Schwab’s Idea Will Fail | Martin A. Armstrong

Martin A. Armstrong (Oct 03, 2022) - Now insofar as the sovereign debt default, we are looking at governments collapsing which will take down banks that must retain reserves in government bonds. Klaus Schwab is an academic. He has ZERO real-world experience. His ideas will collapse just like Marx for the one element both ignore is human nature. It cost over 200 million lives for Marx to get his theory in place. Communism collapsed because without curiosity and freedom to explore, talk, and think, all advancement of society comes to an end.

Klaus Schwab

Schwab’s idea will fail because the setup is different this time. Marxism succeeded because in Russia serfdom ended only during the 1860s. Therefore, the common people DID NOT own anything and it made sense to raid the rich. This time, people own houses and cars, and they save with pensions and to help their children. This time the common people would have to surrender all their assets so Schwab’s Marxist theories can be implemented. It is a whole different board game this time around.

Quoted from:
Martin A. Armstrong (Oct 03, 2022) - Answering Questions

The Bullish and Bearish Market Maker Cycle

 

The weekly pattern does not imply the use of a weekly time frame. It refers to the pattern that is seen in a 15, 60 or 240 minute chart over a period of a week. However, market makers also have seasonal variations of price movement and so it can be seen on longer time frames, though it is probably too slow to be traded effectively.

 

 

A typical pattern of behaviour particularly when examining the Three Day Cycle is to be able to identify a peak high followed by three moves down and a reversal which forms the peak low. Each time price moves down a level they can be referred to as achieving or making either a Level I, Level II or a Level III move. Level I and Level II have relatively similar patterns of behaviour (1-2-3 stop hunt). However Level III tends to be choppy with a wide range and represents an area of profit-taking for the institutions and signifies the beginning of an accumulation period for another cycle. 

 

The reasons for this behaviour can be understood if you consider what happens during the rundown:

1. On day one the retail traders are selling and the institutions buying from the retail traders.
2. On day two the retail traders are selling and again the institutions are buying.
3. However, on day three the retail traders are again interested in selling and the institutions are buying up heavily.
4. Now price moves up aggressively triggering stops and taking a profit. (In effect, the market makers are using a scaling-in method to book their profit).
5. Following a Level III pullback price becomes choppy and continues because of what happens with the trader’s psychological adaptation to loss. After the market has run down for three days and traders have taken losses, these individuals react by pulling away from the market quite literally and having a few days off before coming back to trade. During this period the market is choppy and relatively stagnant until the traders have returned to play in the game again.

To remember the patterns the following phrases are useful:

1. "After a big drop the market must chop"
2. "After three days of drop the market must chop"
3. "After a big rise the market needs more guys"
4. "After three days of rise the market needs more guys"

These patterns are similar in different time frames. The areas of reversal are often synchronized so that they occur at the same time in different time frames. Using this knowledge it is possible to convert a spot trade into a swing trade when you enter it from a peak formation high to a peak formation low. 

Count the levels to know what part of the cycle price is currently in. Entering trades at peak reversals is best. One should only take a long position when the Low of the Day (LOD) or High of the Day (HOD) is clear. This is the only place that has a high level of certainty in directional movement. Look for a midweek reversal which will generally correlate with one or both of the intraday reversals. With an awareness of the longer cycle and assuming one is in the correct place within the cycle, it is possible to convert a spot trade to a swing trade from one of the 3 day cycle peaks to the other given an appropriate entry. This would involve going from one peak formation high to the next peak low and may take several days.

On an intraday trade, it is still important to understand the current position within this larger cycle. This will help to make a judgement about how far a run may last. For example, if price has just passed the peak high and is at a Level I accumulation then an intraday long trade after a bearish stop hunt, while valid, will not be likely to produce consistent results. Hence, it is a good idea to not take trades against the longer trend at a Level I accumulation.

 

The Accumulation Phase: This phase commences with the resetting of a daily high/low. It occurs at 5pm ET which is the beginning of the “Dharma” period. The Dharma period occurs after the US markets have closed and before the London markets have opened. During this period there tends to be little activity and the market just cycles back and forth between two price points. This occurs because Bank A will buy a quantity of currency from Bank B [1]. This causes price to rise. This is followed by bank B selling the same currency to Bank C [2] and this causes price to fall. This process goes around in circles and so the price simply oscillates back and forth. After a while, the range begins to widen [3]. This has the effect of triggering pending orders placed by breakout traders. So positions become committed and gradually accumulate as more and more traders begin to ‘take the bait’. However, when they are triggered, price is quickly pulled away and they will often be stopped out on the other side of the range which is also widening. 

 

The Stop Hunt - also defining the HOD and LOD: Sometimes between 1 – 4am ET, the market makers make a stop hunt. The stop hunt involves a deliberate movement outside of the range to what will become the high or low of the day. The move usually occurs in three pushes which can be as simple as three candles though you will sometimes see a small pause in the form of a pullback in the middle of this. The stop hunt has two main objectives:

1. Take out existing stops, that is: collecting buy side and sell side liquidity.
   
2. Encourage traders to commit to positions in a direction that is opposite to where the real trend is going to be.

This represents the high/low of the day (HOD/LOD). Once the HOD/LOD has been hit:

1. The spread is opened up by a few pips. This allows traders orders to be triggered outside their normal boundaries and they will be holding negative positions from the outset.
2. It is common to see price undergo a further period of accumulation lasting 30 to 90 minutes which encourages traders to take further positions. When there are enough positions, the price is moved in the direction of the true trend and their stops will be triggered.
3. There is often a second move to the HOD/LOD though most of the time it will fail to take it out (so as to not give those who got in a profitable position to escape from). This forms the typical W or M pattern.

This is the preferred point of entry for most of these trades, particularly the second leg of the M or W. It is relatively slow moving and so there should be no reason to rush or impulsively take a trade. 

 

 

Other behaviors at the HOD and LOD Reversal: Market makers induce traders to take the wrong direction by using sharp and aggressive moves near the high or low of the day. One of the ways of identifying that you are in the right place is that the market will seem to be quiet, in consolidation and make a sharp move out of the range, faking "the breakout".

If a trade is taken in the area of the HOD/LOD one might notice that price is moving around but the position changes little. Looking at the price board one will see that it is "flickering red and blue" with lots of changes suggesting that there is lots of activity but in fact there is little and a reversal is imminent. Another observation during this period is that the spread widens. This is done so that a broader range of orders can be collected and accumulated during this period, making it even more difficult for traders to take profit as they are in a losing position right from the outset. The diagram below demonstrates what happens to the spread during this period.

 

But these patterns do fail sometimes. This occurs when there has not been enough volume to make it worth their while to take a reversal. In these situations that price is moved to the next level to further induce positions to be taken in the wrong direction, against what is to become true trend. This is called the extended stop hunt.

 

Extended Stop Hunt: When price is pushed outside of the Asian range and comes to rest 25 to 50 pips beyond the range, the market makers' motivation is to generate a stop hunt. However, if as a result of this move the accumulation of positions is inadequate for their purposes, then the stop hunt will be extended. This means that price will be pushed beyond this Level in the direction of the technical trend in an effort to induce more traders to enter positions and build up the positions required.

Like before, this move will be in the 25 – 50 pip range and be comprised of 3 candles or 3 pushes. But also like before this is not necessarily the case and more or less are also possible. Again the trader must use their own judgement and discretion. Therefore, identifying that after a period of time the stop hunt has not led to a reversal one should scratch the trade. An appropriate period of time is 2 hours following the second leg of an M or W pattern. It the trader has not moved in the expected direction by this time, something is wrong and they have not been able to build up enough volume to make it worthwhile to reverse the market.

 

The True Trend: The stop hunt is followed by a reversal and a slower trend that continues against the ‘faked’ trend toward the opposite high/low for the day. This trend tends to move in three waves, the pause between each wave representing a new opportunity to fake out traders by reversing direction and then moving against them again. These pauses are often characterized by sideways movement rather than a significant retracement though both are possible.

 

 

The Opposite LOD / HOD and Reversal: Ultimately the opposite LOD/HOD will be reached and there will be another reversal. This often occurs in the NY session, called the NYC Reversal Trade. This trade is likely to return a smaller profit than the initial stop hunt reversal trade though it is still worth taking particularly if you are not able to enter a trade following the London open.

 

 

Return to Accumulation: Once the reversal has occurred, price tends back toward the center, often not far from the starting point and recommences a new period of accumulation to lead into the new Dharma period and tomorrow’s cycle.

 

Quoted from:

Anonymous - The Market Maker Method

 

See also:

ICT - Smart Money Technique

ICT - Market Maker Primer Course
ICT - Market Maker Forex Series

ICT - Core Content Lectures
Stacey Burke - Peak Formations

The Bankster's Paradise Conspiracy Theory | Antony C. Sutton

There is an extensive literature in English, French, and German reflecting the argument that the Bolshevik Revolution was the result of a "Jewish conspiracy"; more specifically, a conspiracy by Jewish world bankers. Generally, world control is seen as the ultimate objective; the Bolshevik Revolution was but one phase of a wider program that supposedly reflects an age old religious struggle between Christianity and the "forces of darkness."

 

The argument and its variants can be found in the most surprising places and from quite surprising persons. In February 1920 Winston Churchill wrote an article — rarely cited today — for the London Illustrated Sunday Herald entitled "Zionism Versus Bolshevism." In this article Churchill concluded that it was "particularly important ... that the National Jews in every country who are loyal to the land of their adoption should come forward on every occasion ... and take a prominent part in every measure for combatting the Bolshevik conspiracy." Churchill draws a line between "national Jews" and what he calls "international Jews." He argues that the "international and for the most atheistical Jews" certainly had a "very great" role in the creation of Bolshevism and bringing about the Russian Revolution. He asserts (contrary to fact) that with the exception of Lenin, "the majority" of the leading figures in the revolution were Jewish, and adds (also contrary to fact) that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship were excepted by the Bolsheviks from their policies of seizure. Churchill calls the international Jews a "sinister confederacy" emergent from the persecuted populations of countries where Jews have been persecuted on account of their race. Winston Churchill traces this movement back to Spartacus-Weishaupt, throws his literary net around Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxemburg, and Emma Goldman, and charges: "This world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing."

 

[...] The persistence with which the Jewish-conspiracy myth has been pushed suggests that it may well be a deliberate device to divert attention from the real issues and the real causes. The evidence provided in this book suggests that the New York bankers who were also Jewish had relatively minor roles in supporting the Bolsheviks, while the New York bankers who were also Gentiles (Morgan, Rockefeller, Thompson) had major roles.

What better way to divert attention from the real operators than by the medieval bogeyman of anti-Semitism?

Quoted from:
Antony C. Sutton (1974) - Wallstreet and the Bolshevik Revolution

 

 

Wall Street's Revolutionary Socialism for Mexico | Anthony C. Sutton

Anthony C. Sutton (1974) - Another case of revolution supported by New York financial institutions concerned that of Mexico in 1915-16. Von Rintelen, a German espionage agent in the United States, was accused during his May 1917 trial in New York City of attempting to "embroil" the U.S. with Mexico and Japan in order to divert ammunition then flowing to the Allies in Europe. 

 

Iconic image of revolutionary Pancho Villa in Ojinaga, a publicity still taken
by Mutual Film Corporation photographer John Davidson Wheelan, January 1914

 

Payment for the ammunition that was shipped from the United States to the Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa, was made through Guaranty Trust Company. Von Rintelen's adviser, Sommerfeld, paid $380,000 via Guaranty Trust and Mississippi Valley Trust Company to the Western Cartridge Company of Alton, Illinois, for ammunition shipped to El Paso, for forwarding to Villa. This was in mid-1915. On January 10, 1916, Villa murdered seventeen American miners at Santa Isabel and on March 9, 1916, Villa raided Columbus, New Mexico, and killed eighteen more Americans. 

 

Columbus, New Mexico, after being raided by Pancho Villa

 

Wall Street involvement in these Mexican border raids was the subject of a letter (October 6, 1916) from Lincoln Steffens, an American Communist, to Colonel House [Edward Mandell House], an aide' to Woodrow Wilson: My dear Colonel House: Just before I left New York last Monday, I was told convincingly that "Wall Street" had completed arrangements for one more raid of Mexican bandits into the United States: to be so timed and so atrocious that it would settle the election [...]

 

Venustiano Carranza, 44th President of Mexico,
First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army, 1920

 

Once in power in Mexico, the Carranza government purchased additional arms in the United States. The American Gun Company contracted to ship 5,000 Mausers and a shipment license was issued by the War Trade Board for 15,000 guns and 15,000,000 rounds of ammunition. The American ambassador to Mexico, Fletcher, "flatly refused to recommend or sanction the shipment of any munitions, rifles, etc., to Carranza." However, intervention by Secretary of State Robert Lansing reduced the barrier to one of a temporary delay, and "in a short while [the American Gun Company] would be permitted to make the shipment and deliver."

The raids upon the U.S. by the Villa and the Carranza forces were reported in the New York Times as the "Texas Revolution" (a kind of dry run for the Bolshevik Revolution) and were undertaken jointly by Germans and Bolsheviks. The testimony of John A. Walls, district attorney of Brownsville, Texas, before the 1919 Fall Committee yielded documentary evidence of the link between Bolshevik interests in the United States, German activity, and the Carranza forces in Mexico.

Consequently, the Carranza government, the first in the world with a Soviet-type constitution (which was written by Trotskyites), was a government with support on Wall Street. The Carranza revolution probably could not have succeeded without American munitions and Carranza would not have remained in power as long as he did without American help.

 

[...] We also identified documentary evidence concerning a Wall Street syndicate's financing of the 1912 Sun Yat-sen revolution in China, a revolution that is today hailed by the Chinese Communists as the precursor of Mao's revolution in China. Charles B. Hill, New York attorney negotiating with Sun Yat-sen in behalf of this syndicate, was a director of three Westinghouse subsidiaries, and we have found that Charles R. Crane of Westinghouse in Russia was involved in the Russian Revolution.

Quoted from:
Antony C. Sutton (1974) - Wallstreet and the Bolshevik Revolution

See also:
The Library of Congress - The Mexican Revolution and the United States

Lenin. Money. Revolution. | Serhii Hrabovsky

The themes linked to Lenin, money, and revolution present an inexhaustible source of inquiry for historians, psychologists, and satirists. Just imagine: we have a man who, after the complete victory of communism, urged that toilet bowls in public restrooms be made of solid gold; a man who never had to earn a living through hard work; a man who was comfortably off even in prison and exile, and barely knew what money was, yet at the same time made a considerable contribution to the theory of commodity-money relations.

How exactly did he manage to do that? Not through brochures and articles, of course, but through his revolutionary activities. It was Lenin who, between 1919 and 1921, introduced non-monetary “natural” barter between towns and the countryside. This led to the total collapse of the economy, a complete standstill in agriculture, mass famines, and, consequently, mass uprisings against the regime of the Russian Communist Party. Only then, just before his death, did Lenin perceive the true meaning of money and introduce the NEP (New Economic Policy), a kind of “manageable capitalism” under the supervision of the Communist Party.

 

 

However, our purpose here is not to explore these fascinating subjects, but to investigate where Vladimir Lenin got the enormous sums necessary to fund party activities before the revolution. Over recent decades, some very interesting materials have been published, but much remains obscure. For example, at the beginning of the 20th century, the underground newspaper 'Iskra' was funded by a mysterious benefactor (individual or collective), disguised in party documents as the “Californian gold mines.” Some researchers believe this was an instance of radical Russian revolutionaries being sponsored by American Jewish bankers, mostly Russian expatriates and their descendants, who hated Tsarism for its official anti-Semitic policies.

During the revolution of 1905-07, the Bolsheviks were funded by American oil corporations aiming to push their rivals out of the world markets (specifically, Nobel’s oil cartel in Baku). At that time, American banker Jacob Schiff also provided money to the Bolsheviks, as he himself confessed. Other donors included Yermasov, a manufacturer from Syzran, and Morozov, a merchant and industrialist near Moscow. Later, the Bolshevik party gained another financial supporter in Schmidt, the owner of a furniture factory in Moscow. It is curious that both Savva Morozov and Nikolai Schmidt eventually committed suicide, allowing the Bolsheviks to inherit a considerable portion of their fortunes. Of course, large sums also came from the so-called “ex’es” (a truncated form of “expropriation”), or, in simpler terms, bank robberies, post office heists, and railway ticket-office hold-ups. These actions were masterminded by two characters with criminal monickers: Kamo and Koba, i.e., Ter-Petrosian and Dzhugashvili.

Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands, and even millions, of rubles invested in revolutionary activities could at best only shake the Russian Empire. Despite its shortcomings, the empire’s institutions were relatively solid—at least in peacetime. With the outbreak of World War I, however, new financial and political opportunities opened up for the Bolsheviks, and they didn’t fail to take advantage of them. On January 15, 1915, the German ambassador in Istanbul sent a report to Berlin regarding his meeting with Russian subject Aleksander Gelfand (aka Parvus), an active participant in the 1905-07 revolution and owner of a large trade company. Parvus revealed his plan for the Russian revolution and was immediately invited to Berlin, where he met with influential members of the German cabinet and advisors to Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg. Parvus suggested that the Germans provide him with a large sum of money to help promote, first, the national movements in Finland and Ukraine, and second, to support the Bolsheviks, who advocated for the defeat of the Russian Empire in the unjust war in order to overthrow the “regime of landlords and capitalists.” The Germans accepted his proposal and, by Kaiser Wilhelm’s personal order, gave him two million German marks as the first contribution to “the cause of the Russian revolution.” Later, other installments followed, some of them for even larger sums. According to a receipt from Parvus, on January 29, 1915, he received 15 million Russian rubles for the development of the revolutionary movement in Russia. The money was allotted with typical German efficiency.

