Money Flow Trading Method along with Risk Management

Precarity and the Point of No Return September 11, 2025

Or maybe it's just me, and all is well. Time will tell. I often wonder if others feel the precarity of this era, or is it just me? It's hard to tell, as economic statistics don't measure precarity; they mostly measure averages and aggregates, all glowing: GDP and profits up, unemployment low, and so on. If precarity makes the news, it's the financial precarity experienced by many American households as costs rise and wages don't keep up, regardless of what the aggregate statistics indicate.

This precarity is real, but it's not what's being featured. It's reflected in mirrors, not in headlines. In this mirror, millions of people are pursuing side hustles and crowding into speculative casinos. If this isn't a reflection of desperation, it's something close to it. But this isn't news. The precarity extends into the realms of public trust. Expertise backed by credentials--presented as evidence the public could trust the credentialed experts to serve the public interest with disinterested competence--has been eroded by self-interest. Public trust is as precarious as household budgets. Faith in our prospects is equally precarious.

We're presented with an endless series of science-fiction fantasies brought to life--flying motorcycles, driverless taxis, household robots, energy so cheap we won't even bother metering it--but the mirror is reflecting a much different future, one of precarity, uncertainty and decay of what can't be measured like GDP or profits.

We all sense when we've reached a Point of No Return, a river like the Rubicon that, should we cross it, there's no going back. There's another type of Point of No Return: the point in the journey where we realize we no longer have the resources to retrace our steps and return to the safety of what we left behind. At this point, we can only go forward into an uncertain future, one without guarantees and one in which trust is diminishing as steadily as the water in our canteen.

This is when the temptation to grasp at straws and seek scapegoats looms large, and the potential of losing our grip is a greater threat than the unknowns ahead.

There's a bad moon rising, and this makes our journey forward more precarious. We like to believe we're in control of our destiny, but the world around us has its own destiny, and we're making choices on a stage with its own gearing. The gearing of precarity is guiding the machine, whether we're aware of it or not.

I fear for the nation, as the journey ahead is faintly illuminated by a bad moon rising. I fear the dwindling sandbar between the raging currents of partisanship will disappear beneath my feet. Or maybe it's just me, and all is well. Time will tell.

GoldFix

https://vblgoldfix.substack.com/p/go...m_medium=email


Goldman: Central Banks Will Be Buying Gold for Years

Macro Funds, Investors, and CBs Now Bidding

September 16, 2025

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...B9EV3bbqwg--~D

Watch now

Goldman Thinks Central Banks Will Be Buying Gold for Years
Market Rundown | Why a 50bp Rate Cut May Not Be Baked in
September 16, 2025

Housekeeping: Good Morning.
The reset is a process, not an event
Topics:

1. Goldman: Central Banks Will Be Buying Gold for Years
2. Not many People Think a 50bp cut is on the table
   

Market Analysis:
Goldman: Central Banks Will Be Buying Gold for Years


https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...s1oBQT.oLA--~D

Last week’s special voice note stated: The 'Real Money' is Buying. This is now confirmed by GS. Their chosen words in describing the new buying were literally “real money” in a separate note.

We say, time tables are speeding up, to what we don’t know. Maybe a HQLA/REPO rollout is actually coming. Something is definitely up. Central banks are buying at current prices, and Macro discretionary is running it up.

Gold has pushed above its multi-month consolidation range of $3,200–3,450 per ounce, gaining 6 percent since August 26 to reach about $3,650. According to Goldman analysts Lina Thomas and Daan Struyven, the breakout reflects the influence of three key buyer groups:


Last week’s special voice note stated: The 'Real Money' is Buying. This is now confirmed by GS. Their chosen words in describing the new buying were literally “real money” in a separate note.

We say, time tables are speeding up.. to what we don’t know. Maybe a HQLA/REPO rollout is actually coming. Something is definitely up. Central banks are buying at current prices, and Macro discretionary is running it up.

Contents ( 1100 words)

1. Bottom Lines
2. Gold’s Breakout and Drivers
3. Positioning Risks and Tactical Pullbacks
4. The Seasonal Central Bank Lull
5. A Three-Year Horizon for Official Demand
6. China’s Path Toward 20 Percent…
7. …But 30% is Most Efficient
8. Survey Evidence Confirms the Shift
9. Conclusion
10. GoldFix Caveat.

Here is what Goldman has to say about the last 2 weeks.

Substack is the home for great culture

News Anchor Resigns After Being Suspended Over On-Air Charlie Kirk Tribute


https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b.../picture-5.jpg
by Tyler Durden
Tuesday, September 16, 2025 - 11:25 AM
Authored by Melanie Sun via The Epoch Times,

A WICS-ABC20 News anchor in Springfield, Illinois, has announced that she is resigning from her position after her employer suspended her for paying tribute to the late Charlie Kirk on air.


https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=nCrsD2DG


Beni Harmony paid an impassioned tribute to Kirk, whom she knew personally, during a Sept. 12 segment on ABC20’s Marketplace program.
“I want you to know that it’s OK if you feel sadness, it’s OK if you’re grieving,” the host told her TV audience.

“Two days ago, I lost a mentor, my first boss, the first person who made me believe in myself, who encouraged me to chase this dream that you’re watching right now, Charlie Kirk.

“I want to share with you one of my favourite sayings that Charlie would always tell us at the office, he would yell it from the mountain-tops, so please listen: When conversations stop happening, when individuals become wordless, that’s when violence begins. So, if you do one thing today, make it be with passion, with conviction. Stand up for your friends, stand up for your beliefs, and speak loudly, even if your voice shakes. Your words have meaning, your values have purpose. Never forget that.

“Thank you, CK, you changed my life.”


https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=46woAiFA


According to a post Harmony made three days later, she was suspended by her network for the tribute to her former employer, whose assassination on a Utah college campus on Sept. 10 made national headlines.

“Many in the mainstream media have been fired or punished for mocking his assassination,” Harmony wrote in a Sept. 15 post on X.
“I believe I am the first to be targeted for honouring him on air.

“Effective immediately, I have resigned from @WICS_ABC20 after being SUSPENDED for airing a non-partisan tribute to Charlie Kirk this past Friday.”
Explaining the reasoning behind her decision to leave the network, Harmony wrote:

“My resignation is guided by values that are essential to who I am, which I refuse to set aside to keep a job. I choose my faith and love of country, and always will.”

She then thanked her community in the city of Springfield and shared a prayer for the country, Kirk, and his wife and two young children.
When asked on X about how people could support her, Harmony said, “While I’m still looking for my next job in media, I recommend everyone support Charlie’s family first.”

Recent Spate of Firings
Numerous people in leadership positions have lost employment over inappropriate comments in response to the assassination of Kirk.
One of the more prominent early cases was the firing of MSNBC analyst Matthew Dowd on Sept. 11, the day after Kirk was fatally shot.

Another media commentator, Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah, also said she had been fired over her comments on the assassination of the conservative influencer.

Several universities, including Clemson University in South Carolina, and companies, including American Airlines and Delta Air Lines, have terminated employees over their inappropriate comments on Kirk’s murder.

Military officials have also said they are looking into disparaging remarks made by service members about the assassination, and that actions that discredit the service will be addressed immediately.

Confronting Political Violence
Vice President JD Vance, who was a close friend of Kirk, hosted a special broadcast of “The Charlie Kirk Show” on Sept. 15—a show that Kirk personally hosted every day from October 2020, right up until his death on Sept. 10, 2025.

In the special broadcast, Vance called on his fellow Americans to confront the problem of political violence, which he said has “terrible consequences,” such as the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump and the shooting of GOP leader Steve Scalise.

“I really do believe we can come together in this country. I believe we must. But unity, real unity, can be found only after climbing the mountain of truth, and there are difficult truths we must confront in our country,” Vance said.

“One truth is that 24 percent of self-described liberals believe it is acceptable to be happy about the death of a political opponent, while only 3 percent of self-described very conservatives agree. Three percent is too many, of course.

“Another truth is that 26 percent of young liberals believe political violence is sometimes justified, and only 7 percent of young conservatives say the same—again, too high a number.

“The data is clear, people on the left are much likelier to defend and celebrate political violence—this is not a both-sides problem. If both sides have a problem, one side has a much bigger and malignant problem, and that is the truth that must be told.”

His comments come after Kirk’s suspected assassin was identified as Tyler Robinson, who Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said had “clearly a leftist ideology.”
FBI Director Kash Patel said on Sept. 13 that Robinson’s father identified his son from footage released during the manhunt for the suspect.

Cox also confirmed that investigators are assessing writings, some with anti-fascist content, allegedly left by Robinson, who had a transgender romantic partner. Authorities have not publicly said whether this is relevant as they investigate Robinson’s motive.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

https://s.yimg.com/lb/brands/120x120_goldsilver.png

GoldSilver
goldsilver.com
From:[email protected]

To:[email protected]

Tuesday, September 16 at 11:33 A.M.

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...u3RvPNgW9w--~D

A Silver Setup We May Never See Again


https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...QSlUcv6EcA--~D


If you’ve ever thought, “It’s too late to buy gold,” Mike has a simple answer: Buy silver.

In his latest video, Mike breaks down why $200 silver isn’t hype — it’s simple math. He explains why we’re in a rare “rush” moment... one where silver could explode upward while most investors are still asleep.

Here’s what you’ll learn:

1. Why gold’s bull run is just getting started
2. How China and central banks are quietly cornering the market
3. Why 18x more buyers and 55x more currency are chasing a fixed supply

This isn’t a guess. It’s the same setup we saw before silver’s historic run in 1980 — but this time, the stakes are much bigger.
Watch now: “$200 Silver Is VERY ATTAINABLE In A Rush”

And coming soon: Alan’s Hidden Secrets of Value, a six-part series inspired by Mike’s legendary Hidden Secrets of Money. Drops this fall.


https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...Nsx4k17XPQ--~D

Refer A Friend and Earn
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...pHthtZJLqA--~D
Featured Investments
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...zrEEuHdVbw--~D
100 oz Silver Bar

You're receiving this because you're a valued GoldSilver customer and you signed up to receive emails from us. Unsubscribe from these emails. Adjust your email preferences here.

GoldSilver
485 Lexington Avenue, Suite 304
New York, NY 10017
United States
1-888-319-8166

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitic...ng-people-hate

How The Left Programmed Young People To Hate

https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b.../picture-5.jpg

by Tyler Durden
Tuesday, September 16, 2025 - 04:20 PM

Authored by David Betz and Michael Rainsborough via The Daily Skeptic,

In the spring of 1975, the Red Army Faction, more popularly known as the Baader-Meinhof gang, stormed the West German Embassy in Stockholm and murdered two of its staff before setting the building ablaze. In its aftermath, a British tabloid printed a headline whose bluntness masked its profundity: ‘So, Who’s Sick?‘

It was less a headline than a rhetorical diagnosis, reflecting the bewilderment at these seemingly senseless acts of terror. Was it the bourgeois world condemned as corrupt by these self-styled revolutionaries, or was it the revolutionaries themselves, who in their righteous fervour appeared possessed by demons?

The question was never one that admitted an easy answer in that moment, and it remains just as piercing in ours. For when, half a century later, Charlie Kirk was struck down in the midst of civic debate, and when voices on the ‘progressive’ Left respond not with horror but with unholy glee, we are forced once again to confront the same ambiguity.
https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=qwuHvDyz

Who is diseased? Who is truly sick? The question still hangs in the air, accusing its audience as much as its subjects.

The Eclipse of Compassion
The murder of Charlie Kirk was barbarous enough, but what followed was more chilling still. Social media, that great theatre of contemporary sentiment, resounded with elation rather than grief. Where the natural response should have been mourning and sober reflection, there was instead celebration, applause, even exultation.

The old pieties of compassion and human dignity were trampled beneath a chorus of malevolence.
If we return to 1975, we can discern that the spectacle is hardly without precedent. The chronicler of the Red Army Faction’s rise and fall, Stefan Aust, described the psychosis that fuelled its violence as the Baader-Meinhof Complex: a toxic brew of revolutionary ideology, middle-class angst and personality cultism, in which politics fused with pathology. Terror and bloodshed were the logical expression of this worldview.

Jillian Becker, in her study of the same phenomenon published in 1977, placed the emergence of the Baader-Meinhof gang within an extended historical frame, tracing how West Germany’s post-war radicals were the children of those who had lived through the Third Reich — parents whose relationship with Nazism was often ambivalent, sometimes unrepentant. Their children judged them guilty of complicity or cowardice. In turn, they felt they had no tradition to receive let alone uphold, no cultural authority to embrace as their own. Becker memorably described them as Hitler’s Children, who expressed their alienation in violence against the very society that had given them life and often prosperity.

The parallels with today are clear. The obnoxious, jeering, bratty mobs on social media and their elevation of spite into virtue: these too are not simply political stances but symptoms of generational breakdown. Becker’s ‘lost children’ of post-war Germany were orphaned by the silence and ambiguities of their parents’ Nazi past. Today’s youth, though shaped by different conditions, are estranged in an analogous way — heirs to a liberal order that preached emancipation but delivered only deracination.

Children of the Void
Becker’s account of Germany’s post-war radicals was of a generation forsaken by history — children who, faced with no inheritance they could accept without shame, turned their fury against the civilization that had produced them. That revolt finds its echo 50 years later.

The YouTube channel Richard The Fourth, one of the few voices to offer measured and calm reflections on our troubled times, spoke in similar terms of those TikTokkers, X users and BlueSkyers who rejoiced in Charlie Kirk’s murder. “Who are these lost souls? Where did they come from?” he asked. They were, he suggested, “the lost children of the boomer generation”, alienated by the failures of a secular progressivism that promised transcendence through empathy and emancipation from tradition, but in the end gifted them only spiritual vacuity.

These people are not monsters by nature; they are the offspring of a culture that extolled compassion while detaching it from justice, that proclaimed liberation even as it erased the sources of meaning. The progeny of flower power have become the children of a void, and in that void, savagery takes root.

The historical parallels, then as now, are evident: youth cut adrift from their cultural moorings find themselves drawn less to renewal than to destruction. Then as now, dislocation breeds violence and scorn rather than reflection. Becker’s Hitler’s Children and Richard’s “lost souls” are separated by time and circumstance yet bound together by the same pattern: a society that cannot pass down its traditions to its successors is liable to be repudiated by them.

If Aust diagnosed the Baader-Meinhof Complex and Becker revealed the deeper dereliction that sustained it, Richard The Fourth’s reflections illuminate the pathology of our own time. The cheering at murder and the inversion of empathy into its opposite are the symptoms of a Liberal Nihilism Complex: a syndrome in which the promises of modernity collapse into petulance and hostility, leaving only a cohort of ‘feral goblins’, mocking and howling into the abyss.

Creating the Land of Hatred
Contemporary academics, especially in the social sciences, have little of real value to offer humanity, but the few decent ones — those who write for this outlet, of course — still have the capacity to bring depth and perspective to some of our present predicaments.

We are neither spiritualists nor psychologists and cannot claim to have a greater window into the minds of these lost souls than anyone else. What we can offer, though, is decades of engagement with the study of strategic conduct: the motives and means of those who resort to violence in pursuit of political ends. And it is here that we wish to advance a thesis that goes further than viewing the collapse of empathy as an unfortunate by-product of social confusion.

What we are witnessing is not a mishap. Whatever the spiritual degradation and cultural dispossession of these young minds, they are, nevertheless, instruments of history. The way they have been psychologically programmed is no quirk of fate; it has been done with intent. They have been conditioned for a purpose.

To explain this means walking backward into history. We could begin with the French Revolution, but for simplicity’s sake let us start a decade before 1975; in 1966, when Mao Zedong unleashed the Cultural Revolution in China, mobilizing youth against their elders, students against teachers, children against parents. He did not stumble into chaos; he conjured it — because chaos was useful.

In Wild Swans, Jung Chang’s memoir of her family’s turmoil during the Cultural Revolution, she recounts that Mao ruled by getting people to despise one another. He understood the ugliest human instincts — envy and resentment — and knew how to weaponize them. “By nourishing the worst in people, Mao created a moral wasteland, a land of hatred.”

What Jung Chang described was not an incidental consequence of revolutionary excess but the very heart of its method: hatred deliberately sown, division systematically engineered, cruelty unleashed as a political instrument.

The lesson travelled westward. French intellectuals, jaded by the ossified torpor of Soviet communism, visited China and found in Mao’s carnival of destruction a perverse vitality. They imported his ideas, transmuting them into the currency of post-structuralist thought, which in turn shaped the practice of the Baader-Meinhof gang and others like them. From there, it was but a short step to their entrenchment on Anglo-American campuses.

In the United States, groups that emerged from 1960s student radicalism, such as the Weather Underground, adopted similar tactics. Their manifesto, Prairie Fire (1974), named after Mao’s dictum that a single spark can ignite a conflagration, urged radicals to exploit racial and class divisions precisely because such divisions could be rendered unbridgeable.

Prairie Fire, which is still an influential text on the American radical Left, is a handbook for permanent confrontation. Its pages bristle with the conviction that America’s prosperity, its institutions, and its constitutional liberties are all obstacles to be torn down. It demanded escalation over reconciliation — more division, deeper fractures, sharper antagonisms. For its authors, harmony was stasis, and stasis was defeat. Hatred was no passing symptom; it was the weapon itself.

This was not a politics of justice but of immolation. Harmony was the enemy; hatred was the accelerant.

The Long March into the Academy
The campaigns of violence waged by groups such as the Weather Underground and the Baader-Meinhof gang were eventually broken. In the latter’s case, their downfall was signalled by the successful storming of a hijacked Lufthansa jet in Mogadishu in October 1977 by German GSG9 Special Forces, assisted by the SAS, which led to the suicide of the first generation of leaders in Stammheim Prison. After these reversals, many radicals withdrew to safer ground: the universities. There, sheltered by tenure and steeped in jargon, they recast their struggle into something less visible but more enduring.

What could no longer be pursued through bombs and bullets was now carried forward in the idiom of theory. Critical theory, post-colonialism, and gender studies all served the same end. Established systems of knowledge and reasoning were methodically dismantled, and in their stead rose the new orthodoxy of ‘social justice’. In this dispensation, social justice meant rancour without limit. The effort of the intellect was no longer a quest for truth. Instead, it was to be redirected into the calculated manufacture of animosity.

Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe set out this programme with striking clarity in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985). Their project was never the reconciliation of differences. It was, rather, in their words, “to extend social conflictuality to a wide range of areas” to generate “new antagonisms”, arising out of “highly diverse struggles: urban, ecological, anti-authoritarian, anti-institutional, feminist, anti-racist, ethnic, regional, or that of sexual minorities”. The aim was less to close fissures in the body politic than to ensure they remained open wounds. The scholarly mind was recast: no longer to think and analyze, let alone to seek concord, but to irritate and inflame.

What they offered was more than theory; it was revolutionary strategy re-clothed in academic garb. Laclau and Mouffe made plain that the task of progressive politics was to create new fronts of enmity, new identities defined not by their substance but by their opposition — a creed of victims and oppressors, endlessly proliferating, endlessly unreconciled. In their schema, the intention was never to knit society together into an equilibrium, only to drive it into perpetual dissonance.

Nor was this movement hidden, or without its early critics. Allan Bloom in The Closing of the American Mind (1987) saw where it was all leading. He warned that the university was ceasing to be the guardian of truth and culture. Instead, relativism was being allowed to erode tradition, while grievance displaced learning. He foresaw the battlelines forming long before the wider culture wars broke out.

In the decades that followed, the academy was unmade: from bastions of learning into factories of disaffection. The lecture hall, once devoted to dispassionate inquiry, became a place where conflict and division were intentionally stirred.

Engineering Discord
The end of the Cold War gave the enterprise added impetus. With the supposed ‘end of history’, liberal triumphalism licensed universities and institutions to reinvent themselves as moral tribunals. Politics was recast as ethics, and ethics as indictment.

‘Diversity’, ‘equity’ and ‘inclusion’ became less articles of faith than a set of tactics — no longer instruments of compromise but of humiliation, tools by which resentment was stoked and sustained. Generations of students have since been trained to denounce rather than to reason, to persecute rather than to persuade. This is Mao’s Red Guards reconstituted for a digital age: armies of accusation, armed less with AK-47s than with hashtags and HR manuals.

Those who dismiss the ‘culture wars’ as a distraction misunderstand the nature of conflict in our time. The sociologist James Davison Hunter, who coined the phrase three decades ago, cautioned that when disputes cease to be arguments within a shared reality and instead become clashes over what reality itself is, rapprochement is no longer possible. At that point, the logic of civic debate and constitutional politics gives way to the logic of force.

To see all this as a tragic misfortune is deeply mistaken. What has emerged is not spontaneous disorder but a carefully tended culture of antipathy — fertilized by theory, irrigated by resentful passions and sustained by bureaucracies whose survival depends on perpetual conflict.

The Fruits of Permanent War
The harvest is plain to see — in the mayhem and murder on a Utah campus, in the digital mobs that revel and rage across social media, and in a public discourse poisoned by denunciation, where opponents are cast as existential threats — Nazis, fascists, and every other heresy of the age — solely for the crime of disagreement. In such a climate, the very possibility of civil discourse dissolves, leaving only the grammar of hatred.

It is the very condition Jung Chang described: a polity increasingly characterized by malice, nurturing the worst in its citizens, sustained by leaders who profit from fracture.

To reiterate, this is not collateral damage. It is the design. A fractured society is a pliable society. The more its members despise one another, the easier it is for elites to consolidate power under the guise of adjudicating conflicting rights-claims. A peaceful society cannot be radicalized. A society at war with itself can be subverted from within.

Here we confront the image of our times: young people clapping bloodshed, institutions that tremble before mobs, elites that fan flames for advantage. This is no vision of reform. No accommodation of political differences. It is the shadow of perpetual strife — the deliberate cultivation of a land of hatred.

The Terminal Condition
Thus, the question of 1975 — “Who’s sick?” — has found its answer. It is no longer only the young who jeer at murder, though they remain responsible for their choices. Yet their conduct reflects more than personal failing. It is the outcome of a society that abandoned its traditions, hollowed out its own authority and left its youth open to manipulation by those who profit from discord. Individuals may bear the guilt, but the culture that fashioned them must also stand condemned.

The signs of decay are no longer hidden. It is the parable of the Emperor’s New Clothes: the pretense sustained only so long as no one dares to speak what all can see. What we are living through is an epidemic of noticing — a slow, reluctant recognition that the social fabric is threadbare and that the fractures are premeditated, not incidental.

David Horowitz, who as editor of the radical 1960s periodical Ramparts once marched in the ranks of the radical Left before renouncing it, understood these dynamics better than most. He argued that the upheavals of the era were not motivated by the “longing for justice”. It was “not a quest for peace but a call to arms. It is war that feeds the true radical passions, which are not altruism or love, but nihilism and hate.” The reality of their political programme, he lamented, “entails only permanent war, that observes no truth and respects no law, and whose aim is to destroy the only world we know”.

* * *

David Betz is Professor of War in the Modern World at King’s College London. Michael Rainsborough is a former Head of the Department of War Studies, King’s College London.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

NOTE: EDITED BY BWM USING SOFTWARE CALLED GRAMMARLY.

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/logo322.jpg

World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily
"The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow."


What You Aren’t Being Told About The World You Live In

How The “Conspiracy Theory” Label Was Conceived To Derail The Truth Movement

How Covert American Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive and Destroy Reputations

September 17, 2025

Transgender Ukraine Dictator Zelensky Plotted With Armed Queers To Assassinate Charlie Kirk
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

A very troubling new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting President Donald Trump declared about the Russia-Ukraine conflict yesterday: “Zelensky is going to have to make a deal”, says this declaration was followed by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warning: “Kiev is actively trying to sabotage President Donald Trump’s efforts to peacefully resolve the Ukraine conflict”—and an analysis just published in Foreign Policy also warned: “Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and his closest advisers are losing touch with reality”.

In 2015, this report notes, socialist Democrat Party leader House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a gathering of top American officials rapturously cheering a video of known transgender unelected Ukrainian Dictator Vladimir Zelensky dancing in women's clothing and high heels—a demonic display celebrating sexual perversity now joined by top Ukrainian lawmaker Artem Dmitruk beyond shockingly revealing yesterday: “I’m saying this with full responsibility: Zelensky has a hand in the attempt on Trump’s life and in the assassination of Charlie Kirk - both ideologically and practically”.

Among those in attendance celebrating the sexual perversity of Dictator Zelensky in 2015, this report continues, was the young communist Cuba trained Marxist transgender Palestinian immigrant Ermyia Fanaeian, who after receiving funding from the socialist Biden Regime created the “Armed Queers” terrorist organization in Salt Lake City-Utah—yesterday it was revealed: “Armed Queers SLC is under investigation for possible foreknowledge of Charlie Kirk’s assassination”—and world-renowned American conservative think tank leader Peter Schweizer posted in horror yesterday: “Mainstream outlets now reporting: Alleged assassin Tyler Robinson did not act in a vacuum...There may even be DOZENS (!) with advanced knowledge of his sinister plans...Marxist infiltration…transgender ideology….trips to Cuba…money from CCP Operatives…This investigation is FAR from normal”.

Also yesterday, this report concludes, Turning Point USA, the powerful organization founded by Christian martyr Charlie Kirk, announced that President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance will deliver remarks this Sunday at the memorial service for Kirk—Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, will deliver remarks at the memorial—other speakers from the Trump Administration include White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and White House Office of Presidential Personnel Director Sergio Gor—former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., are also slated to give remarks—the event website says more names will be announced—and the memorial will take place at State Farm Stadium, where the Arizona Cardinals football team plays and which can hold more than 63,000 people.

[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]


https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/mok23.png

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/mok21.png

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/mok22.png

September 17, 2025, EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition that it is linked to its 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 many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human being’s right to know the truth. Due to our mission’s conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their ‘agents’ have been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit us, and others like us, that is exemplified 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.]

Trump Vows Use Of “Harsh Measures” To Free Innocent Patriot Tortured In “Feral City” State

Trump Launches Historic “Feral City” Blitzkrieg To Decide Fate Of America

Return To Main Page

It All Has Happened Before for the Same Reasons


https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2...bhiUN-KNMFcFAE


Ray Dalio

Founder of Bridgewater Associates


September 17, 2025
For me, watching the news feels like watching a contemporary version of a movie that I’ve seen many times before. While the details change—the specific leaders, clothes, technologies, and stories aren’t identical—the basic story that is now unfolding and the cause/effect relationships that are driving it are the same as what I’ve seen many times in history (most recently the 1930s) and are laid out in detail in my book and video, Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order.

Because seeing things this way has brought me great benefits and because I’m now at a stage in my life where I want to pass along to others what I see that might help them, I am sharing how I see what’s going on through that lens.

What follows are all things I have recently seen in the news that I haven’t seen through most of my lifetime but that I have seen many times before in my study of history. These events are all following my Big Cycle template that points toward breakdowns in monetary, political, and geopolitical orders.
So here is what I’ve watched in the news and how I saw it:

 

1. The passage by the central government of the world’s leading reserve currency country, which is heavily indebted, of a budget bill that will produce big deficits that will require large bond sales and big increases in debt service payments, which will most likely be dealt with by the central bank pushing real interest rates down and monetizing its debt—increasing the risk to fiat money and debt denominated in it.
2. The imposition of relatively large tariffs for both economic and geopolitical reasons in an attempt to make the country more competitive, bring in tax revenue, and use trade as a weapon against opposing countries.
3. Moves by the country’s leader to increase his control over the central bank.
4. Moves by the country’s leader to gain control over both the political system and his political opponents, which he believes are ruining the country, leading to conflict between those of the hard right and those of the hard left.
5. Moves by both the rightist (Republican) and leftist (Democratic) sides in a democracy to influence the elections to come out in their favour via redistricting initiatives (by Republicans in Texas and Democrats in California) rather than through representative democracy.
6. The deployment of the National Guard in cities that have social disorder and political opposition to the leader’s policies.
7. The shooting, martyrizing, and eulogizing of a political figure (Charlie Kirk) in a country where there is a lot of gun violence and increasing political violence.
8. Leaders from a group of rival powers (China, Russia, India, North Korea, Iran) gathering in meetings and for a military parade to talk about and display their powers to challenge the leading world power and its world order.
9. The incursion (by Russian drones) into countries (Poland and then Romania) that are in an alliance with other major countries (NATO countries) requires them to enter a war if an attacked member country triggers that action.
10. The attack of a country at war (Israel) on its enemies, who were being housed in a neutral sovereign country that was trying to help negotiations between Israel and Hamas.
11. There are many more news items that I could cite that paint a picture that is inconsistent with what we have become used to in this world order since World War II, but is very consistent with what has happened at other times in history, especially during prior breakdowns in monetary, political, and geopolitical orders (e.g., in the 1930s).

