London Declares World War III
The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) has produced a paper titled, "Manning the Barricades," which those committed to saving human civilization would do well to take note of. As a mouthpiece for the London-based financial oligarchy, going all the way back to the U.S. Civil War, when it openly opposed President Abraham Lincoln's war to save the Union, The Economist's "study" should be read as a statement of intent for ushering in a period of global chaos, in which that financial oligarchy maintains its power over a decimated planet.
"There is growing concern about a possible global pandemic of unrest," the report almost gloats.
The study warns that there is a 40% likelihood that the efforts to solve the financial crash, through the bailouts, will fail, and that it could lead to world war. At minimum, The Economist admits that the financial crash has killed globalization, and then moans that a new protectionist wave, like the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in 1930, could prolong the depression. The document attacks President Obama for allowing a "Buy America" clause to be included in the first stimulus package, and warns that he is moving in a populist direction that could cause a far worse crisis, leading to the global political destabilizations the report already forecast.
If protectionism and nationalism do fully erupt, the EIU warns, the world will face "armed rebellions, military coups, civil conflict and even wars between states." Will we once again face "wheelbarrow time?," the report asks, warning of global hyperinflation.
The bulk of the report deals with nation-by-nation ratings of the likelihood of countries being destroyed. The EIU projects that Britain will be in the front line of nations shaken by social upheavals that will topple governments. In Britain, "popular discontent and anger are likely to rise, and populist sentiments to strengthen. The news of big personal payouts to bankers who have failed spectacularly has incensed public opinion." Overall, 95 countries are ranked as being at "high" or "very high" risk.
The top of the list coincides with countries already targetted by Lord Mark Malloch-Brown's and George Soros's destabilizations: Zimbabwe, Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cambodia, and Sudan. Three European countries are among the 27 rated as "very high risk": Ukraine, Moldova, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.
As for Britain, the EIU points to immigrant labor as a possible flashpoint for unrest. A Financial Times/Harris poll says that almost 80% of British adults believe that immigrants should be asked to leave the country if they do not have a job, and a majority believes that social chaos will lead to the deployment of the British Army onto the streets. Clearly, such a scenario is not limited to Britain alone.
How can such a wish list/scenario be subverted? In fact, only by the very measures which The Economist excoriates—a revival of national sovereignty which leads to cooperation among nations for a new international credit system (not a British monetary system) geared to global economic reconstruction. That means war against the British imperialists—to prevent them from destroying us all. Left to their own devices, the Brits will resort to their longstanding doctrine of "permanent war/permanent revolution," a doctrine forged during the World War I period by British agent Alexander Helphand ("Parvus"), and earlier, by Lord Palmerston's Jacobin duo, Karl Marx and Giuseppe Mazzini.
