lewrockwell--2020-08-28--A Critique of Modern Socialism

A Critique of Modern Socialism

Socialism has moved on from the Marxist version of the state owning the means of production to one whereby production remains in the hands of individuals but are heavily regulated — echoing Mussolini ’ s fascist-socialist model .
But after nearly nine decades this model faces collapse , much like the Soviet collapse after sixty-seven years .
This article explores the modern socialist model , updates the economic calculation problem identified by von Mises in 1920 and explains why it still fails in today ’ s socialism .
And finally we predict the consequences for governments and their state-issued currencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Knox , Macgregor Best Price : $ 18.95 Buy New $ 23.62 It is presidential election year in the United States .
The choice is between the Republican ’ s or the Democrat ’ s socialism , the former being a milder version of the latter .
A further difference is President Trump ’ s administration increasingly pays the government ’ s bills by socialising money , while great-uncle Joe wants to tax the rich even more ( which in practice means not the rich but the middle and lower classes ) as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In Britain , those of us who rejoiced at a free marketeer becoming Prime Minister with a strong electoral mandate have experienced a greater clampdown on personal freedom than imposed by any British government since post-war rationing .
Admittedly , Covid-19 and its lockdowns were not foreseen , but will the British ever regain any of their hitherto restricted freedoms ?
And those of us with long memories are reflecting that the imposition of taxes — the socialising of our earnings — under the Conservatives is almost always more onerous than under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be like that .
One way or the other , the establishment ’ s socialisation of our wealth , money and freedom “ creeps in this petty pace day to day until the last syllable of recorded time ” .
Whether we like it or not , we are all socialists now .
It is a fact of our lives , if not our inclinations .
The destruction of our money and what wealth we have left is claimed to be for the common good , as opposed to capitalism , which the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is deeply immoral .
They , the socialists , have captured the moral high ground , leading us to their higher plain .
They allege it is progress towards a better humanity .
Their utopian view sees the end of social inequality as its final goal , and as Man progresses towards it the human race will discard capitalism and the class wars that go with it .
No longer should we define socialism by its post-Marxian objective , the acquisition by the state of the means of production and the ending of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organising state to produce goods demanded by the consumer was fully exposed by the collapse of the USSR and the ending of the Chinese state ’ s monopoly on production .
But that has not stopped socialism , which has simply evolved into a new form dominated by the social democratic model .
The title is itself a contradiction .
Social is laudable and democratic is inclusive but put them together and the state has been handed power over its electors by its electors .
The social democratic philosophy begs some fundamental questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the alleged evils of capitalism , why does social cooperation not evolve towards it at the behest of ordinary people without the need for an organising government ?
Why are leaders required to coerce , organise and force people to part with their income and wealth for their own common good ?
Who benefits ?
Arguing with Socialists Beck , Glenn Best Price : $ 11.00 Buy New $ 15.37 Those who are said to benefit are the sick and the poor through the redistribution of wealth .
But the evidence is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better at this humane function than independent charities .
The socialist ’ s rebuttal is that no one should have to rely on charity , to which those who value their freedom are normally too dull-witted to respond by asking , why not , when the alternative is state coercion backed by imprisonment ?
Claims of morality are a thin cover , a disguise for wealth transfer from ordinary people to the state .
The state is now an organisation that leeches on its electors in order to pursue its own separate agenda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morality to one side if we are to understand the damage socialism has done to ordinary people and their economic progress .
No longer ambitious for the acquisition of the means of production , modern socialism has evolved into a fascist form , a fact which when pointed out to social democrats leads to instant denial and horror , because in their language it is right wing and extreme , wrongly associated with free market capitalism .
Being fascists without knowing it The accusation that social democratic planning is fascism is easily proved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were in the nineteenth century , when European philosophers expressed ideas which were only later described as fascist .
But the fascist movement proper started in Italy , when Benito Mussolini , then an avowed Marxist , was the most forceful Italian proponent of the Marxian paradise to come .
In 1914 on the declaration of the Great War Italian communists declared it to be a fight between imperialists and exploiters of the proletariat .
In their view , the proletariat should stand aside and not be exploited by either side , waiting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pave the way to the destruction of capitalism , giving power to the workers .
Having initially taken the Italian communist position of abstaining from war , Mussolini then aligned himself with the nationalists against the imperialist Austrians .
It was an opportunist move and a grab for support from the communist rank and file .
Following the First World War , the Italian communist party movement faltered , and Mussolini with his new fascist party stepped into the void .
Members left the communists and joined Mussolini ’ s fascists in droves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between Mussolini ’ s socialism and that of the Italian Marxists .
His 1919 manifesto was anti-capitalist and posed as socialism with renewed vigour .
From there , it evolved into advocating aggressive interventionism , and then towards Nazism which was developing in parallel .
The Nazi economic creed was simple : capitalists can own the means of production so long as they obey the commands of the state .
In other words , business was directed and regulated instead of owned by the state .
United States of Socia ... D'Souza , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ describes the socialism of today .
Socialists no longer deem it necessary for the state to own the means of production , it merely controls it by regulation , directing it by selective subsidies and taxes .
It also exposes the intellectual ignorance of the useful idiots who blindly follow slogans .
The loss of the means of economic calculation We have established that the objectives of today ’ s social democrats are little different in principal from those of the fascists in the interwar years .
But this modifies our analysis from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who wrote an important essay titled “ Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth ” [ i ] , which sparked what became known as the socialist calculation debate .
Mises demonstrated why public ownership of the means of production was bound to fail .
Central to his argument was the state ’ s inability to make the calculations necessary to allocate the means of production , a function which can only be attempted successfully by independent entrepreneurs putting their own resources on the line .
Today ’ s institutional socialism is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lines which were debated between Mises and socialist economists a century ago .
The failure of Marxist socialism was for the reasons Mises predicted .
It must still apply today to that portion of a socialist economy that relates to government spending which is not redistributed in the form of welfare payments or put out to private sector contracts by means of competitive tender .
What then remains of government expenditure will lack the basis of economic calculation , which can not be performed .
But welfare distributions and government contracts raise a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy by state-directed spending into spending that would not otherwise occur , and the wasteful use of all forms of capital which would otherwise be deployed more efficiently by private enterprise .
Economic activities that remain under free market principles , whereby entrepreneurs seek to profit by anticipating the needs and wants of consumers successfully , are now heavily regulated and restricted .
State bureaucrats effectively control the forms and characteristics of goods and services offered by producers .
They claim to protect the consumer from unscrupulous capitalist profiteers .
Sometimes , regulations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ objective , but it is wrong to argue that free markets would not have matched or even provided higher standards of product than those framed by the state ’ s regulatory regime , because it is manifestly in every producers ’ interest to produce the best product for the market , unless , that is , the state regulator protects the producer from competition .
This is too often the case .
The Naked Socialist Skousen , Paul B .
Best Price : $ 25.82 Buy New $ 24.95 The bureaucrats and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — do not understand prices .
They firmly believe in the cost theory of prices , whereby the price of a final product is set by the cost of production .
It is also central to Marxist economics , which evolved before marginal price theory , and declared prices to be determined by the cost of labour and therefore exploitative .
The Austrian economist , Carl Menger , was one of three independent discoverers of marginal price theory in the 1870s .
Menger showed that in free markets prices are purely subjective : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by consumer preferences and it is up to the producer to anticipate and then respond to them .
[ ii ] It is this division between the bureaucratic-socialist belief and free market evidence that separates two entirely different propositions : the state ’ s bureaucratic management and free markets .
It is only by understanding how the different systems operate that we can explain the flaws of bureaucracy in an economic context .
Free markets work on the basis of the ownership of property and its unfettered deployment for the production of goods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ takes it value from it , which is why by giving property no value by monopolising it economic calculation can not take place .
It is a socialist myth that private ownership gives capitalists power over people .
It is true that capitalists are in command of resources , but their masters are the consumer , who they must satisfy by organising their property and other resources effectively .
In economic terms , it is the purest form of democracy .
The regulatory burden on established sectors producing goods and services has become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the regulators instead of customers , businesses are decreasingly focused on customers .
The regulator replaces the customer completely in the scale of importance when the provider of goods or services is guaranteed a margin over costs and given a monopoly by the state .
These businesses extend the state ’ s control over the consumer , and while nominally in the private sector , should be regarded as part of the state for the purpose of economic analysis , because they operate on a statist cost plus regulated margin basis .
Allowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private sectors in modern economies are less important than commonly thought , most businesses being more burdened by bureaucratic management and control than is generally realised .
Supposedly free markets are being directed by bureaucrats and administrators who have opted for an easy life of secure income and pensions , where they do not have to make judgements , but only to administer regulations without any further thought or responsibility for their actions .
How Fascism Works : The ... Stanley , Jason Best Price : $ 13.80 Buy New $ 13.37 Who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run by the state owning the means of production can not succeed because it can not calculate .
It can only resort to force , evidenced by the masses killed by the Soviets and Chinese communists in their attempts to get Marxist socialism to stick .
Now that that form of socialism has been exposed by its failures , modern socialism is in a halfway house of some remnants of state ownership coupled with fascist control and regulation over private production .
It is not difficult to see why contemporary economies are struggling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not need to resort to empirical evidence to assist with an explanation .
But with modern economies overburdened by economic inefficiencies arising from state-directed malinvestment of scarce capital , they are heading for the same general failure experienced by the Soviets .
A similar collapse of our socialistic governments has only been deferred so far by the partial existence of markets .
But as an economic policy , increasing rates of wealth transfer from producers and consumers through taxation to sustain the socialistic state has finally run out of road .
Cries to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are failing to convince the wider public that that is a course to be followed .
Now that we are in the grip of the Covid-19 crisis , ordinary people know that the ending of government support schemes can not be replaced with higher taxes to recoup lost government revenue , without crashing the economy .
It is only the bureaucrats in government offices , secure in their jobs and pensions acting as unthinking functionaries , who miss this vital point .
There can only be one desperate solution , the one understood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ print whatever it takes to fund government deficits .
When socialists run out of people to rob of their wealth by overt taxation , they inflate .
In modern times it has been a process that dates back to the depression in the 1930s .
This fascist social construct has now been evolving for eighty-seven years in America , if we take Franklin Roosevelt ’ s socialising policies and his ban on owning gold as a starting point — even longer than the Soviet experiment which started with the foundation of the Soviet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 .
Over the last forty years , the US economy has been financialised ; that is to say economic resources have shifted from the non-financial economy to the financial .
It is the consequence of the financial reforms in the 1980s , when London underwent its big-bang and America abandoned the Glass Steagall Act , which had banned retail banks from investment banking activities .
Through the combination of these events banks took over all financial activities , including market making in securities , commodities and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apply virtually unlimited capital resources to these functions .
Being licensed by governments , it has become an extension of statist control over prices , with the benefit that through their banking agents governments could use the expansion of broad money supply to finance government spending and spread the wealth effect through rising stock markets , while suppressing commodity prices by increasing their synthetic supply .
The cost of this financialisation has been economic stagnation in non-financial activities , with the production of goods exported to the savings-driven economies of Eastern Asia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial speculation for their profits .
They are now failing in their original mandate to sustain non-financial businesses .
As well as its normal cyclical failures , the banking system now faces the consequences of the failure of socialism itself , from which they have benefited in the past through the socialisation of money through the inflation of bank credit .
Covid-19 and its lockdowns have exposed the fragility of the whole system , bankrupting businesses and making the banks reluctant to lend , preferring to call in their loans .
Any independent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to one logical conclusion : financing economic expansion by bank credit has finally come to an end , and widespread bank failures are becoming impossible to avoid .
The inflation of money as a means of financing the state now falls increasingly on central banks , even without a banking crisis .
And here it is worth noting that US dollar bank credit is a current multiple of M1 money supply of 3.4 times [ iii ] .
Figure 1 shows how US dollar M1 , principally currency and demand deposits , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growth since the 1980s : a steady rate until the Lehman crisis , a significantly faster pace since then , and finally a nearly vertical rate since last March , all indicated by the arrowed lines .
We now must consider how inflationary financing will progress in the absence of bank credit being made available to the non-financial private sector .
Bank lending to the private non-financial sector is currently $ 11 trillion [ iv ] , twice the M1 figure , giving us an indication of how narrow money must increase from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to prevent an imminent economic slump in the non-financial economy .
And that is before we consider another important factor which requires inflationary financing , the maintenance of the financial asset bubble which is central to the illusion that all is well .
The magnitude of central bank monetary inflation yet to come is far greater than hitherto and therefore bound to radically undermine the dollar ’ s purchasing power .
In turn the US Government ’ s finances will be undermined by the quantity of dollars required and the effect on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a far worse position , and like the USSR in the late 1980s are rapidly running out of options .
This analysis has exposed the failings of government intervention in free markets .
Predictably , the increasing burden of government intervention on any economy will cause it to underperform , detracting from the primary function of free markets , which is to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers .
Consumers consume because they are employed , specialising in their labour to maximise their output and therefore their ability to buy the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the decades , consumers have become increasingly dependent on governments , either to employ them as bureaucrats , officials in nationalised education and health systems , or to guarantee their employment through regulations .
They benefit most from free markets but lack an understanding and sympathy for them .
The loss of free markets and their vilification by socialists is likely to ensure that when the current international socialist regime fails , free markets will be blamed .
We appear to be rapidly approaching that point of failure .
We can see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ narrow money supply has already accelerated in three phases , and how the failure of bank credit expansion will lead to an even greater debasement of the currency .
And that is likely to be the most optimistic outcome , assuming bank failures will be strictly limited instead of systemically widespread .
The statists ’ dependency on inflationary financing is set to increase to the point where all confidence in fiat currencies will be lost .
We have made comparisons with the failure of the USSR after sixty-seven years , noting that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for eighty-seven .
When the USSR failed , there was a better economic model for which the Soviets could refer .
The standard of living and plentiful supplies of food and consumer goods in Western shops were a ready comparison with Soviet misery and it was relative economic freedom that had delivered .
Our failure will not have that comparison .
Instead , it is likely that statists will point towards another economic model in the hope of continuing with state control .
It will be a muddle that lasts for as long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maintain control over economic events .
We will need as many people as possible to explain to the politicians that the way to national wealth is not through socialism but by free markets and small government .
[ ii ] The other two economists were Leon Walrus , who attempted to develop a general equilibrium theory , and William Stanley Jevons , who believed supply and demand were mathematically related , the earliest forerunner of Keynes ’ s macroeconomic theories .
Jevons in particular failed to appreciate the role of human preferences in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre ( Principles of Economics ) , published in 1871 .
[ iii ] This is an approximate calculation by dividing M2 money supply by M1 .
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author ( s ) and do not reflect those of Goldmoney , unless expressly stated .
The Best of Alasdair Macleod

Socialism has moved on from the Marxist version of the state owning the means of production to one whereby production remains in the hands of individuals but are heavily regulated — echoing Mussolini’s fascist-socialist model.
But after nearly nine decades this model faces collapse, much like the Soviet collapse after sixty-seven years. This article explores the modern socialist model, updates the economic calculation problem identified by von Mises in 1920 and explains why it still fails in today’s socialism. And finally we predict the consequences for governments and their state-issued currencies.
Introduction
To the Threshold of Po... Knox, Macgregor Best Price: $18.95 Buy New $23.62 (as of 04:21 UTC - Details) It is presidential election year in the United States. The choice is between the Republican’s or the Democrat’s socialism, the former being a milder version of the latter. A further difference is President Trump’s administration increasingly pays the government’s bills by socialising money, while great-uncle Joe wants to tax the rich even more (which in practice means not the rich but the middle and lower classes) as well as defoliating the magic money tree.
In Britain, those of us who rejoiced at a free marketeer becoming Prime Minister with a strong electoral mandate have experienced a greater clampdown on personal freedom than imposed by any British government since post-war rationing. Admittedly, Covid-19 and its lockdowns were not foreseen, but will the British ever regain any of their hitherto restricted freedoms? And those of us with long memories are reflecting that the imposition of taxes — the socialising of our earnings — under the Conservatives is almost always more onerous than under Labour. It was not meant to be like that.
One way or the other, the establishment’s socialisation of our wealth, money and freedom “creeps in this petty pace day to day until the last syllable of recorded time”. Whether we like it or not, we are all socialists now. It is a fact of our lives, if not our inclinations. The destruction of our money and what wealth we have left is claimed to be for the common good, as opposed to capitalism, which the socialists tell us enriches the few and is deeply immoral. They, the socialists, have captured the moral high ground, leading us to their higher plain. They allege it is progress towards a better humanity. Their utopian view sees the end of social inequality as its final goal, and as Man progresses towards it the human race will discard capitalism and the class wars that go with it.
No longer should we define socialism by its post-Marxian objective, the acquisition by the state of the means of production and the ending of property ownership. The failure of the organising state to produce goods demanded by the consumer was fully exposed by the collapse of the USSR and the ending of the Chinese state’s monopoly on production. But that has not stopped socialism, which has simply evolved into a new form dominated by the social democratic model. The title is itself a contradiction. Social is laudable and democratic is inclusive but put them together and the state has been handed power over its electors by its electors.
The social democratic philosophy begs some fundamental questions. If it is a better system than the alleged evils of capitalism, why does social cooperation not evolve towards it at the behest of ordinary people without the need for an organising government? Why are leaders required to coerce, organise and force people to part with their income and wealth for their own common good? Who benefits? Arguing with Socialists Beck, Glenn Best Price: $11.00 Buy New $15.37 (as of 04:21 UTC - Details)
Those who are said to benefit are the sick and the poor through the redistribution of wealth. But the evidence is overwhelming that a state bureaucracy is not better at this humane function than independent charities. The socialist’s rebuttal is that no one should have to rely on charity, to which those who value their freedom are normally too dull-witted to respond by asking, why not, when the alternative is state coercion backed by imprisonment?
Claims of morality are a thin cover, a disguise for wealth transfer from ordinary people to the state. The state is now an organisation that leeches on its electors in order to pursue its own separate agenda. We must therefore put claims of morality to one side if we are to understand the damage socialism has done to ordinary people and their economic progress. No longer ambitious for the acquisition of the means of production, modern socialism has evolved into a fascist form, a fact which when pointed out to social democrats leads to instant denial and horror, because in their language it is right wing and extreme, wrongly associated with free market capitalism.
Being fascists without knowing it
The accusation that social democratic planning is fascism is easily proved. Some claim fascism’s origins were in the nineteenth century, when European philosophers expressed ideas which were only later described as fascist. But the fascist movement proper started in Italy, when Benito Mussolini, then an avowed Marxist, was the most forceful Italian proponent of the Marxian paradise to come.
In 1914 on the declaration of the Great War Italian communists declared it to be a fight between imperialists and exploiters of the proletariat. In their view, the proletariat should stand aside and not be exploited by either side, waiting for the inevitable civil war which would pave the way to the destruction of capitalism, giving power to the workers.
Having initially taken the Italian communist position of abstaining from war, Mussolini then aligned himself with the nationalists against the imperialist Austrians. It was an opportunist move and a grab for support from the communist rank and file. Following the First World War, the Italian communist party movement faltered, and Mussolini with his new fascist party stepped into the void. Members left the communists and joined Mussolini’s fascists in droves, because there was little discernible difference between Mussolini’s socialism and that of the Italian Marxists. His 1919 manifesto was anti-capitalist and posed as socialism with renewed vigour. From there, it evolved into advocating aggressive interventionism, and then towards Nazism which was developing in parallel. The Nazi economic creed was simple: capitalists can own the means of production so long as they obey the commands of the state. In other words, business was directed and regulated instead of owned by the state. United States of Socia... D'Souza, Dinesh Buy New $25.93 (as of 11:38 UTC - Details)
It neatly describes the socialism of today. Socialists no longer deem it necessary for the state to own the means of production, it merely controls it by regulation, directing it by selective subsidies and taxes. It also exposes the intellectual ignorance of the useful idiots who blindly follow slogans.
The loss of the means of economic calculation
We have established that the objectives of today’s social democrats are little different in principal from those of the fascists in the interwar years. But this modifies our analysis from that of Ludwig von Mises in 1920, who wrote an important essay titled “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth”[i], which sparked what became known as the socialist calculation debate. Mises demonstrated why public ownership of the means of production was bound to fail. Central to his argument was the state’s inability to make the calculations necessary to allocate the means of production, a function which can only be attempted successfully by independent entrepreneurs putting their own resources on the line.
Today’s institutional socialism is now fascist instead of being on the Marxist lines which were debated between Mises and socialist economists a century ago. The failure of Marxist socialism was for the reasons Mises predicted. It must still apply today to that portion of a socialist economy that relates to government spending which is not redistributed in the form of welfare payments or put out to private sector contracts by means of competitive tender. What then remains of government expenditure will lack the basis of economic calculation, which cannot be performed. But welfare distributions and government contracts raise a separate issue, the distortion of an economy by state-directed spending into spending that would not otherwise occur, and the wasteful use of all forms of capital which would otherwise be deployed more efficiently by private enterprise.
Economic activities that remain under free market principles, whereby entrepreneurs seek to profit by anticipating the needs and wants of consumers successfully, are now heavily regulated and restricted. State bureaucrats effectively control the forms and characteristics of goods and services offered by producers. They claim to protect the consumer from unscrupulous capitalist profiteers. Sometimes, regulations imposed by the state succeed in this objective, but it is wrong to argue that free markets would not have matched or even provided higher standards of product than those framed by the state’s regulatory regime, because it is manifestly in every producers’ interest to produce the best product for the market, unless, that is, the state regulator protects the producer from competition. This is too often the case. The Naked Socialist Skousen, Paul B. Best Price: $25.82 Buy New $24.95 (as of 03:32 UTC - Details)
Why bureaucracy fails and free markets succeed
The bureaucrats and their supporters — the socialists and trade unions — do not understand prices. They firmly believe in the cost theory of prices, whereby the price of a final product is set by the cost of production. It is also central to Marxist economics, which evolved before marginal price theory, and declared prices to be determined by the cost of labour and therefore exploitative. The Austrian economist, Carl Menger, was one of three independent discoverers of marginal price theory in the 1870s. Menger showed that in free markets prices are purely subjective: in other words, prices are set by consumer preferences and it is up to the producer to anticipate and then respond to them.[ii]
It is this division between the bureaucratic-socialist belief and free market evidence that separates two entirely different propositions: the state’s bureaucratic management and free markets.
It is only by understanding how the different systems operate that we can explain the flaws of bureaucracy in an economic context. Free markets work on the basis of the ownership of property and its unfettered deployment for the production of goods and services. Property used in production takes it value from it, which is why by giving property no value by monopolising it economic calculation cannot take place.
