The Bear and the Dragon

The Bear and the Dragon

March 29, 2014



Reflective Symbolism and the Rise of Multilateralism
By JC Collins



Bones and old newspapers.

America was a giant of the 20^th Century. The echo of its mighty roar will be heard for the next 50 years as the seeds of its economic power continue to grow in the markets around the world. Just as the East India Trading Company was the spear tip for the growth of the British Empire, so too was American industry and commercialism at the forefront of its expansion into regions and markets around the world.


The hundreds of former US military installations will become symbols of the new multilateralism where the international community can build the science of the future. The gnostic dream of ultimate knowledge will be realized. The burning fires of knowledge corrupted by matter, which has been called Lucifer, will stand in stark contrast to the universal truth of Virgo Lucifera, uncorrupted knowledge.

The symbols of this gnostic reality are everywhere and anywhere within the structure of our civilization. The keys to understanding the revelation of the method are handed to few. The doorway through which the modern alchemist reflects on his symbols and draws forth the power to create wealth is invisible to the profane.

Man’s mightiest power is twisted into his greatest weakness. Through this weakness he seeks power. Symbols are created to represent this power. Power is given to the symbols. The symbols become a prison.

Man is lost within the confines of his own prison. It drives him to madness.

Madness is but a shallow grave upon on the shores of everyday thought.

The human mind seeks symbols. It does so in an attempt to understand something abstractly which it cannot otherwise fully comprehend. Social engineers have tapped into this natural predilection and have created and used symbols as a powerful method of manufacturing trends and patterns within civilization.
When we subconsciously observe the manufactured symbols of Russia and China which are being presented to us, we emotionally feel and think what they were designed to make us feel and think. And to experience.

Russia and China offer a specific image. Both symbols in their complexity bring forth contradictory feelings of comfort and discomfort within the guilt stricken subconscious of the western mind. This is the intended purpose.

So when we read that the G20 countries, led by Russia and China, are threatening the United States with aggressive measures in order to complete reforms to the International Monetary Fund, we can only conclude that this is intentional and injected into the mass consciousness for a specific reason.

Sometimes I laugh about the American images which were presented to the masses when the dollar markets were still expanding. There was a boogeyman around every corner. Movies from the 1980’s where Russian’s were represented as evil and simple in their approaches to the human condition, were countered by the young and brave spirit of the American citizen. Whether they fought in the jungles of Vietnam or were thrown into Siberian labor camps only to fight for their freedom and escape, the American mind was transfixed by its own greatness and potential. Both of which were in fact no greater or less than any other people from any other country.



Today we are living in a time period where the dollar market is contracting and our entertainment has been pulled inward so the western mind can reflect on the enemy within. America has become the scapegoat for all the wrongs in the world today. Right or wrong, this slight-of-hand which has taken place is a well-coordinated and orchestrated operation to consolidate and centralize all components of civilization.

Putin is strong because Obama is weak. China is economically superior because America is economically inferior. And so it goes.
Most of my readers have been following the drama unfolding between the International Monetary Fund and the United States over the 2010 Governance and Quota Reforms. All the G20 countries agreed to these reforms in 2010 and the United States is the only country which hasn’t enacted the required legislation to support the changes.

The Obama administration and US Treasury attempted to piggy back the reforms on an aid package for Ukraine in the hopes that Congress would finally pass them. This has turned out to be a no go.

The G20 collectively warned the United States back in February that they had until the next meeting on April 10^th and 11^th to pass the legislation or they would take aggressive measures to bypass the dollar and complete the reforms without US participation. It was also referred to as “no good options”.

So this of course raises the question of what exactly could these “aggressive measures” refer too?

Any attempt to bypass the dollar based economic system without US participation would require the following components:

1. Creation of a development bank outside of the World Bank structure.
   
2. A way to balance trade settlement outside of the SWIFT payment system.
   
3. Advanced diversification away from US dollar denominated reserves.
   
4. The multilateral G20 will have to become more influential than the US controlled G7.
   

Though many analysts in the western world theorize that we are at least a decade away from the level of workarounds that would be required to remove dollar dominance, I propose that we are much further along this process than most would care to realize.

The once US dominated institutions which were created during the Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944, such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, have now been fully infiltrated, most likely as planned, by the economic interests of the emerging markets, as represented by the BRICS countries.

The attempts at transitioning the world from a dollar based system to a multilateral SDR system have been made through these once western institutions. But in the event that the plans could not be fully realized or only partially realized, the economic interests of the emerging markets began to build the structure of an alternative system.

When we consider that the same banking interests that control the western world are the same banking interest that control the emerging markets, is it any wonder that they would allow for a back door from the current system. No intelligent banking consortium would have handed America that much power without a way of countering it if things didn’t go as planned. A lessen they learned after WW2 and their financing of Hitler and Nazi Germany.

The bankers handed America a gun but it was never truly loaded.
The four conditions listed above for the bypassing of the dollar have in fact been met and have progressed far in the last few years. Let’s take them one at a time.

1. The BRICS Development Bank has already been created and is simply waiting to be “activated” and injected with capital. This can be accomplished in weeks if not days.
   
2. Trade can now be balanced outside of the SWIFT system by the currency swap arrangements which have been made over the last 6 years. More on those below.
   
3. Diversification away from dollar reserves is in fact well advanced and the true level will only become apparent when the system actually shifts away from the dollar. One only needs to research the level of US debt that Belgium purchased last month to realize that something at right in Denver.
   
4. The power of the G20 is obvious at this point as they are directly threatening the dollars position. The fact that the G7 are removing Russia from the G8 is only proof that the G8 is in fact redundant. All negotiating power now resides with the G20.
   

Let’s expand on the currency swap arrangements mentioned above. It is openly stated by all countries but America that currency swaps promote global financial stability as the US dollar is now the single source of the world’s economic ills. Though most, if not all of the gold in western banks, has been heading east into the vaults of the Shanghai Gold Exchange and central banks throughout Asia, there is virtually no coverage of this in the western media.



Without a doubt gold brings financial stability. History proves this obvious fact. No spin by modern financial witchdoctors can take away from thousands of years of recorded history surround the usage of gold and other precious metals. The price of gold and silver has been viciously manipulated to ensure the balance of accounts from debt to gold is accomplished fairly. It’s a mark in a ledger.

The rise of the Chinese renminbi is inevitable. It will become freely tradable only after China announces their full gold reserves and supports the currency with gold by a peg of less than 50%, most likely 30%. This will be the base from which the renminbi’s SDR composition is built.

The future status of the RMB is displayed nowhere more distinctly then in the currency swaps themselves. Central banks that have signed agreements with the People’s Bank of China are listed as 23 in number. Here are just a few:

1. Bank of England
   
2. European Central Bank
   
3. Reserve Bank of Australia
   
4. Monetary Authority of Singapore
   
5. Central Bank of Iceland
   
6. Bank Indonesia
   

Unsigned agreements are even more numerous. In fact, the only RMB swap holdouts are the Bank of Japan and the Federal Reserve. Watch for this to change in the coming months.

Foreign central banks all over the world have made and are making currency swap agreements with the renminbi as China continues to expand its reach. Being the economic powerhouse in the BRICS, it’s interesting to note that China, nor Russia, are having the fastest growth of the emerging market countries. It’s the smaller countries which are seeing the largest GDP growths.

In fact, it’s not even reasonable to refer to them as emerging markets as they have already emerged. As a whole (BRICS and all other emerging markets), have seen incredible GDP growth in the last 14 years.

1. Year 2000 saw the emerging markets with 37% of global GDP.
   
2. Year 2013 saw the emerging markets with 50% of global GDP.
   
3. Year 2020 can potentially see emerging markets with 65% of global GDP. (it is my belief that this will happen much sooner, perhaps even by next year)
   

And the GDP to debt ratio of the emerging economies are all within the margins required for continued growth and sustainability. It is the developed markets which have a huge GDP to debt ratio. The US is over 100% debt to GDP. This is a sovereign debt crisis which will be addressed in the consolidation which will unfold as the economic system shifts.

With the percentage of global GDP allocated to the emerging markets, it’s interesting to point out that the percentage of the world equities held by the emerging markets is only 11.5%.



Can we not see the imbalance between western stock markets and their actual percentage of global GDP? When the multilateral system becomes a reality where do you think the wealth in the western stock markets will be moved?

Russia and China are a tag team effort to intentionally dismount the dollars dominance as designed and orchestrated by the Hegelian Dialectic engineers. The symbolism of both countries, as well the American one, is conditioning and prodding the human herd in the direction desired.

Whether the path here was one of randomness or secret negotiating, the future is plain to see. The world will become multilateral in all aspects. As such, humanity is being conditioned to accept certain realities.

This fast coming future of multilateralism is far too complex for any single entity or country to control. The resource production, political stewardship, ideological unifications, and overall economic capacity required to power the creation of the future is only attainable by the multilateral approach.

Russian and China will be strong but still unable to govern this future unilaterally. Multilateralism is a must.



The characteristics of this new system will be a sacrifice of national freedom for the collective good. It will mean the implementation of a supra-sovereign multilateral reserve currency that is not vulnerable to the economic cycles and manipulation of a single country or currency.

The system will have to be managed above the national level. The structure of this system will anticipate, limit, and discipline countries and institutions which seek to profit from orchestrated imbalances within.

It matters not whether I agree or disagree with the intentions of this new system. I only present the information as I see it and through the filters from which I understand the world. And I read the language of symbols and patterns.

The power to create is the one thing that cannot be replicated within the technological future of trans-humanism. Though it is the power of creation which makes trans-humanism possible. Man will continue to create symbols and methods to attract more and more matter to him. The more matter we gather around us the darker it becomes.

Man must reflect on his condition in the world of matter to truly attain a lasting multilateralism.

Anything else is madness.   – JC Collins

http://philosophyofmetrics.com/2014/03/29/the-bear-and-the-dragon/comment-page-1/#comment-1160

And Duck shared this one with me... ;)


By Paul Mylchreest of Monument Securities

A critical juncture
Over the course of the last century, the US Congress has been blamed for much that has gone wrong in international relations. The unwillingness of Congressional leaders in 1919 to support US participation in the League of Nations doomed from the outset that quixotic attempt to put global relations on a rational basis. Renewed world war was the eventual outcome. Then in 1930, Congressional passage of the Tariff Act, widely known as Smoot-Hawley, marked the break-out of beggar-thy-neighbour trade practices that no less an authority on that period than Mr Bernanke has maintained contributed to the length and depth of the global depression. It is no matter that some historians argue that Smoot-Hawley merely built on the Fordney-McCumber Tariff Act of 1922; that had been Congress’s doing as well. More recently, the US Congress has resisted presidential demands for ‘fast-track’ authority to tie up international trade deals. The lack of faith of the USA’s counterparties in Washington’s ability to ratify trade agreements was an important factor in the collapse of the Doha Round, which has put a brake on the development of the World Trade Organisation. Now, the US Congress is acting in a way which could have consequences at least as serious as those that followed these past examples of obduracy.

