All Hail the Conquering Euros!

Sometimes headline writers say more than they mean to say (or maybe not): “Western leaders march into Libya” -- to describe the victory lap Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron are taking around the country they did so much to help conquer on behalf of the rebels. And... well, for one thing, where was Obama? Isn't he feeling a bit left out? But let's admit, Britain and France did most of the heavy lifting, and all we contributed were a few million tons of bombs, drones, and missiles, and a few billion dollars, all of which we can easily afford since our economy is doing so well... so one can hardly blame Obama for not wanting to upstage his allies and steal even a tiny fragment of their glory. Plus, he has better things to do, like saving his behind in next year's election. But still – it is a bit grotesque, in this day and age, to see the two most prominent colonial powers of the 20th Century celebrating as they once again descend on the helpless hordes of Africa. Is this the beginning of a new colonial era? Or simply the last dying gasp of the old one? One thing's for certain – they are protecting their interests when it comes to oil, and the interests of their banks when it comes to finance... and, I suppose, in some sort of roundabout way, the interests of Israel.

But not so fast! Hasn't it turned out that, in many cases, these drives for “democracy” in the Arab/Islamic world have resulted in greater hostility toward Israel, and toward the West in general, than was there before (or, at least, evident before)? It turns out that, in the view of the various rebel/insurgent groups, their estwhile leaders were actually “American puppets” -- although we always saw them as sketchy allies at best. After all, didn't they require a steady diet of bribes – oops, I mean “foreign aid” -- to keep their hands off Israel? And thus the resentment grew among the unwashed and disenfranchised. We never really supported democracy in the Third World; only pretended to. And we're only pretending to support it now – until it turns out not to be in our best interests, in which case we'll be the first ones to cheer when a military coup brings another tyrant to power.

But I don't want to give the wrong impression here. I fully agree that our interests don't always coincide with what other people might consider “democracy”. The best thing, or one of the best things, that could ever happen to our foreign policy would be to disavow all interest in converting countries to democracy that have no interest in being converted. And in fact, “democracy” and human rights – which we should support – are not necessarily synonymous; that's a misconception. You can, at least in theory, have human rights in a dictatorship... and few if any human rights in a democracy, if it results in radical majority rule. So I'm not interested in their forms of government per se, and I don't think the State Department or the administration should be either. And I suspect that they really aren't, but see a need to mouth the right words from time to time. Does anyone really think that Sarkozy, or Cameron, or Obama care about the form of government in Libya? Please. Whoever, or whatever, serves our interests is the right form of government, by definition. We see this already in plenty of other places around the world.

So with that picture of hypocrisy in mind, let's at least reflect on the fact that Sarkozy and Cameron descended on Libya like conquerors. It's a miracle they didn't stage a victory parade, with Gadhafi supporters being led along in chains behind flatulent elephants. In any case, it left no doubt as to who is now in charge in Libya, and it has nothing to do with the National Transitional Council. No – Libya is now securely in the hands of the E.U., as are all of its assets – the newest jewel in the crown of the Euro-Empire, and hopefully a much less troublesome one than Libya and its neighbors were in former times.

And then – coincidentally, perhaps – we also read about a new bailout plan for the E.U. and the euro – namely an infusion of American dollars, courtesy of the Federal Reserve. That's right, folks – your taxpayer dollars are now being used to bail out the behinds of ne'er-do-well European countries and of the banks that are located in the more prosperous countries. And I guess it would be silly to ask whether the American taxpayers, or even their representatives in Congress, had anything to say about this; of course they didn't. This is a deal hatched at the very top of the heap, and serves the interests of those at the top and no one else. And, as usual, the American taxpayer is the cash cow, just sitting there waiting to be milked – or bled. And besides – since when have the Europeans been so enamored of American dollars? Aren't they betting against it and assaulting it on a regular basis? And yet we see that “(t)he coordinated action is intended to give large European banks ample access to dollars...” And that “European banks... have had trouble raising dollars from U.S. investors and financial institutions, which are scared off by Europeans' heavy exposure to Greece” (as if Greece isn't part of Europe – it makes it sound more like a disease than a country). Translation: No one right now wants to voluntarily invest in European banks, so the Fed will cheerfully step in with money stolen from the American taxpayer and do the investing itself. Isn't international finance great?

And get this: “European banks need the cash to make loans to their U.S. customers and repay their own dollar-denominated borrowings.” Translation: We're bailing them out, period. (Plus, why do "their U.S. customers" need to borrow U.S. dollars from European banks? Can't they borrow from American banks? I'm sure I don't want to know why... ) So... the Fed, not being satisfied with overseeing the massive bailouts of criminally-negligent American banks, investment houses, insurance companies, mortgage companies, automobile companies, etc., are now doing, or helping to do, the same thing in Europe.

And then – get this! -- here's Timothy Geithner – (I can't believe he's still running loose, and not in jail!) -- going over to Europe to “press his counterparts for stronger action to stem the crisis”. “Take our money! Please!”

So what does all of this tell me? It merely confirms my suspicion that the true power center these days is nowhere near the U.S. The Europeans get us to help them conquer Libya, then move in and gather up all the goodies and glory. The Europeans create this bogus crisis with the euro and the “PIGS”, then call on us to bail out their banks. So – who's in charge, after all? It certainly isn't us. We have become, for all intents and purposes, a European colony once again – a source of military resources and of money – just like any colony in the old empire days which provided soldiers, raw materials, and other forms of wealth to the colonial powers. And I don't care how many stories I read about “Europe in crisis”, and “when is the euro going to crash”, blah blah – it might be true to some extent. But we are in an even worse crisis, which is that our fate – economically and militarily at the very least – is no longer in our own hands. Welcome to the Euro-American Empire, which – once the mask is no longer of any utility – will be known simply as the Euro-Empire, with us as the largest chunk of meat hanging in the smokehouse.

Beware of Non-Greeks Bearing Gifts

The death pangs of Greece, as it is spirited away and thrown into the harem of the New World Order, continue. But the quote of the day comes from "Socialist critic" Vasso Papandreou: "Europe should be a zone of solidarity, but it is a jungle where the banks can do what they like." Well, yes -- but it's only a jungle if you happen to be on ground level. From the high, clear air that is the vantage point of the globalist banks, everything is going as planned, and any sort of minor anarchy on the part of the unwashed is no more than a minor irritant. And this is the lesson we have yet to learn over here -- that no matter how chaotic and difficult things become for the ordinary citizen, everything is completely under control. Throughout the recent and ongoing crisis, people seldom stop to ask, who is profiting from all this? Because someone is, clearly. Someone profited handsomely from the subprime mortgage extravaganza... someone profited from the stock market meltdown... someone is profiting from the bailouts and the "stimulus" programs... and so on. And these are not people who just happened to luck out -- who happened to be holding on to the right kind of paper at the right time. They made their choices -- their "investments" -- with the full knowledge that things were about to go off the cliff, and those investments were structured in such a way as to extact maximum profit from the woes, losses, and disappointments of others. And this, by the way, is why things are not going to degenerate into total anarchy, as so many doomsayers think. There is, and will continue to be, a "floor" below which things are not going to fall. And that floor has already been established -- but it has nothing to do with the best interests of ordinary investors, citizens, job holders, the unemployed, or the country in general. If any of those hapless parties should profit from what is going on, all well and good -- but it's just an accident. They're basically picking up crumbs that fall from the tables of the powerful. I can say that I got the hell out of the stock market before the big plunge, and then got back in (to a very modest extent) at about 8000, because I had a feeling that that (or 7000 at the very least) was the "floor". And yes, if things had really been as chaotic as the media claimed, the floor could have been much lower -- all the way down to zero, in fact. But I had already decided that nothing that was happening was an accident, and that there would be a limit to the "take" from the middle class that time around. As I pointed out at the time, the stock market is one of the primary means of income redistribution that the Regime has -- it serves to take money from the middle class and transfer it to the powerful... but not so drastically or obviously as to tip anyone off. And granted, a lot of people made the usual panic-stricken run to gold... but before long they were seduced back into stocks. The only question now is, when does the next big "take" occur, and I'm frankly hoping that won't happen for quite a while. I think that the powers that be have shifted their attention to other lucrative things -- like Greece, for instance, and the rest of the "PIGS"... or the perpetual, ever-multiplying wars the United States is fighting... or figuring out the best way to profit from our deficit spending and stupendous national debt. There are so many opportunities out there for the smart investor, but you have to be a member of the anointed elite to take advantage of them. Otherwise you're no better off than the country bumpkin sitting at a three-card monte table on Times Square.

Greece on the Skids

At this point, Greece – the “G” in “PIGS” -- is in the process of selling itself into slavery, mostly to French and German banks, in order to stay out of the EU version of debtor's prison. I'm not sure it's much of a choice, but under the new order (remember that term from the old days – by which I mean the Nazi era?) that's what happens when you borrow and spend yourself into oblivion. Of course, one could well ask, how was all that borrowing possible, and who was the money borrowed from? -- and the answer would of course be, why those very same French and German banks who now have the fate of Greece firmly in their hands. The EU giveth, and the EU taketh away. We think of the EU as a bit of a joke over here, but over there it's no laughing matter.

But then the question arises, do those banks work for the EU or does the EU work for those banks? In other words, who is a subsidiary of whom? And I think the answer is becoming more clear every day – namely that the banks are in charge, and that anything the French, German, or other governments do by way of rule-setting and enforcement is done in their role as a surrogate for the banks.

So far so good. But then we have to ask if the situation really and truly developed on its own – spontaneously – or if it was, in fact, planned... and I think the answer is again clear. The “PIGS” (or “PIIGS” if you include Italy) are being rounded up and brought into the fold one by one. First they're allowed to get hooked on borrowing and spending, just like the most abject junkie, and then the day of reckoning comes and they're left with no resources (other than slave labor) and no defenders. It is then that the creditor nations/banks move in and take over, in the modern version of empire building. The interesting thing about it is that what is now developing is a Franco-German empire, which is, truly, a new thing under the sun, since those two entities have been on-and-off enemies for centuries now.

But that's just part of the story, as we all already know. Another part is that the Greek government is having to consider “severe austerity measures” -- AKA living within a (balanced, I assume) budget, in order to meet the conditions for their sale of their country into slavery. Oh yeah... the big boys aren't just going to welcome them into the sheepfold with open arms; they have to pay the price of modifying their behavior as well. Then consider what the Greek government is facing: They are in charge of a nation of, basically junkies – people who have lived beyond their proper means for as long as most of them can remember. And socialism does that to you – it completely beclouds any sort of realistic picture of what your proper standing of living is, and instead dazzles you with images of a perfect life. And so, when that perfect life turns out to be a cruel hoax, people react the way one would expect – they take to the streets and start burning and smashing things. We've seen it in our own “inner cities”, on and off, for decades now, and psychologically the causes are quite similar.

Now, one could say, but wouldn't “rational” people know better than to adjust their expectations to a stratospheric (nice Greek word, there) level? After all, isn't Greece the birthplace of “reason”? Well, yes – if we're talking about toga-clad philosophers. But overall, people are people anywhere you go, and once they are hooked on a certain idea it is nigh unto impossible to unhook them. (It may take only one generation to produce a socialist, but it takes a hundred years to produce a libertarian.) And it's the ordinary people – not the philosophers – who are taking to the streets. And admittedly, all they are concerned with is their handouts and entitlements... their “piece of the pie”. They couldn't care less if their country is self-ruled or confined to a penitentiary-like subdivision of the EU. In fact, I doubt if those running the government of Greece care either – as long as they get their cut. They will sell their own country down the river if need be, as long as they continue to receive their “perks”. (What ever happened to national pride? The answer is “the EU”.)

Ah, but! Maybe things aren't so bad after all. Now the French banks are offering Greece “rollovers” -- which are the equivalent of refinancing a home mortgage (even when “under water”)... or using one credit card to pay off another. They're the equivalent, in other words, of methadone for a junkie – not a cure but, basically, just a legal version of the thing they got addicted to in the first place.

So this is the reward Greece gets for joining the EU! But, lest we forget, one of the main motivators for insolvent socialist governments to join was precisely this – the availability of a safety net, courtesy of the EU, i.e. of the _solvent_ socialist governments. Yes, you can be socialistic and still stay in the black – but it takes a people of discipline and a certain sort of character to pull this off... people like the Germans, say. They can – as can the Scandinavians – head for the cliff's edge at full speed, but then pull up short while their less-sophisticated, more impulsive fellows go careening off into the pit. And that is precisely what has happened over the years in the EU – with full intent, I might add. Like teenagers in a 1950s hot-rod movie, the smart ones know when to make that last-instant turn and the dumb ones don't. So we're left with the final scene in the cemetery with everyone in mourning for “Johnny”, while some doughy old police chief stands off to the side muttering “Why don't they listen? Why?” And it's a good question – but the answer is that socialistic governments do listen – to the irrational demands of the citizens, who have been taught that they have nothing but “rights”, and no obligations or responsibilities.

And as Greece goes, so goes Portugal, Ireland, Spain, and Italy too, I guess – all strangely confined to the Mediterranean or the Celtic sphere. And what is the significance of this? Is it because people from those places tend to be weak minded... gullible... foolish? Well, not weak-minded so much as invincibly ignorant when it comes to even the most basic economics. They literally don't understand where money, or wealth, or prosperity come from; their thinking is non-linear and, basically, magical. So they become fair game for those who do not labor under those sorts of illusions. And I suppose there is a certain kind of Darwinian justice to it all – but it's still depressing and sad. I mean, we throw junkies in jail in this country even though many people would say it's not their fault – go after the pushers instead. Well, OK – but the Puritan mind set is ever focused on individual responsibility, and mainly on everyone getting their “just deserts”, according to those who fancy that they stand on the moral high ground. In other words, it's a very non-compassionate world view that is operating here... and if you consider that the doctors, let's say, and the pushers are the same people – as is the case in the EU – it goes way beyond simple lack of compassion to outright exploitation and sadism.

Ah well, at least the trouble is confined to Europe; it's nothing we have to worry about, right? Or... well, we're constantly being told that Greece's troubles are going to create a fearsome domino effect, and will “shake confidence”, and “roil the financial markets”, etc. Well... this is partly just old-fashioned fear mongering, designed to get everyone else to go along with the scam. And, it also provides cover for those who fully intend to extract the maximum profits from the situation – the way the anarchy resulting from a natural disaster provides cover for looters. How can the average person tell when things are bad just because they're bad, and when they're bad on purpose? They can't – and that's just the situation that those in charge want. What they want is bad times, to lower people's expectations, but not times that are sufficiently bad to create real anarchy. I mean, they don't want to have to drive their limo to work every day through a gauntlet of bonfires and people throwing bricks. But even that can have its uses, as witness the events in Greece right now. You loose the dogs of economic war, let people express themselves with a bit of violence... that scares the bourgeoisie, who give the politicians carte blanche, which really means giving the financial powers carte blanche... and the noose is tightened around everyone's neck. We have seen this cycle in this country time and time again, and it's not always about money either – at least not directly. It can be about social unrest, “rights”, jobs, housing – any number of things. But the outlines are always the same, which leads one to believe that there is a template being applied, in a cyclic way, by those in power.

But hold on; I'm not finished. Even though we fancy ourselves aloof, and much more stable and secure than those hapless Greeks, we really aren't. The conditions being protested in the “Greek street” are no different from those we will have here, eventually – but our day of reckoning has not yet come, because whoever's in charge has decided to put it off for a while more. But think about it – insane levels of borrowing, insane levels of debt – all for the sake of entitlements and handouts? And in our case we are also acting as the world's policeman, which at least one cannot say of anyone in the EU – except for the occasional Sunday afternoon jaunt across the Mediterranean to bomb Tripoli. And as I said, it's not as if we have no experience with what happens when people's economic world, and world view, are threatened. The Greeks will riot about just about everything, it's true – as will the Italians, the Arabs, the Argentines, all those hot-blooded types. But we have our career rioters as well, confined so far to the inner cities and large university campuses. But who is to say that can't change? You try to impose the same “austerity measures” on American citizens that Greece is imposing on its citizens, and you might just wind up with working-class _white_ riots... or Hispanic riots... or even bigger black riots... or all three combined! And what happens when it starts cutting into the middle class? Well, they won't go so far as to riot; they are too used to being treated like lambs to the slaughter. But might there not be mirror images to the tea parties – middle class people demonstrating _for_ entitlements, rather than against them? It has happened, in a low-key way. And who knows, it might even get to the point where our middle class starts demonstrating against war; now that would shake up the powers that be!

So – I say that as Greece goes, so go we; eventually. The die is cast. And it might take years for things to come to a head, but when they do it will be for the same reasons – borrowing, spending, entitlement addiction, followed by disappointment and frustration... and all watched over from the high vantage point of the powers of this world – the bankers, the pushers, the manipulators. They look on with evil grins as places like Greece are clamped in irons... and will look on likewise as any other country in the EU sphere that is tried and found wanting is dealt with the same way. And then their sights will turn toward the U.S. -- and in fact, they already have. We are being fattened for the kill; make no mistake. Our fate is already firmly in hands not our own, but this will become more obvious over time, and less possible for our leaders to deny. The day that the papers are signed committing us to enslavement, those doing the signing will be the same ones we elected to office.

