Tuesday, January 15, 2019

Wells Just Reported The Worst Mortgage Number Since The Financial Crisis

ORIGINAL LINK

When we reported Wells Fargo's Q3 earnings back in October, we drew readers' attention to one specific line of business, the one we have repeatedly dubbed the bank's "bread and butter", namely mortgage lending, and which as we then reported was "the biggest alarm" because "as a result of rising rates, Wells' residential mortgage applications and pipelines both tumbled, sliding just shy of the post-crisis lows recorded in late 2013."

Well, unfortunately for Wells, despite the sharp drop in yields in Q4 which many had expected would boost mortgage lending or at least refi activity for the bank that was until recently America's largest mortgage lender, the decline in mortgage activity has continued,  because buried deep in its presentation accompanying otherwise unremarkable Q4 results (modest EPS best; sizable revenue miss), Wells just reported that its 'bread and butter' is once again missing, and in Q4 2018 the amount in the all-important Wells Fargo Mortgage Application pipeline shrank again, dropping to $18 billion, the lowest level since the financial crisis.

Meanwhile, Wells' mortgage originations number, which usually trails the pipeline by 3-4 quarters, was just as bad, dropping a whopping $12BN sequentially from $46 billion to just $38 billion, and effectively tied for the lowest print since the financial crisis.  Putting this number in context, just six years ago, when the US housing market was actually solid, Wells was originating 4 times as many mortgages, or about $120 billion.

And since this number lags the mortgage applications, we expect it to continue posting fresh post-crisis lows in the coming quarter especially if rates resume their rise.

Going back to the headline numbers, here is a recap of the key metrics:

  • 4Q adj. EPS $1.21, est. $1.19
  • 4Q revenue $20.98 billion, Exp. $24.7BN
  • 4Q net interest income $12.64 billion
  • 4Q loans $953.11 billion vs. $942.3 billion q/q
  • 4Q mortgage non-interest income $467 million
  • 4Q residential mortgage originations $38 billion
  • 4Q margin on residential held-for-sale mortgage originations 0.89%
  • 4Q non- performing assets $6.95 billion
  • 4Q net charge-offs $721 million, estimate $736.8 million (BD)
  • 4Q total avg. deposits $1.27 trillion

There was more bad news for Wells. First, as the chart below shows, Noninterest Income has been a disaster and is only getting worse with virtually every revenue category posting Y/Y declines.

Things were not better on the interest income side where the bank's Net Interest Margin managed ended its recent streak of increases, and was unchanged at 2.94% resulting in $12.644 billion in Net Interest Income, and missing expectations of an increase to 2.95%. This is what Wells said: "NIM of 2.94% stable LQ as a benefit from higher interest rates and favorable hedge ineffectiveness accounting results were offset by the impacts of all other balance sheet mix and lower variable income."

While Wells loss provisions declined modestly in Q4, its actual charge-offs jumped from $680MM to $721MM, the highest since Q1.

There was another problem facing Buffett's favorite bank: while NIM failed to increase, deposits costs are rising fast, and in Q4, the bank was charged an average deposit cost of 0.55% on $914.3MM in interest-bearing deposits, double what its deposit costs were a year ago.

There was a silver lining however: amid concerns over the ongoing slide in the scandal-plagued bank's deposits, which declined 3% or $40.1BN in Q3 Y/Y (down $2.3BN Q/Q) to $1.27 trillion, in Q4 Wells finally succeeded in getting a modest increase in deposits, which rose to $1.286 trillion, if still down 4% Y/Y. This was driven by growth in Wealth & Investment Management deposits driven by higher retail brokerage sweep deposits, "partially reflecting a change in our customers’ risk appetite, as well as higher private
banking deposits." Offsetting this were declines in small business banking deposits, partially offset by growth in retail banking consumer deposits.

And some more good news: the recent ongoing shrinkage in the company's balance sheet appears to have finally reversed, because one quarter after average loans declined from $944.3BN to $939.5BN, the lowest in years, and down $12.8 billion YoY, average loans outstanding increased fractionally to $946.3BN, up $6.8BN, or 1% Q/Q. This rebound was entirely due to commercial loans , which were up $7.7 billion LQ on higher commercial & industrial loans. Meanwhile, consumer loans continued to decline, and were down $835 million LQ as growth in nonconforming first mortgage loans and credit card loans was more than offset by declines in legacy consumer real estate portfolios including Pick-a-Pay and junior lien mortgage loans due to run-off and sales, as well as lower auto loans.

And finally, there was the chart showing the bank's overall consumer loan trends: these reveal that the troubling broad decline in credit demand continues, as consumer loans were down a total of $13.7BN Y/Y across most product groups.

What these numbers reveal, is that the average US consumer can barely afford to take out a new mortgage even at a time when rates are once again sliding. It also means that if the Fed is truly intent in engineering a parallel shift in the curve of 2-3%, the US can kiss its domestic housing market goodbye.

Source: Wells Fargo Earnings Supplement



via IFTTT

Integrity Initiative: By All Means Smear & Attack, But At Least Be Honest About It

ORIGINAL LINK

Authored by Simon Rite, op-ed via RT.com,

We've all met those people who describe themselves as laid back, when in reality they're just one loud noise from a mouth frothing breakdown. So when something describes itself as having integrity, be wary.

Enter the Integrity Initiative (II), Britain's very own government funded influence network which is currently in the process of having its underpants revealed to the world. There's no doubting it's an initiative, the jury's out on the other bit. Some of the people behind it are alleged former spies (can you be a former spy?), a calling not often linked to integrity.

There's a good chance you may not know much about the Integrity Initiative, the mainstream media is not exactly straining to tell you about it. Labour MP Chris Williamson suggests that's because a number of mainstream journalists have signed up to work with it.

The only time II briefly attracted the attention of the mainstream world was when it became clear it had been pushing conspiracies about Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's links to the Kremlin. That's not a good look for an organization which receives cash from the Foreign Office.

It describes itself as non-partisan, but then as we've discussed, it also has "Integrity" in the title. Maybe it can get away with it, always worth a try I suppose. It also claims to be "combating propaganda and disinformation," but as you'll see for yourself on its Twitter account, it's simply a stream of invective and criticism about Russia. If you want to spend cash smearing an entire nation, fine, fill your boots, but don't then act all moral about it.

Integrity Initiative deals in propaganda, mainly against Russia, and if anyone involved tries to deny that, then they've clearly been drinking their own Kool Aid. Of course, it defends itself by saying it's on the front line of the fight against so-called Russian disinformation, which is a pretty wide category these days. But it doesn't matter if it's propaganda you agree with or disagree with, it's still propaganda.

One of its main aims is to put together what it calls 'clusters' of journalists, writers and the like who are sympathetic to the cause. If you've been paying attention, you won't be surprised to find out who are making up those clusters.

Some of those journalists who have had their links revealed are carefully backtracking. One interesting form of mea culpa from some of them is to admit that while they did do some work for II, they didn't get paid much to do it, which is a curious defense if you think about it. If you're involved in something you might feel the need to defend in the future, at least make sure you getting paid! About £200 for a talk or an article seems to be the going rate if you're interested.

I don’t know how I can be clearer. They. Paid. Me. Once. For. One. Freelance. Piece. About £200.

— Edward Lucas (@edwardlucas) January 6, 2019

Good luck to anyone signing up to work with II, we've all got mortgages to pay, there's no judgement from me, but at least take responsibility for it. And if you really didn't know you were engaging in propaganda, then perhaps a period of self-reflection is in order. 

Guardian journalist James Ball, for example, wrote a column in which he came clean on his links to II (he gave a training talk for about 225 quid) but there was no real self-reflection. The headline "When free societies copy Russian media tactics, there's only one winner" is indicative of the myopia which drives the movement against so-called Russian disinformation. Even when he is literally caught up in a Western government funded propaganda effort, he somehow still manages to reflect it back on Russia. Moscow made me do it!

Ball literally describes the Integrity Initiative as a 'victim'. Beautiful!

— Media Lens (@medialens) January 11, 2019

Ball goes on to lament the hacking of Integrity Initiative in a newspaper which revelled in publishing juicy stories from WikiLeaks.

He even analyses the events around the Salisbury poisoning by saying: "Russian-backed outlets and supporters threw question after question to cast doubt on the official narrative."

There we have it, the biggest crime of all – casting doubt on the official narrative.



via IFTTT

Now That They Have Deeply Insulted All Men With Their “Toxic Masculinity” Ad, Let’s Respond By Boycotting Gillette

ORIGINAL LINK

Does Gillette really think that they are going to sell more razors to men after millions of men watch their horrific new ad that is essentially an all-out assault on masculinity? The new ad is entitled “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be”, and within the first few seconds the term “toxic masculinity” is used. This is a deeply, deeply offensive term, and it has no place in our society. After all, could you imagine the uproar that would ensue if a large corporation dared to use the term “toxic femininity” in an advertisement? Women would be freaking out from coast to coast, and for good reason. There would simply be no excuse for using the term “toxic femininity”, and there is simply no excuse for using the term “toxic masculinity”. Gillette owes every man in America an apology, and they better make it a good one.

Just yesterday I wrote an article about the American Psychological Association’s new guidelines for men which say that “traditional masculinity” is “harmful”, and so when I heard that Gillette had put out this new ad it got my attention right away. Over on YouTube, this ad has already been watched more than 1.4 million times. It has 16,000 likes and more than 159,000 dislikes. That is almost a ten to one margin, and it is clear that this ad is backfiring spectacularly. Here is how Breitbart described this deeply offensive ad

A new ad from P&G razor brand Gillette encourages men to reexamine themselves and the way that they raise young boys. The ad, which is called “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be,” is essentially a two-minute broad generalization about the way that men act and think.

The ad depicts men getting into fights, standing in front of barbecue grills, and verbally harassing women. The ad also heavily features news clips discussing the recent #MeToo movement.

Look, nobody approves of bullying or sexual harassment. But to make an ad which suggests that “masculinity” is defined by these sorts of behaviors is fundamentally wrong, and it is going to turn off millions of potential customers. I really like how Paul Joseph Watson made this point

Insulting most of your own customers by insinuating they’re all would-be sexual abusers & creeps has to be one of the most original marketing campaigns in decades.

Somebody at Gillette needs to be fired over this.

Millions of men are going to quit buying Gillette razors because of this ad, and many of them will never forgive Gillette no matter how contrite the company may appear to be in the future.

And they should definitely realize that they have messed up really, really badly if even Piers Morgan is threatening to stop using their products

I’ve used @Gillette razors my entire adult life but this absurd virtue-signalling PC guff may drive me away to a company less eager to fuel the current pathetic global assault on masculinity.

Perhaps some advertising exec thought it would be a grand idea for Gillette to jump on the social justice bandwagon. After all, it seems to be the hot thing to do.

But to conduct a direct attack on masculinity when nearly all of your customers are men seems to be incredibly foolish.

Of course I am not saying that all men are angels. In fact, earlier today I came across an article about a horrible 32-year-old doctor that is calling his pregnant wife “lazy” and is upset that she is only working 30 hours a week. But such behavior does not have anything to do with masculinity. Rather, that is called being a jerk.

And there is certainly nothing wrong with urging all of us to be the best people that we can possibly become. We should never be afraid to challenge one another to be better and to set higher standards, and on some level I think that is what this ad was attempting to do.

But this ad was so much more than that. It was essentially an all-out attack on masculinity, and it is very easy to understand why virtually every man that watches this ad comes away deeply offended.

So what should we do about it?

I like what one Twitter user is suggesting

“I am taking action,” one Twitter user said in response to Gillette’s call for action. “I’m researching every product made by Proctor & Gamble, throwing any I have in the trash, and never buying any of them again until everyone involved in this ad from top to bottom is fired and the company issues a public apology.”

Let’s boycott all Gillette products until they apologize to us.

And the apology needs to have the same scale and scope as the original ad did. In other words, Gillette should make a new advertisement of similar length apologizing for the first ad, and they should spend at least as much money promoting it.

Of course they are not likely to do that, because it would not be the politically-correct thing to do.

As I stated yesterday, the elite are absolutely determined to permanently change our culture, and they are becoming more overt about it over time.

In the old days, big corporations would stay out of such controversies in order to avoid offending potential customers, but now they think that they can get away with it.

And the only thing that is going to make them think otherwise is if we quit buying their products, and so that is precisely what we need to do.

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

The post Now That They Have Deeply Insulted All Men With Their “Toxic Masculinity” Ad, Let’s Respond By Boycotting Gillette appeared first on The Most Important News.



via IFTTT

Monday, January 14, 2019

Israel's Top Commander Finally Spills Secrets Of "Invisible War" In Syria

ORIGINAL LINK

For years Israel denied allegations that it had a role in funding and weaponizing the anti-Assad insurgency in Syria, and in recent years military officials responded "no comment" even when confronted with overwhelming evidence of Israeli weapons documented in al-Qaeda linked insurgents' hands, but this all changed in a new British Sunday Times interview with outgoing Israeli army commander Gadi Eisenkot, who has finally confirmed the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) supplied weapons to rebels across the border "for self-defense," and further perhaps more stunningly, has admitted to long waging an "invisible war in Syria" that involved "thousands of attacks".

IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot 

The interview constitutes the first time that any current top Israeli military or government official has fully acknowledged sending anything beyond "humanitarian supplies," such as medical aid to Syrian militants seeking to topple the Assad government; and yet it still appears the country's military chief is slow playing the confirmation, only acknowledging the IDF provided "light weapons" — even after years of reporting has definitively uncovered an expansive Israeli program to arm dozens of insurgent groups and pay their salaries, including known affiliates of al-Qaeda in Syria.

