Eugenics Masquerading as Environmentalism

The eugenics angle becomes apparent when you realize that wealth and income are being used as proxies for genetic fitness, by imposing needless gradients in access to real food and real medicine.  GMO food is an obvious example.   There are no economic, ecological or productivity benefits, only health detriments, specifically sterility and early death.    And it finds its way mainly into cheap food despite not being cheaper to make.   If you believe that economic productivity is determined by genes (and you’re a psychopath), it’s the logical solution.

A more obvious eugenics agenda is seen in the selective targeting of black people via the FDA’s ridiculously low RDA for vitamin D.

Needless to say, a new, steeper survival gradient under a carbon trading regime (which is somehow oblivious to the real planet-threatening crises of ordinary chemical, radiological and genetic pollution) will, assuming the genetic-wealth connection above, accomplish the same depopulation and selection goals attained by more traditional eugenics campaigns in the past, while  the focus on the byproduct of traditional energy production will make the gradient all the more comprehensive and systemic.   There will be no geographic or demographic refuge (aside from wealth) from such a “humanitarian” planetary regime.   It will be the shock doctrine on steroids.   For our own good.

Global Cooling: An Inconvenient History of the Climate Change Hoax

James Corbett on Why Big Oil Conquered The World

The Real Enemy: YOU


“Judging By Bond Markets, Economic Armageddon Is Just Around The Corner”

“It’s difficult to describe markets,” said the CIO, reflecting on his decades of trading. “For what seems like forever, markets behaved in ways that reflected shifting expectations about central bank activity, economic trends, and profit potential, but that’s changing,” he said. “Now markets shift direction on a tweet then reverse on some comment. And nearly all of it is political.” But even politics are different now.

“Yet through it all, global interest rates are collapsing like an economic calamity looms.” 

* * *

“It is a bowl of water that might help put out a fire that has just started,” said young Jimmy Sham, describing Carrie Lam’s withdrawal of Beijing’s extradition legislation. “But it is now useless in the face of what has become a forest fire,” continued Jimmy, one of many leaders in Hong Kong’s burning rebellion. Naturally, the government hopes that by meeting the protestor’s principal demand, cries for further action will soften.

But that’s not how crowds work. Hong Kong’s emboldened freedom fighters have another four demands to go. Behind them lay more still. And far in the distance, beyond the event horizon, lay their ultimate objective, barely spoken of today, democratic revolution in China.

“Public discontent extends far beyond the bill,” conceded Carrie Lam, exuding a manufactured calm, withdrawing the bill, “It covers political, economic and social issues, including problems relating to housing and land supply, income distribution, social justice and mobility.” No doubt she’s right.

All revolutions are sparked by such failures of government. But this one goes further. Hong Kong will fully revert to Chinese rule in 28 years, which means its citizens will be subjected to Beijing’s political oppression. Today’s young protestors will suffer its retribution as they enter middle age, images of their rebellious youth forever swirling in servers. The only hope for Hong Kong’s young freedom fighters is a Chinese political revolution between now and 2047. And with that inferno as their only escape, each concession by Carrie Lam’s government will be met with calls for another, then another.

Just as each central bank rate cut is followed by the market’s demand for another, then another. It’s what has begun in the US. And what will soon start in Europe. With central bankers in both economies cutting rates, exuding a manufactured calm, when in fact they’re terrified that what little they have left will be useless in the face of a forest fire….

A fire which the central bankers themselves have set, in furtherance of long published and widely known objectives.   They are not hapless spectators, they are arsonists pretending to be fire fighters.   Betrayal is their business model, and war is just another means of diverting blame while continuing their rape and pillage of humanity.

The Next Stage Of The Engineered Global Economic Reset Has Arrived

— Quote from Caroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope, Chapter 20

Carroll Quigley was a professor of history at Georgetown University from 1941 to 1976. He also taught at Princeton and at Harvard, and lectured at the Brookings Institution. He was a frequent lecturer at the U.S. Naval Weapons Laboratory, the Foreign Service Institute, and the Naval College at Norfolk, Virginia. In 1958, he served as a consultant to the Congressional Select Committee which set up the National Space Agency. Below are key excerpts on the history of money and banking from Prof. Quigley’s masterpiece Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time.

Note: The below excerpts are taken from chapters 5, 9, 20, 65, and 77 of Tragedy and Hope, with a focus on Prof. Quigley’s excellent discussion of the role of money and banking in world history. This is a 10-page summary. ….

Corbett: Echoes of WWI: China, the US, and the Next “Great” War

Corbett: China and the New World Order

PDF: “War is a Racket” by Gen. Smedley Butler


We refuse to be a ‘normal country’ if it means US-style bombings & invasions, Moscow tells Pentagon

It’s better not to be a “more normal country” if that means being as prone to invasions and coups as the United States, top Russian ministers have said, firing back at bizarre remarks by a new Pentagon chief.

