26 July 2017

The Problems of, and Solutions to, Money - Wilberg on Wednesday

The History of Money Power - Usury versus Fiat Money
Gods, religions, tribes, cultures, cities, civilisations and empires have been around for untold millennia. So also have wars, violence, destruction, plunder, slavery and the forced occupations or migrations of peoples. All these phenomena are interrelated . Marx and Engels were among the first to cease using the religious or cultural paradigms of good and evil to seek a particular scapegoat for these phenomena - or to blame one on the other - but instead to seek to analyse their dialectical interconnection and development. Everyone who has read the Communist Manifesto knows of the historic line of social-economic development that they traced - from primitive communism to slavery, feudalism and industrial capitalism. Few readers, even of Das Kapital , are as knowledgeable of their - and particularly Engel’s analysis - of the history and nature of money and usury. Yes there are the formulae relating commodities to Money. C-C (barter), C-M-C (selling in order to buy, and obtain use values), M-C-M (buying in order to sell and accumulate surplus exchange value - or M for money. Yet what is considered far less, even by Marxists, as well as academic historians in general, is the history and nature of money itself - both in the ancient past and in the present day - where a quite different formula ruled and now rules also: M-M-M. Making money from nothing, and then making money, with money from that money - and all this quite independent of any use-values, commodities or even labour - but purely through money in the form of what is now called ‘fractional reserve banking’ i.e. the multiplication of promissory notes or numismata, whether in the form of clay tablets, letters of credit, paper money or figures keyed into an electronic account - but not based on any actual reserves of either simple commodities such as grain or precious metals such as silver or gold. This brings us to the nature of money, not simply as an accounting unit, exchange value or capital - but as debt. Immediately we have a relation established to religion via the notions of sin, guilt and ‘redemption’. The words for debt and guilt are actually identical in German ( Schuld ) and closely related in many religious cultures. The sinner is the debtor. Therefore ‘forgiveness’ related initially and primarily to debt. Debt forgiveness or ‘redemption’ for the peasantry and lower castes was an annual event in early Sumerian civilisation, in which money - as in many other hierarchical and theocratic civilisations such as Egypt - ruled by divine god-kings from the heavens - was an accounting unit defined, created and quantified by law - fiat, which meant also divine law. The institution of state accounted and state issued fiat money and non-interest bearing credit began in the form of a generalised use-value or commodity such as grain or cattle - both of which can be repaid by reproducing themselves biologically. If this proved impossible, there was debt forgiveness to maintain stability and social well-being.

Before, Behind and Beyond Marx
In his pamphlet “Critique of the Gotha Program,” Marx advocated exactly the same alternative to money as the Welsh socialist Robert Owen - to get rid of money and replace it with labour vouchers, as Hitler did. Yet if one famous Marxist thesis declares that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”, another, hidden thesis, asserts something quite different, namely that “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of money” - and in particular the long history of a struggle between state money, accounted, quantified and valued by law or fiat on the one hand, and privately accrued debt- and interest-bearing money, created from nothing. Crucial in the evolution of this form of money was the introduction of metal coinage. Aristotle: “Men called bankers we shall hate, for they enrich themselves while doing nothing.” But Plato and Aristotle also disagreed. Plato, unlike Aristotle, was an opponent of private property, and believed in the ‘Chartalist’ principle that money should take the form of a mere token or symbol. Here he anticipated the argument of John Law that “Silver that serves as money with no other use than to buy goods might just as well be replaced by a cheaper material, in the limit, by one that has no commodity value at all, such as printed paper” because “Money is not the Value for which Goods are exchanged, but the Value by which they are exchanged.” On the other hand, what Joseph P. Farrell called the “Babylon’s Banksters” - bullion banksters - went for the ‘Metallist’ thesis that the value of money is and should be intrinsic - based on its own hard won labour-value and its market-value as a commodity. Hence the brutal ancient and modern slave-mines for gold - the conversion of slave ownership from a relatively benign cultural custom into an important source of booty from war, and one which also offers the state rulers and temple priesthoods both a new form of monetary power - and could be used to build up more powerful and well-equipped armies, albeit only through debt to the bullion bankers and slave drivers - who therefore naturally had an innate interest in fostering wars, and all their dire consequences - destruction and destitution that led either to physical slavery or to debt slavery to the same banksters. Engels was more aware of the danger of usury capital than Marx, noting that it was “the principal means for suppressing the common liberty, breaking apart the old communal bonds of the Greek gens, and reinforcing the inequalities and exploitation of the newly emerging class society of the Athenian state”.

“... the growing money economy penetrated like corrosive acid into the old traditional life of the rural communities founded on natural economy … Hence the money rule of the aristocracy now in full flood of expansion also created a new customary law to secure the creditor against the debtor and to sanction the exploitation of the small peasant by the possessor of money…”

“...when men invented money, they did not think that they were again creating a new social power, the one general power before which the whole of society must bow . And it was this new power, suddenly sprung to life without knowledge or will of its creators, which now, in all the brutality of its youth, gave the Athenians the first taste of its might.”

Resistance to the power and rule of bullion and debt-based money in Athens and Persia came only from Sparta - which deliberately used degraded iron as money to defend its fiat currency against silver and gold from the East. In Rome resistance was restored by Julius Caesar, thereby challenging the power of the patrician plutocracy over an impoverished populace. In England it was maintained by the pre-Cromwellian Monarchs (with the exception of King John) who issued tally sticks from the 11th to the 15th century as debt- and interest-free currency. Rejection of the Rothschild banksters was enforced by Napoleon - and, yes, by Tsarist Russia.

In modern times, the battle for fiat money was maintained by the (assassinated) U.S. Presidents Lincoln, Jackson, Garfield and J.F.K. and through the Social Credit movement. State banking and fiat money was used with incredible success by Japan before WW2 (under the influence of the Social Credit Movement), by Germany under Adolf Hitler (under the influence of Gottfried Feder) and by Libya under Gaddafi. It is still maintained by the Isle of Guernsey! Unknown to many is that one of the secrets of Germany’s post-war e conomic success (along with its maintenance and modernisation of its traditional craft and trades apprenticeship system) was its revival, protection and expansion of a significant number of regionally and communally devolved cooperative, public banks - with a share of 40% of total banking assets in Germany. These ‘saving banks’ or Sparkassen are regionally or communally controlled, rather than state controlled, though they operate under state law. They have no owners, but are non-profit savings and credit organisations, designed to serve their local communities, providing low-interest loans for farmers, small and medium-sized businesses, and not engaging in speculative transactions. The attempt to disrupt and destroy rather than replicate this successful regional and communal public banking system, which withstood the 2008 banking crisis, has been an aim of Anglo-American financial and banking interests since the Thatcher-Reagan era.

Some Notes on English History

“In the thirteenth century … the agriculturalist over nearly the whole of Europe was a freer man … England for example, was even in the fifteenth century almost entirely in the hands of thousands of farmers, who were not only legal owners of their land, but possessed in addition far-reaching free rights to common pastures and woodland.” 
Anglo-German philosopher Stuart Houston Chamberlain

From ‘The History of Central Banking’ by Stephen Mitford Goodson:
With the banishment of the money-lenders (Edward III in 1364) and the abolition of usury, taxes were moderate and there was no state debt … Tally sticks were first introduced by Henry II (1100-1135) and would remain in circulation until 1873 …
… With tolerable taxes, no state debt and no interest to pay, England enjoyed a period of almost unparalleled growth and prosperity. The average labourer worked only 14 weeks and enjoyed 140 to 160 holidays. According to Lord Leverhulme, a writer of that time, “The men of the 15th century were very well paid” … a labourer could provide for all the necessities his family required. They were well-clothed in good woollen cloth and had plenty of meat and bread…During their spare hours many craftsmen volunteered their skills in building some of England’s magnificent cathedrals, which reinforces one of the basic tenets of Western Civilisation that without leisure time, the fostering of culture is not possible … The York Minster was completed in 1472 and has the largest expanse of stained glass in the world.

This golden period came to an end with Cromwell - whose Puritanism was financed by Jewish
money (the Jewish usurers even told him he was the Messiah!).

Thirty-three years after Cromwell had let the Jews (back) into Britain, a Dutch prince arrived from Amsterdam, surrounded by a whole swarm of Jews from that financial centre … six years later the Bank of England was established for the purpose of lending money to the Crown. 
A.N. Field All These Things

Henceforth a pattern would emerge where unnecessary wars would be embarked upon which simultaneously increased the national debt and the profit of the usurers. Significantly, most of these wars were started against countries that had implemented interest-free state banking systems, as was the case in the North American colonies and France under Napoleon. This pattern of attacking and enforcing the bankers’ system of usury … includes the defeats of Imperial Russia … Germany, Italy and Japan in WWII, and most recently, Libya in 2011. Goodson

The Great Paradox
The same breed of Jewish money-lenders that heralded from Holland are now freely financing
white nationalist movements such as that of Geert Wilders in Holland! Mr Horowitz’s organisation, Freedom Centre, has paid out $150,000 (£125,000). Some $120,000 of that was given in 2015, making it the largest individual contribution to the political system in The Netherlands in a year. The conservative Zionist think-tank Middle East Forum paid a substantial sum into a legal fund set up for Mr Wilders after he was accused of making racist statements. Two US right-wing foundations, the Gatestone Institute and the International Freedom Alliance Foundation, have sponsored his trips to America. I pray that social nationalist parties in England do not fall prey to this hidden international game - and become mere red-painted Trotskyist or Stalinist pawns in that game.

Fiat Money and ‘Free Energy’ - where Finance meets Physics
There are important and intimate connections between finance and physic s, fiat money and 'free energy '. The 'alchemy' of creating money from nothing can be likened to creating energy from 'nothing'. The question, of course is whether this power rests in the hands of a people’s state or of a tiny elite of private banksters. Another connection between finance and physics is that national financial sovereignty on the one hand, and national energy sovereignty or ‘autarky’ necessarily go together. This is why, in addition to Hitler defying the banksters with state-issued fiat money - but then being forced to fight a war despite trade boycotts and lack of petroleum and rubber - there was also intensive research in Germany into 'free energy' under special departments of the S.S. This in order to ensure energy autarchy in the face of trade boycotts and petroleum shortages. This secret research challenged the established fictions and shibboleths of relativity and quantum mechanics. It also combined conventional with occult science and physics - deriving from earlier pre-war secret societies such as the Vril society (the ‘All-German Metaphysical Society’). Going back even further in history, Joseph P. Farrell claims that a war between god kings, rulers and states issuing their own money, and those wishing to subvert these rulers and their temples and priests using debt-based money and ruthlessly slave-mined silver and gold (to be used purely as money and to finance wars) has not only been going on right through known history , starting with ancient Sumerian, Assyrian, Egyptian and many other civilisations - but has perhaps a 100 million year old pre-history going back to Atlantis - a subject of such great interest to the S.S. that it was intensively researched through expeditions to Tibet and many other countries. This civilisation may have destroyed itself through its advanced sound- and resonance based physics, as a result of which this science was first lost - and preserved only in fragments by secret societies and esoteric thinkers. I believe a sound metaphysical basis for this science can be I found in what I call The Awareness Principle - a principle which has applications in fields as diverse as economics, medicine and the sciences. The Awareness Principle is a unified field theory of awareness - one which denies that awareness is either a product or the private property of any localised body or being, and has an essentially non-local or field character. A physics based on this principle would recognises awareness itself as that universal ‘aether’ (much spoken of by free-energy physicists) which is the very source of all ‘matter’ and all ‘energy’ - and the very stuff’ of which, like dreams “they are made on” (Shakespeare). This new philosophy I call ‘dialectical trans-materialism’. It follows Marx’s insight ( Theses on Feuerbach ) that all previous materialisms have denied the subjective dimension of human sensuous activity and labour.

The chief defect of all previous materialism (including Feuerbach’s) is that the object, actuality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the form of the object of perception, but not as sensuous human activity, practice [Praxis], not subjectively . Karl Marx

No comments: