of boosting reserves).
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...e%20nordea.jpg


Incidentally, BMO agrees with Goldman in expecting the FOMC to officially call for QT to end by Q4 (i.e. September hard stop), with that announcement coming at the March meeting (or May at the latest). After Powell’s comments in his testimony, there's no point in delaying this specific announcement (not all details have to be released at the same time).

The bank's base case is that the Fed will continue the current SOMA reduction cadence until the $1.2 trillion reserves level is achieved, and that monthly caps will not be lowered (which could potentially push things past year-end anyway). The Fed tends to "taper" the removal of market-friendly policies like QE to ween the market off of them and avoid a potential negative response to their conclusion.

QT is a market-unfriendly policy, and concluding it should only have a positive response, so there is no need to ween. Also, the Fed clearly wants to keep MBS holdings shrinking, so why change the maximum permissible pace of $20 billion per month which has been in place for the past five months? This would set up an awkward communications situation of tapering one aspect of SOMA reduction but not the other.

A follow-up announcement could come in March, May, June or July. The follow-up announcement of technical details would cover the Fed’s plans for normalizing the asset mix of its portfolio. In addition to confirming that MBS holdings will continue to shrink after SOMA's size is stabilized, BMO expects the technical note will also state that the Fed’s future purchases will exclude MBS in favor of Treasury instruments and will likely include a growing portion of T-bills.


End of QT Scenarios
Given the multiple dimensions in which the Fed could choose to act (QT end date, announcement dates, taper), there are a myriad of potential scenarios of how things could play out from here. For simplicity, BMO has chosen to reduce the issue down to four scenarios that span the spectrum of what is plausible. Those scenarios are summarized in Figure 1. Note that the table transitions from most dovish on the left to most hawkish on the right.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...0scenarios.jpg


BMO's base case scenario is the third from the right that we have named ‘September Sudden Stop.’ We have assigned it a 55% probability. The key arguments for and against each scenario follow.

1. June Sudden Stop: The principal argument for ending QT as early as June would be to get the issue out of the spotlight so that the Fed can revert back to steering the economy and communicating with markets via its base rate corridor. The argument against this scenario is that ending QT in June could leave the Fed with too big of a reserve cushion, which might reduce its ability to control markets in the future. For that reason, the bank assigns this only a 20% probability.
2. Tapered June Stop: The argument for this scenario is that the Fed wants to move on, but it also wants to experiment just a bit. Such experimentation could benefit the Fed in the future and could serve as a favor to other central banks lagging behind the Fed in QE reversal (BoE, ECB, BoJ). But because "taper" is an unnecessary complication, BMO only assigns this scenario a 10% probability.
3. September Sudden Stop: The key argument for this approach is that it is the closest to perfect in terms of reducing the excess supply of reserves. Ending in September prevents the Fed from either causing or being blamed for a year-end liquidity event. Also, by holding back the announcement of details and end date for as long as possible, the Fed retains the flexibility to ease policy a bit by pulling forward the QT end date in the event that economic confidence sours again.
4. Tapered December Stop: The argument for this scenario is that it gives the Fed the most time and flexibility. By providing a taper, the FOMC might offset disappointing markets with a later end date than has been hope for by market participants. Where Lyngen doesn't think a taper is necessary and since the Fed likely doesn’t want to get anywhere near year’s end with policy action on this front, BMO only gives this scenario a 15% probability.

End of QT Scenario Responses in Markets, US Yields and the USD
The bulk of the market response to the end of QT has probably already occurred. As noted above, the S&P 500 is up 11% YTD, and that is probably the most important price response. The response in interest rate markets has been less dramatic. The yield response has presumably been muted because the impact of the equity market reaction has counteracted the dovish evolution in Fed policy expectations. As a result, BMO does not look for a huge price reaction to any of our scenarios, but it does think that a bit of a response will show up when the end of QT is confirmed by the announcement of a clear termination date.

It is worth a note that the impact on 10-year yields is very indirect. If the FOMC doesn’t formally announce an end date in March, yields would back up about 5bps, but other than that, impact further out the curve should be marginal.