The Lack O' the Irish

Ireland is the flavor of the month in the ongoing saga of EU bailouts – which really means that it is the most recent national economy to become enslaved to the gnomes of Brussels. It's all part of a master plan, of course – the strong con the weak into “joining forces”, which is, as anyone can see, a joke... then the weak stumble, and the strong accuse them of bad faith and deliver an ultimatum – either you turn your economy over to us or you'll never work on this continent again. Well, what's a country to do? They aren't used to playing with the big dogs... or playing by the rules at all. The siren song of being part of something strong, stable, and prosperous rang out across the land... and the foolish fell for it. And now they realize they've sold themselves into perpetual slavery. And guess who's in charge? Germany! Is this the Fourth Reich? Kind of looks that way. But hey, they're all socialists and materialists... and they all believe in Darwinism. So when the survival of the fittest comes down to cases, no one can complain when nature takes its course. The easy-going, laid-back countries of the sunnier clime were clearly destined to become the servants of the hard-nosed, frigid, austere denizens of the sub-Arctic regions. North always trumps south; this may be the most generalizable lesson of history.

And as Greece and Ireland go, so goes – or so it's expected – Portugal, Spain, and possibly Italy. Thus, the “PIGS” with an extra I. And like pigs everywhere, they're all headed for the sausage grinder. Of course, there is much feigned consternation on the part of the more sober countries about all this – why, we've cast our lot with a bunch of free-spending ne'er-do-wells! How could we have made such a mistake? (heh heh) Well, of course, it was not a mistake at all – any idiot could have told you that this bizarre marriage would never work. It would be like your thrifty sister marrying the town drunk – guess what their household budget's going to look like. Right, it'll look like the budget of the town drunk. So what we're seeing now is, basically, a set-up. The PIGS, or PIIGS, entered into this marriage with the cool, thrifty Nordic types expecting that they would be able to continue in their insolvent "manana" ways indefinitely... and the gnomes of the EU gave them just enough rope to hang themselves, at which point they pulled it taut. So now the town drunks are in the clanger, and the cool Nordic types are moving in and reaping the reward of their investment. All well and good. Europe has been without war, except for a bit of awkwardness after Yugoslavia broke up, since 1945. What it has in its place is a kind of intramural economic battle, of which the milestones were the establishment of the EU in the first place, then the anointing of the Euro, and now the liquidation of all the underachievers. It's just another empire; let's admit it. And whoever was foolish enough to fall for the scam deserves their fate.

But then here's Jack Markowitz speculating in Sunday's Tribune-Review that as Ireland goes, so we will go... if we don't clean up our act. He predicts a reduction in the minimum wage, less “progressive” tax rates, a national sales tax, new property and utility taxes, a reduction in the number of government employees, and – optimist that he is – keeping corporate taxes low, in order to sustain employment. This is apparently what Ireland has in mind – or, rather, what the EU has in mind for Ireland, since Ireland's economic fate is no longer in its own hands. And it's the U.S. should have in mind... or will be forced to have in mind in the near future. At least, that's his implication.

But here's the problem. Ireland is not making these policy changes of its own free will; they are being forced upon them by a greater power – one which they gladly aligned themselves with not all that long ago. Ireland is being transitioned to a bread-and-water diet for the foreseeable future... but not because they have a zest for bread and water (The Irish? Please.) but because they have no choice – or feel that they don't. The alternative is to go bankrupt and become a Jonah, and to be shunned by all decent people in all the rest of Europe forever. And surely the gregarious Irish want none of that sort of thing. So they will be forced to crawl in the dirt and eat dust, while others look on with amused grins on their well-fed faces.

So if Ireland is incapable of restoring fiscal sanity on its own, why would anyone think we can? And we don't have a Big Brother in the form of the EU to crack the whip, or simply move in and take over. That's the problem with being at the top of the economic heap – who's able to discipline us? And if self-discipline is totally lacking, then what's to stop us from descending into the pit, which we are clearly doing? I mean... can you imagine the political consequences of any American politician suggesting a reduction in the minimum wage, less “progressive” tax rates, a national sales tax, new property and utility taxes, a reduction in the number of government employees... all while keeping corporate taxes low? It would be political suicide, simply because no one takes budget deficits seriously. And you know what? I don't blame them. Budget deficits are just numbers on paper. You can't see them, or feel, or touch, or smell them. Who knows, they may not even exist! Now, one thing people _can_ perceive is inflation, or devaluation of the dollar, which are the same thing. That's nice and tangible. But what's a deficit, and what's the national debt? They're abstractions. So there is no political pressure to do anything about deficits per se... or even devaluation of the currency, until it's too late. On the other hand, there is a huge amount of political pressure when it comes to things like the minimum wage, taxes, government (i.e. union) employees, and corporate tax rates. Those are issues that get someone elected... or voted out of office. So those will be the issues that receive attention, while the esoteric machinations of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department fail to appear on most people's radar.

Now, one might accuse the American electorate of short-sightedness – after all, the deficit is, in the long run, going to create catastrophic conditions and hurt everyone. If you project the national debt, every American will eventually owe "someone" (or something) more than they can possibly earn in a lifetime. But people don't vote in the long run. They don't even vote in the medium run. They vote for what they want to have happen tomorrow... or next week at the latest. And when the catastrophe does come, well... it will be blamed on something else so no one will have to feel guilty, or responsible. It will be “fate”, just like the Great Depression... or “things going out of control”, like stock market crashes... or “our enemies”, like war and terrorism. Anything but accepting the responsibility ourselves – especially accepting it now, while it's not too late to prevent catastrophe, or at least minimize the damages.

Plus, let's face it, you're never going to get a bill in your mailbox for your portion of the national debt. Yes, it will be your responsibility... in a weird kind of way. But again, it's an abstraction. I mean, if the dollar is an abstraction -- which it is, since it has no backing -- then anything denominated in dollars is also an abstraction, and that includes the national debt. Right? I mean, in theory we could just all rise as one man and say, "We're not paying, and you can't make us." It's unlikely... but it could happen. It's worth a thought, at least.

And it's not as if no one out there is concerned. China has been counseling us for quite some time now about our profligate ways... and now the EU is starting to get a bit nervous. I mean, Greece and Ireland are one thing, but if the U.S. acted the same way? That could get serious. But of course, we go on ignoring all their pleas, because, guess what, they don't vote for American politicians; only Americans do.

But there is one thing that might save us – a source of discipline that the vast majority of Americans are unaware of. I refer, of course, to my favorite villain (well, one of them at least...) -- namely the international financial cabal, which, I have a strong feeling, is centered in Europe. It's not the EU, but the EU and our own economy fall under the same heavy hand. And I have been saying for a long time now that things are working out quite nicely for these folks – exactly as planned. We are hideously in debt and our economy is on the ropes, which is just the way they like it, because it gives them control. They are running the game (the casino analogy again) and we're the gambling addicts that don't know when to quit (especially when the house keeps loaning us more chips). But as I've also said, there has to be a limit to this scheme at some point. I can't imagine that there would be any advantage to letting us go down the drain completely. Again, it's like the Masai and their cattle -- they keep them alive for milk and blood; what good does it do if they're dead? Much better to have a vast slave army (the American public), hopelessly in debt, with leaders who are no more than glorified servants themselves – and collaborators as well. We have come very close to this state of things already, and all current trends seem to be pointing to a more solid, complete version.

Now, obviously, China has a role to play as well, since they took the initiative and bought up so much of our now shaky-looking debt. But do they want to take over our economy? I think they would rather concentrate on advancing their own. But certainly there has to be cooperation, on some level, between them and the European cabal. If they're going to work together to carve up the U.S. economy like a Thanksgiving turkey, it's a lot easier if they're on the same page, and have the same, or a similar, agenda.

We sit over here and laugh at all the problems the EU is having. But that's just on the surface. If you look at the totality of their economic challenges, and the totality of ours, it's clear that ours are much more severe, and much less amenable to cure. The Irish might actually adopt all the policies Markowitz describes! But we never will -- never in a million years. And yes, you can start with the fact that we're still fighting wars in pursuit of empire, and they aren't. They finally learned that lesson! But by the time we do, there won't be any “we” left to benefit. At that point, silly old Europe will rise again, along with its ally China... and everyone else of consequence (Russia, India, Brazil) will have to position themselves or remain free agents. And the Third World will, of course, remain locked in misery and squalor, because no one will care, any more than they do now. And we'll be... well, what will we be? Extinct? More likely, a sort of labor and resource pool... or one might even say a colony. It's enough to make you believe in the Myth of the Eternal Return.

Read My Apocalypse

Pope Benedict XVI, in an address to the recent Synod on the Middle East, named three major threats to the world today, of which one was what he termed “anonymous capital”. He described this, along with terrorism and drug trafficking, as “great powers of today's history”. I provide the quote (in translation) from the Chiesa web site:

“We think of the great powers of today's history, we think of the anonymous capitals that enslave man, that are no longer something belonging to man, but are an anonymous power that men serve, and by which men are tormented and even slaughtered. They are a destructive power that threatens the world. And then the power of the terrorist ideologies. Violence is done apparently in the name of God, but this is not God: these are false divinities that must be unmasked, that are not God. And then drugs, this power that, like a ravenous beast, stretches its hands over all parts of the earth and destroys: it is a divinity, but a false divinity, which must fall. Or even the way of life promoted by public opinion: today it's done this way, marriage doesn't matter anymore, chastity is no longer a virtue, and so on.”

“These ideologies that are so dominant that they impose themselves by force are divinities. And in the suffering of the saints, in the suffering of believers, of the Mother Church of which we are part, these divinities must fall, what is written in the letters to the Colossians and Ephesians must come true: the dominations and powers fall and become subjects of the one Lord Jesus Christ.”

Interestingly, another Catholic web site, Catholic Culture, has this to say: “The translation includes an awkward phrasing of one key point in the Pope's talk. In a reference to economic affairs the Holy Father denounced the approach in which the accumulation of capital is given preference over human needs. The translation in L'Espresso muddles this passage, speaking of 'anonymous capitals that enslave man.' In context the Pontiff is clearly not saying that the capital itself is anonymous-- a meaningless phrase in any case-- but that those who manipulate capital may be heedless of how their activities affect individuals.”

Well... with all due respect to Catholic Culture, I don't think it's at all “meaningless” to call capital “anonymous”. And I don't think that the Pope was "clearly" not saying that there is such a thing. And what would the term "anonymous" mean otherwise? Would it refer to anonymous individuals manipulating known capital, out in the open? But that would make no sense. No, I think the Pope knew exactly what he was talking about here, and that the translation reflects that. So I'll stick with the “anonymous capital” idea... with the thought that someone might just possibly have gotten cold feet somewhere along the line when it came to the translation and its interpretation. After all, the Pope's remarks were “unscripted”, and he has no fear of the truth... whereas other people down the line might have found reason to pull back. It wouldn't be the first time this has happened -- for truth to be watered down a bit, in order to avoid trouble. For the Church to denounce the destructive effects of known, overt capital manipulations is one thing... but to pull the veil away from that which is hidden – that involves a whole new level of daring and risk. The Pope is willing to take that risk -- but the same cannot be said for everybody in the Church; there are too many vested interests -- and too much fear.

So to proceed with the discussion -- no one is likely to dispute terrorism – a great mover of people and a challenge to empires -- or drug trafficking – a great mover of wealth – as “great powers”. But it's striking that he referred to “anonymous capital” -- not “capitalism”, note (which, I'm sure, disappointed a lot of the “liberation theology” types)... in other words, not a theory or a system or a formal structure, but an entity, and one of great, if hidden, power. An autonomous entity, in fact -- a law unto itself (not unlike the "intelligence community"). One commentator said that the Pope's remarks were an attempt to “lift the veil in a rather bold way on what is now occurring in our world... on the hidden truth behind the appearances and lies of our time”... and that the remarks constituted an “apocalypse”, in the sense of “a revealing of something hidden from most of mankind.”

Now, if terrorism and drug trafficking represent false divinities, isn't it also possible to see anonymous capital as a divinity – albeit an evil one? The idea gives one pause. Certainly there is worship of capital... it has its high priests and its houses of worship (can you say “Federal Reserve”, class?)... but this term seems to attribute to it some demonic power – a notion I'm perfectly willing to accept. One clue is that the accumulation of wealth is an addiction, even at the highest levels; it does not satisfy, but continues to create its own need for more. Thus, it has no purpose other than itself. Even the greatest accumulator of wealth on earth is, ultimately, its victim – because, after all, what can one man do? How can a person justify, or rationalize, the accumulation of wealth beyond a certain point; how can he do it justice? There is much talk of “social justice” -- but there is also such a thing as justice to one's own resources; it's called stewardship. I don't have any problem “stewarding” my modest income, and I imagine I could do justice to a bit more... but how does one properly steward billions of dollars? And especially, how does one justify, by any criteria, the accumulation of wealth through hidden, secretive, improper means? Can it be true that, as Balzac said, “behind every great fortune there is a crime”? I don't think this is necessarily true in theory, but current events provide ample support of it in fact. Not all capitalists are corrupt, and corrupting, exploiters... but those tendencies are certainly seen in many, if not most, cases. Once again, when wealth becomes addictive – when it becomes its own justification and its own goal – things get distorted. A man buys a 50-room house. But how many of those rooms can he actually live in? How many horses can he ride? How many cars can he drive? You would think diminishing returns (psychologically) would set in – but they never seem to. I think of the scene toward the end of “Scarface” where Al Pacino is sitting at a desk heaped high with cocaine powder. It was a good metaphor: Power, money, drugs – ultimately all amounting to the same thing.

But let's analyze this notion of “anonymous capital” a bit more. All the capital that we see operating in public, on an everyday basis, out in the open – in the stock market, in commercial trade, in small businesses, in small banks and investment firms... that's not what we're talking about here. We're not even talking about the public, above-board activities of the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve, or outfits like Fannie Mae. Anonymous capital, is, by definition, anonymous – no one knows where it is, in what form it's held, or who controls it. And yet it seems to exert influence – maybe total influence – on the capital that we're aware of. If you want to talk about cause and effect, anonymous capital is the cause and “known” capital the effect; it certainly can't be the other way around. And another question is, what are the relative proportions of anonymous to known capital? One point of view would be that most of what goes on in the world of finance is either known or knowable, and that wealth that has been secreted away in Swiss bank accounts (to be metaphorical about it) is in the hands of the few. And this might have actually been the case at one time, but I suspect that it is no longer – in fact, I suspect that the vast bulk of the world's capital at this time is, in fact, anonymous. What we see, and know about, is no more than the tip of an upside-down iceberg, with the vast weight of anonymous capital pressing down, and exerting massive (and highly-programmed) force on the rest.

But there is, in fact, another possibility, and I will call it “leverage”. Accumulated, concentrated wealth in the right (or wrong) hands can exert much more force on people and events than scattered, unfocused wealth. Think about a million people with $1000 each... and then about one person with $1 Billion. The same total amount – but those million people have no influence as individuals, and probably not in the aggregate either... whereas the billionaire very definitely has influence, if he's smart enough to use it (and let's assume that if he has it, he's smart enough). So perhaps the weight of the invisible part of the iceberg consists not only of sheer quantities of wealth, but of less-tangible factors – leverage, influence, connections (political, religious, family, fraternal, etc.), and just plain social dominance (through persuasion or violence, or some of each). But in any case, there are, as the Pope said, great powers at work in today's world, and anonymous capital is one of them (and possibly the dominant one).

What is my evidence? Well, for one thing, the financial and economic movers and shakers of our time all seem to be working for, and under orders from, invisible masters. They are always disappearing for days at a time to parts unknown, and coming back with new schemes. (I call it “checking in with the home office.”) We see this in the frequent and never-explained sudden changes in policy and “strategy”. What was touted as a good idea last week is suddenly off the table – and a “better” idea has taken its place. But the public is never told why – at least not in any convincing way. So this is the influence of unknown forces, and they operate in particular to put our so-called leaders – politicians – into a perpetual state of whiplash. They are forever behind the power curve, on the defensive, and trying to make up for lost time... and I believe this is an intentional ploy by the powers that be to keep them off balance... and humble. They are, after all, servants – and servants need a frequent updating as to the wishes and intent of their masters... and an occasional whipping if the occasion warrants (think: Biden in Israel).

Another piece of evidence is that anonymous capital will occasionally make a brief appearance – like a whale breaking the surface of the ocean only to descend, once more, to the depths. This happens in the financial and currency markets, when “deals” are suddenly made between known persons or entities, and persons and entities unknown. Anonymous capital rears up, mows down everything in its path, then disappears again, having absorbed and absconded with another large chunk of known resources. It's kind of like the rogue tax collectors in Medieval times, who would simply ride into a village, grab anything of value, and ride off again – and what could anybody do, because they were “government officials” with licenses and charters from the king. So much of the evidence for anonymous capital is in the frequent taking, or skimming off, of known assets – the fact that, for example, billions of our tax dollars percolate up through the system then mysteriously disappear... and no one in government seems to know where they disappear to. It's more than "government waste and inefficiency" -- it's a vanishing act. Note that the military is a particularly good conduit for this, since it provides a path for our wealth to travel overseas, where it vanishes as a matter of course. Our money lands in the deserts of Iraq and Afghanistan and simply vaporizes -- and no one is responsible or accountable. And as for foreign aid – well! That has to be the most intentional, and blatant, means of turning our money into someone else's ever devised. I don't think most of it ever gets to the “intended” country at all – it's simply transferred directly into the Swiss bank account of the African dictator in question (speaking only semi-metaphorically this time).

Want more evidence? And speaking of Africa – did you ever wonder where all of those rag-tag rebels, and insurrectionists, and guerrilla fighters in the Third World get all that high-tech, state-of-the-art weaponry? They have to live off the land and sleep under bushes, and poop into a hole in the ground, but their weapons are top-notch. And it is never explained where it all comes from. I mean, we know where it's made (mostly in the U.S., Russia, and Israel) but how does it get from there into the hands of guys out in the jungles of the Congo? And why? My answer: Anonymous capital. Someone buys the stuff and sees that it gets shipped to the right “trouble spots” and into the right hands. And as to the “why” -- well, let's start with “population control”. Isn't that Job One of the elite powers that be in Europe and America? To see to it that all the ravening hordes of sub-Saharan Africa are, somehow, turned back from their impending demographic triumph? I mean, you can talk all you want about mineral rights, and “blood diamonds”, and all that – and those are all factors. But I really suspect that the paramount agenda item is to – not to put too fine a point on it – kill black people. And what better, and non-controversial, way than to supply them with as much firepower as it will take for them to finish each other off?

Who, for that matter, supports any revolution anywhere in the world? Why is it anyone's business other than the people in the country in question? Because whoever you support winds up owing you a big favor – and if they win, you stand to collect. And that payback may be in the form of resources, cheap labor, or power... or maybe just submission to the Culture of Death (think: government “family planning” programs all over Latin America). And why, for that matter, does big business in the U.S. support candidates from both parties? That way they are always on the winning side. It's not a matter of principle, or ideas, but of power.

Another blessing that anonymous capital has heaped on the Third World is birth control. Who pays for it all? Certainly not us – at least not directly. And by the way, how about all those mysterious tropical diseases, plagues, and epidemics that many decades of medical aid seem to have been unable to eradicate? How about plain hunger, for that matter? Food costs money, but so does famine – i.e. the creation of situations (political, military, economic) that create a famine-friendly environment. Who's in charge of that department? Because I doubt, very much, if the situation would be as bad as it is without considerable outside influence. The fact that, at any given time, large numbers of Africans are refugees ought to tell you something.

Oh, and how about drugs and terrorism – the Pope's other two plagues? The drug trade is lucrative, no doubt... but where does all the money go? And what is it used for then? And these “terrorists” -- where on earth do they get all their weapons? From Saudi oil? Again, I think we're seeing the invisible hand of anonymous capital at work.

The generic point is this: Whenever you can't see, or figure out, where the money (from any enterprise or activity) is going, or where it's coming from (to support some other enterprise or activity), then you can suspect anonymous capital. Now... add that up, and you'll realize that anonymous capital is overwhelming in size and scope – or leverage, as discussed above -- compared to known capital. What operates in the open – more or less – is a pittance compared to what is operating in secret. It dwarfs, in quantity and/or influence, any nation's treasury, or GNP... any military budget on earth (even ours!)... any known assets of even the largest businesses or financial institutions. It's like the “dark matter” that, supposedly, constitutes the bulk of all matter in the universe – but is invisible and not directly detectable; it can only be inferred by means of indirect evidence. And yet, how can it not exert an overwhelming influence?

Now, one question that has me a bit puzzled is this. If one accepts that there is convincing evidence for the existence and influence of anonymous capital – and how can I disagree with the Holy Father on this issue? -- how is this capital held? In what form? Currency? (And if so, whose – and I don't think the answer is “U.S. dollars”.) Gold? Other metals? Gems? Certainly not perishable goods – and probably not real estate either; too bulky, too visible. (If you can see it on Google Maps, it's not anonymous.) Which reminds me – another place where anonymous capital shows itself, if only for a brief instant at a time, is the art market! That's right – and when you think about it, it's not an unlikely place. How many works of art sell for outrageous prices these days to “anonymous bidders” -- many of whom are from Russia and Asia? Are these people art lovers? Please. Twenty years ago most of them were street toughs who slept in their cars. No -- art is a good place to stash assets. They know they can get it all back, with ample interest, any time the need arises. Do you think the stuff winds up on the walls of palaces in Moscow or penthouses in Tokyo? Maybe some, but I'll bet the bulk makes it way into secure vaults, to age like fine wine until it's time to change assets again. In fact, I daresay that any commodity that is fetching completely insane prices has become a medium of exchange for anonymous capital – and art is at the top of the list, followed by antiques, vintage cars, etc. There's a lot of money chasing premium goods around these days – and I don't think there's enough gold, or precious stones, to soak it all up. When comic books start selling for a million dollars – well, you know there's a lot of desperate and lonely capital out there.

Plus, it may be a mistake to assume that anonymous capital is ever “held” in any one form for very long. Just look at the currency markets – billions of dollars change hands every day, and all it usually adds up to is a few measly percentage points (or fractions thereof). But the point is, they're preserving capital – they're keeping it “working”, hot, and liquid – and available for whatever use they might want to put it to. Of course, “cold capital” has the advantage of being hidden away from prying eyes – and in that case you can be sure it's not in anything even remotely speculative. Speculation = hot commodities = turbulence = visibility. They can afford some visibility, but there's no way they're going to expose all, or even the bulk, of their assets on a regular basis. There's the market, and there's the coffee can buried in the back yard (back to metaphors!). The hidden masters of space and time (Tom Wolfe's term) play the market, but they also have their coffee cans. There are always funds available to support wars and revolutions – call it a form of investment. The return on investment? Even more capital (the addictive part), power, and, once again, ridding the world of excess people – of “useless eaters” (or non-eaters, as the case may be). And you can see how that last part resonates with, for example, people like Bill Gates. Where does so much of his money go? No matter what it's called, what he's investing in is a combination of utopia and euthanasia – ridding the world of excess people so the ones who are left can live an idyllic life (with broadband access). Nearly every super-rich person I'm aware of... and nearly every foundation started by super-rich people... seems to have this as a primary goal – to remake the world in their own image, and turn it into an exclusive club – a global gated community. And this is just the piece we know about – the piece that makes the evening news. But is there any reason to think that the priorities of anonymous capital are any different?

