← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · OlafLynckner
Thread ID: 11379 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2003-12-06
2003-12-06 06:51 | User Profile
I do not agree with everything below. The author's notions on race are stupid and some thing he says are no better. Still, about the main subject it is pretty good in general and helps give some small glimpse at American rejection of usury. Still the best stuff about these things are from Europa but mist is not in English.
As the American colonies warmed to revolution, a German-born embezzler, trained by his father in matters of money and trading that he could become a Rabbi, rose from a Jewish slum to become the world's1 prototypical international banker 1.
He would change his name from Mayer Amschel Bauer to Mayer Amschel Rothschild. With his sons, equally trained in usury and its supporting skills, Mayer Amschel Rothschild would comprise the House of Rothschild, intervening upon production and consumer to amass, at the expense of both, the greatest loss of profit the world could know.
From roots steeped in ferocious concepts of unearned profit, and by associations peddling mercenary armies for the causes of plutocracy, the House of Rothschild would gain prominent world power in little time. Rothschild, the voracious embezzler, would form the Illuminati. The present quest for world government was begun for Rothschild's ends, at Rothschild's command. The central, ostensibly beneficial concept of that quest, is entrenchment of Rothschild's purported "economic" system.
As the American Colonists fought a revolution to throw off imposition of a central banking system, Rothschild declared arrogantly, "Let me issue and control a nation's money, and I care not who writes its laws." The modern era of financial, political, social, commercial and military strife and subversion had begun.
This was the beginning of the present world's central banking systems 2. The righteous, anti-central-banking principles of the founding fathers, which many had given their lives for in the revolution, comprised a formidable threat to the world's new breed of usurer. The central bankers could not afford for the colonists' experiments in usury-free taxation and circulation to survive, or especially to evolve as an example of the prosperity possible by a circulation not subject to unearned profit.
Central banking is not an industry. It can only distribute wealth from the producers of the wealth. An effort to establish a central bank here caused the revolution. Immediately upon conclusion of the revolution, agents of the same bankers appeared amongst the fledgling government, attempting yet still to establish a central bank.
Though central banking systems can serve no people, money and influence peddling wield great power. The ensuing century and a quarter were rocked by repeated efforts to establish and to thwart the establishment of central banks. The effort to impose usury took every form of pretended propriety. Today, at the grace of "financiers" tethered to their purse strings, the central bank establishments are the real owners of virtually all commerce and financed property. They own virtually every important politician. Every significant media outlet and publishing house, is indebted to serve them. And for the sweeping vacuum of material as would penetrate the nature of this most vital issue, "somehow" hardly but the fewest common citizens are aware even that the so-called Federal Reserve, the crowning glory of Rothschild, is comprised of privately owned banks descended from none other than the very origin of central banking itself.
While Rothschild's crowning glory multiplies our debt all about us, "somehow" the nature of the system is unquestioned across all ostensibly objective analysis of the mainstream media. Understanding of this most vital issue, and solution of Rothschild's debt multiplication engine, are not to be exposed. Is there a formal proof such a system serves us? No. Nor can there be, for despite all advancement of industry, such a system operates only to our ever greater cost.
And so it is, without even a formal precept central banking is any advantage at all, that the money whores of the central bankers deliver such a splendidly null, unquestioned pleasure with the costs of the system, wrapped in the guise of benefit.
The subject societies? By multiplication of debt wrapped in the guise of beneficial "appreciation," cost of every depreciating article is perpetually multiplied. Under central banking systems, subject societies will not exchange their production for equal production. To establishments which produce nothing, generation upon generation will pay their lifetimes for homes produced by a mere few months' work.
Rectitude was never the intention of the advocates of central banking. At the close of the 19th century, the central-bankers-to-be imposed artificial currency shortages, foreclosing on the debtors they doomed. The nation rose in contemptuous indignation, only to be further abused by servants of Rothschild's debt multiplication engine.
Much as would result "for instance" of Enron purchasing the favor of both purportedly vying political parties, the Republicans of the 1912 presidential election proposed, as solution, the audacity of uniting the very culpable banks into one central bank. The Democrats promised not to create a central bank, and were elected on that very platform.
A year later, in violation of that promise, at the "guidance" of these same bankers, Democrat President Woodrow Wilson established the proposed banking coalition under the purposed guise, "Federal Reserve System."
Fifteen years later, multiplication of debt precipitated the Great Depression. Since the inception of the Rothschild era of "economy," the principal theory of modern economists is history (under central banking systems) repeats a pattern 3 where initial, less impeded commerce rises in vigorous industrial energy to be thwarted by conditions the subjects of the system were unable to avoid ââ¬â a huge magnitude of indebtedness. Broad bankruptcies dissolve the debt and intermediate creditor alike, until, from the ashes of ruined industry, and from the cleansing of debt imposed by impoverishment, once again, a mankind disposed to commit again the errors engendering collapse, rises to a further defeat. How unremarkable.
One of the most incredible marks of our time is the fact so few realize there is a vital death struggle between the proponents of the world's central bank "economies" and we ourselves ââ¬â those to whom these systems comprise such incredible cost and seeming, intangible obstacle to social justice. There are many groups fighting vital battles which cannot be won without first establishing one solution.
Why?
Because you are at odds with a system which multiplies the costs of all things by a process designed from its beginning to multiply debt upon the whole of society, that an unassented ruling class could prevail to the consequences we suffer together.
Unjust taxation is a product of central banking. Multiplying costs of homes, for which we pay our entire lifetimes though we produce them with a mere few months' work, is a product of central banking. Multiplying medical costs are a product of central banking. Control of energy and resources to our ever greater cost is a product of central banking. Election and control of political principals is a product of central banking. The undermining of every social process by multiplying cost is a product of central banking.
How?
All money/financing is merely published, and the fact it is not merely a medium of exchange, but a medium of exchange subject to profit by interest, perpetually and irreversibly multiplies debt, if merely we are to maintain a circulation.
Thirty-some-odd years ago, a high school student loosely formed a concept of mathematically perfected economy. In 1979 he published a mathematic proof any economy conveyed by a currency subject to interest, ultimately terminates itself under insoluble debt.
The solution of this demonstrable process, evident everywhere about us, combined with the singular solution of inflation, deflation, manipulated cost, impeded prosperity, and multiplication of debt inherent to and unavoidable within central banking systems, comprises a singular prescription for mathematically perfected economy.
Many dream of solving the consequences of abusive government without first establishing mathematically perfected economy. But without mathematically perfected economy, solution of most any social iniquity, if possible, can only mean suffering the consequences in another form. Each abuse, directly or indirectly, is the consequence of unearned profit imposed at every level by the central banking system and its equally undeserving middle-men, through the nature of the currency. It is impractical to reduce payment of costs, if the centralized system itself multiplies the costs of all things, irreversibly. What is not mathematically possible, is not socially possible.
Many also believe without qualification, that intangible safeguards are in place, that we cannot re-suffer the ultimate consequence of the cycle the "economists" measure. What safeguard exists to eliminate the multiplication of debt in proportion to commerce, inherent to the system itself? The device of Rothschild was never intended to be reversible. It cannot be reversed. Merely because it exists, it perpetually and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to commerce, with the singular ultimate consequence of system-wide insoluble debt.
To fail to establish mathematically perfected economy then, is to suffer the consequences. All about us, every subject nation of the world is now verging almost simultaneously on system-wide insoluble debt; and nowhere can the one thing a central bank can offer, further multiplying debt, save us from the multiplying debt we soon altogether cannot afford.
The struggle is not a new one. Our founding fathers gave their lives for it. A return to the Constitution is imperative, if we are not to suffer the most inapt and damaging cycle so far repeated, by a supposedly evolved mankind. The question to be answered eternally is whether an economy should be a system providing for unjust profit ââ¬â or whether an economy should provide only for its subjects to exchange their production equitably. The former is the grave illness. The latter is solution.
Thomas Jefferson put it somewhat differently. If the American people ever allow the banks to issue their currency, the banks and [bank-owned] corporations which will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake up homeless, on the continent their fathers conquered. Please join us. There is no solution but mathematically perfected economy. You, the visitor to these pages, have a huge stake in the success of this effort. FOOTNOTES 1 prototypical international banker : See The Rothschild Dynasty . 2 central banking systems : private banking establishments, purporting to serve commerce, and imposing currencies instrumental in multiplying private and public debt in proportion to commerce, to the ever greater profit of the banking establishment and ever greater detriment and instability of regular commerce. 3 repeats a pattern : variously discussed as the "Kondratieff Cycle," "K Wave," or "long wave." (also spelled "Kondratiev".) Ostensibly, this pattern is attributed to systems featuring currencies of the nature of central bank "economies." The Kondratieff Cycle or Kondratieff Wave is a repeated pattern of rising industry, eventually fallen by cumulative conditions which the theory does not attribute to the nature of the currency, but to fault of the subjects and managers of the system, though every system of examination, by the nature of the currency, irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to commerce; and every such system therefore ultimately renders system-wide insoluble debt.
