BLINK: Apr 12 2016



Nose on your face..


In this piece Mr Edelman says:


‘Remarkably, today the derivatives positions held by the large banks approach 10 times those of 2007-2008. In four banks alone, they exceed the GDP of the entire world. This is the interesting consequence when unchecked risk management rests in bankers’ hands.’


Is this a co-incidence? If it is not a co-incidence, then it must be intentional musn’t it? What could be the intention behind creating ten times as many derivatives as there were in 2008?


It seems that central banks and politicians must want lots of derivatives what else could this mean? Why would they want lots of derivatives? What is it about derivatives that central bankers and politicians like? If you visit USE regularly I think you already know…

I’m the real-life Gordon Gekko and I support Bernie Sanders
Asher Edelman

The potential for a depression looms on the horizon. The Vermont senator is the only candidate who can stop banks from spiraling out of control again


Things Fall Apart..


This diagram shows in a very clear and succinct manner the point I have been making in Vector History about capitalism and financialisation DISINTEGRATING society..


@ian bremner


The best explanation so far



Head-Brick Wall


American Trotskyists can’t seem to understand why information like this doesn’t provoke a move towards ‘class’ politics but instead provokes a move towards what they call ‘identity’ politics. Until they address the arrival of CULTURAL CONSTITUENCIES, they are going to have to continue stumbling around in the dark..

Life expectancy gap between US rich and poor widens
By Jerry White
12 April 2016


Roll over
Reuters coverage of the Syrian theatre of war just seems to get more ridiculously lopsided by the day..

Syria’s Assad shows no willingness to compromise
CAIRO | By Samia Nakhoul


Cake or Ha’penny

You can have millions of pretend jobs or you can have productivity growth but you can’t have both at the same time…

Britain suffers biggest downturn in productivity since the financial crisis
Figures a bitter blow to hopes the UK is finally escaping the stagnation that has bogged down the country since the banks crisis



This black gentleman might not quite be on the ball about everything, but he is having a go at thinking about Eurasia etc., so good for him. He seems to me like a reasonably nice, relatively harmless type.  But oh dear, check out the response..


Imagine a world without whiteness

Professor Calls For “Whiteness” to be “Abolished”
 “We need to….demolish the whole concept”

Paul Joseph Watson
April 6, 2016

Professor Calls For “Whiteness” to be “Abolished”


Living History


This is what ancient Greek democracy actually looked and sounded like. It wasn’t Lawrence Olivier and Marlon Brando walking about in bedsheets making speeches over Gina Lollobrigida, it was this: Rape, torture, cruelty and murder. All over Athens, all over Sparta, all over. Next time someone tries to give you the spiel about how noble and great democracy was/is, show them this….


‘House of horrors’: Police find apparent sex slave chained to stripper’s pole in Detroit home


By Peter Holley April 6 Follow @peterjholley


When police searched the run-down, two-story house on Tuller Street in Detroit, they found something that took even longtime cops by surprise: a woman chained to a stripper’s pole, with a padlock around her neck.




Pyramid Schemes Or Vector History Or I’m Ready for My Close Up Or There is no such thing as a Disintegrated Society Or Is There?

The structure of pre-capitalist societies is often depicted as a Hierarchical pyramidal structure with the mass of people forming the widest part of the pyramid at the bottom and then progressively smaller echelons forming each tier as it moves towards the top. We can call this a Standard Hierarchy Model and make a simple diagram of it something like this:



In this model wealth and power moves upwards from the bottom of the pyramid to the top and wealth and power in the form of patronage is redistributed down from the top to the bottom. In establishment rhetoric this is portrayed as the ‘classic’ ‘oppressive’ state structure.


Establishment history argues that this oppressive state structure belongs both to our pre-capitalist past and contemporary non capitalist societies such as North Korea, (which in Establishment ideology are essentially the same thing). But Establishment history argues that in contrast to all other types of societies, present and past, the pyramid structure is modified within capitalist societies.


