Skip to main content

The USA and UK are under attack

Is the USA undergoing serious change and if so who is stirring it?  The American War of Independence was agitated and financed by France, the French Revolution was supported by the USA and UK,  the Greek War of Independence by the UK,  the Russian Revolution by Germany, the Chinese Revolution by Russia etc.  Big changes are almost always due to active political movements within a country that are fomented and supported from outside.

Are the changes in the USA "big"?  There have been riots across the USA by the Black Liberation Movement (BLM) but we have seen this sort of rioting before in the 1960s and 70s.  What is new is that the rioting is being supported by the US Establishment.  This is extremely strange and unusual.  Is this evidence for a solely domestic movement?  Domestic movements usually work through the infiltration of existing political parties and seek change at the ballot box so it does not fit the "domestic" pattern.  The riots are continuing despite a Democrat President.  The new pattern of political change in the USA strongly suggests a new foreign intervention, as does the way that the movement has spilled over to the UK and even, to a smaller extent, the EU.  It is likely that a new foreign power is involved.  This foreign power is China. 

The USA purged Soviet financed communist movements in the 1950s and 1960s which left a vacuum that was filled by China in the late 1970s onwards. As a result the main left wing groups in the USA, such as Freedom Road and the Black Liberation Movement, became attached to China rather than Russia.

In the same way as the American War of Independence needed aggrieved local businessmen and the communist subversions in 1960s Europe needed aggrieved trade unionists the current change needs seriously upset local groups.  It is not just Black Americans who have a political grievance.  The changes of the past ten years have seen another group feeling under attack: the Internationalists.  The power base of the Internationalists lies in the UN, IMF, World Bank etc. They employ large numbers of starry eyed academics and hard headed international bankers who believe that the world will, and should, evolve into accepting global government.  In the USA they leave these International institutions and join Democrat governments and the CIA.  I know a lot of senior members of this group and they are livid about the direction the world is taking.  No-one should underestimate the bitterness of these people.  The irony is that much of the pressure that is breaking the old world order is due to the rise of China.

The Internationalists want change, the Black Americans want change and most of all China wants the USA to be sidelined as a global power.  This is a toxic cocktail.  The Internationalists believe that events are going their way in the USA but by co-financing and unleashing the BLM they are satisfying the need of China for "perpetual revolution" in the West.  Continuous unrest and the undermining of the sense of purpose in the West will give China the hegemony it desires.

The Soviet Subversion of the West between 1950 and 1980 was serious and undermined Western economies but most of the People and the Western government and industrial Establishments were opposed to it.  In the current Chinese subversion only the People oppose it and even this opposition is patchy.  Opposition is probably strongest in England, Australia, Canada and India.

Most English people know that something funny is going on.  In England we know in our bones that the attempt at tearing down our sense of identity as a separate nation is being orchestrated somewhere else. The USA is the focus of the change and the attack is tailored to their political conditions.

The big problem for those resisting the change is that the condition of the black population in the USA involves many injustices.  It is the perfect point of attack because reasonable people will sympathise with black Americans (though not with BLM).  The UK does not share the American problem so our main concern must be with opposing supporters of the change in the UK.  In particular our government must intervene to stop our Internationalist media from treating the UK as yet another American State and our whole political Establishment must wake up to the threat from China before it is too late.  Big changes are always aggravated by foreign powers for their own purposes.

If China wins and replaces the USA as global hegemon a new Dark Age will follow.  Is it getting too late to stop them?

22/4/2021


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Falklands have always been Argentine - Las Malvinas son Argentinas

"The Falklands have always been Argentine" is taught to every Argentine child as a matter of faith.  What was Argentina during the time when it "always" possessed Las Malvinas?  In this article I will trace the history of Argentina in the context of its physical and political relationship with "Las Malvinas", the Falkland Islands.  The Argentine claim to the Falkland Islands dates from a brief episode in 1831-32 so it is like Canada claiming the USA despite two centuries of separate development. This might sound like ancient history but Argentina has gone to war for this ancient claim so the following article is well worth reading. For a summary of the legal case see: Las Malvinas: The Legal Case Argentina traces its origins to Spanish South America when it was part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio del Plata.  The Falklands lay off the Viceroyalty of Peru, controlled by the Captain General of Chile.  In 1810 the Falklands were far from the geographical b
35 comments
Read more

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H
1 comment
Read more

Membership of the EU: pros and cons

5th December 2013, update May 2016 Nigel Lawson, ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer,  recently criticised the UK membership of the EU , the media has covered his mainstream view as if he is a bad boy starting a fight in the school playground, but is he right about the EU? What has changed that makes EU membership a burning issue?  What has changed is that the 19 countries of the Eurozone are now seeking political union to escape their financial problems.   Seven further EU countries have signed up to join the Euro but the British and Danish have opted out.  The EU is rapidly becoming two blocks - the 26 and Britain and Denmark.   Lawson's fear was that if Britain stays in the EU it will be isolated and dominated by a Eurozone bloc that uses "unified representation of the euro area" , so acting like a single country which controls 90% of the vote in the EU with no vetoes available to the UK in most decisions.  The full plans for Eurozone political union ( EMU Stage
15 comments
Read more