posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:55 PM
Covering each other’s back. One cult, many faces.
That night the banker met up with his fellow bankers, who emptied their vaults and gave him enough money to make good his worthless promises.
The next day his customers returned and he paid them in full.
His customers then took their gold and silver to the banks of the men who had covered their fellow cultist’s back.
That night the same cult of bankers counted their common assets and found that they had all their gold and silver back.
Soon the banker who made good all his promissory notes, became the most respected banker in the land.
Part III: the legalisation of reserve banking.
Eventually it became clear that all bankers operated such a scam, so the bankers sought to make their scam legal.
Once this scam was legal, for every pound of silver in a depository, the banker could legally issue silver notes for many pounds of silver.
This was simply the legalisation of theft, and soon the bankers, not the tyrants who ran the government, became the richest Capitalists (monetarists)
on the face of the earth.
The worker must sell his labour hours for Capital (money), but the bankers can simply issue Capital; this is simply theft of ‘labour.’
Since no new money is ever issued without being lent at interest, and since the worker cannot produce his own currency to pay this interest, since for
monetarism to work, only a select few are ever given the power to issue money, there is always more money owed to the bankers, including the interest,
than there is money in the system; thus the worker is enslaved by a system where he/she is constantly ‘chasing his/her tail,’ since it is
impossible for all debt to be repaid; thus Capitalism (monetarism) is a system where debt and bankruptcy are inevitable for some (the indebted) and
great wealth are inevitable for the Usuryists (money creators and lenders).
Money is power; power corrupts.
Whether gold or silver, or whether promissory notes; as long as there is monetarism, and some can create Capital from nothing and lend it at interest,
and others have to sell their labour (as labour slaves or sexual slaves) and become indebted to survive, there will be crime and poverty and some
shall have abundant wealth and others will starve.
The slave master and those who benefit from slavery can always be expected to argue that ‘slavery works,’ and this is true for the slave master
since the slaves do all the work and the master reaps all the rewards of their labour.
Capitalism (Monetarism) works.
Capitalism works for those who are the beneficiaries of Capitalism. Those in the First World who are the beneficiaries of Third World labour slavery
can mostly be expected to argue that ‘Capitalism works,’ which is true for the Capitalists, since it is their labour slaves in the Third World who
make the products which fill the bargain shops of the First World, and specifically the bankers (Usuryists) who are the richest of the rich can be
expected to argue this most of all.
Communism (Fr. To share) does not work as much as Capitalism.
In a world without governments, private property or money, where agriculture was the priority, people would not have to do as much work; they could
spend their time enjoying the fruits of their collective labour, eating, drinking, making love, travelling, listening to music or whatever they chose
In India today, for example, there are 15 million child labourers. In a Communist society they would probably do the least amount of work, and the
Capitalists would still be expected to argue ‘Communism does not work’ since for those 15 million children it would be true, they would not work,
they would not be enslaved to Capital, they would not make trinkets to be shipped around the globe to fill the bargain shops of the First World where
the products of their labour would be stolen by their enemies who convince themselves that Capitalism works each time they buy an item for a dollar
that took a child a day to make.
The liberation of the Third World proletariat and globalisation. Monetarist Imperialism: the highest stage of Capitalism
The term globalisation sounds very nice; it suggests that we are living in a global village, and that all people in the world are becoming closer;
nothing could be further from the truth.
In Marx’s day, the European proletariat were impoverished and they lived side by side with the rich; in today’s world there are no children
working down mines in Europe, and few workers in the First World are working in such appalling conditions for subsistence wages as there were in 19th
century Europe, for such labour slavery has been exported to the Third World, where appalling working conditions for subsistence wages are the norm
for much of the population, and extreme poverty is the norm for many.
The poorest nations of the world service debt to the richest Usuryists in the richest nations and the poorest people in the world export the products
of their labour to the proletariat of the First World. Nothing much has changed since the era of Marx and Kropotkin and the 19th century Communists,
merely that the world has divided into exploited nations and those nations who are the beneficiaries of their slavery.
Only war can resolve this problem. The Capitalists of the First World are militant and totally committed to militant evangelical world Capitalist
revolution; only militant resistance can stop them.
