transcript
But it's come to a point where, you know, if we don't push back, if we don't demand a change of course, then we are surrendering our children to slavery, basically. And I don't I don't think I'm either even exaggerating. That's that's really what it is. Well, guys, you just heard a taste there of my fascinating conversation with Alex Crainer. And, Alex, it's great to see you again.
Maybe give a quick introduction, and it'll probably indicate how you seem to be correct on nearly everything in geopolitics and macroeconomics, which is quite stunning. Well, thank you. Thank you, Ivor. Great to join you again. I think maybe you're a little bit too kind.
But I think that, you know, if you if you take a very broad study of history, you know, to try to understand the the context of everything that's going on, then the, you know, the dots connect nicely. And it's you know, rather rather than this blizzard of PsyOps, you can maybe pay better attention to what's relevant, what's not relevant, what's what's real, what's, a psyop or a or a, you know, induced psychosis, and and then it becomes a little bit more easy to to predict what what might happen next. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
You know, I was you know, I'm I'm I'm hesitating to say because I'm going to certainly butcher it, but there's a an American historian who who has a great quote. I forget his name now, but, basically, he says that when we study history, it's very important not to just look at events and statistics and and figures, but to try to understand the the, who are who are the groups and individuals driving historical event and what their motivations are. And once you understand that, then it becomes really predictable, which is not easy to do. But I think that with enough attention and focus, you can you can kind of approximate that. Yeah.
Absolutely. Or in the world I come from is root cause analysis, and the pinnacle of successful time to resolution and getting a clear picture of what's going on is to go to the root cause, not a band aid, not a peripheral thing. And what you've described there is essentially root cause because all the happenings in the world, the true root cause of them are the influential parties who drive them. And often history kind of ignores that and just gives you facts. Fantastic.
You know what? I was gonna start off with a list of bullets here, but I was gonna start off with a case in point in a way. I heard you in an interview, an hour Russia interview in Dubai was fantastic, but you didn't mention this. The rule of the seven bankers. I thought it was just an incredible story that I wasn't aware of.
So maybe a few minutes on ninety nineteen ninety Russia, the collapse, how Putin brought it all back, but and the rule of the seven bankers. Okay. So that story fits in in a context of things that are happening today, which are things that have been happening for two thousand years, for for longer than two thousand years. And that is basically that, you know, I've been I've spent my lifetime pretty much trying to understand why is everything messed up, you know, you know, why did why did what we call the western civilization go around the world, enslave people, colonize, wipe out six major indigenous civilizations, and depopulate huge swathes of the of the Earth, of their indigenous peoples. And, you know, it's if you look around, it's not like people that surround us are are evil, but the system that we live in somehow must must be incentivizing those behaviors.
You know, the forever wars, the colonizations, the empires, you know, Spanish, Venetian, Dutch, British Empire, French Empire, British Empire, American Empire. It's it's what what motivates this? What is incentivizes this process, and where does it come from? And, I I I kind of worked it out to, to the it it it seems to always stem from the, money lending oligarchies. Since the Greek antiquity, since the times of Greek antiquity, the the the process of colonizing foreign lands and building empires always stems from the money lending classes from the from the bankers.
And so I wondered why that is. And the reason why that is is because they're always in search of collateral because, you know, once they get control of a colony, they can turn its wealth, they can turn its working age population into their collateral, which means that, magically, other people's wealth turns into assets on their balance sheet, and they are profit making assets because what do they do with that collateral? Well, they lend money to their clients in order to go and develop whatever, natural gas, coffee plantations, tobacco plantations, crude oil, whatever it happens to be, gold, diamonds. And then their clients, which are which are business companies. Right?
They go to those lands. They employ the local populace to develop all these resources, and then they turn them into financialized flows that ultimately are shaped as a, basically, as a as a as a as a conveyor belt that extracts wealth from wherever they can, take it to their own banks, be it Wall Street, London, Paris, whatever else. And as it happens, if you if you study all these historical episodes, you know, the Roman Empire, Sparta, Athens, Venice, Venetian Empire, Dutch Empire, Spanish Empire, British Empire, the American Empire, you see that the the syndrome is always that it creates mayhem abroad, and at the same time, it creates misery at home. Because even even when these empires are at their zenith of power, the local population at home, lives pretty much a life of misery. You know, like, if you look at The US cities today so, you know, you could say that, you know, the The United States is this empire today.
You look at The US cities and they are and they're they're gutted. They're they're, you know, they're they're like a dystopian places of misery and illness and homelessness and poverty and so forth. And if you go back to Victorian, era of the British empire, the same is true of life in Britain. And then you go to Italy during the Lombard banking period, same thing. Misery, plagues, internal strife, and so forth.
So it's always the same thing. But, you know, so what is the solution? And we have one very, very recent example was Russia during the nineteen nineties because when Russia when Russia was transitioning from the communist system to the capitalist system, all of a sudden, very quickly, the bulk of the ownership, something like 60% of the GDP, fell into the hands of a small group of oligarchs. And the most powerful of these oligarchs were, the group of seven bankers. In Russia, they called it Semban Kirshina.
So it was that world entails the rule of seven bankers. And then during the nineteen nineties, in Russia, we have the same symptoms of social decay, you know, where where more than 40% of the population falls below the poverty line. 25 one one in four are at destitute poverty. Law and order disintegrates. You have you have fights between rival gangs in Saint Petersburg and Moscow, you know, shootouts on the streets.
Military disintegrates. The the the the whole country turns into into a into a waste case. And, then Vladimir Putin takes over in 1999, and she so he Boris Yeltsin nominates him as a as a as a caretaker prime minister. And the situation begins to turn around a little bit later. Putin, stands for election in March 2000, wins the presidency, and then he does something interesting in 2003.
He calls all the oligarchs to his office, the fifth about 15 of them, including the seven bankers. They have they have a meeting around a very large roundtable, and, basically, Vladimir Putin lays down the rules, and he says, okay. Three key things. We're not going to nationalize your property. So what you stole, you keep.
It's yours. But you have to pay your taxes correctly. You have to treat your, employees correctly. Don't treat them as disposable, workforce. And three, you have to stay out of politics.
And this third rule was actually the the most difficult for the oligarchs to accept because they, up until that time, they pretty much owned the government. They were boasting about how they, set up and take down prime you know, ministers. The ministers have to do as they tell them. If if not, they they're they're sacked and so forth. So these seven bankers, they were boasting about having complete control of the government.
Now Vladimir Putin telling them you have to stay out of politics. Politics is is is is not your domain. This was a big challenge. So there were some court cases, you know, a few of the, these oligarchs challenged the government. It went to it went through courts.
You know? So, you know, unlike the way people in the West imagine, Vladimir Putin didn't just send assassin assassins to take out these these oligarchs. It was it was done in, in a legal way. But, basically, the oligarchs lost the court cases, the legal cases. Right?
Which which which went to show that, between 2000 and 2003, Vladimir Putin, solidified his political support. So he felt that he was more powerful than the oligarchs, and he felt that he could take them on. And then, one of the oligarchs, challenged Vladimir Putin more seriously, and that was, Mikhail Korokovsky, who was a trustee for the Jacob, Rothschild's interests in Russia. And, and there, you know, they they arrested Korokovsky, and they charged him with tax evasion. And, he was found guilty, and he spent nine years in prison.
But that was a signal to other oligarchs. Don't mess with it. I laid down the rules. You have to play by those rules. So basically, what happened is, you know, he didn't disenfranchise them in the sense of taking away their properties and renationalizing it.
He didn't, shoot them dead. He didn't, imprison them apart from Mikhail Korokovsky. He just left them alone with those three rules. No politics. Pay your taxes correctly.
