The immigration crisis hit Europe dozen months ago was dominated by a strong unanimous voice of European officials and institutions. The debate was driven by sympathy and need to accommodate fleeing asylum seekers. This narrative was not broken by any threats posed by so massive crowd. Crimes and even terrorist attacks were not enough to change the policy of the Western Europe.
The new angle was discovered with leaked documents of Open Society Foundation – a charity of George Soros. From them, we can learn how one man’s vision can lead media efforts and align hundreds of politicians according to one’s will.
Welcome to our latest issue of issue of ValueWalk’s hedge fund update. Below subscribers can find an excerpt in text and the full issue in PDF format. Please send us your feedback! Featuring Tiger Global's losses total 44% in 2022, Allianz Global's $5.8bn SEC settlement, and commodity funds draw in cash. Q1 2022 hedge fund Read More
Every society can boast up to dozen percent of people having enough common sense and free time to be able to base their beliefs on multiple sources. Unfortunately, a case for the majority is quite the opposite – one tearful evening news report can shape views of millions.
Open Society Foundation used populist propaganda before elections to the European Parliament in 2014. Many projects with budgets from several to 340 thousand USD were founded right before the elections.
Crucial goal for this campaign was to achieve or strengthen: fight with hate speech, increase the women’s share in politics and add significance to powers far from the circles of authority. Every single point sounds benevolent and you have to be thoroughly prepared to debate that blind realisation of all those goals can backfire. Example: fight with hate speech easily evolves into censorship of free speech.
This does not change the fact that mentioned goals of Soros’ project were widely accepted especially by unaware, young people. Simultaneously, while being a candidate for the European Parliament it was a cheap way to score easy votes by promoting buzzwords about tolerance and equality.
Let us take one of Open Society Foundation’s projects and analyse it for better reference.
Name: Our Elections – Our Europe!
Project conducted throughout Hungary, France, Italy and Greece. A three-month media campaign aimed at younger people promoted sharing positive stories about immigrants and scoffing any xenophobic reactions. Budget: 50 000 USD.
The campaign realised in such manner reached all EU member states (especially France, Italy, Hungary and the UK) and continued until the EU elections.
1/3 of the EU parliament controlled by one man
You can find a report circulating the web, made for Open Society Foundation by Kumquat Consult “Reliable allies in the European Parliament (2014-2019)”. Understanding how big of a role lobby groups play in Brussels it would be naïve to believe they act accordingly only because they identify with particular goals.
Why do we even bother mentioning it? Because this report talks about 226 MEPs (Members of the European Parliament). This is nearly 1/3 of the institution. The count of “allies of Soros” is higher than mandates given to any single country in the EU. This begs a question over the division of mandates as the true distribution of power is clearly different. A bigger role is played by low-profile charities owned by influential figures.
The European Parliament contains now 8 different political fractions. Today only politicians from the Europe of Nations and Freedom (ENF) parliamentary group are not on the Kumquat Consult list The ENF, the Eurosceptic group is chaired by Marine Le Pen.
Further analysis of Open Society leaked documents give us the answer why so many politicians supported (in the past and continue doing it now) the vision of “open society”. Those who promote this goal are aware of the risk that may threaten security and wellbeing of millions of Europeans but they do it for their own gain. The result is visible in hundreds of thousands of immigrants flooding Europe without being properly checked nor registered. Additionally, German intelligence agencies admitted that fighters of ISIS used the cover of mass immigration to get to Europe. The admission came only after the biggest wave was already on the Continent. Previously they stubbornly hold their story of “there is nothing to worry about” while letting in an unaccounted mass of people in without any control. This situation could not have taken place unless the political influence of a very small group of people had laid the groundwork (propaganda).
Centralisation of power in hands of politicians easily manipulated from the back seat is the priority of George Soros and others with similar ambitions. You already heard different media attempting to erase any national identity. Europeans were asked countless times to believe in their new – European – identity while national distinctiveness is shamed as backward thinking. A Recent example was very ‘innocent’ – MEP Roza Thun tweeted medal table of the Rio Olympics where the EU (as one team) topped others. Question: Have you heard about any athlete fighting for the EU? Maybe, you heard about one who cannot wait for the anthem of the EU to be played when the medals are given? You can point out that it is a direction pushed from top-down rather than the will of Europeans.
Terrorist attacks throwing Europe off balance incited aversion or even hatred towards immigrants. This was according to the plan.
Let us assume that Europe is ruled by leaders who want to refrain from building huge walls alongside borders but also prevent destabilisation on the continent. Scenario when a big number of immigrants suddenly pour inside the Union can be solved by one decree. No social welfare payments for immigrants. The best example of how to handle this situation can also be found in Europe. Look at Poland and the result of the Ukrainian crisis at its borders. Millions of Ukrainians escaped the war-torn country in pursuit of a better life and (what is crucial) a job. Their attitude is appreciative for the warm welcome given by Warsaw.
Immigrants in Western Europe feel different about their new home. Regrettably, the majority of under one million people who reached Europe from the Middle East and Africa, are the worst element to handle. Some of them have a terrorist affiliation, others are lured to the West by the vision of a huge welfare state they can abuse. The real number of those running from war is similar to the share of (the mainstream media mantra) ‘women and children’ in this group. Merely few percent.
This was the plan all along. Thanks to this ‘selection’ calm and peaceful Europeans can resort to violence – even to a civil war. This escalation can change their opinion about any potential intervention in the Middle East. Next thing we know NATO with high approval ratings could occupy (or bring democracy) in another Muslim country.
We also cannot forget about politicians enacting tougher laws limiting everyone’s freedom after every single terrorist attack under the pretence of increasing our security. It takes multiple incidents for an average person to read between the lines and realise that authorities claiming to safeguard citizens are most often the source of very serious problems. In fact, the pervasive impression is that they are mere errand boys used by groups of interest to achieve their goals, increase their reach. The average Joe’s standard of living ranks very low on their agenda.
The example I presented above is just one instance of George Soros intervention in Europe but in the light of this year’s US elections worth mentioning is the fact that he is very much rooting for Hillary Clinton. His support for the Democratic Party candidate reached 30 million USD. Strengthening the grip of special interest groups in the US (like George Soros and his helpers) means the willingness to further destabilise different regions of the World, just like it has happened in the Middle East recently.
Independent Trader Team