“The potential consequences are frightening”
Regular Bilderberg attendee and associate editor of the Financial Times Martin Wolf insists that the “global super elite” must stop Donald Trump from winning the presidency.
According to a New Republic profile, Wolf is “staggeringly well-connected within the elite circles he is writing for” and counts amongst his close friends many influential central bankers.
In an editorial entitled The economic losers are in revolt against the elites, Wolf writes that economic “losers” have rejected “the elites that dominate the economic and cultural lives of their countries” and that “the potential consequences are frightening.”
Asserting that “it may already be too late” to stop the wave of populism that Trump has spearheaded, Wolf notes that elites have become, “detached from domestic loyalties and concerns, forming instead a global super-elite.”
This in turn has left ordinary Americans “alienated” and “abused,” with discord over high levels of immigration that only benefits big business leading to the view that elites are “incompetent and predatory.”
“Nativist populists must not win. We know that story: it ends very badly. In the case of the US, the outcome would have grave global significance. America was the founder and remains guarantor of our global liberal order. The world desperately needs well-informed US leadership. Mr Trump cannot provide this. The results could be catastrophic,” writes Wolf, adding that, “If western elites despise the concerns of the many, the latter will withdraw their consent for the elite’s projects.”
As we reported yesterday, Davos power brokers are intent on preventing Trump from capturing the White House, with prominent CEO Martin Sorrell asserting, “It doesn’t matter who the Republicans put up…Hillary will win.”
The Financial Times is the paper of record for the global elite and has been represented at Bilderberg confabs by several other individuals, including Gideon Rachman, who in 2008 called for an “global government” to be imposed.
In his editorial, Rachman admitted that such a system would only be effective if it is “anti-democratic” and promoted via “soothing language” that would prevent “people reaching for their rifles in America’s talk-radio heartland.”
More recently, the FT published an anonymous editorial which called for the abolition of cash in order to give central banks and governments more power.