Before the death of Queen Elizabeth II, there were two details that were very noteworthy.
The first is that even though her physical condition is already very bad, Elizabeth still insists on receiving the new British Prime Minister Tras and dressed up in front of the media camera (died 2 days after receiving the meeting).
The second is that when the Queen died, she did not stay at Buckingham Palace in London or Windsor Castle in the southeast of England, but chose to stay in Scotland.
Considering that the public opinion of "Scottish independence" is now surging and an independence referendum will be held next year. The Queen's move may be to express to the Scottish people that she does not want the United Kingdom to split, and to play her last role as a "British stabilizer".
From these two details, it can be seen that Queen Elizabeth, who has reigned for nearly 70 years and has a long standby time, is a qualified monarch.
But hosting 16 British prime ministers is a mirror that reflects the embarrassing status quo in the West – that is, there is no successor in the political arena.
When Elizabeth was crowned, the British Prime Minister was Churchill. Before her death, the British prime minister was Terrass.
Queen and Terrass
Churchill We all know that in the darkest hour of the difficulty of World War II, Churchill withstood domestic and foreign pressure, insisted on fighting against Germany, turned the tide, and finally saved the crippled British Empire.
And Terrass? You may not be very familiar with it.
Before becoming the new British Prime Minister on September 6, Tras did three of the most famous things:
First, the campaign declared that it would use nuclear weapons against Russia and "destroy the world at any cost";
Second, having been a British foreign minister, but not knowing where the hot spots between Russia and Ukraine are, Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts, made a big joke in front of the world media.
Third, when he was a parliamentarian, he cheated on other male parliamentarians and was exposed by the mainstream british media.
Such a politician, with flaws in private morality and problems with ability, eventually became the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
We can't help but ask, in the Western political arena, is there really no capable person?
I. Why are there no more incompetent people in Western politics?
Today's Western politics is mostly ruled by a bunch of philistines and puppets.
In the United Kingdom, in addition to Terrass, there is the former Prime Minister Boris, who pioneered the "new crown herd immunity" theory, Theresa May, who has achieved nothing in the Brexit negotiations, and Cameron, who took Brexit as a political bet and lost the game.
In Germany, German Chancellor Scholz blindly obeyed the wishes of the United States after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, offended many countries in international diplomatic occasions, and lost ground.
In terms of private morality, the recent overseas media exposed that a number of women were drugged at the party held by Scholz, which became a boiling "party door" scandal.
More recently, there is also the Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin.
The female prime minister went to the nightclub herself to dance when the country's internal inflation problems were serious and external frictions with Russia were constant. And in the case of having a husband, he danced with men close to him and attracted scandals.
The Finnish female prime minister who is deeply involved in the "hot dance storm"
From the above examples, it can be seen that most of the developed countries in the West today are dominated by political mediocrity. There is no longer the scene of the emergence of strongmen in various countries during World War II and the Cold War, Churchill, de Gaulle, Tito, Cole and others, for the sake of their own interests.
We can't help but ask, why is this?
Among them, of course, it is inseparable from the American factor.
After World War II, the United States carried out comprehensive penetration into all aspects of Europe's politics, military, diplomacy, and economy through conditional economic assistance to Europe and the formation of a military alliance NATO.
This infiltration and control is known to Americans as "Pax Americana."
The implication is that Europe does not need independent diplomatic, military, or even economic rights.
By ceding these rights to the United States, and by listening to the United States, the United States will naturally give a piece of the pie to its European allies while harvesting the Third World.
In order to establish the benchmark of "American rule", after World War II, the United States provided a large amount of economic assistance to the defeated countries of Germany and Japan, allowing these two countries to quickly return to the industry of industrial countries.
As a result, other European countries that have seen the successful experience of Germany and Japan have since willingly hugged the thighs of the United States and become the little brother of the United States.
Since sovereignty has been betrayed to the United States, and diplomatic and military power is entirely decided by the United States, for European politicians, there are naturally not so many major national events, bringing experience and challenges to politics.
Under the rule of the United States, even if you are the prime minister or prime minister of a country, all you need to do every day is to collect taxes and issue benefits – these are things that the mediocre can do.
If it is not done well, it will not prevent European countries from following the United States and "eating meat and drinking soup" when the United States harvests the world.
So that's why, when we look at Western politics today, there are no more capable people — and there are mediocres, fools, puppets, and actors everywhere.
All of this is the result of the operation of the United States.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe in the 1990s, the concept of "American rule" was popular all over the world. People and politicians around the world have been brainwashed into thinking that the United States has the best system and the most universal values
In short, it is a sentence - "Believe in America and have eternal life."
2. The end of "American rule"
But can the United States really prosper? Just look at the example of Ukraine.
After ceding sovereignty to the United States, the United States betrayed the Ukrainians with its backhand and became a pawn for the United States to harvest Europe and sanction Russia.
After all, if there is no object of harvest, where does the United States come from to distribute so many benefits to itself and its allies?
Under the "Rule of the United States", the countries of the former Soviet Union and the third world will always be the first to be harvested, and these countries will usually be the first to wake up.
For example, Putin in Russia, Erdogan in Turkey, Duterte in the Philippines, Vucic in Serbia.
Once, they all trusted the United States very much.
But after being harvested once by the United States and recognizing the face of the Americans, they finally chose to lead the country away from the United States and make a major strategic turn.
For this reason, these people are also known as "political strongmen".
Political strongmen have been hurt by the United States
With the decline of us hegemonic power, the object of the United States' harvest has gradually spread from marginal third world countries to European allies.
In this Russian-Ukrainian conflict, Europe lost a lot of blood, but the United States made a lot of money by attracting European funds back and selling energy to Europe at high prices.
And this also put an end to the lie of "American rule".
After all, when America's closest allies are also blackmailed by the United States, naturally no country will believe the lie that "if you follow the United States, you will prosper."
However, judging from the current situation of mediocrity in European politics, most Europeans have not yet soberly realized that the current difficulties in Europe are completely caused by the United States.
So Europe will be harvested by the United States for a while until they feel enough pain.
I believe that at that time, Europe will once again emerge de Gaulle-style strongmen, leading Europe to make a turn away from the United States.
De Gaulle, the first anti-American man in Western Europe
Before that, There were still quite a few leeks to be cut in Europe, and quite a few lessons to be learned.
~End of full text~
Thanks for reading, if you think the article is well written, welcome to follow me, forward, collect and like it!