The Blogs: The Alarming Silence of Our Friends

When the United States seceded from its motherland, Great Britain, in 1776, it was not a break with the British nation. It was a break with the anti-freedom policies of the British government. Despite the existence of two parliaments, this government had for centuries served the interests of a financial aristocracy that had amassed enormous wealth during the colonial period. North American settlers resisted their unscrupulous business practices.1)

But just a few decades after the Declaration of Independence, this financial aristocracy was able to conquer the United States economically and develop it into its second headquarters. The consequences for liberal civilization were destructive on a massive scale. In particular, the growing influence of these ultra-rich led to a role shift for the United States – from a successful liberal-democratic model to an unsuccessful militaristic global policeman.

The break was initially economic in nature and consisted of the distortion of the free market economy into the rule of privileged corporations. Politicians continue to this day to discriminate against fair, smaller market participants, through bureaucratic hurdles and selective taxation, among other things. However, this gradual undermining of the liberal democratic system could only occur in an uncritical media environment.

The same lack of criticism in the media has allowed a militarization of American politics, particularly since the presidency of William McKinley (1897-1901). The largely counterproductive military engagements in Vietnam, Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East have confirmed a learning psychological insight: rewards work far more effectively than punishment and the use of force. Superior social models such as the market economy and democracy automatically prevail in competition with autocracy through nonviolent means, not through forceful imposition. And it is their appreciation by committed individuals that sustains their stability.

A nation that allows an unfree system to be imposed by autocratic forces will fall behind in this peaceful competition. This was recently illustrated by the failure of real socialism in Africa, Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.

Meanwhile, even civilized nations are beginning to feel the consequences of a gradual loss of freedom. In virtually all Western countries, a political environment has developed – strikingly uniformly – in which the power of large corporations is increasingly evident behind a regulatory state. Since the end of socialist competition in 1991 (with the dissolution of the Soviet Union), the rulers of these corporations, banks, and media outlets have made little effort to conceal the use of their oligopolistic power. Naive politicians continue to erect bureaucratic obstacles for smaller companies, forcing them out of the market so that the multinationals can buy them up cheaply.

This gives the oligopolists free rein to set surreal pricing policies to the detriment of consumers. Examples from the pharmaceutical sector demonstrate how far the regulatory mechanisms of supply and demand have already been undermined. Every January, the pharmaceutical giants in the USA have increased their prices, since 2019 by an average of 4 to 5%. The timing and scale demonstrate the absence of genuine competition and, instead, the existence of a cartel-like unity among providers. (Cartels do not require agreements, as is falsely assumed.)

The extra profits thus achieved continually increase the power of the cartels. Stabilizing the expanding, unfair system requires constant ‘investment’ in political influence, through which the legal framework is viewed as advantageous for corporations and burdensome for smaller companies. This influence is known to be exerted through lobbying – demonstrably with increasing success2) and thus to the detriment of democratic nations.

The political influence of the financial aristocracy has long extended far beyond lobbying and includes many other forms of influencing opinions and actions. In this context, billionaire George Soros (probably not even perceived by him) fulfills the role of a well-known pre-tester for the ultra-rich financial elite. By preferentially funding tax-exempt NGOs that clearly operate against the security interests of liberal nations, the powerful are testing how far they can go down this destructive path without provoking public resistance.

The coronavirus crisis has already activated such resistance. It is directed against, among other things, the regulatory state and the pharmaceutical cartels. This inevitably paves the way for a historic showdown, after liberal democratic nations have allowed the power of the financial aristocracy to continue to grow at their expense for far too long.

The Middle East war that broke out again on October 7, 2023, has clarified the fronts in this conflict between freedom and autocracy – theoretically. Because in reality, the true fronts are only visible to those who do not allow themselves to be led down one of the many false trails by the mainstream media and overwhelmed politicians. The all-out war waged by the financial aristocracy against democratic nations since American independence includes not only military, migratory, and demographic components, but also the aforementioned influence on opinions and actions.

The laying of false trails is primarily intended to keep the nations of the Judeo-Christian cultural area at odds with one another. This is achieved particularly effectively by preventing citizens from learning from historical mistakes. Thus, the Third World War, which MIC militarists are heading toward through their misguided “help” in the confrontation with Russia, would in fact be the fourth major European fratricidal war. For long before the First World War, the Crimean War (1853-1856) against Russia took place. It was worth 1 million deaths to the leaders of British politics – but is kept out of focus in the education system.

