Sunday, November 3, 2013

The State is Criminal; Long Live the State

So says Gerald Celente, in a display of cognitive dissonance in today’s interview at the Daily Bell. He does a good job of pointing to the criminality of the system, and then looks to the system to provide salvation.

First, the criminality in foreign policy:

I can tell you how much immoral. How about starting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – in Iraq with the proof that a war was started that killed at least a half a million people that was started under fake reasons; lies that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda. An Afghan war that's the longest war in American history, the war in Libya that they called a time-limed, scope-limited kinetic action that's destroyed the entire nation.

Then the criminality of crony-capitalism:

You want to talk about immorality? How about the "too big to fail"? The government mandated immoral act of stealing money from the American people to give it to the banks, financiers and favored corporations?

This sums up pretty well the current situation.

He is able to glimpse the solution:

Under capitalism there's no such thing [as too big to fail]. You're not too big to fail; you fail. Big, small, medium, you fail – it's capitalism.

Yet he cannot draw logical conclusions from this insight.  His solution?

…put back the laws and acts that were passed that prohibited the multinationals from taking over the world, particularly the United States, laws such as the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Robinson-Patman Act and, of course, in the banking sector, the Glass-Steagall Act.

Please stop.  The criminal enterprise known as the state, described so well in the paragraphs cited above, somehow is able to morally and judiciously implement monopoly-enforced regulations that will be successful at taming the corruption? 

Why not let the market regulate, as is implied in Celente’s advocacy of allowing failing enterprises to fail?

Celente moves on to big-business bashing…for all the wrong reasons:

You probably could not count the hundreds of thousands of mom-and-pop businesses and entrepreneurs that have been wiped out because of Walmarts. You couldn't count how many hardware stores, stationary stores, pharmacists, small farms have been put out of business because of the ConAgras of the world and the CVSs and Home Depots and Staples and Office Depots and Lowes.

The Wal-Marts of the world survive and thrive because they satisfy customers.  That they also advocate for and are beneficiaries of government intervention in the market is the issue that should be addressed.  Yet, Celente calls for more regulation, and at the same time advocates that the market (meaning the individual “votes” of each customer) should not be allowed to determine winners and losers.

Now to the oft-repeated shell game regarding the “private” central bank:

Most people don't even know what a central bank is and they still believe the lie that the Federal Reserve is a quasi-government institution when it's not. It's a totally private bank. Most people don't even know that. So most people are uninformed and like in all countries, they follow their leaders. Very few people rebel.

Different central banks around the world have different legal structures.  Getting into a debate about what is private and what is public is a shell game and is completely immaterial.  Central banks are monopolies created by the state.  Full stop.

Legislatures passed laws to create central banks – in whatever form they take.  They passed the laws, they can repeal the laws.  That the bank is public, private, or some-combination is immaterial – central banks are creatures of state creation, and can be eliminated by legislative action.

Instead of calling for the panoply of regulation as he does in this interview, might Celente just call for the repeal of legislation that has enabled central banking?  Simple.

Celente is also anti-immigration:

I'm in favor of bringing in all the people we need but when you can't take care of your own, you want to bring in more?

Who is this “we”?  Who is the “your” that is not able to “take care of [their] own”?  Who is the “you” that wants to bring in more?

Stop talking in terms of government action, when you complain about the immorality of government action.

Celente is one of several who are very well able to identify the state as a criminal enterprise in foreign and crony-capitalist matters, yet looks to the state in terms of salvation via regulation. 

For his efforts in terms of pointing out the immorality, he should be commended.  However, he does a disservice by advocating government action and abandonment of market principles as the solution.

It is not possible.


  1. Thank You, Mosquito, Thank You! I could not quite put my finger on what, exactly, was uncomfortable to me in Celente's interview. You pointed out every single discrepancy that came to my mind.
    I swear, I learn more from you than even LRC!!

    1. You are very kind. If not for sites like (and especially) LRC, I wouldn't have in my head the basic building blocks necessary to add my two cents.

  2. "Please stop". Ha. I love it, how many times must I say this to myself every day reading the usual propaganda?

    Celente and others like him have always perplexed. They seemingly grasp the problems so well, and then when you wait for the payoff it's…we need more government to fix this evil government!

    At least he's gotta hint…seemingly sorta kinda maybe getting something of what real capitalism should be.

    Could make a fun guest for me someday.

    I think I will post this one on Lions, likely Tuesday.

    Broken Record Libertarian Says: Continue to keep up the great work, BM.

    1. Marc, I always appreciate the encouragement. Thank you!

  3. Great review of Celete's B.S.He never makes any sense.He always making
    some salacious rant.Does he sit in front the mirror and watch himself?
    Ever since the little exposure received a few years ago the ego has been
    off the charts.Does he still have scarf on when and where ever speaks??
    Does he need to read some Merrill Jensen??