For the Triumph of the Immaculate

u
to do that, television can
make it look like
it’s the whole
country, and
things start to
mushroom. Except
in the case
of Chavez, he was
smart enough and the
people were so strongly behind
him that they overcame it,
which was a phenomenal moment
in the history of Latin America. (Editor’s
note: Chavez has since given
in to the pressures of the big corporations.
He is nothing less than
a dictator, ruling with an iron fist. Of
course, this is the reason why he is still in power!)
Iraq is a perfect example of how the system works.
We economic hit men are the first line of defence, we go
in and we try to corrupt the governments and get them to
accept these huge loans which we then use as leverage
to basically own them. If we fail, as I failed in Panama
with Omar Torrijos and in Ecuador with Jaime Roldos,
men who refused to be corrupted, then the second line
of defence we send in are the jackals. The jackals will
either overthrow governments or they assassinate the
country’s leader and once that happens then a new government
comes in and its going to toe the line because
the new president knows what will happen if he doesn’t.
In the case of Iraq, both of those things failed. The
economic hit men were not able to get through to Saddam
Hussein and we tried very hard. We tried to get him
to accept a deal that the house of Saud had accepted in
Saudi Arabia but he wouldn’t accept it and so the jackals
went in to take him out but they couldn’t do it, his security
was very good. After all, he had at one time worked
for the CIA. He had been hired to assassinate a former
president of Iraq and failed but he knew the system. So
in 1991 we sent in troops and took out the Iraqi military,
we assumed at that point that Saddam Hussein was going
to come around. We could have taken him out at that
point but we didn’t want to. He’s the kind of strong man
that we like, he controls his people and we thought he
could control the Kurds and keep the Iranians in their
border and keep pumping oil for us, and once we took
out his military, he would come around.
So the economic hit men went back in, in the 90’s,
without success. If they had success, he’d still be running
the country. We would be selling him all the fighter
jets, and anything else he wants. But they didn’t have
success, the jackals couldn’t take him out so we sent in
the military, and this time we did the complete job and
took him out and in the process, created for ourselves
some very, very lucrative construction deals. We had
to reconstruct a country that we essentially destroyed.
Which is a pretty good deal when you own essentially all
the construction companies.
Iraq demonstrates the three stages: the economic hit
men failed there, the jackals failed and as a final measure,
the military went in. In that way we have really cre-
ated an empire but we’ve done
it in a very, very subtle,
clandestine way. All the
empires in the past
were built on the military,
and everybody
knew they were building
them. The French, the
Germans, the Romans, the
Greeks, they were proud
of it and they always had
some excuse like spreading
civilization, spreading a
religion, something like that.
But they knew they were doing it!
We don’t.
The majority of the people in the United States have
no idea that we are living from the benefits of a clandestine
empire, that today there is more slavery in the world
than ever before. You have to ask yourself, if it’s an empire
than who is the emperor? Obviously our presidents
of the United States are not emperors, an emperor is
someone who is not elected, doesn’t serve a limited term
and doesn’t report to anyone, essentially. So you can’t
classify our presidents that way.
But we do have what I consider to be the equivalent
of an emperor and that is called the Corporatocracy.
The Corporatocracy is this group of individuals who run
our biggest corporations and they really act as the emperor
of this empire. They control our media through direct
ownership or advertising; they control most of our
politicians because they finance their campaigns, either
through the corporations or through personal contributions
that come out of the corporations. They are not
elected, they do not serve a limited term, they don’t report
to anybody and… at the very top of the Corporatocracy,
you really can’t tell if a person’s working for a
corporation or the government because they are always
moving back and forth.
One minute you have a guy who is the president of
a big construction company like Haliburton, and the next
moment, he is vice-president of the United States... or
we had the president who was in the oil business. And
this is true whether you get democrats or republicans in
office, you have them moving back and forth through the
revolving door. And in a way, our government is invisible
a lot of the time, and its policies are carried out by a
corporation, on one level or another.
Again, the policies of the government are basically
forged by the Corporatocracy and presented to the government
and afterwards they become government policies.
So it’s an incredibly cosy relationship. This isn’t a
conspiracy theory type of thing, these people don’t have
to get together and plot to do things; they all basically
work under one primary assumption… and that is that
they must maximise profits, regardless of the social and
environmental costs.
