This episode of Breaking History rips apart the official narrative on power and ideology, exposing a century-long, meticulously engineered plot for global conflict.
I think it was about 40 to 45 years ago, my kids were growing up and I wanted to help with their education. The BBC were running programs for schools so I would sit my kids down to watch. I began to notice some subtle brainwashing . For example in a chemistry class a little group who were black, always got the experiment right whereas the white kids didn’t. Then other things, on the TV at that time were pop programmes showing videos. I began to notice that nearly all the acts featured white girls With black guys dancing in the back, or together. Then in their school books, little Charlie’s Dad couldn’t repair his bicycle so Charlie went round to his friend Mohammed and his dad repaired the bicycle perfectly. At first I believed this was just Diversity education but it happened too often and I wondered how mine and other white kids accepted this and how it affected their outlook on life.
Then, as the years went on, I noticed a distinct replacement of weight particularly white boys by black boys. This happened in adverts, in government publications (like passport manuals) on all media, in music and of course the black kids or men were always part with white girls , particularly blondes. It seemed like our girls were being sneakily persuaded to find a black partner, and this was becoming obvious in real life.
When Black actors started to appear in BBC movies, remix of famous history like Les Misérables, the Time Machine, One of the worlds and other classics where they are never featured in books and would never have been in the productions anyway. This, as you know is still operating at this time. Other things were happening as well, the March of queer theory and grooming into our infant schools And other perverted situations which began to seriously affect our children.
I couldn’t work out how and why this was happening. Who was behind this reshaping of our society? I didn’t know where to look. I began by looking through one of David Icke’s books. I know David has been rubbished for some weird things he said but there was a lot that made sense… About a Cabal controlling our society. I knew this control must be Well above government level.
Then I looked at others, Paul Joseph Watson, and James Lyndsey and Logan Lancing, for their excellent book, “the Queering of the American child” (I can thoroughly recommend this as a illumination of Marxism and queer culture). I found quite a few sources.
I remember reading about Count Koudenov Kalergi and his work and theories. He was, in my source, quoted as being the first man to push the concept of a break up of white European Christian Society by replacing it with natives of underdeveloped irregilious countries like Africa and India with cultures very different from ours
Perhaps it wasn’t him, but some organisation or Cabal was behind such an operation. And introducing it effectively and quickly. However, it was but obviously permeated government, the big institutions like UNESCO, all the media, the police… Basically every aspect of our society. You Matt, you seem to suggest that this operation wasn’t happening but I can assure you that it is. Our White population and particularly girls, are being treated like cattle by these imported thugs, mainly from Africa. And worse when they are raped and assaulted Our police are defending the perpetrators, the media are not reporting incident and parents are being shut up. There is obviously a drive to Show our society how powerless we are. It is horrendous and it can only get worse.
here in Britain we don’t have a Trump And if we did how long would he last. You have made it abundantly clear Cynthia how if anyone tries to stop the controllers they are simply assassinated.
God bless Trump, but I do not know how he has lasted this long against the satanic powers who dominate society (with vile members like Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Bill Gates et cetera)
I could go on and on, what can we do? I really appreciate your fantastic work Matt and Cynthia. And you have become my solace, and first step to relax my mind. God bless you both.
Thanks, Cynthia, for the comprehensive review of our current Geo Nazi Regimes. “Fascism” is a gentle descriptor. “Nazi” explicitly encapsulates the pervasive closet militarism of the Creep State (in all its traditional ancient and modern historical forms, secret societies, cults, thru OAS-SS-MI*, AI, PayPal Mafia, Palantir et al.), as well as our current ZioNazi death cults.
I'm still ploughing through your “The Empire ..”, an intriguing Nazi buffet? Definitely everything we weren't taught in school! Merci d'abord!
Truly .. finished my Third Watch, for fun, and catch all the details. My brain automatically turned off for the ads, but my Third time I caught the Faraday Bags ad!
Hi James, I watch the ads as well because I know they support the channel. I feel I should order some towels because I really like the guy who runs the company. The security gear was excellent as well and if I had anything worth keeping safe I would be definitely looking at some of those.
As usual your work is highly interesting and relevant.
.
What I enclose here is just something I think is being overlooked about the actual loss of real influence by the EU and that it is largely omitted from the debate,
.
Namely that the NWO as regards the EU was already in place in 1991 when David Rockefeller held a speech at the Bilderbergs.
US congressman John Rarick had revealed in 1971 what the plans were and that they would take about 20 years to attain.
.
So since David Rockefeller thanked the msm in 1991 for having helped to guard the secret about what was going on and since he says we couldnt have carried it out without the medias help we may make a plausible guess that the NWO had been achieved.
He virtually said that.
.
John Rarick had revaled that an important aspect of the plan was for the US to gain control of ALL EUROPEAN ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS.
That was the NWO what regards the EU.
And nothing indicates that has been altered.
What it means is the EU is a powerless puppet.
.
And all the tough talk of some Europeans is just an act in the interest of the US.
Because the US benefits from making the EU look like an aggressor who is independently pulling in a different direction than the US.
.
So Russia may conclude that since they dont want the WW3 to happen they can settle for just attacking some targets in the EU if they continue supporting attacks on Russian targets.
.
But leaving the US alone what regards their North american territory.
Those experienced americans who have been outspoken critics of the west and of the US are allowed to act like that not because the ruling oligarchy likes the truth but because they fear Russian retaliation targeting US territory if they continue pestering and provoking Russia.
.
So they condition the EU to put up the act they presently perform.
.
The European slaves or puppets are bravely performing the act in the service of the US.
Bravely like actors on a stage do an effort to look genuine.
.
If the EU really had something to back it up with and were amassing a huge army and enough of military equipment the situation would look very different.
.
Since Europeans would then face a destiny much more like that of the Ukraine and this would undoubtedly lead to much more European protests knowing they would now become cannon fodder and die by the hundreds of thousands.
Hi Peter, thanks for sharing your thoughts. The point of discussing the origins of the pan-europe movement from the level of the masses is an ideological one, and although it is to service the "elites" the masses buy into it anyway. As we see today with the revival of romanticisation around a crusader mythos, blood and soil ideologies and even feudalism around a system of monarchy and chivalric knight orders. A lot of people are buying into this as a response to the weaponisation around immigration. Something that Kalergi was also promoting during his lifetime. The European Union is not a powerless structure. The nations who have signed away their freedom are powerless within it, but the European Union has immense power politically as well as financially through the central committees that manage it. I have discussed this in my paper here https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/why-shinzo-abe-was-assassinated-towards?utm_source=publication-search which also includes the relevance of Kalergi.
The thing is I dont trust the thesis that the financiers have enormous power. The only existing historical narrative totally ignores death threats to the bankers in important phases of history. People just assume they are powerful because they serve the empire.
But that only signifies adaptability. Opportunism. In reality if the financiers had independent power it would have been an alternative to invest in Germany and Russia instead of allowing themselves to only fund activities to the liking of the anglosaxon elites. Both Germany and Russia had great potential. And no war was necessary if investments didnt have to serve the angloempire. The British prepared the ground by encouraging zionism and nazism. And by lyingly blaming the jews for what they did only in the service of that empire. The propaganda bureau was busy together with Nesta Webster to render it very difficult for the financiers to have better relations with the rivals of the angloempire. In addition Webster blamed both the Germans and the jews for the bolshevikrevolution omitting Britains crucial role. There are other than jews among financiers but the British recruited them just because they are weak and gave them an offer they couldnt refuse. They became important within the financial world and other financiers would normally not want there to be divison among them. So the special handling of the jews also decided the handling of the financial world.
There was one document, now missing, by Tarpley about how Edward VII in 1907 threatened the Rothschilds saying they would not be welcome if they didnt do what he told them. Being an obvious VIP client himself there is no chance the Rothschilds would have had any problems selecting suitable investments for his private money. But the obvious explanation is that it wasnt about his private money but about the economy of the British empire.
Later when the FED was created. Things changed and allowed for financiers and angloimperialists to more easily join forces. But in 1907 the Rothschilds suddenly divested from Russia. Obviously, on the surface, rebels played a role. Tartars attacked the employees of the Nobels where Rothschild was invested.
But the bankers never come forward and tell us about divison among the elites. They just adapt to the demands of the leading figures. Edward was the Grand Patriarch of Freemasonry and all masonic bankers were sworn to lojalty. You understand that the absence of much info about such internal conflicts doesnt mean they dont happen or dont matter. The jews and therefore the financiers having been deliberately singled out by Britain not to assimilate among Britains rivals, could be kept in check by Britain. Houston Stewart Chamberlain encouraged the German establishment to not allow jewish assimilation since, as he said that would only make them worse. Some things related to Britains meddling behind the scenes is omitted from the debate since financiers are assumed ultrapowerful. But without solid proof. HSC's teaching was like Mazzinis in some ways: HSC insisted that race is all that matters. In that he was more extreme than other racial theorists influencing Germany.
I realise that many years have passed since then and the Davos crowd like they say seem very influential. But remember how Allen Dulles (A Knight of Malta) was involved with the BIS. According to Lyndon Larouche the Knights of Malta were still sort of a higher power level above the financiers as late as the 1980s.
There is one document on Larouchepub where it is stated that Venice funded the Knights of Malta in 1588.
Larouche's associate Donald Phau also mentioned that Christopher Marlowe told his audience in 1592 that those Knights was a higher power above the money lenders and profited from their actions while in the play (The Jew of Malta) the knight pretended to agree with the popular critics of Barabbas.
There is one document in americanalmanac about the evil of Venice
"In Christopher Marlowe's The Jew of Malta, the main character, Barabas, is skilled in the Venetian art of turning one's adversaries against each other to protect oneself. But Barabas foolishly fails to realize that he himself is a puppet of gamemasters at a higher level: the Knights of Malta for whom he performs as a money lender and financial wheeler-dealer. In the play's closing, Barabas reflects triumphantly--and yet pathetically--on his modus operandi, when he says:
``And thus roundly goes the business;
Thus, loving neither, will I live with both,
Making a profit of my policy;
And he from whom my most advantage comes,
Shall be my friend.''
To the audience, however, Marlowe has made it quite clear that Barabas is as much the victim as the victimizer."
This isnt quoted to defend Barabbas but to discern the bigger picture.
Further Marlowe was officially murdered in 1593 but those who have scrutinised that story concluded that he survived and was allowed to live on under a new name but was not allowed to publish under his real name ever again. Why? For blasphemy it is assumed. His enemy the archbishop plays that role and Marlowe was supposed to have been able to return home in 1604 when the archbishop died. At the time Venice was busy transplanting its system to England and of cource finance was a subject matter of concern. Was it Marlowe's talk about the Knights of Malta that had to be buried without revealing what it was really all about? Did they fear that he would have left a document in the event he was assassinated so they needed to keep him alive but under strict control?
When I say that the EU central committees control pretty all major decisions in western Europe, economically, politically, financially, military I am not discussing them as if they were a separate entity from all else in terms of control. The Trilateral Commission for instance has exerted a great deal of global centralisation in decision-making among a few but they are also not the end all be all, it was just another mechanism, but rather significant nonetheless.
So, I think you are missing the point. The pan-europe movement was created to remove power from the nation states within Europe but also create forms of unhealthy ideologies to which I already mentioned in the above comment. Matt's mentioning of Steve Bannon is a good example. Have you read Matt's paper on who Bannon really works for? https://matthewehret.substack.com/p/steve-bannon-and-chinas-deep-state?utm_source=publication-search (it is the last section of the article).
It is effectively the Black Nobility. If you look into Kalergi's background as well, there is Jesuit and Pietist influences. The EU centralising is an instrument, it is not the head of the octopus so to speak, but it nonetheless crucial to bring into existence in order to achieve the goal of a return to monarchy and empire and away from nation states. The power is of course beyond the EU central committees but the point of our discussion is to discuss the mechanism of how this Kalergi/Bannon vision is playing out, to which they were/are also instruments of.
Let me just say that I appreciate the information You and Matt are providing about those gnostic cults and the long history tying them to the oligarchy
It is part of the universal history we need to know to be able to interpret the historical process.
.
So I am not disregarding that aspect when I deny that EU has such real power that people seem to think.
And yes I did see Matt's information about Bannon.
As always very interesting. I take this seriously but it doesnt mean there is any separate genuine Power than that of the Angloempire.
.
It just underlines how the anglosaxons are meddling everywhere and by all means available.
.
What I mentioned was what the anglosaxon opinion makers omit.
That the jews were not as powerful as most everybody seems to assume.
For example when I mentioned that incident in 1907 the response was : well that must have been a low-level Rothschild.
No it wasnt.
.
And that document seems to be gone since the last 10 years or something.
Or replaced so it was harder to find it, at least the last time I tried.
.
Before that there was the Jack Ripper affaire that I believe was all about preventing Germans and jews to collaborate, with various cover stories about monarchic scandals but I have mentioned it before so I will leave that point now.