The crudest Establishment description of hierarchy modification is in the Inverted Hierarchy Model. This model shows the mass of people benefiting from capitalism relatively and absolutely more than any other echelon in the pyramid. The argument is that the lower down you are in the oppressive pyramid model the more you benefit from the Inverted Hierarchy Model. We can show it like this:


In this model it is argued that power ‘democratically’ flows away from elites, up to the mass of people. Then patronage is redistributed down from the mass of people to the elite through the democratic process. As proof of this redistribute process the Inverted Hierarchy Model argues that the mass of people receive invisible, intangible social goods. These include the right to be an individual, the right to express opinions in free speech, sexual freedom etc, As an added bonus these riches get progressively larger and more encompassing with every passing year!


This Inverted Hierarchy Model is obviously overtly ideological and tends to be used mostly in Anglo Saxon societies and in particular the USA. But that doesn’t mean that is has no basis in history and culture. The objective is to try to understand what basis it actually has..


A more subtle Establishment argument is to agree that we live in a base heavy pyramidal structured society but to argue that who is at the top of the pyramid and who is at the bottom regularly changes over time. In other words the structure remains constant but the composition of the pyramid is open to change. This model accepts the implied need for the state to guarantee some kind of equality to mitigate the nature of the pyramid but characterises this as the need for equality of opportunity.


In contrast, anti Establishment arguments emphasise the fact that the structure of the pyramid remains constant irrespective of the composition of any particular echelon. Any movement of elements within the pyramid is limited and inconsequential. It follows that if the pyramid is incapable of internal change, change must come from outside.

So the basic mainstream Establishment position is:

The Capitalist form of society is a pyramid but it differs from previous social pyramids in that its composition changes and will continue to change over time.

The anti Establishment position is:

The pyramid is essentially the same as previous pyramids, has not changed and will not change until political force (usually from below), makes it change.


On these two essential positions the matter rests and has rested for some time. But it is possible to conceive of social structure in a different, dynamic way. This dynamic understanding can illuminate the observation people understand the pyramid structure not in abstract or random ways, but in ways that are exactly the inevitable outcome of the relationship between elite and the rest of society and the way this relationship has developed and been subjectively experienced.


Instead of the Establishment series of ongoing pyramid ‘snapshots’ or the opposition ‘oil painting’ of a single static pyramid, we can imagine the pyramid form instead as a dynamic vector on a graph representing a flow of wealth and power from the base of the hierarchy to the top and then back down again. This model integrates movement into the basic model itself. It is the difference between the dissection of a cadaver and studying the flow of blood through a living body.


Lets go back and look at the classic ‘oppressive’ pyramid structure from the perspective of this Hierarchical flow model. It looks like this:


Wealth and power moves upwards from the ‘peasants’ at the bottom to the ‘King’ at the top and is then redistributed by the King back down through the lords and barons and so on until a residue of wealth reaches the bottom again. In this model the elite is the mechanism of redistribution and the ‘King’ is the personification of the elite. We are taught that this is how medieval European society or contemporary non capitalist society such as North Korea is structured.


The fundamental Capitalist critique of an oppressive state structure like this is that the ‘King’ collects wealth and power from the people and then redistributes it to the power structure that protects him and the echelons below him from the people he collects wealth from in the first place. In other words the process of redistribution reinforces the redistributive structure in place and makes it impervious to change. This can be called a Force System.


The people pay to the King and the King pays the bodyguards and so on downwards thought society. Redistribution and force are intertwined. Wealth is redistributed throughout society through the Force System.


This process is characterised as a ‘crony system’ by Capitalists. It is also often misrepresented as a Forced System as opposed to a Force System. Capitalists argue that because redistribution is done through the force system it is ‘forced’ – it cannot be to any extent voluntary. They argue that this is morally unfair and/or economically and politically inefficient. They argue that it must inevitably collapse, and if it doesn’t decent people should work to bring about that collapse anyway and by any means necessary.


You should note that Germanic capitalist ideology viscerally detests Force System   because it does not reward the personal character traits that German culture and personality  admires and promotes.


The Fate of Kings


In a fully ‘feudal’ society everybody is effectively employed by government. Your economic boss is very often literally the general who leads you to war. And this political/economic model is reproduced right up to the very top. The commercial and the political is entirely integrated and entirely consistent , (which is to say that the logic of society is reproduced throughout society to the same extent). All of society is integrated and consistent.


