10-second video reveals why “all hell will break loose on August 10” – 「August 01」

Former Hedge Fund Manager: “On August 10th, All Hell Will Break Loose…” A Wall Street legend who made $95 million during the 2008 financial crisis says, “All hell is about to break loose” again. [Income Investing Insider]( A note from the Editor: At Income Investing Insider, we keep an eye out for favorable circumstances we believe will interest our readers. The following is one such message from one of our colleagues I think you’ll appreciate. Modernization theory is used to explain the process of modernization within societies. The "classical" theories of modernization of the 1950s and 1960s drew on sociological analyses of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and a partial reading of Max Weber, and were strongly influenced by the writings of Harvard sociologist Talcott Parsons.[1] Modernization theory was a dominant paradigm in the social sciences in the 1950s and 1960s, then went into a deep eclipse. It made a comeback after 1991, when Francis Fukuyama wrote about the end of the Cold War as confirmation on modernization theory and more generally of universal history.[2] But the theory remains a controversial model.[3] Modernization refers to a model of a progressive transition from a "pre-modern" or "traditional" to a "modern" society. Modernization theory suggests that traditional societies will develop as they adopt more modern practices. Proponents of modernization theory claim that modern states are wealthier and more powerful and that their citizens are freer to enjoy a higher standard of living.[citation needed] Developments such as new data technology and the need to update traditional methods in transport, communication and production make modernization necessary or at least preferable to the status quo. That view makes critique difficult since it implies that such developments control the limits of human interaction, not vice versa. And yet, seemingly paradoxically, it also implies that human agency controls the speed and severity of modernization. Supposedly, instead of being dominated by tradition, societies undergoing the process of modernization typically arrive at forms of governance dictated by abstract principles. Traditional religious beliefs and cultural traits, according to the theory, usually become less important as modernization takes hold.[4] The theory looks at the internal factors of a country while assuming that with assistance, "traditional" countries can be brought to development in the same manner more developed countries have been.[5] Modernization theory both attempts to identify the social variables that contribute to social progress and development of societies and seeks to explain the process of social evolution. Authors such as Daniel Lerner explicitly equated modernization with Westernization.[6] Today, the concept of modernization is understood in three different meanings: 1) as the internal development of Western Europe and North America relating to the European New Era; 2) as a process by which countries that do not belong to the first group of countries, aim to catch up with them; 3) as processes of evolutionary development of the most modernized societies (Western Europe and North America), i.e. modernization as a permanent process, carried out through reform and innovation, which today means a transition to a postindustrial society.[7] Historians link modernization to the processes of urbanization and industrialization and the spread of education. As Kendall (2007) notes, "Urbanization accompanied modernization and the rapid process of industrialization."[8] In sociological critical theory, modernization is linked to an overarching process of rationalisation. When modernization increases within a society, the individual becomes increasingly important, eventually replacing the family or community as the fundamental unit of society. It is also a subject taught in traditional Advanced Placement World History classes. Modernization theory is subject to criticism originating among socialist and free-market ideologies, world-systems theorists, globalization theorists and dependency theorists among others. Modernization theory stresses not only the process of change but also the responses to that change. It also looks at internal dynamics while referring to social and cultural structures and the adaptation of new technologies. Dear Reader Former Hedge Fund Manager: “On August 10th, All Hell Will Break Loose…” A Wall Street legend who made $95 million during the 2008 financial crisis says, “All hell is about to break loose” again. And he’s not alone. Billionaires Larry Fink, Warren Buffett, and Jamie Dimon are warning of “extreme consequences” to come. To see why everyone is panicking, [click here and watch the first 10 seconds of this video.]( Regards, Lauren Wingfield Managing Editor, The Opportunistic Trader The rise and fall of modernization theory[edit] The modernization theory of the 1950s and 1960 drew on classical evolutionary theory and a Parsonian reading of Weber's ideas about a transition from traditional to modern society. Parsons had translated Weber's works into English in the 1930s and provided his own interpretation.[9][10][11] After 1945 the Parsonian version became widely used in sociology and other social sciences. Some of the thinkers associated with modernization theory are Marion J. Levy Jr., Gabriel Almond, Seymour Martin Lipset, Walt Rostow, Daniel Lerner, Lucian Pye, David Apter, Alex Inkeles, Cyril Edwin Black, Bert F. Hoselitz, Myron Weiner, and Karl Deutsch.[12] By the late 1960s opposition to modernization theory developed because the theory was too general and did not fit all societies in quite the same way.[13] Yet, with the end of the Cold War, a few attempts to revive modernization theory were carried out. Francis Fukuyama argued for the use of modernization theory as universal history.[2] A more academic effort to revise modernization theory was that of Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel in Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy (2005).