miércoles, 24 de agosto de 2016

Lord Rothschild évoque les conséquences de la politique monétaire des banques centrales

La plus importante expérimentation de politique monétaire de l’histoire est en cours, selon Lord Rothschild

Le rapport financier de RIT Capital Partners, rédigé par son président Lord Jacob Rothschild, a présenté l’évolution actuelle du monde des banques centrales et de la haute finance dans le rapport semestriel de la société qu’il vient de publier. Selon lui,la plus importante expérimentation de l’histoire en matière de politique monétaire est en cours.

Taux d’intérêt bas, voire négatifs, des rendements négatifs sur la dette publique et le « quantitative easing », la politique d’assouplissement monétaire mise en place par les banques centrales constituent une gigantesque expérience aux conséquences encore inconnues, a-t-il affirmé.

Une expérimentation de politique monétaire aux effets inconnus et connus

« Les six mois qui font l’objet de ce rapport ont vu les banques centrales poursuivre ce qui constitue à coup sûr la plus importante expérimentation en matière de politique monétaire de l’histoire du monde. Nous sommes donc dans des mers inconnues et il est impossible de prédire les conséquences non intentionnelles de taux d’intérêt très bas, et des 30 % de dettes publiques à rendement négatif, le tout associé à un assouplissement quantitatif à très grande échelle », indique Lord Rothschild.

Le banquier a indiqué que cette politique a eu pour effet de provoquer une croissance rapide des bourses ; la valeur des actions américaines a été multipliée par trois depuis 2008, le début de la grande crise financière, avec une progression des investissements associée à une faible volatilité.

Mais cette croissance de la richesse virtuelle n’a pas été accompagnée par des bénéfices similaires pour l’économie réelle : « La croissance demeure anémique, la demande est faible et une part importante du monde développe est en pleine déflation », commente Lord Rothschild.


Objectifs de l’ONU, gouvernance globale : le G20 sert le dispositif, Chine en tête

La Chine se positionne pour prendre la tête du G20 et du Nouvel Ordre Mondial

En accueillant pour la première fois le sommet du G20 le mois prochain, la Chine ne cache pas sa volonté de prendre la tête du groupement des grandes puissances économiques et se positionne d’ores et déjà pour jouer un rôle moteur dans ce qu’il est convenu d’appeler le Nouvel Ordre Mondial. Le gouvernement chinois – qui se confond avec la direction du Parti communiste comme de bien entendu – se vante d’avoir pris un « rôle de leader » au sein de la « gouvernance économique globale » au service de la construction de « l’ordre international ».

La prochaine tenue du G20 à Hangzhou dans la province du Zhejiang a conduit les responsables du PC chinois et des multiples organes de propagande du régime à célébrer le rôle de la Chine dans cet événement qu’il présente comme devant « conduire l’économie mondiale vers l’avenir » par la mise en place de nouvelles politiques déterminées avec l’ensemble des partenaires au service d’une « économie globale verte ». Les objectifs du développement des Nations unies font partie de cet ensemble. La Chine ne s’est-elle pas vantée récemment d’avoir joué un rôle clef dans la définition du Programme de développement durable à l’horizon 2030, qu’on appelle aussi l’Agenda 2030 ?


USA: since 2008, federal debt levels have been at 50-year highs and at levels one would expect from a country in crisis or at war

The US National Debt Load is Second-Worst in the World

by Ryan McMaken

The US Office of Management and Budget last month released its latest numbers of US federal debt as a percentage of gross domestic product. According to the OMB, the federal debt is now at 100 percent, which makes it similar to debt levels reached during the aftermath of the second world war when the US was still dealing with its massive war debt.

Indeed, since 2008, federal debt levels have been at 50-year highs and at levels one would expect from a country in crisis or at war:

Defenders of deficit spending, however, claim that 100 percent of GDP is not particularly alarming, and some point to the fact that, in comparison to other wealthy nations, a debt level of 100 percent is not anything special. For example, if we use the World Bank's data oncentral government debt, we find that the US falls below Japan, Italy, and even the UK:

While Japan, Greece, and Portugal all certainly have their budget challenges, the deficit-spenders say, none of these places are on the verge of collapse. Moreover — it is often pointed out— the US benefits from the fact that it controls the global reserve currency and can thus monetize its debt more freely than other states.


