Complete book: The Dark Modern Age – A Farewell to the Enlightenment by Janos Drabik

This is the HTML version of the full book written by Janos DRABIK, titled “The Dark Modern Age”, subtitle: “A Farewell to the Enlightenment” . For a PDF version with table of contents, please visit or

These books are officially free to download and share, but not to modify or re-sale.

On the author

Dr. János Drábik is the retired leading programme editor of Radio Free Europe.

He was born on 9th June 1938 in Budapest. Initially he planned to become a cello player. He followed musical studies at the “Erkel Ferenc” Secondary School of Musical Art in Budapest as the pupil of Ede Banda, where he took the final examination in 1956. Nevertheless, due to breaking his hand, he was forced to change career. In 1960 he graduated from the Faculty of Political Science and Law of the “Eötvös Loránd” University of Sciences (ELTE) of Budapest, then from the Faculty of Humanities of the same university. In 1971 he took the final examination of lawyer – legal consultant, and previously he also graduated from the School of Journalism of the National Federation of Hungarian Journalists (MÚOSZ).

Until November 1979, he worked in various legal, editorial and state administration jobs. Prior to his leave to America, he was the chief of legal department of ERBE. He continued his studies at the New York University and in 1981 he became a registered legal consultant in New York State. In 1983 he went to Munich, Germany, being employed at Radio Free Europe, where he wrote and edited several programmes under the name of Pál Kézdi. Among others, he wrote serials about Stalinism, the Constitution of the USA, neo-conservatism and on the history of Soviet Union. For five years, he edited the world economy magazine and the programme titled “On the Western Road” which analyzed the functioning of democratic institutions. In February 1989, the President of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty conferred to him the “Superior Performance Award” for his performance delivered in the year 1988, primarily for his 32-part serial about the Constitution of the USA.

Beginning from 1983, he took an active part in the activity of the Széchenyi Circle in Munich, where he delivered several presentations and lectures. Between 1993 and 1998 he was the Secretary of Széchenyi Circle. He was a regular author of the paper “Nemzetőr” (National Guard) published in Munich and of other Hungarian daily newspapers and weekly magazines. He is the deputy editor-in-chief of the “book newspaper” titled “Leleplező” (Unveiler) issued since 1999. He regularly delivers lectures on the interrelation between human-centered society, democracy and monetary system. He is the founding member of the federation “Összefogás a Fennmaradásért Szövetség” (Union for Survival) formed in 2000, the objectives of which are the preservation of Hungarian land, the creation of the conditions for a “Garden-Hungary”, the restoration of Hungary’s economic and financial sovereignty, the achievement of the participation democracy, the extension of the powers of the referendum as well as the necessity of treating the money as the public institution of basic importance of the nation.

His book titled “Why Did the Three Kennedys Have To Die?” was published in 2002. It was followed, in the same year, by the first volume of the “Usury Civilization” and then, in 2003, by the second and third volumes. The three-volume “Usury Civilization” was already sold in several editions. In 2004, his book titled “Consciousness Modification” was issued, which calls the attention to the dangers of brain manipulation. The process of the creation of a world order controlled from a single centre is analyzed in his collected studies titled “New World Order? World Dead-End”. In 2005, his book titled “1956 – The Third Way of the Hungarians” was published, in which he looks for a way out from the dead-ends of the Communism and of the money rule. His book published also in 2005, titled “The Dictatorship of the Money” points out what advantages the restoration of the public money system might bring over. In his book titled “World Democratorship” published in 2006, the author presents in detail how the global gaining ground of the world democratorship system was made possible by the aggressive spreading of the credit money monopoly. In 2007, in his work titled “Orwellia”, he analyzed thoroughly the real superpower of our century, the money power, the most powerful ruling group in the world. In his book titled “The Human-Centered World Order”, he analyzes in detail how the malign and detrimental globalism can be substituted by the benign and useful globalism serving the interests of the whole mankind, the human-centered world order. His 2008 book, the “Turbulence”, is about the destructive turbulence of the anti-life world forces, primarily of the unlimited money power, in which the mankind fights its life-and-death struggle for survival. The “Change of Era” issued in 2009 is a recommendation for the whole mankind concerning how a change of era, the new historical era of the harmonic world order can be achieved with solidarity.

Between 1997 and March 2000 he was member of the BUOD presidium, the Federation of Hungarian Associations in Germany, in 1996 he was elected into the steering committee of the MVSZ (World Federation of Hungarians), where he represented the Hungarians living in South Germany. In the 1998 parliamentary elections he was the candidate of the KDNP (Christian Democrat People’s Party) in the election district nr. 1 of Budapest. Since 2004, he is taking part in the activity of the presidency of a civil organization, the Hungarian National Committee, which strives at the restoration of the force of the Hungarian historical Constitution.

He is married, his wife is a chemist, scientific researcher.


Contents………………………………………………………………………………. 1

Preface ……………………………………………………………………………….. 9

What kind of world order will be born from the financial chaos? ……………… 17

The “New World Order” strategy of the global elite is in danger…………………… 18

What would a real change of regime be in Hungary?. …………..…………………. 19

There is a need for Hungarian money covered with Hungarian work ……………… 20

A few reminders about what measures are necessary to be taken immediately …… 22

The money rule global elite at a crossroad ………………………………………. 24

The power organisms above nations are being enlarged.…………………………… 26

The deliberate destruction of world economy………………………………………. 29

How could we get out of the world financial crisis?..……………………………… 30

The secret of the banks’ success: making the clients indebted ……………………. 32

The orgy of the “money bubble barons” …………………………………………… 36

Globalization of the unscrupulous extortion and looting…………………………… 38

Even the “Greek crisis” is not Greek ………………………………………………. 41

The Islam is more moral…………………………………………………………….. 42

The new Banking Act of the United States ………………………………………… 43

The parasite European banking system …………………………………………….. 43

The credit of the IMF was needed for taking out the interest from the country…….. 45

From the Enlightenment to the bankruptcy of Liberalism ………………………….. 47

Is there life without ideologies? …………………………………………………………. 51

The original economic liberalism is ethical ………………………………………… 52

The annuity and the interest are a “free lunch” …………………………………….. 53

Who started the financial crisis in 2008? …………………………………………… 55

Neo-liberalism is anti-liberal ……………………………………………………… 57

Ethics and economy ………………………………………………………………… 58

Privatization of the profit, nationalization of the losses ……………………………. 61

Did the neo-liberalism fail? ………………………………………………………… 64

How does the money rule world order work? ……………………………………… 66

The King is naked – There is no need for banks in their current form……………… 68

There is a need for money substitutes ……………………………………………… 72

Instead of monetary feudalism, a harmonic world order! ………………………….. 72

The money rule can even turn into an open dictatorship …………………………… 77

What is the obstacle in the way of the dénouement? ………………………………. 80

The morality as the main economic factor………………………………………….. 84

A public money system is needed ………………………………………………….. 85

The “money barons” are playing poker

The background of the world financial crisis ……………………………………. 88

Why do the “money barons” keep blowing the speculation bubbles? …………….. 88

Can we soon expect for a world-scale collapse? …………………………………… 88

Who are the “money bubble barons”? .……………………………………………… 91

How does the money industry blow the trillion-dollar money bubbles? …………… 92

Goldman Sachs – the super speculator of the world ……………………………….. 93

The Goldman Sachs comes on the scene …………………………………………… 95

The second act in the Goldman Sachs speculation play..…………………………… 97

The Goldman Sachs played the main role also in the real estate speculation …….. 101

The petrol bubble – the fourth scene of the global money cabaret………………… 104

The subvention bubble – falsification of the financial rescue operation of the state..108

Global warming – the newest speculation bubble ………………………………… 111

Which were the applied speculation strategies? …………………………………… 113

Con trick nr. 1: The “Swoop and Squat”…………………………………………… 113

Con trick nr. 2: The “Dollar Store” ………………………………………………… 115

Con trick nr. 3: The “Pig in the Poke” …………………………………………….. 116

Con trick nr. 4: The “Rumanian Box” ……………………………………………… 117

Con trick nr. 5: “The Big Mitt” ……………………………………………………. 119

Con trick nr. 6: The “Wire” ……………………………………………………………… 120

Con trick nr. 7: The Reload………………………………………………………… 122

A financial nuclear bomb: “Naked-shorting” ……………………………………… 124

The Prime Brokerage on the top …………………………………………………… 133

Attack against the Lehman Brothers ………………………………………………. 134

Matt Taibbi and the money power ………………………………………………… 136

Goldman Sachs – The “veterinary surgeon’s horse” of the money rule world order 138

The political power, which is more powerful than the governments ……………… 141

The SEC starts an investigation against Goldman Sachs …………………………. 144

Attempt for the re-regulation of the state supervision of the money system …..…. 146

What can Obama’s crisis management show up? ……………….………………… 151

Will there be a new financial world order? ……………………………………….. 153

What does China suggest for the solution of the financial crisis? ………………… 158

How did the world financial system become a gambling casino? ……………… 160

World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2010, Davos …………………………… 160

What caused the collapse of the money system? …………………………………. 164

The credit money with virtual coverage takes the lead ……………………………. 165

The money cartel is also in command of the EU ………………………………….. 167

The money cartel has expropriated also the affairs of state ………………………. 168

The bankers were forced to defence in Davos……………………………………… 169

What is the real cause of the conflict between Jews and Gentiles? …………… 174

Ravage: “A Real Case Against the Jews” ………………………………………… 174

The Jew as the representative of the Gentiles……………………………………… 181

Revilo P. Oliver on the causes of the success of the Christianity ………………… 190

Gustav Ruhland on the disintegration of the economy of the Roman Empire ……. 192

Capitalism is the system of the legalized interest and usury ……………………… 194

How did the financial and economic situation evolve in the Roman Empire? …… 196

The social and economic teachings of the Jewish world view ……………………. 199

The Old Testament on the relationship between Jews and money ……………….. 200

The gaining of ground of the Western Christianity in the Roman Empire ……….. 202

Are the Christians the followers of Chrestos or Christos? ………………………… 205

When did the misleading of the Gentile world begin? ……………………………. 211

Philo of Alexandria and the Christianity…………………………………………… 218

The millenary strategy of the “chosen people” …………………………………… 219

What is the difference between the people linked to their homeland and the world-wanderer people? ………………………………………………………………………… 223

The Jews – the eternal separatists …………………………………………………. 227

Sincerely on the relationship of the Jews and Gentiles based on mutual respect … 232

Walter White’s interview with Harold Wallace Rosenthal in 1976 …………… 239

The first part of Walter White’s interview with Harold Wallace Rosenthal ……… 242

The Jewish belief and religion …………………………………………………….. 246

What did Rosenthal say about money power?……………………………………… 247

Mind control and conditioning..……………………………………………………. 248

Manipulation of labour and industry ………………………………………………. 249

Getting the control over religion..………………………………………………….. 250

The picture is assembled and the connections are made clear…………………….. 251

The second part of Walter White’s interview with Harold Wallace Rosenthal …… 253

The Zionist power structure in the America of our days ……………………… 264

Zionist hegemony under single management………………………………………. 267

Globalization of the Zionist power ………………………………………………… 273

Are there any possible alternatives against the Zionist hegemony? ……………… 281

The “divine destiny” of Senator Chuck Schumer ………………………………… 285

Yehezkel Dror: “When survival of the Jewish people is at stake, there’s no place

for morals”…………………………………………………………………………. 287

Double standard everywhere ………………………………………………………. 290

Is it the modern “Samson option”? ……………………………………………………… 291

Double standard and the world financial crisis ………………………………………. 292

To what extent can the world financial crisis be linked to an ethnic group? … 297

Why exactly the Jews? ……………………………………………………………………… 307

Israel Shahak – “the world’s most conspicuous Jewish anti-Semite” …………….. 312

“When victims rule” ………………………………………………………………….. 316

Why is Israel Shamir unsatisfied? ………………………………………………………….. 319

Is the historical strategy of the Jews aggressive or defensive? …………………… 323

Organized Jewry and the Jewish supremacy………………………………………. 324

Gaza – a gigantic concentration camp ………………………………………….. 328

What happened on 31st May 2010? ……………………………………………….. 329

We must return to the public money system …………………………………… 332

The entrepreneurs should get the money, not the banks! (An interview with the author

made by Tibor Farkas for the Hungarian web newspaper “Ingatlannet”) ………… 332

About the Bilderberg Group, through the world crises to the wars

(An interview with the author made by Veronika Takács for the 17th June 2010 issue of the Hungarian weekly magazine “Barikád”) ……………………………………. 337

What kind of values does György Surányi represent? …………………………. 343

Who should pay the costs of this? ………………………………………………… 351

Deliberately misinterpreting of the meaning of the words is life-threatening ……. 354

The Hungarian people is Hungarian people only together with the Hungarian land!…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 358

The Single Payment Scheme ………………………………………………………. 359

How can the agricultural land be kept in national property? ……………………… 361

Interview with János Drábik

(A preliminary interview for the conference “Vision of the World – Battlefield of the 21st Century – The Stock Exchange” held at the International Business School in Budapest, on 12th June 2010) ……………………………………………………… 367

The Hungarian people also deserves ethnic borders

(An interview with the author made by Veronika Takács for the 10th June 2010 issue of the Hungarian weekly magazine “Barikád”) ……………………………………. 371


As Hungarians and Europeans, we now bid a sad farewell to the Enlightenment. In secret, we hope that this hopeful era of the light of the spirit left us only temporarily. Nevertheless, the evolution of the anti-Enlightenment that, at present, seems to be unstoppable, signals that the new era of the “endarkening” of the human spirit, morality and culture – of the general decay of the Western civilization – has not only begun, but is even pressing forward more and more powerfully. If we do not manage to create new ownership relations, linked to natural persons and their own performance, as well as to shift from the money rule system to a natural economic order, we shall have to be in need of the new era of a harmonic world order, of the light and brightness, of the prevailing of the universal morality for still a long time.

In the history of the world, the Renascence and the Enlightenment, gradually, put an end to the so-called Dark Middle Ages. Through bloody wars of religion, the peoples of Europe lived over both the Reformation and the anti-Reformation. Nevertheless, in the first decade of the 21st century, the denying of the ideas of the Enlightenment, the annihilation of its achievements, and the destructive effect of the anti-Enlightenment developed more and more perceivably. All that Oswald Spengler foresaw in his major work “The Decline of the West” and George Orwell in his famous works “Animal Farm” and “Nineteen eighty-four” was achieved in front of our eyes. We are facing that the general decay of our civilization has accelerated as a consequence of the gaining ground of the anti-Enlightenment.

The hopeful period of the Enlightenment, comprising two and a half centuries, ended not completely unexpectedly around the end of the millennium. The change of era was already forecast by the more and more frequent and greater and greater financial, economic and political crises, the perpetual local conflicts, the big and small wars. In our days, we can already experience that the thunderclouds of the era of darkness and decay are gathering above mankind. Unfortunately, even the possibility of a nuclear war cannot be totally excluded.

The world-ruling elite has gradually annihilated the achievements of the Enlightenment, and then has introduced the financial rule world order. This order is the dictatorship of the money empire over nations, leaning on the power economy and masked as democracy. The global system controlled from one single centre is already in fact (de facto) a nearly completed reality. Nevertheless, formally (de jure), some smaller adjustments, finishing operations are still to be done, until the Great Work is finished: the New World Order, one of the variants of the Global Union. Before this, the new financial world order must be established, because the system based on the dollar, as the world currency, cannot be maintained any longer, on the long run.

At present, everything is hidden by the dimness of the faceless money relationships, and the bigot blindness of the superstitious belief in the eternality of the interest mechanism. The autocracy of the delusions concerning the rule of money surpasses the stupefying effects of the darkest dogmas of the Dark Middle Ages, effects that paralyze the spirit, and tie up the freedom of action of the creative man. There is not even a word more about social progress. The progressive modernization of the human relations has finished and has turned on the reverse, the struggle for social justice has been terminated, and the solidarity, based upon sympathy and compassion, does not prevail any more. Almost all values have got a relative character and could be expressed in money, and, by this, they have become undervalued. The bright sunlight of the human spirit is getting dimmer and dimmer, the validity of the universal morality has weakened into a mere wish, and its feasibility into an uncertain utopia. The European culture and the world historical top achievement of the white man – the social market economy enforcing also the social justice – have ceased to exist. Only ruins remained from the welfare state – the cathedral surpassing the overwhelming Gothic church miracles. Europe has given up herself, and it seems that has definitively surrendered to her new masters: the money rule global elite and to the transnational money cartel above states, which expropriated the international supreme power.

The new era of the world history developing around the end of the century can be characterized with three terms: enervated, morbid and decadent. This era carries the culture of destruction, of disintegration and of death in itself. In this one-dimension order of value, the human spirit has fallen deep under its own possibilities. The dim and confused “humanism” stepping in the place of the universal morality, as well as the individualism neglecting the community atomized the human communities and made them vulnerable against the organized, aggressive and arrogant private power. The society of the Dark Modern Age is enervated, because it is hardly capable of more than the weakening biological and social reproduction. It has lost that vigorous dynamism, which was assured for it by the period of the Enlightenment and progress. The Dark Modern Age is also morbid, since the strategists of the New World Order propagate openly that the mankind presently amounting to seven billion people should be reduced to half or even less. This means that the world ruling elite has to create such conditions which will soon result in the considerable reduction of the number of human beings on earth. Many reasons can be mentioned to support the stopping of the explosion of population increase emerging in the 20th century. The question is whether the strategists of the population reduction count themselves among the survivors or among those who must be eliminated. The Dark Modern Age is decadent, because its culture is characterized by the cultural disintegration, the moral decay, the annihilation of social justice, and by the general regression of the civilization. From the progression and modernization, only the technical progress remained, which is frequently self-contained. A small group of interest can expropriate for themselves the results of the work of all others, of the peoples of the world. Hiding behind faceless money relations, they can continue the building of their colonizing empire, reminding of a creeping thief. These robber knights of the Dark Modern Age throw the peoples of the world into a slave-like dependence with getting them indebted and collecting interest, and holding the mankind to ransom, especially the nations deprived of the tools of auto-defence.

The two hundred years of modernity can also be characterized as the process of getting into a dead-end. Not only the civilization of the West got into a dead-end. Nevertheless, the symptoms of the disease became most obvious in this culture. The decline of the West was accelerated by the fact that the religious dimension weakened and got unimportant in the Western civilization. The secular liberalism drove out not only the classical mythologies, but also banished the spiritual and cultural historical perspective, referring to the fact that they all contradict the rational thinking, and they cannot be harmonized with the progress of science. The extremely generalized (universal) concept of mankind, as well as the extremely atomized (individualistic) concept of the individual have become a myth. We had to witness the disappearance of the myths of Modernity. To our days, there is no such a system of ideas left to the humanity in which it could still believe and could cramp on, and the perspective of which it could still accept trustfully.

After the Dark Modern Age has set in, only the empiric sphere, the empirical world tied down to the ground has remained, but, without a guiding order of value, even this has become a mere marshland. The money rule world order tries to present its own order of value as a timeless one, as if its rules were eternal truths valid for all times. Nevertheless, even the ideologies offered by the rationalism overstrained beyond its frames proved to be nothing but myths themselves. The socialist economic and political theory failed primarily in its application in practice. But the theory of the capitalist and money rule economy failed either. In our days, it is hardly arguable that even that assumption proved to be a myth, according to which the “invisible hand” always steers the operation of the market into the good direction. As a consequence of the general decay, even the words have lost their original meanings. The speculators doing business carelessly on the money market are called “the market”, opposed to the actors of the productive economy operating according to the principles of free enterprise, who are competing with each other in a moral manner and undertaking even social responsibility.

That assertion has also proved to be a delusion according to which the process of globalization would be the greatest achievement of market economy. The globalization has created such a world-scale power economy, in which a narrow money rule elite can enforce its selfish particular interests. The myths of the rationalism appearing in the guise of science could not explain, in a durable and convincing way, neither the reality surrounding the man, nor his own world. Even in our days, we still do not have a comprehensive and convincing explanation about the universe, about the macrocosm surrounding the man and his own microcosm. As a consequence of the over-expanded relativization, the modern mythologies cannot be considered to be universal. The most different myths are permanently at war with each other. None of them offers a solid frame of orientation, a reliable map and compass – a useful intellectual-spiritual GPS – to the members of the society, within the amazingly accelerated changes. Freedom, in essence, has become the prerogative of a small group detaining money wealth and production wealth. And the individual freedom of the atomized average man can be measured by weighing to what extent he is subjected to the money rule and political structures surrounding him.

During the development of the Dark New Age, the different ideologies and utopias mix together the effects of different myths. The ephemeral ideas lost their effect, because their existence and future depends on the ever changing circumstances of the events. The ideologies concerning equality, free market economy, a democracy based on ethics and merits, as well as an economic, social and political globalization.

The Dark Modern Age brought the acceleration of the disintegration of the society for our civilization. The cohesion of communities, the solidarity is the result of the integration forces working within the whole of the society. The modern development, reduced to technical modernization, removed these integrating powers from the society. The European Enlightenment – to some extent, similarly to the Christian values – wanted to integrate the individual man into the whole of the mankind. This, nevertheless, has led to something inhuman, to the extreme atomization of the society and to the individualism that shakes off all restrictions. The annihilation of the community and of the traditional values connected with the community has accelerated. In consequence, the individual cannot develop optimally, because a complete life can be lived only in a community. As a consequence of the started disintegration of the natural communities, even the public power is not able to maintain the order required by the population and to assure public safety.

The attempt to place the respect of law and legislation in the place of the traditional values of the community was not successful either. The constitutional values linked to the national community could not be substituted by the compulsion of artificial loyalty – without affective commitment – to the written constitutions. Due to the interest mechanism at work in the money rule world order, the exploitation of the natural environment – in fact the destruction of the irreplaceable resources – is being increased unceasingly. It is not the growth enforced by the interest, but the preserving of the irreplaceable resources that would be necessary. But the power relations of the Dark Modern Age do not make it possible. The ethics, as a social cohesive force, and the morality, as the relation of the individual man to the universal moral values, have touched bottom in nearly all spheres of social life. That endeavour of the modernization limited to technical development and of the money rule world order, which attempted at endowing the exchange and usage relations, as well as the money with moral authority, also failed. The human relations reduced to money are not able to control the individual and community behaviour. On the other hand, the legislation, the so-called “legality” only suggests that you can do anything, if you are not caught in and called to account. Thus, the pretence, the secretiveness and the camouflage have become a norm. The mania of secrecy, of classification, that has reached a morbid measure, settled down both on public and private life.

All this does not mean that there is no alternative to the Dark Modern Age. The new property system linked to the natural persons can make it possible to return to the rules of universal morality. If we can link the size of the property available to the individual with the performance of the natural person, the interest enforcing capacity of men can be approached to each other. And, with the enforcement at equal scale of the own interests, the unselfish ethic behaviour, based upon the mutual respect of interests, can be enforced even on the level of the society. Property is power. Property is freedom. Nevertheless, in order to achieve the new property system, it is necessary to restore the public money system and to exclude the interest mechanism from it. The money system – as it was proved by Silvio Gesell and István Síklaki – can be operated well even without the interest mechanism. Furthermore, even on international level, the “legal person jungles” created for the sake of different frauds and tax evasions.

We can get out the Dark Modern Age by creating the harmonic world order. For this, it is necessary to get duly acquainted with the elite of the money rule world order. This world elite and its predecessors played a decisive role in the creation of the money rule relations of the Dark Modern Age. It has come a public argument topic whether a certain ethnic and its specific values play a decisive role in the establishment and operation of the current money rule world order or not. Trying to answer this question, we face the extremely complicated problems of Semitism and anti-Semitism. The “anti” prefix of the term anti-Semitism refers to the fact that it stands against the Semitism, but we have rather little information about what that it is against is, i.e. what Semitism is. That who doubts this, only has to type these two words into the searching programme of his computer, and then to compare how many scores he got for Semitism and how many for anti-Semitism.

He can perceive that there is an enormous quantitative and content difference between the two notions. The rules of logics prescribe that, prior to dealing with the negation of something, one has to examine what he really rejects. It is necessary to tell what Semitism is, who the Semite and the Philosemite are. Which was the first? The Semitism or the anti-Semitism? Which of them arouses the other? In the language of mathematics: which is the independent and which is the dependent variable? The correct answer may enhance the better understanding of who and why is against the Semites, and what do their criticizers, their counterparts, i.e. the anti-Semites oppose in the Semitism, as a complex social phenomenon. The writer of the present lines, therefore, feels it as his duty to make the relevant knowledge public, leaning on the works of the most outstanding Jewish and non-Jewish scientists, public personalities and researchers. On the basis of the law of action–reaction, most of them start from the fact that the Semitism created the anti-Semitism as an answer. In our days, nevertheless, the latter, in turn, already strengthens the Semitism, and became one of the essential preconditions of its survival.

The recollection, the finding the way back to itself of the Hungarian nation in 2010 may help it to take up the fight, in the hope of success, with the Dark Modern Age and the money rule world elite hiding behind it. The success of the Hungarian union incarnated in the System of National Cooperation may lead to a larger union aiming at the Europe of Nations, to the rebirth of the – transcontinental – struggle for social justice. This new European solidarity, union could undertake again to create the social market economy based upon the equality of chances and the freedom of enterprise. The way of the future – not only in Europe, but in the whole world – is the returning to the original ideas of the Enlightenment and progression, the establishment of the ethical democracy based upon the universal morality, and of the harmonic world order based upon social justice. For this, nevertheless, a new system of property – linked to natural persons and performance – is needed, which can be created only through a long and hard struggle. Furthermore, it is necessary to demolish the over-centralized financial, economic, political and armed power system of the globalism. Firstly, we have to go back to the public money system so that we could get out of the Dark Modern Age, and we could definitively leave behind us the culture of disintegration, destruction and death, so that the shining light of the spirit could rise at last. The hope has been given to us for the sake of the hopeless, but we cannot expect for a quick success.

And, finally, I would like to say a few words about the birth of my writings. At first, there is always a central goal: to pass over knowledge about something important to the readers. Then the second question arises: how to do all this? So, there is a goal, an initial plan, to which, then, the sources must be found, the information must be gathered, which, then, must also be checked, and the writings containing the opposite opinion must be found. The pros and cons must be confronted with each other. In our days, the electronically retrievable information plays a greater and greater role besides the traditional sources. The building bricks are available to nearly everybody. That who has a clear concept, can build the house from them, that is he can write a book from the amount of information. For that person who has not got such a concept, all this remains a mere pile of information.

Books are inspired by life itself. The person who continuously inquires, investigates the events – trying to find what, why and how happened, what goals did the controllers of the events follow, and what were they motivated by –, will discover more and more interrelations. In order to be able to give answers to the questions, it is necessary to obtain the opinions of as many as possible well-informed and reliable specialists. This way, the expedient scientific research progresses and the fact-finding works are written. The present book, for instance, was born from the question: who and why want to deprive the mankind of the achievements of the Enlightenment? Therefore, we have to ask questions from the world permanently, and then we shall never run out of answers.

Budapest, 1st October, 2010

Dr. János Drábik

What kind of world order will be born from the financial chaos?

The different possible solutions can be divided into two large groups according to whether they strive at the preservation of the current money rule world order or, on the contrary, at the establishment of a world order based upon social justice, so a qualitatively different world order. The creation of the world system controlled from one centre and of the connected “new financial world order” has constituted the important part of the world elite strategy for many centuries. The transnationally organized private power, leaning on the private ownership of the money system, wants to strengthen its ruling position, even globally, with the establishment of a ruling structure above states.

In contrary with this, the harmonic world order based upon justice and equality of chances will terminate the private money system, and will re-establish the public money system both on national and international level. The essence of the public money system is that the production of the – otherwise valueless, but necessary – signs (banknotes) that convey the processes of the productive economy is not the private monopoly of a narrow and private group of interest any more, but the unalienable right of the democratically elected and politically responsible public power. With the restoration of the public money system, the emphasis will be put again on the value-creating productive economy, and the mediating medium of the economy, the money, this sign, will be subordinated to the productive economy again. The issuing of money, as well as the regulation of crediting will become a public service of the state again, which cannot be expropriated any more by a narrow and private group for the enforcement of its selfish interests. The place of the values based on individual selfishness of the money rule world order will be taken by the community values serving the social justice and public welfare. The extreme property differences make it possible that the freedom based on the equality of chances can be distorted to be the freedom of abusing the freedom, for some privileged persons.

With the restoration of the public money system, it can be achieved that the result, the fruit of work should belong to the person who actually performed the work, and the property should be primarily linked to natural persons and not to the owners hidden in the faceless money relations and the legal person jungles. And, what is more, the size of the property should be proportional with the output of these natural persons. These conditions enforce the division of the wealth in a more proportional and more just way. Since the property is power, the property correlated with performance can assure the more just possibility of interest enforcement.


The “New World Order” strategy of the global elite is in danger

One of the main institutions of the money rule world elite is the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which, since its establishment, influences decisively the foreign and interior policy of the United States, and, through this, the whole of the world policy. The leaders of this powerful body called “think-tank” held a conference in Montreal in May 2010. The participants included David Rockefeller, the founder of the Trilateral Commission (TC), one of the important sister institutions of the CFR, and the actual organizer and controller of the TC, Zbigniew Brzezinski, professor of the Columbia University, who is also known to have been Chief National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter.

At this important conference of the world elite, Brzezinski warned the participants about the fact that the political consciousness gaining global size, as well as the internal fights emerged within the elite can jointly hinder the establishment of the “world order controlled from a single centre”. Brzezinski explained that, in our days, the global political leadership of the world had become “much more diversified unlike what it was until relatively recently”. He referred to the rise of China as an important geopolitical factor, as well as to the global controlling role of the G20. Nevertheless, the latter was “lacking internal unity with many of its members in bilateral antagonisms.” The internal fight emerging within the world elite hinders the efforts which strive to save the strategy serving the creation of the global government. Therefore, this programme of world historical importance has to experience failures continuously on almost every front.

Brzezinski also called the attention to another important factor, namely that “for the first time in all of human history mankind is politically awakened – that’s a total new reality – it has not been so for most of human history.” According to Brzezinski, “the whole world has become politically awakened,” adding that all over the world people were aware of what was happening politically and were “consciously aware of global inequities, inequalities, lack of respect, exploitation.” “Mankind is now politically awakened and stirring,” said Brzezinski, adding that this, in combination with a fractured elite, “makes it a much more difficult context for any major power, including currently the leading world power, the United States.”

On the conference, Brzezinski was asked if he thought the United Nations Organization should be transformed into a “one world government”, to which Brzezinski responded that the UNO expresses mostly the variety of the countries of the world, and can create cooperation in only secondary questions, because it is based upon the fiction that all member states have equal rights. Only the five members of the Security Council having veto right are an exception. Brzezinski admitted clearly that humanity has undergone a political awakening is not a positive development in the eyes of the global elite striving to establish a New World Order, and he was not happy with it at all.

Brzezinski exposed, already in 1970, how he imagined the New World Order, which he called “technotronic era”. (The translator’s observation: the term “technetronic” was misspelled, even in the title of the book, and it is referred to as “technotronic” in all dictionaries and encyclopedias.) In his 1970 book titled “Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technotronic Era”, Brzezinski wrote the following: “The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.” The “elite” to which Brzezinski refers attended the Montreal CFR conference.

More and more signs show that there is not only a rivaling at the highest level of world elite, but even a situation similar to a state of civil war. In the latest months, the leadership of the super-rich money dynasties underwent a generation change. The questions left open include the fate of the dollar, the introduction of the new global currency, as well as the creation of the structure of a new financial world system, which, in our days, is not possible without, for instance, China, India and Russia. The possibility of a so-called “preventive strike” against Iran must also be taken into account.

What would a real change of regime be in Hungary?

The Hungarian society was split in two by the fact that a disproportionately smaller part of it appropriated the overwhelming majority of the national wealth for itself and for the money cartel above states. The most valuable part of the national wealth taken away this way was absorbed into the global stock wealth of the transnational money cartel exerting the world power. As we have already made reference to it, property is power, and the majority deprived of their national wealth has become powerless, who hardly has any interest enforcing capacity. The political struggles of the past twenty years reflected – only in the upper region of the political sphere – the process of becoming propertiless of the majority of the Hungarian society, its general pauperization, and the regrouping of a larger and larger part of its income to the international financial structures. The main representation of the latter in Hungary is the Hungarian National Bank torn from the public power, made independent from its owner according to the law, but depending very much from the structures of the money world.

The establishment of the System of National Cooperation without the basic change of the property and ownership relations would remain only a beautiful wish. If the Hungarians fail to create more just property relations, those social fault lines and front lines will remain, which inalienably confronted with each other the two parts of the Hungarian society. One side was formed by those cosmopolite, comprador and collaborator groups of interest, which arrived from the mediocre technocrat layer of the nomenclature of János Kádár’s regime. They could transform their contact capital into their own private property, with the – frequently illegal – privatization of the public property. It was them who – by passing the most valuable part of the national wealth into the hands of the transnational money cartel – could get such hidden return service, which enriched them even more and, in the meantime, impoverished the majority of the Hungarian society.

It is difficult to create the national unity among the selfish beneficiaries of the change of regime and the losers of the change of regime. The conflict of interest between the looters and the looted cannot be bridged with national rhetoric. This conflict can be eased somehow only by the at least partial regaining and more just redistribution of the national wealth. The first step towards the regaining of the national wealth is the soonest restoration of the public money system. Namely, the current private money system not only pours concrete upon the unjust property relations, but associates them with the extremely unjust income relations.

There is no need that the Hungarian economy should operate exclusively with credit money arrived from abroad, which, from the very first, arrives in the country charged with a disproportionately high interest. The international money cartel forces its own money onto the country through the central bank which is exclusively responsible to it. The Hungarian National Bank (MNB) is in 100% Hungarian property, but it is controlled exclusively by the money cartel – the money rule group of interest about which we have proved, in our writing titled “The New World Order is born from chaos”, that it uninhibitedly loots the human societies and the world economy. The MNB is, in fact, controlled by the Basel-based bank of the money cartel, the BIS (Bank of International Settlements), together with the ECB, the Frankfurt-based central bank of the European Union. The money cartel loots the countries and the world economy with fraudulent methods. Therefore, it must be deprived of the exertion of the monetary prerogatives. And also the monetary rights due to the Hungarian State must be taken away from the money cartel!

There is a need for Hungarian money covered with Hungarian work

Nevertheless, until a really nationally committed government dares to make this really revolutionary step, it would still be possible to operate at least a part of the Hungarian economy with Hungarian money covered with Hungarian work.

Today, Hungary has only very scarce available material devices. In this case, it is necessary to create extraordinary money resources, on the one hand for the establishment and enlargement of the economic infrastructure, and, on the other hand, for research and development and for scientific and technical innovation. Instead of the present-day MNB, a new-type central bank is needed, which assures money for the real economy in such a way that it would not cause inflation, since exclusively such projects can be financed from it, which serve the building up of a production-increasing infrastructure, as well as the technological modernization, the research and development and the innovation. This kind of credit money creation can increase the capacity and productivity of the given economy without indebtedness and interest payment. Nevertheless, the state should only issue money with the condition that the economic actors would spend it strictly on the increasing of the potential of the real economy.

We can overcome the current economic and financial state of emergency not by restrictions, by the restrictive economic and financial policy urged, even today, by the IMF, the international money cartel and the EU, but by the increasing of output. The current fallback of the Hungarian economy is characterized by the fact that the internal (but also the external) demand lags constantly behind the offer. And this, in turn, results in the further decrease of production. The reaction to this of the Hungarian financial administration was that it tried to eliminate or decrease the budget deficit, and, on the other hand, we can also witness that they have decreased the amount of money in circulation with high rates of interest.

Nevertheless, the depression can be answered also in another way. The state should finance infrastructure-developing and productivity-increasing projects, from public money, from public credit. In times of depression, it is practical to spend the public moneys on productive and infrastructure-developing projects, which are organized by the state. If, by restoring the public money system, the state exerts the monetary sovereign rights, the assurance of the money devices can be solved. Namely, the liquidity is an organizational and technical question. The issue bank controlled by the public power could already achieve the credit enlargement necessary for the financing of the workplace-creating programmes and investments. The actually utilized credits must make up only a fragment of the total sum necessary for the financing of the workplace-creating programmes. It could even be possible to introduce the large-scale application of the state-guaranteed commercial papers, which has a valid legal background in Hungary.

The commercial papers that can be cashed and prolonged by the central bank are suitable, combined with other financial devices and techniques, for the short-term financing of workplace-creating and productivity-increasing programmes. These would exert their effect quickly and effectively in Hungary. These programmes, organized by the public power, increase the production by making use of the existing machine capacity, as well as the raw materials and the fuels. By this, the demand for such goods increases. The financial status of the enterprises will improve, and thus, with the solvency of the enterprises, the situation of the commercial banks that offer them credits or manage their accounts will also get solid. A further favourable effect is that the newly employed labour force would represent an increasing effective, solvent demand towards consumption goods.

The primary credits, through the financing of infrastructure programmes, exert an animating effect on the whole economy. This financial propulsive power would make it possible for the state to transform the preliminary financing of the achievable programmes into a long-term financing. According to the economists committed to the current money rule world order, the financing of infrastructure programmes with state issue bank money can cause inflation. According to the evidence of history – since these concepts were already applied in Japan, in Germany even twice, in the United States and France, and, at present, in China –, if the public credits are spent strictly on production-increasing and infrastructure-developing programmes, it cannot cause inflation.

In fact, a capital development process is started. As a result of credit financing, real economy values are created. Furthermore, the measure and pace of the production increase surpasses many times the measure and pace of the credit enlargement. Of course, reasonable programmes of economy are also necessary, but they must be connected with the economy-developing programmes. This means a guarantee for the efficiency of the crediting and investment policy. Nevertheless, the main tool is the assurance of credit, the saving only plays a secondary role. Such a “Hungarian money covered with Hungarian work” programme decreases the disproportionateness between the domestic demand and offer, making, by this, the whole of the economy more equilibrated.

The key problem in Hungary today is: who controls the monetary policy? When the financial collapse happened, with both its deliberate and additional consequences, the controllers of the international money world did not hesitate to enforce from the government of the United States and from the European states the issuing of state public money amounting to 4.5 trillion (4500 billion) dollars and 3000 billion euros, which aimed at the restructuring and recapitalization of the banking system from the money of tax-payers. Now, the same money cartel, with the detained private money monopoly, blackmails on the basis that it “had lost confidence in the over-indebted governments”. This money cartel, however, does not add to this that the global financial system collapsed owing to its own hazardous, irresponsible and unscrupulous behaviour. The states could have given the public moneys directly to the productive economy too, which produces alone value-bearing goods that satisfy social necessities. Instead of this, the public moneys were given to the banks, which used it not for the financing of the real economy, but for the further operation of the global financial casino. Their goal is to produce even more money from money, since they cannot satisfy their endless aim to get rich from the financing of the real economy any longer.

A few reminders about what measures are necessary to be taken immediately

We cannot speak of a radical change and of strategic turn without further decreasing the base rate of interest and bringing it down to the average level of the EU. An exact account must be given to the Hungarian society about what was the 25-billion stand-by credit taken up from the IMF and Brussels spent on. The Hungarian people must be told, at last, how much does the European Union membership cost for the country, and this account must also include reference to the incomes the country lost as a consequence of this membership, as well as to the other detriments and disadvantages that occurred. Poland’s pattern must be followed concerning the fighting out of the cancellation of debt and rescheduling of debt. It must be also studied how Argentina solved successfully this question. A programme must be elaborated for the enlargement of the public property, for the re-nationalization, if necessary, and at the same price and with the same conditions, as the sale and the privatization was stipulated.

The Hungarian state controlled by national forces must become again such an economic actor, which plays a determining role not only as a redistributor, but also as a guarantor and end buyer. The financial crisis has proved that actually the state is the only real economic force, which can really have an effect, because it has the final word. The Hungarian state controlled by national forces must become the defender of public welfare. The public welfare serving and social justice enforcing role of the state is not an ideology which can come and go, but an indispensable function of the social, state existence. The public interest, public welfare and public safety are indispensable conditions of the good social public feeling, which are in harmony with health, welfare and the consciousness of belonging to a community. This means the harmonic coexistence of people. And, on world scale, this would mean the harmonic world order, the real alternative to the fallen usury civilization, kept alive only on respirator.

The money rule global elite at a crossroad

The international money cartel controlling the world operates several networks and institutions. Among these, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg Group have an outstanding importance. The Trilateral Commission discussed the world situation in Dublin, and the Council on Foreign Relations in Montreal. The third important organization, the Bilderberg Group, in turn, convened, behind closed doors again, in Sitges, near Barcelona. On this year’s conference of the Bilderberg Group, it became unambiguous that the leaders of the transnational groups of interest are worried about the uncertainty around the euro, because it endangers the further European integration, as well as the switching over to the new global currency. The financial crisis developing in Greece on one hand staggered the European monetary system, on the other hand it served as a pretext for the introduction of such drastic austerity measures, which can cause chaotic relations. The transnational elite wants to persuade the public opinion that the chaos and anarchy can be avoided only with the radical change of the current world rule relations. The deliberately generated chaos, kept under control by the super-rich oligarchs with their financial institutions, giant banks and the hedge funds owned by them, can offer an occasion for the creation of such a global financial mechanism, which is necessary for the operation of the world system, the world state, controlled from a single centre.

The financial attack started against Greece evolved into an attack against the euro and the whole of the eurozone. The developments were also connected, to some extent, with the structural problems of the Greek economy. The size of the developing crisis was already threatening the economic and political integrity of the European Union. All this cannot be explained solely with the avidity of the great financial players striving unscrupulously at profiteering. It is obvious that also deeper causes can be found behind the appearance of the Greek crisis situation. George Soros referred to this, when he stated that the European Union owes its present crisis primarily to the unwillingness and hesitation to move on of the European, more concretely the German politicians.

These politicians did not delay in taking decisions regarding the accumulated problems. Therefore, the crisis striking Europe continued until the officials of the EU decided on the establishment of the European Monetary Fund, which makes it possible to overcome the ever increasing budget deficits of the EU member states. The European leaders were compelled to choose between the collapse of the eurozone and the further centralization of the governance of the European Union. The transnational money cartel is on the opinion that the monetary union must be completed with a fiscal union, which means that the European tax system and the budget policy of the EU member states must be controlled from Brussels.

French financial and economic expert Jacques Attali, who was a close colleague of former French President Mitterrand and the first president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), has elaborated a concrete detailed plan recently for the more powerful centralization of the EU. Attali suggested that the EU member states should create their own institutions to monitor closely the activity of the structures that control the financial system. He also proposed that a new crediting system should be introduced, which is connected neither to the European Central Bank, nor to the Bank for Reconstruction or to the governments. This new crediting system would undertake guarantees for the operation of the viable local financial institutions, and would also buy property shares in them. This European credit institution would extend loans only under specific terms.

Attali also urged the establishment of a European Ministry of Finance, which would be empowered, from the beginning, to hand out loans in the name of the European Union. This would be completed with the creation of a European Budget Fund, with a mandate to oversee the budgets of the countries whose cumulative dept totals over 85% of the GDP. Attali thought that an even severer crisis should be expected in the future, if the European decision-makers are not willing to make this step.

Under the United States pressure, German Chancellor Angela Merkel – allegedly, also at the pressure of French President Nicolas Sarkozy – finally consented to that, in May 2010, the EU finance and economy ministers signed an agreement on the mechanisms of budgetary stabilization in the Eurozone. They established a 60 billion euro safety pillow fund to urgently rescue countries battling with their temporary financial problems. Within the framework of this financial assistance system, the member countries fighting with financial hardships could get loans, in a total value of 440 billion euros, which would be guaranteed jointly by the EU member countries. The International Monetary Fund also pledged to supply further guaranteed loans amounting to 250 billion euros in the case of need. These altogether 750 billion euros are meant to maintain the solvency of the states belonging to the Eurozone. The European Central Bank will also undertake this mission.

The central banks throughout the world, including the US Federal Reserve, the FED, announced that they will put an appropriate amount of US dollars to the disposal of the European Central Bank as well as of British and Swiss banks. All this can be regarded as the first phase of progress towards centralized European monetary administration. Nevertheless, it is unclear so far how exactly the “grand architects” of the new global financial order see the world financial governance and what role they plan to give to such existing financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund. The agenda also includes using the IMF as an authorized supranational regulation center under the supervision of a G-24 board.

The power organisms above nations are being enlarged

The world can witness again the creation of such a supernational mechanism, which controls the national economies of the individual states, and, if a crisis situation occurs, intervenes for the sake of the necessary change, but in a prepared and organized way. The essence of this is to tighten integration within the EU, which is the precondition of the strengthening of the Euro-Atlantic power block – the West. The plan imposed on Europe by leading world financial circles wants to counterbalance the partly deliberately created indebtedness crisis with the help of new huge borrowings. This solution will exacerbate rather than remedy the problems occurred in the budget of individual states. The main cause of the delay of these ardent problems is that no single standpoint in these questions has emerged in the global elite yet, due to the struggle for power among the main global decision-makers.

According to the statistical office of the European Commission, the Eurostat, in 2010 the indebtedness (sovereign debt) of the countries belonging to the Eurozone will grow from 77.7% to 83.6% of their GDP. The financial experts consider that the indebtedness figures for not only Greece and Portugal, but also for Spain, Italy and a number of other EU countries are unrealistically low as compared to the actual data. Experts estimate the bulk of Greek bad debt at 875% of its GDP, while in Poland and Slovenia the debt to GDP ratio is 15 and 11 respectively. The corresponding average in the United States is 5, and the ratio of indebtedness in the states of the Eurozone is 4.34.

The structural transformations are still being awaited. In order to alleviate the situation, the EU finance ministers adopted the German plan. On 21st May 2010, European Central Bank president Jean-Claude Trichet and European Council President Herman A. van Rompuy supported the German plan of much closer budgetary coordination including penalties for member states that break the EU budgetary rules. The sanctions will include suspending the voting rights and withholding the funding for infrastructural development of those member states, which repeatedly offend the budgetary limits. It was also proposed to subject national budgets to EU screening prior to their being debated in national legislative bodies.

The European Commission, the European Central Bank and the 11 countries belonging to the Euro Group (Eurozone) discussed other, yet more ambitious projects. They included the adoption of the joint budget of the 11 Eurozone member states.

In order to avoid the financial collapse, the EU countries were compelled serially to introduce extremely unpopular austerity measures. They froze the salaries and pensions of state employees, cut welfare expenses and increased retirement ages. Greece was forced the first to adopt such measures. Then Germany decided to cut spending by 10 billion euros annually in 2011-2016. France abolished the annual pension for low-income families.

Under the IMF pressure, also Spain was forced to a comprehensive reform, including pension indexing freeze, pay reductions and employment cuts in the state sector. Similar austerity measures are being planned in Great Britain, Italy and several other countries. The consequences of these measures are hard to gauge considering that the unemployment has reached 10% of the economically active population and continues to grow. As a consequence, in the member states of the European Union at least 80 million people are currently below the poverty line.

We have mentioned all these in connection with the Sitges meeting of the Bilderberg Group because we wanted to demonstrate that the power elite, which wants to retain control over the world, had to make hard decisions in rather difficult situations.

This time, several invited representatives of the world elite stayed away from the meeting, because their participation to the conference could have an unfavourable effect on their judgment, if their presence comes to light. The dominating panic was even increased by the bloody demonstration broken out in Greece following the austerity measures imposed by the International Monetary Fund. This also signaled that the world elite gradually loses control over the events, while the hostile attitude of the world public opinion is growing. The increased interest of the world public opinion is shown by the fact that Charlie Skelton reported for the second time about the Bilderberg meeting for the Guardian of London, and a detailed report was published also in Russia Today.

It is a peculiarity that Daniel Estulin – who also wrote a remarkable book about the operation of the Bilderberg Group – delivered a speech to the politicians in Brussels, at the request of the European Parliament. In this speech, he revealed the intention of the world financial elite to collapse the global economy and make the world economy a corporation controlled only by them, of which only they benefit. Estulin’s book directed the worldwide attention onto the Bilderberg Group, revealing what role it plays and why it must be stopped. In the international financial world, there are those who lead and those who react to events. While the latter are better known, more numerous and more powerful in appearance, the real power lies in the former. In the global financial system, the financial oligarchy is represented by the Bilderberg Group.

The organization of the Bilderberg organization is dynamic, i.e. it changes over time, it absorbs, but also creates new phenomenae, while disposing of those in decline. Some of its members continuously change, but the system itself has not changed. It is a self-replicating, virtual web network, intertwined with the financial, political, economic and industrial control.

The Bilderberg Group is a secret society. It is like an all-seeing evil eye. Nevertheless, Estulin states that there is no conspiracy, in the classical sense, as childhood fantasies see it. No group of people are sitting around a table in the dark, holding hands, gazing at a crystal ball, planning the future of the world.

The people gathered in Sitges are linked together with a certain ideology. The Bilderberg Group is not the global government or the New World Order yet, it strives at the strengthening of the global corporation for the moment. According to Estulin, the goal of the Bilderberg meetings is to create a global aristocracy following the same ideology, which is able to manage our planet optimally with the cooperation of the elites of Europe and North America. To create a huge network of cartels, more powerful than any nation on Earth. This super cartel is destined to control the vital needs of the humanity, obviously from his vantage point, for its own good and benefit. The rest of the world, the lower classes, would represent “The Great Unwashed”.

The Bilderberg Group is the institution of the international financial community that represents the most powerful and predatory financial interests. And this combination is the worst enemy of humanity – says Estulin. The Bilderberg Group that today has got in the centre of the corporate mass media. Not because the corporate media has suddenly remembered its responsibility towards other people, but because the public opinion has forced the representatives of this opinion power to be aware that the presidents and prime ministers and kings and queens are only tiny puppets of powerful, world-forming forces operating behind the scenes. Something has happened in the midst of general economic collapse. People are frequently subject to something that they do not always understand. That leads them to act in their own interest. That’s what happened in Greece, and that is what is going on in the United States.

The financial crisis, like a tidal wave, took away the fears of the people. They realized that their existence is threatened, so they have lost their fear, and today already perceive the Bilderberg Group in a different way. Maybe that’s why, in a recent speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, the CFR, in Montreal, Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the founders of the Trilateral Commission, said that the “global political awakening”, in combination with internal struggles within the global elite, is already threatening to divert the world strategy towards the establishment of global governance. Estulin condemned with harsh words those who worked for secret societies and who have sold their nation for material advantages. He called them traitors – not only traitors to their people and their nations, but of humanity as a whole.

After this, Estulin referred to the fall of the Roman Empire, and to the decline occurred in the 14th century, to the creation and collapse of the financial bubble of speculation, and then to the start of the historical Modern Times. At this time, new institutions were created. The conception of the modern nation-state republic under the rule of natural law was born. The citizens have given – as a central role – the mandate of promoting scientific and technological progress to the republic. But the members of the Bilderberg Group want a global empire. That is called globalization. And many people believe that to create an empire, you need money. But money, in itself, creates neither wealth nor economy. Money has no intrinsic value. The human mind and knowledge determine the development of the planet.

The deliberate destruction of world economy

It is not for the first time that the world elite represented by the Bilderberg Group destroys the world economy deliberately: the predecessors of this closed group of interest did the same also in the 14th century, in the Dark Middle Ages. At present, this global elite wants zero growth and zero progress. According to a 1980 draft of the Council on Foreign Relations, the controlled disintegration of the global economy is necessary. In 1955, the Bilderberg Group stood beside destruction, namely by planning the destruction of world economy on purpose. The Great Depression, actually, aimed at the massive transfer, taking away of others’ wealth. This world crisis was not an event that wiped out America’s capitalists. On the contrary! The Great Depression made them even richer by making it possible to take the wealth away from those who produced and operated it, by transferring wealth from people at the hands of those who were already rich.

The Bank of America made billions of dollars through foreclosures from 1929 to 1937. Do not think for one second that the interests of the richest of the rich will be hurt by the forthcoming newer world economy collapse, as a consequence of the second phase forecast by Soros, being still ahead us. The only losers will be those who do not belong to them. A good example is Greece. What they’re trying to do is collapse her economic system, instead of allowing Greece to reorganize her monetary system. They are imposing that the Greek debt is financed by Europe, but that debt is worthless. In fact it’s garbage money monopoly. So, by making Europe absorb the unpayable debt of Greece, they enforce the transformation of Europe’s financial system and the continuous blackmailing of the large states.

An official communiqué, containing the essence, about the Bilderberg meeting in Sitges was not issued this time either. The observers, usually, can deduce the taken decisions from the events happening after the meeting. Thus, it is interesting what the finance ministers and central bank governors of the G20, the greatest economic powers of the world, decided about on 7th June 2010, that is one day after the Sitges meeting. On their South Korean meeting, the participants to the G20 conference rejected the policy of economic stimulus followed up to then, and abandoned also the proposals for a global banking levy. The financial leaders of the G20 decided to shift to severe fiscal policy, instead of economy-stimulating and growth-incentive measures. They motivated this with the fact that the possibility of the world-scale debt crisis makes the financial system unsure of itself. In April 2010, the standpoint of the same financial leaders was still that the fiscal incentives should be continued until the private sector and the productive economy strengthens duly.

The council of finance ministers welcomed the crisis management measures of countries struggling with high budget deficit. The French finance minister also added that the debt consolidation is more important than the stimulation of economic growth. Nevertheless, U.S. Treasury Secretary pointed out that restoring fiscal sustainability of the budgets of European states makes the possibility of growth difficult worldwide. Timothy Geithner found the fiscal rigour inefficient until the confidence of the market was restored. In connection with the global bank levy, the G20 finance ministers agreed that, for the moment, each country should provide for the supervision and taxation of its own financial institutions. They have to reach all this so that they should assure the transparency of their banking system. Nevertheless, the introduction, until the end of 2012, of an international money market regulation will still remain on the agenda.

According to the nearly unanimous opinion of the experts surveying the Bilderberg meeting, a possible war against Iran was on the agenda in Sitges. For the moment, we cannot know whether a decision on this was taken or not. Many experts think that the situation is similar to that one between 1929 and 1939. Therefore, the global forces working on the creation of the New World Order could possibly use – beyond the economic devices – also the war for the sake of creating the one-world government governed from a single centre as soon as possible. But, in this respect, we can only guess again, and only the events occurring in the future will verify that the analysts were right or wrong.

How could we get out of the world financial crisis?

Firstly, we have to answer the question: what caused the distortion and extreme degeneration on world scale of the money system? Each and every man is at the same time and inseparably a natural, a social and a spiritual-intellectual being. The money, as a sign, nevertheless, can measure and convey only one relationship of the man, namely that one which he exerts within a community, as the member of the human society. The role of the man in the division of labour, and the goods produced by him can be, more or less, compared to and measured with the quantitative index numbers. Therefore, when we measure such a complex phenomenon as the interrelation of human communities with each other and with the natural environment, i.e. when we measure the “metabolism” of mankind with nature, we can use money as an aid. The complete activity reduced to the quantitative side can be described with a sequence of figures. Nevertheless, all these only show what is more or less, or in which order of magnitude it is so.

All this lacks the complexity of man as a natural being, and, similarly, we do not get to know anything about all other dimensions of man. This means an extremely great reduction, since all human beings are, at the same time, unique and unrepeatable microcosms. So when we try to express the multiply complex and sophisticated values in money, we undertake an impossible task, which cannot be achieved. What we consider to be a solution, is nothing else than arranging certain abstract quantitative indexes, and their keeping on file in a certain accounting system.

Keeping on file – especially with the development of information technology – has become such an independent institution, that frequently the filing itself is the value, and is more important than that, what the records refer to. The reduction of the complex phenomena to one-dimension, abstract and homogenous sequences of numbers, of course, makes comparison easier, and, if being numerous is a value, this numeric comparison can even be a measure of value. In essence, in accounting we keep records on claims, which are also used for value measuring. Gradually, the claims themselves have become means of payment, and, when the business partners settled the accounts with each other, they usually changed claims with each other, as settlements.

The claims recorded in the accounting have different profits, and the settling is done by collating the returns or profits. If the banknote representing the numeric relations, i.e. the money is inflated, this means a negative return for the owner of the inflation money. If the account money is also included in this banknote in the accounting records, it will be inflated in the same ratio as the banknote. In the accounting, the bank deposit of a client is a claim from the bank. When the bank gives a credit to the client taking up a loan, it is the claim of the bank from the client.

In several articles published in the Hungarian tabloid newspaper Magyar Nemzet, as well as in lectures given on different forums, István Varga set forth that the banking balance is just the mirror image of the balance of the enterprises. The tool of the bank, which it grows continuously in order to have more profit, is not the liability of the bank. The financial institutions (primarily the banks) want to multiply their own money instruments and to decrease their liabilities. The more successful a financial institution, an investment fund or a bank is, the more devices it has, and the larger these devices are, the larger the debts of its clients are.

The secret of the banks’ success: making the clients indebted

So that a financial institution dealing with crediting should be successful, it should indebt efficiently its clients. These indebted partners themselves can also be banks and financial institutions or investment funds. When, within the banking system, these financial actors reciprocally indebt each other, in fact they produce money within the banking system. But the banking system has broken away, for a long time, from the value-creating real economy that produces physical goods. The assets and liabilities recorded within the banking system are only sequences of figures, and the raw material of the banking system consists of computing digits. The multiplication, growth of these signs arranged into sequences of figures is possible with different virtual methods.

The actor of the real economy – which produces value-bearing physical products and services that satisfy human necessities – strives with the mining, the processing, the development, the transport, the multitude of services, the obtaining of information, and the taxation. In contrast, the financial sector and the banking network operating within it are a one-dimension factory, which only has to multiply the accounting signs.

When the transnational money cartel that had developed the current financial system of the world succeeded in pushing out the state-issued money, and, then, drew under control even the central bank issue moneys substituting the former, could create the interest-yielding credit money monopoly, the money necessary to which was raised by the banking system, in the form of account money. The state-issued money, the issue bank money, as well as the account money were still connected, to a certain extent, to the value-producing real economy. Nevertheless, due to the interest mechanism, the credit money, connected to the real economy, after a certain determined time, could not grow in the required measure. At that time, the mass production of the synthetic money started, which money was only covered with virtual banking instruments, financial “products”.

It would be normal if the signs serving the transmission of the economic life were produced by those who produce the mentioned values, the physical products and useful services. According to the normal order of life, the sign should be secondary, since the primary is what it signals. Nevertheless, in the case of money, mankind had to face such a sign in such a sphere where the production of signs was totally cut from those who produce the mentioned values. The production of signs became the privilege belonging to only a few people, and passed into the property of a self-designated, narrow and closed group of interest, which made the production of signs its private monopoly. This group of interest gives in use these signs – essentially produced free – extremely costly to the actors of the value-producing real economy. Until this interest-operated private money monopoly was created, the public power – the state – had produced, as a public service, the signs assuring the communication of the economic life: the money covered with productive work, value-production, physical products and services that satisfy needs. As long as this system worked, the money could primarily be created only through work and production. At that time, the financial sector was only serving the real economy, and the money, as a sign, was the mediating instrument of the value-producing economy.

The organized transnational money cartel took this authority away from the states, and transferred it to an institution invented and spread over by itself, the international network of central banks. The creation of the central banks was necessary so that there should be such a private institution looking like a public institution, which is exclusively owned by or is under the control of the money cartel. The international money cartel exerts the power over the central banks by enforcing the “independence of the central banks”. The central banks are independent only from their states and governments, but are totally dependent from the transnational money cartel and the international banking system owned and controlled by it. (For instance, the Hungarian National Bank regularly reports to and receives instructions from the BIS of Basel, the Bank of International Settlements belonging to the sphere of interest of the House of Rothschild.) So, the money cartel has taken away the monetary authority from the states, i.e. has deprived the states of the issuing of money, the regulation of currency rates and credit rates, as well as of public crediting. Thus, the operation of the money system has become the intangible privilege of banks and other financial structures in private ownership.

As long as the money cartel and its institutions create the money, and only credit money operated with interest mechanism is in circulation, all money within this money system is such a claim, for which interest – some kind of money rent – has to be paid. In the productive economy, industry and services, this interest appears as cost, because it withdraws money from the productive activity and regroups it to the money cartel detaining credit monopoly and its institutions. The so ever strengthened money sector has grown into such a money economy, which has totally surmounted the real economy that had become dependent. The public economy was transformed into money economy, the economy into chrematistics.

Thus, while, in the real economy, the interest is a cost, which withdraws resources, this interest, in the banking system, is a tool, the production of which is an accountant’s task. If, in a banking accounting, the interest of a claim changes, the yield of the given value also decreases or increases. This means that the exchange value of the two accounting claims also changes. A promissory note with a higher interest is worth more than one with a lower one. The state and corporate bonds with a better yield push out those with a smaller yield. The current fair market value of certain bonds, securities, money instruments mostly depends on human will and influence. The exchange of securities can be influenced with calculated steps, and great money yields can be obtained by this, especially if these exchanges are made in large items. In the monetary system, the actor which is able to exert changes and can calculate the triggered consequences, will be in superiority against that one which does not detain the information and tools necessary for that.

With the creation of the transnational money cartel, and the strengthening of the system of chrematistics, techniques like this developed and improved gradually. As a result of the development of information technology, of computerization, also the influencing of the movement of money was automated. The so-called forward transactions are in fact bets. The result of the bet is such a claim against somebody, in which, in the real economy, somebody’s work is accounted. In the real economy, where real values are created, the economic actors are subject to the laws of nature. The employee can perform work only within determined time and health limits. On the contrary, business transactions consisting of bets can be made almost without limits, especially in the case that, at the time of the business transaction, not even a part of the value of the bet has to be paid in advance. This money, produced with bets, is what is called synthetic money.

This so-called money that can be produced unlimitedly was deliberately confused with the book value of the value-creating work. Since this synthetic money could be multiplied unlimitedly, it took over the rule over the money covered with work. What we call “normal money”, was money covered with precious metal, gold and silver, for a long time in the course of history. This was substituted with the issue bank money issued by the central banks invented by the money cartel, the acceptance of which was guaranteed by the state, and the state allowed that the public debts, the taxes could be paid in this money. At stock exchanges, bets could be made with this issue bank money, and greater and greater sums were created in this way. It even happened that the return reached 40-45 times the invested amount of money. At this time, the claims kept on record in the accounting have already become dominant. People started to call these moneys credit money, since they were created by financial structures and not by central banks.

The speculation practice gradually changed over to the trade with promissory notes, because, in large amounts, they could be manipulated easier, in order to get even bigger yields. One of the methods of manipulation was the influencing of the investors’ mood. The government bonds, for instance, were popular because it was easy to influence the attitude against the given states with the help of political propaganda and the mass media. Thus, when we speak about financial crisis and indebtedness, always the budgets come into the limelight, because the good or bad propaganda about the budgets drives directly the price of the government bonds on the money markets.

By the end of the 1970-ies, the outlay of the oil dollar billions resulting from the deliberate oil price explosion, accomplished in several phases after 1973, was finished, in essence, to the rising countries of the so-called “third world”, with a relative low interest of 4.5–5%. Nevertheless, in the summer of 1979, during the Thatcher administration, the determining rate of interest was raised to four times its current value. This was followed by the interest rate raising of the American central bank, the FED, which raised the level of the basic interest rate over 20%. The countries indebted according to a plan were able to pay the debt service loads raised to 4-5 times only by issuing newer bonds and by getting even more indebted. (These deliberately indebted countries include also Hungary, which country has taken up a resource loan amounting to altogether one billion dollars at the end of the 1970-ies and the beginning of the 1980-ies, and for which has paid 11 billion dollars interest until 1989, according to the official data of the Hungarian National Bank, but still has to pay a debt amounting to 22 billion dollars – MNB Műhelytanulmányok 2, 1993.)

It has become a general practice that the states paid their former debts with even bigger loans. As a consequence of this, the amount of government bonds continuously increased on the money market, and their re-evaluation with the news spread about the political and economic status has become a special business branch. In the course of world history, the indebting of states was always considered to be the most secure debt. The sovereign debtor repays the debt nearly always, since, even in the case of the so-called “state bankruptcy”, usually only the rescheduling of the payment liabilities takes place. The issue bank money still connected to the real economy was pushed into the background, and the credit money created with the transactions of the financial structures became dominant. But even this money-raising action within the banking system has its limits.

When also the multiplication of the government bonds has already reached the upper limit, newer financial techniques had to be found. The so-called index trade was created at the beginning of the 1990-ies, which already means the buying and selling of index numbers included in the accounting reports. Of course, we cannot speak about actual selling or handing-over and buying or reception, since these accounting file indexes cannot be actually taken into ownership. In fact, we can speak about bets, which are made by those who control the financial movements on the evolution of the indexes. The transnational money cartel could attain that the authorities controlling the money system should loosen the regulations. They enforced such regulations for themselves according to which, during such transactions, only 1-2% of the bet value should be deposited, and, in this way, they could speculate to values 50 or even 100 times greater. Here we can already speak about such a large-size financial movement, which only the strongest actors of the money system transformed into a gambling casino could afford. They, conspiring with each other, regularly speculated to the prejudice of smaller actors, or got rid of their undesirable rivals in this way.

The orgy of the “money bubble barons”

By 2008, with inflating five giant money bubbles, synthetic money amounting to 12 times the world’s gross domestic product. This gambling of gigantic size could not bear the publicity of the wide public opinion any longer, so these financial gamblers used maximally the opportunities hidden in the off-shore environment. They needed, first of all, to be able to hide away their records covering such transactions, the books of the biggest money-makers from the authorities. But, with the billions of synthetic dollars produced this way, the transnational money cartel continuously and globally bought up the precious metal deposits, first of all the gold and the silver, and, furthermore, it became the owner of the value-bearing properties of the real economy.

The mass production of money organized by the money cartel affected primarily the United States, since this multiplied its currency, the dollar, which also fulfils the role of the world’s deposit currency. The American money system symbolized by the Wall Street primarily dealt with portfolio investments and neglected to supply credits to the value-producing real economy, and the capital investment into the production and the research and development gradually fell out. The money economy settled down onto the real economic life, the place of economy was taken by chrematistics. While the economy focuses on the production, the creation of goods and services that satisfy human needs, the chrematistics focuses on trade, on turnover and, mostly, on how more and more money can be produced from money – with the total avoiding of real economy. The goal of the original banking activity is to supply the real economy with appropriate credits, and to assure the money, as intermediary tool.

But the role of the investing financial institutions, primarily of hedge funds is to multiply the money, in as high amount as possible. When the mass production of money started, the classical banking activity was pushed into the background. The plants and factories producing goods of common necessity in the United States were closed one after another, and the productive activity was transposed to China, India and other Asian countries, as well as to South America. They justified this saying that it is enough if America concentrates on the trade and the goods marketing. As a consequence, quite many Americans lost their jobs, and this increased the social expenses of the state. Not only the amount of the paid unemployment benefits rocketed, but also the taxable income decreased more and more. All this increased the budget deficit and further accelerated the indebting of the state.

Many Asian productive companies – mostly the Chinese enterprises – used their money covered with own work for their value-producing activity. This way they saved their dollars received for their products exported to America and to other countries of the Euro-Atlantic area. They spent a considerable part of this huge sum on buying American government bonds, i.e. they credited the more and more indebted Washington administration. The foreign manufacturers played a more and more important role. In order to decrease the indebtedness, the private bank fulfilling the role of central bank of the United States, the FED, lowered the base rate of the dollar to nearly zero. The credit became extremely cheap, and this made it possible that even unemployed people could take up loans on mortgage for real estate procurement. In this way, money got into circulation not only through benefit payment, but also through money issuing, and increased thus the demand and the consumption.

The economy of the United States, representing the centre of the financial system of the Western world, still operated with this method. Nevertheless, experts already knew that the debtors without income would not reimburse the credits. There were also two institutions operating, the Freddie Mac and the Fannie Mae, with the task of handling the bankrupt mortgage loans within the framework of the so-called Relief Refinance Mortgage program. The indebted state, nevertheless, could not undertake the expectable burdens in case the real estate market collapsed. Therefore, the big investment financial institutions of the Wall Street bought up the debts from the small local credit institutions, and supplied them with money in this way, so that they could continue crediting. The investors packed the bought-up credits on mortgage into bigger and bigger units, and the credit qualification institutions financed by them, on request, gave good qualifications on these packed credits on mortgage. They labeled them as reliable securities assuring secure yields. The next step was to sell these, as guarantees, to pension funds detaining covered money, if possible, to European banks. The fact that also Europe’s money system became instable, can be attributed, among others, to these bought packets of credits on mortgage. The Canadian and Asian banks did not buy any of these financial instruments of doubtful value. Some of the European financial institutions – for yet unknown reasons – acted in collusion with the Americans.

The financial crisis was started primarily by those investment financial institutions, which managed to get rid of the restrictions brought by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, meant to make the banking system more secure. They argued also with that “they were too big to go bankrupt”, because their fall would cause the collapse of the whole economic system. Anyway, it is a fact that they managed to persuade the United States and the Western European governments to help them with bank relief packages, to the detriment of the taxpayers. In the enforcement of the bank-saving and economy-vitalizing state aids, an important role was played by the panic-raising of the credit qualifiers, who, on order, were ready to manipulate the public opinion. The investing financial institutions managed not only to make up the falling-out yield of the bonds priced with fraud, but could also charge the not-accounted expenses of the index trade onto the public power.

With the guarantees undertaken to the debit of the society, the taxpayers, the governments took over the loss of the hazardous bets. Thus, also the European states got indebted. Nevertheless, the size of this indebtedness is not visible, since these financial liabilities are not included in the accounting of the public finance. A special index number was invented for the stock of liabilities originating from bank reliefs. But it is not made public. It is well-known that the central bureaucracy of the European Union has a great propensity for referring to the obligatory provisions included in the Maastricht Treaty, according to which the budget deficit of a EU member state cannot be bigger than 3% of the yearly gross national product, and its external indebtedness cannot exceed 60% of the GDP.

At present, several states of the European Union have loaded themselves with many times the upper limit, due to the state aid supplied to the hazardous banks. The mass media of the European Union, but also the Hungarian one, does not say much about the bank-saving packages. On the contrary, those experts get great publicity, who now already speak about the wavered confidence of the money market, because the governments are much too indebted. The natural answer to this would be that the competent governments should at least make reference to the fact that they had to break the Maastricht criteria exactly because they had to help those who are accusing them now.

Globalization of the unscrupulous extortion and looting

In the summer of 1979, first the City of London and then, in December, the FED raised to nearly four times the determining basic interest rate. Owing to this, the debt service burdens of the indebted countries and enterprises rocketed. Also Hungary had to carry such debt service burdens as if it had taken up four times more credits on the international money markets earlier. The borrowers were forced to reimburse their previous debts by taking up newer credits, therefore the amount of government bonds continuously increased on the money markets. By the re-evaluation of these and by influencing the political and economic atmosphere, it was possible to obtain a large extra profit. The state or governmental debts represented the most secure claims, so raising money and crediting for them did not seem to be a risk-increasing factor. The role of the central banks was forced into the background, and the credit money prevailed.

As a matter of fact, the actual value of all money originates from the real economy. If the growth of the value-creating real economy, above a certain level, is not possible, any kind of money could be built upon this economy, but it could not be multiplied unlimitedly, only for the sake of satisfying the speculation needs of the investor financiers. Therefore, also the multiplication of government bonds was limited. At the beginning of the 1990-ies, a newer money-creating method had to be applied, and this was the index trading, which means the selling and buying of index numbers included in the financial accounts. These accounting indexes cannot be actually owned, but bets can be made for the evolution of the index numbers.

Thus, those who operate the money industry created such rules for themselves, according to which they had to deposit only 1-2% of the betting value, i.e. they were able to make bets on values 50 or even 100 times bigger than the amount of money they detained. This was what they called high degree capital leverage transaction. In this way, the great financial actors who determine the money movements could act jointly against the smaller and the undesirable, and thus assure a huge extra profit for themselves.

This practice made it possible for them to produce, prior to 2008, synthetic money amounting to 10-12 times the total world economic product, and to use it for speculation purposes. This money production technique, nevertheless, proved to be finite by the middle of 2008. At this time, the great financial investors moved such a big amount of synthetic money, which could not bear the publicity any longer. As we have already mentioned previously, the circulation and negotiation of these sums was done in off-shore environment, where the financial authorities could neither regulate, nor supervise the performed financial transactions, thus the business books of the global money makers could avoid control. With these billions made from air – through bets –, the large investors bought up the value-bearing enterprises of the real economy, together with their physical assets.

The international money cartel multiplied primarily the dollar, today still fulfilling the role of the reserve currency. The financial institutions specialized in the investment of financial instruments shifted on to the trade of promissory notes, since they could transform their value easier through the mass media. The opinion industry owned by them could influence duly the public opinion, the investors’ mood. The government bonds played an outstanding role in this, because it was relatively easy to influence the public mood at will, concerning the policy of the governments. This is why the programmes of the mass-media were primarily about the budgets, because the good or bad propaganda about them could efficiently move the price of the government bonds up and down.

The world financial crisis, which started in 2007 and burst out in 2008, was primarily caused by the unscrupulous striving to grab of the large banks. Especially the largest banks among the large ones thought that they could indulge in everything, because they are so big that the state cannot allow them to go bankrupt, as that would pull down the whole of the economic life with it. Thus, the governments of the United States and of the European Union saved these financial institutions by accounting the long-term financial liabilities undertaken to the account of the taxpayers. The governments of the European Union supplied an aid amounting to altogether 4,131.1 billion euros to the banks, under the title of guarantee, capital increase, taking over of bad claims and cash assistance between October 2008 and March 2010. Making reference to the Greek state bankruptcy, artificially inflated for blackmailing purposes, Athens was helped with 101 billion euros in three years. If we collate the amount of the aid supplied to the European banks with this sum, we can see how great a hysteria-raising was being done under the pretext of the so-called “Greek crisis”.

The international money cartel, which took away the monetary sovereignty from the states and made it its own private privilege, forbade the states exerting the public power to issue money, to regulate the currency rate, to determine the rate of interest and to offer public credits on the reason that all these generate inflation, because the “banknote press”, i.e. the state money issuing floods the productive economy with uncovered money. If, on the other hand, the investor bankers, driven by unscrupulous money greediness, cause a loss amounting to many thousand billions with irresponsible speculation, then it is permitted to run the “banknote press”, and to compensate the thousands of billions lost with irresponsible hazard from public money, at the expense of taxpayers. The valid contracts of the EU determine in detail the operation of the money system, irrespective of the fact that the given EU member state belongs to the Eurozone or not. The key terms of the regulation are the free competition and the open market.

Therefore, the European Union does not have an own financial system, so all doors are open in front of the totally free and destructive operation of the speculation. This is why the monetary policy of the European Union is weak. It is true, a so-called European System of Central Banks exists, but it is subordinated to the larger and open financial system of the world. In terms of information flow, the ECOFIN, i.e. the Economic and Finance Council of the Council of the European Union, composed of the Economics and Finance Ministers of the 27 European Union member states, works on an acceptable level. The same cannot be said about its decision-making activity. It was not the institutions of the EU who made a decision on saving the banks, which got in trouble because of the irresponsible risk undertaking, but the individual states. It only needed the approval of the European Commissioner for Competition.

This Commissioner for Competition was Neelie Kroes, who is well-known due to her close relationship maintained with the international money cartel. This politician, also called “Nickel Neelie”, attended the Bilderberg Group conferences in 2005 and 2006. The Forbes magazine accounted her among The World’s 100 Most Powerful Women several times. In 2009, when she was routinely stamping the permits on the basis of which the individual governments could support their banks got in trouble with public credits, she reached the 53rd place on the Forbes magazine’ list of Most Powerful Women. (In 2008, she was the 47th, in 2007 the 59th, in 2006 the 38th and in 2005 the 44th.)

If the provisions of the European Union Treaty and its Attachments strictly forbid the individual member states to issue money, since this is the exclusive monopoly of the central banks and of the whole of the banking system, then how was it possible for a lady to permit, routinely stamping, that, the governments of the member states, in contradiction with the EU treaties, could charge their taxpayer citizens with 4,131.1 billion euros, i.e. flood the economy with this amount of money, bringing about the danger of inflation, the dilution of money. Who gave permission to Lady Neelie Kroes to do that? Who is going to call this person to task for that? All this proves again how harmful an institution the European Union is, as the servile servant of the money cartel and the executor of its orders.

The recently created, supra-state, imperial institution system of the European Union is futile and is hindering the really democratic operation of the Europe of Nations, based upon equality of rights. This indebtedness of the states of Europe serves exclusively the interests of the transnational money cartel. The fact that the European Union and especially its bureaucratic institutional system served the demands of the money cartel with such servility signals that the European Union is such a futile imperial structure, which does not enhance, but hinders the operation of the Europe of Nations.

What is necessary for the increased economic, social, political and cultural cooperation, can be achieved through the cooperation between nations based upon equality of rights more efficiently and more cheaply than through an imperial system got under the control of an extremely expensive, prodigal and bureaucratic hydrocephalus, which cannot even be controlled democratically. The transnational money cartel needed this artificial imperial makeshift to put its strategic goal, the establishment of a global system controlled from a single centre, into practice as soon as possible. For the sake of the finalization of its private money monopoly on global scale, this transnational money cartel needs to annihilate, within the individual national states, the middle class, and, on international level, the national states detaining claims of sovereignty. The cheapest way of annihilating the national states – which requires neither army, nor war – is when these national states are forced into an imperial structure, and the individual member states are reduced to the status of regions with cultural autonomy.

Even the “Greek crisis” is not Greek

In his already mentioned work, István Varga states that even the “Greek crisis” is not Greek, but an external action attacking the euro, with the purpose to support the dollar close to collapse by weakening the European money. In the case of economies operating in different conditions, the euro is unsuitable for serving the real economy. Those, who do research in the field of the currency zone operating optimally, have revealed that the common currency concentrates the money capital. This means that it regroups the resources from the weaker to the stronger, that is from the periphery to the centre. In this way, it deepens the differences between the countries belonging to the currency zone.

These deviations could be equaled with the different currency rates, but this issue is excluded by the common currency. Following the important conferences of the international money cartel held in 2010 (TC – Dublin; CFR – Montreal; Bilderberg – Sitges), decisions were made concerning that the financial and economic equilibrium should be restored, among others, with budget austerities. Nevertheless, keeping the budget deficits under control is not suitable for this purpose. They are talking so much about budget deficit primarily because this reacts upon the risk of government debt bonds. Their pricing and quantity already depends on the international banking system. The budget of a state depends primarily on the operation of the economy of the given country. If this economy cannot produce enough income, the state will not have enough revenue to cover its public expenditures, and, in this case, deficits occur necessarily in the budget. If, on the other hand, the deficit grows, the crediting risk increases, and the financing becomes more expensive, which makes the deficit increase even more.

The income production of the economy is determined by the bank crediting. If the productive economy does not get enough medium, or, in other words, there is not enough money driven onto the economy, but, at the same time, it has to reimburse the debt service burdens, in fact a money withdrawal is going on. In such a case, if the budget does not get credit for financing the public tasks, it is possible to enforce the transformation of the large distribution systems and the cutting down of the financing of public tasks. The society perceives that the decay is continuous, but – since the mass media institutions hide away the real causes of the operation of the money system, and the controllers of the monetary system misinform the people – it is possible to create the appearance that it is the fault of the budget, because it overspends. The society is also guilty, because does not consume in proportion with its value-creating labour, that is its consumption is bigger than the result of the work done.

In this neo-liberal money rule world order, the moral value standard was not only pushed into the background, but even deleted. It is basically immoral to limit the supplying of the economic actors, struggling against economic hardships, with financial media, on the reason that the risk of repayment increased, so financial instruments can be obtained only for an essentially higher interest. The logics of the natural economic order would dictate that, in such cases, all actors of the economic life should undertake surplus burdens. The entrepreneur got in a difficult situation should not be hit with punitive interest rates, but should be supplied with working capital and other financial instruments with a smaller debt service burden. This is what concludes from the natural laws and universal morality.

