GET ACCESS TO CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

€225/250$ FOR 10 ISSUES

SUBSCRIBE or PURCHASE

Iran in turmoil

Again and again, we hear news from Iran. We are hearing it right now. There are street demonstrations, there are street riots, there are arrests. We’ve been hearing about it for some time now, and we are hearing it at present. Obviously, the Iranian government does not suit the political plans of the powers that be or else there would be no riots, no demonstrations. What is happening in Iran has been practised in many other places around the globe, be it Syria or Libya, be it Serbia or Georgia, be it Venezuela or Kazakhstan. There is no evidence, but all the fingerprints point to the culprit behind the riots, and the culprit is always the same: CIA or MI6… or both.

What is again occurring in Tehran is a typical example of a colour revolution, of a revolution from outside. It makes one think about the two Russian revolutions of 1917. Those, too, were instigated from abroad. The result, initially at least, was astonishing. The grand Russian Empire disappeared; Russia sank into a prolonged, atrocious civil war that was also a war of attrition. When the country eventually surfaced onto the political stage, barely anyone reckoned with it because it was so weakened.

Such revolutions, or regime changes as they are called, have been applied very frequently during the second half of the former century, and continue to be applied in the current century. They are very often successful. They were successful in Serbia and Libya, in Syria and in Ukraine. Attempts were made in Belarus, Georgia and Kazakhstan, but they failed. Recently, in Venezuela, another approach has been adopted: that of abduction.

Iran is supported by (first of all) China and Russia. China purchases large quantities of oil from Iran. Iran is a BRICS member. Iran forms a slightly remote underbelly of the Russian Federation. But Iran is also a thorn in Israel’s flesh, and since the United States serves Israel just as the European Union serves Ukraine, so Washington feels obliged to support Israel. We do remember – do we not? — last time when Iran was bombed while the Washington-Tehran negotiations were under way?

The West will either achieve its goal of regime change – like in Syria – or it will lose its grip on Iran for good – just like it lost its grip on Belarus. Let us not forget that it was the British and the Americans who toppled Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953 and paved the way for the monarchical political system to be installed in Tehran. It might be that the same political actors would not mind at all if monarchy were to be restored in Iran. No, it is not monarchy that they are after, we know. It might be monarchy, it might be oligarchy, it might be as well as democracy – or, indeed, any other system of government so long as it is compliant with the managers of the world.

Freedom of expression in the West

The West is fighting to restore democracy and freedom of expression in Russia, Belarus, China, Venezuela and everywhere else on the planet. But Western democracy is like an increasingly rigid corset that restricts citizens’ freedom of movement and expression. In Western democracies, you can only say what the so-called quality media, i.e. government-friendly media, say, otherwise you will end up in prison. To illustrate this, we have selected this graphic from the World of Statistics website (see below).

It turns out that the United Kingdom is the leader in the category of the New Beautiful World, Orwellian style. Of course, someone might say: But this graph does not take into account the population of a particular country. And that’s true, but in the case of the United Kingdom, it doesn’t change much. The population of the United Kingdom is approximately 70 million, which is almost twice the population of Poland. Meanwhile, 40 times more people have been arrested for comments in the United Kingdom than in Poland.

Source

Let’s move on. There are reports that the UK is planning to introduce a surveillance system that reads facial expressions and emotions. The police will be able to analyse people’s emotions in public places using a camera system supported by artificial intelligence algorithms. These technologies will identify potentially suspicious behaviour based on facial expressions, movement patterns, tone of voice or characteristic gestures. The authorities are presenting the project as a tool for fighting crime, preventing suicide attempts and speeding up the search for missing persons. In practice, however, this means paving the way for the creation of a surveillance system that until recently was only a vision from dystopian novels. If such a system is implemented, it will be possible to initiate an arrest before you even touch the keyboard. The Chinese regime is not that far ahead.

Source

Discrepant Exegeses

It was not executed in broad daylight – rather, in the dead of night – but still it was disrespectful as disrespectful can be. A head of state of a sovereign nation was abducted as if he were a criminal. Handcuffs were put on his hands, he was blindfolded and transported – together with his wife – from his own country to the United States. What a show! For all to see. For all leaders to take notice. For all top politicians to be on their guard. That happened on January 3. We all know it, the whole world knows it – the whole world observed it with bated breath.

