|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 3, 2020 20:28:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gridley on Sept 4, 2020 12:48:25 GMT
Bretton Woods may have been a conference of experts and officials, but it was first and foremost a gathering of a wartime alliance engaged in the massive mobilization effort of total war. The conference met in July 1944 in the weeks following D-Day and the final Soviet breakthrough on the Eastern Front. As a wartime rather than a postwar meeting, disagreements were minimized. Though the conference was about the future order of the international economy and though the aim of the talks was to link national economies back together, the building blocks were centralized, state-controlled war economies. The Bretton Woods negotiators were government officials, not businessmen or bankers. As they had done since the collapse of the global financial system in the early 1930s, central bankers played second fiddle to treasury officials. The Americans who were bankrolling the Allied war effort called the shots." Much more here:> foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/30/everything-you-know-about-global-order-is-wrong/Not sure how much this can be trusted but it provides a lot of background Some of it is certainly correct, but I think it is missing an important point. There is a tendency, encouraged by the sound bite generation, to think of WWII as a two-sided war; us against them, good vs. bad, Axis vs Allies, etc. It would be more accurate to consider it as a four or five-sided conflict; one can consider it along ideological grounds, in which case you neatly have democracy, imperialism, fascism, and communism, or slightly more nuanced - further dividing imperialism into "old" and "new". The major European powers in the latter case would be the "old" imperialists: interested in holding on to their empires but not interested in further expansion. The Japanese by contrast wished to create an empire but had not yet done so. Viewed through THAT lens WWII makes much more sense... and seems much less triumphant. True, the new imperialists and the fascists lost. But the *old* imperialists lost much of their empires as a result of the war, and thus must to an extent be lumped among the losers. The democracies had some small gains... but the real winner was communism, which, thanks in no small part to allies in the US, emerged in the post-war world as THE rising tide. Eastern Europe was not the only gain - China went communist as well, and several of the ideals of communism were legitimized in the US. Likewise, there is a tendency to act as if communism died with the breakup of the Soviet Union. Once again, this does not stand up to scrutiny. China alone maintains enough of the communist system to be a standard bearer, and we must again think of *ideology*, not simply national boundaries. How many communist ideas are advocated in non-communist states? The legitimacy of socialism in the US grows every day - how far behind is the acceptance of communism as a workable form of government? For that matter, how much has Russia and the former territories of the USSR truly abandoned the system, whatever surface trappings may be in place?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Sept 4, 2020 13:38:30 GMT
An aside: The cab driver who brought me back from hospital today is from Uzbekistan, left when the USSR collapsed.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 4, 2020 15:05:53 GMT
Bretton Woods may have been a conference of experts and officials, but it was first and foremost a gathering of a wartime alliance engaged in the massive mobilization effort of total war. The conference met in July 1944 in the weeks following D-Day and the final Soviet breakthrough on the Eastern Front. As a wartime rather than a postwar meeting, disagreements were minimized. Though the conference was about the future order of the international economy and though the aim of the talks was to link national economies back together, the building blocks were centralized, state-controlled war economies. The Bretton Woods negotiators were government officials, not businessmen or bankers. As they had done since the collapse of the global financial system in the early 1930s, central bankers played second fiddle to treasury officials. The Americans who were bankrolling the Allied war effort called the shots." Much more here:> foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/30/everything-you-know-about-global-order-is-wrong/Not sure how much this can be trusted but it provides a lot of background Some of it is certainly correct, but I think it is missing an important point. There is a tendency, encouraged by the sound bite generation, to think of WWII as a two-sided war; us against them, good vs. bad, Axis vs Allies, etc. It would be more accurate to consider it as a four or five-sided conflict; one can consider it along ideological grounds, in which case you neatly have democracy, imperialism, fascism, and communism, or slightly more nuanced - further dividing imperialism into "old" and "new". The major European powers in the latter case would be the "old" imperialists: interested in holding on to their empires but not interested in further expansion. The Japanese by contrast wished to create an empire but had not yet done so. Viewed through THAT lens WWII