The king is the guarantor of the system and the network. Consider the fate of Gaddafi in Libya and Ceausescu in Romania. Consider also what is in store for al Assad if his enemies get their way. This fate of kings is not random or happenstance. The fate of the King is absolutely entwined with the fate of the redistributive system.


Rather than a feudal society It would be more accurate to call this an integrated society because economics and politics are fused and every echelon is fused to the one above and below it by means of the redistributive system.


The popular capitalist ideological critique is that systems like this are static. Everybody is in a place within the system. Nobody can be outside the system and nobody can move within the system. Of course if they see any evidence to the contrary of their assertions they simply ignore it.


This criticism fits within the capitalist list of accusations which run from popular to true in descending order:
It is static

It rewards ‘bad character’

It is dangerous for ‘the people’ (which really means it is dangerous for people like us!)


If the capitalist system was the opposite of an integrated society it would be a disintegrated society wouldn’t it ? Could there be such a thing as a disintegrated society? A society like this would be a society that is defined by the belief that: ‘There is no such thing as society’. Could such a society exist? If so how could it exist?


With the advent of Capitalism instead of one income and dispersal system there are now two systems within society. Where there was only the integrated feudal political system there is now also a separate capitalist ‘economic’ system that mirrors the feudal political system. This can be called a Split Stream Model because there are two separate streams of income and redistribution. It can be shown like this.


Wealth and power rises and falls on a ‘commercial’ stream (blue) and a parallel political stream (red). Both streams are integrationist which is to say they concentrate wealth upwards towards the elite and then redistribute it.


Notice that this model does not differentiate between a ‘feudal’ and ‘capitalist’ elite. There is no need to try to manufacture a fundamental political or cultural conflict between the feudal and the capitalist elite in this model. They have separate income streams and dispersal networks but they are not fundamentally different.


This is in stark contrast to capitalist establishment history, (and Establishment anti-Capitalist theory!), for which it is very important to claim that capitalist elite are different from the feudal elite, because they have been transformed by an intangible, magical process called ‘Enlightenment’


I’m Ready For My Close Up


This Split Stream Model can be regarded as the basis for the idea of a ‘Golden Age of Capitalism’. In as far as Capitalism can be said to be progressive, the justification for it lies in this model.


The capitalist commercial blue vector shows Capitalism concentrating power upwards through the capitalist production process and then redistributing wealth and power back down through the very same capitalist production process. It should be very clear that unlike a feudal system wealth and power are NOT redistributed back to the people they had been extracted from. And wealth and power are NOT redistributed to everyone throughout society. But they are redistributed comprehensively nevertheless.


Imagine yourself standing on any point on the blue vector in other words, imagine yourself as part of the commercial vector. As part of the process, from your point of view Capitalism really does redistribute wealth and power; you can see it happening, it is happening to you. You are part of an alternative to the feudal redistribution system.


This is the form of society that traditional (sometimes ‘libertarian’ and even Neo Conservative) Anglo Saxon history focuses on. This is the basis and justification for Neo Conservative ‘trickle down’ rhetoric and at the same time the reason for its ‘Libertarian’ opposition returning again and again to the period of the American Constitution, and even sometimes the French Revolution.


We can look again at the Inverted Pyramid Model from this perspective. For someone at the apex of the blue vector the pyramid is indeed inverted.. power and wealth comes to you and you redistribute it. And that is why this model forms the basis for all pro-market, particularly Saxon rhetoric. Think of it as a snapshot of Germanic capitalism in early adulthood; fresh-faced and looking at her very best. It’s the same snapshot that Capitalism still uses on her Facebook page, although it’s a long time since she looked anything like that….


There are two systems co existing, but one of them has a clear future where the other does not. A new Divergent Split Stream Model begins to assert itself where economic wealth and power is no longer distributed back down through the lower echelons. The feudal vector system comprehensively redistributes wealth. The capitalist vector no longer does.

What this means is that in effect the capitalist vector is getting its government for free….It can abandon its obligations outside of the state. That model looks like this:


As a consequence of capitalists abandoning any social obligations they may have felt they had, the feudal system progressively impoverishes itself in comparison with the capitalists. This is effectively the moment of overt capitalist revolutions, the moment when ‘feudalists’ and ‘capitalists’ understand the true meaning of what is happening and what its inevitable consequences will be. Then comes a decisive political battle. Ironically it is when capitalism stops actually being progressive and revolutionary that an actual capitalist revolution becomes necessary!


