Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home3/tandem/public_html/golemXIV/wp-content/themes/canvas/functions/admin-hooks.php on line 160

The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation

In every country I can think of, the sovereignty and wealth of the Nation, which was once the embodiment of the power and will of the people,  is being butchered and sold to the highest bidder. Everywhere, the Nation and the people within it, are under attack. Not from without by terrorists but from within. Because in every country the people who run the State have largely decided they no longer wish to serve the people but prefer instead to serve the interests of a Global Over-Class.

Of course we are not encouraged to see this clearly or if we do, certainly not to speak of it to others. And many of those we might try to talk to, do not want to hear.

Many of us prefer instead to find what warmth we can in the false and threadbare beliefs fed to us by the quisling elite of the State and their close friends and allies in a rigged and corrupted ‘free’ market. Together they tell us that whole functions of our nation which we built and treasure, are no longer viable because they are at odds with the ‘realities’ of a global economy. The more ideological of them proclaim that the state, whenever and wherever it tries to do good, will always and by necessity do harm. The more ‘realist’ among them tell us that once inalienable liberties, must now be curtailed or suspended in the name of defending the ‘nation’ from outside enemies. And yet I want to argue it is now, not ever us or the nation that is being defended or empowered.  It is always and everywhere a small elite who own and control both the State and the Markets who are being defended.

In my view, we are, in most industrialized countries, watching the machinery of the State being used to betray the Nation in favour of global finance and the elite who own it. It is a familiar betrayal in the third world. One we have all watched with sordid complacently as the wealth of nation after nation is gutted for the benefit of the few. The disease is now with us.

I want to make it clear, as I have before, that I am neither libertarian nor anarchist and therefore have no ideological distrust of the State. In my opinion, there have been times and places, when the machinery of the State did animate and represent some of the wishes of the at least some of the people – of the Nation. There have been instances when the State was, in many, though certainly not in all ways, the means by which the great ideal, of government of the people, by the people, for the people, was made real. The creation of the National Health Service in Great Britain is one shining example.

I think that great ideal of government by and for the people is being butchered – for profit. The Nation-State is dying, because any given arrangement of power can be corrupted and will be, by those who benefit from it most – those who hold its powers – in this case the powers of the State  – IF people cringingly let them. And that it what we are doing.

We are allowing the elite of the State, to convince us that we are ‘all in it together’, and to claim that our interests and their interests are still one and the same. But they are not. And we must come to see this clearly – and soon. As long as we deny the truth, that they are not standing ‘with us’, and do not have our best interests at heart – until we can face these self evident but chilling truths, then we are never going to see them for what they have become nor see their actions for what they are.

I think it is critical that we disentangle in our minds the State and the interests of those who control it, from those of what I am calling the Nation. The State and the Nation are not the same. They are, in fact, at war.

The Propaganda War

Our problem and their advantage is that it is deeply ingrained in us to see the State and the Nation as almost interchangeable. The very name, ‘The Nation State’ inclines us to believe that the State and Nation are one and therefore that any action taken by the State, no matter how harsh or unfair it might seem to us, must necessarily be for our good. It allows those who control the State to hide their narrow selfish interests behind a smokescreen of talk about the Nation.

This intentional confusion of Nation and State is everywhere in reporting about global finance and trade.

Battle lines drawn for EU-US trade talks

Cried a recent headline in the Telegraph. To me, it reads intentionally like an old fashioned report of a war.  Wars of any sort are fantastically useful for the elite of the State because wars, better than anything else, encourage people to collapse the State and the Nation together in their minds. Faced with an external enemy it is the State and those who guide it, who marshal our defenses and face the enemy.  And so we are encouraged to assume that when the EU and the US meet it will be ‘our side’ fighting for us, against theirs. But will it?

In reality it will be unelected, largely un-named trade representatives supported and surrounded by a legion of  lawyers, advisors and lobbyists, nearly all of whom will be recently seconded from or still in the pay of global corporations,  who will meet behind closed doors to negotiate in secret. Whose interests will they be fighting for?

They, with the help of a largely supine and grovelling media, will claim to be there for you.  They will be decked out in flags and called by the names of our nations or national groupings, such as the EU. But the truth will be otherwise. Behind the national name plate a largely unseen machinery will be almost entirely corporate. Both sides will be there to seek advantage, not for you the people, not for the nations whose flags they use as camouflage , but for the corporations who pay them. The US delegation will seek advantage for US based global corporations and the EU delegation will seek advanage for EU based global corporations. Both sides will be hailed victorious.  The real question – very carefully never ever raised by the compliant media –  will be who lost? And the answer, studiously unreported, will be the ordinary people of both sides.

The object of the whole endeavour is to roll back soveriegn protections and powers in favour of an ‘unregulated’, unfettered, free market. How can I make such a sweeping claim? Because we have seen the results of over 200 previous Free Trade Agreements which these same people have negotiated and agreed previously. Just think of NAFTA.

If you think those agreements have benefited you, rather than, as I claim, the global corporations parasitical upon your nation and mine , then show me the proof. Don’t trot out platitudes about increased GDP without showing me who owns that GDP.  Don’t bore me with text-book clap trap about how much corporations contribute unless you show me how much tax those corporations actually pay versus how much they quite legally move off-shore to low tax or no tax havens. Show me figures. I challenge you.

In part two I will return to this, and to explain what Bilateral trade Agreements are and what extrordinary and completely anti-democratic new power the State has given to corporations to over-rule Nations and to sue them for democratic decisions corporations do not like.

For now lets move from trade and finance to the actions of the machinery of State itself.

The NSA: Is It American, or British? 

Is the title of a recent paper written by Edward Spannaus at Executive Intelligence Review.

What makes the author think the NSA’s primary loyalty is to either, other than simply being used to thinking they must be? The NSA and its UK counterpart, GCHQ,  exist in thoir respective nations but is it really sensible to assume they feel loyal to the people who live there? And yet the author and his paper, like so many who are trying to understand what is going on around us, are stuck in the logic of what I think is now a world gone by.

If you were to ask someone from the NSA or GCHQ who they worked for would they immediately say, ‘the people’ or would they say ‘the NSA’ or ‘GCHQ’?

All those organs of power whose names and acronyms we are familiar with exist officially as servants of the… well of the what? Of the People? Of the Nation? Or of the State? Once power is created, it does not have to remain loyal to its creators. Any organization will come over time, as ambition eclipses morality, to regard its own survival and rise to greater power as paramount.  Its original purpose will be drowned in a rising tide of inward looking ambition and greed for power.

It is my contention that we have become so used to the word and the idea of ‘the Nation-State’ that we have forgotten it is a compound of two very different things.

One more example, as quoted at Zerohedge,

Melissa Harris-Perry, from the otherwise progressive cable channel MSNBC, critized Snowden’s behavior as “compromising national security.”

But is it really National Security Mr Snowden compromised or State Security? When someone appeals to ‘National Security’ the unspoken assumption is that they are talking about your security and mine.  We, after all, are ‘the Nation’.  But I wonder if Mr Snowden might be more accurately described as having compromised the State’s security rather than the Nation’s. Which doesn’t sound nearly as good, does it? State security has a ring of the Stasi about it. And for good reason. Protecting the interests and security of the State is quite different from protecting the interests of the people who make up the Nation. One is about protecting you and me. The other is more about protecting the position, power and wealth of those who make up the State and its various organs of power. State security is about the security of the jobs and social postion of those who are ‘the State’. It is about the security of a particuar arrangement of power and those who benefit from that arrangement.  Which one does the NSA or GCHQ serve? Which did Mr Snowden really compromise by revealing the extent of the NSA’s and GCHQ’s indiscriminate and unlawful spying upon ordinary and innocent citizens?

If we wish to hold on to the fiction that the NSA and GCHQ work for their respective Nations then how do we explain that the people we elect, even very senior members of the State, even within the government of the day, had NO idea what the NSA or GCHQ were doing? Certainly the NSA and GCHQ were financed by us, and draw their original legitimacy from us, but they no longer answer to those who we elect. So who do they answer to? To what are they loyal and to whom do they report?

Think of how different ‘One Nation under God’ sounds from “One State under God”.

My point is that we are so used to thinking of the State – our elected officials and the machinery that carries out their wishes, as being part of the Nation, loyal to it and us, that we are not seeing clearly that this relationship has ended. I am not saying that the old relationship between Nation/People, State and Market has altogether gone. It has not. Not everyone in the State has forsaken their old loyalties. We are in a moment of transition. But I am saying we need to see the new relationship more clearly, if we possibly can, because only then can we defend ourselves.

We are at war, we need to know who our real enemies are and take up arms against them.

The New World Order

While everyone agrees you cannot stuff a square peg into a round hole, when it comes to the new and unfamiliar, humans have a dreadful habit of trying. I think this is particularly true at the moment. The world is changing, a new order of things is taking shape around us but we are loathed to see it because we insist on trying to see everything through the lens of the previous world order.

The old order was laid out from left to right: Communist to Libertarian. From those who felt the State was there to guarantee certain protections and provide a minimum of welfare and service, over to those who felt any intervention from the State was no more than an abuse of power by a group of self serving insiders. Largely this is still the range of thought and opinion. Those on the Left see the Free Market as the greatest danger to liberty, welfare, justice and fairness, and regard the State as our best protection against it. While on the Right the fears are exactly the same but the State is now the great danger and the market the best protection. Each side regards the other as hopelessly, even criminally, misguided. Each side sees the other advocating that which will bring disaster.

Into this sterile and suffocating tweedledumness a new ideology and power has grown. It is neither Libertarian nor Left, but has been called both. The Libertarians have seen how eagerly and constantly this new politics intervenes in and distorts the market and cries “Socialism”. Which, it has to be said, makes anyone who knows anything about Socialism gasp with amazement. Nevertheless you can read this ‘it’s socialism’ opinion in most of the right wing press and on most blogs where Libertarians comment, such as ZeroHedge or The Ticker.

On the other hand the Left sees the way the new politics intervenes on behalf of and protects the interests of the wealthy (The financial class and global corporations) doing nothing about tax avoidance, nothing to regulate the banks, insisting instead that the only answer is more free market, less regulation and austerity to be borne by those least able to bear it – and sees clear evidence that this new politics is right wing and libertarian.

Both sides seems only able to see things in terms of the labels and world view they are used to and as a consequence see nearly nothing at all. The truth, I suggest, is that we are at a moment when an entire cultural form is ending. At such times it is not one part or another, government or market, which corrupts and breaks, which betrays the values it was meant to embody and ceases to do the job for which it was created, it is all parts at once. All parts of our society have become corrupted.

We must move beyond the politics of the last century, seeking to blame all ills on a corrupt and captured State or alternatively on a corrupt, captured and rigged market. BOTH are true. Both are corrupt. Neither is working for us. A new elite exists in every nation, has control over every State but which has no loyalty to the Nation of people in which it exists any more than a tape worm is loyal to the creature in whose body it feeds and grows.

The New World Order has its own ideology which does not fit happily on the old left to right axis.

The new ideology is not fully formed yet, but already it is clear that it is not Libertarian because unlike Libertarianism, the new ideology believes the State should be very powerful and large and should intervene. But neither is it Socialist, because unlike the Left the new ideology believes those interventions should be on behalf of the wealthy not the poor.

It’s a new world. We need to see it anew.

In Part Two I will look in more detail at what I merely introduced almost in passing in this introduction: the new and rapidly mutating and evolving ideology in the world of Finance,  in particular at Bilateral Investment Treaties which are the real danger point inside the Trade Agreements currently being negotaited.  And  the mutation of the security and Intelligence world into something that spies upon Nations rather than working for them, in the serivce of a new ‘Greater Good’.


, , , , , , , , , , ,

179 Responses to The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation

  1. cynicalHighlander November 17, 2013 at 10:27 pm #

    GCHQ snoops on hotel reservations targeting diplomats – Snowden leaks

    Remarkably, the report comes right after British intelligence chiefs made assurances that their actions were conducted within the framework of the war on terror. At a November-7th hearing by parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee in London, GCHQ head, Sir Ian Lobban, acknowledged that Edward Snowden’s leaks would make GCHQ’s work “far harder” for years to come.

  2. Kathy November 17, 2013 at 10:59 pm #

    This is well written and a marvelous explanation of the transition the world is going through. In addition to Part 2, I’d be interested in your current thoughts on terms for the new ideology to replace the terms used for the old one.

    • Golem XIV November 17, 2013 at 11:20 pm #

      Hello Kathy,

      I do have a few suggestions for terms for the new ideology. I’ll put them in part 2.

    • bradanfeasa November 19, 2013 at 4:43 pm #

      “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” – Mussolini.

      Perhaps the new order is just new wine in old wine skins… the plutocrats are just more savvy this time than their goose-stepping counterparts in the 1930s, yet many of the same elements are present – a compliant media, repression of dissent (through political correctness today), groupthink and militarism. I really think that 2008 is a watershed for western democracies – for a moment the mask slipped and canny individuals (such as Golem!) were able to clearly see the wood from the trees for the first time. Our democracies are slower withering on the vine. Perhaps we are fools for thinking they would last.

      • pinotcanoz November 20, 2013 at 10:07 pm #

        Great incite. NWO = Fascism without the jackboots.

  3. Alex Taylor November 18, 2013 at 12:25 am #

    Another good read David.

    Sorry to go off topic so early in a thread, but I value your insights and wondered if you could give consideration to the Scottish Independence question with some future article.

    Many of us in favour of independence see it as a chance to escape the sociopathic brutality that has become Westminster. We don’t claim we’ll achieve utopia, but could we start anew and avoid the callous disregard of the people by the state that you describe above?

    Or is even a newly independent Scotland destined to put power and money before people?


    • Golem XIV November 18, 2013 at 9:30 am #

      Hello Alex,

      I personally don’t see why Scotland shouldn’t have independence. Would it be better for Scottish people than Westminster? It is hard to imagine it would be worse.

      The question is what relation would Scotland chose to have with England, Europe and America?

      I think independence is not about ‘going it alone’ but rather being free to choose the terms of your own alliances. Scotland would have to decide what relation it had to which sphere of influence. I think there would be questions of choosing sides.

      I think an indepedent Scotland would have to avoid finding that its ‘own’ financial and political class did not start to sell off what independence had just achieved.
      Independence for the Scottish people would be great. Independence just for Scottish corporations and those of the financial class who choose to domicile some of their wealth and power in Scotland, would bring little real change.

      If being independence was grasped as the chance to DO positive things – to do this and engage with that – then it would herald a new time for Scotland. If however, it was seen by too many as a chance to simply ‘not do’ – to not have to listen to Westminster, not look outward and graple with international questions, if it became a bully pulpit for the Scottish version of the Little Englander – the Little Crofter – then I think the benefits would be quickly and cheaply sold away.