In Finland and Ukraine, Parvus’ (and the German general staff’s) agents turned out to be of secondary importance. Their influence on the independence movements in these countries was insignificant compared to the broader processes of nation-building in the Russian Empire. However, in regard to Lenin, Parvus hit the bull’s-eye. Parvus claimed that he told Lenin that, at that moment, revolution was only possible in Russia and only as a result of Germany winning the war. In response, Lenin sent his proxy Fuerstenberg (aka Ganetsky) for close cooperation with Parvus, which lasted until 1918. Another installment from Germany, although not as large, came to the Bolsheviks via Swiss parliamentarian Karl Moor—amounting to only $35,000. More investments came from the Nia Bank in Stockholm, which, on the order of the German Imperial Bank, opened personal accounts for Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev, and other Bolshevik leaders. Order No. 7433 of March 2, 1917, allocated funds for the “services” of Lenin, Zinoviev, Kollontai, and others in spreading public peace propaganda in Russia after the Tsarist regime had just been overthrown.

The enormous sums were wisely administered. The Bolsheviks published their own newspapers, which were distributed free of charge in every town and village. A network of professional propagandists covered the entire territory of Russia, and “Red Guard” units were formed openly. Of course, this was not done with German money alone. Although the “poor” political émigré Trotsky had $10,000 confiscated by Canadian customs in Halifax in 1917 while en route from America to Russia, it is clear that he still managed to smuggle vast sums from banker Jacob Schiff to his supporters.

Even greater funds were raised during the “expropriation of the expropriators” (in simpler terms, robbing the wealthy), initiated in the spring of 1917. Has it ever occurred to anyone to question the Bolsheviks' occupation of the palace of ballerina Kshesinskaya or the Smolny Institute?

The Russian democratic revolution broke out unexpectedly in early spring 1917 for all its political subjects, both inside and outside the empire. It was a spontaneous, grass-roots movement both in Petrograd and on the empire's outskirts. Lenin, who was in exile in Switzerland, had publicly doubted only a month earlier whether the politicians of his generation (those in their 40s and 50s) would live to see a revolution in Russia. However, it was the radical Russian politicians who were the quickest to change their ways and seize the opportunity, aided by German assistance.

All in all, the Russian revolution was not accidental. It is even strange that it did not break out a year earlier. The social, political, and national problems in the Romanov empire had reached their breaking point. From a formal economic perspective, industry was developing dynamically, and the stockpile of weapons and ammunition had increased considerably. Yet, the utter inefficiency of central power and the corruption of the elite—inevitable in any autocracy—took their toll. The deliberate corruption of the army, the undermining of the rear, the sabotage of any attempts to constructively address urgent problems, and the incurable chauvinistic centralism typical of virtually all Great Russian political forces exacerbated the crisis. During the 1917 campaign, Entente troops were supposed to launch a simultaneous general offensive on all European fronts, but the Russian army was unprepared. Consequently, in April, the Anglo-French forces at Rheims failed, with casualties exceeding 100,000 dead and wounded. In July, Russian troops attempted an offensive towards Lviv, but eventually had to retreat from Galicia and Bukovina, and nearly gave up Riga in the north without resistance. Finally, the Battle of Caporetto in October resulted in the disastrous defeat of the Italian army, with 130,000 Italians dead and another 300,000 taken prisoner. Only the English and French divisions, urgently shipped from France, stabilized the front and prevented Italy from withdrawing from the war. After the November uprising in Petrograd, when the Bolsheviks and Left Social Revolutionaries came to power, an armistice was declared on the Eastern front—first de facto and then de jure, with Russia, Ukraine, and Romania.

These changes on the Eastern front were largely made possible by funds allotted by Germany to demoralize the Russian army from the rear. The military operations on the Eastern front, prepared and executed with large-scale success, were considerably facilitated by undermining activities within Russia, conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "Our chief goal in this activity was to further strengthen the nationalist and separatist sentiments, and support the revolutionary elements. We are continuing this activity even at present and completing an agreement with the political division of the General Staff in Berlin" (Captain von Huelsen).