And now things get really interesting.

The post revolutionary redistribution system bypasses the elite entirely. This is the Split Stream Welfare Model and it looks like this:


The top echelon elite have taken themselves out of the redistribution process altogether but they are still protected by it. The elite are effectively disintegrated from the system. The difference between an old fashioned ‘oppressive’ pyramid and a modern system is that the people used to pay wealth and power to the King to distribute to his bodyguards. Now they pay to the bodyguards directly. This is called democracy. The system is streamlined.


And if the red vector looks familiar from the models above. It should because it is the same one.

Now the Split Stream Welfare Model reproduces the feudal distribution system, but outside of the elite. That is what ‘welfare’ redistribution actually is; a reproduction of the classic feudal non capitalist redistribution system but at a lower level of society. If redistribution is really feudalism, is the left really ‘feudal’?

You betcha!

So what is a ‘progressive’ then?

‘Back To The Future’ Next time….

14/15 Whiteism: Years of Culture

In 2014 it became impossible to ignore the fact that culture increasingly replaced economics as the driving and defining force in human affairs, both domestic and international. What we have come to know as ‘rational’ economic self interest is exerting less and less pull on the way that people think. Something is taking its place. Across the globe people are beginning to understand themselves as individuals and groups in a different way.


This change in perspective is not nationalism or patriotism. In fact it comes into existence in direct contradiction to nationalism and patriotism. It is based on a conception of shared belief, values and history that opposes the property rights and geographic definitions that make up Germanic Land Democracy.


We need a new term for this collective/individual identity to differentiate it from what has gone before; I would suggest that the term Cultural Constituency is the most appropriate..


The transition from class and nation to constituency has become explicit in relatively few places in the past year but the principle behind it has affected EVERY territory on the globe. This is why I can confidently predict you will see more examples of culture superseding economics throughout the coming year.


Here are some of the most prominent examples of the constituency effect in 2014.


Scotland Referendum. The desire for independence was built on a non Saxon constituency that sees itself as separate from Britain as a whole with a conception of social rights and responsibilities that puts Scottish/Gaelic priorities in direct opposition to Anglo Saxon priorities.

The referendum was in effect a judgment on the financialised Anglo Saxon economy and resulting Credit Crunch, what was done to ‘repair’ the damage from the financial crash and what is going to happen going forward. This specific difference of opinion and culture explains why the population of Scotland split the way it did: The Gaelic/Scottish west voted for independence, the Saxon East voted against. It also explains why the membership of the SNP has surged in the aftermath of the referendum, especially in the west of Scotland. A national referendum only partially expressed the difference that has emerged between these two constituencies. That is why a national referendum has been unable to resolve these differences and they are ongoing.


UKIP in Britain. The United Kingdom Independence Party has emerged as a destabilising force in British politics winning two by elections and threatening to destabilise the entire forthcoming general election. UKIP offers overt Anglo Saxon perspectives and values, differentiating itself starkly from establishment pan European parties. It is not a coincidence that UKIP is strongest in the south east of England, the area with the highest density of Anglo Saxon inhabitants.


The Emergence of UKIP in Britain and the SNP in Scotland reveals clearly how fundamentally differing perspectives on the role of government in society, social cohesion etc are all rising to the fore. These perspectives are no longer seen as conditional and subject to changing economic conditions. People are making permanent and irreversible decisions about the way they want to see their societies develop. And they are doing this on the basis of culture.


The Catalonian Independence movement is using a secession referendum to challenge the Spanish national consensus on EU membership and the German led restructuring of the European economy. Catalonia can claim a distinct history and culture as will as industrial infrastructure separate from the rest of Spain. This is reflected in the development of Catalan economy and industry which makes Catalonia a viable separate region. Catalonia won’t accept the consequences of being integrated into Europe on German terms which would effectively mean becoming a service hinterland to the central German manufacturing economy abandoning a significant part of their identity and history.


The Greeks are another constituency that is deciding whether to remain part of the German culture dominated EU.  This is expressed in opposition to continued compliance with the terms of the bailout organised in the aftermath of the Credit Crunch. The restructuring of the Greek economy, including wholesale privatisation of state assets is increasingly perceived by a majority of Greeks as a German led process. Greek identity is becoming a central issue, if the German led EU has its way there will be no recognisable Greece left. Those who are pro- EU and pro austerity have defined themselves as being anti Greek culture.

(As I write: Greece has failed to ratify the existing bailout arrangements, a General Election is now inevitable…)


Sweden has entered a crisis of social democracy ever since Anders Brevik forcibly called an end to the consensus on immigration and the post war model. Scandinavian societies have become increasingly polarised. The Social Democrat consensus is breaking down and Sweden is becoming increasingly divided in terms of wealth distribution. This represents a battle to determine what the ‘true’ nature of Germanic/Scandinavian culture is. Is it the pre WWII culture of polarisation or the post WWII culture of Social Democracy and cohesion?


Russia Syria and Ukraine form a troika of nations that are in the crucible of the constituency process. Syria, Ukraine and Russia are being dismembered from without and within using the process of constituencies.


In Ukraine a pro German cultural constituency is attempting to permanently dismember a moderately pro Slavic constituency and expel it from political power. Maidan Ukrainians are making a decisive cultural break from Russian/ Slavic culture; even though this is a full on economic disaster for the majority of ordinary Ukrainians, including pro-German Ukrainians. The fact that they are willing to suffer financial collapse in order to separate from pro Slavic Ukrainians is an indication of just how far the culturisation process has gone.


Syria is convulsed by the birth of ISIL and Sunni nationalism which seeks to overthrown the existence of Syria as a modern multi-group nation state. Already vast numbers of Shiite and Christian Syrians have been expelled from Eastern Syria. Unless the Sunni army and the Sunni population is utterly defeated and subjugated, the civil war will result in the permanent alteration of Syria along cultural lines. This will mean the end of any kind of modern western economy.


As I spent quite a bit of time discussing, Russia has become the central strategic cockpit for the culture war in Europe. This is without doubt the most important culture conflict in the world at this time and it is intimately connected with the nature of Whiteism.

Whether by design or accident, Russia is moving into a period of economic stress. Some might calculate that this will be sufficient to put unbearable pressure on Putin and the Russian leadership; colour ‘revolution’ anyone? But I argue that Cultural Constituencies mean that this kind of economic pressure is becoming increasingly irrelevant.


Race in America. In the aftermath of a spate of judicial killings and the abject failure of the American legal system to respond in a way that commands widespread support, race has again become the focus point for the American culture wars -the forerunner of the global move from economics to culture. The situation has degenerated to the extent that individuals are targeting cops to be killed. The Mayor of New York and his local police force are not even on speaking terms. As a whole, the Anglo Saxon constituency in America is becoming less and less willing to make even token concessions to the idea of race based civil rights and cohesion. A growing Anglo Saxon constituency wants an all out confrontation with those who will not toe the established  line. Don’t be surprised if you see them agitating to get one…


And China, Korea and Japan are going to emerge as a new cockpit for cultural constituencies in 2015.

South Korea’s Constitutional Court issued a ruling on the 19th December disbanding the opposition Unified Progressive Party (UPP), citing government claims that the party supported North Korea. Clearly there is a move within South Korea to eliminate even token acceptance of the idea of common Korean nationality.


In Japan the Abe government is increasingly embracing overt Japanese militarism as an alternative to their ongoing economic malaise. The adoption of secret courts indicates that sections of Japanese society want to return to a traditional relationship between government and people that makes no concessions to post WWII liberal democratic sentiment.

As evidenced by Hong Kong, China on the mainland and in its sphere of influence is going to express a divergence between constituencies as a consequence of the American soft power pivot to Asia. Parts of Chinese society will manifest a more overtly non European, even hostile to European, identity


Cultural Constituencies and how to recognise them:


  • They make permanent rather than transitory demands; the removal of American military bases from Japan instead of a change in interest rates.
  • Willing to compromise on periphery, completely unwilling to compromise on core; creating new spheres and forums for co-operation, even international organisations that encompass Cultural Constituencies. But less and less willing to negotiate with their own national governments.
  • Economic demands secondary or irrelevant.
  • Profound realignment of politics within constituencies; Less and less will traditional areas of contention and politics operate within cultural constituencies. The members will tend to see what they have in common over what they have in difference.
  • Condemned by the post war establishment; Pundits and politicians of the post WWII order are not going to like these groups. And they are going to act against them.

Ethnic Bomb:Reap the Whirlwind


It has long been a staple of Saxon Axis foreign policy to manipulate ethnic tensions within target states to promote political change. This tactic has been intensively used in the past decade. but the way it has been used recently is qualitively different from the Cold War realpolitik method applied in the decades after the end of the 2nd Germanic war..

The reason for this is that the ‘ethnic bomb’ has been hi jacked by Neo Cons.

That’s right; it was only a matter of time before a dangerous weapon like this fell into the hands of extremists.


The ability to foster explosive racial/ethnic/identity conflict is a powerful weapon- look up ‘USA soft power projection’ on Google if you doubt it. We can call this power the ‘Ethnic Bomb’. And we can say that the Ethnic Bomb is the post-modern equivalent of the Atomic Bomb.


The ethnic bomb uses ethnic division and grievances (funded by NGOs under the guise of human rights and humanitarian aid), to create a relatively small but dedicated group that will attack the general order of a nation, and create a ‘runaway reaction’ of disorder. Just like ‘liberated’ neutrons are ‘freed’ by an exploding plutonium plug to smash into uranium 236 atoms in a chain reaction!


Neo Cons have recently been using the hijacked ethnic bomb to devastating effect in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, the entire ‘Arab spring’, Ukraine and Russia, western China, Latin America and on and on.


After the atomic bomb was developed, America effectively held the whip hand over the entire world until the Soviet Union developed the ability to manufacture a counterpart. After that, a period of relative stability appeared with neither side ultimately willing to risk the use of a weapon that could escalate out of control.


Now worldwide stability is again threatened because no one else apart from the Neo Cons has the ethnic bomb. Because of this Neo cons believe that they are free to use the E Bomb without fear of consequences; or so it seemed. But the process is getting out of hand in Syria/Iraq where a Sunni religious/military crusade threatens to topple the wrong apple cart. In arming and organising the Islamic State, Neo Cons were so psychotically desperate to get Assad and Iran they pushed reasonable safety considerations aside. And now it is blowing up in our collective faces.

So far so bad, but now we have: Ferguson- the Fukushima of the ethnic bomb.


Just like atomic weapons manufacture and storage, using and maintaining the E bomb requires a comprehensive safety mechanism. That mechanism was a framework of liberal, progressive ‘universal rights ‘ (which actually means subsuming Anglo Saxon national, economic and political identity at home within a broader framework of rights for others).


The Great Society in the 1960’s provided the safety framework required. The Great Society gave the Saxon Axis the moral freedom required to propgandise about conflicts abroad under the guise of human rights and democracy etc.


Unfortunately for America the Great Society safety regime has collapsed because surprise, surprise Neo Con extremists are not prepared to stump up time and money for safety measures. Like all crazy people they just want to blow stuff up.


Welfare and health care as well as prisons, military and law are all being privatised under the neo con religion. There is no basis to build a civil society among the marginalised in American society. Just like Fukushima was an accident waiting for TEPCO in Japan. Ferguson was an accident waiting for the New World order.


And now for the fallout…


‘US authorities have been told to show restraint in dealing with the racially charged demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri – by the Egyptian government. In a bizarre turnaround, authorities in Cairo used language similar to that offered by Washington when Egypt was facing its own protests from Islamists ‘




‘Criticism of the US over Ferguson has similarly flowed from other repressive regimes, including China, with a comment piece published by the state-run Xinhua news service on Monday excoriating the US for the “racial divide” that “still remains a deeply-rooted chronic disease that keeps tearing US society apart, just as manifested by the latest racial riot in Missouri”.




If you have ever wondered what expression a man sitting next to a barrel of nuclear waste would have on his face:





One Way or Another…

 ‘One way, or another,

I’m gonna get ya

I’m gonna

Get ya

Get ya

Get ya

Get ya’


A while ago I predicted that Russians leaders would come under increasing pressure from Anglo Saxon backed forces within the territory of Russia itself.

The reason for this increased pressure would be to force Putin to come to back down from his confrontation with the Saxon Axis over Syria.

Anglo Saxon strategic thinking goes that once Syria can be turned into a staging post for Wahabi style militants Russia will be forced into a direct conflict with them. This will achieve two fundamentally important strategic goals for the Saxon Axis:

First it will tie Russia down in a re-run of Afghanistan. The Saxon elite yearns for a return to the days when Russia was embroiled in fighting Islamists in the first Afghan war. Russia was in a state of permanent emergency and being bled dry of blood and money. As a result it was no threat to Saxons plans in the rest of the world.

Second, it will allow the Saxon Axis to complete the pivot to Asia. Once Russia and the Islamists are locked in a death embrace Saxons can turn their attention to encircling China and creating the security structure that will best suit their need in the Pacific. In part this will be also accomplished by the trans Pacific trade agreement of which I will write more later.

Outside of these two strategic objectives there is a further ideological goal for the Saxons to achieve in Russia.

Many have been struck by the apparent change in Frances attitude to the policy of interventionism and particularly Saxon interventionism that has been seen in the Middle East. It seems that France, which under traditional Gaullist philosophy has been at best lukewarm about collaborating with Saxon interests, has changed its attitude completely. Again, this was something that I predicted some time ago, and it an inevitable progression in the development of WHITEISM.

Whiteism is the ideological structure that rests on the belief that all white people have a common ‘white’ culture and common ‘white’ interests. It follows from this that all ‘white’ people should act together in political military and economic spheres. French refusal to co-operate with NATO for example was a direct challenge to Whiteism. In order to gain French co-operation it would be necessary to find a threat that clearly unified all white people around the need to defend ‘our’ culture and ‘our’ way of life- and does not Islamism fill this role admirably? Think about the way that a carefully orchestrated campaign around outlawing the Burkha in France set the groundwork for a new French attitude towards Muslim extremism.

So far so good. That’s the Gallic whites taken care of. But what about the other big group of non Germanic whites, the Slavs?

Unfortunately the first Afghan war in which Islamists were used against the Slavs by the Saxons had the side effect that Slavs developed the unhelpful,(from a Saxon point of view) perspective that theirs was a solitary fight against Islamism. As a consequence Slavs developed their own methods and philosophy in this struggle. So far it has proved virtually impossible for Saxons to subvert or gain control of this Slavic perspective despite their many increasingly desperate attempts to do so. So instead they have developed a separate track- the NGO approach, which is to use pro Saxon factions within Russian society to attack the Russian leadership, especially using that totem of Germanic Pagan religion- homosexuality. So Russia finds itself under a secret Saxon siege: check out the Guardian coverage of the mayoral elections as pure Saxon propaganda.

One way or another the Saxons intend the Slavs to join the White war against Islam. If the Putin leadership will not fall for the idea that we are all whites together, then the Saxons intend to install a leadership who will.

WHITEISM: PLAYING FOR KEEPS or: What the Hell is Obama up to? or Washingtons Secret Civil War

I am updating this piece as it is being written in the light of ongoing events

Whatever else is going on, one thing is clear; everybody is playing for keeps in Syria.

The Damascus chemical attack is a rare moment, clearly seen by everyone as a turning point and not just for the Middle East. Room for a fudge has diminished until it is vanishingly small. One way or another, everyone is now going to be forced to take sides in the Syrian conflict. On the surface this is how it splits:

The attack either took place or it did not.
There is no independent way of verifying that an attack using a known chemical weapon agent such as Sarin actually happened. The evidence of a chemical attack of this nature will always be open to dispute in any event. There is no doubt that the ‘Neo Con’ faction will say such an attack occurred even if the evidence is highly contentious.
(Cameron admitted in the House of Commons debate that evaluating the available evidence of an attack was ‘a matter of judgement’)

The attack resulted in mass casualties including women and children or it did not.
There is plenty of evidence of the Cannibal army producing propaganda material, especially to promote the case for western intervention. There is also plenty of evidence that the western media uncritically jump on this material and use it to promote war. But it is also clear that much of the public has become increasingly wary of the ‘stampede’ tactic- weapons of mass destruction in Iraq etc. If it should turn out that the footage of casualties is not all it seems to be, the media which accepted it unchallenged would suffer a major, possibly even a terminal blow.

Either the Assad regime or the Cannibal army carried out the attack.
If the Assad regime did it then there will be the perfect pretext for an attack and the overthrow of the last secular regime in the Middle East. But if the Cannibal army can be shown to have done it, then they too are finished.
(Since it is clear now that a significant minority of the public and politicians are not willing to accept the media narrative, you can expect a major corporate media offensive to shore up credibility and make the public accept their version of events)

Somebody is going down and pretty soon. Given the way these things have played out in the recent past it seems reasonable to assume (barring a major upset), that it is the Assad regime that is due to go.

But hang on a minute, the fat lady is not singing, not just yet.

First of all, there is still no widespread public support, either in USA or England for an attack on Syria despite nearly two years of pro war propaganda.

Second, there is no public trust in the official narrative with regard to Syria (eg. the public does not yet believe that Assad carried out this or any other attack)

Third, there is no widespread support within Syria for the Cannibal Army

Fourth, there is no guarantee that the Russians and the Chinese will roll over and take it.

In short, there is no guarantee that the West can pull it off.

But why should that matter? -there was no guarantee that the Saxon Axis could pull off Iraq and Libya (and in point of fact, the Saxon Axis secured at best limited and partial success in these areas), but that did not stop them going ahead with those adventures.
The determining factor is not if Obama achieves his stated objectives in atacking Syria.

What matters is that Obama can get away with it if he fails to achieve his objectives- what matters are the consequences of failure.

If you think I am predicting some kind of peasants uprising that will bring the elite to justice for war crimes across the Middle East, I am not. The danger to each faction of the elite comes not from the public but from the other of the two. One section of the elite might be willing and able to pin a failure in Syria on the other one. This is what is different and defining about contemporary events and this is why both sides in this secret war are playing for keeps.

Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are a familiar illustration of this principle. It has been clearly shown that there were none. Which means that the invasion of Iraq was a war crime, yet no-one has been brought to book.
Because no one with the real power to cause any trouble is interested in causing any trouble. In other words the media and political elite regard it as being in their best interest to present a common front against the idea that any of them could be brought to book for events in Iraq. So even though Blair and Bush were shown to have committed what was at least a terrible act of incompetence they know they are in no danger of facing a war comes tribunal. This foreknowledge is essential if elites are going to have the confidence to act.

Ask yourself this question: What would politics look like if politicians didn’t have that confidence?

There are two elite Anglo Saxon political factions that no longer have an interest in the consensus as it has previously existed. Events in the Middle East are one arena they are fighting in. Whoever loses in the international arena as a consequence loses in the domestic arena. Most people have figured out the conflict has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat allegiances. In fact, these allegiances can be said to be secret from the public.

We need a framework within which we can understand who these two elite competing groups are, and what exactly divides them.

Obama is plainly not left wing or even liberal, either in terms of domestic or international policy. Yet it is clear that his agenda diverges significantly from that of the Neo Cons in the USA elite.
In domestic policy he has followed the policy of reducing ‘entitlements’ and supporting the financial sector.
He is plainly less enthusiastic about military action as it is undertaken by the Neo Cons. But this is not because he is anti-war;Obama likes to use drones. Obama just does not want to fight Neo con wars on Neo Con terms.

Obama’s sees himself as the forerunner of a whole generation of black politicians in the run up to 2040 (racial tipping point in USA). He sees himself as struggling against a racist Neo-Con plot to bring him down using whatever means come to hand, including Syria. His entire purpose is his personal political survival and by extension the survival of what he represents- the new black political class. He sees the ‘red-lines’ as a trap that McCain sprung on him. In return he is now busily wrapping McCain and the Neo-Cons up so tightly in the coming attack that no matter how it plays out they cannot use it against him. This is Obama’s politics and his morality- the struggle against McCain and all the other Yankee Boers- his war against American Apartheid.

The secret civil war in Washington is every bit as vicious as the one in Syria is.