(Fairy)Tales of War | Pt. 2 - The One-Man Army

Continuing my miniseries on diverging narratives of war and how there is reason to believe in an underlying cause for all its symptoms we see on a daily basis.

Cui bono?

As we already explored in part one many people have different ideas about the governments' motives in going to war, sometimes people argue about these sorts of things to great degree.

But from a macroeconomic standpoint, armed with the knowledge about fractional-reserve banking and the money cartel operations on a worldwide basis, the mystery becomes somewhat accessible.

You see, our news may pretend that there are different countries on Earth, different "regimes" and differences in opinion when it comes to political matters, but ALL countries we have ever heard about run on a similar basis - money.

It may sound redundant but money itself isn't really the problem. The problem is that the type of money used is tied to evergrowing interest rates and the unavoidable accumulation of debt.

The reason for this is that countries today don't just create their own currency in a smart manner in order to become independent and sovereign, they are not allowed to do so. Rather the established financial mammoths of the Western economic system have become the kings of moneylending on the world stage, and are bringing new countries into the machine through empty promises and the sheer prestige our Western societies still enjoy due to the historic rise of Capitalism. While the dolalr has lost most of its value, it remains the world reserve currency and therefore carries a lot of weight in deals offered to sturggling economies trying to keep up with boundless work of megacorporations.

The issue is that while these poor countries - after making such a deal with the Western proxies - may now temporarily have the money to improve on their infrastructure, avoid famines and create additional profits, the debts tied to these loans are often so astronomical that in a few years time the lenders of said money demand their compensation.

For many countries this has historically meant the inevitable selling off of natural resources, large infrastructure hubs like airports or cutting social programs drastically, affecting those who have the least to live off of.

This is especially true for those countries we always get to hear are "evil". If we look at the few remaining places on Earth without a central bank and compare the list to those alleged "terrorist" states, a huge lightbulb may go off in our heads, shoving the pointless chatter about unproven reasons aside that the virtue-signaling politicians of the West love to repeat publicly.

Warfare wears a costume

What does all of this have to do with outright warfare? Well, this economic stranglehold on developing countries has become quite the substitute for all-out invasions by the military. Making economic deals that leave the "foreign" government little choice will always be preferrable to invading a nation outright. This way you won't have to deal with critics from your own population, there is way less noise about the whole situation than a hot war would make and most of all - invasion through economic blunder-deals is way less expensive than mobilizing the army and sending it to far-off lands.

I really wish this was just a smart idea with little backing, but as I have stumbled upon in my TZM activism days, there are actual people telling the story of their involvement from the inside, relaying how Western modes of economy are imported into developing countries with enormous strings attached.

Meet John Perkins

If you have never heard about the work of John Perkins you really are in for a treat. Perkins is a self-described "economic hitman". He is (was) the man you would call in order to bring a country to its knees in a slick and discrete manner, long before you would ever consider sending the military.

Perkins story is mindblowing, and from what I have researched, his claims have great merit. It will come as quite a shock to being confronted with the re-evaluation of some of the most notorious geopolitical conflicts of the last 7 decades in light of Perkin's testimony and historically available data.

The patterns we can extrapolate from the sheer number of cases he cites will be reason enough to never ever blindly believe a government narrative again when they tell us that "this dictator is evil" or that "that despot needs to be removed from power". It's the very same pattern that has been at work for a long time, and many "nations" have already been subdued by the iron web of debt, cast by the same international gang of moneylenders and tyrants in suits and their agents in trying to gain control of any and all precious resources of foreign lands.

We learn about the unwillingness of the UN to do anything about the situation other than lip service, and after this interview it dawns on us that we are always looking for the reasons of war in the wrong places. The institutions the Western governments have established do not help the agenda of worldwide prosperity and security, they are actively destroying the little bit of sovereignty and independence the people on Earth have left.

I should stop here, I want you to reach your own conclusions, and I may have said too much already...

That said, I cannot recommend the work of Perkins enough, if only to shine a new light on the seeming "complexity of geopolitics". If we dare to question what we have been told from the ground-up, the conclusion may come as shocking as it is impactful.

Here is the extended Perkins interview from the movie Zeitgeist: Addendum that I highly recommend to this day. Many other interviews exist on the internet and Perkins has also written a book about the clandestine activities of economic hitmen of the last century.

If Perkins is new to you, prepared to be wow'ed <3

Read part one of this mini-series:

(Fairy)Tales of War | Pt. 1 - The Dictators, the Oil, the Stargates

_{Image sources:
unsplash.com
unsplash.com
unsplash.com
unsplash.com}

Thanks for stopping by <3