Something strange is in the air.
The ideas of Alexander Hamilton were once recognized as synonymous with the 19th century American System of Political Economy.
It was this system which was recognized the world over as being founded upon national sovereignty, cooperation, and industrial growth with many leading economists such as Henry C. Carey noting that this system stood in total opposition to the British System of Free Trade, Speculation and empire. Carey wrote of this clash in his Harmony of Interests published in 1851:
“Two systems are before the world; the one looks to increasing the proportion of persons and of capital engaged in trade and transportation, and therefore to diminishing the proportion engaged in producing commodities with which to trade, with necessarily diminished return to the labour of all; while the other looks to increasing the proportion engaged in the work of production, and diminishing that engaged in trade and transportation, with increased return to all, giving to the labourer good wages, and to the owner of capital good profits… One looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other in increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization. One looks towards universal war; the other towards universal peace. One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.”
From a mechanical level, the system described by Carey wasn’t too complicated to understand.
Carey and his school understood that it were necessary to use the power of the nation state to play an important role in the management of the economy without breaking the social compact to ensure life, liberty and happiness for each citizen. The irreconcilable opposition between ‘top down’ and ‘bottom up’ forces of society as presumed a universal law of nature by Karl Marx would thus be resolved in Carey’s concept of ‘A harmony of interests’.
What it did
The tools to advance this harmony involved:
1) The use of national banking in all of its forms following Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution
2) The emission of productive credit as a tool for growing the economy
3) The use of protective tariffs and bounties (subsidies) where needed to grow desired high technological manufacturing/scientific sectors, and
4) the harmonization of public and private capital for the accomplishment of national works. This could take the form of national bonds tied to great projects (such as Lincoln’s 5-20 bonds or FDR’s War Bonds), or simply national banking procedures that ensures deposits are tied to loans that are tied in some way to the growth of the real economy via anti-inflationary [self-liquidating] loans.
The system took on various forms of expression in the years after Hamilton’s murder in 1804, including the great continental programs led by John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay in the 1820s, and was revived by Lincoln’s Greenback system and broader national banking program during the Civil War.
Despite several assassinations of pro-American System leaders after Lincoln (including James Garfield, William McKinley and Warren Harding), it emerged again through Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal which saw a renewed system of National Banking practices (via the Reconstruction Finance Corporation), protective tariffs, Federal corporations, and large scale public works.
How to Crush a Bankers’ Dictatorship: How the Great Reset of 1933 Was Thwarted by FDR
Erasing the American System from Memory
Yet by the end of World War II, the living memory of Alexander Hamilton and his entire school of political economy was largely erased.
Academic textbooks no longer featured Hamilton’s system, and when it was mentioned, Hamilton’s system was characterized deceitfully as a sub-section of the more general British system of mercantile capitalism.
After the death of Franklin Roosevelt, the only permissible theories which westerners were permitted to debate were found in the system advanced by Lord John Maynard Keynes (for liberals) or the Austrian School system of Friedrich von Hayek (for conservatives).
The Keynes Vs Von Hayek Debate: A False Dualism With Malthusian Characteristics
By 1971, Keynes’ sun had set with the collapse of the rigid Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system that had been established in 1945 following Keynesian principles.
With the death of Keynesianism, a new era of liberalization, privatization and speculation following Austrian School traditions took over with Reaganomics and Thatcherism leading the way.
Now that this system of radical monetarism has run its course generating the largest speculative time bomb in the history of mankind now breaking down at the seams, a new system will be introduced.
What will it look like? How will it work? After the collapse of the current monetary system, what new standards of value will be introduced to shape the behavior of the economy?
According to the signs now emerging, we can safely say that whatever it may be, this new system will likely wear the appearance of Alexander Hamilton’s system, as it uniquely creates a mechanism for industrial growth, command and control while incorporating private capital into a participatory role within the goals of that society.
A Delphic Hamiltonian Systems Emerge with Jake Sullivan
The first sign of the revival of Delphic perversion of Alexander Hamilton’s system took the form of Jake Sullivan’s open call for a Hamiltonian reset in a February 7, 2020 issue of Foreign Affairs titled ‘America Needs a New Economic Policy’.
This neo-Hamiltonian vision was later established as mainstream White House policy during his landmark speech at the Brookings Institution on April 27, 2023. In that address, he introduced a “New Washington Consensus” that updated Hamilton’s 1791 Report on Manufactures, arguing that public investment and trade protectionism are vital to safeguarding modern national security and economic independence
Finally in Julyn 29, 2026, Sullivan again upgraded his call for a Hamiltonian Reset in Foreign Affairs under the title How to Reindustrialize America: The Case for a Strategic Investment Fund.
In his essay, Sullivan states that America needs to revive a pro-industrial Hamiltonian program in order to fight China and warns of an immanent “second China shock” due to China’s capacity to produce, innovate and secure supply chains which he says threated the western world.
Sullivan wrote:
“At the same time China was building its industrial strength, the United States was allowing much of its productive base to migrate abroad. For a few decades, that shift appeared to carry few strategic costs. America remained the world’s leading center of research and invention even as manufacturing employment fell and supply chains stretched across continents. But the costs of separating innovation from production are now too great to ignore. As factories have moved offshore, the United States has lost much of its skilled workforce and the expertise to build at speed and scale. If it does not change course, the country could cede its technological edge, and, in time, its broader global leadership, to China.”
Sullivan called for restoring Hamilton’s system first unveiled in 1791 writing:
“Since its founding, the United States has treated finance as an instrument of sovereignty. In his 1791 Report on Manufactures to Congress, Hamilton made the case that economic independence was inseparable from political independence. The young republic, he argued, had to use public credit to nurture productive industry and national strength. Hamilton envisioned a pragmatic model of state-enabled capitalism, in which loans and bounties encouraged `infant manufactures,’ tariffs protected strategic sectors, and public institutions channeled capital toward long-term national aims. Whenever the United States has faced existential tests, its leaders have returned to Hamilton’s logic.”
Were this a straightforward policy outlook and call to action for the New Washington Consensus he first unveiled in 2020, then it would appear to be a breath of fresh air.
Hamilton certainly designed his system in accordance with the scientific needs of humanity to prosper and grow, as well as the moral demands for society to cherish and involve individual sovereign citizens into the process of building the nation’s powers of productivity.
This system literally built America and the world at large throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
It is not a little ironic that in January 2026, American Trade Representative Jamieson Greer quite literally delivered a presentation at Davos that could have flowed out of the mouth of Jake Sullivan.
Greer’s Sleight of Hand
In Greer’s presentation titled ‘From Hamilton to Today: Trade and U.S. Economic Strategy’, he not only demonstrated a functional knowledge of the American System of Hamilton, but rather accurately traced its evolution throughout 150 years of progress both in the USA and abroad. Greer went so far as to include a sketch of such American System followers as German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck and China’s first president Sun Yat-sen.
Many patriots in America familiar with the lost Hamiltonian traditions were overjoyed… but this joy accompanied a certain psycho-emotional lobotomization in many citizens who refused to acknowledge any systemic fallacies in the presentations put forth by either Jake Sullivan, or MAGA’s Jamieson Greer.
What fallacies might those be you ask?
For one, both Greer and Sullivan are of one mind that the driving purpose of this Hamiltonian system must be to defeat China (assuming cynically that China actually wants to destroy, subdue and dominate the United States and the west more broadly).
When one explores the origins of Hamilton’s system and its successful application in US history, it was always based upon the paradigm of mutual collaboration and prosperity of a community of sovereign nations. A true representative of Hamilton’s American system would follow the lead of Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt or John F. Kennedy by seeking cooperation with other nations on great projects that would elevate humanity’s ability to thrive and meet our basic physical and spiritual needs.
