Hence why I distinguish between short-term price manipulation and long-term price. The intentions of Strategy or Michael Saylor are irrelevant to my analysis. What matters is what these financial instruments enable, regardless of anyone’s intentions. I don’t care who people cheerlead for, worship, or which team they choose to support. I care about giving my followers the information they need to understand how the system works and make better-informed decisions. That’s my only agenda when I post.

I agree with that in general. And if it’s a Democrat instead of Vance, it will lead to the same outcome anyway. I don’t see Trump stepping down, though. He’s been very useful to the FIC. Real power loves Trump, and what the people want or think is irrelevant in the final two years. “Draining the swamp” was code for multipolarity. And the succession plan with Vance is for TIC to become the dominant node, which is code for a police and surveillance state, in my opinion.

🔴 PREMIERE Today at 6pm GMT / 1pm EDT "The Global Mafia Running the World and Why They Need Forever Wars" | Simon Dixon on Commodity Culture w/ Jesse Day

Ideology, religion and ethnic identity absolutely matter. They can genuinely motivate individuals, but they can also be used to recruit soldiers, mobilise populations and manufacture consent. In my experience, their relative importance often changes as you move towards the institutional structures that govern capital flows, ownership and financial power. At those levels, incentives, governance mechanisms and institutional checks can create continuity even when individual leaders, ideologies and political parties change. These structures often favour the preservation of existing power relationships, although competing interests and ideological convictions can still disrupt them. My argument isn’t that ideology doesn’t matter. It’s that ideology alone rarely explains how institutional power is maintained, transferred or exercised. That’s why the FIC/MIC/TIC framework follows ownership, incentives, governance and capital flows rather than stopping at political, religious or national identities. Ideology helps explain what people believe. Follow the money to understand who benefits. Study the governance to understand how power is maintained.

No. My position hasn’t changed. Two different mechanisms of financial influence. One is campaign financing. The other is economic alignment through sovereign wealth funds, investments and commercial agreements. Musk, Mellon and Adelson were among Trump’s largest political donors. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE operate on an entirely different financial scale. We’re comparing hundreds of millions in campaign financing with hundreds of billions in investment commitments and commercial agreements. Campaign financing helps determine who gets elected. Economic relationships can influence the incentives shaping what happens after the election. Follow the money beyond the election cycle. That’s where the FIC operates.

You have to see beyond nation-states and presidents. In my opinion: Trump is primarily a FIC node. Vance is primarily a TIC node. War is not determined by presidents. It’s determined by the MIC, which is increasingly aligning with TIC through the police and surveillance state that Vance will deliver if the Republicans win in 2028. Vance is being groomed as a peacemaker, as a deal with Iran is inevitable as part of the FIC’s transition to a multipolar, multi-node world order. The result will be the same whoever is president. All in my humble opinion, of course.

🔴 PREMIERE Today at 6pm GMT / 1pm EDT "The Global Mafia Running the World and Why They Need Forever Wars" | Simon Dixon on Commodity Culture w/ Jesse Day