A head of a relatively large country was captured like he was a street ruffian. Apart from his personal security detail that attempted to put up a fight there was no resistance in the true sense of the word. American aircraft hovered over Caracas the way they might hover over their own turf. There were casualties to be sure but no appreciable resistance of the country as such. Pundits draw conclusions that Nicolás Maduro’s closest associates – generals, ministers – had betrayed him, had let themselves be bribed, and abandoned him in the critical moment. Word has it that only Cuban bodyguards stood up for Nicolás Maduro, as a result of which some of them were killed.

The warrant for the action? The drug trafficking into the United States that allegedly had been sponsored by Caracas and the president himself. Sure enough that is the declared objective, not the genuine one. We’ll talk about the genuine objective later in the text. Here let us make an assumption that it was drug trafficking that triggered the US action, and that Nicolás Maduro really sponsored it. If that were the case then a couple of questions arise.

For at least four years during the Biden administration the American southern border was not merely porous: it was wide open for all to come. Arrivals from South America were flocking across the border and they were not even vetted! Sure enough, drug traffickers may have been among them. Why should Venezuela be punished for that? The drugs are distributed in American cities – does anybody forces the purchase of them at gun point? Last but not least, why are the American police not effective enough? Why must the American army step in? If particular countries were to be blamed for particular sorts of crime that is perpetrated on American soil, then the US army should be intervening around the globe twenty-four seven. But then, if you do not want to have drug traffickers, why have borders open wide for all to cross them?

The event of January 3rd compels one to draw a comparison between the intervention of the US Army in Venezuela and the intervention of the armed forces of the Russian Federation in Ukraine. How alike they are and at the same time how different! Americans claim that Venezuela posed a security threat to the United States; Russia claims that Ukraine posed a security threat to the Russian Federation. Washington says it is protecting its citizens from drug trafficking cartels; Russia maintains it is protecting its citizens from Banderite fascist ideology and the military bases complete with ballistic missiles to be installed in Ukraine once Kiev joins NATO. Washington feels threatened by a country that is three-four thousand kilometers away from America’s coastline; Russia feels threatened by a neighbouring country, a country that is adjacent to Russia, a country that is not separated from the Russian Federation by a body of sea as the United States is separated from Venezuela.

Knowing all this full well, America’s allies go out of their way to either support politically the United States or keep their mouths shut; contrarily, they are beside themselves with outrage when it comes to the Russian intervention in Ukraine. Caracas had diplomatic and economic ties with China and Russia – America’s rivals, but Kiev had ties with the United States and was planning to join NATO, a military alliance which is openly hostile to Russia. These are mirror events and yet they are adjudicated entirely differently. Why?

The United States has executed an action of decapitation which is just yet another one in the long string of such actions. Think about Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, Serbia’s Slobodan Milošević, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, and many others. Leaders of sovereign states are put on trial (Slobodan Milošević, Nicolás Maduro) or killed (Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milošević) or chased away (Bashar al-Assad). Do you still remember the repulsive repugnant disgusting sickening abhorrent enunciation of one Hillary Clinton as she said – commenting on Gaddafi’s death and paraphrasing Julius Caesar – We came, we saw, he died! – and laughed heartily at that? Imagine Vladimir Putin saying something along these lines, commenting on the death of, say, Volodymyr Zelenskyy… What a howl would be raised in the the ‘free’ world! A statement like that would be interpreted as ultimate evidence of Putin’s wickedness.

Might is right, that’s all there is to it. So, America intervened in Venezuela because it saw it fit. All the justification that is being rolled out is either easily refutable or laughable. Isn’t it ridiculous to hear that the world’s dominant superpower needs to abduct the head of a small country located thousands of miles away across the sea because the superpower feels insecure? Isn’t it laughable to hear that the Russian Federation has no legitimate grounds for intervening in a neighbouring country that is about to join a military alliance which is openly hostile to Russia? And yet, millions of people do not seem to see it.

Now the genuine reasons for the American intervention in Venezuela. Venezuela holds the largest oil reserves than any other country, including Saudi Arabia. Venezuela also has other valuable resources. Control over them will provide the United States with enormous economic and – what follows – political leverage. We should not lose the sight of the fact that Saudi Arabia has not prolonged the agreement it once signed with Washington to only sell its oil for American dollars. That in itself is dangerous for the United States. It was the petrodollars that safeguarded American might and American development. All countries and any country wishing to buy oil – and they all need oil for a variety of purposes – needed to first have dollars. Dollars are issued by the United States, so ultimately all the world’s nations needed to directly or indirectly either sell to the United States their goods and services or borrow from the United States. Americans were growing rich by simply… printing dollars or transferring electronic impulses from their bank account to the bank account of a country which was in need of dollars.

The capture of the head of state and the installment of someone who might be willing to comply with American wishes is also a strike dealt against China. China has been spreading its tentacles to Africa and… South America. Beijing has been replacing European colonial powers on the Dark Continent and attempting to dislodge American influence from the Western hemisphere. Americans suddenly remembered the 1823 Monroe’s doctrine, which stated that both American continents are the sphere of influence of the United States alone. No one should dare to set foot anywhere south of the American border. The Chinese have financed the construction of the Port of Chancay in Peru as a part of the Belt and Road Initiative. Its task is to enable the exports to China from South American countries and imports from China to South America. The Middle Kingdom is setting foot where it should not dare, according to the Monroe doctrine.

With this intervention Americans have set yet another example – a warning sign – a mafioso-like manifestation what awaits those leaders who will not comply…

Be it as it may, what strikes the eye is pure hubris, the kind of hubris that has always been present throughout history and always will be. In 1939, the Third Reich and the Soviet Union signed a pact to divide Poland. That pact has been branded by the European Union as a conspiracy against peace; the leaders of the contracting states – Hitler and Stalin – were labeled warmongers who paved the way for the outbreak of the Second World War. Now almost a whole year earlier another pact had been signed, a pact between Germany, Italy, France and the United Kingdom, a pact that paved the way for the partitioning of Czechoslovakia. This pact – signed by Hitler, Mussolini, Daladier and Chamberlain – in Munich has not been branded by the European Union as outrageous, although it, too, led straight to the outbreak of the Second World War. You see? Very similar events, very different interpretations. Much the same is true of the current interventions in Venezuela and Ukraine: American intervention is regarded as the right one, Russian intervention as abominable. History is full of events mirroring each other and receiving discrepant exegeses.

Nuclear fusion, or how Americans want to keep inflating the AI bubble

Nuclear fusion is the process in which two light atomic nuclei fuse under extreme conditions (heat and pressure) to form a heavier nucleus, releasing enormous amounts of energy—similar to what happens in the sun and has been exploited in hydrogen bombs, but this time for the purpose of future energy production.

Nuclear fusion is a kind of holy grail for scientists, as power plants operating in this way would produce huge amounts of energy at low cost. Why so much energy? – one might immediately ask. Well, AI (and cryptocurrencies, for that matter) only work thanks to huge amounts of energy.

Has something new happened? Have we achieved a breakthrough in nuclear fusion technology? Apparently so: on December 19, the owner of the Truth Social platform (Trump Media & Technology Group, DJT) announced a merger with Tae Technologies, a private nuclear fusion company. The transaction is valued at more than $6 billion and its goal was to create the world’s first publicly traded company dedicated to this revolutionary technology. According to Donald the Great, construction of the first power plant was supposed to begin as early as 2026, which is unlikely. However, ambitious promises arise from actual needs. As mentioned, the data centers created by the flood of artificial intelligence around the world require gigantic amounts of energy that the system simply cannot provide.

However, the merger of DJT with TAE Technologies is cause for concern. Nuclear fusion is a technology that requires stable financing, while Trump’s media company is considered a “meme stock” due to its high volatility.

TAE Technologies is not an uninteresting company—it is in a key development phase. In collaboration with Google, they are building a machine called Copernicus, which is intended to demonstrate that it can produce more energy than it consumes. The challenge is great because previous devices heated the plasma to 75 million °C, while a temperature of 1 billion °C is required for efficient power generation. Their technology has a chance of success, but it now requires large investments to lead to its potential commercialization. There is still a long way to go, and given the volatility of DJT, it may just be hot air.

As always, regardless of who is at the helm of the US, a Democrat or a Republican, it is the markets that save the day and play into the hands of Wall Street, especially now that more and more analysts are pointing out the overvaluation of companies such as Nvidia and others in the Magnificent 7.

Conclusion: Perpetual growth is the holy grail of America’s political class.

Venezuela

The country has more oil than Saudi Arabia, yet the majority of its citizens live in poverty. Venezuela’s history is instructive, even for Europeans. When demand for oil rose during the Second World War, the country benefited from its location outside the military conflicts in Europe and Asia to such an extent that in the 1950s it ranked fourth in the world in terms of GDP per capita.

