Buy courses here: www.academic-a... Sub to my substack here: substack.com/p... Join the channel here: / @academicagent All my vital links: unpopular.acad...
The GAE has a huge vassal swarm EU4 style, primarily Western Europe, the Anglo-sphere and Japan. Israel occupies a sort of Papal state position in relation to the Holy Roman Empire, dependent on the Empire for military protection, but socio-spiritually influential enough to berate the Empire on matters of politics it can often tell it what to do.
While it is technically correct, there's something distasteful in calling it the same name as Roman Empire, Spanish Empire, British Empire or even the Galactic Empire. All of those did the conquering, ruled boldly and were proud of themselves. They carried a certain organizational aesthetic, which can only be called "imperial". The GAE rules throught yag< and etanimeffe< means, hates itself, and has little to no dignity. It certainly has absolutely no imperial aesthetic.
Exactly, who did America conquer? Germany was a half job, with the Soviets doing most of the actual fighting, South Korea was another half-job and ever since then America has only failed miserably at kinetic subjugation. The only serious nation America has legitimately conquered is Japan and even then, it was mainly thanks to the nukes.
Maybe you could say it conquered itself (civil war), and Mexico was another half job (how the southwest was gained). A few territories taken from Spain in the Spanish-American war, I guess. What about the likes of Rhodesia, Angola, SAfrica though? Granted it wasn't traditional conquest either but the yanks (and Brits and bagels) had their mits in those messes
@@chico9805 They clearly conquered all of those fully and made them subservient to the same master they are beholden to (You know who very well, I will not state them, not out of fear of naming them, but to circumvent this comment being shadowbanned..). Just look at the policies, direction and subservience you can witness in those nations today. Japan is arguably the only nation that America DIDN'T conquer - they neutralized them, and established trade with them, making them a sort of neutered trading partner, with some policy control, but they didn't conquer them to the extent that the west was conquered.
I feel like there is a lot of focus on post-wwii American influence, but the foundations were already built during wwi. Wilson's foreign policy had zero tolerance for the old monarchical structures of Europe and wanted to completely eradicate them and replace them with liberal democratic republics. The post-wwii order is merely a completion of the seeds that were planted in wwi. It also underscores AA's point on this being a uniquely American phenomena, because if you look at President Wilson. He was a Southerner, a segregationist and would by any means be associated as a right-winger today, but the order he established was exactly the sort that would lead to the GAE. It goes back to a foundational understanding of America as the Empire of Liberty, as Thomas Jefferson put it.
@axileus9327 The Founding Fathers were more aristocratic minded than the Jeffersonians who inherited the nation. Washington, Adams, Jay and Hamilton would have preferred America to become a constitutional monarchy but thought the population would not accept a king for the time being. They had a higher belief in hierarchy, leaders promoting virtue to the population, constrained liberty and a view of mankind as fallen. Jefferson's view was that America was exceptional and better than the rest of the world, so America had nothing to learn from the old world. The rules of government and rulership in the old world did not apply to America, thereby creating a sort of blank slate. The Jeffersonian vision of mankind as primary individual, rational and good won in 1801. America went towards the path of liberal democratisation, and with the idea of Empire of Liberty and American Exceptionalism, the idea became to export this liberal vision to the world. America is not necessarily GAE, but a lot of it's traditions are built upon ideas of it and if America is to reject it, it needs to examine it's own tradition critically.
Why? The discussion of GAE centers around the American nation and its geopolitical power. This empire may or may not be partly or wholly captured by what you refer to as the ESS. However this would constitute a distinct if correlated discussion to our initial subject concerning DC's military, cultural and economic influence
@@happygofishing Which America? The one that currently exists? That's ZOG. There have been about four different Americas since the republic fell in the 19th century, "America" proper doesn't exist anymore.
27:10. I dispute this comment. The penal laws in Ireland did exactly that. There were illegal "hedge schools" in Ireland that had to be held in a clandestine manner in order to keep language going. It was also illegal to use the Irish language.
I don't like to use the word 'U.S. interests' That's why I wish some other critics Friends of ours, would stop saying 'We go into this country, we go into that country We do this and we do that,' and I'm going: 'Shh! Shh! We don't do anything, they do it to us We are part of the victims We are not part of the victimizers
Good summary. To understand how the US government took over Europe you really need to understand the period from about 1944-1956(though Americas original imperial aims were probably formulated as long ago as the end of the 18th century). All European countries apart from Russia are US client states and have a governing class controlled accordingly. Any who get out of line can expect to be punished economically or via regime change carried out either openly or by manipulating the national political systems particularly via the media. All of this control is dressed up in language about anti-colonialism, freedom, liberty, ‘self determination’ (ha ha) etc but the actual naked power being used is pretty much similar to that the ancient Athenian Empire applied to the Melians during the Peloponnesian War.
In PPP terms what Russia spends on it's military equals budgets of UK, France and Germany combined. Don't be fooled by weak ruble, they make everything themselves. I agree that Europe shouldn't be afraid of Russia in principle but in reality Europa is weak and demilizarized and lacks will. So relativelly weak Russia can be a threat.