This comes after the Syrian government has for years accused Israel of partnering with the west and gulf countries, such as the US, UK, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey of funding and weaponizing an al-Qaeda/ISIS insurgency as part of covert regime change operations aimed at Damascus and its allies Iran and Hezbollah. Since then, countries like Qatar have come forward to reveal just how vast their covert role in fueling the Syrian war really was, which we covered in our viral story, In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War.

The Sunday Times relates a key confession that comes out of Lt.-Gen Gadi Eisenkot's explosive interview as follows

Eisenkot acknowledged for the first time, however, that Israel had supplied rebel groups in the border area with light weapons “for self-defence”.

Israel was a hidden player on a crowded Syrian battlefield

Eisenkot positively boasted in the interview that “We operated in an area controlled by the Russians, sometimes attacking targets a kilometre or two from Russian positions,” in order to strike at Iranian assets in Syria. 

The rare "confession" of sorts comes at a moment the White House says it's moving forward on President Trump's previously announced US troop pullout from Syria, something which has rattled Israel's leadership, which has argued that Iran will become entrenched near Israel's border as a result. Eisenkot's words appear a warning to Iran that Tel Aviv aims to maintain operational capability inside Syria. 

On this point the IDF chief admitted to "thousands" of attacks inside Syria

“We carried out thousands of attacks [in recent years] without taking responsibility and without asking for credit,” he told the Sunday Times.

Given that prior military officials have typically put this number at "hundreds", often from 200 to 400, this is an astounding admission that confirms Israel and Syria have been in a de facto state of open war since the first acknowledged Israeli airstrikes began in 2013. 

Commenting on a prior report, The Times of Israel, summarized the timeline of Israel's support to the anti-Assad insurgency as follows:

Foreign Policy said that Israel’s support for the rebel groups began in 2013, funding groups in places such as Quneitra and Daraa. It ended this summer as the regime’s forces advanced and made increasing gains in southern Syria against rebels. Syrian President Bashar Assad’s troops regained control of the border area in July.

The Syrian army said in 2013 that it had seized Israeli weapons in rebel hands.

The report said Israel sent the rebel groups weapons that included assault rifles, machine guns, mortar launchers, and vehicles. It initially sent the rebels US-made M16 rifles that would not identify Jerusalem as the source, and later began supplying guns and ammo from an Iranian shipment to Lebanon’s Hezbollah group that Israel captured in 2009, according to Foreign Policy.

But a number of analysts have suggested Israeli support to the opposition began even closer to the start of the conflict.

A prior Wall Street Journal investigation found that this relationship involved weapons transfers, salary payments to anti-Assad fighters, and treatment of wounded jihadists in Israeli hospitals, the latter which was widely promoted in photo ops picturing Netanyahu himself greeting militants. As even former Acting Director of the CIA Michael Morell once directly told the Israeli publicIsrael's "dangerous game" in Syria consists in getting in bed with al-Qaeda in order to fight Shia Iran. 

Prior widely shared photo of Israeli soldiers speaking face to face with al-Qaeda fighters near the Israeli occupied Golan heights in Syria.

In recent years, multiple current and former Israeli defense officials have gone so far as to say that ISIS is ultimately preferable to Iran and Assad. For example, former Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren in 2014 surprised the audience at Colorado's Aspen Ideas Festival when he said in comments related to ISIS that, "the lesser evil is the Sunnis over the Shias." Oren, while articulating Israeli defense policy, fully acknowledged he thought ISIS was "the lesser evil." 

Likewise, for Netanyahu and other Israeli officials the chief concern was never the black clad death cult which filmed itself beheading Americans and burning people alive, but the possibility of, in the words of Henry Kissinger, "a Shia and pro-Iran territorial belt reaching from Tehran to Beirut" and establishment of "an Iranian radical empire."

What is clear, and now finally settled for the historical record, is that for years Israeli concealed its "hidden hand" in the proxy war while feigning merely "humanitarian aid"  something now fully admitted by Israel's top military commander. In other words the humanitarian smokescreen was cover for a full-on covert war on Damascus, as we and many other independent outlets have reported many times, and for years. Yet another past "conspiracy theory" becomes  today's incontrovertible fact.



via IFTTT

Top 9 things you can't talk about freely in America

ORIGINAL LINK

Remember when you could talk about anything in America without fear of retribution, shaming, harassment?

Do you recall when media was a plural noun, implying a multitude of voices?

What about speech codes? Can you remember a time before they were imposed on college campuses?

How about the internet before Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google set the rules for what you could say and what you couldn’t say?

A generation ago, America was celebrated for its free speech, its free press, its freedom of religion.

But consider the topics today that you can’t talk about, write about or dissent about.

Let’s take a look at the top 9 topics that are basically off-limits in our formerly free society:

  1. Evolution: We went from a time when God’s Creation was accepted as fact to a time when public schools can’t even teach about it as a legitimate “theory” – a possibility. Evolution has gone from a theory to a fact in academia while the evidence has gone the other direction. While the scientific world is in near total agreement now that the universe had a beginning, as well as a time when life sprung up in abundance all at once, America’s most powerful cultural institutions continue to push the evolution line exclusively without second thoughts, second looks. Are we better off without the debate, the dialogue, the discussion? Are we more learned, more advanced as a society without dialectics?
  2. Man-made climate change: Some “news organizations,” CNN comes to mind, are no longer interested in sources they characterize as “deniers,” those who are skeptical about the urgent need to reorder the world’s economic and political systems around the priority of lowering carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. It’s unlikely you could have a debate at a major university about the evidence against impending doom from catastrophic, man-made climate change. Does that make us more informed or less? Does it make for open political discussions? Are we a healthier, more open society as a result?
  3. Donald Trump: We now have a president of the United States for whom it is unsafe in many venues simply to show support. Just wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat is considered provocative. Despite his demonstrated Midas touch on all matters economic and better poll ratings than his recent predecessors, the gatekeepers of media, Big Tech, academia, the entertainment industry and the Democratic Party continue to hound him like an unindicted co-conspirator, a war criminal, a “fascist” authoritarian, an unregistered foreign agent, a “white supremacist” or worse.
  4. Illegal immigration: You can’t have a free and open debate about controlling it without being called names – hater, bigot, racist. The sovereignty of America is at stake, but the cacophony of denial about a simple border barrier is hysterical, maniacal, completely over the top and one-sided, full of misinformation, disinformation and fake news.
  5. Muslim terrorism: Nearly 20 years after Muslim terrorists declared war on America by hijacking airliners and crashing them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and an open field in Pennsylvania, killing more people than in any foreign on the homeland in American history, incidents and evidence of Muslim terrorism is systematically covered up by the media. Instead, the real problem, according to the thought police, is Islamophobia.
  6. Roe v. Wade: It is, according to the cultural institutions that serve as our morality cops, “a settled matter of law.” Anyone who opposes this Supreme Court decision, which denies the right to life for preborn babies, will find a hostile environment in the media. Even restrictions on abortion for the purpose of sex selection are considered threats to “a woman’s right to choose.” But what about freedom to dissent? What about free speech? What about a free hearing on the sanctity of life?
  7. Gender: Can you believe we can no longer identify men and women based on biology without fear of “discrimination” and accusation of “bias” and “bigotry”? It’s true. Meanwhile, judges and activists are promoting gender dysphoria as well as irreversible surgical disfiguration and chemical castration even for children. It’s a new and brave new world – but don’t try too hard to dissent unless you’re ready for the consequences. Prepare to be called a “hater,” a “homophobe,” just for the crime of disagreeing.
  8. Guns: Just as America is quickly watering down its commitment to the First Amendment, so too is it continually compromising on the Second Amendment. And you won’t get a fair hearing in the media or though social media or through the search engine that commands a nearly worldwide monopoly yet ignores legal requirement for political impartiality in the way it serves and controls content. The anti-gun propaganda never stops. There’s a war on private ownership of guns like never before.
  9. The family: Everyone knows the family unit, with a father and mother at the center, is the building block of a self-governing, healthy and prosperous society. Or do they? Who is making that case in America today? Government follows policies that are hostile to families, as is our corporate culture. But just try making that case in a public forum that counts. Kudos to Tucker Carlson for bravely making the effort.

