Gold is going up, and so is the risk of global war
Is it time to prepare for a world where the rules have changed?
Gold is going up, and so is the risk of global war. This is not a coincidence. For centuries, gold has been the currency of war. Governments may talk about democracy and diplomacy, but when they prepare for real conflict, they stockpile gold. That’s exactly what we are seeing now across the world. It signals a deeper shift. What we are living through may already be the early stages of a world war. The signs are not loud declarations of war but movements in markets, military logistics, supply chains, and global manufacturing.
According to Clem Chambers, a seasoned financial analyst, the rising price of gold is not just about inflation or market speculation, it is about war. Historically, gold is used by governments to pay for heavy wartime needs when trust in fiat currencies disappears. In past wars, countries sent gold to buy ships, weapons, and supplies. When World War II ended, the U.S. had much of the world's gold because other nations had paid it for weapons and industrial goods. Now, similar patterns are repeating. Countries like China and Poland are aggressively buying gold. Even lesser-discussed countries across Africa and Asia are doing the same, but quietly. Most of it is happening behind closed doors. When people rush to gold, it’s because they expect the current system to break down.
The reason behind this is the growing confrontation between the United States and China. It is not just a political rivalry; it is a collision between two global systems. The U.S. has ruled the world through control of finance, media, and military power. China now controls manufacturing. And the one who controls production has the real power in a time of war. As Chambers said, if your enemy makes your ships and steel, you cannot win a war. That is why reindustrialization has suddenly become a top priority for leaders like Donald Trump. He may not explain it clearly, but the reason he is trying to bring manufacturing back is because the U.S. is not ready for a large-scale conflict. Without the ability to produce hardware, ships, ammunition, electronics, it can’t defend its global position. China can, and that changes everything.
People argue over whether World War III has started. But that misses the point. It may not look like old wars with trench lines or massive invasions, at least not yet. But it is already underway in other forms: trade wars, energy disruptions, economic sanctions, currency battles, and information warfare. Every region is heating up, Ukraine, the Middle East, the Pacific. India and Pakistan are again facing military tension. And the U.S. Navy is struggling to hold its ground in the Red Sea. These are not isolated events. They are all pieces of the same puzzle.
The financial system is another front line. The global economy is built on credit and liquidity. But when confidence drops, and people no longer want to hold paper assets, they rush to real stores of value. That’s why gold and even Bitcoin are rising. Gold is the choice for governments preparing for conflict. Bitcoin, in Chambers’ words, is for people fleeing. When both go up at the same time, it signals mass distrust in the future. And right now, both are rising. That is the warning sign.
The Fed, America’s central bank, is trying to keep things afloat by managing money supply and market liquidity. But even that is a dangerous game. As Chambers explained, if the system breaks, if the carry trades and leveraged bets fail, markets could crash. And if they do, the only thing holding the system together will be central bank intervention. But how long can that last, especially if the geopolitical situation continues to deteriorate?
Artificial Intelligence adds another dangerous layer. AI requires massive energy and industrial support to scale. The country that wins the AI race may dominate the next phase of global power. The U.S. currently has a lead, but China is catching up quickly. The AI arms race is not just about innovation, it’s about energy, data, and computing dominance. Whoever can fuel the most servers, run the biggest data centers, and apply it to military technology will hold the advantage. That means more pressure on energy supplies, more demand for rare earth minerals, and more global competition over strategic resources. Again, this leads back to conflict.
The idea that the global order is splitting into two camps, the Western U.S.-led system and the emerging BRICS alliance, is not just talk anymore. China is building alternative trade routes, known as the Belt and Road. Countries are starting to trade outside the dollar system. America’s ability to export its inflation by printing dollars may soon come to an end. If that happens, the U.S. will face the same fate that many Latin American and African countries have faced when their currencies collapse under unsustainable debt. The U.S. has survived by being the issuer of the world’s reserve currency. If that status is lost, there is no safety net.
The lesson is clear. The world is entering a phase of instability not seen in generations. Leaders are reacting, some with strategy, others with panic. The rise of gold, the realignment of global manufacturing, the energy demand of AI, and the military buildups are all connected. This is not about left or right, East or West. It is about preparation for a world where the rules have changed. The people who survive will be those who understood early, stayed grounded, and took real steps to secure their position before the storm hit.
This is not fearmongering. This is reality based on numbers, history, and current policy. Those who dismiss it as doom talk will be the ones most shocked when the system changes for good.
@GGTvStreams
Re: “And the one who controls production has the real power in a time of war. As Chambers said, if your enemy makes your ships and steel, you cannot win a war.”
Here’s a quote from a speech in the Australian Senate in 2018:
QUOTE
The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement might be great for Vietnam, the Philippines and other low-wage Third World economies, but it is very bad for Australia. This agreement is but the latest in a long line of deals with foreign countries that give away Aussie jobs and industry to supposedly disadvantaged foreign nations, beginning with Whitlam, who put a wrecking ball through Australian industry with his unilateral tariff cuts. Subsequent Liberal and Labor governments have all been infatuated with the internationalist vision of trade. In 1975, the Whitlam government signed the United Nations Lima Declaration, through which the Australian government sold out Australian industries and workers by specifically agreeing to transfer manufacturing to Third World countries, supposedly to help them develop. Almost every move to liberalise trade since that day has led to a net transfer of jobs and industry away from Australia, and the current TPP is just the latest outrageous example. Giant transnational corporations love the Lima agreement, of course, since taking jobs away from decently-paid Aussie workers and instead employing Third World semi-slaves made them a fortune. Perhaps that is the reason why both Labor and the Liberals agree on these kinds of trade deals. The Left think that our national prosperity is something to apologise for and that we have an unending obligation to subsidise foreigners. In practice, if not intent, the capitalist globalists agree with them. Transnational corporations don't care about the best interests of Australians, only their own profits, and profits are larger if you employ Third Worlders on slave wages than if you employ Aussies on decent award wages.
END OF QUOTE
Ref: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansards/d7fb77b1-0930-425d-ad2a-6fd86946e453/&sid=0042