Mr. Hudson, you make some very good points on the historical basis of debt forgiveness. Keep it up!

Americans really need to be free of fractional-reserve bank fraud.

Enjoyed the discussion, many interesting insights – it seems the debate revolves around the nature of a predatory lending class vs. a predatory borrowing class. Both sides will take advantage of the situation given the chance.

So, what are the options? We clear the debts of entitled idiots that buried themselves in debt for things and educations for which there were no returns, or we enforce those debts unto the bitter-end for the enrichment of the oligarch class?

Peasants are not inherently moral, and the oligarchs will leverage the situation against the peasants, if for no other reason, to increase their returns so that they may continue to compete against their fellow oligarchs.

Beyond both sides embracing a ‘morality’ based on natural law, what are the options, Michael?

With you having come from the University of Chicago, I’m betting I can guess the answer.

In short, the human race is fucked; the seeds of its own destruction baked into the cake at birth, regardless of status.

Face it, Mike, you’re a Marxist indoctrinated by Jews – well meaning though you may be.

But, hey, I’m open minded; throw-up your concept of Utopia that accounts for the moral defects and propensities on both sides of the equation.

Always a treat, anything from Prof Hudson.

Suppose that you follow Socrates and ask, — Should these countries pay the debts to the banks and to the bondholders, if they’re going to use the dollar debts, they’re all going to be paid to the United States, and it’s going to do what it’s doing in Ukraine now.
It’s going to make proxy wars. It’s going to fight in the Ukraine and threaten World War III (…)

Countries pay their debts out of fear of being financially punished, but I see how moral arguments might overrule those fears and start a worldwide movement. Poor Russian soldiers are fighting in the Ukraine as proxies of their dictator Vladimir Putin and thus threatening World War III. So it is imperative that all countries stop paying their debts to Russia.

Though they were pawns of monarchs, Jews often exploited plebs. Clauses 10 and 11 of the Magna Carta of 1215, for instance, limited the amount of interest on debts owed to Jewish moneylenders. Shakespeare used the fictional character Shylock to demonstrate this trait.

The situation changed after the emergence of the Dutch, British, and American empires. These people used finance as a competitive advantage to shape commerce and ultimately politics. This is the crux of Werner Sombart’s book “The Jews and Modern Capitalism.� He is a so-called hater. All the same, his observations are valid.

Today, wealthy Jewish donors and various organizations, notably AIPAC, are effectively kingmakers. The phenomenon is known as “state capture� in South Africa.

It is always immense pleasure to read anything by Prof. Hudson. Amazing new insights. This is a very important contribution to economic history as well as philosophy of history, at par with putting materialism into dialectical method and Muqaddama of Ibn Khaldun on reasons of state failure. History, as a documented progression of events, needs a temporally consistent causal explanation for those events-and this colloquia just provide a valid causal explanation. In absence of such a causal mechanism, many a brilliant historians have fallen victim to utilizing deus ex-machina, e.g. great man idea of history generally or for example, passionarnost by Lev Gumilev.

It extends the scope of production relations retrospectively to feudal and pre-feudal pastoral and nomadic societies. Also, Ben Norton navigates the interview very well to highlight all the major arguments and evidence used to reach the main conclusions. Thanks for your work.

Wow, thank you very much for this!

It’s a shame Christianity divorced itself from the Mosaic Law. Doesn’t scripture teach us that what God intended with our salvation was to provoke the Jews to jealously by giving us the blessings of Israel. What goes around comes around. They provoked God to jealously by serving other gods and so He returned the favor! True are the words I heard from the Spirit of God in my youth:

“My people will accept all of the good things that exist in my word while neglecting and even rejecting the hard and difficult things it must say.”

If this discussion hasn’t proved the truth of this?!?! Thank you very much!

For all of this great learning of the past however, I sure wish Dr. Michael Hudson would do what a hero of mine from the past did and that is take us into the future by asking if the QR Code and this CBDC now is the fulfillment of what St. John saw in Revelation 13 about:

It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. Rev. 13:16-17

Not being able to buy or sell unless one hand a mark of some kind in either hand or forehead sounds like economics and banking doesn’t it? It certainly did to the late Dr. Willard Cantelon who was the first to try and give us an explanation. From the jacket of his book The Day the Dollar Dies Logos International 1973 this is what he says:

“The dollar will die! A universal number system will replace it! Thirty-five years ago audiences were startled by statements of this nature, made by the author.

Willard Cantelon has written for over three decades concerning the coming One World Money System. Today his books are published in a score of languages. As a speaker on the subject, he is respected by television, radio, and live audiences both at home and abroad.
through the years, he has pointed with amazing clarity to the milestones passed by a world marching towards a universal number system.

In 1913 the Federal Reserve Bank in America became the the Banks Bank.

In 1944 the International Monetary fund gave birth to the World Bank.

In 1934 America left the Gold Standard

In 1968 America with over a hundred other nations, accepted Paper Gold. Neither paper nor gold, this new number system was to serve in place of money in International Trade.

In 1945 the coming of the computer paved the way for a world-wide system which would transform men and masses into digits and file cards.

World War 2 produced a system of rationing where the number on the coupon took priority over mans money as legal tender, or a medium of exchange.

The author reminds his readers that the masses which accepted the ration system under the crisis of war will accept the new number system under a monetary crisis that will be purposely created by those wishing to establish world control.”

Wow, if Dr. Cantelon were around today to see the QR Code and all this talk about CBDC I often wonder if he wouldn’t be asking if this code is what St. John saw in his visions two thousand years ago?

Ah, how I wish I had more learning on the subject to write well and become the expert taking up where Dr. Cantelon left off and why so few haven’t in the Church is bothersome. My expertise rather is in climate change which unbeknown to so many is the work of God in relation to the pollution of sin and the pollution of forgive us our debts don’t you know!!!!! The history of it just so very fascinating and prophetic.

Please Dr. Hudson take up where Dr. Cantelon left off! You certainly have the foundation to take us there!!

Nice spelling of the word “monky’s” genius.

Babbales:

“how would you be different from a rhesus macaque monkey?�

In your case, whateverr difference there is would tell in the monky’s favor.

“how would you be different from a rhesus macaque monkey?”

The monkey and you would both want “government”.

I would not.

“laws enacted by communities that identifies who is deemed a crimninal worthy of execution”

The victim would do that either alive or by will.

Do you believe in God ? Do you believe the Bible is the True Word of God? If yes to both questions Acts 4:35 and Acts 11:29 are by definition true. Agreed?

If NO –you are in violation of the Word of God.

Odd thing is —both these readings apply to the early Church and a couple were killed for not complying. What exactly did they do?

It is evident that with the great divide between color—an economy entering a recession -then depression- a nation held captive by a cabal 1% – weekly mass shootings – people residing along the street and the porous Mexican border —USA and capitalism is Failing.

Why does Unz publish the musings of a communist economist?

Burbles:

Your system, as you admit “has not had a discernable impact onm making their genees disappear from the gene pool� doesn’t appear to work. At all.

I guess it was too deep for you. That’s not my system. I am thereby describing your system of clearing the gene pool,of criminals by executing them. That’s been going on for ceturies without a discernable impact omn ridding humanity of criminals.

You obviously missed the import of my point that it is laws enacted by communities that identifies who is deemed a crimninal worthy of execution rather than having been identified as crimninals by their genes that were then eliminated from the human gene pool by their execution.

There is, of course, one tiny step missing from your briliant argument. You have produced not even an iota of evidence that establises any link between the genes that without esxception identifes who is a criminal whose genese need to be eliminated to thereby end criminality in humanity.

Your proposal is even more absurd than Plato’s notion that God embeds in human beings the gold, silver and bronze metals identifying the various classes of individuals in society, with gold naturally identifying those destined to rule.

Now go play stupid somewhere else.

“without explaining how capital punishment has been used for centuries to rid humanity of its criminals that has not had a discernable impact onm making their genees disappear from the gene pool since criminals are still very much within us”

I would hope that you might consider that how government operates would explain that. Government removes people it doesn’t like, that is, dangerous to government. Criminals sit in a corner for a while and then are released back INTO society.