      I would wish Scotland to have its own independent voice but would hope fervently it would use it wisely and bravely.

      • averagejoe November 18, 2013 at 1:14 pm #

        Interesting. As a Scot I’ve been thinking the same thing, ie can independence offer the chance of getting away from the current London approach of bending at the knee to meet the needs of the corporate business sector, regardless of the party that is in power. There is a stronger socialist ethic in Scotland, and independence would provide the chance to make a real change. But it is clear to me that the SNP, are just as willing to bend to corporate business interests. What sticks in my head is that in Iceland, the people stood up and said no to the bailing out of the banks. It was a small country with a small population, but they were able to influence politics in a way that as a Scot we cant in the UK. That doesn’t imply the outcome in Iceland was perfect, but as I see it, it was way better than here. Also a small country, will always struggle to bail its banks out. And I think thats its easier to argue not to, if the figure would instantly bankrupt a country rather than the slow death the UK is in for. Lets not forget, nothing has been fixed in the banking system. Its been kept afloat by massive QE especially by the Fed.
        Much to think about before I vote next year.

        • M_T_Wallet November 18, 2013 at 3:44 pm #

          Joe – right in part but the bank’s ship has sailed. Ireland didn’t do what Iceland did.

          Scotland’s influence on UK politics has (thankfully) to me as an Englishman of Irish parents been disproportiantely positive until recent times.

          Salmon’s influence in binning the Old Witch via the non payment approach of Poll Tax (I think he even coined the idea) has got to be the most under rated act of political coup d’etat in the Union’s history.

          However he has turned into the same arse licking Corporate Glove Puppet that the rest have. He is now a Murdcoh ‘lover’ and NATO member. I’d stick with UK at least a fair few ship builders will keep their job. If I lived in Portsmouth I’d suggest otherwise.

      • Andrea November 18, 2013 at 6:39 pm #

        Along the same lines…I don’t know squat about Scotland.

        Secessionist moves are these days often based on economic superiority, i.e. richer regions wish to breakaway to avoid paying for the poor – see for ex. Flanders, Catalonia, Northern Italy.

        I don’t see Scotland as belonging to that crowd, but who am I?

        The question then becomes what is to be gained by independence. And that gain is not be counted in pounds – as the loss is not to be counted in pounds in the form of protection from a larger, instituted area. Note ideological, religious, ethnic, institutional differences between Scotland and GB are really minor as compared to other places (e.g. Kurds at the top and Bretons in France at the bottom of an informal ranking.)

        Sure there is a long history but Scots are not imprisoned for arguing for independence and the Scots are not discriminated against. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a good idea….but what could an independent Scotland bring not only to its citizens but the World? That is I think the crux, and one needs to look forward, rather than be stuck in the past. So to wind up with all the confusion the vote usually comes down to close to 50-50 and is decided on a small margin.

      • Mike Hall November 18, 2013 at 9:47 pm #

        Besides Golem’s concerns I would add the absolutely vital question of what currency an independent Scotland might adopt.

        Seriously, this is the most important question after whether your ‘democracy’ might function, or not, and up there alongside it.

        Best way to understand money, banking and the government and macro economics options that flow from that – or don’t, in favour of elites interests, not yours – is by seeing what the MMT blogs have to say in respect of the Euro zone.

        In brief, if you go independent and retain £UK with BoE supervision, you will be a colony – even worse than at present. Monetary policy handed down by your imperial masters.

        If you ‘peg’ your own currency to the £UK, but have your own central bank, it’s nearly as bad, but you would have options to readily separate and be truly sovereign. (Not if, but +when+ this ‘peg’ would inevitably threaten to impoverish your citizens.)

        I’m in Ireland, in the Euro zone. Our real ‘sovereignty’ – even in the ‘State’ terms Golem rightly distinguishes here – lies in Frankfurt and Brussels with people we never had the option to even vote for.

        It would be enormously difficult – near impossible – to do what we really should do, exit and reuse our own currency. Bankers knew all this before the Euro was introduced.

        As I’ve written recently, the ‘debt’ that no sovereign currency country actually need take on in order to spend, is now costing Ireland what is effectively a private ‘tax’ to banking elites of about 5% on every transaction of our GDP. Not off profits – every sales price.

        For this, we get nothing whatever in return. Most of this debt was incurred in paying for banks’ private casino losses and the consequential losses incurred by the subsequent damage to the real economy. It can never be repaid, nor will it. Our only possibility, besides the ECB being told to pay it off with ‘issued’ money, is if growth and/or some inflation reduces its cost relative to GDP. But vicious and unnecessary ‘austerity’ means that won’t happen for years, if at all.

        If citizens do not understand at least the basic principles of their money system (incl banking), as now, and the macro economic principles that follow, they cannot ever have any meaningful democratic voice that represents their interests. We see the results, as Golem eloquently describes.

        It’s as simple as that.

        The present narrative is written by and for the interests of the – by definition – minority capital owners, not ‘labour’ majority, whose interests are always – by definition – in opposition.

        • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 9:44 am #

          Hello Mike,

          I agree about the importance of the currency. The choise will have profound consequences.

        • John Souter November 26, 2013 at 12:32 pm #

          Mike . David et al.

          I support Scotland gaining its independence, not for any xenophobic reasons but for the following.

          Westminster is a sovereign parliament, Scotland’s aim is for a sovereign people. How far this is achieved or how deep the political aspirations towards it we may get some enlightenment today with the publishing of the Scottish governments white paper. (26/11/13)

          The currency question is a false hurdle. Initially a sterling zone makes sense in order to ease the divorce settlement and allow the market (sic) to settle. Beside’s we should all know by now, the first law of money market physics is that it abhors a vacuum even more than nature. though what it uses to fill that vacuum is a triumph of myth over purpose.

          With regard to the globalisation trend, the ratios of resource and the policies imposed by Westminster for their exploitation by privatisation,make it a thorny problem that will take time to solve, if possible, and even longer if the only pragmatic possible is modification.

          However all that aside I believe an independent Scotland, gradually gaining pace and societal success could well be the catalyst for beneficial change to the governance of all the countries and regions of this Island we call home.

  4. ConfederateH November 18, 2013 at 8:36 am #

    “There have been instances when the State was, in many, though certainly not in all ways, the means by which the great ideal, of government of the people, by the people, for the people, was made real. The creation of the National Health Service in Great Britain is one shining example.”

    “All those organs of power whose names and acronyms we are familiar with exist officially as servants of the… well of the what? Of the People? Of the Nation? Or of the State? Once power is created, it does not have to remain loyal to its creators. Any organization will come over time, as ambition eclipses morality, to regard its own survival and rise to greater power as paramount. Its original purpose will be drowned in a rising tide of inward looking ambition and greed for power.”

    Well which is it? Is the NHS a state organism basking in the power of the state’s monopoly of force, or is it a unique example of socialism that works? You can’t have it both ways, even if you truly believe that in this case the ends justify the means (establishing a state monopoly to forcibly deny choice from the “folks”).

    Like the rest of the left the author appears unable to deal with the schizophrenia deliberately induced by the elites. Any time I here someone say “I am a libertarian socialist” all I can do is shake my head. Just like reading this article.

    The left has been lying and cheating (see Obamacare) to increase the power of the state for over s century. The libertarians have been unsuccessfully trying to counter-act this for the same period. To now pretend that they are all the same group of people who have been duped is something I would expect from a socialist.

    • Golem XIV November 18, 2013 at 9:39 am #

      Hello ConfederateH,

      Please don’t confuse Mr Obama’s ill thought out, neither fish nor foul scheme, with the quite different NHS which we have here. The fact of the matter is that for a coule of generations the NHS has provided wonderful care for the people of Great Britain.

      There is nothing schizophrenic about saying that some times the State can do good things while also warning that unless attended-to even the best things can become perverted. One can say exactly the same about the marketplace. Markets can sometimes function well. But if left unattended they can become captured and corrupted.

      • ConfederateH November 18, 2013 at 10:27 pm #

        I have little doubt that many British subjects have benefited from the NHS. Even in the moments directly preceeding the collapse of the USSR, the nomenklatura still benefitted massively from the soviet state.

        The real test of a democracy is not how you treat those who willingly to comply, but how you deal with those who don’t.

    • Lisa Enos November 18, 2013 at 4:52 pm #

      First of all Malone’s Betrayal of the Nation commentary is bang on. I’d like to weigh in, though, in response to ConfederateH’s comment. This is a subject that is near and dear to my heart. As a US citizen who has had the privilege of living in the UK as the spouse of a UK citizen for a spell and during the birth of my second child, I have experienced first-hand the health care systems on both sides of the Atlantic. I feel that if my tax dollars can go into a slush fund in the U.S. that pays for roads, schools, military weaponry, etc. why is it not until these funds are earmarked for “healthcare” is it the kneejerk reaction by people from the right to cry ‘socialism’?
      Living in the U.S. now I am required to buy insurance for myself and my children. This need for insurance is the whole impetus behind why people choose certain career paths over others. We are prohibited from choosing career paths that do not offer health insurance upon graduating from college, which is basically every career that doesn’t involve working for a multinational corporation. Although the law that states we must purchase health insurance only just came into effect, it’s been a entwined in our social mores for years– that unless you were one of those irresponsible people ok with incurring exhorbitant hospital fees should the need arise then you must go to work for big business so that you get ‘good health insurance.’ Big Business are the only ones providing good group insurance policies. Talented people who could otherwise earn their living as artists, writers, musicians and in other non cubicle environments are discouraged from doing so. In fact, it’s practically an impossibility now that the ‘must buy health insurance’ law is in effect unless they are independently wealthy.
      Other major life decisions, as well, are made because of health insurance in the U.S. When I became pregnant with my first child, I did so willingly as I was 30. It was time. It was part of a plan that my live-in boyfriend and I had. However, I didn’t have health insurance at the time. I was earning a living as an independent filmmaker and there was no way to get an insurance policy except to purchase a private policy, which are a joke. The premiums are high and the yearly deductible is higher than any amount I’d ever paid out to a doctor in any one year, so basically having a private policy would just be money out the window (I was one of the irresponsible ones who chose to forego the cubicle job). That’s where marriage came in. By marrying my husband I was able to become insured under his policy and thus he wouldn’t be liable like he had with his first wife (ten years prior he and his first wife who was uninsured had a baby in the US and incurred medical expenses to the tune of $40,000). Along with marrying this man came a mountain of debt. He had back tax bills galore and my creditworthiness was affected indefinitely…may seem like it was a penny wise and pound foolish decision on my part, but you never know in the U.S. when medical treatment is going to go awry and you become liable for hundreds of thousands in medical expenses, even millions.
      We moved from LA to London where we had our second child. I received prenatal care free of charge and when the time came, I walked into the Royal Free Hospital in Hampstead and delivered my second child without incident and without a $40,000 bill. In fact there was no bill at all. We may have paid a slightly higher tax rate in the UK than the US, but I felt that at least I was getting something in return for my taxes. I am now back in the U.S. and every time I make a payment to the IRS, I feel I have just helped pay for another civilian-killing drone or a corrupt politician’s salary. Not that corrupt politicians don’t exist in the UK, but at least UK citizens don’t make major life decisions, who to marry, what job to choose, all because you must purchase health insurance. The NHS is a service provided to the people and paid for by taxes. I don’t want to live in a society where my neighbors aren’t fed and don’t have access to the same medical care that I do. Why would anyone? I don’t know why that makes me a socialist or anything more than a person who wants to live in a society that is not wrought with desperate people who don’t have their basic needs met. Disparity among members of the population creates tension between the haves and have nots. and that makes the world around me unsafe. Providing healthcare and other basic needs to people who do not have them doesn’t necessarily stem from compassion or altruism and I don’t care if you want to call it socialism. In my mind, it’s just common sense.

      • Mike Hall November 18, 2013 at 9:53 pm #

        Great comment Lisa, thanks for posting.

        • steviefinn November 19, 2013 at 12:47 am #

          Lisa – Thanks for that scary insight – Due to me being a child of “Nye” Bevan, it’s pretty shocking. In particular the fact that health care should be such an important factor in how one chooses to live their life.

      • HappyGrecian November 18, 2013 at 10:37 pm #

        Yes, good comment. The NHS is one of the very few things that we can still feel proud of in this country. And for that reason it, state education and the BBC are very much in the firing line of this current government, who can’t wait to dismantle them and sell them off to global corporatism. Bit by bit anything of value left in this nation is being stripped away and processed for profit. The very essence of this nation is being hollowed out and fracked. I worry for the future of the two little girls I kiss goodnight to…

      • El Sid November 19, 2013 at 8:04 pm #

        Some things private does best, others it’s public.

        When it comes to utillities and monopolies it’s best left to public services, or state-controlled services. Eg, gas, electricity and water companies (have a good look at your Monopoly board).

        Same goes for health: on average, a private health system like the US’s costs five times more than the public health systems in Europe or Canada:

        • Phil (Mcr) November 22, 2013 at 5:45 am #

          Indeed. Wasn’t the lesson of the 20th Century that a mixed economy was best?

          The state can’t possibly do everything and neither can the private sector. To claim that either can is ideological zealotry.

          Public ownership of utilities and monopolies needn’t necessarily take the form of state control – there are many forms of community ownership to be explored. And thankfully in the UK renewable energy sector, some are.

      • Jeremy November 20, 2013 at 8:00 am #

        Spot on Lisa. I have just returned with my wife and son to the UK from 22 years living in the US where I had one of those high premium private health policies with huge deductibles ($800pm. premium with a $10,000 annual deductible). It is a predatory system that inflates costs in order to generate profits. Providing healthcare is secondary to generating profit.
        All I can say is that it is a true relief to now have the umbrella of the NHS over us and to not have the constant concern about health care and cost issues.
        My US wife can’t believe how easy it is to access NHS health care here and without the mountain of paperwork that is generated by a visit to a doctor in the US. She can’t believe that you don’t even show id. when going to see you GP.
        And, of course, if we so wish we can elect to purchase private medical cover here too!
        The Brits really don’t realize how fortunate they are to have the NHS.

        • Phil (Mcr) November 22, 2013 at 5:47 am #

          Yep, and sadly these bastards are doing everything they can to undermine public faith in it.

      • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 9:46 am #

        Thank you Lisa,

        I wish there were more voices like yours.

      • blanny November 22, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

        You nailed that. Well said.

      • ConfederateH December 6, 2013 at 9:10 am #

        @Lisa, all
        I am not at all surprised at all the comments here in favor of the NHS despite overwhelming evidence of (ie. unsanitary hospitals, deliberate euthenasia through dehydration,

  5. paul November 18, 2013 at 12:28 pm #

    NHS= cash cow for the corporations – always was

    try this instead http://www.amazon.com/Nutrition-Physical-Degeneration-Weston-Price/dp/0916764206

  6. aporia November 18, 2013 at 1:48 pm #

    Thanks for a good article, which undoubtedly points to issues that ought to occupy us all to much greater extents. I have one huge question though, about which I cannot make up my mind: are you describing a new order, or merely the desperate efforts of a dying one? Look at the influence of the NSA scandals on EU-US trade negotiations, or the increasing problems of Obama to mobilize support even from within his own party. Although no doubt supported by very powerful corporate interests: what is the real clout behind these deals?

    • Andrea November 18, 2013 at 7:31 pm #

      Good question.

      If I may — the new order is very slow in coming into being.

      Ppl now notice the power of the banks and the financial sector as a whole.

      They object but nothing happens, and the entire scene of hedge funds / speculators / shadow banking etc. is kept under mysterious wraps.

      Banks are called on to ‘reform’ but nobody says that their control is illegitimate. Ppl still think it is fine if they have to go to a bank to get a biz. loan or a mortgage and they face the banker – humbly, sometimes in despair – the control of the banks is not questioned, just their funds, % of leverage, systemic risk, etc. from mealy-mouthed impotent higher authorities.

      Their illicit money and trades (whitewashing, drug money, arms deals, etc.) are not made public, that is all lost intranslation in weirdo accounts and leads only to some smallish fines on rare occasions.

      What is completely hidden from view is the links between banks (incl. Central Banks), Big Corps, the most important big commodities extractors and traders, Gvmts and tax structure (in the OECD.)

      A new order or the struggles for a dying one? The easy answer is a bit of both. My feeling is that the terrific economic expansion after ww2 which did lift many boats and has now come to an end blinded everyone, no plans for the future were made, that opened up space for the bandits.

    • Mike Hall November 18, 2013 at 10:20 pm #

      Possibly splitting hairs, but i don’t see any ‘new’ order at all. Rather a continuation of neo liberal capture by the largest banks and corporations of what were previously institutions with some semblance of democracy, at times.

      I think it is entering a ‘new’ phase, where this capture is becoming more overt, even formalised in such things as these supranational legal structures masquerading as ‘trade deals’.

      But it’s been decades in the making.

      Whilst we might see the advent of the ‘information’ revolution’ (still in progress) as empowering countless millions of citizens in way never before possible, the elites, banks and corporations have made massive use of it also to entrench and expand their power over governments and other supposed institutions of the public interest. A major accelerator imo anyhow.

      I would also quibble with Golem’s idea that this agenda has ever believed in ‘free markets’. Pure PR guff imo. I’ve worked with people who trade commodities and I can tell you that their first thought on waking is…”…how can I rig this market to my advantage…”. It’s also their 2nd, 3rd…and last thought. Think Enron – they are all the same. It also pervades any business activity with vaguely related ‘commodity’ trading characteristics.

      Otherwise, thanks Golem.

      This is a really great piece 🙂

      But I can’t see for the life of me why you’d think standing for the Green Party would be any way effective in challenging what you identify here?

      As I’ve said before, you should use your program making skills to tell the story (-ies) the public needs to hear. The explanations of the monetary system & basic macro principles they should have had in secondary school.

      This is by far the most powerful thing you could do.

      I know, I’m an impatient SOB & not shy at expressing my frustrations 🙂

      But you’ve used the word ‘soon’ in your piece above. I hope your getting some urgency now? (I know, cheeky sod.)

      Why not see if you could tap Mr Brand for a few bob & get some videos made to move the ‘revolution’ on a bit? 🙂

      I’ll help for free 😀

      • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 9:51 am #

        You could well be right Mike.

        I wonder about running for election. Westminster is captured so what could I achieve? That was my question to myself. My answer was some ability to get answers to questions that I cannot as a private citizen. Maybe I am being naive.

        I am also loathed to give up on democracy mainly because I see the other routes as leading to violent confrontation. And if it does come to violence we will need some sane voices in parliament.

        But my main hopes are in agitating and oragnizing outside of party politics. As for making films I would love to. But the powers ranged against getting any film made on any of the questions we talk about here are considerable. Believe me I try.

        • Jamie_Griff November 22, 2013 at 1:21 pm #

          Hi Golem,

          Great article. I share Mike’s quibble about the ‘newness’ of the nation-state confusion but your analysis of how it works is, as ever, spot on.

          I think running for parliament as a green Party candidate is a very good idea. While the real hopes of regenerative change do lie outside the Westminster echo chamber there’s still a tremendous amount you can do as an MP for your constituents – including asking awkward questions articulately – many of whom I’m sure will be surprised to find someone with such radical positions who can’t be written off as a crank or a loon.

          Non-mainstream voices in Westminster can only help the efforts of those working towards a revolution without. You can also use the platform to bring greater attention to the large number of groups and people generating ideas for better ways of doing things.

          People need to know that there ARE alternatives. Those of us who read this blog already know but many are still reliant on mainstream channels (both in the media and politics) to present them with their choices.

          In short, even if it fails, I think it is a very worthwhile endeavour.

          As for film making: you have a large readership and there are many fans of your documentaries (myself included). Have you considered crowd-funding a project?

          • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 1:54 pm #

            Hello Jamie,

            Thank you for the encouragement. The way I look at it, all the convassing and speaking I am doing and will do over the next 18 months are good in themselves. And so none of it is wasted effort no matter what the outcome of teh vote.

            As for Crowd funding, do you really think it might work? The notion of making a film where I didn’t have the broadcasters taking all the fun out of it, is so appealing, that alone makes me think it can’t possibly be a real option. But I would so very much like to be wrong about it.

          • Jamie_Griff November 22, 2013 at 3:37 pm #

            Yes, I’m positive it could work.

            The principle is already well established among documentary film makers.

            It’s probably much harder work producing a film yourself but the payoff is greater creative control and, I’m sure, a huge sense of satisfaction.

          • Mike Hall November 22, 2013 at 3:41 pm #


            I was thinking more of something that could go up on youtube, but with some decent thought and craft put into it.

            These are your professional skills (and good ones too).

            I don’t think it would cost a fortune and I seriously think we need to reach a majority of citizens (ultimately) with at least the monetary and macro basics.

            Keep it simple to begin with, then progress it.

            Sector Balance analysis is blindingly simple and obvious once taught. The maths is infants school stuff, yet it is enormously powerful. Even if that was the only tool ‘deciders’ had, the only thing people understood about macro economics, we’d have far better decisions made than now.

            The ‘household’ budget thinking that most now have can never produce results in the interests of the majority. Nor can such ill-informed – plain wrongly informed – decision making be remotely considered ‘democracy’ in any meaningful sense.

            See also my piece below on ‘linear’ vs ‘dynamic’. I’m sure there’s a simpler way, using graphics etc. to get this across.

      • Chris Hart March 4, 2014 at 10:28 pm #

        Yes, tap up Russell Brand for some dosh to make some great video’s. Anyone got his e-mail

  7. rick shaw November 18, 2013 at 3:32 pm #

    I posted a comment from my mobile but it’s not appeared.

    Anyway, what you’re describing is fascism.

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 9:56 am #

      Hello Rick,

      I am sorry about your comment. I looked for it in case it had been spammed but I couldn’t see it at all. I have no idea why you couldn’t post. All I can do is offer my apologies and hope it won’t put you off commenting again.

  8. Boris J Dirnbach November 18, 2013 at 4:54 pm #

    Brilliant analysis. It’s quite true, though uncomfortable to admit, that one’s preconceived language or theories mold how new observations are accommodated.

    Though I’d say that the suspicions of the Left are closer to the truth than the Right. The Right suspects the State in arrogating too much power to itself (health care, taxation, spying?), the Left suspects all of this PLUS the disloyalty of the corporations.

    Keep up the great work.

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 9:55 am #

      Thank you Boris and welcome.

  9. Tao Jonesing November 18, 2013 at 4:58 pm #

    “The new ideology is not fully formed yet, but already it is clear that it is not Libertarian because unlike Libertarianism, the new ideology believes the State should be very powerful and large and should intervene. But neither is it Socialist, because unlike the Left the new ideology believes those interventions should be on behalf of the wealthy not the poor.

    The “new” ideology is fully formed and has been in effect for decades now, it just isn’t fully visible yet and, therefore, not openly discussed except in passing (and without comprehension) as the Washington Consensus. The new ideology is neoliberalism, whose Left is Milton Friedman and whose Right is F.A. Hayek. While most people identify Friedman and Hayek (and Mises and Rothbard) as libertarians, they are better viewed as propertarians who have absconded with and perverted the concepts of liberty and libertarianism. The regulation of the Money Power, i.e., whether there should be a central bank, its nature and its role in the economy, is the axis on which left-right is defined in neoliberalism. At the end of the day, though, a strong state is required to enforce the economic and other property rights of the owners, thereby ensuring they remain the winners.

    • looselyhuman November 18, 2013 at 7:10 pm #

      Deadly accurate. Neoliberalism is the term and we should continue to strive to bring it into common parlance. That’s especially difficult here in the US, as many simply don’t recognize that anything like it exists or is happening. A more propagandized people you will never find.

    • Hawkeye November 19, 2013 at 3:19 pm #


      “Propertarianism” is the perfect term!

      After all, what on earth is Libertarian about classifying all objects and people in the world as possessions, to be bought and sold for a price??

    • neretva November 20, 2013 at 4:51 pm #


      In addition to that this will further clarify new “ideology” http://rwer.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/two-concept-proposals-from-neoclassical-economics-to-neoliberal-economics-and-from-neoliberalism-to-plutocratism/

      Prof. Michael Hudson is speaking for a years in therms of neo-feudalism. If look back into human history just for a brief moment (Cold War) a State worked in behalf of a Nation. The rest is like Loui’s XIV saying “I am the State.”

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 9:58 am #

      I agree with you analysis. In particular about the need for a strong state to enforce property rights of the wealthiest. I just suggest that a new phase has begun in which deomcracy is being rolled back and a new justifiucation for doing so is being hatched.

  10. Nell November 18, 2013 at 5:07 pm #

    Is it any accident that the countries which have the most dominant financial sectors also have the most intrusive intelligence agencies? Is it any accident that in these countries, both institutions (financial and intelligence) flout the laws the rest of us have to abide by?

  11. jon November 18, 2013 at 6:25 pm #

    @rick shaw and david

    In my view, what we are wittnesing is the road to feudalism.

    Best regards.

    • David November 27, 2013 at 6:57 pm #

      Land held in return for military service? Are you sure?

  12. Elspeth Crawford November 18, 2013 at 7:51 pm #

    I usually read your work with interest and did so this time until near the end. There I read “unlike the Left the new ideology believes those interventions should be on behalf of the wealthy not the poor” etc. I am now completely bewildered. WHY? Why not continue to think ‘people’, call us electorate or whatever, but I just cannot get this statement and these paragraphs in any way consistent with the clarity you offer in the rest of the article re difference between ‘nation’ and ‘state’, or those with power and those disempowered.

    Unless you mean interventions should address ‘wealthy’ (earned or unearned) in order to re-distribute that wealth to those who help create it (however cash poor they may be)? What do you mean?

    • Phil (Mcr) November 18, 2013 at 10:03 pm #

      When the financial markets collapse – as they did in 2008 – they will require State intervention i.e. injections of our taxes. Us, the little people, will pay to prop up the wealth of the elite.

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 10:03 am #

      Hello Elspeth,

      I am sorry if I have not made myself clear. For the record I am in no way advocating the ideology I am describing. I am saying that the new emerging ideology does believe in a strong and interventionsist State, but unlike the traditional Left, this new ideology thinks the State should be there to intervene on behalf of the rich NOT on behalf of the poor.

      I think it is an awful ideology but I think it is ascendent among the global over class and their servants.

  13. Jon November 18, 2013 at 9:02 pm #

    Excellent article – but as the phrase “New World Oder” is linked to conspiracy sites, where you worried about such a title being associated with a lack of truth or integrity?

    And what was your motivation for using such?

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 10:12 am #

      Hello Jon,

      You are not the only person to question the wisdom of using “New World Order”. I did wonder about using it. I know it has become one of those phrases associated with those who insist the world has been run by a secret cabal since 1940, 1920, 1600’s pick a date.

      I suppose I chose to use teh phrase because whiloe I don;t think there has been a single cabal, nor a single, long range plan, I do think there is now, an emerging vision and elements of a plan are coming together.

      Rather than an organized conspiracy I see clever opportunists seeing developments and saying to themselves, ” Ah, this presents an opportunity” and taking it. I think various strands are now coming together which when they do ties together will create a new world view and ideology.

      But maybe I am still unwise to use the phrase. Should I drop it for part two?

      • deus ex inferis November 22, 2013 at 6:19 pm #

        nwo, cfr, fed, bis, etc. – who cares about labels? there are flesh and blood individuals with home addresses behind these organizations which they run for the benefit of banking families, aristocracy, vatican, etc. all these individuals have faces, names and family (rothschilds, warburgs, et. al.)
        dear david molone, respectfully, until you start putting names and faces to these individuals and identify their ulterior motives, all your well written efforts are just, in my opinion, academic commentary on the kabuki theater. it doesnt tell me anything about who those individuals who pull the strings of public actors are so they can be identified and their means to power curtailed. no change will come until individuals who run the show from behind the scenes are removed.

        • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 6:34 pm #

          There will be some names for you in part two

          • Roger November 23, 2013 at 7:33 am #

            Now thats just teasing. What a tantalising prospect, it recalls for me your piece on the offshore tax havens and the faceless accountants made flesh. Can’t wait for Part Two now , NWO or no.

            Mind you? that Emperor George the 1st clip is famously out there for declaring the New World Order and of Course Emperor Obama had Exceptionalism in his victory speech at the last shoe in ( oh sorry election). Strange it is that if America ends up with an Emperor George the 111 ( Maybe it will be a second Coming? George the 2nd reprise)the roles will be reversed and we’ll all be having a Southhampton Tea Party.

  14. Buck Turgidson November 18, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

    Again Golem I find your ideas thought provoking.

    Always an interesting question is this, what National Anthem does the CEO of a multinational corporation tap his foot to? Eric Schmidt of Google answered this question in an interview by stating he has more in common with the international elite than he does with his fellow Americans. Maybe they have their own anthem? Any guesses on what it might be called?

    I wish you well with part 2 but I’m pessimistic any change will occur by bloging about it. The most upsetting thing to come out of the Edward Snowden revelations is not in their content but in the ho-hum reaction of the general public to them. The NSA and the New World Order are winning by default. .

    • Martin_E November 19, 2013 at 1:17 pm #

      There’s only one possibility for the anthem.

