It’s In Our Blood

To be human is to rebel. It is in our nature to be discontented with the status quo and strive for societal change. Each of us possesses the unique attribute of free will, exhibiting varying degrees of defiance. History is defined by the outliers who reject conformity and stoke the flames of revolution. The flame exists in us all, but it can be taken advantage of to instigate an unwelcome change of power that leaves us with far less liberty than before.

We embrace change despite our modern comforts. As life becomes harder, we detest our leaders, undermine our systems, and hope for a troublesome wrench to sabotage the gears of our society. This sentiment grows gradually. It creeps like stubborn mold that can only be stalled but never eradicated. It intensifies in the incensed culture until the heat of anxiety and rage culminates in its crescendo. The tension swells and shakes until the breaking point is met, and suddenly… change.

The new order is often accepted without a riposte as the populace welcomes the new unknown simply because it contrasts with the old. We cannot hope to fix what we do not know. We collectively exhale in relief and wait to see what the new regime has in store.

These changes are not always good, nor are they innate. Countless times in history, revolution has led to dictatorship. The motives for insurgency were pure, egalitarian even. Meaningful desires and peaceful methods do not guarantee a benevolent result. The product of communal strife and rebellion can just lead to more subjugation and misery rather than less.

We are all susceptible to the desire for change for the sake of change. The grass may look greener on the other side, but it could taste awful. Intelligent revolutions must be accompanied by a specific alternative, led by thoughtful instigators with the disposition of liberty. This is rarely the case.

History can teach us to yearn for change while also being skeptical of those who initiate and profit from it.

It Ain't Easy Being King

Today we face a multitude of challenges in geopolitics and international trade that may prompt an upheaval in our monetary system. The trade imbalances between nations are inherent in our reserve currency system. Consequently, this unfair and paradoxical nature leads to the revolutionary desire to expire it.

The Triffin Dilemma espouses that the reserve currency system is intrinsically unsustainable and is destined to be revolted against. The world's demand for the reserve currency is infinite as the world economy grows. However, the nations that purvey the reserve currency can never match this limitless demand with their own produced goods, so they become an exporter of money and debt.

Eventually, the rest of the world loses confidence in the reserve nation's ability to service their debt and doubts the value of the reserve currency. Without confidence in the stability of a reserve asset, it ceases to be a reserve, and nations will begin to circumvent it.

There is an expiration date on monetary empires. Reserve currencies run their course while the imperial nation is economically dominant, but once they lose supremacy, the world rejects and replaces them. Often through violent means if the empire wishes to remain the financial hegemon.

Today the world feels entrapped and wronged by the current reserve currency, the U.S. dollar, and its debt-based mechanism.

Conversely, America feels cheated by its own reserve status privilege and wishes to reestablish its manufacturing independence.

The reserve currency is a blessing and a curse, as its strength relative to other currencies is contradictory to normal methods of valuation.

A strong U.S. dollar makes American exports less competitive in the global market, as nations with relatively weaker currency have comparatively cheaper goods.

The United States does not need to export goods to maintain its currency strength since its primary export is debt. The world relies on this “stable and reliable” debt to facilitate financial growth, and in exchange, Americans get cheap foreign imports.

Inadvertently, or perhaps purposefully, the supremacy of American finance in the global economy leads to amplified debt burdens and the deterioration of industry for its own country.

The debt has become too expensive, and our dependency on foreign goods has made us susceptible to the increasing distrust from our trading partners.

This system does not seem to be working for anyone. Except, of course, the banking institutions that profit from the manipulated exchange rates and collect interest on all the debt. We’ll get back to them later.

To rectify the imbalance of trade and overvaluation of the reserve currency, countries can explicitly finagle the exchange rates (1985 Plaza Accord) or implicitly mend the disparity with war and recessions.

This safeguarding of reserve currency status is arguably the primary impetus for much of the world’s conflict and economic protectionism.

The current establishment will do all manner of depravity to protect their financial hegemony, but their favorite method of destabilization is manufactured revolutions and coups d'état.

War by Proxy

The United States government may have perfected this economic imperialism in the 21st century, but the true artists of colonialism and commercial warfare were the authorities of the British Empire.

Agents of the empire were caught fanning the flames of the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and even the American Civil War. Wherever internal resistance rose within a nation, there appeared to be British backing abroad. The political instability cultured in their rival countries allowed the formation of an empire spanning over 26% of the world’s landmass.

The most expansive empire in human history was not built solely on industrial and naval might. An island roughly 1/3 the size of Texas could never manage its various colonies without tactful financial extortion.

