Current Events

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Clayton — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 06:16:01 GMT

It's really a verstehende topic, anyway.

Agreed. There are multiple, valid points-of-view, unfortunately, due to the highly speculative nature of the topic and the information-vacuum.

Clayton -

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Aristippus — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 06:04:36 GMT

a) If you and I can see they are losing strength in Europe and the US, do you think that the Vatican can see this?

Of course they can. Those who would want to strengthen the Church must take orders from their overlords, who in turn are filtered by TPTB.

b) Given that their strength is declining in Europe/US (and has long been on retreat in the UK since the days of Henry VIII), what could they do about this?

I'm not too sure. Infiltrating the media, the 'education' cartel and politics would be the best strategy, probably. The gate-keepers, however, are pretty tough and the shocktroops are generally anti-religion leftists.

c) Do you think they are doing everything they can do and still failing?

No idea, depends on what you think would be effective strategies.

For example, many religious organizations have liberalized and agreed that the Bible is metaphorical/allegorical... the Vatican could do this too.

Catholics are not really Biblical literalists (at least today). It depends on which parts of the Bible.

That would be a sign of "following" but given that they're losing so much influence and given that changing their teachings might salvage some of that influence, why do you think they haven't done it?

Well, they probably have been doing it more and more over time. The Catholic Church already abandoned a great deal of its traditions in the 60's (after infiltration in the late 50's). There isn't that much left that distinguishes them from the other branches of Christianity, especially compared to the differences a century ago.

If these countries are so inconsequential, how come the European powers have spilled so much blood - their own, each other's, and the natives' - on their account?

Well, they were easier to conquer and control than European neighbours, but they also weren't as valuable. It's a similar situation that regard, but the European empires could at least harvest resources effectively. The Vatican can only draw on the qualities and value of the people, which is pretty low in most of those countries.

I'm unclear on the origins of liberation theology.

Karl Marx, I guess. It's very popular in Latin America, and amongst the Jesuits. The Vatican doesn't seem too happy with it but hasn't had much success rooting it out.

True, it does not set trends in countries where it does not have significant influence but I think this has been the case for more than a half-century.

Yep, ever since it was infiltrated, abandoned its traditions, and ecumenised, alongside the propaganda machine of those same interests who were responsible for the infiltration.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Clayton — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:42:12 GMT

@Aristippus: Sorry, 3-to-1 is a bit of a beat-down... lol

1. Catholic population is also falling rapidly in Europe - the former stronghold of Catholicism, where the Vatican itself resides. Atheism is gaining strongly there.

Questions in response:

a) If you and I can see they are losing strength in Europe and the US, do you think that the Vatican can see this? Or do you think they're just too out of touch and deceiving themselves?

b) Given that their strength is declining in Europe/US (and has long been on retreat in the UK since the days of Henry VIII), what could they do about this? That is, irrespective of whether you think deconversion is inevitable in the long-run.

c) Do you think they are doing everything they can do and still failing? For example, many religious organizations have liberalized and agreed that the Bible is metaphorical/allegorical... the Vatican could do this too. That would be a sign of "following" but given that they're losing so much influence and given that changing their teachings might salvage some of that influence, why do you think they haven't done it?

2. The only countries in which Catholicism is not declining are the poor, Third World ones (mostly in Africa and Latin America).

If these countries are so inconsequential, how come the European powers have spilled so much blood - their own, each other's, and the natives' - on their account?

3. In the countries where Catholicism is not declining, it is becoming increasingly infiltrated by Marxist 'liberation theology', especially amongst the Jesuits. Now I've asked you in another thread and I did not receive a reply to this question: is that phenomenon part of the plot or is it an outside influence?

I'm unclear on the origins of liberation theology. I do know that there are sects of the Jews that do infiltrate Christian churches and it is conceivable that this could be the work of such an outside influence.

4. The past half-century has had Catholicism continuously watering itself down and ecumenising in order to follow modern trends. It no longer sets societal trends, but merely follows them.

True, it does not set trends in countries where it does not have significant influence but I think this has been the case for more than a half-century. In other words, Rome has long had to deal with the fact that its dominance is not truly global.

Clayton -

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Minarchist — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:12:34 GMT

Aristippus:
One thing, Minarchist: I think the only pre-modern Eurasian states that were able to approach the cartelization of the modern state were those of Pharoanic/Ptolemaic Egypt, the Late Roman Empire, and Mesopotamian city-states (a case could be made for China, also).

Fair enough.

I think on the whole, however, that the norm was for proto-state structures to be very weak, in line with the low degree of productivity, and the high degree of the mobility of would-be subjects.

I think that describes classical Greece pretty well. Very low agricultural productivity, and very high mobility due to the enormous opportunities in trade and colonization (in turn a response to low agricultural productivity) and political anarchy. And it seems to me the Greek States were less interventionist than contemporary Asian States, which were agricultural, land-focused, few, and enormous.

The higher the productivity and the lower the mobility of its subjects (which can go hand-in-hand, e.g. a zone of fertile soils), the more able were bureaucratic states to form.