The post Top 9 things you can't talk about freely in America appeared first on WND.



via IFTTT

Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the “Integrity Initiative”

ORIGINAL LINK

Is there such a plane of blissful, balanced information, deliberated and debated upon?  No.  Governments mangle; corporations distort.  Interest groups tinker.  Wars must be sold; deception must be perpetrated.  Inconsistencies must be removed.  There will be success, measured in small

The post Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the “Integrity Initiative” appeared first on Global Research.



via IFTTT

Sunday, January 13, 2019

Fake News? How About No News?

ORIGINAL LINK

Authored by Eric Peters via EricPetersAutos.com,

Trump gets flak for characterizing the mainstream press as purveyors of Fake News. But what about no news at all?

Isn’t lack of coverage even worse than biased coverage?

Well, how much news have you heard or read about the gilets jaunes – or “yellow vest” – protests in France?

CNN hasn’t got anything on its main page today (Jan. 9). Neither did NBC or CBS. Lots of the usual – endless – carpet-chewing coverage of Trump, though. And also of such important stories as “Want to Pay off Your Mortgage? Try Frugal Minimalism.”

You might think France, a major western European country, coming unglued – and on the verge of its government outright banning “unauthorized” criticism of its actions – might at least be  . . .  well,  news.

Instead, nothing.

Which is very interesting, given what the yellow vests are protesting. This being chiefly the purposely punitive taxes on fuel – diesel especially – imposed by the French President, Emmanuel Macron. In the name of “climate change” – but really in the name of squeezing average Frenchmen (and women) out of their cars. These taxes – already extortionate and brutally regressive – were on track to increase the cost of a gallon of fuel to more than $7.

This brought the French not to their knees – but to the streets. The yellow vests – which are reflective jackets every French motorist is required by law to keep in their vehicle, to be worn in the event of an emergency – were donned for a different kind of emergency.

And Macron buckled. The tax hike has been rescinded. But did you read about it?

Probably not – unless you went out of your way to look for it. Mainstream press coverage of this effective protest has been as scanty as its coverage of the reason for the yellow vest protests – which by the way continue, notwithstanding Macron’s retreat.

The reason being that Macron has not retreated in principle from resurrecting the tax, once the protests are well in hand. He hasn’t abandoned the “climate change” excuse for the tax; indeed, he is as adamant as ever that energy austerity be imposed. Well, on the French people.

Not on him and those in his class.

The yellow vests know this, which is why they haven’t gone home yet.

Macron made the great tactical mistake of pushing the people of France too hard, too soon.

And the American press doesn’t want you to know about it.

Nor – apparently – about the latest news out of France, which is that Macron’s government has floated the idea of a new law criminalizing “unauthorized” demonstrations of, well, anything the French government happens not to like its citizens protesting.

Macron’s Prime Minister, Eduouard Philippe, characterizes such citizens as “troublemakers” – a species of word very much of the same species as “climate change” in that both are conveniently vague as well as conveniently defined to be whatever the user wishes them to be.

Big snowstorm? Climate change!

Criticize the government? You are a troublemaker!

French citizens are already being arrested for less – merely for wearing a yellow vest. “Those who question our institutions will not have the last word,” Philippe declared. Mark that. It will be enough, in France, to question our institutions to be subject to arrest, prosecution and caging.

Which means, questioning the policies of the government – including those related to the “climate change” religion. Which brings us full circle to the absence of coverage of these events.

The government of this country is in the process of enacting similar laws, just not too soon and not as hard. We are on the slower-motion plan, and because of this far more strategicapproach to gradually getting the American cattle to accept the transition from being free range cattle to feedlot cattle, the American cattle are – unlike the French – generally oblivious.

Most Americans haven’t noticed, as a for-instance, that while gas prices haven’t gone up, the cost of the cars they put gas into has – and not because of new features they want but because of impositions made by the government. Examples include the sudden appearance of ASS in most new cars. Automatic Stop/Start – a system which turns off the engine whenever the car isn’t moving, in order to fractionally increase individual car mileage for the sake of increasing so-called “corporate” (or fleet) averages, which is necessary because of government fuel efficiency fatwas – which end up being just the same as a tax except on the car, not the fuel.

Because either way, you still pay.

This is subtler, and so smarter – from the standpoint of the people holding the proverbial cattle prod.

The fuel economy fatwas are also forcing mass-production of electric cars, which cars cost tens of thousands of dollars more than otherwise comparable non-electric cars. This amounts to an even more extortionate and regressive tax on mobility – which is pure genius, relative to Macron’s hamfisted (because obvious) direct tax on motor fuels.

But you didn’t read about that here.



via IFTTT

Saturday, January 12, 2019

Someone’s Finally Going to Jail over the Panama Papers: A Turkish Journalist Who Reported True Facts from Them

ORIGINAL LINK

A Turkish court has sentenced journalist Pelin Ünker to 13 months’ imprisonment for her participation in reporting the Panama Papers, a massive leak of documents from the tax-evasion enablers Mossack-Fonseca.

Ünker published the true (and undisputed) facts about former …

The post Someone’s Finally Going to Jail over the Panama Papers: A Turkish Journalist Who Reported True Facts from Them appeared first on Global Research.



via IFTTT

Trump Goes On Epic Tweetstorm After NYT Reveals FBI "Witch Hunt" Escalation Following Comey Firing

ORIGINAL LINK

President Trump on Saturday lashed out after a Friday evening report in the New York Times that US law enforcement officials "became so concerned by the president's behavior" in the days after Trump fired James Comey as FBI director, that "they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests.