Britain was so adept at establishing economic dominance over their colonies that political meandering was hardly necessary. They ensured that the manufacturing of goods was exclusively done on the British Isles, so the raw materials produced by the colonies were worthless without their sole customer.

Anytime colonies tried to establish their own manufacturing or sell to other markets, the empire would deploy a ferocious campaign of customs duties (tariffs) or dumping cheap goods to stifle all competition. They would even sell products at a loss if it meant securing total market share of the industry.

Under the British system, every country was forced to rely on overseas trade and never become self-sufficient. Sound familiar?

The monopolization of industry allowed the empire to establish dependence in the economies of their colonies and rival nations. Even after declaring political independence, the colonies would still rely heavily on British industry and fall back into the empire’s economic grasp.

The American Revolution was followed by decades of recessions and rebellions because the new country could not establish its own industrial footing. 85 years after the declaration was signed, the American South was still heavily dependent on British manufacturing. Great Britain made up over 70% of southern trade, making them a more strategic trading partner than the South's neighboring northern states.

Parliament and the Crown practically instigated the American Civil War. They pushed the Confederacy into war by promoting a trade alliance and even suggested they join them in fighting. The British built the entire Confederate Navy and even manned their ships (CSS Alabama). By the summer of 1863, there were 14,000 redcoats stationed in Canada ready to march on Portland, Maine, and a sizable armada ready to break the Union blockade at any moment.

Abraham Lincoln famously cautioned his Secretary of State, William Seward, to focus on “one war at a time,” acknowledging that the British were scheming to break up the Union. If not for a Russian fleet of ships coming to the aid of Lincoln and threatening war with the British, the Civil War could have had a drastically different outcome. Most Americans don’t ever learn this pertinent aspect of a war that killed 600,000 people.

The imperialism of the British Empire promoted slavery around the world, particularly in the American South, as they demanded cheap prices for cotton. The economic tactics purveyed by the empire depressed the cost of labor all over the world. The supremacy of the British pound (the reserve currency at the time) devalued the wages and purchasing power of every nation, thereby incentivizing slavery to produce goods for the empire.

Economic slavery is achieved by the comparative values of currency. The same is true today. The imperialism of the British Empire never ended; it was simply transferred to America with the Bretton Woods agreement after the end of the Second World War.

It's Not Your Fight… Yet

Multiple conflicts of the Cold War, color revolutions in the Middle East, and military coups in South America were initiated for the purpose of protecting the existing monetary system. The techniques of destabilization were refined in the British and now American intelligence agencies to ensure that regime changes are accomplished by proxy.

If you haven’t already picked up on it, the American Empire vastly contrasts with its British predecessor through the method of economic warfare. The British Empire dominated through its industrial might and monopolization of manufacturing. The American empire does the same by financial supremacy and monopolization of debt and equity markets.

America’s proportion of debt to productive output makes it vulnerable and arguably undeserving of the world reserve currency.

This is why China threatens U.S. monetary domination. China more closely resembles a British empire with colonies of emerging markets around the world that are dependent on Chinese manufacturing and financial investment.

America is now on the defensive with a policy of economic protectionism through tariffs and a push to remonetize our increasingly expensive debt.

A monetary reset or even a total revolution of global finance is now on the table.

Now is the time to learn from history to understand the implications of a monetary reset. Will America lose the world’s reserve currency? Will the U.S. government default on its debt? Or will the nations of the world come together to redetermine various exchange rates with the dollar and its value relative to commodities?

The latter is the most likely considering the historical context. The aptly named Mar-a-Lago Accord, in conjunction with historic executive orders, will look to monetize the asset side of the Treasury’s balance sheet and kick the can down the road with respect to the national debt.

This momentous change could revalue America’s gold stores to par ($30/oz to $3000 or more), significantly devalue the dollar, establish a sovereign wealth fund with 100-year government bonds, and could even precipitate a new payment and financial system on the blockchain.

Nothing is guaranteed, and anything is possible. The real question is whether this revolution resolves the inequality of the old system for the benefit of average citizens. Or does it just send us down another path of subjugation and inflation so the empire remains at the expense of everyone?

It seems that every single civil war, military coup, and revolution of estranged people has coincidentally benefited the existing systems of power and the banks that finance them.

Any new revolution of the monetary system was likely concocted decades ago with the intent of being implemented at the right moment when everyone is begging for a change.

Our passion for insurrection is constantly used against us to further the agendas of individuals who do not have our best interests at heart.

Do not wish for change for the sake of change. Do not rebel and fight for those who wish to subjugate. Do not die in a bankers' war.

Don’t let that flame go out just yet; we may need it for a real revolution.

Share

Leave a comment