Extraordinary Times, Intentional Collapse, and Takedown of the U.S.A.
- From: hal@xxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 07:43:14 -0600
http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=8854
Extraordinary Times, Intentional Collapse, and Takedown of the U.S.A.
By Richard C. Cook
Global Research, April 30, 2008
Much has been written about whether a worldwide plan exists to control
events and steer them in the direction profitable to an elite of the
rich and powerful. Is this a ?conspiracy theory?? While it is
difficult to be specific about who exactly may be behind such a
conspiracy, if it exists, it is at least clear that the
privately-managed system of global financial capitalism gives ample
opportunity for the world?s richest people to combine for their mutual
benefit. Further, global financial capitalism itself is based on the
monopolization of money-creation by a world banking system that is
largely privately owned, even while working through the central banks
of the largest and most prosperous nations. This article postulates
the existence of a coordinated and longstanding matrix set up by the
controllers of money to dominate the movements of history. The article
focuses particularly on what seems to have been an attack that has
been going on for over a century against the independence of the
nations of Russia and the U.S. The article also suggests a series of
monetary reforms whereby the U.S. , or any other nation, can regain
its economic identity and preserve its political freedom. The article
was written a short distance from the reconstructed colonial capitol
building in Williamsburg , VA. On this site on May 15, 1776, the Fifth
Virginia Convention voted unanimously to instruct its delegation at
the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia to enter a motion for
independence. It may be time to do that again.
Russian philosopher P.D. Ouspensky (1878-1947) wrote, ?It is a mistake
to think the times we are living in are like any other. These are
extraordinary times.?
Ouspensky, with his mentor, G.I. Gurdjieff, escaped from Russia after
the Bolshevik Revolution, during the Russian Civil War. Though
academia has failed to acknowledge it, this epochal convulsion was
financed in part through the monetary resources of the international
financial elite operating out of London, Amsterdam, New York, Paris,
Hamburg, and Frankfurt.
It was this elite, acting through Western banks, which appears to have
surreptitiously provided the wherewithal for Lenin and Trotsky to
destroy the Russian nation after the fall of the Tsarist regime at the
end of World War I. Support by the Western financiers is discussed by
Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson in his revisionist history, The Third
Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism & Orthodoxy. (The Foundation for Economic
Liberty , Washington , D.C., 2003)
The present analysis postulates that the takeover of Russia, whose
backbone was the alliance among the House of Romanoff, the Orthodox
Church, the land-owing nobility, and thousands of self-governing
peasant communes, was one of two major projects which the financiers
set out to accomplish early in the 20th century in a longer-range plan
to dominate the globe. The other was the control and eventual
destruction of the United States of America. That project may be
reaching fruition through the ongoing and seemingly purposeful
financial meltdown of 2008.
Why Russia and the U.S. ?
Events affecting nations have their roots in history, and people
underestimate how what happens today is conditioned by the past. The
respective fates of Russia and the U.S. have been linked for a long
time.
The two countries had a close relationship during the American Civil
War, when the Russian fleet anchored in New York and San Francisco
harbors. In 1867, Russia sold the huge expanse of Alaska to the U.S.
Later, the U.S. provided engineering support for Russian industrial
development.
The two continental giants were, during the latter part of the 19th
century, becoming the greatest land powers in the world. With Germany
, Great Britain ?s chief rival for economic might, added to the mix,
the hegemony of the financiers? power base in Britain and northern
Europe was threatened in a way not seen since Napoleon.
Both Russia and the U.S. were largely Christian nations, with a
sizeable portion of the American population, especially recent
immigrants, being members of the Roman Catholic faith. For centuries
nothing had been a greater obstacle to the financial control of
nations through war and finance than the Christian religion and its
teachings against usury.
Plus neither the U.S. nor Russia had a central privately-owned bank.
The U.S. had long since gotten rid of its own central banks, the First
(1791-1811) and Second (1816-1836) Banks of the United States . The
whole concept of commercial banking having control of a nation?s
economy was alien to the Russian and U.S. mindset.
Instead, wealth came from work. This was expressed by President
Abraham Lincoln in a December 3, 1861, address to Congress when he
said, ?Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only
the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not
first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the
higher consideration.?
Lincoln could make such a statement because the U.S. economy, as was
the Russian, was deeply rooted in the soil. The backbone of the two
cultures was the Russian peasant and the American yeoman farmer, as
Thomas Jefferson called him. The merchant and artisan economies of the
towns and cities in both nations were founded upon the wealth of the
countryside which was derived from human and animal labor and from
working the land. Even when industrialization began to flourish in the
latter part of the 19th century, it was fueled in both countries
largely through savings and retained earnings, not bank credit created
?out of thin air? through fractional reserve lending.
