(De)Centralisation
International Man Communique
Doug Casey on the Struggle Between the Powerful Forces of Centralization and Decentralization
by Doug Casey
International Man: We're seeing several disturbing trends converge: currency debasement, increased surveillance, and more travel restrictions.
It seems governments everywhere—and the WEF elite behind them—are waging an all-out war on ordinary people worldwide.
What do you make of this trend, and where is it headed?
Doug Casey: Well, as I said earlier, the World Economic Forum is actually an informal United Nations, which is bad enough.
It's populated by people who like the idea of powerful government in general, and a powerful world government in particular. When you look at history, you find that there are people who arise from seemingly nowhere and are able to put themselves in positions of huge influence and power. In today's world, that usually happens through elections. But Bismarck, Napoleon, Mao, Kissinger, Schwab, Gates, and most others didn't come up through elections for what they're worth. They came up through force of personality, cleverness, and connections. Elections are essentially an Americanism.
Incidentally, I don't believe in elections or "democracy" as means for determining who your boss is and who controls you. Elections have rarely been more than popularity contests at best, and more often, mob rule dressed in a coat and tie. As HL Mencken quipped, an election is just an advance auction on stolen goods. Now, more than ever, they're just rubber stamps for political operators who are adept at using the media and other forms of influence to get the hoi polloi to robotically legitimize their rulers.
Manipulating public opinion has become a fine art using electronic media. It's especially effective in getting the bottom half of society—let's call them marginal citizens—who aren't famous for researching issues or thinking critically, to vote one way or another. Voting can make sense if the voters are virtuous, independent thinkers, at least 21 years old, and property owners. Many today are none of these things. That's why elections are meaningless shams, more now than ever. They do nothing but legitimize power junkies.
Where is this trend going? As the economy and the dollar deteriorate further, people are likely to look for a strong leader, someone who will promise to make things better if he's given enough power.
Strong governments come in many flavors, but because life so often imitates art, I think it makes sense to look at science fiction for a view of the future. One possibility is that governments will become overtly draconian and move in the direction of George Orwell's 1984, which some are already using as an instruction book. Another possibility is outlined in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, where biological modifications and drugs are used to create a kinder and gentler kind of police state.
Meanwhile, our friends at the WEF assure us that by 2030 we'll own nothing and be happy because everybody will have a guaranteed annual income. That sounds good to proles and wokesters who not only hate their jobs but have so much debt that they already own less than nothing.
These things are happening right before our eyes. The question is whether it's possible to reverse the trend. Trends in motion tend to stay in motion, and current trends toward economic, political, and social upset are accelerating. At some point—I'd say very soon—they'll reach a crisis point when anything can happen. It's a good bet we could see a collapse of the current system, at which point a whole new paradigm might be set up, whether we like it or not. The WEF types call it "The Great Reset." It's unlikely to be convenient or pleasant for most people over the next 10 or 20 years as the world reshapes itself.
The world changed totally after World War I. It changed even more radically after World War II. What's going on right now is at least that magnitude. I think anything before 2019 is going to be known as the "Before Times." It's almost like we're emulating science fiction.
International Man: For years, you've predicted the eventual destruction of the nation-state.
In large countries like the US and Brazil, for instance, it's clear that the values and culture of people in some parts of the country are entirely different—and even opposed—to those in other regions.
What can we expect to happen to these large nation-states?
Doug Casey: It's not all bad news. The WEF types are trying to make governments bigger and centralize things more. But at the same time, centrifugal forces will tear apart many nation-states and decentralize society.
In the examples you mentioned, the Northeast of Brazil could—and probably should—separate from the South. They're different countries culturally, economically, and racially; even their religious traditions are different. In the US, young Chicano males in California have about zero in common with old white women in the Northeast—except that they'll soon be paying 15% of their earnings in Social Security to support them, and they won't like it. There are numerous regional differences now that the US has devolved into what amounts to a multicultural domestic empire. At tens of millions of Thanksgiving tables 2 weeks ago, I'll warrant that there wasn't much talk beyond trivialities because the country is so divided over Red and Blue issues.
My guess is that Russia will start breaking up along ethnic, cultural, and linguistic lines. Only half of their population are ethnic Russians. I don't doubt the same thing will happen in China as its economy falls apart in this decade. While the country has transformed over the last 40 years, there have been huge misallocations of capital, from ghost cities to their Belt and Road venture, which will collapse. Along with their banking system.
Most of the countries in Europe have secessionist movements. And there's not a single country in Africa where national borders have anything to do with linguistic or ethnic borders. Not to mention that tens of millions of young Africans and Middle Easterners are going to migrate to Europe. And there's nothing the Europeans can or will do to stop it. It's as if Europe has signed its own death warrant. It's a dying culture and will dry up and blow away when it's overrun by alien masses—which they seem to welcome. And with it will go the values of Western civilization (link), which means that the currently brewing chaos is going to change the nature of the world at large.
Of course, change is the only constant. It's good that change came to ancient Egypt, ancient Rome, medieval Europe, and hundreds of other cultures—even though it was traumatic for them at the time. But I believe Western Civ is not only unique in all of history but orders of magnitude better—at least if you define "better" as personal freedom and a high standard of living for the average man.
Secession and decentralization will hopefully—against the will of the Globalists and the WEF—happen all over the world. In big countries like those we've mentioned, down to obscure countries like Bolivia or Burma, both of which are likely to break into at least two or three in the years to come.
On a local level, it's going to be dangerous and inconvenient because, of course, the powers that run governments will try to hold them together while the secessionists try to break them up into smaller entities.
I'm almost always on the side of the secessionists because a smaller entity comes closer to a grouping of people that share linguistic, ethnic, racial, religious, and philosophical values. And that makes it more stable. Ideally, the world will reorganize in Phyles. In fact, we're making a move in that direction, albeit with cautious baby steps.
While I think secession movements and the breakup of huge nation-states are part of the answer, that's not to say it's going to be pleasant. The American War Between the States was very unpleasant and inconvenient for everybody alive at that time, and, like most secession movements and revolutions, it failed. There's no guarantee that any of them are going to be successful, but these are the kind of times we're looking at. And it may be our best chance for averting something like a world government.
It all sounds chaotic, I know. And, contrary to what the WEF's neo-Marxist court intellectuals believe, the results are unpredictable.
International Man: There is a struggle between two powerful forces: centralization and decentralization.
Governments, large corporations, and globalists are pushing hard for centralization in all aspects of life.
At the same time, powerful forces are pulling towards decentralization.
Where do you think this is all headed?
Doug Casey: In Third World countries, millions of people are moving towards the big cities as a way to better themselves. Meanwhile, in countries like the US, people who are in a position to are moving out of the big cities. It's centralization on the one hand and decentralization on the other.
The same is happening in the world of finance. With any luck, Bitcoin will triumph completely over fiat currencies and CBDCs. The impending collapse of unsound financial and economic systems of the world will result, I think, in the reinstitutionalization of gold as money, along with Bitcoin.
As all this happens, a lot of corporations will go under, and their employees will have to find new ways to put groceries on the table. Not everybody will succeed.
There's potential for mass chaos on numerous levels in the years to come.
A final note, on the bright side. The Globalists, WEFers, and Jacobins pushing for more centralization are quite arrogant; there's a good chance they'll overreach, even though it now looks like they're winning. Maybe the average guy, even if he doesn't go out and riot in the streets, might still wake up.
A lot of people are becoming very unhappy about their lower standard of living and increasing controls. Perhaps enough of them will figure out the causes and retake their personal lives into their own hands, not just as part of a mob or a group, but as sovereign individuals.
