The Fiscal Fantasies of Stephen Zarlenga and Other Monetary Reformers - Or "Won't Get Fooled Again"?
Youtube link
[Time saver: this article is fairly long-winded, and somewhat repetitive, so if you are short of time just skip to the very last part - the short post summary-highlighted in brown text- regards, onebornfree]
"Freedom is not a system" - Jon Rappoport
Over the past few months, several members of the Freedom Network have expressed an interest in, and their support of, the various [and in my opinion dangerously wrong] proposals of a US monetary system reformer named Stephen Zarlenga, and have asked me for my opinion of Mr Zarlenga's proposals for reform of the US monetary system [Lord knows why :-) ].
This article is therefor an attempt by me to make my position on Mr Zarlenga's ideas clear to those members, possibly help them, and to possibly help others as well.
My Own Self- Education In Economic and Investment Philosophy
From approximately 1983 to around 1995, my primary learning focus was economics and investment philosophy.
I therefor studied [privately- not in school] the writings of classical economists such as :Adam Smith and David Ricardo, plus other none- classical economic theories from: Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, Karl Menger, F.A. Hayek, Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Henry Hazlitt, Frederic Bastiat and others, as well as the investment philosophies of investment advisors such as Doug Casey, Harry Browne, John Pugsley,Terry Coxon, Harry Schultz, and Richard Russell.
Assume Nothing
Of course, this does not mean that you should assume I know what I'm talking about here :-).
So Anyhoo...
So anyhoo, to cut a long story short[er], during my studies all those years ago I came across the monetary reform theories of Mr Zarlenga, [before he had published a book, I believe].
Zarlenga's Ideas Still Do Not Make Sense To Me
Quite honestly, his theories did not make any sense to me back then, and as these days I do not have time to wade through his very long book, [unless someone is going to pay me to so do :-)] - after re-checking more recent comments from a speech he made in 2003 before members of the US Treasury, to try to see if anything major in his viewpoint had changed in the intervening years since I'd last taken a serious look at his theories, I have to say that my original opinion of Mr Zarlenga's monetary reform theories remains unchanged.
Assumptions, Assumptions, Assumptions : The Assumptions of Stephen Zarlenga's Monetary Reform Theories
In order for Mr Zarlenga to reach his present conclusions about what, to him, has to be done in the area of monetary reform in the US, he has to have first made certain assumptions, yes?
A Common Mental Process - We All Do It
It's the same process for all of us in life.
We first of all, for various reasons, come to make certain, often unexamined/unquestioned assumptions that we believe to be true [with out any real proof], and then, "truth" in hand via those various assumptions, we go on to draw our conclusions and to try to take action, based on those unquestioned assumptions, as needed.
Assumptions Always Lead To Conclusions Drawn
We all quite often go through this same mental process [i.e. making unproven assumptions] before reaching what we believe to be definitive conclusions - to a greater or lesser degree - and to an extent this mental process is unavoidable in life, for you, me, Zarlenga and everyone else.
Therefore, logically, Mr Zarlengas original unexamined pre-assumptions must inexorably lead him to draw his final conclusions to date about what has to be done in the area of US monetary reform, yes?
Are Zarlenga's Assumptions True, Or False?
But what if his pre-assumptions are incorrect?
If so, then wouldn't that mean that his final conclusions to date, based on those false assumptions, would also be incorrect ?
Many Wrong Zarlenga Assumptions
I believe that Mr Zarlenga has made many false [i.e unexamined/unquestioned] assumptions, and that therefor his conclusions about what needs to be done to reform US monetary system are not only wrong, but dangerously wrong, and if enacted, might actually make things even worse that they already appear to be right now .
Two Main Culprits: So Only Two Zarlenga Assumptions Are Examined Here:
However, for purposes of both clarity and relative brevity, for this article I intend to focus only on what I see as the two main false assumptions of Mr Zarlenga's monetary reform proposals, because, as I see it, these false assumptions are the main culprits and directly lead to the false conclusions that he and his followers continually labor under.
