Will there be a multi-currency arrangement? Neoconservatives, e.g. Bolton originate with liberal hawks who sought to bring about the United States’ status as the world’s premier military power; and with social democrats, paleo liberals, and modern socialists associated with the right-wing of the Socialist Party of America, which founders include Trotskyites, vanguards of Marxism. Meanwhile, after the split of the Socialist Party of America, the Communist Party USA was established, which has a unparalleled history in the progressive movement. Neoconservatives like Bolton, and not unlike the liberal hawk, or the Clinton Doctrine consistent with this vision, are anti-Soviet/Stalinist liberals, which objective is to confront Soviet expansionism, i.e. extending their influence around the world. A primary example of “Soviet expansionism” is Russia’s involvement in the push for an overhaul of the international monetary system. BRICS, an economic block of emerging national economies and political alliance, a formal trading association, a development bank and contingency fund, is the forerunner of a new multi-currency world, which could result in the loss of US dollar hegemony, and its exorbitant privilege as the world’s reserve currency, and the domination of Fed monetary policy, toward which the exigencies of US business cycles and economic crises around the world gears itself. Amschel Rothschild made a good point when he said, “Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!”, because whomever controls the money controls the world, but should the U.S. be willing to underwrite international financial stability in an age of global finance, e.g. allow emerging economies to draw from the monetary system and bear a depreciation risk of their currency swap on its own balance sheet? Without our monetary system, the independent lifestyle we boast might become a mere phantom of a memory, with all its debt-funding, debt-driven growth schemes. So rather than split ideological hairs on whom and what economic or political theory and policy another politician is pushing, because none appear to serve freedom, it might be a good idea to support the Second Amendment, i.e. “a well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, [which] shall not be infringed” and to support the military who struggle and sacrifice their lives to preserve our independence.
March 29, 2018