The Islam is more moral

In contradiction with the Christian and Jewish religion, the Islam forbids the collecting of interest even in our days. If an oil sheikh wants to invest his money, he looks for an actor of the real economy, who will add his productive work to this, and will produce surplus value bearing real economy product or service. If this activity is successful, they share the surplus value in a previously determined proportion. If this economic activity is unsuccessful, they bear and share the loss in the same ratio. And if there is neither profit, nor loss, none of them has any claims against each other. In practice, the value-producing activity needs also a third actor, who brings together the owner of the money instruments with the performer of the productive activity. This Islamic financial institution or bank is the organization which manages the investment of the money instruments into the real economy, i.e. enhances that the money could fulfil the role of mediator in the economic life. This practice is more moral than that one followed by the Euro-Atlantic type banking system of the current money rule world order.

A single man, alone, cannot make even a single pin in all his life. If it is so, it is even more true that a whole branch of industry cannot be operated by a single actor. All that is created through the human civilization is the result of a joint human activity. Therefore, both the responsibility and the burdens must be carried jointly. How is it possible that, among the actors of economic life, only the owners of one of the factors – i.e. those who detain the financial instruments – are not obliged to undertake the higher risk, if the risk of their partners increases? Instead of this, driven by their unscrupulous selfishness, they become a destructive force, which – demanding a bigger interest ransom “due to the increased risk” – makes the successful economic activity even more difficult, the result of which necessarily satisfies common needs and interests.

The new Banking Act of the United States

The new Financial Reform Act adopted by the Congress of the United States, which makes up 2,300 pages together with its attachments and preamble, contains important provisions even in its very diluted final version, as follows:

Hereafter, the contracts have to be formulated in plain and easily intelligible language, so that they could be understood even without special qualification. Hereinafter, credits may be given only if the capacity of reimbursement is assured from the part of the borrower. An important change is that, after then, capital must be placed behind index trade, and it must be handled transparently. In the future, it will not be possible to pay bank-saving aid packages from public money. The large capital funds and investing financial institutions cannot control the credit rating institutions any longer, which, hereafter, will be responsible and accountable for their credit rating decisions. Hereafter, the leaders of the commercial banks can also be held responsible for their decisions.

The parasite European banking system

The Euro-Atlantic region should copy the new regulation adopted in America, since its financial system influenced extremely prejudicially the economic life. Under the current regulation, Hungary belongs to the most defenceless group in this area. Such executive institutions of the international money cartel like the International Monetary Fund established that Hungary has a great “exposedness to risk”. From 2006 on, the flooding-in of speculation money, of portfolio capital rocketed. The main cause of this was that the foreign banks operating in Hungary drew in more and more resources from their mother banks, speculating on the continuously high interest rate of the Hungarian currency, the forint.

The European banking system is sponging Hungary as a parasite. The central banks of the EU member states are obliged to keep their reserves in the business banks of another country, so that it should bring income. Due to the big interest rate difference, an extremely big amount of these moneys arrived in Hungary. Since the safest money deposit is at the central bank, a sum corresponding to several thousand billion forints was deposited there. The interest of these thousands of billions is paid from the budget by the Hungarian state. This increased the indebtedness of the state even more, because the high interests could only be financed by issuing new government bonds. Not only the state, but the whole country got indebted, because the drawing-in of capital of the banks registered in Hungary appears as the debt of the whole Hungary.

In the autumn of 2008, not the public finance, the public sphere (this is only a part of national economy, besides the enterprises, the financial sector, the individual households and the citizens) got indebted, but the whole Hungary, and, within it, the private economy. This indebtedness was promoted by the representation in Hungary of the international money cartel, the Hungarian National Bank (MNB), with its specific interest rate policy. The interest rate of the forint was so high that neither the individuals, nor the corporations could be credited at such a high interest, because they would have not been able to manage with credits at such high interest. Only the public finance, i.e. the budget could undertake this high interest payable. The handlers of the state debt could do whatever they wanted to the budgetary act.

The increasing of the number of public securities was advantageous for the international capital market, because more securities on the money market assure a greater scope of action for speculation. In the sphere of crediting the population, the enterprises and the local authorities, the banks, instead of actual payments in currency, have only shifted to the currency-based accounting. The interest rate seemed to be more advantageous, and this came in handy for the banking system for several reasons. The interbank interest rate of currencies was generally extremely low, so they could apply a big interest margin. The mother banks could send the money here expensively, but they took out the income as expense, although the visibly smaller currency interest rate already contained a rather big profit margin. When taking back the currency poured into Hungary, the investors were able to avoid even the possibly occurring exchange rate loss, because, through the credits accounted in currency, the population would pay more, in accordance with the sum of the exchange rate loss, and thus the risk could be shifted onto the Hungarian people. In consequence, the financial investment became almost totally riskless.

In a country, where there is no income production, the indebting cannot be continued either, because the actors of the economic life do not know where they would reimburse the loans from. Nevertheless, due to the shrinking of income production, the banks did not have to be saved in Hungary. In other countries, the governments sanitized the banks got in trouble with bank-saving packages and long-term undertakings of obligation by the state. In Hungary, it was necessary to assure the repurchase of the large amount of currency previously arrived in the country. This requires an ever increasing amount of currency, because much more than the arrived amount wants to leave, since the sum deposited in forints increased considerably due to the high interest rate.

The credit of the IMF was needed for taking out the interest from the country

And here, finally, we arrived at the point where we can tell what even the new government does not tell the society unambiguously and clearly, up to the present day. Taking up of the IMF-EU loan amounting to 25 billion dollars (20 billion euros) became necessary so that this very high forint surplus, transformed into currency, could leave the country undisturbed. The incomes created in the form of forint interest rates were taken out of the country by the structures of the international money cartel, using this 25 billion dollars currency. It was necessary to sham this IMF-EU credit off on Hungary and to burden the otherwise already over-indebted country with the payment of the interests of this loan, so that the taking out should be continuous and undisturbed. This was the real cause, which could not be communicated to the Hungarian society. It was not possible to communicate so much, that even the current government does not do that.

The Hungarian banks consisting preponderantly of the representations of foreign banks conspired with each other and started spreading the word that the Hungarian government bonds are too risky and this is why they are not bought. And they added to this that the large credits would soon fall due, and they could only be paid by taking up newer credits, and thus, in order to reimburse the debt falling due, the help of the IMF and of the EU would be needed. This did not correspond to the facts, since, in reality, there was no uncovered debt falling due. Referring to the fact that Hungary must be defended from the attacks of speculation was not realistic either, since these speculators could not be else than right the bank capital funds fearing their profit.

Due to the – otherwise unnecessary – currency credit taken up for the sake of the undisturbed taking out of the income resulting from the interests kept too high in a treasonous way, the Hungarian government debt rocketed, and the indebtedness of the households and local authorities increased. It became obvious that, due to the world economic crisis, infiltrated in the meantime, and to the growing unemployment, also the credit-undertaking capacity of the economic actors, the households and local authorities was exhausted. Therefore, they did not have enough income for bearing even the debt service burdens of the previous credits. At this point, the banks could say that they would not give more credits, because all of them are considered risky debtors. In this way, such a situation appeared when the debt service keeps reducing the amount of money necessary for the operation of the economy, while there is no inflow and the financial processes are frozen. This can have no other consequence than economic decay.

The money, which accumulates in the banking system, but is not laid out into the value-producing real economy, brings a considerable profit for the credit institutions. That is, in many cases, the liquid money that can be used for speculation purposes does not leave the country, even being covered with currency. The central bank, the Hungarian National Bank (MNB), accepts unlimitedly this money, at a higher interest rate than that on the international money market. These investments bring a secure income, because the interests after the MNB bonds are paid by the central bank, and then, after a year’s delay, they are reimbursed to it from the budget, in other words the secure yield is guaranteed by the whole of the Hungarian taxpayers.

The one year delay of the reimbursement makes it possible to hide away the burden indebting the state. In this way, it becomes possible that the banking system can make a big and secure income even without crediting the productive economy. Thus, the real economy is choking in the lack of money, and the families, the state and the labour remain without income. In April 2010, the MNB received 572 billion forints more money from the commercial banks, and, by this, increased its two-week maturity bond stock to 4,454 forints. This passive money is invested in currency abroad, with the considerably lower interest and yield paid there. At that time, the investment moneys – falling under reserve obligation – arrived in Hungary from foreign central banks exceeded 4,000 billion forints.

Nevertheless, a considerable amount of money arrives in the country also from foreign commercial banks. In the summer of 2010, this exceeded 1,300 billion forints. The Hungarian banks, most of them being subsidiaries of foreign banks, also took up 3,500 billion forints worth credit, in order to exchange it into forints and to deposit it at a higher interest rate on their bank accounts at the MNB. In this way, the commercial banks detain 7,000 billion forints invested in government bonds deposited on their bank accounts at the MNB. They credit the enterprises with a sum corresponding to 7,000 billion forints, and they spend the same amount on the house-building and consumption credits given to the citizens.

It can be stated that, out of the assets of the credit institution sector amounting 34,000 billion forints, the crediting of enterprises and citizens makes only 14,000 billion forints, while the share of transactions within the banking system reaches 20,000 billions. From this, we can draw the conclusion that there is, indeed, enough money in Hungary to satisfy duly the credit needs of the productive economy and to start the enlargement of the economy.

The current money system, which operates in opposition with the interests of the society, is the result of the two-century development and decay of liberalism. How was this trend born, the dramatic fall of which marks, at the same time, also the end of the period of Enlightenment in world history? What may come after this era? What will the new financial world order be like? What will be the fate of mankind in the 21st century?

From the Enlightenment to the bankruptcy of Liberalism

The Enlightenment preceding the French Revolution was the culmination of all that rooted back to the mediaeval variant of materialism, the religious movements and the scientific rationalism. This Enlightenment, which ultimately led to the bloodsheds of the French Revolution, destroyed those social groups, institutions and values, which served as the basis of the Middle Ages, and which were determined by the value system of Christianity. In science, the activity of Newton and his followers means a turning point, while in the field of social thinking, the concept of progress and the putting of modernism into the limelight emerged. The modernism – which, at that time, comprised also the humanization of the social relations, the development of the human rights and political freedoms, as well as the technical modernization and the gradual building out of the leading role of science in the social and economic life – differs considerably from how the modernism is interpreted in our days, reducing it to the technical progress and totally neglecting the social progression.

This kind of modernity took over the leading role from the church representing the Christian order of value, which was more and more accused of spreading the world of darkness, of superstition, against the light of science, modernity and progression. It is striking that, at that time, there is already no word about morality, the universal protection of interest and order of values being due to each and every man. Today, we already know that this can be represented consequently only on Christian basis, namely according to Jesus Christ’s such teachings as “love thy neighbor as thyself” and “all things whatever ye desire that men should do to you, thus do ye also do to them”.

During the Enlightenment, this kind of modernity and progression meant the alloy of the current social and economic reality and of a connected world view. The new idea and norm system called Enlightenment placed the continuous change in the centre. At that time, the change meant the absolutization of progress, and, with reference to the fact that they were old, it rejected almost all proven values, which, nevertheless, were verified by the experience of mankind. The individual and community life, the biological and social existence of man is connected in thousands of ways to what is old, what is more, exists from the beginning of time, but must be kept nevertheless, because basic human needs, interests and values can be satisfied or preserved only in this way.

At that time, the groups of interest that form the world history from the background already knew that a new cult of change is needed, as that would allow them to achieve their long-term strategy. As an answer to the over-dimensioned cult of change, the conservativism appeared, as a reaction to the ideology of modernism that frequently kicked over and wanted to change everything. The conservativism sticking to the traditions made an attempt at slowing down the developing changes. As an ideological system of ideas, the conservativism represented a political programme too. The representatives of this tradition-protecting system of ideas strived to preserve the state power, since they knew, from historical experience, that they could achieve their endeavours most efficiently through the institutions of the state.

The history-forming world powers took up the struggle with conservativism making use of the system of ideas of the liberalism. Their long-term world strategy was served by the forcing, pushing of liberalism. And the liberal system of ideas developed by them always referred to the conscious undertaking of modernity. The representatives of liberalism trumpeted about themselves that they had to influence all the institutions of the society and state, in order to free them from the remnants of the religious superstition and anti-scientific irrationalism. They accused the representatives of conservativism of being afraid of the free man, who had already got rid of the darkness of thinking, of the false adoration of the superstitious tradition (represented primarily by the church). The liberals, of course, made reference to progress, and tried to elaborate a political programme to that. They stated that the history could only follow its natural course if it encouraged it with conscious and continuous reforms.

The history-forming world powers were not fully satisfied with the liberalism, and so, as a new answer, they developed the ideological system of ideas of socialism and later of communism. Thus, the socialism was an answer to liberalism, but it took up an own image only after the revolutions of 1848 (which were prepared by the international freemasonry). Even after the French Revolution of 1789, there were such socialists who regarded themselves the heirs of the revolution, and, in essence, they were not different from those who called themselves liberals. The only difference between the programme and ideology of the socialists and those of the liberals was that, for the sake of progress, the former wanted to speed up the course of the changes even using violence. This is why the socialists (communists) were more attracted by the revolutionary violence than by the peaceful reforms.

They found the latter too compliant and patient, which would require a long waiting time. The forcing of modernization and change in connection with the new endeavours produced three attitudes. The first one was that the danger originating from the forced change should be recognized and it should be treated somehow. These were the conservatives. The second idea was that the mankind should be helped to reach happiness, as rationally as possible. This was propagated by the liberals. The third standing point was the socialist idea, according to which the progress and modernization should be speeded up, even by employing violent tools against the opposition. Thus, the conservatives opposed the changes of the French Revolution enforced with bloody violence, the liberals opposed this tradition-defending opposition of the conservatives, while the socialists resisted the careful reformism of the liberals, considered slow and too tolerant.

The systems of ideas born from the Enlightenment considered the people to be the bearers of their ideology. Nevertheless, the concept of people is extremely ambiguous and dim. According to the liberals, all individuals are the independent and autonomous bearer of political, economic and cultural rights, and the totality of these individuals is the people. The only question is who can be considered to be an autonomous person capable of independent will-enforcing. Babies cannot, illiterates cannot, the completely propertiless cannot, strangers cannot, the insane cannot, criminals cannot, and so on. For a long time, even women were forbidden to take part in the political life.

Thus, the people’s sovereignty is an extremely ambiguous and dim concept, because it is, in fact, restricted to a relatively small group of those who detain the capacity of interest-enforcement. Therefore, the basic precondition of the political democracy is, in fact, the establishment of the condition system of the economic and financial equality of chances. For this, nevertheless, such a new property system is necessary, which assures the property and the connected rights – which guarantee the sanctity of private property – exclusively for natural persons. And fixes the size of this property depending of the performance of the given natural person. The legal persons, who are totally unsuitable for satisfying the moral requirements, would not receive legal protection connected with natural persons.

This principle can be supported by the fact that there is no man who can produce all alone – totally alone! – even a pin during all his life. And, if so, this is even more true for more sophisticated products, for a car, a plane or for a whole branch of industry. If, on the other hand, a man can own only what he produces, during his life, with his own performance, it comes to light that the natural and civilization environment being at the disposal of mankind is the common heritage of each and every man. It is the heritage of every man, as it is the solar system, the planet Earth, with its atmosphere and waters, with its whole natural environment. On what basis can, then, pass into private ownership, what the man is not able to produce, either alone, or jointly? This is why the private ownership of the Earth or a part of it is a conceptual absurdity. Man cannot produce any kind of earth, not even fertile soil, thus it cannot be in the property of man. The fertile soil is the common heritage of each and every man, received from those forces, owing to which life works “as accurately and sharply as the stars move in the sky”.

We know the standpoint according to which such utopian concepts cannot be achieved. But already the thinkers of the Enlightenment developed several utopias, since it is an unalienable capacity of man that he strives, within desirable frames, to find the optimal solutions, the dynamic equilibrium emerging from the reciprocal effects on each other of the antagonistic forces.

With the emergence of the Enlightenment, the conservatives – in order to protect the proven interests of the society – put into the limelight such communities as the family, the church and the larger family: the nation. They emphasized the political rights of those communities, which preserved the traditions, and thus assured the continuity in the development of the society.

Against the small communities, the socialists wanted to assure political rights resulting from the principle of the people’s sovereignty to the whole of the society, as a collective formation. According to the testimony of history, none of the ideological systems of ideas could answer satisfactorily the question who was the true bearer of people’s sovereignty, the real owner of the state sovereignty taking the place of the sovereignty of the removed absolute monarchs.

At that time, the human society already worked within organizational frames called state, which detained power licenses due exclusively to it, like, for instance, the monopoly of the use of armed violence, or the privilege to issue the medium of the economic life, the money. Therefore, it became extremely important what kind of relation the mentioned ideological systems of ideas have toward this state power. How can these ideologies harmonize the state and the society? The establishment of the relation with the state, finally, resulted in the fact that the number of ideologies decreased from three to two. The liberals and the conservatives started to reconcile after the Masonic revolutions of 1848. The conservatives realized that they stand on the basis of the defense of private property, together with the liberals. The defense of private property enhances and promotes the continuity in the society, strengthens the family, the church communities and the solidarity of persons who are dependent on each other.

The conservatives and the socialists were brought closer to each other by their attitude against individualism. Both of them emphasized the collective interests. On the other hand, also the liberals and socialists got closer to each other, and so the social-liberalism or liberal-socialism was born. In this way, the three ideologies became two: the conservative liberalism, as well as the liberal socialism. This ideology reduced to two, nevertheless, still kept the principle of development and progress, which is considered to be one of the most basic liberal ideas. When Marxism has become the representative of socialism or communism, this ideology also kept the propagation of social progression and modernization.

Thus, in the 20th century, the ideology of liberalism got a leading role, at least in terms of the most basic ideas. In the bloodiest century of human history, the liberal parties gradually lost ground and shrunk, but the large parties achieved, in essence, the liberal programme. This is why the 20th century could be called the century of liberalism. This is why, when this victory of liberalism took place, such thinkers as, for instance, Francis Fukuyama, thought that, by this, the human history reached its goal, and the history came to an end.

Nevertheless, the history goes on. It only happened that the liberalism, as a social and economic system of ideas, exhausted its possibilities, and, after 1989, it started not only to transform, but also to disintegrate.

Is there life without ideologies?

In the modern human society, there is not. The cause of this is that the man, necessarily, thinks in knowledge reflecting the facts, and in interest-oriented knowledge or ideas expressing his relation towards the facts. Illustrating it with a quite simple example: according to the rules of formal logics, only one correct statement is possible concerning a concrete object in our room. The given object (let us say a table) either is in our room or is not there. This is the scientific knowledge. Nevertheless, the question can also be raised in the way that whose interest is served, whose needs are satisfied by the fact that this concrete object can be found right in this room, which room belongs to this and that person? Is it rightful that this table is right in this room and belongs to this person? Isn’t all this the consequence of corruption? Ad absurdum, following the interest of the exploiters or of the exploited, does it serve the social progress and modernization if this table is right in this room?

From this, we only want to draw the conclusion that all such knowledge in which the man, the individual and social cognition is present in some respect, is, in a form or another, a knowledge determined also by interests, i.e. it is endowed with ideological charge. An item of knowledge is the more disinterested, the less human relation it contains. In principle, the knowledge material of mathematics, geometry, astronomy and the other abstract sciences, as well as of natural sciences and technical sciences detains such convergent problems to which it is possible to give a single correct answer. In the social sciences – in which the man, as a biological and social being, has a determining role as both an object of research and researcher – the items of knowledge are oriented towards interests and detain ideological charges.

The social science is not able to be free from ideology, either. The practice of the social, economic and political life is even less able. The sciences which study the man and the human communities, the society and the metabolism between these societies and the natural environment lead, almost without exception, to items of knowledge which contradict each other. Of course, the researcher tries to give logical and clear answers to the rising problems. But these answers contradict each other, because the knowledge reveals divergent problems in connection with man and the human activity. The ultimate contradiction regarding the individual man is that he is both alive and dead at the same time. Namely, the death begins in the moment of birth, it accompanies the whole human life, and, at the end of life, the given biological structure falls apart definitively and gives place to another structure. The same is in the course of life: if the given person has no descendants, the death is dominant.

Within the human community called society, the two requirements getting in opposition with each other are freedom and equality. The items of knowledge concerning these requirements are in an insoluble relation with each other, since the existence of one of them is made possible by the existence of the other. This is such an interdependence like darkness and light. None of them has any sense without the other, since they exist only depending on each other, being the precondition and the complement of each other. They are double entities. Freedom and equality are in the same relation with each other. The former favours the strong, while the latter the weak. Equality limits the freedom, while the exaggerated equality annihilates it. In the respect of the man and the human society, we inevitably face the human life and the pair of oppositions characterizing it, the birth and growth, the decay and destruction, and, in terms of the society, the freedom and order.

The freedom and the equality, with the help of their contrary requirements, the fraternity, the solidarity, the feeling of community, that is the moral values, can create a harmonic unity, completing each other. For the man, this is made possible by the human, historical experience inherited from the previous generations, which is capable of activating the higher capacities of man, on both individual and social level. By the unconditioned acceptance of the universal moral and social justice, the man and the human society – rising above themselves and leaning on their own superior capacities – are capable of a real social solidarity and to create harmonic, sustainable human relations.

The original economic liberalism is ethical

The goal of free market economy performed on the basis of equal chances represented an organic part of the liberal system of ideas. The most distinguished authors of the classical political economics were, in fact, teachers of ethics promoting the transformation of economic life according to ethical norms. The classical political economics – from the socialism hallmarked by David Ricardo, through John Stuart Mill, to the social democrats of the progressive era – stood on ethical bases. The classical liberals wanted to reform the economic life in three directions, and to create the market economy based upon the freedom of enterprise operating on the basis of equal chances.

The first such requirement was that the public power should withdraw, from the economic life, through taxation, the ground rent, which the ruling class managed to privatize in the Middle Ages. This land rent should be given back to the community, and should be spent on investments serving the needs of the community. The second attempt of the classical liberal economic thinkers was to minimize the incomes originating from monopolies, in such a way that the basic infrastructure should be kept in public property, and its services should be made available, against cost or through state subsidies, so that the competiveness of the economy should be increased in this way. The third reform attempt was that the price of the goods and services in circulation should be regulated in such a way that the incomes of the natural monopolies getting into private hands should be withdrawn and spent on public purposes, or, if they are in private hand, their prices should be reduced.

The annuity and the interest are a “free lunch”

The goal of this classical liberal programme was to harmonize the incomes with the actually performed work inputs and costs. They wanted, in this way, to deliver the market economy from the unnecessary income withdrawal of parasite character. In the Anglo-Saxon lexical practice, “free lunch” denotes the dividend, the illicit profit without any input, which is built in the prices and, through this price increase, the competitiveness of economy is decreased, in fact unnecessarily. Therefore, the reformer thinkers of economics of the classical liberalism paid an exquisite attention to the annuities and rents applied in economy. They determined these as such an income proceed, which have no counter entry as production input or cost.

The additional income surpassing the actual costs of production, and the higher prices appearing as a consequence of them hinder the equal chances and the free competition, so these thinkers suggested that the state should either ban this kind of income, or it should levy a tax of such a measure on it, that it could be regrouped for common goals. From the taxation of the land rent and from the withdrawal of the higher prices resulting from natural monopolies, they hoped to harmonize, in this way, the prices with the technologically and socially necessary costs of the production. Entrepreneurs and employees supported this liberal taxation system, since it made it possible to withdraw the market prices surpassing the prices representing the real value.

This is why the value and price theory had a strongly political content. The taxation system, which focused on the withdrawal of the land rent, in fact, withdrew that feudal ransom, which the landowner aristocrats of Europe demanded for themselves from the conquest of the given country. This is how William the Conqueror, Prince of Normandy, who otherwise was of Viking origin, who conquered England, in 1066, as a French sovereign, became the founder of the rule of the English aristocracy. He and his vassal aristocrats collected land rent, on the right of the conqueror, from their defeated subjects of Anglo-Saxon and Celtic origin.

The elaborators of the classical value and price theory determined the production inputs in such a way that it was possible to calculate which costs are necessary, and which ones originate from the monopoly position, and they have to be limited with anti-monopoly price regulation. When the public utilities in private ownership, but regulated by the public power were created, the more modern variants of the “free lunch” have also turned up, in the form of corporate bonds and shares given to the owners, the managers, as well as to strategically important politicians. These were already charged with the interest payable and the dividend payment, which was transferred to those who utilized the public utility services. All this raised the price of these public utility services over the production costs.

These theories were elaborated by the French physiocrats, as well as by Adam Smith and his contemporaries, among them by John Stuart Mill. Later on, Karl Marx joined them, who, continuing the work of the classics, analyzed the problems of wealth, property and income, as well as those of the income produced with work and that without any input. According to him, the wealth created with performance is that one, which is produced by somebody with his own work. On the other hand, the property obtained by somebody without his own effort and performance, cannot be considered to be a wealth created with own performance. Such wealth-making is the inheritance, the enforcement of special prerogatives, and the additional income originating from natural and artificial monopoly position.

This formation of wealth and income is considered to be, by the thinkers of the classical liberalism, such an income, which is not a necessary element of the production and distribution. Therefore this additional income must be withdrawn through taxation and must be spent, in this way, on the community needs. The beneficiaries of the acquired interests and prerogatives did everything possible to maintain their tax exemption, to withdraw the money system from under control and to keep the real estate property, as well as to protect their monopoly position. The ideologists being in their service did not bother about what the wealth without output and the economic parasitism was. They simply stated that all existing wealth and income production originates from value-creating activities.

Everyone’s activity is worth the amount of money paid for it. They did not take into account the fact that there was also an income increase without any output. And if there is nothing like this, because we do not talk about it, then there is nothing to be drawn away with extra taxes. These economics thinkers coming after the classics did not want any longer to conduct arguments about the structural and legal reform of the value-producing economic activity. Being narrow-minded, they only dealt with the problem of demand and offer. By this, they closed out the problem sphere of the wealth creation, of property, of the credit-raising of banks and of the income without performance from the public thinking and public debates.

They stated that the government expenses, the state aids and taxes represented such an unnecessary economic load, which, starting from their nature, does not bring any profit and income. It is contradictory to this the fact that the building of the infrastructure, of the roads, railways and traffic systems, the creation of the educational and scientific institutions, as well as the support of the research and development made it possible that the economy could cheaply get efficient services. Economists know that the biggest investment in nearly all economic activities is the infrastructure of the given country.

The enterprises that got into privatized private ownership against credit money obtained extremely much extra-profit from services of this kind, operated from public expenses, among others in the 1980-ies, as well as following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, in the successor states that became a free prey. The raptor vulture capital bought up the enterprises in monopoly position, being in the service of community interest up to then, and thus obtained an additional income surpassing the actual costs to a considerable extent.

The marginal utility theory also avoids the expropriation with private purpose of the wealth originating from national property handled by the state. It tries to explain the value from the side of the satisfaction of needs, instead of that of the production, it hides away that the value is created in production, and neglects that the change of needs originates from production. It handles the value of unlimitedly multipliable and of rare goods in a similar way. In the case of the decisions of consumers, does not take into account the brainwashing of the advertisements, the deception, the withdrawal of different fees and annuities, as well as the established practice of pricing. As a result of all this, it considers the evolution of prices an agreement occurred at random between the sellers and the buyers.

They do not take into account the fact that the producers and the consumers bring their decisions in an essentially more complex economic system. They state about the credit that it is produced by the savings-makers through limiting their own consumption. They do not admit the fact that the banking system can freely produce the interest-bearing loans, i.e. the super-rich groups of interest living on annuities and yield of interest, the financial enterprises, the funds operating with risk capital make even more money from money, and the consumer has no role in this process any more. They try to justify the interest paying with the time preference of the individuals. The person who wants to consume impatiently and quickly, takes up a loan for this sake, and pays interest for the possibility of immediate consumption.

This superficial explanation does not take into account the fact that the consumers get themselves indebted for the sake of satisfying their very essential needs. In order to have a home, they take up credit on mortgage, and, so that their children could study, they utilize student credit. The same situation is when they can reach their places of work only by using a car, or they can pay for food and clothes only with a credit card.

Who started the financial crisis in 2008?

In 2008, when the real estate mortgage bubble burst out, the conducted proceedings of the authorities revealed that in 70% of the speculation performed with secondary credits on mortgage, the immoral, money-grubber brokers, real estate appraisers and jurists. When the securities classified AAA by the bribed credit raters suddenly lost their value, this, finally, forced the state to substitute the losses occurred from fraudulent credit risk barter transactions with bank-saving packages. All this could be fought out by the lobbyists paid by the Wall Street.

The banking system is not willing to invest, any more, in the processes requiring necessarily a longer payback period of the value-creating productive economy. Actually, the financial sector counts with the shortest payback period possible. Therefore, it favours the circulation of money performed through speculation techniques, the production of money from money. An amount equal to the gross national product of the United States keeps turning in the New York accounting house and on the Chicago commercial stock exchange daily. Here shares and securities, credits on mortgage, bank loans in packages, as well as contracts with the character of bets made for future purchases and sales change owner.

The performance of the transactions hardly requires more time than the participation to the gambling performed in casinos. These financial activities are already controlled by computer programmes, and consist of capital leverage transactions achieved with the existing financial devices. This kind of financial activity sacrifices the long-term economic interests to the short-term and short-sighted financial acquisitiveness. The speculation motivated by greediness, the unscrupulous fabrication of money from money neglects totally the social responsibility lying on the economic activity. The mechanism of compound interest pushed out the requirement of social justice and solidarity from the economic life.

The debt is credit debt. In North America and Europe, 90% of the population is indebted to the upper 10%. The currently taught economics does not deal with this extreme financial split. They analyze the money and the credit only from the point to what extent they affect the prices and the wages, and they do not deal with the evolution of the price of property items. They also neglect the question to what extent the trade is financed from credits. Thus, for instance, did not deal with the issue concerning how the credits on mortgage contributed to the increasing of the prices of land and house real estates, as compared to wages and personal incomes.

Following World War I, the Anglo-Saxon banking model became dominant in the North Atlantic area, which offered credits primarily by demanding real estate or mortgage as cover. So, the main endeavour was not that the borrower could enterprise from that capital and produce value in the real economy, from which then he could reimburse the loan together with interest, but that the credited person should assure a cover, from which, in case of failure of payment, the bank could immediately satisfy its demands. Therefore, as a consequence of this model, the emphasis was laid, instead of financing the industrial and commercial activity, on the crediting against mortgage.

In 2010, in the Anglo-Saxon countries, 70% of bank credits are covered with real estates. The reform concerning the withdrawal of the land annuity, urged on by the classical liberal economists, lost its timeliness by the fact that the overwhelming majority of the population have become the owners of their housing estates. In this way, the owners of real estates of commercial and industrial character could also withdraw themselves from the scope of the property tax levied on real estates. They carefully kept the fact quiet that the elimination of this taxation serves primarily the interests of the owners being at distance.

In the second part of the 20th century and at the beginning of the 21st century, the prices are considerably higher, due to the other costs and fees burdening the interest and money circulation, than the value that would occur through the summation of the inputs necessary for the production of these goods. The prices keep going up as a consequence of these financial burdens, while the production costs and inputs do not change. It is well-known that nowadays the banks produce the money and the credit with the help of computers. The government could do themselves all this, as they even do it when foreign currency arrives in the country and it is exchanged into the money being in circulation in the given country. In Hungary, for instance, the Hungarian National Bank (MNB), which received the monopoly of money issuing from the state, issues forints only when foreign currency arrives in the country. But if the currency leaves the country, the MNB withdraws the same amount of forints from circulation.

Nevertheless, if a state (in Hungary the MNB) would issue money for domestic needs, it is already accused by the international financial community and its system of institutions that it generates inflation and that is detrimental for the whole of the money system and economy. The cause of this different judgment is that the transnational money cartel and the financial institutions owned by it can only outlay, on high interest, the amounts of money produced by them also from air, if they forbid this money issuing and crediting function for the states and keep this prerogative exclusively for themselves.

In principle, the credits laid out for public and private purposes have a similar effect, if both of them are spent, for instance, on the operation of the value-creating productive economy. But the effect differs, if, for instance, the commercial banks owned by them issue the money on property purchase, financial speculation or on financing securities. The states usually issue money with the purpose to finance the domestic production and consumption, and to assure the working assets necessary to pay the wages and to buy the articles of public necessity and services.

Neo-liberalism is anti-liberal

By returning to the principles of the original liberalism, this practice could and should be changed. The real obstacle of this is that the money rule groups of interest reject the principles of economics elaborated by the classics. This rejection is headed by the representatives of the School of Chicago, referring most frequently to the defense of market economy. The followers of this theory of economics know well that the ideology of free market economy demands the strict control of the universities that teach economics. This must be completed with the strict keeping in hand of the mass media, even with the utilization of the state violence, where necessary.

Here we can raise the question whether the planning of the social and economic processes is done by the public power or it is transferred to the financial structures in private ownership. The representatives of the School of Chicago are struggling, with all their power, against any intervention of the public power, and they named the centralized planning, controlled by the state, the state planned economy as their main enemy. If, on the other hand, the planning of the economic life is in the hands of the privately owned financial institutions, it can already be considered a good thing. Here we are facing the phenomenon of the political ambiguousness, of the so-called “doublespeak”.

The extremist adepts of the free market economy consider free thinking to be their main enemy. The works of the classics were exiled from the teaching of economics, and even the history of the economic theory does not belong to the study material any longer. The followers of the neo-liberal School of Chicago censored the return to the teachings of the classical liberalism, and labeled it a heresy. The planned control of economy is a bad thing if it is done by the public power, and a good thing if it is performed by the private institutions owned by the money oligarchy.

Here it is necessary to stress again the fact that the thinkers of the classical liberalism wanted to create the free market economy in the way that they should liberate the industrial capitalism from the feudal limits that restrict it and live it off. Firstly, the land-owner aristocracy, which had conquered countries and settled over them, had to be deprived of the land annuity seized as a war indemnity. And the states got indebted, because, since the transnational money cartel was established, the individual governments usually financed their wars from the credits borrowed from this money cartel. They paid for these loans and their interests, beside others, by ceding the prerogatives belonging to the state sovereignty to the private property of the money cartel. Such a ceded prerogative was the monetary sovereignty of the state, which, among others, includes also the issuing of money, as well as the regulation of interest and exchange rate.

Ethics and economy


Adam Smith, the outstanding representative of the science of economics was the professor of moral philosophy at the University of Glasgow. He published his work titled The Theory of Moral Sentiments in 1959. In it, he defined the mutual sympathy between men, the solidarity as the basis of the social coexistence, and he also considered solidarity the main motive of the value-creating work. He published his main work, The Wealth of Nations in 1776. It is considered to be the first systematic elaboration of the history of economics and the work with the greatest effect of the western classical liberalism.

The physiocrats defined the source of new value in the fertile land. Adam Smith, on the other hand, traced back the appearing new value to the value added created with work and to the division of labour. The book has proved to be the standard work of classical economics. The basic notions of this book were taken over not only by Thomas Malthus or David Ricardo, but even Marx used the notions of Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations emphasizes the importance of free trade. The “invisible hand” which arranges the relations in the free market is the demand and supply.

This invisible hand is what regulates the resources of the nations, as the result of the different economic actions and reactions. The determining forces of demand and supply create that price too, which can be considered natural. Adam Smith opposed the intervention of the state in the economy, and, as the professor of moral philosophy, he had reserves against the politicians, since their decisions are governed by short-term and particular interests. He considered the self-interest as the main motive of economic life. Nevertheless, the man can only follow his self-interest if he supplies a service to other people, i.e. he offers the result of his own work in exchange for the result of other people’s work. And so is that division of labour created, which is one of the factors of social progress.

Smith already used the term of natural economic order, which later was elaborated in detail by Silvio Gesell. Smith considered those conditions to be natural within which the beneficial effects of self-interest and the spontaneous laws of economic development are accomplished the most efficiently. The announcement of the laissez faire, the principle of intervention-free economic freedom of action is linked to his name. At Smith, the laissez faire meant the free movement of the labour force, the free buying and selling of fertile land in unofficial dealings, the termination of the state regulation of industry and trade, and the free foreign trade. The wealth of the society depends on the number of those who deal with productive work and of the productivity of work. The latter is considerably influenced by the degree of development of the division of labour.

It was Adam Smith who already considered exclusively the labour as the source of value. He regarded the wages the counter value of the work spent on the production of goods. He also realized that the person who invests the money into the activity of the value producer, gets a higher value, surpassing the wages, than that who invests his workforce. In the course of value production, the money investor is the capitalist, and he takes away the value added in the form of profit. Adam Smith also established that, within such capitalist relations, the value of the given product is not determined by the quantity of work contained in it, but the quantity of work that van be received for it.

Some scholars perceive an irresolvable conflict between his two major works. In the first one, he denominated the sympathy for others, the solidarity as the basis and the mover of the social activity, while, in The Wealth of Nations, the self-interest.

According to the writer of the present lines, this apparent conflict can be resolved if the actors of the economic and social life detain approximately equal interest enforcing capacities, and, in this way, the self-interest enforcing can change into a moral attitude based upon solidarity. The confronting selfish attitudes of equal force mutually refrain each other, and, as a vectorial component, the altruistic attitude, respecting the interests of others, appears. Due to his fallible character and dual nature, the man, getting in superiority in any way, tends to misuse this superiority. This can only be refrained if the other man can enforce his own self-interest with an approximately similar power.

It is not difficult to realize all this. A bigger problem is how people could be made to be of equal power. The precondition of this is that each and every man should own only what he himself has produced with his own performance and with the optimal development of his capacities. All that a natural person cannot produce all alone is the result of the common work of mankind (including the generations preceding us), and is a common heritage of us, as is the Sun, the Earth and the man-made artificial environment in which the man performs a metabolism with his natural environment called human civilization.

This is why we stated already in the previous part that we could become free human beings detaining an approximately equal interest enforcing capacity only by the basic change and decentralization of the property system and, within it, the money wealth system, the radical decreasing of the number and role of the legal persons, and the restoration of the rights of the natural persons. Only that person is a free man, who detains the results of his work, and has no possibility to take away the result of the work of his other fellow human being, either using armed violence or financial techniques. Only those human beings can be moral, who have interest enforcing power, because only in this way it is possible to enforce the keeping of the universal moral requirements which are due for each and every human being.

Coming back to The Wealth of Nations, Smith, in fact, struggled to make his country, England, competitive, by reducing the measure of the costs spent on business activities and of the costs of living. He wanted to reach this with the termination of the land annuity, as well as with the imperative that the states waging wars of conquest should not pay their debts of war by levying higher and higher taxes on the society and economy. Due to the interest and to the compound interest mechanism, introduced by the forming international money cartel, the fulfillment of the debt service became a bigger and bigger public burden, which hindered the normal operation of the economic life.

The income withdrawal of a parasite character, similar to the land annuity, gradually extended onto the withdrawal, for public purposes, of the surplus income originating from different monopolistic situations, as well as onto the demand of the termination of such incomes without counter value. In Great Britain and France, the state debt increased to such an extent that the governments were compelled to levy taxes in such a measure, which already overloaded the economy. In order to be able to pay their debt service burdens and the interest burdens growing to an increased degree, the states created state monopolies to sell them in the form of government bonds. In England, the East India Company is established in 1600, and then, in 1694, the Bank of England and, in 1711, the South Sea Company. Adam Smith opposed the establishment of these state monopolies. And then, with the development of the socialist system of ideas, the programmes of the social democrat parties started to include the provision that the public purpose and natural monopolies must be kept in the common property of the given nation.

Privatization of the profit, nationalization of the losses

The neo-liberal political movements and politicians referring to the classical liberalism, but, in fact, achieving right the contrary of it, withdrew the monopolies from the national wealth serving the interests of the community, and then, through privatization, gave them into private ownership. This was completed with the fact that the incomes, the yields and the annuities without any return service were gradually exempted from taxation. In the neo-liberal period hallmarked with the names of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, exactly the contrary was achieved of what Adam Smith and the other classical liberal thinkers represented.

All this was even capped with the fact that the financial twins of Bretton Woods, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, by enforcing the demands comprised in the Washington Consensus, burdened the indebted countries – among them, the successor states of the Soviet Union and some of the Eastern European countries – with nearly hopelessly high costs. The cold war was won by the International Financial Community, exerting the supreme power over the West. As a winner, it collected also the war indemnities due to it. In order to seize the wealth of the conquered countries, the actors becoming the strongest of the world power created uniform economic and political rules of the game, through the international institutions established and controlled by them.

The representatives of the leading money rule structures imposed ten demands in the so-called Washington Consensus. For the conquered countries, they prescribed the strict public finance discipline, the strict control of expenses spent on public purposes, the continuous tax reform, which favours the investors, the liberalization of financial affairs, and the limited use of currency rates in the economic policy. The conquered states have to terminate the defense of their economies, and have to withdraw the laws serving the protectionism. The foreign trade has to be liberalized, but the foreign capital investments have to be maximally supported. The passing into private property, i.e. the privatization of the public goods is compulsory, which has to be completed with the decrease of the controlling licenses of the public power, the deregulation. The private property system and its institutions have to be strengthened.

The goal was to operate the economies of the individual national states with credit money, which states, in this way, cede the value produced by them, in the form of debt service, to a parasite, annuity-collecting, supranational class. This is served by the taxation system enforced by the Washington Consensus, and the privatization deeply under value of the public property. As a result of the Washington Consensus, the countries defeated in the cold war paid much more war indemnities and compensations than if they were militarily defeated in a war.

In this way, an annuity-paying society, pushed into debt dependence, was created, which we can also call money feudalism. If the countries forced into debt trap struggle with financial difficulties, such institutions of the money rule world order as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund intervene as the executors of the transnational money cartel. In order to fulfil their debt service obligations, the individual countries are forced to continuously raise their taxes and to sell out the infrastructure making up their national wealth. As a consequence of this, the individual national economies become weaker and weaker, and, besides the national wealth, they were forced to sell or to pledge the non-working national wealth, what is more, to give over some profitable public functions, like the exertion of monetary and fiscal sovereignties. In this way, those bipolar societies come to life, in which the productive wealth and the money wealth get into the exclusive property of restricted groups of interest, while the majority of the society becomes pariahs in a dependent position, living on wages and salaries or aids, who can be regarded to be the serfs of the modern money feudalism.

The great figures of the classical liberalism wanted exactly to prevent the appearance of such a class sponging on annuities and interests, or to exclude the existing one by imposing that the goods and services created within the productive economy should not include the unnecessary costs lacking any counter service. They wanted to annihilate all costs which were not absolutely indispensable for the production of the given value-bearing product. On the other hand, in the current money rule system, those persons get the tax credits who make up an unnecessary and parasite social class, living on allowance and interest. According to the neo-liberal and neo-conservative systems of ideas, the renters and the interest yield bearers fulfil a positive role in the economic life, since they increase the value added by pressing out higher rents. The neo-liberals or the neo-conservatives create the appearance as if the privatization of the public property would make the real economy more effective from the point of value production.

The saving of expenses got such an extreme character, which already annihilates the normal conditions of work, increasing the operational safety conditions, and the already high remunerations of the owners, directors and managers were increased even more with the sums saved this way. The sums saved in the productive economy become bonuses, interests and different extra allowances. This behavior of the money rule layer, first of all of the bankers, was a parody of all what Adam Smith stood up for in his works. The investor financiers made a profit from selling their allowance-raising privilege on credit, and from presenting the interest paid by the buyers as a deductible expense, which, in this way, is built into the business activity. Thus, a general increase of expenses was created, which unnecessarily increased the production and living costs of the whole society. The financial sector makes its clients compete in the respect of which of them can pay more rent, allowance or interest to the creditors.

Thus, the allowance originating from the monopoly position is transformed into financial overhead costs or surplus expenses. In the real estate sector, the buyers agree to pay allowance to the bankers, because they expect that the real estate prices will rise and thus their capital invested in real estate will grow. In America, the current taxation system enhances this kind of getting rich in two ways. On one hand, it treats the interest paid after the loan on mortgage as a cost that can be reduced from the tax of the normal business activity, on the other hand, less tax must be paid after the property part increased in this way, than after the income produced with work performance and the wages. Therefore, the investments into real estates enjoy essentially higher tax credits than the investments into the productive real economy.

From 1980 on, the groups of interest enjoying different allowances gained one victory after another, and gradually reversed on the contrary all that the representatives of the classical liberalism fought for. With the gradual driving into the background of the industrial branches, the post-industrialism appeared, which proved to mean nothing else than the financial sector took over the leadership from the productive sector, and that the money economy got into a ruling position, taking the place of the economic system based upon the primacy of the productive economy. Already Aristotle differentiated the money economy from the economy, and called it not “economy”, but chrematistics. In this system, the emphasis is not on the value-creating productive activity, but on the money turnover, and its essence is making money directly from money, if possible, with the exclusion of the productive economy.

As a consequence of the system of chrematistics i.e. of making money from money, all debt service, interest and financial yield – including the subventions received from the state and the consolidation sums – flows back to the financial sector. This flowing back of money, nevertheless, is limited by the situation in which the financial sector already expropriates the whole of the yield, surplus value of the economy. In this case, no returnable, investable capital remains in the productive economy. Due to the debt service transferred to the creditors, it is not possible to replace the used means of production any more, and to introduce newer, more developed technologies. In this way, the state gets lesser incomes, and thus no resources remain even for the development of the infrastructure being in public property. The individual persons, families, enterprises, and, equally, even the state gets indebted to such an extent that it will not be able to buy enough goods and services so that the flow between production and consumption should be continuous. The demand is decreasing and the productive economy is shrinking – at present, this is the greatest problem appeasing the world economy.

Due to the allowance and interest withdrawal of the financial sector, and to the huge payments, bonuses and other grants allocated to themselves, there is not enough money any more to help, as a medium, the continuous and efficient operation of the productive economy. This is why the real liberal thinkers emphasized, for instance, the necessity of the termination of the land allowance and any other allowances, because they regarded the land a factor that was similar to the air, the water or the sunlight. The property rights, which mean a prerogative concerning a certain production place, do not actually contribute to the production, represent only a financial claim concerning the produced value. An artificially created legal environment, which assures this withdrawal of income. The index numbers of the routinely used GDP do not reflect the actual situation of the economy, because more and more part of it is constituted by the financial, assurance and real estate sector, which is a cost-increasing burden on the value-creating productive economy.

Did the neo-liberalism fail?

In his study titled The importance of the “Washington Consensus” for the post-socialist countries, Péter Mihályi calls the classical liberalism and the neo-liberalism rivaling paradigms. (The paradigm is the ensemble of the general scientific theses accepted in a given epoch, the scientific world view and determining order of values of the given period.) According to Mihályi, the Washington Consensus and the debate about it are also part of a paradigm competition, which lasts for 250 years. According to Mr. Mihályi, teacher of the Pannon University in Hungary, the rivaling is going on between, on one hand, the transcendent world view, nurtured by religious roots, and, on the other hand, the rational world view that can be traced back to David Hume and Adam Smith. The transcendent thinking, the great world religions and, in most cases, even the art are trying to find the elements of equilibrium, harmony and justice in the world. They suppose that these high goals should assert themselves surely.

From this point of view, the capitalism, identified wrongly with the market economy by Mihályi, is inherently bad. Partly because there are many frail, selfish and greedy people, due to whom millions live in poverty, partly because the institutions established by frail, selfish and greedy people work badly. The natural need of people for the assertion of the universal moral was traced back by Mihályi to the biologically determined need for security and demand of stability. Namely, because these are reflected in the religious dogmas and in the artistic abstractions.

Mihályi opposed the natural need for the universal moral with the Anglo-Saxon tradition, which, starting from the utilitarianism, places the competition and the risk undertaking into the centre, because it considers them the moving forces of progress. Mihályi adds to all these that, finally, this approach also starts from the biologically determined needs and possibilities of man. Here he refers to a fact which is already known on the basis of the work of Adam Smith, i.e. how are the scarcity and the division of labour logically connected and how will all these make a profit for the individual and generate wealth for a country. Due to the finite nature of human life and the limited character of the available time, an advantage is generated by the institutionalized division of labour, which serves as the basis of the economic competition.

Mihályi also mentions that those who defend, in a committed way, the Washington Consensus, argue that there are not two types of economics. By this, they also assert that the current model, the market economy model operated by the most developed countries, i.e. the Anglo-Saxon model of the existing capitalism has no alternative. Therefore, the rising countries have to follow the same way as the developed ones, and they even have to apply approximately the same tools. In the following part of his paper, Mihályi makes reference to those authors who realized the close interrelation between the positive and negative effects of market competition. He refers to the Austrian Joseph Schumpeter’s concept of Creative Destruction, as well as to the fact that the Hungarian economist, János Kornai has emphasized for many decades that the specific features of the capitalist and the socialist system cannot be mixed on discretion, namely that there is no third way, no social market economy, and the model of the welfare economy is not viable on the long run either. After this, he quotes Ferenc Jánosi, who, on page 341 of his book published in 1975, already wrote:

“If it were easier to destroy the fortress of the enemy than to reinforce that of our own, the competition would only refrain the development. The social order, which defends the inviolability of private property, forces the entrepreneur to make his own tools perfect, instead of destroying the competitor.”

Mihályi also makes reference to the fact that it is not a new phenomenon to evoke greediness and speculation in connection with the crises and financial bubbles. The answer to this can be that when, on the other hand, the speculation, wriggling out of all regulations and responsibility, reaches incomes amounting to several trillion dollars, and transforms the financial system of the world into a global casino, causing immeasurable damages to the whole of world economy, putting millions of people out in the street, we are already facing a totally different quality, which cannot be simply dismissed by saying that there is no market economy without crises. It must be said clearly that this economic system is not a market economy, but the contrary of it, where the power economy of the private monopoly holding the money system in hand, the transnational money cartel took the place of the free competition market economy operating on the basis of the equal opportunities and the freedom of enterprise.

This is why we cannot accept that standing point of Mihályi, the apologetic representative of the money rule world order, the prejudiced defender of neo-liberalism, which he wanted to express with the words of Márton Tardos, a liberal politician and economist: “There are many arguments supporting that the rules of the game of the capitalist world economy should be changed basically. Who, in this case, has a direct impact on Good Lord, should try to arrange all this through Him, and should not expect the Hungarian Government to run its head against a wall.”.

In this writing, on the basis of the previously presented facts, it is obvious that both Mihályi and Tardos identifies the international money cartel following its unscrupulous selfishness simply with the “Good Lord”. Many volumes could be written about how the Good Lord differs from the transnational money cartel. The writer of the present lines considers God to be the absolute law and truth, the universal moral, which cannot be relativized. Therefore, he rejects the relativizing attitude, which denies the possibility of existence of the absolute truth. The denial of the absolute truth makes it possible that the relative truth “on duty” is always that one, which is declared the current truth by the financial elite that seized the world rule. In this way, the truth – and its human aspect, the justice – can be changed from time to time.

God, as absolute law and truth, means that it is self-consistent, it exists absolutely independently, autonomously and infinitely. Nobody and nothing can be equal to Him and cannot influence Him. All whom and what can be influenced by man or any other factors cannot be, in fact, the omnipotent God of the universe. Only a so interpreted God can detain possibilities, which are infinite in space and time, knowing no limits of any kind. On the other hand, that transnational money cartel, which has depraved the financial system of the world into a gambling casino, is surely impressionable, so is not a “God” even if it considers itself to be so, and if it could grow its own freedom into the freedom of unlimited abuse of others freedom.

The Mammon, the money worshipped as an idol, incarnating the unscrupulous greed for gain, can be deprived of its demigod character. The idol of the money, this false god, can be knocked down, even with a well-directed stroke. If the nations of the word took away the exclusive right of issuing money from the transnational money cartel, and if the global private money monopoly was transformed into a public money system, where the monetary prerogatives would be given back to those who perform value-creating work and to the public power representing them, then it would immediately come to light what a fragile idol god is the transnational money cartel, which seized the world rule. The power of the money cartel deprived of the money monopoly and the prerogative of interest collection would melt before our very eyes, like the ice in the sunshine.

How does the money rule world order work?

The global private money monopoly and the interest mechanism operates, as an economy of power, the system, which is still invariably called free market economy. And the decisions of the financial speculators are presented as if they were the result of the game of market forces. The current economic system works as a power economy, which essentially denies the free market economy. In the previous part, we tried to prove that it is exactly the contrary of what Adam Smith and David Ricardo has defined as free market economy. The representatives of the classical economics consider the market economy free if it does not have to bear the overhead costs generated by the redundant annuities, if it is free from the unnecessary production costs, if it is not settled on by stock exchange speculations meaning a needless load. For the neo-liberals, including Péter Mihályi and his fellows, free market economy means that it gives the parasitic speculators a free hand, without any restrictions, and, in this way, they can extort, unscrupulously, no matter how high prices from the society.

In the new interpretation, that economy is a free market economy, which gets rid, at discretion, of any kind of regulation, public power control and social responsibility. In their eyes, the free market economy is which can lie to the consumers without any consequences, can increase, at discretion, the taking away of the results of other people’s work, and which can indebt, unlimitedly, all persons, enterprises and communities, pushing them into debt dependence. In this way, it can rule freely within the boundaries of the financial feudalism created by itself, where the money cartel can determine the rules of the game at discretion. Those, who speak about free market economy, in fact, deliberately misinterpreted the original meaning of freedom, and, in this misinterpretation, the leading role was played by the group of economists called the Chicago School.

But even Milton Friedman, the founder and Nobel Prize winner representative of this school, wrote in his work Capitalism and Freedom, published in 1962, that “the money supply should neither be determined by the politicians, nor by the independent bank of issue, because in this way small groups take away others’ freedom, but a public regulation should control the issue of money in a scheduled pace, proportionally with the growth”.

Who detains a considerable wealth today, in this degenerated and decadent economy, in fact, does not produce money at all, because nearly everything has changed into costs deductible from taxes. The giant raptors of the legal entity jungle of the transnational money cartel, the corporations, apparently do not produce any income, because what could be so, are all costs. The IRS, the Internal Revenue Service, having a confused legal background, created by the money cartel, allows the corporations to deduce all their business expenditures from their tax as costs, but they do not spend these expenditures on their business and economic activity at all. They use these sums of money withdrawn from taxation to buy up enterprises, in order to liquidate their costly departments, and to sell out the profitable ones. By this, they do exactly the contrary of what the3 value-producing economy would need.

The financial sector settled onto the productive economy is not part of the economy any more. The same can be said about the owners – at least, according to the records – who are separated from the production. This totally detached sector, in fact, only sponges the productive economy which produces goods and services. This is why the economists following the principles of the classical liberalism divided the economy into productive and non-productive work, into wealth and overhead costs, as well as into actual income and costs. This approach endangered the beneficiaries of the annuities collected under different titles, because the public power could withdraw this income through taxation and could spend it on financing the public tasks. The anti-state attitude of the already mentioned Chicago School can be led back to this. Namely, what the class enjoying the annuities and interest yield has obtained for itself, the state power should not take away and give back to those from whom the parasites withdrew it.

The transnational money cartel continuously spends hundreds of million dollars to mislead the public opinion through the mass media and the school system. It enforced that the history of the economics thinking should not be taught in higher education institutions any more, and, instead, a continuous brainwashing should be applied on students. Such a typical device, deluding the thinking, is the reinterpretation of notions. Everybody has an income earned through performance, even if the enterprise managed by himself goes bankrupt. The person who gains an income without any performance, risk undertaking and work, is still the legal owner of what he inherits or acquires in any other way. The public power cannot take away anything from these wealth growths and incomes through taxation, since all these incomes – including, lately, the many billion dollar incomes and bonuses of the controllers of the Wall Street, more exactly of the Goldman Sachs – are considered incomes earned with work, from which the state is not allowed to take away anything.

The King is naked – There is no need for banks in their current form

In the well-known tale, everybody was praising the wonderful new dress of the King, but only a naïve child shouted that the King is naked. The writer of the present lines considers himself a naïve child like this, because he asserts with deep conviction that the banking system, in its current form, is totally unnecessary, and the economic life would operate more efficiently and more justly without it. Let us take, for instance, the crediting practice of the banks. In the United States, the commercial and investment banks use 70% of the available money on giving credits on mortgage. In the textbooks of university teachers forced into the role of a steward, one can read that the banks use their money to finance the productive economy, so that an appropriate amount of mediating agent should be available for the value-creating activity. On the other hand, the truth is that they, primarily, give credits in exchange of real estate property, i.e. the credits supplied from money made of air must be covered, in a proportion of 70%, with real estate wealth.

The banks of investment are ready to give huge loans to those who speculate on buying up enterprises. They also give loans to broker houses, so that they could buy shares, which have already been issued. They are pleased to give credits also to foreign states, but those credits became more and more prevailing, which were supplied with speculation purposes, for the sake of doing business with derivates. Nevertheless, on the contrary, they spend considerable amounts of money (and here also, primarily the United States) on military expenses, waging wars, as well as on political movements and organizations supporting them. As a fig-leaf, a smaller amount is spent on public welfare, social security, health care and, sometimes, on infrastructure development.

From the income of the corporations owned by the money cartel, hardly anything remains for research and development. Even if the banks supply credits for this purpose, they have to be paid back to them until the last cent. The real result of the crediting practice of the banks is the pushing-out and minimization of research and development, and the pumping of the so created capital into the achievement of capital leverage speculation transactions, since large profits can be obtained quickly from them.

The current financial system is such a credit money system, where the commercial banks, through crediting, put previously actually not existing money in circulation. This money is created on the bank account, and the whole of the banking system can issue more money than the amount of issue bank money it detains, in the form of deposits. The banking system is able to issue many times the amount of the money in circulation. At present, the compulsory banking reserve rate is 2% in Hungary, which means that the Hungarian banking system can produce even 50 times the tied up deposit stock, the issue bank cash as money in account. The problem with this practice is that the banking system creates, through the production of money, a debt, the amount of which necessarily increases, due to the interests settled onto them later.

The debt money can only repaid from the money in circulation. Nevertheless, this, increased with compound interests, is a mathematical nonsense, since it is impossible to repay more from the less. The consequence of this is that a part of the credits must always become unrefundable. There will always be such entrepreneurs, economic actors, who, no matter how valorous activity they perform and how they manage their businesses, will have to go bankrupt nevertheless, if there is such an economic actor, who is stronger and faster than them, and withdraws from them the scarcely available money in circulation.

In such cases, the crediting bank takes away the guarantee of the credit supplied from money produced of air, and, by this, the flow of material goods towards the money owners starts. In this crediting process, the coverage value is supplied not by the commercial bank that issues the money, but by another economic actor. For instance, if somebody buys a flat from bank loan, not the bank, but, in this case, the seller supplies the value. The banking system only gives a signal, which, through the monopoly of money supply and production, can only be made by it. In fact, this is nothing else, but money forgery, the privilege of which is only detained by the banking system.

In the current money rule economy, the major part of the investments is achieved from credit, and, since also the state covers the financing of the accomplishment of its public tasks from credit, therefore everybody pays interest in a form or another, even if he has not taken up any credit personally. Some of the economists consider the interest the price of the money, more exactly of the capital service. The capital connects the elapsing of time to the money. Therefore, the interest is the reward of the lender, creditor, investor, for having postponed his consumption by tying up his capital. Some formulate this in the way that the investor receives this reward, because he changes his secure money of today to the risky money of the future. Even such a great mind as Albert Einstein called the compound interest “the greatest mathematical discovery of all times”. A member of the House of Rothschild, being at the top of the money rule world order, when asked to name the seven wonders of the world, answered: “I cannot list them, but I definitely know that the eighth wonder of the world is the compound interest.”

This wonder occurs when the credit is given not for only one year, but for more, so that, in the second year, already not the original capital bears interest, but the capital, increased with the compound interest in the first year, continues to grow. The writer of the present lines questions, from the beginning, whether it is allowed or not to connect the time, in this form, into the money system. Namely, the time is not the property of anyone, so it should be banned that anyone could trade with it. Everybody should be allowed to trade only with his own property, that is only with what he created through his own performance, his own value-creating work. Through the compound interest, the interest mechanism built in the money system forces the economy to do such a growth at a highly increased rate, which is incompatible with the natural processes, and the self-supporting metabolism of the mankind with the natural environment.

Since the money rule system can enforce this forced growth, this will involve the looting of the natural resources and the irreversible destruction of the natural environment. Our planet, the Earth forms a finite system, in which none of the subsystems can develop infinitely. Therefore, not the infinite growth of a subsystem is needed, which is called, euphemistically, sustainable development, but sustainable resources, which would assure the possibility of life for the mankind and for the whole of the living world.

Since the money economy and the value-creating real economy were definitively separated from each other for more than a century, we are now facing two totally different activities. The real economy has to satisfy the needs of the human society with real value-bearers. The money economy, which expropriated, for itself, the production of the signs representing the mediating agent of the real economy, is able to produce, practically unlimitedly, such signs, different types of money: credit money, synthetic money, money created through bets, index money. The financial devices produced by the money industry have taken over the rule also upon the real economy.

Forty times the amount of money working in the real economy circulates in the financial sector. The real economy produces 100% of the material goods, but its share in money turnover is of only 2.5%. More money circulates on stock exchanges everyday than in the whole of the real economy in one year. The money cartel mixes the virtually created synthetic money with the money produced in the real economy and endowed with value covering. In this way, the products, the services and the wages have become disproportionately cheap.

Prior to the 2008 financial collapse, the trade with transactions for future bets, the trade with Credit Default Swaps (CDSs) and with Collaterized Debt Obligations (CDOs) reached the size of 800 trillion dollars on world scale. This unbridled production of virtual money collapsed, and started the financial and then, the economic world crisis triggered by it, lasting up to the present day. This unlimited power of the international money cartel is based on the fact that the credit money can be, nearly without hindrance, converted into power, including even the political power.

The credit money monopoly, operated through the interest mechanism, always needs a scarcity of money. Namely, in abundance of money, the borrowers are not willing to pay interest and compound interest. The scarcity of money can be produced in many ways, the most efficient of which is the war. Thus, we can state that the current money system is responsible, in our days, for the social injustices and for the crises, the pauperization and misery, the indebtedness of the state, local governments and families, the military conflicts, the corruptions, the high taxes, the mass unemployment, the threatening inflation, the ever recurring economic crises, and, not lastly, for the irreversible environment pollution.

In the current money system, the basic functions of the money are in irreconcilable contradiction with each other. The money is a tool of exchange, of turnover and payment, as well as a value measuring, value preserving and value accumulating device. These functions achieve functions that contradict each other. The same device cannot be used for exchange and for value production in the same time. It is easy to realize that the money, as a tool of exchange, must circulate, while, as a value bearer (engaged capital), must be static. In contrast with the other economic factors, a differentiated role is assured for money by the fact that it is non-perishable, therefore it can be retained and accumulated. For this reason, the money owners always get into the most advantageous situation in the whole of the economic life.

There is a need for money substitutes

These contradictions can be dissolved with the application of money substitutes. The universal character of the traditional money must be terminated, and several of its functions must be separated. Special devices can be created for these separated functions, while, for the accomplishment of the non-separated functions, we keep on using the traditional money. The transnational money cartel, which created the current money system and which is the beneficiary of it, would not even hear of changing this money system. This transnational money cartel does everything so that the functions of money should stay unchanged, and so that it should continue to retain, as a global private monopoly, the prerogative of money issuing and of the regulation of exchange rate and interest rate.

Since this money is a tool of power, the money rule economic order operated through it is a power economy. The international money cartel, which holds the world power in hand, made a turn in its long-term strategy, which aims at the annihilation of the results of the social progress that emerged following the Enlightenment. The top achievement of the two thousand year old European culture was the creation of the social justice, the social market economy and the welfare state. This cathedral of the Judeo-Christian- and Greek-Roman-rooted European culture was already mostly demolished or is in ruins. All this is the result of the new strategy of the history-forming forces, the anti-Enlightenment, which strives to reverse the changes occurred following the emerged social progress and modernization, and to establish the new world order that can even be called monetary feudalism.

Instead of monetary feudalism, a harmonic world order!

In our days, when it seems that the most developed states and societies of the world civilization are irresistibly forced to give up the accomplishments thought to be definitive of the Enlightenment and of the social-economic progress occurring after it, we can witness the emergence of a kind of neo-barbarian relations, following the money rule world order. Those changes accelerated, which demolish the system of social market economy and social justice, sweep away even the remains of the welfare state, and bring back the methods of the raw and open exploitation, by putting the outputs of the value-creating work and the natural resources into the service of selfish private interests.

In ancient times, the attackers coming from outside were called barbarians, who attacked the Greek city states or the Roman Empire, and looted those who inhabited there. In the money rule world order, the barbarians come from inside, from the so-called ruling elite. They are those history-forming groups, which want to establish, by all means, the new world order, which demolishes the social structures occurred following the Enlightenment, transforms radically the production systems of individual societies, and, in consequence, changes the relatively secure living conditions into totally insecure ones, by pushing the majority of population into a depending situation.

In his article published on 30th of July 2010, American Professor James Petras calls this system contemporary barbarism, the appearance of which he leads back to the establishment of the imperial state and to the decadent distortions occurred in its organizational and operational order. Firstly, he mentions the ascendancy of a financial-speculative elite which has pillaged trillions of dollars from such members of the society who saved, invested, carried mortgages and consumed. The list of the losers also includes the state, from which enormous resources were siphoned. In this way, they deprived the productive economy of its resources, regrouping them and letting them into the hands of a parasitic ruling elite embedded in the power institutions of the state and in the money economy.

Secondly, the article is about the militaristic political elite overseeing a state of permanent warfare since the middle of the 20th century. As a consequence of this, endless wars, cross border assassinations, state terror and the suspension of traditional constitutional guarantees are continuous not only in America, but also in other Western democracies. All these have led to the concentration of dictatorial powers, arbitrary jailing, torture and the open denial of the personal security and human rights guaranteed in the act of habeas corpus.

Thirdly, Petras mentions the deep economic recession and stagnation. This is characterized by the fact that the public power, the state, is spending huge sums on economic and military empire building at the expense of the domestic economy and living standards. Thus, the real necessities of the society are subordinated to the interests of the imperial state striving at world power.

As a fourth distortion, he mentions the corruption at the top in all aspects of state and business activity – from state procurement to privatization to subsidies for the super-rich. As a consequence, law and order, as well as the state based on them have fallen into disrepute.

As the fifth symptom of the general decay, he mentions the high costs of empire building, combined with the unscrupulous pillage by the financial oligarchy, with the socio-economic burden that has been placed directly on the shoulders of wage and salaried workers, pensioners and the self-employed. The money rule elite privatized the profit for itself, and nationalized the losses produced by itself. The long-term, large-scale downward mobility, as well as the disintegration of the middle-class representing the backbone of the healthy society accelerated. Millions have lost their jobs and mostly the well paying jobs disappeared. The foreclosures of real estates and homes skyrocket. The stable middle and working classes shrink. More and more are forced to extend their hours of labor and years of work, for less and less payment.

The sixth factor includes the conquering imperial wars waged for the world rule, as well as sustained bombings. The secret and clandestine state terror operations generate opposition, and thus such terrorist networks appear, which also target civilians in markets, transport and public spaces. Such relationships resemble the world of Thomas Hobbes, in which the war of “all against all” goes on. As the seventh factor, he points out that the rising ethno-religious extremism linked to militarism is already equally found among Christians, Jews, Moslems and Hindus. The international class solidarity which appeared in the 19th and 20th century is on the way to disappear, and the doctrines of racial supremacy are already penetrating the deep structures of states and societies.

As the eighth factor, he mentions the fact that the European and Asian welfare collectivist movements, which, according to their officially declared goals, strived at social justice, exerted pressure on the Western type capitalism. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union and that of the Socialist world system, as well as the inner transformation of China, this competitive pressure on the West decreased and it made it possible for it to revoke all the concessions conceded under force to the public welfare and to the welfare state in the post World War II period.

As a ninth and tenth factor, Petras added that the demise of communism and the transformation of the essence of social democracy and its integration into the capitalist system have led to a severe weakening of those movements which, according to the original meaning of Leftism, represented the social progress, the social justice and the public welfare. The developing social movements have failed, up to now, to resist effectively the current large scale assault of the capitalism on workers’ and middle class’ living standards.

As the eleventh remark, Professor Petras still added that those who do value-creating work are exploited in an unparalleled way in the post-communist, newly capitalist societies, like China and Vietnam. Hundreds of millions of workers are excluded from elementary public educational and health services. The unprecedented pillage and seizure by domestic oligarchs and foreign multinationals of thousands of lucrative strategic public enterprises in Russia, the ex-Soviet republics, Eastern Europe, the Balkans and Baltic countries was the greatest transfer of public to private wealth in the shortest time in all of history.

In the last half century, the power of a militarist and parasitic financial ruling class has gradually emerged and consolidated. Since, on global size, the brakes and counterweights are missing, although speaking all the time of “the rule of law” and of “state funded on the rule of law”, in fact they established the system of the “fist-law” exerted through financial devices, the system of unscrupulous selfishness. In this system, the “contemporary barbarians” are continually reducing living standards, transferring public wealth to the private wealth of the financial and corporate oligarchy. All this is combined with the pillaging of public and national resources, the savaging of constitutional rights in the pursuit of imperial wars, as well as the disintegration and diminution of the stable working and middle class. According to the unanimous statement of several research institutes, more than at any time in recent history, the top 1% of the population controls an increasing share of national wealth and income in the world. This is supported by the statement published in 2000 of the UNO Tokyo Research Institute, according to which, if we reduced the population of the earth to 10 persons and the total wealth of mankind to 100 dollars, one person would own 99 dollars and 9 persons one dollar.

All this proves that the connection of money capitalism (which is not identical with the market economy) with progress is a false idea. This duly sustains that the capitalist world system, which is degenerated into a global money rule, continuously pulls down the social rights and welfare provisions, reduces wages, job security, pensions and salaries.

The second false assumption is that the market economy, starting from its inner essence, prefers the peaceful situations. It is possible that the market economy insisted on by the classics of the Enlightenment really requires peace, but the power economy of the current money rule world order is not a market economy, only its parody. And such a system like this really demands the militarism, the violence. This is proven by the fact that the United States has been in a constant state of war since the early 1940’s, actively engaged in wars on four continents, to the present day, with new bigger and bloodier wars on the horizon. The cause and consequence of permanent warfare, is the growth of a monstrous military and national security violence system, which absorbs the greater part of the national budget, using more and more resources that could be used for public purposes.

The third myth is that the capitalism is the engine of the scientific and technical revolution. With the getting to power of the money rule global elite, the resources serving the value production were regrouped for military purposes and financial speculations. In our days, innovation is already largely restricted to the “discovery” of more and more exotic financial instruments and speculation methods. They deprive the value-producing economy of the necessary investments, strip productive assets and wipe out productive employment. As the empire grows, the domestic economy diminishes and, with the excessive centralization of the executive power, the operation of the constitutional order is endangered.

The distrust and public revulsion against the groups of interest practicing the political power increased not only in the United States, but also in Europe. The majority of the inhabitants of countries belonging to the Western civilization are more and more confronted with the financial and corporate oligarchy exerting the supreme power. This majority rejects the continuous centralization and concentration of the power of financial structures and corporations. As a natural consequence of this, more and more withdraw their trust from those political leaders who act at the behest of the financial and corporate elite. This general distrust is also manifested in the fact that, for instance, the large majority of the American society rejects the pillage of the state treasury to bail out banks and the irresponsibly hazarding financial speculators.

In order to be able to change the situation, first of all, it is necessary to come to terms with the current adverse circumstances. It must be weighed which persons, movements and organizations would be suitable to take up the fight against the ruling groups of the money rule world order, in order to establish a more just property and distribution system, as well as a harmonic world order, based upon solidarity.

The first precondition of this is the need to recreate the primacy of the productive economy and to reconstruct and reinforce, in this way, the social class performing the productive work. The money rule groups of interest not only demolished the productive industrial branches, primarily the so-called “dirty” industry, but also hindered the development of new industries using and inventing clean and renewing energy sources.

The second task is that the Secondly, the capitalist societies, indebted until the limit of insolvency, should give up the extremely costly wars and military industry, as well the empire-building policy of conquering character, and shift, instead, to the proportional bearing of common charges, where the privileges of the financial structures come to an end. This requires structural reforms on the banking, financial and big retail commercial sectors, which should be completed with the promotion of all forms of local production. All this should be done according to the ideas, proved to be lasting, of German-born philosopher and economist Ernst Friedrich Schumacher, set forth in his work titled Small is beautiful, published in 1973.

Schumacher states that the modern economy is not sustainable. Natural resources, like the fossil fuels, are treated like a definitively usable source of income, although they should be regarded a capital that should be spent on production, since are not renewable, and it is expectable that they run out. He establishes that the efforts of the public power should be focused so that the economy should operate on the basis of the principles of sustainable development. He rejects the assumption according to which the continuous and forced growth would be something good, as it is also false that all that is big is also good, at the same time.

Accordingly, the third task to be done urgently is to reduce considerably the size of the financial and retail sector. This requires the upgrading of skills of the workers and employees with different levels of qualification, who previously worked in the productive sector, and a turn must be done to reinforce the role of the IT sector in the productive economy. Similarly, changes involving basic values and basic conditions are necessary concerning the remuneration of the value-producing work. The compensation should shift from the money wage to the social wage, i.e. the extra-wage allowances, where the public power responsible for common welfare should distribute the money according to social needs.

A greater proportion of the socially produced value must be spent on the high-level free public education, on universal health care system and a sustainable level of pensions. The more just bearing of common burdens and the state distribution serving the public welfare more efficiently should prevail against the debt-financed consumerism, which continuously increases the rate of indebtedness. The individual consumerism is, at the same time, also the system of unscrupulous self-interest enforcing, which grows into selfishness. This is why it must be changed to the system of solidarity, which mutually undertakes the social responsibility.

The money rule can even turn into an open dictatorship

Those money rule dictates, by which the money and corporative oligarchy has, on one hand, enforced the compensation of its speculation losses from public money, and, on the other hand, compels the individual states to refund, by reducing their public expenses, the thousands of billions (in dollars and euros equally) spent on bank-saving packages, can generate such a resistance all over the world, which can lead to social revolts, financial and economic anarchy, to a world-scale chaos. Many representatives of the history-forming background power also think that would be a good opportunity to introduce the new world order. Bu already such representatives of the mainstream official history do so, like British historian Simon Schama, who wrote in the 22 May 2010 issue of Financial Times that “The world teeters on the brink of a new age of rage”.

Schama is in the service of the Bilderberg Group, therefore his statement is even more worth the attention. He is aware of the fact that the controllers of the money rule world order impose the measures of austerity onto the states under their control because they consider these measures steps that are necessary for the introduction of the new world order. They reckon with the fact that this could lead to street demonstrations, revolts and mass social unrest, but, if the global elite cannot keep the processes in hand, they could trigger such a revolution, which could already endanger the successful accomplishment of its long-term world rule strategy.

Schama’s thoughtful article refers to the fact that we are facing such a global outburst of rage, which cannot be solved with a slight wave of the hand. According to the British historian, the austerity measures which can already be felt in the United States are directed unambiguously against the elitist federative administration. According to his formulation, this requires much more from President Obama than, figuratively said, to be an excellent form-master. He, as the fighter of the word, will have to be the same combative as the army of the Plebeians claiming their rights, which thinks that the truth is on its side and, with its irresponsible beating about, it can even turn over the government of the American republic.

In other words, Obama must give up his “wrongly applied politeness”, and should become such an authoritarian, strong-handed leader, being able to give orders, who can successfully resist the increasing tide of the constitutional rage, which is directed against the forthcoming “austerity fascism”. We already could witness several reports, which informed about the revolts in Greece, the fights with the police, from setting the banks on fire to killing people. The paralyzing austerity measures, combined with the many trillion dollars or many thousand million euros bank-saving packages for the United States and the European Union, caused bloody events in several places.

Nevertheless, the mass-media institutions owned by the transnational money cartel did not inform the population exactly about the causes of these austerity measures striking the standard of living, forcing an ascetic attitude. In the European countries and in the United States, we can expect for the following:

  • There will be restrictions surpassing two or three times the public-utility service restrictions known since World War II.
  • The wages of public servants will be frozen or diminished, which can cause strikes, paralyzing whole regions of countries. This will make the economic dénouement and the restoration of the equilibrium even more difficult. In June and July 2010, we could already witness preparations for mass demonstrations both in France and Spain.
  • We must expect for considerable tax increases, due to which the middle-class actually disappears. The enormous common charges forced the many-million masses of employees to avoid taxation. In the United States, the number of employees of the Internal Revenue Service, the IRS, was already increased with 16 thousand persons.
  • The governments are forced to decrease their social and welfare expenditures, which makes the life of those poor strata even more difficult, which have already been struck most by unemployment and inflation. These hopeless people, being in a disadvantageous situation, might undertake the resistance knowing that they have got nothing to lose.
  • The Value Added Tax (VAT) strikes the European citizens with an extra tax extending between 15–25%. This masked tax can increase even more. In Greece, the VAT was increased in June 2010, and, in the United States, President Obama is also planning to increase this tax. The International Monetary Fund has already announced that it is planning to levy a tax on financial transactions.
  • The individual governments are even considering the possibility of laying hands on the pension funds, namely by continuously raising the age limit, so that the overwhelming majority of those entitled to an old-age pension will already be dead before they could enjoy their rights to a pension.
  • In several European countries, laws prescribe how many employees can be fired by private employers in a certain period. There are several such countries (recently Greece), where the number of employees that can be made redundant was increased to double.

After World War II, in Great Britain, the state expenditures spent on public purposes were considerably decreased, with 4%, in 1977. This led to national strikes, street riots, revolts and unburied victims. All this warns that the expenditures spent on important public purposes cannot be decreased without punishment. Those who study, as intimate persons and experts, the long-term world strategy of the global elite, write about post-industrial revolution, which, as we have already made reference to, is characterized by a power exertion of fascist character, operated through austerity measures. In this system, the standard of living dramatically decreases, the growth of real economy stagnates, and the people are already preoccupied primarily by how they could assure the basic conditions of living to their families.

If the introduced new world order will be such a fascist-like system, based upon austerity measures, it must be taken into account that the starving masses will organize themselves into revolting masses. This can radically change even the meaning of the word “revolution”. Karl Marx, who, through the League of the Just, was directly connected to the secret societies of the Illuminati and to the money rule circles backing them, called the revolutions the engines of history, i.e. such desirable phenomena, which enhance the accomplishment of the strategy of history-forming forces. The mass dissatisfaction, which can cause even revolts, can easily flare up into such a rebellion, which can not only stop the successful achievement of the money rule world elite’s world strategy, but can even lead to the fall of the international money cartel that became corrupt, morbid and decadent.

Several objective factors can trigger and start the turn by which the angry dissatisfaction of the masses can transform into an overwhelming mass movement against money capitalism. A so-called double dip financial and economic recession, the possibility of which George Soros is convinced of, can, in a short time, put an end to the current anemic economic recovery. A long-lasting economic recession, deeper than the current one, can render the power exercisers of the money rule world order and its political servants even more discreditable.

Due to the never-ending austerity measures becoming more and more severe, nobody will believe the advertising text of the current power elite, repeated to boredom, according to which these austerity measures and the scarcities connected to them are the preconditions of a higher standard of living that could be reached in the future. The national wealth being taken away, the majority of the Hungarian society is fed up with the fact that most of the population, instead of a wealth and capital revenue necessary for their survival, can only be “spiritually rich” and can detain, at most, a “happy future”. The Hungarians would like to get back the part of the national wealth due to them, and want to detain also a tangible wealth besides the spiritual wealth. And they would give over, with pleasure, the bright glamour of a happy future for a less shining, but real happy present.

What is the obstacle in the way of the dénouement?

We could see: the international money cartel controls the world economy with dictatorial methods. With the help of the owned financial structures, it forced the money system and the real economy within such coordinates, which assures an unlimited revenue withdrawal and power to it. Wealth is power. Who owns, through the private monopoly of the money system, the productive wealth, in fact holds in hand also the political power, as an autocrat.

The national forces, which got in governing position in Hungary, are aware of the fact that the era of the liberalism, degenerated into money rule and backstage democracy, has come to an end, and the mankind is in front of a crossroads. With the end of international money cartel’s many-century world strategy, either a strongly centralized dictatorial world order, some variant of the global union controlled from a single centre is created, or, on the other hand, we manage to prevent the establishment of this global state and to annihilate definitively the rule of the international financial community.

We could see that Zbigniew Brzezinsky considers an important new factor the fact that, in our days, the majority of people is already aware of the strategy of the background forces aiming at the establishment of a new world order. As a result of the becoming conscious of the masses, the activity of people increases, and they claim a part for themselves in shaping the history. Perhaps, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán thought of this, saying the following in his address prior to the agenda of the Parliament on 22 June 2010:

“In the last period, serious changes, similar to those in Hungary, took place in Europe. The changes were enforced, in both places, by the fact that the ideologies of the last century failed. In fact, the whole ideological frame which emerged in the first half of the 20th century and became determining in the European countries, simply got out of breath by the end of the century. The traditional trends could not give answers to the questions of the new times, and, instead of solutions, sank in unproductive arguments.”

The Prime Minister introduced, in this way, the fact that, for Hungary, a point of breaking-out from the existing inertia could be if, in the Hungarian society either, that social-political middle could appear, which would be able to put aside the customary ideological arguments and points of view, and could find the correct direction, leaning on the common sense.

We can interpret the concept of common sense as a practical approach, free from ideological prejudices, to the problems, and a search for pragmatic solutions. As a realpolitik (realistic politics), practiced according to objective criteria, which assures the optimal use of opportunities. In the previous part, we have already set forth that the need for the – if possible, unfailing – knowledge concerning the objective acquisition of the reality is present, at the same time, both in cognition and action, and the ideological thinking, determined by interests is also present, irremovably, which reflects the objective knowledge in a way determined by the interests. For the man, all knowledge gains either positive or negative charge, and thus it is ideological. The knowledge provided with a sign acts also as an ideology.

Appealing to the common sense can mean that we focus directly on the facts of the reality, and, insofar, we act like the artist, whose first starting point is the world around him, the micro- and macrocosm, the inner and outer nature, as they exist. To all this, he adds his specific way of seeing things, and he reflects it his created work of art, in a stylized way, emphasizing some aspects, while fading others. If these changes are successful, they can even stiffen as rules, which, breaking away from the reality, can even have an independent life. As a consequence, such creations can already emerge, which obey only the rules and disregard the reality. This is that stage in politics when the reality is adjusted to the stiffened ideologies. The ideological systems of the 20th century, to which Viktor Orbán may have referred, mean exactly that these ideological systems, broken away from life, do not take the objective facts of the radically transformed reality in consideration any longer, and are obstructing the right decision-making. Therefore, they have to be put aside.

This is why that formation could call itself a free market economy, which, for a long, long time, degenerated into a power economy and economic dictatorship. The freedom was transformed into the freedom of unlimited abusing of others’ freedom. In this respect, we can only welcome the fact that the common sense, as a decision-making method, appeared in the System of National Cooperation. In other words, we should not approach the problems of the reality that need to be solved through the perspective of the ideologies degenerated into delusions. This realpolitik-type approach makes it possible to recognize and solve the problems more quickly, and, through the analysis of the possibilities, necessities and probabilities, to have a right vision of the future.

In our days, the national interests can only be defended within the coordinates drawn by the money rule world order. The scopes of action of the desirable and of the possible differ essentially from each other. Today, the state, which undertakes the defense of the common necessities, interests and values of the larger family, the nation, is unavoidably confronted with the interests of those who live on the territory of the state, but do not belong to the nation. In concordance with Hungarian economist István Varga, we also think that, within the Hungarian state, there are very many such immigrant legal persons, which are not parts of the Hungarian nation at all, and they even behave accordingly. This kind of unnatural economic immigration – which can be called also a violent penetration – can even be regarded as a form of modern colonization. Such a foreign import, which did not work, and, thus, we have to consider it a hindrance in the way of the development of the Hungarian nation.

The problem here is not that the Hungarian society, the Hungarian state and the Hungarian economy have become open, but the fact that, at present, this openness can be misused unlimitedly. The invasion of the legal persons that became the bearers of the financial, economic and social irresponsibility enhances the confrontation of the state and the nation, as well as the pushing into dependence of both of them. In economic terms, the nation is a more restricted term than the state, but, due to the 1920 Peace Treaty of Trianon, as a specifically Hungarian feature, the nation is still larger than the state, because millions of people, who form an organic part of the Hungarian nation, live outside the borders of the Hungarian state. This is the consequence of the fact that, among the peoples living in the Carpathian Basin, the Hungarian nation was the only to which the history-forming forces hiding in the background denied the right to form a state within ethnic borders.

Among the history-forming forces, the international money cartel detains the decisive power. It is worth thinking it over what interest this money cartel had and still has to deny the right to ethnical borders only from the Hungarian nation. There is not even one such a principle of the international law, which could support this, without the existence of such interests, which cannot be spoken out freely even in our days.

If we take into account the presence in Hungary of such legal persons, which detain mostly foreign company centres, we can see that, from financial, economic and ownership point of view, the overwhelming majority of the country is ruled by foreigners. After 1989, the operating part of the national wealth, and the considerable part of the non-operating part of it were melted into the global share property of the international financial community (the money world, the international money and corporation oligarchy, the transnational money cartel, the universal and regional financial structures). We have listed these denominations between brackets because they refer to the same closed and exclusive group of interest, which now owns, informally, the main power in Hungary, and with which the current national government has to struggle day by day.

One of the outspoken representatives of this financial main power, László Lengyel writes, for instance, that: “The decay of Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány started when it became clear for the international and domestic chief actors that it was more risky with him than without him. Viktor Orbán showed that his person meant a risk. This political and economic risk is billed to Hungary: we have already paid for it by the depreciation of the Hungarian forint.”

This spokesman of the international main power, the virtuoso of the prejudiced demagogy, goes on telling that even the “international and domestic actors” were thinking about the opportunity that: “Isn’t it possible to assign the government to another, less risky and conflict-generating personality? To somebody who has learned something from the last years. Who listens to others. Who cannot be accused of non-authenticity and irresponsibility.”

Why László Lengyel, who is always trying to defend the democracy from the democratically elected government, which undertakes the interests of the nation, does not denominate these domestic and international chief characters who were already thinking about the necessity of changing, for instance, the current prime minister. Because, if this master of the word magic revealed this, it would come to light that Hungary is controlled not only by a democratically elected government, but, above it, there is also an invisible government, without any democratic responsibility, the domestic and international chief characters, who could even change the democratically elected government and its leader who proved to be specialist and brave.

The main power in Hungary could get in the hands of the international money cartel and its domestic comprador servants because the political groups acting in the name of the Hungarian nation after 1989 did not defend the economic wealth of the Hungarian nation. This basis of the national self-determination, without which no freedom – neither individual, nor community – exists, is still not defended by anyone and anything in our days. “There is no fence and barrier for the defense of national wealth” – stated the already mentioned Hungarian economist István Varga in his manuscript titled National defense with financial solidarity, completed in August 2010.

In the respect of the defense of national wealth, the Hungarian Constitution being in effect until 2012 failed completely. It did not assure any kind of defense for the public property. The comprador politicians and the technocrat financiers let the foreign legal entities enter the country, and, within the process of privatization, they gave over to them nearly all those properties, which were created, by many Hungarian generations, through, practically, sweating their blood. The majority of this public property was not only wasted away, but also destroyed by them. These comprador politicians and financial technocrats did not want to know that the financial and economic penetration is a form of colonization in our days.

As for the disposition over money, it completely got into the competence of legal persons outside the nation. The so-called Hungarian National Bank, legally, is still 100% in the property of the Hungarian State. Formally, it was not privatized. Nevertheless, this could not stop the fact that the HNB passed totally into the exclusive sphere of disposition of the international money cartel, since it was, de facto, made totally independent from its de jure owner, the Hungarian State, and from its main institutions, the National Assembly and the Government.

In the money rule world order, the highest power is the disposition over the money system. It got over the state, and overcame even the armed power. We have already referred to the fact that the money is the mediating agent of the economic life, but, in itself, is completely valueless. The normal way is when the actor of the economic life gets money through work or through property sale. The international money cartel, nevertheless, gradually transformed the issue bank money into credit money and then into synthetic money. It developed the mass production of money, because it realized that money can be produced in a great amount also through financial transactions accounted as bets, and through accounting tricks, which money would be meant to be a mediating agent within the productive economy. Nevertheless, the amount of the money produced through betting increased so quickly that it proved to be a jinn released from a bottle, over which even the money cartel has lost its rule.

All this appeared as a world economic crisis, a newer Great Depression. The great investment funds produced, through betting, the synthetic money for the benefit and on the debit of each other. Wherever there were losses, they forced the governments, appealing to “the crisis”, to take over the substitution of the losses from public money. By this, they could reach that the virtual money, produced with a virtual cover, through betting, could become a covered, real money. Such a money, which, though was produced from air by the money oligarchy, became the debt of the whole of the society, for which the states pay the debt service burdens, primarily the interests, with the money – covered with work and taxes – withdrawn from the taxpayers. All this could happen because the money world is one of the most marked and most efficient collaboration, solidarity against the outsiders.

The international financial community really became a mafia-like, closed and exclusive group of interest. In essence, collaboration, solidarity means trust. Through this collaboration and solidarity, within ourselves, we behave in a different way, to a certain extent, than with those who do not belong to this closed community. The unnecessary and detrimental European Union chases right this behavior. The international money cartel created this bureaucratic hydrocephalus, settled above the nations and siphoning their resources, in order to eliminate, in this way, the states still endowed with a need for independent sovereignty. No nation or state should be in solidarity with others in order to defend themselves jointly. The more closed the international financial community is, the more open all other actors of the world economy have to be, including the world market and all important geopolitical regions of the earth.

The morality as the main economic factor

The transnational money cartel gradually annihilated the business ethics, as the system that regulates the economy. It relativized the universal morality, and then it closed it out from the financial and economic life. At the same time, it preserved for itself the advantages originating from the solidarity and the organization. In Hungary, as in a drop in the sea, we can witness all the consequences of the moral disintegration. The international money cartel and its domestic representatives are chasing the real solidarity and self-organization with fire and sword, not only in the financial and economic life, but also in other fields of the social life. The already mentioned Hungarian economist István Varga stated that the solidarity, as a form of mutual trust, urges to a natural behavior. Nevertheless, in the lack of it, it is again the turn of the money, the guarantees, the covers, the numberless contracts, the attorneys and, finally, the court procedures. All this holds a huge amount of energy, in order to substitute for the fallen-out trust and the lack of collaboration and solidarity. Right by over-emphasizing the competition, the European Union destroyed the cooperative, collaborative activity, based upon trust. The so-called competition announced by it is hypocritical, Pharisaic and all kinds of manipulations can be found in it.

If a nation consists of the basic communities of the given people, of the families, the nation is, actually, the larger family of the given people. Through the historical heritage and the accumulated culture, the morality keeps the larger family, the nation together. The artificial substitute of this cementing force would be the money. On the other hand, the money is such an abstract device, which can be used, instead of moral coherence, also for the sake of the disintegration, destruction of the given national community. Legal entities cannot be called to account for responsibility for others, for solidarity, for social justice, since they are legal abstractions, which follow a single goal: the profitable operation and the production of as much profit as possible for the owners.

In our days, a legal person, which is unable to produce such a moral behavior and social responsibility can come to Hungary without limits, as an economic actor. Nevertheless, the leaders of the legal entities already determine who can be a bank founder or a bank manager, so they form such a closed community, in which one can get only with their approval. These are the so-called “international and domestic chief actors”, mentioned with so much admiration by László Lengyel, who like to call themselves an international financial community, because they are hold together by the common interest and the identical view.

A public money system is needed

In order to build up the System of National Cooperation, the current money system must be changed, in which the circulation of the money is propelled by the interest mechanism, which withdraws the money from circulation in the form of interest. The private money system operates with an exaggerated secrecy, urges to an income without work, disintegrates the community, only limited closed groups speculate with it, and the overwhelming majority of the society is continuously getting poor. If the national forces really want to introduce the System of National Cooperation, it is immediately necessary to shift from the system of private money monopoly to the decentralized public money system.

The banking system, being the private property of the money cartel, is able, at present, to produce an almost unlimited amount of new money, through crediting. For this money, the bankers demand interest. The banks of the money cartel make a big income not from putting out the money deposited at them as credit, and keep the interest margin, but from lending newly produced money with a very low coverage, and obtaining, in this way, the whole of the interest. The fact that, in our days, the commercial banks are allowed to produce money, is in contradiction with the principles of the System of National Cooperation. They issue a proportion of 90% of the new money put in circulation, while the central banks issue only the remaining 10% in the form of coins and banknotes. If it is in their business interest, the banks can increase their profit without an upper limit. A limit is only when the debtors become insolvent and the financial collapse takes place.

The bank-saving packets and reflation subventions assure only a symptomatic treatment, and the cause therapy would be if we nationalized not the banks, but the production of money, i.e. we restored the state monopoly of money production, namely if this important public matter became again part of the state sovereignty. The forces being in the service of the nation agree in the fact that it is necessary to defend the monopoly of violence of the state, which is, at the same time, also the precondition of the legal security. The state monopoly of money production is even more important, because, in our days, the monetary sovereignty assure the capacity of action of a government. It is possible to enforce the public interest effectively and to serve the public good optimally only by taking back the monetary sovereignty by the state and restoring the public money system.

The profit originating from money issuing, which, at present, is siphoned by commercial banks, should be spent on the financing of state public duties or on the reimbursement of the state debt. The Hungarian State could get new money through crediting its own account kept at the Hungarian National Bank, what is more, interest free. From accounting point of view, the state could obtain money in the form of a loan given for an unlimited period. In the public money system taking the place of the current system of private money monopoly, it will be possible to regulate the amount of money in circulation more efficiently. In a public money system, the commercial banks could only give credits from their actually existing money stocks, which would assure that both the bank deposits and the money in circulation should have a full coverage. This would increase the security and stability of the system. Nevertheless, the money cartel refuses this, because it would decrease its freedom of movement, and would refrain the enlargement of the method of making money from money, which assured the biggest profit for it in the last 25 years.

The struggle against the unambiguously detrimental measures of austerity forced onto the country from outside must be fought even until the government that undertook the defense of national interests will be able to fight out these long-term changes. Even George Soros set forth in June 2010, in Berlin, that the present time is the least suitable for these forced savings. He considers important to fight down the banking crisis, but, according to him, the exaggerated austerity restrictions can plunge the euro, as a money, in danger, as well as, in a given case, even the European Union, as an empire to be born. Soros put this in the way that Germany can push the whole Europe in a durable recession, if it insists on the too quick reducing of the state debt.

According to the writer of the present lines, the Hungarian nation could get the surplus resource with the help of which the Hungarian economy could really set off, from those hundreds of thousand of Hungarian employees, who, at present, do not contribute to the production of the national gross product, due to the money system forced onto them from outside. In order to put them to work, such economic programmes are needed, which enlarge the infrastructure and the productive economy. The state itself could issue the money instruments necessary for the performance of these works. This kind of money issuing does not cause inflation, since the value of the new objects, surplus goods and services produced at the end of the programmes elaborated and financed by the public power will cover the money instruments put into circulation. On the other hand, the tens of thousands of employees performing work, who became taxpayers from benefit-receivers, will rocket the incomes of the state, which can be spent on public goals. It must be acknowledged that the state can issue money not only on bank-saving packets, but even on the financing of infrastructural and productive economic programmes.

To the question asked at the beginning of this book, namely what kind of world order will be born from the financial chaos, we can give the answer that this mostly depends on the role played in it by the public power, the main representative of the public interest, the state. For the sake of the restoration of the public money system, a strong state and a brave government is needed. The public power representing the real necessities, interests and values of the nation must continuously renew the social contract with the groups of the population frequently representing different interests. We are convinced that, with a property system linked to natural persons and their performance, it is possible to create such free citizens, having equal power, who can resist the selfishness of the more powerful. The universal moral requires the enforcement of self-interests to an equal measure. This can lead to a really new, harmonic world order of social justice and of the mankind living in peace, in a creative relationship with itself and with the nature. The 21st century can, in this way, give a harmonic answer to the destructive dissonance of the 20th century, which could be approved also by nature.

The “money barons” are playing poker

The background of the world financial crisis

Why do the “money barons” keep blowing the speculation bubbles?

The financial magnates have not finished yet their hazarding with money bubbles in the global casino. The poker players of money-making are ravaging almost as fanatics, and go on sponging the mankind with these speculation money bubbles. Is it possible that they are the slaves of a compulsive action, in the same way as the scorpion in the well-known moral story? Namely, the scorpion bit the frog, on the back of which it crossed the river, from an irresistible inner impulse. It simply could not do in another way. Being a scorpion, its vital function is to plunge its sting filled with lethal venom into the other. He had to bite, even if it knew well that both of them would get drowned because of it. It seems that also the passionate addicts of the money power cannot put a curb on their insatiable money-hunger. They must make money from everything, with all possible tools, sweeping aside all moral and legal norms. Their life principle is: “I am growing rich, therefore I am.” This is their fate, this is why they are in the world, and they have to do this even if this will be their destiny. But the sad thing is that, as global scorpions, they can drag the whole mankind down with them into peridition.

There is also another way of interpretation. Even a well thought-over world strategy can hide behind the passionate money-grubbing and the deliberate driving the money system to bankruptcy. This can be the long-planned beginning of a new era of the history-forming forces, the money rule global elite, the first stage of the introduction of the new world order promoted by it. We have to analyze thoroughly the causes, techniques and processes that lead to the collapse of the financial world system, because, if the mankind manages to find the right diagnosis, it can enhance even the finding of that effective therapy, which could definitively deliver the world from the plague epidemic of usury civilization, the culture of death, od destruction.

Can we soon expect for a world-scale collapse?

Dr. Marc Faber, the manager of a so-called hedge fund operating in London, at a conference held in Tokyo on 22 February 2010, told the participating managers of 700 pension and property management funds that, according to his analysis, we must count with the collapse of the money system and world economy. (In the Japanese capital, the group called CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets held its conference. The acronym CLSA stands for the independent property management and financial service group Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia, which serves primarily the world’s biggest investment institutions. The centre of the CLSA, founded in 1986, is in Hong Kong, but its regional centres operate also in 19 more important regions.)

This brokering agency, specialized on research and the service to the maximum of its clients, holds yearly conferences for the world’s biggest investors. Its uniquely thorough analyses are in the attention of the whole financial world. So, they were not unimportant persons, whom Dr. Faber advised to withdraw their investments from the share markets, because, according to his opinion, a world-scale collapse was expected. Faber suggested the actors on the market to rearrange the portfolios and to place at least half of the investments into the instruments of the rising markets. Mark Faber criticized severely the loose monetary policy of the Federal Reserve System, because the low interests enhance the appearance of newer speculation bubbles.

Faber considers the world-scale financial collapse possible, that is why he made proposals for the preparation for it. This London financier fears the appearance of a war situation, in which such strategies can be applied like the poisoning of the waters or the paralyzing of the mobile phone system. If the investors want to prepare for this “dirty war”, they should buy the assets, the touchable physical instruments of the real economy, and, within it, primarily the agricultural production units, farms and products. He advised the world’s largest investors to think over their global instrument allocations, and invest at least half of their investment funds into the rising markets.

In addition, Faber also advised the participants to go on preferring, on the gold and silver market, the so-called “long positions”, while, in the case of American state bonds, the “short” transactions. He also mentioned that, in the next years, the budget problems would multiply. As for world politics, Faber expects the increasing of the military opposition between China and the United States, first of all because of the more and more limited oil resources. At present, the United States is in a more favourable position, because it can get energy resources both from the Atlantic and the Pacific, and this is completed by the reserves in Alaska and Mexico.

The 700-member audience was quite eager to follow Faber’s words, because it was him, who, in 1987, in the week before the market crash, signaled the forthcoming collapse, and he even took quick measures, accordingly. In this respect, he is similar to Nouriel Roubini, who deserved the nickname of “Dr. Doom”. Before analyzing in detail why and how the world financial elite, called lately more and more frequently “Money Bubble Barons”, continue their activity, we relate briefly about another conference of the financial world elite, too.

This conference took place in the Claridge Hotel of London, in October 2009. The most influential bankers in the world hold work conferences twice a year, where they exchange views in the most important business issues, and try to elaborate a common strategy. The leaders of the British bankers kept persuading their American colleagues to cut down their extremely high allowances, because the governments of the leading industrial countries spent astronomical sums of money to save of the world’s banking system. The governments charged these sums onto the taxpayers of the given countries. This generated aversion and even revolt among the population. According to the British bank leaders, the financial sector should undertake more responsibility because of the financial crisis, and, as a visible sign of this, it should diminish its astronomical allowances. Extra-salary bonuses or rewards are due only if a financial institution is profitable, if the given banker or bank clerk had an exceptionally good performance and deserved to have a share from the profit.

Nevertheless, the American highest-level bankers strongly opposed the proposals of their British colleagues. First of all, the leaders of JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs had a reluctant attitude. They argued that such a measure would be stinking of socialism, and, as such, would encounter the most severe opposition. The Americans do not manage their business affairs in this way. Those who, on the other hand, defended this standpoint, thought that, if the financial sector collaborates with the governments and agrees that the income of the actors of the financial sector should decrease proportionally, that would serve, in fact, the interests of the whole financial industry, because it would decrease the overall costs in an extremely sensitive political atmosphere. The huge bonuses continuously raise the costs, and they have to be decreased not only because of the public opinion, but also for the sake of the whole financial sector. Until the breakout of the 2008 world financial crisis, the investing banks, generally, paid more than half of their income yearly, primarily to their managers. At the joint pressure of their shareholders and the public opinion, nevertheless, they lowered the payments to 30-40% of the yearly income. And the payments are performed in shares nowadays, and only in a lesser part in cash. This was urged on by directives adopted by the G20, as well as the decisions of the Financial Stability Board.

(The Financial Stability Forum, the FSF, was established by a group consisting of the financial authorities, ministers of finance and central bankers of the leading industrial countries, as well as the leaders of the international financial structures in 1999, for the sake of strengthening the international financial stability. This body, consisting primarily of the G7, later G8 countries, enhanced the cooperation in the international control of financial institutions and transactions. The Financial Stability Forum was controlled by a secretariat, which operated in the centre of the Basel-based Bank of International Settlements. On 15th November 2008, the summit of the G20 decided to accept the accession of the countries with rising economy, among them also China. The 2009 summit of the G20 held in London created the successor organization of the FSF, the Financial Stability Board. The members of the FSB also include those participants of the G20, which previously were not members of the FSF.)

Who are the “money bubble barons”?

In the 19th century, when the United States became one of the leading industrial states in the world, the giant properties were still connected to some legendary persons or families. The steel industry to Andrew Carnegie, America’s first big oil enterprise, the Standard oil to the dynasty-founder John D. Rockefeller, or the Morgan financial and steel industry empire to J. P. Morgan. Who reads their biographies, can get acquainted with their merciless business methods and with the fact that, a greedy acquisitiveness, surpassing even the mediaeval robber barons was hiding behind their colossal growing rich. At the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the current century, the place of the industrial empire builders, who can be called robber barons, was taken by white collar “barons” of a different kind.

The identification of the contemporary money oligarchs, as well as the assessment of their influence and power is more difficult. A considerable part of their wealth consists of non-transparent financial investments, artificially made dim, controlled by legal persons, corporative and financial structures operating in the Wall Street and other financial centres. The mass production of money and the management of the created fabulous properties usually consists of over-complicated, intricate processes, artificially made sophisticated, which are carefully hidden in the faceless financial relations of the legal person jungles. In the latest 25 years, but especially in the last few years, giant properties were created from trading with money instruments having virtual coverage. The mass production of the uncovered speculation money was done with this. The super-rich money oligarchs do not take part directly in the business activity any longer. They frequently live far away from the sites of business life, they carefully avoid the financial control and call to account, and hide away from the public and public opinion.

The mediaeval robber barons and then the big industrial barons of the 19th century still had to undertake the responsibility for their economic activity, for the committed frauds and crimes. The money bubble making financial oligarchs cannot be forced to do this any longer. After the collapse of the international money system, it is still difficult to identify those multi-billionaire groups of interest, which made astrological profits, for instance, from the crash of the second mortgage crediting. The causers of the financial collapse could avoid being called to account, up to the present day, although it was them who bought up the property assets having real value of the real economy, from the many trillion dollar profit of the CDS’s (credit default swaps), i.e. the credit risk barter transactions. The world public opinion would like to know who these money bubble barons are, and concretely which groups of interest are the beneficiaries of the financial world crisis.

Upon civil initiatives, such research groups were already created, which try to reveal who got the astrological income of the speculation trades and on what purposes they were spent. They try to find out what the money bubble barons invested their huge income into, which political trend or which politicians they sponsor. If they do charity acts, which organizations get subventions from them?

But who can be considered a money bubble baron? The Forbes magazine publishes the list of the 400 richest Americans every year. This list means a good starting point. A money bubble baron is a person whose wealth amounts to at least two billion dollars or more. Namely, even among the richest persons, the money bubble barons are included in the group of the super rich. Another criterion of them is that they performed a considerable property growth from the blowing and bursting of the most recent money bubble between 2000 and 2009. If, in this period, somebody, for instance, made a profit of one billion dollars or more, he can be considered a money bubble baron. Another criterion is the fact that these super-rich persons were active primarily in the financial sector and the assurance and real estate branch, since these business branches brought the most income for those who could be their controllers and beneficiaries. The list of the money bubble barons is not the list of the richest persons. The super-rich persons can still be connected to the houses of Rothschild and Rockefeller, as well as to the undivided family wealth of these dynasties. Those who personally detain big properties also belong here, like, for instance, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Carl Slim or the Walton family. Therefore, among the money bubble barons, there are several corporation presidents, general managers and managing directors (like Lloyd Blankfein), and such front persons of the political and financial power (like, for instance, Alan Greenspan), who actively collaborated in the spectacular enriching of the money bubble barons.

The civil organizations undertaking the research identified, up to the present date, a number of sixty-seven money bubble barons, according to the criteria presented above. The research work goes on, because the public opinion wants to know who they are, how they got their huge money wealth, and where they invested their astrological profits. How an on what do they spend their money, who are their spouses, friends and closest business partners? Which enterprises did they work for, which enterprises did they found or which do they own? In the managing boards of which enterprises they detain memberships? Who are those who helped (are helping) them in maintaining their wealth and in finding newer investments? If they do charity acts, to which organizations they supply their subventions? Which schools did they attend? And so on.

How does the money industry blow the trillion-dollar money bubbles?

It is also an important question: why does the money sector under the control of super-rich speculators produce these money bubbles? The simplest answer to this is that this is the easiest way to obtain incomes of astrological size. One of the most recent examples of this is the fact that, in January 2010, Lloyd Blankfein, the president of Goldman Sachs, communicated to the managers and employees of the Goldman Sachs that they can expect for record-size rewards and bonuses at the end of the year. The Goldman Sachs Bank separated, for this purpose, 16.2 billion dollars, which means that each and every employee could expect for 498,246 dollars at average, which, at large, corresponds to those sums, which they received in the years of growth of the money bubble, prior to its bursting-out. There were, nevertheless, some rumours according to which Lloyd Blankfein, nicknamed “dr. Ballsachs”, would probably cease to the political pressure and would radically decrease the measure of the rewards and bonuses to be paid. This would have been understandable, since nearly fifteen million Americans were queuing for unemployment benefit in the first months of 2010, and even President Obama urged the introduction of the so-called “bailout tax” (bank-saving packet tax) after the sums serving the saving of banks.

Nevertheless, Blankfein tried to justify the yearly bonus orgy with the fact that the employees of the Goldman Sachs deserved it with their outstanding performance, which should be understood so that the criticisms do not have to be taken into account, the bank obtained a huge profit and, therefore, it gives its employees a princely reward. The six biggest banks of the United States separated, for the year 2009, 140 billion dollars for the rewarding of their managers and employees. This sum is only 24 billion dollars lesser than that these bankers paid for themselves in the year preceding the financial collapse, in 2007. Blankfein felt that he had to make a symbolic gesture, so he took up only a “humiliating low” sum, only 9 million dollars. This penitential gesture, nevertheless, gains a totally different meaning, if we take into account that each and every dollar was taken away from the taxpayers and given over – with the help of the government – to the bankers that control the money system. Finally, the Americans sunk in apathy acknowledged the newer big money distribution. The rich always get the big moneys, and a few millions here or there, in fact, do not change the essence. They could get out of this paralyzing apathy only if they knew more exactly the methods by which the financial giants of the Wall Street manufacture, already with industrial methods, the confection dollar billions for themselves.

Goldman Sachs – the super speculator of the world

Goldman Sachs, present everywhere, is the most powerful investment bank in the world. Matt Taibbi, in his series of articles published between 9-23 July 2009 on, compares it right to a great vampire squid, which is “wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money”. In this article, Taibbi lustrates this money industry global company specialized on global speculation. Henry Paulson, the Treasury Secretary of President George W. Bush, who was the architect of the bailout for the unscrupulously hazarding banks, was one of the main managers of the Goldman Sachs previously. Henry Paulson is not the relative of that John Paulson, who made 2.7 billons alone in the first nine months of 2007, overcoming all other hedge fund managers.

Henry Paulson handed out billions of dollars to such former colleagues and friends of him like Robert Rubin, President Clinton’s former Treasury Secretary, who formerly spent 26 years at the Goldman Sachs, before becoming chairman of Citigroup. Rubin got three hundred billion dollars from the bailout subvention pressed out from the money of the taxpayers. The chief of Merrill Lynch, John Thain, who also was a former Goldman Sachs banker, also enjoyed a multi-billion-dollar handout from Paulson.

In the last days of the Bush administration, Paulson used billions from the taxpayers’ money to help Bank of America rescue Thain’s company. And Robert Steel, the former Goldmanite head of the company called Wachovia, also scored himself and his fellow executives 225 million dollars. In the Bush team, nevertheless, even other decision-makers began their careers at the Goldman Sachs. Neither the new American administration falls behind from this point of view. Ed Liddy, chief of staff of the current Treasury Secretary, Mark Patterson, was a former Goldman director. Paulson put him in charge of the insurance giant American Insurance Group. The AIG was bailed-out. From the money received as a present, the AIG immediately forked over 13 billion dollars to Goldman Sachs after Liddy came on board.

Goldman Sachs found that back door through which the well-organized and looting money power could surmount the organized democracy, sunk into chaotic relations. The bank proved to be a huge, highly sophisticated engine for converting the useful, deployed wealth of society into the least useful, most wasteful and insoluble substance on Earth — pure profit for super-rich individuals. The money bubble barons achieve this using the same playbook over and over again. The formula is relatively simple: Goldman Sachs positions itself in the middle of a speculative bubble, selling investments they know are crap. Then they hoover up vast sums from the middle and lower floors of society with the aid of a crippled and corrupt state that allows it to rewrite the rules in exchange for the relative pennies this superbank throws at political patronage. Finally, when it all goes bust, leaving millions of ordinary citizens broke and starving, Goldman Sachs begins the entire process over again, riding in to rescue us all by lending us back our own money at interest, selling themselves as men above greed, just a bunch of really smart guys keeping the wheels greased. They have been pulling this same stunt over and over since the 1920s — and in 2010 they were prepared to do it again, creating what may be the biggest and most audacious bubble yet in history. They have already started to blow the new money bubble with the privatization of the carbon dioxide quota trade and the global starting of the speculative transactions.

At the beginning of the present book, we have already mentioned that if we want to understand how we got into the 2008 financial crisis, we have to first understand where all the money originating from it went. In order to understand that, we need to know that Goldman Sachs has already produced five similar speculation bubbles. There were a lot of losers in each of these master speculations, but that who found it out and directed it always got out of it as a winner. In the following, we shall oversee these five large-scale financial speculations, on the basis of Matt Taibbi’s already referred to article.

The Goldman Sachs comes on the scene

How did this financial giant produce its masterwork, the first speculation money bubble? Goldman Sachs was not always a too-big-to-fail Wall Street bank. The small financial institution was actually founded in 1869 by Marcus Goldman, who built it up with his son-in-law Samuel Sachs. They started trading with so-called commercial papers, which means they made money lending out short-term IOUs, personal judgment notes to smalltime vendors in downtown Manhattan. Namely, the Goldman Sachs embarked upon the speculation business from the very beginning, and reached its first climax when the speculative mania flooded the pre-crash Wall Street in the late 1920s, as a result of the artificially maintained abundance of money. As one of the main characters of the money rule world order, this future determining investment financial institution of the Wall Street already got an important role.

This is something like when a big star introduces himself on the Broadway. The great player of the future global money casino also laid down its card, on which the lettering said: Goldman Sachs. At that time, the new star of the art of money-making turned up with gathering the potential investors in a so-called “investment trust.” The investment found means such a bank issuing private shares and investing the money of shareholders into securities, which is suitable for performing speculative transactions. This kind of financial activity is similar to that performed by the modern “mutual funds”. In the United States, security-issuing financial institutions are called mutual funds. The share issued by such financial institutions is the “mutual fund share”, which is the name of the unit certificate or share issued by the investing financial institution and not quoted on the stock exchange.

As mutual funds – this is how Goldman Sachs operated, as an investing financial institution – the trusts collected the cash of large, medium and small investors and invested it in the most various forms of Wall Street securities. Nevertheless, the securities and amounts were usually kept hidden from the public. So an unsuspicious small investor could invest $10 or $100 in a trust and feel like he was a big player. This was the forerunner of what emerged in the 1990s, when new vehicles like day trading and e-trading spread. The common feature in the methods applied in the 1920s and 1990s was that attracted small investors made new suckers, who, in this way could be connected into the big speculation games played by the professional investors. When, as a first effort, the Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation was created, the bank issued a million shares at $100 a piece, bought all those shares with its own money and then sold 90 percent of them to the hungry public at $104.

Nevertheless, the trading corporation then relentlessly bought shares in itself, bidding the price up further and further. Eventually it dumped part of its holdings and sponsored a new investment trust, the Shenandoah Corporation. This trust issued millions more in shares in that fund, which in turn sponsored yet another trust called the Blue Ridge Corporation. In this way, each investment trust served as a front for an endless investment pyramid: Goldman hiding behind Goldman hiding behind Goldman. Of the 7,250,000 initial shares of Blue Ridge, 6,250,000 were actually owned by Shenandoah, which, of course, was in large part owned by Goldman Trading.

The end result was a daisy chain of borrowed money, which made this financial construction exquisitely vulnerable. The basic idea behind all that is the following: You take a dollar and borrow nine against it; then you take that $10 fund and borrow $90; then you take your $100 fund and, so long as the public is still lending, borrow and invest $900. If the last fund in the line starts to lose value, you no longer have the money to pay back your investors. The pyramid collapses, the daisy chain is broken and the masses of investors lose their money.

In a chapter from his book written about the 1929 financial crash (The Great Crash, 1929), the famed economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote that the Blue Ridge and Shenandoah trusts were a major cause of the market’s historic crash; in today’s dollars, the losses the bank suffered totaled $475 billion. It seems as if the speculators followed the principle: “If there must be madness, something may be said for having it on a heroic scale.”

The second act in the Goldman Sachs speculation play

How did Goldman Sachs blow up the second money bubble? Goldman Sachs, specialized for money speculations performed with industrial methods, not only survived the great stock exchange collapse of 1929 and the consequent financial crisis, but it became the chief underwriter to the wealthiest and most powerful corporations of the United States. The Goldman Sachs, as a loan subscriber or share underwriter undertook to take over, at the issue of securities and shares, that part, which the security and share buying public would not take over. In this way, it undertook guarantee for the disposal of the issue of securities. Thanks to Sidney Weinberg, who rose to the rank of head of the firm, Goldman Sachs became the pioneer of the initial public offering, known under the acronym of IPO. The first issue for the large public always makes it possible for the issuing firm to be the first to establish the number and the price per unit of the issued papers. Therefore, the IPO makes it possible for the investors and the other participants involved in the issuing to make a big profit, an extra-profit. At this time, they determine, in fact upon estimation, the market value of the given security, bond or share, which already envisages the evolution of the future market value of the given enterprise. The issue of new securities can be extremely advantageous for the financial institution dominating the market.

The Goldman Sachs, thus, obtained the extremely important role of the “first security issuer”. What is less understandable is the fact that, for this role, it could even make people believe that it was a financial institution, which had a reputation for relatively solid ethics and a patient approach to investment. The compulsory guideline of Goldman Sachs was the endeavour to a long-term profit, expressed as “long-term greedy.” This philosophy of Goldman Sachs, nevertheless, changed during the presidency of Bill Clinton. Then, Goldman’s co-chairman in the early nineties, Robert Rubin, followed Bill Clinton to the White House, where he directed the National Economic Council and eventually became Treasury Secretary. Rubin, who proved to be a banker that embodies the essence of Goldman Sachs, was called “the smartest person” by the media, and it became almost a national cliché that whatever Rubin thought was best for the economy. This phenomenon reached its apex in 1999, when Rubin appeared on the cover of Time with his Treasury deputy, Larry Summers, and FED chief Alan Greenspan under the headline The Committee To Save The World.

And what did Rubin, “the smartest person ever to walk the face of the Earth” think? What this smart genius thought, was that the whole of the American economy, and in particular the financial markets, were over-regulated and needed to be set free from these binding regulations. Clinton followed his advices docilely, and started to withdraw quickly those legal acts, which President Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced exactly to prevent a speculation crash of the stock exchange similar to that one in 1929, and a consequent economic fallback lasting for years.

What happened in fact was that Rubin had a complete and total failure. He failed to regulate his old firm, Goldman Sachs, when it started a mad dash for obscene short-term speculation profits. In the Internet Age, it was relatively easy to find out such financial tricks by which it was possible to deceive masses of people who can be qualified almost financially illiterate. Companies that weren’t much more than good ideas with attached post office boxes were taken public by launching initial public offering stocks via the IPO procedure, In this way, many million stocks were to the public for mega-millions. Taibbi uses a suggestive comparison in connection with this:

“It was as if banks like Goldman were wrapping ribbons around watermelons, tossing them out 50-story windows and opening the phones for bids. In this game you were a winner only if you took your money out before the melon hit the pavement.”

What the average investor didn’t know at the time was that the banks managed to change the rules of the game. Thus, the stock issuing and the following stock deals looked better than they actually were. The banks managed to set up a two-tiered investment system — one for the insiders who knew the real numbers, and another for the lay investor who was invited to chase soaring stock prices the banks themselves knew were irrational and unfounded.

Goldman Sachs later made a huge profit from the changes in the basic regulatory environment of financial transactions and institutions. When, nevertheless, the speculation comprised also the Internet companies, Goldman Sachs totally abandoned its previous business practice laying emphasis on quality control. Previously, the rule was that, in order to be allowed to issue stocks, a company had to be in business for a minimum of five years, and it had to show profitability for three consecutive years. When the rules have changed, the Wall Street did not apply these guidelines any longer. Many American IPO specialists have shown that banks like Goldman Sachs were quite aware of the fact that many of the public offerings they were making would never make a dime. Of course, Goldman Sachs has denied that it changed its underwriting standards during the Internet dumping years.

Goldman took a little-known company with weak financials called Yahoo! public in 1996, once the tech boom had already begun, Goldman quickly became the IPO king of the Internet era. Of the 24 companies it took public in 1997, eight were losing huge amounts of money at the time of the IPO. In 1999, at the height of the boom, Goldman arranged the issuing of first stocks for 47 “.com” (Dotcom) companies, including stillborns like Webvan and eToys. The person who has a closer look at all this, involuntarily compares it to what Goldman Sachs did in the case of Blue Ridge and Shenandoah. In 2000, it underwrote 18 companies in the first four months, 14 of which were money losers at the very beginning. As a leading underwriter of Internet stocks during the boom, Goldman guaranteed much more profits than its competitors. In 1999, the average Goldman IPO leapt 281 percent above its offering price, compared to the Wall Street average of 181 percent. Goldman achieved such extraordinary results by using a practice called “laddering,” which is just a fancy way of saying they manipulated the share price of new offerings. Here’s how it works:

A company called, say, Dotcom comes to Goldman Sachs and asks it to take their company public. Goldman is entitled, in the usual way, to determine the price the stock, how many shares should be released and how should the Dotcom take part in those “road shows” on which they want to persuade the potential investors to buy these stocks. All this in exchange for a substantial fee (typically six to seven percent of the amount raised). And then the best clients are promised the right to buy big chunks of the IPO at the lowest offering price. Thus, Dotcom’s starting share price is $15 — in exchange for a promise that they will buy more shares later on the open market. This demand gives Goldman inside knowledge of the IPO’s future. Nevertheless, Goldman also suggests to certain of its clients to buy a determined amount of more shares at $20 or $25, virtually guaranteeing by this that the price is going to go up from $15 issue price to $25 and beyond. In this way, Goldman could artificially jack up the new company’s price, which, of course, brought a huge benefit for the bank.

If, in this way, an IPO reaches the price of $500 million, the six percent fee amounts to $30 million. Goldman Sachs was repeatedly sued by shareholders for this technique called laddering. Experts who evaluated this process, pointed out that this kind of behavior of Goldman contributed to a great extent to the global crash of money markets. In 2005, Goldman was forced to pay $40 million for its laddering violations. Nevertheless, it was a rather small penalty relative to the enormous profits it made.

Another practice Goldman engaged in during the Internet boom was “spinning,” better known as bribery. “Spinning” is a doubtful procedure in the course of which the investment bank would offer the executives of the newly public company a large amount of shares at extra-low prices, in order to assure them extremely high profit. In exchange for this extra profit, these managers are expected to use the services of the investment bank also in the future.

So, Goldman Sachs first undervalues the initial offering price, ensuring that those “hot” opening-price shares it had handed out to insiders would be more likely to rise quickly, supplying bigger first-day rewards for the chosen few. According to a report by the U. S. House Financial Services Committee in 2002, Goldman Sachs gave special stock offerings to executives in 21 companies that it took public, including Yahoo! co-founder Jerry Yang, the bankrupt Enron’s Ken Lay and others. Eliot Spitzer, who at that time was Attorney General of the United States, said that using these hot IPO shares for bribery was not a harmless corporate influencing tool at all. It was an integral part of a fraudulent scheme to win new investment-banking business.

Such practices conspired to turn the Internet bubble into one of the greatest financial disasters in world history. From one day to another, some $55 trillion of wealth was wiped out on the NASDAQ (National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations) alone. But the real problem wasn’t the money that was lost by shareholders, it was the money gained by investment bankers, who received huge bonuses for fraudulently manipulating the normal course of market processes. These speculation bubbles always cause deflation. The Internet years demonstrated to Wall Street bankers that in the new age, when the money capital could withdraw itself from all regulation, the unscrupulousness of financial structures is not hindered by anything, thus it became extremely easy to create giant money bubbles with speculation. In this case, the reward moneys and bonuses due to bankers grow depending on the extent to which they make – sometimes quite risky – manipulations.

As for Goldman, between 1999 and 2002, the firm paid out $28.5 billion in compensation and benefits — an average of roughly $350,000 a year per employee. This proves that, as the key legacy of the Dotcom era, the controllers of the financial system got used to the fact that the more speculation bubbles they make possible, the bigger their salaries and bonuses are. Goldman’s old directive of “long-term profit” vanished into thin air. Its place was taken by the principle that such financial manipulations should be done, where the astronomical profit could be pocketed as quickly as possible. The state did not offer any protection against this global financial gambling. For laddering and spinning 50 Internet IPOs, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC fined – with a big delay – Goldman Sachs only $110 million. Such sanctions do not have a deterring effect. With such a ridiculous sum, the investing company could not be forced to change, to the slightest extent, its business strategy followed until then.

The Goldman Sachs played the main role also in the real estate speculation

The third act of the money drama written and acted by Goldman Sachs was the virtuosic blowing up of the real estate speculation, especially of the bubble of the second mortgage. The trick of Goldman Sachs, the world star of the speculation drama was a decline in underwriting standards, namely the guarantee requirements became extremely slight. In the case of real estate speculation, the standards were not in IPOs but in mortgages. Prior to the appearance of the speculation bubble, mortgage dealers insisted that home buyers be able to produce a down payment of 10-20 percent, show a steady income and good credit rating. And, of course, should properly prove his identity.

Nevertheless, from the year 2000, all this changed. Anybody could undertake mortgages without any conditions. None of that would have been possible without investment bankers like Goldman Sachs. These investors started to make packages of these uncovered mortgages and sell them in mass to unsuspecting insurance companies and pension funds. In this way, they created a mass market for the in fact uncovered indebtedness. That would never have existed before, since no bank would have wanted to keep such mortgage on its books, of which it knew from the very beginning that it could not expect to be reimbursed regularly, and it was totally uncertain that it would get any money from them.

You could not make real money of these mortgages, unless you could sell them to someone who doesn’t know what they were. Goldman Sachs used two methods at selling. First, they bundled hundreds of different mortgages into instruments called Collateralized Debt Obligations. Then they persuaded the potential investors of the idea that those mortgages were secure, would turn out to be OK, and there was no reason to worry. And the CDOs, as a whole, represent a reliable, secure money. Thus, these junk-rated mortgages were turned into AAA-rated investments. The second method was that it was possible to bet on credit defaults. To hedge its own bets, Goldman got companies like the super insurance company AIG (American International Group) to provide insurance – known as Credit Default Swaps (CDS) – on the CDOs. These swaps were essentially bets similar to racetrack bets. Goldman was betting the investors who bought up these in fact junk mortgages made a bad deal and would lose. And AIG was betting they would not, because these mortgages would continue to represent a good and marketable coverage.

These speculation transactions, derivatives like CDOs, i.e. Collateralized Debt Obligations and CDSs, i.e. Credit Default Swaps had already caused a series of serious financial calamities. As, for instance, Procter & Gamble and Gibson Greetings both lost their whole wealth. Orange County, California, was forced to default in 1994. A report that year by the Government Accountability Office recommended that such financial instruments be tightly regulated. Nevertheless, Goldman Sachs wanted exactly the contrary. And at that point, in 1998, Robert Rubin, the financial smart-ass intervened again, who condemned the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, who circulated a letter to business leaders and the Clinton administration. In that letter, the CFTC leader suggested that banks be required to provide greater disclosure in derivatives trades, and maintain reserves to cushion against possible losses.

Rubin recommended that the Congress strip the CFTC of its regulatory and controlling authority. In 2000, on its last day in session, the Congress passed the now-notorious Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which had been inserted into an 11,000-page spending bill at the last minute, with almost no debate on the floor of the Senate. Banks were now free to trade default swaps with impunity.

The AIG (American International Group) proved to be a major purveyor of default swaps. It approached the New York State Insurance Department in 2000 and asked whether default swaps would be regulated as insurance. At the time, the office was run by Neil Levin, a former Goldman vice president. He decided against regulating the swaps. Now Goldman Sachs was freed to underwrite as many housing-based securities and buy as much credit-default protection as it wanted. Goldman went berserk with lending lust. By the peak of the housing boom in 2006, Goldman was underwriting $76.5 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities – a third of which were sub-prime – much of it to institutional investors like pension funds and insurance companies.

These massive issues of real estate flooded the money economy with vast swamps of crap. Most of these mortgages belonged to second-mortgage borrowers, and the average equity they had in their homes was 0.71 percent. Moreover, 58 percent of the loans included little or no documentation – no names of the borrowers, no addresses of the homes, just zip codes. Yet both of the major ratings agencies, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, rated 93 percent of the issue as investment grade. For instance, Moody’s projected that less than 10 percent of the loans would default. In reality, 18 percent of the mortgages were in default within 18 months.

Nevertheless, Goldman Sachs kept financing these hideous, completely irresponsible mortgage transactions with full capacity. Moreover, it was taking short positions in the same market, in essence betting against the same crap it was selling. Even worse, Goldman was not ashamed about this dishonest business behavior, that even bragged about it openly in public. David Viniar, the bank’s chief financial officer, boasted in 2007 that the bank took significant markdowns on its long inventory positions, and, on the contrary, it rocketed the short-term investments, because net short position was profitable. In other words, not the selling of mortgages was the big business, but the real money was in betting against those same mortgages.

Selling such securities to customers that you’re actually betting against at the same time is qualified securities fraud. This is why Goldman Sachs was hit with a wave of lawsuits after the collapse of the housing bubble. The bank was accused of withholding pertinent information about the quality of the mortgages it issued. But once again, Goldman got off virtually scot-free, staving off prosecution by agreeing to pay $60 million compensation.

The crash of the mortgage market led more or less directly to the collapse of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and AIG. The toxic portfolio of credit swaps of Bear Stearns was in significant part composed of the insurance that banks like Goldman bought against their own housing portfolios. In fact, at least $13 billion of the taxpayer money given to AIG in the bailout ultimately went to Goldman, meaning that the AIG, as an insurance company, paid for the damage of Goldman Sachs, caused by the devaluation of the crap securities. But these crap securities were produced and marketed by the Goldman Sachs itself. In this way, the bank made out a profit on the housing bubble twice: It ripped off the investors who bought their valueless CDOs by betting against its own crappy product at the AIG. When the AIG got the taxpayers’ money, Goldman pocketed also the insurance fee.

In 2006, Goldman Sachs paid $16.5 billion bonuses and rewards, an average of $622,000 per employee, saying that “We work very hard here.” But the best was yet to come. While the collapse of the housing bubble sent most of the financial world fleeing for the exits, or to jail, Goldman boldly continued its double game: almost single-handedly created yet another bubble, which can overcome in size the previous ones, of which the world still barely knows Goldman had anything to do with.

The petrol bubble – the fourth scene of the global money cabaret

At the beginning of 2008, the financial world system was in a paralyzed state. The main characters of the money market caused one scandal after another in the last 25 years, and there was hardly any such financial device, which could be qualified secure. The terms junk bond, IPO, sub-prime mortgage were now firmly associated in the public’s mind with scams. In the last one and a half decade, the terms CDSs (Credit Default Swaps) and CDOs (Collateralized Debt Obligations) were about to join them, all of which made it possible to serve as coverage for such virtual financial transactions performed with multiple capital leverage, which were primarily the hunting fields of hedge funds. In the first half of 2008, the credit markets were in a deep crisis, when the “financial laws” thought to be incontestable truths proved to be delusions. They included also the opinion that housing prices never go down. But they collapsed, because, within a system, no subsystem can grow to the infinite.

The great financial gamblers looked for a new speculation bubble in the international money system transformed into a global casino. The public was deeply disappointed of the speculative money instruments, deliberately called “products” by money industrialists. They turned instead towards real value-bearing goods and services, that is real products. It means stuff you could touch: corn, coffee, cocoa, wheat and, above all, energy commodities, especially oil and gas. Those who speculate on the evolution of the price of oil skyrocketed the price of the so-called “oil futures”. The price of a single barrel went from around $60 in the middle of 2007 to $147 in the summer of 2008. The speculators tried to talk in the public opinion that there were serious problems with the world oil supply. With this speculation, they derailed and sidetracked even the topics of the current presidential election campaign. Republican candidate for president John McCain insisted that the moratorium on offshore drilling should be ended. Democrat candidate for president Barack Obama argued that federal investment in hybrid cars was the way out. But it was all a misleading manoeuvre. It is true that the global reserves of oil would not increase considerably, and exploitation has reached its climax (peak oil), but the short-term flow has actually been increasing, and the crude oiul offer was plentiful on world market.

The world oil supply rose from 85.24 million barrels a day to 85.72 million. Over the same period, world oil demand dropped from 86.82 million barrels a day to 86.07 million. So, on short-term, there was no shortage, since the demand for it was falling. If prices were regulated only by economic laws, the demand and offer, the price of crude oil should have gone down in fact.

Knowing the speculation art of Goldman Sachs, we dare to raise the hypothesis that these virtuosos found the way again how they could transform the world market of oil into a money-swallowing and money-producing machinery. Goldman Sachs, the star of the speculation play, persuaded pension funds and other large institutional investors, which traded with covered money, to invest in oil futures.

(The terms futures, futures market, futures transaction, futures contract all refer to goods, currency of negotiable instruments bought and sold on a fixed future date. According to the futures contracts, the parties buy or sell a determined amount of the determined goods, currencies or financial instruments at a specified future date and price. The price is established either by the buyer and seller, or the current rate of stock exchange, using the system of public auction. The futures transaction compels the buyer to buy the given goods, and the seller to sell it, if only the contract itself was not transferred to a third party, before the futures transaction was performed. Even the sale of such a contract can take place, if the trader wants to make profit or wants to diminish losses.)

With this, Goldman Sachs transformed oil from a physical commodity, rigidly subject to supply and demand, into something to bet on, like a stock. Between 2003 and 2008, the amount of speculative money in commodities grew from $13 billion to $317 billion, an increase of 2,300 percent. By 2008, a barrel of oil was traded 27 times, on average, before it was actually delivered and consumed.

During the New Deal, there had been a Depression-era law in place designed specifically to prevent this sort of speculation. The was to help farmers. In 1936, however, the Congress empowered the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the CFTC to place limits on speculative trades in such commodities, goods of prime importance, base and raw materials. As a result of the CFTC’s oversight, normal business relations reigned in the commodities markets for more than 50 years.

Nevertheless, all that changed in 1991. A Goldman-owned commodities-trading subsidiary called J. Aron & Company wrote to the CFTC and made an unusual argument. Farmers with big stores of corn, Goldman argued, weren’t the only ones who needed to hedge their risk against future price drops, but Wall Street dealers who made big bets on oil prices also needed to hedge their risk, because they stood to lose a lot too, depending on the evolution of prices in the future. This is the so-called “risk management” to which Blankfein made repeatedly reference on the hearing in front of the Angelides Committee.

It is really good if a farmer who is actually exposed to the evolution of prices in the future can conclude such a contract by which he can sell his corn at a preliminarily negotiated price. This will help him to store his products in great stocks more intrepidly. When nobody buys his corn, the farmer can sell it to a mediator, who stores the corn himself and sells it later, when the demand returned and the prices went up. This assured the possibility that there were always appropriate buyers who buy from the producer even when the market, temporarily, does not need corn.

The J. Aron & Company wanted to extend this solution also to its speculative transactions concerning the future price of oil. This was a complete nonsense, since the 1936 law was specifically designed to maintain distinctions between people who were buying and selling real tangible stuff and people who were trading in paper alone. But the CFTC accepted the argument of Goldman’s subsidiary. It issued the bank a free pass, called the “Bona Fide Hedging” exemption, allowing Goldman’s subsidiary to call itself a physical hedger and escape virtually all limits placed on speculators.

In the years that followed, the gradually corrupted CFTC would secretly issue 14 more similar exemptions to other companies. By this, it made the already free speculation possible in the respect of commodities, first of all the oil. So Goldman and other banks were free to drive more investors into the commodities markets, and to take part in the new speculation money bubble. This more or less directly led to the oil bubble in 2008, when the number of speculators in the market finally overwhelmed the real physical suppliers and consumers. By 2008, at least three quarters of the activity on the commodity exchanges was already speculative. This letter, letting speculation go free, was handed out to Goldman Sachs so secretly, that even the chairman of the CFTC, Brooksley Born did not know about it.

Armed with this secret government exemption, Goldman had become the chief designer, creator and manipulator of a giant commodities betting market. Its Goldman Sachs Commodities Index – which tracks the prices of 24 major commodities but is overwhelmingly weighted toward oil – became the place where pension funds and insurance companies and other institutional investors could make massive long-term bets on commodity prices. The so-called index speculators are mostly “long only” bettors, who seldom if ever take short positions, meaning they only bet on prices to rise. This kind of behavior of those who expect for a long-term price increase is good for the stock market, but it is terrible for commodities, because it continually forces prices upward.

Nevertheless, if index speculators take short positions instead of long-term price increase, in fact they push prices both up and down. But the Goldman Sachs and its team made up of banks only pushed prices in one direction: up, by betting on the rise of price index. Goldman itself was cheerleading with all its might for an increase in oil prices. In the beginning of 2008, Arjun Murti, a Goldman analyst predicted a “super spike” in oil prices, forecasting a rise to $200 a barrel. At the time Goldman was heavily investing in oil through its commodities trading subsidiary, J. Aron & Company. But it wasn’t the consumption of real oil that was driving up prices. The real cause of the price increase was the bets on oil price, as well as the contained derivative transactions, i.e. the huge speculation with oil papers.

By the summer of 2008, in fact, commodities speculators had bought and stockpiled enough oil futures to fill 1.1 billion barrels of crude oil. This meant that speculators owned more future oil on paper than there was real, physical oil stored in all of the country’s commercial storage tanks and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve combined. It was a repeat of both the Internet craze and the housing bubble. For the sake of sky-high profits, the Wall Street sold average people considered “suckers” shares of a fictional fantasy future of endlessly rising prices.

This bubble also burst in the summer of 2008, causing a massive loss of wealth to average investors. Crude oil prices plunged from $147 to $33. Once again the big losers were ordinary people, the pensioners who invested funds in these futures. For instance, CalPERS, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, had $1.1 billion in commodities when the crash came. But the damage didn’t just come from oil, but also from soaring food prices at the same time. This led to catastrophes in many countries across the planet, forcing an estimated 100 million people into hunger and sparking food riots throughout the Third World.

The subvention bubble – falsification of the financial rescue operation of the state

This fifth money bubble totally misinterpreted the original meaning of the relief action performed by the state from public funds, since the super speculators used even this aiding action for an unprecedented profiteering. After the oil bubble collapsed, they had to look after new hunting fields. The big gamblers of the global financial now casino set its eye on the public money left unguarded of taxpayers. This time, the Goldman Sachs speculators could make a presentation about how a money bubble should be blown in a virtuoso way.

In September 2009, American Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson made a momentous series of decisions. A few months before, Paulson helped bail out quasi-private lenders Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation), by placing these two giant companies, subsidized also by the state, operating in the real estate and mortgage sector, under state supervision, so-called conservatorship. The state control of these two mortgage giants was taken over by the FHFA, the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

(In the legal system of the United States, there is the legal institution of conservatorship – a kind of supporting supervision, a placement under the economic tutorship of the state. In this case, the supervision of the given legal entity is assured by the conservator. Such a supervision can be ordered, in the interest of the owners, by the court or, in the case of organizations, by the legislative and administrative power. In the case of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, such a placing under government control of two private corporations took place, which is not identical with nationalization. Namely because the latter is definitive, while the placement under government supervision is only of a transitory character.)

As Treasure Secretary, Paulson let Lehman Brothers – one of Goldman’s last remaining real competitors – collapse without intervention. The New York-based Lehman Brothers Holding was a global money market company itself. It dealt with selling and buying securities and bonds, banking investments and market research. It was ranked among the prime traders with state-issued treasury bonds and securities in the Unites States. It had centres in several points of the world, so, among others, also in London and Tokyo. When the global financial crisis broke out, Lehman Brothers, America’s fourth biggest brokerage house, lost $60 million on its investments in a short time, and the holding collapsed.

After scarifying the main rival, Paulson green-lighted, as Treasure Secretary, a massive, $85 billion bailout of AIG, which promptly turned around and repaid $13 billion it owed to Goldman, as assurance fee for its loss-making transactions. Immediately after the AIG bailout, Paulson announced his federal bailout for the financial industry, a $700 billion plan called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the TARP. Paulson put a 35-year-old Goldman banker named Neel Kashkari in charge of administering the TARP programme. In order to qualify for bailout moneys, Goldman announced that it would convert from an investment bank to a bank holding company. This move allowed it access not only to $10 billion in TARP funds, but to a whole galaxy of less conspicuous, publicly backed funding – most notably, lending from the so-called “discount window” of the Federal Reserve.

By the end of March 2009, the Federal Reserve System, fulfilling the role of the central bank of the United States, but being in 100% private property, will have lent or guaranteed at least $8.7 trillion under a series of new bailout programs. The FED could do this, because a deliberately obscure, ambiguous law allowed it to block most congressional audits and to avoid the supervision of its banking operations and records. Both the amounts of the supplied loans and bank guarantees and the recipients of the moneys remain almost entirely secret. Converting to a bank-holding company has other benefits as well: Goldman’s primary supervisor is now the New York FED, whose chairman at the time of its announcement was Stephen Friedman, a former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs.

Friedman was technically in violation of Federal Reserve policy by remaining on the board of Goldman even as he was supposedly regulating the bank. It is characteristic of the unscrupulousness of the money power that Friedman, in order to rectify the problem, applied for a conflict of interest waiver from the government. And, indeed, he got the waiver. This also made it possible for Friedman not only to keep his Goldman stock, but, thanks to the waiver, he was also allowed to buy 52,000 additional shares in his old bank. When Friedman stepped down, the man in charge of supervising Goldman was New York FED president William Dudley – yet another former Goldmanite. Those who swear by the omnipotence of free market, when it comes to Goldman Sachs, will find that there is not a free market at all. The government, as the representative of public power, in fact assured a supreme privilege to Goldman Sachs, and by this it helped it have inacceptable advantages against other actors in the market.

Once the bailouts were in place, Goldman Sachs looked for a new speculation hunting field. One of its first moves in the post-bailout era was to report that its pretax losses in December 2008 amounted to $1.3 billion. At nearly the same time, the bank announced a highly suspicious $1.8 billion profit for the first quarter of 2009. This apparently included a large chunk of money funneled to it by taxpayers via the AIG bailout. The bank paid out to its employees an astonishing $4.7 billion in bonuses and compensation in the first three months of 2009, an 18 percent increase over the first quarter of 2008. It also raised $5 billion by issuing new shares almost immediately after releasing its first quarter results. Taken together, Goldman Sachs paid out record salaries for its executives in the middle of the global economic crisis it helped cause, just months after receiving billions in a taxpayer bailout. The government of President Obama initiated that the banks should repay at least partly the billions of the TARP bailout money originating from taxpayers’ money. The Washington government aimed at not causing further problems to the banks by insisting on the immediate repayment of the received bailout.

So, Goldman Sachs played a key role in four historic bubble catastrophes: It helped $5 trillion in wealth disappear from the NASDAQ crash. It looted the pension funds during the speculation with second mortgages. Drove the price of gas up to $4 a gallon and pushed 100 million people around the world into hunger. Seized tens of billions of taxpayer dollars through a series of bailouts. Therefore, it is rightful to ask the question: after pocketing a huge profit, what did Goldman Sachs give back to the people of the United States? We already know the figure: fourteen million dollars.

This modest little sum is what Goldman Sachs paid in taxes in 2008. We have already seen that the bank paid out $10 billion in compensation and benefits for its employees that same year and made a profit of more than $2 billion. Yet, Lloyd Blankfein, who made $42.9 million in the same year, paid the Treasury less than a third of his earnings received from Goldman. This was possible because Goldman Sachs moved out its money into the “tax paradises” invented, for tax evasion, by the transnational money cartel. In other words, the bank was registered in foreign countries with low tax rates. This off-shore technique made it possible that any corporation, which is experienced in accounting juggling, could always find a way to zero out its taxes. A U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office) report, in fact, found that between 1998 and 2005, roughly two-thirds of all corporations operating in the U.S. paid no taxes at all. Lloyd Doggett, a Democrat representative from Texas remarked in connection with this: “With the right hand out begging for bailout money,” he said, “the left is hiding it offshore.”

Global warming – the newest speculation bubble

The global warming and the carbon dioxide emission quota trading connected to it has grown, almost unobserved, a bigger and bigger speculation. And guess, who is blowing again the money bubble of the quota trade virtuously? This bubble baron is also Goldman Sachs, the most successful speculator of all times. When Barack Obama looked for sponsors to his presidential candidate campaign, the employees of Goldman Sachs gave some $981,000 to him. Obama was not ungrateful, since he seamlessly navigated the ship of the bailout package through the political minefield of the financial crisis era. Goldman arranged even that it placed – with a relatively slight investment – several of its alumni in key government jobs. Mark Patterson became the new Treasury Secretary and Gary Gensler the chief of the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission). Both of them were previously top-ranked officials of Goldman Sachs.

The essential difference between them and Hank Paulson and Neel Kashkari, the previous two Goldmanites in the same functions, was that they did not blow the bubbles of credit derivatives or oil futures or mortgage-backed CDOs any longer, but that of carbon credits – a bubble called “cap-and-trade”.

The new carbon credit market – the trading with carbon dioxide emission quota credits – repeats in the virtual sphere all that the speculative trade with commodities represented. With the latter, Goldman Sachs managed to produce a giant money bubble and, by it, to make a huge extra profit. The trading with carbon dioxide emission quotas allows an even higher extra profit, since the prices are determined by the governments of the given states. Here is how the creation of the speculation bubble works: If the bill concerning carbon dioxide emission quotas passes, there will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon dioxide emissions. In other words: it is determined how much greenhouse gas, i.e. material originating from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil or natural gas) a plant can emit into the atmosphere per year. On the northern hemisphere, in a height of already 4-5 kilometers, an almost continuous cloud of high concentration carbon dioxide was formed.

If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy “allocations” or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions. In financial terms, these quotas can be considered credits. White House experts estimate that about $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years. Other experts, nevertheless, speculate that the real number might be twice or even three times that amount. The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the “cap” on carbon will be continually lowered by the governments, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time. The volume of this new market is estimated to one trillion dollars annually.

Goldman Sachs wants to enforce this bill at first. Then it must ensure to obtain the profit-making slice of the market. And it must make sure the slice is a big slice. In fact, Goldman started pushing hard for cap-and-trade long ago. Already in 2008, the firm spent $3.5 million to lobby climate issues. In the hope of a big profit, they were not averse even to the fact that the state regulation could strongly intervene in the activity of certain economic actors.

Goldman Sachs owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, where the carbon credits will be traded. Moreover, Goldman owns a minority stake in Blue Source LLC, a Utah-based firm that sells carbon credits of the type that will be in great demand. Al Gore, Vice President in the Clinton administration, also started up a company which invests into the production of energy that substitutes coal. It is interesting here that all three of Gore’s partners were former managers of Goldman Sachs. It seems that this cap-and-trade business is in fact just a carbon tax, the profit of which can be pocketed by private banks and investment financial institutions. A much easier solution would be if the state simply imposed a fixed government levy on carbon pollution and forced unclean energy producers to pay to the society for the mess they make.

On the contrary, the cap-and-trade allows a small group of unscrupulous and greedy businessmen to get a newer hunting field, where make profit by speculation, as a private tax collector, at the detriment of the public interest. This time it is again Wall Street that can set the tax and also Wall Street can collect the tax. The lack of business ethics can be perceived as in the case of all the other bubbles that was created by the virtuosos of Goldman Sachs, in cooperation with other speculators, helped create, from 1929 to date. This kind of “business” activity driven by greediness and unscrupulousness assured a massive profit and astronomical bonuses for the speculators, while, at the same time, caused extremely big losses to the value-producing ordinary people, the nameless taxpayers – who paid the bill.

All this reveals the huge difference between, on one hand, earning money with value-creating work and, on the other hand, using the manipulation of the prices of industrial products and raw materials for making speculation bets, and getting, in this way, fabulous profit. Goldman Sachs is not alone, but it is the outstanding star of this global financial casino. Its enormous profit does not signal America’s gross domestic product, but the passing of the economic crisis. This parasite activity of banks is, in fact, the mirror image of the loss suffered by the whole of the society. Almost everybody agrees with the fact that there is a need for change. This is why it is worth looking over the course of the financial and economic crash so that we could unambiguously know what changes are necessary in the whole of the financial system, in the regulation of the activity of banks, first of all of financial institutions dealing with financial investments. The social justice and the business ethics should be again controlling principles in the world of money and economy.

Which were the applied speculation strategies?

In his article (, titled Wall Street’s Bailout Hustle, published on 4 March 2010, Matt Taibbi analyzes those seven speculation strategies, through which the controllers of the financial system, transformed into an organized private power, made a huge profit, at the detriment of the whole society. In the following, we shall briefly overview these seven money-making methods, in fact taking-in or con tricks, on the basis of Matt Taibbi’s article.

Con trick nr. 1: The “Swoop and Squat”

In 2010, most people who have followed the financial crisis can already know that the bailout of the giant assurance company AIG was actually a bailout from public money given to the financial institutions assured by the AIG. What is less understood is that the bailout of AIG counterparties like Goldman Sachs and Société Générale, a French bank, actually began before the collapse of AIG. These counterparties actually accelerated the wreck of AIG.

This is something very like the old insurance scam known as “Swoop and Squat,” in which a target car is trapped between two perpetrator vehicles and wrecked. This happens as follows: A third car, suddenly, cuts in before the car going in front of the car of the unsuspecting driver. The first two cars collide and the unsuspecting driver crashes into the second car, which stopped suddenly because of the accident. The driver of the second car even “gets hurt” in this latter collision, and the bill is submitted to the insurance company. The suddenly-turned-up vehicle (the “swoop”) and its driver usually disappear. The second car, which stayed there (the “squat”), sues the driver who ran into it and his insurance company. Of course, the drivers of both the swoop and the squat cars conspired beforehand and they share the profit.

In the case of the mass insolvency of banks, the role of the insurance company is passed over to the state i.e. the government. All this can be proved by the fact that the financial crisis of 2008 was very much caused by a series of legal incentives that often made failed investments worth more than thriving ones. Taibbi, ironically, compares this situation to that of “a town where everyone has juicy insurance policies on their neighbors’ cars and houses. In such a town, the driving will be suspiciously bad, and there will be a lot of fires.”

At the height of the housing boom, Goldman Sachs was selling billions in bundled mortgage-backed securities. The buyers of these no-money-down, no-identification-needed variety of home loans were mainly various institutions like pension funds and insurance companies, who frequently thought they were buying investment-grade financial instruments. A glaring example of the hypocrisy of Goldman Sachs is the fact that, while it was the main seller of these toxic papers, it was also speculating, with huge amount transactions, against those same sorts of securities. In the respect of such scrap security trades, the main insurance company of Goldman Sachs was the AIG. We remind the reader that the insurance was made on a quasi-product: on CDSs, i.e. credit default swaps.

Robert Rubin, former chairman of Goldman Sachs and Treasury Secretary under Bill Clinton, played a key role in the so-called deregulation process. As a consequence, AIG wasn’t even required to actually have the capital necessary to pay off its obligations in case of need. Goldman Sachs bought $470 billion worth insurance from AIG on these valueless securities. Nevertheless, in the end the taxpayer had to pay the bill.

When the housing bubble was flying high in the sky, Goldman Sachs, on one hand, made money selling the crap mortgages, and it made money, on the other hand, by buying insurance on them and collecting on the bogus insurance from AIG when the crap mortgages flopped. When, in the summer of 2008, AIG headed into a tailspin, it looked like the firm wasn’t going to have the money to pay off the bogus insurance. So Goldman and other banks began demanding that AIG provide them with cash collateral. In the 15 months leading up to the collapse of AIG, Goldman received $5.9 billion in collateral, and Société Générale received $5.5 billion.

These collateral demands squeezing AIG from two sides were the “Swoop and Squat” that ultimately crashed the firm. Goldman Sachs was even able to arrange that the assets of AIG should not be equitably distributed among all its creditors. Had AIG gone bankrupt, Goldman Sachs would have likely lost much of the $5.9 billion that it pocketed as collateral. Any bankruptcy court that saw those collateral payments would have declined that transaction as a fraudulent conveyance. After all, when AIG was taken over by the state in September 2008, Goldman Sachs was paid 100 cents on the dollar on an additional $12.9 billion it was owed by AIG. In the case of a normal bankruptcy proceeding, this could not have happened. It means that Goldman Sachs got $19 billion in pure cash due to the massive state intervention. Out of which the net profit of Goldman was $13.4 billion in 2009.

Con trick nr. 2: The “Dollar Store”

In the usual “Dollar Store” or “Big Store” scam, a huge cast of con artists is hired to create a whole fake environment. The unsuspecting mark is lured into this, and then gets robbed over and over again. The warehouse is converted into a makeshift casino and the fool walks in with money and leaves without it. In this case, a pair of investment banks were dressed up to look like commercial banks overnight. The role of the mark, of the fool was played by the taxpayer who walked into this trap, confused by the appearance.

Less than a week after the AIG bailout, Goldman Sachs and another investment bank, Morgan Stanley, applied for, and received, federal permission to become bank holding companies, i.e. societies that control stocks of securities, wealth of shares. This change in the legal status makes them eligible for much greater federal support. The stock prices of both firms were on the bottom, and there was talk that either or both might go the way of Lehman Brothers. By law, a five-day waiting period was required for such a conversion. But the two banks got this approval overnight. The final approval was actually coming only five days after the AIG bailout.

This master trick was necessary because it allowed bank houses that were, in reality, high-risk gambling houses to masquerade as conservative commercial banks. As a result of this new designation, they were given access to state subventions paid from the money of unsuspecting taxpayers. Goldman Sachs received $10 billion under the TARP bailout. But it was only a chump change in comparison to the amount of direct and indirect aid it qualified for as a commercial bank.

When Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley got their federal bank charters, they joined the group of such banks as Bank of America, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase and the other banking titans who could go to the FED anytime and borrow massive amounts of money at interest rates that soon sank to zero percent. The ability to go to the FED and borrow big amounts at no interest was what saved Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and other banks from death in the fall of 2008. The possibility of borrowing at zero percent interest, allowed banks like Goldman to have virtually infinite ways to make money. In one of the most common maneuvers, they simply took the money they borrowed from the government at zero percent and lent it back to the government by buying Treasury bills that paid interest of three or four percent. It was basically a license to print money – no different than attaching an ATM to the side of the Federal Reserve.

Con trick nr. 3: The “Pig in the Poke”

The English term “pig in the poke” denotes the situation when somebody buys something that, in fact, he does not know. The scam’s name comes from the Middle Ages, when some fool would be sold a bound and gagged pig that he would see being put into a bag; he’d miss the switch, then get home and find a tied-up cat in there instead. Hence the expression “Don’t let the cat out of the bag.” After the crash of the housing bubble, the economy was suddenly flooded with securities backed by failing or near-failing home loans. The interest of the speculators was to get clients and shareholders, but mostly the taxpayers to buy these valueless securities, these worthless cats, but at pig prices. This scam appeared first in September 2008. That was when the Federal Reserve System, i.e. the private banking system fulfilling the role of the American central bank, changed some of its collateral rules.

Banks could once borrow only against sound collateral, like Treasury bills or AAA-rated corporate bonds. After the changes, nevertheless, banks could borrow against nearly anything – including, for instance, even the mortgage-“backed” crap securities. For this purpose, it started even a special program, the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, or PDCF. In this program, even the non-investment-grade securities and equities became eligible for pledge in the PDCF as reliable coverage. Coming back to the analogy of the “pig in the poke”, the FED now declared that it accepted even cats in the poke, instead of pigs.

In April 2009, the U.S. Congress established an agency called the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, and by this changed the so-called “mark-to-market” accounting rules. Until this rule was in effect, banks had to assign a real-market price to all of their assets. If they had a balance sheet full of securities they had bought at $3 that were now only worth $1, they had to figure their year-end accounting using that $1 value. But, with the establishment of the FASB, banks could avoid reporting losses, but they could even declare such values which are likely to appear in the future as market prices. Therefore, the “profit” numbers of banks can strongly be questioned. In this way, they can hide their losses from their shareholders, since it became possible to mark their claims at a higher price.

Con trick nr. 4: The “Rumanian Box”

At the time of the Great Depression, Victor Lustig, the legendary con man, wrote a book titled Ten Commandments for Con Men. In this book, he writes about a thing called the “Rumanian Box.” This was in fact a little machine into which a blank piece of paper is put on one side, and real currency comes out the other side. The brilliant Lustig sold this “Rumanian Box” over and over again at an extremely high price. But Lustig has been outdone by the modern money barons of Wall Street, who managed to get themselves a real “Rumanian Box”. What the speculator financial institutions hallmarked with Wall Street did was something that could have never been thought of before. They took much money from the government, but then did so little with it. Thus, they forced the state to go on printing new cash and issue more and more money, which it finally gave over to them.

By early 2009, the banks had already replenished themselves with billions if not trillions from the money the state presented them during the bailout. It wasn’t just the $700 billion supplied in cash within TARP, as well as the cheap money provided by the FED, but also the untold losses obscured by accounting tricks. Another new rule allowed banks to collect interest on the cash they were required by law to keep in reserve accounts at the FED. In fact, the state compensated the banks simply for guaranteeing their own solvency. And a new federal operation called the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) let insolvent and near-insolvent banks dispense with their deservedly ruined credit profiles and borrow on a clean slate, with FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) backing.

Leaning on the government’s good name i.e. solvency, Goldman Sachs borrowed $29 billion, J.P. Morgan Chase $38 billion, and Bank of America $44 billion. TLGP made it possible to make use of big credit subventions. Collectively, all this state money gift was worth trillions. The idea behind the flood of money was to enhance a national economic recovery. It starts by refilling the banks’ balance sheets with liquid moneys, and they, in turn, start to lend money again, recharging the real economy and producing jobs for millions of unemployed. But this did not happen. Despite all these trillions in government rescues, despite the FED slashing interest rates down to nothing and showering the banks with mountains of guarantees, Goldman Sachs and its friends had still not started financing the real economy in the first months of 2009. Goldman Sachs and other banks, headed by Lloyd Blankfein basically threatened to pick up their bailout billions and go home if the government didn’t put more cash at their disposal.

Goldman’s chief domestic economist, Jan Hatzius said: “We’re in a deep recession mainly because the private sector, for a variety of reasons, has decided to save a lot more.” In essence, he said: You can lower interest rates all you want, but we (i.e. Goldman and company) are still not lending the bailout money to the real economy, until the government agrees to hand over even more money presents to them. It is a fact that the heads of these banks shared most of this bailout money among themselves and their employees, in the form of bonuses and compensation.

In March 2009, the FED sharply started a radical new program called quantitative easing. In fact, the goal was to get more public money easier. This program effectively operated as a real “Rumanian Box”. The government put stacks of paper in one side, and out came $1.2 trillion “real” dollars. What happened concretely was that the government used some of that freshly printed money to prop itself up by purchasing Treasury bonds. This qualified to be a desperation move, since Washington’s demand for cash was so great after the financial crash of 2008. Even the Chinese couldn’t buy U.S. debt fast enough to keep the American economy afloat. But the FED, this central bank in private property, used most of the new cash to buy mortgage-backed securities in an effort to spur home lending and to create, in this way, a massive market for major banks.

And the banks, among other things, used the received huge sums to buy Treasury bonds. This meant that they essentially lent the money back to the government, at interest. This is how the magic “Rumanian Box” of the Big Business in 2008. Wall Street stepped into the circle just long enough to get paid.

Con trick nr. 5: “The Big Mitt”

In the card game called poker, the “Big Mitt” is the person, who plays a key role in the conning of the non-initiated, unsuspicious player. In such a hazardous game, played as a matter of course for the sake of looting the “mark”, the initiated gamblers all know the others’ cards. Also in 2008, in the poker game called financial crisis, everybody was indeed looking at everyone else’s cards, in many cases with state sanction. Only the bona fide players, the taxpayers and clients were left out of the information, since the goal was to get their money.

At the same time the FED and the Treasury were making massive, earthshaking moves like quantitative easing and TARP Troubled Asset Relief Program). The two financial controlling organizations were also consulting regularly with private advisory boards, including, of course, every major player on Wall Street. The Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee has a J.P. Morgan executive as its chairman and a Goldman executive as its vice chairman. The board advising the FED includes bankers from Capital One and Bank of New York Mellon. That means that, in addition to getting huge amounts of free money, the banks were also getting clear signals about when they were getting that money, making it possible to position themselves to make the appropriate investments.

One of the best examples of the banks gambling and winning, on government moves was the Public-Private Investment Program, or PPIP, invented by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. Within it, the government loaned money to hedge funds and other private investors to buy up the most valueless securities on the market. They bought up mostly “toxic” mortgage-backed securities. Such were the high-risk, high-yield mortgages that were most responsible for triggering the financial chain reaction in the fall of 2008. Just a reminder for the reader: Jobless dope persons could buy houses with no money down, and the big banks wrapped those mortgages into securities and then sold them off to pension funds and insurance companies as investment-grade deals.

The whole point of the PPIP was to relieve the speculator banks of these dangerous, worthless assets. before they hurt any more innocent bystanders. The most shocking, nevertheless, was what the banks did with the moneys obtained in this way. They started buying those crap securities again, to sell back to the government at inflated prices. In the third quarter of 2009, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and Bank of America added $3.36 billion of exactly these crap securities to their balance sheets.

Beyond this, the FED, which plays the role of the American issue bank (of which we repeat again and again: it is 100% owned by private banks), made currency swap agreements with 14 more foreign central banks, in the interest of foreign markets using the dollar. At them, the FED is protected, because it is the central bank that is responsible for the repayments, and not the financial institution, which ultimately uses the dollar. A further advantage was that the FED got foreign currency in the value of the supplied dollars.

Con trick nr. 6: The “Wire”

When Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley transformed overnight from investment banks into commercial banks, the opinion power owned by the international money cartel communicated to the Americans that, from then on, much more severe regulations would come into effect, and even the public supervision of banking would tighten control. Here’s the thing about our current economy. Nevertheless, the The New York Times reporting on this kept it silent that this kind of metamorphosis simply completed the process in the course of which the money cartel further concentrated and centralized the power and wealth in hand. All that began in 1999, when the Washington Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act – the law that was adopted during the presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, after the 1929 Great Depression. The goal of this act was to prevent the merger of insurance firms and commercial banks, operating with covered money, and the investment banking houses, dealing with very doubtful securities.

With the abolishment of the Glass-Steagall Act, the Wall Street and the government became one giant quasi criminal gang, where the major players share valuable information between themselves the way drug addicts share needles during their meetings. One of the most common practices is a thing called front-running, which is really not different from the old “Wire” con, another famous scam. But here it is not the case of intercepting a telegraph or telephone wire in order to bet on racetrack results ahead of the crowd. What Wall Street bank leaders do here is making bets ahead of valuable information they obtain in the course of everyday business.

Let us suppose that the executive working for the commodities desk of a big investment bank is called by a major client, a pension fund, and asked to buy a billion dollars of oil futures for them. When the executive performs the order, he can be sure that the price of those futures is almost guaranteed to go up. If another employee in charge of asset management somehow finds out about that and takes measures accordingly, he can make a fortune for the bank by betting ahead of that client. The deal would be instantaneous and undetectable, and it would offer huge profits. The client, the pension fund would lose money, of course, since he would end up paying a higher price for the oil futures he ordered, because the other employee had driven up the price. Goldman Sachs actually warns its clients about the consequences of such a con.

In the disclosure section at the back of a research paper the bank issued on January 15th 2009, Goldman Sachs advises clients to buy some “toxic” high-yield bonds while admitting that the bank itself bets against those same crap bonds. The laws and regulations concerning securities oblige the banks to have a fair attitude towards their clients and prohibit the analysts of the given bank from expressing opinions that are contrary to their real conviction.

The major investment banks employ such high-speed computer programs that can glimpse orders from investors before the deals are processed and then make trades on behalf of the banks at speeds of fractions of a second. Banks would not admit it, but everybody knows what this computerized trading – known as “flash trading” – really is. Flash trading is nothing more than computerized front-running. The management of the Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) voted to ban flash trading in 2009 September, but at the time of the writing of the present book (May 2010), it has not yet issued a regulation to put a stop to the practice.

In 2009, a federal prosecutor admitted in open court that the Goldman Sachs trading program could be used to unfairly manipulate markets. After this, the bank released its annual numbers. The report included the fact that 76 percent of its revenue came from trading, both for its clients and for its own account. This revenue is much higher than any other bank. It is really difficult to answer the question why big institutional investors like pension funds continually come to Wall Street to get raped. This is the riddle that needs solving. In testimony before a government panel, where he was confronted about his firm’s practice of betting against the same sorts of investments it sells to clients, Lloyd Blankfein answered: The buyers are professional investors who want this exposure. In other words, the clients are professionals, so they can be cheated if they are dumb enough to let it.

Con trick nr. 7: The Reload

Not all professional swindlers are so thick-skinned to con the same victim twice. But those few virtuosic con men, who do it, nevertheless, call this operation “reloading”. The usual way to reload on a repeated victim – a quasi “gambling addict” – is to persuade him into trying to get back the money he just lost. This is exactly what started to happen on the Wall Street in 2009. The housing bubble itself was a classic confidence game of the Ponzi scheme. The essence of the Ponzi scheme is that old investors must be continually paid off with money from new investors to keep up what appear to be high rates of investment return. Residential housing was never as valuable as it seemed during the bubble. The soaring home values were a reflection of a continual upward rush of new investors in mortgage-backed securities. This housing investment rush finally collapsed in 2008, and the bubble burst.

By the end of 2009, we could witness that the housing speculation bubble was re-inflating. The bailout policy of the state that was originally designed to help the American economy get out from under the bursting of the largest asset speculation bubble in history produced exactly the opposite result. The government-fueled billions suddenly began flowing into the most dangerous and destructive investments all over again. Wall Street was going for the reload. This was mostly the government’s own fault. By slashing interest rates to zero and flooding the market with money, the FED was replicating the mistake that Alan Greenspan had made not once, but twice, before the tech bubble in the early 1990s and before the housing bubble in the early 2000s.

With interest rates kept on an extremely low rate, Alan Greenspan forced the investors to go elsewhere to search for moneymaking opportunities, instead of traditionally safe investments like certificates of deposit and savings accounts. The situation was the same in 2010. Wall Street was flooded with money originating from government subventions, and interest rates that were not just low but near to zero. Investors were forced again to seek out more “creative”, i.e. yielding higher profit investment opportunities. Some of that money could be used to back the efforts of investment-worthy entrepreneurs. But Wall Street does not want to lend to small and medium-sized business. What they want to invest in is marketable securities. And the definition of small and medium-sized businesses, for the most part, is that they don’t have marketable securities. These market actors operate with bank loans. So the small businesses, which are out of the money market, fall out the sphere of interest of Wall Street, since, due to the FED’s low interest rates, they could not make money on them. The Wall Street solved this dilemma by going back to the hazardous financial speculations.

The essence of bubble economics is the same as that of gambling: betting on crowd behavior. What is important is not the real value of the given economic actor, i.e. the economic fundamentals. Matt Taibbi sums up Goldman Sachs leader Lloyd Blankfein’s “virtuoso performance” as follows:

“Take massive sums of money from the government, sit on it until the government starts printing trillions of dollars in a desperate attempt to restart the economy, buy even more toxic assets to sell back to the government at inflated prices – and then, when all else fails, start driving us all toward the cliff again with a frank and open endorsement of bubble economics. I mean, shit — who wouldn’t deserve billions in bonuses for doing all that?”

Con artists have a word for the inability of their victims to accept that they have been scammed. They call it the “True Believer Syndrome.” We are in a state of nagging disbelief about the real problem on Wall Street. It cannot be neglected either that there are inadequate rules and incompetent regulators. The real problem is that it doesn’t matter what regulations are in place if the people running the economy can be considered virtuoso white collar criminals who are never short of inventiveness if they can make even more profit through it. Even the private money system operated with an interest mechanism assumes a certain minimum level of ethical behavior. If those business ethics are absent, there is no regulation that cannot be evaded. Ethical brakes would also be necessary, since it is impossible to place a state supervisor next to each banker.

When the American government undertook to help, from public money, the gamblers who got in trouble, through the biggest bailout in history so far, in fact offered them even an ethic support. Instead of liquidating the insolvent institutions and prosecuting the responsible persons for taking the American society down with them in a giant Ponzi scheme, the government helped them in all imaginable ways. It showered them with money and state guarantees, but, at the same time, ethically stands on the side of those who can still be proud of the fact that they are “Too Big to Fail”, i.e. they are so big and indispensable that their bankruptcy and liquidation cannot be accepted in any circumstances.

If they are too big to be called to give account for their attitude endangering the society, they have to be split up or let to go bankrupt. If the precondition of social responsibility is to be cut to size, it is necessary to find the optimal size of the financial giants with too great power. Instead of giants, they should be “giants broken in two” or dwarfs, and they would immediately be more modest. Nevertheless, the white collar criminals of Wall Street not only escaped from the crash and from being called to give account, but got into the position to draw a huge profit from the bailout. This was proved by the huge benefits and bonuses that they could pocket at once. By recapitalizing the irresponsibly hazarding bad banks, the state bailout policy was like the swindler gambling addict goes back to the casino to get his lost money back.

A financial nuclear bomb: “Naked-shorting”

The speculation financial techniques known to date represent, even themselves, a serious danger not only for the normal operation of the money system, but also for the whole of the economic life. So that certain outstanding actors of the money world could be able to defeat such financial giants as Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers, American International Group and AIG, a mass-destruction financial weapon was necessary, which can even be called a financial nuclear bomb. This dangerous weapon is the “naked short-selling”. In other words, it means a mass optional trading at the stock exchange with virtual shares. Without it, bringing such financial giants as Bear Sterns of Lehman Brothers to heel would not have been possible.

On March 11th, 2008, when Bear Sterns shares were worth $63 at the stock exchange, a mysterious speculator turned up at the market-maker of the New York stock exchange and spent $1.7 million on a series of options, gambling that Bear Stearns shares would lose more than half their value in nine days or less. After this, huge bundles of Bear Stearns stock were sold at $30 and $25. on or before March 20th. In a week, the venerable investment firm had lost virtually all of its cash and was compelled to turn to the FED for loan. The FED and the Treasury refused to help, and forced Bear Sterns to sell itself to J.P. Morgan Chase (which had been given $29 billion in public money earlier) at the humiliating price of $2 a share. Whoever bought those options, speculating on the fall of Bear Sterns shares, made 159 times his money, and pocketed roughly $270 million with this sole transaction.

The illegal insider information manipulation was obvious. The Senate Banking Committee questioned Christopher Cox, the then-chief of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC, who promised to investigate the case. Although more than 50 Wall Street firms were questioned, they could not identify yet the mysterious short trader. The SEC’s halfhearted oversight didn’t go unnoticed by the market. Six months after Bear Sterns was eaten by predators, virtually the same scenario repeated itself in the case of Lehman Brothers – an even bigger investment bank.

In the money system and economy overloaded with money bubbles, both Bear Stearns and Lehman were full of leveraged securities, which made the vulnerable to collapse. Many of the methods that the stronger Wall Street firms used to knock their rivals over were mostly legal: the so-called “credit markers” were pulled, rumors damaging good reputation were spread through the media, and legitimate short-sellers were activated to pressure the price of the chosen stocks down with a great amount of optional transactions. But they were pushed in the abyss by the “naked short-selling”, which can be regarded a kind of counterfeiting scheme.

By the middle of the eight-year Bush administration, the great investment banks like Bear and Lehman no longer made their money financing real businesses, i.e. not from fulfilling, by creating jobs, the mediating function of the value-producing physical economy. Wall Street had to look for new revenues, since, on world scale, the real economy can only assure a growth of 2-5% even within optimal conditions. And this is not enough for the financial giants to get a profit that satisfies even their needs. Therefore, Wall Street itself started to produce such virtual financial products by which it could lure the great herd of unwitting investors, always offering them some new speculation opportunities bringing a big profit.

This is what we have already mentioned in this book: Internet, real estate, oil futures. With this, Wall Street has managed to obtain the wealth and income of the otherwise already weakened American middle class. Due to this strategy, the American middle class slowly became impoverished and thus could not feed the money-hunger of the Wall Street speculators any longer. At this moment the emergency situation occurred, in which the strongest actors of the money world assessed who were those remaining persons among them who can still be stripped as they did with the American middle class. By now, quite enough information has come to light to know how the strongest actors of Wall Street performed the further centralization and concentration of money wealth, and how the state officials supposed to enforce the regulating role of the state contributed to this.

The duty of the government representing the public interest would have been to protect the economy and the society from this super speculation. But the state did not fulfil this duty. It did not undertake to put an end to the spreading financial speculation. The highest-ranked representatives of the money world, being built in the governing of the state, used its power to consolidate their own financial and political power. In 2008, there were five major investment banks in the United States: Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs. Today only Morgan Stanley and Goldman survive as independent firms, occupying the highest level of the restructured Wall Street hierarchy. The whole world was shocked by the consequences of this large-scale Wall Street financial consolidation. In Europe and in other parts of the world, sweeping measures were taken to restrain the corruption and to strengthen the control of the financial structures. In the United States, while they were speaking about the same thing, in fact they invited the key persons who caused the crisis into the government, and the new president even charged them with the control of the financial sector.

At present, the derivative-driven economy is still working, and it is still characterized by counterfeiting and the speculation with fictive financial products. Such financial innovations like credit default swaps (CDSs) and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) were employed for the primary purpose of synthesizing out of thin air those revenue flows that the American industrial enterprises moved out from the United States to Asia and Latin America were no longer pumping into the financial sector. The basic concept in almost every case was the same: replacing hard assets with complex financial formulas – negotiable financial instruments – that are backed by promises to pay instead of real, tangible and value-bearing things.

Credit-default swaps enabled banks to lend more money without having the cash to cover potential defaults. One type of CDO let Wall Street issue mortgage-backed bonds that were not backed any more by actual monthly mortgage payments made by real human beings. These worthless bonds were called synthetic CDOs i.e. derivative contracts covered with derivative contracts. In this way, the whole money economy became a fake, artificial, fictitious money economy, dragging down even the value-producing real economy with itself.

In the first decade of this century, even Bear Stearns itself was one of the beneficiaries of this artificially created, fake economy, and played an outstanding role in the establishment of the illusory housing market. It was Bear Stearns that asked the SEC for a relaxation of lending restrictions that required it to possess at least $1 for every $12 it lent out. As a result, Bear’s debt-to-equity ratio soared to 33:1. Bear Stearns used much of that leverage to issue great amounts of mortgage-backed securities, and by this it managed to drive its share price to $172 in early 2007. But that summer brought a change. Two of its hedge funds that were heavily invested in mortgage-backed deals imploded in June and July. This forced the credit-raters at Standard & Poor’s to change the rating of Bear Stearns from stable to negative. The company survived this somehow, but by March 2008, a network of creditors was needed to avoid the crash.

Then, on that March 11th 2008, when that mysterious speculator was betting $1.7 million, a meeting was held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York that was attended by FED chief Ben Bernanke and New York FED president at that time, Timothy Geithner. This intimate luncheon included virtually everyone who was anyone on Wall Street – except for Bear Stearns.

The list of participants included the following: Jamie Dimon from J. P. Morgan Chase, Lloyd Blankfein from Goldman Sachs, James Gorman from Morgan Stanley and Richard Fuld from Lehman Brothers. The meeting was never announced publicly. In fact, it was discovered only by accident. A reporter from the Bloomberg financial information service filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act and came across a mention of it in Bernanke’s schedule. After this, Matt Taibbi, the fact-finding and pragmatic journalist of Rolling Stone has contacted every major attendee, and all declined to comment on the real goal and agenda of the meeting.

There’s no evidence that Bernanke and Geithner called the confidential session to discuss the troubles of Bear Stearns. It is possible that one of them made an impolitic comment about Bear Stearns (the representative of which was not present), inadvertently fueling a run on the bank, i.e. all depositors take out all of their money from the bank. Geithner and Bernanke testified before the Senate that they only learned about the severe liquidity problems of Bear Stearns on Thursday, March 13th. This is a less believable affirmation, as if you were saying you spent the afternoon of September 12th, 2001, in the Oval Office, but didn’t hear about the Twin Towers falling until September 14th.

Taking into account the FED’s nearly morbid confidentiality, we simply don’t know what exactly happened at the meeting. But it is a fact that from the moment it ended, the run on Bear Stearns was on, and every major player on Wall Street with ties to Bear kept clear of helping the company in trouble. Banks, brokers and hedge funds that held cash in Bear’s accounts withdrew it in mass quantities, making it harder for the firm to meet its credit payments. The credit-default swaps started against Bear, making public bets that the firm was going to collapse. At the same time, the wounded financial institution was bombed with so-called “novation requests” – efforts by worried creditors to sell off the debts that Bear Stearns owed them to other Wall Street firms, who would then be responsible for collecting the money. By the afternoon of March 11th, two rival investment firms – Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs – were so swamped by novation requests for Bear’s debt that they temporarily stopped accepting them. This was a serious signal for the money markets that Bear got into a grave crisis.

The tactics applied against Bear Stearns had been in use against smaller companies for years. The brokers manipulating the stocks employed the counterfeiting scheme called “naked short-selling” even against smaller companies. Nevertheless, from the moment the confidential meeting at the FED ended on March 11th, a giant investment bank became the target of this destructive financial practice. The assault was started by the companies that attended this private meeting kept secret.

The roots of short-selling date back to 1973, when Wall Street went to a virtually paperless system for trading stocks, instead of physically tangible papers. Before then, if you wanted to sell shares you owned in a certain company, you and the buyer would verbally agree to the deal through a broker. The buyer would take legal ownership of the shares, but only later would the broker deliver the actual, physical shares to the buyer. A whole network of runners was carrying paper shares from one place to another.

In order to upgrade this system, the Wall Street leaders established a kind of giant financial septic tank called the Depository Trust Company. The DTC was privately owned by a consortium of brokers and banks. It centralizes and maintains all records of stock transactions. From then on, it was not necessary to carry these tangible paper shares back and forth across Manhattan by messengers on bikes and motorbikes. These physical shares of stock remain permanently in the safes of the DTC. When one broker sells shares to another, the trust company “delivers” the shares simply by making a change in its records: erases the old owner and enters the new one.

The paper-based records were completed by this new electronic system, which then took the leading role. The introduction of electronics spurred an explosion of financial innovation. One practice that had been little used before but now began to be employed with great popularity was short-selling. This perfectly legal type of transaction allows investors to bet against a stock. A normal short sale is easy to follow. A hedge-fund manager goes to a brokerage house like Goldman Sachs and borrows 1,000 shares in a company, the share price of which he expects to go down. On that day, these shares happen to be trading at $10. This hedge-fund manager takes those 1,000 shares, and sells them on the open market at $10, which leaves him with $10,000 in cash. Then he waits. A week later, he sees that the press reports on scandalous cases that ruin the good reputation and credit of the company. Due to the scandal, the firm’s share price tumbles to $3.5. At this moment, the hedge-fund manager goes out on the market and buys back those 1,000 shares of the sinking company for only $3,500, and then returns the shares to the lender company, in this case to Goldman Sachs. at which point your interest in WGI ends. By betting against or “shorting” the company, So, the hedge-fund manager made a profit of $6,500, by expecting correctly at the decrease of the targeted firm’s share price.

This normal short-selling is completely legal. It can also be socially beneficial, by selecting inefficient or corrupt companies and punishing them. It can enhance exposing such scandalously fallen firms like Enron. Nevertheless, the new paperless system instituted by the DTC offered an opportunity for swindlers to apply new methods of fraud in the stock market. Under the old system, would-be short-sellers had to physically borrow actual paper shares before they could execute a short sale. In other words, they had to actually have stock before they could sell it. But under the new system, a short-seller only had to make a good-faith effort to “locate” the stock he wanted to borrow. This effort is usually nothing more than a short conversation with a broker.

The hedge-fund manager tells the broker that he wants to short, say, the IBM, and asks whether the broker has a million shares he can borrow. The broker, without checking, says yes, and so the business has started. The regulation did not prescribe that the broker is obliged to check whether IBM has a million shares or not. But even more serious was the fact that there was nothing to prevent that broker – let’s say he has only a million shares of IBM total – from making the same promise to five different hedge funds. In this way, brokers could lend stocks they never had, and the system also allowed hedge funds to sell those stocks and deliver a kind of IOU (“I owe you”), a promise to pay instead of the actual share to the buyer. When a share of stock is sold but never delivered, it is called a “fail” or a “fail to deliver”. There was no law or regulation in place that prevented it. This loophole, legal gap legalized the counterfeiting of stock. The place of real stock was taken by “fails” – phantom shares –and the real assets were substituted by IOUs.

If you own stock that pays a dividend, you can see a sign on your dividend check that says “PIL” – meaning “Payment in Lieu” of dividends. It means that your shares were never actually delivered to you when you bought the stock. No dividend should be paid after such a phantom share, but it still happens, nevertheless. This counterfeiting scheme is so profitable for the hedge funds, banks and brokers involved that they are willing to pay “dividends” for shares that do not exist.

In fact, even the operation of certain companies can be influenced negatively with phantom shares. Within individual corporations, corporate transfer agents are at work, who keep track of who owns shares incorporations. This is an important data for the purposes of voting in corporate elections. Several times, when corporate votes came up, they were getting more votes than there were shares. In other words, transfer agents representing a corporation that had, say, 1 million shares outstanding would report a vote on new board members in which 1.3 million votes were cast. This happened several times, so analysts came to the conclusion: The fact that short-sellers do not have to deliver their shares made it possible for two people at once to think they own a stock.

In 2005, the experts of a trade group called the Securities Transfer Association analyzed 341 shareholder votes taken that year, and found evidence of over-voting in each and every case, which means that more people voted than the number of shares the corporation detained. This falsifies the elections performed at corporations. Corporate-election fraud was a simple thing to achieve: anyone can influence any corporate election simply by borrowing great masses of shares shortly before an important merger or board election, exercising their voting rights, and preventing or reaching, by this, an important corporate decision. Then the shares were returned to the lender right after the vote was over. Hilariously, because you’re only borrowing the shares and not buying them, you can effectively “buy” a corporate election for free. The lack of hard rules forcing short-sellers to deliver shares, made it possible for unscrupulous traders not only to influence detrimentally a corporate vote, but it could also enable them to depress the price of a stock by selling large quantities of shares they didn’t possess.

This problem was presented to the management of DTC already in 1993, but they were not willing to react properly, saying that it was an issue of minor importance. At that time, the amount of the assets handled annually by the DTC reached already $1.8 quadrillion in any given year, roughly 30 times the GDP of the entire planet. Nevertheless, ten years later, in 2003, the short-selling of “phantom” shares became so dominant that it could already be considered a financial weapon of mass destruction. It was an early version of the “naked short-selling” technique that would help take down Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers later.

In his article titled “Wall Street’s Naked Swindle” (, Matt Taibbi illustrates how naked short-selling works:

Imagine you travel to a small foreign southern-sea island on vacation. Instead of exchanging your dollars into the local currency of the mini-state, the country gives you a small printing press and makes you a deal: Print as much local money as you like, then on the way out of the country you can settle your account. So you take your small money-printing press, print out gigantic quantities of local money and start buying goods and services. In a short time, the cash floods the market, and, due to inflation, the currency’s value starts to decrease. If this situation persists long enough, the value of the local currency will fall drastically, and the loaf of bread that cost the equivalent of one dollar the day you arrived now costs less than a cent.

With prices completely depressed with the local money printed on the small money-press, you can buy everything of value – homes, cars, works of art – at fragments of the original price. You then load it all into a cargo ship and head home. On the way out of the mini-country, you have to settle your account with the currency office. But the local money you printed is now worthless, it takes just a handful of dollars to settle your debt. Arriving home with your cargo ship, you sell all the island goods you bought and make a huge fortune.

This is the basic outline for how to seize the assets of a publicly traded company using counterfeit stock. What naked short-sellers do is sell large quantities of stock they don’t actually have, flooding the market with “phantom” shares. So it is possible to depress the chosen company’s share price, since the more shares are in the market, their price is of the less value, due to inflation. This operation is called “bear raids” in stock exchange slang. The “bullish” market refers to the operation of the stock exchange when prices go up, while the “bearish” market to the process when the price of the shares continually falls.

The first series of “bear raids” was executed on small companies, so that sellers sold shares they didn’t possess in huge quantities. In the meantime, negative rumors were fomented about the company, in order to undermine the reputation of the firm. Next, they approached the chosen victim with offers to desist the attack – if the company sells them stocks in a high quantity at a discount. In 2005, complaints from investors about naked short-selling finally prompted the SEC to try to curb the scam. A new rule called Regulation SHO, known as “Reg SHO” for short, which already regulated and tightened up the short-selling. This rule was designed, in theory, to prevent traders from selling stock and then failing to deliver it to the buyer. The then-SEC chief Christopher Cox stressed that this practice was a market manipulation that is clearly violative of the federal securities laws.

But thanks to lobbying by hedge funds and brokers, the new rule included no financial penalties for violators and no real enforcement mechanism. Instead, the Reg SHO merely created a thing called the “threshold list”. This required short-sellers to close out their positions in any company where the amount of “fails to deliver” exceeded 10,000 shares for more than 13 days. Taibbi remarked in his mentioned article that this merely meant that, if counterfeiters got caught selling a chunk of phantom shares in a firm for two straight weeks, they were no longer allowed to counterfeit the stock.

As for the Bear Stearns, the company had never shown up on the Reg SHO list. But beginning on March 12th – the day after the FED meeting that failed to include Bear – the number of counterfeit shares in Bear skyrocketed. On March 11th, there were slightly more than 200 thousand shares of Bear that had failed to deliver. The very next day, the number of phantom shares leaped to 1.2 million. By the close of trading that Friday, the number passed 2 million – and when the market reopened the following Monday, it soared to 13.7 million. Several experts and even a senator were on the opinion that “naked short-selling” helped destroy Bear Stearns.

At the same time that naked short-sellers were counterfeiting Bear’s stock, the firm was being hit by another classic tactic of bear raids: negative rumors in the media. Thanks to the media-fueled rumors and the mounting anxiety over the company’s ability to make its payments, Bear’s share price fell rapidly. Initially, the FED and J. P. Morgan still helped Bear Stearns, but it could not resist the newer attacks, so its share price fell from $62 to $30. The emergency credit line that the FED had arranged was originally supposed to last for 28 days, but Bear Stearns was suddenly told that the rescue timeline had to be accelerated. This was communicated by the then-Treasury secretary Henry Paulson, who was the former head of Goldman Sachs, one of the firms rumored to be shorting Bear most powerfully. Paulson, allegedly, suggested Bear to find a buyer or it could liquidate itself.

  1. P. Morgan, the only realistic potential buyer demanded a huge bargain on the sale price, and that the state should buy up the uncovered papers of Bear Stearns. Finally, at the intervention of Paulson, Bear Stearns was sold at a symbolic price of $2 per share, while, on the same day, Bear’s stock was still selling at $30.

The Prime Brokerage on the top

Prime Brokerage is the general term for the services supplied by banks of investment and houses of securities for hedge funds. Without the so-called prime brokers, the hedge funds could not operate. Their activity comprises the full deposit management of fund assets, lending securities to short-selling operations, financing of capital transfers and technological services. (Since the prime brokers fulfil such an important central role in the hedge fund markets, it is practical to obtain the data necessary for the system risk management from the limited number Prime Brokers than from individual the risk capital funds.)

We still don’t know who was or were behind the naked short-selling that targeted Bear Stearns. Short-traders aren’t required to reveal their stake in a company. On the contrary, the widespread selling of shares without delivering them emerged into such an enormously profitable business that even the biggest companies on Wall Street did not want to renounce to it. One of the booming engines of this financial-services industry was the Prime Brokerage. The industry started when the Washington government semisecretly surrendered its regulatory authority to the so-called Prime Brokers.

In 1989, a group of prominent Wall Street broker-dealers asked the SEC for permission to manage the accounts of hedge funds. In 1994, federal authorities in Washington agreed, allowing the nation’s biggest investment banks to serve as Prime Brokers. Under the original concept, a hedge fund that wanted to short a stock like Bear Stearns would first “locate” the stock with his Prime Broker. If this was successful, it then would do the trade with a so-called Executing Broker. But as time passed and the digital technology progressed, Prime Brokers increasingly allowed their hedge-fund customers to use automated systems and “locate” the stock chosen for short-selling themselves.

Following the Securities and Exchange Commission’s approval, Prime Brokers boomed. Indeed, with the rise of discount brokers online and the collapse of IPOs and corporate mergers, Prime Brokerage – in essence, the service end of the short-selling business – has become the most profitable sector that big Wall Street firms have left. So, for instance, Goldman Sachs alone produced $3.4 billion profit providing “securities services”. Since it is extremely easy for short-sellers to sell stock without delivering, it is not hard to see how this can be such a profitable business for Prime Brokers.

This activity is similar to a license to print money. Prime Brokers are not really making sure that their customers actually possess, or can even realistically find, the stock they have sold. The biggest Prime Brokers like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank all have so-called “compliance officers”, who are supposed to make sure that traders at their firms follow the rules. It is widely known that, in practice, they routinely greenlight transactions they know are risky. It is also known that an automated program is used to report where the stock destined for short-trading was borrowed from. The problem is that the system allows short-sellers to enter anything they want in the text field, or even leave the field blank.

The rules are so loose that Prime Brokers do not even need to avoid them. The short-selling speculators can counterfeit stocks legally, thanks to yet another regulation loophole. This opportunity involves key players known as “market makers”. A market maker is that active price quotation-maker who not only requires the quotations of others against investors, corporate and private clients and mediators called market users, but also satisfies quotation requirements of others, usually commercial banks. These active price quotation-makers frequently sell phantom shares to the same person who bought the so-called “put options”. (A put option or a selling option is such a contract in which the buyer of the option, against the option fee, gets the right to sell, on or until a given day of maturity, a determined quantity of a certain product, at a pre-determined price, the so-called trading price, to the caller of the option.)

That buyer, after all, would love to obtain a bunch of counterfeit Bear Stearns stock, since he can drive the company’s price down by reselling those uncovered, fake shares, which are sometimes called “bullets,” because, by “killing” the price, they can make a company bankrupt. This is exactly what happened to Bear Stearns: Someone bought a pile of put options in Bear, and sold those shares that never got delivered.

Attack against the Lehman Brothers

Three months after the extinction of Bear Sterns, on June 27th 2008, a whole avalanche of undelivered Lehman Brothers shares, i.e. phantom shares flooded the money markets. On that day, their number exceeded 700 thousand, but on July 1st there were more than one and a half million. In the meantime, also the rumors started, according to which Barclays was buying up them for 25 percent less than the share price. The tale was quickly debunked, but the attacks continued, and Lehman Brothers lost 44 percent of its share price. The novelty was that the major players on Wall Street, detaining insider information, earlier raped only smaller companies, but now had begun to eat each other alive, and they did not spare even the giants. It made a rational sense to attack these giant firms, since their books were full of so-called “toxic assets”, and also the professional and ethic standards of their managers left much to be desired.

In an order issued on July 15th, Cox, the chairman of the SEC, dictated that short-sellers must actually pre-borrow shares before they sell them. Nevertheless, it makes us wonder that the order only covered shares of the 19 biggest firms on Wall Street, including Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, and would last only a month. This essentially meant that the supervisory authority forbade Wall Street players to speculate with counterfeited stock, but only temporarily, and only concerning the stock of the 19 of the richest companies on Wall Street. This caused the raise of share price for Lehman Brothers and some of the other protected companies.

When, in the second part of August 2008, the Cox order expired and fails in Lehman Brothers stock quickly started mounting again. On September 9th, there were over 1 million undelivered shares in Lehman. On the next day, there were nearly six million failed trades, on September 11th 22.5 million, and the day after 32.9 million. It is understandable that, on September 15th, the price of Lehman Brothers stock fell to 21 cents, and the giant company declared bankruptcy. It was obvious to everyone that naked shorting was the weapon of mass destruction used to kill Lehman Brothers. This is nothing else than financial terrorism. In fact, the War on Terror should better be waged against this financial terrorism, which is an anti-human civil war, because man is the wolf of his fellow man and it is the war of all against all.

Anyway, the fall of Lehman Brothers should have been followed by a full-bore investigation. But the SEC not only did not conduct such an investigation, but even refused to identify the main wrongdoers. On September 18th 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission did repeal the preposterous “market maker” loophole. The SEC forbade market makers from selling phantom shares, but that same day, the SEC also introduced an agreement called “Rule 10b-21,” which makes it illegal for an Evil Hedge Fund to lie to a Prime Broker about where he borrowed his stock. Basically, this new rule formally exempted Wall Street’s biggest players from any blame for naked short-selling.

This order put all the responsibility on the backs of the short-seller brokers. The chairman of the SEC simply eliminated the law against aiding and abetting hazardous fraud. On the same day that Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy, the share price of Goldman and Morgan Stanley began to fall sharply. Nevertheless, it came to light that for the most part it was done legally, through legitimate short-selling. Then, at the request of Morgan Stanley, the SEC banned the legitimate short-selling of financial stocks. Namely, Christopher Cox imposed a temporary ban on legitimate short-selling of all financial stocks. The stock price of both Goldman and Morgan Stanley quickly rebounded, because they were instantly designated as bank holding companies, which made them eligible for a considerable amount of emergency federal aid. The designation into their new status of these two investors – instead of a five-day wait for such a conversion required by the law – was done by the FED and Timothy Geithner overnight.

Naked short-selling was only one of the destructive weapons used in the civil war fomented by the financial crisis. Nevertheless, the financial civil war itself was caused by broader and deeper problems. Among them we can list the corruption of the ratings agencies, the use of smoke-and-mirrors like derivatives, the already mentioned speculation money bubbles, as well as the overall decline of the value-producing branches of the American industry. All these pushed Wall Street towards the financial speculation, the synthetic economic growth, where, in fact, more money is being produced from money, and there is no true real economic growth. In this respect, trading with “phantom” shares produced by naked short-sellers is only symptomatic of a problem that goes far beyond the stock markets, the money markets, but even the whole economic world system.

Matt Taibbi and the money power

The writer of the present lines has been making attempts to understand the money system of the world since 1994. Since the outbreak of the global financial crisis, I have studied the opinions of several financial and economic experts, among them the writings available in the electronic and printed press and on the internet of numerous worldwide-known economists. I have systematically filed most of these writings in my archive. When I came across the analyzing articles written by Matt Taibbi, the journalist of Rolling Stone magazine, I had to realize that they surpass the studies written about the causes of the global financial crisis by several economists who are considered authorities on the field. First of all, I studied the special literature, so the Rolling Stone magazine escaped my attention. I got to know this magazine as one which identified itself with the hippy counter-culture of the 1960-ies and 1970-ies, popularizing an alternative system of values.

Nevertheless, as one of the forums of the underground, the magazine is counted among the higher-level ones. It dealt not only with the popular music, the fashionable protest attitude, but also with the essential issues of life. On the other hand, the Rolling Stone magazine, nevertheless, belonged to the cosmopolitan avant-garde, in so far as it rejected, from the very beginning, that traditional Christian-conservative system of values, on which the traditional culture of the West and of America was based. Namely, the Rolling Stone did not rely on universal ethical norms, did not detain such an ethical background, which would it make possible to solve the serious problems raised by Matt Taibbi in 2010. By spreading the alternative culture, the Rolling Stone in fact undermined those moral bases upon which the unveiled abuses now could be driven to a solution.

The Rolling Stone has always questioned – sometimes even cynically mocking – that traditional Christian system of values, upon which the American society, the American political and legal system was based. It weakened the traditional values with the utopia of a kind of naïve modernism. It frequently tried to present such persons as heroes, who had better be neglected from the very beginning. These “stars” soon disappeared without a name, but, at the same time, they occupied, for a while, the place of valorous people, worth to be followed. All in all, the Rolling Stone had a part in the demoralization of America for at least fifty years. And now, when it bravely undertakes to tell the truth about the moral debauchery of the money rule system, revealing the methods of the financial capital unscrupulously looting the society, the Rolling Stone is in trouble, because does not detain the moral background on which it could rely on to draw the conclusions necessary for the solving of the problem.

It is difficult for the Rolling Stone to make a moral judgment, when, for 50 years, it undermined the moral bases of the American society in an anarchic way, but consequently. So that it could represent the long-lasting values and interests of the American society and culture, it should deny its anarchist, frequently cynical and “épater le bourgeois” style and line manifested up to now. For this sake, this cosmopolitan, anarchist magazine should return right to those durable conservative-Christian views, which it championed to mock at cynically and to ridicule to date.

All this does not diminish at all Matt Taibbi’s bravery, who went after the facts and dared to tell the solid truth. The real problem with the owners and operators of the Wall Street is that it is almost all the same what laws and legal prescriptions regulate the operation of the money system and the economy. So that the law and order could prevail, the presence on a minimal level of the moral norms is indispensable. In this respect, the civilized attitude means to keep the rules even if nobody checks it or it cannot be controlled, and to obey such unwritten rules, which are not given a legal form by the state power. If this moral attitude, this ethical behavior is missing, the regulations concerning the money system, which defend the public interest, do not work. The lack of consciousness and voluntary obeying the moral norms cannot be substituted by any kind of state supervision and police. How much is it worth then if we are moral? The normal operation of the money system requires the obeying of not only financial and legal, but also moral norms.

Goldman Sachs – The “veterinary surgeon’s horse” of the money rule world order

On the “veterinary surgeon’s horse” used for teaching purposes, all diseases described in medical books can be found. It is obvious that Taibbi used Goldman Sachs as such a “veterinary surgeon’s horse” in order to show almost all defects of the money system that got out of the control enforcing public interest. Therefore, when we continue to write about Goldman Sachs, we use this bank of investment to demonstrate the whole fallen neoliberal money rule system. Soon after the state bailed out this gambler of the financial global casino from public money, it showed up record-size profits, and paid even higher allowances and bonuses to its employees than ever before. If we examine it from closer, it is possible to demonstrate the intimate trading generated by software, the share of confidential information with well-informed, chosen VIP clients, and, equally, the trade with second mortgage, speculating on their simultaneous fall of value.

As a symbol of the money rule world order controlled by neoliberal delusions, the Goldman Sachs became, more and more, the target of the most different criticisms. A considerable part of the public opinion in America and the world got to the conclusion that the Goldman Sachs and the money rule groups of interests represented by it deliberately caused the financial collapse and the economic world crisis following it, and made a huge profit of this. But Goldman Sachs and those who it represents manipulated not only the money markets, but also the highest state power, the legislative body in Washington, the Congress, and the White House, representing the presidential power. On the third place, we also have to mention the opinion power under the control of the organized private power, since the mass-media devices are unambiguously in the property or under the hegemony of the money power.

The continuous creation of the speculation money bubbles mentioned before means in fact the global practice of “creative destruction”. This term was introduced by Werner Sombart and Alois Schumpeter. In his work titled Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Schumpeter referred to the changes that occurred following the radical innovations with this term. The competition continuously enforcing the innovations formed the engine of the long-term economic development. Certainly, the successful innovation offers advantage for its introducer on the market, weakening the position of the traditional enterprises and reducing their profitability, which forces them to innovation also. So, the creative destruction is an economic term, which can partially give an answer to the question how a competitive stage can become a monopoly position, and even vice versa, how can create again market competition with the restriction of monopoly positions.

In 2010 we can say that Goldman Sachs is a kind of ruling organization of the financial universe, which disposes, like its own, of a global stock casino, in which it can always create a winning situation. There are people who put it more carefully and only stated that Goldman Sachs is the most powerful financial organization of Wall Street, which actually belongs to the sphere of interest of the House of Rothschild. The House of Rothschild is the number one dynasty of that super-rich community about which David Rothkopf wrote in detail in his book titled Superclass. To the same network controlled by the House of Rothschild belongs also the Bilderberg Group, for instance, but also that layer of super-speculators, which are symbolized by George Soros. The brain trust of the current American president is also composed of persons belonging to the Rothschild network: Timothy Geithner and Rahm Emanuel. They became the successors of Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers and Paul Volcker.

The Rothschild network also includes the Rockefeller, Ford and Bush dynasty, together with the Bush couple. The core of the wealth of the Rothschild dynasty is made up by the undivided foundation wealth of the family, the current amount of which is more than 100 trillion dollars, according to different expert estimates. We detain only estimates, because no heritage inventory is made about this family foundation wealth, and they do not even pay inheritance tax after it. The personal wealth of the presently numerous Rothschild family can, really, be less than that of Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or Carl Slim, and, in this respect, the list of the Forbes magazine on the wealthiest men in the world can be considered trustworthy.

Although it is true that the Goldman Sachs controls also the Wall Street, and has a decisive impact on the decision-makers of the American state, we still must say that the Goldman Sachs cannot be considered the main power of the world economy even if it was maybe the main causer of the collapse of the global financial system. In 2010, the Goldman Sachs can be regarded extremely dangerous because its profit, exceeding that of all others, comes from trading with its own property, a money obtained from the American taxpayers, and now the company trades with this money on the stock markets, consumer goods markets and overseas markets. Goldman Sachs developed such a computer software controlling the financial transactions, which is globally suitable for the unlimited control of money markets.

The server of this software is in the New York Stock Exchange. Goldman Sachs knows the information concerning the stocks sooner and more exactly than the owner of the stock itself. But even more important than this is the fact that the Goldman Sachs detains something that means a more powerful force than any computer software. And this is the intimate information. The people of Goldman Sachs, its former and current leaders sometimes have high governmental functions, and sometimes are leaders in the bank itself or in controlling organizations. While they flow here and there, they take with them the information concerning the main future decisions of the state institutions and the government. In this way, Goldman Sachs always knows what is to be expected, and so is able to place itself in the winner’s position in the right time, overtaking all other competitors. Goldman Sachs not only knows the most important pieces of information, but it can also create them itself, and is able to manipulate them according to the most various strategies. Its men are present in the ministry of finance, at the stock exchange supervision, in the World Bank and in all key institutions of the printed and electronic mass-media. Not only the opinion power stars are Goldman’s paid agents, but it always has eyes and ears also in the White House.

If all this is true, how was it possible that Goldman Sachs was still unveiled during the financial and economic collapse? Why did Goldman Sachs have to send his former number one, Henry Paulson, who was U.S. Secretary of the Treasury when the crisis broke out, to the members of the Washington legislative body?

Paulson threatened the senators who opposed the adoption of the huge state bailout telling them that they would have to count with the revolt of the American people and the introduction of the state of emergency if they do not adopt the nearly one trillion dollar state bailout for the banks that caused the crash.

Lloyd Blankfein, the number one leader of Goldman Sachs, was aware of the fact that the second mortgage market, in the creation of which also Goldman had a lion’s share, would collapse. He was led by unscrupulous greediness and arrogance when he was only concerned with the amount of profit that Goldman could pocket when the housing market bubble bursts. Today we already know that Goldman’s competitors, Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers did not detain the appropriate information, and owned a huge amount of unsellable securities. When the first big shake happened, Paulson called up the Chinese and asked for a ten billion dollar immediate relief for Bear Stearns. When the same happened to Citigroup, the same Paulson raised a five billion dollar immediate relief from the Arabs to save it.

Paulson reassured the creditors that their investments were secure. But when the newer bankruptcies happened, they did not answer the phone calls asking for help. Paulson knew it well that for his former company, the Goldman Sachs, the crisis of the interbank crediting and the burst of the housing bubble are not only extremely profitable, but they made it possible to get rid of the old competitors. Nevertheless, Goldman Sachs did not weigh that even a global economic crisis can burst out as a consequence of all these. Blankfein and his team thought that their man in Washington, Paulson, would continue to control the situation and the speculative deals could go on. They were prepared to make a good profit from the economic collapse of America. But both Blankfein and Paulson were surprised by the fact that the collapse of the financial system lead into a global economic crisis of an unparalleled size.

When the foreign markets collapsed, Goldman Sachs had to realize that, no matter how huge a profit they can pocket from the economic hardships of the United States, if the world economy collapses, also their profit will be lost. This is why Goldman Sachs (and its majority owner, the Rothschild dynasty) had to send their key figure, Henry Paulson, to the American Congress to blackmail out 800 billion dollars taxpayers’ money from them, to bailout the banks. The formula “give us the money or there will be a revolution” worked. After this, Goldman Sachs did not lean on foreign creditors any more in its action to savage the American financial system, but it had to persuade the American taxpayers to do so. Since its own people were present on all levels of decision-making of the American administration, Goldman Sachs could reach that the bill on the blackmailed 700 billion dollars passed the Congress urgently, and also the President at that time, Bush, signed it. Even Obama, the then only campaigning current President, took part in softening the hesitating Democratic representatives.

The Obama administration, the private-owned FED and the American Treasury pumped many trillion dollars from the taxpayers’ money, as a present, into the suddenly dried-out financial system. The Obama administration and the Washington Congress, nevertheless, did not manage to reform and re-regulate the financial system of the United States. Until May 2010, the new president and his government did nothing but agreed obediently to the continuing of the speculation gambling. It is characteristic to the arrogance of Goldman Sachs that it paid record-size bonuses to its employees from those billions he obtained from the blackmailed “benevolence” of the American taxpayers.

The political power, which is more powerful than the governments

The centre of this power is on 85 Bond Street, New York. This is the building in which the most perfect “money-making machine” invented by the global capitalism operates. According to the 9th November 2009 issue of the British The Sunday Times, the world power which operates from this centre is really a political power that is stronger than even the governments. Here is the office of Lloyd Blankfein, the number one man of Goldman Sachs. Nevertheless, the powerful billionaire himself is only a servant of an even more important person, Lord Rothschild, the first-born noble descendent of the British branch of the Rothschild dynasty. In the hierarchy of the non-public (i.e. not official) sphere of the global money power, Lord Rothschild detains also the title “King of the Jews”.

When Blankfein was asked about the incredibly profitable business activity of Goldman Sachs, he, surprisingly, answered only this: “I’m doing God’s work.” If we recall the opinion formulated with bitter irony of the famous 19th century German-Jewish writer and philosopher, Henrich Heine, namely that “Money is the God of the Jews, and Rothschild is his prophet”, Blankfein can really fulfil a special vocation, worthy of the prophets, on the commission of Rothschild. Goldman Sachs, the giant financial company, is officially a public corporation, the securities of which can be bought also by private persons, both in stock exchanges and outside of them, but the control equity stake of the consortium is in the property of 221 persons being in close connection with each other. The main owner is Lord Jacob Rothschild, and personally he, as well as other members of the Rothschild family are the decision-makers and beneficiaries of Goldman Sachs. The money empire, which can be considered the most powerful institution of the global monetary system, operates under the hegemony of the Rothschild family. This is the heart and the brain of the money empire.

Many researchers, among them Texe Marrs, consider the Goldman Sachs an institution which is more important than the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), the TLC (Trilateral Commission), the Bohemian Grove and the Skull and Bones. The listed ones, and the other similar private societies and networks can easily be influenced by Goldman Sachs, since all of them operate under its hegemony. The personalities seeming to have great power, being present in the visible sphere of international life, from Washington, through London to Beijing and Tokyo, are, in fact, the chosen ones and servants of this money rule world power, who substitute the real decision-makers on the stage of world politics.

If we examine it from closer, it comes to light that Goldman Sachs is one of the most important tools of the money rule world order symbolized by the Rothschild dynasty. At the time of the changes in Russia, George Soros stated: “Big moneys make the history…”. Today these “big moneys” use the Goldman Sachs to create the total control system covering the whole of global financial structure under their hegemony. For the sake of the institutionalization of the global system controlled from a single centre, the money power, on one hand, demolishes existing structures, and, on the other hand, re-structures them. Part of this is the radical transformation of the United States into such a financial, economic and social structure, which enhances the long-term settlement of the money empire hallmarked by the Rothschild dynasty.

Even Barack Obama owes the taking-over of the control of the White House partly to the fact that he was selected, by the main decision-makers of the money empire, to execute the radical transformation of the American state and society. In the financial publication titled Market Rep, Perry Rod called Obama the captured chess-piece of the Wall Street, more exactly of Goldman Sachs. David Bromwich, professor of Yale University, characterized the same person saying that Obama is nothing else than one of the important investments of the Wall Street. We have already mentioned before that The Goldman Sachs, since its establishment in 1869, has been leading the conception and application of the different financial frauds. These include the IPO, the initial public offering of securities, but the Goldman was also leading the stock manipulations causing the 1929 stock exchange crash. In 1970, he also played a key role in driving the American Penn Central Railroad into bankruptcy, from which it pocketed a huge profit.

Goldman played a decisive role in the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and in enhancing that the persons chosen and supported by it should become, with the so-called privatization tricks, the private owners of the former Soviet public property. These persons came from among the technocrats of mostly Jewish origin of the Communist party state nomenclature, and they became the oligarchs of the present-day Russia, the owners of the most valuable national wealth, including the oil fields and gold mines.

Goldman Sachs has a decisive influence on the evolution of world events. In our days, it has nearly the whole American government at his disposal. Obama bows his head in front of Goldman Sachs to the same extent as his predecessor, George W. Bush did. The Secretary of the Treasury of the Bush administration entered the White House from the head of Goldman Sachs. The present-day Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, as the President of the FED of New York, received the orders from Goldman Sachs. Now Stephen Friedman, as the head of the FED of New York, fulfils the desires of Goldman. Even President Bill Clinton obeyed to his Secretary of the Treasury, Robert Rubin, who previously also was the leader of Goldman Sachs.

Warren Buffet, declared the richest man in the world, hurried to invest ten billion dollars cash in Goldman Sachs securities, when he was urged to do so. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger got into the governor’s seat at the order of Lord Rothschild. At the same time, it is well-known that the loss of value of the Californian state bonds and the getting into a near-bankrupt situation of this important member state of America is owing to the fact that Goldman Sachs short-traded in mass with the state bonds, speculating on their large-size loss of value.

We could experience this phenomenon also in Europe when even the euro started to weaken, in which the key role was played by the fact that the Goldman Sachs sold valueless, crap derivatives (CDOs and Credit Swaps) of many billion dollars value to Greece earlier. And after this, it placed a huge amount of Greek state bonds on the market, speculating on their loss of value with short trading. So Goldman Sachs pocketed a huge profit firstly by selling the valueless securities, and secondly with the speculation on their loss of value.

The SEC starts an investigation against Goldman Sachs

The SEC, the Securities and Exchange Commission, started an action against Goldman Sachs because, at the beginning of 2007, it put such CDOs on the market, which were covered by second mortgage packets. Goldman did not make it public that the Paulson & Co. risk fund itself also wants to make a profit from the securities put on the market in this way, and is betting on their price decrease on the stock market. John Paulson, the manager of the hedge fund, asked Goldman, the bank of investment, to issue such mortgage-based securities, on which he could make a big yield by shorting. Goldman Sachs agreed, and billed Paulson 15 million dollars fee. What is more, the investor made it possible to Paulson to “borrow” the same securities and to short-trade with them, that is to speculate on their price decrease on the stock market.

Goldman qualified these securities predestined to failure with “AAA”, the safest marking, and put them on the market for its own clients. It collected considerable sums from them, and, following John Paulson’s pattern, he himself short-traded with these AAA-marked securities in secret, speculating on their price decrease. According to the standpoint of the SEC, Paulson and the Goldman created such an investment mediating medium, forced path, on which the issued securities were moved and thus they lost value. The essence of this was that, while Paulson and Goldman short traded, the duty of Goldman was to beat up such clients (pension funds, insurance companies and other investors aiming at security, detaining covered money), which, in turn, expected for the price increase of the given stocks or securities.

John Paulson’s firm made one billion dollars on this short trading, but no action was brought against it. The SEC initiated legal proceedings, nevertheless, against Goldman’s Vice President, Fabrice Tourre, who was primarily responsible for the creation and selling of the toxic securities, performed with multiple capital transfer. Goldman Sachs and Tourre were aware of the fact that it would be nearly impossible to sell CDOs if they made it public for the investors: John Paulson, on one hand, chose the securities with doubtful value used as coverings himself, on the other hand he made high-value bets on their depreciation in a short time.

The action started by the SEC also covered the fact that, in January 2007, Goldman Sachs contacted the ACA Management LLC, performing credit risk analyses, with the request to choose those CDOs eligible for security, which are recommended by John Paulson. Goldman Sachs undertook to help the putting on market of the so chosen CDOs with capital transfer transactions. Paulson, Tourre and the ACA managers personally discussed, in February 2007, what securities they would include in the packet covered with mortgage and used as security. Paulson and Tourre already knew that they would speculate on the rapid value loss of these with short transactions. Nevertheless, the ACA, which delivered the expertise, did not know about this. As a consequence, it is utmost probable that the Düsseldorf-based IKB Deutsche Industriebank AG would not have invested into this CDO portfolio, if it had not be advised to do so by the ACA. On the other hand, the ACA did not know that it was misled by Paulson and the Goldman Sachs.

The SEC’s action also comprised the Abacus 2007–ACI case. The Securities and Exchange Commission accused Goldman Sachs of having created synthetic CDOs for some of its clients expressly with the intention to make a big profit on their pre-planned loss of value. The Abacus 2007–ACI was created on the order of John Paulson, who was already short trading in mass with synthetic securities at that time. The Abacus 2007–ACI was created, from the very first, for failure, and it was Paulson who selected those second mortgages, which he wanted to short. The securities, carefully selected and doomed to failure in this way, were included into packets and sold, as first-class, secure bonds, to the clients of Goldman Sachs. In this case, the legally delicate circumstance is that the investors lured to be buyers were told that the investment packet was made up by a third party, an independent credit risk rater. John Paulson can hardly be considered to be such an independent credit risk rater, since his main activity was already the shorting at that time.

The started legal proceedings have immediately weakened Goldman Sachs, and strengthened its competitors. The operation of Wall Street cannot be considered a zero-sum game. Nevertheless, it is a fact that, following the shake of the money system and the economic crisis, the competition for the obtainable profits sharpened. After the suing by the SEC, many investment firms made steps to increase their market share at the detriment of Goldman Sachs.

It is well-known that Goldman Sachs sponsored Obama’s election campaign with 994 thousand dollars in 2008, and, by this, it was his main supporter. It is also a fact that, under Obama’s presidency, the SEC got a new leadership, headed by an iron-handed president and a director who strongly enforces the rules. In 2009, this SEC, as a regulating and controlling authority, has already started investigations in two times more cases than in 2008, the last year of the Bush administration. The levied fines also increased with 35%. Due to this severe attitude, the pressure in the Congress lessened for the moment, concerning which the SEC and the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) should be unified and transformed into a giant super-controlling institution.

Nevertheless, several proceedings of the SEC were not efficient. If the investigation started for securities frauds against Goldman were also inefficient, this would considerably weaken the Securities and Exchange Commission. Such a failure would support the accusations according to which the SEC intervened in April 2010, in the middle of a debate on the general financial reform because the Obama administration wanted to frighten the Wall Street and wanted to persuade it in this way to support the new bill enforcing the stricter regulation.

Attempt for the re-regulation of the state supervision of the money system

The money system of the United States is a private money system since 1913. At the beginning, the regulating and controlling role of the state still asserted itself over the Federal Reserve System and Board being in private ownership, but this gradually decreased and, practically, even ceased. When, nevertheless, this money system that became an organized private power got into crisis, its owners and controllers turned to the state, asking it to save the system from collapse with the money of the taxpayers. The FED, the Wall Street and the government are the main operators of the current money system. All of them have their indispensable role. But, till the FED and the Wall Street are unambiguously the centres of the organized private power, the same cannot be said about the state power embodied by the White House and the Congress of Washington. According to the Constitution, still formally in effect, the state power must represent the whole society, the interests of all Americans. It cannot be only the server of the organized private power, even if the organized private power has, in fact, already taken over the control of the state.

This may explain the fact that, at the beginning of 2009, the Congress adopted the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act, signed by President Obama on 29th May, 2009. According to this law, a ten-member, two-party commission, composed of Democrat and Republican senators and representatives, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) was established, with the duty of investigating and revealing the causes of the world financial crisis between 2007–2010. This Congress investigation committee is called Angelides Commission, after its president, the Californian Democrat representative, Phil Angelides. Since in 1930, during the great depression, there was also a similar investigation commission, the Pecora Commission, the FCIC is also called New Pecora Commission. It is also compared to the 9/11 Commission, investigating the background of the September 11, 2001 events, but FCIC has a greater authority than it, because it has the right to get any document and to summon anybody under the burden of a fine. The 9/11 Commission did not have these authorities.

The main duty of the FCIC commission was to investigate those internal and external causes, which led to the financial and economic crisis of the United States. Among others, this means that the commission, composed of highly qualified members, has to examine exactly what frauds and abuses took place in the financial sector, including also the operation of the mortgage business branch. The commission is obliged to hear also the financial leaders of both federal and member state level, and to establish to what extent they are responsible of neglecting their regulation and control duties. The commission supervises the monetary policy according to how it raised the huge amount of money, which was necessary for the speculations.

In addition, the duty of the commission is to examine closely the evolution of the transactions outside accounting and the whole of the banking accounting practice. Its important task was the auditing of the activity of the Federal Reserve Board, as well as the analysis of the effect of the giant enterprises created through fusion on the whole of the money system and economy. The Angelides Commission has to examine the stock exchange practice with CDSs and short-selling, and some other important circumstances, which led to the crash of the financial system.

In the first months of 2010, a wide campaign emerged in the United States, at the initiative of Ron Paul, a former Texas representative, who ran for president on the latest election. The aim of the campaign was to audit the whole of the Federal Reserve System, for the first time since its establishment, and, based on the laws in effect, experts should examine the accounting of the FED, as well as the classified decisions of its governing bodies. The goal of the campaign “Auditing the FED” is to reveal to what extent contributed this private financial institution fulfilling the role of the central bank to the bankruptcy of the money system, how the FED abused its power and enhanced the inflation of the money and the devaluation of the dollar.

Several million Americans already joined the campaign, who demanded the auditing of the FED from the legislative body of Washington. They argue that altogether 13 billion dollars from the taxpayers’ money were spent on bailout packets and loans, in the adoption of which not only the Congress, the financial leadership of the Bush and Obama administrations, but also the Federal Reserve Board, avoiding all control, played a key role.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission held a public hearing between April 7–9, 2010. During it, Alan Greenspan, the former Chairman of the FED, was examined. Financial expert Frederick J. Sheehan has been studying the operation of the FED for years, and he even wrote a book on this with the title Panderer to Power. In this book, he sets forth how Greenspan enriched the Wall Street with astrological incomes, and caused the situation, which ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the financial system and the economic crisis. Already prior to the hearing, Sheehan wrote a letter to all members of the Angelides Commission. He informed them that he has been continuously studying the documents of the FED’s Federal Open Market Committee, the FOMC, as well as the minutes of the Congress and Senate hearings. He knows Greenspan’s speeches, interviews and writings since 1959. Since his retirement, the today 80 years old Greenspan tries to palliate and justify himself on nearly all forums. Sheehan states that Greenspan had a decisive role in the fact that the mortgage market rocketed. The mortgage debt amounted to 153 billion dollars in 1995, which increased to 380 billions by 2000, and to 1,100 billion dollars by 2005. The mortgage portfolio of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two real estate firms bailed out by the American state, amounted to only 132 billion dollars in 1990, but, at the same time, in April 2003, it increased with 139 billion dollars in only one single month.

The starting of the mortgage machinery was a known fact. Nevertheless, Greenspan stated on many forums: he did not know how big this market grew. In the FED’s Federal Open Market Committee, they were making jokes, even in November 2002, about that the purchases had to be restricted to “three real estates per head”. Greenspan used his position and authority to enlarge the mortgage market. In February 2004, he stated in the National Association of House Builders that he found the mortgage loans with fixed interest too expensive, and that the house buyers could save many thousand dollars if they took the mortgage loan with variable interest. After this statement of his, the ratio of the mortgage loans with variable interest raised from 2% to 47% by 2002, and it already surpassed 60% in 2005.

On September 26, 2005, Greenspan made a speech at the annual convention of the American Bankers Association, and he not only encouraged the widest possible extension of the mortgage crediting with variable interest, but he also recommended a whole range of mortgage loan novelties. He mentioned the mortgage loan of 40 years term, as well as the so-called piggyback mortgage. This is a shared mortgage loan, such a joint loan, in which several creditors share a single mortgage, in a determined ratio and order, but the combination of a building and long-term loan is also called piggyback mortgage loan. He also mentioned that the HELOC (home equity line of credit) can also be taken as a piggyback mortgage loan. (The piggyback mortgage loan is such a subordinate mortgage loan, where the debtor can call down sums from the available line of credit according to his needs. The line of credit represents a certain percentage of the net property value in the real estate of the borrower.)

Greenspan comforted his audience made up of bankers, saying that he was not worried about that the home-buyers would be especially exposed to a radical turn occurring in the transformation of the price of homes. Nevertheless, he finished his remarks made in front of the American Bankers Association Annual Convention, making the following statement:

“In summary, it is encouraging to find that, despite the rapid growth of mortgage debt, only a small fraction of households across the country have loan-to-value ratios greater than 90 percent. Thus, the vast majority of homeowners have a sizable equity cushion with which to absorb a potential decline in house prices. In addition, the LTVs for recent homebuyers appear to be lower in those states that have experienced the most explosive run-up in house prices and that, conceivably, could be at risk for the largest price reversal.”

As a main regulator and controller of the American banking system, Greenspan did not state all this in vain in the convention of the National Association of House Builders. The participants understood this encouraging, and continued to build and sell the houses with an even higher impetus. Thus, the FED was the causer and not the injured party of the abuses emerged in the mortgage loan branch. The monopoly of the FED is the issuing and putting in circulation of the money, the mediating agent of the economic life. The overgrowing crediting needs an overgrowing money issuing. The FED operates the banknote press and the commercial banking system produces the credits. The FED can prescribe the conditions of creating reserves for the banks. If, for instance, a commercial bank sticks to the prescribed reserve ratio 10:1, it cannot lend more than 10 dollars in case of a one dollar reserve.

The FED, being in 100% private property, solely detains the state prerogative to increase and decrease the reserve prescriptions concerning the commercial banks. Under Greenspan’s chairmanship, the FED considerably decreased the reserve prescriptions of the banks several times, but never made them more severe. Accordingly, when the commercial banks could not finance the production programmes of the real economy any longer, they lent the available money to investment financial institutions, investment funds, property holdings, second mortgage lenders and speculators on the commercial housing market. Had Greenspan wanted it, the FED could have limited the amount of the money put in circulation, which could have refrained the unscrupulous speculation, which was fostered also by the abundance of money and proved to be destructive.

In his above referred letter, Sheehan sensed it well that Greenspan would smartly wriggle out of responsibility in front of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, the FCIC. If we study through Alan Greenspan’s statement, originally made for the Brookings Institute, but attached to the FCIC as an official document, we can state that Sheehan’s worries were founded. In the course of his hearing, he not even once was in a hard-pressed situation, and he could apply the whole repertoire of the public life play. He was once condescending and once professional, once militant and once permissive, and once bitterly sarcastic or sharply scornful.

The Americans could see the well-known, old Greenspan again: that who sometimes chatters boringly, who replies severely and who apologizes endlessly. In spite of the financial collapse, the Commission treated him with exquisite honour, and, instead of a severe argument, only a friendly match took place. Nowadays many Americans already know that nobody else is burdened by bigger responsibility for the financial crash and the economic crisis than Alan Greenspan. He can say anything, but he has a lion’s share in the fact that 8.5 million Americans are queuing for unemployment benefits, more than 300 thousand families lose their homes monthly, and never have so many people lived on food aid stamps.

Greenspan made nearly everybody responsible for the occurred crisis, from the securitization of subprime mortgages, through the business practice of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the demolition of the Berlin wall and the excessive financial strengthening of China – except for the FED and himself. When he was asked about the money bubble, Greenspan used the technique of asking back. “Bubble? What bubble? Who saw a bubble at all? Who said here anything about a bubble? What could have been done? How could we have stopped it? All in all, who could know about it?”

But, in the next sentence, Greenspan admitted, almost without transition, that he saw the bubble, but he did not think he could persuade the Congress to do something about it. Greenspan said: “[If]we had said we’re running into a bubble and we need to retrench, the Congress would say: ‘We haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.’ “

The only really essential word-duel took place between Greenspan and Brooksley E. Born. Ms. Born was an attorney, earlier the Chairman of the CFTC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The duty of this commission is to regulate and supervise, as an independent agency of the U.S. government, the futures and options markets. As Chairman of the CFTC, Born strived to reach that the Congress and the President should assign the commission – beyond the transactions with derivatives at the stock exchange – the task of controlling the derivative transactions outside the stock exchange. This foreseeing and timely endeavour of her was, nevertheless, opposed by regulators performing other financial control. Born, thus, wanted to stop, in time, the FED led by Greenspan from making the trading with derivatives totally liberal. Born not only succumbed in this struggle, but also lost her function. It is worth citing a few sentences from the duel between Born and Greenspan:

“In your recent book, you described yourself as an outlier in your libertarian opposition to most regulation. Your ideology has essentially been that financial markets, like the OTC derivatives market, are self-regulatory and the government – and the government regulation is either unnecessary or harmful. You’ve also stated that as a result of the financial crisis, you have now found a flaw in that ideology.

You served as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board for more than 18 years, retiring in 2000, and became, during that period, the most respected sage on the financial markets in the world. I wonder if your belief in deregulation had any impact on the level of regulation over the financial markets in the United States and in the world. You said that the mandates of the Federal Reserve were monetary policy, supervision and regulation of banks and bank holding companies, and systemic risk. You appropriately argue that the role of regulation is preventative but the Fed utterly failed to prevent the financial crisis.

The Fed and the banking regulators failed to prevent the housing bubble; they failed to prevent the predatory lending scandal; they failed to prevent our biggest banks and bank holding companies from engaging in activities that would bring them to the verge of collapse without massive taxpayer bailouts; they failed to recognize the systemic risk posed by an unregulated over-the-counter derivatives market; and they permitted the financial system and the economy to reach the brink of disaster.

You also failed to prevent many of our banks from consolidating and growing into gigantic institutions that are now too big and/or too interconnected to fail. Didn’t the Federal Reserve system fail to meet its responsibilities, fail to carry its mandates?”

Greenspan simply avoided to give a substantial answer, and only said: “The notion that somehow my views on regulation were predominant and effective as influencing the Congress is something you may have perceived. It didn’t look that way from my point of view.”

In essence, this answer contains that Greenspan and the FED led by him did not regulate the market of derivatives outside the stock exchange because nobody would have paid attention to it. Nevertheless, this is hard to believe, since Alan Greenspan, in his time of service, was declared the greatest central banker of all times, and was not regarded a kind of paper-maker bureaucrat. In fact, Greenspan escaped from giving a substantial answer to Brooksley Born and the commission representing the interests of the whole American society. He did not feel and show any regret, and he also fled from being called to give account.

What can Obama’s crisis management show up?

When, in February 2009, the continuation of the 200 billion dollars bailout package started by the Bush administration was announced, which was called, euphemistically, Troubled Assets Relief Program, TARP, it became unambiguous that they want to use public money also in the future, with state guarantees, to remove the uncovered securities and banking devices from the ledgers of banks in private property. These uncovered securities would be taken over by the government or such private investors, hedge funds, property management firms, which find this productive. The original bailout program and its modified version were initiated by Paulson, who was committed to Goldman Sachs, and by Geithner, committed also to Goldman.

The essence of this concept was that the banking system should be helped with the billions from taxpayers, so that it should not go bankrupt and could continue its crediting activity, necessary for the operation of the economy. Saving banks from bankruptcy, which went insolvent is not identical with regulating their normal operation and restoring it. In fact, the Obama administration enlarged the original 700-billion bailout packet into a 1.5 trillion dollar state relief packet. It did not treat the basic cause of the financial crisis: the tide of the unsustainable bad credits, which grew as an avalanche year by year. This avalanche swept away the value-creating real economy. At the beginning of 2010, we can already see that the banks, sunk in their hazardous gambling, used the huge amount of public relief money to pay their debts, to buy up the smaller competitive financial institutions, as well as for the financial reward, surpassing any imagination, of their bankruptcy-causing swindler or incompetent controllers.

The ratio of the GDP of the United States compared to the total debt of the country was essentially worse in 2010 than in 1933. In 1933, the debt amounted to 300% of the GDP. Nearly 20 years were necessary so that the ratio of the amount of the debt and the gross national product could go down under 140%. Since in 2008 the level of indebtedness surpassed 358%, therefore – taking into account the 1933 Great Depression – a similar decrease of the debt could take place only in 2027.

For the moment, all that happened was that the unsustainable and unpayable amount of debt was transferred from the banks in private property to the state, and now it is charged onto the taxpayers. This kind of regrouping does not solve the problem. It would be necessary to ban, with a new regulation, the occurrence of such an indebtedness in the money system. If the consequences of the unscrupulous speculation is simply loaded onto the state, namely onto the whole society, it is not a real change. The solution of the problem is hindered by the fact that the same persons should make the decisions of the state, serving the public interest, who caused the whole situation themselves, as leaders of the private banking system. From this point of view, it is irrelevant that the men of the Wall Street, symbolizing the money power, get into the government as Republicans or Democrats.

Rodrigue Tremblay and L. William Seidman suggest that the Obama administration should establish a Banking Restructuring Trust, which would temporarily perform the supervision of the big and bankrupt banks, would streamline their organization, would terminate their bad credits and credit risk commitments, and it could consolidate the whole of the banking system in this way. This is more efficient and less costly than aiding them with more trillions from public money. The former chairman of the FED, Paul A. Volcker made a similar suggestion. According to his standpoint, the uncovered and unsellable CDOs and CDSs of the banks must simply be written down and wiped out from the ledgers of the banks. This would relieve the banks from those extreme speculations, which became their main activity in the last two decades. It would make it possible that the banking system – coming back to its original function – could assure again the crediting of the real economy. Such a basic change would make the improvised and frequent interventions of the state, which are not suitable for the termination of the general crisis of the banking system.

The bank-saving bailout packet of Geithner, the current Secretary of the Treasury, is not identical with that real economy supporting programme amounting to 800 billion dollars, the goal of which is already the soonest restoration of the operation of the productive economy. So that all this should be effective, it should be taken into account that, in our days, the national economies already operate as parts of a strongly integrated and global economy. Therefore, it is also important how the leading institutions of the European Union react to the efforts of the United States. The American financial crisis had a stronger effect even on Europe, than it was supposed at the beginning of the crisis.

Will there be a new financial world order?

It is an unquestionable fact that the financial collapse occurred in 2008 shocked the whole world economy. Giant banks went bankrupt, and also several countries got close to the financial collapse. What happened between 2007–2008, can only be compared to what happened in the course of the Great depression between 1929–1933, during which, finally, the place of the classical liberal economic world order was taken by a new type of financial and economic order. Another change took place in the 1970-ies, when the years of stagflation occurred, i.e. the economic life was characterized by both stagnation and inflation. The financial crisis broken out in 2007 proved that the extremely unregulated orthodox neo-liberalism is, in reality, non-functional. The possibility also arose, according to which the state, obliged to represent also the public interest, should take back, at least partially, the control over the financial market into its authority. So, the state should bring more severe regulations, and should enforce them more efficiently.

The paralysis of the financial system, and the size of the subsequent economic crisis were shocking. Not only giant banks became insolvent, but even states got into a near-bankrupt situation. This time, the crisis struck primarily the central structures of the financial world order, but neither the peripherals were left out of it. It is also worth the attention how many different measures the involved governments took in order to handle the situation: bailout packets, wide-scale nationalizations, economy-reviving measures, the reduction of the interest rate to zero and the increasing of the quantity of money in circulation for the sake of maintaining liquidity. They threw aside the neo-liberal orthodoxy, which was considered a taboo to date, and the state returned at once, what is more, as the main character of the economic life. The crisis shocked the whole world economy, but it comprised primarily the process of the recessions emerging in individual states, climaxing in different times. The common characteristic of the crisis was that the states got extremely indebted, and they transferred the consequences of the paralysis of the money system onto the taxpayers.

The political consequences of the crisis are developing right now, both in the individual states and on international level. In many countries, changes of government took place, and it is not decided yet who are going to win and who are going to lose, and how the division of the financial and economic resources will change. On international stage, important changes can be expected in the power equilibrium between East and West, and we have to count with the further strengthening of China and India and the weakening of Europe.

More and more is being said, already even in official circles, about the introduction of the new world order, the essence of which is that a strong central control is needed even globally, in order to avoid the general chaos and anarchy. The new power centre of the world must be strong both in financial and military terms. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, even prior to the crisis, in September 2007, at the general assembly of the UNO, initiated the creation of a new, world-scale financial architecture, and the introduction of a supranational control. He proposed on world scale the New Deal, which was introduced in America by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt after the Great Depression.

At the G20 summit held in February 2009 in Berlin, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown also promoted such a worldwide New Deal. According to Gordon Brown, supranational institutions are necessary for the regulation and supervision of the financial system that became global, which have a large-scale enforcing authority. On several internet forums, it can be read about Sarkozy and Brown that they are very close to the Rothschild dynasty, which controls the supranational financial and power structures.

According to several representatives of the global elite, the current financial, economic and social crisis should be used to establish such relations which could be fought down only through a supranational strong-handed government, a dictatorship. They try to find a way out of the current situation, following the pattern of the Great Depression between 1929–1933. At that time, the financial crisis was followed by an economic crisis, and the social conflicts were sharpened alarmingly. Therefore, totalitarian dictatorships came to power, which strived at the further violent concentration and centralization of power.

The signs refer to the fact that, in 2010, the goal is to put the strategy of global control into practice. As part of this, the history-forming world power prepares to make a decisive strike on national states and on institutions bearing national sovereignty. As early as the end of the 1990-ies, David Rockefeller stated that there is a worldwide need for transforming the public power exerted by states into a private power exerted by corporations, so that it could be possible to introduce the new world order, and, as part of it, the new financial world system. According to David Rockefeller, for this sake it is only necessary a crisis of a huge size, which will persuade people that it is in their interest to accept voluntarily the new world order as soon as possible.

Jacques Attali, who was advisor to French President Mitterrand, and who is also close to President Sarkozy, is concerned that the groups of interest currently controlling the world, the global elite, will commit the same mistake even now, that they did in 1930. According to Attali, the global elite was not able to handle the financial problems properly. Wars can break out again, and kill 300 million people, and only after this, the basic reforms will follow and the establishment of a world government. He asks the question: “Shouldn’t we better think about a world government already at this stage?”

The same was stated by Henry Kissinger: “In the final analysis, the main task is to define and formulate the general concerns of the majority of countries, as well as of all leading states with regard to the economic crisis, considering the collective fear of a terrorist jihad. Next, all of that should be converted to a common action strategy… Thus, America and its potential partners are getting a unique chance for turning the moment of the crisis into a vision of hope.”

The openly confessed goal of the above views was to lead the mankind to accept the new world order idea, because the universal protests against the worsening conditions of human existence would only lead to uncontrolled chaos and anarchy. The strategists of this world programme connect the necessity and utility of global government with the inadmissibility of protectionism, serving the national states. They propagate that the national-state models are hopelessly out-of-date and are not able to lead out the individual states from the financial and economic world crisis. The strategy of the global elite is served by such forecasts, which were issued by the WTO, the World Trade Organization. According to it, 1.4 billion people are likely to sink below the poverty line in 2009. Similar is the statement by the IMF Chairman Dominique Strauss-Kahn that a world economic crash is impending unless a large-scale reform of the financial sector of the world economy is implemented, and a crash that is most likely to bring in its wake not only social unrest but also a war.

The plan to introduce a common world currency is also a cornerstone of the new world order. The real masterminds of this well thought-over world strategy are as yet in the shadow. In an article published on March 25, 2009 in Moskovsky Komsomolets, Gavril Popov, the current President of the International Union of Economists, mentioned World Parliament, World Government, World Armed Forces, World Police Force, World Bank, the necessity of placing under international control the nuclear weapons, nuclear power generating capacities, the entire amount of space rocket technology, and the planet’s minerals. In the same article, he urges the imposition of birth-rate limits, as well as the cleansing of humanity’s gene pool. A new thing may be only the establishment of a worldwide totalitarian police order and the elimination of national states, which is being suggested as an open program of action. Such a program was earlier viewed by both the liberals, and the socialists, and the conservatives as a form of new fascism.

According to several financial and political analysts, the 2007–2008 financial and economic world crisis is not simply a newer financial and economic decay, but it means the end of a whole world history epoch. That system ended, the main pillar of which was the economic and military power of the United States. This entire epoch ends before our own eyes. Since the main cause was the thickening and weakening of the dollar, and the general crisis of the dollar-based money system, if the key dollar problem fails to be solved, the world events will take a most dramatic turn. The potentially decades-long crisis of the dollar-based money system will trigger off even a world-wide geopolitical disintegration. In such a situation, not only social upheavals, but also open civil conflicts, revolts and civil wars can be expected. On international level, even the division of the world into separate, adverse blocs. Such a situation can emerge, as that one preceding World War I.

The global elite itself makes up a multiply stratified hierarchy, and consists of several networks and structures. Its medium-level controllers, according to the signs, are not fully aware of the well-considered and far-seeing strategy hiding behind the world crisis. The upper level of the global elite was, nevertheless, well informed. It is them who execute the programme of the “controlled chaos” and of the general disintegration. In all this, the possibility of the social tension reaching even the level of civil war, as well as the planned weakening of the constitutional order of the United States, or, if necessary, the suspending of the constitutional order.

Part of the strategy is the establishment of such a supranational power centre, which is suitable for the mobilization of a large-scale order-maintaining force for the sake of the exertion of the total political, military, legal and electronic control over the population of the world. That system uses the network management principle that allows embedding into any society parallel structures of authority that report to external decision-making centers and are legalized through the doctrine of prevalence of international law over national law. The shell remains national, while real power becomes transnational. Jacques Attali called this a “global law-based state”, which, in fact, means the legal frame of the rule of the supranational money empire, as prime power.

According to the view of some analysts, the ruling center of the global law-based state would be located in the United States. The passing of the 2001 Patriot Act after the 9/11 tragic events not only allowed security services to control the American population and suspected foreigners, but also accelerated the passing of state responsibilities into the hands of transnational corporate structures. Intelligence activities, trade of war, penitentiary system, and information control are passing into private hands. This is done through so-called outsourcing, a relatively new business phenomenon, which spread relatively quickly not only in America, but also in many European and Asian countries. All this marks the building up of the organized private power on world-scale, to the detriment of the organized public power, the exclusive state authorities.

There is also another supposition according to which the centre of the state based on global right would be Europe. In connection with this, a comment can be read on the homepage, posted on February 18, 2010. A friend from Budapest of Henry Makow, a certain Jean D’Eau wrote the following noteworthy analysis in connection with the financial crisis in Greece:

Greece was chosen by the history-forming powers to play the role of the European Union bankrupt member state in order to “create” the big problem to which the European Union is going to “find” the “solution” soon. Greece was chosen because it symbolizes Europe (nobody in Europe cares about countries like Hungary or Estonia) and because its economy was relatively easy to devastate after it renounced its own currency. The European “elites” are using Greece to persuade the flock of sheep that if the Greek problem is not fixed, Southern Europe will go bankrupt which will trigger the collapse of the whole European financial system and thus the bankruptcy of the whole European economy.

The “problem” is that the so-called Eurozone (where the euro currency replaced the national currencies) is doomed to collapse since the Southern European states (as well as the Eastern ones) cannot sustain their economy if they can’t devalue their own currency in order to boost export and tourism (they are now sucked to the euro currency.)

According to Jean D’Eau, that’s the point where corrupt globalist politicians played their important role in weakening their own economy by every means but the current “global recession” triggered by the international bankers was the main part of the plan to bring the Southern and Eastern European economies to a breaking point as well as to weaken the US economy and collapse the Chinese, Indian and Russian economies. The “only solution” soon to be proposed soon by the EU is to suppress the national fiscal and budgetary policies in Europe and have a centralized European budget.

All European states will have to send most of their tax money to a central European government and the national budgets will be established by this central government too. It will mean that the European national governments will cease to exist. In parallel, the European Union is already announcing the “necessary” creation of a big European Army to match the predominant military power of the US in the NATO. It is especially wort the attention what Jean D’Eau writes to Henry Makow about the members of the cast of international bankers:

“As you already know, the international bankers are indeed mainly European bankers (Rothschild and co.) and these are the real brains behind the man-made global recession (just as they are behind the “global warming” scam.) Thus the European “elites” are now on the way to becoming more powerful than the traditional US “elites”. All they need is to make the European Union a real superstate (with centralized taxation and budgetary policy) with a real super army (the coming European Army). Then, the US “elites” will be forced to merge the US into the EU and not the opposite as they would like. The resulting “UNION” (this is the projected label) would be an empire ruled by the money powers whose ancestor ruled the Khazar Empire at that time.”

