172 Comments
author

This won't sit well with just about anybody, the defenders of "communism" or the defenders or "capitalism." I hope I still have a Substack by the end of the day.

Going to feed the birds.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

I consider myself a capitalist and I just liked your article and comment! I don't want to look like a jerk, but this information has been very well known in the "tinfoil hat community" for decades. (Of course no one can know everything, you opened my eye about a lots of medical stuff for example.)

Banksters have financed and manipulated most of history's biggest scumbags, since at least WWI from Lenin trough Hitler up until todays "leaders" (one could argue it actually started much earlier).

Good sources for this kind of information: Carroll Quigley - Tragedy and Hope (or the recent tldr. version of it from Joe Plummer - Tragedy and Hope 101)

Edward G. Griffin - The Creature from Jeckyll Island

Anthony C. Sutton - Wall Street and the Boslhevik Revolution, Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler

More recent books: Doerthy and McGregor - Hidden History - The Secret Origions of the First World War

Patrick Wood - Technocracy Rising

These are just some basic books, this rabbit hole is pretty damn deep.

Expand full comment
author

I concede that I am late to this understanding but as I said, I had bits and pieces. I still reject Allen's blow that I am "historically illiterate." Jay Dyer depicting that dialogue between the Trotsky guy and the true believer made me go "AHA" about the fact that the insanely named Federal Reserve IS the revolution. Now I sort of feel like we're screwed since this is all the infinite revolution playing out. And the opposition is Christianity. Which is WHY they penetrated the Catholic Church so utterly leading up to Second Vatican (Malachi Martin etc.) Malachi was "anti-communist." Surely they killed him. It's all spelled out in the opening pages of Windswept House. I can only read a few pages at a time, It's scary stuff. Understanding occultism is key, hence "Marx and Satan" by Wurnbrand is central reading. AIDS as occult but nobody in HIV dissent movement listens to me about that. They think it's bad science, mostly. Not all of them. Richard Strohman understood. "The machine model of biology."

Expand full comment

You are on the right path! I have listened and read all of Malachi Martin (Windswept House twice). Just the past year , I started to understand the truth about Bolshevism, never understood it before. We are in spiritual warfare, I hold tight to my belief in God and my traditional Catholic faith. Archbishop Vigano is a voice crying in the wilderness.

Expand full comment

Also anyone saying you are "historically illiterate" is a tit lol

There are people who spend their life learning JUST about WW2 or the Sumerian empire or 5th dynasty Egypt.

What I mean by that is EVERYONE is "historically iliterate" :p

Expand full comment

Also, to understand Malachi Martin , you have to realize he one of just a few people to read the 3rd Secret of Fatima. He was sworn to not reveal it, so I believed he attempted to reveal it in all of his fiction.

Expand full comment

After 15 years of research on this topic (the history and theory of finance) and reading hundreds of books, I still don't consider myself completely literate.

Although a few very important conclusions can be deduced quickly with the application of pure logic (austrian economists call this method praxeology).

One of them is that fiat money is a scam, and it is fundamentally evil.

(This is a good, short and free book for starters, which has both easily understandable theoretical explanations and some historical context:

https://mises.org/library/what-has-government-done-our-money )

The hardest fact to stomach, that every time we use fiat money for even our most bengin everyday transactions, we are contributing to this fraud. Fiat money undermines and poisons every transaction it is involved in, because strictly speaking none of the participants intentions are represented in a honest way. From a rigorous legal standpoint all contracts are invalid which contain fiat money.

Just think about it: when you get your income in fiat money, you are hit with an unknown amount of depreciation trough inflation which directly transfers wealth to the issuer of money (it is openly admitted and called seniorage in bankster jargon). The same happens when you use fiat money to pay for any goods and services, or even when you give it to your children as present, or as a charity.

There are many more aspects of fiat money that make it immoral and destructive, it is very well explained in this (free) book: https://mises.org/library/ethics-money-production

It is truly disturbing. One can limit their participation in this sinful fraud, by doing barter etc. but if you live in modern country, you cannot escape it completely because you have to pay taxes in fiat money.

Expand full comment

So true. This is how I explain it to people. Fractional reserve banking using fiat money de-values your life force. Bankers are vampires.

Most of the world trades dollars (or other fiat money) for goods and services. They trade hours of their lives to earn dollars. The hours of your life are your life force. Instead of viewing prices as dollars, convert the price of goods and services into hours worked to buy them.

Your dollars depreciate when the bankster gangsters inflate the fiat money supply. It takes more fiat dollars to purchase goods and services so you have to work more hours to compensate. Convert price increases into the increase in hours needed to be worked to afford the same things.

If you put your fiat money in the bank it will be worth less very shortly, therefore they devalue your past labor. Convert the devaluing of the currency into the number of life hours lost.

Low interest rates dis-incentivize savings, and incentivize us to put our money into the rigged stock market casino. It is the only way to keep up with inflation. They crash the stock markets and wipe out the hours worked to invest the money.

They are vampires stealing our life force.

Expand full comment

I don't know much about this subject but Jay has a couple videos about Malachi Martin that you should check out. Jay says he is a good source of info but was also an agent sent in to subvert the church - I can't remember the details like "an agent of who?"

E Michael Jones is a Catholic and I think he had the same views about Malachi.

On a side note did Malachi do something weird near the start of his career? Like did an interview on Coast to Coast about Aliens/UFO's?

Expand full comment

I would add Juri Lina's "Under the Sign of the Scorpion" and Nesta Webster's "Secret Societies and Subversive Movements" if you want to trace the history back to the eighteenth century, and back to biblical times respectively.

Webster is truly excellent - I imagine she was the Celia Farber of her day :-).

Expand full comment
author

He's in the post! He's very interesting. Is he a "holocaust denier?" Don't answer that actually. It will just degenerate.

Expand full comment

Yes I saw that Juri was in the post, but it wasn't clear to me that you (let alone your readers) had actually read his books. And "Under the Sign of the Scorpion" is the relevant one to the topic at hand.

As instructed I will not address the holocaust denier question :-).

In my view Nesta's work is even more interesting and is based on a truly breathtaking degree of knowledge and volume of research.

Expand full comment

Yes, I agree on Nesta's books- especially the one on the French Revolution.

Expand full comment

Celia, the "holocaust" as you call is undeniable! It has been happening for hundreds, if not many thousands of years! In fact it's happening today under the cloak of "Government, and Healthcare" Peace and blessings!

Expand full comment

YES Indeed...have you ever heard of DEMOCIDE? Death by govt: Fascinating study a guy did about how govts kill more o ftheir own peoplethan anything in history.

Expand full comment

Yes! Peace and blessings! Finally found someone with a brain!

Expand full comment

I listen to Jay Dyer, and will definitely check these out. Thank you. Your open mind and willingness to adapt as new information is revealed, imo, is what we'll all need to go, rapidly in order to move through these times. You're a light.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Ha ha. I'm still here. I just bought "The Creature From Jekkyl Island", a book describing how the Fed was created. I will watch & listen. Peace. :-)

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

I've seen the film, have not read the book. Will add it to the pile. How to keep up?

Expand full comment

read years ago, it changed so much to know our whole lives are built upon lies, and that knowing and finding the truth is worth the pain. I hope you know Him...Jesus, the Way the Truth and the LIFE!

Expand full comment

Thanks lulita. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior. Have a great day. Peace. :-)

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Feed the birds, not the trolls!

Expand full comment
founding

Although I'm somewhat of a defender of anarcho-capitalism, I don't suffer emotionally because of Jay Dyer's teachings. I'm also a 100% Celia Farber fan.

And if my "capitalistic" beliefs are wrong, I want to know. I am a crazy person from the internets, but I am not crazy for ideologies.

I'm going to comment a little bit on Jay, in what may be perceived as an attack on the person and not on the arguments, but it is not. It is a very long comment. Sorry.

Don't feel bad if you can't read it. Many overlapping ideas in all this.

Jay says he converted to Orthodox Christianity long ago. He is a very smart person and he studied Protestant theology and Roman theology and Greek Orthodox theology, and he decided the best one was the Greek Orthodox. (I don't know the differences between Greek Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox and Russian Orthodox and Romanian, Bulgarian and other variants.)

I knew about Jay ears ago, when I was watching the videos of the "alt right" psyop. The Nazis have a limited sympathy for him, but he is obviously not a Sun Worshiper or a socialist.

People don't know much about the separation, about 1000 years ago (if history is correct,) between Rome and Constantinople, or the Byzantine Roman Empire. There economic, cultural, political and theological reasons why Eastern Christians have been rivals of Western Christians for a long time, through many wars. The Protestant Reform 500 years ago was not in the direction of reconciling with the East. There is much rivalry and theological hatred in these topics.

The traditional contempt and abuse of Jews all over Europe is not a German thing or a Protestant invention. The Greeks also hated the Jews. The Russians hated them, the Romans, the French Catholic, the Spanish, the Portuguese and all the Muslims hated them in their own way, and also the Nordics, who were not officially Christians until the 9th or 10th centuries A.D. also hated the Jews. One reason why this is so is because the Jews are like Gypsies in that they move around. Another reason is envy. Another reason is that people don't like the sexual perversion of their young people, which Jews probably did a few times in many places. The so called "sexual exploitation" of people with pornography is not a 20th century development. Sex is a business for some people and there have always been Jewish persons interested in that business.

Libertarianism, my ideology, is a mainly Jewish ideology. It is mostly materialistic, secular and modern. Everyone hates libertarian ideology. It defends property (only private property is true property) and usury, which is meant only as the cost of buying money. Selling money today to a willing buyer in exchange for the capital plus interest (which is the cost of money) in the future, is a good thing in libertarianism. Coercion, theft, fraud, violence are not good things in libertarianism. Contracts must be respected and fulfilled, but it is a crime to enslave people through contracts, charging them with the burden of debt.

Orthodox Christian Theology is fundamentally against usury, which they understand in a different way than what the modern ideology of libertarianism teaches (I may be wrong on my understanding of what the Orthodox believe about money lending, so it may be exactly the same as what libertarians understand.)

Jay Dyer is theologically against one part of the political and economic ideology of libertarianism. Maybe more than one. And remember, the Orthodox have always been obsessed with the Jews, as if all the actions of the Jews were intrinsically corrupting, criminal and revolutionary.

It is important to separate theology from economic arguments. For example, Jesus Christ in his earthly life 2000 years ago was not a socialist, or a communist or a capitalist or a libertarian. If anything he was closer to the concept of an "anarchist" but not exactly. When discussing anarchism (not the same as libertarianism) people often quote the story of the prophet Samuel, how the Jews lived without rulers long before the first temple of Solomon, supposedly following God's design in the land of Israel they conquered after Moses and Egypt. So, between Joshua and Samuel, they were kind of an anarchistic society, and maybe that was the plan. But the Jews decided they wanted to be like anyone else, and have a King. Against the God's plan. Things went downhill from there. Many ups and downs in the Old Testament.

Why we have an Old Testament and a New Testament? Because the traditional theology, long before the schism of the East and the West, was that the Christians were the new Jews, the new chosen people of God. Jews according to the faith, not according to the flesh. The real Jews were destroyed in A.D. 70. No more temple, no more lineages, no more Levites, no more tribes, no more law.

This understanding was changed at the turn of 20th century with the creation of modern Evangelical theology, which many people accuse of being a creation of the Jews to destroy Christianity.

God hates sin. Theft is a sin. God wants that people collaborate with each other. This means that, when the collaboration is for a salary, that the money is paid according to the contract. No more, no less money, and in the proper time for payment. The devaluation of money through the bastardization of coins (mixing silver coins with other metals, as the Persians and the Greeks and the Romans did many times) is a way to steal money from the worker, and in general from anyone who uses money. It is sin. It is a way to make the contract invalid, because the money being paid is worth less after the inflation of the amount of money. Prices rise, the widow and the orphan become poorer.

This is not the same as the usury that the Orthodox denounce, but it is close. In usury, even if the money (coins of gold and silver) remain unadulterated, there may be an unjust alteration of the value of money, either by devaluation (inflation) or gain of value of money (deflation) by the dynamics of lending and borrowing, and the success or failure of businesses and enterprises.

One argument is that if a lot of people accumulate money, which is saved and not in circulation, then the money increments its value. Then, the laborer is sinning because he gets more value and the employer is losing value, even if they fulfill the exact numbers of the contract. This may cause unemployment. The employers do not want to buy labor if their money is rising in value.

This creates chaos: there is no harvest because no one wants to work. They have too much savings. So they will run out of food, and their gold will lose rapidly value, because they will be in crisis and must buy food from their neighbors, who commit "price gouging" when the Jews who saved too much need to buy from them, after many years of being despised by them. The Jews also despise their neighbors, mind you.

This catastrophic scenario is possible when an economy focuses in only one economic activity: cereal crops, for example. And by having a money that is "too good." In the present day, the Western world only has one economic activity: debt. And the money is inexistent.

To prevent the "problem" of people being too industrious and responsible, fiat currency was invented (notice the sarcasm.) This creates never-ending inflationary crises, where savings are destroyed. Money must be very bad. Worthless paper and ink, or even cheaper than that. This is where we are.

Thank God, Jesus Christ was not an economist. Neither a historian, or philosopher or a social engineer.

Jesus is our Lord and Savior, Jesus is God, even of those who don't believe. The second person of the trinity, in the doctrine of trinitarianism, which all real orthodox, catholics and protestants follow.

Jesus repeats the commandments that were given to the chosen people through the prophet Moses. Jesus adds a new commandment which we always forget. Saint John the Evangelist explains in his gospel that God loved so much the world (this world we hate sometimes) that he gave in sacrifice his only son, so that any who believes in the son will not die but have eternal life. And later the same John says that Jesus said to his disciples: "A new commandment I give to you: love one another; As I loved you, you also love one another."

The mass theft and mass murder caused by the wars in Europe so often during the middle ages are not from God. The horrible French revolution and Napoleonic wars were not from God. The incredibly violent 20th century was not caused by people following God's plan. I think everyone can agree with that, even the atheists.

My contention is that the ideology of libertarianism, free market capitalism or "freed" markets as left-libertarians say, is closer to God's plan than all the others, so far. It is not theology, it is a political doctrine.

It is about measuring the rulers and the legislators with the same rules as the people are being measured. It means that no one should have privileges. That there should be no theft in the world, from inflation or from money lending. It means that a good law should be based on the correct principles. Part of this principles come from Christian theology, and that is why some libertarians are also Christians.

The difference is that non-libertarian Christians want something more, but they are not open about it, sadly. Making theft and murder and extortion and coercion very difficult through natural law, God's law, is not enough. They desire, but do not say that, to have earthly Kings. They want to put libertines in prison, and remove them from civilization, even when they have not committed violence or fraud against anyone else. Peaceful people should be physically punished for sin, in the non-libertarian Christians social model. They never say this explicitly, I don't know why. I that is God's plan, they should talk about it openly, in my opinion.

This is already too long. Sorry!

[end of part 1]

Expand full comment
author

I agree! Thank you. My God this is a lot to take in.

Expand full comment
founding

hahaha

::blushes::

sorry!

Expand full comment

As my son would say, "Bruh!" You have a lot to share. Extremely interesting point of view. This is why I love Substack. I get exposed to so many interesting people. Do you write anywhere else?

Expand full comment
founding

Thank you. I love substack too.

I am disorganized and I don't write a blog or a stack or anything. Just a commenter with too many thoughts.

Expand full comment
founding

[tome 2]

Libertines are not only homosexuals or whatever else. Atheists are also libertines, even if they never partake in an orgy. And people with weird musical tastes are also sinful libertines. Drunks, gluttons, angry people, greedy people, the loners without a family, those who talk too much: all libertines.

Not only sexual lust is sin. In the Orthodox view, everything that is sinful must be punished as if it was murder or theft or rape. Voluntariety is not important. This is because the souls of the sinners must be saved from Condemnation by force. The civil law cannot be different from the law of the religion. Real Catholics opine the same, but they argue with the Orthodox about the content of the law, not its supremacy.

In my opinion, Orthodoxy is hebraizing in a way, and I'm sure Jay Dyer has an answer to this. Jesus fulfilled the Law, and removed it from the world. Following the law does not save anyone. It is only the Grace of God that saves. That is Christianity, properly speaking. Adding anything to the perfect sacrifice of Jesus is an attempt to add again the burden of the Law of the Jews to the Christians. Hebraizing is a form of rejecting Jesus Christ, in part.

According to the Protestants, the Catholics also act like the Orthodox. They impose rituals on people, to receive the Grace of God. Protestantism rejects the traditions of the early Church, which are part of both Orthodox and Catholic faiths, in favor of a direct interpretation of the New Testament. Protestantism is horrible for both Catholics and Orthodox theologians.

Protestantism in turn has its problems. You only need to see the case of that female Bishop of the State Church in Norway or Sweden, who received "Muslim refugees" and chose to remove all Crosses from the building in order to not offend them. That's only a recent example, not the worst. In practice, Protestant organizations reject Jesus Christ. They are corrupt. Nothing new under the Sun.

[end of tome 2]

Expand full comment
founding

[volume three]

What should be the Law? The Law for this world, not to be saved from the second death. The law so that men live in peace, without violence, without committing crimes. Small crimes, and huge crimes, such as the Plandemonium or the Nazi Holocaust.

The human law for human affairs in this temporal, sublunar world, should be based in the idea of the supreme value of the life of the individual, which comprises her bodily integrity (no forced masking, no forced treatments, no forced tests) and her moral integrity: there can be no law that punishes hate or speech.

The Law should be about preventing violence, and restoring the victims of violence. It should not be about infantilizing people and overseeing all their acts. Espionage attacks both physical and moral integrity.

There can be no world government. Different people have different values. Some countries will never accept the idea of free commerce and free enterprise. It is not their culture. Therefore they will not see the benefits of that kind of freedom. But the people there may move to a country that has a culture and a law that respects fundamental freedoms.

The project of the Illustration was the World Government: absolute centralized control of everyone in the world, in a Oligarchichal form of government, with the destruction of all traditions, customs, philosophies, religions. Only one law, one language, on calendar, one metric system, etc. Total despotism. That is not libertarianism, that is not anarchism.

So as weird as it seems, all libertarians agree with all serious Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants, in that tyranny is bad. Localism is better. Peace is a good thing for everyone.

We disagree in that some individuals must be allowed to do sinful acts. And we may disagree in what constitutes a valid form of commerce and contract, and what should be the specific laws that regulate labor and banking. But both atheists, liberals, scientists, believers of any religion, and theologians agree to oppose the Despots who want to exterminate entire races and destroy human liberty as much as possible.

Human liberty is also a gift of God, and is part of God's design.

Jay Dyer is not, as far as I know, a denier of the holocaust, because he is a well informed and rational man. He is also a revisionist, which is not the same as a denier, because all informed and rational man who study deeply important topics become revisionists of any topic. Corruption is everywhere. But among the Orthodox who hate the ideology of libertarianism (I repeat, a Jewish political ideology) are also people who deny the persecution and murder of Jews by both Germans and Russians. And they do so in an self-refuting way: the deniers say the mass murder did not happen but the Jews deserved it because of usury and sexual perversion, and, more importantly, sabotaging the Russian Empire and the German Empire. So it did not happen, according to those who hate the Jews, and it they deserved that thing that did not happen, and they are innocent of supporting it and proud that it happen, but it didn't happen.

I think Jay is not as dumb as those who make that argument.

It is quite possible that the criminal behavior of Kazarian Jews (are they really Jews according to the flesh?) everywhere caused innocent people to suffer violence. Not only murder, but also imprisonment, starvation, psychological abuse, medical experimentation, and theft of their all their property. Even without the mass murder, it is already genocide, and against God's will.

Innocent Germans and Russians and Poles and Hungarians and Austrians and French and Romanians and Czech and Ukrainians and Belgians and Dutch and Hungarians and many more humans, who just happened to be also "Jews," suffered violence from States run by Ideologues and sick bastards, for the financial and sexual crimes of a small number of evil individuals, who also happened to be Jews. And this horror has been happening many times in the past. Probably the worst case was the 1914-1946 period.

I, a mere anarchist, emphasize the State as guilty of all the violence. The State is not from God. The State destroys people and religion and all culture, everywhere. Hobbes was not a real Catholic, because he was an Atheist. Hegel was not a real Protestant, because he was an Atheist. No defender of the State has any intention of following the First Commandment.

The Orthodox attack the State using libertarianism, or ideas associated with it, as if the State pushed libertinism using libertarian ideology, which is impossible because all libertarians are against sexual violence, which is prominent in some libertines.

But then the Orthodox also want the State. They do not have full faith in God. They need human violence to impose their worldview, and they support ungodly human hierarchy. Which means they know they have to put up with corruption. I believe they want a gang of evil bastards to run the world, but in favor of their views on what should civil life look like. The Orthodox fail to realize that the State also destroys Orthodoxy and its followers.

The State is self-serving, systematic violence against everyone. It has no values other than its own survival. The State is nihilistic. In any modern State, child rape can be legalized and no one would oppose tat law violently, because the State has bought everyone. Even the religious people. We are all in deep risk.

My point is that the State is a beast that cannot be tamed or controlled, and the Orthodox need to formulate another way to live in the world they want to live. Ungodly means will not produce godly results.

But Jay Dyer is a good fellow. Most people who have been censored over the years have good things to say. Anyone who doesn't know him yet has a lot to learn from him. To those who want to start watching Jay, I recommend to exercise critical thinking. Don't idolize Jay Dyer, because he does not like idolatry.

Thanks for reading!

Expand full comment

In my opinion you are not seeing the true picture here because your anarcho-capitalist lens is coloring your vision somewhat.

Two quick examples:

Human hierarchy is not definitvely ungodly. For example Jesus describes the relationship between a servant and his master without condemning it. And the rleationship between parent and child is also clearly hierarchical and defined in the commandments.

A desire for a state does not imply lack of faith in God. Both the old and new testaments define a role for a civil authority (render unto Caesar etc., and there are many other examples) while limiting it (taking a census is not a legitimate function of government :-)), as well as for the individual and family. Also supporting the idea of a state does not necessarily imply that you support that state killing people, and nor (I have read) does a reasonable translation of the first commandment prohibit a judicial death sentence.

Expand full comment
founding

I agree my ideology biases my worldview, but I also try to see the world without outside my biases.

I don't say human hierarchies are ungodly in general, only that there are corrupt (ungodly) hierarchies in many places which subsist only because we the people prefer to not rebel against them. Some of these corrupt hierarchies are also running some religious organizations. Corruption is everywhere.

The desire for order is natural. God put that in us. We are confused if we think the human institution we call sometimes "the State" can generate order. The state is born from a bad social order (17th century England, for example,) and feeds on lazyness and vice, to destroy all semblance of order, until people are persecuted and destroyed for the crime of being peaceful and meek. Then, there is usually some form of conquest, and the birth of a new order, which becomes corrupt within one generation.

In my opinion, those who love the State as Hobbes did, the materialists, the people who only believe in themselves and in this life, are too distracted with their own big plans to learn to love the Almighty.

Expand full comment

Yes indeed there are ungodly hierarchies everywhere including in religions.

I agree that the state is also subject to corruption. And I agree that any state controlled by materialist atheists will always devolve to terrible levels of corruption.

I disagree that that means that all states must do so however, although I would agree that some corruption is inevitable and that utopia can only exist in a place where evil men do not exist at all (i.e. not here on earth).

Expand full comment
founding

Are you saying that the Orthodox want the state more than the Catholics or Protestants?

Expand full comment
founding

At some point a Christian must choose between having full confidence in God or attempting to gain political power over others.

There is a risk. Everything is political these days, and that is not normal or sustainable.

It seems to me the Orthodox know from experience that the State is dangerous. It seems to me that Protestants and the Catholics are very naive about the State.

But the Orthodox of today know about being on the receiving end of the Stick, whereas in the past they were controlling the stick. Do some Orthodox Christians who live in chaotic Western nations want more power? To do what?

I think the best arrangement is "isolated" communities. This group lives here and own this property and they organize themselves as they like, and there are certain things, like drag queens, which are not allowed there. Other groups, with other religious beliefs or no religious beliefs at all, do other things. But there is peace between the groups because none want to use power to invade and destroy their neighbors. The Law respects the religious freedom, and no one attempts to corrupt the Law. This is the point where the enemy attacked in 2020.

Something comparable to this is called the "principle of Subsidiarity" in Catholic politics. It comes from the mid 1800s when Catholic thinkers were working to stop the risk of more revolutions and more wars.

Of course, people would prefer to not having to put up with neighbors who do things they don't like. But that is conquest. It is necessary to use violence, which today happens to be monopolized by the human institution called the "State." And because the State is a god unto itself it is not possible to fully control it to crush your rivals: inevitably, the Behemoth will revolve against the controllers to attack them.

So whether we like it or not, people are forced to tolerate each other a little, until they find a way out of the State and can conquer the heretics or whatever. With the State, only defensive strategies are possible. But my feeling is that all religions and ideologies have a universal ambition to control everyone else.

The State is not part of God's plan, but some believers are willing to use it, to join the competition to gain control over it, for the greater good.

Right now, we live in a moment where the materialistic religions are trying to conquer and destroy the mystical religions. Some of the problems of today are the result of that campaign of conquest. It is a Holy War.

Naturally, there is a resurgence in the interest in religions. People naturally come together when are under attack. And there is dissent within the religious groups because some people there have already sold out. There will be purges.

Expand full comment

well youd be a peach to sit and talk to...but I only know the Jesus and your words seem to indicate you know Him, if not I hope you find Him, and soon, outa the matrix , as His Kingdom Comes and boy, do we need Him. Ahava

Expand full comment

PS I have a particular bugbear about the use of the word "capitalism". It is not sufficient to define an economic system by itself, or if it is, it is too easily misunderstood.

Free market capitalism is better because it starts to reveal some of the contradictions.

Personally I prefer to separate the concepts of capitalism and freedom entirely and define capitalism as the private ownership of capital, and freedom as freedom from coercion. Then you can see that both laissez-faire and fascist economies are capitalist, but only one of them permits a man to buy and sell freely.

Using these definitions it is also clear that freedom is not possible without capitalism, but capitalism is entirely possible without freedom. And therefore while capitalism is necessary to a just and free society, it is by no means a sufficient condition by itself.

And it is also true that a free society must be able to resist corruption or it quickly fails. And, in my view, a Godless society is incapable of resisting corruption.

Expand full comment

The real Jews weren't destroyed in 70 AD though as there were several times the tribes were moved into other areas. Which means their blood lives on.

Or do you mean the religion was destroyed in 70AD?

Expand full comment
founding

The religion was destroyed. I used "destroyed" in a symbolic way.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Anyway, the context is that this idea of "the end of Judaism" is and has always been part of the Christian theology. Which is one of the reasons many Jews have always been angry at Chrsitians.

They also hate the Roman Empire even though there is no Roman Empire any more. Maybe the laurel wreath in the United Nations, but that organization is not the same as the Roman Empire that destroyed the 2nd temple. Which is one of the reason why the R.E. fell.

Expand full comment

Oh dear , the pharasaical Jews are alive and well, and you must study chabad lubovitch judaism which rules israel govt today. Fully came out of the babylon ian exile,and the basis is Kabbalism, which they call judaism, and they hate with a passion ANY gentiles. Trump is one as is kushner and his wife Ivanka. Its adeep dive into history, but Jana Ben Noon did a series on this, and the book "kabbal secrets all christians should know" also dives into this perversion of judaism. Hence the warning in revelation"There are those who call themselves jews but are of the synagogue of satan". Hope this helps!

Expand full comment
founding

But the prophecy was fulfilled: God sent the Messiah and many of the Jews of that time (the pharisees, the saducees) rejected God, for the last time. There won't be another time for the salvation of the Jews. Spiritually, they are confused because they don't know God kept all his promises.

But God is always calling them too, like everyone else. For all time and all place there is no Jew nor Greek, no slave nor free, no male nor female, in Christ Jesus.

Those who want some distinction, something special to fit their ambition, are going to end up disappointed.

Many of the people who today are called Jews tend to be very politically ambitious. They only want land and domination. Those who really seek God see the problem in becoming like Cain: self-sufficient and proud.

Expand full comment
Mar 17, 2023·edited Mar 17, 2023

So when they made the Talmud the main book they stopped being Jews? If I am getting the dates correct... I think 70ad was when the 2nd temple was destroyed.

Edit: Ah you mentioned the 2nd temple in your comment.

I would have to read their arguments against this. So far I have only read the Christian argument - I think from E Michael Jones.

Expand full comment

It's more complex than this. I am not an expert, but

1. The Talmud and Kabbalah are not the same thing.

2. The Talmud is the "oral Torah". It is a written form of all the oral legal tradition which provided the necessary knowledge to interpret the Torah and understand the whole of the law. God instructed Moses that it was not to be written down, which was later interpreted to mean that it must be taught and explained orally but may be written as a reference for the teacher. The oral tradition dates back to Moses, but the books were not written down until hundreds of years later in the 4th (Jerusalem Talmud) and 5th (Babylonian Talmud) centuries.

3. The Kabbalah is something very different. It is Jewish mystical tradition - supposedly a way of understanding the essence of God and spirituality on a deeper level. Kabbalah is a way of thinking or perhaps a set of concepts rather than a set of books, but there are books which are written to help students understand Kabbalah. The most significant of these are probably the book of Zohar (the book of light) and the book of Sepher Habahir (book of Illumination), although there are more.

Again the books appeared well after the birth of Christ but the ideas likely existed earlier. In particular, the Pharisees accused Jesus himself of practising sorcery and belonging to the Essenes which were a sect who engaged in closely held secret mystical (very likely Kabbalistic) practices. However, unlike the oral Talmud which definitely existed at the time of Moses (although it evolved over time as rabbis interpreted the law over the centuries and added their interpretations to the oral tradition), it is not clear whether these ideas and practices were always part of Judaism since the time of Moses or were added later. Critics have suggested that these pratcices were adopted from pagan religions.

It is the case that Kabbalistic ideas have underpinned many mystical and ideological movements over millenia including Ismailism, Sabbataean Frankism, Illuminism, Freemasonry, Theosophy, and New Age Spiritualism, and arguably the entire Enlightenment itself is Kabbalistic at its core.

As I wrote earlier, I am very far from an expert on these matters, so I might be wrong about any or all of the above.

Expand full comment
founding

Since Jesus always existed and all was created through him, God has saved many people from many nations since the beginning of time, long before Moses. It is possible that all mystical traditions are a mockery of the universal revelation of God to certain individuals. If a spiritual movement promotes self-reliance and self-salvation to the detriment of a direct relationship with the true and living God, that movement is not from God, but against God.

But there is no need to fear. When in doubt, just go to the Lord's prayer: everything is there.

Christian Mystics always emphasize the simplicity of the gift of faith.

In fact, those who teach false ideas about God dislike very much the simplicity of that prayer. They are very uncomfortable with that.

Expand full comment

Which Talmud exactly?

There are two along with 10 other books in Judaism. The Babylonian version strays far from the original books given to the Hebrews.

"In time, this crystalized into two distinct bodies of tradition: the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. Spread out over many volumes, the Babylonian Talmud is the most widely studied Jewish text—a labor of love that can take a lifetime."

An Introduction to Jews and Judaism

10 Sacred Texts of Judaism

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4354682/jewish/10-Sacred-Texts-of-Judaism.htm#:~:text=10%20Sacred%20Texts%20of%20Judaism%201%201.%20Five,%28%20Code%20of%20Jewish%20Law%29%20...%20More%20items

Expand full comment

I have not listened to Jay Dyer, but I was once an anarcho-capitalist libertarian myself but have come to believe that that way of thinking leads nowhere but ruin, exactly as Milton described when he first saw these bankrupt enlightenment ideas begin to take root.

Now don't get me wrong, there is much that appears good - and much that actually is good about anarcho-capitalism. But Satan is not stupid, his lies are cunning and hard to see through. Interestingly (at least to me), my very first inclination that there might be something wrong with my thinking came decades ago when I idly picked up a paperback from a bookshelf in Walmart of all places. The book was an introduction to Satanism - but it might as well have been an introduction to Ayn Rand (of whom I was a big fan at the time). I think cognitive dissonance led me to avoid considering the implications of this for many years.

One problem is that, without God, there is no unchanging and absolute definition of right and wrong - and we inevitably slip into the tyranny of rule by the strongest or cleverest man. If a man be such an orator that he can convince us that pedophilia must be permitted in the name of liberty, then we have no defense against that man or his ideas. And related to that, without God there is no limit to man's ambition. He may seek himself to become God, and such a man does not permit any limit to his own actions which he can always justify on the grounds that the end justifies the means.

Back to Milton - the problem with freedom is that too much of it leads only to slavery.

God on the other hand rules over us with the lightest of hands. He permits us to pursue our lives without impediment provided only that we obey his laws which all can see are good and just laws (except maybe today we have fallen so far that many can no longer see this) even although we may be individually tempted to break them.

Put another way - obedience to God provides us with all the freedom we can handle :-).

Expand full comment
founding

That's a very good comment, thank you.

One thing that we have to remember is that there are many anarcho-capitalists. They argue about every detail because they don't want to form a party or unified movement. That will never happen.

Because there will never be a big country ruled with ancap principles, there will not be ruin in the real world, only ruin in your mind if you run the computer simulations of this game.

Humans depending only in reason end up becoming monsters. Love for humanity is necessary. Ayn Rand, although an atheist, was a true humanitarian. Nothing corrupts people more than privileges and false promises, and she was against all that.

The omnipotent government is the party formed by a coalition of utilitarian monsters and hard-line rationalists, limited only by the desire to be economically sustainable. If they didn't care about profit we would all be dead by now.

But ancap ideology is not utilitarianism and is not pure rationalism. It includes a generous dose of vitalism, which makes it unfit to earn power.

I think Christians who want power and a limited government, perhaps bigger than Jefferson's but smaller than Roosevelt's, need to realize that their political power can exist only in an ordered society. To have an ordered society, the State must be ignored. Which means that Christians have to learn to cheat the State. And that is not what the hierarchy teaches.

As the State is ignored, it loses the number of preys to parasitize. Then it becomes sick, and it goes to sleep. That is the time when human society flourishes, for a couple of generations at least. Then the corruption appears again, and the State awakens, and feasts on human foolishness. By that time, the Christians are bored and begin to consider becoming Buddhists.

So, as long as Christians remain naive about the true nature of the State, they won't ignore it, and they will be driven crazy by the State, and then they will be insecure, unfree and living in ruins.

Expand full comment

"Ayn Rand [...]was against all that."

Was she? What she was against more than anything was God.

I eventually realized that her entire philosophy was an attempt to create a noble world without God. She based everything on the innate right of a man to exercise his conscience and free will - and she claimed that this was an obvious right.

Again the parallels with Milton are clear. Satan's cry for freedom appears noble. he rejects "the tyranny of heaven", and claims the right to build his own world.

The problem starts with the fact that without God, it does not follow that man has a fundamental and innate right to exercise his conscience and free will. For a consicence is meaningless in the absence of good and evil, and if good and evil are to be defined by man then which man defines them? Or are we to live in a world where every man defines good and evil as he likes and must be permitted to follow his conscience? Or are we simply to accept Ayn Rand's ideas of good and evil and we can follow our conscience as long as it is, in fact, her conscience?

To be clear there is much about which Ayn Rand is correct. And if you accept this basic flawed premise then the rest does indeed follow in a perfect tower of terrifying logic. But she built her castle upon sand, and it has only a single turret where God's castle is built upon rock and has many turrets.

Satan tells a hundred truths to hide a single lie, and that one lie perverts the whole.

Expand full comment
founding

But God exists, and it is impossible to be without God. He is everywhere, and always calling. So our free will does not depend on our rhetorical ability to argue against the impossibility of the non-existence of God.

Rand is in the right direction, unlike some Christians who insist on defending privilege. But Rand's system fails, because, like most philosophers, she leaves no room for God. Which is a story repeated many times.

Expand full comment

I think we agree on many things, but - for the sake of completeness - you cannot have your cake and eat it. When you say "Humans depending only in reason end up becoming monsters", and then claim that Ayn Rand is not a monster because of her love for humanity.