Instead, Greer actually called for the creation of international powers capable of enforcing mathematical rules that prohibit any nation from producing more than it consumes (ie: total equal trade balances for all) citing directly from his hero… John Maynard Keynes… whom he cites as the highest representative of the American System!
Don’t believe me? Simply listen to Greer’s own words when he says:
“John Maynard Keynes—the great British economist and the British representative to the Bretton Woods conference—had an idea for how this could be done. He argued that the international economic system needed to be organized around the principle of balance. Nations could pursue what Keynes called “national self-sufficiency” through different models of economic development, but a requirement of long-term balanced trade would protect everyone against so-called “beggar-thy-neighbor” tactics.”
Hamilton’s school expressly forbids the notion of mathematical equilibrium as a basis for deciding the amounts of production and consumption within or between nations. There are no intrinsic limits to human growth and prosperity within the true American system and as such attempting to impose a Keynesian logic onto it as Greer (and also as Sullivan) does is a fallacy that should not be ignored- even by MAGA forever patriots within Promethean Action.
Sullivan’s pedigree also should be held in mind when evaluating his otherwise good words.
Is his role as a Rhodes Scholar to be ignored?
Should the venue of Foreign Affairs (the official mouthpiece of the Council on Foreign Relations) which was used to announce his Hamiltonian Reset to be ignored as well?
Should Sullivan’s powerful role in Obama’s Administration crafting the Asia-Pivot Strategy that has brought about the greatest danger of WW3 in history meaningless?…
Is his role in handling Joe Biden as National Security Advisor from 2021-2025 also meaningless?
I don’t think so.
But this brings us to another expression of a perverse Hamiltonian revival in Europe… Romania specifically.
In this instance it saddens me to say it, but the man who nearly became president (and may become president more quickly than you realize it): Calin Georgescu.
Calin Georgescu: Romania’s Hamilton or Club of Rome Sleeper Agent?
Since the entry of Joe Biden in to the White House in 2020, Calin Georgescu went through one of the most dramatic re-brandings of a political figure in recent history.
For most of his career, Georgescu was a leading figure within the UN Sustainable Development agenda and earlier UN Environmental Programme, founded by Maurice Strong.
He was the head of the Office of the Environment of Romania in 1991, Secretary General of the Ministry of the Environment from 1997-1998 and was executive director of the National Center for Sustainable Development of Bucharest from 2000-2013. Following this role overseeing the transformation of the economy towards a post-globalization order premised around decarbonization (ie: depopulation), Green New Deals and global governance, Georgescu became the President of the European Research Center for the Club of Rome from 2013-2015.
Yet in 2020, just as Covid appeared onto the scene turning our lives upside down, he re-appeared onto the stage of politics as quite literally, a new man.
It was almost too perfect.
Modelling himself as the “Donald Trump of Romania”, Georgescu gained a vast following among conservatives who had become rightfully disgusted by the anti-Russian insanity, and loss of sovereignty to operations led by George Soros, the UN and NATO.
His rhetoric was a breath of fresh air for many conservatives and catered his messaging perfectly for a conspiratorially-minded audience distrustful of government lies, vaccines, nano-chips in sodas, Satanic pedophile rings, and discussed witnessing evil non-human species at the UN.
This new alt-right Georgescu satisfied the conservative zeitgeist perfectly, and by 2024, he nearly won the presidency coming out with a large majority in the first round of polls.
Then suddenly, Georgescu’s plans to become president were dashed by radical abuses of the law with the Constitutional Court of Romania cancelling his candidacy based on the supposed misuse of campaign funds. This incredible abuse of the judicial system and leftist media paralleled the same operation that had been launched against Donald Trump in his first presidency and during the Biden years.
