|
"The more things change, the more they stay the same." That oft-repeated bromide
contains more truth than most would care to admit. This statement can be applied
to our troubled times as every day we are greeted with the same lurid tales
of death and destruction overseas. Not a day goes by without news of several
bombings and other acts of violence happening throughout the world, especially
in the Middle East region. This violence has been underway since the start
of the year and is reaching the crescendo stage; it's culmination will
undoubtedly bring about a revolutionary change in geo-politics and the global
economy. No country will be untouched by its significance. It's our place
in this article to examine what these changes might be and how they are being
brought about.
The month of July is historically a revolutionary month. If we return back
to the pages of history we will see this proven time and again. From the U.S.
Declaration of Independence, to commencement of the French Revolution of 1789,
to the July Revolution of 1830, major acts of violence and terror often occur
in July. More recently we saw the London Bombing last year on July 7, and this
year's July witnessed the notorious Indian train bombings of July 11.
As we shall see, in virtually all cases these acts of terror are instigated
by a small cadre of vested interests whose design is to bring about a desired
change (i.e., "revolution") through a manipulation of mass psychology, principally
through the emotion of fear.
The French Revolution period of the late 1700s is a fertile field for study
in the various modes of propaganda and manipulation tactics used to bring about
political and economic change to a country. It also shows how the people of
a given country must always be intimately involved in the revolutionary process,
even if it means dragging them kicking and screaming against their will into
the fray (this literally occurred in several instances during the French Revolution).
Change can only be brought about through the active participation of the people
of the country involved in revolution. A passive disinterest or even tacit
consent is never sufficient. The people at some point during the revolutionary
process are always called upon to suffer in some way or another before the
desired change can be brought about.
To see numerous examples of this there is no better reference text than Nesta
H. Webster's classic volume entitled "The French Revolution." Unlike
most studies of this epochal period of French history, Webster delves behind
the scenes and uncovers the details that most establishment histories fail
to uncover. Her exhaustive investigation of the French Revolution brings to
light the involvement of a few sinister men and women and explains how they
managed to drag the country into a long and bloody revolution with consequences
that reach to modern times.
One of the more striking aspects of the French Revolution was the progress
made on behalf of revolution and anarchy by the most unsuspecting accomplices - that
of the normally law-abiding French people. Through various propaganda techniques,
chiefly involving contrived fear and terrorism campaigns, the decent hard-working
folks of France were reduced to their basest natures and driven to commit unspeakable
atrocities against their king and queen. Above all, it was fear that was the
key that enabled a relative handful of conspirators to manipulate multitudes
of Frenchmen and Frenchwomen to do their bidding.
Webster chronicles the beginning of the Revolution ahead of the siege of the
Bastille (which began in July 1789). She provides a riveting description of
the emotional state of the French public in the early stages of the Revolution.
Fear and terror were the weapons used to engender the required state of mind
used by the manipulators to bring about revolution.
Concerning the public agitation just before the siege on July 12, 1789 she
writes: "This agitation...was terrifying...At every moment a fresh rumour was
circulated, adding to the general consternation; now a messenger, wild-eyed,
rushing into the square and crying out that he had just arrived from Versailles
where the deputies were being massacred; now a panic-monger announcing that
the Duc d'Orleans was exiled - thrown into the Bastille - condemned
to death; now warnings shrieked to the terrified people that the troops were
marching on the city to put everything to fire and sword. The seething multitude
that filled the garden and arcades was like a sea lashed by a hurricane; at
each new alarm a long deep moan arose from thousands of throats, a moan that
now grew into a muffled roar of fury, now died away into the silence of consternation."
Webster continues with her vivid description of what has been called the Great
Fear: "The effect of this circumstance on the minds of the people was indescribable.
The wildest scene of confusion began. Men haggard with fear, women pale and
tearful rushed hither and thither; the streets were filled with bands of citizens,
silent and distraught, hurrying like frightened sheep they knew not whither.
Unhappy people driven desperately to and fro by the men who had made themselves
their shepherds!"
Webster later proves that many of the most violent episodes of terrorism during
the French Revolution were not spontaneous outbursts of the supposedly enraged
French peasants, but instead were carefully plotted and pre-planned by a small
group of revolutionary "illuminati." She writes, "In no case, however, do we
find these outrages to be the spontaneous work of the people; the conception
of downtrodden peasants rising incontrollably to overthrow their oppressors....Such
violence as the people committed was invariably instigated by revolutionary
emissaries who persuaded them to act under a misapprehension, and methods of
diabolical ingenuity were employed to overcome their reluctance." The more
things change...
Moreover, Webster places the blame for stirring up revolutionary sentiment
in the French multitudes on what we would today call the government and the
popular press. Quoting a "man of good sense" writing a report to the Committee
of Inquiry, she quotes him as saying: "You wish to know the authors of the
troubles, you will find them...particularly amongst those who are attorneys
or lawyers. They write incendiary letters to their constituents, these letters
are receives by the municipalities which are likewise composed of attorneys
and lawyers...they are read aloud in the principal square, and copies are sent
into all the villages."
Returning to our opening statement about things never changing despite the
progression of history, are we not seeing now an eerily similar replay of this
fomenting fear? Are not the "scandal sheets" of the popular press daily proclaiming
some new terrorist episode (actual or potential) with an aim at arousing fear
in the minds of the populace? And are not the seeds of violent revolution being
planted every day, particularly in the powder keg that is the Middle East?
Indeed, the winds of change are blowing strongly and the Great Fear of late
18th century France is reviving in 21st century America!
One recent example of this fear-mongering in the daily press is found in an
article published by Reuters on July 4, headlined "Minister says new attack 'inevitable.'" The
article was in reference to the first anniversary of the July 7, 2005 London
bombing which killed 52 people. It stated that a new guerrilla attack on Britain
is inevitable, according toa member of the British government. Asked if he
thought further attacks were "inevitable" he responded, "Yes, I do think it
is inevitable, yes." As if expressing such alarmist, impossible-to-prove sentiments
weren't enough, he added, "...there are some exponents of some religious
that believe that it's their job to kill all infidels." Not just "some" infidels,
but "all" infidels. Presumably that includes you and me. The message of course
is the same that is being repeated and circulated throughout the mass media
every hour of every day: "Be afraid...be very afraid!"
As if to underscore the ubiquitous threat that global terrorists pose to us
all, we are given stories to show us that major terrorist threats are being
attempted all the time. One recent example was the headline given by the AFP
on July 7 (a busy day for terror-related news!) The headline read, "FBI foils
terror attacks on New York tunnels, three arrested." It explained that a major
plot involving "martyrdom, explosives and certain of the tubes that connect
New Jersey with Lower Manhattan" was prevented thanks to the ever vigilant
anti-terrorist officials within the government. But what this high-profile
story really amounts to is more fuel for the fire of fear within the public
imagination.
What then is the connection between violence, revolution, and the financial
markets? In our time the most obviously politically sensitive financial commodity
is oil and the crude oil price is daily thrust before our eyes as a barometer
of not only inflationary pressure but of political/military activity, mainly
in the Middle East. Even as this is being written a headline crosses the news
wire: "Oil makes new high as Middle East violence escalates." Thus the relationship
between oil and violence is easy for all to see.
A more finely tuned approach to seeing the correlation between the oil price
and violence in the Middle East and elsewhere is the Global Bombing Momentum
index (GBI) which was developed earlier this year and previously discussed
in these commentaries. As its name implies the Global Bombing Momentum index
shows the increase or decrease in the rate of change of the number of politically
motivated bombings worldwide. At any given time most of these bombings are
of course in the Mid-East region and not a single day passes without at least
3-4 bombings taking place, on average, as reported in the mainstream news.
(Note: "bombings" as defined by the GBI does not include military initiatives
such as aerial attacks, mortars,, etc. It focuses solely on explosive devices
used by non-military personnel in private initiatives).
When the Global Bombing Momentum index is rising it shows not only that the
trend for bombing and terrorist activity to be on the rise but it also paves
the way for further increases in the price of oil and gas. A rise in the GBI
has never failed to produce a rise in the crude oil price.
Going back to the start of this year we find the crude oil price peaking in
late January at approximately $68/barrel. Then in February it fell to a low
for the year-to-date of about $58 by the end of that month. During this same
period of time between January and February the GBI index continued its upward
path of making higher highs and higher lows and didn't peak until around
the middle of March (the same time oil was bottoming). Thus the GBI index made
a positive divergence when compared to the oil price and was predicting that
oil would take off again soon for higher prices. This it did in April when
it rose from approximately $60 to the $75.00 level.

After the near-vertical rally in the oil price during April, crude oil peaked
in May and spent most of that month traveling a sideways-to-slightly lower
path. It bottomed above $68 (previous resistance) and continued its sideways
move into the middle of June, at which point it turned slowly higher again
and most recently made a new high of just over $76/barrel. Throughout the months
of May and June when the oil price was consolidating, the GBI index was screaming
higher, and again making higher highs and higher lows. It spiked on June 14
when an incredible 42 bombings were reported that day, a record. (Interestingly,
a record 104 earthquakes were also recorded that same day by the U.S. Geological
Survey). This gave birth to a spike rally in the oil price that as of July
13 hit a recent high of almost $77.
The lessons of history combined with the lessons of the global bombing phenomenon
show us that not only can a major commodity price be influenced by fear, but
so too can the very social and political fabric of entire countries. We will
soon experience the end goal of the global bombing and terror campaigns and
the result will likely be similar to that of all previous revolutions, namely,
a shift from the "Old Regime" to an entirely new one.
|