It may be a bit of a bitter pill to swallow for some, but as I outlined in my Missed Chance of 1867, and the True Story of the Alaska Purchase, the original founding of Canada on July 1st, 1867 was designed by British Geopoliticians for the explicit purpose of keeping Canada locked into the British Empire
The depth of the corruptions and manipulations to play their games of domination and exploitation , and the grotesque 'infiltration' of their ' agents' ( members) placed throughout our government , and all the ' colonies' and the violence and aggression they're using towards dissent makes me wake up every morning with anxiety. I do everything I can, every day, to spread the Truth.
I do know , ultimately, they fall; and humanity begins the turning of that great wheel of Time that signals the upward journey where we make a better world.
Is there any hope that these treasonous tyrants masquerading as our political and public 'representatives' are arrested?
You failed to mention Benjamin Franklin was a French attorney employed by the Bank of England to financially enslave America with a debt-based monetary system and a leaky constitution. However I did learn other historical details. Thank you
I'm so glad to see you feature our mutual hero, Ben Franklin. And I know we've gone around on this several times. But as a historian, you need to counter my arguments with facts and logic, not just disagree on the conclusion. The difference is whether, in following Franklin's example, we should be designing 'land-backed money' for local exchange and debts, issued and controlled by commonwealths around 200K people, which he called colonial scrip.
Or should we be promoting a global form of money backed by precious metals, called specie, so that local gov'ts are forbidden to use any other form of credit or currency for local exchange and debts? This is Hamilton's system that repaid the debts to France and his mentor, the banker Robert Morris, by foreclosing on the farms of Revolutionary War veterans for unpaid taxes while not allowing them to issue back wages for their war service in a local currency. This is the system that destroyed the sovereign people of Appalachia, my birth home, by giving hundreds of thousands of acres free to Robert Morris, of land that they'd established as homesteads and cultivated.
You say Franklin argued for a colonial scrip but that's misleading. He was the leading designer and advocate of the scrip that made Philadelphia a model of success, so much that when he argued to export the model to Europe, dismayed by the poverty in Ireland, the merchants passed The Currency Act forbidding it. That, and not taxes, was the cause of the American Revolution according to him. And after the War was won, your hero Hamilton worked with the merchants and bankers to reinstate the exact terms of the British Currency Act by forbidding Franklin's system in the Constitution. Whether they were in thrall to American bankers like Morris or British bankers was the only difference with Hamilton's death. The cause for which they'd fought had already been lost.
With respect, Matt, you're rewriting history to promote what you see as the current solution. We can disagree on what the answer is now, but don't destroy Franklin's greatest invention to do it.
I assume, William, that this article is linked to reinforce my point to Matt. It uses many of the quotes and narrative in the chapter of my book called "The Short Eventful Life of Sovereign Money." The book is How to Dismantle an Empire: https://www.amazon.com/How-Dismantle-Empire-2020-Vision/dp/1733347607.
Does size not matter, in your opinion? The point of disagreement is whether Franklin and Hamilton agreed on the size of a sovereign entity that's able to issue its own currency. Please give me a quote showing that either Franklin thought bigger was better, or contradicting that Hamilton was AGAINST the state level, at that time 200K people. This article shows the opposite: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-constitutional-convention-coup.
And it's certainly your prerogative to reject my last decade of researching this based on a cursory reading. But you do understand that for me to abandon everything I've read and thought in favor of some links you're throwing out there would be self-negating.
Haha! I will need to quote you on that. Glad that you're humble enough to tell other people they're wasting their lives based on a few moments that you, from your position of superiority, have spent understanding their lifework. I think this fits best under my series: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/mansplaining-economics. Imagine what you would have said if you weren't so humble!
What's the right size for sovereignty, William? Is it over a billion people, like India and China? 330M people like the US? Or 350K like Iceland? Is bigger better or smaller?
Since a nation is a fictitious construct built on ancient wars between rulers, who derived their authority from shedding the blood of their 'subjects', should we consider that sacrosanct? Or start by deciding what at what size democracy is possible?
You've defined the rules that you think William's fiefdom should run by. I have a different set of rules for mine, based on Ben Franklin's model. Rather than convince each other and 330M others, we could put our strategies into a computer simulation game (once it was written) and see which one generates the most exchanges of productive labor before getting cashed out for an imperial currency. I write about this in https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/how-to-be-czar-of-your-fiefdom.
I just want to leave a comment because I think that what you are doing is so vital. It is not that the truth does not exist, it has been obfuscated and must be unearthed and presented publicly as the Real Truth. Thank you. I hope that at some point this information becomes widespread. Honestly, I have been completely unaware of much of what you are presenting in this article and your work as a whole.
Now I know the real reason why the British-controlled nation of Canada has always been a British Commonwealth. The Brits have done everything necessary over the last 400 years to protect and maintain its global hegemony. 😤
Wow.
Is there any hope Matt?
The depth of the corruptions and manipulations to play their games of domination and exploitation , and the grotesque 'infiltration' of their ' agents' ( members) placed throughout our government , and all the ' colonies' and the violence and aggression they're using towards dissent makes me wake up every morning with anxiety. I do everything I can, every day, to spread the Truth.
I do know , ultimately, they fall; and humanity begins the turning of that great wheel of Time that signals the upward journey where we make a better world.
Is there any hope that these treasonous tyrants masquerading as our political and public 'representatives' are arrested?
What do we do?
We need hope.
Remarkable.
You failed to mention Benjamin Franklin was a French attorney employed by the Bank of England to financially enslave America with a debt-based monetary system and a leaky constitution. However I did learn other historical details. Thank you
I'm so glad to see you feature our mutual hero, Ben Franklin. And I know we've gone around on this several times. But as a historian, you need to counter my arguments with facts and logic, not just disagree on the conclusion. The difference is whether, in following Franklin's example, we should be designing 'land-backed money' for local exchange and debts, issued and controlled by commonwealths around 200K people, which he called colonial scrip.
Or should we be promoting a global form of money backed by precious metals, called specie, so that local gov'ts are forbidden to use any other form of credit or currency for local exchange and debts? This is Hamilton's system that repaid the debts to France and his mentor, the banker Robert Morris, by foreclosing on the farms of Revolutionary War veterans for unpaid taxes while not allowing them to issue back wages for their war service in a local currency. This is the system that destroyed the sovereign people of Appalachia, my birth home, by giving hundreds of thousands of acres free to Robert Morris, of land that they'd established as homesteads and cultivated.
You say Franklin argued for a colonial scrip but that's misleading. He was the leading designer and advocate of the scrip that made Philadelphia a model of success, so much that when he argued to export the model to Europe, dismayed by the poverty in Ireland, the merchants passed The Currency Act forbidding it. That, and not taxes, was the cause of the American Revolution according to him. And after the War was won, your hero Hamilton worked with the merchants and bankers to reinstate the exact terms of the British Currency Act by forbidding Franklin's system in the Constitution. Whether they were in thrall to American bankers like Morris or British bankers was the only difference with Hamilton's death. The cause for which they'd fought had already been lost.
With respect, Matt, you're rewriting history to promote what you see as the current solution. We can disagree on what the answer is now, but don't destroy Franklin's greatest invention to do it.
I assume, William, that this article is linked to reinforce my point to Matt. It uses many of the quotes and narrative in the chapter of my book called "The Short Eventful Life of Sovereign Money." The book is How to Dismantle an Empire: https://www.amazon.com/How-Dismantle-Empire-2020-Vision/dp/1733347607.
Does size not matter, in your opinion? The point of disagreement is whether Franklin and Hamilton agreed on the size of a sovereign entity that's able to issue its own currency. Please give me a quote showing that either Franklin thought bigger was better, or contradicting that Hamilton was AGAINST the state level, at that time 200K people. This article shows the opposite: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-constitutional-convention-coup.
And it's certainly your prerogative to reject my last decade of researching this based on a cursory reading. But you do understand that for me to abandon everything I've read and thought in favor of some links you're throwing out there would be self-negating.
Haha! I will need to quote you on that. Glad that you're humble enough to tell other people they're wasting their lives based on a few moments that you, from your position of superiority, have spent understanding their lifework. I think this fits best under my series: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/mansplaining-economics. Imagine what you would have said if you weren't so humble!
What's the right size for sovereignty, William? Is it over a billion people, like India and China? 330M people like the US? Or 350K like Iceland? Is bigger better or smaller?
Since a nation is a fictitious construct built on ancient wars between rulers, who derived their authority from shedding the blood of their 'subjects', should we consider that sacrosanct? Or start by deciding what at what size democracy is possible?
You've defined the rules that you think William's fiefdom should run by. I have a different set of rules for mine, based on Ben Franklin's model. Rather than convince each other and 330M others, we could put our strategies into a computer simulation game (once it was written) and see which one generates the most exchanges of productive labor before getting cashed out for an imperial currency. I write about this in https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/how-to-be-czar-of-your-fiefdom.
I just want to leave a comment because I think that what you are doing is so vital. It is not that the truth does not exist, it has been obfuscated and must be unearthed and presented publicly as the Real Truth. Thank you. I hope that at some point this information becomes widespread. Honestly, I have been completely unaware of much of what you are presenting in this article and your work as a whole.
Now I know the real reason why the British-controlled nation of Canada has always been a British Commonwealth. The Brits have done everything necessary over the last 400 years to protect and maintain its global hegemony. 😤