According to the NYT, agents and senior F.B.I. officials "had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign" but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude.

What happened next? Well, a collusion narrative was born and carefully crafted as the paper explains:

The president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry, the people said.

The odd inquiry carried "explosive implications" as counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

The criminal and counterintelligence elements were coupled together into one investigation, former law enforcement officials said in interviews in recent weeks, because if Mr. Trump had ousted the head of the F.B.I. to impede or even end the Russia investigation, that was both a possible crime and a national security concern. The F.B.I.’s counterintelligence division handles national security matters.

Even so, "...some former law enforcement officials outside the investigation have questioned whether agents overstepped in opening it."

Then, in paragraph nine we read "No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials."

Or, as The Washington Examiner's Byron York sums it up: 

Then Comey told Trump three times he wasn't under investigation while leaving public impression that he was. Trump understandably angry. Then, when Trump fired Comey--as some advisors had advocated for months--FBI saw it as treason. 2/4

— Byron York (@ByronYork) January 12, 2019

Investigation result: 'No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.' Is NYT story about Trump, or about FBI malfeasance? 4/4 End. https://t.co/L8U5rPbJup

— Byron York (@ByronYork) January 12, 2019

Some were even more laconic, summarizing the "scoop" as "anybody who fires corrupt Comey must be a Russian spy."

LOL!! Anybody who fires corrupt Comey must be a Russian spy. #SCOOP https://t.co/QfZuDiYqek

— GreekFire23 (@GreekFire23) January 12, 2019

Responding to the "bombshell" NYT report - which curiously resurrects the "Russian collusion" narrative right as Trump is set to test his Presidential authority over the border wall, the president lashed out over Twitter

Wow, just learned in the Failing New York Times that the corrupt former leaders of the FBI, almost all fired or forced to leave the agency for some very bad reasons, opened up an investigation on me, for no reason & with no proof, after I fired Lyin’ James Comey, a total sleaze!"

Funny thing about James Comey. Everybody wanted him fired, Republican and Democrat alike. After the rigged & botched Crooked Hillary investigation, where she was interviewed on July 4th Weekend, not recorded or sworn in, and where she said she didn’t know anything (a lie), the FBI was in complete turmoil (see N.Y. Post) because of Comey’s poor leadership and the way he handled the Clinton mess (not to mention his usurpation of powers from the Justice Department). My firing of James Comey was a great day for America. He was a Crooked Cop who is being totally protected by his best friend, Bob Mueller, & the 13 Angry Democrats - leaking machines who have NO interest in going after the Real Collusion (and much more) by Crooked Hillary Clinton, her Campaign, and the Democratic National Committee. Just Watch! 

I have been FAR tougher on Russia than Obama, Bush or Clinton. Maybe tougher than any other President. At the same time, & as I have often said, getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. I fully expect that someday we will have good relations with Russia again!

Lyin’ James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter S and his lover, agent Lisa Page, & more, all disgraced and/or fired and caught in the act. These are just some of the losers that tried to do a number on your President. Part of the Witch Hunt. Remember the “insurance policy?” This is it! -Donald Trump

Wow, just learned in the Failing New York Times that the corrupt former leaders of the FBI, almost all fired or forced to leave the agency for some very bad reasons, opened up an investigation on me, for no reason & with no proof, after I fired Lyin’ James Comey, a total sleaze!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2019

...Funny thing about James Comey. Everybody wanted him fired, Republican and Democrat alike. After the rigged & botched Crooked Hillary investigation, where she was interviewed on July 4th Weekend, not recorded or sworn in, and where she said she didn’t know anything (a lie),....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2019

....the FBI was in complete turmoil (see N.Y. Post) because of Comey’s poor leadership and the way he handled the Clinton mess (not to mention his usurpation of powers from the Justice Department). My firing of James Comey was a great day for America. He was a Crooked Cop......

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2019

.....who is being totally protected by his best friend, Bob Mueller, & the 13 Angry Democrats - leaking machines who have NO interest in going after the Real Collusion (and much more) by Crooked Hillary Clinton, her Campaign, and the Democratic National Committee. Just Watch!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2019

I have been FAR tougher on Russia than Obama, Bush or Clinton. Maybe tougher than any other President. At the same time, & as I have often said, getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. I fully expect that someday we will have good relations with Russia again!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2019

Lyin’ James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter S and his lover, agent Lisa Page, & more, all disgraced and/or fired and caught in the act. These are just some of the losers that tried to do a number on your President. Part of the Witch Hunt. Remember the “insurance policy?” This is it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2019

While there is nothing new here confirming Trump was colluding with Russia, as Byron York asks following the article, was the New York Times story about Trump, or about FBI malfeasance? 



via IFTTT

Orlov: Placing The USA On A Collapse Continuum

ORIGINAL LINK

Authored by Dmitry Orlov via The Unz Review,

The West is rotting!
Yes, maybe, but what a nice smell…

Old Soviet joke

The word ‘catastrophe‘ has several meanings, but in its original meaning in Greek the word means a “sudden downturn” (in Greek katastrophÄ“ ‘overturning, sudden turn,’ from kata- ‘down’ + strophÄ“ ‘turning’). As for the word “superpower” it also has several possible definitions, but my preferred one is this one “Superpower is a term used to describe a state with a dominant position, which is characterized by its extensive ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of economic, military, technological and cultural strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers” this one, “an extremely powerful nation, especially one capable of influencing international events and the acts and policies of less powerful nations” or this one “an international governing body able to enforce its will upon the most powerful states“.

I have mentioned the very visible decline of the US and its associated Empire in many of my articles already, so I won’t repeat it here other than to say that the “ability to exert influence and impose its will” is probably the best criteria to measure the magnitude of the fall of the US since Trump came to power (the process was already started by Dubya and Obama, but it sure accelerated with The Donald). But I do want to use a metaphor to revisit the concept of catastrophe.

If you place an object in the middle of a table and then push it right to the edge, you will exert some amount of energy we can call “E1”. Then, if the edge of the table is smooth and you just push the object over the edge, you exercise a much smaller amount of energy we can call “E2”. And, in most cases (if the table is big enough), you will also find that E1 is much bigger than E2 yet E2, coming after E1 took place, triggered a much more dramatic event: instead of smoothly gliding over the table top, the object suddenly falls down and shatters. That sudden fall can also be called a “catastrophe”. This is also something which happens in history, take the example of the Soviet Union.

