The Domino Effect of WW1

Bismarck was a key figure in the unification of Germany in 1871¹, but his guess was born, when the political idea of balkanization did not even exist. However, the destabilization method worked so well that it’s been applied in western countries for a long time, the USA itself falling victim to it at the present.

---

The French and the Germans were not best friends after the Franco-Prussian war (1870-1871), and the corollaries still exist.

The heir of the Austro-Hungarian empire, Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in 1914. That was the second attempt on his life on the same trip, yet he chose to travel (to the hospital) in an open car without much protection. Just like the Rosenbergs, was he really killed?

It was still unclear why the empire would strike against Serbia, whose occupation made not sense, and it was allied with Russia. The Serbs didn’t like the empire, especially after it annexed the Muslim-dominated (which it still is) Bosnia, because they thought they would come next (which would have been just as promising as the ancient Romans trying to colonize Germania, that is, an insane plot).

While the heir to the throne would not be resurrected by war, the empire wanted to humiliate Serbia with a treaty that was only partially accepted by the Serbian government, and was confident that the Russian tsar wouldn’t support regicide even for a “brotherly” nation, but they were wrong. The tsar, however, paid for his mistake of starting the chain reaction that led to WW1 by entering the conflict militarily, because he and his whole family was wiped out by the “communists” led by Lenin in 1917. However, even with Russia out of the war, the central powers stood no chance after the US sent over 4 million conscripts. I suppose, the US wanted to prevent “Hitler” from “taking over the world,” but the move was too preemptive for some reason².

So, attacking Serbia brought Russia into the war. Germany deemed that setting up defenses against the Russian troops accumulating at its border, with all honesty, required a declaration of war, just like in 1941, when Germany had to start a preemptive strike against the Soviet Union, which saved Europe from Stalin’s invasion, but alas, only half of it, and as it later turned out, it made little difference in the globalist plot:

So, France, the Russian’s ally, was also drawn into the war, and after Germany crossed the neutral Belgium to attack France, Britain also declared war on Germany.

It looks like WW1 was already designed by the banking cartel to complete the job that was not finished before 1945, when the UN was presented as a globalist stronghold.

But it gets better. The US (already controlled by globalist bankers after the Federal Reserve Act of 1913) also entered the war on the usual trumped-up premises, when the Lusitania was sunk by a German U-boat³, because it was carrying war materials in May, 1915. The ship later on was confirmed to do just that, which was a provocation against Germany⁴.

While Britain alone could have prevented WW1, it didn’t. The demise of its empire after WW1 could have materialized even after WW1, hadn’t it been for a few missteps, which were properly corrected in the Paris “peace” treaties, including retaliatory restitutions from Germany to France (that also had to pay an astronomical amount to Germany after 1870) which Germany fully paid only in 2005, which only added to the still-existing multigenerational German payouts to “H* survivors.” Chopping up the monarchy was also a winning move, giving away two thirds of historic Hungary to neighbors, while at least half of the territories had a Hungarian majority.

I know, I am “only” conjecturing, but as Montecuccoli⁵ (1609-1680) already noted, for war, you only need three things: money, money, and money:

So, what’s your best guess about the white genocide of WW1?

Globalist banking financed just about every war in the last 200 years or more. Observing the process that led to the WW1 white genocide might reveal more. On the surface, it looked like a chain reaction of minor events that created a tide leading to war. Behind the scenes, however, it all boiled down to financing by the banking cartel, whose objectives were already the same as today. When you look at the mass-murdering clowns called politicians⁶ these days, there is no reason to assume that politicians were not insiders or globalist puppets at that time, too, which cuts a potentially long story extremely short.

Perhaps the most important reason for WW1 was that governments started treating their subjects as state property. Wartime economics, just like the convid restrictions or the (un)Patriot(ic) Act after 9/11, tightened the noose around the neck of personal freedom and trained people to be compliant.

After all, where is America’s gold?

People don’t even own their own homes:

1. Balkanization or Balkanisation is the process involving the fragmentation of an area, country, or region into multiple smaller and hostile units.^[1][2] It is usually caused by differences in ethnicity, culture, religion, and geopolitical interests.

The term was first coined in the early 20th century, and found its roots in the depiction of events during the Balkan Wars (1912–1913) and World War I (1914–1918), specifically referring to incidents that transpired earlier in the Balkan Peninsula.^[3]

2. Well, not quite: Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy outdeveloped Britain, France, and the US both culturally and technologically, which was untenable. Apparently, those countries had a “higher destiny,” which they have obviously achieved, because all three of them are now under controlled demolition.

3. The Germans used U-boats against the British naval blockade that was meant to starve it out.

4. Even Wikipedia acknowledges the details by now:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_RMS_Lusitania

5.

6.