.
After WWI all those think tanks began to emerge.
.
The Trilaterals later like you mention.
.
But it was still all about the Anglosaxon empire.
Through their proxies. And against their rivals.
.
I use the term Anglosaxon as a cultural label so I include those who identify with that culture.
Independent of what ethnicity they have.
.
But Nazis Zionists and Radical Islamists did not invent themselves.
.
They are another subset of proxies the Angloempire uses.
So they perform the role they were meant to.
.
In the 1500s when Venice began to transplant itself to Northern Europe, they also initiated the Jesuits in the Vatican and Calvinists in Switzerland.
So there is a line from different stages of the the development of the oligarchy to all the power centers.
.
There arent two strong oligarchies that may be clearly discerned. There is just one.
.
Because those concerned realise that if they remain united they will be much stronger than if they would act like Marxists expect: Trying to capture power from the rest so there is a last man standing at the end.
.
That didnt happen in Venice. They acted like a collective.
.
It may have been about how intellect evolves. That if there are two few separate clans inside the oligarchy there will be a lacuna of smart people to take over important roles and the oligarchy as a whole will be weakened.
.
So there may be some optimum of say at least ten clans. But that means they will not compete as much internally. They will tend to preserve the oligarchy as a collective.
.
I therefore Think the elites are more of collectivists than one might expect.
Since it makes them stronger as a Group. The secret societies have most likely functioned as a stabilising machinery for securing lojalty among the elites.
.
That explains why internal competition isnt perceived to be prevalent among the western elites. And this tendency has increased.
.
Europeans used to be a bit more open and critical about the US. But this absense of a genuine Power struggle in the west, as I see it has subsided gradually since the US in 1991 had changed something in Europe and that something is hard to misunderstand: It was about the economic Power having left Europé and the US had taken over much more Control than they had Before.
.
(Even though the whole process when the EU was created was in the hands of the US. Jean Monet was on pay from the CIA.)
.
Since the US at the time (1991) looked like they were without military competition the EU could accept to be swallowed like that.
.
It was convenient with the US as a world police. They would continue holding the rest of the World down. And therefore eliminate the competition from the global South.
.
When that has began to change, EU being swallowed by the US becomes a greater liability.
.
But since they have never exposed this clearly it hasnt happened in the Eyes of most so the puppets in the EU can go on making bold statements while in reality the mobilisation they would need to have a significant impact hasnt happened.
.
They make some investments in the weapons industry, but they dont show any sign that they really intend to let hundreds of thousands or more die on the battle field.
.
If they had any such plans they ought to have began mass mobilisation at the latest in 2023 or 2024.
.
But they havent. It all makes sense for the US. They need it and Russia accepts that on the Surface the EU looks like a genuine agressor. But just on the Surface. I dont know what the Russians really know about the actual economic control the US has over the EU.
.
But it means it is all about performing acts in the service of the US.
The reason in my view is that the US has Power over the EU that nobody wants people to realise.
.
David Rockefeller gave more than just a hint in 1991 but most people havent got it. The reality is that in the event that the US economy crashes,
.
their connection to the EU is that they are able to confiscate all EUs national possessions and privatise the whole of it.
.
That is probably the consequence of the Euro having the Dollar as the currency of last reserve.
.
That explains why the EU is so desperate to avoid the crash of the US economy.
It seems they feel their own sinking economy is less of a problem.
As long as the US and the west were strong nobody expected it.
.
Now after this long excursion I want to add that the appearance of who is and who isnt powerful should be handled with skepsis. Note how Switzerland suddenly dropped its neutrality.
.
The supposedly powerful Davos crowd's nest.
Because the US needed that parameter to change.
.
And the BIS, who Controls it? Everybody seems to Believe that the bankers most often synonymous with the jews excert enormous Power.
.
I claim that is untrue.
They are just serving the Angloempire.
.
The Illuminati some Believe is very powerful. But it emerged only weeks after some US states declared independence in April 1776.
.
The Illuminati was most likely an arrangement to compensate Britain for the division in anglosaxon freemasonry due to the US rebellion.
.
So again a piece of the puzzle that Points in the same direction as every other piece. Why would the Davos Crowd be a genuine separate Power?
