Globalist Elites Fear You

Democracy Is Their Biggest Threat [The Daily Reckoning] June 30, 2023 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( Globalist Elites Fear You - Globalists talk a good game about democracy, but loathe it in reality… - Does the moral arc of the universe bend toward globalization?… - Climate change is a Trojan horse for globalism… [“Godfather Of AI” Reveals Stunning Prediction]( [Click here for more...]( He’s a 35-year AI veteran who has worked closely on AI technology for decades… - In 1988, the National Science Foundation funded him to build an AI chess program. - He’s written and published academic papers on AI. - And he’s used AI to trade stocks as early as 2001. [But today, he’s stepping forward with a critical prediction that he says every investor needs to hear.]( Whatever you do, I’m urging you to not invest a single dime into AI technology until you see this man’s warning. [Click Here For More Details]( Reno, Nevada [Jim Rickards] JIM RICKARDS Dear Reader, Globalist elites like to talk about democracy. But in reality, they don’t believe in democracy. When the U.K. voted for Brexit in June 2016, the globalists were stunned. They couldn’t believe it. They then did everything they could to delay and fight Brexit. Then when Donald Trump won the election as president in November 2016, the globalists were even more stunned. They went into complete denial and put their heads in the sand. They comforted themselves with the convenient myth that Russian interference lost them the election, not a popular rejection of their ideology. Yet it kept getting worse for globalists. Both China and Russia have become more nationalistic and completely turned their backs on globalism. The war in Ukraine has only intensified that trend. The pandemic only strengthened the trend away from globalism, and the ongoing supply chain issues we’ve been seeing expose globalism’s fragile underbelly. These chains may be efficient and economical, but when they break down, it has a rippling effect on the global economy. It’s like pulling on one strand on a carpet. The entire thing is affected. “Tariffs Are as American as Apple Pie” Globalists worship at the altar of free trade. But free trade is a myth. It doesn’t exist outside classrooms. France subsidizes agriculture. The U.S. subsidizes electric vehicles. China subsidizes a long list of national champions with government contracts, cheap loans and currency manipulation. Every major economy subsidizes one or more sectors using fiscal and monetary tools and tariffs and nontariff barriers to trade. America grew rich and powerful from 1787–1962, a period of 175 years, using tariffs, subsidies and other barriers to trade to nurture domestic industry and protect high-paying manufacturing jobs. In fact, tariffs are as American as apple pie. Beginning in 1962, the U.S. turned its back on a successful legacy of protecting its jobs and industry and embraced the free trade theory. This was done first through the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, or GATT, one of the original Bretton Woods institutions in addition to the World Bank and IMF. [Download My New Survival Guide Today!]( I’ve created a BRAND-NEW “2023 Crisis Survival Guide” that I’m making available to all of my Strategic Intelligence readers today. This short 54-page document has everything you need to know to protect yourself and your family in times of crisis. Things like what foods to stock up on now, staying safe during periods of rioting and looting and more. Inside I break down all of the coming threats you face and how to prepare… [Click Here To Download Your Copy Now]( Against the mercantilist system was a theory of free trade based on comparative advantage as advocated by British economist David Ricardo in the early 19th century. Ricardo’s theory said that trading nations are endowed with attributes that gave them a relative advantage in producing certain goods versus others. These attributes could consist of natural resources, climate, population, river systems, education, ports, financial capacity or any other factor of production. Nations should produce those goods as to which they have a natural advantage and trade with other nations for goods where the advantage was not so great. Countries should specialize in what they do best, and let others also specialize in what they do best. Then countries could simply trade the goods they make for the goods made by others. All sides would be better off because prices would be lower as a result of specialization in those goods where you have a natural advantage. Works in Theory, Not in Fact It’s a nice theory often summed up in the idea that Tom Brady should not mow his own lawn because it makes more sense to pay a landscaper while he practices football. For example, if the U.K. had an advantage in textile production and Portugal had an advantage in wine production, then the U.K. and Portugal should trade wool for wine. But if the theory of comparative advantage were true, Japan would still be exporting tuna fish instead of cars, computers, TVs, steel and much more. The problem with the theory of comparative advantage is that the factors of production are not permanent and they are not immobile. If labor moves from the countryside to the city in China, then suddenly China has a comparative advantage in cheap labor. If finance capital moves from New York banks to direct foreign investment in Chinese factories, then China has the comparative advantage in capital also. Before long, China has the advantage in labor and capital and is running huge trade surpluses with the U.S., putting Americans out of work and shutting down U.S. factories in the process. Worse yet, countries such as China can pull comparative advantage out of thin air with government subsidies. We’ve been living in a world where the