Written by Davian Views.



[Read part 1 here and Part 2 here]

As a development Fiat Currencies, despite their high failure rate, (Twenty eight in the last century, and many walking wounded) are an irresistible prize for the MICE as they offer, via a fractional reserve banking system, nearly absolute power over economic activity.

The key to understanding fractional reserve banking and how it determines the nature of the underlying currency is the effect it has on the citizen who uses it. The UK Pound Sterling is sometimes referred to as a share in U.K. plc. This view is useful as it highlights the difference between shares and currency.

Imagine that you own shares in a British company, say Morrisons the supermarket (I chose Morrisons because it is based in Britain and conducts its business in Britain), you also had some money that you deposited in Lloyds TSB Bank plc, I used the word had, because as soon as you deposited the money in the bank, it is considered an asset of the bank, your status has changed from owner of the money, to a creditor of the bank who is owed the money.

This change of ownership allows the bank to lend many times the amount of your money to somebody else. Being a bank (A lifeless juristic person, which can have any person in the driving seat of the company car as no formal qualifications are required) has huge power not granted to ordinary citizens. This is necessary in order for fractional banking to be possible, and just to rub salt in the wounds, you as a taxpayer are currently on the hook for £85,000, per person per institution if things go wrong.

The boss of Morrisons can issue shares, providing that existing shareholders are protected in some way from the dilution of their capital, which is bizarre as there are no such controls on the accumulation of debt by a company.

However Lloyds TSB Bank plc can create loans, and dilute the value of the Pound Sterling by expanding the money supply almost at will, where if the citizen does the same thing, they will be charged with forgery and sent to jail.

So how has the hunting and farming of money changed relative to the concentrations of power created by the use of precious metals? First the rapid advance of technology in surveillance, communications, medicine, productivity and power of the state since the Second World War is due in large part to the rise in quantity and power of computers.

Computers have increased both productivity and the curse of productivity. On the business side of the equation, the jobs that were done by an army of book keepers are now done automatically, the book keepers are no longer required which is the curse of productivity. On the customer’s side of the equation things are not so helpful, convenient shops have closed because they are no longer economic. Simple tasks like booking a holiday can take hours of wading through websites to try and find what you want, whereas previously half an hour with a travel agent and it was job done. The basic shift has been less time taken to produce by the seller and more time taken to purchase by the customer. Time is money so time costs have been passed to the customer. Customer productivity is not measured as there are no figures produced to balance business productivity, so the economy does not know if there has been a net gain or loss in productivity.

Surveillance is everywhere, but it is not been watched. There are automatic fine systems such as speed cameras. But if a crime is being investigated, it is forensic pathology, not real time policing. 

As a croupier I worked in an environment of real time “policing”. The dynamic is different from surveillance, I know that I will make mistakes, the point of someone watching me was to prevent mistakes, not fine me if I made one. This created a culture of watching one another’s back and is supportive, rather than divisive, and so pleasant to work in. The introduction of cameras and remote viewing from the camera room eroded the supportive atmosphere, which had knock on effects throughout the casino, over time. The current mode of remote policing has the same corrosive effect.

Communications have changed, but the main change in balance is that now people talk at you, rather than to you. This very similar to the changes in surveillance just mentioned.

When humans communicate, they evolved communication techniques that involved speech (Hearing), posture (Sight and Body Language), smell (Perfume), taste (Meetings usually involve consuming food and or drink) and touch (Handshake). These meetings evolved the skills of etiquette and manners.

Since the industrial revolution, the format of our messages has been reduced because of the distances involved. The devolutionary message chain runs from: Letter, Newspaper, Semaphore, Sign, Morse Code, Telegram, Telephone, Television, Text Message, Email, Website. Each step along this path further separates the sender from the receiver, in the process the traditional skills of human interaction are required less and less, and begin to decay in accordance with the ‘use it or lose it’ principle.   

Medicine is a double edged sword, because if you know how to heal, then you know how to harm. What determines behaviour is the moral attitude of the life form that uses the knowledge (“Knowledge is power”, as the saying goes). Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. 

The National Health Service is the darling of the welfare system, but it does not function in the way the name suggests. A health service would be primarily focused on promoting good health in the population, so this would focus primarily on the causes of disease, the old maxim being prevention is better than cure.

Accordingly, some form of regular monitoring and education from childhood onwards would be the norm. but the situation is almost opposite to good practice, in that most people get sick first, then they visit the doctor, meaning that each case has progressed further along the disease pathway and is more expensive to treat. This again is reactive rather than proactive response, similar to policing, which is behind the curve.

State Power is an interesting concept in that the state (which is another one of those lifeless entities, that can be driven by anyone competent or otherwise) is controlled not by the voters, which is the main point of having a democracy you would think …


[The concluding part will be published tomorrow]


Print Friendly, PDF & Email