Comments by "Ralph Bernhard" (@ralphbernhard1757) on "David Pakman Show"
channel.
-
11
-
7
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The people of the Americas (most of whom are Christians), including the USA, have been divided and ruled over by outsiders for centuries.
Because it is easier to divide people based on personal differences, than it is to unite them, based on what they have in common.
Strategically ambiguous rulers make use of this, for own advantages. In the era of European Imperialism, first Spain and Portugal entered the Americas, employing the divide and rule technique of top-down power, then after 1900 as European colonial powers' influence decreased, the role of divider was simply taken over by Washington DC (the entire world was the playground after around 1900).
Today, it is the globalists who employ imperialist tools to play divide and rule games on their neighbors.
Now the intention is simply to avoid unity in the Americas, in order to rule over the dissent which is classical divide and rule.
Today, their leaders are too weak to unite.
Endless wars on anything and everything from "drugs" to "terror", constant dissent.
Insert levers of lies, mistrust...
Create favorites: favoritism...
Point the finger, everywhere else...
Divide and Rule.
Oldest trick in the book...
In February 1948, George F. Kennan's Policy Planning Staff said: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity." [end of]
And that is what they did.
America's friends and self-proclaimed default rivals in Europe are still being burnt to ensure this disparity continues.
Set up European and Eurasian nations (including the MENA region) against each other.
It is how divide and rule is implemented.
The imperialist playbook of Great Britain and the USA for more than 100 years. Read Halford Mackinder (Pivot of History, 1904) and Zbigniew Brzezinski (Grand Chessboard, 1997) regarding Eurasia. Who wields the POWER? Who has had (in all historical cases in the ME/Levant) the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE of being able to reach all the other little buck catchers (tools, and other Roman-era style instruments of POWER), but could not be reached itself, because of a geographical-, technological-, organizational-, military-, strategic-, political advantage at any given point of a historical timeline?
War is a great "divider." It goes straight through the heads of millions and billions of people from the very top tiers, right down to the individual level. War divides alignments and alliances, goes straight through organizations, divides political parties, tears through peace movements and other families of humanity, and finally at the very bottom tier, goes straight through individual hearts and minds as individuals struggle with themselves.
"Most of the great problems we face are caused by politicians creating solutions to problems they created in the first place." - Walter E. Williams
That is what empires have always done.
Create the default rival/enemy.
It is usually the power most likely to succeed which is determined as the default rival/enemy.
Notice how, as soon as a rival starts mass-producing products high up in the value chain of capitalism, and starts vying for markets, and becomes successful, it immediately becomes the systemic rival, and is then geopolitically encircled by the greater empire. It happened around 1900, as Germany started building high-value products, and it happened around 2000, as China started moving away from building cheap toys and labor intensive kitchen appliances...
The games start on the home turf. The first victims are their own people.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Wesley Wright I gladly, and voluntarily pay more for my food, since I can afford it. It's called the 'fair trade' principle, and the food sold like this guarantees that the higher price I pay for the food I buy actually reaches the farmer or farm workers, and doesn't end up making a few traders and big land owners rich at the expense of others.
However, on the other hand I also realize that not everybody can afford to do this. We don't have kids, and our house is paid, so we don't pay rent.
Therefore I'm not preaching from a privileged position.
I realize there is a need for cheap fresh healthy, and locally produced food, and that one way to achieve this is by low wages.
I'm willing to compromise on some of my principles, as long as a certain measure of humanity (for example free health care and education) is made available to these poor, paid for by the taxes of people like me, who can also afford it.
I'm not being hypocritical at all.
I gladly pay my taxes, so that indirectly others who contribute to our society benefit, and give something back (for example, by making fresh fruit more affordable).
I'm not rich.
In fact, I earn below average wages. I'm just in the lucky position of having paid off my debts, and can now give something back to the society in which I live.
What's wrong with that?
1
-
Wesley Wright First we have to clarify a misunderstanding.
I'm not 'for illegal immigration'. I think we are basically on the same position.
I'm for legalizing illegal immigrants who live in the US today, and making it easier for them to achieve legal status.
Immigration is actually dropping.
The idea that 'more and more are pouring in' is actually incorrect. The figure has actually dropped since the peak around five years ago, and has now stabilized at around 11 million ( down from 12 million at the peak).
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/
My position is that all western nations should make legal immigration easier, and integrate new arrivals asap, so that they can start paying for their own health insurance, education for their kids, etc., and not rely on the government or NGOs.
The first step is to make it easier to become legal.
Of course, anybody guilty of breaking any serious laws, should never gain legal status, but that should be a case by case decision.
The best way to achieve this would be that if an illegal alien can provide 3 references of good character by an accepted member of society (say, a church or charity organisation), has a job which can support him/herself, then he/she should be granted a green card.
Why complicate matters, and make it so expensive, by trying to deport them or otherwise force them out? Bear in mind that any effort to 'send them back' (11 million people,most of them working somewhere), would have repercussions for all of us, or which could indirectly cost you too (for example food prices going up).
1
-
Wesley Wright I think we can generally agree on many points.
What I notice though is that some of the points you make, are based on misconceptions.
For example you state that you think that if 'most of the illegals leave, then that would automatically mean that Americans would find jobs'.
That is not correct, since many Americans who are unemployed, would never do the kind of work some of these immigrants are doing.
A 55-year old unemployed banker, for example, would never go back to picking oranges in California.
http://www.tolerance.org/immigration-myths
Of course, western nations can NEVER take up every single poor person in the world.
That is why I'm doing my tiny little bit in making life more livable in the places they come from.
Even if every American who can somehow afford it, use the fair trade system to buy coffee, sugar, and other typical '3-rd world' imports, life could be much better in these places (for example Central America), and people won't want to leave.
I feel good when I drink my fair trade coffee, put in fair trade sugar, and add locally produced milk from a nearby dairy farmer.
It costs me a few cents per cup more, but I know that pays for medical aid and education in Nicaragua, Brasil, India or Cambodia.
As for the best course of action for those already here, we might have to agree to disagree :-)
I don't think their impact is that great, that the richest nations on earth cannot bear the burden (please also read the article about typical misconceptions about 'freebies' for example).
Most of the misconceptions are not even true, so I think legalizing illegals already here, while at the same time making future illegal immigration less attractive is the long-term plan with the most chances of success.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The people of the Greater Middle East, including the Levant (most of whom are Semites, and the followers of Abrahamic religions) have been divided and ruled over by outsiders for centuries.
Because it is easier to divide people based on personal differences, than it is to unite them, based on what they have in common.
Strategically ambiguous outsiders make use of this, for own advantages. In the era of empires, first Rome/Constantinople, then during WW1 the seat of POWER playing these games changed to London/Paris (Sykes-Picot/Balfour Declaration/WW1), then after the 1950's as European colonialism's power decreased, starting around the time a bark by Washington DC in 1956 (Suez Crisis/War) showed who the new boss was, the role of divider was simply taken over by Washington DC (the entire ME was the playground during the Cold War). Now the intention is simply to avoid unity in the ME, in order to rule over the dissent which is classical divide-and-rule. Today, their leaders are ALL tools. Draw lines on the map without asking any of those affected. Exploit and foster endless wars, meddle for constant dissent.
Divide-and-rule connects the dots on the timeline of history.
Who has had (in all historical cases in the ME/Levant) the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE of distance from the events resulting out of the own meddling and political activities, being able to reach all the other regions, but could not be reached itself as hegemony, at any given point of a historical timeline?
Pax Romana, Rome. Pax Britannica, London. Pax Americana, Washington DC. All they ever wanted was pax, because they said so, but who picks up the pieces of great wealth and the systemic gains when all the others can be avoided from uniting?
Different Empires. Different era. Same games...
-------------------------------------
The people of the Africa have been divided and ruled over by outsiders for centuries. Tribalism makes it easy to divide people, then keep them poor under the "kind foot" of exploitation. In the era of empires, first Rome/Constantinople in North Africa, then during the era of Western imperialism the seat of POWER playing these games changed to the USA/Europe, then after the 1950's as European colonialism's power decreased, Africa was the playground during the Cold War. Once the dividers had reached peak power for themselves, by simply drawing lines on the map without asking any of those affected (Congo Conference/1884) the own systems of gain could siphon off wealth like a giant vacuum cleaner. The intention was simply to avoid unity in Africa, in order to rule over the dissent which is classical divide-and-rule. During the Cold War, Moscow took on the role of arming the resistance to the colonial dividers.