What does China suggest for the solution of the financial crisis?

To our days, many Americans have realized that the economic future of their country was squandered for the sake of the speculators of Goldman Sachs and the Wall Street, and in the service of the careers of those politicians, who represent the Goldman Sachs and the Wall Street in Washington. Foreign investors and creditors, primarily China, already see it clearly that Wall Street is not operational, and it is, in fact, kept alive only by a breathing machine. These creditors demand the radical transformation of the global financial system, and want to get rid of the uncovered billions of dollars, which still fill up the big banks of Wall Street.

China, representing its interests more and more definitely, demands an involvement to a ratio of at least fifty-fifty in the creation and operation of the new financial global system. One of the preconditions of the creation of the new system is that each and every dollar, which was produced through fraudulent, derivative speculation, must be deleted from the ledgers of the banks. The three main controllers of the current financial system, the Wall Street, the FED and the government (primarily the President and the Treasury, and only in the third place the Senate) cooperate closely. All three of them have to take it into account that the centre of gravity of the global financial system will be transposed into China in the following decades. The West can only slow down or even hinder this, if it places also its own financial system and political system under the control of the public power, restores the rule of law, and cleans these systems – including their highest levels – of the different forms of white-collar criminality.

To some extent, this has already begun. There are signs that refer to the fact that the 100 year old rule, started in 1913, of the Federal Reserve System is getting near to its end, but at least to its radical transformation. The size of the crisis is signaled by the fact that Henry Paulson threatened the senators opposing to him with the suspending of the constitutional government and the introduction of the state of emergency. In our days, it is also obvious that the taking office of the new American President and his administration did not essentially change the internal power relations of the American power structure, and did not terminate the causes that triggered the crisis.

There are also informal negotiations going on between the rivaling financial groups of interest. On these negotiations (related also by Benjamin Fulford on his website, from Chinese and Japanese part it was offered that they would be willing to support those American billions of dollars, which were not made through fraudulent derivative transactions, and they would be covered with the Chinese national currency (the renminbi or the yuan) and by gold. They would also change the current name of the dollar to Hong Kong dollar. Following this, the United States can introduce its own local money, which may be similar to the state dollar nicknamed greenback, issued by Presidents Lincoln or Kennedy. They are ready to negotiate about the cancellation of the external debts of the United States, in exchange that the Pentagon would embark upon the policy of peaceful coexistence, instead of arming. It was also discussed that both Japan and China – together with other countries – would be willing to cooperate for the sake of restarting the production of industrial goods in the United States, and to restore the whole of the American productive industrial capacity, if America gives up its policy of world empire building, of aggressive expansion.

How did the world financial system become a gambling casino?

World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2010, Davos

In 2010, the 39th Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum was held in Davos, Switzerland, which was attended by 2500 political, financial and economic leaders, among them 40 heads of state and government. Klaus Schwab, founder and organizer of the Forum, is on the opinion that the works of re-planning the new financial system of the world and of world economy will only start in the future. The World Economic Forum is officially considered to be a place of debate of the representatives of so-called non-profit organizations. Nevertheless, all those who meet in Davos belong to the elite of the current money rule world order, the winners of the money capitalist order, namely to such a system, in which the bankers control the credits and the indebtedness through the issue of the credit money monopolized by them. The investor banking dynasties and the financial structures created by them – due to their privileged status – hold the taps of credit issuing in their hands. As a result, they can split out for themselves a disproportionately big slice from the total world wealth.

Josiah Stamp, who, in the 1920ies, was considered the second richest man of England, and earlier was the Chairman of the Bank of England (the central bank of Great Britain), said the following at the Commencement Address held at the University of Texas in 1927:

“Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits.”

In 2008, primarily those bankers and financial structures became the victims of the financial world system transformed into a gambling casino and the money capitalism degenerated into a hazardous speculation, which created this system themselves. The unscrupulous selfishness and insatiable greed of the investing financiers, counted as the main beneficiaries of the system, demolished the mechanism, by which these bankers can indebt and rule over anybody else. This collapse of the structures of the interest-operated credit money system had serious consequences on the whole of the money rule world order.

The current, money-controlled economic system, the capitalism controlled with credit money, began in 1694, when the English central bank, the Bank of England issued for the first time the money, which was based on debt. (Economics, the real economic science, primarily strives at the satisfaction of needs. In this system, the money is just the mediating agent of the economic activity. In the money rule capitalism, the system called crematistics by Aristotle, the emphasis is not on production, but on commerce and money turnover, and the goal is not to satisfy needs, but to create more money from money. The credit money takes over the lead, moved by the interest mechanism. On the other hand, through the interest, the profit of the value-producing activity flows to the money wealth owners, increased according to a geometrical progression.) This system of the private money monopoly served well the interests of its creators for two centuries.

Nevertheless, in 2008, this system of the money capitalism was so much shocked that even famous experts say that it is close to the end. But not because the victims of this system revolted and overthrew it, but because the controllers and beneficiaries of the credit money system, due to their greed and covetousness, did not know the limits any more. They demolished the mechanism through which the money wealth owners indebt the other actors of the economic life: the citizens, the enterprises and the state. The truth is that those, who were pushed into debt slavery by this indebtedness, are still ready to live as subjects of this bankers’ rule, and continue to pay obediently the costs of their own pushing into money slavery. Namely, they are willing to endure that the mediating agent of the economic life, the money, will continue to be produced by these bankers from air, so that they could lend it for huge interest to those who perform value-producing activity.

The solution would be the return from the private money system to the public money system. The democratic public power owing political responsibility should take back the monetary sovereign rights into state authority again. The issuing of money and the crediting can and should be transformed into a free public service. Without this, it is not possible to terminate the system of usury freedom, irresponsibility and selfishness and the enforcement of the social justice.

The World Economic Forum of Davos was founded in 1971, in the same year in which the dollar was transformed from a banknote partly covered with precious metals into a totally uncovered paper money. The little mountain town in the Swiss Alps is regarded, from the point of money capitalism, the beginning of the end, where it became obvious that the paper money of the international bankers is nothing more than a gambling built on a kind of credulousness, where everybody loses everything in the end, including the bankers themselves. The hazard through money issuing began in 1694, with the issuing of the founding document of the Bank of England. It was then when this central bank, being under private control and then getting in total private property, obtained the right of issuing money with putting paper money into circulation. The owners of the bank stated that their banknote is an equally solid money like the coins made of gold or silver. It was not true even at the beginning, but this became obvious only later.

Prior to the taking over of the financial power by the Bank of England, money changing was the trade of goldsmiths, who lent their money consisting of golden and silver coins on interest. After 1694, these money-changers, sitting at wooden tables called “banco” in Italian, started to be called bankers, and the wooden tables gradually became palaces and cathedrals. The paper money set off, for the use of which they counted interest, and by this an initial version of the money system operating today. The main business secret of the money wealth owners and the money-issuing bankers is that they substituted the money made of precious metals with paper money, and they calculated the interest also on this money substitute as they did on the money made of precious metals.

In this way, the delivered credit and the interest collectable for it could grow nearly unlimitedly. But this is not only the secret of the bankers, but of all the money capitalist system. The essence of this is that, at the moment of issuing the credit money, those who detain the monopoly of issuing money indebt everybody else: the entrepreneurs, the consumers, the states. So that this system should work smoothly, the money issuing, the sovereign right of the state, should get in the hands of a private institution, a central bank in usually private property, but, in any case, under private control. At the moment of crediting, the central banks produce the money from air, and deliver it to the borrower in the form of a banknote, which can be considered a promissory note, a declaration of acknowledgement of debts, i.e. a promise to pay. And then they give these banknotes over to the money-savers.

The accumulators of money need these securities, because, due to the continuous inflation, they can preserve, at least partly, the value of their paper money with these securities. Together with the paper money and the interest, the inflation also appears necessarily. At the time of the issue of paper money, when the actors of the economic life: the enterprises, the natural persons and the state take up credits, the money-producing creditors do not issue also the interest in the same time. Therefore, when the credit and the interest is being repaid, the amount of money being in circulation is reduced, which can only be supplemented by taking up newer credits, bigger than the previous ones, and so more and more money is being put into circulation or accumulated, what is more, in a quicker pace than the real economy can grow. This is the basic cause, determined by the paper money system, of inflation.

It was only in the 20th century when the relation between the money made of precious metals and paper money became obvious gradually, and the shortcomings of the paper money system came to the surface. Great Britain became one of the biggest beneficiaries of this money system, since London was the centre of this international money cartel, becoming gradually transnational. England, which got under the hegemony of the money cartel, maintained, to the very last, the belief according to which the paper money is as good as the money made of precious metals. In the 20th century – as a consequence of the two world wars – the role of Great Britain was gradually taken over by the United States, the money system of which got under the hegemony of the transnational money cartel in 1913, after a century of struggle. The private money issued by the money cartel, the FED dollar, became the official currency of America, and then, gradually, a global currency. This brought on many advantages for the money-wealthy American groups of interest.

Following the Great Depression, in 1933, the then President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, confiscated, with a decree, the gold owned by the American citizens, what is more, at a low price established by the state. From this moment on, the Americans did not believe any longer that the value of the paper money is the same as the money made of precious metals, which was, allegedly, exchangeable into golden and silver coins or golden and silver bullions. (Here we only mention the fact that, if the money of a given country detains a coverage with precious metals, the amount of paper money cannot be increased unlimitedly. It means that the ratio between the precious metal coverage and the issued paper money must be kept. Thus, if we want to double the amount of the paper money in circulation, and we want to keep the earlier measure of coverage of the paper money, also the amount of the precious metal serving as coverage must be doubled. As a consequence, the precious metal coverage or standard hinders the unlimited issue of paper money. The value of the money, as a sign, is, nevertheless, determined by the thing it signifies, namely the value-producing work and the result of it. The sign can fulfil the role of the mediating agent until the people – economic actors, enterprises and states – trust it. Namely, the coverage with precious metals limits only the unlimited multiplication of the sign, but is not bearing the value of the money,)

Under the pressure of the supranational money cartel, the confiscation of gold was later repeated also on world scale. In 1933, Roosevelt collected the gold only from the Americans. On the other hand, in 1971, the international money cartel, making use of America’s power, forced the whole world to do the same. Following World War II, the United States detained the biggest gold deposits ever existing in history. The Bretton Woods Accord was made as early as 1944. According to the agreed rules, the U.S. dollar was exchangeable to gold anytime, and the other currencies were linked to the U.S. dollar. Thus, through the dollar exchangeable to gold, the whole international money system was solidly connected to the gold.

By 1971, the United States has spent all its gold reserve. In only 1958, the gold reserve of America decreased to 10% of the previous one. This had several causes. One of them may be that, between 1949 and 1971, many costly wars were waged, and, through the expansion of the American large corporations, a considerable amount of dollars got to foreign states, which could not be exchanged to gold according to the Bretton Woods Accord any more. French President De Gaulle still managed to exchange the dollar reserve of France into gold, but Great Britain already failed to do the same in August 1971.

Giving up the gold standard and the fixed exchange rates proved to be a decisive step from the point of the world economy. With the fact that the gold standard of the dollar ceased to exist, the money of all states became paper money without precious metal coverage, which was previously covered by the dollar, fulfilling the function of the global currency. With the termination of the gold standard, also the security disappeared with which this hazardous gambling could be continued. From this on, only the degree of trust differentiated the piece of paper called dollar from the other ordinary pieces of paper. Only after 1st February, 1957 they wrote on the one dollar banknote the following: “In God we trust”. After 1971, nevertheless, this statement got a cynical tint: the Christian Americans could believe in God, if not in somebody else, hoping that their dollars are worth more than a piece of paper.

What caused the collapse of the money system?

The process (which started this way and then accelerated) led, finally, to that many trillion dollars bankruptcy, which paralyzed the financial world system, led to an economic fallback, which surpassed even the 1933 Great Depression. The personal savings backed with work were all invested in such state securities and bonds, which were worldwide owned by pension funds, investment funds and insurance companies. Since the purchasing power of the dollar, which became a mere paper money, decreased in a rapid pace, more and more people were forced to place their savings into securities, bonds, at banks, pension institutions, insurance companies and investment funds, and, in this way, trying to save at least a part of the value of their savings.

All such economies, which are built upon credits supplied from uncovered money, as well as on debt burdened with interest, are, from their nature, ab ovo instable. This economy is at the mercy of the cycles of enlargement and shrinking, dictated by the credit money, as well as at the mercy of the sometimes very capricious speculations of those who detain money wealth. When the gold standard was terminated, together with this also that financial system came to an end, which is called Fractional Reserve Banking. The essence of this is that a part of the paper money in circulation detains a precious metal coverage. According to the learning of the history, the passing onto a totally uncovered money leads to the collapse of the system. Something else happened, nevertheless. The money rule capitalism started a yet unprecedented march of triumph. The twenty-five years elapsed between 1982 and 2007 proved to be the longest expansion of the capitalism operated with credit money. The financial crisis broken out in 2008 supports the fact that it was, at the same time, the last successful period of the money rule world order. Namely, because this unusual boom was achieved with virtually covered speculation money.

The credit money with virtual coverage takes the lead

In the current system of the private money monopoly, the money, as the sign serving the mediation in the economic life, makes it possible, with the help of accounting techniques, to account, compare and evaluate, as well as to file the different human activities. The transnational money cartel, the owner of the global money monopoly, is only able to produce uncovered money. This uncovered money is transformed into covered money when it is used, as a credit, by the actors of the economic life (enterprises, natural persons and the state), and then start to repay it with interest and compound interest. Behind the reimbursement, there is already a coverage with work. And, in the case of debt repayment by the state, it is backed by the tax income of the state, the coverage of which is also the value-creating work.

Nevertheless, the work-based money is connected with the productive economy. The natural boundaries of the growth of real economy do not make it possible to multiply the work-based money unlimitedly. Therefore, the international money cartel passed onto the putting into operation of the betting-based money. With this, it could speed up the pace of the production of money from money, as well as the growth of volume. At the produce exchange, the producer can sell, say, ten tons of corn. But the person, who bought it from the producer, can give it over in the way that he splits off the value expressed in money from this product, and says he sells the monetary value of these ten tons of corn, which, in half a year, will be a market value. In this case, he did not sell a product, but the purchase right connected to the product, i.e. the option. To this option, further options can be connected, so the money, which does not account the work, can be multiplied.

The contracting parties, the seller and the buyer, in fact, make a bet on how big the fair market value of the product in case will be after a certain time. The mediating agent of this betting, as a “financial product”, is a type of money connected to it, the synthetic money. The objects of this betting are not the stocks connected to the concrete physical product any more, but the different packets of synthetic money. Since it is possible to make bets in the most various forms, almost unlimitedly, also the synthetic money can be produced unlimitedly.

In the case of the credit money operated with the interest mechanism, all actors of the economic life can only detain credit money, that is they have a debt, which must be repaid, with interest, to the creditor. Nevertheless, due to the interest mechanism and other reasons, not all borrower debtors can repay the loan. Therefore, there is a risk connected to all debtors: they either repay their debt or they do not. The risk connected to a given debtor can be measured. For this purpose, the transnational money cartel created the credit raters, whose duty is to professionally weigh the measure of the risk, and to determine the price of credit risk accordingly. The credit will be more expensive for the debtor qualified risky. Risk undertaking spread more and more, and the respective credit undertaking contract was standardized. They created a special financial device, the security called “credit default swap”, the CDS, for this purpose.

They even thought about the possibility that the insurance and guarantee-undertaking financial institutions could take over the non-paid credits, for a fee. The CDS started an independent life, it could be sold and bought, used as a paying device, and even became unlimitedly multipliable, since all borrowers have a risk. Not the CDS is a big business, but the change of the value of the CDS over a determined period of time. On this change, it is possible to make a bet, i.e. to make option bargains. Who thinks it over, can state that, in fact, this is not a trading, but a betting on a future state. Here the bargain is being done with fictitious values, and these fictitious values are accounted as quasi money. This is made possible by the financial accounting, standardized also on global scale.

The transnational money cartel could reach, in this way, that the CDSs multiplied as an epidemic. In 2005, already three hundred trillion such securities were in circulation in the financial global system, degenerated into a global casino, which were only covered with such a quasi money with a fictitious value. By 2007, the number of the CDSs already doubled, that is it grew to six hundred trillion dollars. And, by June 2008, it reached seven hundred trillions. This is such a big money bubble, which already has nearly nothing to do with the productive economy – the whole of the world economy. The value of the GDP of the whole world amounts to sixty trillion dollars. Breaking from the real facts, the growth of the money consisting of figures synthetically produced by computers was not limited by anything any more.

All this was completed with the fact that, within the same time, the differentiation of the pension funds, insurance companies and savings banks administering money covered with work and the huge financial institutions dealing with investment and speculation was gradually terminated. By now, the actors of the money system got rid of all state control, and are only under their own control. They unscrupulously abused their freedom that became unlimited. They mixed the uncovered and the covered billions of dollars, and, in this way, the money rule global elite could buy up, for itself, the majority of the productive wealth of the world, including the main part of the former Hungarian national wealth.

The money cartel is also in command of the EU

The supra-state money cartel forced this system also on Europe. The European Union, transformed into an imperial structure, does not detain monetary prerogatives. The accounting device of the economic life, the euro, cannot be created by the organs of the European Union: the Parliament, the Commission and the Council. The exertion of monetary rights got over the Union, in such a way that the member states and their citizens cannot intervene in these decisions. The Treaty of Lisbon, being already in effect, stipulates that the primary goal of the European System of Central Banks, the ESCB, is the maintaining of price stability. The European Central Bank, the ECB, operating in Frankfurt, and the banks of the member states cannot grant overdrafts to the community institutions, as well as to the governments, local organs and bodies of public law of the member states, and they even cannot buy so-called debt instruments from them.

The governments of the EU member states and the community institutions cannot dispose of the activity of their own financial organizations. When they formulated it that Hungary received a credit from the Union, in fact we did not take up a credit from Brussels. We took up the credit money also from private banks, similarly as in the case of selling the state bonds, but now the money ran through the European Central Bank, the EU Commission and the Hungarian National Bank, as agents, and thus it was linked to severe conditions.

The European banking system is not obliged to promote the goals included in the Treaty of Lisbon. The monetary power – the most important and biggest power in the money rule world order – serves the trans-EU universal market economy (more exactly, the speculation money economy). Namely, the treaty does not define what the market economy is. It does not say anything about the relationship between the market economy and the social policy goals of the treaty. What resources is all that about? Where is the man, the human resource, and where are the natural resources? It does not say a word about what efficiency is all about either. The whole is dim and can be interpreted at discretion.

Thus, the money supply, the whole of the monetary policy is concentrated in the hands of a few people, and the real decisions are made, from the background, by the structures of the transnational money cartel. The free market (i.e.: the speculation of the money market, more exactly, of the money world) is considered to be more important than the equilibrated development of the society or the economy, and the high level of employment. The whole structure of the European Union lacks the conditions of the exertion of the monetary power. But they are not only missing, but the treaty even forbids it that such conditions could exist in the organizational system of the European Union. The European Union, which has introduced the common currency, the banknotes and the coins, for more than ten years, did not create a bank card of its own, which would perform the movement between the bank account and the cash, or would substitute cash. In the circulation of the euro, only the American Visa and Master Card bank cards can be used.

From all this, we can state that, in the money rule world order, the accounting system of the division of work was distorted. It was surrendered to the synthetic money, stranger from work and society, which further centralizes and concentrates the power. And this synthetic money undermined in a quick pace the operation of the society based on work and morality. The speculators, who unscrupulously hazard in the global casino, precipitated into crisis also the world economy surrendered to them. In our days, when the operation of the money system should almost be criticized, the re-regulation of the monetary authorities in the European Union, nevertheless, did not take place.

The internationally standardized accounting system was also distorted. This filing technique made it possible the rule of the synthetic money and the orgy of the hedge funds of the depredating speculators. It was expectable that the dollar would gradually inflate, because its quantity still surpasses many times the whole of the wealth expressible in money of the world. The more and more accelerating thickening and depreciation of the dollar will, expectably, pull also the euro down. It is only a question of time.

Thus, the basic question is whether a public money system or a private money system works within a given country or on world level. The transnational money cartel does not even want to hear about the restoration of the public money system, as well as the reduction, or even the termination of the authority and power of the central banks, which were invented and spread by them. In our days, the words, expressing the essence of the money rule, of Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the founder of the Rothschild dynasty: Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

American economist Gary North summarized in this way the essence of the Federal Reserve System, the financial organization controlling the money system of the United States, but being in 100% private property:

“The Federal Reserve System is not to issue money at the expense of the administration (state). Its duty is to regulate the economic life, with the help of the money-issuing monopoly handed over to it by the state, to the benefit of a few big banks. It has always been its primary function. The banking system forms a cartel. And the Federal Reserve System is the defender of this cartel and the enforcer of its interests.”

The money cartel has expropriated also the affairs of state

In addition to this, the transnational money cartel and the political elite also agreed in the fact that the money cartel would always supply the political class with the necessary amount of money, which would facilitate the exertion of power for it. This was advantageous for the political elite exerting the power because it was able, in this way, to overspend without that the extremely unpopular tax burdens should have been increased immediately. In this way, they could defer the negative effects to the next generation, and so they could preserve their popularity necessary for the elections. They could remain at government more easily. In return, the political elite defended the money-issuing monopoly of the money cartel, and assured for it the unlimited freedom of interest collecting. This is the same even at present, in almost all countries.

Simon Johnson, a leading economist of the International Monetary Fund, wrote the following on the 2008 collapse of the financial world system in his work titled The Quiet Coup: “The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government – a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time.”

As we have already referred to, the situation evolved similarly in Europe. The transnational money cartel, with the help of the governments of the given countries, gradually took over the weakened banks and financial institutions. Although it is even more insolvent that those banks on which it put its hands on, the money cartel can never go bankrupt, due to the money monopoly in its hands. The encoded expression that “it is too big to go bankrupt”, in fact, expresses that these financial structures are owned by the owners of the untouchable international money cartel, namely those who also control the governments of the given countries.

In order to illustrate the above, we refer to the fact that the newer debt burden, by which the American government bailed out the bankrupt giant investment financial institutions, increased the debt appeasing each and every American (including also the newborns) with forty-five thousand dollars. So, in 2010, a debt burden amounting already to three hundred forty-seven thousand dollars falls on every American. When a newborn gets its social security card from the authorities, also gets such a big debt burden, which it will carry until the end of its life. As if it had to study, work and bring up children all through its life, moaning under the weight of a heavy sack.

The bankers were forced to defence in Davos

One of the main features of the 2010 Davos meeting was that the super bankers representing the financial system got into a defensive position. They had to agree that there was a need for thorough reforms, that is for such drastic steps, which decrease the riskiness of the financial industry. On the meeting, they also agreed that the interests of both the creation of new workplaces and of the freedom of trade must be taken into account. Larry Summers, the key economic adviser of the American President, qualified the initial signs of the dénouement from the financial collapse and the consequent economic world crisis as nothing else but a “statistical recovery and a human recession”.

The participants to the Davos meeting were characterized by a general uncertainty. The leaders of global firms were somewhat more optimistic than the political leaders, but no common standing point was created about what the economic recovery would emerge, and whether a newer decay would precede it. They mentioned that an economic recovery is to be expected, marked with the acronym LUV. L is the shape of the European recovery, a slow process, requiring long time. U marks the also long-term process expectable in the United States, and V marks the powerful and quick development, which, expectably, will take place in the “emerging” economies of India, Brazil and China.

Of course, the representatives of the money rule world order and of the money and corporation oligarchy were worried about the possibility that the populism and the endeavour to protectionism could strengthen on global size. In this respect, populism means the enforcement of the interests of the majority of the population against the particular interests of the transnational money and corporation oligarchy, that is the interests of the inhabitants of a given country get priority against the interests of the money rule elite. Protectionism also means that the interests of the economic actors performing value-producing work and being active in the production have priority against those structures of the power economy, which, with all means, want to produce more money from money. If it is not possible otherwise, they do it at the detriment of the productive economy and the standard of living of the population.

For the transnational money cartel, the enforcement of the free movement of the capital is more important than any other points. This was expressed by Peter Sands, Executive Director of Standard Chartered Bank, when he put it this way: “Free trade is absolutely important from the point of development, and the raising of people from poverty.”

Chief leader of Deutsche Bank, Josef Ackermann, proposed that – similarly to the regular meetings of the heads of state and government of the G20, the most developed industrial states – it would be necessary to hold an also regular meeting of the B20, the leaders of the twenty biggest financial and economic groups in the world. This would assure that the voice of the leaders of the financial and economic life would be more heard when the heads of state and government of the G20 hold their annual meeting. The G20 – i.e. the owners and leaders of the Big Business, the global commercial banks and corporation empires – should determine what the politicians representing the states and government should talk about. This means that the organized private power should tell what decisions the public power may make. In our days, the public power is already the servant of the organized private power. Josef Ackermann only confirmed this fact when he made the proposal for the establishment of the B20. All officials must know that, in the money rule world order, all states and governments representing the public power are surrendered to the money rule global elite representing the organized private power, which is, at the same time, also the owner of the biggest enterprises in the world.

Nevertheless, most of the arguments were about how it would be possible to consolidate the still ailing financial global system. These arguments, nearly without exception, led to the severe criticism of the bankers. At the beginning of the Davos meeting, these representatives of the international money cartel still defended themselves loudly and found those astrological sums justified, which they pocket in the form of bonuses. At the end of the forum, nevertheless, they were forced into defensive. The chief leaders of Deutsche Bank and Barclays Bank declared that they are willing to pay a fee of a big amount to a global financial insurance company. This company would undertake, in the future, the bailout of the bankrupt banks. In this way, instead of the states – the governments and the taxpayers – from now on, the money world and the private firms would support the costs of consolidation of the bankrupt banks.

During private discussions, these potentates of the international money world were even shaking clubs, figuratively speaking, when they concretized how they imagine the decrease of risk in the industry dealing with money production, first of all in the operation of banks. In Davos, it became clear unambiguously that the decision-makers of the money rule economy are still far from getting to an agreement on the world-scale regulation of the financial system. For the moment, only the different possibilities of solution were outlined. It became unambiguous that – in exchange, as a return service, for making the financial system more secure – they want to make the credits more expensive and to limit them.

So, according to the ideas, such an insurance system would be created, which would help, in the future, the financial institutions got in crisis. The politicians and bankers participating to the World Economic Forum in principle supported this idea, but the International Monetary Fund only qualified it “practical”, because, in this way, the making of the financial system more secure could be financed from the insurance fees paid by the banks. They find this solution more realistic than the so-called Tobin Tax, which would levy a tax on financial transactions. Tobin, the Nobel Prize winner economist, has proposed, already years before, the levying of this tax on global level, on money transactions with speculation purpose. At that time, the idea was supported by Great Britain and France, but was received coldly in the United States. In Davos, it became unambiguous that the insurance fee paid by the financial structures is more acceptable for the transnational money cartel.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy went further than the representatives of the transnational money cartel. He suggested that the whole of the system of money capitalism should be reformed, limiting the size of the giant banks. In this way, a more united and uniform and more efficient global economy should be created. Sarkozy urged that, for the moment, the governments of the individual countries should not stop the supports serving the stimulation of the economy. The states must take such measures, which help to recover the productive economy, because, if these stimulating measures disappeared suddenly, we will have to count with the newer crisis of the world economy, on an even higher level than the previous one. Sarkozy thought that President Obama’s attempt to limit the size of the banks could only be efficient, if it is not achieved in only one country, but in the whole financial global system. According to the French President, this problem should also discussed within the next annual meeting of the G20, hosted in France.

The French President also stated that the American dollar cannot be the primary reserve currency of the world economy any more. He announced that France endeavours at the establishment of a new international monetary system. For this sake, Sarkozy proposed, on the pattern of the Bretton Woods system achieved in 1944, that such a summit should be convoked, on which the participants could agree on the rules of the new financial world system. These far-fetching ideas of the French President surprised several participants of the Davos meeting. Many participants received Sarkozy’s speech making a sour face, which they qualified as being full of commonplaces and demagogic. According to them, the speech was not properly thought over.

Here we remind the fact that, on the World Economic Forum held in Davos in February 2009, German Chancellor Angela Merkel proposed the establishment of the Economic Council of the UNO, in order to prevent a global financial crisis in the future. The German Chancellor envisaged the establishment of this financial and economic body with super authority on the pattern of the UNO Security Council, which could even make compulsory decisions. In 2009, Merkel mentioned that the affairs belonging to the authority of the planned Economic Council of the UNO should be included in a global economic basic document.

As we have already mentioned, a great attention was paid to the issue of protectionism again in Davos. A part of the participants thought that the import restriction measures, introduced in many countries for the sake of preserving the workplaces, only further deepen the crisis. They criticized that part of the 825 billion dollar economy-reviving packet of the American government, according to which only American steel and iron products can be used for infrastructural programs. The tools of protectionism are still used by the powerful countries even in our days. The United States, Germany, France and other states took several protectionist measures. Nevertheless, they forbid the same for the smaller and weaker countries. The double measure was present even in this question.

George Soros, who regularly attends the Davos meetings, related to the reporter of the CNBC (Consumer News and Business Channel) television that he finds the basic interest rates too low. In his opinion, this may lead to such money bubbles, which may result in the outburst of a newer financial crisis. Soros, who is counted as the most distinguished hedge fund manager even in our days, supported his opinion saying: When interest rates are low we have conditions for asset bubbles to develop, and they are developing at the moment. The ultimate asset bubble is gold.”

Gold prices last month reached a record level of just over $1,225 per ounce, having risen around 40% last year. Investors are piling into the metal amid fears both of potential inflation and fading faith about the stability of previously-assumed safe assets. Such are state securities and government debts. George Soros proposed so-called imminent “exit strategies”. Due to the unprecedented support handed out to troubled banks and consumers, governments around the world could be in danger of triggering a double-dip in the global economy.

In February 2010, Soros said: “I think that since the adjustment process to the recession is incomplete, there is a need for additional stimulus. Some countries, like the US and European countries, have plenty of room to increase their deficits. The political resistance to doing so increases the chances of a double dip in the economy in 2011 and after that.” George Soros supported President Obama’s idea to divide part of the American banks grown giant into smaller banks, but, at the same time, he thought that the suggestions concerning the taxation of the banking system may endanger the recovery of the economy and the start of the boom.

What is the real cause of the conflict between Jews and Gentiles?

Ravage: “A Real Case Against the Jews”

Zionist theoretician and publicist Marcus Eli Ravage (1884, Rumania – 1965, United States) immigrated into the United States in 1901, and studied at several American universities, among them at the University of Columbia. He published several articles in the magazines Nation, New Republic and Harper. Besides this, he participated actively in the American Jewish public life. In January and February 1928, he published, in The Century Magazine, two writings, which stirred great sensation and are quoted even in our days. One of them is A Real Case Against the Jews, and the other is titled The Jew: Commissary to the Gentiles. Some researchers regard these two studies sarcastic writings, i.e. lampoons, but those who refer to them take the message quite serious. Connecting to the latter, we present both writings in detail, because we find their content timely even in our days.

Ravage addresses the Gentiles – the Christians, the Goy – with benevolent irony:

Of course, you do resent us. It is no good telling me you don’t. So let us not waste any time on denials and alibis. You know you do, and I know it, and we understand each other. To be sure, some of your best friends are Jews, and all that. I have heard that before once or twice, I think. And I know, too, – continues Ravage – that you do not include me personally when you fling out at us in your wholesale fashion, because I am, well, so different, don’t you know, almost as good as one of yourselves. That little exemption does not, somehow, move me to gratitude; but never mind that now. It is the aggressive, climbing, pushing, materialistic sort you dislike – those, in a word, who remind you so much of your own up-and-coming brethren. We understand each other perfectly. I don’t hold it against you. Bless my soul, I do not blame anybody for disliking anybody. The thing that intrigues me about this anti-Jewish business, as you play at it, is your total lack of grit.

You are so indirect and roundabout with it, you make such fantastic and transparent excuses, you seem to be suffering from self-consciousness so horribly, that if the performance were not grotesque it would be irritating. It is not as if you were amateurs: you have been at it for over fifteen centuries. Yet watching you and hearing your childish pretexts, one might get the impression that you did not know yourselves what it is all about. You resent us, but you cannot clearly say why. You have been piling up justifications for yourselves these many hundreds of years and each new invention is more laughable than the last and each new excuse contradicts and annihilates the last.

We tried to render Ravage’s style, although, necessarily, we had to abbreviate, this is why we did not use quotation marks. Ravage remarks that, not so many years ago, the Jews used to hear that they were money-grubbers and commercial materialists. Now (around 1928) the complaint is being whispered around that no art and no profession is safe against Jewish invasion.

He continues: We are, if you are to be believed, at once clannish and exclusive and unassimilable because we won’t intermarry with you, and we are also climbers and pushers and a menace to your racial integrity. Our standard of living is so low that we create your slums and sweated industries, and so high that we crowd you out of your best residential sections.

We shirk our patriotic duty in wartime because we are pacifists by nature and tradition, and we are the arch-plotters of universal wars and the chief beneficiaries of those wars (see the late “Dearborn Independent,” passim, and “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”). We are at once the founders and leading adherents of capitalism and the chief perpetrators of the rebellion against capitalism. Surely, history has nothing like us for versatility!

After this, Ravage remarks cynically: And, oh! I almost forgot the reason of reasons. We are the stiff-necked people who never accepted Christianity, and we are the criminal people who crucified its founder.

After this preparation, Ravage passes on to the essence: But I tell you, you are self-deceivers. You lack either the self-knowledge or the mettle to face the facts squarely and own up to the truth. You resent the Jew not because, as some of you seem to think, he crucified Jesus but because he gave him birth. Your real quarrel with us is not that we have rejected Christianity but that we have imposed it upon you!

Your loose, contradictory charges against us are not a patch on the blackness of our proved historic offense. You accuse us of stirring up revolution in Moscow. Suppose we admit the charge. What of it? Compared with what Paul the Jew of Tarsus accomplished in Rome, the Russian upheaval is a mere street brawl.

(Spreading of Jesus’ teachings is partly linked to Paul the Apostle, who was a Roman citizen born in the town of Tarsus of the province Cilicia, and grew up in Judaism, following the family traditions. He zealously persecuted the Christians, but then, through a personal miracle, he converted and turned against his previous self. He joined Jesus’ disciples and stepped among the Apostles. Paul of Tarsus is regarded the 13th Apostle, because he was invited by God himself, what is more, he is even called “the first after the Only One”. After Jesus, he is the person about whom the Christians detain the most information. We can inform about him not only from the Acts of the Apostles, but also from several epistles written by Paul the Apostle, and which reveal directly his personality and thoughts. We know from the Book of Luke that his original Hebrew name was Saul, and belonged to the Diaspora Jewry, since he originated from the town of Tarsus, located between Anatolia and Syria. He got to Jerusalem as a young man, where he studied the Mosaic law at the school of Rabbi Gamaliel. He also learned how to make the mohair with which tents were made. Later, as a Christian missionary, that trade became a means of support for him, avoiding in this way to burden the local churches with his subsistence.

For Saul transformed into Paul, it was important to get to know those communities, which confessed to be the disciples of Jesus. He learned from them the new faith, in the centre of which stands not the Mosaic law, but the person of the crucified and resurrected Jesus, whose important teaching was the remission of sins. As a zealous Jew, he could not accept this teaching and he felt obliged to haunt the followers of Christ even beyond Jerusalem. It was at around 34 AD, on the road to Damascus, when the famous event happened, during which Saul – according to his own words – was possessed by Christ. Luke the Evangelist reports on the details, relating how the Light of the resurrected Christ affected Paul and how it changed all his life. In his own epistles, Paul the Apostle mentions not only the vision, but also the revelation. He emphasizes that he became an apostle from God’s will, being called by God. He expressly emphasizes that his conversion was not the result of his own spiritual development, but the consequence of a divine intervention, of God’s mercy. From then on, he rejected all that he previously considered a value, and put his life exclusively in the service of Jesus Christ and his Gospel.

The activity of Paul the Apostle had a universal character. He saw clearly the importance of the fact that the pagans also should get to God, who offers – through the crucified and resurrected Christ – salvation for each and every man, irrespective of their origin. Paul consecrated his life to make more and more people know this message and to conciliate them with God and with each other. Paul the Apostle stood on the basis of a universal reality, which comprised not only the Jews or a certain group of mankind, but, in a universal mode, the whole mankind, because God is the God of all human beings. First he went to Antioch, Syria, where he preached the Gospel to the Greeks. It was here where the term “Christian” appeared, meaning “believer in Christ”. From Antioch, he went to Cyprus, and then he visited Asia Minor several times. From here, he went on to Europe. Paul the Apostle gave the highest evidence of his faith when he sacrifices his life in Rome, during the rule of the Emperor Nero.)

In December 2006, the Vatican communicated that, the sarcophagi of Paul the Apostle was found in the course of the excavations made in St. Paul’s Cathedral, situated outside the walls of Rome. Pope Benedict XVI appointed Cardinal Montezemolo the Chief Priest of the St. Paul’s Cathedral, who made important restoration works within the cathedral. The marble sarcophagi of St. Paul of Tarsus was found during the excavations made under the high altar, after they moved a part of the altar raised in the honour of a martyr from the 4th century.

In order to weigh the hypothesis of Marcus Eli Ravage, we have to mention the fact that it was Paul the Apostle who firstly recognized that the new faith can only be viable if it is spread not only within the Jews. For the sake of the success of the new religion, they renounced to the requirement that the taking up of Christianity should mean, at the same time, the acceptance of the Judaism. In other words, they did not link even the conversion to the Christian faith to the obligatory pledge of poverty. The first Christian centres, established as a consequence of the activity of Paul, as well as the Patriarchates of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople and Rome gradually strengthened and so the basis of the Christian church was established. Following the crisis developing in the Roman Empire, the spreading of Christianity accelerated in the third century. The new faith promised salvation, was not part of the state power, and did not prescribe complicated rules. The command of mutual love was in the centre of his teachings, which assured a moral elevation and self-appreciation to the followers, cared the poor, and preached the hope of salvation. All this contributed to the quick spreading of the Christian teachings. At the beginning, the Roman Empire did not persecute the Christians, except for a few emperors like Caligula and Nero. The persecution of Christians reached their climax when the religion turning against the divinization of the emperor has already spread, but the empire was still strong enough to haunt the Chrisians, so that this haunting should not paralyze the operation of the empire.

Under the rule of Emperor Constantine (336 – 337 AD) the persecution became pointless, because the new religion has already integrated in the Roman society, and the violent persecution would have endangered the survival of the empire. The crisis of the whole Roman Empire favored the spreading of Christianity, which was only enhanced by the bloody Christian haunting. In 313 AD, Constantine assured free practice of religion for the Christians. The Christianity, became in this way official, had the possibility to establish its open institutional and dogmatic system, which were adopted at the early synods. This organizational reinforcement made it possible that Christianity became a state religion, which happened in 391 AD, during the rule of Theodosius, the last emperor of the integral Roman Empire. Christianity grew a viable religion and became a political factor. By its declaration a state religion, nevertheless, the decline and the ultimate fall of the Roman Empire could not be hindered.

Coming back to Ravage’s A Real Case Against the Jews, the Jewish theoretician goes on saying that the Gentiles (Christians, Goy) make much noise and fury about the undue Jewish influence in their theaters and movie industry. He considers it evident and accepts it as well-founded. At the same time, he asks the question: But what is that compared to our staggering influence in your churches, your schools, your laws and your governments, and the very thoughts you think every day? Ravage refers to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which, in his opinion, was forged by a clumsy Russian, but, for the sake of argument, he admits that every word of it is true. According to the Protocols, the Jews plotted to bring on the late World Wars. Nevertheless, he emphasizes that he regards the Protocols genuine and authentic only for the sake of making a point for his message. His question is the following:

But what is that beside the unquestionable historical conspiracy which the Jews have carried out, which they have never denied because the Christians (Gentiles, Goy) never had the courage to charge the Jews with it, and of which the full record is extant for anybody to read?

Ravage says, verbatim, the following:

“If you really are serious when you talk of Jewish plots, may I not direct your attention to one worth talking about? What use is it wasting words on the alleged control of your public opinion by Jewish financiers, newspaper owners and movie magnates, when you might as well justly accuse us of the proved control of your whole civilization by the Jewish Gospels?

You have not begun to appreciate the real depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are disturbers. We are subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the bottom not merely of the latest great war but of nearly all your wars, not only of the Russian but of every other major revolution in your history. We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one can tell how long we shall go on doing it.

Look back a little and see what has happened. Nineteen hundred years ago you were an innocent, carefree, pagan race. You worshipped countless gods and goddesses, the spirits of the air, of the running streams and of the woodland. You took unblushing pride in the glory of your naked bodies. You carved images of your gods and of the tantalizing human figure. You delighted in the combats of the field, the arena and the battle-ground. War and slavery were fixed institutions in your systems. Disporting yourselves on the hillsides and in the valleys of the great outdoors, you took to speculating on the wonder and mystery of life and laid the foundations of natural science and philosophy. Yours was a noble, sensual culture, unirked by the prickings of a social conscience or by any sentimental questionings about human equality. Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you alone.

But we did not leave you alone. We took you in hand and pulled down the beautiful and generous structure you had reared, and changed the whole course of your history. We conquered you as no empire of yours ever subjugated Africa or Asia. And we did it all without armies, without bullets, without blood or turmoil, without force of any kind. We did it solely by the irresistible might of our spirit, with ideas, with propaganda.

We made you the willing and unconscious bearers of our mission to the whole world, to the barbarous races of the earth, to the countless unborn generations. Without fully understanding what we were doing to you, you became the agents at large of our racial tradition, carrying our gospel to the unexplored ends of the earth.

Our tribal customs have become the core of your moral code. Our tribal laws have furnished the basic groundwork of all your august constitutions and legal systems. Our legends and our folk-tales are the sacred lore which you croon to your infants. Our poets have filled your hymnals and your prayer-books. Our national history has become an indispensable part of the learning of your pastors and priests and scholars. Our kings, our statesmen, our prophets, our warriors are your heroes. Our ancient little country is your Holy Land. Our national literature is your Holy Bible. What our people thought and taught has become inextricably woven into your very speech and tradition, until no one among you can be called educated who is not familiar with our racial heritage.

Jewish artisans and Jewish fishermen are your teachers and your saints, with countless statues carved in their image and innumerable cathedrals raised to their memories. A Jewish maiden is your ideal of motherhood and womanhood. A Jewish rebel-prophet is the central figure in your religious worship. We have pulled down your idols, cast aside your racial inheritance, and substituted for them our God and our traditions. No conquest in history can even remotely compare with this clean sweep of our conquest over you.

How did we do it? Almost by accident. Two thousand years ago nearly, in far-off Palestine, our religion had fallen into decay and materialism. Money-changers were in possession of the temple. Degenerate, selfish priests mulcted our people and grew fat. Then a young patriot-idealist arose and went about the land calling for a revival of faith. He had no thought of setting up a new church. Like all the prophets before him, his only aim was to purify and revitalize the old creed. He attacked the priests and drove the money-changers from the temple. This brought him into conflict with the established order and its supporting pillars. The Roman authorities, who were in occupation of the country, fearing his revolutionary agitation as a political effort to oust them, arrested him, tried him and condemned him to death by crucifixion, a common form of execution at that time.

The followers of Jesus of Nazareth, mainly slaves and poor workmen, in their bereavement and disappointment, turned away from the world and formed themselves into a brotherhood of pacifist non-resisters, sharing the memory of their crucified leader and living together communistically. They were merely a new sect in Judea, without power or consequence, neither the first nor the last.

Only after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans did the new creed come into prominence. Then a patriotic Jew named Paul or Saul conceived the idea of humbling the Roman power by destroying the morale of its soldiery with the doctrines of love and non-resistance preached by the little sect of Jewish Christians. He became the Apostle to the Gentiles, he who hitherto had been one of the most active persecutors of the band. And so well did Paul do his work that within four centuries the great empire which had subjugated Palestine along with half of the world, was a heap of ruins. And the law which went forth from Zion became the official religion of Rome.

This was the beginning of our dominance in your world. But it was only a beginning. From this time forth your history is little more than a struggle for mastery between your own old pagan spirit and our Jewish spirit. Half your wars, great and little, are religious wars, fought over the interpretation of one thing or another in our teachings. You no sooner broke free from your primitive religious simplicity and attempted the practice of the pagan Roman learning than Luther armed with our gospels arose to down you and re-enthrone our heritage. Take the three principal revolutions in modern times – the French, the American and the Russian. What are they but the triumph of the Jewish idea of social, political and economic justice?

And the end is still a long way off. We still dominate you. At this very moment your churches are torn asunder by a civil war between Fundamentalists and Modernists, that is to say between those who cling to our teachings and traditions literally and those who are striving by slow steps to dispossess us. In Dayton, Tennessee, a Bible-bred community forbids the teaching of your science because it conflicts with our ancient Jewish account of the origin of life; and Mr. Bryan, the leader of the anti-Jewish Ku Klux Klan in the Democratic National Convention, makes the supreme fight of his life in our behalf, without noticing the contradiction. Again and again the Puritan heritage of Judea breaks out in waves of stage censorship, Sunday blue laws and national prohibition acts. And while these things are happening you twaddle about Jewish influence in the movies!

(Those laws were called blue laws, which were designed to restrict or ban some or all Sunday shopping and any commercial activity. Their goal was to enforce, in this way, the religious standards, particularly the observance of a day of worship or rest. There are no evidence that these laws are called blue laws because originally they were printed on blue paper. Rather, the word blue was used in the 17th century as a disparaging reference to rigid moral codes.)

Is it any wonder you resent us? We have put a clog upon your progress. We have imposed upon you an alien book and an alien faith which you cannot swallow or digest, which is at cross-purposes with your native spirit, which keeps you ever-lastingly ill-at-ease, and which you lack the spirit either to reject or to accept in full.

Is it any wonder you resent us? We have put a clog upon your progress. We have imposed upon you an alien book and an alien faith which you cannot swallow or digest, which is at cross-purposes with your native spirit, which keeps you ever-lastingly ill-at-ease, and which you lack the spirit either to reject or to accept in full.

In full, of course, you never have accepted our Christian teachings. In your hearts you still are pagans. You still love war and graven images and strife. You still take pride in the glory of the nude human figure. Your social conscience, in spite of all democracy and all your social revolutions, is still a pitifully imperfect thing. We have merely divided your soul, confused your impulses, paralyzed your desires. In the midst of battle you are obliged to kneel down to him who commanded you to turn the other cheek, who said “Resist not evil” and “Blessed are the peace-makers.” In your lust for gain you are suddenly disturbed by a memory from your Sunday-school days about taking no thought for the morrow. In your industrial struggles, when you would smash a strike without compunction, you are suddenly reminded that the poor are blessed and that men are brothers in the Fatherhood of the Lord. And as you are about to yield to temptation, your Jewish training puts a deterrent hand on your shoulder and dashes the brimming cup from your lips. You Christians have never become Christianized. To that extent we have failed with you. But we have forever spoiled the fun of paganism for you.

So why should you not resent us? If we were in your place we should probably dislike you more cordially than you do us. But we should make no bones about telling you why. We should not resort to subterfuges and transparent pretexts. With millions of painfully respectable Jewish shopkeepers all about us we should not insult your intelligence and our own honesty by talking about communism as a Jewish philosophy. And with millions of hard-working impecunious Jewish peddlers and laborers we should not make ourselves ridiculous by talking about international capitalism as a Jewish monopoly. No, we should go straight to the point. We should contemplate this confused, ineffectual muddle which we call civilization, this half-Christian half-pagan medley, and – were our places reversed – we should say to you point-blank: ‘For this mess thanks to you, to your prophets and to your Bible.’ “

The Jew as the representative of the Gentiles

Marcus Eli Ravage published another article worth the attention, The Jew: Commissary to the Gentiles, in the February 1928 issue of The Century Magazine. In it, he writes that the Christians worry and complain about the Jews’ influence in their civilization. They consider the Jews an international people, a compact minority in their midst, with traditions, interests, aspirations and objectives distinct from their own. And they declare that this state of affairs is a menace to their orderly development. It confuses the natural impulses of the Christian (Gentile) society, it defeats their purposes and it muddles up their destiny.

Nevertheless, Ravage does not altogether see any danger in it, because the societies have always been ruled by minorities. To him, it seems a matter of indifference what the remote origin and professed creed of the governing clique is. The influence, on the other hand, is certainly there, and it is vastly greater and more insidious than the Gentiles appear to realize. That is what puzzles and amuses and sometimes exasperates the Jews about the Gentiles’ game of Jew-baiting. It sounds so portentous. They go about whispering terrifyingly of the hand of the Jew in this and that and the other thing. It makes the Jews quake. They are conscious of the injury they did the Gentiles when they imposed upon them their alien faith and traditions. And then, he continues:

“Suppose, we say tremblingly, you should wake up to the fact that your religion, your education, your morals, your social, governmental and legal systems, are fundamentally of our making! And then you specify, and talk vaguely of Jewish financiers and Jewish motion-picture promoters, and our terror dissolves in laughter. The Goy, we see with relief, will never know the real blackness of our crimes.

We cannot make it out. Either you do not know or you have not the courage to charge us with those deeds for which there is at least a shadow of evidence and which an intelligent judge and jury could examine without impatience. Why bandy about unconvincing trifles when you might so easily indict us for serious and provable offenses? Why throw up to us a patent and clumsy forgery such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion when you might as well confront us with the Revelation of St. John? (The Book of Revelations written by John the Apostle, in The New Testament – J. D.) Why talk about Marx and Trotski when you have Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus to confound us with?

You call us subverters, agitators, revolution-mongers. It is the truth, and I cower at your discovery. It could be shown with only the slightest straining and juggling of the facts that we have been at the bottom of all the major revolutions in your history. We undoubtedly had a sizable finger in the Lutheran Rebellion, and it is simply a fact that we were the prime movers in the bourgeois democratic revolutions of the century before the last, both in France and America. If we were not, we did not know our own interests. But do you point your accusing finger us and charge us with these heinous and recorded crimes? Not at all! You fantastically lay at our door the recent great War and the upheaval in Russia, which have done not only the most injury to the Jews themselves but which a school-boy could have foreseen would have that result.

But even these plots and revolutions are as nothing compared with the great conspiracy which we engineered at the beginning of this era and which was destined to make the creed of a Jewish sect the religion of the Western world. The Reformation was not designed in malice purely. It squared us with an ancient enemy and restored our Bible to its place of honor in Christendom. The Republican revolutions of the eighteenth century freed us of our age-long political and social disabilities. They benefited us, but they did you no harm. On the contrary, they prospered and expanded you. You owe your preeminence in the world to them. But the upheaval which brought Christianity into Europe was – or at least may easily be shown to have been – planned and executed by Jews as an act of revenge against a great Gentile state. And when you talk about Jewish conspiracies I cannot for the world understand why you do not mention the destruction of Rome and the whole civilization of antiquity concentrated under her banners, at the hands of Jewish Christianity.

It is unbelievable, but you Christians do not seem to know where your religion came from, nor how, nor why. Your historians, with one great exception, do not tell you. The documents in the case, which are part of your Bible, you chant over but do not read. We have done our work too thoroughly; you believe our propaganda too implicitly. The coming of Christianity is to you not an ordinary historical event growing out of other events of the time; it is the fulfilment of a divine Jewish prophecy – with suitable amendments of your own. It did not, as you see it, destroy a great Gentile civilization and a great Gentile empire with which Jewry was at war; it did not plunge mankind into barbarism and darkness for a thousand years; it came to bring salvation to the Gentile world!

Yet here, if ever, was a great subversive movement, hatched in Palestine, spread by Jewish agitators, financed by Jewish money, taught in Jewish pamphlets and broadsides, at a time when Jewry and Rome were in a death-struggle, and ending in the collapse of the great Gentile empire. You do not even see it, though an intelligent child, unbefuddled by theological magic, could tell you what it is all about after a hasty reading of the simple record. And then you go on prattling of Jewish conspiracies and cite as instances the Great War and the Russian Revolution! Can you wonder that we Jews have always taken your anti-Semites rather lightly, as long as they did not resort to violence?”

After this, Ravage refers to British historian Edward Gibbon (1737–1794), who finished in 1788 the publication of his six-volume main work The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Gibbon, who dealt with this historical period as a historian, leant primarily on first-hand, original documents and sources. Since he was not a clerical person, but a scientist, he looked on the organized religions with a rather critical eye. Ravage points out that Gibbon did not try to account for the end of a great era by inventing fatuous nonsense. He avoided saying that the vice and degradation of Rome was caused by the decay of morals and faith in an empire which was at that very time in the midst of its most glorious creative period.

According to Ravage, Gibbon was a race-conscious Gentile and an admirer of the culture of the pagan West. As a historian, he had no difficulty laying his finger on the malady that had rotted and wasted away the noble edifice of antique civilization. According to Gibbon, Christianity – the law which went forth from Zion and the word of God from Jerusalem – was the central cause of the decline and fall of Rome and all she represented.

Ravage thinks that Gibbon did not go far enough. He was born and died a century before the invention of “scientific anti-Semitism”. Therefore, he left wholly out of account the element of deliberation. He saw an alien creed sweeping out of the East and overwhelming the fair lands of the West. It never occurred to him that it was precisely to this destructive end that the whole scheme of salvation was dedicated. Yet the facts are plain.

At around 65 BC, Judea was a tiny kingdom off the Eastern Mediterranean. For five centuries it has been hardly more than a geographical expression. Again and again it has been overrun and destroyed and its population carried into exile or slavery by its powerful neighbors. Nominally independent, it was as unstable as ever and on the edge of civil war. The empire of the West, with her nucleus in the City Republic of Rome, while not yet mistress of the world, was speedily heading that way. She was acknowledged the one great military power of the time as well as the heir of Greece and the center of civilization. Then a dispute had arisen between two brothers over the succession to the petty throne, and the Roman general Pompey was called upon to arbitrate between the claimants. Pompey happened to be in Damascus at that time, winding up bigger matters. With the simple directness of a republican soldier, Pompey exiled one of the brothers, tossed the function of chief priesthood to his rival, and abolished the kingly dignity altogether. Pompey’s mediation amounted in effect to making Judea a Roman dependency.

The Jews objected, and Rome, to conciliate them and to conform to local prejudice, restored the royal office. She appointed, that is, a king of her own choosing. He was the son of an excise-man, an Idumean by race, named Herod. But the Jews were not placated, and continued making trouble. Rome thought it very ungrateful of them. (The Idumeans are a Semite people, which settled down. in the 13th century BC, in the region located south of the Dead Sea, and founded a kingdom here. There were frequent hostilities between Idumeans and Jews. After the Egyptian Captivity, their state was mentioned as Idumea. The Hasmoneans conquered the Edomites, and then converted them to Judaism by force. Herod the Great was born from this people.)

Jewish discontent grew to disaffection and open revolt when their Gentile masters began importing into Jerusalem the blessings of Western culture. Graven images, athletic games, Greek drama, and gladiatorial shows appeared. All these were not to the Jewish taste. The pious Jews resented them as an offense in the nostrils of Jehovah, even though the resident officials patiently explained they were meant for the entertainment and edification of the non-Jewish garrison. The Judeans resisted with especial strenuousness the advent of the efficient Roman tax-gatherer. Above all, they wanted back a king of their own race and their own royal line. Among the masses the rebellion took the form of a revival of the old belief in a Messiah, a divinely appointed savior. The word Messiah, meaning “anointed” in Hebrew, was originally an attribute reinforcing the function of priest or king. Later it also meant the person himself: the king and the priest. The king – as the anointed of God – managed the fate of God’s people. If the general situation worsened, it was not God made responsible for the failures, and so the belief emerged that Jehovah will see for the real Messiah. Even when the continuity between the ruling king and the expectable liberator ceased, the hope still persisted that a Messiah, descending from the family of David, would create the Messianic empire, Jehovah’s rule over all peoples, predicted by the prophets.

So, they expected the Messiah to redeem God’s chosen people from the foreign yoke and make Judea supreme among the nations. Ravage mentions that claimants to the mission were not wanting. In Galilee, one Judas led a rather formidable insurrection, which enlisted much popular support. John, called the Baptist, operated in the Jordan country. He was followed by another north-country man, Jesus of Nazareth. According to the article published in The Century Magazine, all three were masters of the technique of couching incendiary political sedition in harmless theological phrases. All three used the same signal of revolt – “The time is at hand.” And all three were speedily apprehended and executed, both Galileans by crucifixion.

Ravage thinks that Jesus of Nazareth was, like his predecessors, a political agitator engaged in liberating his country from the foreign oppressor. There is even considerable evidence that he entertained an ambition to become king of an independent Judea. He claimed, or his biographers later claimed for him, descent from the ancient royal line of David. But his paternity is somewhat confused. The same writers who traced the origin of his mother’s husband back to the psalmist-king Solomon, also pictured Jesus as the son of Jehovah, and admitted that Joseph was not his father. It seems, however, that Jesus before long realized the hopelessness of his political mission and turned his oratorical gifts and his great popularity with the masses in quite another direction. Using modern terms, he began preaching a primitive form of populism, socialism and pacifism.

The effect of this change in his program was to gain him the hostility of the substantial, propertied classes, the priests and patriots generally, and to reduce his following to the poor, the laboring mass and the slaves. After his death these lowly disciples formed themselves into a communistic brotherhood. A sermon their late leader had once delivered upon a hillside – the Sermon on the Mount – summed up for them the essence of his teachings, and they made it their rule of life.

Ravage emphasizes: It was a philosophy calculated to appeal profoundly to humble people. It comforted those who suffered here on earth with promised rewards beyond the grave. It made virtues of the necessities of the weak. Men without hope in the future were admonished to take no thought for the morrow. Men too helpless to resent insult or injury were taught to resist not evil. Men condemned to lifelong drudgery and indigence were assured of the dignity of labor and of poverty. The meek, the despised, the disinherited, the downtrodden, were – in the hereafter – to be the elect and favored of God. The worldly, the ambitious, the rich and powerful, were to be denied admission to heaven.

The result of Jesus’ mission was a new sect in Judea. It was neither the first nor the last. Judea, which was a fertile soil for strange creeds. The Ebionites, i.e. the Jewish Christians – the paupers, as they called themselves – did not regard their beliefs as a new religion. Jews they had been born, and Jews they remained. The teachings of their master were rather in the nature of a social philosophy, an ethic of conduct, a way of life. To modern Christians, who never tire of asking why the Jews did not accept Jesus and his teachings, Ravage answers that for a long time none but Jews did. The fact that the whole Jewish people did not turn Ebionites can be regarded the same as one cannot expect all Americans to join the Unitarians or the Baptists or other sects.

To this, we can add that the Christians – coming from Jews and Proselytes converted to Judaism – were really sticking to the Mosaic laws strictly. For instance, they practiced the circumcision, kept the Sabbath and the Jewish eating rules. They represented this line even in the Jerusalem community. The arguments with Christians of pagan origin were rather sharp, especially in the first period of Christianity. Although the Apostolic Synod tried to make peace in this area, the Jew Christians set a bad eye on the activity of Paul the Apostle among the pagans all the time. At the beginning, the Jew Christians were in majority, but the Christian communities multiplying more and more on the territory of the Roman Empire soon forced them into minority.

In the 2nd century AD, they were still accounted as a separate group. Hitherto their number decreased and their communities got a character of sect. From the point of the teaching separated from Christianity, they are accounted as a not even united fraction, mentioned as Ebionites. They rejected not only the teachings of Paul the Apostle, sticking to the Mosaic books, but they also questioned the existence of Jesus, the Messiah, the Logos (the Word). According to the Gospel of John, the Logos (the Word) was Jesus Christ himself. In some contemporary philosophical systems, the Logos (the Word) was a linking hook, an intermediary between the deity deemed good and the matter deemed bad. The Gospel of John deemed Jesus the incarnation of this Logos (Word). Even his Gospel starts with the sentence: “And the Word became flesh”. The attributes of the Logos (Word) listed at John the Evangelist are the life, the light, the glory, the mercy, the truth and the completeness. In the contemporary Gnostic philosophy and religious teaching, the above listed notions are present also as intermediaries.

Continuing the presentation of Ravage’s second article, he exposes that in ordinary times little attention would have been paid to the ragged brotherhood. Being slaves and laborers for the most part, their meekness might even have been encouraged by the solider classes. But with the country in the midst of a struggle with a huge foreign enemy, the religious teachings promising an unworldly beatitude took on a dangerous aspect. It was a creed of disillusion, resignation and defeat. It threatened to undermine the morale of the nation’s fighting men in time of war. This blessing of the peacemakers, this turning of the other cheek, this non-resistance, this love your enemy, looked like a deliberate attempt to paralyze the national will in a crisis and assure victory to the foe.

After this, Ravage finds it quite logical that the Jewish authorities began persecuting the Ebionim. Their meetings were invaded and dispersed, their leaders were clapped into jail, their doctrines were proscribed. It looked for awhile as if the sect would be speedily wiped out. Then, unexpectedly, the curtain rose on a new act in the historical drama, and events took a sudden new turn. Perhaps the bitterest foe of the sectaries was one Saul, a maker of tents. A native of Tarsus and thus a man of some education in Greek culture, he despised the new teachings for their unworldliness and their remoteness from life. A patriotic Jew, he dreaded their effect on the national cause. A traveled man, versed in several languages, he was ideally suited for the task of going about among the scattered Jewish communities to counteract the spread of their socialistic pacifistic doctrines.

The leaders of Jewry in Jerusalem appointed him chief persecutor to the Ebionim. He was on his way to Damascus one day to arrest a group of the sectaries when a novel idea came to him. In the quaint phrase of the Book of Acts he saw a vision. He saw as a matter of fact, two. He perceived, to begin with, how utterly hopeless were the chances of little Judea winning out in an armed conflict against the greatest military power in the world. Second, and more important, it came to him that the vagabond creed which he had been repressing might be forged into an irresistible weapon against the formidable foe. Pacifism, non-resistance, resignation, love, were dangerous teachings at home, among Jews. Spread among the enemy’s legions, they might break down their discipline and thus yet bring victory to Jerusalem.

Ravage thinks that Saul was probably the first man to see the possibilities of conducting war by propaganda. He journeyed on to Damascus, and there, to the amazement alike of his friends and of those he had gone to suppress, he announced his conversion to the new faith and applied for admission to the Christian brotherhood. On his return to Jerusalem he laid his new strategy before the Elders of Zion (the Sanhedrin, or its predecessor). They were startled to hear it. After much debate and searching of souls, it was adopted. More resistance was offered by the leaders of the Ebionim of the capital. They were mistrustful of his motives, and they feared that his proposal to strip the faith of its ancient Jewish observances and practices so as to make it acceptable to Gentiles would fill the fraternity with alien half-converts, and dilute its strength.

But, in the end, Saul won them over, too. And so Saul, the fiercest persecutor of Jesus’ followers, became Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles. And so, incidentally, began the spread into the pagan lands of the West, an entirely new Oriental religion. Unfortunately for Paul’s plan, the new strategy worked much too well. His revamped and rather alluring theology made converts faster than he had dared hope, or than he even wished.

It should be kept in mind that his idea was at this stage purely defensive. He had as yet no thought of evangelizing the world. He only hoped to discourage the enemy. With that accomplished, and the Roman garrisons out of Palestine, Paul was prepared to call a truce. But the slaves and oppressed of the Empire, the wretched conscripts, and the starving proletariat of the capital itself, found as much solace in the adapted Pauline version of the creed as the poor Jews before them had found in the original teachings of their crucified master.

The result of this unforeseen success was to open the enemy’s eyes to what was going on in fact. Disturbing reports of insubordination among the troops began pouring into Rome from the army chiefs in Palestine and elsewhere. Instead of giving the imperial authorities pause, the new tactics only stiffened their determination. Rome swooped down upon Jerusalem with fire and sword, and after a fierce siege which lasted four years, she destroyed the nest of the agitation in 70 AD. At least she thought she had destroyed it. The historians of the time leave us in no doubt as to the aims of Rome. They tell us that Nero sent Vespasian and his son Titus with definite and explicit orders to annihilate Palestine and Christianity together.

To the Romans, Christianity meant nothing more than militant Judaism, anyhow, an interpretation which does not seem far from the facts. As to Nero’s wish, Vespasian had at least half of it realized for him. Palestine was so thoroughly annihilated that it has remained a political ruin to this day. But Christianity was not so easily destroyed. It was only after the fall of Jerusalem that Paul’s program developed to the full. Hitherto, as I have said, his tactic had been merely to frighten off the conqueror, in the manner of Moses plaguing the Pharaohs. He had gone along cautiously and hesitantly, taking care not to arouse the powerful foe. He was willing to dangle his novel weapon before the foe’s nose, and let him feel its edge, but he shrank from thrusting it in full force. Now that the worst had happened and Judea had nothing further to lose, he flung scruples to the wind and carried the war into the enemy’s country. The goal now was nothing less than to humble Rome as she had humbled Jerusalem, to wipe her off the map as she had wiped out Judea.

Following Ravage’s argumentation, the reader may have doubts about how he interprets the relationship between Rome and Christianity and Rome and the Jewry. Also Ravage feels that he has to support his idea with something else either, therefore he invites John the Apostle, who was very close to Paul. John was more outspoken than Paul, who spent half of his life as a prisoner in Roman jails, therefore he was obliged to deal in parable and veiled hints. John, addressing himself to disaffected Asiatics, could afford the luxury of plain speaking. At any rate, his “Book of Revelations”, included in the New Testament, is called a pamphlet by Ravage and, in his opinion, is nothing else but the revelation of what is the real meaning of the spreading of Christianity.

Rome, fancifully called Babylon, is minutely described in the language of sputtering hate, as the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, as the woman drunken with the blood of saints (Christians and Jews), as the oppressor of “peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues” and – to remove all doubt of her identity – as “that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth”. An angel triumphantly cries: “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen”. Then follows an orgiastic picture of ruin. Commerce and industry and maritime trade are at an end. Art and music and “the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride” are silenced. Darkness and desolation lie like a pall upon the scene. The gentle Christian conquerors wallow in blood up to the bridles of their horses. “Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her.”

And what is the end and purpose of all this chaos and devastation? – asks Ravage. John the Apostle is not too reticent to tell us. For he closes his pious prophecy with a vision of the glories of the new – that is, the restored – Jerusalem. Not any allegorical fantasy, but literally Jerusalem, the capital of a great reunited kingdom of “the twelve tribes of the children of Israel”. Ravage finds this a plain and clear speaking, together with the fact that no civilization could forever hold out against this kind of assault. By the year 200 AD, the efforts of Paul and John and their successors had made such headway among all classes of Roman society that Christianity had become the dominant cult throughout the empire.

Meantime, as Paul had shrewdly foreseen, Roman morale and discipline had quite broken down. More and more the imperial legions, once the terror of the world and the backbone of Western culture, went down to defeat before barbarian invaders. In the year 326 AD, the emperor Constantine, hoping to check the insidious malady, submitted to conversion and proclaimed Christianity the official religion. It was too late. After him the emperor Julian tried to resort once more to suppression. But neither resistance nor concession were of any use at that time. The Roman body politic had become thoroughly wormeaten with the spreading of the new creed started from Palestine. Paul had triumphed.

Ravage finishes his essay with the assertion that if he were an anti-Semite in search of a credible sample of subversive Jewish conspiracy, he would interpret in the same way the advent of a modified Jewish creed into the Western world.

Revilo P. Oliver on the causes of the success of the Christianity

Revilo Pendleton Oliver (1910–1994) was a professor of classical philology at the University of Illinois. during World War II, as the Director of Research of a top secret research department of the Pentagon, he saw an outstanding service for America. Revilo P. Oliver played an important role in the conservative movement developing in the 1950-ies, and was a regular author of the National Review edited by William Buckley. In the last years of his life, he joined the National Alliance, a white supremacist organization, and collaborated with the historians of the Institute for Historical Review. Oliver spoke eleven languages, among them Sanskrit.

His posthumous work titled The Jewish Strategy was published in 2002. In its Chapter 12, the author deals with the spreading of Christianity in the Roman Empire. It is worth reviewing some of Oliver’s argumentations, because, as an agnostic and atheist scientist, he puts many questions in a new light. Since also our readers are partly religious and partly agnostics or atheists, or have a neutral attitude toward the religious explanations, therefore we cannot neglect the approximation and analysis with this view of our knowledge about Christianity. On page 65 of his mentioned book, Oliver writes that there was no such thing as an ‘orthodox’ Christianity before the last two decades of the 4th century. Then one bunch of Christian holy men got hold of Theodosius by explaining to him how advantageous it would be for him to cooperate with them. And so they were able to use the police power of the state to repress and kill their competitors, the Arians. Flavius Theodosius or Theodosius the Great was the emperor of the Roman Empire between 379–395. He managed to reunite the western and the eastern part of the Empire, and so he was the last emperor of the united Empire. After his death, the state definitively split into the Eastern and the Western Roman Empire.

It was Theodosius, who made the Christianity based upon the Nicene Creed the religion of the state. In 381, he bans the Arianism as a heretic teaching, and in 391 puts an end to the practice of pagan cults, and so Christianity became the state religion. After a year, with a decree, he shares the Western part (with the centre in Rome) and the Eastern part (with the centre in Constantinople) of the Empire between his two sons. The Empire, in fact, splits up in 395 AD. The Western Roman Empire is overthrown by the Germans in 476 AD, and the Eastern Roman Empire persisted for nearly one thousand years more, under the name of Byzantium, until the Seljuk Turks occupied Constantinople and made it, under the name of Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire.

Aurelian, who reigned between 270–275, tried to hinder the decline of the Roman Empire with reforms. Also Diocletian (284–305) made an attempt at the reinforcement of the emperor’s power. He deemed himself the descendant of Jupiter, that is he considered himself both God and man at the same time. He doubled the number of the army, raised the pay of the soldiers, and divided the army into two parts: one of them was assigned with the defense of the borders, while the other with the assurance of the internal order. The Senate lost its decision-making authority, the leadership of the Empire was controlled by functionaries. For the sake of the more efficient governing, he divided the Empire into four parts, so that a tetrarchy ruled over the Empire: two senior co-emperors (the Augusts) and two junior co-emperors (the Caesars). He himself was the leader of the Augusts, ruling over the Eastern Empire. The rule of the co-emperors proved to be expensive. He introduced a new tax system, levied the poll-tax and the land-tax, and issued a new, value-preserving gold coin.

At that time, the state religion was the cult of Jupiter and the cult of Sun God (Sol Invictus), combined with the prosecution of Christians. The Christians were banished from the army, but they could not be driven out totally. Following the abdication of Diocletian, a civil war broke out, in which ultimately Constantine won. He fought his last battle at Milvius in 312 AD. Then he saw a sign in his dream, the monogram of Jesus. He ordered that this monogram be embroidered on the clothes of the soldiers and he won. A year later, he issued the Edict of Milan, which decreed religious tolerance throughout the empire and declared Christianity a free religion. He did not persecute the Christians any more and even he himself converted to Christianity before his death. He called the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, presided by him as Maximus. This Council adopted the religious dogma according to which Jesus Christ is the Son of God. According to the teachings of Arius, preacher from Alexandria, Jesus is not identical with God, he only looks like Him. He is not God, but a creature. His followers, the Arians, were later declared heretics.

In the Western Roman Empire, the economy and trade continuously declined. A scarcity of money occurred, and the situation of the urban inhabitants is so much worsened that they started to move to the country in masses and re-organize their lives onto self-sufficiency, subsistence farming. After this, they pay taxes in crops. The power of the big landlords increased to such an extent that the poor peasants were placed under their protection. The peasant offered his land to the landlord, who bought it, and then paid the so-called “poor tax”. The barbarian invasions became stronger and stronger, which the Western Roman Empire could not repel any more, and the barbarian settled down in masses in the empire. Even the importance of the city of Rome decreased; after four hundred years, already not Rome was the controlling centre any more, but the eastern Constantinople, a city which underwent a rapid development. The Eastern Roman Empire was governed from here. Owing to the developing trade, the incomes grew. Large units were established both in industry and agriculture. Due to the economic development, there was enough money for the development of the army and the fleet, so they managed to repel the attacks of the barbarians. After the reign of Theodosius the Great, the destiny of the Western Roman Empire was sealed. The great migrations accelerated the fall of the empire. The Germans attacked from north (Vikings and Normans), from east (Vandals, Goths and Gepids) and from west (Anglo-Saxons, Francs and Goths). In 410 AD, the western Goths broke into also in Rome, robbed it, and they received lands in exchange and assured the defense of the borders.

The Huns also arrived from Central Asia, and they expanded their empire from Lake Aral to the Rhine. Even Byzantium paid tax for them. The most outstanding king of the Huns was Attila (434–453), who may have had the seat in the area between the rivers Danube and Tisza. The battle of Catalaunum took place in 451, but, at that time, already a German man was at the head of Rome. In the same year, Attila set up against Rome, but did not occupy the town. In 453, Attila died and the Hun Empire disintegrated. In 455, Vandals rushed at Rome, and in 476 German chieftain Odoaker dethroned Romulus Augustulus, the last Western Roman Emperor, and he himself became the king of Italy.

Gustav Ruhland on the disintegration of the economy of the Roman Empire

As a result of the victory won in the 1870–1871 French–Prussian war, Chancellor Otto von Bismarck managed to unify Germany with the leadership of Prussia. On 18th January, 1871, in the hall of mirrors of the Versailles Palace, the German princes solemnly announced the birth of the German Empire. The peace treaty was signed on 10th May, 1871, in Frankfurt on Main. Germany obtained the regions Alsace and Lorraine, and also got a war indemnity amounting to five billion gold francs. After this, the German Empire underwent a rapid development, but her successes did not blind Bismarck, on the contrary, they filled him with greater and greater concern. This German statesman, who was highly appreciated also by Henry Kissinger in his work titled Diplomacy, would have liked if his life-work, the united Germany had persisted for a long time.

Therefore, in 1887, he asked Gustav Ruhland (1860–1914), professor of the University of Freiburg, Switzerland, to answer the question: What caused, in world history, the fall of high cultures and successful empires – among them the decline of the Greek culture and the fall of the Roman Empire –, because he wanted to preserve his life-work, Germany from this failure. Bismarck started from that practical problem that the German people has always wanted to live so that they could produce their own food, and not to need foreign help.

In 1885, Bismarck saw that his government was forced to keep the corn prices high, so that the corn production should be profitable at all, and the German economy should not be at the mercy of foreign countries. “Let God give that Germany should always be in the situation to produce the corn, her main food, at home, by herself.” But Ruhland was on the opinion that they ought not levy corn duties in order to continuously defend the economy from competition. Also Bismarck agreed with this, but nobody could suggest a really good solution. This is why Ruhland got the task to find a satisfactory answer to this problem. Thus, he returned to Germany and started a thorough research work, the results of which he planned to publish in ten volumes. Nevertheless, only three volumes were finished until his death. His work titled The System of the Political Economics (System der politischen Ökonomie) contains, on one hand, the findings of and economist and money reformer searching for an alternative, and, on the other hand, such a historian reveals for us the deep connections discovered by such a historian who, in fact, tried to find the way out of that civilization deadlock, which the mankind being at crossroads in the beginning of the 21st century, at the time of writing of the present lines, also tries to find.

As a social scientist, he did not restrict his research to the problems of agriculture, but he also analyzed the questions of economy, finance and politics. His findings, nevertheless, do not fit at all in the world economic views of those, who are the beneficiaries of the economic and financial novelties carried to extreme excess. To this can be attributed also the fact that nowadays only few people know Ruhland’s epoch-making realizations. The economic liberalism was already on power in the time of Ruhland, and this power, ruling even in our days, swept totally away his life-work.

Gustav Ruhland had no connection at all with national socialism, because he died on 4th January, 1914. At the same times, he is accounted almost as a hated person among the internationalists and globalists. The international money aristocracy, the highest money capitalist circles and their auxiliary troops cannot stand Ruhland, and neither the internationalist socialists and communists fall behind. All nuances of the so-called socialists limit themselves from him, including also the chameleon greens who, as we know, get red quite quickly, as the green tomatoes. Ruhland studied thoroughly also the writings of Marx, and got to the final conclusion that the termination of the private property of the means of production does not offer a universal solution, as Marx thought.

Capitalism is the system of the legalized interest and usury

Ruhland defined the capitalism completely differently than Marx, who cited a British trade union leader in The Capital as follows:

“The capital dreads the lack of profit as nature dreads emptiness. With an appropriate profit, the capital is brave. With a secure ten per cents, it can be applied everywhere; with twenty per cents, it is already vivid; with fifty per cents, it is bold; with one hundred per cents, it already crashes all human laws with its boots; for three hundred per cents, there are no more such crimes, which it would not venture, even right the danger of being hanged.”

The terms usury and the here used interest are synonyms. Their different presentation and interpretation is regulated in the laws surrendered to capitalism, in “the right of capitalists”. On one hand, in a hypocrite way, they condemn the use of the term “usury”, but, on the other hand, they declare it legal in the form of “interest”. This is done with the purpose that the same exploiting, looting interest, under which the compound interest should be understood, so that it should be properly imprinted in the minds of law-abiding people as an honourable thing, and the resistance against it should be discharged. Namely, the size of the interest plays a relatively little role. The crediting techniques elaborated for the financial looting of private persons and public institutions reached such a perfection that the predecessors of today’s financiers, the money changers, would only watch it with envy. They were still driven out of the Temple of Jerusalem with a lash by Jesus. The today’s financial managers, on the other hand, are highly respected citizens.

Ruhland interpreted the class struggle propagated by Marx as the symptom of a disease. The gradual degeneration of capitalism appears in this disease. The periods and degrees of development turn up in all social formations, they took place in all cultural circles, and led to decline and disintegration in all of them. In a repeating pattern, the final phase of these processes was that the interest system took over the rule. Marx himself never spoke of socialism. The spreading international socialism belongs exclusively to those who willingly refer to Marx, because they realized quickly that the Marxist transition into the communism, as it was taught, would never be achieved.

As a researcher striving at the essence, Ruhland did not restrict only to the accomplishment of the original task received from Bismarck, but he also reached results opening new ways. He studied thoroughly the history of city states, the development of world empires and high cultures, as well as the causes of their decline. He examined and analyzed, on the dissection table of history, the knowledge available on bygone epochs and peoples.

The basic notion of the disease and degeneration of the national economy is the capitalism. The spirit of this ill system is the private credit money and the interest. Who really wants to terminate this disease, cannot keep the credit money operated with interest mechanism of the private money system as the mediating agent of the economic life. This private money system, with the interest mechanism, strives, in all fields, to siphon over the output of the productive economy – without counter-service – exclusively to the capital. Nothing remains from the yield, the surplus and the output at those, who do the work. The profit of the value-producing activity gets to the owner of the capital. Thus, Ruhland got to the conclusion that the decisive contradiction, the determining conflict of interests is between the capital and work.

As the scientist of the political economics, Ruhland revealed the different degrees of the disease, and analyzed the pathological processes of the capitalist economy in the divergent historical periods. In the period of commercial and loan capital, due to the usury rules and the collection of compound interest, the people doing the productive work became dependant from the capitalists detaining capital. In the period of the industrial capitalism, the proletarization of the urban and rural middle class led to the development of the masses of depending workers, while, in the country, to the emerging of the plutocratic landowning system. In the money rule period, governed by the banking system and the stock exchange, the indebting of the states and the establishment of their dependence was completed. The money capital influenced the elections with bribery, and so it reached that the political leading layer could legalize for itself all variants of usury methods, and that it could take the so obtained huge interest income and profit out of the given country unlimitedly, and that it should be fully available both at home and abroad.

The capitalists exploited all forms of parasitism. In order to survive, the real parasite needs a host-people. And so we can meet the Jewish people, when they still were agrarians, and the Phoenicians and Canaanites were the capitalists. After this, the Jewish merchants and money-changers turned up in the great Greek-speaking trade areas of the antiquity. This is why Juvenalis, the outstanding figure of the antique satirical poetry, wrote the following at the beginning of the empire period of the Roman Empire: “It is as if the Orontes (the largest river of Syria) had reversed into the Tiberis.”

In this way, the eastern capitalists invaded Rome and found each other. We can meet again these eastern people in the Islamic world empire. They follow the world trade through Portugal and Spain to the Netherlands, France, England and Germany. They take with them everywhere their capitalist legal system, which, for centuries, can be divided into commercial law and the legal material regulating the currency trading, the movement of exchange rates and the operation of stock exchanges. As soon as the economic relations of the hosting guest-people start to decline, the money-owners leave the country that was their home hereto, using their capability to move and settle down somewhere else relatively easily, as a global people.

An irreconcilable antagonism is present between the hosting guest-people and the parasites – and, accordingly, between capital and work. It is easy to realize what we should mean by products created by value-creating work and products accumulated by the capital, and which of them serve the production satisfying social needs. The capital, to a lesser or greater extent, is that amount of goods, which satisfies the greediness for profit of the money-owner capitalists. Those who trade and circulate the money wealth (the capitalists) are usurers in the widest sense of the word. By usury, Gustav Ruhland means the obvious and contractual private appropriation of the surplus value (or value added). And, by the notion “capitalism”, he denotes that social and economic system, in which the usurer freedom of appropriation exists in a more or less legally regulated way.

Obviously, the capitalists strive to transform the whole of national wealth into merchandise. The more is the amount of goods on the market, the more profit can the capitalists reach. The prices of the goods are determined by the capitalist speculation, that is all those techniques which are available for the money-owner groups of interest. Therefore, the production costs and the interests of the producers and consumers are pushed into the background at the establishment of prices.

Ruhland emphasizes that the use of the universal means of exchange called money is really one of the great achievements of mankind. But the function of exchange should be kept. In the course of history (and even in our days), in several cases, the value-preserving function of money should have been kept under the strict control of the public power. Namely because the money, being the only imperishable merchandise, detains such advantages against other goods, which are perishable in a way or another, which, in the form of usury interest, make it possible for the owners of capital to withdraw, in a disproportionate measure, the income from the value-creating producers.

How did the financial and economic situation evolve in the Roman Empire?

In Rome, there was not a proletariat that can be interpreted in Marxist terms. On the other hand, a larger and larger social stratum and later even a social class emerged from the debt slaves, who formerly were free Roman citizens, but got indebted, due to the money system operated with interest. When they were not able to fulfil their debt service duties any more, and they could not pay the interests, the Roman law allowed the creditors to push their debtors into slavery and to behave with them as real slaves. This is similar to the situation that can be perceived, in our days, in the so-called developed West, including North America and the European Union, as well as in several Eurasian countries. We know about indebted entrepreneurs, citizens, enterprises and states, which are not able to pay their debts. The situation of these indebted millions – the measure of their dependence and defencelessness – is more and more similar to the debt slaves of the antiquity.

It is right fearful how the forms of decline of high cultures revealed by Ruhland repeat themselves in our days, including the fall of the Roman Empire and the disintegration of the Spanish world empire. Ruhland relates about the continuous decrease of food production, the shrinking of food supply, the increase, surpassing all measures, of the state debt, the insupportable interest burdens, and the ever deepening alienation of the population. Although we can witness similar processes even in our days, we must know that these processes do not obey to unchangeable natural laws. All of them are the result of the rules of the game created by men, proved to be delusions. Right for this, if we realize these regularities, it would be possible to prevent that the processes of the decline of high cultures and of the disintegration of empires, known from the history, should repeat. The credit money system, operated by the interest mechanism, the consequent indebting, the taking away of the productive wealth, the looting and pushing into debt slavery of the society are all such a circulation, which we can stop if we study its regularities.

The circulation of the abuse of parasite power essentially shows a similar syndrome, therefore it is practical to review it in a comprehensive way. In the case of the 22 historical high cultures studied in detail by Gustav Ruhland, the following regularities – as repeating phenomena – have lead to decline and disintegration:

  1. Making as much money as possible – it does not matter where, when and how – has become a ruling guiding principle. The relations between the productive economy and agriculture are less and less observed. The interests of commerce and industry, as well as of the money system are determining. On the markets determined only by the money, almost everything becomes a merchandise that can be sold at discretion.
  2. The increasing indebtedness, the freedom of collecting interest of usury type, the spreading of leases and tenures, the termination of the independent middle class, as well as the pauperization of those who perform productive work and the growth of the proletarian layers become general.
  3. The enrichment and the luxury consumption of a thin layer are increasing disproportionately. In agriculture, the latifundiums, i.e. the disproportionate large estates became dominant. The layers that do agriculture as independent owners disappear. The peasants who lost their lands invade the towns from the country, and leave their native places going abroad.
  4. People chase the material goods, the money, becoming more and more profiteering and unscrupulous. The general moral weakens alarmingly, the civil virtues disappear, the corruption spreads, and, in the modern era, the election frauds appear, as well as the continuous misleading of the public opinion in the interest of the money rule groups of interest.
  5. As a consequence of the food supply depending on import from abroad, the lean years are more and more frequent, famines occur, and the oscillation of prices are intensified to a great extent.
  6. The state does not represent the social justice any more, but serves the greediness to own and the goals of enrichment of the rich layers detaining money and productive wealth. War becomes the regular form of the economic growth of the ruling groups of interest detaining wealth.
  7. In order to reconcile, in the interest of the wealthy groups of interest, the ruling political power with the propertiless layers, the proletarians, ever increasing in number, they start supplying aids, in mass, to the poor, from the state budget, and create the organizations serving for the performance of public works with a compulsory character. The state aids and the demands for public money increase in a quick pace.
  8. The state policy, representing the groups of interest that became immensely rich, leads to trade agreements representing the interests of these ultra-rich capitalists, as well as to colonization policy and world strategy that enforce these agreements. War periods increase and are delayed alarmingly.
  9. The discontent and unrest of the population are increasing more and more. In the historical modern age, the anarchism, socialism and communism appear, the institution of marriage starts to disintegrate, the growth and the number of the population decrease, tensions of civil war occur, and the whole of the financial, economic and social system is in a state of disintegration.

So, these are the common traits, pathological syndromes which Gustav Ruhland discovered, as a common factor, in the 22 high cultures examined by him, and all of these had to be cured, in a way or another, from these diseases. Ruhland found the first and most essential cause of the decline of high cultures in the usury, i.e. in the possibility that the person who does not produce any value, can take away, with financial techniques, the value from the person who produced it, and store it as his own property. With getting people indebted, the credit money system, operated with the interest system, disintegrates the economic basis of the given society. The leading groups of interest of the present-day capitalism also detain such a private money monopoly, which operates with interest mechanism. The continuous wealth and income siphoning with the interest, and the unscrupulous wealth-obtaining constraint are that lethal disease, which destroyed the high cultures. Ruhland formulated in this way his recommendations for that Germany, the Chancellor of which charged him with the task needing a huge research work:

“We can summarize our whole political programme by declaring: that usury liberty must be destroyed, behind which the following sentence hides: ‘if possible, buy cheaply and sell as expensively as you can’.”

Those democrats do not say even a word about the existence of usury liberty, who like to refer to human rights and political freedoms as the bases of the democracy in Western terms. They forget the words of the well-known communist German playwright, Bertolt Brecht: “It is easier to rob by setting up a bank than by holding up a bank clerk.”

The peoples, countries and states pushed into subjected and depending status, could do nothing else than regain the right for self-determination of the given people, namely in the way that the structures above states of the international money power should not have the right to hinder the financial and social self-determination of the given people, state and society. In the present-day circumstances, the transnational and over-state structures detain the most important ruling tool: the private money system operated with the interest mechanism. This is why the money cartel, consisting of super-rich investment bankers, is interested in hindering the right of self-determination of peoples, and in surrendering them to the imperial structures over the states, which it controls, through its informal network, and which guarantees for it the unlimited usury freedom.

The conversion to Christianity and the switch-over to money economy (crematistics) could undermine, together, the Roman Empire. In the western part of the empire, one of them weakened its intellectual, spiritual and moral power, discipline and internal capacity of resistance, while the coming to power of the trade, money flow and collection of interest in the economic life necessarily led to the gradual decline of the productive economy, and, ultimately, to the total collapse. The combination of the two may have proved decisive, may have sealed the fate of the Western Roman Empire, causing the fall of it.

The social and economic teachings of the Jewish world view

In the course of history, the increasing of the scope of action of man represented the greatest change in Jewish mentality. In antiquity, people felt that they were only at the mercy of natural forces and thought that the world neglects them. The Old Testament changed this situation. The essence of it is that the man is not helpless against his fate. According to the Jewish social teaching, we are responsible for our deeds. We have to strive maximally at preserving the human dignity and to hand over a better world to the next generations. For this, activity and creativity is needed. Therefore, Judaism made the education a primary religious obligation. Written literature enhanced the accumulation and transmittal of the knowledge. The economy is based upon the accumulated intellectual capital, and is in direct relation with the education and knowledge of a given population. The Judaic teaching emphasizes the cooperation, which is based upon the families, the religious communities and the schools. Without these, the Jewry living in dispersion could not have survived.

An important part of the Jewish social teaching is what we call distributive truth. According to the Old Testament, God’s people will become mighty if keeps the commandment of the right and just life. The Jewish equivalent of the word “right” unifies the notions of charity and justness, which are two different categories in the Roman Law. In a Rechtsstaat, i.e. a state founded on the rule of law, what is rightful is due, so it cannot be regarded charity. The Jewish teaching, however, makes charity compulsory. Nobody can remain without the satisfaction of his basic needs. In our days, this is called social justice. However, in the economic life, the just distribution of goods does not appear by itself, thus a conscious intervention is necessary for the sake of the just distribution of goods.

For instance, according to the Old Testament, every seven times seven years, that property must be given back to the poor, which they lost in the course of their indebting. Nevertheless, Judaism embodies a double moral, because it has some rules, which apply to everybody, and other ones, which apply only to Jews.

Christianity propagated that God created the men equal, in His own image, therefore they have not only conscience, but also conscience about their own conscience, i.e. self-conscience. They are such moral beings who are responsible for their deeds and for their fellows. The Christian teaching is based upon the dignity of the individual and on private property. It enhances the creative activity of man, but takes into account also his frailness and human weaknesses. Due to his nature, the man is equally inclined to selfishness and to unselfishness, to generosity, therefore he needs the private property to persist. The Christian teaching also regards men as children of God, and, as such, they must take part in the preservation of the world created by God and assigned to the man. The greatest challenge of the Christian social teaching is the commandment of love. According to it, we should love our other fellow men as ourselves. The economic system, in itself, does not urge us to love our neighbours as ourselves. It does not create, in a spontaneous way, those circumstances, which are suitable for the enforcement of social justice. Therefore, the Rechtsstaat must get involved, through its institutions, in the strengthening of social sensibility.

The Old Testament on the relationship between Jews and money

The Tanakh, i.e. the Old Testament, teaches that wealth is only a tool for the man to serve God. It prescribes: “Love the Lord your God with all your strength”, which the Pharisees interpret “with all your wealth”. Accordingly, the wealthier a man is, the more tools he has to love God. Thus, richness is not a final goal, but an important means, which must be gained honestly, and not taken away from others. The Old Testament also considers work very important, this is why it is forbidden to learn and pray only, because that who learns and prays only, but does not work, gets isolated and does not understand the world properly.

We know also from the Old Testament that two great social revolutions took place in the antiquity. As a result of them, the Jews lived in a different way than their neighbours. They rejected the view according to which the goal of getting rich is to build more and more beautiful cultic places. They put an end to the compulsory human sacrifice, as well as to the right of revenge and reprisal. The place of this was taken by the financial compensation, by which the development of human civilization stepped in a new period. The power of money did not put an end to violence, it only proved to be another variant of violence. All powers can be abused, even with the power of money.

In the antiquity, the Jews could not, or could only hardly find the appropriate relation toward richness, as prescribed in the Bible. Jacques Attali, the first president of the London-based European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), writes the following about this issue in his book The Jews, the World and the Money:

“One of the most important texts of Jewry is the speech uttered by King Solomon three thousand years ago, at the inauguration of the Temple. According to this, the Jewish people can only get rich if, at the same time, makes richer also others. It cannot be happy if nobody is happy around it, and vice versa: the non-Jews are interested in the prosperity of the people of the Book, which prays also for them. This is the epoch in which the institution of the “solidarity tax”, which later became Tzedakah. So, the institution of the tax was invented by the Jews, and they formulated very important rules connected with it: the amount of the tax should fall between ten and twenty per cent, it must be anonymous, and the whole of the collected tax must be distributed among the poor. In spite of this, even in the era of the Temple, the Jews went off the established road in two respects. The loans could not be repaid in instalments, and some people started to regard enrichment as their final goal. The punishment did not delay: the division of the people, military defeat, and, finally, the destruction of the Temple. In the course of reconstruction, the rules were laid down in books of law. The first Sanhedrin was created, namely a kind of supreme court, which appropriated the jurisdiction of several little community courts.”

In his quoted book, Attali continues:

“In a strange way, Israel is much more flourishing under foreign rule than earlier, when it was an independent kingdom. 2,300 years ago, the economic and cultural capitals of the world were Babylon and Alexandria. Both of them could prosper only through the literate Jewish merchants. The Jews elaborated such effective financial and commercial techniques, which made them competitive and by which they could gain even legitimacy. Among others, they invented the cheque, the bill of exchange and the letter of credit. However, this could not refrain the appearance of an anti-Jew attitude in Alexandria, well before Christianity.”

“In the times preceding and following the Roman colonization, a few rich and powerful Jewish merchants and priests became a thorn in the flesh of the prophets, who reproached to the rich Jews mostly that they did not put their money in the service of God, but, neglecting the Laws, lived in a big luxury. They exhibit their wealth and they collaborate with the Romans. Such a prophet was also Jesus himself, but he did not regard richness a tool: according to him not the richness, but the poverty takes us closer to God.”

“For the Jews, the poverty was insupportable, while for the first Christians the richness. But, with the appearance of the New Testament and the church, the situation gradually changed. The wealth of the community already strengthened the power of the whole religious, church institution system. Even the church started to foster the collection of gifts, and then made the bishop’s estates inalienable.”

“In the Middle Ages, the church forbids the collection of interest for three reasons. One of them was – like at the Greeks – that the time is not the property of man, and it must not be sold or make profit of. Secondly, the interest is an income gained without work. Thirdly, the lender can get rich, which is not in the interest of the church: the believer cannot be the beneficiary of money collection, only the church, which identifies the creditor with the devil, since the interest means a temptation, against which all believers must struggle.”

The Rabbis replied to this measure taken by the church by summarizing all their previous accumulated knowledge in books. The Talmud of Jerusalem appeared 1,600 years ago, and then, two centuries later, the Talmud of Babylon. This regulated, in detail, all forms of social life, and so also the interest and the profit. For instance, in the case of foods, the price differential cannot be higher than one sixth. The speculation is also forbidden. If prices rise, it is not allowed to store up the goods, but they must be sold out, so that the prices should go down. The ban of cartels also appeared. The Talmud deals with nearly all problems of the modern economy, including the publicity, the environment, the direct or indirect taxation, the right for work and strike, and the inheriting or solidarity.

The gaining of ground of the Western Christianity in the Roman Empire

Classical philologist Revilo P. Oliver approaches this question from the standpoint of the sociologist. He asserts that the Jesus cult existing in the Roman Empire is connected with the Western Christianity only by a few generally accepted, but not duly proved stories. In the second volume of his work The Decline of the West, Oswald Spengler wrote that, even in the last period of the Roman Empire, the Orthodox Christianity was, in fact, a magical cult, and this is why it cannot be properly understood by the Western people thinking in a Faustian way. He also adds to this that Saint Augustine, highly esteemed by the Catholic Church, would consider the world of thinking and faith of Saint Anselm of Canterbury, Saint Thomas of Aquino and Luther a repugnant and incomprehensible heresy, and so would do the other Fathers of the Church. If the Fathers of Church of the first Christians had known the medieval Christianity, they would probably have rejected it angrily.

We have already referred to the fact that, according to Oliver, no Orthodox Christianity existed in reality. The only historically pertinent standing point is to apply the term “Christian” to all the sects that claimed to be followers of a Jesus entitled “Christus”. The Jews have been waiting for God’s anointed envoy, the Messiah. The meaning of the term “christus” is nearly totally identical with that of the term “messiah”, namely it refers to such a person, who is a person anointed by God, and has a unique task on earth. The name of Jesus and the denomination “christus” were connected in the 1st century A.D., and became the central character of the Western civilization up to our days: Jesus Christ.

The followers spread about this Jesus Christ that he was executed in Judaea in the time of Tiberius or thereabouts. When Christians become conspicuous, late in the Second Century, most of them were Jews. It is probable that the numerous letters of Paul the Apostle, including both those that were incorporated in the “New Testament” anthology when it was put together. Those that were excluded for some reason, were manufactured at this time by Jews who wanted to take in goyim on easy terms. These fabrications probably included the forged correspondence of Seneca with Paul, which seems to have been known to Tertullian. (Quintus Tertullian was a prolific author, the first to found the Christian literature in Latin language. He defended fiercely the Christian faith and struggled against heresy. He is called the father of Latin Christianity.)

The Nazarenes, whose holy book was a “Gospel According to the Hebrews”, of which fragments survive, and who spoke only Aramaic in their rites, held that only Jews by race could be Christians, since Christ, when he returned to butcher the hated goyim, naturally wanted only Jews to rule the world. A compromise was made by the Ebionites, who had, inter alia, a “Gospel of Matthew” that was certainly older than the diluted rifacimento that got into the New Testament”.

In Chapter XII (p. 67) of his referred book, Oliver thinks that the Gospel preached, in fact, a perfect communism, with all property and women to belong to everyone in common. The Ebionites held that goyim, if they were circumcised and went through ceremonies to purge them of their native vileness, could become only Christians second-class.

There was another Christian sect, called after their leader, the Gnostic Carpocrates of Alexandria. The Carpocratians seem to have been a numerous and powerful sect in their day, and they believed in the transmigration of souls, as well as in the human nature of Jesus Christ. With the accumulation of the experiences of the past, Jesus Christ purified, elevated and strengthened the soul within Him on a specially high level.

The Carpocratians admitted goyim on equal terms, since Salvation was for all those who had been ‘redeemed by Christ’ from servitude to man-made laws and materialism. Christ had come to free mankind from oppression and to bestow on the righteous a new freedom. What matters is spiritual salvation, and we must show our emancipation from material things by recognizing no human law whatsoever and by feeling free to indulge any lust and perform any act to which the spirit may move us.

Oliver thinks again that, like the Ebionites, the Carpocratians preached a total communism, with all property and women to be for the use of everyone. They admitted women for the sake of general promiscuity in the modern manner, and although they had no objection to homosexuality, they thus differed from some other brands of Christians, who excluded females as “unworthy of the Kingdom of God” and practiced only male homosexuality. There were many other Christian sects, each with its own revelations from God via Jesus, such as the Naasenes, a Gnostic sect, who worshipped snakes as symbols and incarnations of divine power because snakes shed their skins periodically and so are born again and live forever. Another sect, the Adamites, believed in a vision of future, which would make it possible to create the state of the innocents. Since they deemed the first man, Adam, sinless, innocent, and themselves the followers of Adam, the members of the sect were going nude in public.

According to their faith, they had been redeemed by Christ from original sin and were thereby emancipated from all the laws of sinful man and scores of others. According to Oliver’s opinion, the Carpocratians and similar ones were the dominant sects of Christianity until the persecutions by the wicked pagan emperors in the Third Century made those forms of Christianity unpopular because likely to be unhealthy. A considerable part of the tales of the martyrs are all fiction, of course. Saint Jerome, in a letter, boasts of his skill in inventing martyr-stories to edify the faithful. Some Roman emperors made systematic attempts to enforce respect for law and accepted morality by trying to excise the Christian tumor on the state. Those sects could mostly survive, which at least professed the relatively innocuous doctrines that finally became “orthodox Christianity”.

It is a mistake calling “Gnostic” all the sects that weren’t “orthodox” by standards that were not devised before the Fourth Century. A “Gnosticism” is a religious sect that claims to have a gnosis, a knowledge of supernatural things, revealed to them by some Savior who was either an incarnate god or a divinely-inspired superman. Obviously, all Christian sects are Gnostic in that sense, because they all claim to be based on revelations made by Jesus Christ, who, in the various sects, was regarded as having been either an incarnation of a god or a man with a special mission, inspired by the Holy Spirit. In the first four centuries A.D. the world was full of Gnostics peddling special revelations. According to Oliver, Christ was only one of the Saviors: others were Baruch, Gamaliel, Tat (= the Egyptian god Toth), Seth (Egyptian god), Balaam, Ezechiel, Adam, Moses, Enoch, Marsanes, Nicotheus, Phosilampes, Mithra, Zoroaster, Zervan, and many others.

In the early centuries of our era, the Near East was an area with chaotic relations, where several “prophets” propagated their different articles of faith. In our part, we consider the thesis of Marcus Eli Ravage properly funded, according to which Christianity was originally a movement promoted and controlled by the Jews. It is noteworthy that the Christians who tried to make their cult respectable, in the Third Century claimed that they repudiated the Jews. One of the earliest to do this was Tertullian, a Carthaginian shyster, a pettifogging lawyer, whose Apologeticum, a defense of Christianity, was written at the very beginning of the Third Century. He asserts that Christianity is not a conspiracy of revolutionaries and degenerates, as was commonly believed, and claims that it is an association of loving brothers who have preserved the faith that the Jews forsook. In our days, Tertullian is claimed to be “orthodox” in his early writings, but then became a Montanist heretic, as the follower of the Phrygian bishop Montanus.

Montanus propagated about himself that the Holy Spirit dwells within him, with the help of which he could lead people to the Christian way of life. According to Oliver, Saint Jerome and other saints have tampered with the facts to make Tertullian seem “orthodox” in his early works.

Are the Christians the followers of Chrestos or Christos?

It is worth the attention what Oliver writes, in his cited work, about the name “Christian”. He asserts that the names “Chrestus” and “Christus”, in spite of their apparent similarity, have sharply different meanings, and it is not the same that the Christians got their name from “Chrestiani” or “Christiani”. “Chrestus”, with the meaning “useful, serviceable, good”, is a common Greek word and was a name frequently given to slaves of Oriental origin. It was also commonly taken as a name by persons of the lower classes in Asia Minor. This name was used by many even in Rome. One of them was a Jewish revolutionary agitator, Chrestus, who was regarded as the leader of one of the big Jewish outbreaks in Rome. As we know from Suetonius, this revolt was accompanied by rioting and outrages so gross that Emperor Claudius ran all the Jews (except, of course, those who had bought citizenship) out of the city.

However, they came back soon, and a few years later Rome was more crowded with Jews than ever, and they again made themselves more obnoxious than usual. Claudius decided they were too numerous and too deeply entrenched in the economic life of the city to be expelled, and tried to control them by suppressing their synagogues in the city. According to Erich Koestermann, the date of the particular outbreak of which Chrestus was the leader is assigned to 49-50 A.D. It occurred between fourteen and fifteen years before the burning of Rome in 64 A.D., for which Nero blamed the Chrestiani, who were certainly regarded as a gang or rather horde of Jews. What happened to Chrestus is not known, but it is not impossible he hid to avoid arrest, got out of Rome, and went back to Judaea, if he had been there before. If so, he could have been arrested and executed there by the Roman authorities. Oliver supposes that he could have been the basis on which the later myths about Jesus can be traced back. Jesus was a very common Jewish name. Oliver also mentions that one of the earliest Christian forgeries, known already to Tertullian and antedating most or all of the New Testament, is a supposed letter from Pontius Pilatus describing the Crucifixion, and exists in two versions.

Both versions of this forgery are addressed to Claudius. However, in the standard versions the reigning emperor is Tiberius. It is hard to see why any Christians should have seen an advantage in placing the Crucifixion so late, but it would be understandable if the story originally concerned Chrestus and not Jesus Christ. Later on, the date was moved farther back when it was decided that it would be better to change the name Chrestus to Christus. Oliver thinks that the change from Chrestus to Christus would have been easy to put over by the end of the Second Century, when the increasing itacism in Greek pronunciation gave eta and iota the same sound in popular speech.

The word Christus, meaning “salve, ointment”, was naturally never a name given to persons, but in contemporary Yiddish (i.e., the Jewish dialect of Greek) it was for some reason used as an epithet applied to the Jewish kings who appear in stories in the Old Testament. This implied that they had been “anointed” and so were legitimate. It does occur several times in the Septuagint, the oldest Greek translation of the Bible, it thus acquired among Jews a connotation that would have made it a logical title to be assumed by a revolutionary agitator who claimed to be a legitimate king of the Jews and also the Messiah whom the Jews had long been awaiting with the expectation that his supernatural powers would enable them to butcher the hated Indo-Europeans without fear of reprisals. It is entirely possible that there was such an agitator, distinct from Chrestus, in the time of Tiberius and that he was executed by the Roman governor of Judaea at that time. Nevertheless, the stories in the New Testament contain clear vestiges of a claim to be the “King of the Jews”, which the authors of the stories find it necessary to explain away.

In Chapter XI of his already cited book, Oliver sets forth that, in the absence of any historical record, one can only speculate whether it was likely that there was an agitator or thaumaturgist named Jesus in the time of Tiberius or that the whole story was reconstructed from the career of Chrestus. At that time, Palestine was full of all kinds of special persons, peddling miracles and revelations to the multitude, trying to call up attention and to find followers. Anyway, Oliver finds it is nearly certain that the Chrestiani executed by Nero in 64 A.D. were a mob of Jewish revolutionaries, followers of the notorious Chrestus. There is thus no historical evidence for the existence of Christians at so early a date. The essence is that the term “Christian” should obviously be applied only to sects that claim to be derived from a Christus distinct from Chrestus.

A Roman jurist, Pliny (Plinius) jr. wrote several letters to his father, and it was him who, in 112 A.D., made the earliest historical evidence for Christians. Pliny was convinced that they were just a bunch of ignorant and superstitious, but innoxious fanatics. Pliny was really astonished to find no evidence that they were guilty of the crimes (such as ritual murders) and anarchistic subversion that he naturally associated with the name. Since his is the only historical evidence for Christians at so early a date, we have no means of knowing whether he confused Christiani with Chrestiani whom he met in Bithynia.

Oliver – in concordance with Marcus Eli Ravage – gets to the conclusion that the Jews were always conspiring against civilization and, in order to properly mask their strategy, found it practical to mix Christiani with Chrestiani. The confusion that was particularly easy because a Roman would have thought it unlikely that a group would call itself “the people of the salve”, which is all the name would mean to anyone who was not a Jew. The Christians, i.e. persons who claimed to be followers of a Christus, not Chrestus, did not commit the crimes that the followers of Chrestus did. It is certain that the earliest known sects of “Christians”, i.e. followers of one or another of the agitators named Jesus, were enemies of, and probably conspirators against, the Graeco-Romans.

As we have already mentioned, he Nazarenes admitted only Jews, while the Ebionites admitted also non-Jews. Nevertheless, most Christians did not understand that the goyim were in fact admitted to the status of “whining dogs”, i.e. slaves, provided they had themselves circumcised and obeyed their divinely-appointed masters. In exchange, they were promised that when Jesus returned with celestial reinforcements and inflicted on the hated Greeks and Romans all the slaughter and torment that is so enthusiastically described in the apocalypse that was included in the New Testament. This promise, however, understandably failed to attract large numbers of goyim, and the superstition got under way only when its doctrines had been modified to facilitate the “conversion” of large numbers of the mongrelized inhabitants of the once-Roman Empire.

Many of the early Christian sects disclaimed in various ways a connection with the Jews, and it can scarcely be doubted that the anti-Jewish passages in the New Testament were designed to facilitate competition with those sects. The Christian sect, which shrewdly made a deal with the despots of the decaying Roman Empire, thus acquired the legal and military power to exterminate its competitors. One of these sects was one which had assembled a hastily collected and slovenly edited anthology of a few of the numerous gospels and called it a “New Testament”, so that it could carry with it an “Old Testament”. According to the latter, the Jews were the Chosen Race of the tribal deity.

This deity was impudently identified by the Jews with the Animus Mundi of Stoic monotheism as well as with the Ahura Mazda of the Zoroastrian cult. Marcus Terentius Varro (116 B.C.–27 B.C.) – who was not only one of the greatest poets, but also one of the greatest scholars of Rome – was on the opinion that Jupiter, the supreme deity of the Roman mythology, was the spirit of the world, the Animus Mundi himself, which permeates everything and moves the whole universe. He is the universal cause of all existing, and the origin of the forces of nature. More explicitly, for the Romans he was the universal genius. He comprises all the other gods and goddesses, which we can consider parts of him or belonging to his universal powers.

Varro makes it unambiguous that he identifies this universal deity with the supreme god of Rome, Jupiter, who had a temple in the capital. Even Saint Augustine referred to the fact that the Romans consecrated their capital city to Jupiter, who breathed life, through his spirit, into all existing things. In other terms, the Romans wanted that Jupiter should be recognized as the king of gods and men, and this should be expressed by his spirit and his throne in the capital. In this way, the centre of the life-giving deity, moving the whole universe, was in the capital of the Roman Empire. Stepping further, Jupiter was also identified with the god of the monotheists of the East, especially with the single God of the Jews.

So, through the Stoics, Varro arrived to the monotheist faith, which also signals a kind of pantheism, the essence of which is that God is the totality of nature, of universe. The pantheism identifies God with nature, and does not recognize the existence of a supernatural God. Varro managed to harmonize this kind of pantheism with the anthropomorphic polytheism of the Graeco-Roman world, but without Jupiter, who was the lord of the skies for both the Greeks and the Romans, this god took care of the fate of the Roman Empire. The identification of the god of the heavens with the Anima Mundi of the Stoics was not a totally new idea. In fact, it can be traced back to Plato. What is, however, new and surprising in it is that this conservative Roman scholar managed to bring down this universal God into the capital of the empire, where he was sitting on his throne between Juno and Minerva, and spread the teaching that he was identical with the Jehovah of the Jews, and both of them are identical with Animus Mundi, the Spirit of the World of the Stoics.

The Mazdaism is an ancient Persian faith appeared in the 7th century B.C., which teaches a dualistic world view, which later, in the 5th century B.C., melted with the teaching of the prophet Zoroaster (Zarathustra). According to the Zoroastrianism, the world is the field of struggle of the good, the light and the forces of the evil, of darkness. The Zoroastrianism equally contains monotheist and dualist features. The most characteristic feature of their divine service is the guarding of the holy Fire in the temples of fire. Zarathustra, the founder of the religion, took away the worshipping of all gods, except Ahura Mazda (the Lord of light and wisdom), who later was called Ohrmazd. According to the revelation given to Zarathustra, Ahura Mazda himself created the material world together with the man. The man is originally good, and Ahura Mazda is his helper and friend. Ahura Mazda is accompanied by the immortal saints, who are the personal representatives of the divine essence. This divine essence is the correct order, the good perception, the power of the sovereigns, the divine devotion toward the man, the perfection and immortality. The Zoroastrianism saw the origin of evil in the free will of man. During their lives, the men have to choose between good and evil. Ahura Mazda is confronting the Holy Spirit, the Evil Spirit, Ahriman, the powers serving the evil, the lies, the bad thoughts and the violence.

A similarity can be found between the Satan of the Judaism, that of the Christianity originating from Judaism, and later that of the Islamic faith, as well as Angra Mainju, i.e. Ahriman. The same can be said about the angels and the immortals. The motif of hell also appears in both religions. Another similarity is that both the Zoroastrianism and the Judaism think that the history has a given beginning and end. Several historians of religion assert that this similarity can be explained with the Iranian effects on the Jews during the so-called Babylonian captivity. However, the Zoroastrianism does not contain the original sin, playing an important role in Judaism.

Coming back to the reasoning of Oliver, he finds that the Christians have always used the normal Jewish techniques of fraud and forgery. Therefore, when they concocted gospels that purport to have been written by eyewitnesses of miraculous and impossible events. The evidence does not permit us to affirm that Christianity was cunningly invented by the Jews as a means of paralyzing the healthy instincts of other races. However, we can affirm that if the Jews did set out to devise a mental poison that would eventually be lethal to our race, they could have concocted no drug that was more efficacious in the circumstances. Thus, Oliver does not accept the concept of Ravage, but, at the same time, reinforces that the Christianity really played a key role in the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.

It is worth citing verbatim what Oliver brings to support his position:

“I emphatically call your attention to the obvious fact that the primitive Christian doctrine is a specific demand for the suicide of our race, which survived from the end of the Roman Empire to the present only because our ancestors, of fresh barbarian stock, simply ignored in practice a large part of the pernicious doctrine, especially in northern Europe under essentially aristocratic regimes. Until the disintegration of Protestantism made it possible for any ambitious tailor, clever confidence man, or disgruntled housewife to have ‘revelations’ and pitch the woo at lower classes to make themselves important or fleece the suckers, the professional holy men either contented themselves with telling our people they were ‘sinful’ or used the common devices of theologians to conceal the import of the Holy Book.”

Oliver is sorry for the deplorable acceptance of Christianity by the Europeans, i.e. the ignorant barbarians. All this he justified in his book, Christianity and the Survival of the West, in 1978, to which only wants to add in his posthumous book The Jewish Strategy, published in 2002, that he has come to the conclusion that, with only numerically insignificant exceptions, the Christians are useless in any effort to preserve the declining white race, sentenced to extinction. The world power, which controls America from the background, deliberately subsidizes those TV-evangelists, called by him evangelical shamans and the revival of menticidal superstitions by every means, including the hiring of technicians who can pose as “scientists” and “prove”, by subtle or impudent tricks, the “truth” of the flimsiest hoaxes and the most preposterous notions.

Let us quote again the assumptions of the classical philologist:

“The development of Christianity in all the sects of the Western world during the past two centuries has been the progressive elimination from all of them of the elements of our natively Aryan morality that were superimposed on the doctrine before and during the Middle Ages to make it acceptable to our race and so a religion that could not be exported as a whole to other races. With the progressive weakening of our racial instincts, all the cults have been restored to conformity with the ‘primitive’ Christianity of the Holy Book.”

According to Oliver, when the Christian myths became unbelievable, they left in the minds of even intelligent and educated men a residue, the detritus of the rejected mythology, in the form of superstitions about “all mankind”, “human rights”, and similar figments of the imagination that had gained currency only on the assumption that they had been decreed by an omnipotent deity. So, in practical terms we must regard as basically Christian and religious such irrational cults as Communism and the tangle of fancies that is called “Liberalism” and is the most widely accepted faith among our people today. He adds that, in our days, even some of the more intelligent “Liberals” are at last perceiving that their supposedly rational creed is simply based on the Christian myths they have consciously rejected.

When did the misleading of the Gentile world begin?

Israel Shamir, who, at present, lives and works in Israel, argued, in the text of his speech written for the Rhodes Conference held between 8–12 October 2009, why it is necessary to make a new translation of the Bible into Hebraic language, although the Bible was originally written in Hebraic, and the first translation of it into Greek is known as Septuaginta. In connection with the disproportionate Jewish influence, money, clannishness, media ownership are frequently mentioned among the reasons for this. This influence is greatest in the United States in particular and in the West in general. Shamir asserts that, since the Jews are the guardians and keepers of a primary sacred text of Christendom, this implication assures their extremely great influence. The true bifurcation point between the Christian East and the Christian West is not based on their geographical location, but is located in their choice of the primary text (aside from the New Testament). Westerners (Catholics and Protestants) use the Old Testament they translated from the Jewish MT; Easterners use the Greek text as the original. This is an extremely important difference.

When St Paul said that the opposites are united in Christ, he mentioned man and woman, Jew and Hellene. Indeed, the ideal Jew and Hellene are as opposed to each other as the ideal man and woman, and the Jewish and Hellenic texts are equally opposed to each other. Moreover, translations from either of these texts carry the imprint of the original spirit with them. The Hellenic spirit found its expression in the Septuagint, while the Judaic spirit was expressed in the Masoretic Hebrew text, the MT. Christianity as a whole treads a narrow path between its Judaic and Hellenic tendencies, which are locked in an eternal fight like the Yin and the Yang in the Chinese Taoism. Their choice of primary text for the Old Testament caused the Eastern churches to favour the Hellenic, and the Western the Judaic tendency.

After this, Israel Shamir discloses that, during his recent visit to Moscow, a charismatic spiritual guide of the Eastern Orthodox Church suggested him to make a new translation of the Bible into Hebrew from the Greek text used by the Orthodox Church. Translations are not machine-made neutral reproductions; they carry with them the twin loads of the original culture and of the translator’s culture. The Orthodox spiritual leader, in essence, wanted a translation of the Septuagint into Hebrew to be made, which reconstructs the H70, i.e. the Hebrew original of the Greek Old Testament, using the text made in 1751 of the Queen Elizabeth Bible, namely a translation into the Old Church Slavonic of the translation into English of the Greek text. If accomplished, this could begin the reversal of a long-term Judaisation and degradation process of the Bible used today, and start the healing of the schism between the West and the East.

At the same time, this would help the Jews to overcome their hubris and to make peace with the nations. The Jews have translated the Bible into the languages of the nations in order to influence them. The world is indebted to them, and it’s time to pay them back by giving them the true original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, free from censorship and later additions, just as it was read in the days of the Second Temple. Why would this bookish project influence the real world? Sacred matters influence our world far more than is acceptable to admit in polite society. The dummies believe that all things are done out of pecuniary considerations, but in truth, it is spiritual authority that decides. The world based on the Jewish Bible is not the same as would be a world based on the Greek Bible. Its priorities would be different. Even the texts themselves are different. The Hebrew text used today by Jews (and by tiny communities of Hebrew-speaking Christians), usually called MT (Masoretic text) is not the same text that was read by Christ and His apostles. (The Hebrew word mesorah refers to the transmission of the tradition to descendents, the next generations. The term Masoretic means the traditional interpretation and precise spelling of the Hebrew text of the Bible.)

If you open the New Testament you’ll see that its references to the Old Testament do not fit. This does not mean that the translators of King James, or any other translators of the Old Testament, made a mistake. They translated correctly, but from the wrong version, from the MT, while Jesus, His apostles and the New Testament writers in general had read and quoted the Septuagint (LXX) or its Hebrew Source (H70). According to Shamir, the transposition of the MT in place of the Septuagint (LXX) or its Hebrew Source (H70), making it the source for all subsequent Western translations, was the biggest coup the Jewish scholars ever pulled off. This is the deep-lying cause of Judaisation of the West.

The MT is not particularly old. The oldest complete manuscript of the MT, the St. Petersburg Codex (1008), is just over a thousand years old. The Septuagint (LXX) is much, much older. The LXX translation was created in a very different era – not only before Christ, but even before the Maccabee revolt. In 330 B.C., the people of Israel still cheered Alexander the Great as a liberator. His successors, the Ptolemaides and the Seleukides oppressed the country more and more. They banned the reading of the Torah, the practice of the Jewish customs, and they enforced the Hellenized Greek way of life, therefore, in 167 B.C., a revolt broke out. At first, they managed to drive out the troops sent for the suppress the revolt, but, ultimately, a guerrilla war started, led by Judah Maccabee. Three years later, in December 164 B.C., they reconquested Jerusalem. After long-lasting struggles, Simon, the brother of Judah Maccabee, gained the title of king and highest priest, and funded a new dynasty.

In those days of the Maccabean revolt, in the third century BC, the Hellenistic world embraced Palestine, Egypt, Syria and their neighbours. The Jews were integrating well into this Hellenic world, and the long struggle between the two spirits of the ancient faith of Israel had just started. One was the inward-looking nationalist exclusivist spirit. It claimed private ownership over the Divine Law and exclusive access to the Creator for the Chosen of Israel. A stranger reading the Law was to be executed. A translation of the Bible into Greek was a most serious sin, equivalent to fashioning a golden calf.

The other spirit proclaimed universality and led to Christ. The Law and God’s mercy were to be given to all. Shamir adds to this that, in modern terms, these are the spirits of privatisation and nationalisation. The battle was fought in the three seats of ancient wisdom: Alexandria, Babylon and Jerusalem. Alexandria was the most universalistic, Babylon the most proprietary – Jerusalem was their battleground. In Alexandria, a happy synthesis of Jewish and Hellenic ideas was reached in the translation of Seventy Elders appointed by the High Priest.

Thus came the revelation of Israel to the world, preparing the way for Jesus Christ. This translation was nothing short of miraculous. The translators consisted of six from each tribe of Israel, making altogether seventy-two. But the translation is called the Translation of the Seventy because seventy is the numeric value of “Sod” – “Secret” in Hebrew. The Seventy revealed the secret that the exclusivist Jews did not want to share. “A curse upon him who reveals our secret to the Gentiles”, they had written on the floor of the En-Gedi Synagogue. Even the Talmud says: “do not disclose our secret to Gentiles”. Furious at the disclosure of the secret, the exclusivist Jews destroyed the Hebrew Source of the Septuagint. Every single copy perished. In Jerusalem, the nationalist Jews slaughtered the Hellenised proto-Christian Jews in the Maccabean revolt.

With the coming of Christ, the free Judeo-Hellenic spirit once again found its expression which was hated by the nationalists, who embarked on the long road to regaining full control over the Scripture. For hundreds of years, the scribes worked over the Old Testament, taking advantage of its ambiguous consonant readings, until they eventually achieved a text we know today. Its main paradigm was changed: if the old text led to Christ, the personal/universal Saviour, the new text implanted the nationalist concept of a messiah of and for the people of Israel, the Saviour predicted by the prophets of the Old Testament.

The nations of the world were to be seen as sinful semi-animals who had no access to God. The name “Jews” stuck with this small fanatic band, while the Hellenised Jews became known as “Christians” and were no longer called “Jews”. What was previously a battle between two schools of thought within the Judaic framework, became known as the battle between Judaic and Christian spirits. The exclusivist Jews could not destroy the Septuagint – there were too many copies extant among non-Jews, and the LXX had been spread around and had succeeded in bringing the nations to Christ. That is why, in their attempt to force the genie of free spirit back into its bottle, the Jews made – one after another – three translations of the Old Testament into Greek to counter the LXX. These translations were made from their proto-Masoretic (original) version, and were quite tendentious. “The Virgin” in the prophecy became “a young woman” in their rendering. Since then, the Jews have made and/or influenced dozens of translations into all languages, while ferociously defending their own Hebrew version, the MT, as the only legitimate primary source.

At the beginning, the young Christian church had not worried overmuch, as they considered Hebrew only a language of the scribes, whilst cultured people used Greek, and the local masses spoke Aramaic. The Church dismissed the Hebrew version as an empty cocoon shed by a beautiful butterfly. The Greek LXX was considered the God-inspired text, and on its basis, the New Testament and the works of the Fathers of the Church were created. The Eastern Orthodox Church still prefers the Septuagint to the MT, for the translation of the Seventy Elders had been kept in the Church and by the Church, whereas the Hebrew text had been kept and prepared by anti-Christian forces.

When later Christian scholars became interested in the Old Testament, and compared the Judaic translations with the LXX, they unavoidably resorted to the Jewish Bible, for by that time the Jews had the edited Hebrew manuscripts and tools for their interpretation. As the H70, the old Hebrew Source of the Septuagint had been destroyed by the nationalists, a great scholar writing in Greek, Origen, qualified heretic by the synod later, therefore turned to the Jews for advice, in order to understand the texts better. The Jews gave him plenty of advice – only their advice was based on their understanding of their text. Origen decided to improve the Septuagint and emended the LXX according to the Jewish Bible of his day. Some of these emendations made their way into the body of the LXX. Still, the Eastern Church remained rather safe, for the Septuagint remained the official version of the Old Testament for the Greek-speaking East from Constantinople to Alexandria.

But the West did not read Greek. For a long while, the West used the Old Latin translations from the Septuagint. However, the translations were weak. Eventually St Jerome, a wonderful man and a great scholar, who lived for 34 years in Palestine, decided to correct the Old Latin translations and update them. He even began his work using the Septuagint. Afterwards, though, he followed Origen and turned to the Jews for their advice and interpretation. That was his undoing. He got carried away, and took the fateful step that made the West susceptible to Jewish influence. He parted with LXX and made a brand new translation into Latin – from the Hebrew Bible of his day, the proto-MT. The Jews surely liked the result, but St Augustine was shocked by this deed, and wrote in The City of God:

Although the Jews acknowledge this very learned labour [of Jerome translating the Old Testament from the Hebrew] to be fruitful, while they contend that the Seventy translators have erred in many places, still the churches of Christ judge that no one should be preferred to the authority of [the Seventy], and we ought to believe that the prophetic gift is with [the Seventy].”

Contemporaries condemned Jerome, as they noticed that he slowly began to appear more and more Jewish in his positions as he got older and his Jewish friends began to have more influence. One of his former friends, Rufinus, publicly attacked Jerome’s Jewish leanings. Jerome, in response to the attacks, wrote in his own Apology: “There is nothing to blame in my getting the help of a Jew in translating from the Hebrew.” He said that he “did not understand how Jewish interpretations here and there would undermine the faith of Christians.” According to Israel Shamir, in this way the Jews managed to plant the seed that would eventually blossom into the acceptance of the Hebrew MT and the virtual abolition of the Greek Septuagint, the authentic Christian Scriptures of Christ and His Apostles.

A reason why Jerome, and Origen before him, accepted the Jewish version was their lack of historical perspective. For Origen and Jerome, the Old Testament was the Old Testament, and the Jews were the Jews. They did not understand that the Hebrew text of the Old Testament had been changed several times since the days of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, when the Septuagint was produced. Some of these changes were tendentious, others were due to scribal errors, and still others were the result of misunderstanding. Origen and Jerome believed the myth about careful Jewish stewardship of the OT scrolls. They did not know that the Jews had destroyed the manuscripts of other types. The Church had no such practice at Jerome’s time. Jerome planted the seed of Jewish influence, and it had made its major inroads by the Ninth century, when the Vulgate of Jerome (the Latin translation of the Bible accepted by the Catholic Church as authentic) became universally accepted.

Still, the Old Testament was not widely read – Latin was not universally understood and its influence remained somewhat limited – that is, until the Protestants began to spread their translations of the Old Testament in the vernacular. The immediate result can be likened to an outbreak of a long-sleeping disease. Previously unheard-of devastation and massacres of civilians during the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) were influenced by spread of the MT-based vernacular translations, as the nations were infected by its exclusivist nationalist spirit unknown in Europe until that time. The King James Bible was translated from the MT in order to correct the mistakes found by the Puritans, had an amazing result. The Brits began to consider themselves a racial new Israel of the flesh, as opposed to the Church being regarded the New Israel of the spirit.

These fanatic Christians fought the Church, and inflicted the ethnic cleansing prescribed in the book of Joshua on their colonies in the New World, in America. They privatised the commons and turned ordinary British people into paupers. The German Bible translated from the MT turned the Germans into ferocious nationalists and eventually prepared the ground for Hitler. Thus, the MT and its translations had an enormous, even magical, effect. The Jews became the collective Merlin behind the throne of a British King Arthur. Merlin was a Druid seer or prophet, endowed with magic power, whom was also thought to be a wizard. People dissatisfied with this pre-eminence of the Jews left Christianity for various heathen cults, or became engrossed with the material side of the world. The Judaisation of the West and the degradation of its spirit accelerated.

Shamir sees that the translation battle continues even today, as unabatedly and as one-sidedly as ever. The Jews produce dozens of translations into many languages, each more Judaic than the last. Some are openly Jewish, like the Jewish Publication Society Bible, others are masked crypto-Jewish or “Christian-Zionist”, like the Scofield Reference Bible that reduces the Christian faith to “love of Jews and of the Jewish state”. (By the way, Scofield was financed by the same super-rich investment banker, Jacob Schiff of New York, who, on the basis of the information supplied by his own son, gave 20 million [in current value two billion] dollars to Trotsky for the goals of the Bolshevik revolution.) Shamir thinks that this long, hard work on these corrosive translations is the real Conspiracy of the Elders of Zion.

After this, Shamir passes to the situation in Russia. He sets forth that Russia was the latest to submit to the Judaising influence of the MT translation. Until the late 19th century, the Russians were exposed only to the QEB, the Old Slavonic translation from the Septuagint, and they were pious, religious, loyal to the throne. In the late 19th century, the pro-British Masonic Bible Society had published a translation of the MT into the Russian vernacular. Very soon, the Jewish influence in Russia began to rise. However, the Russian Church did not accept this Judaised Russian Bible for liturgical purposes, and continues to pray and read from the QEB. This caused a tragic rift between the LXX-orientated Church and MT-induced reading public. This conflict came to forefront with the Bolshevik revolution. Shamir adds another personal disclosure, when he relates about the fact that, as an ex-Jew who was received into the Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, he is acutely and personally aware of the continuous struggle of these two spirits in the world. He himself would like to know: Will the Christian world submit to Judaisation, or will the Jews accept Christ?

He had the occasion, in a church in the Holy Land, to see a Bible in Hebrew published by a Christian society for the purpose of bringing the Jews to Christ. However, the Old Testament had been reproduced from the MT. If a Jew sees that Christians actually use the Jewish text prepared by anti-Christian Jewish Rabbis, how can he ever accept the Christian interpretation? Shamir thinks that the encounter of Jews and Christians should bring Jews to the Church, not lead to Christians leaving the Church in dismay. Proselytising efforts usually fail because the Jews consider themselves the guardians of the Scripture.

Finally, Shamir measures what advantage would the reconstruction of the Hebrew OT according to the LXX would bring. He is convinced that a truly Christian Hebrew Bible has now become a distinct possibility. The H70, the Hebrew Source of the LXX, can be reconstructed on the basis of the textological discoveries of the last hundred years, with the help of the Qumran scrolls. Shamir intends to do this work. Such a publication could become the turning point in this millennial struggle. We do not know whether Shamir is right saying if this project had been attempted by the young Church in the second century, the Jewish influence today would be the same as the Samaritan one – negligible.

Shamir wonders why the Queen Elizabeth Bible should be relevant. And why not any other translation? Why not the Greek text? The QE Bible was prepared in the least Judaised country of the Christian world, in 18th century Russia, under the royal protection of its least Judaised queen. When Queen Elizabeth I was asked to permit Jewish traders to enter Russia, as they would bring her much profit, she replied: “I wish no profit from Christ’s enemies”. Western ideas (and in their guise, Judaic influence) made few inroads then. The QE Bible was edited by churchmen, not by scientists, and edited within the full view of the Church tradition. Shamir compares the QE Bible to a mammoth unearthed in the frozen tundra – its corpse survived for millennia because it was protected by permafrost. One may dislike permafrost and prefer the tropics, but permafrost is better for preservation.

To all this, we can add that the Queen Elizabeth Bible is also called the Bishops’ Bible, although not only bishops, but also several other qualified church personalities took part in its production. These qualified theologians, belonging to the new generation, were already serving in the Church of England, and included many excellent linguists. Many of them studied on the Continent, at the leading universities of the Reformation in Europe. The Bishops’ Bible is also called Puritan Bible, because this Bible was more Puritan than the enlarged version, which followed it and which became the official version. However, the Bishops’ Bible has never become the Queen Elizabeth Bible officially, because the Queen has never gave Her consent to this. Nevertheless, Elizabeth I accepted this translation and subsidized fourty editions of it during Her long reign.

So Shamir sees that one may prefer a more Westernised, better translation for this work. But if one wants to discover the pure old Hellene tradition, one should prefer the Queen Elizabeth Bible to the subsequent, strongly Judaised texts. The Septuagint has plural interpretations and various versions. The QEB has the great advantage of being a single text based on the LXX and fully approved by the Church. Its language is lucid, its meaning is clear, and this allows us to find and reconstruct its lost Hebrew source.

Philo of Alexandria and the Christianity

Philo Judaeus or Philo of Alexandria is the first great figure of the Jewish philosophy and theology, who fused the methods of the Homer interpretation of Stoic origin and of the new Pythagorean numerology in order to reveal the hidden sense of the Old Testament. Philo was born in a noble, honourable and wealthy Alexandrian family, his father was the leader of the local Jewish community. Philo preferred studying and thinking to the business activity. He undertook a public activity only when he led the Embassy of Alexandrian Jews to Roman Emperor Gaius Caligula so that he should withdraw his self-idolizing and anti-Jew dispositions. One of his preserved two biographical works deals with this mission of him mentioned above, and the other relates about the Alexandrian Jewish riots that caused it. Among his theoretical works we can mention his treatises titled On the Contemplative Life and Every Good Man is Free. The former presents the life of the Egyptian Jewish ascetic sect of the Therapeutae. The latter relates about of life of the Essenes, who lived in monastic communities.

In his work On the Life of Moses, Philo compares Moses to the philosopher king known from the teachings of Plato. He presents the activity of Moses as a law-maker, a priest and a prophet in detail. Philo, who wrote mostly for the Alexandrian Greek Jews, was the contemporary of Jesus, but does not mention either Him, or the developing Christianity. He does not say a word about the Jewry of Judea either, and, presumably, he could not speak Hebraic or Aramaic, and he knew only the Greek translation of the Bible. Many historians consider him one of the direct forerunners of Christianity. According to the Christian church tradition, when visiting Rome, Philo met Peter the Apostle, the founder of the Christian community of Rome.

The philosophic theology of Philo treats the Mosaic Jewish laws in harmony with the cosmos. The law-abiding man is also the citizen of the cosmos, since he adjusts his actions to that one who controls the universe. The omnipotent God did not create the world in six days because He needed time, but for the sake of the order. In Philo’s theory, the order is to be found in the numbers, and the number six is the most perfect among all numbers (6 = 1+2+3). Living beings were created by God on the fifth day, because there are five senses: vision, hearing, taste, touch and smell. God first imagined and then created the world, and did the same with the physical world. The only God has no name; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is nature itself, the correct way of life, the acquirable wisdom. Philo stated that people started to think deeper when they realized that there is a conceivable spiritual world beyond the physically perceptible world.

The millenary strategy of the “chosen people”

Adolphe Isaac Crémieux (1796–1880) was the president of the Alliance Israélite Universelle (Universal Alliance of Israelites) for six years, from 1864 to 1870. This original Jewish political alliance was established in 1860, and its centre was the same Zionist Masonic lodge, where Crémieux was the grand master of the highest council. The Alliance Israelite Universelle, an extension of the Prieuré de Sion (Priory of Sion), was created to counterbalance the Zionist movement powerfully developing in Russia. The Zionism was based upon the nation, and wanted to create such a nation state for the scattered Jewish communities, which would have brought the diaspora Jewry in an equal situation with the other nations detaining a territory and a country. On the other hand, the Alliance led by Crémieux focused on the universal Jewry. The essence of their world strategy was that the Jewish communities should continue to stay in those nation states in which they were rooted, and should preserve their Jewish identities within them.

Therefore, Crémieux opposed those Zionist endeavours, which wanted to create a nation state for the Jews on a geographically delimited territory. He also supported that the Jews should give up their separatism, and, if possible, should integrate or even assimilate as much as possible into the community of that nation, which hosted them. Following the establishment of the Alliance, the Universalist Jews were successful all over Europe, but they could not cross the English Channel, and they did not rival with the British freemasonry. Although unwilling, the British masons supported the Zionism, at the request of the super-rich Rothschild money dynasty. The Universalist Jews were not anti-Semites, only anti-Zionists. Although the Alliance was created by the Prieuré de Sion, it was an alliance maintained strictly for Jews, which, nevertheless, operated within a Rosicrucian Masonic lodge in Paris.

Crémieux, who was twice the member, as Minister of Justice, of the French government in 1848 and 1870, also fulfilled the function of grand master of the Masonic mother lodge Grand Orient, turned toward the Jewry of the world in 1869, with a Manifesto that was published in The Morning Post of London on September 6, 1920. The Manifesto says:

“All Jews for one and one for all. The union which we desire to found will not be a French, English, Irish or German union, but a Jewish one, a universal one. Other peoples and races are divided into nationalities; we alone have not co-citizens, but exclusively co-religionaries. A Jew will under no circumstances become the friend of a Christian or a Moslem before the moment arrives when the light of the Jewish faith, the only religion of reason, will shine all over the world.

Scattered amongst other nations, who from time immemorial were hostile to our rights and interests, we desire primarily to be and to remain immutably Jews. Our nationality is the religion of our fathers, and we recognize no other nationality. We are living in foreign lands, and cannot trouble about the mutable ambitions of the countries entirely alien to us, while our own moral and material problems are endangered.

The Jewish teaching must cover the whole earth. No matter where fate should lead, through scattered all over the earth, you must always consider yourselves members of a Chosen Race. If you realize that the faith of your Fathers is your only patriotism, if you recognize that, notwithstanding the nationalities you have embraced, you always remain and everywhere form one and only nation, if you believe that Jewry only is the one and only religious and political truth, if you are convinced of this, you, Jews of the Universe, then come and give ear to our appeal and prove to us your consent… Our cause is great and holy, and its success is guaranteed.

Catholicism, our immemorial enemy, is lying in the dust, mortally wounded in the head. The net which Judaism is throwing over the globe of the earth is widening and spreading daily, and the momentous prophecies of our Holy Books are at least to be realized. The time is near when Jerusalem will become the house of prayer for all nations and peoples, and the banner of Jewish monodeity will be unfurled and hoisted on the most distant shores. Our might is immense, learn to adopt this might for our cause. What have you to be afraid of? The day is not distant when all the riches and treasures of the earth will become the property of the Jews.”

To this Manifesto, we could add that Crémieux considered the Jewish communities, living dispersed all over the world, primarily a global people, more exactly a world rule people. For him, the Zionist idea – according to which the Jewish communities living scattered all over the world should be transformed into a single people, linked to a territory and state, having a nation state – was not a good solution, because, in this way, the Jewish people would have been one among the civilization-making peoples in the world. Did Crémieux think that all the members of the Jewish community would then move to the newly established Zionist national home? This might have seemed realistic to him. It is obvious that such a “danger” has never been threatening. Therefore, those were right who thought that the Jewish communities, which were already integrated into the societies of the host national states, would only be strengthened if, besides that, they detain a “normal” nation state, linked to an own territory. So, from the point of the strategy of Jewish survival, not Crémieux was right, who favoured exclusively the universality, but those who wanted to strengthen the Jewish communities living among other nations as minorities also with such a nation state, where the Jews form the majority.

Nevertheless, when Crémieux writes that, living in stranger countries, the Jewish communities cannot care about the problems and interests of states that are totally stranger from them, because these communities usually strive to take over, in the host country, the control over the financial, economic and, if possible, the cultural and political life, or at least to influence them effectively. And, if so, they can be expected to identify themselves, at least partially, with the problems and interests of these countries, societies and states.

It is worth quoting from the book titled Jewry (Zsidóság) of the Hungarian Dr. Lajos Fejér, published in 1936. On page 232, the author exposes that “until the last period, when the Christian world kept the Jewry at a distance not because their racial origin, but because their religion, the Jew had a free way, after converting to Christianity, to the nation and society of the host people, he could assimilate into it without any restriction. Thus, the assertion concerning the exile is unjustified. The Jew himself expelled himself from the host people, through his religion and his written and oral laws.”

Fejér refers to the Zionist novel of Louis Levisohn, titled The Eternal Island. According to Levisohn, the assimilation is the Jewish application of the defensive mimicry. He quotes from Levisohn the following:

“The mimicry originating from respect and devotion, as well as the desire for union (assimilation) did not always remain pure, but it sunk – it had to sink in almost all cases – into the defensive mimicry. It stayed apparent. Target and shelter. And, from the fusion of these two mimicries, was that Jewish soul created, that complicated, sick, hair-splittingly anguished, talented, but rarely creative, sensitive, arrogant, creeping like a reptile, sentimental, solid, patriotic, revolutionarily modern Jewish soul, all characteristics of which can be predicted, all heroism and all treason and confusion, and even the mere existence of which is cruelty and cross.”

Analyzing this standpoint, Fejér exposes that in fact it is the process of transfiguration, assimilation of the Jewry that stepped out into the light of the modern culture, a deep change, which goes together with the psychological-intellectual and even physical parturition. From the tradition of the Jewry and from the millennial conditionings rooted in the Jewish soul, we can still expect for such inhibitions, which resist the effects of the civilization and of the Christian culture that transform soul and body. Fejér got to the conclusion that the assimilation and the cult of the Jewish traditions are incompatible, and lead to a scission in the self-conscience, a kind of schizophrenia. The Jewry must choose between the assimilation and the ghetto, i.e. the jungle of the Talmud. If they choose the assimilation, they must not stop on this road or turn back. Following the way of Christianity, they must know that they bear two world views within themselves. One of them is a dead-weight, which pulls them down, and, through the racial memory, could take them back to their sad past. And, on the other hand, the Jewry does not want the assimilation, they must close themselves out of the physical and spiritual life order of the Christian world. They must continue to live, separated, their own ancient Jewish life. Namely, they will have to restore the separate Jewish world, which they had created for themselves in their dispersion from the beginning, and which they had not left until they stepped out of their religion, i.e. of the ghetto.

According to the standpoint of Crémieux and the Alliance Israélite Universelle created by himself, the assimilation is compulsory for the Jewry. Of course, the Alliance established in 1860, as a Jewish institution, does not deny the Jewish religion, and does not require it to be given up. However, it protested against Jewish nationalism. It finds it desirable that the Jewry should melt into the surrounding peoples, so that they should not leave any other trace behind them, but their morality manifesting itself in their religious practice. The relationship between the western and the eastern Jewry should be the same as that one existing between the Catholics and Protestants of two countries.

However, Lajos Fejér thinks that the religious relationship between the Catholics of the two countries essentially differs from the contacts between the religious relationship between the eastern and western Jewry. Namely, the Christians of the European countries are connected with each other, besides their religion, also by the identical Christian culture. The culture of the eastern and western Jewry, however, differs to a great extent from each other. The culture of the former is Jewish, that of the second is Christian. Even their religious life is extremely different. The western Jewry does not practice the observance, i.e. the strict following of the Jewish traditions, and, right for this reason, the eastern Jewry does not consider the western assimilated Jews to be Jews. If the Neolog Hungarian Jews were aware of the fact that the Jewry is not a religion, but a race, a nationality, they would feel to make a choice: to stay a Jew or to become a Hungarian. Lajos Fejér asserts that most of them would break with the Jewry.

In the following part of his book, Lajos Fejér deals with the fact that, if there is no Jewish religious life, only assimilation, then, as a matter of fact, the Jewish ethnic should cease to exist, since it never had any special purpose. It was secured by the separation, the restriction of contacts with the pagans, the strict ban of mixing through intermarriage, the observation of the Law. The ethnic separation and the intermarriage were not the will of the people, but the result of the theocratic Jewish state, and later of the way of life of the Jewish communities living in Diaspora. Where the Jewish existence lives in the conscience and way of life of the Jewry as a religion, there the Jewish ethnic character has neither importance, nor justification, from the point of general culture and progress.

What Lajos Fejér writes about racial existence, is important even up to the present date. He starts from the fact that the Jewry in not so much a religion, but more a race and a nationality. The religion is an ideological complexity, conveyed by the reason or the affection, but is not given a priori through birth. The situation is different in the case of the race, which continues with the birth. Fejér thinks that the racial characteristics cannot be taken off, they can only be disciplined and modified through mixture. But, as the German or Slav of Christian religion could sincerely undertake to serve the Hungarian national idea, as he could reform the other people living here to his own image, and could put them, serving the public good, in the service of the Hungarian national genius, the same can happen even with the Jewish race, if the Jewish religion does not stand, as a prohibitive fence, between the Jewry and the society of the host nation.

According to Fejér, the Jew, assimilating into the Christian culture and society, learns the history and cultural history of the Jewry, and, by this, lays the bases of the Jewish self-education. In this way, the Jew will be able to see that the history of the Jewry, especially in the course of the 2000 years of the Diaspora, “is a series of mostly justified persecution, and their cultural history is the sterile cultivation of the Talmud and then of the Kabbalah, and everything that happened to them or what they did was originating from the Orthodox physical and moral separation from the cultural endeavours and development of the European nations.”

From all this, the emancipated and culture-needing Jew draws the conclusion that “the sticking to the Jewish religion has not and even cannot have a reasonable connection with the development of the European cultural nations.” (cited work, p. 237)

For 2000 years, the Jewish intellect – otherwise susceptible to ultra-subtle differentiation – wasted so much energy on the exegesis of the Bible, on the Halakkah, the collection of traditions and laws (the Talmud) and its explanation, that the realization of this exerts a more discouraging than elevating effect on the Jew having a purified thinking.

According to Lajos Fejér, the Jewish problem can be solved in only one way (cited work, p. 238): “The Jewry must cease to exist. Naturally, on the current stage of civilization, it is absurd to think about violent means, what is more, everything must be done so that such an idea should not serve as nourishment to the instincts of the masses of people.”

And, in turn, if we avoid the violent means (we remind the reader that the book was written in 1936, well before the tragedy of the holocaust – J. D.), “the solution of the Jewish problem can come only from one side: from the side of the Jewry” Fejér sees that this solution has already started with the process of assimilation. And this must finish with the termination of the Jewry. Let us quote again the author: “The honest desire of the assimilation will strip off, from the assimilated Jewry, the thick bark, stratified through millenniums, of the Talmudic suggestions. It will make the Jewry available for the deepest suggestions of the Christian culture. Under the effect of these suggestions, the Jewish ‘self’ and the Jewish selfishness – the pharisaism, the fastidiousness – will be replaced by the Christian ‘self’ and the Christian unselfishness. The nation, in the trunk and bloodstream of which the Jewry wants to assimilate in this way, will, instinctively, register this psychic metamorphosis, and will not differentiate, from the other fellow countrymen, these people who, themselves, do not make and feel any difference between themselves and their environment.”

What is the difference between the people linked to their homeland and the world-wanderer people?

That people can be considered to be the people of the land, of the soil, which can only exist if his life is organically and closely linked to his land of birth, motherland, homeland, and to that special piece of land on which his birthplace and native house lies. This kind of sticking to a concrete piece of land is not an excluding nationalism. The Greek democracy was also based on the clinging adherence to the given city-state and to its territory representing the homeland. For a citizen of Athens, it was not easy to move to another city-state. He could move there, but his rights there were not identical with the rights of those of who were born in the given city-state. Israel Shamir writes in his work titled Cabbala of Power published in 2007 (pp. 161–166) that it can be approached in many ways why the Jews are so susceptible to internationalism and globalization. According to some, this is the proof of the special humanism of the Jews. Clement Greenberg thinks that “the world history level of the European Jew represents the highest type of the forms of human existence known to date.”

Those who receive this with doubtful cynicism, refer to the fact that the Jews are those who do not see much difference between peoples and peoples, because for them a goy is a goy, and so the non-Jews can be qualified together. These Jews mention that the nations must disappear, and the religions too. But this does not apply to Israel, because this little people is God’s chosen people.

Kevin MacDonald, professor at California State University, Long Beach, is on the opinion that the annihilation of nations would be useful for the Jews from practical reasons, because in this way they could play, as an organized team, against the individuals carefully separated from each other. Nevertheless, for this it is necessary to properly foresee the distant future. The enhancing of the communication flow is useful for the Jews, because they live in many different countries

The more developed communication system is not only a blessing. If the flow from one place to another is very easy, the necessity of it ends rapidly, since the people changing place and the information will become similar. Shamir examines closely how the flow, the continuous change of place and migration creates, for the different Jewish movements, the possibility of integration into a community. He calls this continuous flow, change of place flux, which is the most general form of free movement, like Carl Popper’s “open society”, the free market liberalism of Friedrich von Hayek, or the brutal violence hiding in Zionism, the revolutionary tools propagated by Trotzkism, and the American militarism applied by the neo-conservatives. All these different movements enhance the flux, the unlimited and continuous change of place in masses, the emigration and immigration, the permanent flow and wandering. And, in the same time, they hinder the belonging and affective linking to the motherland, the native land, to a determined piece of land.

Shamir supports his opinion with a strange example. In Russia, in the 19th century, the government nationalized the production of alcohol, and, by this, it made more income than by all other previous income taxes. By this, it put an end to the poisoning of the population with alcohol. According to Shamir, this disposition of the tsarist government contributed to the fact that the Jews emigrated in masses from Russia to the United States much more than those “persecutions” which they suffered.

After supporting this assertion with the Jewish successes reached in the field of arts, Shamir asserts that even the imperialism is the form of appearance of this flux. The modern American imperial expansion was enhanced by the rightist neo-cons. In the Soviet Union, the leftist Trotzkist fraction propagated the imperialist policy of the permanent world revolution, until Stalin stopped it with the slogan “building up the socialism in one country”.

The British world conquest was urged by Disraeli, Great Britain’s rightist Prime Minister, who, although was baptized, stayed an extremely chauvinist, haughty Jew. It was Disraeli who dreamt the establishment of a Jewish state, and he can be considered the creator of Zionism much more than Theodor Herzl.

Disraeli fought passionately against those Englishmen who were convinced that the colonies can be considered to be millstones pending in the neck of their country.

The French Adolphe Crémieux, considered “leftist”, was the great supporter of the French imperialism. It was him who, as a member of the government, gave citizenship to the Jews living in Algeria, while the Muslims there could only be second-class citizens in their own country.

The imperialism, i.e. the imperial expansion did not improve the lives of the simple French and English people in their own motherlands. It resulted in a series of wars and the immigration in masses into their countries. This exhausted them completely. Here remarks Shamir that, if they wanted to save their country, they should let the United States to expand so much that it collapses. However, he is worried that the collapse of the world would happen earlier. In this interpretation, the love of motherland and homeland is an anti-imperialistic tendency. It is worth the attention that, according to Shamir, the movement “Gay Pride” belongs to the flux. The problem is not with the gays, as it is a private business. The impertinence is in the term “pride”, the hubris. Proud Jews, proud gays, proud Americans are equally unpleasant and rejectable, since all of them express the haughtiness and arrogance of the flux.

All exaggeration switches into its opposite. Therefore, for the sake of avoiding the misunderstandings, Shamir emphasizes: all this does not mean that the flux, i.e. the continuous change of place and flow should be terminated completely. The world needs flow and change of place to a certain extent. Without it, the mankind would not have universal ideas, and, for instance, even the internet would not exist, which offers a huge opportunity for the mass exchange of information. But the arrogance, haughtiness and even shouting impudence of this flux should be limited, namely so that we follow it with closer attention and keep it under observation. This is necessary because the flux consumes the energies accumulated in the differences, the common heritage of mankind. Similar to this is how the Jewish settlements, with their green lawns and swimming-pools live such a life that they consume the underground water reserve, the consequence of which is that the Palestinian villages are short of drinking water.

Shamir thinks that what he calls flux, as well as the sticking to the place of birth and to the family home – called, in turn, Sumud, with a term borrowed from the Palestinians – are not racist approaches. He differentiates them sharply from the slogan of “Blood and Soil”. Namely, in this slogan, the emphasis is on the clinging adherence to the soil, the binding to the soil. The fatherland is the first and the last, since the blood is never enough.

Shamir illustrates his standpoint with several examples, and then draws the learning: “In order to belong to a people, we must give up the flux, and, studying carefully the customs and way of life of the given country, we must adhere to a new Sumud, keeping the rules of the country, loving its people, joining their church, accepting their leadership, learning their language. We must give up the haughtiness of the flux, and sincerely love the idea of Sumud. I thought to all this when I stood behind a little black girl in our parish church, in the queue waiting for the Holy Communion.”

The writer of the present lines thinks that also in the question of the flux and Sumud, the solution is the golden mean. If freedom is a good thing, the exaggerated freedom is bad yet, since it switches into its opposite and leads to anarchy. If the sticking to the native land is a good thing, the binding to the soil, the narrow-minded provincialism leads to stagnation, to closing-in, and it cannot be considered good any more. As also in pedagogy there is a need for freedom, which enhances the development of self-activity and initiative, the exaggerated freedom, the libertinism, which lacks the disciplined learning, is already a bad thing, because hinders the optimal acquisition of knowledge. If discipline is a good thing, the rigid discipline, refraining the development of the creative thoughts, is a bad thing, because it limits the performance, and leads to stagnation and, finally, to rigid barracks conditions at school. It is necessary to find the optimal relationship between the freedom limited with discipline and the discipline kept in motion with freedom, the order serving the life.

Therefore, if I unilaterally favourize the movement, the migration, the making off, I will not be able to really get rooted in the culture of any of the nations. If, on the other hand, I cut myself out of the movement, of the reception of new things, I will get stiffened into the provincial conditions and will be the prisoner of the lifeless stagnation.

Both Lajos Fejér and Shamir recommend that the people of eternal change of place and wandering, the Jewry of towns and big cities should make efforts to get attached to the host people, to its homeland, landscapes and fatherland. In this way, they can find the equilibrium between their openness to the world and cosmopolitan freedom and their belonging to a specific people and to its natural habitat. The latter makes it possible to be a part of a living world being in harmony with the natural and social environment instead of wind-blown sand.


The Jews – the eternal separatists

William Luther Pierce (1933–2002) was born in one of the aristocrat families of the American South. He earned a doctorate in physics and was a professor at Oregon State University for years. Until his death, he was active as the leader of the white separatist organization called White Alliance, and was the leading ideologist of the white nationalists. He took the racial question as seriously as several other outstanding leaders of the Jewish people. In 1978, Pierce adopted the views of the religion called Cosmotheism. This, in fact, can be qualified as Panentheism. The widely known Pantheism is a world view that identifies God with nature, the natural laws. On the contrary, the Panentheism teaches that everything exist in God, as if God were the ocean and we were the fish in it. The universe is God’s body, but the conscience and personality of God is greater than the totality of all parts of the universe. All parts participate, with a freedom of certain extent, in the creation, together with God.

Cosmotheism is an impersonal form of Panentheism, which believes in an impersonal spiritual creative force, and regards it God. It is the moving force of the whole universe. According to the teaching of Cosmotheism, everything is in God, and God is in everything. It deems the nature of reality and existence variable, which is intended to reach, developing together, the totality of the universal consciousness, the Goodness. The cosmos is an arranged, harmonic universe, and thus the divine is equal with the existing and with the consciousness, and represents an arranged and harmonic part of the whole universe.

As we have already mentioned, Pierce regarded the survival of the white race the most important, and, according to his peculiar world view, man is his own god, and his religion can be derived from the respect for his ancestors, so the ancient great white civilizations have always believed in the greatness of people who created them. So did the ancient Greeks, Vikings and the Aryans who created the Hinduism and believed that the secret of goodness lies within them. Therefore, the unique characteristics of the human race should be preserved and developed.

In July 2001, Bob Grant, the media star, invited William Pierce to a talk show in his New York radio programme. At the time of the broadcasting, it was an afternoon rush-hour in New York, and many people phoned from their car. Most of them agreed with what Pierce said about the racial issue and the Jewish problem. The few Jewish callers, of course, were intensely hostile, and wanted to know why Pierce blamed the Jews for the bias of the news and entertainment media. It’s not the Jews who should be blamed, they said, but the shareholders of the media companies. The Jewish media bosses just do what the shareholders tell them to do.

Pierce responded by pointing out that the top Jewish media bosses also are in many cases the dominant shareholders in the media companies, and he gave Sumner Redstone as an example. Redstone is the majority shareholder in his Viacom Corporation, which in turn owns Music TV, Paramount Pictures, and CBS. He described Music TV as being the most destructive of all media influences on young, white Americans. He said that MTV deliberately and consistently encourages miscegenation. This racially destructive policy is Sumner Redstone’s policy, not that of any anonymous shareholders, that it is a Jewish policy, and that it is the same policy as that of every other Jewish media boss.

The host of the talk show, Bob Grant did not understand Pierce’s answer and asked: “I don’t understand. You said that Sumner Redstone and the other Jewish media bosses are deliberately trying to destroy our society. Why would they want to do that? They are rich and powerful and influential. This society has been good to them. Why would they want to destroy it? That doesn’t make sense to me.” It was a very reasonable question from the part of the host. It was the question that almost any intelligent, honest person might ask in those circumstances. It was the natural question to ask: Why do the Jews want to destroy a society that has been so good to them – especially the richest and most powerful Jews? One can imagine some embittered Jewish cab driver or office clerk wanting to strike out at Gentile society because he is resentful over the fact that he can’t seem to strike it rich like the more fortunate members of his tribe, but why would those who are riding high – billionaire Jews such as Sumner Redstone and Michael Eisner – want to wreck the system from which they are profiting? When Bob Grant asked him that question, Pierce wished he hadn’t. He knew the answer, and it was a simple answer. One needs to hear the answer and then to think about it carefully for a month, turning it over in one’s mind.

The answer, in its simplest form, to Bob Grant’s question is this: Jews do what they do because they are Jews. A more didactic answer is what Pierce actually said to Bob Grant: “The Jews, throughout their entire recorded history, have lived as a minority among other people. That’s their typical modus vivendi: not living among themselves in a Jewish society, but living as a small minority – usually a rich and powerful minority – in a non-Jewish society. Israel today is an exception to this pattern, but Israel is an anomaly, something that has existed for only 50 years out of the last 2000 years, and even today it encompasses only a small minority of the world’s Jews. Most of them live in the so-called ‘Diaspora’ as members of a Jewish minority in the midst of a Gentile society.”

“When the Jews approach a healthy, homogeneous Gentile society with the aim of infiltrating it, they are looked upon as outsiders, as aliens, and regarded with suspicion — and often with hostility if their reputation has preceded them. Facing such suspicion the Jews find it very difficult to gain power or influence so that they can exploit the society. Their way of dealing with this obstacle is to undermine the solidarity of the Gentile society: to destroy its homogeneity, to attack its morality and its traditions, to encourage alienation among its young people. They do everything they can to make the society more “diverse,” more multicultural, more cosmopolitan, more rootless, more atomized. This is a slow process, often continuing for several generations, but as it proceeds the society’s barriers against the Jews crumble. Ultimately it allows the Jews to control and then plunder the society, to suck it dry before moving on to another Gentile society and beginning a similar process anew.”

Pierce was sure that his answer was simple and straightforward, but it was not likely to be fully digested by someone listening to his car radio while trying to get home in the New York rush-hour traffic. It’s a statement of fact, but it needs to be substantiated with a lot of detailed explanation, with many concrete examples, in order to be convincing. Therefore, Pierce decided to try to provide some of the explanation and some of the concrete facts in a short study with the title The Scorpion and the Frog, referring to the well-known fable. First, Pierce looks at what he said about the Jews being a tribe of perpetual outsiders. This is a notion many people who look only at the here and now have difficulty believing. They think the Jews aren’t outsiders, since they are as thoroughly integrated into the American melting pot as anyone. They are in every facet of American business and professional and cultural and political life. They own stores of every sort. They buy and sell every type of merchandise. They may not be farmers or welders or machinists or carpenters, but they are doctors and dentists and lawyers and teachers and writers and artists and musicians. They are politicians. There are more and more of them in the U.S. Senate, four times as many as one would expect from their percentage of the overall population. There are even two of them on the Supreme Court, which is about nine times what one would expect, since they make up only 2.5 per cent of the general population.

Pierce presented in detail the sorts of responses he had sometimes had from people because, in his opinion, the historical record, however, shows something quite different. In the course of the past 2000 years, the Jews were worming their way into one country in Europe after another, gradually monopolizing certain sectors of the economy and then using their monopoly to exploit the Gentile population. For this, eventually, they were expelled en masse when their depredations caused sufficient public unrest. He mentions England as an example. The Jews entered England in the wake of the Norman conquest, purchased various privileges and trade monopolies from the ruling monarchs, and made themselves thoroughly unpopular. By the latter part of the 13th century, the people of England had become so exasperated with the Jews that in 1290 King Edward the Great expelled all of them from his realm and forbade them ever to return. One might think that they wouldn’t want to go back to a place where they had become so unpopular and undesirable, but it is a historical fact that they never stopped scheming to get back in. It wasn’t until Oliver Cromwell and his forces had overthrown the monarchy in the middle of the 17th century, however, that they were permitted to return to England.

They also were run out of virtually every other country in Europe – several times from some of them – but they always were looking for opportunities to sneak back in and return to their old depredations. They especially welcomed the upheavals and dislocations accompanying wars and revolutions because these gave them opportunities to gain footholds in places from which public hostility or the law had excluded them. During the Napoleonic Wars at the beginning of the 19th century Jews followed Napoleon’s armies into many places from which they previously had been barred.

Usually they didn’t have to wait for a war, however: typically they would depend upon the natural tolerance of their hosts to get a toe in the door, and then they would work slowly and patiently to push that tolerance beyond all limits. They always have had an uncanny instinct for sniffing out their hosts’ natural weaknesses and vices and then using them to break down the society’s discipline and order, thereby making it possible for them to enlarge their toehold and gain more influence. Thus, the Jews always have had a proclivity for the liquor business, casinos and other gambling activity, prostitution, the white slave trade, pornography, and the like. It is no coincidence that for many years the Jewish Bronfman family owned the biggest producer and distributor of liquor in North America, the Seagram Company. There are many non-Jews involved in the hotel business around the country, but in Las Vegas, where gambling is so intimately associated with hotels, the business is completely dominated by Jews. In the booming new business of internet pornography, the biggest pornography site operators are indirectly or directly Jewish control.

In this article, William Pierce also presents that the organized Jewry find their way to whatever corrupts and weakens their hosts, to whatever is morally destructive, to whatever makes their hosts forget their own traditions and values. They attack order and discipline: those things are no fun, those things are old-fashioned, those things are not cool, they tell the young people. They ridicule the concepts of personal honor and personal responsibility. They distract the people from the important things and fill their minds with foolishness. They encourage every alienating tendency, every tendency that separates people from their roots. They preach “tolerance” as the supreme virtue: their hosts should be tolerant of every sort of cultural filth and weakness and perversity. And all the while they worm their way into the host society more and more deeply. At the beginning of the 20th century, the American society still resisted and tried to keep away the pushy, unpleasant outsiders. But they kept on pushing, kept on breaking down the order and structure in the society.

Pierce summarizes his answer to the questions asked by Bob Grant: “Many ethnic groups came to America from Europe and at first were considered as outsiders but sooner or later became insiders, and the interests of the majority became their interests. In a sense every group that didn’t come here from Great Britain began as outsiders. The German mercenaries from Hessen who fought for King George and stayed here after the American Revolution very quickly became insiders. The Irish, the Poles, and the Italians all went through a similar evolution. Why is it so different with the Jews – aside from the fact that their roots are not European but are Middle Eastern?”

Pierce answers his own question: “For one thing these other groups, the non-Jewish groups, never had deceit and destruction as their primary tactics for becoming insiders. These tactics are not part of their history. Their aim was to become part of the society, not to break it up so that they could exploit it more easily. This difference is manifested in the difference in self-image between non-Jews and Jews. Every healthy ethnic or racial group has a distinct sense of group identity and a distinct self-image. The Scots and the English, for example, have distinct self-images, with their own distinct ancestral languages, their own historical traditions and customs and so on. But despite their history of conflict and hostility toward one another in Europe, either group can blend into the other and adopt the other’s interests without difficulty.”

“The Jews are different in both degree and kind. For one thing they are much more strongly ethnocentric than any other group. Look in the Yellow Pages under the heading ‘associations’ in any large American city. Compare the number of Jewish associations or clubs or societies or organizations with those of the Irish or the Germans or the Poles. Of course, you also must have some idea of what percentage of the city’s population is Jewish or Irish or whatever in order to get a meaningful comparison. For the best statistics, go to a library that has a copy of the Encyclopedia of Associations. Jews make up just 2.5 per cent of the population of the United States, and yet you will find more Jewish associations listed than for any other ethnic or religious group. They do stick together and support each other more than the members of any other group.”

“The Jews also are different in kind. What is the essential element in being a Jew? It is being ‘chosen’. It is believing that one is a member of a tribe or a race or a people that has been chosen by their tribal god to inherit the earth and all that’s in it. It is being superior to all who have not been chosen. If you are able to read the Old Testament with an open mind, the message there is quite clear. If you want more detail, read their Talmud. They don’t like for you to go poking around in their Talmud, but if you are reasonably resourceful you can find a set of volumes of the Talmud and read what they think about themselves in contrast to non-Jews.”

In the end of his present article, William Pierce refers to the book titled You Gentiles, by the Jewish leader Maurice Samuel, which is excellent for a start. He also recommends the very revealing books on the doctrines and practice of Judaism by Israeli Professor Israel Shahak. But most fundamentally the Jew, like the scorpion and every other creature, does what it is in his nature to do. Pierce continues:

“He has always lived not by settling down on a piece of turf of his own and planting his own crops and building his own house, but rather by breaking into someone else’s house. And once in he doesn’t try to repair the damage he did by breaking in, but he continues to cause more and more damage as he loots everything of value and then, when there is nothing of value remaining, finding another house to break into — and then another — and another. That is his nature.”

Sincerely on the relationship of the Jews and Gentiles based on mutual respect

In the newspaper The American Hebrew, Jesse H. Holmes wrote the following: “It can hardly be an accident that antagonism directed against the Jews is to be found pretty much everywhere in the world where Jews and non-Jews are associated. And as the Jews are the common element of the situation it would seem probable, on the face of it, that the cause will be found in them rather than in the widely varying groups which feel this antagonism.”

The Dearborn Independent, also known as The Ford International Weekly, was such a weekly magazine, which was published by Henry Ford, the founder of the Ford Motor Company, from 1919 to 1927. The famous articles were not written personally by Ford himself, but he set forth, in words, his opinion in detail to his secretary, Ernest Liebold, and to William J. Cameron, the editor of the magazine. Therefore, the series of articles dealing with the Jewish question, signed by Henry Ford, can be considered the direct work of Cameron, although Cameron himself did not agree with many of the assertions in it. On the other hand, it was Liebold who gathered the sources, which supported the factual statements of the articles. In 1925, The Dearborn Independent was already issued in 90 thousand copies, and only the number of copies of a New York newspaper, the New York Daily News was bigger than theirs in this time. Court cases were started against Ford due to the articles considered to have anti-Semitic content, and this partly caused the fact that the last issue of the magazine appeared in December 1927.

In the issue of January 7, 1922, a central question came into the limelight: whether what the series of articles says is true or it is untrue. If true, it ought to be considered. If untrue, it ought to be disproved, mentioning the proofs. The Jewish leaders did neither of the above in 1922. According to the magazine, tens of thousands of Jews know that the assertions of the series of articles are true. No representative Jew has ever approached the editorial office with a denial of the truth of what has been stated in the magazine. The chief objection made against the publication of the facts was stated in this form:

“What you say is true. Certain Jews are guilty of the things you charge. But why do you say ‘Jew’? Why do you not say Al Wood, Morris Gest, Louis Marshall, Samuel Untermyer, ‘Wolf’ Lamar, Edward Lauterbach, Felix Warburg – why not let it go with these men’s names, why say ‘Jew’? When you say ‘Jew’, it sounds as if you blamed all the Jews.”

The editors of the magazine argued as follows: First, that these men are Jews. Second, that being Jews these men constitute a problem for the Jews themselves. Third, it is time for someone to call attention to the necessity of cleaning up on that problem. There has been too much mincing of words. There has been too much concealment of names and relationship. The method which Jews were taking in America with regard to concealment was heading them swiftly toward the same conditions which have menaced their race in Europe. The editors said that their magazine would count no labor lost that would rouse the Jews to a sense of the responsibility which rests on them to solve the Jewish Question in their country, possibly the only country where it can be solved.

If the paper had mentioned only the names of individual Jews, never mentioning their race, and had exposed them as isolated persons, it would have made no difference in the general Jewish reaction, the cry would still have been that “the Jews were being attacked”. Whereas the other people of the country would have been just as much in the dark regarding the close bonds which unite all the groups of evil influences in this country. The purpose of this series of articles is to let in the light – to show the Jews generally that the stench had become too great, and to show the rest of the people where the stench arose. The list of charges for the Jews of the United States to consider as affecting the distinguished members of their race is very serious. And the charges are true.

It is true that there is a distinct “Jewish idea” in business and professional life, which has eaten away the traditional principles of honor on which Anglo-Saxon life was erected. Every Jew knows that, every non-Jew knows it. Here and there a Jew in business or professional life makes a breakaway from trickery, deception, dishonesty, and exploitation of the gullible public, and achieves success with honor, but that Jew also knows that the majority of his brethren in the same line practice different methods. It is true that behind the amazing degeneracy of the modern stage and motion picture is a solid wall of Jewish ownership and control. This ownership and control must bear the responsibility for the rapid and dangerous deterioration which has come since such ownership and control was achieved.

It is true that behind all the shoddy and make-believe and adulteration in the staples of life is the Jewish idea of profits, “making the ephah small and the shekel great”, and that the initiators of American business into these shady practices were Jewish. It is idle to retort that apt pupils have been found among non-Jews. The point is that before Jewish influence began to be felt in American business, sound quality and a fair price were the rule. It is the Jews’ ceaseless boast that wherever they go they change business, but not for the better.

It is true that beneath all the network of trivializing influences in literature, art, politics, economics, fashion and sport, is Jewish influence controlled by Jewish groups. Their Orientalism has served as a subtle poison to dry up the sound serum of Anglo-Saxon morality on which this country thrived in its formative years. In every movement toward a lower standard, a looser relationship, especially toward the overthrow of the old Christian safeguards, do not Jewish names predominate? These charges and many more have all been made in detail with evidence submitted by The Dearborn Independent with the purpose simply to get the problem squarely before the Jews of the United States. These charges are true, they cannot be disproved, Jewish leaders have not attempted to disprove them. Thousands of Jews have said that they are true. Then the question is justified: where is the obstacle to a settlement? This question is best answered by three typical replies made by Jews during the course of the present series.

The first counter-argument is the following: “What you say is true, but you should not say it.” There is a principle, seldom expressed among the Jews, but always acted on, that Jews should not have public attention called to them except by themselves or their chosen spokesmen. This is unfortunate, because any establishment of the Jews as an accepted and trusted part of the general citizenry must include their being known as such. In America the Jew should not only welcome the widest knowledge (unless he has something he fears to have known) but should himself undertake the exposure of those things which will eventually bring a shadow on the name of his race. The Jew has never done this. When exposure could no longer be suppressed, the Jewish attitude has always been one of defense, regardless of the merits of the case. “The Jew can do no wrong” is the principle acted upon. Never must a “Gentile” charge be admitted, however true it may be. Never must a “Gentile” reform be assisted, no matter how much needed. According to the authors of the article, that principle may do for other countries, but not for the United States. If the Jew is wise, he ought speedily to take warning that in this country the old line of action will not succeed. If Jews continue to show a disposition to defend the malefactors of their race against the just expostulations of the rest of the people, they must not be surprised if the public begins to view them as all one crowd – an inner nation set against the outer nation.

The second counter-argument is the following: “What you say is true, but your conclusion is wrong: it is not for the Jew to change to your standards, it is for you to change to the Jew’s standards.” This answer admits that there are two ideas in conflict in the United States, what it unfairly terms the “Puritanic” idea, opposed by what it calls the Jewish Universal idea. This view would command respect if it represented a superior morality in conflict with a lesser morality, if it represented a higher civilization against a lower civilization. Will any Jew contend that it does? Will any Jew deny that the influence of the Jewish idea in this generation is to break down the Anglo-Saxon morality? Will any Jew deny that the civilization of the United States before the advent of the Jews thither was superior to the highest civilization ever achieved by the Jews anywhere at any period of their history?

The Jewish idea has a tremendous infiltrating force and a serious degenerative power. It is a powerfully disintegrating influence. It eats the substance out of the civilization which it attacks, destroys its moral virility, throws down its reverence, saps its respect for authority, casts a shadow on every basic principle. That is the way the Jewish idea works in American civilization. Moral gravitation being, like physical gravitation, downward, it is not difficult to seduce human nature to lower levels, but it is a massive task to lift it to higher levels of morality and reverence and sober justice. And this latter task, organized Jewish effort has never attempted. The campaign in the United States is a campaign for the breakdown of the ideas that now obtain, not a lifting of them to a higher degree of nobility.

If it were an attempt to substitute the austerity of the Mosaic law—the law given to Moses, not the ordinances decreed by Moses—for the half-hearted Christian idealism of the day, even that would be a task in which all right-hearted men could join. But Moses condemns the modern Jews more severely than anyone else could. The modern Jews have rejected the Mosaic law. They have built their international power upon the exact opposite of the Mosaic law. Moses was given a law of human society which would have saved civilization its greatest tragedies. Moses has a social program, obedience to which for one day would completely wreck the Jewish international power. Moses is their judge, and when the Law is established Moses will be their destroyer. From the conflict of the Christian and the Jewish systems of values and ideas, it becomes clear that one of them is the idea of disruption, fostered by the false and delusive hope that disruption will spare the disrupter.

The third counter-argument can be formulated as follows: “What you say is true, and we Jews could change it if we only would. The trouble is, we don’t want to seem to be driven to it. But I don’t see how otherwise we are to do it.” Many Jews will recognize this sentiment as their own, but they will be readier to express it to a non-Jew than to a Jew. Why? Because prophets must be prepared to suffer in Judah. “Well, if you insist on playing Christ, you must expect to be crucified”, said Lilienthal to Isaac Wise. No one with a sense for such things—and there are believers still left in Judah—will doubt that the times are ripe for a great change respecting the Jews. So strong is the feeling among the remnant of believing Jews that it is interpreted as forewarnings of the Messianic period. Among the Judaized Christian sects, other interpretations are given to the times, most of which are used to support political Zionism which represents the materialism and unbelief of present-day Judaism. The misguided Christians, who see God’s alleged will of universal Jewish dominion fulfilled by means of the Jews’ defiance and despite of the Law given to Moses, ought to re-examine their ground for so strange and immoral a conclusion. The break-up of this civilization, this age of civilization, will occur because of the collapse of this system by which the Jew has obtained his hold on the nations. The system that gives him his hold is doomed, is passing, and the fallacy of Jewish tribal destiny to rule the world will pass with it.

The author of the article thinks that, with this change already on the threshold, prophets should be expected to arise in Judah to recall their people to the Law whose previous denial meant their overthrow. These prophets will not be of the “Reform school” which denies the God of Israel as a divine Person, nor will they be of the ultra-orthodox school which makes much of fringes and cookery. They will be of the race of the ancient prophets who spoke boldly against Judah’s violation of the fundamental law.

The editor of The Dearborn Independent thinks that the greatest overturn would be if the Jewish communities understood that the way they are going is the way their own Law foredooms to failure, and that the people they hope to triumph over are the people their own Scriptures say they are not to triumph over. They think that the first assertion is beyond dispute: there is no success for the Jew, no establishment of him in the world except upon the basic law given to Moses. In any other attempt he must fall when the structure collapses. The second assertion is in dispute, but is by no means beyond consideration, especially by Jews. In these matters the Jews are much wiser than the so-called Christians. There is among the Jews “the law of the brother” and “the law of the stranger”. The latter permits several important things which the former prohibits. The Jews have been treating the rest of the world, often intentionally, sometimes as a matter of course, according to the “law of the stranger.” This is one of the influences which has helped to solidify Jewry against the rest of the world.

Jews are thinking about those very matters now. They are thinking from within. They are seeking a reason for the sense of unfitness which they feel when they adopt the traditional attitude of enmity toward the “others”. In the case of America, the “others” in this case are the Anglo-Saxon peoples. The reason for this sense of impropriety is that here, in this land, the Jew will have to change his attitude of antagonism and dwell in peace as in a land prepared for him. Not as lord of it, by any means, but as a grateful wanderer at last come home. Not as a ruler, but as adding his bit to the righteousness, prosperity and peace of the people. It is not a question of religion. Let the Jew get back his Mosaic religion – it is the most perfect social system ever devised and directly contrary to the practical modern Jew’s idea of things. It is not a question of intermarriage. Let the Jew keep as long as he pleases his idea that he is racially different. Let the Jew keep all his traditions.

After this, Henry Ford, who dictated the content of the series of articles, and William Cameron, the recorder and editor enumerate some recommendations, which could establish the harmonic relationship between Jews and non-Jews, based upon mutual respect. These recommendations are the following:

But let him shed his false notion of “the Jew against the world”!

Let him shed his false program of breaking down Christendom by the infiltration of Orientalism into business, art, entertainment and the professions.

Let him abolish the false ideal that it is an honor to Jewry to save a guilty Jew from the common law, and a disgrace to Jewry to see a guilty Jew punished by the common law.

Let him draw up notice on all the Jews of the United States who by hook or crook are sowing vile seed in society, that the Jewish community charges itself with their misbehavior and will use methods well known to Jews to bring that misbehavior to an end.

The fifth recommendation of the authors is: Let the Jew end forever the disgrace of an anti-defamation committee which grows frantic over innocent remarks on the part of “Gentiles”, and is absolutely indifferent to the misdeeds of thousands of Jews who do more damage to the Jewish name than all the “Gentile” critics and newspapers could do in twenty years. No one can give the Jews a bad reputation but the Jews themselves.

The recommenders thought that most Jews who have given this matter a thought would agree. A good deal of bad temper exists among them, no doubt, and it will be hard for them to admit that anything The Dearborn Independent may contend for is right, but the idea here expressed, when divorced from this paper, does command respect from many Jews. After this, the authors ask the question: Is it possible for an additional number of Jews to catch the thought that this series of articles cannot be so easily explained away – we are not referring to the contents now, but to the fact that these articles exist at all – as being the creation of prejudice, or hatred or vindictiveness or ignorance? Suppose these articles should be truly a sign of the times for American Jewry! Suppose they offer a warning word, however unwelcome, and a light, however undesired, which it would be most unwise for Jews to ignore.

Suppose the set time has now come for the Jews to quit their attitude of attacking everyone who shows them the truth, and to profit by this report of the poor figure they cut in American life today. The enemies of the Jews are those who defend them for the pay of hire or praise or votes. The real enemies of the Jews are those who bespeak them fair to their faces and express quite different thoughts behind their backs. The enemies of the Jews are those who encourage them to take an attitude that they cannot hold in America. They are hired friends, false friends, incapable of realizing for a moment what this whole Jewish Question means. The friends of the Jewish people today are those who will speak the surgical truth to him, braving his fury in the knowledge that the future will justify the word. The Jewish leaders’ opposition to The Dearborn Independent rises mostly from the fear that the Jews may read it! The Jews have read it, and they have not found hatred, they have not found abuse and calumny, they have not found ignorance and malice.

They have found statements of fact calmly set forth, not to arouse hatred among the non-Jews, but to arouse a sense of social responsibility among the Jews. The cited study emphasizes, in the end, that the emergence of the Jewish Question is a part of the culmination of destiny that has come upon not only the United States, but upon the world civilization, not for harm but for good. The Jewish community, each and every Jew, must realize that the world has come to a new beginning. The justification of a discussion of the Jewish Question is the good of the Jews. Nevertheless, it seems that the greatest present obstacle to that good is the Jews themselves. The time is here when they shall see it, as soon as possible, in their own interest.

Walter White’s interview with Harold Wallace Rosenthal in 1976

In 1978, a brochure-size booklet was issued in the United States, which contains the text of a sincere sounding interview consisting of two parts. In it, the publisher of the booklet, Walter White Jr. had a talk with Harold Wallace Rosenthal, who was the victim of a hijacking attempt made by terrorists in Istanbul, two years earlier, in 1976. The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, which can be considered a Zionist organization, asserts that the tapes presented by Walter White Jr. are fake. They support this statement with the argumentation that White could not explain properly why he published the talk recorded on tape only two years later, in 1978. These two years can be considered extremely important because, as we have already referred to it, Harold Wallace Rosenthal lost his life in the course of a passenger plane hijacking attempt in Istanbul, on 12th August 1976. According to the news, a firing took place between the hijackers and the Israeli security officers on the Israeli plane heading for the Turkish capital, and Rosenthal fell victim to the shooting.

Walter White, the interviewer, revealed, with a thorough research work, that the lethal bullet did not hit H. W. Rosenthal on the plane. (By the way, four people died and thirty were wounded in the firing.) According to White, Rosenthal was killed by his brothers of communion on the airport of Istanbul. After his death, the American Jewish Committee in Washington immortalized his name by establishing the foundation offering the professional fellowship called “The Harold Wallace Rosenthal Fellowship in International Relation”. The first honorary chairmen of the foundation were Walter F. Mondale (Vice-President of the United States during the presidency of Carter) and Senator Jacob K. Javits of New York. H. W. Rosenthal was a senior aide to the latter. As for ourselves, we would only like to add that the findings of Walter White Jr. were not totally unusual. Who studies the works of Jewish scientists written about Zionism, can know that there are such circles which consequently defend the Talmudist Zionism from being exposed by non-competent persons.

The subject of the interview, Harold Wallace Rosenthal, is presented authentically by Henry Makow in his article published on 15th February 2004, which can be read even today on the internet homepage of this excellently prepared Canadian researcher. Harold Wallace Rosenthal, aged 29in 1976, was the personal assistant to New York Senator Jacob Javits. The talented and well-informed Rosenthal felt that Jewish power was so unassailable that he could make some extra cash by sharing his knowledge with Walter White Jr., the editor of the Conservative monthly Western Front.

In the interview, as we will be able to read later, he puts it this way: “Too many Jews do not have the guts to tell you how we live and plan, but I am not intimated by anything or anyone,”

Later Rosenthal told White: “It is too late for your Christian followers to put up a defence. That time is long past. Long, long ago we had to become the aggressors! That is undoubtedly one of our great purposes in life. We are aggressors!”

This shocking interview, published in full length below, contradicts the general presentation – spread mostly after WWII – according to which the Jews are always victims, and are not responsible for the bad things that happen to them. Benjamin Freedman, the New York financier, and Christian Georgievitch Rakovsky, the Trotzkist Bolshevik have also described similarly the real forces directing the world.

Makow is on the opinion that Rosenthal, who presumably was a gambler, needed gambling money urgently, and wanted to get it by selling the carefully hidden information. But his candor cost him his life. Also Makow refers to the foiled skyjacking on the plane heading for Istanbul. He mentions that Walter White concluded that the incident was a cover for Rosenthal’s murder.

The reader himself can perceive that the mercilessly sincere toned interview can even be called virulently anti-Semitic. Both talking men characterize this world conspiracy as “Jewish” and make many superficial and racist generalizations. Makow, who is already counted to be a considerable and reliable researcher of the background power, pointed out that, in fact, “the Jews” are really the Rothschilds and a few hundred banking families and their non-Jewish allies who were transformed into a group of interest acting more or less systematically by their common occult beliefs, the global money cartel held in their hands and intermarriage. The vast majority of Jews – like other people – are unaware of the fact that there is an organized private power executing a common global strategy, which can even be considered a world conspiracy. And they even would oppose it if they were. Jews are as much its unwitting dupes and victims as anyone else.

It is a historical fact that the founder of the Rothschild dynasty played a key role in setting up the secret society of the Illuminati in 1776. The confessed goal of this secret society led by Adam Weishaupt was to subvert the Christian basis of Western Civilization. They allied with the freemasonic organizations and took over their leadership in order to infiltrate the highest social circles and state institutions. Repeating words like “freedom,” “equality” and “fraternity”, they wanted in fact to annihilate the family, race, religion, and nation and melt them into a malleable anonymous mob.

Their goal is to create a centrally controlled world police state, served also by the global strategy now called “globalization”. This has not only financial and economic aspects, but it also includes, in America, those measures, which restrict the human rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution (“The Patriot Act”) and the expanding global empire strategy characterized best by “The War on Terror”.

Rosenthal offers an insight into the well-disguised “Jewish” world strategy. According to him, that part of the “Jews” (Levites, Pharisees, Talmudists, Cabbalists, Zionists) who have strived to build an earthly empire by rejecting Christ’s vision of a spiritual kingdom based on the commandment that you should love thy neighbor as thyself and you should do onto others as you would have done to you. Because this is the true brotherly love. The Cabbalist bankers plan to govern the world – at least spiritually – from Jerusalem according to their own interests.

Rosenthal says the Jewish religion is essentially a disguise for the racial imperative that sounds as follows: “We can live among other people and states [by] persuading them that the Jews are not a distinct people but the representatives of a religious faith…” The “Jewish” power, more exactly the Illuminati power, was created through the control of the monetary system.

  1. W. Rosenthal offers an insight into the inner invisible world of Jewry. He reveals the modes and tactics Jews have used in oppressing and destroying Christian civilization and covertly attaining total control over the social and state life. The result has been a hidden tyranny. The question arises again: How could such a relatively small number of Jews enslave so many people and gain such an overwhelming control over their governments, especially without their being aware of it? The answer to the fact that they are always able to prevail in the world is that they do not follow Christ’s commandment to love their neighbors as themselves. They follow their own rules, and allow themselves to do things that the forbid to others. As Christ said in his parable of the unjust steward, which represents Jewry: “For the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.” (Luke 16:8)

In other words, the “Jews”, applying a double standard, can attain, of course, financial, economic and other successes more easily, and can even exert the power more easily than those who strictly keep the rules preserving different moral, legal and other Christian traditions. Namely, the Jew, with his worldly mind set, is wiser than God’s children, the Christian people, even according to Jesus. From the answers of Rosenthal, the learning of this statement will come to light. This is why Christ had instructed us to “be wise as serpents”. (Matthew 10:16)

We can witness that the money rule world order releasing the unscrupulous selfishness has pushed our civilization in a deep crisis. The mankind, for the sake of its survival, cannot avoid solving those political, economic, moral and social problems which threaten the civilization with destruction. As Edmund Burke, the Irish-born British philosopher and public personality, highly appreciated also by Diderot and Kant, stated: “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

For the sake of solving those serious problems that the human civilization is facing today, first of all an accurate diagnosis, a quick recognition of situation, the seizing of the essence of the problems and a brave action is needed. We can stand up effectively against the destructive world force only if we understand the goals of this world force and its strategy elaborated to reach these goals. This booklet might help provide the reader with that understanding.

The first part of Walter White’s interview with Harold Wallace Rosenthal

Mr. Rosenthal started the conversation saying: “We Jews continue to be amazed with the ease by which Christian Americans have fallen into our hands. While the naive Americans wait for Khrushchev to bury them, we have taught them to submit to our every demand.”

Asked how a nation could be captured without their knowing it, Mr. Rosenthal attributed this victory to absolute control of the media. He boasted of Jewish control of ALL NEWS. Any newspaper which refused to acquiesce to controlled news was brought to its knees by withdrawing advertising. Failing in this, the Jews stop the supply of news print and ink. “It’s a very simple matter”, he stated.

Asked about men in high political office, Mr. Rosenthal said that no one in the last three decades has achieved any political power without Jewish approval. “Americns have not had a presidential choice since 1932. Roosevelt was our man; every president since Roosevelt has been our man.”

When the U.S. foreign policy was mentioned, he said: “The American stupidity in failing to see through the entire scope of Kissinger’s foreign policy. It is Zionist-Communist policy from beginning to end. Yet the citizens think this Jewish policy will benefit America.” (…) “We Jews have put issue upon issue to the American people. Then we promote both sides of the issue as confusion reigns. With their eye’s fixed on the issues, they fail to see who is behind every scene. We Jews toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse.”

As the conversation went on into the late hours, one could sense that perhaps America deserves the reign of terror being planned for her. The Jewish mind pits every ethnic group against the other. “The blood of the masses will flow as we wait for our day of world victory“, Mr. Rosenthal said coldly.

For hours after this incredible discussion, a sense of inadequacy prevailed. Is it possible that another group of “human being” could be so treacherous in spirit, so evil in intent? Yet, the words heard and the evidence at hand are real. Is it possible that the American people can remain docile, even while their life’s blood is being drained from them? It seems so. What does all this say to us?

Lots of things have already been written about the conspiracy of the World Jewry, but this thing was revealed by nobody more openly than by Rosenthal. The fully thought-over program is nearly astonishing…

Looking back to the time of this interview and having had time to analyze Harold Rosenthal’s candidness, we are compelled to think of him as a conceited, boastful yet very knowledgeable person. At times his cruelty surfaced with a venom, especially as he describes the “stupid Christians” or “goys” as he so often referred to “us.” (The term refers not only to Christians, but generally to non-Jews – J. D.) This surprised me because the word “goy” is not in our language and he must have known this. His mind was thoroughly immersed in the One-World Plan of World Jewry. With arrogance, he boasted that the Jew’s conquest of the world was almost complete thanks to Christian stupidity.

When asked if he was a Zionist, Mr. Rosenthal replied: “That’s a hell of a question! At the foundation of the issue the traditional Zionist concept of aliyah, a Hebrew term meaning the ‘in gathering’ or return of Diaspora (dispersed) Jews to the Palestine homeland. Ever since 1948 and the creation of the State of Israel, aliyah has become a basic imperative of Israeli government policy.”

I asked: What is Zionism?

Mr. Rosenthal replied: “Our first leader, former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, said that Zionism without a ‘return to Zion’ is phony. Not many American Jews migrate permanently to Israel. Some say that all Jews, by definition, are Zionists. Others say that a Jew is not a Zionist unless he’s a member who pays dues to an actively Zionist organization. Definitions have been tossed everywhere since the Jewish homeland became a reality.”

I continued: Millions of tax-exempt American dollars are sent to Israel yearly and we true American do not like this.

Mr. Rosenthal replied: “The naive politicians in Washington are gullible. Most of them are not to bright so the powerful Jewish lobbyists influenced this practice years ago and there is no one strong enough to stop it. Some of the money is even returned to the United States and spent on Zionist propaganda efforts, much of it through the B’nai B’rith and the Conference of Jewish Organizations and the World Jewish Congress. The Jewish Agency is a funding arm, a sort of body of B’nai B’rith officials. There is nothing wrong with sending American dollars to Israel tax-free so long as we are smart enough to get away with it. Let’s reverse this conversation for a minute. You made it clear and quite vociferously, that you don’t like Jews. Why do you hate us?”

I replied: Mr. Rosenthal I do not hate anybody. I said I hate what the Jews are doing to us and especially as it relates to any and everything related to Christianity. I hate their deceit, trickery, cunning and their detestable dishonesty. Does that make me anti-Semitic? If it does then I am anti-Semitic!

“Anti-Semitism does not signify opposition to Semitism. There is no such thing. It is an expression we Jews use effectively as a smear word used to brand as a bigot, like you guys, anyone who brings criticism against Jews. We use it against hate-mongers. During Christ’s time, the Jews were seeking a material and earthly kingdom but Christ offered the Jews a spiritual kingdom. This, they could not buy, so they rejected Jesus Christ and had him crucified.”

I asked: What do you mean had him crucified? Doesn’t history prove that the Jews crucified Jesus Christ?

To which he answered: “Yes, I guess they did. I don’t beat around the bush but 2,000 years ago your people would have done the same thing to a man who mistreated them as Christ did the Jews.”

You speak of Jesus Christ as merely a man.

“That’s all he was a man who walked on the Earth like any other man and this myth about Christ rising from the dead and returning to Earth to visit with his disciples is a bunch of crap. The Jews who drove the Arabs out of Palestine did so to disprove Christ’s mission for a spiritual kingdom. You see, instead of a leader who would make an empire for the Jews, your kind of people gave the Jews a peaceful preacher called Christ who instead of an eye-for-an-eye turns the other cheek. Rubbish! We are building and, in fact, have built an earthly empire without your kind and your disappointing Messiah.”

I can see that it is you and your kind who try to get Christ out of Christmas. I feel sorry for you…

He quickly replied: “Don’t give me that shit. I don’t want your pity. I don’t need it! Too many Jews do not have the guts to tell you how we live and plan, but I am not intimidated by anyone or anything. I know where I’m going.”

When we asked why do Jews frequently change their names, he said: “Jews are the most intelligent people in the world so if it benefits them to change their name they do so. That’s all there is to it. They mix in your society, which is plenty corrupt so while the Jews are benefiting themselves the dumb goy doesn’t realize that these Jews with non-Jew names are Jews. I know what you are thinking about Jews in government who use non-Jew names. Well don’t be concerned because in the foreseeable future there will be no Presidential power in the United States. The invisible government is taking strength in that direction.”

To your knowledge, are the Jews in Russia really persecuted or are they given any kind of freedom?

To which he said: “Most Jews throughout the world I’d say more than 90%, know what is really happening to our people. We have communication unequalled anywhere. It is only the jerks, the ignorant and misinformed and degenerates who can find peace in your society and you bastards hide your sins by donning sheep’s clothing. You are the hypocrites not the Jews, as you say and write about. To answer your question in Russia, there are two distinct governments one visible and the other invisible. The visible is made up of different nationalities, whereas the invisible is composed of all Jews. The powerful Soviet Secret Police takes its orders from the invisible government. There are about six to seven million Communists in Soviet Russia, 50% are Jews and 50% are gentiles, but the gentiles are not trusted. The Communist Jews are united and trust each other, while the others spy on one another. About every five to six years the secret Jewish Board calls for the purge of the party and many are liquidated.”

When asked “why”? he said: “Because they begin to understand too much about the Jewish secret government. Russian Communists have a Secret Group Order which consists of Jews only. They rule over everything pertaining to the visible government. It was this powerful organization that was responsible for the secret removal of the center of Communism to Tel Aviv from where all instructions now originate.”

Does our government and the United Nations have knowledge of this?

He replied: “The United Nations is nothing but a trap-door to the Red World’s immense concentration camp. We pretty much control the U.N.”

When asked why the Communists destroy the middle class or educated and their entire families when they invade a country Mr. Rosenthal replied: “It is an established rule to destroy all members of pre-existing government, their families and relatives, but never Jews. They destroy all members of the police, state police, army officers and their families but never Jews. You see, we know when a government begins to search for the Communists within its borders they are really attempting to uncover Jews in their area. We’er not fooled! The invisible rulers in the Communist countries have a world control over the propaganda and the governments in free countries. We control every media of expression including newspapers, magazines, radio and television. Even your music! We censor the songs released for publication long before they reach the publishers. Before long we will have complete control of your thinking.”

The way you boast, if this is true, it is frightening to think about our future, and that of Christianity.

To which Mr. Rosenthal said: “There will be a forced class warfare here in the United States and many will be liquidated. You will unquestionably be among them. The Jews will not be harmed. I’m not boasting! I’m giving you the facts! And it is too late for your Christian followers to put up a defense. That time is long past. Long, Long Ago we had to become the aggressors!! That is undoubtedly one of our great purposes in life. We are aggressors!! Because you stole your pretended religious beliefs from our Talmud.”

After reminding him that we thought he was intelligent but now realize that he doesn’t know what he was talking about he replied: “Judaism is the unequaled culture — with nothing, nothing anywhere in the world to compare with it. Your so-called Christianity is an outgrowth of Judaism. The cultural and intellectual influence of Judaism is felt throughout the entire world — yes, throughout civilization.”

When I asked whether he thought we faced a problem eventually with the Blacks because of their startling population increase he said that the Blacks are helping to serve “our purpose” which might mean several things. We discussed the Black invasion of city, county and state and their prominence now in television. Also how ridiculous it is for Blacks to become converted to Jews – like Sammy Davis for instance.

Mr. Rosenthal replied: “That doesn’t mean anything. We know that a Black cannot become a Jew and that Sammy Davis is still Black. It may have been to his advantage to become converted. In reality he still remains a nigger and not a Jew.”

I told him of my in-depth study of the Jews and about my unpleasant discoveries, reminding Mr. Rosenthal that there is no morality among Jews.

He replied: “Money is more important than morality. We can accomplish anything with money. Our people are proving that in Israel where its strength against attack is its permanent state of war readiness. Israel can now win in any encounter. The kibbutz-raised intellectual elements are going to build that small country into a mid-east wonderland. It will also eventually be the base for World Government Headquarters.”

We discussed the tragedy of Watergate and corruption at all levels of government and suggested that government representatives practice more openness and candor in dealing with the people.

Mr. Rosenthal said: “What good would it do? What the hell does the public know about the running of government. The great majority are asses – horses asses!!”

May we quote you on that?

“I don’t care: what you do – as I said, few have the guts to speak out. We would all have better understanding between each other –Jews and gentiles – if we spoke out more openly. Your people don’t have guts. We establish your thinking – we even place within you a ‘guilt complex’ making you afraid to criticize Jewry openly.”

The Jewish belief and religion

When the talk arrived to this topic, it became clear for White that a contemporary fellow, informed over the average, revealed sincerely his hidden thoughts to him. In the quietness of this enlightening conversation it became clear that the understanding poured forth did not come from a novice. Mr. Rosenthal was asked how Jews gain acceptance so easily among other races.

His answer was long and thorough. “At a very early date, urged on by the desire to make our way in the world, Jews began to look for a means whereby we might distract all attention from the racial aspect. What could be more effective, and at the same time more above suspicion, than to borrow and utilize the idea of a religious community? We’ve been forced to borrow this idea from the Aryans. We Jews never possessed any religious institution which developed out of our own consciousness, for we lack any kind of idealism. This means that a belief in life beyond this terrestrial existence is foreign to us. As a matter of fact, the Talmud does not lay down principles with which to prepare the individual for a life to come, but furnishes only rules for a sumptuous life in this world. It is a collection of instructions for maintaining the Jewish race and regulating: intercourses between us and the goy. Our teachings; are not concerned with moral problems, but rather with how to ‘get.’ (…) We are the best example of the kind of product which religious training evolves. Our life is of this world only and our mentality is as foreign to the true spirits of Christianity as our character was to the Founder of this new creed 2,000 years ago. The Founder of Christianity made no secret of his estimation of the Jews and the fact that he was not one of us. When he found it necessary he drove us out of the temple of God, because then, as always, we used religion as a means of advancing our commercial interest. But at that time, we managed to nail Jesus to the cross for his attitude towards us; whereas, the modern Christians enter into party politics and in order to win elections, they debase themselves by begging for Jewish votes. They even enter into political intrigues with us against the interests or their own nation. We can live among other nations and states only as long as we succeed in persuading them that the Jews are not a distinct people, but are the representatives of a religious faith who, therefore, constitute a ‘religious community,’ though this be of a peculiar character. As a matter of fact, this is the greatest of our falsehoods. We are obliged to conceal our own particular character and mode of life so that we will be allowed to continue our existence as a parasite among the nations. Our success in this line has gone so far that many believe that the Jews among them are genuine Frenchmen, or Englishmen, or Italians, or Germans who just happen to belong to a religious denomination which is different from that prevailing in these countries. Especially in circles concerned with government, where the officials have only a minimum of historical sense, we are able to impose our infamous deception with comparative ease. Therefore, there is never the slightest suspicion that we Jews form a distinct nation and are not merely the adherents of a ‘confession.’ Though one glance at the press which we control ought to furnish sufficient evidence to the contrary, even for those who possess only the smallest degree of intelligence.”

What did Rosenthal say about money power?

When questioned about the ways in which the Jews have gained power, Mr. Rosenthal said:

“Our power has been created through the manipulation of the national monetary system. We authored the quotation. ‘Money is power.’ As revealed in our master plan, it was essential for us to establish a private national bank. The Federal Reserve system fitted our plan nicely since it is owned by us, but the name implies that it is a government institution. From the very outset, our purpose was to confiscate all the gold and silver, replacing them with worthless non-redeemable paper notes. This we have done!”

When asked about the term ‘non-redeemable notes,’ Mr. Rosenthal replied:

“Prior to 1968, the gullible goy could take a one dollar Federal Reserve note into any bank in America and redeem it for a dollar which was by law a coin containing 412 1/2 grains of 90 per cent silver. Up until 1933, one could have redeemed the same note for a coin of 25 4/5ths grains of 90 per cent gold. All we do is give the goy more non-redeemable notes, or else copper slugs. But we never give them their gold and silver. Only more paper,” he said contemptuously. “We Jews have prospered through the paper gimmick. It’s our method through which we take money and give only paper in return.”

Can you give me a example of this?

“The examples are numerous, but a few readily apparent are the stocks and bonds market, all forms of insurance and the fractional reserve system practiced by the Federal Reserve corporation (the possibility of financing the banks with partially covered money – J. D.), not to mention the billions in gold and silver that we have gained in exchange for paper notes, stupidly called money. Money power was essential in carrying out our master plan of international conquest through propaganda.”

When asked how they proposed doing this, he said:

“At first, by controlling the banking system we were able to control corporation capital. Through this, we acquired total monopoly of the movie industry, the radio networks and the newly developing television media. The printing industry, newspapers, periodicals and technical journals had already fallen into our hands. The richest plum was later to come when we took over the publication of all school materials. Through these vehicles we could mold public opinion to suit our own purposes. The people are only stupid pigs that grunt and squeal the chants we give them, whether they be truth or lies.”

Mind control and conditioning

To White’s question asking whether the Jews ever felt any threat from the part of the “silent majority”, Rosenthal answered the following, with a condescending smile:

“There is no such thing as the silent majority because we control their cry and hue. The only thing that exists is an unthinking majority and unthinking they will remain, as long as their escape from our rigorous service is the opiate of our entertainment industry. By controlling industry, we have become the task masters and the people the slaves. When the pressure of daily toil builds to an explosive degree, we have provided the safety valve of momentary pleasure. The television and movie industries furnish the necessary temporary distraction. These programs are carefully designed to appeal to the sensuous emotions, never to the logical thinking mind. Because of this, the people are programmed to respond according to our dictates, not according to reason. Silent they never are; thinking they will remain.”

Continuing his thought of Jewish control over the goy, Mr. Rosenthal said:

“We have castrated society through fear and intimidation. Its manhood exists only in combination with a feminine outward appearance. Being so neutered, the populace has become docile and easily ruled. As all geldings in nature, their thoughts are not involved with the concerns of the future and their posterity, but only with the present toil and the next meal,”

Manipulation of labour and industry

When this topic came to surface, it caused a well perceptible excitement in Rosenthal, who said the following about this important issue:

“We have been successful in dividing society against itself by pitting labor against management. This perhaps has been one of our greatest feats, since in reality it is a triangle, though only two points ever seem to occur. In modern industry where exists capital, which force we represent, is the apex. Both management and labor are on the base of this triangle. They continually stand opposed to each other and their attention is never directed to the head of their problem. Management is forced to raise prices since we are ever increasing the cost of capital. Labor must have increasing wages and management must have higher prices, thus creating a vicious cycle. We are never called to task for our role which is the real reason for inflation, since the conflict between management and labor is so severe that neither has time to observe our activities. It is our increase in the cost of capital that causes the inflation cycle. We do not labor or manage, and yet we receive the profits. Through our money manipulation, the capital that we supply industry costs us nothing. Through our national bank, the Federal Reserve, we extend book credit, which we create from nothing, to all local banks who are member banks. They in turn extend book credit to industry. Thus, we do more than God, for all of our wealth is created from nothing. You look shocked! Don’t be! It’s true, we actually do more than God. With this supposed capital we bring industry, management and labor into our debt, which debt only increases and is never liquidated. Through this continual increase, we are able to pit management against labor so they will never unite and attack us and usher in a debt-free industrial utopia. We are the necessary element since we expend nothing. Management can create its own capital – the profits. Its business would grow and profits increase. Labor would prosper as well, while the price of the product would remain constant, the prosperity of industry, labor and management would continually increase. We Jews glory in the fact that the stupid goy have never realized that we are the parasites consuming an increasing portion of production while the producers are continually receiving less and less.”

Getting the control over religion

The interview continued in a relatively friendly tone, when Mr. Rosenthal expressed his sincere opinion about different religions and the situation of churches.

“Religion, too, must be taught, and through this necessity we have labored. With our control of the text book industry and the news media, we have been able to hold ourselves up as the authorities on religion. Many of our rabbis now hold professorships in supposed Christian theological seminaries. We are amazed by the Christians’ stupidity in receiving our teachings and propagating them as their own. (…) Judaism is not only the teaching of the synagogue, but also the doctrine of every ‘Christian Church’ in America. Through our propaganda the Church has become our most avid supporter. This has even given us a special place in society, their believing the lie that we are the ‘chosen people’ and they, gentiles (i.e. not the chosen – J. D.).

These deluded children of the Church defend us to the point of destroying their own culture. This truth is evident even to the dullard when one views history and sees that all wars have been white fighting white in order that we maintain our control. We controlled England during the Revolutionary War, the North during the Civil War, and England and America during World War I and II. Through our influence of religion we were able to involve the ignorant white Christians in war against themselves which always impoverished both sides while we reaped a financial and political harvest. Anytime truth comes forth which exposes us, we simply rally our forces – the ignorant Christians. They attack the crusaders even if they are members of their own families.

Through religion we have gained complete control of society, government and economics. No law is ever passed except its merits have previously been taught from the pulpits. An example of this is race equality which led to integration and ultimately to mongrelization. The gullible clergy in one breath instruct their parishioners that we are a special, chosen people while in another breath proclaim all races are the same. Their inconsistency is never discovered. So we Jews enjoy a special place in society while all other races are reduced to racial equality. It is for this reason that we authored the equality hoax, thereby reducing all to a lower level.

We have been taught that our current economic practices are benevolent therefore Christian. These pulpit parrots extol our goodness for loaning them the money to build their temples, never realizing that their own holy book condemns all usury. They are eager to pay our exorbitant interest rates. They have led society into our control through the same practice. Politically, they hail the blessings of democracy and never understand that through democracy we have gained control of their nation. Their book again teaches a benevolent despotic form of government in accordance with the laws of that book, while a democracy is mob rule which we control through their Churches, our news media and economic institutions. Their religion is only another channel through which we can direct the power of our propaganda. These religious puppets’ stupidity is only exceeded by their cowardice, for they are ruled easily.”

The picture is assembled and the connections are made clear

In the part to be presented now of the booklet published in 1978, Walter White remarks:

“Rarely does any man confess the intimacy of his soul as did Mr. Rosenthal. Hindsight suggests that there was a greater Force compelling this man to reveal what has been written here. The remainder of the interview seems to confirm this.”

“Since we do not believe in a life after death, all our efforts are directed to the ‘now.’ We are not as foolish as you and will never adopt an ideology that is rooted in self-sacrifice. Whereas you will live and die for the benefit of the community, we will live and die only for our own individual self. The idea of self-sacrifice is abhorred by Jews. It is abhorrent to me. No cause is worth dying lot since death is the end. The only time we unite is to preserve our individual selves. As a group of wolves unite to attack a prey, but then disperse after each is filled, so we Jews unite when peril is pending, not to preserve our community but to save our own skin.

This attitude permeates our entire being and philosophy. We are not the creators for to create would only benefit another. We are the ‘acquirers’ and are interested only in satisfying the ‘self.’ To understand our philosophy understand the term ‘to get.’ We never give but only take. We never labor but enjoy the fruits of others’ labor. We do not create but confiscate. We are not the producers but the parasites. We can physically live within any society, but always remain spiritually apart. To work would be to produce and the highest form of that labor would be to create. Your race has always worked for the satisfaction of what it produces. We would never work for anyone’s benefit, only for what we can get. We have used this Aryan attitude to achieve our greatest prosperity. You will work for the enjoyment you derive out of producing, while never being concerned about the pay. We take your productivity for a paltry fee and turn it into fortunes.

Until recently, the pride of workmanship exceeded the quest for high incomes. However, we have been able to enslave society to our own power which is money, by causing them to seek after it. We have converted the people to our philosophy of getting and acquiring so that they will never be satisfied. A dissatisfied people are the pawns in our game of world conquest. Thus, they are always seeking and never able to find satisfaction. The very moment they seek happiness outside themselves, they become our willing servants.

Your people never realize that we offer them only worthless baubles that can not bring fulfillment. They procure one and consume it and are not filled. They procure one and consume it and are not filled. We present another. We have an infinite number of outward distractions, to the extent that life can not again turn inward to find its definite fulfillment. You have become addicted to our medicine through which we have become your absolute masters.

On the first and fundamental lie, the purpose of which is to make people believe that we are not a nation but a religion, other lies are subsequently based. Our greatest fear is that this falsehood will be discovered, for we will be stamped out the moment the general public comes into possession of the truth and acts upon it. It is becoming apparent that an awakening is occurring even here in America. We had hoped that through our devastation of Christian Germany that any subject dealing with us would be a fearful taboo. However, there seems to be a resurgence here in the one nation that we so strongly control. We are presently making plans for a rapid exodus. We know that when the light begins to dawn, there will be no stopping it. All efforts on our part will only intensify that light and draw focus upon it.

We fear that light is coming forth in movements across this land, especially yours. It has amazed us how you have been successful in reaching the people after we closed every door of communication. This, we fear, is a sign of a coming pogrom that will take place in America soon. The American public has realized that we are in control, which is a fatal mistake on our part. This nation could never be the land of the free as long as it is the land of the Jew. This is the revelation that will be our undoing.

The American people have been easily ruled through our propaganda that the pen is mightier than the sword. We virtually get away with murder, and all the goy do is to talk about it, which is ineffective since we, the masters of propaganda, always publish a contradicting account. If the Aryan would review history and apply those lessons of the past, then the pen will be thrown down in disgust and the sword wielded in the heat of passion. Thus far, we have escaped the sword, when the only reprisal is some periodical of no repute, or some pamphlet with limited circulation. Their pen is no match for ours, but our constant fear is that they may open their eyes and learn that no change was ever brought about with a pen. History has been written in blood, not with ink. No letter, editorial or book has ever rallied the people or stopped tyranny. We understand this principle and are continually propagandizing the people to write letters to the President, to Congress and to their local media. We are safe to continually exploit, intimidate and disenfranchise the white American as long as they are preoccupied with the illusion of educating the masses through printed material. Woe be unto us if they ever see the futility of it, lay down the pen and employ the sword.

History confirms the fact that the passions of an aroused minority, no matter how small a group, have exerted enough power to topple the greatest empire. The movements that control destiny are not those that rest on the inactive majority; but on the sheer force of an active minority. Will is power, not numbers, for a strong Will will always rule the masses!” Again, we are safe as long as our Will is stronger, or the Will of the people is misdirected, scattered and without leadership. We will never be deposed with words, only force!”

The second part of Walter White’s interview with Harold Wallace Rosenthal

The second part of the booklet The Hidden Tyranny begins with a quotation:

“Most Jews do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer.”

The above is an exact quote of Harold Wallace Rosenthal, former top Administrative Aide to the then New York Senator Jacob Javits until 1980. The interviewer starts the second part of the interview with the following statement:

“I, Walter White, Jr., for the past 17 years Director and Editor of the monthly conservative publication Western Front, was told about Mr. Rosenthal’s boastings around Washington, D.C., and I was encouraged to meet with him and to interview him (for a fee).

Mr. Rosenthal had stated publicly that the Jews will completely dominate throughout the entire world – and that they control every facet of political life in America and every aspect of the communication media. Eventually Mr. Rosenthal and l were brought together, at which time I interviewed him privately and taped said interview with Mr. Rosenthal’s knowledge and consent. During the lengthy meeting Mr. Rosenthal became impatient, rude and vulgar (all of which is recorded on the tape) and he sought the balance of his fee before I had concluded my questioning.

Since the entire interview was so lengthy, in 1977 we released and published only the first portion under the same title as above “The Hidden Tyranny”.

Copies of this manuscript (Part I) have been sought by people from all around the globe. We now release the balance of the taped interview as Part Two. Although I do not wish to digress, an Eastern analyst has told me that “The Hidden Tyranny” manuscript (Part I) has had a pass-on readership of 3.5%. Thus, if true, the manuscript (Part I) has been read by more than 7 million people. When this final portion (Part Two) begins circulating, its impact may be even greater. It depends upon you, the reader.

Before any agreement was reached between us, I had established with Mr. Rosenthal that he would answer an unlimited number of questions with complete honesty and to the best of his ability. It was because of this understanding that I took issue with Mr. Rosenthal during the final stages of the interview and accused him of not being honest with me as it related to his response to my question: “Do you have knowledge of when and why the story began about the Jews being God’s chosen people?” That is when he said in part: “Most Jews do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer – so I wasn’t lying – and we are his chosen people. Lucifer is very much alive.”

As this goes to press, we still seek a governmental body to investigate Harold Rosenthal’s allegations. My dictionary conveys such allegations as “treason”. We now pick up after a dispute during which the tape recorder has been turned off.Obviously where the “W” appears, those are my words. Where the “R” appears, that indicates comment.

W: Mr. Rosenthal, when true history is permitted to be published at large – when the truth actually surfaces – what do you expect the people of the world will do to you Jews?

R: I thought we had concluded this interview.

W: I’m concerned – and this question seems to require your answer.

R: We were all finished White, and now you start to pump me again. I’ve already given you the ‘tables of stone’ and yet you want more. Never mind — you wouldn’t understand anyway – you Christians!!!

W: So now you damn me because I’m a Christian. I thought we had tried to keep this on a business-like basis did we not?

R: (Mumbled exclamation by Rosenthal!)

W: Whatever that is – or means, you’re using words I’ve never heard before. Are you speaking English?

R: I said ——-.

W: Will you spell it?

R: (Rosenthal spells M-I-S-H-N-A-H and briefly says it is from the basics of the Talmud). [The Mishnah is the earliest work of the Rabbinic literature that has been preserved. Although not being a code, the Mishnah was considered a guideline by the later generations, and it became the basis of the Halakhic traditions. The Talmud is the enlarged explanation of the Mishnah, but it covers a larger sphere than the Mishnah. The studying of the texts of Mishnah in a mourning family has become a habit due to the mystic traditions. – J. D.] Mr. R. continues: Let’s not dwell on this. We’re not getting anywhere – besides we had concluded things and that ends our agreement.

W: Are you afraid to answer the question I posed?

R: Who the hell do you think I am – I’m not afraid to answer any question but I’ve given you enough information for a book.

W: Did I not pay you as per our agreement?

R: Yeah – sure – but again you’re wanting more. All right, you want my opinion as to what the people of the world are going to think when history is written.

W: Well, I didn’t pose the question exactly like that, but go ahead.

R: I don’t give a damn what the people will think. Besides, whenever that happens you and I will be dead. Plain dead. Does that satisfy you?

W: There are two or three questions among my notes here Mr. Rosenthal which have yet to be answered and one is quite important.

R: What is that?

  1. The story about the six million Jews supposedly cremated or murdered by the Nazis.

R: What about it?

W: Do you know who or what Jewish organization created that big lie?

R: No, I don’t know anything about its authenticity. I don’t think it’s too important anyway.

W: Mr. Rosenthal, you know better than that, What about the younger generation who is growing up believing this big lie? And you say it’s not important!

R: It was an outgrowth of the war and we all know that Hitler hated the Jews so someone, somewhere, thought of exaggerating the number. We know that many, many Jews were killed by the Nazis.

W: I’m sure you know that when World War II broke out there were less than a quarter of a million Jews in all of Germany. Many thousands had already left Germany.

R: So what? As I said before, the Jewish people are the cleverest people in the world. So somebody thought up a big number and perhaps it grew until now the number of Jews killed is six million. We have control of the news media and that is the great difference. Otherwise your people could tell your big lie.

  1. Go you brush it off that lightly. Something of such enormity…

Mr. R. interrupted here saying – My people have been taught to give consideration and attention to our teachers rather than to the words of your people and laws.

W: You’re living in America, Mr. Rosenthal, It is our duty to uphold the laws of our Country. Your religion teaches you that you may take an oath such as when being inducted into political office — and if the oath displeases you, you can deny silently the fact you have taken that oath. Now I have copies of the Jewish document – called the Kol Nidre and I have proven their authenticity. (The Kol Nidre (“all vows”) is found in the Talmud book Nedarim (Vows), and is recited each year in the synagogue on the Day of Atonement It allows all future obligations. oaths or pledges a Jew may engage in to “be deemed absolved, forgiven, annulled, and void, and made of no effect.”) This allows Jews to lie, subvert, cheat, etc.

R: Well – all Jews don’t practice that oath business, I’m sure.

W: But they do practice it, do they not – with the Rabbi’s approval.

R: To some extent. Perhaps when it is helpful to the individual.

W: Is that not sinful?

R: Maybe to your way of thinking. I’ve told you — you and I are different. We are different people. Our beliefs are entirely different. We have been raised that way for many centuries so it is not a sin for us to take any oath and break it. It’s our teaching. (This point on the difference of character has been made by many other Jewish writers and statesmen, and is well supported in history and science. Yet, ironically, Christians continue to believe the Jewish lie that “we are all the same” or “equal.”)

W: I’ve possibly saved the most important question of all until now.

R: Listen, White, if you’re going on any further, my time is money. We made an agreement and you’re extending it beyond reason. You have it all on tapes and remember that we agreed for you to take whatever you want from the tapes and your notes — but no reproduction of the tapes under any circumstances. They are to be destroyed. If you violate this White, we’ll cut your balls off.

W: Who are “we”?

R: Just get smart and you’ll find out. You don’t want any trouble and I don’t either. You keep our agreement and no one gets hurt!! Now give me the rest of my money. Okay?

W: I intend to keep our agreement to the letter and you have my word of honor that these tapes will not go any further than my use in the preparation of the story. There is no misunderstanding. We agree on that and I’ll keep my word. You’ll get your money in a minute.

R: I have friends White – I know a lot of people and I don’t want them to be reading things attributed to me that I didn’t say. I don’t give a damn what you or anybody else thinks – but I don’t want lies printed – only the questions and answers of this interview.

W: We understand each other perfectly in that regard, Mr. Rosenthal. Now, please, this question!!

R: Shoot. But remember I need Las Vegas money.

W: Surely you must know somewhere in your schooling, or you have some kind of personal feeling or understanding as to when and why the story began that the Jews are God’s Chosen People.

R: We are God’s chosen people.

W: Do you really believe that Mr. Rosenthal?

R: Maybe I can explain or perhaps Jake could give you a better answer…

W: Who is Jake?

R: Jake Javits – you know, my associate. He’s the man that I work for and he’s a pretty smart guy. Plenty smart. His answer might serve your purpose for the story better.

W: I want your answer!

R: . . . You and we actually have a different God.

W: Is that the answer to the Jews being God’s chosen people?

R: To our god we are chosen ones. We are taught that from our childhood.

W: That is an evasive answer. You know what I mean when I pose such a question and I don’t believe your reply or your explanation.

R: Okay. I don’t give a damn what you believe.

W: Do your people believe that Jesus Christ was a Jew?

R: Hell! We’re not going back to that again are we? We’ve already gone over that.

W: That was before the tape machine was ever turned on. I don’t think we recorded your reply to this question.

R: Well, I can’t answer for all Jews. I guess you’re asking what Jews throughout the world believe?

W: Yes.

R: Jake could answer that better than I.

W: Please, I don’t want Senator Javits’ answer to anything. I want your answer.

R: White, I know what you’re searching for. I’ve known from the beginning but that’s all right. You and we are so apart. You’re another breed. You’re not our kind. It’s not secret that we do not respect you, and of your kind. (Genesis 3:15).

W: Are you referring to just our kind as ‘Christians’?

R: No, you gentiles – all of you are our enemies. When I was a little boy, just a kid, very young, we were taught very wisely. Many centuries ago when the Jews were persecuted in almost every country and driven out of so many countries – some of the governments, I cannot remember exactly whether it was the government of France or Spain. Anyway, the government demanded that the Jews must become Christians or be expelled from the country.

W: Yes, I recall reading of this many times.

R: Was it France or Spain.

W: Possibly both but I vividly remember the story of Queen Isabella of Spain — how patient she was with the Jews – always giving them the benefit of doubt – until such time as her eyes were opened completely to the deceptions of the Jews. But please go on.

R: Anyway, the Jews at that time had a very wise Rabbi leader, a world leader, and his advice was respected throughout the world. He said that the Jews must pretend to become Christians and bide their time and make real sacrifices if necessary. We have always been ready to sacrifice a few thousand Jews in exchange for world leadership. (This was the plan of the Jews who instigated WW II. Some Jews were sacrificed so that the “persecution” propaganda could continue.) It is a small price and there is nothing wrong with that. I was taught that we Jews must become lawyers so we could control and strangle the courts, and even the judges, unless they were Jews. We should become doctors and teachers and leaders in all the churches — and this goal has almost been fully accomplished.

I said it before and I’ll say it now — that we will have complete, I say complete control, throughout the entire world possibly before I die. We are very successful in keeping you gentiles confused. We create confusion. (The word Babylon in Hebrew is Babel and means confusion. The Jews are masters at confusion because they are the ringleaders of the system known as “Mystery Babylon.”) You’re not stupid White. You know that the Jews are successful because of our unity. We die for one another if necessary. We generously finance our own, so it is understandable how we govern not only in this country. We direct American foreign affairs. We are the super government of the world. Is that enough?

W: Go on. I find what you are saying most interesting. Please go on.

R: We are the most powerful international body of people in the world! Do you believe that?

W: You speak with such confidence that I . . .

Mr. R. interrupted – We can destroy any country’s economy without their even being aware of it – if we want to. I think this is what you want to hear. (Most Americans are totally unaware that by the Federal Reserve system their money has been stolen and the economy debauched.)

W: I’m expecting you to be truthful with me Mr. Rosenthal.

R: Well, it’s true. We’re smart – we are powerful and at the proper time we will mix up your gentile women with the Blacks and in 50 years you’ll be all mixed up. Niggers love to s…w your white women and we encourage it by using them to our advantage.

W: I recall your saying that the Blacks serve a purpose.

R: Yes, we will use them to a great advantage. (It was primarily by Jewish merchant ships and Jewish-run slave auctions that the blacks got to America.)

W: And try to destroy them after you have used them I presume?

R: If necessary. Yes! You and I know they’re inferior people, a dumb race, but can be useful with the use of money. I mean real big money. Niggers will do anything for money. So, when the time comes – and you might even live to see it – we will have that complete control while you stupid Christians are waiting for your Christ, the impostor, to return as your savior.

W: You sound bitter.

R: Not at all. Why should I be bitter? We are on top!

W: And when this whole sordid story becomes known, the result will be an aroused citizenry – an angry citizenry who will want to destroy you.

R: How? I ask you how? You can’t reach the people. We have it all under such control that no one – no one or no-body can people unless it is done through our media control. (Who has control of the mass media in the 20th century? – Chairman of ABC Leonard Goldenson, President of CBS – James H. Rosenfield, Chairman of RCS – David Sarnoff, Chief Executive of NBC – Fred Silverman, President of PBS – Lawrence Grossman, Chairman of Time – Arthur Heiskell, Editor of U.S. News & World Report – Marvin Stone, Chief Executive of Dow Jones – Warren H. Phillips, Editor of Newsweek – Lester Bernstein, President of TV Guide – Walter Annenberg, President of New York Times – Sulzberger family, TV program producer – Norman Lear – these and more all are Jews!!) We have it sewed up!! We have infected your churches completely and we now control the school system in the United States. It is a reality that we have complete control of organized Christianity. Almost anywhere – completely.

W: I find so many things you say to be repulsive. The way you say things . . .

R: It’s what you wanted to hear or you wouldn’t have paid good money for this interview.

W: So long as you are truthful with me – but you still haven’t answered that question I posed long back – do you believe that Jesus Christ was a Jew?

R: As I said, Jake could give you a really intelligent answer. I know that most of our friends, kids and people I grew up with – in fact all of our friends – I’d say all of them, don’t believe Christ was a Jew. He was an impostor and millions of people all over the world now believe that Christianity was founded on untruth and deliberate incorrect translations of your Bible. Christ was a fraud. Even the National Council of Churches agree that there were false translations of the book your people respect. It’s built on lies. (This comment can hardly be regarded as coming from a true Christian source since the National Council of Churches was organized by Jews and its theology is controlled by them.)

W: According to the latest scholarly research, your ancestors are not Israelites but Mongolians and Asiatics from Eastern Europe and Western Asia, so your ancestors were thousands of miles from the Holy Land. They never, ever saw the Holy Land – proving that your people were not the chosen people of God.

R: So what? What difference does it make?

W: We have been taught the big lie for many years that Jews are God’s Chosen people, so it does make a difference. A very grave difference.

R: What grave difference?

W: Does it not prove that the great majority of Jews today are Khazar in origin. Your ancestors never trod the lands where Christ walked. They never knew Jerusalem and Palestine so how could . . . (Mr. R. interrupted)

R: (shouting) What the hell difference does it make now?

W: I find so many things that you have said as being repulsive and your arrogant manner in boasting, as it were, to admittedly being a part of this gigantic . . . this heinous plot against mankind — and at times, you attempt to brush things off by saying ‘what difference does it make’. So much of what you have admitted staggers me, in fact, I lack the words . . . (Mr. R. interrupts here).

R: That’s because you’re a gentile. You don’t understand. You never will! Until it’s too late and my hope, personally, is that the American people do not… (Mr. R. paused here).

W: There is so much of what you have said, that as an individual, people may not believe you – they may not believe this interview… (Mr. R. interrupts).

R: That is why we have the control today. One of the reasons. Your people did not believe that it was possible for any people or race to accomplish what we have within a couple of hundred years. The gentile is stupid. WE are intelligent. I am going to be a very important person in and around Washington and soon. I intend to become nationally prominent. You are going to hear and read about me in the future. I’m young and have had the guts to tell you more than any other Jew would ever dare to tell you — at least publicly. I’ve stuck my neck out White. Some of what I have told you is part of the inner, invisible world of Jewry.

W: Looking at you now as I denote your change, I see you as a despicable bastard – all of you . . . (Mr. R. interrupts).

R: No one calls me a bastard and gets away with it!

W: You are all contemptible, base and detestable . . .

R: I’ll knock your God damn head off if you call me a bastard . . .

W: I wouldn’t try it if I were you. I too have friends, many of them would like a chance to get to you so let’s keep this on a formal basis as it was intended at the beginning. (Mr. R. then said something which I asked him to spell. He spelled O-Y V-A-Y, Oy Vay, and added oy vay iz mir, and when asked what it meant he said I would not understand, but I am including it here because it is on the tape.) Many times when referring to a person being a Jew, I have heard it said, ‘Well, I understand he is a Presbyterian or a Catholic.’ So, I would like your opinion or explanation. How do Jews feel about another Jew who becomes a Christian Scientist or converts to any other religion? Is he or she no longer a Jew?

R: That can best be answered – well let me put it this way. I don’t know what your mother and father were – what nationality I mean . . .

W: My father was British – English, and my mother was German.

R: Well, if you decided to study Zionism or the Talmud or actually wanted to become converted and attended the synagogue would that erase your English or German heritage?

W: Of course not – but I wanted to hear it from a learned Jew. What you have said then is that he or she is always a Jew.

R: It’s stupid – stupid. We are what we are! No matter what we join or adopt it doesn’t change what we are. I am a Jew and nothing can change me because I take up another religion. Such stupidity! (This concept is verified in Scripture by the rhetorical question: “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?” And in the parable of the Tares and the Wheat we find that the Tares (the children of the wicked) are utterly destroyed. None are saved from the destroying fire, none are converted into Wheat. God is not going to change the tares into something they never were.)

W: But the Jews are a great part of this deceit.

R: We have a talent for confusing your issues.

W: You are masters of deceit and this cunning practice of yours has allowed your people to infiltrate the governments throughout the world.

R: Why not? Why shouldn’t we take over the banks, the universities, the church and the government if the gentiles are not intelligent enough to run them? I could not have talked this way a few years ago but now it is different. There is nothing to undo our strategy in the world today so I can speak much more freely. What I’ve disclosed may help other Jews to speak out if they have any guts. We are not a pusillanimous race.

W: You’re very sure of yourself and your people aren’t you?

R: We may be divided in many things, but nothing ever actually separates us.

W: Who is we?

R: My people, the Jews are ‘as one’ when it counts most. No incident can ever divide us. (Down throughout the centuries Jews have learned they cannot trust other people. Thus, the Jewish racial bond is their greatest bond.)

W: I have heard Jews fight each other with venom!

R: Ahh, that’s entirely different. Sure we will fight one another but as I say, when it counts most we’re ‘as one’. Our forte White is division and duplicity. It is an infallible weapon and we are skillful – perhaps perfectionists in its application. You don’t have the intelligence to compete.

W: But we have a culture that you Jews will never understand or equal.

R: Jews have a family life. Our culture requires a high standard in education. We establish standards so that our kids exceed that of their parents. Our people continue to show a dramatic educational advancement. Our kids’ success doesn’t depend entirely on schools but on the family and we are damn proud of these accomplishments. You can’t compete! More than 12,000 doctors are graduated from medical schools in the United States every year and almost 10,000 of them are Jews. Among the law students the Jewish percentage is even higher. Jews are on such a solid foundation here in the United States that any kind of opposition to our control would only be temporary. You know we laugh about the, six million story just like the story that Christ was a Jew and the God’s Chosen People story. This should show people that we have a solidarity like none other in the world. Jews have a closeness to other Jews whom they have never seen or perhaps even heard of. (As it is said – “Blood is thicker than water.”)

W: Mr. Rosenthal, I hope you haven’t lied to me in any of this interview because if you did we could retaliate on you. Understand?

R: What I have told you is true – all of it. I don’t need to lie.

W: I have found the Jews’ passion is greed, profit and the destruction of Christianity. Am I correct?

R: I cannot speak for all Jews.

W: I’m speaking of the great majority of Jews. Am I right?

R: Maybe most Jews feel that way – but there’s nothing wrong with that!

W: I think you just go on and on because there is a bitterness within you and perhaps you say things that even you do not believe. Some of the things you say are almost unbelievable.

R: Well I don’t give a good God damn what you believe. I’ve given you honest answers and opinions. Now no more questions. And don’t forget our agreement – if I learn that the tapes are used other than what we agreed upon you will suffer serious consequences. Do you understand?

W: I understand. And now Mr. Rosenthal, here is the balance of the money agreed upon for this interview.

(This is the end of the recording.)

After the tape machine had been turned off, White accused Harold Rosenthal of not living up to our agreement in replying truthfully to my question as to the Jews being God’s Chosen people. He replied:

“We are god’s chosen people . . . Most Jews do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer – so I wasn’t lying – and we are his chosen people. Lucifer is very much alive.”

White was stunned and had no further comment. He had watched this arrogant, boastful person change at times like a chameleon that changes its color. Many times he showed a hatred – yes, even a venom. At the conclusion, White felt bad, even unclean being around him. Much of what Harold Wallace Rosenthal said brought to the surface a reality White and his fellows have known all along. But this “Jewish” treachery was more shocking when getting it all in one package. It has been alleged that Harold Rosenthal was killed because he talked too much. If all he said was true, this explanation may even sound real.

In the following, White related how they tried to minimize Rosenthal’s boastings of their control of our churches, which seemed unbelievable at the time of the interview. But later, in the autumn of 1983 it became a reality that the U. S. Supreme Court sanctioned IRS approved State Churches. At that time, White already saw that Organized Jewry was determined to strengthen control over the operation of Christian churches via taxation and other regulations. The editor of the Western Front magazine finally came to the conclusion that: “The enemy is not coming. The enemy is here. War has been declared on Christianity, churches, religious freedoms, the true American Way, and the white race.”

The Zionist power structure in the America of our days

The organizational structure and operation of the Zionist power was analyzed by sociologist James Petras, Professor Emeritus of the Binghamton University and the New York State University, in his article titled Bended Knees: Zionist power in American Politics (20 December 2009, He assessed, with the accuracy of the scientist, logically and sophisticatedly, all that Harold Wallace Rosenthal spoke about only vaguely and unsystematically, as White, the interviewer, asked him his questions. Professor Petras calls the hierarchy of the Organized Jewry, which is built in deeply into the political system of the United States, Zionist Power Configuration, or ZPC. In his analysis, he starts from the claims by the ZPC that it represents Jewish opinion and values as well as its authority to speak for the interests of the American people. The 51 Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organization (PMAJO) claim to speak for all Jews in the US.

Petras found that near majorities of young people of Jewish ancestry do not identify with Judaism and are critical or indifferent to Zionist appeals for Israel. A small, but vocal, group of Jews are organized and active critics of the entire Zionist apparatus, rejecting the idea of Israel as an exclusive ethno-religious state and supporting a secular democratic republic in Palestine. The “51” misrepresent their actual numbers and claim to speak for 6 million US Jews. Their political influence resides in the support of the State of Israel and the control of the mass-media institutions. The material basis of it is the Jewish financial power that supports them. The 51 presidents are willing to use force, money and media slander to intimidate any and all critics, including dissident politicians, media, journalists and professors.

According to Petras, the ZPC is powerful but not omnipotent. It controls the US Congress and Executive and has decisive influence in the mass media. At the same time, a number of Jewish organizations and individuals, revolted by Israel’s mass killings in Gaza and the ZPC unconditional support, have spoken out in support of the Goldstone Report.

In September 2009, Justice Richard Goldstone prepared a Final Report for the United Nations’ Fact Finding Mission on the 2009 Gaza Conflict. Nevertheless, the ZPC did not like this 500-page report. With pressures, threats, flattery and promises, they managed to persuade Congressional representatives to vote against Justice Goldstone. It is characteristic that many Congresspersons condemned the Goldstone Report and proudly confessed to never having even read it. In the UN National Assembly, the Zionists were able to leverage the US to vote against the Goldstone Report, which in turn determined the attitude of the Eastern European client states. Nevertheless, even together with the Western European “Allies”, this amounted only to a total of 18 votes against the 114 UN members who endorsed the Report’s thorough documentation of Israeli war crimes committed in the course of the Gaza conflict.

Professor Petras wanted to find out whether the ZPC is a lobby or an unregistered agent of a foreign power. Based on its organizational structure and political aims, the ZPC is a pro-Israel social-political configuration, which cannot be reduced to a common “lobby”, since it plays a major role in shaping the opinions and behavior of public opinion and civic society organizations. Secondly, unlike other American lobbies, it acts to shape US foreign policy in the interest of a foreign military power, by imposing sanctions against Israel’s opponents. By this, it prejudices the lives and security of thousands of American working people and taxpayers.

Thirdly, the term “lobby” does not apply for the ZPC, because lobbying organizations ordinarily do not pursue repressive activities against those who criticize them, should they be even cultural figures or academics. The ZPC not only acts a foreign agent for Israel today, but has been openly doing so over fifty years. When, in the 1960’s the Justice Department attempted to enforce the relevant act against the current American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)’s predecessor, the American Zionist Council (AZC), it was blocked by pro-Israel politicians.

The ZPC not only publically gives unconditional support to Israeli policy but engages in espionage on behalf of Israel. In our days, a vast archive of declassified official US documents prove that the AIPAC purloined internal classified government documents, which then have been used to enforce further Israeli trade privileges. A leader of the Zionist Organization of America was implicated in the illegal transfer of US government uranium to Israel in 1956. From 1979 to 1985, several critical confidential documents have been passed through Israeli agents to the Soviet Union in order to influence their policy on immigration to Israel.

American Zionist spy, Jonathan Pollard, who worked as an analyst for US Naval intelligence, also provided the Mossad with crate-loads of classified top secret military and intelligence documents. But he worked for money, similar to the Justice Department charged Stewart David Nozette, a Defense Department scientist. Like Pollard, he asked for money and an Israeli passport. According to former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky, the spy agency recruits thousands of overseas Zionist sayanim (Hebrew for ‘helpers’) who “must be 100 percent Jewish” for Israeli Mossad operations, which may include terrorism.

In 2001 Fox News investigative reporter, Carl Cameron, reported that several Israeli spies were arrested and deported in the aftermath of 9/11, including five Mossad agents videoing the World Trade Center bombing. Industrial and political spying is not uncommon among states, even between allies. What is striking is that representatives of an organized ethno-religious group, the major American Zionist organizations, have expressed sympathy and solidarity with the mentioned spies. According to the leading American Zionist organizations, spying for Israel, is the expression of their primary loyalty to the Jewish state.

Those top Zionist leaders had top positions in both the Bush and Obama administration, who have been working directly for Israel. Many of them failed even the security clearances. Two top Pentagon officials in the Bush administration, Former Undersecretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Assistant Secretary of Defense, Douglas Feith are cases in point. Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emmanuel spent time in the Israeli armed forces and has long been suspected of ties to Mossad. Stuart Levey, a top US Treasury Department official involving in enforcing sanctions against Iran, has spent nearly a decade in close collaboration with Mossad. During the Bush (Jr.) Presidency, non-Zionist officials in the Pentagon and CIA complained of being sidelined by top Zionist officials, who set up their own intelligence offices.

So, for instance, Wolfowitz and Feith set up the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans run by Abram Shulsky. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, an official in the Pentagon at the time, complained of being marginalized and supplanted by Israeli officers who had unfettered access to the highest Pentagon officials. In November 2007, the national intelligence organizations of the United States prepared a National Intelligence Estimate Report (NIE) on the Iranian nuclear program. The report was rejected by all the major Jewish American organizations. And, accordingly, it was also rejected by their men in Congress and the Executive branch. It was because the report concluded that Iran had suspended its nuclear weapons development since 2003. The major Zionist organizations and their supporters in the US government favored Israeli intelligence disinformation claiming that Iran continued its active nuclear weapons program that threatened US security. In short order the NIE report, prepared by 16 major US Government intelligence agencies, was pushed aside and US policy followed the lead of the Zionist-backed Israeli claims of a “secret” Iranian weapons program despite the absence of any hard data.

The result is that the Zionist Power Configurations unquestioningly support Israel, including Zionist espionage for Israel within the US and the universally-condemned Israel war crimes. This uncontested support of espionage by foreign power acting through public organizations is unique in US history. In the past organizations acting as surrogates for a foreign power were condemned, ostracized, suppressed, prosecuted and subject to mass public outrage. It is a “tribute” to the power of ZPC that none of that occurs today, but even the most radical “fellow leftist traveling editors”, who otherwise claim “internationalist” and “working class” allegiances, are not willing to confront the ZPC

Zionist hegemony under single management

American researchers have already duly revealed, to date, which questions and institutions of key importance are determinedly under Zionist influence. Some have identified AIPAC as an influential pro-Israel lobby. Others have noted the pro-Israel bias of the mass media. This is supported by the Zionist predominance in media ownership. During the Bush Jr. presidency, the Zionists had key positions in the Pentagon, and played a decisive role in promoting the US invasion of Iraq. It can be proved that those who consequently place Israel’s interests in front of American interests have been present continually and in large numbers on the decision-making levels of the administration for a long time. In a word, the problem of ZPC power in the US is not confined to a single issue lobby. The ZPC effectively deprives the great majority of the Americans of their wages and salaries, transferring the incomes withdrawn from the middle class to war expenses. The ZPC, for instance, can block investment opportunities for corporate America in countries designated (by Israel) as “security threats”, i.e. enemies.

The leading Zionists continuously move from business (Wall Street, Corporate law firms) to government. This move is going on in two directions. A similar pattern involves Zionist academics and researchers who move to the executive branch. When the direction of the move changes, many of them find jobs in corporate intellectual workshops, research institutes, Zionist think tanks. Others follow a career combining academic – propagandist – journalist policy consultant positions, often prominent on the television political ‘talk’ shows. The leading media moguls on one hand manage these media, on the other hand they are public opinion forming propagandists themselves, and, at the same time, Israel’s most devoted advocates. The overlap of career positions created a network of shared ideologies, defined by ‘what is best for Israel’. They are the Israel Firsters. The shared “world view” creates a cohesive group that sets the boundaries of US policy debate.

These public discourses are confined by these ZPC-determined parameters. According to James Petras, these pro-Israel career patterns and projections of power have established a kind of Judeo-Zionist hegemony of US public life. One of the extreme manifestations of this Zionist-Jewish hegemony is found in the fear and trepidation with which critics of Israeli policy approach the issue. Most seek to “Judaize” any criticism, instead of seeking and citing truth, facts or analyses on their own merits. They support their statements by citing Israeli sources and Jewish writers, even if earlier non-Jewish, non-Israeli writers and analysts have raised the same issues and may have provided a more systematic and consequential critique. This procedure of seeking to play off critical Jews against the ZPC and Israel is strongly debatable if not counter-productive, regressive and serves to re-enforce the already existing, pervasive fear of the ZPC, as well as the servitude.

The proponents of this approach, assuming they are not ignorant of non-Jewish critics, argue that by citing the Jewish background of the critics of Israel, they disarm the ZPC charge of “anti-Semitism”. They further argue that by putting an ethnic ‘spin’ or ethnicizing’ the critique they are responding to “Jewish sensibilities” and are more likely to gain understanding from Jews and their sympathizers.

According to James Petras, these arguments are plausible but deeply flawed. Committed Zionists, meaning the persons and organizations belonging to the ZPC, dismiss Jewish and non-Jewish critics with equal ferocity. They qualify the former “self-hating Jews”, the latter “anti-Semites”. It is not worth sacrificing truth and principled criticism to shield “Jewish sensibilities”. Yielding to the “Jewish sensibilities” means refraining from challenging their residual tribal sympathies to a ‘Zion-centric’ view of the world. If the central problem is Zionist hegemony of US culture and especially the unilateral foreign policy in the Middle East, it ill behooves the Americans to pander to amorphous “special sensitivities” of the few Jewish dissidents who demand ethnically-based critiques.

The big challenge for opponents of Judeo-Zionist hegemony is demystifying its ideological bases. Zionists and their media camp followers always highlight “Jewishness” and the disproportionate number of notable, successful scientists and public figures with whom the Zionists self-identify, even if the said individuals have no identification with anything remotely “Jewish” beyond some distant ancestry. In contrast, they do not mention the “Jewishness” and Israel-centricity of notorious swindlers, spies, warmongers, gangsters, drug or arms traffickers. If somebody brings such persons in connection with Jewry, he is labeled anti-Semitic.

This selective ethnic identity is crucial to maintaining and perpetuating the racist myth of Jewish superiority and the corollary of power and prestige. It creates the impression that the claim of Jewish superiority is based on special meritorious qualities. One of the key components of Zionist-Jewish ideology and Israeli state power is precisely the racist myth of the Jewish moral and intellectual superiority. Thus, the special status of the Zionists lies on this moral and intellectual basis – and not on the money and backing of Washington and the ZPC’s central location within the US elite social structure.

According to James Petras, there are two options for those interested in demystifying Zionist-Jewish hegemony. One could eliminate all ethnic labels or one could insist that labels be applied to all individuals including the most nefarious, grotesque and embarrassing. Cracks can already be perceived in the Zionist monolith and several public critics have emerged within and without the Jewish community. Especially among young former Jews, who prefer to assimilate with their fellow-citizens. At the same time, still up to a third of US Jews remain hard-core backers of the ZPC with Israel as their most enduring political loyalty.

Identification with beliefs in a mythical biblical past offers a kind of psychological gratification in many respects. More important are the real material benefits offered by joining the Israel First Power Configuration. It is true that Zionists contribute money and time to promoting the Israeli agenda, but there are also powerful material incentives, especially the benefits accruing from exclusive identification and membership in a cohesive configuration. The ZPC empowers its members, finances electoral campaigns and is well-connected among political leaders, as well as financial, real estate and insurance moguls.

For upwardly mobile Zionist activists, belonging to the ZPC can be lucrative and career-enhancing. Ambitious politicians, who measure up and toe the line, are likely to get substantial funding and favorable media coverage. Networks, which work for Israel, enhance Jewish-Zionist prestige while providing emotional gratification. A vicarious pleasure is caused by Israel’s military victories and its forceful expansion of the “fatherland”, even through bloody battles.

Not a few careers have advanced through the “contacts” made at the national and regional Zionist meetings. This is especially the case for many, otherwise mediocre, political candidates facing competitive elections. The same is true for those who perform activity in scientific fields, since active membership in a powerful Zionist organization may protect the careers of lackluster, or even incompetent, performers in some academic or professional settings. They only need to threat the universities and other institutions with a lawsuit charging anti-Semitism, namely that they want to get rid of the person in case because he is a Jew.

Zionist racist ideology emphasizes in many respects that Jews are “special people”, chosen and ordained by God. To this, we can add the media’s bias toward presenting a selectively positive ethno-religious identity, provides symbolic gratification to lower middle class Jews. They are those who sell Israel bonds, write letters to politicians, heckle critics of the Jewish state and march under the flag of Israel. They are likely to play a role at the grassroots level in influencing family members, neighbors and colleagues to join the cause or refrain from voicing criticism of Israel.

Professor Petras attributes the success of the ZPC in projecting power and shaping US policy, in large part, to the financial power of its millionaire financiers. This money oligarchy penetrates into the state apparatus and interlocks the corporate-political directorate. However, equally important is the grassroots work of hundreds of thousands of middle and lower middle class activists. The effective exercise of power by the Zionist elites is based on the strong vertical ties between the leaders and followers, especially in mobilizing for Israel’s high priority campaigns promoting dubious causes. Like, for instance, Israeli repudiation of United States calls for stopping Jewish colonial settler expansion in Palestine.

It is highly unlikely that any changes can be induced among the Zionist elite. Nevertheless, there are reasons to believe that these vertical links (from up downwards and from down upwards) can be weakened. According to Petras, over the past 5 years, numerous articles, books and videos critical of Israel have broken through Zionist censorship and could reach the large public. Equally important is the emergence of new activist Jewish organizations, which follow an anti-Zionist program. Faced with this growing opposition in civil society, the ZPC has escalated its repressive efforts to ban publication of critical authors, fire academics and savage journalists and politicians who criticized the ZPC and Israel.

Simultaneously a concerted ideological attack started at universities against those who criticized Israel’s activity in Gaza, the brutal expansion of settlements in the West Bank, as well as the Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes. And also the resistance against Israel’s well-orchestrated push for war against Iran.

The ZPC has long established a systematic control on the research institutes, major media outlets and programs for opinion and analysis on the Middle East. As a result, Israel First academics and journalists monopolize the editorial and opinion pages of the Washington Post, the Murdoch chain, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, ­Newsweek, and other print outlets. The above listed press organs, for instance, in articles published on December 21, 2009, glorified the head of the Israeli secret police, Mossad, Meir Dagan for his success in assassinating political adversaries beyond national boundaries and his close ties with US Treasury official Stuart Levey.

Levey is in charge of introducing trade sanctions against Iran. Such media personalities, like Ted Koppel and Wolf Blitzer, enforce the Israeli-ZPC line in the major media. The result is self-styled “experts” with strong ties to Israel and Zionist propaganda institutes, with a dubious loyalty – according to Petras – to America. Numerous professors from the most prestigious universities hurried to defend Israel’s assault on Gaza, with editorials, commentaries and advertisements. They even cited the “Just War” theory to defend Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, when confronted by near universal support for the Goldstone Report, ordered the ZPC to denigrate Justice Goldstone, the basis and legality of the Report and falsify its contents. As a consequence, the ZPC started a mass campaign, mobilizing the academics, journalists and propagandists being under its control.

Over one hundred op-ed pieces in the major media savaged the Report, slandered Goldstone and defended Israeli terror attacks, which destroyed the entire human infrastructure of the Gaza. Professor Petras notes that no Israeli crime was too great to cause any Harvard, Yale, Princeton or John Hopkins Zionist academic to rethink their bind subordination to the Jewish state. They parroted Netanyahu’s line that the massacre over one thousand civilians and the brutalization of hundreds of thousands was an exercise of “Israel’s right to self-defense”.

Few of the Jewish and non-Jewish academics, who dared to criticize Israel’s terrorist policy, and cited the weakest section of the Goldstone Report – its amalgamating Israel’s all-out terror bombing of Palestinian neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, mosques and farms, with Hamas’ futile and ineffective retaliatory rockets falling mostly on empty Israeli fields. The ZPC managed to secure over 90% of the US Congress in favor of Israel’s repudiations of the Goldstone Report. What is striking about the vast majority of Zionist academic apologists of terrorism is their shoddy scholarship, their tendentious and illogical arguments and de-contextualized analogies. Their “persuasiveness” is based on the fact that their “line” is reinforced by the institutions of the mass media industry, broadcasting them over and over.

This is further enforced by the ZPC’s political banditism and unscrupulous propaganda to run down the potential critics. Their repeated presence in the media gives the appearance of legitimacy, although, in fact, they defend violations of international law. Their prestigious positions at universities or scientific institutions and the media provide a veneer of expertise or knowledge to these shallow opinions. This is made possible by the fact that they are able to argument on flawed premises, including disproven religious legends and colonial mythology. According to Petras, the more deeply the Zionist academics become involved in justifying the Zionist and Israeli claims, the more their intellectual standards deteriorate. Over time the reaching of prestigious academic positions becomes linked with mediocrity. Academic degrees, awards and badges of merit can be obtained more and more through pre-ordered hack writing with purpose. Promotions and academic chairs are secured by eminently distinguished apologists of dubious morality. According to Petras, the American Zionist academic elite fits Theodor Wiesegrund Adorno’s opinion about the authoritarian personality:

This elite is at the throat of the American polity and at the feet of the Israeli – ZPC elite. Arrogant posturing, angry polemics and emotional ejaculations cover up for their lack of substantive arguments. Where bullying fails, soothing rhetoric which speaks to values, dialogue and cooperation accompanies a blind eye to the relentless Israeli uprooting of Arab residents from Palestinian/Jerusalem. Princeton academics cite classical political theorists in defense of gun-toting Jewish settlers who brutalize shepherds, threaten school girls and up-root centuries-old Palestinian olive groves.”

Globalization of the Zionist power

From the State of Israel that can be considered the Jewish national state to the nerve-centre of the Zionist world power operating in America, the influence of the ZPC has spread to important political institutions operating in England, Canada, France, the Netherlands, Russia, and, more recently, in South America. In England, leaders and deputies from both the Conservative and Labor party are dependent on campaign funds from billionaire Zionists, as they could not take part successfully in political life without the millions received from them. More and more make state-funded journeys to Israel and accept other payoffs in exchange for supporting Israel’s politics of violence in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.

Zionist front groups like the “Conservative Friends of Israel” and “Labor Friends of Israel” ensure that the incumbent regimes and the opposition put Israeli trade and militarist interests at the center of British Middle East Policy. In Canada under the Conservative Stephen Harper regime, Zionists have secured unprecedented influence and diplomatic and material support for Israel’s top priorities. These include support for the annexation of most of Palestinian East Jerusalem, repudiation of the Goldstone Report, as well as support for Israeli war crimes during the 2008/09 invasion of Gaza. The government of Ottawa supported Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and there are pending legislations criminalizing criticism of Zionism as “anti-Semitism”. In Canada, the opposition Liberal and New Democratic parties compete with the Conservatives in pandering to the pro-Israel power configurations. In this way, they compete to secure campaign financing.

In contrast, major Canadian trade unions and anti-Zionist Jewish campus and community organizations have organized boycotts of Israeli goods and academic organizations serving the Israeli occupation. In France, the well-known Zionist Foreign Minister Bernard Bernard “Bernie” Kouchner, has embraced Netanyahu’s extreme position of “unconditional negotiations”. This allows massive land seizures and the construction of “Jews-only” apartment complexes on illegally confiscated Palestinian land to continue. In the meantime, endless inconsequential “peace” negotiations take place. This position has been supported by U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

In Russia, eight of the top nine billionaire oligarchs have claimed dual Israeli citizenship. They illegally and violently seized hundreds of billions of dollars worth of formerly state-owned mines, factories and banks. And then transferred part of their illicit fortunes to overseas banks in Israel, the US, London and the money-laundering offshore island states and tax-havens. Zionist power peaked during the Presidency of Yeltsin in the 1990’s, when public life was characterized by general depravation, chaos and anarchy.

During the presidency of Putin and later of Medvedev, the situation improved, but residual influence of the ZPC is still evident. This is particularly apparent in the US-Russian accords to increase sanctions on Iran, a policy that jeopardizes billions of dollars in Russian investments and trade with Iran. They were able to persuade Russia to refuse resolutely to pressure Israel over its colonial settlement expansion. In a similar manner, Israel and the ZPC retains a decisive influence over Holland and Germany’s Middle East policy, through the continuous exploitation of the Holocaust Memory, and the psychological pressure with the Anna Frank legacy. In doing this, they are helped by the pro-Israel trade and financial contact system.

According to Petras, the newest example of the “globalization” of Zionist power and the drive for new Israeli spheres of influence is found in Latin America. Major US Zionist organizations have contributed substantial financial resources to building, advising and orienting their counterparts, especially in Argentina, Brazil and Peru. The ZPC is engaging in a systematic effort to curry favor with the US by demonizing President Chavez for his forthright defense of Palestinian rights and condemnation of Israel’s crimes against humanity during its invasion of Gaza. For these acts of courage the 51 US Jewish organizations branded Chavez an “anti-Semitic”, even going so far as to accuse him of fomenting an assault on a Jewish community center in Caracas. When the arsonists were arrested, the assault was revealed to have been carried out by center employees hired by the local Jewish notables.

Global Zionism has targeted Argentina and Brazil. Argentinean Jews have a history of ambiguous feelings toward the state of Israel and Zionism. Early twentieth century international Jewish organizations established farming and cattle ranches – the legendary “Jewish Gauchos”. Urban artisans and working class Jews were active in socialist, anarchist, communist and left wing Yiddish organizations. The mid-century generation (1940-60) of professionals, businesspeople, academics and bankers divided between leftist anti-Zionists and Zionists. Both suffered attacks from the pro-fascist sectors of the dominant mass-based populist Peronist regime.

In Argentina, a profound generational split took place in the local Jewish communities especially under the military dictatorships of (1966 – 1973) and (1976 – 82). A significant contingent of university-based students and professors, psychologists and professionals of Jewish ancestry joined urban guerrillas and radical mass movements. Many of them died or “disappeared”. At the same time, Israel continuously promoted Jewish immigration to Israel, securing passage of Zionist and non-Zionist Jews to Israel. While the generation of young non-Zionist Argentine leftist revolutionaries of Jewish ancestry was decimated, new groups of wealthy Argentine Zionist Jews rose during the neo-liberal electoral regimes. They deepened ties with Israel and more recently established extensive links with the US ZPC.

Under the pro-Israel Carlos Menem regime, anti-Semitic terrorists bombed a major Jewish civic center in downtown Buenos Aires killing scores of Jews. Investigations of police complicity were aborted by the Menem regime. Israel overlooked Menem’s “negligence” and instead exploited Jewish fear to offer extremely favorable terms for Argentine Jews to immigrate into Israel. These terms included paid travel, subsidized housing in the occupied territories free education, jobs etc.

The non-religious, secular Jews, who previously had an active leftwing activity, gave up their radical attitude. With de-industrialization, Jews, who had formed the backbone of the previous progressive national bourgeoisie, turned to emigration, finance, real estate and Zionism. The severe depression and financial crash of 2001–2002 led to the mass impoverishment of all Argentines including otherwise prosperous middle class Jews. They joined the popular mass neighborhood assemblies calling for the return of their savings, the end of neo-liberal policies and politicians and the restoration of their jobs.

The subsequent economic recovery between 2003–2008 led to a sharp de-radicalization and the ascendance of Jewish Zionist bankers, real estate and media moguls as principal leaders in the Argentine community. Their influential role in business led to a shift toward closer relations with the ZPC. This included increased efforts to include Israel as a member of the regional integration treaty MERCOSUR, i.e. the Southern Common Market. Claiming that an Islamic Iranian terrorist conspiracy is going on in Latin America, the ZPC, the ADL and AIPAC started a campaign, calling new trade ties between Iran and Brazil a threat to the security of the US.

Leftist regimes came to power in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, which opposed to US and Israeli colonial wars. Brazil and Argentina publicly opposed Israel’s crimes in Gaza. As a consequence, Israeli President Shamir and then Foreign Minister Lieberman followed a disastrous failed tour in South America.

The continuous growth of the ZPC power in Europe and the US, and the new Zionist offensive in Latin America is part of the “globalization” of Zionism. Following the aggressive militarism pushed by the ZPC and Israel in the Middle East and South Asia, public hostility is growing world-wide. A proportion of 80% to 90% of Israeli Jews defended Gaza war crimes and land seizures, while the rest of the world endorsed this aggressive attitude by an almost ten to one margin. This is evidenced by the United Nations General Assembly vote on the Goldstone Report. Moreover, in the case of the leftist regimes in Latin America, there is a significant reversal of Zionist influence. There are equally important cracks in the Zionist monolith among North American Jews and former Zionist fellow travelers.

As a consequence of all these, certain changes can already be felt also in the United States, which affect the Jewish Zionist cultural and political hegemony. In the beginning the ZPC could fully impose their view that Israeli conquest and wars against the native people of Palestine and its Muslim neighbors was a war of “national liberation” or “independence”. This first phase culminated with Jewish-Zionist success in convincing President Johnson to cover up Israel’s bombing of the electronic spy ship USS Liberty during the Six Day War, in June 1967. Between 1970-90, the Zionist-Jewish hegemony extended its dominance in such traditional fields as the film, TV and radio mass media. Including a whole series of former left-of-center and conservative weekly and monthly publications.

We can mention here the formerly liberal New Republic and the Commentary. The latter soon became a mouthpiece for the neo-conservative ideology supporting the ZPC. Also the National Review moved into the “Israel First” camp. The many thousand employees of the numerous American “think tanks” (for instance, Brookings Institute, American Enterprise Institute) produced many pro-Israel position studies and books. Their staff turned up in the mass media as “experts” and into foreign policy advisory positions serving various politicians and administrations. They rose to the highest levels of government in the Clinton Administration and expanded further during the Bush and Obama regimes. At present, the reliable cadres of the ZPC fulfil key positions in the government.

It is estimated that as high as 60% of Democratic Party contributions came from Israel First benefactors. By this, they could secure a proportion of 90% Congressional vote for decisions affecting Israeli interests. During the American public life debates and public opinion forming, neither liberal, progressive, radical, nor “Marxist” writers, academics, editors, journalists brought up the issue of Zionist-Jewish cultural-political hegemony or its growth. The so-called “left” has equally stepped obediently into the line as the neo-conservative side, and, instead of arguments, they applied the vile ad hominem attacks when they want to slander the analysts and critics of the ZPC.

Even today, at the end of the first one and a half year of the Obama regime, the Zionist presence in strategic positions in foreign policy making has been ignored by analysts and critics of US Middle East policy. When, for example, an article criticized President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s “inconsistent” position on Israeli settlements in Palestine’s West Bank, they did not mention the fact that, where Chief of Staff of the White House Rahm Emanuel (dual Israeli-US citizen) keeps a firm grip on U.S. foreign policy. Emanuel not only has been active in the Israeli army, but, according to Petras, is suspected by several experts of ties to its spy agency, the Mossad.

American liberal and leftist analysts maintain their “support” for Israel on the basis of the fiction that the “bad” Israelis are the fanatical Likud party leaders while Labor and Kadima party leaders and the Israeli people want peace and a just settlement. Unfortunately they do not mention that it was the supporter of “progressive” Zionism, the Defense Minister Ehud Barak who directed the bloody massacre in Gaza. He is the leader of the Israeli Labor Party and supports all the new aggressive Israeli land seizures and colonial settlements. The genocidal wars and violent settlements have the support of the vast majority of the Israeli Jewish population. A public opinion poll carried out in November 2009 reveals that 53.2% of the Israeli population say the solution to the conflict with the Palestinian people is their forceful dispossession and ethnic cleansing – “transfer” from their homeland.

According to the analysis of Professor Petras, not only the Israeli-Jewish majority’s embrace of a totalitarian final solution shakes the Zionist hegemony in the US. The embrace of inconvenient positions, such as genocide approval, is not publicized in the Zionist mass media. Instead they continue to broadcast clichés of a “dialogue” and “negotiated solution” between the expropriators and the dispossessed.

The question of Zionist cultural and political hegemony, where it is even been acknowledged by non-Jews and Jews, revolves around several mistaken partially distorted conceptions. One key idea held by anti-Semites and Zionists alike is that Jews possess special qualities (“blood” or “genetic”). Many cite the importance of a Jewish historical tradition, which emphasizes education and learning. Others, still, claim success and power comes from knowledge, merit and achievement. Recent studies refute the idea of a special, unique Jewish “gene pool”. Most contemporary Ashkenazi Jews are descendants of Central Asian Khazar converts to Judaism in the 8th Century A.D.

After the fall of the Khazar Empire, they settled down in Eastern European countries. Israelis are not descendants of the ancient Jews of the Canaan in the Bible. Many of the Jews from the Bible converted to Christianity and later Islam. Their descendants are most certainly the modern-day Palestinians, as conceded by David Ben-Gurion himself. For over one thousand years Jewish “scholarship” revolved around sterile debates and exegeses of the minutiae of the Talmud and bodies of law based on religious myths. Critical philosophers like Spinoza, who approached these myths with scientific methods, were looked at as renegades, persons who deny the Jewish tradition and their faith.

The growth of the Enlightenment and the establishment of liberal laws opened doors for several Jewish scholars and scientists to break out of the sterile confines of the Rabbinal intellectual ghettos. Many of the great thinkers were called “Jews” because of their ancestry, but, in fact, they did not belong to the traditional Jewish communities in the original sense any longer. Spinoza, Karl Marx and Leon Trotsky did not practice Judaism nor identify as “Jews”. Recognition and success of Jews can be led back to business and financial activity, mostly to seizing of the control over the money system. The rise of several dynasties of Jewish origin, especially in Europe, was assured especially by the technique of the production of money and its lending on interest. A Jewish authored scholarly history of the Jewish people was not written till the 19th century. When this happened, nevertheless, it treated biblical legends as facts – without any scientific proofs.

After this, Professor Petras examines the special quality and merits of the Jewish performance. He questions that the rise of Jewish-Zionist hegemony is a product of “merit” or “achievement”. He distinguishes between the mass of Jews who occupy middle or lower middleclass positions in society and those few individuals who have made major contributions. According to Petras, the rise of individuals to economic power through the exploitation of labor, the extraction of rent from tenants and speculation cannot be considered achievement through “merit”. Merit is made up of skills applied to advancing knowledge for the greater good of the whole mankind.

The theorists of Zionists’ “superior race” lump successful Wall Street speculators with innovative scholars as examples of “Jewish superiority” justifying or “explaining” hegemony. Zionist race theories claim a homogenous ‘Jewish’ people bound by common history and horizontal and vertical ties, which overwrites the profound social and even ideological divisions. Jewish-Zionist hegemony in the US is the result of a supra or meta-historical mythology with mystical religious foundations in the Old Testament. The rise of American Zionism is tied to a virulent exclusivist tribal religious loyalty to Israel as the “mother state”. The driving force of US Zionism is the subordination of US civil society organizations and the instrumentalization of the US military and economic resources to service Israeli colonial expansion and projections of power in the Middle East.

The total subjection of the Middle East policy of the United States to the Zionist Power Configuration is a result of the latter’s accumulation of power and political-cultural conditions within the US, which weakened the articulation of alternative values and policies.

The rise of Zionism is a virulent form of tribal-religious identity. They managed to link it to a foreign state. Its successful exercise of hegemony within US society has been facilitated by the abdication by the US ruling class ‘establishment’ of any ‘national’ identity. The power structure surrendered to the Zionist power brokers in the strategic financial and economic sectors of the United States. In this way, the public power was surrendered to the organized private power of the financial structures. The globalization of US capitalism, and the subsequent process of worldwide empire building, has shifted the focus of the US ruling class toward international issues, as the center of its concerns. Thus, the United States favors these foreign points of view even as it intervenes in its own domestic economic policies. This determines the defense measures taken by the Pentagon, as well as the subsidies and bailouts. None of these may trespass on Zionist power configuration priorities.

Going “global” and the emergence of “global consciousness” has worked against challenging the Zionist pursuit of the colonial agenda of the state of Israel. The ZPC has filled a power vacuum left by the globalized world elite and has been able to instill and impose a Zionist conception of US “national interest” relatively uncontested. The rise of the Zionist business elites into the top echelon of investment banking, financial institutions, real estate and insurance enhanced the close cooperation and integration of Zionist and non-Zionist members of the American ruling class. Within this new power structure, one side has a deep and abiding political commitment to Israel, while the other sector gives exclusive primacy to the accumulation of wealth and guaranteeing that state economic policy ensured profits, a deregulated financial sector and bank bailouts.

The two parts of the new power structure shared the advantages between each other. The non-Zionist sectors of the ruling class were not willing or able to engage in a fight with the Zionist financial circles. However, Professor Petras perceives that there are divisions, both in government and within policy advisory bodies, over Zionist control. The 16 major intelligence agencies of the United States issued a report on Iran’s nuclear program in late 2007. The report debunked the Israeli-Zionist claims of an active Iranian nuclear weapons program.

Likewise a Pew Foundation of the Council on Foreign Relations financed a study made in November 2009. The study found that over two-thirds of the CFR members believe the US favored Israel too much. Yet the same percentages claimed Obama is “striking the right balance” but sustained that “Iran is a major threat to US interest”. Since the CFR is a think tank made up of the most reliable members of the power elite, such an opinion could even have some effect. Nevertheless, these two-third opinions within the policy elite have had no impact on Obama’s Israel-friendly line, and the White House continues to promote the ZPC on all major issues connected with Israel. Namely, the ZPC could counterbalance the position of the CFR effectively via its secret contributors built in the Washington Congress and with the collaboration of such Israel-friendly politicians as Hillary Clinton and Stuart Levey.

Levey, as the first Under Secretary within the United States Department of the Treasury, has been the head of financial intelligence since June 2004. By controlling and regulating the financial intelligence, his duty was to fulfil also connected tasks of public order maintenance, so that the different participants and organizations of the international terrorism could not get financial funding. Furthermore, his duty was to hinder the proliferation of the mass destruction weapons, to combat the traffic of drugs, and to prevent that any organization or person threatening the American national security could get financial support. We can state that the Zionist power at the top is uncontested and free to control politically the lower echelons of the political system and class structure for its own interest.

This includes the wholesale purchase of political parties and the financing of congressional politicians on key foreign policy committees, in order to make appropriate decisions in issues that are important for the ZPC. The Israel First Political Action Committees (PAC) promote the selection of Zionist Congress people to key committee posts. Four of the top fifteen Congress people funded by Wall Street super-rich financial leaders are Zionists. Eleven of the top fifteen are Democrats, who receive 60% of their contributions from Zionist multi-millionaire financiers in Los Angeles, New York, and south Florida and other metropolitan centers.

The American political class, party leaders, as well as executive and congress people, have also ignored economic growth based on endogenous resources, which would be in the interest of American working classes. In the meantime, they conduct active interventionist foreign policy in several regions of the world. The political class detaining the power favors military driven empire building. This undermines any enforcement of national interests, democratically supported by the majority of Americans. Moreover, the military nature of world-scale empire building of the United States promotes the Zionist-Israeli projection of regional military power and hegemony. Military-driven imperialism weakens any effort to develop alternative US overseas economic interests and policies, especially with Moslem and Middle East oil countries.

Such a policy – serving America’s real interests – could counterbalance the Zionist Israeli policy, which gives priority to Israel’s military expansion and colonization interests. This servile attitude of the American ruling class has undermined the traditional community moral and solidarity even on the lower levels of the society. Most of the American trade unions are controlled by Zionist functionaries, who managed to channel hundreds of millions of member pension funds and dues into purchasing Israel bonds, rather than building cheap co-operative housing or helping their members’ rise in other way, for example by funding the schooling of their children. Many trade union leaders were bribed with travels on public cost and other benefits, and diverted from the service of the real interests of the community.

In universities, municipal politics, professional associations, Israel Firsters successfully stifled any debate, let alone criticism, which could be critical against Israel. It proved to be detrimental and destructive that the ZPC eliminated debate on possible American democratic foreign policy options in the Middle East. Those who, in any way, may question the Israel First option, are frightened, intimidated and, frequently, even lose their jobs.

Are there any possible alternatives against the Zionist hegemony?

In countries where independent and relatively strong trade unions and other autonomous social and trade organizations are still operating, and where there are such scientific and research teams, which have their own material basis necessary for their autonomy, the civil society is still able to defend itself against the Zionist overpower. The heinous blackballing of critics by Zionists is rejected in these societies. Where internationalist solidarity movements are still strong, there still exists the support for Palestinian resistance to Israeli colonialism. In these countries, the local ZPC organizations have not been able to use their economic power and their hegemony over media to enforce their interests.

There still are remnants of international solidarity among some universities and trade unions in the US, especially the dock and warehouse workers in San Francisco and in other places. According to Petras, the major potential counterweight to Zionist Israel First hegemony in the US would be in a revival of patriotic working class consciousness. America’s “special relation” with Israel has been at an enormous cost to the working class. The foreign aid, loan guarantees given to Israel, the hijacked technological innovations and lost overseas investment opportunities amount to over $1.5 trillion (1012) dollars. This sum does not include the cost of the war in Iraq fought on Israel’s behalf, as well as the inexpressible value represented by the lives of 4,715 American soldiers. This is the official number of those who lost lives in fighting Israel’s war in Iraq. As a further figure, we mention that the number of Iraqi victims amounts to 1,366,350. As their lives are not directly American losses, their data have not been taken into account.

There is a material base for a mass patriotic working people’s revolt against the excessive submission of the entire political class to the ZPC and its patrons in Tel-Aviv. But today tens of millions of Americans are for the moment disillusioned with “patriotic” appeals, whose purpose is to promote imperial wars – including wars for Israel – at the expense of their living standards. Right wing pro-capitalist politicians, clinging to the delusion of the failed money rule capitalism, use patriotic rhetoric to deflect attention from the usury money power – which is an organized private power standing against public interest and public welfare – and from its domestic, society-destroying failures. This also includes how Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street speculators continuously perform massive transfers of wealth and income from the value-creating work to the parasite money capital.

The devaluation of patriotism is evident in that extremely right wing manipulation by the owners of power to turn native born workers against immigrant workers, propagating a kind of perverse nationalism. At the same time, they do not say a word about how costly is the ZPC’s pro-Israel strategy for Americans. This manipulative use of nationalism, in turn, hinders the growth of a national mass movement against the Wall Street speculators looting America, the wars for Israel and the costly global empire expansion.

According to recent surveys, literally less than 5% of the American society even trusts the operation of the financial sector symbolized by Wall Street. The Americans, nevertheless, already managed to denounce Obama’s initial bank bailout plan, forcing a temporary postponement. The national-scale, unorganized mass resentment persists and is smoldering, and, if it reaches an appropriate degree of organization, changes can be expected, which restructure the whole society.

It is worth attention that family and relatives of the Zionist power configuration, who strongly promote US wars for Israel in the Middle East, are rarely to be found in the Armed Forces, least of all at the frontlines. If we exclude non-Zionist Jews – mostly immigrants from the former Eastern Block and USSR – the number of the members of ZPC families participating to war service would be one-thirtieth of one percent of American troops taking part in the war, which means that less than ten of ten thousand American front fighters belong to that ZPC, which imposes these wars on the American state and society.

It is a fact that more American Zionists are more eager to join the Israeli Army than to put on an American uniform, yet Zionists are present in great number in public office, in the Pentagon, executive branch and the White House. These powerful public officers design and promote war policies and military-driven sanctions. As a consequence of their decisions, the members of the American working class are shedding their blood, especially jobless American workers, including many minorities, who, not finding jobs for themselves, are forced to seek employment in the military. It would be difficult to persuade the members of the American working class to shed their blood in a Zionist war, if the still existing leftist forces and the real adepts of peace united. This, nevertheless, was not possible to date, because the left and pacifists were beholden to their Jewish colleagues “sensibilities”, and were reluctant to raise the question: To what extent is the Zionist Israeli influence responsible for promoting US war policies?

Genuine patriotic solidarity, representing the interests and values of the majority of Americans, is weak and is lacking any meaningful recall of the American anti-colonial, anti-slavery, anti-imperialist and anti-fascist identity. In contrast, the organized private power built in the American society – and called “Zionist fifth column” by Petras – is driven by a powerful mythological-tribal race-driven identity, such religious legends, which, through the racial superiority, are deep-rooted even in the sense of secular Jews.

Israeli hegemony is deeply embedded in a Zion-centric cultural universe. Anglo-America’s flaccid intellectuals did not dare to challenge this culture. Their intellectual cowardice is masked with a thin layer of cosmopolitanism. Their intellectual silence and even complicity is intended to “protect the sensitivities” of their Zionist colleagues regarding any forthright critique of Zionist power in America. Professor Petras, sincerely committed to social justice, thinks that only a revived working class movement, which recovers its historical memory of national class solidarity, will be able to fight the real independence for the American society and state. By enforcing the principles of social justice it will be possible to free America from under foreign dictates and to put an end to the Zionist hegemony and Wall Street money rule pillage.

The study written by American Professor James Petras raises several central questions that need to be addressed and answered appropriately by Americans, or they would have impacts on the fate of not only the United States, but of the whole world. At the end of his study, he asks three questions:

Can we oppose Israeli war crimes and expansion and US government support of Israel by confronting the ZPC?

Can we open a debate on US, Middle East policy by fighting Zionist authoritarianism, witch hunts and hate crimes?

Can we discuss and propose a democratic foreign policy, which opposes military intervention, sanctions and economic blockades, by tackling American militarists and Israel’s foreign agents?

If the answer to these questions is affirmative, what can be done? What practical measures can be pursued and supported by Americans? One of the possibilities is to educate the American public about the Obama regime’s charade – of talking peace to the American people while supporting the Israeli war machine; of talking about an evenhanded and just Middle East policy while appointing committed Zionists to top policy positions. The Americans can demand the Justice Department enforce the Foreign Agents Registration Act toward the 51 presidents of major American Jewish Organizations and especially the president of AIPAC.

The Americans should also oppose all dual citizens’ appointments to key policymaking posts. They should demand that Undersecretary of Treasury and Israel Firster Stuart Levey be investigated and prosecuted for gross malfeasance of office for his refusal to investigate the illegal billion-dollar money laundering operations by US Zionists in the funding of illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Stuart Levey should also be prosecuted for his promotion of economic sanctions against trade with Iran. They have cost US workers thousands of jobs and the crippled US economy billions of dollars in lost trade.

Another possibility would be to oppose military and economic aid to Israel, especially when the average per capita income of Israelis exceeds that of 40% of Americans. It should be necessary to demand the end of trade privileges for Israel in light of the US’ multi-billion dollars trade deficit with Israel, which has destroyed tens of thousands of American jobs in industry and services.

They should combat widespread Zionist hate propaganda, organized and publicized by the ZPC, against Muslin Americans and Arab Americans, their cultural foundations and charity institutions.

It is necessary to demystify Zionist claims that the Jews’ ancestral homeland is Israel, rather than North Africa and Central Asia, and that there is no historic basis for the Right of Return.

And lastly maybe the most important: Americans should support the struggle against that money rule class, organized private power, which turns the money accumulated with interest into political power through the most various techniques of corruption. The structural cause of the corruption is the extreme over-enrichment ­of a narrow finance, real estate and insurance billionaire cast, and the consequent excessive concentration and centralization of the political power under their hegemony.

The “divine destiny” of Senator Chuck Schumer

The Democrat senator of New York Charles Ellis “Chuck” Schumer is the third Democrat senator fulfilling the most outstanding position in the Washington Congress. He stated – in an interview given to a New York radio on 1st May 2010 – that he phoned Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff of the White House, and warned him he would “blast” (attack in public) the Administration if the State Department did not back down from its policy condemning Israel’s colonization policy. According to Schumer, there are two sides in the White House. One of them supports Israel in the traditional way, while the other exerts a hard pressure on both Israel and the Palestinians. Schumer said: he and the senators with similar commitment “are pushing hard” to make sure the Israel-friendly side wins and if not they “will have to take it to the next step”.

He completed his statement telling the interviewer that he was Israel’s “guardian” in the Senate, a role given to him by Hashem (God’s orthodox name): “My name as you know, comes from a Hebrew word. It comes from the word shomer, which mean[s] guardian. My ancestors were guardians of the ghetto wall in Chortkov and I believe Hashem, actually, gave me [that] name as one of my roles that is very important in the United States Senate [is] to be a shomer for Israel. I will continue to be that with every bone in my body for of the other is [sic]against me.”

We can cite similar statements from other Jewish American Congressmen as Representatives Jerrold Nadler, Eliot Engel and Anthony Weiner, all belonging to the Zionist Organization of America, and represent a kind of Democratic Party opposition against President Obama. Such a maximal commitment to Israel has a special importance, because more and more news come about that the Israeli leadership still keeps the question of the destruction of Iran’s nuclear sites on agenda, the possibility of the so-called preventive attack.

Senator Joe Lieberman tried to enforce the essential aggravation of the sanctions planned against Iran at President Obama. He expressed his concern about the fact that America does not do everything quickly in order to hold back Iran from the development of nuclear weapons. Lieberman said: “I am convinced that we have arrived to a historical turning point. An Iran detaining nuclear weapons means that the world will be less safe than today, and the threatening of our security is growing day by day. Iran is an extremist power in expansion. No country detaining nuclear weapons like this existed previously. Therefore we must impose severe sanctions quickly. I am convinced that the Congress will soon pass an act on this.”

Senator Lieberman representing the state of Connecticut thinks that this is the last chance for forcing Iran with sanctions to stop its nuclear program, and to let Tehran know that it can expect military counter-actions if it does not do this. Lieberman stressed that he was strongly convinced that it is necessary to prepare for military actions, to stop the Iranian nuclear program, in case Tehran rejects to make it itself.

All this means that the neo-conservative American politicians who represent the interests of Israel and the ZPC would like to persuade the United States to either take itself the steps against Israel, or, if Israel makes the first step, the United States should fully support it. The neo-conservative front men of the ZPC argue that, if Israel itself performed the bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites, the expectable Iranian counter-actions would endanger the lives of many American soldiers in the Middle East region. The argumentation is built on the logic that the Iranians would consider the Israeli attack an attack made by America and so they would exert punitive sanctions against the Americans too. This argumentation must be taken into serious, since General Petraeus, Commander of the U.S. Forces in the Middle East has already said several times that the American armed forces must act taking into account that the United States and Israel is one and the same in the Middle East region.

This is word by word identical with the standpoint of the AIPAC, expressed by one of the speechwriters of Vice-President Joseph Biden in this way: “When the question of security arises, there is simply no distance between the United States and Israel.” Israel and the ZPC put the United States in front of a choice: It either holds back Israel from attacking Iran, or it endangers its own soldiers through the planned Israeli attack. The answer to this of the ZPC’s neo-conservative front men was that the United States must undertake the destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Eliot Abrams said that, according to him, Israel would make a step, and he hoped America would do the same. And Steve Rosen, one of the leaders of AIPAC, argued saying that the majority of Americans supported the use of force against Iran, and that the United States could perform this task more efficiently than Israel. The neo-conservative groups of interest, which have enforced the Iraqi war, think that the new war against Iran is a kind of a world political power game, where it is only important that the other party must be defeated. Being the owners of the institutions of opinion power, they can propagate convincingly that Israel does not do anything wrong, therefore the opinions of those who criticize Israel must be neglected.

The consequences of a military intervention against Iran are incalculable for the moment. According to experts, the destruction of the nuclear facilities, established in underground bunkers dispersed everywhere in Iran, is probably not possible without nuclear devices. And this, in turn, forecasts the danger of a nuclear war, into which many other countries in the region can be involved, i.e. the possibility of a new world war exists. Surely, this would cause the death of quite many people. And all this could be argued primarily with the defense of the security of Israel. This raises the question that the survival of the Jewish people and Israel as the Jewish State is such a morally acceptable universal interest, conforming to the norms of the universal ethic, for which it is worth putting at risk even the outburst of a world war.

Yehezkel Dror: “When survival of the Jewish people is at stake, there’s no place for morals”


The Jewish weekly magazine Forward, issued in America, has an electronic daily newspaper version already for years. On 15th May, 2008, this online newspaper published the article of Professor Yehezkel Dror, Professor Emeritus of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in which the author formulated the thesis in the title and tries to support it with arguments. Professor Dror performed a scientific and training activity in several foreign institutions and universities, among them the Berlin Scientific Centre. He served as a senior consultant on policy-making and planning for the Israeli government and performs research and expertise work for several international organizations, among them the OECD. His opinion is hallmarked by the fact that, being a member of the Club of Rome, many of his writings were considered the official statement of the Club of Rome.

Dror asks the question: When the survival of the Jewish people conflicts with the morals of the Jewish people, is existence worthwhile, or even possible? The position of Dror is that physical existence must come first. No matter how moral a society aspires to be, physical existence must take precedent. If clear external and internal dangers threaten the very existence of Israel as a Jewish state, it is very likely that the collapse of Israel or the loss of its Jewish nature would undermine the existence of the Jewish people as a whole. And even given the existence of a Jewish state, less clear but no less fateful dangers threaten the long-term sustainable existence of the Diaspora.

When the requirements of existence conflict with other values, therefore, realpolitik should be given priority. From the threat of a disastrous conflict with Islamist actors such as Iran, to the necessity of maintaining distinctions between “us” and “others”. By this, it is possible to limit assimilation, which is an unconditioned imperative. Human history refutes the idealistic claim that in order to exist for long, a state, society or people has to be moral. Given the foreseeable realities of the 21st century and beyond, harsh choices are unavoidable, with requirements of existence often contradicting other important values.

Some might argue that putting existence first may be counter-productive in terms of existence itself, because what may be regarded as immoral action can undermine external and internal support essential for existence. However, the calculus of realpolitik gives primacy to existence, leaving limited room for ethical considerations. The unfortunate reality is that the Jewish people may be faced with tragic choices in which important values have to be sacrificed for even more important ones. Responsible decisions in such difficult situations require clear recognition of the involved moral issues, careful pondering of all relevant values and acceptance of responsibility for one’s autonomous judgment. They also demand an effort to reduce to a minimum the violation of moral values.

Nonetheless, when faced with such choices, the Jewish people ought not be captivated by political correctness and other thinking-repressing fashions. The survival of Jewish people must be given primacy to moral concerns. What is required is an a priori pondering of values, so as to have guidelines ready for judgment in specific contexts and under crisis conditions. According to Dror, the overall issue is whether the imperative for the Jewish people to exist is a categorical one overriding nearly all other values, or one among many imperatives of similar standing. Dror’s answer is unambiguous: Taking into account the other moral imperatives, the imperative to assure existence is overriding all others, for four reasons:

First, the Jewish people has an inherent right to exist, just as any other people or civilization.

Second, a people that has been regularly persecuted for 2,000 years is entitled morally, in terms of distributive justice, to be very tough in taking care of its existence, including the moral right and even duty to kill and be killed if this is essential for assuring existence – even at the cost of other values and to other people. This argument is all the more compelling in light of the unprecedented killing only a few decades ago of a third of the Jewish people – mass murder that was supported directly and indirectly, or at least not prevented when possible, by large parts of the civilized world.

Third, given the history of Judaism and the Jewish people, there is a good chance that they will continue to make much-needed ethical contributions to humanity. However, in order to do so they require a stable existence.

Fourth, the State of Israel is the only democratic country whose very existence is endangered by deeply hostile actors, again, without the world taking decisive countermeasures. This justifies – indeed, requires – measures that would be not only unnecessary but also potentially immoral in other circumstances.

The Jewish people should give much more weight to the imperative to assure existence than to other values. There are, of course, limits; nothing can justify initiating genocide. But with the few exceptions where being killed and destroyed is better than transgressing against absolute and total norms, assuring the existence of the Jewish people, including a Jewish State of Israel, should be valued as a top priority.

Jewish leaders should support harsh measures against terrorists who potentially endanger Jews, even at the cost of human rights and humanitarian law. Professor Dror adds to this: if the threat is sufficiently grave, the use of weapons of mass destruction by Israel would be justified if likely to be necessary for assuring the state’s survival, the bitter price of large number of killed innocent civilians notwithstanding. Of course, it must be debated what is really required for existence. Giving priority to the imperative to exist does not imply supporting each and every policy of Israel. Indeed, the opposite is true.

Diaspora leaders, organizations and individuals have a duty to criticize Israeli policies that in their view endanger the Jewish state and the Jewish people’s existence. At the same time, they have the obligation to propose alternative existence-assuring policies. According to Dror, there is no need for endless arguments about the tough and painful practical implications of prioritizing existence. When important for existence, violating the rights of others should be accepted, with regret but with determination. The imperatives of existence should be given priority over other concerns, including liberal and humanitarian values.

Dror is aware of the fact that this tragic but compelling conclusion is not easy to accept, but he finds it essential for the future of the Jewish people. Once the existence of the Jewish people is assured, including basic security for Israel, much can and should be sacrificed for Tikkun Olam, i.e. “repairing the world”.

Professor Dror’s ideas are not convincing – what is more, they should be rejected –, because any other people can acquire the principle that its existence and survival legitimates neglecting universal moral values. If this is acceptable in the interest of one nation, it must be accepted in the interest of another too. This, in turn, means that we can never put an end to the conflicts between nations and to killing wars. If everybody were thinking like Dror and cared only for himself, would commit himself, in fact, to the culture of death. Professor Dror should think over that moral imperative which says “love thy neighbor as thyself” and “do onto others that you would like to be done to yourself”. From this heritage of Jesus, we can draw the consequence that the universal moral imperatives cannot be relativized, and they must be kept as unconditioned moral commandment by the whole mankind, even if the goal can never be wholly reached.



Double standard everywhere

The double standard is a double moral. It is especially obvious in the Jewish nationalism. In most countries and cultures, nationalism has both positive and negative aspects. Its virtue is that it unites people, while its disadvantage is that it turns them against their neighbors. Being exaggerated, it can become such an extremism, which already expressly hurts the human rights and political liberties of others, including also the collective rights. The Jewish nationalism can be considered extremist, and must be opposed, to the extent that its essence includes the confrontation of both religious and secular Jews with the non-Jews (goy). This does not mean that all Jews or all Israelis feel and think in this way. But it means that Israel cannot be different, in our days, from what it is.

There are several essential points in the issue of the Jewish nationalism (Zionism) and other countries and cultures. One of them is that, in the Zionism, the xenophobia, racism, ultra-nationalism and militarism are determining. Secondly, we can mention that the Zionism undermines the citizen’s loyalty towards other countries and nations in its followers. According to some researchers (e.g. Dr. Alan Sabrosky), not even the German national socialists did dare to go as far. A considerable part of the American Jews, even those who are not American-Israeli dual citizens, cultivate the double loyalty, which can even be compared to bigamy. For instance, Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff of the White House, has never been a soldier in the American Army, but fulfilled military service in the Israeli Army. When the war between the United States and Germany broke out, the members of the American-German federations left these organizations and nearly all of them joined the Israeli Army as volunteers.

And thirdly we can mention that the enemies of an average nationalist movement also include the occupants and their allies. Nevertheless, when they manage to win independence, usually normal relations are established with the occupant power. This is different in the case of Zionism, since it considers all outsiders actual or potential enemies, and the only difference between them is whether they are close or far.

As a fourth difference, we can mention that all nationalist movements, including the irredentist and separatist movements, have set the goal of establishing independent states. They want to unite the fractions of nation living separated in this state. It is very rare that a whole people is removed from its original native land. (Nevertheless, it happened several times during the colonization, so also in America, where the native Indians were haunted and exterminated.) These points become important if we examine the possibilities of the peace in the Middle East.

Is it the modern “Samson option”?

Starting from 12 March 2010, several such writings were posted on different internet forums, which cited Martin Karfield, the well-known Israeli military historian, according to whom Israel might get in such a situation in which it would be forced to exterminate the European continent, using its available military force, including even its nuclear weapons, if its unavoidable destruction was approaching. He added to this that Israel also considers Europe a hostile target. The cited statements came in a press interview broadcast by the Israeli Seventh Hebrew Radio and was translated on Wednesday, 10th March 2010 into Arabic by the Press Information Analysis and Study Center. According to the text translated into Arabic, the Israeli historian stated:

“We have hundreds of nuclear warheads and missiles that can reach different targets in the heart of the European continent, including beyond the borders of Rome, the Italian capital,”

Karfeld said, adding that most of the European capitals would become preferred targets for the Israeli air force. The Israeli historian reiterated Israel’s ability to destroy the whole world whenever it felt its existence would be doomed to extinction. As for the Palestinians, the historian said that Israel at the present time pursues a specific strategy based on mass deportation of the Palestinian people and has intentions to expel all Palestinians without exception, but it is awaiting the right moment to take this step. “Two years ago, there was only seven to eight percent of the Israelis believing in this solution towards the Palestinians and just two months ago this percentage rose amongst the Israelis to 33 percent, but today, according to a survey conducted by Gallup institute, this figure surged to 55 percent,” he noted.

The historian highlighted that Israel must take advantage of any incident that would give it a golden opportunity to expel the Palestinians as what happened in Deir Yassin massacre in 1948. Replying to a question whether Israel does not have fears of being classified as a criminal state if it expelled Palestinians, Karfeld said:

“Israel is a state that does not care about what others say about it and you must remember the saying of former defense minister Moshe Dayan when he said that ‘Israel must always act as a wild dog even if it would be seen as dangerous in the eyes of others, rather than be harmed.’”

In the case of the interview with Karfeld, we had to do with a translation made of translations, so we tried to check out the above presented text. First, we had to specify the name of the Israeli historian: his real name is Martin van Creveld. He was the former professor of the Hebrew University and taught or lectured at several Western strategic centres, including the U.S. Navy Academy. Second, we have to mention that the radio station referred to as “Seventh Hebrew” is in fact the “Arutz 7”, which is a station broadcasting only in Hebrew. We could also establish that this interview was made much earlier, and the radio programme in case was in fact the re-broadcasting of an article published in 2003 in the British The Guardian.

And, fourth, we have to mention that Martin van Creveld probably expressed the strategic thinking of the upper level of the Israeli military leadership, and not his own opinion in the interview. In 2003, only a few radio and television stations broadcasted this interview. All he said in it, probably reflected the opinion of the Sharon government at that time. And one must not forget that this interview can be read on the internet and only in the way that they always redirect you to the Palestinian Information Center.

Double standard and the world financial crisis

The double standard applied in practice can be regarded an objectified double moral. In April 2010, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC, brought a charge against the leading financial corporation of the Wall Street, the Goldman Sachs. At the same time, the hearings started in the U.S. Senate. In the leading circles of the Zionist power configuration, the question arose: can that person be considered anti-Semite who criticizes the business practice of Goldman Sachs and takes a strong line against it? Namely, the public opinion considers Goldman Sachs such a powerful Jewish financial institution, which controls the whole financial branch, and that who criticizes Goldman or its owners and managers, in fact attacks the Jewry. Nevertheless, we can interpret this in the way that the financiers of Jewish origin play a leading role in the Wall Street because the intelligence quotient of Ashkenazi Jews is higher than the average Europeans, so Goldman Sachs is Jewish only to this extent.

If a sociological survey shows that nine of ten street crimes are committed by blacks, it is nothing but a fact-finding in America. But, on the other hand, if another sociological survey shows that nine of ten of crimes with securities are committed by persons of Jewish origin, this finding is considered an anti-Semite calumny. It is a fact that the enterprises and financial institutions being in Jewish property or under Jewish control played a determining role in the financial collapse developing between 2007 and 2010. The processes were managed by Jewish financiers, and they drew a record-size profit out of them. The Wall Street and the Goldman Sachs can be criticized, but it is not allowed to mention the fact that Goldman Sachs is a corporation in decisive Jewish property and under Jewish control.

The statements – that already became commonplaces – concerning the Jews and the financial relations are sometimes expressed in a harsher form: the Jews are greedy, they lie, cheat, they detain an unfairly large influence in the state power, which they selfishly and harshly misuse, and so on. These can and must be debated, arguing pro and contra, but it is, nevertheless, reasonable to ask the question: do the decadent phenomena perceivable in the world of money – primarily the lack of moral norms – have anything to do with the Jewish way of life, or, in other words, does the Jewry create, for themselves, such an own culture, which then will be identified with themselves?

Kevin MacDonald (professor of psychology at California State University, Long Beach, who presented his theory on Judaism in three books) sees that this argumentation has two aspects. According to one, the Judaism is such a group strategy for staying alive and getting on in life, the organic part of which has always been the sharp difference between the own community and the other people. Totally separated moral rules are valid for the own community, and essentially others for the outsider groups. As a consequence, the Jewish moral world is a particular one, and it neglects the ethical concerns towards the non-Jews. This attitude, which regards all other people only tools for making profit, strives at the maximal profit not taking into account the consequences, the detrimental effects exerted on the non-Jews.

In the traditional societies, the common characteristic was that the Jews made alliance with those non-Jewish elites who made up the powerful, wealthy layer in the given society. This strategy, serving the successful survival and prosperity, was determining. The Jews were the ideal mediators for all ruling elites, living on others’ work. The interests of the Jews – since they formed a genetically consciously separated group – considerably differ from the interests of those who were exploited by the ruling elites. The mediators manifest maximal loyalty towards the rulers, and hardly take into account the interests of the lower ones, those in a disadvantageous situation. They regard them as tools suitable for making profit, who can be used together with the other inhabitants of the given territory.

The other aspect of the argumentation shows out that the double moral is prevailing in the Jewish attitude, and it is present everywhere in the basic documents of Jewish popular traditions, culture and religion. In the long history of anti-Semitic attitude, an outstanding role has always been played by the accusation that the Jews are in fact xenophobes, and are too likely to exploit the non-Jews. Tacitus, the Roman historian, wrote about the Jews: “among themselves they are inflexibly honest and ever ready to show compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies”. Immanuel Kant, Werner Sombart, Heinrich Graetz, Max Weber, Theodor Herzl and Edward A. Ross have also stated that the Jews generally apply different moral rules for themselves and for the non-Jews.

In the respect of the financial crimes with serious consequences, committed by the Jewish financiers of Wall Street, the key problem is how the other American Jewish communities relate to them. It is a fact that they do not distance themselves from these successful swindlers, but, on the contrary, they are proud of them. They consider them the main financial supporters of the Jewish communities. They judge the so-called white-collar criminality totally differently from the other crimes. Michael Milken, who made billions by speculating with so-called junk bonds, is surrounded with great respect, because he makes generous donations for Jewish programs. Ivan Boesky, who was also sentenced, donated twenty million dollars to the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary. Mark Rich supported with many millions the Birthright Israel program, the goal of which is the strengthening of the Jewish identity among Jewish youths.

The real problem is that the Jewish financial elite regards the non-Jewish world only a tool, which can be maximally used – by neglecting all moral barriers – for obtaining the highest possible profit. This is why that opinion appeared in a part of the American social researchers, according to which the financial elite behaved like an organized criminal gang, and not as a leading group bearing responsibility for the whole of the society. This elite did not take into account the long-term interests of the American people. The organized crime originates from the lower levels of the society, but the financial collapse was caused, on the contrary, by the groups of interest at the top of the social elites. The biggest financial corporations, banks of investment and credit rating institutions cooperate closely with those state institutions, which, on one hand, neglected to regulate and control appropriately the operation of the money system, while, on the other hand, they bailed out the financial collapse caused by speculation from public money, at the expense of taxpayers.

Kevin MacDonald doubts that a financial elite made up from only WASPs would also manifest the same attitude. According to MacDonald, the Jewish financiers who caused the crisis had a condemnable, antisocial attitude towards the non-Jewish world. They did not take into account the moral and existential consequences of their financial frauds. They did not feel sympathy or worry for their victims. MacDonald, who dealt with socio-psychology, points out that, according to the recent results of neurology, human beings are capable of a high degree identification and sympathy towards the members of their own group, while they did not show any sign of sympathy for outsiders. This is especially valid for those who are highly ethnocentric, i.e. they place their own people or nation above all.

In this way, a person having a deep-rooted Jewish conscience can be so cold and selfish, who is a member manifesting an exemplary community attitude in his social group consisting of Jews, and who is not tormented by bad conscience or by living through the fate of the victims. Such a person does not care either about the long-term interests of the society in which he lives. The changing of times is marked by the fact that, when the investigation started against Goldman Sachs, it was already possible to ask Lloyd Blankfein, the president of Goldman, before the publicity of CNBC, whether the financial and economic activity of the Wall Street is good for America and serves the public welfare.

In the Rolling Stones magazine, Matt Taibbi compared the world’s biggest bank of investment, the Goldman Sachs to a “great vampire squid”, which is “wrapped around the face of humanity”. The “thought police” of the ZPC immediately qualified him an anti-Semite. He was blamed for having surpassed the usual commonplaces on Jews and money, and reviving such anti-Semite accusation going back to the antiquity, according to which the Jews, forming an alien and antihuman group, poison the mankind and the society. The economic parasitism is also an anti-Semite accusation tracing back to old times. According to this, the financial sector does not produce real values, goods and services that are important for the satisfaction of human needs, it only withdraws the results of others’ work, piles up the values produced by others, and it takes part only in their re-distribution at most.

MacDonald does not agree with those who try to refute that the behavior of the Jewish financial elite fits in the historical pattern of the Jewish ethic. According to MacDonald, the Jewish ethical code has always contained the different moral norms and forms of behavior applied towards the non-Jews. The application of a different moral measure is built in deep also in the Jewish religious traditions. The income of the financial sector being under Jewish dominance surpasses, to a great extent, the incomes of the others who work in other sectors of the economy. The financial and economic resources are gradually accumulated at such groups of interest, which have an antisocial attitude against the non-Jew America and the non-Jew inhabitants of the world.

Bernard Lazare (1865–1903), a Jewish public personality in the 19th century, stressed that it is necessary to break with the view concerning which the Jews are not responsible for what is happening with them. Lazare thought that the anti-Semitism, no matter what form it might take, in fact, can be considered a response to the Jewish exclusiveness and excluding attitude. The Jewish communities – reaching back to antiquity – managed again and again to gain power and influence within the Western societies. Their ethnocentric behavior, well-known high intelligence and expertise in financial issues contributed to this. All this let some of them get wealth and power. In their success, an important role was played by their moral separation, the application of the double moral and double measure, as well as their ability to cluster into well-organized groups excluding others and based upon authority, keeping alive the feeling of continuous threatenedness.

The present-day money rule world order is getting close to its end. According to our hopes, its place will be taken by the harmonic world order, and one of the preconditions of this is the definitive termination of the conflict between Jews and non-Jews. The first step towards it is to keep the rules of the universal moral that cannot be relativized, as well as to put an end, by everyone, to the practice of the double moral and double measure.

To what extent can the world financial crisis be linked to an ethnic group?

David Rothkopf, who is the researcher of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and, besides this, member of the managing boards of several distinguished institutions, published a book titled Superclass recently, in which examines closely the global power elite and the world system controlled by them. He asserts that approximately six thousand people belong to this global elite, who are the owners, directors and managers of the biggest financial institutions and corporations. Their decisions affect the lives of nearly all human beings. World fame is not enough for somebody to be a member of this chosen group. Politicians like Gorbachev or Blair were temporarily members of it, but are not any more. On the other hand, Henry Kissinger and Bill Clinton still belong to these six thousand chosen.

The world order created and controlled by them is extremely unequal and unstable. The time has come for the New York super-bankers and the lords of the City of London, accounted as the centre of the money empire, to realize: they cannot do with the world what they did so far. One of the distinguished members of this elite was Peter Sutherland. He belongs to those who are suitable for nearly all leading tasks, are extremely multilateral and flexible, i.e. “flexians”. Well, Peter Sutherland was the Chairman of British Petroleum company between 1997 and 2009. He is also the non-executive Chairman of the Goldman Sachs International since 1995. In 2008, he fulfilled the position of the Chairman of the London School of Economics Council, the top tier university of the money empire. Previously, he was the founding General Director of the World Trade Organization, and, since July 1993, he was the General Director of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. He was Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Maastricht-based European Institute of Public Administration from 1991 to 1996.

In 2009, Sutherland resigned from his position as the Chairman of British Petroleum, but he still fulfils many influential functions. As we have already mentioned, he was the non-executive Chairman of the Goldman Sachs International (a subsidiary of the Goldman Sachs Group), and the chief advisor of the Goldman Sachs Group. That we have here a polyhistor “flexian” with extraordinary abilities is shown by the fact that he is the Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission. As a member of the steering committee, he attended the conferences of the Bilderberg Group several times, and he is the chief financial advisor of the Vatican. Peter Sutherland, nevertheless, already was the Attorney General of Ireland, and, in Brussels, as a member of the European Commission, accounted as the government of the European Integration, responsible for competition policy between 1985 and 1989. Between 1989 and 1993, he was the Chairman of the Allied Irish Bank. He worked as a manager for the Swedish Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, and, since January 2010, he is the member of the steering committee of the EU share company Allianz SE. Here we stop listing, though we could still continue. Nevertheless, even all this is enough to prove that the altogether six thousand persons belonging to the global elite are not average people, but detain special power and influence.

When, in May and June 2010, it became possible that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Senate would make the leaders of Goldman Sachs responsible for high amount financial frauds, this, according to observers, caused a perceptible worry in the district of New York inhabited by Americans of Jewish origin. This attracted also the attention of public opinion. In that time, several distinguished papers have also dealt with the question: to what extent can the attitude of Wall Street leading businessmen and bankers be connected with the fact that they are Jews or have Jewish origin? For some columnists, the question was not whether the negative characteristics of the Jewish bankers or the condemnable behavior of such enterprises being in well-known Jewish property like the Goldman Sachs can be brought in connection with the fact that these bankers and businessmen are of Jewish origin, and they behave according to the Jewish customs and traditions. For them, the question was whether the person who criticizes Goldman Sachs or refers to the reproachable methods of this super bank house is anti-Semite or not?

In America, in the 1980-ies, one of the biggest financial scandals is linked to the name of Michael Milken. It was him who speculated with high-yield securities called “junk bonds” on the money market. In 1989, Milken was indicted with 89 charges including racketeering, securities fraud and insider trading. Within a plea bargain, he pleaded guilty to six charges, for which he was sentenced to ten years in prison and, in addition, the SEC permanently banned him from the securities industry. Finally, Milken was released after serving only less than two years in prison.

Milken, nicknamed “The Junk Bond King”, traded with such bonds, which have several names in English. All of them refer to such securities, which are classified, at purchase, as unfit for investment by debt rating specialists. They are not suitable for investment because they are exposed to the most different risks. Nevertheless, with the help of junk bonds, Milken amassed a personal fortune amounting to more than two billion dollars, and in 2007 he was marked as the 458th richest man in the world by the Forbes magazine.

Pulitzer Prize winner James Stewart, in his documentary book Den of Thieves published in 1992, revealed in detail how the insider trading spread since 1982, and how it was used by such unscrupulous speculators like Ivan Boesky, the already mentioned Michael Milken, Martin Siegel, Dennis Levine, Robert Freeman, Richard Wighton, Timothy Tabor, John A. Mulheren, Lowell Milken, Robert Wilkis and other similar Wall Street financiers. Stewart informs the public opinion about those carefully masked, almost mystical financial manipulations, which, finally, climaxed in the 1987 financial collapse. Milken, Boesky and company served as an example for the investors in Enron, Tyco and Adelphia, who tried to overcome even their masters in the unscrupulous acquisition and market manipulation.

It is well-known that the IQ of the Ashkenazi Jew population is higher than that of the average Europeans. This can have the conclusion that, if those of Jewish origin play a dominant role in a certain occupation, for instance mathematics, this is, among others, due to the fact that their higher IQ make them more suitable for it. When the large-scale financial scandals burst out, and it became public that the overwhelming majority of the key persons taking part in them were of Jewish origin, the question was raised: is this related somehow to their origin? James Stewart thought it was, for what he was severely attacked and his book was qualified anti-Semitic. For the anti-Semitic accusation, it was already enough that he frequently mentioned Jewish names. Some argued in the debate as follows:

“If we show that nine of ten street crimes are committed by blacks, it is nothing but a sociological fact-finding worth the attention. But, on the other hand, if we show that nine of ten persons accused of crimes with securities are Jews, this is considered an anti-Semite calumny. Though it is difficult to see any essential difference.”

Michael Kinsley, who graduated from Harvard, was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship, and, among others, was American Editor of The Economist, was the founding editor-in-chief of the online magazine started in 2010. It included The Occidental Observer Blog, in the May 2, 2010 issue of which we can read Michael Kinsley’s article. In it, he analyzed in detail how the collapse of the international money system is judged from Jewish point of view.

In his article “How to Think About: Jewish Bankers”, Kinsley admits that the Jews play a key role on Wall Street, and finds it is all right if somebody criticizes a Jewish financial institution like Goldman Sachs. But only to the extent that he does not mention that the Jewish order of values, the belonging to the Jewry is related to any extent with how the Wall street and Goldman Sachs operate.

Kingsley writes in this article:

“Sometimes the stereotype about Jews and money takes a harsher form: Jews are greedy, they lie, cheat and steal for money, they have undue influence with the government, which they cultivate and exploit ruthlessly, and so on. In recent weeks, many have said this sort of thing about Goldman Sachs, but with no reference to Jews. Are they all anti-Semites? No. It ought to be possible to criticize Goldman in the harshest possible terms – if you think that’s warranted – without being tarred as an anti-Semite.”

So, it is possible to argue that the bad habits and condemnable forms of behavior have something to do with being a Jew. The wider approach is that essence of the Jewish existence includes the creation of a specific culture. Kevin MacDonald, professor of psychology at California State University, Long Beach, author of the world-famous three-volume work The Culture of Critique (1994, 1998, 2002), sees that this argumentation has two important parts. His first remark is that the Judaism, as a group strategy for staying alive and getting on in life, has always contained the sharp difference between those within and those outside the group, as a determining element of the Jewish way of thinking. They applied totally separated moral rules within and those outside the group. As a consequence, the Jewish moral universe became a particular one, the ethical attitude towards the non-Jews turned expedient and was connected to practical efficiency.

Its goal is to maximize the personal profit without any moral scruples. The neglecting of moral concerns exerted an important effect on the non-Jews. For instance, in the traditional societies, it was an accepted pattern that the Jews made alliance with those non-Jewish elites who also lived on others’ work. In this practice, the assurance of the unstopped, continuous development can certainly be perceived. The Jews were the ideal mediators between all exploiting elites, exactly because their interests – being a genetically consciously separated group – considerably differed from the interests of the exploited population. From such individuals, it is expectable to manifest maximal loyalty towards the rulers and minimal scruples, when they regard human beings only as tools for reaching their goals, including their exploitation.

The second remark of MacDonald is that it must be shown to what extent this double moral is reflected in the attitude of the Jews, which is present everywhere in the Jewish religious scriptures. In the long history of anti-Semitic attitude, an outstanding role has always been played by the accusation that the Jews are in fact misanthropes, who have negative personal characteristics and are too likely to exploit the non-Jews. He cites Tacitus, the Roman historian, according to whom Jews “among themselves are inflexibly honest and ever ready to show compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies”.

He refers to German philosopher Immanuel Kant, according to whom “the Jews are a nation of usurers (…) who are duping the people among whom they found refuge, (…) who made the formula ‘Let the buyer beware’ the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us.”

He also cites from Werner Sombart, the distinguished German sociologist and economic historian: “With Jews [a Jew] will scrupulously see to it that he has just weights and a just measure; but as for his dealings with non-Jews, his conscience will be at ease even though he may obtain an unfair advantage.”

Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz wrote: “He [the Polish Jew] took a delight in cheating and overreaching, which gave him a sort of joy of victory. But his own people he could not treat in this way: they were as knowing as he. It was the non-Jew who, to his loss, felt the consequences of the Talmudically trained mind of the Polish Jew.”

German sociologist Max Weber put it in a more sophisticated way: “As a pariah people, [Jews] retained the double standard of morals which is characteristic of primordial economic practice in all communities: What is prohibited in relation to one’s brothers is permitted in relation to strangers.”

Theodor Herzl, one of the founders and leaders of Zionism, wrote: “Anti-Semitism was a natural response to the Jewish faults, which, ultimately, led to the persecution of Jews by the non-Jews: The Jews were called ‘leeches’ who ‘own a tremendous financial power’; they were ‘the money-worshippers who were not able to understand that a man can act motivated by something else than money’.”

And, finally, we quote the opinion of Edward A. Ross: “The authorities complain that the East European Hebrews feel no reverence for law as such and are willing to break any ordinance they find in their way. (…) The insurance companies scan a Jewish fire risk more closely than any other. Credit men say the Jewish merchant is often ‘slippery’ and will ‘fail’ in order to get rid of his debts. For lying the immigrant has a very bad reputation. In the North End of Boston the readiness of the Jews to commit perjury has passed into a proverb.”

It is worth the attention that swindling and fraud has a certain legitimacy within the Jewish community. The successful swindlers do not deny this, but, on the contrary, they are the main financial supporters of the given Jewish communities. For instance, Michael Milken is a member of the Jewish community of Los Angeles, surrounded with great respect, because he makes generous donations for Jewish programs. Ivan Boesky donated twenty million dollars to the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary. Mark Rich also spent many millions on a series of Jewish community issues, including the generous support of the Birthright Israel program, the goal of which is the strengthening of the Jewish conscience and the identification with Jewry among Jewish youths. The list of those persons who persuader Bill Clinton, in the last hours of his presidency, to grant amnesty to Mark Rich, can be regarded the “Who’s Who?” of the Israeli society and of Jewish charity.

There is a strong opinion that the Jewish financial elite regards the non-Jewish world only a tool for obtaining the highest possible profit, and is totally neglecting all moral barriers. Others put it in the way that the financial elite behaved much more like an organized criminal gang, and not as a community of responsible citizens, the members of which are committed to the long-term survival of the society. The perpetrators of the organized crime usually originate from the lower social classes. While the financial collapse was caused by the groups living at the top of the society. The cooperation between the super-rich financial corporations, credit rating agencies and trustees placed in the government made it possible to bailout the hazardous elite from public money and to avoid the real fact-finding and to call the responsible to account. It is doubtful that all this would have happened exactly in the same way if the control of the governmental and financial sphere had been in the hands of the WASPs fulfilling previously the role of the power elite in the United States.

Kevin MacDonald thinks that, using socio-psychological terms, the way the Jews behave with the non-Jews can be qualified as sociopathy. The sociopath personality can integrate into the society with difficulty, and, in a certain respect, his psychic orientation and behavior differs from the attitude qualified normal of average people. Certain groups of the Wall Street super-rich financiers did not care about the moral consequences of their hazardous deals. They did not feel sympathy for those who were stricken by these consequences. Modern neurology has shown that those people who are quite capable of sympathizing with those fellow humans with whom they belong to the same ethnic or social group, but they are not capable of the same empathy, sympathy for outsiders. This is especially valid for those who are highly ethnocentric.

As a consequence, a Jew with a strong identity can be an example of a man with a community feeling and thinking with solidarity, if he is within his own group, and the same person can behave with cold-bloodedness and coldness towards outsiders, without feeling the least remorse or empathy towards the victims. From all this, it is obvious that he does not any responsibility for the long-term future of the society in which he lives.

All this can be marked well by the fact that, when Lloyd Blankfein, the first man of Goldman Sachs, was asked, in a nationally broadcasted TV-programme, whether the existence of Wall Street, taking everything into account, is good for America or not. Does it do anything that has a positive social effect? Blankfein could not give a convincing answer to this. The characterization of Goldman Sachs by Matt Taibbi has nearly become a proverb: “The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.”

The “thought police”, which has greater and greater influence, immediately qualified this analogy of the Rolling Stones columnist as anti-Semite. They said: “This sentence surpassed all usual commonplaces on Jews and money, and connects to other classical anti-Semite topics, according to which the Jews, forming an alien and antihuman group, poison the mankind and the society, and, to a certain extent, even refers to the ill-famed blood accusation, according to which the Jews had the habit to suck out the blood of Christian infants to prepare matzos from it.”

He reminds of the quite common view according to which the financial sector does not take part in the production of value-bearing goods and services, but only in their distribution, and, thus, in fact it takes away wealth from the whole of the society. The economic parasitism is an accusation against the behavior of the Jews looking well back to the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, it is a fact that the financial sector being under Jewish control has totally subordinated the real economy and has actually drawn its income to itself.

Can it be proved that the behavior of the present-day Jewish financial elite is connected to the ethnic attitude of Jewry to the non-Jewish communities in the history? This question was tried to be answered by Albert Lindemann in his work Esau’s Tears issued in 1997. Lindemann’s thesis is that modern European anti-Semitism is closely linked to the “rise of the Jews”. The cultural, political, and economic power of Jews developed in the nineteenth century. Consequently, the real conflicts of interest between groups had a determining role from the point of anti-Semitism. Anti-Semites often exaggerate Jewish behavior, and occasionally even invent it.

Nevertheless, Lindemann challenges the still common view that anti-Semitism is nothing more than the fundamentally irrational residues of Christian religious ideology or the psychological projections of inadequate personalities. He investigates this question in detail in Austria, England, France, Germany, Romania, Russia, and the United States. His attempt is to find commonalities and differences. From among all these countries, it is worth examining first the situation of Jews in Russia. Lindemann notes that Jews were highly resistant to attempts by the tsarist government to russify them. They remained a nation apart in dress, language, diet, and by keeping the rules of their own community strictly.

The Russian authorities believed that Jews exploited the peasants economically and corrupted them with alcohol, exerting a destructive effect on the peasant community. At the same time, tsarist oppression of Jews was far less severe than usually depicted. Jews could own land, engage in commerce, and attend universities. Nor were Jews the only group subject to restrictions and under suspicion by the authorities. The requirement to serve in the military reflected a suspension of a peculiar Jewish privilege.

Most Jews were restricted to the Pale of Settlement, an area established for them by the tsarist government, but this area was larger than France or Spain, and forty times the area of modern Israel. As a consequence of the liberalization of restrictions concerning the settlement and movement of Jews in the 1860s and 1870s, many economically successful Jews left the area. The impoverished Jews remained there, who, because of their severe Jewish religious laws, avoided certain economic activities. Nevertheless, it is a fact that the vast majority of Jews were much more upwardly mobile than other groups in Russia. Their success placed them in competition with other groups that exerted pressures to control the numbers of Jews in business and the liberal professions.

According to historians such as Simon Dubnow, anti-Jewish pogroms were spontaneous uprisings in opposition to the developing Jewish economic domination. Indeed, the government abhorred outbreaks of mass violence as a sign of popular discontent and in some areas was quite effective at preventing it. The government’s response to the pogroms of 1881 was to place limits on Jewish economic activities in order to protect the peasants. It imposed quotas of around 10 percent on Jewish admission to universities. The result was that Jewish emigration to the West intensified. Following the Kishinev pogrom of 1904, the Jewish participants and organizations both in Russia and the West already played a determining role.

Jews within Russia radicalized and increasingly turned to revolutionary socialism because they believed they could reach their political and economic aspirations most effectively in this way. The already effectively operating international money cartel and the Jewish banking dynasties playing a leading role within it financed the Jewish organizations. Jewish money power was widely regarded by the Russian government as directed at undermining Russia and the tsar. For example, Jacob Schiff financed Japan’s war against Russia. This is partly connected with the fact that the Romanovs hurried to help President Lincoln during the American Civil War, and the Russian Fleet in the Pacific sailed to San Francisco, while the Baltic Fleet to New York.

In our days, it is already a proven historical fact that the war between North and South in America was fomented by the money power over the nations. The South was financed by the Paris Rothschilds, while the North by the London Rothschilds. This war was necessary because the international bankers could not draw the money system of the United States under their control, and they thought they would create two states of equal power and hold both of them in check with each other. If they duly indebt both of them, the transnational money cartel controlled by the House of Rothschild can apply the same policy of power balance also in America, which they successfully tried out in Europe. In World War I, the world Jewry – especially the organized Jewry – did not show much willingness to defend Russia, and regarded Germany a more tolerant state, more acceptable for them.

The most aggressive form of twentieth-century anti-Semitism emerged in Germany, but Hitler and the Hitlerism, as a political factor deemed to win power, in fact, was born in Versailles, where, in turn, the international money cartel and the freemasons in its service played the key role. One of the motors of Hitlerism has been the belief that Jews were instrumental to the success of the Bolshevik revolution. On page 429 of his book Esau’s Tears, Albert Lindemann notes that “citing the absolute numbers of Jews, or their percentage of the whole, fails to recognize certain key if intangible factors: the assertiveness and often dazzling verbal skills of Jewish Bolsheviks, their energy, and their strength of conviction”

This comment fits well with the general tendency for Jews to be highly successful in a wide range of areas requiring high intelligence, conscientiousness, and personal ambition. Jews who became radicals retained their high IQ, their ambitiousness, their persistence, their work ethic, and their ability to organize and participate in cohesive, highly committed groups. Jewish Bolsheviks retained their Jewish identities, and this was obvious also in the conflict between Stalin and Trotsky. In Russia, there were several leading personalities who were not Jews or of Jewish origin, but who respected and imitated the Jews, and established intimate friendships with them.

Lindemann also notes that Jews were also highly overrepresented as leaders among the other communist governments in Eastern Europe as well as in communist revolutionary movements. It was so also in Germany and Austria from 1918 to 1923. He also discusses the biological moment of Judaism. Jewish communities, if possible, prevent intermarriage. The converts have a lower status, and Judaism is generally not interested in proselytism. Otherwise, Lindemann is convinced that Judaism is much more an ethnic group than a religion. He labels the practice of Judaism “protoracism” and suggests that it contributed in vague, often contradictory ways to modern racism, especially to its concern with racial exclusiveness and purity.

Racialist thinking, i.e. keeping account the racial origin, was typical of the nineteenth century generally. Among Jews racialist thinking can be found throughout the Jewish intellectual spectrum. It was common among Zionists and typfied several prominent Jewish intellectuals, such as Heinrich Graetz and Moses Hess. There was some fantasy involved in anti-Semitic beliefs about Jews, but the nineteenth-century anti-Semitic idea that Jews regarded themselves as a superior race was also based on real Jewish behavior, attitudes and experience. Lindemann states that Jews actually do not want to understand their past – or at least those aspects of their past that have to do with the hatred directed at them, since understanding may threaten other elements of their complex and often contradictory identities.

On page 535 of his book, he notes that especially in popular history, a strong tendency exists to favor an emotionally laden description and narrative, especially of colorful, dramatic, or violent episodes, over explanation that employs calm analysis or a searching attention to historical context. Murders, arsons, and rapes are described with moral fervor, rhetorical flair, and considerable attention to the details, but background, context, and motives are often slighted or dealt with in a remarkably thin and tendentious fashion. Lindemann considers that this impassioned, moralistic rhetoric and simplistic analysis is to be found in Robert Wistrich’s Anti-Semitism: The Longest Hatred and in the writings of Holocaust historians Lucy Dawidowicz and Daniel J. Goldhagen. He detects in Lindemann a certain incomprehension regarding the powerful need among Jews to remain a people apart even in the globalizing contemporary world. Modern anti-Semitism is fundamentally rooted in real conflict between ethnic groups and that it has resulted in tragical intrasocietal animosity.

Lindemann asks the question on page 543 of his book:

“What is the utility of meaning of Jewish survival in modern times to a modern, secular consciousness? (…) How can Jewish survival be considered any more important than, say, the survival of Wends, Byelo-Russians, Chechens, or Croats. In the context of a multicultural society such as the United States, why should a Jewish ethnicity or cultural style resist blending and “disappearing” any more or any longer than the cultural styles of the Germans, Swedes or Irish? Intermarriage and assimilation have occurred and are occurring in most other communities, but do prominent Armenian-American or Japanese-American leaders publicly address the issues with such terms as “bloodless Holocaust” and “candy-coated poison”? (…) The leaders of Jewish communities seem to believe that the question of the Jewish ethnicity is fundamentally different from the other groups. This is when the Jewish attitude is getting close to ethnic chauvinism.”

These questions are particularly relevant because Jewish power and influence are quite high in the contemporary world, particularly in the United States. And there is no question that official American Judaism is becoming more traditionally separatist in its focus and more concerned to prevent intermarriage. Multicultural societies characterized by ethnic chauvinism and conflicts of interest among their constituent groups cannot survive long without the intense intrasocietal hatreds and animosities that have been the consistent consequence of the rise of a powerful Judaism in Western societies.

In his article titled A Revisionist View of Anti-Semitism, Kevin M