Interestingly, it was in those ideal agricultural zones that the first States emerged: fertile river valleys.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

gotlucky — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:03:13 GMT

Yup, there it is.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Aristophanes — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:01:02 GMT

Says the guy who has recently been swearing at Neodoxy and Clayton, unprovoked.

"Swearing! Swaering! You swore!"

Grow the fuck up, you woman.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Aristippus — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:00:12 GMT

I wasn't taking a swipe at you, I just think everything's been said and you have your own view of it. It's really a verstehende topic, anyway.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

gotlucky — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:59:47 GMT

Yeah, I agreed with you. Even if you were denigrating me in the first sentence of that post...Have you ever tried not being a jerk?

Says the guy who has recently been swearing at Neodoxy and Clayton, unprovoked.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Clayton — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:55:00 GMT

I don't think there's much point entering into it.

I can be swayed but I just really think the view that the Rothschilds run the world, or Europe/UK at least, is not tenable given what I know so far.

Clayton -

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Aristippus — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:50:30 GMT

I pretty much agree with everything Minarchist has been saying in this thread. But I've already had this exact discussion with you Clayton and was obviously unable to sway you, so I don't think there's much point entering into it.

One thing, Minarchist: I think the only pre-modern Eurasian states that were able to approach the cartelization of the modern state were those of Pharoanic/Ptolemaic Egypt, the Late Roman Empire, and Mesopotamian city-states (a case could be made for China, also). I think on the whole, however, that the norm was for proto-state structures to be very weak, in line with the low degree of productivity, and the high degree of the mobility of would-be subjects. The higher the productivity and the lower the mobility of its subjects (which can go hand-in-hand, e.g. a zone of fertile soils), the more able were bureaucratic states to form.

EDIT: Btw Clayton you still haven't answered by question about liberation theology.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Minarchist — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:50:06 GMT

Adding to my thesis:

A feature of the European Miracle was political anarchy, i.e. the radical decentralization of Europe. At the same time that States were unusually weak (i.e. unusually restrained from economic intervention), they were also locked into an unusually intense inter-State rivalry. This set the stage perfectly for those independent businessmen (who, given the weakeness of States at that time, enjoyed an unusual ability to amass wealth by the economic means) to use their wealth to gain influence with States by financing their wars.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Aristophanes — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:49:27 GMT

You and I and nobody else in the world has any idea what kind of cash the Vatican has.

Certainly not, but we do know that the Vatican holds gold at the NY FED. (There is there a signed letter from Paul Volcker stating as much - it is however from the 1970's and does deal with the Vatican selling some of it). Their, and many others, holding their gold in a different vaults than their own reeks...but, it is all for administrative convenience.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Minarchist — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:36:35 GMT

Clayton:
most of them were spend-thrifts.

Indeed, hence they were always in hock to the bankers. Many a King lost a war or his throne because his creditors cut him off, and/or funded his equally cash-strapped enemy.

And to anyone with the power to nationalize any particular line of production (such as, a King), money really is a pointless nuisance, except for security against deposition and the conspiracies of the nobles, or in payment of foreign bribes or procurement of supplies when the army is overseas. In short, the King really does not have to buy anything within his own territory, except as a matter of trying not to upend the territorial economy.

I agree with you that tax revenues are not an end in themselves, as that control over the economy (cartelization as I suggested above) is the real prize. However, firstly, the King (in Western Europe in the pre-modern era) didn't usually run cartels directly. Rather, he sold them to others. This was a form of revenue like selling offices or titles. This seems to me sort of like selling off your capital to meet payroll. Secondly, the primary need for cash was war. The King spent practically nothing for any other purpose, a few courts, a few buildings, and maintaining himself in royal style. The King didn't maintain funds to fight a war, he pretty much always had to turn to the bankers, which I think is the source of their influence over the State.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Minarchist — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:24:33 GMT

Here's a thought:

Increasingly I view the State as essentially a device for coercive cartelization, not actually as a "tax-farm." Taxation is instrumental, not an end in itself. In other words, the State is essentially corporatist in character. That is its nature. Another way of describing this is as a "plantation." In any case, the only important exception to this rule occurred in Europe during the Middle Ages, when for various historical reasons States were restrained from economic intervention to a large degree, what Ralph Raico refers to as the "European Miracle." This involved an explosive expansion of production and capital accumulation outside the domain of the State: off the plantation, so to speak. Hence the independent merchants, bankers, and industrialists gained far more influence relative the State than they as a class had ever enjoyed before. They used this influence to take control of States. Around this same time, States began to reorganize themselves to be more efficient cartelizing machines. Innovations included the introduction of democracy and eventually leftism, which added to the legitimacy of the State, and allowed it to justify far more economic intervention than would have been possible before (i.e. more thorough cartelization). The State apparatus itself was rationalized: e.g. the civil services were professionalized. And so the decline of classical liberalism since the 19th century can be understood as a reversion to the norm that existed prior to the "European Miracle," as the aforementioned merchants, bankers, and industrialists once again closed the door (non-cartelized economy) through which they themselves had walked to power.

Re: $43 trillion lawsuit; CNBC reporting fallout

Clayton — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:22:11 GMT

Yeah, that is why they hold their gold at the NY Fed.

You and I and nobody else in the world has any idea what kind of cash the Vatican has.

Clayton -