"Because we fear the responsibility for our actions, we have allowed ourselves to develop the mentality of slaves. Contrary to the stirring sentiments of the Declaration of Independence, we now pledge "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" not to one another for our mutual protection, but to the state, whose actions continue to exploit, despoil, and destroy us." ~ Butler Shaffer
Tail of a Dog
Exclusive to STR
There are a lot of good folk out there who think civilization is being run--badly--by the Bilderbergers and their friends.
They point to such sources as G. Edward Griffin's The Creature From Jekyll Island which documents how the Federal Reserve Bank was set up a century ago, and conclude that since the Fed holds the purse strings, it governs the government; that hence, we are all at the mercy of a small group of sinister bankers who become fabulously wealthy on the backs of our labor. They hold that whereas supposedly The People own and operate the government (ha!), its real owner is the Trilateral Commission or Council on Foreign Relations, the Illuminati, or merely the Fed; the names change, but the handful of people in charge do not. Some extremists associate the bankers with Jewry and spew anti-Semitism from every pore. Allegedly, the bankers pick Presidents and grant money to governments provided their will is followed in the policies being purchased. Instead of the Fed being the tail of the dog of government, supposedly it is really the dog itself, and the government the tail and We the People are merely those who get whacked when the tail is wagged. Roughly, that's the world according to the patriots--who are, I repeat, mostly fine people whose courage in facing down government bureau-rats puts most of us to shame.
Are they right, in their view of canine anatomy?
In a word, no; they are dead wrong. Not about the fact that bankers and government do very well out of each other at our expense--there's no doubt about that--but about who, ultimately, is in charge; who is wagging whom. And therefore, what solution would fix the problem.
The symbiotic trick that has been pulled ever since 1913 when the FedRes was thrust upon us is detailed in Rothbard's masterpiece, What Has Government Done to Our Money? In very brief essence, when the FedGov wants more money than it gets from taxes, it prints an IOU called a "Treasury Bill" and sells it to the FedRes, which writes the check on an account which has no money in it until the IOU is deposited. When the check is cashed, the presses roll and the newly printed "money" circulates (with the FedGov enjoying the greatest value, before prices rise in response to the currency dilution) and impacts everyone in the form of higher prices; it's a hidden form of tax. Meanwhile, the FedRes and its members are granted the privilege to lend money not actually in hand not only to the Feds in that way, but also to John and Jane who wish to buy a home--by the magic of fractional reserve. The member banks "earn" interest on such loans made with money created by the stroke of a pen. Nice work, if you can get it. The result has been a devastation of the value of the "dollar" since 1913, of about 98%. Whoever would have guessed.
Notice that both parties to the fraud are doing nicely. The bankers earn real interest on phantom money, and the Pols get to purchase votes without having visibly to impose taxes to acquire the means. If they want to wage a war, they can do it on the Kill Now, Pay Later principle--for them and their dreams of power, such fiat money is a godsend.
The Fed is a private club, something that a lot of Patriot folk find offensive, and they suppose without proof or reason that that fact is what causes the fraud; some actually advise that a government central bank should replace the Fed! Evidently they have no knowledge of what happens outside US borders. Every government using paper money has a central bank, and inflates it over the long term roughly in line with the US dollar, depending on the demands of domestic politics and international trade; the "ownership" of any central bank is almost wholly irrelevant to the trick it pulls. It's private in the US primarily because in 1833, Jackson very properly abolished that monstrous creation of Hamilton and Madison , the Bank of the United States . His fine work was bypassed in 1913 by the trick of commissioning private bankers to run the bank instead of government hacks. It's actually the only good thing I can find to say about the Fed.
So much for the trickery; now, who's in the mystery club of the super rich, so wealthy that not even Robin Leach can peer into their lifestyles? Why, it's the Bilderbergers, the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the Morgans, Their Britannic and Dutch Majesties, and their pals. It's quite a puzzle to me, how they manage to spend it all without anyone noticing much. That strange invisibility alone gives ground for suspicion; these super men and women are so well concealed. I used to work for IBM , and for a while had a Rothschild for a colleague; yes, though heir to part of an allegedly uncountable fortune, he chose to work in market research for a computer company. I recall he was charming, hardworking and a little shy; a Frenchman who spoke excellent English, which was a quality in France somewhat more rare than the finest wines from his family's châteaux. He had no pretensions, no arrogance, just a wish to do professional work. The notion that he and his parents, uncles and brothers were actually directing the world is ludicrous.
Where would each be, if the other were abolished? Ultimately, that's the surest indicator of which is the dog and which, the tail. Suppose first that the Federal Reserve Bank vanished one day in a puff of smoke. Would the Federal Government disappear also, in consequence?
Alas, not a bit of it. We can be certain of that, because between 1789 and 1913, the FedGov did actually exist and wage war and obscenely grow--even during the 82 years within that period when no central bank existed at all. Therefore, the FedGov does not depend on the FedRes.
Conversely, suppose instead what would happen to the FedRes, if the FedGov were to evaporate--as it will, in or about 2027 as I suggested here. Would the bankers likewise vanish? Most certainly they would! Imagine yourself a wealthy banker, the day after government implodes. You trot along to the Treasury, kiteable-check book in hand, ready to buy another ten billion with zero down. Ah! Horrors! The US Treasury building is empty! Nobody any longer has IOUs for sale!
Worse yet: you call at the corner cigar store to buy the means to think it over quietly, and find that your $5 Federal Reserve Note is no longer accepted! You remonstrate with the owner, pointing to the words that have mattered for all of our lifetimes: "This note is legal tender, for all debts public and private"--but the son of a gun spits at the bill and defies that law! Even worse: you grab your cell phone to call the fuzz on him, and nobody picks up. The game is over. You pay in free-market money, or you get no cigar. And you weren't even close.
Hence the conclusion: the Federal Reserve and its mysterious alleged owners are the tail, and the Pols constitute the dog, and there is very little gain in severing the two. It would be painful to the dog, and he would end up shorter, but he'd still have his bark and all his teeth. What's needed--and what will happen--is that this rabid, vicious animal be put down once and for all, and when that happens, its appended banker will disappear as well.