Dangerous animals are usually removed from society or killed and don’t get to reproduce amongst the civilized – as should dangerous people. Can you understand that?

Self-assort and see which system works. Your system, as you admit “has not had a discernable impact onm making their genees disappear from the gene pool” doesn’t appear to work. At all.

You can enjoy it with your kind.

“The original Magna Carta was an uprising against usury and land theft.”

Yes. The first Jewish communities of significant size were brought to England by William the Conqueror in 1066. William encouraged the Jews to establish usury, so that a portion of the extorted proceeds would be sent to William as tax revenue.

Average people in England resented Jews and their swindles. By the time King John signed the Magna Carta (15 June 1215) Jews were hated.

Hatred of Jews and their swindles continued to increase until 19 July 1290 when King Edward I signed his Edict of Expulsion, which purged all Jews from England.

England was free for the next 350 years, until Oliver Cromwell re-opened the door to the plague in 1657.

Since then the Western system of finance, based on usury, has been Judaic. Today it faces imminent collapse.

In May 2022 the Church of England formally apologized to Jews for the Edict of Expulsion. The Church of England was not formed until 244 years after the Edict was signed.

Westerners are so eager to worship their Jewish owners that Westerners apologize for things they never did.

Franz, sorry if I imputed you with being a Lolbertarian. I consider Hogeland to be one, or at least leaning in that direction. My Appalachian relatives told me stories from birth that are at variance with Hogeland, and I have pointed out to you a more naunced history on Hamilton and Washington than Hogeland possesses.

There ARE groups of mammonites that work to self-aggrandize. Hamilton was both, a complex character, who was both good and bad. His triangulation meant that he had to have feet in both camps. And, he did make mistakes, most especially with allowing the camel into the tent, as I pointed out earlier. Of course the creditors in the first bank did not want to be paid off with the sinking fund, they wanted to take rents forever.

The same thing happened in the Federal Reserve Act, where member banks were guaranteed profits forever. Heads I win, tails you lose. It took Wright Pattman to sniff this out and put a stop to it.

Hogeland is not wrong on the fact that there were battles after the country was formed, and I heard first hand from birth stories about some of those battles, many of which are not written down, and are much worse than even Hogeland knows.

_________

Triggered by the tax on domestic whiskey, with which the prodigiously energetic Alexander Hamilton was realizing his visions of high finance and commercial empire, the rebellion brought to a climax an ongoing struggle not over taxation but over the meaning and purpose of the American Revolution itself.

(My opinion is that Hamilton was triangulating, and did have visions of high finance and commercial empire, which would redound to Americans and not the British. Further, you can glean insights into his thinking by reading his report on manufacturers, and SEUM, society for establishing useful manufacturers. Without some sort of manufacturing and industry the nascent country would have been doomed. In his report of manufacturers, you can see American Credit flowing in sectors, and this was not gold, silver, or bank of england money.)

The struggle had financial, political, and spiritual aspects. In the most literal sense, it was about paying the revolution’s debt. The whiskey rebels weren’t against taxes. They were against what they called unequal taxation, which redistributed wealth to a few holders of federal bonds and kept small farms and businesses commercial paralyzed. Farmer and artisans, facing daily anxiety over debt foreclosure and tax rebellion and its suppression turned into outright conflict. By the time federal forces marched west, the Whiskey Rebellion was bathing all of its actors – founders and terrorist, extremists and moderates – in the stark light, not of an argument between genteel parties in Congress, but of a guerrilla war on the country’s ragged margin, our first war for the American soul.

(Yes, and the confusion was that a country is not to borrow its on credit from privateers. This is a basic law of economics, an iron law. Wealth was being taken from the periphery, to pay the stock and bond holders. This mistake is what destroyed Rome.)

….

What people in the western backcountry recognized, and most Congressman lacked the expertise to understand, were mechanisms embedded in the tax for keeping wealth in the hand of a few while denying western laborers and small farmers their last, slim chances for economic opportunity.

(Here Hogeland is not being a libertarian, as it is impossible for freedumb to produce expertise on mechanisms, as it has to be formally taught to politicians, and is a requirement for good governance. Russia is beginning to do this now, as any governor of a Krai or Oblast is required to go through training, the same as Military Officers.)

The whiskey tax was offensive to genteel libertarians… those whom the tax disabled (Hamilton) knew he was dropping a smart bomb on his target (the rebels).

(Hamilton was being confused, as taxes on whiskey are taxes on production, when taxes are to land on cancers, many of which are the ‘creditor class” that Hamilton was triangulating. It was easy to do, to have a sin tax – and a mistake.)

The secretary of treasury was celebrating a victory … the long struggle of nothing less than the power of money in the lives of the American people.

(I don’t think so. Hamilton had locked himself in with his stupid sin tax on production. In other words, he was a complex figure, who did both good and bad. The other side of money creation is taxation, and there was no good theory on fiscal policy in those days. )

When you drill into it, these sort of people (Hogeland) are bolstering the libertarian argument that the money power is to be privatized.

Of course, I am not surprised that you would wave you hands and be dismissive of a mere chiseler who died broke, because money is the measure of a man, right?

I honestly have no clue who you’re talking to. Not being a libertarian, I’m convinced you’ve confused me with someone else.

Then you make my point when you say “…Morris (and fellow mamonites)”. That was my point — why single out one fellow when a whole gang was required to do the job?

Whatever floats your boat.

“Perhaps you should try and figure it out for yourself although you seem to be wired to not be able to.�

You’re being evasive. Again, specificity is required. How are you wired? What exactly entails this plan of “everyone voluntarily self assort�? What pitfalls will result? How do you seek to minimize them?

“Your replies offer nothing but emotioal responses much like a petulant child that has to always get its way.�

And now you are projecting.

“Much better than the vast majority of the population that steals, kills, and destroys so that they can have a better life at someone else’s expense.�

That comes across as self serving and elitist.

How exactly does your own philosophy NOT lead people to act in ways you find uncivilized!

My question to you: if you stripped away all of the knowledge imparted to you from the last several milennia of mankind’s intellectual achievements, and ignoring physical differences, how would you be different from a rhesus macaque monkey?

“the sun shone down, and that plants grew, and they had seeds, and that humans ate the plants and seeds. It was a free lunch”

No effort or improvement required.

I wouldn’t want you running a farm. You’re strictly an “outer three rows” person.

The thoughtful response from least knowledgable member of the peanut gallery who mages to discern from the following comment about the ability to choose as a measure of freedom:
as proved by his really insightful conclusion that was a:

Really really stupid comment. In nature and in man’s world animal predators are outnumbered by about 50 or 100 to one by their prey. People are compltely clueless to the fact that if you killed off criminals eventually their genes disappear from man’s gene pool. That would be a beneficial form of evolution.

Those comments in the first instance prove beyond doubt that he entirely missed the substance of my reference that I made clear in the immediately following sentence to the comment he cites:

The point, of course, is that the ability to choose as a measure of freedom is absolute nonsense until the conditions under which the choice must be exercised is factored into the equation which Friedman entirely ignored as Hudson points to by noting “ As if there is no outright need–to eat or to pay.�

He then exhibit his total ignorance about everyhting by first alleging that :

In nature and in man’s world animal predators are outnumbered by about 50 or 100 to one by their prey.

without explaining how the vastly outnumbered prdators regularly prevail over their prey.

And then proves to a certainty his ignorance of genetics by claiming:

People are compleely clueless to the fact that if you killed off criminals eventually their genes disappear from man’s gene pool. That would be a beneficial form of evolution.

without explaining how capital punishment has been used for centuries to rid humanity of its criminals that has not had a discernable impact onm making their genees disappear from the gene pool since criminals are still very much within us and they killing them will never make thei genes disappear from the gene people because criminals are identified by the laws mankind enacts rather than the genes criminals had inherited from their ancestors.

That’s what free market prponents claim, although as you cited my comment, you distorted it.

Oh, I see, you subscribe to relativism of marlets with degrees of freedom and unfreedom. I can see it now that this version of economics can generate an entiurely new subject area for assessing the relativity of freedom of markes, much like scholasticists counting and establishing how many angels could stand on a pin head.

Feel free to indulge in such nonsense. But noite that not once did the guru of free to choose ever even give a whiff of a hint that there are degrees of freedom that determine just free you are to hooose that could mean you are as controlled as a slave.

Thus when the advocates of free markets extoll its virtues, never do they even hint there are any limitations to this freedom that could still be called free. It hocus pocus bunkum to mislead and deceive the masses.

Actually, as Hudson points out in his book The Destiny of Civiliazation what the classical economists like Smith and Ricardo meant by free markets were markets free from the ability of the rentier class by whom they meant landlords and banksters extorting from the producers of wealth a tribute for the entirely non-productuve activity derived from holding titles to property and monatory instruments that created no wealth but that merely by their ownership enabled them to extort from the producers of wealth payments in the form of rent and interest.

So my short answer is I have no use for attempt to preserve free markets by relativism that is simply ackowledges unconditional surrender to my points.

BTW, I would not take much comfort from the support you get from the the know nothing wizard of frauds.

Hudson is an out-and-out communist, seething with egalitarian jealousy. His every published utterance is simply a rationalization and advocacy of his resentment of the fact that there is no free lunch.

Where do you retards come from?

The free lunch is the free gift of nature. The French Physiocrats were a farming class, who noticed that the sun shone down, and that plants grew, and they had seeds, and that humans ate the plants and seeds. It was a free lunch. The Earth provided the free lunch, it was the soil (land) and the sun shining on the land that was free.

When Hudson is talking about a Free Lunch it is in terms of distribution, or the grabbitizers, who grab others wealth though various mechanisms, most importantly through debt schemes.

You are projecting, “seething with egalitarian jealously.” LoL

You probably don’t want YOUR free lunch taken away. You are probably a “coupon clipper” or have some sort of rent scheme where you don’t produce, but only harvest others.

No, Hogeland (among many others) gets into Morris. He was a chiseler, but how impressed can anyone be with an chiseler who died broke?

The chiseler who died broke, changed the entire learning from the Colonial Period.

That learning was industrial capitalism, and that money was to be equity and not privateering debt.

Also, Morris (and fellow mamonites) inverted the natural order, where privateers via the money power were in charge of civilization, and hence the planning was done in the dark, with motives that were not “For the General Welfare.”

Of course, I am not surprised that you would wave you hands and be dismissive of a mere chiseler who died broke, because money is the measure of a man, right?

________

Article 9 of the Articles of Confederation 1781, (not the Constitutional Convention). Article 9 = Congress has the power to “emit bills of credit.�

Constitutional Convention, six years later in 1787, Article 1 Section 8, the words “to emit bills of credit,� is erased.

The new nation has to borrow its credit from privateers like Robert Morris, and the reason for the Revolutionary War (demonetization of Colonial Script) is overturned with barley a whimper.

It was through the money power that the U.S. was back-doored. The Continental Currency and the various Colonial scripts were issued by “Bills of Credit,” which was the entire reason the war was fought.

Madison recorded the argument, which was won by the chiselers. Jefferson wanted his one do-over at end of life, to undo this argument, because of its world shaking implications.

Gov. Morris: The moneyed interest will oppose the plan of government if paper emissions are not prohibited.

Read it two or three times. He is saying that moneyed interests, the privateering oligarch class, get to have veto power on the new government.

This is hardly inconsequential.

Mason (Virginia), who speaks the truth: “The Revolutionary war could not have been carried on had such a prohibition existed.

Read it again two or three times.

The revolutionary war was funded by “Washington’s money,” or colonial script, or “Continentals.” The Continentals were not evidence of debt to be paid to a creditor class.

Ellsworth (CT.) “By withholding the power (to emit bills) from the new government, more friends of influence would be gained to it than by almost anything else.

Ellsworth is another P.O.S. who is signaling for the creditor class (friends of influence).

Butler (S.C), chimes in: “Paper money was not legal tender in any European Country.”

Butler is a P.O.S. who has just waved his hands and ignored what was learned in the Colonial period. There was no gold and silver when Colonies got their start, and the colonials would have died if they could not have money to kick start commerce.

Mason (Va) countered Butler, and said, “Neither was any European Country forbidden from making paper money legal tender.”

The committee voted 9 to 2 AGAINST including the words “to emit bills of credit.”

The money power not being properly codified is where it went wrong, and the top P.O.S. who operated for the privateering money interests (finance oligarchs) of the day, was Morris.

Morris was the richest merchant in America through his war profiteering, primarily through his firm Willing and Morris.

In 1781, Congress (Continental Congress) appointed Morris as Superintendent of Finance. This is hardly trivial, and from this cat-bird seat, Morris was able to a lay his plans.

Hamilton tried to convince Morris to create a State Bank, or really a National Bank with a 10 year charter, and said bank was to be based on Land. This is NOT the bank of England model, of which Morris was an adherent.

In 1783, when Congress dismantled his scheming, especially for a National Debt. (Some members of Congress still remembered the Colonial Period.)

His Scheme: “Paper money had to be backed by Gold, and must be based on the interest and influence of monied men.” Then Morris wanted the Country to borrow from a bank he controlled, so he shilled for a national debt. This would make him the creditor, and the nation his debtors.

Morris died with too much debt, failures of his business operations, and speculation on land gone wrong.

Perhaps you should try and figure it out for yourself although you seem to be wired to not be able to.

Your replies offer nothing but emotioal responses much like a petulant child that has to always get its way.

As for being an “evtreme outlier” that is nice compliment. Much better than the vast majority of the population that steals, kills, and destroys so that they can have a better life at someone else’s expense.

My question to you: if you stripped away all of the knowledge imparted to you from the last several milennia of mankind’s intellectual achievements, and ignoring physical differences, how would you be different from a rhesus macaque monkey?

the real POS, Robert Morris, who is not even on your radar.

No, Hogeland (among many others) gets into Morris. He was a chiseler, but how impressed can anyone be with an chiseler who died broke? More on all this in Hogeland’s other book, Founding Finance. It’s not the revelation the reviewers at Amazon make it sound like, but it’s not bad either.

That there is hierarchy in all things is not a strawman.

If you cannot accept that reality, then there is something wrong with your brain function.

Even in very small groups, humans organize themselves into a hierarchy; in larger groups it becomes a government. This is so obvious it should not even bear mentioning. But, here we are in clown world, with clowns.

The people that occupy the hierarchy is also not a strawman, and is central to said hierarchy functioning. If your brain starts functioning improperly, you are considered crazy. If you arm is not taking commands from the brain center (top of hierarchy) you are not crazy, only a body part is malfunctioning.

The fact of the matter is that there are some leaders in government who are in it for themselves.

Yes, of course there are. The question remains, how do you select for your hierarchy, and keep out the clowns? You would not be a candidate.

How many local, state, and national officials in government fir your description? How are you certain? What specific evidence backs up your numerical claim?

I don’t know what you are getting at here. But, there have been civilizations in the past, where a concerted effort was to populate the government with people who weren’t degenerates.

Democracies especially are weak, and allow the worst sort of people to latch onto the levers of power.

Of course China considers itself a democracy, but it is not a (((creditor))) democracy like in the west, where creditors and oligarchs string pull government from behind the scenes. China has an open power vertical (hierarchy), which rules by mandate of heaven. Ooops, there goes that god-king thing that Hudson alludes to.

https://english.news.cn/20220722/f086a4f875b245e392fa2c88a7458faa/c.html

Looks like Shibadong Village is benefiting from good government, and state investments aimed at lifting up labor conditions are meeting with success.

“You cannot accept that all of life is a hierarchy. People that cannot accept basic reality, belong to clown world. That makes you a clown.“

Thanks for the strawman.

“But, with your clown world posturing, the conversation could never advance to the point where can never look at the “people� infesting government, because your default hypothesis�

Another strawman.

The fact of the matter is that there are some leaders in government who are in it for themselves.

How many local, state, and national officials in government fir your description? How are you certain? What specific evidence backs up your numerical claim?

Yes! And notice the demand to “redistribute” land. This demand relies on the assertion that land as such originally belongs to all, equally, evading the issue of the capital improvement in land that has occurred. It really isn’t land that these communists want: there is plenty of undeveloped land that almost no one wants. You don’t see communists fighting for equal distribution of land in the badlands of the Dakotas; you do see plenty of them hatching “land-redistribution” schemes on Manhattan island or in regard to other valuable real estate, including the more prosperous kind of farms. What they want is land already improved. They want wealth created by others. Communists are thieves rancorously accusing their victims, or would-be victims, of theft. History shows us many communist theoreticians cooking up inversions like that, on the order of “freedom is slavery,” “obedience is liberation,” “creators are parasites,” and so on.

I like the suggestions about debt relief to people who are struggling right now. But I have never been able to stand Dave Ramsey’s voice lol.

Thank you.

Hudson is an out-and-out communist, seething with egalitarian jealousy. His every published utterance is simply a rationalization and advocacy of his resentment of the fact that there is no free lunch. If you want the tools of production, you must pay for them, they are the products of others’ thought, work, and daring, often over generations; and if you have no money to pay for them, then you must hire the money; and if you hire the money, then you must make good: you must pay your debt. Pounding sand and bawling: “cancel debts, liberate the bondservants and redistribute the land” is the infantile tantrum of someone who wants his betters to work for him for free.

Anyone who is struggling financially can Google “debt relief.” There are a number of companies who can help. I paid off my credit card debt earlier this year using such a company. Another good resource to Google is Dave Ramsey.

“Government lovers are the most evil animal ever created.�

In your opinion. It’s safe to say you are an extreme outlier.

Why don’t you plug your ears, and then stamp your feet like a petulant child?

You cannot accept that all of life is a hierarchy. People that cannot accept basic reality, belong to clown world. That makes you a clown.

The question should be reformulated. How do you keep crazy people out of government (which would include you)?

Hudson, as a political-economist, has noticed a societal problem of philarguria. These are money sick people, who have no loss of wants.

These types of people are drawn to the levers of power, so they can self aggrandize.

But, with your clown world posturing, the conversation could never advance to the point where can never look at the “people” infesting government, because your default hypothesis, should be that government is banned, or some sort of other sophomoric drivel.

Pretty much, Lolbertarians and “super individualists” have imbibed on false ideology, and are contributing to clown world.

We were cursed at birth with the likes of Hamilton and Jefferson, but we could speak freely.

We weren’t cursed by Hamilton and Jefferson.

Jefferson wanted one do-over at the end of his life, and that was to fix article 1 section 8. He basically wanted “bills of credit,” so the country did not have to borrow from privateers.

Jefferson didn’t know if Hamilton was a fiend or a friend. Hamilton DID have a sinking fund, which you cannot wave your hands and dismiss. That means unequivocally, that Hamilton intended on returning money power back to Treasury after the debt crises had passed.

The debt crises was in the intervening years after the war, and before the constitutional convention. It was basically chaos, with creditors wanting their pound of flesh.

Since humans are imperfect, then both Jefferson and Hamilton made mistakes, but it doesn’t automatically follow that they were intent on self aggrandizement.

Hamilton DID confab with the real POS, Robert Morris, who is not even on your radar.

Hamilton DID also do some shady moves, such as buying up war bonds, on the cheap, and then using them at face value for capitalizing the bank.

In all cases, the real credit of the country belongs to the people, and not those who would use it as their own piggy bank.

Jefferson figured this out, which is why he wanted a do-over. Hamilton was more of a real-politik person trying to navigate with the sharks. He sometimes behaved as a shark, in the grey area.

Then there were super predators, sharks like Robert Morris, who in turn became wealthy by war profiteering.

We were cursed at birth because Robert Morris prevented language, and then the country was “back doored.” The full destruction happened in 1912.

https://www.unz.com/jtaylor/juneteenth-they-want-their-independence-we-want-ours/#comment-5410289
_______

One Crypto Jew did enormous damage, and changed the course of history, and now here we are celebrating negroes. Bow down because your (((overlords))) have told you who to worship.

Robert Morris at the Constitutional Convention, prevented language from being inserted into Article 1 Section 8. Why? Because he had Hubris, and wanted to be the Creditor to the new nation.

Not including the words, “Emit Bills of Credit� overturned the revolutionary war, and was the original sin.

The West invented the modern world, provided *all* of it fundamental underpinnings. Hudson forgets to mention this point for some reason. He prefers to babble on about the economic wisdom of realms perpetually trapped in Malthusian conditions. What communistic nonsense.

Yes, specificity is required. How are you wired? What exactly entails this plan of “everyone voluntarily self assort�? What pitfalls will result? How do you seek to minimize them?

“The problem is those of aggressive intent – government supporters – would set about conquering those wishing to be free.�

Ok, how do you define “free�? What metrics are involved? How do you think people are free without any form of government?

“Because the control freaks are still animals under complete control of nature’s “diktat� – Might Makes Right.�

False premise, for starters. Furthermore, your demand that everyone abandon government is rooted in absolute control of one’s behavior. It’s hypocritical on your part.

“Hundreds of millions killed, trillions upon trillions in money stolen, trillions upon trillions of wealth destroyed, just in the 20th century.�

Overgeneralization.

“Government lovers are the most evil animal ever created.�

In your opinion. It’s safe to say you are an extreme outlier.

Sorry about the delay – I keep thinking that the forward response to my email button is going to work.

Regardless, and with no disrespect, your answer is not even in the ballpark. With respect to the rate of interest, an equal amount paid sooner is a greater rate by definition and in fact.

The rate of interest defined by the transaction ($335 today for $400 in 10 days) is 64,622% per annum.

That is the rate that the micro-lender / payday-loaner will report to its shareholders, and the real rate of interest. It is what determines whether they get a Ford versus a Ferrari as part of their bonus package.

But the same management will tell the customer / borrower that the rate of interest is 708% per annum.

If and when challenged, they will avoid the question of the real rate, and claim that they are required by law to tell the customer that it is 708% per annum. That law is the 1968 federal Financial Consumer Protection / Truth-In-Lending Act.

The same ridiculous and wholly-bogus methodology has been at-least officially prohibited and banned as civil and criminal fraud in the U.K. since 1971 on the grounds that it is “false and seriously misleading”, which is itself the understatement of the century.

It is, in a word, impossible. But it is what it is.

The high-school-level-math version is at http://werex.org/nominal-rate-real-fraud/

The university-level version is at http://werex.org/the-psy-op-goes-on/

___

The spreadsheet formula is:

=(((1+(335/400))^(365/10))-1)

= 646.22 or 64,622% per annum

P.S. The government’s official position is that the math is too complicated for an average American to understand, and that the class of people who have to pay interest at such rates would tend to get agitated, and possibly violent, if they were told the real rate. Therefore they substitute a “nominal” interest rate which is in fact a Non-exclusive convergent logarithmic derivative of the interest rate, instead of the real / actual rate.

Thanks. Tim.

No specificity needed.

Everyone voluntarily self-assort.

The problem is those of aggressive intent – government supporters – would set about conquering those wishing to be free. Because the control freaks are still animals under complete control of nature’s “diktat” – Might Makes Right.

Hundreds of millions killed, trillions upon trillions in money stolen, trillions upon trillions of wealth destroyed, just in the 20th century.

Government lovers are the most evil animal ever created.

“The plain fact of the matter is that all of life is hierarchical.”

Certainly aspects of it are. You as an intelligent person cannot create another intelligent person but your DNA can with other DNA and a suitable environment.

You are a tool used by DNA to propagate itself – much as you use tools for your benefit. Are you less important than DNA?

In the sweep of history, yes.

If some Franz had persuaded Sumerian, Babylonian, or (George Washington) other ancient rulers ….civilization could not have developed.

No, I was right about the Republic.

We were cursed at birth with the likes of Hamilton and Jefferson, but we could speak freely.

After 1947, anything the security state decided was off-limits was taboo. Maybe you don’t think it should be mentioned, as Charles Beard and other smart guys did.

I who anywhere thinks a private bank would do anything good? Why would I want to convince anyone of that nonsense?

…Jews were able to build themselves houses of stone, a material which was usually reserved for palaces.

“The house burning of Jews in England, which is attributed as “anti-semitism� by our friends, was to burn the records of debt. It was a Jubilee by fire. Even though the homes were stone, they were still burned, which gives one pause, as townspeople were enraged.

Yesterday evil party twitter was petting itself because one of their guys, Jamie Raskin (US Rep. …) gave a two-minute rebuttal to a stupid party rep re gun control.

See, https://www.salon.com/2022/07/21/a-constitutional-joke-jamie-raskin-destroys-republicans-2nd-amendment-fantasy/

As far as I was concerned it was a straw man.

But possibly relevant to this discussion, is that he cited Shay’s Rebellion as amongst that which caused the founders to put the ‘guarantee clause’ into the US Constitution.

This is great!! Consciousness is rising. I encourage all to research that history.

From main stream source Wik:

“Shays’ Rebellion was an armed uprising in Western Massachusetts and Worcester in response to a debt crisis among the citizenry and in opposition to the state government’s increased efforts to collect taxes both on individuals and their trades….
“…
“Most rural communities attempted to use the legislative process to gain relief. Petitions and proposals were repeatedly submitted to the state legislature to issue paper currency, which would depreciate the currency and make it possible to pay a high-value debt with lower-valued paper. The merchants were opposed to the idea….â€�

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays’_Rebellion#Shutting_down_the_courts

My further understanding from this and other reading is that Shay and hundreds (thousands?) of his types blockaded the courts, because that’s where the debt paper evidence and foreclosure motions were, and where the court orders were gonna come from. And then it escalated and they got put down.

Also, my take is that the state legislature back in Boston were basically in cahoots with the merchants and finance class to take sordid gain from guys like Shay who actually fought in the Revolution. Like the merchants and their politician cronies were gonna not only not lose money but make a killing with their debt management shenanigans.

Maybe in a way it’s better now? There’s less of a temptation for an ‘easy’ out of just like burning down the debt paper.* One is almost forced to look the whole thing right in the eye and say give me a break, it can’t be paid it won’t be paid and we won’t be slaves or enslave the next generation; we have to do everything up front and honest and in the clear. Talk about it; make the sordid creditors take a hair cut.

So yes, Rep. Raskin, you go man! Keep talking about Shay’s Rebellion!!!

*FN: The movie ‘Fight Club’ had a joke ending imo. Pull the buildings down because they house the servers and databases with all the credit card debt records?!? Give me a break. Like those things aren’t backed-up off-site in multiple nuclear-attack and ice-age proof locations.

I went though only a few of your comments for the LOL’s.

Here is one:

The National Security State smothered the Republic and its constitution just short of 8 decades ago. The violation of America as a sovereign nation started right there:

1912 election was when the republic was smothered, and it had nothing to do with the National Security State.

The split ticket election was to install the 16’th, 17’th amendment and Federal Reserve Act. This was funded by privateers, especially a (((finance class))) from Europe, and some Americans.

Hamilton had installed a sinking fund, which was to be used to buy out the foreign stock owners, and then return first bank back to Treasury.

If somebody like you were around back then, you would have been shilling for the first bank to become “private,” which happened anyway.

If some Milton Friedman or Margaret Thatcher had persuaded Sumerian, Babylonian or other ancient rulers to follow today’s neoliberal philosophy, civilization could not have developed.

If some Franz had persuaded Sumerian, Babylonian, or (George Washington) other ancient rulers ….civilization could not have developed.

To be fair to Hamilton, he was against this, and probably figured out he had been duped.

I wouldn’t bend over backward for Hamilton. At least in Hogeland’s telling of the tale, Hamilton was manipulating and lying to Washington something awful. He was a snake.

I agree with your comments on usury. See how many factories are built or infrastructure created when the Benevolent God-King wipes out people’s investments.

More LoLs!

I guess Xi, who in effect is a god-king, is wiping out Chinese investments?

Yes, he is.

He is wiping out the sordid gain taking of the property bubble. He also slammed the head of privateering fin-tech in the form of Jack Ma.

Ma was trying to make his own finance technical money available on his Ant-Group platform. This was the usual maneuvering of a privateering oligarch wanna-be grabbing for power, a power which does not belong to him.

Oh Wait! Only bad investments and sordid-gain taking are being targeted by the god king. Maybe the free market is only free for rentiers, and usurers, and the Lolbertarian world view is a fantasy.

Meanwhile, China continues to surge ahead. Let’s all just pretend it isn’t happening, as our precious shibboleths are more important than observable reality.

Lolbertarian alert! Wherever Hudson goes, the fleas are buzzing around.

The fleas fly on over from their parallel universe, and then the Kvetching begins. If only the Kvetching energy could be harnessed, it could power a city.

They cannot accept that maybe their worldview is unreal. How dare Hudson challenge what they think they know!

Both rebellions were proof for latter-day libertarians that the founders used a classic bait-and-switch. The men fought for one sort of government and ended up with another.

Lolbertarians are always good for the LoLs! They cherry pick history, or color outside of the lines, anything to find their confirmation bias. They also are beyond reach with logic and facts, as they cling to their unreal worldview.

It was the first bank, and allowing privateering creditors to own stock. The compromise worked out by Hamilton was a 50:50 split… supposedly. Eventually the first bank Treasury stock was sold off to the Baring Brothers of London, a banking corporation IN LONDON. To be fair to Hamilton, he was against this, and probably figured out he had been duped.

Hamilton let the privateering camel into the tent, making the first bank a kissing cousin to the Bank of England.

The taxes were to pay the (((creditors))) at the bank, many of whom had funded the revolutionary war at debt. They wanted their pound of flesh.

And to be fair to Washington, he had to be convinced to allow the first bank to be constructed with “privateering” (read Lolbertarian) alignment.

If usury is possible it shows democracy is a bad idea.

Also, banning usury is impossible. Nobody has ever managed to do it. All that happens is folk with excess money get clever and subvert the rules. All it accomplishes is to add wasteful expenses to the loans due to the complication.

What is “usury” as distinct from regular interest? It is interest that is too high.

Usurious lenders make such loans because they are more profitable than regular loans – they extract more money than not-lending to the victim. As such, they are a bad deal. To defeat usury, all the victim has to do is not take out a loan.

If usury is possible, we must assume that there is a class of people who can’t refuse bad trades, such as a loan with unprofitable terms. By inspection, these folk also can’t be allowed to vote.

(If -all- interest is usury, it is clear nobody should be allowed to vote.)

If there is a class of folk that can’t be allowed to vote, there is clearly a distinct (very disparate-impact) class of folk who happen to be especially good at voting.
Indeed, there is probably one guy who is best at voting. Why not strip votes from everyone except the very best voter? Why settle for unnecessarily poor service?
We can call this voter a king voter, perhaps. He’s the best, after all.

Hudson is doing humanity a signal service by deconstructing ancient civilizations, so that the future can have less POS. Or, at least there will be an intellectual class able to grasp what he is teaching, and they will then have the intellectual tools to resist the pozzing.

This made me laugh.

I agree with your comments on usury. See how many factories are built or infrastructure created when the Benevolent God-King wipes out people’s investments. Investing is a way the average worker can make his money grow. In those ancient Far East societies, the only way something got built was if the King or another wealthy warlord made it happen, and then they would enslave You at spear tip to do the labor. Sounds like Communism, which Hudson is seems to favor.

They make excellent scapegoats. As is meet for the inventor of the very practice the term “scapegoat” is named after.

Same role they’re playing now.

