Money chapter

Money is the life blood of society. Without a sane and sustainable monetary system, a modern society is dysfunctional.

          A monetary system is not about your money or my money, it’s about our money, the cash and credit we all use to buy and sell and keep track of who owes whom how much. Today, everybody needs money to live. If everybody has enough money to buy necessities, the whole society prospers.   

          Money became everybody’s business with the industrial revolution (beginning around 1776) and massive population shifts from farms to cities. Before this migration, during medieval times most people, other than the aristocracy, grew their own food, made their own clothes, built their own homes, bartered, and had little need for money. Now money extends its tentacles into every facet of all our lives, from conception to death.  

          When gold and silver and other precious metals were used as money, money was a form of wealth itself.  Modern paper currencies are based on our faith in them as means of exchange, measure of value, and symbol of wealth. About 97% of what we now call money is credit. Modern money is not wealth itself. But just as the flag is often equated with the patriotism it symbolizes, money is often equated with the real wealth it symbolizes.

          Since money is now as necessary to our lives as air and water, it’s amazing that most of us know more about air and water than we know about money. In this and other ways, money is comparable to the great mystery from which we came into this life and into which we disappear when we die.

Mammon and Public Debt

          Control of money bestows God-like powers.  “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws,” said Mayer Amschel Rothschild a couple hundred years ago as he was pioneering what we now call “the New World Order.” 

          Centuries ago, the God of anti-social greed was named Mammon. A good case can be made that today Mammon rules, for tremendous amounts of money are transferred from society at large to personal fortunes. This is done by both private loans at usurious interest rates and the creation of public debt for private gain.   

          Lending and borrowing money is as old as money itself. What’s new in the past few centuries is public debt: Government borrowing from bankers to be repaid by an unwitting third party called “we the people.” Public debt is not to be confused with private debt, all those corporate loans and personal mortgages, auto and credit card loans.  Murray Rothbard (1) explained public debt this way:

          “The public debt transaction…is very different from private debt…the government receives money from creditors, both parties realizing that the money will be paid back NOT out of the pockets or the hides of the politicians and bureaucrats (who borrowed it), but out of the looted wallets and purses of the hapless taxpayers, the subjects of the state. The government gets the money by tax-coercion; and the public creditors, far from being innocents, know full well that their proceeds will come out of that selfsame coercion. In short, public creditors are willing to hand over money to the government now in order to receive a share of tax loot in the future. This is the opposite of a free market, or a genuinely voluntary transaction. Both parties are immorally contracting to participate in the violation of the property rights of citizens in the future. Both parties, therefore, are making agreements about other people’s property, and both deserve the back of our hand.”

          This money borrowed by government is then sliced and diced and sold as Treasury Bonds and Bills. It cannot be completely repaid without leaving the American population money-less. All our money—currency and credit—has been borrowed from the banks of the Federal Reserve, the USA’s privatized central bank. If everyone were to suddenly repay all debts in full, we’d be without the means-of-exchange money we need to function as a society. That’s at once utterly illogical and literally true. 

          The vast majority of the American population believes government creates our money.  Not so.  More than 97% of what we call money is credit, loaned by the bankers of the Federal Reserve.  In other words, the bankers of the Fed sell us the stuff we use as money.  Money is created when loans are made. So most of what we call money is actually debts to borrowers and credits to lenders. Electronic transfers of credit become paper bills and coin money if or when people cash checks rather than deposit them.  

          Most people believe the Federal Reserve is an agency of the US Government.  Why else would it be called “Federal”? 

          Many, if not most, politicians like this system. It means they don’t have to notify taxpayers when they want to spend a lot of money, i.e., go to war.  They borrow the money needed and spread the cost to taxpayers over coming generations.  Executives of big banks and Wall Streeters love it too, for it means politicians will bail them out with taxpayer money when—as happened most recently in 2008—they screw up.  Who suffers?  The vast majority who don’t understand the system.  They lose jobs, homes, businesses, educations and opportunities. 