It is noteworthy that this success was achieved under the dictatorship of Jimenez, which refutes the theory that dictatorships of any kind are bad for the economy. Jimenez created a healthy coexistence between foreign corporations and his state: large companies such as Exxon Mobil and Shell brought their technologies and expertise and received 50% of the profits in return, with the other half going to the state treasury.

Country	GDP per capita in 1950

USA	9 500 $
Switzerland	9 000 $
New Zealand	8 500 $
Venezuela	7 500 $
Australia	7 200 $

Source: IWF

When the Arab producers united in OPEC raised prices during the oil crisis in the 1970s, Venezuela was flooded with petrodollars (incidentally, OPEC was Caracas’ initiative). Government revenues rose by 300% between 1972 and 1974! However, the “democrats” who ruled after the fall of Jimenez did not think about the future: instead of building up reserves for a rainy day, such as the Norwegian state pension fund, they spent everything. Although the standard of living in the country rose and the education system was developed, the economy was completely “channelled” into oil production instead of being diversified, as the countries in the Persian Gulf are currently doing. At the same time, the ruling Democrats around Pérez made numerous other mistakes: for example, they embarked on a course of neoliberal austerity policies. When it came to austerity, they resisted the notorious IMF, which tried to impose its will (i.e. that of the US government) on Venezuela, as it did on many other countries around the world. Incidentally, Pérez aptly described the IMF as a “neutron bomb” that “kills people but leaves buildings standing.” Later, due to falling oil prices on the world markets, Pérez privatized state-owned enterprises, subsidies and price controls for public services were abolished, and oil prices were liberalized, which was intended to satisfy the IMF and enable new loans from major Western banks. However, foreign debt hardly decreased, but fuel at petrol stations and public transport prices became significantly more expensive.

Although Pérez was partly neoliberal, he belonged to the National Socialist Party and opened the door to the greatest plague in the world – socialism. And, of course, this did not happen without bloodshed, but with mass protests against his policies, the deployment of the army against its own people, and military coups in which thousands were killed. Extremists naturally emerged victorious from the battles: the Marxists led by Hugo Chávez, the supporters of the Bolivarian Revolution. And lo and behold: while the country had been doing well after the Second World War, despite being ruled by a military junta, its steep decline began with the government of an officer who had been infected with Marxism.

The large corporation that was created by the nationalization of oil companies under Pérez in 1976, which deprived foreign corporations of control over resources (in an effort to achieve self-sufficiency), PDVSA (Petroleum of Venezuela), began investing in infrastructure and technology in the 1990s when oil prices rose again. Once again, foreign companies were allowed to cooperate, contributing capital and technological solutions. This made it possible to produce oil cost-effectively even in old, inefficient fields. As long as PDVSA was independent of politicians, invested in refineries abroad in order to process Venezuelan oil (which was of poor quality) effectively, and performed well on the stock market, the entire post-war system continued to function efficiently. However, Chávez did not like the fact that the company’s lower profits due to investments were making the state coffers in Caracas poorer. He turned PDVSA into a wholly state-owned company, filled it with his own people, and made it ineffective, inefficient and unprofitable. This was also the fate of almost all companies in the former Soviet bloc that were taken over by the state.

Chavez’s policies were met with massive protests because he dismissed over half the workforce of the company that fed the state. The protests (supported by whom? – take a guess) led to Chavez even being arrested in 2002. George Bush triumphed and Donald Trump now wants to follow in his footsteps. But then Chávez returned to power and ruled for so long that he had to name his successor – Nicolás Maduro.
The two men – Chávez and Maduro – ruined the country. PDVSA had consolidated revenues of $96.2 billion in 2007. In 2015, it was barely $12 billion. Not to mention the decline in GDP per capita over the last two decades! Inflation rose from an initial level of 40% in 2013 to over 250% in 2016. Was that when Western sanctions began in order to stop the president? No way! It was to take back the resources!

We do not want to burden you any further with a historical description of the defeat of the Venezuelan socialists/Marxists. There is too much to write about. It suffices to mention a few facts and figures to illustrate the outcome of decades of left-wing governments: Over the past 20 years, Maduro has carried out a complete expropriation of businesses and citizens, the economy is practically non-functional, inflation has risen to an absurd level of 1.3 million per cent, oil production has fallen to World War II levels, foreign assets have been seized by creditors, there is a shortage of food and medicine in shops and pharmacies, and almost 3.5 million Venezuelans have left the country.

Only the USA has the military capability to take over/occupy the country/resources/beautiful piece of nature in South America. War is always waged in the name of something. This time, it is in the name of the fight against drugs and, of course, against dictatorship. If the Russians or Chinese had such an opportunity, they would have seized it immediately. The armed forces have already been sent to the Caribbean.