So how does this story play into my cautionary tale about the fallacious revival of fake Hamiltonian dopplegangers? Amidst the Romanian elections, Georgescu spoke with Tucker Carlson extolling the virtues of Alexander Hamilton saying:
“And of course another point very, very, very important was my program [for] food, water and energy because I present to change the economic system of Romania. And this was based as everybody who knows about Hamilton ideology. I wish to make a Hamiltonian Romania in a sense to be totally independent, to provide a performance economy, that depends only on your natural resources, not by debt, you know? So we can be a Hamiltonian powerhouse in Eastern Europe site or also in Europe, just because we have to follow the best which we had in the world. And one of the best, which I recognize myself, is the founding father of United States, Alexander Hamilton.
“…And we have to change the system, exactly as I propose to change the economic system. Exactly as I said about Hamilton presence and ideology. We have to change all these things. Otherwise we remain just as slaves in our own country. We have rich natural resources. We have to consider that we have to [be] based on our natural resources, not to debt. Because what they offer to us, they offer technocracy and debt. And I propose to the Romanian people and to other countries, freedom and dignity.”
Like Jake Sullivan, Jamieson Greer, these remarks were refreshing and speak to a fundamental truth that has been kept hidden for decades. But is he honest, or playing a game within a real-life World Wrestling Federation theatrical performance?
As much as I would sincerely like to believe that Georgescu has gone through a road to Damascus conversion, his former relationship to the Club of Rome weighs heavily on my mind.
The Club of Rome vs the American System
For anyone who has studied the origins and immense power of the Club of Rome, from its earliest founding by the arch Malthusian duo of Aurelio Peccei and Sir Alexander King in 1968, to the Club’s role in shaping the cybernetic managerial system of controls imposed onto the world after the 1971 floating of the US dollar via the MIT Limits to Growth model, the fact that Calin was not only a member, but a leading president of this agency should cause red alarms in all thinking people.
In this writer’s analysis, the Club of Rome was among the most powerful agencies assigned to oversee the transformation of the industrial capitalist order into a speculative time bomb after 1971.
Its leadership also demonstrated a deep awareness of the American System of Political Economy and from the earliest writings of leading Club of Rome agents in the 1960s and 1970s, the American System figured carefully into their calculus.
Take the case of the former President of the Queen’s Privy Council of Canada, and co-founder of the Canadian Club of Rome… Senator Maurice Lamontagne.
It is likely that you have not even heard of Lamontagne, but this Oxford trained cyberneticist from Quebec had worked closely with Pierre Elliot Trudeau in the 1950s operation to de-Christianize Quebec and rose quickly in influence working alongside Rhodes Scholars such as Marc Lalonde, and Paul-Guerin Lajoie to undermine every attempt Canada’s pro-development Prime Minister John Diefenbaker made for creating a genuine Hamiltonian system of national banking and northern development leading to the bewildered Prime Minister’s ultimate downfall via a soft coup in 1963.
From 1970-1973, Lamontagne was a leading figure in Canada’s Club of Rome alongside Maurice Strong, and in this period oversaw the powerful Senate Committee on Science Policy which forever transformed Canada’s model of research and development, university relations to industry and scientific value structure. Lamontagne was explicit that the “old values” were based upon the belief in economic growth, freedom and abundance, while the new values that would shape policy planning in science and ‘acceptable’ technologies would be driven by “sustainable” zero growth activities.
In his Senate Report on Science Policy published in 1973, Lamontagne explicitly went to war with the American system:
“During the early part of the 19th century, Great Britain and to a lesser extent France were fast developing industrial technology and finding ways of fruitfully exploiting science. Later on the United States moved from technical backwardness to such a level that it could begin exporting to the “advanced” European countries manufacturing techniques and machine tools so different that the whole approach became known as the “American System”. An English productivity team that visited the United States in 1853 to study this ‘system’ concluded that “men served God in America, in all seriousness and sincerity, through striving for economic efficiency.”
Lamontagne’s allegiance to the forces opposing the American System, can be clearly seen when Lamontagne let his true intention shine forth when he wrote in vol. 2 of his 3 volume report:
“It is becoming apparent, however, that nature is not as passive as we thought, that it has its own laws and can revenge itself, once its own equilibrium has been disrupted… Nature imposes definite constraints on technology itself and if man persists in ignoring them the net effect of his action in the long run can be to reduce rather than to increase nature’ potential as a provider of resources and habitable space… But then, an obvious question arises: How can we stop man’s creativeness?”