Banker Domination
By the early 20th century, the bankers of Europe had a mission before
them. If Russia and the U.S. could be controlled, nothing would stand
in the way of the rule of humanity by the materialistic
pseudo-religion of power and wealth by which the financiers were
obsessed. As Max Weber (1864-1920) wrote in The Protestant Ethic and
the Spirit of Capitalism, the acquisition of wealth was viewed as a
sign that a person was one of the ?elect.? The financiers? sphere of
influence was centered in northern Europe , where the anti-usury
doctrines both of the Roman Catholic Church and Martin Luther
(1483-1546) had been undermined through the teachings of John Calvin
(1509-1564).
As is well known, banking in Europe began in the medieval period with
store-front gold merchants who invented fractional reserve banking by
lending certificates against a gold reserve held for their customers
on deposit. By the time of the Renaissance, banking was centered in
Italy and Germany , then spread north and west to the Netherlands ,
France , and England .
By this time the Catholic prohibition against usury was
well-developed. Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) said charging of interest was
?detestable to God and man, damned by the sacred canons and contrary
to Christian charity.? Theological historian John Noonan wrote that
?the doctrine [of usury] was enunciated by popes, expressed by three
ecumenical councils, proclaimed by bishops, and taught unanimously by
theologians.? (?Development of Moral Doctrine,? 54 Theological
Studies, 662, 1993)
Lending of money at interest was often left to the European Jews,
where statements in various scriptures, such as the Talmud, appeared
to allow the practice when dealing with non-Jews. Some argue that the
Vatican worked behind the scenes by using Jews as fronts for their own
lending operations.
In England , the Tudor and Stuart monarchs made a stand against the
rise of bankers as issuers of currency. As Susan Boskey writes in her
book The Quality Life Plan: 7 Steps to Uncommon Financial Security,
?the Mixt Moneys Case of 1604 in England determined money as a public
measure to be regulated by the state.? According to Alexander Del Mar,
head of the U.S. Department of Weights and Measures in the late 19th
century and author of the book, History of Money in America From the
Earliest Times to the Establishment of the Constitution, the Mixt
Moneys Case determined that ?the state alone had the right to issue
money.?
Boskey continues: ?For over half a century, this ruling alarmed the
merchants of London who attempted to defeat the Mixt Moneys decision.
The East India Company was the main instigator in the effort, because
they were eager to turn a profit by shipping silver to India in
exchange for gold. Success was achieved with the British Free Coinage
Act of 1666, which, according to Del Mar, ?altered the monetary
systems of the world.? He wrote: ?The specific effects of this law
were to destroy the royal prerogative of coinage, nullify the decision
in the Mixt Moneys case, and inaugurate a future series of commercial
panics and disasters which to that time were totally unknown.?
Moneylenders known as ?strong room keepers? began the practice of
making interest-bearing loans that were not backed one-hundred percent
by the gold reserves remaining in their strong room.?
?The British Free Coinage Act of 1666,? continues Boskey, ?marked a
turning point in the role of currency creation as a public measure to
one dominated by moneylenders. No longer was the act of putting money
into circulation directly connected to the actual, existing material
riches of a nation.?
About this time, Samuel Pepys (1633-1703) was writing his now-famous
Diary. According to Canadian monetary expert Martin Hattersley, Pepys
?was describing in surprised delight the new institution of banking,
by which the smart investor, instead of paying the goldsmith for
warehousing his valuables, opened an account, and was actually paid
interest for having his money looked after!?
Pepys was captivated by the familiar but pernicious notion that,
instead of working for a living, a person could have his money ?work
for him.? Aristotle had spoken against this concept 2,000 years
earlier: ?The most hated sort of wealth getting and with the greatest
reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself and not from
the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in
exchange but not to increase at interest. And this term interest,
which means the birth of money from money is applied to the breeding
of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of all
modes of getting wealth, this is the most unnatural.? (1258b Politics)
Hattersley continues: ?Who paid for Samuel Pepys' remarkable new
service? Basically, the public did. Pepys, leaving his gold with the
banker, enabled the latter to lend it out to a third party. Pepys had
his ?money in the bank,? and the borrower took the gold. The borrower
naturally paid interest on the loan. Pepys received interest on his
deposit. The same money being (notionally) in the possession both of
Pepys and of the borrower meant an increase in the monetary mass of
the nation. All the holders of money in the nation, therefore, had the
value of their holdings very slightly diluted. There was a profit to
the banker on the ?spread? between borrowing and lending rates. There
was a profit to Mr. Pepys, who at one and the same moment had both
money in the bank and an interest bearing investment. Yet the borrower
also profited. His loan would be at a lower interest rate than that on
capital that had had to be saved up. ?Smart? bank financing put him
ahead of conventionally financed competitors. All three parties
gained, at the expense of the general public, the value of whose money
was diluted through inflation of the monetary mass.?
