And in fact, there are a handful of banking families, including the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, who have come to dominate economic and political affairs in the Western world. Unlike aristocrats, capitalists are not tied to a place, or to the maintenance of a place. Capital is disloyal and mobile – it flows to where the most growth can be found, as it flowed from Holland to Britain, then from Britain to the USA, and most recently from everywhere to China. – Richard K. Moore/New Dawn Magazine/Global Research
Dominant Social Theme: The elites are a bunch of corporations and greedy capitalists. What banking families? They're never mentioned in the mainstream media, are they? So how can they exist?
Free-Market Analysis: This is an excellent article in our view, perhaps because we agree with most of it – though at the end of this analysis we will present some important ways in which we DISAGREE.
Nonetheless, it's "our" paradigm in some ways, presented eloquently by Richard K Moore, "an expatriate from Silicon Valley, [who] retired and moved to Ireland in 1994 to begin his 'real work' – trying to understand how the world works, and how we can make it better."
This article of Moore's puts manipulated events like Occupy Wall Street into context. The movement's leaders/nonleaders (as we've been writing) blame today's dysfunctional society mostly on the private market. Oh, they give lip service to other formulations, but basically the problems come from greedy capitalists.
Moore makes the point, as do we, that this is a kind of dominant social theme, an elite promotion. He sees the world as being manipulated by elite banking families (see above excerpt) and like us, he's suspicious of the current attempts by the powers-that-be to salvage the current system. In fact, he's come to the conclusion that the salvage attempts are phony ones.
Why the falsity? Because the Anglosphere power elite wants to create world government and it needs maximum chaos to do so. Of course, this doesn't bode well for the future but it's important to face it unflinchingly. War, depression, famine, plagues – all of these are weapons the elites can use if they can get away with it.
And that's the crux issue. Even now, the elites behind this incipient chaos need to disguise their actions. They need to hide – to present solutions that seem to address the problems they are actually causing with their incessant central banking booms and increasingly depressive busts.
Moore as much as says this. In his view, the solutions are real enough, but they are not intended to work. Merkel's miracles (see other article this issue) are fake ones, designed for mass consumption, along with her public feuds with Sarkozy. They are being promoted simply to ensure that the masses believe "something is being done" despite "enormous pressure."
Well, yes … Something is being done, all right. The bankruptcy of the world is being engineered! Of course, to announce this on mainstream media wouldn't work very well. It needs … context. Here's some more from this extensive article:
A capitalist stirs up a war in order to make profits, and in fact our elite banking families have financed both sides of most military conflicts since at least World War 1. Hence historians have a hard time 'explaining' World War 1 in terms of national motivations and objectives. In pre-capitalist days warfare was like chess, each side trying to win.
Under capitalism warfare is more like a casino, where the players battle it out as long as they can get credit for more chips, and the real winner always turns out to be the house – the bankers who finance the war and decide who will be the last man standing. Not only are wars the most profitable of all capitalist ventures, but by choosing the winners, and managing the reconstruction, the elite banking families are able, over time, to tune the geopolitical configuration to suit their own interests.
Nations and populations are but pawns in their games. Millions die in wars, infrastructures are destroyed, and while the world mourns, the bankers are counting their winnings and making plans for their postwar reconstruction investments. From their position of power, as the financiers of governments, the banking elite have over time perfected their methods of control.
Staying always behind the scenes, they pull the strings controlling the media, the political parties, the intelligence agencies, the stock markets, and the offices of government. And perhaps their greatest lever of power is their control over currencies. By means of their central-bank scam, they engineer boom and bust cycles, and they print money from nothing and then loan it at interest to governments. The power of the elite banking gang (the 'banksters') is both absolute and subtle…
Bottom line, Moore explains in this article's summation: Capitalism is past its "sell date." The elites are getting ready to jettison it for a form of feudalism in which autocratic global bureaucracies, which will take their orders, directly or indirectly, from the bankster clique …
In this new world system there will be no prosperous middle class. Indeed, the new regime will very much resemble the old days of royalty and serfdom (the ancien régime). The banksters are the new royal family, with the whole world as their dominion. The technocrats who run the global bureaucracies, and the mandarins who pose as politicians in the residual nations, are the privileged upper class. The rest of us, the overwhelming majority, will find ourselves in the role of impoverished serfs – if we are lucky enough to be one of the survivors of the collapse process.
OK, so far so good. But now some caveats. Having analyzed the process extensively, Moore, in our view, begins to veer off the tracks with some of his perspectives. He claims that the current resistance movements are genuine. We think they may have been initially but they are in the process of being co-opted.
He also apparently believes in the implacability of a new era. … "Just as capitalism was a new era after aristocracy, and the Dark Ages followed the era of the Roman Empire. Each era has its own structure, its own economics, its own social forms, and its own mythology." And here is perhaps the most interesting paragraph in the entire article:
These things must relate to one another coherently, and their nature follows from the fundamental power relationships and economic circumstances of the system. Whenever there is a change of era, the previous era is always demonized in a new mythology. In the Garden of Eden story the serpent is demonized – a revered symbol in paganism, the predecessor to monotheism. With the rise of European nation states, the Catholic Church was demonized, and Protestantism introduced. When republics came along, they demonized … monarchs. In the post-2012 world, democracy and national sovereignty will be demonized.
Moore doesn't use our language but here he is actually talking about elite dominant social themes. We analyze them every day and would tend to agree with Moore that the elites are in the process of promoting a new mythology – one that celebrates "scarcity," earth worship, egalitarianism and other forms communitarianism. It is anti-family and anti-individualistic.
In this regime change, ushering in the post-capitalist era, we're seeing a conscious orchestration of economics, politics, geopolitics and mythology – as one coordinated project. A whole new reality is being created, a whole new global culture. When it comes down to it, the ability to transform culture is the ultimate form of power. In only a single generation, a new culture becomes 'the way things are.'
As mentioned above, we think Moore is leaving out certain aspects that ought to be emphasized. First of all, nothing in life is certain, not even directed history. There is plenty of evidence that elite plans have been set back throughout history and that their scenarios have not always operated as advertised.
Second, we think the specifics of his paradigm contain lacunae. He seems to place the modern conspiracy within the past century. There is plenty of evidence it has been ongoing for more like 300 years, ever since the establishment of the Illuminati and the flowering of central banks.
Third, and most importantly, he seems to leave out the role of information technology and the evolution of its historical impact. History, in fact, CAN change. As Moore points out, wars are fought for different reasons today than yesterday. We would argue that history has changed for normal people as well as a result of technology.
Our paradigm is more hopeful than Moore's from what we can tell. (Admittedly, he's written a book on this subject, but in this analysis we're confining our comments to his article.) We believe that Western elites were set back as regards their control of the world because of the advent of the Gutenberg Press.
We believe this is a state of affairs they will have to grapple with again in a different context as a result of the truth-telling of the Internet, which we've taken to calling the Internet Reformation. As people wake up, the elite finds it more and more difficult to implement its world-spanning plans.
Moore seems to see elements of the elite plan as preordained. We're not so sure. He believes that the downward manipulation of the world's economy is planned; we think the elites are performing a balancing act, trying to inject a maximum amount of chaos into the world while maintaining control.
We see many failures in the elite's program. Global warming, peak oil, central banking, even the establishment of the European Union itself – all of these elite memes and more have come under attack in the Internet era. For Moore, or so it seems, the elite may soon carry all in front of them. Not so fast.
There is also evidence that in the modern era, "history" is the struggle between the elites and their control of economic and political institutions and the masses of people groping their way to understanding the "matrix" as technology evolves and bursts the bonds of elite communications control.
We are fortunate to live in a time when this is taking place and we can appreciate the extent to which the 20th century was controlled via "directed history." The elites are not all-powerful. They took a step back after the advent of the Gutenberg Press and in our view they may yet be in the process of taking a step back now.
The Internet Reformation is a process not an episode.