      • Buck Turgidson November 19, 2013 at 8:53 pm #

        Excellent choice Martin ………with the exception that the “clinking clanking sound” has been replace with clacks and squeaks from the keyboard.

    • Roger November 20, 2013 at 3:10 am #

      This talk was banned by TED talks apparently for being too political.

      Via Business Insider: “As the war over income inequality wages on, super-rich Seattle entrepreneur Nick Hanauer has been raising the hackles of his fellow 1-percenters, espousing the contrarian argument that rich people don’t actually create jobs. The position is controversial — so much so that TED is refusing to post a talk that Hanauer gave on the subject. National Journal reports today that TED officials decided not to put Hanauer’s March 1 speech up online after deeming his remarks “too politically controversial” for the site…”.

    • Wirplit November 22, 2013 at 8:43 am #

      Buck sometimes it seems expected that a revelation like Snowden’s will provoke some kind of instant understanding and outrage among the populace. When this does not happen it seems it is not affecting them.

      But life does not work in these instant Hollywood moments in which everything is transformed merely by it being exposed. This idea in itself in itself is a dangerous fantasy because it provokes a kind of pessimistic quietism when it does not happen like that.

      First those who think at all…a clear minority… have to digest and think through the implications. The effect is slow but pervasive. More like acid than a blow. But it keeps working. At the moment it is a form of dissidence to think outside the box at all.

  15. kevin November 19, 2013 at 1:37 am #

    “If you identify the country, the people, the culture with the rulers, accept the totalitarian doctrine, then yeah, it’s anti-Semitic to criticize the Israeli policy, and anti-American to criticize the American policy, and it was anti-Soviet when the dissidents criticized Russian policy. You have to accept deeply totalitarian assumptions not to laugh at this.”
    — Noam Chomsky

  16. Susan Pizzo November 19, 2013 at 3:46 am #

    Spot on. David Harvey (Brief History of Neoliberalism), William I Robinson (A Theory of Global Capitalism), and Susan George (The Lugano Report) have written on aspects of neoliberalism and the New World Order – a subject that dates back at least to 1940 when General Motors honcho Graeme K Howard published a book on how to run the post-war world called “America and the New World Order.” I’m in the process of adding my own bit to the literature, in a form that may be easier to ‘take’…


    • Salford Lad November 19, 2013 at 1:00 pm #

      The roots of this Great Financial Bubble go all the way back to the end of the post war Bretton Woods Agreement, when Richard Nixon exited the arrangement in 1971. This was caused by an exodus of gold from the US to pay for the Vietnam war.
      Countries were constrained in issuing money, by requiring the backing of gold in their vaults to cover this money. In effect a Govt had control of its currency and its economy.
      The end of the Bretton Woods agreement allowed bankers to issue credit unrestrained. In effect Sovereign Govt ceded control of their economies to the financiers. Today ,it is obvious the banks and large corporations are the real power in the world. The politicians being merely sideshows.
      The finance sector has run amok with their power to issue money in the form of credit and the level of debt is now it at an unsustainable level and many times the value of the underlying real wealth assets.
      When the US induced the Middle East oil exporting countries to trade their oil in Petrodollars in exchange for US MILITARY protection around 1974, US dollar hegemony was born.
      This allowed the US to buy oil with printed paper (USdollar) and the trapped oil exporting countries were forced to use their excess dollars to buy US Treasury bonds to park their money. The perfect confidence scam ,believed to have been initiated by Henry Kissinger and Zbigneuw Brezinski.
      Wall St was not slow to abuse the power of having the dollar as a reserve currency and proceeded to plunder the economies of the Far East , Argentina, Mexico, Russia, et al causing currency and Financial crisis in each and massaged by their trained attack dog the IMF.
      Another side issue of being the possessor of the World reserve currency is that you can wage war at no cost, by just printing paper dollars to cover the costs of the military machine. Power corrupts and total power corrupts totally ,as has been witnessed by the US irresponsible use of their reserve currency power to wage financial and military war against other nations for dubious reasons.
      This dog and pony show is currently playing out its end game and the time of the US dollar as a reserve currency is coming to a chaotic end soon.

        • Phil (Mcr) November 20, 2013 at 5:40 pm #

          MANY thanks for posting Michael Hudson’s book! I’ve wanted to get it for a long time.

          A proper ”free media” in the UK would at least give that man some air time.

      • Phil (Mcr) November 21, 2013 at 4:00 am #

        Have you read ‘Treasure Islands’ by Nick Shaxon, Salford Lad?

        I think it would add to your analysis – how the tax haven system combined with the privatised credit you describe has taken over the world.

      • blanny November 22, 2013 at 10:53 pm #

        A great distillation of the reality of the last 40 years. I’m going to learn it by heart as ammo against the Keynsian flat-earthers in my local pub!

  17. Jeremy S November 19, 2013 at 5:49 pm #

    The words taken from Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, “…government of the people, by the people, for the people…,” continue with, “…shall not perish from the earth.” These words are now translated into, ‘control of the many, by the few, for the benefit of the few,’ and indeed democracy is rapidly perishing form the earth.
    A very inspiring piece Golem. I look forward to part 2

  18. GIABO Cheshire November 19, 2013 at 7:41 pm #

    The difference between NSA and GCHQ, simple, the Brits spy on the American population, the Yanks spy on the British population, they both share everything, perfectly legal…..

  19. Brendan November 19, 2013 at 8:14 pm #

    As Tony Benn said, “If one meets a powerful person—Rupert Murdoch, perhaps, or Joe Stalin or Hitler—one can ask five questions: what power do you have; where did you get it; in whose interests do you exercise it; to whom are you accountable; and, how can we get rid of you? Anyone who cannot answer the last of those questions does not live in a democratic system.”

    The answer that would be given to the last question by the largest financial institutions who control the economy today is that they are of systemic importance and are too big to fail. There is no alternative. Being too big to fail seems like a good reason to gradually make them smaller instead of letting them carry out even more fraud, but who am I to question such powerful people?

  20. RT Rider November 20, 2013 at 2:56 am #

    The nation state was destroyed a long time ago, and the NWO has been in place for quite some time now. It’s called the Global Banking Cartel. The reason for this cartel is the socialization of financial failure on a global basis, using the taxing power of the former nation states to underwrite the enormous, worldwide systemic risk, brought about by massive debt creation, that has built up over the the last 4 decades. This has been underway since the severing of fixed currency, tied to gold, to a fully elastic currency, that is tied to the good faith and credit of the nation state, which of course is dependent on its ability to tax its citizenry into penury.

    All states of the western, developed world follow the same policies, without fail – massive, third world immigration, Cultural Marxism, welfare dependency, destruction of the family unit, encouragement of aberrant social behavior, and every other kind of deviancy imaginable. Hard to believe that this is uncoordinated. Are there no political parties, or politicians, who think otherwise? Obviously not in the West. Why has this happened, and for what purpose? In my opinion, to destroy cultural and national coherence, divide and conquer, and create a culture of dependency on government and banks.

    We reached the debt wall 5 years ago. Extraordinary measures were initiated to prevent a global collapse. Unfortunately, these measures were the creation of even greater amounts of debt to try and revive the moribund economies of the west, and provide funds to service the old debt. But it’s all three card monte.

    These criminals who run the cartel are doubling (and even quadrupling) down – going for broke to salvage the system. But it’s not working!

    The recovery cycle is most likely over, and despite panic attempts to revive it, look for the next collapse within a year. This time, in sudden death overtime, there will be no stick save and the game will end with much misery and hardship.

    • sandman November 22, 2013 at 4:18 pm #

      Spot on analogy, RT. The creation of perpetual debt has empowered elitists and their minions for centuries. This cycle is about to end. All of the signs are present.

      The author personally lost me when extolling Britain’s NHS.

      • Anne November 25, 2013 at 12:21 pm #


        What is your experience of it (if any)? The NHS goes to the heart of what a ‘Good Society’ should be.

        The basic notion that everyone in society, whatever their financial status, should have access to healthcare ‘free at point of use’. Its not free, we pay for it through our taxes and National Insurance contributions.

        Its not perfect and is of course under attack by those who believe that healing the sick and caring for the dying should generate profit.

        I believe we should care for each other and the NHS has saved my life at least three times. All my adult life I have,when ill, been able to concentrate on getting well and not worry about medical bills.

        Humans are social creatures we survive better when we look out for each other as a society. In some countries this essentially humane principle is denigrated. The only beneficiaries are the insurance companies and certainly not the poor who so often have no insurance because they can’t afford the premiums.

        In the US for example up to one third of the population have either no access or inadequate access to healthcare.


        I would not feel comfortable if this was true of the UK,even if I could afford to pay individually.

        Fox news will of course tell you different, ask yourself why

        • desmond November 25, 2013 at 12:51 pm #

          well said Anne….

        • steviefinn November 25, 2013 at 2:04 pm #

          Yes Anne – I am pretty sure those who would prefer us to increase the coffers of the insurance industry instead of a taxpayers NHS are sure that they will profit from the former & never have need of the latter.

          “It has always seemed strange to me… the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling, are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest, are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of the second”.

          John Steinbeck

  21. Pat November 20, 2013 at 1:45 pm #

    I heard an interesting interview with Roberto Unger:


    His thoughts seem to chime with the idea of a ‘bill of obligations’.

  22. Pat Flannery November 20, 2013 at 8:32 pm #

    Before we give up on democracy or on the United States please consider what one individual, one woman has been able to achieve in the U.S. Elizabeth Warren. Every one of her videos on YouTube are inspiring and gives me hope. My dream is that she will become the next POTUS.

    Just watch her videos in any order on any subject and see if you agree:

    • Phil (Mcr) November 21, 2013 at 3:40 am #

      Agreed Pat, she is a legend.

      We must grateful for these people who dedicate so much of their lives to justice. Jonathan Sugarman, John Christensen, David Malone being another three from our era.

      And although plenty of people are out to bash the politicians these days, my MP Kate Green is tireless in her fight for a fair society.

      Let’s give them all the support we can.

    • s.tristero December 13, 2013 at 2:09 pm #

      perhaps in order to not give up on either, we need to give up our belief that one person, no matter how well-intentioned we believe them to be, will be THE ANSWER TO ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS?

      p.s. this is not a comment criticizing the accomplishments or ideologies of the Honorable Gentlewoman from the fine State of Massachusetts.

  23. karalan November 20, 2013 at 10:42 pm #

    Nice work, but….

    “The more ideological of them proclaim that the state, whenever and wherever it tries to do good, will always and by necessity do harm.”

    I’d say a more accurate portrayal of this view would be that the state always BECOMES a vehicle for doing harm, regardless of the good it does or is attempting to do.

    “we are, in most industrialized countries, watching the machinery of the State being used to betray the Nation”

    Precisely, and as always.

    • Phil (Mcr) November 21, 2013 at 3:42 am #

      How much of this can we trace back to Buchanan and his Public Choice theory? I was always struck by one of the things he said in an interview once: ”the real problems are the zealots, those are the ones you have to get rid of”. In other words the type of people who DID believe in public service and therefore disproved his theory of rent-seeking.

      How the world has paid for the myth of Homo Economicus.

  24. WinstonC November 21, 2013 at 3:21 am #

    It was inevitable that globalization would create a mighty boost for neoliberalism and the defacto takeover of ‘popular government’ by corporations. It was also inevitable that some persons would become wealthy beyond any previous measure. While it is tempting to view this as growing pains for an expanding civilization, it bears remembering that this Age of Human Rights is barely three hundred years old. For most of our history, average citizens have been slaves, serfs, or restrained by some form of caste system. Corporatocracy seeks only profits, and would have us all return to that state. Those who rule have little empathy for those who don’t, and in an age of narcissism are unlikely to learn any better on their own.
    The pity is that it was the freeing of humanity from the yokes of priests and kings which drove the Renaissance, out of which was born the machinery of the modern age-manufacturing and all that was spawned by the wealth it generated. So many things which we take for granted today were only possible because of the flowering of public education, safety nets for the poor and oppressed, and rules of law which bounded the rights of rich and poor to the same standards.
    Through greed, negligence and something as simple as pushing all boundaries, we find ourselves in the midst of an extinction event larger by orders of magnitude than any reflected in the fossil record. We continually dump billions of tons of pollutants into the closed system which is our biosphere, sacrificing perhaps our own existence on that altar of profits. Without question we thereby sacrifice many other organisms without so much as an examination of the divine reasons why they might be part of our world. And now we face the very real threat that the rich will do as they so often have in the past, which is to murder us by the millions. One can already see the work beginning – poison the food supply, impoverish as many as can be made poor, restrict access to education, medical care and family planning. Imprison as many as can be made to fit in a cell, reduce or abolish habaeus corpus and the right to due process. The list goes on and on, made ever more complex by the brilliant minds that wealth can acquire, hire and brainwash.
    The worst of it, though, is that the net result will not aid the rich. They will die like the rest of us in the cesspool of their own creation. If the environment doesn’t create a way to rid the dog of fleas, so to speak, then the poor will do as they have ever done, rising up in murderous rage. Once again, the libraries will be burnt, and the brilliant will perish along with the stupid, the good soul with the wicked one.
    It amazes me that all these minds we have on this planet cannot imagine a better outcome. For that, above all, is what we all must do, and now. We must imagine a better outcome, for it is only in the birth of new ideas and ways of accommodating one another that we have any right to expect survival as a species. As you say, Golem, we have entered a new age. The sooner the Left, Right and Oblivious understand that the old labels are obsolete, the sooner we can get on with the process of enlightenment – which in our case includes finding a way off this rock. We will only do that by empowering members of our species, and lifting the plight of the normal citizen to one of security and prosperity. Elon Musk cannot and will not suffice for us.
    Agriculture, biodiversity, mathematics, literature and music made all this world we live in possible. Those are the courses we need to hold for our continuation. The sooner we turn the genius that invents something as useless as Twerking to sorting out a peaceful and prosperous existence, the sooner we begin to navigate away from the Abyss.

    • Mike Hall November 21, 2013 at 3:27 pm #

      Well expressed WinstonC, thanks for that 🙂

      I’d like to mention an idea that’s arisen in my head from conversations with JohnB here and others. It concerns conceptualizing the macro economy. Here is as good as anywhere to throw it out there 😉

      I think that as a society we get this concept of the macro economy near completely wrong by always thinking in ‘linear’, A to B terms. Even when we know flows of materials & money etc. are all circular and interconnecting, the tendency is still to slip into linear reductionism. But most people don’t even recognise the ‘circularity’ at all.

      We’re never going to get anything right if we don’t fix this way of thinking. We’re not well equipped to deal with it intuitively, but most of us (enough) can learn, if we make the effort in Kahneman’s ‘slow’ thinking mode.

      Steve Keen has demonstrated, with his (digitally simulated) ‘analogue’ computing software ‘Minsky’, that the economy is a ‘dynamic’ system. (Back in the ‘iron’ age of electronics, we made analogue computers like ‘Minsky’ out of wire and operational amplifier ICs. Great fun to play with.)

      This ‘dynamic’ system is not a trivial point. Besides profound mathematical implications, like ‘chaos’ outcomes, it means that the economy is +never+ in equilibrium, or trending to one. Everything in it is in flux – always changing, and always interconnecting with and changing the system as a whole.

      So what we should be most concerned with is flows. In simple terms, what directions, up are down, and how fast are things changing. By definition we can +never+ select some fixed quantity of something and set the system to achieve it. It won’t ever be achieved except fleetingly. What is important is the flow. If we want to try and select a particular ‘static’ level of something, the best we can ever achieve will be some fluctuating graph with acceptable period and range of amplitude.

      But in general terms, optimising the flows, optimises the whole system.

      I suggest, in society we want all humans to participate in the flow. Potentials realised. We don’t want the next Mozart to die in poverty never going near a piano. That’s real waste. To maximise opportunity, we must maximise flows overall as the first step, and adjust within that as best we can.

      But one thing that works against flow is unconstrained accumulations of static pools of flow items.

      We can say that in a dynamic system, for maximal overall +flow+, any pools of resources may be useful as ‘buffer’ stocks, in appropriate quantity, related to flow.

      But we can also say unequivocally that flow cannot be optimised if the system operates to continually +maximise+ accumulation of anything. Maximisation of flow and maximisation of accumulation of any flow resource are incompatible. The system cannot do both.

      Even where natural (external) limits periodically limit such accumulation increases, it can be shown that flow overall is hindered, even crippled.

      Thus, in operating any system ‘control levers’, we should view any large and increasing accumulations as a first warning sign that we should act to stop such increasing ‘hoarding’. And even act to reduce it.

      So, what I’m saying here, if we look at ‘money’ resources in terms of ‘hoarding’ and ‘flow’, is that our present system is disastrously non optimal for all people who do not accumulate significant hoards or buffer stocks, relative to the entire system.

      In our economies, by definition, the vast majority, ordinary citizens, cannot accumulate significant financial assets. And certainly not enough to live from them, not their labour.

      The present system is clearly operating with the goal of maximising a relatively few hoards of financial assets (money) and also some physical assets too (land, other commodities).

      And this is crippling the flow to vast numbers of people, and the overall flow itself.

      It also follows that the people who own these increasing hoards are ‘socio pathic’ to the system overall and flow maximisation.

      They should not have any access to the control levers. But at present they have near exclusive access in every country and globally.

      This cannot end well, even if the system just bumps along limited by one external resource or another. It’s a sick system, operating way below potential. And importantly not dealing with the real constraints – our need to respect sustainable use of limited resources, and build recycling of key resources into the flow, as needed.

      It’s a system problem. The rich are fucking it up and the rest of us (dissidents aside) are letting them do it.

      Of course, maximising the flow doesn’t imply some ‘consumerist’ nightmare. Our basic needs are required for all, but beyond that, the flow can be whatever we can imagine ourselves creating. Maximising the potential for all human creativity, say, 🙂

      • CArratiaM December 10, 2013 at 1:57 am #

        sorry, the previous comment got submitted by mistake…

        So Mike, I was trying to say that it seems like an interesting idea, but that as you seem to acknowledge when you say that ‘maximising the flow doesn’t imply some ‘consumerist’ nightmare’, it is not so straightforward…

        It seems to me that maximising the flow would induce a tendency to over-activity in the economy and what comes with it. The fundamental dynamical problem of the monetary system is that it can only work under exponential growth, which is obviously unsustainable. We should not forget that the system is not totally closed and that associated to most flows there actually is waste and energy consumption.

        That said, what you say about avoiding hoarding and increasing circulation makes a lot of sense. I guess that what should be maximised is something like flow over consumed resources… ?

    • steviefinn November 22, 2013 at 12:27 am #

      Very well put WinstonC.

      i did a bit of reading up on democracy the other night, it was due to the last line of Bradanfeasa’s comment in regard to the subject – “Perhaps we are fools for thinking they would last “. The 300 year period you mentioned with the roughly 200 year Athenian experiment added ( Which was interrupted by that well named tyrant – Pisistratus ) the total only adds up to about 9% of an estimated 5,500 years of civilisation.

      The Wiki page gives other examples of what might be called infant movements & even states that the Spartans had a democracy of sorts, but they are few & of course the early versions were part of slave based societies & didn’t include universal suffrage. The modern period for most of it’s history also didn’t include the latter – Women were given the vote in France in 1945, & in Switzerland it was not until 1971. Also during much of time when these systems were operating they were in a minority on this planet – Small lights in a chasm of tyranny.

      The page gives a little idea of the enormous struggle that was put into trying to make earlier versions of our present bunch of power addicts accountable to those who they shat on from a great height – I imagine that those who sacrificed & fought for an improvement in the lot of the vast majority would if they could, be screaming at us in horror at what we are in danger of letting slip away. The billions of victims of a long list of tyrants who would judge our lives to be heavenly compared to theirs, might well think us insane to let ourselves fall into the hands of those who care only for personal gain.

      As you say the rich will die with us & others have said that they need saving from themselves. It appears to me that they simply cannot help themselves, like this guy:


      Democracy it seems is a bit like a weed growing through a slab of concrete, far from perfect but as that other Winston C. once said – It’s better than the alternatives.



      • Jamie_Griff November 22, 2013 at 3:14 pm #

        And let’s remember that our current incarnation of ‘democracy’ is actually a compromise between the forces demanding the accountability of power and the conservative forces who want power to remain solely, and unaccountably, in the hands of the wealthy few.

        Bismarck and Disraeli weren’t democrats – they offered a watered down version of democracy to placate the near-revolutionary masses. A version which kept the exploitation of the many by capital and the rentiers baked-in.

        Democracy is an ideal which continues to evade our grasp. It has never been fully realised so instead we’ve put up with its facsimiles. (I’d say the best effort thus far was Chavez’s Venezuela with its citizens’ assemblies and cooperatives but I’m sure many would disagree).

  25. Mariane Carnas November 21, 2013 at 10:14 am #

    The future of the world is beyond any doubt determined by the people who do it for the money. If their course is the same as that of the god, remains to be seen. But they are smart, powerful and motivated. Now stop panicking.

    First realize that there are just two possible directions: one is that of the matter, of which money is the blood. The other is that of the higher purpose and evolution of mankind towards higher, more pleasurable states. If you do not understand this, you will not be able to align with the axis mundi and will be thrown panicking off the wheel of fortune. Reading Vitvan could help.

    People like democracy, as it gives them a feeling of immense potential power. But even in rare cases when this potential is realized in a certain individual, he did not pass the first filter of understanding between material and divine, he is emotionally unfit and just perpetuates the same mistakes as his predecessors. Democracy is wrong. Democracy is a means of hypnotising the whole organ by progressively evading the weak cells. Reading Claude Levi-Strauss and how this problem was solved in ancient societies could help.

    There is a solution. Spiritually educate and train yourself. Support and organize diversity and require your diverse style to be respected. This is not for everyone, as most people would and will rather wilfully die than to leave their well established feeding and entertaining patterns. But you could take the spark and pass it on.

  26. yiannis vasilakis November 21, 2013 at 4:32 pm #

    there are no free nations anywhere.Fascism exists everywhere today.

  27. stone November 21, 2013 at 6:22 pm #

    “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” — Benito Mussolini

    By his definition, what you are describing as being the New World Order seems like good old fashioned Fascism but a sort of globalist Fascism rather than nationalist and (thankfully) not racist.

  28. Wirplit November 22, 2013 at 1:20 am #

    Talking of how the State can play the corporate game… entwined together.

    In France it seems too close an analysis of the French Bank’s true condition can get you into trouble. An American blogger used evidence from a French one, Jean Paul Chavallier about BNP Paribas being leveraged at 27 : 1 and Societe Generale being 50 : 1 rather than the official figures handed out. For this effrontery he was fined 8000 euros after they complained to the French financial regulators the AMF in a shoot the messenger moment.
    Meanwhile it seems Credit Agricole admits to being 49 to 1 or 33 to 1 with its insurance business included.

    Know you keep a close eye on this David…wonder how you think the French Banking system is going…?… just be careful who you annoy if you ever want to visit Paris

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 10:18 am #

      Thanks for the link. France is a deep old country. I love it, but like to think I have few illusions.

  29. TwoShortPlanks November 22, 2013 at 9:10 am #

    Nice article/post.

    We may currently be living through something which will be written about, discussed and ponders for perhaps centuries to come.

    • Meditationmusicguy November 22, 2013 at 4:11 pm #

      You’re right TwoShortPlanks, this time in history is a great learning opportunity. I mean, who would willingly accept the rise of the combination of materialism, individualism and corporatism and have it cemented by state powers again after this period of suffering and man made calamity?

      We are in for a period of world history after this which will be quite different – dynamically move in a different direction. The global web of inequity and exploitation is growing more and more tense by the day, and if only one strand gives way the whole thing will unravel with surprising speed.

      Who has any good ideas on how to prepare for this?

  30. Warren Celli November 22, 2013 at 1:18 pm #

    Good article! Regarding this;

    “I think that great ideal of government by and for the people is being butchered – for profit. The Nation-State is dying, because any given arrangement of power can be corrupted and will be, by those who benefit from it most – those who hold its powers – in this case the powers of the State – IF people cringingly let them. And that it what we are doing.”

    It is no longer about profit. The nation states have long been co-opted. It is now about control and the goal is herd thinning and instilling a two tier system of ruler and ruled. The middle class is rapidly being replaced with a technocratic law enforcement class.

    Yes, it is a disease and the disease is of the mind and it is called Xtrevilism.


    “Abstract: The less than 1% of the population who control the greater population are afflicted with an aberrant disease of the mind with many readily identifiable characteristics that negatively affects their morality. It is known as Evilism. In the post WW II years the disease has mutated. The old fashioned form of Evilism, which had developed over the past two to three hundred years, was relatively stable and came to be identified as “Vanilla Greed for Extraction”. It has been overtaken by a newer more virulent form of Evilism called Xtrēvilism, which is now identified as, “Pernicious Greed for Destruction”.

    Evilism , the original disease, (the old fashioned Vanilla Greed for Extraction), expresses itself as a parasitic form of cannibalization that sustains its host victim for future cannibalization. It is a milder form of the disease.

    Xtrēvilism , the new mutation (Pernicious Greed for Destruction), expresses itself as a parasitic extreme form of cannibalization that minimally sustains or eliminates its host victim with no concern for future cannibalization. It is an extreme form of the disease.

    Xtrēvilism relies on; the Noble Lie, the corporate structure, scam finance, ownership of media, and the trusting gullibility and complicity of its victims for its propaganda based divisive control. The effects of Xtrēvilism have caused governments around the world, once marginally responsive to the will of the people, to now be totally NON responsive to the will of the people. The goal of Xtrēvilism is a two tier ruler and ruled world with the ruled engaged in a spirit exhausting perpetual conflict of controlled elimination. Ironically the goal of Xtrēvilism includes stripping the assets of the once powerful old fashioned Vanilla Greed For Extraction class and subsuming it into the ruled class of perpetual conflict.

    The disease can be eradicated with Fairism.”

    More here…


    Deception is the strongest political force on the planet.

    • s.tristero December 13, 2013 at 2:15 pm #

      “Deception is the strongest political force on the planet.”

      agreed, but doesn’t using signifiers such as “Xtrevelism” only continue to play the game of polarization that allows deception free reign?

  31. Avcobe November 22, 2013 at 3:48 pm #

    Thanks David for expressing some thoughts that need to be heard above the din of the left-right state-libertarian paradigm.

    Ironic, and rather good, that Zero Hedge takes it on the chin and re-posts your piece in spite of being painted somewhat as a haven for libertarian postings. Indeed they post revolutionary and anarchist stuff too, an impossible split for any publisher.

    What you are expressing seems to be a synthesis of the old outdated thesis-antithesis. No wonder it is a minority view that few can grasp.

    • Golem XIV November 22, 2013 at 4:28 pm #

      Yes it always surprises me when Zerohedge repost an article of mine. But I am grateful to them that they do.

      Thank you for your comment and I hope we’ll see you around here again. You would be very welcome.

    • Greg Lemieux November 22, 2013 at 7:21 pm #

      Greetings and thank you all,

      I was also surprised to see the article on ZH. I read it daily because of the variety of perspectives. One of the links left by a commentator of a courtroom video in Montana is an exceptional example of one gentleman who has opted out.


      Keep up the good work and if you do seek crowd funding Mr. Malone you can count on me for a donation.

      Best wishes

  32. Just me November 22, 2013 at 10:26 pm #

    “a special browser”


  33. avcobe November 23, 2013 at 1:17 am #

    Thanks David for your post. I agree with all you say, and here are some of my reflections:

    Insatiable hunger for money and power

    Imagine a family sitting around the dinner table. If one family member took nineteen out of twenty pancakes, wouldn’t that be considered anti social and lead to hunger for the other family members? Wouldn’t it be considered pathological? Would it even lead to lasting happiness for this pathological individual? It follows that if we want our society to have social cohesion and be able to support its members, anyone with insatiable hunger for money and power will have to be cured of his or her pathology.


    Excessive nationalism as a sentiment has done much damage down the history, resulting in bloody conflicts for the satisfaction of power hungry national leaders. Having said that, borders to ones own socio economic zone need to be protected against multinational exploitation. Production of all basic necessities have to be provided for within the borders of this socio economic zone to avoid any susceptibility to extortion by other powers or multinationals.

    The social cycle

    “The truth, I suggest, is that we are at a moment when an entire cultural form is ending. At such times it is not one part or another, government or market, which corrupts and breaks, which betrays the values it was meant to embody and ceases to do the job for which it was created, it is all parts at once. All parts of our society have become corrupted.”

    You describe eliquently the last most exploitative stages of capitalism, when the counter weight from any other sector in society have been removed or been made to serve the purposes of the moneyed class. Libertarians are longing in vain for a past era when capitalism was young and vigorous, and frankly a blessed relief from the religious oppression that came before. No era lasts forever, and each class have to be compelled by circumstances to let go of the tiller of society whenever they start exploiting everyone else.

    Whole human being

    No materialistic ideology such as capitalism, socialism or communism has been able to sustainably cater for the economic, mental and psycho-spiritual needs of human beings as well as the needs of animals, plants and the natural environment. Some of the blame lies with the name itself: capitalism is ruled by capital no matter what, socialism can be “social” while trampling over peoples needs, communism can be communal yet be a hell that people try to escape from. Do we need another ‘ism’ to replace what we have now? Universalism? We need an ideology that accepts all creatures as multi dimensional beings with physical mental and spiritual aspects to themselves. We need an ideology that is workable with human psychology and leads to the sharing of the pancaces fairly around the dinner table yet still rewarding higher levels of physical and mental work the family members may do for the whole.


    Democracy is a system that does not work unless there is a requisite level of a)education, b)morality and c)financial security in the voting public. If these factors are not there the democratic system becomes a playground for the moneyed class pulling the strings from behind.

  34. gerry parker November 23, 2013 at 7:43 pm #

    David, great article thanks.
    The power of crowd funding, look at Wings over Scotland’s results here.


    I believe there’s also some crowd funding for a series of films going on too.

  35. apol November 24, 2013 at 3:36 am #

    I missed this story when it came out, as a lot of people did I imagine.
    It should be given a lot of prominence in the run up to the EU
    ( Eugenicists United?) elections next year which could be the last…knowing them.

    By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels
    12:00AM BST 19 Sep 2000

    DECLASSIFIED American government documents show that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement.

    The documents confirm suspicions voiced at the time that America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European state. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gives instructions for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen William J Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the CIA.

    The documents were found by Joshua Paul, a researcher at Georgetown University in Washington. They include files released by the US National Archives. Washington’s main tool for shaping the European agenda was the American Committee for a United Europe, created in 1948. The chairman was Donovan, ostensibly a private lawyer by then.

    The vice-chairman was Allen Dulles, the CIA director in the Fifties. The board included Walter Bedell Smith, the CIA’s first director, and a roster of ex-OSS figures and officials who moved in and out of the CIA. The documents show that ACUE financed the European Movement, the most important federalist organisation in the post-war years. In 1958, for example, it provided 53.5 per cent of the movement’s funds.

    The European Youth Campaign, an arm of the European Movement, was wholly funded and controlled by Washington. The Belgian director, Baron Boel, received monthly payments into a special account. When the head of the European Movement, Polish-born Joseph Retinger, bridled at this degree of American control and tried to raise money in Europe, he was quickly reprimanded.

    The leaders of the European Movement – Retinger, the visionary Robert Schuman and the former Belgian prime minister Paul-Henri Spaak – were all treated as hired hands by their American sponsors. The US role was handled as a covert operation. ACUE’s funding came from the Ford and Rockefeller foundations as well as business groups with close ties to the US government.

    The head of the Ford Foundation, ex-OSS officer Paul Hoffman, doubled as head of ACUE in the late Fifties. The State Department also played a role. A memo from the European section, dated June 11, 1965, advises the vice-president of the European Economic Community, Robert Marjolin, to pursue monetary union by stealth.
    It recommends suppressing debate until the point at which “adoption of such proposals would become virtually inescapable”.

    • Dana November 29, 2013 at 7:39 pm #

      Yes, this information needs to be remembered and repeated.

      The link to the original article isn’t easy to find [at least from my location]. Le voici:

      Euro-federalists financed by US spy chiefs

      Many too many contradictions and foggy historical accounts remain regarding the circumstances surrounding the two world wars, the second of which provided the perfect ‘scorched earth’ context in which to exploit Europe’s destruction and destitution.

      Following a decades-long propaganda campaign, including an era of Al Qaeda … oh, no, sorry!, Communist terrorism, along came the European Union, literally forced upon the populations, and [drumbeat] now the TTIP and TPP.

      Might there be a pattern, here?

  36. Just me November 24, 2013 at 1:06 pm #

    “The US economy is already in shambles, with bond and stock markets propped up by massive and historically unprecedented Fed money printing pouring liquidity into financial asset prices. This month at the IMF annual conference, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said that to achieve full employment in the US economy would require negative real interest rates. Negative real interest rates could only be achieved by eliminating cash, moving to digital money that can only be kept in banks, and penalizing people for saving.

    The future is developing precisely as I have been predicting.”


    • steviefinn November 24, 2013 at 3:52 pm #

      So the banks would be in total control of who gets what, no need for real government or democracy, just the bankers calculating the individual return on investing in individuals & organisations as if they were commodities – Full serfdom.- The desperation of a dying empire perhaps. I hope I have got this nightmare scenario wrong.

  37. Robin Smith November 24, 2013 at 8:06 pm #

    Yes we agree. But this is not news. Its how Rome rose, fell and was buried. And Egypt. And Babylon. All for the same deeper reason you do not mention.

    There is nothing new in the world that is important. Because the people of the world, in all times and all places, including the poor, the wealthy, the powerful and the weak, in equal amount, refuse to call for an end to political economy that inevitably ends up in slavery.

    True, it does not look like slavery today does it. But it is slavery still when there are more slaves than ever out of sight out of mind. “nothing to do with me”

    Taxing hard work and enterprise at a nominal rate of 50% like it was harming society. Not taxing at all the enormous windfalls in property price and land rents like hoarding unearned income was a virtue. This collective insanity is the basis of the economy. It always has been.

    So what gives, no one ever wants to discuss it. Forbidden Knowledge. Though we often hear you “asking for a debate”, we wonder if you really mean what you say.

    What gives is that every single person in the world, even a charity worker and priest, wants to reserve the right to get their mitts on some of that unearned income and bugger the rest, even our children. There is no fundamental difference here between a scamming banker and a Red Cross worker. Shocking right?

    Its really that simple. Would you like to start a debate on root cause?

    We’re all ears and happy to lead that one, just call. Robin Smith 07786 078836. I’ll even come over your way if you are too busy.

    Following another side effect of avoiding Forbidden Knowledge

    Immigration – The British are just bullies scared of fair competition


  38. Phil (Mcr) November 25, 2013 at 12:12 am #

    O/T (sort of but not) This article touches on where power is held in this country. One wonders how the emerging new bargain that David describes fits with that.


  39. nexangelus November 25, 2013 at 2:26 pm #

    Hi Golem and all his followers!

    I have nothing to add to the discussion at this point, but wanted to thank you for the intelligent debate and the spot on blogs. I have your book Golem (and totally forgot to subscribe to your blog when I bought it the year before last) and am an avid follower of Max Keiser, John Pilger and now yourself. I have recently watched a film called The UK Gold, which told me nothing new, but it was heartening to see so many people there (it was a free screening but the seats sold out that night here in Bristol).

    Golem, I was wondering how do “we the people” start to make any headway into changing this mess that we are all in? I mean, how can ordinary folks make stands and even become active in changing the way people think, for one, and also the system itself? Reading and sitting idly by, is no longer an option with which I am comfortable.

  40. Joe Taylor November 25, 2013 at 4:39 pm #

    >DECLASSIFIED American government documents show that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement.

    Hi Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

    At the moment I’m almost half way through reading Bernard Connolly’s book, The Rotten Heart of Europe.

    This ZN blog with a five minute video of the man talking about the European Crisis, which he so acutely forecasted, might inspire others to do the same?

    The grist of the book so far is that the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) and the Economic & Monetary Union (EMU) was a front for deeper political manoeuvring between Germany and France – one having great economic, but no geo-political, clout in the early decades after the War and the other having comparatively less economic and industrial clout but a seat on the UN Security Council and, of course, the atomic bomb.

    A couple of quotes from the early chapters as examples:

    “I came to realize that the mechanism was part of a programme to subvert the independence – political as well as economic – of Europe’s countries.
    In short, there is no meaningful economic argument for a single currency in Europe – now or ever.
    EMU was all about power and about national interests, not about a mythical Community interest.”
    (more in-depth quotes here, if you’re interested http://bit.ly/1havqOq)

    From what I can gather so far, the book seems to be at odds with the idea that US Intelligence was behind it, more along the lines of the French and Germans wanting to impose a more regulated, less free-market ethos than the Anglo-Saxon economic model.

    Have you, or any of Golum’s regulars read this book?

    Bernard Connolly is very much alive and kicking, as that video demonstrates. I wonder what he would have to say about those de-classified documents?

  41. Phil (Mcr) November 25, 2013 at 11:35 pm #

    Some excellent work here from the Jubilee Debt Campaign, mapping who owes who and what:


    Interactive Global Debt Map


  42. steviefinn November 26, 2013 at 11:50 am #

    I spent yesterday evening at my first Common Law N.I. meeting which was an interesting insight into how the courts are dealing with property re-posessions. It appears that due to solicitors not ( for whatever reason ) being on the ball, the majority of people are left totally at the mercy of a system that favours the lenders. The lead members of the group who have a good knowledge of how this works try their utmost to advise what appear to be mainly middle class people on their actual rights & how to present their cases to best advantage. None of the members are lawyers but have obviously spent many hours becoming familiar with how the law works, or doesn’t, in regard to this area.

    They are voices in the wilderness, so I just wondered if anyone who reads this blog might know of any other such similar groups within the British isles, as contact between them might be helpful to their work. Also if anyone can provide info or links to anything they think might be useful that could be passed onto me at finney.steve@gmail.com.

    Santander & Ulster bank were most mentioned & the latest news from Ulster bank’s dad RBS in regard to their treatment of business clients was also discussed. I read the Robert Peston apologist article when I returned home in which he basically states that RBS were forced to put some of these ” Zombie ” entities out of their misery. No mention that the biggest zombie of the lot is the one who was screwing them. Surely using his logic RBS should have received the mercy bullet in order to put them & us out of our misery. He should have been defence counsel for Harold Shipman – ” Well they were on their way out anyway, so may as well loot them ” sort of thing. The comments I read are heartening, it appears that more people are becoming aware of the reality, I have found this appears to be true on other sites like ” Business Insider ” too. Even the BBC’s facebook page to which I have fun adding links too, there seems to be more people out there that are copping on.

    Maybe it’s time Robert headed for that revolving door.

  43. Salford Lad November 26, 2013 at 12:13 pm #

    @Stuart Taylor.
    The SNP today published their manifesto/case for an Independent Scotland. While personally I think it is a no-brainer for Scotland to cut itself loose from the sinkng ship that is the UK, the document states that the SNP hopes to remain in the British sterling system.
    I know Alex Salmond is an astute and canny politician and I believe this choice is just a preliminary move to assuage the fears of an electorate, 99% of whom do not understand Central banking or the money system.
    Should the vote for an exit from the UK prove successful, Scotland will be independent in name only if it ties itself to either sterling or the euro.
    An independent sovereign country with control over the issue of its own currency, can use this issue to generate 100% employment and REAL wealth, if it is invested wisely in productive industry .
    Scotland for centuries has had some of the greatest Engineers and inventors in the world. Backed by an excellent education system and a strong work ethic, it can become the poster boy of how an economy and a country can be run for the benefit of its people and not for an elite. The Declaration of Arbroath stated as much .
    Central banking is an institution, run by the bankers ,for the benefit of the bankers, as is evident by the issue of QE in the UK and by the Federal Reserve in the USA.
    Not one job has been created by the trillions of money created, but a false bubble has been induced in the stock markets of the world. It is all a mirage of wealth. Money created without any real asset value behind it.
    A sovereign country is not restrained in its spending as a Swabian Hausfrau (as per Angela Merkel). It can create and issue money at will. The important thing is to use this money as a tool to create real wealth and employment by investing in productive industry.
    The City of London creates no wealth ,only money in the financial casino that is the stock exchange. That Is why London is one of the most expensive Cities of the world, because of the volume of money circulating there.
    There is no real independence for Scotland without monetary independence. That means having its own currency , controlled by its own Treasury panel and issued into its own economy to create jobs and real wealth.
    The capital of a country consists of its peoples labour ,ingenuity and natural resources. Money is just a tool to enable industry & exploit this capital to generate wealth for its people.

  44. karalan November 29, 2013 at 3:47 pm #

    “there have been times and places, when the machinery of the State did animate and represent some of the wishes of the at least some of the people.”

    “The more ideological of them proclaim that the state, whenever and wherever it tries to do good, will always and by necessity do harm.”

    “The creation of the National Health Service in Great Britain is one shining example.”

    The mechanism by which the state does good, even wrt shining examples, is that it uses force against non-consenting people. The ‘wishes of at least some of the people’ are imposed by threat of violence against the wishes of the others – why are their wishes, to be free from coercion, not respected? A social contract which is imposed by force is not a legitimate contract.

    The state’s only mechanism is coercion, force and violence – in the case of democracy this may mean by the majority against the minority, but it is violence nonetheless.

    There is no escaping this fundamental flaw in the logic of the state. The state IS violence, regardless of the beneficence of its motives and even outcomes. Until humanity grants the free right of consent and/or dissent to each of its members, the cycle of empires will continue. That is, rise… and fall.

    • Phil (Mcr) November 29, 2013 at 11:28 pm #

      As opposed to all the times non-state actors have used force against non-consenting people?

      ”The state’s only mechanism is coercion, force and violence – in the case of democracy this may mean by the majority against the minority, but it is violence nonetheless.”

      Do you know how we got rid of the Poll Tax in the UK?

      • karalan November 30, 2013 at 6:33 am #

        My understanding of the UK Poll Tax is that popular rebellion and rioting led to its demise. But what about those who consented to it? Where was their choice? As well, violent rebellion by citizens is relatively rare and often unsuccessful (see Dr. Gene Sharp http://www.aeinstein.org), not to mention ‘illegal.’

        To be sure, non-state actors and individuals engage in violence as well. Corporations for example, because they are created and legitimized by the state, can be seen as extensions of it in this context.

        In the absence of a state, no one has a monopoly on violence. Non-consent is an option; the state denies that option.

        Historically, it is a simple matter to point out that by far the greatest amount of violence against people has been inflicted by the state. The 20th century was the bloodiest in human history.

        I have no problem with the existence of a state, just believe each individual should have the contractual right of consent, which includes the option of non-consent.

  45. Phil (Mcr) November 29, 2013 at 11:24 pm #

    Frightening insights into how corporations with the help of private security firms and national intelligence agencies have spied on civil society groups across the world


  46. steviefinn December 3, 2013 at 1:49 am #

    This would make the ghost of Franco very happy – Isn’t this the sort of thing that the West used to scream about if those who once ran the ‘ Evil Empire ‘ did something similar ?


    Fascinating video on high frequency trading courtesy of Jesse. Algorithms, info at the speed of light, banks skimming pension funds etc, & a whistleblower testimon that led to an ongoing, perhaps never ending ( OK, it is a bit like rocket science ), so far,2 year SEC investigation.

    One of the Phd ‘ Quants ‘ featured – Dave Laeur concluded that the 2010 Nasdaq flash crash was caused by something impossible to fathom due to the fact that the systems were so complex & also, if the same scenario was repeated, the same result would most probably not occur.. He appeared at the Congressional hearing into the incident, but his name is not mentioned on the Wiki page in which numerous bodies came up with rationalisations that it appears to me, give the impression that they have it all under control.

    I think it is a good example of the uncertainty that David talks about that can occur within complex systems & how those at the top act as though they have it all under control, assuring themselves & us, that they have a tame leopard by the tail.

    Dave Lauer left Wall Street – In this segment he comments on the waste of Phd’s squeezing money from stone for banks :



  47. Joe Taylor December 5, 2013 at 12:48 pm #

    Steve Radford has posted an interesing and quite in-depth comment about David’s ideas on the New World Order here – worth a read.


  48. ConfederateH December 6, 2013 at 9:51 am #

    @Lisa, all.
    It is unfortunate that Golem doesn’t allow up and down votes on comments, I would have liked to have seen how this thread turned out.

    There is overwhelming evidence of NHS incompetence and corruption yearly directly causing thousands of deaths (ie. unsanitary hospitals, euthenasia through dehydration, denial of treatment, rationing of limited resources, etc). This thread reminds me of the warmists’ steadfast refusal to recognize any contrary evidence or even proof of their all false hypothesi (last I checked there were still glaciers in the Himalayas).

    I find it amazing that Golem can write an entire article about lifetime government servants being of “inward looking ambition and greed for power.” while he and his readers nonchalantly brush this aside in the cases of their pet government monopolies like NHS and education.

    I am a citizen of the Kanton of Schwyz which is a member of the Swiss Confederation. I recently found out that I have made it onto Obama’s no-entry list after renouncing my US slavery-bond. I will never see my mother or siblings there again. At the time I shed myself of it I didn’t realize that if I hadn’t renounced I would now be paying a 3.5% Obamacare surcharge on all my Swiss salary and earnings as well as on any capital gains including currency appreciation.

    As a long time IT contractor I have worked with many Brits who have gotten into tax troubles in the UK while working in Switzerland. In effect they are having their property stolen twice to support two separate heath systems. Bravo NHS lovers. Its clear, your needs trump anyone else’s rights, especially anyone’s right to property or the fruit of their labors.

    Now for my healthcare story. My wife has cancer and wants to pursue a line of treatment not recognized by the Swiss medical system. Without a doctors perscription, the insurance won’t pay and we can’t get the medication anyway. I sincerely doubt that she would simply waltz into the NHS and get the treatment there either. So what I want is the entire medical industry to get out of my way. I want to be able to order the medication on the internet at a competitive price and that is my natural right. I won’t harm anyone else, I promise. Unfortunately the healthcare industrial complex have their own agenda.

    So what I want is my sovereignty. I want the right of secession from all the fascistic things that do-goody socialists keep forcing on me. They should do their naval gazing without me, I want no part of their pet government monopolies that they think are so vital that they are willing to steal property from other sovereign humans to pay for them.

    • steviefinn December 6, 2013 at 1:13 pm #

      Interesting to hear the views of someone with no direct experience of the NHS. Maybe I should comment on the US system from my experience of watching ER & the reading of the odd newspaper article.

      “There is overwhelming evidence of NHS incompetence and corruption yearly directly causing thousands of deaths (ie. unsanitary hospitals, euthenasia through dehydration, denial of treatment, rationing of limited resources, etc).”

      I can only judge these things from my own direct experience – After 56 years on this planet looking back at all the incidents that required medical care within my family I can only think of one time when it went horribly wrong. My Father contracted MRSA while receiving treatment in a NHS hospital for collapsed lungs & it nearly killed him. Other than that any complaints would be in regard to trivial things like waiting times.

      On the plus side: My Mother benefitted from the fledgeling NHS as a child by receiving treatment for diphtheria. Her parents were pretty poor so might not have been able to afford private treatment so she might have died, seeing as she only barely survived. I was rushed to a hospital unconscious with a fractured skull at 12 mths old &I had scarlet fever at 4yrs old, perhaps I might have survived these incidents ( I did surprise the ambulance men by walking instead of making use of the stretcher ) without the NHS, but again, my Mother was struggling financially & had no assets, with my Father away in Germany doing his army national service, sending home what he could from a private’s pay

      Since then myself & my family have benefitted from something that I would admit is not always perfect care, but for the most part we have been born, died & been tended to pretty successfully & unlike the US where there is, or was, more social mobility & potential higher earnings for working class people, it has been important for those who basically just get by. Of course in the New World order most of my family will be considered not worthy of any care within a new society that only judges the value of a person on how much they can’t take with them.

      My Mother worked as a cleaner in private care homes in the 80’s – she wore herself out trying to do a good job within a strict timetable she had to work to for each specific task. She was forced by the time constraints to skim, as she put it, & felt bad because she was not allowed to do a good job, which was how she went about everything. At about the same time Mrs. T was in the process of privatising hospital cleaning – I remember headlines such as ” pay peanuts, get monkeys “, perhaps those dark corners that my Mum referred to were also skimmed within the NHS, making for nice breeding grounds for bacteria.

      There was also a possible connection with the cleanliness of the people who work in the NHS in regard to washing their hands. My experiences of most men who visit public toilets has shown me that the majority actually make things worse in regard to bacteria by simply not taking the time to dry their hands properly. I would suggest that the behaviour of people as in cleanliness or corruption is not the fault of the NHS, the former has improved through education to a large extent carried out by the NHS.

      As you can see the worst offenders in the case of dehydration & starvation are from private care homes. From the Daily Mail which is no friend of the NHS:

      “His figures show that in 2011/12, some 168 care home residents aged over 65 were admitted with a primary diagnosis of dehydration.
      This includes 34 in NHS-run nursing homes, 10 in residential homes run by councils and 124 in privately-run care homes”.

      Incidentally the NHS treats approx. 1 million people every 36 hours.

      I sincerely wish you the very best outcome in relation to your wife’s condition. I think I have an idea of what you are both going through. My late wife developed cancer some 20 yrs ago. Her breast cancer was initially treated by the NHS in England, she survived after what seemed to me to be excellent treatment but 12 yrs later developed a metastasis type brain tumour ( Gliablastoma multiforme grade 3 ) & was given 9-12 mths to live. Her treatment was received from the Irish healthcare system, Which has suffered from the same problems as the NHS. It is a more privatised system in which most people pay for GP visits, hospital stays & prescription charges are or were then relatively pretty high. I found the infrastructure pretty tatty compared to the UK, but this was more than compensated for by the wonderful staff we dealt with.

      I bought many books & scoured the internet for anything that could help, but in her case there was nothing – I wish you a much better result.

      • Golem XIV December 6, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

        Well said Stevie.

        I could relate many smimlar instances of the very good care I and my family recieved in the NHS. I could also tell you how my maternal grandmother very nearly died lying on her kitchen table when no doctor would treat her (my grandparents were too poor) in the days before the NHS.

        Like you I wish with all my heart for ConfederateH to find a treatment for his wife.

        • ConfederateH December 6, 2013 at 10:18 pm #

          @Steve, Golem,

          As I have stated previously in this thread, there is little doubt that there are numerous people who are willing and eager to testify in support of the NHS. The point I will repeat is that fervent supporters alone s not sufficient justification of a system of coerced, mandatory and involuntary participation in system who’s proponents also wield the power of a monopolistic propaganda organ like the BBC.

          Steve wrote “My Father contracted MRSA while receiving treatment in a NHS hospital for collapsed lungs & it nearly killed him”. This also touches on one of the weakest points of your beloved NHS. Where can you turn when you have been done wrong by career civil employees who can never be fired? If I don’t like my Ford next time I can secede from the ford buyers world and buy an Audi. But you NHS lovers would not only steal my money to force me to pay for your personal health care, but you also have robbed the seeds of any free and competitive health care system of all oxygen and light. Those of us who want to secede from your state imposed healthcare nirvana want nothing from you. Unfortunately we cannot say that the opposite holds true.

          • BobRocket December 7, 2013 at 4:39 am #


            You write very well, so I upvote you on that, but I disagree with some of what you say so can I downvote you on that.
            I like what you say about the freedom of choice but I dislike the fact your wife has cancer.

            I’ve never been treated in a hospital (NHS or private) and nor do I want to be.

            I have been to the Drs once for a diagnosis (I needed to know if the spots I had were Pityriasis rosea (self-diagnosed) or was contageous/infectious) in order to get a letter to allow me back into the country (it was fatigue related PR)
            Only other visits were for sick notes for skivyitus or prescriptions for restricted ‘medicines’.
            (all of the above would have qualified for US Medicaid)

            The only good thing about the NHS is it is free at the point of access.

            If I were to find you (or anybody) in a street in the UK having been rolled by a mugger, I can call an ambulance (and wait for an undetermined period) or I can take you to A&E myself.
            The one thing I can be assured of is no-one will try to stiff ME with the bill.

            The NHS (as long as their kill rate is kept acceptably low) is the cheapest way of providing communal health care (that includes immunisation /vaccination) that keeps me from needing their services.

            I agree that you should be allowed to buy what you want from any source (and that you agree to absolve the supplier from any responsibility and also be responsible to any you supply to)

            The regulatory environment is mostly created by those who are regulated in order to maintain monopoly.

            As for Obamas ‘no-entry’ list, I’m on it too, I’m a UK citizen, unless I pay some kind of temporary membership fee, he won’t let me in to sample the benefits of his club. It seems you renounced your membership because you didn’t want to pay the dues.

            As for your wife ‘waltzing’ into an NHS hospital, they might ask for an address (and the computer will be stumped by a CH postcode) but they will treat her like any other patient.

          • Roger Lewis December 7, 2013 at 7:58 am #

            Best wishes for your wifes care and I hope you get access to what ever course of treatment you choose to pursue.

            On the NHS and other universal health care schemes I do not believe privatisation is the answer or that some sort of Natural Market will arise for providing healthcare, sure all systems can be improved upon but I suspect the role model is not to be found in the USA.

            Here in Sweden there is a very good system there are prescritpion charges and such but one does not have to worry about going under a bus and finding that one loses onses shirt on top of any other physical injury.

            I detect a hint of the Stefan Moleneux brand of Taking up serpents type libertarianism in your comments Confederate H. I have had many discussions with another freind that seems to feel that Mr Moleneux evangelises the Panacea for ills . My freind and I have not yet reached an accomodation on Externalities he claims that private insurance provides a solution I am skeptical about that.

            Externalities exist and as a society we need to protect ourselves from organisations that profit from their causes. I also believe that some Capital provision is only affordable collectively and belongs within the commons. I see the NHS as part of the UK commons and its enclosure should be strongly resisted, there is much recently on evidence based government and management on the Web as with much esle regionalised and devolved governance of the commons is perhaps the best way to ensure that evidence is interpreted appropriately by those at the point of use and delivery.

          • s.tristero December 13, 2013 at 3:01 pm #

            re: Roger — perhaps an issue is that the commons is too firmly wrapped up in the “Public” sphere, and thus entangled in the neverending battle of Public vs. Private?

  49. ConfederateH December 7, 2013 at 6:40 pm #

    @Bobrocket, Roger Lewis, Golem, all,
    First of all I recognize that typically civilized British tone to all of your replies and I tip my hat y’all. It is probably beyond me to reproduce, but I do appreciate it. My wife is doing well and for those of you who are interested her preferred treatment is cannabis oil.

    Yes, I do like Moleneux, but I am not an regular follower of his. http://www.lewrockwell.com and http://www.zerohedge are two my favorites.

    In Switzerland there is the concept of the “Heimatort”, your home town. This is where your citizenship originates and it is your home town that has to pay to keep you alive if all else fails for you. When you naturalize into Switzerland, it is your Heimatort that has to accept you first. If you become crippled and have nothing else, your heimatort has to pick you up. It will be interesting to see what happens in all of those socialist heimatorts when all those unskilled and uncivilized third worlders (the numbers of Romanians and Bulgarians in the country due to Schengen has already exploded along with “twilight robberies”) end up back on their doorsteps. Most of them live in big cities, but if things ever collapse, it will be their heimatort that has to pick them up.

    I live in Kanton Schwyz, one of the most tightly run kantons and certainly one of the lowest taxed. Most of the immigrants who lied and got into Switzerland because they were looking for a free lunch didn’t land in our Kanton. They will be in Geneva, Zurich and Basel and in the French part of Switzerland.

    This has been a long ramble, but one thing the Swiss have gotten right is that charity should start at home, or possibly the village. Not from Washington or London or Bern where the politicians are entirely isolated from local conditions. I don’t want people dieing on the streets but that doesn’t give any of these politicians the right to steal the fruit of my labors. Nor any NHS supporter for that matter either.

  50. Roger December 8, 2013 at 12:22 pm #

    Hi Confederate H,

    You are also very polite and I am perhaps detecting some Southern charm.

    But many gleams and shadows needs must pass
    Along the budding grass,
    And weeks go by, before the enamored South
    Shall kiss the rose’s mouth.


    A new sprng for real direct democracy perhaps.
    Read more at http://www.poetry-archive.com/t/spring.html#x0JWRsS88lQTJEEp.99

    On the Swiss Cantons I have found these panarchy and Government by contract sites very interesting.



    With respect to safety nets and so forth I think Napolean probably sums up best why as Crass say in the song ” Of Course they Owe us a Living”

    French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte echoed Paine’s sentiments and commented that ‘man is entitled by birthright to a share of the Earth’s produce sufficient to fill the needs of his existence’ (Herold, 1955).


    On the Romanian Stereotyping , as with all stereotyping it comes across as shallow and holds little water. A Romanian friend of mine is a London Based Economist, he was recently offended by the rise of main stream media scapegoating of Romanians in the Sun newspaper, I had a similar conversation with an Austrian freind here in Sweden , we were chatting about the Swedish National Party, I wondered if my freind felt an attraction to its Rhetoric but realised they were not promoting invading Poland so perhaps not.

    • ConfederateH December 13, 2013 at 9:07 am #

      “Romanian Stereotyping , as with all stereotyping it comes across as shallow and holds little water”

      Why don’t you simply admit that your use of the word “stereotype” is just a veiled accusation of racism.

      Are you going to try to deny that statistically Romanians and Bulgarian immigrants (legal or illegal) are far more likely to commit crime than, say, a racially pure Swede? Give me a break. Furthermore, your Romanian economist friend appears to be trying to play that completely worn out “victim of racism” card, which is in reality an attempt to stifle other peoples natural right to express their own opinion. This is all a part of the Cultural Marxists agenda of breaking down and diluting the social capital that historically has allowed western democratic states to exist and to thrive. Well none are thriving anymore, and denial of the primary role that the left has played in these insane immigration policies is not going to bring that back.

      I would also like to point out that the degree to which the NHS ever functioned well in its entire history was, as stated above by someone else, in the old days before the left crammed all THIER pet immigrants down OUR throats and diluted our social capital. That’s the thing about the left, they always want someone else to pay for their pets, whether they be immigrants from societies devoid of social capital or state monopolies whose existence destroy freedom and free markets.

  51. Just me December 8, 2013 at 2:25 pm #

    “The move is part of a new national infrastructure plan, which sets out how the British government intends to privatise the equivalent of $32 billion or 24.1 billion euros of financial and corporate assets by 2020.”


    • BobRocket December 11, 2013 at 12:45 am #

      So they want to sell the EuroStar (or at least the bit they own), why did the government own it in the first place ? was it necessary for the average Brit to be able to cross the channel by train, what was wrong with a ferry or a hovercraft ?

      Perhaps it was a prestige thing where top bods could have their photos taken for the obsequient* media to parade at the time.

      The big question (since it would be stretching the bounds of credibility that EuroStar was vital to ‘The National Interest’)
      is will it pay for itself or is this just another long term self enriching exercise ?

      *obsequient is not a real word apparently but one created by James Joyce, I’m with Humpty on that one.

      I like your link on the Mandela blog to the World Socialist WebSite (if only I could Upvote/Dislike you), I disagree with everything they stand for (but not what they say)
      I expected to be a lone dissenting voice, subject to vitriolic abuse (I had cracked a 5lt can of Old Speckled Hen)

      How about rather than Downvoting/Likeing posts people put forward their own ideas.

      Ideas are not a popularity contest

      Ideas are a starting point.

      Ideas are an endpoint

      Where do you think we should be in 2020, 2030, 2070, 2110 ?

      What should options for the life of average Planet Earth Person be ?

      How about

      Accessible Clean Drinking Water for Every Person On This Planet To Be Freely Available by 2025

  52. Just me December 8, 2013 at 2:32 pm #

    “Massive Crude Inventory Drop of 12 Million Barrels: API”


  53. Just me December 12, 2013 at 2:17 pm #

    “Machine Guns vs Disabled People : Ministers quake facing the wrath of disabled people.”


    “US Congress, White House to allow jobless benefits to expire for 1.3 million”


    “More Misleading Official Employment Statistics — Paul Craig Roberts”


  54. Just me December 12, 2013 at 5:35 pm #

    “And the number of homeless children in the United States overall recently set a new all-time record.”


  55. Joe Taylor December 14, 2013 at 12:20 am #

    Someone from this blog recently recomended the newly published book, Sack The Economists’ by Geoff Davies.

    I’m quite impressed by what I’ve read of it so far.

    It’s in straight forward English for change, not language that only the author and his mother can understand.

    The Kindle version only costs £3.14.

    I’ve put up a few quotes from the book here http://bit.ly/1gwvTdH

  56. Just me February 12, 2014 at 12:13 am #

    “American Deep State”


  57. andrew cullen March 11, 2014 at 4:01 pm #


    A most thoughtful and perceptive piece. I unfortunately think that your case is flawed because you have no theory of the State to back up your favourable view of the nation state and of representative democracy.

    I was myself brought up in the UK in the 1950s and 60s so I ended up as a young adult with pretty similar views and assumptions. I held on to these with the “victory” of the West over communism.

    However, the massive economic and financial changes that have occurred over the past years fro the dot.com bust, the wars in the Middle East, American global hegemony, and then the 2007-09 financial meltdown and the repurcussions in terms of extreme monetary policy by (private) central banks, and the emerging melt-down in paper currencies; all this leads me to take a much more critical stance to the limitations and risks both of the State in general and representative democracy (dominated by party politics).

    The most incisive critique of the State, imo, comes for writers like Hoppe and Rothbard. I do not buy in to everything that they conclude from their praexologic analyses. Nevertheless, their insights (built also on the work of von Mises) offer coherent positions why we, as individuals with the right to be free of coercion, should beware of the monopolistic, coercive nature of the State and its tendency to extend and intensify its power and control – at the expense of free exchange and the unhampered markets.

  58. substance abuse programs May 13, 2015 at 2:00 am #

    Thanks on your marvelous posting! I seriously enjoyed reading it, you are a great author.I will be sure to bookmark your blog
    and will often come back sometime soon. I want to encourage you to continue your great work, have a nice day!


  1. Link 11/18/13 « naked capitalism - November 18, 2013

    […] The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation Golem XIV […]

  2. GolemXIV: New World Order, Betrayal Of The Nation - November 18, 2013

    […] Malone’s new post: The New World Order, is an important read. Part I The Betrayal of The Nation takes a look at the general themes surrounding our economic and political dysfunction and ties it […]

  3. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betraya... - November 18, 2013

    […] by Golem XIV on NOVEMBER 17, 2013 in LATESTIn every country I can think of, the sovereignty and wealth of the Nation, which was once the embodiment of the power and will of the people, is being butchered and sold to the highest bidder. Everywhere, the Nation and the people within it, are under attack. Not from without by terrorists but from within. Because in every country the people who run the State have largely decided they no longer wish to serve the people but prefer instead to serve the interests of a Global Over-Class. Of course we are not encouraged to see this clearly or if we do, certainly not to speak of it to others. And many of those we might try to talk to, do not want to hear. Many of us prefer instead to find what warmth we can in the false and threadbare beliefs fed to us by the quisling elite of the State and their close friends and allies in a rigged and corrupted ‘free’ market. Together they tell us that whole functions of our nation which we built and treasure, are no longer viable because they are at odds with the ‘realities’ of a global economy …  […]

  4. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation » Golem XIV – Thoughts | rajnishkapoor - November 18, 2013

    […] The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation » Golem XIV – Thoughts Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading… […]

  5. The Top 10 Flaws of Neoclassical Economics | Politics and Parasites - November 19, 2013

    […] The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation […]

  6. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation | owngoldllc - November 19, 2013

    […] on http://www.golemxiv.co.uk Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading… This entry was posted in Uncategorized by […]

  7. Brave New Politics – Addressing Banks, Ethics and Interest | Think Left - November 19, 2013

    […] are The Debt Generation. Money is a tool, not a resource. And it’s a broken tool.  We need Positive Money to be […]

  8. Golem XIV - The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation | PRN.fm - November 21, 2013

    […] Read More This entry was posted in Politics and tagged Communist China, Golem XIV, Nation, Nation state, National Security Agency, People Liberation Army, RIMPAC, United Nations, United State on November 21, 2013 by admin. […]

  9. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | Prepper Post - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  10. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation - UNCLE - UNCLE - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  11. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | peoples trust toronto - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  12. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | FXCharter - November 22, 2013

    […] posted at Golem XIV blog,In every country I can think of, the sovereignty and wealth of the Nation, which was once the […]

  13. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | Option Class - November 22, 2013

    […] Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation   (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); #fsb-social-bar { width: 100%; border-bottom: 1px solid #dbdbdb; border-top: 1px solid #dbdbdb; padding: 10px 0; margin: 0px 0 20px 0; float: left; background: #fff; position: relative; clear: both; } #fsb-social-bar a { border: 0px !important } #fsb-social-bar.fsb-fixed { position: fixed; top: -2px; z-index: 99999; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-title { display: block; float: left; margin: 3px 20px 0 0; font-size: 16px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-decoration: none; color: #333; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-facebook { width: 120px; float: left; padding: 3px 0 2px; height: 25px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-facebook.fsb-hide-count { width: 44px; overflow: hidden; margin-right: 30px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-twitter { float: left; width: 135px; padding: 3px 0 2px; height: 25px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-twitter.fsb-hide-count { width: 61px; overflow: hidden; margin-right: 30px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-google { float: left; width: 105px; padding: 3px 0 2px; height: 25px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-google.fsb-hide-count { width: 33px; overflow: hidden; margin-right: 30px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-linkedin { float: left; width: 135px; padding: 3px 0 2px; height: 25px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-linkedin.fsb-hide-count { width: 61px; overflow: hidden; margin-right: 30px; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-pinterest { float: left; width: 115px; padding: 3px 0 2px; height: 25px;} #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-pinterest.fsb-hide-count { width: 43px; overflow: hidden; margin-right: 30px; } #fsb-social-bar .socialite { display: block; position: relative; background: url(http://option-class.com/wp-content/plugins/floating-social-bar/images/fsb-sprite.png) no-repeat scroll 0 0; } #fsb-social-bar .socialite-loaded { background: none !important; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-service-title { display: none; } #fsb-social-bar a { color: #333; text-decoration: none; font-size: 12px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-twitter { width: 105px; height: 25px; background-position: -13px -10px; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: middle; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-twitter .fsb-count { width: 30px; text-align: center; display: inline-block; margin: 0px 0 0 69px; color: #333; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-google { width: 75px; height: 25px; background-position: -136px -10px; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: middle; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-google .fsb-count { width: 30px; text-align: center; display: inline-block; margin: 0px 0 0 41px; color: #333; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-google .socialite-button { margin: 0 !important; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-google .socialite-loaded .socialite-button{padding: 2px 0 0} #fsb-social-bar .fsb-facebook { width: 89px; height: 25px; background-position: -231px -10px; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: middle; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-facebook .fsb-count { width: 30px; text-align: center; display: inline-block; margin: 0px 0 0 52px; color: #333; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-facebook .socialite-button { margin: 0 !important;} #fsb-social-bar .fsb-share-facebook .socialite-loaded .socialite-button {padding: 2px 0 0} #fsb-social-bar .fsb-linkedin { width: 105px; height: 25px; background-position: -347px -10px; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: middle; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-linkedin .fsb-count { width: 30px; text-align: center; display: inline-block; margin: 0px 0 0 70px; color: #333; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-linkedin .socialite-button { margin: 0 !important; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-pinterest { width: 88px; height: 25px; background-position: -484px -10px; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: middle; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-pinterest .fsb-count { width: 30px; text-align: center; display: inline-block; margin: 0px 0 0 50px; color: #333; } #fsb-social-bar .fsb-pinterest .socialite-button { margin: 0 !important; } .fsb-clear { clear: both; } .fsb-clear:after { clear:both; content:; display:block; height:0; line-height:0; overflow:auto; visibility:hidden; zoom:1; } @media (max-width: 768px) { #fsb-social-bar.fsb-fixed { position: relative !important; top: auto !important; } } Connected with UsFacebook0Twitter0Pinterest0Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  14. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | Financial Fall - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  15. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation - Since 1998 Hitrust.net = Privacy and Protection | Since 1998 Hitrust.net = Privacy and Protection - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  16. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | Offshore, gold, anarchy, privacy anti-big-brother - November 22, 2013

    […] Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation November 22nd, 2013 admin Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  17. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | LiMiT - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  18. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation - Exploring the News - November 22, 2013

    […] Of The NationNovember 22, 2013 By News Feed Leave a CommentBy Tyler DurdenOriginally posted at Golem XIV blog,In every country I can think of, the sovereignty and wealth of the Nation, which was once the […]

  19. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation - Commodity Trade Mantra - November 22, 2013

    […]   Courtesy: Golem XIV […]

  20. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation | - November 22, 2013

    […] Golem XIV […]

  21. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation » Golem XIV – Thoughts « Olduvaiblog: Musings on the coming collapse - November 22, 2013

    […] New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation » Golem XIV – Thoughts The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation » Golem XIV – Thoughts. By http://WWW.OLDUVAI.CA in Liberty on November 22, 2013. ← China Fires Shot Across […]

  22. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation | Gold For Life - Gold & Silver Investment Strategies - November 22, 2013

    […] continue reading at golemxiv.co.uk Tweet#call_to_action h4{padding:0px 5px;}Share this:FacebookGoogleLinkedInTwitterEmail […]

  23. Guest Post: The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal Of The Nation | WP1 TCTimes presents The REAL News - November 22, 2013

    […] Originally posted at Golem XIV blog, […]

  24. Betrayal of the Nation | Financial Markets :: E... - November 22, 2013

    […] In every country I can think of, the sovereignty and wealth of the Nation, which was once the embodiment of the power and will of the people, is being butchered and sold to the highest bidder. Everywhere, the Nation and the people within it, are under attack. Not from without by terrorists but from within.  […]

  25. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation | Buysilver.sg - November 25, 2013

    […] more here: http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2013/11/the-new-world-order-part-1-the-destruction-of-the-nation/?utm_sour… ← Wall Streeters Are Starting To Pass Around This Chart Showing The Market On The Cusp Of A […]

  26. The Emerging New World Order - Part 2. The End of Sovereignty » Golem XIV - Thoughts - December 12, 2013

    […] The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal of the Nation […]

  27. The Emerging New World Order – Part 2. The End of Sovereignty » Golem XIV – Thoughts « Olduvaiblog: Musings on the coming collapse - December 12, 2013

    […] In part one I wrote, ” …in every country the people who run the State have largely decided they no longer wish to serve the people but prefer instead to serve the interests of a Global Over-Class”. I believe we are in the midst of an historical shift in the alignment of loyalty and political power, away from democracy. I want to make it clear I do not believe the new arrangement of political and economic power was the clear goal of some hidden cabal. I think each change had an ideological drive behind it but, to begin with at least, each change was largely opportunistic and piecemeal. These pieces have, however, added up. And as time has gone by and the different pieces have accumulated, I think some wealthy and powerful people as well as some who were ideologically driven, have seen the chance to make something they desired out of the pieces. I think those who never liked democracy-for-the-masses, but preferred something that was more like the Roman senate – a place for the sons and daughters of the already wealthy and powerful families to ensure they remained wealthy and powerful – I think those people have seen an historical chance to further their vision of the future they desire and, particularly in the last twenty or so years, have actively schemed and pushed for it. Some of them have lobbied for it from Wall Street and the City, others of the same elite have written laws for it when they were in Congress and Parliament. And always they have found affordable lackeys among our political class. […]

  28. Greg Mitchell: '60 Minutes' Continues Disgraceful Slide - December 16, 2013

    […] Director of National Intelligence, John Miller, to lead the segment.  What ensued was a complete travesty in ethical news reporting.  Of course Mr. Miller conveniently forgot to ask how both James Clapper and Keith Alexander lied […]

  29. The New World Order – Part 1. The Betraya... - December 17, 2013

    […] In every country I can think of, the sovereignty and wealth of the Nation, which was once the embodiment of the power and will of the people, is being butchered and sold to the highest bidder. Everywhere, the Nation and the people within it, are under attack.  […]

  30. new world order uk 2013 | Occult.net.au - June 27, 2014

    […] The New World Order – Part 1. The Betrayal… Traducir esta página […]

  31. The Black Red Flesh of FergUSon Our Reminder | GLEFnet - August 27, 2014

    […] on this process within the USA, and how we as a nation, as a world, as One which elects or has elected a new world order, must not be divided and conquered by our ignorance of money, power, and greed into our […]

Leave a Reply