The impact on T-bills will be more flow driven than announcement driven. There is the impact on 3-month bills vs. OIS maxing out at 10bps if QT ends in H1, but at only 5bps if QT extends into H2. Figure 2 shows how Lyngen thinks the US rates market would respond to our four scenarios.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...%20to%20QT.jpg


In FX, the response in the USD has been somewhat bifurcated. The announcement effect of QT coming to an end has caused only a slight decline in the USD against G10 currencies, but there has been a more noteworthy USD decline relative to emerging market currencies. The Fed’s ‘AFE’ (Advance Foreign Economies) USD index is down 0.6% YTD. The Fed’s ‘EME’ (Emerging Market Economies) USD index is down 1.4% YTD.

While further impact is likely to be limited, BMO believes that a firm announcement of an end-date to QT will have a second-wave negative impact on the USD, and as a result expect that impact to be greater on local-market currencies than on G10 currencies. See Figure 3.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...20QT%20BMO.jpg

The MBS vs. Treasuries Issue
As Lyngen notes, the January FOMC minutes indicate that participants agreed that “it would be appropriate once asset redemptions end to reinvest most, if not all, principal payments received from agency MBS in Treasury securities.” As a result, the Fed will likely adopt a policy whereby all MBS redemptions are reinvested in Treasuries unless a sudden increase in MBS redemptions occurs, stemming for example from a wave of mortgage prepayments. The shift of reinvestment from MBS to Treasuries will be marginally bearish for spread products, although the Fed has not been hitting its caps, and thus has not been reinvesting its MBS redemptions since the caps maxed out last October. Further, estimating MBS portfolio evolution using an 8% runoff, significant monthly maturities in excess of $20 billion going forward are not forecast (Figure 4).

Additionally, if the Fed opts to keep a backstop in place for the MBS market to guard against mass redemptions, the current $20 billion cap seems a reasonable level, so it is possible that there is no change in Fed policy as it relates specifically to MBS, and by extension spread products. However, it also seems reasonable that the Fed raises this cap alongside the change in reinvestment policy to something much larger, say $50 billion, so that reinvestment into MBS only occurs following a truly significant wave of prepayments.

On the other hand, the imminent start of a move towards a Fed balance sheet composed primarily of Treasuries would be bullish for Treasuries. The most bullish outcome is a sudden stop in balance sheet normalization beginning in July. Between Treasury and MBS runoff, the Fed would purchase about $298 billion in Treasuries under this scenario. BMO's base case of a sudden stop in September results $203 billion in Treasury purchases by the Fed (Figure 5).
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...dule%20BMO.jpg


Impact on the US Government’s Net Issuance
An earlier end to Fed balance sheet normalization coupled with Fed reinvestments of MBS runoff into Treasuries results in the Fed buying more Treasuries than previously expected. This decreases Treasury net marketable borrowing from the public, specifically bill issuance, all else equal. The decrease in supply will likely richen Treasury-OIS, with the degree of richening depending on the timing of the sudden stop.

Treasury is likely to hold coupon auction sizes at the current levels as deficits are projected to continue to increase over the next several years. Therefore, the decrease in funding needs translates to a mirror decrease in net bill issuance held by the public. Even if the Fed decides to reinvest some of the proceeds from maturing securities into bills, the impact on net bills available to the public would not change.

BMO's base case is that they simply end runoff, roll MBS maturities into Treasuries, and continue to reinvest as add-ons to the auctions until the SOMA portfolio begins to grow again. The expectation for runoff to end on September 30 is about one year earlier than originally expected. This reduces Treasury net marketable borrowing from the public by about $350 billion, with about $230 billion coming from the halt in Treasury runoff alone and another $120 billion from rolling MBS into Treasuries (assuming 8% in prepays). This decreases Treasury marketable borrowing by 33% from Q4:19 to Q3:20.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...20QT%20BMO.jpg


In terms of net bills issuance, BMO had expected about $539 billion in issuance during this period and now expects $184 billion as shown in Figure 6. In the bank's base case, Q4:19 net bill issuance totals about $77 billion, down from $166 billion. In the first three quarters of 2020, Lyngen now expects $107 billion in net bill issuance, down from $372 billion with $177 billion coming from SOMA Treasury rollovers and $88 billion from MBS rollovers into Treasuries. Figure 6 also shows updated net bill issuance projections with and without MBS rollovers to put a band around issuance possibilities given the uncertainly in prepayment speeds. In table 8, BMO shows three additional scenarios. Spanning the scenarios, net bill issuance would fall by $41 billion at a minimum and $184 billion at a maximum in 2019.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...0scenarios.jpg


The Fed’s Portfolio Duration Issue
According to BMO, in designing the end of portfolio normalization, the Fed will need to decide whether to use its holdings as a means by which to influence financial conditions. They could achieve this by structuring holdings longer or shorter versus the WAM of outstanding Treasuries. In essence, if the Fed wanted to contribute to lower borrowing costs, it could disproportionately focus reinvestment purchases further out the curve (and vice versa), creating a (reverse) Operation Twist. This leaves the core question as to whether holdings will converge to passively reflect the distribution of publically available debt or not. For context, current holdings skew longer in duration, partially due to the lack of Treasury bills held in the SOMA, as any maturing proceeds are presently distributed across coupon auctions.

For historical context, pre-crisis SOMA holdings skewed shorter in maturity than the aggregate weighted average maturity of outstanding Treasuries. This was done in order to maintain a highly liquid portfolio, and included 35% to 40% of holdings in Treasury bills. However, since 2008, the component of holdings represented by bills has been completely eliminated. The Fed has concentrated purchases further out the curve in an attempt to suppress longer-tenor yields and bring down borrowing costs for businesses and households. That degree of accommodation is no longer justified at this stage in the cycle, so the Fed will likely rebuild their bill portfolio in order to better reflect the actual Treasury market.

In addition, focusing holdings on a more realistic reflection of the Treasury market allows for another ‘twist’ in future years. Said differently, the impact of extending SOMA duration to provide future accommodation is likely greater when coming from a lower starting point. With neutral rates significantly closer to the effective lower bound than during previous cycles, the central bank may need every tool at its disposal, including adjusting the duration of holdings as required.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...20vs%20WAM.jpg


International Implications
On the whole, BMO observes that exchange rate movements have mapped reasonably well with the relative sizes of central bank balance sheets over the last 8 or 9 years (see charts below). But estimating the FX impacts of balance sheet shifts and the timing
of those impacts is not an exact science. In fact, it is extremely imprecise.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...%20of%20QT.jpg


Economic theory argues that an increase in the relative supply of a currency – as one result of a QE program – should tend to weaken that currency, while a drop in the relative supply of a currency should do the opposite. However, despite what economic theory regarding QE posits, the Fed’s broad USD index rose about 8% during QE2. QE3 also brought USD strength.


BMO here notes that it does not think that any of the major central banks will change their balance sheet policies in response to the Fed ending QT. The ECB is likely to keep its balance sheet static, while the BoJ is likely to continue slight balance sheet growth as a result of its QQE program, at least for the foreseeable future absent any unexpected spike in inflation (or bond market breakdown).

This means that if the implementation and end of QE didn’t impact major exchange rates in textbook fashion, there is no guarantee that the end of QT would bring a textbook response. But with the red lines in the two figures below flattening out to horizontal (in the case of the Fed/ECB ratio chart) or near horizontal (Fed/BoJ case), the textbook response is flat ranges in major exchange rates.

The risk-positive implications of ending QT indirectly benefit other major economies and their respective central banks because of its loosening effect on global financial conditions. This should offset the slight weakening of the USD and keep everyone in the room happy when G20 central bankers gather.

Meanwhile, emerging central banks that have currencies pegged to the USD or that are tightly aligned with the USD (including the
PBoC) will indirectly benefit from both a rebound in capital inflows as well as slightly weaker trade-weighted currencies. This could lead to the resumption of a modest amount of FX reserve accumulation by the aggregate of EM central banks. That reserve accumulation would lead to modest purchases of sovereign bonds (including US Treasuries), which would further ease global financial conditions.