Jekyll Island Conspiracy 

          A US senator and the world’s most powerful bankers conceived what was to become the Federal Reserve System in secret during November 1910, at a retreat on Jekyll Island, Georgia.  “Their expressed purpose was to standardize the nation’s banking system.  But they also intended to eliminate competition between banks and maximize profits by creating a central bank independent of government control. To do this, they would need to write the needed legislation and carefully navigate it though Congress in such a way as to not arouse fears by allowing the public to realize they were privatizing control of the nation’s money.  If they could manage this they might expand and achieve their long-range goal: A cartel of independent central banks that would dominate the world.” (2)   

          Even today some historians deny that this conspiratorial meeting ever happened. But the cat got out of the bag in 1916 when B. C. Forbes, who would later found Forbes Magazine, was a reporter for Leslie’s Weekly, and wrote: 

          “Picture a party of the nation’s greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily hieing hundreds of miles South, embarking on a mysterious launch, sneaking on to an island deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the names of not one of them was once mentioned lest the servants learn the identity and disclose to the world the strangest, most secret expedition in the history of American finance…I am not romancing. I am giving to the world, for the first time, the real story of how the famous Aldrich currency report, the foundation of our new currency system, was written.” 


The most pertinent aspect in the Fed’s birth chart is the Sun-Pluto opposition.  It’s pertinent now (2010) because Transiting Pluto is lingering in early Capricorn, conjunct the Fed’s Sun, and thus also opposite the Fed’s Pluto in the 12th house.  T Pluto moved into Capricorn in January 2008 to coincide with the stock market plunge predicted five years ago in this book’s first edition. T Pluto moving over the Fed’s Sun opposite natal Pluto means the Fed is in for some kind of major transformation beginning in 2008.  By that year there was a rising tide of concern, even outrage, as more individuals came to comprehend exactly what the Fed really is and how it impacts the overall US and world economy.  

A Most Unhappy Man

          In 1930 banker Paul Warburg wrote a book of 1,750 pages in which he described the meeting on Jekyll Island and its purpose without mentioning its location or the names of those who attended—except for Senator Aldrich. “I do not feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy,” wrote Warburg. “Even the fact that there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public.”

          The assumption that money is the private provenance of a few is a holdover from medieval times when a “divinely-appointed” aristocracy controlled money. Although we no longer believe that a few of us were God-ordained to control money, the assumption continues to so be deeply embedded in our culture that most are unaware of how it shapes our lives.       

          Ten years after signing off on the Federal Reserve Act, President Woodrow Wilson said: “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial Nation is controlled by a system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation, therefore, and all its activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world—no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote by the majority, but Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

          In the 1920s, Congress asked one Fed member (Donald J. Winn, Assistant to the Board of Governors) if the Fed wasn’t in fact a private corporation.  Winn replied, “The Federal Reserve System was established by an act of Congress and is not a private corporation.”  He went on to explain: “The stock of the Federal Reserve Banks is held entirely by commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System.” 

          Say what?  How can it NOT be privately held corporation when its stock is privately held by a few bankers?  If some homeless guy said he didn’t rob that convenience store, he merely refreshed its cash register, he’d be declared reigning clown of the criminal realm.   

Ezra Pound’s Passion  

          Poet Ezra Pound got himself in a world of trouble in the 1930s and 1940s by vociferously objecting to this heist we now affectionately call The Fed. He felt the need to flee the USA and go to Italy where he broadcast diatribes against those who had created it. Since most, if not all of the Fed’s creators were of the Jewish faith, Pound railed against “the Jews.” This got him vilified as an anti-Semite. If the conspirators had been Methodists, would Pound have railed against Methodists? Not likely. On the other hand, anyone who objected to the Fed was labeled a conspiracy nut by the media.   

          The US Government finally captured Pound and locked him up in an insane asylum. While there, he was visited by a young poet, Eustace Mullins. Mullins described this meeting in his book, Secrets of the Federal Reserve:    

          “In 1949, while I was visiting Ezra Pound…at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington, D.C., Dr. Pound asked me if I had ever heard of the Federal Reserve System. I replied that I had not, as of the age of 25. He then showed me a ten dollar bill marked ‘Federal Reserve Note’ and asked me if I would do some research at the Library of Congress on the Federal Reserve System which had issued this bill. Pound was unable to go to the Library himself, as he was being held without trial as a political prisoner by the United States government. After he was denied broadcasting time in the U.S., Dr. Pound broadcast from Italy in an effort to persuade people of the United States not to enter World War II. Franklin D. Roosevelt had personally ordered Pound’s indictment, spurred by the demands of his three personal assistants…I had no interest in money or banking as a subject, because I was working on a novel. Pound offered to supplement my income by ten dollars a week for a few weeks. My initial research revealed evidence of an international banking group which had secretly planned the writing of the Federal Reserve Act and Congress’ enactment of the plan into law. These findings confirmed what Pound had long suspected. He said, ‘You must work on it as a detective story.’”

          When Ezra Pound ran out of money and could no longer pay young Mullins $10 a week for his research, Mullins appealed to various foundations for money to complete his task. All refused. He then wrote a book based on what he’d found so far, but 19 New York publishers rejected his manuscript.  One editor, Devin Gerrity, president of Devin Adair Publishing Company, gave him some friendly advice: “I like your book but we can’t print it. Neither can anybody else in New York. Why don’t you bring in a prospectus for your novel, and I think we can give you an advance. You may as well forget about getting the Federal Reserve book published.” 

          Mullins eventually did publish a small edition in 1952 via two of Ezra Pound’s disciples, under the simple title Federal Reserve. A couple of years later an unauthorized edition was done by a New Jersey publisher under the title The Federal Reserve Conspiracy. In 1955, a German edition was put out by Guido Roeder but the entire edition of 10,000 copies were burned by “government agents,” ordered to take this action by the US High Commissioner to Germany James B. Conant, who was President of Harvard University from 1933 to 1953.  This was the only book burning in Germany since the days of the Nazi Party. 

          In 1968 another pirated edition appeared in California and Mullins tried to get the FBI and Postal Inspectors to act, but they refused. Then, in 1980, a second German edition came out and because the US Government no longer controlled the internal affairs of Germany, this edition survives. It’s a duplicate of the one that was burned in 1955.

Fed’s Impact on Society 

          The Fed was not designed to benefit society; it was designed to plunder society, making the Haves richer and the Have-nots poorer. By clever public relations and a lot of secrecy, it was navigated through Congress and passed while most congress persons had their minds on Christmas shopping and getting home for the holidays. 

          Let’s inspect a biwheel chart for the Fed’s impact on the USA’s natal chart. 


Notice on the outer wheel for the Fed’s nativity that Saturn at 13 Gemini is conjunct the USA’s Uranus and Mars, with those planets opposite the Fed’s Venus and Mercury in Sagittarius. And all those planets are square the USA’s Neptune in Virgo, indicating inspiration/illusion/delusion for the financial sector, and/or trouble for the nation from the financial sector. The Fed’s Sun-Pluto opposition afflicts the USA’s money planets Venus and Jupiter in Cancer, and the Fed’s Mars hits the USA’s economically-sensitive Sun-square-Saturn. The position of the Fed’s Neptune conjunct the USA’s Mercury and opposite the USA’s Pluto indicates the deception that was perpetrated on the American public.

          People who have studied the Fed and its impact describe it as the greatest heist in human history. The vast majority of the American population does not know that the Fed is not part of the Federal Government, and that the money it lends the government constitutes what is called “the national debt.”

          The national debt is also called government debt, public debt, federal, state, municipal or local government debt, or sovereign government debt.  It’s not to be confused with deficit—which is a budget shortfall (more annual spending than income).  The national debt is now so much a part of the economy that it is taken for granted, as though it is as inevitable as sunrise and sunset.

          Who owns the debt being repaid by American taxpayers for money borrowed from the Fed banks by the US Government?  In 1952, Mullins says, he traced those people to a group called the London Connection. The conclusion was obvious.  Although the USA gained its political independence during the Revolutionary War, we were resold into debt to British and European “divinely endowed” aristocrats by the creation of the Fed. 

“Follow the Money”

          Today the general belief is that our money is printed by government, although simultaneously we are harangued by the mass media about the national debt and how each of us owes an astounding share of it, and what a crime it is to pass this horrendous debt onto our children and grandchildren. If money were really created by government, why would government borrow money from banks? This cognitive dissonance is evidence that secrecy persists. Even President John F. Kennedy got whacked shortly after he made a move to undermine the Fed’s absolute money power. (Google Executive Order 11110. June 4, 1963 for details).  Remember that famous line, “Follow the money,” in Oliver Stone’s movie “JFK”?    

          While it’s true that Congress and/or the President appoint key members of the Fed, it’s also true that the most powerful bankers recommend who should be appointed, and since the politicians depend on the most powerful bankers for campaign contributions, they do not bite the hand that feeds them.  

          When you watch the TV news and see that handsome face under the perfectly coifed hairdo blathering on about “the national debt,” know that this purveyor of information is grossly misinformed, and that if he/she were not misinformed, you would not be seeing him/her on TV. The top brass of the cartel of corporations which now own and operate the American mass media are in cahoots with the bankers of the Fed and benefit from the system.

          The Fed-run, debt-based monetary system is, after all, the opposite of a democratic institution. There are people in high places who understand that the Federal Reserve System is legalized thievery, but most would rather throw their mothers under a bus than chance ruinous loss of personal wealth and status by saying so publically. 

          “When society loses control over its money system, it loses whatever control it might have had over its destiny. It can no longer set priorities and the policies for achieving them. It can’t solve problems which then develop into crises and continually mount up…Its leaders substitute public relations for actions and although the media is part of this pretense, an awareness slowly develops that there is ‘nobody home’ in Washington. Nobody is taking care of America. People stop voting and a deep sickness of the spirit develops.” (The Lost Science of Money by Stephen Zarlenga, American Monetary Institute, 2002, page 656.)     

Ben Franklin’s Paper Money

          Ben Franklin understood the difference between commodity money (gold and silver coins) and paper money (called “fiat money,” declared legal tender by government).  He understood what Aristotle pointed out a couple of millennia previous, that money’s primary function is as a medium of exchange.  In 1792, he published a pamphlet titled “A Modest Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper Currency.”  His printing company rolled off paper money for Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware. And he experienced first hand and with keen intelligence how well paper money worked for his own colony, Pennsylvania. 

          As the Revolutionary War was brewing, 1764, Franklin journeyed to London to petition Parliament to lift its restrictive bans and taxes so as to prevent what was building toward a bloody conflagration. The British aristocracy had banished their poor to the colonies and now wondered how in the world they had become so prosperous there. Franklin told them:

          “That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Scrip. We issue it to pay the government’s approved expenses and charities. We make sure it is issued in proper proportions to make the goods pass easily from the producers to the consumers…In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one.” 

          The Bank of England, prototype of the USA’s Federal Reserve, was created in 1694 when King George needed to borrow money to fight a war. He could not tax his subjects for wealth they did not yet have, so the Bank of England was established to lend the British Government whatever money it needed to fight wars, to be repaid from future tax collections. This worked so well for the British aristocracy that they outlawed the creation of money by colonies. That did not work for the American colonies. British Pounds went back and forth across the Atlantic but the colonists needed money to trade among themselves. So despite the ban, each colony created its own medium of exchange. Ben Franklin is sometimes called “the father of paper money” for his role in this illegal colonial enterprise.

          After the USA became a separate and independent nation, a kind of psychological tug of war ensured between those who believed a privately-owned central bank should issue the nation’s money and those who believed government should issue money rather than borrow from banks. Two national banks were established (1782 and 1816).  Each was abolished at the end of its 20-year charter. President Andrew Jackson abolished the second after a protracted the damaging battle with its president, Nicholas Biddle. The bankers retaliated by withdrawing credit, sending the nation into its second great depression in the 1840s. 

          President Abe Lincoln, to fight the Civil War without bankrupting the Union, had his government issue “greenback” dollars instead of borrowing the money from banks at 36 percent or higher. This being a radical departure from rule by a wealthy aristocracy (traditional lenders of money) the London Times expressed outrage: 

          “If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic should become indurate down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without a debt. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.” 

          The Fed was created in 1913 after a chaotic period following the Civil War of private and state banks issuing a variety of reliable, unreliable and downright counterfeit currencies—to prevent the US Government from following in Franklin’s and Lincoln’s footsteps. The government could have, and in retrospect should have, brought order out of the chaos without handing creation of the nation’s money over to those now often referred to as “banksters.” But the group who met in 1910 on Jekyll Island was clever enough to pull the wool over the eyes of Congress and the public. Few people understood how a monetary system works. Those who did understand it saw it as an opportunity to greatly enrich themselves and their heirs at the expense of taxpayers.    

China’s Ben Franklin Bank    

          Ironically, the Peoples Republic of China, established December 1, 1948, adopted the monetary system advocated by Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln. Their People’s Bank of China is an agency of their government. 

          American and European financiers have lambasted the Chinese system as “state control” in contrast to “free enterprise.” Well, our system is free profits for a tiny minority—those who economist Thorstein Veblen called “a parasitic leisure class”—but an increasingly heavy burden for the vast majority. Novelist Gore Vidal called this system socialism for the rich, free enterprise for everyone else. 

          The current national debt numbers stagger the mind: $13 Trillion owned by the Federal Government to Treasury bond and bill holders at home and around the world. The bankers of the Fed lend money to government and then, via the Treasure Department, issue bonds and bills to monetize the debt, paying it down over decades with taxpayer money.  By summer 2010, this debt amounted to 89% of GDP, and annual interest on this debt came to roughly $375 Billion.   

Private v. Public Control 

          If the Fed were to be abolished, it would return the creation of money to the national government, presumably responsive to the public.  I say “presumably” because as of 2010, the US Government was aptly described as “of, for and by the big banks and corporations.” Politicians are dependent on campaign money to win re-election, and bankers and their best corporate customers control who gets most of that campaign money and who doesn’t. If the Federal Government were to take back its Constitutional right and duty to create our money, it would be a small next step from today’s big-money backed political campaigns to publically-funded political campaigns.   

          Government creation of our money would not change how banks make private loans to consumers and corporations, but it would remove much of the pressure on politicians to serve the wealthy instead of their electorate. Instead of a privatized central bank selling money to government, government would sell money to the banking system. Above all, this would relieve taxpayers of the unwitting obligation to repay a national debt. Today’s national debt would be phased out as obligations to bond holders are repaid over time, ending that scam. 

          A publicly owned national bank would not mean the end of the difficult business of managing the nation’s monetary system.  Government created money would have to be balanced by need, keeping demand (money) in balance with supply (goods and services). But instead of all our busy economic activity being for the greater enrichment of the already rich, we’d be working for the material improvement of our whole society. Taxes would be greatly reduced, for eventually there would be no more national debt to pay. Private debts on mortgages, credit cards, corporate borrowing, etc., would continue as they are. But with government selling money to banks instead of banks selling money to government, the American taxpayer would be out from under an impossible burden.

          Nationalizing the Fed would not end problems arising from the so-called “Fractional Reserve” system of lending—banks legally able to lend $10 for every $1 they hold as deposits.  But it would put government in the catbird seat, freeing it from dependence on bankers and enabling it to regulate the banking industry as representatives of the electorate. And it would enable public access to banking information. Sweetheart deals and other scams would still be possible, but so would journalistic exposes. The public would no longer be kept in the dark about how the money system works. It would no longer be the private business of the super wealthy; it would become the concern of every voter.  “He who controls the money, rules.” Thus, public control of the money system would stimulate a purer democracy, as government monetary specialists would be working for the public. The system would become transparent.      

Pluto: Conception and Birth 

          In his book The Creature from Jekyll Island, E. Edward Griffin compares trying to understand the banking game to isolated islanders suddenly transported to an American football game trying to comprehend why those strangely costumed players are colliding with each other and throwing an oddly shaped object around. The purpose of the banking game is to relieve customers of money while convincing them they are being served.  This is done by employing some truly arcane and illogical rules and regulations developed over centuries.  If government were to relieve the privatized Fed from its duty to create the nation’s money, it would not disrupt most of the banking game, but it would relieve taxpayers of the obligation to repay what government borrows, since it would end the need for government to borrow. 

          Will the Fed be nationalized? 

          Transiting Pluto lingers conjunct the Fed’s Sun opposite the Fed’s Pluto till the summer of 2011 when it moves beyond a 7 degree orb of influence. Then Pluto moves retrograde, back and forth as seen from our perspective on Earth, and by September 2011 it returns to 4 Capricorn, again conjunct the Fed’s Sun. The effects of Pluto are usually delayed. An exact Pluto aspect is often symbolized as the time of conception, leading to pregnancy and birth. We can expect the birth of whatever happens behind the scenes in Washington to manifest later, as the birth of whatever new comes out of the present T Pluto conjunction and economic angst that began with the crash of 2008. 

          By the winter Solstice 2012, Pluto will be at 8 Capricorn and square Uranus at 4 Aries.  With both Uranus and Pluto still in the first third of these Cardinal Signs, we can expect something dramatic.  And given that Uranus will be square the Fed’s Sun-Pluto opposition at this time, we can expect that whatever manifests will involve the Fed’s privatized monetary system. 


Uranus square Pluto indicates a clash of values. It’s an aspect that has a long history of coinciding with revolutionary change. The Sun on this day conjunct the Fed’s Sun and opposite its Pluto could trigger the kind of change needed for the monetary system to be wrested from the big banks and returned to control by a government agency responsive to public needs. The Solstice’s Saturn conjunct the Fed’s Moon in Scorpio indicates that whatever change occurs around this time will be long-lasting.  The question is, will the conception indicated by Pluto’s lingering over the Fed’s Sun manifest at this time?  With the Solstice’s Mars conjunct the Fed’s Jupiter there will be plenty of energy behind whatever manifests.  And with the Solstice’s Jupiter applying to a conjunction with the Fed’s Saturn-Mercury opposition, it appears that the time may very well be ripe for the transformation needed to end the plundering of our society by “banksters.”    

Risky Business

          One thing is certain: the present privatized, Fed-run money system is not sustainable, for it creates a slow but relentlessly growing gap between a decreasing number of Haves and a growing number of Have-nots. This gap has never been greater than it now is. No society can survive such a huge imbalance. Nor can any amount of generosity relieve the problems thus created. What’s needed is a systemic change, a new script for the 21st Century. For in our modern, urbanized societies, money is no longer the privilege of a small aristocracy, it’s now a necessity for everyone. 

          Changing the bankster-run monetary system is risky business, as the fates of Presidents Jackson, Lincoln and Kennedy hint.  Lincoln and Kennedy were assassinated. Jackson would have been assassinated if his assassin’s bullets had not been disabled by the wet atmosphere of the Washington of his day. Were these assassinations coincidences having nothing to do with the control of the nation’s money? Maybe, but maybe not. The three assassins involved were all declared crazies, with no connection to the bankers of their day.     

          As I write this, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Democrat from Ohio, is trying to push through Congress a law written by Stephen Zarlenga’s American Monetary Institute. But this new law would ask politicians to bite the hand that feeds their drive for wealth-based status, and we humans are instinctively status-driven creatures.  Kucinich is also swimming against the tide of public ignorance, for about 99% of the population does not understand how the system works. 

          The ancient Greeks were concerned about a money system’s ability to destroy polis, community, and had a very different perspective on the short-sighted greed of Mammon.  Here is a quote from an article by classics scholar Richard Seaford, titled “Money Makes the (Greek) World Go Round: what the ancient Greek anxiety about money has to tell us about our own economic predicaments”: 

          “Consider…the myth of Erysichthon, a full version of which can be put together from a few sources (notably Callimachus and Ovid). Erysichthon cuts down a sacred grove to make himself a banqueting hall and is punished by being made insatiable. No food is enough—whether from land, sea, or air—to satisfy him. He is driven to sell his daughter in marriage, from which she returns to him, and the process is constantly repeated. In the end he eats himself. This myth contains a unique combination of unusual features: the transformation of nature into product, selling to obtain food, and eating the self. The constant return of the daughter from marriage excludes progeny (the future). The Greeks had a myth for many of our central concerns, and here is one for global warming: exploitation of nature produces pathological insatiability, the unlimited need for a source of income that sacrifices the future, and (eventual) self-destruction.” (6)

Brain-Damaging Hubris

          As though to echo this ancient Greek myth with chest-pounding bravado verging on brain-damaged hubris, Nelson Rockefeller, addressing the Bilderberg Group meeting in June 1991, said this:

          “We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national self-determination practiced in past centuries.” 

          In other words, forget democracy, folks, you will henceforth be ruled by we who control money and thus governments. You want to vote? Fine. Line up and vote but know that whoever you elect will obey us, for we control what your elected representative will need.  No one bites the hand that doles out the money and lives to tell about it.    

          Thus the privatized Fed’s money game has grown dramatically since 1913, fulfilling the long-range intentions of the Jekyll Island conspirators, for the Fed is now the “lender of last resort” to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, created at a meeting known as the Breton Woods Conference in July 1944.  In effect, though not so stated, the IMF and World Bank are part of the USA’s Federal Reserve System. Through a procedure known as SDR (Special Drawing Rights) these worldwide organizations lend credit money to mostly third-world countries. If the taxpayers of these countries cannot fully repay with interest, American taxpayers make up the difference.

          This is how it works: the US issues a credit (money conjured from thin air) to the IMF of, say, $1 Billion dollars. The IMF lends these electronic digits in the form of SDRs to anther country, publicized as “aid,” via elites chosen for their compatible ideology. These elites usually spend the billion on themselves. If the taxpayers of that country cannot repay the loan plus interest, the difference comes out of the hard-earned cash paid in taxes by Americans.  

          The stated intention of IMF and World Bank lending is to uplift the world’s poor, but it has the opposite effect.  Its unstated intention is to take over the world’s monetary system and rule all humanity by controlling all humanity’s money.  As of 2010, it was slowly but steadily on track to achieve that goal.

          IMF and World Bank SDRs go into the pockets of elites in Asia, Africa and Latin America. It is supposed that these elites will use the money to benefit their societies. But that’s not what happens. Argentina went from prosperity to pauperism during the 1990s when its elites accepted “aid.”  In 1996 Tanzania fed its own people and exported food to other countries; after receiving $3 Billion in “aid,” Tanzania nationalized its farms and factories, and sunk into poverty, received more “aid,” and became one of the poorest nations on earth. 

          For the involved elites, “…money has probably never been easier to obtain than it is today; with no complicated projects to administer and no messy accounts to keep, the venal, the cruel and the ugly are laughing literally all the way to the bank…All they have to do—amazing but true—is screw the poor, and they’ve already had plenty of practice at that.” (7)   

          The poverty created grows until it surrounds the wealthy elites whose “success” created it and who live isolated from their societies behind layers of security.  Thus isolated, they eventually wind up “eating themselves” as in the Greek myth. In other words, the system eventually kills the goose that lays their golden eggs.     

          Sometime after 2012, under the lingering Uranus-Pluto square and grand cross to the USA’s Sun-Saturn square, a series of crises leading to exceedingly harsh circumstances will force a drastic change in this privatized monetary system.  The message of Pluto in primary angles with Uranus is, Change or be changed. A history of these primary angles is explored later in this book.    

Foot Notes: 

  1. “Repudiating the National Debt” by Murray Rothbard (1926–1995), posted on the von Mises web site January 16, 2004. Rothbard was professor of economics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and vice-president for academic affairs at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. This article ran in the June 1992 issue of Chronicles (pp. 49–52).
  2. G. Edward Griffin’s The Creature From Jekyll Island, American Media, 2006.

End Notes:

  1. Also see The Lost Science of Money—The Story of Power by Stephen Zarlenga, American Monetary Institute, 2002; and The Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System—The Slight of Hand That has Trapped Us in Debt And How We Can Break Free, by Ellen Hodgson Brown, Third Millennium Press, 2007. Ellen Brown’s web page has a blog with numerous articles and reader comments. 
  2. For more information, including videos about this complicated subject, Google “debt based monetary system.”
  3. Also see Dishonest Money: Financing the Road to Ruin, self-published in 2010 by Joseph Plummer, who skillfully makes the hide-and-seek complexities of banking comprehensible in common English.
  4. The Times Literary Supplement, London, June 17, 2009.
  5. Lords of Poverty: The Power, Prestige, and Corruption of the International Aid Business, by Graham Hancock, Atlantic Monthly Press, 1994.
  6. Astrologers are certainly aware that Pluto was “demoted” from “planet” to “dwarf” at a meeting of the International Astronomers Union convention in Prague, Czech Republic, August 24, 2006. Since it was first declared a planet back in 1929 and its orbit calculated historically by astronomers, astrologers have studied its apparent effects on earthly affairs and compiled a body of lore about it. Thus most astrologers, myself included, continue to call it a planet, even though its small size, remoteness from the Sun and extremely elliptical orbit make it an oddity. Like the Greek deity it is named for, it inhabits a separate Hades-like realm. When it forms primary angles to certain natal positions such as an entity’s Sun, it consistently correlates with transformations that manifest as dramatic and long-lasting.