Finally, concludes Hattersley, ?Skipping forward three centuries (past
events such as the South Sea Bubble, tulip mania, the railway boom and
the 1929 market crash) we find that the little spot of inflation that
Mr. Pepys indulged in has become a universal way of life. The
extensive capital development of Canada [and the U.S. ] in the
post-World War II boom has been largely financed, not by personal
savings and investment, but by the inflation of the money supply. This
has left the thrifty who invested their little savings from the hard
times of the Great Depression in mortgages, bonds, and life insurance
deprived of most of the rewards of their thrift, and has caused the
profits of inflation to benefit all who could borrow, build, and then
repay their capital in deflated dollars later on.?
Hattersley captures the essence of the modern usury-based economy. No
longer is life based on honest human labor and the resources of
nature, but on financial manipulation. This is why religious people
have always viewed usury as a crime. Aristotle placed the usurer in
the same category as others who ?ply sordid trades,? such as pimps.
Returning to the march of history, in 1688, James II, who had become a
Catholic, fled the British throne. Through the ?Glorious Revolution,?
he was replaced by the Protestants William and Mary of the Dutch House
of Orange. The main instrument of power of the financiers who
supported them was the Bank of England, founded in 1694.
The next two centuries saw the financiers? control of world commerce
spread through the instrumentality of the British Empire . The bedrock
of British policy was ?free trade,? which allowed British
manufacturers who paid their workers a pittance to undersell their
competitors elsewhere. This was aided by having the British pound
become the world?s trading currency.
With the First Zionist Congress of 1897, one of the financiers?
geopolitical goals became to support the creation of the nation of
Israel , at least partly to dominate the world?s crossroads in the
oil-rich Middle East . The oil was needed to fuel the British navy.
The nature and origins of Zionism have been hotly debated in recent
years, as the role of Israel on the world stage has grown. One thing
seems certain: The Jewish religion is by no means monolithic. But its
followers, many of whom opposed the philosophy of Zionism, would now
be drawn into the financiers? power game. From this point on, anyone
who even questioned Zionism would be labeled ?anti-Semitic.?
As the 20th century advanced, the financier elite became heavily
involved in getting rich off world war and the manufacture of the new
weapons of mass destruction that modern technology made possible.
Warfare and weaponry, combined with control of credit manufactured
through the leveraging of industrial production, were to be the
primary means of putting nations and their populations into debt. A
materialistic slave society was being created, which books like 1984
warned against. Humanity was lured into compliance through the fantasy
world brought about by the mass media by means of advertising, cinema,
and television. Another enticement was the growing availability of
mass-produced consumer goods.
How It Was Done
While World War I and the Russian Revolution still lay a few years in
the future, the international financiers quietly took control of the
U.S. economic system in 1913 through the Federal Reserve Act and the
16th Amendment to the Constitution which provided for the federal
income tax. The purpose of this tax was to use citizens? earnings to
pay the interest on the ?funded? national debt. As with the debt owed
by the British people to the Bank of England, this would be one so
large the principle could never be paid off.
Russia was allied with Britain and France during World War I
(1914-18). But the war against Germany and Austria-Hungary had reached
a stalemate until the tide was turned by entry of the U.S. on the side
of the Allies. Fighting on the eastern front between Germany and
Russia was savage. By the end of the war the Russian Revolution broke
out, and, after a terrible Civil War, the Soviet Union came into
being.
It was the financier-controlled press which goaded President Woodrow
Wilson into taking the nation into World War I on the side of England
and France. But it was also part of the financiers? plan to shift the
apparent focal point of their financial power from London to New York
.. This was done through the financing of the war by loans made to the
European combatants by the New York banks.
It seemed to be in accord with a plan spelled out decades earlier by
Cecil Rhodes, whereby the U.S. would not only be ?recovered? for the
British Empire, but would appear to become the senior partner in the
enterprise. By the start of the 1920s, this objective had been
accomplished. German, English, French, and other European taxpayers
were all deeply in debt to the U.S. banks for the costs of the war.
Also during the war years the financiers had secured the issuance of
the Balfour Declaration signaling British support for the
establishment of a Zionist state in Palestine. The 1917 Declaration
was made in a letter from Arthur James Balfour, British Foreign
Secretary, to Walter Rothschild, Second Baron Rothschild, for
transmission to the Zionist Federation.
During and after World War I, world financial power shifted to the New
York banks through which, however, it would be the London-based elite
exerting de facto control. It might also be said that starting with
U.S. entry into World War I, once you look past the patriotic slogans,
the U.S., its vast productivity, and the blood of its population have
been used in making this country the worldwide military enforcer of
international financier domination.
