The Boomerang of Controlled Chaos

The work of the creator of the “Shadow CIA” George Friedman has always aroused great interest among political analysts and journalists. In many ways this happened because the organiser of Stratfor company, at the suggestion of the media, was listed among the persons close to the sponsor of colour revolutions George Soros. Given this fact, in the works of Stratfor’s creator’s they sought hints about the future goals of the United States.

Against this background, the announcement of Friedman’s new book, the presentation of which is scheduled for the end of 2019, could not but arouse interest. It is called “The Storm Before the Calm: America’s Discord, the Coming Crisis of the 2020s, and the Triumph Beyond”. But what the author proposes to his future readers looks rather strange. The man who recently promised China’s “fragmentation” and Russia’s “collapse” by 2030 now predicts a “crisis” of the United States for this period. And all of this is voiced by someone described by The New York Times as “the best predictor of geopolitical processes of our time”.

But what could have influenced his position to make him change his views 180°?

Given that Friedman is connected not only to Soros, but also to other financiers of the West, the answer should be sought not so much in the world of politics as in the sphere of finance. But this sphere is one of the most closed. The only thing that can be guessed by the more or less plausible information appearing in the media is that there is a change of generations in Western financial groups. Among the reports that had the greatest resonance are the death of the head of the Rockefeller family and changes in the Rothschilds banking house. Less resonant were the changes in the world’s other most influential families.

As historical experience has shown, such changes do not happen painlessly. They are often accompanied by intergenerational conflict. The views of the younger offspring of the richest families tend to vary radically with those of their ancestors. Accordingly, they look differently at the financial policies that business empires created by their predecessors should pursue. When the rotation of elites begins, i.e., the change of heads of financial groups, the more radical views of the new generation come into conflict with the conservatism of their ancestors.

Given that Friedman is connected not only with Soros, but also with other financiers of the West, the answer should be sought not so much in the world of politics as in the sphere of finance. But this sphere is an odak, relatively recently the focus of media attention has been the situation related to contradictions in the Rothschilds family. In 2018, the head of the bank Rothschild and Co was changed, after which some media drew attention to the following circumstance. The new head of the banker’s house Alexander Rotschild consistently began to act as “defender of the continuity of Rotschild traditions.” But he did so that his father, David Rothschild, was exposed as “a violator of family traditions.” Such behavior of Rotschildovsky offspring led financial analysts to think that his show “traditionalism” is actually only a psychological move. In fact, under the pretext of “returning to family values,” Alexander Rothschild conducted an audit of his father’s financial policy. With David Rothschild’s achievements including the merger of the British and French branches of the Rothschild clan, their strategic alliance with David Rockefeller, it was not difficult to conclude that these results of his activities would also be destroyed.

When there is a generational conflict within business empires – they begin to shake, and this inevitably affects geopolitical. After all, the latter is derived from the financial sphere. Given that the peak of the conflict of generations within the financial and political elites of the West is projected for the 2020s, it is not difficult to guess where Friedman has the conclusion of the upcoming crisis in the United States of America in the late 2020s. The only thing that can be guessed by the more or less plausible information appearing in the media is that there is a change of generations in Western financial groups. Among the reports that had the greatest resonance are the death of the head of the Rockefeller family, changes in the banker’s house of Rothschilds. Less resonant were changes in the world’s other most influential families.

As historical experience has shown, such changes do not occur painlessly. They are often accompanied by intergenerational conflict. The views of younger offspring of the richest families tend to vary radically with those of their ancestors. Accordingly, they look differently at the financial policies that business empires created by their predecessors should pursue. When the rotation of elites begins, that is, the change of heads of financial groups, the more radical views of the new generation come into conflict with the conservatism of their ancestors.

Thus, relatively recently, the focus of the media’s attention has been on the situation related to contradictions in the Rothschild family. In 2018, the head of the Rothschild & Co bank was changed, after which some media drew attention to the following circumstance. The new head of the banking house Alexandre Rothschild consistently started to act as a “defender of the continuity of Rothschild traditions”. But he did it so that his father, David Rothschild, was exposed as “a violator of family traditions”. Such behaviour of Rothschild offspring led financial analysts to think that his ostentatious “traditionalism” is actually only a psychological move. In fact, under the pretext of “returning to family values,” Alexandre Rothschild conducted an audit of his father’s financial policy. Given that David Rothschild’s achievements include the merger of the British and French branches of the Rothschild clan, their strategic alliance with David Rockefeller, it was not difficult to conclude that these results of his activities would also be destroyed.

When there is a generational conflict within business empires – they begin to shake, and this inevitably affects geopolitics. After all, the latter is derived from the financial sphere. Given that the peak of generational conflict within the West’s financial and political elites is projected for the 2020s, it is easy to guess how Friedman came to the conclusion of an upcoming crisis in the US in the late 2020s.

Of course, the current conflict of generations within Western financial elites is far from being the first. But the whole thing is that the current one coincided with the general crisis of the dollar pyramid. Finally, by implementing a policy of “controlled chaos”, the West’s financial groups are only exacerbating their own problems. After all, by undermining other States, they ultimately do not receive the full extent of what they expect. It is enough to look at Iraq or Libya destroyed by them to be convinced of it. Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi were politically hostile towards the West. On the contrary, they were absolutely negotiable in economic matters. During their rule, Western financial groups had the opportunity to extract excess profits by lending to the developing economies of Iraq and Libya, as well as by supplying them with goods.

It’s quite different today. Individuals who are driven solely by selfishness have come to power. They do not feel any gratitude for their Western “benefactors”, but, on the contrary, look at them exclusively as an object of blackmail. And this is the case wherever Western financial groups implement their policy of “controlled chaos”.

With it’s help, they planned to create a system of global domination. But one can’t create any system while destroying any rules. Sooner or later, the chaos sown in the world will return. The 17-richter hurricane boomerang will return to its creators.


Yury Gorodnenko

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.

Tags: