4114 The Truth About Italy's Populist Revolution | European Union, Migration and The Euro
Italy is on a collision course with the European Union and the European Central Bank, and while many celebrate the rise of the new “populist” government coalition, the stability of both the Euro and the European Union once again gain the spotlight on the world stage.Italy is now led by Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte – a relative unknown – and the government coalition between The League, led by Matteo Salvini, and the Five Star Movement, led by Luigi Di Maio.Italy’s debt currently stands at approximately €2.17 trillion - or 132% of gross domestic product (GDP). To put things in perspective, Greece’s debt-to-GDP ratio was “only” 127% when they were bailed out in 2010.Includes: The European Migrant Crisis, Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, The League led by Matteo Salvini, Five Star Movement led by Luigi Di Maio, George Soros, Asylum Applications, United Nations Migration Estimates, Italy Population Figures, Unemployment, Foreign Students In Italy, attitudes Towards Refugees, The Truth About The Euro, Debt to GDP Breakdowns, Government Debt Per Capita and much much more!Sources: http://www.fdrurl.com/italy-revolutionYour support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
I hope you're doing well. Now, in our continuing series of Hope They Make It, we turn our attention to Italy, currently undergoing some extraordinary, fertile, and challenging complications on the political scene.
The two-party state has its limitations, to be sure, but some of this coalition-stitched-together Franken-politics also has its own challenges, which we'll talk about.
Now, I'm going to focus in particular on two areas, immigration and And economics.
And the fallout of Italy's recent elections is going to impact these two areas the most with possible European-wide, if not worldwide, consequences.
So let's dive straight in.
Currently, Italy is on a collision course with the European Union and the European Central Bank.
So many, of course, are celebrating the rise of the new populist government coalition, but the stability of both the Euro and the European Union once again gains a spotlight on the world stage.
So Italy is now led by Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, a relative unknown in the government coalition between the League led by Matteo Salvini and the Five Star Movement led by Luigi Di Maio.
So while campaigning for Prime Minister earlier this year, Italy's new Interior Minister Matteo Salvini pledged that if elected, he would deport 100,000 migrants within his first year and half a million over the course of his five-year term.
Now, In terms of refugees, only a very, very small percentage of the people who make it across the Mediterranean to Italy's shores end up being actual refugees, and just moving from a poorer country to a richer country without the requisite paperwork is not legal, so he's generally talking about...
Enforcing the law, which seems in immigration to be something rather radical these days.
Governments hard-pressed to close borders and enforce the law when it comes to immigration.
Tax policy remains rigidly enforced for obvious reasons.
So despite falling short of his intended office, Salvini's intentions as interior minister remain similar.
This is a quote from interior minister Matteo Salvini.
My line of action as a minister, increasing number of return centers so that immigrants are in and do not turn to the cities.
Confusing. Reduce number of landings and increase number of expulsions.
Regular immigrants have nothing to fear.
It just seems common sense.
Sorry for a little bit of the, I guess, Italian Caesar-style word salad, but some of these translations are not the best.
Basically, what he's talking about is if people come into the country without paperwork, you keep them in immigration centers or return centers and don't let them just wander around the city and camp and harass and cause problems and so on.
When he says it just seems common sense, well, I applaud that notion, of course, but common sense, Europe or the West and immigration don't seem to be on speaking terms these days, but perhaps we can get them talking.
Now, of course, this has ripple effects, and none of these guys are Marine Le Pen in terms of staunchness, but Marine Le Pen of France said, it is desirable the whole thing is that they do not expel them to France.
In any case, as long as France does not receive the 500,000 in question, I think it's reasonable.
Now, I'm no lawyer, of course, but why France would end up receiving people who had illegally entered Italy remains somewhat confusing to me.
I also am quite curious about the reactions of half a million people who face deportation back to poverty-stricken, unstable Middle Eastern nations, whether they will go quietly.
And, of course, there are lots of people in Italy not from the Middle East, not from Africa, but I just wonder...
If they feel they may have something to say about it, which is one of the reasons why I think the Western governments are not acting decisively in this area, afraid of insurrection and so on.
Or just bad PR. So let's take a look at several data sets to try and help people understand the impact of immigration and migration to and within Italy.
So with a near constant flow of migrants from Africa, Italy has been adversely impacted by the Dublin rule.
It's a European Union regulation which It's supposed to force would-be refugees to file for asylum in the first member state where they enter, right?
I mean, if you're in the Titanic and the Titanic goes down and you're dying of cold in the water and Leonardo DiCaprio is hanging on to your leg, then you don't sit there and say, I'll wait for the next boat if someone comes with cocoa and blankets.
And that's the basic idea, that if you're that desperate and you're fleeing in the middle of the night and you're crossing oceans to try and get to safety, you don't then say, not this place.
I think I'll shop for some other place.
The selective enforcement of these Dublin rules has been heavily criticized, with confirmed reports of migrants moving from the country of entry and shopping for the best benefits package, which usually comes with more syllables than the Welsh nickname of Aztec God, i.e.
Germany. So, that's not what is supposed to happen.
Now, we turn to...
Noted immigration advocate, migration advocate George Soros, who says,"...public opinion in Italy has been troubled by how wrong migration policies have imposed an unjust burden on the population.
Regulation states that the responsibility for migrants is the first country in which they arrive.
This has an out-of-proportion impact on Italy due to another rule that ships that rescue migrants at sea must take them to the nearest safe harbor.
Basically, it means in Italy." George Soros goes on to say, Again,
a little bit of a word salad, but the general idea is, boy, are you ever going to profit on people with often opposing ideologies who don't speak your language and come from relatively IQ areas in the world?
That's just going to be how you're going to make a huge amount of money.
Don't worry. The people in Africa, they can't be economically productive in their own environment, and their countries are generally giant economic sinkholes of foreign aid consumption, child soldering, and massive criminality and corruption.
But when they come to your country, the magic soil will turn them into...
Wonderfully productive economic citizens.
That's the theory. I haven't seen it play out that well in actual facts, but you know, when you're an ideologue, facts are just annoying insects to be swatted away with ideology.
League party deputy Claudio Borgi Aquilini said, Soros worried by the Italian government?
So it means we are going in the right direction.
We understand that those who have been speculating for years off of the skin of immigrants, financing NGOs and smugglers to invade Italy are now aware that the good times are over and they will take any pretext.
So, I mean, I want to understand this is not natural human migration, even if we were to say there was such a thing as open borders.
In a free society, there wouldn't be hundreds of millions of dollars being poured into churches and other non-governmental organizations to facilitate the flow of migrants.
There wouldn't be massive welfare states to pay for the migrants.
There wouldn't be massively subsidized education and cultural acclimatization courses and language courses and so on.
So, it's important to understand this is not a free flow.
of human migration this is a giant government program at the expense usually of the unborn because it's financed through debt as we'll see and ridiculously low interest rates that kills worker productivity in the long run because nobody invests in anything and there aren't any savings with which to invest but yeah this is not just an ebb and flow of human populations this is a well-paid-for traverse and a government program so let's look at asylum applications by country this is as of 2017.
So, there's a couple of layers of how you estimate this stuff.
So, this is the stuff that's on paper, that's documented.
Of course, as we know from the American experience with the southern border and the Canadian experience with the southern border, there are lots of people who come across without being documented.
So, there's the asylum applications, then there are UN estimates, and then there are the actual demographics as best that they can be measured.
By trying to ask people who are in a country illegally why they're there and what they're there, well...
Obviously, you're not going to get very frank responses.
Otherwise, we could just do away with the entire justice system and just ask criminals where they were and what they did and just put people in jail accordingly.
So you're not going to get many good facts out of this.
So Germany, 222,560.
Italy, 128,850.
France, 99,330.
Greece, 58,650.
UK, 33,780.
There were a total of just over 700,000 asylum applications in the European Union countries.
In 2017. Percent of total EU applications by country.
These are asylum applications.
Germany got 31.5% of them.
Italy, 18.3%.
France, 14.1%.
Greece, 8.3%.
UK, 4.8%.
Now, of course, a lot of the people who come from the Third World to countries which formerly had empires, like France and the UK and so on, come on because of sort of Commonwealth and...
Easy access to coming into the country as the result of the empire, which means that not only did the poor people have to pay for the empire at the time by being forced into the military or the navy in order to maintain it and being forced to pay for the taxes required to maintain it, now their descendants also deal with the problems of empire because there's easy access to the country and its welfare state treasures because of the prior empire relationships.
Empire, it's the gift that never seems to stop taking, isn't it?
Well, America's learning that these days.
So here we go. Asylum applications by country from 2000 to 2017.
And as you can see, fairly low, diminished like crazy.
These are breaking up into six main countries.
And then you can see what happens.
Italy goes up enormously.
Sweden had a bulge and then went down.
But Germany just went through...
The roof! And still paying for World War II, because we all know that imposing really harsh peace terms on Germany after World War I was so wonderful, looks like everybody's repeating the same mistake, because nobody listens to historians anymore.
So as we can see here, Italy, at the moment, the two highest asylum applicants by country are Italy and Germany.
Are a lot of people fleeing persecutions across the Mediterranean just happening to land first in Germany where they're supposed to stay?
Well, of course not. So here we have...
Boy, why does this seem so familiar?
Italy and Germany collectively threatening the survival of Europe.
I feel like I've seen this before, but more in black and white.
Anyway... Italy Asylum Applications 2000 and 2017.
This is a zoom in. As you can see, the numbers are fairly low, remaining at or around 20,000 a year.
And then they just go through the roof.
And of course, there's a response to all of this.
And this is one of the great horrors.
Migration is kind of like, you know, if you've ever rented a car, you go over those teeth that face one way.
You know, it's easy to go one way, very hard to go another.
It's easy to get populations into a country.
It's very hard to change your mind about that.
You know, it's easy to pour milk into water.
It's very, very difficult to get the milk back out.
So, yeah, 2000, there were 1500 195 asylum requests in Italy.
In 2017, that went to 128,850, a percent increase of 748%.
And this has to do with both the welfare state within the country, which gives sometimes up to 10 times the income you would otherwise get in your host countries, particularly if you're from the Middle East or Africa.
And also, this is the result of foreign aid, right?
Within Africa and other places, and there's a natural spillover.
All these violations of property rights, well, I guess we all know what the wages of sin are.
Asylum applications by country.
This is 2000 to 2017.
The sources, again, for all of this are below.
Asylum applications, 17 years, 2000 to 2017.
Germany, 2.4 million.
2.4 million.
No plan, no historical precedent, no research, no studying, no discussions of race and IQ allowed, no discussions of cultural compatibility allowed.
People who question it, who are opposing it, are often shut down or threatened.
I mean, this is monstrous.
And they don't want it in general.
If they did want it, they wouldn't be forced to pay for it.
France, over a million.
The United Kingdom, 731,255.
You know, quite a bit smaller than Germany and France.
Sweden, 712,700.
Italy, 647,720.
So you can take down a country with war, famine, plague, pestilence, or you can take it down with rank and uninformed sentimentality.
Migrants in Italy. So these are the United Nations estimates.
So you can look at assignment applications.
It's a reasonable metric for looking at the impact of the European migrant crisis.
But the United Nations does keep data on the estimated number of migrants in each country and where they claim to have originated from.
So migrants in Italy, this is cumulative.
This is not per year. United Nations estimates.
And I won't go through all of this.
If you're just listening to this, this is one you probably want to watch on the video.
YouTube.com forward slash Free Domain Radio.
In 1990, there were just over 1.4 million migrants in Italy.
1995, close to 1.8.
2000, over 2.1 million.
2005, almost 4 million.
2010, 5.8 million almost.
2015, held pretty steady, 5.8 million.
2017, 5.9 million.
Again, no plan.
No plan whatsoever.
And a time when there's massive indebtedness, and you're bringing in these kinds of liabilities.
So migrants in Italy, United Nations origin country estimates as of 2017.
Now, this includes moving for work.
And so that's, you know, it's not quite as easy, but moving within the European Union is not wildly dissimilar from moving within a particular province or a state in another country.
So, this is not quite the same as, to me, what I would call migrants in terms of economic opportunity coming from people outside of the European Union, outside of relatively open borders.
So, migrants in Italy, Romania is the highest over a million, Albania 455,000, Morocco 432,000, Ukraine, 236,000.
Germany, 224,000.
Give or take China, 204,000.
Switzerland, 201,000 and change.
Moldova, just under 170,000.
Philippines, 145,000.
Close to 146,000. And India, almost 139,000.
Now let's look at another data set to determine the possible cause of migration.
This is Italian residence permits.
So these are non-European Union foreigners and their origins.
So Morocco 454, almost 455,000.
Albania almost 442,000.
China 319,000 close.
Ukraine 234,000.
Philippines 162,000.
India Almost 158,000 Egypt, almost 138,000 Bangladesh, 132,000 Moldova, 130,000 Pakistan, 118,000.
So as of January 1st, 2017, over 3.7 million non-European Union citizens held an Italian residence permit.
Of those, 51.5% were men, 48.5% were women, and only 21.9% were Americans.
Minors. And residence permits, of course, are undercounting the population as a whole.
So, this is as of 2016.
Non-European Union foreigners, what is their specific reason for a residence request?
The vast majority, close to half, over 45%, were for family.
34.3% were for asylum, 7.5% for study, other 7.3%.
And if you squint and look forward, lean right down to the bottom of the screen, you will see that a grand total of 5.7% of the specific reasons for residence requests, 5.7% were for work.
But don't worry, they're going to be enormously economically productive any day now.
5.7%. The West is the greatest place to live, therefore it should have the highest standards of those who let in.
Can you imagine? I mean, can you imagine?
20 family members want to move into your house.
One of them is willing to get a job.
How long are you going to last?
Not long! is the key phrase and of course the family stuff you know you can bring in your 75 year old grandmothers who need hip replacements you can bring in people who can't function who don't work I mean just again domestic population is not asked so let's look at the general population figures as a whole the population as a whole 60.5 million.
Nationals, 55.4 million.
Foreign nationals, just over 5 million.
UN migrant estimate is 5.9 million.
So, with just over 5 million foreign nationals in the country, we're talking about 8.37% of their total population.
Now, if the UN estimate is correct, then it's 9.8% of the total population is foreign nationals.
Now, the most recent demographic breakdown data is that Italian, 92%, other European, mostly Romanian, Albanian, Ukrainian, and others 5%, North African, mostly Moroccan, 1.5%, others 2.5%.
Now, on May 3rd, 2018, Estat released a report entitled The Demographic Future of the Country, which noted that, and I quote, The resident population for Italy is estimated to be 59 million in 2045 and 54.1 million in 2065.
The decrease coupled to 2017 would be 1.6 million of residents in 2045 and 6.5 million in 2065.
So there's a decline.
Of course, it's an old population because Italians, I don't know, just haven't seemed to want to have kids very much lately.
Good job, feminism! You sure are going to protect...
The rights of women when Western men are displaced, because Lord knows other cultures, right up your alley when it comes to protecting women's rights.
So births in Italy.
So the yellow is Italian parents and the red is at least one foreign-born parent.
2008, 480,000 to Italian parents to 96,442 to at least one foreign-born parent.
2010, 457,000.
Ooh, going down! Well, I guess going down ain't having babies.
And at least one foreign-born parent has gone from 96,442 to 104,773.
2014, pretty huge decline from 457 to 398.
And holding fairly steady for foreign-born parents.
Another catastrophic drop from 2014 to 2016.
We've gone from 398 to 373,000.
Holding steady. Slight dip.
At least one foreign-born parent.
Fertility rate of Italian women.
Maybe they don't want to undress because they compare themselves to black and white photos of Sophia Loren.
I don't know. Fertility rate of Italian women, 1.26%.
Fertility rate of foreign women, 1.97%.
That's called population displacement.
If not, in the long run, downright replacement.
Mean age at childbearing for Italian women, 32.4 years of age.
Mean age at childbearing for foreign women, 28.7.
So, almost a four-year head start on having babies.
Because, you see, according to modern feminism, it's really, really important, you see, when you're young and you're the most fertile, To get your education.
To get a job. To start a career.
Oh, you can have children. Later.
Yeah, just later. But of course, for a lot of women, tomorrow never comes.
Later never comes. By the time they're in their 30s, they're having problems conceiving.
If they can even find a guy who's not crushed by child support or alimony payments or who isn't weird or strange or...
What did they say?
Hanging off his mama's boob in Italy and just a kind of narrator in Fight Club style man-child.
Or doesn't have a good job or doesn't have a job.
You know, you've got a lot of time to live, women.
You can live until your 80s, most likely.
You've got a lot of time to have a career.
You've got a very short window in which to have healthy babies when you have the good energy to raise them.
And if you want lots of kids and you start in your 30s, you ain't going to have lots of kids.
If you want lots of kids, which I think is a great thing, if you start in your 20s, you're good to go.
Have your kids. By the time you're 30, if you want to keep working, you've got a half century to do so.
But you don't have a half century to have your babies.
So, Unemployment.
Now this is interesting.
Native-born unemployment rate is still lower than foreign-born unemployment rate, but the gap isn't quite as large as one might imagine, as I would imagine.
This is from 2000 to 2016.
So as of 2016, the native-born unemployment rate 11.4%, foreign-born unemployment rate 14.9%.
Now, remember, to be considered unemployed, you have to have been looking for work.
And so, of course, a lot of the migrants are getting educated, they're lolling around on their free MacBook Pros, they are on welfare, they're not looking for work, and therefore they're not counted as unemployed.
So that's one way to remember to look at this kind of information.
Foreign students. So in 2015, the Italian Ministry of Interior and the European Union, European Fund for the Integration of Third Country Nationals, conducted a survey regarding the integration of the second generation related to foreign students.
Because you see, After you let millions and millions and millions of people from the third world into your country, it might be worth studying to see if they're actually going to integrate, which is kind of the promise.
Because if no integration occurs, then there's nothing but negatives for the domestic population.
You get your no-go zones, you get...
You get riots, you get problems, you get hostility, you get intertribal conflicts, you get all of the ethnicity and tribalism that has characterized human history for, well, all of human history until this delusion that magic soil changes people has infected the Western mind.
You kind of want to study this ahead of time, right?
Say, hey, I wonder how well Muslims have integrated into countries they've migrated to in the past.
Historical data's there.
It's not that hard to find.
So, anyway, they decided to start studying that which had been put into place for 20 or more years.
According to the survey, 30.4% of foreign students in secondary schools were born in Italy.
23.5% arrived before 6 years old.
26.2% between 6 and 10 years old.
And 19.9% at 11 years or older.
I think in Sweden, 14% of them were in their 30s.
No, I'm just kidding. That's not a fact.
Only 49% of non-native-born foreign students were enrolled in the appropriate grade level class for their age.
Approximately 40% of non-native-born foreign students were one class behind, and 12.2% were at least two years behind.
Now, some of this, of course, would have to do with a lack of knowledge of Italian, and some of this would have to do with IQ differences between human populations, which...
It's the Voldemort hypothesis you can't talk about as a way of explaining some of these discrepancies, because you can teach people Italian, you cannot teach people higher IQ. Survey press release.
Again, this is from the survey press release.
It's a bit odd, but 27.3% of foreign students had to repeat one or more years of schooling.
Most of those born abroad had the experience of repeating the school year, 31%, while for those born in Italy, value was closer to that of Italian students, 18.7% and 14.3%.
It goes on to say, 21.6% of foreign students of lower secondary schools did not spend time with classmates outside school versus 9.3% of Italian students.
13.8% of foreign students declared they spent free time with other foreigners only.
Fragmentation, balkanization, the isolated moat-filled honeycomb of ethnic and racial and religious differences.
Soon you won't have to visit the Middle East to get the joys of multiculturalism, because it's coming to you.
Repeated years of schooling by citizenship and birth location.
Italians. Have you never had to repeat a year of school?
Well, 86% of Italians never have, 11% once, and 4% more than once.
Foreigners born in Italy, 81% have never had to do it, 15% once, 3% more than once.
Foreigners born abroad, 69% have never had to do it, 24% have had to do it at least once, 7% more than once.
Now, of course, the schools probably like this because it's extra money, extra resources.
We need money for language classes, for integration classes, for cultural connection classes, blah, blah, blah, right?
So you're not going to get much pushback from the insatiable money-chewing-more-of-government Education, but these are facts.
These are facts.
Again, according to the survey press release, nearly 38% of the foreign students declared to feel Italian.
33% felt foreigner, and more than 29% preferred not to answer.
Almost 53% of the students arrived at the age of 10 or older feeling foreigner.
The situation for foreign students born in Italy was very different.
Only 23.7% of respondents felt foreigner, while 47.5% felt Italian.
Born in Italy, only a quarter almost of respondents felt still like foreigners.
Born in Italy, still feel like a foreigner.
How's that integration going to work?
How's it going to work? Less than half of people born in Italy felt Italian.
Quick question. I'm born in China.
Am I Chinese? They say the politics is downstream from culture.
Another important question is, is culture downstream from ethnicity?
It's an interesting question.
Press release goes on to say, many Italian students, 42.6%, and foreign students, 46.5%, would have liked to live abroad when adult.
Excellent. So almost half the foreign students really want to go and live abroad when they become adults.
So they come in, they bungee, and they take advantage of free education, free healthcare, free this, free that, welfare, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And then they vanish.
Two parts unknown.
What a great investment.
Want to buy a paper factory and burn it to the ground?
Press release goes on to say, teachers declared in general a good level of integration of foreign students.
The most relevant difficulties were related to the language use.
Teachers in schools with a high proportion of foreign students declared more frequently difficult situations.
Of course, teachers love it.
I mean, you got all these problems, you get all these increased budgets, or at least the administrators really.
Love it. But all of the resources going to foreign students, going to students who don't know Italian and so on, these are all resources either taken from other students or taken from future students in terms of debt and unfunded liabilities.
And why? What is the value?
What is the value?
Having one language in a country is incredibly efficient.
It's incredibly efficient and it's incredibly kind to young people.
So if in America, if you live in a place with increasing Hispanic presence, you may not be able to get a job at McDonald's unless you speak both English and Spanish.
Now, a lot of people who come in from Mexico will end up learning English.
They get the advantage. But a lot of teenagers locally, there's this creeping requirement for multi- Linguistic prowess, which shuts them out of the labor market when they're teenagers, and that's really very unfair, isn't it?
Lady One asks. Press release goes on to say 73.1% of headteachers declared a greater awareness than before about the need to plan appropriate strategies for a positive integration of immigrant children.
See, they say integration is going to happen, but they don't actually talk about how much you're going to have to pay for this integration to happen.
Because why would you want it? You get people born from Italian parents in Italy, grow up speaking Italian, you save all that money for a risky integration that may or may not occur.
Save all that money. So why would you want to import a whole bunch of people, pay for them to be on welfare, pay for them to learn Italian, have resources diverted from your own children in the cross-finger hope that they might somehow integrate?
I mean, the people born natively are going to integrate.
You don't have to pay for all that.
Why would you? Anyway.
Of course you wouldn't. That's why nobody's asked.
Of course you wouldn't. And even if they're asked, they'll not send the bill directly.
So, European attitudes.
Refugees will increase the likelihood of terrorism in our country.
Now, I wonder if they asked refugees themselves, or migrants, or new immigrants, or whatever, but refugees will increase the likelihood of terrorism in our country.
Hungary, 76% said yes.
Poland, 71%.
Netherlands, 61%.
Germany, 61%.
Italy, 60%.
Sweden, 57%.
Greece, 55%.
United Kingdom, 52%.
France and Spain, obviously trouble with math, 46% and 40% respectively.
So... This is another fact.
You get to lose your liberties, you get giant concrete blocks on your roads, you get asset attacks, you get stabbings, you get problems...
Where's the upside? Refugees.
The question, refugees are a burden because they take our jobs and social benefits.
Hungary, 82%.
Yep. Poland, 75%.
Greece, 72%.
Italy, 65%.
France, 53%.
United Kingdom, 46%.
Netherlands, 44%.
Spain, 40%.
Sweden, 32%. Germany, 31%.
Well, of course, in Germany, you never want to say anything about an ethnic group different than yours except positive superlatives because Hitler.
Long shadow. So, of course, they take social benefits in general.
Do they take jobs? Well, in Germany, not so much.
But, of course, if they have government support and they're working, then they can charge less for their labor than others.
The local population. I mean, I'm fine with competition.
I mean, competition is wonderful.
But when people aren't paying their own way and they're subsidized by the state, they can charge less for what they do.
And also, if there are affirmative action hiring programs, they're going to displace whites in particular in favor of non-whites, except Chinese and Japanese for reasons of IQ. Which we've talked about before, but if there's affirmative action, then yeah, you are being forced to pay for people to come into your country, and then you're prohibited from getting a job because of those people.
And people are going to be surprised when there ends up being problems from all of this, or they're going to pretend to be.
The whole point is to mess things up.
Here's another question. Refugees in our country today are more to blame for crime than other groups.
Hmm, more to blame.
That's a very subjective statement as opposed to look at the facts, if they're even allowed to be kept on third world versus whites in particular.
I mean, whites around the world have about the same level of murder, of homicide, of killing, unlawful killing of others.
So, I mean, whites in Washington, whites in Belgium, whites in Switzerland, they all have about the same rate of murder.
So when you see big differences in murder rates, you have to look for differences in ethnicity because Nature in her infinite wisdom has deigned not to distribute criminal tendencies evenly across ethnic groups for reasons that remain somewhat obscure.
So let's shift to these questions.
Are refugees more to blame for crime than other groups?
Italy, 47% say yes.
Sweden, 46%.
Hungary, 43%.
Germany, 35%.
Greece, 30%. UK, 28%.
Poland, 26%.
France, 24%.
Spain, 13%.
Let's shift here to the economics and what's going on in terms of debt.
Because when a country is doing something that's unsustainable, that unsustainability is itself sustained usually by debt and unfunded liabilities.
You know, if you quit your job and start living off your credit cards, you are doing something that's unsustainable, and the only reason it appears sustainable for a short amount of time is that you're living off your credit card debt.
So, immigration...
Negative immigration in terms of economics and cost and so on.
Immigration that is costly requires debt and unfunded liabilities.
You can't sustain the immigration if you start sending bills to people immediately saying, oh, we're going to take all these migrants, your taxes have to go up 15%, 20%, 30%, 40%.
People are like, whoa, whoa, whoa!
But if it's funded by debt, then there's no increase in taxes in general.
And then if people are asked, well, I'm not paying more, it all seems kind of free, so I guess I'd be kind of mean to say no, because government debt, well, it's like cocaine for a toothache.
Hey, I'm better. Nope, the rot's just getting deeper.
So Italy's debt currently stands at approximately 2.17 trillion euros, 132% of gross domestic product.
And remember, gross domestic product is somewhat of a squidgy metric because it includes, I don't know, you borrow a bunch of money, you give a bunch of money to people through the welfare state, and then they buy stuff.
Woohoo! Your GDP is up.
And that's ridiculous, right?
I mean, so it's worse than that.
So, 132% of gross domestic product.
Sure, let's take in a whole bunch of unfunded liabilities in terms of mass migration because we're already massively in debt.
132% of gross domestic product.
So to compare that, to put that in perspective, Greece's debt to GDP ratio was only 127% when they were bailed out in 2010.
So Greece was considered a basket case when their debt to GDP was still 5% less than that of Italy's currently.
Now shortly after forming this brand spanking new government, the Italian coalition drafted an agreement outlining their political and economic proposals.
Because, you see, massive amounts of debt.
So what do you expect the government to do?
Well, in a rational universe, you would expect the government and the taxpayers to say, wow, this is really unfriendly.
It's really, really mean to the children we refuse to have, so let's not bother spending anymore.
Let's not cutting back and paying down that debt to be responsible custodians of the civilization we inherited that took about 2,000 years to grow.
More. Well, what do they do?
Well, they're going to go on a spending spree.
Of course they are! Of course they are!
Because democracy and fiat currency.
So independent economic estimates have put the cost of the economic and political proposals of the coalition, the cost of the plan, at about 125 billion euros, or 146 billion dollars in American currency.
Soon to be worth more, I think.
So they did include some immigration-related items, a rejection of the Dublin regulation, governing asylum seekers, tax cuts included, the possibility of a flat tax, increased police funding, huh, I wonder why, and harsher penalties for a litany of crimes.
Other suggestions in the proposal would be at best described as a socialist wish list.
It's, you know, if you've got the infinite Santa and you've been a very good boy, what do you put down?
Well, you put down everything.
Like my friends and I when we were kids saying, if you had a million pounds...
So, they're massively in debt, and they have not the greatest labor force participation in the world, so naturally, when you're hugely in debt and people aren't working, let's start paying them to not work.
Shocking element of the proposal is the implementation of a universal basic income, 780 euros per month, and that is expected to cost about 17 billion euros or 20 billion dollars.
Sure, absolutely. Are you in debt to 12 credit cards?
Well, let's give you five more, because that's going to solve your problems.
The Italian government also, quote, expects, end quote, the European Union to contribute up to 20% of its European social fund to help cover the costs of universal basic income.
See, it's populist, it's nationalist, they hate the European Union, they're Eurosceptics.
Except when they can get money out of the European Union, in which case it's like, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme!
What else have they got in the works?
This coalition, this Franken-party of general socialist mayhem.
Well, what have they got? Massive, massive debt-to-GDP ratio.
Huge. What else do they want to do?
Well, we mentioned imposition of flat tax, establishment of minimum wage regulations for separate categories of workers, a ban on unpaid work experiences, I guess internships and so on, an increase in maternity bonuses, free nurseries for Italian families, the public management of water supplies, making the green economy...
A priority. You know what else is green?
Gangrene. Also, free unicorns for children.
Third boobs for space aliens.
Travel to Mars.
You can go back in time anytime you want, except the only destination is to alter Joy Reid's blog from years ago.
You can have anything you want.
It's magic. You can have infinity.
You can have everything because this is government by economic psychosis.
I mean, this is...
I mean, try taking this business plan to a bunch of investors.
I mean, you'll have a trapdoor.
Bam! Simon Caller will chew on your jugular.
An original draft of this wish list even included a call for the European Central Bank to simply cancel 250 billion euros of Italian debt.
But that was later dropped and replaced with a request to, quote, exclude any debt bought by the ECB from the calculation on whether they're exceeding borrowing limits.
Money printing breeds mental illness.
I'm just telling you that straight up.
And why shouldn't it? Because if you can type whatever you want into your own bank account and go and spend stuff, mental health is required because there are limitations in the universe.
Remove those limitations, you remove the barriers to madness.
And I'm not kidding when I say that.
This is madness.
Now, well, we'll get to that at the end.
We'll get to that at the end. So, European regulations, and I put regulations in significant air quotes here, European regulations require the countries not run budget deficits higher than 3% of GDP without facing possible sanctions.
But Prime Minister Giuseppe Gondi plans to speak to the European Commission about breaking the established rules, which haven't really been enforced anyway.
It's a liar's club, right?
The euro was just a big giant liar's club.
And one of the lies was that Germany had to pay for everything because they were doing so well economically.
But the Liars Club was, yeah, yeah, sure.
We're going to hide a bunch of stuff.
We're going to pretend a bunch of stuff.
We're going to commit to a bunch of stuff in the future.
And the European Union said, well, yeah, but if you don't do it, you're going to face sanctions, which you won't ever face.
So it's just a Liars Club, you know, like the Dublin agreement right about where the migrants are supposed to land and stay.
It's just a bunch, right?
The European Union had also expected Italy to cut its structural budget deficit by 0.3% this year and by a further 0.6% the following year, not to be asked to pay for its new universal basic income proposal.
Ah, Prime Minister Giuseppe Gonti said, "This government has the audacity to seek new economic This means promoting social and economic growth, respecting the principle of a gradual reduction of debt.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't laugh at this.
They tell you everything you need to know, just right there in the speech.
Are you going to reduce the debt?
No! We are going to respect the principle of a gradual reduction of debt.
It's like you're a wife. You catch your husband cheating on you with everything from local call girls to strippers to...
A fairly room temperature watermelon with an apple corer nearby.
