Bob Murphy On If The Devil Made Him Do It...
http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2009/07/big-picture.html
While it's fun, geeky, and necessary to argue about credit vs. money, I think we should also occasionally take a big step back and look at the broad themes. In a recent post, I said that the best way to predict what was coming--and how to protect your household--was to imagine that you were in control of the world governments and central banks, and had no conscience. I challenged Robert Wenzel to throw us a bone, but apparently if you want something done...
One disclaimer before I get going. I am not saying the following are my official predictions, and of course a lot of what I do below is post-dicting (not predicting).
[Editor: Somewhat akin to post-judice versus prejudice, I presume]
Furthermore, I am aware that an insane person has quite rational beliefs and theories; it's just that he sees spurious patterns everywhere. (That's what really happened to John Nash, if you read the book and don't trust Ron Howard's entertaining but absurd interpretation.) But even if the below is a little off in some of the specifics, it is the type of analysis of which we need a lot more. If the below is right, if only in spirit, then it's pointless for us to ponder what the "right" Fed move is, vis-a-vis the payment of interest on reserves. Bernanke isn't implementing what he thinks is best for the US economy, and so that academic question is as relevant as arguing about whether the Fed should allow casual Fridays at its offices.
If I were extremely rich and powerful, and had absolutely no conscience, this is what I might do:
* I'd have a very popular and trusted Fed chair all of a sudden prime a massive bubble in the world economy. Then, just as it was about to crash, I'd make him take the fall and install a new chair.
* The qualities I would seek in the new Fed chair would be threefold. First, he'd have to be a complete tool. Second, he'd have to be a very competent economist. And third, he'd have to be an expert on how to turn a huge financial crash into a worldwide economic depression.
* Now the fun stuff. When everyone started flipping out, I'd use the crisis to bail out my associates at the big banks and investment firms who had had to go along with my reckless plan. Obviously I would zap anybody who hadn't been playing ball with me, and give trillions to those who had the foresight to tell I was the coach of the winning team.
* For some time I would have known that the US government was getting too big for its britches. As its global supremacy grew, there would be a greater and greater chance that the American presidents and senators I installed might decide they didn't like my plan after all (even though that was the deal when I hired them). So I would gradually shift my power base elsewhere, and I would leave the US government in such a mess that it would take decades to recover.
* In order to contain the US government, I'd get its military bogged down in foreign adventures. I'd do what I could to spur dictators (whom I couldn't directly control) into developing nuclear weapons. (My plan there would be simple: I'd invade those dictators who disarmed like I demanded, and I'd give money to those dictators who repeatedly flouted my ostensible demands and openly developed an offensive nuclear program.)
* On the economic front, I'd cripple the US economy relative to its major rivals by slapping on a huge new system of energy regulation. Once I had let that particular genie out of the bottle, I wouldn't need to worry about economic growth from the US for decades.
* Now just before jumping ship, I would crank up the printing presses and have the federal government incur unprecedented new debt. It would be one last parasitic HURRAH before my colleagues and I plunged the US government into truly Banana Republic status, and destroyed the dollar. In order to cover our tracks, I'd make sure that the crash originated from foreign speculators who "attacked" the dollar. I might even plant stories suggesting that Bernie Madoff (whose Ponzi scheme we had nurtured for years, knowing it would be a great pretext for further power grabs in the financial markets) had orchestrated the speculative attack from prison.
* In order to make the dollar truly crash, I'd have my tool at the Fed pump in an absurd amount of new reserves, and then have him keep them bottled up in the banks by paying interest. I'd dangle that sword in front of the markets for several months, until they became desensitized to it. Yet deep down all the traders would know, in the back of their minds, that if they all began to anticipate a fall in the dollar, then it would immediately become a self-fulfilling prophecy. As the yields on dollar-denominated bonds suddenly went through the roof because of the speculative attack, the banks would rush to exchange their bottled reserves for Treasurys. The money supply held by the public would begin expanding at double-digit weekly rates, at the same time that foreign central banks would dump their dollar holdings.
* Of course, there would be resistance to my plans. Most obvious, the other major financial players--US commercial and foreign central banks--would normally be unwilling to go along with my suggested course of action, since they would be devastated by the dollar's collapse. In order to get them to follow my lead, and do what I wanted at the precise time I wanted, I would have to divide the spoils with them. I would give government guarantees to all the major US domestic players, to make sure they were whole when the smoke cleared, and that any of their losses were transferred to the US taxpayers. I'd also give plenty of advance notice to the central bankers, to give them time to expand their holdings of gold and hence offset their losses from the dollar crash. Also, I would remind China and Russia that their economies would benefit tremendously (at least in a relative sense) from the new regulations being slapped on to the American economy.
* And at last, we come to the remaining obstacle to my plans: the charming American public. Even though they are ultimately the only force on earth that could physically stop me, I've known for years how to keep them in line. Through just a few companies, my associates and I dominate all of the major media, and we can keep them distracted about celebrity funerals and racist judges while the final elements of my plan are implemented.
* Just to make sure that I kept the American public in line, I would have a black man in the White House when the crash occurred. This would keep the blacks from rioting, for their pastors and grandmothers would tell them they couldn't let the first such administration go down in history as a failure. And if the president himself started to protest to me, saying he hadn't agreed to all of this? I would gently remind him what happened to the last president who had gotten so popular that he thought he could buck the system. I'd also point out that his own second-in-command was just the kind of amoral power seeker who would have no qualms becoming president through any means possible.
* Of course, at some point I might really have to drop the hammer on the dispersed and unorganized band of rebels who would catch on to my plans, and start raising a ruckus. Fortunately by then I would have perfected the Predator drones and my worldwide system of secret prisons.
Comments (13)
Conza88
Very good. You could of kept going though. What was left out was the logical progression towards world government. You want it all, surely!
The Drive for a World Central Bank by Hans-Hermann Hoppe ( http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/AEFM99/11_AEFM_Hoppe.mp3 )
"Before I will explain why there is a drive to a world bank. I will have to discuss briefly another question, "Why is there a drive toward world government?" Because the drive toward a world bank, can best be understood as an intermediate step, in an underlying drive to world government."
Published: July 15, 2009 5:49 AM
2nd Amendment
Conza88,
I would have no problem with a one world government provided that EVERYBODY will be submitted to the same rules and same rectal search at the airport.
Last time, Mohamed El Baradei was insulted that an airport security guard questioned and searched him. He said: I Am MOHAMED EL BARADEI, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog.
Well, I'm sorry Mr. Baradei but you share responsibility for putting this security system in place, you should be the first one to bend over for the rectal search and you should thank the guard for doing his job.
Mr. Baradei, if you expect normal citizens to submit to security, you should too.
I want a world governement that grants privilege to NO ONE and which submits everyone to the same procedures.
Even that rude fat black security lady that invades your rectum at the airport and treats you like manure, she should get hers invaded every time she gets to work, leaves for lunch and gets back home.
Published: July 15, 2009 7:55 AM
Conza88
"I would have no problem with a one world government provided that EVERYBODY will be submitted to the same rules and same rectal search at the airport."
Ok, well I do.
Published: July 15, 2009 8:47 AM
Alexander S. Peak
Dear "2nd Amendment,"
You write, "I want a world governement that grants privilege to NO ONE and which submits everyone to the same procedures."
I take it, then, that you share Rousseau's conception of freedom. Rousseau incorrectly held, essentially, that we are all free insofar as we are equally enslaved. My own view to the contrary is that Rousseau's main failure was his not taking his own anti-slavery position (found elsewhere in his Social Contract) to its logical conclusion. Had he done so, he would have had to adopt the libertarian position and recognise that the so-called "equality" (later) found in Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" is not, in fact, conducive to Liberty.
A world government (or any state of any expanse) that enslaves its subjects, even if it enslaves them all "equally," is still horrendous and in need of being dismantled.
One final note: I fail to see the relevance of the weight, gender, or skin colour of the state's henchmen. Being an employee of the state is disgusting regardless of these irrelevant factors. My recommendation would be to ignore such factors in future discussions, thereby not restricting the appeal of your essential point regarding the inequality between the state and those over whom it rules.
Regards,
Alex Peak
Published: July 15, 2009 10:13 AM
Alexander S. Peak
Dear "2nd Amendment,"
You write, "I want a world governement that grants privilege to NO ONE and which submits everyone to the same procedures."
