Before the first half of the twentieth century had concluded, European elites had led their people into two world wars that left over 100 million dead. These are the ideological twins of those so-called leaders. They are again leading their people to a catastrophe of epic proportions. This time, the people must reject this drive to war and throw the bums out.
I know this to be a fact. Mircea Geoană was Romanian Ambassador to the US from 1996-2000, and was then Romania's Foreign Minister from 2000-2004. While he was Foreign Minister he was cultivated by the British under Tony Blair's government when Rumania took the Presidency of the OSCE in 2001.. He was accompanied by a British diplomat (no. 2 in the UK Embassy in Bucharest) the entire year of the Romanian Presidency of the OSCE, who even wrote his speeches. This same diplomat was then loaned to Romanian Foreign Ministry for yet another year by Blair's Foreign Minister Jack Straw, to reorganise the entire Romanian Foreign Ministry. Later in 2006, Geoană 'founded' and became President of the Aspen Institute Romania, and this same diplomat went with him to be the Director of the Institute. This British diplomat had close relations with the Anericans. The Aspen Institute Romania then started Aspen Young Leaders Programme. Geoană held many prominent positions before being appointed Stoltenberg's NATO Deputy Secretary General.
Listening to the conversation with Colonel Wilkerson cleared the fog and offered, almost as a eureka moment, a clearer view of the deeper geopolitical roots of today’s leadership deficit.
Post-1990 US unipolarity → hegemonic order-building → institutional capture → loyalty over strategic competence → recycling of failed leadership → multilateral paralysis → crisis of global governance.
US unipolarity did not merely concentrate power at the international level; it generated a transnational leadership ecology in which proximity to the hegemonic centre became a source of protection, advancement, and impunity. In this order, loyalty to the strategic architecture of American primacy often insulated elites from the consequences of policy failure.
The central thesis is that the post-1990 era of US unipolarity did not simply produce American dominance; it entrenched a geopolitical order in which access to power, influence, institutional legitimacy, and reputational rehabilitation became tied to alignment with Washington’s strategic preferences.
Across international organisations, alliance systems, security bureaucracies, financial institutions, think tanks, and transnational policy networks, a self-reinforcing architecture emerged that privileged political reliability over independent judgement, strategic competence, or demonstrable success.
Leadership was therefore increasingly defined by proximity to hegemonic power and by participation in the maintenance of a US-centred order, rather than by the ability to resolve crises or defend the broader interests of international society.
The result was a geopolitical incentive structure in which failure was rarely terminal for those who remained embedded within the dominant strategic consensus.
Officials associated with military overreach, financial mismanagement, diplomatic collapse, regime-change failures, or institutional stagnation were often not displaced from influence; instead, they were recycled through think tanks, advisory boards, international agencies, corporate networks, university centres, media platforms, or new government posts.
This produced an elite circulation of failure: accountability was diluted, loyalty was rewarded, reputations were laundered, and strategic conformity became a substitute for competence.
This dynamic helps explain the contemporary crisis of global governance. Many institutions created to manage international order have become structurally constrained by the same hegemonic logic that shaped their post-Cold War era.
Rather than functioning as autonomous mechanisms for collective problem-solving, they have often operated as instruments for reproducing Western strategic priorities, stabilising US primacy, and disciplining alternative centres of power.
The cumulative effect has been the institutionalisation of mediocrity, the protection of failed leadership from accountability, and the weakening of multilateral capacity at precisely the moment when the world faces systemic crises.
This also helps explain the emergence of a captured transatlantic leadership class: an elite formation marked by strategic dependency, moral exhaustion, Atlanticist conformity, and geopolitical paralysis, especially in Europe and across institutions tied to the liberal international order.
The rise of the Epstein Class should therefore be understood not merely as a reference to individuals associated with scandal, but as a broader geopolitical category: a transatlantic elite formation characterised by impunity, institutional protection, reputational laundering, compromised legitimacy, and insulation from democratic accountability.
To compensate for this leadership of failure, the ruling institutions of the unipolar order increasingly turned to talking points, strategic messaging, and propaganda aimed at managing public perception.
We now inhabit an ecosystem of narrative warfare, in which political authority is sustained less through performance than through the construction, repetition, and policing of narratives. It is, in effect, leadership by narrative: the substitution of communicative control for strategic competence.
That’s known for decades an goes at least back to East / West German unification. It was all ways clear EU will become the political arm of NATO. This explains it’s a ti-democratic, not directly elected executive management, it’s untouchability, aka immunity.
In brief - they only allow puppets to rise and take power. Anyone who is democratically elected or favoured, but who does not align with what a puppet is expected to say and do, is cancelled.
Like Romania's Călin Georgescu - the whole election was cancelled over mere allegations of "Russian interference." And when it turned out that it was actually the opposition who ran those ads... Nothing. The results weren't reinstated, Georgescu wasn't allowed to run again on different grounds, and his party lost.
For the EU and the West, democracy is democracy only when you chose the right candidate that suits their interest. In other words, a puppet.
The power-hungry leaders drunk on violence and control, filled with pride, they plan an increased control of the human race toward destruction - complete moral corruption.
Before the first half of the twentieth century had concluded, European elites had led their people into two world wars that left over 100 million dead. These are the ideological twins of those so-called leaders. They are again leading their people to a catastrophe of epic proportions. This time, the people must reject this drive to war and throw the bums out.
