Decline and Fall of the Western World

Comparisons are often like bikinis, what they reveal is suggestive, what they conceal is vital. The principle equally applies when comparing the history of nations, as implied in the title, which echoes Gibbon’s 6-book, monumental “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”.

Indeed, in a possible contest of titles, quotes or witticisms, a winner would be uncertain. For, implied in that ‘decline and fall’ is the idea that the decline could have been reversed and the fall avoided – that is, the fall of the Roman Empire and the decline of the Western World. Whereas it is equally true that all that lives must die, passing through nature to eternity.

Yet, indirectly suggested though not openly stated in Gibbon’s title, is the idea that men are responsible for the fall of empires and nations. But a counterpart could respond with equal reason that “As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods, they kill us for their sport.”

Alternatively, a hopeless contemporary skeptic, prompted to say what he would do with the world, if it were in his power, could reply as one Shakespearean character did when questioned on that topic, “Give it the beasts, to get rid of the men.”

The argument quickly leads nowhere, though this preamble should serve as a caution against hasty or dogmatic ideological conclusions.

The best a historical observer can do is to suggest what are the perceived carrier-themes of an époque, to pinpoint its dominant dynamics and to observe if the consequences fit the perceived premises.

Given the above, an arbitrary beginning of the decline and eventual fall of the Roman Empire could be the advent of the emperor Diocletian, who re-organized the Roman empire in 286 AD, splitting it first into two and then four sub-empires. With the re-organization leading eventually to Byzantium (Constantinople) becoming the actual capital of one new-and-improved Roman empire in 395AD.

Often many causes are the parents of one event. With Diocletian one such cause was the growing influence and importance of the East. Equally Rome had become increasingly difficult to govern. A process begun much earlier, for example with Emperor Caligula, famous for having made his horse a senator.

Some chroniclers and subsequent historians said that Caligula was mad. According to others, however, he only wanted to show and emphasize that the Roman senate had become so corrupt and dysfunctional that even a horse as a senator would be a notable improvement.

Observing the results of the most recent mid-term American elections, it would be difficult to disagree with Caligula, given the record, the type and the temper of sundry elected candidates.

Anyway, a latter day Caligula would retire Biden and exchange some of his cabinet members with horses – leading to an improved economy, peace, restoring international standing and reclaiming common sense as a guideline of policy.

A process extendable at large to the European Union, a splendid example of public funds consumed in private luxury. Where members of an unelected junta vie with each other into a shameless emulation of servitude, and believe themselves to be magnificently grandiose while actually being inelegantly little – with some qualifying as proper marionettes or licensed buffoons.

In ancient Rome, Emperor Domitian Aurelian (214-275 AD) gave the first official signal of the Empire’s end. He was an able general and fought successfully against various tribes of Barbarians, including the Goths, the Vandals and the Alemans. But he realized that, notwithstanding these temporary victories, he had delayed rather than avoided the catastrophe. Therefore he adopted a measure that signaled the death of Rome and the beginning of the Middle Ages. He ordered the citizens of the empire to surround their cities with strong walls and fortifications, as henceforth each center was to be solely responsible for its defense. Tourists visiting various Northern Italian cities will have seen or even walked on the remaining ramparts of these massive defensive monuments.

The next momentous events were respectively the official entry of Christianity into the history of political Rome and the first Roman war fought in the name of religion.

Facing each other were the armies of Maxentius – who represented one of the sub-empires created by Diocletian – and Constantine. Maxentius’ standard was the symbol of the Sun, Constantine’s was the Cross of Christ. As Constantine told the historian Eusebius, on the day of the battle (Oct 27, 312 AD) he had seen a flaming cross appearing in the sky with the inscribed words, “In hoc signo vinces”, “In this sign you will win,” and he won.

In 330AD Constantine moved the capital of the empire to Byzantium which he renamed Constantinople. That date marks the beginning of the Eastern Roman Empire, which endured until 1453 AD.

In 800 AD Charlemagne established a new and improved Western Roman Empire. However, its capital was no longer in Rome but in Aachen, today’s Germany.

During the long interim centuries, after Rome’s official surrender to the barbarian chieftain Odoacer, in 476AD, it fell to the Church of Rome, but chiefly to the many abbeys founded and erected throughout Europe, to preserve and maintain the Greek-Roman culture, traditions, arts and science. Many monasteries still afford today ample testimony of their ancient magnificence. Meanwhile Goths, Franks, Longobards, Normans, Byzantines and Arabs fought among themselves to decide who was ruling what part of the Italian peninsula and other lands of Europe.