Shakespeare is still being hounded by his enemies 400 years after his death

Shakespeare: A Life Clouded in Mystery

by Joseph Pearce

St. George’s Day, the feast day of England’s patron saint, is Shakespeare’s birthday and, believe it or not, is also the day on which Shakespeare died. Apart from the astonishing coincidence that Shakespeare died on his own birthday, it is also singularly appropriate that England’s greatest poet should have been born and should have died on the feast day of her patron saint. It seems appropriate, therefore, that we should celebrate the four-hundredth anniversary of Shakespeare’s death by reminding ourselves of the enduring stature of the Bard of Avon.

Arguably the three greatest writers of all time are Homer, Dante, and Shakespeare. Of the first of these, very little is known. Homer, it seems, has disappeared amidst the murk and mists of history. So great and wide is the chasm that separates him from us that he is almost invisible. What we know of him, for what it’s worth, is gleaned from allusive and elusive clues embedded in his work. Thus, for instance, it is widely presumed that, like Milton, he was blind. If so, like the blind seer Teiresias, he sees more in his blindness than those blinded by their own unwillingness to see.

Much more is known of Dante, a devout Catholic and a disciple of the scholasticism of Thomas Aquinas, who lived much of his life as a political exile from his beloved Florence. Perhaps the fact that he is a thousand years closer to us than Homer might explain the greater knowledge. If so, why is it that such mystery continues to surround the seemingly elusive figure of William Shakespeare? In terms of the time that has elapsed from his time to ours, it would seem reasonable to presume that we should know more about the Bard of Avon than about the divinely-inspired poet of Italy, the latter of whom lived three hundred years earlier.

Much of the mystery surrounding Shakespeare is linked to the age in which he lived. It was an age in which a large and alienated section of the population was considered outlaws by the state. In Elizabethan and Jacobean England it was a criminal offense to practice or propagate the Catholic religion, an offense that, for priests, was punishable by death. It is for this reason that England’s greatest poet remains largely unknown. He is unknown, first of all, because he sought to keep his religious life unknown, as far as possible, from the authorities. He is also unknown because later generations of Englishmen erected a myth in the nation’s likeness, ignoring or smothering the Bard’s “treacherous” popery in the interests of a nationally acceptable patriotic iconography. He became the posthumous victim of “patriotic correctness.”

The overwhelming evidence for the Bard’s Catholicism is rooted in the solid facts of his life and in the theological, philosophical and moral truths to be found in his work.

The factual evidence is to be found in documents, such as Shakespeare’s last will and testament and in the spiritual last will and testament of his father; in the persecution of Shakespeare’s family and friends for the practice of their faith; in court cases in which Shakespeare became embroiled; in property that he purchased; and in the sort of acquaintances and friends that he valued, and the type of people whom he considered enemies. All of these historical facts, pieced together meticulously by historians, paint a picture of Shakespeare’s life that points to his papist sympathies.


Read more:

martes, 23 de agosto de 2016

A new world order is sweeping across America.

Donald Trump and Atheists

by Michael Voris

The entire American electorate is in massive flux and about to undergo the most significant change in the country's history.

If current trends hold or even accelerate by just a little, this may very well be the last election where a majority of voters will be white Christians — if not this election, certainly 2020. This is due to two large factors: the decline of the Protestant majority and the rise of the religiously unaffiliated, also known as "nones."

The nones, at least many of them, while claiming to be "spiritual" are functionally and in practice atheists. They are a-theist not so much in their cores but in their lives, where it really matters after all. We have said at various times that Protestantism leads to atheism, and here are reports back from the political front lines proving the truth of that statement.

Up until about the past 10 years, the bulk of the decline among white Protestants was largely among more liberal mainline Protestants, like Methodists, Episcopalians or Presbyterians. Since the re-election of Ronald Reagan in 1988, their numbers have been cut nearly in half to just 14 percent of the overall population.

But more surprising, in the last 10 years, there has also been a notable decline among the more conservative branch of white Protestantism —Evangelicals. Since the end of Ronald Reagan's last term in 1988, they have dropped from 22 percent to just 17 percent. Add both those Protestant camps together and you get just 31 percent of the electorate.

What's driving the decline over the past generation? The rise of the younger generation, 34 percent of which identify as unbelievers — not affiliated with any religious body at all.

It doesn't take a genius to look at the numbers here. A larger percentage of millennials — 34 percent — are unaffiliated with any religion than the the overall percentage of white Protestants — 31 percent — relative to the population. All this volatile mixture needs is a little more time, perhaps one more election cycle, before white Protestant voters lose their majority status. And then, by the time, today's millennials are in their forties, they will be the majority — and you need to stop and think about that for a moment.

What is looming just over the horizon, politically and culturally speaking, is a nation where Christians are the minority, and cultural atheists are the majority. And this is owing precisely to the Protestant ethos of the rule of the exaltation of the individual. All of Protestantism is built on this principle — the principle of individual interpretation of Scripture, of individual personal relationship with Jesus, unmediated by the Church.

Protestantism eventually gives way to atheism, because philosophically, it is atheism. What, after all, is atheism? It is a-theism, no God. What does Protestantism, with its me-centered theology, produce? That you become your own God. You determine your morality. You determine the meaning of Scripture. You determine your own theology. There is no longer room for God, because the individual assumes the throne — kind of the working definition of atheism.

So what is most surprising in the case of Donald Trump is his strategy of going after the white Christian vote — which he is getting. Political strategists and Monday morning quarterbacks say this is why Romney lost last time around. He formed a strategy around capturing the white Protestant vote — which he did, and he lost. Why?

Because there weren't enough white Protestant voters to carry the day compared to all the other voting blocks. Romney lost because he was playing out of Ronald Reagan's playbook from a generation before. But time had passed him by. This is why there is panic in the smoking rooms of the Republican establishment. Trump is playing from the exact same playbook — and getting the exact same results.

When Obama said publicly that America is not a Christian nation, he was right. That ideal of American nostalgia died with the Reagan era. A new world order is sweeping across America, and it is the result of Protestantism following through to its natural conclusions. American Catholics, especially leaders, had a very small window in the 1950s where they could have prevented all this, and they failed to understand it.

And now, Catholics are going to begin paying the price for that failed leadership.

Understanding revolution: demands for greater faculty and student diversity and a campus climate that is more inclusive ...

Students Won the Campus Culture War
Last year, colleges erupted in protests at offensive monuments and trespassed-upon ‘safe spaces.’ What happened next may have changed campus life forever.
Last year, college campuses roiled with student activism and protests, from hunger strikes to requests for trigger warnings on academic curricula, the likes of which the country hadn’t seen in decades.

Student groups across the country, many of them aligning themselves with national movements like Black Lives Matter, submitted demands for greater faculty and student diversity and a campus climate that is more inclusive and supportive of minority students.

As of December 2015, students at roughly 80 schools nationwide had submitted lists of demands to their universities: calls for new deans and presidents, more globalized curricula at liberal arts colleges, and school-endorsed “safe spaces” for minority groups, among other things.

Many universities and colleges have attempted to assuage students—and right the wrongs of history—by abandoning symbols and traditions with ties to racism, colonialism, and slavery.

Yale University, which was criticized for deciding not to rename Calhoun College at the end of last semester, has established a new naming committee to reconsider the issue as school reopens.

Indeed, a number of liberal arts schools have developed new diversity and inclusion initiatives in response to protests by the “Firebrand Generation”—a nickname, coined the New Yorker’s Nathan Heller, for today’s politically restive students.

As the new school year begins, it’s clear that universities are bending to student activists’ forcefully stated will.

These students have won many small and large battles against old-school institutions, sometimes refusing to eat until their vilified college leaders resigned. Do not expect students’ demands for change to die down anytime soon.

Here’s our guide to the most high-profile student protests over the last year—and how school administrations are heeding their calls for change.

“Masters” abolished; traditions, symbols, and songs abandoned

Last year, students at schools across the country called on their respective universities to abandon traditions and symbols with ties to racism. Harvard’s residential “House masters” were officially renamed “Faculty Deans” in the spring semester, in response to complaints that the title “master” connoted slavery. Harvard Law School also retired its official coat of arms, which dated back to 1936, because of its link to a slave-owning benefactor.

The racially charged names of two student dormitories at Georgetown University were abandoned last year. Mulledy Hall and McSherry Hall, both named for university presidents who authorized the sale of 272 slaves in 1831, were respectively (and temporarily) renamed Freedom Hall and Remembrance Hall.

The university’s Working Group on Slavery, Memory and Reconciliation, established by Georgetown’s president in September, has been “thoughtfully developing a comprehensive range of actions for the university to consider to best acknowledge our historical ties to slavery,” a school spokesperson told The Daily Beast.

Comprised of Georgetown Jesuits, faculty, students, staff, and alumni, the group is responsible for considering “the renaming of buildings, identification of significant historical locations on campus, enabling research that advances understanding of the history, support for descendants, and convening events and opportunities for dialogue on these issues,” according to the spokesperson.