This process is called globalization…
John Perkins
A Brief Summary of Social Credit
by Oliver Heydorn
In what follows, I intend to cover only some of the economic
aspects of Social Credit. It should be noted,
however, that Social Credit also comprises important
philosophical, political, and historical ideas (amongst
others).
In the first place, it is necessary to recognize that the
true purpose of the economy is the production and distribution
of those goods and services which are desired
by the population with the least amount of trouble to
everyone, i.e., the desired production should be carried
out in the most efficient and effective manner possible.
Unfortunately, this goal is not achieved in the modern
world to the extent that it is physically possible (poverty
and servility continue to plague us even if there
are enough natural resources, advanced technology,
and know-how to eliminate them). The element which
intervenes and prevents the actualization of this potential
is the financial system which is presently in place.
This system is structured and functions as a monopoly.
It is based on an artificial scarcity of money (with respect
to both production and consumption), the fact that the
banks create the vast majority of our money supply exnihilo,
and, most importantly, the fact that the banks
claim that the money which they create belongs to them
(i.e., it is their property).
In general, the financial system may be said to have
two main tasks: 1) that of catalyzing the desired production
by advancing financial credit to productive organizations,
and 2) that of distributing the goods and services
which are the result of this process. The artificial
scarcity of money that is a fundamental part of the system
prevents the complete catalysis of production (i.e.,
there are, in certain cases, things which the population
needs which are not produced) and it also prevents the
efficient distribution of the resulting goods and services
(i.e., distribution is subject to artificial constraints). The
latter failure is due to a shortage of consumer purchasing
power. This shortage is caused by a number of different
factors that have the tendency of elevating prices without
liberating a sufficient amount of purchasing power
with which those prices might be liquidated. These include
the collection of profits (including interest charges
on loans), the re-investment of savings, taxes, a policy
of devaluation on the part of the banks, and the A+B
factor (on account of certain charges to cover the finan-
Toronto monthly meetings
August 14, October 9, December 11
Lithuanian Hall, 1573 Bloor St. W.
(One block west of Dundas Subway Station)
Rosary at 2:00 p.m. — Meeting at 2:30 p.m.
For information call: (416) 452-6639
cial costs of the machines used in production, as well
as their depreciation, maintenance, etc., the purchasing
power distributed to consumers in the form of wages,
salaries, and dividends, is always insufficient to meet
the prices which are generated by the same process.)
The solutions proposed by Social Credit for these
two problems are to repair the catalyzing function of the
financial system and to repair the distributive function
of the financial system.
The first function can be repaired by liberating the
financial system from the necessity of having to create
credit through the fractional reserve system of banking.
Douglas always insisted that what is physically possible
should be financially and, hence, economically possible.
As long as there is a desire to produce certain
goods, and the materials, labour, and technology, etc.,
to do so, the necessary amount of money to facilitate
this production should be created and freely advanced
without the imposition of artificial limitations. This could
be arranged through the institution of a National Credit
Office which would be charged with the task of creating
(but not independently or arbitrarily determining) the
money supply.
The second function can be repaired by introducing
some changes to the system of distribution. Instead of
filling the gap in purchasing power which is generated
by the existing system with more money in the form
of debt (through new loans to companies for expansion
and new production — whether desired or not —
through government loans for public works — whether
desired or not — and/or through loans to consumers
to purchase goods and services), Social Credit recommends
that this gap be filled in two different ways by
the creation of new money which is completely free of
debt. Firstly, there would be a compensated price which
would lower the prices of consumable goods in accordance
with the observation that the just or true price of
production can be determined by the cost of the consumption
which that production requires. Secondly,
there would be a dividend which would be received
by every individual — whether he be employed or not.
Together with the wages and salaries distributed to the
workers who are still necessary to run the economic
system, the compensated price and the dividend would
be sufficient to make the financial system balanced and
stable, capable of satisfying its true purpose of distributing
the goods and services which the economy produces
with the least amount of trouble to all.
These changes to the financial system constitute,
in effect, the end of the monopoly which presently controls
the financial system and its replacement with a
system where the power of money has been decentralized
in favour of each and every individual to the greatest
extent possible.
Dr. Oliver Heyrdorn is a professor of philosophy at
the University of Arkansas-Fort Smith.
10 MICHAEL August/September 2011 www.michaeljournal.org www.michaeljournal.org
MICHAEL August/September 2011 11