The fate of all empires…

Some readers might recall how Alexander Solzhenitsyn repeatedly declared in the 1980s that he was sure that the Soviet regime would collapse and that he would return to Russia. He was, of course, vitriolically ridiculed by all the “specialists” and “experts”. After all, why would anybody want to listen to some weird Russian exile with politically suspicious ideas (there were rumors of “monarchism” and “anti-Semitism”) when the Soviet Union was an immense superpower, armed to the teeth with weapons, with an immense security service, with political allies and supporters worldwide? Not only that, but all the “respectable” specialists and experts were unanimous that, while the Soviet regime had various problems, it was very far from collapse. The notion that NATO would soon replace the Soviet military not only in eastern Europe, but even in part of the Soviet Union was absolutely unthinkable. And yet it all happened, very, very fast. I would argue that the Soviet union completely collapsed in the span of less than 4 short years: 1990-1993. How and why this happened is beyond the scope of this article, but what is undeniable is that in 1989 the Soviet Union was still an apparently powerful entity, while by the end of 1993, it was gone (smashed into pieces by the very nomenklatura which used to rule over it). How did almost everybody miss that?

Because ideologically-poisoned analysis leads to intellectual complacence, a failure of imagination and, generally, an almost total inability to even hypothetically look at possible outcomes. This is how almost all the “Soviet specialists” got it wrong (the KGB, by the way, had predicted this outcome and warned the Politburo, but the Soviet gerontocrats were ideologically paralyzed and were both unable, and often unwilling, to take any preventative action). The Kerensky masonic regime in 1917 Russia, the monarchy in Iran or the Apartheid regime in South Africa also collapsed very fast once the self-destruction mechanism was in place and launched.

You can think of that “regime self-destruction mechanism” as our E1 phase in our metaphor above. As for E2, you can think of it as whatever small-push like event which precipitates the quick and final collapse, apparently with great ease and minimum energy spent.

At this point it is important to explain what exactly a “final collapse” looks like. Some people are under the very mistaken assumption that a collapsed society or country looks like a Mad Max world. This is not so. The Ukraine has been a failed state for several years already, but it still exists on the map. People live there, work, most people still have electricity (albeit not 24/7), a government exists, and, at least officially, law and order is maintained. This kind of collapsed society can go on for years, maybe decades, but it is in a state of collapse nonetheless, as it has reached all the 5 Stages of Collapse as defined by Dmitry Orlov in his seminal book “The Five Stages of Collapse: Survivors’ Toolkit” where he mentions the following 5 stages of collapse:

  • Stage 1: Financial collapse. Faith in “business as usual” is lost.

  • Stage 2: Commercial collapse. Faith that “the market shall provide” is lost.

  • Stage 3: Political collapse. Faith that “the government will take care of you” is lost.

  • Stage 4: Social collapse. Faith that “your people will take care of you” is lost.

  • Stage 5: Cultural collapse. Faith in “the goodness of humanity” is lost.

Having personally visited Argentina in the 1970s and 1980s, and seen the Russia of the early 1990s, I can attest that a society can completely collapse while maintaining a lot of the external appearances of a normal still functioning society. Unlike the Titanic, most collapsed regimes don’t fully sink. They remain about half under water, and half above, possibly with an orchestra still playing joyful music. And in the most expensive top deck cabins, a pretty luxurious lifestyle can be maintained by the elites. But for most of the passengers such a collapse results in poverty, insecurity, political instability and a huge loss in welfare. Furthermore, in terms of motion, a half-sunk ship is no ship at all.

Here is the crucial thing: as long as the ship’s PA systems keep announcing great weather and buffet brunches, and as long as most of the passengers remain in their cabins and watch TV instead of looking out of the window, the illusion of normalcy can be maintained for a fairly long while, even after a collapse. During the E1 phase outlined above, most passengers will be kept in total ignorance (lest they riot or protest) and only when E2 strikes (totally unexpectedly for most passengers) does reality eventually destroy the ignorance and illusions of the brainwashed passengers.

Obama was truly the beginning of the end

I have lived in the US from 1986-1991 and from 2002 to today and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the country has undergone a huge decline over the past decades. In fact, I would argue that the US has been living under E1 condition since at least Dubya and that this process dramatically accelerated under Obama and Trump. I believe that we reached the E2 “edge of the table” moment in 2018 and that from now on even a relatively minor incident can result in a sudden downturn (i.e. a “catastrophe”). Still, I decided to check with the undisputed specialist of this issue and so I emailed Dmitry Orlov and asked him the following question:

In your recent article “The Year the Planet Flipped Over” you paint a devastating picture of the state of the Empire:

It is already safe to declare Trump’s plan to Make America Great Again (MAGA) a failure. Beneath the rosy statistics of US economic growth hides the hideous fact that it is the result of a tax holiday granted to transnational corporations to entice them to repatriate their profits. While this hasn’t helped them (their stocks are currently cratering) it has been a disaster for the US government as well as for the economic system as whole. Tax receipts have shrunk. The budget deficit for 2018 exceeds $779 billion.

Meanwhile, the trade wars which Trump initiated have caused the trade deficit to increase by 17% from the year before. Plans to repatriate industrial production from low-cost countries remain vaporous because the three key elements which China had as it industrialized (cheap energy, cheap labor and low cost of doing business) are altogether missing. Government debt is already beyond reasonable and its expansion is still accelerating, with just the interest payments set to exceed half a trillion a year within a decade.

This trajectory does not bode well for the continued existence of the United States as a going concern. Nobody, either in the United States or beyond, has the power to significantly alter this trajectory. Trump’s thrashing about may have moved things along faster than they otherwise would have, at least in the sense of helping convince the entire world that the US is selfish, feckless, ultimately self-destructive and generally unreliable as a partner. In the end it won’t matter who was president of the US—it never has. Among those the US president has succeeded in hurting most are his European allies. His attacks on Russian energy exports to Europe, on European car manufacturers and on Europe’s trade with Iran have caused a fair amount of damage, both political and economic, without compensating for it with any perceived or actual benefits.

Meanwhile, as the globalist world order, which much of Europe’s population appears ready to declare a failure, begins to unravel, the European Union is rapidly becoming ungovernable, with established political parties unable to form coalitions with ever-more-numerous populist upstarts. It is too early to say that the EU has already failed altogether, but it already seems safe to predict that within a decade it will no longer remain as a serious international factor.

Although the disastrous quality and the ruinous mistakes of Europe’s own leadership deserve a lot of the blame, some of it should rest with the erratic, destructive behavior of their transoceanic Big Brother. The EU has already morphed into a strictly regional affair, unable to project power or entertain any global geopolitical ambitions. Same goes for Washington, which is going to either depart voluntarily (due to lack of funds) or get chased out from much of the world.

The departure from Syria is inevitable whether Trump, under relentless pressure from his bipartisan warmongers, backtracks on this commitment or not. Now that Syria has been armed with Russia’s up-to-date air defense weapons the US no longer maintains air superiority there, and without air superiority the US military is unable to do anything. Afghanistan is next; there, it seems outlandish to think that the Washingtonians will be able to achieve any sort of reasonable accommodation with the Taliban.