World War II became the means of consolidating financier control.
Prior to that, during the years of the Great Depression, both Russia
?aka the Soviet Union?and the U.S. were slipping away from the fold.
Stalin had shown his ?Bonapartist? tendencies by favoring ?Socialism
in one country,? as well as by his deadly purges of the
financier-controlled Trotskyite faction and his shocking rapprochement
with Hitler in 1939 that seemed to foil the financiers? intent to play
off Nazi Germany and the Soviets against each other.
In the U.S., President Franklin Roosevelt had taken steps during the
Great Depression to rebuild the U.S. economy by exerting an
unaccustomed degree of control over the Federal Reserve System and
providing credit at low rates of interest to homeowners, farmers, and
businessmen. This made Roosevelt seem to many wealthy Americans ?a
traitor to his class.?
Roosevelt saw that a healthy and self-sustaining domestic economy is
essential for the well-being of a sovereign nation. But instead of
looking for ways to create a monetary system based on the productivity
of the economy, as Lincoln had done with the Greenbacks during the
Civil War, Roosevelt left intact the debt-based system overseen by the
Federal Reserve. He added to this system the Keynesian idea of
government deficit spending for public works to create employment.
This was essentially a system whereby government would try to pay its
debts by engendering inflation, a policy that has continued until
today.
But World War II thwarted even these stirrings of nationalism in both
countries. In both the Soviet Union and the U.S. , the financiers
worked the levers of debt to build massive war machines. They were
also working through the Western banks, including Brown Brothers
Harriman in New York, to achieve the same ends in Nazi Germany.
Eventually Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, and the U.S. entered the
war. Both during and after the war, operatives from the international
financial elite centered in London were the linchpins of a worldwide
matrix of spying, assassination, terrorism, industrial espionage, psy
ops, media manipulation, and monetary control. This included financing
the founding of Israel as the Western bridgehead in the Middle East in
1948.
Despite the creation of an appearance of conflict between the West and
the Soviet Union through the Cold War, the financiers continued to
work both sides of the fence through their London-based operatives. In
the U.S. they created the modern national security state with both the
National Security Agency and the CIA firmly under their control. Then,
after President John F. Kennedy moved to forestall the neocolonialist
Vietnam conflict and replace the Federal Reserve with a U.S. system of
silver-backed Treasury currency, he was shot dead in Dallas ?s Dealey
Plaza on November 22, 1963.
In charge of convincing the public that the Warren Commission was
correct in concluding that Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald,
supposedly a lone deranged gunman, were figures associated with the
financier elite from the New York Times, Washington Post, and Yale Law
School . (See The Kennedy Assassination Cover-Up Revisited by Donald
Gibson, 2005.) But in 1979, a report of the House Select Committee on
Assassinations stated that Kennedy was killed by a ?probable
conspiracy.?
It has been thoroughly documented that since World War II the Western
intelligence agencies, all with close ties to the financial world,
particularly the New York and London investment banks, have been
responsible for engendering wars, revolutions, and mayhem in countries
around the world, causing the deaths of millions of people in Asia,
Africa, Latin America, and southeastern Europe.
Meanwhile, the worldwide arms industry, also under financier control,
have produced the greatest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction ever
seen. After Kennedy was killed, the U.S. moved to arm Israel as the
leading military power of the region. Today nuclear weapons have
proliferated, with Israel , Pakistan , and India becoming nuclear
powers in addition to the U.S. , Russia , Britain , China , and France
..
But warfare and weapons cost money, and by the late 1960s the Vietnam
War was sinking the U.S. deeper into debt. The U.S. war machine was to
be the main tool for financier enforcement of their worldwide plan of
domination, but the nation was going broke. The problem was made worse
by heavy federal expenditures for the poor and elderly through such
programs as Medicare and Medicaid.
But President Richard Nixon?s Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had a
plan. The government worked out an arrangement whereby Saudi Arabia
and the other OPEC nations would gradually increase the price of oil,
with the profits to be used by the oil-producing nations to buy U.S.
Treasury debt securities. By 1980 the cost of oil would be ratcheted
up from about $3.50 a barrel to $39.50.
The drastic increase of the price of gasoline at the pump acted as a
de facto tax on the U.S. economy. But the plan worked. The
?petrodollar? and ?dollar hegemony? were born, with the dollar
becoming the world?s reserve currency. Dollars could flood the world
only because in 1971 the Nixon administration had abandoned the
dollar?s gold peg as a basis for international currency exchange. Now
currencies floated freely in world markets with speculation and
inflation rampant. The economies of the world were no longer based on
production, but on financial manipulation. It was also the start of
the era of monetarism, where the Federal Reserve thought it could
regulate the economy by the raising and lowering of interest rates.
The Kissinger plan also made the U.S. dependent on Middle Eastern oil
and turned it into the muscle behind the financiers? ambition for
Israel to dominate the region. So now Americans, who had liberated
Europe from the Nazis, had to fight and die for the financiers in the
Middle East . The final conquest of Iraq , starting in 2003, and the
planned war against Iran are the latest phases.
Meanwhile, through the financiers? control of the U.S. Federal Reserve
System, the producing economy was shattered through the Fed-induced
recession of 1979-83, where interest rates were raised to the highest
in history to combat the inflation the financiers had themselves
caused by the oil price shocks. By this time, as some allege, the
controversial concept of ?peak oil??whether it really existed or
not?was being used as a cover for financier manipulation of oil
markets by limiting production in order to maintain prices.
By 1992, when Bill Clinton was elected president, the U.S. producing
economy had been devastated by the shutdown of factories and the
export of jobs. The work of wrecking the economy was completed by
Clinton ?s embrace of NAFTA, which has largely eliminated family
farming in favor of financier-controlled agribusiness in the U.S. ,
Canada , and Mexico . Deregulation of the financial industry began in
earnest during the Reagan years from 1981-89 and accelerated under
Clinton .
By this time, the U.S. economy was being kept afloat only through
financial bubbles that allowed the purchase of consumer goods to take
place through more family and household debt. We had the
merger-acquisition bubble of the 1980s, followed by the George H.W.
Bush recession which led to Clinton ?s election in 1992. During the
1990s we had the dot.com bubble fueled by foreign investment. Capital
gains taxes on stock price inflation and counting trust funds like
Social Security as budgetary assets allowed Clinton to balance the
federal budget the last three years of his presidency.
But the dot.com bubble also burst with the loss of $7 trillion of
wealth through the crash of 2000-2001. Next came the Bush bubbles?in
housing, equity funds, commercial real estate, and hedge funds that
have been deflating while threatening to destroy altogether the
economic viability of what was once the world?s greatest industrial
democracy.
After this, the only bubble left for an economy that appears to be
entering terminal depression may be the current fuel/food bubble that
could result in the starvation of millions worldwide. Now the
longstanding ambition of the financier elite for the destruction of
the American republic may finally be realized?with a lot of help, of
course, from their American friends.
?End Times?
Can it be that the last stage of the U.S. takedown is ?The Project for
the New American Century?? Is this ambitious plan for ?global
leadership? through military might that was seemingly invented by the
?neocons??many with dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship?a Trojan Horse?
It certainly appears that with 9/11 as a pretext, the neocons suckered
the U.S. into the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq as a means of
military occupation of the Middle East . Certainly 9/11 and the Iraq
invasion benefited Israel, as some Israeli politicians have frankly
stated.
Were the neocons also acting on behalf of the financial controllers in
London and elsewhere? And was one reason the neocons were so eager to
engage in a ?clash of civilizations? against the Islamic world the
Koranic prohibition of usury which states, ?Those who charge Usury are
in the same position as those controlled by the devil's influence.
This is because they claim that Usury is the same as commerce.
However, God permits commerce, and prohibits Usury.? (Koran,
Al-Baqarah 2:275)
Prior to 9/11, the Bush administration got Congress to cut taxes for
the highest income brackets, reversing Bill Clinton?s budget
surpluses. The tax cut remained in effect, even as the massive
expenditures on the Middle Eastern wars mounted. The consequence has
been to bring the federal government to the brink of bankruptcy.
The last official act of this phase could well be the ultimate
insanity of a U.S. attack on Iran . If successful, this would complete
the Western conquest of the Middle East but may start a larger
conflict that could eventually force the U.S. to withdraw its forces
once the money runs out. Israel would then be at liberty to sweep in
to dominate a region that U.S. military power had devastated.
Whatever may happen overseas, the U.S. economy at home is on the verge
of collapse. It if does, we will have to retreat to our own shores and
face here the edifice of a ruined nation with no manufacturing base, a
crumbling infrastructure, an aging population, insufficient food,
poorly developed resources, and the collapse of the dollar. Of course
the prophets of doom who claim that overpopulation must inevitably
lead to Malthusian scarcity will take all this as justification of
their prejudices. The rumored North American Union, with its currency
the amero, could then follow, both under the control of the
financiers.
Meanwhile in Russia, things took a surprising turn when the Russian
people threw out their communist controllers in 1991 and established a
Russian republic. The financiers immediately took over through the
government of Boris Yeltsin and began to divide up the nation?s
resources through their local allies, the ?oligarchs.? But the Russian
people refused to comply. Despite desperate poverty, they elected
Vladimir Putin, a nationalist leader who moved quickly to establish a
self-governing Russian state that the financiers and the Western press
clearly intend to take down. Russia is now back on the world scene,
and a revival of the Orthodox Church is taking place. The drama in
that country has not been entirely played out it seems.
As far as the U.S. is concerned, the financiers will have used us for
a century, then thrown us in the trash. The U.S. may well be replaced
by China, which the financiers seem to be grooming as the world?s next
military enforcer. China has the advantage of an absolutist one-party
system which has achieved remarkable success in terrorizing its huge
population into obedience and passivity. The financiers would not
hesitate to sacrifice hordes of Chinese to fight both Russia and what
may remain of the U.S. By this time, the European Union will likely
have its own unified nuclear deterrent to protect the financial
centers. The time may come when there will be Chinese bases in the
U.S. as occupiers/military police.
The wisest and safest course for U.S. foreign policy could be a new
alliance with Russia that would rekindle our affinity with that nation
from over a century ago. But how likely is this in a world ruled by
the financiers where the destruction of the two nations is a long-term
goal?
One of the tools of financier domination in the meantime will likely
be worldwide famine engineered by artificial shortages. This has
already started and may cause hundreds of millions of people to die
and their resources to be seized. The smokescreens for this will not
only be peak oil but also global warming as a means of dealing with
the world?s ?surplus eaters.? Numerous non-profits and NGOs are
greasing the skids with their insistent lobbying against even
responsible economic development.
Now in the U.S. we will likely see riots, panic, martial law, plagues,
epidemics, and prison camps, much of which has already begun with
police crackdowns, anti-terrorist exercises, declining public health,
erosion of civil liberties, and the world?s largest prison population.
It is likely that the ?American Century? is over and that the ?New
American Century? will really be the ?No American Century.? Outside of
select pockets of prosperity around financial centers, resorts, and
military installations, the U.S. is being destroyed. As an example,
the residents of once-prosperous towns in Michigan have turned to the
illegal manufacture of meth-amphetamine now that the jobs are gone.
We have been used and abused, though often suckered into it by our own
stupidity and greed. We have allowed ourselves to serve the will of an
alien force?the world?s financial elite. Our payback now appears to be
a looming national catastrophe.
Economic Restructuring
Economically, what is left of America must be rebuilt from the ground
up. The flaw is not in the productivity of nature, the availability of
resources, our ingenuity, nor our ability to work. The flaw has been
in the capitalist financial system.
We must now rebuild three things: American family farming, since a
nation that cannot feed itself cannot long exist; then infrastructure
and manufacturing, which will require energy conservation and
redevelopment of our energy resources; then income security tied to
productivity but not always to employment?a basic guaranteed income
for all. The best available treatment of the history and benefits of a
guaranteed income may be found in Steven Shafarman?s new book,
Peaceful, Positive Revolution, Tendril Press, 2008.
The concept of a guaranteed income as a benefit of a modern industrial
economy has been around for a long time. But it is often confused with
job-creation. As indicated earlier, during the 1930s, British
economist John Maynard Keynes came up with the idea of using
government deficits to try to out-run unemployment through
government-controlled pump priming. But in the long run his methods
were doomed to fail as debt-based economic growth eventually reached
its limits due to inflation. This is where we are today, with
President George W. Bush now the largest deficit spender in history.
The most successful attempt to define a rationale for an honest and
democratic monetary system, one based on human labor and not financial
chicanery, was the Social Credit movement founded by British engineer
C.H. Douglas (1879-1952). He first set forth his ideas in his book
Economic Democracy in 1918 and continued to teach his system for the
next thirty years, attracting a considerable following in Great
Britain , Canada , New Zealand , and Australia .
Douglas explained the dynamic whereby the incredible productivity of
modern technology can readily be harnessed to provide the material
sustenance for all members of society, but fails to do so because
there is a chronic shortage of purchasing power from the cumulative
societal income realized through wages, salaries, and dividends. The
main reasons income cannot keep pace with prices is that the latter
include retained earnings for savings and reinvestment, along with
depreciation of capital?i.e., the tools and facilities of production.
But the ?gap? between prices and earnings (what Keynes was to call
?aggregate demand?) was viewed by Douglas as a benefit of a modern
industrial economy rather than the curse which in the Depression was
causing farmers to dump their milk in the fields because consumers
lacked the money to purchase it.
Douglas saw this gap as the natural appreciation of the potential
producing economy to which everyone in society was entitled as
monetized shares. He said this appreciation should manifest in regular
payments of a National Dividend by government from a calculated credit
account not dependent on taxation or government borrowing. The
National Dividend could be paid by a combination of regular stipends
to citizens and/or through a system of price subsidies. And it would
be non-inflationary.
Douglas went further by explaining that in real life the price-income
gap was in fact filled?nature abhors a vacuum?but by bank lending at
usury. This was why the banks got richer, while everyone else
struggled just to survive. Banks also use their credit creating
ability to acquire securities, such as Treasury bonds, with the
government paying interest that is compounded because the debt is
constantly being re-financed. Interest on the U.S. national debt is
expected to exceed $500 billion in fiscal year 2009. To pay it, many
social programs will be cut.
The technical explanation is provided by Canadian Social Credit expert
Wallace Klinck, ?Expanding interest charges being paid on
exponentially compounding debt accumulates due to an industrial cost
accountancy error related to allocating capital charges in retail
prices which do not distribute equal incomes within the same
production cycle. The growing disparity between prices and incomes is
progressively worsened by the replacement of human labor by capital
(technology).?
Under the current system, the banks steal the fruits of economic
wealth which properly belong to the public as a whole, both workers
and non-workers, and while the financiers were well aware of Douglas
?s system, they hated it. Word went out in the 1920s that his name was
never to be mentioned in the British press. John Maynard Keyes was
said to have developed his own deficit-spending theories as a means to
counter Douglas ?s influence. And when Douglas visited the U.S. in the
late 1930s, he was told to his face that he would never be allowed to
introduce his ideas in this country.
Next Steps
To accomplish a program of real reform will require a strong president
but possibly a political revolution to get one. Congressman Ron Paul
has made history as the first major presidential candidate to call for
the abolishment of the Federal Reserve. He is right. The first thing a
president worthy of the name should do is eliminate the Federal
Reserve as a bank-of-issue, get rid of our debt-based monetary system,
and depose the bankers and Wall Street financiers from the seats of
power. Ron Paul is also right that the U.S. should withdraw its
military from overseas and stop trying to control the world.
What Ron Paul?s candidacy proves is that in the internet age, with
financial crises jumping from the headlines every day, and authorities
such as Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary
of the Treasury Henry Paulson manifestly having no intention of making
real changes, the public is ready to listen to new ideas. But even
progressive analysts are so locked into outmoded concepts that they
fail to realize an entirely new type of monetary system is needed.
The basic concept that must be understood, as expressed repeatedly by
this author in past articles, is that credit is a power of nature that
is part of the human ?commons.? Credit allows society to materialize
value by drawing from future potential productivity into present
actualized reality. Credit therefore should be treated legally as a
public utility, like water or electricity.
Credit is not a mathematical abstraction that should be manipulated
into building pyramids of debt. Such practices are suicidal for an
economy. Rather credit is organic, deriving ultimately from human
labor (including mental labor, as in the application of technology),
along with the sun, the soil, natural resources, and the rain. Thus we
have gone full circle to the beginning of this article, where Russia
and the U.S. were cited as the two nations that best understood where
real wealth comes from.
The management of credit may be licensed to responsible private
parties who are accountable to public authority, but it should never
be given away or ?privatized? to individuals or corporations who
manipulate it mainly for their own profit, as banks do today. It is
the privatization of credit through the banking systems of the world
which has loaded humanity with debt, rendered short-term profits the
highest priority of all business endeavor, and made modern
industrialization as much a curse as a blessing.
Note that credit differs in this discussion from the legitimate
investment of capital derived from profits or savings whereby an
individual risks a portion of his wealth through a contract with a
producing entity. Capital markets that facilitate this type of
investment fall under the category of commerce, not usury.
A national monetary system should reflect the treatment of credit as a
public utility and thereby make possible responsible economic activity
and the fair distribution of wealth. Some of the measures which should
be implemented are contained in the American Monetary Institute?s
draft American Monetary Act. (www.monetary.org/) The resulting
currency could be issued, not in the form of debt instruments like
Federal Reserve Notes, but silver-backed Treasury certificates as in
President Kennedy?s program of 1963.
Features of a new monetary system could be as follows:
*
A guaranteed income, followed by a National Dividend, should be
paid directly to citizens from a Treasury credit account without
recourse to either taxation or government borrowing. (C.H. Douglas?s
theory of the National Dividend as the monetization of the net
appreciation of the productivity of a modern industrial economy is set
forth in this author?s Global Research article entitled, ?An Emergency
Program of Monetary Reform for the United States ,? April 26, 2007.)
