Armstrong Economics Blog/Australia & Oceania
Re-Posted Sep 17, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
This is why revolutions take place, and I have warned unless the police support the people, they are the face of government and they will all become targets. This is how revolutions have unfolded. There is no freedom left in Victoria, Australia. How will Andrews win an election in the future? The risk is that there will be no election, and under the pretense of civil unrest, elections will be suspended. Unfortunately, the next Victorian state election is scheduled to be held on November 26, 2022. If that does not take place, then the revolution becomes the only alternative. This is how NOT to run a government.
Generally, at the federal level, an election can be called as early as August 7, 2021, and as late as May 21, 2022. However, the House of Representatives can go as late as September 3, 2022. We should expect political turmoil in 2022. With respect to Victoria, it is highly debatable whether Andrews can make it to 2022 without blood in the streets.
Armstrong Economics Blog/Disease
Re-Posted Sep 17, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, what is your comment on Dr. Yan and her assertion that this virus was created in the Wuhan Lab. She fled Hong Kong to the United States in April and says she will never be allowed home. What is your take on this story?
Thank you. I think you are the only one to trust these days.
ANSWER: I have stated from the beginning that this pandemic did not fit with our models as being natural. I have reported that Fauci was the one experimenting with this type of virus and was told to stop. He then sent this off to Wuhan. Every source I have looked at confirms it was made in a lab but was not a bioweapon because of the very low death rate. However, based on the evidence of those who suddenly sold stock and bond positions in December & January, and inside sources who stated a “virus” was coming, I do not believe that China deliberately leaked this virus.
I BELIEVE that if a real investigation were possible, you would uncover that the source of this leak goes back to this consortium pushing the Great Reset with plans to restructure the entire world economy. They are making the very same mistakes as Marx — they ignore human nature and are trying to manipulate us by converting society into sheep.
If Socialists and Communists want to play the “reparations game,” they need to recall all that the world could hold them accountable for in history
Democrat Party leaders who are proud of their heritage, need to seriously take responsibility for the crimes of their ancestors, which amazingly seems to be what they are calling for as their Party is demanding reparations be paid for the price of slavery – especially that which is “systemic racism.” The free-for-all in the herd of the twenty-odd Democrat “leaders” were clamoring for public attention last year in their “race” to get their Party’s nomination to run for POTUS, were all demanding that reparations be paid to descendants of slaves. What a way to pander to the Blacks for their votes.
Democrat Party has violence in its political DNA, and the Ku Klux Klan was just a formal terror arm of the defeated Confederacy
This has persisted despite the lack of logic or the nightmarish logistics of such an insane effort. Yet, it could drum up a few votes from those low information voters that still do not know that the major resistance to ending slavery was from the “Democratic” Party that had an entire region of the nation under the domain of slavery – even after most northern states abolished slavery. In fact, the deaths of many white soldiers who fought in the Civil War that slavery would end is on the heads of the Southern Democrats who changed their name to the Confederate States of America, So, if these calls for reparations are real, which it appears they are nothing more than a political tool, the real reparations should also include payment for the lives of those soldiers of the Army of the Republic who died fighting to defend the Constitution and to expand freedom to the Blacks held in slavery by the Democrats of the Deep South.
As long as the Democrat leadership is coming around to accepting financial responsibility for slavery, there are a few other reparations that should be tallied up for the Democrats to be held accountable for as well the “peculiar institution of slavery” as Democrat Alexander Stephens of Georgia referred to it. Stephens was the former Vice President of the Confederate States of the Union, and a serious proponent of institutionalized, systemic racism. The Democrat Party has violence in its political DNA, and the Ku Klux Klan was just a formal terror arm of the defeated Confederacy. Long before the Klan, Southern Democrats were “arranging” for Yankee abolitionists to be threatened, roughed up, or even murdered for their printed opinions against the slave system of the Democrat-run South.
The Democrats used labor union thugs to perpetrate violence in a similar way to accomplish specific tasks to coerce or intimidate citizens and bend their will to the will of the Democrat-backed unions. It was a symbiotic relationship as hardworking employees of large companies were coerced to pay the union dues, and for the most part, those union dues, went to support (read buy) Democrat officials or higher level candidates. Political “favors” were the rule rather than the exception. A classic example is the real origin of Labor Day as a federal holiday. It was born of severe violence from the American Railway Union strike. It was the inception of the marriage of Big Labor to Democrat politics. Is it not right that the Democrats assume the responsibility for all the violence and the serious destruction of property that union strikers and rioters have caused since 1893?
Violence being carried out by the anarchists, Antifa terrorists, and BLM Blackshirts
In the same vein, the violence being carried out by the anarchists, Antifa terrorists, and BLM Blackshirts in the major cities run by Democrat mayors or Democrat-run city councils should incur a great deal more accountability than the taxpayers having to pay for the damages. The leadership in those cities show culpability, and even outright support of the violence. Those leaders who have had an obvious causal relationship to such blatant violence should be sued and citizens should not only seek monetary damages, but in more flagrant instances, some mayors or city council members need to be prosecuted for aiding and abetting criminals committing crimes against the public. Voting such elected officials out of office will not curtail such a cycle of systemic disregard for regular citizens. It is such systemic lawlessness that absolutely needs to be stopped now.
Additionally, the damages to the stores and businesses that were destroyed because the Democrat mayors or Democrat city council members held back their city’s police forces, or ordered the police to stand down and essentially be impotent in the face of mass lawlessness, violence and destruction in the inner city areas. Such Democrat “leaders” need to be held financially accountable. Truly, they should be sued just as medical doctors are sued for malpractice. These so-called community leaders have been masquerading as people who would uphold the law, specifically to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, as well as the constitutions of the states in which they preside. If it takes citizen groups to form to effectively support the efforts of law enforcement in their cities until order can be restored it may need to happen. “Leaders” who fail to uphold their oaths of office need to be arrested and held accountable for crimes against the citizens who pay their salaries.
In fact, withholding of the salaries of such irresponsible “leaders” should be a possibility or option available to citizens who have had enough. The contracts that city officials sign for their positions, as they are employees of the citizens who rightfully pay taxes, should include provisions for dereliction of their duties as public servants.Salaries could be withheld and even recourse could be made for reparations made by such Democrat officials who think they are being clever by letting mob violence deliver a political message to all observers. Such inaction and ineptness should no longer be viewed as acceptable by “We the People.” And, if Democrat leaders want to make reparations some political ploy, and if they want to have reparations for something as far back as the 1800s, then there should be no statute of limitations on the severe property damage, destruction of businesses, and even the deaths of innocent citizens caused by the indifference or “malpractice” of such elected officials.
People’s “Republic” of China should be held accountable for the dreaded COVID-19
Even more importantly, it is much more a tragedy of Democrat leaders of states as well as leaders in cities that allowed serious harm to come to the elderly and most at-risk people during the height of the COVID-19 influx. Governors like Andrew Cuomo of New York and Gavin Newsom of California need to be investigated and held accountable for negligence in committing senior citizens to senior centers where known communicable health hazards were rampant and where multiple deaths were common. Those governors who made such decisions to forcibly confine such seniors to facilities in which they would be more likely to die from COVID-19 should be sued for negligence just as any doctor could be sued for malpractice. Such actions are comparable to criminal activity as much as those who are charged with negligence for wrongful deaths. Individuals who claim to be “leaders” need to be sued, or even charged with criminal intent for such actions.
On the ultimate level, if Democrats, who are exercising their socialist ideologies in allowing harm to come to American citizens, agree to be held accountable for their actions (or inactions), then it should also follow that “Mother China” should be held accountable for all of the COVID-19 related deaths in the United States and throughout the world. If wrongful death suits or war reparations are legitimate ways to recover from intent or criminal negligence, then the People’s “Republic” of China should be held accountable for the dreaded COVID-19. If Socialists and Communists want to play the “reparations game,” they need to recall all that the world could hold them accountable for in history.
Armstrong Economics Blog/Socrates
Posted Sep 16, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: Marty; My cousin in Britain who works in the government said the governments are acting insane because of your model. They timed the Covid-19 pandemic to coincide with your turning point January 18, 2020, and then the lockdowns are because your model has been forecasting the rise in civil unrest and then the collapse of the monetary system. He said there is not a government that does not follow your models after Margaret Thatcher and your forecast for the collapse of Russia in 1998.
Do you ever consider not publishing when you have that much influence?
