Clarissa's Blog

4 responses to “It’s Still 1492”

1. 

   Dreidel

   November 10, 2024

   > “Half a millennium later, Spain is still expelling the Jews.”

   How ironic, considering that Spain’s only internationally celebrated hero who’s in all the world’s history books was a Sephardic Jew named Christopher Columbus..

   Fortunately, he discovered a new world where Jews and people of other religions are all welcome.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   Dreidel

   November 10, 2024

   > “Half a millennium later, Spain is still expelling the Jews.”

   How ironic, considering that Spain’s only internationally celebrated hero who’s in all the world’s history books was a Sephardic Jew named Christopher Columbus..

   Fortunately, he discovered a new world where Jews and people of other religions are all welcome.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   mosckerr

   November 10, 2024

   The New Balance of Power

   PVV’s leader, Geert Wilders, has called for a ‘Nexit,’ but this position does not currently reflect the broader majority sentiment within Dutch society. However, other far-right leaders across Europe have congratulated Geert Wilders on his victory, emphasizing their shared anti-EU sentiments.

   The Dutch political landscape has buzzed like a beehive with discussions about Nexit. After all, Brexit set a precedent, and now everyone’s eyeing the Netherlands. Geert Wilders, the far-right leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV), has been waving the Nexit banner. The Netherlands thrives on trade. Rotterdam—their colossal port—anchors their economy. A Nexit compares to the risks of unplugging the espresso machine at a busy café—it’d hurt. Unlike the UK, the Dutch love the euro. But the Dutch absolutely want less of the Brussels bureaucracy and allot fewer red tape tangles. Even the pro-European crowd agrees: EU reform way overdue.

   The coronavirus pandemic and EU’s vaccination strategy has aroused a strong minority opposition lead by Geert Wilders PVV Party for Nexit. Some individuals and Opposition groups condemn the long-term effects and societal impacts of the Covid-19 mass vaccinations! Nexit opposes the box thinking of EU bureaucracies like those of the World Health Organization (WHO) bureaucrats, who lavish praise and awe for the Covid-19 mass injections of the EU populace.

   Nexit taps into a broader sentiment of frustration with perceived bureaucratic overreach, both within the EU and organizations like the WHO. Geert Wilders and his supporters argue that the EU’s centralized socialist decision-making stifles national sovereignty and imposes unnecessary bureaucratic regulations. This perspective resonates with those who feel that the EU’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, including its vaccination strategy, a Corporate monopoly-greed-betrayal of the European peoples!

   The pogroms of the early 20th century were part of a larger pattern of antisemitism in Europe, which the Amsterdam pogrom and Kristallnacht directly remembers! Understanding this context helps illuminate the long-standing vulnerabilities of Jewish communities and the historical roots of conflicts involving Israel and its anti-semitic racist enemies. The rise of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah often includes deeply antisemitic rhetoric. All Arab Israeli wars starting with the ’48 Independence War fought over the racist Nazi like Arab absolute rejection of Jews equal rights to self-determination in the Middle East. Their ideologies viewed as a continuation of historical antisemitic attitudes, which can lead to violence against Jewish communities globally.

   The conflicts involving Hamas and Hezbollah, also rooted in territorial, political, and religious disputes in the Middle East. But Arab racism which categorically rejects Jewish self determination, this defines the Arab Israeli wars fought in the 20th and 21st Centuries. The historical context of antisemitism, including events like the recent Amsterdam pogrom, reflect old long standing motivations and narratives used by Nazi-like racists. The actions and ideologies of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah can significantly impact Jewish communities worldwide, influencing perceptions and experiences of Jewish safety and belonging.

   Consider the connection between PM of Israel wanting to break of diplomatic relations with the UN, using UNRWA and UNIFIL as justification; coupled with the UN distortion of Israeli condemnations which perverts Chapter VI suggestions unto Chapter VII ultimatums like as found in the last UNGA condemnation of Israel, serves as the foundation of Israel’s desire to break off all diplomatic relations with the UN-nations in particular due to Israel’s rejection of the Wilson/FDR\Truman notions of a World Government by which nation states conduct international diplomacy.

   PVV’s leader, Geert Wilders strongly favors and supports Nexit! Could a secret alliance between Israel and the Netherlands use the Amsterdam pogrom and the corruption of UNRWA and UNIFIL on Oct 7th, for the Netherlands to leave the EU and Israel leave the UN?

   Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV), advocates for the Netherlands to exit the EU. His stance is largely driven by concerns over national sovereignty and immigration policy. If Wilders were to gain significant political power, a shift towards a more Israel-friendly foreign policy could coincide with his Nexit agenda, potentially framing it as a way to assert Dutch sovereignty against perceived international biases.

   A hypothetical alliance between Israel and the Netherlands could focus on mutual interests, including security and economic cooperation, especially if both nations feel marginalized by the EU and UN. Both countries could leverage historical narratives, including the recent Amsterdam pogrom, to rally domestic support for their respective political agendas, framing their actions as protecting national interests and historical legacies.

   Breaking ties with international organizations carries significant risks & repercussions for both Israel and the Netherlands, affecting trade, diplomacy, and security arrangements. Combine this with the possibility of Trump deciding to “bring the boys home” from Europe; the US leaving NATO in exchange for Russia to leave the Ukraine including Crimea. Furthermore, in light of the rise of the BRICS currency competition against the dominance of the international dollar. Trump potentially negating the Wilson establishment of the Federal Reserve and returning America to the pre-1913 gold standard commodity based currency. Thus the alignment of a US/Israel\Netherlands economic alliance replaces the 20th Century NATO/Allied alliance.

   The Dutch and the British have a strong history of competition and wars. In the 17th Century, the Dutch, with their innovative joint-stock companies and merchant fleets, sailed to distant shores. They founded colonies in North America, India, and Indonesia. Their ships—those sleek fluyts—dominated the seas. The British and Dutch fought four wars; in the the Second Anglo-Dutch War in June 1667, the Dutch pulled off a daring raid on the English fleet in its home port—the Medway, a river in South East England. This humiliation of the British. One of the worst defeats in the Royal Navy’s history, and one of the worst suffered by the British military.- a never forgotten Dutch victory.

   If Trump advocates in negotiations with Putin, for a withdrawal of US troops from Europe, it could signal a major pivot away from traditional US commitments, including the WWI/WWII\NATO Allied alliance. This move might frame the a way to refocus & prioritize upon domestic issues and reduce military expenditures abroad. The idea of the US leaving NATO in exchange for Russia’s withdrawal from Ukraine, including Crimea, suggests a willingness to reshape the security landscape in Europe. This could lead to a re-evaluation of military alliances and security commitments. Both the US, Israel, & the Netherlands share concerns about Iran, regional instability, and terrorism, which could serve as a foundation for a more formalized alliance.

   The rise of BRICS as a counter to the US dollar could significantly alter global economic dynamics. If countries within BRICS establish a competitive currency system, it could challenge the dollar’s dominance and influence in international trade. With Saudi Arabia’s withdrawal from the Nixon era’s petro-dollar monopoly and joining BRICS, the US dollar as the world currency directly threatened and challenged.

   The petrodollar system, established in the early 1970s, tied the US dollar to oil sales, requiring countries to use dollars for oil transactions. This arrangement bolstered the dollar’s status as the world’s primary reserve currency. As one of the largest oil producers, Saudi Arabia’s decision to move away from the petrodollar could undermine the dollar’s dominance. Especially if the rest of OPEC followed the Saudi leadership.

   By joining BRICS, Saudi Arabia aligns itself with a coalition of emerging economies seeking to challenge Western economic hegemony. This move could facilitate trade in alternative currencies, reducing reliance on the dollar. Saudi Arabia’s membership could enhance BRICS’ credibility and economic weight, potentially leading to a more coordinated effort to create a new currency system that competes with the dollar.

   A significant shift away from the dollar in global oil markets could threaten its status as the world’s primary reserve currency. This would have profound impact upon the US economy, including potential inflation and increased borrowing costs. A diminished role for the dollar could lead to a rebalancing of global power dynamics, allowing countries within BRICS to exert more influence on international affairs. The US may need to re-evaluate its foreign policy and economic strategies in response to these shifts. This could include the prioritization of the US/Israel\Netherlands alliance. Both the US and Israel both reject the model of fiat currencies which currently domination world money markets!

   Saudi Arabia’s withdrawal from the petrodollar system and its alignment with BRICS represent a significant challenge to the US dollar’s status as the world’s primary reserve currency. This shift could have wide-ranging implications for global trade, economic stability, and international relations. The evolving dynamics compel\require strategic adaptations from the US and its Primary allies Israel and the Netherlands to navigate this changing landscape.

   A stronger US-Israel alliance could emerge as the US scales back its commitments to NATO. This partnership might focus on shared interests in security, counterterrorism, and geopolitical stability in the Middle East. Proposals to return unto a gold standard mark a radical departure from modern monetary policy. This shift could appeal to some constituencies seeking stability and predictability in economic values but would face significant challenges in implementation. Any dramatic changes in foreign policy, especially regarding NATO and economic systems, would likely face substantial domestic and international opposition. The interplay of these factors—US foreign policy shifts, the potential realignment of alliances, economic competition from BRICS, and radical changes to the monetary system—could reshape the geopolitical landscape in profound ways.

   Wilders’ advocacy for a Nexit reflects a broader wave of populism and nationalism in Europe. His focus on national sovereignty resonates with constituents frustrated by EU bureaucracy and immigration policies. The Netherlands has a strong trade-oriented economy, particularly through Rotterdam’s port. Exiting the EU could jeopardize trade agreements and economic stability, drawing parallels to the challenges faced by the UK post-Brexit.

   President Trump seeks to restore States rights to bureaucratically regulate all trade and commerce within the States as defined by the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution as the basis for dismantling the corrupt Federal post Civil War bureaucracies in Washington. This “tune” enjoyed by the musical ears of both Netanyahu and Wilders’ detestation of a huge Big Brother bureaucratic socialist domination of governance. President Trump has indeed emphasized states’ rights and deregulation as key components of his policy agenda, since the Supreme Court reversed Roe vs. Wade. His approach aligns with Netanyahu and Wilders; both men harshly critical of what they perceive as overreach by corrupt bureaucratic monstrosities.

   This perspective resonates with those who advocate for more localized governance and less centralized control. The common thread among these leaders, their push for greater national sovereignty and a reduction in the influence of supranational organizations and bureaucracies, like the UN. This stance particularly evident in Wilders opposition to the EU’s centralized decision-making and regulatory frameworks.

   During his tenure as Finance Minister under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Benjamin Netanyahu likewise implemented significant economic reforms aimed at reducing the power of state bureaucratic monopolies and promoting free-market principles. His policies included privatizing state-owned companies, cutting taxes, and reducing government spending. President Trump’s Make America Great defined by sharing an identical nation strategic interest. These measures part of all three leaders broader strategy to modernize the economy and encourage private sector growth in America, the Netherlands, and Israel.

   LikeLike

   Reply