U.S. has been a free trade sucker and everyone else breaks the rules. In a world where a few parties are free traders but most are mercantilists, the mercantilists win every time. They are like parasites sucking the free traders dry. Globalization at All Costs But to globalists, the moral arc of the universe bends in one direction, and that’s toward increasing globalization. Populism and protectionism are therefore moral evils that must be condemned. But globalists have slowly realized that the nationalist trend is not an anomaly but a powerful force that is reversing globalist policies that have been ascendant since 1989, or even since the end of World War II, when institutions like the IMF and World Bank were established to promote globalist goals. But right now, free trade is on the ropes, currency wars are rampant, there’s an actual war in Eastern Europe and geopolitical hotspots like Taiwan are becoming more dangerous. What happened to globalism? [New LIVE Demo Video STUNS Crypto Investors]( In this short 3:28 video… Crypto genius James Altucher reveals his most shocking crypto secret yet… A little-known secret that’s delivered over $1,170 in FREE crypto income per month. If you AREN’T using this affordable little device… You’re missing one of the best, easiest ways to earn real cash with cryptos. [Watch This Short Video Now]( The globalist-in-chief is Columbia University academic Jeffrey D. Sachs. He led the charge for “market” solutions in Russia in the 1990s, which backfired into a takeover by oligarchs and the rise of Putin. He also led the charge for “opening” China in the early 2000s, which led to the rise of Xi Jinping and the strongest form of Communism since the death of Mao Zedong. Is Sachs willing to admit any mistakes? No. Like most globalists who are too arrogant to question their own worldviews and assumptions, Sachs instead says the problem is democracy itself. Essentially, Sachs wants to abandon traditional voting in the U.S. and U.K. to create a system more favorable to globalists. Sure, you can let voters choose center-right candidate x or center-left candidate y, who might be 10% apart on many issues. Neither of them will really rock the boat and have no fundamental disagreement with globalism in general. Globalists Don’t Trust You As far as globalists are concerned, voters cannot be trusted to vote on fundamental issues like Brexit. They also can’t be trusted to vote against presidential candidates like Trump. Such decisions should be beyond democratic control, globalists believe. In fact, Time magazine ran an article gloating about how corporate and media elites essentially conspired to prevent Trump from winning the 2020 election. Media refusal to cover the Hunter Biden laptop scandal was just one example. Former intelligence officials joined in by claiming it bore all the trademarks of “Russian disinformation.” Of course, we all know the laptop was real. But they wouldn’t allow it to influence the election. Meanwhile, recent disclosures by Twitter revealed the extent to which the company worked with the federal government to censor viewpoints they didn’t like. The bottom line is, when elites don’t like the potential outcome, just change the rules. The Climate Change Trojan Horse Another issue that unites globalists is climate change. Globalists argue that climate change is too important to trust to voters in individual countries. Climate change is the perfect cover for globalism because combating it requires an internationally coordinated policy run by elites. Their real agenda is to define a “global problem” so they can advance “global solutions” such as world governance, world taxation and world rule by elites. It doesn’t matter that the actual science behind hysterical climate alarmism is extremely weak. Unfortunately, the media, corporations, governments and international organizations are run mostly by globalists. And many of them are working hard to silence dissent. We’re in a Brave New World. Regards, Jim Rickards for The Daily Reckoning [feedback@dailyreckoning.com.](mailto:feedback@dailyreckoning.com) P.S. Nobody’s talking about this — though they should be… There’s an [urgent banking threat that’s targeting your wealth.]( And it’s set to take place tomorrow — July 1. If you went to your local ATM to withdraw cash this week… You probably didn’t notice a strange notice posted above the slot that dispenses your money: [click here for more...]( [It’s a legal disclaimer that practically no one understands…]( And thanks to a development I see coming tomorrow… You could be in [BIG TROUBLE]( next time you go to withdraw your money. Of course, the President doesn’t mention anything about this. Neither have members of Congress. But you need to know what’s going on. [That’s why I strongly urge you to click here now to get all the details. <<]( Thank you for reading The Daily Reckoning! We greatly value your questions and comments. Please send all feedback to [feedback@dailyreckoning.com.](mailto:feedback@dailyreckoning.com) [Jim Rickards] [James G. Rickards]( is the editor of Strategic Intelligence. He is an American lawyer, economist, and investment banker with 35 years of experience working in capital markets on Wall Street. He is the author of The New York Times bestsellers Currency Wars and The Death of Money. [Paradigm]( ☰ ⊗ [ARCHIVE]( [ABOUT]( [Contact Us]( © 2023 Paradigm Press, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your The Daily Reckoning e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from The Daily Reckoning, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@dailyreckoning.com. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. The Daily Reckoning is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your The Daily Reckoning subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting The Daily Reckoning.](