I AM SHOCKED! JUST SHOCKED!
I am shocked, just shocked, at the following news
Trustee: J.P. Morgan Abetted Madoff
Why would a fine, upstanding patriotic American corporation like JP Morgan Chase, that wonderful institution of those warm humanitarians the Morgan and Rockefeller families, be involved in fraud, in ignoring the "warning signs" of a clear swindle?
I don't know about you, but I am imagining interesting punishments for the bankers and major stockholders, and the management, of this company, and the families that lurk in the background... enough is enough. It is time for America and Americans to wake up, and to quit idolizing the robber barons of laissez faire capitalism as heros; it is time to recognize them for what they are: pariahs, and parasites, and above all, criminals.
39 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
“The Witch” by W.B. Yeats
Toil and grow rich
What’s that, but to lie
With a foul witch
And after, drained dry
To be brought to the place where
Lies one long sought
With despair.
Dear Justina this March4 the problems you outline are nothing to what the Republicans are dreaming up. With Scott Walker in Wisconsin and his plan to renstate slavery in all but name and his fellow Republican governors same wishs it back to the seventeen and eighteen centuery for us if they are not stoped. We will be lucky if all we get is serfdom if they forfeild their plans. By the way I also have a blog it,s http://martinpadway.blogspot.com there are a few post there you might find interesting.
After that quote from Casablanca I had to watch it on you tube. Very cute.
Hey, Karl Marx was basically right about the rapaciousness of “big capital”,
and Lenin was basically right about the growth of that sector into imperialism
and fascism. I am not a communist but must admit those guys saw clearly.
Whence comes the General Uprising in the West??
Probably from people who don’t have some axe to grind of a
greater than themselves drunkenness on mass movements
and ideology who are stumbling onto the reality, that Marx
& Co. recognized, but exploited for their own reasons.
Someone once said, “under capitalism, man exploits man.
Under communism, it is just the reverse.”
Marx was an oddball. Frankly, the behavior reported reminds
me of some of Hitler’s tantrums. It is almost like both were
semi possessed or inhabited and guided. Before Marx,
atheism existed in socialism, but was not standard, Marx
kept beating everyone down till that atheist plank got put on
the Communist International platform. Some of the planks
like justice without fees were just common sense that
are wrongly denounced because they are inconvenient
to some, and happened to be in the platform.
Marx seems to have written more than he published, and
what he published was strictly geared to break his rivals.
All he did was to one goal, not the supremacy of the
working class, but the supremacy of himself.
Even his claim that the League of Just Men was some
fighting revolutionary group whose organization style
and whatnot needed copying was nonsense. There
is a PhD dissertation Karl Marx and the Communist
Manifesto by Elliot Erikson (my late father), which shows
this. As for the League, police reports of the time show
they were nothing more than a coffee klatch and don’t
figure in riots or anything. Here is a link to part of it,
the files named k-marx-e-erikson
http://web.archive.org/web/20010502231653/www.advweb.com/kw/misc/misc/
Someone made a case once, for Communism and Big Capitalism
being two arms of the same thing, supposedly tracking back to
the British East India Company. Given how the British ruling classes
and wealth tended to value each other i suppose anything could be
tracked back to someone connected to the British East India
Company.
Lyndon La Rouche made a case for Communism being what he calls
a Frankenstein monster, something created for a purpose other
than what it thought it was for, but which got out of control. Might
be something to that. (La Rouche is nuts. Also, by constantly
campaigning for president repeatedly on the argument that electing
him was the only way to save Western Civilization in general and
the United States in particular from whatever then current crisis was
looming, and he wasn’t elected and we are all still here, he effectively
proved himself to be the most unnecessary man in history so to speak.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIZp6aOibiM&feature=related
vinnie and the truthers, you can see, especially if you stop and
start click it, that the collapse is NOT from the bottom, the lower
parts remain intact, edges sharp, until the collapse reaches
them, it is from the TOP DOWN.
the way the top sort of peels away would fit the flex, not melt
but bent, NOT MELT but soften enough to slip off the struts
that the cross beams are balanced on and as it pancakes
down, the outer beams are pushed aside.
Jet engine fuel burning in a confined space, should soften
not melt, SOFTEN SLIGHTLY steel enough to give way under
its own weight.
Indications of other explosions might be relevant to some
augmentation effect weird technology.
A drive through garage burned once that I knew of. The fire
was unbelievably hot, because it was trapped under Spanish
tile, which turned the upwelling heat and fire back down,
reinforcing itself, while air coming through fed it oxygen.
Same deal here.
And it doesn’t matter HOW it came down anyway. To focus on
technology of explosion is to get your attention shifted from
what matters. The Bush-Bin Laden family-Halliburton connections
to all this, the many many warnings incl. from Mossad that this
was going to happen that were ignored, and yes, you can get
American special unit to do whatever. I think there is a certain
dream world quality about the lot of you, you think Americans
won’t do whatever to Americans, bah humbug. Just turn on
the news, look what people do to each other every day.
Check some of the cold case and csi work focussed nonfiction
programming. IF there were other explosives, most likely at
the level of the planes’ hits to make sure the separation
occurred as hoped for, you only need a few people of the
sort who don’t mind derailing a train for the fun of it, and
yes that sort of stuff has happened. Or very disciplined
people used to doing that sort of stuff elsewhere and taking
orders.
The real focus has to be what Peter Dale Scott called
“parapolitics” not quack speculations. The latter only makes
you look silly, and this failure of credibility is all it takes
to keep this from driving some people out of office, and
those associated with them out of appointed positions.
It is not the means of the event that matters, it is the people
that surround it, and the corrupt conflict of interest
oligharchic relationships surrounding it that matter, and
arguing about how the controlled media lies about the
nature of the collapse keeps attention OFF of that.
And having made fools of yourselves in public already,
no one is going to listen to any analysis that does deal
with what counts, it has to come from other sources.
Someone find someone who accepts the standard view,
whether it is entirely correct or not, that gives them
credibility in public, who DOES focus on the parapolitics,
and get this guy plenty of advertising.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freiburg_School
I never heard of these people, but I think I have stumbled onto
a kind of view of things not unlike theirs. To judge by the first
paragraph or so summation.
Right on!!
I must say, I assume you feel passionately about this, Dr Farrell. When one resorts to free-flowing, eloquent cynicism such as this, one has arrived at true truth, in my opinion. I would like to nominate you for membership in a society of which I have been a proud membef for years:
http://www.i-cynic.com/fame.asp
A great man once said: “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member!” -Julius “Groucho” Marx (1890-1977)
“Liberty isn’t something that’s created.It springs naturally whenever the heavy hand is lifted just as a seed will spring from the ground when the conditions are right and the soil fertile.”
once the heavy hand of government is lifted altogether, the heavy
hand of whoever is the strongest or the best at organizing, or who
has the money to hire thugs (and the technology and guess who
that is? the very people we are concerned about here) will descend.
even if they disappeared, it would develop later. where is the heavy
hand of government, to explain the mind control cults that are
primitive societies with their initiation rituals and crippling customs
and rigid roles of sex or bloodlines?
where was the heavy hand of government in the late dark ages
and early middle ages? it took centralization of power and of
the separate power of money back then, in several loci, to break
the heavy hand of feudal lords.
where is all this virtue to come from that will keep liberty from
becoming license? and if we are to have, shall we say,
prescription heroin at dispensation points for addicts, where
is the enforcement to come from to be sure it stays there,
and that they don’t go and recruit more people to be like them,
or to keep people from seeking them out and sampling what
they got? What is to shut down the pop culture support of
all this?
What of all those people who die, not to mention the trouble
they make for everyone else, because without run ins with
the law, and enforced rehab a few times they never realize
they need to change? I know people like that.
Don’t talk about intervention, in such an environment where
radical indepedence is the rule, such people would throw
the interventionists out. Or worse yet, with no sense of
propriety or fear of law to restrain those interveners who
have some corruptibility themselves, the addict might
convert some of them!
@Justina
A little education in Economics goes a long way.
http://blog.mises.org/5773/economics-in-one-lesson/
Also (with respect to Dr. Farrell), I agree that the JP Morgan firm/family are both a travesty and parasite of the american people, but they are in no way, shape, or form Laissez Faire Capitalists. They are simply corporatist facists/ crony capitalists who bank on their intimate relationship with the FED (and open lines of credit wink wink) to establish their own financial hegemony upon the world.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard66.html
Also, Dr. Farrell you should look into Free Banking Theory, as such a system is perfectly compatible with the theories in “Free Energy” systems that your work is concerned with, and I’m afraid Ellen Brown’s solution to end the banking monopoly would only serve to politicize the nation’s issuance of money. The right to issue money should be rightly given to the people. Whether that means a gold standard, a silver standard, or whatever commodity that is highly valued at the time, the right to issue money should go to those self-interest lies in safekeeping the value and liquidity of currency.
There is a reason the FED doesn’t want legal tender laws to be repealed.
Point well made and taken re. laissez faire capitalism and the banksters
The problem is not legal tender. That is something the Constitution
mandates, and the writers were against central banks and knew
enough of history to know what total non regulation and minimized
to non existent government results in. A balance between bad
alternatives was sought.
The problem is monetized debt and fractional reserve banking.
Legal tender makes commerce easier. You don’t have to argue
anything but price, rather than price AND what it is to be paid
in. Recognizing foreign coin at approximately the rate it is
equal to in our coins would be a good idea also.
but if people can issue their own money, you can have all
kinds of fraud. If by “the people” you mean local or state
governments that is one thing. but private issuance is just
going to end up as a small time version of monetized debt.
and why wait for the market to sort it out, while the “body
count” figurative, in some cases literally, whether from
violence or the lack of goods such a food and medicine
because money recognized one place is not recognized
another, piles up?
“The problem is not legal tender.”
Yes, it is. By legally mandating what can and can’t be used as money, you effectively set up major market barrier to entrance into the “currency” industry. Very effective for those in bed with the government, and who would like to institutionalize fractional reserve banking (i.e. the FED).
“but if people can issue their own money, you can have all
kinds of fraud.”
Because government can’t be responsible for arguably the greatest fraud in history , correct (hint: it’s banking, and it’s centralized)? At least when you subject the heavily centralized industry of banking to market forces, you place those which wish to thrive in such an industry (following their own self-interest) in a position where the services and goods they produce (stable, liquid currency, or what ever the market demands ) must actually be wanted by people. Without the monopoly held over the banking industry, these people would actually have to WORK (*gasp!).
“and why wait for the market to sort it out,”
Because no man has the knowledge or power to use prices to coordinate the allocation of scarce resources to various locations and people all over the world. You should really take a basic course on economics.
The only reason the FED got where it is, is because of the
perhaps legally dubious measure taken by the govt. of
delegating to the FED the very money minting and creating
powers that the Constitution reserved to the govt. and
which would have protected us from monetized debt, as
Dr. Farrell calls it, IF that clause in the Constitution had
been followed.
So the problem in this very phase of history and location
we are talking about, came about PRECISELY BECAUSE
of a failure of govt. retaining control, control that further
would be affected in its application, by the people who hold
the careers of the elected in their hands.
When, on the other hand, people get appointed for life or
something like that, they are out of reach.
Mises is full of randian crap.
I am in full agreement with Dr. Farrell’s views in Babylon’s Banksters.
I also have enough knowledge, 40 years I guess of miscellaneous
reading of this and that, to know that total laissez faire doesn’t
work, and total lack of government doesn’t work, except as the
staging ground for the chaos that will necessitate strong measures
which is ideal for bad people.
But one reliable warlord is better than many competing ones. I have
never forgotten the pitiable situation of a Chinese man I read about,
who having paid the taxes to one warlord, whose perimeter he
was unfortunate enough to live on, and the border shifted slightly,
was tortured with barbed wire because he had no money to pay
the other warlord with.
This is what happened when the Chinese monarchy fell. One
heavy hand gone, replaced by many heavy hands.
As for Mises et. al., they are the ones whose theories mandate
the deregulation and privatization that simply put more power
into the hands of the very people you want to get rid of.
A semi directed market is not the problem. the problem is when
anyone is allowed to have a govt. or regulatory role, who
himself or herself or extended family or private organizations
he or she is a member of, has interest in the outcome.
Here, have a look at who helped shape this mises favoring
mentality. And like I said, never underestimate the
bad taste of the American public. Or her novels would
never have sold. Despicable heroes, one of them a rapist.
And by the way, a rape murder serial killer was an early
hero of hers. And her idea of morality and high values
was to adore her whims.
http://www.slate.com/id/2233966/
http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/critics/personal.html
though I couldn’t stomach the excerpts of her novels,
her analyses of some leftists and others wasn’t half
bad. But there comes a point where she flops and
badly. By the way, her philosophy along with that of
Nietzsche, Ragnar Might Makes Right whatever his
last name was, was among the hellslew that went
into making Anton La Vey’s satanist philosophy.
Even the Temple of Set had to face some reality, in one
of their publications they announced that even though
everybody is a god and they all naturally tend to seek
supremacy they need to rein it in and act a bit more
properly and orderly for the TOS to function or however
they phrased it.
“Mises is full of randian crap.”
Mises work predates Ayn Rand’s work. Although admittedly they were friends when both lived in NYC, it was actually Mises work in economics that inspired a lot of Rand’s own beliefs, although her philosophy is entirely of her own making. Way to promote guilt by association.
“But one reliable warlord is better than many competing ones.”
How about no warlord, and a system of property right protection (with property rights starting with one’s own right to their body) ?
“As for Mises et. al., they are the ones whose theories mandate
the deregulation and privatization that simply put more power
into the hands of the very people you want to get rid of.”
Erroneous. The Austrian School of Economics is hated by both the left, the right, Big Business (well pretty much BIg anything). Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps because the kind of economic system they advocate (or rather advocate would exist sans government intervention) would spell the end to their hold of power over the market, and in turn people (for what makes up the market? People).
“A semi directed market is not the problem. the problem is when
anyone is allowed to have a govt. or regulatory role, who
himself or herself or extended family or private organizations
he or she is a member of, has interest in the outcome.”
The government and its various agencies and departments will always attract those who desire power with virtually no sacrifice (except perhaps morals). That is why the Founding Fathers desired a limited government. Limit the government, and you limit the corruption*
*= Although a true, market-basked anarchy (Anarcho-Capitalism) could never exist outside of uncontested territory. So where do we get uncontested territory? We would need an energy system, a field propulsion system, a- oh wait 🙂
Keep up the good work, Dr. Farrell.
“Mises work predates Ayn Rand’s work. Although admittedly they were friends when both lived in NYC, it was actually Mises work in economics that inspired a lot of Rand’s own beliefs, although her philosophy is entirely of her own making. Way to promote guilt by association.”
Because her influence on the American right, which is however
indirectly enormous, leads to favoring this sort of free market and
no controls.
Boom and bust, harmful to all involved, has always been a feature
of markets uncontrolled by anything. Consider the tulip bubble in
the Renaissance or late medieval whichever time it was, it burst.
Real estate markets, should never have existed in the first place,
bubble, and bust. Real estate should not be a commodity the way
it is, not that it be inalienable, which means it can’t be sold, but
it should not be the sort of thing it has become. Neither should it
be the way it was under feudalism, where few owned and everybody
leased or subleased.
Then of course the Market Crash of 1929 which led to some controls
that, had they been in place, might have prevented or mitigated it.
Dr. Farrell has an interesting theory, that to some extent these cycles
operate anyway, up and down, and that some people knowing this
can time and increase the disaster to their benefit.
QUOTE:
““But one reliable warlord is better than many competing ones.”
“How about no warlord, and a system of property right protection (with property rights starting with one’s own right to their body) ?”
Who is going to enforce this? no govt., i.e., no controller, and you
got no enforcer.
Warlordism develops in that vacuum. Eventually some dog gains
top position, and to make economy run smoothly if for no other
reason, enforces such rights.
what do you mean right to your own body? if you mean freedom
to have no strings sex, homosexual actions, never mind whether it
is long term orientation or fooling around, or “pansexual” with animals,
or abortion for nonmedical reasons, then you are making an enemy
out of God Himself.
If you mean right to work, like no enforced joining of unions, fine.
Unions were what forced uncontrolled, unregulated business and
industry of the 1800s and early 1900s to provide the better pay
and conditions, that later became built into law and custom and
we take for granted.
But then the unions got corrupt, uppity, charging high membership
fees (and for a day laborer etc. ANY fee may be too high) and mafia enfested. So its time to take them down – not all the way, they are still useful, but a notch.
“Who is going to enforce this? no govt., i.e., no controller, and you
got no enforcer.
Warlordism develops in that vacuum. Eventually some dog gains
top position, and to make economy run smoothly if for no other
reason, enforces such rights.”
When did I call for anarchy? The position I advocate for is more in line with a minimalist style government (read: limited government).
“what do you mean right to your own body? if you mean freedom
to have no strings sex, homosexual actions, never mind whether it
is long term orientation or fooling around, or “pansexual” with animals,
or abortion for nonmedical reasons, then you are making an enemy
out of God Himself. ”
It’s called freedom of individuality, and you deny this you are no better than the elite/facist leaders who will justify intrusion on individual liberties in pursuit of “the greater good”.
“Unions were what forced uncontrolled, unregulated business and
industry of the 1800s and early 1900s to provide the better pay
and conditions, that later became built into law and custom and
we take for granted. ”
-For god’s sake, get an education in economics/economic history. Not what the political pundits tell you.
“But then the unions got corrupt, uppity, charging high membership
fees (and for a day laborer etc. ANY fee may be too high) and mafia enfested. So its time to take them down – not all the way, they are still useful, but a notch”
-Centralized power always corrupts.
self interest, eh? what do you think drives the banksters and
the sort of people whose self interest is in “do unto others
and run like hell?” Why do you think we got the FDA?
We need to purge it of corrupt influence not eliminate it.
Same thing with anything else.
first off, just how do you expect to create Jeffersonian liberty
in the anarchistic no controllers at all scenario?
secondly, you are addressing matters I have already addressed.
laws can be passed, lawsuits done and enforced. People can
be forbidden to be jobs that relate to jobs they or immediate
relatives have. The overlapping directorate and payoff etc.
can be addressed, some of it has been in the past. We have
the tools, we have to use them.
merely eliminating all controls means back to the law of the
jungle in short order. And that is the context that these people
really want, to eliminate whatever they have to weasle with to
evade control over, and be able to control us directly with
goon squads backed up by high tech, not to mention the
manipulation game of getting people to make certain decisions,
and then, well, it was THEIR choice. A choice made while
trusting the wrong advisors, or in absence of any workable
alternative. Many such choices.
Can you spell feudalism? Can you spell primitive tribal and
extended family warlordism?
Let’s not reinvent the wheel, we need merely redesign it and
use it better.
Liberty isn’t something that’s created.It springs naturally whenever the heavy hand is lifted just as a seed will spring from the ground when the conditions are right and the soil fertile. All Jefferson and others did was to recognize and point out this amazing fact that we might also recognize the spontaneous order of life that erupts all around us wherever man is allowed to act on his own behalf.