Finally, the Fed’s clear path to ending QT and policy rates likely being on hold for some time, reinforces that the Bank of Canada is going to stay on the sidelines through at least the first half of 2019. And yet, while BMO's house call is for one more BoC rate hike

in December (Friday's shocking GDP print notwithstanding), it’s going to take a more positive global backdrop and likely a more positive tone from the Fed before the BoC can turn more hawkish. That should keep the front end of the Canada curve range-bound, while longer-term yields are expected to largely follow UST’s in their reaction to the end of QT.

The Return To A Gold Exchange Standard
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...?itok=LY4e264-


by Tyler Durden
Sat, 02/23/2019 - 12:35


Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,
This article makes the obvious point that a return to a gold standard is the only way nations can contain the interest cost of servicing debt, given the alternative is inflationist policies that can only lead to far higher interest rates and currency destruction. The topic is timely, given the self-harm of American economic and geopolitical policies, which are already leading America into a cyclical slump. Meanwhile, American fears of Asian domination of global economic, monetary and political outcomes have come true. The upcoming credit crisis is likely to kill off the welfare state model in the West by destroying their unbacked paper currencies, while China, Russia and their Asian allies have the means to prosper.
https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...2_14-33-25.jpg


The fragility of state finances
In my last Goldmoney article I explained why the monetary policies of inflationist economists and policy makers would end up destroying fiat currencies.

The destruction will come from ordinary people, who are forced by law to use the state’s money for settling their day-to-day transactions. Ordinary people, each one a trinity of production, consumption and saving, will eventually wake up to the fraud of monetary inflation and discard their government’s medium of exchange as intrinsically worthless.

They always have, eventually. This has been proved by experience and should be uncontroversial. For the issuer of a currency, the risk of this happening heightens when credit markets become destabilised and confidence in the full faith and credit, which is the only backing a fiat currency has, begins to be questioned either by its users or foreigners or both. And when it does, a currency starts to rapidly lose purchasing power and the whole interest rate structure moves higher.

The state’s finances are then ruined, because by that time the state will have accumulated a lethal combination of existing unrepayable debt and escalating welfare liabilities. Today, most governments, including the US, are already ensnared in this debt trap, only the public has yet to realise the consequences and the planners are not about to tell them. The difficulty for nearly all governments is the deterioration in their finances will eventually wipe out their currencies unless a solution is found.

There is a solution that if taken allows the state to survive. It could be modelled on Steve Hanke’s (of John Hopkins University) preferred solution of a currency board, that when strictly observed removes the state’s ability to create money out of thin air. He recommends this solution to currency debasement and the evils that come with it for Venezuela and the like, linking a distressed emerging market currency to the dollar. But here we are considering stabilising the dollar itself and all the other currencies linked to it. The currency board in this case can only be linked to gold, which has always been the peoples’ money, free of issuer risk. In former times this was the basis of a gold exchange standard.

Professor Hanke’s currency board is a rule-based system designed to achieve the same thing. Once the system is in place, every currency unit subsequently put into public circulation by the monetary authority must be physically backed by a defined weight of gold bullion. This was the method of the gold exchange standard adopted by the Bank of England under the terms of the Bank Charter Act of 1844. A modern currency board, consisting of digitised currency, effectively works the same way.

A currency board system is not the best mechanism whereby currency is made exchangeable for gold. Its weakness is it relies on the state fulfilling its obligations, so it would be better to use gold directly, either in physical or digitised form. America reneged on its gold exchange standard in 1933/34, when it first banned gold ownership and then devalued the dollar. That was simply theft by the state from its citizens. Therefore, other safeguards for a gold exchange standard must be in place.

A return to a credible gold exchange standard will then put a cap on interest rates and therefore government borrowing costs. Instead of nominal rates of 10% going on 20% and beyond, a gold exchange standard will probably cap long-term government borrowing rates in a two to five per cent range. It also allows businesses with viable investment plans to progress as well. Not only is it an obvious solution, but it is similar to that adopted in the UK following the Napoleonic wars.