[False] Zarlenga Assumption Number [1] { The "Biggy"} = Government Works, Government is Necessary, Government Solves Problems; Therefor, Government Can Solve The Monetary System Problem:
Zarlenga says: ".. the nature of money is a fiat of the law, " [emphasis mine]
Zarlenga says:"I am suggesting that the nature of human affairs requires government to have four branches, not three; the fourth branch to embody and administer the monetary power." [emphasis mine]
Zarlenga says:"The De-funding of government at the local, state and federal levels, arises out of this disease of attacking government as the enemy."[emphasis mine]
Zarlenga quotes source
Therefore, I Conclude That The Primary, False Zarlenga Assumption = Government Works/ Solves Problems
From those [2003] Zarlenga quotes above it is perfectly obvious to myself that Zarlenga sincerely believes that government is necessary, that it works and can solve problems, including the perceived current US monetary system problems.
So this appears to be Zarlenga's primary assumption, from which nearly all others follow, and from which all of his reform conclusions duly follow.
Zarlenga [False] Assumption Number [2] = The True Nature of the Current Federal Reserve System - [i.e. Zarlenga's "Straw Man" Argument]:
Mr Zarlenga claims that the Federal Reserve system is privately owned, and that therefor, "logically", that it has failed solely because it is a private, and not a government-run entity.
But this is, in point of fact, a "straw man" argument being made by Zarlenga - the truth of the matter is that the Federal Reserve system, although ostensibly privately owned, is fully protected by the government, and enjoys government enforced monopoly privileges whereby no competitors are allowed to operate/copy its functions.
As Bill Bonner has said: "That is why we have the Fed. It is really a cartel of bankers who make sure they protect and defend the right of bankers to make a lot of money."
Other quotes concerning the true nature of the Fed [as I see it]:
"While it is undoubtedly true that the Fed is owned by private banks, the notion that it is a private company, as private as Federal Express, is wrong."
"First, the Fed was created through an act of Congress. Not only that, a separate constitutional amendment was added in order to create the central bank. What other private company can claim the same? Certainly not Federal Express." [My emphasis]
"Second, the Fed has been given the governmental authority to control the nation's money supply and direct monetary policy. As a rule, private companies don't enact and enforce national policy. That is the function of government. Any entity authorized to enact and enforce policy is a de facto government agency."
"Third, one of the Fed's main functions is to fund government expenditures. The same can be said for almost all other central banks in history. Obviously, the private bankers reap huge profits from this partnership with the state, but that does not negate the fact that the state itself benefits hugely as well."
"Since the creation of the Fed, all the of the United States' wars and all of its major welfare programs have to a very large extent been funded by the Fed's printing presses."
Source for above quotes
Zarlenga's Fictitious "Bass Ackwards","Straw Man" Claim
Mr Zarlenga's claim that the Fed has done what it has done to date because it is privately owned/operated is ficticious- entirely "bass-ackwards", as it were; the Fed is in fact a 100% government protected and guaranteed "legal" monopoly.
Fact: The Federal Reserve causes the problems it causes directly and only because it is a fully government protected, legally enforced [by "rule of law"], monetary monopoly system.
Meaning that in reality, and entirely contrary to Zarlenga's assertions, the Federal Reserve system is a problem directly because, and only because it is a legally [i.e government] protected monopoly with exclusive rights and privileges not available to everyone else.
The Fed = The US Post Office
The Federal Reserve is no more private than the US Post Office, yet another allegedly private entity that is fully protected from nearly all competition by the government- and therefor the Fed, just like the Post Office, consistently fails in its publicly stated purpose [although it works just fine for the employees of the system itself and for other, associated "insiders".]
Take away those government enforced monopoly privileges of the the Fed system and the Post Office etc. [like that's ever going to happen :-)] , and it/they would have to succeed or fail in competition with other freely competing monetary and postal systems.
The "Magic Wand" Zarlenga "Solution" For Monetary Reform [and everything else presumably] Always = Even More Government:
Because Zarlenga and his supporters actually seem to believe :
[1]: that government actually "works", is necessary, and can solve problems...[i.e, it's not just a criminal scam, as I would assert]
and they also appear to believe that:
[2]: the Federal Reserve System is actually some sort of genuinely private company, and not simply just another poorly disguised, government favoured entity, and because they believe that private ownership [and not government protection from competition] is the root cause of the Feds historical shenanigans since its 1913 creation [via an act of Congress, no less]:
............Zarlenga's "solution[s]" to the problem of the Federal Reserve System are as follows:
1]"Nationalize the Federal Reserve, place it within the Treasury .."
2] "Remove the privilege banks have to create money. Only government should have this power. "
3]"Institute anti-deflationary programs to assure that sufficient money is introduced by government into the system."
Source of above Zarlenga quotes
So What Would Happen If Zarlenga's Proposals Were Ever Enacted?
"Freedom is not a system" - Jon Rappoport
To cut a long story short, because Zarlenga proposes even more government control of the monetary system than presently exists, if enacted, Zarlenga's reform proposals would end up causing just as much damage as the current system, if not more.
In other words:
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss [or worse]"
This Just In: Government Cannot Work/Has Never Worked.
In direct opposition to Zarlenga's primary assumption, I will simply assert here that ALL governments, right from from the very first one, have ultimately failed to deliver what they promised [except to the insiders, of course], and that all future governments, regardless of the details of the actual form they might take, will inevitably act in the exact same way as all previous governments.
As to exactly why this is so , I am not going into get into details here - suffice to say that the reason is a result of mix of the true nature of man and human action, and the true nature of all governments.
Zarlenga's Assumtions, Your Assumptions[?]
If you, dear reader, believe that the monetary reform proposals of Mr Zarlenga and other, similar claimed monetary reformers , make sense, then obviously you must fully agree with what I would claim to be his many false assumptions, including the two that I have briefly outlined above.
Psychological Issues
Please notice that I have not attempted to explain exactly why I believe that his main assumption [1], [i.e. that government actually works] is incorrect.
And for his secondary assumption concerning the true nature of the Federal Reserve System, as proof of my contention all I have offered are a few quotes from other writers, and then simply concluded with the assertion that Zalenga's proposals would actually make things even worse, if enacted, and I have offered little else.
Question: Why have I acted in this way- instead of trying to completely refute Zarlenga, point by point here?
Answer: Time [Is Money]
The reason I only make a few simple assertions here, instead of getting deeply into Mr Zarlenga's [and your?] assumptions, is because these type of assumptions, although false in my opinion, are typically very deeply and closely held by an individual, and are always backed up/reinforced by other, equally false, never seriously questioned, assumptions.
In other words, to look closely at these types of assumptions [assuming you also make them] takes time, and patience, and a lot of thought, usually.
Bluntly, as a financial safety consultant and an alternative psycho-therapist and personal freedom therapist, I do not have the time to help you to take a closer look at these types of assumptions and others related- unless I am going to be duly compensated for my time and effort.
I believe that Zarlenga's [your?] assumptions are both incorrect and, more importantly, psychologically dangerous for the individual, and just as dangerous in the real world that individuals live in day by day.
In Defense of Zarlenga [You Too?]
In Zarlenga's and your defense - assuming you have similar beliefs - for various cultural/sociological reasons, these beliefs/assumptions are extremely common these days - from personal observation I'm guessing that at least 95+% of the population in the US have made the exact same primary assumption[s] as Zarlenga has, plus others related.
Take Responsibility For What You Have Freely Chosen To Believe
If you believe that his two pre-assumptions as briefly outlined here are in fact correct, so be it- I have no desire or need to change your opinion on these matters, nor the time to discuss them with you for free- bluntly, I don't do free psycho-analysis, even for Zarlenga himself.
After all, it's your life- in the end, if you believe in Mr Zarlenga and his monetary reform proposals, then the truth is that at some time in the dim, distant past you freely chose to accept, unexamined, the exact same assumptions Mr Zarlenga and others like him have made.
In other words, just like Zarlenga, your assumptions are your responsibility, not mine, nor "society's" [however defined], and that in fact, that's the way its always been, and that's the way it always will be [4 evva 'n evva, amen :-) ].
Dangerous Assumptions?
I would only once more point out that in my opinion, if you, dear reader , really do share Mr Zarlenga's and other financial reformers primary number [1] assumption as briefly outlined here [let alone his "straw man" no. [2] argument concerning the nature of the Fed] that, as I see it, and if it has not already done so, that single false assumption of yours [plus others closely related but not covered here], will cause you considerable damage in both your future private life in general, your personal freedom, and in your future financial/savings and investment "life" also. Possibly other life areas too- assuming it has not already done so.
My Concluding Assertion = Zarlenga Is Flat-Out Wrong:
As a Personal Freedom consultant, I boldly assert here that Mr Zarlengas pre-assumptions, [and therefor his "final solution" conclusions about monetary reform] , are flat out wrong.