A threat to what exactly? Being colonized by legal and illegal migrants while your Quisling figure heads who do exactly what Israel and America tells them to do at the expense of your people? Wow, what a loss that would be if Russia came in and cleaned house. /s Ethnic Russians in Russia make up about 80% of the population, together with other Europeans they constitute about 85% of the population and those figures are incredibly stable compared to the rapid and permanent changes taking place in the "West". And ethnic minorities in Russia are well integrated and are generally more patriotic than the average ethnic Russian and are more likely to voluntarily serve in the military. Putin stated to the duma in 2015 that those citizens who wish to live under Islamic law or Judaic law should leave Russia and go to those places where those laws are practiced. If they wish to stay they must conform to Russia's laws, which are informed by Russian culture, history, tradition, and the Russian Orthodox church.
In “A Farewell to Alms” Gregory Clark explains how British textile entrepreneurs tried to set up factories in India. Indian wages were then less than one sixth of British wages, so they expected to make huge profits. But these British-owned Indian factories never ever made a profit, and were eventually out-competed by the Japanese. Why? It seems there were major cultural problems. For instance, a British foreman might train an Indian worker how to operate a mechanical loom, only to discover later that the worker he’d trained was sharing his job with the rest of his extended family, none of whom had been trained at all. And the British foreman didn’t even notice this swap out of personnel. It led to all manner of industrial accidents. There were exceptions. Jamsetji Tata, the “father of Indian Industry”, set up the Central India Spinning, Weaving, and Manufacturing Company in Nagpur in 1869. He opened a second factory in 1877, and had five such factories by the time of his death. He also opened the first hotel in India with electricity - the Taj Mahal Hotel in Bombay / Mumbai. Even though he was a Parsi, I imagine that Tata was very familiar with Indian cultural practices, and understood better than the British how to steer people around them. Tata’s son founded Tata Steel in 1907. British orders in the First World War ensured that the company grew rapidly. By 1939 Tata was the largest steel producer in the entire British Empire. James Heartfelt is an interesting writer; one of the better dissident Marxists. But it’s important to remember the saying of Pascal Boyer: “Ideology gives you information for free”. If your ideology tells you something must be a certain way, you can feel you don’t need to check empirically if it’s actually true. For instance, Karl Marx’s theory tells me that industrial workers wages were being squeezed down to bare subsistence levels in the late 19th century. So if the data says otherwise, who should I believe? Marx, of course.
I remember that AA had a Cigar stream, in which he said that the Americans, in addition to using black soldiers (a precedent set by the French) were manipulating the German entertainment industry to ram black entertainment down German throats after the Second World War.
@@blue18404It’s weird how this channel has become a pure US hating channel… And check your own country, you capital city has been conquered by Muslims…. Instead of saying I’d like to help you reverse that because I’m somewhat of an Anglophile, I’ll just say it’s your own fault.
the USA does benefit from the empire, the problem is most of it, is wasted on certain groups. I fear another methode of containment will be to actually enforce merrit and benefits to the empire for citizens, that way securing the empire for another 100 years, a true roman empire
Ah, the ol' z og/gae debate. I do think the acronym you choose matters. I tend to think were the US not the global power but Britain, that the UK would have found itself with a fair bit of "german" and "russian" immigration in the 20th century and would be pushing similar policies globally. Its debatable I guess whether this would have been possible but my point is that the impetus for this is spite and neurosis rather than whatever we rationalize the roots of this being.
We’ve had that “German” influence for a very long time, much of the empires military campaigns were financed that way. Researching the “Father of International Finance” will tell you all. At some points the London branch of that family had more funds than the BOE.
Thank you for this clarification, in 2020 I thought we began an occupation government, now I think most of my life the government was either mostly if not fully captured.
Quite odd that the most popular form of media within the GAE for the past 2 decades are superhero movies, an obvious escape from the "reign of quantity". A small cast of supers dukes it out while the masses are ignorant and powerless to affect the goings-on. Most animes are like this too! More "grounded" stories, like Westerns and crime films, became obscure after the turn of the century or switched to using main characters so absurdly competent that they might as well be superheroes. A sign of the GAE's core ideology losing appeal?
(joke): I'm starting to think that AA is quickly becoming the King of the Autists, and in basically a pyramid scheme format, with him at the top. His arguments are so compelling to anyone of the spectrum that we can't help but be drawn to his arguments. And handily he happens to sell good quality courses at reasonable prices. And also his advert style is very appealing to the nostalgic-type. (serious): Where do I sign-up?
@axileus9327 yes I mean a lot of this stuff isn’t directly relevant to daily life. But it helps to gain a different perspective on how things work in terms of power, politics, economics etc. maybe for most it’s an intellectual pursuit, but the 10s seems to be committed to the cause, which is admirable. For me, it’s reassuring to find similarly-minded people to share ideas with, for I often feel homeless politically otherwise.
@18:15 this had previously been the case with the internal seizure of Britain and Ireland from the natives (enclosures etc). William Cobbett noted the inferiority of the new potato based diet with his usual eloquent vehemence.
I disagree. Who is going to rise up and fight for their nation? Most Brits will not fight Russia for Rishi. And Putin and Russia are only fighting in 2nd gear. They are doing their best to not destroy Ukraine, they are hoping they can grind them down.
Wait a minute what do you mean Russia has never come close to conquering Western Europe in history, Alexander the Ist army entered Paris during the Napoleonic Wars.
Yeah with support from Prussia and Austria and Sweden and UK funding... It's not like they solo'ed the entirety of Central and Western Europe to get to Paris. The furthest the Russians got was East Germany under the Soviets... which again was not a solo effort. Edit: Just to clarify, what I was getting at is that the Russians in the Napoleonic Wars did not conquer France or turn it into a satellite state after the conflict ended. While in WW2 they did turn East Germany into a satellite state, effectively making it part of their empire. So the furthest they got, in terms of actual gains, was the eastern part of Central Europe. Nowhere near conquering Western Europe.
@@SoulReaperIsHere well the Grand Armee was destroyed in Russia, by Russia and all of these powers you are saying contributed really hardly contributed. And Russia had no interest in conquering France. Stalin didn't even want to conquer Germany he wanted to make it neutral like Austria. But the US had other plans.
@@8KoG8 You are going to completely ignore the German campaign of 1813 and how the Russians would have been hopelessly outmatched without Prussian and Austrian troops? What about all the French troops that were kept tied down by the British, Portuguese and Spanish forces in the Iberian Peninsular? You are aware that Napoleon's France still resisted heavily until early 1814 right? The war didn't end in 1812. Plus now I see you've moved your goalposts. Originally you implied the Russians came close to conquering Western Europe as they entered Paris in the Napoleonic Wars. Now you are saying they never had the intention of conquering Western Europe. So it sounds like you agree with the statement that they never came close to conquering Western Europe after all.
I would take issue with the claim that the US imperial model is in fact hugely different to the British Empire in its economic model. In essence both essentially privatised the profits while socialising the costs on their own populations. If the average Briton had genuinely shared in the profit of Empire then one would have expected them to enjoy better nutrition and to grow taller. The reality is that the average English male in 1850 was about three inches shorter than when James 1 ascended to the throne in 1603.
In the 2nd paragraph, you described the EU as a "supra-national holding mechanism", along with Nato. Does the US really have any control over the EU, and if so, how?
1) It was set up as a condition for Marshall Aid. 2) A lot of the EU works via the major member states (France, Germany, and, until recently, Britain) setting policy. Britain and Germany have been occupied since the war, with US Army Europe on their soil, and Britain in particular hooked on American finance. 3) You have to remember that the GAE is a global empire, at least in part, run for a certain group. These people wield enormous power in Britain and France as well (look at Tory and Labour cabinets over the last 45 years).
- Military occupation by US forces - Spying on/hopeypots for European elites for blackmail - Bribing European elites with industry/think tank revolving doors - Financing subservient parties via "NGOs", interfering in elections via spying on opposition parties - Influencing public opinion via MSM propaganda
It is the way it is due to the nature of the modern world. Was Protestantism not a great leveling? Did the British not undermine European nations? Did they not laugh at the demise of the Spanish or at the French Revolution? Would Britain have had any chance of becoming a hegemonic power if Europe resisted it with an adherence to cultural values and dignity and by overcoming their own disputes? The liberal empires rise due to the moral failing of previous orders which creates the power vacuum to exploit. The ability to destroy cultures is due to the availability of mass communication technology and is not uniquely American. As Spengler and Strauss have pointed out it is all of liberal tradition one should blame. The whole angle on Zionism is also a pointless tack-on as if it wasn't the British who supported it in the first place. All of this is insufficient. I do however agree with the call to resist the GAE's propaganda, however one cannot place the past in its place. As Evola had pointed out treating the late form of a disease with its early onset form is lunacy. The antidote has to either be something entirely new which is usually born out of a collapse or something different that already exists; any other road leads the same way.
You can leave out the 'saxon' part. Anglosaxons were a mercenary class, only used to destroy the last free european nations, and right now they pay the price for their kinslaying by being discarded and replaced by pakistanis.
I clearly remember parts of this. That comes with genuine interest and good writing. Yet I think that the "Total opposition" posture is mostly not practicable, as the US and the USD have so much global influence.
one could reasonably argue, in addition, that: 1) they empowered enemy / alien civlizations (Japan and especially China) for short short short term profits (in the case of China the technological transfer provided by the GAE is astonishing, to the point of appearing willingly tracherous) - but it is not so new, the southern States in the period 1800-1860 did everything in their power to increase ten folds their black populations, always for short term profits ; 2) strangely enough, once again, our greatest enemies are two fellow majority Indo-European nations as Russia and Iran.
It infuriates me every time an American criticises European nations for insufficiently contributing to collective defence. I have to figure out, every time, if the critic is either ignorant, or dishonest about the way in which the US spent the majority of the 20th century leveraging every advantage it could to undermine the great powers and eventually establish itself as world hegemon. It's actually a very fitting conundrum for the US, in that American political philosophy in its foundations is naive, foolish and hypocritical. The US fought long and hard for an end to colonialism and then wept when the newly established states proved to be out of their control. The US stages interventions into various nations for "democracy building" which effectively translates to colonialism without any pledge of responsibility to administrate the destabilised region. And now US figureheads kick and scream about the lack of militaristic zeal in nations whose history they had been decrying for two hundred years as oppressive and evil; they now turn for help to the very nations they demoralised and brought low. The US built itself an Empire that it now complains about sustaining. As positive a world order as it is by comparison to alternatives, I might actually just point and laugh when it goes.
I'm sorry your nation got lazy and stopped developing their own stuff the moment they could suckle at the US's teet. That's not our fault though. You do need to pay your share for your defenses. Perhaps if you started spending on your own military again this "American Empire" wouldn't exist. It's almost like it's the lot of you taking advantage of the USA or something.... weird....
Academic Agency Off topic but have you encountered former currency trader Gary Stephenson's arguments for taxing back the Gov spending bloat of the fortunes of the wealthy?
AA clearly he does not know much about 17th Century Ireland or has decided to ignore it . Clearly the proto British state had decided to eradicate it & turn it into its image . UK certainly by then was North Atlantic Venice in everything but name.
This video inspired a new slogan. You know the saying "don't feed the animals, they will become dependent and forget how to provide for themselves." Well I've found the geopolitical version of this. Don't defend the Europeans; they will become dependent and forget how to take care of themselves... and then call you an evil overlord for your efforts.
AA give credit where credit is due - well, at least Algeria has a export that they cant use - they dont make wine but very interested in everything else
I see a large overlap between this video and whatifathist Modern Civilization, have you seen it AA? I think you two could do some work together or at least analyse each work and conclussions.
With the collapse of the American empire you've got to think about who will fill the vacuum of power? Would a world run by China and Russia be any less brutal?
Envy more than hate on clear display here. AA envies the power of those who inherited the British Empire and is motivated by that more than his hatred, based on what they did with that power and imagines that he and his Scylldings "elite" could do better...like all those who became before him and those old empires that crumbled, thinking they too can wield the Damocles sword of power to make a "better" world....on the treadmill of that intoxicating fantasy.
Surely you jest, sir! Isn't Davos somewhere in America as is the city of Rome where the Club of Rome was founded? Wasn't Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi an American? Have you forgotten America's century long love affair with Marxism and other forms of socialism. Especially in the 1950's.
@@cyberninjazero5659This has become a coping channel for Brits lead by a guy who isn’t even British… Which is ironic because y’all like to choose people who aren’t British to rule you.
Original article: open.substack.com/pub/forbiddentexts/p/what-is-the-global-american-empire?r=b7pl2&
Heck yea, RadLib in the comments, miss you around here, when's the next live stream with AA?
The GAE has a huge vassal swarm EU4 style, primarily Western Europe, the Anglo-sphere and Japan. Israel occupies a sort of Papal state position in relation to the Holy Roman Empire, dependent on the Empire for military protection, but socio-spiritually influential enough to berate the Empire on matters of politics it can often tell it what to do.
Referring to Israel as the Papacy to America's HRE helps to square the circle a lot better as to who has power over whom
While it is technically correct, there's something distasteful in calling it the same name as Roman Empire, Spanish Empire, British Empire or even the Galactic Empire.
All of those did the conquering, ruled boldly and were proud of themselves. They carried a certain organizational aesthetic, which can only be called "imperial".
The GAE rules throught yag< and etanimeffe< means, hates itself, and has little to no dignity. It certainly has absolutely no imperial aesthetic.
It's also fundamentally different in that it is unbelievably subversive, and tends to act in the shadows unless absolutely necessary.
Exactly, who did America conquer? Germany was a half job, with the Soviets doing most of the actual fighting, South Korea was another half-job and ever since then America has only failed miserably at kinetic subjugation.
The only serious nation America has legitimately conquered is Japan and even then, it was mainly thanks to the nukes.
Maybe you could say it conquered itself (civil war), and Mexico was another half job (how the southwest was gained).
A few territories taken from Spain in the Spanish-American war, I guess.
What about the likes of Rhodesia, Angola, SAfrica though? Granted it wasn't traditional conquest either but the yanks (and Brits and bagels) had their mits in those messes
It's if they like to degrade a country society and it people for they benifit
@@chico9805 They clearly conquered all of those fully and made them subservient to the same master they are beholden to (You know who very well, I will not state them, not out of fear of naming them, but to circumvent this comment being shadowbanned..). Just look at the policies, direction and subservience you can witness in those nations today.
Japan is arguably the only nation that America DIDN'T conquer - they neutralized them, and established trade with them, making them a sort of neutered trading partner, with some policy control, but they didn't conquer them to the extent that the west was conquered.
I feel like there is a lot of focus on post-wwii American influence, but the foundations were already built during wwi.
Wilson's foreign policy had zero tolerance for the old monarchical structures of Europe and wanted to completely eradicate them and replace them with liberal democratic republics.
The post-wwii order is merely a completion of the seeds that were planted in wwi. It also underscores AA's point on this being a uniquely American phenomena, because if you look at President Wilson. He was a Southerner, a segregationist and would by any means be associated as a right-winger today, but the order he established was exactly the sort that would lead to the GAE.
It goes back to a foundational understanding of America as the Empire of Liberty, as Thomas Jefferson put it.
@axileus9327
The Founding Fathers were more aristocratic minded than the Jeffersonians who inherited the nation.
Washington, Adams, Jay and Hamilton would have preferred America to become a constitutional monarchy but thought the population would not accept a king for the time being.
They had a higher belief in hierarchy, leaders promoting virtue to the population, constrained liberty and a view of mankind as fallen.
Jefferson's view was that America was exceptional and better than the rest of the world, so America had nothing to learn from the old world. The rules of government and rulership in the old world did not apply to America, thereby creating a sort of blank slate.
The Jeffersonian vision of mankind as primary individual, rational and good won in 1801.
America went towards the path of liberal democratisation, and with the idea of Empire of Liberty and American Exceptionalism, the idea became to export this liberal vision to the world.
America is not necessarily GAE, but a lot of it's traditions are built upon ideas of it and if America is to reject it, it needs to examine it's own tradition critically.
The Empire of the Synagogue of Satan would be more accurate.
☝️ This
TESS
The black cube of saturn. They wear it on their heads.
ZOG
Why? The discussion of GAE centers around the American nation and its geopolitical power. This empire may or may not be partly or wholly captured by what you refer to as the ESS. However this would constitute a distinct if correlated discussion to our initial subject concerning DC's military, cultural and economic influence
"Also known as The G.A.E."
I lol'd
British empire was riddled with tunnelling experts.
"Brazil was a Rothchild state by 1825"
🇺🇲🇮🇱Our mortal enemies, not the Russians. I'm a German Swiss.
I genuinely hate the United States with every fiber of my being
That's called "jealousy."
@@grimjoker5572 I'm American, fool
@@user-cv7ej8rd9q
Ah, so it's just lack of education then.
@@grimjoker5572what is he jealous of?
@@JT-bc5cd Uh, he can't eat stuff turkey on Thanksgiving, duh, stuffed with the most fresh produce, such as kfc, mcdonalds, burger king and applebee's
🏳️🌈🏳️🌈G A E!!🏳️🌈🏳️🌈
Z O G *
@@user-pr7pd9wd5bZOG let's the concept of "America" off the hook.
@@happygofishing Which America? The one that currently exists? That's ZOG. There have been about four different Americas since the republic fell in the 19th century, "America" proper doesn't exist anymore.
@@qoph1988 I’m curious, would you explain what these four Americas have been? I like the idea
@@happygofishingG A E Z O G
27:10. I dispute this comment. The penal laws in Ireland did exactly that. There were illegal "hedge schools" in Ireland that had to be held in a clandestine manner in order to keep language going. It was also illegal to use the Irish language.
Ireland was different for several reasons
Great Summary of the Evil Nemesis Empire we are up against on Planet Earth 🌏 🌍 🌎 👏🏻 👍🏻
I don't like to use the word 'U.S. interests'
That's why I wish some other critics
Friends of ours, would stop saying
'We go into this country, we go into that country
We do this and we do that,' and I'm going:
'Shh! Shh! We don't do anything, they do it to us
We are part of the victims
We are not part of the victimizers
Good summary. To understand how the US government took over Europe you really need to understand the period from about 1944-1956(though Americas original imperial aims were probably formulated as long ago as the end of the 18th century). All European countries apart from Russia are US client states and have a governing class controlled accordingly. Any who get out of line can expect to be punished economically or via regime change carried out either openly or by manipulating the national political systems particularly via the media. All of this control is dressed up in language about anti-colonialism, freedom, liberty, ‘self determination’ (ha ha) etc but the actual naked power being used is pretty much similar to that the ancient Athenian Empire applied to the Melians during the Peloponnesian War.
In PPP terms what Russia spends on it's military equals budgets of UK, France and Germany combined. Don't be fooled by weak ruble, they make everything themselves. I agree that Europe shouldn't be afraid of Russia in principle but in reality Europa is weak and demilizarized and lacks will. So relativelly weak Russia can be a threat.
A threat to what exactly? Being colonized by legal and illegal migrants while your Quisling figure heads who do exactly what Israel and America tells them to do at the expense of your people? Wow, what a loss that would be if Russia came in and cleaned house. /s
Ethnic Russians in Russia make up about 80% of the population, together with other Europeans they constitute about 85% of the population and those figures are incredibly stable compared to the rapid and permanent changes taking place in the "West". And ethnic minorities in Russia are well integrated and are generally more patriotic than the average ethnic Russian and are more likely to voluntarily serve in the military. Putin stated to the duma in 2015 that those citizens who wish to live under Islamic law or Judaic law should leave Russia and go to those places where those laws are practiced. If they wish to stay they must conform to Russia's laws, which are informed by Russian culture, history, tradition, and the Russian Orthodox church.
Even more if US is out of NATO. Yes seems imposible but imagine if they need neutrality from Russia in a war against Iran
In “A Farewell to Alms” Gregory Clark explains how British textile entrepreneurs tried to set up factories in India. Indian wages were then less than one sixth of British wages, so they expected to make huge profits. But these British-owned Indian factories never ever made a profit, and were eventually out-competed by the Japanese.
Why? It seems there were major cultural problems. For instance, a British foreman might train an Indian worker how to operate a mechanical loom, only to discover later that the worker he’d trained was sharing his job with the rest of his extended family, none of whom had been trained at all. And the British foreman didn’t even notice this swap out of personnel. It led to all manner of industrial accidents.
There were exceptions. Jamsetji Tata, the “father of Indian Industry”, set up the Central India Spinning, Weaving, and Manufacturing Company in Nagpur in 1869. He opened a second factory in 1877, and had five such factories by the time of his death. He also opened the first hotel in India with electricity - the Taj Mahal Hotel in Bombay / Mumbai. Even though he was a Parsi, I imagine that Tata was very familiar with Indian cultural practices, and understood better than the British how to steer people around them.
Tata’s son founded Tata Steel in 1907. British orders in the First World War ensured that the company grew rapidly. By 1939 Tata was the largest steel producer in the entire British Empire.
James Heartfelt is an interesting writer; one of the better dissident Marxists. But it’s important to remember the saying of Pascal Boyer: “Ideology gives you information for free”. If your ideology tells you something must be a certain way, you can feel you don’t need to check empirically if it’s actually true. For instance, Karl Marx’s theory tells me that industrial workers wages were being squeezed down to bare subsistence levels in the late 19th century. So if the data says otherwise, who should I believe? Marx, of course.
I like James Heartfield a good bit
Feeling some Bowden in this one
watch leo varadkar talking about love actually during his first visit to Whitehall to see a leader of a subjugated nation
Excellent rendering of The Matrix's (1999) 'woman in the red dress' scene 👍
Extremely thought-provoking. Thank you.
Good topic
I prefer "Judeo-American Empire".
We could also get the Fake J's meme involved too there but that's another level most aren't ready for
Fake J’s?
ZOG is what we should be using...
ZOGAE
@@robertanderson9509 so I'm not the only one to have independently coined this 😁
8:42
Bit of a correction here, America was 90% white, and remained so for awhile....
Living in mordor sucks.
In 1945 America was still white AF
I remember that AA had a Cigar stream, in which he said that the Americans, in addition to using black soldiers (a precedent set by the French) were manipulating the German entertainment industry to ram black entertainment down German throats after the Second World War.
No more. Your own fault
@@blue18404It’s weird how this channel has become a pure US hating channel…
And check your own country, you capital city has been conquered by Muslims…. Instead of saying I’d like to help you reverse that because I’m somewhat of an Anglophile, I’ll just say it’s your own fault.
@@blue18404 It was not their fault. They had it forced on them at gun point, same as every White country.
The Great Satan
the USA does benefit from the empire, the problem is most of it, is wasted on certain groups.
I fear another methode of containment will be to actually enforce merrit and benefits to the empire for citizens, that way securing the empire for another 100 years, a true roman empire
Oy .. does he want to shut us down ?
Ah, the ol' z og/gae debate. I do think the acronym you choose matters. I tend to think were the US not the global power but Britain, that the UK would have found itself with a fair bit of "german" and "russian" immigration in the 20th century and would be pushing similar policies globally.
Its debatable I guess whether this would have been possible but my point is that the impetus for this is spite and neurosis rather than whatever we rationalize the roots of this being.
A bit of the Bio-Leninism?
We’ve had that “German” influence for a very long time, much of the empires military campaigns were financed that way. Researching the “Father of International Finance” will tell you all. At some points the London branch of that family had more funds than the BOE.
Thank you for this clarification, in 2020 I thought we began an occupation government, now I think most of my life the government was either mostly if not fully captured.
Quite odd that the most popular form of media within the GAE for the past 2 decades are superhero movies, an obvious escape from the "reign of quantity". A small cast of supers dukes it out while the masses are ignorant and powerless to affect the goings-on. Most animes are like this too!
More "grounded" stories, like Westerns and crime films, became obscure after the turn of the century or switched to using main characters so absurdly competent that they might as well be superheroes. A sign of the GAE's core ideology losing appeal?
This is a serious subject, but I can't help but laugh every time he says "The GAY". :D
(joke): I'm starting to think that AA is quickly becoming the King of the Autists, and in basically a pyramid scheme format, with him at the top. His arguments are so compelling to anyone of the spectrum that we can't help but be drawn to his arguments. And handily he happens to sell good quality courses at reasonable prices. And also his advert style is very appealing to the nostalgic-type.
(serious): Where do I sign-up?
@axileus9327 yes I mean a lot of this stuff isn’t directly relevant to daily life. But it helps to gain a different perspective on how things work in terms of power, politics, economics etc. maybe for most it’s an intellectual pursuit, but the 10s seems to be committed to the cause, which is admirable. For me, it’s reassuring to find similarly-minded people to share ideas with, for I often feel homeless politically otherwise.
Absolutely brilliant and correct
@18:15 this had previously been the case with the internal seizure of Britain and Ireland from the natives (enclosures etc). William Cobbett noted the inferiority of the new potato based diet with his usual eloquent vehemence.
"The only compromise between food and poison is death." Rand on the idea of compromise with evil.
Appreciated that one.
Good essay.
Based
I disagree. Who is going to rise up and fight for their nation? Most Brits will not fight Russia for Rishi. And Putin and Russia are only fighting in 2nd gear. They are doing their best to not destroy Ukraine, they are hoping they can grind them down.
Great video as always chief.
Avante✋🏻 Σ
Russia took Berlin three times, in 1760 in a war with Prussia, 1813 in a war with Napoleon and in 1945, and Paris once in 1814.
1813 wasnt a conquest. The russians and prussians were allies. Its like claiming the british conquered dunkirk in 1940.
If there is one video to explain how the western world works then this is it.
Great summary!
AA you keep me sane. I know you are clever; I admire you.
Wait a minute what do you mean Russia has never come close to conquering Western Europe in history, Alexander the Ist army entered Paris during the Napoleonic Wars.
Yeah with support from Prussia and Austria and Sweden and UK funding... It's not like they solo'ed the entirety of Central and Western Europe to get to Paris. The furthest the Russians got was East Germany under the Soviets... which again was not a solo effort.
Edit: Just to clarify, what I was getting at is that the Russians in the Napoleonic Wars did not conquer France or turn it into a satellite state after the conflict ended. While in WW2 they did turn East Germany into a satellite state, effectively making it part of their empire. So the furthest they got, in terms of actual gains, was the eastern part of Central Europe. Nowhere near conquering Western Europe.
@@SoulReaperIsHere well the Grand Armee was destroyed in Russia, by Russia and all of these powers you are saying contributed really hardly contributed. And Russia had no interest in conquering France. Stalin didn't even want to conquer Germany he wanted to make it neutral like Austria. But the US had other plans.
@@8KoG8 You are going to completely ignore the German campaign of 1813 and how the Russians would have been hopelessly outmatched without Prussian and Austrian troops? What about all the French troops that were kept tied down by the British, Portuguese and Spanish forces in the Iberian Peninsular? You are aware that Napoleon's France still resisted heavily until early 1814 right? The war didn't end in 1812.
Plus now I see you've moved your goalposts. Originally you implied the Russians came close to conquering Western Europe as they entered Paris in the Napoleonic Wars. Now you are saying they never had the intention of conquering Western Europe. So it sounds like you agree with the statement that they never came close to conquering Western Europe after all.
@@SoulReaperIsHere I am aware when and how Napoleon was defeated. And you are coping. Also no you are completely misrepresenting what I said. lol.
I would take issue with the claim that the US imperial model is in fact hugely different to the British Empire in its economic model. In essence both essentially privatised the profits while socialising the costs on their own populations. If the average Briton had genuinely shared in the profit of Empire then one would have expected them to enjoy better nutrition and to grow taller. The reality is that the average English male in 1850 was about three inches shorter than when James 1 ascended to the throne in 1603.
ZOG
It's GAE. The GAE is not contingent upon zionists. Remove Js from murka and the beast would still exist.
In the 2nd paragraph, you described the EU as a "supra-national holding mechanism", along with Nato. Does the US really have any control over the EU, and if so, how?
1) It was set up as a condition for Marshall Aid.
2) A lot of the EU works via the major member states (France, Germany, and, until recently, Britain) setting policy. Britain and Germany have been occupied since the war, with US Army Europe on their soil, and Britain in particular hooked on American finance.
3) You have to remember that the GAE is a global empire, at least in part, run for a certain group. These people wield enormous power in Britain and France as well (look at Tory and Labour cabinets over the last 45 years).
- Military occupation by US forces
- Spying on/hopeypots for European elites for blackmail
- Bribing European elites with industry/think tank revolving doors
- Financing subservient parties via "NGOs", interfering in elections via spying on opposition parties
- Influencing public opinion via MSM propaganda
It is the way it is due to the nature of the modern world. Was Protestantism not a great leveling? Did the British not undermine European nations? Did they not laugh at the demise of the Spanish or at the French Revolution? Would Britain have had any chance of becoming a hegemonic power if Europe resisted it with an adherence to cultural values and dignity and by overcoming their own disputes? The liberal empires rise due to the moral failing of previous orders which creates the power vacuum to exploit. The ability to destroy cultures is due to the availability of mass communication technology and is not uniquely American. As Spengler and Strauss have pointed out it is all of liberal tradition one should blame. The whole angle on Zionism is also a pointless tack-on as if it wasn't the British who supported it in the first place. All of this is insufficient. I do however agree with the call to resist the GAE's propaganda, however one cannot place the past in its place. As Evola had pointed out treating the late form of a disease with its early onset form is lunacy. The antidote has to either be something entirely new which is usually born out of a collapse or something different that already exists; any other road leads the same way.
AA on the case...
Thanks AA
Judeo Saxon Empire?
You can leave out the 'saxon' part. Anglosaxons were a mercenary class, only used to destroy the last free european nations, and right now they pay the price for their kinslaying by being discarded and replaced by pakistanis.
It certainly is Gae
I clearly remember parts of this. That comes with genuine interest and good writing. Yet I think that the "Total opposition" posture is mostly not practicable, as the US and the USD have so much global influence.
have so much influence for now ...
one could reasonably argue, in addition, that: 1) they empowered enemy / alien civlizations (Japan and especially China) for short short short term profits (in the case of China the technological transfer provided by the GAE is astonishing, to the point of appearing willingly tracherous) - but it is not so new, the southern States in the period 1800-1860 did everything in their power to increase ten folds their black populations, always for short term profits ; 2) strangely enough, once again, our greatest enemies are two fellow majority Indo-European nations as Russia and Iran.
AA must be protected at all costs.
It infuriates me every time an American criticises European nations for insufficiently contributing to collective defence. I have to figure out, every time, if the critic is either ignorant, or dishonest about the way in which the US spent the majority of the 20th century leveraging every advantage it could to undermine the great powers and eventually establish itself as world hegemon.
It's actually a very fitting conundrum for the US, in that American political philosophy in its foundations is naive, foolish and hypocritical. The US fought long and hard for an end to colonialism and then wept when the newly established states proved to be out of their control. The US stages interventions into various nations for "democracy building" which effectively translates to colonialism without any pledge of responsibility to administrate the destabilised region. And now US figureheads kick and scream about the lack of militaristic zeal in nations whose history they had been decrying for two hundred years as oppressive and evil; they now turn for help to the very nations they demoralised and brought low.
The US built itself an Empire that it now complains about sustaining. As positive a world order as it is by comparison to alternatives, I might actually just point and laugh when it goes.
I'm sorry your nation got lazy and stopped developing their own stuff the moment they could suckle at the US's teet. That's not our fault though. You do need to pay your share for your defenses. Perhaps if you started spending on your own military again this "American Empire" wouldn't exist. It's almost like it's the lot of you taking advantage of the USA or something.... weird....
Your channel is eye opening
Academic Agency
Off topic but have you encountered former currency trader Gary Stephenson's arguments for taxing back the Gov spending bloat of the fortunes of the wealthy?
I'm pretty sure the Russian army marched through the streets of Paris before.
yeah Trump: EU payup for protection or we leave!
EU: for real? thanks and good bye xd
Well, what are you waiting for? Get on with it and go. Stop being freeloaders.
the citizens might think that. the puppet leaders... not so much
@@city_of_coompton6832 Even the citizens are brainwashed to think that they need nato
What happened to the Blackpilled interview?
This is an excellent video.
Brilliant as always 👏
Banger video
AA clearly he does not know much about 17th Century Ireland or has decided to ignore it .
Clearly the proto British state had decided to eradicate it & turn it into its image .
UK certainly by then was North Atlantic Venice in everything but name.
This video inspired a new slogan.
You know the saying "don't feed the animals, they will become dependent and forget how to provide for themselves." Well I've found the geopolitical version of this.
Don't defend the Europeans; they will become dependent and forget how to take care of themselves... and then call you an evil overlord for your efforts.
AA give credit where credit is due - well, at least Algeria has a export that they cant use - they dont make wine but very interested in everything else
I see a large overlap between this video and whatifathist Modern Civilization, have you seen it AA? I think you two could do some work together or at least analyse each work and conclussions.
4:40 I like how autistic like me AA is by listing the 4 countries in alphabetical order
With the collapse of the American empire you've got to think about who will fill the vacuum of power? Would a world run by China and Russia be any less brutal?
We will run it.
Who is exactly is we?
GAE is anti life, and anti nature. China, Russia, or any other power, may be brutal, corrupt, and so on, but they are not fundamentally anti life.
@@user-vz1zc3fn7o We can't run ourselves at the moment.
I think we are entering a multipolar world.
And who would do better or different?
Not for long tho, honestly we pullin back
Pax Americana had good intentions but devolved to Pax >eaduJ>
Gae delenda est!
Envy more than hate on clear display here. AA envies the power of those who inherited the British Empire and is motivated by that more than his hatred, based on what they did with that power and imagines that he and his Scylldings "elite" could do better...like all those who became before him and those old empires that crumbled, thinking they too can wield the Damocles sword of power to make a "better" world....on the treadmill of that intoxicating fantasy.
I would not like to be in power only more sensible folk than are there now
This just feels like anger that a Brit holds towards a more successful state than his own.
I'm getting angry.
Another AA video, another candy nook ad.
Obviously american citizens should own never own funs, we can only trust our benevolent government with that.
Ha! GAEEEE
The "American Empire" of AA's fever dream is neither American nor an Empire. Sad!
Surely you jest, sir! Isn't Davos somewhere in America as is the city of Rome where the Club of Rome was founded? Wasn't Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi an American? Have you forgotten America's century long love affair with Marxism and other forms of socialism. Especially in the 1950's.
It's schizophrenic.
Global Israeli American Empire.
GIAE.
HA! GAEEEE
Pasta! Pasta! Pasta! 🤷🏾♂️
My empire good and noble, others bad.
you're not cornish stop hiding behind someone elses culture and flag, american
@@test-201 how can I be hiding when a smart guy like you found me.
@@timcornish2788 change your pic and go get a spanish lesson
@@test-201 Cultural appropriation sounds like a lefty outrage thing.
@@timcornish2788 yeah whatever go get a spanish lessons and change your profile picture, you're not cornish
👍👍
No u r
HA! GAYY!!
Lol gae
Why are you gae?
So the main takeaway here is: whaaaa merca is bad and England is too weak and pathetic to stand up to the baaaaad mercans whaaaa….. ok gotcha.
No.
Found the burgermutt
No, America is too weak and pathetic to stand up to a certain group.
@@tastypymp1287Yes…
@@cyberninjazero5659This has become a coping channel for Brits lead by a guy who isn’t even British…
Which is ironic because y’all like to choose people who aren’t British to rule you.
ZOG