rphb

This is a question that I think we in the west needs to ask.

Vladimir Putin have been compared in the west to a certain long dead German Chancellor who did some "bad stuff" back in the days.

It have been consistently said that we cannot allow him to win, and "how much can we tolerate him invading."

The question we have forgotten to answer is where have we gotten the audacity and gall to think that it is any of our business what two foreign dictators are doing.

Now I know what ye are saying Zalensky is not a dictator he is a champion of democracy. Okay if ye want to believe that, there is no helping it, but regardless it is still not our business nor our fight.

We have the idea that we can dictate everything. We meaning the west, more specifically America, even more specifically the shadowy cabal that controls America and the west, no need to go into details, but the small group of people in power that are the ones who decides what the rules are.

We are individually not very powerful, but likes to pretend that we are that we are part of something bigger even when it is they who really makes the decision.

And what Russia have done, what Putin have demonstrated is a discord.

He have broken the rules of what they permits. Now invading another country is never a good thing and I am not defending it, but the invasion is not the problem for them, it is that it was unsanctioned. There are many invasions that are sanctioned that we hear little about Yemen, Libya Syria, but what makes Ukraine special is not the level of carnage and death but the defiance.

The defiance of the order of the law of their law.

I ask if ye are willing to die for Ukraine, because what must we do to maintain the order? How far are we willing to push it?

Would a situation of Ukraine being annexed be intolerable?

How many of ye could even pinpoint Ukraine on a map in January?

We care and are outraged because we are told to be outraged, it is all part of "their" message.

"Normies" it is called, to not think independently. To be one of these who don't form their own opinions based on personal research and reflection, but simply regurgitate what ye have heard. The reason why these are"normies" are because they constitute about 85% of any population.

Normies are on the left, on the right but especially in the centre. Their interest are trivial like sports, celebrity gossip or some kind of hobby that means nothing like knitting. As well as of course partying, dating and children.

Not that there is anything wrong with the later but normies don't care about the world at large and are always caught unaware when something fundamental changes.

Now in current year Normies are the most hardlines against Putin, because that is what they have been told to be, he is AH reincarnated afterall right?

And they do a lot to support Ukraine, they raise the Ukrainian flag, they paint pictures of it, put bumper stickers on their cars, and of course talk to all of their friends just how much they support Ukraine and how evil Putin and the Russians are. Except for the good russians of course who opposes Putin and the war and will storm the Kremlin any day now, and put a bullet though his head, or something like that.

But what these normies don't want, and in fact cannot even imagine is to suffer actual hardships themselves.

The sanctions against Russia have not helped, they have only hurt the west, and the people living her, especially in Europe. We havn't seen anything yet, not compared to what is to come.

And now Putin have expanded the war, he called in reserves and annexed territories of Ukraine.

Of course the normies believe because that is what they have been told that these reserves, these conscripts wont make a difference because Putin have tried for 7 months to crush Ukraine and failed with his best and brightest.

Therefore this is a sign of complete desperation that herald the complete collapse of the Russian Federation.

If ye believe that, ye properly also believe in Santa Claus.

This changes everything, it means that Russia is finally getting serious and it means that they will not leave Ukraine until they feel that their mission is completed. Again it is not up to us and what we feel, it is what she feels, what Russia feels.

And Ukraine will lose.

The only two things she had going for her was that Russia was limiting her involvement to her "special military operation" and that the west supplied her with and endless stream of weapons.

There was never any victory conditions for Ukraine, only a negotiated truce that Russia could accept, and the lines are very hard now. With Putin's deceleration of annexation this is total war.

The west can withdraw, or it can go all in. These are our options.

Withdrawing means accepting the inevitable, that Russia will win, and it means in time to negotiate with Russia for its resources on abandoning sanctions against it.

It means in short an admission that we do not set the rules, and that Russia is our equal, not a rogue state or "misbehaving child" that needs to be taught a lesson.

Going all in means world war three, and that means nukes.

