Every so often there’s a challenge to one’s world view that is disturbing. Often, like this one, it dances on the edge between acceptance and rejection. Between “the data fit what I know” and “that’s crazy talk”. I’ve not settled on a POV on this one. It is somewhat from the “paranoid POV on Evil Bankers dominating the world”; yet the snippets of information cited are correct. So where does the small bit of data end; and the paranoid propaganda begin?
That is what makes it disturbing. I can’t spot the line. Usually I can.
So it could be just a very well done propaganda piece, or it could be “onto something” in an “even paranoids can have real enemies” kind of way.
One example: It cites that The Fed, the U.S. Central Bank, is a private operation owned by a consortium of Banks. That is true. Yet it is also true that the head of it must report to Congress. It is also true that when Government directly runs the Central Bank there is great political pressure to print and inflate. When I was taking Economics, one of the reasons given for the strange hybrid quasi-non-government form was to prevent that political push to print… Yet what do we have? LOADs of dollar printing.
Similarly, the points about gold conversion and petro-dollars are things I have studied. They have the basic economic facts correct. Yet there was a ‘reason’ given in my classes that there really isn’t any other currency able to fund the massive trade in oil. There just are not enough Yen or Euro or whatever. Yet in the back of my mind I’ve always wondered “Why not just price and trade it in ALL currencies? Wine and clothing trade in many currencies, why not oil?” It is those “loose end” nags that this video tickles.
So I’m looking at it and trying to decide just how far along is the point where it goes “off the deep end”, and like all good ‘thriller / chiller / horror shows'; can’t quite tell where the man in the rubber suit takes the stage…
Is it ‘willing suspension of disbelief’?
Is it just really good ‘crazy talk’ propaganda?
Or is it “informed insight”?
And I just don’t know.
I ran into it in a posting on WUWT from Gerald Wilhite so h/t due. In the “post election trends” article comments:
WUWT is the internet’s crown jewel prototype for passive (and sometimes active) citizen participation in good science. Ordinary people learn by watching you guys do what you do. The mix of politics and science seems about right.
That said, I’ll take this rare opening Anthony provided to agree with Peter Hodges and the 14 minute video he recommended. For those who missed it: