Daily Bell Review On Wörgl, Gesell, The Fabian Society, and The Alternative Media

Daily Bell review: on Wörgl, Gesell, the
Fabian society, and the “alternative” media

November 17, 2012
by The Daily Knell
Usury or Taxes?
Mindless attacks on anti-usury activists have become the Daily Bell’s modus operandi in
recent months, so the tenor of this article did not surprise us too much. However, there are
some blatant inaccuracies and misstatements that deserve to be pointed out:
‘Gesell’s theories were tried famously at Wörgl in Germany.’
Actually, Wörgl is located in Austria, although it is true that the town is close to the German
border. Nevertheless, this is a blatant error, given that a long debate on Wörgl had already
taken place on the Daily Bell (see feedbacks), and that bionic mosquito’s articles on Wörgl,
endorsed by the Bell, clearly stated that the town was located in Austria. The truth is that this
“mistake” was probably intentional: the Bell is reluctant to associate, even implicitly, the
words “Wörgl” and “Austria”, to avoid confusing the average naïve Austro-libertarian
sympathizer.
More importantly, although the Bell seems to conclude, in agreement with bionic mosquito
(hereafter BM), that the Wörgl experiment was a “funny-money miracle fallacy”, neither the
Daily Bell nor BM convincingly analyzed the effect of demurrage on velocity. To be fair, BM
eventually addressed the issue of velocity in a reply to a comment by Memehunter, but his
arguments have been thoroughly debunked by Anthony Migchels (here, here and here).
‘Fabians were an upper crust phenomenon – along with the Bloomsbury Group – that sought
to replace Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand with increasingly virulent socialism … the regulatory
hand of government, in other words.’
As pointed out by blogger (and Daily Knell commentator) Tao Jonesing, Adam Smith’s
original use of the expression “Invisible hand” refers to “a sort of system of social pressure
that persuades the wealthy to do, of their own volition, what the society around them
requires”, quite unlike the meaning ascribed to this phrase by contemporary Austro-
libertarians. Indeed, the first appearance of the “Invisible Hand” is found in Smith’s Theory of
Moral Sentiments, and the “socialist” connotations of this sentence are unmistakable:
“The rich…are led by an invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the
necessaries of life, which would have been made, had the earth been divided into equal
portions among all its inhabitants, and thus without intending it, without knowing it, advance
the interest of the society…”
‘The Fabians reportedly published a lot of both Gesell and Douglas’s work, in part because
much of what these two were proposing probably couldn’t have come to pass without
government compulsion.’
To our knowledge, there is absolutely no evidence that the Fabians published or supported the
publication of Gesell’s work. It is likely that this is pure speculation on the part of the Daily
Bell, perhaps motivated by Keynes’ endorsement of Gesell’s ideas. Gesell himself wrote in
German and in Spanish. The Natural Economic Order, perhaps his most important book,was
only translated in English in 1929 (one year before his death), and most of his work has not
yet been translated to this day.
Speaking of Fabian connections, the Bell should mention that Austrian economist Friedrich
von Hayek was himself a member of the Fabian Society and taught at the London School of
Economics, an offshoot of the Fabian Society. Besides Hayek, Ludwig von Mises also
collaborated with Lord Lionel Robbins, head of the London School of Economics.
‘This is the real reason that proponents of free markets are attacked by followers of Gesell
and Douglas.’
Interestingly, Gesell was seen by many as a proponent of free markets and fair competition.
Of course, Gesell’s vision of a true “free market” differs considerably from the anarcho-
capitalist utopia envisioned by the Daily Bell and other Austro-libertarians.
Here is a relevant quote from Harper’s Magazine:
“If Karl Marx can be called the prophet of socialism, Silvio Gesell can be seen as the prophet
of free private economy. But oddly enough, few businessmen have ever heard of Gesell; he
has been consistently neglected by orthodox economic theorists and not one nation has put his
teachings into practice. Of course there are reasons for this; but nevertheless the day may
come when we realise this to have been one of the greatest ironies of world history.
Most people believe in freedom in theory and many have given their lives for it. But in
practice, most people seem to seek freedom only for themselves, for their group or class, but
still desiring power and control over others, even to the extent of accepting the danger of
social unrest, revolution or war. Silvio Gesell wanted freedom for all and like others in the
past whose call was directed to mankind as a whole, he found devoted followers in all
countries, but no party that fought for his ideas. It is time such a party was founded.”
And here is a paragraph from Wikipedia:
“Taking selfishness into account, Gesell called for free, fair business competition with equal
chances for all. This included the removal of all legal and inherited privileges. Everyone
should rely only on his personal abilities in order to make a living. In the “natural economic
order” which he aimed for, the most talented people would have the highest income, without
distortion by interest and rent charges. The economic status of the less talented would also
improve, because they would not be forced to pay interest and rent charges. According to
Gesell, this would lead to an equalization between the poor and the rich. Further, there would
be more means available to help the poor because the higher average income would mean that
everyone would have enough money to spare what was necessary to help.”
Finally, unlike Austro-libertarians, who have turned Mises and Murray Rothbard into quasi-
deities, we are not strict “followers of Gesell and Douglas”. We do not necessarily agree with
everything Gesell wrote but, as explained by Anthony Migchels, the aim is to take the best
ideas from each school but to refuse to become enslaved by any single one.
Electronic Publishing and the Internet Reformation
‘The Anglosphere model of Keynesian inflation, high taxes and multinational corporatism is
coming under attack as never before. The “alternative media” has emphasized ancient
verities of sound money (gold and silver), low taxes and republican forms of government at
the local level.’
The problem with Wile’s narrative here is that by advocating for the reduction or destruction
of government, the neoliberal ideologues of the Mont Pèlerin Society and their Austro-
libertarian associates are paving the way for a global takeover by transnational corporations
and globalist concerns. The belief that Austro-libertarianism is a real opposition to the elites is
dangerously misguided.
Obama’s Hammer and the Progress of The Daily Bell
A feedbacker made an interesting comment in reply to this article:
“But how come libertarians have not succeeded in putting their leaders out front in the
national stage if its tenets, as you say, are the most ideal for today’s problems?
Much like communism that hastily labels anyone an evil capitalist if he or she does not
subscribe to their ways, you also quickly judge anyone who is not a libertarian a “power elite
puppet” who’ll simply carry on business and politics as usual. Are you sure a libertarian
would not do the same once such an individual occupies the White House? I believe you fell
flat on your face when you exhorted libertarians not to vote. That was a big mistake! Why?
Because the nation never got the chance to see how many you were had you all voted for that
3rd candidate whose name escapes me.
And about this “currency to be determined by free markets,” ever heard of the Mafia? If only
Dr Mises factored in greed, he wouldn’t be all too ecstatic in espousing this free market thing
because at the end of the day, a market system devoid of government is like saying Utopia
exists. Greed and the urge to control is in man’s DNA, which is also the reason why the
power elite came to be in the first place. Someone or some group is definitely bound to create
a system that would give them the most advantageous position and limitless amount of
resources even in your so-called “free market” society. Nothing man-made – or man-thought
– is meant to last.
You want to be really free of the power elite? Go Amish. “
The Daily Bell replied:

”But how come libertarians have not succeeded in putting their leaders out front in the
national stage if its tenets, as you say, are the most ideal for today’s problems?”
‘Money Power. Ron Paul was starting to win and he was stopped. Jefferson was a libertarian.
The US was founded on Libertarian principles. Money Power is a great distorter. That’s why
we value the Internet Reformation.’
Ironically, Ron Paul is himself supported by elite elements, such as Peter Thiel (a member of
the steering committee of the Bilderberg), and the Rothschild- and Rockefeller-connected
Agora. Moreover, the Bell’s reply does not address the valid points made by the feedbacker
regarding the fact that “some group is definitely bound to create a system that would give the
most advantageous position and limitless amount of resources even in your so-called “free-
market”. The feedbacker also perceptively notes that the Bell is quick to “judge anyone who
is not a libertarian a “power elite puppet”, a tendency we also highlighted in our previous
Daily Bell review.
Conclusion
The Daily Bell’s analysis of Gesell’s theories and of the Wörgl experiment is marred, as
usual, by a litany of errors, misstatements, and dubious interpretations. Importantly, the Bell’s
attempt to paint Gesell as an opponent of free markets falls flat on its face: Gesell was an
advocate of freedom, but of a very different kind of freedom than the fake neoliberal and
neofeudalist “freedom” that is the end goal of anarcho-capitalism. More generally, Austro-
libertarians try to sell their ideology as the only real pathway to true freedom, whereas we
have shown time and time again that this ideology is just another cleverly disguised elite
meme.
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
The Daily Bell hoax?In "Agora Inc."

Daily Bell review: on banking, the nature of money, and dubious affiliationsIn "Agora Inc."
How Money Power controls the Libertarian movement in the 21st centuryIn "Agora Inc."
from → Austrian Economics, Daily Bell, Free market, Interest and Usury, Libertarianism,
Ron Paul
← Daily Bell review: on banking, the nature of money, and dubious affiliations
Debunking another cornerstone of the Austrian-Keynesian dialectic: do central banks really
control the money supply? →
7 Comments leave one →
1.
bionic mosquito permalink
November 18, 2012 2:18 am
Thank you for referencing (and providing links to) my various posts on this subject,
thus allowing the readers to come to their own conclusions.
As I have done at my site, I will also take this opportunity to thank memehunter and
Mr. Migchels for their comments and feedback. These have helped me to sharpen and
clarify my thoughts.
I am satisfied that we will not agree, however I welcome the dialogue.
Regards
Reply
2.
Tao Jonesing permalink
November 18, 2012 11:29 pm
I’d never heard of Gesell before. I look forward to reading his work.
I recently started reading about Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and his “Property Is Theft!”
Interestingly, Proudhon was known as a libertarian in his time. Since then, the word
“libertarian” has been misappropriated by the elite. Today’s libertarian is more
accurately labelled a “propertarian” and requires the existence of a state to enforce
man-made property rights, which do not arise in nature.
Reply
o
dreamofgaltification permalink
January 6, 2013 7:15 am
I take it you like Rousseau also?
3.
January 6, 2013 7:12 am
The phrase “we don´t necessary … ” seems to be frequently used when the Daily
Knell try to explain things. Why is it that you have to clarify yourselves so much. And
please, explain to me how the power money elite, Rockefeller, Rotchild et al., doesn´t
already have all the power they need within the western corporativistic (fascism)
national socialistic economic models that we see all over the world today in all social
democratic states?
Why would this elite promote Libertarianism to reach their goals, to me that seems
counterproductive. Classic Liberalism wants to have free markets, big corp. doesn´t
like competition and free markets and that´s why we have EU, NAFTA and AFTA so
they can control the market, their assets, their wealth and their industries by different
anti-free market regulations. Are you on the same page as libertarians this far or is it
something wrong with this view also?
I have come to the conclusion that this western pink socialism suits the economic elite
like a glove, with all its taxes and regulations and all other free market obstacles.
Reply
4.
January 6, 2013 7:26 am
In trying to figure out what political stance this site is coming from I have to ask if you
have … so to speak, ‘special thoughts on banking Jews’ and jews and money in
general and in extension special thoughts on the mideast conflict too?
Reply
5.
January 6, 2013 7:59 am
*Modern proponents of Gesell have cited (Gottfried) Feder, the German Nazi
economist, as “a great light … implementing his ideas today would solve basically
everything.” But Feder was a command-and-control German economist who
participated in Hitler’s famous 25-point plan to nationalize the German economy.
*Gesell has been called a free-market economist but he wished to ensure a free market
by banning inheritance so that everyone would start on an “even playing field.”
*Gesell believed in government enforcment of a currency that would lose value by

design month to month. Everyone using the currency would have to receive a
government stamp proving the money was still worth a certain amount.
Reply
6.
Andrew Buckley permalink
January 2, 2014 8:19 pm
I had a good time arguing this point with The Daily Bell today. Sadly, The Daily Bell
did not participate in the argument, but instead accused me of disseminating
pernicious memes aligned with the policies of Nazi Germany. All discussion of the
endogenous component of money creation was astutely ignored by The Daily Bell.
“Dishonest argument” was the only feedback I received. Unfortunately the misplaced
cynicism of the “radical right” is effectively preyed upon by The Daily Bell, which
seeks to convince readers that the unaccountable market will fix all problems, whilst
attacking the proponents of a monetary economics which is consistent with empirical
observation.
Reply
Leave a Reply
 “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of
the main… Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and
therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
- John Donne (1572-1631), Meditation XVII
 Search
type and pres
 Follow via Email

Enter your email address to follow The Daily Knell and receive notifications of new
posts by email.
 The loudest knells

 The Mont Pèlerin Society: The ultimate neoliberal Trojan horse
 Debunking Tom Woods’ “Catholic” Austrian economics
 Analyzing Austrian economics memes: Who benefits from the anarcho-capitalist
utopia?
 Recent Posts
 It’s official: The Daily Bell lied about their website numbers
 Debunking another cornerstone of the Austrian-Keynesian dialectic: do central banks
really control the money supply?
 Daily Bell review: on Wörgl, Gesell, the Fabian society, and the “alternative” media
 Daily Bell review: on banking, the nature of money, and dubious affiliations
 The Daily Bell adopts an “elite methodology” that it had previously blasted
 The Mont Pèlerin Society: The ultimate neoliberal Trojan horse
 Debunking Tom Woods’ “Catholic” Austrian economics
 Fighting Free Market Fundamentalism
 Answering Tom Woods
 Video: A street conversation between a Ron Paul fan and the Daily Knell
 Recent Comments
Ideas and Economics… on The Mont Pèlerin Society: The…
The Elements of Cons… on The Mont Pèlerin Society: The…
3 Lessons from the 2… on The Mont Pèlerin Society: The…
Debunking another co… on Debunking another cornerstone…
ey.tsujimoto on How Money Power controls the L…
In The Year 2000 The… on Debunking another cornerstone…
Edwin on Analyzing Austrian economics m…
WScottT on The “Catholic” Arm…
WScottT on The “Catholic” Arm…
eithan on Debunking another cornerstone…
 Archives
Archives
Categories
Categories

 Blogroll
o Critiques Of Libertarianism
o Exposing Faux Capitalism
o Real Currencies
o Reality Blog
o Recovering Austrians
o Ron Paul Exposed
o The Daily Bell
Advertisements
Report this ad
How Money Power controls the Libertarian
movement in the 21st century
October 8, 2012
by Memehunter
William Rees-Mogg, the fascist British Lord who pulls the strings behind most of the
Libertarian movement and “hard money” community
In a series of articles earlier this year, Anthony Migchels and I exposed how Libertarianism
and Austrian economics were sponsored by the elites as a dialectical counterpart to
Communism during the 20th century. See especially:
Old Rothschild- and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialectic
How the Money Power spawns Libertarians
The sad truth is that not much has changed during the last 60 years. We already know that
Ron Paul is backed by billionaire Peter Thiel, a member of the steering committee of the
Bilderberg group.
But what few people realize is that the entire Libertarian movement is still controlled by a
handful of individuals who are directly connected to the highest elite circles, including the
Rothschild dynasty. In this article, we will shed more light on these connections and expose
the elites’ control of the Libertarian movement in the 21st century.
The Agora Empire
As documented in The Daily Bell Hoax?, blogger (and libertarian sympathizer) Lila Rajiva
recently revealed that Ron Paul had a longtime partnership with James Dale Davidson,
founder (with Lord William Rees-Mogg) of the financial conglomerate Agora Inc. Through
the Agora network, Davidson, Rees-Mogg, and executives Bill Bonner and Addison Wiggin
control most of the “hard-money” investment newsletters and “free-market” websites in the
West, most of them ferociously pro-Paul.
These outlets include: Anthony Wile’s Daily Bell, Bonner’s Daily Reckoning, Doug Casey’s
International Speculator, Gary North’s Remnant Review, The Oxford Club, Whiskey &
Gunpowder, Laissez-faire Books, a leading libertarian bookseller, and a slew of other
“alternative media” websites. It is no exaggeration to say that Agora controls most of the
Libertarian material published in the West.
Rajiva’s revelations are important because they blow apart the myth of the “Ron Paul
revolution” as a grassroots movement, and confirm Paul’s close ties with elite globalist
financial concerns. In fact, Lyndon Larouche’s Executive Intelligence Review (cited by
Rajiva) implied a direct link between Libertarian circles and the Rockefeller and Rothschild,
the very elites whose domination they claim to abhor!
Libertarians, “hard-money” investors and power elites: an enduring partnership
Although Davidson and Rees-Mogg apparently promote pseudo-libertarian solutions and

“free-market” thinking, both are bona fide members of the highest elite circles. Davidson was
likely a Rhodes scholar (although he does not publicize this information), a leading indicator
of acceptance into elite British circles.
His partner Rees-Mogg was a longtime editor of the Times and a member of the governing
council of the BBC. He is a member of the very select Roxburghe Club and apparently has
ties to the Pilgrims Society. He also belongs to The Other Club, together with British and
Zionist aristocrats such as the Cecils, Howards, Cavendishes, Rothschilds, and Oppenheimers.
Rees-Mogg is also on the board of Rothschild’s St. James Place Capital.
Rees-Mogg and Davidson apparently work in tandem with mainstream British journalist
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, whose father was a military intelligence officer and who has long
been suspected of being an intelligence asset himself. It is surely no accident that Evans-
Pritchard, known for his anti-Clinton crusade and hard-money sympathies, is one of the few
mainstream journalists frequently cited by Wile’s Daily Bell, but very few readers would
suspect that they are essentially partners.
Although Rees-Mogg is associated with the Libertarian movement, he would be more

accurately described as a fascist. In an article entitled “It’s the Elites Who Matter”, published
in the Times in January 1995, Rees-Mogg publicly called for limiting education to the top 5%
of the population, creating an elite that would be ideally positioned to dominate the remaining
95% of the people after Rees-Mogg’s so-called “Information Revolution” would bring in a
feudalist dystopia.
Soon after Davidson and Rees-Mogg published The Sovereign Individual in 1997, they
founded the Sovereign Society, another Agora offshoot. Besides Davidson and Rees-Mogg,
the Board of Advisors of the Sovereign Society has included over the years some of the best-
known names in the “hard money” community, such as Doug Casey (a classmate of future
president Clinton in Jesuit hotbed Georgetown University), CIA asset Mark Skousen (son of a
FBI agent and nephew of J. Edgar Hoover’s assistant Cleon Skousen), perennial libertarian
candidate Harry Browne, the Aden Sisters (Pamela and Mary-Ann), and Daily Bell advisor
Ron Holland.
Casey also founded the Eris Society, a group of “free thinkers” who meet annually. Among
the past speakers at Eris Society meetings, we find the names of Ron Paul, Skousen, Browne,
Davidson, “Uncle” Richard Maybury, and investor Jim Rogers. Already in 1994, Casey,
Davidson, and Skousen were collaborating on a presentation about “ERIS Island”, indicating
that their partnership predates the foundation of the Sovereign Society.
Another Agora spin-off is the FreedomFest, the “world’s largest gathering of free minds”.
While FreedomFest claims to be independent and “not affiliated with any organization or
think-tank”, we find that it is coordinated by Skousen and Holland’s wife Tami, and that
speakers associated with Agora are regularly invited. Perhaps surprisingly, Bilderberger Peter
Thiel was featured as a keynote speaker in 2011.
Of course, the old Libertarian networks centered around the Volker fund that we exposed in
Old Rothschild- and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialectic are
still active: thus, Gary North, a Volker protégé, retains an enormous influence in Austrian
economics. More interestingly, alumni of the Libertarian think-tanks sponsored by the Volker
fund and its affiliates are often found working together with the “new generation” of Agora-
associated hard-money investors.
For instance, academics Richard Ebeling, past director of the Foundation for Economic
Education, and Tibor Machan, a scholar of the Institute for Humane Studies, are advisors for
the Daily Bell. Together with Lew Rockwell, director of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, they
also sit on the advisory board of Ron Holland’s Biologix Hair Inc., a company that claims to
have developed a therapy for hair rejuvenation.
Only one degree of separation between Rothschild and the Daily Bell
The Daily Bell is a prime example of these apparently independent libertarian outlets that are
in fact closely associated with the highest elite circles. The Bell, which earlier this year had to
close its comments section in the face of an onslaught of negative criticism, is well-known for
its staunch support of Ron Paul, strident goldbug mindset, stubborn advocacy of Austrian
faux economics, and more recently for its vociferous condemnation of anti-interest activists.
Not only is Ron Holland, senior editor at the Daily Bell, a longtime associate of Rees-Mogg
and Davidson, but so was perennial libertarian candidate Harry Browne, with whom Daily
Bell founder Anthony Wile worked for several years.
More importantly, Davidson and Rees-Mogg were once shareholders in Lines Overseas
Management (LOM), the Bahamas off-shore company implicated in a stock manipulation
affair for which Wile, along with other shady entrepreneurs, was in litigation with the SEC for
most of the last decade. Interestingly, the late Bob Chapman was also named in the same SEC
probe, raising serious doubts about Chapman’s International Forecaster as well.
In fact, Davidson and Rees-Mogg blatantly promoted LOM in The Sovereign Individual,
citing the “triple-digit returns” of their “colleagues” at LOM (p. 298), and advising their
readers to contact LOM for investment of “sums in excess of $100,000” (p.403). This
indicates that Wile was already involved in a close business partnership with Davidson and
Rees-Mogg in the late 1990s, an association that is likely to have lasted much longer given
Wile’s longstanding partnerships with Browne and Holland, both advisors at the Sovereign
Society.
Considering that Rees-Mogg is an advisor to Rothschild, we can say that there is essentially
only one degree of separation between Rothschild and the Daily Bell. How ironic given the
Daily Bell’s endless posturing as a free-market publication that aims to “expose the power
elite and their societal manipulations”.
But there is more to the story. In The Daily Bell Hoax?, I revealed the existence of a business
partnership between the Daily Bell and gold mining concern Dicon Gold Inc., whose main
assets are located in Colombia. At the same time, Kathleen Peddicord, founder of the Agora-
affiliated “Live and Invest Overseas” publishing group and a member of the Board of
Advisors of the Sovereign Society, was recently promoting Colombia, and especially
Medellin, as a “screaming bargain” for real estate.
Perhaps not coincidentally, the Daily Bell recently started praising former Colombian
president Alvaro Uribe’s pro-business administration, although Uribe was once listed by the
Defense Intelligence Agency as an “important Colombian narco-trafficker” and “a close
personal friend of Pablo Escobar”. It is difficult to imagine that the well-informed editors of
the Daily Bell would not have been aware of this fact. I will leave it to the reader to connect
the dots…
Conclusion
Although the names have changed, the cozy relationship between the top Money Power elites
and the Libertarian movement has remained essentially the same for the better part of a
century, if not longer. This connection must be relentlessly exposed because Libertarian
“alternative media” outlets and “hard money” entrepreneurs continually promote their views
as being “pro-freedom” and “anti-elite”, in contrast to the mainstream “statist” message,
whereas they have in fact always been part of a centuries-old Hegelian dialectic which is
entirely controlled by the same transnational oligarchy. We must recognize these gatekeepers
for what they are and look beyond their phony posturing if we want to find real solutions to
the economic and political issues that our society is facing.
Special thanks to reader Bob whose comments (here and here) sparked this investigation
h/t to Faux Capitalist for pointing out Chapman’s involvement with Lines Overseas
Management
Related:
The Daily Bell Hoax?
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
Video: A street conversation between a Ron Paul fan and the Daily KnellIn "Agora Inc."
Old Rothschild- and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialecticIn

"Libertarianism"
from → Agora Inc., Daily Bell, Libertarianism, Phony dialectics, Ron Paul
← Libertarianism is evil in 3 minutes or less
The Huffington Post-Tom Woods controlled opposition gold standard debate →
1.
Contrarian Rex (@ContrarianRex) permalink
October 8, 2012 11:17 am
You just know that all the Paulbots and anarcho capitalists will shrug all this off as
conspiracy theory crackpotery. I’ll bet a pot of gold on it.
Not all libertarians are connected to the financial oligarchs. Bill Still is aware of all
that you wrote about and rejects all the aspects of libertarian and austrian economic
thought that binds one within the dialectic of debt slavery.
http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-465-bill-still/ He is an advocate of
decentralized monetary policy involving debt free fiat issued by a national bank, and
controlled at the state level. It’s also why he didn’t get the nomination from the
libertarian party. Johnson took money from the banks while a republican canidate, and
is their apologist as a libetarian. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTihklVR52M
Reply
Anthony Migchels permalink

October 9, 2012 5:44 pm
Bill Sill is not a libertarian. The only reason he got involved in that party is that
he fancied controlling the party structure. he failed miserably and now finally
is starting to build up his own. Which he should.
Libertarianism is just gold porn and anarchy for Jewish people and upper
middle class americans.
2.
infowarrior1 permalink
October 8, 2012 12:10 pm
So even though the libertarians are against central banking( The federal reserve). How
do they promote monopoly and social division?
Reply
3.
October 8, 2012 12:59 pm
Reblogged this on Recovering Austrians.
Reply
4.
name789 permalink
October 8, 2012 11:23 pm
>>>>William Rees-Mogg, the fascist British Lord who pulls the strings behind most of
the Libertarian movement and ‘hard money’ community
Fascist, like Ezra Pound ? –you could only wish
Is the Lizzard of Oz still a presidential candidate for this Libertarian Party ?

Reply
October 9, 2012 5:45 pm
I think our friend memehunter has actual negative connotations with fascism
name789, hahahaha
5.
Dave Scotese permalink
October 9, 2012 2:52 am
Not so much conspiracy theory crackpottery, but rather biased in the direction of
invalid associative reasoning. A psychotic murderer-rapist who enjoys regular exercise
and eating healthy isn’t going to make me get fat and lazy. How about you?
Reply
The Daily Knell permalink*
October 9, 2012 4:03 am
Austrian faux economics isn’t “healthy”… See Real Currencies for more on
this.
The point is that the Libertarian movement is ultimately controlled by the same
elites who control the mainstream “statist” media. This should make you stop
and think, no?
If you want more “theory-based” reasoning, you may have a look at this:
Analyzing Austrian economics memes: Who benefits from the anarcho-
capitalist utopia?
Or, better, you could peruse the abundant material already published on this
topic on Real Currencies or on Recovering Austrians.
o
marxbites permalink
October 9, 2012 3:12 pm
Thats 100% correct Dave.
IF these bohunks EVER actually read any Rothbard they’d see Austrians are
100% opposed to concentrated power and ESPECIALLY that of these
globalist shylock parasitic bloody-handed pigs.
Here’s a PERFECT EXAMPLE!
I’m beginning to believe these are really just controlled opposition here. They
ONLY know what the critics say of Austrian econs, and NOTHING of what
they have ACTUALLY written.
Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy

by Murray N. Rothbard
Businessmen or manufacturers can either be genuine free enterprisers or

statists; they can either make their way on the free market or seek special
government favors and privileges. They choose according to their individual
preferences and values. But bankers are inherently inclined toward statism.
Commercial bankers, engaged as they are in unsound fractional reserve credit,

are, in the free market, always teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Hence they
are always reaching for government aid and bailout.
Investment bankers do much of their business underwriting government bonds,

in the United States and abroad. Therefore, they have a vested interest in
promoting deficits and in forcing taxpayers to redeem government debt. Both
sets of bankers, then, tend to be tied in with government policy, and try to
influence and control government actions in domestic and foreign affairs.
[Edited for brevity]
cont at
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard66.html
Lets see just ONE of you read this and show us where in the hell Rothbard is
on the side of power elite scumbags, I freakin dare ya’s.
o
Abu Aardvark permalink
October 9, 2012 3:56 pm
marxbites wrote: “IF these bohunks EVER actually read any Rothbard they’d
see Austrians are 100% opposed to concentrated power and ESPECIALLY
that of these globalist shylock parasitic bloody-handed pigs.
Here’s a PERFECT EXAMPLE!
I’m beginning to believe these are really just controlled opposition here. They
ONLY know what the critics say of Austrian econs, and NOTHING of what
they have ACTUALLY written.”
—————-
Spot-on, marxbites! Some months ago in the feedback-section of the Daily

Bell – after his hogwash was refuted again and again [Although Abu has
difficulties admitting this, the Daily Bell has not been able to refute what
Anthony Migchels and I have shown in our series of articles on
Libertarianism]– “memehunter” felt constrained to admit that he hasn’t even
read the most basic austrian textbooks [Actually, I have read a fair amount
of Austrian literature in the last year, as should be obvious from the
articles published on the Daily Knell and on Real Currencies. Besides, one
does not need to read hundreds of pages from Mises and Hayek to
understand where they come from].
6.
BMan permalink
October 9, 2012 10:44 am
Reblogged this on BuelahMan's Revolt and commented:

The Big Money connections to Ron Paul and Libertarianism Explained:
Reply
7.
MetaCynic permalink
October 9, 2012 2:53 pm

As a real test of your claim that the libertarian movement was financed by and is still
controlled by the mega wealthy, what have Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Bill Bonner,
Lew Rockwell, Gary North and Anthony Wile ever said or written that would give the
Power Elite any comfort? These decentralist libertarians are either all free market
anarchists or borderline free market anarchists. The Power Elite by definition are
mercantilist, pro state centralizers, laboring mightily for a one world government
supported by a global fiat currency. How is spreading the libertarian decentralist
message advancing the one world government championed by the Power Elite?
At the core of their anti state, pro individual liberty philosophy, the above gentlemen
have repeatedly called for the repeal of legal tender laws, thus allowing for competing
private currencies which would must likely be gold and silver backed. Such a
monetary system would be the spike through the heart of the Power Elite’s hold on
power – central banking. The anti central banking message is now resonating around
the world. People everywhere are beginning to understand that the destructive
economic boom and bust cycles are caused by central banking’s credit creation
activities. And central banking everywhere is a government created and supported
monopoly. Why would the Power elite fund the individuals calling for the elimination
of their real hold on power? Are they suicidal?
It’s no secret that both Obama and Romney have received millions in campaign
contributions from Goldman Sachs and other Power Elite financial powerhouses. How
much money had these Power Elite icons donated to Ron Paul’s campaigns? Zero.
Reply
October 9, 2012 5:54 pm
“what have Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Bill Bonner, Lew Rockwell, Gary
North and Anthony Wile ever said or written that would give the Power Elite
any comfort?”
Uhhhh….how about:
use Gold to stop the boom bust cycle (which it will not) while ignoring that the
gold is controlled by these goons they supposedly resist. So the nations will
have to BORROW the gold at INTEREST, continuing the wealth transfer of 5
to 10 trillion per year in interest in real terms.
Meanwhile, blathering about that wicked state, while ignoring the monopolistic
tendencies of capital (‘competition is sin’, or ‘capital needs monopolies to
cooperate untrammeled’). Or, of course, downplaying or ignoring Money
Power as even a worse scourge than statist tyranny.
Did I forget anything? Ah, yes, I think I did. It transpires that Rees Mogg, ex
editor of the Times, and ex governing council of the BBC member (how
mainstream do you actually wanna get?) is just the umpteenth in a long line of
elitist assholes running Libertarianism and indeed building it up from scratch.
Only the feeble minded watch Rothbard scolding banks, while promoting
Gold, the same gold that the maranos of the Amsterdam Wisschelbank
controlled to create modern Capitalism…………….
Oh, oh, oh…….How long will we have to deal with this nonsense, while so
much more challenging, enjoyable, nurturing, pleasant and faith inspiring
subjects are there to be explored.
But like the opposition explained: ‘the American People don’t read! they just
don’t read!’
Next, I’ll have to repeat myself once more to the next that just doesn’t read.
Let alone thinks for himself……..
MetaCynic permalink
October 9, 2012 9:29 pm
The beauty of private money, as is the beauty of private anything, is that you
are free to accept or reject it for any or no reason at all. If you really believe
that commodity money backed by gold or silver is evil, then you are free to not
deal in it. Unless you live in self sufficiency and have no use for the division of
labor, then you are forced by the reality of your circumstances to come to grips
with the concept of money.
What is money? What is it not? Why bother with money at all? What
properties must money possess for you to accept it? I think that some thought
on this matter will force you to conclude that money is a store of value and a
unit of value and that it must be portable. It must also be scarce and have value
apart from and prior to its use as money. Paper money is portable and a unit of
value, but since it can be almost infinitely expanded, it’s not at all a good store
of value. Politicians and central bankers have repeatedly demonstrated their
unwillingness to restrain credit creation – inflation. And why should they?
Inflation is a tax, a transfer of wealth from savers and wealth creators to the
pockets of politicians, bureaucrats, bankers and corporations doing business
with the government. What’s there in fiat money for these players not to like?
But they have a visceral hatred of gold because it restrains government
spending to whatever the political caste can steal through taxes before there’s a
taxpayers’ revolt.
The last thirty years prior to 1913, the birth of the Federal Reserve system, the
gold dollar saw its purchasing power increase about 25%. In the almost century
since then, the fiat dollar has seen its value erode about 96%. I’ll go for the
gold. You’re welcome to the paper. If the Treasury still has any of the gold that
Roosevelt stole from the American people, then it should be exchanged at
some fixed rate for all of what passes for fiat dollars today and the government
should then get out of the money business.
Libertarian thinkers have performed a useful service to mankind in educating

people to the true nature of central banking. I think that if you look behind the
scenes into the “monopolistic nature of capitalism” you’ll find that none of this
monopoly power is possible without the gun of the state. It all happened
because of coercion masquerading as protecting people against this, that and
the other. The entire regulatory apparatus of the state from the earliest days of
the Progressive Era was in service to politically connected businesses. To this
day regulations are a barrier to entry. It protects established businesses against
competition from smaller, nimbler rivals.
Free market capitalism is almost nonexistent in today’s world. So how can all
kinds of modern evils be blamed on it? The powers that be everywhere favor
crony capitalism – mercantilism – a partnership between the gun of the state
and private interests who would rather not compete in the rugged world of free
market capitalism. They want their market share and profits to be guaranteed
by guns and badges and not to superior products and services for willing
buyers.
saturno_v permalink
October 12, 2012 9:44 pm
Anthony, your claims are so ridiculous, they really go well beyond funny (the
entire blog is)….you must live in some sort of parallel universe..
Tell me how it would favour the elite following these concepts:
– Free competing currencies. Austrians suggest the free will of people would
converge on gold.
[See: http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/the-austrian-free-
market-for-currencies-hoax/ ]
– Full reserve banking system (so no bubble to blow)
– No central bank…meaning no money supply to manipulate or control.
– Living within your means, balanced budgets (no wars to wage, no voters to
buy), limited state borrowing should be allowed for productivity enhancing
infrastruture projects…….you want social programs, fine, ask for them in the
honest way, explicit taxation.
– No bailout for insolvent insistutions
– No industry subsidies
– If you go bankrupt, no shackling, just hitting reset…meaning instant transfer

of wealth from lender to borrower.
[See: Analyzing Austrian economics memes: Who benefits from the

anarcho-capitalist utopia?]
After you report back with these answers then investigate how much “elite
money” are used to finance Austrian/Libertarian economic studies….I have an
answer for you…..a big fat zero or about that much…….how much traction
these ideas have in the corridors of power?? Again zero…like someone already
said before, how much “elite” financing the Ron Paul campaign got?? Answer
for yourself to this one….
[See: How the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian

Economics, How the Money Power spawns Libertarians, Old Rothschild-
and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialectic for
a start]
Then do your homework finding the money source behind many economic
studies of more accepted mainstream economic school of thoughts and their
mandarins…..you will find a lot of interesting info…
[What makes you think that we endorse ‘mainstream economic school(s)

of thoughts’? The goal of this blog is to expose libertarian lies because
they are everywhere in the alternative media. That does not mean we
endorse mainstream thinking. You are obviously still imprisoned in the
elite’s Hegelian dialectic that we have identified on this blog.]
Do I believe that if the libertarian ideas grow in strength, some group would try
to hijack it for their own advantage?? Or someone trying to establish devious
strands?? Absolutely….
[The libertarian ideas were not hijacked, they were an elite promotion
from the beginning. See: The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism and of
course The Satanic Core of Libertarianism]
Finally use your guts….who is benefitting from the current system….the

masses?? Does it pass the smell test??
[The point is, the same people who are benefitting from the current system
would benefit from the libertarian anarcho-capitalist utopia. Are YOU
beginning to get it?]
I leave you with few powerful famous quotes that should clear your confused
mind a little bit….
———————————————————————————–
“I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than

standing armies…”
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration

of Independence, 3rd US President.
To John Taylor, 1816
“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws”
Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744 -1812), Godfather of the Rothschild

Banking Cartel of Europe
“I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire,
…The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire.
And I control the money supply.”
Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild (1777-1836) London financier, one of the

founders of the international Rothschild banking dynasty
“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process
is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented.
Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the
earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits,
and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back
again.
However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will
disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better
world to live in.
But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own
slavery, let them continue to create money and control credit.”
Sir Josiah Stamp (1880-1941) President of the Bank of England in the 1920’s,
the second richest man in Britain.
Speaking at the Commencement Address of the University of Texas in 1927
“Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value….zero.”
François-Marie Arouet (1694-1778) French writer and philosopher known with

the pseudonym of Voltaire
[What makes you think that we have not seen these quotes a thousand
times previously?]
o
Degrees of Separation Man permalink
October 13, 2012 12:45 am
You clearly don’t understand the power that Fiat Money lends to governments
& banks. Gold cannot be printed, and works poorly in a fractionally reserved
system. Nearly every single bank in the world would have collapsed in 2008,
and every government would have defaulted were it not for central banking’s
ability to hit CTRL+P.
You seem to think interest on a gold backed currency is bad, yet you
completely ignore that people still pay interest on fiat. Furthermore, you ignore
that fiat is subject to debasement at will through fractional reserve policy and
central bank printing.
Do you want to pay interest on a stable money that encourages prudence and
restraint, or would you rather pay interest on a depreciating meidum that you
WILL NEVER catch up to?
[Please do not use a different alias – you posted under a different name
previously.]
October 13, 2012 5:47 am
We do not endorse interest on any type of currency. Where do you get the idea
that we “ignore that people still pay interest on fiat”? Maybe you should read
this blog and Real Currencies.
Exposing libertarian lies for what they are does not mean that we endorse
“central bank printing”. The fact that we continually have to repeat this just
shows how powerful is the elite’s Hegelian dialectic: many readers apparently
cannot seem to understand that one can denounce libertarian lies and Austrian
faux economics and yet not endorse the mainstream economic views. We do
not spend much time on “fiat” or “central bank printing” on this blog because
this is what 90% of alternative media constantly repeat ad nauseam (and many
of them are controlled by Money Power in one way or another). There is no
need for another blog repeating this. Again, you are welcome to browse our
links: Real Currencies, Recovering Austrians, Faux Capitalist, etc…
As discussed on this blog, physical gold (not “paper gold” or any other form of
gold-backed currency which will also likely lead to excessive and dishonest
printing of paper compared to the actual metal reserves) may be useful as a
long-term store of value, but not that useful as a medium of exchange.
saturno_v permalink
October 13, 2012 10:42 pm
Anthony
This is a MSNBC video with a Ron Paul intervention where he clearly states
that fractional reserve banking is a fraud (got at min. 7:45)
Another video of Ron Paul at a congressional hearing about fractional reserve

banking.
http://www.dailypaul.com/242542/ron-paul-s-fractional-reserve-banking-
congressional-hearing-june-28-2012
This should put to rest any fantasy about Ron Paul being a vehicle of the power
elite…..
So try again guys…..
October 14, 2012 5:36 am
What about this video of Ron Paul saying that there is nothing to fear from a
global currency:
You should also probably read the following, this should put to rest any
fantasy about Ron Paul NOT being a vehicle of the power elite:
http://libertyrevival.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/ron-paul-supports-
globalization-and-one-world-currency/
o
saturno_v permalink
October 14, 2012 6:40 pm
Yes, there is nothing to fear from a global currency (gold) not manipulable and
not fractionally loanable and TRUE free trade without the intervention and
coercion of the WTO. IMF (where elitist interests dictate policy)…..it seems to
me the antithesis of elite interests.
Gold would be a global currency simply because the free will people would
gravitate towards the “barbarous relic” (see Gresham’s law) as it has always
been the case for millenias…
saturno_v permalink
October 14, 2012 7:03 pm
About that link on libertyrevival “Ron Paul supports globalization”…oh boy,

where I do start with the debunking……that piece is like taking facts and
turning them over their head….”The Gold Standard caused the great
depression???” Really??, We conveninently forget what happened in the 20’s
and the massive amount of fraud and fractional debt creation……why nobody
mention the depression of 1921 where the government did exactly NOTHING
an the economy roared back in short time???
The Gold standard caused the collapse of the Roman Empire?? That is
laughable at best, devaluation was the order of the day (coin clipping
anyone??)…..what about the Byzantine empire which was the most prosperous
during te dark ages, a real “heaven island” compared to the darkness in the rest
of Europe….their formula?? The Gold standard….
Ron Paul promotes deregulation not unbridled frauds as the derivative and
fractional reserve are, backed by the taxpayer if things go wrong….under Ron
Paul scenario, many global banks would have gone under in the crisis of 2008.
Deflation is bad?? So I guess the entire electronic industry should not exists…
What do you guys promope?? The continental?? the greenback?? MMT??
Really?? I have few trillions of Zimbabwe dollars to donate to this blog…..
Do I believe that some powerful interests try to put their hands in every
competing ideas with the goal of protecting their own interests??
Absolutely…..if someone propose libertarian ideas and Austrian economics
AND fractional reserve banking I know that I have to walk away….
8.
marxbites permalink
October 9, 2012 3:32 pm
IOWs you anti-libertarians are therefore anti-freedom, b/c libertarians ARE 100%
PRO-freedom and anti-statist.
Reply
October 9, 2012 5:56 pm
pro freedom and anti statist?
Are you serious marxbites? Why are you regurgitating these grandiose
containers aimed at the absolute lowest denominators of the libertarian cattle?
You’re a smart guy. At least use your own words.
9.
Nick11766 (@Nick11766) permalink
October 9, 2012 6:18 pm
What else have they done?

9/11, US and Israel:
http://www.amazon.com/America-Deceived-II-Possession-
interrogation/dp/1450257437
Reply
10.
October 10, 2012 9:26 am
memehunter: “Abu has difficulties admitting this, the Daily Bell has not been able to
refute what Anthony Migchels and I have shown in our series of articles on
Libertarianism”
AA: Since you refute, contradict and negate yourself in nearly every paragraph there’s
no need to bother. THAT’S what you’ve “shown” … impressively, that is.
memehunter: “Actually, I have read a fair amount of Austrian literature in the last
year, as should be obvious from the articles published on the Daily Knell and on Real
Currencies”
AA: Once more it’s exactly the other way round. Your “articles” confound your
claims time and again. Since you demonstrated this peculiar “technique” in the Bell’s
feedbacks ad nauseam this comes as no surprise.
[Do you have anything to say about the article itself? Can you effectively rebut
any part of it?]
Reply
11.
Don Hank permalink
October 11, 2012 2:21 am
Cato’s famous drug legalization study busted here:
http://laiglesforum.com/cato-portugal-drug-study-based-on-false-government-
data/2602.htm
Reply
12.
LuvGov permalink
October 11, 2012 5:51 am
Watch Ron Paul’s eyebrow fall off.

http://wellaware1.com/ron_paul.htm
[We post this for the purpose of discussion but do not necessarily endorse
WellAware1’s theories]
Reply
13.
William Dean A. Garner permalink
October 11, 2012 7:51 pm
Been studying the Jesuits for 31 years. http://williamdeanagarner.com explains a lot of

this. More to follow. . . .
Reply
October 11, 2012 8:31 pm
Thank you. Interesting blog, looking forward to your follow-up posts.
As you probably know, the Jesuits are also behind the Libertarian-Communist
dialectic. We discussed this in The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism.
14.
Keith Gardner permalink
October 11, 2012 10:54 pm
The Church of Scientology is known to fund libertarian and truther activists.
Reply
15.
Ade permalink
October 12, 2012 6:37 pm
Interesting post, thanks for your effort. Ron Paul supports Bitcoin as a competing
currency. I’m of the opinion that people can be associated with others without
realising that might not be such a good idea. I’m also of the opinion that many of our
politicians are doing evil, but they don’t see the big picture of what they are doing.
EG, imagine a politician agreeing to support a Bill in return for funding for a
community project. The Bill gets passed and the politician gets his community project,
he thinks he’s done a good job for his community.
Most politicians are too busy being politicians, they are much less informed about the
big picture than a lot of us bloggers and researchers are.
Reply
16.
rmstock permalink
October 13, 2012 12:18 am
Why do you guys in here keep pounding on that nearly dead horse called
Western Society, consisting of Western culture, economy, science and
industries? It makes me puke. When the horse is dead, your Western asses
will be sold to the highest bidder from China, Russia or some other
fat far-east Asia aristocrat.
Reply
17.
Degrees of Separation Man permalink
October 13, 2012 12:36 am
Ron Paul has spoken with, vote on the same legislation as, and even Nancy Pelosi &
Ted Kennedy. Both Ted Kennedy & Nancy Pelosi supported the bank bailouts and
universal communist healthcare. Therefore, Ron Paul is actually a bank enabling
Communist! Gaaaah! Don’t trust what he says or does, look at who you can associate
with him! Run for the hills!
[We would recommend not to trust politicians in general]
Reply
18.
Puck T. Smith permalink
October 13, 2012 5:59 am
If I’m being controlled by the money power, all I want to know is where’s my cut? I
spent years in the O.T.O waiting for my chance to pull the strings from behind the
curtain. That didn’t work either. I just keep picking the losing side. Maybe I should
start voting again. I’m sure that will solve everything.
Reply
19.
October 13, 2012 7:10 am
You guys are missing the point here and simply concentrating on the symptoms, i.e.
those minions of the powers that be controlling our world.
No one wants to admit it, but the Jesuits have been in power for hundreds of years:
Destroying Humanity Since 1541.
http://williamdeanagarner.com (blog: who really runs We The People’s world and

how)
http://adagiopress.com (book: Who Really Owns Your Gold)
Reply
October 13, 2012 10:03 am
Not sure whether the “you guys” in your comment refers to the readers of this
blog or to its authors, but we replied this to your previous comment:
As you probably know, the Jesuits are also behind the Libertarian-Communist
dialectic. We discussed this in The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism.
So clearly we are aware of the Jesuits’ power, although your blog and your
book explore this topic in much greater depth.
20.
October 13, 2012 10:17 am
Please forgive me: I did not wish to be mean in my comment. Thank you for your kind
attention.
Reply
21.
October 13, 2012 12:03 pm
Interestingly, the Jesuits use celestiophysics to run geoeconomic markets. It’s based on
thousands-year-old physics of the planets [and other “heavenly bodies.”], our sun and
moon and how that physics affects geophysical and biophysical events on Mother
Earth.
Everything runs in cycles. Everything.
If you study the geoeconomic events of the past 250 years, you’ll see striking
correlations between celestiophysical events (cycles) and subsequent geoeconomic
cycles here on earth.
While there is a time lag between the “cause” way out there in the Universe and the
effect on earth, there is a definite behavior that cannot be ignored.
Anyone who purports to use “Austrian Economics” or any other form of econ to
describe the geoeconomic events on earth is only dealing in the symptoms, not the real
“cause.” I place cause in parentheses because as we peel back the layers of this
mysterious calculus, we keep finding more and more “causes.”
Nonetheless, celestiophysics is well known to the Jesuits. It’s the underlying

mechanism of the first science on earth, Astrology, which was marginalized by the
powers that be, effectively keeping it from We The People (I use this term to describe
all good people of the world; Jesuits need not apply).
Celestiophysics also is used by billionaires, not millionaires, to play and manipulate

the markets.
Imagine if you knew and understood the celestiophysical events that impinge Mother
Earth. Now imagine that you also know the effects of those events on various cycles
on earth. You could know well in advance when to bet on a market, when to pull out,
and also when to manipulate or exacerbate its celestiophysical effects.
You could clean house.
Surely, this is not what the Austrian economists had in mind when creating their sham
economic system.
Not by far. . . .
Reply
22.
Bob Wood permalink
October 13, 2012 4:02 pm
i am new to your site—exactly what do you believe or what is your philosophy

concerning money ,personal freedoms,the government ,the Fed , etc?
Reply
October 13, 2012 5:09 pm
Concerning the monetary system, please have a look at Real Currencies. More
generally, we believe that it an important step to expose how Money Power
controls the Libertarian movement. You can always take what is good in
Libertarian philosophy (not everything is bad, same as with Keynesianism or
other -isms, believe it or not) and reject the rest. You are then free to choose or
construct your own alternative philosophy, and hopefully one that is not simply
part of another elite dialectic.
23.
Golden Conscience permalink

October 13, 2012 4:28 pm
what a joke
[Can you effectively rebut any part of this article?]
Reply
24.
saturno_v permalink
October 13, 2012 6:37 pm
Anthony
Let’s begin with the first link:
http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/the-austrian-free-market-for-
currencies-hoax/
It doesnt really adress my point other than making generic claims that people would be
“conned” into gold…….however have you ever heard of the Gresham’s law??
“Bad money drive out good”,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_law
A snippet of that article clarify the concept:
“Consider a customer purchasing an item which costs five pence, who possesses
several silver sixpence coins. Some of these coins are more debased, while others are
less so—but legally, they are all mandated to be of equal value. The customer would
prefer to retain the better coins, and so offers the shopkeeper the most debased one. In
turn, the shopkeeper must give one penny in change, and has every reason to give the
most debased penny. Thus, the coins that circulate in the transaction will tend to be of
the most debased sort available to the parties.”
People free will would converge to gold, no need to “con” the masses
The second link:
https://thedailyknell.wordpress.com/2012/09/24/analyzing-austrian-economics-
memes-who-benefits-from-the-anarcho-capitalist-utopia/
First of all one of the arguments proves my point…a true libertarianAustrian would
not support fractional reserve banking (paper gold to be multiplied) but only full
reserve banking…no power to inflate bubbles and asset values, no money supply to
control or manipulate.
FInally, the government still has power…the power of explicit taxation….and as a

libertarian I do not envision a world without law…..fraud should be prosecuted and so
environmental damage, etc…a libertarian society does not mean a lawless
society….your freedom stops where mine begin….
The third group of links, again, prove my point about “strands” of Austrianism and
libertarianism.
One of them makes a connection with Milton Friedman monetarist school…I think we
can stop right there as monetarism is as much a money elitist sham as corrupted
Keynesian economics is (strangely enough I support some of original Keynes ideas
such as spending some honest budget surplus accumulated in good times during the
lean times and Keynes clearly recognized the tragedy of currency debauchement)
I repeat again, a true libertarian/Asutrian would not support frasctional reserve

banking….do I believe that the effect of a recession is made worse with fractional
reserve banking in a gold standard regime?? Absolutely!! Fractional reserve banking is
fraud pure and simple.
Mises quote:
“There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit
expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result
of voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total
catastrophe of the currency system ”
You did not adress my point yet….how taking away from governments (owned by the
power elite) the means to waging war, how taking away the possibility to inflate assets
and money supply, does exactly favour the elite…just explain “the mechanics” of it to
me.
If Libertarianism/Austrian economics has so much powerful backing behind it, why

still it does represent a fringe movement, at best…why famous (and paid for)
economists even refuse to debate Austrian economists, why gold is dismissed without
as much of a second thought by mainstream economic thinking?? The proof is in the
pudding, as i said it does not pass the smell test.
Finally, what do you guys suggest for a better system than the current one?? We are all
ready to ear…..before criticizing, propose something….
Reply

October 14, 2012 5:33 am
To avoid constantly having to repeat ourselves, we refer hardcore Austrian

sympathizers to this video:
Video: A street conversation between a Ron Paul fan and the Daily Knell
saturno_v permalink
October 14, 2012 7:35 pm
That video contain a fallacy since the first 30-40 seconds “Commercial banks
creates 97% of the money supply”….there is nothing to be “created” under full
reserve banking, money is not loaned into existence but it comes from previous
savings.
[Maybe under a full reserve banking, but the video is describing the
current fractional reserve banking system.]
Another fallacy is that money supply needs to grow…..it doesn’t…
Gold established itself as currency thousands of years ago before banks and the
goldsmith guilds…the reason are simple, rarity, divisibility, indestructibility.
The alternative is barter.
[We make a distinction between physical gold and gold-backed

currencies]
Do elite interests try to control every competing ideas….yes they do, this is the
reason why you do not have to the the eyes off the ball…..no fractional reserve
banking.
saturno_v permalink
October 14, 2012 9:46 pm
[Maybe under a full reserve banking, but the video is describing the current
fractional reserve banking system.]
Ron Paul does not advocate a fractional reserve banking system so the entire
premise of the video is disingenuous.
[We make a distinction between physical gold and gold-backed currencies]
100% backed, full reserve banking are the purest (most hardcore) form of
libertarianism/Austrian economics ideals….so what this blog is arguing about?
Anything less than that is false or “massaged” libertarianism/Austrian

ideology.
saturno_v permalink
October 14, 2012 9:47 pm
I concede that it may not be the most perfect system…but beats the alternatives
and what we have now by a long shot……
25.
October 14, 2012 6:42 am
A suggestion: doesn’t do any good to argue with people. Simply put out the
bibliographic or video evidence and let We The People discover for themselves. Our
duty as authors/researchers is to educate, not argue or preside over discontent. Takes
time away from morning tea. . . .
Reply
26.
October 14, 2012 8:54 am
By the way, in my latest book, Who Really Owns Your Gold, I do in fact offer a
laundry list of suggestions for how to counter the powers that be, not to mention arm
yourselves with proper knowledge and intel.
http://adagiopress.com
Reply
o
October 14, 2012 9:06 am
Thank you for your insights and for visiting this blog.
27.
Dave Scotese permalink
October 15, 2012 11:34 pm
Hi Daily Knell,
I wanted a copy of the conversation you used in the video at

https://thedailyknell.wordpress.com/2012/10/13/video-a-street-conversation-between-
a-ron-paul-fan-and-the-daily-knell/. Is that available?
You argue that “the power elite” hold all the … stuff we could use as commodity
money … and therefore using it as money just keeps the power in their hands. I see
three options: 1) we allow them to fritter it away (if they are as unproductive as I
imagine), 2) we take it from them by force, or 3) we let them keep it. Do you see a
fourth option?
When paper money is backed by gold, the “interest” is paid by the owner of the gold
to protect that gold from being stolen. Holding wealth has a cost, and you’re calling
that interest. The main problem with debt-backed currency is not that its users have to
pay interest, but that the interest can never be fully paid because the currency cannot
be created except by borrowing. The “interest” (protection fee) on gold-backed
currency would be payable in gold, which you can get from the earth with hard work –
just like food and shelter.
Your failure to convince me and others here seems to stem not from a lack of
understanding on either side, but from an unwillingness to perceive what is hidden.
Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt may help – most Austrians are already
quite familiar with it. For example “money power” is never static. It dwindles as it is
used. Your arguments seem to contain the premise that it is static.
Reply
o
October 16, 2012 5:15 pm
Hi Dave, Memehunter will provide you with the text.
the idea that ‘the holder of money pays interest’ is one of these sly wordgames
that economists are famous for and which have not other aim than to obscure.
Obviously this aim is achieved. In this particular instance, they are suggesting
(but not explicitly stating) it is the borrower that holds the money. Also
observe the important distinction between HOLD and OWN.
The holder of money only pays interest when borrows it, not when he owns it.
This, of course, is the crucial distinction. The owner of money NEVER pays
interest. He RECEIVES interest, when he lends it out.
The borrower pays and the lender receives. ‘Holding’ money as such has
nothing to do with it and this word, as noted, serves only to hide the truth.
The fact is that it is the rich that lend and the poor that borrow. The total
wealth transfer from poor to rich globally through usury is anywhere between a
cool 5 and 10 trillion per year.
This is the stone cold fact facing us. Not being ‘convinced’ is usally connected
with not being aware of this piece of data.
Another problem is, that even you have not a dime in debt, you still lose 45%
of your disposable assets to interest passed on by producers (who go into debt
to invest) in prices.
Many in the interest free community tend to stress what you mention also:
there is not enough money to repay principal plus interest ,but as you can see
the problem is far, far bigger.
I don’t have the slightest idea what you mean with ‘money power dwindles
when used’ and that it is thus ‘dynamic’. I’d be interested in some more
insights into this notion, but I guess you’d have to explain away the fact that
the current bunch ruling the planet through control of the Money Supply have
been at it for ages. If not millennia.
October 16, 2012 8:23 pm
Here is the text of the dialogue:

Libertarian sympathizer: Hi, I just found your blog the Daily Knell and read
some articles. Interesting stuff.
Daily Knell blogger: Thanks.
LS: But I don’t get it. Why do you say that Ron Paul and the Libertarian
movement are controlled by the elites when they are against central banking
and fiat money?
DK: Austrians always talk about “central bank printing”. But did you know
that 97% of the money supply is created by commercial banks, not by central
banks.
LS: Really?
DK: Yes, check it out.
LS: Still, Ron Paul is right to talk about using precious metals as a basis for a
sound currency.
DK: Well, who do you think owns most of the gold?
LS: Ummm, I guess the central banks. They have thousands of tons in their
vaults.
DK: Correct.
LS: Probably some of these elite Money Power families as well.
DK: That’s right. Then why would these people be afraid of going back to a
gold-based currency?
LS: Well, they cannot create money so easily if it is based on a commodity.
DK: True. But if we are talking about a gold standard, or a gold-backed
currency, then they can print a lot of paper notes, a lot more than is actually
backed by metal. After all, this is why goldsmiths created gold receipts in the
first place. The gold stays in the vaults, and the paper circulates. Think about
it. Also, the one thing that both Austrians and mainstream economists have in
common is that they both think that it is legitimate for banks to collect interest
on loans.
LS: Well, what’s wrong with that? Banks are lending their own capital. They
are taking a risk and should be compensated.
DK: In our current system, loans are created out of thin air, the minute the
borrower agrees to the contract. Most credit is created by commercial banks
that way.
LS: Well, duh, that’s why Austrians want us to go back to sound money, so
that these banksters can’t create it from nothing like they are doing now.
DK: OK. But what is the difference when you borrow money under a gold
standard? The bank can still print more paper than is backed by their actual
gold reserves. It’s true that maybe they would have to be more careful if they
cannot be bailed out by a central bank. But do you really think it is better that
the money supply is under the control of the elites who hoard most of the gold,
or that gold miners can influence the money supply so much?
LS: Well, everybody is free to go and start digging their gold.
DK: Are you sure that this is the best way to keep everyone busy? Maybe
increasing the quantity of gold available overground should not be the grand
goal of humanity. Let’s forget about the Annunaki fantasies.
LS: What are you talking about? Anyway, many Austrians want a free market
for currencies. They are not forcing us to use gold.
DK: The problem with the Austrians’ free market is that what they are really
proposing is the law of the jungle. Who do you think will win in their free
market? It’s obvious that the Money Power elites have a huge advantage. They
will just prevail over everyone else with their gold-backed currency and you
will end up having to dig gold to reimburse your interest charges.
LS: No one has to borrow money.
DK: Actually, money is issued as interest-bearing debt-based currency, and
must first be borrowed into existence. To pay the interest costs, the borrower
must raise his prices. Therefore, the interest costs are indirectly transferred to
the entire society.
LS: You are describing the current fiat money system. That’s not what
Austrians and Libertarians propose. Also, some Austrians are against fractional
reserve banking.
DK: Well, the gold-backed currency of the Austrians will still carry interest,
right? And it still must be borrowed into existence, right?
LS: Hmm, I’m not sure. They don’t really talk a lot about how their private
currencies are issued. But I guess you are right.
DK: Then the bankers will end up owning everything in the long run, or having
everyone working for them. It does not matter if we are talking about paper,
gold, fiat money issued by the government, or a gold-backed currency issued
by private banks.Even under a full-reserve banking system, the bankers would
end up owning everything in the long run, although it would take longer.
LS: So you are saying that the bankers always win in the end?
DK: As long as the currency must be borrowed into existence with interest
charges, yes.
LS: So they don’t care whether it’s gold or paper?
DK: It doesn’t matter that much to them. Even under the Gold standard,credit
created by commercial banks was the most important form of money.
LS: Interesting, I didn’t know that. How about central banking versus private
banks?
DK: That’s a good question. See, Libertarians and Austrians are against big
government. The bankers don’t like that government still has the power to
create money. They would prefer to keep it all for themselves. Also, we know
that Western-style democracy is a sham, but still a government is in theory
accountable to its citizens. But private banks? Not so much.
LS: I still don’t get it. You don’t see Ron Paul or Libertarianism in the
mainstream a lot. If the elites wanted to promote their ideas, we should see
them a lot more, no?
DK: The thing is, the elites always work both sides. They know that there will
always be people who will see through the system, so they try to make sure
that they catch them before they can escape the matrix. That’s why there is
always a mainstream side and an alternative side. See, I’m not just talking
about the two-party system. They also control the gold versus paper dialectic:
they win anyway as long as we have to borrow our money from them and we
have to pay interest on it. Even more, they have been on top of the Libertarian
versus Communist dialectic for centuries. They even try to control the
government versus no government dialectic.
LS: You want to tell me that Ludwig von Mises worked for the elites? Murray
Rothbard? Ron Paul? Come on…
DK: Actually, that’s true. Mises was funded by the Rockefeller and indirectly
by Bernard Baruch, an agent of the Rothschild. Rothbard was sponsored by the
Volker fund, and the Rockefeller were behind that outlet as well. Ron Paul is
backed by Peter Thiel, a top Bilderberger. You can’t get a lot more elite than
that. Check it out. It’s all online, on the Daily Knell and elsewhere. Oh, and did
you know that most of the Libertarian media outlets are controlled by one
company?
LS: No. Which company?
DK: It’s a big financial conglomerate called Agora. They are behind most of
the free-market websites and hard-money newsletters you see nowadays. By
the way, Agora was founded by Lord William Rees-Mogg and James Dale
Davidson. Did you know that Rees-Mogg was also on the governing council of
the BBC for a long time?
LS: The BBC? You mean that the exact same people who are controlling the
mainstream media are also controlling the Libertarian movement?
DK: Correct.
LS: Hmm. That’s crazy. Well, maybe you are onto something after all. When I
first read your articles, I thought that you were just another bunch of statists
trying to promote fiat money and central banks. Now, I see that it is more
complex than that.
DK: Exactly. We are exposing the Libertarian propaganda and their
connections to Money Power, but that does not mean that we are in favor of
big government, or central banks, or fiat money. We just want people to start
thinking for themselves. We want to help them escape the elite dialectic.
LS: Wow, my head is spinning. That’s a lot to think about.
DK: Take your time.
LS: Well, thanks for the conversation. I think I might visit your blog again. I’m
still not sure I agree with you, but it’s good to hear a different viewpoint.
DK: You’re welcome.
Wood permalink
November 30, 2014 3:01 pm
I actually found this more enrnttaieing than James Joyce.
28.
Tony Ryals permalink
I only happened to come across your blog by a chance Google search and – I LIKE IT
!
Speaking of Lard William Rees-Mogg and BBC pedophiles such as the recently
exposed Jimmy Savile,it should be noted that David Marchant of the old
offshorebusiness.com or kyc website did an article some years back that must still be
available on his pay per view ‘service’ regarding the Lard William Rees-Mogg who
is,as you’ve pointed out,involved with CIA connected stock fraudsters and money
launderers of Agora Inc.,Baltimore and world wide internet,that named a publishing
company Mogg was involved with that promoted prostitution and, I believe, child
pornography in Eastern European countries.I posted a part of that article but can’t
seem to find it and the site it was on disappeared it.I would contact Marchant for
another copy since the one I posted on the Genemax’s ragingbull.com penny stock
promotion board has somehow disappeared but unfortunately Mr.Marchant went
berserkers and attacked me on his website and deleted a number of my posts several
years ago just before shutting his entire public message board site down.
Still he now has most of my old comments-posts online.
For the very reason that the Lard Rees-Mogg’s Agora Inc financial crime partner and
co-publisher, James Dale Davidson who, as you know,is founder of both Agora Inc as
well as the NTU or National Taxpayers,(or tax dodgers), Union in Alexandria,
Virginia has made so much effort in recent years to spread the rumor that he is married
to a ‘Miss Brazil’,(whose name he doesn’t mention),I have wondered if this was a
cover particularly because it appears an ex Maryland congressman who is part of their
crime family was involved in a homosexual pedophilia scandal,in the 1980’s,I have
have suspected that whole group to be possible pedophiles.
As an aside it may be that Agora Inc of Baltimore also has a Rothschild connection
not only because the Lard Rees-Mogg is very Rothschild connected but also because
of various companies I have recently come across with Rothschild connections that
also use ‘Agora’ as their title as does an Norway connected offshore oil company
recently sold by a Rothschild concern.I am suspicious that Agora S.A. that owns the
largest newspaper in Poland may also have a connection to either Agora Baltimore or
Agora Rothschild or, of course,both.
You are so correct about gold and how outrageous of these so called ‘libertarians’ who
complain so about government intervention to actually want government to insure
their own gold speculations by backing it ! If they could ONLY back their own
currencies !Better to give welfare to the needy than for government to insure the price
of gold for the wealthy !
And in light of Ron Paul’s Gold Corp investments,he should be paying restitution to
the Maya people of Guatemala for the rape of their land that would not be
economically
viable mining had not the elites touted gold ‘o da monn’ like so many worthless penny
stocks they have also pumped and dumped.Uh,and speaking of Ron Paul or whoever
he is,who claims his grandfather came from Germany – well it recently occured to me
the
‘Paul’ is NOT exactly a German name.So that begs the question of what was his
grandfather REAL name when he arrived in America ?
And finally,thanks or pointing out Ludwig Von Mises’ Rothschild connections which
is what I suspected.I will return and read more asap.Also a while back James Dale
Davidson’s replacement to head the NTU or National Taxpayers Union in Alexandria,
Virginia died mysteriously and the only,uh,explanation I ever found was that some
uinidentified NTU employees or whatever found him ‘in peace’ at his residence.Do
you have any idea what would of caused to to die ‘in peace’ ?
http://www.agoracorp.com/
Founded in 2004 by senior bankers Rothschild office in Colombia, Agora has advised
major Colombian companies, multinationals and government of Colombia in a high
number of complex transactions.
In the last five years has advised sellers, buyers and potential investors in many of the
most important transactions in the Colombian market, including the merger of the
Terpel with Terpel Antioquia, Terpel Bucaramanga, Terpel North Terpel Terpel West
and South, the sale 13.4% of Banco Popular, selling Granbanco in merger and Gazel
Terpel Organization (formerly GNC), the purchase of Carulla Vivero, buying Éxito
control, selling Fenoco, the El Dorado airport concession The valuation for regulatory
purposes of EPSA, CETSA, Bancolombia, and Conavi Corfinsura, Sidelpa Pavco and
Diaco, the acquisition by Terpel service station in Ecuador and Panama, among others.
In recent years, Agora has been among the first investment banks in M & Colombia.
See Money magazine ranking
Agora S.A. – Polish media company

http://www.agora.pl/agora_english/0,0.html
Newspapers. Agora publishes „Gazeta Wyborcza” – the largest opinion making
newspaper in Poland, “Metro” – the largest free newspaper in Poland and popular …
Reply
29.
rob permalink
February 18, 2015 8:40 am
Nonsense. Most of these people cited aren’t even pledged Libertarians. For more on
world Libertarians see http://www.libertarianinternational.org
Reply
30.
ey.tsujimoto permalink
March 22, 2016 5:22 pm
Your research was an eye- opener for me. I have read many articles from most of the
men you have mentioned. Thank you so much for all you have done. There is one
economist/lawyer /advisor to governments, including CIA, etc. that was not
mentioned. His name is James Rickards. Is he another one who is related or connected
to the Elites??? ey.tsujimoto@gmail.com
The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism
February 21, 2012
by Memehunter
(left, Ignatius Loyala, the Marrano Jew who founded the

Jesuit Order.)
The Jesuits were never true Catholics. Jesuits are part of a long-term Illuminati Jewish
plot to infiltrate and subvert Catholicism from within, even though most Jesuits are
probably not aware of it.
Indeed, Lew Rockwell is right: the Salamancan Jesuits, AKA the Illuminati, were
behind modern Libertarianism.
for Henry Makow and Real Currencies
In a reply to Proof Libertarianism is an Illuminati ploy, in which Anthony Migchels pointed

to the Jewish money behind Austrian Economics, the Daily Bell noted that many prominent
current Libertarians were Catholics, including Lew Rockwell, Pat Buchanan, Thomas Woods,
and Justin Raimondo.
That may be true, but it does not refute the dominant Jewish character of Libertarianism.
Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Ayn Rand were Jewish. Professor Martha Steffy
Browne, a member of Mises’ private seminar on economics in Vienna, noted that 23 out of 29
attendees were of Jewish descent.
Jesuits AKA Illuminati

However, it is ironic that both the Daily Bell and Gary North attempted to ridicule our claim
that Libertarianism was an Illuminati ploy.
Why? Because Lew Rockwell himself, the founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute,
actually identified the Spanish Jesuits associated with the University of Salamanca as the
founders of modern “free-market” thinking.
Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuit Order and himself a student at Salamanca, was linked
to the Alumbrados, the precursors of the modern Illuminati. Loyola was also a Marrano, a
converted Jew.
The Jesuits were never true Catholics. Jesuits are part of a long-term Illuminati Jewish plot to
infiltrate and subvert Catholicism from within, even though most Jesuits are probably not
aware of it.
Indeed, Rockwell is right: the Salamancan Jesuits, AKA the Illuminati, were behind modern
Libertarianism. More than that: Austrian economics descend in a straight line from the ideas
of the Alumbrados. Carl Menger, the founder of the Austrian School, was strongly influenced
by the Salamancan Jesuits and quoted them in his Principles of Economics.
Zionists, Jesuits, Illuminati: all in it together?

Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, studied political economy with Menger, and
law with his brother Anton Menger, at the University of Vienna.
The House of Habsburg, one of the most powerful Black Nobility families, was closely
associated with Austrian economists. Carl Menger was the personal tutor of Archduke Rudolf
von Habsburg and accompanied him in his travels for three years.
Ludwig von Mises was one of the closest economic advisors to Otto von Habsburg, head of
the Habsburg dynasty and co-founder, with arch-Zionist Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, of the
Pan-Europa Movement which promoted a unified Europe as early as 1923.
Later, Mises worked with Coudenhove-Kalergi, who studied at the Jesuit-controlled

Theresianum in Vienna and whose father was a close friend of Herzl.
From the very beginning, Illuminati elites have supported Libertarianism from behind the
scenes, and they continue to do so today. As shown in “Proof Libertarianism is an Illuminati
Ploy”, the ultra-wealthy Zionist Koch family founded both the Catholic-friendly John Birch
Society and the Libertarian CATO Institute. Both groups endorse Austrian economics. The
Koch brothers are also heavily involved in the Tea Party. Perennial Libertarian candidate Ron
Paul is sponsored by business magnate Peter Thiel, a member of the steering committee of the
Bilderberg Group.
Jesuits and Libertarianism today

The association between Jesuits and Austrian economics is still going strong. Universities
with a significant Austrian presence are all controlled by Jesuits or by Freemasonry: George
Mason University, which hosted the first “academic” Freemason lodge in Virginia, Loyola
University, and Auburn University, which was originally known as “Alabama Masonic
College”. The Ludwig von Mises Institute is also located in Auburn, Alabama.
“Catholic” Libertarian Pat Buchanan, a Knight of Malta, attended Jesuit-run Gonzaga College
High School and Jesuit hotbed Georgetown University.
“Catholic” Austrian scholar Thomas Woods has struggled mightily to justify the Austrian
School’s endorsement of usury, which goes against authentic Catholic teachings. Woods
supported his position by quoting Jesuit theologian Leonard Lessius (1554-1623), who, in his
words, “played a significant role in eroding the interest prohibition.”
What is wrong with Libertarianism?
Libertarianism emphasizes individual freedom, but fails to recognize that humans are social
beings, not isolated individuals. Self-interest reigns supreme for libertarians, but there is no
room for social justice.
Although informed by “Catholic” Jesuit doctrines, Austrian economics accepts and even
justifies usury, which is contrary to the following Bible verses: Psalm 15:5, Exodus 22:25,
and Leviticus 25:36-37. Another Bible verse, Deuteronomy 23:20, states that “you may
charge a foreigner interest, but not an Israelite”.
Meanwhile, the Austrian crowd has no problem calling for deflation. In fact, Austrians deny
that their coveted Gold Standard is as deflationary as can be. They blame the State for
everything but ignore Money Power. They refuse to see that Gold has been under the control
of Money Power for centuries. Worse, they sell their specie by professing unabashedly that
‘Bankers hate Gold’.
Communism and Libertarianism: a 500-year old Illuminati dialectic

Of course, the same Jesuits AKA Illuminati who concocted Libertarianism also perfected the
system of reductions, a sort of proto-Communism, in 17th-century Paraguay. These same
Jesuits later taught Karl Marx, another Jew.
Libertarianism and Communism are the two poles of a 500-year old Illuminati dialectic, with
extreme individualism, exemplified by Rand’s “virtuous selfishness”, at one end, and extreme
collectivism, encapsulated by Marx’s “From each according to his abilities, to each according
to his needs”, at the other end.
The Illuminati dialectic leaves no room for a middle ground, for a balance between
individualism and collectivism, between anarchy and totalitarianism. This is the trap that they
have set up for us.
It is no surprise that Jesuits and the Illuminati have been banned from several countries over
the last few centuries. What is surprising is that we have forgotten how dangerous their
ideologies can be, and how far they can lead us away from true freedom and happiness.
Special thanks to Anthony Migchels
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
Debunking Tom Woods’ “Catholic” Austrian economicsIn "Austrian Economics"

"Libertarianism"
The Satanic Core of LibertarianismIn "Austrian Economics"
from → Austrian Economics, Daily Bell, Gold, Interest and Usury, Libertarianism, Phony dialectics
← How the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian Economics
The Satanic Core of Libertarianism →
1.
skullnboner permalink
September 19, 2012 9:44 pm
Reblogged this on Skullnboner's Blog.
Reply
2.
Jose B permalink
July 9, 2014 1:10 am
He’s SAINT Ignatius of Loyola. And among the Jesuits there were Saint Francis
Xavier, Saint Peter Canisius, Saint Peter Faber, Saint Edmund Campion, Saint
ALOYSIUS GONZAGA and Saint Robert BELLARMINE, and lots of other saintly
men.
The Society of Jesus evangelized much of the Americas, Africa and Asia. And what
did you do? The Jesuits ARE Catholics. You are a bunch of crazy conspirationists.
Reply
WScottT permalink
October 20, 2015 3:12 am
CONTRAIRE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/30408550/Quotes-About-the-
Jesuit-Order-From-Famous-People#scribd
3.
WScottT permalink
October 20, 2015 2:58 am
INTERESTING… I think you need to also “add- in” the “European Esoteric
Masonry” hierarchy ABOVE the so- called Jesuits (descended from the Spanish
“Order of Montessa” and prior Knights Templar and also Black nobility lineages)
which are the “IHS.” (= Isis > Horus < Set) that run the modern Roman created
empire, under the modern "three city state" of Vatican City, the City of London and
Washington DC… using Roman Canon (Law of the Land) and Maritime Admiralty
(Law of the Sea) along with UCC, et al to control and deceive the masses, worldwide.
(Firstly via the Romans, then their Germanic conquerors, then using 150+ ROMAN
"RCC Concordat agreements," and today via 194+ "United Nation" countries and
territories, ALL CONTROLLED by the IHS, Monarchies, the network of Crown
Livery companies, central (Aragon Templar) banks and extended " Crown Empire…"
which also controls Protestantism, and Sunni Islam, etc. BTW: My great grandfather
was a BOTH a 33rd "Scottish Rite" and also a Knights Templar "York Rite"
Freemason, Red Cross of Constantine and an (Anglican) Episcopal bishop, of Scottish
and English descendancy… and it says "IHS" in the center of his tombstone. (So do
the math!)
Debunking Tom Woods’ “Catholic”
Austrian economics
October 21, 2012
by Memehunter
Father James Sadowsky, the Jesuit “grey eminence” behind Murray Rothbard and Tom
Woods
By all appearances, Thomas Woods Jr., a noted promoter of the “Catholic” strand of
Austrian economics, is being groomed as the heir apparent to Lew Rockwell in the
Libertarian propaganda network. Given Woods’ increasing role and visibility, his
background and ideas deserve to be explored further, and the contradictions between
the Catholic doctrine and Austrian economics need to be exposed.
As documented in The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism, the Jesuits’ involvement in the

Libertarian-Communist false dialectic is nothing new, and has in fact been ongoing for
several centuries. In fact, according to Mises Institute’s founder Lew Rockwell, the Spanish
Jesuits of the University of Salamanca were the founders of modern “free-market” thinking.
Not surprisingly, Jesuits are also behind several of the Austrian think-tanks and propaganda
outlets that have sprouted all over America in the last century.
While the Jesuits’ involvement with education and intellectual life may be laudable in some
respects, many readers will no doubt be aware that the Jesuits occupy a significant position in
the globalist elite’s hierarchy, and that their ideologies and goals often differ substantially
from those associated with the traditional Catholic doctrine. In fact, as I wrote in The
“Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism, Jesuits are likely part of a long-term Illuminati plot to
“infiltrate and subvert Catholicism from within”.
Clearly, Thomas Woods Jr. is being positioned to slowly take over Rockwell and continue
this dubious tradition of “Catholic” Austrian economics. In fact, Woods has devoted a
considerable part of his output to justifying the “free market” from a “Catholic” perspective
(see for instance The Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy).
However, there are apparently indissoluble differences between the Catholic and Austrian
perspectives, and Woods, despite his scholarship and clever arguments, has not been able to
avoid them entirely. In this article, we will first expose Woods’ connections to the Jesuit
hierarchy as well as to other “controlled opposition” movements, before discussing some of
the contradictions inherent in his intellectual positions.
Father James Sadowsky, SJ: the éminence grise behind Rothbard and Woods
The term “éminence grise” (grey eminence) was first used to describe a French monk who
advised Cardinal Richelieu behind the scenes. The tradition continues today with Jesuit priests
discreetly advising and guiding academics who are then charged of disseminating their ideas
to an unsuspecting public.
One such grey eminence was Father James Sadowsky (1923-2012), who taught at Fordham
University for 38 years. Sadowsky, a co-president of the International Philosophy Quarterly
and a member of the Mont Pèlerin Society, was no run-of-the-mill Jesuit: while he was
teaching in Beirut (prior to his appointment at Fordham), one of his students was Peter-Hans
Kolvenbach who later became the General Superior of the Jesuits and, according to some
alternative researchers, one of the most powerful men on the planet.
Sadowsky, described as an “anarcho-catholic priest”, was a close friend of Murray Rothbard

from the early 1960s until Rothbard’s death. While we are told that Sadowsky and Rothbard
mutually influenced each other and did not always agree on everything, it is reasonable to
suspect that Sadowsky was behind many of Rothbard’s ideas, given what we know of the
Jesuits’ modus operandi.
Sadowsky likely exerted a major influence on Woods as well: Woods cited Sadowsky’s
writings several times in The Church and the Market and openly sought to acknowledge
Sadowsky’s contribution to his book.
Besides the questionable Jesuit infiltration of the Catholic doctrine, it is important to

document Woods’ and Rothbard’s connections with Sadowsky as this corroborates the
evidence already presented on this blog and elsewhere regarding the Jesuits’ centuries-old
campaign for the acceptance of usury in Catholic countries, as well as their unremitting role in
fanning the flames of the Libertarian-Communist dialectic.
Woods’ ties to the John Birch Society
I have already shown how the John Birch Society was part of an operation orchestrated by
Rothschild and Rockefeller operatives to channel the anti-Communist movement into an
essentially harmless organization entirely under the control of the Money Power elites. As
such, members and affiliates of the John Birch Society can generally be regarded as
gatekeepers who may be telling the truth on many topics, but who generally remain silent on
Freemasonry, Zionism, or the Jesuits’ involvement in the elites’ plans for a global takeover. A
notable example is G. Edward Griffin.
Unlike Griffin, Woods does not seem to be openly affiliated with the JBS, so we do not know
whether he is a bona fide member of the organization (perhaps some better-informed readers
can confirm this). However, we know that Woods has given numerous speeches at JBS-
sponsored conventions, and videos of his speeches and interviews are available on the JBS
website. This strongly suggests that, knowingly or not, Woods is associated with an
organization that fits the “controlled opposition” label to a T.
Woods’ cognitive dissonances on government, usury, and the Church
Can one denounce government and “statism” and at the same time be a faithful Christian?
Although we are not necessarily in favor of “big government” here at the Daily Knell, we also
do not claim to strictly follow religious edicts. However, the following passage from Paul’s
Letter to the Romans is a seemingly insoluble dilemma for any minarchist or anarcho-
capitalist Libertarian who claims to follow the Bible:
“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from
God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists
authority resists what God has appointed and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers
are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. […] For the same reason you also pay taxes, for
the authorities are God’s servants, busy with this very thing. Pay to all what is due to them –
taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is
due, honour to whom honour is due.”
As noted by this blogger, “it seems very difficult to reconcile Christianity with any kind of
anti-state ideology, left or right”.
Usury is another fundamental point of dissent between the Catholic and Austrian doctrines.
As I pointed out in my earlier article, “Woods has struggled mightily to justify the Austrian
School’s endorsement of usury which goes against authentic Catholic teachings”. In fact,
Woods resorted to quoting a Jesuit, Leonard Lessius (1554-1623), who “played a significant
role in eroding the interest prohibition”, to wiggle himself out of this uncomfortable position.
The plain truth is that it is impossible to reconcile any form of usury with the Catholic
doctrine, as explained in this remarkable article by Anthony Santelli, a former student in
economics at George Mason University who reverted to Catholicism and came to the
conclusion that “all along it has been usury that lies at the root of many social ills.”
Finally, it is difficult to understand how Woods, as a practicing Catholic, can praise the work
of some of his Austrian predecessors such as Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises. Indeed,
Rothbard wrote at length about the Church’s hatred of liberalism, while the atheist Mises
claimed that Christianity had become a “religion of hatred”. Here, it may be relevant to note
that both Woods and his advisor Sadowsky are converts: Sadowsky was originally an
Anglican, whereas Woods was a Lutheran.
Conclusion
Like his mentor Rockwell, Woods’ role is to convince Catholics, and more generally “right-
wing” traditionalist Christians, that usury, along with the “free-market” anarcho-capitalist
utopia of Austrian economics and its Satanic core, are compatible with their religious beliefs.
This, of course, is a lie, as many writers have shown. In his attempts to defile Christian
precepts with Libertarian propaganda, while refusing to address the true causes of our social
and economic problems, Woods dutifully fulfills his role as a Jesuit-controlled gatekeeper.
Libertarian network chart:

See our new page where we will periodically update our chart depicting the networks
orchestrating the Libertarian propaganda. Recommended for new readers or if you need to
refresh your memory about the names and roles of the main Libertarian propagandists and
their elite handlers.
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
The "Catholic" Arm of LibertarianismIn "Austrian Economics"
The Satanic Core of LibertarianismIn "Austrian Economics"
from → Austrian Economics, Free market, Interest and Usury, Libertarianism, Phony dialectics
← Fighting Free Market Fundamentalism
The Mont Pèlerin Society: The ultimate neoliberal Trojan horse →
1.
October 21, 2012 2:51 pm

Reply
2.
Chili Boots permalink
October 22, 2012 7:09 am
“Paul”, to whom you referred, was Saul of Tarsus, marauding Murderer of Christians,
until he appointed himself the ’13th Apostle’ (there can be only 12). “The Charlatan”,
as he was called by both James, the Brother of Jesus, and Peter (2 REAL Apostles), is
the author of
the persuasion to never question authority, mentioned above. Jesus never said anything
resembling that. When asked about paying taxes, he dodged the question, and said to
pay
to Caesar what was due him. But, nothing is due him. Saul may be considered the very
first ‘Jesuit’. It is my unpopular contention that this is exactly what he was. His
doctrine is
at odds with Jesus’ words, not correlation.
Reply
October 22, 2012 7:12 am
Indeed, there are many questions surrounding Paul/Saul of Tarsus. The point
was that it is difficult to claim to follow the Bible and at the same time be
against government.
blkthorn permalink
October 25, 2012 3:10 am
Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it
shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on
him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this
parable against them.
20 And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves
just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him
unto the power and authority of the governor.
21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest
rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God
truly:
22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?
23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?
24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered
and said, Caesar’s.
25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be
Caesar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s.
26 And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they
marvelled at his answer, and held their peace.
(Saul of Tarsus, marauding Murderer of Christians, until he appointed himself

the ’13th Apostle’) Sorry saul did not apoint his self as an aposite. GOD does
that.
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why
persecutest thou me?
Acts 9:8 KJV
And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened , he saw no
man: but they led him by the hand , and brought him into Damascus.
Acts 9:11 KJV
And the Lord (GOD) said unto him, Arise , and go into the street which is
called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of
Tarsus: for, behold , he prayeth
Acts 9:17 KJV
And Ananias went his way , and entered into the house; and putting his hands
on him said , Brother Saul, the Lord, (GOD) even Jesus , ( Emmanuel, which
being interpreted is, God with us.) that appeared unto thee in the way as thou
camest , hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight , and be filled with
the Holy Ghost.
3.

The problem with articles like this one is that it deals mostly with the symptoms of the
disease and not the disease itself.
Austrian economics has always been Jesuit economics. Period.
Since the mid 1500s, the Jesuits have infiltrated every single country on the planet,
taken control over dictators, monarchs and presidents, subjugated the rights of We The
People, installed privately owned central banks that drain We The People’s hard-
earned money (in the form of illegal personal income taxes), and controlled the entire
economy of each country and state.
Brilliant work!
So it doesn’t matter whether this guy Woods will replace so-and-so, because . . . meet
the boss, same as the old boss. The new guy just toes the line that is laid down by the
Jesuits, even if it may be Sadowsky. But, then again, Sadowsky has a Jesuit boss with
an agenda that was established perhaps 50-100 years ago with some modifications
over the decades.
Cheers,
William Dean A. Garner
NY Times bestselling ghostwriter/editor
Author of Who Really Owns Your Gold: The Intended Global Meltdown of 2012-
2014
http://williamdeanagarner.com
http://adagiopress.com
Reply
4.
Iakovos Alhadeff permalink
February 24, 2014 10:35 pm
The Socialist Myth of the Greedy Banker & the Gold Standard
http://iakal.wordpress.com/2014/02/24/the-socialist-myth-of-the-greedy-banker-the-
gold-standard/
The Daily Bell hoax?
September 16, 2012
by Memehunter
In this article, Memehunter explores the murky underworld of the

Libertarian movement, in the wake of blogger Lila Rajiva’s stunning revelations about
the “long-standing relationship” between Ron Paul and the founder of financial
behemoth Agora Inc., with which the well-known libertarian website The Daily Bell is
affiliated. The ramifications of the partnership between the Daily Bell, known for its
strident “gold bug” mindset, and gold mining concern Dicon Gold Inc. are also
discussed.
The Daily Bell, a leading libertarian website known as much for its staunch support of
Austrian economics as for its strident “gold bug” mindset, recently featured an article entitled
“The Ron Paul Hoax?” which attempted to defend Ron Paul’s reputation in the wake of a
series of articles on Clint Richardson’s Reality Blog showing Paul to be essentially nothing
more than a fraud. Although the Bell admits to having doubts about the efficacy of Paul’s
“Audit the Fed” legislation, they refuse to believe that Paul himself is a fraud. Of course, one
may wonder how much evidence the Bell and its supporters will need before accepting the
truth.
But more importantly, this unshakeable belief in Ron Paul as “the world’s only apparently
honest politician” (no less!) strikes one as an inscrutable paradox in the face of these recent
revelations about Paul’s character, especially coming from an anarcho-capitalist website that
purports to denounce party politics, Western-style democracy, and the institution of
government in general.
Ron Paul and the Agora Empire
One clue to this enigma has recently been provided by blogger Lila Rajiva, co-author with
William Bonner (president of the publishing company Agora Inc.) of the bestseller Mobs,
Messiahs, and Markets, and herself a libertarian sympathizer. In a scathing article, Rajiva
revealed that the Daily Bell is closely associated with the Agora network, a large
conglomerate known for its financial newsletters promoting “get-rich-quick” schemes and
assorted penny stocks, all the while touting bogus “free markets” and Austrian faux
economics.
Some of the numerous Agora affiliates and alternate business names include the Daily
Reckoning, the Oxford Club, International Living, Penny Sleuth, Whiskey & Gunpowder,
Doug Casey’s International Speculator, Gary North’s Remnant Review, as well as Laissez-
Faire Books, a leading libertarian bookseller. In fact, according to Rajiva, the Agora network
and its executives Bonner and Addison Wiggin hold sway over most of the libertarian circles
in the West.
Agora also appears to have ties with the Rockefeller dynasty via Peter G. Peterson, longtime
chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations and chief backer of the film “IOUSA”, whose
content was inspired by Bonner and Wiggin’s book Empire of Debt. Going even deeper,
Rajiva finds all kinds of shady characters associated with Agora, including ex-CIA director
William Colby and Le Cercle member Lord Rees-Mogg, a close associate of the Rothschilds.
But the real stunner was Rajiva’s disclosure that Ron Paul had “a long-standing relationship”
with Agora founder James Davidson, via Murray Rothbard. Perhaps not surprisingly, Agora
and its affiliates, including the Daily Bell, have until recently been indefatigable promoters of
Paul’s political platform. However, the Daily Bell has never mentioned its ties to Agora,
which would obviously throw into question the Bell’s credibility as an impartial observer of
the political and financial scene.
“Private gold-backed currencies” and Colombian gold mines
Another reason why the Daily Bell, itself an ardent promoter of privately gold-backed
currencies, is enraptured with Paul’s unremitting advocacy of the gold standard could be that
the directors of the Bell have a vested interest in a return to a gold standard, and more
generally a larger role for gold and silver as circulating currencies. Indeed, as Diana Zoppa,
an advisor to the Daily Bell, acknowledged in an interview with Kerry Lutz of the Financial
Survival Network, Zoppa’s hiring by the Daily Bell was facilitated by the existence of a
business partnership between the directors of the Bell and Zoppa’s husband, Shawn Perger,
owner of a gold-mining company called Dicon Gold Inc., whose main assets are found in
Colombia.
This partnership seems to have been a very close one because Perger and Zoppa apparently
followed Daily Bell founder Anthony Wile and moved to Switzerland (the Daily Bell’s home
base until recently) for a few years. We also learn from the Daily Bell that Perger and his
team “have built deep social relationships with the wealthier and more private Colombian
families who have held the ownership rights of some very attractive gold projects”.
Coincidentally or not, the Daily Bell has been, of late, very vocal in its support of former
Colombian president Alvaro Uribe’s pro-business administration and “free-market strategies”,
and has even established an “on-the-ground editorial presence” in Colombia.
Conclusion
As with most of the alternative media, the Daily Bell does play an important role in opening
the eyes of “red pill” newcomers who are exposed for the first time to a non-mainstream view
of politics and economics. The Bell has not been afraid to tackle controversial issues,
including questioning the veracity of the official accounts of the Apollo XIII mission and of
Osama bin Laden’s death. Nevertheless, the Bell’s refusal to address the issue of usury, its
blatant dismissal of the Zionist role in the New World Order conspiracy, coupled with its
relentless pro-gold and pro-Paul propaganda, are symptomatic of a larger malaise in the
alternative media. It is time for dedicated truthseekers to move past these gatekeepers and
their phony dialectic, in order to continue their quest for real alternatives and authentic
solutions to the monetary, political, and spiritual issues of our age.
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
Reply to the Daily Bell: Gold porn, lies, and misrepresentationsIn "Agora Inc."
from → Agora Inc., Daily Bell, Gold, Libertarianism, Ron Paul
← Daily Bell, show us independent confirmation of your readership numbers, and then we’ll
believe you
Reply to the Daily Bell: Gold porn, lies, and misrepresentations →
1.
John permalink
PLEASE SEE http://www.still2012.com
Reply
2.
Reply
3.
Bob permalink
September 28, 2012 2:47 am
More weird stuff at The Daily Bell.
Ron Holland is promoting Uribe and Colombia with ex–CIA Mark Skousen (son of an
FBI agent and nephew of J Edgar Hoover FBI assistant Cleon Skousen) of Agora
Inc.’s Investment U.
http://www.mskousen.com/about/mark-skousen-biography/
http://www.investmentu.com/
Agora associate International Living (Katherine Peddicord) owns real estate and has
investments in Colombia.
http://money.msn.com/retirement-plan/10-exotic-retirement-spots-for-2011-
usnews.aspx?cp-documentid=26731158
Ron Holland partners with Lew Rockwell (see his bio and articles) in BIOLOGIX a
hair therapy business:
http://www.biologixhair.com/about-us/biologix-news/ron-holland-lew-rockwell-tibor-
machan-and-richard-ebeling-release-biologix-hair-inc-code-of-business-conduct/
Ron Holland is also listed at Agora and coordinates Freedom Festival with Skousen.
http://freedomfest.com/2011/freedomfest-cruise-2011/
Here is what one commenter noted about this:
posted by Fascist_Decapitator on 09/25/12 09:57 PM

Mr Holland is obviously uninformed observer.
Colombia has been in the banksters’ grip for almost a century. In 1948 Jorge Eliecer
Gaitan was the leader of Colombia and would have won the presidency had he not
been assasinated by the newly created CIA. From then on the banksters have sought
and succeeded in misinforming the population and have carried out a scorched earth
policyagainst Colombia.
In the 1960s the Rockefeller Foundation, the same one behind the eugenics program in
Germany out of which Mengele was spawned, was caught sterilizing colombians
against their will. Rockefeller owns Exxon Mobil which has vast oil interests in
Colombia. The Rockefeller where behind the ethnic cleansing in the 1920s in the US
where 27 states had forced sterilization laws enacted and which was immortalized by
that great jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes with the words’ ”
Three generations of imheciles is enough (STERILIZE THEM). The same Rockefeller

Foundation which funds the human genome project at Cold Spring laboratory in
Manhattan. In the 1970s, Rockefeller and Rothschild diabolical spawn Kissinger
ordered genocide against almost a dozen countries including Colombia in National
Security Study Memorandum 200. They, drug trafficking banksters who have been
trafficking drugs since the Opium Wars, which is where most of the great fortunes of
the “liberal establishment” in the US originated, founded the drug cartels.
George HW Bush was Pablo Escobar’s business partner. Alvaro Uribe was fingered as
his consiglieri and the 82nd most powerful drug trafficker in Colombia by the Defense
Intelligence Agency in the early 90s. His political campaigns have been financed since
the 1980s by Unitd Fruit Co, a company funded by the drug trafficking Coolidge
family and a CIA/Mossad bankster vehicle for drug trafficking since time
immemorial.
So, seventy percent of Colombains are poor because of the genocidal politics carried
out by scum like Santos and Uirbe and their predecessors which followed the orders of
the drug trafficking banksters regarding the prohibition against industrializing
Colombia. Then they brought in the drug trafficking into all that poverty so they could
ter the fabric of society, something thy have succeeded admirably in, and here we have
Ronny Holland calling the drug tacficking paramilitary and CIA mole Alvaro Urobe
the Reagan of Colombia. He betrays his ignorance by that statement because Reagan
was just a puppet of the banksters; GHWBush ran the (drug trafficking) show.
I hope you stay away from my country. We don’t want your ilk here. No wonder
people complain about this website being a farce.
Reply

September 28, 2012 6:13 am
Thank you for this very interesting comment. This confirms and expands our
findings about the Daily Bell.
4.
realitybloger permalink
As shocked as I was to find the Daily Bell attempting to debunk my undebunkable

research (verifiable facts, in other words) – and without providing the link for its
readers to actually read the research from me… I’m just as shocked and pleased as
punch that you spent the time to defend me here, and I just wanted to say thanks.
I love the part where the Bell states that because I’m anti-usury, I am likely like most
anti-usury individuals – and a part of some United Nations group. LOL! What
wonderfully delicious fallacy.
Kudos on your exposure of yet another controlled opposition.
-Clint Richardson-
Reply
Thanks for your comment and thanks for the work you do on Reality Blog!
5.
LibertyJusticeForAll permalink
April 3, 2013 3:43 am
What a bunch of nonsense…

An implication seems to be that organizations and/or individuals that are pushing for a
gold standard return would actually benefit monetarily. As soon as it were to occur,
the purchasing power of gold would drop drastically as the market would inevitably
move back to it, and likely in a rapid manner…especially considering the dollar’s
current and future dilemma.
There’s no hard (or soft) evidence that anything sinister is embodied in the libertarian
movement via the plain-speaking, honest, and unwavering Ron Paul, or the perfectly
sensible economic approach of the Austrians via the Mises Institute. The only thing
that’s sinister is what the establishment sees in it as such: an adversary that relies on
common sense, critical thinking, honesty, a keen understanding of history, and worst
of all: a return to true liberty.
No, there is a reason garbage like this needs to be written. And it’s because the truth is
becoming known once again, people are waking up to our actual past, people are sick
and tired of the lies of Keynesian economics, socialists, propaganda, fear-mongering,
and on and on. People see the blatant failure of central control at almost every turn,
and they see that WOW, the Founders actually knew what the heck they were doing
when they set this country up. People are taking back their local governments, getting
educated about the tactics of the enemy, and technology just doesn’t allow the truth to
be hidden anymore.
Reply
Martin permalink
June 3, 2014 2:08 am
Outstanding remarks. I would add that if TheDailyBell we’re looking to make

a profit, so what. Get your skirts off and start competing instead of crying.
The Mont Pèlerin Society: The ultimate
neoliberal Trojan horse
October 29, 2012
by Memehunter
Walter Lippmann, the American journalist and CFR co-founder whose ideas led to the birth of
the Mont Pèlerin Society
Far from being merely a “debate club”, the Mont Pèlerin Society is an elite globalist
organization that played a leading role in shaping the economic policies of several
countries and in creating numerous think-tanks devoted to propagating the theories of
the Chicago and Austrian schools of economics. In this article, Memehunter delves into
the origins and goals of the MPS, and analyzes its impact on postwar economic policies.
The globalist origins of the Mont Pèlerin Society: Lippmann, Rappard, and Rockefeller
money
Although the birth of the Mont Pèlerin Society (MPS) officially took place in 1947, its
conception can be traced back to 1938. Capitalizing on American journalist Walter
Lippmann’s visit to Paris, French right-wing philosopher Louis Rougier decided to organize a
“Walter Lippmann Colloquium” (WLC) that would build upon the ideas presented in
Lippmann’s recent book The Good Society and promote the neoliberal ideology that was
threatened by the emergence of fascist and communist regimes in Europe.
Lippmann (1889-1974), who came from an upper-class German-Jewish background, was

initially very influenced by the views of the Fabian Society: he was a founder and president of
the Harvard Socialist Club as a student. Soon, Lippmann began moving in elite circles.
Already in 1917, he was working with “colonel” Edward Mandell House as an advisor to
President Woodrow Wilson and participated in drafting the famous “Fourteen Points” speech.
Together with House, Lippmann was one of the founding members of the Council on Foreign
Relations. Lippmann, who viewed journalism as “intelligence work”, was very interested in
the manipulation of public opinion, as evidenced by his book by that same title published in
1922. His political views apparently changed in the 1930s, and he openly began discussing
liberalism as a viable alternative to socialism.
Upon hearing the news about Lippmann’s visit, Rougier, who already in 1934 had received a
grant from the Rockefeller Foundation to investigate totalitarianism in Central Europe,
contacted Swiss academic William Rappard to discuss a list of attendees for the colloquium.
Rappard, a hardcore globalist, had known both Lippmann and House for several years (he
taught at Harvard in 1911-12), and had been instrumental in convincing Wilson to choose
Geneva for the seat of the League of Nations in 1920. Rappard’s globalist achievements are
celebrated nowadays in the form of the Center William Rappard, the headquarters of the
World Trade Organization in Geneva.
Rappard was also the co-founder of the Graduate Institute for International Studies in Geneva.
The Institute for International Studies, which hosted several professors and visiting scholars
associated with the neoliberal or Austrian ideologies, such as Friedrich von Hayek, Ludwig
von Mises, Michael Heilperin, and Wilhelm Röpke, was almost entirely funded by the
Rockefeller Foundation. Not surprisingly, Rougier’s list of invitees to the WLC included, in
addition to the above-mentioned scholars, the name of Tracy B. Kittredge, a longtime trustee
of the Rockefeller Foundation.
As pointed out in The Road from Mont Pèlerin, the list of attendees to the WLC reads like a
who’s who of postwar economic and political prominence: we find a future Nobel Prize
(Hayek), the first general secretary of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation
(Robert Marjolin), De Gaulle’s financial adviser (Jacques Rueff), the director of the Bank of
International Settlements (Roger Auboin) and its manager (Marcel van Zeeland), Ronald
Reagan’s adviser on the Star Wars project (Stephan T. Possony), and a prominent French
philosopher (Raymond Aron), to name but a few.
From the Walter Lippmann Colloquium to the Mont Pèlerin Society
Although there were some dissensions between Austrian economists such as Mises and
“softer” neoliberals like Lippmann and German economist Alexander Rüstow, WLC
participants agreed on an agenda which would provide the cornerstone of the postwar
neoliberal propaganda. One of the fundamental tenets of this agenda was that “only the
mechanism by which prices are determined by the free market allows the optimal organization
of the means of production and leads to the maximal satisfaction of human needs”.
The WLC led to the creation of the “Society for the Renovation of Liberalism”, whose
activities were interrupted by the onset of World War II. Nevertheless, the seed was planted,
and as soon as the war ended, Hayek, Mises, Röpke and their colleagues devoted their
energies to creating a society that would further the neoliberal aims enunciated at the WLC.
This led in 1947 to the first meeting of the Mont Pèlerin Society in Switzerland, a reunion
which was sponsored by the Volker Fund, the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), and
most notably the multinational bank Credit Suisse, which paid 93% of the total conference
costs.
The continuity between the WLC and the MPS becomes obvious when one considers than 12
of the 26 participants to the WLC participated in the first meeting of the MPS, and another
four eventually joined. Moreover, it was the arch-globalist Rappard, who was at the center of
the WLC network, who gave the opening address of the first-ever MPS meeting.
From a modest gathering of 36 attendees in 1947, the MPS grew quickly to include 167
members in 1951, and 500 members by the late 1990s. Nevertheless, the MPS remained an
exclusive club whose members are co-opted and must generally first attend as guests.
The impact of the Mont Pèlerin Society on postwar economics and politics
Hayek’s goal was to mold the MPS into an intellectual meeting place which would help
disseminate the neoliberal agenda. He was keenly aware that ideas were more powerful in the
long run than politics, and he knew that the opinions of scholars carried more weight than
those of businessmen and bankers.
However, this should not be construed to mean that the MPS was merely a “debate club”. On
the contrary, MPS members often ended up occupying leading positions in their respective
countries, and ideas first enunciated behind closed doors at MPS meetings were eventually
disseminated to a wider public by think-tanks and journalists, and became official policies a
few decades later.
Chancellor Ludwig Erhard (West Germany), President Luigi Einaudi (Italy), Chairman of the
U.S. Federal Reserve Arthur Burns, Prime Minister Vaclav Klaus (Czech Republic) are
among the best-known examples of MPS members who later occupied prominent public
positions. In addition, no less than eight MPS members, including Hayek, Milton Friedman,
and George Stigler, won Nobel prizes in economics.
In essence, the MPS became the prototype for all the neoliberal think-tanks that proliferated in
the decades following WWII. The first of the neoliberal think-tank breeders was Antony
Fisher, a successful chicken farmer who was elected to the MPS in 1954. The following year,
he founded the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) in London and was soon joined by Ralph
Harris, who eventually became president of the MPS from 1982 to 1984. Over the ensuing
decades, the IEA spawned a dozen of think-tanks (including the Atlas network), that mostly
function as fronts for the MPS.
Harris candidly admitted in a 1996 interview that “the Mont Pèlerin Society created the IEA,
which comes to be called ‘Thatcher’s think-tank,’ but we were running long before Thatcher.
We weren’t Thatcherites, but she was an ‘IEA-ite.’ ” Harris added that MPS founder Hayek
was dubbed a “Companion of Honor” of the British Empire by the Queen, one of only 60 to
ever receive that title. Following Thatcher’s election, Harris himself became Lord Harris of
High Cross, while Fisher was knighted.
Edwin Feulner, MPS president (1996-1998) and treasurer (2004-2006), emulated Fisher on
the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and co-founded the Heritage Foundation in 1973. The
impact of the neoliberal wave was similarly powerful across the pond: Of 76 economic
advisers on Ronald Reagan’s 1980 campaign staff, 22 were MPS members. In Chile, “free-
market” policies inspired by the Chicago school of economics and supported by Friedman and
Hayek were implemented soon after Pinochet took power. In fact, according to Corey Robin,
author of The Reactionary Mind, “Hayek admired Pinochet’s Chile so much that he decided to
hold a meeting of his Mont Pèlerin Society in Viña del Mar, the seaside resort where the coup
against Allende was planned.”
Mont Pèlerin Society, Black Nobility, Bilderberg, and Pan-Europa: all in it together
The MPS was also, from its inception, associated with elite European aristocrats. Thus, Max
von Thurn und Taxis, the head of an ancient and extremely wealthy family, as well as Otto
von Habsburg, putative heir to the throne of Austria, were both influential members of the
MPS. Von Thurn even served as the general secretary of the MPS from 1976 to 1988. This
association between neoliberals and members of the Black nobility lends credence to the
suspicion that the MPS ultimately seeks to promote a neo-feudalist society under the guise of
the “free market” utopia.
Moreover, MPS members often took part in Bilderberg meetings, a clear indication of high-
level connections between neoliberal thinkers and globalist policymakers: Frenchmen Aron,
Rueff, and Marjolin attended multiple annual meetings in the 1950s and 60s, whilst economist
Heilperin was invited twice in the 1950s.
Finally, several MPS members had close ties to pan-European organizations. Besides Otto
von Habsburg, who was president of the Pan-Europa Movement from 1973 until 2004, the
best example is probably Marjolin, recipient of a Rockefeller scholarship in 1931, whose
name is associated with the 1962 “Marjolin Memorandum”, the official starting point of
monetary integration in Europe.
The relationship between the Mont Pèlerin Society and Austrian economics
Austrian sympathizers, when confronted with the apparent paradox of Hayek’s and especially
Mises’ prominent role in an elitist organization such as the MPS, often emphasize the
distinctions between the Chicago and Austrian schools. They also conclude from the oft-told
anecdote that Mises stormed out of the initial MPS meeting shouting “You’re all a bunch of
socialists” that he quickly became disenchanted with the MPS.
To be sure, there were two antagonistic factions in the MPS, identified by longtime MPS
secretary general Albert Hunold as “the laissez-faire liberals… and the neoliberals,” and
Mises was not alone in complaining about the collectivist tendencies of some of his
colleagues. A group of American businessmen led by Jasper Crane of the DuPont company,
along with the Volker Fund and the FEE, wanted Mises and his “hardcore” Austrian followers
to play a larger role in the MPS.
However, after being urged by Harold Luhnow (director of the Volker Fund) to attend the
second MPS meeting in 1949, Mises seems to have gotten over his initial disappointment, as
he became an active participant to MPS meetings until 1965 (when he was 84 years old), even
giving a keynote in 1958 at Princeton.
In spite of his sometimes tense relationship with the neoliberal wing, there is no doubt that
Mises himself was a globalist. Indeed, he wrote in 1927 that “the [classical] liberal therefore
demands that the political organization of society be extended until it reaches its culmination
in a world state that unites all nations on an equal basis,” even going so far as to hope that “a
world superstate really deserving of the name may someday be able to develop that would be
capable of assuring the nations the peace that they require”. Later, Mises worked on currency
issues for the Pan-Europa movement, founded by his fellow Austrian exile Richard
Coudenhove-Kalergi.
Following Mises, several prominent Austrian economists have been active in MPS circles,
including Murray Rothbard, Israel Kirzner, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Jesus Huerta de Soto, and
Thomas Di Lorenzo. In addition, George Roche III and Larry Arnn, the last two presidents
of Hillsdale College, a conservative institution which houses Mises’ personal library, were
MPS members.
In a blatant display of the close links between the MPS, the globalist elites, and the most anti-
statist factions of the Austro-libertarian movement, Otto von Habsburg, an active MPS
member and noted pan-Europeanist whom Mises served as economic advisor, was the first-
ever winner (in 1999) of the $10,000 Schlarbaum Prize, awarded by the Ludwig von Mises
Institute “to a public intellectual or distinguished scholar” for “lifetime defense of liberty”.
Conclusion
From its earliest origins to its contemporary incarnation, the MPS has served globalist
interests. Despite its appearances as a mere intellectual meeting place, the MPS became the
ultimate neoliberal Trojan horse, influencing the public opinion and infiltrating political
movements worldwide, with a pronounced impact on economic policies. Although there have
been tensions between the “laissez-faire” and “true neoliberal” wings of the MPS, Austro-
libertarian economists in the Mises/Rothbard mold have always found a home in the MPS,
indicating the close ties between the “free-market” anti-statist ideology and the “one-world”
agenda of the transnational plutarchy.
Libertarian network chart:
We have updated our chart depicting the networks orchestrating the Libertarian propaganda.
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
How the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian EconomicsIn "Austrian
Economics"

"Libertarianism"
from → Austrian Economics, Free market, Libertarianism, Phony dialectics
← Debunking Tom Woods’ “Catholic” Austrian economics
The Daily Bell adopts an “elite methodology” that it had previously blasted →
1.
October 30, 2012 4:14 am
Mirowski’s The Road from Mont Pelerin is an excellent reference that seems to fairly
characterize the source material it cites (at least that which I can get my hands on; they
seem to have had access to Rockefeller archives that are not available to the rest of
us). There are several other relevant articles available online from Mirowski and other
authors of the book. See the following link, for example:
http://coolessay.org/docs/index-66143.html
Reply
2.
October 30, 2012 6:45 am

Reply
3.
djmilosz permalink
May 22, 2014 1:36 pm
Reblogged this on djmilosz and commented:

A good though brief overview of the Mont Pelerin Society and its connections to other
informal elite meetings. For German-speaking readers interested in this think tank,
Bernhard Walpen’s “Die offenen Feinde und ihre Gesellschaft” is mandatory reading.
Reply
4.
janamurray permalink
August 27, 2014 3:14 pm
Reblogged this on janamurray and commented:

“Austro-libertarian economists in the Mises/Rothbard mold have always found a home
in the MPS, indicating the close ties between the “free-market” anti-statist ideology
and the “one-world” agenda of the transnational plutarchy.”
Libertarian network chart
On this page, we will periodically update our chart depicting the networks orchestrating the
Libertarian propaganda. Click on the chart to enlarge it.
Solid lines refer to funding and dashed lines refer to mostly ideological connections.
For more information about these connections, see the following articles:
How the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian Economics
The “Catholic” Arm of Libertarianism
How the Money Power spawns Libertarians
Old Rothschild- and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialectic
The Daily Bell hoax?
How Money Power controls the Libertarian movement in the 21st century
Debunking Tom Woods’ “Catholic” Austrian economics

The Mont Pèlerin Society: The ultimate neoliberal Trojan horse
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

1.
turtle permalink
Excellent job on the chart. I suspect a lot of these individuals and institutions although
admitting to being libertarian would genuinely disagree with being labelled as working
for the money power so I like your theory of the trojan horse from a consumer point of
view and would extend it to some well meaning producers as well.
I would be very interested to hear your opinion on some more big names from the
precious metals bug crowd (which I admit to following on a regular basis):
EdSteers GSD Report (sponsored by Casey Research):
http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/archives
King World News:
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/King_World_News.html
GATA: The Gold Anti-Trust Action committee devoted to exposing suppression of
precious metal prices.
http://www.gata.org/
and one of their ex-employees Bix Wier (and his road to RootA theory):
http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/main.cfm
No rush… just wondering if you may have come across them in your travels.
Reply
2.
Giovanni Rosado permalink
So that’s it all libertarians are fake, so what political ideology is the true one if not
libertarianism. I see myself as a libertarian but basically what this chart tells me is that
I just want to be enslaved & that I don’t care for personal & economic freedom.
Reply
turtle permalink
January 21, 2014 8:05 am
Maybe the question is whether or not one wants to be part of a system.

Unfortunately the natural tendency of efficient and convenient
interdependency always seems to be towards some form of collectivism (eg.
globalisation) and this inevitably entails some loss of liberty.
In the meantime “libertarianism” has some useful arguments in swinging the

global conspiracy “nay” sayers around to reality – but then its time to decide
what sort of liberty one means while being aware of the many wolves in
sheeps’ clothing.
p.s. I now have enough info to answer my own questions posted above if
anyone is interested.
3.
Lila Rajiva permalink
October 31, 2013 6:14 pm
http://mindbodypolitic.com/2013/10/31/god-father-of-us-libertarians-was-cia-
informant/
Reply
4.
eithan permalink
I very much like what I read in your many research concerning Liberterian movement
as a whole. My question is what prove’s that you are not one of that network daily
knell like daily Bell, what ever..?
Daily Bell review: on banking, the nature of
money, and dubious affiliations
November 9, 2012
by The Daily Knell
Today, we introduce what may become a semi-regular feature here at

the Daily Knell: the Daily Bell review, where we comment on the Austro-libertarian
propaganda peddled by this well-known “alternative” website.
For our first “Daily Bell review”, we focus on a couple of articles posted in the last week on
the Daily Bell, and especially on Detlev Schlichter’s interview and the ensuing comments and
discussion that this interview generated.
Bank of England Reports Whitewash Central Bank Reality
‘In fact, what the modern system does is create huge flows of fiat money that end up building
an entirely artificial system beholden to central bank facilities.’
Actually, 97% of our money supply is created as credit by commercial banks, but that won’t
stop the Daily Bell and others from focusing exclusively on “central bank facilities”. In fact,
the Daily Bell is rehashing the typical Austro-libertarian cliché: central banks are evil statist
institutions creating untold amounts of money, while private banks are simply wonderful
financial institutions that would function perfectly in a utopian “free market”, but whose
operations are distorted by central banks. Basically, the Daily Bell and their friends forget, or
rather do not want to admit, that the banking system is one.
Now Central Bankers Directly Boost Occupy Movement
‘A funny thing happened on a way to a “movement.” It was exposed. The alternative media,
including The Daily Bell, pointed out the various contradictions, suspicious funding and
general nonsensical nature of this manufactured effort. And that has helped sink it, or at least
diminish it.’
Similarly, we at the Daily Knell have pointed out the “suspicious funding” and elite
connections of most of the Austro-libertarian alternative media, including the Daily Bell. We
have also demonstrated that the so-called “Ron Paul revolution” was a manufactured effort for
the most part, even though it was branded as a “grassroots movement”.
Detlev Schlichter on the Nature of Money and the Evolution of an Inflationary

Depression
Schlichter: “The Cobden Centre is an educational charity that promotes honest money, free
trade and peace. […]There is no political agenda or political affiliation, which I like.”
No “political agenda”? Are you sure, Mr. Schlichter? Maybe you forgot to mention that the
Cobden Centre is part of the Atlas Network, a family of inter-related neoliberal think-tanks
that are all ultimately controlled by the Mont Pèlerin Society (see our analysis of the Mont
Pèlerin Society). In fact, the Cobden Centre would fit perfectly in the left-hand lower corner
of our Libertarian network chart.
Schlichter: “The supply of gold is relatively inelastic, largely outside political control (or
anybody else’s control), and gold has a long global tradition as money.”
According to Schlichter, the supply of gold is “largely outside political control or anybody
else’s control”.
However, here is what the Daily Bell elves themselves replied to a feedbacker elsewhere:
‘But this is a statement otherwise of absolute lunacy: “Commodity (or quasi-commodity)

money has a predetermined supply, that cannot be altered arbitrarily by anyone.” As
Rothbard as pointed out, the circulating supply of gold (and silver) – the only supply that
counts within the context of monetary utility – can be affected by hoarding and dis-hoarding
deponent to value. Others have made the same argument regarding the price sensitivity of
mining.’
So who is right, Schlichter or the Bell elves? This is a crucial issue, as one of the purported
advantages of commodity money, according to some Austrians, is that its supply cannot be
controlled arbitrarily. Austrians can’t have it both ways and suggest that gold is outside
political control when it suits them, and then elsewhere claim that this is a statement “of
absolute lunacy”.
It is also important to ask ourselves if it is better to have the money supply controlled by gold
miners and entities hoarding large quantities of gold (including elite familial dynasties and, in
spite of the Bell’s claims, central bank vaults) rather than, wait for it… central banks
controlled by the same elite familial dynasties? Granted, it may not be a pure monopoly in the
first case, but it would not take long for the Money Power to have a complete corner on gold.
Does this sound like a true alternative or more like another phony elite dialectic?
Although the Bell recognizes that Rothschild, Rockefeller, and their allies control the central
banks, it disputes the claim that the Rothschild dynasty controls the world’s gold. But the Bell
elves, who collaborated with Rothschild associate Lord Rees-Mogg, should know that
Rothschild fixed the gold price until 2004 and is likely still in charge behind the scenes.
Schlichter: ‘Injections of new money are always disruptive.’
Schlichter (in response to another question): ‘A growing economy that uses an unchanging
quantity of a monetary asset (let’s say a fixed supply of gold) as money will probably
experience moderate secular deflation, that’s all, and it is no problem.’
This is the typical Austrian position: a fixed money supply is preferable, even with an
expanding population and growing economy. What this means is that Austrians are in favor of
a currency whose purchasing power is increasing or at best stable, but never decreasing. This
is very favorable to rentiers, moneylenders, and those sitting on large amounts of gold, but not
for debtors or for the majority of the workers.
In fact, Austrianism is the perfect economic school for lenders: 1) they want a hard,
commodity-based currency (which is why they would prefer the “means of exchange” to be
an “asset”), 2) they accept and justify usury and reject as “cranks” all theorists and schools
that denounce interest, and 3) they don’t mind deflation at all (Schlichter is quite explicit
about this) but they hate inflation as if it’s the worst possible thing that could happen to
mankind.
Schlichter: ‘This whole excitement about the anthropologist David Graeber and the idea that
he dethroned Adam Smith and, one assumes, by extension all of modern monetary theory is
not only nonsense, it provides a classic example of how, without proper theory you
misinterpret historical facts. I may not be an anthropologist but David Graeber is certainly
no economist. […]So even if the state invented money, the benefits of money accrue directly to
everybody who uses it – to this day.’
Clearly, Schlichter is quite uncomfortable with the research of David Graeber and other
advocates of the “Credit theory of money”. Some readers may find this puzzling: after all,
why should a contemporary Austrian economist worry about some historical findings?
There is an interesting subtext here: Austrians rely heavily on their claims that money evolved
out of barter, and that commodity-based forms of money were chosen by the “free market”.
Now that Graeber and others have debunked this theory and shown that money likely
appeared as a statist (gasp!) institution, Austrians are deeply troubled as the historical
credibility of their narrative is thrown into question.
As an aside, given that Ludwig von Mises got his degree in law, Schlichter’s dismissal of
Graeber’s economic theories on the basis of his training as an anthropologist implies a
dubious double standard. More importantly, since Austrian economists reject the empirical
reductionist methodology, as well as any attempts to use mathematical models to quantify
economic phenomena, an anthropological approach does not seem so difficult to reconcile
with praxeology, catallactics, and other concepts developed by the author of Human Action.
The Schlichter interview also generated a vigorous discussion. We will address some
interesting comments by the Daily Bell elves:
Daily Bell (in reply to a feedbacker): ‘We are simply applying an Austrian analysis to Ms.
Kennedy’s critique. As she and her husband are long-term UN affiliates and deeply green we
tend to distrust her anyway. And Austrian economics tells us it is very difficult if not
impossible to quantify an economy with exactitude.’
Margrit Kennedy’s conclusions regarding interest as a primary wealth transfer mechanism are
based on the work of German economist Helmut Creutz, whose book The Money Syndrome is
now available in English. Now, Mr. Creutz is also “green”, so that is probably enough for the
Bell to “distrust” him. However, we believe that, “green” or not, Creutz’s work should be
judged on its own merits. In any case, if affiliations are a sufficient criterion to “distrust”
someone, one would be well-advised to “distrust” most of the Austro-libertarian propaganda,
as our regular readers surely know (see below).
Daily Bell (in reply to a feedbacker): ‘If you can find ANY active, FORMAL modern
endorsement of the power elite of a legitimate Austrian anarcho-capitalist, provide it on these
pages and we’ll treat it with the seriousness it deserves.’
Oooh, that’s a difficult one… How about the Rockefeller Foundation being Mises’s main
sponsor for nineteen years (1926 to 1945)? How about elite member Lord William Rees-
Mogg founding the libertarian propaganda behemoth Agora? How about Council on Foreign
Relations co-founder Walter Lippmann establishing the neoliberal agenda in 1937 together
with Mises, Friedrich von Hayek, and the director of the Bank of International Settlements?
Or how about well-connected Jesuit James Sadowsky, the teacher of future “Black Pope”
Peter-Hans Kolvenbach and a member of the Mont Pèlerin Society, the grey eminence behind
Murray Rothbard and Thomas Woods?
Finally, the discussion included a somewhat surprising analysis of the Gesell-inspired “Wörgl
experiment” by blogger (and Austrian sympathizer) bionic mosquito. But given that bionic
mosquito has now written two articles on the Wörgl experiment, we will comment on his
efforts in a separate article.
Conclusion
Schlichter is basically regurgitating the archetypal nonsense of Austrianism. He can be

forgiven: he does not believe in “conspiratorial history”, meaning he’s completely in the dark
and using economics as a nice mindgame, instead of a tool to understand reality. Hence his
blindness to the obvious benefits of deflation to the monied classes. Like many Austro-
libertarians, Schlichter and the Daily Bell focus almost exclusively on the public/private
dichotomy, with the State being the source of all evil. They essentially ignore class
differences and the fact that the aims and goals of the monied classes, comprising the rentiers,
moneylenders, and “old money” families, are often in direct opposition to those of the
working population.
Let us be clear: Austrianism, with its insistence on commodity money, its justification of
usury, its praise of deflation, and its connection to globalist and transnational interests, is the
economic theory of choice of the wealthy. No wonder that David Rockefeller considers
himself “a follower of Austrian economics”. But by ignoring “conspirational history” or by
reducing everything to the public/private dichotomy, Austro-libertarian propagandists try to
pull the wool over our eyes and convince us that their ideology is one of “freedom” and
“liberty”. It is no coincidence that the Daily Bell is becoming quicker than ever in dismissing
competing viewpoints solely on the basis of their affiliations, while trying to sweep under the
carpet the obvious elite connections of many, if not most, Austro-libertarian writers.
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Share this:
 Email
 LinkedIn
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Facebook
 Google
 Tumblr
 Pinterest

Related
Debunking another cornerstone of the Austrian-Keynesian dialectic: do central banks really

control the money supply?In "Austrian Economics"
Daily Bell review: on Wörgl, Gesell, the Fabian society, and the “alternative” mediaIn
"Austrian Economics"
from → Agora Inc., Austrian Economics, Banking, Daily Bell, Free market, Gold, Interest and Usury,
Libertarianism, Phony dialectics
← The Daily Bell adopts an “elite methodology” that it had previously blasted
Daily Bell review: on Wörgl, Gesell, the Fabian society, and the “alternative” media →
1.
November 10, 2012 11:12 am
Mises made two big breakthroughs in his life. One was that the business cycle was
sparked by central bank monopoly money printing. In fact, in the US, the Fed has a
quasi-monopoly over money thanks in part to “legal tender laws.” It doesn’t matter
how much money private sector banks produce – they haven’t been given the
franchise to print money.
[So the fact that interest-bearing loans created out of thin air by private banks
constitute the majority of our money supply doesn’t matter? Can you explain on
what basis you are making this statement?]
The problem is the monopoly granted to central banks by government authorities.

That’s what ultimately distorts the money supply. Also, it’s been admitted that Ben
Bernanke printed up to US$16 trillion in short term loans in 2008-2009 and sent the
money around the world. A lot of it was apparently never paid back. You think this
sum was only five percent of the world’s money supply in 2009? Ten percent of 1
trillion would be 32 trillion. Now multiply that by ten. That’s how much money you
think the private sector printed in 2009? Your figures seem a bit “off.”
http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2011/07/16-trillion-lent-bernanke
[The 97% is a global figure, not referring specifically to the money supply in
2009. Granted, the number may vary by a few percent, but you can find similar
values for different countries, and for earlier decades, on the Internet. If you
want to deny that most of the money supply actually corresponds to interest-
bearing loans created out of thin air by private banks, you will have to do better
than that. Also, we are not denying that central banks distort the money supply,
in part because of their role as “backstops”. We simply note that Austro-
libertarian outlets, including the Daily Bell, tend to focus exclusively on central
banks. Finally, why would gold injections (from mining or dishoarding) be less of
a “distortion” to the existing money supply?]
The second breakthrough was human action. This invalidates central planning by
pointing out that no matter what government projects or what laws its passes, people
will always act out of their own self-preservation. Human action is a profound
observation that economics is not a science and monetary economies therefore cannot
be “mathematically perfected.”
Until you can refute these observations in a meaningful way all the rest of what you
claim is just wind. These are profound freedom-oriented observations that are
reshaping the world. Rockefeller certainly never publicized them, nor did the rest of
the mainstream economic establishment. The mainstream STILL doesn’t acknowledge
them. It is strange you don’t acknowledge them; even stranger that you continue to
attack them – by ommission or commission.
[The point is that Austrian economics are part of an elite dialectic and ultimately
serve elite interests. Keynes and Marx also had some valuable insights, and the
mainstream rarely acknowledges Marx’s insights, but that does not prevent us
from seeing the critical flaws in their theories and from identifying them as being
part and parcel of a larger elite dialectic. You would probably agree with us
regarding Keynes and Marx. The situation is similar with Mises and Austrian
economics. It is strange that you are unable to understand that and finally rise
above the elite dialectic.
Finally, we refute the claim that mathematical reasoning cannot be applied to
study human behavior (including economics), at least in a probabilistic fashion
(i.e., not trying to predict the behavior of a particular individual but predicting
general tendencies). There are hundreds, if not thousands, of empirically-based
peer-reviewed studies by eminent scientists that contradict this claim.]
Reply
@Abu Aardvark,
Mises’ “business cycle,” including booms and busts, existed in the U.S. when
there was no central bank. So, Mises first “big breakthrough” seems to have
been that ignoring inconvenient historical facts and asserting a reality that does
not exist are necessary predicates to advocating the rentier propaganda that is
the Austrian school of economics.
And Mises’ observation of “human action” was neither profound nor a

breakthrough for anybody other than Mises personally. Plato and Aristotle both
recognized that the nature of the individual made it difficult for a state to scale
beyond a certain size. Political science (including economics, aka political
economy) since Aristotle has been concerned with creating a state that can
scale to infinity. The modern corporation is an example of such a state, by the
way, and all corporations are centrally planned.
The only difference between Austrian neoliberalism and communism is who

nominally does the central planning, which never goes away.
The only difference between Austrian neoliberalism and communism is who

nominally does the central planning, which never goes away.
Good point. As Kees van der Pijl noted in Transnational classes and
international relations (1998):
(Hayek’s claim in The Road to Serfdom (1985) that large-scale economies
cannot be
planned at all due to lack of knowledge implies that, even within a single firm
or
state institution, internal exchanges should be of a market type.)
November 12, 2012 12:45 pm
Memehunter, this is your blog. So, of course you may deal with it as you wish.
However, the fact alone that you’re apparently unable/unwilling to let a
feedback stand as it is and answer it BELOW the actual post, is particularly
telling. This rather unique modus operandi reveals a lot more about you than
you’d wish for.
[Inserting replies directly below your comments makes it easier to follow

the discussion. This is made necessary by your style of posting.]
Now, to your inserted remarks:
MH: “So the fact that interest-bearing loans created out of thin air by private
banks constitute the majority of our money supply doesn’t matter? Can you
explain on what basis you are making this statement?”
AA: Simple. Commercial banks are merely “required” distributors and

multipliers of the central banking ponzi scheme. Why “required”? If central
banks would simply hand out the money, people would realize the overall
fraud much easier. And bring it to a halt.
[This is simply not true. See Tao Jonesing’s comment and my reply to
Turtle. Have you read the Kydland and Prescott paper? Would you like to
seriously attempt to “debunk” their conclusions?]
Free-market capitalism on the other hand means: no central banks, no legal

tender laws, no fiat-money monopoly, no lender of last resort, no
government/central bank bail-outs of overleveraged commercial banks. It
means that a commercial bank, no matter how big, has to file for bankruptcy
when it lent too much. It goes out of business instead of getting BIGGER and
even more hazardous due to even more central bank money printing.
MH: “We simply note that Austro-libertarian outlets, including the Daily Bell,
tend to focus exclusively on central banks”
AA: Another lie. Neither Austrians nor the Daily Bell tend to “focus
exclusively on central banks”. It’s simply not true. Look, I understand that it’s
quite a job to sugarcoat your money-from-nothing-schemes. However, you do
a real disservice to your operation by blatantly making things up. Everyone
even remotely familiar with “Austro-libertarian outlets, including the Daily
Bell” will know that your claims bear no close examination. Those who still
don’t may want to follow a simple google search to see – in a matter of
minutes – that you make things up as you go:
commercial+banks+site:thedailybell.com
[The Daily Bell almost exclusively blames central banks for the current
financial situation. The fact that you can find the words “commercial
banks” on the Daily Bell doesn’t disprove our point. In fact, clicking on
the results of the Google search you suggested tends to prove our point.]
MH: “The point is that Austrian economics are part of an elite dialectic and
ultimately serve elite interests.”
AA: Ah, yes. That’s probably why for decades not one in a thousand had even
heard of Austrian Economics and their tiny group of scholars, who, in many
cases, had trouble to put food on the table. Some elite minions, some elite
“dialectic”, eh?
[See our Libertarian network chart and the articles listed under the chart.
You might as well watch once more this video: Video: A street
conversation between a Ron Paul fan and the Daily Knell]
MH: “Keynes and Marx also had some valuable insights, and the mainstream
rarely acknowledges Marx’s insights, but that does not prevent us from seeing
the critical flaws in their theories and from identifying them as being part and
parcel of a larger elite dialectic.”
AA: Keynes’ and Marx’ “valuable insights”? Like what?
“We will not have any more crashes in our time” (John Maynard Keynes,
1927)
“The theory of aggregate production, which is the point of the following book,
nevertheless can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state
than the theory of production and distribution of a given production put forth
under conditions of free competition and a large degree of laissez-faire. This is
one of the reasons that justifies the fact that I call my theory a general theory.”
(John Maynard Keynes, foreword to the German edition of his “General

Theory”)
As to Marx and the “mainstream rarely acknowledging” him: The

“mainstream” of entire continents “acknowledged” Marx’s “insights” for the
most part of the 20th century. In fact, there was no other “stream”. More than
100 million people perished in the process of applying Marx’ “valuable
insights”. You may want to reconsider your outlandish stance.
MH: “You would probably agree with us regarding Keynes and Marx. The
situation is similar with Mises and Austrian economics. It is strange that you
are unable to understand that and finally rise above the elite dialectic.”
AA: No, I don’t agree with you. Not one bit. Look, you’ve admitted – on the
record – to not having read Austrians at all. [Obviously, this is not true
anymore, as evidenced by this blog. By the way, how much of Gesell,
Lietaer, Soddy, Kennedy, or Creutz have you read? More to the point, can
you “debunk” the main points that we have presented on the Daily Knell?
This is the important question for truthseekers, not how many pages of
Mises one can cite from memory.]
And yet you devote entire blogs to supposedly write about them – which, in
reality, you don’t. If you bothered to actually read the works of Austrian
economists (and/or Marx and Keynes, for that matter) – which you still didn’t,
as evidenced by your assertions – you’d probably shy away from making
nonsensical claims that do not stand even cursory examination.
[Can you give an example of a nonsensical claim on the Daily Knell? Can
you actually debunk anything we have shown about the Daily Bell or
about Austrianism or Libertarianism? Speaking of nonsensical claims,
what about your claim that commercial banks are only “distributors”?]
For our regular readers: It is important to understand that Abu Aardvark

is almost certainly a Daily Bell agent, paid or not. The three authors of
this blog (Memehunter, Anthony Migchels, and Faux Capitalist) are
unanimous on that point, and we have several months of experience with
Abu’s comments. He quickly comments on any blog or website that
mentions anything critical of the Daily Bell, and immediately spots and
attacks commentators on the Daily Bell who disagree with the Austro-
libertarian doctrine, or with anything the Daily Bell wrote.
2.
turtle permalink
I question the ability of commercial banks to create money in the same way central
banks are able. My understanding (which may be outdated) is that every dollar that a
bank loans out on credit comes from one of the following:
1. Initial capital base (long term debt or equity holders) … limited potential
2. Current and term deposits of the bank’s “saver” customers. This is for the vast
majority of loans and is where the fractional reserve system and money multiplier
come into effect as loaned money, once it has been spent, comes back into the banking
system as new deposits to be loaned out again with a small fraction (5-10%) being put
aside as a cash reserve to meet the needs of any withdrawals by depositors.
3. Short term money markets. Where banks can borrow from and lend funds to each
other so that point 2 above operates on a system wide basis rather than just on an
individual bank basis. The central banks also operate in these wholesale money
markets as the “lender of last resort” but also as a short term savings institution for any
banks holding excess reserves which are not on lent to other banks for whatever
reason.
It is this last point which requires central banks to either withdraw or inject base
money into the system to affect liquidity levels and enables them to control the short
term official cash rate. When keeping liquidity high (and interest rates low) which is
the current situation, these central banks are required to create NEW base money
(either printing or digitally) as is evidenced by the increasing size of their balance
sheets.
In summary then, commercial banks’ ability to create money is limited by the existing
money base and the level of reserves they are required to hold, but it is only the central
banks who can create the new base money.
I admit there may be a problem when there is no required reserve so the rate is
effectively 0%. Under the Basel Capital Accord the focus has moved away from
liability management (having adequate reserves to meet withdrawal of deposits) to
asset management which requires having “adequate capital” to cover potential losses
on risky assets such as loan portfolios.
Reply
Thanks for your comment, Turtle.
Regarding point 2 (and also addressing your summary), several economists

(including two Nobel-Prize winning neoclassical economists) have shown that
“credit money” is created before “government money” (I am using their terms
here).
Here is a passage from Steve Keen’s blog:
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/09/19/it%E2%80%99s-hard-being-
a-bear-part-five-rescued/
[T]he model of money creation that Obama’s economic advisers have sold him
was shown to be empirically false over three decades ago.
The first economist to establish this was the American Post Keynesian
economist Basil Moore, but similar results were found by two of the staunchest
neoclassical economists, Nobel Prize winners Kydland and Prescott in a 1990
paper Real Facts and a Monetary Myth.
Looking at the timing of economic variables, they found that credit money was
created about 4 periods before government money. However, the “money
multiplier” model argues that government money is created first to bolster
bank reserves, and then credit money is created afterwards by the process of
banks lending out their increased reserves.
Kydland and Prescott observed at the end of their paper that:
“Introducing money and credit into growth theory in a way that accounts for
the cyclical behavior of monetary as well as real aggregates is an important
open problem in economics.”
Here is a quote from the description of “Where does money come from?” :
http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/where-does-money-come-from
We find that the most accurate description is that banks create new money
whenever they extend credit, buy existing assets or make payments on their
own account, which mostly involves expanding their assets, and that their
ability to do this is only very weakly linked to the amount of reserves they hold
at the central bank. At the time of the financial crisis, for example, banks held
just £1.25 in reserves for every £100 issued as credit. Banks operate within an
electronic clearing system that nets out multilateral payments at the end of
each day, requiring them to hold only a tiny proportion of central bank money
to meet their payment requirements.
The power of commercial banks to create new money has many important
implications for economic prosperity and financial stability. We highlight four
that are relevant to the reforms of the banking system under discussion at the
time of writing:
1. Although useful in other ways, capital adequacy requirements have not and
do not constrain money creation, and therefore do not necessarily serve to
restrict the expansion of banks’ balance sheets in aggregate. In other words,
they are mainly ineffective in preventing credit booms and their associated
asset price bubbles.
2. Credit is rationed by banks, and the primary determinant of how much they
lend is not interest rates, but confidence that the loan will be repaid and
confidence in the liquidity and solvency of other banks and the system as a
whole.
3. Banks decide where to allocate credit in the economy. The incentives that
they face often lead them to favour lending against collateral, or assets, rather
than lending for investment in production. As a result, new money is often
more likely to be channelled into property and financial speculation than to
small businesses and manufacturing, with profound economic consequences
for society.
4. Fiscal policy does not in itself result in an expansion of the money supply.
Indeed, the government has in practice no direct involvement in the money
creation and allocation process. This is little known, but has an important
impact on the effectiveness of fiscal policy and the role of the government in
the economy.
Washington’s blog also offers a nice recap:

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/7-questions-about-public-
banking.html
@Turtle,
First, here is a link to the Kydland and Prescott paper referred to in the Keen
excerpt:
http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/qr/qr1421.pdf
“I question the ability of commercial banks to create money in the same way
central banks are able.”
The issue is not whether commercial banks create money in the same way as
central banks, the issue is whether commercial banks create money. The fact is
that commercial banks create money by lending it into existence. The Kydland
and Prescott paper show that money is lent first, then reserves are deposited.
But you don’t have to take my word on it when we have Milton Friedman
online to confirm (the relevant discussion is at the very beginning):
Mises argued that endogenous money is not possible when you have a central
bank but admits that endogenous money exists in the absence of one. Mises
was a crank, and his assertion that the central bank swamps the commercial
banks’ ability to create money was demolished by the Kydland and Prescott
paper above.
Do commercial banks create base money, i.e., M0? No. But they do create M2
money, and the central banks increase the amount of base money to account
for that. The commercial bank tail wags the central bank dog, indicating that
the commercial banks are really the dog, not the central bank.
3.
Reply
4.
November 12, 2012 10:58 am
Tao Jonesing wrote:
“Mises’ “business cycle,” including booms and busts, existed in the U.S. when there
was no central bank. So, Mises first “big breakthrough” seems to have been that
ignoring inconvenient historical facts and asserting a reality that does not exist are
necessary predicates to advocating the rentier propaganda that is the Austrian school
of economics.”
———————————
In fact, quite the reverse is true. YOU are the one who is “ignoring inconvenient
historical facts and asserting a reality that does not exist”. Please get your facts straight
when you want to engage in a serious discussion:
“The Feds Before the Fed”
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=478
“Financial crisis”
http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Financial_crisis
“The Panic of 1819 – Reactions and Policies” – by Murray Rothbard
http://mises.org/rothbard/panic1819.pdf
“Pre-Fed Booms, Busts and Panics – Part 1”
http://www.southernbread.org/pre-fed-booms-busts-and-panics-part-1/
“Pre-Fed Booms and Busts – Part 2: The Panic of 1819”
http://www.southernbread.org/pre-fed-part-2-the-panic-of-1819/
“Pre-Fed Booms and Busts – Part 3: The Panic of 1837”
http://www.southernbread.org/pre-fed-booms-and-busts-part-3-the-panic-of-1837/
“A History of Money and Banking in the United States” – by Murray N. Rothbard
http://mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf
Reply
5.
Tao Jonesing wrote: “Do commercial banks create base money, i.e., M0? No. But they
do create M2 money, and the central banks increase the amount of base money to
account for that. The commercial bank tail wags the central bank dog, indicating that
the commercial banks are really the dog, not the central bank.”
————————-
OK, now I am enlightened ‘Tao Jonesing.’ I didn’t realize that the US$16 trillion (and
counting) issued out by Ben Bernanke in 2008-2009 was nothing more than the tail!
I’d hate to see the dog. Do you have figures, btw, for how much say Citicorp, issued
out to other banks around the world during this (still ongoing) crisis. Surely Citi must
have issued even more to bail out the world if indeed your argument is correct and
Mises is just a “crank.” Love the state, hate the Invisible Hand, eh Tao?
PS: Using Fed issued academic propaganda to counter the idea that central banks are
the primary force behind modern, elongated and deeply destructive business cycles is
especially inspired, btw. Hats off, Tao!
Reply

PS: Using Fed issued academic propaganda to counter the idea that central
banks are the primary force behind modern, elongated and deeply destructive
business cycles is especially inspired, btw. Hats off, Tao!
Can you seriously debunk the conclusions of Kydland and Prescott’s paper?
For our regular readers: It is important to understand that Abu Aardvark is

almost certainly a Daily Bell agent, paid or not. The three authors of this blog
(Memehunter, Anthony Migchels, and Faux Capitalist) are unanimous on that
point, and we have several months of experience with Abu’s comments. He
quickly comments on any blog or website that mentions anything critical of the
Daily Bell, and immediately spots and attacks commentators on the Daily Bell
who disagree with the Austro-libertarian doctrine, or with anything the Daily
Bell wrote.
6.
November 12, 2012 11:52 pm
Predictable, Memehunter. It took you all of two posts to start making it personal. I was
commenting at DB long before you tried to take over their threads.
[Memehunter began commenting on the Daily Bell in October 2010, whereas

“Abu Aardvark” appeared on the Daily Bell only in July 2011. Once again, Abu
is debunked…
Memehunter was in fact an esteemed commenter at the Daily Bell and enjoyed a
cordial relationship with the elves for most of 2011, before he slowly realized over
the course of a few months (beginning in November 2011) that the Bell was
basically an elite propaganda operation, and played a role that could be equated
to gatekeeping or “controlled opposition”. This led him to analyze the role played
by Austro-libertarianism in the elite dialectic.
Finally, we have seen several comments by Abu Aardvark, not only on the Daily
Knell, but also on Real Currencies and on Faux Capitalist (not to mention those
on the Daily Bell), so our assessment is based on extensive “experience” with
Abu’s comments, dating back to mid-2011.]
They never banned you so far as I know and they usually countered you with facts,
even if you stretched their patience a good deal. Now you call me an “agent, paid or
not” of the Daily Bell. I am not paid by DB. What I do, I do of my own volition and
because I believe in it.
[Paid or not, all three authors of this blog are unanimous in their assessment that
you are almost certainly a Daily Bell agent. Once again, your posts on the Daily
Knell, on Real Currencies, and on Faux Capitalist (not to mention those on the
Daily Bell) would tend to confirm our assessment.]
Perhaps you’ll surprise me by debating the issues instead of calling me names. Or does
the “cemetary of Libertarian lies” really mean you intend to bury all discussion that is
not supportive of your economic arguments. We’ll see …
[Issues related to Austrian economics have been debated over the course of
several detailed articles, both on the Daily Knell and on Real Currencies. Can
you debunk any of the main points made on the Daily Knell? Can you dismiss the
conclusions of Kydland and Prescott’s paper, which invalidate the Austrian
dogma about the role of central banking?]
Reply
7.
Memehunter, I wrote “I was commenting at DB long before you tried to take over
their threads.” According to you, I began commenting in July of 2011. You began to
take over threads around Nov. 2011 when you came to a “realization” about DB. This
is according to YOUR dates! It is good to read before responding …
Your analysis of me as an “agent” of the Daily Bell is equally inaccurate. I’ve never
received a dime from DB. DB is your fixation. I do what I do because I believe in it. I
believe your recently adopted “ideas” are intended to confuse and are trying to lead
people back to big government solutions. I don’t know why this is your agenda but it
sure seems to be. Obviously you are not confident of your arguments if you have to
resort immediately to name calling. I guess we’ll soon see if it is your intention to bury
libertarianism or just to bury discussion of it …
Reply

Just out of curiosity, what has defending the Bell’s obviously inaccurate
numbers regarding their monthly hits or page views (to give just one example)
got to do with the ideas you believe in? Speaking of “fixation”, why the need
to comment, generally negatively, on practically every article anywhere on the
‘Net that says something critical about the Daily Bell (and not only on this
blog)?
As explained many times on this blog, realizing that Austro-libertarianism is

just another elite meme does not necessarily mean that one is in favor of “big
government solutions”. This way of thinking (e.g., “if you are not in favor of
Austro-libertarianism, then you are obviously for “big government”) is
unfortunately typical of Libertarians who are still stuck in the elite dialectic.
Please watch once more Video: A street conversation between a Ron Paul fan
and the Daily Knell to try to understand this.
8.
turtle permalink
Seems things have gotten a little out of hand since my last visit. Interesting debate. I
think both central banks and commercial banks together are to blame. I agree the Daily
Bell tends to focus its criticism on central banks and I pointed out to them shortly
before I stopped visiting (about the same time as MH) that their own sponsors came
from private bankers and fund managers. But I would also hope that MH’s criticism of
DB and AA’s defense of DB is not construed as a defense of central banks themselves.
Interestingly the “Our Sponsors” link from the DB homepage is no longer available on
their “newlook” website but I did find some guest editors under the “Free
Subscription” link. Of course, the bankers and fund managers names have been
removed and replaced with academics who would hopefully know more about how to
edit and be in much less of a financial position to sponsor. I did learn through the
copyright note though that the company is actually based in Liechtenstein and not
Switzerland as I had previously mistakenly assumed.
Thanks for those links. I am still working through them and will hopefully comment
on them another time.
Reply

Thanks for your visit, Turtle.
Well, let’s just say that Abu Aardvark sometimes tests our patience (again, this
is not only Memehunter speaking). But we still welcome his contributions,
when he makes an attempt to write constructive comments.
No one on this blog (including other commentators such as Tao Jonesing) was
defending central banking. Rather, the issue is about the importance of the role
of central banks. As Tao said, it would seem that “the commercial bank tail
wags the central bank dog, indicating that the commercial banks are really the
dog, not the central bank.” This is very different from the usual Austro-
libertarian dogma.
The Daily Bell was based in Switzerland (so this was not a mistake on your
part) but they are now based in Liechtenstein as you noted, although it seems
that they still have strong connections to Switzerland (Anthony Wile recently
announced that he is moving back to Switzerland).
9.
turtle permalink
Questions to ponder.
If commercial banks can create money (without needing to source it from somewhere),
why don’t they do this and lend it to themselves or to eachother? Why would they
need bailouts from a central bank at all.
I am working on an incredibley boring answer which involves the repeal of

Glass/Steagal to “No reserve” banking, the Basel Capital Accord, risk weighted capital
& risk adjusted loan portfolios.
A final point of interest is the IMF solutuion to this revisiting FDRoosevelts “Program
for Monetary Reform’ (“Chicago Plan” ) which proposes 100% reserve banking and
the return of money creation power directly to governments.
Reply

Hi Turtle,
For a discussion of the “Chicago Plan”, you might want to read the following
article on Real Currencies:
Full Reserve Banking revisited

Who is Ed Griffin?
by Anthony Migchels on January 18, 2012
With the ascent of Ron Paul it has become very clear that the subversion of the Patriot
movement through Austrian Economics and its Gold Standard is a far more serious
threat than perhaps imagined. How did America’s Patriots lose its connection with their
natural heritage from the Populists, calling for plentiful money?
It seems Ed Griffin might have more to do with it than we’d care to know.
It is no use introducing G. Edward Griffin. If you don’t know him, it’s highly unlikely you
will be reading this. His influence on the ‘Truth/Patriot’ movement is hard to overestimate.
He made a name for himself with his cancer analysis and Laetrile antidote. But his big break
was ‘The Creature from Jekyll Island (1994)’, an expose on the Federal Reserve System.
Now, I don’t think I’m the only one that associates this book with Eustace Mullins’ ‘The
Secrets of the Federal Reserve’. Mullins himself certainly did. And Mullins of course, was
inspired and basically educated by the great Ezra Pound himself, who was then incarcerated in
a mental asylum in Washington D.C.
So in this way by association I basically assumed Griffin would understand the basics of
money and the Money Power’s control over it. At least the suggestion is created that Griffin is
part of a tradition that has a very specific and concrete analysis of these matters.
It was only the last few years that I started to realize that Griffin, however, plugs a Gold
Standard as the solution to what he considers the problem: the Federal Reserve Bank and its
‘fiat’ money.
And this is simply astonishing.
Ezra Pound was probably the greatest political commentator of the 20th century. He
profoundly studied and explained the Money Power’s origins, ‘ethics’, methods, economics,
sociological effects and of course its control over money.
And he didn’t call the Money Power ‘Fiat’, nor ‘Inflator’. He called her Usura.
Pound was very astute in his observations of money as a means of exchange and not a store of
value. He proposed Social Credit. He also supported Gesell’s work.
And Gold? “The present war dates at least from the founding of the Bank of England at the
end of the 17th century, 1694-8. Half a century later, the London usurocracy shut down on
the issue of paper money by the Pennsylvania colony, A.D. 1750. This is not usually given
prominence in the U.S. school histories. The 13 colonies rebelled, quite successfully, 26 years
later, A.D. 1776.” According to Pound, it was the money issue (above all) that united the
Allies during the second 20th-century war against Germany: “Gold. Nothing else uniting the
three governments, England, Russia, United States of America. That is the interest–gold,
usury, debt, monopoly, class interest, and possibly gross indifference and contempt for
humanity.”
And elsewhere: “Gold is a coward. Gold is not the backbone of nations. It is their ruin. A
coward, at the first breath of danger gold flows away, gold flows out of the country.”
That is the real face of Gold as Pound saw it and how right he was.
Pound, evidently, had no problems seeing the self evident: that the Gold Standards of the past
and most certainly of modern history, beginning in Amsterdam, were banker operations.
Neither had Eustace Mullins, who left very little to guess in his book:
“The international gold dealings of the Federal Reserve System, and its active support in
helping the League of Nations to force all the nations of Europe and South America back on
the gold standard for the benefit of international gold merchants like Eugene Meyer, Jr. and
Albert Strauss, is best demonstrated by a classic incident, the sterling credit of 1925.
J.E. Darling wrote, in the English periodical, “Spectator”, on January 10, 1925 that:
“Obviously, it is of the first importance to the United States to induce England to resume the
gold standard as early as possible. An American controlled Gold Standard, which must
inevitably result in the United States becoming the world’s supreme financial power, makes
England a tributary and satellite, and New York the world’s financial centre.”
Mr. Darling fails to point out that the American people have as little to do with this as the
British people, and that resumption of the gold standard by Britain would benefit only that
small group of international gold merchants who own the world’s gold. No wonder that
“Banker’s Magazine” gleefully remarked in July, 1925 that:
“The outstanding event of the past half year in the banking world was the restoration of the
gold standard.””
So where the currently popular notion comes from that Gold is feared by the Bankers is really
very hard to understand. It was certainly not the opinion of Mullins or Pound.
Of course, neither Mullins nor Pound are saints whose stories we should accept at face value.
But it is strange that Griffin is associated with them. Because he clearly vehemently disagrees
with both his forebears.
Griffin on Gold
On his website Griffin addresses a number of questions about his position on Gold. They are
arranged in a Q & A. Let’s have a look at them.
We will not go into the stuff we already discussed with Gary North and the Daily Bell, but
Griffin mentions a few more typical pro Gold arguments and we’ll deconstruct them here.
1. On Social Credit
Let’s first see how Griffin responds to the question whether Social Credit would be a better
monetary system. And let’s keep in mind that Ezra Pound favored this system.
Here’s what Griffin replies:
“Fiat money remains fiat money regardless of the formulas used to determine its quantity and
distribution. Social credit systems are designed by men according to formulas drafted by men
and enforced by men – all of which means the system is not fixed by supply and demand but
by edict – and that is not fundamentally different from the present system. Eventually, if the
rules for money creation CAN be changed, they WILL be changed to the advantage of those
with the power to change them and to the disadvantage of everyone else.”
Now this is the typically incredibly lame clincher that Austrian Economics is famous for. ‘It’s
Fiat Money so it’s bad’. They’ll mess up the volume!
And how about 700 billion on debt service per year for the Government Mr. Griffin? How
about paying 150.000 dollars in interest over a 100.000 mortgage over 30 years? Ring a bell?
Again: the blatant ignoring of Interest. Usura.
In this case damnable because Griffin MUST know about interest, when considering his
predecessors.
2. On the wonders of Gold

The question he replies to is fair enough:
‘If the Banks own all the Gold, why would we want a Gold-Backed Money System?’
Now that is a very, very good question indeed. Here’s Griffin’s reply:
“The Rothschilds do not own all the gold or even close to it. Most of it is still in the ground, in
the ocean, and in private hoards. Even if they did own all of it that presently is in the form of
bars, that would just drive up the price and stimulate gold mining so that new supplies would
quickly come into production – as now is happening around the world. When the price hits
several thousands of dollars per ounce, it will be profitable to extract it from the oceans, and
there is a limitless supply from that source. It’s just a question of the natural balance between
supply and demand – without a committee of politicians and bankers drafting a magic
formula and using coercion to redirect human resources.
Bankers may hoard gold (because they understand its value more than most people) but they
have always done everything possible to prevent a gold-backed currency. If they wanted it,
they could have had it long ago, but (as you may have noticed) they always have worked
against it. Why is that? It’s because they can acquire far more wealth by expanding the money
supply at will and collecting interest on money created out of nothing than they can by having
limits on their money supply and collecting interest on a much smaller amount of gold-backed
loans. Bankers love to possess gold but they hate a gold-backed currency because that limits
their money supply and, thereby, limits the volume of loans.
Any system other than precious metals is dependent on human decree and manipulation. It
must inevitably end up no different than any other fiat money. I am familiar with the social-
credit scheme and find it lacking in merit. It is a social engineer’s fantasy. It does not line up
with human nature.
Gold has always worked well as a monetary base throughout history. It can’t be improved
upon. We must not fall for the line about gold being just a pretty metal, etc. It has intrinsic
value even if not used for money, it does not deteriorate, it can be divided into small units and
recombined again if necessary, it is scarce so it has great value in a small space, and, best of
all, it can be precisely measured for purity and weight, which allows for units that are beyond
human judgment and human manipulation. It is the perfect money.”
Let’s go through this point for point:

“The Rothschilds do not own all the gold or even close to it. Most of it is still in the ground, in
the ocean, and in private hoards.”
Now this is a completely unprovable statement. It is just as unprovable as the idea that they
DO own it all. However, since the Rothschilds CLEARLY owned the Gold Market during the
19th century, it is at least a very serious possibility that they still do today. And considering
the all importance of the control of the money supply it should be completely self evident that
we should not take the risk.
Even Bitcoin is better than Gold: at least we know where these Units are. We don’t know
where the Gold is, so we don’t know what the Volume is, and whether someone could
manipulate it.
Therefore the rationale for Gold, stable Volume, does not stand: we simply cannot know
whether it can be inflated and/or deflated.
Griffin himself seems to understand his treading on quicksand, because he continues:

“Even if they did own all of it that presently is in the form of bars, that would just drive up the
price and stimulate gold mining so that new supplies would quickly come into production – as
now is happening around the world. When the price hits several thousands of dollars per
ounce, it will be profitable to extract it from the oceans, and there is a limitless supply from
that source. It’s just a question of the natural balance between supply and demand – without
a committee of politicians and bankers drafting a magic formula and using coercion to
redirect human resources.”
Suggesting we could break a Rothschild Monopoly if it were real.

But Ed: who do you think controls the Gold Mines?
Cooperative Unions of Sovereign Individuals? 6 Billion wide awake Citizens of the World?
The White Brotherhood? Ben Fulford’s Friends?
Or perhaps the Usual Suspects?
And it’s even worse. We are supposed to go Gold because its volume cannot be increased.
But if we need more we can dig it up?
Huh? What kind of logic is this?

And last: the notion that rising prices would force Gold out of hoarding. The Daily Bell is also
known for spouting this ridiculous nonsense: a Monopolist doesn’t surrender his stash when
the price is right! He just lets the market set the maximum price it can bear and then proceeds
to rip us all off for ever at that price!
So no, there is no free market for Gold. Rothschild DOES own a decisive stake in the World’s
reserves. And rising prices due to scarcity is his wet dream: he can continue his monopoly
pricing operation.
It’s just incredibly upsetting and annoying that we even need to have this conversation.
Then this:
“Bankers may hoard gold (because they understand its value more than most people) but they
have always done everything possible to prevent a gold-backed currency.”
This is such a blatant lie. Are we to believe that Ed Griffin did not read Eustace Mullins? Just
read Mullins’ quote above. His entire book radiates an absolute disgust for a Gold Standard.
Mullins time and again explains it’s a banker operation.
I can understand people reading Griffin and ignorantly touting this lie all over the
Blogosphere.
But Griffin is responsible for this obfuscation of the Truth. For this clearly blatant and well
considered try to extinguish Mullins’ and Pound’s message from the Truth Movement.
“If they wanted it, they could have had it long ago, but (as you may have noticed) they always
have worked against it.”
Again lying. And adding another lie: they could have had it long ago.
They had it. The reason they lost it, is because the Great Depression was SO bad through
artificially deflated volume WHILE ON A GOLD STANDARD, that populists in both Europe
and America finally managed to force their elites to dump the Gold Standard. THAT’s what
happened in the thirties.
However, they were compensated for their loss by a new monopoly, based on the printing
press. In Europe, anyway, because the Dollar remained redeemable for Gold under Bretton
Woods, although not for American Citizens and only in international trade.
“Bankers love to possess gold but they hate a gold-backed currency because that limits their
money supply and, thereby, limits the volume of loans.“
Another example of idiotic ‘logic’. What does the size of the Money Supply matter?? Even if
we would have only ONE ounce of Gold, it would suit them fine. For the reason that is
always explained so beautifully by the Austrians themselves: We simply divide the Gold
through all the money there is, and that’s what the one ounce will be worth. We then divide
the Gold through trillion and use these small nuggets as backing for the notes that will
circulate.
It is completely irrelevant how large the size of the money supply is. What matters is who
owns and controls it. So he can slap interest on it.
Griffin also makes the point that bankers want to inflate the money supply because that will
make them more money.
Nonsense! Bankers are interested in their share of the whole, not in nominal profits. They will
prefer a billion which is half of the total over a trillion which is only a quarter of the total.
They are willing to let the total pie shrink, if they get a larger percentage of what remains.
That’s why Bankers love deflation: it shrinks the total because it destroys economic growth,
leaving less for us and increasing their share of the total.
Griffin ends with a love song comprised of erroneous and or unprovable statements quite
typical of Goldbugs:
“Gold has always worked well as a monetary base throughout history. It can’t be improved
upon. We must not fall for the line about gold being just a pretty metal, etc. It has intrinsic
value even if not used for money, it does not deteriorate, it can be divided into small units and
recombined again if necessary, it is scarce so it has great value in a small space, and, best of
all, it can be precisely measured for purity and weight, which allows for units that are beyond
human judgment and human manipulation. It is the perfect money.”
Gold has not always worked well as money. That’s why there was almost revolution in the
thirties and the elite dumped it to save their asses. That’s why the colonists went to war with
Britain in 1776, because Britain’s Gold Standard was impoverishing the colonies, which had
thrived under their own scrip.
That’s why Caesar ended fiat money that brought the Roman Republic to Hegemony, when he
perpetrated his Plutocracy sponsored coup in 44 BC. He introduced a Gold Standard and the
newly formed Empire started Rome’s decline.
That’s why millions upon millions of desperate Europeans allowed themselves to be forced
from the land they inherited through generation upon generation and left for the sweatshops in
the cities: because scarce Gold forced upon them by the emerging Central Banks destroyed
their ancient fiat currency based economies.
That’s why Bryan so brilliantly exclaimed: “Having behind us the commercial interests and
the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands for a gold
standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of
thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.“
Many Problems, One Source

The problem is that the enemy is everywhere. GMO ‘foods’, Pharmacide, Big Oil, Empire,
Feminism, Global Warming, Environmental Destruction, Famine, DU weapons, left wing
radicals, right wing radicals, Consumerism, the coming Iran War and WW3, Pornography,
Television and other Mass Media.
Each of these represent a major threat. As a result everybody attacking one or more of these
outrages is welcomed in the Alternative Media as a valiant knight fighting Power.
But we must understand that behind all these phenomenona there is one source: the Money
Power.
And the Money Power rules through control over the Money Supply. It uses this control to
enslave us with Interest first and foremost, but certainly also through the boom/bust cycle.
All issues must be addressed, but they cannot be addressed before we get it right concerning
the money supply!
How are we going to finance green energy, healthy food and 21st century architecture? Do
you really believe going to a bank for some interest bearing credit is going to work out?
No! We need Trillions of interest free capital to clear up this mess.
The Money Power rules through control of the money supply. It enslaves us with Interest and
the boom/bust cycle. We cannot allow the Truth Movement to be hijacked by change agents
who make moot points about cancer and like looking a hero by exposing chemtrailing in 2010
when even the UN is already admitting large scale terra forming and Geo Engineering.
We must not fall for the idea that ‘My enemy’s enemy is my friend’.
Not so! The Money Power is well known for organizing its own opposition.
Money is All Important!

People that hide behind credible information about cancer but in the mean time plug a Gold
Standard, subverting the legacy of Pound and his pupil Mullins, should not be taken seriously!
Conclusion
We have cooperated with Austrian Economics because they hate the FED, abusive
Government, Fractional Reserve Banking and inflation.
But in the final analysis these are ALL red herrings. The FED is not the problem but a
symptom. The Money Power does not care about the FED. It is ready to dump this vehicle. As
long as it controls its successor! And it will, because its successor will oversee a Gold
Standard.
Inflation is way overrated and absolutely the lesser evil compared to Deflation. Deflation
comes with economic stagnation and decline, inflation is associated with economic growth.
Deflation is good for creditors, inflation good for debtors.
Abusive Government is a result of it being subverted by the Money Power. But the Money
Power fears Government, because it can be liberated by the Nation to which it belongs. That’s
why they want their World Government, that will know no national affiliation and will be of
their making only.
Considering the horrible damage done by the Austrian Economics Mind Control operation, as
witnessed by Ron Paul’s ascent, it will no longer do to see them as allies against the Powers
that Be.
Ed Griffin is a particularly nasty cookie, as he clearly purposefully tries to obscure the crucial
messages of Pound and Mullins. Knowing the Money Power there is every reason to suggest
that this is the main reason Ed Griffin exists and why we all know about him.
Related:
Austrian Economics still is ‘Jewish’ Economics
The Ron Paul Challenge: 10 Reasons the Alternative Media is Failing this Test
What Gary North is not telling you about Interest
Discussing Gold and Interest with the Daily Bell
Faux Economics
Advertisements
Report this ad
Report this ad
Rate this:
Share this:
 Facebook
 LinkedIn
 Email
 Print
 Reddit
 Twitter
 Tumblr
 Pinterest1
 Google

Related
Ed Griffin admits the Bankers own all the Gold and that Usury is the issueIn "Austrian
Economics"
End the Fed: a Trojan Horse destroying the Truth Movement from withinIn "Austrian
Economics"
Austrianism is Dying! Truthers Unite!In "Austrian Economics"
From → Austrian Economics, Economic Commentary, Gold, Interest, Margrit Kennedy,

Monetary Politics, Money Power, NWO, Rothschilds, Truth about Money, Usury
110 Comments
1.
Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org permalink
I also found it strange that a) Mr. Griffin does not acknowledge Eustace Mullins’
Secrets in Jekyl Island; and b) that Mr. Griffin was (or still is) pitching the Gold
Standard along with former congressman Ron Paul.
I examined this issue of specious monetary reform where the reformers tend to miss
the point entirely, here: Re-visiting Money as Debt and Monetary Reform: The Secret
of Oz
print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2010/10/re-visiting-money-as-debt-and-oz.html
And the Gold Standard boondoggle is examined at the link cited therein, where the
inexplicability of Mr. Griffin’s and Ron Paul’s position on the Gold Standard is
systematically analyzed — and it can naturally lead one to sensibly conclude what you
have concluded as well:
print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-gold-standard-boondoggle-
revisited.html
However, I hope that I am mistaken. Mr. Griffin has otherwise made some revealing
documentaries and interviews, and done much for public awareness. Your thesis that
Griffin wrote Creature as damage control reaction to Mullins’ Secrets of the Federal
Reserve, just as I have the thesis that Quigley’s monumental Tragedy and Hope was in
damage-control reaction to Mullins’ Secrets of the Federal Reserve, needs more study
on my part. I need to find the time to look at the differences between the emphasis and
omissions in the two books side by side and I haven’t got around to doing that yet.
Clearly though, Mullins and his mentor Ezra Pound never downplayed the
contemporary power of the House of Rothschild, as Quigley has done in Tragedy and
Hope. Has Mr. Griffin done that in his version? I have to study that. My study of the
Invisible House of Rothschild is here:
sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/pamphlet-the-invisible-house-
of-rothschild-by-zahirebrahim.pdf
I just wanted to leave you this little note for Who is Ed Griffin? I share this concusion
of yours: “But in the final analysis these are ALL red herrings. The FED is not the
problem but a symptom. The Money Power does not care about the FED. It is ready to
dump this vehicle. As long as it controls its successor! And it will, because its
successor will oversee a Gold Standard.”
The Gold Standard is the banksters’ own interest.
Thank you for your efforts.
Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
humanbeingsfirst@gmail.com
comment for: realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/who-is-ed-griffin/
Reply

Thanks.
Reply
2.
Betsy Kunkel permalink
Wow, I am new to all of this. I thought Ed Griffin’s book was great, but you make
interesting points! Are there many people who share your position? I would like to
learn more.
Reply
Those in the know, know, but they are in the minority, as always. You do have
a few true populists still left in the US, though.
Reply
3.
Kevin Poss permalink
Ending the Federal Reserve doesn’t necessitate a gold standard. Even letting the U.S.
Treasury just print money would be a big improvement over what we have.
Reply
4.
Anti-Statist permalink
“Abusive Government is a result of it being subverted by the Money Power. But the
Money Power fears Government, because it can be liberated by the Nation to which it
belongs. That’s why they want their World Government, that will know no national
affiliation and will be of their making only.”
The “Money Power” fears government? Wow, what a delusional idiot. Yeah, there is
no way the power elite have their hands in manipulating government.
Reply
5.
janamurray permalink
Reblogged this on Jana Murray and commented:

Bankers are interested in their share of the whole, not in nominal profits. They will
prefer a billion which is half of the total over a trillion which is only a quarter of the
total. They are willing to let the total pie shrink, if they get a larger percentage of what
remains.
That’s why Bankers love deflation: it shrinks the total because it destroys economic
growth, leaving less for us and increasing their share of the total.
Reply
6.
Sigh. permalink
“The Rothschilds do not own all the gold or even close to it. Most of it is still in the
ground, in the ocean, and in private hoards.“
Now this is a completely unprovable statement.
Ouch… I had to stop reading there. You really shouldn’t be writing anything if you’re
that clueless. But hey, typical know it all American. Probably watch a lot of Jewtube
videos.
Reply
7.
paulhollister permalink
Another great article and so well written i was in some confusion over the gold
business but now i have a much clearer understanding Thanks
Reply
Thanks Paul!
Reply
8.
Chris permalink
Many years ago when I started reading this book I put it down almost as quickly when
he failed to mention every name at the meeting was Jewish.
Reply
9.
Nobody Special permalink
Christian lawyer Constance Cumbey (USA, Michigan), top researcher on New Age
operatives, dealt with Mullins and ultimately confronted him as an “Aquarian
Warrior” (sic). Mullins bragged in reply over his success, she reports. Migchels, tread
carefully hurling charges, as you so often do. Talk to Constance re Mullins.
I’m glad you confessed Pound and Mullins weren’t saints…so close though, eh?
That Mullins interview on YouTube shows a book cover, not citations. Any claim of
plagiarism is easily proven with side-by-side citations. An author mouthing off is not
the same thing, Migchels.
If you want to piss on Griffin, have enough decency to aim for him. Show citations
proving the stated crime. Otherwise you’re just telling us how your third bowel feels
and leaving its turds on the net for us to clean up.
Given his character, we must ask evidence of Mullins, not dish his poop raw. Maybe
he was jealous that an author succeeded on his pet subject while he didn’t. Worse,
maybe Mullins and Pound were on board with the general illuminist program to link
criticism of banks with anti-semitism. You know, controlled opposition and all that,
which you are always on about.
Now, the well known and persecuted scholar Antony C. Sutton wrote “The Federal
Reserve Conspiracy” (1995). This title matches one by H.S. Kenan, which Mullins
claims as plagiarism, putting the author’s name in quotes. I make nothing of the
coincidence. Sutton was a first-class scholar (aka detective) who makes Mullins’
screeds seem like junior school essays. A reviewer highlights a real literary crime
documented by Sutton. The PTB disappeared “The Science of Government, Founded
on Natural Law” (1841).
personalliberty dot com/2010/02/18/the-federal-reserve-conspiracy-by-antony-c-
sutton/
Reply
o
Sutton also wrote a less famous, but very powerful book called ‘the War on
Gold’ with the typical Austrian take on specie and fractional reserve banking.
Griffin didn’t copy verbatim text from Mullins, that’s not what I am talking
about here. The subtitle of Griffin’s book is ‘a second look at the Federal
Reserve’. It was a clear hit at Mullins’ work and very typical: this is the way
the ‘free market’ crowd has been poisoning the populist monetary reform
movement for ever. It was already happening in the late 19 hundreds.
At the time of writing of this article I was not yet so aware of the dynamics of
the Gold is real money mind control operation subverting the calls for
abundant money by classical populists and I didn’t really realize Griffin is in a
long line of traitors to the cause.
Reply
name789 permalink
Not to forget Sutton’s other books, ‘the war on gold’ ‘gold verses
paper’ ‘what is libertarianism?’
Wasn’t Mr. Sutton a libertarian ? (Migchels considers them satanists)
Reply

Well, one thing is for certain: after I read his ‘war on Gold’,
Sutton never meant the same to me anymore.
I have difficulty believing researchers of that kind of

brainpower falling for Gold. As a young guy’s vice, ok, but
decade after decade? He must have come across debt free paper
money theory, as an American.
Reply
name789 permalink
he was fully aware of the paper money concepts and

literature; his views on gold were inspite of them, and
because he did not know any better —something to
ponder
Reply
pm permalink
Sutton was actually English, he took US citizenship

,regards PM
Reply
PePa permalink
It would be great if somehow the time of each reply could also be

displayed.
Reply
o
name789 permalink
>>>> Talk to Constance re Mullins.
Hummm, and just what would she have to tell Migchels about his mentor,
Ellen Brown, the new ager ? or Margrit Kennedy ?
Reply
10.
ramonthomas permalink
Ernie’s comments must be deleted by the owner of this blog. Everywhere you go on
the Web he tries to confuse people about Eustace Mullins. All you have to do is read
Mullins for yourself. This is a brilliant analysis of the hogwash who claim to be
experts.
Reply
11.
ernie1241 permalink
Everything you need to know about what Eustace Mullins believed can be discovered
via the following:
(1) In a letter to the publisher of Women’s Voice (Lyrl Clark Van Hyning), Mullins
wrote:
“I hope our citizens will awaken to the fact that the international Jewish conspiracy
against the white race is our real danger. Communism is a threat to America because
of the thousands of Jewish agents working for it in this country.”
(2) In a July/August 1955 Women’s Voice article by Mullins entitled “International

Finance”, Mullins made the following observations:
Page 11:
“There is no ism or international organization which is not controlled directly or
indirectly by international bankers. Communism is the most useful puppet of
international finance today. Completely financed by the Rothschild bankers through
the New York banking house of Kuhn Loeb of New York and Max Warburg Co of
Germany, alien agents of international finance overthrew the legal government of
Russia in 1917. Now international finance has divided the world into two parts, the
democratic world and the Communist world, with the usual expectation of colliding
the two forces in a highly profitable slaughter.” …
“Now international finance faces two alternatives:
1. to start the Third World War between ‘democratic’ and ‘Communist’ nations, a war
which cannot help but use atomic weapons in such quantity as to destroy most of our
civilization.
2. to declare an immediate world dictatorship and execute all opponents of
international finance.
“The peoples of the earth have no alternative. They must execute the two hundred
members of international finance or civilization will perish from the earth.”
[Note: That last sentence…i.e. “They must execute…” is in bold type in the original
publication.]
(3) In October 1952, Mullins wrote an article for the National Renaissance Party
(NRP) Bulletin entitled “Hitler: An Appreciation”.
The NRP was the first postwar neo-fascist group to be formed in the United States.
The January-February 1972 issue of the NRP Bulletin contained an article entitled
“First Racial Government” which identifies the type of individuals they anticipated
appealing to and, consequently, why someone with Mullins’ political or ideological
convictions might be interested in associating himself with them. Quoting from that
article:
“The NRP collaborated with its political allies, the Ku Klux Klan and White Action
Movement, in celebrating the birthday of Adolf Hitler, founder of National Socialism
and creator of the first historically-recorded government whose policies were based
exclusively on RACIAL considerations.”
Reply
paulhollister permalink
I really dont know what your point is here there is no doubt the oct revolution
was a jewish controlled operation 19 of the 23 men council were jews many of
whom couldnt speak russian, as for hitler operating a racial policy this is a
oversimplification of his desire that germany should be run and controlled by
germans. Im afraid due to the internet ( see justice for germans) the days of
waving the hitler flag as the big bad bogeyman are over. So if your intent is to
suggest mullins should be dismissed for his support of National Socialism im
afraid its simply not enough.
Reply
12.
Reply
13.
name789 permalink
>>>I quoted him on what he did NOT want: Gold as currency.

His mentor Pound favored both Social Credit and demmurrage money
Pound, evidently, had no problems seeing the self evident: that the Gold Standards of
the past and most certainly of modern history, beginning in Amsterdam, were banker
operations.
Neither had Eustace Mullins, who left very little to guess in his book:
“The international gold dealings of the Federal Reserve System, and its active support
in helping the League of Nations to force all the nations of Europe and South America
back on the gold standard for the benefit of international gold merchants like Eugene
Meyer, Jr. and Albert Strauss, is best demonstrated by a classic incident, the sterling
credit of 1925.
Until you brought it up, I thought Mullins was a hard money man –still do. Looking
through his two main books, it turns out, Mullins did not really come out and say what
his views on money were: what and how should be money and currency; how banks
should operate. This note of his hints at gold/silver standard:
“Crozier’s book exposed the financiers plan to substitute ‘corporation currency’ for
the lawful money of the U.S. as guaranteed by Article I, Sec. 8 Para. 5, of the
Constitution.”
In the quote you used, Mullins objects to the activities of the Fed, banks, and League
of Nations; but doesn’t say anything against gold/silver coins circulating in daily
business
=====
Ezra Pound, poet and fascist—
Based on “Jefferson and/or Mussolini” I think what Pound actually favoured was the
fascist state spending money into circulation.
He does list different alternatives to bank currency.

It is too bad, that Pound purposely mis-interprets what Jefferson wrote to Eppes and
Crawford. Jefferson was clearly talking about financing a war, and suggested that
during war coins should disappear and Treasury notes –promising to pay coin– should
circulate; after the war, notes should disappear and coin alone should circulate.
The full sentence, the second half of which Pound quotes and uses:
” The metallic medium of which we should be possessed at the commencement of a

war, would be a sufficient fund for all the loans we should need through its
continuance; and if the national bills issued be bottomed (as is indispensable) on
pledges of specific taxes for their redemption within certain and moderate epochs, and
be of proper denominations for circulation, no interest on them would be necessary or
just, because they would answer to every one the purposes of the metallic money
withdrawn and replaced by them.”
The full text of the two letters is here:

http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/jefferson/eppes.html
Based on Jefferson’s letters, it is my opinion that Jafferson would have objected to

Gessel’s notes with expiration date on them (and Jefferson wasn’t big on public works
projects, either: “I very much fear the road system will be urged. The mines of Peru
would not supply the moneys which would be wasted on this object, nor the patience
of any people stand the abuses which would be incontrollably committed under it.”)
Jefferson did not like Napoleon and his government; it is likely that he would not have
liked Mussolini and his corporate state.
Ezra Pound holds up President Van Buren to us; but President Van Buren was very
much a hard-money man, he made a deal with Senator Calhoun to pass the
Independent Treasury Act which stipulated that the Federal government may receive
and pay out gold and silver coins, only.
Reply
14.
name789 permalink
Christian morality (in Bank we trust)
{
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church has, as appears from a report made
to it on the 3rd of June last, the following amounts invested in stock.
2 shares Bank of North America, $ 800.00

20 do. Philadelphia Bank, 2,000.00
115 do. Mechanics Bank of Philadelphia, 4,828.00
1 do. Bank of Pennsylvania, 400.00
11 do. Bank of United States, 1,100.00
45 do. North American Insurance Co., 450.00
2 do. Pennsylvania Insurance Co., 800.00
100 do. Planners’ Bank of Mississippi, 11,077.62
200 do. Agricultural Bank of Mississippi, 23,701.76
10 do. Grand Gulf Bank of Mississippi, 992.00
150 do. Mer. & Mec. Bank of Wheeling, 15,025.00
250 do. Mer. & Man. Bank of Pittsburg, 14,302.00
200 do. Planters’ Bank of Tennessee, 22,106.25
150 do. Union Bank of Tennessee, 15,262.50
100 do. Bank of Mobile, 11,027.50
100 do. Bank of Louisville, 10,526.25
10 do. Chel. & Willow Gr. Turnp. Co., 1,000.00
1020 Phila. & Wilm. Railroad bonds, 940.00
$136,339.62
These stocks were estimated on the 27th May, 1842, by Charles Macalester, Thomas
Wickereham, and Joseph Swift, brokers, to be worth, at that time, $46,705, showing
an estimated loss of $9,634.62.
So much for the unholy connection of Bank and Church. If any one had proposed to
invest the funds of the Church in lottery tickets, the whole body of clergy and laity
would have been “horrified” at such a proposal. But those who had the management of
the financial concerns of the General Assembly, chose to employ its funds in a far
worse kind of gambling, to wit, in paper money banking, and no one ought to regret
the loss that has consequently been sustained.
}
40 years later, the Golden Church

http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/donnelly/goldchurch.html
Reply
15.
name789 permalink
Oh, (and by the way) do you have anything from Mullins in which he declares his
views on money and currency ? what did he consider the constitutional money of the
United States ?
In the passage you quote he voices his displeasure over what bankers do with gold, but
what did he think the money and currency of the United States (and every other states)
should have been ?
Reply

no, I don’t. But i’d be interested!
Reply
name789 permalink
So, without knowing anything about Mullins’ views on money, you try
to use him to support your contention against Griffin ?
Reply
not really name789: I quoted him on what did NOT want: Gold
as currency.
His mentor Pound favored both Social Credit and demmurrage
money
Reply
name789 permalink
I don’t, either (that is why I am asking)
=============
According to this footnote if his, it seems Mr. Mullins considered coin the
lawful money of the U.S.
“Crozier’s book exposed the financiers plan to substitute ‘corporation
currency’ for the lawful money of the U.S. as guaranteed by Article I, Sec. 8
Para. 5, of the Constitution.” –chapter 3, ‘The Federal Reserve Act’
Mr. Crozier said in his testimony before the Senate Hearrings, referred to by
Mr. Mullins, “Every dollar should be a real dollar, good to pay a dollar of debt
or purchase, full legal tender, redeemable in and secured by an adequate
reserve of actual gold.” (volume 3, page 2902)
This ‘quote’ used by Mullins, is a composite (below is what Crozier actually

said, and how):
Crozier testified before the Senate Committee that, “Prohibit the granting or
calling in of loans for the purpose of influencing quotation prices of securities
and the contracting of loans or increasing interest rates in concert by the banks
to influence public opinion or the action of any legislative body or the political
action of bank customers.
[break]
….within recent months, the distinguished Secretary of the Treasury of the

United States was reported in the open press notices as specifically charging
that there was a conspiracy, or words to that effect, among certain of the large
banking interests to put a contraction upon the currency and to raise interest
rates for the sake of forcing public opinion — to force Congress into passing
currency legislation desired by those institutions.
[long break]
The so-called administration currency bill grants just what Wall Street and the
big banks for twenty-five years have been striving for, namely, private instead
of public control of currency. It does this as completely as the Aldrich
Bill. Both measures rob the government and the people of all effective control
over the public’s money, and vest in the banks exclusively the dangerous
power to make money among the people scarce or plenty. The Aldrich Bill
puts this power in one central bank. The Administration Bill puts it in twelve
regional central banks, all owned exclusively by the identical private interests
that would have owned and operated the Aldrich Bank.
[long brake]
Garfield said that whoever controls the supply of currency would, to a large
extent, control the business and activities of all the people.
The great and immortal Jefferson declared that a private central bank issuing
the public currency was a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a
standing army.”
We do know that Representative Garfield was a spokeman for gold and bond
interest, and vocally opposed greenback ideas; we also know that Thomas
Jefferson considered gold/silver, alone, the constitutional money of the United
States
Reply
16.
John permalink
PLEASE SEE http://www.still2012.com
Reply
o
I’m aware of Bill and his campaign John! Were you just pointing him out or do
you have something specific in mind?
Reply
name789 permalink
Are you kidding someone ?

You know full well that that indicates that the Lizzard of Oz has no
principle (other than the principle of fortune & fame); neither do the
Libertarian Party which nominated him.
Is there a Libertarian Party platform somewhere, to which the lizzard

had to attach his name ? what does it say about free-trade, money,
banking and currency ?
Reply
name789 permalink
http://www.lp.org/platform
2.5 Money and Financial Markets
We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition

among banks and depository institutions of all types.
Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use
as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We
support a halt to inflationary monetary policies and
unconstitutional legal tender laws.
3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free

trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that
individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in
the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom
demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as
financial capital across national borders. However, we support
control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who
pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
Reply
yep….this is the kind of nonsense that libertarianism is

famous for……
Reply
name789 permalink
But your mentor added his name to this platform
On a different note: in the

Rothschild/Rockefeller article my post is
awaiting your approval in moderation; when you
find it, please correct the link in it
Reply
my mentor? Added his name?

Please elaborate a little name789!
Reply
name789 permalink
Is this “kind of nonsense” not the

platform of the Party which Bill,
the Lizzard of Oz, joined as
candidate ?
Reply
Lol
I like Bill. He made a

great film (the Money
Masters). That one really
hit me big time back in
2003. Still also promotes a
‘greenback’ (a continental,
really): debt free money. I
don’t think he wants to
back it with interest
bearing bonds, like our
man Lincoln did.
But to call him my

‘mentor’? Well, he did
teach me a lot, like many
others did.
You taught me a lot, but I

don’t like your solutions!
Reply
name789 permalink
Do you have (or plan) an article on the “competing currencies” concept

? I am itching to say a few rude things about the idea and its projectors
Reply

https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/for-self-
determination-we-need-free-currencies/
It’s rather primitive, I’ll have to do a better one at some stage,

but the grist is clear!
Reply
17.
Jason Greenwood permalink
I am a HUGE fan of Bill Still and have spoken to him on the phone. Nice man and
incredibly intelligent and very astute to monetary history. His seminal work the
Money Masters was one of the docos that opened my eyes to the NWO all those years
ago. The Secret of Oz is a fitting follow up doco for sure.
This was a great article and it’s also worth reading this:
http://www.peoplesmandate.iinet.net.au/debt_free_money_in_america.html
as it tells about how the founding fathers knew all too well the dangers of a Gold
standard.
Be well.
Reply
18.
FollowsTheWay permalink
I believe Ron Paul and G. Edward Griffin to BOTH be controlled opposition. They
both smell of freemasonry and/or Jesuits.
1Tim 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted
after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many
sorrows.
Reply
Kenneth Hulsberg permalink
I cannot testify whether or not they’re Freemason or of the Jesuit Order. I can
say they’re thinking is favorable to the international monetary empire lording
over western nations. Thus, whether willingly or unwittingly, they’re indeed
controlled opposition.
Reply
Betsy Kunkel permalink
The Jesuits before Vatican II would have been opposed to

Freemasonry. Freemasons actually came into positions in the Catholic
Church (themselves not being Catholics) in order to take over the
structures of the Church. This culminated at Vatican II when a false
council took place. The Catholic Church was the strongest opponent to
Freemasonry which is ultimately Satanism. The Catholic Church now
resides in a remnant of faithful believers. See Vaticancatholic.com for
all the proofs and information.
Reply
19.
Halyn permalink
I have been suspicious of Ron Paul and Ed Griffin. You gave me some new insight.
Thanks for the fine articles.
Reply
great! thanks!
Reply
20.
Franz Seiler permalink
Quote from this article:

Half a century later, the London usurocracy shut down on the issue of paper money by
the Pennsylvania colony, A.D. 1750. This is not usually given prominence in the U.S.
school histories.
:End of quote
I’m just about reading Griffin, and having known the events as reported in this article,
I was quite astonished about his report: He writes that the law enforced by the Bank of
England in 1751 was due to the paper ‘colonial scrip’ needed to be corrected for
having been inflated, abused by the colonial authorites (Pennsylvania). So what G.
Edward Griffin has written here is wrong to follow his gold agenda….. It will be
absolutely easy for the ‘Money masters’ to absolutely control a currency based world-
wide on gold. This may well be the trap set up by the ‘Money masters’, propagated by
the “gold-bugs” such as Ron Paul, Griffin, Alex Jones etc.etc.. This trap is then set up
for the people world-wide! Cp. to this what Aaron Russo said on the plans for world-
domination by the ‘Money masters’ ……
Thanks for this clarification!
Reply
That’s what it’s all about Franz, and I’m happy it has helped you.
Reply
In fact: You’re clarifying the article and I thank YOU!
Very interesting and actually quite damning.
Reply
name789 permalink
This is really amusing; and the two of you can walk upright and
chew gum ?…
Reply
o
Just about everything Franz, including the Holocaust.
I’d suggest you read up on http://www.henrymakow.com

He’s not a revisionist, in the sense that he supports the official holocaust
narrative, but he turns upside down just about everything we think we know
about the war.
Reply
It’s much larger than just the gold-standard. The Austrian School promotes this
myth of free-market economies. However, according to our Constitution we
have a political economy. Article 1, Section 8, gives Congress the express
authority to “coin Money, and regulate the Value thereof.” The fact is, this
alone is the kernel of our national sovereignty. No nation is sovereign which
does not create and regulate its own currency, and whoever does is the true
sovereign power.
Government and civilization go hand and hand. One cannot exist without the
other. Wherever there is government there is a political economy, not some
free-market utopia guided by the loving hands of private international
corporate interests.
The Austrians want to remove government from regulating or interfering with

the economy. This means handing over the power to “coin Money, and
regulate the Value thereof” to private financial interests. They’ll say, let the
markets decide! Think credit rating agencies, Goldman Sucks, Morgan, Bank
of America, etc, etc. You get the point. This is exactly what the monetary
empire wants in order to allow private corporate control over the U.S economy
in totality. This is better known as fascism, global governance, or the new
world order.
It’s funny how many leading figures of the truth-movement are tied to groups
like the Council for National Policy, the Mont Pelerin Society, the Sovereign
Military Order of Malta, and on and on it goes. They love to cloak themselves
in the conjured dead spirit of Thomas Jefferson, and preach to everyone how
we must crucify ourselves upon a cross of gold, and turn over our government
and economy to the hidden-hands of private finance, in desperate hope we may
once again regain the blessings of God. They’ll tell you we need one trillion of
austerity just to get started. The good Doctor will cure the disease by killing
the patient!
You simply cannot have a “free-market” and government at the same time, and
thus you cannot have civilization. But, depopulation has been the goal all
along.
Reply
21.
Good stuff Anthony Migchels.
The gold buggers place all that faith in gold as a currency, because they perceive the
supply and demand value of that gold as representing real value. Bad news for the
austerity, I mean, Austrian boys. When the U.S was on the gold standard the “free-
market” didn’t determine the value of it, rather it was the many coinage acts passed by
Congress, and signed into law by presidents. Thus, that beloved gold-standard
becomes nothing more than “fiat” money with its value assigned by man.
You see, that’s the big problem. The gold buggers, who are simply Austrian austerity
boys, believe in this fantastic myth about a “free-market.” The U.S has never had a
“free-market,” and no where does it exist today. In order to have civilization you must
have government. Wherever you find government you find a political economy.
You know what the Austrian School’s “free-market” really is? The conditions needed
for global corporate governance.
The Austrian School is a farce, and the pay-to-riot movement.
Anthony, the answer to 1984, is $19.95 + tax.
Reply
Techy permalink
Why don’t you boy first learn what are you talking about? Why not simply
download and read “Human Action” by Ludwig von Mises and “Capitalism:..”
by George Reisman? Both are free at capitalism.net and mises.org. Among the
other, the later book has a very fine chapter specifically on gold vs. inflation
but to understand it you may need first to learn about the quantitative theory of
money from the previous chapters. Oh well, these are serious books that may
intimidate someone complementing his twisted and poor education with hours
spent in the leftist and antisemitic blog-sphere.
Reply
Your counter-argument is to promote Austrian material? Really? Weak,

very weak. Look, you may get intellectually romanticized by Austrian
non-sense born of the mind of Carl Menger, the personal tutor of fascist
Rudolph Von Habsburg of the Austrian Empire, but I don’t. I’m not a
monetarist, imperialist, or fascist.
Let’s keep things real simple here. Either we support the Constitution
or we don’t. Article 1, Section 8, gives Congress the authority to “coin
Money, and regulate the value thereof.” That’s a political economy, and
not this free-market non-sense promoted by the Austerity School.
Great idea. Let’s institute another damn gold-standard, the very thing
used by the bankers to create their empire. Yeah, because somehow this
time around things will be different.
Sorry, but your little Austerity School and gold-buggery wont solve
anything. It will only create the needed conditions for global
governance, AKA the new world order.
Here’s a real idea for you. Restore the Constitution and Republic of the
U.S by re-instituting the American credit system, which will restore
real national sovereignty again. Gold and silver coin is NOT for
government, it’s for the people only. Stop being monetarists! We’re
American, and our tradition is a credit system, not the monetary system
of free-trade, or the Austrian Austerity School.
Reply
marxbites permalink
The Banksters ONLY TOUTED another gold standard to suck

away hard money democrats from the Bryanites and NEVER
had plans to NOT INFLATE, even though 100% redemption
was still in effect. Hence, that bankster lackey FDR’s stealing of
our gold.
Of course anyone with a lick of sense understands that 1907’s
crash was mere ruse to get a FED to paper the costs of WW1 in
planning before 1907 by the progressive imperialist corporate
statists and bankster overlords.
ALSO – IYRCC – FDR then devalued the people’s new paper,

promised to be redeemable AFTER the EMERGENCY, by
almost 70%. A 70% windfall for govt’s war and power-
mongering spendthrifts by the same general cabal in charge of
WW1’s spending on WW2.
You blowhards kill me.
Have a single solitary one of you actually read Mises or

Rothbard, both of whom NEVER supported statism of the legal
tender inflationist war kind? Nor interest on fiat created from
thin air? Human Action? Or Murray’s The History of Money
and Banking?
I dare say NOT!!!
Reply
name789 permalink
to “coin money” cannot mean to coin paper
>>>>Restore the Constitution and Republic of the U.S by re-

instituting the American credit system
you really have no idea what you are talking about, do you ?
The originators of the United States were very much free-
traders and hard money men (all those smugglers didn’t do it for
paper, and couldn’t have been friends of tariff)
The credit system which you imagine to be your tradition was
introduced into the United States by Baring, Brothers and
Company; these purveyors of the credulity system were also the
ones who gave ye the tariff system; which make Alex Hamilton
and Daniel Webster and Henry Clay your hero and standard
bearer (and, of course, the banker tool Lincoln)
Reply

“The originators of the United States were very much
free-traders and hard money men”
Hah! Now I’ve got you! It’s a first, and that’s why I’m
so happy, you’re human after all.
George Washington printed the Continental.
Reply
name789 permalink
He was not a printer.

Have you seen one with his signature on it ?
Have you read his views on money ?
We have already discussed it in another topic

that the people who composed and ratified the
constitution considered gold/silver/copper coin
the money of the united States
ye may disagree with these dead people as to
their opinions, but that will not change the fact;
of course, it is also true, that a good half of those
composers and ratifiers had every intention of
breaking the constitution and to issue paper
money through intermediaries, but also does not
change the fact (these were the people who later
established the credibility system, you may say
that half of the founders were liars, but that
doesn’t help you, either);
if ye want to restore the concept (that was written

as constitution) of 1791 you have no room for
anything other than free trade and coin money
Reply
It’s an important subject. I’m not really

sure you’re right, but I’m most definitely
not sure you’re wrong. But I’m only
interested in it because so many people
seem to believe the Constitution is some
kind of Holy Scripture.
I’m more with Dubya on this one: it’s

just another goddamn piece of paper.
Written by dead men, 250 years ago. Not

much may have changed since then, but
enough to reconsider some of their
positions, most notably regarding Gold, a
commodity that was already utterly
controlled even in their day.
Reply
name789 permalink
>>>>piece of paper
I am with you on that one; and no
one should make a religion out of
it
Just as Jefferson wrote, from time
to time (or from generation to
generation) it should be evaluated
and adjusted; Jefferson also wrote
that even within his own life time
one or two modification should
have been made, but it was
impossible to overcome vested
interests
But if someone wants to hold up

this 250 year old paper, he has no
choice but to adhere to its letters
Reply
name789 permalink
>>>gold/silver
With the electronics age the
situation got worse: now both
metals became commodities
(today even poor people own toys
which contain silver and gold)
Reply
TruthHurts permalink
How laughably you are exposed.

Just like all anti-semites, you are
a light-weight annoyance to the
true leaders of the world.
All this charismatic talk. All for

nothing, getting your followers
into an energy vortex of emotion
that leads nowhere.
Conspiracy theorists are all about

deceiving your fellow men. Look
at how some love gold, others
hate it. Some are fundamentalist
Christians, others die-hard new-
agers. Some are anti-semites,
worshiping Hitler — for other
Hitler is worth more hate than
even Jews have for him.
Some are catholics, others

consider the Church the anti-
christ. Nothing unites them. No
coherent theory on the inside as
well. No common enemy. No
common allies. No coherent
logical arguments.
Only application of base emotion:

fear, perhaps a bit of “good”
inspiration for change but no
substantial improvement.
No reason. It is all a mess, Ezra

Pound had it right. All a big mess.
For what? To appear to be a
charismatic leader of a tiny sect,
to worship power and in the end
to come to the same conclusions
as the Bush family? To become
just as naive, petty, tiny-minded
and ignorant as the supposed elite
of the globe?
What you have learned is rhetoric

to inspire and to trick the masses.
What you haven’t studied is
philosophy.
Reply
I’m sorry to say this

comment gives me
absolutely zero clues
either about what has
provoked this tirade, or
how I could improve
Truthhurts!
Reply
REN permalink
Anthony, I
wouldn’t worry
about truthhurts
tirade. I see you as
digging deep for
the truth, and that
means stepping on
long standing
shibboleths. Man’s
nature is not a
pretty thing, but
there are things we
can do and core
principles that
should guide us.
Discovering those
things is not for the
faint of heart, and
is bound to rile
some feathers.
Don’t be
discouraged.
For example_
Jewish Anti-
semitism: We
cannot even
examine money
history without
running into
Jewish mal-
feasance. It’s
pervasive and
expected because it
is a superiority cult
merged with
money power.
Other’s have
grabbed this
money power, and
have then
exhibited the same
bad behaviors. I’m
sure this sounds
anti-semitic, but so
what? The truth
hurts then so be it.
We are at a place
in time and space,
where lying and
maintaining smoke
screens are being
undone.
Personally, I use
my JewDar and
look for Jewish
names as a marker
in history to help
me find bad
behaving money
power elites. I’m
seldom
disappointed, and
equally I feel
genuinely sorry for
the jewish sheeple
as their co-
religionist
“wolves” consume
their own flock.
Also, I don’t
believe you are
trying to ‘lead.”
There are groups
of us that have
common interests,
and we are
congregating
across vast
geography via the
internet. Together
we are piecing
together the
puzzle, and we are
becoming more in
“agreement” day
after day,
especially as the
truth wins out.
Anthony Migchels
permalink
Thanks REN, I
appreciate it. Yes,
Jewish
involvement in this
is simply
impossible to
avoid, simple as
that. And indeed: I
don’t ‘try to lead’.
I just want to get
the job done and
the people with
that mindset
gravitate towards
each other. Let’s
just help each
other keeping the
eye on the ball.

name789 permalink
Senator James Fowler Simmons (1795-1864) of

Rhode Island
in the Senate on Friday, December 18, 1857,
during the debates of the Treasury notes bill
(I think he indicates well the mindset of the
founders)
” I think anybody who has read the history of

our country may know what the fathers of the
Republic meant when they prohibited the States
from issuing bills of credit, or making anything
but gold and silver coin a tender for the
payment of debts. We know that during the
revolutionary war, and the period anterior to the
formation of the Constitution, this country was
cursed with an irredeemable paper currency,
issued by the States and by Congress, called
continental money, and made a tender for the
payment of debts. Why did the framers of the
Constitution mean in prevent this ? They did not
mean that anything should circulate as money,
the payment of which could not be enforced by
the individual holding it in the legal tribunals of
the country. Can you enforce the payment of one
of these Treasury notes ? No more than you
could enforce the payment of a bond from this
Government. You cannot enforce the payment of
a note issued by a State. You cannot sue a State.
Rhode Island, which was one of the last States to
adopt the Constitution, and one of the most
lavish in paper money, because she used it to pay
her soldiers, and had more soldiers, in proportion
to territory, than any other State, adopted the
Constitution in 1790 or 1791; and one of the first
acts of the General Assembly, immediately
afterwards, was to create a bank to issue paper
money. That bank is in existence to-day. It is one
of those “irresponsible” institutions of which the
President speaks. Its first board of directors
contained three or four men who spilled the first
blood of the Revolution; for, say what you will,
the beginning of the Revolution was the capture
and burning of the Gaspee, and the contest in
which Lieutenant Duddington was wounded.”
in the same speech Mr. Simmons suggested a

network of savings institutions—
“I would make an institution into which I should
allow the producing classes to put their small
mites, and become mutual aiders and helpers of
each, leaving your commercial men and traders
to manage as they may. I would have what is
now called in the States, a saving’s institution,
connected with the Treasury of the United States,
and let the business of the Government be kept
in the channel of the business of the producers,
widening and deepening them, and increasing
your facilities, and I would let anybody who
pleased, deposit fifty dollars, and make the
permanent depositors retire from the institution
when they had been in fifteen years. I was
familiar with the origin of the last Bank of the
United States, and it was the most popular
institution in the world, while it was open to
everybody to subscribe. But when you have let
in the present generation to an institution whose
benefits are large, and shut the door against their
successors, it will become unpopular from that
day, and by the time it has run twenty years it
will have no sympathies with the public, and the
public will have no feeling for it but hatred. You
should have an institution into which you would
let people come, as they grow into active
business life, and make their deposits and share
in the benefits of the institution. Then you will
have no monopolies. When a man has been there
the period of his common business life, let him
retire; he has no further use for a bank; he may as
well put his money in stocks, as a permanent
investment. The advantages of such an
institution should be for the active business men
engaged in the transport of the products of the
country, and should be for the benefit of the
producers, to enable them to wait for the distant
return of the rewards of their labor.”
Reply
name789 permalink
General Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the

Treasury, a Founder, the one who introduced and
started the “American System” reveals the
attitude of many of the signers and ratifiers:
governmnet-issued paper is bad, very dangerous;
paper issued by a privately owned central bank is
highly recommended –and they do not consider
it violation of the constitution to do through
surrogates that which is prohibited for them to do
“The emitting of paper money is wisely

prohibited to the State Governments, and the
spirit of the prohibition ought not to be
disregarded by the United States’ Government.
Though paper emissions under a general
authority, might have some advantages not
applicable, and be free from some disadvantages
which are applicable, to the like emissions by the
States, separately, yet they are of a nature so
liable to abuse –and it may even be affirmed, so
certain of being abused– that the wisdom of
Government will be shown in never trusting
itself with the use of so seducing and dangerous
an expedient. In times of tranquillity it might
have no ill-consequence; it might even perhaps
be arranged in a way to be productive of good:
but in great and trying emergencies, there is
almost a moral certainty of its being
mischievous.”
—And to this Hamiltonian “american system”

wants your friend, in his ignorance, to
return……
Reply
btw, are you saying the treasury notes that were printed
in the days before Lincoln were ‘unconstitutional’?
Reply
name789 permalink
No.
1. your friend has no idea of what he talks about;
if he did, he would not want to return to the letter
of the constitution
2. The Treasury notes were not paper money –of

which your friend is wet dreaming; they were
evidences of debt, circulating as currency;
promising (just like Continentals) to pay silver,
and promising to pay interest; there were strict
constructionists who considered them un-
constitutional as bills of credit read endNote at
bottom—
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/benton/calho
un_370918.html
Thomas Jefferson –who did not sign or ratify the
constitution– considered them perfectly fine, and
recommended their use for war finance
my opinion is that until Nevada and California

there was not enough gold/silver in the U.S., so
provision to Treasury notes should have been
considered and made
Reply
22.
a_reader permalink
Another great article. I noticed a few months ago on the DB that Griffin was a Bircher
– that comment was not particularly well received. But I read Mullins (but not Pound)
and so I felt that, in comparison to Mullins, Griffin was not willing to go as far (he had
simply rewritten Mullins to make it more palatable to Money Power). Notice how
Griffin gets invited on Glenn Beck, etc…
But you really dug deep with this one – I’m impressed that you went back to Pound to
truly understand the kind of distortions introduced by Griffin.
Just a side note: the yearly mining production is really a small percentage of the total
amount of gold mined. So either way, it is dubious that mining can really be used to
efficiently modulate the supply of gold. And why should we trust this method of
control to be better than others (apart from the question of who controls the mines, as
you pointed out)?
Reply
o
It’s just all so nonsensical a_reader, all these rationales.
Sometimes I think they’re in a panic. I mean: it must be difficult to keep the

faith when there are so many inconsistencies in the story.
Now you hear them talk about ‘commodity’ money. We can supposedly also
use other commodities, like wheat.
Really good for steady volume, he? Oh my, a good harvest, we’ll see inflation!
If we can have commodity money, why can’t I generate some money by

offering my house or other assets I own as collateral?
Sounds like interest free credit?
I don’t care about ignorance, but the fact of the matter is: I think the above
proves either bloated arrogance from a guy who thinks he knows, or sheer
malice.
Reply
23.
philo permalink
I think it’s safe to say Ezra Pound was saying a lot of “crazy things” that led to his
being committed that didn’t survive the passage of time. Even things a close friend
like Mullins wouldn’t repeat if it didn’t make sense to him. Unfortunately Pound
didn’t have the internet.
As for “Creature” – a book commissioned and largely written by the Austrian
controlled John Birch Society.
Reply
Of course, like I said Pound was no saint. He fell for Hitler after all.
But he was right on the money, pun intended.
Reply

Franz Seiler permalink
If Pound was right on the money issue it’s for aught I know at present
that he was also right on this: (quote from your article:)
.” According to Pound, it was the money issue (above all) that united
the Allies during the second 20th-century war against Germany: “Gold.
Nothing else uniting the three governments, England, Russia, United
States of America. That is the interest–gold, usury, debt, monopoly,
class interest, and possibly gross indifference and contempt for
humanity.”
(:end of quote)
If this is right it’s diametrically opposed to what’s school-, and
university-learning, also to the injunctions of the Allies on present
Germany…. What else need to be corrected in the histric narrative on
WWII?
Reply
required permalink
Has Pound ever mentioned the name Hitler ? How did he fall for him ?
(isn’t your friend, book-peddler Brown, an admirer of Hitler?)
Pound was no expert or authority on money, or on the history of
banking in the United States.
He moved into that asylum at the suggestion of Hemmingway, to avoid

prison; the warden, Ms. Overholser, was an admirer of Pound. The
book from which Pound learned most of what he new about bankers
Willis A. Overholser.
Griffin from Jeckyl Island is a plagiarist, plain and simple; the

conspiracy industry is made up of them. Read about an othe rparasite
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/mullins/media.html
who lived off Mullins’ work
Why would you expect a plagiarist to know about money ? or cancer ?

or martians ?
Jennings Bryan — none of ye wants to mention that Mr. Bryan was

practically the godfather of the fed res act; how could ye, none of ye
knows anything about the fed res act (afraid of library, afraid of
congressional record)
Reply

Ah, you were here before our little encounter re Lincoln, I

didn’t notice.
I’ll submit anytime that your knowledge of US history is way

beyond anything I ever hope to learn, I’m happy you find it
worthwhile educating the ignorant masses (me in particular)
here.
I was starting to get the idea that Bryan was way over rated. I
just like that legendary quote so much.
I wouldn’t say Brown is a fan of A.H., she just favorably

evaluated his monetary policy.
You don’t agree that ‘Pound fell for Hitler’? He was in Italy
doing his radio shows, right? He was a little ‘anti semitic’ too, it
seems?
Are you saying Pound did not mention Hitler anywhere in his
writing?
I think you underrate Pound’s monetary expertise. The Populist

american monetary tradition is quite different from Europe’s
freethinker tradition. It’s probably true Pound was not too well
versed when it comes to the American way, but he was well
aware of Social Credit and Gesell’s work. His ‘what is money
for’ is a good basic primer on monetary theory. Most
economists today would benefit immensely from it, although
that does mean very little indeed, of course.
How would you like me to address you?
Reply
name789 permalink
I don’t like to go through the process of signing up; as

we may see from the result, when i did sign up, on
account of another blog, it did not turn out exactly as
expected (it should have been “789” as is everywhere
else)
http://www.dailypaul.com/123696/what-happens-when-
your-money-is-based-on-gold-and-silver-but-there-is-
no-gold
b) no; I was asking the question, where in his writings

did Pound use the word “Hitler”? I searched for the
word in the text i have….
He was for Mussolini all the way; and for the concept
that the power of the government should be used for the
whole nation, not just for the benefit of one class
c) Pound’s expertise:
If you read through Pound’s pamphlets and books, you
notice that until he refers to Overholser’s pamphlet (30
pages), his knowledge reflects what he heard from
british social creditors; then he swallows uncritically
what he read in Overholser’s booklet.
2) it is simply not true what he complains of, that
information is not available; if he had walked into the
library of New York he could have read Van Buren’s,
Benton’s, Wright’s, etc. speeches in Congress; a 4,500
pages Jefferson papers was published in 1861, an other
one around 1900 — he could have read Jefferson until
his eyes glaze over
the reason Pound himself fell for the mythological

Lincoln of McGeer’s creation, because he did not avail
himself the readily available resources
Pound’s book “Impact” i did not feel was worth my time

scanning and uploading
w) this should be about the last remark (same old, same

old, same old) on E. Brown’s Lincoln fetish: count the
pages in “web of debt” how many for Lincoln and
greenback, and count how much of the theory/picture
presented in it is based on this false foundation
what was the true Lincoln monetary policy ?

I have 600+800 pages to back up my contention that
legal tender notes were issued to pave the way
Is that what Brown is favourable of ? is that what
Brown’s chinaman would want for China ? a national
banking system built on legal tender US notes ?
Jennings Bryan:
Good guy, upstanding citizen; yet i still think he would
have signed the Fed Res act –in fact, in 1913 his name
was attached to the bill; if any of ye groupies dared to
read the Record, we might just find out for-sure
Mr. Bryan was a good christian man, but as we know
from his appearence in the Scopes monkey trial, he did
not comprehend that if the very first chapter of the Bible
is wide open to wide intepretation (or not even true) then
the whole book is on sinking sand
similarly, i think he did not comprehend that banking is
one, and cannot be regulated. One of his suggestion, the
deposite insurance later became reality
Judging by the efforts and money expended to defeat

him, he must have been substantial nuisance to goldites
Reply
“Judging by the efforts and money expended to

defeat him, he must have been substantial
nuisance to goldites”
I think he was: his powerful advocacy of a

broader money supply with silver, instead of just
gold, was anti scarce/deflationary money.
I think the same battle is going on today. Silver

is undervalued by historical standards: 1:50 to
Gold, where 1:15 seems to have been normal.
But Gold is expensive because the Money

Power’s stooges are betting it will be money
again. Silver not.
Especially in this day and age Silver is important

in many industrial processes and there simply is
not enough of it around to play a serious
monetary role. Or at any rate, that is what I
gather from the data, but correct me if I’m
wrong.
However: who needs silver when there is paper?

Ok, bits ‘n bytes nowadays.
Reply

name789 permalink
“They say that we are opposing national bank currency;

it is true. If you will read what Thomas Benton said,
you will find he said that, in searching history, he could
find but one parallel to Andrew Jackson; that was
Cicero, who destroyed the conspiracy of Cataline and
saved Rome. Benton said that Cicero only did for Rome
what Jackson did for us when he destroyed the bank
conspiracy and saved America. We say in our platform
we believe that the right to coin and issue money is a
function of government. We believe it. We believe that
it is a part of sovereignty, and can no more with safety
be delegated to private individuals than we could afford
to delegate to private individuals the power to make
penal statutes or levy taxes. Mr. Jefferson, who was
once regarded as good Democratic authority, seems to
have differed in opinion from the gentleman who has
addressed us on the part of the minority. Those who are
opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper
money is a function of the bank, and that the
government ought to go out of the banking business. I
stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell
them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of
government, and that the banks ought to go out of the
governing business.”
No, my friends, that will never be the verdict of our

people. Therefore, we care not upon what lines the battle
is fought. If they say bimetallism is good, but that we
cannot have it until other nations help us, we reply, that
instead of having a gold standard because England
has, we will restore bimetallism, and then let England
have bimetallism because the United States has it. If
they dare to come out in the open field and defend the
gold standard as a good thing, we will fight them to the
uttermost. Having behind us the producing masses of
this nation and the world, supported by the commercial
interests, the laboring interests and the toilers
everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold
standard by saying to them : You shall not press down
upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall
not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cross_of_Gold_Speech
notice how he names England; untill 1900 it was

commonly known that England was enemy of the
United States
Reply
yeah, that’s the quote: “You shall not press down

upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you
shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”
That’s the stuff of legends. I’ll quote him again

and again.
Signing the FED act is bad though. It’s what

made me turn away from him. But you give a
better analysis: he just didn’t really see through it
all.
Just shows how good men can be made to do the
bidding of evil.
Reply
name789 permalink
He was Secretary of State, technically he

had nothing to do with the Act (or any
act); the two houses passed it and
President Woodrow signed it. What is
saying the most is that Bryan was silent
on the subject (Jefferson wrote an
objection, even if he couldn’t do
anything)
When the loan was extended to England,

Bryan resigned in protest.
This is what I am harping on regarding

these conspiracy industrialists: they don’t
know anything; and the people do not
want to learn from good history.
Mr. Bryan could have and should have

learned from Benton, etc.
Senator Pettigrew’s opinion:–
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/petti
grew/petig_18.html
Reply
Senator Pettigrew’s opinion:–
That’s just about the most

damning report on any man I’ve
ever read. I hope I’m dead before
anybody writes like this about me.
Reply
name789 permalink
What did Jennings Bryan

–Cross of Gold Jennings
Bryan– do when the
Federal reserve bill came
up for discussion ?
It was not until August 29,

1913, that the currency
bill was first introduced.
This bill bore the name of
the Glass-Owen bill,
because in its final shape
it was the result of
conferences between Mr.
Glass, President Wilson,
Secretary of the Treasury
McAdoo, Secretary of
State Bryan and Senator
Owen, chairman of the
newly organized Banking
and Currency Committee
of the Senate.
On September 18 (3
weeks later) the House
voted on, and passed, this
bright reorganizational
idea 286 to 85………
Reply
name789 permalink
I am standing corrected: Pound did mention “Hitler”
“Now what were, and are the three planks of the Hitler
program as set forth in the opening of La Mia Battaglia,
Italian translation of second half of Mein Kampf?
“First, health, health of the race. Now every American

(or Englander of my generation or of that before or after
my generation) knew and knows that we were up against
the problem of “be a slave or not breeding.” Any man
not born rich in our time knew he had to mate late.
Breed late, and breed few, or else go into slavery. Mr.
Curtis Moffit said to me that he saw what would happen
if he was a good boy, so he decided on badness. Said he
would be a bad boy, and float on the top of the current.
Waal, I landed in Europe, as my incipient biographers
have stated, with justice, with 80 bucks, American
dollars (pre-Morgenthau) in my clothin’ and that led me
to a practical view of some problems. As to the Hitler
program, it was (what we all knew, and did nothing
about, namely) that the breedin’ of human beings
deserves more care and attention than the breedin’ of
horses and wiffetts, or even the breedin’ of sheep, goat,
and the larger livestock. That is point one of the nazi
program. Breed good, and preserve the race. Breed
thorough, that is for thoroughbreds, conserve the best of
the race. Conserve the best elements. That means
eugenics: as opposed to race suicide. And it did not and
does not please the Talmudic Jews who want to kill off
all the other races whom they can not subjugate; and
drive down what he thinks is doin’, his usf to his race or
nation consists in seeing the object and writin’ down
what he sees, and not falsifying his record.
“Secondly, what is the second point of the Hitler

program? Personal responsibility. A political system in
which you can’t pass the buck. Very unpleasant for
hired M.P.’s debtors (Jews, butter-and-egg-men fakers
like Wendell Willkie, and M.P. congressmen, etc.).
Financed by Jews and put in the legislatures to defraud
the people in usurer’s interests and kept there by bank
money who can be on committees, and always, always
avoid all responsibility for swindling laws. Such as was
the demonetization of silver [in] 1873, the sale of the
country in 1863. The Federal Reserve System, and its
infamous workings, making the people pay two dollars
for every one dollar spent by the government. Hitler,
having seen the Jew puke in the German democracy,
was out for responsibility, government officials etc. to
be responsible for their acts. Most unpleasant for
Monds, Warburgs, invisible de facto Jew governments.
“And the third point was a study of history. To look at

the history. Waaal, now what program does this
contradict? I ask you, if you are such low down and gol
darn suckers, or such British blockheads, or such
unfathomable and irredeemable ignorami, as not to
know what program this contradicts, there is not a great
deal of hope for your posterity. I may tell you someday
where the opposing program is found, if you are too
weak-kneed and puny to trace it. And when you, or if
you do trace it, you may see why the stick screen was
erected, and why people began to speak evil of Hitler.
As to who spake and speaks evil of Hitler, we will
someday go into that also.”
Reply
ernie1241 permalink
Mullins, it should be noted, became a critic of the Birch Society only AFTER
they refused his request to sell his books through their American Opinion
bookstore chain.
Reply
24.
Pēteris permalink
Seems that it is time to write some good book. Like Griffin did
Reply
Well……..we seem to disagree: I don’t like his book

Daily Bell Review On Wörgl, Gesell, The Fabian Society, and The Alternative Media

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Daily Bell Review On Wörgl, Gesell, The Fabian Society, and The Alternative Media

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Daily Bell review: on Wörgl, Gesell, the

Fabian society, and the “alternative” media

‘Gesell’s theories were tried famously at Wörgl in Germany.’

Here is a relevant quote from Harper’s Magazine:

And here is a paragraph from Wikipedia:

Electronic Publishing and the Internet Reformation

Obama’s Hammer and the Progress of The Daily Bell

A feedbacker made an interesting comment in reply to this article:

You want to be really free of the power elite? Go Amish. “

The Daily Bell replied:

The Daily Bell hoax?In "Agora Inc."

bionic mosquito permalink

November 18, 2012 2:18 am

I am satisfied that we will not agree, however I welcome the dialogue.

Tao Jonesing permalink

November 18, 2012 11:29 pm

January 6, 2013 7:15 am

I take it you like Rousseau also?

January 6, 2013 7:12 am

January 6, 2013 7:26 am

January 6, 2013 7:59 am

*Gesell believed in government enforcment of a currency that would lose value by

Andrew Buckley permalink

January 2, 2014 8:19 pm

- John Donne (1572-1631), Meditation XVII

 Follow via Email

 The loudest knells

3 Lessons from the 2… on The Mont Pèlerin Society: The…

Debunking another co… on Debunking another cornerstone…

ey.tsujimoto on How Money Power controls the L…

In The Year 2000 The… on Debunking another cornerstone…

Edwin on Analyzing Austrian economics m…

WScottT on The “Catholic” Arm…

WScottT on The “Catholic” Arm…

eithan on Debunking another cornerstone…

Old Rothschild- and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialectic

How the Money Power spawns Libertarians

The Agora Empire

Libertarians, “hard-money” investors and power elites: an enduring partnership

Although Davidson and Rees-Mogg apparently promote pseudo-libertarian solutions and

Although Rees-Mogg is associated with the Libertarian movement, he would be more

The Daily Bell Hoax?

Old Rothschild- and Rockefeller hands controlled the Libertarian-Communist dialecticIn

← Libertarianism is evil in 3 minutes or less

The Huffington Post-Tom Woods controlled opposition gold standard debate →

64 Comments leave one →

Contrarian Rex (@ContrarianRex) permalink

October 8, 2012 11:17 am

Anthony Migchels permalink

October 8, 2012 12:10 pm

Anthony Migchels permalink

October 8, 2012 12:59 pm

Reblogged this on Recovering Austrians.

October 8, 2012 11:23 pm

Fascist, like Ezra Pound ? –you could only wish

Is the Lizzard of Oz still a presidential candidate for this Libertarian Party ?

Anthony Migchels permalink

October 9, 2012 5:45 pm

Dave Scotese permalink

October 9, 2012 2:52 am

The Daily Knell permalink*

October 9, 2012 4:03 am

October 9, 2012 3:12 pm