Guilt, compassion, fear

How do we know that we are being primed to accept a world government or one global state? If you do not let yourself be intimidated by the wire-pullers who will immediately start calling you a conspiracy theory follower, then the observation of your own senses is more than enough. Begin with handbooks to foreign languages. Why of all the topic it is globalism and the world as a global village a leitmotif in all of them? Why rather than present the language and its intricacies through something in the vein of Aesop’s fables and ordinary adventure stories along with dialogues do the students get politicized themes of globalism and climate change? It certainly does not happen by chance. Why, do you talk to your own child or grandchild about globalism or climate change of all the topics? I guess you don’t. Yet, the authors of textbooks seem to be hellbent on such problems.

What do you make of all those international conferences that necessarily seek to make all countries agree to pursue the same policy about:

  • women’s rights,

  • reproductive rights,

  • migration compacts;

  • human rights;

and many others? Ask yourself a question why all governments should be made to sign all those treaties, compacts, and agreements. To make it easier for you: why should you sign an agreement with a bunch of your neighbors that you promise to refrain from abusing your wife and children? Why should you need such an agreement if you are a decent man? Notice that all governments declare to be decent. Conversely, how on earth could such an agreement turn you into a decent man if you are not one? Why should you relegate power over your household to your neighbours? Who and how will evaluate whether you are abusive or not, which acts constitute abuse and which do not? Finally, how would you be capable of defending years against interference once you have allowed others to step into your affairs when they see fit? Go and make such an accord with your neighbours. Not willing?

We have the dollar as the international currency, we have the World Bank, the Bank of International Settlements, the International Monetary Fund. All human activity is internationalized and taken away from the prerogatives of national governments. Why? Continue reading

Gefira 59: Astride the Borderline Between the Past and the Future

“Astride the Borderline Between the Past and the Future” or Gefra 59 says goodbye to 2021 and looks beyond 2022. The year that is coming to its end has left the world with a mountain of money in circulation, which by no means implies that money creation has reached its limits. To the contrary. The system in which money is loaned on condition that more is paid back, the system in which numerous measures aimed at saving world economy – like quantitative easing along with the steps taken to cushion the effects of the global lockdown that does not appear to end anytime soon – the system that enlarges the heap of banknotes exponentially seems to be doomed. This is what we are leaving behind and what will – no doubt – linger on well into the rest of the 2020s. And besides?

Besides, we will be more and more intensely confronted with the development of science and technology that forcibly enter our lives, our biological and psychological lives. It is gene editing, artificial intelligence, the internet of bodies, and the merge of them all that is meant here. We – or at least our children and grandchildren – are promised to become supermen and superwomen, equipped with capabilities like infrared vision, very low muscle fatigue, resistance to ionizing radiation, hand-free control of external devices and remote thought exchange between individuals. Our lives will be longer and we will possibly attain immortality, while death will be a thing of the past. What do you feel when you hear about such a future: excitement or fear?

 

Gefira Financial Bulletin #59 is available now

  • Astride the Borderline Between the Past and the Future
  • Are we in for a Frankensteinian world?
  • Conflation between human beings and digital devices
  • Milkshake Theory

Err on the safe side

It is very often that we come across a statement, a remark, that someone somewhere at a time expressed an anti- (here comes the name of an ethnic group or biological sex) bias or prejudice. Such a statement or remark evaluates the person who has prejudices against a group, a class, a nation, a race, a category of people.

The evaluators of people expressing biased opinions obviously follow this train of thought. You wake up in the morning, you start thinking about a group of people, a nation, a social class and for want of a useful occupation, out of boredom or stupidity or God knows what, you develop a negative opinion about that group, that nation or that class that you have never come into contact with. You formulate your opinion out of thin air and then stubbornly stick to it against the evidence of your senses, even if you mingle with many representatives of the said group, nation or class and are positively impressed. In a word, you create a world of your own and this invented world is more real to you than the one accessible through your senses.

