And another one gone, and another one gone … Another one bites the dust − Queen
Is it possible that the biggest roll-up in history is foundering?
What roll-up? Well … roll-up, of course, is a money-industry term of art. It means that someone − an enterprising banker backed by big money − begins to buy up mom and pop shops to turn them into one large industry with "economies of scale" and an intrinsic value that is larger than its individual moving parts.
In this case, the roll-up that is taking place is of nation-states.
The bankroll comes from central banks.
And the supervisory business council is made up of the great Anglosphere families that control them around the world.
But if such a roll-up is taking place, it just hit a snag. The Anglosphere power elite that is trying to create worldwide government seems to have suffered yet another setback with the withdrawal of Britain and three other countries from upcoming treaties designed to make the EU even more of a massive nation-state.
Ironically, Britain (home of the City of London's mile-square nexus of elite, global domination) has led the way. Apparently, there is simply too much resistance among the population and even the political class to overcome. I would like to thank the Internet for that. Perhaps people for the first time in a long time are waking up and realizing what is being done TO them in THEIR name.
Unless something changes very quickly (and it always could), Britain shall remain outside of the core Eurozone. But another 23 European countries will participate in a new treaty mandating strict oversight of how they spend their taxpayer's money.
The treaty is supposed to be written by March. It will probably mark the first time in history that 23 countries voluntarily gave up their sovereignty without a single shot being fired. Britain won't be among them. We'll see how far the treaty actually gets.
Britain's top men supposedly made the decision to leave in order to ward off regulatory attacks against its financial services industry. Do you believe that? Britain's been moving toward the Union for decades.
What is more likely is that a tipping point was finally reached. Had Britain's political class followed its instincts and handed over the last vestiges of sovereignty to the EU, it might have faced open rebellion at home. It was, therefore, a bridge too far …
Why should this be? Well, we've explained it before. The Internet era and what we here at the Daily Bell call the Internet Reformation is making it increasingly difficult for the power elite to pull together tens or hundreds of millions in a single, bureaucratic entity, let alone seven billion. In this Internet era, where this sort of manipulation is either known or suspected, the end result is increasingly difficult to mandate.
Sometimes a rose is a rose and a setback is a setback. It may be what we have here. For 50 years, the elite that wants to rule the world lied and dissembled to the British people about the EU. Step by step a union was built like a gilded cage around the British Isles – and around Europe as well.
It begs common sense to maintain that this was built up so painfully and with such determined malevolence with the idea of its destruction in mind. No, the preferred plan, as is obvious and evident, is to build up "unions" of countries around the world – and then to build global governance on top of it.
There can be NO doubt of this. There are now "unions" – and planned currency unions – around the world.
Are we to believe it is all "coincidence"? We find them in South America, Africa, Asia, even the Middle East. Lift the blanket and you will find unions scurrying about like bed bugs. They are likely being organized by the same Money Power that built up the EU and has been trying to create, as well, a North American Union.
The initial reorganization could date back to colonial times. During the so-called "colonial era" European countries spread out around the world and "colonized" Africa, South America and Asia. All of a sudden regions that had no countries were given specific designations, governments and boundaries.
Today, of course, all this is looked upon as an "aberration" and a "mistake." Really?
I've long since given up on the idea that history is full of "mistakes." World War I was a mistake. World War II was a mistake. Versailles was a mistake. Yalta was a mistake. And yet each mistake yields more and more global tension, chaos and ultimately, globalist "solutions" leading inevitably to global governance.
So was the colonial era simply another aberration? Another mistake. Another era of greedy pillaging with no larger purpose. Or was there a method to the seeming madness? Am I wrong to ask the question?
It certainly SEEMS like a mad question, to be sure. Could the great Money Power families even 500 years ago have ALREADY been contemplating world government? Could they have set out from Europe on a colonizing mission to create nation-states that would then form the fulcrum of regional unions and finally global government?
Could this international "roll up" have roots that go back a millennium?
It's a big project, to be sure! One of those projects that is so big it's almost impossible to wrap your mind around it. But take a step back and the parameters become achingly familiar and shockingly – brutally – simple. Build up nation-states, convert them to regions and roll them up!
Of course, it is merely coincidence …
Merely the sweep of history …
Merely the evolution of culture and power …
And yet … The result is always CENTRALIZATION. Always. Never anything else. Always the solution is more power for the center, more "leadership," more technocratic advances by those who cluster around the modern central banking establishment.
So … yes, one can view such inevitable results as accidental. But when the same results repeat themselves over and over, no matter the circumstances, one can surely make the argument that what is taking place may NOT be accidental but "directed." Here's something from Wikipedia about the colonial era:
In history, the early modern period of modern history follows the late Middle Ages. Although the chronological limits of the period are open to debate, the timeframe spans the period after the late portion of the Middle Ages (c. 1500) through the beginning of the Age of Revolutions (c. 1800). From a global standpoint, the most important feature of the early modern period was its globalizing character — it witnessed the exploration and colonization of the Americas and the rise of sustained contacts between previously isolated parts of the globe. The historical powers became involved in global trade. This world trading of goods plants, animals, and food crops saw exchange in the Old World and the New World. The Columbian Exchange greatly affected almost every society on Earth.
