Promoting Women, Part VII

October 13, 2015

“What the f*** did we come here for? There’s no money here.’’~ Hillary Clinton to her staff upon arriving at a 4H Club in Upstate New York

By Catherine Austin Fitts

America has been on a tear to brand itself as a promoter of women over the last two years. It has been clear from the beginning that this is actually hardball geopolitics — it has nothing to do with building a healthier, more humane culture.

The women being used and the policies being promoted are defined by their enthusiastic support for using “soft revolution” to build the one-way mirror (“Thank You” to Sheryl Sandberg for all she does at Facebook to invade privacy) and to engineer global disaster capitalism (“Thank You” to Hillary for making us all feel warm and fuzzy about the 400,000 Haitians who died).

The rare benefit of seeing the real game has been to watch Dick Cheney hiss and spit as skirts are used to out-evil-do him and his brethren. Dick just doesn’t know how to do “fluffy.”

Global Female Earned Income
(Click on the chart to view a larger version)

The reasons for this commitment to “gender equality” are slowly emerging. A recent chart from Business Insider helps explain the latest soft revolution madness. The GNP of the global female consumer is $15 trillion — that is larger than all of China.  If that $15 trillion can build brand loyalty to the US first and foremost, it will help America stay in the superpower game. Given the opportunities for 1-to-1 marketing facilitated by digital systems and smart phones, playing the “woman card” makes a great deal of economic sense.

This is the power of “mobility marketing” — now you can reach individuals and win their affection away from family, tribe, church and local institution. Watch for words like “personal empowerment” as personal information flows into databases behind the “one way mirror” and entrainment then flows back via hand-held devices.

For many decades, the US political establishment has used women issues to play divide and conquer very effectively. Roll the local guys by buying the women out from under them. If you can get women out of the home, it becomes easier to institutionalize and control the upbringing of children. Unfortunately, one of the reasons why this strategy works is that women are often under-utilized.  The latest study from McKinsey Global Institute concludes that  “as much as $28 trillion – a staggering sum – should be added to the global annual GDP in 2025 if women in the world played an identical role in labor markets as men.”

For over a year, Knight Kiplinger of the Kiplinger newsletter has expended significant credibility promoting Hillary Clinton for the presidency. I presume this is based on a vision of US power establishing itself as the preferred political and business choice of women globally. What this means is that one of the most sensible voices in personal finance media is committed to the idea that reality is engineered through the media and facts are irrelevant:

In fact, Hillary Clinton is irrelevant — but she’ll do. What is relevant is playing the woman card. The particular woman selected as “front man” is meaningless. Clinton herself in a recent interview with Another Round agrees:

“HILLARY CLINTON: You guys are the first to realize that I’m really not even a human being. I was constructed in a garage in Palo Alto a very long time ago. People think that, you know, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, they created it. Oh no. I mean, a man whose name shall remain nameless created me in his garage.”

Clinton was spoofing, of course. But for once her words rang true.

Related Reading: