There is a rule: a prominent politician in a country, a former prime minister or head of the central bank is suddenly selected and promoted to the IMF, the president of the Council of Europe or some other highest office for which everyone in the world has respect. These are often amazing careers and one wonders if people actually have competencies for this.

That’s what happened with Donald Tusk. He did not block the construction of the Northern Stream under Merkel, which would have been in line with the Polish raison d’être at the time. The favorite child of the Mutti-Merkel in Poland became the president of the European Council. A price for the services rendered to Germany and Gazprom Bank. Now Tusk’s arch-enemies have been ruling Poland for more than 8 years, and Kaczynski’s favorite child, the former head of the state television station Jacek Kurski, suddenly got a job at the World Bank. His competences? None. But somehow the pharmaceutical lobbyists and the financial elites had to show their gratitude to him for being a right-wing politician in the Corona pandemic, resisting the “right-wing” and “conspiracy-theory” temptation to question the sense of vaccinations by his critical journalists, and for scaring all citizens hand in hand with left-liberal media in the pandemic every day.

Equally controversial was the election of Louis de Guindos, Spain’s former economy minister, to the ECB board. De Guindos was a banker at Lehmann Brothers, and after the fall of the U.S. bank at Pricewaters Coopers. Similarly, President Macron and Polish Prime Minister Morawiecki rose from the banks to government circles. The high offices are a price for faithful service to bankers, not for service to the people of the given country.

In the fall of 2014, Jose Manuel Barroso resigned as president of the European Commission after 10 years in office. He then waited the legally required 18 months before accepting a job offer from Goldman Sachs. If Barroso cared in the least about the situation of the people of Europe, he would not have taken a job at a bank that helped Greece hide its debt just before it joined the eurozone. However, it is difficult to expect a man who began his political career in communist groups to care about ordinary people.

Goldman Sachs is unrivaled in this regard. The institution effectively pushes its employees into positions in the structures of various countries and then takes them over at the end of their tenure. Sometimes the order is reversed. This is true, for example, of Mario Draghi, who was Italian Finance Minister, then CEO of Goldman Sachs, and is now President of the European Central Bank.

There are many more well-known politicians with ties to Goldman Sachs. Before Mario Monti was appointed to head the Italian government (replacing the democratically elected Silvio Berlusconi), he worked as a senior advisor at Goldman Sachs.

When Greece manipulated its debt just before joining the Eurozone, the head of the National Bank of Greece was Petros Christodoulou, who began his career at Goldman.

Until 2015, Peter Sutherland held the position of Managing Director of Goldman Sachs International. In the 1980s, Sutherland was Attorney General in Ireland. He was later appointed EU Commissioner for Competition. He was also Ireland’s key representative in the negotiations over the nationalization of the banks and the terms of the country’s bailout package.

This shows how elites are strongly connected to the financial world and that it is not politicians who run the world, but those who pull the strings on Wall Street and in the City of London.

Titbit

In the biggest circus for elites – Davos, so hated by anti-globalists – the course is set for our future. In 2023, as always, the annual meeting was attended by the heads of Goldman Sachs and the world’s largest wealth fund, the equally notorious Black Rock. The former – Solomon – and the latter – Fink, together with other billionaires, have already written the history for the destroyed country. And do you know, dear friends from Ukraine, what awaits you in the future? According to Fink’s statements in Davos, the country can become “a beacon of hope.” You mean beacon of hope for Ukrainians? Not at all: For Western investors, because they would “flood the country with money” – according to Fink. Fink and his colleague, the powerful banker calculated the country’s construction costs at $750 billion. Goldman Sachs had already sent its own people to Kiev as advisors a few months ago, and Fink agreed with Zelenskyy at the end of the year that Black Rock would support and advise Ukraine on investments after the end of the war. So the new colony has already been bought, the future flood of money will make Ukrainians entirely dependent on the West. A model for successful takeover of a country tested several times in history. Now a small obstacle stands in the way: the war must be won.

Beast
The West is handing over weapons to Ukraine on a scale reminiscent only of similar sponsorship of the Allies by the U.S. in World War II. The result? The Ukrainian army is better equipped than the armies of Germany, France and Italy combined.

Weapons	Ukraine	Germany	France	Italy	Great Britain
Tanks	2596	266	406	200	227
Armored vehicles	12 303	9217	6558	6908	5015
Self-propelled artillery	1067	121	109	54	89
Towed artillery	2040	0	105	108	126
Mobile missile systems	490	38	12	21	44
Soldiers	500 000	200 000	240 000	190 000	231000

Comparison of armed forces in Europe. (Source: IISS, The Military Balance 2022)

One day the war will end and the weapons will remain in Ukraine. The far-right movements in Ukraine are gaining ground. The nationalist-minded mercenaries, provided with state-of-the-art Western weapons by Ukrainian oligarchs, are responsible for many successes on the front lines. It is the mercenaries from Azov, Kraken and other troops who are considered as the new elite. They will come to power in the new post-war Ukraine.

And now remember the biggest operation of the CIA from the 1980s (Operation Cyclone), when the USA supported mujaheddin with billions of dollars and supplied them with weapons. In this way, the Americans played the Islamists against Moscow. Now, in this way, they created a new Frankenstein – the Taliban, who emerged from the radicalized Afghan tribes of the mujaheddin. The Taliban later required thousands of Americans and other NATO soldiers to fight against them for decades, only to lose the battle ignominiously in 2021 under Joe Biden. Is this not a warning from recent world history?

“You know how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to interpret the present time?”1

If one knows much about the rules of a game, and if one looks at a given moment of that game, it is not at all difficult to predict with a high degree of probability how the various players will behave. If one knows the properties of a particular chemical, it is not at all difficult in principle to predict how an organism will react to it. Finally, if one is familiar with past events, then seeing a similar play of forces, factors and data, then future in its general outline holds few secrets.

Consider Yugoslavia. What was this country like? A federation, made up of several nationalities and several religious denominations. It included related nationalities and nationalities completely alien to each other. This mixture was held by the strong hand of someone who nowadays would be called a dictator. Somehow this political entity functioned. Furthermore, Yugoslavia was envied by all citizens of the socialist countries of Eastern Europe and praised by citizens of Western countries. Then, as a natural consequence of things, the dictator died and the country fell apart with a bang into several parts. The breakup lasted almost a decade and manifested itself in cruel murders, rapes and destruction.

The authors of Gefira invite readers to entertain just such rational predictions about politics, society, economy and finance. The authors of this issue of Gefira ask readers not to cling to wishful thinking, but to brave reality as it is, and not to believe that things are different now because… No, nothing is different. There are laws that operate in the history of humanity as there are laws that operate in physics or chemistry. If we want to pretend that those laws don’t exist, or that we can act against them, we will be doomed to make the same mistakes forever. Fighting against nature – and man with his instincts, psyche and all biology is part of nature – is as ridiculous as fighting against laws in the sciences.

Going back to the example with Yugoslavia: since the attempt to peacefully hold together nations and faiths has failed twice, since there has been slaughter, rape and destruction accompanying the inevitable breakdown twice (first in the years 1941-1945, then in the years 1991-1999), then why try again and again to conglomerate nations, faiths and anthropological types a third time? Why create Yugoslavia 3.0, the Soviet Union 2.0 or any other union 1.0? because humanity has grown out of its “wild instincts”? Please…

So different and so similar! At first glance, these ladies seem to have nothing in common. Margot Honecker came from a working-class background and for all practical purposes had no higher education. Ursula von der Leyen, on the contrary, is a member of the highest strata of society, a woman with as much higher education as possible. And yet, leaving aside low and high birth and the lack or acquisition of education, these two figures share a great many similarities. Even the facial similarity.

Someone with poorer eyesight, in poorer lighting, casting a fleeting glance could easily mistake one lady for the other. Especially since both of them dress in a very similar way (to be precise, one would have to refer to Mrs. Honecker in the past tense, as she is no longer alive, but in the following text we will refer to her as if she were among us). Both are of German nationality and both pursue a successful political career. Both Margot and Ursula believe deeply in the ideologies to which they have dedicated their lives; both fervently work to improve the plight of the disadvantaged, exploited and marginalized. Margot cared for the working class and peasantry, Ursula – for sexual minorities and (wouldn’t you know!) black Europeans or African Europeans. Further, both Margot and Ursula are very militant ladies: the former set her sights on the military training of East German youth, anticipating the coming clash with capitalist states; the latter is hell-bent on punishing Putin and putting him on trial, and advocates supporting the Ukrainian war effort to the last Ukrainian. (So much for the gentle or peaceful disposition of women, who, by participating in politics, were supposed to balance male aggressiveness.)

