Banking and Conspiracies

[soulman]

<snip>
On to the actual question, the reason discussions of banking are often accused of verging on "conspiraloons" is because we have had a succession of people arrive on these boards cutting and pasting huge treatises involving, variously, the Bilderbergs, lizards and the jews. I do not, obviously, include yourself or Bakatcha for example in this but it's something to bear in mind.

That's very convenient eh.

Bakatcha - It's a shame you've quoted a not particularly insightful comment on our discussion, because it was a reasonable exchange. I wouldn't characterise my approach as being patronising towards non economists, if I have failed to explain what I mean to the satisfaction of others then that's my failing, not anybody else's.

Finance and the debt that national economies take on is based on the assumption of future economic growth, but mortgaging current financial loans to future real economic activity provides great incentives for productive activity and isn't so unreasonable if it doesn't reach crazy proportions, which however arguably it now is.

Similarly, interest is, according to one way of seeing things, not a payment for nothing, but compensation for the fact that the money borrowed by somebody for one purpose could have been use for an alternative profitable purpose. This was true before money started assuming its modern properties and was indeed 100% backed by real reserves, and it is still true now.

The distributional effects of this are obviously open for massive debate, and the struggle between capital and labour is not going anywhere (see recent debates in the British papers on the size of city bonuses)...

For me the study of 'economics' is a sham. It's an attempt, a quite successful attempt it seems, to mystify a very basic relationship. Capitalism is built on exploitation. Exploitation of labour and resources. The rest is merely window dressing...

 

[Aldebaran]

How can a human activity be "supernatural"? It makes no sense.

This should be taken in the same meaning as "un-natural". Everything artificially created fits that description.

salaam.

 

[Blagsta]

This should be taken in the same meaning as "un-natural". Everything artificially created fits that description.

salaam.

What does "artificially created" mean? Human beings are natural, what we do is natural. The division between natural and unnatural is a false one.

 

[bluestreak]

Whilst I'd wholeheartedly agree with you, Bluestreak, do you have any thoughts as to why, if 'it's bloody obvious', discussion of the topic provokes such responses as we saw on the thread (I.E. Accusations of anti-semitism, poor mental health and threats of violence, topped off with the wholesale unexplained removal of the thread) that seems to have prompted Phil to bring the subject up?

well, it's bloody obvious because the difference between capitalist ecomonics and using money as a symbol to intermediate between bartering is that with economics money becomes an abstract concept and leaves us open to all the successes and failings of the fluctuations of the finance markets.... markets which harm the poor (or people for whom money is a real and tangible concept rather than a way of keeping count). just look at the insurance and futures markets for a way of creating money from nothing!

 

[bluestreak]

Of course it's obvious that if I write you a cheque, and you cash it, someone doesn't travel from my bank to yours with an equivalent value of gold. But that's not the point at all.

no, but i think you're missing mine. to me the argument is not that there are conpiracies but WHAT the conspiracies are. to me the whole thing of capitalist economics is another way of ensuring that the people with the power retain the power by controlling money in ways that keep the rich rich and the poor poor. anyone here may disagree, but that's their call. while i may not agree with all of phil's economic analysis, i certainly agree that many of the left have become too complacent regarding capitalism, treating it as a necessary evil or the framework to be worked within - i blame the soviets of course, turning the communist dream into a state capitalist dictatorship and thus undermining the marxist economic model - by putting the idea into people's heads that marxism = soviet style state capitalism. thus we're left with a couple of generations now of leftists who are really indoctrinated into capitalism and are more the democratic capitalist left rather than the true socialist / communist left. and of course the failure of the soviets has undermined the argument in many ways leaving "the left" looking for a replacement for marxist economic theory that hasn't truly showed up yet. personally i haven't wrked it all out yet.

 

[Jazzz]

I'm not going to tell anyone how to behave. You're all sensible adults

That's a shame - you were showing some promise as a moderator. When did you quit?

 

[bluestreak]

Because of who posted it? Because Jazzz always bangs on about it, and he's a nutcase? Because phil then writes nonsense about money being supernatural?

It would be nice to see a discussion on the topic without the usual paranoid idiots.

i hope what my learned friend is saying here is that it becomes difficult to play the ball not the man sometimes.

 

[slaar]

...just look at the insurance and futures markets for a way of creating money from nothing!

How exactly are insurance and futures markets not providing a useful service? That's just silly.

soulman - What's convenient? Rants about bilderbergs and jews certainly aren't. Your views on economics on the other hand are defensible, I just don't share them. What about ecological economics? Marxist economics? Again, like phil, you're taking the standard arguments of mainstream economics and suggesting that's all economics can be, just because that's what's currently dominant.

 

[ViolentPanda]

This is what really puzzles me, yes. Take for instance the aptly-named Violent Panda's response to Jazzz's eminently sensible (I am tempted to say 'common sense') observations concerning the fraudulent nature of banking.

Except that anyone familiar with Jazzz's views will know that he isn't usually talking only about the financial system and the corporate, private and governmental entities behind it, but (unfortunately) about supposed cabals of powerful Jewish bankers (tm "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"), although "Jew" sometimes nowadays gets replaced with "international", what with anti-Semitism being a tad passé nowadays.

Mr. Panda expressed the hope that Jazzz would be rewarded by having his head smashed in with a baseball bat.

I didn't express any "hope" for Jazz to be "rewarded" in any way, muppet.
I expressed the wish, when Blagsta posted "bangs head", that the head belong to Jazzz.
Why? for the reason posted above. I'm sick and tired of rational subjects being diverted by idiots who give credence to the likes of David Icke.

The violent intimidation of those who dare to criticize capitalism was par for the course in Pinochet's Chile, but I was slightly taken aback to find it on a Leftist British message board in the year 2007. On reflection, however, I began to suspect that it might be a sign of the times. Hence this thread.

"Violent intimidation"? That's pathetic even by your low standards, phil. Comparing the murderous intimidation of political dissidents in Chile with a few words on a bulletin board which were written to give vent to my annoyance at the incipient arrival of another of Jazzz's "it woz the lizards wot dun it" fantasies reeks of your desperation to be controversial.

I'd declare "how are the mighty fallen!", but that would credit you with having been mighty in your time, whereas you've always been strictly third-rate.

 

[Jazzz]

I think you are right to point out that what we're discusing on this thread is not best defined as 'capitalism.' I'd be quite happy to employ the term 'usury' instead (and by 'usury' I intend *any* lending of money at interest, not just excessive interest-taking). That is what I really object to. I don't believe you could have capitalism without usury, but if you could, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Well, then we do seem to largely agree. There may well be plenty of concerns about a capitalist economy, but the nature of this banking scam is simply one of a street-hustle within any type of society as far as I can see.

Thomas Edison and Henry Ford spoke up about it back in 1921, back when the New York Times would speak up on the issue (mainstream media wouldn't dare touch it now)

If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good. It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the usurer, and the other helps the people.

On the 'muscle shoals' project

And that's the simple cure: the creation of interest-free currency. There's no reason why a society that did that would be any less 'capitalist'.

The other point is that - like creating money out of thin air is not necessarily bad thing - I don't agree that all lending money at interest is a necessarily a bad thing. The problem only occurs when the two are placed together.

 

[soulman]

<snip>

Oh look Mr. Internet hard man has arrived. Is he sitting on his baseball bat?

 

[Jazzz]

ViolentPanda, this has nothing to do with race whatsoever.

And I do hope you have put down your baseball bat.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What is your understanding of the term 'magic?' Because most theorists of magic would say that it consists in the ritual manipulation of signs or images to achieve objective effects. And I put it to you that this is precisely what the financial system does.

Most "theorists of magic" wouldn't actually describe "magic" in that way at all, a few, such as Patrick Dunn, Peter J. Carroll or Ray Sherwin might, but they're a very small minority. Most theorists still hold with the Crowleyan formulation of magic, that it is "the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with the will". The signs, images and rituals are trappings, unnecessary stage props that give a focus for the unenlightened mind.

All of which is explained in Crowley's "Magick in Theory and Practice".

Hmm, it looks like your analogy is somewhat slipshod, given that the financial system actually requires the signs and images.

 

[ViolentPanda]

ViolentPanda, this has nothing to do with race whatsoever.

And I do hope you have put down your baseball bat.

"Jew" isn't a race, and my point isn't that you're an anti-Semite, but that your belief system carries some very unsavoury echoes of anti-Semitic propaganda, and that some of the disciples you heed (Icke, for example) have a history of anti-Semitism (nowadays masked with his "lizards" thesis).

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh look Mr. Internet hard man has arrived. Is he sitting on his baseball bat?

Oooh, look, Mr "hasn't got his facts straight again" has arrived. Is he sitting on a drawing pin, or is his face always that sour-looking?

 

[soulman]

"Jew" isn't a race, and my point isn't that you're an anti-Semite, but that your belief system carries some very unsavoury echoes of anti-Semitic propaganda, and that some of the disciples you heed (Icke, for example) have a history of anti-Semitism (nowadays masked with his "lizards" thesis).

Stop trying to appoint yourself witchfinder general. If those of us posting on here need to take exception to someone elses views we are more than capable of doing that ourselves without resorting to violent fantasies about smashing someone's head in with a baseball bat.

 

[bluestreak]

How exactly are insurance and futures markets not providing a useful service? That's just silly.

well, at their most basic levels they are, but when you get deep into it, it becomes more like gambling with money and goods that aren't yours to gamble with.

 

[rorymac]

There is nothing more stupid than letting a load of jews act like cunts because you think that makes you superior. The jews just think you're a cunt same as every other cunt basically. My mate is a jew and he told me himself that 'you can't trust my da or any of his brothers lol fuck no don't never buy a car off em Roy cos they reckon it makes em closer to God to be a cunt ha ha .. you like that one don't you lol .. ?? do you call it dinner or tea in Ireland when did you first see your wife's you know what ? .. aw yeah my dad and my uncle love it when they stick bits of old volvos together and rent out bits of property with no light bulbs or fuckall ha ha but they don't have a clue how to go down on a woman's fanny for example lol' what do you reckon of my honesty Roy .. I'm just like you really lol'? Fucking questions about bank balances and interest rates .. I don't fucking know do I?
There is nothing Roy .. not fucking anything mate .. they love more than stealing all your savings because the more they do that lol the more certain that they will be of being one of the chosen ones and everyone else is just a cunt who won't ever ever get into heaven lmao .. aaaaand they have never gone down on a woman's fanny ha ha ha you never thought I would say that innit in their fuckin lives .. was that the last bell mate ? ! Ha ha got you you and me are like brothers I know it's my round why do we pay those prices at Spurs ah?? I am just showing you that we are all the same I'm sorry maybe you don't want another drink I don't know well will you have a drink with me or not I have to get going maybe there isn't the time .. have you got a mortgage ? do you know how much the bus to Stamford Hill is etc etc'? It's the same ol bollocks every time with that lot.

Why could he not see that my glass was below the half full mark ? Why do I always have to get Denise to ring his mobile and ask the fucker what I'm drinking? Why does he look surprised like it never happened before every time. 'Ha ha Rory you got me there .. cor she's a bit of all right mate you done her too lol ?? can you manage a full pint I'm having a half .. hey what about a packet of crisps it's ok you don't have to buy them ha ha ha .. here Roy is it possible to buy just a small garden trowel full of quick set mortar at B&Q or anywhere at all .. do you have any that you don't need anymore .. a half of bitter used to cost 21pence can you believe that .. how much do those tarts charge to scratch your back .. do they just do that Roy .. do you know that ?? .. do you believe in God mate ?? etc etc '
Cesc Fabregas is a great player and he plays for Arsenal but he could easily have been a yid same as Dennis Bergkamp IMO. But they made their decision just like Darina Kniefsey did. She loved the portion and she knows I done her 7 times without ever holding back on what I thought about money lenders and fuckin Barclays.
I fucking done her good and proper don't worry about that.

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

..interest is, according to one way of seeing things, not a payment for nothing, but compensation for the fact that the money borrowed by somebody for one purpose could have been use for an alternative profitable purpose. This was true before money started assuming its modern properties and was indeed 100% backed by real reserves, and it is still true now.

Nope. You're trying to pretend that the 'money' created when a bond is issued 'could have been use for an alternative profitable purpose', which is simply not true.

The 'money' created by a bond does not exist until the bond is issued.

*Now that's magic*​

-

well, it's bloody obvious because the difference between capitalist ecomonics and using money as a symbol to intermediate between bartering is that with economics money becomes an abstract concept

I think it does that through the mechanism of 'usury'.

Did you ever catch that 'Crusoe' thing I keep posting?

many of the left have become too complacent regarding capitalism, treating it as a necessary evil or the framework to be worked within

Very true. Although I'd keep the distinction between 'usury' and 'capitalism'.

I think 'capitalism' has become accepted because you can almost say 'good things' about it that appear to make sense, in a sensible common-sense sort of way.

'Usury', however...

-

Back to the topic:

All this bollocks about 'lizards' etc. isn't coming from anyone arguing for the recognition of 'usury' as the evil super natural magic it so clearly is.

As for 'unsavoury echoes' of anti-semitism - well, it's not really surprising it's come up. Again, not from anyone advocating urgent monetary reform.

But since it's well and truly up (thanks, Rorz ) I'd like to make it clear that just because the Rothschilds are Jewish, doesn't mean discussing the very real and well documented history of the family is in any way 'anti-semitic'.