I would point out two things.

1. If any human in the history of mankind depended only on reason it was Ayn Rand.

2. I don't believe that love for humanity (even if I accepted that Ayn Rand possessed it) is sufficient to prevent becoming a monster. That requires love for God.

And I would go on to suggest that there is a reason that my book on Satanism read just like a book on Objectivism. Did Satan tempt man to pursue his own goals at the expense of obedience to God because he loved humanity?

As a final question, do you think Ayn Rand would have advised Eve to eat the apple? I do.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

There are lies, damn lies, and documentaries. (anon).

There are lies, damn lies, and Experts. (anon).

my favourite: There are liars, damn liars, and politicians, priests, and TV. (anon).

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

When the truth is painfully shocking and shockingly painful, it just doesn’t sit well.

I am glad you have the nerve to say what needs to be said, come what may.

Back in the 80s there was a popular t-shirt saying, “I’ve given up reality for a nice fantasy.” I thought it was deeply troubling that anyone would wear such a thing. Little did I know that reality had already left the building.

Expand full comment

my mom had a tea shirt " My name is Cleopatra , Queen of Denial :"!

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Those with open minds will listen while those without won't. I don't think most on here will hold your beliefs against you either way, it's up to them if they will be willing at least look at a different perspective and consider any validity.

Love feeding and watching the birds even though the squirrels seem get the bigger share, but I figure everything needs to eat so once I put it out it belongs to the critters and o to them to decide. My cats don't seem to mid either, and the squirrels love to tease them.

Expand full comment
founding
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023

You will have a Substack. I work in finance. It is an important topic, mostly hidden from the public.

Not all fiat money is necessarily bad. You can create interest-free fiat money -- and put it to good use.

Expand full comment

Oh yeah, that's what the Reichsbank (nazi Germany's central bank) and the Gosbank (soviet Russia's central bank did), and we all know how wonderful it turned out for them! Right!?

Actually fiat money is completely evil and immoral in a fundamental way. I recommend you this two wonderful free books about this problem:

https://mises.org/library/ethics-money-production

https://mises.org/library/what-has-government-done-our-money

Expand full comment

The link doesn't work inside anymore, but his economy worked fine and why the gangster bankers went out to destroy him at all costs. Victors ReWrite the History books and propaganda is fed throughout the educational systems and society adnauseam.

https://ia800206.us.archive.org/3/items/HowHitlerDefiedTheInternationalBankers/HowHitlerDefiedTheBankers.pdf

Expand full comment

Yes, I agree- we get victors history and only hear one side. Years ago, I delved into revisionist history and it's still not completely clear to me, but I do recall some saying that he found a way to break free of the banking cartel. There was a guy Mark Weber who used to run the Institute for Historical Review, which put out some interesting videos. I think they've all been taken down, but I recall the one on the economy was very interesting--made sense they would want to hide info on how he broke free from the bankers (kind of like the way they never told us that Gaddafi was setting up a gold backed system for the whole of Africa to break free from the bankers). And I remember there was one on the Sound of Music not being accurate history and good video on WW1.

Expand full comment
founding

I heard Austrians sponsored the Sound of Music to portray themselves as anti-Nazi, while there was an overwhelming support for Hitler in Austria during WWII.

Expand full comment
founding

Those experiments did not turn out well because the money owners did not let them do well. Just compare the fates of Libia and Saudi Arabia. The latter one went along with the dollar imperialism. Thank you for the book recommendations. I will check out the first one. I have read Rothbard and still do not understand why you would limit your economic activities by the amount of gold you have.

Expand full comment

It doesn't have to be gold, any real commodity money would do fine, it can be anything that cannot be printed, or produced below it's "nominal price". Gold just happens to have the best physical properties to be used as money. (I wouldn't rule out that in the future a better type of money / element will be discovered.)

The most important role of commodity money woud be, that it would put a break on government spending. Politicans would be only able to spend what they can collect as tax. That would for example limit, or completely stop big wars, and all the other harmful crap they do.

The second advantage is that, commodity money (with 100% reserves for demand deposits) directs economic growth in a natural way. The avarege worker and saver would get much bigger say in deciding what gets financed. There would be no boom and bust cycles. There would be no Beanie Babies, Silicon Walley Banks, and other similar types of malinvestment. The free market would kill them in infancy.

A 100% reserve commodity money system wouldn't put any unnecessary limits on economic groth, since prices can free float, the amount of gold doesn't even matter.

It would only limit parasitic politicans and other similar types vermin in spending and destroying the fruits of other people's labour.

Expand full comment

With all due respect, if you have read Rothbard and still believe that using gold as money limits your economic activities, then you didn't pay attention :-).

Expand full comment
founding
Mar 17, 2023·edited Mar 17, 2023

Probably, I was not paying attention enough, but I am suspicious of giving such as role to any commodity, as it can increase the price of that commodity, so inflation can occur even when you do not have fiat currency. But I did make an effort to broaden my views and not to be dogmatic. I even own a hard copy of the book. I am for the government's financing of important project, but some complain that it leads to corruption.

Expand full comment

Rothbard would not argue for giving a role to anything, but instead for letting the market decide, which would result in the best possible solution which still may fall short of perfect, but is at least less imperfect than any other solution.

I do not have a problem with people deciding to cooperate with government to pay for and manage some projects. Corruption ensues when the government is permitted to coerce people who do not wish to cooperate, or wish to withdraw their cooperation. Withdrawal of cooperation is the natural limiting force which would control the extent of corruption.

Fiat currencies would disappear except that governments force people to use them by demanding tax payments in fiat currency, applying taxes and other regulatory burdens to the use of alternatives, and vicious geopolitical policies designed to ensure that essential commodities are priced only in fiat currency.

Expand full comment

Sonja, yes, I believe that is correct. I'm fairly certain that John Titus, who works with Catherine Austin Fitts, also has this perspective. I think the main issue is allowing private bankers to create money out of thin air and loan it at interest to governments versus the government having the power to issue debt and interest free currency and spend it into the economy. With the private banking families having such power for 300 years (I believe this model of banking started with the Bank of England), well that has led humanity to the brink of disaster. And Bill Still, in his The Money Masters documentary, noted that the bankers realized that they could make the most money through war financing, which is basically why we have endless wars. Even former Congressman Dr. Ron Paul said something along those lines, that it is not a coincidence that over a century of private central banking has led to over a century of war.

Benjamin Franklin talked about how the colonists issued their own currency and it worked well for the economy (from http://www.xat.org/xat/moneyhistory.html):

During a visit to Britain in 1763, The Bank of England asked Benjamin Franklin how he would account for the new found prosperity in the colonies. Franklin replied "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one."

America had learned that the people's confidence in the currency was all they needed, and they could be free of borrowing debts. That would mean being free of the Bank of England.

In Response the world's most powerful independent bank used its influence on the British parliament to press for the passing of the Currency Act of 1764. This act made it illegal for the colonies to print their own money, and forced them to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold. Here is what Franklin said after that. "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."

And he said this was the main reason for the Revolutionary War: The inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the prime reason for the Revolutionary War.https://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Banks/Money_Masters_quotations.html

President Abraham Lincoln found a way to break free of the bankers by issuing his own debt-free, interest-free currency (greenbacks). Here's his stance on how the monetary system should work: “The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.” -Abraham Lincoln

And apparently Lincoln's greenbacks were a threat to the bankers. Here's what an editorial in the London Times about President Lincoln's issuing of full legal tender Treasury notes (Greenbacks) during the Civil War, 1962-63:

"If this mischievous financial policy which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

And back in the late 1800s the American people were very knowledgeable about the monetary system and could actually debate about it (unlike now, where everyone has been deliberately dumbed down and rendered clueless about how the debt based monetary system actually works). Anyway, there was a big debate about gold and silver, as well as some people who wanted to go back to the green backs. It's been a while since I read this book, but I recall that she was able to outline some problems with gold and silver and how it was somehow rigged by the bankers against the people:

Seven Financial Conspiracies which Have Enslaved the American People By Sarah Emery (1887)

https://archive.org/details/sevenfinancialc00emergoog/page/n6/mode/2up

(interestingly, she dedicates the book to the enslaved American people of a dying republic)

Expand full comment

Allowing government to print money instead of private bankers would solve nothing. The same psychopaths would end up controlling the printing machine, using the same mechansims (blackmail, bribery, lawfare, rigged elections, violence etc.) and they would abuse that power in the same way.

It doesn't matter what you call the rulers, or how they are supposedly chosen, if you create a system where some people have massive power over others, then the worst people conspire to control that system and take advantage of it. In other words the system you are proposing as a better alternative is to all intents and purposes functionally equivalent.

I will modify that basic position slightly, because there is a reason that the puppet masters prefer the private banking model - it does allow them to hide much better than the direct government control model, and that's how they hope to escape blowback which they will attempt to redirect to more public figures. A "king" (or government) who is abusing power for his own benefit cannot hide.

Expand full comment

I am skeptical of this. Fiat money inevitably implies that some man or men have the ability to print it, and other men do not. This is centralized power, and centralized power is not stable and always leads to a cycle of corruption and further centralization.

The truly wise understand that the ring cannot be used for good.