Individual joos are generally unpleasant to be around. They don’t make friends, so peasants/serfs/voters are happy to let them take the blame. This lets the true criminals go on to perpetrate again. “Ingroup would never do bad thing! Only outgroup would do bad thing! Throw outgroup down the well!” And lo, outgroup ended up at the bottom of the well.

Especially an envious scapegoat like the highly intellectual joos. Not only do the peasants/serfs/voters get to let their friends off the hook, they get to take their ressentiment out on a convenient target.

Many of the more audacious schemes would never have been attempted in the first place without a convenient scapegoat.

However, economic development was relatively stagnant until around 1750

Gregory Clark showed that economic development was in fact a smooth exponential for a long as any form of data exists.

What happened circa 1750 was that the exponential exceeded population growth for the first time, causing wealth to go up per capita instead of only driving more population growth.

In fact the correlation between wealth and property rights is likely the reverse – growing wealth revealed to locals the importance of property law.

English property law has been in decay since about 1300. It used to be far more powerful and flexible than it is now. The current version is strictly inferior to ye olde versions. Using 1300s-style property law, you would be able to buy and sell not only your vote, but the right to vote itself, along with everything else in the bill of rights.

“Your comment reeks of a true believer in government�

So exactly what is the alternative from your vantage point? Please be specific. Cite sources.

“You are wired for governance like other social anmals – from ants to chimps.
Tough luck�

So exactly how are you wired? Again, be specific.

Either way Washington (George, not Sodom) mobilized more men against
them than at any one time against the British so the priorities were clear from
the beginning.

Well, Daniel Shays fought in the Revolution, and his rebellion happened BEFORE the US Constitution was passed. He had doubts and he was right to have them. He had fought for the principles outlined in the Articles of Confederation, which the city slickers were throwing out.

The Whiskey Rebellion was economic necessity, but the Constitution was already done by then. The fact that George Washington had to raise an army to put it down nearly the same time Anthony Wayne had ANOTHER army marching west against the Indians had to be irritating.

Both rebellions were proof for latter-day libertarians that the founders used a classic bait-and-switch. The men fought for one sort of government and ended up with another.

Fourth, economic growth down the ages was almost always zero. So debt, which is the anticipation of future income, was even riskier than today.

Ok, but there was always “industrial growth” in the sense that we became more productive in terms of manufacturing, exploitation (in the classical definition) of resources etc, which improved/grew our standard of living. So what do you mean RE: “economic growth down the ages was almost always zero”? Is that an empty “banksters” related comment (which it could easily be)?

Thanks in advance for your (‘s or anyone else’s) thoughtful reply!

Eyeballing it at 465%.

Do give us the citation for your latest research stud (peer reviewed only) or alternatively the number of your last NIH grant.

This is a hopelessly antediluvian position based on grasping one variable out of dozens all of which impinge on usury. Begin with compound interest (just need to need to know how to multiply, forget the exponentials).

Did I miss someone saying that all billionaires are Jews? Or are you just a very simple person in a complex world?

As Jordan Peterson said, the Dominance Hierarchy is older than trees.

If you liked this article you might try reading E. Michael Jones. Things like:

The American founding went wrong from the start when the founders took the side of the banks and decided to put into law favoring contract disputes for the creditors.

Or, The Church taught for a thousand years that usury and homosexuality go hand-in-hand.

Or, just read the back cover of Shylock’s Ewes and Rams.

By the way, it sounds like National Socialism is the best way to go…a gov’t that actually looks out for its people…maybe that’s why anything to be demeaned by the mainstream today has to be called a Nazi. General Patton was right, we fought the wrong enemy.

I allows?
Please type more-carefully. I’m reading, and so might others (be). Are our time and attention that cheap to you?

It may seem strange to invite an economist to give a keynote speech to a conference of the social sciences. Economists have been characterized as autistic and anti-social in the popular press for good reason. They are trained to think It may seem strange to invite an economist to give a keynote speech to a conference of the social sciences. Economists have been characterized as autistic and anti-social in the popular press for good reason. They are trained to think

One hell of an opening.

Bernard Lazare, a Jewish intellectual in late 19th century France, an early defender of Dreyfus and opponent of Judeophobia, asked as much.
Why, he wondered, have Jews been expelled from most of the countries in which they dwelt over the centuries, despite the often great differences of race, religion, history, social arrangements etc, in those countries? Lazare decided that at least some of the blame MUST be the fault of Israel (the Jews) itself. Today he would be denounced as an ‘antisemite’ and a ‘self-hating Jew’.

It was carefully created, by some US or globalist group, I would say, to immediately infect humans, and be Protean in its variability over time. The madness of vaccinating during the pandemic drove the selection process for immune escape. This was all carefully crafted to be a great reducer of the ‘useless eaters’.

You are wired for governance like other social anmals – from ants to chimps.

Tough luck.

There are several major forces driving humanity to Near Term Extinction. One is the pace of change. Our drive to maximise everything eg profits, population, production and consumption, is at odds with the way the natural world acts. There the pace is slow and not uniform across the planet allowing organisms a chance to adopt, sometimes as individuals in migrations and flights for safety, but most tellingly in evolution through natural selection.
This human speed is a result of our short lifespans and the variability of human individuals. There are many humans who value life and think beyond their lifespans to the future in which their descendants will exist, but there are plenty who couldn’t give a rat’s arse what happens after they are dead. The latter type have dominated for thousands years, more or less coinciding with the rise of patriarchy and the benign Holocene climate regime.
That type created agriculture and animal husbandry, beginning the process of forest destruction, human population growth, the commodification of everything, including women and children, biodiversity loss and all the rest. This process hit overdrive with the Industrial Revolution, and the destructive process has reached a climax as our technology and the means of destruction burgeoned.
Latterly, a few have noticed the unfolding apocalypse of life destruction, although those we euphemistically call ‘the Right’ ie the psychopaths, more or less florid, still deny it or simply do not give a stuff. Hopeless propaganda measures have been taken to ameliorate the devastation, like the loony tunes, advertising-driven, program to ‘re-seed’ the Great Barrier Reef with new corals, in inexorably warming and acidifying waters. It will have a limited PR usefulness to continue ignoring the herd of elephants, the fossil fuel Moloch.
Any even ‘successful’ measures generally create one or more new disasters, as the biospheres have no time to adjust to the changes, or unpredicted negative consequences arise, particularly from that beastly inter-connectedness of all things that our science long ago left behind in the race to ever more discrete ‘specialisations’. Of course rank pseudo-science like ‘neo-liberal economics’ further worsen the situation. Our, now forlorn, hope of survival relied on reducing our destructiveness by humanely reducing population, consumption, production and destruction, and in massive bio-system repair, over centuries. Too late. The Evil ones will move to more and more violent means of repression to destroy resistance to self-destruction, and protect their precious money.

Economics now is a pseudo-science sitting on the fringes of reality. Standards –actual standards must be set and met.

Your comment reeks of a true believer in government.

Alpha-males/rulers “owned” all of their realm and government has always been a net negative throughout history. It steals wealth created by others and gives a less than a 50% return of the value of what was stolen.

Ex. in the US government cost is about 50% of the economy and its net ‘benefit’ is at best less than half of that.

For any everyday worker I would say that government’s real value is negative.

Are there any, even one US “reporter” that’s pro multi-polarity that could properly interview Dr. Hudson? Thus far, no names come to the foreground.

Best to call in Pepe Escobar, or even a knowledgeable and well educated European, Central European, or a Russian journalist who can both describe the latest circumstances and *ask* the most pressing questions centered on these issues?

Wonder what happened to it?

There were others too. For example when King Edward kicked out our friends in 1287, debts were released. The upper middle ages in England (after expulsion) were not nearly as horrible as most historians make out. Personal debts especially were settled every year at the big fairs, like Mayfair.

After expulsion, England went on the Talley stick system, where debts were owed to the Palace for corvee labor. The Jews were allowed to take their gold and silver with them, so this caused a collapse in the money supply.

The sticks, instead of evidence of debt, became circulating money, and good for paying taxes. Also, they couldn’t be counterfeited, and were not “international” money.

The Jews were brought in by the Normans during invasion in 1066, to be a “foreign element” and to collect taxes. The Jews were subjects of the King, and not subject to the Noble classes already in England.

It took about 200 years for the Jews to put land next to land. As stated earlier, to pay off monetary debts, real assets are transferred. The debts grow beyond the ability of production and nature to pay, so there is polarization, especially of land, due to debt mechanisms.

And yes, Mustache man also released debts, especially among the farming class. Mustache man also made the Reichsmark related to labor and production, and not finance.

So, is the West a detour? It looks like there were lots of skirmishes, and attempts toward righting ships of state. Unfortunately, agents of Mammon have a long track record of deception, war, and winning.

https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/magna-carta-english-translation

Magna Carta 1215 (expulsion in 1287, so there were already problems 70 years before expulsion).

(10) If anyone who has borrowed a sum of money from Jews dies before the debt has been repaid, his heir shall pay no interest on the debt for so long as he remains under age, irrespective of whom he holds his lands. If such a debt falls into the hands of the Crown, it will take nothing except the principal sum specified in the bond.

(11) If a man dies owing money to Jews, his wife may have her dower and pay nothing towards the debt from it. If he leaves children that are under age, their needs may also be provided for on a scale appropriate to the size of his holding of lands. The debt is to be paid out of the residue, reserving the service due to his feudal lords. Debts owed to persons other than Jews are to be dealt with similarly.

During the reign of King Henry II ( 1154 – 1189), English Jews prospered economically, with Aaron of Lincoln, a Jewish financier, becoming one of the richest men in all of England. Jews were able to build themselves houses of stone, a material which was usually reserved for palaces.

The house burning of Jews in England, which is attributed as “anti-semitism” by our friends, was to burn the records of debt. It was a Jubilee by fire. Even though the homes were stone, they were still burned, which gives one pause, as townspeople were enraged.

People don’t wake up some day, and decide, “oh I am going to be an anti-semite, because I am an ignoramus.”

Well, there was a Western country that did away with laws favouring creditors and that exiled the rapacious Jew bankers.

Wonder what happened to it?

Brilliant! I could not have said it better myself…not in a millenium!

The basis of Western economic success is characterized as an imperial pursuit of naked self interest, relying as it did on several centuries of slavery, slaughter and colonial conquest that has brought us to the present moment – The Collapse of The West.

Superbly papered over by a veneer of Victorian moralizing and high minded narratives that The West brought civilization to primitive people who should remain ever appreciative. They are not.

Examined here in depth, the sacrifice of The Ukraine in this US-NATO-UK Proxy War designed to collapse the Russian State. Just did not deliver – and it won’t . . .

Examined here . . . Join The Club of Kremlin Stooges

https://les7eb.substack.com/p/ukraine-notes-the-long-war

and here . . . Foreign Policy, Power Projection, Deceit

https://les7eb.substack.com/p/ukraine-notes-the-long-proxy-war

and here . . . The Writing Is On The Wall

https://les7eb.substack.com/p/ukraine-notes-the-long-proxy-war-b15

We have been over this many times already! We know why it makes no sense for individuals to be free to own and control such huge sums of the national resources…enough to control the entire society. It serves no useful purpose.

Take a look at the world around you! Any one of Musk, Bezos, Schwab, Gates, anyone of the Rothschilds can control what…more than a fifth of the entire world..even as the world roils in all manner of impoverishing economic problems that actually enriches those guys even more…

What sort of reality is that that provides so much for the few at the expense of the multitudes?

Such a reality is bound to lead to programs of depopulationand holocaust!

Who determines that that is the basic purpose of social life…the way we have lived for so long now, clearly at our own human physical and social existential expense the degrading of the very natural conditions of existence we depend on for life. The long millenarial experience has taught us we are wrong, we need another way of life because there are now too many people to be supported by such a way of life that won’t affect the nature of the planet in ways that would kill us

We need less people so the men with the billions who stole it most from the unsuspecting ordinary people of the world while using them horribly in so many disgusting ways have decided to depopulate so he has given us a menu of Pandemics with a vaxx dessert

Notice how Hudson creates his own definition of an economist. This is fairy tale stuff. Economists are lackies who do other peoples, or governments, bidding. It’s in the Social Science departments of universities for Christs sake

Hudson is independent… Please prove to us that he is doing other people’s bidding. You are making up strawmen, to then knock them down, and to support your agenda, whatever it is.

Hudson is in his lane, as a Political Economist, and is not creating new “definitions” for himself.

Definition of Political Economist from Wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_economy

Political economy is the study of how economic and political (e.g. law, institutions, government) systems are linked.[1][2][3][4] Political economy studies macroeconomic phenomena such as growth, distribution, inequality, and trade, and how these phenomena are shaped by institutions, laws, and political behaviour. Originating in the 16th century, it is the precursor to the modern discipline of economics.[5][6] Political economy in its modern form is considered an interdisciplinary field, drawing on theory from both political science and modern economics.[4]

Political economy originated within 16th century western moral philosophy, with theoretical works exploring the administration of states’ wealth; “political” signifying the Greek word polity and “economy” signifying the Greek word οἰκονομία; household management.

Western civilization owes more to the Greeks than any of the others. The Greeks gave the West, among other things, Science. No one else came up with science, without which man’s world would be quite backwards.

That’s right, the Greeks figured out that money was law, and hence belongs to the sovereign.

Aristotle: “Money exists not by nature but by law.”

Aristotle: All goods must therefore be measured by some one thing…now this unit is in truth, demand, which holds all things together, but money has become by convention a sort of representative of demand; and this is why it has the name nomisa (nomos = binding law = custom), because it exists not by nature, but by law (nomos). And, it is our power to change it, and make it useless.

Aristotle: … money then acting as a measure makes goods commensurate and equates them… There must then be a unit, and that fixed by agreement.

Plato: “a money token for the purposes of exchange”

Paulus: “This device being officially promulgated, circulated and maintained its purchasing power not so much from its substances as from its quantity.

In Eraxius, Plato said that the Carthaginians used money that was the size of a drachmae coin, tied up inside of a leather pouch, and then marked with a state seal, and then it passes into circulation.

The Carthaginians would raid ships at sea, and then take the silver coins/gold as pirate booty. They would then retreat to their safe harbor (where Tunisia is now).

Most probably, Hannibal was paid in international gold/silver and not the “pouch money” of Carthage.

Nice to read a post like yours to emphasize again that government, always and everywhere, is nothing but a POS.

That is a separate issue. The plain fact of the matter is that all of life is hierarchical.

If government is a POS, it does not automatically follow that the money power should be privatized.

Privatizing the money power is a transference from an open hierarchy to a hidden one. Privateers owning the money by definition is hidden, and hence unlawful operations are a foregone conclusion.

Also, how can government not be a POS, if they are operating under false ideology, such as neoliberalism?

Hudson is doing humanity a signal service by deconstructing ancient civilizations, so that the future can have less POS. Or, at least there will be an intellectual class able to grasp what he is teaching, and they will then have the intellectual tools to resist the pozzing.

Here is a link to a government that is attempting to not be a POS in the monetary sphere, and is the likely future. The Atlantacist long game of monetary hoaxing is coming to an end.

https://thecradle.co/Article/interviews/9135

The new economic system united various strata of their societies around the goal of increasing common wellbeing in a way that is substantially stronger than the Anglo-Saxon and European alternatives. This is the main reason why Washington will not be able to win the global hybrid war that it started. This is also the main reason why the current dollar-centric global financial system will be superseded by a new one, based on a consensus of the countries who join the new world economic order.

“The last is, of course, the nuttiest of the three that I always dreamed I could hold up to Friedman by pulling out a Luger and a 357 magnum and giving him the right to choose which one I would use to put a bullet in his hand, therebyby granting him his wish of living by exercising his right to choose.”

Really really stupid comment. In nature and in man’s world animal predators are outnumbered by about 50 or 100 to one by their prey. People sre compltely clueless to the fact that if you killed off criminals eventually their genes disappear from man’s gene pool. That would be a beneficial form of evolution.