Their departure will spell the end of Kabul as a center of corruption where foreigners steal humanitarian aid and other resources. Somewhere along the way the remaining US troops will also be pulled out of Iraq, where the parliament, angered by Trump’s impromptu visit to a US base, recently voted to expel them. And that will put paid to the entire US adventure in the Middle East since 9/11: $4,704,439,588,308 has been squandered, to be preciseor $14,444 for every man, woman and child in the US.

The biggest winners in all of this are, obviously, the people of the entire region, because they will no longer be subjected to indiscriminate US harassment and bombardment, followed by Russia, China and Iran, with Russia solidifying its position as the ultimate arbiter of international security arrangements thanks to its unmatched military capabilities and demonstrated knowhow for coercion to peace. Syria’s fate will be decided by Russia, Iran and Turkey, with the US not even invited to the talks. Afghanistan will fall into the sphere of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. And the biggest losers will be former US regional allies, first and foremost Israel, followed by Saudi Arabia.

My question for you is this: where would you place the US (or the Empire) on your 5 stages of decline and do you believe that the US (or the Empire) can reverse that trend?

Here is Dmitry’s reply:

Collapse, at each stage, is a historical process that takes time to run its course as the system adapts to changing circumstances, compensates for its weaknesses and finds ways to continue functioning at some level. But what changes rather suddenly is faith or, to put it in more businesslike terms, sentiment. A large segment of the population or an entire political class within a country or the entire world can function based on a certain set of assumptions for much longer than the situation warrants but then over a very short period of time switch to a different set of assumptions. All that sustains the status quo beyond that point is institutional inertia. It imposes limits on how fast systems can change without collapsing entirely. Beyond that point, people will tolerate the older practices only until replacements for them can be found.

Stage 1: Financial collapse. Faith in “business as usual” is lost.

Internationally, the major change in sentiment in the world has to do with the role of the US dollar (and, to a lesser extent, the Euro and the Yen—the other two reserve currencies of the three-legged globalist central banker stool). The world is transitioning to the use of local currencies, currency swaps and commodities markets backed by gold. The catalyst for this change of sentiment was provided by the US administration itself which sawed through its own perch by its use of unilateral sanctions. By using its control over dollar-based transactions to block international transactions it doesn’t happen to like it forced other countries to start looking for alternatives. Now a growing list of countries sees throwing off the shackles of the US dollar as a strategic goal. Russia and China use the ruble and the yuan for their expanding trade; Iran sells oil to India for rupees. Saudi Arabia has started to accept the yuan for its oil.

This change has many knock-on effects. If the dollar is no longer needed to conduct international trade, other nations no longer have hold large quantities of it in reserve. Consequently, there is no longer a need to buy up large quantities of US Treasury notes. Therefore, it becomes unnecessary to run large trade surpluses with the US, essentially conducting trade at a loss. Further, the attractiveness of the US as an export market drops and the cost of imports to the US rises, thereby driving up cost inflation. A vicious spiral ensues in which the ability of the US government to borrow internationally to finance the gaping chasm of its various deficits becomes impaired. Sovereign default of the US government and national bankruptcy then follow.

The US may still look mighty, but its dire fiscal predicament coupled with its denial of the inevitability of bankruptcy, makes it into something of a Blanche DuBois from the Tennessee Williams play “A Streetcar Named Desire.” She was “always dependent on the kindness of strangers” but was tragically unable to tell the difference between kindness and desire. In this case, the desire is for national advantage and security, and to minimize risk by getting rid of an unreliable trading partner.

How quickly or slowly this comes to pass is difficult to guess at and impossible to calculate. It is possible to think of the financial system in terms of a physical analogue, with masses of funds traveling at some velocity having a certain inertia (p = mv) and with forces acting on that mass to accelerate it along a different trajectory (F = ma). It is also possible to think of it in terms of hordes of stampeding animals who can change course abruptly when panicked. The recent abrupt moves in the financial markets, where trillions of dollars of notional, purely speculative value have been wiped out within weeks, are more in line with the latter model.

Stage 2: Commercial collapse. Faith that “the market shall provide” is lost.

Within the US there is really no other alternative than the market. There are a few rustic enclaves, mostly religious communities, that can feed themselves, but that’s a rarity. For everyone else there is no choice but to be a consumer. Consumers who are broke are called “bums,” but they are still consumers. To the extent that the US has a culture, it is a commercial culture in which the goodness of a person is based on the goodly sums of money in their possession. Such a culture can die by becoming irrelevant (when everyone is dead broke) but by then most of the carriers of this culture are likely to be dead too. Alternatively, it can be replaced by a more humane culture that isn’t entirely based on the cult of Mammon—perhaps, dare I think, through a return to a pre-Protestant, pre-Catholic Christian ethic that values people’s souls above objects of value?

Stage 3: Political collapse. Faith that “the government will take care of you” is lost.

All is very murky at the moment, but I would venture to guess that most people in the US are too distracted, too stressed and too preoccupied with their own vices and obsessions to pay much attention to the political realm. Of the ones they do pay attention, a fair number of them seem clued in to the fact that the US is not a democracy at all but an elites-only sandbox in which transnational corporate and oligarchic interests build and knock down each others’ sandcastles.

The extreme political polarization, where two virtually identical pro-capitalist, pro-war parties pretend to wage battle by virtue-signaling may be a symptom of the extremely decrepit state of the entire political arrangement: people are made to watch the billowing smoke and to listen to the deafening noise in the hopes that they won’t notice that the wheels are no longer turning.

The fact that what amounts to palace intrigue—the fracas between the White House, the two houses of Congress and a ghoulish grand inquisitor named Mueller—has taken center stage is uncannily reminiscent of various earlier political collapses, such as the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire or of the fall and the consequent beheading of Louis XVI. The fact that Trump, like the Ottoman worthies, stocks his harem with East European women, lends an eerie touch. That said, most people in the US seem blind to the nature of their overlords in a way that the French, with their Gilettes Jaunesmovement (just as an example) are definitely not.

Stage 4: Social collapse. Faith that “your people will take care of you” is lost.

I have been saying for some years now that within the US social collapse has largely run its course, although whether people actually believe that is an entire matter entirely. Defining “your people” is rather difficult. The symbols are still there—the flag, the Statue of Liberty and a predilection for iced drinks and heaping plates of greasy fried foods—but the melting pot seems to have suffered a meltdown and melted all the way to China. At present half the households within the US speak a language other than English at home, and a fair share of the rest speak dialects of English that are not mutually intelligible with the standard North American English dialect of broadcast television and university lecturers.

Throughout its history as a British colony and as a nation the US has been dominated by the Anglo ethnos. The designation “ethnos” is not an ethnic label. It is not strictly based on genealogy, language, culture, habitat, form of government or any other single factor or group of factors. These may all be important to one extent or another, but the viability of an ethnos is based solely on its cohesion and the mutual inclusivity and common purpose of its members. The Anglo ethnos reached its zenith in the wake of World War II, during which many social groups were intermixed in the military and their more intelligent members.

