Here is an article I’m planning to publish in New Dawn magazine. The deadline is Dec 4, so if you have any feedback or suggestions for changes, please get them to me right away.
thanks in advance,
Trump, Soros, Putin, and the reshaping of world order
Donald Trump’s first significant act following his election was his phone call with Putin. Trump confirmed that he intends to follow through with his promise to seek a cooperative relationship with Russia, and he expressed the intention to cooperate with Russia to defeat ISIS in Syria. This decisive step was taken even before he recruited his cabinet, or worked out any kind of relationship with the new Congress.
Trump is coming in not like a politician, but like the new CEO of a failing company, hired with a mandate to shake things up and turn things around. With his Putin initiative – amounting to a turn around of establishment foreign policy – he’s letting everyone know that he’s dead serious about his mandate.
Campaigns are theater, and we can’t judge Trump’s character by the exaggerated populist image he projected in the debates. He is a seasoned executive, a well-connected Washington insider, and he could never have built his empire if he was a fool. Only a fool would take on the establishment as a lone cowboy with a homegrown agenda. And only a fool would act as if he has a mandate to shake things up, if that mandate did not have support in the highest of circles.
The highest of circles is of course the top financial oligarchy, the close-knit banking dynasties that control the currency and credit policies of nations, and who pull strings from behind the curtain, via key agents in the White House, Congress, government agencies, the CIA, the Pentagon, and the media. Franklin D. Roosevelt summed up the situation this way:
“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happened, you can bet it was planned that way.”
It is no secret that these oligarchs are engaged in a process of reshaping the world order. David Rockefeller brags openly in his autobiography about being “part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States”, and about “conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will”. He boasts, “If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it”.
If Trump has a mandate to shake things up, and if that mandate comes from the oligarchy – the only place it could come from – then we can assume his mission is to move the globalist project forward, in one way or another, despite his rhetoric to the contrary.
The process of reshaping the world order involves destabilizing the old nation-state order, while at the same time developing the infrastructure of the new globalist order.
The globalist economic infrastructure is already largely in place, in the form of organizations like the IMF, WTO, World Bank, and the BIS (Bank of International Settlements, the central bank of central banks). Such organizations wield immense power over the fate of nations, and they are not subject to any political process nor are they accountable to any nation. Their agenda is determined by corporate and financial elites, and one of their primary missions over the past several decades has been to destabilize the nation-state order, by trapping nations into debt, and then forcing the privatization/corporatization of national assets and infrastructures.
Multinational corporations are themselves an essential part of the post-nation-state globalist power structure. These corporations have interlocking boards of directors, and the strings of power lead ultimately to the usual suspects, the oligarchs. As more and more functions and assets are transferred from nations to corporations, and with corporations empowered to ignore regulations (due to ‘free trade’ treaties), the political process becomes increasingly irrelevant to the operation of societies. Nations devolve into corporate fiefdoms within a global economic empire managed by the globalist oligarchy.
Recall that David Rockefeller referred to “a more integrated global political and economic structure”. While the integrated economic structure is largely up and running, we seem to be a long way from having an integrated political structure, an actual world government.
We do have the UN, and if there is to be a world government, it will presumably result from a transformation of the UN and its mission. The UN already has much of the structure of a world government, if only in embryonic form, with its General Assembly, Security Council, ‘peace keeping’ missions, and all of its committees, projects, and agencies.
In order to be a real world government, the UN would need to be empowered to issue binding directives to nations, and empowered to enforce compliance. It would need to have the exclusive right to intervene militarily in the affairs of nations, if the need arises, and it would need the military muscle to do so. It would need to have an effective decision-making process, one that couldn’t be blocked by vetoes.
In other words, nations would need to give up a great deal of their political sovereignty to the UN, in order for it to become the kind of world government envisioned by the oligarchy. This is not something we can expect to happen any time soon. Nations would need to be gradually seduced into it, as Brussels has seduced Europe, with insincere promises of subsidiarity and the like.
Perhaps most important, there would need to be an atmosphere of trust among nations, in order for a world-government project to be feasible. Like that which existed after World War 2, enabling the establishment of the existing globalist institutions.
It has taken decades for the oligarchy to develop its globalist economic empire to what it is today, and this was accomplished in stages. Similarly, it will take some time to create the conditions necessary for a world government to be established, and the current institutions can be seen as the first stage of that process.
If Trump has a mandate from the oligarchy to shake things up, then it would make sense for us to review his announced agenda in light of what we know about the globalist project.
As regards setting the stage for a world government, Trump’s cooperative approach to Russia has the potential to contribute to that process in a couple of ways. For one thing it could be a significant and dramatic step towards building trust between nations, particularly if Trump approaches other nations in a similar spirit, as he has said he intends to do.
For another thing, by pursuing this initiative, Trump is undermining the doctrine of US exceptionalism, and opening up the possibility of a multi-polar world. If major powers feel they are being treated as equals, rather than being bullied by Washington, they’d be more likely to give consideration to stronger global institutions.
As regards advancing the economic agenda of the oligarchy, we can turn to Trump’s most ambitious initiative – his infrastructure rebuilding project. The US certainly needs such a project, and the work required is so vast that it could increase employment and economic activity to such an extent that that America could seem ‘great again’, at least while the construction phase lasted.
But how will Trump fund such a vast project? It won’t be through tax increases, given his intention to cut taxes. It can’t be through borrowing, because the amount would be so large, and the US is already deeply over its head in unrepayable debt. The only viable source of funding – and the one most in line with the globalist project – is wholesale privatization: to fund the rebuilding with the infrastructure itself, giving away the infrastructure (roads, bridges, railways, water systems, power grids, airports, national parks, prisons, schools, fire departments, etc.) to the folks that do the rebuilding.
Richard Sauder described the situation this way, in an article he posted online, back in October 2015:
“If Donald Trump is permitted to prevail in the quadrennial political farce known as the ‘national election’ – all thoroughly rigged and controlled by powerful, shadowy, mega-rich interests that largely hold themselves back from direct public view – then he will have been brought in to manage the USSA corporate bankruptcy, precisely because of his bankruptcy experience.”
The rebuilding project is a clever way of making the sacrifice of American assets seem like a good thing. First the assets will be given away to creditors to write off debt, and then lower taxes and reduced regulations will make it easier for the creditors to develop the assets into ongoing profit streams.
Long after the bonanza of the rebuilding project has been forgotten, Americans will still be paying for that bonanza with a myriad of usage fees and tolls, high prices for water and electricity, etc. Perhaps America will be new and shiny, but it won’t belong to its citizens – it will be a corporate fiefdom. Indeed, people will hardly be citizens any more; they will instead be customers of USA Inc, over which their votes have no influence.
If Trump has the support of the oligarchy, and if billionaire George Soros is aligned with the oligarchy, as he most certainly is, then we may wonder why Soros is sponsoring mass demonstrations against Trump’s election, what the media is calling a ‘counter-coup’.
The first thing to notice is that this counter-coup does not address the actual Trump threat – selling off America – rather it continues the same line of attack used by Hillary, responding to Trump’s racist and misogynist comments. This serves to distract the population from the real threat, and it serves to keep alive the extreme divisiveness that characterized the campaign.
This is a classic divide-and-rule strategy – get the left and right to fight against one another over identity politics, so that the oligarchy can proceed with its plans undisturbed.
Indeed, what other purpose was there to Trump’s inflammatory comments in the first place? His campaign would have been much stronger without them. He could easily have proclaimed his opposition to immigration without employing racist slurs. While presenting an image of reckless disregard for the effect of his rhetoric, he was carefully planting the seeds that would enable the counter-coup to emerge following the election.
How far Soros plans to go with his counter-coup is an open question. Hopefully it will just be demonstrations and protests, aimed at maintaining divisiveness. There is another possibility however, one which I do not offer as a prediction, but which I think we do need to be aware of. This other possibility is what we might call the ‘Maidan scenario’ – referring to the fascist coup that Soros helped sponsor in the Ukraine.
What the oligarchy did in Maidan, among other things, was to install snipers who shot both protestors and police. In the Western media, this was presented as the Ukraine government shooting protestors. The result on the ground was a successful coup followed by a civil war that is still going on.