Expand full comment

Yes, fiat money is the "philosohers stone" in an evil and scammy way. A central banker Mervyn King even wrote a book about this (and the coming banking collapse) and called it "The End of Alchemy".

Expand full comment

Yes, except that there is no version of the philosopher's stone which is not inherently evil and scammy :-).

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

What?? Malachi Martin is rolling in his grave. That's truly insane! Peace. :-)

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Barf. Pure ignorance. Evil.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

That list of AID is impressive. But nothing like the aid given to the Soviets by America.

I guess America can also talk about all the aid it gave Afghanistan and how there wouldn't be an Afghan if not for America actions in the 70's-2010's

Lol "we had to save you so we invaded you. And yes we are staying in charge for a few decades"

Expand full comment

"The Red Army, which vastly outnumbered the Polish defenders, achieved its targets, encountering only limited resistance. Some 320,000 Poles were made prisoners of war.[4][11] The campaign of mass persecution in the newly acquired areas began immediately. In November 1939 the Soviet government annexed the entire Polish territory under its control. Some 13.5 million Polish citizens who fell under the military occupation were made Soviet subjects following show elections conducted by the NKVD secret police in an atmosphere of terror,[12][13][14] the results of which were used to legitimise the use of force. A Soviet campaign of political murders and other forms of repression, targeting Polish figures of authority such as military officers, police and priests, began with a wave of arrests and summary executions.[Note 5][15][16] The Soviet NKVD sent hundreds of thousands of people from eastern Poland to Siberia and other remote parts of the Soviet Union in four major waves of deportation between 1939 and 1941.[Note 6] Soviet forces occupied eastern Poland until the summer of 1941 when Germany terminated its earlier pact with the Soviet Union and invaded the Soviet Union under the code name Operation Barbarossa. The area was under German occupation until the Red Army reconquered it in the summer of 1944"

I wonder why the Poles have a problem with their "saviors"

Expand full comment

I agree. Diana West's "American Betrayal" was a real eye-opener for me. Peace. :-)

Expand full comment
Mar 22, 2023·edited Mar 22, 2023

I haven't read that but her name rings a bell. I feel like I have read one of her books before... did she do one about the problems with multiculturalism?

What is America Betrayal about?

Expand full comment
author

This just in via email from Mark Crispin Miller:

Thu, Mar 16 at 3:30 PM

Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution

That volume is included in Sutton's Wall Street Trilogy. His massive

Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development demonstrates

in great detail that Stalin was utterly dependent on (mainly) US

industrial output.

(For his heresy vis-a-vis the Red Menace, Sutton was eventually

thrown out of the Hoover Institution, as this bit from Wikipedia notes:

In 1973, Sutton published a popularized, condensed version of the sections of the forthcoming third volume relevant to military technology called National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union, after which he was forced out of the Hoover Institution.[7][better source needed] His conclusion from his research on the issue was that the conflicts of the Cold War were “not fought to restrain communism” but were organised in order “to generate multibillion-dollar armaments contracts”, since the United States, through financing the Soviet Union “directly or indirectly, armed both sides in at least Korea and Vietnam.”[8][non-primary source needed]

Richard B. Spence, Wall Street and the Russian Revolution

Jim McGregor & Gerry Docherty, Prolonging the Agony: How the

International Bankers and Their Political Partners Deliberately

Extended World War I

Also:

Guido Giacomo Preparata, Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America

Made the Third Reich

Expand full comment

It's important to emphasize that Sutton's Wall Street work is a TRILOGY. "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution;" "Wall Street and FDR;" "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler." I don't think they have any favorites. Also, in same general vein, here's Jon Rappaport from today:

https://substack.com/inbox/post/108779754

Expand full comment
founding

“It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it”

Expand full comment

I was hoping that Sutton was going to be part of the discussion...Thanks!

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

The link to the doc at the bottom is age restricted. For those who refuse to use the weapons of mass information destruction like ZooTube anymore and don't want to support those with ties to the very people who have engineered both sides of every war over the last century here's a link to the archive version with no age restriction:

https://archive.org/details/InTheShadowOfHermesByJriLina2009/In+the+Shadow+of+Hermes+by+J%C3%BCri+Lina+(2009).mp4d

An old Russian joke (Re: Harvard boys pillaging Russia) just after the fall of the Soviet Union:

There are two former party members and one says to the other, "Have you noticed that everything they told us about communism was false?" And the other replies, "Yes, but that's not the worst thing. The worst thing is that everything they told us about Capitalism was true."

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Capitalism has lost all its meaning...the current meaning is fascism. The world hasn’t seen real capitalism in at least 115 years.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

It was destroyed by central banking.

Expand full comment
founding
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

It was created by central banking, first the Bank of Amsterdam, then the Bank of England. But you are right: the American central banking pushed it to its limits.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

That depends on what your definition of capitalism is. My definition is free market.

Expand full comment

The Bank of Amsterdam was actually a pretty decent institution for about ~120 years. It ran 100% gold reserve banking for a long time, which "weirdly" coincided with the quickest and most stable economic growth in that country. Legend says they were so solid, that they were even able service constumers while invading armies were about to besiege the city.

Then of course it got ruined by fractional reserve banking and fiat money.

Expand full comment
founding

I would appreciate a cite that supports the claim that the Bank of Amsterdam ran 100% gold reserve banking. Where did the Dutch get that gold? Thank you.

Expand full comment

Now, I will seem to be like a shill for the Mises Institute. I'm not ascossiated with them in any way, and I don't actually agree with them about a lot of things, but I admit they have some pretty good free books. :-)

This is one of my favourite ones. It is a must read for any finance nerd. It goes through the legal history of banking in pretty good detail starting with the antiquity, up until today, including the Bank of Amsterdam.

https://mises.org/library/money-bank-credit-and-economic-cycles

Expand full comment

They got it from companies and other empires. (Adam Smith-The wealth of nations.) Amsterdam was the center of global trade at the time. As Dirty Peasant said the Wisselbank was the most trusted commercial banker in the world. Before the bank of england and british empire, all empires settled accounts through the bank paying in gold and silver for other staples-imports of food, spices etc. from other countries. Commodities were bought with gold and silver. England, Spain, Portugal went through the bank for storage, deposits, settlements. And bank denominated coinage was actual gold and silver. It was not a speculative private bank but a city-backed commercial bank that used its stellar reputation for speed of settlements and accuracy of accounting to become what London or New York are today, except without the value, accuracy, integrity, honesty, speed, and trust.

Expand full comment
founding

"They got it from companies and other empires." But how did other empires get it? A lot of blood in South America and Africa was spilled for it.

Expand full comment

See my comment higher up.

Capitalism has not lost its meaning, but the word is much misused. Capitalism is not a system. It is just a particular mechanism or feature of many different systems. It refers to the private ownership of capital.

Freedom (or free markets) is a system if you like. Freedom is impossible without capitalism, but Capitalism is perfectly possible without Freedom.

As you note fascism is capitalist, as is corporatism. Communism is not capitalist. And yet all three of these systems are not free, although arguable to differing degrees.

The important distinction is freedom vs slavery. Capitalism is a detail (albeit an important one). Making it the headline is a Marxist trick.

Expand full comment

Thx Celia!...Perhaps one of my top 5 favorite topics(been researching this for the last twenty years)...I will try to be brief(impossible to do)...re: the Fiat Money system as revolutionary. Firstly: Value created out of nothing = babylonian black magick. We allow tyrants to rule a money-matrix and through our complicit agreement assist in its maintenance. When the ruling elite hired Marx to write the manifesto, Marx was merely an intelligent, albeit useful lackey who served the needs of the ruling elite. The entire money matrix bamboozlement has been a charade worthy of Houdini. Getting back to the idea of “usury”—we could not have a master/slave paradigm unless DEBT defines the 'eco-financial' sphere we consider real-world politics. As I see it—Politics is synonymous with Economics in 2023. Plausibly this was always the case. I also prefer the distinction ''eco-financial" to “economics.” Economics is an overused political trigger term used to forward special interests and keep citizens in the dark. In the simplest sense—as long as we don’t teach our children about the realities of the Political-Financial history of the world, generations remain ignorant and provide slave labor without questioning the authorities who dictate the terms of the deal.I also feel that a term like “Predatory-Capitalism” is useful and rooted in the Truth of a reality where 'Money=God' [which I’ve written about over the last several months]…the Fact that Humans are waking up to the Money Matrix Paradigm is a significant detail as we begin the 21st Century. Will we create a better model? Or will we remain tethered to the obsolete 17th and 18th century rituals imposed by the 13 families who own the BANK?

Expand full comment

Yes, a number of researchers say that this goes back to Babylon (Joseph Farrell, F. William Engdahl, author of The Gods of Money, and Mike McGibbon and Douglas Gabriel over at American Intelligence media-they refer to it as the Babylonian Cartel rather than the banking cartel)

Expand full comment

So wonderful to see Joseph Farrell's name mentioned! Many more people are paying attention now, and this certainly fortifies ones faith in humanity--despite the herd-think issue.

Expand full comment

Bankers love socialism.

Expand full comment
author

There you have it.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

I don't think that this perspective is offensive to true free market supporters.