The Holy Father calls it a threat to the world and a false god... a form of enslavement... a destructive power. But surely if people are making money and accumulating wealth, how can that be destructive? Aren't they bringing order out of chaos? And as to “enslavement” -- aren't most of their slaves more than willing to serve, the way the “underprivileged” in this country faithfully play their part and support politicians who keep them in moral and economic chains? What world is being “threatened” here? These are questions that might occur to a member of the power elite who happens to read the Pope's remarks in a idle moment. There's certainly nothing wrong with their world – so why is this so-called “religious leader” complaining? Well, the answer, of course, is that their world is an evil one, based on evil premises and built on evil deeds – it is a mockery of a real, natural world in which the true nature of man is respected, and in which the sort of life appropriate to man is fostered and encouraged. It is, in fact, a totalitarian world in which the vast bulk of humanity are slaves – of widely-varying levels and standards of living, certainly – but slaves nonetheless. It is the very perversity of Lucifer, who preferred to rule in Hell rather than to serve in Heaven. These people have what is to them a kind of heaven – even though it necessitates its being a kind of hell for everyone else. But until humanity recognizes this “brave new world” for what it actually is, it will continue to grow in power and dominate their existence. If only even a small portion of the human race would read, and understand, and act on the words of the Holy Father!

You've Been Warned

"China turns back on dollar" -- yes folks, it has finally happened. China seems to have decided that the dollar is passe as an investment, and has started investing heavily in... the euro! You remember the euro? That currency that was walking tall a year ago, but more recently was pronounced DOA? Well guess what, all of that is going to change based on China's decision... and just to show that they're serious, their representatives have been touring Europe of late -- to counterbalance, I'm sure, George Soros' advice, which is, basically, for Europe to start acting like the U.S. because that's what will net him the most profit.

So what else has China done? It has, according to the article, "cut its holdings of U.S. government debt by... 11 percent". So they're letting us down easy, as would be the case if they were interested in preserving their capital rather than trashing our economy; we can breathe a sigh of relief on that score, at least. And! Other Asian nations are following suit: Korea, Malaysia, and India. So the rats are deserting a sinking ship, sure enough... but not so fast that they wind up sinking with it (yeah, I know, it's a tough metaphor to visualize, but I think you get my meaning).

And what does this say about the world's financial power centers, in terms of where they are and who is in charge? Well -- the least one can say is that the U.S., which was lured into two too many wars that had nothing to do with its national security, is about to be abandoned, financially. In other words, we have been fooled, exploited, looted, and are now about to become second-class citizens in the world of finance. Oh, the thanks we get for being so willing to sacrifice everything for the sake of democracy! But guess what, the rest of the world, and especially Europe, is laughing their asses off. Poor old America -- so big, so strong, so impulsive, so foolish. Sooner or later we had to be farmed out to the rest home for failed enterprises -- and I see this move by China as a warning sign of that, and of much more besides. You see, the Chinese, and the Europeans as well, have the decided advantage of being amoral -- not "immoral" or evil, necessarily... just completely jaded, cynical, and post-ideational... whereas we're still stuck in the crusader mode, and thus highly vulnerable to being taken advantage of. Just about our only reliable ally left (if you discount all the places that profit handsomely from hosting our military bases) is Israel, which is -- no surprise -- also highly ideational. Their idea is the survival of Zionism at all costs... and ours is... well... the survival of Zionism at all costs. Because as much as we mouth words about "democracy", it's curious that the only places on earth that we are still worried about, and trying to force the blessing of democracy on, are Israel's enemies. And what's amazing about all this is that we've already seen that democracy per se doesn't always fill the bill; a democratically-elected government in the Near East might hate Israel every bit as much as a kingdom or dictatorship. But "democracy" is a fetish for us, and when you have a fetish, it's like a drug addiction -- you're just asking to be exploited by everyone else.

But all of that aside, it's time to start getting rid of dollars, if you haven't already done so... and buying, well... euros? I mean, China isn't putting it all in Swiss francs, or gold -- so maybe they're on to something. Or, maybe they realize that the true international financial power center is in Europe, and they will never let their favored currency become too distressed. Plus, there are probably too few Swiss francs available to satisfy China's investment needs -- and too little gold as well. And if you invest in something that's in short supply, the price is going to go up faster than you might like. The advantage of the euro is that there's a lot of it... and, despite the high-jinks of the "PIGS", it's clearly seen as having a more sound future than the dollar, which has just barely started absorbing all the major blows of failed American empire building, massive government spending, and borrowing. An investor with any sense would have bailed on the dollar a long time ago... except that they had to wait until the euro got over the cold it caught from us. So now they've recovered, and we're coming down with pneumonia -- but it was all quite predictable, it seems to me. I never did think that the "PIGS" could bring down the euro all by themselves; they were more than counterbalanced by the countries that had sound fiscal policies. So in that sense, the Greek "crisis" was probably just another hoax that made a few people a lot of money. But in any case, the Chinese aren't stupid, and they aren't going to shift their portfolio into something that's about to crash. Besides, they probably have a very good idea of where the financial power centers are, and who runs them. For all I know, they have come up with some sort of gentleman's agreement -- but one that, basically, leaves the U.S. out of the loop.

And thus, the twilight of democratic idealism, to the extent that it involves massive funding and borrowing. We could, if truly chastened, go back to the ideal of merely setting a good example... or we could continue to fight losing battles and wind up not only snubbed, but cast into the outer darkness by the cynical, sophisticated money changers of Europe and China. It's hard to know which it will be, but in these times anyone who bets on catastrophe is making, let's say, a fairly safe bet.