As Orwell foresaw it, one of the ways in which the Party controls thought is to control language.
At this stage of the game, where only a few bank holding companies control the central core of the global economy, language, and therefore, thought, is being destroyed through control over the mass media and social media. As any behaviorist will tell you, if you repeat a lie often enough, most of the people will begin to believe it. A techno-corollary would be: if you limit the number of text characters severely enough, all subtleties of meaning (and thinking) will be lost.
One of the central themes promulgated by those at the top of the power pyramid is to paint the current political and economic systems in the United States and western Europe as a blend of representative democracy (i.e., republics) and capitalism, with the antithesis being socialism, as represented by the Stalinist Russia and Maoist China. Nothing could be further from the truth.
These terms have lost their meaning in the context of the current situation.
As capitalism evolved, the sovereign currencies of nations have been gradually usurped by the banksters (please note that we do not consider this a pejorative term, since we have shown here and here, among other places, that the current banking and corporate business model is one of FRAUD).
This control over once-sovereign currencies has enabled the banksters to literally buy up the world, including all key corporations, governments (plus the intelligence and military services), and natural resources. What we have then is corporate control over the state, which is a textbook definition of fascism.
So, essentially, capitalism, which literally means a system in which the exigencies of capital are the primary focus, necessarily leads to fascism. This is because money starts out as an accounting for labor and is turned into capital when interest is charged, subsequently devaluing and enslaving labor and stealing the fruits of labor. We have explored this at length here.
Socialism is a system where society (humanity and other living things) is the central focus. The fascists, who call themselves capitalists, democrats, and republicans ("Of course we will have fascism in America but we will call it democracy!" --Huey Long) point to Stalinist Russia and Maoist China as examples of socialism and communism, but, in fact, an examination of the political and economic structure of these societies do not support such a contention. First, the commissars ruled like the czars and Mao ruled like the Mings. Both Russia and China were authoritarian societies long before socialism was ever conceived. Also, economically speaking, Lenin was backed by the western bankers because democratic Russia, under Kerensky, owned its own banks and currency. Today, all state-owned Russian banks (begun under Stalin) have been sold to the private western banks, which also have large stakes in China's main banks. This is why China is being run into debt, which would be entirely unnecessary, if China were a sovereign state.
All this being said, what then would socialism look like? Modern economies necessarily are a mix of entrepreneurial (private) sectors and regulated and/or state-operated sectors. This is because certain sectors operate more efficiently as monopolies, which is why they should not be under private control (plus "public utilities commissions" have shown themselves to be lackeys of the corporations). Banking and currency, as well as power generation, are in this category of sovereign functions and monopolistic efficiencies. So, currently, those nations in which universal healthcare and other basic social safety net features are in place have socialistic elements within a framework of fascism, since, after the false flag of 9-11, there are only a handful of nations that still control their own currency and could be called sovereign. Among these are Syria, Iran, and North Korea, which are at the top of the fascist hit list.
It's important to note that even when the current system collapses or is overthrown and replaced (say, here in the U.S.) by a national network of publicly owned banks, including the prohibition of usury, this would not be socialism, because government control over money creation is a SOVEREIGN function as defined by the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sections 8 and 10. Within this context, both entrepreneurial capitalism and socialistic services could co-exist. Once the government and society were free from private control over currency (and utilities), representative democracy could be restored and irect democracy would also be possible, as long as a few other preconditions--verifiable elections and decentralized media (discussed here)--were also met.
Copyright 2014
Robert Bows
Colorado Public Banking
# # #
[We are pleased to announce that our book, 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation, is now available online at Amazon and at Barnes and Noble.]
No comments:
Post a Comment