A few days ago I made a blunder in a blog, which a few people kindly pointed out in emails to me, so I want to draw attention to this blunder, because, as it turns out, there may be an even bigger blunder (this time hopefully not my own) lurking in my blunder, calling for some more high octane speculation. I may, in the course of speculating on my blunder and the even bigger blunder which follows it, be digging an even deeper hole in my "blunderdom", but I can't help it, because this story, and the link shared below by Mr. S.H., if true, seems to take more and more hairpin turns into "weirdity," if I may be permitted to coin a weird word reflective of the Coefficient of the Constant of Weirdity in this whole saga. Indeed, the word "weirdness" doesn't quite seem to capture the "weirdity" of this story adequately, at least, not as adequately as does "weirdity," for the weirdity exceeds mere weirdness by at least an order of magnitude. Indeed, by speculating on a blunder on a blunder, I suppose I'm resorting to the conceptual equivalent of the inflated unregulated  unbounded finance capitalism that I like to call crony crapitalism. If international bankers can double down on unregulated speculative folly, why not me, right?

Ok... so what was my big blunder? A few days ago I blogged about an article that the Dutch banker, Ronald Bernard, who did a video on YouTube that went viral on the internet on the evil machinations of the international finance crowd (as if we needed a Dutch banker to tell us that), in which I referenced a story from Florida that he had apparently been found dead. Wrong. Blunder. Big blunder. Not dead. It was someone else.

He wasn't dead at all, and the article in question apparently had omitted the surname of the individual in question. A few days after the blog, I began to receive private comments from people that the story was either mistaken, or had been doctored to make it appear that Mr. Bernard was the missing, now dead, person in question. I asked the people to post their findings as public comments rather than private emails, which they very kindly did.

Well, this whole saga just took another very bizarre turn, launching from mere weirdness into full-blown "weirdity," for Ms. S.H. found the following link:

The Best Solution? -- Ronald Bernard's Bank of Joy

Following the links there led me to this:

B. of Joy

Now, I have to admit, when I read that this entity - whatever it is - was to be called the "Bank of Joy," I couldn't help but think of all those catchy, innocent sounding phrases used by socialists of all stripes whenever they want to sell a program for their enrichment and the servitude of everyone else; to be honest, it sounded a bit like the old Nazi slogan, "Strength through joy." Yes, Volks, the key to strength is one big happy Reich grinning from ear to ear; it's important that you smile if you really want to enjoy your Tiger tank.  Not that "Bank of Joy" wasn't catchy. I used to live in a part of the USSA many consider to be the buckle of the Bible belt, and there one particularly oddly-named banking chain was named "Spirit Bank", I kid you not. The name at least had the advantage of appealing to Pentecostals, Evangelicals, Theosophists, Spiritualists, Satanists and what-have-you, since the "spirit" in question was left conveniently undefined. But "Bank of Joy" is even better... who doesn't want joy? Kraft durch Freude! 

Well, the Dutch authorities, according to the second link, have presumed to rain on this Happy Parade of Joy by insisting that this entity cannot call itself a bank, so Mr. Bernard and Co. (assuming, of course, that the first link is true and that Mr. Bernard is one of the people behind this entity) are now calling it the "B." of Joy. But not to worry, so long as there is Joy, everyone is Happy.

When reading the review of "prospectus" of this entity, however, I'm experiencing - I don't know about you, but I'm experiencing - something less than Joy and something more like brezelgebundene Zusammengehoerigkeitskontextangst (Ed.: concern), making me wonder if, in fact, certain parties in the Netherlands are not already spiking their water with lithium, oxytocin, or, yes, oxycontin (Freude durch Wasser!). What's the cause of my high speculation (notice I left out the word "octane")? Well, it's this comment in the link Ms. S.H. sent:

Unlike the current banks we do not, as a full reserve bank, lend out more money than we have received. Next to financial returns, B of Joy also gives Ecological, Emotional and Social (F.E.E.S) returns. We invest in local economies, in innovation and in small and medium enterprises.  The B of Joy doesn't only stand for bank. It stands also for Awareness, Citizen and Movement.

This is followed by the reassurance that everyone will save gobs of money:

How will that work in practice?
With our new form of mortgage one will save in 30 years, on a house costing 230.000 euro, an average of 100.000 euro on interest. By eliminating interest we will become the first truly sustainable financial initiative in the Netherlands.
Through the Bail-free saving- and investment program we protect deposits amounting to 100.000 euro or more against the greedy hands of politicians, the EU and banks. The assets will serve society and will be inflation-proof, because we will compensate for inflationary effects on the euro.
B of Joy members will have access to a fixed value currency (URA), a members marketplace, business guide and collective purchasing power. This will promote connections, save on costs and improve turnover. Every member is part-owner, has a say in the cooperative through 1 vote and a right to share in the returns. How can you take part in the realization of this bank?
For 25 euro or more, you can become a supporter of the initiative and, if you want, a member for the first year free of charge. For 100 euro you are a part-owner of the bank and you will receive a member certificate that in the future can give yield. By taking part, you help create a just society based on abundance. For ourselves, for our children and the future of our world. Will you join us?"
According to the first link, the "B. of Joy" is linked to Mr. Bernard:
The Bank of Joy is affiliated with Ronald Bernard who has exposed the institutionalized anti-morality of the international financial elite.  They formed a clean bank, an honest bank, a bank of virtue and call it the Bank of Joy.   I like it because it lends only money that people with savings have entrusted to it for lending -- instead of making loans on the basis of a mere fraction of cash on deposit.   They are right on this.  Banks should only lend what savers give them to lend.
The flaw, according to the first link, is this:
But the Bank of Joy lends without charging interest.  This is not a good solution for a national banking system.  Paying people for the use of their money and that loan having a price is necessary for allocating scarce savings among the many seeking loans for endless uses.  The interest rate is the price of the scarce loanable funds in a system where only real money savings are lent out.  Interest rates in such a loanable funds market would be determined by supply and demand and competition among banks for the savers' money and for the entrepreneurs borrowing business.  Prices regulate.
If one reads the second link, however, the "B's" official website, there is, to my mind, a wholly different cause for brezelgebundene Zusammengehoerigkeitskontextangst (Ed.: concern), and it is this:
As a full reserve bank, we don't lend out more money than we have received. Next to Financial returns, B of Joy also gives Ecological, Emotional and Social (F.E.E.S) returns. (Emphasis added)
Then there's this:
Through the Bail-free saving- and investment program we protect deposits amounting to 100.000 euro or more against the greedy hands of politicians and the EU headquarter. The assets will serve society and will be inflation-proof, because we will compensate for inflationary effects on the euro.
The concern here in this second quotation - and herewith my high speculation - is there's no indication of how all this wondrous magic will be accomplished, for as the first statement indicates, this will be a "full reserve bank", which, presumably, means it will not function with any fractional reserve. But this is qualified in the very next clause in a very disturbing way: "we don't lend out more money than we have received." Now, there's two ways of reading this: (1) the bank, lending out an equal amount of money as it receives, is either functioning with a 50% reserve (which would be the way, I suppose, that the conventionally-minded people who lack Joy would read it), or (2) the bank will be able to lend out all the deposits expressly earmarked by depositors to be "lendable," and hence, functioning - we're not told how, but presumably we're supposed to experience Joy about it - with absolutely no reserve at all, which sounds completely insane because all it would take to create a run on the bank would be for a depositor to demand but a penny of his or her deposits. Presumably we're not supposed to Worry about this, because Worry is contrary to Joy, and we're supposed to be experiencing grandly unspecified Ecological, Emotional and Social returns on our designated "loanable" deposits.
So I cannot help but wonder if, in blogging and blundering about the first story, that the first story was perhaps salted to draw attention to this scheme.
And I cannot help but wonder if "Banks of Joy" are not the other side of "crypto-currencies," but in any case, there's only one word to describe my reaction to this scheme besides Zusammengehoerigkeitskontextangst and that's Schadenangstfreude.
And here all along you thought that bankers were humorless people!
See you on the flip side...



Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. BetelgeuseT-1 on September 29, 2017 at 8:44 pm

    Only one thing comes to my mind: Pyramid Scheme

  2. primal_murmur on September 19, 2017 at 9:52 pm

    Somewhere in his famous video Ronald Bernard says that Islamic banking is the only legitimate form of banking, and the one practised by all insiders; something that effect — going from memory. Catherine Austin Fitts felt there was a strong possibility that Bernard’s “confessions” were a well-orchestrated hoax.
    In any case, here’s another “insider/whistleblower” who no longer has any claims on my attention, time and energy.

  3. Pierre on September 17, 2017 at 9:31 pm

    any time you declare interest non gratia, you have subsitutes..
    inflated purchased price.
    administration fees.
    being given less than the loan amount.
    fascist decree (and dont ask any questions).
    the problem is who is doing the usury, to what ends, and how the inevitable need to balance it (inflation, war, jubilee) is carried out.
    interest problem is petty compared to the trillions missing from the pentagon, and the quadrillions of the derivative death star.
    and sterlisisation through flu vacs (see today).

  4. Kahlypso on September 16, 2017 at 7:03 pm

    Im sure that BOYJOY has been founded by a LARPer. The people who keep the system in place, that the banker was talking about, kills people left right and centre, but let this guy walk away after asking him to kill a child. The website talks about citizen initiatives..unique money and a revolution that is coming… this is Rothechild trying to bank on the sympathy vote and people thinking that they can get away from evil bankers by giving their money to maybe not so evil bankers.. ( hushed voice.. wait until they get your money. Then their Evil gets it ON.) Oh and all the wording is Tavistock wording. Triggers and social engineering. (On the boy joy website)

  5. goshawks on September 16, 2017 at 2:42 pm

    As suming that this is not some modern version of one of those Venture schemes that often bilked the naïve (invest in this canal, invest in that railroad line), I could see a parallel to the early Christian and Islamic prohibitions against charging interest on loans. The insti tutions [hah!] had to stay solvent, so they were allowed to charge ‘fees’ to cover their cost of doing business. There was enough ‘wiggle room’ in the fee-charging to still be exploitative, but the concept was sound. Just not rapacious-enough for the banksters. (The 100 euro ‘membership fee’ could be seen as part of the cost-covering aspect.)

    Also, I am curious as to what level of Reserve-retaining is actually ‘doable’ as a business, as versus jacking-it-up for maximum exploi – excuse me, profit – off the masses. That would be an interesting experiment, although you would have to have ‘backers’ who were not concerned-about growing their money. (Kind of like the George Bailey character [played by Jimmy Stewart] in “It’s a Wonderful Life.”) A whole different mindset…

    • Robert Barricklow on September 16, 2017 at 7:16 pm

      Loved it;
      “insti tutions [hah!]

      [In the News & Views for 9/19
      I got zapped for “ent itled”!]

      • Robert Barricklow on September 16, 2017 at 7:18 pm

        …another one of those
        quantum keystroke entanglements.

  6. marcos toledo on September 16, 2017 at 1:18 pm

    Will our oligarchs please stop playing the game of Monopoly for real. Speculation is gambling and in the real world there are real consequences including misery and death.

  7. Robert Barricklow on September 16, 2017 at 12:16 pm

    Snake Oil has a myriad of ways to be marketed.

  8. basta on September 16, 2017 at 10:24 am

    Ummm… You do know that most Dutch people of a certain age and older actually loathe their German neighbors for their occupation during WW II, and that they’d be rather “triggered” if an article about one of them was incongruously (gratuitously?) riddled with German expressions?

    Granted it was over a decade ago now, but I have a German friend and his companion who drove to Amsterdam for the weekend in their little VW and found themselves next to a canal on Queen Mother’s Birthday ( a major celebration), unfortunately with their German license plates and blond hair. Well, soon enough the well-oiled crowd had surrounded their little car and began thumping on it, then rocking it, and then finally picked it up and nearly tossed it into the canal. Recounting the incident, they both swore they were going to die. Es war nicht so schoen wie Freundschaft.

    • Joseph P. Farrell on September 16, 2017 at 1:11 pm

      Actually my intent was to make FUN of these utopian schemes, and to remind people precisely that such fluffy slogans were used by some very bad people; I was NOT trying to anger the Dutch.

      • basta on September 16, 2017 at 3:56 pm

        Yes I enjoyed the post and it is wickedly spot-on there, it’s just that they really do dislike each other, and it just stuck out so glaringly to me. No one ever really mentions it publicly of course, but I’ve seen it occur so many times (a Dutch acquaintance jokingly calling a German friend “obersturmfuehrer” within a half hour of meeting pretty much sums it up) that if I were to do a word association test, “Germany, Holland…?” I’d immediately answer, “loathing.”

  9. WalkingDead on September 16, 2017 at 7:48 am

    Bankers always sell you just the opposite of what you’re lead to believe you’re receiving. This is most likely going to be a B. of Misery.

  10. Neru on September 16, 2017 at 7:21 am

    I thought the Dutch already had a green bank called Triodos.

    Honestly, I wouldn’t put it past R. Bernard. All of his talks never added anything new except for emotions. Triodos is doing too well is more likely.

  11. DanaThomas on September 16, 2017 at 6:56 am

    This is a curious little story. It sounds like a provider of a parallel currency (called here “fixed value currency URA”) and these have been around for some time; the word blockchain is not used, so it does not seem to be that kind of system.
    The “joy” strikes an odd note: just an original marketing ploy? [Personally I would have called it “B. of Value”, the message being to create value and not destroy it as happens presently…].
    Nevertheless, if we read Graeber’s “Debt, the First 5,000 years” we see that there have been and still are residues of a “human economy” approach in which money / means of exchange / stores of value in general can be an open system, and not that closed system typified emotionally by the anxiety-ridden, miserable miserliness of Scrooge and his heirs.
    We have all been taught to associate “money” and “interest”. But there is no reason for “money” functioning as a means of exchange to be linked to interest. And for “money” seen as a store of value the same applies. Going back to Mesopotamia, as discussed in Graeber’s book and in Joseph’s Bankster series, the Babylonians created the problem (interest bearing loans) as well as the solution (debt jubilee); but even then, if you had a clay tablet for a measure of grain, it would be worth more if there is a bad harvest and not because you have lent it out…

    • DanaThomas on September 16, 2017 at 7:04 am

      As for the b. of joy web page symbols, the top one is of course the City of London coat of arms, followed by England, the Isle of Man and Scotland.

  12. Baz on September 16, 2017 at 5:57 am

    Gives a whole new meaning to Affekt management, ooops I mean Asset

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.

Upcoming Events