Amherst College retired its unofficial mascot, a colonial-era military commander and the college’s namesake, Lord Jeffery Amherst.

Many students argued that “Lord Jeff,” who advocated to “inoculate” Native Americans by spread of germ warfare, symbolized white oppression. The school agreed to remove all “Lord Jeff” imagery and representation on campus.

Students at Princeton University orchestrated a 32-hour sit-in in President Christopher Eisgruber’s office, calling for the university to reconsider the impact of Woodrow Wilson’s “racist legacy” on campus. Last April, the university’s board of trustees voted to keep Wilson’s name on Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School of International and Public Affairs, as well as on one of its residential colleges.


lunes, 22 de agosto de 2016

When you have no culture, you shout political slogans. It is the easiest thing in the world to do...

Exercises in Unreality:
The Decline in Teaching Western Civilization

by Anthony Esolen

There’s a chilling image from my youth that I’ve never been able to scrub out of my mind. It might not seem at first glance to amount to much. It was a blue spiral spray-painted on our street, a sort of insect with enormous eyes, with a caption suggesting LSD. In those days, the newspapers were filled with war and rumors of worse than war—of the wholesale collapse of the social order. It was when the Students for a Democratic Society engaged in their violent demonstration against that inoffensive, old-fashioned liberal Hubert Humphrey at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. “Off the pigs,” cried the Black Panthers, whose tongues were not in their cheeks when they said it; rather their thumbs were ready to cock their pistols if any “pig” of a policeman were to get in their way.

I don’t know that it was very heaven to be young in those days, wallowing naked and hungry and snuffling in the rain and mud at Woodstock, but to be a child was like being perched at a high window of a riverside house, watching the waters rise and lap at a bridge beginning to tilt and crack. Perhaps those of my generation who were nine or ten years older than I can indulge themselves in rosy memories of it all, if they were not dragooned into the fever swamps of Indochina: of porn flicks suddenly advertised in the newspapers as cutting-edge, hip, hot from Sweden; of Christians chucking their prayer books into a bonfire of pieties; of the suddenly prominent evils of divorce and child murder; of music made by drug-addled geniuses, the music of loneliness, lust, rage, foolish hope, and wickedness. My family was strong and my backcountry coal town was not entirely insane. Still, my memories are not rosy.

I had no idea then that the college classroom was its own sewage spillway, over­flowing into the quads—or perhaps the sewage flowed in the other direction. It hardly matters. At age nine I could see through the stupidities of the New Math: set theory for children, rather like teaching toddlers how to talk by drawing blueprints of the oral cavity, or how to walk by naming the bones and muscles in their legs. Long before I read Orwell I could perceive that most new things were empty and that the higher the diction that people used to name them and describe them, the emptier or more sinister they were. Call it Esolen’s Law of the Distributive Property of Stultification over Tradition.

What I could not see was that the stupidity came from on high, and that college education lay in the balance. My parents graduated near the top of their classes in high school. Like most Americans, they considered college education as something of a dream—college was a place of intelligence, profound learning, some risible pride, and venerable tradition. Gaudeamus igitur! My mother could not have known that she was more likely to study Latin in her little town than were the college students at Berkeley.

None of us knew who John Dewey was. But there was a nice line to be drawn between that man and the people, both professors and students, who went down to the bridges in rafts to help the floodwaters do their work. Dewey was classically trained but would have none of it for the ordinary democratic masses. He had no use for the useless things—that is, the best and noblest things: no use for poetry, flights of imagination, beauty, religion, and tradition. He was a hidebound innovator. His children and grandchildren in the 1960s had been well trained in his democratic scorn. Out with the notion that the academy is not a place for political recruitment, precisely because it is to be devoted to the truth. “What is truth?” said the serious Dewey, and he could not wait to give us all his answer: truth was only what could be ascertained by empirical observation and measurement. That meant that only the hard sciences could rest upon their foundations. Every other building could be commandeered by the politicians, or blown to bits.

And that is what the young politicians did. They began to turn arts and letters into instruments of politics, or to blow them to bits. Thus the demand that literature be “relevant.” Homer is relevant to me because Homer is relevant to man. But once you deny that there are stable truths to be learned about man by studying his history, his philosophy, and his art, what is left for Homer but to be adopted by a few curious souls who happen to like him, or to be drafted into the New Model Army? And there are nearer ways to go to burn down buildings than by struggling over Homeric verbs. So in a few short years, centuries of learning were merely tossed aside. The central pier cracked, the bridge buckled, and the waters came crashing through.


Read more: