It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CitiGroup: The End of Pax Americana, With No Replacement in Sight.

page: 2
73
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Considering the endless wars police actions and other conflicts America has been involved in id say Americana maybe....but no pax...




posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Pax Judaica To Replace Pax Americana.

Coming soon!



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Interesting stats within.

172% rise in crime against person and property '13 - '14.

On the EU referendum it touches on how right wing parties use immigration and terrorism as a fulcrum. Interesting as both are caused by governments, malpractice or something more sinister.

Cracking doom porn. Shame it looks highly reputable.
edit on 19-1-2016 by and14263 because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-1-2016 by and14263 because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I don't like this or trust this. It looks to me like the banksters trying to rewrite the past to frame the debate of the future. I don't believe they are panicking. But I do believe they want us to panic.


“Pax Americana” is the term often used to define the (previously) current geopolitical order. That the general peace and stability of the Post-WWII world is due to America’s dominant economic and political power, backed up by its ridiculously large military.


Pax Americana and the peace and stability of the Post-WWII world was due to our American "Exceptionalism;" we put people first. We recognized and respected and promoted the fundamental inalienable natural rights of every single man, woman and child. We understood that money was a tool for the benefit of everyone and the goal was the greatest good for all; now we believe that people are a tool for the benefit of some people and money is the goal. We once used our economic and military might to raise the rest of the world to our level; now we use our economic and military might to raise a few to unprecedented levels and lower the rest of us to third world standards.


In its analysis, Citi is certain that the Pax Americana era is over, but the main problem for the future is what they’re calling the “Great Power Sclerosis.” In other words, there’s nothing to replace Pax Americana, other than chaos, disorder, and a great many panicking investment bankers.


NONSENSE!!! We can and should and must return to the values and principles that once made us "great."


The full PDF of the report, “Global Political Risk: The New Convergence Between Geopolitical and Vox Populi Risks, and Why It Matters” is available here, and I encourage all to take the time to read its 70+ pages.


I probably will... but only because it's good to know what the enemy is up to.


And we are deeply concerned that the political capital necessary to stem the refugee crisis and terrorist threat, perhaps best-characterized as the collision between previous foreign policy failures and current governance capacity, exceeds that available to government leaders, who have relied upon central banks to manage the lion’s share of global crises over the past several years. 2016 could be a very political year for markets.


Our political leaders squandered their political capital when they sold their souls to the central banksters, and created global crises over the past several years for the benefit of the banksters, with absolutely no regard for the death and suffering they have inflicted on so many.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I personally do not think that after Pax America is going to be a void, those behind the global wealth are just not going to see the fruit of their labor go to waste allowing countries to fall under chaos, Perhaps the influential power of America has been in down side but that doesn't mean that they are not longer in control.

Just because Amerca will no take center stage doesn't mean they are not behind the scene allowing countries like the European union take over.

After all developing countries are now becoming power houses and conflics are more likely to be handle domestically in Europe.

Is more to this warnings from Citi bank, that we may realized perhaps citibank and US bankers may not like the plans for their future, the new era where US will not be the only player.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Before that it was the UK. The world wars were basically born out of the collapse of the British Empire and the power vacuum that left.

Consider that before you sound off.

The next global conflicts are likely to be nuclear.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   
If you weren't a prepper before reading this, you might want to consider becoming one at least on a small scale after reading it. Sounds like this could be a bumpy ride and the economic outlook is even less attractive than we have all been lead to believe.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Citi...? did you mean the money laundering cartel pandering Citi or some other "good" bank.....? Just asking...



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Interesting read. However. It's probably fair to assume, whoever authored this, had their own interests at heart. Those we can only speculate about, but in my mind I view bankers as a tight knit group - not part time Wikipedia contributors.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Obama's foreign policy approach is driven by the leftist idea that at the base of every problem in the world is America.

If this report is to be believed, then it was America that held the world stable, and our withdrawal to allow the world to be free of America and let the world sort itself out is directly to blame.

So was it evil for America's influence to have kept the world more or less stable and thus more peaceful or is it better to have the chaos we see?

I guess we're going to find out.

Just look at WW1, WW2, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, middle east, africa, for what happens when the US ignores or takes too long to get involved. Luckily we always prevail in the end, but there sure is a lot of suffering that comes from most of the world's innate savagery, including pockets of europe and asia, Mexico central America and south America.

