Hi I just wanted to congratulate you on completion of your first year of writing! I found you through my Robert Barnes daily brief and I was seeking to understand what all this meant. You had me when you first wrote of our trucker’s freedom convoy and tried to break down what all of it meant. I appreciated your verbal descriptions and breakdowns and explanations of the professional class of managerial elites and the blue collar working class truckers who started the protest for their own unhappiness with their mandates but how it quickly and organically evolved into our truckers fighting for all of our freedoms lost and representing all of us across Canada who couldn’t be there in person ourselves… and how our movement spread to other parts of the world and gained momentum showing them they too could fight the oppression but the globalists didn’t like this so the news cycle was quickly replaced with Ukraine Russia war for breakfast lunch and supper.
Anyways really do enjoy your writing and am looking forward to this year’s works! Congrats!
I'm very partial to people who look at society as a cycle, or series of cycles; "The Fourth Turning", George Freidman's "The Storm Before the Calm", George Modelski's Model of World Leadership, Martin Armstrong's Economic Confidence Model, etc. And as I look at the works those people and their teams produce, I can see the generational ebb and flow of ideas and groups. I think the managerial elite that is causing so much damage right now is directly tied to Globalism and two cycles, one described by Friedman and the other by Armstrong. In Friedman's newest book, Strom Before the Calm, he talks about two cycles; an 80-year political institutional cycle, and a 50-year socio-economic cycle, and how 2028-2032 is an overlap where both cycles turn over and that this time period is the first in American history where both turnover simultaneously. As well, Martin Armstrong of armstrongeconomics.com has something he calls the Economic Confidence Model (its really something like 72 models all feeding their results into another model...) that shows the US and China will change places as the dominant power in the world because of the collapse of Globalism, which is primarily a result of the current American led World Order (or American Empire as Ray Dalio, Friedman, or George Modelski would describe it in their own ways), and the collapse of America's standing as the world leader. The system the US created after WW2 is over and collapsing, and the managerial elite (ie the technocrats), are the cause of that collapse; populism is the inevitable backlash against them for destroying the system in their greedy desire for increased profits (getting China into the WTO so they could outsource manufacturing and engineering work in order to skim more profits for themselves) , and the politicians they cultivated and funded to enable their economic pursuits ala Friedman's 50-year socio-economic cycle. So what comes next? Armstrong predicts China surpasses the US in 2032 (specifically and even down to the dates); Freidman predicts 2032 as the political-economic cycle being complete; Modelski and Dalio would say that either the US or China will be the leading power in the world at the end of "a long lifetime (ie 80-120 years)" from the beginning of American supremacy (1945). Either the US rules for a second long lifetime, or it moves to China unless they have a complete and total collapse/implosion. Either way, Friedman suggests that there will be a hard swing away from the managerial elites and technocrats, but post-2032 both working class and technocrats (or as N.S. Lyons' The Upheaval Substack calls them the 'physicals' and 'virtuals' - a great series on Gnosticism BTW, since he sees this as a continuation of a religious battle going back 1,000 years!) will come to realize they each need each other in order to survive - a delicate peace that will emerge after 2032. Enter Peter Zeihan and his thoughts on the future (his books "The End of the World is Just the Beginning' and 'Disunited Nations') where he sees the US retreating into a North American economic cycle (NAFTA 2 / MCA trade deal) and a few select partners (Japan, South Korea, Australia, UK) creating a somewhat closed economic system and American power only being projected to support a form of militant mercantilism like that of the late 1800s-early 1900s in order to secure resources and commodities that that economic block needs to trade amongst themselves. In that condition, how does the managerial elite, technocrats, virtuals, physicals, communities, and working class all fit back together? We're heading for a break up, and Zeihan has interestingly pointed out how the 2 political parties in the US are fracturing and realigning by the various factions that make up the voting blocks of each party. The new parties that form under the old names will still be Democrats (virtuals, technocrats, managerial elite, socialists) and Republicans (physcials / working class, fiscal conservative, small government, anti-abortion, Christian - especially blacks and hispanics); the national security first, neo-cons, and Communists become the swing voters.
In that context, I think your research is valuable to look at the two factions that will emerge over the next 10 years, and their ideological motivations as pertains to economic development in a post-Globalism world. And within that context, what governmental ideology would best minimize conflict between the physicals and virtuals, and bring the greatest quality of life to each group. In other words, knowing that the managerial elite and technocrats will exist no matter what, how do you aim them at an external entity so that they don't cause harm domestically, and the rest of us can get along happily without them??
Big question at the end there. I gave one (wildly unpopular) answer in my book, The Managerial Class on Trial. This substack is gradually working its way toward a second possible approach. We'll see.
That's interesting. I haven't seen these, but I like Peter Turchin's model (how empires/societies rise and fall, and go through cycles of stability and instability). He formalizes his model in mathematical equations so it can be tested against historical data and has a huge amount of research supporting it's predictions. His model also suggest that the 2020s will be a decade of great instability for the USA.
Speaking of distractions along the way, would Danielle Smith’s recent apology and promised Alberta Sovereignty Act be of relevance here? On the former, from what I read, she is counted as the first leader to publicly apologize for government discrimination of those who made a free decision to not have a covid inoculation.
Congratulations on your anniversary and thank you for your engaging content and for so much variety. I’m really enjoying The Managerial Class on Trial, which is taking me forever to finish due to my super slooow reading style.
A big part of the story will be about the prospects for genuinely decentralized federalism: a radically federal pluralism. In that context, Smith's Sovereignty Act has the potential to be a fascinating development in all of this.
Hi I just wanted to congratulate you on completion of your first year of writing! I found you through my Robert Barnes daily brief and I was seeking to understand what all this meant. You had me when you first wrote of our trucker’s freedom convoy and tried to break down what all of it meant. I appreciated your verbal descriptions and breakdowns and explanations of the professional class of managerial elites and the blue collar working class truckers who started the protest for their own unhappiness with their mandates but how it quickly and organically evolved into our truckers fighting for all of our freedoms lost and representing all of us across Canada who couldn’t be there in person ourselves… and how our movement spread to other parts of the world and gained momentum showing them they too could fight the oppression but the globalists didn’t like this so the news cycle was quickly replaced with Ukraine Russia war for breakfast lunch and supper.
Anyways really do enjoy your writing and am looking forward to this year’s works! Congrats!
I'm very partial to people who look at society as a cycle, or series of cycles; "The Fourth Turning", George Freidman's "The Storm Before the Calm", George Modelski's Model of World Leadership, Martin Armstrong's Economic Confidence Model, etc. And as I look at the works those people and their teams produce, I can see the generational ebb and flow of ideas and groups. I think the managerial elite that is causing so much damage right now is directly tied to Globalism and two cycles, one described by Friedman and the other by Armstrong. In Friedman's newest book, Strom Before the Calm, he talks about two cycles; an 80-year political institutional cycle, and a 50-year socio-economic cycle, and how 2028-2032 is an overlap where both cycles turn over and that this time period is the first in American history where both turnover simultaneously. As well, Martin Armstrong of armstrongeconomics.com has something he calls the Economic Confidence Model (its really something like 72 models all feeding their results into another model...) that shows the US and China will change places as the dominant power in the world because of the collapse of Globalism, which is primarily a result of the current American led World Order (or American Empire as Ray Dalio, Friedman, or George Modelski would describe it in their own ways), and the collapse of America's standing as the world leader. The system the US created after WW2 is over and collapsing, and the managerial elite (ie the technocrats), are the cause of that collapse; populism is the inevitable backlash against them for destroying the system in their greedy desire for increased profits (getting China into the WTO so they could outsource manufacturing and engineering work in order to skim more profits for themselves) , and the politicians they cultivated and funded to enable their economic pursuits ala Friedman's 50-year socio-economic cycle. So what comes next? Armstrong predicts China surpasses the US in 2032 (specifically and even down to the dates); Freidman predicts 2032 as the political-economic cycle being complete; Modelski and Dalio would say that either the US or China will be the leading power in the world at the end of "a long lifetime (ie 80-120 years)" from the beginning of American supremacy (1945). Either the US rules for a second long lifetime, or it moves to China unless they have a complete and total collapse/implosion. Either way, Friedman suggests that there will be a hard swing away from the managerial elites and technocrats, but post-2032 both working class and technocrats (or as N.S. Lyons' The Upheaval Substack calls them the 'physicals' and 'virtuals' - a great series on Gnosticism BTW, since he sees this as a continuation of a religious battle going back 1,000 years!) will come to realize they each need each other in order to survive - a delicate peace that will emerge after 2032. Enter Peter Zeihan and his thoughts on the future (his books "The End of the World is Just the Beginning' and 'Disunited Nations') where he sees the US retreating into a North American economic cycle (NAFTA 2 / MCA trade deal) and a few select partners (Japan, South Korea, Australia, UK) creating a somewhat closed economic system and American power only being projected to support a form of militant mercantilism like that of the late 1800s-early 1900s in order to secure resources and commodities that that economic block needs to trade amongst themselves. In that condition, how does the managerial elite, technocrats, virtuals, physicals, communities, and working class all fit back together? We're heading for a break up, and Zeihan has interestingly pointed out how the 2 political parties in the US are fracturing and realigning by the various factions that make up the voting blocks of each party. The new parties that form under the old names will still be Democrats (virtuals, technocrats, managerial elite, socialists) and Republicans (physcials / working class, fiscal conservative, small government, anti-abortion, Christian - especially blacks and hispanics); the national security first, neo-cons, and Communists become the swing voters.
In that context, I think your research is valuable to look at the two factions that will emerge over the next 10 years, and their ideological motivations as pertains to economic development in a post-Globalism world. And within that context, what governmental ideology would best minimize conflict between the physicals and virtuals, and bring the greatest quality of life to each group. In other words, knowing that the managerial elite and technocrats will exist no matter what, how do you aim them at an external entity so that they don't cause harm domestically, and the rest of us can get along happily without them??
Big question at the end there. I gave one (wildly unpopular) answer in my book, The Managerial Class on Trial. This substack is gradually working its way toward a second possible approach. We'll see.
That's interesting. I haven't seen these, but I like Peter Turchin's model (how empires/societies rise and fall, and go through cycles of stability and instability). He formalizes his model in mathematical equations so it can be tested against historical data and has a huge amount of research supporting it's predictions. His model also suggest that the 2020s will be a decade of great instability for the USA.
Speaking of distractions along the way, would Danielle Smith’s recent apology and promised Alberta Sovereignty Act be of relevance here? On the former, from what I read, she is counted as the first leader to publicly apologize for government discrimination of those who made a free decision to not have a covid inoculation.
Congratulations on your anniversary and thank you for your engaging content and for so much variety. I’m really enjoying The Managerial Class on Trial, which is taking me forever to finish due to my super slooow reading style.
Thanks!
A big part of the story will be about the prospects for genuinely decentralized federalism: a radically federal pluralism. In that context, Smith's Sovereignty Act has the potential to be a fascinating development in all of this.
Sounds delicious. Happy birthday!