“Off Tangent Show” # 18 with your host Latin
Latin takes a look at the claims made by Daryl Bradford Smith. Latin asks do the numbers matter?
http://theinfounderground.com/ftp/lav/audio/oft18.mp3
Who controls the past, controls the future; who controls the present, controls the past - George Orwell, 1984
George Orwell Looking back on the Spanish War
The struggle for power between the Spanish Republican parties is an unhappy, far-off thing which I have no wish to revive at this date. I only mention it in order to say: believe nothing, or next to nothing, of what you read about internal affairs on the Government side. It is all, from whatever source, party propaganda — that is to say, lies. The broad truth about the war is simple enough. The Spanish bourgeoisie saw their chance of crushing the labour movement, and took it, aided by the Nazis and by the forces of reaction all over the world. It is doubtful whether more than that will ever be established. I remember saying once to Arthur Koestler, ‘History stopped in 1936’, at which he nodded in immediate understanding. We were both thinking of totalitarianism in general, but more particularly of the Spanish civil war. Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’. When one thinks of all the people who support or have supported Fascism, one stands amazed at their diversity. What a crew! Think of a programme which at any rate for a while could bring Hitler, Petain, Montagu Norman, Pavelitch, William Randolph Hearst, Streicher, Buchman, Ezra Pound, Juan March, Cocteau, Thyssen, Father Coughlin, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Arnold Lunn, Antonescu, Spengler, Beverley Nichols, Lady Houston, and Marinetti all into the same boat! But the clue is really very simple. They are all people with something to lose, or people who long for a hierarchical society and dread the prospect of a world of free and equal human beings. Behind all the ballyhoo that is talked about ‘godless’ Russia and the ‘materialism’ of the working class lies the simple intention of those with money or privileges to cling to them. Ditto, though it contains a partial truth, with all the talk about the worthlessness of social reconstruction not accompanied by a ‘change of heart’. The pious ones, from the Pope to the yogis of California, are great on the’ change of heart’, much more reassuring from their point of view than a change in the economic system.
Father Charles Edward Coughlin (October 25, 1891 – October 27, 1979) was a Canadian-born Roman Catholic priest at Royal Oak, Michigan's National Shrine of the Little Flower Church. He was one of the first political leaders to use radio to reach a mass audience, as more than forty million tuned to his weekly broadcasts during the 1930s. This radio program included commentary about Jews that was widely regarded as antisemitism, as well as rationalizations of some of the policies of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini[1] that many people found objectionable. The broadcasts have been called "a variation of the Fascist agenda applied to American culture".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coughlin
George Orwell Toward European Unity
Socialist today is in the position of a doctor treating an all but hopeless case. As a doctor, it is his duty to keep the patient alive, and therefore to assume that the patient has at least a chance of recovery. As a scientist, it is his duty to face the facts, and therefore to admit that the patient will probably die. Our activities as Socialists only have meaning if we assume that Socialism can be established, but if we stop to consider what probably will happen, then we must admit, I think, that the chances are against us. If I were a bookmaker, simply calculating the probabilities and leaving my own wishes out of account, I would give odds against the survival of civilization within the next few hundred years. As far as I can see, there are three possibilities ahead of us:
http://theinfounderground.com/ftp/lav/audio/oft18.mp3
And so too, will the various incarnations of governmental beasts. A beast is a beast by any other name; one may call it 'democracy', but it is fascism; one may call it communism, but it is whatever the fine print reads: 666 empire. Interchange the names of beasts, or of their political propaganda mills, and juggle them if you may, most often the differences are not sublime, or what the title, theory and philosophy claim to be.
The bigger a beast gets, the more it's bullshit stinks.
This will keep happening until people figure it out.
What is it?
The show is really about propaganda. It is really about a simple observation made in Orwell's work. I put some reference material to support my conclusions.
Cheers
That's alot of shows you've got there, Latin. Good work!
I hope it has the effect of a fresh cuppa joe, so people WTFU!
What is LAV doing on WUFYS? I thought I banned him last week. (ho ho)
LAV makes an interesting point about the imminent crash. I will attempt to summarize: The numbers don't matter. The system won't crash unless the powers LET IT. In response, I would say yes and no.
I think The Powers That Be (TPTB; I thought writing THEY all the time was making me start to look paranoid.) are going to crash the system, just like in '29, but they are going to put it off until the time is convenient for them.
This sort of makes LAV's point moot, or at least unprovable. If the system crashes, we are still left wondering whether: they CAUSED the crash at a time when TPTB were holding all the REAL assets; or they just knew when the game was up and grabbed all the good stuff.
I think there is a lot of power in the central banks, but they cannot get around the flaw in their own system: interest. Interest is the BEAST. The economy is required to create more money to feed the ever-growing interest. The amount of interest owed is worsened by the practice of fractional lending, which allows more of a debt-beast to be created from the same amount of capital.
The debt-beast grows and grows. It is never paid off, rather more debt is created to pay down the debt. It is like a drug habit. It is never satisfied, but rather the tolerance is increased, so that more and more of the drug is needed to get that high. Desperate for cash, the junkie soon finds himself on the street, hungry and alone, offering to do sordid things for European Central Bankers. I believe people cook up many of these hare-brained money schemes (e.g. CDOs) not only because of greed, but out of desperation to turn a profit in the fact of the ever growing debt.
It seems to me that the Kondratieff cycle is based on the fact that system becomes rife with bad credit over time. This bad credit has to be burned out of the system. Why does bad credit build up? Why does the debt become unsustainable? Because the ever growing debt-beast. Because of Interest. Why does every major religion say Usury is a sin? Why do Bishops wear yarmulkes? Why do dogs get mad when you blow in their face?
Long tangent to say that the cycle is unavoidable. The music will stop, and those without chairs will be out of the game. But TPTB can make sure they have all the chairs.
It's interesting that, as I was listening to your show, I opened this post by Ellen Brown, who I believe has been posted here at WUFYS before.
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/wag_the_dog.php
Ellen describes the situation at the beginning of her article this way:
"Last week, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had just announced record losses, and so had most reporting corporations. Unemployment was mounting, the foreclosure crisis was deepening, state budgets were in shambles, and massive bailouts were everywhere. Investors had every reason to expect the dollar and the stock market to plummet, and gold and oil to shoot up. Strangely, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 300 points, the dollar strengthened, and gold and oil were crushed. What happened?"
What happened indeed? She notes the presence of the Plunge Protection Team, who guarantee the stability of the Ponzi Scheme, I mean the Dow. Ellen also quotes James Turk from Goldmoney, who credited the wall street rebound to intervention: "Central banks have propped up the dollar, and here’s the proof.
“When central banks intervene in the currency markets, they exchange their currency for dollars. Central banks then use the dollars they acquire to buy US government debt instruments so that they can earn interest on their money. The debt instruments central banks acquire are held in custody for them at the Federal Reserve, which reports this amount weekly.
“On July 16, 2008 . . . , the Federal Reserve reported holding $2,349 billion of US government paper in custody for central banks. In its report released today, this amount had grown over the past three weeks to $2,401 billion, a 38.4% annual rate of growth. . . ."
I had seen Turk's article before and it seemed to explain a lot. Of course, I don't know much.
But Ellen Brown goes on to note that while central banks can manipulate currencies, gold and oil and virtually "any other market....markets can be manipulated by only so much and for only so long without fixing the underlying problem. There is more bad news coming down the pike, news of such magnitude that no amount of ordinary manipulation is liable to conceal it."
What is it that they say about Great Minds? I forget, but I am in concordance with Ellen Brown. TPTB will LET the market fall, but they will let it fall because inherent flaws (Interest) make it unsustainable.
-----------------------
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."
Who is providing these numbers? Mathmatical theories need numbers and those number need to coresponse to reality. I suggested that the numbers don't matter. However we do agree that the TPTB will determine when. HOWEVER, the when is partly determined by way the Masses can psychologicaly accept and justify the calmity. Here is quote from and thread on my show:
Lets put it this way- When will the ends times occur? Clearly all the signs suggest that we are close. When will the Roman Catholic Church collapse? Apostate Christians, Homosexual priests,Jewish popes- Clearly it can not last much longer! The answer is never. Faith can sustain anything indefinitely! This is because of faith and good credit of the United States. The credit is shot! All we have is faith! So when will people stop believing? Suppress all real information and this thing can go on forever.
Forever!!!
.
4000 - FDIC Advisory Opinions
Full Faith and Credit of U.S. Government Behind the FDIC Deposit Insurance Fund
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/ru ... -2660.html
I would say that the end cannot be postponed FOREVER by Faith. I believe that God will determine the end.
I agree that there are so many signs that point to the end times. But we can't stop the end by refusing to recognize it. God, in His infinite Mercy, will end things when He sees fit.
(Out of curiosity, are you interpreting the Awful Horror of Mk 13:14 as the perversion of the Catholic faith?)
As this metaphor applies to economics, I'm sure the faith of the people is a large factor, but faith alone cannot control the outcome of the markets. We are not in control there either.
I suppose the situation could be one where the truth is completely suppressed, as in 1984: everyone is impoverished, nothing is created, and no one officially recognizes that there has been a crash. But that would require a radical redefinition of the term. It always comes down to terms.
I would define a market crash as: a major loss of wealth, or redistribution of wealth, from the majority of the people; severe unemployment, and large amounts of business failures and home foreclosures.
I would say if we have these things, there has been a crash, no matter what AP or Reuters says.
It is my belief that Bernanke is trying to bring everything down at once, so that the market continues despite the loss of wealth. He has shown an intent to solve market failures by applying liquidity. I suppose that by preventing a liquidity crisis, everyone will continue lending, and not as many businesses will close. This will avoid a catastrophic collapse on Wall Street, and people will keep their jobs.
The ending in that situation is just a dollar that is worth .25 in 2000 dollars. It appears that the central banks are aiding in this plan by buying dollars, which would bring their currencies down as well. By suppressing the gold price, they are hoping to stop the flight from stocks, and everyone can look at the Dow and think, "It's not that bad. The Dow is still above 10,000."
Perhaps this is what you are getting at. This soft landing plan, where all the middle class are equally impoverished. Perhaps that is what you mean by the non-recognition of a market collapse, and the retention of faith.
Perhaps this sort of soft landing is possible. In my definition of a crash, it would be missing some of the factors. I think we both see that there would be no more free market at that point. Maybe we're already there. It seems like a slow descent into communism without a shot being fired.
Maybe Orwell should have written "2014".
-----------------------
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."
In other words, it is not knowable? I think you miss my point- how can anyone can to know something like an impending economic collapse based on numbers provided by people who an interest in deceiving us and have a history of deception? I remain skeptical.
and it's good to look at sources, especially when you are getting info from people you don't trust.
Looking at your point again, it does make a lot of sense. Above all, we must be skeptical when dealing with factual matters.
LAV said: "[H]ow can anyone [come] to know something like an impending economic collapse based on numbers provided by people who an interest in deceiving us and have a history of deception?"
Your inclusion of Winston dealing with a succession of fictitious numbers of shoes is particularly apropos. None of those numbers had any factual basis, so they meant nothing.
In our current system, we are dealing with several groups of liars: the government(s); the Fed (and all the central banks); and corporations. Supposedly there are independent auditors: the GAO for the government; corporations have independent auditors; and the Fed is audited regularly by a guild of Goblins.
Although the corporations audits were thrown into doubt with the Enron/Anderson scandal, I still place some trust in the GAO; If only because they are still coming out with reports that would be highly damaging to the government if anyone in Congress were paying attention.
So while we are near to the 1984 world where ALL the numbers are lies, I don't think we are quite there yet. Some of the numbers are still correct. But you are right to question which numbers are correct.
Someone that I know makes software that tracks shipping containers. He says that the overall numbers of these containers are way down. So, to use your other analogy, there is snow falling on the ground.
-----------------------
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."
I have come to the conclusion that 1984 happened in 1948. I simply have no faith in government.
Lets say that is true. Could you tell what those numbers are?
This claim I would take seriously. However, I wonder what part we play in this self fulfilling prophesy? Kinda like a false rumor. Rumors or speculation have and do effect the market. hmmmm... Guess what they are beliefs also.