Just a job
Joe Kennedy said, and FDR is purported to have said, and it had been said many times long before that "there are no accidents in politics".
There are clearly competitions, often rigged or multiply rigged, and there may be surprises. We can assume lies.
Rational-actor theory in global politics applies in other political venues.
Politicians are not stupid if they do not accomplish what they say they intend, merely lying opportunists.
The job of politicians is to deliver the actions of the people, preferably willingly, to the desired plans of the owners/masters.
This job is easiest in times of plenty and a booming economy, like in the US after WW-2. The masters wanted to continue war-economy, and the benefits of war for global control of commerce and profits. They got the Korean War. they got Vietnam ramped up over JFK's dead body. JFK worked against critical interests in the military, CIA and banking. He was determined to turn America back over to the Americans, including the money, and including their desire for peace.
Now the talk is about "reducing carbon footprints". Politicians have long tried to get people to embrace this concept, and it is a really good concept, like stopping pollution and becoming stewards of living ecosystems. The problem is that everything we know runs on oil, coal, natural gas, some nuclear, and that wind and solar electricity generation completely depends on this vast existing industrial economy, which cannot be transitioned off these buried treasures.
We have seen evidence that the COVID lockdown was to hide the effects of the biggest bank bailout ever, which was required to keep the system operational.
We know now that there will be a "recession" and the asset super-bubble will be popped to support the $US as global reserve currency. After centuries of globalization of trade, we are seeing a balkanization, compartmentalization which is restricting trade. A western financial bloc is cutting itself off from the rest of the world, as the new "G-8" (see below) steps up to manage most other global trade. All of the things being given as reasons for actions like refusing cheap, good Russian oil are preposterous at first analysis, "suicidal". Still, we must assume "rationality", so what are the interests being served? Who benefits? How?
The ultimate contraction of global industrial economy has been predicted, based upon resource fundamentals and patterns of economic growth and usage, since the early 1950s. Admiral Hyman Rickover and Oil Geologist M. King Hubbard predicted, and their predictions held very closely. US oil production did peak in 1971-1972.
Jimmy Carter, the last US president to present this honestly, was a nuclear sub commander, and was a protege of Rickover. Carter's honesty, wearing a cardigan on TV and urging Americans to conserve fuel, is an object of derision to this day. That approach was abandoned, but the interests of the elites in maintaining control of the economic systems, even as they eventually shrank, and total wealth contracted, never changed.
As Reagan/Bush derided The Limits To Growth, and said "there are no limits on America", and things like that, Deng Xiaopeng was studying The Limits To Growth and taking it very seriously, in a 50 year plan and 100 year plan kind of way. Why would Ruling Classes of the rest of the world do less? The book was commissioned by The Club Of Rome, which is often derided for conflicting interests, but it seems like they really just wanted to know back around 1970 (published 1972). They got experts in systems analysis, computer modeling, and MIT's big computer, and ran models with no economic assumptions at all, just resource information and use trends over previous centuries. The extrapolations seem to be holding well, as far as I can tell. Global industrial economic output appears to have peaked in the second half of 2018.
Last June Gail Tverberg had this analysis: Where Energy Modeling Goes Wrong
Summary: The economy is approaching near-term collapse, not peak oil. The result is quite different.
The modeling that comes closest to being correct is that which underlies the 1972 book, The Limits to Growth by Donella Meadows and others. This modeling was based on physical quantities of resources, with no financial system whatsoever. The base model, shown here, indicates that limits would be reached a few years later than we actually seem to be reaching them. The dotted black line in Figure 1 indicates where I saw the world economy to be in January 2019, based on the limits we already seemed to be reaching at that time.
(I think that line is drawn at 2010, myself. Extrapolate between 2000 and 2050. See what i mean?)
Are you a "useless eater"? I am these days, as would be judged by the business interests of the owners, which is all that matters for this analysis, since they are determining actual policies and seeking certain physical-world progressions and outcomes, about which they must lie, since Jimmy Carter failed them.
Industrial Output Per capita is a pooled measure, but Catherine Austin Fitts has long spoken and written about elite plans for a "breakaway society" which would be more formalized, but there would be strict separation of "haves" from "have-nots" Another mitigating factor is clearly getting rid ofa lot of people throung accelerating the trend of rising deaths, and drastically cutting down on births.
Resource conservation on the global scale has only ever been seen with massive economic collapse. The collapse of the USSR cut CO2 emissions a lot for several years. No voluntary actions have done anything globally, though the nation of Japan, working together, regrew her forests over 300 years. Coupling the dramatic use of natural resources by most people, while cutting total human population, lines up well with policies used in recent decades to keep-the-oil-in-the-ground in countries like Iraq, Libya and Iran, by destroying their oil-fueled economies by wars and embargos. This is a model which Dick Cheney supported. Cheney had a "total energy policy". "Get everything and keep it and control it."
