The end of monetarism & the global government

Hitler and Mussolini were only the primary spokesmen for the attitude of domination and craving for power that are in the heart of almost everyone. Until the source is cleared, there will always be confusion and hate, wars and class antagonisms. Jiddu Krishnamurti

By Ylli Permeti

"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power, and all chattel slavery abolished. This I and my friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan, led on by England, is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages. The great debt that capitalists will see to it is made out of the war must be used as a means to control the volume of money. To accomplish this, the bonds must be used as a banking basis. We are now waiting for the secretary of the treasury to make this recommendation to Congress. It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate as money any length of time, as we cannot control that. But we can control the bonds and through the bonds the bank issues."

The Hazard Circular

July 1862

Money can never reform mankind because money is slavery the same as religion does.

10 December 2008 Ylli Permeti

It is obvious that the end of this kind of capitalism is in its last breath. It is as well clear, that all the past structures of what was considered positivism is obsolete. The social sciences that developed in the past have already died. Although there is a continuous struggle between the superclass and the enslaved population. This enslavement has its roots in the very ancient times. One of the means that tried to enslave the population in the past times and still continue -- is the religion. Having point of departure the monotheistic religion in the Middle East i.e. Judaism, Christianity and Muslimism and all the others substructures which intend to enslave the population -- in different ways -- have now reach to an end. The monetarism is an other science that comes as well to an end, despite the fact that there are efforts by the superclass to keep their science for their own to enslave and suppress the population. It is clear that they i,e. the governments of all wings will try to keep the population under their armpits. In this light, are all the other sciences i.e. post-modernism; post-structuralism; behaviouralism; criticism; realism and all the other post-positivism sciences. Furthermore, there are just three sciences that comes to the surface of a pragmatic society, and they are as Bent Flyvbjerg pointed out as bollow:

1) phronesis -- which concerns values and it goes beyond analytical knowledge (episteme) and concentrates its attention on power;
2) technology -- according to Aristotle is the art possessed by the craftsman and is true knowledge and involves judgments and decisions made in the manner of a virtuoso social actor.
3) epistemology -- concerns global issues.


[P]hronesis is most important because it is that activity by which scientific and instrumental rationality is balanced by value-rationality; and because, according to Aristotle, such balancing is crucial to the viability of any organization.


On this paper I shall show the end of this kind of capitalism by using in my mind just the first value which is phronesis -- translated some times as wisdom and some times as prudence. Why then, this kind capitalism comes to an end? First, we have to take into account the means that this kind of capitalism use to achieve its goal. First parameter then is money, which is just paper and doesn’t have any real value. So, all the today economy is based on false products, e.g money. Money comes from nowhere and is a creature of the most sophisticated and the most disguised conqueror in this world. Actually money is just debts, which a government issues for its own reason, e.g. to enslave the working class or as they pretend to concretise the prosperity of the human being. Furthermore, money is converted in inflation, which means in economic terms, money have to convert its self in real production. In other words means that, one dollar have to be measured with, say, an apple. But the game is not like this. One dollar is converted just with its own debt, e.g. as many dollars in the banks as much the debts grow up. In other words, the equation is like this:


One dollar plus debt (its own) equal zero. Banks then, are just with zero product, which leads to zero existence. How then one can support himself on loans which in turn are debts? Here is the point: banks emphasise their profit on interest. What then is interest rate? Practically, one hundred dollars multiply, say, ten per cent, is a hundred ten. Which again, is debt, e.g. zero. How then, one can underpin himself on debts? And the answer is: liquidity trap. In this point we are today: in a liquidity trap which lead to the change and compulsion of the system to another one. Surprisingly, there is not any propose by the wings of the parties: they have the same means to achieve their goal, e.g. money. Where then is the difference between the wings: nowhere. Just the way how to approach the profit, because the aim of both is to profit by debt money. Time then, for the conspiracy of this trick: [1]‘there are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation -- one is by the sword -- the other is by debts’: John Adams 1735-1826, economist and president of America. How can one then call a system democratic by using the same mean: profit? Monetarism then is antidemocratic, it defines itself as a gamble.


Now, let’s assume that they are right. How then are going the American schools of economics to sort out the problem of the today’s (2008-2009) destruction? Explicitly, by using the last gun: injection into the banks and all the substructures of the legal institutions, i.e. political composition, legal, religions, co-corporations and so on. We saw above that every dollar is debt: how then governments are going to sort out their/our problem by using just debts, e.g. Dollars; Euro and so on? Their policy is based on monetarism, then, they add to their debts other debts and so on. This is the end of the story: the self destruction of the system for the sake of the enslavement by the superclass, which means that their digital money which is about 97% and the physical money just 3% is going to be in a corollary result full digital money. Furthermore, all this leads to bankruptcy of the capitalism-monetarism system.

The global gevernment

We shall have world government whether or not we like it. The only question is whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent...

Lames Warbur

Feb. 17, 1950, to the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

Now, what’s next? As we have seen above, the superclass try to establish a system for the sake of their own, e.g. as Perkins called it: corpocracy. In other words, global epistemology which lead to a global government. How then, can a global government manage the world? The answer seems to be oxymoron. Above we lined up three basic sciences and we started from phronesis which is the main and the most important science of humanity. Is what we call ‘irreplaceable science’ by computer or global corpocracy. Let’s assume again that this goal of the global government, and take into account the proportional number of the simple class which is according to [2]Rothkopf six hundred against six billion. In proportional numbers is one person to each million. So, we’ll have for each ten million one person who commends us, who makes the laws, the rules and doesn’t care about democracy. This is not a joke but a real game by the today’s governments which try to establish and to control the masses.

What is human being then? Just for reference: [3]Habermas, German philosopher and sociologist in the tradition of critical theory and American pragmatism, who tried to establish a universal government accepted that human being is ‘homo democraticus‘, in other words democratic being. He accepted it despite the fact that he was a follower of a universal communicative conception.

Let’s assume again, that this masses is going to be for long time in an obscurantist condition: for how long then? And let’s assume again, that the superclass design the new world: what is going to be this world? May be a co-operative-cracy, e.g., kind of centre-decision-state. Is that possible?

[1] John Perkins: The Secret History of the American Empire - Economic Hit Men, Jackals, and the Truth.
[2] Rothkopf: Superclass 2007
[3] Jurgen Habermas. 1979 Communication and the evolution of Society