No watchdog or big brother ? Better get ready for untold, incalculable misery.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
If you don't give us trillions of dollars the economy will collapse! You mean I'm supposed to listen to the cronies who are responsible for the biggest theft in history?
They are fighting against progress and against people waking up to the fact they are wolves in sheep's clothes.
The best thing we can do is dismantle the too big to fail banks and change our economic policy to benefit the many not the few.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Well they should be worried.

But not, perhaps, for the reasons which would be immediately obvious. Yes, there are huge issues in the Middle East, despite lots of foreign intervention, gerrymandering, and bloc shifting over the last little while. Further to that, wages are not keeping up with needs in western nations, which essentially makes everyone rather more concerned than they might otherwise be, about everything, from the future of their businesses, to the potential for investment later on. Lots of very important and very troublesome things are happening.

But the most worrisome thing that is happening, and continues to happen, is that big business reacts so counterproductively to these things. For example, here in Britain, despite the banking collapse and several other big issues, including the fact that our government seems intent on crippling the working class (that's right, I said it, and it's the damn truth) our economy is relatively stable, as is our security situation. And yet, big businesses have moved their operations abroad, to places like India for example. Now, sure, they get work done cheaper out there, steel industry being one of the key elements which has been moved nearly entirely away from our nation lately.

However, as cheap as things are done out there, India is also a less secure, and more unstable place from both a financial and physical standpoint. They share borders with nations which harbour these horrid terrorists we hear so much about, and also have a big issue with corruption out there. Now, that is not to say that we do not have corruption here. Let's face it, if I won the lottery, I would probably donate a portion of my winnings to a sting operation to catch out MPs and cabinet ministers taking cash for votes. I would be certain to require a bigger net come the end of fishing season. But the thing with this country is, its stable as can be.

But here's the real crux.

The fact that this document that you posted has any importance at all, speaks to one of the largest issues that the worlds economy faces at this time. You see, it should not be POSSIBLE for the fears of investors, or the opinions of speculators, or any of those people with what I call "non jobs" to effect ANYTHING! Their opinion should be worth NOTHING to ANYONE because these people have no business deciding what the price of bread ought to be, or deciding that trade in this place, or that place ought to be more or less profitable, and yet, that is what they do. They read the tea leaves, and utter forth, and on their word hinges the fate of nations, and more importantly, hard working citizens of the Earth.

I absolutely refute the idea that these people should have that power, especially when they are to a man, the most gutless, spineless and utterly disreputable bastards the world has ever assembled in one mode of employment. Things ought to cost what they cost, and that cost should never change. Gas should be the same price everywhere, no one ought to be getting a better or worse deal on it. Bread and milk, all foodstuffs, drinks, everything should have a worth which is decided on, clad in iron, and prevented from ever changing so that we can get USED to it and have some ability to plan our lives decades ahead of time.

No one with half a brain cell is going to bother to plan a future in a climate where nothing is going to be recognisable in forty years time, because planning a future requires one to have information, solid and certain, about what is happening next. The only way to achieve that, is to make sure that SOME things do not change. Pop music may evolve, hairstyles may wax and wane, and clothing choices will still be boggling the mind in time to come. But if the price of energy, the price of food and drink, the price per yard of fabric that you wear on your back, will be subject to drastic and inexplicable changes down the line, then frankly what the hell is the point in trying to plan?

Answer, there is no point.

The best we can do, could ever have done with speculators and other people with nonsense jobs that should not even exist, running the game, is to ride the wave from day to day, move with the changes, and pray to whatever deity you believe in that there will be some kind of pay off at some point, while being prepared to accept that there might not be in the worst case, and also that the worst case is the most likely for a greater percentage of the human race. The only thing these folk need to fear, is the possibility that the human race wakes up to the fact that they are being dragged hither and thither by these puppeteers, and decides to end the gravy train they are all running on.

Good grief!



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Government lies. Bankers lie. Investors lie. Credit ratings agencies lie. Appraisers lie. Politicians lie.

We're all being lied to and all the above need time in prison for what they've done, or worse.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Willtell

Before that it was the UK. The world wars were basically born out of the collapse of the British Empire and the power vacuum that left.

Consider that before you sound off.

The next global conflicts are likely to be nuclear.



I don't agree at all with what you said, I think it's probably the opposite. There has been no power vacuum at all in that sense, the USA replaced Spain in 1898 and Britain in 1945 becoming the absolute world power. In fact it was the British Empire against other european empires (considering Nazi germany as a reborn Prussia) that funneled the wars, and I'm pretty sure you know who financed Lenin who took over the Romanov in the time between the WWs.

Powers get replaced quickly unless both sides gets destroyed in a conflict. The only way to have a power vacuum is by ENFORCING it, like in Lybia, Afghanistan, most of south America, most of the SEA, the whole sub-saharian Africa, most of the "non-aligned" middle east and everything around Russia. The only region which is at risk of having some form of power vacuum is Europe, and just because the secret services will just let their mafias to control the territories.

The strategies changed compared to the past, since a global economy is a permanent threat to every state by who controls it, and you often don't need military intervention. Or at least it was like this up to these days, maybe in the future cyberwarfare will be the big deal.
edit on 19 1 2016 by Mastronaut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   
What Citigroup is saying is that the "new economy" is one where the books are being opened and we're actually seeing that a Twitter/ Facebook economy, overnight economic and social upheaval, and the house of cards we're built on..are surprisingly not viable..



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   
sounds good to me. shuffle the deck a little and see what happens


a reply to: SkepticOverlord



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Willtell

Before that it was the UK. The world wars were basically born out of the collapse of the British Empire and the power vacuum that left.

Consider that before you sound off.

The next global conflicts are likely to be nuclear.



Maybe from a rogue actor but an argument can be made that a large conflict between nations cannot go nuclear due to cyber weapons. Those weapons if sufficiently well developed can intercept the commands and prevent the launching of weapons. Alternatively, cyber weapons provide a way for governments to attack each other and wipe out infrastructure even more effectively than nuclear weapons do which renders nuclear weapons useless for anything other than killing troops.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   
As I watch world events unfold, I think this report tells us why Trump is polling so high, and why he has 15,000 attend his rallies and the other guys have a couple hundred. America will not go down quietly. Americans see all that stuff happening in the report and they want a Patton type personality to turn things around. And they might just get it.
The problem is you can't have your cake and eat it too, a strong authoritarian has benefits but it has drawbacks too.
Germany knows this all too well.

As for it's replacement as world policeman, if it backs away from that role, it's successor won't be China or Russia, but likely the UN, as it still has some influence on that entity, interestingly as I listen to Trumps speeches, I think it's something he might advocate to get other countries to pay, he doesn't like the cost of the current treaties to defend his allies. He will be negotiating better deals, at least so he says.
I am not pro Trump by any means, I fear what his rule would do to human rights, but I can't ignore the way the political winds are blowing in America right now, and it's not for the best.
edit on 19-1-2016 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I love how calm, cool, and calculating they are discussing injustice and inequality, protectionism, aggressive regulation, border disputes and armed conflict, anti-establishment sentiment, protests, violent demonstration and terrorist activity, all without the slightest hint of emotion. Nothing of humanity, just currency.



But in addition to these local factors, another, more structural reason exists that works as a force multiplier for simmering conflict around the world, most notably in Eastern Europe, Northern Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia. It is the weakness of the post-Cold War world order, or, to put it more bluntly, the weakness of Pax Americana.



Failure to produce policy options to address middle class anxiety, declining living standards and public trust increases the likelihood that Vox Populi risk could move from being episodically disruptive to systemic, undermining globalization in the
process.


I could be tempted to view that as a "new world order" script.

Short of mentioning pushing back the debt ceiling as a deterrent, I didn't see much discussion of the ponzi-economy the banks manufactured for us. It seems as though this is everyone's fault but the banks.



posted on Jan, 19 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

There may be plans in place for an economic collapse. When the banks crash due to their interconnection. Reallocation of Money based on Social Security records.

We may allocate the new money by how much each person has invested into the system up to this point. Everyone's yearly income has been carefully tracked over the years through your SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES! (You probably get a document from them every so often with your income by year going back decades).

There may be a plan to reallocate money through what you've paid into social security.

Fast Forward to 18:00





top topics



 
73
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join