Man, the State and Empire – The Rise of Monetarchy – Rule by Banks
The world is coming upon a significant transformation. From villages to fiefdoms to monarchies to empires to sovereign states, the world is now poised to transition to its most significant integrative transformation since the middle of the 20th century that saw the consolidation of the nation state.
The world is moving to what President George Herbert Walker Bush referred to as a New World Order. This NWO is a Monetarchy or Rule by Banks.
Monetarchy has sucessfully implanted itself in the internal state governance of those participating in the world fiat currency markets. It has achieved sufficient integration to be rightly considered an empire (overarching entity composed of various countries and nationalities) that exercises global management of multi-state fiscal, and by extension – social, policies through a synarchic financial banking sector led by a Federal Reserve system. The Federal Reserve system is led by a Chairman who functions as the Monetarch of the transnational banking empire.
The monetarchic system is interlinked with the most powerful unipolar, devolving, constitutional and polycratic state – the United States. Polycratic refers to the exercise of the three branches of government.
Kenneth Waltz’s anarchic world order has shifted to a unipolar system supported by a fiscal matrix of fiat currency institutions. The U.S’s unipolar refers to its productive and military capacity relative to other world states. Despite enormous advances by China and Russia in developing their internal market capacity, the U.S. continues to outpace them.
Many states are in a process of nation-state devolution. Devolution is defined here as the transfer of power from the sovereign constitutions to the transnational monetarchy. This transfer of power is best illustrated by the number of technocrats filling important positions in sovereign governments. A technocrat is one that has served as a senior transnational bank official that shares the prevailing ‘equilibrium’ economics ideology, also referred to as Keynesianism.
The international system is, currently, maintained through explicit alliance among the US and a small number of strategic global state regional partners also in a state of devolution: Europe, UK-Australia-Canada, Israel, Arabia-Turkey, Pakistan-India, China, Russia, Japan, Brazil-Latin America, Indonesia-Taiwan, Africa. Importantly, those alliances are maintained through various commercial and free market agreements. These agreements are key in any effort to re-balance the relations of power in the new unipolar system.
Undergirding this emerging hierarchical system is the the fact the monetarchic empire is managed through senior banking sector technocrats sanctioned by the Federal Reserve bank.
The singular characteristic of the empire is that it has designated the US dollar as the world reserve currency and regulates its quantity. This power over the world’s reserve currency and its control of the fiscal decision process provides it with the leverage to exercise a monopoly of force through its state partner and its allies.
Technocrats from the various financial sector corporations serve interchangeably in executive branches of devolving states. Devolving states are not necessarily autocratic. Indeed, they may be democratically-elected governments. They do however share one characteristic. They are plutocracies, that is, governments increasingly composed of members of a wealthy financial class, whose role it is to enforce laws, legislate new ones and arbitrate conflicts. They are also, at least nominally, nomocracies. The legitimacy of their rule depends on the rule of law.
Plutocratic regimes ensure policies consistent with the interest of the Monetarchy because they perceive it as being in their direct financial self-interest. At the top of this empire is the Monetarch. He heads the Federal Reserve International Banking system and, although subject to pro forma oversight by the governing body of the unipolar sovereign (US), is not accountable to it.
There is are opposing dynamics within the monetarchic empire that affect its long-term viability.
On the one hand, there is the ongoing reaffirmation of constitutional democratic institutions of the unipolar sovereign state (US). This sovereign state benefits most from the empire because the Monetarchy transfers its inflation to other lesser state allies. A constitutional reaffirmation tendency can theoretically lead the polycratic state to stop the transfer of wealth from the sovereign’s citizenry to the empire’s transnational financial institutions. This implies the elimination of implicit and explicit guarantees of fiscal international trade, exchange and commercial policies.
In addition, the sudden de facto integration of various classes of global labor pools is increasing the stress within the sovereigns who are forced to rapidly reallocate labor, raw materials and other resources to the needs of the empire.
These tendencies are counterbalanced by the reserve and world currency policies supported by global sovereign governments that continually increase the military and commercial leverage of the monetarchy relative to its principal nation-state partner and other allied devolving sovereigns.
Whether the Empire is long-lived or whether the system re-balances in favor of the sovereignty of the nation state will depend on which dynamic proves stronger with its consequent policy mix.
Many despair of the economic confusion that seems to rule the news of the day as we move into 2012. They simply do not understand what is happening. Single issue micro-analysis is highly cumbersome and often confuses the reader because various complex issues and subject areas considered in isolation from the broader picture are necessarily incomplete and limited. A broader theoretical model is required.
Macro-analysis can provide a brief formal overview but has the very real danger of oversimplifying a great many complex processes. This description of a monetarchic model is an attempt to synthesize the issues in a way that is accessible to the average reader.
If you accept the theoretical framework as presented, the conclusion is fairly simple relative to what steps must be taken to restore the primacy of the nation-state. Implicit in this assertion is the normative bias toward it.
The goal here is seek and recommend prescriptions for the ailments arising from the sudden globalization tipping point experienced in 2008 not, simply, to find short-term palliatives, mitigators or superficial treatments of the global fiscal challenges.
What must be done?
To bring down an empire, the enabling sovereign nations must transform themselves from within. That means each and every American, as well as, each citizen proud of all proud national traditions have a choice to make – Restore the sovereignty of their respective nation-state or allow the continued consolidation of the monetarchic empire.
For Americans, the question is: Can we find and bring back our Washingtonian revolutionary spirit, our tea party boldness, Lincoln’s fight for unity and equality; Wilson’s hope to end all wars; Roosevelt’s affirmation of democratic values relative to the centralized party hierarchies of communism/fascism; Kennedy’s man on the moon searching the stars; Johnson’s great society, and citizen’s multiple occupy (occtupy) passions — in constructive ways that restore sovereignty to the United States?
Most importantly, can we fight to restore sovereignty without resorting to Huntingtonian bigotry?
Can we as Americans reaffirm our values of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?
It remains an open question.