Good heavens! Isn’t it the other way around? Clearly, we do not form opinions about anything and anybody until and unless we come into contact with this thing or that person. Imagine a child who first learns about the existence of Eskimos in a very simple way: he sees a drawing in a children book of a man or maybe a family against the backdrop of an igloo. Do you really think the child will start developing bias or prejudice? What if the drawing is complete with a nice-looking polar bear and a seal emerging from a hole in the ice? Do you really think the child will start forming bias and prejudice?

True, we may take over the opinion of something or somebody, of a collective, from our relatives, friends, acquaintances, from books or films, but then those relatives, friends, acquaintances, the authors of those books and the scriptwriters of those films must have come into contact with the thing, or individual or group of individuals, or they themselves have inherited the opinion from their relatives, friends and acquaintances, but then the same chain of causes and results applies until we reach those who did come into contact with a group of people, an ethnic group and by mingling with them have gathered experience which led them to formulate positive or negative evaluations.

Which of the two explanations sounds plausible? Continue reading

Libération and the new EU scandal

Laurent Joffrin, the main editor of the French “Libération”, which is known for its leftist views, was until now the Ayatollah of the EU, who praised the EU to the skies in his publications. Suddenly, just at the moment when Merkel’s era is (fortunately) coming to an end and the SPD is coming to power (God have mercy on us!), he publishes sensations that cause earthquakes in Brussels and especially in Luxembourg, which is less watched by journalists. In his latest articles he describes how corrupted and corrupting the EU politicians are. He revealed, among other things, abuses in expense accounts, housing allowances or private use of official cars at the top of the European Court of Auditors (ECA). It turned out that a state within a state was created around the ECA, a network of civil servants and lobbists mainly from the European People’s Party (EPP), who built their own paradise out of the public money. The money went, among other things, for hunting and parties in luxurious castles, where further machinations were discussed in a champagne-bubbling ambience. Number one of the clique was a member of the Court of Auditors from Belgium, Karel Pinxten. He was convicted by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the autumn for using 500,000 euros illegally. Poor Pinxten: his colleagues cut his salary by two-thirds for this.

You can easily find the other details on the Internet. We don’t need to repeat them here. You know it yourself, how far the EU elites are out of touch with reality, hypocritical, corrupt and nepotistic. “Libération” only provided further evidence of this. The comparison that the EU is like Byzantium comes naturally. The difference is: the Saracens are not ante portas, but deeply inside by the millions.

It is interesting here that Donald Tusk, the president of the EPP, is silent on this. Tusk, who recently, after the termination of his career as President of the EU Parliament, made possible by Merkel (it was a reward for allowing the construction of the Northern Stream when he was Polish Prime Minister) tries to assert himself again – unsuccessfully – on the political scene in Poland. There he criticizes the ruling Law and Justice Party, which has come into conflict with the EU Court of Justice. Well, some judges, like Chairman Koen Lenaerts, have joined Pinxten’s parties and his network, Mr. Tusk. That you are silent on the unpleasant facts about their colleagues, we understand: Omertà.

Silence applied also in the Western “qualitative” media until now. Anyone who dared to criticize the EU was immediately called a Russophile and had mud thrown at him. Times are changing? Did Monsieur Joffrin experience an inner transformation and see through how evil the kolkhoz, called the EU, is? No way. We bet he continues to write to order. The EPP had to get problems because now Mr. Scholz is at the head of the federal empire of left-green ideas and the socialists and social democrats wanted to see blood of the EPP at last. You understand comrades, sometimes there has to be a purge.

John 18:38

He was an illustrious representative of the highly developed civilization, a civilization that had swallowed up and internalized a number of cultures. He was a representative of a multi-cultural state that had been absorbing aliens by the thousands and granting them citizenship. He had been immersed in the philosophical and literary trends of the times, he had much knowledge about the physical world and social institutions. For all that, confronted with a convict from one of the far-flung corners of the empire, he was incapable of formulating a definition of what truth is. He went down in history not only as the one who washes his hands in an attempt to exonerate himself from guilt and responsibility: he is also remembered for asking the (foolish) question of: What is truth.

