What is a globalist?

[panamaican]

Certainly it seems difficult to think that they could be that coordinated, since they are human after all. I was as skeptical as anyone else.

There are many layers to how this system is run and how it came about. The top players are not like you and me they are born into it and are in that sort of environment all the time. The ones that weren't are accepted based on certain criteria (loyalty being one of them). So applying common assumptions doesn't always apply to the operation of such a high up system.

The best analogy for how to visualize it is a sort of cross between a military and a mafia.

Military command structure can include in theory, an infinite number of people. Do they all get along? Probably not. But they listen to hierarchy and direction from above and if they don't they will be reprimanded. There is also a sense of loyalty to the group which is instilled. Same with the mafia and how they are part of the family, or brotherhood. At the top there is much more to it, but in general it applies.

That and most people within the system only know what they need to know based on position and hierarchy. People with jobs..

It IS very complicated, but it is also very explainable and well understood by a lot of researchers.

So it's an economy where instead of saying that there are competing and supplementing market forces, you're simply re-classifying those market forces as a nefarious shadow organization.

For example: The head of Microsoft and the head of Apple agree to fund a new type of computer chip. They decide who will fund which parts of the research and design and then pass down instructions to their underlings as required to keep the project moving.

Someone could say that's normal since they have overlapping interests. OR...someone could say there's a secret cabal in the computing world trying to create a super chip to take over our computing lives. :icon_conf

 

[IDL]

So it's an economy where instead of saying that there are competing and supplementing market forces, you're simply re-classifying those market forces as a nefarious shadow organization.

For example: The head of Microsoft and the head of Apple agree to fund a new type of computer chip. They decide who will fund which parts of the research and design and then pass down instructions to their underlings as required to keep the project moving.

Someone could say that's normal since they have overlapping interests. OR...someone could say there's a secret cabal in the computing world trying to create a super chip to take over our computing lives. :icon_conf

People are free to work within the system as defined for them. As we all are.

So there are free market forces within limits, and certainly there naturally will be overlapping interests.

In your example, for sure both natural and unnatural explanations could be true. It would require diving into it to see.

 

[IDL]

This is not even even close to being true. In the whole world *including the U.S.* all physical cash adds up to a little less than $2T. Also, what "leverage" do "the people who control it" (who?) have, and how are they using it?

Fair enough, I was referring to debt as well. Not just physical cash, since it can be hit with times multipliers through fractional reserve.

If you had to come to me for money, which I could create with my magic wand, would it give me leverage over you? They use such leverage to further their own interests, basically. That can manifest itself in many ways. Corrupting politicians would be tempting.. Keeping people off your backs would be tempting..

 

[Jukai]

So is there people in EVERY COUNTRY that are "spies" per say for this secret organization? Or do some countries have more pull than others?

 

[IDL]

So is there people in EVERY COUNTRY that are "spies" per say for this secret organization? Or do some countries have more pull than others?

New York, London, and parts of Switzerland are named as banker operations central. From what I understand the central bank of central banks is the Bank for International Settlements in Basel Switzerland.

I wouldn't call them spies, I'd call them active participants and directors in the system. Mind you the ones at the very top take a more passive role.

They don't work for the benefit of their countries though.

 

[Ruprecht]

So if they exercise so much control, what could possibly be the cause of an investment banking massacre?

...and if they are all powerful, why do they still end up on trial and in jail?

 

[HOLA]

 

[Bay Area]

 

[IDL]

Why are you trying to mock and trivialize?

 

[Jukai]

They are haters, IDL.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Fair enough, I was referring to debt as well. Not just physical cash, since it can be hit with times multipliers through fractional reserve.

What does that mean? What would be hit? Do you mean that bankers could threaten deflation if they didn't get what they want? It doesn't seem that there's anything they could ask for that would exceed the value of deflation.

If you had to come to me for money, which I could create with my magic wand, would it give me leverage over you? They use such leverage to further their own interests, basically. That can manifest itself in many ways. Corrupting politicians would be tempting.. Keeping people off your backs would be tempting..

You're not talking about gov't debt, I assume, as they don't just call up a bank and say they need money, and then bankers ask for some favor in return. When they want to sell debt, they have auctions, and there are a lot of buyers. And the conditions are a payment schedule. Are you suggesting that politicians ask banks for personal loans, and banks issue them on condition of votes?

 

[Bumble_Bee_Tuna]

OK This will probably (rightfully) get moved to the dump, but I'm just curious. The only person I've heard use this term is Alex Jones. So who the fuck is he talking about? I want specific names.

*also, the term globalist seems to imply people that prefer globes to maps or some shit. Doesn't have the most evil ring to it. I'd have come up with something that sounded cooler:redface:

A globalist is someone who espouses globalization. However, you cannot define a globalist, unless you have a proper idea of what we mean by globalization. Basically, "globalization" is a euphemism that refers to the post-1991 unipolar world set up under the American financial empire.

The global picture that we have is one in which wealth, and by logic its corollary, power, are leaving the Atlantic world, or "the West," into mostly East Asia and beyond. Indeed, China's political-economic model is a direct contradiction if viewed through the prism of Western thought, but it has proven to work. This is a good article that assesses China's place in the future of the global economy buttressed by a declining "West." This was as much confirmed by James Wolfensohn, former president of the World Bank, during a speech to the Stanford Graduate School of Business, on January 11, 2010.

[YT]6a0zhc1y_Ns[/YT]

In other words, the brief and exceptional time period of unipolarity established in the post-1991 world and the financial model around it are crumbling as the world reverts back to the historical constant of multipolarity. In effect, what unipolarity has shown is that monopolies are bad, because they lead to abuse, and in this case, abuse of power. Economically, the people in the US have gotten poorer, and the world has entered into a world wide depression with no end in sight, exceptions being East Asia. Having other centers of gravity can only lead to competition between powers versus only one having "the way" and "the currency." It has lead to unholy wars resulting in loss of life and money domestically and in the countries directly harmed. It has resulted in a stagnant world overall. Just like monopolies are bad in the marketplace, they are also bad when it comes to concentrations of power. The world is thus finding its equilibrium in which diffusion of power is the norm.

 

[IDL]

What does that mean? What would be hit? Do you mean that bankers could threaten deflation if they didn't get what they want? It doesn't seem that there's anything they could ask for that would exceed the value of deflation.



You're not talking about gov't debt, I assume, as they don't just call up a bank and say they need money, and then bankers ask for some favor in return. When they want to sell debt, they have auctions, and there are a lot of buyers. And the conditions are a payment schedule. Are you suggesting that politicians ask banks for personal loans, and banks issue them on condition of votes?

The dollar amount, it was just an old video game reference. Take 10 dollars, hit it with the 40 times bonus multiplier..

Bankers could threaten whatever they want, by the power vested in them.

No obviously it's full of red tape and not some bat phone with a line up of politicians asking for money

Governments do need money to run their affairs though.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The dollar amount, it was just an old video game reference. Take 10 dollars, hit it with the 40 times bonus multiplier..

Bankers could threaten whatever they want, by the power vested in them.

No obviously it's full of red tape and not some bat phone with a line up of politicians asking for money

Governments do need money to run their affairs though.

Gov'ts have something called "taxation," which is how they raise money. If they want to borrow, they sell debt at auctions. They don't call up bankers and tell them that they'll do whatever they want in exchange for some cash.

Other than that, I asked for some clarification on what you were saying, and you've really provided none at all. Is it possible that you can provide some? Not a vague insinuation that bankers have power beyond their wealth, but like a mechanism by which they actually get things done. Something concrete. Bankers want to achieve goal X, and they make it happen by method Y. Can you explain that?

 

[5H3RD0G]

.............................................depends on the perspective of a banker, president, military dictator, stock broker how they see and manage the worlds evolving infrastructure and how to succeed within it's confines.

 

[jmag]

Gov'ts have something called "taxation," which is how they raise money. If they want to borrow, they sell debt at auctions. They don't call up bankers and tell them that they'll do whatever they want in exchange for some cash.

Other than that, I asked for some clarification on what you were saying, and you've really provided none at all. Is it possible that you can provide some? Not a vague insinuation that bankers have power beyond their wealth, but like a mechanism by which they actually get things done. Something concrete. Bankers want to achieve goal X, and they make it happen by method Y. Can you explain that?

If you can loan practically any amount of fiat to anyone, foreign governments, etc., in secret, what power do you not have?

 

[Jack V Savage]

If you can loan practically any amount of fiat to anyone, foreign governments, etc., in secret, what power do you not have?

Well, obviously no one has that power. But assuming someone did, you tell me. Are you just assuming that whoever is entrusted to set monetary policy is omnipotent? Does that really make sense?

 

[jmag]

Well, obviously no one has that power. But assuming someone did, you tell me. Are you just assuming that whoever is entrusted to set monetary policy is omnipotent? Does that really make sense?

It appears that the World Bank and the Fed and others exercise this kind of power. Assuming they can, the sky is the limit.