"Our joint efforts have yielded considerable results. Without our constant support, the Bolshevist movement could never have reached the scale and influence it has now. Everything testifies to the further growth of this movement." These were the words of German Secretary of State Richard von Kuehlmann, written on September 29, 1917. A month and a half before the Bolshevik revolt in Petrograd, von Kuehlmann knew what he was talking about. He was an active participant in all those events; soon after, he would conduct peace negotiations with Bolshevik Russia and the Ukrainian People's Republic in Brest in early 1918. He controlled huge financial currents, amounting to tens of thousands of German marks, and had contacts with key figures in this historic drama. “I have the honor of asking Your Excellence to allot a sum of 15 million marks at the disposal of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for political propaganda in Russia, referring to paragraph 6, section II of the extraordinary budget. Depending on the development of events, I would like to stipulate in advance the possibility of addressing Your Excellence again for additional funds,” von Kuehlmann wrote on November 9, 1917.

No sooner had news of the Petrograd revolt (soon to be labeled the Great October Revolution) arrived than Kaiser Germany allocated new funds for propaganda in Russia. This money went primarily to support the Bolsheviks, who first demoralized the army and then withdrew the Russian Republic from the war, freeing millions of German soldiers for operations in the West.

Despite all this, the Bolsheviks managed to maintain the image of unselfish revolutionaries and romantic Marxists until today. Even now, not only “official” adepts of the Marxist-Leninist creed but also some non-party left intellectuals remain convinced that Lenin and his followers were sincere internationalists and noble champions of the popular cause.

In 1958, Oxford University published secret documents from the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs (including von Kuehlmann’s telegrams) which proved the massive financial and organizational assistance provided by the German authorities to the Bolsheviks. Germany’s goals were clear: the radical revolutionaries were to undermine the military potential of one of the principal rivals of the Central Powers, i.e., the Russian Empire. Thousands of books have been published providing further convincing evidence. Yet, even today, many communist historians and some liberal researchers deny these self-evident historical facts. As German Secretary of State von Kuehlmann noted on December 3, 1917, “Only when the Bolsheviks began to receive constant investments from us via various channels and under various labels were they able to firmly establish their major printed organ, 'Pravda', develop active propaganda, and significantly enlarge their party base, which was rather narrow at the beginning.” Party membership grew a hundredfold within just a year after the overthrow of Tsarism.

Colonel Walter Nicolai, head of German military intelligence during World War I, described Lenin in his memoirs as follows: “Like anyone else at the time, I knew nothing about Bolshevism; as for Lenin, I only knew that he was living in Switzerland as a political émigré. Under the cryptonym ‘Ulianov,’ he provided my service with valuable information on the situation in Tsarist Russia against which he was fighting.”

In other words, without constant German assistance, the Bolsheviks would hardly have become one of the leading Russian parties in 1917. This would have meant a completely different development of events, probably much more anarchical, which would hardly have led to the establishment of a dictatorship, let alone a totalitarian regime. The most likely scenario would have been a different version of the disintegration of the Russian Empire, as World War I was primarily about the destruction of empires. The independence of Finland and Poland was effectively a fait accompli around 1916.

The Russian Empire, or even the Russian Republic, would likely have followed the same process of collapse triggered by World War I. Consider that Britain was forced to grant independence to Ireland, India was pushing for independence right after the war, and many other colonial territories followed suit. The revolution itself was, to some extent, marked by national-liberation struggles, as it was the Life Guards Volhynia Regiment that first rebelled against autocracy in early 1917. At that time, the Bolsheviks were a tiny party, barely known to anyone (with only about four thousand members, mostly in exile and emigration). They had no significant role in overthrowing Tsarism.

Assistance continued after Lenin’s government came to power. "You are free to operate large sums, as we are extremely interested in the stability of the Bolsheviks. You have Riesler’s funds at your disposal. If necessary, wire us how much more you need." (Berlin, May 18, 1918). Von Kuehlmann addressed the German embassy in Moscow, confirming the continuing German support for the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks held fast, and by the fall of 1918, they were channeling huge sums from the Russian imperial treasury into revolutionary propaganda in Germany, hoping to incite world revolution.

In Germany, a revolution did break out in early November 1918. Money, weapons, and qualified professional revolutionaries shipped from Moscow played their role. However, local communists failed to lead this revolution. Subjective and (more importantly) objective factors worked against them. A totalitarian regime was only established in Germany 15 years later, but that is a different story. Meanwhile, in 1921, the democratic Weimar Republic's renowned social democrat Eduard Bernstein published an article in his party's central organ 'Vorwärts' titled “A Shady Story,” in which he revealed that, as early as December 1917, he had received confirmation from “a certain competent person” that Germany had given money to Lenin. According to Bernstein, the Bolsheviks alone were paid more than 50 million German marks in gold. This sum was later officially mentioned in a session of the Reichstag's foreign policy committee. When the communist press accused Bernstein of libel, he invited them to sue him, which led to an immediate cessation of the campaign. Since Germany was in desperate need of friendly relations with Soviet Russia, the discussion of this topic in the press was abruptly shut down.

Aleksander Kerensky, one of the Bolsheviks’ main political opponents, concluded from his own investigation that the total sums received by the Bolsheviks before and after coming to power amounted to 80 million German marks in gold. In fact, Lenin never even tried to conceal this from his party colleagues. At a meeting of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (a Bolshevik quasi-parliament) in November 1918, Lenin stated: “I am often accused of having carried out our revolution with German money; I do not deny it, but with Russian money, I am going to carry out the same revolution in Germany.” And he tried to do so, throwing away tens of millions of rubles. However, he failed: the German social democrats, unlike their Russian counterparts, quickly recognized the situation and arranged for the timely assassination of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. This was followed by the disarmament of the “Red Guards” and the physical elimination of their leaders.

They had no other option. Perhaps, if Kerensky had found the courage to order the shooting of Smolny along with all its "red" inhabitants, even the Kaiser’s millions wouldn’t have helped them. We might round off here, were it not for a report from 'The New York Times' in April 1921, stating that in 1920 alone, 75 million Swiss francs were sent to Lenin’s account in a Swiss bank. According to the newspaper, Trotsky had $11 million and 90 million francs in his accounts; Zinoviev had 80 million francs; the “knight of the revolution,” Dzerzhinsky, had 80 million; and Ganetsky-Fuerstenberg had 60 million francs and 10 million dollars. Lenin, in his secret note to Cheka leaders Unschlicht and Bokiy on April 24, 1921, demanded they find the source of this information leak. However, it was never discovered.

Was this money also intended for the world revolution? Or was it some form of kickback from politicians and financiers in countries where Lenin and Trotsky’s “red horses” were not ordered to go? We can only speculate. Even now, a significant portion of Lenin’s papers remains top secret.

Quoted from: 

Serhii Hrabovsky (2010) - Lenin. Money. Revolution.

See also:

Eustace C. Mullins (1952) - The Study of The Federal Reserve and Its Secrets.

Arsene de Goulevitch (1962) - Czarism and Revolution: From the Past to the Future of Russia.

Carroll Quigley (1966) - Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World In Our Time.

Gary Allen and Larry Abraham (1971) - None Dare Call It Conspiracy.
Gary D. Best (1972) - Financing a Foreign War: Jacob H. Schiff and Japan, 1904–05. 

Antony C. Sutton (1974) - Wallstreet and the Bolshevik Revolution.

Carroll Quigley (1981) - The Anglo-American Establishment.

 Quora (2017) - Who funded the Bolsheviks rise to power in Russia?  

Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret (2020) - COVID-19: The Great Reset.

Swing Trading - Rules and Philosophy | Linda Bradford Raschke

My style is based on the 'Taylor Trading Technique', a short-term method for trading daily price movements that relies entirely on odds and percentages. It is a method as opposed to a system. Very few people can blindly follow a system, though many find it easier to be discretionary in a systematic way. 

 

 

Because of the short-term nature of this technique, swing traders must adhere to some very basic rules, including: 

• If the trade moves in your favor, carry it overnight--the odds favor follow-through. Expect to exit the next day around the objective point. An overnight gap presents an excellent opportunity to take profits. Concentrating on only one entry or one exit per day relieves the pressure. 
• If your entry is correct, the market should move favorably almost immediately. It may come back to test and/or exceed your entry point a little, but that's OK. 
• Do not carry a losing position overnight. Exit and play for better position the next day. 
• A strong close indicates a strong opening the following day. 
• If the market doesn't perform as expected, exit on the first reaction. 
• If the market offers you a windfall of big profits, take them to the bank on the close. 
• If you are long and the market closes flat, indicating a lower opening the following day, scratch or exit the trade. Play for better position the next day. 
• It is always OK to scratch a trade! 
• Use tight stops when swing trading (wider stops when trading trend). 
• The goal always is to minimize risk and create "Freebies." 
• When in doubt--get out! You have lost your road map and your game plan! 
• Place your orders at the market. 
• When the trade isn't working, exit on the first reaction. ANTICIPATE! 

 

Traders Laboratory (2007) - Taylor Trading Technique

How does one anticipate entry? The following may be indicators of a buy day or a sell day:

The Count

Start searching for a buying day 2 days after a swing high or, conversely, a shorting day 2 days after a swing low. Ideally, the market will move in complete 5-day cycles. (In a strong trend, the market will move 4 days in the primary direction and only 1 in reaction. Thus, one must seek entry 1 day earlier.)
 

"Check Mark" on the Test

The potential entry is sought opposite, or contrary to, the previous day's close. If looking to buy (sell), one first wants the market to "test" the previous day's low (high), preferably early in the day, and then form a trading pattern that looks like a "check mark" (see examples). This pattern sets up and establishes a "double stop point" or strong support. If entering a market with only a "single stop point" or support formed by today's low only, exit on the same day--the trade is clearly against the trend.

Close vs. Open

The close should indicate the following day's opening. When a market opens opposite what is expected or indicated by the trend, one may first look to "fade" it--but must take profits quickly. Then look to reverse!

Support (Resistance)

Is today's support (resistance) higher or lower than yesterday's?

Swing Measurements

Where is the market relative to the last swing high or low? Look for swings (up or down) of equal length, and for retracements of equal percentage.

No matter in what time frame, always look for supply at tops and support at bottoms. Penetrations should be accompanied by volume and activity. Expect trends, either up or down, to last for either 2 or 4 weeks. The following conditions are fairly reliable indicators for the start of one of these trends (I personally skip the first buy or sell swing when one occurs because the move ensuing could be quite strong): 

• Narrowest range in the last 7 days 
• 3 consecutive days with small range
• The point of a wedge
• A breakaway gap 
• A rising ADX (14-period) above 32

Practice

Because a certain amount of confidence in any technique is required to trade it consistently, paper trading can cultivate the faith necessary to recognize and trade pattern repetition. Although the temptation to try too many different styles and patterns always exists, one must strive ultimately to trade in just one consistent manner or at least to integrate techniques into your own unique philosophy.
 

System Characteristics

Certain points about trading short-term swings deserve note. Understanding the nature of short-term systems can help you recognize the psychological aspect of trading. When consistently following a short-term system, you should expect a very high win/loss ratio. Though the objectives with this style of swing trading appear conservative, you will almost always incur "positive slippage". In all systems, winners are skewed. Even though making steady profits, 3-4 really big trades may actually make the month. It is vitally important to always "lock in" your trades. Don't give back profits when short-term trading. You may be astonished at just how big some winners may be from catching the swings "just right!"

 

[...] Finally, I want to leave you with what I believe are two Golden Rules, applicable to all traders but, of essential importance to short-term swing traders: 

• NEVER, ever, average a loss! Sell out if you think you are wrong. Buy back when you believe you are right.
• NEVER, NEVER, NEVER listen to anyone else's opinion! Only YOU know when your trade isn't working.

 Quoted from:
Linda Bradford Raschke (2001) - Swing Trading - Rules and Philosophy

 

See also:

Linda Bradford Raschke (1995) - Capturing Trend Days

George Douglass Taylor (1950) - The Taylor Trading Technique

 YouTube - The Taylor Trading Technique

George Angell (2002) - Sniper Trading: Essential Short-Term Money-Making Secrets for Trading

Laurence A. Connors & Linda Bradford Raschke (1996) - Street Smarts: High Probability Short-term Trading Strategies

Linda Bradford Raschke (2009) – 50 Time Tested Classic Stock Trading Rules

Steve Burns (2012) - Linda Raschke’s 12 Technical Trading Rules  

Linda Bradford Raschke (2015) – The Taylor Trading Technique  

Linda Bradford Raschke and Damon Pavlatos (2020) - Timeless Trading Strategies

Traders Laboratory (2007) - Taylor Trading Technique

David D. Dube (2014) - The Three-Day Trading Cycle

Stacey Burke (2021) - The Three Day Cycle - Stalking the Best Trade Setups 

TPR (2018) - Contraction > Breakout > Expansion. Toby Crabel's Price Patterns