If the American People EVER allow the banks to issue their currency, their children will wake up homeless in the continent their forefathers conquered.
ââ¬â Thomas Jefferson Since ancient times, more undeserved wealth and abusive power have been concentrated to an unassented few by institutionalized usury, than by any other form of oppression.
Hessian mercenaries ââ¬â themselves the subjects of usury ââ¬â were sent against the American Revolution by usurers, for the purposes of enforcing usury. Benjamin Franklin may have explained the principal cause of the American Revolution itself, was usury, and the enforcement of usury. World War II was largely financed during the Great Depression, by sixty billion dollars per year in gold sent to Germany from the monetary reserves of the United States by the so-called Federal Reserve ââ¬â twelve private institutions whose principal purpose is usury of all "economies" [purposely] monetized by "Federal Reserve Notes." The Great Depression itself ââ¬â a collapse of commerce across the world ââ¬â was the consequence of usury, and usurers. The present brink of insoluble debt across the world, and the collapse of Argentina and every other such nation to come, are the consequences of usury, and usurers.
In its broadest historic connotation, usury has meant unearned profit of any kind. This would apply to government profit above the true costs of government service. It would apply to government charges for unassented service. It would apply to charges attached to a currency which truly only represents the people's debts to each other. It would apply to any prejudice of trade which intervenes upon receipt of wealth equal to the production delivered in every attempt at equal trade.
Usury exists then, wherever any party is deprived of receiving for their production, production of equal value.
Usury exists wherever any person fails to realize prosperity equal to their doings.
A narrower category of usury 1 applies to charging interest for money. Usury is forbidden to Christianity. The Islamic equivalent is "Riba." Riba is forbidden to both the giver and taker. Judaism forbids usury among the Semitic, but preaches usury against the non-Semitic. "Buy cheaply. Sell dearly." Mayer Amschel Rothschild was prepared by his father to become a Rabbi. Ferociously, he deployed the teachings of unearned profit instead to multiply an embezzled fortune into the House of Rothschild ââ¬â precursor to the modern, world-wide network of central banks. The money changers of Christ's famous episode at the over-run Temple, practiced this ethic of unearned profit, and unfair trade. Fittingly, usury has been called, an abomination that makes desolation. Hence the great historic, social, and religious significance of usury.
The economic instability, mal-distribution of production, and uncertainty of modern times, are solely the product of usury.
Without qualification, advocates of unearned profit suggest that "interest" is somehow not usury ââ¬â that while "usurious" interest rates are indeed harmful, there are lower magnitudes of usury which are not.
Whether interest is truly distinguishable from usury therefore, can be understood by examining the possible magnitudes of "interest."
Unless our purpose is deception necessary itself to unearned profit, why and how establish an ostensibly "legal," ostensibly serviceable, ostensibly conducive, ostensibly undamaging rate of usury, called "interest"?
Unless we can distinguish the consequences of some ostensible rate of "interest" from the consequences of usury, then introduction of the more recent term would serve no purpose whatsoever but to perpetrate usury upon an unapprehending public.
Unearned profit is championed by modern "economics" ââ¬â in every possible instance, solely at the cost of true producers. But is there a magnitude of interest which is not usurious?
While this too is the preaching of the modern "economist," no "economist" in eternity has shown how.
Where any part of the circulation whatsoever is subject to any magnitude of "interest" whatsoever, the circulation can only be maintained by re-borrowing payments against principal and interest, as subsequent debts, increased so much as periodic interest.
No matter the magnitude of interest or usury, debt is multiplied in proportion to the circulation.
The magnitude of interest or usury therefore only regulates the rate at which debt is multiplied in proportion to the commerce.
As debt is multiplied in proportion to given commerce, ever less of a given circulation is available to sustain commerce, because ever more of the given circulation is subverted to delivering unearned profit in the form of interest on the multiplied debt.
Eventually then, the costs of servicing debt exceed the capacity to sustain commerce; and thus, regardless of the ostensible magnitude of interest, any possible rate of interest likewise multiples debt into unconscionable, unearned profit, in the identical form of the maximum possible, affordable sum of interest, on some insoluble sum of debt. Just the same, interest ultimately renders collapse under insoluble debt.