Tell me my friend, which would you say came first, the
chicken or the egg? Answer: You'll have to study the history of evolution to
answer this question. And after you've done all that studying, you'll find that
there is no definitive answer to that question.
Okay; tell me now which came first, organized governance or
economics? Answer: We're a little more on firmer ground with this one because
we can easily determine that the practice of economics started when the nuclear
family was formed, and this happened before we even became fully human. Also,
because when saying family, we mean hierarchy, it follows that we also mean
governance. We must, therefore conclude that governance and economics came
together with the advent of the family, and evolved in tandem.
But why is it that we have many systems of governance, each
claiming to engender better economics? The truth is that throughout recorded
history, Planet Earth has witnessed systems of governance of all kinds – from
the ultra permissive to the ultra authoritarian and everything in-between. Each
kind has, at one time or another, gone through periods of plenty or periods of
scarcity. Most of the time, however, it was not governance that determined the
prevailing economic performance but history, geography and climate conditions.
Yet, most of the time, the citizens attributed their lot to the work of the
ruling class, giving it credit and obedience when life was easy, or discredit
and rebellion when life was harsh.
Until about two decades ago, the people in Eastern
Europe believed there was a solid relation between the so-called
democratic system of governance and prosperity. They also believed that their
lives will transform for the better if they switched from authoritarian
socialism to permissive capitalism. They did the switch but very little, if
anything has changed for them. In fact people have been complaining that for
every little thing that improved in their lives, something big got worse. The
result is that most of these people now suffer from a condition called buyer's
remorse. In short, the people of Eastern Europe
responded to the invitation and went to the capitalist dinner but hated what
they were served.
What, if anything, did the people of Eastern
Europe learn from this experience? Well, they came to realize that
their lot was determined not by the system of governance under which they lived
but by history, geography and climate conditions … as did their forefathers
centuries ago. But there was a slight difference between the two situations.
Whereas geography and climate conditions played a big role in the old days, it
is history that's playing a big role in what's happening today.
And the history of Europe
was that the nations of the Continent progressed economically at the same pace
till the invention of the firearm. This happened in the western part of Europe where they used it as a weapon to go colonize the
world. This allowed the colonial powers to loot and take home enormous wealth.
But while the wealth remained in the hands of a few, the downtrodden were made
to work under inhuman conditions in the coal mines and factories of a nascent
Industrial Revolution. This triggered the protests and insurrections that
culminated in the modern social contracts that the nations of Western
Europe have lived with ever since.
In the midst of these changes, the antipathy that the
Europeans had developed toward the Jews since the fall of the Roman
Empire , was hushed up. But instead of taking advantage of the lull
to assimilate with the societies that took them in and tolerated them, the
self-appointed leaders of the Jews urged their followers to reject
assimilation. They told them that the changes they see around them were
predicted in the Old Testament, and were proof that the Messiah will be coming
soon to hand them the whole world. The followers took the advice and lived by
it, thus revived what came to be called antisemitism, culminating in the
Holocaust of WW II.
After that, antisemitism was hushed up again in Capitalist
Western Europe, and totally suppressed in Socialist Eastern Europe. But when
the latter converted to the Capitalist system, the people began to realize that
the Jews were working to revive the old colonial era. The problem is that aside
from Palestine ,
there was no other place in the world that the Jews could colonize. And so they
started to turn the citizens of Europe into
“Palestinians” in their own countries. Shortly after that, they brought the
habit to North America .
They played the game in a manner that fits their religious
belief. That is, everywhere they went, they worked incessantly to convince the
authorities to impose rules on others while specifically exempting them from
these rules. The idea was to clearly set the Jews as a privileged group; one
that is favored over everyone else. They did it not only on the local scene but
the international one as well.
For example in America ,
they worked to make it an offense to criticize the Jews or Israel , calling that “hate speech.”
At the same time, however, they called “free speech” the act of insulting the
Muslim Prophet. As to the international scene, they called to increase the
military aid to Israel , and
called to curtail it to Egypt .
And now, the Jews are going for the jackpot. You'll find
what that is when you read the article that came under the title: “Defund the
United Nations,” written by Rich Lowry and published on December 30, 2016 in
National Review Online.
Pay attention to the places where Lowry recommends isolating
the United States
from the rest of the world by setting a wall between it and the United Nations.
He does that while at the same time demanding that America
work to prevent the isolation of Israel .
Clearly, the author wants to make Israel the he-man who will interact
with the world while hiding the concubine behind the walls of his harem.