But you still don’t seem to see that the cross pollination that goes on between big govt, big business and big finance can only lead to ever more corruption and that the safeguards that are suppose to protect from harmful practices, give rise to them instead. Why do you think the worse kind of person is drawn to politics, if not for the power and wealth that can easily be amassed by placing oneself in the service of the special interests? Mosca points out to us that the persons that can least be trusted are the ones most animated to go into public life. Why else would anyone spend millions for a job that pays less than two hundred thousand a year? Are we to stretch our belief that they’re so spirited to serve the public at large that they’d waste millions just to do so?
Do you really for even a moment think that in this age of plunder and waring that we’ve really advanced beyond the jungle whose laws are embodied as part of the statutory and regulatory predations we’re forced to pay for?
Who are the right advisers we should be trusting and how should we be able to know they’re the right ones to cast our trust upon? And why should we trust them to begin with? Remember Joe Izuzu?
Feudalism? Why that’s the exact end game that the globalists are aiming at with their population reduction and re-wilding the planet initiatives. A small well controlled population, chipped and living in tight communities, serving their globalist nobility is the outcome they’re aiming at. Take a look at the Aaron Russo interview where he tells about what Nick Rockefeller told him about the plan the elites have in store for us. Very telling stuff.
Now, I’m afraid you’ll have to excuse me, but I don’t think we want to continue to bore everyone else, so I’ll excuse myself and withdraw from any further comments lest this degenerate into another Justina and Vinnie show. As always, I do appreciate you or your considered thoughts and comments.
that is merely what happened in this country. and some others.
but before those people were all that well connected, they
were doing their best, incl using violence and getting away
with it, to drive out competition.
elimination of competition is in the interest of anyone except
the purchaser, and once the competition is eliminated there
is no where else to go. this goes on all the time, and is the
economic theory behind much Mafia activity.
What you describe is merely the more developed version.
And all the more reason to have controllers, who can mitigate
this, because the educated electorate will interfere in their
careers and force laws and enforcement of them.
I repeat, (1) we have the tools we need already, the kind of
information now being promulgated by such blogs as this
and some books and movies. We need to USE them, and
to do so effectively means to start by doing more educating
of as many people as we can about what is wrong, what
needs changing, and how to do it, and NOT arguing that
there should be no possible controls, no one exists except
individuals – bullshit, ever see a mass movement or a mob
or a crowd of nasty bully children at work, the sum is
greater than the whole of its parts.
(2) remember the easiest way to enslave someone is to
promise him total freedom. This was the advice of L. Ron
Hubbard the founder of Scientology, and he ought to
know.
The controllers will be bought off and the regulators will be regulating the industries they come out of. Look no further than the revolving door between the corporate cartels and the federal govt. Think it’s just by chance that the folks who came from Goldman, Sax and took positions at treasury might have had some self interest in all those guaranteed loans that were given out? How about big pharma and the defense industries? Is there a pattern we’re seeing?
A while back I asked who controls the controllers? I think that’s a question in need of answers or we’ll always come out with the wrong solution.
I don’t mean to keep beating a dead horse, but the problem is the centralization of political power and the marriage between it and big finance and business. The only way to put an end to this arrangement is to take away the power to create money substitutes out of thin air and to return the power back to the individual to chose what he/she decides to accept as payment and to direct their own lives without some form of top down control.
It’s not like you have another choice between individual liberty in the best Jeffersonian tradition, or dictatorship and tyranny. When you despense with the first alternative, you’ve automatically set in motion all the things that will eventually lead to the final solution. Chips anyone?
What businessmen do, whether to build a monopoly or cartel,
is to ELIMINATE COMPETITION. No one wants competition
to beat them, or even drive them out of business. Sure,
government can grant a monopoly status, it can also make
it illegal and bust up cartels and have laws against anti
competition agreements.
Adam Smith noted that competition elimination and other
conspiracy against the people was what businessmen’s
associations did in his time.
And once you have a gentleman’s agreement that incl. extended
family and friends and blackmail victims and dependents and
favor owers and so forth who are supposed to be protecting
people against thugs, your hired thugs can operate at will and
the law can’t touch them. In the old days before modern forensics
this could happen more easily for anyone not just business.
We need people other than just mob reaction and looting of
stores that don’t compete but cooperate too much, and who
sometimes lower prices long enough to drive an independent
out of business and then raise them again, something I think
AT&T is trying to do now to some extent as it can, we need
a control force that can use guns and lockup if the court
orders are not obeyed.
The problem is not, shall we have controllers, it is, to keep
them honest and the laws just. That is what democracy and
free press is about, and we need to use those tools.
L. Ron Hubbard once said, that the best way to enslave
anyone is to promise them total freedom.
And some of the libertarian approach, is suspiciously
similar to the Illuminati program in its early proposed
stages.
What you’ll notice happened with the consolidation of monopoly capitalism/corporatism at the turn of the last century and the so called Progressive Era, is that it began the creation of the American empire as envisioned by Rhodes and Milner and the Round Table group to bring together the British and Americans to create an anglo/american empire that was financed from the banking houses in the City of London, and that would spread its tentacles around the globe through the creation of various commercial and maritime agreements based on an expanding debt based, fiat currency that would eventually entangle all nations so they could be controlled financially as well as through the use of military force. Is any of this sounding familiar?
We might note too that the incorporation of the nazis within this establishment poses no problem either as it was the design of Hitler as well as many in Britain to work together to place the world under the control of “Aryan” rule. Hitler had no desire to go to war with England as his target lay with destroying Soviet communism. It explains both the false war, where the British were allowed to escape at Dunkirk and the mysterious overture that Rudolph Hess was trying to carry out during his failed mission. I think this is a link that could do with far more exploration and expansion.
But they WERE laissez faire capitalists in practice, and abused
all the power that that freedom gave them in the 1800s and early
1900s before controls were effectively in place.
controls that laissez faire don’t like. and this crew was part of
the whole privatization scam that made control more difficult,
and increased plausible deniability by increasing a confusing
range of targets for complaint.
The irony of laissez faire, is that no one really reads Adam
Smith, or they wouldn’t see it like this. Laissez faire was something
he invented along with the so called invisible hand, which Calvinists
and others have misequated with God and have a religious attitude
towards, even if they are technically atheist free marketers.
Adam Smith was arguing for free trade, no tariffs, in inventing
this idea. The point was to build so much common interest between
England and its often rivals, that war would hopefully be unlikely
or even impossible. (Internationalist pinko commie red peacenik
hippie creep.)
As for the home front, he remarked that buisnessmen’s
associations never meet, except to fix prices and otherwise
conspire against the rest of the people, and should be outlawed.
No they weren’t. They were monoploy capitalist who used government to grant them monopolies in their industries and to shut out the competition. If you read Kolko and others who’ve researched the progressive era, it becomes clear that it was during this time that the Hamiltonian ideal of the American system of central banking, fiat money, high tariffs and expansive govt spending on internal projects was the big winner. With the passage and creation of the federal reserve bank in 1913, the scene was set for the financing of two world wars and an endless expansion of the central govt with it’s welfare/warfare programs into every area and aspect of both the economic and private lives of the American people. People love their fascism and it seems will ignore the facts of history to defend it.
never mind all that ancient history. Look at what has been going
on over the past 30 years. And big government isn’t needed for
warfare and so forth either. That went on among primitives all
along.
I repeat. The Scientology founder once said, that the easiest
way to enslave someone, is to promise them total freedom.
Things don’t spring full blown into existence and to understand the present, we do well not to take lightly the things that brought us to the present state of affairs, lest we learn nothing and keep repeating the same mistakes.
Interesting you quote Ron Hubbard, who was one of the masters at mind control and who promised just that to the members of his church, to the same result.
You might also be interested in looking into the link between him, JPL founder Jack Parsons and Aleister Crowley.
I agree in theory about understanding the background,
and I already know about that last bunch
of unspeakable undesirables you mention.
My point is, that this situation is created over and over,
throughout the centuries, on local and primitive and
larger than local.
Right now we have a situation where all we have to do
is rework some of the machine. Not destroy it outright.
I keep quoting Hubbard to get it through to you, if you
hear it often enough you may get the idea, that
the cry of FREEDOM! LIBERTY! LAISSEZ FAIRE!
PRIVATIZATION! DEREGULATION!
is just the cartelist etc. version of Hubbard’s game.
Right now they have to shimmy around controls that
they have to keep scrambling to get or keep hold of.
Rather than create a situation, where they need do
little or no work at all, make it too slippery for them
too much work and too public and too much easy
scandal.
One thing we should do, is legalize all recording,
audio and video, by everyone, while penalizing any
alterations of it, the only legitimate reason to fear
bugging. Perhaps only crude tape and some
untamperable digital programs that give off warnings
when tampering to give a false impression has
occurred, should be allowed for this.
Think of all the crap that can be caught and broadcast!
“never mind all that ancient history.”
-“Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.” -George Santayana
I do remember the past, and I refer to it often, that bigger
picture that shows that the problem is not govt. but
oligharchy, and the kind of warlordism that will break out
once you got your anarchic situation with everyone armed
to the teeth with phased array energy weapons.
My point was, that we need to look at what we got right
now, what is the situation now, and not from the perspective
of “principles of economics” some of which are dependent
on conditions that don’t always pertain.
If I can interject. The Rothschild’s, Rockefeller’s, Morgan’s and other commercial pirates are hardly laissez-faire capitalists. The system they’ve perfected and rigged is commercial credit/corporatism. Good old fascism, the marriage of big government, international banking and international corporate cartels.
The only alternative is the decentralization of power through market forces, including money, banking and credit. Either the individual in the fullness of his natural liberty, or an all powerful, centralized state. Take you pick.
which reminds me of something I said in my little screed,
A Possible History of Life on Mar at my blog
http://politicallyunclassifiable.blogspot.com
“Alien is a film worth remembering briefly, as a paradigm. Remember the
context in which all that broke loose? A huge supranational multi planet
based corporation, who wanted the xenomorph for its weapons department.
Something that would make the modern multi nationals with their security
forces and de facto semi control over governments, green with envy.
Something that might well become a reality this century.”
Maybe J. P. Morgan derived operations are working in this direction
already. God help us! never mind xenomorphs, just the idea of such
a setup in the first place! Remember how Bechtel is always so bad
to its workers? Anyone see the photo of those guys stirring uranium
soup with a loincloth and no shirt in India or somewhere? And the
Alaska pipeline, at least one woman who worked there was pressured
into prostitution. That she wasn’t honorable enough to die rather than
put out is not the issue. That there were people willing to use her
and people willing to coerce her IS the issue. The weak need
protection against the strong. That is why we need government, that
if it gets corrupt can be changed by voters who are pissed off at
failure of oversight. Bechtel was started by a good Calvinist
church going man, a Baptist, and extreme Calvinism is like
baptized social darwinism. God supposedly rewards virtue with
worldly wealth, and the poor and the exploited are just being
punished by God. Bah humbug. Such theorists never noticed
that God warned Job’s comforters, who talked along this line,
that things weren’t quite that simple. Similar stuff in Proverbs
is way out of context, and ignores such things in Proverbs
as how it is better to eat bitter herbs on a roof corner or some
other ratbag condition, than in a spacious house with a
querillous woman or for that matter trouble maker of either
sex.
Wasn’t it J.P. Morgan who effectively buried Tesla?…and also excised his discoveries from the textbooks?
One and the same. And there is some evidence that Morgan lurks in the background of other physics goings-on.
“quit idolizing the robber barons of laissez faire capitalism as heros”
Been thinking a lot about Napoleon Hill. Much of his theory of positive thinking was based on the sugarcoated examples of those robber barons.
Yup…precisely. Think and Grow Rich… oh yeah, and while you’re at it, hire thugs to beat up the competition…