He simplifies. Historically, it's globalization. The British empire was a big player, with 25% of all land in the world by 1920. Financial systems, always had power, and tended to banking families. Fugger in Germany and Medici in Italy, neither Jewish. The "global country" that manifested itself, improvised, over past 250 years, reasonably also had a banking family. It happened to be Jewish, Rothschilds. One reason, is a people "spread among the nations" in "diaspora" tend to naturally involve themselves in globalization I'd assume, even if it was not planned from start. I have friends all over the world, so I'm interested in globalization for that reason - it is the same type of reason. The globalist Jews (which isn't all Jews, but the globalists who were Jewish) had a lot of power but not the main power probably. They were given Palestine but this was mostly in the beginning so British empire could get a foothold to colonize the rest of middle East for the oil - and possibly as a safe haven for the Jewish bankers to escape it the other non-Jewish globalists betrayed them. Lots of people wanted to globalize. Jews were disproportionally represented relative to their numbers, but globalization is, well, global. And has been by internationalism for 250 years and now in Satoshi paradigm, the global nation (majority consensus for a singular state such as Bitcoin/Ethereum, although still early days). I think it is possible to have the discussion. I think both McAllister and Braun have a point. They have different points of views. Two things can be true at the same time without being contradictory, if the truth is the synthesis of both. Thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis (which is not necessarily "double-think", holding incompatible truths, but rather truths that were combinable).