"Post-Civilized" Possibilities: Beyond Wealth and Power, Part I is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
You are free:
Under the following conditions:
- to share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
- to remix — to adapt the work
- Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
- Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
- Share alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.
Quotations and derivative works should acknowledge its Author: J. Harmon Grahn; and its source on the Net: The Wellspring Publishing Group.
1 A Can of Worms
In The Writing on the Wall #5 § 3 It Doesn't Work, is written:
Top to bottom, beginning to end, "civilization" was, and remains, an instrument of naked power — often "clothed," however, in benign and appealing raiment. Every "civilized" institution, such as education, religion, government (of course), the media, entertainment, industry . . . everything "civilized," is first an instrument of power; or is tolerated because it does not interfere with the exercise of power.
The reasons for this were discussed at some length in the prior § 2.2 Wealth and Power of the same essay. Which discussion was prompted in turn by a question raised by the prior § 2.1 Money:
. . . the question as to how this "organic" emergence of money became the exclusive prerogative of "the rich and powerful," instead of the universal practice of everybody engaged in interpersonal commerce. That is, how did "the money makers" acquire their unique prerogative of creating the commonly used media of exchange in every nation on Earth, and how have they defended this powerful and exclusive prerogative from those who might like to share it?
More recently, in "Post-Civilized" Possibilities: Gravity Wheel, "I would like to suggest in principle that we Earth-humans have not come close to exhausting the energy freely available to us at all times, everywhere — notwithstanding that we may indeed have come close to "maxing out" all of the commercially marketable energy sources on Earth. Of course, this opens up another can of worms, which we may examine in more detail another time."
The time has arrived for a more detailed examination of the can of worms known generically among humans as money; and there is no way to disentangle money from the coeval can of worms known as "civilization." What follows will not be presented as an "economic treatise," but rather as an intuitive personal inquiry into the peculiar nature and consequences of that unique human invention which seems so self-evidently natural and necessary to every aspect human commerce, yet has no parallel anywhere else in nature.
As summarized in The Writing on the Wall #5, pp. 17-18:
Humans are naturally observant, resourceful, inventive, adaptable — all admirable qualities, endlessly useful for thriving on a lush planet.
Some observant, resourceful, inventive Paleolithic individual notices that the food his people eat grows from seeds — and experiments with planting seeds deliberately, and nurturing their growth.
Further experimentation gradually discloses the basic secrets of agriculture, and enables humans for the first time to produce their own food — thereby liberating themselves forever from the tyranny of ecological restraint.
The discovery spreads from tribe to tribe, and people who had sustained an adequate but not always certain livelihood on the bounty of nature, are now able to thrive in even greater abundance, producing more food whenever more food is needed.
Human populations grow: and agricultural production improves, and expands.
Human populations grow: and inevitably, sooner or later, collide with other growing human populations.
Competing interests can no longer be resolved peacefully; resort is made to power; the victor triumphs over the vanquished, with one of the four results described above (The Writing on the Wall #5, p. 13).
Facing similar circumstances, other tribes either resort to power themselves, or prepare to defend themselves against those who would.
Thus, the contagion of coercive power is released irrevocably into the world, and willing or unwilling, becomes the dominant factor in human life, everywhere, always — until this very day and hour.
Whose "fault" is all this? Who are "the bad guys," and who are "the good guys?"
In The Writing on the Wall #7 § 2 "Civilization", in connection with how Greek historian Thucydides, (approximately) -471 to -400, described the terms dictated by the victorious Athenians to the defeated Melians, the core meaning of "civilization" was summarized in this way:
In historical fact, there can hardly be a more succinct and complete summing up of what "civilization," at bottom, has always been in principle than this: that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. All else is "window dressing," or the sugar coating on a bitter pill. In contemporary "civilized" parlance, this inflexible principle bears the label, realpolitik.
The Section in which the preceding passage appears concludes that "in a Cosmos created and inhabited by purposeful, intelligent, creative beings, the principle enunciated by the Athenians to the Melians does not work, and cannot be made to work: simply and inescapably because it stifles — alike for the more, and for the less powerful — purposeful, intelligent creativity; which cannot thrive or persist, absent the liberty to exercise it. Full stop."
A surprising and easily overlooked corollary to the "civilized" practice, whereby "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must," is that those who usurp the prerogatives of their peers not only stifle the creativity of their prey: they stifle their own creativity as well. For by the very act of preying upon their fellows, they create a probability that they may be preyed upon in turn; and create for themselves a necessity for constant vigilance against that probability. Those who live in circumstances requiring constant vigilance against predatory peers thereby compromise their own liberty to exercise their native creativity: by the necessity of channeling it into predominantly or exclusively defensive or offensive measures. It is this self-perpetuating vicious cycle that has ensnared "civilization" from its inception in the human resort to coercive power.
Herein lies the inescapable paradox which must be resolved by any race of purposeful, intelligent, creative beings anywhere, if they are to evolve beyond the stage reached by Earth-humans that we call "civilization." This is so, because purposeful, intelligent, creative beings can purposefully, intelligently, and creatively, accumulate the coercive power necessary to trespass upon, and usurp the prerogatives of their peers. This is an option that lies within the scope of any purposeful, intelligent, creative being, or group of such beings. However, it does not work, and inevitably leads to self-destructive results: because its essence is the stifling of the purposeful, intelligent creativity of beings whose fundamental nature is purposeful, intelligent creativity. This is unnatural, in the sense of being against the nature of "what is."
The resolution of this unavoidable "civilized" paradox may be reached by one, or the other, of two alternative paths:
"Civilized" humans may continue to usurp the prerogatives of their peers, as has been the practice throughout "civilized history" — until "civilization" in all its forms self-destructs, and ceases upon the face of the Earth. The final outcome of this option is near, and swiftly approaching.
"Civilized" humans may recognize the significance of the usurpation of the prerogatives of their peers, and opt not to exercise it, thereby becoming, in essential part, "post-civilized" humans. This option is available only through the free choice, and sustained exercise, of individual humans.
Because the choice between the paths just enumerated lies within the scope of individual humans — and not within the scope of human collectives — the exercise of both choices does, and will continue to coexist, for a period of time. However, only the second path bears a possibility of emerging at the end of the transition; and its emergence is not certain. Only the outcome of the first path is certain: "Things that can't go on forever don't."
Although The Writing on the Wall #5 § 2.1 Money represents "the emergence of money as a natural — one might even say 'organic development' — among the acts of many individuals, rather than the deliberate invention of some isolated archaic economic mastermind," the possibility that money had its origin and onward evolution with a succession of "economic masterminds" is at least worthy of examination. This is so, because the emergence of so subtle, ubiquitous, and effective an instrument of coercive power as a purely "organic development," with no "ulterior motive" behind it, practically defies credibility.
The emergence of money as the exclusive prerogative of "the rich and powerful" complicates and obscures, but does not fundamentally change the self-destructive cannibalism (predation upon peers) of long-established "civilized" practice — a/k/a "business as usual."
In The Writing on the Wall #5 § 2.1 Money, economic mastermind Ludwig von Mises is quoted as stating that "Money is the thing which serves as the generally accepted and commonly used medium of exchange. This is its only function. All the other functions which people ascribe to money are merely particular aspects of its primary and sole function, that of a medium of exchange."
This is the commonly accepted story about money: it is simply a medium of exchange to facilitate peaceful commerce among humans; nothing more, nothing less. What could possibly be more innocent and benign than money? It provides a means of keeping balanced accounts of the exchanges among humans — who in its absence would conduct their exchanges anyway, but without the benefit of knowing with precision that the "buyer" has paid for his purchases, and that the "seller" has received equal value in exchange for his goods.
Money also has the collateral virtue of facilitating exchanges between "buyers" and "sellers" in the often encountered circumstance that the "seller" does not want what the "buyer" happens have in exchange for the "seller's" goods. However, if the "buyer" can offer money, the "seller" knows that he can exchange it in turn for whatever he wants, even though he cannot have what he wants directly from the "buyer." Thus money makes possible a far more efficient commerce among humans than is possible by direct exchange, or barter.
Maybe money itself was originally innocent and benign; and then again, maybe not — or, not anymore. In any case, many of the routine tasks undertaken by "civilized" humans, and facilitated by money, are far removed indeed from being "innocent and benign;" and the peculiar nature of money is such that it strangely facilitates these neither innocent nor benign tasks with literally effortless ease.
This condition did not emerge at a stroke with the first invention of money. However, it did emerge in an inexorable, purposeful, deliberate fashion, consistently to the material advantage of "the strong," who do what they can; and to the material disadvantage of "the weak," who suffer what they must — or in more contemporary parlance, to the advantage of "the 1%," and at the expense of "the 99%."
But this is only a figure of speech. In actuality, because it does not work, the monetary system operates ultimately at the expense of everything and everybody without exception on the planet; and unless replaced by a system that does work, is very likely, very soon, to make life on Earth of any kind virtually impossible.
1.1 How It Works
Perhaps the most important single fact to understand about the nature of money is that it is entirely of human invention; and consequently that all of its properties are products of human design. Money is not a human adaptation of something similar found in nature; for there exists nothing in nature that resembles money.
Nature, as observed throughout planet Earth, is characterized by a rich tapestry of constantly humming exchanges among all living species; yet none of this "natural commerce" is facilitated by a medium of exchange anything like the money central to all commercial exchange among "civilized" humans. Prototypically, blossoms produce nectar, which they make freely available to bees, and other flying insects. The bees gladly accept this gift, which they transform into large volumes of honey, upon which they feed. Yet in the act of receiving this free gift of the blossoms, the bees fecundate them by carrying their pollen from blossom to blossom in the course of their foraging. They leave no currency, or promissory note behind, exchangeable for their vital service at a later date. Nature operates entirely on a "pay as you go" basis: "credit" is neither offered, nor accepted.
The commercial exchanges among "civilized" humans are strikingly different from this "natural commerce." Among "civilized" humans, commerce is facilitated by the human invention, money, which is imbued with two vital properties found nowhere else in nature: a) monetary units are precisely identical to each other, without the slightest variation; b) there is no conceptual or practical limit upon how many monetary units may potentially exist.
In nature, no two of the same kind are exactly alike; each is unique and singular, and cannot accurately be described as a "unit;" which is a term applicable only to the identical items exchanged in human commerce. And of course in nature, there are limits upon the number of anything that can participate in a finite planetary ecology: that is, the finite number of anything that can be sustained in nature. This limitation applies no less to humans than to any other living species on Earth. Anything, in order to live, must establish and sustain a balanced exchange with the aggregate of everything else that lives. Exceptions do not work, and do not last.
In practice, because as described above, money as a medium of exchange does indeed facilitate the mechanics of human commerce, money quickly, and throughly, became a standard feature of human intercourse wherever it was introduced; and its use swiftly evolved from a convenience into a seeming commercial necessity.
Although the first effective money may have emerged spontaneously in trade among "pre-civilized" tribes, it must have been only a matter of time before the practice would have attracted the attention and interest of the Warlord, the King, the Sovereign who wielded the overarching power in his domain of conquest. Surely command of such a practice, if it could be achieved, would be recognized as being to the advantage of an enterprising despot.
In any Sovereign domain, the issuance and administration of an "official" medium of commercial exchange multiplies the Sovereign's already established power in numerous subtle, and not-so-subtle ways; and historically has turned loose cascades of anticipated, and unanticipated consequences, such as the following:
Creation by fiat of a commodity, itself of no intrinsic value, whose value is derived from the Sovereign decree that it may be exchanged for any good or service valued by humans, has proven historically to be a potent — and disastrous — power.
Precious metals, such as gold and silver, were employed early as money; but because most of these commodities came into the Sovereign's possession typically as plunder, they cost him little, and disproportionately expanded his power when employed as the basis for money.
Later, with increased sophistication, the power of money creation became incalculably more potent, cost-effective — and in consequence, catastrophic.
Although there are a few historical examples of honest banking, they are the exception, not the rule; and money has been almost universally an instrument of fraud, duplicity, plunder, and expanding human misery throughout its sordid history.
For weal or woe, monetary wealth and coercive power quickly became synonymous, and one may be measured in terms of the other; however, neither wealth nor power have ever been reliably equated with virtue, or wisdom.
The existence of a single commodity that in sufficient quantity can purchase anything has had the effect of narrowing the attention upon the acquisition of more of it, alike among the exalted and the lowly; and money has risen to the top of virtually everybody's list of desires.
The single-minded attention to money by virtually all "civilized" humans has created and sustained an insatiable demand for more of it, no matter how much of it there is; which in turn sustains a willingness among "the 99%" to rent money from "the 1%" who have it: with the consequence that the automatic flow of money is inexorably away from "the 99%," and toward "the 1%."