Thus, Lamontagne has established that it is man’s creativity itself that must be stopped if the supposed “fixed” equilibrium of nature will remain unchanged by technology! This is the root morality of the current global environmentalist religion which Lamontagne was at the forefront of unleashing. Since Lamontagne admits that his “ideal” solution of destroying man’s creative impulse is itself an impossibility, like the Zeus of Aeschylus’s Prometheus Bound, he never the less finds a resolution to this problem by introducing a perverse alternative when he wrote:
“How can we proclaim a moratorium on technology? It is impossible to destroy existing knowledge; impossible to paralyze man’s inborn desire to learn, to invent and to innovate… In the final analysis we find that technology is merely a tool created by man in pursuit of his infinite aspirations and is not the significant element invading the natural environment. It is material growth itself that is the source of conflict between man and nature”
Thus creativity and its fruits of technological progress are acceptable only IF they reduce the assumed conflict between man and nature posited by Lamontagne! “Bad” technology in Lamontagne’s formulation, has the effect of increasing humanity’s powers of productivity and thus increase the entropy in his fixed ecosystem-based economy. If, on the other hand, we promote technologies of a low energy flux density form, such as windmills, solar panels and biodiesel, which lead to the reduction of man’s powers to exist, then technology can be defined as a “good” thing.
The Case of Canada’s Fake National Policy
Perhaps my sensitivity to the perverse doppelgangers of Alexander Hamilton are so strong because I have spent so much time studying the fraud of Canada from its earliest years as a deep state masquerading as a nation state.
The British Empire’s ability to keep Canada in the clutches of the Empire and thus a useful weapon to undermine the United States over the past 150 years had much to do with the application of an evil version of Hamiltonian economics.
The Imperial Myth of Canada’s National Policy… From Sir John A MacDonald to Mark Carney
That’s right. Believe it or not, but as soon as Canada was brought into a London-directed Confederation in 1867, the only way this Dominion was kept from slipping into the influence of the USA was the Hamiltonian-inspired 1875-1885 National Policy of Sir John A. MacDonald which in many respects reflected the mechanisms of the American System of Hamilton and Lincoln.
Protective tariffs were used by MacDonald, as was the deployment of productive credit for the building of industrial and rail projects stretching across the continent. The only problem was the dishonest INTENTION.
The protective tariffs were directed against the USA instead of the power across the ocean that had systematically destroyed Canada’s efforts to develop native manufacturing for decades.
The industrial growth and rail projects were built not for the love of the people or expanding civilization, but rather were geopolitically expedient to keep Canada locked into the clutches of the British Empire. As Sir John A MacDonald said:
“I would be quite willing, personally to leave the whole country a wilderness for the next half century, but I fear if Englishmen do not go there the Yankees will.”
Canada’s Club of Rome National Policy 2.0
The long-planned efforts of the Club of Rome’s Cybernetics depopulation agenda have failed to achieve the success anticipated by its devotees.
Instead of a general collapse and embrace of a global Green New Deal driven by genocidal acts of reducing carbon footprints (i.e.: destroying the means of productivity and thus supporting human life), major civilizational forces of the world have decided to exit the collapsing western system and establish a new paradigm founded on genuine Hamiltonian principles of long term thinking, mega projects and a conjunction of private citizens’ interests with the general welfare.
Thus with China’s Belt and Road Initiative announced in 2013, the Club of Rome’s plans have had to increasingly go through severe modification.
Mark Carney’s role as Bank of Canada governor from 2008-2013, followed by head of the Bank of International Settlements’ Financial Stability Board from 2012-2016 and the Governorship of the Bank of England from 2013-2020 has positioned this arch technocrat into a strategic position paralleling the role played by Sir John A. Macdonald 150 years earlier.