Correct learning from historical mistakes could also have prevented the new Middle East war. The learning process, which unfortunately failed to materialize, would have made it clear that this represents a single theater in the Third World War, which had long since begun. It is the aforementioned war by any means, which autocratically ambitious forces are waging against liberal civilization. The specific theater of the Middle East, with its spectacular twists and turns, fulfills two functions in this context. First, it is a testing ground in which military and non-military means of warfare, including media propaganda, can be tested on a manageable scale. Second, Israel distracts from the main theater, which is over 3,000 times larger: the Judeo-Christian cultural area stretching across several continents.*) The Islamization of this area by the turn of the century is already clearly evident in the current suicidal course.

World War III can only be stopped before it fully breaks out if the citizens of the West, who have long been too trusting, no longer allow themselves to be incited by unfairly partisan media and NGOs against other nations of their own, European-influenced culture.

Under this polarizing influence, the concerning nations have adopted highly irrational, fundamentally wrong positions. In the European fratricidal war in Ukraine, their sole role should have been that of mediators, never that of partisan arms suppliers pouring oil on the fire.

In contrast, in the Middle East conflict, they are not neutral bystanders, but rather a party in solidarity with Israel, whose existence, after now five (!) Middle East wars must finally be sustainably secured. This only correct position applies regardless of the fact that the Israeli government, like any other government involved in war, is to be criticized for individual actions.

However, these limited points of criticism are objectively overshadowed by the great guilt that must be attributed to the other side. And this opposing side includes not only the countries of the Arab world, but also the UN, the mainstream media, NGOs, other organizations, as well as Great Britain, the former mandate power for Palestine – or more accurately, its financial aristocracy. The guilt of this unholy alliance is evident in a chain of historical facts, including the following:

Great Britain pursued a policy in pre-Israeli Palestine that, according to psychological rules, could lead to no other result than lasting tensions between Arabs and Jews,3)
then leader of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, announced to the Zionists in 1947, more than half a year before the founding of Israel, a war for Palestine with horrific massacres,4)
however, the war of aggression that then began in 1948 resulted in an Arab refugee problem instead of the intended massacre of Jews, because the settlers were able to successfully defend themselves,
the UN unnecessarily relieved the six Arab aggressor states of responsibility for the reception and integration of the then only 730,000**) refugees by building refugee camps,
with the result that today, 6 million descendants and descendants of the descendants of the refugees still inhabit the constantly expanding camps as UNRWA guests,
as a result of exorbitant demographic growth and the radicalization promoted by UNRW, such camps played a key role in triggering the civil war in Lebanon (1975-1990) – and thus in the transformation of this formerly predominantly Christian country into an Islamic one,
Lebanon is symbolic of the whole Arab world, as the proportion of Christians there is declining everywhere as a result of discrimination and persecution,
almost all of the Jewish residents – approximately 900,000 – were expelled and expropriated,
the UN has backed the Islamists through a multitude of unfair resolutions that demonstrably violate the principles of its own charter5), thus inciting the Arabs to endless revanchism.

It is time for the citizens of free civilization to recognize their threatened situation and its perpetrators. They have to persuade their politicians to finally defend their freedom, their rights, and their security with adequate means. This requires, above all, taking morally sound positions and maintaining them consistently. To do this, democratic citizens must evolve from spectators to peaceful, yet committed and courageous defenders of their freedom. The great civil rights activist Dr. Martin Luther King warned of the consequences of coward passivity with the words, “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

The high relevance of this warning against cowardice and ignorance is demonstrated by a recent report from Syria, which is now controlled by pro-Turkish militias: “Since Ahmed Al-Sharaa … assumed power in Syria, Christians there have been subjected to … murder, forced displacement, and coercion into converting from Christianity to Islam under the threat of terror and violence. Christian families are being expelled from their homes, their properties are being seized, … homes are being set on fire, and churches are being converted into mosques,”…“These crimes are being committed … while Western nations and the global Christian community … (are) failing to take any serious action,…“.6)

*) Europe, including Russia, Israel, the Americas, Australia, and New Zealand

**) The much smaller Germany took in approximately 14 million refugees immediately after World War II and integrated them within a few years.

References and internal links