I have found that studying the cause/effect mechanics of history makes it possible to logically explain these cause/effect relationships because they are relatively clear. I have built my understanding of these relationships into tools and models/templates for seeing how history has transpired. Because the causes come before the effects, these models have worked well for me, and I can’t help but see things through that cause/effect lens. While I have other models that determine my day-by-day positioning in the markets, my Big Cycle template has been most important in determining my big, long-term positioning.

By the way, I agree with the idea that history rhymes rather than repeats exactly. That is because many situations are similar, but none are identical. I find that to understand the big things that are going on and where these big things are probably headed, it is most important to focus on the interactions of the big forces and not squint at the details or expect precision. I suggest that you do the same.

Because I have found my Big Cycle template to be invaluable in helping me do what I do, especially in doing my investing (e.g., owning gold and having other market positions that have done well), and because at this stage in my life I want to pass it along to others who find it helpful, I laid it out in detail in my books Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order and How Countries Go Broke: The Big Cycle.

Now, to help convey why what’s happening looks like a movie that I have seen many times before, I will very briefly explain my Big Cycle template, why it helps me bet on what will probably happen, and what the picture now looks like to me.

How the Big Cycle Works
As previously explained (so I won’t dwell on it here), the Big Cycle is mostly driven by five big forces that have repeatedly interacted in basically the same ways throughout time. Because these forces and their effects can be tracked, one can see them evolve just as a doctor can watch vital signs to see a patient’s condition evolve.

The five big forces are:
The Debt, Money, Economy Force: By most measures, the Big Debt Cycle is tracking the template that I laid out in my book How Countries Go Broke: The Big Cycle. Most importantly, we are now seeing that governments’ debt-service costs are very large and rising much faster than the amounts of money that governments are taking in taxes, so we are now seeing debt-service payments squeezing out spending at the same time that we are seeing the supply of debt increasing faster than the demand for it. Domestic politics and international geopolitics are now operating with these debt, money, and economic forces in ways that we haven’t seen throughout most of our lives, but have seen in analogous times in history due to understandable cause/effect relationships.

Because I have seen the dynamics that are now driving things in over 50 cases in history, I understand what central banks and central governments have done when they were in analogous positions, because it is logical for them to do such things. That’s what informs my view of what will probably happen—e.g., that there will probably be a lowering of real interest rates and a printing and devaluation of money to pay the debt back with cheaper money—and this view drives my bets. From studying history and seeing what is happening, I believe that big increases in debts and deficit spending are likely to continue because the American voting population won’t accept either higher taxes or lower benefits, and those who want to be elected don’t want to impose fiscal discipline on those whose votes they need.

For that reason (and for the other political and geopolitical reasons that I am about to touch on), I see that central bankers and investors have been shifting away from holding fiat currency debt as their dominant storehold of wealth reserves/savings and toward holding gold and other non-fiat currencies as their reserves/savings, which has been driving up the prices of gold, other hard currencies, and non-fiat currency storeholds of wealth. This is all logical to me. I also see that because of these circumstances, the leader of the heavily indebted country, in this case, President Trump, wants to lower real interest rates, gain control over the central bank, and lean on foreign creditors not to sell their debt and to invest instead in his country. All these things have happened before during this stage in the Big Cycle.

The Domestic Political Force: The existing political order is also changing in unusual and dangerous ways that haven’t happened before in our lifetimes, but that have happened many times in history and that are driven by understandable forces working in logical ways. More specifically, because there are large and growing gaps in wealth and values, we are now seeing extreme political splits between those of the hard right and the hard left, and we are seeing the rise of both populism of the right and populism of the left and win-at-all-cost fights between them. These forces are changing the domestic legal and political systems in ways that we haven’t seen before in our lifetimes, but similar to those that happened many times before for analogous reasons in the analogous stages of the Big Cycle, most recently in the 1930s.

These big changes are notable. For example, throughout most of the post-World War II period, US leaders were expected to operate by laws within a system that was designed to be run with checks and balances, broad representation of the country’s diverse perspectives, and compromises that work for the whole rather than for either side. Now, leaders are no longer willing to do that because they are in win-at-all-cost fights and are working on changing the system for their side to win. That is reflected in the recent news about people in government jobs being hired or fired based on their political alignment, the ways voting districts are being gerrymandered, and the ways the Supreme Court, Congress, and the tripartite checks-and-balances system are now working. These are all very different from what we are used to, yet are both analogous to prior times in history and logical given the existing circumstances.

Similarly, the news about the president ordering National Guard troops into major cities that are in disorder and that are run by the president’s political opposition is inconsistent with what we have become used to, but consistent with what we have seen in the past and what is typical in this phase of the classic Big Cycle. All this is logical when a country is in a mess in many ways and when there are great differences in wealth, values, and approaches (i.e., right versus left), because those on different sides want strong leaders to take charge to fix the mess and win at all costs. Throughout history, this kind of fighting has weakened democracies and led to great conflicts that changed the domestic political order. Violence between the sides that leads to killings is a big red flag that typically signals a big fight and big disruptive changes, so the killing of Charlie Kirk naturally triggers memories of historical cases of political violence. While there have been some other recent examples of left/right politically motivated, rich/poor class motivated, religiously motivated, and ethnically motivated acts of violence, I am not yet ready to conclude that there will be a significant enough number of these to be systematically disrupting. Still, I am watching this closely because an increase in this kind of violence is a reliable leading indicator of periods of great disruption.

The International Geopolitical Force: It should now be obvious that the world order is changing from a US-led multilateral order, with multilateral institutions and agreements playing important roles in shaping how the world works, to a much more unilateral order in which the United States and its allies are on one side and China and its allies are on the other side. We can now see that these great powers are engaging in the kinds of classic economic, trade, technological, and capital wars that have typically preceded military wars. And we can see that these developments are following the classic international geopolitical cycle. The recent gathering in Beijing included Xi of China, Putin of Russia, Modi of India, Kim of North Korea, Pezeshkian of Iran, and other US-opposing or “non-aligned” leaders and was followed by a big military parade that followed President Trump’s military parade earlier this year. These events look more like the classic sabre-rattling that we have seen many times before in analogous historical periods in the Big Cycle than what we are used to seeing in the post-1945 world order. The recent Russian drone incursion into Poland that I touched on earlier and the recent Israeli attack on the Hamas headquarters in Doha were notable and concerning crossings of red lines.

The Force of Nature: Throughout history, droughts, floods, and pandemics have killed more people and toppled more orders than any of the previously mentioned forces. It should be obvious that it is now a very big force that will have big economic, political, and geopolitical impacts that won’t be good.

Humankind’s Learning and the Creation of New Technologies: AI and quantum computing will both be huge forces and will be used for both great and terrible purposes. Perhaps it will greatly increase learning and productivity to help mitigate the other issues, or perhaps it will exacerbate them. While nobody can predict how much of each will happen, we certainly can monitor and ride the changes. I believe that great fortunes will be made in the platforms that enable great usage of these technologies, as well as by the smart users of them who raise profits and productivity a lot, so I am investing in both.

To reiterate, while these Big Cycles are no more preordained than people’s life cycles, they do unfold logically and, like the progressions of human life cycles and diseases, can be monitored and measured to judge the health of the systems and their prognoses. In Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order and my more recent book, How Countries Go Broke: The Big Cycle, I explain the cause/effect mechanics, the current and past conditions and how and why they changed, and the limited options that currently exist under these circumstances.

Understanding these Big Cycle linkages isn’t just valuable for investors; it can also help leaders, policy-makers, and citizens understand what is likely to come next if events unfold as they typically do, which can lead to them steering things in ways that avoid the worst outcomes. For those interested, I’m sharing a chapter from my latest book with a distilled version of the Overall Big Cycle, which describes this Big Cycle and what is now happening in a 10-minute read. You can go here to read a quick 5-minute summary of the full book, which explains my straightforward 3-part 3% solution for getting the US debt issue stabilized.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

How Countries Go Broke: The Overall Big Cycle


https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2...bhiUN-KNMFcFAE

Ray Dalio

Founder of Bridgewater Associates

March 26, 2025
If I had to pick the most important chapter in the book, this would be it. That is because it deals with the biggest and most important forces that are dramatically changing the world order, and it shows how and why these forces have repeatedly driven history through its big cycles. Having seen so many of these cycles, watching what is happening is like watching a movie that I have seen many times before—just a contemporary version in which the clothes that the people are wearing and the technologies that they are using are more modern. I hope to show you what I see. Also, by showing what happened in the past and why it happened, we can understand how previously unimaginable developments are now happening and could happen in the future.

While this book is mostly focused on understanding what’s going on with debt/credit/money/economic cycles, we can’t look at this dynamic in isolation and make sense of it because how these cycles transpire is influenced by other big forces. Similarly, to understand what is happening in other areas, we need to understand the debt/credit/ money/economic force as it has a big effect on developments in most areas. Together, five big forces produce the Overall Big Cycle that leads to radical changes in monetary, domestic, and/or world orders.

I comprehensively explained how this Overall Big Cycle works and how it was manifest over the last 500 years in Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, but I won’t cram that 600-page book in here. Instead, I am going to give you a summary. That way, when we turn to Part III about what has happened in our current Big Cycle, and Part IV, in which I will try to look into the future, you will be able to see how what actually happened compares with my templates of both the Big Debt Cycle and the Overall Big Cycle.

HOW THE MACHINE WORKS
Because everything that happens has reasons that make it happen, it appears to me that everything changes like a perpetual motion machine. To understand this machine, one needs to understand its mechanics. Because everything affects everything else directly or indirectly, these mechanics are very complex.

Sometimes I try to explain what I know about them with enough of their complexity to show them in useful detail, as I did previously in this book to explain how countries go broke. And sometimes I try to explain them simply. As the saying goes, “Any fool can make something complicated. It takes a genius to make it simple.”

In this chapter, I will try to explain the Big Cycle simply. I will begin by explaining my approach.
As a global macro investor for most of my life, I have tried to understand and model the cause/effect relationships and use my models to bet on what will happen in the markets.

To do that, for about the last 35 years, I have created computerized expert systems that enable the computer to make decisions like I make them. These systems are based on the following principle:
Decision-making systems should be based on timeless and universal relationships, meaning that they should explain all the big, important developments in all time frames and in all countries, though not necessarily precisely or in detail. If they fail to explain all the big developments in all time frames and in all countries, that indicates that an important influence is missing and needs to be added to the template/model.

The expert systems I have built are previously developed forms of artificial intelligence. Now, with various breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, I am—and I believe we all are—on the brink of being able to understand all of the cause/effect relationships that drive everything, though for now we still have to labour along the old-fashioned way, with people studying what happened using the computing and AI tools available today. That is why, in my own feeble attempts to understand and describe the most important mechanics that change the world as we know it, I do these in-depth studies and create explanations of them. What I am about to describe is a result of this process. However, because the forces that drive the Big Cycle are so big, it is easy to see and understand them without worrying about the details and the complexities.

Zooming out to the highest level, the five most important drivers of change are:[1]
1. The debt/credit/money/economic cycle
2. The internal order and disorder cycle
3. The external geopolitical order and disorder cycle (i.e., the changing world order)
4. Acts of nature (droughts, floods, and pandemics)
5. Human inventiveness, most importantly, of new technologies

These forces affect each other to shape the biggest things that happen, creating cycles that move markets and economies around an upward-sloping trend line. The incline of its upward slope is primarily driven by the inventiveness of practical people (e.g., entrepreneurs) who are given adequate resources (e.g., capital) and work well with others (their coworkers, government officials, lawyers, etc.) to make the inventions and products that create productivity improvements.

Over a short period of time (i.e., 1-10 years), the short-term cycles, especially the debt and political cycles, are dominant. Over a long period of time (i.e., 10 years and beyond), the long-term cycles and the upward-sloping trend line in productivity have much bigger effects.

As I explained earlier, conceptually, the way this dynamic transpires looks like this to me:


https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/v2...JtmvHVm62e798Q


I will now delve into these five forces. While reading about them, please think about how these forces have worked and how they are working now. That will help you see how and why “history rhymes” and better understand what is now happening and what is likely to happen.

HOW THE OVERALL BIG CYCLE WORKS: THE FIVE BIG FORCES
We are now 80 years into the Overall Big Cycle that began at the end of World War II, which is by and large unfolding in the classic ways that will produce dramatic changes that one can only imagine by visualizing these five forces interacting simultaneously in a historical context.
More specifically:
1. The Debt/Credit/Money/Economic Cycle
Throughout this book, I have described the most important things that influence the Big Debt Cycle (like debt service payments relative to income, the amount of new debt sold relative to the demand for it, the desirability and willingness of debt asset holders to hold their existing debt assets, and other factors explained earlier etc.).

Because I have already covered this Big Debt Cycle so completely that you are probably sick of hearing about it, I won’t say much more.
I will just reiterate the main points I want to get across, which are:

1. There has always been, and I expect that there will always be, short-term cycles that over time add up to Big Debt Cycles.
2. The average short-term debt cycle has typically taken about six years, give or take about three (with the duration of that cycle dependent on a number of influences that we can monitor and use to come up with rough estimates of how long each one will last).
3. The average long-term Big Debt Cycle has typically taken about 80 years, give or take 25 years (with the duration of that cycle also driven by a number of influences that we can monitor and use to come up with rough estimates of how long each one will last).
4. These debt cycles are influenced by and influence other things, most importantly, what I have identified as the four other big forces.

To summarize the dynamic in a few sentences, what has timelessly and universally (i.e., throughout the millennia and across countries) driven the Big Debt Cycle changes and has created the big debt and economic problems is the creation of unsustainably large amounts of debt assets and debt liabilities relative to the amounts of money, goods, services, and investment assets in existence. This has always led to big debt crises and runs on banks. By a run, I mean a turning-in of debt assets (that have no intrinsic value—i.e., their only value is to buy things) to banks to get real money, which the bank doesn’t have enough of to meet the demand. Classically, when the holders of those financial assets actually try to convert them back into money and buy things and see that they can’t get the buying power they believe they have stored in their debt assets, the run accelerates and feeds on itself, which causes great shifts in markets’ values and wealth until debts are defaulted on, restructured, and/or monetized, reducing the debt burdens relative to incomes, and a new equilibrium is reached. The debts are almost always monetized, by which I mean that it is almost always the case that the central bank creates a lot of money and credit to make it easier to pay back the debt, which devalues the money and debt.

It’s worth noting that at times when the debt/money force, the internal order force, and the external order force are late in their cycles (i.e., when there is a lot of debt and a lot of internal and external conflict), it is typically just before big conflicts and revolutionary changes to monetary orders, internal orders, and world orders.

Like a life cycle, the Big Cycle goes through stages. This late-cycle stage, which I call Stage 5, comes just before the depression and war stage that brings about the end of the Big Cycle. For reasons I will explain later, I believe that we are now in this late-cycle stage. It is a time of radical, typically unexpected changes that haven’t happened in one’s own lifetime but have happened many times throughout history. At such times, it is extremely valuable to understand these past cases of big changes and consider whether they could happen again.

In Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, I examined a number of such cases. Since history can be an effective guide for understanding cause/effect relationships and bringing perspective on what is now happening and might happen, we can use these historical cases to think about what’s logically likely to happen under the existing circumstances.

So, what are the existing circumstances? At this time, there is great over-indebtedness and in all other major countries at the same time, as there are increasingly nationalistic and fragmented internal orders in these countries, increasingly contentious relationships between countries, adverse and expensive acts of nature, and amazing new technologies.

Looking at past cases with similar configurations of conditions can help us imagine otherwise unimaginable possible developments. For example, I repeatedly saw, and will show you in the next part of this book, that, when faced with similar conditions of excessive debt, countries (including the US) took the following extraordinary actions:

 

1. Exerting great pressure on countries to buy the country’s debt (as the British did in the past)
2. Selectively freezing debt and/or taking the assets of “enemy” countries (the way the US did to Japan in 1941 and Russia more recently)
3. Defaulting on/restructuring debts by extending maturities and/or monetizing them to cut debt burdens (the way Germany did after Hitler came to power)
4. Imposing confiscatory taxes and capital/foreign exchange controls to prevent assets from leaving the country
5. Revaluing/managing government assets
6. Creating new types of money

To be clear, I am not saying that these sorts of things will happen, and I am hesitant to raise them as possibilities because my doing so could engender exaggerated fears, which could prompt inappropriate and exaggerated actions. However, like a good doctor speaking to a patient suffering from serious conditions, I feel that it would be an irresponsible omission of mine not to convey what past cases tell us about the possibilities that sometimes accompany these conditions.

2. The Internal Order and Disorder Cycle
Within countries, there are both short-term political swings lasting about six years on average, give or take three years, that over time add up to big shifts in domestic orders that last about 80 years, give or take 25 years. To reiterate, I don’t mean that these time frames are fixed because they are highly variable in duration, but I do mean that they have always happened and I believe always will happen, with the durations driven by influences that we can monitor and use to come up with rough estimates of how long each one will last.[2]

These are the cycles that exist within countries and lead to conflicts and changes in the system of governance, or what I’m calling “orders.” These fights for power work basically the same way in all systems of government, all types of organizations, and even within families because the approaches to fighting them are embedded in human nature.

So, how do they work?
It’s simple: nothing lasts forever. That includes the orders built around established leaders and governance systems. Changes in orders are driven by those who have the greatest power getting to determine what is done. Orders change when those who don’t run the existing order acquire more power than those who do and want to change it. Fights occur when both a) a powerful group wants to change the order and b) it is not clear which side has more power, so only a fight can determine it.

Fights don’t occur if a) there isn’t a powerful group that wants to change the order, and/or b) there is a powerful group that wants to change it and is so much stronger than the existing group that the changes will take place with little or no fighting.
In democracies, there is an election cycle that roughly coincides with the economic cycle because bad economic conditions typically lead to political changes. At the beginning of a new popularly chosen leader coming to power—e.g., in the first 100 days of a new presidency—there is a honeymoon period and great optimism. That is when dreams of great changes and great improvements exist, and before realities and criticisms of how the new leader has shaped and handled them set in. As time passes, typically, the big promises the leader made to get elected become difficult to deliver, and bad things happen, so disappointment sets in, critics and enemies become bolder, and support wanes. All this makes fighting to stay in power harder, which often leads to more extreme actions to make that happen.

These dynamics are at play in the US at the time of writing this book in March 2025. How things go typically depends mostly on the economy, which depends mostly on where the market- and economy-shaping short-term and long-term debt/credit/money/economic cycles are, though exogenous events (like droughts, floods, and pandemics, and big international or domestic conflicts) can also matter.

All governance orders within countries change from one type to another—e.g., from democracies to autocracies and from autocracies to democracies—and each major type of order comes in varying flavours, with some managed well and some managed poorly. I will now focus on what happens when democracies fail.

When democracies fail, autocracies come in.
In my studies of how orders have changed throughout history, I have seen how changes from republic-style representative democracies to autocracies typically happen. These changes are exemplified in how Julius Caesar in ancient Rome (from 49 to 44 BCE), Napoleon Bonaparte in France (from 1799 to 1815), Benito Mussolini in Italy (from 1922 to 1943), Adolf Hitler in Germany (from 1933 to 1945), a consortium of leaders in Japan (from 1931 to 1945), Francisco Franco in Spain (from 1936 to 1975), Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey (from 2016 until now), and many other countries’ leaders have shifted to become autocratic leaders. I also read about it in Plato’s Republic, written around 375 BCE, which is still a valuable description of how democracies become autocracies.

In almost all cases, there are large gaps in wealth and values, bad and worsening conditions, and weak, fragmented leadership in the republic-style representative democracies. These democracies can’t fix their problems because democracies intrinsically rely on compromise between opposing factions, and compromise breaks down during such times. So, instead of following the laws and the system of compromise, the opposing sides become willing to fight to win at all costs. Typically, this leads to intensifying populist conflicts between those of the hard right, those of the weak middle, and those of the hard left. Conflicts increase, especially during times of economic stress, which leads to fights for the power to control. How these fights for power take place are largely similar for logical reasons that I will explain.

Plato pointed out, and my study of history showed me, that leaders in democracies typically appeal to their constituents’ desires for immediate benefits and temporary relief rather than doing the hard things that address deeper, systemic issues and make their nation strong over the long term. I have seen and read historical accounts of how leadership also typically becomes weak, decadent, and corrupt, especially after periods of great prosperity and few challenges. Plato argued that when democracies become weak and decadent and lose sight of justice and virtue, they pass their peaks and begin their declines. These periods are typically marked by growing corruption, inequality, and a failure of institutions to function effectively. When the system no longer satisfies the needs of a large percentage of the people, it loses legitimacy. Independently, and long before Plato observed this, this dynamic was recognized in China (as far back as 1046 BCE), where it is called “losing the mandate of heaven.” It is when and why orders fail.

In times of disorder, financial, political, and military power matter more than laws, and authoritarianism works better than weak, disorganized collectivism.

Plato called the person who typically leads the revolutionary changes from democracy to autocracy a “demagogue.” Demagogues manipulate public opinion, stir up emotions, and use extraordinary means to gain power. They typically rile up populist sentiment, promise easy solutions to complex problems (often at the expense of truth or rational discourse), and use propaganda and bullying to gain and increase power. They are generally of the well-educated class and gather around them others who are powerful. When they are of the political hard right, they and those who support them are typically rich and powerful nobles (in the old days) or capitalists (since the Industrial Revolution) who are allied in their belief and their self-interest that great leadership requires strong leadership and strong partnerships from the top, like strong companies that have to work well together to do great things.

When demagogues are on the left, they typically get their support from the unprivileged masses. As these populist leaders, whether they are from the right or the left, gain power, they typically employ tactics such as propaganda, coercion, and the consolidation of power to undermine their enemies and the democratic institutions that support them and/or that support the inefficient bureaucracies that are enabling the problems rather than fixing them. This typically leads to the eventual replacement of democracy with a more centralized, dictatorial form of government.

The approach a strong CEO uses in running a company can be difficult to distinguish from a demagogue’s approach. In fact, it can be said that some strong CEOs govern as demagogues, so it should be expected that if they were running governments, they would run them the same way. In both cases, they are people who take control and make radical changes to make radical improvements, and the big questions are what controls will be imposed on them and how far they will take the autocracy. If looking at a company, one should see if there is strong oversight and a controlling force like a strong board and controls from effective regulators; for governments, such controls come from oversight functions and the separation of powers. The more uncontrolled they are, the more dictatorial the leaders are likely to become. A relevant good principle is that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, a phrase attributed to historian and politician Lord Acton in 1887.

In the new order that emerges, financial and political power matter more than laws, and authoritarianism works better than weak, disorganized collectivism.

In most of these cases, the transfers from democracies to autocracies take place within the rules of the democracy and become increasingly extreme over a few years, usually around three to five. These leaders typically make radical changes to the monetary, political, and geopolitical orders, and they typically become very nationalistic, militaristic, expansionist, and autocratic. As mentioned, examples include Caesar in Rome, Napoleon in France, Hitler in Germany, and Mussolini in Italy.

In ways that were more thoroughly explained in Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order and that should be apparent to observers who are watching what is happening today, this is now taking place with big political shifts (mostly toward the hard right) for the same reasons that they happened in the past.

3. The International Order and Disorder Cycle (i.e., the Changing World Order)
How countries deal with each other is of paramount importance, and it, too, is cyclical.

For the same reason that there are periods of order (i.e., periods of harmony, productivity, and prosperity) and periods of disorder (periods of great conflict, destruction, and depression), and big cyclical swings between these periods within countries, there are periods of order (periods of harmony, productivity, and prosperity) and periods of disorder (periods of great conflict, destruction, and depression) between countries. The periods of disorder take place when there are fights to determine which country or countries will have the power to set what type of order exists. However, because there has never been an effective global governance system, the world order is more prone to disorder and conflict.

As part of the Big Cycle, there have also been big swings between a) unilateralism, in which there is fighting for one’s self-interest, the strong winning over the weak, and the law of the jungle/the survival of the fittest and b) multilateralism in which there is striving for global harmony, peaceful coexistence, and egalitarianism.

Historically, the only times that multilateralism worked were after wars, when people were sick of fighting, and there was a dominant power to enforce how things should go. In fact, throughout most of history, brutal and destructive unilateralism was the norm and periods in which there was multilateralism in pursuit of harmony, peaceful coexistence, and the common good were extremely rare and never sustained. Consider that it wasn’t until 1648, after the terrible Thirty Years’ War, that there was an agreement in Europe (the Peace of Westphalia) establishing that countries have borders and that all countries would pledge to enforce those borders rather than to simply fight one another to get what the other had, which up until then was the norm (though these pledges not to fight have only worked sporadically).

Also consider that it wasn’t until after World War I, when Woodrow Wilson, the idealistic academic president of Princeton University who became president of the newly powerful United States in 1913, naïvely aspired to have a world governance system that imitated the US governance system, the League of Nations. It didn’t last and failed to prevent World War II, which was followed by the new American world order, which created multilateral organizations like the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organization, the International Court of Justice, the World Intellectual Property Organization, etc. These organizations aimed to foster global cooperation, economic stability, and collective problem-solving. The US, leveraging its unparalleled economic and military power, became the linchpin of this liberal international order, promoting democracy, free markets, and human rights. While not without its flaws, this system has maintained a relative stability that has so far prevented another world war.

While we all have lived through a time when multilateralism’s striving for harmony, peaceful coexistence, and egalitarianism was, of course, what we all wanted, multilateralism is now fading into irrelevance, and unilateralism is rising for reasons that are understandable in the context of history. As a result, the powers of multilateral organizations are declining rapidly and transitioning into the hands of the major powers. I believe that realists must accept the fact that both the aspiration for and the existence of global cooperation are eroding as the pendulum is swinging toward self-interested unilateralism and survival of the fittest. It increasingly becomes the case that the strong prey on the weak. These developments are all typical of the stage of the Big Cycle that we are now in.

While this transition from multilateralism to unilateralism is at first shocking, it quickly becomes normalized. For example, it was only months before this writing that Donald Trump’s statements concerning Greenland, Canada, and the Panama Canal would have been considered unimaginable (much like Russia’s use of military force to defend what it saw as its interests by invading Ukraine if its interests weren’t guaranteed peacefully).

At such times, alliances often change fast as circumstances change quickly and winning is more important than loyalties.
To help us imagine the future, we should pay close attention to the lessons from history. Through most of history, without the existence of countries with borders, collections of people with common interests (i.e., tribes) fought to seize wealth from other tribes or defend their own. As those who won got richer and more civilized, they typically got more decadent and weaker and were eventually taken down by stronger barbarians, who were in turn brought down by subsequent generations learning to be stronger. For example, that is the story of the rise of the Roman Empire and its defeat by the Gauls, as well as the rises and falls of most dynasties, and with them, the rises and declines of leadership approaches. These alternating ages of barbarianism and civility contributed to periods of war that took down the more advanced civilizations when the barbarians were strong and civilizations were weak.

History has repeatedly shown us that civility, when taken too far, creates weak decadence that eventually loses to strong barbarism.
The peaceful and productive, modern-day version of this is the “fighting” that happens in business with the invention of new and effective business ideas/weapons that fuel creative destruction. We love to watch these fights, which are like watching fights in the Roman Colosseum, or better yet, we love being in them. Frankly, I love being in them, and I detest impractical idealism (while I love practical idealism above all else). But the destructive version of this same impulse leads to a lack of cooperation and to fighting in politics, geopolitics, dealing with acts of nature (particularly climate change), and new technologies, and I worry a lot about it.

4. Acts of Nature (Droughts, Floods, and Pandemics)
Throughout history, acts of nature have killed more people than wars and toppled more orders than the previously mentioned forces, and an objective view of the data shows that droughts, floods, and pandemics are increasing and increasingly costly. While why this is happening is debated, that it is happening is not debatable. Nor is it debatable that humanity’s polluting and disrupting of nature, higher human population density, closer contact across the world (brought about by more international travel), and closer contact with other species due to land development (leading to animal-human disease transmissions) are all causes. We regularly see these happening in the news, most recently with the Los Angeles wildfires. It is also almost certain that these problems will get worse.

As with the other forces, this force is intertwined with the other big forces to shape what is happening. For example, the migration issues in developed countries (with immigration pressures resulting from climate changes) and the living conditions issues in underdeveloped countries (where people are struggling to adapt to droughts, floods, and other changes) are obviously worsening due to damaging acts of nature increasing, and given that nearly all nations are facing debt issues, there isn’t enough money to be spent on climate mitigation or adaptation.

