Free Pages: EN — LARRY ROMANOFF: Jews are Plundering the World – Part 9

Friday, June 5, 2026

EN — LARRY ROMANOFF: Jews are Plundering the World – Part 9 — The Transactional Society

Jews are Plundering the World – Part 9

The distinction between transactional and relational is one of the most important – and most invisible – features of modern social breakdown in the West. The most simple explanation is that transactional is about exchange, while relational is about bond. A transactional interaction asks, “What can I get from you?” A relational interaction asks, “How are we connected?” Once we see transactional behavior, we begin to notice it everywhere. We can see it in our workplace, in our family, in friendships, in our own behavior.

Imagine two people who see each other every morning at the same coffee shop.

In the transactional version, the barista makes your coffee, you pay, and say “thanks”, and leave. The interaction is complete at the moment of exchange. No residue remains. In the relational version, the barista knows your name and your order. You ask about his child’s soccer game; he asks about your upcoming vacation. When you don’t show up for a few days, he wonders if you’re okay. If he leaves the coffee shop, you might stay in touch. The interaction creates a thread that continues beyond the transaction. The transactional coffee purchase is efficient. The relational one is human. Both get you coffee. Only one builds a community.

The test, the most useful diagnostic question, is “What remains after the exchange?”

In a transactional relationship, nothing remains. The exchange is complete, and both parties walk away unchanged. The other person is simply a means to an end, someone with a function or a role to play. This is not nothing. Consider that young people freely have sex today, and their relationships are increasingly transactional. For the young man, the girl is “simply a means to an end, someone with a function or a role to play”. If he never saw her again, it wouldn’t matter because her function can be replaced by another girl playing the same role. There is no loss felt.

In a relational context, you would miss someone who is gone because your interactions create an emotional bond, a memory, and an obligation. There is a sense of connection that persists. In terms of a young man’s view of a young woman, she is a whole human being with a name, a history, a family, a future. The relationship is measured by warmth, durability, mutual care, and a loss would be felt.

It is today in the workplace where transactionalism is firmly institutionalised. This was not always the case, but financialisation has caused it. Thus, modern workplaces are almost purely transactional, and this is by design. There was a time when building our businesses or departments, we were in a sense building a “family”. We cared about each other, we socialised together. In today’s transactional employment, we exchange labor for money; we work exactly the hours we are paid for; we do not stay late unless compensated, we do not form friendships beyond what is necessary. When a better offer comes, we leave; when the company needs to cut costs, we are laid off. Neither party owes the other anything beyond the written contract.

In relational employment, which is becoming increasingly rare today, we feel loyalty to our employer and our employer feels responsibility for us. When times are hard, we all take a pay cut to save everyone’s job. When times are good, the company shares the prosperity. If we leave, we often remain in touch. The shift from relational to transactional employment is one of the great hidden disasters of the last fifty years. It explains why workers no longer trust bosses, why bosses no longer feel loyalty to workers, and why quitting for a bit more money is a rational response to a system that treats human beings as interchangeable inputs.

Friendship is perhaps the most painful example of a transactional society, because the atomisation of society has even infected friendship. Most people today have many transactional “friends” and very few relational ones. This is why loneliness is epidemic even among those with hundreds of Facebook friends. Any bond is based on utility, and when the utility ends, the friendship ends. We “drift apart” because there was never anything holding us together. In the US and Canada particularly, which was traditionally the last refuge of the relational bonds, the family is far from immune. Family relationships today are increasingly governed by obligation and contract rather than love or affection. You put your aging father in a home because it is more efficient than caring for him yourself. The transactionalism of the modern North American family life is rarely acknowledged, but it is everywhere: in the rise of “eldercare facilities”, in the geographic scattering of siblings, in the silence between phone calls.

Transactional marriage.

Jewish interests have tried in many ways to fractionate and transactionalise Chinese society, attempts that I view as entirely evil. Jewish companies are heavily promoting nursing homes in China because of the enormous potential profits. But to succeed in China, they must first embark on a program to change the values of young Chinese to the point where abandoning your responsibility to your parents is the best way to fulfill it. Their success would be toxic to China and devastating to the Chinese culture and family.

In China, the family is of extreme importance, and children naturally – and usually happily – accept an obligation to care for their elderly parents who will often live together with them in their later years. These traditions and attitudes are part of the treasure of Chinese culture. It is precisely these family values that the Jews want to attack and destroy, because there will be no profits so long as these family loyalties exist. They are well aware of Chinese cultural values and have obtained much assistance from psychologists and psychiatrists in how to attack and change the values of a society. They present their concept on the basis of responsibility and “freedom”, as values they need you to adopt and internalise.

Father and daughter.

Another perfect example of toxic transactionalism – as well as cultural colonisation – was reported in the Chinese media in July of 2014, this being a “house-for-pension” scheme that encouraged elderly Chinese to transfer full ownership of their home to a private (Jewish-owned) vulture corporation in exchange for some extra cash in their hands and the “right” to continue living in the house. The plan was so typical of Jewish “cleverness” that these elderly people would have sold their homes but would still carry full responsibility for maintenance and insurance, and would have full liability for loss. A pilot project was begun in Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou and Wuhan, where it reportedly met with “absolute rejection” as it so richly deserved to do. I must say that reading of this plan made me angry. A home is the main asset and security for all Chinese, and is a legacy for their children after they die. I can scarcely imagine a more frontal assault on Chinese traditions and culture, or a greater betrayal of the Chinese people, than to promote such an idiotic scheme. This abomination is very much a Jewish attitude, where the vultures and vampires circle the vulnerable, looking for a revenue stream anyplace they can find one, regardless of the social or human costs. This is truly a betrayal of the Chinese people, and a good example of the Jewish values of greed and anti-social capitalism.

Transactionalism is not so much a moral failing of individuals, but rather a structural feature of Jewish neo-liberal capitalism. Geographic mobility means people do not stay in one place long enough to form deep bonds. They move for jobs, for schools, for cheaper rent. Each move resets the relational clock. Contract employment and the gig economy treat every interaction as a discrete transaction. There is no continuity, no loyalty, no expectation of future connection. The digital revolution has replaced face-to-face encounters with screens. It is harder to be relational when you are looking at a profile picture on a phone, rather than a human face. The ideology of individualism tells people that they should be self-sufficient, that needing others is weakness, that dependency is shameful. This ideology is taught in schools, preached in advertising, and reinforced by every self-help book on the shelf.

The consequences of transactionalism are serious. A transactional society is not merely cold; it is fragile. It results in loneliness because transactional relationships do not satisfy the human need for belonging. You can have dozens of transactional contacts and still feel utterly alone. It also engenders distrust; if every interaction is an exchange, you begin to suspect that everyone wants something from you. Fragility is inherent in this; transactional bonds break instantly when the exchange stops. A society held together only by transactions has no resilience, and a transactional life is meaningless. We humans need to feel that our lives matter to others. Transactionalism offers efficiency but no meaning. A transactional world is one where you are surrounded by people who do not see you. The tragedy of modern life under capitalism is that we have optimised for efficiency and called it progress. The truth is that we have built a world of solitary consumers, each locked in their own car, their own apartment, their own screen, each surrounded by strangers who are useful but not beloved.

Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 34 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chap. 2 — Dealing with Demons).

His full archive can be seen at

https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/ + https://www.moonofshanghai.com/

He can be contacted at:2186604556@qq.com

This article may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. This content is being made available under the Fair Use doctrine, and is for educational and information purposes only. There is no commercial use of this content.

Other Works by this Author