I take it, then, that you share Rousseau's conception of freedom. Rousseau incorrectly held, essentially, that we are all free insofar as we are equally enslaved. My own view to the contrary is that Rousseau's main failure was his not taking his own anti-slavery position (found elsewhere in his Social Contract) to its logical conclusion. Had he done so, he would have had to adopt the libertarian position and recognise that the so-called "equality" (later) found in Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" is not, in fact, conducive to Liberty.
A world government (or any state of any expanse) that enslaves its subjects, even if it enslaves them all "equally," is still horrendous and in need of being dismantled.
One final note: I fail to see the relevance of the weight, gender, or skin colour of the state's henchmen. Being an employee of the state is disgusting regardless of these irrelevant factors. My recommendation would be to ignore such factors in future discussions, thereby not restricting the appeal of your essential point regarding the inequality between the state and those over whom it rules.
Regards,
Alex Peak
Published: July 15, 2009 10:14 AM
ralph h
You missed the implementation of a central healthcare program to monitor the charming American public.
Reviewing this in hindsight assures me that a man of no conscience could ever to successful before a revolution begins
which I think is on the horizon in the next few weeks.
Published: July 15, 2009 10:16 AM
ralph h
In reviewing this plan in hindsight, you missed the centralization of healthcare for the charming American public. The benefit of this article assures me that no one man can forestall a revolution which is becoming more imminent to me in the next few weeks not months or years.
Published: July 15, 2009 10:20 AM
Ralph Harrison
You missed the centralization of healthcare for the charming American public. The benefit of this article provides wonderful hindsight where no man or group will ever be successful in controlling so many essential variables of activity. It does however confirm my feeling the next American revolution is now only weeks away instead of months or years.
Published: July 15, 2009 10:26 AM
Ralph Harrison
You missed the centralization of healthcare for the charming American public. The benefit of this article provides wonderful hindsight where no man or group will ever be successful in controlling so many essential variables of activity. It does however confirm my feeling the next American revolution is now only weeks away instead of months or years.
Published: July 15, 2009 10:28 AM
Caveman
It does however confirm my feeling the next American revolution is now only weeks away instead of months or years.
I'm assuming you're joking since there is no evidence that a majority of Americans even realize what's left of their liberty is in danger, much less see a need to fight for it.
As far as Murphy goes, while I enjoy his writing he is an unrepentant conspiracy theorist (or at least gives the impression of being one). I am skeptical of most conspiracy theories and tend to think the actions of powerful persons and institutions are generally committed with short-term goals in mind. String all these actions together and the result is a state of affairs which benefits the powerful, but this doesn't require the acts themselves to be components of a single plot to achieve a specific end-result. It's just that the progressive consolidation of power in the hands of a few (e.g., a single world government) is the likely outcome of the powerful always getting their way.
Published: July 15, 2009 12:06 PM
DavidH
@Caveman - Murphy is not being a conspiracy theorist, he is simply showing us that the current situation could not be any worse even if it was planned that way.
Published: July 15, 2009 4:47 PM
Caveman
@DavidH - I'd be inclined to agree with you if I hadn't been following Murphy's blog lately. What Murphy has done here is propose a conspiracy theory. I am happy to allow that he is doing so for the purpose of illustration only (and not because he believes the conspiracy is true), but it is a conspiracy theory nonetheless. So, you can't say he isn't being a "conspiracy theorist," unless you define a "conspiracy theorist" as something other than a person who develops conspiracy theories. Yes, I'm being unnecessarily literal but I also am not convinced that Murphy doesn't believe in conspiracies.
More to the point, I disagree with Murphy's contention that "the best way to predict what [is] coming...[is] to imagine that you [are] in control of the world governments and central banks, and [have] no conscience." I don't think analyzing events in an imaginary context is the best way to produce accurate predictions of what will happen in reality. Murphy seems to be saying that whether events are the result of a conspiracy or not, events will unfold just as they would if they were the result of a conspiracy. I respectfully disagree.
Published: July 15, 2009 8:03 PM
Ralph Fucetola JD
And don't forget to throw in, for good measure, an engineered, weaponized pandemic triggered by a weaponized, unproven, uninsurable, mandated vaccine...
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2752
Published: July 15, 2009 11:14 PM