Britain had government debt levels in 1815 greater than that of all advanced nations today relative to the size of her economy, with the single exception of Japan.

She introduced the gold sovereign coin in 1816, comprised of 0.2354 ounces of gold, as circulating money with a face value of one pound. Over the following nine decades, not only did she pay down her government debt from over 200% of GDP to about 30%, but her economy became the most advanced and wealthy in the world. This was achieved with sound money, whose purchasing power rose significantly over those nine decades, while the quality of life for everyone improved. A sovereign was still one pound, only it bought much more.

Ordinary people were encouraged to work, spend and save. They aspired to make their families better off. The vast majority succeeded, and for those few unfortunates who fell by the wayside, charitable institutions were set up by successful philanthropists to provide both housing and employment.

It was never the function of the state to support them. It would be too much to claim that it was a perfect world, or indeed that everyone behaved as gentlefolk with the best of Victorian values, but the difference between the successful laissez-faire economy in Britain with its relatively minor faults compared with the bureaucratic socialism that succeeded it is stark.

The key is in the creation and preservation of personal wealth, contrasting with socialist redistribution and wealth destruction, which has steadily undermined formerly successful economies. The future is coalescing towards an inflationary collapse for all Western governments, the manner of which is described in more detail in the following section. For prescient politicians, it creates the opportunity to reverse out of socialism, because the silent majority, which just wants commercial stability in preference to state handouts, if properly led will support a move away from destructive socialism. It is not a simple task, because all advice that a politician receives today is predicated on the creed of inflationism and socialist imperatives.

Why and how an inflationary collapse occurs
Monetarists are fully aware that if a government increases the quantity of money in circulation, its purchasing power declines. Their theory is based on the days when gold was money and describes the effect of imports and exports of monetary gold on the general price level.

Pure monetarists appear to assume the same is basically true of fiat currencies, unbacked by gold. But there is a fundamental difference. When gold is used as money for settling cross-border trade, an arbitrage takes place, correcting price differentials. When prices are generally low in one country, that country would achieve sales of commodities and goods in other countries where prices were higher. Gold then flows to the lower price centre, raising its prices towards those of other countries. With unbacked national currencies, this does not happen.


Instead, national currencies earned through cross-border trade are usually sold in the foreign exchanges, and the determinant of trade flows is no longer an arbitrage based on a common form of money. The pure link between money and trade has gone, and whether foreigners retain or sell currency earned by exports depends mostly on their confidence in it. That is a matter for speculation, not trade.

Domestic users of state-issued currency are divorced from these issues, because foreign currencies do not circulate domestically as a medium of exchange. Instead of being a form of money accepted beyond national boundaries, as gold was formerly, there is no value anchor for domestic use. For this reason, a national currency’s purchasing power becomes a matter of trust, and it is that trust that risks being undermined in a credit crisis. The less trustworthy a government, the more rapidly a currency is in risk of decline.

This is why monetarism, which was based on gold as ubiquitous money, is no longer the sole determinant of currency values. It is true that an increase in the quantity of circulating money devalues the existing stock, but if the population as a whole is prepared to increase its preference for money, usually expressed as a savings ratio, there need be no detrimental effect on its purchasing power.

With fiat currencies we enter a world where statistics reflect the quantity of money, and never the confidence people have in it. Additionally, we should observe that statistics can tell you everything and nothing, but never the truth. It is possible for an economy to collapse, but statistically appear healthy as the following example illustrates.

Imagine, for a moment, that modern statisticians and their methods existed at the time of the Weimar Republic. Government finances were covered by approximately ten per cent taxes and ninety per cent monetary inflation. It was a government whose finances were run on the lines recommended by today’s modern monetary theorists.


There can be no doubt the low level of taxation was an encouragement to business and permitted the redeployment of earnings for investment. A falling exchange rate delivers excess profits for export businesses as well. Interest rates were attractive relative to the rate of price inflation, and the economy, statistically anyway, was expanding rapidly.

This was certainly true measured in nominal GDP, the basic measure of economic activity today. Official prices, which are always the latest gathered and indexed, lag monetary debasement by at least a month, possibly two or even three. To this we must also mention governments always under-record price inflation, which is the natural consequence of earlier debasement. Therefore, even after an official price deflator is applied to nominal GDP, “real” GDP growth in Germany between 1918 and early-1923 would be judged by today’s government economists to be booming.

Interestingly, Joseph Stiglitz and a raft of left-leaning economists and politicians believed Hugo Chavez’s socialist policies were successful in 2007, when statistics revealed a similar interpretation for Venezuela’s inflation-ridden economy. However, instead of Germany being deemed to be in an economic boom, in 1920 economists in the classical and Austrian traditions saw it for what it was. Even Keynes wrote about it in his Tract on Monetary Reform, published coincidentally in late-1923 when the papiermark finally collapsed.

Germany’s inflation may have been a statistical success, but it concealed crippling wealth destruction through the transfer of wealth and wages from private individuals to the state through monetary debasement. As Lenin is reputed to have said, “The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them down between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”


In Germany, inflationary financing started before the First World War to finance a build-up of armaments. At the outbreak of war, gold convertibility was suspended, and the unbacked papiermark began its inflationary drift. Exploiting the facility to issue valueless pieces of paper as currency and for the people to circulate them as legal tender became the principal source of government funds.

This trick worked until approximately May 1923. By then, the purchasing power of the mark had fallen consistently at a relatively even pace. It then took only seven months to lose all its purchasing power, when the public collectively realised what was happening, and manically dumped their marks for anything. It was the katastrophenhausse, or crack-up boom, the end of life for a state’s unbacked currency.


It was the pattern firmly established in all fiat currency collapses, which, besides the currencies in existence today, has happened to all of them throughout the history of post-barter trade, without any known exception. It is the familiar route along which the dollar and other paper currencies are travelling today. Now that we are entering a statistical slowdown in most major economies, Weimar-style financing is set to return to centre-stage. The fate for unbacked state currencies, unless somehow averted, will be the same.


The lesson from Weimar and today’s monetary inflation is that the period before the public cottons on to it can be prolonged. In Germany it was 1914-1923, followed by a swift seven-month collapse. Today it is from 1971 and still counting. But the final collapse could be as rapid as Germany’s between May and November 1923.

Doubtless, we will see rising price inflation later this year, but that statistic will continue to be suppressed. With the gap between the effect of accelerating monetary inflation and the official rate of price inflation widening, we could see for a brief period the statistical recovery in GDP that so badly misled Professor Stiglitz and others observing Venezuela’s economy twelve years ago.

A gold standard alone is insufficient
A major problem for governments when price inflation begins to rise is the notional cost of borrowing, because markets alive to the decline in the currency’s purchasing power will drive interest rates higher, despite official attempts to suppress them. So far, the problem has been successfully covered up by central banks rigging government debt markets, and by government statisticians masking the true rate of price inflation through statistical trickery. In future, efforts to keep a lid on reality will presumably intensify as a core feature of monetary and economic policy. In light of another wave of monetary debasement, the question then arises whether markets will permit this market rigging to continue. If not, the purchasing power of unbacked currencies will be visibly undermined by the erosion of public confidence in them.

We cannot know this outcome for sure until it is well on the way. The Lehman credit crisis led to a global explosion in the quantity of money as central banks worked in tandem to rescue the banks and the entire financial world. That injection still circulates in the global blood-stream. A second globally-coordinated monetary debasement is just starting, notably with China leading the way. A realistic assumption must be that this time the purchasing power of state currencies will be the victim of a severe monetary overdose.

This being the case, there is bound to be an upward adjustment in nominal interest rates forced on central banks by the markets. Government financing becomes overtly inflationary, embarking on a modern equivalent of the papiermark route. How else do you describe accelerated quantitative easing?

