• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

FED Conspiracy theories

The Fed is operated in the interests of the economy, and since the economy is important to the people, it is run in the interests of the people. The Fed's role is to maintain stable prices, a stable currency, low inflation, high employment, and act as a lender of last resort. Oooh, spooky!
 
I'm wondering about this. What is it that makes the Federal Reserve system a popular target for conspiracy theories?

Numerous reasons.

- The initial Jekyll Island meeting was carried out in complete and total secrecy. The press was not permitted any information and was left incapable of informing the public, which had a right to know about any proposed changes to their monetary system.

- One of the men involved, Frank Vanderlip, even admitted the organization and nature of the Jekyll Island meeting had a conspiratorial element. From the February 9, 1935 edition of the Saturday Evening Post:

[T]here was an occasion, near the close of 1910, when I was as secretive—indeed, as furtive—as any conspirator....I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System.…We were told to leave our last names behind us. We were told, further, that we should avoid dining together on the night of our departure. We were instructed to come one at a time and as unobtrusively as possible to the railroad terminal on the New Jersy littoral of the Hudson, where Senator Aldrich's private car would be in readiness, attached to the rear end of a train for the South.…Once aboard the private car we began to observe the taboo that had been fixed on last names.…Discovery, we knew, simply must not happen, or else all our time and effort would be wasted.

- The Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression through monetary expansion and contraction. Current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke admits this:

Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve System. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.

- More than one White House, banking, and other government insider has claimed that the Great Depression was deliberate. Curtis Dall was Franklin Delano Roosevelt's son-in-law, a successful Wall Street banker, and White House insider. In his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law, he wrote:

The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market.

- The Federal Reserve has failed miserably at it's primary policy objectives over the last 97 years. The results:

* Non-stop inflation since 1913. The U.S. dollar has lost 95% of it's value since the creation of the Federal Reserve.

* A steady, unrelenting cycle of depressions and recessions with periods of massive unemployment.

* Disastrous U.S. government fiscal policy, which is partially a function of Federal Reserve monetary policy.

* Our monetary system under the Federal Reserve is naturally unstable and relies on the growth of debts to remain operational, because our money equals debt. There can be no economic growth in this country without a corresponding increase in the supply of money to facilitate commerce. To create this money, the government and citizens must go into increasing levels of debt, paying increasing levels of interest to private Federal Reserve System banks for the use of their own national currency.

- The Federal Reserve has never been independently audited and has stonewalled attempts by numerous members of Congress to have an outside audit of their books completed.

- Distinguished Georgetown professor and Council on Foreign Relations archivist Carroll Quigley revealed in his 1966 book, Tragedy & Hope, the long-range goal of the elite bankers behind the Federal Reserve and the rest of the world's central banking system:

The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.

- There's no good reason the people and government of this country should go into debt just to create and have the money the Constitution granted Congress the authority to create through the Treasury. The U.S. Treasury could print sovereign money without any debt whatsoever and spend it into the economy, just as Lincoln had done with his greenbacks. For our money to be in the hands of private bankers for their own benefit and profit is quite obviously unnecessary and dare I say, conspiratorial.
 
Last edited:
What people need to understand about the Federal Reserve and the men behind it is there is indeed a multi-generational conspiracy underway to permanently alter life in the United States and the rest of the world. The march toward the centralization of power under a one-world government is no accident of happenstance.

Real men with real power, wealth, and influence have been working behind the scenes of our elected governments for at least 100 years to bring about a form of government and economy none of us would vote for willingly. The sooner the electorate learns this the better off we will all be.
 
The Fed is operated in the interests of the economy, and since the economy is important to the people, it is run in the interests of the people. The Fed's role is to maintain stable prices, a stable currency, low inflation, high employment, and act as a lender of last resort. Oooh, spooky!

Right, and I'm sure Bernie Madoff informed all of his investors that he was operating in their interests.

Do you really believe everything you are told?
 
100 years, eh? Sounds like there's nothing to worry about if they're that incompetent.
 
100 years, eh? Sounds like there's nothing to worry about if they're that incompetent.

They are far from incompetent. It's just difficult to transform a world of about 200 nation-states into a global financial empire managed by a single central bank and government. As some observers have said, it's like trying to herd seven billion cats in one direction.

They are making progress, though. The United Nations was part of this progress. NATO was part of this progress. The European Union was part of this progress. GATT and NAFTA were part of this progress. The ongoing efforts of globalization are part of this progress. Everything has been according to a grand, far-reaching design.
 
Controlling inflation, for example, is always unpopular in the immediate sense but think of how bad things would be if no one ever did it.

From 1789 to 1913, the dollar maintained a nearly constant value, aside from spikes during periods of war. A dollar in 1900 bought nearly the same amount of goods that a dollar in 1800 bought.

But since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the value of a dollar has plummeted. Last time I checked, you would need 25 2010 dollars to buy the goods and services that a single 1910 dollar bought.

If the Federal Reserve was instituted to control inflation, as you claim, why hasn't it done this? Your post is completely disconnected from reality.
 
Your post is completely disconnected from reality.

Oh you're sooooooo going to get pwnd.

Hmmmm. Who wants odds? Da Jooos or Da Illuminati or Da Catholic Church?
 
They are far from incompetent. It's just difficult to transform a world of about 200 nation-states into a global financial empire managed by a single central bank and government. As some observers have said, it's like trying to herd seven billion cats in one direction.

They are making progress, though. The United Nations was part of this progress. NATO was part of this progress. The European Union was part of this progress. GATT and NAFTA were part of this progress. The ongoing efforts of globalization are part of this progress. Everything has been according to a grand, far-reaching design.

How about NAMBLA? Are they in there? I was a member of the Dennis the Menace Fan Club as a child, should I be worried that The Beano is in on it?
 
