I have not written at length for a while because, as Ludwig Wittgenstein said in his “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus”, «Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen», which means “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent”. And indeed, what else could I possibly have written about, beyond what I have already covered in my previous articles regarding the era we are living in? Very little, in fact. This is also because everything is proceeding as planned, at least for those who decided that this epochal shift in all our lives had to be implemented: first came the fake pandemic, then the war (which is waning in the interest of many), and now it is the turn of the gradual disappearance of commercial banks (see the Swiss case and the Silicon Valley one) in favour of a centralised shift to digital currency. Do not be afraid, it will happen very soon, not as far off in the future as some believe and continue to maintain. Around 200 US banks are at risk of failure and could collapse in a manner similar to the Californian bank. A report states that “Even if only half of uninsured depositors decide to withdraw their funds, almost 190 banks are exposed to a potential risk of impairment to insured depositors, with potentially $300 billion of insured deposits at risk.” A study by four economists from leading universities, published on the 13th of March on the Social Science Research Network, argues that the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes led to the depreciation of assets such as US Treasury bonds held by these banks. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has warned that not all uninsured deposits will be bailed out by the FDIC. In other words, only the big banks will be saved. In Europe, the mechanism was announced by Fabio Panetta, a member of the ECB’s Executive Board, during his introductory statement before the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs: “The investigation phase of the digital euro project started over a year ago. Since its launch, the close involvement of the European Parliament has been a priority for the ECB. During 2022, we regularly discussed the main technical options under consideration in this Committee. Your contributions have provided valuable guidance for our work; together with feedback received from other counterparts, both public and private, they have contributed to the progress made in recent months. These interactions are essential to ensure that public money (money issued by the central bank) meets the preferences and needs of citizens and businesses in a constantly evolving digital environment. The payment habits of European citizens are changing at an unprecedented speed: over the past three years, cash payments in the euro area have dropped from 72 to 59 per cent of the total, while digital payments have become even more widespread. In the Netherlands and Finland, for example, cash is used in only one-fifth of transactions. At the same time, citizens want the option to pay with public money. The majority consider it important or very important to always have such an option available. A digital euro would respond to this growing demand for electronic payments by making public money available in digital form. Alongside cash, a digital euro would offer European citizens access to a means of payment that would allow them to pay anywhere in the euro area, free of charge. The ease of access and the convenience of its use would foster the adoption of the new currency, improving financial inclusion. In my remarks today, I will explore how a digital euro could help us make our currency available everywhere and for every need within the euro area. I will conclude my observations by focusing on the work programme for 2023, during which the ECB will complete the investigation phase of the digital euro project and the European Commission will present its legislative proposal.” In short, social control, via a digital currency with an expiry date issued solely by central banks, is well mapped out. First in Western countries, then the rest will follow (by hook or by crook). The system has been set in motion and, adjustments aside, has its own precise roadmap. The boiling frog principle still applies, as does the Overton window. This short piece of mine is therefore more of a memo to myself, primarily, regarding a couple of points being woven by all the parties involved. For anyone who has taken the trouble to read my previous articles, exactly who the “parties involved” are should be abundantly clear by now. For the more distracted, it could simply be summarised that there is no “good guy” opposed to the “bad guy”, or to be clearer, the “Trump” opposed to the “Biden” of the moment (or vice versa, depending on how one wishes to believe the current narrative), or the “good West” opposed to the “bad East” (to simplify, the “good guys of NATO” against the “bad Russians and Chinese”); rather, there are two main masonic groups taking turns at the pinnacle of the global power pyramid, with one prevailing now and the other later, tripping each other up along the way (read: fake scandals about things actually well known to everyone, or fake attacks of various kinds aimed at “destabilising” the other side, at least in the eyes of public opinion). In short, it is all a role-playing game on an enormous chessboard, where the pawns being slaughtered (more or less consciously) are all of us “ordinary mortals”. As for who sits above even the kings and queens, that would require a separate discussion which I do not intend to tackle here, partly because I am aware you would all call me mad (even more than some already do).

The lead soldiers

In this descent into the underworld, one cannot rely on the so-called “new generations” for a slowdown (I do not even consider a U-turn, which in my view is impossible). As I have written elsewhere, they are masses of little soldiers specifically trained in schools and universities worldwide through curricula tailor-made for this purpose. Within them (and I am not just referring to twenty-somethings or teenagers), every sense of critical conscience has been killed off, deliberately creating for them an unquestionable, top-down reality that tolerates no doubts, other than fake ones specifically created to give the illusion that dissent is tolerated. Then again, Ernst Jünger had already explained perfectly how this works in his “The Forest Passage” (Trattato del ribelle). The docile little soldiers, armed with mobile phones, seek answers to the world’s queries through the algorithms of “ChatGPT” (the name itself speaks volumes: Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer), cleverly set up by the “non-profit” company OpenAI, whose founders and participants include the usual suspects: Elon Musk, Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn), Peter Thiel (PayPal), Sam Altman and Jessica Livingston of “Y Combinator” (a startup incubator for the likes of Airbnb, Stripe, Coinbase, Dropbox, Twitch, Reddit), Ilya Sutskever, a former Google expert on machine learning, and Amazon Web Services (a subsidiary dealing in cloud services). And so they wander the globe, chanting slogans (specifically prepared for them by others), hurling anathemas against anyone who dares to question the mainstream vulgate, and occasionally dispensing pearls of political or moral wisdom. The thirty- and forty-somethings in particular are the quintessence of uncultured and self-referential pedantry. And this is a phenomenon unaffected by geographical borders. Almost everywhere in the world, they are the age group that best encapsulates these new “qualities” of homo technologicus (sic.), spreading democratically across all branches of human endeavour. In practice, they are now the central pivot of modern society (there are, of course, due exceptions, but they are exactly that: exceptions).

Italialand, my Love

A brief nod to Italialand, where between an “orbe terracqueo” (globe) from the Prime Minister Meloni and a “rambata” (Ramboesque stunt) by the Mayor of Florence Nardella, parade the LGBTQXYZ+++ hordes (note the irony?), captained by the new PD secretary Elly Schlein, our very own homegrown Greta Thunberg, reared directly in the bosom of the American “neo-liberal” faction. Obviously, all this has nothing to do with the sacrosanct right of homosexuals to civil and social rights, but rather with the destabilisation of the individual through the fake demand for the normalisation of practices that are highly questionable from various points of view, such as surrogate motherhood. One could debate these topics for days, and I certainly do not intend to do so here.

Senescence

Personally, I feel like a being immersed in a “Spenglerian” vision of the world, meaning part of a world (as in Der Untergang des Abendlandes, or “The Decline of the West”) that is already dead and hopeless, desperately trying in every way to resist its decline. It is my fault, the fault of my generation (and of all those from the generations immediately preceding mine) that we failed to spot the poisoned meatball thrown into our enclosure. Yet the means to understand it were already there, we simply failed to use them. Hindsight analyses serve only to console oneself and, if possible, to understand. Nostalgically, I think of the phrase uttered by Donald Sutherland at the end of John Sturges’ beautiful film “The Eagle Has Landed”, and I somewhat identify with it: «Bonnie my love, as a great man once said: I have suffered a sea change and nothing can ever be the same again… as they say in Ireland: we have known other days».