Fantastic potential was unleashed when privilege—the curse of the Anglo ethnos since its inception—was temporarily replaced with merit and the more talented demobilized men, of whatever extraction, were given a chance at education and social advancement by the GI Bill. Speaking a new sort of American English based on the Ohio dialect as a Lingua Franca, these Yanks—male, racist, sexist and chauvinistic and, at least in their own minds, victorious—were ready to remake the entire world in their own image.

They proceeded to flood the entire world with oil (US oil production was in full flush then) and with machines that burned it. Such passionate acts of ethnogenesis are rare but not unusual: the Romans who conquered the entire Mediterranean basin, the barbarians who then sacked Rome, the Mongols who later conquered most of Eurasia and the Germans who for a very brief moment possessed an outsized Lebensraum are other examples.

And now it is time to ask: what remains of this proud conquering Anglo ethnos today? We hear shrill feminist cries about “toxic masculinity” and minorities of every stripe railing against “whitesplaining” and in response we hear a few whimpers but mostly silence. Those proud, conquering, virile Yanks who met and fraternized with the Red Army at the River Elbe on April 25, 1945—where are they? Haven’t they devolved into a sad little subethnos of effeminate, porn-addicted overgrown boys who shave their pubic hair and need written permission to have sex without fear of being charged with rape?

Will the Anglo ethnos persist as a relict, similar to how the English have managed to hold onto their royals (who are technically no longer even aristocrats since they now practice exogamy with commoners)? Or will it get wiped out in a wave of depression, mental illness and opiate abuse, its glorious history of rapine, plunder and genocide erased and the statues of its war heros/criminals knocked down? Only time will tell.

Stage 5: Cultural collapse. Faith in “the goodness of humanity” is lost.

The term “culture” means many things to many people, but it is more productive to observe cultures than to argue about them. Cultures are expressed through people’s stereotypical behaviors that are readily observable in public. These are not the negative stereotypes often used to identify and reject outsiders but the positive stereotypes—cultural standards of behavior, really—that serve as requirements for social adequacy and inclusion. We can readily assess the viability of a culture by observing the stereotypical behaviors of its members.

  • Do people exist as a single continuous, inclusive sovereign realm or as a set of exclusive, potentially warring enclaves segregated by income, ethnicity, education level, political affiliation and so on? Do you see a lot of walls, gates, checkpoints, security cameras and “no trespassing” signs? Is the law of the land enforced uniformly or are there good neighborhoods, bad neighborhoods and no-go zones where even the police fear to tread?

  • Do random people thrown together in public spontaneously enter into conversation with each other and are comfortable with being crowded together, or are they aloof and fearful, and prefer to hide their face in the little glowing rectangle of their smartphone, jealously guarding their personal space and ready to regard any encroachment on it as an assault?

  • Do people remain good-natured and tolerant toward each other even when hard-pressed or do they hide behind a façade of tense, superficial politeness and fly into a rage at the slightest provocation? Is conversation soft in tone, gracious and respectful or is it loud, shrill, rude and polluted with foul language? Do people dress well out of respect for each other, or to show off, or are they all just déclassé slobs—even the ones with money?

  • Observe how their children behave: are they fearful of strangers and trapped in a tiny world of their own or are they open to the world and ready to treat any stranger as a surrogate brother or sister, aunt or uncle, grandmother or grandfather without requiring any special introduction? Do the adults studiously ignore each others’ children or do they spontaneously act as a single family?

  • If there is a wreck on the road, do they spontaneously rush to each others’ rescue and pull people out before the wreck explodes, or do they, in the immortal words of Frank Zappa, “get on the phone and call up some flakes” who “rush on over and wreck it some more”?

  • If there is a flood or a fire, do the neighbors take in the people who are rendered homeless, or do they allow them to wait for the authorities to show up and bus them to some makeshift government shelter?

It is possible to quote statistics or to provide anecdotal evidence to assess the state and the viability of a culture, but your own eyes and other senses can provide all the evidence you need to make that determination for yourself and to decide how much faith to put in “the goodness of humanity” that is evident in the people around you.

Dmity concluded his reply by summarizing his view like this:

Cultural and social collapse are very far along. Financial collapse is waiting for a trigger. Commercial collapse will happen in stages some of which—food deserts, for instance—have already happened in many places. Political collapse will only become visible once the political class gives up. It’s not as simple as saying which stage we are at. They are all happening in parallel, to one extent or another.

My own (totally subjective) opinion is that the US has already reached stages 1 through 4, and that there are signs that stage 5 has begun; mainly in big cities as US small towns and rural areas (Trump’s power base, by the way) are still struggling to maintain the norms and behaviors one could observe in the US of the 1980s. When I have visitors from Europe they always comment how friendly and welcoming US Americans are (true, I live in small-town in East-Central Florida, not in Miami…). These are the communities which voted for Trump because they said “we want our country back”. Alas, instead of giving them their country back, Trump gifted it to the Neocons…

Conclusion: connecting the dots; or not

Frankly, the dots are all over the place; it is really hard to miss them. However, for the doubleplusgoodthinkingideological drone” they remain largely invisible, and this is not due to any eyesight problem, but due to that drone’s total inability to connect the dots. These are the kind of folks who danced on the deck of the Titanic while it was sinking. For them, when the inevitable catastrophe comes, it will be a total, mind-blowing, surprise. But, until that moment, they will keep on denying the obvious, no matter how obvious that obvious has become.

Don’t expect these two losers to fix anything, they will only make things worse…

In the meantime, the US ruling elites are locked into an ugly internal struggle which only further weakens the US. What is so telling is that the Democrats are still stuck with their same clueless, incompetent and infinitely arrogant leadership, in spite of the fact that everybody knows that the Democratic Party is in deep crisis and that new faces are desperately needed. But no, they are still completely stuck in their old ways and the same gang of gerontocrats continues to rule the party apparatus.

That is another surefire sign of degeneracy: when a regime can only produce incompetent, often old, leaders who are completely out of touch with reality and who blame their own failures on internal (“deplorables”) and external (“the Russians”) factors. Again, think of the Soviet Union under Brezhnev, the Apartheid regime in South Africa under F. W. de Klerk, or the Kerensky regime in 1917 Russia.

As for the Republicans, they are basically a subsidiary of the Israeli Likud Party. Just take a look at the long list of losers the Likud produced at home, and you will get a sense of what they can do in its US colony.

Eventually the US will rebound; I have no doubts about that at all. This is a big country with millions of immensely talented people, immense natural resources and no credible threat to it’s territory. But that can only happen after a real regime change (as opposed to a change in Presidential Administration) which, itself, is only going to happen after an “E2 catastrophe” collapse.

Until then, we will all be waiting for Godot.



via IFTTT