It would be “great” if the West “could get Russia to behave like a more normal country,” Mark Esper, the newly appointed defense secretary, was reported to have claimed while visiting Paris this week.

That remark did not go down well with Moscow, however.

“If he said so, he called upon us to act as a normal country [as such] and not like the United States,” Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told a press briefing in the Russian capital, where he and Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu had a face-to-face meeting with French counterparts.

Otherwise, we should have been acting like the US, bombing Iraq and Libya in blatant violation of international law… We should have supported coups, violent and anti-constitutional, like the US and its closest allies did in February 2014 [in Ukraine].

What’s more, if Russia followed Washington’s instructions, then “we would have spent millions on intervening in the affairs of other countries as Congress has done by authorizing $20 million for supporting democracy in Russia,” Lavrov stated.

On his part, Shoigu also said that normalcy has a different meaning for Moscow then.

We will probably remain [an] abnormal [country].

Meanwhile, the visiting French officials advocated coming to terms with Russia.

“The time has come, the time is right, to work towards reducing distrust,” Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said.

Defense Minister Florence Parly added that “it is important to talk to each other, to avoid misunderstanding and friction.”




Show notes:


Show notes:


Who Is Holding Back the Russian Economy?

Russia’s economy has been a sore spot for more than two years now. Since the ruble crisis of late 2014 the role of the Bank of Russia has been to apply IMF-style counter-cyclical tightening to stabilize the situation in the wake of the decision to allow the ruble to float freely on the open market.

That was the right decision then. It was the move the US did not expect President Vladimir Putin to make. It was expected Putin would hold to his natural conservatism and keep the ruble trading in the 30’s versus the US dollar as opposed to risking a collapse in exchange rate in the face of an historic drop in oil prices over the eighteen months between July 2014 and the low made in late January 2016.

Oil dropped from $120+ per barrels to around $28 during that period. And if Putin hadn’t proactively allowed the ruble to fall from RUB32 to a high of RUB85 in early 2016 Russia would have been bankrupted completely.

During that time Bank of Russia President Elvira Nabullina raised the benchmark lending rate to 17.00% and Russia began the slow, painful process of de-dollarizing its economy.

It’s been five years since those dramatic times. But a lot of damage was done, not just to the Russian people and their savings but also to the mindset of those in charge at the Bank of Russia.


But those IMF rules are there to protect the IMF making the loans to the troubled nation, not to assist the troubled nation actually recover. To explain this, I have to get a bit technical, so bear with me.



Nabullina still believes that her job is to get inflation down to 4%. Inflation targeting, as central bank policy, is a disease that needs to be placed next to smallpox at the CDC in Atlanta.

It seems I have to write this article once every few months just to remind people what the problem is.

When inflation is above the target an austerity mindset dominates at the central bank who keeps interest rates above the market rate in the vain hope they can wring the last bits of inflation out of the economy, because sufficient confidence hasn’t returned to the banking system after the crisis.

This is Russia’s problem today. Nabullina still believes there’s work to be done before allowing the economy to grow.

When inflation is below the target, like in the ECB and the US, then to the miseducated central banker growth is sluggish and demands stimulus in the form of cheap money to create a virtuous credit cycle. It hasn’t worked and it won’t work.

Because both of these theories about the effects of inflation targeting are dead wrong.

They haven’t worked in the US and Europe because there is no more capacity within their economies to take on more debt to stimulate demand and increase spending. All they are doing is, as described by Mises and others, “pushing on a string” offering money no one wants at interest rates the market cannot sustain.

That cheap money inflates asset prices like stocks and bonds while diverting capital to long time-horizon projects like fracking in Texas, and housing and car loans, but it thieves working capital from the future by mispricing the risk of those projects in the form of the interest rate.

The net effect is enriching the already obscenely rich and powerful, through wealth transfer which feeds leftist and Marxist criticisms of the ‘free market’ while they proclaim the end of capitalism.

But central bank inflation targeting and control is the height of a centrally-planned economy. Control the value and cost of money and you control the means of production. So, capitalism this ain’t folks.

Miseducation on matters economic are commonplace today from the commanding heights to the lowest barrios.

Eventually, you reach the point we’ve arrived at in the west where no amount of forcing the market, through punitive negative rates, can stimulate growth. This is simply arrogant men praying at the altar of math torturing equations which have no resemblance to reality and turning it into policy.

On the other hand, we have Nabullina trained in this world of econometrics and its econo-babble, holding back the Russian economy with interest rates set above the market. She is either overly-cautious, if I’m being generous, or a full on fifth-columnist stifling growth to support Russia’s enemies, if I’m being cynical. …