Are you confused by current events? Are you perplexed as to why things are the way they are?
Do you get confused when politicians go against their campaign promises whether that candidate be a Democrat or a Republican?
If you do, it is probably because you believe in the social view of history.
Not surprisingly, the media and our elites promote the social view of history.
It’s an attractive concept, but it’s wrong.
What moves history and politicians is economics.
The social view of history is wrong.
The social view history states that it is people, their philosophies, their ideologies that move history and shape events. Consequently, much effort is spent to understanding people, cultures and their thinking.
This is reflected by our educational institutions that teach courses in social studies, not history.
The indoctrination into the social view of history is pervasive.
It begins in elementary school, then continues through high school and into college. It is perpetuated by the media.
What is never talked about to any large degree is the monetary view of history, or the economic view of history.
In the economic view of history, it is money and the acquisition of it by the elites that moves history.
This view is never taught in school, and is never talked about much by the media, because it would reveal who the real power in the world is.
If people started talking about economics to any large degree, then war might see the end of its existence as a ruling force in the world.
Wars are often seen and portrayed by the elites and the modern media as a natural consequence of two social forces coming up against each other.
Frequently these two social forces are portrayed as freedom destroyers versus freedom fighters, or wealthy capitalists versus poor working class peasants.
But what if it isn’t that way? What if that is a lie?
What if the wars are being fought because the elites on both sides want to justify their existence as well as make a pile of loot along the way?
What if the social view of history is wrong?
Let’s ask some questions.
Was the war in Vietnam fought to save democracy? Or was it fought because the US wanted to extend its hegemony over Southeast Asia for the purposes of oil and rubber extraction? Let’s not forget about palm oil. We have more palm oil in our bodies than blood.1
Was the war in Syria fought because the US truly desired freedom for the people in Syria? Or was it fought because the US and its ally Israel wanted to damage the Syria-Iran axis – the Syria-Iran axis being a threat to the western allies’ beachhead in the Middle East, that being Israel?
Did the US elites really care that Assad was oppressing his people? They didn’t care about the Saudi regime oppressing its people.
Was the war in Japan fought because the Japanese were oppressing the rights of other peoples in the Pacific Rim, or was it fought because the Japanese were fucking around with America’s rubber plantations? Or perhaps the vital assets that might one day be extracted from Indonesia? Or the oil in Sumatra?
How about the takeover of the Philippines by the US in the early part of the 20th century? Was that undertaken in order to improve the life for Filipinos? Or was it undertaken because the Philippines sits in an important geo-political location? Wouldn’t the Philippines be the ideal place to place bases from which to send bomber jets into countries in Southeast Asia – just in case they got any ideas that might fuck with our money?
The same can be asked of Cuba. Did the US really care about improving the life of Cubans? Or did the US want Cuba in order to exploit its citizenry so as to give us cheap sugar?
Was the Civil War in the United States fought to free the slaves? Or was it fought because the South after seceding was free to import finished goods from England thus creating competition for northern factories? Or maybe it was fought to free up cheap black labor for northern factories who could pay them “slave” wages? Or maybe it was fought to free up cheap black labor to act as scabs against emerging Northern unions?
Why was Jacobo Arbenz overthrown in Guatemala by the CIA? Because the US cared for the citizens of Guatemala who might live under communist oppression? Or was it fought in order to put down labor unions who might represent an economic threat to greedy corporate fruit importers like United fruit (Chiquita) and Standard Fruit (Dole)?
Why did we really fight in Afghanistan? Was it to get Al-Qaeda and bin Laden? Or was it to secure the vital minerals that are found there? Or maybe it was to make corporations a pile of money by fighting a war. We didn’t invade Pakistan. Isn’t that where bin Laden was ultimately found?
Let’s not forget about Iraq. Why did we go to war there? Wasn’t Saddam Hussein our former ally? Didn’t Rumsfeld once shake his hand? Did we really care about Saddam’s oppression of his people? We didn’t care for decades, so why now? Is it possible we went to war because Saddam Hussein was threatening the petrodollar? Or maybe we wanted to make corporations even more money by fighting a war?
Of course, the elites don’t want you asking too many questions. They would rather have you play the same idiotic game that is played out on national television every day of the week.
They want you to engage in the sporting match known as left versus right, Democrats versus Republicans, capitalists versus peasants.
The social view of history rapes you and removes you from the truth. While you debate and fight at the local level against your opponent be he or she Democrat or Republican, the corporate elites are laughing all the way to the bank.
Sincerely,
Archer Crosley
Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved
Cowboy Archer 