The universal narrowing of attention throughout all social strata seems to have exacerbated the inescapable paradox discussed earlier, alike among "the 1%," and among "the 99%:" for when a single narrow obsession becomes the focused common objective of an entire species, whose fundamental nature is otherwise purposeful, intelligent creativity, the result cannot be, and has not been, the sharpening of that species's purposeful, intelligent creativity.
Rather than sharpening human creativity, a surfeit of wealth and power evidently dulls it significantly: because wealth and power at once insulate a man, a nation, or a species from the natural consequences of their errors; enlarge the scope of human errors to the planetary scale; and postpone, but do not eliminate, their ultimate consequences.
In sum, the net combined consequence for Earth-humanity of the administration of wealth and power known as "civilization" has been the progressive crippling of the fundamental human nature of purposeful, intelligent creativity, alike among "the 1%," and among "the 99%" — creating a formidable, imminent, and escalating hazard for "the 1%," for "the 99%," and for all life on planet Earth.
Listed above are some of the consequences that have followed from the combination of wealth and power in the fabric of what Earth-humans like to call "civilization." Surely others could be added to the list. Instead, let us examine further those already listed, and sift them for implications germane to Earth-humanity's immediate present, and future.
Items 1, and 2 mention "Creation by fiat of a commodity, itself of no intrinsic value;" and that "Precious metals, such as gold and silver, were employed early as money." Fiat money is by definition of no intrinsic value, and its use is always attended by coercive "legal tender" laws enforcing its acceptance in exchange for goods and services having actual value. In this way, dishonesty and theft are woven into the very fabric of "civilization." Gold and silver, by contrast, are valued by humans because they have properties very attractive to purposeful, intelligent human creativity; may be shaped into creations of extraordinary beauty and appeal; and because they are relatively scarce.
Precious metals are the kind of commodities von Mises was talking about above, and in #5 § 2.1 Money, that were initially valued for their useful qualities; became more highly valued because they were more easily traded than other trade goods; and were eventually used primarily as effective media of exchange, or money. This may well have been, in its beginnings, an innocent, guileless, "organic" process.
However, when the Sovereign power in a conquered land struck coins of gold or silver, he gave them a value in addition, and unrelated to whatever value they may have had as materials for creative human expression. They were thereby transformed into money; and their value was now strictly commercial, rather than aesthetic, or creative.
Well . . . not strictly commercial. Gold and silver coins were still made out of gold or silver, and creative humans were able to make other creations directly out of them. Additionally, gold and silver were always relatively scarce, and commanded a market value independent of the Sovereign's will. Because these metals were scarce, there were insuperable limits upon how much coinage the Sovereign could make out of them — an obstacle to the eventual designs of "the money makers" that involved subtle, devious, and convoluted maneuvering, before it was finally overcome.
Item 3 mentions the catastrophic consequence of the improved cost-effectiveness with which it has eventually become possible to create money. If anything, this is an extravagant understatement.
The chronic point of tension between "the strong," who do what they can, and "the weak," who suffer what they must, has always been that "the strong," or "the 1%," like to do whatever they want — which generally involves getting "the weak," or "the 99%," to do whatever "the 1%" want as well. It's "a one-way street," and even in "the best of times," for reasons already discussed, it has never worked very well. Mainly, "the 99%" are intrinsically no less purposeful, intelligent, creative beings than are "the 1%." We just happen not to be as "strong;" or as wealthy and powerful.
The equation of monetary wealth with coercive power mentioned in item 5 engenders an almost universal lust for more money. The inexorable flow of money away from "the 99%," and toward "the 1%," mentioned in item 7, suits "the 1%" just fine — although it naturally isn't as well appreciated among "the 99%;" who generally haven't known what to do about it better than wailing, gnashing our teeth, and wringing our hands. This is about as effective as the mewling of a sackful of kittens.
In America, the Federal Reserve banking system, which was put in place one century ago this year (2013), is the instrument in which the cost-effective creation of money has been brought to absolute perfection. That is, limitless amounts of money can be created at no cost whatsoever through the mechanisms of the Federal Reserve. You can't get any more cost-effective than that; and the elusive dream of "the 1%" has at last been fulfilled: "money for nothing; checks for free."
Well . . . but that's not really "the whole story." It never is, is it? There's always "something else," that changes the picture; and the elusive dream turns out actually to have been an illusive dream, fabricated of smoke and mirrors. Ha ha, very funny; but the joke is on "the 99%," not on "the 1%."
But that's not "the whole story" either. As implied by item 10, the joke is on everybody; and it isn't very funny. Although the game of coercive power, whereby the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must appears like a "win" for the strong, and a "lose" for the weak, it is ultimately a lose/lose game for everybody involved: because it does not work, and played out to its final conclusion, can only end up destroying the entire context in which it is played — which in this instance happens to be the habitability of planet Earth.
Does that sound like an exaggeration? Hold that thought; and let us follow the thread a little further, and see where it takes us. Item 4 mentions "a few historical examples of honest banking," which "are the exception, not the rule."
It is easy to appreciate the chronic problem with banking, from its inception. A bank is the place where money is maximally concentrated — the single commodity whose value trumps the value of all other commodities, because in sufficient quantity, "money can buy anything." And a bank is the one place, if anywhere, that money accumulates "in sufficient quantity." So how can such a concentration of the most valuable commodity on Earth be secured against the possibility that those who work most directly and intimately with it, will not be, and cannot be, corrupted by its constant proximity? The answer of history seems to be that there is no way this ideal can reliably be accomplished; and if it is, that it is exceptional, and does not last for very long.
During centuries of chronic destructive cycles of this very nature wherever in the world money was traded in commerce, the city-state of Venice emerged eventually as the birthplace of banking in the contemporary sense — but not without difficulties of the same kind. In 1584, the house of Pisano Tiepolo, the largest bank in those days, and heavily engaged in loaning its deposits (because bankers have learned by long experience that most depositors seldom require the return of their deposits at the same time) was caught short; was unable to return deposits to their owners, because it had loaned them to others; and was shut down. The government bank, Banco della Piazza del Rialto, was established in its place, with rigorous regulations prohibiting it from making loans at all. Its only means of sustenance consisted of the fees it was able to charge for its legitimate services, such as negotiating exchanges between clients, currency exchange, coin storage, and notary services.
The government solution worked! — for awhile. The Banco di Realto thrived, and became the focal point of commerce in a prosperous city-state. The bank's paper receipts for deposits were accepted as currency at large, and because of their reliability and convenience, were traded at a premium, in preference even to gold coins. (This is a prototypical example of a receipt currency; and it works well, as long as it is kept rigorously honest — which historically, has seldom happened for very long.)
There were so many different kinds of coins in circulation in Europe in those times that determining their relative value could be accomplished only by experts: such as those employed by the Banco di Realto. The bank's paper receipts were therefore able to state the precise value of their corresponding deposits, and were consequently traded at a premium over actual coins.
However . . . you know how the story ends. The temptation of the enormous profits to be reaped by lending money — especially other people's money — eventually overcame the prudence of the Venetian Senate. Human memory is short; and corruption waits patiently in the wings for its lapses. It seems to be in the nature of politics that politicians have an unquenchable thirst for money — and a corresponding reluctance to demand in taxes (too much) of it from the voting public. Much more expedient it is to borrow from a bank. But of course, the bank cannot then be prohibited from lending money.
Accordingly, the Banco del Giro was created in 1619, with no such prohibition; and began creating (out of nothing) the money needed by the politicians, and "loaning" it to them — the standard "magic" of bankers in all times and places. It has the same effect as taxing "the 99%" for it: because expanding the supply of money, without equally expanding the supply of goods and services money buys, has the universal and inevitable effect of diluting the value of money. This goes under the label, inflation, and it amounts to an "invisible tax" upon all owners of money: because the same amount of money will no longer purchase the same amount of goods and services as before. Prices are seen to rise; what is unseen is that the value of money actually declines. This disproportionately penalizes "the 99%," because they are squeezed by a much narrower economic margin than that enjoyed by "the 1%." In 1637 the Banco di Realto was absorbed by the Banco del Giro — and that was the end of the first instance in history of honest banking.
The second instance in history of honest banking occurred in Amsterdam, under circumstances almost identical to those just described in Venice. The Bank of Amsterdam, established in 1609, accepted deposits, which it refused to loan, and conducted its business entirely on the proceeds from banking services required by its clients. As in the case of the Banco di Realto, the Bank of Amsterdam issued honest receipt currency backed by its deposits, which also became the preferred medium of commercial exchange throughout the region; and for the same basic reason: it was sound, and more convenient to exchange than coin.
There was a panic in 1672, in response to the approach of Louis XIV's armies, and the bank was besieged with withdrawals. When the bank honored all such demands, its depositors calmed down, and tranquility, balance — and the depositors' money — returned to the Bank of Amsterdam, and to Amsterdam's commercial sphere. However, this was a condition that did not last.
Beginning in 1657, depositors had been allowed to overdraw their accounts, thereby invisibly creating money out of debt; and later on, the bank made vast loans to the Dutch East India Company. The jig was up when the bank's situation became publicly known in January, 1790. Depositors began steadily withdrawing their funds, and within ten months the bank was insolvent. So ended the second instance in history of honest banking.
The Bank of Hamburg was steadfast in the principles of honest banking for more than two hundred years; and when Napoleon plundered it in 1813, its assets amounted to 7,506,956 silver marks, against 7,489,343 marks in liabilities — or a surplus of 17,613 silver marks. Within a few years, the French restored the value of the plundered silver in the form of securities which, whatever their value may have been, were not the same as silver. The bank's currency could no longer be entirely converted into coin, as it had been, and as had been the currencies of the Banco di Realto, and the Bank of Amsterdam, during their periods of honest banking. It was now at best fractional money — meaning that only a fraction of it was convertible into coin. Historically, this has always been a step along the one-way decline of a valuable receipt currency into a worthless fiat currency.
And that in a nutshell, according to Griffin, is the entire history of honest banking, anywhere.
The narrowing of attention upon the acquisition of more money, alike for the exalted and the lowly, discussed above in items 6-9, is a less obvious, more subtle consequence of the partnership of wealth and power than those we have considered so far. For anything that lives, the "art and science of staying alive" is a wide-angel, surround-sound, always-everywhere, never interrupted endeavor that begins before the moment of birth; and ends . . . if ever, on the occasion of "death." There is an awful lot to learn, that may require "many lifetimes" to master; and although fortunately, a great deal of margin for error seems to be built into the Cosmic System, a persistent exclusive focus, to the exclusion of all others, upon a single narrow objective, may reliably be expected to be "a formula for disaster." A great many people have believed that, because "money can buy anything," the accumulation of enough of this single commodity — of human invention, and without parallel in nature — holds the solution to every imaginable challenge one may encounter in life. Big Mistake: there can never be "enough money."
The so-called "Rothschild Formula" for profiting from war, mentioned above in footnote 11, may never have been explicitly stated, either by the House of Rothschild, or by anybody else. Yet a review of historical events, at least from the Napoleonic wars to the present, suggests that, one way or another, something of the kind has evolved among "the money makers," and is very much alive in the onward unfolding of human events.
There have always been men [Griffin writes] who were in a position to make private fortunes out of cooperating with both sides in a war. The Rothschilds were not unique in this, but they no doubt perfected the art and became the personification of that breed. They were not necessarily evil in a moral sense. What preoccupied their minds were not questions of right or wrong but of profit and loss.
Griffin imagines the analysis of a highly pragmatic individual, family, or cartel, of great monetary wealth, preoccupied like the Rothschilds, and other houses of great wealth and power, with profit and loss; arriving at a strategy along the following lines, for maximizing profit, and minimizing loss:
War is the ultimate discipline to any government. If it can successfully meet the challenge of war, it will survive. If it cannot, it will perish. All else is secondary. The sanctity of its laws, the prosperity of its citizens, and the solvency of its treasury will be quickly sacrificed by any government in its primal act of self-survival.
All that is necessary, therefore, to insure that a government will maintain or expand its debt is to involve it in war or the threat of war. The greater the threat and the more destructive the war, the greater the need for debt.
To involve a country in war or the threat of war, it will be necessary for it to have enemies with credible military might. If such enemies already exist, all the better. If they exist but lack military strength, it will be necessary to provide them the money to build their war machine. If an enemy does not exist at all, then it will be necessary to create one by financing the rise of a hostile regime.
The ultimate obstacle is a government which declines to finance its wars through debt. Although this seldom happens, when it does, it will be necessary to encourage internal political opposition, insurrection, or revolution to replace that government with one that is more compliant to our will. The assassination of heads of state could play an important role in this process.
No nation can be allowed to remain militarily stronger than its adversaries, for that could lead to peace and a reduction of debt. To accomplish this balance of power, it may be necessary to finance both sides of the conflict. Unless one of the combatants is hostile to our interests and, therefore, must be destroyed, neither side should be allowed a decisive victory or defeat. While we must always proclaim the virtues of peace, the unspoken objective is perpetual war.
Perpetual war. Why? One reason: perpetual war = perpetual debt = perpetual profits for "the money makers." That's the deal. "The money makers" can make it stick, because . . . well, they make the money — that amazing human invention, with no parallel in nature, that has become such a vital element in all "civilized" human commerce. Makes a fellow think a bit, what?
Griffin goes on in subsequent chapters to detail how this game plan has played out in World War One, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Southern Africa, World War Two, Korea, Vietnam, and the ongoing wars in the Middle East. It is a fascinating chronicle: fascinating . . . in its horror.
1.2 Why It Does Not Work
It should be pretty obvious why this scheme does not work; but it evidently isn't very obvious at all, to most contemporary Earth-humans. It seems to be tangled in complexities far beyond the capacity of the "normal human" to unravel. This is no accident, of course. That is how it's supposed to seem. If the "hall of mirrors" were not complicated, convoluted, and filled with illusions and false reflections, it wouldn't mystify anybody; and it wouldn't even seem to work. So that is why it needs to be complicated. All the complications are woven into the fabric exactly for the purpose of obscuring its substance — because it hasn't any substance. It is an imaginary fabrication of "smoke and mirrors," and richly embroidered deception. The whole thing is very complicated, without having any real substance at all: only deceptive complications. To simplify the complications: it is simply dishonest: top to bottom: rotten to the core. That is why it doesn't work.
There is a terrible irony in all of this: for remember 'way earlier, when we were talking about the virtues of money? "It provides a means of keeping balanced accounts of the exchanges among humans," we wrote, "who in its absence would conduct their exchanges anyway, but without the benefit of knowing with precision that the 'buyer' has paid for his purchases, and that the 'seller' has received equal value in exchange for his goods." Money was supposed to furnish a means of "keeping people honest" in their exchanges with one another. It was supposed to establish and maintain "a level playing field."
Ha ha, what a joke! When you receive something purposefully and maliciously designed not to have any value whatsoever, in exchange for your valuable goods and services, in which you have invested your toil and unique creativity, do you really believe that you have "received equal value in exchange for them?" Probably so. Most people do, without even thinking about it. So maybe now is as good a time as any to start thinking about it.
A vital premise underlying money, or a medium of exchange, is the assumption that people are fundamentally dishonest, and cannot be trusted to return equal value in exchange for valuable goods and services — which turns out to have been a self-fulfilling prophesy, with a terrible vengeance. Otherwise, like the bees and the blossoms, we might have no use for money. Instead, we might exercise our native purposeful, intelligent creativity to the maximum extent of our capabilities, and offer it freely, openly, "with no strings attached," to whomsoever appreciates it, or has a use for it. And we might find among the reciprocal gifts of our purposeful, intelligent, creative peers a rich abundance of everything we or they need or desire, for the enrichment of all our lives.
I know, I know: to the cynical "civilized" mind, that knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing, this sounds hopelessly naïve. But then, "civilization" is a can of worms that doesn't work; and the bees and the blossoms do work. So "civilized" objections don't carry much weight anymore . . . at least, with me.
2 We Interrupt This Broadcast . . .
We interrupt this broadcast to bring you a late-breaking news dispatch, possibly affecting the lives of every being — human or other — currently resident on planet Earth. Briefly, somebody may have pushed the RESET button, and we are now beginning A Whole New Ballgame.
Remember that scene in The Lord of the Rings where Frodo and Samwise finally make it to the Crack of Doom, in the heart of Mount Doom, in the Land of Mordor? Frodo stands upon the brink that he and Sam had struggled so desperately to reach; but instead of casting the Ring of Power — the "One Ring to rule them all" — into the chasm in which the Ring was originally forged, where it may at last be destroyed, and its power broken forever . . . Frodo instead claims the Ring for his own, and puts it on, and vanishes.
Instantly, Gollum, who had followed Frodo and Sam throughout their interminable journey, rushes forward, leaps upon the invisible Frodo, bites off Frodo's finger, regains the Ring for himself . . . and losing his balance, falls with it into the Crack of Doom, where Gollum and the Ring are finally consumed in a tumultuous eruption of Mount Doom — that ends for once and forever the tyranny of the Lord of the Rings on Middle Earth.
Believe it or not, something equivalent to that dramatic scene may have occurred, and is now playing out in "the real world" we call planet Earth. I am not making this up; I never saw it coming, nor imagined it; and possibly like you, I am now in the midst of evaluating it, and grappling with its implications and unfolding possibilities.
I have often entertained the thought: Wouldn't it be nice if the human predicament on planet Earth could be solved as neatly and tidily as that on Middle Earth, in which all could be made clean and whole again, simply by destruction of the One Ring of Power? Unfortunately, I mused, the predicament in "the real world" is far more complex, and widely distributed than that; and there is no localized nexus, like the fabulous Ring, in which are embodied the combined sources of all human oppressions.
It turns out I may have been wrong about that. (I love it when that happens, because it means I get to learn something new!) If what follows is "the real goods," there was a "localized nexus" in "the real world," in which were embodied the combined sources of all human oppressions. It consisted of the corporate structure, a/k/a corporatocracy, that had clandestinely usurped the sovereignty of all lands and peoples on Earth; more or less as (partially) described above in § 1 A Can of Worms, et seq. And there are "real world" counterparts to Frodo and Sam, who have in effect destroyed the power of the counterpart to the "One Ring to rule them all" — by quietly, persistently, and unobserved, legally and lawfully foreclosing upon the entire corporatocracy that had fraudulently, criminally, and treasonously usurped the sovereignty of all lands and peoples on Earth.
Now this is supposed to be a "done deal;" although it is not as yet widely known or understood among people at large. Word is spreading swiftly, however, and the purpose of this "interruption of broadcast" is to participate in that process of information dispersal.
There is something profoundly appealing to me about this process, that I never dreamed could possibly be negotiated; and it springs from this: that accepting this information, and acting upon it; or rejecting it, perhaps as "an impossible dream," lies entirely within the free choice and prerogative of each individual receiving this information. Nobody has urged me to accept this information into my personal perception of "how things really are;" nor to pass it along to anybody else. And I in turn am not urging anybody to do anything. This information was simply brought to my attention — suddenly, and unexpectedly, to be sure — "with no strings attached;" and that is the spirit in which I am passing it on. What you decide to "do about it," if anything, is governed entirely and solely by your sovereign, unalienable freedom of choice.
In consequence, there seems to be the possibility of a gentle, seamless, smooth transition in progress between "what has been," and "what is now becoming," that I was never able to picture clearly before; and about which I could never entirely escape being chronically worried. I mentioned this in The Writing on the Wall #7: "Not All That Can Be Imagined Works In Practice" § 3.1 Transdimensional Possibilities; in which I wrote:
I mentioned above that "I regret to confess that, in my personal 'dark night of the soul,' I do not have a 'ready answer' to [the question, How do we get 'there' from 'here?'] that may be applied to the apparent situation on three-dimensional planet Earth." Frankly, "the apparent situation on three-dimensional planet Earth" appears to me to be shaping up as "a global train wreck" without parallel during the entire span of "civilized history."
Now the image of "a global train wreck" seems to be evaporating like the mist rising in response to a fresh, spring sunrise. I hope so. It "feels" to me like this is "how it should be;" yet I was never able to imagine how such a gentle transition might materialize under contemporary circumstances. Now, I think maybe I can.
The best overview I have encountered so far of what I am talking about is an article titled One People's Public Trust Lawfully Forecloses Corporations, Banks and Governments for Operating Slavery and Private Money Systems by Andy Whiteley, 17 February 2013.
In summary, a small group of "real world" counterparts to Frodo and Sam have established themselves as trustees of a legal entity known as the One People's Public Trust (OPPT); and between 2011 and 2012, formally filed a complex series of affidavits under the jurisdiction of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). By name, the OPPT trustees are Caleb Skinner, Hollis Randall Hillner, and Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf. OPPT beneficiaries are all the human inhabitants of planet Earth: "the One People, created by The Creator." The UCC is the governing law of all commerce on planet Earth. The substantial effect of the OPPT UCC filings is summarized on the final page of the Courtesy Notice available at oppt-in.com:
The One People's Public Trust (OPPT)
The OPPT documents that were disclosed on December 25th  have swept across the land like wildfire. It has become a grass roots movement taken on by hundreds of thousands of people across the world (soon to be millions) who all want the same thing; They want freedom from the old enslavement system and a choice to live their lives according to their own free will and to exercise their own free will choices. The current systems have failed and they are being held up only by artificial means and the last bit of energy that was already “in the pipes” before the foreclosure. The OPPT documents open the door to the possibility of allowing the people to free themselves from these failed systems and co-create a new system, according to the desires and free will choice of each acting in the highest good of all where we can all thrive.
What is the One People's Public Trust?
The One People's Public Trust itself consists of every person on the planet, the planet itself and the Creator.
The One People's Trust trustees are a group of very skilled individuals including legal professionals who, in conjunction with a positive group inside the financial system, carried out extensive investigations into the massive fraud and theft taking place at the time. After exercising extreme prudence, the OPPT concluded that the corporations operating under the guise of the people's government and financial systems were committing treason against the people of this planet without the people's knowing, willing and intentional consent. Through a series of REGISTRATIONS of the BE'ing of the one people of this planet, the land, airs, seas and every creation thereof and therefrom, all unlawful and illegal claims of ownership and actions of management and control by the principals, agents and beneficiaries were lawfully and legally duly cancelled and foreclosed upon by their own free will choice not to remedy the damage they had caused. The final report from the investigation is to be found here http://www.scribd.com/doc/118067922/PARADIGM-DOCUMENT-FROM-THE-TREASURY-FINANCE-AG-INDUSTRIESTRASSE-21-CH-6055ALPNACH-DORF-SWITZERLAND
OPPT guards, protects and preserves all BE'ing, inclusive of gold and silver previously misused and abused by the banking system. The one people of this planet, and all BE'ings guarded, preserved and protected in Trust, individually and equally, are the only lawful and legal issuers of any legitimate REPRESENTATION of value, especially currency. The alleged main stream banking system no longer has asset backing. The trustees have returned and allocated a significant amount value to each human, a value that could pay the debt of the average person many, many times over. This is unnecessary of course. All debt has been eliminated by the very fact that the banks chose not to provide verified documentation that a loan had ever been made, as a matter of law, as a matter of fact, and as a matter of public policy, and the banks therefore chose by their free will choice to foreclose on themselves.
Many significant changes have come about including that we now live in a world of unlimited responsibility and liability that may bother you, but when you have a huge asset to call upon in need, that fact is mitigated.
At the same time, the trustees invoked a replacement system of governance called Creators Value Asset Centres or CVAC's. The CVAC system is the antithesis of the corrupt, externally controlled looting devices that were termed Governments. They are in fact, in commerce, in law, preserved by public policy, REGISTERED as wholly owned, with full title, value and rights, co-jointly and equally by each of the one people on this planet, expressly warranted to be entirely transparent entities that exist only to serve the people of this planet by providing any systems of assistance the people of this planet deem necessary or desired, and these systems are prevented from impinging on any aspect of the free will of any human.
The CVAC system is presented as a planet wide, completely interconnected network structure run only by bonded public servants who act with full responsibility and in full liability at all times. Every human on the planet is served by CVAC and its BRANCHES. Each former nation on the planet has one CVAC BRANCH reserved for it. This incredible paradigm shift is just beginning to unfold right now.
Why is day to day life still the same? The old system is currently in denial and although there are negotiations going on continuously at the highest level, the news of the existence of the Trust is deliberately being kept out of the main stream media by the alleged corporate system to deceive the one people of this planet as it always has done. The impending implementation of funded CVACs will correct this situation.
Yet this document is in front of you and YOU now know what is really happening. You are now part of the paradigm shift.
This document is a lawful and legal challenge to approaches by individuals acting in ignorance of the new system or knowingly, willingly, and intentionally attempting to usurp, violate, invade, abrogate, subjugate, or insubordinate any BE'ing on this planet.
It is also an invitation to participate transparently, with integrity, in the greatest period of change ever seen on this planet.
In the months to come our world is going to change beyond recognition. Our true history will be revealed along with the truth of the system we have been living under. Much technology that has been withheld from us will be released including power production, health and transport. War, disease and pollution will be a thing of the past.
Each of us needs to do our own research. Patience is required while we develop our own understanding of what is occurring and choose what we do with this information only as it resonates within each of us. There are many groups around the world that have formed to develop strategies on how best to use the OPPT filings to help free the people and many who are working to push the information out to the people as the CVAC system is prepared for rollout.
Just Google One People's Public Trust, OPPT or go to www.peoplestrust1776.org. Thank you.
The Courtesy Notice, from which the preceding paragraphs have been quoted, is an instrument for dealing with foreclosed corporate entities that persist in fraudulent claims against any one or several of "the One People, created by The Creator." A corporation is defined as: "A statutory entity (usu. a business) having authority under law to act as a single person distinct from the shareholders who make it up and having rights to issue stock and exist indefinitely." The corporate veil is defined as: "The legal assumption that the actions of a corporation are not the actions of its owners, so that the owners are exempt from liability for the corporation's actions."
As I understand it, the unrebutted, and therefore lawfully binding foreclosure upon all corporations on Earth, through the UCC filings by the OPPT trustees, on behalf of "the One People, created by The Creator," has the effect of lifting the corporate veil, and rendering all persons formerly sheltered by it to have unlimited responsibility and liability for their individual acts, and their consequences. If so, then in law, all humans are now peers, each with unlimited responsibility and liability for our acts, and with corresponding unlimited liberty to act — subject only to the caveat that any act that limits the liberty of a peer constitutes a trespass, and cannot be allowed. If so, this is certainly a game-changer; and as mentioned above, it's A Whole New Ballgame.
3 A Whole New Ballgame
All this is heady stuff, maybe; but its full implications are not easily absorbed in one sitting. If we really have entered "a whole new ballgame," what does that mean? And, is it even so? And if so, what are the rules of the new ballgame; and if you want to, how do you play?
I know, I know, and I'm grappling with these, and other questions as well. As mentioned above, this information was recently brought to my attention, suddenly, and unexpectedly, and I have been looking into it, and evaluating it since then. This is "work in progress," and for me, is still inconclusive.
Nevertheless, I have informed one other person about this: a recent e-mail correspondent I'll call "Zeke," who contacted me in reference to something he encountered on one of my Websites. Through correspondence we discovered that we had numerous interests in common, and I learned that Zeke has been studying law, in the specific interest of severing himself legally from "the system." So, when I unexpectedly encountered the OPPT, I naturally assumed that it would be of interest to Zeke; and I sent him a brief e-mail with a link to the article mentioned above, and cited in footnote 22.
Zeke's response surprised me considerably. He "flamed" me:
I've had an opportunity [Zeke wrote] to go through the link you provided to the OPPT article, and all I have to say is that some people can sure be gullible. This thing has more red flags on it than a Red Cross ship. It smells to high heaven. People (read: the masses) are gullible because they have short memories; they tend to disregard the lessons of history. Anyone who is buying into this rubbish is living in a fool's paradise. And you can take that to the bank, if you can find one that's honest!
The only true statement in that article evidenced the fact that the Powers that Be (yes, they still are in control and will remain in control despite these hollow claims) "won't go down without a fight." These Powers have been in control of the world's nations for over 2000 years, if not longer! They aren't going anywhere anytime soon, I'm afraid.
The only thing that might have convinced me that any of this had any validity would have been FULL DISCLOSURE through the media. The fact that this has not occurred tells me that this is all just another cruel hoax designed to distract and mollify people for a while longer as more parts of the coming changes to the economic system are moved into place.
Within our lifetime a man with whom you may have been familiar at the time uttered the phrase, "Belief is the booby prize!" His name was Werner Erhard, the founder of est (Erhard Seminar Training). His statement was based on an understanding of history and human nature. You've heard the thought before: "You can fool all the people some of the time and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all the people ALL of the time."
It seems some people (present company not excluded) fall into the second category. I would have thought that some people were too old and experienced to fall for such nonsense. I, for one, don't have any time to waste on things that don't work!
Well! So much for my first venture at sharing the "late-breaking news" about OPPT. I suppose that, so long as we're in the mode of quoting aphorisms, I might reply with a remark by Kierkegaard: "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." However, I'm afraid I'll have to plead nolo contendere to the charge of being gullible; and Kierkegaard didn't provide a formula for distinguishing reliably between the two ways of being fooled. I can believe practically anything, until or unless I learn better. It is the primary method I have developed for learning things. Somebody tells me something I have no prior reason to disbelieve, and I'll believe it — provisionally, and with reservations. If it isn't so, I figure sooner or later, I'll discover its inconsistency with something I feel pretty sure is "true," and amend my belief accordingly. Unfortunately, Zeke did not lend me any aid in this process. He was not at all specific in his criticism; he only called the subject article "rubbish," and "nonsense." That does not contribute anything toward resolving anybody's uncertainties.
So, it is evident that the claims by OPPT to have foreclosed upon the corporatocracy are not certain to be taken at face value by everybody who encounters them — even among those one would expect at least to give them an impartial hearing. However, even if the OPPT claims turn out to be valid, bona fide, and do eventually achieve their intended and predicted results, such reflexive skepticism is not necessarily a "bad thing." It tends to moderate the pace of tumultuous adjustment in the midst of a world already inundated by tidal waves of change in every domain of contemporary human experience.
Such obstacles may contribute to the grace of a smooth transition mentioned earlier, between "what has been," and "what is now becoming." Even if all the corporations have been foreclosed at a stroke: still, people who are unaware of this development are conducting their lives more or less as they have been, showing up for work on time at their (former) corporate occupations, "business as usual," same old same-old. And for those who are becoming aware of the "invisible shift," it obviously may take awhile to become reoriented to the new landscape. It is an awareness that emerges gradually, in an individual, and in propagating through populations; and as suggested above, it is incumbent upon each of us to do our own research, and to decide for ourselves what to do in response to it, when we encounter the OPPT.
Meanwhile, although everything appears to be "normal" (whatever that is!) and most people are paying their bills, etc., those who are "tuning in" to the "invisible shift" may begin to "test the waters," and for instance, respond with a Courtesy Notice to an invoice for payment of a debt without a lawful contract; informing the claimant of the foreclosure on their corporation; and of the claimant's resulting status as a private individual, without the corporate veil, and with unlimited responsibility and liability for their acts.
The play-out of these preliminary ventures will either bear the results predicted by the OPPT, or they will not. If they do, the word will quickly spread, and people will graduate soon enough from foreclosing upon, say, parking tickets, to foreclosing upon their fraudulent mortgages, and other instruments of unlawful indebtedness. It shouldn't take very long, either way. Stay tuned!