This week the US Congress is considering a bill to provide financial aid to Ukraine. President Obama had appended clauses to this bill to ratify the IMF’s 2010 decision to increase the quotas, and hence voting power, of emerging countries, chiefly at the expense of European members, and to boost the IMF’s capacity to lend. The USA enjoys a blocking minority in IMF decision-making under current quotas, and would continue to do so after the changes; it is essential, therefore, that US ratification be secured if the reform is to go ahead. However, many members of the US Congress, especially on the Republican side, are suspicious of the IMF and its activities. Specifically, that element of the reform package which would convert countries’ temporary lending to the IMF during the global financial crisis into a permanent increase in IMF resources has roused fierce opposition. For more than three years, congressional leaders have thought better of exacerbating party tensions by bringing forward proposals to approve the IMF changes. However, the G20 meeting in February ‘deeply regretted’ that the reform was still held up and urged the USA to ratify ‘before our next meeting in April’. Mr Siluanov, Russia’s finance minister, then suggested that the IMF should move ahead with the reforms without US approval, a suggestion sympathetically received by other BRICS leaders but which would threaten to split the IMF. Mr Obama’s concern to avoid this outcome is understandable and he has argued that, since the IMF will play the lead role in supporting Ukraine’s economy, approval of the new quotas is relevant to the Ukraine legislation. All the same, Mr Reid, the Democrat Majority Leader in the Senate, yesterday stripped the IMF provisions from the text, taking the view that the bill would be given a rough ride through the Senate and no chance of passage through the House of Representatives if it retained them. It now seems unlikely that the USA will complete (or, indeed, begin) legislative action on the IMF reform by the 10 April deadline the BRICS have set. The odds are moving in favour of a showdown at the G20 finance ministers’ and central bank governors’ meeting due in Washington on that date.

International discord over Ukraine does not bode well for the settlement of differences over the IMF’s future. Though the G7 is excluding Russia from its number, in retaliation for its action in Crimea, this does not amount to isolating Russia. There has been no suggestion that Russia be excluded from the G20. The USA and its allies have suspected that several other G20 members would not stand for it. This suspicion was confirmed yesterday when the BRICS foreign ministers, assembled at the international conference in The Hague, issued a statement condemning ‘the escalation of hostile language, sanctions and counter-sanctions’. They affirmed that the custodianship of the G20 belongs to all member-states equally and no one member-state can unilaterally determine its nature and character. In short, their statement read like a manifesto for a pluralist world in which no one nation, bloc or set of values would predominate.

Meanwhile, Mr Obama has also been active at The Hague fostering warmer relations between South Korea and Japan. His aim seems to be to contain China’s expansionism in the Asian region. But US worries in this regard may be exaggerated to judge by a recent article in the PLA Daily, the official media outlet of China’s military. This urged China’s leaders to study the history of the 1894-95 war with Japan, which China lost decisively despite being at least as well equipped. The concern in Beijing seems to be that problems of corruption and nepotism in the PLA today are no less serious than they were in China’s forces in 1894. That may well deter China from taking military action. However, to the extent that China lacks confidence to use military force, it may be all the more intent on wielding financial weapons in pursuing its geopolitical aims. Beijing  leaders have long dreamt of displacing, or at least dethroning, the US dollar from its reserve currency role. US dominance of the IMF is one of several effective bars to the achievement of such a goal. The kind of action Russia is advocating, the BRICS wresting control of the IMF in despite of US veto power, might have some appeal. That would mark the end of the unified global monetary system that has developed since the IMF was founded in 1945, to be replaced by a bloc of fiat currencies in the developed countries and a system in the emerging sector where currencies were linked to drawing rights in some new international fund, possibly with some material backing. It seems unlikely that convertibility between these monetary systems could be maintained for long. Consequently, the 10 April meeting is shaping up as a potentially critical juncture in world economic history.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-26/how-brics-just-kicked-out-g-7-out-g-20

Moving to a world system .... so then is Obama foreign policy merely inept buffoonery or deliberate systematic planning designed to foster new world alliances shifting power away from the US?

wciappetta wrote:Moving to a world system .... so then is Obama foreign policy merely inept buffoonery or deliberate systematic planning designed to foster new world alliances shifting power away from the US?

Makes you wonder... but I just use the information for decisions with diversifying... ;)