It is a socialist myth that private ownership gives capitalists power over people. It is true that capitalists are in command of resources, but their masters are the consumer, who they must satisfy by organising their property and other resources effectively. In economic terms, it is the purest form of democracy.
The regulatory burden on established sectors producing goods and services has become increasingly onerous. Being forced to satisfy the regulators instead of customers, businesses are decreasingly focused on customers. The regulator replaces the customer completely in the scale of importance when the provider of goods or services is guaranteed a margin over costs and given a monopoly by the state. These businesses extend the state’s control over the consumer, and while nominally in the private sector, should be regarded as part of the state for the purpose of economic analysis, because they operate on a statist cost plus regulated margin basis.
Allowing for influences such as these, unfettered private sectors in modern economies are less important than commonly thought, most businesses being more burdened by bureaucratic management and control than is generally realised. Supposedly free markets are being directed by bureaucrats and administrators who have opted for an easy life of secure income and pensions, where they do not have to make judgements, but only to administer regulations without any further thought or responsibility for their actions. How Fascism Works: The... Stanley, Jason Best Price: $13.80 Buy New $13.37 (as of 04:21 UTC - Details)
Who pays for it all?
An economy run by the state owning the means of production cannot succeed because it cannot calculate. It can only resort to force, evidenced by the masses killed by the Soviets and Chinese communists in their attempts to get Marxist socialism to stick. Now that that form of socialism has been exposed by its failures, modern socialism is in a halfway house of some remnants of state ownership coupled with fascist control and regulation over private production.
It is not difficult to see why contemporary economies are struggling under these burdens, and we do not need to resort to empirical evidence to assist with an explanation. But with modern economies overburdened by economic inefficiencies arising from state-directed malinvestment of scarce capital, they are heading for the same general failure experienced by the Soviets. A similar collapse of our socialistic governments has only been deferred so far by the partial existence of markets. But as an economic policy, increasing rates of wealth transfer from producers and consumers through taxation to sustain the socialistic state has finally run out of road.
Cries to soak the rich by even higher taxes are failing to convince the wider public that that is a course to be followed. Now that we are in the grip of the Covid-19 crisis, ordinary people know that the ending of government support schemes cannot be replaced with higher taxes to recoup lost government revenue, without crashing the economy. It is only the bureaucrats in government offices, secure in their jobs and pensions acting as unthinking functionaries, who miss this vital point. There can only be one desperate solution, the one understood by central bankers who reaffirm they will print whatever it takes to fund government deficits.
When socialists run out of people to rob of their wealth by overt taxation, they inflate. In modern times it has been a process that dates back to the depression in the 1930s. This fascist social construct has now been evolving for eighty-seven years in America, if we take Franklin Roosevelt’s socialising policies and his ban on owning gold as a starting point — even longer than the Soviet experiment which started with the foundation of the Soviet Union in 1922 and ended with the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
Over the last forty years, the US economy has been financialised; that is to say economic resources have shifted from the non-financial economy to the financial. It is the consequence of the financial reforms in the 1980s, when London underwent its big-bang and America abandoned the Glass Steagall Act, which had banned retail banks from investment banking activities. Through the combination of these events banks took over all financial activities, including market making in securities, commodities and derivatives, using bank credit expansion to apply virtually unlimited capital resources to these functions. Being licensed by governments, it has become an extension of statist control over prices, with the benefit that through their banking agents governments could use the expansion of broad money supply to finance government spending and spread the wealth effect through rising stock markets, while suppressing commodity prices by increasing their synthetic supply.
The cost of this financialisation has been economic stagnation in non-financial activities, with the production of goods exported to the savings-driven economies of Eastern Asia, while the banks have become dependent on financial speculation for their profits. They are now failing in their original mandate to sustain non-financial businesses.
As well as its normal cyclical failures, the banking system now faces the consequences of the failure of socialism itself, from which they have benefited in the past through the socialisation of money through the inflation of bank credit.
Covid-19 and its lockdowns have exposed the fragility of the whole system, bankrupting businesses and making the banks reluctant to lend, preferring to call in their loans. Any independent observer of economic developments can only come to one logical conclusion: financing economic expansion by bank credit has finally come to an end, and widespread bank failures are becoming impossible to avoid. The inflation of money as a means of financing the state now falls increasingly on central banks, even without a banking crisis. And here it is worth noting that US dollar bank credit is a current multiple of M1 money supply of 3.4 times[iii].
Figure 1 shows how US dollar M1, principally currency and demand deposits, has increased at three progressively greater rates of growth since the 1980s: a steady rate until the Lehman crisis, a significantly faster pace since then, and finally a nearly vertical rate since last March, all indicated by the arrowed lines.
We now must consider how inflationary financing will progress in the absence of bank credit being made available to the non-financial private sector. Bank lending to the private non-financial sector is currently $11 trillion[iv], twice the M1 figure, giving us an indication of how narrow money must increase from its current accelerated rate if the Fed is to prevent an imminent economic slump in the non-financial economy. And that is before we consider another important factor which requires inflationary financing, the maintenance of the financial asset bubble which is central to the illusion that all is well.
The magnitude of central bank monetary inflation yet to come is far greater than hitherto and therefore bound to radically undermine the dollar’s purchasing power. In turn the US Government’s finances will be undermined by the quantity of dollars required and the effect on dollar interest rates. Other nations are in a far worse position, and like the USSR in the late 1980s are rapidly running out of options.
Epilogue
This analysis has exposed the failings of government intervention in free markets. Predictably, the increasing burden of government intervention on any economy will cause it to underperform, detracting from the primary function of free markets, which is to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers.
Consumers consume because they are employed, specialising in their labour to maximise their output and therefore their ability to buy the things they need and want. But over the decades, consumers have become increasingly dependent on governments, either to employ them as bureaucrats, officials in nationalised education and health systems, or to guarantee their employment through regulations. They benefit most from free markets but lack an understanding and sympathy for them. The loss of free markets and their vilification by socialists is likely to ensure that when the current international socialist regime fails, free markets will be blamed.
We appear to be rapidly approaching that point of failure. We can see from the chart in Figure 1 how narrow money supply has already accelerated in three phases, and how the failure of bank credit expansion will lead to an even greater debasement of the currency. And that is likely to be the most optimistic outcome, assuming bank failures will be strictly limited instead of systemically widespread. The statists’ dependency on inflationary financing is set to increase to the point where all confidence in fiat currencies will be lost.
We have made comparisons with the failure of the USSR after sixty-seven years, noting that the current fascistic socialising model has already run for eighty-seven. When the USSR failed, there was a better economic model for which the Soviets could refer. The standard of living and plentiful supplies of food and consumer goods in Western shops were a ready comparison with Soviet misery and it was relative economic freedom that had delivered. Our failure will not have that comparison. Instead, it is likely that statists will point towards another economic model in the hope of continuing with state control.
It will be a muddle that lasts for as long as governments in their bankruptcy try to maintain control over economic events. We will need as many people as possible to explain to the politicians that the way to national wealth is not through socialism but by free markets and small government.
—
[i] Available at https://mises.org/library/economic-calculation-socialist-commonwealth
[ii] The other two economists were Leon Walrus, who attempted to develop a general equilibrium theory, and William Stanley Jevons, who believed supply and demand were mathematically related, the earliest forerunner of Keynes’s macroeconomic theories. Jevons in particular failed to appreciate the role of human preferences in marginal pricing. Menger explained his reasoning in his Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre (Principles of Economics), published in 1871.
[iii] This is an approximate calculation by dividing M2 money supply by M1.
