“There’s no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch [inflate] the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which only one man in a million can diagnose.”—The Economic Consequences of Peace by John Maynard Keynes (A.D. 1920).
Keynes’ quote may sound improbable to most Americans, but I think it’s one of the two or three most profound and concise statements of secular truth I’ve seen.
To illustrate the validity of Keynes’ observation consider Paul Moritz Warburg—the purported “chief architect” of the Federal Reserve Act. Shortly before his death in A.D. 1932, he was quoted in The Nation magazine as saying:
“I have studied finance, and economics, and international trade all my life, and now, after these recent events, I have come to the conclusion that I know nothing about any of them.”
If even the purported “chief architect” of the Federal Reserve Act didn’t understand money, perhaps Keynes was right—maybe it’s true that only “one man in a million” really understands money.
Still, most people would dismiss Keynes’ comment as gross exaggeration. After all, if Keynes were right, America (with a current population of roughly 300 million) might have no more than 300 people in the entire country who truly understood money. That would only be an average of six people in each State.
Doesn’t sound possible, does it?
I believe Keynes’ estimate was about right—at least for his time. Today, thanks to the internet, there might be one man in 100,000 (maybe even one in 10,000) who truly understands the nature of money. If so, there might be 30,000 American who truly understand “money”—but no more.
I can’t say that I’m one of those rare individuals who fully understands money. But the fact that I even try to understand guarantees I’m part of a tiny minority who have some insight into the nature of money. If you would join that tiny minority, you’ll find the resultant understanding amazing, unbelievable and, initially, even threatening.
But if you would be free—if you would preserve your wealth—you must understand money.
• Twenty years ago, a friend of mine with a degree in political science decided to test Keynes’ “one man in a million” observation. He experimented with several of the cartoon “$6 Bills” that were printed during the Clinton administration. (You probably saw them: They were green pieces of ordinary paper crudely formatted to resemble regular dollar bills—except they had a picture of Bill Clinton (instead of Jefferson or Washington), some jokes about Monica and Hillary, and were denominated in the corners as “$6” bills rather than $1’s, $5’s or $10’s.)
To see if people understood anything about money, my friend reportedly passed several $6 bills at convenience stores. He’d walk into a 7-11, order a hot dog, slurpee, or a candy bar and hand the clerk a “$6 Bill”. Every clerk took the $6 without hesitation and even gave change.
The clerk’s only problem was trying to decide which section in the cash drawer should hold the $6 bill. It didn’t belong with the $1s … nor the $5s … nor the $10s …. Hmm. Eventually, the busy clerk would lift the cash drawer and file the $6 underneath, with the checks, money orders and food stamps.
This experiment may seem funny, but it wasn’t fair. Virtually all of the convenience store clerks were Middle East immigrants who barely understood English and were working entry level jobs in their new country. They were overworked, unsophisticated and easily fooled.
Surely, you and I would not be so easily deceived. Any “real” American can instantly tell the difference between a $6 joke and “real” paper money—right?
Wrong. The truth is that our understanding of money is only slightly superior to that of the immigrant clerks. No, we won’t fall for “$6 bills”. But what do most of us really know about money except magnitude? Even little kids know that a $5 bill is better than a $1 bill, and a $10 bill is better yet. But once we learned that difference, who learned more?
Who among us understands what a “bill” is—or a “note”? Who understands the difference between “tender” and “legal tender”—or “money,” “currency” and “credit”? Who understands the difference between paying and promising to pay? Who understands the difference between “buying” and “purchasing”? Who even imagines that “purchasing” a home, car or magazine with “debt instruments” may gain only the equitable right of possession, but not legal title to true ownership of the object being purchased?
According to Lord Keynes, only a few hundred Americans understand the nature of money sufficiently to answer the previous questions and others more profound. I’d say there’s no more than 10,000. I don’t claim to be one of those “chosen 10,000”, but I’m a student of money and if I don’t have all the answers, I do have some questions. At first glance, my questions may seem silly. But if you’ll consider them for a moment, you may find them puzzling, intriguing and even disturbing:
Is paper “currency” money?
• When you offer one $5 bill for a $1 purchase and you receive four $1 bills as change, do you receive four times as much money as you offered or four times as much paper? Does this question prove that paper currency is not real money?
• When government prints currency, do they pay for the paper, ink, and labor with the same currency that they printed? If not, what “money” do they use to pay for the currency they print?
• Can government print any number it wants on the paper when printing currency?
• Why are we forced to pay interest on the national debt when government could print one piece of paper with a number on it equal to the national debt and thereby pay it off? Could the answer be that government wants us to live in the status of perpetual debtors?
• Why does just one Federal Reserve bank shred over five tons of Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) daily instead of giving the currency to the starving people of the world who would not care that the currency was torn or soiled? In fact, why doesn’t the Fed merely use all of the currency it shreds each day to pay off the National Debt? Who, in their right mind, would shred or burn money? Doesn’t the daily destruction of tons of our fiat currency prove that Federal Reserve Notes are not “money”?
• Why does our government go to the trouble of issuing Treasury bonds to get paper currency from us when they can simply print all of the paper currency that they want?
• If government doesn’t print all of the currency it wants, why don’t they? What restrains it?
• If our government can print currency, can’t all governments print currency?
• If all governments can print currency, why do all governments borrow currency?
• Why would any government need to collect taxes if all governments can print currency?
• Does the IRS aggressively pursue taxpayers to collect valuable taxes? Or does the IRS merely “put on a show” to fool Americans into believing that our intrinsically-worthless currency is “real money” and therefore valuable? Surely, government wouldn’t go to all the expense of harassing, fining and jailing Americans for failing to pay income tax if our currency was essentially worthless—or would they?
• All of us sense that our “system” of government does not operate according to the principles established by Jefferson, Madison and Washington. Individual rights? Personal liberty? Private property ownership? We pay some lip service to these concepts, but they seem to have become nostalgic relics of a former glory rather than controlling principles of our current government.
But if government isn’t operating according to the principles established by the 18th-century Founders, what controlling principles are now in effect?
Over the past twenty-two years, I’ve observed two general principles that seem to control government conduct:
First, the only thing our current system fears is public exposure. Government can and will do virtually anything so long as it doesn’t arouse widespread public exposure. In worst case scenarios (when they’re caught), government will deny, deny, deny, lie, lie, lie, influence the media and even hide or destroy evidence to conceal the truth from the general public.
However, for the first time in history, all governments’ penchant for secrecy is threatened by the internet. You can bet that if our government could choose between taking away our guns and taking away (or at least controlling) the internet, they’d choose to restrict anti-government rhetoric (freedom of speech) on the internet.
The second principle that animates government is a fanatical defense of the existing fiat currency system against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Over the years, I’ve deduced this second principle from watching the fate of those who challenged the money system—they almost always go to jail. You can conspire to kill the President or blow up tall buildings and maybe the government will come to arrest you, or maybe they’ll ignore you, or maybe they’ll send undercover agents to ostensibly help you. In the end, Presidents (and skyscrapers) are as disposable as light bulbs.
But if you create your own “comptroller warrants,” open your own bank, counterfeit paper dollars, or issue private, silver “Liberty Dollars” that offers a real alternative to Federal Reserve Notes—the only question is how many years you’re going to spend in the slammer. Mess with the money system, and you will be arrested, indicted, convicted, and incarcerated—or, in the case of Iraq and Saddam Hussein (who, in A.D. 2000, dared to sell Iraqi oil for euros rather than dollars), be invaded and bombed for over eight years or hanged by the neck until dead.
Of course, here, in the U.S., you’ll get a trial. The judge will appear attentive as your lawyer presents your defense. But the appearance of “due process” will be window-dressing intended to conceal a certainty recognized long before they kicked in your door: you committed the ultimate secular blasphemy of challenging the fiat monetary system, so you’re goin’ bye-bye.
I’ve seen this process take place several times, and judging by the system’s virulent assault on anyone who offers an alternative to the existing monetary system, there’s no doubt that fiat currencyis our System’s “third rail”—touch it and die. Judging by government’s determination to protect the money system at all costs, I’m convinced that fiat currency is our System’s “heart of darkness.”
• Curiously, the essential ingredient for modern currency is “public confidence”. As long as the public has faith in the value of a particular medium of exchange, we can use buckskins, corn cobs, Monopoly Money, or even the intrinsically-worthless Federal Reserve Notes as “money”.
But if public confidence (faith) in the value of our currency fails, that currency can instantly succumb to hyperinflation and become worthless. Insofar as the value of our currency depends on our “confidence” in that currency, and insofar as “confidence” is merely another word for “faith,” then we can begin to wonder if today’s fiat currency is valued objectively or valued subjectively as a kind of “religion”.
In fact, our faith in the value of our fiat currency is “all in our minds”. The entire world has been deceived into accepting fiat dollars as if they were “money” (gold and silver). That deception is so great and so extensive that the cause seems reminiscent of “sorcery.” Admittedly, that’s not the kind of “sorcery” that emanates from a man waving a magic wand, but it’s pretty close. Who can deny that an entity able to deceive the whole world, belongs in the ranks of (secular) “sorcerers”?
Most Americans still believe in “Federal Reserve Notes”. Do you?
If so, your economic future will depend on whether your FRNs are a basis for a “one true (secular) faith”. But if you’ve been deceived into believing in a false currency, you could wind up in bankruptcy (a secular equivalent to “hell”).
• The vast majority of people do not understand fiat currency. In their ignorance, they only believe in fiat currency. Thus, our modern fiat currency isn’t a science so much as a faith.
As Lord Keynes said in the opening quote, there are “hidden forces” at work in economics. There are unexpected powers in currency. As you begin to appreciate these hidden (occult) forces, you’ll be astonished to find yourself wondering if economics, money, and especially fiat currency are such mysterious concepts that they sometimes resemble a kind of “sorcery”.
I realize that comparing fiat currency to “sorcery” seems ridiculous, right?
But even so, but I’m reminded of Revelation 18:23 which describes the End Times fall of “Babylon” as follows: “For your merchants were the great men of the earth, for by your sorcery all the nations were deceived.”
We can debate if the Bible is true. If it is true, we can debate who or what the End Times “Babylon” signifies. But, for me, the phrase “merchants [who] were the great men of the earth” seems to describe the super-wealthy corporate executives of multi-national corporations and central banks. For me, the “sorcery” that deceived all nations could be fiat currency.
More, I suspect that those “merchants” who practiced the End Times “sorcery” hinted at in the Bible may be the same people today who John Maynard Keynes described as the “one man in a million” currently able to understand money.
I may be stretching this “fiat currency/sorcery” metaphor beyond reasonable limits, but it still seems that by means of fiat currency (a false “money”) that can be “spun” (conjured?) out of thin air, the super-rich have purchased the “cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men,” (Rev. 18:13) without actually “paying” the resultant debts with real money (gold and silver). Instead, they merely “discharged” those debts with fiat currency freshly spun off the government’s printing presses.
By the “sorcery” of fiat currency, the nations and peoples of the world have been deceived into selling their property and even themselves into bondage without even really being paid. The super-rich have purchased much of the world without ever really paying. They are “purchasing” the world with the illusion of “money” we call “fiat currency”. If anyone could “purchase” the world with only illusions, would it be completely irrational to describe them as “sorcerers”?
I suspect that The Powers That Be intend to use fiat currency to purchase the entire world in order to achieve one-world government and a New World Order. If so, the New World Order will defend fiat currencies—the source of their “sorcery”—to the death.
• In the final analysis, you may not be that one man in a million who understands the nature of money. But I guarantee that one man is out there and he’s robbing those who don’t understand without ever needing a gun or burglar tools to break into their homes. He’s robbing Americans with a kind of “sorcery” because we are generally as ignorant as children. So long as you don’t make it your business to understand the nature of money, you will be robbed by the “sorcerers” who do.