makes much more sense... and seems much less triumphant. True, the new imperialists and the fascists lost. But the *old* imperialists lost much of their empires as a result of the war, and thus must to an extent be lumped among the losers. The democracies had some small gains... but the real winner was communism, which, thanks in no small part to allies in the US, emerged in the post-war world as THE rising tide. Eastern Europe was not the only gain - China went communist as well, and several of the ideals of communism were legitimized in the US. Likewise, there is a tendency to act as if communism died with the breakup of the Soviet Union. Once again, this does not stand up to scrutiny. China alone maintains enough of the communist system to be a standard bearer, and we must again think of *ideology*, not simply national boundaries. How many communist ideas are advocated in non-communist states? The legitimacy of socialism in the US grows every day - how far behind is the acceptance of communism as a workable form of government? For that matter, how much has Russia and the former territories of the USSR truly abandoned the system, whatever surface trappings may be in place? It should also not be forgotten that although 'the war' ended overt takeover, there continued to be covert attempts to alter the outlook of 'the other side'. As you say in that regard communism seems to have gained. Also the destabilizing of the WW2 'winners' has been largely successful - as we can now see in the 'blue' states in the USA. This has been done by steady take over of education and the media as a 'common purpose' which seems to have been based on the approach 'The Frankfurt School'. After Gorbachev took down the wall, the 'West' was all for peace dividend thinking all had been won. Reminds me of Harold's men breaking ranks and chasing the Normans downhill only to be caught in the open. Similarly, politicians were saying Russia and China were now our friends and would grow more like us the more we dealt with them. As we can see that has not happened. China without a USSR neighbor has expanded its reach and capability while buying industry leaders and their manufacturing, politicians and the UN. The WEF thinks it is going to serve the interest of the Globalist billionaires but it looks like any Great Reset will put China in the driving seat of the world economy. China has patience and long term strategy that the 'West' cannot comprehend as all western leaders tend to be short term thinkers looking forward at most to the time of the next election or the next annual results.
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Sept 4, 2020 17:28:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 4, 2020 18:06:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 4, 2020 19:04:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 4, 2020 19:29:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 5, 2020 1:36:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Sept 6, 2020 14:37:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 6, 2020 14:58:07 GMT
The only thing that will stop the violence is taking out the people that are financing it. As it is now known that these organizers and paymasters are acting across state lines they come under the federal racketeering and conspiracy acts. Specific high level arrests and a well timed freezing of all assets, bank accounts credit cards etc. would put a very big damper on the proceedings. The only problem is that much of the 7th floor of the FBI including Wray are anti-Trump so Durham's report and action should come first. Interesting times.
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Sept 6, 2020 15:53:02 GMT
The only thing that will stop the violence is taking out the people that are financing it. As it is now known that these organizers and paymasters are acting across state lines they come under the federal racketeering and conspiracy acts. Specific high level arrests and a well timed freezing of all assets, bank accounts credit cards etc. would put a very big damper on the proceedings. The only problem is that much of the 7th floor of the FBI including Wray are anti-Trump so Durham's report and action should come first. Interesting times. Not to mention the pan-national players like the W.E.F...🤬. This is not tin-foil hat, it’s reality. Just because the majority of citizens no nothing about it doesn’t change fact. www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/rationalizing-great-reset
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Sept 6, 2020 17:18:44 GMT
Some of this would have us assume that the US military would merely follow orders, no matter what these were. The only real case example of this we have are the results following Southern secession in 1861. The military split, largely along regional lines, and went home to support their own regions. The current US military has a disproportionate number of southerners, just as then. I don't agree with everything here ... militarytruth.org/why-are-there-a-disproportionate-number-of-southerners-in-the-us-military/ ... but it makes one wonder what would shake out if push comes to shove. There is still a sense of "region" in our sympathies.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 7, 2020 16:57:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Sept 7, 2020 17:09:14 GMT
|
|