Posts
Working Hypothesis
The elite work through government to achieve their
control. The Anglo-elite purposefully
chose to transition (as their primary tool of control) from the government of
Great Britain to that of the United States.
This transition began toward the end of the nineteenth century and was
complete by the end of World War Two.
Besides the evidence presented with the benefit of hindsight (it
happened), there is much evidence that something to this effect was
intended.
At least that’s my story.
Background
Perhaps the most significant work that I have come across
that demonstrates this purposeful intention is a book by W.T. Stead: The
Americanization of the World. I cover
this book in several posts, to be found here. I also find the assassination of McKinley
quite curious, for reasons explained here.
If this version of history is correct, one man should be considered as
perhaps the most important political figure throughout this time – an
on-again-off-again leader during most of the transition period of fifty years:
Winston Churchill. Certainly there were
others: Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson come to mind – yet,
while they could build-up American expansionism, they couldn’t directly control
British actions. Churchill’s presence on
the global stage spanned this time period, playing a key role in many of the
events that contributed to this transition and the downfall of Great Britain as
empire.
Therefore I wonder – was Churchill selected to play this part, to
ensure the transition that was desired by the Anglo-elite? Did Churchill know he was playing this
part? Did he need to know? To try to find some clues, I decided to read
a biography of the man: The Last
Lion, by William Manchester. This
volume covers the years 1874 to 1932.
These years would be the critical years in my chase – if he was chosen,
it happened early on, and for reasons that were visible early on.
An American is struck by the
facility with which so many British intellectuals slight the man who saved
their country. (P. 16)
Perhaps, being British, they have a different view. For the British, it could be concluded that
Churchill was a key figure in the demise of Empire; of even a more direct and
personal impact, consider the fate of the British economy in the several
decades after World War II (something to consider if / when the US empire
follows this same course).
Churchill certainly had a vision early on in the Second
World War:
…by combining the might of the
English-speaking peoples in so strong a defense of the United States and the Commonwealth
that the rest of the world would be held at bay, as it had been held by the
British Empire in the relatively quiescent nineteenth century. (P. 16)
For my hypothesis to hold water, it would be helpful to find
evidence that some hint of this was known to the elite early on – perhaps even forty
or fifty years earlier. If the
characteristics that allowed Churchill to make this statement were known to
those who walk in important circles early on, perhaps my wild goose chase will
have a happy ending.
Wow, what am I thinking?
Manchester’s book is thick.
I never thought I would read a biography of Churchill; such is the world
of tin foil. I will cover the book in
some detail (it will take several posts), but I am only concerned with tidbits
that touch on my quest – who did Churchill know, who knew of Churchill, where
might he have crossed paths with important people, what characteristics of his
were visible early on that might have provided an insight into his
win-at-any-cost attitude to the war (even when a fight was not necessary) –
thereby ensuring that the cost would be the British Empire in favor of an
American Empire – a good outcome for the Anglo-elite, not so good for too many
others.
For now, an overview.
