In July of A.D. 2009, I posted an article on this blog entitled “The Undefined Dollar, Part II”. In that article, I wrote in part:
“Our current economic problem began in 1934 when President Roosevelt removed gold-backed dollars from domestic circulation. The problem was aggravated in 1968 when the gov-co stopped redeeming paper silver certificates with silver dollars and thereby removed all tangible definition from the domestic dollar. The problem was further exacerbated in 1971 when President Nixon closed the “gold window” in international trade and thereby left the dollar without definition in both the domestic and international spheres.
“Once the dollar was completely undefined, the U.S. should’ve soon suffered a massive economic failure. However, Nixon and Kissinger devised a brilliant deal with Saudi Arabia whereby the U.S. guaranteed the Saudi’s security and the Saudi’s guaranteed to sell their crude oil for dollars only. OPEC quickly followed the Saudi’s lead and for the next 30 years, any nation that wanted to purchase oil on the international market could do so only with dollars.
“Result? The dollar—no longer expressly defined in terms of a physical mass of gold or silver—became implicitly and vaguely defined in terms of crude oil. This scheme was brilliant but ultimately too fragile to last.
“Enter Saddam Hussein who, circa 2000, dared to sell Iraq’s oil for euros rather than dollars. In doing so, Saddam threatened the “de facto definition” of the dollar and the foundation of the world’s economy. Saddam Hussein precipitated today’s global financial crisis by stripping the dollar of its last quasi-tangible definition in terms of crude oil.
“Our gov-co responded to Hussein’s denial of the dollar’s quasi-definition by invading Iraq and hanging Hussein—but too late. The genie was out of the bottle and the world’s petroleum-producing nations began selling their oil for euros, yen or other currencies. Once the dollar was no longer the only currency that could purchase crude oil, the dollar lost its last claim to tangible definition. Without a gold-, silver- or oil-backing, the dollar became undefined, irrational and surreal. Completely untethered from tangible reality the dollar’s value became “relative”.
That’s the first time I’d expressed the relationship between crude oil and fiat dollars on this blog. It’s the first time I’d explained that preservation of the “petro-dollar” was the motive for the War on Iraq. If I recall correctly, I’d first had the insight about A.D. 2006 and expressed it repeatedly on my radio shows.
I don’t know that I’m the first layman to recognize that when the dollar went off the international gold standard in A.D. 1971, it was subsequently “backed” by crude oil and, therefore, our primary motive for invading Iraq in A.D. 2003 was to stop the mortal threat Iraq posed to the “petro-dollar” in A.D. 2000 by selling its crude oil for euros rather than petro-dollars. I.e., if the world could purchase crude oil with currencies other than “petro-dollars” (and it now can), the dollar would soon be recognized as a pure fiat (worthless) currency and it’s value would fall (inflate) until it died.
But if I wasn’t the first to connect those dots, I’m sure I was one of the first. If other laymen had previously connected those dots, they were unknown to me.
Over the following years, I’ve seen others express the same insight. Some may have connected the dots (just as I did) as an “original insight”. Most wrote to express the connection based on what they’d read from other writers. They didn’t have an “original insight,” but they recognized the importance of the idea and sought to present it more clearly.
I was very proud of my “original insight”. I still am. I knew from the moment I made that connection that that insight was powerful and important. It explained much about recent world history and laid the foundation for the subject of “currency wars” that I also presented on this blog.
• Most of the articles I write on this blog are just “there”. I write ‘em. I try to make a credible presentation of an idea or insight that I think may be worth my readers’ time.
But every so often, I write something that I think has real value. Such articles are rare, but I take a lot of pride in such articles. I have an egotistical investment in such articles. The “man or other animals” insight is a good example of one of my “original insights” (something that I wrote completely on my own, without any clue or basis from any other previous writer). The articles on notice and the correlative right of inquiry are another example of “original insight”. The articles on “petro-dollars” are also, initially, based on pure “original insight”.
I probably shouldn’t be proud of such articles. Such pride may be offensive to God. I shouldn’t be egotistical. But I am. Sometimes.
I’m proud of those “original insight” articles—but not because I’m really proud of myself. I know all of those articles could’ve been written much more clearly. I’m sometimes embarrassed by the mistakes I make while writing, speaking, thinking—groping to find and express the truth.
If you’re honest, writing is a humbling activity. I may be able to write better than most people, and some people might be a little impressed by my “talent”. But I know how much better I could be, how much better I could write. Just don’t have the time and energy to do my best. My constant hope to do my best is necessarily cause for humility and recognition of how often I fail to do so.
Nevertheless, I am proud of those “original insight” articles because I know that every time, they’re result of the Good LORD allowing me to “see”. The Good LORD let me see “man or other animals”. The Good LORD let me see “notice and right of inquiry”. Our Father YHWH ha Elohiym let me see the relationship between fiat dollars, crude oil and the invasion of Iraq.
I don’t make the truth. I don’t own the truth. The truth is God’s property, not mine. But sometimes I’m allowed to “see” some of the truth, and then I try to report that truth to others. And don’t suppose that I ever report the truth perfectly. Even when the Good LORD lets me “see,” my reporting is imperfect. I doubt that I’ve ever written anything that was 100% true.
Still, I couldn’t ask for a better job. I get to “see”and try to report some of the truth.
That’s what I’m proud of: the Good LORD sometimes lets me “see”. And despite my persistently mediocre job of communicating the insights I’m allowed to “see,” He must not be too much offended because every so often, He provides me with yet another chance to “see,” another opportunity for “original insight”. Insofar as He still gives me the chance to “see,” that means I still have a shot at salvation. That means I’m not damned.
And, therefore, my pride. Not in myself. In fact, in some respects I have a pretty low opinion of myself. But I am proud to be “called”; to be “considered”. I am proud. I am grateful. I am amazed.
I’m like a kid with a five-gallon pail of ice cream. Is all that for me?!!! As an adult, I know I can’t eat that much ice cream. As a kid, I know I’m darn sure gonna try.
I really don’t know why He puts up with me.
I don’t know why He let’s me “see”.
I don’t know why He gives me reason to live.
But He does.
Must be love.
What else could explain the Good LORD’s tolerance for a sinner like me?
• In any case, all of the previous text is brought to mind by a recently-released video (below) that explains the relationship between “petro-dollars,” the invasion of Iraq and current global politics. The video does a much better job of communicating that concept than I ever did. It will probably reach a lot more people than I did. That’s good.
But I doubt that the video offers “original insight”. Instead, I suspect that the video is “derivative” in that it does an effective job of reporting that which I (and others) saw in an “original” sense two years, three years, six years ago.
I don’t suppose that it much matters who sees and tells the truth first. It only matters that the truth be seen, told, shared and recognized by others.
Still, I was among the first. I regret that my presentation of the truth was nowhere near as effective as the presentation in this following video. But I was among the first to “see”.