Gold does not belong to Italians

Nowadays, it is central banks that steer economies, not governments. A central bank should act in the name and for the benefit of the people, but the policies of all central banks, starting with their abandonment of the gold standard, only lead to our currencies becoming increasingly worthless as purchasing power declines. This can be seen, for example, in the US, where consumers can now buy less and less due to the particularly weak dollar.

Currencies are just pieces of paper that we are supposed to trust. We are supposed to trust the notes issued by central banks, but it is all just an illusion. Jacques Delors’ famous quote, “Not all Germans believe in God, but they all believe in the Bundesbank,” may no longer apply since the introduction of the euro, because the euro is not the German mark and today’s dollar does not have the same purchasing power as it did in the 1960s.

Trust in central bankers is declining. Politicians are also less willing to cooperate with them. Trump’s dispute with Powell is well known. Less well known is the fact that the current head of Poland’s central bank is going against government policy. And the example of Italy shows that where the ECB has a say, there is no freedom of decision-making and no trust in this central bank.

At the end of November, Senator Lucio Malan of the Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy) party, the party of Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, proposed an amendment to the draft budget. It was to be added that the gold reserves of the Banca Italia belong to the nation. The proposed amendment aimed to establish once and for all that gold is a national asset held in trust by the central bank for the benefit of the country. Those affected at the ECB immediately began to protest, and instead of the entry about “national ownership,” the law only included a confirmation that gold remains on the balance sheet of the Italian bank, which manages it within the Eurosystem.

This was no insignificant event, as Italy’s gold reserves are the fourth largest in the world and represent 14% of GDP. By comparison, Germany’s reserves represent 10% of GDP and those of the US 4%. We are talking about 2,451 tons of gold, which has been placed under the heavy hand of the bankers in their tower in Frankfurt am Main. If a crisis were to occur, the gold reserves would be “managed within the framework of the Eurosystem.” Another argument for being Eurosceptic.

China’s economy is faltering

In recent decades, economic growth in China has been largely driven by real estate. This sector accounted for up to 30% of the country’s GDP in 2020. The Chinese people’s low confidence in the stock market, coupled with the fact that local governments’ source of income was the sale of land to developers, meant that up to 60% of the country’s citizens’ assets were tied up in real estate. When companies such as Evergrande, which operate on a pyramid model (the money from pre-orders went to repay past obligations), went bankrupt, millions of people were left with mortgages on homes whose construction had been halted or which had largely become vacant. The result is a sharp decline in real estate investment, as shown in the chart below. As you can see, the decline in investment in November 2025 compared to November 2024 was more than 15%, and this trend appears to be deepening month by month. This confirms the capital flight from Chinese real estate.

Source: Chinese Statistics Bureau. Figures for fixed asset investment and real estate investment are given as cumulative change from the previous year. Data for January and February have been combined.

The chart above contains some other important data from the Chinese economy, such as investment in fixed assets like factories, bridges, roads, i.e., infrastructure in general. Such spending has artificially improved economic performance while simultaneously indebting local governments. Within three months, we are facing a decline in this type of investment, which means that another engine of China’s economic development is beginning to collapse.

The Chinese people’s dependence on real estate confirms the sharp decline in retail sales momentum, which rose by only 1% in November compared to the previous year. As the housing market crisis depleted citizens’ savings, they feel less secure and prefer to spend less money. The result is deflation, because people prefer to postpone purchases, knowing that after a while it will become even cheaper.

Unemployment has also risen. When more than 20% of 18- to 24-year-olds were out of work in 2023, the government decided to suspend publication of the results for six months in order to “optimize” the methodology. And lo and behold: unemployment suddenly fell by more than 6% in six months! Despite all such government manipulations, nearly 17% of young people are out of work—that’s not good news.

The response of the comrades in Beijing to the economic crisis is to focus even more on exports. This is confirmed by the maintenance of stable growth momentum in industrial production (see chart). China’s aggressive expansion into foreign markets is therefore directly linked to a difficult domestic situation. If the outlook at home does not improve, the central government will flood the entire world even more with its cheap products (as can already be seen in the European car market).

Beyond the present

Europe has crossed the point of no return when you think about its ethnic structure. The proportion of people from the other continents may not be very high – it might be ten, fifteen percent – but that’s not the point. The point is that, first and foremost, these ten or fifteen percent are very often virile young men who are willing to put up a fight and assert themselves, while the indigenous Europeans are middle-aged or older, very often childless, pacified, and with no other ambition than to have fun and a good relaxing time. Second, the newcomers form their own communities and have effectively appropriated swaths of France, Great Britain, Germany or Sweden, where the indigenous inhabitants are – to put it mildly – not welcome. Third, the arrivals are neither assimilated nor integrated; rather, they are more and more hostile toward the host nations. Fourth, the host nation has a guilt complex that makes it surrender its property and rights to the people from the other continents. In the future, France, Great Britain, Germany or Sweden may still bear the same names, but they are going to be intrinsically different, will be known as France, Great Britain, Germany or Sweden only in name.

Think about the medieval Holy Roman Empire: it was referred to as Roman and yet it had very little to do with ancient Romans apart from the Latin language that was still used in administration, in written form only, and apart from a few legal terms. The Holy Roman Empire was created and run by the Germanic tribes. Hence in historical texts this political entity is often known by its fuller name: the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.

There is a difference between the change that occurred in the early Middle Ages and the change that is taking place now. In late antiquity and the early Middle Ages the ancient Romans were gradually being replaced by the Germanic tribes who were genetically related to the Romans: they were white, Indo-European. At first glance you could not tell the difference. At present we are facing something other than this: the settlers from outside Europe are entirely different. They are not Indo-Europeans, their languages are a long distance away from the Indo-European languages, their faiths, their customs, their heritage, their biology… all of this is a far cra from what Europe used to be. Present-day actors from France or Germany, the United Kingdom or Sweden can impersonate ancient Romans without having to have their skin whitened. The Asian and especially African ethnic replacements of the indigenous peoples of Great Britain, France, Germany or Sweden physically do not resemble the host nations. In a not too distant future we can imagine the future African or Asian actors trying to impersonate the historical figures from the European past. They will have to make a huge effort to make themselves look like the Europeans. That’s a measure of the immense transformation that we are facing.

Yes, there were many ethnic replacements throughout history, also in Europe. But in Europe, one European ethnic group replaced or displaced or absorbed the other European ethnic group. The difference between the two groups that were on a collision course was reducible to language. All other features – faith, skin colour, general customs or heritage – were the same or almost the some (Catholic-Protestant-Orthodox), which made it easily possible for one ethnic group to dissolve itself in the other, dominant group. Thus, the Germans settling in Silesia, south-western part of the then Polish Kingdom and today’s Poland, made the indigenous Slavs become Germans with ease and without violence. Once the indigenous Slavs had given up on their language and adopted German as their mother tongue, they became Germans for good, and they were indistinguishable from the German Germans. The same was true of the German settlement in medieval Prussia (today’s north-eastern Poland), where the conquered people were over time germanized (while, accidentally, the country’s name of the conquered was adopted by the conquerors as their own name).

The same is true of the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish who – since they were white and Christian and since they had adopted English as their mother tongue – could seamlessly become British. For all practical terms, to the outside world, they were simply English because… they spoke the English language and there was no other way than language of knowing which ethnicity the representatives of the Scottish or Welsh or Irish nations were. Such is not the case with all the Algerians, Nigerians, Somalians, Pakistanis or Indians. Even if they speak English, French, German or Swedish as native speakers they will remain distinct at first glance when it comes to looks, and they will remain distinct when it comes to their faith and customs. The white sections of the British, French, German or Swedish societies will stand out visibly in many respects which will create racial and ethnic tension and will possibly lead to the emergence of a caste society, something we have in India. The caste system in India was precisely the result of the Aryan settlement among the indigenous peoples on the Indian subcontinent. First, the racial – ethnic – religious – cultural gap was too large to be bridged; second, the particular ethnic groups naturally wanted to preserve their identity, their separateness, they naturally wanted to live among their own kind.

That’s what Europe is in for. And what a paradox! Precisely at the time when the European political class desired to design a nationless European society, by their policy of importing millions of aliens the same political class is contributing to creating a Europe that is going to be even more fragmented than ever before in its history. The dream of creating a universal European who is of mixed race, believes in nature and speaks English is doomed to be shattered. India is a prime example, as are very many other regions of the world.

GEFIRA BULLETIN

GET ACCESS TO CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

€225/250$ FOR 10 ISSUES

GEFIRA provides in-depth and comprehensive analysis of and valuable insight into current events that investors, financial planners and politicians need to know to anticipate the world of tomorrow; it is intended for professional and non-professional readers.