French public TV had an enquiry into how McKingsley has been given thd keys of the house by Macron ever since he was minister of economy of Holland. The scandal is so huge that anywhere else lots of heads should have fallen. But not in France. (Check: "cash investigation" " macron" "mckinsgley")
“Why are European elites torching their own house?
As we begin to see, the answer does not lie in pure and straightforward corruption or ideological fervor. It is far more banal and far more effective. The answer also lies in biographies, networks, and institutions.”
I wonder if I can claim some superficial similarity between the described mechanism for elite-capture and the Comintern of the 1920s and 1930s. Both have a system of front-end aliases, evaluation of candidates, internal reward within the system (including monetary reward), and a hierarchy for internal promotion. Both are globalists. One side focused on revolutionaries who were willing to go the route of armed rebellion if necessary, the other side focused on young people who were likely to get ahead in the current system. Comintern in the past wanted to establish a new hegemony, while the globalists now want to maintain their existing hegemony. As for "capture of institutions", then Chinese Communists scored as good as the American Empire. I claim that the Chinese Communists captured the bulk of the elites, the leadership, and lieutenant positions in all ranks and facets of Chinese society by 1948. The military collapse of the Chinese government forces in 1949 was merely a predictable footnote. In terms of threat to the various sovereign nations in the world, this Anglo-American-Atlanticism-EU-WEF/Bilder-globalists blob and the Comintern are about equal, but the Atlanticists today perform better than the Comintern in the old days.
As for China using a similar mechanism to start a similar hegemony in Asia, I think it lags behind the US for many years, and its networking effect is far less powerful. The US can always use the USD hegemony to boost the claim that "our value system is better"; China does not have anything similar to show off. All the foreign students in China can watch the countless unfinished skyscrapers in every major city. The USSR chose to dissolve the Comintern during WW2 in exchange for deeper Western help. I don't see a similar event or mechanism to dissolve the "blob" from within.
China has Big Beautiful cities with modern high speed rail systems to show off as opposed to Western shithole cities with legions of drug-addicted youth.
Brilliant! I was looking for an exposé like this for a while.
French public TV had an enquiry into how McKingsley has been given thd keys of the house by Macron ever since he was minister of economy of Holland. The scandal is so huge that anywhere else lots of heads should have fallen. But not in France. (Check: "cash investigation" " macron" "mckinsgley")
Excellent analysis!! Well done!
Belatedly :
The EU needs simply to end nato
By forming an eu member security agreement
And then leave nato
It's a confusion to call of Ukraine support and remain inside
uucle Sam's posse
“Why are European elites torching their own house?
As we begin to see, the answer does not lie in pure and straightforward corruption or ideological fervor. It is far more banal and far more effective. The answer also lies in biographies, networks, and institutions.”
This is a question my friends and I have been puzzling over for the last two or three years. Here is another essay I found that takes a stab at answering it—using a different focus and approach, but ultimately complementary. https://open.substack.com/pub/aurelien2022/p/digging-deeper?r=145k0&utm_medium=ios
Thank you for explaining…:
Why Germany Cheers Gutting Its Economy’s Lifeblood — NordStream….
Among other acts of National Suicide across the former continent of Christendom.
I wonder if I can claim some superficial similarity between the described mechanism for elite-capture and the Comintern of the 1920s and 1930s. Both have a system of front-end aliases, evaluation of candidates, internal reward within the system (including monetary reward), and a hierarchy for internal promotion. Both are globalists. One side focused on revolutionaries who were willing to go the route of armed rebellion if necessary, the other side focused on young people who were likely to get ahead in the current system. Comintern in the past wanted to establish a new hegemony, while the globalists now want to maintain their existing hegemony. As for "capture of institutions", then Chinese Communists scored as good as the American Empire. I claim that the Chinese Communists captured the bulk of the elites, the leadership, and lieutenant positions in all ranks and facets of Chinese society by 1948. The military collapse of the Chinese government forces in 1949 was merely a predictable footnote. In terms of threat to the various sovereign nations in the world, this Anglo-American-Atlanticism-EU-WEF/Bilder-globalists blob and the Comintern are about equal, but the Atlanticists today perform better than the Comintern in the old days.
As for China using a similar mechanism to start a similar hegemony in Asia, I think it lags behind the US for many years, and its networking effect is far less powerful. The US can always use the USD hegemony to boost the claim that "our value system is better"; China does not have anything similar to show off. All the foreign students in China can watch the countless unfinished skyscrapers in every major city. The USSR chose to dissolve the Comintern during WW2 in exchange for deeper Western help. I don't see a similar event or mechanism to dissolve the "blob" from within.
China has Big Beautiful cities with modern high speed rail systems to show off as opposed to Western shithole cities with legions of drug-addicted youth.
Profoundly misguided