Jim Rickards’ Strategic Intelligence email update, which arrived today, highlights five topics gleaned from recent articles in the news. Here are the five articles Jim suggests reading this week —
• The Impeachment Train Has Left the Station. What Comes Next? — from AP News
Protesters in Hong Kong are calling China’s 70th anniversary The Day of Grief. Some protesters have been seen carrying “Chinazi” flags through the streets of Hong Kong.
Taking a broad view, the west has for much of its modern history had a poor and worsening view of politicians. Not just that, also political institutions, establishment institutions, judiciary and police authorities, official authority, state policies, scientific and health professionals’ advice, official investigative bodies etc. etc. The starting point was the rejection of the JFK assassination case: I have heard that the first book rejecting the official story was produced by a publisher with well known KGB links.
Many of our institutions have been weakened or constrained as a result of left-thinking “liberalisation” through the drive towards the recognition of human rights and the individual’s supreme liberty, either by legal/political intervention or by direct public opposition.
The currently accelerating drive towards populist politics and the resulting polarisation of political movements is to be expected with this background. The only politicians likely to succeed are those with an instant and gut-felt emotional appeal deliverable within a 20-second web video clip. Who else would their respective parties put up as candidates?
In a world Which for a couple of decades now has sought more and more extreme Identity politics - to set black against white, female against male, and has passed laws to unfairly enshrine these priinciples in law. A society where “we” are told we are responsible for some notional and unsubstantiated “warming” due entirely due to our lifestyles, where we are held to blame for eating the wrong foods and making ourselves fat - although we have been advised by an insistent “Officialdom” that sugar and carbohydrates are the right foods since the '60s - WHere fat and animal protein have been vilified, there is WAY too much willingness on our part to accept what we are told and to internalise blame.
That far and no further I agree with you that we do have some blame to accept.
Insofar as the “Middle ground” of the population is beginning to wake up and refuse to accept the BS we are constantly drip fed - I think we are entitled to feel a sense of satisfaction that at long last the opinions of the quiet majority WILL be heard and accusations of “Populism” (Popular) voting patterns - are not only Good, but Essential for the good of the human race. At the end of the day “Populism” is the whole point of “Democracy” - there is no criticism worth accepting from the application of THAT word as though it was somehow “Bad” -
Politics has become more reactionary, in reaction to counter-cultural movements. It has found populist causes that are sufficiently simplistic that the strident, narrow but rather limited ability politicians (Clinton, Trump, Farage, May, Johnson, Hollande, Macron, LePen) able to win air-time and votes can handle. Politics has not changed, the swamp is not drained, there is no new politics.
Populism is the abuse of democratic liberty for the pursuit of narrow political gains. It is not a new liberty, it is an old trick that gets poor politicians into power.
If you’re sayng (and I’m not sure exactly What you’re saying - it sounds way to “jargonist” for me) that the majority is expressing disagreement with these “counter-cultural movements” - Then yes I agree - and that disagreement they are fully entitled to express.
No, the counter-cultural movements have become sufficiently large that democratic votes can be manipulated along populist lines. These are simple, short-term and narrow, promising simultaneously strides forward which are immense and urgent - but only in the narrowest of fields - single-issue politics in some cases.
Its noticeable that populist political movements seem to be more often against something than for something. Which is inherently easy, simple, emotional, quick, cheap. Good for the tub-thumpers, no great basis for the advance of any nation.
I’m amazed nobody has yet been killed in the HK rioting. Hardly surprising this police officer shot the protester, what else did he expect the officer to do?
Chinese government policy re HK looks non-existent, which isn’t going to quell the Hong Kongers’ conclusions they are losing their civil rights.