Still, Everything's "Fine and Dandy"
However, again, assuming you hold similar beliefs to Mr Zarlenga, and despite the fact that I believe that you, in my opinion, have some very serious personal issues to confront and hold up to the light of day; along with ideas/concepts that if left unexamined can be very self-destructive and dangerous for you, I am unwilling to expand on/attempt to justify in any detail my simple assertion[s] here; meaning that if you believe both of Zarlenga's assumptions and conclusions [ and more besides], then that's just fine and dandy with me, it's your life after all.
"Dreams [Anarchist Blues]"
Instead, by way of "refutation", and for your continued listening displeasure, I would simply offer my musical composition "Dreams [Anarchist Blues]":
Youtube link
Your Opinion: Good News/Bad News
In the final analysis you are, no different from Mr Zarlenga or anyone else, fully entitled to your opinion , and I respect that.
If however, you are seriously interested in learning more about why Mr Zarlenga's assumption's [1] and [2] are in my opinion flat out wrong [and consequently very dangerous to you, your freedom, and your financial safety], then feel free to email me at: onebornfreeatyahoodotcom and we can possibly discuss session times, rates etc.
*************************************************
Short Post Summary
In summary , I believe that Mr Zarlenga's core assumption[1] - that government can solve problems- any problem, including monetary system problems- [however defined] is a major misconception, both for him, and for you if you share that same core assumption.
This Just In: Government Causes Problems- It Never Solves Them
The truth is that the problems that people like Zarlenga see with the US monetary system were/are directly caused by the federal government's interference and protections, and in that respect are no different from most other social problems that Zarlenga and others probably fantasize about as being solveable by governments.
Governments cause problems- they never have, and never will , solve any of them.
Given time, and concentration, the fundamental reasons that this is the case in the real world [and why therefor Zarlenga's and his believers instead inhabit a fantasy world], can be explained fairly easily, but I have deliberately made no attempt to so do within this article.
Your Own Self -Psycho- Analysis?
Unless you, like Zarlenga, can see nothing wrong with the assumption that the government can solve monetary [or any other] problems, I would strongly suggest that you set aside some serious time for self-analysis/examination to ask yourself the question:
exactly why do I continue to assume/believe that governments can solve problems, including perceived fiscal/monetary problems [and other closely related questions/assumptions]?. On what real-world evidence do I continue to believe that assumption?
Or Use A Pro?
If you have no idea how to go about such a process, then I'm afraid that you are going to have to find a professional who can perhaps help you to analyze this fundamental, very important, and entirely unrealistic assumption that is in complete denial of how the real world has ever actually worked, can work, or will work, and that, because it so far from reality, will cause you considerable problems in you life in many areas, both personal, professional, and financial in the future, and even that's assuming it has not already caused you considerable anguish in your life to date.
Regards, onebornfree.
**********************************************
"Blue Pill" Versus "Red Pill" Afterword [Added 09/01/14]:
Youtubelink direct
Q: Does The Matrix Still "Have" You [Just As It "Has" Zarlenga]?
If you are familiar with the movie "The Matrix" , you are probably aware of the "blue pill" /"red pill" concept.
You may well imagine yourself as having taken "the red pill" and as therefore currently being "outside the Matrix", as the heros of that movie are once they have taken the red pill.
However, I would strongly suggest that you are still very much inside this matrix [i.e. blue pill] , and that "the Matrix" most definitely still "has" you, [ as Morpheus says to Neo] if you continue to believe any of the following:
1]: that governments can solve problems- or have _ever_ solved _any_ problem. [This is an essential, core belief within the "blue pill" , matrix belief system ] .
In Truth
In truth [i.e. "Red Pill"], there are, [and never have been, nor will there ever be in the future], no government solutions to monetary problems, nor to any other perceived problems in this world.
Governments only
create problems- they will never solve them.
WARNING!: Your own continued belief in this one, single lie/fantasy/chimera/ mirage, or whatever else you wish to call it,
will keep you firmly locked inside "The Matrix" for the rest of your life, unless you can find a way to break free of it.
2]: that the federal reserve system is a fully private company that can be freely competed with by other monetary systems and non-systems alike, and that it has no special, legally enforced, government granted monopoly privileges [i.e. at the point of a gun- or many guns, more accurately] .
Isn't it time for you to take that
"Red Pill" [ or to at least take another, far more potent one, instead of the watered down version you appear to have been using to date]?
Regards, your
"Red Pill" therapist, onebornfree.
****************************
More About "Onebornfree":
Onebornfree Personal Freedom Blogsites:
**********************************************************************************************
= Long term savings plan
