Monday, February 6, 2012

Withholding Consent from the Khan

People all over the world — in the United States, the eurozone, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and everywhere in between — are now inescapably facing the consequences of a century of unmitigated fiat-currency expansion. In response, a global movement has risen to search for solutions to the central-bank-engineered deterioration of standards of living, purchasing power, employment prospects, and economic health in general.

In the United States, this pursuit is embodied by two superficially different — though both hopelessly naive and economically underinformed — political movements: the numerous Occupy groups and the so-called Tea Party. But both factions ultimately kowtow before the state, worshiping either its welfare or warfare.

The sad reality is that both groups were born of the frustrations and dissent of the populace, but have been hijacked for political use from either side. There still exists the core values they were born with, but are driven by ties to the status quo of political pandering. 

Is activism that appeals directly to the political class and central bankers — the individuals who are directly responsible for the current economic morass — a logical course of action? A review of history reveals some alternatives; what follows is one of them.

The 99% have found themselves positioned as pawns for the 1% they show such contempt for. How is the elite Left that much different from the elite Right? 


No comments:

Post a Comment