There is another common denominator for both ladies, a very important common denominator: neither Margot Honecker nor Ursula von der Leyen, mingling for years in their own circles, ideologies and politics, holding high positions of power for years, has the faintest idea of what lives normal people live and what an average person wishes for. Worse still, both women are convinced that they know better what people want, and because they know better and – as they firmly believe – hold high moral ground, they try to make life better for their subject citizens: Margot saw the salvation of humanity in the Soviet version of socialism, Ursula – in its European counterpart. Both one and the other are convinced that the path they are following is the right one, and that their views are shared if not by a crushing, then at least by an overwhelming majority of citizens.

By the end of her life, Margot Honecker had managed to find out how wrong she was. She had to flee the country she ruled, chased away by the people from whom she expected gratitude. To the end of her days, she denied reality and maintained that East Germans had been seduced by capitalist mirages and that they would regret it. We don’t know whether Ursula von der Leyen will be given a chance to learn about the “ingratitude of the people.” We can be sure, however, that if it came to that, she would deny reality in exactly the same way as her East German political colleague of a few decades ago.

Margot Honecker and Ursula von der Leyen: look at their smiling, seductive faces. How much goodness, warmth and humanity radiates from them!

Assuming that the current crisis or recession is temporary and merely an interruption in the upward trend in the U.S. stock market that has been going on for many years, one should buy U.S. stocks soon, but be very selective.¹

Behind us lies a year of a bear market, in which the word inflation was king in the media. By the end of last year, however, inflation had already subsided, giving way in the media to the ominous recession that is now on everyone’s lips. Historically, recessions have always been the best time to buy stocks, and the ideal time to buy stocks is in the middle of a recession. Therefore, in our opinion, the long-term investor should already be on the lookout for opportunities in the overvalued sectors and build up their positions on a regular basis.
In which sectors could there be great potential? In our opinion, such a search should start with the sectors that have been hit the hardest recently and are currently out of favor with investors. With this in mind, consider the growth sector (growth companies) of the U.S. equity market.

Growth companies are characterized by above-average growth in sales, profits and operating cash flow, as well as high profit margins and a high return on invested capital. In their case, the current valuation of the stock is of secondary importance and the most important factor is the positive outlook for further growth in the parameters responsible for the company’s profitability. Continue reading →

Christmas reading from a guest author

I see them walking around shopping malls, laughing, carefree. I see them getting out of or into gleaming cars. I see them going along the streets and thronging the squares of my city. And I listen in. I listen in and hear them almost all and sundry speaking Russian. Beautiful, literary, radio and television Russian. I get thrilled by its sound. I recall the time when Soviet troops were stationed in my country. Soviet troops were statistically overwhelmingly composed of soldiers of Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian nationalities, the three nationalities that speak Russian. There were quite a few of them, especially in the part of my homeland where I lived and where I still live. Back then, however, I didn’t hear Russian spoken on the streets at all. Nor did I see Soviet soldiers. Today, it is impossible to walk a hundred meters not to hear people talking in Russian, not to hear Russian spoken by… Ukrainians. Indeed, in a store you stand amazed when you hear both the customer standing in front of you and the cashier serving him communicate in Russian. You wonder if you have moved across the eastern border in your dream. Immediately, however, you come to the realization that you are still at home and ask yourself: are you sure you are still at home?

Now I am getting to know firsthand how the Germans, French, Swedes or English feel. They are at home, and yet as if not at home. But no. They probably have it worse. My country is taking in people of the same anthropological type, people who adhere to a similar creed: my country is being populated by Europeans. Of course, I realize that the aforementioned Germans, Frenchmen, Swedes and Englishmen need not feel at all bad about having relocated to a foreign country without relocating. After all, years of grooming by schools, the media and churches have done their part. I recall those young German women from 2015 with “Welcome refugees” signs and facial expressions that I won’t describe because of the not-so-nice words I would have to use. These young German, Swedish, French, English women whose minds have been completely appropriated and who do what their grandmothers would have been ashamed of, preach what their grandmothers would have condemned, believe what their grandmothers would not have thought of! Unfortunately, their grandmothers and grandfathers are leaving the stage and are – like me – deeply disgusted by what they see and hear.

I’m shopping in the big shopping mall of my city, listening and looking at the Ukrainians, looking at those so-called refugees, looking at the young men and young women, and I can’t help thinking that their countrymen are sitting in trenches, in tanks, in armored vehicles; that their countrymen are sitting in cold and unlit apartments and houses; that their countrymen have lost hope of effective medical help, that their countrymen…. And I can’t shake off the thought that their compatriots – like the sick man on his bed of pain – would like at least the presence of those here, those who shop around in brightened malls and smile and sit down at a table with coffee and cake; I can’t help thinking that their compatriots would like those here to be there with them and at least accompany them with their presence.

Someone will tell me I’m wrong. Someone will tell me that those there in the trenches and cold apartments are happy that at least some managed to break out, some managed to escape. Perhaps. In a similar situation I would, however, prefer my compatriots to be with me. I would not be comforted by the thought that, lo and behold, this man or this woman managed to escape. Rather, I would feel betrayed. I would feel left to my own devices by this man and this woman. I think there are more like-minded people, more people like me, who have neither so much cleverness, nor such acquaintances, nor such a lack of a sense of duty and solidarity with their compatriots to save themselves and not to bother with the fate of the other members of the community. I wouldn’t be heartened by the thought that many managed to escape. I know myself, so I know I would be pushed out of the train crowded with defectors or if you will refugees; I know I would not be able to arrange for fuel for my car, I would not be able to bribe an official to delete me from the conscription list. I would be helpless.

With this thought I saunter through the shopping mall, look at the people who we are told to call refugees – don’t you dare call them defectors or deserters! – and wonder about the world in which I happen to live. For several decades the word refugee has been present on the pages of dailies, weeklies and monthlies, for several decades the word refugee has not stopped resounding on radio and television. I can’t help thinking that this global movement of refugees is not a natural phenomenon; rather, behind the appearance of naturalness there is someone’s idea, an idea to resettle millions of people around the globe, an idea to make ethnic exchanges, to wipe nations off the face of the earth. A truly satanic intent. Solve et coagula: destroy (what is) and put back together or – as they customarily say nowadays – build back better (from scratch). Artistic stagings inaugurating the 2012 London Olympics or those accompanying the 2016 opening of the St. Gotthard Tunnel only confirm this conjecture.

It is obvious to me that these mass displacements are wanted. How else can we explain that phenomenon that the mighty United States spends billions of dollars arming Ukraine and is unable to control the endless stream of human masses crossing the southern US border? How else can we explain the phenomenon that one day German police forces are cracking down on some organization whose members allegedly sought a coup d’état and wanted to restore the German empire (quite a ridiculous idea), while Britain’s police forces failed to do what they ought to have done when gangs of Pakistanis enslaved and raped hundreds of teenage British girls in Rotherham and other towns for years? Where there is a will, that is a way. Obviously certain things are wanted. The accompanying double standards have become a political and social norm in the West. In all spheres of life. How to explain such extraordinary vigilance of the Western media to any manifestation of – what they call – nationalism or Nazism while they turn a blind eye or even support groups with a nationalist and Nazi political profile in Ukraine?

What is the so-called public opinion on all this? It is difficult to make judgments about true public opinion. After all, what passes for public opinion is nothing more than the opinion of the leading mass media, that is, the small group of people who dispose of these media. Period. Here is the German Chancellor giving a speech against the backdrop of a sign: Deutschland – Einwanderungsland. Do all Germans really wish for an ever-growing mix of anthropological types, religions and cultures in their country? Here is the American president repeating again and again that diversity is America’s strength and that it’s a good thing that whites have already become a minority in the US since 2017. Does he really believe this? Does he have people of various anthropological types, faiths and cultures in his family? How about the other Western countries? Alas, everywhere the same hypocritical ideology and everywhere this supposedly authentic public opinion that wants diversity and immigration. Somehow I don’t want to believe it. And the reason I don’t believe all of this is because I’m from a country where, just a month before he completely lost power, the then leader was still achieving a 98 percent result in parliamentary elections….

Similarly, I don’t believe in the man-made climate change with which our consciousness has been assaulted for more than a quarter of a century. Why I don’t believe in it? Precisely because my consciousness is being assaulted with this nonsense ruthlessly, day in, day out; precisely because this man-made climate change gibberish is being thrust down my throat; precisely because I am being shown hysterical teenagers who are seriously convinced that in a few years they won’t have air to breathe. I am thoroughly sick of it! Continue reading →