Just as all errors fall in the favor of the bank, any glitches in Great-Reset actualization will be made to fall in favor of reducing wealth/resource-consumption, lifespan and fertility for the vast majority of humans, like me, and probably like you. This is not explicable, so everything we hear lately sounds completely foolish on the face of it. We only have to comply and go into that chute.
COVID "vaccines" seem to be causing immunocompromise, which progresses over time and the number of doses.
Cancers and infections associated with AIDS are on the rise in the multiply "vaccinated".
Twice per year "boosting" seems "optimal". This cuts lifespan in a myriad of ways, only a few directly recognizable, but it's making that anomaly that the life-insurance companies have to pay out on. Thes products just got FDA approved for kids starting at 6 months of age, who have truly immature immune systems. They'll never have a chance. It was a unanimous decision. Public comment was pre-censored at the shortened hearing. Absolutely minimal short term data from just a very few kids was used. Nobody who was allowed in objected.
National policies to reduce drilling, pumping and distillation of oil, and to reduce mining of col, are purported to "force" a transition to wind and solar energy, but the main issue is that people will use far less total energy and only sometimes, when it is available, with the constraints being put in place. Energy austerity being imposed upon European people is like that, too. These policies make some sense to people with fervor and group loyalty, who are not very good at physics and math word-problems, which is most people. You just have to fool most of the people most of the time, enough to get a commitment from them, then lock them in.
The locking-people-in to being robbed, enslaved and killed is always the hard part. Wars work, but wars destroy the wealth-producing assets the owners need to keep intact for their future needs. "Vaccination" has a lot of good features, especially if the rise in deaths is gradual, delayed, not apparent until later, then "nobody could have known". Compartmentalizing economies allows for a lot of constraints upon resource use. No chips, no cars? Who could have foreseen that?
There are bound to be limitless war-gamed contingency-plans to grind down the resource use of most humans, while preserving the wealth for the important humans who need their wits about them to guide our species and our planet through these unprecedented trying times.
As for me, I will merely assume that the owners will have moderate and ongoing success in reducing our carbon-footprints, birth rates, lifespans and access to the many luxuries we now take for granted, like electricity and the internet, grocery stores tap water and warmth in winter.
My reading of history is also that they will only be able to protect their own wealth and position sometimes and incompletely. They read history too. they are doing everything they can to get rid of my demographic, which is a pretty threatening demographic to them. I'm just going to blog and grow vegetables, try to "collapse early and avoid the rush", and help family and friends survive. I intend to never be the immediate threat that they need to expend valuable resources (like a predator drone and hellfire missile) on.
I have long said that the upper middle class and middling wealthy will have to take the first round of big losses. I suspect the Fed will "defend the dollar" at the expense of the "risk assets" held by these demographics, wave after wave, perhaps. Tom Luongo sees the big $US banks scoring a win over "the Davos crowd".
China has her own plans to leap out in front of the crisis, Great Leap Forward 2.0. Russian nationalists like V. Putin, Sergey Glazyev and Sergey Lavrov do, clearly have their own 50 year plan, which looks like the global populist option to me. China is currently in harmony with that, but the Chinese way is historically one of absolute domination. The current story of health-passport RED codes being used to keep Chinese depositors from visiting their stressed banks, for their funds, or even an explanation, bears repeating and much consideration.
Dr. Mercola has this well fleshed out and researched piece, though our outlooks are not identical.
Preparing for the Reality of Financial Collapse
Pepe Escobar has this progress report on China's belt-and-road initiative and 'G-8", a term likely to catch on.
The ‘New G8’ Meets China’s ‘Three Rings’
..This non Russia-sanctioning G8, he added, is 24.4% ahead of the old one, which is in fact the G7, in terms of GDP in purchasing power parity (PPP), as G7 economies are on the verge of collapsing and the U.S. registers record inflation.
The power of the acronym was confirmed by one of the researchers on Europe at the Russian Academy of Sciences, Sergei Fedorov: three BRICS members (Brazil, China and India) alongside Russia, plus Indonesia, Iran, Turkey and Mexico, all non adherents to the all-out Western economic war against Russia, will soon dominate global markets.
Fedorov stressed the power of the new G8 in population as well as economically: “If the West, which restricted all international organizations, follows its own policies, and pressures everyone, then why are these organizations necessary? Russia does not follow these rules.”
The new G8, instead, “does not impose anything on anyone, but tries to find common solutions.”
Germany (Siemens) did not return the pumps/turbines for the Nordstream (1) pipeline after sending them to Canada for repair, as contracted with Gazprom, so the Nordstream-1 gas pipeline output falls with fewer pumps. Blame Putin.
European NatGas Soars 70% In Week Amid Freeport Delays And Russian Cuts https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/european-natgas-soars-70-week-amid-freeport-explosion-and-russian-cuts
Coincidence Theorist (took picture of Jenny holding harvested ears of sweet corn in jungly patch of Yoakum garden)