Central Banks Worry About Engaging World Markets After ‘Brexit’ … As global markets reel after an establishment-rattling vote by Britain to sever ties with Europe, investors are again expecting central banks to ride to the rescue.  And that may be the problem.- New York Times

Yesterday, we wrote about a new dominant social theme emerging as a result of Brexit.

The propaganda seemed to be resolving itself into Globalism vs. Populism.

Brexit supporters were being characterized as populists. “Remainers” were in the globalist camp.

In this New York Times article, we can see this theme repeated clearly.

Globalist central bankers want to do the right thing, we read. But they are holding back because of the emotion of the crowd. The populists, in other words, are standing in the way of the globalist saviors.

Here:

Investors and economists … worry that another round of central bank intervention in the markets will compound the sense of alienation, frustration and anger at global elites that encouraged a majority of Britons to opt for leaving the European Union. 

Interestingly, there is a secondary theme emerging as well. It seems – and we have suggested this before – that some globalist enterprises are more equal than others.

Despite the larger meme, central banks are taking serious and sustained blows from the mainstream media.

The negativity can be seen even in this Times article. Farther down, we read:

“People say that central bankers have not done enough, but they have done too much already,” said Stephen Jen, a former official at the International Monetary Fund who now manages a hedge fund in London.

It seems the IMF is the “golden-haired globalist child” these days. Central banking is running a distant second.

Here’s an article that ran in the Straits Times. It’s a virtual rewrite of the New York Times article, but with some strange differences.

The headline reads. Ruinous Effect of Persistent Central Bank Interventions.

Contrast that to the New York Times headline on virtually the same article: Central Banks Worry About Engaging World Markets After ‘Brexit’

The Straits Times headline is significantly more negative. Additionally the IMF quote  (see above) appears at the very beginning of the article.

It seems two things may be going on. One, the globalist meme will advance against the populism of Brexit in Britain and Trump in the US.

Two, central banks will continue to receive a mainstream pounding.

None of this would be happening if the world system was going to stay the same. But it is changing.

The idea no doubt is to collapse national central banks into larger regional ones. The case must be made that current central banks are dysfunctional and must get bigger.

The continued high profile of the IMF in the mainstream media probably means that the IMF is still central to globalist plans.

However, it appears that Christine Lagarde may not be, as we have previously reported. She is due to go on trial in France.

The continued, unusual, negative treatment of central banking in the mainstream media may give us some clues as to how they will operate going forward.

It seems that the banks are to be constrained by criticism and public opinion, and therefore, the easing everyone expects may be less aggressive than it seemed directly after Brexit.

Conclusion: If this is the case, then there will be immediate, continued economic dislocations as well. The inevitable implosion will arrive more quickly. And it may take place in October, as we have indicated previously.