ANSWER: There are aspects and certain models I will not publish. I spent 7 years in contempt for refusing to turn over the source code to my models. The movie “The Forecaster” could NEVER have been made without insurance against slander and libel. The New York boys were after the model — the source code to be precise. They even put that in writing so I had to provide all the documentation for Llyods of London to insure the production of the film. If every allegation could not be proved, they would never have been able to make the film. The government was given the opportunity to be in the film and give their side. They refuse to ever cooperate with the producers. I was released ONLY because I got into the Supreme Court which ordered the government to explain how I could be held for 7 years on a statute that stated civil contempt maximum is 18 months – 28 USC 1826.
CNN even reported first that the money laundering involved stolen funds from the IMF loans. They quickly buried that truth to hide it from the public. The movie has been played around the world, but it was banned in America. Why? Only because it hit home. Curious how not even Fox News will report what took place in 2000. The USA, under the Clintons, interfered with the Russian elections of 2000 and that is how Putin came to power.
Why do you think everyone tried to avoid our forecasts and pretend Socrates does not even exist? They would not dare to report that we have created the only fully-functioning Artificial Intelligence computer in the world. They do not like what it forecasts because it exposes the truth.
Perhaps you are correct and everything they are trying to do is because of our model. It still changes nothing. At best, it merely will increase volatility. They are looking to cancel the currencies and move to digital currencies because the monetary system is collapsing. The ECB lowered rates to negative in 2014, and 6 years later, their experiment has failed. They are now trapped and cannot raise rates. There is no place to hide.
Government officials reach out all the time. Even Nigel Farage had the courage to speak at our World Economic Conference in Rome, stating bluntly because we were the “alternative to Davos,” which is now even more apparent as we are head-to-head against Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum in league with Gates.
This collapse would have taken place without me. I do not believe Gates follows our model. Perhaps others convinced him to use January 18, 2020, for his timing. However, if he really respected Socrates, he would see his own demise.
So your question is interesting. I do not believe I have that sort of influence or they would listen and NOT try to defeat the model. I have no desire to go through all of this craziness. As I have said, I wish Star Trek was real. I would be screaming right now — “Scotty! Beam me UP!”
Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics
Re-Posted Sep 16, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
A separatist movement has begun within Scotland. Now, the Orkney islands are following Shetland in demanding independence from Scotland itself. This is part of a widening global trend; as the government begins to crumble internally, separatist movements will begin. We will see this also appear in the United States after the elections. Some people want to separate from the USA, taking California, Oregon, and Washington if Trump wins. We should support that if they take Bill Gates with them, and perhaps then we can revoke any passport to allow travel to the USA.
Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics
Re-Posted Sep 15, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
Armstrong Economics Blog/Uncategorized
Re-Posted Sep 13, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
The Wolds New Hitler — Bill Gates
We are in the midst of an all-out psychological war being wages to subjugate the people in the same manner as Adolf Hitler in order to impose this new Great Reset and redesign our world to surrender eat meat and you live off of insects and Bill Gates’ meat alternatives. Gates sold his stock weeks before the crash as if he knew the stock market was looking at the Crash of 2020 come January 2020. Of course, the SEC & CFTC would never investigate Bill Gates any more than they investigated Buffet’s silver corner which anyone else would be still in prison.
Strangely incorporated in this assault that the majority will never believe is taking place is also the attempt to reduce religion as was the case behind the Marxist revolution. On April 10, 2020, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear announced plans to record the license plate numbers of Easter churchgoers and force them into self-quarantine for 14 Days. Fortunately, a judge overturned the edict. Less fortunate was Greenville, Mississippi, where police cars descended on King James Bible Baptist Church for scheduling a drive-up church service and fined each person $500.
Additionally, they have seized control of the vast majority of mainstream media all telling you the future ends unless we stop climate change and overthrow Donald Trump following by the subjugation of Russia and China as well as South America, which will only lead to war. These are all strategies right out of the playbooks of Hitler and Lenin. The vast majority of newspapers and all the three major TV stations are all preaching this psychological warfare tactic to destroy everything we thought would be our future.
November election represents a crucial internal test, the failure of which could prove the undoing of the United States as a constitutional republic
Surveying the urban war zones, property destruction and the shuttered and bankrupt businesses across so many American cities from lawless rioters and extended Covid-19 shutdowns imposed by feckless political leaders, many wonder, “Just how did we get here, and will we ever regain normalcy?” Those two questions loom over the November election, but what’s really at stake is a choice between civilization and chaos.
