PDA

View Full Version : Global socialism? Is this part of the end times movement?



Dragonfighter1
Nov 4th 2008, 05:50 PM
I thought about putting this in the political section. BUT, This is not intended to be a political discussion per se, Rather, an analysis of economic events, global movements and possible outcomes, hence I placed it here where such discussion are more likely to occur.

Please review this article from a European newspaper and make comments on its possible "prescience". (That's snob talk for foreknowledge lol)


From The Daily Telegraph, UK.
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. Last Updated: 11:27AM GMT 04 Nov 2008
Revenge of the Left across the world

Whatever the exact result of the US elections tomorrow, we must assume that the whole governing machinery of Washington and the state capitols will soon be hostile to laissez-faire thinking.

It is not just that the Democrats will win a crushing victory in both houses of Congress, perhaps reaching the 60-seat Senate threshold that lets them steam-roll legislation. It is also that the incoming class of 2008 is of a new creed. Many no longer believe – or actively reject – the free trade and free market catechisms.
As commentator Markos Moulitsas put it in Newsweek: "The big question is, will Democrats nationwide simply 'win' the night–or will they deliver an electoral drubbing so thorough that it signals the utter rejection of conservative ideology and kills the notion that America is a 'center-right' country?" he said.
No matter that statist policies were responsible for this global crisis in the first place. It was Western governments that set interest rates too low for too long, encouraging us all to abuse credit.
It was Eastern governments that held down their currencies to pursue mercantilist trade advantage, thereby accumulating vast foreign reserves that had to be recycled. Hence the bond bubble. This is the deformed creature known as Bretton Woods II. Protectionist Democrats are right to complain that the game is rigged. Free trade? Laugh on.
But at this point I have given up hoping that we will draw the right conclusions from this crisis. The universal verdict is that capitalism has run amok.
In any case the damage caused as credit retrenchment squeezes real industry is likely to be so great that Barack Obama may have to pursue unthinkable policies, just as Franklin Roosevelt had to ditch campaign orthodoxies and go truly radical after his landslide victory in 1932. Indeed, Mr Obama – if he wins – may have to start by nationalizing the US car industry.
For those who missed it, I recommend Edward Stourton's BBC interview with Eric Hobsbawm, the doyen of Marxist history.
"This is the dramatic equivalent of the collapse of the Soviet Union: we now know that an era has ended," said Mr Hobsbawm, still lucid at 91.
"It is certainly greatest crisis of capitalism since the 1930s. As Marx and Schumpeter foresaw, globalization not only destroys heritage, but is incredibly unstable. It operates through a series of crises.
"There'll be a much greater role for the state, one way or another. We've already got the state as lender of last resort, we might well return to idea of the state as employer of last resort, which is what it was under FDR. It'll be something which orients, and even directs the private economy," he said.
Dismiss this as the wishful thinking of an old Marxist if you want, but I suspect his views may be closer to the truth than the complacent assumptions so prevalent in the City.
To those who still think that business can go on as normal now that EU taxpayers have had to rescue the financial system, I can only say: what will happen to London if EU exchange controls are imposed, or if leverage is restricted by draconian laws – as demanded by the German, Dutch, and Nordic Left?
Does the UK still have a blocking minority under EU voting rules to stop a blitz of directives that could shut down half the activities of the City – or the 'Casino' as they say in Brussels? I doubt it.
Who thinks that the three key Commission posts – single market, competition, and trade – will still be held by free marketeers when the new team comes in next year?
In Germany, Oskar Lafontaine's Linke party now has 23pc support in Saarland on a Marxist pledge to nationalize banks and utilities. Needless to say, the Social Democrats (SPD) are shifting hard Left to protect their flank.
"The rule of the radical market ideology that began with Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan has ended with a loud bang," said Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany's foreign minister and SPD candidate for chancellor next year.
"We need a comprehensive new start, so we can reestablish our society on fresh foundations. People create value, not locusts," he said.
France has its own Gaullist version on this, seizing on the crisis to launch the most far-reaching strategy of state intervention since the 1970s.
"Laissez-faire, c'est fini," said President Nicolas Sarkozy. "We will intervene massively whenever a strategic enterprise needs our money."
Such language can now be heard daily across Europe. It can only intensify as the fall-out from the EU's €1.8bn trillion (£1.4 trillion) bank rescue becomes clearer, and as Europe's elites discover that their own banks are the most leveraged in the world and have played their own Wagnerian part in Gotterdammerung.
European and UK banks are five times more exposed to emerging markets than US banks. They alone hold the collective time-bomb of $1.6 trillion (£990bn) in hard currency loans to Eastern Europe – now starting to detonate in Hungary, Ukraine, Romania, and even Russia.
At some point, Europe's political class will face the awful truth that their own credit bubbles are just as bad – and perhaps worse – than the excesses of US sub-prime property. As that occurs, the shock will move by degrees from revulsion to political rage.
Professor Hobsbawm, who spent his youth watching Hitler's rise in Berlin, has a warning for those who think this will help the Left in any recognizable form. "In the 1930s, the net political effect of the Depression was to enormously strengthen the Right," he said.
America was the great exception, as it may prove to be again. I for one will take the enlightened "socialism" of Barack Obama any day over the Hegelian broth nearing the boil in Europe.

From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/3366575/Revenge-of-the-Left-across-the-world.html
END ARTICLE...


What impact might this scenario have on Global Christianity?

What impact on middle east Christianity/Judaism?
etc..

Please give you opinion of the article, NOT your opinion of others opinions
Once we are 10-15 or so, posts deep then we can start chewing the fat on each others opinions... fair enough? :)

thepenitent
Nov 4th 2008, 05:57 PM
I thought about putting this in the political section. BUT, This is not intended to be a political discussion per se, Rather, an analysis of economic events, global movements and possible outcomes, hence I placed it here where such discussion are more likely to occur.

Please review this article from a European newspaper and make comments on its possible "prescience". (That's snob talk for foreknowledge lol)



What impact might this scenario have on Global Christianity?

What impact on middle east Christianity/Judaism?
etc..

Please give you opinion of the article, NOT your opinion of others opinions
Once we are 10-15 or so, posts deep then we can start chewing the fat on each others opinions... fair enough? :)

I believe this phenomena will more a consequence of the consolidation of Global Banking interest power than any real political ideological movement.

Richard H
Nov 5th 2008, 09:16 PM
I had to delay this until later, DF.
But now is later,
and it may be later than we (as a collective) realize.

Hitler was a fascist and fascism is on the rise.
Karl Marx was an under employed reporter for Hurst, before he became an “economist”.
His (as the article mentions the word) Hegelian framework was that - out of two opposing views, a third and better view would emerge.
He believed communism to be that perfect synthesis.

His whole thing of opposing views creating a new view has been a method used by the elite for many years.
Often, the “opposing view” had to be created – in order to propel society toward the final goal desired by the elite.

The idea is that order can arise out of chaos.
This coming (it has almost already arrived) New World Order – announced by Bush Senior on September 11, 1991
began rushing toward us exactly ten years to the day afterward.

Some may think me paranoid, but I perceive Illuminati manipulation in the course of world events.
The “illuminati” being: not just the uber – elite, but those “illuminated” and made “lucid” by the shining one – the fallen angel originally known as Lucifer.

I’m not frightened about it, but I see it happening.

What does this mean for Christians?
It means the globalists are a step closer to one world government.
It means Jesus must be “on His way” and we should be about our Father’s business as we watch for the coming of the King.

Our world economies are intertwined and it will one day be necessary to stabilize the money and society with a single controlled currency.
Who profits from all this? The private holdings of the ruling elite and the private holdings of the global banksters.

The next big thing might be a huge mid-east incident – on top of this economic dilemma, and terrorist threat, which would necessitate global governing.
We need to watch the infusion of Islam into Europe, what Javier Solana is doing, and even keep an eye on Charles as defender of the faiths.
Additionally, Akmadinajad has his sights on bringing forth the last Imam – the Mahdi, believing that this event will bring all the world into submission to Islam.

I’ll bet you didn’t expecting all that, DF.
_______________________...Or maybe you did… :hmm:

Kudo Shinichi
Nov 6th 2008, 09:37 AM
It's about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOi-77AusXI said by Richard H, a series...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQJj2Pi5U-s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTiUtBicJDs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGXGAWjJwJM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM5fvnvcJcE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl_QKsSPuYI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmgNOmMpgc4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHkTnR_CQZ4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yuv8U3S2GdA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywE1jCoyDiI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3jjlTn9ti4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc9-0Il3PVg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPmlU1fZdXk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M19JaRqFCIY&feature=related


I had to delay this until later, DF.
But now is later,
and it may be later than we (as a collective) realize.

Hitler was a fascist and fascism is on the rise.
Karl Marx was an under employed reporter for Hurst, before he became an “economist”.
His (as the article mentions the word) Hegelian framework was that - out of two opposing views, a third and better view would emerge.
He believed communism to be that perfect synthesis.

His whole thing of opposing views creating a new view has been a method used by the elite for many years.
Often, the “opposing view” had to be created – in order to propel society toward the final goal desired by the elite.

The idea is that order can arise out of chaos.
This coming (it has almost already arrived) New World Order – announced by Bush Senior on September 11, 1991
began rushing toward us exactly ten years to the day afterward.

Some may think me paranoid, but I perceive Illuminati manipulation in the course of world events.
The “illuminati” being: not just the uber – elite, but those “illuminated” and made “lucid” by the shining one – the fallen angel originally known as Lucifer.

I’m not frightened about it, but I see it happening.

What does this mean for Christians?
It means the globalists are a step closer to one world government.
It means Jesus must be “on His way” and we should be about our Father’s business as we watch for the coming of the King.

Our world economies are intertwined and it will one day be necessary to stabilize the money and society with a single controlled currency.
Who profits from all this? The private holdings of the ruling elite and the private holdings of the global banksters.

The next big thing might be a huge mid-east incident – on top of this economic dilemma, and terrorist threat, which would necessitate global governing.
We need to watch the infusion of Islam into Europe, what Javier Solana is doing, and even keep an eye on Charles as defender of the faiths.
Additionally, Akmadinajad has his sights on bringing forth the last Imam – the Mahdi, believing that this event will bring all the world into submission to Islam.

I’ll bet you didn’t expecting all that, DF.
_______________________...Or maybe you did… :hmm:

Richard H
Nov 6th 2008, 11:55 AM
It's about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOi-77AusXI said by Richard H, a series...Thanks for posting the link to the video, Shinichi Kudo.

It is one of 14 in the series.
Unfortunately, YouTube limits videos to 10 minutes, so it had to be divided up.
I was able to find a 2 hr 17 min version by using Miro, a donationware video player with full screen capabilities and pretty good searches on various search engines.
(I just set it to "google")

Anyone interested can google "miro", but it is not a tiny player and is a machine hog.
'Still worth getting, as it can find full length video in full screen.
You can create play lists, so you can place video segmants into a list, so they play in proper order.
(hint: drop them into the play list: "first" to "last")

Richard H
Nov 6th 2008, 12:09 PM
BTW: Marx didn't "invent" the Hegelian Dialectic. It was the Greeks.

The idea is that with thesis and antithesis (opposing views),
a synergy results where the best of the two are combined - a "more perfect" approach.

The shadow elite do exist and they often create and even force this conflict to bring about their goals.

Thesis and antithesis was the whole M.O. of his Communist Manifesto.
Only Marx could not see past communism - thinking it to be the perfection of all.
Unfortunately, he did not take into account that it still requires an elite, and absolute power always leads to corruption.

I have a book on quotes which ascribes this saying to Karl Marx:
______________________________"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

<sweet!> :rolleyes:

Kudo Shinichi
Nov 6th 2008, 03:17 PM
I realise that from watching those videos in Youtube randomly since I watch anime about connecting CIA and FBI...there were too many secrecy...:hug: That kind of spook me off...cause Illuminati was scary...those who didn't kept their promise to Illuminati will be assasinated.

Amos_with_goats
Oct 15th 2013, 05:55 PM
BTW: Marx didn't "invent" the Hegelian Dialectic. It was the Greeks.

The idea is that with thesis and antithesis (opposing views),
a synergy results where the best of the two are combined - a "more perfect" approach.

The shadow elite do exist and they often create and even force this conflict to bring about their goals.

Thesis and antithesis was the whole M.O. of his Communist Manifesto.
Only Marx could not see past communism - thinking it to be the perfection of all.
Unfortunately, he did not take into account that it still requires an elite, and absolute power always leads to corruption.

I have a book on quotes which ascribes this saying to Karl Marx:
______________________________"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

<sweet!> :rolleyes:


This point is germane to any discussion of government power.


Only Marx could not see past communism - thinking it to be the perfection of all.
Unfortunately, he did not take into account that it still requires an elite, and absolute power always leads to corruption.


I suppose it is bound up in our view of human nature. If one beleves natural humans acting together are likely to produce good, then systems that favor government control are good.

If one believes that men acting together are dangerous (sin nature, as demonstrated in the construction of the Tower of Babel)... Then government should assume smaller roles such as collective Defence and the administration of laws to keep peace.

Scripture consistently places responsibility on the individual. No one will stand on the day of judgement and successfully point a finger and say that someone else was to blame... If we prosper or if we perish we are responsible.

To abdicate these roles to a government is ineffective, inefficient, and contrary to the principals of scripture...

IMHO.

Blessings,

Aijalon
Oct 15th 2013, 07:28 PM
The article seemed to cover debt and the debt bomb in terms of Euro and Pound Sterling exposure to central bank debt structure.

What effect will that have on Christianity? None. If your faith is in Christ, you will not be shaken by the collapse of a house made on sand because your house is made on the Rock.

But sadly many Christians have not followed simple Scriptural wisdom, the borrow is slave to the lender. If you have a mortgage, your home is not yours. It is collateral that is for sale to the bank at whatever market price is "fair". Which if your net worth is cut in half by a debt restructuring, you are left with no house maybe.

Communism and price controlled trade would actually the antithesis of Judeo-Christian economics. The law of Moses puts on display the economic all-importance of property ownership, property inheritance, and a solid backing for the value of labor and land. The foundation of the economy was rooted then in the price controls over temple tribute. I don't think any other price controls existed except for the bride price.

Aijalon
Oct 16th 2013, 01:56 PM
The bride price by the way was 50 shekels of silver, right?

If that is one oz each, and lets roughly estimate that one troy oz of silver is equal to a weeks hard labor.

So if a highway worker gets $15/hr at 54 hours of work (6 days at 9 hrs per day) then that is an annual salary of $42,000.

So 50 ounces of silver is 50 weeks of labor, that's roughly $40,000. So if a poor man were to agree to have his daughter marry a man that could pay the full bride price, his dowry (being poor) and having no property, might be very small. The bride price would give him a very nice sum of money. The bride price was a weapon against poverty the way it appears.