I think it was about 40 to 45 years ago, my kids were growing up and I wanted to help with their education. The BBC were running programs for schools so I would sit my kids down to watch. I began to notice some subtle brainwashing . For example in a chemistry class a little group who were black, always got the experiment right whereas the white kids didn’t. Then other things, on the TV at that time were pop programmes showing videos. I began to notice that nearly all the acts featured white girls With black guys dancing in the back, or together. Then in their school books, little Charlie’s Dad couldn’t repair his bicycle so Charlie went round to his friend Mohammed and his dad repaired the bicycle perfectly. At first I believed this was just Diversity education but it happened too often and I wondered how mine and other white kids accepted this and how it affected their outlook on life.
Then, as the years went on, I noticed a distinct replacement of weight particularly white boys by black boys. This happened in adverts, in government publications (like passport manuals) on all media, in music and of course the black kids or men were always part with white girls , particularly blondes. It seemed like our girls were being sneakily persuaded to find a black partner, and this was becoming obvious in real life.
When Black actors started to appear in BBC movies, remix of famous history like Les Misérables, the Time Machine, One of the worlds and other classics where they are never featured in books and would never have been in the productions anyway. This, as you know is still operating at this time. Other things were happening as well, the March of queer theory and grooming into our infant schools And other perverted situations which began to seriously affect our children.
I couldn’t work out how and why this was happening. Who was behind this reshaping of our society? I didn’t know where to look. I began by looking through one of David Icke’s books. I know David has been rubbished for some weird things he said but there was a lot that made sense… About a Cabal controlling our society. I knew this control must be Well above government level.
Then I looked at others, Paul Joseph Watson, and James Lyndsey and Logan Lancing, for their excellent book, “the Queering of the American child” (I can thoroughly recommend this as a illumination of Marxism and queer culture). I found quite a few sources.
I remember reading about Count Koudenov Kalergi and his work and theories. He was, in my source, quoted as being the first man to push the concept of a break up of white European Christian Society by replacing it with natives of underdeveloped irregilious countries like Africa and India with cultures very different from ours
Perhaps it wasn’t him, but some organisation or Cabal was behind such an operation. And introducing it effectively and quickly. However, it was but obviously permeated government, the big institutions like UNESCO, all the media, the police… Basically every aspect of our society. You Matt, you seem to suggest that this operation wasn’t happening but I can assure you that it is. Our White population and particularly girls, are being treated like cattle by these imported thugs, mainly from Africa. And worse when they are raped and assaulted Our police are defending the perpetrators, the media are not reporting incident and parents are being shut up. There is obviously a drive to Show our society how powerless we are. It is horrendous and it can only get worse.
here in Britain we don’t have a Trump And if we did how long would he last. You have made it abundantly clear Cynthia how if anyone tries to stop the controllers they are simply assassinated.
God bless Trump, but I do not know how he has lasted this long against the satanic powers who dominate society (with vile members like Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Bill Gates et cetera)
I could go on and on, what can we do? I really appreciate your fantastic work Matt and Cynthia. And you have become my solace, and first step to relax my mind. God bless you both.
Thanks, Cynthia, for the comprehensive review of our current Geo Nazi Regimes. “Fascism” is a gentle descriptor. “Nazi” explicitly encapsulates the pervasive closet militarism of the Creep State (in all its traditional ancient and modern historical forms, secret societies, cults, thru OAS-SS-MI*, AI, PayPal Mafia, Palantir et al.), as well as our current ZioNazi death cults.
I'm still ploughing through your “The Empire ..”, an intriguing Nazi buffet? Definitely everything we weren't taught in school! Merci d'abord!
Another mind-expanding delivery from you guys and Badlands. O’ on my third watch now and still struggling to take it all in!
As I’ve said before you are surely and steadily filling all the pieces of that jigsaw that is my conception of, mainly, UK and USA history
Truly .. finished my Third Watch, for fun, and catch all the details. My brain automatically turned off for the ads, but my Third time I caught the Faraday Bags ad!
Hi James, I watch the ads as well because I know they support the channel. I feel I should order some towels because I really like the guy who runs the company. The security gear was excellent as well and if I had anything worth keeping safe I would be definitely looking at some of those.
Good to meet you
As usual your work is highly interesting and relevant.
.
What I enclose here is just something I think is being overlooked about the actual loss of real influence by the EU and that it is largely omitted from the debate,
.
Namely that the NWO as regards the EU was already in place in 1991 when David Rockefeller held a speech at the Bilderbergs.