Imagine the consequences if a sniper were to take out a few protestors in one of the Soros-sponsored demonstrations, and if the media blamed the shooting on right-wing Trump supporters. Under such conditions Soros would be able turn his counter-coup into full-scale riots all across the nation. Out would come the police and military to suppress the riots, which would only add fire to the flames of outrage. We’d end up in a martial-law regime, with half the population in active and staunch opposition to the government – we’d be on the verge of a civil war. What a difference a few bullets can make.
This may seem like an extreme and unlikely scenario, but it is the kind of thing the oligarchy has been doing overseas routinely in the maintenance of its global empire. It’s the kind of thing the CIA specializes in. If the oligarchy believes such a move is necessary to fulfill their agenda, we can be sure that moral considerations would not hold them back.
Let us now turn our attention to Russia and Putin. The media wants us to believe Putin was interfering in the recent election, and was behind the Wikileaks revelations. This is of course ludicrous, but at the same time Putin is clearly playing a central role in bringing in a new world order. Not only is he energetically promoting a multi-polar world, but he has more than once called for a stronger UN, where only the UN would undertake military interventions.
The big unknown with Putin is whether or not he is aligned with the oligarchy. What we can be sure of is that he is fully committed to Russian national interests, and that his only concern with American internal affairs is how that affects Russian interests. Has he made a deal with the oligarchy, where he expects Russian interests to be somehow protected under the oligarch’s new global regime? Or is he acting entirely on his own, in the belief that multi-polarism can be a way to curtail the power of the oligarchy? Either is within the realm of possibility, and both play into the hands of the oligarchy.
Next, let’s turn our attention to the actions of the Obama administration, in the wake of Trump’s election. If the oligarchy, who is behind both Trump and Obama, wants things to proceed according to Trump’s agenda, why is Obama apparently sabotaging Trump’s rapprochement initiative by extending sanctions against Russia during this lame-duck period? Presumably Trump will reverse any such lame-duck actions once he gets into office, so what’s the point?
One possible answer to this question lies entirely in the realm of domestic politics. By opposing Trump right up to the end, Obama is encouraging his followers to do likewise, to keep struggling against Trump even after he takes office. What better way for Obama to implicitly add fuel to Soros’ campaign of civil discord?
There is another possible answer, and again I don’t offer this as a prediction, but rather as a possibility we should be aware of. You may recall how the Pentagon sabotaged the cease fire agreement between Obama and Putin in the Ukraine, by launching an airstrike on Syrian troops. What if the sanctions extension is only a first taste of lame-duck sabotage? What if the Pentagon arranges for a US plane to shoot down a Russian plane in Syria, or some such similar event, bringing us to the brink of all-out war just as Trump is about to take office?
If this happened, it would provide a dramatic opportunity to accelerate the creation of a multi-polar world. Trump could immediately contact Putin, blaming the oligarchy for stirring up trouble. The two of them would end up on prime time TV – on all channels – shaking hands, and agreeing to work together to build stronger international cooperation. The world would have been saved from nuclear war! What better way for the oligarchy to implicitly add fuel to Trump’s campaign for international accord?
Finally, in closing, I’d like to bring to your attention an important book published by insider Samuel P. Huntington in 1996, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. This book caused quite a stir in Washington circles when it came out, and it presents a very specific vision of a multi-polar world order.
Huntington dismisses the idea of universal human values and asserts that there are seven distinct ‘civilizations’ in the world, each of which can be expected to maintain its own unique set of values. The Muslim civilization, Western civilization, the Russian civilization, and the rest, are to remain distinct and in cultural opposition to one another, enabling divide-and-rule by a dominant player, which Huntington identifies as the US, backed by the Pentagon.
By its actions in the Middle East, it seems that the US is seeking to make Huntington’s vision come true. Not only did the US create the whole Jihad movement, but the Muslim nations it has chosen to invade (Iraq, Libya, Syria) are precisely the ones that were moving toward a modern, cosmopolitan culture. In this way, the US is ensuring that the ‘Muslim civilization’ takes a form strongly distinct from the West, and in opposition to it.
In Huntington’s multi-polar world, each ‘civilization’ has its own regional hegemon, each of which is granted the right to maintain order in its own sphere of influence. Russia is mentioned specifically in this regard, and Huntington says Russia should have the right to ensure that its interests are protected around its periphery. Like in Syria for example.
Very little changes in Huntington’s model if we substitute a strong UN for the US, as the dominant player in the oligarch’s multi-polar world.