Posted by Curt on 1 May, 2023 at 9:29 am. 1 comment.


CTH has been warning about how the multinationals use the false construct of the DC Potemkin Village to keep people distracted from the true power center that is in control of the system of our national government.  Just as Washington DC and the Legislative branch do not write legislation, the DC system does not control the regulations that flow as an outcome of the Executive branch policy.

Behind the Potemkin Village we discover the mechanisms and people who write the laws, construct the rules, and pay for control over the priority and execution of policy.  Corporations are in control of government; the politicians are the faces that keep everyone distracted.  This dynamic was recently highlighted when Senator Lindsey Graham discovered during a television broadcast that he was a sponsor of a bill he didn’t even understand.

The RNC and DNC are two private corporations within this dynamic.  The same funding mechanisms and corporations behind the Potemkin Village are the same funding mechanisms and corporations who fund the RNC and DNC.  This is one big political apparatus that gives the illusion of government, while the corporations exfiltrate the wealth using laws they construct and policies they create.

Earlier this year we warned these same multinational entities would use the “culture war” to enhance the distraction.  This is ‘The Big Trap.’  Earlier today NBC’s Chuck Todd ran the promotional preview for the 2024 deployment.  WATCH (2 minutes):

Prior to the 2012 election and the rise of the Sandra Fluke free birth control narrative, we used to call them social issues; however, the usefulness of cultural wars has morphed into the larger war of wokeism.

In the big picture, keeping the voting base distracted from the economic expansion of multinational globalism, the corporate ‘masters of the universe’ (ie. the Big Club within both parties), need to keep pushing wokeism and anti-wokeism as a political strategy.  The cultural issues are useful tools to keep control of an alignment of voters.  It has always been thus, and even more important now that people are starting to realize the expansion of the rust belt.

Political parties were created to present you with: (1) a controlled outlet for your focus (pro-tip the Big Club “they” control it); and (2) the illusion of choice.

Now there are some differences between the two political parties – between the two wings of the same DC vulture.

• The DNC wants power. The RNC wants money.
• The DNC uses money to get power. The RNC use power to get money.
• The ideology of the DNC drives their donor activity. The ideology of the donors drives the RNC.

This is the essential difference in their business models.  This is also how the system works when you think about ‘money’ and raw ‘ideological power’.

Let me give you an example in current culture, around “wokeism“.

The social and cultural ideology of the left-wing is clear; they are pushing ideology.  However, when you look at the right-wing corporate response, notice the focus is on money.  The left is pushing a cultural revolution; the right is seeking to gain money in (a) corporate alignment, or (b) velvet-gloved combat against it.

The leftist ideology advances. Notice there is no ideological pushback against the cultural revolution from Congress.  Why?… Money

Democrats know if they want to advance ideology, simply find a mechanism to pay Republicans.  Easy peasy.

The rust belt, the diminishment of the U.S. economic manufacturing base, was an outcome of corporate control over politics.  Corporations and banks seek profit, those profits are inflated by a U.S. service driven economic model.  Skilled jobs require higher wages.

If the skilled jobs can be outsourced to lower cost labor nations, the subsequent lowered labor costs drive bigger margins.  Again, it has always been thus.

At the core of the U.S. political issue, you discover that both wings of the DC UniParty agree with this basic economic model.  Republicans and Democrats now use the catchphrase ‘service driven economy‘ with bipartisan frequency.  Many voters no longer have any reference to an economic system that is anything except a ‘service driven economy’, yet nothing about that system provides long-term value for U.S. voters or workers.

Within this very specific dynamic, you find the root of the support for Donald J. Trump.  A larger, formerly considered silent majority who comprise the baseline middle class workforce, find common understanding with President Trump because he sees the flaws in the economic model.

Not coincidentally, it is only Donald Trump who has ever discussed these economic issues. Factually, no national politician in the modern era prior to Donald Trump ever dared broach the subject of economic globalism, and the negative consequences therein, because they would find themselves in the target field of the corporations who fund the political system.  A general platform more akin to a code of omerta covered the entire subject of republican economic policy.

As the pandemic years have shown, economic security is deeply tied to national security.  As an outcome, economic policy ultimately drives foreign policy.  When combined, the economic and foreign policy outlooks form the structural alignment of the UniParty platform.

Following the downstream effect of multinational corporate influence, modern Democrats support expansionist and interventionist foreign policy.  Meanwhile, modern Republicans, previously called “neocons” have always supported expansionist and interventionist foreign policy.  Leadership of both parties now align in a singular foreign policy outlook; thus, we see support for the Ukraine spending and intervention by both Democrats and Republicans.

However, outside the DC bubble of multinational corporate influence, the support for the interventionist foreign policy doesn’t exist in the same scale and scope.  Voters inside both the Democrat and Republican base do not support the intervention at the same level as the political leadership of both parties.  There is a structural breakdown between the priorities of voters and the priorities of the elected officials.  None of this is new discussion, we all accept this basic reality.

With political leadership of both parties supporting the same economic outlook, and both parties supporting the same foreign policy outlook, we find the source of opposition against U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Economic policy and foreign policy form the uniting bond that drives both parties to oppose Trump’s America First ideological outlook.

As long as Donald J Trump singularly represents the only counterforce against this UniParty globalist construct, he will continue to be targeted by the system of financial controllers who fund the political system.  For the sake of brevity this alignment of multinational corporate and financial economic interests is called “the big club.”

As part of the strategic political effort, the Republican wing of the Big Club needs to carve up the supporters of Donald Trump into smaller, easier to target, pieces.

This is where the value of the culture war, what is now considered as ‘wokeism’, plays into the strategy of those who seek to control political outcomes and remove the threat that Trump represents to their financial interests.  This is the division that Ron DeSantis is being funded by them to assist.

In many ways, this is why we are seeing prominent Republican officeholders pushing the culture war as a tool for their own political advancement.  The same Big Club members who are directly fighting against the America-First economic agenda, are the same Big Club members who are funding the Republican politicians to push the culture war.

The corporations, billionaires and multinationals who are funding the Republican candidates do not have any vested interest in the culture war. For them the social issues are a tool, technique or insurance policy to guarantee security of the interest that does matter, their financial status.

There are trillions at stake, literally trillions.  Additionally, decades of their prior investment interests are contingent upon the ‘service driven economy’ being maintained.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x