A loss of confidence in currencies is always reflected in the prices of gold and silver, which by then should be heading considerably higher. Crypto-currencies could compound the problem by becoming an alternative for people no longer content to retain bank deposits.

Governments and their central banks will be at a fork in the road. One direction towards monetary stability is rough, tough, suspension-breaking, but leads to a better place. The other towards accelerating monetary debasement is smoother, more familiar, but just out of sight leads to a cliff-edge of monetary destruction.


Which road will your government take?
Western governments are poorly equipped to make this decision. There are a few people in the political establishment who might understand the choice, but they will have to deliberately put the clock back, and reverse government policy away from socialism and state regulation towards free markets and sound money. They will be fighting the neo-Keynesian economic establishment, the inflationists who form the overwhelming majority of experts and advisers. These neo-Keynesians populate the central banks and government treasury departments almost to the exclusion of all other economic theorists. Spending ministers and secretaries of state will have to be told to reduce their power-bases, which goes against their personal ambitions and political instincts.


It will take an extraordinary feat of leadership to succeed.
In favour of a brave statesman will be the free-market instincts of the silent majority. It is only at times of crisis that a statesman can muster this support. In a different context, Churchill in 1940 comes to mind. The public will not know the solution, but with the right leadership they can be led along the path to economic and monetary salvation. The currency will have to be stabilised by making it convertible into gold bullion, and government spending will have to be slashed, by as much as a quarter or a third in most advanced economies. This means enacting legislation cancelling government responsibilities, something that could require a state of emergency. The message to the electorate must be the government owes you nothing. And so that you can look after yourself, the government must encourage individuals to accumulate personal wealth by removing taxation from savings.


Obviously, the most socialist welfare states will face the greatest challenge. There will be extreme tension between financial reality and entrenched interests. There can be no doubt that their currencies are most likely to fail.

The Eurozone poses a particular challenge, with one currency circulating between nineteen member states. Conventional opinion is that all the troubles visited on the PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) are due to an inflexible currency. Here, there is likely to be a split, with Germany and perhaps a northern faction gravitating towards the protection of a gold standard, while the PIGS will press for more interest rate suppression and infinite supplies of easy money from the ECB.


The US is a pivot of disaster
The US has a different but more worrying problem. It refuses to accept its decline as the dominant super-power, retreating into trade protection and autarky.

Consequently, the US Government is taking destructive decisions. Since President Trump was elected, he accelerated inflationary financing late in the credit cycle in the belief it would lead to greater tax income in due course. He has also replayed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, in the belief that trade protectionism somehow makes America great again (MAGA). Instead, it has crashed global trade, just as it did in the 1930s. MAGA is a fateful combination of tax cuts and trade protectionism. It is a curious form of self-harm, which backfires badly on American consumers and corporations. And it does not help foster good relations with America’s creditors, who have allowed America to live beyond her means for decades.

Foreigners now own dollars in enormous amounts, for which interpret they are America’s reluctant bankers. They are now beginning to be net sellers as a consequence of a dollar glut in their hands, combined with America’s clumsy geopolitical manoeuvrings. TIC data for December showed foreigners sold a net $91.4bn[ii] – the largest monthly outflow during Trump’s presidency, and this only a few months after everyone believed foreigners were buying yet more dollars to service their own debts.


While ignoring its dependency on foreign finance, America is trying to strangle China’s economic and technical development, but that horse has already bolted.

Washington surely knows the jig is up, and that the US, Japan and Britain are merely islands on the periphery of a vitalised Eurasian powerhouse. We were all warned this would happen in one form or another by Halford Mackinder over a hundred years ago. America, it appears, is prepared to destroy herself rather than see Mackinder’s prophecy come true.


Consequently, the whole world is being thrown into a trade-induced slump, and the American government is central to the problem. We can expect its economy, along with all the others, to decline significantly in the coming months. It will be an encouragement for yet more inflationism. The monetary expansion which is sure to follow is set to lead to an acceleration in the decline in the dollar’s purchasing power, as foreigners turn from dollar bankers to dollar sellers. This will lead to an increase in the value of time-preference set by markets, and unless the Fed counters this increase sufficiently by raising its rates, the dollar will simply slide.