I know this to be a fact. Mircea Geoană was Romanian Ambassador to the US from 1996-2000, and was then Romania's Foreign Minister from 2000-2004. While he was Foreign Minister he was cultivated by the British under Tony Blair's government when Rumania took the Presidency of the OSCE in 2001.. He was accompanied by a British diplomat (no. 2 in the UK Embassy in Bucharest) the entire year of the Romanian Presidency of the OSCE, who even wrote his speeches. This same diplomat was then loaned to Romanian Foreign Ministry for yet another year by Blair's Foreign Minister Jack Straw, to reorganise the entire Romanian Foreign Ministry. Later in 2006, Geoană 'founded' and became President of the Aspen Institute Romania, and this same diplomat went with him to be the Director of the Institute. This British diplomat had close relations with the Anericans. The Aspen Institute Romania then started Aspen Young Leaders Programme. Geoană held many prominent positions before being appointed Stoltenberg's NATO Deputy Secretary General.
Listening to the conversation with Colonel Wilkerson cleared the fog and offered, almost as a eureka moment, a clearer view of the deeper geopolitical roots of today’s leadership deficit.
Post-1990 US unipolarity → hegemonic order-building → institutional capture → loyalty over strategic competence → recycling of failed leadership → multilateral paralysis → crisis of global governance.
US unipolarity did not merely concentrate power at the international level; it generated a transnational leadership ecology in which proximity to the hegemonic centre became a source of protection, advancement, and impunity. In this order, loyalty to the strategic architecture of American primacy often insulated elites from the consequences of policy failure.
The central thesis is that the post-1990 era of US unipolarity did not simply produce American dominance; it entrenched a geopolitical order in which access to power, influence, institutional legitimacy, and reputational rehabilitation became tied to alignment with Washington’s strategic preferences.
Across international organisations, alliance systems, security bureaucracies, financial institutions, think tanks, and transnational policy networks, a self-reinforcing architecture emerged that privileged political reliability over independent judgement, strategic competence, or demonstrable success.
Leadership was therefore increasingly defined by proximity to hegemonic power and by participation in the maintenance of a US-centred order, rather than by the ability to resolve crises or defend the broader interests of international society.
The result was a geopolitical incentive structure in which failure was rarely terminal for those who remained embedded within the dominant strategic consensus.
Officials associated with military overreach, financial mismanagement, diplomatic collapse, regime-change failures, or institutional stagnation were often not displaced from influence; instead, they were recycled through think tanks, advisory boards, international agencies, corporate networks, university centres, media platforms, or new government posts.
This produced an elite circulation of failure: accountability was diluted, loyalty was rewarded, reputations were laundered, and strategic conformity became a substitute for competence.
This dynamic helps explain the contemporary crisis of global governance. Many institutions created to manage international order have become structurally constrained by the same hegemonic logic that shaped their post-Cold War era.
Rather than functioning as autonomous mechanisms for collective problem-solving, they have often operated as instruments for reproducing Western strategic priorities, stabilising US primacy, and disciplining alternative centres of power.
The cumulative effect has been the institutionalisation of mediocrity, the protection of failed leadership from accountability, and the weakening of multilateral capacity at precisely the moment when the world faces systemic crises.
This also helps explain the emergence of a captured transatlantic leadership class: an elite formation marked by strategic dependency, moral exhaustion, Atlanticist conformity, and geopolitical paralysis, especially in Europe and across institutions tied to the liberal international order.
The rise of the Epstein Class should therefore be understood not merely as a reference to individuals associated with scandal, but as a broader geopolitical category: a transatlantic elite formation characterised by impunity, institutional protection, reputational laundering, compromised legitimacy, and insulation from democratic accountability.
To compensate for this leadership of failure, the ruling institutions of the unipolar order increasingly turned to talking points, strategic messaging, and propaganda aimed at managing public perception.
We now inhabit an ecosystem of narrative warfare, in which political authority is sustained less through performance than through the construction, repetition, and policing of narratives. It is, in effect, leadership by narrative: the substitution of communicative control for strategic competence.
When Wilkerson says bought out, I imagine they blackmailed Mark Rutte and put him in the job as he had a sordid past. NL5 Child Sacrifice and Prime Minister Mark Rutte https://foxyfox.substack.com/p/nl5-child-sacrifice-and-prime-minister
That’s known for decades an goes at least back to East / West German unification. It was all ways clear EU will become the political arm of NATO. This explains it’s a ti-democratic, not directly elected executive management, it’s untouchability, aka immunity.
In brief - they only allow puppets to rise and take power. Anyone who is democratically elected or favoured, but who does not align with what a puppet is expected to say and do, is cancelled.
Like Romania's Călin Georgescu - the whole election was cancelled over mere allegations of "Russian interference." And when it turned out that it was actually the opposition who ran those ads... Nothing. The results weren't reinstated, Georgescu wasn't allowed to run again on different grounds, and his party lost.
For the EU and the West, democracy is democracy only when you chose the right candidate that suits their interest. In other words, a puppet.
Ring Around The ZioImperial MIC MayPole ~ round n Round n ROUND
ZioSATANistDCs PERPETUAL MiLiTARY ATTACK on Our planet's BioRegenerative Systems make it not only HUMANITYs Greatest Enemy but EARTHs GREATEST ENEMY
http://earthsgreatestenemy.com/
The human race is bent on self-destruction.
The power-hungry leaders drunk on violence and control, filled with pride, they plan an increased control of the human race toward destruction - complete moral corruption.
...