Crossover Episode for both The Causey Consulting Podcast and con-sara-cy theories.
I recently read Why England Slept and it sounds like it could be a playbook for how the public is led into conflicts, changes, social engineering, etc.
Links where I can be found: https://causeyconsultingllc.com/2023/01/30/updates-housekeeping/
Need more? Email me: https://causeyconsultingllc.com/contact-causey/
Transcription by Otter.ai. Please forgive any typos!
Welcome to the Causey Consulting Podcast. You can find us online anytime at CauseyConsultingLLC.com. And now, here's your host, Sara Causey.
Hello, Hello, and thanks for tuning in today's slash tonight's episode will be a crossover episode, because I feel that it's relevant to both my daytime and nighttime listeners. I recently read the book why England slept. And there were several times in reading this book that I was just struck by how much it seems like inside baseball, it seems like a playbook that is still used today. Even though the book is more than 80 years old, it feels surprisingly, still relevant. Now, as an odd aside, the local library where I obtained this book, because if you want to buy your own copy, it's expensive. I think the cheapest copy around is like 25 or $30. So I go to the library, and they have to retrieve it out of the basement because no one has checked it out in years. For one thing, dobro pathology of America, right? There's all these books when you first walk in about identity politics, and how we're all supposed to hate each other and foment even more vitriol in this country. But a book like this is down in the basement. The other funny thing is that, okay, nobody's checked this book out in years, I want it the same day, I check it out and leave from the library, somebody else pops up and puts a request for a hold on it. So that whenever I'm done with it, they can immediately have it afterwards. And I'm like, that seems odd that the books sat in the basement for years. And then as soon as I get it, somebody else wants it too. Now, maybe that's just a weird synchronicity. Wavelink thing I don't know. But I did find it peculiar. If you're not familiar with this book, which as I said, you know, some, some people didn't seem to have any interest in it for years. And wouldn't be surprising. It was written in 1940. It was turned into a book, but it was originally JFK senior thesis at Harvard, or I guess we should say have it. It was reworked into a book and it doesn't go through the entirety of World War Two, obviously, because it was published in 1940. So the purpose of the book is not just to be a purely historical book about the Second World War, it's to cover the appeasement in Munich. And to answer the question of why England slept. It's a it's a play on Churchill's book while England slept. Okay, well, why did they do that? Why? Why did they have to resort to appeasement? Why weren't they better prepared, so that when an evil force like Hitler popped up on the world scene, they were sort of caught with their pants down? You know, there's even that scene in The Godfather where Clemenza says something like you got to stop them at the beginning, like they should have stopped Hitler at Munich. So this book covers questions about disarmament, the League of Nations budgets, and just the general sense that most people have, I think most sane people have any way that peace is preferable to warfare. So I am on page three. Now there's an introduction. And there's actually a couple of additional forwards in front of the book, but I'm on page three of the actual thesis itself once we get past the introduction, and we're into the meat of why England slept fart one. Here's something that I think you'll find interesting. So JFK writes, rearmament answered all of Germany's problems. Through it, the evils of Versailles would be wiped out through it, unemployment would end through it, Germany would be able to attain her destiny. And so Germany rearmed. I thought about this, and here we are just right, in the opening portions of this book. And I thought that to the number of Saturday broadcasts, where I said, if the powers that be say, we're going to war, we're going to war. If they want to pull people, sons and daughters and grandsons and granddaughters into some hot kinetic war, they're going to do it. They don't care about the casualties. They don't care about the injuries. They don't care if somebody comes back with their limbs blown off or their spinal cord severed. If they say we're going to war, we're going to war. War is a very profitable enterprise. Now, not for me and you not for John and Jane Q public, but for the military industrial complex, the defense contractors, the oil barons, etc. War is a very, very profitable racket. So let's think about this again. The evils of Versailles would be wiped out, unemployment would end And in Germany would be able to attain her destiny, unemployment would end. Think about that. I have wondered, at times, and I hope that this is wrong. This is just a conjecture, and I hope that it's a wrong conjecture. I have wondered if we will get pulled into some kind of hot kinetic warfare as a way to salvage whatever is left of this dumpster fire of any economy, because that's one way of doing it. send everybody to war, make sure that the weapons manufacturers are churning and burning. And let's let's get everybody involved in a war effort. I'm on page 32. Now, no one wished to renounce the weapons upon which they were most dependent. England felt her Navy had been cut to the bone by the Washington