[iv] See https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QUSPBMUSDA
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not reflect those of Goldmoney, unless expressly stated.
Reprinted with permission from Goldmoney.
The Best of Alasdair Macleod


lewrockwell--2020-08-28--How ‘The Great Reset’ United COP-21 and COVID-19: The Rise and Fall of Predictive Models

The world has recently been swept up by waves of propaganda promoting the idea that a “ Great Reset ” of the world system is in order to prepare society for a new “ post-COVID ’ world order .
When one reviews the nature of those reforms on the World Economic Forum ’ s websites , or from the words of the former Governor of the Bank of Canada Mark Carney ( who has recently returned to Canada to run the post-COVID reset team alongside fellow technocrat Chrystia Freeland ) , it becomes crystal clear that this Great Reset is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name .
Just as the Green New Deal has been the effect of decades of tireless propaganda designed to convince credulous people that it is a good idea to deconstruct industrial civilization by eliminating all activities which either increase carbon dioxide into the atmosphere or disrupt supposedly pristine states of nature ( which ivory tower mathematicians suppose exists in stasis ) , the Great Reset agenda is driven by very similar objectives and assumptions .
COVID-19 : The Great Reset Malleret , Thierry Best Price : $ 24.00 Buy New $ 10.99 When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justifying the total shutdown of global economies falls apart like a house of cards as outlined perfectly by the Swiss Propaganda Research Institute ’ s Facts of COVID-19 .
Yet in spite of all of the evidence , it is worth asking : How have so many seemingly educated people become persuaded that COVID-19 or climate change are so existentially dangerous that we must shut down the world economy to somehow save ourselves from their apocalyptic effects ?
The answer is to be found in the sleight of hand which occurred gradually over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking for something called “ predictive computer modelling ” .
The Global Coup : Predictive Models Take Over Actual Thinking The age of “ predictive doomsday models ” in many ways grew out of the 1972 Limits to Growth study funded by the Club of Rome which popularized the technique of tying temperature increases to carbon dioxide and projecting economic variables like population , resource losses , and “ pollution growth ” into the future in order to scare the hell out of their incredulous victims and intimidate nations to drastically modify their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , under-defined statistics , projected into the future in order to “ act preventatively on future crises ” became a hegemonic practice for the next 40 years and has been used by neo-Malthusians consistently to justify the increased rates of war , poverty and disease across the world .
Paul Ehrlich ’ s influential 1968 book the Population Bomb used similar models to cast trends of geometric population growth into the future which would result in a global crisis of unimaginable proportions as oil would dry up , arable lands dry away and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In 1968 his book , Ehrlich stated his misanthropic view in the following words : “ A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells ; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people… We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer .
The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.
” Ehrlich ’ s protégé John Holdren , who led in the shutdown of NASA ` s manned space systems and fusion program as Obama ` s science Czar went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his 1977 book Ecoscience : “ Perhaps those agencies , combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies , might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population , resources , and environment .
Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development , administration , conservation , and distribution of all natural resources , renewable or nonrenewable , at least insofar as international implications exist .
Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans .
The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade , perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs , and including all food on the international market .
The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries ’ shares within their regional limits .
Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government , but the Regime would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Shaping the Future of ... Davis , Nicholas Best Price : $ 19.19 Buy New $ 18.96 Under this heartless logic , nation states simply had to be converted into tools for imposing depopulation programs rather than naively endeavoring to end colonialism , poverty and war as foolish statesmen like John Kennedy , Bobby Kennedy , Enrico Mattei or Martin Luther King attempted .
Kissinger ’ s National Security Study Memorandum 200 ( 1974 ) outlined this new objective for America stating : “ Assistance for population moderation should give emphasis to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where there is a special US and strategic interest ” .
Among those developing nations targetted for population reduction , NSSM-200 listed birth control and the withholding of food as primary tools .
Kissinger coldly wrote : “ is the US prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can ’ t/won ’ t control their population growth ?
” Throughout the 1970s , the Trilateral Commission/Council on Foreign Relations cabal under the direction of Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski completely took over American foreign policy and launched a new economic program which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the controlled disintegration of the economy ” .
Upon attaining chairmanship of the Federal Reserve in 1979 , Volcker put this policy to work by raising interest rates to 20 % and kept them there for another two years- destroying America ’ s small and medium agro industries while leaving only a highly cartelized corporate behemoth capable of surviving such draconian rates .
Real growth plummeted , long term planning was forgotten and deregulation ushered in vast speculation which replaced the formerly dirigistic capitalism that made the west great .
All investments into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Fusion energy research was systematically destroyed as fast as the space program .
Infrastructure investments dried up and America ’ s age of nuclear power construction was shut down .
In true Pygmalion fashion , the oligarchy was able to “ scientifically justify ” their misanthropic view of global governance by first breaking humanity ’ s kneecaps and then arguing that we were never meant to run .
In today ’ s language , this practice of ‘ predictive modelling ’ is reflected in the central banking high priest Mark Carney ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to promote a decarbonized society by 2050 since ‘ predictive models ’ state that the world will heat 1.5 degrees according to a presumed connection to carbon dioxide emissions which can only be corrected if we monetize carbon and put a profit on shutting down human industrial activity .
As it turns out , when compared to the real data , not only does one quickly find that the post 1977 warming trend ended in 1999 , but the actual temperature falls well below all computer projections produced by the IPCC ( which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to health policy ) .
This hysterical prediction is also seen in Prince Charles ’ recent warning that the world has 18 months to save itself before ‘ predictive modelling ’ says that global warming becomes unstoppable and the earth burns in a dystopic inferno !
Charles is the son of the same Prince Philip who infamously gushed over his wish to be reincarnated as a deadly virus “ in order to solve overpopulation ” making it more than a bit ironic that Charles announced his contraction of COVID-19 on March 25 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Press Agentur , Prince Philip said : “ The more people there are , the more resources they ’ ll consume , the more pollution they ’ ll create , the more fighting they will do .
We have no option .
If it isn ’ t controlled voluntarily , it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease , starvation and war .
…In the event that I am reincarnated , I would like to return as a deadly virus , in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.
” One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Philip ’ s misanthropic statements with his active role in co-founding the global ecology movement alongside Bilderberg group founder Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands .
This includes their joint role as co-founders of the World Wildlife Club in 1961 , their founding of the 1001 Nature Trust in 1970 or their joint management and funding of global climate science throughout the 20th century .
As I outlined in my 2019 lecture , it was this organization that was caught red handed organizing the murder and coverup of John F. Kennedy .
Technocracy : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Best Price : $ 33.00 Buy New $ 24.59 Prince Bernhard and Philip ’ s powerful lackey Maurice Strong ( who served as WWF vice-president under Philip from 1976-78 ) , let the cat out of the bag in a 1990 interview saying : “ What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries ?
And if the world is to survive , those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
The group ’ s conclusion is ‘ no ’ .
The rich countries won ’ t do it .
They won ’ t change .
So , in order to save the planet , the group decides : Isn ’ t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse ?
Isn ’ t it our responsibility to bring that about ?
” [ 1 ] This is exactly what Carney and his fellow central banking ideologues are talking about when they speak of “ Green New Deals “ .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pact After five decades of tireless panic and propaganda , the oligarchy has had to conclude that this whole plan hasn ’ t really worked out too well .
Many nations were more than a little reticent to shut down the basis of their existence just because some Malthusian technocrats said their computer models required it to be so .
Many inquiring minds noticed that those same computer models never proved in the first place that carbon dioxide actually causes temperature changes and others noticed that in longer waves of history , carbon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the true causes of climate change has less to do with CO2 and more to do with astrophysical effects like the sun and cosmic radiation ( which recent studies by Professor Svensmark have proved seeds clouds and plays a much more direct role in shaping climate change than statisticians wish to admit ) .
Others were bothered by the fact that linear computer projections fail to take into account such non-linear processes as human creative reason and morality which allows mankind the freedom to leap beyond our “ limits to growth ” through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universe and the application of those discoveries to the economy in the form of constant leaps in scientific and technological progress .
Try as they might , linear models can not map non-linearity ( except in the form of logarithms that seek chaotic randomness in the form of a Jackson Pollack painting ) , but not real creative DIRECTED progress .
What made this “ Controlled disintegration agenda ” additionally frustrating was the rise of China ’ s Belt and Road Initiative which demonstrated what REAL nation states can accomplish when they want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their populations out of poverty and “ go green ” at the same time [ 1 ] .
In total opposition to the doomsday ‘ predictive models ’ , China has lifted 800 million people out of poverty by forcing the monetary system to obey human needs rather than conforming to the statistical models used by the World Bank or IMF .
China , Russia and other nations working within the BRI Framework have transformed the definition of “ green ” in recent years by investing massively into carbon free energy like 3rd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research , hydroelectricity and greening deserts .
On this last point , NASA recently announced a surprising 10 % increase of global biomass due entirely to China and India ’ s development strategies which not only bring water into deserts , but also produce carbon dioxide which plants and trees actually treat as… FOOD !
Then Trump got elected and the Malthusian de-carbonization goals collapsed even further as an America long held under the control of a deep state changed its character and in so doing , revived both a lost sense of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a technocratic global dictatorship .
So something new had to happen .
Luckily , computer modelling doomsday scenarios are not hard to come by for British intelligence assets working through London ’ s Imperial College and Bank of England who settled on a new strategy… if only a virus could be blown into global pandemic proportions through a systemic skewing of data and centralized control of data management through the Michael Bloomberg School of Public Policy at Johns Hopkin and World Health Organization… then perhaps nations will finally learn how to shut down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization , the COVID-19 Response Team at London ’ s Imperial College wasted no time in using the same predictive modelling techniques that failed so miserably on climate catastrophe projections to begin forecasting end times scenarios for the coronavirus outbreak .
March 17 models projected over 500 000 UK deaths and 2.2 million American deaths over the coming months .
These numbers were quickly taken up by the WHO and spread across international media to justify the study ’ s “ remedy ” of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of society for over a year.
” Despite the fact that these models were adjusted to predict only 20 000 UK deaths and 100 000 US deaths a week later , the calls to keep the world economy shut down for 12-18 months continued by Dr. Fauci , Gates , Soros and leading experts from the WHO , some of whom were caught on camera advocating breaking into homes to separate family members who have COVID .
For those paying attention , Michael Bloomberg isn ’ t only a famous billionaire corporatist who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ass kicked on public television , but is also Mark Carney ’ s green bosom buddy who acted as United Nations Special Envoy for Climate Change from 2018-2019 until Carney took over the position .
Bloomberg also chairs Carney ’ s Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures which is a keystone piece of the new green cathedral of anti-growth economics which will punish all “ climate offending ” companies by cutting them from credit while rewarding “ green zero carbon ” companies which accelerate human population collapse .
Bloomberg ’ s School @ @ @ @ @ @ @ co-sponsor the October 19 , 2019 Global Pandemic Exercise Event 201 alongside the Bill Gates & Melinda Gates Foundation , and World Economic Forum which ran computer simulations under the theme of a novel coronavirus pandemic killing 60 million people .
Over the years while taking over economic , foreign policy and environmental policies of formerly industrial advanced nations of the western alliance , the neo-Malthusian movement also took over medical research through a gradual co-opting of funding of the World Health Organization by private foundations which have increasingly replaced the role of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Technocracy Rising : Th ... Wood , Patrick M. Best Price : $ 30.00 Buy New $ 24.00 Today the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has become the primary financier of the WTO ( taking the top spot with Trump ’ s recent announcement of America ’ s exit from it ’ s supporting role ) .
With their interests so intertwined with Big Pharma , and the Five Eyes intelligence agencies , medical practice and medical policy has been put firmly under the control of an elite cadre of “ scientific experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race in ivory towers “ untouched by politics ” beholden only to the cold hard numbers of ‘ predictive models ’ .
Both Gates and Bloomberg are among the top five world billionaires who run “ The Giving Pledge ” – which is a foundation made up of “ good ” plutocrats who pledged to donate half their wealth to charities .
What are billions after all , when you know the system you parasitically exploited is designed to collapse ?
As Carney stated last year , those “ that anticipate these developments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fail to adapt will cease to exist.
” Those industrial interests whom Carney threatened in his speech include those “ dirty ” ( see “ productive ” ) agro-industrial interests who are generally unhappy about the idea of being sacrificed on the alter of Gaia and would rather join China ’ s multi-trillion dollar Belt and Road Initiative , as the crisis continues to move closer to the inevitable collapse of the $ 1.2 quadrillion bubble economy .
As this future collapse point accelerates towards the present , the oligarchy knows that nations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ net will gladly jump into the Multipolar Alliance as an alternative to their total destruction if for no other reason .
The Multi-Polar Alliance Re-asserts the Hegemony of the Human Mind over Computer Modelling The beauty of the new Multipolar Alliance guided by the associated Belt and Road Initiative Framework is this new system ’ s reliance upon the non-linearity of human creative thought .
By defining future states of humanity not as a crisis caused by human cancer cells killing Gaia , the new system approaches the future from the standpoint of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exploration , asteroid defense , lunar mining , fusion and fission development and large scale infrastructure the Multipolar Alliance is bringing mankind back into harmony with the demands for boundless scientific and technological progress within creation .
Speaking to the CPC central committee in 2016 , President Xi said : “ Coordinated development is the unity of balanced development and imbalanced development .
The process from balance to imbalance and then to rebalance is the basic law of development .
Balance is relative while imbalance is absolute .
Emphasizing coordinated development is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to equal opportunities and balanced resource allocation.
” In an earlier speech , Xi developed this concept even further : Applied Supervised Lea ... Mathur , Ishita Best Price : $ 48.94 Buy New $ 39.99 “ We must consider innovation as the primary driving force of growth and the core in this whole undertaking , and human resources as the primary source to support development .
We should promote innovation in theory , systems , science and technology , and culture , and make innovation the dominant theme in the work of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyday activity in society… In the 16th century , human society entered an unprecedented period of active innovation .
Achievements in scientific innovation over the past five centuries have exceeded the sum total of several previous millennia .
.
.
.
Each and every scientific and industrial revolution has profoundly changed the outlook and pattern of world development .
.
.
.
Since the second Industrial Revolution , the U.S. has maintained global hegemony because it has always been the leader and the largest beneficiary of scientific and industrial progress.
” In a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prioritization of fusion power as a replacement to the fossil fuel economy , President Putin expressed similar insights saying : “ It may seem strange at first , but fusion energy , which in fact is similar to how heat and light are produced in our star , in the Sun , is an example of such nature-like technologies .
“ Potentially we can harness a colossal , inexhaustible and safe source of energy .
However , we will only succeed in fusion energy and in solving other fundamental tasks if we establish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and business , and join the efforts of researchers representing different scientific schools and areas .
If technological development becomes truly global , it will not be split up or reined in by attempts to monopolize progress , limit access to education and put up new obstacles to the free exchange of knowledge and ideas.. With their help , scientists will be able to literally see nature ’ s creation processes.
” So when Putin or Xi come out calling for a new economic order to replace the currently collapsing one , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is talking about .
They are talking about a system that rejects ‘ predictive modelling ’ using linear equations in favor of the REALITY of human creative mentation as a non-linear YET intelligible geological force of change bringing humanity into ever greater harmony with the laws of creation .

The world has recently been swept up by waves of propaganda promoting the idea that a “Great Reset” of the world system is in order to prepare society for a new “post-COVID’ world order. When one reviews the nature of those reforms on the World Economic Forum’s websites, or from the words of the former Governor of the Bank of Canada Mark Carney (who has recently returned to Canada to run the post-COVID reset team alongside fellow technocrat Chrystia Freeland), it becomes crystal clear that this Great Reset is just the Green New Deal under another name.
Just as the Green New Deal has been the effect of decades of tireless propaganda designed to convince credulous people that it is a good idea to deconstruct industrial civilization by eliminating all activities which either increase carbon dioxide into the atmosphere or disrupt supposedly pristine states of nature (which ivory tower mathematicians suppose exists in stasis), the Great Reset agenda is driven by very similar objectives and assumptions.
COVID-19: The Great Reset Malleret, Thierry Best Price: $24.00 Buy New $10.99 (as of 04:23 UTC - Details) When compared with reality, the WHO/Gates-funded narrative justifying the total shutdown of global economies falls apart like a house of cards as outlined perfectly by the Swiss Propaganda Research Institute’s Facts of COVID-19.
Yet in spite of all of the evidence, it is worth asking: How have so many seemingly educated people become persuaded that COVID-19 or climate change are so existentially dangerous that we must shut down the world economy to somehow save ourselves from their apocalyptic effects?
The answer is to be found in the sleight of hand which occurred gradually over the 20th century which replaced actual scientific thinking for something called “predictive computer modelling”.
The Global Coup: Predictive Models Take Over Actual Thinking
The age of “predictive doomsday models” in many ways grew out of the 1972 Limits to Growth study funded by the Club of Rome which popularized the technique of tying temperature increases to carbon dioxide and projecting economic variables like population, resource losses, and “pollution growth” into the future in order to scare the hell out of their incredulous victims and intimidate nations to drastically modify their collective behavior.
This use of skewed, under-defined statistics, projected into the future in order to “act preventatively on future crises” became a hegemonic practice for the next 40 years and has been used by neo-Malthusians consistently to justify the increased rates of war, poverty and disease across the world. Paul Ehrlich’s influential 1968 book the Population Bomb used similar models to cast trends of geometric population growth into the future which would result in a global crisis of unimaginable proportions as oil would dry up, arable lands dry away and resources disappear by the year 2000.
In 1968 his book, Ehrlich stated his misanthropic view in the following words:
“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people… We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”
Obama and his science czar John Holdren (UNITED STATES SCI TECH SOCIETY) – RTXPEZ2
Ehrlich’s protégé John Holdren, who led in the shutdown of NASA`s manned space systems and fusion program as Obama`s science Czar went further when he wrote on p.942 in his 1977 book Ecoscience:
“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market. The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”
Shaping the Future of ... Davis, Nicholas Best Price: $19.19 Buy New $18.96 (as of 04:23 UTC - Details) Under this heartless logic, nation states simply had to be converted into tools for imposing depopulation programs rather than naively endeavoring to end colonialism, poverty and war as foolish statesmen like John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Enrico Mattei or Martin Luther King attempted.
Kissinger’s National Security Study Memorandum 200 (1974) outlined this new objective for America stating: “Assistance for population moderation should give emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is a special US and strategic interest”. Among those developing nations targetted for population reduction, NSSM-200 listed birth control and the withholding of food as primary tools. Kissinger coldly wrote: “is the US prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?”
Throughout the 1970s, the Trilateral Commission/Council on Foreign Relations cabal under the direction of Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski completely took over American foreign policy and launched a new economic program which Trilateral Commission member Paul Volcker called “the controlled disintegration of the economy”. Upon attaining chairmanship of the Federal Reserve in 1979, Volcker put this policy to work by raising interest rates to 20% and kept them there for another two years- destroying America’s small and medium agro industries while leaving only a highly cartelized corporate behemoth capable of surviving such draconian rates. Real growth plummeted, long term planning was forgotten and deregulation ushered in vast speculation which replaced the formerly dirigistic capitalism that made the west great. All investments into scientific and technological progress were shut down. Fusion energy research was systematically destroyed as fast as the space program. Infrastructure investments dried up and America’s age of nuclear power construction was shut down.
In true Pygmalion fashion, the oligarchy was able to “scientifically justify” their misanthropic view of global governance by first breaking humanity’s kneecaps and then arguing that we were never meant to run.
In today’s language, this practice of ‘predictive modelling’ is reflected in the central banking high priest Mark Carney’s calls for a new financial system to promote a decarbonized society by 2050 since ‘predictive models’ state that the world will heat 1.5 degrees according to a presumed connection to carbon dioxide emissions which can only be corrected if we monetize carbon and put a profit on shutting down human industrial activity. As it turns out, when compared to the real data, not only does one quickly find that the post 1977 warming trend ended in 1999, but the actual temperature falls well below all computer projections produced by the IPCC (which is to environmental policy what the WHO is to health policy).
This hysterical prediction is also seen in Prince Charles’ recent warning that the world has 18 months to save itself before ‘predictive modelling’ says that global warming becomes unstoppable and the earth burns in a dystopic inferno!
Charles is the son of the same Prince Philip who infamously gushed over his wish to be reincarnated as a deadly virus “in order to solve overpopulation” making it more than a bit ironic that Charles announced his contraction of COVID-19 on March 25. In a 1988 interview with Deutsche Press Agentur, Prince Philip said:
“The more people there are, the more resources they’ll consume, the more pollution they’ll create, the more fighting they will do. We have no option. If it isn’t controlled voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease, starvation and war. …In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
One should not make the mistake of separating Philip’s misanthropic statements with his active role in co-founding the global ecology movement alongside Bilderberg group founder Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands. This includes their joint role as co-founders of the World Wildlife Club in 1961, their founding of the 1001 Nature Trust in 1970 or their joint management and funding of global climate science throughout the 20th century. As I outlined in my 2019 lecture, it was this organization that was caught red handed organizing the murder and coverup of John F. Kennedy. Technocracy: The Hard ... Wood, Patrick M. Best Price: $33.00 Buy New $24.59 (as of 03:55 UTC - Details)
Prince Bernhard and Philip’s powerful lackey Maurice Strong (who served as WWF vice-president under Philip from 1976-78), let the cat out of the bag in a 1990 interview saying:
“What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no’. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” [1]
This is exactly what Carney and his fellow central banking ideologues are talking about when they speak of “Green New Deals“.
The Failure of the Collective Green Suicide Pact
After five decades of tireless panic and propaganda, the oligarchy has had to conclude that this whole plan hasn’t really worked out too well. Many nations were more than a little reticent to shut down the basis of their existence just because some Malthusian technocrats said their computer models required it to be so.
Many inquiring minds noticed that those same computer models never proved in the first place that carbon dioxide actually causes temperature changes and others noticed that in longer waves of history, carbon dioxide actually follows temperature changes… implying that the true causes of climate change has less to do with CO2 and more to do with astrophysical effects like the sun and cosmic radiation (which recent studies by Professor Svensmark have proved seeds clouds and plays a much more direct role in shaping climate change than statisticians wish to admit).
Others were bothered by the fact that linear computer projections fail to take into account such non-linear processes as human creative reason and morality which allows mankind the freedom to leap beyond our “limits to growth” through the discovery of new principles in the universe and the application of those discoveries to the economy in the form of constant leaps in scientific and technological progress. Try as they might, linear models cannot map non-linearity (except in the form of logarithms that seek chaotic randomness in the form of a Jackson Pollack painting), but not real creative DIRECTED progress.