Today, all African dissenters, including some of Africa's own greedy corrupt leaders, are ALL tools. Endless wars, constant dissent.
Give the weak mind money, and they will dance for the outside dividers...
Divide-and-rule.
Oldest trick in the book...
Different people and systems. Different places on the map. Same games.
--------------------------------------
The people of the Americas (most of whom are Christians), including the USA, have been divided and ruled over by outsiders for centuries. Because it is easier to divide people based on personal differences, than it is to unite them, based on what they have in common. In the beginning stages of era of European Imperialism, first Spain and Portugal entered the Americas, employing the divide-and-rule technique of top-down power on the local systems (Aztecs/Incas), then after 1900 as European colonial powers' influence decreased, the role of divider was simply taken over by Washington DC. As the own power increased incrementally, the entire world became the playground after around 1900.
Today, it is the globalists who employ imperialist tools to play divide-and-rule games on their neighbours.
Forget nukes. The divide-and-control/rule/conquer strategy is the most powerful force on the planet, because it can be employed equally in times of peace to CONTROL, in times of crises to RULE, and in times of war to CONQUER.
Ever since the two-faced snake slithered down that tree of unity (fable), speaking out of both sides of the mouth (lies, deceit), the wisest human beings have fruitlessly warned, and the easily divisable have continuously been warned against divisions within a peaceful status quo. When you bow to the division caused by deception, you will lose the good life..."and much that once was, is lost; for none now live who remember it." Such divisions create GAIN for OUTSIDERS (Eden as a system divided by lies and deceit).
Now the intention is simply to avoid unity in the Americas, in order to rule over the dissent which is classical divide-and-rule.
Endless wars on anything and everything from "drugs" to "terror" (sic.), constant dissent with everything's a war war war...
Insert levers of lies, mistrust. The two-party-duopoly is two cheeks of the same butt which set out to create favourites: Favouritism, by granting access to the own POWER/WEALTH, to those who volunteer to act as proxies and extensions for the own power projection. The small picture lives of domestic political chaos, of the big picture reality of international insanity.
Point the systemic (MSM) finger, everywhere else, by use of the own paid stooges of power by presenting their deep state-orchestrated three-letter-agency astroturfed violence on multiple tiers as being the reactions of "the poor oppressed people, who need our help for freedom and democracy" (sic.). Liars, deceivers, creators of the BLACK LEGEND for the "other side".
In February 1948, George F. Kennan's Policy Planning Staff said: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity."
Kennan: A prototype GLOBALIST. And that is what they did to increase their own wealth. Set up people against each other, then siphon off the wealth of entire regions of the planet.
And that is what you are fighting for. That is what the hegemon has always done, pretending to be the "good pax", but playing "good cop/bad cop" with the world, from a position of power.
In the past, the "good cops" were the INTERNATIONALISTS, and the "bad cops" were the IMPERIALISTS. In the present that has morphed into the "good cops" being the GLOBALISTS/NEOLIBS, and the "bad cops" being the NEOCONS.
Name-branding and doublespeak for the slumberland plebs, enchanted by their "bread-and-circuses"-existences.
America's friends and self-proclaimed default rivals in Eurasia are still being burnt to ensure this disparity continues, with a (quote) "pattern of relationships" which are beneficial to the own rule. Set up European and Eurasian nations (including the Middle East/North Africa) against each other. It is how divide-and-rule is implemented. The imperialist playbook of Great Britain and the USA for more than 100 years. Read Halford Mackinder (Pivot of History, 1904) and Zbigniew Brzezinski (Grand Chessboard, 1997) regarding Eurasia for the template. Read Smedley-Butler/War is a Racket for the modus operandi. Some say Europe is a divine goddess. I say, it is a humble apple tree, from an allegory as old as modern civilizations...
Divide and Rule.
Oldest trick in the book...
Four corners of the globe. Different cultures and religions. Same games.
THE LINK OF THE WORLD.
---------------------------------------
The entire system they favor in the USA/collective West is based on a pre-set managed and moderated division, for the benefit of a very few at the top of the pyramids accompanied by the often-repeated nice-sounding storyline. Create the script of the own heroes. Their entire scripted money-funded history sounds like a Hollywood superhero movie that sounds too good to be true. Guess what? It is. It is what they are NOT telling you, that they try to hide.
Who wields the POWER? Who has had the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE of being able to reach all the other little buck catchers (tools, and other Roman-era style instruments of POWER), but could not be reached itself, because of a geographical-, technological-, organizational-, military-, strategic-, political advantage at any given point of a historical timeline? Create the default rival/enemy on their own marching routes. It is usually the power most likely to succeed which is determined as the default rival/enemy. Notice how, as soon as a rival starts mass-producing products high up in the value chain of capitalism, and starts vying for markets, and becomes successful, it immediately becomes the systemic rival, and is then geopolitically encircled by the greater empire. It happened around 1900, as Germany started building high-value products, and it happened around 2000, as China started moving away from building cheap toys and labor intensive kitchen appliances...
The games start on the home turf. The first victims are their own people in the USA/collective West, locked in the eternal struggle for wealth and personal gain which they have been deceived into thinking is "good greed", but which WILL be exploited by the snakes who deceive them in the divide and rule technique of power. Because ..."most of the great problems we face are caused by politicians creating solutions to problems they created in the first place." - Walter E. Williams
War is a great divider. It goes straight through the heads of millions and billions of people from the very top tiers, right down to the individual level. War divides alignments and alliances, goes straight through organizations, divides political parties, tears through families, and finally at the very bottom tier, goes straight through individual hearts and minds as individuals struggle with themselves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
THE RULES BASED ORDER
Making the "rules" is very profitable for oneself.
In February 1948, George F. Kennan's Policy Planning Staff said: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity."[end of]
During most of the previous centuries America's allies and foes in Europe burned in order to achieve primacy for the USA with a pattern of aligned/allied relationships before 1945, and after 1945 are still being burnt to ensure this disparity continues, with a (quote) "pattern of relationships".
It is how divide and rule is implemented. Set up European and Eurasian nations against each other in a (quote) "pattern of relationships."
Look for the patterns, and see the technique.
The people don't need a political "rules based order", because the wise use the GOLDEN RULE.
Do unto others, as you wish to done onto.
Do not do to others, as one does not wish to be done onto.
------------------------------------
With regards to the current mess called "Europe", just remember what was agreed following the collapse of the USSR.
"The Charter of Paris for a New Europe (also known as the Paris Charter) was adopted by a summit meeting of most European governments in addition to those of Canada, the United States and the Soviet Union, in Paris from 19–21 November 1990. The charter was established on the foundation of the Helsinki Accords and was further amended in the 1999 Charter for European Security. Together, these documents form the agreed basis for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. However, not all OSCE member countries have signed the treaty." (wiki)
One of the key points agreed upon, and signed into being, was that no member state would engage in behaviour which would undermine the security concerns of another member state or signatory. Now let's leave it to the finger pointers and obfuscators who will happily point you in the wrong direction with regards to whose fault it was that the spirit of these accords (dove work) were untangled, step-by-step in the same way the spirit of the Concert of Europe (post-1815) was once undermined, step-by-step.
Here is one point the finger pointers will however never address: Why any European state, specifically those who stand most to gain, in the middle of Europe/Eurasia, and who would gain most from European/Eurasian unity, would set out to create division.
It is easy to see how the Paris Charter (1990), if abided by to the letter would have lead to unity in Europe, and by extension also to Eurasia if Russia had used their location as link between Europe and East Asia.
However, history has shown that every intention to create unity automatically triggers an instinct in ... ahem... "some people" to destroy it, by use of proxies, or directly: in steps "NATO enlargement" as the means to inject dissension into a formatting unity.
The intentions of the doves wishing unity, interacting with the strategizing and cajoling of the hawks of division.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1