In any case, however this "legal drama" plays out, what is going on here at a deeper level, as discussed earlier, involves a fundamental transition from what we have been calling "civilization," to what may provisionally be called "post-civilization," by whatever name we might eventually prefer to label it. In order to establish a lasting "post-civilization," that does not quickly degenerate back into another "civilization," in which "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must," it is essential not only to secure the legal / lawful standing of the emerging system: it is also essential that its constituents become genuinely "post-civilized" humans, who voluntarily and consistently opt out of the human option to usurp the prerogatives of their peers. This has been discussed at some length in the recent essay, "Post-Civilized" Possibilities: The Quality Without a Name, so I need not elaborate further in this place.
The preceding only scratches the surface of an enormous, and enormously exciting topic. Fortunately, there seem to be swiftly accumulating numbers of good-hearted people to discuss it, act upon it, and thereby take our first steps beyond the slave-dominion of fraudulent wealth and tyrannical coercive power. It has been said that not all the armies of the world are sufficient to stop an idea whose time has come. It may be the privilege of those now resident upon planet Earth to witness, and to participate, or not, by choice, in the fulfillment of that observation by Victor Hugo, 1802-1885.
If so, it will not be because a mob, or a "mass of people," in sufficient numbers to make it prevail, have latched upon a galvanizing idea. It will be because a sufficient number of freely choosing individuals have decided that the time has at last arrived for each to commence living with full responsibility, and in unlimited liability for his or her every act; and to stand answerable to any and all for each human action's every consequence.
Accordingly, there is a brief paragraph in the Courtesy Notice quoted above that I may have misunderstood, or that may have slipped through in the rush to get awareness of the OPPT "out the door," and in circulation among people who can put it into execution. Either way, the statement, or my misunderstanding, may easily be amended. The statement that I question is the following:
Many significant changes have come about including that we now live in a world of unlimited responsibility and liability that may bother you, but when you have a huge asset to call upon in need, that fact is mitigated.
It seems to me that if living in a world of unlimited responsibility and liability "bothers you," yet may be mitigated by "a huge asset to call upon in need," then you will have missed the essential element that gives the OPPT its power to catalyze the emergence of "a whole new ballgame" among humans on planet Earth.
As I understand it, the essential element of the OPPT is the blanket foreclosure on all corporations, for the entirely just reason that a corporation is by definition a "legal fiction" whereby its owners are relieved of all responsibility and liability for the acts of their corporation. A legal fiction is defined as: "An assumption that something is true even though it may be untrue, made esp. in judicial reasoning to alter the operation of a legal rule. . . ."
Thus a "legal fiction" is fundamentally corrupt: because it declares to be "true" something that is actually "untrue," by fiat of "judicial reasoning to alter the operation of a legal rule." It is an administrative device that provides its beneficiary with the unjust privilege of "having it both ways." However, in reason, and in fact, "you cannot have it both ways." If something is "untrue," it cannot legitimately be declared to be "true," to suit the convenience of "judicial reasoning." To do so is fundamentally to corrupt, and make a meaningless mockery of so-called "law."
If the owners of a corporation are not fully responsible and liable for its corporate acts, who is responsible and liable for them? By "law," evidently nobody is. In that case, effectively, there is no law; there is only "color of law": and "we the people" bear the burden of a corrupt condition that is unbearable: the condition whereby "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." It is a condition that does not work; and one way or another, will not last.
Now the OPPT trustees have stepped forward and voluntarily placed themselves in full responsibility, and in unlimited liability for their acts; and we shall see in due course whether others are willing, with eyes wide open, to follow their example, and do likewise. This, as I understand it, is what it means to opt in to the OPPT.
1. Grahn, The Writing on the Wall #5: "Don't Take Any Wooden Nickels" § 3 It Doesn't Work.
2. Ibid., § 2.1 Money. wellspringpublishinggroup.com/wl/wow05.html#econ02.1.8
3. Grahn, "Post-Civilized" Possibilities: Gravity Wheel § 1 Energy Abundance. wellspringpublishinggroup.com/wl/pcp-c.html#ea01.6
4. The Writing on the Wall #5 § 2.2 Wealth and Power, pp. 17-18.
5. Grahn, The Writing on the Wall #7 § 2 "Civilization".
6. Grahn, loc. cit.
7. Herbert Stein, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, Nixon administration.
8. Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Econimics, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, Alabama, The Scholar's Edition, Bettina Bien Greaves, 1998, p. 398.
9. For an example of one of the neither innocent nor benign routine tasks undertaken by "civilized" humans, and facilitated by money, see the discussion below of the incredibly slick method "the money makers" have perfected for reaping obscene profits from wars and revolutions.
10. See The Writing on the Wall #5 § 4 The End for a description of one of probably many different ways this may be achieved.
11. Fomenting revolution hasn't been very effective either; and revolutions — and wars in general — are financed by "the 1%," who only reap obscene profits from them, at no cost to themselves. See G. Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve, Fourth Edition, American Media, Westlake Village, California, June, 2002; particularly Chapter Eleven, The Rothschild Formula, describing how "the 1%" have perfected the technique of profiting by financing all principals engaged in war — and deliberately fanning the embers of conflict, simply because warfare is the single human activity that yields its financiers their most lavish profits. We will discuss this further below (pp. 13-14).
12. At no cost whatsoever, that is, to "the 1%." The costs are borne by "the 99%."
13. Griffin, 2002, p. 171.
14. Ibid., p. 172.
15. Griffin, loc. cit.
16. Ibid., pp. 172-173.
17. Ibid., pp. 173-174.
18. Ibid., p. 228.
19. Ibid., p. 230.
20. J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, New York, first published in Great Britain by Harper-CollinsPublishers 1991, pp. 924-926.
21. Grahn, The Writing on the Wall #7: "Not All That Can Be Imagined Works In Practice" § 3.1 Transdimensional Possibilities.
22. Andy Whiteley, One People's Public Trust Lawfully Forecloses Corporations, Banks and Governments for Operating Slavery and Private Money Systems, 17 February 2013.
23. OPPT Courtesy Notice, Page 5 of 5. oppt-in.com
24. Bryan A. Garner, Editor-in-Chief, Black's Law Dictionary: Pocket Edition, West Group, 1996.
26. Zeke, private correspondence with the author, 02/25/2013 08:09.
27. Sören Kierkegaard, 1813-1855.
28. FINAL BULLET REPORT ∞PARADIGM∞ 3/6/2011, 16 pp., 6.4MB.
29. Nominations are now open for a name for the system emerging in replacement of "civilization," which from its inception thousands of years ago, has always relied upon wealth and power to secure the will of "the 1%" at the expense of "the 99%."
30. Grahn, "Post-Civilized" Possibilities: The Quality Without a Name.
31. Garner, Black's Law Dictionary.
Return to Authors