What most people don’t realize is that there is an ideology behind Black Lives Matter (BLM) and the Democratic leadership that empowers BLM, and it’s called Critical Race Theory CRT).
Critical Race Theory
On the eve of Labor Day weekend, when President Trump became aware that CRT had infiltrated many of the agencies of the Federal bureaucracy through the reporting of Christopher Rufo on the Fox News—Tucker Carlson show, he issued a directive that all Federal agencies cancel race-related training programs based on “critical race theory” (CRT).
It turns out that CRT education and training programs have been promoted throughout various federal government agencies through the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, which came into existence from President Obama’s 2011 Executive Order 13583. His stated purpose was to “Establish a Coordinated Government Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce,” and he amped that up in his last six months in office, perhaps to institutionalize his legacy. In July of 2016, he rolled out the “Inclusive Diversity Strategic Plan,” calling on Federal agencies to “fully utilize policies, programs, and systems that support inclusive diversity through increasingly focused, innovative, and accelerated communication and learning strategies.”
To make sense of all this it’s important to recognize that diversity and inclusion were already well established in the Federal Government long before Obama’s 2011 executive order. At that time the percentage of blacks and minorities in the Federal workforce was about 18% and 34% respectively, a disproportionately larger representation than in either the civilian population or the private sector corporate work force. By the end of the Obama Administration, the percentage of minority representation in the Federal Government was even higher. Thus the 2016 initiative was probably less about expanding diversity and inclusion than about indoctrination—the “focused, innovative, and accelerated communication and learning strategies,” for government personnel—which is where “critical race theory” comes in.
Critical race theory is a derivative of critical theory which made its way into America by leftwing intellectual immigrants from the “Frankfurt School,” who were neo-Marxists forced to flee Nazi Germany in the mid-1930s. Luminaries from the Frankfurt School included Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkeimer, Eric Fromm and Wilhelm Reich, who set up shop at Columbia, Berkeley, Princeton, Harvard, New School for Social Research and Brandeis. In the 1970s Harvard Law School Professor Derrick Bell applied critical theory to legal theory, and his 1973 book, Race, Racism and American Law became the first primary text on critical race theory (CRT)—giving birth to the CRT movement.
But it looks like 2020 will resemble 1860 as the year in which the November election represents a crucial internal test
Critical theory and CRT are not like traditional theories limited to explaining and understanding certain areas of human motivation and behavior. Rather, critical theory is activist-oriented and emphasizes political organizing. Many of its advocates think of themselves as revolutionaries whose primary purpose is to critique and transform society as a whole. In short, critical theory is a radical, emancipatory form of Marxist philosophy.
CRT advocates downplay the accomplishments of the civil rights movement and generally reject rights-based remedies, such as affirmative action, color blindness, role modeling and the merit principle. They attack the very foundations of the classical liberal legal order that includes equality theory, legal reasoning, rationalism and neutral principles of constitutional law, and they specifically oppose neutral rules, such as one-person/one-vote or voter ID requirements. CRT advocates don’t believe the law itself is a neutral tool, but rather part of the problem, structured to oppress minorities, while preserving white supremacy. No wonder some want to tear it all down.
Prior to Trump’s directive, compulsory CRT seminars and training were going on in the U.S. Treasury Department, NIH and Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). CRT’s influence invariably brings on mission creep and distraction and can turn agency management on its head.
Consider FBI Director Christopher Wray who clearly has his hands full straightening out his agency. He was probably unaware of the weekly seminar training going on in the J. Edgar Hoover headquarters on the CRT subcategory “Intersectional Theory.” Intersectionality reduces people to being part of a network of racial, gender, and sexual orientation identities that “intersect” in diverse ways that determine the degree to which one is an oppressor or is being oppressed. With Chris Wray being an Ivy League white guy at the top of the FBI pyramid, “intersectionality” adds a whole new dimension of leadership complexity.
In a free society fringe groups and extreme ideologies can and do appear, and one would hope that the American people and their government representatives would have sufficient judgment and ability to withstand most contradictions and absurdities. But it looks like 2020 will resemble 1860 as the year in which the November election represents a crucial internal test, the failure of which could prove the undoing of the United States as a constitutional republic.