For the purpose of this historical comparison, I will arbitrarily choose the end of World War II as the starting point of observation of Western Europe and the Western World at large. But some brief mention of previous events not as remote as the Roman Empire may contribute to making the comparison less questionable.

It is commonly assumed that the French Revolution was a popular movement, though it was mostly confined to Paris and some larger French cities, where there was discontent, though not extraordinary. And, at least at the beginning, the upheaval resembled what we call today a color revolution.

Providing the necessary funds were, among others, the new recently established Masonic Lodges and the Illuminatis of Bavaria, whose spiritual descendants today are Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum, among others. The Masonic lodges were the equivalent of today’s National Endowment for Democracy and of Soros’ ‘Antifa’, or Black Lives Matter’ or sundry NGOs (Non Government Organizations).

Usually overlooked by official history is the strong and bloody counter-revolution that took place in the rest of France, eventually known as the Vandee’s war, named after a region on the Atlantic Coast. For the countryside was more attached to what we today call ‘traditional values’. Nor people craved, for example, for the new 10-day week – where people worked for 9 days instead of 6 – or for the new church of the Goddess Reason.

The historical impact of the Revolution and of the Napoleonic aftermath buried the notion and the fact that there was ardent opposition to the Revolution. Or that the declaration of the rights of men did not prevent a few thousand people from losing their head and producing, in the end, a heap of headless corpses and a tyrant.

But legend is an essential part of history – much as the founding the United Nations in 1945 was intended to prevent further wars…

One more parallel. In 1817, following Napoleon’s defeat, Britain, Prussia, Russia and Austria, installed on the throne of France Louis XVIII,, brother of the beheaded Louis XVI. Then the victors instituted a ‘constitutional charter’, meaning elections, though with a very limited electorate. Yet even this mild democratic reform worried the establishment. But Alexis de Tocqueville, author of the famous “Democracy in America” dispelled the fears of the nobility, regarding the universal suffrage. He later stated what was as true in the 1830s as today. Namely that “people will vote as they are told to vote.”

To wit, the results of the recent American interim elections confirm Tocqueville’s pronouncement, as the massive, political, practical and anticipated changes failed in their promised expectations. And this notwithstanding evidence of widespread popular discontent and grievances, inflation, open borders, US’ humiliating escape from Afghanistan, billions in foreign wars and resistance against the excesses of ‘Wokism’, ‘Counter-Culture’, ‘Rainbow-advocacy’, ‘Black Lives Matter’ and 2-billion dollars in associated BLM-caused damages. For either the results were rigged, or the credulity of the electorate was stretched beyond imagination, or we are dealing with senseless happenings or happenings that sense cannot untie.

Back to the main story and main events, leading to the today’s drama of the Western World. A reasonable beginning is the so-called Schuman Declaration of May 9, 1950, establishing the European Coal and Steel Community. This was a French – German initiative involving the French Robert Schumann and Jean Monnet and the German Konrad Adenauer. Schumann and Monnet were CIA assets and Adenauer did the best he could in the circumstances. For, not long before, Morgenthau, Roosevelt’s right hand man, had him and Churchill sign the well-known ‘Morgenthau Plan,’ intended to make the surviving Germans perennially poor, to convert Germany into a waste land, and to prevent Germany from ever having any industry. The plan was discarded only because the Soviets had different designs for East Germany, with easily imaginable consequences, economically and politically, if Morgenthau’s plan had been implemented.

Curiously omitted from the popular historical narrative of this era is the role of Count Kalergi, notorious advocate of the European Union, and ever since honored by a yearly prize given to outstanding promoters of the Union.

In his book “Praktischer Idealismus” (only available in German) Kalergi envisions a Europe led by the best of the chosen-people, intermarried with the best of the gentiles, ruling over an Orwellian-style European prole, a mixed breed of gentiles intermarried with people imported from other continents and working in underground factories. Prof. Matteo Simonetti has studied Kalergi’s book, plans and ideas. An English version of his book is available online.

Nor this is a question of distinguishing the absurd from the impossible or the incredible from the false. Ex French president Sarkozy, whose ethnic roots are undisputed, said, “What is the objective? It is going to be controversial. The goal is to meet the challenge of mixed racial breeding – the challenge that faces us in the XXI century. It is not a choice, it is an obligation! It is imperative. We cannot do otherwise. We risk to be confronted with major problems. We must change and therefore we will change.” Here is the link for the unbelievers:

The US sponsored plan for ‘European integration’ and spearheaded by Schuman and Monet advanced steadily until Charles DeGaulle returned on the French and European stage in the late 1950s. As we know, he was the pillar of the French resistance during WW2, but now he became an obstacle for America, as well documented in the book by Vincent Nouzille, “Des Secrets Si Bien Gardes”, (Well Guarded Secrets) – the dossiers of the White House and the CIA on France and her presidents.”

DeGaulle’s plans clashed with the Americans’. He made France independent of NATO, recognized Mao’s China, travelled to Russia in 1966, and was there met with great honors at the peak of the Cold War. In a toast in Moscow he said, “(Russia) seems to France to be an interlocutor with whom understanding and collaboration are natural to the highest degree.” Perhaps DeGaulle had in mind King Francis I, who, in 1536, established an alliance with Suleiman I, Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, as a counterweight to the Spanish-Austrian empire of Charles V.

But there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy. For the ensuing youth mass upheaval of 1968 was actually the first European color revolution. Its ideological promotion came from the same school that fueled various others ever since.

Critical in the 1968 operation in France was the split within the powerful French Communist party, of which the official section sided with DeGaulle, while the ‘gauchistes’ (leftists of heavier color) were against him. Even though DeGaulle was as remote from communism as a man could be he had to resign.

Fueling and nourishing the ‘mass movement’, and eventually triggering the 1968 Western color revolution was the ideology defined as the ‘Frankfurt School’ or ‘Cultural Marxism’. Its spiritual father was Freudian psychologist Wilhelm Reich with disciples or followers belonging to the same sect, such as Theodor W. Adorno, Ernst Bloch, Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse.

Much critical information is lost in the swallowing gulf of forgetfulness and dark oblivion. One sentence by one of the gurus may give a hint of the cultural-marxist ideology: “The critique of domination, or the reflective critique of socially unnecessary constraints of human freedom, is as old as the Western concept of reason.” Translation: reason is bunk. While for Marcuse sexual promiscuity was “the fulfillment of the need for the people to rise up against Western civilization and to free themselves of the sexual repression it created.”

The color revolution of 1968 was not a historical surprise, nor its sexual-liberation agenda a novelty. The French Revolution harbored similar notion or ideology. And during the 1917 Russian Communist Revolution it fell to Alexandra Kollontai, Lenin’s secretary, to be the patroness of the ‘liberated’ lifestyle. Until Lenin intervened due to the sudden and dramatic collapse of the birth-rate in Russia.

Earlier on, during the times of the Protestant revolution various sects arose with similar philosophies. The Jews, for example, found in Shabbetai Zevi (1626-1676) the prophet they had been waiting for. Zevi, who was active throughout the Ottoman Empire, claimed to be their long-awaited Jewish Messiah. He urged his followers to engage in anything hitherto forbidden, from eating pork to orgiastic sexuality. In this he was ahead of later sexual revolutionaries of the same sect, like Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Reich.

According to David Bakan, author of a book titled “Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition,” Freud considered himself a re-incarnation of Shabbetai Zevi. “Like his inspirer, Freud promised release from all sexual prohibition and guilt to wealthy Americans as a way of bringing them and, more importantly, their money under his control.”

In turn Wilhelm Reich took the ideas learned from his master and converted them into the science of sexual liberation as a means for political control, brilliantly applied in the upheavals of 1968 – when the chain of authority broke down, which restrains the bigot from thinking as he pleases and the slave from speaking as he thinks. Why, some may ask, the 1968 color-revolution in France was successful, whereas the Gilet Jaunes’ color-revolution of 40-year later wasn’t? Considering that the grievances of the Gilet Jaunes had practical objectives – rather than the sexual freedom of the 1968ers that none had repressed? Simple, only spontaneous revolutions are successfully suppressed.

But never resting time moves history onward and, not long later (at least historically speaking), European national currencies were turned into ‘euros’. By so doing the European currencies suffered the same fate as the East German mark. Before reunification the West German Mark was worth about 3 East German Marks, which, in turn, made East German goods very competitive. After re-unification Eastern and Western Marks were made equal in value, which meant that East German goods became 3 times more expensive literally overnight, and therefore uncompetitive. Leading to millions becoming unemployed and massive closure of firms and factories, eventually sold to speculators for literally pfennigs on the mark.

Similarly, the creation of the Euro split Europe into two economic models both using the same currency, namely the northern ‘virtuous’ and the southern ‘un-virtuous’ economies. As per available data, (and rationalizing the decimals), in 1950 one French Franc was worth 1.25 German Marks. At the beginning of 2022, if there were no Euro currency, 1 German Mark would be worth respectively 2.80 French Francs and 3.50 Italian Liras.

Clearly the ‘virtuousness’ of an economy is a relative evaluation. While the subject would require books to avoid the charge of uttering platitudes, German, French and Italian customs, traditions and lifestyles were and are still different. Their respective economies reflect their differences and could only be forcefully integrated, leaving all parties dissatisfied. The ‘virtuous’ economies complaining for supporting the others, and the others for having to reduce or dismantle their social structures and protections adopted after WW2.

By the way and for the sake of parallels, debasing of the currency (or pretending that it is worthier than what it is), also contributed to the eventual demise of the Roman Empire. By 265AD, there was only 0.5% silver left in a ‘denarius’ throughout the Roman Empire, and only barbarian mercenaries were paid in gold. With soaring logistical and administrative costs and no more precious metals available from conquered enemies, taxes were increased to sustain the Empire. And the combination of hyperinflation, taxes and worthless money contributed to the dissolution of the Roman economy.

In this thoroughly incomplete analysis, I will finally deal with the twist introduced by the Ukrainian war, possibly unexpected by the US Cabal and probably not predicted by the European marionettes and vassals.

The US managed to force Russia into an intervention intended to destroy its own leadership and simultaneously stabilize the US economy at the expense of Europe’s – as well as preventing Europe from expanding commercial, technological and (God forbid) political relations with Russia. At least, this is the essence of a Rand Corporation’s (read CIA) document published in January 2022.

Perhaps anticipated in the US, forcing Europe to detach from Russia and its resources would mean intolerable energy prices and economic disaster. But to kill a friend to prevent him from being a rival is part of being exceptional. Hence the sale of shale gas at higher prices than domestic, and giving energy subsidies to companies relocating to the US.

Still each medal has another side. Having forced Russia to intervene, the US has been drawn into a conflict that it cannot refuse, given the risk of destruction of the ‘Washington consensus.’ Yet it is a conflict the US is unlikely to win, considering the evolution of military technologies. A nuclear confrontation would shatter the Western alliance, nor the rest of the world has been blind to the theft of Russian assets and probably has drawn some conclusions. Furthermore, given the last 2 elections, it would be difficult to consider America as a model of electoral equity and fairness, a model possibly even inferior to Afghanistan’s.

As of now the loser is Europe, being essentially a US political colony, though its geopolitical interests are different from Washington’s. Europe refused to end a military alliance become superfluous after the fall of the enemy against whom it was formed. Instead it subscribed and participated into the transformation of NATO into an aggressive alliance, bringing war worldwide and even on its own territory. While the Ukrainian adventure is an excuse to legitimize the alliance through a media-produced fictional image of the enemy. In the meantime, a sorry figure as J. Bolton, shameless warmonger of the US establishment, had the gall to declare through the enslaved media that “Putin has gained the right of being assassinated.”

DeGaulle would have liked to avoid it, but Europe, eager to comply with the solicitations of the exceptional nation, has become a vassal with no sovereignty and a prisoner of itself. And it is also historically meaningful that French President Mitterrand, a few weeks before his death confessed to his biographer that “France is engaged in a war with America, and it is a war to the death.”

The last reflections on the subject of this article refer to the mutually supporting phenomena of the Covid pandemic and Klaus Schwab’s ‘Great Reset.’ Nothing new really except some conclusions inevitably suggested by the recent turn of related events.

Readers will be aware of the extraordinary statements produced by the main vaccine manufacturer, Pfizer, according to whom: 1) the Covid vaccine does not prevent the spreading of the illness but only reduces the gravity of its effects among the affected and 2) the vaccine was introduced before having been tested. A point, the date of introduction, which, in honor of absurdity, became a point of merit for the candidacy of Giuseppe Biden in 2020.

Given all the precedents, Pfizer’s admission that the vaccine does not prevent the spread of the illness, exceeds the power of words to convey its impact, implications and consequences. For one it means that the millions or billions of ‘passport vaccines’ were/are useless in their promised effect. I wonder if someone will ask Macron the Magnificent if he will renounce his plan to “emmerder les non vaccinee’”

Nevertheless, on Sep 7, 2022 the Pentagon has awarded Pfizer a contract for 4,852,867,500 $$ (4 billion) for its new Covid vaccine.

Still, whether by default or by design, the vaccine passport has also proven a useful instrument to test the viability of a Western social credit and social score-card, a’ la Chinoise. And, as per qualified sources, France will introduce, in the near future, the ‘Numeric Euro,’ managed and handled by one central bank only. Whereupon the bank, i.e. the state, will know on what, where and when each citizen has disposed of his money, including how much electricity or fuel he consumed. Therefore, if he exceeds certain pre-assigned limits, he could be penalized and, like in China, prevented from say, buying a plane or train ticket, depending on the gravity of his infractions.

Klaus Schwab’s promises (or threats), are just around the corner.

If all the above were played upon a stage many would condemn it as improbable fiction, but we are now used to believe anything, provided it is quite incredible.