5 Filters

Cash Con Game is Over: Current Financial System Has Reached Its End Warns Lynette Zang

Lynette Zang interviewed by Daniela Cambone.16mins. Chilling in places. I doubt whether Jim Rickards, Ed Dowd and Catherine Austin Fitts would disagree. EDIT: Suggest skip the first 2 minutes advert.

“The reality is, this is the end of the current system’s life cycle. It actually died in 2008,” says Lynette Zang, chief market analyst for ITM Trading. “They just pumped a lot of garbage [money] into the system to make it look like it’s still alive and still viable when it’s not.” She claims that we are living in a bigger crisis than the pandemic and the “entire system” needs to be changed. “Things don’t look the same today as they did before, just like they don’t look the same as they did in 2007 before the banking system actually died,” she warns. In addition, she points out that the recent crackdown on crypto by SEC is orchestrated by the authority to “scare the crap out of everybody” so that people can feel comfortable spending government-issued CBDCs in the future. Finally, Zang indicates that gold holds no geopolitical risk or counterparty risk as it’s outside the system. “A rising gold price is an indication of a failing currency,” she concludes.

1 Like

Start buying physical silver now (Cooksons gold is good) It’s currently under valued (£20 an ounce?). There is also the issue that silver is required for solar panels and it’s getting harder to acquire.

Also, from Queen of the CopperMountain;

Some interesting points from the recent RAND Corporation analysis (RAND is an American global policy think-tank; the report needs to be read with awareness that it’s an entity serving the globalists)

The publication argues in favor of the US embracing a neomedieval style of competing on the global arena and abandoning the industrial age practices.

The societies of the industrial era involve progress-oriented, centralized, unitary states with a high degree of internal cohesion and robust patriotic popular support. Governments enjoy strong legitimacy and popular support partly due to expanding opportunities for political participation and economic advancement.

The author states that the US (and many other countries) is losing some of those industrial era features. The US government’s ability to meet the citizens’ needs is diminishing, as well as the popular support for the government and people’s feelings of unity and patriotism. (The authors omit the fact that the society was MADE this way).

The author argues that we are now in an epoch which he calls “neomedievalism” which is characterized by the attenuation or regression of the political, social, and economic dimensions of the modern era. I.e. progress in various spheres of our life is either too slow, stopped, or going backward.

Interestingly, the think-tank does not suggest going back to the path of progress but, on the contrary, calls for a complete and full-scale plunge into neomedievalism.

The nation state, it goes on, is in steep decline which brings about political crises (again, makes it seem like it’s a natural process, but is it?)

The author is calling the performance of the Russian army in Ukraine “disastrous” which he lists as evidence of the outdated industrial-era thinking. (This sounds like a misleading statement or a belief in one’s own propaganda. Russia did not send nearly enough troops to conquer Kiev in early 2022 and the amount of help the Kiev regime helps makes it unsurprising that Russia cannot easily beat the Kiev regime)

A big conventional war, RAID concludes, is unlikely, because the societies won’t be able to mobilize for one. Proxy wars and causing internal conflicts in the enemy’s country are going to be more likely and effective ways of waging wars.

Compared to the modern industrial period, states are more secure from external threats and more vulnerable to internal threats.

Overall, grasping and adapting to the neomedieval reality will give the US an advantage, while trying to stay on the industrial modernist style path will not be as beneficial and is not recommended, RAND Corporation believes.

1 Like