How about NAMBLA? Are they in there? I was a member of the Dennis the Menace Fan Club as a child, should I be worried that The Beano is in on it?

Instead of responding to this kind of stuff directly, I'll defer to Arthur Schopenhauer and one of my all-time favorite quotes:

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
 
No, first you provide evidence. THEN it is ridiculed. Then everyone stops listening to them because they're talking crap.

Alternately, if you have real evidence, actual, really truly, bona-fide, non-logical-fallacy-detector-inducing, evidence, then you at least get listened to.
 
Instead of responding to this kind of stuff directly, I'll defer to Arthur Schopenhauer and one of my all-time favorite quotes:

Conspiracy theorists love that quote. The logical error they always make when using it is that the quote says nothing about whether something which is ridiculed is true or not. It only says that if something is true, then it will be initially ridiculed. (Even that isn't always true.)

About the actual point, though... You complained in an earlier post that these people are working to bring about something we wouldn't vote for willingly. You appear to be thinking of some one world government and a global economy. My major question is: why do you think no one would vote for that and why, besides nobody voting for it, would such a thing be bad? (I think I can guess at the answers, but I want to be certain.)
 
No, first you provide evidence. THEN it is ridiculed. Then everyone stops listening to them because they're talking crap.

Alternately, if you have real evidence, actual, really truly, bona-fide, non-logical-fallacy-detector-inducing, evidence, then you at least get listened to.

Fair enough.

Is there anything you wish to dispute in my opening post? Do you find anything - anything at all - about the secrecy of the Federal Reserve and it's creation suspicious? Do you find it odd that the American people and their government have to pay interest to use their own national currency when the Constitution delegated to Congress the power to create debt-free, sovereign money?
 
Instead of responding to this kind of stuff directly, I'll defer to Arthur Schopenhauer and one of my all-time favorite quotes:
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

You know what also gets ridiculed? Ridiculous ideas.

Are we to suddenly accept a Hollow Earth just because it is routinely ridiculed?

Do you really believe everything you are told?

Do you disbelieve everything you are told?
 
Fair enough.

Is there anything you wish to dispute in my opening post? Do you find anything - anything at all - about the secrecy of the Federal Reserve and it's creation suspicious?

Nope.

Do you find it odd that the American people and their government have to pay interest to use their own national currency when the Constitution delegated to Congress the power to create debt-free, sovereign money?

Nope.
 
But since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the value of a dollar has plummeted. Last time I checked, you would need 25 2010 dollars to buy the goods and services that a single 1910 dollar bought.

Don't confuse "controlled" inflation with "zero" inflation.

If the Federal Reserve was instituted to control inflation, as you claim, why hasn't it done this?

It has. Among other things, what it's done is largely eliminate the scourge of deflation from the economy. Since a growing economy requires an expanding money supply, and since a slightly inflationary environment actually increases economic growth (in real terms) because it encourages investment, the Fed has maintained a low target rate of inflation.

Mild controlled inflation is not bad for the economy. As pointed out above, it's actually good for the economy. The effect is to raise interest rates slightly for borrowers (since bankers charge "expected interest plus a premium"), but not high enough to discourage investment since it's still fairly easy to get an ROI above inflation if you can get the investment capital -- and people like providing investment capital when the real return on cash is negative.

The other reason it's done that is because deflation, even mild deflation, is generally a complete disaster for the economy (you need look no further than the Lost Decade in Japan for an example). Since the Fed can't control inflation exactly, it makes more sense to aim for a 2-3% inflation rate. If they miss by 1% in either way, there is no harm done. If the Fed aimed for complete price stability and undershop by a percent, that would create a deflationary environment that would completely stall out the economy.
 
You know what also gets ridiculed? Ridiculous ideas.

Are we to suddenly accept a Hollow Earth just because it is routinely ridiculed?

You misunderstand the meaning behind the quote. Schopenhauer wasn't referring to all ideas, just truth. And what he said is largely true. All ideas that are later proven to be true are at first denied, laughed at, and mocked. Then, later on when they are proven credible, they are accepted.

Do you disbelieve everything you are told?

Not at all, but I seek to verify as much information as possible.
 
Last edited:
You misunderstand the meaning behind the quote. Schopenhauer was referring to all ideas, just truth.

No, he wasn't. He was just referring to ideas that are later proven to be true. And not even to all of them; many truths are accepted immediately because they're not particularly controversial. If a molecular geneticist published a paper next month suggesting that blue whales are actually a group of several related species that cannot interbreed, I doubt it would be particularly ridiculed.

And what he said is largely true. All ideas that are later proven to be true are at first denied, laughed at, and mocked. Then, later on when they are proven credible, they are accepted.

And how about ideas that are later proven to be false?

They are generally at first denied, laughed at, and mocked.

Then, later on, they're still denied, laughted at, and mocked.
 
About the actual point, though... You complained in an earlier post that these people are working to bring about something we wouldn't vote for willingly. You appear to be thinking of some one world government and a global economy. My major question is: why do you think no one would vote for that and why, besides nobody voting for it, would such a thing be bad? (I think I can guess at the answers, but I want to be certain.)

Let me rephrase, I don't think anybody rational would willingly vote for the system Dr. Quigley described in Tragedy & Hope. I'll quote again the key passage:

The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.

The two parts in bold are not something I can imagine the world's people would be happy to bring about.

Another problem with a world government is pretty obvious. In the past, when any government grew oppressive to it's people and become a threat to the nations around it, other governments could organize to fight it and defeat it. Germany during WW2 is a good example of this. In a one-world scenario there can be little chance at the rectification of an oppressive, totalitarian government because there would be no competing governments left to subvert it or support the people fighting it.

I don't think monopolies of any kind are a good idea.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom