Audit or eliminate the Fed?
My number one political issue for more than three years has been the audit and subsequent abolition of the Federal Reserve Bank.
With the understanding that the Federal Reserve is responsible for creating the conditions that allow corporations and government to run rampant with malfeasance and malinvestment, it felt natural to attack the structural integrity of the Fed itself. I trusted that addressing this core flaw would restore balance and liberty to the marketplace. But what if there is more at play than meets the eye?
Could it be that while the liberty movement and supporters of free markets work to bring accountability to the Federal Reserve or to end it altogether, the men behind the scenes quietly adapt? The collapse of the economy was foreseeable and inevitable, as was the coming struggle between world government and national sovereignty. Is it possible that the collapse or restructuring of the Federal Reserve and the global economy is not only inevitable, but intended to give rise to an even larger and less accountable system?
Since 2008, I have grown increasingly concerned about the likelihood of success in battling the Federal Reserve. That concern has led to a more sobering realization. The only way such a movement succeeds is if existing financial powers find a way to harness and exploit its energy. Surely contingency plans exist that do not rely on force confronting force, but instead redirect the opponent’s momentum to serve entirely different ends. Is it possible that grassroots mobilization is resisted only until it becomes strong enough to be useful?
Can institutions as powerful as multinational corporations and the global banking system simply adopt new strategies that preserve profit and advance their agendas under new banners? Is it possible that whatever course of action we pursue will ultimately be used against the outcome we seek?
With centuries of political and social experience behind them, those in positions of power understand the Hegelian dialectic. Problem, reaction, solution. It makes sense, at times, to create a problem when you already know how the public will react. Once the bewildered herd responds exactly as anticipated, an opportunity emerges to implement changes that would otherwise be rejected. As Rahm Emanuel put it, “It’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”
To what extent who knew or knows what remains unclear. What is clear is this. Regardless of how events unfold, those who seek power and control, whether for humanitarian justifications or otherwise, will exploit moments of fear and uncertainty to advance agendas that would never be accepted under calm conditions.
Comments
Post a Comment