5. Human Inventiveness, Most Importantly of New Technologies
There are great advances in technology, particularly in artificial intelligence, that will dramatically affect all thinking in all areas for good or for bad.
Throughout history, technological advances have raised living standards and life expectancies, have been used to generate economic and military power, and have been used in wars to create great destruction. They are closely tied to the other four forces. When technological advances are supported by good financial, economic, and social conditions, they advance more quickly than when those conditions are bad. But when their developments are supported by unsustainable credit growth, they tend to cause financial bubbles and busts. For example, the South Sea Bubble in 1720 when the Dutch Empire was beginning to decline, the Railway Mania in the 1830s and 1840s, the electricity and utilities bubbles (the “War of the Currents”) in the 1870s and 1890s, and the dot-com bubble and telecoms crash of 1990-2001 are all relevant examples of cases where great advances in major life- and productivity-improving technologies led to debt bubbles and busts, as well as big beneficial changes.

That’s enough of the Big Cycle for now—enough to help you better understand the dynamics you’ll read about in Part III as you look at the events that have unfolded since our current Big Cycle began in 1945 with the end of World War II. It will also help you understand the perspective I take when I attempt to look into the future in Part IV. But before we move on, it is worth sharing one final principle, which has the biggest impact on how the challenges that arise during the Big

Cycles are handled, namely:
The biggest and most important force is how people deal with each other.
If people deal with their problems and opportunities together rather than fight each other, they can get the best possible results. Unfortunately, while technology has evolved a lot, human nature hasn’t changed much, so this is still probably beyond the capabilities of humankind.

The views expressed in this article are mine and not necessarily Bridgewater’s.
The information provided herein is not intended to provide a sufficient basis on which to make an investment decision, and investment decisions should not be based on simulated, hypothetical, or illustrative information that has inherent limitations. Unlike an actual performance record, simulated or hypothetical results do not represent actual trading or the actual costs of management and may have under- or overcompensated for the impact of certain market risk factors. Bridgewater makes no representation that any account will or is likely to achieve returns similar to those shown. The price and value of the investments referred to in this research and the income therefrom may fluctuate. Every investment involves risk, and in volatile or uncertain market conditions, significant variations in the value or return on that investment may occur. Investments in hedge funds are complex, speculative and carry a high degree of risk, including the risk of a complete loss of an investor’s entire investment. Past performance is not a guide to future performance, future returns are not guaranteed, and a complete loss of original capital may occur. Certain transactions, including those involving leverage, futures, options, and other derivatives, give rise to substantial risk and are not suitable for all investors. Fluctuations in exchange rates could have material adverse effects on the value or price of, or income derived from, certain investments.

Bridgewater research utilizes data and information from public, private, and internal sources, including data from actual Bridgewater trades. Sources include BCA, Bloomberg Finance L.P., Bond Radar, Candeal, CBRE, Inc., CEIC Data Company Ltd., China Bull Research, Clarus Financial Technology, CLS Processing Solutions, Conference Board of Canada, Consensus Economics Inc., DataYes Inc, Dealogic, DTCC Data Repository, Ecoanalitica, Empirical Research Partners, Entis (Axioma Qontigo Simcorp), EPFR Global, Eurasia Group, Evercore ISI, FactSet Research Systems, Fastmarkets Global Limited, the Financial Times Limited, FINRA, GaveKal Research Ltd., Global Financial Data, GlobalSource Partners, Harvard Business Review, Haver Analytics, Inc., Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), the Investment Funds Institute of Canada, ICE Derived Data (UK), Investment Company Institute, International Institute of Finance, JP Morgan, JSTA Advisors, M Science LLC, MarketAxess, Medley Global Advisors (Energy Aspects Corp), Metals Focus Ltd, Moody’s ESG Solutions, MSCI, Inc., National Bureau of Economic Research, Neudata, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Pensions & Investments Research Center, Refinitiv, Rhodium Group, RP Data, Rubinson Research, Rystad Energy, S&P Global Market Intelligence, Scientific Infra/EDHEC, Sentix GmbH, Shanghai Metals Market, Shanghai Wind Information, Smart Insider Ltd., Sustainalytics, Swaps Monitor, Tradeweb, United Nations, US Department of Commerce, Verisk Maplecroft, Visible Alpha, Wells Bay, Wind Financial Information LLC, Wood Mackenzie Limited, World Bureau of Metal Statistics, World Economic Forum, and YieldBook. While we consider information from external sources to be reliable, we do not assume responsibility for its accuracy.

This information is not directed at or intended for distribution to or use by any person or entity located in any jurisdiction where such distribution, publication, availability, or use would be contrary to applicable law or regulation, or which would subject Bridgewater to any registration or licensing requirements within such jurisdiction. No part of this material may be (i) copied, photocopied, or duplicated in any form by any means or (ii) redistributed without the prior written consent of Bridgewater Associates, LP.

[1] Additionally, there is the demographic force that will certainly lead to a lot of old people who don’t work and will be expensive to support (because at that stage in their lives, their healthcare costs will be high), a shrinking workforce in developed countries, large increases in population in less developed countries, and only a small percentage of the people being truly productive.
[2] I explained these more completely in Chapter 5, “The Big Cycle of Internal Order and Disorder,” of Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order.
Comments

1. https://static.licdn.com/aero-v1/sc/...af8i7f86vd1ftthttps://static.licdn.com/aero-v1/sc/...9qepsh4nc28zushttps://static.licdn.com/aero-v1/sc/...e8epox8rdcds221,083

The Moral Decay Of Debt


https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b.../picture-5.jpg
by Tyler Durden

Thursday, Sep 18, 2025 - 03:25 PM
Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Debt has moral implications, and in denying this, we're choosing a rendezvous with Nemesis

Let's start with a household analogy. A married couple have four fine children, and since expenses are higher than income, they borrow money in their children's names to fund their lifestyle and investments. Once the offspring reach 18 years of age, the debt their parents borrowed is theirs to service.
The offspring didn't get a say in how much money was borrowed or how it was spent, but the debt is now theirs to service (i.e. pay the interest) for their entire lifetimes, as the debt is simply too large to pay off with conventional wages.

The economy changed, and since wages don't go as far and costs keep rising, the four offspring borrow in their own children's names to afford the basics of a middle-class life.

The parents are now comfortably retired, drawing on their investments bought with borrowed money. The two generations behind them are now debt-serfs who funded their own lifestyles by borrowing even more money. Since the kind of house their parents bought for 3-times-income is now 6-times-income, the debt required to own a house and fund what is considered the minimum middle-class entitlements is multiples of their parents' borrowing.

Is anyone willing to call this offloading of ever-expanding debt onto future generations wrong, as in morally wrong, or have we lost the vocabulary and ability to declare the offloading of debt as morally disgraceful, a line that should never have been crossed?

Debt that cannot be extinguished and that is offloaded onto future generations is a manifestation of moral decay, a decay of the moral foundations of the economy and society that is terminal.

So here we are, cheering on a big reduction in the Fed Funds Rate to encourage an expansion of debt, as more debt means more spending, and that means more taxes and corporate profits. The manipulation of interest rates and the financial machinery to encourage more debt is viewed as bloodless, absolutely devoid of moral judgment: when it comes to "growth" of asset prices, spending, taxes and profits, there is no wrong, as "growth" is the only good anyone cares about.

This is the perfection of moral decay. Offloading debt onto future generations--money borrowed to prop up a self-serving status quo that focused on expediencies, not future consequences--and then telling the debt-enslaved generations, "we'll inflate away the debt, and your wages will buy less and less, but no worries, we'll just borrow more to pay the interest due"--how is this not morally repulsive?

Here is the Federal debt as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This is a better measure of consequences, for it illustrates that the Federal government's ability to counter a deep recession by borrowing and spending trillions of dollars is now limited by extreme debt levels.


https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=rPLUgGul


Those who track the history of government debt generally draw the red-line at 100% of GDP, so 120% is already deep in the danger zone. History is rather decisive: any attempt to add trillions in additional debt at these levels has zero chance of working as intended, i.e. a pain-free way to boost "growth."

Note the debt-to-GDP ratio actually declined during both the stagflationary 1970s and the 1990s Internet boom. In both eras, the economy was still largely organic, i.e. unmanipulated enough that natural forces (supply, demand, risk aversion, writedowns of bad debt, etc.) could work through excesses of speculation and debt and restore not just balance sheets but legitimacy.

The Federal Reserve no longer trusted the system's self-correcting capacity and leaped into full-blown manipulation of financial and mortgage markets in 2008-09. The debt-to-GDP ratio soared from 60% to 100% in the post-Global Financial Crisis (GFC) "save" of the Federal Reserve, which inflated the money supply and pushed ZIRP (zero interest rate policy) and QE (quantitative easing) to boost borrowing.

As a result, private-sector borrowing also skyrocketed. Now that households and enterprises have borrowed up to their capacity to service debt, their ability to "borrow their way to prosperity" is also constrained.

Here is the total debt, public and private (TCMDO). In Q2 1975, total debt was $2.5 trillion. If this had tracked inflation, it would have reached $15 trillion by Q2 2025. ($1 in Q2 1975 is $6 in Q2 2025.) (BLS Inflation Calculator)


https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=nAkYpY5k


Let's say that debt can double the rate of inflation if it's being invested productively. That would put today's total debt at $30 trillion.
But total debt isn't close to $30 trillion; it's $104 trillion and climbing, suggesting 70+ trillion is "excess debt." As for all this borrowed money being invested productively--given "waste is growth" planned obsolescence and rampant asset appreciation/speculation, it seems obvious that most of this borrowed money was consumed by ephemeral products and services or squandered chasing asset bubbles.

Debt has implicit moral implications, and in denying this, we're choosing a rendezvous with Nemesis--a rendezvous with Destiny that will be arranged by Nemesis, not the Federal Reserve or the Treasury.

Yes, debt can be productive, but it can also be exploitive, and therein lies the moral implications. Debt can never be amoral or bloodless; its moral nature cannot be extinguished. We appear to be destined to discover this truth the hard way.

* * *

Check out my new book, Ultra-Processed Life and my updated Books and Films. Become a $3/3/month patron of my work via patreon.com. Subscribe to my Substack for free

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitic...ng-people-hate

How The Left Programmed Young People To Hate

https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b.../picture-5.jpg

by Tyler Durden
Tuesday, September 16, 2025 - 04:20 PM

Authored by David Betz and Michael Rainsborough via The Daily Skeptic,

In the spring of 1975, the Red Army Faction, more popularly known as the Baader-Meinhof gang, stormed the West German Embassy in Stockholm and murdered two of its staff before setting the building ablaze. In its aftermath, a British tabloid printed a headline whose bluntness masked its profundity: ‘So, Who’s Sick?‘

It was less a headline than a rhetorical diagnosis, reflecting the bewilderment at these seemingly senseless acts of terror. Was it the bourgeois world condemned as corrupt by these self-styled revolutionaries, or was it the revolutionaries themselves, who in their righteous fervour appeared possessed by demons?

The question was never one that admitted an easy answer in that moment, and it remains just as piercing in ours. For when, half a century later, Charlie Kirk was struck down in the midst of civic debate, and when voices on the ‘progressive’ Left respond not with horror but with unholy glee, we are forced once again to confront the same ambiguity.
https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=qwuHvDyz

Who is diseased? Who is truly sick? The question still hangs in the air, accusing its audience as much as its subjects.

The Eclipse of Compassion
The murder of Charlie Kirk was barbarous enough, but what followed was more chilling still. Social media, that great theatre of contemporary sentiment, resounded with elation rather than grief. Where the natural response should have been mourning and sober reflection, there was instead celebration, applause, even exultation.

The old pieties of compassion and human dignity were trampled beneath a chorus of malevolence.
If we return to 1975, we can discern that the spectacle is hardly without precedent. The chronicler of the Red Army Faction’s rise and fall, Stefan Aust, described the psychosis that fuelled its violence as the Baader-Meinhof Complex: a toxic brew of revolutionary ideology, middle-class angst and personality cultism, in which politics fused with pathology. Terror and bloodshed were the logical expression of this worldview.

Jillian Becker, in her study of the same phenomenon published in 1977, placed the emergence of the Baader-Meinhof gang within an extended historical frame, tracing how West Germany’s post-war radicals were the children of those who had lived through the Third Reich — parents whose relationship with Nazism was often ambivalent, sometimes unrepentant. Their children judged them guilty of complicity or cowardice. In turn, they felt they had no tradition to receive let alone uphold, no cultural authority to embrace as their own. Becker memorably described them as Hitler’s Children, who expressed their alienation in violence against the very society that had given them life and often prosperity.

The parallels with today are clear. The obnoxious, jeering, bratty mobs on social media and their elevation of spite into virtue: these too are not simply political stances but symptoms of generational breakdown. Becker’s ‘lost children’ of post-war Germany were orphaned by the silence and ambiguities of their parents’ Nazi past. Today’s youth, though shaped by different conditions, are estranged in an analogous way — heirs to a liberal order that preached emancipation but delivered only deracination.

Children of the Void
Becker’s account of Germany’s post-war radicals was of a generation forsaken by history — children who, faced with no inheritance they could accept without shame, turned their fury against the civilization that had produced them. That revolt finds its echo 50 years later.

The YouTube channel Richard The Fourth, one of the few voices to offer measured and calm reflections on our troubled times, spoke in similar terms of those TikTokkers, X users and BlueSkyers who rejoiced in Charlie Kirk’s murder. “Who are these lost souls? Where did they come from?” he asked. They were, he suggested, “the lost children of the boomer generation”, alienated by the failures of a secular progressivism that promised transcendence through empathy and emancipation from tradition, but in the end gifted them only spiritual vacuity.

These people are not monsters by nature; they are the offspring of a culture that extolled compassion while detaching it from justice, that proclaimed liberation even as it erased the sources of meaning. The progeny of flower power have become the children of a void, and in that void, savagery takes root.

The historical parallels, then as now, are evident: youth cut adrift from their cultural moorings find themselves drawn less to renewal than to destruction. Then as now, dislocation breeds violence and scorn rather than reflection. Becker’s Hitler’s Children and Richard’s “lost souls” are separated by time and circumstance yet bound together by the same pattern: a society that cannot pass down its traditions to its successors is liable to be repudiated by them.