It is no coincidence that the dominant themes of the Ron Paul presidential campaign (and his time in Congress) were End the Fed and End the Empire.

There are powerful critiques of central banking and militarism in libertarian thought going back to at least the 18th and 19 centuries.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

I shared an important reading of Russell Means from 1980 on my Substack last year that opened my eyes and mind to a new understanding of him:

Teaching an Old Fox New Tricks

https://freedomfox.substack.com/p/teaching-an-old-fox-new-tricks

He spoke to us, these times, your share in this post. Before I read this I believed what I was told to believe about him, that he was a radical, a terrorist, a malign actor in our nation. I've since come to realize he was used by malign actors, both common thugs and uncommon intelligence infiltrators seeking to discredit him, his message being too powerful to allow into the public mind. Below are excerpts from one of his speeches. My Substack draws parallels of them to our times. And I encourage all to read the entire Mother Jones article. Marxism, Fascism, Capitalism, any -ism, question everything you think you know about anything. It's when you learn that friends can be foes and foes can be friends. Busting through narratives and propaganda allows us to find our common humanity that unites us.

"I Am Not a Leader”: Russell Means’ 1980 Mother Jones Cover Story:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/russell-means-mother-jones-interview-1980/

"This is what has come to be termed “efficiency” in the European mind. Whatever is mechanical is perfect; whatever seems to work at the moment—that is, proves the mechanical model to be the right one—is considered correct, even when it is clearly untrue. This is why “truth” changes so fast in the European mind; the answers which result from such a process are only stop-gaps, only temporary, and must be continuously discarded in favor of new stop-gaps which support the mechanical models and keep them (the models) alive."

...

"The European materialist tradition of despiritualizing the universe is very similar to the mental process which goes into dehumanizing another person. And who seems most expert at de humanizing other people? And why? Soldiers who have seen a lot of combat learn to do this to the enemy before going back into combat. Murderers do it before going out to commit murder. Nazi SS guards did it to concentration camp inmates. Cops do it. Corporation leaders do it to the workers they send into uranium mines and steel mills. Politicians do it to everyone in sight. And what the process has in common for each group doing the dehumanizing is that it makes it all right to kill and other wise destroy other people. One of the Christian commandments says, “Thou shalt not kill,” at least not humans, so the trick is to mentally convert the victims into nonhumans. Then you can proclaim violation of your own commandment as a virtue."

...

"Terms like progress and development are used as cover words here, the way victory and freedom are used to justify butchery in the dehumanization process."

...

"I look to the process of industrialization in the Soviet Union since 1920 and I see that these Marxists have done what it took the English Industrial Revolution 300 years to do: and the Marxists did it in 60 years. I see that the territory of the USSR used to contain a number of tribal peoples and that they have been crushed to make way for the factories. The Soviets refer to this as “The National Question,” the question of whether the tribal peoples had the right to exist as peoples: and they decided the tribal peoples were an acceptable sacrifice to industrial needs, I look to China and I see the same thing. I look to Vietnam and I see Marxists imposing an industrial order and rooting out the indigenous tribal mountain people."

...

"Faith. Science will find a way. Faith of this sort has always been known in Europe as religion. Science has become the new European religion for both capitalists and Marxists; they are truly inseparable; they are part and parcel of the same culture. So, in both theory and practice, Marxism demands that non-European peoples give up their values, their traditions, their cultural existence altogether. We will all be industrialized science addicts in a Marxist society."

...

"there are forces beyond anything the European mind has conceived, that humans must be in harmony with all relations or the relations will eventually eliminate the disharmony. A lopsided emphasis on humans by humans—the Europeans’ arrogance of acting as though they were beyond the nature of all related things—can only result in a total disharmony and a readjustment which cuts arrogant humans down to size, gives them a taste of that reality beyond their grasp or control and restores the harmony. There is no need for a revolutionary theory to bring this about; it’s beyond human control. The nature peoples of this planet know this and so they do not theorize about it. Theory is an abstract; our knowledge is real."

...

"All European tradition. Marxism included, has conspired to defy the natural order of all things. Mother Earth has been abused, the powers have been abused, and this cannot go on forever. No theory can alter that simple fact. Mother Earth will retaliate, the whole environment will retaliate, and the abusers will be eliminated. Things come full circle, back to where they started. That’s revolution. And that’s a prophecy of my people, of the Hopi people and of other correct peoples.

American Indians have been trying to explain this to Europeans for centuries. But, as I said earlier, Europeans have proven themselves unable to hear. The natural order will win out, and the offenders will die out, the way deer die when they offend the harmony by overpopulating a given region. It’s only a matter of time until what Europeans call “a major catastrophe of global proportions” will occur. It is the role of all natural beings, to survive. A part of our survival is to resist. We resist not to overthrow a government or to take political power, but because it is natural to resist extermination, to survive."

...

"Clearly, individual whites can share in this, given only that they have reached the awareness that continuation of the industrial imperatives of Europe is not a vision, but species suicide. White is one of the sacred colors of the Lakota people—red, yellow, white, and black. The four directions. The four seasons. The four periods of life and aging. The four races of humanity. Mix red, yellow, white, and black together and you get brown, the color of the fifth race. This is a natural ordering of things. It therefore seems natural to me to work with all races, each with its own special meaning, identity and message."

...

"A culture which regularly confuses revolution with continuation, which confuses science and religion, which confuses revolt with resistance, has nothing helpful to teach you and nothing to offer you as a way of life. Europeans have long since lost all touch with reality, if ever they were in touch with it."

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Celia, serendipity strikes! Jon Rappoport also writing today about the Globalist-run "front operation" called "communism":

"Say what?? $80 BILLION in funding for Black Lives Matter and associated causes?" -- by Jon Rappoport

https://jonrappoport.substack.com/p/say-what-80-billion-in-funding-for-blm

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Yup. Known all this for decades. Truth finally coming out. It’s ALWAYS been the Khazarian Mafia.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Celia looking forward to watching--thnks! i recommend to you and readers to also read AMERICAN THINKER. Lots of amazingly well crafted articles written exposing marxism at work. I recommend a recent article called The Communist Tortoise and the Communist Hare.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

What we are dealing with is TECHNOCRACY, the most evil system ever conceived by the monster psychopaths infesting the human species for centuries - the desire for total control by the few over the enslavement of everyone else. https://www.technocracy.news

HORRIFYING TECHNOCRATIC PSYCHOPATHY TO DESTROY HUMANITY AND ALL NATURAL LIFE!

It was NEVER about health! The Powers That Should Not Be were ALWAYS about they want you DEAD or a SLAVE! This is a painful truth to accept but we the people must wake up and fight back!

Supporting this excellent post with a statement and useful links.

We must never lose sight of the larger picture of the vile malignance we are fighting against.

There is an insidious global ruling class plot to enslave all life on earth behind all the madness and suffering inflicted on We the People.

How to fight back against this TOTAL SLAVERY!

RESIST! DO NOT COMPLY! DITCH THE DAMNED 'SMART' PHONES AND THE DAMNED QR CODES AND GO BACK TO LANDLINES OR FLIP PHONES AND USE CASH AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE! INSIST ON CASH! CBDC IS TOTAL SLAVERY!

Other than getting rid of nuclear weapons which I support 100% the rest of the anti-nuclear peace movement and CLIMATE CRISIS propaganda is parroting UN utter GARBAGE, a complete surrender to the ENSLAVEMENT AGENDA by the diabolical despots of Davos - ruling class criminals who lust for total power and control and all of whom should be tried and jailed for life and their malign organizations dismantled: the UN, the WEF, the IMF, the WHO, the BIS, NATO, Blackrock, Vanguard, The Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, The Bilderbergers, the CFR et al.

There is an evil predator globalist technocratic elite agenda of eugenics/depopulation/genocide using bioweapon poison jabs, war, geoengineering, EMF radiation, starvation and economic collapse - THE GREAT RESET/AGENDA 2030/4TH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION to get rid of billions of 'useless eaters' and to use nano tech to turn the survivors into ROBOTIZED COMPLIANT SLAVES! WAKE UP AND RESIST! DO NOT COMPLY! These are psychopath megalomaniacs who want to play god by turning all life into digitized metaverse mechanistic synthetic biology to be manipulated by their AI algorithms. A more demonic sickening idea is nearly impossible to imagine!

APPALLED AND HORRIFIED AT INSANE TYRANNICAL PROTOCOLS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HEALTH AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH TOTALITARIAN CONTROL! REVERSE THIS NOW!

MAKE THE WORLD AND AMERICA 2019 (comparatively speaking), AND FREE AGAIN!

NO, I AM NOT AFRAID OF THE MORONIC SCARIANT SHMARIANT MONKEYSHINES! WAKE UP ALREADY!

TOTALLY CONDEMN BIDEN AND ALL OTHER POLS WHO HAVE NO POWER TO LAWLESSLY ACT LIKE AN EMPEROR OR DICTATOR AND DECREE JAB CROW 'SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS' FASCIST SEGREGATION/DISCRIMINATION/APARTHEID VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION, THE NUREMBERG CODES AND EVERY CIVIL RIGHT IMAGINABLE.

NO GREEN NEW DEALS OR BUILD BACK BETTER FROM THE CRIMINAL TECHNOCRAT TYRANTS KLAUS SCHWAB AND HIS CRONIES FROM THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM.

STOP THE TERRIBLE TYRANNY OF THE TECHNOCRATS GLOBAL AGENDA OF TOTAL SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL USING THE VIRUS AS EXCUSE AND PROPAGANDA TOOL!

NO MUZZLING STIFLING MASK MANDATES! NO FORCED VACCINES! END TORTUROUS DEVASTATING LOCK DOWNS NOW! I WANT MY LIFE BACK.

https://wrenchinthegears.com

https://www.stopworldcontrol.com/

https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com

https://pandemicfacts.info

https://wearehumanwearefree.org/7-days-campaign/

https://sonsoflibertymedia.com/covid-19-roadmap-12-step-plan-to-create-a-totalitarian-new-world-order-were-on-number-8-headed-towards-number-9/

https://questioningcovid.com

https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1581-james-corbett-breaks-down-the-great-reset/

http://www.stopcp.com/GlobalResetPSYOP/GlobalResetPSYOPMindMap.html

https://everydayconcerned.net/2020/09/04/breaking-major-investigative-report-by-association-of-french-reserve-army-officers-finds-covid-19-pandemic-to-have-a-hidden-agenda-for-global-totalitarianism-nanotech-chipping-of-all-5g-irradia/

Pam Popper: https://makeamericansfreeagain.com

Del Bigtree: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/highwire

Naomi Wolf: https://dailyclout.io

www.nojabforme.info

https://www.globalresearch.ca/we-must-awaken-from-corona-coma-reject-great-reset-robotic-technocracy-assert-common-humanity/5745213

Expand full comment
author

Technocracy is huge and central to all this. Patrick Wood tried to warn us. AIDS dissidents tried to warn about Fauci. Many, including Griffin tried to warn about the creature, the Federal Reserve. Vladimir Bukovsky tried to warn about USSR money infiltrating way more deeply into western culture including all our 3 TV networks (proofs in his book "Judgment in Moscow: Soviet Crimes and Western Complicity." It now makes all sense in the world. No "West" was ever opposed to "communism!" No two sides. No Cold War. And no "collapse" of communism. All fairy tales.

Expand full comment

Yes, and former Congressman Dr. Ron Paul also spent his career warning about the Federal Reserve, and the media always attacked him, did their best to portray him as kooky and weird, and even called him an antisemite on occasion, yet he was the only one telling the truth about the central bankers. And he ran for President twice, back in 2008 and 2012, and had huge End the Fed rallies. A number of us thought the nomination was stolen and given to Mitt Romney.

I think Eustace Mullins' book The Secrets of the Federal Reserve was the first one on the subject. And he was actually put up to it by Ezra Pound, who was locked away in St. Elizabeth's Hospital in DC, I believe for the crime of trying to stop WW2 on radio broadcasts in Italy ( I think he called out the banking families behind the war). Not sure how Ezra figured it out, but he somehow did and clearly made the connection between the wars and bankers (just like former Congressman Dr. Ron Paul has said it's not a coincidence that over a century of central banking has led to over a century of war). And Ezra was clear on the problem of usury and wrote a poem about it. Anyway, back to Eustace Mullins, he later found out that he was a target of the FBI and that they had a huge file on him--all for writing books about the Federal Reserve banking system, so that kind of tells you who the FBI really works for.

And I agree, no two sides, the cold war was a looting operation and no "collapse" of communism--the bankers orchestrate all of it. It's not a coincidence that the Muslims started "misbehaving" after the cold war ended (they needed a new enemy!!). Both Sibel Edmonds and F William Engdahl have talked/written about how the Muslim "extremism" was orchestrated by powerful people --they were socially engineered to be the new enemy for more endless war. In his documentary The Money Masters, Bill Still goes over the history of the banker takeover and he notes that the bankers realized that they could make the most money from war financing. So it's certainly not a surprise to find that the created enemies so that they could orchestrate wars.

In his 1961 speech (available online). Benjamin Freedman goes over what went on behind the scenes to get us into WW1--he was an assistant to Bernard Baruch (yesterday's Soros/Rothschild agent), so as an insider, he saw what happened. He broke with these people, married a Catholic woman, and spent the rest of his life and personal fortune trying to warn people about the bankers.

And Col Fletcher Prouty, who was basically an eyewitness to history, was a cargo pilot during WW2, and he saw them setting up for the wars in Korea and Vietnam before WW2 was even over!! (see "The Real Mr. X Col Fletcher Prouty interview EIR" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeW4GcJ0oro&t=2103s )

Bottom line: we've been lied to about everything!!

Expand full comment

I was a supporter of Ron Paul back when he was running for president. I maxed out on contributions, joined groups to make signs and stick them everywhere, had T-shirts made etc.

All that said, the man has significant connections to, and has publicly expressed support for, freemasonry. e.g. See https://www.freemasonrywatch.org/ron.paul.and.freemasonry.html

I am skeptical that he is not aware of the probematic nature of freemasonry, and his continued support for the organization therefore gives me great concern.

Expand full comment

Yeah, I hear you, though at the same time, I guess I just tuck that away. I'm not that concerned about him speaking at Georgetown University- he's not responsible for the masonic symbols on the wall. Actually, I went to undergrad at Georgetown and was completely oblivious to the masonic and Jesuit influence. But I think it's a corrupt university, much more so now than when I was there. I do recall their School of Foreign Service promoting the US line of BS. So far, I still see Dr. Paul as being a force for good---I think he woke tons of people up to the Federal Reserve. And he's still trying to spread the word with his Campaign for Liberty (you can sign up for free) -he sends out alerts on what the whores in DC are doing, especially regarding digital ID and CBDCs and he gives you a way to send quick messages to your representatives.

I also follow financial expert Greg Mannarino on a daily basis and he apparently was involved with masonry too. So, I keep that in the back of my mind, but I still listen to him and IMO he's one of the best on calling out the criminality of the financial system and the central bankers.

Here's what Dr. Paul recently sent out, calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve, with the idea being that this could lead to ending it (apparently Massie introduced the bill):

https://www.chooseliberty.org/cosponsor-audit-the-fed/?source_code=c14159545

(people should go to the link and send a message to their representative to co-sponsor the bill)

And this is an alert from the John Birch Society:

Stop Digital Currency Tyranny — Enact H.R. 1122

https://jbs.org/alert/stop-digital-currency-tyranny/

Members of Congress are seeking to enact H.R. 1122. This bill would prevent the Federal Reserve from issuing a digital currency, which would decimate personal privacy and implement a full-fledged surveillance state.

There are a few in Congress who are trying to stop this:

https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/us-legislators-introduce-bill-would-prohibit-creation-american-cbdc So it looks like Rep Tom Emmer (R-MN) and Rep Andy Biggs (R-AZ) know about the Federal Reserve's plan for CBDCs and are trying to stop it.

And Rep Mooney (R-WV) introduced a bill to return us to a gold standard (which would be great--anything but the CBCDs/cashless society) https://twitter.com/repalexmooney/status/1579881812503187456

And Senator Lankford (R-OK) introduced a bill to allow us to keep cash and not go cashless.

https://news.bitcoin.com/us-senator-introduces-no-digital-dollar-act-to-prohibit-treasury-and-the-fed-from-interfering-with-americans-using-paper-currency/

So these are signs of hope, but we have to get our Representatives and Senators to sign onto these bills and get them passed.

Expand full comment

Agree that speaking at Georgetown University is not a big problem.

However his father being a freemason, his wife Eastern star, his frequent attendance at meetings at the lodge and his public support for freemasonry are concerning - at least for me. I still hope that he's on the side of the angels, but I would no longer be surprised if he were not.

Expand full comment

Time for you all to read the book "The Killing of Uncle Sam" by Rodney Howard-Browne and Paul L. Williams. It's the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, following the designs of Cecil Rhodes for the past century plus who have precipitated all that we are now in the end stages of. Read the book.

Expand full comment

Cecil Rhodes was servant not master. Otherwise you are in the ballpark.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023·edited Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

Regardless of any ideology it is quite a frightening thought when one realizes that there is no single currency anywhere in the world linked to a commodity. For now the dollar is simply the best looking horse in the glue factory. This is another form of waking up-hedge accordingly.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

I thought true value derives from labor. For example, See Barren Metal by E Michael Jones.

Expand full comment
Mar 16, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

No. It doesn’t. Digging post holes isn’t worth the same as mining gold.

Expand full comment

I am a big critique of Lenin's Blanquism--the totalitarian part, not the democratic centralist part. Why don't you look at books like Orlando Figes, A People's Tragedy, and Laura Engelstein, Russia in Flames, wrote? This would turn you on to the fact that Communism is not necessarily totalitarian. Marx was NOT a totalitarian. But Lenin was. See the essay I wrote: https://bmccproftomsmith7.substack.com/p/lenins-intentions-for-the-new-soviet

And let's debate, and discuss.

Expand full comment

Marx was a satanist; try and discuss his poetic output on that count. And you do not need some fancy totalitarianism where plain old tyranny will do. “Short words are best, and old words when short are best of all.”

Expand full comment

Celia thanks for posting this. I believe there is much truth in this.

Expand full comment