What made this “Controlled disintegration agenda” additionally frustrating was the rise of China’s Belt and Road Initiative which demonstrated what REAL nation states can accomplish when they want to get rid of pollution, raise their populations out of poverty and “go green” at the same time [1].
In total opposition to the doomsday ‘predictive models’, China has lifted 800 million people out of poverty by forcing the monetary system to obey human needs rather than conforming to the statistical models used by the World Bank or IMF. China, Russia and other nations working within the BRI Framework have transformed the definition of “green” in recent years by investing massively into carbon free energy like 3rd and 4th generation nuclear power, fusion research, hydroelectricity and greening deserts. On this last point, NASA recently announced a surprising 10% increase of global biomass due entirely to China and India’s development strategies which not only bring water into deserts, but also produce carbon dioxide which plants and trees actually treat as… FOOD!
Then Trump got elected and the Malthusian de-carbonization goals collapsed even further as an America long held under the control of a deep state changed its character and in so doing, revived both a lost sense of nationalism while also rejecting green suicide under a technocratic global dictatorship.
So something new had to happen.
New Lipstick. Same Pig.
Luckily, computer modelling doomsday scenarios are not hard to come by for British intelligence assets working through London’s Imperial College and Bank of England who settled on a new strategy… if only a virus could be blown into global pandemic proportions through a systemic skewing of data and centralized control of data management through the Michael Bloomberg School of Public Policy at Johns Hopkin and World Health Organization… then perhaps nations will finally learn how to shut down their economies.
After COVID-19 was announced as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization, the COVID-19 Response Team at London’s Imperial College wasted no time in using the same predictive modelling techniques that failed so miserably on climate catastrophe projections to begin forecasting end times scenarios for the coronavirus outbreak. March 17 models projected over 500 000 UK deaths and 2.2 million American deaths over the coming months. These numbers were quickly taken up by the WHO and spread across international media to justify the study’s “remedy” of a full “shut down of major aspects of society for over a year.” Despite the fact that these models were adjusted to predict only 20 000 UK deaths and 100 000 US deaths a week later, the calls to keep the world economy shut down for 12-18 months continued by Dr. Fauci, Gates, Soros and leading experts from the WHO, some of whom were caught on camera advocating breaking into homes to separate family members who have COVID.
For those paying attention, Michael Bloomberg isn’t only a famous billionaire corporatist who paid $500 million to get his ass kicked on public television, but is also Mark Carney’s green bosom buddy who acted as United Nations Special Envoy for Climate Change from 2018-2019 until Carney took over the position. Bloomberg also chairs Carney’s Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures which is a keystone piece of the new green cathedral of anti-growth economics which will punish all “climate offending” companies by cutting them from credit while rewarding “green zero carbon” companies which accelerate human population collapse.
Bloomberg’s School of Public Health just so happened to co-sponsor the October 19, 2019 Global Pandemic Exercise Event 201 alongside the Bill Gates & Melinda Gates Foundation, and World Economic Forum which ran computer simulations under the theme of a novel coronavirus pandemic killing 60 million people. Over the years while taking over economic, foreign policy and environmental policies of formerly industrial advanced nations of the western alliance, the neo-Malthusian movement also took over medical research through a gradual co-opting of funding of the World Health Organization by private foundations which have increasingly replaced the role of nation over the past 4 decades. Technocracy Rising: Th... Wood, Patrick M. Best Price: $30.00 Buy New $24.00 (as of 07:16 UTC - Details)
Today the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has become the primary financier of the WTO (taking the top spot with Trump’s recent announcement of America’s exit from it’s supporting role). With their interests so intertwined with Big Pharma, and the Five Eyes intelligence agencies, medical practice and medical policy has been put firmly under the control of an elite cadre of “scientific experts” who play god with the human race in ivory towers “untouched by politics” beholden only to the cold hard numbers of ‘predictive models’.
Both Gates and Bloomberg are among the top five world billionaires who run “The Giving Pledge”– which is a foundation made up of “good” plutocrats who pledged to donate half their wealth to charities. What are billions after all, when you know the system you parasitically exploited is designed to collapse? As Carney stated last year, those “that anticipate these developments will be rewarded handsomely; those that fail to adapt will cease to exist.”
Those industrial interests whom Carney threatened in his speech include those “dirty” (see “productive”) agro-industrial interests who are generally unhappy about the idea of being sacrificed on the alter of Gaia and would rather join China’s multi-trillion dollar Belt and Road Initiative, as the crisis continues to move closer to the inevitable collapse of the $1.2 quadrillion bubble economy. As this future collapse point accelerates towards the present, the oligarchy knows that nations enmeshed in the west’s monetarist net will gladly jump into the Multipolar Alliance as an alternative to their total destruction if for no other reason.
The Multi-Polar Alliance Re-asserts the Hegemony of the Human Mind over Computer Modelling
The beauty of the new Multipolar Alliance guided by the associated Belt and Road Initiative Framework is this new system’s reliance upon the non-linearity of human creative thought. By defining future states of humanity not as a crisis caused by human cancer cells killing Gaia, the new system approaches the future from the standpoint of creative change. By investing in space exploration, asteroid defense, lunar mining, fusion and fission development and large scale infrastructure the Multipolar Alliance is bringing mankind back into harmony with the demands for boundless scientific and technological progress within creation.
Speaking to the CPC central committee in 2016, President Xi said:
“Coordinated development is the unity of balanced development and imbalanced development. The process from balance to imbalance and then to rebalance is the basic law of development. Balance is relative while imbalance is absolute. Emphasizing coordinated development is not pursuing equalitarianism, but giving more importance to equal opportunities and balanced resource allocation.”
In an earlier speech, Xi developed this concept even further: Applied Supervised Lea... Mathur, Ishita Best Price: $48.94 Buy New $39.99 (as of 04:23 UTC - Details)
“We must consider innovation as the primary driving force of growth and the core in this whole undertaking, and human resources as the primary source to support development. We should promote innovation in theory, systems, science and technology, and culture, and make innovation the dominant theme in the work of the Party, and government, and everyday activity in society… In the 16th century, human society entered an unprecedented period of active innovation. Achievements in scientific innovation over the past five centuries have exceeded the sum total of several previous millennia. . . . Each and every scientific and industrial revolution has profoundly changed the outlook and pattern of world development. . . . Since the second Industrial Revolution, the U.S. has maintained global hegemony because it has always been the leader and the largest beneficiary of scientific and industrial progress.”
In a 2019 speech calling for Russia’s prioritization of fusion power as a replacement to the fossil fuel economy, President Putin expressed similar insights saying:
“It may seem strange at first, but fusion energy, which in fact is similar to how heat and light are produced in our star, in the Sun, is an example of such nature-like technologies.
“Potentially we can harness a colossal, inexhaustible and safe source of energy. However, we will only succeed in fusion energy and in solving other fundamental tasks if we establish broad international cooperation and interaction between government and business, and join the efforts of researchers representing different scientific schools and areas. If technological development becomes truly global, it will not be split up or reined in by attempts to monopolize progress, limit access to education and put up new obstacles to the free exchange of knowledge and ideas.. With their help, scientists will be able to literally see nature’s creation processes.”
So when Putin or Xi come out calling for a new economic order to replace the currently collapsing one, this is the spirit of the system he is talking about. They are talking about a system that rejects ‘predictive modelling’ using linear equations in favor of the REALITY of human creative mentation as a non-linear YET intelligible geological force of change bringing humanity into ever greater harmony with the laws of creation.