If Aust diagnosed the Baader-Meinhof Complex and Becker revealed the deeper dereliction that sustained it, Richard The Fourth’s reflections illuminate the pathology of our own time. The cheering at murder and the inversion of empathy into its opposite are the symptoms of a Liberal Nihilism Complex: a syndrome in which the promises of modernity collapse into petulance and hostility, leaving only a cohort of ‘feral goblins’, mocking and howling into the abyss.

Creating the Land of Hatred
Contemporary academics, especially in the social sciences, have little of real value to offer humanity, but the few decent ones — those who write for this outlet, of course — still have the capacity to bring depth and perspective to some of our present predicaments.

We are neither spiritualists nor psychologists and cannot claim to have a greater window into the minds of these lost souls than anyone else. What we can offer, though, is decades of engagement with the study of strategic conduct: the motives and means of those who resort to violence in pursuit of political ends. And it is here that we wish to advance a thesis that goes further than viewing the collapse of empathy as an unfortunate by-product of social confusion.

What we are witnessing is not a mishap. Whatever the spiritual degradation and cultural dispossession of these young minds, they are, nevertheless, instruments of history. The way they have been psychologically programmed is no quirk of fate; it has been done with intent. They have been conditioned for a purpose.

To explain this means walking backward into history. We could begin with the French Revolution, but for simplicity’s sake let us start a decade before 1975; in 1966, when Mao Zedong unleashed the Cultural Revolution in China, mobilizing youth against their elders, students against teachers, children against parents. He did not stumble into chaos; he conjured it — because chaos was useful.

In Wild Swans, Jung Chang’s memoir of her family’s turmoil during the Cultural Revolution, she recounts that Mao ruled by getting people to despise one another. He understood the ugliest human instincts — envy and resentment — and knew how to weaponize them. “By nourishing the worst in people, Mao created a moral wasteland, a land of hatred.”

What Jung Chang described was not an incidental consequence of revolutionary excess but the very heart of its method: hatred deliberately sown, division systematically engineered, cruelty unleashed as a political instrument.

The lesson travelled westward. French intellectuals, jaded by the ossified torpor of Soviet communism, visited China and found in Mao’s carnival of destruction a perverse vitality. They imported his ideas, transmuting them into the currency of post-structuralist thought, which in turn shaped the practice of the Baader-Meinhof gang and others like them. From there, it was but a short step to their entrenchment on Anglo-American campuses.

In the United States, groups that emerged from 1960s student radicalism, such as the Weather Underground, adopted similar tactics. Their manifesto, Prairie Fire (1974), named after Mao’s dictum that a single spark can ignite a conflagration, urged radicals to exploit racial and class divisions precisely because such divisions could be rendered unbridgeable.

Prairie Fire, which is still an influential text on the American radical Left, is a handbook for permanent confrontation. Its pages bristle with the conviction that America’s prosperity, its institutions, and its constitutional liberties are all obstacles to be torn down. It demanded escalation over reconciliation — more division, deeper fractures, sharper antagonisms. For its authors, harmony was stasis, and stasis was defeat. Hatred was no passing symptom; it was the weapon itself.

This was not a politics of justice but of immolation. Harmony was the enemy; hatred was the accelerant.

The Long March into the Academy
The campaigns of violence waged by groups such as the Weather Underground and the Baader-Meinhof gang were eventually broken. In the latter’s case, their downfall was signalled by the successful storming of a hijacked Lufthansa jet in Mogadishu in October 1977 by German GSG9 Special Forces, assisted by the SAS, which led to the suicide of the first generation of leaders in Stammheim Prison. After these reversals, many radicals withdrew to safer ground: the universities. There, sheltered by tenure and steeped in jargon, they recast their struggle into something less visible but more enduring.

What could no longer be pursued through bombs and bullets was now carried forward in the idiom of theory. Critical theory, post-colonialism, and gender studies all served the same end. Established systems of knowledge and reasoning were methodically dismantled, and in their stead rose the new orthodoxy of ‘social justice’. In this dispensation, social justice meant rancour without limit. The effort of the intellect was no longer a quest for truth. Instead, it was to be redirected into the calculated manufacture of animosity.

Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe set out this programme with striking clarity in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985). Their project was never the reconciliation of differences. It was, rather, in their words, “to extend social conflictuality to a wide range of areas” to generate “new antagonisms”, arising out of “highly diverse struggles: urban, ecological, anti-authoritarian, anti-institutional, feminist, anti-racist, ethnic, regional, or that of sexual minorities”. The aim was less to close fissures in the body politic than to ensure they remained open wounds. The scholarly mind was recast: no longer to think and analyze, let alone to seek concord, but to irritate and inflame.

What they offered was more than theory; it was revolutionary strategy re-clothed in academic garb. Laclau and Mouffe made plain that the task of progressive politics was to create new fronts of enmity, new identities defined not by their substance but by their opposition — a creed of victims and oppressors, endlessly proliferating, endlessly unreconciled. In their schema, the intention was never to knit society together into an equilibrium, only to drive it into perpetual dissonance.

Nor was this movement hidden, or without its early critics. Allan Bloom in The Closing of the American Mind (1987) saw where it was all leading. He warned that the university was ceasing to be the guardian of truth and culture. Instead, relativism was being allowed to erode tradition, while grievance displaced learning. He foresaw the battlelines forming long before the wider culture wars broke out.

In the decades that followed, the academy was unmade: from bastions of learning into factories of disaffection. The lecture hall, once devoted to dispassionate inquiry, became a place where conflict and division were intentionally stirred.

Engineering Discord
The end of the Cold War gave the enterprise added impetus. With the supposed ‘end of history’, liberal triumphalism licensed universities and institutions to reinvent themselves as moral tribunals. Politics was recast as ethics, and ethics as indictment.

‘Diversity’, ‘equity’ and ‘inclusion’ became less articles of faith than a set of tactics — no longer instruments of compromise but of humiliation, tools by which resentment was stoked and sustained. Generations of students have since been trained to denounce rather than to reason, to persecute rather than to persuade. This is Mao’s Red Guards reconstituted for a digital age: armies of accusation, armed less with AK-47s than with hashtags and HR manuals.

Those who dismiss the ‘culture wars’ as a distraction misunderstand the nature of conflict in our time. The sociologist James Davison Hunter, who coined the phrase three decades ago, cautioned that when disputes cease to be arguments within a shared reality and instead become clashes over what reality itself is, rapprochement is no longer possible. At that point, the logic of civic debate and constitutional politics gives way to the logic of force.

To see all this as a tragic misfortune is deeply mistaken. What has emerged is not spontaneous disorder but a carefully tended culture of antipathy — fertilized by theory, irrigated by resentful passions and sustained by bureaucracies whose survival depends on perpetual conflict.

The Fruits of Permanent War
The harvest is plain to see — in the mayhem and murder on a Utah campus, in the digital mobs that revel and rage across social media, and in a public discourse poisoned by denunciation, where opponents are cast as existential threats — Nazis, fascists, and every other heresy of the age — solely for the crime of disagreement. In such a climate, the very possibility of civil discourse dissolves, leaving only the grammar of hatred.

It is the very condition Jung Chang described: a polity increasingly characterized by malice, nurturing the worst in its citizens, sustained by leaders who profit from fracture.

To reiterate, this is not collateral damage. It is the design. A fractured society is a pliable society. The more its members despise one another, the easier it is for elites to consolidate power under the guise of adjudicating conflicting rights-claims. A peaceful society cannot be radicalized. A society at war with itself can be subverted from within.

Here we confront the image of our times: young people clapping bloodshed, institutions that tremble before mobs, elites that fan flames for advantage. This is no vision of reform. No accommodation of political differences. It is the shadow of perpetual strife — the deliberate cultivation of a land of hatred.

The Terminal Condition
Thus, the question of 1975 — “Who’s sick?” — has found its answer. It is no longer only the young who jeer at murder, though they remain responsible for their choices. Yet their conduct reflects more than personal failing. It is the outcome of a society that abandoned its traditions, hollowed out its own authority and left its youth open to manipulation by those who profit from discord. Individuals may bear the guilt, but the culture that fashioned them must also stand condemned.

The signs of decay are no longer hidden. It is the parable of the Emperor’s New Clothes: the pretense sustained only so long as no one dares to speak what all can see. What we are living through is an epidemic of noticing — a slow, reluctant recognition that the social fabric is threadbare and that the fractures are premeditated, not incidental.

David Horowitz, who as editor of the radical 1960s periodical Ramparts once marched in the ranks of the radical Left before renouncing it, understood these dynamics better than most. He argued that the upheavals of the era were not motivated by the “longing for justice”. It was “not a quest for peace but a call to arms. It is war that feeds the true radical passions, which are not altruism or love, but nihilism and hate.” The reality of their political programme, he lamented, “entails only permanent war, that observes no truth and respects no law, and whose aim is to destroy the only world we know”.

* * *

David Betz is Professor of War in the Modern World at King’s College London. Michael Rainsborough is a former Head of the Department of War Studies, King’s College London.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

NOTE: EDITED BY BWM USING SOFTWARE CALLED GRAMMARLY.

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/logo322.jpg
World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily
"The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow."






What You Aren’t Being Told About The World You Live In

How The “Conspiracy Theory” Label Was Conceived To Derail The Truth Movement

How Covert American Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive and Destroy Reputations



September 19, 2025

Saint Zelensky Watches Trump Lament “Putin Let Me Down” And Warn “Netanyahu Is Fu-king Me”
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

A compelling new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting President Donald Trump claimed yesterday that he ended seven wars, says he then lamented: “The one that I thought would be the easiest to end was because of my relationship with President Putin...But he’s let me down...He’s really let me down”—a lament joined by the Wall Street Journal warningly revealing: “President Donald Trump recently told top aides that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is fucking me”.

Also yesterday, this report notes, President Trump declared it is “not the right time” for him to call for a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine—a declaration joined with the news: “The United States has exercised its veto power to block a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip”.

Though President Trump could immediately end two wars by cutting off all weapons to Ukraine and Israel, this report continues, American military analysts just assessed: “From Northern Kharkov to Southern Kherson, Russian pressure is relentless, and Kiev’s defenses are barely holding...The Russia-Ukraine peace talks are all but dead, and the war continues, brutal as ever, to its inevitable end – capitulation or annihilation of Ukraine”—an assessment joined with the news today: “Hamas has warned Israel that pushing further into Gaza City will turn it into a “graveyard”, as six Israeli soldiers were killed in separate incidents amid the ongoing Israeli ground invasion in the area”.

Following President Trump issuing an ultimatum to all NATO countries to stop buying Russian oil if they want Washington to tighten sanctions on Moscow, this report details, these NATO countries openly proclaimed they would defy it—an open defiance by NATO countries of President Trump joined by the International Energy Agency (IEA) warning: “The world needs to spend some $540 billion a year looking for oil and gas to maintain current output by 2050 as the pace of declines in existing fields increases...While global spending is likely to hit $570 billion this year — enough to keep production at current levels if sustained — the amount would be down slightly from 2024”.

While watching President Trump continue to fuel wars in Ukraine and Israel that are able to upend global energy markets, this report notes, a fearful Saudi Arabia broke away from the United States yesterday and signed a mutual defense pact with nuclear weapons armed Pakistan—an unexpected move joined by top Kremlin geopolitical expert Timoffey Bordachev most factually observing:
Whether we like it or not, the history of international politics is a near-continuous chain of violence between states.

Rarely has this violence been aimed at total conquest or permanent subjugation. More often it reflects a state’s instinct for survival – the attempt to build a system where security does not depend solely on self-defense, but on recognition by others. That logic is especially clear when outside protection begins to fade.
For decades, the United States has provided such protection, shaping a world in which some states survived not because of their own balance with neighbors, but because Washington made their survival a strategic interest.

Today, however, America’s reach is shrinking. Even its most privileged allies must consider unfamiliar ways of surviving in hostile regions.

The results may be unpredictable, but the trend is inevitable.
As a troubled world staring into the abyss stills reels over the brutal trans-leftist assassination of Christian martyr Charlie Kirk, this report concludes, yesterday it saw his grieving widow Erika Kirk appointed as the new CEO and Board Chairman of Turning Point USA—an appointment that followed top Ukrainian lawmaker Artem Dmitruk beyond shockingly revealing about unelected Ukraine Dictator Vladimir Zelensky: “I’m saying this with full responsibility: Zelensky has a hand in the attempt on Trump’s life and in the assassination of Charlie Kirk - both ideologically and practically”—but now here to watch over the troubled world is Saint Zelensky, as it was just revealed: “The September issue of New Voice of Ukraine magazine carried a photo-shopped image of Zelensky, his chief of staff Andrey Yermak, and adviser Dmitry Litvin dressed in white robes with halos above their heads and large white wings extending behind them”.

[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]




https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/zsu21.png

September 19, 2025 EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked 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 many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human being’s right to know the truth. Due to our mission’s 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.]

Trump Vows Use Of “Harsh Measures” To Free Innocent Patriot Tortured In “Feral City” State

Trump Launches Historic “Feral City” Blitzkrieg To Decide Fate Of America

Return To Main Page

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

Message from the Rabbi
 
Dear Friends,
Rosh Hashanah includes three stages of divine service, expressing three levels of attachment to Hashem.

1. The bond created by doing mitzvot. A Jew is, so to speak, an existence separate from Hashem, and fulfillment of mitzvot is what forms and creates the bond between them. This bond is expressed in the mitzvah of the day — blowing the shofar.

2. An inner bond, not dependent on mitzvot. This level is expressed in repentance: even a sinner feels regret and repents. However, even this level, which transcends the bond created by mitzvot, is nevertheless connected to them. A person regrets lapses in mitzvah observance, and resolves to correct precisely that. Since this resolve is linked to mitzvot, it involves a person, a separate existence, bonding to Hashem through mitzvot.

3. The Zohar states that “The Jewish people and Hashem are entirely one”; i.e., that a Jew and Hashem are essentially the same entity, so to speak. This level of unity is expressed through the coronation of Hashem. The bond through mitzvot and the one through repentance are only created after the coronation. Only then is general obedience to the King possible (and repentance for its absence). However, before the coronation (before the service of “Proclaim me a King over you”), what brings a Jew to feel the need for Hashem’s Kingship, so that he asks Hashem to accept the coronation and accept him as a servant? The answer is that a Jew is in essence one with the Creator, and so he cannot be without his King.

Shabbat shalom & Ketiva vehatima tova,

Rabbi Mendel Raskin

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/logo322.jpg

World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily
"The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow."



What You Aren’t Being Told About The World You Live In

How The “Conspiracy Theory” Label Was Conceived To Derail The Truth Movement

How Covert American Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive and Destroy Reputations



September 20, 2025

Trump Faces World War III As Armed American Socialists Proclaim “The Revolution Is Here”
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

A forewarning new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting President Putin revealed yesterday: “Russia’s military industry has enjoyed remarkable growth over the past two years...For certain types of weapons and some products, our production has increased not by a few percentage points, but almost 30-fold”, says this revelation was followed by President Donald Trump proclaiming about the Russia-Ukraine conflict: “We are actually making money on that war”—and was a proclamation joined by NATO-American Ambassador Matthew Whitaker declaring: “President Trump is going to continue to find the leverage and to find the conditions where he can bring both sides and mediate a resolution, but he’s not going to set the conditions...Both sides are going to have to agree to a peace deal”.

Contributing to the remarkable growth of the Russian military industrial complex, this report notes, Bloomberg revealed: “Indian refiners intend to continue purchasing Russian crude to meet rising fuel demand, even as New Delhi restarts trade talks with the US for a bilateral deal”—a revelation joined by the German Economic Institute announcing: “EU member states imported $10.2 billion worth of Russian goods in the first three months of 2025 alone”.
The EU member states graciously contributing billions-of-dollars to support the Russian military industrial complex, this report continues, completely surround the Russian enclave Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea—Russian fighter jets make daily flights between the mainland and Kaliningrad over the Baltic Sea, but yesterday, Estonia hysterically invoked Article 4 of the NATO Treaty claiming this daily air patrol violated their airspace for 12 minutes—an hysterical claim quickly followed by the Ministry of Defense (MoD) most factually announcing: “During the flight, the Russian aircraft did not deviate from the agreed-upon air route and did not violate Estonian airspace...The aircraft's flight route lay over neutral waters of the Baltic Sea, more than three kilometers from Vaindloo Island”.

On 9 September, this report details, Poland hysterically invoked Article 4 of the NATO Treaty claiming that Russian drones entered their nation—it was quickly observed: “The incident was obviously very strange, because, while a few errant Russian drones had maybe fallen over other countries here and there—after likely being jammed off their course—this has never happened in such a large scale...This heavily suggests something very fishy, in the way of either a false flag or a coordinated campaign...There were several signs pointing to the ‘false flag’ explanation, for instance a photo of a Russian drone that landed on a Polish “chicken coop” that shows the drone taped together with literal duct tape”— and the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita most factually revealed: “A house in Poland that was damaged during a Russian drone incursion was hit not by drone debris, but by an air-to-air missile fired from an F-16 fighter jet”.

The invoking of Article 4 of the NATO Treaty against Russia twice during the past fortnight, this report notes, is a socialist fake news tactic known as “narrative building”, that is designed to hide the truth while inflaming violence against a specific target—another example being the socialist Democrat Party declaring a “new five-alarm fire” over the ouster of leftist late-night host Jimmy Kimmel—is a fake news narrative that shifts attention away from brutally assassinated Christian martyr Charlie Kirk to Kimmel, who openly disparaged the death of Kirk—and it was shockingly revealed: “In a vote that exposed the dark side of the majority of Democrats, the House on Friday passed a resolution honoring slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk and rejecting the political violence of recent years...The vote was 310-58, with 95 Democrats joining all 215 Republicans in voting yes on the nonbinding resolution...The 58 no votes all came from Democrats, but another 38 Democrats voted present (would not take an open side) and another 22 Democrats did not vote...In other words, 118 Democrats in Congress refused to support the resolution”.

As President Trump faces the fake news socialist narrative clamoring for World War III, this report concludes, he also faces growing leftists protests caused by the fake news socialist narrative branding him a fascist, and it was just warned: “The Socialist Rifle Association has 52 local chapters across 33 U.S. states, and claims to have 10,000 members...Considering they are the armed wing of the anti-American revolution, people should be more concerned about what is going on with the growing militant left...Earlier this year, the Democratic Socialist of America held a meeting to debate merging with the SRA, and afterward, many DSA members went online to voice their opinions about the decision not to do it...Regardless, the discourse was still highly alarming...Some DSA members tweeted that the revolution is here”.

[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]




https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/rdr21.png

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/rdr23.png

https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/rdr22.png

September 20, 2025 EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked 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 many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human being’s right to know the truth. Due to our mission’s 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.]

Trump Vows Use Of “Harsh Measures” To Free Innocent Patriot Tortured In “Feral City” State

Trump Launches Historic “Feral City” Blitzkrieg To Decide Fate Of America

Return To Main Page

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...nore-red-flags

https://www.zerohedge.com/images/ico...Icon_White.png

https://www.zerohedge.com/images/icons/print-icon.svg
Great Leaders Don't Ignore Red Flags


https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b.../picture-5.jpg
by Tyler Durden
Saturday, September 20, 2025 - 03:10 PM
Authored by Glennys Hyland via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Great leaders are quick to recognize signs and warnings that indicate a potential toxic dynamic. They don’t ignore behaviours that cause uneasy and uncomfortable feelings. Lying, controlling attitudes, self-seeking, manipulation, and blaming others instead of taking responsibility are all strong signs or warnings that need immediate correction to prevent a dangerous and painful outcome in your corporation, ministry, or business.



https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-pu...?itok=vlfmxKoi
Portrait of a male CEO in a big corner office. Klaus Vedfelt/Getty Images

Here are some signs and behaviours to take seriously.
Lack of honesty

Do not ignore a lack of honesty. Even a small, tiny lie requires immediate correction. Exposing lies will help others understand that your organization stands and works in a deception-free zone. This approach strengthens relationships, builds trust, and instills confidence among team members.

Chaos
Organization, order, and structure are essential. A chaotic workplace, where individuals pull in different directions without a clear workflow or instructions, can drain the team’s energy. Such disorder creates anxiety and unrest, impacting both mind and body—what begins in the head eventually affects the entire self.
Effective leaders prioritize order and neatness, fostering a peaceful environment that allows their teams to thrive. They embrace a teachable spirit, consistently seeking to learn and grow. Their character goes beyond surface-level impressions, evident in their demeanour, the atmosphere they cultivate, and, most importantly, their words and actions.

Absence
Great leaders understand the value of being present. They actively identify and address harmful behaviours that create discomfort, such as manipulation, controlling attitudes, gossip that damages reputations, or unwholesome conversations.

These leaders demonstrate love for their vision and workplace through their actions—they show up on time, bring enthusiasm, express gratitude, and inspire their team members to share in that passion. By appreciating, motivating, and encouraging their teams, they cultivate a culture of commitment and shared purpose, amplifying the love for the vision.

Self-Seeking
Leaders must remain focused and align every action with the vision. Losing focus can lead to self-serving agendas that misuse the vision and platform for personal gain.

Don’t fall into the trap of being caught in your own net. Straying from the core purpose of the organization—be it a corporation, ministry, or business—creates space for distractions to take center stage, resulting in chaos and confusion. This shift can alter the direction and undermine the purpose. Prioritize exalting the mission above the visionary to successfully achieve the vision.

Favouritism in Rules and Regulations
Know every rule, regulation, and policy—and apply them consistently, including to yourself. Stay informed about team dynamics, changes, and accommodations.
Favouritism, where rules are enforced for some members but not others, breeds inconsistency and results in a dysfunctional team. Ensure fairness by holding everyone accountable equally. Be consistent. Be prepared. Be honest. Lead by example by adhering to the rules you establish.

Accountability
Great leaders embrace accountability and transparency, taking full ownership of their actions, whether positive or negative.
They accept responsibility without shifting blame or offering excuses, even when their positions are on the line. With humility, they prioritize others above themselves, seek wise counsel, and strive to act justly. When challenges arise, they take the time to investigate thoroughly and hold everyone, including fellow leaders, accountable.

They understand that every situation has two sides and ensure both perspectives are heard. Relying solely on one person’s account—especially when that individual holds a higher position or provides a preferred narrative—can lead to devastating consequences for the organization, ministry, or business.

Truth, no matter how painful, is essential for freedom and resolution. Justice is the key to bringing closure and restoring balance in every scenario. Great leaders recognize that mistakes happen and use them as learning opportunities. They act quickly to correct injustices and make amends with all parties involved. Above all, they embody the principle: Treat others as you would like to be treated.

Bad Behaviors
Wise leaders identify and address lies, manipulation, and controlling behaviours. They reject unwholesome language and actions that make team members feel uncomfortable or intimidated by misuse of power. While things may seem fine on the surface in these cases, leaders understand that, deep down, many team members may be silently hurting, choosing to endure for the sake of their dedication to the vision. Truly great leaders prioritize the well-being of their team, fostering fairness and respect. They actively encourage honesty and genuine unity, creating an environment where everyone feels valued and heard.

Prevent Dangerous Outcomes
Addressing wrongdoing and taking immediate corrective action are essential for building a healthy, successful team.
Covering up the truth by removing the team member who felt uncomfortable is a perilous path for any organization. These behaviours cannot be ignored. Leaders must remain vigilant, as appearances can be deceiving—what seems fine from the surface or from your point of view may not reflect the reality.
Invest in fostering healthy relationships. Engage with your team, listen to their concerns, and ask thoughtful questions. Take every possible step to prevent harmful and painful outcomes for your organization, ministry, or business.

A leader without accountability—or with accountability that is too distant—is like a country without border protection: they can come and go freely, leaving those under their care vulnerable and insecure. This lack of accountability is dangerous for those within their responsibility.
Effective leaders always have someone to whom they can be accountable—someone who encourages them when they excel and gently corrects them when they fall. Accountability is essential for growth and trust. Embrace it.

The Epoch Times copyright 2025. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

1. Main
2. News

With the Treasury General Account refill almost done, ‘up only can resume’: Arthur Hayes
September 20, 2025


by Christina Comben
for CryptoSlate


https://cryptoslate.com/wp-content/u...09/up-only.jpg
Crypto markets have been somewhat muted as the U.S. Treasury drained liquidity from the system. But as it approaches completing its Treasury General Account (TGA) refill, something the former BitMEX CEO, Arthur Hayes, called a “liquidity drain,” the “up only” trajectory can get back on track.

The TGA is basically the government’s checking account at the Federal Reserve. When the TGA needs refilling, the Treasury issues new debt, effectively pulling liquidity out of the broader financial system.

In 2025, the Treasury set a refill target of $850 billion. Hitting that mark meant soaking up hundreds of billions in cash by selling Treasury Bills and bonds; cash that otherwise might have pumped up stock and crypto markets instead.

When the government’s checking account gets topped off, that money sits on the sidelines, unavailable for investors, and market liquidity contracts.

Did the TGA refill cause markets to stall?

Yes, at least in part. The TGA refill created a temporary liquidity vacuum. Bitcoin fell to around $113,500 after trading above $124,000 earlier in the year. The Nasdaq dropped roughly 1.4% as well. This drain synchronized with a pullback across most risk assets, not because of a dramatic change in fundamentals, but simply less cash sloshing around for speculation.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve announced its first rate cut of 2025, lowering the Fed funds rate to a range of 4.00%-4.25%. Markets expect at least two more cuts before year’s end.

This marks a clear shift away from two years of tightening, and historically, lower rates have been strong fuel for risk assets like stocks and crypto.
The Fed pointed to a slowing labour market and weakening economic data as key reasons for the cut, signalling that policy is moving to support growth again, even if inflation isn’t fully conquered yet.

The trillion-dollar firehose for crypto
Perhaps the biggest reason for the “up only” thesis: capital is waiting. Money market funds have swelled to a record $7.5 trillion as of mid-September 2025; money that’s been earning yield in low-risk settings but could be unleashed into stocks, bonds, or crypto as soon as risk appetites return.
When the liquidity tide turns, as it now appears to be doing, that cash has the potential to create a ferocious rally.

With the TGA refill largely complete, the liquidity drain is set to reverse. Combine this with a friendlier Federal Reserve and trillions of dollars parked on the sidelines ready to move, and the stage is set for new risk-on momentum.

The liquidity withdrawal is ending, the rate cut cycle has begun, and the market’s vast cash pile is primed to chase yield and upside once more. Or as Hayes puts it, “up only can resume.”

The post With the Treasury General Account refill almost done, ‘up only can resume’: Arthur Hayes appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Read the article at CryptoSlate


https://coingape.com/wp-content/uplo...-US-CPI-1.webp


WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

Morgan Stanley’s Chief Investment Officer, Mike Wilson, has upended conventional wisdom surrounding the classic 60/40 portfolio, advocating instead for a 60/20/20 mix. Gold now joins bonds as a direct allocation for investors seeking resilience in a time of inflation and market volatility.

A new framework from Morgan Stanley
Instead of relying solely on bonds to offset equity risk, Morgan Stanley recommends a 60/20/20 model that shifts 20% of the portfolio into gold, positioning it as a superior inflation hedge over Treasuries and suggesting shorter-duration bonds to optimize rolling returns. Wilson explained:
“Gold is now the asset that demonstrates resilience, surpassing Treasuries. High-quality stocks and gold serve as the most effective hedges.”

This marks a break from tradition, as gold outperformed bonds as the classic diversifier for equity portfolios over the last two decades.
There has been a global uptick in gold purchases lately, with El Salvador, the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), and Poland all ramping up purchases to historic levels, and central bankers expecting to buy more gold.

For investors, this means revisiting assumptions about risk protection. Gold’s safe-haven profile and independence from real rates have converted it into a portfolio mainstay.

Morgan Stanley acknowledges that U.S. equities offer “historically low upside” over Treasuries, while long-term bonds are under pressure from rising yields and tight credit spreads.

Implications for investors
For investors, the new split offers greater protection against inflation and geopolitical risk, which is critical as central banks face supply-side dilemmas and surging deficits.

For the U.S. Treasury, Morgan Stanley’s revised portfolio falls like rain on a picnic, as macroeconomist and goldbug Peter Schiff pointed out:
“The only way to go from a 60/40 portfolio to a 60/20/20 portfolio is to sell bonds. This amounts to Morgan Stanley reducing U.S. Treasuries to a sell. This could not have come at a worse time, as the U.S. Treasury needs to issue more Treasuries than ever before.”

The 60/20/20 portfolio offers higher risk-adjusted returns compared to a pure reliance on bonds, given the fragility of credit markets and uneven rate hikes. Gold’s “anti-fragile” status complements high-quality equity holdings, especially as real interest rates decline in downturns.

Morgan Stanley recommends shorter-duration Treasuries for bond allocations, focusing on five-year notes to better capture returns.

For crypto markets, Morgan Stanley’s elevation of gold is a double-edged sword. The move unveils a deepening skepticism towards fiat debt and long-term government bonds, concerns mirrored by Bitcoin and digital asset advocates.

As investors search for alternatives not correlated with conventional finance, Bitcoin’s digital scarcity narrative becomes increasingly appealing.

Both gold and Bitcoin benefit from narratives around dollar debasement, but institutional advice still aggressively favors gold for now.
Morgan Stanley’s shift to a gold-heavy hedge is a warning shot across the bow of “set and forget” investing. Investors must adapt to a world where classic bonds are losing ground to alternatives that prove their worth in volatility. Bitcoin’s claim as digital gold may have to compete even harder for institutional recognition.
Posted In: US, Featured, Investments, Market

Authorhttps://cryptoslate.com/wp-content/u...en-150x150.jpg
Christina Comben
Contributor at CryptoSlate

Christina is a web3 writer, editor, and content manager with a passion for technology and starting important conversations. As an industry OG, she’s not phased by market volatility and frequently scrimps on Starbucks to BTFD.
@christinacomben LinkedIn

Editor
News Desk
Editor at CryptoSlate

CryptoSlate is a comprehensive and contextualized source for crypto news, insights, and data. Focusing on Bitcoin, macro, DeFi and AI.
@cryptoslate

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

1. Home

How Will Fed Rate Cuts Impact Gold and Silver? Hint: Pay Attention to Real Interest Rates
September 16, 2025


https://silverseek.com/sites/default...?itok=6QSgw88c
Mike Maharrey
Market Analyst


The Federal Reserve is expected to cut interest rates by at least a quarter percent this week, dropping its federal funds rate to between 4 and 4.25 percent. What will that mean for gold and silver?

The metals have already gotten a boost from rate cut expectations, so there won’t likely be much effect from the cut itself. That has already been built into the price. The messaging coming out of the FOMC meeting will primarily drive market reaction after the meeting. If Powell hints that more cuts are in the pipeline, gold and silver will likely rally further. But if Powell & Company suddenly turn more hawkish and hint that future cuts will be limited, that could put a drag on prices.

But what about the longer term? How will this apparent pivot to looser monetary policy impact the gold and silver market moving forward?

In a nutshell, an environment of lower rates will generally be viewed as positive for the metals.

Gold, Silver, and Real Interest Rates
Gold and silver are non-yielding assets. This means they don’t generally generate income from interest, dividends, or rental payments. Gold and silver’s value is derived from price appreciation alone.

When interest rates are higher, there is an opportunity cost to holding gold or silver when you could own bonds that generate interest income or stocks that pay dividends. However, when real interest rates fall or turn negative, those income-producing alternatives lose their comparative advantage. In such an environment, the relative cost of holding precious gold and silver diminishes, making the metals more attractive as safe-haven and wealth-preservation assets.

What do we mean by “real” interest rates?
The real interest rate is simply the stated rate you see on the news, adjusted for price inflation.
To calculate the real interest rate, you take the quoted nominal rate and subtract CPI.

For example, let's say a 10-year Treasury bond is yielding 4 percent. That seems like a pretty good return. But if the CPI is running at 3.5 percent, the real interest rate on that bond is only 0.5 percent (4-3.5=0.5).

Note that in a low-interest-rate environment or if price inflation is particularly high, real interest rates can go negative.
If that same 10-year Treasury is only yielding 3 percent and the CPI is 5 percent, your real interest rate is -2 percent. That means you will lose money in real terms if you buy and hold that bond (Assuming everything remains static).

If you take CPI data at face value, the current real rate is between 1.6 and 1.25 percent (That’s the Fed funds rate minus the current CPI of 2.9 percent).
If the Federal Reserve cuts its rate by 25 basis points, as expected, the average real rate will fall below 1 percent. Two or three more cuts will result in a negative real rate. And if price inflation continues to increase, negative rates will manifest even faster.

Keep in mind that the true price inflation rate is higher than the CPI indicates. The government revised the CPI formula in the 1990s so that it understates the actual rise in prices. Based on the formula used in the 1970s, CPI is closer to double the official numbers. So, given the current BLS estimate of 2.9 percent, under the old formula, you'd be looking at CPI closer to 6 percent. In other words, real rates may well already be negative.
And that means there is no opportunity cost to holding gold or silver.

This is extremely bullish for precious metals. It explains why their prices have rallied every time the Fed has hinted at cutting. And it’s one of the reasons many analysts believe the gold and silver rally has plenty of legs left.

The truth is (although they would never say it out loud), the central bankers over at the Federal Reserve prefer negative real rates because it softens the government’s massive debt burden.

As an investor, it’s crucial to pay attention to real rates. If you fail to grasp the concept of real interest rates, you can easily get fooled by media headlines. They will tout higher interest rates even when real rates are negative.

The Inflation Factor
It’s also important to remember that looser monetary policy is inherently inflationary. The whole point of rate cuts is to stimulate borrowing and spending (In other words, the move is to incentivize more debt). In a fractional reserve banking system, bank loans create new money. This is, by definition, inflation.

While the perception is that monetary policy is currently tight, it isn’t. The money supply has been increasing for well over a year. Again, this is, by definition, inflation. So, we are already in an inflationary environment, and the central bank is poised to crank up the inflation machine even higher.

This is yet another reason cuts are bullish for gold and silver. Gold, in particular, is an inflation hedge. It protects your wealth against this perpetual dollar devaluation.

About the author
https://silverseek.com/sites/default...?itok=6QSgw88c

Mike Maharrey
Market Analyst

Mike Maharrey is a journalist and market analyst for MoneyMetals.com with over a decade of experience in precious metals. He holds a BS in accounting from the University of Kentucky and a BA in journalism from the University of South Florida.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

Technical Scoop: Worse Inflation, Unemployment Rise, Market Highs

September 15, 2025
https://silverseek.com/sites/default...?itok=41zkL0wZ
David Chapman
Enriched Investing

11Shares

Excerpt from this week's: Technical Scoop: Worse Inflation, Unemployment Rise, Market Highs
The Scorecard


https://silverseek.com/sites/default...15211340-3.png
Source: www.stockcharts.com


As expected, gold not only maintains its lead, but the spread is widening. Gold is now up 34.9% in 2025. Next is the MSCI World Index (ex U.S.), up 20.5%. Oil remains last, down 19.9%, while the US$ Index is down 10.7%.

Gold and Silver


https://silverseek.com/sites/default...15211350-4.png
Source: www.stockcharts.com

After consolidating from April to August, gold has broken out and is now on the next wave to the upside. The records continue to fall as gold has now set a record high 30 times so far in 2025. Interestingly, on an inflation- adjusted basis we are now at, near, or have surpassed the all-time high set in 1980, depending on how it is calculated. The S&P 500 long ago passed its inflation-adjusted high.

The breakout from that months-long consolidation suggests a target of at least $3,800. We closed at $3,642 on Friday. Silver is also breaking out, closing at its highest level since 2011. Still above is the 1980 and 2011 high near $50. Further away is the inflation-adjusted high of at least $146, but some believe it’s up to $192. Nonetheless, gold and silver have been the place to be in a year that has been punctuated with economic uncertainty and geopolitical and domestic political tensions. We should add that platinum, the overlooked precious metal, has been the best performer so far in 2025, up 53.5% vs. silver up 44.1% and gold up 37.9%.

Many have asked whether it is still worthwhile to buy gold and silver. The answer is yes, citing the decline in the U.S. dollar, the confiscation of Russian reserves after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the huge U.S. debt and the dangerous debt/GDP ratio of 124%, projected huge spending by the Trump administration as a result of its Big, Beautiful Bill, and its ongoing attempt to seize control of the Fed. Upwards of thirty percent of U.S. debt, or $10.5 trillion, has been added since the 2020 pandemic year.

Add in signs that the U.S. economy is slowing, possibly rapidly, as the Fed prepares to cut rates despite signs that inflation is not going away, the geopolitical tensions continuing with the Russia/Ukraine war that now threatens to bring in NATO, the domestic political tensions which moved another notch higher with the assassination of Charlie Kirk – and we have ongoing perfect conditions for gold. Oh, and need we mention again the ongoing attempt of the Trump administration to take control of the Fed, an event that could shake the global financial system to its core.

As good as the rise of gold, silver, and platinum has been, the rise of the gold stocks has been nothing short of spectacular. The Gold Bugs Index (HUI) is up 103.0% in 2025 while the TSX Gold Index (TGD) has been making record highs, up 98.8% so far in 2025. The HUI has been setting 52-week highs but remains about 12.5% below its record 2011 nominal high. Many believe gold stocks are still under valued despite the huge rise in 2025.

So, the answer is yes, it is not too late to buy gold, silver, and platinum. That said, corrections could occur, especially now when we are getting consistent RSI readings above 70, a level that signals overbought. Corrections should be bought. North Americans under-own gold and silver compared to Asia and even Europe, given they are more enamoured with tech/AI. However, central banks have been buyers, purchasing an estimated 67 metric tonnes so far in 2025. The largest buyers have been China, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Poland, the latter being the largest buyer thus far in 2025. Only Serbia in Europe appears in the top 15 purchasers. No other European or North American/South American country appears on the list, as it is dominated by Asian and some Middle Eastern countries. Countries like Canada hold no gold, having sold theirs back in 2016. Could that prove to be a big mistake?

On the week, gold rose 1.7%, silver was up 2.9%, platinum was up 1.6%, the near precious metal palladium was up 9.5%, and copper gained 2.5%. The gold stock indices were up, with the HUI gaining 4.1% and the TGD up 4.0%. It’s no surprise to find that Golds (TGD), Metals (TGM), and Materials (TMT) have helped take the TSX Composite to record highs this year, up 18.4%. TGD is up 98.8%, TGM up 49.8%, and TMT up 62.6%. No other TSX sub-indices are close to challenging these three.

We should also mention the energy market, where WTI oil rose 0.9% this past week and Brent crude was up 2.0%. Natural gas (NG) fell 3.3% but the EU NG rose 1.9% on renewed NATO/Russia tensions. Those same tensions helped oil rise this past week. The energy stocks saw the ARCA Oil & Gas Index (XOI) up 0.4% and the TSX Energy Index (TEN) up 3.2%.

Commodities have done well this year, although we note that the CRB Index is up only 1.7% in 2025 because energy is the largest component, and, as we know, it has done poorly so far. Energy represents some 33% of the index, with oil alone representing 23%.

Currencies were pretty quiet this past week, with the US$ Index down 0.1%, the euro up 0.1%, the Swiss franc up 0.2%, the pound sterling up 0.4%, and the Japanese yen down 0.1%. The Cdn$ fell less than 0.1%.

Gold would be in trouble if it fell back below $3,350. That could signal a steeper correction. We’d prefer it to hold above $3,400 going forward, a level that would rise as the market moves higher. Silver’s point is at $39; however, we’d prefer it remain above $40. For the HUI, the point is 480, although again we’d prefer it remain
above 520.0. For the TGD, the key point is 550, with a preference that it remains above 620 on any pullback.

We are reading that some are predicting a huge blow-off in gold, bigger than what happened in 1979. Gold rose by over 400% from late 1978 to the peak in January 1980. A move like that today from the 2022 low would see gold rise to over $6,900. For silver, it rose by over 1,000% from a key low in 1978 to the high in 1980. Again, a comparable move today would see silver rise to around $175. Could it happen? Yes. Will it happen? We tend to take one step at a time. We’ll reassess gold once it achieves $3,800, while silver’s next target could be $44/$45.

For the stock indices, the HUI targets next up to just over 600, while the TGD targets next up to over 700. The message is straightforward – stay long, add on dips. The reasons we are going up are not going away anytime soon.

Read the FULL report here: Technical Scoop: Worse Inflation, Unemployment Rise, Market Highs
Copyright David Chapman 2025

Disclaimer
David Chapman is not a registered advisory service and is not an exempt market dealer (EMD) nor a licensed financial advisor. He does not and cannot give individualized market advice. David Chapman has worked in the financial industry for over 40 years, including large financial corporations, banks, and investment dealers.

The information in this newsletter is intended only for informational and educational purposes. It should not be construed as an offer, a solicitation of an offer or sale of any security. Every effort is made to provide accurate and complete information. However, we cannot guarantee that there will be no errors. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this commentary and expressly disclaim liability for errors and omissions in the contents of this commentary. David Chapman will always use his best efforts to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of all information.

The reader assumes all risk when trading in securities, and David Chapman advises consulting a licensed professional financial advisor or portfolio manager such as Enriched Investing Incorporated, before proceeding with any trade or idea presented in this newsletter. David Chapman may own shares in companies mentioned in this newsletter. Before investing, prospective investors should review each security’s offering documents, which summarize the objectives, fees, expenses and associated risks. David Chapman shares his ideas and opinions for informational and educational purposes only and expects the reader to perform due diligence before considering a position in any security. That includes consulting with your own licensed professional financial advisor, such as Enriched Investing Incorporated. Performance is not guaranteed, values change frequently, and past performance may not be repeated.

About the author
https://silverseek.com/sites/default...?itok=41zkL0wZ
David Chapman
Enriched Investing


https://silverseek.com/sites/default...23202932-2.png


Website: https://[U]www.enrichedinvesting.com[/u]

Disclaimer: David Chapman is not a registered advisory service and is not an exempt market dealer (EMD) nor a licensed financial advisor. We do not and cannot give individualized market advice. David Chapman has worked in the financial industry for over 40 years, including large financial corporations, banks, and investment dealers. The information in this newsletter is intended only for informational and educational purposes. It should not be considered a solicitation of an offer or sale of any security. The reader assumes all risk when trading in securities, and David Chapman advises consulting a licensed professional financial advisor before proceeding with any trade or idea presented in this newsletter. David Chapman may own shares in companies mentioned in this newsletter. We share our ideas and opinions for informational and educational purposes only and expect the reader to perform due diligence before considering a position in any security. That includes consulting with your own licensed professional financial advisor.

WWW.AVIELFOREXLEARNINGEDGE.COM

EDITED BY BWM USING THE SOFTWARE GRAMMARLY !!!
Give it 1/5
Give it 2/5
Give it 3/5
Give it 4/5
Give it 5/5