Post by steveb on Mar 26, 2013 13:03:45 GMT
Last night I made a confession, and the relief it brought has made me want to share it with this forum. Current reading, as well as comments made in open forums and the recent questions surrounding the Zeitgeist movement, have brought to a head one of the things I find difficult about Positive Money.
The introduction to Where Does Money Come From makes an opening disclaimer that 'this is not a conspiracy theory'. The same denial is at the beginning of the film Four Horsemen and the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins (who gave a video message to the annual PM conference in Jan). The problem I have with these statements is that in my interpretation, the works describe precisely what I would call 'a conspiracy'- i.e. a relatively tiny group of criminally minded men who have created and maintain a system of power and control largely out of the gaze of the mass of ordinary people. The need to distance ourselves from what was not so long ago a much less taboo concept, is I think slightly dishonest and limitting.
We struggle to communicate the message of PM because the enormity of accepting the fact that the money system is essentially fraudulent is simply too weird for many to comprehend. Perkins' book and the film mentioned describe in some detail the way that the global economic system has been forced upon the world by threat of sanction, political assassination and warfare. If we consider the many far reaching connections between the worlds of the security services and banking, and then read Nicholas Shaxson's book about the extent of tax havens and secrecy juristictions, or remember the Libor scandal or BCCI etc. etc. then could we be forgiven for calling a spade a spade? This is a conspiracy is it not?
What, at one time seemed to be the standpoint of wild eyed 'conspiracy theorists' -that power in reality operates covertly in our democracies, that the media and education systems have been compromised by these same interests; seems to me now to be born out by a lot of facts.
Whilst I can see the importance of issues like pensions and house price bubbles, I attach more importance to the question of the democratic implications of run away money power and it is for this reason that I wish to reclaim the term 'conspiracy' from its pejorative usage.
I confess that I am a conspiracy theorist, and I will happily share the information that I would say supports my theory. I disagree with a comment made at the Occupy Open Forum that the elites 'share the same values as the rest of us'. I am one of many who see (some of) them as sociopathic/ psychopathic, dangerously un-integrated into society; and thinks that our society needs protecting from them.
Positive Money is a well organised campaign that I support- but mainly because I think it brings the issues of money creation into discussion, and less because it presents a solution that addresses my deepest concerns. I think PM is wise to try to keep its message simple and inclusive, but I also get frustrated that it doesn't go far enough in its criticisms for fear of putting people off. These wider political questions seem unavoidable, and whilst I don't align myself with the Zeitgeist movement's vision, I long for more things like it.
The introduction to Where Does Money Come From makes an opening disclaimer that 'this is not a conspiracy theory'. The same denial is at the beginning of the film Four Horsemen and the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins (who gave a video message to the annual PM conference in Jan). The problem I have with these statements is that in my interpretation, the works describe precisely what I would call 'a conspiracy'- i.e. a relatively tiny group of criminally minded men who have created and maintain a system of power and control largely out of the gaze of the mass of ordinary people. The need to distance ourselves from what was not so long ago a much less taboo concept, is I think slightly dishonest and limitting.
We struggle to communicate the message of PM because the enormity of accepting the fact that the money system is essentially fraudulent is simply too weird for many to comprehend. Perkins' book and the film mentioned describe in some detail the way that the global economic system has been forced upon the world by threat of sanction, political assassination and warfare. If we consider the many far reaching connections between the worlds of the security services and banking, and then read Nicholas Shaxson's book about the extent of tax havens and secrecy juristictions, or remember the Libor scandal or BCCI etc. etc. then could we be forgiven for calling a spade a spade? This is a conspiracy is it not?
What, at one time seemed to be the standpoint of wild eyed 'conspiracy theorists' -that power in reality operates covertly in our democracies, that the media and education systems have been compromised by these same interests; seems to me now to be born out by a lot of facts.
Whilst I can see the importance of issues like pensions and house price bubbles, I attach more importance to the question of the democratic implications of run away money power and it is for this reason that I wish to reclaim the term 'conspiracy' from its pejorative usage.
I confess that I am a conspiracy theorist, and I will happily share the information that I would say supports my theory. I disagree with a comment made at the Occupy Open Forum that the elites 'share the same values as the rest of us'. I am one of many who see (some of) them as sociopathic/ psychopathic, dangerously un-integrated into society; and thinks that our society needs protecting from them.
Positive Money is a well organised campaign that I support- but mainly because I think it brings the issues of money creation into discussion, and less because it presents a solution that addresses my deepest concerns. I think PM is wise to try to keep its message simple and inclusive, but I also get frustrated that it doesn't go far enough in its criticisms for fear of putting people off. These wider political questions seem unavoidable, and whilst I don't align myself with the Zeitgeist movement's vision, I long for more things like it.