Most likely, the aim of the anonymous and hidden Finance Tycoons, their servile and well-paid Brussels technocrats, is to relegate industrial production (with the exception of the arms factory, for obvious reasons of power) outside the 'West (or at least, as long as the strength of Trump and Johnson, outside of continental Europe) lasts. Entrepreneurs who relocate their factories will receive loans and mortgages from the Banks and Greta Thurnberg will be able to return, quietly and satisfied, to school desks, because there will be neither consistent smoke nor toxic waste to pollute the environment. Environmentalists will return to being satisfied as they were, probably, in the feudal era, when the "serfs", the laboratores only did damage to their backs.
In addition to creating particularly profitable operating conditions for themselves, the bankers will take revenge, so to speak, "moral": in the old feudalism, those who lent money were in deep disrepute; moneylenders were considered the scum of humanity; in the new they will be respected, revered and feared. It's not cheap!
Furthermore, they will have the monopoly of writing as the dominant classes in the ancien regime: but not because they have learned to handle grammar and syntax casually but as masters of the entire western information system: the mass media are all in their hands and illiterate the old days will replace the uninformed of the new era of fake news.
In their support there will always be the evangelizing activity of the men of the Church to convince the mass of the population to accept the mentality of the dominant class. It is true that the dualistic conception of the world with the consequent threats of hellish punishment in the afterlife begins to work less with the younger generations, but fanatic and uncritical religious, put together, still constitute a reserve of headless irrationality that is not easily exhausted and easily maneuverable thanks to migration in the globalized world.
Finally, the advantage of a feudal society based on wealth produced exclusively by money and by the robotic new servants of the banks is that of having a so-called "cleaner and cleaner" appearance: there is less mud around in the fields after the rain and less rust on the work tools. Of course, the absence of any rewarding form of human work (it is not the one done anonymously, devoid of any consideration and substantially servile) may be felt.
Since the time of the French Revolution, Man has begun to conceive as his right to contribute to the production of wealth in a personal, creative or proactive way and the desire to keep it out of any individual (and psychological) participation of a certain importance, both as an entrepreneur and as an employee, it will give rise to some discontent. It will not be easy to convince him that digital robotics, mechanically used, (for calculating and filling in forms) can replace the old contribution he gave to industrial society.
First Question: There are possibilities to "resist" the "risk of a feudal return"?
The possibilities had become almost "nil" before the Brexite election of Donald Trump and Boris Jonhson. Today there is some more chance (coronavirus permitting).
When, in fact, those two countries with conservative and Labor governments (in England) or republican and democratic (in North America) had been succubus (or, more likely, complicit, drawing economic advantages) of Wall Street and the City, to the rest the West had not been spared a "robbery policy" both inside and outside the European Union. Their decidedly imperialist expansion with both left and right governments was exactly on the globalizing political line of the masters of finance.
Interestingly (idest, in exchange for various kinds of support, especially in the media) those governments accepted, supinely or with conviction, the idea of monetary capitalism, carried out by the credit system.
Then, in that balance, something broke and changed. Certainly not because of "electrocutions on the road to Damascus" by their respective political leaders, but because the British and American populations, free, pragmatic, not accused (like those of continental Europe) of submission to absolute power in its various configurations (theocratic , monarchist, oligarchic, dictatorial or half democratic, with substantially immovable parties due to the double and different bogeyman of fascism and communism) and always immune to the virus of German post-Hegelian idealism they began to feel and express discomfort at the steps behind their economies throttled by banking power.
However, it seems more difficult for the Euro-continental countries to take the "alarm clock off their neck" and make the technocrats of Brussels and their principals of the Wall Street of the City understand that Member States are no longer willing to fill credit holes caused by the outbreak of "Bubbles", from the collapse of funds and foundations of various denominations and consistencies, from sudden bank defaults (and so on) with taxpayers' money. The latter, on the other hand, would like to allocate, at least mainly their money, to productive and infrastructural investments (and therefore to the overall improvement of the countries).
Second question: But which European politicians will be able to tell the financiers (in difficulty due to the failure to collect the accruals or the poorly finished monetary risks) that we must change the "course" on the use of the savings of the people who work?
The continuation of the next article.