For Anarchist Communism
'The revolution will have to be (Anarchist) Communist or it will be drowned in blood and will have to begin all over again'
'Either the State forever, crushing individual and local life, taking over in all fields of human activity, bringing with it its wars and its
domestic struggles for power, its palace revolutions which only replace one tyrant with another.....Or the destruction of all states and new life
starting again in thousands of centres on the principle that the lively initiative of the individual and groups of that Free Arrangement The choice
lies with you'.. Kropotkin, 'Conquest of Bread' (1892).
On the Pan-German banner is written: Retention and strengthening of the State at any cost. On our banner, the social-revolutionary banner, on the
contrary, are inscribed, in fiery and bloody letters: the destruction of all States, the annihilation of bourgeois civilization, free and spontaneous
organization from below upward, by means of free associations, the organization of the unbridled rabble of toilers, of all emancipated humanity, and
the creation of a new universally human world. Mikhail Bakunin
Children often ask, 'Since there are so many poor people in the world, why don't they just issue more money?'
A response by Lucifer
I asked this question as a child to my father who is an accountant and a Masonic cultist. At the time he simply told me that it was a ridiculous thing
to ask and that it could not be done, but he offered no explanation that a child could understand.
Thus in the language that a child could understand.
Capital and labour hours. Price and value.
Marx argued that the 'value' of a commodity was the amount of labour hours it took to produce the commodity. Thus a pound of silver was worth more
than a pound of sand. What Marx suggested was the introduction of 'labour vouchers,' by a temporary tyranny (government) where everyone had the same
amount of labour vouchers per week. Thus no person could possibly be better off than anyone else. In the history of Marxist governments however this
has never occurred and what we have seen is the history of 'Leninist' state Capitalist governments where the banks are nationalised and the issue of
Printing more money in State Capitalism
Let us take the example of Cuba. Everyone gets the same wages, lives rent free and only the state bank can issue currency. Cuba, North Korea and China
all have state banks which are not privately owned; they do not practice reserve banking; unlike in Capitalism, they do not borrow in order to issue
new currency. Let us say that Castro increased everyone's wages by 100 times. What would occur? Frankly the same amount of goods would be in the
shops, the same amount of agriculture would be produced, but everyone would have 100 times their usual salary; what would have to occur to stop the
shops emptying in the first few hours after everyone got paid, would be instant inflation; the goods would have to cost 100 times more and nothing
would really change. The wealth of the nation can be determined firstly by how much food they produce and the standard of living (healthcare etc), not
by how much money they have, but if everyone had ten times more money, and the same amount of commodities were produced, nothing would change. Thus
printing more money in a state Capitalist (Leninist) system would not enrich the population; all that would occur would be inflation.
Those with Capital (money) can demand labour slavery of others.
For example in the UK, the minimum wage is about $10 an hour ($1600 a month), whereas there are 15 million child workers in India who work for a few
dollars a week, and also millions of adult prisoners in China who work in government factories and who cost the government a few dollars a week to
feed. The Capitalist in Britain can walk into a bargain shop and pick up something for a dollar that represents the labour slavery of some Third World
labour slave, and the Capitalist thinks 'Oh isn't Capitalism wonderful, it would take me hours to make that and it would cost $20 if it was made in
the First World.' However it is not wonderful for the labour slave who has to make it.
Money makes the Capitalist world go around, not love.
The Capitalist does not have to say please do this for me my love; the power of Capital makes the demand, 'do this or be impoverished.'
Capital works for the Capitalist in the same way that slavery works for the slave master.
The State Capitalist solution.
There are many people in the First World who have studied private Capitalism and who oppose it, and who call for the introduction of State Capitalism
in the First World; i.e., the nationalisation of banking. This type of Capitalist government however would not be Cuba where all persons have the same
wages; on the contrary some would be rich and others would be poor.
Economic power would be transferred from the private usuryists to the governments (police states / tyrannies). This would simply be a 'modification'
of Capitalism. People would still starve in some regions, there would still be labour slavery in the Third World. There is no reason to believe that
state terrorists such as the governments of George Bush and Elizabeth Windsor would not still be committed to World Capitalist Revolution, the
holocaust of all militant enemies and the economic enslavement of humanity under Capital.
Capitalism cannot be reformed; it has to be abolished.
For a world where all persons are economically equal, Capitalism (monetarism) would have to be totally eradicated; State Capitalism simply leads to
the corruption of the tyrants and the political elites. Private Capitalism leads to empowering the Usuryists and all who collaborate with them and
For stateless collectivism (Anarchist Communism)