Russia cannot win a nuclear war with the west, this have been said many times, especially in America and technically that is true.

But it is also true that America cannot win a nuclear war against Russia, because in a nuclear war there is no winners. Only loosers, it is called Mutually Assured Destruction.

This is the worst case scenario, and it will come if we keep raising the tension if we never talk to Putin, never tries appeasement and rapprochement, but instead are gun ho on punishing a rogue nation, believing that our rules are undeniable and our authority absolute.

Would you die for Ukraine?

I am not saying that it is good that this country is going to disappear, but it could be a lot worse, and we need to think practically, not ideological. Ideology will get us killed, and I for one don't want that.

For these who don’t know me, my main creative interest are the hama mini 2,5mm plastic beads and writing stories, that I orcassionally try to draws character from. However academically I have a dual mayor in Philosophy and Economics. In order to not having to write lesser versions of this multiple times in comment entries; and to properly explain my position to people who think I may hate their country of America; I will here write a short history of money, so I can explain just how central the USA is to the system today and also how precarious the current situation is.         1 Ancient history  2 John Law       3 The Classical gold standard       4 Is war good for the economy?

5 The Road to Bretton Woods 6 American zenith 7 Petrodollar and stragflation 8 Triffins dilemma       9 To Infinity and Beyond

10 Peak madness 11 Real Value

12 The four evils 13 Complexity 14 The End 15 Conclusion   I) Ancient History The story of money begins in ancient Egypt where before the invention of proper money people used gold springs that they cut pieces of in order to pay, even there gold was central, as it was, is and will always be, a universally desired commodity. But it wasn’t until the sixth century BC in Lydia (eastern shore of Anatolia) when true money came into existence when the fabled King Croesus stamped a specific weight and purity of gold with his seal thus creating the first coins. Croesus name have gone throughout history as the name of someone famously wealth, and one could not assume anything less from the very inventor of money. Under him, Lydia became exceptionally wealthy. But that also attracted powerful enemies, in the form of  the Persians. When Lydia fell, Persia was perfectly positioned to invade Greece at the onset of the fifth century BC. This war is famous due to the historian Herodotus it is from here that we have the run of Marathon and where the great king of Sparta Leonidas fell. It ended with Greek victory but it is the second war that followed, the one where Athens and Sparta fought (The Peloponnesian War) that is of interest to us. Because this is the first time in recorded history that we had a hyperinflation. Until this point money was simply a weight in gold, but Croesus earlier invention of coins now meant that we had a standardised and fungible token that could be used as payment of goods. This was of no problem as long as the coins were worth their weight in gold, but as the war with Sparta dragged on and became more and more expensive, the Athenian states income simply did not match their expenditures. That is when they got the idea of mixing in a little copper with the coins they collected in taxation. At first this had no noticeable effect on the economy. The state could now run a deficit and pay everyone with its devalued currency, but slowly this started to affect prices, because as ye may or may not know *inflation IS an increase in the currency supply*. The prices simply rose to reflect the true value of the devalued now mostly copper coins. Another thing that came into effect was Gresham’s law. That is that bad money drives out good money, or that people tend to hoard what is precious and spend what is not. This meant that the people of Athens was all saving their old pure gold coins and spending their new debased currency. The story ends as the story always does for these partaking in monetary debasement, namely the collapse of the Athenian economy and the surrender and occupation of Athens itself, by their Spartan enemies. Centuries later with the Rise of Rome were also the rise their currency the denarius. A pure silver coin that was the basis of all commerce in the great and vast Roman Empire. A pure coin is sign of monetary soundness, but the lure of debasement is ever present for any statesman as it promises to give them something for nothing. And Rome had a big warfare and welfare state that was always hungry for more. The Roman state gradually debased their currency again by mixing in copper, but also with coin clipping, that is cutting of the corner of the coin, to get just a little bit of silver from it, which could than late be smelted into new coins. Rome also ended up falling, and although there are many theories as to why, the one that I have always favoured is that it was monetary. Romes warfare and welfare state coasted more than it could gain from taxation and rapid inflation was the result, which ended with a general collapse of their supply chains and a fragmentation. Their hybris ended up costing them everything and cast the world into a dark age. The second dark age in recorded history but that is besides the point. Part of the Point is when Emperor Diocletian issued his Edit of Maximum Prices in 301AD, which was like an exertive action of price control. Enforced with the full power and might of the state with the worst punishment being death for defying it and taking more, people still choose to do so. Why? Because their choices was a possible death by the state if they got discovered, or a certain death by starvation if they followed the rules. Prices reflect the supply of goods in the economy, and no ground stumping by a president or emperor can change this fact, it would be like fighting the tide. It was because of this total collapse, that moneylending (earning money from money itself) and debasement were so anathema in the middle ages.   II) John Law We have to go up to the beginning of the modern period before we really see anything of that scale again. John Law 1671-1729 was an English conman that after things were getting too hot for him in England fled to France where he charmed the Duke of Orleans (the prime minister of France) and convinced him of putting him in charge of the France economy with a new something for nothing scheme in the form of paper fiat currency. His theory was that money creation was good for the economy, and paper fiat currencies superior to gold. It ended again with a total collapse, and the rise and fall of John Law is an interesting subject of study in its won right. He should be mentioned because he was the spiritual grandfather to the fiat currencies who would later take over the world.   III) The Classical gold standard After the French revolution, after the Napoleonic wars, and all of the chaos it brought with it. We entered a relatively peaceful time in the 19th century from the Congress of Vienna in 1815 till the outbreak of world war one a hundred years later in 1914. This was the time when the classical gold standard was adopted, where everyone agreed to use gold as money and no one debased their currencies. The stability of gold resulted in an era of great progress and prosperity for all.   The Great War, now known as World War One, shattered that peace, and the optimistic belief in the future as ever brighter. These who fought in world war one was known as the Lost Generation. They were lost not simply because so many died, but because they lost faith, faith in the future and in the western civilisation who had turned Europes beautiful countryside into a killing field.   But it was in this carnage that one power rose to prominence. The United States of America. Until the outbreak of world war one the USA had been a regional power only, interested only in the western hemisphere and as a result it had been ignored by the combatting nations, to their peril.   IV) Is war good for the economy? It is said in America, that war is good for the economy, as it was world war two that brought America out of the great depression. And that is technically true, but only under the condition that you are not in it. America only joined world war one in 1917 and only world war two in 1942, and no fighting ever took place on American soil. While English, German and French infrastructures were destroyed in the fighting, Americas stood untouched and only ramped up speed as the fighting intensified. America was war profiteering and doing the two world wars thousands of tons of gold was flowing into America, as payment from the combatting nations for American made goods. What happened in 1914 with the outbreak of world war one, was that the combatting nations immediately suspended their currencies convertibility into gold.   V) The Road to Bretton Woods In America another tragedy happened in 1913, when the third central bank of America, the Federal Reserve was created and the 16th amendment passed that allowed the federal government to levy a direct tax on peoples income. This event can in turn be traced back to the 1910 Jekyll Island meeting, where a conspiracy made up of the most powerful men at the time (often called the “robber barons”) drafted the bill that would later become the Federal Reserve act and the 16th Amendment.   Regardless, before the great depression, that everyone knows and that was blamed on gold, the US had a small forgotten depression in 1920 that was over in less than a year because they did NOT interfere, and allowed the market to function. President Hoover was a big interventionist and Roosevelt was elected on the promise of keeping the gold standard alive. The gold standard by the way had been on shaky ground after the war. What replaced the classical gold standard with general convertibility and small coins in circulation was the Gold Exchange standard, that had the United Kingdom and the United States as their hub with a 40% backing. Redeemability was only for these who could buy 400oz at once, and not the quarter oz that the old British sovereigns were in. However, Winston Churchill who as the time was Chancellor of the Exchequer made the fatal mistake after the war to repeg the pound to the pre war price of gold. This caused a massive deflation, which locked the united kingdom in a depression after the war. In Germany of course we had the famous Weimar hyperinflation, when the paper mark was printed to oblivion in order to pay for the war. Both of these things were the result of dishonestly from politician and not the flaw of gold.   But as I said FDR was elected in 1932 on the promise of protecting the gold standard. However he had barely become president before passing his infamous executive Order 6102 on April 5 1933. That made gold ownership in the United States illegal. See a dollar is a gold and silver coin, a federal reserve note is simply a claim check on the money itself. This by the way is the difference between money and currency. Money is no one else’s liability, it can serve as final payment of good and retain its purchasing power over time. Currency on the other hand is simply a claim check on money. The federal reserve note, to take that example is one level of abstraction, and before 1933, anyone could take a 20 dollar note (currency) to their bank and ask to get their money, a 20 dollar gold coin. The note of course have no value on its own, it is just a piece of paper with ink on it, its value are extrinsic, it comes from what it can be redeemed to, namely the gold coin. A second level of abstraction is currency we have in banks. We assume that he banks have our currency and that we can get them when we want to. But that is a lot of ifs and buts and bankruns have proven just how fragile that system is. But more on that later.   Roosevelt confiscated everyone’s gold who at that point was valued at 20 dollars a troy oz. Than after he had finished his collection he devalued the dollar to 35 dollars an oz, a 75% devaluation. Had he simply devalued the dollar while allowing people to keep their gold, everyone would have had more money as it could have defeated the deflation that had gripped the world, instead he used it as a power grab for the government and the depression continued for another decade.   VI) American zenith In 1944 It was clear that the allied power lead by the United Kingdom were winning the war and the fate of the world (monetary system) had to be decided. This happened in the Bretton Woods conference. In which the US managed to make the nations of the world agree to all go on a dollar standard. Every country on the planet would peg their currency to the dollar, who in turn would peg it to gold at 35$/oz. Only foreign central banks were allowed to redeem their dollars in this system. But the US at this time had over 20’000 tons of gold which it had gained partly though its war profiteering by forcing other nations to pay for their imports with gold and partly from what FDR stole from the citizens of the United States. 20 thousand tons were about two thirds of all the worlds known gold reserves so it was compelling argument in 1944 that the dollar was “as good as gold”. We see this claim often throughout history, that many things are “as good as gold” but in reality of course nothing that are not gold are as good as gold. Regardless, we had the dollar standard, and the US entered the war just in time to put its massive army on European soil, justified of course by the soviet union who did the same. Germany who since the earliest middle ages had been central to Europe were now divided in two, a western (American) sector, and an eastern (Russian) sector. The victorious British empire who had done the bulk of the fighting against the Nazis in the west quickly fell apart following the war having completely exhausted itself. America stepped in to fill the gap. Now America was The Empire, the leader of the free world. It had a rival of course in the form of the USSR and the communist block. America and its allies became known as the first world, while the soviet union and the nations orientating towards them and communism became the second world. Third world referred to the unaligned nations. These were often poor, hence why the third world have become an euphemism for a poor country.   Regardless empire is expensive. America first exerted its imperial authority in the Korean War, where it successfully defended South Korea but failed in crushing North Korea thanks to Chinese intervention. It was however the Vietnam War that really cost America its gold. Earlier American government had tried to keep a relatively balanced budget in order to ensure monetary stability. But with Lyndon B. Johnsons ascendency to presidency things changed. Launching his Great Society Program he started on a national campaign against poverty in the united states, while at the same time also ramping up the war effort in Vietnam. He forgot rule #1 in economics, you can’t get something for nothing, and as a result the solvency of the dollar came into question. The draining had started earlier so we can’t pin everything on Johnson, but his politics certainly exacerbated the problems. America tried to pressure its allies to not exercise their right under Bretton woods to redeem their dollars for gold, and to a certain degree this helped, especially for countries like west Germany who at the time (and remains so today) were under de facto US military occupation. But France under President Gaulle called Americas bluff when they in 1966 withdraw from the NATO alliance, so they unencumbered by American bullying could redeem their dollars for gold. And they did not send a merchant ship to collect it, but a fleet of warships to New York harbour where they were handed over their gold. Gold that they had originally shipped to America in 1940 to avoid it falling into the hands of the Nazis. But as we entered the 1970’s and the president was now called Richard Nixon, the situation grew more and more desperate. Every day the gold hoard of America shrunk. Even their closest ally Great Britain had started to demand gold, so on the 15th of August 1971 Richard Nixon made his famous speech in which he “closed the gold window” aka reneged on Americas promise from 1944 to redeem dollars into gold. This was a de facto US SOVEREIGN DEFAULT   VII) Petrodollar and stragflation There were other options on the table, such as simply doing another devaluing, by admitting the dollars that they had printed and setting a new gold price that reflected reality so that it was neither deflationary nor inflationary, but that would require that the US henceforth kept a balanced budget and moderate its imperial ambitions and Richard Nixon had other plans. In 1973 Henry Kissinger (who believe it or not still lives today at age 98) made a deal with the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, that became the beginning of the petrodollar standard. A global oil monopoly. This monopoly have been challenged several times in recent years, by men like Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, and the response have always been harsh from America, because control of oil is so critical to its power.   However, when we think of the 1970’s what comes to mind is its stagflation, inflation + recession, plus of course the oil crisis, both of which resulted from the default. Gold rose in that period from 35$/oz to 800$/oz in 1980. Many believed at the time that the dollar was dead, that is why so many was buying gold. From 1975 Americans too were allowed to participate in this new gold rush, as Gerald Ford lifted FDRs 1933 ban. The dollar might very well have collapsed back than if not for one man: Paul Volcker, the chairman of the federal reserve. His remedy was to go medieval on inflation, by ranking up interest rates to near 20% That combined with a low national debt at the time of less than 1 trillion was what saved the dollar, and combined with the petrodollar allowed the new system to stabilise. However again Hybris is the eternal foe of empire. The idea that the economy can or even should be managed. It was what the soviet union believed, but America was supposed to be a free capitalist country, not a centrally planned one. It is however important to remember that the difference between freedom and slavery is gradual, there is no hard line, only degrees. And though the centrally planned currency America gradually slipped.   VIII) Triffins dilemma Is the consequence having the reserve currency. While gold is the natural reserve and controlled by no one, the dollar is printed by America, and because America have made it necessary for ALL NATIONS to hold dollar, (so they can get oil). There is an unnatural demand for dollar, that have allowed the US to run consistent deficit since its adaption. If another country tries to run a budget deficit their currency would quickly lose value and collapse to compensate, but when America does it, because it have the reserve, everyone else keeps buying it, but that instead creates a trade deficit, which is when the US imports more than it exports. Its primary export becomes the dollar. This sounds like a great deal for America, the US gets stuff and sends back only digits but the downside is that that undermines the US industrial base, and since the 1971 default most manufacturing have disappeared in America, that have largely deindustrialised. And it is the production that creates the real value, which means that the US gradually, little by little, hollow out its own economy. Replacing sound businesses with empty financial institutions that only supply the world with numbers..   IX) To Infinity and Beyond Paul Volcker were replaced by Alan Greenspan who were known as the Maestro. Like a wizard he was sought to be almost magic, managing the economy carefully though the 1990’s, while at the same time successive Democratic AND Republican president ranked up the national debt over time. When Nixon defaulted in 1971 the US national debt was 400 billion. America was still the worlds largest creditor and although there were import most things were still build in the US. When Mr. Big Government himself, Ronald Reagan went into office the debt was just short of 1 trillion and when he left, it was close to 3. That is when things really went parabolic. Bush started with 5 trillion in 2001 and ended with 10. Obama went from 10 to 20. At the same time “the maestro” caused the dot com bubble and the bubble that followed the “great recession” in 2007 That was also when the balance sheet of the FED started to balloon. Until the great recession the stock market and the currency supply was relatively unconnected, since the correlation have approached 1 (near 100%). The problem with “Quantitative Easing” or QE that the fed started to embark on in 2008 is that it is just thinly disguised debt monetisation. Until 2008 the fed balance sheet was less than a trillion. Most of the debt that the US had taken on between Nixon and Bush 43 were bought by private investors, there were a market for it. But debt monetisation is when a countries central bank directly prints currency to pay for government expenditures. Last year, it went from 4 trillion to 8 trillion. That is a cool doubling and that is by the way the dollars in circulation.   X) Peak madness We are thus close to the end, and although it is foolhardy to call the peak, as there can always be a new summit beyond our view, I would say that we are close to peak madness. Bitcoin, NFT (Non-fungible tokens) and the like are an example of the insanity of the current era. Bitcoin have no intrinsic value, but neither does it have any extrinsic value, it is thus neither worth anything on its own nor worth anything due to a third parties guarantee, it is thus pure fugazi, its price are derived exclusively from the minds of its holders as a form of collective delusion. And NFT of course have no collector value either. They are not like a baseball card that can be rare and subject to tear, it is again just a representation of nothing. It is a symptom of our time, of us being so detached from what real value is.   XI) Real Value What fundamentally differentiate bitcoin from gold is that gold is a metal, and not just a metal but a metal that do not corrode but maintain its inherent properties forever. Even if nobody wanted gold, it would still be useful, and it is because it is useful that it have value. Many other things (like strawberries) have value too, but these often lose their value rather quickly. I can hardly put strawberries away till Christmas and expect them to still delicious or even edible at that point. That is what makes gold money, its eternity.   Real material value, (because there is spiritual value too), are knowhow and capital. That is it. Capital is tools, it is our ability to make stuff and get stuff easier, and knowhow is the knowledge for how to use and repair said tools. From capital and knowhow we get goods. Things we enjoy. There are value in entertainment of course, but digital assets are non rival, they can be copied at no cost and thus have no natural scarcity. Scarcity is not a good thing. Since the dawn of time, we have spent every waking moment trying to think of ways to overcome it, so we could have more, more of everything. It is imperative to understand this, that scarcity is the enemy, and what drives us forward.   What causes empires to fall is when they try to cheat scarcity, when they spend money they don’t have, and devalue the currency. In theory a stable currency don’t have to be money, it don’t have to be a commodity it just have to accurately represent the true value of the goods, because it is the goods that have the true value, the INTRINSIC VALUE, the milk, the wheat, the oil. These things are not essentially different than they were in 1971 and when the price is different it does not symbolise any change in the goods but rather a change in the currency. There are more of it, and thus the price have to be larger. That is the really nefarious thing with inflation. It is a tax. It is not a natural phenomenon it is a way for these at the top to steal purchasing power from these at the bottom. Therefore Johnsons war on poverty failed. When the state creates debt, it steals purchasing power from these at the bottom of society, it causes inequality, and it makes these at the rich not due to their virtues of creating great value, but simply for being closer to the currency printing. That is why being a stockbroker is so profitable, while being a business owner is not. The man who own a factory creates jobs and makes value for society. While the stockbrokers are only supplying numbers.   XII) The four evils. The four evil in this world, that are the cause of all our woes are 1) Fiat currencies, which are based on debt, rather than honest money like gold and silver. 2) Fractional reserve banking which is inherently fraudulent, as they create currency that does not naturally exist. Money are supposed to represent honest labour and the goods we have available in society. A bank does not create value like a factory do, yet are the central source of currencies. 3) financialization which is when baking gradually takes over the economy, and replaces their supply of numbers, with the factories supply of goods. 4) Globalism, which is the co-dependency of nations that gets bound in increasingly complex and fragile supply chains. Which makes the entire system more and more vulnerable, and are again designed to exploit the lowest in society, the workers, who now have to compete with low waged earners in distant countries, again exacerbating the inequality of all.   XIII) Complexity Now ye may ask why things WILL COLLAPSE when they have been going on for so long and the distortions have already become so great is because the economy is a complex system. The central bankers that tries to manage the system all believe that they are dealing with an equilibrium system, so they are constantly surprised when something goes wrong. A complex system is refers to system that have emergent properties, interdependence and adaptability. It is not possible to calculate the behaviour of the system from having perfect information about the individual parts. An example of a complex system can be something as simple as snow on a mountaintop. What makes complex system so dangerous is that the risk of collapse goes up exponentially with their size. Every time a complex system doubles in size the strain on that system goes up by a factor of 8. A wise ski resort would ensure that there is never too much snow on the mountainsides by using controlled explosions to set of avalanches in time and places where no one will be hurt. But that is not what the worlds central banks have done. They reacted to the financial crisis in 2008 (that they themselves had created) by putting up barriers around the figurative mountain, in order to prevent any new avalanches any new recessions. But recessions are the economy’s way of detoxifying itself, to bring overvalued assets down to fair value, preventing recessions are like preventing a hangover by continuously remaining drunk, it allows much more debt to be build up than naturally possible, and it will reach a point when it cannot be held back. The result from this inevitable debt collapse is unimaginable, but it will be cataclysmic. However regardless of the consequences we need it to happen, because everything will become worse and worse until the system breaks, for everyone that is, but for a tiny minority.   “Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin... Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again... Take this great power away from them and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in... But, if you want to continue to be a slave of the bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers continue to create money and control credit.” Sir Josiah Stamp.   IVX) The End Is neigh is the saying of doomsayer since time immemorial. I will not say that the world at large is coming to an end but the system as is now are in its final spasm before the sweet release of death. And we can see that with the Wuhan flu and the reactions to it. It was in 2020 that the FED balance sheet doubled, after they had tried and failed to shrink it again. Not only was the number of dollars in circulation doubled in a year but the shutdowns put a real supply crunch on the goods available for consumption. All of this is a lethal cocktail that hints of imminent demise. The fall of Kabul on the very day of the dollars as a fiat currencies gold university (August 15) is also a very bad omen, after all the soviets retreat happened only a year before the fall of the Berlin Wall, so we might very soon see the End of America as we have known it for a century, as the world premier power.   VX) Conclusion Money is gold and silver as they are universally desirable due to their inherent properties and unchanging nature. States have always sought to devalue their currencies in order to try and get something for nothing, but this have been at the detriment of their citizens, specifically the poorest and worst of in their society, and ultimately lead to the downfall of that nation. America is the current empire and have partaken in an unparalleled exercise of monetary control. While America rose to power from being a production power house they have abandoned that role in favour of financial control. But financialization gradually hollows out the economy, leaving it as an empty husk. The effect of inflation have started to show, and shortages to develop. These will only be exacerbated in the years to come. The expected response from the FED will be increased money printing and more deficit spending who after half a century of living above their means would be unable to do otherwise. This will lead to a hyperinflationary collapse of the dollar and a rapid disintegration of the imperial influence of America. Much like we saw with the soviet union in 1991 outlying regions and allies will be abandoned, and crime will rise rapidly. There are too many unknowns what a loss of imperial power will mean for the US, of whether the country will rise again or fall to the annals of history.

I am somewhat of a philosopher, but what written little down, at least on deviantart. I have been encouraged to list a few of my findings and today i will summarize what I call the six principles.

The six principles are an attempt to organise the most basic order derived from natural law.

1st principle: God

This is the principle of principles, the idea that there is such a thing as principles, namely absolute imperatives that transcends any human thought or cognition. This principle seeks to illustrate the externality of principles, they are not an invention but a discovery.

2nd principle antroprocentrism

Mankind is created in the image of God. A sentence that should be uncontroversial, but for atheists that reject the first principle it is very controversial, but the logical moral consequence of being an atheist is deep in deed which i will illustrate in a later post.

This principle is a limiter, and it is an appeal to the individual.

It is the principle that dictates that the principles apply only to individuals and only to humans.

There are these who thinks that groups have rights, and there are these who thinks that animals have rights, both are wrong, both are wrong but for different reasons.

Certain animal rights activist seeks to put animals up to the ranks of humans, but all they attain are to pull humans down to the level of an animal.

There are too many of them, their lives too trivial, and it is quite impossible to live without killing directly or indirectly animals. And to claim that killing animals in itself is wrong leads to the disturbing conclusion that predators are evil, and that there is moral virtue in being a prey.

I will not go into further details but be free to comment.

3rd principle justice.

Put simply, this the principle that we must always be considered innocent until proven guilty, and that everyone have the right to meet their accuser an defend themselves accordingly. Justice is the very goal of a good society, the first principle simply states that there is such a thing as good and, (2nd) who is included in it.

4th principle Liberty

The principle of liberty is the first of our (natural) Rights, it is the right to freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of everything that does not infringe of the freedom of others.

To violate this principle is malum in se (inherently evil) and the classical crimes are rape, abduction and slavery.

5th principle Property

The principle that we have the right to the fruit of our own labour. Socialist in particular hates this as they believe they have the right to other peoples labour, but socialism as ye may know is derived from atheism and incompatible with Christianity or indeed any form of principle (one can't be a socialist Buddhist either)

It is quite essential that our property is respected, as it is from where all prosperity is derived. Socialists likes to ask "where does poverty comes from" but that is a misnomer, the correct question is "where does prosperity comes from" Because poverty is the natural state of mankind, it does not come from anywhere. Like gravity there is a force that seeks to draw us there and it requires every skill we have to prevent that destination.

Socialists by rejecting the right to property are denying the very source to all prosperity, namely capital.

Capital comes from savings, which is surplus accumulated resources attained from living beneath our means. When we have saved sufficiently we invest this surplus, not in consumption but in the production of tools that will make further production easier. These tools are what is called capital, and these who own them capitalists.

Hard work by itself does not provide prosperity, as the human body is weak and capable of little, prosperity comes from capital, and from the knowledge (knowhow) to use said capital.

Take a man with a scythe and a man with a combine harvester, and assume that both are equally hard working and skilled, who will be able to harvest the most grain by sunset?

The one with the most efficient form of capital of course.

Socialism fails because it destroys the incentive to create and maintain capital, and while it puppets sympathy for the worker, the workers wishes are also ignored,as these who chooses to sell their time to the capitalist for a secure paycheck does so with open eyes, they prefer the safety of a paycheck over the risk of earning no profit. The capitalist bears the risk and suffers the consequence of bankruptcy.

To violate this principle is malum in se (inherently evil) and examples of this are theft, robbery, fraud and embezzlement.

6th principle Life

The final principle is life, or more specifically human life, that unlike animals have absolute value. So you can't make moral calculations regarding human lives, as infinity + infinity = infinity (so five lives or a million lives are the same as one life) Which is also the correct answer to "the trolley problem" where the choices are to watch five people die or to commit murder.

It is the final principle because liberty and property are more important. There are cases where we should sacrifice our lives for our liberty, but we should never do the opposite as doing so means that we will lose everything.

To violate this principle is malum in se, and the classical example is murder.

And to summarise the Right of law.

The first order is the natural law, as expressed here,

the second order is the will of the people, who is the absolute sovereign

the third order is the will of the people expressed congruently in a constitution

the fourth order is the legislative assembly that rule according to the constitution (that are made according to the will of the people, that adhere to the Natural Law)

International agreements and treaties like the UN and the EU always comes below that as a fifth order, that is they must be subordinate to the assembly not the other way around.

That is the difference between being a nationalist and being a globalist, as only nationalist respect the concept of sovereignty, the will of people and the will of God.