The Convict standing in front of him did not answer that question. Why? Because it was no use. Try telling the modern post-Western intellectual what truth is and he will ridicule you and call into question any and all facts, data and their interpretation, reasoning and – yes – common sense. Not a stone in your argumentation will be left unturned. You will learn from him that there is no truth, or that we all have our own truths, or that everything is relative and changeable, and to claim the possession of truth is tantamount to intellectual dictatorship that leads straight to – yes, your guess is correct – fascism.

That is why the Convict did not try to engage in any conversation on what truth is, since no one is so blind as the one who will not see. Pilate, that illustrious representative of the highly developed civilization, a civilization that had swallowed up and internalized a number of cultures, a man of letters knowledgeable about everything and anything, was left with his question for all eternity. The followers of the Convict, the mostly illiterate dimwits making their living from simple trades and inhabiting the space somewhere between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea, knew what truth is, they knew it to such a degree that they were ready to lay down their lives for it, and so their spiritual heirs slowly but surely subverted the Roman Empire and brought about the downfall of the world of those who did not know what truth is. It is really as simple as that.  Continue reading

The battle for water

It is a well-known thesis that the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is not really about politics, but about access to water. The Israeli military administration has systematically prevented Palestinian groundwater capture in the West Bank since 1967. In Gaza, on the other hand, anyone can drill a well, and although Tel-Aviv’s policy there is not as restrictive as in the West Bank, there is a huge problem with water quality. Demography plays a big role in this, as water-scarce Gaza is densely populated, while the water-rich West Bank is sparsely populated. This problem is not being solved as the Israelis seek to expand their state eastwards.

In the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel occupied the Syrian Golan Heights and the West Bank to secure the water supply for the fledgling state. Since then, about 90 per cent of the Jordan’s water has been piped to Israel, while the 250-kilometre-long Jordan River must also supply water to Syria and Jordan. The fact that the Jordan is such a small river will lead to even more conflicts in the region in the future.

Egypt functions in a similar way. As early as 1929, it secured a treaty signed with the British to the effect that all states bordering the Nile must first ask Egypt for permission if they want to use the Nile water. Egypt’s entire life takes place on the banks of the Nile, from which the country draws 97% of its water. When Ethiopia tried to build dams on its territory in 1980, it almost came to war.

Turkey controls the upper reaches of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers and determines how much water Syria and Iraq get. Erdoğan, the new sultan on the Bosporus, who obviously wants to expand his sultanate, does not necessarily have to intervene militarily in Syria or Iraq: it is enough that he will just turn off the tap once in a while. Just as he cleverly put pressure on Europe with migrant flows, in the future he could blackmail the countries located on the two rivers with access to water.

That wars over water are not just latent or part of history, like the 1948 conflict over the Indus between India and Pakistan, is evidenced by the events of this spring, when a bloody clash broke out between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Heavy fighting between the centralist countries, which left 40 dead and several hundred injured, was triggered by disputes over the water distribution point on the Isfara River. Water was then only a spark in the powder keg of the hostile ethnic groups of Central Asia. While the Western media paid little attention to the events in May this year, the decision-makers in Beijing certainly watched it with great attention – anything that happens on the New Silk Road can thwart China’s plans.

With water it is like with oil: whoever sits at its source has a right to it that no one can dispute.

More on this topic in our latest bulletin.

Jordan River, aerial view, Wikipedia 

Government bonds or shares are all rubbish. What to invest in?

The answer is not easy. Bill Gross, the founder of Pimco and “king of government bonds”, predicts that the yield on US 10-year bonds will rise to 2% next year. This would mean the 3% loss for investors at the current inflation rate. The dynamics of demand and supply also point to the further fall in the prices of US government bonds (rise in yield). Today, the FED is buying 60% of all US bonds as part of its quantitative easing, but will soon have no choice but to reduce the scale of US bond purchases in the face of inflation. At the same time, China, Russia are massively dumping these debt securities. So should one invest in equities? Now, when their prices are shooting through the roof? After all, shares can turn out to be rubbish if companies’ profits don’t want to rise as they have in recent years. With today’s inflation, it’s not worth holding cash either. The situation is becoming dramatic.

If you want to learn more, if you are looking for tips for your investments, please read recommendations and warnings for investors in our bulletins.