“Western governments need war,” warns Martin Armstrong, “because their debts are no longer sustainable” (the Lupus Blog)

5 of 5 (2 votes)


About Tyler Durden 


16th May 2024

View original


Interview with Martin Armstrong by Piero Messina for SouthFront

Martin Armstrong is one of the most influential economists of our time. Someone nicknamed him the “Predictor,” because that was the title of the biographical film that helped make his activities known around the world.

Those of Martin Armstrong are not simple “predictions”, since his reflections are based on a collection of precise mathematical formulas and analytical skills. We interviewed him to try to understand the current geopolitical context. From the crisis of Western democracies to the birth of the BRICS front, to arrive at a profound reflection on the risk of a military conflict on a global scale, Armstrong interprets the data in real time thanks to his diachronic "vision" and an effort of several decades. research and analysis. Armstrong's work allows us to connect knowledge of the past to critical factors of the present. For all these reasons, Armstrong's analyzes are valuable for understanding the present and orienting ourselves towards a future which appears strewn with unknowns and pitfalls.


Fukuyama advocated the end of history. Huntington spoke of a clash of civilizations. Is it possible to imagine a third way?

Our greatest threat is centralized control; this is what condemned communism. I agree with Huntington that the clash of civilizations will be based on cultures and religion, primarily due to a centralized attempt to impose a unified culture.

At the end of the 1980s, the geopolitical model of reference was the unipolar world, based on Western primacy. On what cultural, military and economic pillars does the Washington Consensus rest? Is this true freedom?

The military in the economic pillars that dominate Washington today have nothing to do with freedom. These are people who did not want to accept the collapse of communism. The enemy has been transformed by communism into ethnic racism.

With the birth of BRICS, can we speak of a multipolar option? What do you think are the limits of this geopolitical dimension?

The birth of BRICS was brought about by these people we call neoconservatives who engaged in ethnic racism and targeted Russia by removing it from the global economy under SWIFT. This woke up many people around the world to the realization that the dollar was now being weaponized and was no longer an exclusively monetary instrument. Nations began to realize that if they did not comply with Washington's orders, then they could be kicked out of SWIFT. They thus divided the world economy, thus putting an end to globalization.


Your analysis and studies seem to reveal several critical problems regarding the stability of the so-called Western system. There is a deep crisis in democratic systems, there is a lot of distrust with regard to dominant information and above all there are “agents” external to institutions (an example is above all the activity of George Soros) who seem to influence the choices of governments. in the United States and Western Europe. What could happen now and in the years to come?

It is propaganda that we live in a democracy. We live in republics, in which the people are represented and do not have the right to vote on crucial issues. Historically, republics are the most corrupt forms of government compared to a monarchy or dictatorship which cannot be bribed. In a republic, all representatives without term limits are sold to the highest bidder. This has led to the collapse of trust in government, both in Europe and the United States, which has fallen below 30%, the lowest level since World War II. Outside agents such as George Soros, Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum push vested interests that have further undermined trust in our systems. It is the government that decides whether we go to war or not. We never ask people.

Now, we invite you to make some reflections on the geoeconomic dimension. The global capitalist system is based on the debt of sovereign states. Is this a sustainable situation? Who will pay the bill in the end?

The sovereign debt crisis we face has occurred many times throughout history. This situation is unsustainable because governments act in their own self-interest and will always continue to increase their debt to maintain power. Historically, these systems collapse when they issue new debt to pay off old debt, and no one is there to buy the new debt. Once they can no longer continue to borrow new money, they inevitably collapse.

Your predictive model is based on precise calculations. The cycles of history and economics thus seem to continue throughout the period of history. If I'm not mistaken, you compared the current context to the crisis and dissolution of the Roman Empire. Is it correct?

History repeats itself because human nature never changes. The Roman Empire is just one historical example of its successes and failures. It lasted longer than anyone else because it did not impose cultural regulations. Christians called them pagans because they had so many gods. It was the product of their religious freedom policy. Athens had Athena, Northern Europe had Thor, so they didn't try to change the culture of the lands they conquered. They created a common market where someone in Britain could sell products to someone in Rome. Thus, freedom of religion, low taxation, freedom of movement, and a common market combined to create the Pax Romana.

Is it still possible to avoid large-scale global conflict?

It is unlikely that we can avoid a world war. Governments need war because their debts are no longer sustainable. They will use war as an excuse to justify their failings – as was the case in World War II. They will create Bretton Woods II with the IMF digital currency as a reserve.

Pope Francis has been talking for years about a fragmented World War III. From your point of view, is what the Holy Father claims shareable? What are the main weapons of this possible third world war?

I believe we have a third world war that will start piecemeal with the Middle East, Iran versus Israel, Europe versus Russia, North Korea versus Japan and South Korea, China versus Taiwan. But they will eventually merge.

Have you argued that the true wealth of a state lies in its people? Why have we forgotten all this? Above all, who is it suitable for?

The wealth of every nation lies in its people. This was proven with the rise of Germany and Japan after World War II. This is the essence of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand.” But those in government prefer Marx, because he argues that the state has the power to manipulate the people. So governments have forgotten him and are rejecting Smith because Marx gives them more power.


Is it accurate to claim that your analysis succeeds in covering the intersection of geopolitics, global markets and economic confidence? Can you explain to us in a simple way how your Socrates predictive model works? By the way, why did you name him after the Greek philosopher?

I named my computer model after Socrates because the Oracle of Delphi said he was the smartest man in Greece. He tried to prove the oracle false and the process proved it correct. He was tried and sentenced to death because he knew too much. My computer taught me a lot about geopolitics, we had a big bank in Lebanon in the 80s and they asked me if I could create a model on the Lebanese pound. I put the data into the computer and it came out that their country would collapse in 8 days. I thought something was wrong with the data. When I told the customer, they asked me what currency would be best, and I said Swiss franc. Eight days later, civil war broke out. Obviously, they saw the movement of money themselves and came to me to find out the timing. The same thing happened with a customer in Saudi Arabia who was a big shipper. He called me to ask what gold would do tomorrow because Iran was going to start attacking ships in the Gulf. Once again there was advanced information about the war. In 1998, I understood how the computer predicted such events. In June, at our conference in London, I warned that Russia was on the verge of collapse. London's Financial Times snuck to the back of the room and published this forecast at the front of its paper on June 27, 1998. Russia collapsed about 6 weeks later.

Are unpredictable events, such as the terrorist attack in Moscow, also taken into account among the parameters of your predictive model? Can a “black swan” event change the course of history and geopolitical relations?

Yes, we saw capital flows change a day in advance, up to a week in advance in the case of the attack in Israel. Defense stocks began to rise even after 11/XNUMX, the government used our model to determine who had purchased puts on airlines in the days before. Someone always knows when they are going to organize these kinds of events. And they move their money either to make a profit or to avoid a loss. The computer tracks everything. He can't tell me which person did this. Just that the move is about to happen.


source: Zerohedge.Com via Leblogalupus.com on the trail of Gâchette



Most recent articles

Subscribe to the Daily Crashletter

Subscribe to the Crashletter to receive all the new articles on the site at 17:00 p.m.

Archive / Research

Friend sites