Friday, June 19, 2015

In Case You Are Still Confused About Who Is In Charge

“Give me control of a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws.”
-        Amschel Rothschild

To my understanding, that Amstel Rothschild ever said such a thing is in doubt.  All I will say is if he didn’t say it, he should have.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard does an excellent job of highlighting the institution that is, in fact, in charge.  He is not impressed with their work regarding the situation in Greece:

Rarely in modern times have we witnessed such a display of petulance and bad judgment by those supposed to be in charge of global financial stability, and by those who set the tone for the Western world.

The spectacle is astonishing. The European Central Bank, the EMU bail-out fund, and the International Monetary Fund, among others, are lashing out in fury against an elected government that refuses to do what it is told.

ECB, EMU, IMF: control of money, control of money, and control of money.

It gets better; even the Greek Central Bank is putting the squeeze on the Greeks:

Does anybody dispute that the ECB – via the Bank of Greece - is actively inciting a bank run in a country where it is also the banking regulator by issuing this report on Wednesday?

Bank of Greece: control of money.

The Greek Central Bank is working to drive, and in fact circumvent, the political process:

The guardian of financial stability is consciously and deliberately accelerating a financial crisis in an EMU member state - with possible risks of pan-EMU and broader global contagion – as a negotiating tactic to force Greece to the table.

It did so days after premier Alexis Tsipras accused the creditors of "laying traps" in the negotiations and acting with a political motive. He more or less accused them of trying to destroy an elected government and bring about regime change by financial coercion.

Those who control the nation’s money supply aren’t worried about any “elected government” – see above quote.

In its report, the Bank of Greece claimed that failure to meet creditor demands would “most likely” lead to the country’s ejection from the European Union. Let us be clear about the meaning of this. It is not the expression of an opinion. It is tantamount to a threat by the ECB to throw the Greeks out of the EU if they resist.

Look…to be clear, I would love to see the Greeks ejected from the European Union, followed by the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italians, and Germans.  And then everyone else.  Eject them all.  And then eject Flanders from Belgium, Catalonia from Spain, and Scotland from Great Britain.

But this is not where Ambrose is headed.  He sees that it is the central bank controlling the political decisions.  Well, duh.  See the above quote.

Ambrose cites other instances – this isn’t the first time that the ECB has flexed its muscle:

It forced the Irish state to make good the claims of junior bondholders of Anglo-Irish Bank in order to save the European banking system….

It sent secret letters to the elected leaders of Spain and Italy in August 2011 demanding detailed changes to internal laws for which it had no mandate or technical competence…

When Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi balked, the ECB switched off bond purchases, driving 10-year yields to 7.5pc. He was forced from office in a back-room coup d’etat…”

Lest we forget, it parachuted in its vice-president – Lucas Papademos – to take over Greece when premier George Papandreou merely suggested that he might submit the EMU bail-out package to a referendum, a wise idea in retrospect. That makes two coups d’etat. Now Syriza fears they are angling for a third.

The IMF and the EFSF are on board (more control of money):

It is obvious what is happening. The creditors are acting in concert. Instead of stopping to reflect for one moment on the deeper wisdom of their strategy, they are doubling down mechanically, appearing to assume that terror tactics will cow the Greeks at the twelfth hour.

More control of money:

The Troika pushed privatisation of profitable state assets at knock-down depression prices to private monopolies, to the benefit of an entrenched elite.

Ambrose regularly puts his fingers on the problem.  He never, however, ends with the proper solution:

End central banking; End the Fed.


  1. Back in the nineties, I naively praised Greenspan for being a benevolent Chairman (a la Mao) and overriding those knaves in Congress.
    Well, I was half right!
    Anyhow, thanks to Ron Paul, the veil has been lifted.
    And thanks to you, BM, for writing such great stuff. I'm glad you have your own blog.

    1. Capn Mike, very kind as always. Thank you.

      And thank you for stopping by!

  2. Tacitus could have predicted all of this.

    “The curse of usury, it must be owned, is inveterate in Rome, a constant source of sedition and discord; and attempts were accordingly made to repress it even in an older and less corrupt society…
    Financial ruin brought down in its train both rank and reputation, till the Caesar came to the rescue by distributing hundred million sesterces among various counting-houses…”
    TACITUS, ANNALS, Book VI (beginning)1*.html

  3. If we do not have the fed, our economy will downsize like crazy. I do not know if this is a good thing. Our economy is being propped up by financial smoke and mirrors.

    1. The fact that the Fed sets the price of money should be an indicator to any-body, no matter how self-professedly ignorant, that it's a ruinously bad idea solely in service to the Feds owners: the Big banks.

      Please give me a list of other instances where Central planning has worked.