Treat your employees correctly. That's it. And, from that point on, you know, with the oligarchs no longer able to dictate policy and, you know, social and economic development, foreign policy, etcetera, Russia had a a spectacular turnaround. So it went from one of the most corrupt countries in the world, whose GDP during the nineteen nineties, Russia lost something like 50% of its GDP. It was absolutely spectacular what happened there.
The the the life expectancy fell to something like fifty seven years. The mortality rate were at the level of countries at war, you know, like in, you know, like, mortality rate was at the level of World War two for countries involved in that war. And, so it was really a basket case. And we see that today, twenty five years later, Russia is a power to be reckoned it with. The standard of living has improved spectacularly.
It's a wealthy country. It's a well ordered country. It's a it's it it it's a country of the rule of, you know, the rule of law. And, this all has been achieved by, you know, putting the oligarchs in their playpen and setting limits. You know, you didn't get rid of oligarchs.
You didn't force some kind of egalitarianism where everybody has to be equally poor. You didn't, you know, bring back communism. You just set the rules where the political process was off limit to the to the oligarchs, and the country turned around in a very spectacular way. And so that is a very, very useful example for us in historical terms because it didn't involve, you know, the knife the the the night of the long knives where, you know, somebody went and got rid of all the oligarchs, you know, like like Philip the seventh with the or with the with the Knights Templar. You know?
Is it just, like, wipe them out? Or, you know, there wasn't a return to communism. There wasn't confiscation of asset. It was all done legally within the framework of the rule of law with minimum recourse to violence, and it helped the country turn around. And I think it's it's a hugely important example to keep in mind because most countries in the West have the acute problem of oligarchies, particularly, you know, France, United Kingdom, United States, Sweden.
You know, many I would say probably most of the Western countries have oligarchies that are above the rule of law, and they get to do whatever they like. And the, democratically elected governments cannot touch them. You know, in the West, it's unthinkable that, you know, some prime minister like Keir Starmer or president Macron or how do you call it? United States president lines up the oligarch and tell oligarchs and tells them, from today on, this is how it's gonna be. But I think that what happened the other day in The United States where Trump had their, you know, Zuckerberg and Bezos, and I don't know who was there, but I think that comes about as close as as possible in The United States.
And I'd you know, many people are interpreting this meeting as, oh, you know, Donald Trump is cozying up to the oligarchs. They're all, you know, in cahoots. I think it was some kind of a laying down of the law. We'll find out, but I don't think that it was the I I I don't think it was some kind of a, oh, yeah. You know?
Like, let's let's us billionaires get together and think about how to screw and enslave the the ordinary population. Yeah. And I agree. And I know that whole Trump question we probably won't really get into it here, but it's a big burning question. Is Trump actually pushing back against the oligarchies in many ways?
Or is he kinda controlled opposition whose populist, kind of approach of appearing to push back but not really? That's a big question. But I'd agree with you. I think he largely is pushing back but he has to kowtow to obviously Zionism and there's certain things you can't mess with. So I think he's playing down to the razor's edge.
That's my my estimation so far. But you know the, Inski person, the Rothschild banker, one of the seven rulers, he was put in jail. But you mentioned the first three who lost in court. Very interestingly, they all ran off, and escaped to Israel. Yeah.
That's kind of like a cliche. That's almost like some somebody would make that up, if they were going to feel a little bit anti s. And yet three of them went to Israel. Rothschild's guy went to jail. What about the other few?
Yeah. They lost their cases, and they ended up going to Israel. I don't, you know, I don't know what the cases were exactly, how they were fought, but I know that they lost. And so, why they felt they had to, hightail the Israel, I don't know. But, they also you know, they they didn't give up their properties.
They turned them over to the next batch of, stand ins of the trustees. You know? So I think that, Mikhail or Vladimir Chernoy, he turned over his, portfolio to, Abramovich, I think, if I'm not mistaken. I don't know how it went exactly, but, you know, they they remained in charge of what they owned. But, you know, it's it's already since the Medicis, you know, the the the the the Florentine banking family that, it was it was it was out in the open that it is very difficult for them to do what they do unless they have political control.
Because if you're just running a business, then you're subject to competition, you're subject to unpredictable event. You cannot hold the whole country, the whole society hostage to your requirements. So I think that Vladimir Putin and people around him were very wise to let them keep their assets. Because, ultimately, it doesn't matter. You know?
You know, even statistically, you know, if somebody is a billionaire, in the next generation, they're probably going to be millionaires. And then in the generation after that, they're just going to be ordinary people. You know, it's it's just the way it is. You know? Somebody builds the wealth.
They think they're very capable, but they're probably it's probably always a mix of capability and luck. And and and wealth dissipates. It's very it's very, very difficult to keep it together unless you're part of this oligarchy that has political control, whether overtly or covertly. And then you can, you know, perpetuate it through many, many generations because you're back in the shadows and you control the government. And you make sure that everything government does is only helping you grow more wealthy and more powerful and that you, you, you, you, you hold the whole society hostage to your agendas and your priorities.
And this is this is what Vladimir Putin has undone, and this is what I hope that, Donald Trump, will be able to do in The United States because if he does, that's a that's a huge gain for for for humanity, in fact. Yeah. For sure. I mean, this one is on the razor's edge. Often people feel despondent and hopeless when I'm sharing all details around the reality, but I think people need to know reality no matter how challenging it is.
The headwinds, you might as well accept them. But I see it as we're all on the razor's edge. It's all to play for. The awareness is growing. Trump is doing a lot of stuff.
Whether he's fully on board with, say, our side of freedom and libertarianism and all that other good American apple pie or not. He's doing loads of things which are hugely in our advantage. No question about that. Huge things to our advantage indeed. But we also need to do things for ourselves and our family, which are hugely to our advantage.
And we're gonna have a conversation later on in this incredible discussion. We're gonna cover way more about The Middle East and the whole world issues at the moment and what's driving them. We're also gonna touch on physical gold. And, of course, Alex, as a hedge fund manager previously and an expert in all things investment is bang on point with everyone else in my network. Physical gold is hugely important.
This isn't financial advice. This is the opinion of all the best I can find out there. And Pure Gold in London, I have a connection with. So you get looked after there. If you want to further explore, hedging against the future and the issues that are coming down the track and with terms of pension or if you have other net worth, consider protecting at least some of it.
I would suggest that's my opinion, which I hold very strongly. But in any case, let's get back to Alex, and you ain't seen nothing yet. So it's all to play for. But one other thing occurred to me with that story and your story, the seven bankers, I immediately recognized that it was pivotal because that's largely been our problem for hundreds of years across all regions in the West and and elsewhere. So it's a microcosm.
Basically, once you understand the rule of the seven bankers and as you described what Putin somehow managed to do, you kinda know how everything in the world works. Only mostly, we don't manage to do what Putin did. Otherwise, that's the game. Right? But one thing occurred to me, it's a little bit controversial.
I was a World War two buff for decades, and I thought I knew nearly everything about World War two. And I realized in the last year or two, I was absolutely filled as to the drivers, to your point, who actually drove World War two, who was funding it, who was orchestrating all the moves. But your story there, there was a certain Austrian nasty man. Okay? Ironically, it almost parallels, the Putin story.
Because he in the thirties threw out the bankers, essentially, brought in a load of country building stuff. And in fairness, he was made Time Man of the Year. I think in '37 or 1938, the world actually officially acknowledged that he was rebuilding Germany in a miraculous form. And then all the bad things happened. But I also found out, and I think it's historical record, that Churchill and The US purposefully avoided any peace or accord with that Austrian guy.
In fact, they would if anything goad him, and I think he had made around 10 or 15 efforts to placate them and reassure them and all of them were rebuffed. So it seems in a way that the world or the oligarchies wanted them to cause some chaos and would benefit from that in the long run. That that's the way it seems to me. And if he hadn't made all those mistakes and done terrible things and all that stuff, he could have pulled off some kind of Putin and Russia thing. Maybe.
But obviously, terrible things happened and it was all the disaster and fifty million people died. Absolutely. I I acknowledge that. But it looks like he was also almost encouraged to go down that path. I mean, what do you think of that?
He was absolutely encouraged to go down on that path. And we know that from, we know that from the way he came to power, and then we know that from the way the World War II started. And the way the World War two started well, you know, he got he got support for, annexation of, Austria in 1937. And then, you know, the, Munich 1938 episode, that's the one that's very, very widely misunderstood. But, basically, you know, the way the way we are being taught, conventionally in our history curriculum is that, you know, Chamberlain tried to prevent war and that he thought that he would appease Hitler by letting him take, how do you call it, Sudeten Sudeten lands in in the Czech Republic.
And, the truth of the matter is completely different, and that is that, Chamberlain together with a very small cabal of, the British foreign policy establishment was actually orchestrating Hitler's takeover of, Czechoslovakia. And they were doing it by, encouraging Hitler to to, take Czechoslovakia, and on the other hand, by encouraging Czechoslovakia to stand down and not defend themselves. And so Chamberlain and Lord Halifax and a couple of these people were going back and forth for for months, making sure that, Hitler takes Czechoslovakia in a peaceful way because they he didn't want to fight Czechoslovakia and making sure that Edward Benesch does not raise mobilize the arm Edward Benesch, at the time, was president of Czechoslovakia, to make sure that he doesn't mobilize, the the military and mount defense. Because at that time, it was perfectly well understood by by everybody involved that, German Wehrmacht was no match for the Czech military. Czech military was superior to Hitler's Wehrmacht in 1938 on on all measures other than air force.
And then to take Sudetenland, they had to, you know, they would have to go and conquer a mountainous terrain where the Czechs had forty five forty five defenses and hundreds of bunkers lining the roads. So, you know, the the German general staff thought that Hitler's orders to go into Czechoslovakia were suicidal. In fact, they were planning to assassinate Hitler. And they were so they had three three ways to diffuse the situation. One was they were appealing to Great Britain because at the time, you know, Britain was like The United States today.
Everybody was deferring to London, and everybody tried to manage their affairs by coordinating with with London. And so, they they tried to do that, and then they they, they plan to, try to talk Hitler out of attacking Czechoslovakia. And if both those initiatives fail, they were, going to assassinate Hitler, and they had a they had a date set for for that for that to happen. And so Chamberlain has been able to, shield Hitler from his own general staff, and he's been able to, get the checks to, stand down and not defend themselves. So the result of it was they had this Munich conference in which they basically signed over, the, not Bohemia, the the Sudeten Deutschland Sudetenland to Hitler, and then, you know, Hitler went in without any opposition.
You know, the hit Hitler's troops went into Sudeten, Germany without any troops, and then they just continued going on and took all of, Bohemia. And then later, they added the rest. And then September 1939, it was it was already already turned Poland's term. But by then, they realized that they have no control over Hitler. And so this is where, you know, they the the the partnership, let's call it, the friendship between the, the British, foreign policy establishment and Hitler, fell apart.
And then, you know, you saw Chamberlain, his government fell, and and Churchill took over. But it was, it was not at all what what is presented to us. Now, I think it's you know, Hitler has been their creation since the get go, since the early twenties. And so they've been they've been cultivating him. They've been, preparing him for his roles.
They've been, you know, in you know, they've been man they've been kind of managing Germany as well because, you know, Germany was desperate for, investment funds. They were practically under an embargo, under trade sanctions, and the Western banking cabal would not give any financial aid to Germany until Hitler won the elections in 1933, until he became the chancellor in 1933. And then they said like, ah, yes. All these credits, practically massive amounts of credits for Germany, which is why, you know, now, the, how do you call it? The the the credit started flowing and the German economy started rebounding.
Yes. He got rid of some bankers, but the the main bankers, which was his the the the the head of the Reichsbank, Hjalmar Schacht, He didn't get rid of him, well, until much, much later. And Helmerschacht was working in very close cooperation with Montagu Norman, who was the the head of the Bank of England and with Benjamin Strong, who was the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank in New York. And so, this is where the the this is where actually the the the German policy was formed. And then there was a very, very heavy corporate support by, you know, Ford and Standard Oil and and, US Steel and all these huge corporations that helped German economy developed, but it developed around the rearmament process.
So, you know, the the credits flooded into German economy, but not for the civilian uses, but for these, huge corporate cartels that were producing steel and energy and explosives and armaments and everything that was needed for the war that they were preparing. And, you know, Hitler was their Zelensky, basically. Exactly. And, you know, Churchill as well, which I always viewed as a straightforward hero. You know, because why would I not?
That's what everything Turns out he was a scumbag. Right? That is the hilarious thing. It's the exact opposite of what you actually grew to believe through propaganda. And, it's a a version of always accuse your enemy of what you yourself are doing.
I mean, everything here is a double thing. But the funny thing was Churchill, I didn't realize, he had very little money, after his naval roles or whatever, but he ran a full household with staff and a huge house. Now I don't know exactly who, but he was well funded as well by the usual sorts. You know? And then he refused to defuse, the Austrian guy.
I mean, I think like I said, 13 or 15 pushes from Germany to kind of, hey, let's let's get a cap on this whole thing. Apparently, there were loads of offers, but demonstrably, Churchill would not even respond to any and the same with the Americans. So although the money was flowing from The UK and America to fuel the war from all the parties you mentioned, On the other hand, the strategy was to keep fueling them and not allow peace to potentially break out. So peace was obviously a problem, a big problem. They wanted their war.
Right? I mean, that's the way I see it now. And, that has a very, very, interesting parallels to what we see today. Yes. You you know, it's it's almost exactly the same thing.
You know, obviously, the the person the the the characters are different. The the countries are different. But the principles, the the the the incentives, and the and the vested interests are practically the same. You know? The the names of corporations are different, but it it's it's basically all the same.
And then, you know, once you understand that, and then you go like, oh gosh. You know? What about World War one? Oh gosh. Look.
It's it's practically the same there too. And then all the wars before that and before that, and and then you go centuries and centuries and centuries back, and you realize that certain certain principles always remain constant, and it's it's some kind of a system of incentives that is shaping the you know, like, if you look at today and you realize that this war in Ukraine is is completely insane, that, it's been lost, but that European leaders can't give up. They they just are clamoring for war to continue. I mean, we even had this little cabal, a a little ad hoc think tank that came together, called what what are they called? Project Alchemy Project Alchemy.
And, you know, they they even put together some kind of a policy paper in which they keep accentuating. It's very important to keep Ukraine fighting. We have to keep Ukraine fighting. And then let now you understand how all those peace initiatives where, you know, the in in March at the March 2022, the Russians and the Ukrainians were on the verge of signing a peace agreement, and that the Ukrainian government people were opening champagne bottles because they thought, like, okay. The war's over.
We're you you know, it's finished. We're gonna be neutral, and the Russians are going to withdraw to before to the position before twenty twenty fourth February two thousand twenty two. And then, you know, Boris Johnson lands in Kyiv, and he's like, you're not signing anything. Fight it out. And so the war goes on, and one point seven million Ukrainian men die.
And you ask yourself, what was wrong with that piece? How was that piece worse than what we have now? And why won't they give up even though they should, you know, like anybody with with two brain cells, can tell that the the war has been lost. But instead of giving up, they're doubling down, and they're doubling down again, and they're doubling down more. And then you understand that it's, it's always the same thing.
