Alternative 4
Alternative 4
Alternative 4 of Table B in Appendix 40C seems to gain a lot of support. There are some reasonable arguments in favor of it. All Subsaharan Africa will be in Coalition C which will have 25,1%. It is very close to the ideal percentage which is 25%. Coalition C has so far three areas (Table A of Appendix 40C). Two of them, Northern Atlantic and a Middle Eastern have relatively high per capita income.
North America (USA-Canada) is the area of the world with the highest per capita income. It is higher than that of Western Europe. Ireland has one of the highest per capita incomes in Western Europe and the world. The countries of Arabian Peninsula, generally have high per capita income because of oil. Ireland (4th), Qatar (5th), USA (10th), UAE (11th), Iceland (15th), Saudi Arabia (18th) have higher per capita income (ppp) than Germany which is in 20th place (IMF 2025).
Subsaharan Africa is the poorest area of the world. Relations in Coalitions will be loose. Nevertheless, there will be cooperation. Coalition C which has rich countries will be more suitable to assist Subsaharan Africa in developing. Obviously there will be mutual benefit, not only Subsaharan Africa will gain. There is another important reason. African Americans have a large percentage in USA.
African Americans are around 48 million or 14,5%. They originate from Subsaharan Africa. They are the most suitable to "do business" or be involved in some other way in Subsaharan Africa. Western Europe also has a noteable percentage of people that originate from Subsaharan Africa but the percentage is very much lower than that in the USA. France, UK and Belgium have the highest percentages. UK is in Coalition C.
Most of Western Europe is in Coalition A which is more than full. Not even a small part of Subsaharan Africa can be added to Coalition A which already has 25,9% with Mercosur+ and India. But there is plenty of room in Coalition C which has only 10,5%. As a matter of fact, with Subsaharan Africa, the Coalition reaches the ideal percentage 25% (25,1 to be precise).
Latinos in USA are around 68 million which is more than 20%. The vast majority of Latinos originate from the Central American Group, in AntiNWO's Grouping B. This is included in Coalition C, as it can be seen in Table A of Appendix 40C. The largest percentages of Latinos are; Mexicans 62%, Puerto Ricans 15%, Cubans 4%, Salvadorans 3,9% Dominicans 3,5%.
Only these are almost 90 (88,4) %. But there are more from other countries of Central American Group A2. Mercosur+ (Southern American Group A3) is in Coalition A. The percentage of US Latinos that originates from there is very small. African Americans and Latinos are almost 35% of the population. It is a large part of the voters. Generally, they vote for Democrats but the percentage that votes Republicans has increased lately.
Latinos are the most suitable to "do business" or be involved in some other way in Central American Group A2. Most of them, still have ties with the country of their origin, even if they may be second or third generation. African Americans generally do not have ties anymore with Subsaharan Africa because it has been a very long time since their ancestors arrived unwillingly in USA. But many know the country they originate from.
Western European NWO has been able to sell to Democrats a lemon, a highly defective plan from the Dark Ages that has failed tremendously. In NWO's ridiculous plan, there is American Union. USA is together with Central Group A2 and Southern American Group A3 (Mercosur+). But that is all. American people (USA) do not want any Latin countries in their Group or Union.
But AntiNWO's Coalitions are nothing like NWO's Unions. Relations are much looser compared to Unions. USA can be in the same Coalition with Central American Group A2 and Subsaharan Africa. More than a third of the people (35%) originates from these two areas. Of course, most people in USA originate from Western Europe. But Western Europe needs no assistance in developing.
Subsaharan Africa is next to the Middle Eastern area of Coalition C. So Coalition C will have two continuous parts a) America - North Atlantic b) Middle East - Subsaharan Africa. Also this will serve well Israel's expansionary plans. The area they are currently trying to increase their influence is unsuitable because many countries around them are hostile. In Coalition C, they are together with the most friendy countries in the area.
Israel is a small country but it has close ties with Jewish people around the world. In USA, there are as many Jews as in Israel. Jewish diaspora has money and most importanty controls other people's money. They have good positions in financial institutions in USA, UK and other countries. There are a lot of money to be made in Subsaharan Africa and at the same time assist the development of the world's poorest area. Subsaharan Africa is an area that can have enormous growth because it is underdeveloped.
Generally, Africans have good relations with Jews in USA and a political alliance. So they could cooperate and make money in Subsaharan Africa while at the same time they do some good. We should note that China already has good relations with many countries in Subsaharan Africa. Coalitions will not be isolated. Countries will be able to have relations with countries in other Coalitions.
In Eastern Europe, the percentage of people originating from Latin America or Subsaharan Africa is very small. Eastern Europeans and Norway-Sweden-Finland have some Ural-Altaic (Asian) ancestry. Geographically, culturally, genetically, Eastern Europe is much closer to Asia, compared to other areas. Eastern Europe (with SFA?) is more suitable to have relations with Asia. Alexander's Empire was towards the East.
Coalition D will have also an African part, North Africa (NA) which was also in Alexander's, Hellenistic and Byzantine Empires. It is different than Subsaharan Africa but it is Africa. It will be one continuous area. One problem is the percentage of Coalition D. It is only 22,7% which is not even in the ±2% range. Nevertheless, if Coalition D accepts having low percentage, the rest will certainly have no problem with that. Another option is to add countries from A or B. Coalition B has the highest percentage, 26,3%.
Next to Eastern Europe is Turkiye which is in Coalition B. Suppose that Turkiye is placed in Coalition D. Turkiye has roughly 1% of the world's population. Coalition B will have 25,3% and Coalition D will have 23,8%. That would certainly be better regarding percentages. However there is some opposition to Turkiye's participation in D. Many people prefer to have less population in the Coalition than having Turkiye included. It is possible though to overcome the opposition.
There are certainly valid arguements for Alternative 4. But there are also some arguments for other alternatives that make Coalitions C and D complete. The four alternatives presented in Table B or Appendix 40C are not all. There are more. However, the first decision that needs to be made is whether there will be Coalitions of Countries or Coalitions of Groups. The other decisions follow.