US congressman John Rarick had revealed in 1971 what the plans were and that they would take about 20 years to attain.
.
So since David Rockefeller thanked the msm in 1991 for having helped to guard the secret about what was going on and since he says we couldnt have carried it out without the medias help we may make a plausible guess that the NWO had been achieved.
He virtually said that.
.
John Rarick had revaled that an important aspect of the plan was for the US to gain control of ALL EUROPEAN ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS.
That was the NWO what regards the EU.
And nothing indicates that has been altered.
What it means is the EU is a powerless puppet.
.
And all the tough talk of some Europeans is just an act in the interest of the US.
Because the US benefits from making the EU look like an aggressor who is independently pulling in a different direction than the US.
.
So Russia may conclude that since they dont want the WW3 to happen they can settle for just attacking some targets in the EU if they continue supporting attacks on Russian targets.
.
But leaving the US alone what regards their North american territory.
Those experienced americans who have been outspoken critics of the west and of the US are allowed to act like that not because the ruling oligarchy likes the truth but because they fear Russian retaliation targeting US territory if they continue pestering and provoking Russia.
.
So they condition the EU to put up the act they presently perform.
.
The European slaves or puppets are bravely performing the act in the service of the US.
Bravely like actors on a stage do an effort to look genuine.
.
If the EU really had something to back it up with and were amassing a huge army and enough of military equipment the situation would look very different.
.
Since Europeans would then face a destiny much more like that of the Ukraine and this would undoubtedly lead to much more European protests knowing they would now become cannon fodder and die by the hundreds of thousands.
.
The EU might be able to recruite drone pilots.
But the russian missiles wouldnt be impressed.
Hi Peter, thanks for sharing your thoughts. The point of discussing the origins of the pan-europe movement from the level of the masses is an ideological one, and although it is to service the "elites" the masses buy into it anyway. As we see today with the revival of romanticisation around a crusader mythos, blood and soil ideologies and even feudalism around a system of monarchy and chivalric knight orders. A lot of people are buying into this as a response to the weaponisation around immigration. Something that Kalergi was also promoting during his lifetime. The European Union is not a powerless structure. The nations who have signed away their freedom are powerless within it, but the European Union has immense power politically as well as financially through the central committees that manage it. I have discussed this in my paper here https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/why-shinzo-abe-was-assassinated-towards?utm_source=publication-search which also includes the relevance of Kalergi.
The thing is I dont trust the thesis that the financiers have enormous power. The only existing historical narrative totally ignores death threats to the bankers in important phases of history. People just assume they are powerful because they serve the empire.
But that only signifies adaptability. Opportunism. In reality if the financiers had independent power it would have been an alternative to invest in Germany and Russia instead of allowing themselves to only fund activities to the liking of the anglosaxon elites. Both Germany and Russia had great potential. And no war was necessary if investments didnt have to serve the angloempire. The British prepared the ground by encouraging zionism and nazism. And by lyingly blaming the jews for what they did only in the service of that empire. The propaganda bureau was busy together with Nesta Webster to render it very difficult for the financiers to have better relations with the rivals of the angloempire. In addition Webster blamed both the Germans and the jews for the bolshevikrevolution omitting Britains crucial role. There are other than jews among financiers but the British recruited them just because they are weak and gave them an offer they couldnt refuse. They became important within the financial world and other financiers would normally not want there to be divison among them. So the special handling of the jews also decided the handling of the financial world.
There was one document, now missing, by Tarpley about how Edward VII in 1907 threatened the Rothschilds saying they would not be welcome if they didnt do what he told them. Being an obvious VIP client himself there is no chance the Rothschilds would have had any problems selecting suitable investments for his private money. But the obvious explanation is that it wasnt about his private money but about the economy of the British empire.
Later when the FED was created. Things changed and allowed for financiers and angloimperialists to more easily join forces. But in 1907 the Rothschilds suddenly divested from Russia. Obviously, on the surface, rebels played a role. Tartars attacked the employees of the Nobels where Rothschild was invested.
But the bankers never come forward and tell us about divison among the elites. They just adapt to the demands of the leading figures. Edward was the Grand Patriarch of Freemasonry and all masonic bankers were sworn to lojalty. You understand that the absence of much info about such internal conflicts doesnt mean they dont happen or dont matter. The jews and therefore the financiers having been deliberately singled out by Britain not to assimilate among Britains rivals, could be kept in check by Britain. Houston Stewart Chamberlain encouraged the German establishment to not allow jewish assimilation since, as he said that would only make them worse. Some things related to Britains meddling behind the scenes is omitted from the debate since financiers are assumed ultrapowerful. But without solid proof. HSC's teaching was like Mazzinis in some ways: HSC insisted that race is all that matters. In that he was more extreme than other racial theorists influencing Germany.
I realise that many years have passed since then and the Davos crowd like they say seem very influential. But remember how Allen Dulles (A Knight of Malta) was involved with the BIS. According to Lyndon Larouche the Knights of Malta were still sort of a higher power level above the financiers as late as the 1980s.
There is one document on Larouchepub where it is stated that Venice funded the Knights of Malta in 1588.
Larouche's associate Donald Phau also mentioned that Christopher Marlowe told his audience in 1592 that those Knights was a higher power above the money lenders and profited from their actions while in the play (The Jew of Malta) the knight pretended to agree with the popular critics of Barabbas.
There is one document in americanalmanac about the evil of Venice
https://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/venphau1.htm
"In Christopher Marlowe's The Jew of Malta, the main character, Barabas, is skilled in the Venetian art of turning one's adversaries against each other to protect oneself. But Barabas foolishly fails to realize that he himself is a puppet of gamemasters at a higher level: the Knights of Malta for whom he performs as a money lender and financial wheeler-dealer. In the play's closing, Barabas reflects triumphantly--and yet pathetically--on his modus operandi, when he says:
``And thus roundly goes the business;
Thus, loving neither, will I live with both,
Making a profit of my policy;
And he from whom my most advantage comes,
Shall be my friend.''
To the audience, however, Marlowe has made it quite clear that Barabas is as much the victim as the victimizer."
This isnt quoted to defend Barabbas but to discern the bigger picture.
Further Marlowe was officially murdered in 1593 but those who have scrutinised that story concluded that he survived and was allowed to live on under a new name but was not allowed to publish under his real name ever again. Why? For blasphemy it is assumed. His enemy the archbishop plays that role and Marlowe was supposed to have been able to return home in 1604 when the archbishop died. At the time Venice was busy transplanting its system to England and of cource finance was a subject matter of concern. Was it Marlowe's talk about the Knights of Malta that had to be buried without revealing what it was really all about? Did they fear that he would have left a document in the event he was assassinated so they needed to keep him alive but under strict control?
When I say that the EU central committees control pretty all major decisions in western Europe, economically, politically, financially, military I am not discussing them as if they were a separate entity from all else in terms of control. The Trilateral Commission for instance has exerted a great deal of global centralisation in decision-making among a few but they are also not the end all be all, it was just another mechanism, but rather significant nonetheless.
So, I think you are missing the point. The pan-europe movement was created to remove power from the nation states within Europe but also create forms of unhealthy ideologies to which I already mentioned in the above comment. Matt's mentioning of Steve Bannon is a good example. Have you read Matt's paper on who Bannon really works for? https://matthewehret.substack.com/p/steve-bannon-and-chinas-deep-state?utm_source=publication-search (it is the last section of the article).
It is effectively the Black Nobility. If you look into Kalergi's background as well, there is Jesuit and Pietist influences. The EU centralising is an instrument, it is not the head of the octopus so to speak, but it nonetheless crucial to bring into existence in order to achieve the goal of a return to monarchy and empire and away from nation states. The power is of course beyond the EU central committees but the point of our discussion is to discuss the mechanism of how this Kalergi/Bannon vision is playing out, to which they were/are also instruments of.
Let me just say that I appreciate the information You and Matt are providing about those gnostic cults and the long history tying them to the oligarchy
It is part of the universal history we need to know to be able to interpret the historical process.
.
So I am not disregarding that aspect when I deny that EU has such real power that people seem to think.
And yes I did see Matt's information about Bannon.
As always very interesting. I take this seriously but it doesnt mean there is any separate genuine Power than that of the Angloempire.
.
It just underlines how the anglosaxons are meddling everywhere and by all means available.
.
What I mentioned was what the anglosaxon opinion makers omit.
That the jews were not as powerful as most everybody seems to assume.
For example when I mentioned that incident in 1907 the response was : well that must have been a low-level Rothschild.
No it wasnt.
.
And that document seems to be gone since the last 10 years or something.
Or replaced so it was harder to find it, at least the last time I tried.
.
Before that there was the Jack Ripper affaire that I believe was all about preventing Germans and jews to collaborate, with various cover stories about monarchic scandals but I have mentioned it before so I will leave that point now.
.
After WWI all those think tanks began to emerge.
.
The Trilaterals later like you mention.
.
But it was still all about the Anglosaxon empire.
Through their proxies. And against their rivals.
.
I use the term Anglosaxon as a cultural label so I include those who identify with that culture.
Independent of what ethnicity they have.
.
But Nazis Zionists and Radical Islamists did not invent themselves.
.
They are another subset of proxies the Angloempire uses.
So they perform the role they were meant to.
.
In the 1500s when Venice began to transplant itself to Northern Europe, they also initiated the Jesuits in the Vatican and Calvinists in Switzerland.
So there is a line from different stages of the the development of the oligarchy to all the power centers.
.
There arent two strong oligarchies that may be clearly discerned. There is just one.
.
Because those concerned realise that if they remain united they will be much stronger than if they would act like Marxists expect: Trying to capture power from the rest so there is a last man standing at the end.
.
That didnt happen in Venice. They acted like a collective.
.
It may have been about how intellect evolves. That if there are two few separate clans inside the oligarchy there will be a lacuna of smart people to take over important roles and the oligarchy as a whole will be weakened.
.
So there may be some optimum of say at least ten clans. But that means they will not compete as much internally. They will tend to preserve the oligarchy as a collective.
.
I therefore Think the elites are more of collectivists than one might expect.
Since it makes them stronger as a Group. The secret societies have most likely functioned as a stabilising machinery for securing lojalty among the elites.
.
That explains why internal competition isnt perceived to be prevalent among the western elites. And this tendency has increased.
.
Europeans used to be a bit more open and critical about the US. But this absense of a genuine Power struggle in the west, as I see it has subsided gradually since the US in 1991 had changed something in Europe and that something is hard to misunderstand: It was about the economic Power having left Europé and the US had taken over much more Control than they had Before.
.
(Even though the whole process when the EU was created was in the hands of the US. Jean Monet was on pay from the CIA.)
.
Since the US at the time (1991) looked like they were without military competition the EU could accept to be swallowed like that.
.
It was convenient with the US as a world police. They would continue holding the rest of the World down. And therefore eliminate the competition from the global South.
.
When that has began to change, EU being swallowed by the US becomes a greater liability.
.
But since they have never exposed this clearly it hasnt happened in the Eyes of most so the puppets in the EU can go on making bold statements while in reality the mobilisation they would need to have a significant impact hasnt happened.
.
They make some investments in the weapons industry, but they dont show any sign that they really intend to let hundreds of thousands or more die on the battle field.
.
If they had any such plans they ought to have began mass mobilisation at the latest in 2023 or 2024.
.
But they havent. It all makes sense for the US. They need it and Russia accepts that on the Surface the EU looks like a genuine agressor. But just on the Surface. I dont know what the Russians really know about the actual economic control the US has over the EU.
.
But it means it is all about performing acts in the service of the US.
The reason in my view is that the US has Power over the EU that nobody wants people to realise.
.
David Rockefeller gave more than just a hint in 1991 but most people havent got it. The reality is that in the event that the US economy crashes,
.
their connection to the EU is that they are able to confiscate all EUs national possessions and privatise the whole of it.
.
That is probably the consequence of the Euro having the Dollar as the currency of last reserve.
.
That explains why the EU is so desperate to avoid the crash of the US economy.
It seems they feel their own sinking economy is less of a problem.
As long as the US and the west were strong nobody expected it.
.
Now after this long excursion I want to add that the appearance of who is and who isnt powerful should be handled with skepsis. Note how Switzerland suddenly dropped its neutrality.
.
The supposedly powerful Davos crowd's nest.
Because the US needed that parameter to change.
.
And the BIS, who Controls it? Everybody seems to Believe that the bankers most often synonymous with the jews excert enormous Power.
.
I claim that is untrue.
They are just serving the Angloempire.
.
The Illuminati some Believe is very powerful. But it emerged only weeks after some US states declared independence in April 1776.
.
The Illuminati was most likely an arrangement to compensate Britain for the division in anglosaxon freemasonry due to the US rebellion.
.
So again a piece of the puzzle that Points in the same direction as every other piece. Why would the Davos Crowd be a genuine separate Power?