They their system is their system completely depends on them conquering new colonies and taking in more collateral because the, the banking system and the institutions that they control run on fraudulent money. It's a Ponzi scheme, and the Ponzi scheme can only remain stable as long as it continues to grow. So you have to con continue to issue more and more credit. Your balance sheet always has to grow. By the way, this is why we have this obsession with GDP growth.
Right? Because even even when a society is at a high level of productivity, standard of living, prosperity, it still has to grow. It always has to grow, like, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%, whatever it be. But it has to keep growing. And if you're not if it's not growing, then, oh my god, we have to do something.
It must grow. Why? Because this whole system is based on a Ponzi scheme that has to keep issuing more and more and more credit in order to remain stable. And what do you need to to issue more credit? You need more collateral.
So that means that you can't let the Russians keep their natural wealth for themselves. You have to take it. It has to become our collateral. And they've got 75,000,000,000,000 of it, and gosh, just imagine how many loans we could issue if that that natural resource wealth could be turned into our collateral. And Vladimir Putin won't let us have it, which is why we think he's, you know, irredeemably evil.
And it's also why we thought that Boris Yeltsin was awesome because, you know, the the the gates of Troy were open, and we could have we could do whatever we wanted with Russia. And then Vladimir Putin said, so sorry. No mas. You know? Which is why we hate him and why which is why we want another Yeltsin or Zelensky or, you know, new new Guaido, to take over and to let us have their natural resources.
That's why. And and and so they can't give up because if the Ponzi scheme comes to an end, it implodes as all Ponzi schemes do. And so they will, you know, they will sacrifice Ukraine. They will sacrifice all of Europe in order to preserve their Ponzi scheme. Yeah.
Absolutely. When all else fails, they take you to war. But that's only one part of it. So the Putin example, and I'm glad you came back and and touch back on that, it is truly a microcosm. It's like fractals.
That scenario, just apply it to everything pretty much. And now you know root cause, and now you're correct. And you know it's a good segue into the second bullet point. I'm only on the second one. We'll speed up a bit.
But this is soup this is superb, Alex, because I really want people we need to frame it and describe it in such a way that it really is simple for any layperson to grasp the enormity of what we're saying. And everyone needs to grasp this and understand it and understand the legacy media. It's comical at this stage, Alex. Nearly everything in the legacy media is largely nonsense or propaganda. I'm I'm astonished.
I flick through it occasionally just to amuse myself. It's it is astonishing. But we'll get now to the network. And I like that name. People say cabal.
People say the blob. But I love the network. And it goes back to a book I got recently from Joe Plummer. And he summarized tragedy and hope from Carol Quigley from the nineteen sixties. An enormous tome, which covers load of history.
But in there, Quigley who worked with the network, the people we're talking about, and he was meant to keep his mouth shut. And then he published Tragedy and Hope. And it wasn't an expose of the network, you know, but it had pieces of truth about them throughout it. And he was meant to never tell anyone a word of this. So the book was pulled after 8,000 copies.
The publisher destroyed the plates, you know, and eventually it came out bootleg and Quigley had lawyers against them. But obviously, the network had such power they picked up the phone and his book was gone. But Joe Pope Plummer has written a synopsis of the important aspects of Quigley's book. And it's an astonishing read. And I'm gonna put the link down below guys.
Download it and read it. It's free. But the network, Alex, broadly who are the network? Because it's clear from tragedy and hope, I'd say, is the most accurate around. It's kind of starts mainly in the modern times with, Cecil Rhodes who had the vision, right, to have a world completely controlled by the elite.
No conspiracy theory. It's all documented. And then he handed over to Milner and the Milner group. And he said Milner basically said is my blood brother. He fully entrusted him with the vision.
Milner was committed. And then you have this whole crown kind of city of London, UK, powerful network that eventually became a network that encompassed Wall Street and the American Deep State, if you wanna call it. And, of course, all the great banking families, many of them named in tragedy and hope. Is this is this getting towards, like, what the network is? It's a meta tribe of oligarchs.
That's why it's kinda hard to to get right to the guy at the top. There isn't really a guy at the top. It's all of what I said and more. Yeah? Yes.
Look, I I read Tragedy and Hope, and I read it very carefully. And in fact, this whole story about appeasement, I reconstructed it from Carol Quigley. And with some subsequent research by, the guy who wrote, Conjuring Hitler, that's that's a masterpiece. His name is Guido Antonio Preparata. Okay?
And that book is not as not as long, but it's it's it's, like, dense. It's, like, completely fluff free, and it, like, blows your mind. So from those two books, I reconstructed the what actually happened in 1938 in in Munich. Anyway, so, basically, Carol Quigley, I believe, that he gave us the keys. He just couldn't come out exactly and give it away because it will be too you know, the it would have been spotted straight away.
So So he put it in a into a book that's, like, thirteen four 1,400 pages long, and then you have to read it very carefully, but it's a lot is there. A lot is there. And, I will I will read to you. I have this in front of me the maybe the key quote, which which tells you what we're up against. And the one so this is this is the key quote from Carol Quigley.
I think many people are already familiar by this, but he says that the powers of financial capitalism had a far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands, able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a decentralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and direct injury of all other economic groups. And so this quote, when you take when you keep that in mind and you look at what happened in Russia in the nineteen nineties, it's it's exactly what happens. And then you you also find out that these people like Mikhail Korokovsky and these other oligarchs, that they were not just, you know, Russian tycoons who emerged because they were very capable and, you know, aggressive young reformers as they were presented in the media, in the West. They were handpicked trustees, who were serving the needs of the foreign financial interests.
And so Mikhail Korokovsky was a trustee for Jacob Rothschild's interests in Russia. George Soros was there, involved very prominently, Edmond Safra, and and a numb a a number of a number of high profile western bankers. But, you know, when you say that there's nobody at the top, I think that there's somebody at the top necessarily because, you know, this is, you know, these are these are networks of power, and you're right to call it a network. These are networks of power that operate outside of the rule of law. So they're not bound by, lawful institutions.
This is like, law of the jungle. It it functions like a like a mafia, like a mafia business, like a mafia organization, which means that somebody necessarily has to be at the top to enforce the order. You know, you can't have democracy at at that level. So in in everything that I've read so far, it always emerges that this name Rothschild comes up as as the people who seemingly wield the most power, and then everybody else is, kind of in a in a subordinate position to them. And I think that when things are going well, they they get along, and they work as a club.
And, you know, I'm in charge, but you have your own suzerainty there, and you have your own you know, you dominate your but when things get difficult, when the system comes to a crisis, then you see that you might have civil wars there, between these bankers. And I think that we're living in a period when these civil wars are erupting again. And it seems to me that the American bankers, feel that they no longer have to be subordinated to the to the British bankers. And I think that part of what we see today might be, that civil war. Of course, we don't know anything about this.
We can just, look at where smoke you know, which orifice produces the smoke, and then we can just try to kind of, wonder what what actually happened behind the the closed walls. But Yeah. You know, there must be there must be top of the hierarchy because, otherwise, the whole system you know, it'd be like you have a pack of dogs. There's always going to be a top dog. And if there isn't a top dog, the other dogs are going to fight to the death until one emerges as the top dog, and then they'll be at peace.
Yeah. And that's the lead dog kind of principle. Absolutely. You know, a slight variant on that to allow for not one kingpin? To your mafia analogy, there's a bunch of major families and each of them sure has the Dom.
But maybe there isn't a single one, but but there's certainly a cluster of key lead dogs. The beautiful elegance of that is because we're talking about families. Right? Back gig families, mafia families. There's there's a family element to it.
And, you know, I was going to my next bullet point. This is fantastic, Alex. This is a one stop shop for everyone to know how the world works. There's no question about that in my mind. I was gonna say Russia Ukraine mess as the next thing to cover, but we've largely covered that and everyone listening knows what that's about now.
Unequivocally, a 100% knows what that's about. And it's nothing like the media tell us, of course. And then the next one I was going to go on to was, of course, to be current and topical, the Middle East mess. Now, obviously, Iran, is a no brainer target and a massive prize for its resources, to your point about the bankers want the collateral. But also there's a bigger picture with the Middle East because there's the craziness of what's going on with the Zionism in Israel and all the other kind of nutso stuff.
So maybe just a few minutes on the whole Middle East side of the mess, but it's connecting right back to the same people, I guess. Yeah. It does. And we can we can go straight back to the creation of Israel or or, you know, for the to the plans for the creation of Israel, which go back to, I think, eighteen seventies, maybe even sooner, maybe even earlier. But let's say that, if we fast forward to, 1917, we had the famous Balfour Declaration.
Now what was the Balfour Declaration? It was basically a a very short letter written by Arthur Balfour, who was the foreign secretary of the of The United Kingdom to, lord, lord Walter Rothschild. Okay? And, basically, it said that his majesty's government will support the formation of a homeland for the Jews, blah blah blah. Okay.
So, Walter Rothschild's son was, Nathan Rothschild, who was very, very close friend with Arthur Balfour and who hung out at the foreign office practically nonstop. So, you know, it was like, hey, dude. I I really need you to write this letter to my daddy saying this. And then this other guy says, like, sure. Yeah.
You got it. We'll do that. Why did they need to create a homeland? Because the Rothschilds felt particularly sentimental about the Jews having their homeland? Absolutely not.
We have, you know, both Nathan Rothschild and, I think Balfour was part of it too. I'm not a 100% sure, but Nathan Rochelle definitely was part of the roundtable group, led by, Alfred Milner, whom you mentioned, who was the, you know, ideological heir to Oh, to, the Rhodesia, Rhodes. Rhodes. Yeah. Yeah.
To Rhodes. And so in a at a later stage, you know, the the alumni of the of the of the of the roundtable group, spoke about why it was necessary to create Israel. And we're talking about nineteen twenties, nineteen thirties before Israel before Israel was actually created. And then basically what they were saying is in order for Britain to remain as a maritime empire, to remain viable, they needed to seed that region, meaning the Palestine. They needed to seed that region with a particularly, patriotic stock.
You know? So they needed somebody who would be practically fanatically devoted to, living in that region, holding on to that region, to be their beachhead with which to control the region, not only because they already knew that it was very rich with energy resources, but also because it was right there at the door doorstep of the Suez Canal and at the at at the at the very crossroads of trade routes and future pipelines between the East and West. And that region has always been extremely important for that very reason. You know, the Roman Empire the Roman Empire was drawing most of the most tribute from the the Levant, from the Eastern Mediterranean. And, you know, once you once you understand that and once you understand that Roman Empire was also an empire of money lending oligarchs, and once you understand that King Herod was one of their clients who was, using the the loans from the Roman, money lenders, from the bankers for this megalomaniacal construction projects everywhere, and they had to service those loan by squeezing his own population, then you start to get a very, very interesting new perspective on what actually happened, back there at that time, you know, and then who Jesus Christ was, you know.
I was gonna say, Herod went after the Jesus Christ. But Jesus Christ ultimately what was the big thing he did? He kicked the money lenders out of the temple. So he was against the bankers. Yes.
That's probably one of his finest attributes or qualities. And that's why the anti Christian thing the anti Christian thing is off the wall as you well know, Alex. Yeah. It's the only religion in the world that's being attacked left, right, and center, which kinda fits in with that. Yeah.
Yeah. Exactly. But that's also the the the the one dimension in history that we're meant to never focus on and we're meant you know, basically, the way they tell us the story is like, oh, you know, the the, the Romans had many gods, and the Jews had one god. So they were just went crazy and started killing each other. You know?
They they they just couldn't tolerate that. It wasn't like that. The Romans lent money to their clients, and they wanted it paid back with interest. That was the that was the the the moving principle of history even back then. Anyway, back to the Middle East.
So today, you the Israel has been fulfilling its role very, very faithfully. It's been keeping the region destabilized. It's been keeping all the regimes, surrounding Israel, let's say, weak and perpetually on edge, much more easier to control for the The United States, for Britain, for for, you know, for the Western and the challenge now is that, the the the most powerful regional player is Iran, which is not on board with the Western Empire. So what they need to do is they need to regime change Iran. And, so now we're hearing about, Iran's nuclear program, blah blah blah blah blah.
Nobody cares about Iran's nuclear program. That is the justification for military intervention. What they want is a regime change in Iran because they need, again, a regime that's going to be run by Boris Yeltsin, Juan Guaido, Volodymyr Zelensky, Shah Bahlavi. I don't know what what the current guy's name is, but, you know, they need to put in their Muppet in there so that their Muppet will open the gates of Troy so that they can take over the collateral so that that collateral can become the, you know, the asset on Western Bank's balance sheet, and then they can loan out, money to JPMorgan no. Sorry.
To, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, to go and take over Iranian oil. And it's not because we need the oil. We can have the oil by just simply buying it from the Iranians. The important part is that all those corporations that go and develop Iran are clients of Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan and Citigroup and Royal, Bank of Scotland and so forth, that all the money ultimately, gets sucked into City Of London, Wall Street. Paris always gets some crumbs off the table to keep the to keep the French on board, but that's that's the whole name of the game.
So it's exactly the same exactly the same as in Ukraine, same players, same moving principles, same incentives, and same reasons why this Western system generates never ending perpetual wars. Yeah. And, you know, I just want to say something not self edifying, but I've spent nearly forty years in root cause, complex problem solving, you know, for what it's worth. And I was damn good at it. But I've realized over the decades that psychology, even though that's seen as very complex, human psychology, oh, that's really complex.
That's not just like physics. No. You can root cause and fix people and even large groups of people and management issues with the same tools. And I'll tell you something, Alex. What you're describing and we're talking about, every complex problem after you put together all the pieces and all the smoke and all the data, always every complex problem that's impossible to see what's going on during it and it's very stressful.
Afterwards, there's always one thing that happens. You can see it all clearly and you could actually explain it in an elevator in retrospect when you know everything. What we're talking about, this method, this system, it's so far from a conspiracy theory. It's the opposite side of the universe. It's actually perfectly logical system to have money and power and dominance over your species for the select number of people and it's been the same for all of human history.
The mechanisms are the same. The propaganda is the same. The tools are the same. And I hope people realize as they listen, they can just see the it with clarity. I hope that's what we're achieving here.
Now the last bullet, which wasn't on my list, but I'm adding it now in my mind, I'm surprised I forgot it, It's the whole China thing. And that'll be it. And then we'll get to a message of hope as to where we're going and why we're gonna win. But just before China, there was one last thought. Oh, yeah.
I might put the clip in here. I was jaw dropped, even though I shouldn't have been surprised when I saw around six months ago a 1986 video of an angry Joe Biden practically slamming his fist as they sent billions, to Israel. And he said and repeated it twice for emphasis. He said, if there was not an Israel, we'd have to create an Israel. And he looked glowering at the audience in the congress or wherever, and then he repeated it again.
He said if there was not an Israel, we'd have to create an Israel for our interests in the Middle East. There's no apology to be made. None. It is the best $3,000,000,000 investment we make. Were there not an Israel, The United States Of America would have to invent an Israel to protect her interest in the region.
The United States would have to go out and invent an Israel. And everyone just said, and then all the money was approved. It's just a delicious little proof of what you're saying. But we get on to China, the final step. And here's what I've come to understand that it may have been from watching one of your other interviews.