Now, three other events. First was the creation of the Gutenberg Press in the mid-1400s. Wikipedia tells us that:
From a single point of origin, Mainz, Germany, printing spread within several decades to over two hundred cities in a dozen European countries. By 1500, printing presses in operation throughout Western Europe had already produced more than twenty million volumes. In the 16th century, with presses spreading further afield, their output rose tenfold to an estimated 150 to 200 million copies. The operation of a press became so synonymous with the enterprise of printing that it lent its name to an entire new branch of media, the press. As early as 1620, the English statesman and philosopher Francis Bacon could write that typographical printing has "changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world."
Second was the Reformation. This split the Roman Catholic Church asunder and was quite possibly the work of the power elite itself, or certain banking facilities that saw the Church as an imminent threat. Wikipedia tells us:
Martin Luther's spiritual predecessors included John Wycliffe and Jan Hus, who likewise had attempted to reform the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant Reformation began on 31 October 1517, in Wittenberg, Saxony, where Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences to the door of the Castle Church, in Wittenberg.
Third was the creation of what today is known as the Illuminati, with all its secret hand-signs, Masonic involvement and furious speculation about what it is today, and whether in fact it even exists – and for what purposes. Wikipedia tells us:
The Illuminati (plural of Latin illuminatus, "enlightened") is a name given to several groups, both real (historical) and fictitious. Historically the name refers to the Bavarian Illuminati, an Enlightenment-era secret society founded on May 1, 1776. In more modern contexts the name refers to a purported conspiratorial organization which is alleged to mastermind events and control world affairs through governments and corporations to establish a New World Order. In this context the Illuminati are usually represented as a modern version or continuation of the Bavarian Illuminati.
Let's try to summarize. Philosopher Francis Bacon wrote that the Gutenberg Press "changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world" – much as the Internet has changed the world today.
The Gutenberg Press was no doubt immensely threatening to the powers-that-be as its initial impact was to generate the rediscovery of scientific thinking – which has been mis-described today as the Renaissance. (Of course, we've argued that a similar Renaissance is taking place today, sweeping away the nonsense of gravitational physics, Peak Oil and the like.)
The powers-that-be seem to have counterattacked in several ways. Here's one (hypothetical) way to look at it: First, they began to create false-flag "movements" such as the Reformation and the Enlightenment. Second, they set up various secret societies to control the advances of knowledge via the printing press. Third, they "took a step back" − and substituted "democracy" for monarchy. It was also at this time that the European countries became far more aggressive in terms of their colonial efforts.
Accept there's possibiy some validity to the above and we can ask ourselves: Are there parallels to what is going on today? This is what we here at DB attempt to cover regularly. We try to write about the way the modern power elite is apparently responding to the 'Net and the "Internet Reformation" that is now taking place. Just like the previous Reformation − perhaps founded by the elites of the time − this one, too, is spinning out of control.
The elites evidently and obviously have tools they use to try to create an ever closer global union. We have labeled these dominant social themes – fear-based promotions that provide internationalist solutions.
These solutions, of course, are ones that have been created by the same elites: the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, Bank for International Settlements, World Bank, International Criminal Court, World Health Organization, etc.
This power elite continually seems to use central bank fiat "money from nothing" to create an integrated and seamless media matrix that speaks with one voice. It is a simple enough procedure and allows the power elite to create convulsive sociopolitical and military movements.
Over the past decade, we believe we've begun to see these dominant social themes founder and fail. The war on terror, global warming, peak oil, central banking, government efficacy – each and every meme propounded by the Anglosphere elite appears to have been undermined by the Internet and the dissemination of information about the Way the World Really Works. This Internet Reformation, as it spins out of control, hasn't reached everyone of course, but it's reached and illuminated tens of millions.
Within this context, I'd argue that Prime Minister David Cameron's move to reduce British exposure to the European Union is perhaps NOT something that the power elite wished to occur. It is being driven by forces in the British Isles beyond their control. It is a setback, a result of what we call the Internet Reformation, not merely a cunning ploy.
Of course, elite strategies are multifarious. The setback itself will no doubt be used to attempt to build a more viable and inclusive European Union. Every setback must inevitably be seen as an opportunity to reinforce a one-world order.
There are plans within plans and strategies within strategies. Hidden in plain sight are apparently whole corporations (Tavistock) devoted to creating, evaluating and re-evaluating the memes of the elite in order to make sure they are viable and appropriately adaptable. (Already, we think we see signs of how this Euro-schism will be put to good use by the globalists.)
But, as I wrote above, a setback is a setback. And the Internet, in my view – and the out-of-control Reformation it is spawning – has provided an unexpected and formidable obstacle to the elite's compulsive internationalism. No doubt, they will be working 24-hour shifts at think tanks around the world to remedy this.
Over the next weeks and months we'll continue to try to analyze the elite's promotional memes as regards what seems to be the collapsing European Union and how they may be attempting to use the setback to buttress their quest for world government. This struggle has ramifications for everything from investing to how and where we live.
It also may mark at least a modest turning point in a 500-year-old roll-up – and thus is history-in-the-making on a grand scale.