The name of Alexander Hamilton does not invoke the same psychological response in Canadians as it does for Americans, so Carney has not used Hamilton’s name in generating his program for Canada’s economy. However upon a close evaluation of the specific mechanisms created by Carney over the years, one can again see the evidence of a studious understanding of the basic mechanisms of the American System of Political Economy.
Canadian Green Bonds were created in 2014 based upon a revived notion of Victory Bonds last seen in World War II and which operated under a pro-industrial paradigm that placed value not on markets, but on long term- project specific thinking needed to increase productive powers of labor. The only difference was that Canada’s Green Bond model (which vastly expanded from 2022-present) was driven by assigning “value” and “incentives” to investments which ultimately reduce the productive powers of labor in the name of ‘decarbonization’.
The idea of WW2 Victory Bonds was simple: Get the population engaged in the goal of great mission… in this case, a good one: defeating fascism. This goal required the participation of citizens who could be incentivized to invest in the greater good while harmonizing with the national interests. Not a bad thing.
In the case of Canada’s first iteration of the Victory Bonds 2.0 proposal in 2013 (the same year as the Belt and Road Initiative), the concept was driven less by war with Russia or China and more with the war on Global Warming.
In July of this year, Carney even unveiled a Canada-led NATO Defence, Security and Resilience Bank in order to generate much-needed long term credit for the military industrial complex of NATO member countries who fear a loss of US engagement in the coming months. Perhaps this shouldn’t be such a concern as the USA still contributes 3.2% of its GDP on defense while sustaining 15% of NATO’s operating costs directly.
And since its founding in 2016, the Canadian Infrastructure Development Bank has generated tens of billions of dollars of capital towards a wide array of large-scale infrastructure investments (mostly of the green variety which no sane private investor would select on their own merit mind you). And since the decision has been made to sideline the ‘war on global warming’ with Carney’s Net-Zero Banking Alliance shut down in October 2025, a new set of priorities has been created for the long-awaited Hamiltonian Reset.[2]
Admittedly, the obsessive need to destroy Russia and China (or at least asymmetrically weaken their many bonds) has forced the Club of Rome’s de-carbonization agenda onto the back burner with a new priority on industrial growth, except with a military goal orientation focused primarily on the ultimate destruction of NATO’s enemies.
The new Canadian-led NATO Investment bank also showcases this concept of productive credit fusing public and private interests into large scale projects. It also demonstrates that pre-Bretton Woods systems have been studied and marketed by the highest echelons of power managers of the trans Atlantic empire.
As it became increasingly clear that neither Russia, China, Iran or other greater powers wished to commit seppuku on an altar of climate models, choosing instead to adopt pro-industrial growth strategies, the earlier priority placed on transitioning the world to a post-industrial green economy has been placed on the back burner.
Like Sir John A. Macdonald and the rogue gallery of founding fathers of Confederation in 1867, the desire to keep Canada a depopulated resource extractive colony has been temporarily superseded by a higher need to mimic and thus destroy the only genuine practitioners of Alexander Hamilton’s system of political economy today… which happens to be the Peoples’ Republic of China.
Hamiltonianism… with Chinese Characteristics
This is the greatest irony hovering over the entire discussion of various calls for ‘Hamiltonian resets’ among power players of the west.
Each and every case study mentioned above is directed AGAINST China and the broader system of cooperation and development unleashed by China’s ability to transform her cheap labor model into a pioneering industrial and scientific powerhouse over the space of only a few decades.
This transformation was not magic, nor was it given to the Chinese by western oligarchs. It was the effect of a vast all consuming fight which very few westerners understand. China’s major national banks, its ability to keep national controls over the private sector (which has still been encouraged to thrive in ways not seen in decades in the western world), and its blend of protectionism, public and private credit generation, and international vision represents the Hamiltonian system more perfectly than anything seen in the castrated and co-opted west.
This fact was noted by the eminent economist and political analyst Glenn Diesen in a recent interview with Executive Intelligence Review on May 23, 2025 which I will end by quoting from at length here and now:
“I began a bit over a decade ago to write on how I saw essentially an American System developing in China, because they kind of followed the same three pillars. They also went for technological and industrial sovereignty—that is, developing their own industrial base. They also, with the Belt and Road Initiative, went with the physical connectivity. They also had a financial component where they developed their own national banks, their own payment systems, and began to diversify the currencies in which they trade; also using the national currency more.
But again, the ideas of Alexander Hamilton, as we know, were carried on by Friedrich List, and from him spread across Europe. Indeed, you mentioned the Russians. They largely built their ideas on what Witte got from Friedrich List, which were promoted in Germany. But he distinguished between the imperial and the more sovereignty-based, the national—because he argued initially that the British were pushing this imperial system of free trade. He saw that Hamilton’s American System was one based on national dignity, autonomy, and was anti-imperial. But what’s interesting is that towards the end of his life, he did recognize that the United States was taking on some of the characteristics which the British had previously dominated.
So, what I linked to, what the final Eurasian order is, is the embrace of this more American System. Again, you see this also now with the Russians, by the way, because they are also pushing for technological and industrial sovereignty within the digital technologies. And in other areas of the physical economy they are also pushing this second pillar, which is the transportation corridor. It’s not just tying the Russian land territory together, but also connecting Russia with the wider Eurasian continent.
Last of course is the financial, so there are the various uses of banks, currencies, payment systems to avoid all the successive dependencies on American and British banks.
So, you do see a lot of similar development taking place. It’s not built around the formation of another empire or hegemon. Instead, you see these economic instruments being used to strengthen national sovereignty. So, the objective is cooperation between sovereign equals instead of creating a very strong hierarchy of dominance. I think this is laying the foundation of this new Eurasian model. Often, we look at it with suspicion, especially with the Chinese. We talk about managed capitalism, dangerous neo-mercantilism; but if you look deeply at what the Chinese are doing, it’s very similar to the industrial capitalism of the Americans throughout the 19th Century when they recognized some basic facts.
If you want a competitive economy, what you need to do is prevent the excessive rise of rent-seekers. So, you tax the rent-seekers who extract wealth from the production process without contributing, and you use this money to build infrastructure, education, and other things which elevate the standard of living for the country but also increase economic competitiveness overall for the country. So, there is a lot there which the Chinese are doing now which is working. It’s working because it also worked for the Americans. I would like to see more of this Hamiltonian economics spreading not just in Asia, but we need it in Europe as well, and also in North America. We reached a bit of a dead end, and we’re not sure what to do with this financialized economy.
Again, the United States has some serious problems because it cannot compete with China. But if we go back to the basics, I think that would be a good start.”
[1][1] Maurice Lamontagne, Report of the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy, vol. 1, p.22
[2] This shift in priorities was signaled by Bill Gates’ proclaimation that ‘global warming may not be as bad as we thought’
Bio: I am the editor-in-chief of The Canadian Patriot Review, and Director of the Rising Tide Foundation. I’ve written the four volume Untold History of Canada series, four volume Clash of the Two Americas series, the Revenge of the Mystery Cult Trilogy and Science Unshackled: Restoring Causality to a World in Chaos. I am also co-host of the weekly Breaking History on Badlands Media and host of Pluralia Dialogos (which airs every second Sunday at 11am ET here).
A message to all subscribers:
Many people know that I am extremely devoted to total top down solutions to humanity’s problems. While I believe that citizen engagement and the fight to impose policies that break the chains of oligarchism are extremely important, I am not ignorant to the dangers which we all face moving into the coming storm. As such having back up plans to protect ourselves and our loved ones is smart. Mikkel Thorup, founder of Expat Money, is someone who has spent many years helping people make the transition to more stable terrain abroad. If you’d like to check out his program, take part in his workshops, consultations, or just download his new free special report ‘Plan-B: Residencies & Instant Citizenships’, then click this link: expatmoney.com/matt