Under current circumstances, the 1980-81 Volcker solution of raising interest rates to 20% to stabilise the currency does not appear to be available. Furthermore, to reverse the Nixon shock of 1971 and reinstate gold backing for the dollar as a means of limiting the rise in interest rates is simply not in the establishment’s DNA. America, which is very much the guilty party in destroying its own Bretton Woods monetary arrangements, will find it very difficult to change its tack with such economic cluelessness at the top.


The SCO bloc
Things are very different in Asia. The eight members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, together with those seeking to join, represent roughly half the world’s population. It is led by gold-friendly China and Russia. A further two billion people can be said to be directly affected by the way the SCO develops, including the populous nations of South-East Asia, the Middle East, and Sub-Saharan Africa. That leaves America’s questionable sphere of influence reduced to roughly one and a half billion souls out of a global population of seven. It is proof of Halford Mackinder’s foresight.


China and Russia still have significant infrastructure plans, which will stimulate Eurasian economic activity for at least the next decade, perhaps two. If the formerly advanced national economies slump, of course Asia will be adversely affected, but not as much as even China-watchers fear. The upcoming credit crisis is likely to mainly affect America, UK, Western Europe and their military and economic allies.

The SCO bloc could escape relatively lightly, if it takes the right avoiding action.
The threat to the SCO’s future is mainly from its current monetary policies, with China in particular using credit expansion to manage the economy. She has sought to control the consequences of domestic monetary policy through strict exchange controls, a strategy which has so far broadly succeeded.

The growing possibility of a dollar collapse will call for a radical change in China’s monetary policy. We know the direction this new policy will take from the actions of Russia, China and increasingly those of other SCO members, and that is to somehow incorporate gold into their paper monies. Furthermore, they are capable of doing it and making it stick.

While it is clear to us that China and Russia understand the importance of gold as true money, it is not clear whether they have a credible plan for its introduction into their monetary systems. The Russians seem to have a good grasp of the issues. China had a good grasp, but many of her economic advisors are now Western-trained in neo-Keynesian inflationary beliefs. Therefore, China is not wholly immune to the faults that are likely to destroy the dollar and other Western currencies.

But the central message in China’s successful cornering of the physical gold market is a switch will be made to sound money when it is strategically sensible, despite the neo-Keynesians in it ranks.


Almost none of the SCO nations have significant welfare commitments to their populations. It is therefore possible for them to contain government spending in an economic downturn. Not only can Russia and China introduce a gold exchange standard and make it stick, but fellow SCO members and those nations tied to it can either introduce their own gold exchange standards, or alternatively use gold-backed roubles and yuan to anchor their currencies.


The economic and monetary direction taken by the SCO in the coming years could turn out to be relatively successful, at least compared with the difficulties faced by the welfare states. Such an outcome would be immensely positive for humanity as a whole and be a lifeline for those of us deluded into inflation-funded socialism.

You never know, it might even force spendthrift Western governments to reform their ways and return to sound money policies.

The effect on the price of gold should be obvious. It is said that foreign students in Berlin in 1923 were able to buy houses with the spare change from their allowances, sent to them by their parents, usually in dollars or pounds. Dollars at that time were as good as gold. Today, a currency board or gold exchange standard would have to be fixed at a rate significantly higher than current fiat-currency prices. Gold is the ultimate protection from theft by currency debasement.

COMMENTS FROM BENJAMIN: Ladies & Gentleman

You now all can see into the FUTURE. Forget about currency trading for the moment. The more important thing that each and everyone of you reading this needs to do is to prepare for the guaranteed collapse of the World Financial System. At the MOST we have until the end of 2022 however more likely by the end of December 31, 2021.

The US elections to be held the first Tuesday of November 2020 will be a major turning point depending on who is elected. You need to contact trusted advisers who understand all these issues. Unfortunately in my learned opinion two many experts cannot see the forest for the trees. If you have any comments and or questions then please post them here.