I'm not sure if it's you. But basically Russia, the banking powers gave Russia their nineteen seventeen revolution. Because there's nothing better to control a country as a vassal state than to give it communism and then just hold the the reins from above and strip mine it. Now Russia kind of went in hard communism Soviet Union and became kind of out of bounds. But the people at the top just say, you know, we'll wait.
Might be a generation or two. And they did and they came in the late eighties to strip mine it. They're very patient. But then Russia, because of its long 1,200 year old history sort of of culture and patriotism and belief in themselves, they managed to pull off a coup against the banking families as you described. Now China, I believe Rockefeller and Rothschild were over there with universities in the thirties, forties, and fifties just slipping them a stinky wink and feeding them a bit of communism.
And then that took off in a big way. But then eventually it looks like Xi Jinping China's kind of Putin now and they're playing the game, but they've got enough Chineseness going back thousands of years that they know what was done to them and they ain't playing anymore. But they're playing along to not get, I don't know, really a massive war thing going. Is China kind of analogous and all and the same mechanisms used? Well, it's they're not they're not the same mechanisms.
That is they are the same mechanisms, but they're not you being used for the same, ends. Okay? And, you know, one one thing that I've understood by researching how how the banking system works, how the corporate system works, is that it's not banking is not inherently and inevitably evil. The it's the evil comes out as a result of choices that are made by people in charge. Same thing with multinational corporations.
So the the cultural element there is very, very important. And in in this sense, the the western empires, the ones that have been fomented by, western banking dynasties, you know, from from the Venetians on, and it was the same thing in in in Rome. And, arguably, there's a there's a there's there's some kind of a continuity there that goes through Vatican, you know, Rome, Vatican to Venice after crusades. There's there's a cultural element there that is that makes that is using those mechanisms and that is using them in a very pathological or pathogenic ways. Okay?
I think that Russian approach, Chinese approach are very different. And we can even you know, for people who don't believe it, you can even look go through history, and you can see how many times did the Russians or the Chinese colonize anywhere. Did they ever develop wholesale slave trade? They didn't. Did they build large empires that went beyond the their, you know, their immediate regions, they didn't.
Are they are they running a system that generates poverty today? You know, the the kind that we were talking about earlier, you know, like, Britain, when it was at the zenith of power, British people lived a miserable life. You know? Charles Dickens wrote novels about this. Upton Sinclair wrote novels about the same in The United States.
Today's cities in The United States are are, you know, are are a disaster. If you look at China today, in the last forty years, they lifted 850,000,000 people out of poverty. Their approach is very, very different, and I think the the direction is given on on the cultural basis. You know? So there's there's this, Taoist, Confucian, dimension that that determines how the how the policy is shaped.
And, I think that the clash between the Western bankers and China occurred maybe even before Xi Jinping. I'm not sure. But it it definitely crystallized with Xi Jinping. That is that, you know, election of Xi Jinping was the moment where the Western bankers realized they'd been had. Because what happened in, in August 1971, Richard Nixon severed the convertibility of US dollars to gold.
And from that moment, I think that they knew that they were going to sacrifice The United States, that they were that the dollar was going to collapse. It was only a matter of time. And that The United States is going to be, too weak. It's going to become too weak to be, you know, the hegemon. The the force in the world is going to be able to, guarantee their empire.
And I think that they designated China as the next global hegemon, which is why Nixon and Kissinger, you know, almost straight after they sever the convertibility of the dollar, they went they started going to China to open up China, and then they started building up China. And, you know, they you're right. They they had certain foundations and certain connections there because, you know, Mao, for example, was a was a was a Yale man. You know? He was he was backed by the Yale Yale University networks, and he was even a publisher of of of of, some kind of, newsletters, for the, you know, the Chinese Yale schools.
I I I knew the name. I don't I don't know the names anymore of these of these institutions and these schools, but he was definitely, recruited and cultivated by the the the American establishment. I think that the Chinese concluded that in order for them to avoid, going through further, centuries of humiliations, that they needed to absorb the American, the Western system. They didn't they needed to bring the Westerners on board and, play along, make them believe that they were going to be their next Hegemon and and serve their their agendas. And then to, you know, not not in order to actually serve them, but in order to behead them.
And you will see in the in the statements from people like, like Evelyn Rothschild and Jacob Rothschild and George Soros and so forth, that they were all very excited about developing China, about transferring their seat of power to China. George Soros was openly talking that that China was going to own the, the future of the globalization process. And, you you you know, like, if you look it up almost almost exactly in those world words, you'll find interviews, where they say things like this. So they were really looking to China as their next global hegemon and as the next model of governance for the world. But then, after Xi Jinping took over, they they had a complete turnaround.
They they realized that they've been had. And now they don't have another hegemon because China is looking to build the future of humanity on a completely different, set of principles. So it's not going to be permanent warfare, but permanent peace. And, you know, this is why China is being demonized twenty four seven every day in the West because they want to convince us that China is the devil, that we we have to go to war against China and destroy them because China has now become a risk to their system. Yes.
And that's and that's where there are quite a lot of parallels with with Russia and Putin. It's not exactly the same. Different cultural stuff, different ploys were used, But they've kind of ended up a bit like Russia. They're nationalistic. They look after their own people.
They want prosperity. They don't want, you know, perpetual wars. And they've never really con colonized majorly. And they simply don't have the cultural makeup of our western sociopaths and all the families we we talked about. So in a sense now, enemy's enemy is your friend.
Well, like, I have no belief that China, if they rule the world, would have me doing anything other than a janitor's role. You know? And why would they? They look after their own. But at the same time, Russia now and China are kind of indirectly very important allies for also fight against the sociopathic western kind of dominated system that we've talked about.
That's kind of the case. And the BRICS, If the bricks weren't there to counter our madmen, we'd be in a worse spot, I think. Yeah. I do think so. And, you know, you're always better off if there's competition in any field.
You know? So even if our pathological monsters have to reckon with some kind of competition, some kind of a challenge to their power, they have to, at the very least, soften their their stance. You know? They have to reduce the contrast between themselves and the other side. Otherwise, it becomes obvious to us to say, like, hey.
How come life in China is, is really good and people can walk safely down the street, and there are no drug addicts and needles everywhere, and their women don't get assaulted routinely and raped, in public, where and then they live they have a very high standard of living, and they support their government, and they report that they live happily, and they feel free. Whereas here, everything is shit. How come that? You know? Can can somebody explain this to me?
Why is it that we have these, beautiful sacrosanct democracies, but it seems that we always keep getting a lot of what we don't want, but we can never have a lot of what we do want and vote for. Why is that? Can somebody explain that to me? You know? But, you know, if if we have democracies, then we should be able to decide the the, you know, the policies and the and the direction of the development of our societies, but we get always everything opposite of what we what we choose.
Whereas, you know, in Russia, people are happy. People support Vladimir Putin. He has a very, very high job approval rating. The standard of living is very high. The percentage of people who report that they believe the country is moving in the right direction is very high.
Over on our side, it's it's actually very low. They've been they've been now, contaminating those statistics. You know? They're no longer, they no longer reflect what people actually say. But a few years ago, they did, and I think that figures from 2011, 2012, 2013, in the Western European countries, the people who, who saw that their country their countries are moving in the right direction was, in some cases, in the in the low teens.
You know? Like in France, I think it was 11%. In Great Britain, it was, like, 13%. Whereas in Russia, it was it was close to 60%. So, you know, I think that we have to acknowledge that something's not right in our house.
Because if we don't acknowledge it, we can't fix it. And once we acknowledge it, we have to diagnose it correctly. Otherwise, we waste energy on on, on false solutions. And, I I I think that you can't you know, if you try to diagnose it and you research, you know, you know, you peel the layers of the onion, you always end up getting to the to the money lending oligarchy. And then you understand that the money lending oligarchy is actually, above the the legally elected, governments and that the legally elected governments, our governments, are subordinated to the money lending oligarchies, and they do their bidding, obviously.
And that's actually an empirical fact. It's not that Alex Kraner is inventing it. That's an imperial empirical fact that was determined both in The United Kingdom and The United States in in, in empirical studies. And so this is a problem that we have to solve because if we don't, then we're surrendering our children into slavery. You know, it's it's there's no two ways about it.
This is not a small problem. This is a huge problem. And if anybody needs, like, a visual about what what a society would look like if this oligarchic power goes in check, Or you have to look at how things turned out for the Western Roman Empire, where you had a complete collapse of society, where you have complete collapse of markets. And we basically went back to the dark ages and the economy of barter where, you know, concrete floors or tiled floors disappeared from the archaeological record for a few centuries. Money disappeared.
Production of small of, you know, like, items of cheap items of broad use, like nails and roof tiles and thing like this, they disappeared. So people went back to living basically, like like like stone stone age existence, you know, like like nomads. They went back to basically pre civilizational times. And this is what happens if oligarchic power is not checked. And then if you wanna know what happens if you do check oligarchic power, then you study the contrast between Russia during the nineteen nineties and Russia today and the man who put oligarchs in their playpen and left them with their money to enjoy life.
He didn't kill them. He didn't arrest them other than Mikhail Khodorkovsky. He he didn't take away their toys, and, you know, they can focus on enjoying their life, eating good food, buying nice cars, having nice women. All they have to do is stay out of politics. And that should be something for our oligarchs to consider as well.
Absolutely, Alex. But I I feel they they will need a little bit of persuasion at this point. Need some pursue they might need some enhanced persuasion as well as enhanced interrogation. Yeah. I mean, they are I often said, like, the COVID flu nonsense, that triggered the massive insanity of the last few years with the trans and, of course, the mass migration, which is a disaster.
I don't even need to tell you what's happening in Ireland and, you know, The UK. It is shocking what they're destroying. They're destroying culture history, sovereignty, nationality. It it's it's it's it's it's a fire sale or not a fire. It's an inferno.
It's crazy. But, you know, a couple of quick things there before we move on to the future, the bright future for all of us. Just one thing people will say when you kinda painted China as a nice place, you know, they got cameras everywhere and everyone's tracked and traced. So there is that. Russia, I think, is a better example.
We've all seen the videos of Russia and, Moscow and everything as you describe. And but China and Russia share something. No mass migration, attack on their countries, you know. And Poland, I think, and a couple of European countries are getting fined by the EU because they don't want to destroy their culture history and their their whole society with mass migration. But that's a topic probably won't get into, but it looks to me to be a major tool of the oligarchs in the West in the last couple of years.
I mean, it's and it's very clever because if you use mass migration to undermine society, just like you attack the family, you bring in abortion, you attack religion, you attack everything that keeps a society solid. If you wanna turn all the societies into one big blob for your pleasure. So that's a whole topic. But getting on to the positive, and where we go from here, I think awareness is a massive thing. We might we might have a quick chat, by the way, first because you're a hedge fund manager and you know all about investments and and everything.
I actually see it, like my role during the COVID flu, was to help people understand reality in order to hedge for themselves and their families this new crazy world. But I've been banging on for years. And, yes, I do have a relationship with Pure Gold in London. I know. But personally, I can say with absolute a 100% honesty.
I see my role, a very important role, to introduce people to physical gold whether through their pension if they don't have much money or whether through money they have especially high net worth. It's so important that people get a percentage into physical gold to hedge against what's coming. I mean, what do you think about that one? I was worried that gold in the last six months might correct, which I would not care about, from 3,200 down to maybe 27. Pippenberg, Matt, the gold guy, he said it best.
He said, I don't care care whether I keep accumulating at 32 or it goes to 27 or it goes up to 36 where it is now. The important thing is we keep accumulating physical gold and silver. And now Alex is looking to me that there was no correction. And after a long holding period or a pennant, a bull flag, it seems to be heading on up. What do you reckon about the importance of gold for people to shield themselves from some of the the crap that's going on?
So before I say that, I just one correction. I'm not a hedge fund manager. I used to be one. I so I'm a former hedge fund manager. But, you know, that's it is very important for us to try to, push back against their, agenda of, you will own nothing and you will be happy.
So it's actually quite important for people to try to preserve their assets and their purchasing power to the best extent possible because, you know, as as I think it was Alexander Hamilton or somebody like that, Benjamin Franklin, I don't know, who said that the power over your, existence amounts to power over your will. So if they manage to get you to owning nothing, then they then they have you. So in that sense, I will agree with you that it's important to own, some assets like gold for the transition that's ahead of us, and that transition could be very, very, very, very difficult, for many people. We don't know what's going to happen. We've never been, at this point in history, but let's say that I I, you know, I don't I don't necessarily, recommend hoarding gold infinitely, but I do recommend having at least so much that it could be let's say, an equivalent of at least several months of your living expenses.
So let's say six months of your living expenses you should own in physical gold just in case it becomes necessary. And also because 100%, the the the currency that we use today, whether it's a pound or euro or dollar or yen or whatever you you're using, it's going to go to zero. That's a mathematical certainty. It's only a question of time. Gold is not going to go to zero.
So in order for you to pre preserve some purchasing power, you need to own some gold. If you can, you should own a little a a plot of, agricultural land, and you might think about diversifying into something like Bitcoin as well, silver, other things. Now if if we're going to talk about the price of gold and where it might go from here, I I've noticed something over the last ten years or so, and that is that any any asset, any security that starts to form an uptrend has a certain tendency to go into a into a vertical accelerated rally that can see the price go up multifold, not, you know, 10%, 20%, 50%, but several fold. And I've seen that happen with with with Cobalt, with many stocks, with with Bitcoin and some other cryptocurrencies, with things like palladium a couple of years ago. Anyway, the Coco, for example, Coco, which has been trading forever between 2 and $3,000 for, I don't know, 15 or 20 years, it was always between, you know, $2,000 a ton and $3,000 a ton.
And then in the last two years, it hit, I think, $14,000. It just went into this almost vertical climb. And I asked myself why why would that be? And I think that maybe part of the explanation at least is in that we have now this huge quantity of, liquidity that's that exist in the so called shadow banking system. And shadow banking system is is, these are institutions like hedge funds and pension funds and endowments and insurance companies.
Let's say they are financial institutions, but unlike banks, they cannot create money. So they have liquid investable assets that they allocate to this or that asset, but they can't create credit. You know? They can't print money out of thin air, unlike banks. Nevertheless, in all the world, the shadow banking system adds up to something like $220,000,000,000,000.
So that's a lot. And if you take a market like gold, which I think all of it all of it all of it in the world amounts to about $20,000,000,000,000, so it's just one tenth of the shadow banking system. And then if you reduce that gold market to just what's traded, that's only a small fraction of those $20,000,000,000,000 because a lot of that is, like, gold that's sitting physically involved somewhere, jewelry. If you if you just go to the, let's say, to to to the to the market where where gold is traded daily, that's a that's a sliver of that market. I I don't know.
Let's call it a trillion or two. And so you have price discovery, which is happening in this 1 or $2,000,000,000,000 market, and you have $220,000,000,000,000 of liquid investable assets that can impact the price of gold. And so when people see the price of gold start to do this, it's enough that just some of those hedge fund managers, pension fund managers, endowments, that some of them just say, like, gold is looking very strong these days. Maybe I will increase my allocation to gold from 1% to 2%, and that can then create that vertical hockey stick chart. According to last information that I have, and that is not so recent, maybe it's a few years old, like two or three years old, Most of these institutions in the shadow banking system had zero allocation to gold.
Zero. So the amount of purchasing power compared to the quantity of of gold that's available for for sale is is there there's a massive, massive imbalance. So for that reason, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw gold reach $10,000 in the next two, three, five years, $20,000. You can't really put a number. And all these analysts that, like, boldly predict, oh, the gold price might close at 3,800 this year, or it might go to 4,000 this year.
The I don't know I don't know on what basis they make those predictions, but I've been reading those predictions for the last twenty years. And they you know, that's a class of analysts that always makes a prediction that's just above where the price of something is today. So, So, you know, if if when when when like, at the beginning of this year, when gold was trading at about $2,600, people were predicting that, oh, during 2025, it might go to 2,800 or even $3,000. Well, what? It's September now, and we're at 3,650.
Did anybody predict it? Somebody must have. But, you know, most people were making these predictions that were maybe current price plus a $100 or $200, depending how bold they actually feel. But there's no predicting this. You know?
You could say, like like with Bitcoin, one day it's trading at, like, $10,000. The next day well, you know, couple of months later, it's at $60,000. Is there any, market fundamentals that could possibly explain this? Nope. There isn't, except that there's so much money out there, and it's chasing after assets that will allow them to not get wiped out, you know, by inflation and by by by government printing infinite amounts of currency.
And and I'd have to say I have my process for who I trust and listen to, and I have around a dozen now, including yourself, of course, in macroeconomics and all these things. And Rick Rule and Matt Pittenberg, Christopher Mullen from the technical traders who purely goes by price action and technicals, not the macro we're talking about. But all of them pretty much were pretty bang on in their predictions for gold over the period. But you're absolutely right. CNBC and all this is just junk.
They just keep adding on a little when it's going up. Like, a moron could do that. So absolutely. And the other key thing, I suppose, that people it'd be good to know, I got heavy into this, and one overriding driving factor for me was 2019 with the Bank for International Settlements, the head of the snake, the head of the head of the snake, which, Quigley earlier referred to the BIS. It's to be the ruling kind of central nexus for all of this crap.
Well, they certainly are. And they move gold from, I think, tier two c right up to tier one with The US sovereign debt 2019. Once when I found that out and I found out that central banks all over the world are buying like crazy. And the other thing is that the gold price gone up to 3,600 from where it was at, I don't know, 1,800 when I got in. That's been driven primarily by central bank buying.
So you gotta watch what the head of the the heads of the snakes are doing. Let's be fair. For the last hundreds of years, they've made everything happen that's happening in the world. Right? And if they're amassing gold and that alone is driving up the price and retail have hardly even got in yet, never mind all the private equity and all the shadow banking.
Your point, you can square your point. No financial advice, no predictions, but it's such a no brainer for me for people to hedge with a chunky amount of that beautiful metal. I mean, I don't know. I truly believe it. But positive stuff besides taking care of your family's finances in the way we just talked about, for me, awareness, it might sound naive, but I keep telling people the only thing that can counter these ultra powerful, and they have all the money and the power currently, it's beginning to crack and fail and there's infighting happening and they're losing against the BRICS and they're losing in Ukraine and they're losing in ways in The Middle East.
They're losing against China. So we covered all the headwinds they have, the so called elite. They're kinda screwing up a lot now. They're getting desperate. But for me, the only thing that will truly topple them and safeguard our children's future fundamentally is awareness of the people.
Currently, we have a small minority of people who are aware. If you double that or tripled and got up to 15 or 20% of people in the West broadly know what we're talking about and understand it, That would make a mark that would leave a mark. Is it your belief that similarly that we just need awareness and a lot of the rest will take care of itself over time? Yes, absolutely. That's the key.
I think we need to understand, how the system works. We need to understand what the agenda is. We need to understand what their plans for us are, and we need to understand where where that would take our children and their children, what what the reality of their life would be. And then there's no question that everybody will resist this because it's it's a fate that could be worse than death. And nobody would wish that to to to their children, even their enemies' children.
And so, we we need to know this, and and that's also the reason why, a lot of what they do, they do in secret, or they try to mis disinform us and mislead us about about it, which is why they're so, you know, vexed and and and hysterical about us having access to information on on social media and on the Internet, and they wanna shut it all down. But, you know, so far, we're in good shape. I read probably about a hundred years ago, you know, after after the Federal Reserve was created in The United States, one of these one of these powerful money people said that maybe there's a few dozen people in the whole world that understand how the money machine works. I think that today, that's probably a a whole percentage of people. It may not be very high, but even even if even if a percentage as low as two, three, 5% of people understand, in very broad terms how the money system works, we are already in a good shape because from there comes the understanding of who exactly the enemy is.
You know, it's not the Chinese. It's not the Russians. It's not the Muslims. It's the people who are, in charge of the of the credit issuance of the of the monetary system of these big banks, of the Bank of International Settlements and the central banks. They are the enemies.
They are the ones who have created the migration crisis. They're the ones who orchestrated the the the the not just the COVID pandemic, but all of the previous ones before that. You know? That started with, you know, I don't know, SARS, MERS, two thousand three, and then they had one every year or two. So they keep doing these things, and these are also the people who who foment the wars, who instigate the wars everywhere around the world, which is why, you know, we we live in this Orwellian world of nonstop never ending warfare and shifting alliances and shifting friends and and and enemies.
And I think it's it's time to end this system. You know? It's had its run for about, you know, a few centuries. Let's call it five hundred, six hundred years. But it's come to a point where, you know, if we don't push back, if we don't demand a change of course, then we are surrendering our children to slavery, basically.
And I don't I don't think I'm either even exaggerating. That's that's really what it is. I know for a fact. That's big claim. I know you're not exaggerating.
And that's what's driven me really since I got engaged in all this thing, primarily through the trigger event of the COVID flu nonsense. And then over the years, I I discovered everything we're talking about from people like you and doctor Nordengard and others. And now I know it's the most important thing any of us can do is help achieve what you just described. A percentage of people aware of the Babylonian money magic of knowing who ultimately, truly, technically is driving all of our problems and then addressing it. So that was a great way to wrap up.
Alex, I've kept you way longer than we agreed at the start, but I think this is a master class. I truly think so. I'm gonna go straight and start putting it together now. And I plan on doing a series of maybe weekly live streams with doctor Jacob Nordengard, I'm sure you're aware of, and his fantastic work on Rockefeller and all the all of what we're talking about, but a little more contained. We went broader.
And, I'm gonna do a weekly with him where we go through tragedy and hope chapter by chapter and reveal the full picture of the world and how it works towards what what you also share with me. I hope that we can get people to understand this and who the enemy is. And we might, if you're available, bring you in occasionally as a special guest of honor into some of those perhaps. That would be with pleasure, Ivor, of course. Thank you so much, Alex.
You're doing a sterling job, getting the message out there, and, it's a joy to watch. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for the invite, and, warm greeting from Croatia to your viewers and listeners. Beautiful Croatia.
Thank you so much. Thank you. Take care. Bye bye. That'll do it, folks.
I'm gonna name this my most important interview yet. I think that's very fair because it's the best compilation or synthesis or integration of everything we need to know about what's happening in the world and how we ultimately push back against this craziness. Again, I'll just mention briefly, there's a link down below if you want to follow-up, on the financial and family kind of wealth and safety front. You can check-in with the guys in Pure Gold and they'll give you excellent advice, covering physical metals and much more besides. I don't give financial advice, but I do direct people towards the people who are good at that kind of thing.
And, of course, I allow access to the opinion of my huge network of hedgy types, investment types, macroeconomics, and of course geopolitics specialists. So see you at the next one.