The National Dividend, currently estimated at over $12,000 per capita
annually, could be distributed in a variety of ways, in addition to a
subsistence stipend. This could include price subsidies for consumer
purchases, taking over existing Social Security payments, universal
health insurance, or payments to women with young children. Another
way to issue a National Dividend would be to monetize food production,
whereby anyone who delivers food products to wholesalers receives a
government payment as a producer?s subsidy, thereby discounting food
at the consumer point-of-sale. This would work in a similar fashion to
farm parity pricing programs of bygone days. As explained by Wallace
Klinck, ?Social Credit policy is to compensate retail prices at the
point-of-sale. It is not, however, to subsidize production which would
be subject to consumer choice and fully supported by consumers having
at all times financial income adequate to fully liquidate the costs of
production. That is, production policy is to be determined essentially
by consumers?this being the Social Credit concept of genuine economic
democracy with maximum decentralization, or dispersion, of power over
production policy. Price controls under the present financial
cost-accountancy system, where continued economic activity is
dependent upon an inflationary expansion of credit to meet rising
costs arising consequent to flawed accountancy, is demonstrably
impossible. Price regulation, however, would appear to be both
necessary and realistic under a self-liquidating Social Credit system
of finance. Although not generally recognized, prices are
?controlled,? (or manipulated) under the present system of finance in
a most deleterious manner.?
*
The government should also spend money directly into
circulation, as it did with Greenbacks in the 19th century, both for
operating expenses and for infrastructure projects at the federal,
state, and local levels. A national infrastructure bank could be
capitalized by state and local infrastructure bonds without any impact
on the federal budget. Such spending would again be without recourse
to borrowing or taxation. Infrastructure spending could be either
through grants or low-interest loans. As with Congressman Dennis
Kucinich?s current proposed infrastructure bank legislation, the
program could specify that a requisite proportion of funding be spent
on American-made products such as steel.
*
We should reform banking by eliminating the catastrophic
privately-controlled fractional reserve system. Instead, the
government should lend money at a low rate of interest to banks, then
use the proceeds to help pay for legitimate government expenditures in
the areas of regulation or services. Use of the proceeds, combined
with the new Greenbacks and savings from no longer having to pay
interest on an unnecessary national debt, would eliminate the need for
the federal income tax, allowing the 16th Amendment to be repealed. In
fact, under a monetary system such as the one described herein,
probably three-fourths or more of the current societal tax burden
could be eliminated.
*
In order to clear the way for these reforms, bankruptcy
reorganization of the entire $50 trillion of existing debt in the U.S.
should be undertaken, with debt being restructured and paid down over
time or simply written off. Bank lending for speculation, such as for
mergers and acquisitions, equity and hedge fund speculation, and
purchase of securities on margin has been explosively enabled through
bankers? ability to move massive amounts of funds electronically.
These leveraging practices should be outlawed, as they are abuses of
the public interest. (According to the London Times, one John Paulson
made $3.7 billion in hedge fund trading last year. ?Mr. Paulson?s
firm, Paulson & Co, made a fortune from shorting America ?s sub-prime
mortgage markets.?) A national fuel conservation program with real
teeth should also be instituted. And at least half of the U.S.
military budget should be eliminated, with half of the remainder
devoted to energy R&D and domestic public works. Employees of the
military-industrial complex will find many new career opportunities as
the domestic economy revives.
As these measures are taken, the United States will no longer be
dancing to the financiers? tune. We would be helping prepare a future
where man?s inhumanity to man as expressed through war and financial
exploitation is no longer glorified. Such a future would be a
milestone in the eventual enlightenment of the human race. But these
are measures that must be implemented now, before it is too late.
While we await these epochal changes, more modest steps may be in
order. The author is often asked for personal financial advice. His
advice is to invest in yourself and in other people. Plant a robust
home garden. Learn new skills. Start community food co-ops that buy
local products. Establish local currencies and barter networks. Join
or form a union. Raise bees. Put kids through school. Get out of debt.
Pray and meditate. Become politically active. Demand change.
Richard C. Cook is a former U.S. federal government analyst, whose
career included service with the U.S. Civil Service Commission, the
Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House, NASA, and the
U.S. Treasury Department. His articles on economics, politics, and
space policy have appeared on numerous websites. His book on monetary
reform is entitled We Hold These Truths: The Promise of Monetary
Reform and will be published this autumn by Tendril Press. He is also
the author of Challenger Revealed: An Insider?s Account of How the
Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age,
called by one reviewer, ?the most important spaceflight book of the
last twenty years.? His website is at www.richardccook.com. Questions,
comments, or contributions may be directed to economicsanity@xxxxxxxxx
..
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed.
For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms
including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@xxxxxxxxx
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you
wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use"
you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor@xxxxxxxxx
© Copyright Richard C. Cook, Global Research, 2008
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=8854
.
- Prev by Date: Essential Fatty Acids - The Bodybuilding Guide To Eat More Fat And Build Mor..
- Next by Date: Re: Renli is very sad
- Previous by thread: Essential Fatty Acids - The Bodybuilding Guide To Eat More Fat And Build Mor..
- Next by thread: Learn English!!!!! Know everything !!!!!!!!!!!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
