Money Power – A Force for Freedom or Slavery?
by The Editor
Swedish economist and Arktos author Isac Boman discusses nationalist and localist economic alternative to the current globalist economic order.
By Isac Boman
Although economists frequently present their work as neutral, objective and based on irrefutable science, sometimes crucial underlying suppositions remain unstated and thereby kept shrouded from view. The most blazing example of this within contemporary mainstream economics is how economists really have ignored deeper questions surrounding money, debt and the banking system.
In an interview for the documentary “The Economic Science”, produced by Swedish Public Service TV in 2012*, Michael Kumhof, economist at the International Monetary Fund, puts his finger on this issue:
To a layman, it sounds like a joke. What is he talking about? He can’t be serious. That macro-economists have been thinking about the macroeconomy without banks? But that is exactly what has been happening over the last 30 years. Anything regarding banks was fringe activity. [...]
Steve Keen at the University of Sydney says the following in the same documentary in regards to the financial crisis of 2008.
The reason most economists didn’t see it, is that they built models of the macro-economy that exclude banks, money and debt. I know it sounds outrageously stupid to anybody who isn’t an economist. The ironic thing is that they are right. It is outrageously stupid. […] It’s insane to have a model of the macro economy that excludes bank, money and debt. You don’t even know if they are misbehaving, that’s irrelevant, off to the side. That’s why the vast majority of economists had no idea [that the financial crisis of 2008] was coming.
The current state of affairs in the economic science not only makes it difficult to analyze the banking and monetary system and detect potential risks for financial crises as Keen points out. It also makes economists less likely to see the growing concentration of wealth and power and how the current system provides for it. An exception and an example of research in a positive direction is the 2011 Swiss study from Federal Institute of Technology in Zürich - The Network of Global Corporate Control, which researched ownership of the world’s transnational corporations. The study clearly showed that control of the global economy is concentrated to and dominated by a tightly knit core of financial institutions.
The observation that this kind of transnational money power has been the dominant force of modern society including politics isn’t something new, however, judging for example by how the U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt put it in a letter to colonel Edward Mandell House in 1933:
The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson—and I am not wholly excepting the administration of Woodrow Wilson. The country is going through a repetition of Jackson’s fight with the Bank of the United States—only on a far bigger and broader basis.**
Against this background, the modern democracy would really be more accurately be described as a plutocracy - a rule of the rich. This form of so called democracy does not serve the interests of the public. Rather, it allows for financial magnates to exercise, protect and increase their power by guiding politicians with various kinds of lobbyism and by shaping the public opinion by means of their corporate media. But even though the very structures of the current banking and monetary system is well designed to serve the globalist plutocrats and their stooges, they are by no means invincible. A recent example of how they have been challenged is Donald Trump’s successful populist rebellion in the US presidential elections despite having the media machinery of the globalists set against him.
We are living in times when new alternatives are challenging the status quo. Donald Trump’s victory would probably not have been possible if it hadn’t been for new forms of alternative media and metapolitical influence from the alternative and political intellectual right challenging neoconservative and liberal cultural hegemony. This doesn’t mean that the rising counter-culture is perfect, and it needs to continue its development on an ongoing basis if it is to become a worthy new hegemon of Western culture. A crucial addition to its opposition of the current world order in the long term would be to put more focus on developing new currency alternatives, in the wake of the yet most successful crypto-currency Bitcoin.
Bitcoin has been a remarkable initiative as an alternative currency in that it has become known and used beyond the sphere of (most honorable) geeks. Yes, in relation to what is possible to achieve with new currencies, Bitcoin is just a primitive prototype. However, it has been an invaluable inspiration that has paved the way for better and upcoming alternatives in an expanded Altcoin Revolution. If the new counter-culture truly wants to transform itself into a new civilization, with an infrastructure that would be truly free from dependency on the big financial powerhouses at the core of the globalist control matrix; the task of developing better altcoins should be an absolutely vital part of its cultural discourse. It’s not enough to provide solutions such as a return to the gold standard and believe that the monetary question will be fixed in a sustainable way. What we need is a more advanced approach to money and create new currencies adapted in the best possible way to the needs of our current situation.
The author hopes that Money Power – A Force for Freedom or Slavery can serve as an inspiration and as a support for all resourceful people capable of taking the already initiated Altcoin Revolution to the next level. If enough intelligence and willpower is put into this task, we do have a chance to heed the call from 1934 made by the English economist Frederick Soddy, as he put it in his book The Role of Money – What it is and what it should be:
Let us not enslave men that pretenders may rule, but take back our sovereign powers over money in order that men can be free. ***
* Search Youtube: Economic Science and the Debt Crisis (Vetenskapens Värld 19-11-2012)
** F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928–1945, edited by Elliott Roosevelt, 1950, Duell, Sloan and Pearce, new york, p. 373.
*** Frederick Soddy, The Role of Money, 1934, George Routledge and Sons, London, p. 219.
Content on the Traditional Britain Blog and Journal does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Traditional Britain Group