And you say, are you going to stop cheating on me?
And he says, I'm going to respect the principle of gradually reducing my cheating.
Are you going to stop? No.
Basically, I've been very honest about that.
With a significantly larger economy than Greece, economic disruptions in Italy could create another debt crisis and threaten the future of the euro itself.
And let me also mention something as well.
This is under-discussed in these situations.
One of the reasons I believe for this mass migration is to prop up the value of real estate.
Because when you have a hollowed out population, you've got the inverted pyramid of demography, what happens is there are fewer demand buyers for homes as the boomers retire, move to smaller places and so on, which means the value of homes are going to collapse.
Now, if the value of homes collapses, then the banks will collapse because that's what happened in America in 2007-2008.
So you have to have a continual wave of people coming into the country to prop up the prices of real estate.
Now, it's true that the migrants...
Aren't buying big expensive homes, but it all pushes upwards, right?
The migrants move into the poorest neighborhoods.
The poorest people move out of those neighborhoods and spend more for more expensive and they push more people out.
So it flows upwards. It's a flowing upwards in terms of keeping the value of housing high.
But this is another reason why this whole house of cards, right?
It should naturally occur of itself that the value of housing goes down, but None of the banks can afford it because that's a lot of their assets, right?
And if the value of their assets goes down, they have to call in a bunch of loans because your asset to loan ratio has to be maintained.
I guess it theoretically has to be maintained.
Who knows these days? And that's why the collapse.
One of the reasons, I think, that it's occurring.
And this is because Italy is large and it's debt-ridden.
The fact that they can go to the European Union and say, well, it's a very nice currency you've got there.
It'd be a real shame if something happened to it.
Oops! We don't want to end up being unable to pay our debts now, do we?
You know, it's the old thing that if you owe the bank $10,000, you're in trouble.
If you owe the bank $10 million, the bank's in trouble if you can't pay.
So, yeah, it's quite a power play that's going on here.
Will the European Union submit to Italy's proposals?
And if so, what would be the reaction from the various member states?
Because, of course, it's a whole house of cards, right?
I mean, if Italy gets away with a bunch of crap and gets free money for universal basic income, well, everybody else is going to want it, too.
Try giving one kid in a group an ice cream.
Just see what happens. Bunch of sharks up in there.
So, yeah, I've got to talk about this.
It's fascinating stuff.
So what was going on in European currencies prior to the euro?
Because one of the things that Italy is talking about is going back to the lira.
We're dumping your currency.
We're going to go back to our own currency.
And this is one of the problems, right?
This is what happened to Greece.
One of the reasons Greece hit such trouble is it couldn't just print money because it didn't have the drachm anymore.
So it couldn't just print money and monetize its debt, pay it off with garbage currency like Weimar Republic toilet paper money.
So, currencies versus gold, right?
Very, very brief history.
Gold was the original currency.
Gold and silver, maybe bronze a little bit.
And you can't just manufacture gold.
People have been trying for a long time.
You can guess, you can forward pyrite at some pseudo, but you can't just manufacture gold.
You've got to go dig it up and refine it and all that kind of stuff.
And gold has been remarkably stable in terms of what it can buy, right?
A piece of silver can buy you a nice dinner.
A piece of gold, an ounce of gold can buy you a nice suit.
And this has been the way throughout history.
Gold retains its value fairly well.
And so it used to be that currency was gold.
Money was gold. And the only thing that paper currency was for was to mark how much gold you had because it was easier to carry around the paper currency than it was to carry orange gold and safer too.
So banks were supposed to have gold and issue paper to cover the gold and that was limited in what paper they could offer by how much gold they had.
Now, this happened at various times.
In America, it was 71. Other places different.
But they disconnected gold from currency.
And basically, since then, governments have been able to print whatever they want.
They're not limited. They're not controlled.
This has nothing to do with the free market.
It's the complete opposite of the free market.
It's the communization of currency, which eventually leads to the communization or the liberalization of the economy.
So here you can see, and bottom left, like all of these European currencies, They stayed pretty close to gold.
Of course they did, because they had to, right?
Then starting in the 70s, the dark satanic decade of the 70s with its key parties and money printing orgies and gas shortages and horrifying stuff, It just went kind of nuts.
And then in the 80s, it went even more insane.
Look at the Greek drachma going up there in the 80s.
And it's just become completely mental.
And the question is, what happened?
Well, they were all competing with each other.
They all wanted to spend like crazy.
And... It got somewhat controlled.
I mean, again, except for the Greeks, right?
It got somewhat controlled because if one currency became worth less, if they printed too much, you'd simply switch to another currency.
So there was kind of a cap on things.
And as you can see here, the Deutschmark, right?
The German currency was incredibly strong and was actually becoming more stable over time.
Well, you can't have that now, can you?
We invite you, Germany, under threat of being called Nazis and racists again, to join us in a collective pillaging of the stability of a currency and the productivity of your workforce because we can't compete with your exports because we're too close to the Mediterranean to go to work on any regular basis.
So we invite you to join us in our wonderful collective where we're going to feast...
On your currency like a bunch of satanic vampires on some Christian newborn.
And this is what happened.
So the percent increase of currencies versus gold since 1960, as you can see, it was somewhat limited, but it did go pretty nuts.
This is a zoom-in from 1980 to 1999, just so you can see.
There was some relative stability.
Again, we're talking about 1,000, 2,000, close to 3,000% increases.
I mean, Greece still 9,000, but then Greece almost went communist after the Second World War, so it's not too shocking that the communization of currency resulted in this kind of massive debt and explosion and so on.
The derangement syndrome, right?
I mean, you get disconnected from...
Reality. I mean, asking, what was an old quote from Elton John about Freddie Mercury saying, Freddie Mercury?
No idea what the price of milk is or the price of bread.
No clue whatsoever, because he lives in such a rarefied economic and artistic and cultural world.
No reality, right?
But things were relatively stable for the other currencies, because they were all in competition relative to each other, and they were all in competition With the Deutschmark and well that clearly had to be fixed and everybody wanted to hook into the interest rates that the Deutschmark was able to commandeer without actually adopting the same policies because that's difficult.
So the road to the euro fully established with the 1992 Maastricht treaty stipulated that from 1994 to 1998 the European Monetary Institute would be founded and participants in the monetary union would be selected.
The European Monetary Institute was the forerunner of the European Central Bank, otherwise known as the helicopter of currency, Santa, which promised a smooth transition for the introduction of the euro.