But no, man is wired to embrace the very thing that keeps him in the animal world – government.

With government man can never be civilized. Without government he can evolve out of the animal world.

Nice to read a post like yours to emphasize again that government, always and everywhere, is nothing but a POS.

Minor disagreement here.

Western civilization owes more to the Greeks than any of the others. The Greeks gave the West, among other things, Science. No one else came up with science, without which man’s world would be quite backwards.

Presently man is devolving into a pre-science mindset – his natural one – as the populations that never developed science are, for all practical purposes, marginalizing those capable of scientific inquiry.

A future of Idiocracy awaits us all. Enjoy!

Great comment. Thank you.

Thanks for your insightful comments. It appears we’re on the cusp of a new world paradigm of socioeconomics, thanks in no small part to Dr Hudson, who has had significant influence in Russia and China. These are now the tip of the spear against the US’ super-imperialism, a system of neoliberal feudalism or gangster capitalism imposed by bribery, blackmail, coups, and aggressive war. What they sell as free-market capitalism is nothing less than rigged-market cannibalism, utterly devoid of morality or humanity. I’m thrilled to witness its collapse, even tho it is bound to be painful to me as an American.

Your comments are thoughtful and substantive critiques that stand out against a number of vacuous dismissals of MH’s profound, historical socioeconomic analysis. His detailed alternative to the neoliberals’ economic Darwinism is so compelling and self-evident that his critics are reduced to empty sputtering, with the predictable, ignorant “Marxist!” perjorative.

So apparently you are part of this 1 percent who does not fall under the category of “useful idiot”? Do tell the viewing audience how and why, because you come across as one of those elitists that you seemingly despise.

“The reality is that civilization could never have taken off if some free-market economist had got into a time machine and travelled back in time five thousand years to the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Suppose that he would have convinced ancient chieftains or rulers how to organize their trade, money and land tenure on the basis of “greed is goodâ€� and any public regulation is bad.”

To the contrary, that is how those past rulers had developed their empires!

https://www.routledge.com/A-History-of-Interest-and-Debt-Ancient-Civilizations/Ustaoglu-Incekara/p/book/9780367517755

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years

The net wealth of the Catholic church is generally agreed to be about 30 billion Dollars. That’s a lot of money to me but scores of individuals have more than that. It is a worldwide organization and owns many hospitals, nursing homes, churches, commercial properties and of course art in the Vatican and elsewhere. 30 billion is not such a large sum for the largest Christian religion in the world. There are more Christians than Muslims or Hindus.

I do not trust anything I am told about Covid by the medical elite

There are some commentators talking about debasement of money. It is a very difficult thing to control the gold/silver price, especially with the draining of this “international’ money outside of national borders.

It is always WHO controls the money. “Individualist” type privateering types are loath to admit this basic fact of nature. Money’s true nature is law, and ergo a national money must never leave its borders.

Of course privateers are a WHO, who then want to control the money, so they can have a nice easy life of taking usury and sordid gain on others.

William Ridgeway, Origin of Metallic Weights and Standards (Cambrdge University Press, 1892)

“The gold unit represented originally simply the conventional value of the cow as the immemorial unit of barter.”

and

130-135 grains (grains are barley weights) was selected partly because it fits conveniently into the palm of the hand

In the beginning (before coinage) power was in the Temples, as Temples had an ample supply of precious metals, and the power to hold gold off of the market. Gold rings and hoops found in Egypt weighing 128 grains, and similar weight gold jewlery were found in Mycennae (Agemmmon’s home) weighing 130-135 grains, and more jewelry of similar weight found on the island of Aegina.

Gold has always been fiat money, created by law, first as weight, and later as coinage.

Rome got its start using bronze disks, not gold. The idea was to keep gold for “international” trade and as jewelry. The Bronze disks were created by the King by law.

Numa, Rome’s second KING (716-672 BC) used his King power, to institute new law. This law was that bronze would be used instead of gold and silver for money. Copper was easy to get, as much of the precious metals were stored in Temple establishments of the East (Temple cults of the East).

By disenfranchising the silver/gold hoards of the east, Rome was able to chart her own course, independent of of the power of the eastern temples and (((merchants))). Of course later, when Rome adopted precious metals, that was an element of her future oblivion.

Rome’s mistakes:

1) Adopting gold/silver as Rome’s internal money – especially after the second Punic war.

Rome adopted silver/gold in order to be imperialistic, and in order to pay the legions in “international money.” Soldiers want to be able to buy on the conquered local economy, especially to buy luxury goods, and get some trim from the local ladies. Conquering the periphery, allowed creditors in the center to be paid.

2) The Sovereign is never to borrow from privateers.

3) Allowing a creditor oligarchy in Rome to develop.

4) Not releasing debts, and thus allowing Rome to polarize into Latifundia. Creditors grab the land in lieu of being paid in specie.

During Crisis stage of second Punic war, Rome borrowed gold jewelry from its citizens and used 4,000 pounds of Treasury gold to mint its first gold coinages. These were the Janus (two head)”Oath scene” coin, minted around 218 BC, to remind bearers of the solemn oath of allegiance. The other coin was 209 BC Mars eagle, which was issued in three different weights.

By time of the second Punic war, there was already accumulations of precious metal “capital” in the hands of a non-Senatorial business class. This capital was the beginnings of a Roman Oligarchy, and said capital probably accumulated during first Punic war, as war profiteering gains.

This capital class oligarchy loaned or had reserves of silver that were delivered to the Roman government starting in 215 BC. This Oligarchy of private creditors provided silver to the mint at many times overvaluation. In other words, the loan would be paid back in multiples of gain, effectively at usury.

No doubt these capital accumulators were virtue signaling their patriotic spirit, but the overall picture is the same as today, philargurists (money sick people) out to make sordid gain. This class works together as an in-group, promoting its selfish interests at the expense of Roman society.

Immediately after defeating Hannibal (and having paid the legion in precious metals), there was a political thrust to start a new war with Macedon 214 BC.

Apparently, those benefiting from the war, the MIC of the day, didn’t want any interruption to their profiteering.

From 200 BC to 168 BC, or 32 years, there was no let-up in war, which gave no breathing space for Rome’s farmer class, who had become soldiers.

Hudson’s approach is DEBT and its obverse, Credit.

Money settles debts. It is also a form of credit; money is pay to the bearer upon demand.

Any sort of discussion about money must always include debt claims, and who is holding the claims on society.

Who. Who controls the money. Who is holding debt claims against society.

When the money power is properly codified in Sovereign hands, and if said Sovereign abuses that power, that is a separate issue. The solution is not to privatize the money power, but instead to punish the sovereign.

The argument is that the banksters “control/own” the politicians/bureaucrats, so what would prevent the politicians/bureaucrats from setting up a similar system to their own benefit, if one removed the banksters from the equation?

Here’s an interesting interview of an unconventional economist just out in the NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/07/18/magazine/herman-daly-interview.html

“Usury is the bread and butter of the Jewish Hierarchy.

Um, no. Government is.

How else can a tiny group of pyschopaths basically run the world? A top-down chain of command hierarchy that 99% of the people – useless idiots – are wired for.

Billionaires who have built businesses from the ground up, have no business owning/controlling those businesses?

It sounds great to eliminate usury. What do we do if we need capital for some worthwhile project? Who will lend money when there is no reward, such as interest? Those who profess to bypass interest in fact effectively establish usury but give it other names. Muslims and medieval Christians have played this game.

It seems possibly sensible to eliminate usury for consumer debt. What happens if citizen John Doe loses his income stream for several months? A few credit cards might help prevent evictions or defaults for a while, and put food on the table. What if someone needs a reliable auto but doesn’t doesn’t have $40,000 cash. The driver might use the vehicle for frivolous vacations but he might also commute to his job.

Societies without credit (usury) tend to be primitive. African nations are often that way.

Entitlement to the communal produce regardless of contribution?

So the solution is to let the socialist state run by “representatives” take comtrol/ownership of everything?