Sure, right-wing nutters will have seized upon certain aspects of this history to promote their own twisted ideologies, in the same way as the BNP use 'peak oil' to further their agenda - but you couldn't suggest that this alters the fact that the Rothschild banking family were reported to be among the wealthiest people on the planet.

Considering, then, that the systemic mechanisms (e.g. usury) that maintain wealth in the hands of the wealthy are as powerful today as they ever were, what on earth is there to make us suppose that they (the Rothschilds) are any less powerful than they have been in the past?

Why should any mention of them be prejudicially dismissed as a 'breathless rant' or similar?

Why the taboo?

General note - please don't 'quote' fucktardery as that negates the 'ignore' function. Arfankyeeew.

 

[Jazzz]

"Jew" isn't a race, and my point isn't that you're an anti-Semite, but that your belief system carries some very unsavoury echoes of anti-Semitic propaganda, and that some of the disciples you heed (Icke, for example) have a history of anti-Semitism (nowadays masked with his "lizards" thesis).

Well I don't know about the unsavoury echoes that you can hear VP.

But the argument that fractional reserve banking is not a horrendous scam because some bankers are Jews is as logical as saying that mugging isn't a crime because some muggers are black.

 

[Jazzz]

Banking Quotes - #1

Let's make this a theme of the thread!

I'll kick off with our good Bank of England chap Josiah Stamp, with the quote I made on the other thread. Let's hope I don't get hit over the head with a baseball bat, eh?

The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again... Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England 1928-1941

 

[Jonti]

Only when a government creates its own money supply free of charge to the nation to facilitate production, consumption and trade, instead of authorising private banks to create the nation's money and then holding the nation at ransom by breaking its back under the ensuing interest debt, only when we get back to a system where the usurer is not being rewarded for taking advantage of others' difficulties, will we achieve real prosperity.

source

 

[nino_savatte]

You're always attempting to insult Phil.

It's sad to see how miserably you fail.

And you're always popping up to snipe others with what you think are clever and witty quips. Pity that they're neither - eh? Pity you've got the brain power of a dry piece of Ryvita.

 

[nino_savatte]

Well I don't know about the unsavoury echoes that you can hear VP.

But the argument that fractional reserve banking is not a horrendous scam because some bankers are Jews is as logical as saying that mugging isn't a crime because some muggers are black.

The phrase "International banking" is often a shorthand for "Jewish world conspiracy".

 

[nino_savatte]

ViolentPanda, this has nothing to do with race whatsoever.

And I do hope you have put down your baseball bat.

Au contraire, Monsieur le Jazzz.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Stop trying to appoint yourself witchfinder general. If those of us posting on here need to take exception to someone elses views we are more than capable of doing that ourselves without resorting to violent fantasies about smashing someone's head in with a baseball bat.

You appear to be labouring under the delusion that I wish anyone to "follow my lead". I'm expressing my own opinion.

Unlike you, I don't "play to the audience". That's why I wouldn't (unlike you in the post I'm replying to) presume to assume that I comprised part of the collective "we" you seem to be representing.

Oh, and if you can read, you'll know it was "bang head", not "smash in".

 

[ViolentPanda]

Well I don't know about the unsavoury echoes that you can hear VP.

The echoes about "international bankers" that resonate all the way from "the Protocols".

But the argument that fractional reserve banking is not a horrendous scam because some bankers are Jews is as logical as saying that mugging isn't a crime because some muggers are black.

I haven't advanced any such argument, so your "logic" escapes me.

My argument is that whenever the mechanics of the international banking and financial system are discussed (whether those mechanics are a "scam" or not), then certain posters, yourself among them, conflate that discussion with parallel but separate issues about forces "controlling" those mechanics for their own ends. You may think such conflation is legitimate. I beleve it's a seperate issue.

 

[Blagsta]

i hope what my learned friend is saying here is that it becomes difficult to play the ball not the man sometimes.

Yep. Who says things is sometimes as important as what they say.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

My argument is that whenever the mechanics of the international banking and financial system are discussed (whether those mechanics are a "scam" or not), then certain posters, yourself among them, conflate that discussion with parallel but separate issues about forces "controlling" those mechanics for their own ends. You may think such conflation is legitimate. I beleve it's a seperate issue.

Why don't you actually wait for a poster to perform this conflation first before laying into them? Remember that this is a public discussion board and not everybody reading it is going to know about past posts. This kind of tiff is fucking tedious.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yep. Who says things is sometimes as important as what they say.

Ditto my comment to VP.