NWO Monetary System

Post Reply New Topic

I will state again, I am not confusing posters. Nothing in my first post in this thread was directed at you. Perhaps it could be applied to you in a roundabout way, but I see you as somewhat more involved and aware than mmstick, so that, while I still disagree with you on a number of topics, I did not see a need to comment on anything you said so far in this thread.

I reject the notion of being evangelical because my opinions are not set in stone, I am willing to change my opinions based on new information. Where I am at now is merely the result of the information I have had access to. If something new comes up, I will reflect that in my views. I am actually rather open-minded and can accept multiple possibilities. This is quite the opposite from someone who is evangelical.

then don't quote me under the title of 'mmstick' - it's pretty simple.

I'm glad you keep an open mind - that surely by implication would mean that you won't shut yourself off from new data contradicting your new found POV - you won't now find it an anathema because you have 'acquired real knowledge of the world'

Such as the veritable mountain of verifiable proof that there was foreknowledge and massive profiteering of the 911 operation before the event, for example.

No the BoG is independent from the shareholders and appointed in political process:





But this is a general US-issue: Vested in the way the higher ranks of the civil service are recruited. In Europe the most civil servant start their career in the civil services directly after leaving university or been educated in special schools dedicated for the training of civil servants. The higher ranks are appointed out of this circle. Normally you neither enter the civil service later into a high ranking position, nor you leave this service (there always exceptions, but exception). The central banking system in Europe is here also no exception. I do not want to discuss the benefits and shortcomings of such a system, but the USA never developed such such caste of civil servants. Therefore the important positions with the FED are appointed from the private sector, which is here the banking industry.




The problem is here that we have this FIAT-money and going back to the gold standard would do much more harm than good. So this enormous power exists. I just don't trust politicians - neither in their skills nor in their long term planing - to handle this power reasonably. So it is IMHO better to have this power vested in something outside the political realm.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who capitalises FIAT (no pun intended) - I was told here that doing so was in error

...but you would invest trust in the banking cartels??

Neither: This also dangerous. Therefore I think a kind of international central bank, established via a treaty without the possibility that an amendment could be done without agreement of all (in practical terms unlikely), setting up clear structures and goals would be on the long run the best way to keep money out of influences.

Sounds like a Marxist variant. I think it would be nevertheless prone to fallibility and corruption - and with it being the veritable central hub that could be very dangerous too.

I think I favour complete decentralisation but I am not well versed enough in the mechanisms of banking as yet to be able to confirm that as my integral position.

It interests me that a key internationalist like Mandel towards the end of his life expressed, to much derision from the 4th international, a belief in variant systems having the ability to find cohesion and the dangers of putting 'all eggs in one basket'

Not a LOGICAL FALLACY!! ! Concenik, if you are going to use a term, use it properly for goodness sake!


Umm... how many actually speak out though? Not only that, but wouldn't we see a large amount of people speaking out if they had tenure? Not only that, but your theory of "prevailing discourse" still seems to suggest that the idea of the NWO isn't as clear cut as you like to put it. After all, the arguments used for a NWO are beneath an undergraduate level education, but you say that your theory is better than most academics. Not only that, but even academics that oppose the federal reserve and are anarchists are usually not known for peddling these conspiracy theories.

Well, the thing is that you are saying that your idea is much much better than the ideas of a large majority of the experts, and the claims made are so broad and sweeping as well that if they are true based upon the arguments made, then you would think that it would be obvious. As you are arguing that an intentional force is behind most of the problems in today's world using unhidden properties of systems that a lot of these people are familiar with, some even deeply familiar with, as academics often times are working for the Federal Reserve, so it seems to me that you are arguing that a lot of people must not have good conscience.

Not really. There are ideas of unification and globalization coming into power already.

are you now moving on from logical fallacy - which it indeed was - as your causality was askew! - to ad hominem ??

As much as you may wish and seek at this point to inculcate the reader with the idea that I present 'my theory' as being 'better' than 'most academics' it is simply just an indirect attempt to undermine, clearly*shrugs* I was expecting more from your reputation tbh. I haven't actually forwarded a 'theory' as much as you seem intent on pigeon holing me to one, no doubt stemming from your own perceptions of what I am saying ( relativelt fair enough)or stereotyping of the 'conspiracy theorist'.(not fair enough)

I know plenty of ageing life long anarchists, as it goes, many of whom that do understand and subscribe to the idea that we are seeing an orchestrated transition of wealth being coralled yet further into the hands of ever limiting group of super rich. I don't see why you need to claim it as the 'below undergraduate' 'peddling' of ideas. Even admirers of Murray Bookchin's ideas amongst them!

just because it's not obvious to you doesn't mean it's not obvious.. I never spoke of an 'international force' - I'm more aligned to the idea of a super strata of factions that yes do not have 'good conscience' - in fact, I'd go as far as to say the sang froid - the psychopath invariably finds top position in this little game we have constructed around ourselves.

In terms of tenure - tell it to Finkelstein'

Last edited by Concenik on 14 Apr 2009, 10:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I didn't make an argument about the "real world". I made an argument about economics. Not only that, but your appeal to the "real world" isn't an argument. It is an assertion.


The mechanisms I propose as functional aren't likely to fail that dramatically. Not only that, but frankly, we haven't been on the printing presses as much as either of them were. Not only that, but if we were on the printing presses that much, then why aren't any economists complaining about the destruction of our society? Lessons were learned, but that does not mean that money cannot be created.


The simple reality? The simple reality that a small group of people on this planet control every single damn thing in existence, and are using it to enslave us through these powers that apparently nobody notices, except for a small group of people who are, interestingly enough, unversed in the economic theory that they are criticizing and who only engage in youtube propaganda? Wow!! ! I am so freaking ignorant, how could I not see this! Are there lizards in this secret cabal?

I already made my argument, your counter-argument was a vague appeal to "compartmentalization", and a claim that the academic community is relatively stupid, and blinded by other theories, rather than persuaded by terrible youtube videos(imagine that!). You can say that you do not "bow" to the "ivory tower", but it is hard to argue that a theory about a secret cabal that nobody has seen is less ivory tower, heck, it is beyond ivory and is rather the white cloud for how substantive the idea is.


Quantitative easing? It is an attempt to get out of a recessionary period. It is a relatively extreme measure, and part of the issue is that current monetary theory wasn't ideal.


Oh no! I have been attacked by many vicious links.

Let's see, goldbuggery. (If the economy collapses, wouldn't this be bad for the NWO because it would decrease economic productivity that would be useful for their activities, or are we to assume that the NWO has progressed beyond such trivial things and has higher aims? If so, how do we expect to predict their behavior? Just say that every pre-existing behavior is caused by the NWO, just as God caused the sun to rise and set to old religious peoples?)
I don't see what the second link really says, as it says that the US is doing better recently, while one rather extreme CEO cites a ratio without much in depth analysis.
I don't see how the US dollar being ditched has much to do with the NWO or anything like that.
China is now avoiding risk? Ok.....
A bunch of charts, cool.

Not much there of interest.

Causality depends on the premises I was using. You are arguing that one of my premises was wrong. That is a completely different issue as there is no "compartmentalization fallacy"(if so, you could have already provided a freaking link to a place that shows it, as I have done the good effort of already making an attempt, or even breaking it down into logical forms so that way my obvious logical fallacy could be revealed and make me look bad. You know, show my premises, show how I misuse my own premises?). I already provided an example of something logically correct, but that has an incorrect output.

Ad hominem? I haven't used one yet. But a person who doesn't know about logical fallacies is certainly worth using one upon. In any case, saying "you are not using a term correctly" is not an ad hominem at all, regardless of whether or not I am correct about you being incorrect. Ad hominems are where I directly attack you.


Well, how aren't you? Either their theory should be accepted, or yours should. And the basis of the argument was that I was incorrect for drawing base views from academia.

As for expecting more? Umm... you are defending out and out errors, I don't know how I could do better against a person who does not know a logical fallacy. I mean, your defense of compartmentalization was not one of logical laws, but rather one about basic assumptions on how the world works. I mean, what you pointed out had no logical fallacies.

You are forwarding a theory of some form. If you weren't then you wouldn't send out links with theories. Don't be dishonest, even though I've already gathered that you are.


Umm... yeah. I am talking about academics. Not just guys who read books. It is below undergraduate level in as much as the average undergraduate would never make mistakes or implications as the person who created the video did. Right, because admiring a thinker *really* implies that you are educated on economic theories, and about the realistic workings of an economic system. Once again, you missed my point: there is no evidence that academics are avoiding your theory for purely ideological reasons.


Right.... and that's also why everybody else gets it? Right.... it is a secret cabal that nobody knows about at all, and they really care about elaborate play-acts. I am not sure that your theory is disconfirmable. It's just nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Not in error so much as a bizarre decision- why capitalize a random word repeatedly? Honestly, most critics of fiat currency you find online have absolutely no understanding of fiat currency, the gold standard, or economics in general.

I don't know you too well, so it's hard to judge whether your flippant tone is a masquerade for agitation or just innate arrogance.

It is a shame you find nothing of interest in the 'vicious' (:roll:) links, perhaps your 'open mind' serves to blinker you. For even someone like me with apparently 'below undergrad' level of education can delineate an emerging crisis from them.

What is roughly the proportion of Gold the IMF just sold off - something like 20% of it's reserve - sounds pretty major to me *shrugs*

I wonder how China will best avoid risk.

I tend to look at influential think tanks and foundations as substantial addition to my overview.



'I don't know you tell me' for you seem to have such an implict understanding of the world around you. I'm more concerned with researching gerontological foundations as it goes - I can answer your question in these terms as perhaps they are MORE pertinent than economic ones but that would be an entirely different thread.



cheap and ridiculous. As much as you would like to protest otherwise economics is not the be all and end all in this scenario. I don't think I have mentioned once anything about 'lizards' on this site or even else where - so good luck to you reel out the ad homs and sterotypes - they certainly make you look cool

youtube - rarely bither with it for information actually - I have a series of good news agregators and I subscribe to a number of intelligence/security industry digests amongst other journals. I admit my forte is not economic theory but I do have a handle on the precepts but continus to deride me if you must Apparently your area of expertise extends to 'everything' judging from the tone of incredulous mockery you are want to adopt. whatev.



Rather than falling foul of your apparently innate compunction to twist words and context it might serve you better to just be straight..

I asked you if you were taking into account the culture of compartmentalisation that is inherent in intelligence services and military research - evidently you were not.

I never claimed the academic community is 'relatively stupid' - you've said that of me 3 times now - is that enough or will you persist with such a nonsense? he academic community is such a diverse construction anyhow - you make it sound like an amorphous blob! Like anarchists, I have the good fortune to know a number of other academics too - it is my experience that they argue quite savagely about these issues - there is no concensus of mind, only the prevailing discourse and it's rebuke for straying off the path.

I stand by my statement of the power that prevailing discourse has on academics, yes.


I'll defer to deeply informed opinion on the whys and wherefores of that



Do you mean hoodwinking people to believe that a covenant has been made that the sun will return reborn to complete it's arc the next morning or am I talking beyond the scope of your knowledge?

have fun.

Part of it in this case is a complete lack of concern.


People say that the world is falling enough that it seems darn-near pointless to even care. I mean, sure, I will admit that there is a problem, but 8.5% unemployment isn't the point where we say OMG! Great Depression 2!! ! It is still below the more vicious recessionary periods.


Most currency isn't backed by gold.


It already said: government bonds.


I am merely trying to see if you have some idea, rather than just trying to have an NWO of the gaps.


You mean economics isn't the end all be all of a conversation about the MONETARY SYSTEM? Yeah, lizards was just a mock. It wasn't an ad hominem, as I wasn't using it against an argument of yours, just mocking you.


Well, you are the one who decided to attack me to some extent, and this is a conversation about economics. Not only that, but you are also the one who is trying to argue for a theory to understand reality that seems relatively questionable. Of course there will be some mockery.


Right, because you are at the forefront of honesty.


Because I was appealing to the Military-Industrial complex? I wasn't even thinking about them, so why would I refer to them?


I put forward my argument, you said this:


In any case, I know there is diversity, but there isn't much of an NWO school of thought in any subject as far as I can tell. The closest would probably be Marxian theory, but that is based upon class interests rather than a cabal.

Yes, they argue about these topics a LOT in fact, the fact that NWOs aren't taken that seriously seems to be an indication of something.


Right... because that is why they don't take conspiracy theories seriously, but will gladly talk about anarchist theory, and other things like that.


Well, you're the one that brought it up. So, if it does not confirm your idea, then why bring it up? It has to be useful.


Right.... yes, completely beyond the scope of my knowledge. You have stumped my genius so, Concenik, I am finally defeated by your knowledge of ancient mythology.

AG, you're just being a pedant now. One can't really engage in a conversation about whether there is now emerging 'an opportunity for a New World Order' as Kissinger said late last year without stepping outside of the bracket of solely Economics.

say what you want you lizard jibe was ad hom. But you can weasel if you need.

lulz just because straight down the line Marxists by and large can't entertain such a discussion does NOT preclude the possibility of there being a degree of reality to it. Most Trots and 'Marxists' I know are soo single issue anyhow, it's rediculous.

A super strata would adhere to both definition of class and cabal.

No, I know academics who will stauchly denounce such ideas and remain safe in the prevailing discourse purely for fear of damage to reputation. However around the dinner table amongst friends it's a different matter..maybe you just don't know any like this, that's all..


Well, you're the one that brought it up. So, if it does not confirm your idea, then why bring it up? It has to be useful.

Your investment to dissect my response into such snippets is admirable but now it is somewhat decontextualised and I have neither the time nor inclination to back track and trawl through to re-associate what it is specifically you are referring to..no doubt it is just a goal post changing maneuver as it is apparent that is the MO you are adopting lol

government bonds - hope that works out



I wasn't aware we were in a competition but thanks for the insight - it does lend some clarity.

My knowledge of comparative mythology is not anything special in comparison(pun intended) to some others that I debate with - probably slightly above par *shrugs* If you can't see the pertinence it has in the world around you that's your thing though..gl

Can you tell me though why all these diverse world 'leaders' are referring to a NWO with increasing regularity though?

Are they 'delusional conspiracy theorists' perhaps? Someone should point them towards you and the Marxists to put them straight!

have fun.

A Marxian version would look much different: A government controlled central bank with government controlled banking system and economy.

Corruption is always a problem if humans are involved. But there mechanisms against this: Publicity, internal check and balances.



We had decentralized money systems - we got rip of those in Europe. In the extreme in Germany till the French Revolution and Napoleon's big clean up. When you couldn't use your coinage in the next village, when literally hundreds of different coins were in circulation and money exchangers had their god business.

We had this in Europe till recently, when I lived some years near the in Germany near the border to France and Luxembourg and I had three wallets: One for German Marks, one for French Francs and for Luxembourgian/Belgium Francs. Those were only small annoyances: More important were cost of safeguarding exports and imports against currency fluctuations, ripping off the own country men by devaluing the own currency (one of the favoured pastimes of the Banque de France), having extra costs for money transfer etc. etc. etc. The introduction of the Euro (€) was a relive.

---

We have an international market; not as a result of any "NWO Conspirators", but as the result of cheaper transport and technical means. This technical progress is motor of the global economy. For a global economy you need a global currency. Till now this is the US-$. I am not certain how long the US-$ can provide this function.

The € may has the potential to become a world currency, but this would mean that vast amounts of € would be outside the €-zone as the world reserve currency. At least the German and Austrian government and the Benelux-governments will be not in favour of such a development - based on a couple of reason.

We will need a replacement for the US-$ - an international currency issued by an independent international central would be a good idea.

Outmoded as it surely is, the tallystick seemed to work okay..

I'm not implying 'NWO conspirators' have created these system, I'm saying that it looks like there are factions competing to gain an unconscionable dominance over them by amalgamating powerbases.

I think I already mentioned Mackinder's Heartland Theory.