All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 25, 2010 - InfoWars Special Reports
01:01:19
20101025_SpecialReport-2_Alex
Source
| Copy link to current segment Download episode

Time Text
For listeners and viewers of Infowars.com and PrisonPlanet.tv, Webster Griffin Tarpley really needs no introduction.
But it is important for some who don't know who Mr. Tarpley is to tell them that he is an accomplished author, researcher.
He has, of course, degrees in history and economics.
And so now our interview in-depth, never before seen, with Webster Griffin Tarpley.
When we look at the environmental fanatics, the ecological extremists, the Malthusians and Neo-Malthusians of the Obama regime, we will see that one of their common denominators is a hatred for science, technology, and industry.
They believe that there are only two main problems for human civilization.
They would say those two problems are overpopulation and industrial pollution.
And everything they do comes from a desire to restrain population growth or to reduce population.
And they're willing to contemplate means that we can only describe as genocide.
And then industrial pollution, and they've gone from their hysteria about chlorofluorocarbons, and then the ozone hole, acid rain, and today their favorite topic, of course, is the greenhouse effect, global warming, carbon footprints, and so forth.
What they are expressing with this is, of course, from the scientific point of view, the work of charlatans, fanatics, obscurantists, irrationalists, and so forth.
But this is a deep-seated ideological impulse of oligarchy per se.
If you go back to the Greek historians, in the time of Thucydides, And we're talking about 400 B.C.
In the time of Thucydides, and sometimes thought to be Thucydides, but it's a separate person, there's a writer called the Old Oligarch.
He has no name.
We don't know what his name was, but he's called the Old Oligarch.
And the Old Oligarch writes that he hates the Athenian navy.
Because the Athenian Navy is a high technology operation and it's allowing social mobility for plebeian and proletarian types from the lower classes and thereby threatening the class privileges of people like the old oligarch.
He also says that he hates the long walls that were built from Athens to Piraeus, so that Athens could be relatively invulnerable to land attacks by the army of Sparta, which of course was the most oligarchical of all the Greek states.
So if we look at the old oligarch, he hates technology, and he wants oligarchical foreign armies to come in and take over his own country, so that he can keep his privileges.
This same impulse is what we see expressed In the modern environmentalist fanaticism of people who think that industry itself is a problem.
The finance oligarch looks at industry as an object of asset stripping.
He wants to get his hands on it so that he can liquidate it and make a bundle of money in the process.
The other aspect of what these people believe is that the world is always overpopulated.
This does not depend on the empirical state of the world from any point of view.
If you go back to the treatment of the Trojan War in Greek literature, you will see that the official explanation, why did there have to be a Trojan War for ten years, killing all those people between the Greeks and the Trojans?
And the answer in certain oligarchical writers of Greece is that the world was overpopulated.
There were too many humans pressing down on the breast of Mother Earth, and they had to be exterminated.
And the Trojan War was the chosen means of doing that.
So, the prejudices of the oligarchy are timeless.
They hate science, they hate technology, they hate industry, and they're also convinced that the world is overpopulated.
In the 19th century, Maybe in the wake of the Krakatoa volcanic eruption, which caused some cloud cover around the world for a couple of years, although it was a purely natural process, you had writers like John Ruskin and a group of proto-fascists and extremists among British academia, who came out then with the additional idea that pollution was the principal product of
Human society and this was obviously a way to attack industrialism to blame pollution on industry.
This is Ruskin's infamous storm cloud of the 19th century and related things and since then the British oligarchy naturally is the most extreme expression of these tendencies up to the time of Prince Philip, right, who says that if he could he would like to be reincarnated as a deadly virus to come back and kill people and solve the problem of global overpopulation.
Now I submit that not even Hitler goes quite as far as Prince Philip in public statements at least about what it is that he wants to do.
In the autumn of 2009, we've had some important international financial meetings.
We've had the Group of 20 meeting in Pittsburgh, and we've had the Istanbul annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund.
And out of this emerges I think a political project of the US-British oligarchs, joined by the European Central Bank and their followers in Japan, which comes down to this.
The International Monetary Fund will be made into the center of a world economic dictatorship.
Back in the 1920s and 30s, Lord Montague Norman of the Bank of England was called the currency dictator of Europe.
Well, this time around, the currency dictator of the world is Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former finance minister of France, who is the boss of the International Monetary Fund, and within that same orbit you've got the World Bank and a series of other institutions.
And the way they want to do this is to make the IMF The central bank of all central banks.
So, we have the Federal Reserve, bad enough.
European Central Bank, extremely bad.
Bank of Japan, also bad.
But above them, yet another layer of oligarchical power, plastered on top of the Fed, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan, is the IMF, with regulatory capabilities, but also as a lender of last resort to the national central banks.
Let's assume we had a panic run on the Federal Reserve.
Perfectly feasible.
It already happened in 1932 to 1933 when you had the great Herbert Hoover U.S.
banking crisis.
There were a lot of banks who were members of the Federal Reserve who had put money in and wanted to get it out.
And if that had continued through 1933, you would have had a panic run on the Federal Reserve.
So now what we've got is the idea of the IMF Being able to come in as the lender of last resort for national central banks, except you don't get that money from the IMF for free.
If the IMF gets on your case, you are required to sign a letter of intent in which you express your commitment to observe the conditionalities of the IMF.
And they have a very specific economic doctrine.
It's called the Washington Consensus.
And that is deregulation, privatization, the destruction of your social safety net.
It would mean union busting.
If you have a state sector, they want to destroy that.
They want to have the race to the bottom across the board.
Now what happens if the U.S.
goes bankrupt and has to turn to the IMF for loans?
At that point U.S.
sovereignty ceases to exist and you're going to have Dominique Strauss-Kahn or some similar cosmopolitan finance oligarch Sitting in Washington, because here's where the IMF is, but imposing a worldwide financial dictatorship on the U.S.
with, of course, the British having the inside track to the kind of stuff that gets done.
It's ironic, because the money that the IMF uses comes from the member states.
Most people are not aware that among its many crimes, and this is one of the worst crimes, the Obama regime has transferred one hundred billion u.s.
dollars to the international monetary fund at the same time the california was collapsing illinois was going to hell new york was facing bankruptcy and uh... communities across the nation were experiencing uh... tremendous hardships obama finds a hundred billion dollars for the i m f now what do they do with that the currency For the New World Finance Dictatorship is already there.
It's Special Drawing Rights, SDRs.
This is something that emerged after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, after Nixon destroyed Bretton Woods with British assistance in August 15th, 1971.
They created special drawing rights.
They called it paper gold.
Of course, it's not gold.
At the beginning, it was a basket of currencies.
That has evolved.
It's a purely paper creation.
You can go to the website of the International Monetary Fund any day, and you will see all of the currencies of the world expressed as SDRs, in terms of special drawing rights.
So that's your supranational currency, and the U.S.
has already given $100 billion To prop that up.
And that's in the program of a trillion dollars that has been pledged by the other main financial powers, by the Japanese, the Europeans, and others.
So they're hoping to stock up on one trillion dollars total in various currencies and use that as reserves to back up the special drawing rights.
Now there's nothing worse than this.
The mentality of this IMF is called the Washington Consensus.
They have no success stories to point to.
They always fail.
They always increase poverty, increase economic backwardness, shut down industries, increase unemployment, and so on down the line.
From Bolivia to Poland to Russia in the 1990s, IMF shock therapy is widely regarded as economic death.
Argentina a couple of years ago owed the IMF ten billion dollars and they realized the only way to get their economy
in order Was to get out from under the IMF get the IMF out of their
country off their case So president Kirchner of Argentina borrowed ten billion
from Chavez of Venezuela To pay off the IMF and get them out
Countries are generally much better off borrowing from another country from a peer rather than borrowing from this
overreaching overarching supernational dictatorial
Empire that comes in and tells you what to do This has gone so far that the Washington Consensus is being widely rejected.
Nobody wants to go under this.
There's now the Beijing Consensus.
And the Beijing Consensus goes like this.
First of all, don't interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign states.
And we want that for ourselves.
We better give it to others.
And the second point is, 50-50.
Everything equal.
No overwhelming advantage for one side or the other.
The special drawing rights is what is happening.
There were other hypothetical options, fallback options, backburner options, regional currencies and things like this.
But what is actually going on in the world, and what you've given $100 billion for, is special drawing rights, SDRs.
We're in a dollar crisis, and there's no doubt that we're in a dollar crisis.
It is impossible now for the U.S.
dollar to remain the single world reserve currency.
The U.S.
dollar cannot do that anymore.
The problem is, if you look at the other candidates, the euro and the yen, we see that they are less able to be the sole unique world reserve currency.
And the worst of all possible worlds is a synthetic, supranational currency like the special drawing rights.
If we go back to 1944 at Bretton Woods, Lord Keynes, a very evil British imperialist with left cover, came to Bretton Woods in 1944 to try to undermine the
dollar and attack the dollar. He proposed something called Bancor, and Bancor is pretty much special
drawing rights. It was a synthetic imperialist currency unit that would be used as a world
reserve currency. Keynes wanted to prevent countries from having balance of payment surpluses.
He wanted to stop them from developing by preventing them from exporting. This is
typical British imperialist thinking represented by Keynes. So people today have to realize that
the proposal to create a synthetic, hoked up, supernational currency is the worst possible
outcome. Now, President Medvedev of Russia showed this coin at a recent international summit.
I'm sure President Medvedev knows better than anybody that that coin is not by any stretch of the imagination going to represent a world reserve currency.
I think what he's trying to do is to prod the United States and others into constructive negotiations on this subject, which should happen.
Naturally, you're going to have to do some Pulling of teeth, right?
Obama, Geithner, Summers, Volker, these characters are hysterically fanatically opposed to any kind of constructive negotiation.
And then you've got the British, who would like to blow up the entire world system and play last man standing.
In other words, to play the card of chaos and confusion in the world monetary system, with the hope that the dollar goes down, the euro goes down, the yen goes down, the ruble goes down, and believe it or not, The decrepit, withered mummy of the British pound is the last man standing and gets all the hot money in the world and somehow comes out of this alive.
I don't think there's any way to do that, but they're trying.
And that makes the British, in some ways, the biggest loose cannon in the entire current situation.
If you want to have a reserve currency, if you want to be a reserve currency, you've got to have a certain amount of basic equipment.
You can't just make this up.
What you've got to have, among other things, is a market like the U.S.
Treasury market.
It is the most liquid market in the world.
It's an area where Large, large sums of money pass through it every day.
Treasury bills, treasury bonds, treasury notes.
It's a huge market, and you can put in a treasury bill, and you can be sure that cash will come out in the form of dollars.
It's the most liquid market in the world.
If you want to be a reserve currency, it means that central banks and other banks around the world are going to start holding that currency.
If you don't have something approaching the U.S.
Treasury market, you're not going to be qualified.
The Japanese have that to some extent, the Euro I think perhaps a little bit less.
So what I would see as the way out of this is a negotiated solution where you recognize
that the dollar, the Euro, the yen, the ruble join together with a possible Arab currency
and a probable Latin American regional currency and have an interlocking set of reserve currencies.
People in the Far East might want to keep their reserves in.
Yen.
People in Europe will use Euros.
In North America it'll be dollars, and similarly in other parts of the world.
It's not a basket of currencies.
It's an interlocking set of currencies that can be used as reserve currencies.
The most important thing is you've got to have fixed parities among them.
You've got to know, if you're buying a turnkey factory, you've got to know what a dollar is worth twelve 24, 36 months down the line, because that's when you're going to have to pay.
You don't want it to be 30% more or 30% less.
It's all got to be predictable.
That's fixed parities.
Narrow bands of oscillation among these currencies, in the same way we had it under Bretton Woods from 1944 to 1971, until the British destroyed that system.
The other thing you've got to have is gold settlement.
Not that gold is the limit of the credit you can produce, because there's not enough gold, but what you can do ...is to have clearing among countries.
At the end of the year, you add up what did I sell you, what did you sell me, and who owes what to whom.
And then, after doing the clearing, you settle that in gold.
Meaning that gold comes on the scene as an indispensable reality principle.
So you can't just run balance of payments deficits of 500 billion to a trillion dollars, the way the U.S.
has been doing over the past several decades.
The track record of the IMF is the destruction of third world economies.
Deindustrialization, deregulation, union busting, privatization, the destruction of a social safety net.
That's what they've done any time that a third world country has been forced to turn to the IMF for help.
The main thing that they lose, of course, is national sovereignty.
You're no longer independent if you're dealing with the IMF.
Now, the U.S.
has paid a price for those policies.
Because what the IMF does to third world countries is one of the reasons why U.S.
exports have stagnated so much.
The U.S.
used to have an industrial capability To export things that third world countries needed and would have been glad to buy if they could have had a credit facility to do it.
So the IMF comes in and says, hey you third world countries, we're going to drive you into poverty and we're going to make sure that you pay your debts.
But this also means that the demand for US industrial exports was never there.
So that's one of the structural features of the post-World War II economy.
Other countries have had to go to the IMF.
The French had to go to the IMF in the 1950s.
During the 1970s, you had Italy going to the IMF.
Tremendous humiliation.
The British had to go to the IMF in the mid-70s.
And every time you go to the IMF, you sign one of those poisoned letters of conditionalities, and you submit to the Washington Consensus, free market, and it destroys your economy.
So, the danger now is, and has been for some time, that the US itself will have to submit to this Frankenstein's
monster, which the US created.
created at Bretton Woods in 1944, but which is now going to come back to haunt us as an instrument of this international finance oligarchy, right?
The people like Soros and Maurice Strong and Dominique Strauss-Kahn and the rest of this cosmopolitan financier oligarchy would love to asset strip the U.S.
under IMF dictatorship and conditionality.
A good example of Obama's foreign policy is Iran.
Now the neocons, Cheney and others wanted to bomb Iran and they tried very hard to bomb Iran.
They fell short during 2007 with the rogue B-52 affair at the time of the Kenny Bunkport warning, August-September 2007.
Now we have a foreign policy not inspired by neocons but by Zbigniew Brzezinski.
The idea here is always that the Middle East is not the main theater, that you've got to have a worldwide policy, and that the question of world domination, world supremacy, involves China, Russia, and India more than anybody in the Middle East.
Brzezinski does not want to attack Iran.
Brzezinski has actually issued a statement saying he wants US fighter jets to shoot down the Israeli Air Force if they try to bomb Iran.
Very interesting statement.
He called it the USS Liberty in reverse.
That got a lot of attention.
Why is it that Brzezinski doesn't want the attack on Iran?
He has greater things in store for Iran.
He doesn't want Iran at war with the United States.
That's a loser.
That's going to cost you a lot, and you're going to lose.
You'll probably collapse in the process.
He wants Iran at war with Russia, or with China, or with both, or at least Iran cutting off the oil to China and locked in a tremendous conflict with Russia about the oil of the Caspian Sea and other regional issues.
The Obama policy has been, first of all, to continue the Bush destabilization of Iran.
This took the form of an attempted color revolution, a CIA people power coup, a velvet revolution, this time the Green Revolution, the Green Revolution of Tehran.
We had the Orange Revolution of Kiev, Ukraine.
We had the Roses Revolution of Tiflis, Georgia.
Now we've got the Green Revolution of Tehran, Iran.
Who is involved?
Mousavi, the foreign minister and prime minister of Iran during the 1980s, who ran the Iranian side of the Iran-Iraq war, which was a dream scenario for the US and the British.
Imagine, Iran and Iraq Locked in a war with millions of casualties, both of them devastated and taken care of for an entire decade.
As some of them said at the time, the U.S.
and the British wanted that war to go on forever, if possible.
Mousavi made it possible.
Mousavi and Hashemi Rafsanjani, the head of the corrupt and backward malarkey and the bizarre merchants.
So the Mousavi and Rafsanjani faction is the CIA coup faction.
They attempted to overthrow Ahmadinejad.
Who is Ahmadinejad these days?
Ahmadinejad is a military man.
He's from the Pasteran Revolutionary Guard.
He's similar to Putin in his background.
Something like military intelligence.
So, Ahmadinejad is evolving that government more and more towards a traditional military dictatorship.
The mullahs, the religious fanatics, play less and less of a role.
You'd think that the U.S.
would be happy.
If Islamic fundamentalism is so bad, why not be happy that Ahmadinejad is cutting down the power of these mullahs?
But no, it's the opposite.
When you see the Mousavi-Rafsanjani Green Revolution faction in Tehran going into the streets, they chant, death to Russia and death to China.
It means that if they take power, they'll cut off the oil to China and they'll look for quarrels with Russia.
They're resentful because at the time of the attempted coup, Ahmadinejad got immediate support from Russia and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
So that's one side.
...is to mobilize the rich elitists of North Tehran and the desperate housewives of North Tehran into a mob to try to convince the world that Ahmadinejad lost the election, when there's absolutely no proof that he did.
Most of the proof says that Ahmadinejad actually won that election.
The other side of it is regional destabilization.
You've got CIA secret armies working on Iranian territory.
This was the program launched by Bush in 2005 and 2006.
Four hundred million dollars plus, some of it for the color revolution stuff, but some of it also for these terrorist secret armies.
If you look at Iran, they have significant ethnic minorities around the edges.
The Persians are in the middle, but around the edges what do you have?
Facing Iraq you've got the Kurds.
You've got the Arabs in the south of Iran.
There's a whole area called Arabistan, which is very important because it has the oil.
It has the Abadan oil fields and refinery, the Karg Island tanker terminal.
The main oil assets are in an area where there are a lot of Arabs, possibly a majority.
You've got Azeris.
in the northwest of Iran. You've got Turkmen in the northeast.
And you've got Balochistan. The Balochi people are shared among Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.
That's in the east. Now in each of these areas, you've got liberation fronts funded and run by
the CIA and the British. In Arabistan, there's something I call the BP liberation front,
British Petroleum Liberation Front.
They want to have Arabistan or Ahvaz, the idea being that they want to detach the oil areas from Iran and bring it back under the control of the US and the British.
The recent action has been in Balochistan.
A large bombing, suicide bombing, set off at a gathering of officials attended by top commanders of the Pasteran Revolutionary Guards of Iran.
30 to 60 people killed, the ground commander of the Pasteran nationwide killed, and the provincial commander of the same Revolutionary Guards also killed.
This is claimed by an organization called Jundula.
Now Jundula is Almost officially, a branch of the CIA.
It is a part of the CIA secret budget.
We had the London Daily Telegraph in 2005 and 2007 reporting that Jundula is on the U.S.
payroll.
They had a State Department official who was named and a CIA official who was not named saying the U.S.
runs Jundula.
Brian Ross of ABC News on television in 2007 says the U.S.
runs and pays for Jundula.
And you've also got Seymour Hersh, in his famous series of articles in the New Yorker, quoting Robert Baer of the CIA, saying that Jundala is an arm of the U.S.
intelligence community.
So the Iranians are being subjected to terror attacks on the part of the Kurds, this Arabistan
group, the Balochistan group, and others coming up, as Ares and Turkmen not far behind.
The goal, of course, being to destroy the nation states of the Middle East and indeed
worldwide.
The Brzezinski policy, micro states and mini states, not one Iran, but four or five, a
bloodlocked, oil-free Iranistan in the middle, Kurds, Azeris, Arabs, Turkmen, and Balochis
around the edges seceding.
Iraq cut into three parts, Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis.
Pakistan, the same story.
Sindh, Punjab, Waziristan, Balochistan, Pashtunistan, all carved out of Pakistan.
One of the main targets is also Pakistan.
Balochistan, on the Pakistan side, would include the strategic port of Gwadar.
Gwadar is a port In southwest Pakistan today, it just so happens that 40% of the oil tankers in the world sail by the port of Gwadar.
One very obvious thing would be to build a tanker terminal at Gwadar and then build a pipeline up across the Pakistan Energy Corridor and into China, over the Himalayas, above Kashmir.
This would solve the biggest single strategic problem of China, which is how to get oil without having to go on the water, where the Anglo-Americans always dominate and can always harass you.
And it's also a question of saving a sea voyage of about 10,000 to 12,000 miles, about halfway around the world.
If you had an oil pipeline from Iran across the pakistan energy corridor and into china that would be an even better solution in these things can be uh... can be put together
The goal, therefore, of the Anglo-Americans is to destroy Chinese allies and Chinese economic partners wherever they can be found.
Pakistan has got to be broken into pieces.
Balochistan is a key part of that.
And the goal has got nothing to do with the dignity of these various ethnic groups, everything to do with creating a chaos ...and civil war so that no pipeline from Iran into China can go across Pakistani territory.
And that is the jundala card that the CIA is playing under Obama.
At the time of the revolution, everybody said, well, at least Obama's not verbally interfering in Iranian affairs.
And this, of course, means absolutely nothing.
The U.S.
government is intervening.
They are de facto at war with Iran.
Below the threshold of conventional forces.
In other words, it's an irregular war.
It's a guerrilla war, plus political subversion, that's being fermented against Iran, and Obama's up to his neck in it.
Obama's demagogy in the election campaign was to say, Iraq is the bad war, Bush is war, Afghanistan is the good war, the 9-11 justified war, and therefore Obama would escalate that.
So he's delivering what he said.
It's interesting that the left liberals, the people who were most upset about Iraq and Afghanistan, were simply incapable of hearing what Obama said repeatedly.
He demanded the escalation of Afghanistan and unilateral attacks on Pakistani territory to pursue, quote, terrorists.
Now, the real purpose of going into Afghanistan is chaos and confusion in the region.
Drive the Taliban out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan, where they can wage war, civil war, against the central government in Islamabad.
And this has largely happened.
The Swat Valley and South Waziristan are two areas where this has happened.
And they forced the conventional Pakistani army to take up what amounts to a civil war against the Taliban there.
This mainly means the Pashtun people, since that is what most of the Taliban are.
But it also then extends the fact that Pashtunistan, Balochistan, and other Afghan regions
also spill over into Pakistan and Iran.
Now, General McChrystal is a practitioner of torture.
He is a guy who set up torture chambers and torture stations across Iraq.
He's probably the guy who invented Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
It was an absolute propaganda necessity for the U.S.
that Al-Qaeda be present in Iraq.
And it looks like he organized this character Zarqawi, a well-known Patsy, to come out of his Ansar-protected enclave where the U.S.
was shielding him And pledge fealty and loyalty to Osama bin Laden and declare himself a member of Al-Qaeda.
That also is the key to creating a civil war, because the main thing that Zarqawi did was to kill Shiites and other Iranians.
He was not targeting the U.S.
at all.
So this is the handiwork of McChrystal.
When he was nominated, the New York Times said, is this a good choice?
Isn't he pretty heavily implicated in torture and God knows what else?
But he's Obama's hand-picked general.
There's a secret report by McChrystal.
Nobody knows how much he's demanding in terms of additional forces.
Some say 40,000 more.
Some say 60,000 more.
Some say 80,000 more.
So you would then get the US invading force in Afghanistan up to 100,000, 120,000, 140,000.
This war is absolutely hopeless because of the terrain, the size of the territory, and the nature of the population.
It is the graveyard of empires.
The British blundered in there in the 19th century.
Three Afghan wars, they lost all of them.
The Soviet Union broke its sword against Afghanistan in the 1980s, thanks to also Brzezinski's role in making that happen.
So the United States is now trudging along the path that leads to the collapse of empire.
And Obama is leaning in that direction.
During the time that he considered the McChrystal request, he was already sending 13,000 additional support troops into Afghanistan.
This is important strategically because, again, Afghanistan is in the middle of Russia, China, India.
If you want to have a rail line from India to Europe, let's say, it's got to go through the Khyber Pass, meaning Afghanistan.
So it's a purely cynical geopolitical gambit And the U.S.
is running predator drone strikes in Pakistan that have no relation to terrorism.
They attack peaceful civilian populations, villages, and wedding parties with the sole purpose of humiliating the central government in Islamabad and breaking and undermining the sovereignty of Pakistan.
So that's the cynical imperialist racket that Obama is now in the middle of.
If you get the Nobel Prize, you're supposed to be contributing To the decline of standing armies.
Obama does the opposite.
He ran on a platform of 100,000 more troops.
And I'm sure we'll hear about that again.
And if we look at the number of combat troops in the field, it's now 120,000 in Iraq.
And if McChrystal gets what he wants, we will be approaching 200,000 and perhaps 250,000 combined total U.S.
McChrystal gets what he wants, we will be approaching 200,000 and perhaps 250,000 combined
total U.S. forces in the field, in war zones.
That will be comparable to several earlier phases of the Vietnam War.
Usury laws.
Let's go back to a period when, before Volcker, you had a 10% limit on credit card interest rates that were set by the states.
And we could do it, we could do that again.
You want to re-regulate financial markets.
So that it's impossible for Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley to drive up the price of oil to $150 a barrel, the way they did in the summer of 2008.
So with those types of measures, you've stopped speculation or discouraged it, and you've diminished this tremendous weight of zombie banks, because a lot of the zombie banks would be put through liquidation, and their derivatives would simply be written off.
Then you need to nationalize the Federal Reserve.
You've got to get control of the process of creating credit.
You've got to seize the Fed, nationalize it.
It means that zombie bankers and cliques of unaccountable and unelected financiers no longer set policy for the entire United States.
The size of the money supply, the interest rates, and who gets these loans is determined by public laws, discussed and debated openly by Congress, signed by the President.
That's all we have under our system.
Once you have a National Bank of the United States, you start issuing tranches of credit, one trillion dollars at a time.
The only trick you have to do is make sure it goes only for production, for farming, for manufacturing, industry, construction, mining, forestry, scientific research, retail sales, yes, you've got to get the goods to market.
You've also got to put money into transportation, be it rail, freight, and things like this.
If you make sure that it only goes into production, there is no inflation.
As a matter of fact, commodities tend to get cheaper.
The goal of this is to create 30 million productive jobs.
Right now the U.S.
unemployment rate is officially 15 million.
The best guess is that in reality we would need 30 million productive jobs to approach full employment.
If you come forward, if you're an industrialist, if you want to take Detroit auto plants and get them going again, reconvert them and rehire the workers and manufacture something that people need, you get 0%.
But if you're a banker, a speculator, financial services, sorry, you go take your chances in the free market that you admire so much.
You've got credit being offered by the nationalized Fed.
You've got to stimulate lending.
Lending and borrowing.
So you've got lending from the Fed, you've got to find borrowers.
Now the borrowers are hard to find because everybody's so frightened by the panic.
So what you've got to do is to create great projects of infrastructure.
And this is really the heart of the program.
You've got to say that the money coming out of the Fed as 0% public credit goes into specific infrastructure projects that we know will increase the capital stock of the United States and increase the productivity of labor.
The first thing you're going to need is 50,000 miles of the most modern maglev rail.
rebuild the entire collapsing transit systems, be it passenger, freight, commuter rail,
with the most modern maglev technology, pioneered by Germany and now being used in Japan and China,
but not here, even though the technology came out of the US.
1,000 hospitals with about 500 beds each.
You want to have medical care?
First thing you need is hospitals.
We've lost 1,000.
In the rural America and inner cities, hospitals are hard to find.
People die from heart attacks because the hospital is too far away.
Build a thousand of the most modern hospitals and you will get up to what was considered the minimum rate in the Hill-Burton Law of 1946.
It said we should aim at 4.5 hospital beds per thousand population.
Right now we're at 3.2, so we ought to build those hospital beds.
We would need 100 nuclear reactors of the most modern type, fourth generation, high temperature,
pebble bed reactors, 1,000 to 2,000 megawatts each to maintain an electricity grid
and to replace all the reactors that are now becoming increasingly obsolete.
You've got to rebuild the entire interstate highway system.
It was a great thing under Eisenhower, the biggest road building project since the Romans, but it's now falling down.
The Minneapolis Bridge over the Mississippi River, bridges in Connecticut and elsewhere.
That has all got to be rebuilt.
The other thing is water systems.
Drinking water, sewage treatment, waste water, canals and irrigation.
All of that has got to be rebuilt from the bottom up.
So you put that together.
A hundred reactors, a thousand hospitals, 50,000 miles of maglev, the interstates and the water systems.
You have created millions and millions of high-paid jobs in creating capital goods and infrastructure of permanent value.
This is not consumer goods.
This stays with you and gives you a permanent advantage.
The other thing you need is science drivers.
Remember the NASA moonshot?
It generated the spinoffs that gave you computer chips and the whole computer-based economy came out of the space program.
So let's do that again.
Let's put a hundred billion dollars each first into high-energy physics.
Let's get into lasers, let's get into thermonuclear fusion power, and other advanced scientific applications.
Second one is Moon-Mars exploration, colonization on a permanent basis, and industrial production.
Do all this, obviously, together with other interested countries.
But let's begin to go into space on a permanent basis and use that for economic benefits.
The third one is biomedical research.
You're talking about health care.
The only way you can save costs and spend less money in health care, other than genocide, is to find cures.
You want to save money on cancer?
Don't deny people treatment.
Find a cure.
Cure it.
Diabetes, heart disease, and all the other dread diseases can find cures.
So begin to put money into that, and obviously make that an international program too.
The fourth point is, while you're doing all this, you've got to keep people alive.
So you've got to maintain your social safety net.
Full funding, at enhanced levels, for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment benefits, food stamps, minimum wage, and all the rest.
And you've got to think about health care in particular.
Obama is interested in looting health care.
The worst thing that Obama wants to do, in my view, is to cut $500 billion out of Medicare.
You've got to stop that.
The only way you can save money is to find cures.
The fifth point is world trade.
The way out of a depression has to do with stimulating world trade and building it up.
Right now, world trade is one-third below the level of 2008.
So, in the depression so far, we're down 33%, and that seems to be headed downwards again.
So, you've got to have an international monetary approach to this.
Set up a system with fixed parities, gold settlement, the yen, the euro, the dollar, the ruble, the Arabs, the Latin Americans, But the goal of this is not currency stability or anything to do with monetarism per se.
It's to start high technology capital goods exports from those Detroit auto plants that you've reconverted and other facilities in the US.
Start exporting hospitals.
Build a thousand hospitals for China.
Build a thousand hospitals for Russia.
Then look at the great projects of world infrastructure.
that remain undone.
Look at the Bering Strait Bridge Tunnel.
Look at the one for Gibraltar, for the Straits of Sicily.
Connect Japan to the Asian mainland.
Do the Congo-Nile equivalent to the Tennessee Valley Authority.
Do the same thing for the Amazon, the Orinoco, and the Rio de la Plata.
Do it for the Ganges Brahmaputra in Asia and the Mekong as well.
In other words, Get the great projects of world infrastructure that have been on the drawing boards now for decades and do them.
That means a Cape to Cairo, Dakar to Djibouti maglev.
Essentially unite all the land areas of the world using maglev rail so you could deliver a package from any point in the world to any other point within approximately 48 hours on a railroad platform.
And use that then to prepare a further advance, but you'd end the depression you want to do that
You will create 30 million new Highly paid industrial jobs productive jobs in the United
States You will stop the depression you will rebuild the u.s.
Economy economy.
You will improve wages and standards of living.
You will restart productive investment.
You will restore corporate profits of industrial capital.
You will get to full employment.
We haven't seen full employment in this country since 1945.
So that would be quite a change.
And, you will have increased levels of capital investment per job, which is the key for getting actual profits out of this.
My estimate is that you'd be back into a budget surplus within five years, and you'd have a trade surplus within five years, or less.
One of the most cynical and criminal things that the Obama regime has done has been to drive the Detroit automakers into bankruptcy.
This was useless and needless.
These companies should have been nationalized.
They should have been shorn of all their derivatives at General Motors, Acceptance Corporation, and Chrysler Finance, and so forth.
And they should then have been operated for the public good under emergency conditions.
Instead, what Obama did was to drive them into bankruptcy and dish them up ...to asset strippers, hedge fund hyenas, and others, in the form of Ron Bloom, the Maoist sympathizer, and Steve Ratner, a former correspondent of the New York Times, and a former hedge fund operator, and accused of criminality in that.
So Ratner the Rat and Bloom destroyed the U.S.
automobile industry.
They forced the closure of several thousand local dealers, destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs, and destroying productive activity.
Because an auto repair shop is production.
They shut those down.
They closed 40 to 50 auto plants, and hundreds of thousands of workers lost their jobs.
The Michigan unemployment rate is officially about 15% as of the autumn of 2009.
That means in reality it's 25% plus.
That's getting close to the point at which human society and human civilization unravel.
It means you don't have enough tax revenues for police, fire, health, education, and other basic services.
In other words, it's a descent into barbarism.
Same story in California.
California needed $20 to $30 billion to plug a hole in their budget deficit.
Obama giving Wall Street $24 trillion, including about $1 trillion direct from the Treasury.
But of course, no.
He had to refuse any aid to California to prevent the collapse of civilization and the descent into barbarism there.
California now leads the nation in Obamavilles.
What used to be called the Hooverville, a shantytown for unemployed, homeless people, is now an Obamaville.
Illinois is now joining California as a failed state.
We've got a list of failed states.
It's not Somalia, Afghanistan.
It's now California, Illinois, and New York State.
The form of government basically almost broke down during 2009.
And that state is now headed into the tank as well.
So it is a situation where dozens and dozens of states are essentially collapsing.
They're on the verge of insolvency.
And the Obama regime thinks of nothing but convoying more and more trillions into the hands of people
like Blankfein at Goldman Sachs, Jamie Dimon at JPMorgan Chase,
Ken Lewis at Bank of America, and the rest of these zombie bankers.
Don't forget Pandit the Bandit at Citibank and his cohorts.
We know that Tiny Tim Geithner, the tax-chiseling Secretary of the Treasury, has a private cell phone where he's got a speed-dialing arrangement for three zombie bankers.
One is Pandit the Bandit at Citibank, The second is Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs, and the third, Jamie Dimon at JPMorgan Chase.
Now that is, in effect, the fascist corporate state in action.
Banking is now a state-sponsored compulsory cartel.
You want to be in it?
You have to join the cartel.
You have to accept the conditions laid down by people like Summers, and Geithner and Volker and the rest of them.
And every day Geithner gets his marching orders from the participants in the cartel, from Blankfein,
from Pandit and from Jamie Dimon. So this is a regime where the Secretary of the Treasury is told what to do
by three zombie bankers who would have been gone.
They would have been probably in jail but certainly in bankruptcy if they had not been bailed out with tens and tens of billions of dollars of public money.
So that's the fascist corporate state.
That is what Obama represents.
The main point about Detroit is you look at those factories, right?
You can still see Henry Ford's River Rouge plant.
You can see The various plants of the big three automakers which have absorbed other companies over the years.
Those factories could lift the world and now they're closing down.
Why should we have an empty auto plant and unemployed auto workers when people around the world and in this country need the products that could come out of those factories?
Why don't we nationalize the Federal Reserve and get those auto workers back to work reconverting auto plants to build things like tractors for African farmers.
We could build high-speed rail, maglev rail.
For urban mass transit and passenger rail, freight rail here in the United States, you could build aerospace equipment, you could build nuclear reactors, you could build modular housing, you could build modular components for factory buildings, modular hospitals that you could plunk down in rural Russia and rural China.
The only missing ingredient is credit.
You go to Bernanke and say, Ben, I need a loan from the Federal Reserve to reconvert the Detroit automakers.
And Ben says, no.
He says, we have zero percent credit, but only if you're a bank.
Not if you want to produce.
Only if you're a parasite.
Only if you want insurance, derivatives, credit cards, and the rest of it.
But if you want to actually create a tangible, physical product, a manufactured commodity, We have no time for you.
You look at the history of the automobile industry.
They were producing autos into 1941.
When Roosevelt's Lend-Lease began to kick in, it began to convert from manufacturing cars for a still somewhat depressed domestic market to manufacturing War material, defense goods, first for the British until the middle of 1941, and then also for the Soviets after the middle of 1941.
So you can go from building cars in 1940-41 to building B-17s and B-29s.
Now that essentially means you can reconvert those factories to do literally anything.
The only missing ingredient is credit and political will.
And you better get those tool-and-die people, those productive autoworkers back in before they get too old, because you got to train a new generation.
Once those abilities are lost, they're lost.
So use them or lose them.
After 1945, The UAW with Walter Ruther proposed a series of
reconversions to convert out-of-war production into other things to promote locomotives,
mass transit, and to promote other kinds of diversified production from Detroit.
The very narrow-minded management of the Detroit automobile industry rejected those things.
And then we get into the area of really incompetent managers like Roger Smith and so forth.
Just remember, though, that the really incompetent people in Detroit are all tools of Wall Street.
They're all people who have been imposed by the Wall Street financiers who own the stocks of these
companies.
So the great task today is to realize that if you don't have industrial production,
you're going to become ethnographic material.
If you don't have factories that produce capital goods and high value added, high capital intensity products that you can export, You're going to become the object of study for Chinese anthropologists who are going to come over and look at this strange civilization where people think that derivatives have value and hedge funds have value but Detroit auto plants and other kinds of productive plant and equipment have no value.
You can either learn Chinese so that you can talk to the anthropologists who are going to come and study this queer, exotic form of life that we have here in North America, or you can gear up production and get back to the path of measures that have worked well in the past and will work even better in the future.
The basic rule of politics is that if you're not fighting bankers and financiers, you're spinning your wheels.
You're being used by somebody.
You're being duped.
You may be cutting your own throat.
So just remember, Wall Street is the enemy.
Wall Street has always been the enemy.
Breaking the power of Wall Street, cutting them down to size, reducing this dictatorial hold of Wall Street over the federal government, that's the project.
Government in itself is a battlefield.
It's where the population confronts, or should confront, inordinate Wall Street power.
The substance of politics is a fight against finance capital.
For Republicans, there's something that you can do too.
The Republican Party had positive features when it considered itself the party of heavy industry.
Modern industrial production found its expression in the Republican Party.
If we had a Republican Party today that came on the scene as the party of heavy industry, we would be much better off.
Instead, the Republican Party, and this is one of the reasons why it's so grotesquely distorted, the Republican Party comes on the scene as a party of sweatshops.
Of low-wage union-busting employers, largely concentrated in the southern states, with the main idea of driving down wages, driving down benefits.
Cheap labor means low profits.
The success of the United States was as a high-wage economy.
You try to turn the U.S.
into a low-wage economy, that's a recipe for ruin.
We need to have a high-wage economy, and the Republican Party should learn from even somebody like Henry Ford, who knew that if you don't pay the automobile workers a living wage, they can't buy your products.
It's just that simple.
So instead of being the party of low-wage sweatshops, across the country, the Republican Party ought to reform
themselves and fight for what we have to call industrial capital.
Industrial capitalism works. That's what the U.S. has functioned on and that's what has gotten us successes.
Finance capital does not work and what we have today is a situation where the finance capitalists
run the government, they own Obama, they dictate the policies and
finance capital is in the process of crushing industrial capital, see the demise of the auto industry,
and also crushing commercial capital.
We have CIT, this is a bank which provides credit so you can get goods from factories into retail stores in time for the holidays every year, and this
is about to go bankrupt.
And Geithner and Bernanke are watching CIT go bankrupt and saying,
we don't care about that, that's not systemic.
Well, that's just several hundred thousand jobs.
We have an economy in the United States today which is two-thirds consumer spending.
Now, that's way too much.
We ought to rebuild our economy so we had much more of it in the area of capital goods and industrial production.
But once you're in a situation where two-thirds of your economy is retail sales and consumer spending,
you damn well better keep that going, because if you let that crash,
then you've got nothing left to keep people going and keep people eating.
So, we're in the middle of a general shipwreck, a general breakdown crisis,
a decomposition and collapse of the entire world economy, and we need these measures.
It's a disintegration of the banking system, a disintegration of the US dollar.
What we have today in the United States, even before a crisis of economy and finance, is a crisis of the entire ruling class.
We have a ruling elite of bankers, politicians, and other masters of human destiny who are insane and incompetent.
It's the kind of ruling class that destroys countries and civilizations.
Look at a guy like Larry Summers.
He believes that derivatives represent value.
We've now got 1.5 quadrillion dollars worth of derivatives crushing the world economy, causing the Depression, because this is the main cause of what's going on right now.
Larry Summers does not want to interfere with that.
Back in the 1990s, there was a battle inside the Clinton administration between Brooksley Born of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission on the one hand, who wanted to not even regulate derivatives, she just wanted to make derivatives reportable, to know how many derivatives there were, over-the-counter derivatives, futures, options, indices, but above all, the over-the-counter derivatives which are the structured investment vehicles, the credit default swaps,
the collateralized debt obligations, mortgage-backed securities,
and so forth. She simply said, let's make them reportable.
And a howl went up, no, that's communism, said Greenspan, said Phil Graham of Texas, said Wendy Graham,
his charming wife, said Bob Rubin from Citibank, who was the Secretary of the Treasury
for Clinton, and Larry Summers, who was also in the Clinton Treasury.
So, Summers believes in derivatives.
He's part of the gang that brought you derivatives.
Deregulated derivatives have destroyed the world economy more than any other single financial factor.
When he became president of Harvard, Larry Summers said, let's put the whole Harvard endowment into derivatives.
I think at that point they had 40 or 45 billion dollars.
And he actually believed it.
He believed that this was an investment.
So the result is, of course, that after the crash, the Harvard endowment has lost one third of its value on derivatives.
So Larry Summers In his incompetence, in his ideological fanaticism, in his blindness, and indeed his cruelty, is a symbol of the incompetence and the impossibility of continuing with the ruling class that we have today.
This ruling class has got to go.
In other words, these individuals have got to be replaced by people who are not from inside their system and who don't share their axioms and premises about what's going on.
Now, out in the world, there are other people.
You can look at Russia, China, India to some extent.
You can see countries in the third world where people don't think like that, where they have a more viable way of looking at the world.
But if we look at just the U.S.
and the British, between the City of London, Wall Street and Washington,
▲
Export Selection