Now, in order to participate in this monetary union, countries would need to meet strict, strict, I tell you, guidelines from the new European Monetary Institute, including a budget deficit of less than 3% of their GDP and a debt ratio of less than 60% of GDP. Spoiler, they didn't. It was also stipulated that price inflation rates and long-term interest rates would need to be under certain limits.
It was claimed that the criteria for participation would ensure stability, but the criteria were only selectively applied.
So you can't get people to sign into this kind of thing unless you say there's some kind of rules.
But who enforces the rules and how are the rules enforced?
They call me an anarchist, my lord.
There's no rules. There's a bunch of lies to get you in to the Ponzi scheme, and then nothing is enforced.
With a simple majority vote, the Council of the European Union could admit countries to the Eurozone regardless of their financial state.
In other words, bribery, I would assume.
Belgium and Italy were admitted, even though they never had public debt under 60% of GDP, even briefly on paper using accounting tricks like several other...
Countries. And remember, Euro was a tool to prey upon and destroy Germany's economic power by incompetent governments that couldn't compete.
Now, the support of a common monetary unit in the Euro also implied that interest rates from countries would need to convert, right?
So interest rates, the price of money, and the price of money includes the risk of non-payment, which is why when you have a good credit history, you can borrow money at lower rates.
In other words, it's the real price of money because they don't have to factor in The possibility that you won't repay because you've got a really good credit score.
And so as governments begin to print and create and go into debt and have massive unfunded liabilities, the risk of them not paying you back or paying you back with garbage overprinted currency becomes pretty high, which is one of the reasons why the interest rates go up for irresponsible people in irresponsible countries.
Now everybody of course wanted Germany's Interest rates.
And so, right, if a country was expected to be allowed into the euro, highly indebted governments were able to pay lower interest rates due to the perceived stability of the upcoming new currency, right?
So Italy got massive subsidies at the start of this process.
We'll get into that. So countries with highly inflationary currencies were subsidized with decreased borrowing costs, which ultimately makes no economic sense.
And countries with less inflationary currencies, like Germany, were punished by having to pay higher interest rates than they would have otherwise.
So let's say you've got some shiftless bum of a brother-in-law who never pays back his debts, and then he says, hey, I'll tell you what, Let's do a joint signing for a credit card.
Well, you're going to end up paying a lot more interest for his risks, but he's going to have to pay a lot lower interest rates because of your stability.
In fact, you might not even get the card otherwise.
So co-signing with some ridiculous, shiftless, non-paying, deadbeat bum, well, good for the bum, bad for you, and that's Germany with the euro as a whole.
Because collective punishment leads to moral horrors, right?
Couldn't do that in a Christian universe.
The mere expectation that certain countries would be allowed into the euro allowed them to decrease their borrowing costs and meet the criteria to be allowed into the euro.
So needless to say, between the selective application, availability of accounting tricks, and the interest rate borrowing cost subsidy which occurred, the criteria for participation provided zero stability.
And here we can see.
In 1980, the interest rate spread for various countries was fairly large, right?
And we just kick in Greece here a little bit later, right?
As you can see, Greece was paying like 25% on its interest rates charges, which was huge, right?
So there was kind of a spread, sort of below 10%, and Italy went up above 20% in the 82-83.
And then you can see, as you get closer to the euro, everybody gets crushed down to the same kind of interest rate, which is, in general...
Lower, right? And so these are all of the non-German economies.
And this is them, you think of this as the flight path of a bunch of vultures.
There's a strong, robust man down there.
He stumbled. They all swoop in to peck at his jugular and chew off his nuts.
And this, the reason why I'm talking about economics and the migrants is this is why these countries can afford this massive migrant programs.
Because if their interest rates were still kicking around 15, 20, 25 percent, They could in no way, shape, or form afford the massive government program known as migrant subsidization.
So these two are incredibly related.
One can't happen without the other.
Now, long-term interest rates.
So this is from 93, right prior to the Euro.
Euro was introduced in 1999.
All the way through to 2014.
Sorry we don't have later data on this.
But it's like if you sit on a spring.
Well, the spring is down. You're kind of uncomfortable, unless that's your thing.
And then when you get up, the spring goes even higher than it was before, because the energy has been compressed.
So you can compress these interest rates down.
As we can see, they went from divergent...
To unified, right?
Because everybody was hanging off Germany.
And then what happened was there was a European debt crisis starting in 2010, 2009, 2010.
And then the interest rates exploded widely again, right?
And I'm not going to go through each individual country.
It's not particularly important. You can just see that there is this massive divergence.
And it's the old thing, right?
Imagine this is your pain, right?
This is your pain metric.
And you get a toothache.
And you're like, man, I'm just going to snort some cocaine from my toothache.
Hey, my toothache is better.
But what's happened is the rod has gone deeper and wider.
And you started swallowing all that bad bacteria.
It's attacking your heart valves.
And then, boom! Massive heart attack.
Because even the short-term defusing of money printing and interest rate divergence and so on, individual punishment for individual bad economic policies was suppressed.
And this is the typical history of Lack of competition leads to massive misallocations of resources, including a giant migrant program.
So look at this.
This is astonishing, right?
European central bank interest rate.
So this is from 98 to 2017.
3%, 4%, 5%, 2%, 4% and change, 1%, right?
A cliff dive.
Into pretending that everyone's frozen in time and there's no value in present consumption of resources as opposed to future consumption in resources.
That is an astonishing thing to see.
Interest rates down to zero percent.
Zero percent. Next thing you know they'll be paying you to take their garbage.
So let's look at the immediate benefit of entering the euro.
In 1996 Italy was paying about 110 billion euros in interest on its debt.
It's a lot of money. In 1999, that was crushed down to 79 billion.
In the 1980s, before entering the Euro, Italy was paying 10-14% interest on its government debt.
Now it is paying 0% interest.
Now Italy couldn't exist in anything even remotely resembling its current form if economic reality was restored and the risks of the Italian experiment were actually accruing to the Italian government and the Italian taxpayers in the moment.
So, collectivization of interest rates leads to the fantasy that the government is solvent, leads to massive spending programs, leads to the migrant crisis, leads, you understand?
Culture is downstream from economics sometimes.
Debt to GDP. So this is the top five European countries that have the highest debt to GDP from 1995.
To 2017.
And you may get some temporary reductions in these kinds of things, but there's always a crisis.
Always a crisis. And the Keynesian idea that governments spend when the economy is slow and then save when the economy is good or pay down that debt, well...
I mean, that's crazy, right?
I mean, it's like saying to the crack addict, well, you'll have more crack when the crack is plentiful, but boy, when you start running out of crack, you'll totally cut down and stop and go to the gym.
Right? Right? Fiat currency is one of the most corrupting and addictive substances known to man.
So, as you can see, debt to GDP is crazy.
It's crazy. And the debt to GDP would be far worse in this situation if the European Central Bank hadn't crushed down the interest rates to 0%.
Can you imagine if interest rates were allowed to kick in?
The economies in Europe are in worse state than they were in the 80s and 90s prior to a migrant crisis, so they'd be paying even higher interest.
It would wipe out. Existing state finances in their current form in about 12.3 nanoseconds.
Debt to GDP by country, Europe, 2017.
Greece, 179%.
Italy, 132%.
Portugal, 126%.
Belgium, 103%.
Spain, 98%. Cyprus, 98%.
France, 97%. UK, 88%.
Austria, 78%.
And Croatia, 78%.
Worldwide, how does Europe stack?
Well, Japan, of course, are paying men and women to not have children, become addicted to anime, and apparently staying out of the sun.
Japan, 253%.
Greece, 179%.
Lebanon, 148%.
Hey, aren't they enjoying the economic benefits of multiculturalism in Lebanon?
Italy, 132%.
Portugal, 126%.
Cape Verde, 125%.
Congo, 118%.
Singapore, 111%. Bhutan, 109%.
United States, 105%.
Government debt per capita in U.S. dollars by country, 2015.
Now, this data is from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Government at a Glance 2017 report does not include unfunded liabilities.
Government's promises that they don't have the money to pay for Comparing per capita debt by country is complicated and challenging.
Have a look at the source report in the notes for a further explanation of this Byzantine methodology.
But nonetheless, it's important to put in as a comparator.
Government debt per capita in US dollars.
Japan, 90,000 and change.
Ireland, Ireland, Ireland, 62,687 dollars.
Per capita, not per taxpayer, not per private sector taxpayer who are actually generating the resources the government is generally pillaging, including the government workers.
This is per capita.
Something feels like one in four person pays taxes these days, so you can multiply this by four or by three for the actual indebtedness per productive worker.
United States, 59,000 and change.
Italy, 58,693.
Well, they're just below the bronze.
Belgium, 58,134.
Austria, just under 50,000.
Same thing with France. Greece, almost 48,000.
United Kingdom, 47,000.
Portugal, 44,306.
See, and we go to other countries, we go to other cultures, and we say, the West is the best, you want to be like us?
And I think they're kind of saying, no.
No, because your societies are distorted by debt.
And the longer you're in debt, the worse the blowback when the money runs out.
The Euro, the European Union as a whole, has been a kind of upwards parasitism based upon German guilt, German self-hatred, German, you know, Dieter in black and white, contempt for its own history.
So there were a bunch of countries that couldn't compete with Germany, couldn't compete with its exports.
The exports were undermining and didn't want to say no to its own domestic population and say, we've got to be more like Germany.
Or maybe they could be. Discipline, culture, IQ, who knows, right?
Germans have one of the highest IQs in Europe.
So there's this upwards parasitism.
If you're a government and you're running these terrible policies, you need to find a larger collective within which to hide your terrible policies.
And so, basically, the European Union is one giant psychotic collection of people who are saying, let's band together against math!
And Europe has learned, I don't know, how much has Europe learned from these continual disasters?
I mean, it's less than 100 years since the end of the First World War.
And how much has Europe learned?
Well, Europe simply will not have rational, moral principles, such as thou shalt not steal.
Well, if you had thou shalt not steal, taxation is challenging.
Certainly, unfunded liabilities are challenging, but just stealing from future generations.
And debt and borrowing is stealing from other people, so one of the Ten Commandments would just turn Europe around right away, but of course, once you've committed to immorality, it's really, really tough to change your course until disaster occurs.
The existing European society is absolutely unsustainable.
Everybody understands that. Something's going to have to change.
The question is, when the economic collapse comes, is the country, the countries within Europe, are they also then going to devolve and dissolve into warring ethnic tribes?
Are you going to get a bunch of white Italians fighting against a bunch of ethnic Albanians or Somalis or like...
Because if the collapse comes, if you have a monoculture, so to speak, people can kind of pull together.
But when resources get really, really short, or even negative, then ethnic differences, tribal differences really tend to erupt.
So the question is, is there going to be collapse with the added spice of rank tribalism and internecine warfare, or is there going to be a collapse where people can pull together without the racism bomb being thrown everywhere all the time?
Can you fix your country without Endless screams of racism distracting you from the work at hand.
And so the question of immigration becomes very important at the moment.
And while none of these Italian politicians have the robustness or spine of Marine Le Pen, they do have Some sensible policies when it comes to immigration.
Traditionally, governments over-promise and under-deliver and accumulate more and more debt, and what they do in history when they can't pay their debts is they go to war.
Now, nuclear weapons have made European war impossible, and so I think that one of the things that's happening is that instead of going to war with each other, they're importing conflicts within their own societies so that they can clamp down, refuse to pay, And they may have scapegoats.
There may be enough internal conflict that the government escapes attention in terms of being unable to pay its bills.
But this is kind of an end-of-fight-club situation, reset to zero.
Because, sure, populations are dropping.
Part of that is due to propaganda.
Part of that is due to radical feminism.
Part of that is due to the general exhortation around the world, particularly for white people to just not have any babies, right?
You can't have babies. Not good to have babies.
Bad for the environment. Oh, you didn't have enough babies?
Well, now we've got to import the third world.
Ooh. That's a bit of a burn and bait and switch.
But the fact that the population is going down, well, so what?
I mean, there's automation, there are actually exoskeletons being used in Japan, which is now also making its own disastrous choices and bringing in, what is it, half a million immigrants and so on.
But there's lots of ways to solve low population.
It's just that the banks, as I said before, don't want the value of their assets to decline, so they need to continually bring more people in to maintain the thirst for real estate.
Now, Europe has gone through this kind of stuff before.
It's been a while. But this anti-rationality, this psychosis, this dissociation from basic facts, this rejection of mathematics, this rejection of basic morality, well, there was a Dark Ages in Europe before.
And the way that they got out of the Dark Ages was not pretty, was not pleasant, but there was a movement towards universal ethics and a subjugation of the rulers to the ethical laws of the land.
A new enlightenment, an age of reason.
And... My hope, of course, is that the Age of Reason can return to Europe prior to the disintegration of the existing ways of pretending to continue.
Because the alternative to rediscovering the Enlightenment is a much better armed and much more fragmented Dark Age.
And very, very few sane people would ever want anything like that.
Thank you so much for watching and listening.
Please, if you value this, it's a lot of work to put together, a lot of technology to put together, very helpful stuff.