[14] Inglehart and Welzel amended the 1960s version of modernization theory in significant ways. Counter to Lipset, who associated industrial growth with democratization,[15] Inglehart and Welzel did not see an association between industrialization and democratization. Rather, they held that only at a latter stage in the process of economic modernization, which various authors have characterized as post-industrial, did values conducive to democratization - which Inglehart and Welzel call "self-expression values" - emerge.[14] Nonetheless, these efforts to revive modernization theory were criticized by many (see the section on "Criticisms and alternatives" below), and the theory remained a controversial one.[16] Modernization and democracy[edit] The relationship between modernization and democracy or democratization is one of the most researched studies in comparative politics. There are many studies show that modernization has contributed to democracy in some countries. For example, Seymour Martin Lipset argued that modernization can turn into democracy."[17] There is academic debate over the drivers of democracy because there are theories that support economic growth as both a cause and effect of the institution of democracy. "Lipset's observation that democracy is related to economic development, first advanced in 1959, has generated the largest body of research on any topic in comparative politics,"[18] Anderson explains the idea of an elongated diamond in order to describe the concentration of power in the hands of a few at the top during an authoritarian leadership.[19] He develops this by giving an understanding of the shift in power from the elite class to the middle class that occurs when modernization is incorporated. Socioeconomic modernization allows for a democracy to further develop and influences the success of a democracy. Concluded from this, is the idea that as socioeconomic levels are leveled, democracy levels would further increase.[20] Larry Diamond and Juan Linz, who worked with Lipset in the book, Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America, argue that economic performance affects the development of democracy in at least three ways. First, they argue that economic growth is more important for democracy than given levels of socioeconomic development. Second, socioeconomic development generates social changes that can potentially facilitate democratization. Third, socioeconomic development promotes other changes, like organization of the middle class, which is conducive to democracy.[21] As Seymour Martin Lipset put it, "All the various aspects of economic development—industrialization, urbanization, wealth and education—are so closely interrelated as to form one major factor which has the political correlate of democracy".[22] The argument also appears in Walt W. Rostow, Politics and the Stages of Growth (1971); A. F. K. Organski, The Stages of Political Development (1965); and David Apter, The Politics of Modernization (1965). In the 1960s, some critics argued that the link between modernization and democracy was based too much on the example of European history and neglected the Third World.[23] One historical problem with that argument has always been Germany whose economic modernization in the 19th century came long before the democratization after 1918. Berman, however, concludes that a process of democratization was underway in Imperial Germany, for "during these years Germans developed many of the habits and mores that are now thought by political scientists to augur healthy political development".[24] One contemporary problem for modernization theory is the argument of whether modernization implies more human rights for citizens or not.[25] We will observe China as an example. China has one of the most rapidly growing economies in the world. The modernization theory implies that this should correlate to democratic growth in some regards, especially in relation to the liberalization of the middle and lower classes. However, active human rights abuses and constant oppression of Chinese citizens by the government seem to contradict the theory strongly. Interestingly enough, the irony is that increasing restrictions on Chinese citizens are a result of modernization theory. In the 1990s, the Chinese government wanted to reform the legal system and emphasize governing the country by law. This led to a legal awakening for citizens as they were becoming more educated on the law, yet more understanding of their inequality in relation to the government. Looking down the line in the 2000s, Chinese citizens saw even more opportunities to liberalize and were able to be a part of urbanization and could access higher levels of education. This in turn resulted in the attitudes of the lower and middle classes changing to more liberal ideas, which went against the CCP. Over time, this has led to their active participation in civil society activities and similar adjacent political groups in order to make their voices heard. Consequently, the Chinese government represses Chinese citizens at a more aggressive rate, all due to modernization theory.[26] [--------------] [Income Investing Insider]( We’re reaching out to you because you showed an interest in the Financial industry by subscribing to our email list through one of our sign-up forms. [Privacy Policy]( | [Terms & Conditions]( Email sent by Finance and Investing Traffic, LLC, owner and operator of Income Investing Insider Do you have any questions or concerns? Our support team is always here to help you out! Feel free to [connect with us](mailto:support@incomeinvestinginsider.com) anytime you need assistance. If you have any security-related questions, please don’t hesitate to email us at abuse@incomeinvestinginsider.com. Make sure you’re always in the know about the latest updates and trends in finance and investing by [adding us to your email whitelist](. All rights reserved. Copyright © 2023 by Income Investing Insider[.]( 221 W 9th St # Wilmington, DE 19801 [Unsubscribe]( [Income Investing Insider](