conference of 1922. And the London Naval Conference of 1931. France would not give up her army unless the other countries gave her more definite guarantees. Russia embarrassed everyone by demanding complete disarmament. This was a very radical step for a disarmament conference. But it was tempered by the obvious fact that Russia's chief weapon was propaganda, which did not depend on an armed force. I also think about that now in a modern context, I've lamented many times that I feel like our population is just lobotomized. It's not difficult to present your evidence, hey, these job market numbers, they're distorted as hell. And the government is going back and quietly revising these numbers so that historically they look more accurate, but they want you to believe that things are fine, fine, just fine. And if you're laid off, if you're on a work, you can't find anything. Well, it must be your own damn fault, because the economy is great. Look at all the gaslighting. The economy is wonderful. It's just you peons and plebs that are in a bad mood, something's wrong with you, because things are great. If you don't think that things are great. Well, that's because you have faulty thinking it couldn't possibly be, because things things actually are crappy. No, no, it's the peons fault. I wonder if maybe our primary weapon at this point is propaganda. Now I am on page 36. And he refers to Baldwin as in Stanley Baldwin, who was the UK Prime Minister and conservative leader. I believe he was the Prime Minister between 23 and 37. Baldwin the next day made a speech in reply that had a tremendous influence on later British policy. I think it is well for the man in the street to realize that there is no power on earth which can protect him from being bombed. Whatever people may tell him, the bomber will always get through. The only defense is an offense, which means you have to kill more women and children more quickly than the enemy if you want to save yourselves. This speech with its note of hopelessness was quoted again and again through the succeeding years by various parties and organizations who were voting against rearmament. The idea that the bomber will always get through deeply and profoundly impressed the house and more deeply and profoundly impressed the people. Of course, people were horrified by that, who wouldn't be the best defense is a good offense, we need to make sure we weapon up because you got to be willing to kill more women and children than the other guy. Wow. I think that that would make a pacifist of anybody. I thought to have like the TIC tock videos and the social media splash about Gen Z are saying we don't want to go off to war. Which Why would they want to go off to some foreign war where they they don't even know what the purpose of this war is. They don't even know why they're being dragged off. And this is what JFK is talking about the Oxford Union saying we will not die for King or country. Well, what better way to change people's minds than to throw the entire world into a world war? Lest you think something like that could not happen again. You are being very naive. I'm now on page 42, where he quotes sir Bolton, Eyres monsell. The people who always deny us the right to an adequate national defense are precisely the same people who internationally are always clamoring for sanctions for blockades for wars to end war. They always profess to be worshipping the goddess of peace, but to my mind, they're real deity is an ancient heathen God of wrath and vengeance. But if these blood thirsty pacifists, I might call them ever get their way which God forbid, let the country realize what part the British Navy would be called upon to play in any form of castigation they wish to inflict and the First Lord of the Admiralty of the day standing at this box would not be asking for an increase of 3 million pounds but for a sum of money that would well now I break the heart of the British taxpayer in quote, bloodthirsty pacifists. I wouldn't be standing here asking for 3 million pounds but for a sum of money that would break your heart
I'm now on page 54. Many people in England felt that Nazism was only a vigorous nationalist movement which would shortly burn itself out. Others thought that it was largely a fascist movement carried on under the direction of Germany's leading capitalists. Herman, rationing in his book The Revolution of nihilism, I'm going to button and say I was able to track down this book and I intend to read it, it sounds quite interesting. The revolution of nihilism points out that there were many different groups in Germany itself, who were completely duped by Hitler during the first years. It is understandable, therefore, that many in England likewise failed at first to recognize the true nature of the revolution. Indeed, during this period, the fear of communism, Nazism was the great British Bogey, Germany under Hitler, with its early program of vigorous opposition to communism was looked on as a bulwark against the spread of the doctrine through Europe and quote, that kind of sentiment is really setting the stage for the Cold War, isn't it? Communism, that's the great evil that's the great boogeyman and the quarter, not Nazi ism. You know, where the US and the USSR going to have to band together to get rid of Hitler? No, we're worried about communism. I'm going to circle back to page five before I go to page 57. So on page five, he writes, but it takes time to change men's minds, and it takes violent shocks to change an entire nation's psychology. Now on 57, he writes, we stated before that men's ideas changed slowly, and that a nation's ideas change even more slowly. It takes shocks hard shocks to change a nation's psychology and quote, think back to in recent memory. What we experienced with the the shutdowns, the lock downs, the panic buying people washing the outsides of their groceries, people hoarding, toilet paper and hand sanitizer and Lysol spray. Also think back to September one, one. That was a horrifying event, you want to talk about a hard shock. It was terrible. I remember watching things play out on television that day. And I'm not going to repeat them. It's burned into my memory. And that's enough. People were willing after seeing these horrific images, and the death toll people were willing to give up whatever, Freedom whatever privacy, they felt like was necessary for safety. I mean, for me, this feels like a playbook. It takes shocks, hard shocks to change a nation psychology. Yeah, it does. And because of mass media, I mean, he's writing this in 1940. So this is predating cell phones and social media and mass media as we know it now. It's much easier to create those hard shocks. And even though it seems like there's breaking news and bad news and sad news all the time, it's easier for them. Now, even though the world's a bigger place, you'd think it wouldn't be it actually is easier for them now to engineer these hard shocks in order to change people's minds. I'm now on page 65. Churchill in his attacks on the British attitude of complacency received strong support from extreme Imperial groups. magazines like the Saturday Review, which was strongly fascist and was in later years to call for a war on Russia cheer Mussolini on against Ethiopia and beseech Edward the eighth to become dictator supported him. They agree that we have never been certainly not for hundreds of years so defenseless as we are now in quote, warfare can also be something like the setting up of an enemy and the getting people pulled into warfare, that can also be a way for these extreme political ideologies to take hold. Just like I said, about September one one people were willing to give up, whatever whatever freedom whatever privacy just make, the bad people go away, just make us feel safe. People are willing to trade whatever in order to feel safe. Again, we saw that with the I'll wash the outside of my groceries, I'll stay home, I'll lose my job, whatever I have to do to just not get this global death illness. I'm now bottom of page 105 Top of Page 106. By that time, they may have been shocked again by some new development, but it will take several more years before they can meet the new threat. In this way. The dictatorship with its long range policy can always keep ahead of a democracy. A dictatorships leaders realize that ordinarily armaments are so repugnant to a democracy based on a capitalistic system, which means everything must be paid for with taxes, that it will get along on a minimum armament program, a democracy will merely try to counterbalance the menaces that are actually staring it in the face and quote, This made me think of that quote, from a few years back that got Justin Trudeau in hot water, because he, he was at some kind of gathering. And he said, there's a level of admiration I actually have for China, their basic dictatorship is allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime. And then there were people who were originally from China that of course, were very angry and said that he must not be very well informed and use words like foolish, I'm sure they probably had other words that were a little less polite than foolish. I think there are plenty of leaders who feel like well, if we just had dictatorships everywhere, then we could change everything on a dime, we could move quickly, we wouldn't have to worry about what the people actually think the idiots and the unwashed masses. And part of what JFK is talking about in this book is that because Hitler was focused on the rearmament of Germany, and he was the Fuhrer, all the book, the book really did start with him. He was in complete control. He could spend whatever he wanted, he could do whatever he wanted, whereas other countries that were I guess, at least trying to keep some semblance of populism, some semblance of democracy, didn't have the same ability to meet the arms race, because they just weren't making the weapons like he was they weren't spending the money like he was. Um, now on page 207. The summer of 1939 saw the dying gasp of appeasement in the Hudson wolf that discussions about a gigantic loan to Germany from England. Hudson was secretary to the department for overseas trade and wolf that was a right hand economic expert of gatherings. conversations were carried on between the two in which a plan was discussed by which Britain would lend Germany enough capital so that she could convert her armament industries back into peaceful production. God, this plan got nowhere as it was inadvertently disclosed and public protests quickly killed it. Well, I imagine. But it is still valuable as an indication that many British still felt the troubles of Europe were primarily economic, and were problems that could be ironed out without resorting to war and quote, yeah, sure, throw some money at these Nazis, tell them to beat their swords into plowshares, because that's really going to work. Again, I feel like Clemenza now they should have never let him get that far. But But people should know that to this idea that they were going to loan Nazi Germany some money. Yeah, public protests should have killed that. And rightfully so. I am now on page 216. A nation takes a long time to change its mind. But although the change may be gradual, one slight shock may make it change with lightning speed from one position to another. It then frequently forgets the reasons for its previous point of view, it cannot understand how it could have believed as it formally did in quote, yeah, we see that all the time. Now. I mean, the way that that the culture has changed, I am again thinking of the people just wearing face masks not knowing is that really going to prevent the spread of the disease? Is is quarantining going to be enough? What is actually going on here? What's in the staff ease? Are they going to help? Are they going to make it worse? We'll see. We weren't we weren't supposed to know, we weren't supposed to ask any questions. People are just supposed to change on a dime and then wonder how they ever went in public without a facemask and half a gallon of hand sanitizer with them. I mean, so it's so it is. On page 223. He says In contrast, in a democracy, the cry of warmonger will discourage any politician who advocates a rigorous arms policy. This leaves arguments with few supporters, there is no lobby for armaments as there is for relief or for agriculture. No group back by millions of votes can persuade the representatives of the people that this is what the people want. The business lobby will oppose armament as it did in the Congress of American industry proclamation and that of the American Chamber of Commerce in 1938. And quote, well, not anymore. That is something that has changed. When you look at the volume of money that goes into the military industrial complex, and to these defense contractors, it is astounding. So while it might not be that your average everyday American person is clamoring for armaments, and clamoring for, oh, well, somebody
lobby for these weapons manufacturers Nobody has to. They're so powerful, and they're so wealthy, that they don't care whether the American public is for them or against them, like it literally doesn't matter. On page 231, he writes, What we need is an armed guard that will wake up when the fire first starts, or better yet one that will not permit a fire to start at all. We should profit by the lesson of England and make our democracy work, we must make it work right now. Any system of government will work when everything is going well. It's the system that functions in the pinches that survives and quote. So look, if you get people riled up, you get people scared. I mean, just scared out of their wits, they're pretty much willing to trade anything. As he says, these hard shocks, these violent shocks, if you are scaring people with something biological, you're scaring people with. I don't say the T word on the air, but some type of T word attack. It's it becomes whatever, there's no hesitation of well, do you think maybe we're overreacting? Do you think maybe we shouldn't like, give up our freedoms and our privacy over this? Do you think maybe we need to have a debate? No. Wrong answer, you're supposed to panic. I've said this many times on the air, you panic when you're told to panic, you sit down, shut up and calm down when you're told to. And it is strange to me that even though we are in this bigger world, because we're all so technologically connected, it's easier for them to engineer those hard shocks, and to just scare the absolute dickens out of everybody. But when I read that book, there were several pages, as you can see that I bookmarked to come back to because I'm like, this could be an absolute playbook for how the public is managed today. Oh, you don't want this war? You don't want more defense spending? You don't want more armaments? Well, we're gonna convince you that you had damn well better want these things. This is for your own good little peon. We're gonna give you some hard, violent shots to make sure that you want to go along with this. I wish that that weren't the case. And I would love to think that 2024 is going to be everybody's year. But I'm skeptical, especially with this being an election year. We just don't know how far the rabbit hole will go. How far do we have to fall? I don't know. I know that that sounds pessimistic. I do. But I genuinely don't know. In thinking about ways to get the economy to rebound, as I have also said before, like in the in the job market predictions that I made back in November of 2023, to the Boston courier. I don't see any, quote correction that's coming to the economy that's not going to also come without job losses. Now, if there is some kind of warfare effort, I hope that there's not if there is, as he says about Germany, well, going to war is going to solve all of their problems. rearmament is going to solve all of their problems. Everybody's going to work. Everybody's making weight making weapons. Everybody's participating in the war effort. I mean, something like that could happen to us. Hey, the economy is in the dumper. The job market is in the dumper, we've printed up so much bullshit fiat currency that we're in a bind, I know what to do. Let's hit the button. I hope not. I pray not. But I mean, past is prologue. And I feel like this book has given us some really interesting insights into how we're manipulated. Stay safe, stay sane, and I will see you in the next episode.
Thanks for tuning in. If you enjoyed this episode, please take a quick second to subscribe to this podcast and share it with your friends. We'll see you next time.